tihv<^xy  of  Che  Cheolojical  ^eminavjo 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


•a^i> 


PRESENTED  BY 


The  Estate  of  the 
Rev.  Harold  F,  Pellegrin, 

BSV9I 


I 


THE  PROPHECIES  OF  JEREMIAH 


CONTENTS. 


Preliminary  Sketch  of  the  Life  and  Times 
of  Jeremiah,       .... 


Chapter  I. 
The  Call  and  Consecration,    ....      21 

Chapter  II. 
The  Trust  in  the  Shadow  of  Egypt,       .        .      25 

Chapter  III. 
Israel  and  Judah — a  Contrast,        ...      36 

Chapter  IV. 
The  Scythians  as  the  Scourge  of  God,  .        .      41 

Chapter  V. 
Popular  ana  True  Religion,  ....      45 

Chapter  VI. 

The  Idols  of  the  Heathen  and  the  God  of 

Israel, 62 


Chapter  VII. 
The  Broken  Covenant,  .        .        .       •        .      70 


Chapter  VIII. 
The  Fall  of  Pride,  . 


7& 


Chapter  IX. 
The  Drought  and  Its  Moral  Implications,   .      83 

Chapter  X. 
The  Sabbath — a  Warning,      ....      99 

Chapter  XI. 
The  Divine  Potter, 103 

Chapter  XII. 
The  Broken  Vessel — a  Symbol  of  Judgment,     108 


Chapter  XIII. 
Jeremiah  under  Persecution,  . 


.     Ill 


THE    PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


BY   THE   REV.    C.    J.    BALL,    M.    A. 


PRELIMINARY   SKETCH   OF  THE  LIFE 
AND  TIMES  OF  JEREMIAH. 

A  PRIEST  by  birth,  Jerejniah  became  a  prophet 
by  the  special  call  of  God.  His  priestly  origin 
implies  a  good  literary  training,  in  times  when 
literature  was  largely  in  the  hands  of  the  priests. 
The  priesthood,  indeed,  constituted  a  principal 
section  of  the  Israelitish  nobility,  as  appears  both 
from  the  history  of  those  times,  and  from  the 
references  in  our  prophet's  writings,  where 
kings  and  princes  and  priests  are  often  named 
together  as  the  aristocracy  of  the  land  (i.  i8, 
ii.  26,  iv.  9);  and  this  fact  would  ensure  for  the 
young  prophet  a  share  in  all  the  best  learning  of 
his  age.  The  name  of  Jeremiah,  like  other 
prophetic  proper  names,  seems  to  have  special 
significance  in  connection  with  the  most  illus- 
trious of  the  persons  recorded  to  have  borne  it. 
It  means  "  lahvah  foundeth,"  and,  as  a  proper 
name.  The  Man  that  lahvah  foundeth;  a  designa- 
tion which  finds  vivid  illustration  in  the  words 
of  Jeremiah's  call:  "  Before  I  moulded  thee  in 
the  belly,  I  knew  thee;  and  before  thou  earnest 
forth  from  the  womb,  I  consecrated  thee:  a 
spokesman  to  the  nations  did  I  make  thee " 
(i.  5).  The  not  uncommon  name  of  Jeremiah 
— six  other  persons  of  the  name  are  numbered  in 
the  Old  Testament — must  have  appeared  to  the 
prophet  as  invested  with  new  force  and  mean- 
ing, in  the  light  of  this  revelation.  Even  before 
his  birth  he  had  been  "  founded  "  *  and  predes- 
tined by  God  for  the  work  of  his  life. 

The  Hilkiah  named  as  his  father  was  not  the 
high  priest  of  that  name,t  so  famous  in  con- 
nection with  the  reformation  of  king  Josiah.  In- 
teresting as  such  a  relationship  would  be  if 
established,  the  following  facts  seem  decisive 
against  it.  The  prophet  himself  has  omitted  to 
mention  it,  and  no  hint  of  it  is  to  be  found  else- 
where. The  priestly  family  to  which  Jeremiah 
belonged  was  settled  at  Anathoth  (i.  i,  xi.  21, 
xxix.  27).  But  Anathoth  in  Benjamin  (xxxvii. 
12),  the  present  'Andta,  between  two  and  three 
miles  N.  N.  E.  of  Jerusalem,  belonged  to  the  de- 
posed line  of  Ithamar  (i  Chron.  xxiv.  3;  comp. 
with  I  Kings  ii.  26,  35).  After  this  it  is  needless 
to  insist  that  the  prophet,  and  presumably  his 
father,  resided  at  Anathoth,  whereas  Jerusalem 
was  the  usual  residence  of  the  high  priest.  Nor 
is  the  identification  of  Jeremiah's  family  with  that 
of  the  ruling  high  priest  helped  by  the  observa- 
tion that  the  father  of  the  high  priest  was  named 
Shallum  (i  Chron.  v.  39),  and  that  the  prophet 
had  an  uncle  of  this  name  (Jer.  xxxii.  7).  The 
names  Hilkiah  J  and  Shallum  are  too  common 
to  justify  any  conclusions  from  such  data.  If 
the  prophet's  father  was  head  of  one  of  the 
twenty-four  classes  or  guilds  of  the  priests,  that 
might  explain  the  influence  which  Jeremiah 
could  exercise  with  some  of  the  grandees  of  the 
court.    But  we  are  not  told  more  than  that  Jere- 

*  The  same  root  is  used  in  the  Targ.  on  i.  15  for  setting 
or  fixing  thrones,  cf.  Dan.  vii.  9  :  (VD^) 

tClem.  Alex.,  "Strom.,"  L  §  120. 
X  At  least  seven  times. 


miah  ben  Hilkiah  was  a  member  of  the  priestly 
community  settled  at  Anathoth.  It  is,  however, 
a  gratuitous  disparagement  of  one  of  the  greatest 
names  in  Israel's  history,  to  suggest  that,  had 
Jeremiah  belonged  to  the  highest  ranks  of  his 
caste,  he  would  not  have  been  equal  to  the  self- 
renunciation  involved  in  the  assumption  of  the 
unhonoured  and  thankless  office  of  a  prophet.* 
Such  a  suggestion  is  certainly  not  warranted  by 
the  portraiture  of  the  man  as  delineated  by  him- 
self, with  all  the  distinctive  marks  of  truth  and 
nature.  From  the  moment  that  he  became  de- 
cisively convinced  of  his  mission,  Jeremiah's 
career  is  marked  by  struggles  and  vicissitudes  of 
the  most  painful  and  perilous  kind;  his  perse- 
verance in  his  allotted  path  was  met  by  an  ever 
increasing  hardness  on  the  part  of  the  people; 
opposition  and  ridicule  became  persecution,  and 
the  messenger  of  Divine  truth  persisted  in  pro- 
claiming his  message  at  the  risk  of  his  own  life. 
That  life  may,  in  fact,  be  called  a  prolonged 
martyrdom;  and,  if  we  may  judge  of  the  un- 
known by  the  known,  the  tradition  that  the 
prophet  was  stoned  to  death  by  the  Jewish 
refugees  in  Egypt  is  only  too  probable  an  ac- 
count of  its  final  scene.  If  "  the  natural  shrink- 
ing of  a  somewhat  feminine  character  "  is  trace- 
able in  his  own  report  of  his  conduct  at  particu- 
lar junctures,  does  not  the  fact  shed  an  intenser 
glory  upon  the  man  who  overcame  this  instinct- 
ive timidity,  and  persisted,  in  face  of  the  most 
appalling  dangers,  in  the  path  of  duty?  Is  not 
the  victory  of  a  constitutionally  timid  and 
shrinking  character  a  nobler  moral  triumph  than 
that  of  the  man  who  never  knew  fear — who 
marches  to  the  conflict  with  others,  with  a  light 
heart,  simply  because  it  is  his  nature  to  do  so 
— because  he  has  had  no  experience  of  the  agony 
of  a  previous  conflict  with  self?  It  is  easy  to  sit 
in  one's  library  and  criticise  the  heroes  of  old* 
but  the  modern  censures  of  Jeremiah  betray  at 
once  a  want  of  historic  imagination,  and  a  defect 
of  sympathy  with  the  sublime  fortitude  of  one 
who  struggled  on  in  a  battle  which  he  knew  to 
be  lost.  In  a  protracted  contest  such  as  that 
which  Jeremiah  was  called  upon  to  maintain, 
what  wonder  if  courage  sometimes  flags,  and 
hopelessness  utters  its  forsaken  cry?  The 
moods  of  the  saints  are  not  always  the  same; 
they  vary,  like  those  of  common  men,  with  the 
stress  of  the  hour.  Even  our  Saviour  could  cry 
from  the  cross,  "  My  God,  My  God,  why  hast 
hast  Thou  forsaken  Me?"  It  is  not  by  passing 
expressions,  wrung  from  their  torn  hearts  by  the 
agony  of  the  hour,  that  men  are  to  be  judged. 
It  is  the  issue  of  the  crisis  that  is  all-important; 
not  the  cries  of  pain,  which  indicate  its  over- 
whelming pressure. 

"  It  is  sad,"  says  a  well-known  writer,  with 
reference  to  the  noble  passage,  xxxi.  31-34, 
which  he  justly  characterises  as  "  one  of  those 
which  best  deserve  to  be  called  the  Gospel  before 
Christ,"  "  It  is  sad  that  Jeremiah  could  not  al- 
ways keep  his  spirit  under  the  calming  influence 
of  these  high  thoughts.  No  book  of  the  Old 
Testament,  except  the  book  of  Job  and  the 
*  Hitzig. 


8 


THE   PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


Psalms,  contains  so  much  which  is  difficult  to 
reconcile  with  the  character  of  a  self-denying 
servant  of  Jehbvah.  Such  expressions  as  those 
in'xi.  20,  XV.  15,  and  especially  xviii.  21-23,  con- 
trast powerfully  with  Luke  xxiii.  34,  and  show 
that  the  typical  character  of  Jeremiah  is  not  ab- 
solutely complete."  Probably  not.  The  writer 
in  question  is  honourably  distinguished  from  a 
crowd  of  French  and  German  critics,  wjlose  at- 
tainments are  not  superior  to  his  own,  by  his 
deep  sense  of  the  inestimable  value  to  mankind 
of  those  beliefs  which  animated  the  prophet,  and 
by  the  sincerity  of  his  manifest  endeavours  to 
judge  fairly  between  Jeremiah  and  his  detractors. 
He  has  already  remarked  truly  enough  that  "  the 
baptism  of  complicated  suffering,"  which  the 
prophet  was  called  upon  to  pass  through  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim,  "  has  made  him,  in  a  very 
high  and  true  sense,  a  type  of  One  greater  than 
he."  It  is  impossible  to  avoid  such  an  impres- 
sion, if  we  study  the  records  of  his  life  with  any 
insight  or  sympathy.  And  the  impression  thus 
created  is  deepened,  when  we  turn  to  that  pro- 
phetic page  which  may  be  called  the  most  "  ap- 
pealing "  in  the  entire  range  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. In  the  53d  of  Isaiah  the  martyrdom  of 
Jeremiah  becomes  the  living  image  of  that  other 
martyrdom,  which  in  the  fulness  of  time  was 
to  redeem  the  world.  After  this,  to  say  that 
"  the  typical  character  of  Jeremiah  is  not  abso- 
lutely complete,"  is  no  more  than  the  assertion 
of  a  truism;  for  what  Old  Testament  character, 
what  character  in  the  annals  of  collective  hu- 
manity, can  be  brought  forward  as  a  perfect 
type  of  the  Christ,  the  Man  whom,  in  His  sin- 
lessness  and  His  power,  unbiassed  human  rea- 
son and  conscience  instinctively  suspect  to  have 
been  also  God?  To  deplore  the  fact  that  this 
illustrious  prophet  "  could  not  always  keep  his 
spirit  under  the  calming  influence  of  his  high- 
est thoughts,"  is  simply  to  deplore  the  infirmity 
that  besets  all  human  nature,  to  regret  that  nat- 
ural imperfection  which  clings  to  a  finite  and 
fallen  creature,  even  when  endowed  with  the 
ijiost  splendid  gifts  of  the  spirit.  For  the  rest, 
a  certain  degree  of  exaggeration  is  noticeable  in 
founding  upon  three  brief  passages  of  so  large 
a  work  as  the  collected  prophecies  of  Jeremiah 
the  serious  charge  that  "  no  book  of  the  Old 
Testament,  except  the  book  of  Job  and  the 
Psalms,  contains  so  much  which  is  difficult  to 
reconcile  with  the  character  of  a  self-denying 
servant  of  Jehovah."  The  charge  appears  to  me 
both  ill-grounded  and  misleading.  But  I  reserve 
the  further  consideration  of  these  obnoxious 
passages  for  the  time  when  I  come  to  discuss 
their  context,  as  I  wish  now  to  complete  my 
sketch  of  the  prophet's  life.  He  has  himself 
recorded  the  date  of  his  call  to  the  prophetic 
office.-- It  was  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  the  good 
king  Josiah,  that  the  young  *  priest  was  sum- 
moned to  a  higher  vocation  by  an  inward  Voice 
whose  urgency  he  could  not  resist. f  The  year 
has  been  variously  identified  with  629,  627,  and 
626  B.  c.  The  place  has  been  supposed  to  have 
been  Jerusalem,  the  capital,  which  was  so  near 
the  prophet's  home,  and  which,  as  Hitzig  ob- 
serves, oflered  the  amplest  scope  and  number- 
less occasions  for  the  exercise  of  prophetic  ac- 
tivity. But  there  appears  no  good  reason  why 
Jeremiah  should  not  have  become  known  locally 
as  one  whom  God  had  specially  chosen,  before 
he    abandoned    his    native    place    for    the    wider 


•i.e. 


t  i.  2,  XXV.  3. 


sphere  of  the  capital.  This,  in  truth,  seems  t ) 
be  the  likelier  supposition,  considering  that  his 
reluctance  to  take  the  first  decisive  step  in  his 
career  excused  itself  on  the  ground  of  youthful 
inexperience:  "Alas,  my  Lord  lahvah!  behold, 
I  know  not  (how)  to  speak;  for  I  am  but  a 
youth."  *  The  Hebrew  term  may  imply  that  he 
was  but  about  eighteen  or  twenty:  an  age  when 
it  is  hardly  probable  that  he  would  permanently 
leave  his  father's  house.  Moreover,  he  has  men- 
tioned a  conspiracy  of  his  fellow-townsmen 
against  himself,  in  terms  which  have  been  taken 
to  imply  that  he  had  exercised  his  ministry 
among  them  before  his  removal  to  Jerusalem. 
In  chap.  xi.  21,  we  read:  "Therefore  thus  said 
lahvah  Sabaoth  upon  the  men  of  'Anathoth  that 
were  seeking  thy  life,  saying.  Prophesy  not  in 
the  name  of  lahvah,  that  thou  die  not  by  our 
hand!  Therefore  thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth: 
Behold  I  am  about  to  visit  it  upon  them:  the- 
young  men  shall  die  by  the  sword;  their  sons 
and  their  daughters  shall  die  by  the  famine.  And 
a  remnant  they  shall  have  none;  for  I  will  bring 
evil  unto  the  men  of  'Anathoth,  (in)  the  year 
of  their  visitation."  It  is  natural  to  see  in  this 
wicked  plot  against  his  life  the  reason  for  the 
prophet's  departure  from  his  native  place  (but 
cf.  p.  74).  We  are  reminded  of  the  violence 
done  to  our  Lord  by  the  men  of  "  His  own 
country "  (17  irdrpii  aiirod),  and  of  His  final 
and,  as  it  would  seem,  compulsory  departure 
from  Nazareth  to  Capernaum  (St.  Luke  iv.  16- 
29;  St.  Matt.  iv.  13).  In  this,  as  in  other  re- 
spects, Jeremiah  was  a  true  type  of  the  Messias. 
The  prophetic  discourses,  with  which  the  book 
of  Jeremiah  opens  (ii.  i-iv.  2),  have  a  general 
application  to  all  Israel,  as  is  evident  not  only 
from  the  ideas  expressed  in  them,  but  also  from 
the  explicit  address,  ii.  4:  "  Hear  ye  the  word 
of  lahvah,  O  house  of  Jacob,  and  all  the  clans 
of  the  house  of  Israel!  "  It  is  clear  enough,  that 
although  Jeremiah  belongs  to  the  southern  king- 
dom, his  reflections  here  concern  the  northern 
tribes  as  well,  who  must  be  included  in  the  com- 
prehensive phrases  "  house  of  Jacob,"  and  "  all 
the  clans  of  the  house  of  Israel."  The  fact  is  ac- 
counted for  by  the  circumstance  that  these  two 
discourses  are  summaries  of  the  prophet's  teach- 
ing on  many  distinct  occasions,  and  as  such 
might  have  been  composed  anywhere.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  the  principal  con- 
tents of  his  book  have  their  scene  in  Jerusalem. 
In  chap.  ii.  i,  2,  indeed,  we  have  what  looks  like 
the  prophet's  introduction  to  the  scene  of  his 
future  activity.  "  And  there  fell  a  word  of  lah- 
vah unto  me,  saying.  Go  and  cry  in  the  ears 
of  Jerusalem."  But  the  words  are  not  found  in 
the  LXX.,  which  begins  chap.  ii.  thus:  "  And 
he  said,  These  things  saith  the  Lord,  I  remem- 
bered the  lovingkindness  (eXeoj)  of  thy  youth, 
and  the  love  of  thy  espousals  (reXe/weni)." 
But  whether  these  words  of  the  received  Hebrew 
text  be  genuine  or  not,  it  is  plain  that  if,  as 
the  terms  of  the  pi-ophet's  commission  affirm, 
he  was  to  be  "  an  embattled  city,  and  a  pillar  of 
iron,  and  walls  of  bronze  ...  to  the  kings 
of  Judah,  to  her  princes,  to  her  priests,"  as  well 
as  "to  the  country  folk"  (i.  18),  Jerusalem,  the 
residence  of  kings  and  princes  and  chief  priests, 
and  the  centre  of  the  land,  would  be  the  natural 

*  "lyj  /«^r  ;  (i)  Ex.  ii.  6.  of  a  three  months'  babe  ;  (2)  of  a 
young  man  up  to  about  the  twentieth  year.  Gen.  xxxiv. 
iQ,  of  Shechem  ben  Hamor  ;  i  Kings  iii.  7,  of  Solomon,  as 
here. 


SKETCH    OF    THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


sphere  of  his  operations.  The  same  thing  is 
implied  in  the  Divine  statement:  "  A  nabi'  to 
'  the  nations  '  have  I  made  thee "  (i.  5).  The 
prophet  of  Judea  could  only  reach  the  "  goyim  " 
— the  surrounding  foreign  peoples — through  the 
government  of  his  own  country,  and  through  his 
influence  upon  Judean  policy.  The  leaving  of 
his  native  place,  sooner  or  later,  seems  to  be 
involved  in  the  words  (i.  7,  8) :  "  And  lahvah 
said  unto  me,  Say  not,  I  am  a  youth:  for  upon 
whatsoever  (journey)  I  send  thee,  thou  shalt  go 
(Gen.  xxiv.  42);  and  with  whomsoever  I  charge 
thee,  thou  shalt  speak  (Gen.  xxiii.  8).  Be  not 
afraid  of  them!  "  The  Hebrew  is  to  some  extent 
ambiguous.  We  might  also  render:  "  Unto 
whomsoever  I  send  thee,  thou  shalt  go;  and 
whatsoever  I  charge  thee,  thou  shalt  speak." 
But  the  difference  will  not  affect  my  point, 
which  is  that  the  words  seem  to  imply  the  con- 
tingency of  Jeremiah's  leaving  Anathoth.  And 
this  implication  is  certainly  strengthened  by  the 
twice-given  warning:  "  Be  not  afraid  of  them!  " 
(i.  8).  "  Be  not  dismayed  at  them,  lest  I  dismay 
thee  (indeed)  before  them!"  (17).  The  young 
prophet  might  dread  the  effect  of  an  unpopular 
message  upon  his  brethren  and  his  father's  house. 
But  his  fear  would  reach  a  far  higher  pitch  of 
intensity,  if  he  were  called  upon  to  confront  with 
the  same  message  of  unwelcome  truth  the  king 
in  his  palace,  or  the  high  priest  in  the  courts  of 
the  sanctuary,  or  the  fanatical  and  easily  excited 
populace  of  the  capital.  Accordingly,  when  after 
nis  general  prologue  or  exordium,  the  prophet 
plunges  at  once  "  into  the  agitated  life  of  the 
present,"  *  it  is  to  "  the  men  of  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem "  (iv.  3),  to  "  the  great  men  "  (v.  5),  and 
to  the  throng  of  worshippers  in  the  temple 
(vii.  2),  that  he  addresses  his  burning  words. 
When,  however  (v.  4),  he  exclaims:  "And  for 
me,  I  said.  They  are  but  poor  folk;  they  do  fool- 
ishly (Num.  xii.  11),  for  they  know  not  the  way 
of  lahvah,  the  rule  (i.  e.,  religion)  of  their 
God  (Isa.  xlii.  i):  I  will  get  me  unto  the  great 
men,  and  will  speak  with  them;  for  they  know 
the  way  of  lahvah,  the  rule  of  their  God:  "  he 
again  seems  to  suggest  a  prior  ministry,  of  how- 
ever brief  duration,  upon  the  smaller  stage  of 
Anathoth.  At  all  events,  there  is  nothing 
against  the  conjecture  that  the  prophet  may  have 
passed  to  and  fro  between  his  birthplace  and 
Jerusalem,  making  occasional  sojourn  in  the 
capital,  until  at  last  the  machinations  of  his 
neighbours  (xi.  19  seq.).  and  as  appears  from 
xii.  6,  his  own  kinsmen,  drove  him  to  quit  Ana- 
thoth for  ever.  If  Hitzig  be  right  in  referring 
Psalms  xxiii.,  xxvi.-xxviii.  to  the  prophet's  pen, 
we  may  find  in  them  evidence  of  the  fact  that 
the  temple  became  his  favourite  haunt,  and  in- 
deed his  usual  abode.  As  a  priest  by  birth,  he 
would  have  a  claim  to  live  in  some  one  of  the 
cells  that  surrounded  the  temple  on  three  sides  of 
it.  The  23d  Psalm,  though  written  at  a  later 
period  in  the  prophet's  career — I  shall  refer  to 
it  again  by-and-by — closes  with  the  words,  "  And 
I  will  return  unto  (Ps.  vii.  17;  Hos.  xii.  7)  the 
house  of  lahvah  as  long  as  I  live,"  or  perhaps, 
"  And  I  will  return  (and  dwell)  in,"  etc.,  as 
though  the  temple  were  at  once  his  sanctuary 
and  his  home.  In  like  manner,  Ps.  xxvi.  speaks 
of  one  who  "  washed  his  hands,  in  innocency  " 
(t.  e.,  in  a  state  of  innocency;  the  symbolical 
action  corresponding  to  the  real  state  of  his 
heart  and  conscience),  and  so  "  compassed  the 

*  Hitzig,   Vorbemerkuiif'ett. 


altar  of  lahvah";  "to  proclaim  with  the  sound 
of  a  psalm  of  thanksgiving,  and  to  rehearse  all 
His  wondrous  works."  The  language  here 
seems  even  to  imply  (Ex.  xxx.  19-21)  that  the 
prophet  took  part,  as  a  priest,  in  the  ritual  of 
the  altar.  He  continues:  "  lahvah,  I  love  the 
abode  of  thine  house.  And  the  place  of  the 
dwelling  of  Thy  glory!  "  and  concludes,  "  My 
foot,  it  standeth  on  a  plain;  In  the  congregations 
I  bless  lahvah,"  speaking  as  one  continually 
present  at  the  temple  services.  His  prayers 
"Judge  me,"  i.  e.,  Do  me  justice,  "lahvah!" 
and  "  Take  not  away  my  soul  among  sinners. 
Nor  my  life  among  men  of  bloodshed!  "  may 
point  either  to  the  conspiracies  of  the  Ana- 
thothites,  or  to  subsequent  persecutions  at  Jeru- 
salem. The  former  seem  to  be  intended  both 
here,  and  in  Ps.  xxvii.,  which  is  certainly  most 
appropriate  as  an  Ode  of  Thanksgiving  for  the 
prophet's  escape  from  the  murderous  attempts 
of  the  men  of  Anathoth.  Nothing  could  be  more 
apposite  than  the  allusions  to  "  evil-doers  draw- 
ing near  against  him  to  eat  up  his  flesh  "  (i.  e., 
according  to  the  common  Aramaic  metaphor, 
to  slander  him,  and  destroy  him  with  false  ac- 
cusations); to  the  "lying  witnesses,  and  the 
man  (or  men)  breathing  out  (or  panting  after) 
violence"  (ver.  12);  and  to  having  been  forsaken 
even  by  his  father  and  mother  (ver.  10).  With 
the  former  we  may  compare  the  prophet's  words, 
chap.  ix.  2  sqq.,  "  O  that  I  were  in  the  wilderness, 
in  a  lodge  of  wayfaring  men;  that  I  might  for- 
sake my  people,  and  depart  from  among  them! 
For  all  of  them  are  adulterous,  an  assembly  of 
traitors.  And  they  have  bent  their  tongue,  (as 
ii  were)  their  bow  for  lying;  and  it  is  not  by  sin- 
cerity that  they  have  grown  strong  in  the  land. 
Beware  ye,  every  one  of  his  friend,  and  have  no 
confidence  in  any  brother:  for  every  brother  will 
assuredly  suppliant  "  (3pj;'  21py  a  reference  to 
Jacob  and  Esau),  "  and  every  friend  will  gad 
about  for  slander.  And  each  will  deceive  his 
friend,  and  the  truth  they  will  not  speak:  they 
have  taught  their  tongue  to  speak  lies;  with  per- 
verseness  they  have  wearied  themselves.  Thy 
dwelling  is  in  the  midst  of  deceit.  ...  A  mur- 
derous arrow  is  their  tongue;  deceit  hath  it 
spoken;  with  his  mouth  one  speaketh  peace  with 
his  neighbour,  and  inwardly  he  layeth  an  ambush 
for  him."  Such  language,  whether  in  the 
psalm  or  in  the  prophetic  oration,  could  only  be 
the  fruit  of  bitter  personal  experience.  {Cf.  also 
xi.  19  sqq.,  xx.  2  sqq.,  xxvi.  8,  xxxvi.  26,  xxxvii. 
15,  xxxviii.  6).  The  allusion  of  the  psalmist  to 
being  forsaken  by  father  and  mother  (Ps.  xxvii. 
10)  may  be  illustrated  by  the  prophet's  words, 
chap.  xii.  6. 

Jeremiah  came  prominently  forward  at  a  seri- 
ous crisis  in  the  history  of  his  people.  The 
Scythian  invasion  of  Asia,  described  by  Herod- 
otus (i.  103-106),  but  not  mentioned  in  the  bibli- 
cal histories  of  the  time,  was  threatening  Pales- 
tine and  Judea.  According  to  the  old  Greek 
writer,  Cyaxares  the  Mede.  while  engaged  in 
besieging  Nineveh,  was  attacked  by  a  great  horde 
of  Scythians,  under  their  king  Madyes,  who  had 
entered  Asia  in  pushing  their  pursuit  of  the  Cim- 
merians, whom  they  had  expelled  from  Europe.* 
The  Medes  lost  the  battle,  and  the  barbarous 
victors  found  themselves  masters  of  Asia. 
Thereupon  they  marched  for  Egypt,  and  had 
made  their  way  past  Ascalon,  when  they  were 

*The  Cimmerians  are  the  Gomer  of  Scripture,  the 
Gimirra'a  of  the  cuneiform  inscriptions. 


THE   PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


met  by  the  envoys  of  Psammitichus  I.  the  king 
of  Egypt,  whose  "  gifts  and  prayers,"  induced 
therri  to  return.  On  the  way  back,  some  few  of 
them  lagged  behind  the  main  body,  and  phm- 
dered  the  famous  temple  of  Atergatis-Derceto, 
or  as  Herodotus  calls  the  great  Syrian  goddess, 
Ourania  Afrodite,  at  Ascalon  (the  goddess 
avenged  herself  by  smiting  them  and  their  de- 
scendants with  impotence — 0^\€iav  vov<rov,  cf. 
I  Sam.  V.  6  sqq.).  For  eight  and  twenty  years 
the  Scythians  remained  the  tyrants  of  Asia,  and 
by  their  exactions  and  plundering  raids  brought 
ruin  everywhere,  until  at  last  Cyaxares  and  his 
Medes,  by  help  of  treachery,  recovered  their 
former  sway.  After  this,  the  Medes  took  Nine- 
veh, and  reduced  the  Assyrians  to  complete  sub- 
jection; but  Babylonia  remained  independent. 
Such  is  the  story  as  related  by  Herodotus,  our 
sole  authority  in  the  matter.  It  has  been  sup- 
posed *  that  the  59th  Psalm  was  written  by  king 
Josiah,  while  the  Scythians  were  threatening  Je- 
rusalem. Their  wild  hordes,  ravenous  for  plun- 
der, like  the  Gauls  who  at  a  later  time  struck 
Rome  with  panic,  are  at  any  rate  well  described 
in  the  verse 

"  They  return  at  eventide 
They  howl  like  the  dogs, 

the  famished  pariah  dogs  of  an  eastern  town — 

And  surround  the  city." 

But  the  Old  Testament  furnishes  other  indica- 
tions of  the  terror  which  preceded  the  Scythian 
invasion,  and  of  the  merciless  havoc  which  ac- 
companied it.  The  short  prophecy  of  Zephaniah, 
who  prophesied  "  in  the  days  of  Josiah  ben 
Amon  king  of  Judah,"  and  was  therefore  a  con- 
temporary of  Jeremiah,  is  best  explained  by  ref- 
erence to  this  crisis  in  the  afifairs  of  Western 
Asia.  Zephaniah's  very  first  word  is  a  startling 
menace.  "  I  will  utterly  away  with  everything 
from  oflf  the  face  of  the  ground,  saith  lahvah." 
"  I  will  away  with  man  and  beast,  I  will  away 
with  the  birds  of  the  air,  and  the  fishes  of  the 
sea,  and  the  stumblingblocks  along  with  the 
wicked  (t.  e.,  the  idols  with  their  worshippers) ; 
and  I  will  exterminate  man  from  off  the  face 
of  the  ground,  saith  lahvah."  The  imminence 
of  a  sweeping  destruction  is  announced.  Ruin 
is  to  overtake  every  existing  thing;  not  only 
the  besotted  people  and  their  dumb  idols,  but 
beasts  and  birds  and  even  the  fish  of  the  sea  are 
to  perish  in  the  universal  catastrophe.  It  is  ex- 
actly what  might  be  expected  from  the  sudden 
appearance  of  a  horde  of  barbarians  of  unknown 
numbers,  sweeping  over  a  civilised  country  from 
north  to  south,  like  some  devastating  flood;  slay- 
ing whatever  crossed  their  path,  burning  towns 
and  temples,  and  devouring  the  flocks  and  herds. 
The  reference  to  the  fishes  of  the  sea  is  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  the  Scythians  marched 
southward  by  the  road  which  ran  along  the  coast 
through  Philistia.  "  Gaza,"  cries  the  prophet, 
"  shall  be  forsaken," — there  is  an  inimitable  paro- 
nomasia in  his  words  f — "  And  Ascalon  a  deso- 
lation: as  for  Ashdod,  at  noonday  they  shall 
drive  her  into  exile;  and  Ekron  shall  be  rooted 
up.  Alas  for  the  dwellers  by  the  shore  line,  the 
race  of  the  Cherethites!  The  word  of  lahvah  is 
against  you,  O  Canaan,  land  of  the  Philistines! 
And  I  will  destroy  thee,  that  there  shall  be  no 

*  Ewald,  "  Die  Psahnen,"  161;. 

tzeph.  ii.  4  sqq.,  D'^H  T)!)]]}  ni]}  ....  np^n  p'lpv 


inhabitant."  It  is  true  that  Herodotus  relates 
that  the  Scythians,  in  their  retreat,  for  the  most 
part  marched  past  Ascalon  without  doing  any 
harm,  and  that  the  plunder  of  the  temple  was  the 
work  of  a  few  stragglers.  But  neither  is  this 
very  probable  in  itself,  nor  does  it  harmonise 
with  what  he  tells  us  afterwards  ab'^ut  the  plun- 
der and  rapine  that  marked  the  period  of 
Scythian  domination.  We  need  not  suppose  that 
the  information  of  the  old  historian  as  to  the 
doings  of  these  barbarians  was  as  exact  as  that 
of  a  modern  state  paper.  Nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  would  it  be  very  judicious  to  press  every 
detail  in  a  highly  wrought  prophetic  discourse, 
which  vividly  sets  forth  the  fears  of  the  time, 
and  gives  imaginative  form  to  the  feelings  and 
anticipations  of  the  hour;  as  if  it  were  intended 
by  the  writer,  not  for  the  moral  and  spiritual 
good  of  his  contemporaries,  but  to  furnish  pos- 
terity with  a  minutely  accurate  record  of  the 
actual  course  of  events  in  the  distant  past. 

The  public  danger,  which  stimulated  the  re- 
flection and  lent  force  to  the  invective  of  the 
lesser  prophet,  intensified  the  impression  pro- 
duced by  the  earlier  preaching  of  Jeremiah.  The 
tide  of  invasion,  indeed,  rolled  past  Judea,  with- 
out working  much  permanent  harm  to  the  little 
kingdom,  with  whose  destinies  were  involved  the 
highest  interests  of  mankind  at  large.  But  this 
respite  from  destruction  would  be  understood 
by  the  prophet's  hearers  as  proof  of  the  relent- 
ings  of  lahvah  towards  His  penitent  people;  and 
may,  for  the  time  at  least,  have  confirmed  the 
impression  wrought  upon  the  popular  mind  by 
Jeremiah's  passionate  censures  and  entreaties. 
The  time  was  otherwise  favourable;  for  the  year 
of  his  call  was  the  year  immediately  subsequent 
to  that  in  which  the  young  king  Josiah  "  began 
to  purify  Judah  and  Jerusalem  from  the  high 
places  and  the  Asherim,  and  the  carven  images 
and  the  molten  images,"  which  he  did  in  the 
twelfth  year  of  his  reign,  i.  e.,  in  the  twentieth 
year  of  his  age,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
the  Chronicler  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  3),  which  there 
is  no  good  reason  for  disallowing.  Jeremiah  was 
probably  about  the  same  age  as  the  king,  as  he 
calls  himself  a  mere  youth  (na'ar).  After  the 
Scythians  had  retired — if  we  are  right  in  fixing 
their  mvasion  so  early  in  the  reign — the  official 
reformation  of  public  worship  was  taken  up 
again,  and  completed  by  the  eighteenth  year  of 
Josiah,  when  the  prophet  might  be  about  twenty- 
five.  The  finding  of  what  is  called  "  the  book 
of  the  Law,"  and  "  the  book  of  the  Covenant,"  * 
by  Hilkiah  the  high  priest,  while  the  temple  was 
being  restored  by  the  king's  order,  is  represented 
by  the  histories  as  having  determined  the  further 
course  of  the  royal  reforms.  What  this  book 
of  the  Law  was,  it  is  not  necessary  now  to  dis- 
cuss. It  is  clear  from  the  language  of  the  book 
of  Kings,  and  from  the  references  of  Jeremiah, 
that  the  substance  of  it,  at  any  rate,  closely  cor- 
responded with  portions  of  Deuteronomy.  It 
appears  from  his  own  words  (chap.  xi.  1-8)  that 
at  first,  at  all  events,  Jeremiah  was  an  earnest 
preacher  of  the  positive  precepts  of  this  book 
of  the  Covenant.  It  is  true  that  his  name  does 
not  occur  in  the  narrative  of  Josiah's  reforma- 
tion, as  related  in  Kings.  There  the  king  and 
his  counsellors  inquire  of  lahvah  through  the 
prophetess  Huldah  (2  Kings  xxii.  14).  Suppos- 
ing the  account  to  be  both  complete  and  cor- 
rect,   this   only   shows   that   five   years   after    bis 

*  rmnn  ~IDD,  2  Kings  xxil.S;  n^l^n  "IDD,  2  Kings  xxiii.2. 


SKETCH    OF    THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


II 


call,  Jeremiah  was  still  unknown  or  little  con- 
sidered at  court.  But  he  was  doubtless  included 
among  the  "  prophets,"  who,  with  "  the  king 
and  all  the  men  of  Judah  and  all  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem,"  "  and  the  priests  .  .  .  and  all 
the  people,  both  small  and  great,"  after  the 
words  of  the  newfound  book  of  the  Covenant 
had  been  read  in  their  ears,  bound  themselves  by 
a  solemn  league  and  covenant,  "  to  walk  after 
lahweh,  and  to  keep  His  commandments,  and 
His  laws,  and  His  statutes,  with  all  the  heart, 
and  with  all  the  soul  "  (2  Kings  xxiii.  3).  It 
is  evident  that  at  first  the  young  prophet  hoped 
great  things  of  this  national  league  and  the  as- 
sociated reforms  in  the  public  worship.  In  his 
eleventh  chapter  he  writes  thus:  "  The  word  that 
fell  to  Jeremiah  from  lahvah,  saying:  Hear  ye 
the  words  of  this  covenant  " — presumably  the 
words  of  the  new-found  book  of  the  Torah — 
"  And  speak  ye  to  the  men  of  Judah,  and  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem.  And  thou  shalt 
say  unto  them  " — the  change  from  the  second 
plural  "  hear  ye,"  "  speak  ye,"  is  noticeable.  In 
the  first  instance,  no  doubt,  the  message  con- 
templates the  leaders  of  the  reforming  movement 
generally;  the  prophet  is  specially  addressed  in 
the  words,  "  And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them,  Thus 
said  lahvah,  the  God  of  Israel,  Cursed  is  the 
m.an  that  will  not  hear  the  words  of  this  cove- 
nant, which  I  commanded  your  fathers,  in  the 
day  when  I  brought  them  forth  from  the  land 
of  Egypt,  from  the  iron  furnace,  saying.  Hearken 
to  My  voice,  and  do  them,  according  to  all  that 
I  command  you;  and  ye  shall  become  to  Me  a 
people,  and  I — I  will  become  to  you  Elohim:  in 
order  to  make  good  the  oath  that  I  sware  to 
your  fathers,  to  give  them  a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey,  as  at  this  day. 

"  And  I  answered  and  said.  So  be  it,  lahvah! 

"  And  lahvah  said  unto  me.  Proclaim  all  these 
words  in  the  cities  of  Judah  and  in  the,  streets 
of  Jerusalem,  saying.  Hear  ye  the  words  of  this 
covenant,  and  do  them.  For  I  solemnly  adjured 
your  fathers,  at  the  time  when  I  brought  them 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  (and)  unto  this 
day,  with  all  earnestness  [earnestly  and  inces- 
santly], saying,  Hearken  ye  to  My  voice.  And 
they  hearkened  not,  nor  inclined  their  ear,  and 
they  walked  individually  in  the  stubbornness  of 
their  evil  heart.  So  I  brought  upon  them  all 
the  words  of  this  covenant  " — i.  e.,  the  curses, 
which  constituted  the  sanction  of  it:  see  Deut. 
iv.  25  sqq.,  xxviii.  15  sqq. — "  (this  covenant) 
which  I  commanded  them  to  do,  and  they  did 
it  not."  [Or  perhaps,  "  Because  I  bade  them 
do  and  they  did  not;"  implying  a  general  pre- 
scription of  conduct,^ which  was  not  observed. 
Or,  "  I  who  had  bidden  them  do,  and  they  did 
not  " — justifying,  as  it  were,  God's  assumption 
of  the  function  of  punishment.  His  law  had  been 
set  at  naught;  the  national  reverses,  therefore, 
were  His  infliction,  and  not  another's.]  This, 
then,  was  the  first  preaching  of  Jeremiah. 
"  Hear  ye  the  words  of  this  covenant!  " — the 
covenant  drawn  out  with  such  precision  and 
legal  formality  in  the  new-found  book  of  the 
Torah. 

Up  and  down  the  country,  "  in  the  cities 
of  Judah  "  and  "  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem," 
everywhere  within  the  bounds  of  the  little  king- 
dom that  acknowledged  the  house  of  David, 
he  published  this  panacea  for  the  actual  and  im- 
minent evils  of  the  time,  insisting,  we  may  be 
s'lre,    with    all    the    eloquence    of    a    youthful 


patriot,  upon  the  impressive  warnings  embodied 
in  the  past  history  of  Israel,  as  set  forth  in  the 
book  of  the  Law.  But  his  best  efforts  were  fruit- 
less. Eloquence  and  patriotism  and  enlight- 
ened spiritual  beliefs  and  lofty  purity  of  purpose 
were  wasted  upon  a  generation  blinded  by  its 
own  vices  and  reserved  for  a  swiftly  approach- 
ing retribution.  Perhaps  the  plots  which  drove 
the  prophet  finally  from  his  native  place  were 
due  to  the  hostility  evoked  against  him  by  his 
preaching  of  the  Law.  At  all  events,  the  ac- 
count of  them  immediately  follows,  in  this 
eleventh  chapter  (vers.  18  sqq.).  But  it  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  Law-book  was  not  found 
until  five  years  after  his  call  to  the  office  of 
prophet. 

In  any  case,_  it  is  not  difficult  to  understand 
the  popular  irritation  at  what  must  have  seemed 
the  unreasonable  attitude  of  a  prophet,  who, 
in  spite  of  the  wholesale  destruction  of  the 
outward  symbols  of  idolatry  effected  by  the 
king's  orders,  still  declared  that  the  claims  of 
lahweh  were  unsatisfied,  and  that  something 
more  was  needed  than  the  purging  of  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  from  the  high  places  and  the 
Asherim,  if  the  Divine  favour  were  to  be  con- 
ciliated, and  the  country  restored  to  permanent 
prosperity.  The  people  probably  supposed  that 
they  had  sufficiently  fulfilled  the  law  of  their 
God,  when  they  had  not  only  demolished  all 
sanctuaries  but  His,  but  had  done  away  with  all 
those  local  holy  places  where  lahvah  was  indeed 
worshipped,  but  with  a  deplorable  admixture  of 
heathenish  rites.  The  law  of  the  one  legal 
sanctuary,  so  much  insisted  upon  in  Deuteron- 
omy, was  formally  established  by  Josiah,  and  the 
national  worship  was  henceforth  centralised  in 
Jerusalem,  which  from  this  time  onward  re- 
mained in  the  eyes  of  all  faithful  Israelites  "  the 
place  where  men  ought  to  worship."  It  is  en- 
tirely in  accordance  with  what  we  know  of  hu- 
man nature  in  general,  and  not  merely  of  Jew- 
ish nature,  that  the  popular  mind  failed  to  rise 
to  the  level  of  the  prophetic  teaching,  and  that 
the  reforming  zeal  of  the  time  should  have  ex- 
hausted itself  in  efforts  which  efifected  no  more 
than  these  external  changes.  The  truth  is  that 
the  reforming  movement  began  from  above,  not 
from  below;  and  however  earnest  the  young 
king  may  have  been,  it  is  probable  that  the  mass 
of  his  subjects  viewed  the  abolition  of  the  high 
places,  and  the  other  sweeping  measures,  ini- 
tiated in  obedience  to  the  precepts  of  the  book 
of  the  Covenant,  either  with  apathy  and  indifTer- 
euce,  or  with  feelings  of  sullen  hostility.  The 
priesthood  of  Jerusalem  were,  of  course,  bene- 
fited by  the  abolition  of  all  sanctuaries,  except 
the  one  wherein  they  ministered  and  received 
their  dues. 

The  writings  of  our  prophet  amply  demon- 
strate that,  whatever  zeal  for  lahvah,  and  what- 
ever degree  of  compunction  for  the  past  may 
have  animated  the  prime  movers  in  the  reforma- 
tion of  the  eighteenth  of  Josiah,  no  radical 
improvement  was  effected  in  the  ordinary  life 
of  the  nation.  For  some  twelve  years,  indeed, 
the  well-meaning  king  continued  to  occupy  the 
throne;  years,  it  may  be  presumed,  of  com- 
parative peace  and  prosperity  for  Judah,  al- 
though neither  the  narrative  of  Kings  and 
Chronicles  nor  that  of  Jeremiah  gives  us  any 
information  about  them.  Doubtless  it  was  gen- 
erally supposed  that  the  nation  was  reaping  the 
reward  of  its   obedience  to  the  law   of   lahvah. 


13 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


But  at  the  end  of  that  period,  circ.  b.  c.  608,  an 
event  occurred  which  must  have  shaken  this 
faith  to  its  foundations.  In  the  thirty-first  year 
of  his  reign,  Josiah  fell  in  the  battle  of  Megiddo, 
while  vainly  opposing  the  small  forces  at  his 
command  to  the  hosts  of  Egypt.  Great  indeed 
must  have  been  the  "  searchings  of  heart  "  occa- 
sioned by  this  unlooked-for  and  overwhelming 
stroke.  Strange  that  it  should  have  fallen  at  a 
time  when,  as  the  people  deemed,  the  God  of 
Israel  was  receiving  His  due  at  their  hands; 
when  the  injunctions  of  the  book  of  the  Cove- 
nant had  been  minutely  carried  out,  the  false 
and  irregular  worships  abolished,  and  Jerusalem 
made  the  centre  of  the  cultus;  a  time  when  it 
seemed  as  if  the  Lord  had  become  reconciled  to 
His  people  Israel,  when  years  of  peace  and 
plenty  seemed  to  give  demonstration  of  the  fact; 
and  when,  as  may  perhaps  be  inferred  from 
Josiah's  expedition  against  Necho,  the  extension 
of  the  border,  contemplated  in  the  book  of  the 
Law,  was  considered  as  likely  to  be  realised  in 
the  near  future.  The  height  to  which  the  na- 
tional aspirations  had  soared  only  made  the  fall 
more  disastrous,  complete,  ruinous. 

The  hopes  of  Judah  rested  upon  a  worldly 
foundation;  and  it  was  necessary  that  a  people 
whose  blindness  was  only  intensified  by  pros- 
perity, should  be  undeceived  by  the  discipline  of 
overthrow.  No  hint  is  given  in  the  meagre  nar- 
rative of  the  reign  as  to  whether  the  prophets 
had  lent  their  countenance  or  not  to  the  fatal 
expedition.  Probably  they  did;  probably  they 
too  had  to  learn  by  bitter  experience  that  no 
man,  not  even  a  zealous  and  godfearing  mon- 
arch, is  necessary  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  Divine 
counsels.  And  the  agony  of  this  irretrievable 
disaster,  this  sudden  and  complete  extinction  of 
his  country's  fairest  hopes,  may  have  been  the 
means  by  which  the  Holy  Spirit  led  Jeremiah  to 
an  intenser  conviction  that  illicit  modes  of  wor- 
ship and  coarse  idolatries  were  not  the  only 
things  in  Judah  offensive  to  lahvah;  that  some- 
thing more  was  needed  to  win  back  His  favour 
than  formal  obedience,  however  rigid  and  exact- 
ing, to  the  letter  of  a  written  code  of  sacred 
law;  that  the  covenant  of  lahvah  with  His  peo- 
ple had  an  inward^  and  eternal,  not  an  outward 
and  transitory  significance;  and  that  not  the 
letter  but  the  spirit  of  the  law  was  the  thing 
of  essential  moment.  Thoughts  like  these  must 
have  been  present  to  the  prophet's  mind  when 
he  wrote  (xxxi.  31  sqq.):  "Behold,  a  time  is 
coming,  saith  lahvah,  when  I  will  conclude 
with  the  house  of  Israel  and  with  the  house 
of  Judah  a  fresh  treaty,  unlike  the  treaty 
that  I  concluded  with  their  forefathers  at 
the  time  when  I  took  hold  of  their  hand,  to 
bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt;  when  they, 
on  their  part,  disannulled  my  treaty,  and  I— I 
disdained  them,  saith  lahvah.  For  this  is  the 
treaty  that  I  will  conclude  with  the  house  of 
Israel  after  those  days  [i.  e.,  in  due  time],  saith 
lahvah:  I  will  put  my  Torah  within  them  and 
upon  their  heart  will  I  grave  it;  and  I  will  be- 
come to  them  a  God.  and  they— they  shall  be- 
come to  me  a  people." 

It  is  but  a  dull  eye  which  cannot  see  beyond 
the  metaphor  of  the  covenant  or  treaty  between 
lahvah  and  Israel;  and  it  is  a  strangely  dark 
understanding  that  fails  to  perceive  here  and 
elsewhere  a  translucent  figure  of  the  eternal  re- 
lations subsisting  between  God  and  man.  The 
error  is  precisely  that  against  which  the  prophets, 


at  the  high-water  mark  of  their  inspiration,  nr^i 
always  protesting — the  universal  and  inveterate 
error  of  narrowing  down  the  requirements  of  the 
Infinitely  Holy,  Just,  and  Good,  to  the  scrupu- 
lous observance  of  some  accepted  body  of 
canons,  enshrined  in  a  book  and  duly  inter- 
preted by  the  laborious  application  of  recognised 
legal  authorities.  It  is  so  comfortable  to  be 
sure  of  possessing  an  infallible  guide  in  so  small 
a  compass;  to  be  spared  all  further  consideration, 
so  long  as  we  have  paid  the  priestly  dues,  and 
kept  the  annual  feasts,  and  carefully  observed  the 
laws  of  ceremonial  purity!  From  the  first,  the 
attention  of  priests  and  people,  including  the  of- 
ficial prophets,  would  be  attracted  by  the  ritual 
and  ceremonial  precepts,  rather  than  by  the  ear- 
nest moral  teaching  of  Deuteronomy.  As  soon 
as  first  impressions  had  had  time  to  subside,  the 
moral  and  spiritual  element  in  that  noble  book 
would  begin  to  be  ignored,  or  confounded  with 
the  purely  external  and  mundane  prescriptions 
affecting  public  worship  and  social  propriety; 
and  the  interests  of  true  religion  would  hardly 
be  subserved  by  the  formal  acceptance  of  this 
code  as  the  law  of  the  state.  The  unregenerate 
heart  of  man  would  fancy  that  it  had  at  last 
gotten  that  for  which  it  is  alwavs  craving — some- 
thing final — something  to  which  it  could  trium- 
phantly point,  when  urged  by  the  religious  en- 
thusiast, as  tangible  evidence  that  it  was  fulfill- 
ing the  Divine  law,  that  it  was  at  one  with  lah- 
vah, and  therefore  had  a  right  to  expect  the  con- 
tinuance of  His  favour  and  blessing.  Spiritual 
development  would  be  arrested;  men  would  be- 
come satisfied  with  having  effected  certain  defi- 
nite changes  bringing  them  into  external  con- 
formity with  the  written  law,  and  would  incline 
to  rest  in  things  as  they  were.  Meanwhile,  the 
truth  held  good  that  to  make  a  fetish  of  a  code, 
a  system,  a  holy  book,  is  not  necessarily  identi- 
cal with  the  service  of  God.  It  is,  in  fact,  the 
surest  way  to  forget  God;  for  it  is  to  invest  some- 
thing that  is  not  He,  but,  at  best,  a  far-off  echo 
of  His  voice,  with  His  sole  attributes  of  finality 
and  sufficiency. 

The  effect  of  the  downfall  of  the  good  king- 
was  electrical.  The  nation  discovered  that  the 
displeasure  of  lahvah  had  not  passed  away  like 
a  morning  cloud.  Out  of  the  shock  and  the  dis- 
may of  that  terrible  disillusion  sprang  the  con- 
viction that  the  past  was  not  atoned  for,  that  the 
evil  of  it  was  irreparable.  The  idea  is  reflected 
in  the  words  of  Jeremiah  (xv.  i):  "  And  lahvah 
said  unto  me,  If  Moses  were  to  stand  before  Me 
(as  an  intercessor),  and  Samuel,  I  should  not  in- 
cline towards  this  people:  dismiss  them  from 
My  presence,  and  let  them* go  forth!  And  when 
they  say  unto  thee.  Whither  are  we  to  go  forth? 
thou  shalt  say  unto  them,  Thus  said  lahvah, 
They  that  are  Death's  to  death;  and  they  that 
are  the  Sword's  to  the  sword;  and  they  that 
are  Famine's  to  famine;  and  they  that  are  Cap- 
tivity's to  captivity.  And  I  will  set  over  their> 
four  families,  saith  lahvah;  the  sword  to  slay,, 
and  the  dogs  to  draw  (2  Sam.  xvii.  13),  and  th^ 
birds  of  the  air,  and  the  beasts  of  the  earth,  to 
devour  and  to  destroy.  And  I  will  give  them 
for  worry  (Deut.  xxviii.  25)  to  all  the  realms 
of  earth:  'because  of  (Deut.  xv.  10,  xviii.  12; 
??J2)  Manasseh  ben  Hezekiah  king  of  Judah, 
for  what  he  did  in  Jerusalem.'  "  In  the  next 
verses  we  have  what  seems  to  be  a  reference  to 
the  death  of  Josiah  (ver.  7).  "  I  fanned  them 
with  a  fan  " — the  fan  b,v  which  the  husbandman 


SKETCH    OF    THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


13 


separates  wheat  from  chaff  in  the  threshingfloor 
— "  I  fanned  them  with  a  fan,  in  the  gates  of  the 
land  " — at  Megiddo,  the  point  where  an  enemy 
marching  along  the  maritime  route  might  enter 
the  land  of  Israel;  "I  bereaved,  I  ruined  my 
people  (ver.  9).  She  that  has  borne  seven,  pined 
away;  she  breathed  out  her  soul;  '  her  sun  went 
down  while  it  was  yet  day.'  "  The  national 
mourning  over  this  dire  event  became  proverbial, 
as  we  see  from  Zech.  xii.  11:  "In  that  day,  great 
shall  be  the  mourning  in  Jerusalem;  like  the 
mourning  of  Hadadrimmon  in  the  valley  of 
Megiddo." 

The  political  relations  of  the  period  are  cer- 
tainly obscure,  if  we  confine  our  attention  to  the 
biblical  data.  Happily,  we  are  now  able  to  sup- 
plement these,  by  comparison  with  the  newly  re- 
covered monuments  of  Assyria.  Under  Ma- 
nasseh,  the  kingdom  of  Judah  became  tributary 
to  Esarhaddon;  and  this  relation  of  dependence, 
;ve  may  be  sure,  was  not  interrupted  during  the 
vigorous  reign  of  the  mighty  Ashurbanipal, 
B.  c.  668-626.  But  the  first  symptoms  of  declin- 
ing power  on  the  side  of  their  oppressors  would 
undoubtedly  be  the  signal  for  conspiracy  and  re- 
bellion in  the  distant  parts  of  the  loosely  amal- 
gamated empire.  Until  the  death  of  Ashur- 
banipal, the  last  great  sovereign  who  reigned  at 
Nineveh,  it  may  be  assumed  that  Josiah  stood 
true  to  his  fealty.  It  appears  from  certain  no- 
tices in  Kings  and  Chronicles  (2  Kings  xxiii.  19; 
2  Chron.  xxxiv.  6)  that  he  was  able  to  exercise 
authority  even  in  the  territories  of  the  ruined 
kingdom  of  Israel.  This  may  have  been  due  to 
the  fact  that  he  was  allowed  to  do  pretty  much 
as  he  liked,  so  long  as  he  proved  an  obedient 
vassal;  or,  as  is  more  likely,  the  attention  of 
the  Assyrians  was  diverted  from  the  West  by 
troubles  nearer  home  in  connection  with  the 
Scythians  or  the  Medes  and  Babylonians.  At 
all  events,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  when 
Josiah  went  out  to  oppose  the  Pharaoh  at 
Megiddo,  he  was  facing  the  forces  of  Egypt 
alone.  The  thing  is  intrinsically  improbable. 
The  king  of  Judah  must  have  headed  a  coalition 
of  the  petty  Syrian  states  against  the  common 
enemy.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the 
Palestinian  principalities  resisted  Necho's  ad- 
vance, in  the  interests  of  their  nominal  suzerain 
Assyria.  From  all  we  can  gather,  that  empire 
was  now  tottering  to  its  irretrievable  fall,  under 
the  feeble  successors  of  Ashurbanipal.  The  am- 
bition of  Egypt  was  doubtless  a  terror  to  the 
combined  peoples.  The  further  results  of  Ne- 
cho's campaign  are  unknown.  For  the  moment, 
Judah  experienced  a  change  of  masters;  but  the 
Egyptian  tyranny  was  not  destined  to  last.  Some 
four  years  after  the  battle  of  Megiddo,  Pharaoh 
Necho  made  a  second  expedition  to  the  North, 
this  time  against  the  Babylonians,  who  had  suc- 
ceeded to  the  empire  of  Assyria.  The  Egyptians 
were  utterly  defeated  in  the  battle  of  Carche- 
mish,  circ.  b.  c.  606-05,  which  left  Nebuchadrez- 
zar in  virtual  possession  of  the  countries  west  of 
the  Euphrates  (Jer.  xlvi.  2).  It  was  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah, 
when  this  crisis  arose  in  the  affairs  of  the  East- 
ern world.  The  prophet  Jeremiah  did  not  miss 
the  meaning  of  events.  From  the  first  he  rec- 
ognised in  Nebuchadrezzar,  or  Nabucodrossor, 
an  instrument  in  the  Divine  hand  for  the  chas- 
tisement of  the  peoples;  from  the  first,  he  pre- 
dicted a  judgment  of  God,  not  only  upon  the 
Jews,  but  upon  all  nations,  far  and  near.     The 


substance  of  his  oracles  is  preserved  to  us  in 
chapters  xxv.  and  xlvi.-xlix.  of  his  book.  In 
the  former  passage,  which  is  expressly  dated  from 
the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  and  the  first  of 
Nebuchadrezzar,  the  prophet  gives  a  kind  of  ret- 
rospect of  his  ministry  of  three-and-twenty  years, 
affirms  that  it  has  failed  of  its  end,  and  that  Di- 
vine retribution  is  therefore  certain.  The  "  tribes 
of  the  north  "  will  come  and  desolate  the  whole 
country  (ver.  9),  and  "  these  nations " — the 
peoples  of  Palestine — "  shall  serve  the  king  of 
Babel  seventy  years"  (ver.  11).  The  judgment 
on  the  nations  is  depicted  by  an  impressive  sym- 
bolism (ver.  15).  "  Thus  said  lahvah,  the  God 
of  Israel,  unto  me.  Take  this  cup  of  wine,  the 
(Divine)  wrath,  from  My  hand,  and  cause  all 
the  nations,  unto  whom  I  send  thee,  to  drink  it. 
And  let  them  drink,  and  reel,  and  show  them- 
selves frenzied,  because  of  the  sword  that  I  am 
sending  amongst  them!  "  The  strange  meta- 
phor recalls  our  own  proverb:  Quern  Deus  vult 
perdere,  prius  dementat.  "  So  I  took  the  cup 
from  the  hand  of  lahvah,  and  made  all  the  na- 
tions drink,  unto  whom  lahvah  had  sent  me." 
Then,  as  in  some  list  of  the  proscribed,  the 
prophet  writes  down,  one  after  another,  the 
names  of  the  doomed  cities  and  peoples.  The 
judgment  was  set  for  that  age,  and  the  eternal 
books  wer^  opened,  and  the  names  found  in  them 
were  these  (ver.  18):  "Jerusalem,  and  the  cities 
of  Judah,  and  her  kings,  and  her  princes.  Pha- 
raoh, king  of  Egypt,  and  his  servants,  and  his 
princes,  and  all  his  people.  And  all  the  hired 
soldiery,  and  all  the  kings  of  the  land  of  Uz, 
and  all  the  kings  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines, 
and  Ashkelon,  and  Gaza,  and  Ekron,  and  the 
remnant  of  Ashdod.  Edom,  and  Moab,  and  the 
bene  Ammon.  And  all  the  kings  of  Tyre,  and 
all  the  kings  of  Sidon,  and  the  kings  of  the 
island  (t.  e.,  Cyprus)  that  is  beyond  the  sea.  De- 
dan  and  Tema  and  Buz  and  all  the  tonsured  folk. 
And  all  the  kings  of  Arabia,  and  all  the  kings 
of  the  hired  soldiery,  that  dwell  in  the  wilder- 
ness. And  all  the  kings  of  Zimri,  and  all  the 
kings  of  Elam,  and  all  the  kings  of  Media.  And 
all  the  kings  of  the  north,  the  near  and  the 
far,  one  with  another;  and  all  the  kingdoms 
of  the  earth  that  are  upon  the  surface  of  the 
ground." 

When  the  mourning  for  Josiah  was  ended  (2 
Chron.  xxxv.  24  sqq.),  the  people  put  Jehoahaz 
on  his  father's  throne.  But  this  arrangement  was 
not  suffered  to  continue,  for  Necho,  having  de- 
feated and  slain  Josiah,  naturally  asserted  his 
right  to  dispose  of  the  crown  of  Judah  as  he 
thought  fit.  Accordingly,  he  put  Jehoahaz  in 
bonds  at  Riblah  in  the  land  of  Hamath,  whither 
he  had  probably  summoned  him  to  swear  alle- 
giance to  Egypt,  or  whither,  perhaps,  Jehoahaz 
had  dared  to  go  with  an  armed  force  to  resist 
the  Egyptian  pretensions,  which,  however,  is  an 
unlikely  supposition,  as  the  battle  in  which  Jo- 
siah had  fallen  must  have  been  a  severe  blow  to 
the  military  resources  of  Judah.  Necho  carried 
the  unfortunate  but  also  unworthy  king  (2 
Kings  xxiii.  32)  a  prisoner  to  Egypt,  where  he 
died  {ihid.  34).  These  events  are  thus  alluded 
to  by  Jeremiah  (xxii.  10-12):  "  Weep  ye  not  for 
one  dead  (i.  e.,  Josiah),  nor  make  your  moan  for 
him:  weep  ever  for  him  that  is  going  away;  for 
he  will  not  come  back  again,  and  see  his  native 
land!  For  thus  hath  lahvah  said  of  Shallum  (t. 
e.,  Jehoahaz,  i  Chron.  iii.  15)  ben  Josiah,  king  of 


14 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


Judah,  that  reigned  in  the  place  of  Josiah  his 
father,  who  had  p:one  forth  out  of  his  place  (i.  e., 
Jerusalem,  or  the  palace,  ver.  i).  He  will  not 
come  back  thither  again.  For  in  the  place 
whither  they  have  led  him  into  exile,  there  he 
will  die;  and  this  land  he  will  not  see  again." 
The  pathos  of  this  lament  for  one  whose  dream 
of  greatness  was  broken  for  ever  within  three 
short  months,  does  not  conceal  the  prophet's 
condemnation  of  Necho's  prisoner.  Jeremiah 
does  not  condole  with  the  captive  king  as  the 
victim  of  mere  misfortune.  In  this,  as  in  all  the 
gathering  calamities  of  his  country,  he  sees  a 
retributive  meaning.  The  nine  preceding  Verses 
of  the  chapter  demonstrate  the  fact. 

In  the  place  of  Jehoahaz,  Necho  had  set  up 
his  elder  brother  Eliakim,  with  the  title  of  Je- 
hoiakim  (2  Kings  xxiii.  34).  This  prince  also 
is  condemned  in  the  narrative  of  Kings  (ver.  27)< 
as  having  done  "  the  evil  thing  in  the  eyes  of 
lahvah,  according  to  all  that  his  forefathers  had 
done;  "  an  estimate  which  is  thoroughly  con- 
firmed by  what  Jeremiah  has  added  to  his  lament 
for  the  deposed  king  his  brother.  The  pride, 
the  grasping  covetousness,  the  high-handed  vi- 
olence and  cruelty  of  Jehoiakim,  and  the  doom 
that  will  overtake  him,  in  the  righteousness  of 
God,  are  thus  declared:  "  Woe  to  him  that  build- 
eth  his  house  by  injustice,  and  his  chambers  by 
iniquity!  that  layeth  on  his  neighbour  work 
without  wages,  and  giveth  him  not  his  hire! 
That  saith,  I  will  build  me  a  lofty  house,  with 
airy  chambers;  and  he  cutteth  him  out  the  win- 
dows thereof,  panelling  it  with  cedar,  and  paint- 
ing it  with  vermilion.  Shalt  thou  reign,  that 
thou  art  hotly  intent  upon  cedar?  "  (Or,  ac- 
cording to  the  LXX.  Vat.,  thou  viest  with 
Ahaz — LXX.  Alex.,  with  Ahab;  perhaps  a  refer- 
ence to  "  the  ivory  house  "  mentioned  in  i  Kings 
xxii.  39).  "  Thy  father,  did  he  not  eat  and 
drink  and  do  judgment  and  justice?  Then  it  was 
well  with  him.  He  judged  the  cause  of  the  op- 
pressed and  the  needy:  then  it  was  well.  Was 
not  this  to  know  Me?  saith  lahvah.  For  thine 
eyes  and  thine  heart  are  set  upon  nought  but 
thine  own  lucre  (thy  plunder),  and  upon  the 
blood  of  the  innocent,  to  shed  it,  and  upon  ex- 
tortion and  oppression  to  do  it.  Therefore,  thus 
hath  lahvah  said  of  Jehoiakim  ben  Josiah,  king 
of  Judah:  They  shall  not  lament  for  him  with 
Ah,  my  brother!  or  Ah,  sister!  They  shall  not 
lament  for  him  with  Ah,  lord!  or  Ah,  his  majesty! 
With  the  burial  of  an  ass  shall  he  be  buried; 
with  dragging  and  casting  forth  beyond  the 
gates  of  Jerusalem!  " 

In  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  this  worth- 
less tyrant,  the  prophet  was  impelled  to  address 
a  very  definite  warning  to  the  throng  of  wor- 
shippers in  the  court  of  the  temple  (xxvi.  4  sqq.). 
It  was  to  the  effect  that  if  they  did  not  mend 
their  ways,  their  temple  should  become  like  Shi- 
loh,  and  their  city  a  curse  to  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth.  There  could  be  no  doubt  of  the 
meaning  of  this  reference  to  the  ruined  sanctuary, 
long  since  forsaken  of  God  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  60).  It 
so  wrought  upon  that  fanatical  audience,  that 
priests  and  prophets  and  people  rose  as  one  man 
against  the  daring  speaker;  and  Jeremiah  was 
barely  rescued  from  immediate  death  by  the 
timely  intervention  of  the  princes.  The  account 
closes  with  the  relatioh  of  the  cruel  murder  of 
another  prophet  of  the  school  of  Jeremiah,  by 
command  of  Jehoiakim  the  king;  and  it  is  very 
evident  from  these  narratives  that,   screened  as 


he  was  by  powerful  friends,  Jeremiah  narrowly 
escaped  a  similar  fate. 

We  have  reached  the  point  in  our  prophet's 
career  when,  taking  a  broad  survey  of  the  en- 
tire world  of  his  time,  he  forecasts  the  charac- 
ter of  the  future  that  awaits  its  various  political 
divisions.  He  has  left  the  substance  of  his  re- 
flections in  the  25th  chapter,  and  in  those  proph- 
ecies concerning  the  foreign  peoples,  which  the 
Hebrew  text  of  his  works  relegates  to  the  very 
end  of  the  book,  as  chapters  xlvi.-li.,  but  whijph 
the  Greek  recension  of  the  Septuagint  inseffts 
immediately  after  chapter  xxv.  13.  In  the  de- 
cisive battle  at  Carchemish,  which  crippled  the 
power  of  Egypt,  the  only  other  existing  state 
which  could  make  any  pretensions  to  the  suprem- 
acy of  Western  Asia,  and  contend  with  the  trans- 
Euphratean  empires  for  the  possession  of  Syria- 
Palestine,  Jeremiah  had  recognised  a  signal  in- 
dication of  the  Divine  Will,  which  he  was  not 
slow  to  proclaim  to  all  within  reach  of  his  in 
spired  eloquence.  In  common  with  all  the  great 
prophets  who  had  preceded'  him,  he  entertained 
a  profound  conviction  that  the  race  was  not  nec- 
essarily to  the  swift,  nor  the  battle  to  the  strong; 
that  the  fortune  of  war  was  not  determined  sim- 
ply and  solely  by  chariots  and  horsemen  and  big 
battalions;  that  behind  all  material  forces  lay 
the  spiritual,  from  whose  absolute  will  they  de- 
rived their  being  and  potency,  and  upon  whose 
sovereign  pleasure  depended  the  issues  of  victory 
and  defeat,  of  life  and  death.  As  his  successor, 
the  second  Isaiah,  saw  in  the  polytheist  Cyrus, 
king  of  Anzan,  a  chosen  servant  of  lahvah, 
whose  v^hole  triumphant  career  was  foreordained 
in  the  counsels  of.  heaven;  so  Jeremiah  saw  in 
the  rise  of  the  Babylonian  domination,  and  the 
rapid  development  of  the  new  empire  upon  the 
ruins  of  the  old,  a  manifest  token  of  the  Divine 
purpose,  a  revelation  of  a  Divine  secret.  His 
point  of  view  is  strikingly  illustrated  by  the 
warning  which  he  was  directed  to  send  a  few 
years  later  to  the  kings  who  were  seeking  to 
draw  Judah  into  the  common  alliance  against 
Babylon  (chap,  xxvii.  i  sqq.).  "  In  the  begin- 
ning of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  *  ben  Josiah,  king 
of  Judah,  fell  this  word  to  Jeremiah  from  lahvah. 
Thus  said  lahvah  unto  me.  Make  thee  thongs 
and  poles,  and  put  them  upon  thy  neck;  and  send 
them  to  the  king  of  Edom,  and  to  the  king  of 
Moab,  and  to  the  king  of  the  bene  Ammon,  and 
to  the  king  of  Tyre,  and  to  the  king  of  Zidon, 
by  the  hand  of  the  messengers  that  are  come  to 
Jerusalem,  unto  Zedekiah  the  king  of  Judah. 
And  give  them  a  charge  unto  their  masters,  say- 
ing. Thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Is- 
rael, Thus  shall  ye  say  to  your  masters:  I  it  was 
that  made  the  earth,  mankind,  and  the  cattle 
that  are  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  by  My  great 
strength,  and  by  Mine  outstretched  arm;  and  I 
give  it  to  whom  it  seemeth  good  in  My  sight. 
And  now,  I  will  verily  give  all  these  countries 
into  the  hands  of  Nebuchadrezzar  king  of  Babel, 
My  servant;  and  even  the  wild  creatures  of  the 
field  will  I  give  unto  him  to  serve  him." 

Nebuchadrezzar  was  invincible,  and  the  Jew- 
ish prophet  clearly  perceived  the  fact.  But  it 
jnust  not  be  imagined  that  the  Jewish  people 
generally,  or  the  neighbouring  peoples,  enjoyed 
a  similar  degree  of  insight.  Had  that  been  so, 
the  battle  of  Jeremiah's  life  would  never  have 
been  fought  out  under  such  cruel,  such  hopeless 
conditions.  The  prophet  saw  the  truth,  and  pro- 
*  So  rightly  the  Syriac,  for  Jehoiakim. 


SKETCH    OF   THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


>5 


claimed  it  without  ceasing  in  reluctant  ears,  and 
was  met  with  derision,  and  incredulity,  and  in- 
trigue, and  slander,  and  pitiless  persecution.  By- 
and-by,  when  his  word  had  come  to  pass,  and 
all  the  principalities  of  Canaan  were  crouching 
abjectly  at  the  feet  of  the  conqueror,  and  Jerusa- 
lem was  a  heap  of  ruins,  the  scattered  commu- 
nities of  banished  Israelites  could  remember  that 
Jeremiah  had  foreseen  and  foretold  it  all.  In 
the  light  of  accomplished  facts,  the  significance 
of  his  prevision  began  to  be  realised;  and  when 
the  first  dreary  hours  of  dumb  and  desperate 
sufTering  were  over,  the  exiles  gradually  learned 
to  find  consolation  in  the  few  but  precious  prom- 
ises that  had  accompanied  the  menaces  which 
were  now  so  visibly  fulfilled.  While  they  were 
yet  in  their  own  land,  two  things  had  been  pre- 
dicted by  this  prophet  in  the  name  of  their  God. 
The  first  was  now  accomplished;  no  cavil  could 
throw  doubt  upon  actual  experience.  Was  there 
not  here  some  warrant,  at  least  for  reasonable 
men,  some  sufficient  ground  for  trusting  the 
prophet  at  last,  for  believing  in  his  Divine  mis- 
sion, for  striving  to  follow  his  counsels,  and  for 
looking  forward  with  steadfast  hope  out  of  pres- 
ent affliction,  to  the  gladness  of  the  future  which 
the  same  seer  had  foretold,  even  with  the  un- 
wonted precision  of  naming  a  limit  of  tirne?  So 
the  exiles  were  persuaded,  and  their  belief  was 
fully  justified  by  the  event.  Never  had  they  re- 
alised the  absolute  sovereignty  of  their  God, 
the  universality  of  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  shadowy 
nature,  the  blank  nothingness  of  all  supposed  ri- 
vals of  His  dominion,  as  now  they  did,  when  at 
length  years  of  painful  experience  had  brought 
home  to  their  minds  the  truth  that  Nebuchadrez- 
zar had  demolished  the  temple  and  laid  Jerusalem 
in  the  dust,  not,  as  he  himself  believed,  by  the 
favour  of  Bel-Merodach  and  Nebo.  but  by  the 
sentence  of  the  God  cf  Israel;  and  that  the  catas- 
trophe, which  had  swept  them  out  of  political 
existence,  occurred  not  because  lahvah  was 
weaker  than  the  gods  of  Babylon,  but  because 
He  was  irresistibly  strong;  stronger  than  all 
powers  of  all  worlds;  stronger  therefore  than  Is- 
rael, stronger  than  Babylon;  stronger  than  the 
pride  and  ambition  of  the  earthly  conqueror, 
stronger  than  the  selfwill,  and  the  stubbornness, 
and  the  wayward  rebellion,  and  the  fanatical 
blindness,  and  the  frivolous  unbelief,  of  his  own 
people.  The  conception  is  an  easy  one  for  us, 
who  have  inherited  the  treasures  both  of  Jew- 
ish and  of  Gentile  thought;  but  the  long  struggle 
of  the  prophets,  and  the  fierce  antagonism  of 
their  fellow-countrymen,  and  the  political  ex- 
tinction of  the  Davidic  monarchy,  and  the  ago- 
nies of  the  Babylonian  exile,  were  necessary  to 
the  genesis  and  germination  of  this  master-con- 
ception in  the  heart  of  Israel,  and  so  of  humanity. 
To  return  from  this  hasty  glance  at  the  re- 
moter consequences  of  the  prophet's  ministry, 
it  was  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  and  the 
first  of  Nebuchadrezzar  (xxv.  i)  that,  in  obedi- 
ence to  a  Divine  intimation,  he  collected  the  vari- 
ous discourses  which  he  had  so  far  delivered  in 
the  name  of  God.  Some  doubt  has  been  raised 
as  to  the  precise  meaning  of  the  record  of  this 
matter  (xxxvi.).  On  the  one  hand,  it  is  urged 
that  "  An  historically  accurate  reproduction  of 
the  prophecies  would  not  i.ave  suited  Jeremiah's 
object,  which  was  not  historical  but  practical: 
he  desired  to  give  a  salutary  shock  to  the  people, 
by  bringing  before  them  the  fatal  consequences 
of  their  evil  deeds:  "  and  that  "  the  purport  of 


the  roll  (ver.  29)  which  the  king  burned  was 
(only)  that  the  king  of  Babylon  should  '  come 
and  destroy  this  land,'  whereas  it  is  clear  that 
Jeremiah  had  uttered  many  other  important  dec- 
larations in  the  course  of  his  already  long  min- 
istry." And  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  suggested 
that  the  roll,  of  which  the  prophet  speaks  in  chap, 
xxxvi.,  contained  no  more  than  the  prophecy 
concerning  the  Babylonian  invasion  and  its  con- 
sequences, which  is  preserved  in  chap,  xxv.,  and 
dated  from  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim. 

Considering  the  unsatisfactory  state  of  the 
text  of  Jeremiah,  it  is  perhaps  admissible  to  sup- 
pose, for  the  sake  of  this  hypothesis,  that  the 
second  verse  of  chap,  xxv.,  which  expressly  de- 
clares that  this  prophecy  was  spoken  by  its  au- 
thor "  to  all  the  people  of  Judah,  and  to  all  the 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,"  is  "  a  loose  inaccurate 
statement  due  to  a  later  editor;  "  although  this 
inconvenient  statement  is  found  in  the  Greek  of 
the  LXX.  as  well  as  in  the  Massoretic  Hebrew 
text.  But  let  us  examine  the  alleged  objections 
in  the  light  of  the  positive  statements  of  chap, 
xxxvi.  It  is  there  written  thus:  "  In  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim  ben  Josiah  king  of  Judah, 
this  word  fell  to  Jeremiah  from  lahvah.  Take 
thee  a  book-roll,  and  write  on  it  all  the  words 
that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee,  concerning  Israel 
and  Judah  and  all  the  nations,  from  the  day 
when  I  (first)  spake  unto  thee, — from  the  days 
of  Josiah, — unto  this  day."  This  certainly  seems 
plain  enough.  The  only  possible  question  is 
whether  the  command  was  to  collect  within  the 
compass  of  a  single  volume,  a  sort  of  author's 
edition,  an  indefinite  number  of  discourses  pre- 
served hitherto  in  separate  MSS.  and  perhaps 
to  a  great  extent  in  the  prophet's  memory;  or 
whether  we  are  to  understand  by  "  all  the  words  " 
the  substance  of  the  various  prophecies  to  which 
reference  is  made.  If  the  object  was  merely  to 
impress  the  people  on  a  particular  occasion  by 
placing  before  them  a  sort  of  historical  review 
of  the  prophet's  warnings  in  the  past,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  a  formal  edition  of  his  utterances,  so 
far  as  he  was  able  to  prepare  such  a  work,  would 
not  be  the  most  natural  or  ready  method  of  at- 
taining that  purpose.  Such  a  review  for  practi- 
cal purposes  might  well  be  comprised  within 
the  limits  of  a  single  continuous  composition, 
such  as  we  find  in  chap,  xxv.,  which  opens  with 
a  brief  retrospect  of  the  prophet's  ministry  dur- 
ing twenty-three  years  (vers.  3-7),  and  then  de- 
nounces the  neglect  with  which  his  warnings 
have  been  received,  and  declares  the  approaching 
subjugation  of  all  the  states  of  Phenicia-Palestine 
by  the  king  of  Babylon.  But  the  narrative  itself 
gives  not  a  single  hint  that  such  was  the  sole 
object  in  view.  Much  rather  does  it  appear  from 
the  entire  context  that,  the  crisis  having  at 
length  arrived,  which  Jeremiah  had  so  long  fore- 
seen, he  was  now  impelled  to  gather  together, 
with  a  view  to  their  preservation,  all  those  dis- 
courses by  which  he  had  laboured  in  vain  to 
overcome  the  indifference,  the  callousness,  and 
the  bitter  antagonism  of  his  people.  These  ut- 
terances of  the  past,  collected  and  revised  in  the 
light  of  successive  events,  and  illustrated  by  their 
substantial  agreement  with  what  had  actually 
taken  place,  and  especially  by  the  new  danger 
which  seemed  to  threaten  the  whole  West,  the 
rising  power  of  Babylon,  might  certainly  be  ex- 
pected to  produce  a  powerful  impression  by  their 
coincidence  with  the  national  apprehensions; 
and   the   prophet    might    even    hope    that    warn- 


i6 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


ings.  hitherto  disregarded,  but  now  visibly  jus- 
tified by  events  in  course  of  development,  would 
at  last  bring  "  the  house  of  Judah  "  to  consider 
seriously  the  evil  (hat,  in  God's  Providence,  was 
evidently  impending,  and  "  return  every  man 
from  his  evil  way,"  that  even  so  late  the  conse- 
quences of  their  guilt  might  be  turned  aside. 
This  doubtless  was  the  immediate  aim,  but  it  does 
not  exclude  others,  such  as  the  vindication  of  the 
prophet's  own  claims,  in  startling  contrast  with 
those  of  the  false  prophets,  who  had  opposed  him 
at  every  step,  and  misled  his  countrymen  so 
grievously  and  fatally.  Against  these  and  their 
delusive  promises,  the  volume  of  Jeremiah's  past 
discourses  would  constitute  an  effective  protest, 
and  a  complete  justification  of  his  own  endeav- 
ours. We  must  also  remember  that,  if  the  re- 
pentance and  salvation  of  his  own  contempora- 
ries was  naturally  the  first  obiect  of  the  prophet 
in  all  his  undertakings,  in  the  Divine  counsels 
prophecy  has  more  than  a  temporary  value,  and 
that  the  writings  of  this  very  prophet  were  des- 
tined to  become  instrumental  in  the  conversion 
of  a  succeeding  generation. 

Those  twenty-three  years  of  patient  thought 
and  earnest  labour,  of  high  converse  with  God, 
and  of  agonised  pleading  with  a  reprobate  people, 
were  not  to  be  without  their  fruit,  though  the 
prophet  himself  was  not  to  see  it.  It  is  a  matter 
of  history  that  the  words  of  Jeremiah  wrought 
with  such  power  upon  the  hearts  of  the  exiles 
in  Babylonia,  as  to  become,  in  the  hands  of  God, 
a  principal  means  in  the  regeneration  of  Israel, 
and  of  that  restoration  which  was  its  prom- 
ised and  its  actual  consequence;  and  from  that 
day  to  this,  not  one  of  all  the  goodly  fellow- 
ship of  the  prophets  has  enjoyed  such  credit  in 
the  Jewish  Church  as  he  who  in  his  lifetime  had 
to  encounter  neglect  and  ridicule,  hatred  and 
persecution,  beyond  what  is  recorded  of  any 
other. 

"So  Jeremiah  called  Baruch  ben  Neriah;  and 
Baruch  wrote,  from  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah,  all 
the  words  of  lahvah.  that  He  had  spoken  unto 
him,  upon  a  book-roll  "  (ver.  4).  Nothing  is  said 
about  time:  and  there  is  nothing  to  indicate 
that  what  the  scribe  wrote  at  the  prophet's  dic- 
tation was  a  single  brief  discourse.  The  work 
probably  occupied  a  not  inconsiderable  time,  as 
may  be  inferred  from  the  datum  of  the  ninth 
verse  (vid.  infra).  Jeremiah  would  know  that 
haste  was  incompatible  with  literary  finish;  he 
would  probably  feel  that  it  was  equally  incom- 
patible with  the  proper  execution  of  what  he  had 
recognised  as  a  Divine  command.  The  prophet 
hardly  had  all  his  past  utterances  lying  before 
him  in  the  form  of  finished  compositions.  "  And 
Jeremiah  commanded  Baruch,  saying:  I  am  de- 
tained (or  confined);  I  cannot  enter  the  house 
of  lahvah;  so  enter  thou,  and  read  in  the  roll, 
that  thou  wrotest  from  my  mouth,  the  words  of 
lahvah,  in  the  ears  of  the  people,  in  the  house 
of  lahvah,  upon  a  day  of  fasting:  and  also  in  the 
ears  of  all  Judah  (the  Jews),  that  come  in  (to  the 
temple)  from  their  (several)  cities,  thou  shalt 
read  them.  Perchance  their  supplication  will  fall 
before  lahvah,  and  they  will  return,  every  one 
from  his  evil  way;  for  great  is  the  anger  and  the 
hot  displeasure  that  lahvah  hath  spoken  (threat- 
ened) unto  this  people.  And  Baruch  ben  Neriah 
did  according  to  ail  that  Jeremiah  the  prophet 
commanded  hmi,  reading  in  the  book  the  words 
of  lahvah  in  lahvah's  house."  This  last  sen- 
tence might  be  regarded  as  a  general  statement. 


anticipative  of  the  detailed  account  that  follows, 
as  is  often  the  case  in  Old  Testament  narra- 
tives. But  I  doubt  the  application  of  this  well- 
known  exegetical  device  in  the  present  instance. 
The  verse  is  more  likely  an  interpolation;  unless 
we  suppose  that  it  refers  to  divers  readings  of 
which  no  particulars  are  given,  but  which  pre- 
ceded the  memorable  one  described  in  the  follow- 
ing verses.  The  injunction,  "  And  also  in  the 
ears  of  all  Judah  that  come  out  of  their  cities 
thou  shalt  read  them!  "  might  imply  successive 
readings,  as  the  people  flocked  into  Jerusalem 
from  time  to  time.  But  the  grand  occasion, 
if  not  the  only  one,  was  without  doubt  that 
which  stands  recorded  in  the  text.  "  And  it 
came  to  pass  in  the  fifth  year  of  Jehoiakim  ben 
Josiah  king  of  Judah,  in  the  tiinth  month,  t'.^ey 
proclaimed  a  fast  before  lahvah, — all  the  people 
in  Jerusalem  and  all  the  people  that  were  come 
out  of  the  cities  of  Judah  into  Jerusalem.  And 
Baruch  read  in  the  book  the  words  of  Jeremiah, 
in  the  house  of  lahvah,  in  the  cell  of  Gemariah 
ben  Shaphan  the  scribe,  in  the  upper  (inner) 
court,  at  the  entry  of  the  new  gate  of  lahvah's 
house,  in  the  ears  of  all  the  people."  The  dates 
have  an  important  bearing  upon  the  points  we 
are  considering.  It  was  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Jehoiakim  that  the  prophet  was  bidden  to  com- 
mit his  oracles  to  writing.  If,  then,  the  task  was 
not  accomplished  before  the  ninth  month  of  the 
fifth  year,  it  is  plain  that  it  involved  a  good  deal 
more  than  penning  such  a  discourse  as  the  twen- 
ty-fifth chapter.  This  datum,  in  fact,  strongly 
favours  the  supposition  that  it  was  a  record  of 
his  principal  utterances  hitherto,  that  Jeremiah 
thus  undertook  and  accomplished.  It  is  not  at 
all  necessary  to  assume  that  on  this  or  any  other 
occasion  Baruch  read  the  entire  contents  of  the 
roll  to  his  audience  in  the  temple.  We  are  told 
that  he  "  read  in  the  book  the  words  of  Jere- 
miah," that  is,  no  doubt,  some  portion  of  the 
whole.  And  so,  in  the  famous  scene  before  the 
king,  it  is  not  said  that  the  entire  work  was  read, 
but  the  contrary  is  expressly  related  (ver.  23)  r 
"  And  when  Jehudi  had  read  three  columns  or 
four,  he  (the  king)  began  to  cut  it  with  the 
scribe's  knife,  and  to  cast  it  into  the  fire."  Three 
or  four  columns  of  an  ordinary  roll  might  have 
contained  the  whole  of  the  twenty-fifth  chapter; 
and  it  must  have  been  an  unusually  diminutive 
document,  if  the  first  three  or  four  columns  of  it 
contained  no  more  than  the  seven  verses  of  chap. 
XXV.  (3-6),  which  declare  the  sin  of  Judah,  and 
announce  the  coming  of  the  king  of  Babylon. 
And,  apart  from  these  objections,  there  is  no 
ground  for  the  presumption  that  "  the  purport  of 
the  roll  which  the  king  burnt  was  (only)  that 
the  king  of  Babylon  should  '  come  and  destroy 
this  land.'  "  As  the  learned  critic,  from  whom 
I  have  quoted  these  words,  further  remarks,  with 
perfect  truth,  "  Jeremiah  had  uttered  many  other 
important  declarations  in  the  course  of  his  al- 
ready long  ministry." 

That,  I  grant,  is  true;  but  then  there  is  abso- 
lutely nothing  to  prove  that  this  roll  did  not  con- 
tain them  all.  Chap,  xxxvi.  29,  cited  by  the  ob- 
jector, is  certainly  not  such  proof.  That  verse 
simply  gives  the  angry  exclamation  with  which 
the  king  interrupted  the  reading  of  the  roll, 
"  Why  hast  thou  written  upon  it.  The  king  of 
Babylon  shall  surely  come  and  destroy  this  land 
and  cause  to  cease  from  it  man  and  beast?" 

This  may  have  been  no  more  than  jehoi- 
akim's     very     natural     inference     from     some 


SKETCH    OF    THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


17 


one  of  the  many  allusions  to  the  enemy 
"  from  the  north,"  which  occur  in  the  earlier 
part  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.  At  all 
events,  it  is  evident  that,  whether  the  king 
of  Babylon  was  directly  mentioned  or  not 
in  the  portion  of  the  roll  read  in  his  pres- 
ence, the  verse  in  question  assigns,  not  the  sole 
import  of  the  entire  work,  but  only  the  partic- 
ular point  in  it,  which,  at  the  existing  crisis, 
especially  roused  the  indignation  of  Jehoiakim. 
The  25th  chapter  may  of  course  have  been  con- 
tained in  the  roll  read  before  the  king. 

And  this  may  suffice  to  show  how  precarious 
are  the  assertions  of  the  learned  critic  in  the 
"  Encyclopaedia  Britannica "  upon  the  subject 
of  Jeremiah's  roll.  The  plain  truth  seems  to  be 
that,  perceiving  the  imminence  of  the  peril  that 
threatened  his  country,  the  prophet  was  im- 
pressed with  the  conviction  that  now  was  the 
time  to  commit  his  past  utterances  to  writing; 
and  that  towards  the  end  of  the  year,  after  he 
had  formed  and  carried  out  this  project,  he 
found  occasion  to  have  his  discourses  read  in  the 
temple,  to  the  crowds  of  rural  folk  who  sought 
refuge  in  Jerusalem  before  the  advance  of 
Nebuchadrezzar.  So  Josephus  understood  the 
matter  ("  Ant.,"  x.  6,  2). 

On  the  approach  of  the  Babylonians,  Jehoia- 
kim made  his  submission;  but  only  to  rebel 
again,  after  three  years  of  tribute  and  vassalage 
(2  Kings  xxiv.  i).  Drought  and  failure  of  the 
crops  aggravated  the  political  troubles  of  the 
country;  evils  in  which  Jeremiah  was  not  slow 
to  discern  the  hand  of  an  offended  and  alienated 
God.  "  How  long,"  he  asks  (xii.  4),  "  shall  the 
country  mourn,  and  the  herbage  of  the  whole 
field  wither?  From  the  wickedness  of  them 
that  dwell  therein  the  beasts  and  the  birds  per- 
ish." And  in  chap.  xiv.  we  have  a  highly  poeti- 
cal description  of  the  sufferings   of  the  time. 

"  Judah  mourneth,  and  her  gates  languish  ; 
They  sit  in  black  on  the  ground  ; 
And  the  outcry  of  Jerusalem  hath  gone  up. 
And  their  nobles,  they  sent  their  menial  folk  for  water  ; 
They  came  to  the  pits,  they  found  no  water  ; 
They  returned  with  their  vessels  empty  ; 
They  were  ashamed  and  confounded  and  covered 

their  head. 
On  account  of  ye  ground  that  is  chapt, 
For  rain  hath  not  fallen  in  the  land, 
The  ploughmen  are  ashamed — they  cover  their  head. 
For  even  the  hind  in  the  field — 
She  calveth  and  forsaketh  her  young  ; 
For  there  is  no  grass. 

And  the  wild  asses,  they  stand  on  the  scaurs; 
They  snuff  the  wind  *  like  jackals  ; 
Their  eyes  fail,  for  there  is  no  herbage." 

And  then,  after  this  graphic  and  alrn'ost  dra- 
matic portrayal  of  the  sufferings  of  man  and 
beast,  in  the  blinding  glare  of  the  towns,  and  in 
the  hot  waterless  plains,  and  on  the  bare  hills, 
tinder  that  burning  sky,  whose  cloudless  splen- 
dours seemed  to  mock  their  misery,  the  prophet 
prays  to  the  God  of  Israel. 

"  If  our  misdeeds  answer  against  us, 
O  lahvah,  w^ork  for  Thy  name  sake  ! 
Verily,  our  fallings  away  are  many  ; 
Towards  thee  we  are  in  fault. 

Hope  of  Israel,  that  savest  him  in  time  of  trouble ! 
Why  shouldst  thou  be  as  a  sojourner  in  the  land. 
And  as  a  traveller,  that  turneth  aside  to  pass  the  night  ? 
Why  shouldst  thou  be  as  a  man  stricken  dumb, 
As  a  champion  that  cannot  save? 
Yet  Thou  art  in  our  midst,  O  lahvah, 
And  Thy  name  is  called  over  us  : 
Leave  us  not !  " 

*  i.  e.,  to  scent  food  afar  off,  like  beasts  of  prey.  There 
was  no  occasion  to  alter  A.  V. 

2 -Vol.  IV. 


And  again,  at  the  end  of  the  chapter, 

"  Hast  Thou  wholly  rejected  Judah  ? 
Hath  Thy  soul  loathed  Zion  ? 
Why  hast  Thou  smitten  us. 
That  there  is  no  healing  for  us? 
We  looked  for  welfare,  but  bootlessly. 
For  a  time  of  healing,  and  behold  terror  ! 
We  know,  lahvah,  our   wickedness,  the  gnilt    of    our 

fathers : 
Verily,  we  are  in  fault  toward  Thee  ! 
Be  not  scornful,  for  Thy  name's  sake  ! 
Dishonour  not  Thy  glorious  throne  !  [i.  e.,  Jerusalem.] 
Remember,  break  not  Thy  covenant  wfth  us ! 
Among  the  Vanities  of  the  nations  are  there   indeed 

raingivers  ? 
Or  the  heavens,  can  they  yield  showers  ? 
Art  not  Thou  He  (that  doeth  this),  lahvah  our  God  ? 
And  we  wait  for  Thee, 
For  'tis  Thou  that  madest  all  this  world." 

In  these  and  the  like  pathetic  outpourings, 
which  meet  us  in  the  later  portions  of  the  Old 
Testament,  we  may  observe  the  gradual  devel- 
opment of  the  dialect  of  stated  prayer;  the  be- 
ginnings and  the  growth  of  that  beautiful  and  ap- 
propriate liturgical  language  in  which  both  the 
synagogue  and  the  church  afterwards  found  so 
perfect  an  instrument  for  the  expression  of  all 
the  harmonies  of  worship.  Prayer,  both  public 
and  private,  was  destined  to  assume  an  increasing 
importance,  and,  after  the  destruction  of  temple 
and  altar,  and  the  forcible  removal  of  the  people 
to  a  heathen  land,  to  become  the  principal  means 
of   communion    with    God. 

The  evils  of  drought  and  dearth  appear  to  have 
been  accompanied  by  inroads  of  foreign  enemies, 
who  took  advantage  of  the  existing  distress  to 
rob  and  plunder  at  will.  This  serious  aggrava- 
tion of  the  national  troubles  is  recorded  in  chap, 
xii.  7-17.  There  it  is  said,  in  the  name  of  God, 
"  I  have  left  My  house,  I  have  cast  off  My  her- 
itage; I  have  given  the  Darling  of  My  soul  into 
the  hands  of  her  enemies."  The  reason  is  Judah's 
fierce  hostility  to  her  Divine  Master:  "  Like  a 
lion  in  the  forest  she  hath  uttered  a  cry  against 
Me."  The  result  of  this  unnatural  rebellion  is 
seen  in  the  ravages  of  lawless  invaders,  probably 
nomads  of  the  desert,  always  watching  their  op- 
portunity, and  greedy  of  the  wealth,  while  dis- 
dainful of  the  pursuits  of  their  civilised  neigh- 
bours. It  is  as  if  all  the  wild  beasts,  that  roam 
at  large  in  the  open  country,  had  concerted  a 
united  attack  upon  a  devoted  land;  as  if  many 
shepherds  with  their  innumerable  flocks  had 
eaten  bare  and  trodden  down  the  vineyard  of  the 
Lord.  "  Over  all  the  bald  crags  in  the  wilder- 
ness freebooters  (Obad.  5)  are  come;  for  a 
sword  of  lahweh's  is  devouring:  from  land's  end 
to  land's  end  no  flesh  hath  security"  (ver.  12). 
The  rapacious  and  heathenish  hordes  of  the  des- 
ert, mere  human  wolves  intent  on  ravage  and 
slaughter,  are  a  sword  of  the  Lord's,  for  the 
chastisement  of  His  people;  just  as  the  king  of 
Babylon  is  His  "  servant  '  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. 

Only  ten  verses  of  the  Book  of  Kings  are 
occupied  with  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  (2  Kings 
xxiii.  34-xxiv.  6) ;  and  when  we  compare  that 
fliying  sketch  with  the  allusions  in  Jeremiah,  we 
cannot  but  keenly  regret  the  loss  of  that  "  Book 
of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah,"  to 
which  the  compiler  of  Kings  refers  as  his  au- 
thority. Had  that  work  survived,  many  things 
in  the  prophets,  which  are  now  obscure  and 
baffling,  would  have  been  clear  and  obvious. 
As  it  is,  we  are  often  obliged  to  be  content  with 
surmises  and  probabilities,  where  certainty  would 
be  right  welcome.     In  the  present  instance,  the 


z8 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


facts  alluded  to  by  the  prophet  appear  to  be  in- 
cluded in  the  statement  that  the  Lord  sent 
against  Jehoiakim  bands  of  Chaldeans,  and  bands 
of  Arameans,  and  bands  of  Moabites,  and  bands 
of  bene  Amnion.  The  Hebrew  term  implies 
marauding  or  predatory  bands,  rather  than  reg- 
ular armies,  and  it  need  not  be  supposed  that 
they  all  fell  upon  the  country  at  the  same  time 
or  in  accordance  with  any  preconcerted  scheme. 
In  the  midst  of  these  troubles.  Jehoiakim  died 
in  the  flower  of  his  age,  having  reigned  no 
more  than  eleven  years,  and  being  only  thirty- 
six  years  old  (2  Kings  xxiii.  36).  The  prophet 
thus  alludes  to  his  untimely  end:  "  Like  the 
partridge  that  sitteth  on  eggs  that  she  hath  not 
laid,  so  is  he  that  maketh  riches,  and  not  by 
right:  in  the  midst  of  his  days  they  leave  him; 
and  in  his  last  end  he  proveth  a  fool"  (xvii.  11). 
We  have  already  considered  the  detailed  condem- 
nation ot  this  evil  king  in  the  22d  chapter.  The 
prophet  Habakkuk,  a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah, 
seems  to  have  had  Jehoiakim  in  his  mind's  eye, 
when  denouncing  (ii.  9)  woe  to  one  that  "  getteth 
an  evil  gain  for  his  house,  that  he  may  set  his 
nest  on  high,  that  he  may  escape  from  the  hand 
of  evil!  "  The  allusion  is  to  the  forced  labour 
on  his  new  palace,  and  on  the  defences  of  Jeru- 
salem, as  well  as  to  the  fines  and  presents  of 
money,  which  this  oppressive  ruler  shamelessly 
extorted  from  his  unhappy  subjects.  "  The  stone 
out  of  the  wall,"  says  the  prophet,  "  crieth  out; 
and  the  beam  out  of  the  woodwork  answer- 
eth  it." 

The  premature  death  of  the  tyrant  removed  a 
serious^obstacle  from  the  path  of  Jeremiah.  No 
1  longer  forced  to  exercise  a  wary  vigilance  in 
avoiding  the  vengeance  of  a  king  whose  pas- 
sions determined  his  conduct,  the  prophet  could 
now  devote  himself  heart  and  soul  to  the  work 
of  his  office.  The  public  danger,  imminent  from 
the  north,  and  the  way  to  avert  it,  is  the  subject 
of  the  discourses  of  this  period  of  his  ministry. 
His  unquenchable  faith  appears  in  the  beautiful 
prayer  appended  to  his  reflections  upon  the  death 
of  Jehoiakim  (xvii.  12  sqq.).  We  cannot  mis- 
take the  tone  of  quiet  exultation  with  which  he 
expresses  his  sense  of  the  absolute  righteousness 
of  the  catastrophe.  "  A  throne  of  glory,  a  height 
higher  than  the  first  (?),  (or,  higher  than  any 
before)  is  the  place  of  our  sanctuary."  Never 
before  in  the  prophet's  experience  has  the  God 
of  Israel  so  clearly  vindicated  that  justice  which 
is  the  inalienable  attribute  of  His  dread  tri- 
bunal. 

For  himself,  the  immediate  result  of  this  re- 
newal of  an  activity  that  had  been  more  or  less 
suspended,  was  persecution,  and  even  violence. 
The  earnestness  with  which  he  besought  the 
people  to  honestly  keep  the  law  of  the  Sabbath, 
an  obligation  which  was  recognised  in  theory 
though  disregarded  in  practice;  and  his  striking 
illustration  of  the  true  relations  between  lahvah 
and  Israel  as  parallel  to  those  that  hold  between 
the  potter  and  the  clay  (chap.  xvii.  19  sqq.), 
only  brought  down  upon  him  the  fierce  hostility 
and  organised  opposition  of  the  false  prophets, 
and  the  priests,  and  the  credulous  and  self-willed 
populace,  as  we  read  in  chap,  xviii.  18  sqq. 
"  And  they  said,  Come,  and  let  us  contrive  plots 
against  Jeremiah.  .  .  Come,  and  let  us  smite  him 
with  the  tongue,  and  let  us  not  listen  to  any  of 
his  words.  Should  evil  be  repaid  for  good,  that 
they  have  digged  a  pit  for  my  life?  "  And  after 
his   solemn   testimony  before  the   elders   in   the 


/valley   of   Ben-Hinnom,   and   before   the   people 
/generally,  in  the  court  of  the  Lord's  house  (chap. 
!  xi.x.),  the  prophet  was  seized  by  order  of  Pash- 
'  chdr,  the  commandant  of  the  temple,  who  was 
himself    a    leading    false    prophet,   and    cruelly 
'beaten,  and  set  in  the  stocks  for  a  day  and  a 
night.     That  the  spirit  of  the  prophet  was  not 
broken    by   this    shameful    treatment    is    evident 
from  the  courage  with  which  he  confronted  his 
oppressor  on  the  morrow,  and  foretold  his  cer- 
tain   punishment.      But   the    apparent    failure    of 
his  mission,  the  hopelessness  of  his  life's  labour^ 
vindicated    by    the    deepening    hostility    of    the 
people,  and  the  readiness  to  proceed  to  extrem- 
ities against  him  thus  evinced  by  their  leaders, 
wrung  from  Jeremiah  that  bitter  cry  of  despair, 
which    has    proved    such    a    stumbling-block    to 
some  of  his  modern  apologists. 

Soon  the  prophet's  fears  were  realised,  and 
the  Divine  counsel,  of  which  he  alone  had  been 
cognisant,  was  fulfilled.  Within  three  short 
months  of  his  accession  to  the  throne,  the  boy- 
king  Jeconiah  (or  Jehoiachin  or  Coniah),  with 
the  queen-mother,  the  grandees  of  the  court, 
and  the  pick  of  the  population  of  the  capital, 
was  carried  captive  to  Babylon  by  Nebuchad^ 
rezzar  (2  Kings  xxiv.  8  sqq.;  Jer.  xxiv.  i). 

Jeremiah  has  appended  his  forecast  of  the  fate 
of  Jeconiah,  and  a  brief  notice  of  its  fulfilment, 
to  his  denunciations  of  that  king's  predecessors 
(xxii.  24  sqq.).  "  As  I  live,  saith  lahvah,  verily, 
though  Coniah  ben  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  be 
a  signet  ring  upon  My  own  right  hand,  verily 
thence  will  I  pluck  thee  away!  And  I  will  give 
thee  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  thy  life, 
and  into  the  hand  of  those  of  whom  thou  art 
afraid;  and  into  the  hand  of  Nebuchadrezzar 
king  of  Babel,  and  into  the  hand  of  the  Chal- 
deans. And  I  will  cast  thee  forth,  and  thy 
mother  that  bare  thee,  into  the  foreign  land, 
wherein  ye  were  not  born;  and  there  ye  shall 
die.  But  unto  the  land  whither  they  long  to 
return,  thither  shall  they  not  return.  Is  this  man 
Coniah  a  despised  broken  vase,  or  a  vessel  de- 
void of  charm?  Why  were  he  and  his  offspring 
cast  forth,  and  hurled  into  the  land  that  they 
knew  not?  O  land,  land,  land,  hear  thou  the 
word  of  lahvah.  Thus  hath  lahvah  said.  Write 
ye  down  this  man  childless,  a  person  that  shall 
not  prosper  in  his  days:  for  none  of  his  offspring 
shall  prosper,  sitting  on  the  throne  of  David, 
and  ruling  again  in  Judah." 

No  better  success  attended  the  prophet's  vniv.- 
istry  under  the  new  king  Zedekiah,  whom 
Nebuchadrezzar  had  placed  on  the  throne  as  his 
vassal  and  tributary.  So  far  as  we  can  judge 
from  the  accounts  left  us,  Zedekiah  was  a  well- 
meaning  but  unstable  character,  whose  weakness 
and  irresolution  were  too  often  played  upon  by 
unscrupulous  and  scheming  courtiers,  to  the 
fatal  miscarriage  of  right  and  justice.  Soon  the 
old  intrigues  began  again,  and  in  the  fourth  year 
of  the  new  reign  (xxviii.  i)  envoys  from  the 
neighbour-states  arrived  at  the  Jewish  court, 
with  the  object  of  drawing  Judah  into  a  coalition 
against  the  common  suzerain,  the  king  of  Bab- 
ylon. This  suicidal  policy  of  combination  with 
heathenish  and  treacherous  allies,  most  of  whom 
were  the  heirs  of  immemorial  feuds  with  Judah, 
against  a  sovereign  who  was  at  once  the  most 
powerful  and  the  most  enlightened  of  his  time, 
called  forth  the  prophet's  immediate  and  stren- 
uous opposition.  Boldly  affirming  that  lahvah 
had  conferred  universal   dominion   upon   Nebu- 


SKETCH    OF    THE    LIFE    AND    TIMES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


19 


*h  itdrezzar,  and  that  consequently  all  resistance 
v.'iS  futile,  he  warned  Zedekiah  himself  to  bow 
h^s  neck  to  the  yoke,  and  dismiss  all  thought  of 
rttellion.  It  would  seem  that  about  this  time 
(arc.  596  B.  c.)  the  empire  of  Babylon  was 
pascving  through  a  serious  crisis,  which  the  sub- 
ject peoples  of  the  West  hoped  and  expected 
wouJd  result  in  its  speedy  dissolution.  Nebu- 
cha(<rezzar  was,  in  fact,  engaged  in  a  life-and- 
deatti  struggle  with  the  Medes;  and  the  knowl- 
edge that  the  Great  King  was  thus  fully  occu- 
pied elsewhere,  encouraged  the  petty  princes  of 
Phoenicia-Palestine  in  their  projects  of  revolt. 
If  chaps.  1.,  li.,  are  genuine,  it  was  at  this  junc- 
ture ihat  Jeremiah  foretold  the  fall  of  Babylon; 
for,  at  the  close  of  the  prophecy  in  question 
(li.  59),  it  is  said  that  he  gave  a  copy  of  it  to 
one  c  f  the  princes  who  accompanied  Zedekiah 
to  Bitbylon  "  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign," 
i.  e.,  in  596  b.  c.  But  the  style  and  thought  of 
these  iwo  chapters,  and  the  general  posture  of 
things  which  they  presuppose,  are  decisive 
against  the  view  that  they  belong  to  Jeremiah. 
At  all  events  the  prophet  gave  the  clearest  evi- 
dence that  he  did  not  himself  share  in  the  general 
delusio/i  that  the  fall  of  Babylon  was  near  at 
hand.  He  declared  that  all  the  nations  must  be 
contenv  lo  serve  Nebuchadrezzar,  and  his  son, 
and  his  i-on's  son  (xxvii.  7);  and  as  chap.  xxix. 
shows,  he  did  his  best  to  counteract  the  evil 
influence!  of  those  fanatical  visionaries  who  were 
ever  pror».ising  a  speedy  restoration  to  the  exiles 
who  had  been  deported  to  Babylon  with  Jeco- 
niah.  At  last,  however,  in  spite  of  all  Jeremiah's 
warnings  and  entreaties,  the  vacillating  king 
Zedekiah  was  persuaded  to  rebel;  and  the  nat- 
ural con&:quence  followed — the  Chaldeans  ap- 
peared before  Jerusalem.  King  and  people  had 
refused  salvation,  and  were  now  no  more  to  be 
saved. 

During  vhe  siege  the  prophet  was  more  than 
once  anxiously  consulted  by  the  king  as  to  the 
issue  of  th^'  crisis.  Although  kept  in  ward  by 
Zedekiah's  orders,  lest  he  should  weaken  the 
defence  by  his  discouraging  addresses,  Jeremiah 
showed  that  he  was  far  above  the  feeling  of  pri- 
vate ill-will.,  by  the  answers  he  returned  to  his 
sovereign's  inquiries.  It  is  true  that  he  did  not 
at  all  modify  the  burden  of  his  message;  to  the 
king  as  to  the  people  he  steadily  counselled  sur- 
render. But  strongly  as  he  denounced  further 
resistance,  ne  did  not  predict  the  king's  death; 
and  the  toiie  of  his  prophecy  concerning  Zede- 
kiah is  in  striking  contrast  with  that  concerning 
his  predecessor  Jehoiakim.  It  was  in  the  tenth 
year  of  Zedekiah  and  the  eighteenth  of  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, that  is  to  say,  circ.  589  B.  c,  when 
Jeremiah  was  imprisoned  in  the  court  of  the  royal 
guard,  within  the  precincts  of  the  palace  (xxxii. 
I  sqq.) :  when  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  was  being 
pressed  on  with  vigour,  and  when  of  all  the  strong 
cities  of  Judah,  only  two,  Lachish  and  Azekah, 
were  still  holding  out  against  the  Chaldean  block- 
ade; that  the  prophet  thus  addressed  the  king 
(xxxiv.  2  sqq.) :  "  Thus  hath  lahvah  said.  Behold, 
I  am  about  to  give  this  city  into  the  hand  of  the 
king  of  Babel,  and  he  shall  burn  it  with  fire. 
And  thou  wilt  not  escape  out  of  his  hand;  for 
thou  wilt  certainly  be  taken,  and  into  his  hand 
thou  wilt  be  given.  And  thine  eyes  shall  see 
the  king  of  Babel's  eyes,  and  his  mouth  shall 
speak  with  thy  mouth,  and  to  Babel  wilt  thou 
come.  But  hear  thou  lahvah's  word,  O  Zede- 
kiah king  of  Judah!     Thus  hath  lahvah  said  upon 


thee.  Thou  wilt  not  die  by  the  sword.  In  peace 
wilt  thou  die;  and  with  the  burnings  of  thy 
fathers,  the  former  kings  that  were  before  thee, 
so  will  men  burn  (spiccry)  for  thee,  and  with 
Ah,  Lord!  will  they  wail  for  thee;  for  a  promise 
have  /  given,  saith  lahvah."  Zedekiah  was  to 
be  exempted  from  the  violent  death,  which  then 
seemed  so  probable;  and  was  to  enjoy  the 
funeral  honours  of  a  king,  unlike  his  less  worthy 
brother  Jehoiakim,  whose  body  was  cast  out  to 
decay  unburied,  like  that  of  a  beast.  The  failure 
of  Jeremiah's  earnest  and  consistent  endeavours 
to  bring  about  the  submission  of  his  people  to 
what  he  foresaw  to  be  their  inevitable  destiny, 
is  explained  by  the  popular  confidence  in  the  de- 
fences of  Jerusalem,  which  were  enormously 
strong  for  the  time,  and  were  considered  impreg- 
nable (xxi.  13) ;  and  by  the  hopes  entertained 
that  Egypt,  with  whom  negotiations  had  long 
been  in  progress,  would  raise  the  siege  ere  it 
was  too  late.  The  low  state  of  public  morals  is 
vividly  illustrated  by  an  incident  which  the 
prophet  has  recorded  (chap,  xxxiv.  7  sqq.).  In 
the  terror  inspired  by  the  approach  of  the  Chal- 
deans, the  panic-stricken  populace  of  the  capital 
bethought  them  of  that  law  of  their  God  which 
they  had  so  long  set  at  naught;  and  the  king  and 
his  princes  and  the  entire  people  bound  them- 
selves by  a  solemn  covenant  in  the  temple,  to 
release  all  slaves  of  Israelitish  birth,  who  had 
served  six  years  and  upwards,  according  to  the 
law.  The  enfranchisement  was  accomplished 
with  all  the  sanctions  of  law  and  of  religion;  but 
no  sooner  had  the  Chaldeans  retired  from  before 
Jerusalem  in  order  to  meet  the  advancing  army 
of  Egypt,  than  the  solemn  covenant  was  cyni- 
cally and  shamelessly  violated,  and  the  unhappy 
freedmen  were  recalled  to  their  bondage.  After 
this,  further  warning  was  evidently  out  of  place; 
and  nothing  was  left  for  Jeremiah  but  to  de- 
nounce the  outrage  upon  the  majesty  of  heaven, 
and  to  declare  the  speedy  return  of  the  be- 
siegers and  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem.  His 
own  liberty  had  not  yet  been  restricted  (xxxvii. 
4)  when  these  events  happened;  but  a  pretext 
was  soon  found  for  venting  upon  him  the  malice 
of  his  enemies.  After  assuring  the  king  that 
the  respite  was  not  to  be  permanent,  but  th.it 
Pharaoh's  army  would  return  to  Egypt  without 
accomplishing  any  deliverance,  and  that  the 
Chaldeans  would  "  come  again,  and  fight  against 
the  city,  and  take  it,  and  burn  it  with  fire " 
(xxxvii.  8),  Jeremiah  availed  himself  of  the  tem- 
porary absence  of  the  besieging  forces,  to  attempt 
to  leave  his  City  of  Destruction;  but  he  was  ar- 
rested in  the  gate  by  which  he  was  going  out, 
and  brought  before  the  princes  on  a  charge  of 
attempted  desertion  to  the  enemy.  Ridiculous 
as  was  this  accusation,  when  thus  levelled  against 
one  whose  whole  life  was  conspicuous  for  suf- 
ferings entailed  by  a  lofty  and  unflinching 
patriotism  and  a  devotion,  at  the  time  almost 
unique,  to  the  sacred  cause  of  religion  and 
morality;  it  was  at  once  received  and  acted  upon. 
Jeremiah  was  beaten  and  thrown  into  a  dungeon, 
where  he  languished  for  a  long  time  in  subter- 
ranean darkness  and  misery,  until  the  king  de- 
sired to  consult  him  again.  This  was  the  saving 
of  the  prophet's  life;  for  after  once  more  declar- 
ing his  unalterable  message,  friSri  733  'HPD  T3. 

"  Into  the  king  of  Babel's  hand  thou  wilt  be 
given!  "  he  made  indignant  protest  against  his 
cruel  wrongs,  and  obtained  from  Zedekiah  some 


20 


TliE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


mitigation  of  his  sentence.  He  was  not  sent 
back  to  the  loathsome  den  under  the  house  of 
Jonathan  the  scribe,  in  whose  dark  recesses  he 
had  well-nigh  perished  (xxxvii.  20),  but  was  de- 
tained in  the  court  of  the  guard,  receiving  a  daily 
dole  of  bread  for  his  maintenance.  Here  he  ap- 
pears to  have  still  used  such  opportunity  as  he 
had,  in  dissuading  the  people  from  continuing  the 
defence.  At  all  events,  four  of  the  princes  in- 
duced the  king  to  deliver  him  into  their  power, 
on  the  ground  that  he  "  weakened  the  hands  of 
the  men  of  war,"  and  sought  not  the  welfare 
but  the  hurt  of  the  nation  (xxxviii.  4).  Unwill- 
ing for  some  reason  or  other,  probably  a  super- 
stitious one,  to  imbrue  their  hands  in  the 
prophet's  blood,  they  let  him  down  with  cords 
into  a  miry  cistern  ("112)  in  the  court  of  the 
guard,  and  left  him  there  to  die  of  cold  and 
hunger.  Timely  help  sanctioned  by  the  king 
rescued  Jeremiah  from  this  horrible  fate;  but  not 
before  he  had  undergone  sufferings  of  the  se- 
verest character,  as  may  easily  be  understood 
from  his  own  simple  narrative,  and  from  the 
indelible  impression  wrought  upon  others  by  the 
record  of  his  sufferings,  which  led  the  poet  of 
the  Lamentations  to  refer  to  this  time  of  deadly 
peril,  and  torture  both  mental  and  physical,  in 
the  following  terms: 

"They  chased  me  sore  like  a  bird. 
They  that  were  my  foes  without  a  cause. 
They  silenced  my  life  in  the  pit, 
And  they  cast  a  stone  upon  me. 
Waters  overflowed  mine  head  ; 
Methought,  I  am  cut  off. 
I  called  Thy  name,  lahvah, 
Out  of  the  deepest  pit. 
My  voice  Thou  heardest  (saying), 
'  Hide  not  Thine  ear  at  my  breathing',  at  my  cry.' 
Thou  drewest  nearer  when  I  called  Thee  ; 
Thou  saidst,  '  Fear  not ' ! 

Thou  pleadedst,  O  Lord,  my  soul's  pleadings  ; 
Thou  ransomedst  my  life." 

After  this  signal  escape,  Jeremiah's  counsel 
was  once  more  sought  by  the  king,  in  a  secret 
interview,  which  was  jealously  concealed  from 
the  princes.  But  neither  entreaties,  nor  assur- 
ances of  safety,  could  persuade  Zedekiah  to  sur- 
render the  city.  Nothing  was  now  left  for  the 
prophet  but  to  await,  in  his  milder  captivity,  the 
long  foreseen  catastrophe.  The  form  now  taken 
by  his  solitary  musings  was  not  anxious  specula- 
tion upon  the  question  whether  any  possible  re- 
sources were  as  yet  unexhausted,  whether  by 
any  yet  untried  means  king  and  people  might 
be  convinced,  and  the  end  averted.  Taking  that 
end  for  granted,  he  looks  forth  beyond  his  own 
captivity,  beyond  the  scenes  of  famine  and  pesti- 
lence and  bloodshed  that  surround  him,  beyond 
the  strife  of  factions  within  the  city,  and  the  lines 
of  the  besiegers  without  it,  to  a  fair  prospect  of 
happy  restoration  and  smiling  peace,  reserved  for 
his  ruined  country  in  the  far-off  yet  ever- 
approaching  future  (xxxii.,  xxxiii.). 

Strong  in  this  inspired  confidence,  like  the 
Roman  who  purchased  at  its  full  market  value 
the  ground  on  which  the  army  of  Hannibal  lay 
encamped,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  buy,  with  all 
due  formalities  of  transfer,  a  field  in  his  native 
place,  at  this  supreme  moment,  when  the  whole 
country  was  wasted  with  fire  and  sword,  and  the 
artillery  of  the  foe  was  thundering  at  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem.  And  the  event  proved  that  he  was 
right.  He  believed  in  the  depth  of  his  heart 
that  God  had  not  finally  cast  off  His  people. 
He  believed  that  nothing,  not  even  human  error 
and    revolt,    could    thwart    and    turn    aside    the 


Eternal  purposes.  He  was  sure — it  was  demon- 
strated to  him  by  the  experience  of  an  eventful 
life — that,  amid  all  the  vicissitudes  of  men  and 
things,  one  thing  stands  immutable,  and  that 
is  the  will  of  God.  He  was  sure  that  Abraham's 
family  had  not  become  a  nation  merely  in  order 
to  be  blotted  out  of  existence  by  a  conqueror 
who  knew  not  lahvah;  that  the  torch  of  a  true 
religion,  a  spiritual  faith,  had  not  been  handed 
on  from  prophet  to  prophet,  burning  in  its  on- 
ward course  with  an  ever  clearer  and  intenser 
flame,  merely  to  be  swallowed  up  before  its  final 
glory  was  attained,  in  utter  and  eternal  darkness. 
The  covenant  with  Israel  would  no  more  be 
broken  than  the  covenant  of  day  and  night 
(xxxiii.  20).  The  laws  of  the  natural  world  are 
not  more  stable  and  secure  than  those  of  the 
spiritual  realm:  for  both  have  their  reason  and 
their  ground  of  prevalence  in  the  Will  of  the  One 
Unchangeable  Lord  of  all.  And  as  the  prophet 
had  been  right  in  his  forecast  of  the  destruction 
of  his  country,  so  did  he  prove  to  have  been 
right  in  his  joyful  anticipation  of  the  future 
renascence  of  all  the  best  elements  in  Israel's 
life.  The  coming  time  fulfilled  his  word;  a  fact 
which  must  always  remain  unaccountable  to  all 
but  those  who  believe  as  Jeremiah  believed. 

After  the  fall  of  the  city  special  care  was  taken 
to  ensure  the  safety  of  Jeremiah,  in  accordance 
with  the  express  orders  of  Nebuchadrezzar,  who 
had  become  cognisant  of  the  prophet's  consistent 
advocacy  of  surrender,  probably  from  the  exiles 
previously  deported  to  Babylonia,  with  whom 
Jeremiah  had  maintained  communications,  ad- 
vising them  to  settle  down  peaceably,  accepting 
Babylon  as  their  country  for  the  time  being, 
and  praying  for  its  welfare  and  that  of  its  rulers. 
Nebuzaradan,  the  commander-in-chief,  further 
allowed  the  prophet  his  choice  between  following 
him  to  Babylon,  or  remaining  with  the  wreck 
of  the  population  in  the  ruined  country.  Patri- 
otism, which  in  his  case  was  identified  with  a 
burning  zeal  for  the  moral  and  spiritual  welfare 
of  his  fellow-countrymen,  prevailed  over  regard 
for  his  own  worldly  interests;  and  Jeremiah 
chose  to  remain  with  the  survivors — disastrously 
for  himself,  as  the  event  proved  (xxxix.  11,  xl.  i). 

An  old  man,  worn  out  with  strife  and  struggle, 
and  weighed  down  by  disappointment  and  the 
sense  of  failure,  he  might  well  have  decided  to 
avail  himself  of  the  favour  extended  to  him  by 
the  conqueror,  and  to  secure  a  peaceful  end  for 
a  life  of  storm  and  conflict.  But  the  calamities 
of  his  country  had  not  quenched  his  prophetic 
ardour;  the  sacred  fire  still  burnt  within  his  aged 
spirit;  and  once  more  he  sacrificed  himself  to 
the  work  he  felt  called  upon  to  do,  only  to  ex- 
perience again  the  futility  of  offering  wise  coun- 
sel to  head-strong,  proud,  and  fanatical  natures. 
Against  his  earnest  protestations,  he  was  forced 
to  accompany  the  remnant  of  his  people  in  their 
hasty  flight  into  Egypt  (xlii.);  and,  in  the  last 
glimpse  afforded  us,  we  see  him  there  among  his 
fellow-exiles  making  a  final,  and  alas!  ineffectual 
protest  against  their  stubborn  idolatry  (xliv.). 
A  tradition  mentioned  by  Tertullian  and  St.  Je- 
rome which  may  be  of  earlier  and  Jewish  origin, 
states  that  these  apostates  in  their  wicked  rage 
against  the  prophet  stoned  him  to  death  {cf. 
Heb.  xi.  27). 

The  last  chapter  of  his  book  brings  the  course 
of  events  down  to  about  561  B.  c.  The  fact  has 
naturally  suggested  a  conjecture  that  the  same 
year  witnessed  the  close  of  the  prophet's  life.     In 


THE    CALL    AND    CONSECRATION. 


that  case,  Jeremiah  must  have  attained  to  an 
age  of  somewhere  about  ninety  years;  which,  tak- 
ing all  the  circumstances  into  consideration,  is 
hardly  credible.  A  celibate  life  is  said  to  be  un- 
favourable to  longevity;  but  however  that  may 
be,  the  other  conditions  in  this  instance  make  it 
extremely  unlikely.  Jeremiah's  career  was  a 
vexed  and  stormy  one;  it  was  his  fate  to  be  di- 
vided from  his  kindred  and  his  fellow-country- 
men by  the  widest  and  deepest  differences  of 
belief;  like  St.  Athanasius,  he  was  called  upon 
to  maintain  the  cause  of  truth  against  an  oppos- 
ing world.  "  Woe's  me,  my  mother!  "  he  cries, 
in  one  of  his  characteristic  fits  of  despondency, 
which  were  the  natural  fruit  of  a  passionate  and 
almost  feminine  nature,  after  a  period  of  noble 
effort  ending  in  the  shame  of  utter  defeat; 
"  Woe's  me,  that  thou  gavest  me  birth,  a  man 
of  strife,  and  a  man  of  contention  to  all  the 
land!  Neither  lender  nor  borrower  have  I  been; 
yet  all  are  cursing  me "  (xv.  lo).  The  perse- 
cutions he  endured,  the  cruelties  of  his  long'  im- 
prisonment, the  horrors  of  the  protracted  siege, 
upon  which  he  has  not  dwelt  at  length,  but  which 
have  stamped  themselves  indelibly  upon  his 
language  (xviii.  21,  22,  xx.  16),  would  certainly 
not  tend  to  prolong  his  life.  In  the  71st  Psalm, 
which  seems  to  be  from  his  pen,  and  which 
wants  the  usual  heading  "  A  Psalm  of  David," 
he  speaks  of  himself  as  conscious  of  failing 
powers,  and  as  having  already  reached  the  ex- 
treme limit  of  age.  Writing  after  his  narrow 
escape  from  death  in  the  miry  cistern  of  his 
prison,  he  prays 

*'  Cast  me  not  off  in  the  time  of  old  age  ; 

Forsake  me  not,  when  my  strength  faileth." 

And  again, 

"  Yea,  even  when  I  am  old  and  grey-headed, 
O  God  forsake  me  not !  " 

And,  referring  to  his  signal  deliverance, 

"Thou  that  shewedst  me  many  and  sore  troubles, 
Thou  makest  me  live  again  ; 

And  out  of  the  deeps  of  the  earth  again  Thou  bringest 
me  up." 

The  allusion  in  the  90th  Psalm,  as  well  as  the 
case  of  Barzillai,  who  is  described  as  extremely 
old  and  decrepit  at  fourscore  (2  Sam.  xix.  ;i3), 
proves  that  life  in  ancient  Palestine  did  not  ordi- 
narily transcend  the  limits  of  seventy  to  eighty 
years.  Still,  after  all  that  may  be  urged  to  the 
contrary,  Jeremiah  may  have  been  an  exception 
to  his  contemporaries  in  this,  as  in  most  other 
respects.  Indeed,  his  protracted  labours  and  suf- 
ferings seem  almost  to  imply  that  he  was  en- 
dowed with  constitutional  vigour  and  powers  of 
endurance  above  the  average  of  men;  and  if,  as 
some  suppose,  he  wrote  the  book  of  Job  in 
Egypt,  to  embody  the  fruits  of  his  life's  experi- 
ence and  reflection,  as  well  as  arranged  and 
edited  his  other  writings,  it  is  evident  that  he 
must  have  sojourned  among  the  exiles  in  that 
country  for  a  considerable  time. 

The  tale  is  told.  In  meagre  and  broken  out- 
line I  have  laid  before  you  the  known  facts  of  a 
life  which  must  always  possess  permanent  in- 
terest, not  only  for  the  student  of  religious  de- 
velopment, but  for  all  men  who  are  stirred  by 
human  passion  and  stimulated  by  human  thought. 
And  fully  conscious  as  I  am  of  failure  in  the 
attempt  to  reanimate  the  dry  bones  of  history, 


to  give  form  and  colour  and  movement  to  the 
shadows  of  the  past;  I  shall  not  have  spent  my 
pains  for  naught,  if  I  have  awakened  in  a  single 
heart  some  spark  of  living  interest  in  the  heroes 
of  old;  some  enthusiasm  for  the  martyrs  of  faith; 
.some  secret  yearning  to  cast  in  their  own  lot 
with  those  who  have  fought  the  battle  of  truth 
and  righteousness,  and  to  share  with  the  saints 
departed  in  the  victory  that  overcometh  the 
world.  And  even  if  in  this  also  I  have  fallen 
short  of  the  mark,  these  desultory  and  imper- 
fect sketches  of  a  good  man's  life  and  work 
will  not  have  been  wholly  barren  of, result,  if 
they  lead  any  one  of  my  readers  to  renewed 
study  of  that  truly  sacred  text  which  preserves 
to  all  time  the  living  utterances  of  this  last  of 
the  greater  prophets. 


CHAPTER  I. 
THE  CALL  AND  CONSECRATION. 

In  the  foregoing  pages  we  have  considered 
the  principal  events  in  the  life  of  the  prophet 
Jeremiah,  by  way  of  introduction  to  the  more 
detailed  study  of  his  writings.  Preparation  of 
this  kind  seemed  to  be  necessary,  if  we  were 
to  enter  upon  that  study  with  something  more 
than  the  vaguest  perception  of  the  real  person- 
ality of  the  prophet.  On  the  other  hand,  I  hope 
we  shall  not  fail  to  find  our  mental  image  of 
the  man,  and  our  conception  of  the  times  in 
which  he  lived,  and  of  the  conditions  under 
which  he  laboured  as  a  servant  of  God,  corrected 
and  perfected  by  that  closer  examination  of  his 
works  to  which  I  now  invite  you.  And  so  we 
shall  be  better  equipped  for  the  attainment  of 
that  which  must  be  the  ultimate  object  of  all 
such  studies;  the  deepening  and  strengthening  of 
the  life  of  faith  in  ourselves,  by  which  alone  we 
can  hope  to  follow  in  the  steps  of  the  saints 
of  old,  and  like  them  to  realise  the  great  end 
of  our  being,  the  service  of  the  All-Perfect. 

I  shall  consider  the  various  discourses  in  what 
appears  to  be  their  natural  order,  so  far  as  pos- 
sible, taking  those  chapters  together  which  ap- 
pear to  be  connected  in  occasion  and  subject. 
Chap.  i.  evidently  stands  apart,  as  a  self-com- 
plete and  independent  whole.  It  consists  of  a 
chronological  superscription  (vv.  1-3),  assigning 
the  temporal  limits  of  the  prophet's  activity;  and 
secondly,  of  an  inaugural  discourse,  which  sets 
before  us  his  first  call,  and  the  general  scope  of 
the  mission  which  he  was  chosen  to  fulfil.  This 
discourse,  again,  in  like  manner  falls  into  two 
sections,  of  which  the  former  (vv.  4-10)  relates 
how  the  prophet  was  appointed  and  qualified  by 
lalivah  to  be  a  spokesman  for  Him;  while  the 
latter  (vv.  11-19).  under  the  form  of  two  vi- 
sions, expresses  the  assurance  that  lahvahwill  ac- 
complish His  word,  and  pictures  the  mode  of  ful- 
filment, closing  with  a  renewed  summons  to  en- 
ter upon  the  work,  and  with  a  promise  of  ef- 
fectual support  against  all  opposition. 

It  is  plain  that  we  have  before  us  the  author's 
introduction  to  the  whole  book;  and  if  we  would 
gain  an  adequate  conception  of  the  meaning  of 
the  prophet's  activity  both  for  his  own  time  and 
for  ours,  we  must  weigh  well  the  force  of  these 
prefatory  words.  The  career  of  a  true  prophet, 
or  spokesman  for  God,  undoubtedly  implies  a 
special  call  or  vocation  to  the  ofilice.  In  this 
preface  to  the  summarised  account  of  his  life's 


22 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


work,  Jeremiah  represents  that  call  as  a  single 
and  definite  event  in  his  life's  history.  Must  we 
take  this  in  its  literal  sense?  We  are  not  aston- 
ished by  such  a  statement  as  "  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  unto  me;"  it  may  be  understood  in 
more  senses  than  one,  and  perhaps  we  are  un- 
consciously prone  to  understand  it  in  what  is 
called  a  natural  sense.  Perhaps  we  think  of  a 
result  of  pious  rellection  pondering  the  moral 
state  of  the  nation  and  the  needs  of  the  time: per- 
haps of  that  inward  voice  which  is  nothing 
strange  to  any  soul  that  has  attained  to  the  ru- 
diments of  spiritual  development.  But  when  we 
read  such  an  assertion  as  that  of  ver.  9,  "  Then 
the  Lord  put  forth  His  hand,  and  touched  my 
mouth,"  we  cannot  but  pause  and  ask  what  it  was 
that  the  writer  meant  to  convey  by  words  so 
strange  and  startling.  Thoughtful  readers  can- 
not avoid  the  question  whether  such  statements 
are  consonant  with  what  we  otherwise  know  of 
the  dealings  of  God  with  man;  whether  an  out- 
ward and  visible  act  of  the  kind  spoken  of  con- 
forms with  that  whole  conception  of  the  Divine 
Being,  which  is,  so  far  as  it  reflects  reality,  the 
outcome  of  His  own  contact  with  our  human 
spirits.  The  obvious  answer  is  that  such  corpo- 
real actions  are  incompatible  with  all  our  expe- 
rience and  all  our  reasoned  conceptions  of  the 
Divine  Essence,  which  fills  all  things  and  con- 
trols all  things,  precisely  because  it  is  not  limited 
by  a  bodily  organism,  because  its  actions  are  not 
dependent  upon  such  imperfect  and  restricted 
media  as  hands  and  feet.  If,  then,  we  are  bound 
to  a  literal  sense,  we  can  only  understand  that 
the  prophet  saw  a  vision,  in  which  a  Divine  hand 
seemed  to  touch  his  lips,  and  a  Divine  voice  to 
sound  in  his  ears.  But  are  we  bound  to  a  literal 
sense?  It  is  noteworthy  that  Jeremiah  does  not 
say  that  lahvah  Himself  appeared  to  him.  In 
this  respect,  he  stands  in  conspicuous  contrast 
with  his  predecessor  Isaiah,  who  writes  (vi.  i), 
"  In  the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died,  I  saw  the 
Lord  sitting  upon  a  throne,  high  and  lifted  up;" 
and  with  his  successor  Ezekiel,  who  affirms  in 
his  opening  verse  (i.  i)  that  on  a  certain  definite 
occasion  "  the  heavens  opened,"  and  he  saw 
"  visions  of  God."  Nor  does  Jeremiah  use  that 
striking  phrase  of  the  younger  prophet's,  "  The 
hand  of  lahvah  was  upon  me,"  or  "  was  strong 
upon  me."  But  when  he  says,  "  lahvah  put  forth 
His  hand  and  touched  my  mouth,"  he  is  evi- 
dently thinking  of  the  seraph  that  touched  Isa- 
iah's mouth  with  the  live  coal  from  the  heavenly 
altar  (vi.  7).  The  words  are  identical  (yjii  >Zi  ^y), 
and  might  be  regarded  as  a  quotation.  It  is  true 
that,  supposing  Jeremiah  to  be  relating  the  ex- 
perience of  a  trance-like  condition  or  ecstasy,  we 
need  not  assume  any  conscious  imitation  of  his 
predecessor.  The  sights  and  sounds  which  afifect 
a  man  in  such  a  condition  may  be  partly  repeti- 
tions of  former  experience,  whether  one's  own 
or  that  of  others;  and  in  part  wholly  new  and 
strange.  In  a  dream  one  might  imagine  things 
happening  to  oneself,  which  one  had  heard  or 
read  of  in  connection  with  others.  And  Jere- 
miah's writings  generally  prove  his  intimate  ac- 
•quaintance  with  those  of  Isaiah  and  the  older 
iprophets.  But  as  a  trance  or  ecstasy  is  itself  an 
involuntary  state,  so  the  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  the  subject  of  it  must  be  independent  of  the 
individual  will,  and  as  it  were  imposed  from  with- 
out. Is  then  the  prophet  describing  the  expe- 
rience of  such  an  abnormal  state — a  state  like 
that  of  St.  Peter  in  his  momentous  vision  on  the 


housetop  at  Joppa,  or  like  that  of  St.  Paul  when 
he  was  "  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven,"  and 
saw  many  wonderful  things  which  he  durst  not 
reveal?  The  question  has  been  answered  in  the 
negative  on  two  principal  grounds.  It  is  said 
that  the  vision  of  vv.  11,  12,  derives  its  signifi- 
cance not  from  the  visible  thing  itself,  but  from 
the  name  of  it,  which  is,  of  course,  not  an  object 
of  sight  at  all;  and  consequently,  the  so-called 
vision  is  really  "  a  well-devised  and  ingenious 
product  of  cool  reflection. "  But  is  this  so?  We 
may  translate  the  original  passage  thus:  "  And 
there  fell  a  word  of  lahvah  unto  me,  saying. 
What  seest  thou,  Jeremiah?  And  I  said,  A  rod 
of  a  wake-tree  "  {i.  e.,  an  almond)  "  is  what  I 
see.  And  lahvah  said  unto  me.  Thou  hast  well 
seen;  for  wakeful  am  I  over  My  word,  to  do  it." 
Doubtless  there  is  here  one  of  those  plays  on 
words  which  are  so  well  known  a  feature  of  the 
prophetic  style;  but  to  admit  this  is  by  no  means 
tantamount  to  an  admission  that  the  vision  de- 
rives' its  force  and  meaning  from  the  "  invisible 
name  "  rather  than  from  the  visible  thing. 
Surely  it  is  plain  that  the  significance  of  the  vi- 
sion depends  on  the  fact  which  the  name  implies; 
a  fact  which  would  be  at  once  suggested  by  the 
sight  of  the  tree.  It  is  the  well-known  character- 
istic of  the  almond  tree  that  it  wakes,  as  it  were, 
from  the  long  sleep  of  winter  before  all  other 
trees,  and  displays  its  beautiful  garland  of  blos- 
som, while  its  companions  remain  leafless  and 
apparently  lifeless.  This  quality  of  early  wake- 
fulness is  expressed  by^the  Hebrew  name  of  the 
almond  tree;  for  shaqued  means  waking  or  wake- 
ful. If  this  tree,  in  virtue  of  its  remarkable 
peculiarity,  was  a  proverb  of  watching  and  wak- 
ing, the  sight  of  it,  or  of  a  branch  of  it,  in  a  pro- 
phetic vision  would  be  sufficient  to  suggest  that 
idea,  independently  of  the  name.  The  allusion 
to  the  name,  therefore,  is  only  a  literary  device 
for  expressing  with  inimitable  force  and  neat- 
ness the  sigificance  of  the  visible  symbol  of  the 
"  rod  of  the  almond  tree,"  as  it  was  intuitively 
apprehended  by  the  prophet  in  his  vision. 

Another  and  more  radical  ground  is  discovered 
in  the  substance  of  the  Divine  communication. 
It  is  said  that  the  anticipatory  statement  of  the 
contents  and  purpose  of  the  subsequent  prophe- 
syings  of  the  seer  (ver.  10),  the  announcement 
beforehand  of  his  fortunes  (vv.  8,  18,  19),  and  the 
warning  addressed  to  the  prophet  personally 
(ver.  17),  are  only  conceivable  as  results  of  a 
process  of  abstraction  from  real  experience,  as 
prophecies  conformed  to  the  event  (ex  eventu). 
"  The  call  of  the  prophet,"  says  the  writer  whose 
arguments  we  are  examining,  "  was  the  moment 
when,  battling  down  the  doubts  and  scruples  of 
the  natural  man  (vv.  7,  8),  and  full  of  holy  cour- 
age, he  took  the  resolution  (ver.  17)  to  proclaim 
God's,  word.  Certainly  he  was  animated  by  the 
hope  of  Divine  assistance  (ver.  18),  the  promise 
of  which  he  heard  inwardly  in  the  heart.  More 
than  this  cannot  be  affirmed.  But  in  this  chap- 
ter (vv.  17,  18),  the  measure  and  direction  of  the 
Divine  help  are  already  clear  to  the  writer;  he 
is  aware  that  opposition  awaits  him  (ver.  19); 
he  knows  the  content  of  his  prophecies  (ver.  10). 
Such  knowledge  was  only  possible  for  him  in  the 
middle  or  at  the  end  of  his  career;  and  therefore 
the  composition  of  this  opening  chapter  must  be 
referred  to  such  a  -later  period.  As,  however, 
the  final  catastrophe,  after  which  his  language 
would  have  taken  a  wholly  different  complexion, 
is  still  hidden  from  him  here;  and  as  the  only 


THE    CALL    AND    CONSECRATION. 


23 


edition  of  his  prophecies  prepared  by  himself,  that 
we  know  of,  belongs  to  the  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim  (xxxvi.  45) ;  the  section  is  best  referred 
to  that  very  time,  when  the  po«ture  of  affairs 
promised  well  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  threaten- 
ings  of  many  years  {cf.  xxv.  9  with  vv.  15,  10; 
XXV.  13  with  vv.  12-17;  XXV.  6  with  ver.  16.  And 
ver.  18  is  virtually  repeated,  chap.  xv.  20,  which 
belongs   to   the    same   period)." 

The  first  part  of  this  is  an  obvious  inference 
from  the  narrative  itself.  The  prophet's  own 
statement  makes  it  abundantly  clear  that  his  con- 
viction of  a  call  was  accompanied  by  doubts  and 
fears,  which  were  only  silenced  by  that  faith 
which  moves  mountains.  That  lofty  confidence 
in  the  purpose  and  strength  of  the  Unseen,  which 
has  enabled  weak  and  trembling  humanity  to  en- 
dure martyrdom,  might  well  be  sufficient  to 
nerve  a  young  man  to  undertake  the  task  of 
preaching  unpopular  truths,  even  at  the  risk  of 
frequent  persecution  and  occasional  peril.  But 
surely  we  need  not  suppose  that,  when  Jeremiah 
started  on  his  prophetic  career,  he  was  as  one 
who  takes  a  leap  in  the  dark.  Surely  it  is  not 
necessary  to  suppose  him  profoundly  ignorant 
of  the  subject-matter  of  prophecy  in  general,  of 
the  kind  of  success  he  might  look  for,  of  his 
own  shrinking  timidity  and  desponding  tempera- 
ment, of  "  the  measure  and  direction  of  the  Di- 
vine help."  Had  the  son  of  Hilkiah  been  the 
first  of  the  prophets  of  Israel  instead  of  one  of 
the  latest;  had  there  been  no  prophets  before 
him;  we  might  recognise  some  force  in  this 
criticism.  As  the  facts  lie,  however,  we  can 
hardly  avoid  an  obvious  answer.  With  the  ex- 
perience of  many  notable  predecessors  before  his 
eyes;  with  the  message  of  a  Hosea,  an  Amos,  a 
Micah,  an  Isaiah,  graven  upon  his  heart;  with 
his  minute  knowledge  of  their  history,  their 
struggles  and  successes,  the  fierce  antagonisms 
they  roused,  the  cruel  persecutions  they  were 
called  upon  to  face  in  the  discharge  of  their  Di- 
vine commission;  with  his  profound  sense  that 
nothing  but  the  good  help  of  their  God  had  en- 
abled them  to  endure  the  strain  of  a  lifelong 
battle;  it  is  not  in  the  least  wonderful  that  Jere- 
miah should  have  foreseen  the  like  experience 
for  himself.  The  wonder  would  have  been,  if, 
with  such  speaking  examples  before  him,  he  had 
not  anticipated  "  the  measure  and  direction  of 
the  Divine  help  ";  if  he  had  been  ignorant  "  that 
opposition  awaited  him";  if  he  had  not  already 
possessed  a  general  knowledge  of  the  "  con- 
tents "  of  his  own  as  of  all  prophecies.  For  there 
is  a  substantial  unity  underlying  all  the  manifold 
outpourings  of  the  prophetic  spirit.  Indeed,  it 
would  seem  that  it  is  to  the  diversity  of  personal 
gifts,  to  differences  of  training  and  temperament, 
to  the  rich  variety  of  character  and  circumstance, 
rather  than  to  any  essential  contrasts  in  the  sub- 
stance and  purport  of  prophecy  itself,  that  the 
absence  of  monotony,  the  impress  of  individuality 
and  originality  is  due,  which  characterises  the 
utterances   of  the   principal   prophets. 

Apart  from  the  unsatisfactory  nature  of  the 
reasons  alleged,  it  is  very  probable  that  this  open- 
ing chapter  was  penned  by  Jeremiah  as  an  intro- 
duction to  the  first  collection  of  his  prophecies, 
which  dates  from  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
that  is,  circ.  b.  c.  606.  In  that  case,  it  must  not 
be  forgotten  that  the  prophet  is  relating  events 
which,  as  he  tells  us  himself  (chap.  xxv.  3),  had 
taken  place  three  and  twenty  years  ago;  and  as 
his  description  is  probably  drawn  from  memory, 


something  may  be  allowed  for  unconscious  trans- 
formation of  facts  in  the  light  of  after  experience. 
Still,  the  peculiar  events  that  attended  so  marked 
a  crisis  in  his  life  as  his  first  consciousness  of  a 
Divine  call  must,  in  any  case,  have  constituted, 
cannot  but  have  left  a  deep  and  abiding  impress 
upon  the  prophet's  memory;  and  there  really 
seems  to  be  no  good  reason  for  refusing  to  be- 
lieve that  that  initial  experience  took  the  form 
of  a  twofold  vision  seen  under"  conditions  of 
trance  or  ecstasy.  At  the  same  time,  bearing  in 
mind  the  Oriental  passion  for  metaphor  and 
imagery,  we  are  not  perhaps  debarred  from  see- 
ing in  the  whole  chapter  a  figurative  description, 
or  rather  an  attempt  to  describe  through  the 
medium  of  figurative  language,  that  which  must 
always  ultimately  transcend  description — the 
communion  of  the  Divine  with  the  human  spirit. 
Real,  most  real  of  real  facts,  as  that  communion 
was  and  is,  it  can  never  be  directly  communicated 
in  words;  it  can  only  be  hinted  and  suggested 
through  the  medium  of  symbolic  and  metaphori- 
cal phraseology.  Language  itself,  being  more 
than  half  material,  breaks  down  in  the  attempt 
to  express  things  wholly  spiritual. 

I  shall  not  stop  to  discuss  the  importance  of 
the  general  superscription  or  heading  of  the 
book,  which  is  given  in  the  first  three  years.  But 
before  passing  on,  I  will  ask  you  to  notice  that, 
whereas  the  Hebrew  text  opens  with  the  phrase 
"Dibre  Yirmeyahu  (1'"i;p">'  ';?^"?),  "The  words 
of  Jeremiah,"  the  oldest  translation  we  have,  viz., 
the  Septuagint,  reads:  "The  word  of  God  which 
came  to  Jeremiah  "  (  t6  p^/oia  rod  GeoO  6  iyivero  iirl 
'lepe/iiav.  It  is  possible,  therefore,  that  the  old 
Greek  translator  had  a  Hebrew  text  different 
from  that  which  has  come  down  to  us,  and  open- 
ing with  the  same  formula  which  we  find  at  the 
beginning  of  the  older  prophets  Hosea,  Joel,  and 
Micah.  In  fact,  Amos  is  the  only  prophet,  be- 
sides Jeremiah,  whose  book  begins  with  the 
phrase  in  question  DlOy  ^"13*7 — A6yoi  'Ayucis);  and  al- 
though it  is  more  appropriate  there  than  here, 
owing  to  the  continuation  "  And  he  said,"  it 
looks  suspicious  even  there,  when  we  compare 
Isaiah  i.  i,  and  observe  how  much  more  suitable 
the  term  "vision"  (Pt-H)  would  be.  It  is  likely 
that  the  LXX.  has  preserved  the  original  read- 
ing of  Jeremiah,  and  that  some  editor  of  the 
Hebrew  text  altered  it  because  of  the  apparent 
tautology  with  the  opening  of  ver.  2:  "  To  whom 
the  word  of  the  Lord  "  (LXX.  rod  GeoO)  "  came  " 
in  the  "  days  of  Josiah." 

Such  changes  were  freely  made  by  the  scribes 
in  the  days  before  the  settlement  of  the  O.  T. 
canon;  changes  which  may  occasion  much  per- 
plexity to  those,  if  any  there  be,  who  hold  by 
the  unintelligent  and  obsolete  theory  of  verbal 
and  even  literal  inspiration,  but  none  at  all  to 
such  as  recognise  a  Divine  hand  in  the  facts  of 
history,*  and  are  content  to  believe  that  in  holy 
books,  as  in  holy  men,  there  is  a  Divine  treasure 
in  earthen  vessels.  The  textual  difference  in 
question  may  serve  to  call  our  attention  to  the 
peculiar  way  in  which  the  prophets  identified 
their  work  with  the  Divine  will,  and  their  words 
with  the  Divine  thoughts;  so  that  the  words  of 
an  Amos  or  a  Jeremiah  were  in  all  good  faith 
held  and  believed  to  be  self-attesting  utterances 
of  the  Unseen  God.  The  conviction  which 
wrought  in  them  was,  in  fact,  identical  with  that 
which  in  after  times  moved  St.   Paul  to  affirm 

*  Even  in  the  history  of  the  transmission  of  ancient 
writings. 


24 


THE-  PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


the  high  calling  and  inalienable  dignity  of  the 
Christian  ministry  in  those  impressive  words, 
"  Let  a  man  so  account  of  us  as  of  the  ministers 
of  Christ,  and  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God." 
Vv.  5-10,  which  relate  how  the  prophet  became 
aware  that  he  was  in  future  to  receive  revelations 
from  above,  constitute  in  themselves  an  impor- 
tant revelation.  Under  Divine  influence  he  be- 
comes aware  of  a  special  mission.  "  Ere  I  be- 
gan to  form  "  (mould,  fashion,  "i!i\  as  the  potter 
moulds  the  clay)  '"  thee  in  the  belly,  I  knew  thee; 
and  ere  thou  begannest  to  come  forth  from  the 
womb,*  I  had  dedicated  thee,  not  '  regarded ' 
thee  as  holy,"  Isa.  viii.  13;  nor  perhaps  "  '  de- 
clared'  thee  holy,"  as  Ges. ;  but  "'hallowed' 
thee,"  i.  e.,  dedicated  thee  to  God  (Judg.  xvii.  3; 
I  Kings  ix.  3;  especially  Lev.  xxvii.  14;  of  money 
and  houses.  The  pi.  of  "  consecrating  "  priests, 
Ex.  xxviii.-4i;  altar,  Ex.  xxix.  36,  temple,  moun- 
tain, etc.);  perhaps  also,  "'consecrated'  thee  "  for 
the  discharge  of  a  sacred  office.  Even  soldiers 
are    called     "  consecrated "   {^'^^'^\>p  Isa.     xiii. 

3),  as  ministers  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  and  prob- 
ably as  having  been  formally  devoted  to  His 
service  at  the  outset  of  a  campaign  by  special 
solemnities  of  lustration  and  sacrifice;  while 
guests  bidden  to  a  sacrificial  feast  had  to  undergo 
a  preliminary  form  of  "  consecration  "  (i  Sam. 
xvi.  5;  Zeph.  i.  7),  to  fit  them  for  communion 
with  Deity. 

With  the  certainty  of  his  own  Divine  calling, 
it  became  clear  to  the  prophet  that  the  choice 
was  not  an  arbitrary  caprice;  it  was  the  execution 
of  a  Divine  purpose,  conceived  long,  long  before 
its  realisation  in  time  and  space.  The  God  whose 
foreknowledge  and  will  direct  the  whole 
course  of  human  history — whose  control  of 
events  and  direction  of  human  energies  is  most 
signally  evident  in  precisely  those  instances 
where  men  and  nations  are  most  regardless  of 
Him,  and  imagine  the  vain  thought  that  they  are 
independent  of  Him  (Isa.  xxii.  11,  xxxvii.  26) 
— this  sovereign  Being,  in  the  development  of 
whose  eternal  purposes  he  himself,  and  every 
son  of  man  was  necessarily  a  factor,  had  from  the 
first  "  known  him," — known  the  individual  char- 
acter and  capacities  which  would  constitute  his 
fitness  for  the  special  work  of  his  life; — and 
"sanctified"  him;  devoted  and  consecrated  him 
to  the  doing  of  it  when  the  time  of  his  earthly 
manitestation  should  arrive.  Like  others  who 
have  played  a  notable  part  in  the  affairs  of  men, 
Jeremiah  saw  with  clearest  vision  that  he  was 
himself  the  embodiment  in  flesh  and  blood  of  a 
Divine  idea;  he  knevv  himself  to  be  a  deliberately 
planned  and  chosen  instrument  of  the  Divine 
activity.  It  was  this  seeing  himself  as  God  saw 
him  which  constituted  his  difference  from  his 
fellows,  who  only  knew  their  individual  appe- 
tites, pleasures,  and  interests,  and  were  blinded, 
by  their  absorption  in  these,  to  the  perception  of 
any  higher  reality.  It  was  the  coming  to  this 
knowledge  of  "  himself,"  of  the  meaning  and 
purpose  of  his  individual  unity  of  powers  and 
aspirations  in  the  great  universe  of  being,  of  his 
true  relation  to  God  and  to  man,  which  consti- 
tuted the  first  revelation  to  Jeremiah,  and  which 
was  the  secret  of  his  personal  greatness. 

This  knowledge,  however,  might  have  come 
to  him  in  vain.  Moments  of  illumination  are  not 
always  accompanied  by  noble  resolves  and  corre- 
sponding actions.  It  does  not  follow  that,  be- 
cause a  man  sees  his  calling,  he  will  at  once  re- 

•isa.  xiiv.  34,  |t33o  -yyp,  xiix.  5,  ifj  nay^  itD3D  nv 


nounce  all,  and  pursue  it.  Jeremiah  would  not 
have  been  human,  had  he  not  hesitated  a  while, 
when,  after  the  inward  light,  came  the  voice, 
"  A  spokesman,"  or  Divine  interpreter  (K^2J), 
"  to  the  nations  appoint  I  thee."  To  have  pass- 
ing flashes  of  spiritual  insight  and  heavenly  in- 
spiration is  one  thing;  to  undertake  now,  in  the 
actual  present,  the  course  of  conduct  which  they 
unquestionably  indicate  and  involve,  is  quite  an- 
other. And  so,  when  the  hour  of  spiritual  illu- 
mination has  passed,  the  darkness  may  and  often 
does  become  deeper  than  before. 

"And  I  said,  Alas!  O  Lord  lahvah,  behold  I 
know  not  how  to  speak;  for  I  am  but  a  youth." 
The  words  express  that  reluctance  to  begin 
which  a  sense  of  unpreparedness,  and  misgivings 
about  the  unknown  future,  naturally  inspire.  To 
take  the  first  step  demands  decision  and  confi- 
dence: but  confidence  and  decision  do  not  come 
of  contemplating  oneself  and  one's  own  unfitness 
or  unpreparedness,  but  of  steadfastly  fixing  our 
regards  upon  God,  vvho  will  qualify  us  for  all 
that  He  requires  us  to  do.  Jeremiah  does  not 
refuse  to  obey  His  call;  the  very  words  "  My 
Lord  lahvah  " — 'Adonai,  Master,  or  my  Master 
— imply  a  recognition  of  the  Divine  right  to  his 
service;  he  merely  alleges  a  natural  objection. 
The  cry,  "  Who  is  sufficient  for  these  things?  " 
rises  to  his  lips,  when  the  light  and  the  glory  are 
obscured  for  a  moment,  and  the  reaction  and 
despondency  natural  to  human  weakness  ensue. 
"  And  lahvah  said  unto  me,  Say  not,  I  am  but 
a  youth;  for  unto  all  that  I  send  thee  unto,  thou 
shalt  go,  and  all  that  I  command  thee  thou  shalt 
speak.  Be  not  afraid  of  them;  for  with  thee  am 
I  to  rescue  thee,  is  the  utterance  of  lahvah." 
"Unto  all  that  I  send  thee  unto";  for  he  was 
to  be  no  local  prophet;  his  messages  were  to 
be  addressed  to  the  surrounding  peoples  as  well 
as  to  Judah;  his  outlook  as  a  seer  was  to  com- 
prise the  entire  political  horizon  (ver.  10,  xxv. 
9,  15,  xlvi.  sqq.).  Like  Moses  (Ex.  iv.  10),  Jere- 
miah objects  that  he  is  no  practised  speaker;  and 
this  on  account  of  youthful  inexperience.  The 
answer  is  that  his  speaking  will  depend  not  so 
much  upon  himself  as  upon  God:  "All  that  I 
command  thee,  thou  shalt  speak."  The  allega- 
tion of  his  youth  also  covers  a  feeling  of  timidity, 
which  would  naturally  be  excited  at  the  thought 
of  encountering  kings  and  princes  and  priests, 
as  well  as  the  common  people,  in  the  discharge 
of  such  a  commission.  This  implication  is  met 
by  the  Divine  assurance:  "  Unto  all" — of  what- 
ever rank — "  that  I  send  thee  unto,  thou  shalt 
go  ";  and  by  the  encouraging  promise  of  Divine 
protection  against  all  opposing  powers:  "  Be  not 
afraid  of  them;  for  with  thee  am  I  to  rescue 
thee."  * 

"  And  lahvah  put  forth  His  hand  and  touched 
my  mouth:  and  lahvah  said  unto  me.  Behold  I 
have  put  My  words  in  thy  mouth!  "  This  word 
of  the  Lord,  says  Hitzig,  is  represented  as  a 
corporeal  substance;  in  accordance  with  the 
Oriental  mode  of  thought  and  speech,  which  in- 
vests everything  with  bodily  form.  He  refers  to 
a  passage  in  Samuel  (2  Sam.  xvii.  s)  where 
Absalom  says,  "  Call  now  Hushai  the  Archite, 
and  let  us  hear  that  which  is  in  his  mouth 
also;  "  as  if  what  the  old  counsellor  had  to  say 
were  something  solid  in  more  senses  than  one. 
But  we  need  not  press  the  literal  force  of  the 
language.  A  prophet  who  c^uld  write  (v.  14): 
"  Behold  I  am  about  to  make  my  words  in  thy 

♦  For  the  words  of  this  promise,  c/.  ver.  19  infra,  xv.  aot 
xlii.  II. 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5. j     THE    TRUST    IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT. 


25 


mouth  fire  and  this  people  logs  of  wood;  and  it 
shall  devour  them;  "  or  again  (xv.  16),  "  Thy 
words  were  found,  and  I  did  eat  them;  and  Thy 
word  became  unto  me  a  joy  and  my  heart's  de- 
light," may  also  have  written,  "  Behold  I  have 
put  My  words  in  thy  mouth!"  without  thereby 
becoming  amenable  to  a  charge  of  confusing 
fact  with  figure,  metaphor  with  reality.  Nor  can 
I  think  the  prophet  means  to  say  that,  aUhough, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Divine  word  already  dwelt 
in  him,  it  was  now  "  put  in  his  mouth,"  in  the 
sense  that  he  was  henceforth  to  utter  it.  Stripped 
of  the  symbolism  of  vision,  the  verse  simply  as- 
serts that  the  spiritual  change  which  came  over 
Jeremiah  at  the  turning  point  in  his  career  was 
due  to  the  immediate  operation  of  God;  and  that 
the  chief  external  consequence  of  this  inward 
change  was  that  powerful  preaching  of  Divine 
truth  by  which  he  was  henceforth  known.  The 
great  Prophet  of  the  Exile  twice  uses  the  phrase, 
"  I  have  set  My  words  in  thy  mouth  "  (Isa.  li.  16, 
lix.  21)  with  much  the  same  meaning  as  that  in- 
tended by  Jeremiah,  but  without  the  preceding 
metaphor  about  the   Divine   hand. 

"  See  I  have  this  day  set  thee  over  the  nations 
and  over  the  kingdoms,  to  root  out  and  to  pull 
down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  overturn;  to  re- 
build and  to  replant."  Such,  following  the  He- 
brew punctuation,  are  the  terms  of  the  prophet's 
commission;  and  they  are  well  worth  considera- 
tion, as  they  set  forth  with  all  the  force  of  pro- 
phetic idiom  his  own  conception  of  the  nature  of 
that  commission.  First,  there  is  the  implied  as- 
sertion of  his  own  official  dignity:  the  prophet 
is  made  a  paqid  (Gen.  xli.  34,  "  oflficers  "  set  by 
Pharaoh  over  Egypt;  2  Kings  xxv.  19  a  military 
prefect)  a  prefect  or  superintendent  of  the  na- 
tions of  the  world.  It  is  the  Hebrew  term  corre- 
sponding to  the  iirlcTKoiros  of  the  New  Testament 
and  the  Christian  Church  (Judg.  ix.  28;  Neh. 
xi.  9).  And  secondly,  his  powers  are  of  the 
widest  scope;  he  is  invested  with  authority  over 
the  destinies  of  all  peoples.  If  it  be  asked  in 
what  sense  it  could  be  truly  said  that  the  ruin  and 
renascence  of  nations  were  subject  to  the  super- 
vision of  the  prophets,  the  answer  is  obvious. 
The  word  they  were  authorised  to  declare  was 
the  word  of  God.  But  God's  word  is  not  some- 
thing whose  efficacy  is  exhausted  in  the  human 
utterance  of  it.  God's  word  is  an  irreversible 
command,  fulfilling  itself  with  all  the  necessity 
of  a  law  of  nature.  The  thought  is  well  ex- 
pressed by  a  later  prophet:  "  For  as  the  rain 
Cometh  down,  and  the  snow  from  heaven,  and 
returneth  not  thither,  but  watereth  the  earth,  and 
maketh  it  bring  forth  and  spring;  and  yieldeth 
seed  to  the  sower  and  bread  to  the  eater:  so  shall 
My  word  become,  that  goeth  forth  out  of  My 
mouth;  it  shall  not  return  to  Me  empty  (Dp^l), 
but  shall  surely  do  that  which  I  have  willed,  and 
shall  carry  through  that  for  which  I  sent  it " 
(or  "  shall  prosper  him  whom  I  have  sent,"  Isa. 
Iv.  10,  11).  All  that  happens  is  merely  the  self- 
accomplishment  of  this  Divine  word,  which  is 
only  the  human  aspect  of  the  Divine  will.  If, 
therefore,  the  absolute  dependence  of  the  proph- 
ets upon  God  for  their  knowledge  of  this  word 
be  left  out  of  account,  they  appear  as  causes, 
when  they  are  in  truth  but  instruments,  as  agents 
when  they  are  only  mouthpieces.  And  so  Eze- 
kiel  writes,  "  when  I  came  to  destroy  the  city  " 
(Ezek.  xliii.  3),  meaning  w'hen  I  announced  the 
Divine  decree  of  its  destruction.  The  truth 
upon  which  this  peculiar  mode  of  statement  rests 
— the  truth  that  the  will   of   God   must  be  and 


always  is  done  in  the  world  that  God  has  made 
and  is  making — is  a  rock  upon  which  the  faith 
of  Hiij  messengers  may  always  repose.  What 
strength,  what  staying  power  may  the  Christian 
preacher  find  in  dwelling  upon  this  almost  visible 
fact  of  the  self-fulfilling  will  and  word  of  God, 
though  all  around  him  he  hear  that  will  ques- 
tioned, and  that  word  disowned  and  denied! 
He  knows — it  is  his  supreme  comfort  to  know — 
that,  while  his  own  efforts  may  be  thwarted,  that 
will  is  invincible;  that  though  he  may  fail  in  the 
conflict,  that  word  will  go  on  conquering  and  to 
conquer,  until  it  shall  have  subdued  all  things 
unto  itself. 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  TRUST  IN  THE  SHADOW  OF  EGYPT. 

Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5. 

The  first  of  the  prophet's  public  addresses  is, 
in  fact,  a  sermon  which  proceeds  from  an  ex- 
posure of  national  sin  to  the  menace  of  coming 
judgment.  It  falls  naturally  into  three  sections, 
of  which  the  first  (ii.  1-13)  sets  forth  lahvah's 
tender  love  to  His  young  bride  Israel  in  the  old 
times  of  nomadic  life,  when  faithfulness  to  Him 
was  rewarded  by  protection  from  all  external 
foes;  and  then  passes  on  to  denounce  the  un- 
precedented apostasy  of  a  people  from  their  God. 
The  second  (14-28)  declares  that  if  Israel  has 
fallen  a  prey  to  her  enemies,  it  is  the  result  of  her 
own  infidelity  to  her  Divine  Spouse;  of  her  early 
notorious  and  inveterate  falling  away  to  the 
false  gods,  who  are  now  her  only  resource,  and 
that  a  worthless  one.  The  third  section  (ii.  29- 
iii.  5)  points  to  the  failure  of  lahvah's  chastise- 
ments to  reclaim  a  people  hardened  in  guilt,  and 
in  a  self-righteousness  which  refused  warning 
and  despised  reproof;  affirms  the  futility  of  all 
human  aid  amid  the  national  reverses;  and  cries 
woe  on  a  too  late  repentance.  It  is  not  difficult 
to  fix  the  time  of  this  noble  and  pathetic  address. 
That  which  follows  it,  and  is  intimately  connected 
with  it  in  substance,  was  composed  "  in  the  days 
of  Josiah  the  king  "  (iii.  6),  so  that  the  present 
one  must  be  placed  a  little  earlier  in  the  same 
reign;  and,  considering  its  position  in  the  book, 
may  very  probably  be  assigned  to  the  thirteenth 
year  of  Josiah,  i.  e.,  c.  c.  629,  in  which  the 
prophet  received  his  Divine  call.  This  is  the 
ordinary  opinion;  but  one  critic  (Knobel)  refers 
the  discourse  to  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Jehoiakim,  on  account  of  the  connection  with 
Egypt  which  is  mentioned  in  vv.  18,  2i^,  and  the 
humiliation  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the  Egyp- 
tians which  is  mentioned  in  ver.  16;  while  another 
(Graf)  maintains  that  chaps,  ii.-vi.  were  com- 
posed in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  as  if  the 
prophet  had  committed  nothing  to  writing  before 
that  date — an  assumption  which  seems  to  run 
counter  to  the  implication  conveyed  by  his  own 
statement,  chap,  xxxvi.  2.  This  latter  critic  has 
failed  to  notice  the  allusions  in  chaps,  iv.  14,  vi. 
8,  to  an  approaching  calamity  which  may  be 
averted  by  national  reformation,  to  which  the 
people  are  invited; — an  invitation  wholly  incom- 
patible with  the  prophet's  attitude  at  that  hope- 
less period.  The  series  of  prophecies  beginning 
at  chap.  iv.  3  is  certainly  later  in  time  than  the 
discourse  we  are  now  considering;  but  as  cer- 
tainly belongs  to  the  immediate  subsequent  years. 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  first  two  of  Jere- 
miah's addresses  were  called  forth  by  any  strik- 
ing event  of  public  importance,  such  as  the  Scyth- 
ian invasion.    His  new-born  consciousness  of  the 


26 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


Divine  call  would  urge  the  young  prophet  to  ac- 
tion; and  in  the  present  discourse  we  have  the 
firstfruits  of  the  heavenly  impulse.  It  is  a  retro- 
spect of  Israel's  entire  past  and  an  examination 
of  the  state  of  things  growing  out  of  it.  The 
prophet's  attention  is  not  yet  confined  to  Judah; 
he  deplores  the  rupture  of  the  ideal  relations  be- 
tween lahvah  and  His  people  as  a  whole  (ii.  4; 
cf.  iii.  6).  As  Hitzig  has  remarked,  this  open- 
ing address,  in  its  finished  elaboration,  leaves 
the  impression  of  a  first  outpouring  of  the  heart, 
which  sets  forth  at  once  without  reserve  the  long 
score  of  the  Divine  grievances  against  Israel. 
At  the  same  time,  in  its  closing  judgment  (iii. 
5),  in  its  irony  (ii.  28),  in  its  appeals  (ii.  21,  31), 
and  its  exclamations  (ii.  12),  it  breathes  an  in- 
dignation stern  and  deep  to  a  degree  hardly 
characteristic  of  the  prophet  in  his  other  dis- 
courses, but  which  was  natural  enough,  as  Hitzig 
observes,  in  a  first  essay  at  moral  criticism,  a  first 
outburst  of  inspired  zeal. 

In  the  Hebrew  text  the  chapter  begins  with 
the  same  formula  as  chap.  i.  (ver.  4) :  "  And  there 
fell  a  word  of  lahvah  unto  me,  saying."  But  the 
LXX.  reads:  "And  he  said, Thus  saith  the  Lord," 
(koI  e?7re,  rA5e  Xiyei  K^pios) ;  a  difference  which 
is  not  immaterial,  as  it  may  be  a  trace  of  an  older 
Hebrew  recension  of  the  prophet's  work,  in 
which  this  second  chapter  immediately  followed 
the  original  superscription  of  the  book,  as  given 
in  chap.  i.  i,  2,  from  which  it  \yas  afterwards 
separated  by  the  insertion  of  the  narrative  of 
Jeremiah's  call  and  visions  ("ip^^ll  cf.  Amos  i. 
2).  Perhaps  we  may  see  another  trace  of  the 
same  thing  in  the  fact  that  whereas  chap.  i.  sends 
the  prophet  to-  the  rulers  and  people  of  Judah, 
this  chapter  is  in  part  addressed  to  collective 
Israel  (ver.  4) ;  which  constitutes  a  formal  dis- 
agreement. If  the  reference  to  Israel  is  not 
merely  retrospective  and  rhetorical, — if  it  im- 
plies, as  seems  to  be  assumed,  that  the  prophet 
really  meant  his  words  to  affect  the  remnant  of 
the  northern  kingdom  as  well  as  Judah, — we 
have  here  a  valuable  contemporary  corrobora- 
tion of  the  much  disputed  assertion  of  the  au- 
thor of  Chronicles,  that  king  Josiah  abolished 
idolatry  "  in  the  cities  of  Manasseh  and  Ephraim 
and  Simeon  even  unto  Naphtali,  to  wit,  in  their 
ruins  round  about"  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  6),  as  well 
as  in  Judah  and  Jerusalem;  and  that  Manasseh 
and  Ephraim  and  "  the  remnant  of  Israel "  (2 
Chron.  xxxiv.  9  cf.  21)  contributed  to  his  resto- 
ration of  the  temple.  These  statements  of  the 
Chronicler  imply  that  Josiah  exercised  authority 
in  the  ruined  northern  kingdom,  as  well  as  in  the 
more  fortunate  south;  and  so  far  as  this  first  dis- 
course of  Jeremiah  was  actually  addressed  to  Is- 
rael as  well  as  to  Judah,  those  disputed  state- 
ments find  in  it  an  undesigned  confirmation. 
However  this  may  be,  as  a  part  of  the  first  col- 
lection of  the  author's  prophecies,  there  is  little 
doubt  that  the  chapter  was  read  by  Baruch  to 
the  people  of  Jerusalem  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Jehoiakim   (chap,  xxxvi.  6). 

"  Go  thou  and  cry  in  the  ears  of  Jerusalem: 
Thus  hath  lahvah  said  "  (or  "  thought:  "  This 
is  the  Divine  thought  concerning  thee!)  "  I 
hare  remembered  for  thee  the  kindness  of  thy 
youth,  the  love  of  thine  espousals;  thy  following 
Me "  (as  a  bride  follows  her  husband  to  his 
tent)  "  in  the  wilderness,  in  a  land  unsown.  A 
dedicated  thing  "  (^T!P  •  like  the  high  priest,  on 

whose  mitre  was  graven  '"'j'^^c  I'v'^'  "  was  Israel 


to  lahvah.  His  first  fruits  of  increafSe;  all  who  did 
eat  him  were  held  guilty,  ill  would  come  to 
them,  saith  lahvah  "  (vers.  2,  3). — "  I  have  re- 
membered for  thee,"  i.  e.,  in  thy  favour,  to  thy 
benefit — as  when  Nehemiah  prays,  "  Remember 
in  my  favour,  O  my  God,  for  good,  all  that 
I  have  done  upon  this  people,"  (Neh.  v.  19) — 
"  the  kindness  " —  "IDn  — the  warm  affection  of 
thy  youth,  "  the  love  of  thine  espousals,"  or  the 
charm  of  thy  bridal  state  (Hos.  ii.  15,  xi.  i); 
the  tender  attachment  of  thine  early  days,  of 
thy  new  born  national  consciousness,  when 
lahvah  had  chosen  thee  as  His  bride,  and 
called  thee  to  follow  Him  out  of  Egypt.  It 
is  the  figure  which  we  find  so  elaborately  de- 
veloped in  the  pages  of  Hosea.  The  "  bridal 
state  "  is  the  time  from  the  Exodus  to  the  tak- 
ing of  the  covenant  at  Sinai  (Ezek.  xvi.  8), 
which  was,  as  it  were,  the  formal  instrument 
of  the  marriage;  and  Israel's  young  love  is 
explained  as  consisting  in  turning  her  back  upon 
"  the  flesh-pots  of  Egypt "  (Ezek.  xvi.  3),  at 
the  call  of  lahvah,  and  following  her  Divine 
Lord  into  the  barren  steppes.  This  forsaking 
of  all  worldly  comfort  for  the  hard  life  of  the 
desert  was  proof  of  the  sincerity  of  Israel's 
early  love.  [The  evidently  original  words  "  in 
the  wilderness,  a  land  unsown,"  are  omitted  by 
the  LXX.,  which  renders:  "  I  remembered  the 
mercy  of  thy  youth,  and  the  love  of  thy  nup- 
tials reXefwo-ty,  consummation),  so  that  thou  fol- 
lowedst  the  Holy  One  of  Israel,  saith  lahvah."] 
lahvah's  "  remembrance  "  of  this  devotion,  that 
is  to  say,  the  return  He  made  for  it,  is  described 
in  the  next  verse.  Israel  became  not  "  holi- 
ness," but  a  holy  or  hallowed  thing;  a  dedicated 
object,  belonging  wholly  and  solely  to  lahvah, 
a  thing  which  it  was  sacrilege  to  touch;  lahvah's 
"  firstfruits  of  increase  "  (Heb.  nriNUn  n''L"N"l). 
This  last  phrase  is  to  be  explained  by  reference 
to  the  well-known  law  of  the  firstfruits  (Ex. 
xxiii.  19;  Deut.  xviii.  4,  xxvi.  10),  according  to 
which  the  first  specimens  of  all  agricultural 
produce  were  given  to  God.  Israel,  like  the  first- 
lings of  cattle  and  the  firstfruits  of  corn  and 
wine  and  oil,  was  mriv  K'Tp  consecrated  to 
lahvah;  and  therefore  none  might  eat  of  him 
without  offending.  "  To  eat  "  or  devour  is  a 
term  naturally  used  of  vexing  and  destroying  a 
nation  (x.  25,  1.  7;  Deut.  vii.  16,  "  And  thou 
shalt  eat  up  all  the  peoples,  which  Jehovah  thy 
God  is  about  to  give  thee;  "  Isa.  i.  7;  Ps.  xiv. 
4,  "  Who  eat  up  My  people  as  they  eat  bread  "). 
The  literal  translation  is,  "  All  his  eaters  become 
guilty  (or  are  treated  as  guilty,  punished) ;  evil 
cometh  to  them;  "  and  the  verbs,  being  in  the 
imperfect,  denote  what  happened  again  and  again 
in  Israel's  history;  lahvah  suffered  no  man  to 
do  His  people  wrong  with  impunity.  This,  then, 
is  the  first  count  in  the  indictment  against  Israel, 
that  lahvah  had  not  been  unmindful  of  her  early 
devotion,  but  had  recognised  it  by  throwing  the 
shield  of  sanctity  around  her,  and  making  her 
inviolable  against  all  external  enemies  (vv.  1-3). 
The  prophet's  complaint,  as  developed  in  the 
following  section  (vv.  4-8),  is  that,  in  spite  of 
the  goodness  of  lahvah,  Israel  has  forsaken 
Him  for  idols.  "  Hear  ye  the  word  of  lahvah, 
O  house  of  Jacob,  and  all  the  clans  of  the 
house  of  Israel!"  All  Israel  is  addressed,  and 
not  merely  the  surviving  kingdom  of  Judah,  be- 
cause the  apostasy  had  been  universal.  A  special 
reference  apparently  made  in  ver.  8  to  the  proph- 
ets of  Baal,  who  flourished  only  in  the  north- 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5.]     THE    TRUST   IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT. 


27 


em  kingdom.  We  may  compare  the  word  of 
Amos  '■  against  the  whole  clan,"  which  lahvah 
"  brought  up  from  the  land  of  Egypt  "  (Amos 
iii.  i),  spoken  at  a  time  when  bphraini  was 
yet  in  the  heyday  of  his  power. 

"  Thus    hath    lahvah    said,    What    found    your 

fathers  in  Me,  that  was  unjust,  (''.}V  a  single  act 
of  injustice,  Ps.  vii.  4;  not  to  be  found  in  lahvah, 
Deut.  xxxii.  4)  that  they  went  far  from  Me  and 
followed  the  Folly  and  were  befooled  (or  '  the 
Delusion  and  were  deluded')"  (ver.  5).  The 
phrase    is   used    2    Kings    xvii.    15    in   the    same 

sense;  ^?l''^  ■' the  (mere)  breath,"-  "  the  nothing- 
ness "  or  "  vanity,"  being  a  designation  of  the 
idols  which  Israel  went  after  (cf.  also  chap, 
xxiii.  16;  Ps.  Ixii.  11;  Job  xxvii.  12);  much  as 
St.  Paul  has  written  that  an  "  idol  is  nothing  in 
the  world  "  (i  Cor.  viii.  4),  and  that,  with  all  this 
boasted  culture,  the  nations  of  classical  antiquity 
"  became  vain,"  or  were  befooled  "  in  their  ima- 
ginations "  (ifiaTaiw6r)ffav=)^2r]^-\),"  and  their  fool- 
ish heart  was  darkened  "  (Rom.  i.  21).  Both 
the  prophet  and  the  apostle  refer  to  that  judicial 
blindness  which  is  a  consequence  of  persistently 
closing  the  eyes  to  truth,  and  deliberately  put- 
ting darkness  for  light  and  light  for  darkness, 
bitter  for  sweet,  and  sweet  for  bitter,  in  com- 
pliance with  the  urgency  of  the  flesh.  For 
ancient  Israel,  the  result  of  yielding  to  the  se- 
ductions of  foreign  worship  was,  that  "  They 
were  stultified  in  their  best  endeavours.  They 
became  false  in  thinking  and  believing,  in  doing 
and  forbearing,  because  the  fundamental  error 
pervaded  the  whole  life  of  the  nation  and  of  the 
individual.  They  supposed  that  they  knew  and 
honoured  God,  but  they  were  entirely  mistaken; 
they  supposed  they  were  doing  His  will,  and 
securing  their  own  welfare,  while  they  were  do- 
ing and  securing  the  exact  contrary"  (Hitzig). 
And  similar  consequences  will  always  flow  from 
attempts  to  serve  two  masters;  to  gratify  the 
lower  nature,  while  not  breaking  wholly  with 
the  higher.  Once  the  soul  has  accepted  a  lower 
standard  than  the  perfect  law  of  truth,  it  does 
not  stop  there.  The  subtle  corruption  goes  on 
extending  its  ravages  farther  and  farther;  while 
the  consciousness  that  anything  is  wrong  be- 
comes fainter  and  fainter  as  the  deadly  mischief 
increases,  until  at  last  the  ruined  spirit  believes 
itself  in  perfect  health,  when  it  is,  in  truth,  in 
the  last  stage  of  mortal  disease.  Perversion 
of  the  will  and  the  affections  leads  to  the  per- 
version of  the  intellect.  There  is  a  profound 
meaning  in  the  old  saying  that.  Men  make  their 
gods  in  their  own  likeness.  As  a  man  is,  so 
will  God  appear  to  him  to  be.  "  With  the 
loving  Thou  wilt  shew  Thyself  loving;  With 
the  perfect,  Thou  wilt  shew  Thyself  perfect; 
With  the  pure,  Thou  wilt  shew  Thyself  pure; 
And  with  the  perverse,  Thou  wilt  shew  Thyself 
froward  "  (Ps.  xviii.  25  sq.).  Only  hearts  pure 
of  all  worldly  taint  see  God  in  His  purity.  The 
rest  worsnip  some  more  or  less  imperfect  sem- 
blance of  Him,  according  to  the  varying  degrees 
of  their  selfishness  and  sin. 

"  And  they  said  not.  Where  is  lahvah,  who 
brought  us  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  that 
guided  us  in  the  wilderness,  in  a  land  of  wastes 
and  hollows  (or  desert  and  defile),  in  a  land 
of  drought  and  darkness  (dreariness  nioW)-  ^^  ^ 
land  that  no  man  passed  through,  and  where 
no   mortal   dwelt"    (ver.   6).     "They    said   not, 


WHiere  is  lahvah,  who  brought  us  up  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt."  It  is  the  old  complaint  of  the 
prophets  against  Israel's  black  ingratitude.  So, 
for  instance,  Amos  (ii.  10)  had  written:  "  Where- 
as I — I  brought  you  up  from  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  guided  you  in  the  wilderness  forty  years;  " 
and  Micah  (vi.  3  sq.) :  "My  people,  what  have 
I  done  unto  thee,  and  how  have  I  wearied 
thee?  -A.nswer  against  Me.  For  I  brought  thee 
up  from  the  land  of  Egypt,  aad  from  a  house 
of  bondmen  redeemed  I  thee."  In  common 
gratitude,  they  were  bound  to  be  true  to  this 
mighty  Saviour;  to  enquire  after  lahvah,  to  call 
upon  Him  only,  to  do  His  will,  and  to  seek  His 
grace  (cf.  xxix.  12  sq.).  Yet,  with  characteristic 
fickleness,  they  soon  forgot  the  fatherly  guid- 
ance, which  had  never  deserted  them  in  the 
period  of  their  nomadic  wanderings  in  the  wilds 
of  Arabia  Petrsa;  a  land  which  the  prophet 
poetically  describes  as  "  a  land  of  waste  and 
hollows  " — alluding  probably  to  the  rocky  defiles 
through  which  they  had  to  pass — and  "  a  land 
of  drought  and  darkness;  "  *  the  latter  an  epithet 
of  the  Grave  or  Flades  (Job  x.  21),  fittingly 
applied  to  that  great  lone  wilderness  of  the 
south,  which  Israel  had  called  "  a  fearsome 
land  "  (xxi.  i),  and  "  a  land  of  trouble  and 
anguish  "  (xxx.  6),  whither,  according  to  the 
poet  of  Job,  "  The  caravans  go  up  and  are 
lost  "   (vi.    18). 

"  And  I  brought  you  into  the  garden  land, 
to  eat  its  fruits  and  its  choicest  things  (i^3lt2 
Isa.  i.  19;  Gen.  xlv.  18,  20,  23);  and  ye  entered 
and  defiled  My  land,  and  My  domain  ye  made 
a  loathsome  thing!  "  (ver.  7).  With  the  w  Ider- 
ness  of  the  wanderings  is  contrasted  the  "  land 
of  the  carmel,"  the  land  of  fruitful  orchards 
and  gardens,  as  in  chap.  iv.  26;  Isa.  x.  18,  xvi. 
10,  xxix.  17.  This  was  Canaan,  lahvah's  own 
land,  which  He  had  chosen  out  of  all  countries 
to  be  His  special  dwelling-place  and  earthly 
sanctuary;  but  which  Israel  no  sooner  possessed, 
than  they  began  to  pollute  this  holy  land  by 
their  sins,  like  the  guilty  peoples  whom  they 
had  displaced,  making  it  thereby  an  abomination 
to  lahvah  (Lev.  xviii.  24  sq.,  cf.  chap.  iii.  2). 

"  The  priests  they  said  not,  Where  is  lahvah? 
and  they  that  handle  the  law,  they  knew  (i.  e., 
regarded,  heeded)  Me  not;  and  as  for  the  shep- 
herds (i.  e.,  the  king  and  princes,  ver.  26),  they 
rebelled  against  Me,  and  the  prophets,  they 
prophesied  by  (through)  the  Baal,  and  them  that 
help  not  (f.  e.,  the  false  gods)  they  followed " 
(ver.  8).  In  the  form  of  a  climax,  this  verse 
justifies  the  accusation  contained  in  the  last,  by 
giving  particulars.  The  three  ruling  classes  are 
successively  indicted  {cf.  ver.  26.  ch.  xviii.  18). 
The  priests,  part  of  whose  duty  was  to  "  handle 
the  law,"  i.  e.,  explain  the  Torah,  to  instruct 
the  people  in  the  requirements  of  lahvah,  by 
oral  tradition  and  out  of  the  sacred  law-books, 
gave  no  sign  of  spiritual  aspiration  {cf.  ver.  6) ; 
like  the  reprobate  sons  of  Eli,  "  they  knew  not  " 
(i  Sam.  ii.  12)  "  lahvah,"  that  is  to  say,  paid 
no  heed  to  Him  and  His  will  as  revealed  in 
the  book  of  the  law;  the  secular  authorities,  the 
king  and  his  counsellors  ("  wise  men,"  xviii.  18), 

*  AjV?"'  so  far  as  the  punctuation  suggests  that  the 
term  isa  compound,  meaning  "shadow  of  death,"  is  one 
of  the  fictions  of  the  Masorets,  like  D'^i^f^P/ and  ^'^^^Q 


and 


na^n ; 


in  the  Psalms. 


28 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF.  JEREMIAH. 


not  only  sinned  thus  negatively,  but  positively 
revolted  against  the  King  of  kings,  and  resisted 
His  will;  while  the  prophets  went  further  yet 
in  the  path  of  guilt,  apostatising  altogether  from 
the  God  of  Israel,  and  seckinf  inspiration  from 
the  Phoenician  Baal,  and  following  worthless 
idols  that  could  give  no  help.  There  seems  to 
be  a  play  on  the  words  Baal  and  Belial,  as  if 
Baal  meant  the  same  as  Belial,  "  profitless," 
•■  worthless  "  {cf.  I  Sam.  ii.  12:  "  Now  Eli's  sons 
were    sons   of    Belial;    they    knew   not   lahvah." 

The  phrase  ^l^VV'^f)  "  they  that  help  not,"  or 
"cannot  help,"  suggests  the  term -'J?^^ 2 Belial; 
which,  however,  may  be  derived  from    r?  "  not," 

and  7y  "  supreme,"  "  God,"  and  so  mean  "  not- 
God,"  "  idol,"  rather  than  "  worthlessness,"  "'  un- 
profitableness," as  it  is  usually  explained).  The 
reference  may  be  to  the  Baal-worship  of  Samaria, 
the  northern  capital,  which  was  organised  by 
Ahab,  and  his  Tyrian  queen  (chap,  xxiii.  13). 

"  Therefore  " — on  account  of  this  amazing  in- 
gratitude of  your  forefathers, — "  I  will  again 
plead  (reason,  argue  forensically)  with  you 
(the  present  generation  in  whom  their  guilt  re- 
peats itself)  saith  lahvah,  and  with  your  sons' 
sons  (who  will  inherit  your  sins)  will  I  plead." 
The  nation  is  conceived  as  a  moral  unity,  the 
characteristics  of  which  are  exemplified  in  each 
successive  generation.  To  all  Israel,  past,  pres- 
ent, and  future,  lahvah  will  vindicate  his  own 
righteousness.  "  For  cross  "  (the  sea)  "  to  the 
coasts  of  the  Citeans  "  (the  people  of  Citium  in 
Cyprus)  "and  see;  and  to  Kedar "  (the  rude 
tribes  of  the  Syrian  desert)  "  send  ye,  and  mark 
well,  and  see  whether  there  hath  arisen  a  case 
like  this.  Hath  a  nation  changed  gods — albeit 
they  are  no-gods?  Yet  My  people  hath  changed 
his  "  (true)  "  glory  for  that  which  helpeth  not  " 
(or  is  worthless).  "  Upheave,  ye  heavens  (I^DE^ 
D'ttK',a  fine  paronomasia),  "at  this,  and  shudder 
(and)  be  petrified "  "'^'p  ''^IT'  Ges.,  "  be  sore 
amazed"  =DOK';  but  Hitzig  "be  dry"  =  stiff 
and  motionless,  like  syn.tJ'2"'  in  i  Kings  xiii.  4), 
"  saith  lahvah;  for  two  evil  things  hath  My  peo- 
ple done:  Me  they  have  forsaken — a  Fountain 
of  living  water — to  hew  them  out  cisterns, 
broken  cisterns,  that  cannot  (imperf.  =  poten- 
tial) "hold  water"  (Heb.  the  waters:  generic 
article)  (vv.  9-13).  In  these  five  verses,  the 
apostasy  of  Israel  from  his  own  God  is  held  up 
as  a  fact  unique  in  history — unexampled  and  in- 
explicable by  comparison  with  the  doings  of 
other  nations.  Whether  you  look  westward  or 
eastward,  across  the  sea  to  Cyprus,  or  beyond 
Gilead  to  the  barbarous  tribes  of  the  Cedrei 
(Ps.  cxx.  5),  nowhere  will  you  find  a  heathen 
people  that  has  changed  its  native  worship  for 
another;  and  if  you  did  find  such,  it  would  be  no 
precedent  or  palliation  of  Israel's  behaviour. 
The  heathen  in  adopting  a  new  worship  simply 
exchanges  one  superstition  for  another;  the  ob- 
jects of  his  devotion  are  "non-gods"  (ver.  11). 
The  heinousness  and  the  eccentricity  of  Israel's 
conduct  lies  in  the  fact  that  he  has  bartered  truth 
for  falsehood;  he  has  exchanged  "his  Glory" 
—whom  Amos  (viii.  7)  calls  the  Pride  (A.  V. 
Excellency)  of  Jacob— for  a  useless  idol;  an  ob- 
ject which  the  prophet  elsewhere  calls  "  The 
Shame  "  (iii.  24,  xi.  13),  because  it  can  only  bring 
shame  and  confusion  upon  those  whose  hopes 
depend  upon  it.  The  wonder  of  the  thing  might 
well  be  supposed  to  strike  the  pure  heavens,  the 


silent  witnesses  of  it,  with  blank  astonishment  (c/^. 
a  similar  appeal  in  Dout.  iv.  26,  xxxi.  28,  xxxii. 

I,  where  the  earth  is  added).  For  the  evil  is  not 
single  but  twofold.  With  the  rejection  of  truth 
goes  the  adoption  of  error;  and  both  are  evils. 
Not  only  has  Israel  turned  his  back  upon  "  a 
fountain  of  living  waters;"  he  has  also  "hewn 
him  out  cisterns,  broken  cisterns,  that  cannot 
hold  water."  The  "  broken  cisterns "  are,  of 
course,  the  idols  which  Israel  made  to  himself. 
As  a  cistern  full  of  cracks  and  fissures  disap- 
points the  wayfarer,  who  has  reckoned  on  find- 
ing water  in  it;  so  the  idols,  having  only  the 
semblance  and  not  the  reality  of  life,  avail  their 
worshippers  nothing  (vv.  8.  11).  In  Hebrew 
the  waters  of  a  spring  are  called  "  living  "  (Gen. 
xxi.  19),  because  they  are  more  refreshing  and, 
as  it  were,  life-giving,  than  the  stagnant  waters 
of  pools  and  tanks  fed  by  the  rains.  Hence  by 
a  natural  metaphor,  the  mouth  of  a  righteous 
man,  or  the  teaching  of  the  wise,  and  the  fear  of 
the  Lord,  are  called  a  fountain  of  life  (Prov.  x. 

II,  xiii.  14,  xiv.  27).  "The  fountain  of  life  "^ 
is  with  lahvah  (Ps.  xxxvi.  10);  nay.  He  is  Him- 
self the  Fountain  of  living  waters  (Jer.  xvii.  13); 
because  all  life,  and  all  that  sustains  or  quickens 
life,  especially  spiritual  life,  proceeds  from  Him. 
Now  in  Ps.  xix.  8  it  is  said  that  "  The  law  of  the 
Lord — or,  the  teaching  of  lahvah — is  perfect,  re- 
viving (or  restoring)  the  soul"  {cf.  Lam.  i.  11; 
Ruth  iv.  15);  and  a  comparison  of  Micah  and 
Isaiah's  statement  that  "  Out  of  Zion  will  go 
forth  the  law,  and  the  word  of  the  Lord  from 
Jerusalem"  (Isa.  ii.  3;  Mic.  iv.  2),  with  the  more 
figurative  language  of  Joel  (iii.  18)  and  Zecha- 
riah  (xiv.  8),  who  speak  of  "  a  fountain  going 
forth  from  the  house  of  the  Lord,"  and  "  living 
waters  going  forth  from  Jerusalem,"  suggests 
the  inference  that  "  the  living  waters,"  of  which 
lahvah  is  the  perennial  fountain,  are  identical 
with  His  law  as  revealed  through  priests  and 
prophets.  It  is  easy  to  confirm  this  suggestion 
by  reference  to  the  river  "  whose  streams  make 
glad  the  city  of  God"  (Ps.  xlvi.  4);  to  Isaiah's 
poetic  description  of  the  Divine  teaching,  of 
which  he  was  himself  the  exponent,  as  "  the 
waters  of  Shiloah  that  flow  softly  "  (viii.  6), 
Shiloah  being  a  spring  that  issues  from  the  tem- 
ple rock;  and  to  our  Lord's  conversation  with 
the  woman  of  Samaria,  in  which  He  character- 
ises His  own  teaching  as  "  living  waters  "  (St. 
John  iv.  10),  and  as  "  a  well  of  waters,  springing 
up  unto  eternal  Life  "  {ibid.   14). 

"  Is  Israel  a  bondman,  or  a  homeborn  serf? 
Why  hath  he  become  a  prey?  Over  him  did 
young  lions  roar;  they  uttered  their  voice;  and 
they  made  his  land  a  waste;  his  cities,  they  are 
burnt  up"  (or  "thrown  down),  so  that  they 
are  uninhabited.  Yea,  the  sons  of  Noph  and 
Tahpan(h)es,  they  did  bruise  thee  on  the  crown. 
Is  not  this  what  "  (the  thing  that)  "  thy  forsaking 
lahvah  thy  God  brought  about  for  thee,  at  the 
time  He  was  guiding  thee  in  the  way? "  (vv. 
14-17).  As  lahvah's  bride,  as  a  people  chosen 
to  be  His  own,  Israel  had  every  reason  to  expect 
a  bright  and  glorious  career.  Why  was  this  ex- 
pectation falsified  by  events?  But  one  answer 
was  possible,  in  view  of  the  immutable  righteous- 
ness, the  eternal  faithfulness  of  God.  "  The  ruin 
of  Israel  was  Israel's  own  doing."  It  is  a  truth 
which  applies  to  all  nations,  and  to  all  individuals 
capable  of  moral  agency,  in  all  periods  and  places 
of  their  existence.  Let  no  man  lay  his  failure 
in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come  at  the  door 
of  the  Almighty.     Let  none  venture  to  repeat  the 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5.]     THE    TRUST    IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT. 


29 


thoughtless  blasphemy  which  charges  the  All- 
Mercifiil  with  sending  frail  human  beings  to  ex- 
piate their  offences  in  an  everlasting  hell!  Let 
none  dare  to  say  or  think,  God  might  have  made 
it  otherwise,  but  He  would  not!  Oh,  no;  it  is 
all  a  monstrous  misconception  of  the  true  rela- 
tions of  things.  You  and  I  are  free  to  make  our 
choice  now,  whatever  may  be  the  case  hereafter. 
We  may  choose  to  obey  God,  or  to  disobey;  we 
may  seek  His  will,  or  our  own.  The  one  is 
the  way  of  life;  the  other,  of  death,  and  nothing 
can  alter  the  facts;  they  are  part  of  the  laws  of 
the  universe.  Our  destiny  is  in  our  own  hands, 
to  make  or  to  mar.  If  we  qualify  ourselves  for 
nothing  better  than  a  hell — if  our  daily  progress 
leads  us  farther  and  farther  from  God  and  nearer 
and  nearer  to  the  devil — then  hell  will  be  our 
eternal  home.  For  God  is  love,  and  purity,  and 
truth,  and  glad  obedience  to  righteous  laws; 
and  these  things,  realised  and  rejoiced  in,  are 
heaven.  And  the  man  that  lives  without  these  as 
the  sovereign  aims  of  his  existence — the  man 
whose  heart's  worship  is  centred  upon  something 
else  than  God — stands  already  on  the  verge  of 
"hell,  which  is  "  the  place  of  him  that  knows  not 
(and  cares  not  for)  God."  And  unless  we  are 
prepared  to  find  fault  with  that  natural  arrange- 
ment whereby  like  things  are  aggregated  to  like, 
and  all  physical  elements  gravitate  towards  their 
own  kind,  I  do  not  see  how  we  can  disparage  the 
same  law  in  the  spiritual  sphere,  in  virtue  of 
which  all  spiritual  beings  are  drawn  to  their  own 
place,  the  heavenly-minded  rising  to  the  heights 
above,  and  the  contrary  sort  sinking  to  the 
depths  beneath. 

The  precise  bearing  of  the  question  (ver.  14), 
"Is  Israel  a  bondman,  or  a  homeborn  slave?" 
is  hardly  self-evident.  One  commentator  sup- 
poses that  the  implied  answer  is  an  affirmative. 
Israel  is  a  "  servant,"  the  servant,  that  is,  the 
worshipper  of  the  true  God.  Nay,  he  is  more 
than  a  mere  bondservant;  he  occupies  the 
favoured  position  of  a  slave  born  in  his  lord's 
house  {cf.  Abraham's  three  hundred  and  eigh- 
teen young  men,  Gen.  xiv.  14),  and  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  the  custom  of  antiquity,  standing  on  a 
different  footing  from  a  slave  acquired  by  pur- 
chase. The  '■  home  "  or  house  is  taken  to  mean 
the  land  of  Canaan,  which  the  prophet  Hosea  had 
designated  as  lahvah's  "house"  (Hosea  ix.  15,  cf. 
3);  and  the  "  Israel  "  intended  is  supposed  to  be 
the  existing  generation  born  in  the  holy  land. 
The  double  question  of  the  prophet  then  amounts 
to  this:  If  Israel  be,  as  is  generally  admitted,  the 
favourite  bondservant  of  lahvah,  how  comes  it 
that  his  lord  has  not  protected  him  against  the 
spoiler?  But,  although  this  interpretation  is  not 
without  force,  it  is  rendered  doubtful  by  the 
order  of  the  words  in  the  Hebrew,  where  the 
stress  lies  on  the  terms  for  "  bondman "  and 
"homeborn  slave";  and  by  its  bold  divergence 
from  the  sense  conveyed  by  the  same  form  of 
question  in  other  passages  of  the  prophet,  e.  g., 
ver.  31  infra,  where  the  answer  expected  is  a 
negative  one  (cf.  also  chap.  viii.  4,  5,  xiv.  19. 
xlix.  I.  The  formula  is  evidently  characteristic). 
The  point  of  the  question  seems  to  lie  in  the 
fact  of  the  helplessness  of  persons  of  servile  con- 
dition against  occasional  acts  of  fraud  and  op- 
pression, from  which  neither  the  purchased  nor 
the  homebred  slave  could  at  all  times  be  secure. 
The  rights  of  such  persons,  however  humane  the 
laws  affecting  their  ordinary  status,  might  at 
times  be  cynically  disregarded  both  by  their 
masters  and  by  others   (see  a  notable  instance, 


Jer.  xxxiv.  8  sqq.).  Moreover,  there  may  be  a 
reference  to  the  fact  that  slaves  were  always 
reckoned  in  those  times  as  a  valuable  portion  of 
the  booty  of  conquest;  and  the  meaning  may  be 
that  Israel's  lot  as  a  captive  is  as  bad  as  if  he 
had  never  known  the  blessings  of  freedom,  and 
had  simply  exchanged  one  servitude  for  another 
by  the  fortune  of  war.  The  allusion  is  chiefly 
to  the  fallen  kingdom  of  Ephraim.  We  must  re- 
member that  Jeremiah  is  reviewing  the  whole 
past,  from  the  outset  of  lahvah's'  special  dealings 
with  Israel.  The  national  sins  of  the  northern 
and  more  powerful  branch  had  issued  in  utter 
ruin.  The  "  young  lions,"  the  foreign  invaders, 
had  "  roared  against  "  Israel  properly  so  called, 
and  made  havoc  of  the  whole  country  (cf.  iv.  7). 
The  land  was  dispeopled,  and  became  an  actual 
haunt  of  lions  (2  Kings  xvii.  25),  until  Esarhad- 
don  colonised  it  with  a  motley  gathering  of  for- 
eigners (Ezra  iv.  2).  Judah  too  had  suffered 
greatly  from  the  Assyrian  invasion  in  Hezekiah's 
time,  although  the  last  calamity  had  then  been 
mercifully  averted  (Sanherib  boasts  that  he 
stormed  and  destroyed  forty-six  strong  citi§s, 
and  carried  off  200,000  captives,  and  an  innumer- 
able booty).  The  implication  is  that  the  evil 
fate  of  Ephraim  threatens  to  overtake  Judah;  for 
the  same  moral  causes  are  operative,  and  the 
same  Divine  will  which  worked  in  the  past  is 
working  in  the  present,  and  will  continue  to 
work  in  the  future.  The  lesson  of  the  past  was 
plain  for  those  who  had  eyes  to  read  and  hearts 
to  understand  it.  Apart  from  this  prophetic 
doctrine  of  a  Providence  which  shapes  the  des- 
tinies of  nations,  in  accordance  with  their  mpral 
deserts,  history  has  no  value  except  for  the  grati- 
fication of  mere  intellectual  curiosity. 

"  Aye,  and  the  children  of  Noph  and  Tahpan- 
hes  they  bruise  (?  used  to  bruise;  are  bruising:  " 
the  Heb.  1J?")''  may  mean  either)  "  thee  on  the 
crown  "  (ver.  16).  This  obviously  refers  to  in- 
juries inflicted  by  Egypt,  the  two  royal  cities  of 
Noph  or  Memphis,  and  Tahpanhes  or  Daphnge, 
being  mentioned  in  place  of  the  country  itself. 
Judah  must  be  the  sufferer,  as  no  Egyptian  at- 
tack on  Ephraim  is  anywhere  recorded;  while 
we  do  read  of  Shishak's  invasion  of  the  southern 
kingdom  in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  both  in  the 
Bible  (i  Kings  xiv.  25),  and  in  Shishak's  own  in- 
scriptions on  the  walls  of  the  temple  of  Amen  at 
Karnak.  But  the  form  of  the  Hebrew  verb 
seems  to  indicate  rather  some  contemporary 
trouble;  perhaps  plundering  raids  by  an  Egyp- 
tian army,  which  about  this  time  was  besieging 
the  Philistine  stronghold  of  Ashdod  (Herod., 
ii.  157).  "  The  Egyptians  are  bruising  (or  crush- 
ing) thee"  seems  to  be  the  sense;  and  so  it  is 
given  by  the  Jewish  commentator  Rashi  (1VVT 
diffringunt).  Our  English  marginal  rendering 
"  fed  on  "  follows  the  traditional  pronunciation 
of  the  Hebrew  term  "V"1V  which  is  also  the  case 
with  the  Targum  and  the  Syriac  versions;  but 
this  can  hardly  be  right,  unless  we  suppose  that 
the  Egyptians  infesting  the  frontier  are  scorn- 
fully compared  to  vermin  (read  ^J'T  with  J.  D. 
Mich.)  of  a  sort  which,  as  Herodotus  tells  us, 
the  Egyptians  particularly  disliked  (but  cf.  Mic. 
V.  5;  Ges.,  depascunt,  "eating  down.") 

The  A.  V.  of  ver.  17  presents  a  curious  mistake 
which  the  Revisers  have  omitted  to  correct.  The 
words  should  run,  as  I  have  rendered  them, 
"  Is  not  this  " — thy  present  ill  fortune — "  the 
thing  that  thy  forsaking  of  lahvah  thy  God  did 
for  thee — at  the  time  when  He  was  guiding  thee 


30 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


in  the  way?  "  The  Hebrew  verb  does  not  admit 
of  the  rendering  in  the  perf.  tense,  (or  it  is  an 
impf.,nor  is  it  a  2d  pers.  fem.(nc'yn  not  '"y];r\)hut 
a  3d.  The  LXX.  has  it  rightly  (o{>xl  raOra  iirol- 
rjcrd  ffoi  rb  KaTaXiireTv  <re  ^/J-^;),  but  leaves  out  the 
next  clause  which  specifies  the  time.  The  words, 
however,  are  probably  original;  for  they  insist, 
as  vv.  5  and  31  insist,  on  the  groundlessness  of 
Israel's  apostasy.  lahvah  had  given  no  cause 
for  it;  He  was  fulfilling  His  part  of  the  covenant 
by  "  guiding  them  in  the  way."  Guidance  or 
leading  is  ascribed  to  lahvah  as  the  true  "  Shep- 
herd of  Israel  "  (chap.  xxxi.  9;  Ps.  Ixxx.  i).  It 
denotes  not  only  the  spiritual  guidance  which 
was  given  through  the  priests  and  prophets;  but 
also  that  external  prosperity,  those  epochs  of 
established  power  and  peace  and  plenty,  which 
were  precisely  the  times  chosen  by  infatuated 
Israel  for  defection  from  the  Divine  Giver  of  her 
goo3  things.  As  the  prophet  Hosea  expresses 
it,  ii.  8  sq.,  "  She  knew  not  that  it  was  I  who 
gave  her  the  corn  and  the  new  wine  and  the  oil; 
and  silver  I  multiplied  unto  her,  and  gold,  which 
they  made  into  the  Baal.  Therefore  will  I  take 
back  My  corn  in  the  time  of  it,  and  My  new  wine 
in  its  season,  and  will  snatch  away  My  wool  and 
My  flax,  which  were  to  cover  her  nakedness." 
And  (chap.  xiii.  6)  the  same  prophet  gives  this 
plain  account  of  his  people's  thankless  revolt 
from  their  God:  "When  I  fed  them,  they  were 
sated;  sated  were  they,  and  their  heart  was  lifted 
up:  therefore  they  forgot  Me."  It  is  the  thought 
so  forcibly  expressed  by  the  minstrel  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law  (Deut.  xxxii.  15)  first  published  in 
the.  early  days  of  Jeremiah:  "And  Jeshurun 
waxed  fat  and  kicked;  Thou  waxedst  fat,  and 
gross  and  fleshy!  And  he  forsook  the  God  that 
made  him.  And  made  light  of  his  protecting 
Rock."  And,  lastly,  the  Chronicler  has  pointed 
the  same  moral  of  human  fickleness  and  frailty 
in  the  case  of  an  individual,  Uzziah  or  Azariah, 
the  powerful  king  of  Judah,  whose  prosperity 
seduced  him  into  presumption  and  profanity  (2 
Chron.  xxvi.  16) :  "  When  he  grew  strong,  his 
heart  rose  high,  until  he  dealt  corruptly,  and  was 
unfaithful  to  lahvah  his  God."  I  need  not  en- 
large on  the  perils  of  prosperity;  they  are  known 
by  bitter  experience  to  every  Christian  man. 
Not  without  good  reason  do  we  pray  to  be  de- 
livered from  evil  "  In  all  time  of  our  wealth;"  nor 
was  that  poet  least  conversant  with  human  nature 
who  wrote  that  "  Sweet  are  the  uses  of  advers- 
ity." 

"  And  now  " — a  common  formula  in  drawing 
an  inference  and  concluding  an  argument — 
"  what  hast  thou  to  do  with  the  way  of  Egypt,  to 
drink  the  waters  of  Shihor  "  (the  Black  River, 
the  Nile) ;  "  and  what  hast  thou  to  do  with  the 
way  to  Assyria^  to  drink  the  waters  of  the  River? 
{par  excellence,  i.  e.,  the  Euphrates).  "  Thy 
wickedness  correcteth  thee,  and  thy  revolts  it  is 
that  chastise  thee.  Know  then,  and  see  that  evil 
and  bitter  is  thy  forsaking  lahvah  thy  God,  and 
thine  having  no  dread  of  Me,  saith  the  Lord 
lahvah  Sabaoth  "  (vv.  18,  19).  And  now— as  the 
cause  of  all  thy  misfortunes  lies  in  thyself — what 
is  the  use  of  seeking  a  cure  for  them  abroad? 
Egypt  will  prove  as  powerless  to  help  thee  now, 
as  Assyria  proved  in  the  days  of  Ahaz  (ver.  36 
sq.).  The  Jewish  people,  anticipating  the  views 
of  certain  modern  historians,  made  a  wrong 
diagnosis  of  their  own  evil  case.  They  traced 
all  that  they  had  suffered,  and  were  yet  to  sufifer, 
to  the  ill  will  of  the  two  great  Powers  of  their 


time;  and  supposed  ihat  their  only  salvation  lay 
in  conciliating  the  one  or  the  other.  And  as 
Isaiah  found  it  necessary  to  cry  woe  on  the  re- 
bellious children,  "  that  walk  to  go  down  into 
Egypt,  and  have  not  asked  at  My  mouth;  to 
strengthen  themselves  in  the  strength  of  Pha- 
raoh, and  to  trust  in  the  shadow  of  Egypt!  "  (Isa. 
XXX.  I  sq.),  so  now,  after  so  much  experience  of 
the  futility  and  positive  harmfulness  of  these  un- 
equal alliances,  Jeremiah  has  to  lift  his  voice 
against  the  same  national  folly. 

The  "  young  lions "  of  ver.  15  must  denote 
the  Assyrians,  as  Egypt  is  expressly  named  in 
ver.  16.  The  figure  is  very  appropriate,  for  not 
only  was  the  lion  a  favourite  subject  of  Assyrian 
sculpture;  not  only  do  the  Assyrian  kings  boast 
of  their  prowess  as  lion-hunters,  while  they  even 
tamed  these  fierce  creatures,  and  trained  them  to 
■the  chase;  but  the  great  strength  and  predatory 
habits  of  the  king  of  beasts  made  him  a  fitting 
symbol  of  that  great  empire  whose  irresistible 
power  was  founded  upon  and  sustained  by  wrong 
and  robbery.  This  reference  makes  it  clear  that 
the  prophet  is  contemplating  the  past;  for  As- 
syria was  at  this  time  already  tottering  to  its  fall, 
and  the  Israel  of  his  day,  i.  e.,  the  surviving  king- 
dom of  Judah,  had  no  longer  any  temptation  to 
court  the  countenance  of  that  decaying  if  not  al- 
ready ruined  empire.  The  sin  of  Israel  is  an  old 
one;  both  it  and  its  consequences  belong  to  the 
past  (ver.  20  compared  with  ver.  14) ;  and  the 
national  attempts  to  find  a  remedy  must  be  re- 
ferred to  the  same  period.  Ver.  36  makes  it  evi- 
dent that  the  prophet's  contemporaries  concerned 
themselves  only  about  an  Egyptian  alliance. 

It  is  an  interesting  detail  that  for  "  the  waters 
of  Shihor,"  the  LXX.  gives  "  waters  of  Gihon  " 
(TriQiv),  which  it  will  be  remembered  is  the  name 
of  one  of  the  four  rivers  of  Paradise,  and  which 
appears  to  have  been  the  old  Hebrew  name  of  the 
Nile  (Ecclus.  xxiv.  27;  Jos.,  "Ant.,"  i.  i,  3).  Shihor 
may  be  an  explanatory  substitute.  For  the  rest, 
it  is  plain  that  the  two  rivers  symbolise  the  two 
empires  (cf.  Isa.  viii.  7;  chap.  xlvi.  7);  and  the 
expression  "  to  drink  the  waters  "  of  them  must 
imply  the  receiving  and,  as  it  were,  absorption  of 
whatever  advantage  might  be  supposed  to  accrue 
from  friendly  relations  with  their  respective 
countries.  At  the  same  time,  a  contrast  seems  to 
be  intended  between  these  earthly  waters,  which 
could  only  disappoint  those  who  sought  refresh- 
ment in  them,  and  that  "  fountain  of  living 
waters "  (ver.  13)  which  Israel  had  forsaken. 
The  nation  sought  in  Egypt  its  deliverance  from 
self-caused  evil,  much  as  Saul  had  sought  guid- 
ance from  witches  when  he  knew  himself  de- 
serted by  the  God  whom  by  disobedience  he  had 
driven  away.  In  seeking  thus  to  escape  the  con- 
sequences of  sin  by  cementing  alliances  with 
heathen  powers,  Israel  added  sin  to  sin.  Hence 
(in  ver.  19)  the  prophet  reiterates  with  increased 
emphasis  what  he  has  already  suggested  by  a 
question  (ver.  17):  "Thy  wickedness  correcteth 
thee,  and  thy  revolts  it  is  that  chastise  thee. 
Know  then,  and  see  that  evil  and  bitter  is  thy 
forsaking  of  lahweh  thy  God,  and  thine  having 
no  dread  of  Me!  "     Learn  from  these  its  bitter 

fruits  that  the  thing  itself  is  bad  (Read  7??  '^'j^^ 
as  a  2d  pers.  instead  of  ^^^O?-  Job  xxi.  33, 
quoted  by  Hitzig,  is  not  a  real  parallel;  nor  can 
the  sentence,  as  it  stands,  be  rendered,  "  Und 
dass  die  Scheu  vor  mir  nicht  an  dich  kam  ") ; 
and   renounce   that  which   its   consequences   de- 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5.]     THK     IRUSF    IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT. 


3f 


clare  to  be  an  evil  course,  instead  of  aggravating 
the  evil  of  it  by  a  new  act  of  unfaithfulness. 

"  For  long  ago  didst  thou  break  thy  yoke, 
didst  thou  burst  thy  bonds,  and  saidst,  I  will  not 
serve:  for  upon  every  high  hill,  and  under  each 
evergreen  tree  thou  wert  crouching  in  fornica- 
tion "  (vv.  20-24).  Such  seems  to  be  the  best  way 
of  taking  a  verse  which  is  far  from  clear  as  it 
stands  in  the  Masoretic  text.  The  prophet  la- 
bours to  bring  home  to  his  hearers  a  sense  of  the 
r<E;ality  of  the  national  sin;  and  he  affirms  once 
more  (vv.  5.  7)  that  Israel's  apostasy  originated 
long  ago,  in  the  early  period  of  its  history,  and 
implies  that  the  taint  thus  contracted  is  a  fact 
which  can  neither  be  denied  nor  obliterated 
(The  punctuators  of  the  Hebrew  text,  having 
pointed  the  first  two  verbs  as  in  the  1st  pers.  in- 
stead of  the  2d  feminine,  were  obliged,  further,  to 

suggest  the  reading  "'lAV.'!?  ^'''  "  I  will  not  trans- 
gress," for  the  original  phrase Tl3yN  N?"  I  will  not 
serve;  "  a  variant  which  is  found  in  the  Targuin, 
and  many  MSS.  and  editions.  "  Serving  "  and 
"  bearing  the  yoke  "  are  equivalent  expressions 
(xxvii.  II,  12);  so  that,  if  the  first  two  verbs 
were  really  in  the  ist  pers.,  the  sentence  ought  to 
be  contimied  with,  "  And  /  said.  Thou  shalt  not 
serve."  But  the  purport  of  this  verse  is  to  justify 
the  assertion  of  the  last,  as  is  evident  from  the 
introductory  particle  "  for,"  ^?'  The  Syriac  sup- 
ports lUyX;  and  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  have  the 
two  leading  verbs  in  the  2d  pers.,  (iv.  19.).  The 
meaning  is  that  Israel,  like  a  stubborn  ox,  has 
broken  the  yoke  imposed  on  him  by  lahvah; 
a  statement  which  is  repeated  in  v.  5:  "  But  these 
have  altogether  broken  the  yoke,  they  have  burst 
the  bonds  "  {cf.  ver.  31,  infra;  Hos.  iv.  16;  Acts 
xxvi.    14). 

"  Yet  I — I  planted  thee  with  "  (or,  "  as  ") 
noble  vines,  all  of  them  genuine  shoots;  and 
how  hast  thou  turned  Me  thyself  into  the  wild 
offshoots  of  a  foreign  vine?  "  (ver.  21).  The 
thought  seems  to  be  borrowed  from  Isaiah's 
Song  of  the  Beloved's  Vineyard  (Isa.  v.  i  sqq.). 
The  nation  is  addressed  as  a  person,  endowed 
with  a  continuity  of  moral  existence  from  the 
earliest  period.  "  The  days  of  the  life  of  a  man 
may  be  numbered;  but  the  days  of  Israel  are 
innumerable  "  (Ecclus.  xxxvii.  25).  It  was  with 
the  true  seed  of  Abraham,  the  real  Israel,  that 
lahvah  had  entered  into  covenant  (Ex.  xviii. 
19;  Rom.  ix.  7);  and  this  genuine  offspring  of 
the  patriarch  had  its  representatives  in  every 
succeeding  generation,  even  in  the  worst  of  times 
(i  Kings  xix.  18).  But  the  prophet's  argument 
seems  to  imply  that  the  good  plants  had  reverted 
to  a  wild  state,  and  that  the  entire  nation  had 
become  hopelessly  degenerate;  which  was  not  far 
from  the  actual  condition  of  things  at  the  close 
of  his  career.  The  culmination  of  Israel's  degen- 
eracy, however,  was  seen  in  the  rejection  of  Him 
to  whom  "  gave  all  the  prophets  witness."  The 
Passion  of  Christ  sounded  a  deeper  depth  of 
sacred  sorrow  than  the  passion  of  any  of  His 
forerunners.  "O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem!  Thou 
that  killest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them  that 
are  sent  unto  thee!  " 

"  Then  on  My  head  a  crown  of  thorns  I  wear  ; 
For  these  are  all  the  grapes  Sion  doth  bear. 
Though  1  My  vine  planted  and  watered  there  : 
Was  ever  grief  like  Mine  ?  " 

"  For  if  thou  wash  with  natron,  and  take  thee 
much  soap,  spotted  (crimsoned:  Targ.  Isa.  i. 
18:  or  written,  recorded)  is  thy  guilt  before  Me, 


saith  My  Lord  lahvah."  Comparison  with  Isa. 
i.  18,  "  Though  thy  sins  be  as  scarlet  .  .  .  though 
they  be  red  like  crimson,"  suggests  that  the 
former  rendering  of  the  doubtful  word  (^'^^'^^ 
is  correct;  and  this  idea  is  plainly  better  suited 
to  the  context  than  a  reference  to  the  Books 
of  Heaven,  and  the  Recording  Angel;  for  the 
object  of  washing  is  to  get  rid  of  spots  and 
stains. 

"  How  canst  thou  say,  I  have  not  defiled  my- 
self; after  the  Baals  I  have  not  gone:  See  thy 
way  in  the  valley,  know  what  thou  hast  done, 
O  swift  she-camel,  running  hither  and  thither  " 
(literally,  intertwining  or  crossing  her  ways) 
(ver.  2^).  The  prophet  anticipates  a  possible 
attempt  at  self-justification;  just  as  in  ver.  35 
he  complains  of  Israel's  self-righteousness.  Both 
here  and  there  he  is  dealing  with  his  own  con- 
temporaries in  Judah;  whereas  the  idolatry  de- 
scribed in  ver.  20  sqq.  is  chiefly  that  of  the 
ruined  kingdom  of  Epliraim  (ch.  iii.  24;  2  Kings 
xvii.  10).  It  appears  that  the  worship  of  Baal 
proper  only  existed  in  Judah  for  a  brief  period 
in  the  reign  of  Ahaziah's  usurping  queen  Atha- 
liah,  side  by  side  with  the  worship  of  lahvah 
(2Chron.  xxiii.  17);  while  on  the  high  places  and 
at  the  local  sanctuaries  the  God  of  Israel  was 
honoured  (2  Kings  xviii.  22).  So  far  as  the 
prophet's  complaints  refer  to  old  times,  Judah 
could  certainly  boast  of  a  relatively  higher 
purity  than  the  northern  kingdom;  and  the 
manifold  heathenism  of  Manasseh's  reign  had 
been  abolished  a  whole  year  before  this  address 
was  delivered  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  3  sqq.).  "  The 
valley  "  spoken  of  as  the  scene  of  Judah's  mis- 
doings is  that  of  Ben-Hinnom,  south  of  Jerusa- 
lem, where,  as  the  prophet  elsewhere  relates 
(vii.  31,  xxxii.  35;  2  Kings  xxiii.  10),  the  people 
sacrificed  children  by  fire  to  the  God  Molech, 
whom  he  expressly  designates  as  a  Baal  (xix. 
5,  xxxii.  35),  using  the  term  in  its  wider  signifi- 
cance, which  includes  all  the  aspects  of  the 
Canaanite  sun-god.  And  because  Judah  betook 
herself  now  to  lahvah,  and  now  to  Molech,  vary- 
ing, as  it  were,  her  capricious  course  from  right 
to  left  and  from  left  to  right,  and  halting  ever- 
more between  two  opinions  (i  Kings  xviii.  21), 
the  prophet  calls  her  "  a  swift  young  she-camel," 
(swift,  that  is,  for  evil)  intertwining,  or  crossing 
her  '-'ays."  The  hot  zeal  with  which  the  people 
wantonly  plunged  into  a  sensual  idolatry  is  aptly 
set  forth  in  the  figure  of  the  next  verse.  A 
"  wild  ass,  used  to  the  wilderness  (Job  xxiv.  5). 
in  the  craving  of  her  soul  she  snuffeth  up  (xiv. 
6)  the  wind  "  (not  "'  lasst  sie  kaum  Athcm  genug 
finden,  indem  sie  denselben  vorweg  vergeudet," 
as  Hitzig;  but,  as  a  wild  beast  scenting  prey, 
cf.  xiv.  6,  or  food  afar  oft',  she  scents  companions 
at  a  distance) ;  "  her  greedy  lust,  who  can  turn  it 
back?  None  that  seek  her  need  weary  them- 
selves; in  her  month  they  find  her."  While  pas- 
sion rages,  animal  instinct  is  too  strong  to  be 
diverted  from  its  purpose;  it  is  idle  to  argue 
with  blind  appetite;  it  goes  straight  to  its  mark, 
like  an  arrow  from  a  bow.  Only  when  it  has 
had  its  way,  and  the  reaction  of  nature  follows, 
does  the  influence  of  reason  become  possible. 
Such  was  Israel's  passion  for  the  false  gods. 
They  had  no  need  to  seek  her  (Hos.  ii.  7;  Ezek. 
xvi.  34) ;  in  the  hour  of  her  infatuation  she  fell 
an  easy  victim  to  their  passive  allurements.  (The 
"  month  "  is  the  season  when  the  sexual  instinct 
is  strong.)  Warnings  fell  on  deaf  ears.  "  Keep 
back  thy  foot  from  bareness,  and  thy  throat  from 


32 


THE    PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


thirst!  "  This  cry  of  the  prophets  availed  noth- 
ing: "Thou  saidst,  It  is  vain!  {sc.  that  thou 
urgest  me.)  No,  for  I  love  the  strangers  and 
after  them  will  I  go!  "  The  meaning  of  the  ad- 
monition is  not  very  clear.  Some  (e.  g.,  Rosen- 
miiller)  have  understood  a  reference  to  the 
shameless  doings  and  the  insatiable  cravings  of 
lust.  Others  (as  Gesenius)  explain  the  words 
thus:  '■  Do  not  pursue  thy  lovers  in  such  hot 
haste  as  to  wear  thy  feet  bare  in  the  wild 
race!  "  Others,  again,  take  the  prohibition  lit- 
erally, and  connect  the  barefootedness  and  the 
thirst  with  the  orgies  of  Baal-worship  (Hitz.), 
in  which  the  priests  leaped  or  rather  limped 
with  bare  feet  (what  proof?)  on  the  blazing  altar, 
as  an  act  of  religious  mortification,  shrieking  the 
while  till  their  throats  were  parched  and  dry 
(Ps.  Ixix.  4,  '^f""?  ""i?^  in  frenzied  appeal  to  their 
lifeless  god  (cf.  Ex.  iii.  S;  2  Sam.  xv.  30;  i  Kings 
xviii.  26).  In  this  case  the  command  is,  Cease 
this  self-torturing  and  bootless  worship!  But 
the  former  sense  seems  to  agree  better  with  the 
context. 

"  Like  the  shame  of  a  thief,  when  he  is  de- 
tected, so  are  the  house  of  Israel  ashamed — 
they,  their  kings,  their  princes,  and  their  priests, 
and  their  prophets;  in  that  they  say  (are  ever 
saying)  to  the  wood  (iii.  9  in  Heb.  masc).  Thou 
art  my  father!  (iii.  4)  and  to  the  stone  (in  Heb. 
fem.),  Thou  didst  bring  me  forth!  For  they 
(xxxii.  33)  have  turned  towards  Me  the  back 
and  not  the  face;  but  in  the  time  of  their  trouble 
they  say  (begin  to  say),  O  rise  and  save  us! 
But  where  are  thy  gods  that  thou  madest  for 
thyself?  Let  them  arise,  if  they  can  save  thee  in 
the  time  of  thy  trouble;  for  numerous  as  thy  cities 
are  thy  gods  become,  O  Judah!  "  (vv.  26-28). 
"  The  Shame  "  (nC'in)  is  the  well-known  title 
of  opprobrium  which  the  prophets  apply  to  Baal. 
Even  in  the  histories,  which  largely  depend  on 
prophetic  sources,  we  find  such  substitutions  as 
Ishbosheth  for  Eshbaal,  the  "  Man  of  Shame  " 
for  "  Baal's  Man."  Accordingly,  the  point  of 
ver.  26  sqq.  is,  that  as  Israel  has  served  the 
Shame,  the  idol-gods,  instead  of  lahvah,  shame 
has  been  and  will  be  her  reward:  in  the  hour 
of  bitter  need,  when  she  implores  help  from  the 
One  true  God,  she  is  put  to  shame  by  being 
referred  back  to  her  senseless  idols.  The 
"  Israel  "  intended  is  the  entire  nation,  as  in 
ver.  3,  and  not  merely  the  fallen  kingdom  of 
Ephraim.  In  ver.  28  the  prophet  specially  ad- 
dresses judah,  the  surviving  representative  of 
the  whole  people.  In  the  book  of  Judges  (x. 
10-14)  the  same  idea  of  the  attitude  of  lahvah 
towards  His  faithless  people  finds  historical  illus- 
tration. Oppressed  by  the  Ammonites  they 
"  cried  unto  the  Lord,  saying.  We  have  sinned 
against  Thee,  in  that  we  have  both  forsaken  our 
own  God,  and  have  served  the  Baals;  "  but 
lahvah.  after  reminding  them  of  past  deliver- 
ances followed  by  fresh  apostasies,  replies:  "  Go, 
and  cry  vinto  the  gods  which  ye  have  chosen; 
let  them  save  you  in  the  time  of  your  distress!  " 
Here  also  we  hear  the  echoes  of  a  prophetic 
voice.  The  object  of  such  ironical  utterances 
was  by  no  means  to  deride  the  self-caused  mis- 
eries in  which  Israel  was  involved;  but,  as  is 
evident  from  the  sequel  of  the  narrative  in 
Judges,  to  deepen  penitence  and  contrition,  by 
making  the  people  realise  the  full  flagrancy  of 
their  sin,  and  the  suicidal  folly  of  their  deser- 
tions of  the  God  whom,  in  times  of  national  dis- 
tress,   they    recognised    the    only    possible    Sa- 


viour. In  the  same  way  and  with  the  same  end 
in  view,  the  prophetic  psalmist  of  Deut.  xxxii. 
represents  the  God  of  Israel  as  asking  (ver.  37) 
"  Where  are  their  gods:  the  Rock  in  which  they 
sought  refuge?  That  used  to  eat  the  flesh  of 
their  sacrifices,  that  drank  the  wine  of  their  liba- 
tion? Let  them  arise  and  help  you;  let  them 
be  over  you  a  shelter!  "  The  purpose  is  to 
bring  home  to  them  a  conviction  of  the  utter 
vanity  of  idol-worship;  for  the  poet  continues: 
"  See  now  that  I  even  I  am  He  (the  One  God) 
and  there  is  no  god  beside  Me  (with  Me,  shar- 
ing My  sole  attributes) ;  'Tis  I  that  kill  and  save 
alive;  I  have  crushed,  and  /  heal."  The  folly 
of  Israel  is  made  conspicuous,  first  by  the  ex- 
pression "  Saying  to  the  wood,  Thou  art  my 
father,  and  to  the  stone.  Thou  didst  bring  me 
forth;  "  and  secondly,  by  the  statement,  "'  Nu- 
merous as  thy  cities  are  thy  gods  become,  O 
Judah!  "  In  the  former  we  have  a  most  interest- 
ing glimpse  of  the  point  of  view  of  the  heathen 
worshipper  of  the  seventh  century  B.  c,  from 
which  it  appears  that  bv  a  god  he  meant  the 
original,  i.  e.,  the  real  author  of  his  own  exist- 
ence. Much  has  been  written  in  recent  years 
to  prove  that  man's  elementary  notions  of  deity 
are  of  an  altogether  lower  kind  than  those  which 
rnd  expression  in  the  worship  of  a  Father  in 
heaven;  but  when  we  see  that  such  an  idea  could 
subsist  even  in  connection  with  the  most  impure 
nature-worships,  as  in  Canaan,  and  when  we  ob- 
serve that  it  was  a  familiar  conception  in  the 
religion  of  Egypt  several  thousand  years  pre- 
viously, we  may  well  doubt  whether  this  idea  of 
an  Unseen  Father  of  our  race  is  not  as  old  as 
humanity  itself.    ■ 

The  sarcastic  reference  to  the  number  of  Ju- 
dah's  idols  may  remind  us  of  what  is  recorded 
of  classic  Athens,  in  whose  streets  it  was  said 
to  be  easier  to  find  a  god  than  a  man.  The 
irony  of  the  prophet's  remark  depends  on  the 
consideration  that  there  is,  or  ought  to  be, 
safety  in  numbers.  The  impotency  of  the  false 
gods  could  hardly  be  put  in  a  stronger  light 
in  words  as  few  as  the  prophet  has  used.  In 
chap.  xi.  13  he  repeats  the  statement  in  an  ampli- 
fied form:  "  For  numerous  as  thy  cities  have 
thy  gods  become,  O  Judah;  and  numerous  as 
the  streets  of  Jerusalem  have  ye  made  altars  for 
The  Shame,  altars  for  sacrificing  to  the  Baal." 
From  this  passage,  apparently,  the  LXX.  de- 
rived the  words  which  it  adds  here:  "And  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  streets  of  Jeru- 
salem did  they  sacrifice  to  the  (image  of)  Baal  " 
{edvov  TTj  BdaX). 

"  Why  contend  ye  with  Me?  All  of  you 
have  rebelled  against  Me,  saith  lahvah.  (LXX. 
^(76/3iJ(rare,  Kal  irdvres  vixeTs  ifvon-fjffaTe  els  i/j.^. 
"  Ebenfalls  authentisch  "  says  Hitzig).  In  vain 
have  I  smitten  your  sons:  correction  they  (i.  e., 
the  people;  but  LXX.  iS^^aa-de  may  be  correct), 
received  not!  your  own  sword  hath  eaten  up 
your  prophets,  like  a  destroying  lion.  Genera- 
tion that  ye  are!  See  the  word  of  lahvah!  Is 
it  a  wilderness  that  I  have  been  to  Israel,  or 
a  land  of  deepest  gloom?  Why  have  My  people 
said,  We  are  free;  we  will  come  no  more  unto 
Thee?  Doth  a  virgin  forget  her  ornaments,  a 
bride  her  bands  (or  garlands,  Rashi)?  yet  My 
people  hath  forgotten  Me  days  without  number  " 
(vv.  29-32).  The  question  "Why  contend,  or 
dispute  ye  Unn  or,  as  the  LXX.  has  it,  talk  ye 
(limn)  towards  or  about  Me  C-^x)  implies 
that  the  people  murmured  at  the  reproaches  and 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5]     THE    TRUST    IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT. 


menaces  of  the  prtiphet  (vcr.  26  sqq.).  He  an- 
swers them  by  denying  their  right  to  complain. 
Their  rebellion  has  been  universal;  no  chastise- 
ment has  reformed  them;  lahvah  has  done  noth- 
ing that  can  be  alleged  in  excuse  of  their  un- 
faithfulness; their  sin  is,  therefore,  a  portentous 
anomaly,  for  which  it  is  impossible  to  find  a 
parallel  iVi  ordinary  human  conduct.  In  vain  had 
"  their  sons,"  the  young  men  of  military  age, 
fallen  in  battle  (Amos  iv.  10);  the  nation  had 
stubbornly  refused  to  see  in  such  disasters  a 
sign  of  lahvah's  displeasure;  a  token  of  Divine 
chastisement;  or  rather,  while  recognising  the 
wrath  of  heaven,  they  had  obstinately  persisted 
in  believing  in  false  explanations  of  its  motive, 
and  refused  to  admit  that  the  purpose  of  it  was 
their  religious  and  moral  amendment.  And  not 
only  had  the  nation  refused  warning,  and  de- 
spised instruction,  and  defeated  the  purposes  of 
the  Divine  discipline.  They  had  slain  their  spir- 
itual monitors,  the  prophets,  with  the  sword;  the 
prophets  who  had  founded  upon  the  national 
disasters  their  rebukes  of  national  sin,  and  their 
earnest  calls  to  penitence  and  reform  (i  Kings 
xix.  10;  Neh.  ix.  26:  St.  Matt,  xxiii.  37).  And 
so  when  at  last  the  long  deferred  judgment  ar- 
rived, it  found  a  political  system  ready  to  go  to 
pieces  through  the  feebleness  and  corruption  of 
the  ruling  classes;  a  religious  system,  of  which 
the  spirit  had  long  since  evaporated,  and  which 
simply  survived  in  the  interests  of  a  venal  priest- 
hood, and  its  intimate  allies,  who  made  a  trade 
of  prophecy;  and  a  kingdom  and  people  ripe  for 
destruction. 

At  the  thought  of  this  crowning  outrage,  the 
prophet  cannot  restrain  his  indignation.  "  Gen- 
eration that  ye  are!"  he  exclaims,  "behold  the 
word  of  the  Lord.  Is  it  a  wilderness  that  I 
have  been  to  Israel,  or  a  land  of  deepest  gloom?  " 
Have  I  been  a  thankless,  barren  soil,  returning 
nothing  for  your  culture?  The  question  is  more 
pointed  in  Hebrew  than  in  English;  for  the  same 
term  (12V  'abad)  means  both  to  till  the  ground, 
and  to  serve  and  worship  God.  We  have  thus 
an  emphatic  repetition  of  the  remonstrance  with 
which  the  address  opens:  lahvah  has  not  been 
unmindful  of  Israel's  service;  Israel  has  been 
persistently  ungrateful  for  lahvah's  gracious  love. 
The  cry  "  We  are  free!  "  (iJTl)  implies  that  they 
had  broken  away  from  a  painful  yoke  and  a  bur- 
densome service  {cf.  ver.  20) ;  the  yoke  being 
that  of  the  Moral  Law,  and  the  service  that 
perfect  freedom  which  consists  in  subjection  to 
Divine  Reason.  Thus  sin  always  triumphs  in 
casting  away  man's  noblest  prerogative;  in 
trampling  under  foot  that  loyalty  to  the  higher 
ideal  which  is  the  bridal  adornment  and  the  pe- 
culiar glory  of  the  soul. 

"Why  hurriest  thou  to  seek  thy  love?"  (Lit. 
"  why  dost  thou  make  good  thy  way?  "  some- 
what as  we  say,  "  to  make  good  way  with  a 
thing")  (ver.  S3)-  The  key  to  the  meaning 
here  is  supplied  by  ver  36:  "  Why  art  thou  in 
such  haste  to  change  thy  way?  In  (Of)  Egypt 
also  shalt  thou  be  disappointed,  as  thou  wert 
in  Assyria."  The  "  way  "  is  that  which  leads  to 
Egypt;  and  the  "love"  is  that  apostasy  from 
lahvah  which  invariably  accompanies  an  alliance 
with  foreign  peoples  (ver.  18).  If  you  go  to 
Assyria,  you  "  drink  the  waters  of  the  Euphra- 
tes," i.  e.,  you  are  exposed  to  all  the  malign  in- 
fluences of  the  heathen  land.  Elsewhere,  also 
('V.  30),  Jeremiah  sneaks  of  the  foreign  peoples, 
whose  connection  Israel  so  anxiously  courted, 
3-Vol.  IV. 


as  her  "  lovers  "  ;  and  the  metaphor  is  a  common 
one  in  the  prophets. 

The  words  which  follow  are  obscure.  "  There- 
fore the  evil  things  also  hast  thou  taught  thy 
ways."  What  "evil  things"?  Elsewhere  the 
term  denotes  "  misfortunes,  calamities."  (Lam. 
iii.  38);  and  so  probably  here  (cf.  iii.  5).  The 
sense  seems  to  be:  Thou  hast  done  evil,  and  in 
so  doing  hast  taught  Evil  to  dog  thy  steps!  The 
term  ez'il  obviously  suggests  the  two  meanings 
of  sin  and  the  punishment  of  sin;  as  we  say,  "  Be 
sure  your  sin  will  find  you  out!  "  Ver.  34  ex- 
plains what  was  the  special  sin  that  followed 
and  clung  to  Israel:  "Also  in  thy  skirts  (the 
borders  of  thy  garments)  are  they  (the  evil 
things)  found  (viz.),  the  life-blood  of  innocent 
helpless  ones;  not  that  thou  didst  find  them 
house-breaking,  (and  so  hadst  excuse  for  slaying 
them)  (Exod.  xxii.  2);  but  for  all  these  (warn- 
ings or,  because  of  all  these  apostasies  and  dally- 
ings  with  the  heathen,  which  they  denounced) 
(cf.  iii.  7),  thou  slcwest  them."  The.  murder  of 
the  prophets  (ver.  30)  was  the  unatoned  guilt 
which  clung  to  the  skirts  of  Israel. 

"  And  thou  saidst.  Certainly  I  am  absolved! 
Surely  His  wrath  is  turned  away  from  me! 
Behold  I  will  reason  with  thee,  because  thou 
sayest,  I  sinned  not!  "  (ver.  35).  This  is  what 
the  people  said  when  they  murdered  the  proph- 
ets. They,  and  doubtess  their  false  guides,  re- 
garded the  national  disasters  as  so  much  atone- 
ment for  their  sins.  They  believed  that  lahvah's 
wrath  had  exhausted  itself  in  the  infliction  of 
what  they  had  already  endured,  and  that  they 
were  now  absolved  from  their  ofifences.  The 
prophets  looked  at  the  matter  dififerently.  To 
them,  national  disasters  were  warnings  of  worse 
to  follow,  unless  the  people  would  take  them 
in  that  sense,  and  turn  from  their  evil  ways.  The 
people  preferred  to  think  that  their  account  with 
lahvah  had  been  balanced  and  settled  by  their 
misfortunes  in  war  (ver.  30).  Hence  they  slew 
those  who  never  wearied  of  affirming  the  con- 
trary, and  threatening  further  woe,  as  false 
prophets  (Deut.  xviii.  20).  The  saying,  "  I 
sinned  not!  "  refers  to  these  cruel  acts;  they  de- 
clared themselves  guiltless  in  the  matter  of  slay- 
ing the  prophets,  as  if  their  blood  was  on  their 
own  heads.  The  only  practical  issue  of  the 
national  troubles  was  that  instead  of  reforming, 
they  sought  to  enter  into  fresh  alliances  with 
the  heathen,  thus,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
prophets,  adding  sin  to  sin.  "  Why  art  thou  in 
such  haste  to  change  thy  way?  (i.  e.,  thy  course 
of  action,  thy  foreign  policy).  Through  Egypt 
also  shalt  thou  be  shamed,  as  thou  hast  been 
shamed  through  Assyria.  Out  of  this  affair  also 
(or,  from  him,  as  the  country  is  perhaps  personi- 
fied as  a  lover  of  Judah;)  shalt  thou  go  forth 
with  thine  hands  upon  thine  head  (in  token  of 
distress,  2  Sam.  xiii.  19:  Tamar) ;  for  lahvah  hath 
rejected  the  objects  of  thy  trust,  so  that  thou 
canst  not  be  successful  regarding  them "  (vv. 
36,  S7).  The  Egyptian  alliance,  like  the  former 
one  with  Assyria,  was  destined  to  bring  nothing 
but  shame  and  confusion  to  the  Jewish  people. 
The  prophet  urges  past  experience  of  similar 
undertakings,  in  the  hope  of  deterring  the  poli- 
ticians of  the  day  from  their  foolish  enterprise. 
But  all  that  they  had  learnt  from  the  failure  and 
loss  entailed  by  their  intrigues  with  one  foreign 
power  was,  that  it  was  expedient  to  try  another. 
So  they  made  haste  to  "  change  their  way,"  to 
alter  the  direction  of  their  policy  from  Assyria 


34 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


to  Egypt.  King  Hezekiah  had  renounced  his 
vassalage  to  Assyria,  in  reliance,  as  it  would 
seem,  on  the  support  of  Taharka,  king  of  Egypt 
and  Ethiopia  (2  Kings  xviii.  7;  cf.  Isa.  xxx.  1-5); 
and  now  again  the  Hation  was  coquetting  with 
the  same  power.  As  has  been  stated,  an  Egyp- 
tian force  lay  at  this  time  on  the  confines  of 
Judah,  and  the  prophet  may  be  referring  to 
friendly  advances  of  the  Jewish  princes  towards 
its  leaders. 

In  the  Hebrew,  ch.   iii.   opens  with  the  word 

"  saying  "  ("ibNP)-  No  real  parallel  to  this  can 
be  found  elsewhere,  and  the  Sept.  and  Syriac 
omit  the  term.  Whether  we  follow  these  ancient 
authorities,  and  do  the  same,  or  whether  we 
prefer  to  suppose  that  the  prophet  originally 
wrote,  as  usually,  "  And  the  Word  of  lahvah 
came  unto  me,  saying,"  will  not  make  much 
difference.  One  thing  is  clear;  the  division  of 
the  chapters  is  in  this  instance  erroneous,  for 
the  short  section,  iii.  1-5,  obviously  belongs  to 
and  completes  the  argument  of  ch.  ii.  The  state- 
ment of  ver.  27y  that  Israel  will  not  prosper  in 
the  negotiations  with  Egypt,  is  justified  in  iii. 
I  by  the  consideration  that  prosperity  is  an  out- 
come of  the  Divine  favour,  which  Israel  has 
forfeited.  The  rejection  of  Israel's  "  confi- 
dences "  implies  the  rejection  of  the  people 
themselves  (vii.  29).  "  If  a  man  divorce  his 
wife  and  she  go  away  from  him  Ol'l^'p)'  de  chez 
lui),  and  become  another  man's,  doth  he  (her 
former  husband)  return  unto  her  again?  Would 
not  that  land  be  utterly  polluted?  "  It  is  the 
case  contemplated  in  the  Book  of  the  Law 
(Deut.  xxiv.  1-4),  the  supposition  being  that  the 
second  husband  may  divorce  the  woman,  or  that 
the  bond  between  them  may  be  dissolved  by  his 
death.  In  either  contingency,  the  law  forbade 
reunion  with  the  former  husband,  as  "  abomina- 
tion before  lahvah;  "  and  David's  treatment  of 
his  ten  wives,  who  had  been  publicly  wedded  by 
his  rebel  son  Absalom,  proves  the  antiquity  of 
the  usage  in  this  respect  (2  Sam.  xx.  3).  The 
relation  of  Israel  to  lahvah  is  the  relation  to  her 
former  husband  of  the  divorced  wife  who  has 
married  another.  If  anything  it  is  worse.  "  And 
thou,  thou  hast  played  the  harlot  'ith  many 
paramours;  and  shalt  thou  return  unto  Me? 
saith  lahvah."  The  very  idea  of  it  is  rejected 
with  indignation.  The  author  of  the  law  will  not 
so  flagrantly  break  the  law.  (With  the  Heb. 
form  of  the  question,  cf.  the  Latin  use  of  the 
infin.  "  Mene  incepto  desists  re  victam?")  The 
details  of  the  unfaithfulness  of  Israel — the  proofs 
that  she  belongs  to  others  and  not  to  lahvah 
— are  glaringly  obvious;  contradiction  is  im- 
possible. "  Lift  up  thine  eyes  upon  the  bare  fells, 
and  see!  "  cries  the  prophet;  "  where  hast  thou 
not  been  forced?  By  the  roadsides  thou  satest 
for  them  like  a  Bedawi  in  the  wilderness,  and 
thou  pollutedst  the  land  with  thy  whoredom  and 
with  thine  evil  '  (Hos.  vi.  13).  On  every  hilltop 
the  evidence  of  Judah's  sinful  dalliance  with  idols 
was  visible;  in  her  eagerness  to  consort  with  the 
false  gods,  the  objects  of  her  infatuation,  she  was 
like  a  courtesan  looking  out  for  paramours  by 
the  wayside  (Gen.  xxxviii.  14),  or  an  Arab  lying 
in  wait  for  the  unwary  traveller  in  the  desert. 
(There  may  be  a  reference  to  the  artificial  bant- 
oth,  or  "  high  places  "  erected  at  the  top  of  the 
streets,  on  which  the  wretched  women,  conse- 
crated to  the  shameful  rites  of  the  Canaanite 
goddess  Ashtoreth,  were  wont  to  sit  plying  their 


trade  of  temptation:  2  Kings  xxiii.  8;  Ezek.  xvi. 
25).  We  must  never  forget  that,  repulsive  and 
farfetched  as  these  comparisons  of  an  apostate 
people  to  a  sinful  woman  may  seem  to  u.-;,  the 
ideas  and  customs  of  the  time  made  thein  per- 
fectly apposite.  The  worship  of  the  gods  of 
Canaan  involved  the  practice  of  the  foulest  im- 
purities; and  by  her  revolt  from  lahvah,  her 
lord  and  husband,  according  to  the  common 
Semitic  conception  of  the  relation  between  a 
people  and  their  god,  Israel  became  a  harlot 
in  fact  as  well  as  in  figure.  The  land  was  pol- 
luted with  her  "  whoredoms,"  i.  e.,  her  worship 
of  the  false  gods,  and  her  practice  of  their  vile 
rites;  and  with  her  "  evil,"  as  instanced  above 
(ii-  30,  35)  in  the  murder  of  those  who  pro- 
tested against  these  things  (Num.  xxxv.  3^;  Ps. 
cvi.  38.  As  a  punishment  for  these  grave  of- 
fences, "  the  showers  were  withholden,  and  the 
spring  rains  fell  not;  "  but  the  merciful  purpose 
of  this  Divine  chastisement  was  not  fulfilled; 
the  people  were  not  stirred  to  penitence,  but 
rather  hardened  in  their  sins:  "but  thou  hadst 
a  harlot's  forehead;  thou  refusedst  to  be  made 
ashamed!  "  And  now  the  day  of  grace  is  past, 
and  repentance  comes  too  late.  "  Hast  thou  not 
but  now  called  unto  Me,  My  Father!  Friend 
of  my  youth  wert  Thou?  Will  He  retain  His 
wrath  for  ever?  or  keep  it  without  end?"  (vv. 
3,  5).  The  reference  appears  to  be  to  the  external 
reforms  accomplished  by  the  young  king  Josiah 
in  his  twelfth  year — the  year  previous  to  the 
utterance  of  this  prophecy;  when,  as  we  read  in 
2  Chron.  xxxiv.  3,  "  He  began  to  purge  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  from  the  high  places,  and  the 
Asherim,  and  thecarven  images,  and  the  molten 
images."  To  all  appearance,  it  was  a  return  of 
the  nation  to  its  old  allegiance;  the  return  of 
the  rebellious  child  to  its  father,  of  the  erring 
wife  to  the  husband  of  her  youth.  By  those 
two  sacred  names  which  in  her  inexcusable  fickle- 
ness and  ingratitude  she  had  lavished  upon  stocks 
and  stones,  Israel  now  seemed  to  be  invoking 
the  relenting  compassion  of  her  alienated  God 
(ii.  27,  ii.  2).  But  apart  from  the  doubt  attach- 
ing to  the  reality  of  reformations  to  order,  car- 
ried out  in  obedience  to  a  royal  decree;  apart 
from  the  question  whether  outward  changes  so 
easily  and  rapidly  accomplished,  in  accordance 
with  the  will  of  an  absolute  monarch,  were  ac- 
companied by  any  tokens  of  a  genuine  national 
repentance;  the  sin  of  Israel  had  gone  too  far, 
and  been  persisted  in  too  long,  for  its  terrible 
consequences  to  be  averted.  "  Behold," — it  is  the 
closing  sentence  of  the  address;  a  sentence 
fraught  with  despair,  and  the  certainty  of  com- 
ing ruin; — "  Behold,  thou  hast  planned  and  ac- 
complished the  evil  (ii.  33);  and  thou  hast  pre- 
vailed!" The  approaches  of  the  people  are  met 
by  the  assurance  that  their  own  plans  and  do- 
ings, rather  than  lahvah's  wrath,  are  the  direct 
cause  of  past  and  prospective  adversity;  ill  doing 
is  the  mother  of  ill  fortune.  Israel  inferred  from 
her  troubles  that  God  was  angry  with  her;  and 
she  is  informed  by  His  prophet  that,  had  she 
been  bent  on  bringing  those  troubles  about,  she 
could  not  have  chosen  any  other  line  of  con- 
duct than  that  which  she  had  actually  pursued. 
The  term  "  evils  "  again  suggests  both  the  false 
and  impure  worships,  and  their  calamitous  moral 
consequences.  Against  the  will  of  lahvah,  His 
people  "  had  wrought  for  its  own  ruin,"  and 
had  prevailed. 

And  now  let  us  take  a  farewell   look  at  the 
discourse  in  its  entirety.     Beginning  at  the  be- 


Jeremiah  ii.  i-iii.  5]     THE    TRUST    IN    THE    SHADOW    OF    EGYPT 


35 


ginning,  the  dawn  of  his  people's  life  as  a  nation, 
the  young  prophet  declares  that  in  her  early 
days,  in  the  old  times  of  simple  piety  and  the 
uncorrupted  life  of  the  desert,  Israel  had  been 
true  to  her  God;  and  her  devotion  to  her  Divine 
spouse  had  been  rewarded  by  guidance  and  pro- 
tection. "  Israel  was  a  thing  consecrated  to 
lahvah;  whoever  eat  of  it  was  held  guilty,  and 
evil  came  upon  them"  (ii.  1-3).  This  happy 
state  of  mutual  love  and  trust  between  the  Lord 
and  His  people  began  to  change  with  the  great 
change  in  outward  circumstances  involved  in 
their  conquest  of  Canaan  and  settling  among 
the  aboriginal  inhabitants  as  the  ruling  race. 
With  the  lands  and  cities  of  the  conquered,  the 
conquerors  soon  learned  to  adopt  also  their  cus- 
toms of  worship,  and  the  licentious  merriment 
of  their  sacrifices  and  festivals.  Gradually  they 
lost  all  sense  of  any  radical  distinction  between 
the  God  of  Israel  and  the  local  deities  at  whose 
ancient  sanctuaries  they  now  worshipped  Him. 
Soon  they  forgot  their  debt  to  lahvah;  His 
gracious  and  long-continued  guidance  in  the 
Arabian  steppes,  and  the  loving  care  which  had 
established  them  in  the  goodly  land  of  orchards 
and  vineyards  and  cornfields.  The  priests  ceased 
to  care  about  ascertaining  and  declariAg  His 
will;  the  princes  openly  broke  His  laws;  and 
the  popular  prophets  spoke  in  the  name  of  the 
popular  Baals  (vv.  4-8).  There  was  something 
peculiarly  strange  and  startling  in  this  general 
desertion  of  the  national  God  and  Deliverer; 
it  was  unparalleled  among  the  surrounding 
heathen  races.  They  were  faithful  to  gods  that 
were  no  gods;  Israel  actually  exchanged  her 
Glory,  the  living  source  of  all  her  strength  and 
well-being,  for  a  useless,  helpless  idol.  Her  be- 
haviour was  as  crazy  as  if  she  had  preferred  a 
cistern,  all  cracks  and  fissures,  that  could  not 
possibly  hold  water,  to  a  never  failing  fountain 
of  sweet  spring  water  (vv.  9-13).  The  conse- 
quences were  only  too  plain  to  such  as  had  eyes 
to  see.  Israel,  the  servant,  the  favoured  slave  of 
lahvah,  was  robbed  and  spoiled.  The  "  lions," 
the  fierce  and  rapacious  warriors  of  Assyria,  had 
ravaged  his  land,  and  ruined  his  cities;  while 
Egypt  was  proving  but  a  treacherous  friend, 
pilfering  and  plundering  on  the  borders  of  Ju- 
dah.  It  was  all  Israel's  own  doing;  forsaking 
his  God,  he  had  forfeited  the  Divine  protection. 
It  was  his  own  apostasy,  his  own  frequent  and 
flagrant  revolts  which  were  punishing  him  thus. 
Vain,  therefore,  utterly  vain  were  his  endeavours 
to  find  deliverance  from  trouble  in  an  alliance 
with  the  great  heathen  powers  of  South  or 
North  (vv.  14-19).  Rebellion  was  no  new  feature 
in  the  national  history.  No;  for  of  old  the 
people  had  broken  the  yoke  of  lahvah,  and  burst 
the  bonds  of  His  ordinances,  and  said,  I  will 
not  serve!  and  on  every  high  hill,  and  under 
every  evergreen  tree,  Israel  had  bowed  down  to 
the  Baalim  of  Canaan,  in  spiritual  adultery  from 
her  Divine  Lord  and  Husband.  The  change  was 
a  portent;  the  noble  vine-shoot  had  degenerated 
into  a  worthless  wilding  (vv.  20-21).  The  sin 
of  Israel  was  inveterate  and  ingrained:  nothing 
could  wash  out  the  stain  of  it.  Denial  of  her  guilt 
was  futile;  the  dreadful  rites  in  the  valley  of 
Hinnom  witnessed  against  her.  Her  passion  for 
the  foreign  worships  was  as  insatiable  and  head- 
strong as  the  fierce  lust  of  the  camel  or  the 
wild  ass.  To  protests  and  warnings  her  sole 
reply  was:  "  It  is  in  vain!     I  love  the  strangers, 


and  them  will  I  follow!  "  The  outcome  of 
all  this  wilful  apostasy  was  the  shame  of  defeat 
and  disaster,  the  humiliation  of  disappointment, 
when  the  helplessness  of  the  stocks  and  stones, 
which  had  supplanted  her  Heavenly  Father,  was 
demonstrated  by  the  course  of  events.  Then 
she  bethought  her  of  the  God  she  had  so  lightly 
forsaken,  only  to  hear  in  His  silence  a  bitterly 
ironical  reference  to  the  multitude  of  her  helpers, 
the  gods  of  her  own  creation.  The  national  re- 
verses failed  of  the  effect  intended  in  the  counsels 
of  Providence.  Her  sons  had  fallen  in  battle; 
but  instead  of  repenting  of  her  evil  ways,  she 
slew  the  faithful  prophets  who  warned  her  of 
the  consequences  of  her  misdeeds  (vv.  20-30). 
It  was  the  crowning  sin;  the  cup  of  her  iniquity 
was  full  to  overflowing.  Indignant  at  the  mem- 
ory of  it,  the  prophet  once  more  insists  that 
the  national  crimes  are  what  has  put  misfortune 
on  the  track  of  the  nation;  and  chiefly,  this 
heinous  one  of  killing  the  messengers  of  God 
like  housebreakers  caught  in  the  act;  and  then 
aggravating  their  guilt  by  self-justification,  and 
by  resorting  to  Egypt  for  that  help  which  they 
despaired  of  obtaining  from  an  outraged  God. 
All  such  negotiations,  past  or  present,  were 
doomed  to  failure  beforehand;  the  Divine  sen- 
tence had  gone  forth,  and  it  was  idle  to  con- 
tend against  it  (vv.  31-37).  Idle  also  it  was  to 
indulge  in  hopes  of  the  restoration  of  Divine 
favour.  Just  as  it  was  not  open  to  a  discarded 
wife  to  return  to  her  husband  after  living  with 
another;  so  might  not  Israel  be  received  back 
into  her  former  position  of  the  Bride  of  Heaven, 
after  she  had  "  played  the  harlot  with  many  lov- 
ers." Doubtless  of  late  she  had  given  tokens  of 
remembering  her  forgotten  Lord,  calling  upon 
the  Father  who  had  been  the  Guide  of  her  youth, 
and  deprecating  the  continuance  of  His  wrath. 
But  the  time  was  long  since  past  when  it  was 
possible  to  avert  the  evil  consequences  of  her 
misdoings.  She  had,  as  it  were,  steadily  pur- 
posed and  wrought  out  her  own  evils;  both  her 
sins  and  her  sufferings  past  and  to  come:  the 
iron  sequence  could  not  be  broken;  the  ruin  she 
had  courted  lay  before  her  in  the  near  future: 
she  had  "  prevailed."  All  efforts  such  as  she 
was  now  making  to  stave  it  off  were  like  a  death- 
bed repentance;  in  the  nature  of  things,  they 
could  not  annihilate  the  past,  nor  undo  whait 
had  been  done,  nor  substitute  the  fruit  of  holi- 
ness for  the  fruit  of  sin,  the  reward  of  faithful- 
ness and  purity  for  the  wages  of  worldliness, 
sensuality,  and  forgetfulness  of  God. 

Thus  the  discourse  starts  with  impeachment, 
and  ends  with  irreversible  doom.  Its  tone  is 
comminatory  throughout;  nowhere  do  we  hear, 
as  in  other  prophecies,  the  promise  of  pardon 
in  return  for  penitence.  Such  preaching  was 
necessary,  if  the  nation  was  to  be  brought  'to 
a  due  sense  of  its  evil;  and  the  reformation  of 
the  eighteenth  of  Josiah,  which  was  undoubtedly 
accompanied  by  a  considerable  amount  of  gen- 
uine repentence  among  the  governing  classes, 
was  in  all  likelihood  furthered  by  this  and  sim- 
ilar prophetic  orations.* 

*  Perhaps,  too,  the  immediate  object  of  the  prophet  was 
attained,  which  was,  as  Ewald  thinks,  to  dissuade  the 
people  from  alliance  with  Psammitichus,  the  vigoro'is 
monarch  who  was  then  reviving  the  power  and  ambition 
of  Egvpt.  Jeremiah  dreaded  the  effects  of  Egyptian 
influence  upon  the  religion  and  morals  of  Judah.  Ewald 
r  jte"  the  significant  absence  of  all  reference  to  the  ene-uy 
from  the  d  'jtt^,  who  appears  in  all  the  later  pieces. 


36 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


CHAPTER  III. 

ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH;  A  CONTRAST. 

Jeremiah  iii.  6-iv.  2. 

The  first  address  of  our  prophet  was  through- 
out of  a  sombre  cast,  and  the  darkness  of  its 
close  was  not  relieved  by  a  single  ray  of  hope. 
It  was  essentially  a  comminatory  discourse,  the 
purpose  of  it  being  to  rouse  a  sinful  nation  to 
the  sense  of  its  peril,  by  a  faithful  picture  of 
its  actual  condition,  which  was  so  different  from 
what  it  was  popularly  supposed  to  be.  The  veil 
is  torn  aside;  the  real  relations  between  Israel 
and  his  God  are  exposed  to  view;  and  it  is 
seen  that  the  inevitable  goal  of  persistence  in 
the  course  which  has  brought  partial  disasters 
in  the  past,  is  certain  destruction  in  the  immi- 
nent future.  It  is  implied,  but  not  said,  that  the 
only  thing  that  can  save  the  nation  is  a  complete 
reversal  of  policies  hitherto  pursued,  in  Church 
and  State  and  private  life;  and  it  is  apparently 
taken  for  granted  that  the  thing  implied  is  no 
longer  possible.  The  last  word  of  the  discourse 
was:  "Thou  hast  purposed  and  performed  the 
evils,  and  thou  hast  conquered "  (iii.  5).  The 
address  before  us  forms  a  striking  contrast  to 
this  dark  picture.  It  opens  a  door  of  hope  for 
the  penitent.  The  heart  of  the  prophet  cannot 
rest  in  the  thought  of  the  utter  rejection  of  his 
people;  the  harsh  and  dreary  announcement  that 
his  people's  woes  are  self-caused  cannot  be  his 
last  word.  "  His  anger  was  only  love  provoked 
to  distraction;  here  it  has  come  to  itself  again," 
and  holds  out  an  offer  of  grace  first  to  that  part 
of  the  whole  nation  which  needs  it  most,  the 
fallen  kingdom  of  Ephraim,  and  then  to  the  entire 
people.  The  all  Israel  of  the  former  discourse 
is  here  divided  into  its  two  sections,  which  are 
contrasted  with  each  other,  and  then  again  con- 
sidered as  a  united  nation.  This  feature  dis- 
tinguishes the  piece  from  that  which  begins  chap, 
iv.  3,  and  which  is  addressed  to  "  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  "  rather  than  to  Israel  and  Judah,  like 
the  one  before  us.  An  outline  of  the  discourse 
may  be  given  thus.  It  is  shown  that  Judah 
has  not  taken  warning  by  lahvah's  rejection  of 
the  sister  kingdom  (6-10)  ;  and  that  Ephraim  may 
be  pronounced  less  guilty  than  Judah,  seeing  that 
she  had  witnessed  no  such  signal  example  of 
the  Divine  vengeance  on  hardened  apostasy. 
She  is,  therefore,  invited  to  repent  and  return 
to  her  alienated  God,  which  will  involve  a  re- 
turn from  exile  to  her  own  land;  and  the  promise 
is  given  of  the  reunion  of  the  two  peoples  in 
a  restored  Theocracy,  having  its  centre  in  Mount 
Zion  (11-19).  All  Israel  has  rebelled  against 
God;  but  the  prophet  hears  the  cry  of  universal 
penitence  and  supplication  ascending  to  heaven; 
and  lahvah's  gracious  answer  of  acceptance  (iii. 
20-iv.  2). 

The  opening  section  depicts  the  sin  which  had 
brought  ruin  on  Israel,  and  Judah's  readiness 
in  following  her  example,  and  refusal  to  take 
warning  by  her  fate.  This  twofold  sin  is  ag- 
gravated by  an  insincere  repentance.  "  And 
lahvah  said  unto  me,  in  the  days  of  Josiah  the 
king,  Sawest  thou  what  the  Turncoat  or  Rec- 
reant Israel  did?  she  would  go  up  every  high 
hill,  and  under  every  evergreen  tree,  and  play 
the  harlot  there.  And  methought  that  after  do- 
ing all  this  she  would  return  to  Me;  Ijut  she 
returned  not;  and  the  Traitress,  her  sister  Judah 


saw  it.  And  I  *  saw  that  when  for  the  very 
reason  that  she,  the  Turncoat  Israel,  had  com- 
mitted adultery,  I  had  put  her  away,  and  given 
her  her  bill  of  divorce,  the  Traitress  Judah,  her 
sister,  was  not  afraid,  but  she  too  went  off  and 
played  the  harlot.  And  so,  through  the  cry 
{cf.  Gen.  iv.  10,  xviii.  20  sq.)  of  her  harlotry 
(or  read  3"l  for  ~)p,  script,  defect,  through  her 
manifold  or  abounding  harlotry)  she  polluted  the 
land  ^^.n?!'^  ver.  2),  in  that  she  committed  adul- 
tery with  the  Stone  and  with  the  Stock.  And 
yet  though  she  was  involved  in  all  this  guilt 
(lit.  and  even  in  all  this.  Perhaps  the  sin  and 
the  penalties  of  it  are  identified;  and  the  mean- 
ing is:  "And  yet  for  all  this  liability:"  cf.  Isa. 
V.  25),  the  Traitress  Judah  returned  not  unto 
Me  with  all  her  heart  (with  a  whole  or  undivided 
heart,  with  entire  sincerity  f)  but  in  falsehood, 
saith  lahvah."  The  example  of  the  northern 
kingdom  is  represented  as  a  powerful  influence 
for  evil  upon  Judah.  I'his  was  only  natural; 
for  although  from  the  point  of  view  of  religious 
development  Judah  is  incomparably  the  more 
important  of  the  sister  kingdoms;  the  exact  con- 
trary is  the  case  as  regards  political  power  and 
predominance.  Under  strong  kings  like  Omri 
and  Ahab,  or  again,  Jeroboam  II.,  Ephraim  was 
able  to  assert  itself  as  a  first-rate  power  among 
the  surrounding  principalities;  and  in  the  case 
of  Athaliah,  we  have  a  conspicuous  instance  of 
the  manner  in  which  Canaanite  idolatry  might 
be  propagated  from  Israel  to  Judah.  The  prophet 
declares  that  the  sin  of  Judah  was  aggravated  by 
the  fact  that  she  had  witnessed  the  ruin  of  Israel, 
and  yet  persisted,  in  the  same  evil  courses  of 
which  that  ruin  was  the  result.  She  sinned 
against  light.  The  fall  of  Ephraim  had  verified 
the  predictions  of  her  prophets;  yet  "  she  was 
not  afraid,"  but  went  on  adding  to  the  score  of 
her  own  ofifences,  and  polluting  the  land  with  her 
unfaithfulness  to  her  Divine  Spouse.  The  idea 
that  the  very  soil  of  her  country  was  defiled  by 
Judah's  idolatry  may  be  illustrated  by  reference 
to  the  well-known  words  of  Ps.  cvi.  38:  "  They 
shed  innocent  blood,  even  the  blood  of  their 
sons  and  their  daughters  whom  they  sacrificed 
unto  the  idols  of  Canaan;  and  the  land  was  de- 
filed with  the  bloodshed."  We  may  also  remem- 
ber Elohim's  words  to  Cain:  "The  voice  of  thy 
brother's  blood  is  crying  unto  Me  from  the 
ground!"  (Gen.  iv.  10).  As  lahvah's  special 
dwelling-place,  moreover,  the  land  of  Israel  was 
holy;  and  foreign  rites  desecrated  and  profaned 
it,  and  made  it  offensive  in  His  sight.  The 
pollution  of  it  cried  to  heaven  for  vengeance 
on  those  who  had  caused  it.  To  such  a  state 
had  Judah  brought  her  own  land,  and  the  very 
city  of  the  sanctuary;  "and  yet  in  all  this" — 
amid  this  accumulation  of  sins  and  liabilities — 
she  turned  not  to  her  Lord  with  her  whole 
heart.  The  reforms  set  on  foot  in  the  twelfth 
year  of  Josiah  were  but  superficial  and  half- 
hearted; the  people  merely  acquiesced  in  them, 
at  the  dictation  of  the  court,  and  gave  no  sign 
of  any  inward  change  or  deep-wrought  repent- 
ance. The  semblance  without  the  reality  of  sor- 
row for  sin  is  but  a  mockery  of  heaven,  and  a 
heinous  aggravation  of  guilt.     Hence  the  sin  of 

*  She  saw:  Pesh.  This  may  be  right.  And  the  Trait- 
ress, her  sister,  Judah,  "  saw  it :  yea,  saw  that  even 
because  the  Turncoat  Israel  had  committed  adultery,  I 
putheraway.  .  .  .  And  yet  the  Traitress  Judah,  her  sister, 
was  not  afraid,  etc."  .    . 

t  X  Kings  ii.  4.  "PB^°?^?"^^2- 


Jeremiah  iii.  6-iv.]  ISRAEL    AND     jUDAH;    A    CONTRAST. 


37 


Judah  was  of  a  deeper  dye  than  that  which  had 
destroyed  Israel.  "  And  lahvah  said  unto  me, 
The  Turncoat  or  Recreant  Israel  hath  proven 
herself  more  righteous  than  the  Traitress  Judah." 
Who  could  doubt  it,  considering  that  almost  all 
the  prophets  had  borne  their  witness  in  Judah; 
and  that,  in  imitating  her  sister's  idolatry,  she 
had  resolutely  closed  her  eyes  to  the  light  of 
truth  and  reason?  On  this  ground,  that  Israel 
has  sinned  less  and  suffered  more,  the  prophet 
is  bidden  to  hold  out  to  her  the  hope  of  Divine 
mercy.  The  greatness  of  her  ruin,  as  well  as 
the  lapse  of  years  since  the  fatal  catastrophe, 
might  tend  to  diminish  in  the  prophet's  mind 
the  impression  of  her  guilt;  and  his  patriotic 
yearning  for  the  restoration  of  the  banished  Ten 
Tribes,  who.  after  all,  were  the  near  kindred  of 
Judah,  as  well  as  the  thought  that  they  had 
borne  their  punishment,  and  thus  atoned  for  their 
sin  (Isa.  xl.  2),  might  cooperate  with  the  desire 
of  kindling  in  his  own  countrymen  a  noble  ri- 
valry of  repentance,  in  moving  the  prophet  to 
obey  the  impulse  which  urged  him  to  address 
himself  to  Israel.  "  Go  thou,  and  cry  these 
words  northward  (toward  the  desolate  land  of 
Ephraim),  and  say:  Return,  Turncoat  or  Rec- 
reant Israel,  saith  lahvah;  I  will  not  let  My 
countenance  fall  at  the  sight  of  you  (lit.  against 
you,  cf.  Gen.  iv.  5);  for  I  am  loving,  saith  lahvah, 
I  keep  not  anger  for  ever.  Only  recognise  thy 
guilt,  that  thou  hast  rebelled  against  lahvah  thy 
God,  and  hast  scattered  (or  lavished:  Ps.  cxii. 
9)  thy  ways  to  the  strangers  (hast  gone  now  in 
this  direction,  now  in  that,  worshipping  first  one 
idol  and  then  another;  cf.  ii.  23;  and  so,  as  it 
were,  dividing  up  and  dispersing  thy  devotion) 
under  every  evergreen  tree;  but  My  voice  ye 
have  not  obeyed,  saith  lahvah."  The  invitation, 
"Return  Apostate  Israel!  "—'C"  TMH^tD  r\2)^*— 
contains  a  play  of  words  which  seems  to  sug- 
gest that  the  exile  of  the  Ten  Tribes  was  vol- 
untary, or  self-imposed;  as  if,  when  they  turned 
their  backs  upon  their  true  God,  they  had  de- 
liberately made  choice  of  the  inevitable  con- 
sequence of  that  rebellion,  and  made  up  their 
minds  to  abandon  their  native  land.  So  close 
is  the  connection,  in  the  prophet's  view,  between 
the  misfortunes  of  his  people  and  their  sins. 

"  Return,  ye  apostate  children  "  (again  there  is 
a  play  on  words— D"'3n"lt^  D''Ja  131K'— "  Turn  back, 
ye  back-turning  sons,"  or  "  ye  sons  that  turn  the 
back  to  Me)  "  saith  lahvah;  for  it  was  I  that 
wedded  you  "  (ver.  14),  and  am,  therefore,  your 
proper  lord.  The  expression  is  not  stranger 
than  that  which  the  great  prophet  of  the  Return 
addresses  to  Zion:  "  Thy  sons  shall  marry  thee." 
But  perhaps  we  should  rather  compare  another 
passage  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah,  where  it  is  said: 
"  lahvah,  our  God!  other  lords  beside  Thee  have 

had  dominion  over  us  "  (l^wS  Isa.  xxvi.  13),  and 
render:  "  For  it  is  I  that  will  be  your  lord;"  or 
perhaps,  "For  it  is  I  that  have  mastered  you,"  and 
put  down  your  rebellion  by  chastisements;  "and 
I  will  take  you,  one  of  a  city  and  two  of^a  clan, 
and  will  bring  you  to  Zion."  As  a  "  city "  is 
elsewhere  spoken  of  as  a  "  thousand  "  (Mic.  v. 
i),  and  a  "thousand"  (rj^JK)  is  synonymous  with 
a  "  clan  "  (nnSK'O).  as  providing  a  thousand  war- 
riors in  the  national  militia,  it  is  clear  that  the 
promise  is  that  one  or  two  representatives  of  each 

*  As  if  "  Turn  back,  back-turning  Israel  !  "  /'.  e..  Thou 
that  turnedst  thy  back  upon  lahvah,  and,  therefore,  upon 
His  pleasant  land. 


township  in  Israel  shall  be  restored  from  exile 
to  the  land  of  their  fathers.  In  other  words,  we 
have  here  Isaiah's  doctrine  of  the  remnant, 
which  he  calls  a  "  tenth  "  (Isa.  vi.  13),  and  of 
which  he  declared  that  "  the  survivors  of  the 
house  of  Judah  that  remain,  shall  again  take 
root  downwards,  and  bear  fruit  upwards  "  (Isa. 
xxxyii.  31).  And  as  Zion  is  the  goal  of  the  re- 
turning exiles,  we  may  see,  as  doubtless  the 
prophets  saw,  a  kind  of  anticipation  and  fore- 
shadowing of  the  future  in  the  few  scattered 
members  of  the  northern  tribes  of  Asher,  Manas- 
seh,  and  Zebulun,  who  "  humbled  themselves," 
and  accepted  Hezekiah's  invitation  to  the  pass- 
over  (2  Chron.  xxx.  11,  18);  and,  again,  in  the 
authority  which  Josiah  is  said  to  have  exercised 
in  the  land  of  the  Ten  Tribes  (2  Chron.  xxxiv. 
6;  cf.  9).  We  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  proph- 
ets do  not  contemplate  the  restoration  of  every 
individual  of  the  entire  nation;  but  rather  the  re- 
turn of  a  chosen  few,  a  kind  of  "  firstfruits  "  of 
Israel,  who  are  to  be  a  "  holy  seed  "  (Isa.  vi.  13), 
from  which  the  power  of  the  Supreme  will  again 
build  up  the  entire  people  according  to  its  ancient 
divisions.  So  the  holy  Apostle  in  the  Revelation 
hears  that  twelve  thousand  of  each  tribe  are 
sealed  as  servants  of  God  (Rev.  vii.). 

The  happy  time  of  restoration  will  also  be  a 
time  of  reunion.  The  estranged  tribes  will  re- 
turn to  their  old  allegiance.  This  is  implied  by 
the  promise,  "  I  will  bring  you  to  Zion,"  and  by 
that  of  the  next  verse:  "And  I  will  give  you 
shepherds  after  My  own  heart;  and  they  shall 
shepherd  you  with  knowledge  and  wisdom." 
Obviously,  kings  of  the  house  of  David  are 
meant;  the  good  shepherds  of  the  future  are 
contrasted  with  the  "  rebellious "  ones  of  the 
past  (ii.  8).  It  is  the  promise  of  Isaiah  (i.  26): 
"  And  I  will  restore  thy  judges  as  at  the  first, 
and  thy  counsellors  as  at  the  beginning."  In 
this  connection,  we  may  recall  the  fact  that  the 
original  schism  in  Israel  was  brought  about  by 
the  folly  of  evil  shepherds.  The  coming  King 
will  resemble  not  Rehoboam  but  David.  Nor  is 
this  all;  for  "  It  shall  come  to  pass,  when  ye 
multiply  and  become  fruitful  in  the  land,  in  those 
days,  saith  lahvah,  men  shall  not  say  any  more. 
The  ark  of  the  covenant  of  lahvah,"  (or,  as 
LXX.,  "of  the  Holy  One  of  Israel;  nor  shall 
it"  (the  ark)  "  come  to  mind;  nor  shall  men  re- 
member it,  nor  miss  it;  nor  shall  it  be  made  any 
more"  (pointing  '"^^V."". although  the  verb  may  be 

impersonal.  I  do  not  understand  why  Hitzig 
asserts  "  Man  wird  keine  andere  machen " 
(Movers)  oder;  "  sie  wird  nicht  wieder 
gemacht "  (Ew.,  Graf)  "  als  ware  nicht  von  der 
geschichtlichen  Lade  die  Rede,  sondern  von  ihr 
begrifflich,  konnen  die  Worte  nicht  bedeuten." 
But  cf.  Exod.  XXV.  10;  Gen.  vi.  14;  where  the 
same  verb  nCJ'y  is  used.  Perhaps,  however,  the 
rendering  of  C.  B.  Michaelis,  which  he  prefers,  is 
more  in  accordance  with  what  precedes:  "nor 
shall  all  that  be  done  any  more,"  Gen.  xxix.  26, 
xli.  34.  But  npa  does  not  mean  "  nachforschen:" 
cf.  I  Sam.  XX.  6,  xxv.  15).  "  In  that  time  men 
will  call  Jerusalem  the  throne  of  lahvah;  and  all 
the  nations  will  gather  into  it  "  (Gen.  i.  9),  "  for 
the  name  of  lahvah  (at  Jerusalem:"  LXX.  om.); 
"  and  they  "  (the  heathen)  "  will  no  longer  fol- 
low the  stubbornness  of  their  evil  heart "  vii. 
24;  Deut.  xxix.   19). 

In   the   new   Theocracy,   the   true   kingdom   of 
God,  the  ancient  symbol  of  the  Divine  presence 


38 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


will  be  forgotten  in  the  realisation  of  that  pres- 
ence. The  institution  of  the  New  Covenant  will 
be  characterised  by.  an  immediate  and  personal 
knowledge  of  lahvah  in  the  hearts  of  all  His 
people  (xxxi.  31  sq.).  The  small  object  in  which 
past  generations  had  loved  to  recognise  the 
earthly  throne  of  the  God  of  Israel,  will  be  re- 
placed by  Jerusalem  itself,  the  Holy  City,  not 
merely  of  Judah,  nor  of  Judah  and  Israel,  but 
of  the  world.  Thither  will  all  the  nations  resort 
"to  the  name  of  lahvah;"  ceasing  henceforth 
"  to  follow  the  hardness  (or  callousness)  of  their 
own  evil  heart."  That  the  more  degraded  kinds 
of  heathenism  have  a  hardening  effect  upon  the 
heart;  and  that  the  cruel  and  impure  worships  of 
Canaan  especially  tended  to  blunt  the  finer  sensi- 
bilities, to  enfeeble  the  natural  instincts  of  hu- 
manity and  justice,  and  to  confuse  the  sense  of 
right  and  wrong,  is  beyond  question.  Only  a 
heart  rendered  callous  by  custom,  and  stubbornly 
deaf  to  the  pleadings  of  natural  pity,  could  find 
genuine  pleasures  in  the  merciless  rites  of  the 
Molech-worship;  and  they  who  ceased  to  follow 
these  inhuman  superstitions,  and  sought  light 
and  guidance  from  the  God  of  Israel,  might  well 
be  said  to  have  ceased  "  to  walk  after  the  hard- 
ness of  their  own  evil  heart."  The  more  re- 
pulsive features  of  heathenism  chime  in  too  well 
with  the  worst  and  most  savage  impulses  of  our 
nature;  they  exhibit  too  close  a  conformity  with 
the  suggestions  and  demands  of  selfish  appetite; 
they  humour  and  encourage  the  darkest  pas- 
sions far  too  directly  and  decidedly,  to  allow  us 
to  regard  as  plausible  any  theory  of  their  origin 
and  permanence  which  does  not  recognise  in 
them  at  once  a  cause  and  an  efifect  of  human  de- 
pravity (cf.  Rom.  i.). 

The  repulsiveness  of  much  that  was  associated 
with  the  heathenism  with  which  they  were  best 
acquainted,  did  not  hinder  the  prophets  of  Israel 
from  taking  a  deep  spiritual  interest  in  those  who 
practised  and  were  enslaved  by  it.  Indeed,  what 
has  been  called  the  universalism  of  the  Hebrew 
seers — their  emancipation  in  this  respect  from  all 
local  and  national  limits  and  prejudices — is  one 
of  the  clearest  proofs  of  their  divine  mission. 
Jeremiah  only  reiterates  what  Micah  and  Isaiah 
had  preached  before  him;  that  "in  the  latter 
days  the  mountain  of  lahvah's  House  shall  be  es- 
tablished as  the  chief  of  mountains,  and  shall 
be  exalted  above  the  hills;  and  all  the  nations 
will  fiow  unto  it  "  (Isa.  ii.  2).  In  chap.  xvi.  19 
sq.  our  prophet  thus  expresses  himself  upon  the 
same  topic.  "  lahvah,  my  strength  and  my 
stronghold,  and  my  refuge  in  the  day  of  dis- 
tress! unto  Thee  shall  nations  come  from  the  ends 
of  the  earth,  and  shall  say:  Our  forefathers  in- 
herited naught  but  a  lie,  vanity,  and  things 
among  which  is  no  helper.  Shall  a  man  make 
him  gods,  when  they  are  no  gods? "  How 
largely  this  particular  aspiration  of  the  prophets 
of  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  b.  c.  has 
since  been  fulfilled  in  the  course  of  the  ages  is 
a  matter  of  history.  The  religion  which  was 
theirs  has,  in  the  new  shape  given  it  by  our  Lord 
and  His  Apostles,  become  the  religion  of  one 
heathen  people  after  another,  until  at  this  day  it 
is  the  faith  professed,  not  only  in  the  land  of  its 
origin,  but  by  the  leading  nations  of  the  world. 

So  mighty  a  fulfilment  of  hopes,  which  at  the 
time  of  their  first  conception  and  utterance  could 
only  be  regarded  as  the  dreams  of  enthusiastic 
visionaries,  justifies  those  who  behold  and  realise 
it  in  the  joyful  belief  that  the  progress  of  true 


religion  has  not  been  maintained  for  six  and 
twenty  centuries  to  be  arrested  now;  and  that 
these  old-world  aspirations  are  destined  to.  re- 
ceive a  fulness  of  illustration  in  the  triumphs  of 
the  future,  in  the  light  of  which  the  brightest 
glories  of  the  past  will  pale  and  fade  away. 

The  prophet  does  not  say,  with  a  prophet  of 
the  New  Covenant,  that  "  all  Israel  shall  be 
saved  "  (Rom.  xi.  26).  We  may,  however,  fairly 
interpret  the  latter  of  the  true  Israel,  "  the  rem- 
nant according  to  the  election  of  grace,"  rather 
than  of  "  Israel  according  to  the  flesh,"  and  so 
both  will  be  at  one,  and  both  at  variance  with 
the  unspiritual  doctrine  of  the  Talmud,  that 
"  All  Israel,"  irrespective  of  moral  qualifications, 
will  have  "  a  portion  in  the  world  to  come,"  on 
account  of  the  surpassing  merits  of  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  even  of  .A.braham  alone 
(cf.  St.  Matt.  iii.  9;  St.  John  viii.  33). 

The  reference  to  the  ark  of  the  covenant  in 
the  sixteenth  verse  is  remarkable  upon  several 
grounds.  This  sacred  symbol  is  not  mentioned 
among  the  spoils  which  Nebuzaradan  (Nabii- 
zir-iddin)  took  from  the  temple  (Hi.  17  sqq.); 
nor  is  it  specified  among  the  treasures  appro- 
priated by  Nebuchadrezzar  at  the  surrender  of 
Jehoiachin.  The  words  of  Jeremiah  prove  that  it 
cannot  be  included  among  "  the  vessels  of  gold  " 
which  the  Babylonian  conqueror  "  cut  in 
pieces  "  (2  Kings  xxiv.  13).  We  learn  two  facts 
about  the  ark  from  the  present  passage:  (i)  that 
it  no  longer  existed  in  the  days  of  the  prophet; 
(2)  that  people  remembered  it  with  regret, 
though  they  did  not  venture  to  replace  the  lost 
original  by  a  new  substitute.  It  may  well  have 
been  destroyed  by  Manasseh,  the  king  who  did 
his  utmost  to  abolish  the  religion  of  lahvah. 
However  that  may  be,  the  point  of  the  prophet's 
allusion  consists  in  the  thought  that  in  .the  glo- 
rious times  of  Messianic  rule  the  idea  of  holiness 
will  cease  to  be  attached  to  things,  for  it  will 
be  realised  in  persons;  the  symbol  will  become 
obsolete,  and  its  name  and  memory  will  disappear 
from  the  minds  and  afifections  of  men,  because 
the  fact  symbolised  will  be  universally  felt  and 
perceived  to  be  a  present  and  self-evident  truth. 
In  that  great  epoch  of  Israel's  reconciliation,  all 
nations  will  recognise  in  Jerusalem  "  the  throne 
of  lahvah,"  the  centre  of  light  and  source  of 
spiritual  truth;  the  Holy  City  of  the  world.  Is  it 
the  earthly  or  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  that  is 
meant?  It  would  seem,  the  former  only  was 
present  to  the  consciousness  of  the  prophet,  for 
he  concludes  his  beautiful  interlude  of  promise 
with  the  words:  ''  In  those  days  will  the  house 
of  Judah  walk  beside  the  house  of  Israel;  and 
they  will  come  together  from  the  land  of  the 
North  "  ("  and  from  all  the  lands:"  LXX  add.  cf. 
xvi.  15)  "  unto  the  land  that  I  caused  your 
fathers  to  possess."  Like  Isaiah  (xi.  12  sqq.) 
and  other  prophets  his  predecessors,  Jeremiah 
forecasts  for  the  whole  repentant  and  united  na- 
tion a  reinstatement  in  their  ancient  temporal 
rights,  in  the  pleasant  land  from  which  they  had 
been  so  cruelly  banished  for  so  many  weary 
years. 

"  The  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life." 
If,  when  we  look  at  the  whole  course  of  subse- 
quent events,  when-  we  review  the  history  of  the 
Return  and  of  the  narrow  religious  common- 
wealth which  was  at  last,  after  many  bitter  strug- 
gles, established  on  mount  Sion;  when  we  con- 
sider the  form  which  the  religion  of  lahvah  as- 
sumed in   the   hands   of  the   priestly   caste,   and 


Jeremiah  iii.  6-iv.]  ISRAEL    AND    JUDAH;    A    CONTRAST. 


39 


the  half-religious,  half-political  sects,  whose 
intrigues  and  conflicts  for  power  constitute 
almost  all  we  know  of  their  period;  when 
we  .reflect  upon  the  character  of  the  entire 
post-exilic  age  down  to  the  time  of  the  birth  of 
Christ,  with  its  worldly  ideals,  its  fierce  fanati- 
cisms, its  superstitious  trust  in  rites  and  cere- 
monies; if,  when  we  look  at  all  this,  we  hesi- 
tate to  claim  that  the  prophetic  visions  of  a  great 
restoration  found  fulfilment  in  the  erection  of 
this  petty  state,  this  paltry  edifice,  upon  the 
ruins  of  David's  capital;  shall  we  lay  ourselves 
open  to  the  accusation  that  we  recognise  no  ele- 
ment of  truth  in  the  glorious  aspirations  of  the 
prophets?     I   think  not. 

After  all.  it  is  clear  from  the  entire  context 
that  these  hopes  of  a  golden  time  to  come  are 
not  independent  of  the  attitude  of  the  people 
towards  lahvah.  They  will  only  be  realised,  if 
the  nation  shall  truly  repent  of  the  past,  and  turn 
to  Him  with  the  whole  heart.  The  expressions 
"  at  that  time,"  "  in  those  days  "  (vv.  17,  18), 
are  only  conditionally  determinate;  they  mean 
the  happy  time  of  Israel's  repentance.  "  if  such 
a  time  should  ever  come."  From  this  glimpse 
of  glorious  possibilities,  the  prophet  turns 
abruptly  to  the  dark  page  of  Israel's  actual  his- 
tory. He  has,  so  to  speak,  portrayed  in  char- 
acters of  light  the  development  as  it  might  have 
been;  he  now  depicts  the  course  it  actually  fol- 
lowed. He  restates  lahvah's  original  claim  upon 
Israel's  grateful  devotion  (ii.  2),  putting  these 
words  into  the  mouth  of  the  Divine  Speaker: 
"  And  I  indeed  thought,  How  will  I  set  thee 
among  the  sons  "  (of  the  Divine  household), 
"  and  give  thee  a  lovely  land,  a  heritage  the  fair- 
est among  the  nations!  And  methought,  thou 
wouldst  call  Me  '  My  Father,'  and  wouldst  not 
turn  back  from  following  Me."  lahvah  had  at 
the  outset  adopted  Israel,  and  called  him  from 
the  status  of  a  g:roaning  bondsman  to  the  dignity 
of  a  son  and  heir.  When  Israel  was  a  child.  He 
had  loved  him,  and  called  His  son  out  of  Egypt 
(Hos.  xi.  i),  to  give  him  a  place  and  a  heritage 
among  nations.  It  was  lahvah,  indeed,  who 
originally  assigned  their  holdings  to  all  the  na- 
tions, and  separated  the  various  tribes  of  man- 
kind, "  fixing  the  territories  of  peoples,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  sons  of  God  "  (Deut. 
xxxii.  8  Sept.).  If  He  had  brought  up  Israel 
from  Egypt,  He  had  also  brought  up  the  Philis- 
tines from  Caphtor,  and  the  Arameans  from  Kir 
(Amos  ix.  7).  But  He  had  adopted  Israel  in  a 
more  special  sense,  which  may  be  expressed  in 
St.  Paul's  words,  who  makes  it  the  chief  advan- 
tage of  Israel  above  the  nations  that  "  unto  them 
were  committed  the  oracles  of  God "  (Rom. 
iii.  2).  What  nobler  distinction  could  have  been 
conferred  upon  any  race  of  men  than  that  they 
should  have  been  thus  chosen,  as  Israel  actually 
was  chosen,  not  merely  in  the  aspirations  of 
prophets,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  in  the  divinely- 
directed  evolution  of  human  history,  to  become 
the  heralds  of  a  higher  truth,  the  hierophants 
of  spiritual  knowledge,  the  universally  recog- 
nised interpreters  of  God?  Such  a  calling  might 
have  been  expected  to  elicit  a  response  of  the 
warmest  gratitude,  the  most  enthusiastic  loyalty 
and  unswerving  devotion.  But  Israel  as  a  nation 
did  not  rise  to  the  level  of  these  lofty  prophetic 
views  of  its  vocation;  it  knew  itself  to  be  the 
people  of  lahvah,  but  it  failed  to  realise  the 
moral  significance  of  that  privilege,  and  the 
moral  and  spiritual   responsibilities  which  it  in- 


volved. It  failed  to  adore  lahvah  as  the  Father, 
in  the  only  proper  and  acceptable  sense  of  that 
honourable  name,  the  sense  which  restricts  its 
application  to  one  sole  Being.  Heathenism  is 
blind  and  irrational  as  well  as  profane  and  sin- 
ful; and  so  it  does  not  scruple  to  confer  such 
absolutely  individual  titles  as  "  God "  and 
"  Father  "  upon  a  multitude  of  imaginary 
powers. 

"  Methought  thou  wouldst  call  Me  'My 
Father,'  and  wouldst  not  turn  back  from  follow- 
ing Me.  But  "  (Zeph.  iii.  7)  "  a  woman  is  false 
to  her  fere;  so  were  ye  false  to  Me,  O  house  of 
Israel,  saith  lahvah."  The  Divine  intention  to- 
ward Israel,  God's  gracious  design  for  her  ever- 
lasting good,  God's  expectation  of  a  return  for 
His  favour,  and  how  that  design  was  thwarted  so 
far  as  man  could  thwart  it,  and  that  expectation 
disappointed  hitherto;  such  is  the  import  of  the 
last  two  verses  (19,  20).  Speaking  in  the  name 
of  God,  Jeremiah  represents  Israel's  past  as  it 
appears  to  God.  He  now  proceeds  to  show 
dramatically,  or  as  in  a  picture,  how  the  expecta- 
tion may  yet  be  fulfilled,  and  the  design  realised. 
Having  exposed  the  national  guilt,  he  supposes 
his  remonstrance  to  have  done  its  work,  and  he 
overhears  the  penitent  people  pouring  out  its 
heart  before  God.  Then  a  kind  of  dialogue  en- 
sues between  the  Deity  and  His  suppliants. 
"  Hark!  upon  the  bare  hills  is  heard  the  weeping 
of  the  supplications  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  that 
they  perverted  their  way,  forgot  lahvah  their 
God."  The  treeless  hill-tops  had  been  the  scene 
of  heathen  orgies  miscalled  worship.  There  the 
rites  of  Canaan  performed  by  Israelites  had  in- 
sulted the  God  of  heaven  (vv.  2  and  6).  Now 
the  very  places  which  witnessed  the  sin,  witness 
the  national  remorse  and  confession.  (The 
'  high  places  '  are  not  condemned  even  by  Jere- 
miah as  places  of  worship,  but  only  as  places  of 
heathen  and  illicit  worships.  The  solitude  and 
quiet  and  purer  air  of  the  hill-tops,  their  un- 
obstructed view  of  heaven  and  suggestive  near- 
ness thereto,  have  always  made  them  natural 
sanctuaries  both  for  public  rites  and  private 
prayer  and  meditation:  cf-.  2  Sam.  xv.  32;  and 
especially  St.   Luke  vi.   12. 

In  this  closing  section  of  the  piece  (iii.  19-iv. 
2)  "  Israel  "  means  not  the  entire  people,  but  the 
northern  kingdom  only,  which  is  spoken  of  sepa- 
rately also  in  iii.  6-18,  with  the  object  of  throw- 
ing into  higher  relief  the  heinousness  of  Judah's 
guilt.  Israel — the  northern  kingdom — was  less 
guilty  than  Judah,  for  she  had  no  warning  ex- 
ample, no  beacon-light  upon  her  path,  such  as 
her  own  fall  afTorded  to  the  southern  kingdom; 
and  therefore  the  Divine  compassion  is  more 
likely  to  be  extended  to  her,  even  after  a  century 
of  ruin  and  banishment,  than  to  her  callous,  im- 
penitent sister.  Whether  at  the  time  Jeremiah 
was  in  communication  with  survivors  of  the 
northern  Exile,  who  were  faithful  to  the  God  of 
their  fathers,  and  looked  wistfully  toward  Jeru- 
salem as  the  centre  of  the  best  traditions  and  the 
sole  hope  of  Israelite  nationality,  cannot  now  be 
determined.  The  thing  is  not  unlikely,  consider- 
ing the  interest  which  the  prophet  afterwards 
took  in  the  Judean  exiles  who  were  taken  to 
Babylon  with  Jehoiachin  (chap,  xxix.)  and  his 
active  correspondence  with  their  leaders.  We 
may  also  remember  that  "  divers  of  Asher  and 
Manasseh  and  Zebulun  humbled  themselves " 
and  came  to  keep  passover  with  king  Hezekiah  at 
Jerusalem.     It    cannot,    certainly,    be    supposed, 


40 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


with  any  show  of  reason,  that  the  Assyrians 
either  carried  away  the  entire  population  of  the 
northern  kingdom,  or  exterminated  all  whom 
they  did  not  carry  away.  The  words  of  the 
Chronicler  who  speaks  of  "  a  remnant  .  .  .  es- 
caped out  of  the  hand  of  the  kings  of  Assyria," 
are  themselves  perfectly  agreeable  to  reason  and 
the  nature  of  the  case,  apart  from  the  considera- 
tion that  he  had  special  historical  sources  at 
his  command  (2  Chron.  xxx.  6,  11).  We  know 
that  in  the  Maccabean  and  Roman  wars  the 
rocky  fastnesses  of  the  country  were  a  refuge  to 
numbers  of  the  people,  and  the  history  of  David 
shows  that  this  had  been  the  case  from  time 
immemorial  {cf.  Judg.  vi.  2).  Doubtless  in  this 
way  not  a  few  survived  the  Assyrian  invasions 
and  the  destruction  of  Samaria  (b.  c.  721).  But 
to  return  to  the  text.  After  the  confession  of 
the  nation  that  they  have  "  perverted  their  way  " 
(that  is,  their  mode  of  worship,  by  adoring 
visible  symbols  of  lahvah,  and  associating  with 
Him  as  His  compeers  a  multitude  of  imaginary 
gods,  especially  the  local  Baalim,  ii.  23,  and 
Ashtaroth),  the  prophet  hears  another  voice,  a 
voice  of  Divine  invitation  and  gracious  promise, 
responsive  to  penitence  and  prayer:  "  Return,  ye 
apostate  sons,  let  Me  heal  your  apostasies!  "  or 
"  If  ye  return,  ye  apostate  sons,  I  will  heal  your 
apostasies!  "  It  is  an  echo  of  the  tenderness  of 
an  older  prophet  (Hos.  xiv.  i,  4).  And  the  an- 
swer of  the  penitents  quickly  follows:  "Behold 
us,  we  are  come  unto  Thee,  for  Thou  art  lahvah 
our  God."  The  voice  that  now  call^  us,  we  know 
by  its  tender  tones  of  entreaty,  compassion,  and 
love  to  be  the  voice  of  lahvah  our  own  God; 
not  the  voice  of  sensual  Chemosh,  tempting  to 
guilty  pleasures  and  foul  impurities,  not  the 
harsh  cry  of  a  cruel  Molech,  calling  for  savage 
rites  of  pitiless  bloodshed.  Thou,  lahvah — not 
these  nor  their  fellows — art  our  true  and  only 
God. 

"  Surely,  in  vain "  (for  naught,  bootlessly,  i 
Sam.  XXV.  21;  chap.  v.  2,  xvi.  19)  "on  the  hills 
did  we  raise  a  din  "(lit.  "hath  one  raised  ";  read- 
ing riiy333  and  ^^"'.H   ;  "  surely  in  lahvah  our  God 

is  the  safety  of  Israel!"  The  Hebrew  cannot  be 
original  as  it  now  stands  in  the  Masoretic  text, 
for  it  is  ungrammatical.  The  changes  I  have 
made  will  be  seen  to  be  very  slight,  and  the  sense 
obtained  is  much  the  same  as  Ewald's  "  Surely  in 
vain  from  the  hills  is  the  noise,  from  the  moun- 
tains "  (where  every  reader  mvist  feel  that  "  from 
the  mountains  "  is  a  forcible-feeble  addition 
which  adds  nothing  to  the  sense).  We  might 
also  perhaps  detach  the  mem  from  the  term  for 
"  hills,"  and  connect  it  with  the  preceding  word, 
thus  getting  the  meaning:  "  Surely,  for  Lies  are 
the  hills,  the  uproar  of  the  mountains!  "  (^^"'.'7 
p'On  .  .  .  D^"lp^E'?)that  is  to  say,  the  high  places 

are  devoted  to  delusive  nonentities,  who  can  do 
nothing  in  return  for  the  wild  orgiastic  worship 
bestowed  on  them;  a  thought  which  contrasts 
very  well  with  the  second  half  of  the  verse: 
"  Surely,  in  lahvah  our  God  is  the  safety  of  Is- 
rael! " 

The  confession  continues:  "And  as  for  the 
Shame " — the  shameful  idol,  the  Baal  whose 
worship  involved  shameful  rites  (chap.  xi.  13; 
Hos.  ix.  10),  and  who  put  his  worshippers  to 
shame,  by  disappointing  them  of  help  in  the 
hour  of  their  need  (ii.  8,  26,  27) — "  as  for  the 
Shame " — in  contrast  with  lahvah,  the  Safety 
of  Israel,  who   gives  all,  and   requires  little   or 


nothing  of  this  kindin  return — "  it  devoured  the 
labour  of  ou^r  fathers  from  our  youth,  their  flocks 
and  their  herds,  their  sons  and  their  daughters." 
The  allusion  is  to  the  insatiable  greed  of  the 
idol-priests,  and  the  lavish  expense  of  perpetu- 
ally recurring  feasts  and  sacrifices,  which  consti- 
tuted a  serious  drain  upon  the  resources  of  a 
pastoral  and  agricultural  community;  and  to  the 
bloody  rites  which,  not  content  with  animal 
offerings,  demanded  human  victims  for  the  altars 
of  an  appalling  superstition.  "  Let  us  lie  down 
in  our  shame,  and  let  our  infamy  cover  us!  for 
toward  lahvah  our  God  we  trespassed,  we  and 
our  fathers,  from  our  youth  even  unto  this  day, 
and  obeyed  not  the  voice  of  lahvah  our  God." 
A  more  complete  acknowledgment  of  sin  could 
hardly  be  conceived;  no  palliating  circumstances 
are  alleged,  no  excuses  devised,  of  the  kind  with 
which  men  usually  seek  to  soothe  a  disturbed 
conscience.  The  strong  seductions  of  Canaan- 
ite  worship,  the  temptation  to  join  in  the  joyful 
merriment  of  idol-festivals,  the  invitation  of 
friends  and  neighbours,  the  contagion  of  ex- 
ample,— all  these  extenuating  facts  must  have 
been  at  least  as  well  known  to  the  prophet 
as  to  modern  critics,  but  he  is  expressively 
silent  on  the  point  of  mitigating  circum- 
stances in  the  case  of  a_  nation  to  whom 
such  light  and  guidance  had  come  as  came 
to  Israel.  No,  he  could  discern  no  ground 
of  hope  for  his  people  except  in  a  full  and  un- 
reserved admission  of  guilt,  an  agony  of  shame 
and  contrition  before  God,  a  heartfelt  recogni- 
tion of  the  truth  that  from  the  outset  of  their 
national  existence  to  the  passing  day  they  had 
continually  sinned  against  lahvah  their  God  and 
resisted  His  holy  Will. 

Finally,  to  this  cry  of  penitents  humbled  in  the 
dust,  and  owning  that  they  have  no  refuge  from 
the  consequences  of  their  sin  but  in  the  Divine 
Mercy,  comes  the  firm  yet  loving  answer:  "  If 
thou  wilt  return,  O  Israel,  saith  lahvah,  unto  Me 
wilt  return,  and  if  thou  wilt  put  away  thine 
Abominations  "  ("out  of  thy  mouth  and,"  LXX.) 
"  out  of  My  Presence,  and  sway  not  to  and  fro  " 
(i  Kings  xiv.  15),  "  but  wilt  swear  'By  the  Life 
of  lahvah!  '  in  good  faith,  justice,  and  righteous- 
ness; then  shall  the  nations  bless  themselves  by 
Him,  and  in  Him  shall  they  glory  "  (iv.  i,  2). 
Such  is  the  close  of  this  ideal  dialogue  between 
God  and  man.  It  is  promised  that  if  the  nation's 
repentance  be  sincere — not  half-hearted  like  that 
of  Judah  (iii.  10;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  2)2)) — and  if 
the  fact  be  demonstrated  by  a  resolute  and  un- 
wavering rejection  of  idol-worship,  evinced  by 
the  disuse  of  their  names  in  oaths,  and  the  expul- 
sion of  their  symbols  "  from  the  Presence,"  that 
is,  out  of  the  sanctuaries  and  domain  of  lahvah, 
and  by  adhering  to  the  Name  of  the  God  of  Is- 
rael in  oaths  and  compacts  of  all  kinds,  and  by 
a  scrupulous  loyalty  to  such  engagements  (Ps. 
XV.  4;  Deut.  X.  20;  Isa.  xlviii.  i);  then  the  an- 
cient oracle  of  blessing  will  be  fulfilled,  and  Is- 
rael will  become  a  proverb  of  felicity,  the  pride 
and  boast  of  mankind,  the  glorious  ideal  of  per- 
fect virtue  and  perfect  happiness  (Gen.  xii.  3; 
Isa.  Ixv.  16).  Then,  "  all  the  nations  will  gather 
together  unto  Jerusalem  for  the  Name  of 
lahvah"  (iii.  17);  they  will  recognise  in  the  re- 
ligion of  lahvah  the  answer  to  their  highest 
longings  and  spiritual  necessities,  and  will  take 
Israel  for  what  lahvah-  intended  him  to  be,  their 
example  and  priest  and  prophet. 

Jeremiah  could  hardly  have  chosen  a  more 
extreme  instance  for  pointing  the  lesson  he  had 


Jeremiah  iv.  3-vi.  30.]    SCYTHIANS    AS    THE    SCOURGE    OF    GOD. 


41 


to  teach  than  the  long-sincc  ruined  and  depopu- 
lated kingdom  of  the  Ten  Tribes.  Hopeless  as 
their  actual  condition  must  have  seemed  at  the 
time,  he  assures  his  own  countrymen  in  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  that  even  yet,  if  only  the  moral 
requirements  of  the  case  were  fulfilled,  and  the 
heart  of  the  poor  remnant  and  of  the  survivors 
in  banishment  aroused  to  a  genuine  and  perma- 
nent repentance,  the  Divine  promises  would  be 
accomplished  in  a  people  whose  sun  had  ap- 
parently set  in  darkness  for  ever.  And  so  he 
passes  on  to  address  his  own  people  directly  in 
tones  of  warning,  reproof,  and  menace  of  ap- 
proaching wrath  (iv.  3-vi.  30). 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  SCYTHIANS  AS   THE   SCOURGE   OF 
GOD. 

Jeremiah  iv.  3-vi.  30. 

If  we  would  understand  what  is  written  here 
and  elsewhere  in  the  pages  of  prophecy,  two 
things  would  seem  to  be  requisite.  We  must  pre- 
pare ourselves  with  some  knowledge  of  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  time,  and  we  must  form  some 
general  conception  of  the  ideas  and  aims  of  the 
inspired  writer,  both  in  themselves,  and  in  their 
relation  to  passing  events.  Of  the  former,  a 
partial  and  fragmentary  knowledge  may  suffice, 
provided  it  be  true  so  far  as  it  goes;  minuteness 
of  detail  is  not  necessary  to  general  accuracy. 
Of  the  latter,  a  very  full  and  complete  conception 
may  be  gathered  from  a  careful  study  of  the  pro- 
phetic discourses. 

The  chapters  before  us  were  obviously  com- 
posed in  the  presence  of  a  grave  national  danger; 
and  what  that  danger  was  is  not  left  uncertain, 
as  the  discourse  proceeds.  An  invasion  of  the 
country  appeared  to  be  imminent;  the  rumour  of 
approaching  war  had  already  made  itself  heard  in 
the  capital;  and  all  classes  were  terror-stricken 
at  the  tidings. 

As  usual  in  such  times  of  peril,  the  country 
people  were  already  abandoning  the  unwalled 
towns  and  villages,  to  seek  refuge  in  the  strong 
places  of  the  land,  and,  above  all,  in  Jerusalem, 
which  was  at  once  the  capital  and  the  principal 
fortress  of  the  kingdom.  The  evil  news  had 
spread  far  and  near;  the  trumpet-signal  of  alarm 
was  heard  everywhere;  the  cry  was,  "Assemble 
yourselves,  and  let  us  go  into  the  fenced  cities!  " 

(iv.  5). 

The  ground  of  this  universal  terror  is  thus 
declared:  "  The  lion  is  gone  up  from  his  thicket, 
and  the  destroyer  of  nations  is  on  his  way,  is 
gone  forth  from  his  place;  to  make  thy  land  a 
desolation,  that  thy  cities  be  laid  waste,  without 
inhabitant  "  (ver.  7).  "A  hot  blast  over  the  bare 
hills  in  the  wilderness,  on  the  road  to  the 
daughter  of  my  people,  not  for  winnowing,  nor 
for  cleansing;  a  full  blast  from  those  hills  cometh 
at  My  beck"  (ver.  11).  "  Lo,  like  clouds  he 
cometh  up,  and,  like  the  whirlwind,  his  chariots; 
swifter  than  vultures  are  his  horses.  Woe  unto 
us!  We  are  verily  destroyed"  (ver.  13). 
"  Besiegers  "  (lit.  "  watchmen,"  Isa.  i.  8)  "  are 
coming  from  the  remotest  land,  and  they  utter 
their  cry  against  the  cities  of  Judah.  Like  keep- 
ers of  a  field  become  they  against  her  on  every 
side"  (vv.  16-17).  At  the  same  time,  the  inva- 
sion is  still  only  a  matter  of  report;  the  blow  has 
not  yet  fallen  upon  the  trembling  people.     "  Be- 


hold, I  am  about  to  bring  upon  you  a  nation 
from  afar,  O  house  of  Israel,  saith  lahvah;  an 
inexhaustible  nation  it  is,  a  nation  of  old  time  it 
is,  a  nation  whose  tongue  thou  knowest  not,  nor 
understandest  (lit.  '  hearest ')  what  it  speaketh. 
Its  quiver  is  like  an  opened  grave;  they  all  are 
htfroes.  And  it  will  eat  up  thine  harvest  and  thy 
bread,  which  thy  sons  and  thy  daughters  should 
eat;  it  will  eat  up  thy  flock  and  thine  herd;  it  will 
eat  up  thy  vine  and  thy  figtree;  it  will  shatter 
thine  embattled  cities,  wherein  thou  art  trusting, 
with  the  sword  "  (v.  15-17).  "  Thus  hath  lahvah 
said:  Lo,  a  people  cometh  from  a  northern  land, 
and  a  great  nation  is  awaking  from  the  uttermost 
parts  of  earth.  Bow  and  lance  they  hold;  savage 
it  is,  and  pitiless;  the  sound  of  them  is  like  the 
sea,  when  it  roareth;  and  on  horses  they  ride;  he 
is  arrayed  as  a  man  for  battle,  against  thee,  O 
daughter  of  Zion.  We  have  heard  the  report  of 
him;  our  hands  droop;  anguish  hath  taken  hold 
of  us,  throes,  like  hers  that  travaileth  "  (vi.  22 
sq.).  With  the  graphic  force  of  a  keen  observer, 
who  is  also  a  poet,  the  priest  of  Anathoth  has 
thus  depicted  for  all  time  the  collapse  of  terror 
which  befell  his  contemporaries,  on  the  rumoured 
approach  of  the  Scythians  in  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
And  his  lyric  fervour  carries  him  beyond  this; 
it  enables  him  to  see  with  the  utmost  distinct- 
ness the  havoc  wrought  by  these  hordes  of 
savages;  the  surprise  of  cities,  the  looting  of 
houses,  the  flight  of  citizens  to  the  woods  and 
the  hills  at  the  approach  of  the  enemy;  the  de- 
sertion of  the  country  towns,  the  devastation  of 
fields  and  vineyards,  confusion  and  desolation 
everywhere,  as  though  primeval  chaos  had  re- 
turned; and  he  tells  it  all  with  the  passion  and 
intensity  of  one  who  is  relating  an  actual  per- 
son^ experience.  "  In  my  vitals,  my  vitals,  I 
quake,  in  the  walls  of  my  heart!  My  heart  is 
murmuring  to  me;  I  cannot  hold  my  peace;  for 
my  soul  is  listening  to  the  trumpet-blast,  the 
alarm  of  war!  Ruin  on  ruin  is  cried,  for  all  the 
land  is  ravaged;  suddenly  are  my  tents  ravaged, 
my  pavilions  in  a  moment!  How  long  must  I 
see  the  standards,  must  I  listen  to  the  trumpet- 
blast?"  (iv.  19-21).  "I  look  at  the  earth,  and 
lo,  'tis  chaos:  at  the  heavens,  and  their  light  is 
no  more.  I  look  at  the  mountains,  and  lo,  they 
rock,  and  all  the  hills  sway  to  and  fro.  I  look, 
and  lo,  man  is  no  more,  and  the  birds  of  the  air 
are  gone.  I  look,  and  lo,  the  fruitful  soil  is 
wilderness,  and  all  the  cities  of  it  are  over- 
thrown "  (iv.  23-26).  At  the  noise  of  horseman 
and  archer  all  the  city  is  in  flight!  They  are 
gone  into  the  thickets,  and  up  the  rocks  they 
have  clomb:  all  the  city  is  deserted"  (ver.  29). 
His  eye  follows  the  course  of  devastation  until 
it  reaches  Jerusalem:  Jerusalem,  the  proud,  lux- 
urious capital,  now  isolated  on  her  hills,  bereft 
of  all  her  daughter  cities,  abandoned,  even  be- 
trayed, by  her  foreign  allies.  "  And  thou,  that 
art  doomed  to  destruction,  what  canst  thou  do? 
Though  thou  clothe  thee  in  scarlet,  though  thou 
deck  thee  with  decking  of  gold,  though  thou 
broaden  thine  eyes  with  henna,  in  vain  dost  thou 
make  thyself  fair;  the  lovers  have  scorned  thee, 
thy    life    are    they    seeking."  *     The    "  lovers  " — 

*  The  modern  singer  has  well  caught  the  echo  of  this 
ancient  strain. 

"  Wilt  thou  cover  thine  hair  with  gold,  and  with  silver 
thy  feet?  ^       , 

Hast  thou  taken  the  purple  to  fold  thee,  and  made  thy 
mouth  sweet? 

Behold,  when  thy  face  is  made  bare,  he  that  loved  thee 

Thy  face  shall  be  no  more  fair  at  the  fall  of  thy  fate." 
—"  Atatanta  in  Caiydon.' 


42 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


the  false  toreigners — have  turned  against  her  in 
the  time  of  her  need;  and  the  strange  gods,  with 
whom  she  dallied  in  the  days  of  prosperity,  can 
bring  her  no  help.  And  now,  while  she  wit- 
nesses, but  cannot  avert  the  slaughter  of  her 
children,  her  shrieks  ring  in  the  prophet's  ear: 
"  A  cry,  as  of  one  in  travail,  do  I  hear;  pangs  as 
of  her  that  beareth  her  firstborn;  the  cry  of  the 
daughter  of  Zion,'  that  panteth,  that  spreadeth 
out  her  hands:  Woe's  me!  my  soul  swooneth  for 
the^ slayers!  "  (vv.  30,  31). 

liven  the  strong  walls  of  Jerusalem  are  no 
sure  defence;  there  is  no  safety  but  in  flight. 
"  Remove  your  goods,  ye  sons  of  Benjamin,  from 
within  Jerusalem!  And  in  Tekoah  "  (as  if 
Blaston  or  Blowick  or  Trumpington)  "  blow  a 
trumpet-blast  and  upon  Beth-hakkerem  raise  a 
signal  (or  '  beacon  ') !  for  evil  hath  looked  forth 
from  the  north,  and  mighty  ruin "  (vi.  i, 
2).  The  two  towns  mark  the  route  of  the  fugi- 
tives, making  for  the  wilderness  of  the  south;  and 
the  trumpet-call,  and  the  beacon-light,  muster 
the  scattered  companies  at  these  rallying  points 
or  haltingplaces.  "  The  beautiful  and  the  pam- 
pered one  will  I  destroy — the  daughter  of  Sion." 
(Perhaps:  "The  beautiful  and  the  pampered  wo- 
man art  thou  like,  O  daughter  of  Sion!"  3d 
fern.  sing,  in  -i.)  "  To  her  come  the  shepherds 
and  their  flocks;  they  pitch  the  tents  upon  her 
round  about;  they  graze  each  at  his  own  side  " 
(i.  e.,  on  the  ground  nearest  him).  The  figure 
changes,  with  lyric  abruptness,  from  the  fair  wo- 
man, enervated  by  luxury  (ver.  2)  to  the  fair 
pasture-land,  on  which  the  nomad  shepherds  en- 
camp, whose  flocks  soon  eat  the  herbage  down, 
and  leave  the  soil  stripped  bare  (ver.  3) ;  and 
then,  again,  to  an  army  beleaguering  the  fated 
city,  whose  cries  of  mutual  cheer,  and  of  •impa- 
tience at  all  delay,  the  poet-prophet  hears  and 
rehearses.  "  Hallow  ye  war  against  her!  Arise 
ye,  let  us  go  up"  (to  the  assault)  "  at  noontide! 
Unhappy  we!  the  day  hath  turned;  the  shadows 
of  eventide  begin  to  lengthen!  Arise  ye,  and  let 
us  go  up  in  the  night,  to  destroy  her  palaces!  " 
(vv.  4,  5). 

As  a  fine  exam,ple  of  poetical  expression,  the 
discourse  obviously  has  its  own  intrinsic  value. 
The  author's  power  to  sketch  with  a  few  bold 
strokes  the  magical  efifect  of  a  disquieting  ru- 
mour; the  vivid  force  with  which  he  realises  the 
possibilities  of  ravage  and  ruin  which  are 
wrapped  up  in  those  vague,  uncertain  tidings; 
the  pathos  and  passion  of  his  lament  over  his 
stricken  country,  stricken  as  yet  to  his  perception 
only;  the  tenderness  of  feeling;  the  subtle  sweet- 
iiess  of  language;  the  variety  of  metaphor;  the 
light  of  imagination  illuminating  the  whole  with 
its  indefinable  charm;  all  these  characteristics 
indicate  the  presence  and  power  of  a  master- 
singer.  But  with  Jeremiah,  as  with  his  prede- 
cessors, the  poetic  expression  of  feeling  is  far 
from  being  an  end  in  itself.  He  writes  with  a 
purpose  to  which  all  the  endowments  of  his 
gifted  nature  are  freely  and  resolutely  subordi- 
nated. He  values  his  powers  as  a  poet  and 
orator  solely  as  instruments  which  conduce  to 
an  efTficient  utterance  of  the  will  of  lahvah.  He 
is  hardly  conscious  of  these  gifts  as  such.  He 
exists  to  "  declare  in  the  house  of  Jacob  and  to 
publish  in  Judah  "  the  word  of  the  Lord. 

It  is  in  this  capacity  that  he  now  comes  for- 
ward, and  addresses  his  terrified  countrymen,  in 
terms  not  calculated  to  allay  their  fears  with 
soothing  suggestions  of  comfort  and  reassurance, 


but  rather  deliberately  chosen  with  a  view  to 
heightening  those  fears,  and  deepening  them  to 
a  sense  of  approaching  judgment.  For,  after  all, 
it  is  not  the  rumoured  coming  of  the  Scythian 
hordes  that  impels  him  to  break  silence.  It  is 
his  consuming  sense  of  the  moral  degeneracy, 
the  spiritual  degradation  of  his  countrymen, 
which  flames  forth  into  burning  utterance. 
"  Whom  shall  I  address  and  adjure,  that  they  may 
hear?  Lo,  their  ear  is  uncircumcised,  and  they 
cannot  hearken;  lo,  the  word  of  lahvah  hath  be- 
come to  them  a  reproach;  they  delight  hot 
therein.  And  of  the  fury  of  lahvah  I  am  full; 
I  am  weary  of  holding  it  in."  Then  the  other 
voice  in  his  heart  answers:  "  Pour  thou  it  forth 
upon  the  child  in  the  street,  and  upon  the  com- 
pany of  young  men  together!  "  (vi.  10,  11).  It 
is  the  righteous  indignation  of  an  ofifended  God 
that  wells  up  from  his  heart,  and  overflows  at 
his  lips,  and  cries  woe,  irremediable  woe,  upon 
the  land  he  loves  better  than  his  own  life. 

He  begins  with  encouragement  and  persuasion, 
but  his  tone  soon  changes  to  denunciation  and 
despair  (iv.  3  sq.).  "  Thus  hath  lahvah  said  to 
the  men  of  Judah  and  to  Jerusalem,  Break  you 
up  the  fallows,  and  sow  not  into  thorns!  Cir- 
cumcise yourselves  to  lahvah,  and  remove  the 
foreskins  of  your  heart,  ye  men  of  Judah,  and 
ye  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem!  lest  My  fury  come 
forth  like  fire,  and  burn  with  none  to  quench  it, 
because  of  the  evil  of  your  doings."  Clothed 
with  the  Spirit,  as  Semitic  speech  might  ex- 
press it,  his  whole  soul  enveloped  in  a  garment 
of  heavenly  light — a  magical  garment  whose 
virtues  impart  new  force  as  well  as  new  light — 
the  prophet  sees  straight  to  the  heart  of  things, 
and  estimates  with  God-given  certainty  the  real 
state  of  his  people,  and  the  moral  worth  of  their 
seeming  repentance.  The  first  measures  of 
Josiah's  reforming  zeal  have  been  inaugurated; 
at  least  within  the  limits  of  the  capital,  idolatry 
in  its  coarser  and  more  repellent  forms  has  been 
suppressed;  there  is  a  show  of  return  to  the  God 
of  Israel.  But  the  popular  heart  is  still  wedded 
to  the  old  sanctuaries,  and  the  old  sensuous  rites 
of  Canaan;  and,  worse  than  this,  the  priests  and 
prophets,  whose  centre  of  influence  was  the  one 
great  sanctuary  of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  the  tem- 
ple at  Jerusalem,  have  simply  taken  advantage  of 
the  religious  reformation  for  their  own  purposes 
of  selfish  aggrandisement.  "  From  the  youngest 
to  the  oldest  of  them,  they  all  ply  the  trade  of 
greed;  and  from  prophet  to  priest,  they  all  prac- 
tise lying.  And  they  have  repaired  the  ruin  of 
(the  daughter)  of  my  people  in  light  fashion, 
saying,  It  is  well,  it  is  well!  though  it  be  not 
well  "  (vi.  13,  14).  The  doctrine  of  the  one 
legitimate  sanctuary,  taught  with  disinterested 
earnestness  by  the  disciples  of  Isaiah,  and  en- 
forced by  that  logic  of  events  which  had  demon-' 
strated  the  feebleness  of  the  local  holy  places  be- 
fore the  Assyrian  destroyers,  had  now  come  to 
be  recognised  as  a  convenient  buttress  of  the 
private  gains  of  the  Jerusalem  priesthood  and 
the  venal  prophets  who  supported  their  authority. 
The  strong  current  of  national  reform  had  been 
utilised  for  the  driving  of  their  private  ma- 
chinery; and  the  sole  outcome  of  the  self-deny- 
ing efforts  and  sufferings  of  the  past  appeared  to 
be  the  enrichment  of  these  grasping  and  unscru- 
pulous worldlings  who  sat,  like  an  incubus,  upon 
the  heart  of  the  national  church.  So  long  as 
money  flowed  steadily  into  their  coffers,  they 
were  eager  enough  to  reassure  the  doubting,  and 


Jeremiah  iv.  3-vi.  30.]    SCYTHIANS    AS    THE    SCOURGE    OF    GOD. 


43 


to  dispel  all  misgivings  by  their  deceitful  oracle 
that  all  was  well.  So  long  as  the  sacrifices, 
the  principal  source  of  the  priestly  revenue, 
abounded,  and  the  festivals  ran  their  yearly 
round,  they  affirmed  that  lahwch  was  satisfied, 
and  that  no  harm  could  befall  the  people  of  His 
care.  This  trading  in  things  Divine,  to  the  utter 
neglect  of  the  higher  obligations  of  the  moral 
law,  was  simply  appalling  to  the  sensitive  con- 
science of  the  true  prophet  of  that  degenerate 
age.  "  A  strange  and  a  startling  thing  it  is, 
that  is  come  to  pass  in  the  land.  The  prophets, 
they  have  prophesied  in  the  Lie,  and  the  priests, 
they  tyrannise  under  their  direction;  and  My 
people,  they  love  it  thus;  and  what  will  ye  do 
for  the  issue  thereof?  "  (v.  30,  31.).  For  such 
facts  must  have  an  issue;  and  the  present  moral 
and  spiritual  ruin  of  the  nation  points  with  cer- 
tainty to  impending  ruin  in  the  material  and  po- 
litical sphere.  The  two  things  go  together;  you 
cannot  have  a  decline  of  faith,  a  decay  of  true 
religion,  and  permanent  outward  prosperity;  that 
issue  is  incompatible  with  the  eternal  laws  which 
regulate  the  life  and  progress  of  humanity. 
One  sits  in  the  heavens,  over  all  things  from  the 
beginning,  to  whom  all  stated  worship  is  a  hid- 
eous oflfence  when  accompanied  by  hypocrisy  and 
impurity  and  fraud  and  violence  in  the  ordinary 
relations  of  life.  "  What  good  to  me  is  incense 
that  cometh  from  Sheba,  and  the  choice  calamus 
from  a  far  country?  your  burnt  ofiferings  "  (holo- 
causts) "  are  not  acceptable,  and  your  sacrifices 
are  not  sweet  unto  Me."  Instead  of  purchasing 
safety,  they  will  ensure  perdition:  "Therefore 
thus  hath  lahvah  said:  Lo,  I  am  about  to  lay  for 
this  people  stumblingblocks,  and  they  shdll 
stumble  upon  them,  fathers  and  sons  together, 
a  neighbour  and  his  friend;  and  they  shall 
perish  "   (vi.  20  sq.). 

In  the  early  days  of  reform,  indeed,  Jeremiah 
himself  appears  to  have  shared  in  the  sanguine 
views  associated  with  a  revival  of  suspended 
orthodoxy.  The  tidings  of  imminent  danger 
were  a  surprise  to  him,  as  to  the  zealous  worship- 
pers who  thronged  the  courts  of  the  temple.  So 
then,  after  all,  "  the  burning  anger  of  lahvah  was 
not  turned  away  "  by  the  outward  tokens  of  pen- 
itence, by  the  lavish  ^fts  of  devotion;  this  un- 
expected and  terrifying  rumour  was  a  call  for 
the  resumption  of  the  garb  of  mourning-  and  for 
the  renewal  of  those  public  fasts  which  had 
marked  the  initial  stages  of  reformation  (iv.  8). 
The  astonishment  and  the  disappointment  of  the 
man  assert  themselves  against  the  inspiration 
of  the  prophet,  when,  contemplating  the  help- 
less bewilderment  of  kings  and  princes,  and  the 
stupefaction  of  priests  and  prophets  in  face  of 
the  national  calamities,  he  breaks  out  into  re- 
monstrances with  God.  "  And  I  said,  Alas,  O 
Lord  lahvah!  of  a  truth,  Thou  hast  utterly  be- 
guiled this  people  and  Jerusalem,  saying,  It  shall 
be  well  with  you;  whereas  the  sword  will  reach 
to  the  life."  The  allusion  is  to  the  promises  con- 
tained in  the  Book  of  the  Law,  the  reading  of 
which  had  so  powerfully  conduced  to  the  move- 
ment for  reform.  That  book  had  been  the  text 
of  the  prophet-preachers,  who  were  most  active 
in  that  work;  and  the  influence  of  its  ideas  and 
language  upon  Jeremiah  himself  is  apparent  in 
all  his  early  discourses. 

The  prophet's  faith,  however,  was  too  deeply 
rooted  to  be  more  than  momentarily  shaken;  and 
it  soon  told  him  that  the  evil  tidings  were  evi- 
dence  not  of  unfaithfulness   or   caprice   in   lah- 


vah, but  of  the  hypocrisy  and  corruption  of  Is- 
rael. With  this  conviction  upon  him  he  implores 
the  populace  of  the  capital  to  substitute  an  in- 
ward and  real  for  an  outward  and  delusive  puri- 
fication. "  Break  up  the  fallows!  "  Do  not 
dream  that  any  adequate  reformation  can  be 
superinduced  upon  the  mere  surface  of  life: 
"  Sow  not  among  thorns!  "  Do  not  for  one 
moment  believe  that  the  word  of  God  can  take 
root  and  bear  fruit  in  the  hard  soil  of  a  heart 
that  desires  only  to  be  secured  in  the  possession 
of  present  enjoyments,  in  immunity  for  self- 
indulgence,  covetousness,  and  oppression  of  the 
poor.  "  Wash  thine  heart  from  wickedness,  O 
Jerusalem!  that  thou  mayst  be  saved.  How 
long  shall  the  schemings  of  thy  folly  lodge 
within  thee?  For  hark!  one  declareth  from  Dan, 
and  proclaimeth  folly  from  the  hills  of  Ephraim  " 
(iv.  14  sq.).  The  "  folly  "  {'awen)  is  the  foolish 
hankering  after  the  gods  which  are  nothing  in 
the  world  but  a  reflection  of  the  diseased  fancy 
of  their  worshippers;  for  it  is  always  true  that 
man  makes  his  god  in  his  own  image,  when  he 
does  make  him,  and  does  not  receive  the  knowl- 
edge of  him  by  revelation.  It  was  a  folly  in- 
veterate and,  as  it  would  seem,  hereditary  in  Is- 
rael, going  back  to  the  times  of  the  Judges,  and 
recalling  the  story  of  Micah  the  Ephraimite  and 
the  Danites  who  stole  his  images.  That  ancient 
sin  still  cried  to  heaven  for  vengeance;  for  the 
apostatising  tendency,  which  it  exemplified,  was 
still  active  in  the  heart  of  Israel*  The  nation 
had  "  rebelled  against "  the  Lord,  for  it  was 
foolish  and  had  never  really  known  Him;  the 
people  were  silly  children,  and  lacked  insight; 
skilled  only  in  doing  wrong,  and  ignorant  of  the 
way  to  do  right  (iv.  22).  Like  the  things  they 
worshipped,  they  had  eyes,  but  saw  not;  they  had 
ears,  but  heard  not.  Enslaved  to  the  empty  ter- 
rors of  their  own  imaginations,  they,  who  cow- 
ered before  dumb  idols,  stood  untrembling  in  the 
awful  presence  of  Him  whose  laws  restrained  the 
ocean  within  due  limits,  and  upon  whose  sover- 
eign will  the  fall  of  the  rain  and  increase  of  the 
field  depended  (v.  21-24).  The  popular  blind- 
ness to  the  claims  of  the  true  religion,  to  the 
inalienable  rights  of  the  God  of  Israel,  involved 
a  corresponding  and  ever-increasing  blindness 
to  the  claims  of  universal  morality,  to  the  rights 
of  man.  Competent  observers  have  often  called 
attention  to  the  remarkable  influence  exercised 
by  the  lower  forms  of  heathenism  in  blunting 
the  moral  sense;  and  this  influence  was  fully  illus- 
trated in  the  case  of  Jeremiah's  contemporaries. 
So  complete,  so  universal  was  the  national  de- 
cline that  it  seemed  impossible  to  find  one  good 
man  within  the  bounds  of  the  capital.  Every 
aim  in  life  found  illustration  in  those  gay, 
crowded  streets,  in  the  bazaars,  in  the  palaces,  in 
the  places  by  the  gate  where  law  was  adminis- 
tered,..except  the  aim  of  just  and  righteous  and 
merciful  dealing  with  one's  neighbour.  God  was 
ignored  or  misconceived  of.  and  therefore  man 
was  wronged  and  oppressed.  Perjury,  even  in 
the  Name  of  the  God  of  Israel,  whose  eyes  re- 
gard faithfulness  and  sincerity,  and  whose  favour 
is  not  to  be  won  by  professions  and  presents;  a 
self-hardening  against  both  Divine  chastisement 
and  prophetic  admonition;  a  fatal  inclination  to 

*The  second  'awen, however,  probably  means  "trouble," 
"calamity,"  as  in  Hab.  iii.  7.  The  Sept.  renders irdi'oc,  and 
this  agrees  with  the  mention  of  Dan  in  viii.  16.  As  Ewald 
puts  it,  "from  the  north  of  Palestine  the  misery  that  is 
comingfrom  the  further  north  is  already  being  proclaimed 
to  all  the  nations  in  the  south  (vi.  18)." 


44 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


the  seductions  of  Canaanite  worship  and  the 
violations  of  the  moral  law,  which  that  worship 
permitted  and  even  encouraged  as  pleasing  to  the 
gods;  these  vices  characterised  the  entire  popu- 
lation of  Jerusalem  in  that  dark  period.  "  Run 
ye  to  and  fro  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  and  see 
now,  and  know,  and  seek  ye  in  the  broad  places 
thereof,  if  ye  can  find  a  man,  if  indeed  there  be 
one  that  doeth  justice, that  seeketh  sincerity; that 
I  may  pardon  her.  And  if  they  say.  By  the  life 
of  lahvah!  Even  so  they  swear  falsely.  lahvah, 
are  not  thine  eyes  toward  sincerity?  Thou 
smotest  them,  and  they  trembled  not;  Thou  con- 
sumedst  them,  they  refused  to  receive  instruc- 
tion; they  made  their  faces  harder  than  a  rock, 
they  refused  to  repent.  And  for  me,  I  said " 
(methought),  "  These  are  but  poor  folk;  they 
behave  foolishly,  because  they  know  not  the  way 
of  lahvah,  the  justice"  (ver.  i)  "of  their  God: 
let  me  betake  myself  to  the  great,  and  speak  with 
them;  for  they  at  least  know  the  way  of  lahvah, 
the  justice  of  their  God:  but  these  with  one  con- 
sent had  broken  the  yoke,  had  burst  the  bonds  in 
sunder"  (v.  1-5). 

Then,  as  now,  the  debasement  of  the  standard 
of  life  among  the  ruling  classes  was  a  far  more 
threatening  symptom  of  danger  to  the  common- 
wealth than  laxity  of  principle  among  the  masses, 
who  had  never  enjoyed  the  higher  knowledge 
and  more  thorough  training  which  wealth  and 
rank,  as  a  matter  of  course,  confer.  If  the  crew 
turn  drunken  and  mutinous,  the  ship  is  in  un- 
questionable peril;  but  if  they  who  have  the  guid- 
ance of  the  vessel  in  their  hands  follow  the  vices 
of  those  whom  they  should  command  and  con- 
trol, wreck  and  ruin  are  assured. 

The  profligacy  allowed  by  heathenism,  against 
which  the  prophets  cried  in  vain,  is  forcibly  de- 
picted in  the  words:  "Why  should  I  pardon 
thee?  Thy  sons  have  forsaken  Me,  and  have 
sworn  by  them  that  are  no  gods:  though  I  had 
bound  them  "  (to  Me)  "  by  oath,*  they  com- 
mitted "  (spiritual)  "  adultery,  and  into  the  house 
of  the  Fornicatress  "  (the  idol's  temple,  where 
the  harlot  priestess  sat  for  hire)  "  they  would 
flock.  Stallions  roaming  at  large  were  they; 
neighing  each  to  his  neighbour's  wife.  Shall  I 
not  punish  such  ofifences,  saith  lahvah;  and  shall 
not  My  soul  avenge  herself  on  such  a  nation  as 
this? "  The  cynical  contempt  of  justice,  the 
fraud  and  violence  of  those  who  were  in  haste  to 
become  rich,  are  set  forth  in  the  following: 
"Among  My  people  are  found  godless  men;  one 
watcheth,  as  birdcatchers  lurk;  they  have  set  the 
trap,  they  catch  men.  Like  a  cage  filled  with 
birds,  so  are  their  houses  filled  with  fraud:  there- 
fore they  are  become  great,  and  have  amassed 
wealth.  They  are  become  fat,  they  are  sleek; 
also  they  pass  over  "  Isa.  xi.  27)  cases  (Ex.  xxii. 
9,  xxiv.  14;  cf.  also  I  Sam.  x.  3)  "  of  wickedness 
— neglect  to  judge  heinous  crimes; the  cause  they 
judge  not,  the  cause  of  the  fatherless,  to  make 
it  succeed;  and  the  right  of  the  needy  they  vindi- 
cate not  "    (v.  26-28). 

"She  is  the  city  doomed  to  be  punished!  she 
is  all  oppression  within.  As  a  spring  poureth 
forth  its  waters,  so  she  poureth  forth  her  wicked- 
ness; violence  and  oppression  resound  in  her; 
before  Me  continually  is  sickness  and  wounds  " 
(vi.  6,  7).  There  would  seem  to  be  no  hope  for 
such  a  people  and  such  a  city.  The  prophet,  in- 
deed,  cannot  forget  the  claims  of  kindred,   the 

*  With  a  different  point :  "  When  I  had  fed  them  to  the 
full  '  {cf.  Hos.  xiii.  6). 


thousand  ties  of  blood  and  feeling  that  bind  him 
to  this  perverse  and  sinful  nation.  Thrice,  even 
in  this  dark  forecast  of  destruction,  he  mitigates 
severity  with  the  promise,  "  yet  will  I  not  make 
a  full  end."  The  door  is  still  left  open,  on  the 
chance  that  some  at  least  may  be  won  to  peni- 
tence. But  the  chance  was  small.  The  difficulty 
was,  and  the  prophet's  yearning  tenderness  to- 
wards his  people  could  not  blind  him  to  the  fact, 
that  all  the  lessons  of  God's  providence  were 
lost  upon  this  reprobate  race:  "  They  have  belied 
the  I^ord,  and  said,  it  is  not  He;  neither  shall 
evil  come  upon  us;  neither  shall  we  see  sword 
and  famine."  The  prophets,  they  insisted,  were 
wrong  both  in  the  significance  which  they  at- 
tributed to  occasional  calamities,  and  in  the  dis- 
asters which  they  announced  as  imminent:  "  The 
prophets  will  become  wind,  and  the  Word  of 
God  is  not  in  them;  so  will  it  turn  out  with 
them."  It  was,  therefore,  wholly  futile  to  appeal 
to  their  better  judgment  against  themselves: 
"  Thus  said  lahvah,  Stop  on  the  ways,  and  con- 
sider, and  ask  after  the  eternal  paths,  where  is 
the  good  way,  and  walk  therein,  and  find  rest 
for  your  soul:  and  they  said.  We  will  not  walk 
therein.  And  I  will  set  over  you  watchmen " 
(the  prophets) ;  "  hearken  ye  to  the  call  of  the 
trumpet!  "  (the  warning  note  of  prophecy)  "  and 
they  said  We  will  not  hearken."  For  such  wilful 
hardness  and  impenitence,  disdaining  correction 
and  despising  reproof,  God  appeals  to  the 
heathen  themselves,  and  to  the  dumb  earth,  to 
attest  the  justice  of  His  sentence  of  destruction 
against  this  people:  "Therefore,  hear,  O  ye  na- 
tions, and  know,  and  testify  what  is  among 
them!  Hear,  O  earth!  Lo,  I  am  about  to  bring 
evil  upon  this  people,  the  fruit  of  their  own  de- 
visings;  for  unto  My  words  they  have  not  heark- 
ened, and  as  for  Mine  instruction,  they  have  re- 
jected it."  Their  doom  was  inevitable,  for  it  was 
the  natural  and  necessary  consequence  of  their 
own  doings:  "Thine  own  way  and  thine  Own 
deeds  have  brought  about  these  evils  for  thee; 
this  is  thine  own  evil;  verily,  it  is  bitter,  verily, 
it  reacheth  unto  thine  heart."  The  discourse 
ends  with  a  despairing  glance  at  the  moral  rep- 
robation of  Israel.  "  An  assayer  did  I  make 
thee  among  My  people,  a  refiner "  (reading 
mecdref,  Mai.  iii.  2,  3),  "that  thou  mightest 
know  and  assay  their  kind "  (lit.  way).  Jere- 
miah's call  had  been  to  "  sit  as  a  refiner  and 
purifier  of  silver"  in  the  name  of  his  God:  in 
other  words,  to  separate  the  good  elements  from 
the  bad  in  Israel,  and  to  gather  around  himself 
the  nucleus  of  a  people  "  prepared  for  lahvah." 
But  his  work  had  been  vain.  In  vain  had  the 
prophetic  fire  burnt  within  him;  in  vain  had  the 
vehemency  of  the  spirit  fanned  the  flame;  the 
Divine  word — that  solvent  of  hearts — had  been 
expended  in  vain;  no  good  metal  could  come 
of  an  ore  so  utterly  base.  "  They  are  all  the 
worst"  (i  Kings  xx.  43)  "of  rebels"  (or,  "de- 
serters to  the  rebels"), "going  aboutwith  slander; 
they  are  brass  and  iron;  they  all  deal  corruptly.* 
The  bellows  blow;  the  lead  "  (used  for  fining 
the  ore)  "is  consumed  by  the  fire;  in  vain  do 
they  go  on  refining  "  (or,  "  does  the  refiner  re- 
fine"*); "and  the  wicked  are  not  separated.    Ref- 

*T'h\s,teTTa—mashchithtfn—is  certainly  not  the  plur.  of 
the  mashchith,  "pitfall"  or  "trap,"  of  v.  26.  The  mean- 
ing is  the  same  as  in  Isa.  i.  4.  The  original  force  of  the 
root  shac/iath  is  seen  in  the  Assyrian  skachdtti^  "to  fall 
down." 

tThe  form— f5;-(5/"— is  like  bachoti,  "assayer,"  in  ver.  27 


Jeremiah  vii.-x,  xxvi.]        POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


45 


use  silver  are   they  called,   for   lahvah   hath  re- 
fused them.'' 


CHAPTER   V. 

POPULAR  AND   TRUE  RELIGION. 

Jeremiah  vii.-x.,  xxvi. 

In  the  four  chapters  which  we  are  now  to  con- 
sider we  have  what  is  plainly  a  finished  whole. 
The  only  possible  exception  (x.  1-16)  shall  be 
considered  in  its  place.  The  historical  occasion 
of  the  introductory  prophecy  (vii.  1-15),  and  the 
immediate  effect  of  its  delivery,  are  recorded  at 
length  in  the  twenty-sixth  chapter  of  the  book, 
so  that  in  this  instance  we  are  happily  not  left 
to  the  uncertainties  of  conjecture.  We  are  there 
told  that  it  was  '"  in  the  beginnins:  of  the  reign 
of  Jehoiakim  son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,"  that 
Jeremiah  received  the  command  to  stand  in  the 
fore-court  of  lahvah's  house,  and  to  declare  "  to 
all  the  cities  of  Judah  that  were  come  to  wor- 
ship "  there,  that  unless  they  repented  and  gave 
ear  to  lahvah's  servants  the  prophets.  He  would 
make  the  temple  like  Shiloh,  and  Jerusalem  itself 
a  curse  to  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  The 
substance  of  the  oracle  is  there  given  in  briefer 
form  than  here,  as  was  natural,  where  the  writer's 
object  was  principally  to  relate  the  issue  of  it  as 
it  affected  himself.  In  neither  case  is  it  proba- 
ble that  we  have  a  verbatim  report  of  what  was 
actually  said,  though  the  leading  thoughts  of 
his  address  are,  no  doubt,  faithfully  recorded  by 
the  prophet  in  the  more  elaborate  composition 
(chap.  vii.).  Trifling  variations  between  the  two 
accounts  must  not,  therefore,  be  pressed. 

Internal  evidence  suggests  that  this  oracle  was 
delivered  at  a  time  of  grave  public  anxiety,  such 
as  marked  the  troubled  period  after  the  death 
of  Josiah,  and  the  early  years  of  Jehoiakim. 
"  All  Judah,"  or  "  all  the  cities  of  Judah  " 
(xxvi.  2),  that  is  to  say,  the  j^eople  of  the  coun- 
try towns  as  well  as  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem, 
were  crowding  into  the  temple  to  supplicate 
their  God  (vii.  2).  This  indicates  an  extraordi- 
nary occasion,  a  national  emergency  affecting  all 
alike.  Probably  a  public  fast  and  humiliation 
had  been  ordered  by  the  authorities,  on  the  re- 
ception of  some  threatening  news  of  invasion. 
"  The  opening  paragraphs  of  the  address  are 
marked  by  a  tone  of  controlled  earnestness,  by 
an  unadorned  plainness  of  statement,  without 
passion,  without  exclamation,  apostrophe,  or 
rhetorical  device  of  any  kind;  which  betokens 
the  presence  of  a  danger  which  spoke  too  audi- 
bly to  the  general  ear  to  require  artificial  height- 
ening in  the  statement  of  it.  The  position  of 
affairs  spoke  for  itself"  (Hitzig).  The  very 
words  with  which  the  prophet  opens  his  message, 
"  Thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel, 
Make  good  your  ways  and  your  doings,  that  I 
may  cause  you  to  dwell  (permanently)  in  this 
place!  "  (ver.  3,  cf.  ver.  7)  prove  that  the  anxiety 
which  agitated  the  popular  heart  and  drove  it 
to  seek  consolation  in  religious  observances,  was 
an  anxiety  about  their  political  stability,  about 
the  permanence  of  their  possession  of  the  fair 
land  of  promise.  The  use  of  the  expression 
"  lahvah  Sabaoth "  "  lahvah  (the  God)  of 
Hosts  "  is  also  significant,  as  indicating  that  war 
was  what  the  nation  feared;  while  the  prophet 
reminds  them  thus  that  all  earthly  powers,  even 


the  armies  of  heathen  invaders,  are  controlled 
and  directed  by  the  God  of  Israel  for  His  own 
sovereign  purposes.  A  particular  crisis  is  fur- 
ther suggested  by  the  warning:  "  Trust  ye  not 
to  the  lying  words,  '  The  Temple  of  lahvah,  the 
Temple  of  lahvah,  the  Temple  of  lahvah,  is 
this!'"  The  fanatical  confidence  in  the  inviola- 
bility of  the  temple,  which  Jeremiah  thus  depre- 
cates, implies  a  time  of  public  danger.  A  hun- 
dred years  before  this  time  the  temple  and  the 
city  had  really  come  through  a  period  of  the 
gravest  peril,  justifying  in  the  most  palpable  and 
unexpected  manner  the  assurances  of  the 
prophet  Isaiah.  This  was  remembered  now, 
when  another  crisis  seemed  imminent,  another 
trial  of  strength  between  the  God  of  Israel  and 
the  gods  of  the  heathen.  Only  part  of  the 
prophetic  teachings  of  Isaiah  had  rooted  itself 
in  the  popular  mind — the  part  most  agreeable 
to  it.  The  sacrosanct  inviolability  of  the  temple, 
and  of  Jerusalem  for  its  sake,  was  an  idea  readily 
appropriated  and  eagerly  cherished.  It  was  for- 
gotten that  all  depended  on  the  will  and  purposes 
of  lahvah  himself;  that  the  heathen  might  be 
the  instruments  with  which  He  executed  his  de- 
signs, and  that  an  invasion  of  Judah  might 
mean,  not  an  approaching  trial  of  strength  be- 
tween His  omnipotence  and  the  impotency  of 
the  false  gods,  but  the  judicial  outpouring  of  His 
righteous  wrath  upon  His  awn  rebellious  people. 
Jeremiah,  therefore,  affirms  that  the  popular 
confidence  is  ill-founded;  that  his  countrymen 
are  lulled  in  a  false  security;  and  he  enforces  his 
point,  by  a  plain  exposure  of  the  flagrant  of- 
fences which  render  their  worship  a  mockery  of 
God. 

Again,  it  may  be  supposed  that  the  startling 
word,  "  Add  your  burnt-offerings  to  your " 
(ordinary)  "  offerings,  and  eat  the  flesh  (of 
them)  "  (vii.  21),  implies  a  time  of  unusual  activ- 
ity in  the  matter <of  honouring  the  God  of  Israel 
with  the  more  costly  offerings  of  which  the  wor- 
shippers did  not  partake,  but  which  were  wholly 
consumed  on  the  altar;  which  fact  also  might 
point  to  a  season  of  special  danger. 

And,  lastly,  the  references  to  taking  refuge  be- 
hind the  walls  of  "  defenced  cities  "  (viii.  14; 
X.  17),  as  we  know  that  the  Rechabites  and 
doubtless  most  of  the  rural  populace  took  refuge 
in  Jerusalem  on  the  approach  of  the  third  and 
last  Chaldean  expedition,  seem  to  prove  that  the 
occasion  of  the  prophecy  was  the  first  Chaldean 
invasion,  which  ended  in  the  submission  of  Je- 
hoiakim to  the  yoke  of  Babylon  (2  Kings 
xxiv.  i).  Already  the  northern  frontier  had  ex- 
perienced the  destructive  onslaught  of  the  in- 
vaders, and  rumour  announced  that  they  might 
soon  be  expected  to  arrive  before  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem    (viii.    16,    17). 

The  only  other  historical  occasion  which  can 
be  suggested  with  any  plausibility  is  the  Scythian 
invasion  of  Syria- Palestine,  to  which  the  previ- 
ous discourse  was  assigned.  This  would  fix  the 
date  of  the  prophecy  at  some  point  between  the 
thirteenth  and  the  eighteenth  years  of  Josiah 
(b.  c.  629-624).  But  the  arguments  for  this  view 
do  not  seem  to  be  very  strong  in  themselves, 
and  they  certainly  do  not  explain  the  essential 
identity  of  the  oracle  summarised  in  chap.  xxvi. 
1-6,  with  that  of  vii.  1-15.  The  "undisguised 
references  to  the  prevalence  of  idolatry  in  Jerusa- 
lem itself  (vii.  17;  cf.  30,  31),  and  the  unwilling- 
ness of  the  people  to  listen  to  the  prophet's 
teaching  (vii.  27),"  are  quite  as  well  accounted 


46 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


for  by  supposing  a  religious  or  rather  an  irreli- 
gious reaction  under  Jehoiakim — which  is  every 
way  probable  considering  the  bad  character  of 
that  king  (2  Kings  xxiii.  37;  Jer.  xxii.  13  sqq.), 
and  the  serious  blow  inflicted  upon  the  reform- 
ing party  by  the  death  of  Josiah;  as  by  assum- 
ing that  the  prophecy  belongs  to  the  years  before 
the  extirpation  of  idolatry  in  the  eighteenth  year 
of  the  latter  sovereign. 

And  now  let  us  take  a  rapid  glance  at  the 
salient  points  of  this  remarkable  utterance.  The 
people  are  standing  in  the  outer  court,  with  their 
faces  turned  toward  the  court  of  the  priests,  in 
which  stood  the  holy  house  itself  (Ps.  v.  7).  The 
prophetic  speaker  stands  facing  them,  "  in  the 
gate  of  the  Lord's  house,"  the  entry  of  the  upper 
or  inner  court,  the  place  whence  Baruch  was 
afterwards  to  read  another  of  his  oracles  to  the 
people  (xxxvi.  10).  Standing  here,  as  it  were  be- 
tween his  audience  and  the  throne  of  lahvah, 
Jeremiah  acts  as  visible  mediator  between  them 
and  their  God.  His  message  to  the  worshippers 
who  throng  the  courts  of  lahvah's  sanctuary  is 
not  one  of  approval.  He  does  not  congratulate 
them  upon  their  manifest  devotion,  upon  the 
munificence  of  their  offerings,  upon  their  un- 
grudging and  unstinted  readiness  to  meet  an 
unceasing  drain  upon  their  means.  His  mes- 
sage is  a  surprise,  a  shock  to  their  self-satisfac- 
tion, an  alarm  to  their  slumbering  consciences, 
a  menace  of  wrath  and  destruction  upon  them 
and  their  holy  place.  His  very  first  word  is  cal- 
culated to  startle  their  self-righteousness,  their 
misplaced  faith  in  the  merit  of  their  worship  and 
service.  "  Amend  your  ways  and  your  doings!  " 
Where  was  the  need  of  amendment?  they  might 
ask.  Were  they  not  at  that  moment  engaged  in 
a  function  most  grateful  to  lahvah?  Were  they 
not  keeping  the  law  of  the  sacrifices,  and  were 
not  the  Levitical  priesthood  ministering  in  their 
order,  and  receiving  their  due  share  of  the  of- 
ferings which  poured  into  the  temple  day  by 
day?  Was  not  all  this  honour  enough  to  sat- 
isfy the  most  exacting  of  deities?  Perhaps  it 
was,  had  the  deity  in  question  been  merely  as 
one  of  the  gods  of  Canaan.  So  much  lip- 
service,  so  many  sacrifices  and  festivals,  so  much 
joyous  revelling  in  the  sanctuary,  might  be  sup- 
posed to  have  sufficiently  appeased  one  of  the 
common  Baals,  those  half-womanish  phantoms 
of  deity  whose  delight  was  imagined  to  be  in 
feasting  and  debauchery.  Nay,  so  much  zeal 
might  have  propitiated  the  savage  heart  of  a 
Molech.  But  the  God  of  Israel  was  not  as  these, 
nor  one  of  these;  though  His  ancient  people  were 
too  apt  to  conceive  thus  of  Him,  and  certain 
modern  critics  have  unconsciously  followed  in 
their  wake. 

Let  us  see  what  it  was  that  called  so  loudly 
for  amendment,  and  then  we  may  become  more 
fully  aware  of  the  gulf  that  divided  the  God  of 
Israel  from  the  idols  of  Canaan,  and  His  service 
from  all  other  service.  It  is  important  to  keep 
this  radical  difference  steadily  before  our  minds, 
and  to  deepen  the  impression  of  it,  in  days 
when  the  effort  is  made  by  every  means  to  con- 
fuse lahvah  with  the  gods  of  heathendom,  and 
to  rank  the  religion  of  Israel  with  the  lower  sur- 
rounding systems. 

Jeremiah  accuses  his  countrymen  of  flagrant 
transgression  of  the  universal  laws  of  morality. 
Theft,  murder,  adultery,  perjury,  fraud,  and 
covetousness,  slander  and  lying  and  treachery 
(vii.  9,  ix.  3-8),  are  charged  upon  these  zealous 


worshippers  by  a  man  who  lived  amongst  them, 
and  knew  them  well,  and  could  be  contradicted 
at  once  if  his  charges  were  false. 

He  tells  them  plainly  that,  in  virtue  of  their 
frequenting  it,  the  temple  is  become  a  den  of 
robbers. 

And  this  trampling  upon  the  common  rights  of 
man  has  its  counterpart  and  its  climax  in  treason 
against  God,  in  "  burning  incense  to  the  Baal, 
and  walking  after  other  gods  whom  they  know 
not  "  (vii.  9) ;  in  an  open  and  shameless  attempt 
to  combine  the  worship  of  the  God  who  had  from 
the  outset  revealed  Himself  to  their  prophets  as 
a  '"jealous,"  1.  c,  an  exclusive  God,  with  the 
worship  of  shadows  who  had  not  revealed  them- 
selves at  all,  and  could  not  be  "  known,"  be- 
cause devoid  of  all  character  and  real  existence. 
They  thus  ignored  the  ancient  covenant  which 
had  constituted  them  a  nation  (vii.  2;^). 

In  the  cities  of  Judah,  in  the  streets  of  the 
very  capital,  the  cultus  of  Ashtoreth,  the  Queen 
of  Heaven,  the  voluptuous  Canaanite  goddess  of 
love  and  dalliance,  was  busily  practised  by  whole 
families  together,  in  deadly  provocation  of  the 
God  of  Israel.  The  first  and  great  command- 
ment said.  Thou  shalt  love  lahvah  thy  God,  and 
Him  only  shalt  thou  serve.  And  they  loved  and 
served  and  followed  and  sought  after  and  wor- 
shipped the  sun  and  the  moon  and  the  host  of 
heaven,  the  objects  adored  by  the  nation  that  was 
so  soon  to  enslave  them  (viii.  2).  Not  only  did 
a  worldly,  covetous,  and  sensual  priesthood  con- 
nive in  the  restoration  of  the  old  superstitions 
which  associated  other  gods  with  lahvah,  and  set 
up  idol  symbols  and  altars  within  the  precincts 
of  His  temple,  as  Manasseh  had  done  (2  Kings 
xxi.  4-5) ;  they  went  further  than  this  in  their 
"  syncretism,"  or  rather  in  their  perversity,  their 
spiritual  blindness,  their  wilful  misconception  of 
the  God  revealed  to  their  fathers.  They  actually 
confounded  Him — the  Lord  "  who  exercised  lov- 
ingkindness,  justice,  and  righteousness,  and  de- 
lighted in  "  the  exhibition  of  these  qualities  by 
His  worshippers  Vix.  24) — with  the  dark  and 
cruel  sun-god  of  the  Ammonites.  They  "  rebuilt 
the  high  places  of  the  Tophet,  in  the  valley  of 
ben  Hinnom,"  on  the  north  side  of  Jerusalem, 
"  to  burn  their  sons  and  their  daughters  in  the 
fire;"  if  by  means  so  revolting  to  natural  affec- 
tion they  might  win  back  the  favour  of  heaven 
— means  which  lahvah  "  commanded  not,  neither 
came  they  into  His  mind  "  (vii.  31).  Such  fearful 
and  desperate  expedients  were  doubtless  first 
suggested  by  the  false  prophets  and  priests  in  the 
times  of  national  adversity  under  king  Ma- 
nasseh. They  harmonised  only  too  well  with  the 
despair  of  a  people  who  saw  in  a  long  succession 
of  political  disasters  the  token  of  lahvah's  un- 
forgiving wrath.  That  these  dreadful  rites  were 
not  a  "  survival  "  in  Israel,  seems  to  follow  from 
the  horror  which  they  excited  in  the  allied  armies 
of  the  two  kingdoms,  when  the  king  of  Moab, 
in  the  extremity  of  the  siege,  offered  his  eldest 
son  as  a  burnt-offering  on  the  wall  of  his  capital 
before  the  eyes  of  the  besiegers.  So  appalled 
were  the  Israelite  forces  by  this  spectacle  of  a 
father's  despair,  that  they  at  once  raised  the 
blockade,  and  retreated  homeward  (2  Kings  iii. 
27).  It  is  probable,  then,  that  the  darker  and 
bloodier  aspects  of  heathen  worship  were  of  only 
recent  appearance  among  the  Hebrews,  and  that 
the  rites  of  Molech  had  not  been  at  all  frequent 
or  familiar,  until  the  long  and  harassing  conflict 
with  Assyria  broke  the  national   spirit  and  in- 


Jeremiah  vii.-x.,  xxvi.]        POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


47 


dined  the  people,  in  their  trouble,  to  welcome 
the  suggestion  that  costlier  sacrifices  were  de- 
manded, if  lahvah  was  to  be  propitiated  and  His 
wrath  appeased.  Such  things  were  not  done, 
apparently,  in  Jeremiah's  time;  he  mentions  them 
as  the  crown  of  the  nation's  past  ofifences;  as 
sins  that  still  cried  to  heaven  for  vengeance,  and 
would  surely  entail  it,  because  the  same  spirit  of 
idolatry  which  had  culminated  in  these  excesses, 
still  lived  and  was  active  in  the  popular  heart. 
It  is  the  persistence  in  sins  of  the  same  character 
which  involves  our  drinking  to  the  dregs  the  cup 
of  punishment  for  the  guilty  past.  The  dark 
catalogue  of  forgotten  ofifences  witnesses  against 
us  before  the  Unseen  Judge,  and  is  only  oblit- 
erated by  the  tears  of  a  true  repentance,  and  by 
the  new  evidence  of  a  change  of  heart  and  life. 
Then,  as  in  some  palimpsest,  the  new  record 
covers  and  conceals  the  old;  and  it  is  only  if  we 
fatally  relapse,  that  the  erased  writing  of  our 
misdeeds  becomes  visible  again  before  the  eye  of 
Heaven.  Perhaps  also  the  prophet  mentions  these 
abominations  because  at  the  time  he  saw  around 
him  unequivocal  tendencies  to  the  renewal  of 
them.  Under  the  patronage,  or  with  the  con- 
nivance of  the  wicked  king  Jehoiakim,  the  re- 
actionary party  may  have  begun  to  set  up  again 
the  altars  thrown  down  by  Josiah,  while  their 
religious  leaders  advocated  both  by  speech  and 
writing  a  return  to  the  abolished  cultus.  At  all 
events,  this  supposition  gives  special  point  to  the 
emphatic  assertion  of  Jeremiah,  that  lahvah  had 
not  commanded  nor  even  thought  of  such  hid- 
eous rites.  The  reference  to  the  false  labours 
of  the  scribes  (chap.  viii.  8)  lends  colour  to  this 
view.  It  may  be  that  some  of  the  interpreters 
of  the  sacred  law  actually  anticipated  certain 
writers  of  our  own  day,  in  putting  this  terrible 
gloss  upon  the  precept,  "  The  firstborn  of  thy 
sons  shalt  thou  give  unto  Me  "  (Ex.  xxii.  29). 

The  people  of  Judah  were  misled,  but  they 
were  willingly  misled.  When  Jeremiah  declares 
to  them,  "  Lo,  ye  are  trusting,  for  your  part, 
upon  the  words  of  delusion,  so  that  ye  gain 
no  good!  "  (vii.  8)  it  is  perhaps  not  so  much  the 
smooth  prophecies  of  the  false  prophets  as  the 
fatal  attitude  of  the  popular  mind,  out  of  which 
those  misleading  oracles  grew,  and  which  in  turn 
they  aggravated,  that  the  speaker  deprecates. 
He  warns  them  that  an  absolute  trust  in  the 
"  praesentia  Numinis  "  is  delusive;  a  trust,  cher- 
ished like  theirs  independently  of  the  condition  of 
its  justification,  viz.,  a  walk  pleasing  to  God. 
"What!  will  ye  break  all  My  laws,  and  then 
come  and  stand  with  polluted  hands  before  Me  in 
this  house  (Isa.  i.  15),  which  is  named  after  Me 
'  lahvah's  House  '  (Isa.  iv.  i),  and  reassure  your- 
selves with  the  thought,  We  are  absolved  from 
the  consequences  of  all  these  abominations?" 
(vv.  9-10.  Lit.  "  We  are  saved,  rescued,  secured, 
with  regard  to  having  done  all  these  abomina- 
tions: "  cf.  ii.  35.  But  perhaps,  with  Ewald,  we 
should  point  the  Hebrew  term  dififerently,  and 
read,  "Save  us!"  "to  do  all  these  abomina- 
tions," as  if  that  were  the  express  object  of  their 
petition,  which  would  really  ensue,  if  their  prayer 
were  granted:  a  fine  irony.  For  the  form  of 
the  verb,  cf.  Ezek.  xiv.  14).  They  thought  their 
formal  devotions  were  more  than  enough  to 
counterbalance  any  breaches  of  the  decalogue; 
they  laid  that  flattering  unction  to  their  souls. 
They  could  make  it  up  with  God  for  setting 
His  moral  law  at  naught.  It  was  merely  a  ques- 
tion  of  compensation.     They   did   not   see   that 


the  moral  law  is  as  immutable  as  laws  physical; 
and  that  the  consequences  of  violating  or  keep- 
ing it  are  as  inseparable  from  it  as  pain  from 
a  blow,  or  death  from  poison.  They  did  not  see 
that  the  moral  law  is  simply  the  law  of  man's 
health  and  wealth,  and  that  the  transgression  of 
it  is  sorrow  and  sufifering  and  death. 

"  If  men  like  you,"  argues  the  prophet,  "  dare 
to  tread  these  courts,  it  must  be  because  you  be- 
lieve it  a  proper  thing  to  do.  But  that  belief 
implies  that  you  hold  the  temple  to  be  something 
other  than  what  is  really  is;  that  you  see  no  in- 
congruity in  making  the  House  of  lahvah  a 
meeting-place  of  murderers  ("  spelunca  latro- 
num:  "  Matt.  xxi.  13).  That  you  have  yourselves 
made  it,  in  the  full  view  of  lahvah,  whose  seeing 
does  not  rest  there,  but  involves  results  such  as 
the  present  crisis  of  public  affairs;  the  national 
danger  is  proof  that  He  has  seen  your  heinous 
misdoings."  For  lahvah's  seeing  brings  a  vindi- 
cation of  right,  and  vengeance  upon  evil  (2 
Chron.  xxiv.  22;  Ex.  iii.  7).  He  is  the  watchman 
that  never  slumbers  nor  sleeps;  the  eternal 
Judge,  Who  ever  upholds  the  law  of  righteous- 
ness in  the  afifairs  o'  man,  nor  suffers  the  slightest 
infringement  of  that  law  to  go  unpunished. 
And  this  unceasing  watchfulness,  this  perpetual 
dispensation  of  justice,  is  really  a  manifestation 
of  Divine  mercy;  for  the  purpose  of  it  is  to  save 
the  human  race  from  self-destruction,  and  to 
raise  it  ever  higher  in  the  scale  of  true  well- 
being,  which  essentially  consists  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  obedience  to  His  laws. 

Jeremiah  gives  his  audience  further  ground  for 
conviction.  He  points  to  a  striking  instance  in 
which  conduct  like  theirs  had  involved  results 
such  as  his  warning  holds  before  them.  He  es- 
tablishes the  probability  of  chastisement  by  an 
historical  parallel.  He  ofifers  them,  so  to  speak, 
ocular  demonstration  of  his  doctrine.  "  I  also, 
lo,  I  have  seen,  saith  lahvah!  "  Your  eyes  are 
fixed  on  the  temple;  so  are  Mine,  but  in  a  dif- 
ferent way.  You  see  a  national  palladium;  / 
see  a  desecrated  sanctuary,  a  shrine  polluted  and 
profaned.  This  distinction  between  God's  view 
and  yours  is  certain:  "  for,  go  ye  now  to  My 
placj  which  was  at  Shiloh,  where  I  caused  My 
Name  to  abide  at  the  outset "  (of  your  settle- 
ment in  Canaan) ;  "  and  see  the  thing  that  I  have 
done  to  it,  because  of  the  wickedness  of  My 
people  Israel  "  (the  northern  kingdom).  There 
is  the  proof  that  lahvah  seeth  not  as  man  seeth; 
there,  in  that  dismantled  ruin,  in  that  historic 
sanctuary  of  the  more  powerful  kingdom  of 
Ephraim,  once  visited  by  thousands  of  wor- 
shippers like  Jerusalem  to-day,  now  deserted 
and  desolate,  a  monument  of  Divine  wrath. 

The  reference  is  not  to  the  tabernacle,  the  sa- 
cred Tent  of  the  Wanderings,  which  was  first  set 
up  at  Nob  (i  Sam.  xxi.  22)  and  then  removed  to 
Gibeon  (2  Chron.  i.  3),  but  obviously  to  a  build- 
ing more  or  less  like  the  temple,  though  less 
magnificent.  The  place  and  its  sanctuary  had 
doubtless  been  ruined  in  the  great  catastrophe, 
when  ';he  kingdom  of  Samaria  fell  before  the 
power   of  Assyria    (721    B.    c). 

In  the  following  words  (vv.  13-iS)  the  example 
is  applied.  "  And  now  " — stating  the  conclusion 
— "  because  of  your  having  done  all  these  deeds  " 
("  saith  lahvah,"  LXX.-  omits),  "  and  because  I 
spoke  unto  you "  ("  early  and  late,"  LXX. 
omits),  "  and  ye  hearkened  not,  and  I  called  you 
and  ye  answered  not "  (Prov.  i.  24) :  "  I  will  do 
unto  the  hcrvr*  upon  which  My  Name  is  called, 


48 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


wherein  ye  are  trusting,  and  unto  the  place  which 
I  gave  to  you  and  to  your  fathers — as  I  did  unto 
Shiloh." 

Some  might  think  that  if  the  city  fell,  the  holy 
house  would  escape,  as  was  thought  by  many 
like-minded  fanatics  when  Jerusalem  was  be- 
leaguered by  the  Roman  armies  seven  centuries 
later:  but  Jeremiah  declares  that  the  blow  will 
fall  upon  both  alike;  and  to  give  greater  force  to 
his  words,  he  makes  the  judgment  begin  at  the 
house  of  God.  (The  Hebrew  reader  will  note 
the  dramatic  efTect  of  the  disposition  of  the  ac- 
cents. The  principal  pause  is  placed  upon  the 
word  "  fathers,"  and  the  reader  is  to  halt  in  mo- 
mentary suspense  upon  that  word,  before  he  ut- 
ters the  awful  three  which  close  the  verse:  "as 
I — did  to — Shiloh."  The  Massorets  were  mas- 
ters of  this  kind  of  emphasis.) 

"  And  I  will  cast  you  away  from  My  Presence, 
as  I  cast"  ("all:"  LXX.  omits*)  "your  kins- 
folk, all  the  posterity  of  Ephraim  "  (2  Kings 
xvii.  20).  Away  from  My  Presence:  far  beyond 
the  bounds  of  that  holy  land  where  I  have  re- 
vealed Myself  to  priests  and  prophets,  and  where 
My  sanctuary  stands;  into  a  land  where  heathen- 
ism reigns,  and  the  knowledge  of  God  is  not; 
into  the  dark  places  of  the  earth,  that  lie  under 
the  blighting  shadow  of  superstition,  and  are  en- 
veloped in  the  moral  midnight  of  idolatry. 
"  Projiciam  vos  a  facie  mea."  The  knowledge 
and  lov«  of  God — heart  and  mind  ruled  by  the 
sense  of  purity  and  tenderness  and  truth  and 
right  united  in  an  Ineffable  Person,  and  en- 
throned upon  the  summit  of  the  universe — these 
are  light  and  life  for  man;  where  these  are,  there 
is  His  Presence.  They  who  are  so  endowed  be- 
hold the  face  of  God,  in  Whom  is  no  darkness  at 
all.  Where  these  spiritual  endowments  are  non- 
existent; where  mere  power,  or  superhuman 
force,  is  the  highest  thought  of  God  to  which 
man  has  attained;  where  there  is  no  clear  sense 
of  the  essential  holiness  and  love  of  the  Divine 
Nature;  there  the  world  of  man  lies  in  darkness 
that  may  be  felt;  there  bloody  rites  prevail;  there 
harsh  oppression  and  shameless  vices  reign:  for 
the  dark  places  of  the  earth  are  full  of  the  habi- 
tations of  cruelty. 

"And  thou,  pray  thou  not  for  this  people" 
(xviii.  20),  "  and  lift  not  up  for  them  outcry  nor 
prayer,  and  urge  not  Me,  for  I  hear  thee  not. 
Seest  thou  not  what  they  do  in  the  cities  of  Judah 
and  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem?  The  children 
gather  sticks,  and  the  fathers  light  the  fire,  and 
the  women  knead  dough,  to  make  sacred  buns  " 
(xliv.  19)  "  for  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  and  to 
pour  libations  to  other  gods,  in  order  to  grieve 
Me  "  (Deut.  xxxii.  16,  21).  "  Is  it  Me  that  they 
grieve?  saith  lahvah;  is  it  not  themselves" 
(rather),  "  in  regard  to  the  shame  of  their  own 
faces  "  (16-19). 

From  one  point  of  view,  all  human  conduct 
may  be  said  to  be  "indifferent"  to  God;  He  is 
airrdpKiji,  self-sufificing,  and  needs  not  our 
praises,  our  love,  our  obedience,  any  more  than 
He  needed  the  temple  ritual  and  the  sacrifices 
of  bulls  and  goats.     Man  can  neither  benefit  nor 

♦  The  omissions  of  the  Septuagint  are  not  ajways  intelli- 
gent. The  repetition  of  the  "all"  here  intensifies  the 
idea  of  the  totality  of  the  ruin  of  the  northern  kingdom. 
The  two  clauses  balance  each  other  :  "  all  your  bretliren — 
all  the  seed  of  Ephraim."  The  objection  that  Edom  was 
also  a  "brother'  of  Israel  (Deut,  xxiii.  8  ;  Amosi.  11)  shows 
a  want  of  rhetorical  sense. 

In  vii.  4  the  Septuagint  tastelessly  omits  the  third  "The 
Temple  of  lahvah  ! "  upon  which  the  rhetorical  effect 
largely  depends :  cf.  chap.  xxii.  29  :  Isa.  vi.  3. 


injure  God;  he  can  only  affect  his  own  fortunes 
in  this  world  and  the  next,  by  rebellion  against 
the  laws  upon  which  his  welfare  depends,  or  by 
a  careful  observance  of  them.  In  this  sense,  it 
is  true  that  wilful  idolatry,  that  treason  against 
God,  does  not  "  provoke  "  or  "  grieve  "  the  Im- 
mutable One.  Men  do  such  things  to  their  own 
sole  hurt,  to  the  shame  of  their  own  faces:  that 
is,  the  punishment  will  be  the  painful  realisation 
of  the  utter  groundlessness  of  their  confidence, 
of  the  folly  of  their  false  trust;  the  mortification 
of  disillusion,  when  it  is  too  late.  That  Jeremiah 
should  have  expressed  himself  thus  is  sufficient 
answer  to  those  who  pretend  that  the  habitual 
anthropomorphism  of  the  prophetic  discourses  is 
anything  more  than  a  mere  accident  of  language 
and  an  accommodation  to  ordinary  style. 

In  another  sense,  of  course,  it  is  profoundly 
true  to  say  that  human  sin  provokes  and  grieves 
the  Lord.  God  is  Love;  and  love  may  be  pained 
to  its  depths  by  the  fault  of  the  beloved,  and 
stirred  to  holy  indignation  at  the  disclosure  of 
utter  unworthiness  and  ingratitude.  Something 
corresponding  to  these  emotions  of  man  may  be 
ascribed,  with  all  reverence,  to  the  Inscrutable 
Being  who  creates  man  "  in  His  own  image," 
that  is,  endowed  with  faculties  capable  of  aspiring 
towards  Him,  and  receiving  the  knowledge  of  His 
being  and  character. 

"  Pray  not  thou  for  this  people  .  .  .  for  I  hear 
thee  not!"  Jeremiah  was  wont  to  intercede  for 
his  people  (xi.  14,  xviii.  20,  xv.  i;  cf.  i  Sam. 
xii.  23).  The  deep  pathos  which  marks  his  style, 
the  minor  key  in  which  almost  all  his  public 
utterances  are  pitched,  proves  that  the  fate  which 
he  saw  impending  over  his  country  grieved  him 
to  the  heart.  "  Our  sweetest  songs  are  those 
which  tell  of  saddest  thought;  "  and  this  is  emi- 
nently true  of  Jeremiah.  A  profound  melancholy 
had  fallen  like  a  cloud  upon  his  soul;  he  had 
seen  the  future,  fraught  as  it  was  with  suffering 
and  sorrow,  despair  and  overthrow,  slaughter  and 
bitter  servitude;  a  picture  in  which  images  of 
terror  crowded  one  upon  another,  under  a  dark- 
ened sky,  from  which  no  ray  of  blessed  hope  shot 
forth,  but  only  the  lightnings  of  wrath  and  ex- 
termination. Doubtless  his  prayers  were  fre- 
quent, alive  with  feeling,  urgent,  imploring,  full 
of  the  convulsive  energy  of  expiring  hope.  But 
in  the  midst  of  his  strong  crying  and  tears,  there 
arose  from  the  depths  of  his  consciousness  the 
conviction  that  all  was  in  vain.  "  Pray  not  thou 
for  this  people,  for  I  will  not  hear  thee."  The 
thought  stood  before  him,  sharp  and  clear  as  a 
command;  the  unuttered  sound  of  it  rang  in  his 
ears,  like  the  voice  of  a  destroying  angel,  a  mes- 
senger of  doom,  calm  as  despair,  sure  as  fate.  He 
knew  it  was  the  voice  of  God. 

In  the  history  of  nations  as  in  the  lives  of  in- 
dividuals there  are  times  when  repentance,  even 
if  possible,  would  be  too  late  to  avert  the  evils 
which  long  periods  of  misdoing  have  called  from 
the  abyss  to  do  their  penal  and  retributive  work. 
Once  the  dike  is  undermined,  no  power  on  earth 
can  hold  back  the  flood  of  waters  from  the  de- 
fenceless lands  beneath.  And  when  a  nation's 
sins  have  penetrated  and  poisoned  all  social  and 
political  relations,  and  corrupted  the  very  foun- 
tains of  life,  you  cannot  avert  the  flood  of  ruin 
that  must  come,  to  sweep  away  the  tainted  mass 
of  spoiled  humanity;  you  cannot  avert  the  storm 
that  must  break  to  purify  the  air,  and  make  it 
fit  for  men  to  breathe  again. 

"  Therefore  " — because  of  the  national  unfaith- 


Jeremiah  vii.-x.xxvi.]        POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


49 


fulness — "  thus  said  the  Lord  lahvah,  Lo,  Mine 
anger  and  My  fury  are  being  poured  out  toward 
this  place — upon  the  men,  and  upon  the  cattle, 
and  upon  the  trees  of  the  field,  and  upon  the 
fruit  of  the  ground;  and  it  will  burn,  and  not  be 
quenched!  "  (vii.  20).  The  havoc  wrought  by 
war,  the  harrying  and  slaying  of  man  and  beast, 
the  felling  of  fruit  trees  and  firing  of  the  vine- 
yards, are  intended;  but  not  so  as  to  exclude  the 
ravages  of  pestilence  and  droughts  (chap,  xiv.) 
and  famine.  All  these  evils  are  manifestations 
of  the  wrath  of  lahvah.  Cattle  and  trees  and  "  the 
fruit  of  the  ground,"  /.  e.,  of  the  cornlands  and 
vineyards,  are  to  share  in  the  general  destruction 
{cf.  Hos.  iv.  3),  not,  of  course,  as  partakers  of 
man's  guilt,  but  only  by  way  of  aggravating  his 
punishment.  The  final  phrase  is  worthy  of  con- 
sideration, because  of  its  bearing  upon  other  pas- 
sages. "  It  will  burn  and  not  be  quenched,"  or 
"  it  will  burn  unquenchably."  The  meaning  is 
not  that  the  Divine  wrath  once  kindled  will  go 
on  burning  for  ever;  but  that  once  kindled,  no 
human  or  other  power  will  be  able  to  extinguish 
it,  until  it  has  accomplished  its  appointed  work 
of  destruction. 

''  Thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel: 
Your  holocausts  add  ye  to  your  common  sacri- 
fices, and  eat  ye  flesh!  "  that  is.  Eat  flesh  in 
abundance,  eat  your  fill  of  it!  Stint  not  your- 
selves by  devoting  any  portion  of  your  offerings 
wholly  to  Me.  I  am  as  indifferent  to  your 
"  burnt-offerings,"  your  more  costly  and  splen- 
did gifts,  as  to  the  ordinary  sacrifices,  over  which 
you  feast  and  make  merry  with  your  friends  (i 
Sam.  i.  4,  13).  The  holocausts  which  you  are 
now  burning  on  the  altar  before  Me  will  not  avail 
to  alter  My  settled  purpose.  "  For  I  spake  not 
with  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them,  in  the 
day  that  I  brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  concerning  matters  of  holocaust  and 
sacrifice,  but  this  matter  commanded  I  them, 
'  Hearken  ye  unto  My  voice,  so  become  I  God  to 
you,  and  you — ye  shall  become  to  Me  a  people; 
and  walk  ye  in  all  the  way  that  I  shall  com- 
mand you,  that  it  may  go  well  with  you!  "  (22- 
23)  cf.  Deut.  vi.  3.  Those  who  believe  that  the 
entire  priestly  legislation  as  we  now  have  it  in 
the  Pentateuch  is  the  work  of  Moses,  may  be 
content  to  find  in  this  passage  of  Jeremiah  no 
more  than  an  extreme  antithetical  expression  of 
the  truth  that  to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice. 
There  can  be  no  question  that  from  the  outset 
of  its  history.  Israel,  in  common  with  all  the 
Semitic  nations,  gave  outward  expression  to  its 
religious  ideas  in  the  form  of  animal  sacrifice. 
Moses  cannot  have  originated  the  institution,  he 
found  it  already  in  vogue,  though  he  may  have 
regulated  the  details  of  it.  Even  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, the  term  "  sacrifice  "  is  nowhere  explained; 
the  general  understanding  of  the  meaning  of  it 
is  taken  for  granted  (see  Ex.  xii.  27,  xxiii.  18). 
Religious  customs  are  of  immemorial  use,  and  it 
is  impossible  in  most  cases  to  specify  the  period 
of  their  origin.  But  while  it  is  certain  that  the 
institution  of  sacrifice  was  of  extreme  antiquity 
in  Israel  as  in  other  ancient  peoples,  it  is  equally 
certain,  from  the  plain  evidence  of  their  extant 
writings,  that  the  prophets  before  the  Exile  at- 
tached no  independent  value  either  to  it  or  to 
any  other  part  of  the  ritual  of  the  temple.  We 
have  already  seen  how  Jeremiah  could  speak  of 
the  most  venerable  of  all  the  symbols  of  the 
popular  faith  (iii.  16).  Now  he  affirms  that  the 
traditional  rules  for  the  burnt-offerings  and  other 

4— Vol.  IV. 


sacrifices  were  not  matters  of  special  Divine  in- 
stitution, as  was  popularly  supposed  at  the  time. 
The  reference  to  the  Exodus  may  imply  that 
already  in  his  day  there  were  written  narratives 
which  asserted  the  contrary;  that  the  first  care  of 
the  Divine  Saviour  after  He  had  led  His  people 
through  the  sea  was  to  provide  them  with  an 
elaborate  system  of  ritual  and  sacrifice,  identical 
with  that  which  prevailed  in  Jeremiah's  day.  The 
important  verse  already  quoted  (viii.  8)  seems  to 
glance  at  such  pious  fictions  of  the  popular  re- 
ligious teachers:  "  How  say  ye.  We  are  wise,  and 
the  instruction  "  (A.  V.  "  law  ")  "  of  lahvah  is 
with  us?  But  behold  for  lies  hath  it  wrought — 
the  lying  pen  of  the  scribes!  " 

It  is,  indeed,  difficult  to  see  how  Jeremiah  or 
any  of  his  predecessors  could  have  done  other- 
wise than  take  for  granted  the  established  modes 
of  public  worship,  and  the  traditional  holy  places. 
The  prophets  do  not  seek  to  alter  or  abolish  the 
externals  of  religion  as  such;  they  are  not  so 
unreasonable  as  to  demand  that  stated  rites  and 
traditional  sanctuaries  should  be  disregarded,  and 
that  men  should  worship  in  the  spirit  only,  with- 
out the  aid  of  outward  symbolism  of  any  sort, 
however  innocent  and  appropriate  to  its  object 
it  might  seem.  They  knew  very  well  that  rites 
and  ceremonies  were  necessary  to  public  wor- 
ship; what  they  protested  against  was  the  fatal 
tendency  of  their  time  to  make  these  the  whole 
of  religion,  to  suppose  that  lahvah's  claims  could 
be  satisfied  by  a  due  performance  of  these,  with- 
out regard  to  those  higher  moral  requirements 
of  His  law  which  the  ritual  worship  might  fitly 
have  symbolised  but  could  not  rightly  supersede. 
It  was  not  a  question  with  Hosea,  Amos,  Micah, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  whether  or  not  lahvah  could  be 
better  honoured  with  or  without  temples  and 
priests  and  sacrifices.  The  question  was  whether 
these  traditional  institutions  actually  served  as  an 
outward  expression  of  that  devotion  to  Him  and 
His  holy  law,  of  that  righteousness  and  holiness 
of  life,  which  is  the  only  true  worship,  or  whether 
they  were  looked  upon  as  in  themselves  compris- 
ing the  whole  of  necessary  religion.  Since  the 
people  took  this  latter  view,  Jeremiah  declares 
that  their  system  of  public  worship  is  futile. 

"  Hearken  unto  My  voice":  not  as  giving  regu- 
lations about  the  ritual,  but  as  inculcating  moral 
duty  by  the  prophets,  as  is  explained  immediately 
(ver.  25),  and  as  is  clear  also  from  the  statement 
that  "  they  walked  in  the  schemes  of  their  own 
evil  heart"  (omit:  "in  the  stubbornness,"  with 
LXX.,  and  read  "  mo'agoth  "  stat.  constr.),  "  and 
fell  to  the  rear  and  not  the  front."  As  they  did 
not  advance  in  the  knowledge  and  love  of  the 
spiritual  God,  who  was  seeking  to  lead  them  by 
His  prophets,  from  Moses  downwards  (Deut. 
xviii.  15),  they  steadily  retrogaded  and  declined 
in  moral  worth,  until  they  had  become  hopelessly 
corrupt  and  past  correction.  (Lit.  "  and  they  be- 
came back  and  not  face,"  which  may  mean,  they 
turned  their  backs  upon  lahvah  and  His  instruc- 
tion.) This  steady  progress  in  evil  is  indicated 
by  the  words,  "  and  they  hardened  their  neck, 
they  did  worse  than  their  fathers  "  (ver.  26).  It 
is  implied  that  this  was  the  case  with  each  sue-, 
cessive  generation,  and  the  view  of  Israel's  his-' 
tory  thus  expressed  is  in  perfect  harmony  with 
common  experience.  Progress,  one  way  or  the 
other,  is  the  law  of  character;  if  we  do  not  ad- 
vance in  goodness,  we  go  back,  or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  we  advance  in  evil. 

Finally,  the  prophet  is  warned  that  his  mission 


5° 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


also  must  fail,  like  that  of  his  predecessors,  unless 
indeed  the  second  clause  of  ver.  27,  which  is 
omitted  by  the  Septuagint,  be  really  an  interpola- 
tion. At  all  events,  the  failure  is  implied  if  not 
expressed,  for  he  is  to  pronounce  a  sentence  of 
reprobation  upon  his  people.  "  And  thou  shalt 
speak  all  these  words  unto  them  "  ("  and  they 
will  not  hearken  unto  thee,  and  thou  shalt  call 
unto  them,  and  they  will  not  answer  thee:" 
LXX.  omits).  "  And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them, 
This  is  the  nation  that  hearkened  not  unto  the 
voice  of  lahvah  its  God,  and  received  not  cor- 
rection: Good  faith  is  perished  and  cut  off  from 
their  mouth  "  {cf.  ix.  3  sq.  The  charge  is  re- 
markable. It  is  one  which  Jeremiah  reiterates: 
see  ver.  9,  vi.  13,  vii.  5,  ix.  3  sqq.,  xii.  i.  His 
fellow-countrymen  are  at  once  deceivers  and  de- 
ceived. They  have  no  regard  for  truth  and 
honour  in  their  mutual  dealings;  grasping  greed 
and  lies  and  trickery  stamp  their  everyday  inter- 
course with  each  other;  and  covetousness  and 
fraud  equally  characterise  the  behaviour  of  their 
religious  leaders.  Where  truth  is  not  prized  for 
its  own  sake,  there  debased  ideas  of  God  and  lax 
conceptions  of  morality  creep  in  and  spread. 
Only  he  who  loves  truth  comes  to  the  light;  and 
only  he  who  does  God's  will  sees  that  truth  is 
divine.  False  belief  and  false  living  in  turn  beget 
each  other;  and  as  a  matter  of  experience  it  is 
often  impossible  to  say  which  was  antecedent  to 
the  other. 

In  the  closing  section  of  this  first  part  of  his 
long  address  (vv.  29-viii.  3),  Jeremiah  apostro- 
phises the  country,  bidding  her  bewail  her  im- 
minent ruin.  "  Shear  thy  tresses  "  (coronal  of 
long  hair)  "  and  cast  them  away,  and  lift  upon 
the  bare  hills  a  lamentation!  " — sing  a  dirge  over 
thy  departed  glory  and  thy  slain  children,  upon 
those  unhallowed  mountain-tops  which  were  the 
scene  of  thine  apostasies  (iii.  21);  "for  lahvah 
hath  rejected  and  forsaken  the  generation  of  His 
wrath."  The  hopeless  tone  of  this  exclamation 
(.cf.  also  vv.  15,  16,  20)  seems  to  agree  better  with 
the  times  of  Jehoiakim,  when  it  had  become  evi- 
dent to  the  prophet  that  amendment  was  be- 
yond hope,  than  with  the  years  prior  to  Josiah's 
reformation.  His  own  contemporaries  are  "  the 
generation  of  lahvah's  wrath,"  i.  e.,  upon  which 
His  wrath  is  destined  to  be  poured  out,  for  the 
day  of  grace  is  past  and  gone;  and  this,  because 
of  the  desecration  of  the  temple  itself  by  such 
kings  as  Ahaz  and  Manasseh,  but  especially  be- 
cause of  the  horrors  of  the  child-sacrifices  in  the 
valley  of  ben  Hinnom  (2  Kings  xvi.  3,  xxi.  3-6), 
which  those  kings  had  been  the  first  to  intro- 
duce in  Judali.  "  Therefore  behold  days  are 
coming,  saith  lahvah,  and  it  shall  no  more  be 
called  the  Tophet  "  (an  obscure  term,  probably 
meaning  something  like  "  Pyre  "  or  "  Burning- 
place:  "  cf.  the  Persian  tab-idan  "  to  burn,"  and 
the  Greek  OdTrrw,  raip-eiv,  "  to  bury,"  strictly 
"to  burn"  a  corpse;  also  tiJ^w,  "to  smoke," 
Sanskrit  dhup:  to  suppose  a  reproachful  name 
like  "  Spitting  "  ^  "  Object  of  loathing,"  is 
clearly  against  the  context:  the  honourable  name 
is  to  be  exchanged  for  one  of  dishonour),  "  and 
the  Valley  of  ben  Hinnom,  but  the  Valley  of 
Slaughter,  and  people  shall  bury  in  (the)  Tophet 
for  want  of  room  (elsewhere)  "!  A  great  battle 
is  contemplated,  as  is  evident  also  from  Deut. 
xxviii.  25,  26,  the  latter  verse  being  immediately 
quoted  by  the  prophet  (ver.  2>3)-  The  Tophet 
will  be  defiled  for  ever  by  being  made  a  burial 
place;   but  many   of  the  fallen   will  ke  left  un- 


buried,  a  prey  to  the  vulture  and  the  jackal.  In 
that  fearful  time,  all  sounds  of  joyous  life  will 
cease  in  the  cities  of  Judah  and  in  the  capital 
itself,  "  for  the  land  will  become  a  desolation." 
And  the  scornful  enemy  will  not  be  satisfied  with 
wreaking  his  vengeance  upon  the  living;  he  will 
insult  the  dead,  by  breaking  into  the  sepulchres 
of  the  kings  and  grandees,  the  priests  and 
prophets  and  people,  and  haling  their  corpses 
forth  to  lie  rotting  in  face  of  the  sun,  moon, 
and  stars,  which  they  had  so  sedulously  wor- 
shipped in  their  lifetime,  but  which  will  be  power- 
less to  protect  their  dead  bodies  from  this  shame- 
ful indignity.  And  as  for  the  survivors,  "  death 
will  be  preferred  to  life  in  the  case  of  all  the 
remnant  that  remain  of  this  evil  tribe,  in  all  the 
places  whither  I  shall  have  driven  them,  saith 
lahvah  Sabaoth  "  (omit  the  second  "  that  re- 
main," with  LXX.  as  an  accidental  repetition 
from  the  preceding  line,  and  as  breaking  the 
construction).  The  prophet  has  reached  the 
conviction  that  Judah  will  be  driven  into  ban- 
ishment; but  the  details  of  the  destruction  which 
he  contemplates  are  obviously  of  an  imaginative 
and  rhetorical  character.  It  is,  therefore,  super- 
fluous to  ask  whether  a  great  battle  was  actually 
fought  afterwards  in  the  valley  of  ben  Hinnom, 
and  whether  the  slain  apostates  of  Judah  were 
buried  there  in  heaps,  and  whether  the  con- 
querors violated  the  tombs.  Had  the  Chaldeans 
or  any  of  their  allies  done  this  last,  in  search  of 
treasure  for  instance,  we  should  expect  to  find 
some  notice  of  it  in  the  historical  chapters  of 
Jeremiah.  But  it  was  probably  known  well 
enough  to  the  surrounding  peoples  that  the  Jews 
were  not  in  the  habit  of  burying  treasure  in  their 
tombs.  The  prophet's  threat,  however,  curiously 
corresponds  to  what  Josiah  is  related  to  have 
done  at  Bethel  and  elsewhere,  by  way  of  irrep- 
arably polluting  the  high  places  (2  Kings  xxiii. 
16  sqq.);  and  it  is  probable  that  his  recollection 
of  that  event,  which  he  may  himself  have  wit- 
nessed, determined  the  form  of  Jeremiah's  lan- 
guage here. 

In  the  second  part  of  this  great  discourse  (viii. 
4-23)  we  have  a  fine  development  of  thoughts 
which  have  already  been  advanced  in  the  open- 
ing piece,  after  the  usual  manner  of  Jeremiah. 
The  first  half  (or  strophe)  is  mainly  concerned 
with  the  sins  of  the  nation  (vv.  4-13),  the  second 
with  a  despairing  lament  over  the  punishment 
(14-23  =  ix.  i).  "And  thou  shalt  say  unto 
them:  Thus  said  lahvah.  Do  men  fall  and  not 
rise  again?  Doth  a  man  turn  back,  and  not 
return?  Why  doth  Jerusalem  make  this  people 
to  turn  back  with  an  eternal  "  (or  perfect,  utter, 
absolute)  "  turning  back?  Why  clutch  they  de- 
ceit, refuse  to  return?"  (The  LXX.  omits  "Je- 
rusalem," which  is  perhaps  only  a  marginal  gloss. 
We  should  then  have  to  read  -5^^  shobab " 
for  nMIC  "  shobebah,"  as  "  this  people  "  is  masc. 
The  "  He "  has  been  written  twice  by  inad- 
vertence. The  verb,  however,  is  transitive  in 
1.  19;  Isa.  xlvii.  10,  etc.;  and  I  find  no  certain  in- 
stance of  the  intrans.  form  besides  Ezek.  xxxviii. 
8,  participle.)  "  I  listened  and  heard;  they 
speak  not  aright"  (Ex.  x.  29;  Isa.  xvi.  6);  "  not 
a  man  repenteth  over  his  evil,  saying  (or  think- 

NOTE  ON  vii.  25. — The  word  answering  to  "  daily  "  in  the 
Heb.  simply  means  "  day,','  and  ought  to  be  omitted,  as  an 
accidental  repetition  either  from  the  previous  line,  or  of 
the  last  two  letters  of  the  preceding  word  "  prophets."  Cf. 
ver.  13,  where  a  similar  phrase,  "  rising  early  and  speak- 
ing," occurs  in  a  similar  context,  but  without  "daily." 


Jeremiah  vii.-x.xxvi.]       POPULAR   AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


5» 


ing),  '  What  have  I  done?  '  They  all  "  (lit.  "  all 
of  him,"  I.  e.,  the  people)  "  turn  back  into  their 
courses"  (plur.  Heb.  text;  sing.  Heb.  marg.), 
"  like  the  rushing  horse  into  the  battle." 

There  is  somethini?  unnatural  in  this  obstinate 
persistence  in  evil.  If  a  man  happens  to  fall  he 
does  not  remain  on  the  ground,  but  quickly  rises 
to  his  feet  again;  and  if  he  turn  back  on  his  way 
for  some  reason  or  other,  he  will  usually  return 
to  that  way  again.  There  is  a  play  on  the  word 
"  turn  back  "  or  "  return,"  like  that  in  iii.  12,  14. 
The  term  is  first  used  in  the  sense  of  turning 
back  or  away  from  lahvah,  and  then  in  that  of 
returning  to  Him,  according  to  its  metaphorical 
meaning  "  to  repent."  Thus  the  import  of  the 
question  is:  Is  it  natural  to  apostatise  and  never 
to  repent  of  it?  (Perhaps  we  should  rather  read, 
after    the    analogy    of    iii.     i,     "  Doth    a    man 

on    a   journey,    and    not    re- 


(^.^.vro 


go   away 

turn?  ") 

Others  interpret:  "  Doth  a  man  return,  and  not 
return?"  That  is,  if  he  return,  he  does  it,  and 
does  not  stop  midway;  whereas  Judah  only  pre- 
tends to  repent,  and  does  not  really  do  so.  This, 
however,  does  not  agree  with  the  parallel  mem- 
ber, nor  with  the  following  similar  questions. 

It  is  very  noticeable  how  thoroughly  the 
prophets,  who,  after  all,  were  the  greatest  of 
practical  moralists,  identify  religion  with  right 
aims  and  right  conduct.  The  beginning  of  evil 
courses  is  turning  away  from  lahvah;  the  be- 
ginning of  reform  is  turning  back  to  lahvah. 
For  lahvah's  character  as  revealed  to  the  proph- 
ets is  the  ideal  and  standard  of  ethical  perfection; 
He  does  and  delig'hts  in  love,  justice,  and  equity 
(ix.  23).  If  a  man  look  away  from  that  ideal, 
if  he  be  content  with  a  lower  standard  than  the 
Will  and  Law  of  the  All-Perfect,  then  and 
thereby  he  inevitably  sinks  in  the  scale  of  moral- 
ity. The  prophets  are  not  troubled  by  the  idle 
question  of  mediaeval  schoolmen  and  sceptical 
moderns.  It  never  occurred  to  them  to  ask  the 
question  whether  God  is  good  because  God  wills 
it,  or  whether,  God  wills  good  because  it  is  good. 
The  dilemma  is,  in  truth,  no  better  than  a  verbal 
puzzle,  if  we  allow  the  existence  of  a  personal 
Deity.  For  the  idea  of  God  is  the  idea  of  a 
Being  who  is  absolutely  good,  the  only  Being 
who  is  such;  perfect  goodness  is  understood  to 
be  realised  nowhere  else  but  in  God.  It  is  part 
of  His  essence  and  conception;  it  is  the  aspect 
under  which  the  human  mind  apprehends  Him. 
To  suppose  goodness  existing  apart  from  Him, 
as  an  independent  object  which  He  may  choose 
or  refuse,  is  to  deal  in  empty  abstractions.  We 
might  as  well  ask  whether  convex  can  exist  apart 
from  concave  in  nature,  or  motion  apart  from  a 
certain  rate  of  speed.  The  human  spirit  can  ap- 
prehend God  in  His  moral  perfections,  because 
it  is,  at  however  vast  a  distance,  akin  to  Him — 
a  "  divine  particula  auras;  "  and  it  can  strive  to- 
wards those  perfections  by  help  of  the  same  grace 
which  reveals  them.  The  prophets  know  of  no 
other  origin  or  measure  of  moral  endeavour  than 
that  which  lahvah  makes  known  to  them.  In 
the  present  instance,  the  charge  which  Jere- 
miah makes  against  his  contemporaries  is  a  radi- 
cal falsehood,  insincerity,  faithlessness:  "  they 
clutch  "  or  "  cling  to  deceit,  they  speak  what  is 
not  right"  or  "honest,  straightforward"  (Gen. 
xlii.  II,  19).  Their  treason  to  God  and  their 
treachery  to  their  fellows  are  opposite  sides  of 
the  same  fact.  Had  they  been  true  to  lahvah, 
that   is,   to    His   teachines    through   the   higher 


prophets  and  their  own  consciences,  they  would 
have  been  true  to  one  another.  The  forbearing 
love  of  God,  His  tender  solicitude  to  hear  and 
save,  are  illustrated  by  the  words:  "  I  listened 
and  heard  .  .  .  not  a  man  repented  over  his 
evil,  saying.  What  have  I  done?  "  (The  feeling 
of  the  stricken  conscience  could  hardly  be  more 
aptly  expressed  than  by  this  brief  question.) 
But  in  vain  does  the  Heavenly  Father  wait  for 
the  accents  of  penitence  and  contrition:  "  they  all 
return  " — go  back  again  and  again  (Ps.  xxiii.  6) 
— "  into  their  own  race  "  or  "  courses,  like  a  horse 
rushing"  (lit.  "pouring  forth:"  of  rushing 
waters,  Ps.  Ixxviii.  20)  "  into  the  battle."  The 
eagerness  with  which  they  follow  their  own 
wicked  desires,  the  recklessness  with  which  they 
"  give  their  sensual  race  the  rein,"  in  set  defiance 
of  God,  and  wilful  oblivion  of  consequences,  is 
finely  expressed  by  the  simile  of  the  warhorse 
rushing  in  headlong  eagerness  into  the  fray  (Job 
xxxix.  25).  "  Also  "  (or  "  even  ")  "  the  stork 
in  the  heavens  knoweth  her  appointed  times,  and 
turtledove,  swift  and  crane  observe  the  season  of 
their  coming;  but  My  people  know  not  the  ordi- 
nance of  lahvah  " — what  He  has  willed  and  de- 
clared to  be  right  for  man  (His  Law;  "jus  di- 
vinum,  relligio  divina  ").  The  dullest  of  wits 
can  hardly  fail  to  appreciate  the  force  of  this 
beautiful  contrast  between  the  regularity  of  in- 
stinct and  thiC  aberrations  of  reason.  All  living 
creatures  are  subject  to  laws  upon  obedience  to 
which  their  well-being  depends.  The  life  of  man 
is  no  exception;  it  too  is  subject  to  a  law — a  law 
which  is  as  much  higher  than  that  which  regu- 
lates mere  animal  existence  as  reason  and  con- 
science and  spiritual  aspiration  are  higher  than 
instinct  and  sexual  impulse.  But  whereas  the 
lower  forms  of  life  are  obedient  to  the  laws  of 
their  being,  man  rebels  against  them,  and  dares 
to  disobey  what  he  knows  to  be  for  his  good; 
nay,  he  sufifers  himself  to  be  so  blinded  by  lust 
and  passion  and  pride  and  self-will  that  at  last  he 
does  not  even  recognise  the  Law — the  ordinance 
of  the  Eternal — for  what  it  really  is,  the  organic 
law  of  his  true  being,  the  condition  at  once  of  his 
excellence  and  his  happiness. 

The  prophet  next  meets  an  objection.  He  has 
just  alleged  a  profound  moral  ignorance — a  cul- 
pable ignorance — against  the  people.  He  sup- 
poses them  to  deny  the  accusation,  as  doubtless 
they  often  did  in  answer  to  his  remonstrances 
{cf.  xvii.  15,  XX.  7  sq.)  "  How  can  ye  say,  '  We 
are  wise  '  " — morally  wise — "  '  and  the  teaching 
of  lahvah  is  with  us!  '  "  ("  but  behold:  "  LXX. 
omits:  either  term  would  be  sufficient  by  itself) 
"  for  the  Lie  hath  the  lying  pen  of  the  scribes 
made  it!  "  The  reference  clearly  is  to  what  Jere- 
miah's opponents  call  "  the  teaching  (or  '  law: 
torah  ')  of  lahvah  ";  and  it  is  also  clear  that  the 
prophet  charges  the  "  scribes  "  of  the  opposite 
party  with  falsifying  or  tampering  with  the 
teaching  of  lahvah  in  some  way  or  other.  Is  it 
meant  that  they  misrepresent  the  terms  of  a  writ- 
ten document,  such  as  the  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
or  Deuteronomy?  But  they  could  hardly  do  this 
without  detection,  in  the  case  of  a  work  which 
was  not  in  their  exclusive  possession.  Or  does 
Jeremiah  accuse  them  of  misinterpreting  the 
sacred  law,  by  putting  false  glosses  upon  its  pre- 
cepts, as  might  be  done  in  a  legal  document 
wherever  there  seemed  room  for  a  difference  of 
opinion,  or  wherever  conflicting  traditional  inter- 
pretations existed  side  by  side?  {Cf.  my  remarks 
on  viL  31).    The  Hebrew  may  indicate  this,  for 


52 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


we  may  translate:  "  But  lo,  into  the  lie  the  lying 
pen  of  the  scribes  hath  made  it!"  which  recalls 
St.  Paul's  description  of  the  heathen  as  chang- 
ing the  truth  of  God  into  a  lie  (Rom.  i-.26). 
The  construction  is  the  same  as  in  Gen.  xii.  2; 
Isa.  xliv.  17.  Or,  finally,  does  he  boldly  charge 
these  abettors  of  the  false  prophets  with  forging 
supposititious  law-books,  in  the  interest  of  their 
own  faction,  and  in  support  of  the  claims  and 
doctrines  of  the  worldly  priests  and  prophets? 
This  last  view  is  quite  admissible,  so  far  as  the 
Hebrew  goes,  which,  however,  is  not  free  from 
ambiguity.  It  might  be  rendered,  "  But  behold, 
in  vain,"  or  "  bootlessly  "  (iii.  23)  "hath  the  ly- 
ing pen  of  the  scribes  laboured;  "  taking  the  verb 
in  an  absolute  sense,  which  is  not  a  common  use 
(Ruth  ii.  19).  Or  we  might  transpose  the  terms 
for  "  pen  "  and  "  lying,"  and  render,  "  But  be- 
hold, in  vain  hath  the  pen  of  the  scribes  fabri- 
cated falsehood."  In  any  case,  the  general  sense 
is  the  same:  Jeremiah  charges  not  only  the 
speakers,  but  the  writers,  of  the  popular  party 
with  uttering  their  own  inventions  in  the  name 
of  lahvah.  These  scribes  were  the  spiritual  an- 
cestors of  those  of  our  Saviour's  time,  who 
"  made  the  word  of  God  of  none  effect  for  the 
sake  of  their  traditions  "  (Matt.  xv.  6).  "  For 
the  Lie  "  means,  to  maintain  the  popular  misbe- 
lief. (It  might  also  be  rendered,  "  for  falsehood, 
falsely,"  as  in  the  phrase  "  to  swear  falsely,"  i.  e., 
for  deceit;  Lev.  v.  24.)  It  thus  appears  that 
conflicting  and  competing  versions  of  the  law 
were  current  in  that  age.  Has  the  Pentateuch 
preserved  elements  of  both  kinds,  or  is  it  hom- 
ogeneous throughout?  Of  the  scribes  of  the 
period  we,  alas!  know  little  beyond  what  this 
passage  tells  us.  But  Ezra  must  have  had  prede- 
cessors, and  we  may  remember  that  Baruch,  the 
friend  and  amanuensis  of  Jeremiah,  was  also  a 
scribe  (xxxvi.  26). 

"  The  '  wise  '  will  blush,  they  will  be  dismayed 
and  caught!  Lo,  the  word  of  lahvah  they  re- 
jected, and  wisdom  of  what  sort  have  they?" 
(vi.  10).  The  whole  body  of  Jeremiah's  oppo- 
nents, the  populace  as  well  as  the  priests  and 
prophets,  are  intended  by  "  the  wise,"  that  is, 
the  wise  in  their  own  conceits  (ver.  8) ;  there  is 
an  ironical  reference  to  their  own  assumption  of 
the  title.  These  self-stvled  wise  ones,  who  pre- 
ferred their  own  wisdom  to  the  guidance  of  the 
prophet,  will  be  punished  by  the  mortification  of 
discovering  their  folly  when  it  is  too  late.  Their 
folly  will  be  the  instrument  of  their  ruin,  for 
"  He  taketh  the  wise  in  their  own  craftiness  "  as 
in  a  snare  (Prov.  v.  22). 

They  who  reject  lahvah's  word,  in  whatever 
form  it  comes  to  them,  have  no  other  light  to 
walk  by;  they  must  needs  walk  in  darkness,  and 
stumble  at  noonday.  For  lahvah's  word  is  the 
only  true  wisdom,  the  only  true  guide  of  man's 
footsteps.  And  this  is  the  kind  of  wisdom  which 
the  Holy  Scriptures  offer  us;  not  a  merely  specu- 
lative wisdom,  not  what  is  commonly  understood 
by  the  terms  science  and  art,  but  the  priceless 
knowledge  of  God  and  of  His  will  concerning  us; 
a  kind  of  knowledge  which  is  beyond  all  com- 
parison the  most  important  for  our  well-being 
here  and  hereafter.  It  this  Divine  wisdom, 
which  relates  to  the  proper  conduct  of  life  and 
the  right  education  of  the  highest  faculties  of 
our  being,  seem  a  small  matter  to  any  man,  the 
fact  argues  spiritual  blindness  on  his  part;  it 
cannot  diminish  the  glory  of  heavenly  wisdom. 

Some  well-meaning  but  mistaken  people  are 
fond  of  maintaining  what  they  call  "  the  scientific 


accuracy  of  the  Bible,"  meaning  thereby  an  es- 
sential harmony  with  the  latest  discoveries,  or 
even  the  newest  hypotheses,  of  physical  science. 
But  even  to  raise  such  a  preposterous  question, 
whether  as  advocate  or  as  assailant,  is  to  be 
guilty  of  a  crude  anachronism,  and  to  betray  an 
incredible  ignorance  of  the  real  value  of  the 
Scriptures.  That  value  I  believe  to  be  inesti- 
mable. But  to  discuss  "  the  scientific  accuracy 
of  the  Bible  "  appears  to  me  to  be  as  irrelevant 
to  any  profitable  issue,  as  it  would  be  to  discuss 
the  meteorological  precision  of  the  Mahabha- 
rata,  or  the  marvellous  chemistry  of  the  Zenda- 
vesta,  or  the  physiological  revelations  of  the 
Koran,  or  the  enlightened  anthropology  of  the 
Nibelungenlied. 

A  man  may  reject  the  word  of  lahvah,  he  may 
reject  Christ's  word,  because  he  supposes  that  it 
is  not  sufficiently  attested.  He  may  urge  that 
the  proof  that  it  is  of  God  breaks  down,  and 
he  ma}^  flatter  himself  that  he  is  a  person  of 
superior  discernment,  because  he  perceives  a  fact 
to  which  the  multitude  of  believers  are  apparently 
blind.  But  what  kind  of  proof  would  he  have? 
Does  he  demand  more  than  the  case  admits  of? 
Some  portent  in  earth  or  sky  or  sea,  which  in 
reality  would  be  quite  foreign  to  the  matter  in 
hand,  and  could  have  none  but  an  accidental  con- 
nection with  it,  and  would,  in  fact,  be  no  proof 
at  all,  but  itself  a  mystery  requiring  to  be  ex- 
plained by  the  ordinary  laws  of  physical  causa- 
tion? To  demand  a  kind  of  proof  which  is  irrel- 
evant to  the  subject  is  a  mark  not  of  superior 
caution  and  judgment,  but  of  ignorance  and  con- 
fusion of  thought.  The  plain  truth  is,  and  the 
fact  is  abundantly  illustrated  by  the  teachings  of 
the  prophets  and,  above  all,  of  our  Divine  Lord, 
that  moral  and  spiritual  truths  are  self-attesting 
to  minds  able  to  realise  them;  and  they  no  more 
need  supplementary  corroboration  than  does  the 
ultimate  testimony  of  the  senses  of  a  sane 
person. 

Now  the  Bible  as  a  whole  is  an  unique  reper- 
tory of  such  truths;  this  is  the  secret  of  its  age- 
long influence  in  the  world.  If  a  man  does  not 
care  for  the  Bible,  if  he  has  not  learned  to  ap- 
preciate this  aspect  of  it,  if  he  does  not  love  it 
precisely  on  this  account,  I,  in  turn,  care  very 
little  for  his  opinion  about  the  Bible.  There  may 
be  much  in  the  Bible  which  is  otherwise  valuable, 
which  is  precious  as  history,  as  tradition,  as  bear- 
ing upon  questions  of  interest  to  the  ethnologist, 
the  antiquarian,  the  man  of  letters.  But  these 
things  are  the  shell,  that  is  the  kernel;  these  are 
the  accidents,  tliat  is  the  substance;  these  are  the 
bodily  vesture,  that  is  the  immortal  spirit.  A 
man  who  has  not  felt  this  has  yet  to  learn  what 
the  Bible  is. 

In  his  text  as  we  now  have  it,  Jeremiah  pro- 
ceeds to  denounce  punishment  on  the  prie.sts  and 
prophets,  whose  fraudulent  oracles  and  false  in- 
terpretations of  the  Law  ministered  to  their  own 
greedy  covetousness,  and  who  smoothed  over  the 
alarming  state  of  things  by  false  assurances  that 
all  was  well  (vv.  10-12).  The  Septuagint,  how- 
ever, omits  the  whole  passage  after  the  words, 
"  Therefore  I  will  give  their  wives  to  others,  their 
fields  to  conquerors!  "  and  as  these  words  are 
obviously  an  abridgment  of  the  threat,  vi.  12  {cf. 
Deut.  xxviii.  30),  while  the  rest  of  the  passage 
agrees  verbatim  with  vi.  13-15,  it  may  be  sup- 
posed that  a  later  editor  inserted  it  in  the  margin 
here,  as  generally  apposite  {cf.  vi.  10  with  ver.  9), 
whence  it  has  crept  into  the  text.  It  is  true  that 
Jeremiah  himself  is  fond  of  repetition,  but  not 


Jeremiah  vii.-x.,  xxvi.]        POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION, 


53 


so  as  to  interrupt  the  context,  as  the  "  therefore  " 
of  ver.  10  seems  to  do.  Besides,  the  "  wisd " 
of  ver.  8  are  the  self-confident  people;  but  if  this 
passage  be  in  place  here,  "  the  wise  "  of  ver.  g 
will  have  to  be  understood  of  their  false  guides, 
the  prophets  and  priests.  Whereas,  if  the  pas- 
sage be  omitted,  there  is  manifest  continuity  be- 
tween the  ninth  verse  and  the  thirteenth:  "  '  I 
will  sweep,  sweep  them  away,'  saith  lahvah;  no 
grapes  on  the  vine,  and  no  figs  on  the  fig  tree, 
and  the  foliage  is  withered,  and  I  have  given 
them  destruction"  (or  "blasting"). 

The  opening  threat  is  apparently  quoted  from 
the  contemporary  prophet  Zephaniah  (i.  2,  3). 
The  point  of  the  rest  of  the  verse  is  not  quite 
clear,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  last  clause  of 
the  Hebrew  text  is  undoubtedly  corrupt.  We 
might  suppose  that  the  term  "  laws  "  (D^'pH)  had 
fallen  out,  and  render,  "  and  I  gave  them  laws 
which  they  transgress  "  {cf.  v.  22,  xxxi.  35).  The 
Vulgate  has  an  almost  literal  translation,  which 
gives  the  same  sense:  "  et  dedi  eis  quae  prieter- 
gressa  sunt."  *  The  Septuagint  omits  the  clause, 
probably  on  the  ground  of  its  difficulty.  It  may 
be  that  bad  crops  and  scarcity  are  threatened 
{cf.  chap.  xiv.  v.  24,  25).  In  that  case,  we  may 
correct  the  text  in  the  manner  suggested  above 

nnats'   or  l^ii?  xvii.  i8,  for  D^n^y:  ;  or  \^^J^ 

Amos  iv.  9.  for  the  CJnny;  of  other  MSS.). 
Others  understand  the  verse  m  a  metaphorical 
sense.  The  language  seems  to  be  coloured  by  a 
reminiscence  of  Micah  vii.  i,  2;  and  the 
"  grapes  "  and  "  figs  "  and  "  foliage  "  may  be  the 
fruits  of  righteousness,  and  the  nation  is  like 
Isaiah's  unfruitful  vineyard  (Isa.  v.)  or  our 
Lord's  barren  fig  tree  (Matt.  xxi.  19),  fit  only  for 
destruction  {cf.  also  vi.  9  and  ver.  20).  Another 
passage  which  resembles  the  present  is  Hab.  iii. 
17:  "  For  the  fig  tree  will  not  blossom,  and  there 
will  be  no  yield  on  the  vines;  the  produce  of  the 
olive  will  disappoint,  and  the  fields  will  produce 
no  food."  It  was  natural  that  tillage  should  be 
neglected  upon  the  rumour  of  invasion.  The 
country-folk  would  crowd  into  the  strong  places, 
and  leave  their  vineyards,  orchards,  and  corn- 
fields to  their  fate  (ver.  14).  This  would,  of 
course,  lead  to  scarcity  and  want,  and  aggravate 
the  horrors  of  war  with  those  of  dearth  and 
famine.  I  think  the  passage  of  Habakkuk  is  a 
precise  parallel  to  the  one  before  us.  Both  con- 
template a  Chaldean  invasion,  and  both  anticipate 
its  disastrous  effects  upon  husbandry. 

It  is  possible  that  the  original  text  ran:  "  And 
I  have  given  (will  give)  unto_  them  their  own 
work  "  {i.  e.,  the  fruit  of  it,  ^^"7^-^  :  used  of  field- 
work,  Ex.  i.  14;  of  the  earnings  of  labour,  Isa. 
xxxii.  17).  This,  which  is  a  frequent  thought  in 
Jeremiah,  forms  a  very  suitable  close  to  the  verse. 
The  objection  is  that  the  prophet  does  not  use 
this  particular  term  for  "  work  "  elsewhere.  But 
the  fact  of  its  only  once  occurring  might  have 

*  Wa'etten  lahem  can  only  mean  "  and  I  give  (in  pro- 
phetic idiom  'and  I  will  give  ')  unto  them,"  and  this,  of 
course,  requires  an  object.  "  I  will  give  them  to  those 
who  shall  pass  over  them  "  is  the  rendering  proposed  by 
several  scholars.  But  lahem  does  not  mean  "  to  those," 
and  the  thought  does  not  harmonise  with  what  precedes, 
and  this  use  of  "121?  is  doubtful,  and  the  verb  "  to  give  " 
absolutely  requires  an  object.  The  Vulgate  rendering  is 
really  more  in  accordance  with  Hebrew  syntax,  as  the 
masc.  suffix  of  the  verb  might  be  used  in  less  accurate 
writing.  Targum  :  "because  I  gave  them  My  law  from 
Sinai,  and  they  transgressed  against  it;"  Peshito  :  "and 
I  gave  unto  them,  and  they  transgressed  them."  So  also 
the  Syro-Hexaplar  of  Milan  (participle:  "  were  trans- 
gressing ")  between  asterisks. 


caused  its  corruption.  (Another  term,  which 
would  closely  resemble  the  actual  reading,  and 
give  much  the  same  sense  as  this  last,  is    ^'J''^-^* 

"  their  produce."  This,  too,  as  a  very  rare  ex- 
pression, only  known  from  Josh.  v.  Ii,  12,  might 
have  been  misunderstood  and  altered  by  an  editor 
or  copyist.     It  is  akin  to  the  Aramaic  "il^J?-  and 

there  are  other  Aramaisms  in  our  prophet.)  One 
thing  is  certain;  Jeremiah  cannot  have  written 
what  now  appears  in  the  Masoretic  text. 

It  is  now  made  clear  what  the  threatened  evil 
is,  in  a  fine  closing  strophe,  several  expressions 
of  which  recall  the  prophet's  magnificent  alarm 
upon  the  coming  of  the  Scythians  {cf.  iv.  5  with 
viii.  14;  iv.  15  with  viii.  16;  iv.  19  with  viii.  18). 
Here,  however,  the  colouring  is  darker,  and  the 
prevailing  gloom  of  the  picture  unrelieved  by  any 
ray  of  hope.  The  former  piece  belongs  to  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  this  to  that  of  the  worthless  Je- 
hoiakim.  In  the  interval  between  the  two,  moral 
decline  and  social  and  political  disintegration  had 
advanced  with  fearfully  accelerated  speed,  and 
Jeremiah  knew  that  the  end  could  not  be  far  off. 

The  fatal  news  of  invasion  has  come,  and  he 
sounds  the  alarm  to  his  countrymen.  "  Why  are 
we  sitting  still"  (in  silent  stupefaction)?  "as- 
semble yourselves,  that  we  may  go  into  the  de- 
fenced  cities,  and  be  silent  "  (or  "  amazed,  stupe- 
fied," with  terror)  "  there!  for  lahvah  our  God 
hath  silenced  us  "  (with  speechless  terror)  "  and 
given  us  water  of  gall  to  drink;  for  we  trespassed 
toward  lahvah.  We  looked  for  peace "  (or, 
weal,  prosperity,  "  and  there  is  no  good;  for  a 
time  of  healing,  and  behold  panic  fear!  "  So  the 
prophet  represents  the  eiifect  of  the  evil  tidings 
upon  the  rural  population.  At  first  they  are 
taken  by  surprise;  then  they  rouse  themselves 
from  their  stupor  to  take  refuge  in  the  walled 
cities.  They  recognise  in  the  trouble  a  sign  of 
lahvah's  anger.  Their  fond  hopes  of  returning 
prosperity  are  nipped  in  the  bud;  the  wounds  of 
the  past  are  not  to  be  healed;  the  country  has 
hardly  recovered  from  one  shock,  before  another 
and  more  deadly  blow  falls  upon  it.  The  next 
verse  describes  more  particularly  the  nature  of 
the  bad  news;  the  enemy,  it  would  seem,  had 
actually  entered  the  land,  and  given  no  uncer- 
tain indication  of  what  the  Judeans  might  expect, 
by  his  ravages  on  the  northern  frontier. 

"  From  Dan  was  heard  the  snorting  of  his 
horses;  at  the  sound  of  the  neighings  of  his 
chargers  all  the  land  did  quake:  and  they  came 
in  "  (into  the  country)  "  and  eat  up  the  land  and 
the  fulness  thereof,  a  city  and  them  that  dwelt 
therein."  This  was  what  the  invaders  did  to 
city  after  city,  once  they  had  crossed  the  border; 
ravaging  its  domain,  and  sacking  the  place  itself. 
Perhaps,  however,  it  is  better  to  take  the  perfects 
as  prophetic,  and  to  render:  "  From  Dan  shall 
be  heard  .  .  .  shall  quake:  and  they  shall  come 
and  eat  up  the  land,"  etc.  This  makes  the  connec- 
tion easier  with  the  next  verse,  which  certainly 
has  a  future  reference:  "  For  behold  I  am  about 
to  send  "  (or  simply.  "  I  send  ")  "  against  you 
serpents,  basilisks  "  (Isa.  xi.  8,  the  "  gif'oni "  was 
a  small  but  very  poisonous  snake;  Aquila  /3a(rt- 
"Kla-Kos,  Vulg.  regulus),  "  for  whom  there  is  no 
charm,  and  they  \vill  bite  you!  saith  lahvah."  If 
the  tenses  be  supposed  to  describe  what  has  al- 
ready happened,  then  the  connection  of  thought 
may  be  expressed  thus:  all  this  evil  that  you 
have  heard  of  has  happened,  not  by  mere  ill 
fortune,  but  by  the  Divine  will:  lahvah  Himself 
has  done  it,  and  the  evil  will  not  stop  there,  for 


54 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


He  purposes  to  send  these  destroying  serpents 
into  your  very  midst  {cf.  Num.  xxi.  6). 

The  eighteenth  verse  begins  in  the  Hebrew 
with  a  highly  anomalous  word,  which  is  generally 
supposed  to  mean  "  my  source  of  comfort " 
(^ri^r^QO)-  ^"t  both  the  strangeness  of  the  form 
itself,  which  can  hardly  be  paralleled  in  the  lan- 
guage, and  the  indifferent  sense  which  it  yields, 
and  the  uncertainty  of  the  Hebrew  MSS.,  and 
the  variations  of  the  old  versions,  indicate  that 
we  have  here  another  corruption  of  the  text. 
Some  Hebrew  copies  divide  the  word,  and  this 
is  supported  by  the  Septuagint  and  the  Syro- 
Hexaplar  version,  which  treat  the  verse  as  the 
conclusion  of  ver.  17,  and  render  "  and  they  shall 
bite  you  '  incurably,  with  pain  of  your  perplexed 
heart '  "    (Syro-Hex.    "  without   cure  ").     But   if 

the  first  part  of  the  word  is  "  without  "Trr"-?  "  for 
lack  of "  .  .  .),  what  is  the  second?  No  such 
root  as  the  existing  letters  imply  is  found  in  He- 
brew or  the  cognate  languages.  The  Targum 
does  not  help  us:  "  Because  they  were  scoffing" 
(pj''yf')D)  "  against  the  prophets  who  prophesied 
unto  them,  sorrow  and  sighing  will  I  bring " 
(Tl'X )  "upon  them  on  account  of  their  sins: 
upon  them,  saith  the  prophet,  my  heart  is  faint." 
It  is  evident  that  this  is  no  better  than  a  kind  of 
punning  upon  the  words  of  the  Masoretic  text.* 
I  incline  to  read  "  How  shall  I  cheer  myself? 
Upon  me  is  sorrow;  upon  me  my  heart  is  sick." 

(The  prophet  would  write  ^^  not  *7.V_  for 
"  against,"  without  a  sv<fix.  Read  t^^l  /'I'  ^^'^^^ 
^'^  Job  ix.  27,  X.  20;  Ps.  xxxix.  14.)  The  pas- 
sage is  much  like  iv.  19. 

Another  possible  emendation  is:  "  lahvah 
causeth  sorrow  to  flash  forth  upon  me  "  ( nUT' 
yhyo  '■  after  the  archetype  of  Amos  v.  9) ;  but  I 
prefer  the  former. 

Jeremiah  closes  the  section  with  an  outpouring 
of  his  own  overwhelming  sorrow  at  the  heart- 
rending spectacle  of  the  national  calamities.  No 
reader  endued  with  any  degree  of  feeling  can 
doubt  the  sincerity  of  the  prophet's  patriotism, 
or  the  willingness  with  which  he  would  have 
given  his  own  life  for  the  salvation  of  his  coun- 
try. This  one  passage  alone  says  enough  to 
exonerate  its  author  from  the  charge  of  indiffer- 
ence, much  more  of  treachery  to  his  fatherland. 
He  imagines  himself  to  hear  the  cry  of  the  cap- 
tive people,  who  have  been  carried  away  by  the 
Tictorious  invader  into  a  distant  land:  "  Hark! 
the  sound  of  the  imploring  cry  of  the  daughter 
of  my  people  from  a  land  far  away!  '  Is  lahvah 
not  in  Sion?  or  is  not  her  King  in  her?'"  (cf. 
Mic.  iv.  9).  Such  will  be  the  despairing  utter- 
ance of  the  exiles  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem;  and 
the  prophet  hastens  to  answer  it  with  another 
question,  which  accounts  for  their  ruin  by  their 
disloyalty  to  that  heavenly  King;  "  O  why  did 
they  vex  Me  with  their  graven  images,  with 
alien  vanities? "  Compare  a  similar  question  and 
answer  in  an  earlier  discourse  (v.  19).  It  may  be 
doubted  whether  the  pathetic  words  which  follow 
— "  The  harvest  is  past,  the  fruit-gathering  is  fin- 
ished, but  as  for  us,  we  are  not  delivered!  " — are 
to  be  taken  as  a  further  complaint  of  the  cap- 
tives, or  as  a  reference  by  the  prophet  himself 

*It  seems  to  take  the  "ifjj;  each  time  as  '■'^y  =  nn'i?y 

and  to  read  >n^X  D''J"'i;^»  for  Tl^J^nO  '.  thus  getting 
"  Scoffers!  I  will  bring  upon  them  sorrow  :  UDon  them  mv 
heart  is  faint." 


sorrow  ;  upon  them  my 


to  hopes  of  deliverance  which  had  been  cheri^lu:! 
ift  vain,  month  after  month,  until  the  season  oi 
campaigns  was  over.  In  Palestine,  the  grain 
crops  are  harvested  in  April  and  May,  the  in- 
gathering of  the  fruit  falls  in  August.  During 
all  the  summer  months,  Jehoiakim,  as  a  vassal 
of  Egypt,  may  have  been  eagerly  hoping  for 
some  decisive  interference  from  that  quarter. 
That  he  was  on  friendly  terms  with  that  power 
at  the  time  appears  from  the  fact  that  he  was 
allowed  to  fetch  back  refugees  from  its  territory 
(xxvi.  22  sq.).  A  provision  for  the  extradition  of 
offenders  is  found  in  the  far  more  ancient  treaty 
between  Ramses  II.  and  the  king  of  the  Syrian 
Chetta  (fourteenth  cent.  b.  c).  But  perhaps  the 
prophet  is  alluding  to  one  of  those  frequent  fail- 
ures of  the  crops,  which  inflicted  so  much  misery 
upon  his  people  (cf.  vers.  13,  iii.  3,  v.  24,  25),  and 
which  were  a  natural  incident  of  times  of  political 
unsettlement  and  danger.  In  that  case,  he  says, 
the  harvest  has  come  and  gone,  and  left  us  un- 
helped  and  disappointed.  I  prefer  the  political 
reference,  though  our  knowledge  of  the  history 
of  the  period  is  so  scanty  that  the  particulars 
cannot  be  determined. 

It  is  clear  enough  from  the  lyrical  utterance 
which  follows  (vv.  21-23),  that  heavy  disasters 
had  already  befallen  Judah:  "  For  the  shattering 
of  the  daughter  of  my  people  am  I  shattered;  I 
am  a  mourner;  astonishment  hath  seized  me!  " 
This  can  hardly  be  pure  anticipation.  The  next 
two  verses  may  be  a  fragment  of  one  of  the 
prophet's  elegies  (qinoth).  At  all  events,  they  re- 
call the  metre  of  Lam.  iv.  and  v.: 

"Doth  balm  in  Gilead  fail? 
Fails  the  healer  there  ? 
Why  is  not  bound  up 
My  people's  deadly  wound? 

*'  Oh  that  my  head  were  springs, 
Mine  eye  a  fount  of  tears  ! 
To  weep  both  day  and  night 
Over  my  people's  slain." 

It  is  not  impossible  that  these  two  quatrains 
are  cited  from  the  prophet's  elegy  upon  the  last 
battle  of  Megiddo  and  the  death  of  Josiah.  Simi- 
lar fragments  seem  to  occur  below  (ix.  17,  18,  20) 
in  the  instructions  to  the  mourning-women,  the 
professional  singers  of  dirges  over  the  dead. 

The  beauty  of  the  entire  strophe,  as  an  out- 
pouring of  inexpressible  grief,  is  too  obvious  to 
require  much  comment.  The  striking  question 
"  Is  there  no  balm  in  Gilead,  is  there  no  physician 
there?"  has  passed  into  the  common  dialect  of 
religious  aphorism;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of 
the  despairing  cry,  "  The  harvest  is  past,  the 
summer  is  ended,  and  we  are  not  saved!  " 

The  wounds  of  the  state  are  past  healing;  but 
how,  it  is  asked,  can  this  be?  Does  nature  yield 
a  balm  which  is  sovereign  for  bodily  hurts,  and  is 
there  nowhere  a  remedy  for  those  of  the  social 
organism?  Surely  that  were  something  anoma- 
lous, strange,  and  unnatural  (cf.  viii.  7).  "  Is 
there  no  balm  in  Gilead?  "  Yes.  it  is  found  no- 
where else  (cf.  Plin.,  "  Hist.  Nat.,"  xii.  25  ad  init. 
"  Sed  omnibus  odoribus  prjefertur  balsamum, 
tmi  terrarum  JudcPcc  concessum").  Then  has 
lahvah  mocked  us,  by  providing  a  remedy  for  the 
lesser  evil,  and  leaving  us  a  hopeless  prey  to  the 
greater?  The  question  goes  deep  down  to  the 
roots  of  faith.  Not  only  is  there  an  analogy  be- 
tween the  two  realms  of  nature  and  spirit;  in 
a  sense,  the  whole  physical  world  is  an  adumbra- 
tion of  things  unseen,  a  manifestation  of  the 
spiritual.  Is  it  conceivable  that  order  should 
reign  everywhere  in  the  lower  sphere,  and  chaos 
be  the  normal  state  of  the  fiigher?     If  our  baser 


Teremiah  vii  -x  ,  xxvi]       POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


wants  are  met  by  provisions  adapted  in  the  most 

onderful  way  to  their  satisfaction,  can  we  sup- 
pose that  the  nobler — those  cravings  by  which 
we  are  distinguished  from  irrational  creatures — 
have  not  also  their  satisfactions  included  in  the 
scheme  of  the  world?  To  suppose  it  is  evidence 
either  of  capricious  unreason,  or  of  a  criminal 
want  of  confidence  in  the  Author  of  our  being. 

"  Is  there  no  balm  in  Gilead?  Is  there  no 
healer  there?"  There  is  a  panacea  for  Israel's 
woes — the  "  law  "  or  teaching  of  lahvah;  there  is 
a  Healer  in  Israel,  lahvah  Himself  (iii.  22,  xvii. 
14),  who  has  declared  of  Himself,  "  I  wound  and 
I  heal  "  (Deut.  xxxii.  39;  xxx.  17,.  xxxiii.  6). 
"  Why  then  is  no  bandage  applied  to  the  daugh- 
ter of  my  people?"  This  is  like  the  cry  of  the 
captives,  "  Is  lahvah  not  in  Sion,  is  not  her 
King  in  her?"  (ver.  19).  Tlie  answer  there  is, 
Yes!  it  is  not  that  lahvah  is  wanting;  it  is  that 
the  national  guilt  is  working  out  its  own  retribu- 
tion. Pie  leaves  this  to  be  understood  here;  hav- 
ing framed  his  question  so  as  to  compel  people, 
if  it  might  be,  to  the  right  inference  and  answer. 

The  precious  balsam  is  the  distinctive  glory 
of  the  mountain  land  of  Gilead,  and  the  knowl- 
edge of  lahvah  is  the  distinctive  glory  of  His 
people  Israel.  Will  no  one,  then,  apply  the  true 
remedy  to  the  hurt  of  the  state?  No,  for  priests 
and  prophets  and  people  "  know  not — they  have 
refused  to  know  "  lahvah  (ver.  5).  The  nation 
will  not  look  to  the  Healer  and  live.  It  is  their 
misfortunes  that  they  hate,  not  their  sins.  There 
is  nothing  left  for  Jeremiah  but  to  sing  the 
funeral  song  of  his  fatherland. 

While  weeping  over  their  inevitable  doom,  the 
prophet  abhors  with  his  whole  soul  his  people's 
wickedness,  and  longs  to  fly  from  the  dreary 
scene  of  treachery  and  deceit.  "  O  that  I  had  in 
the  wilderness  a  lodging-place  of  wayfaring 
men  " — some  lonely  khan  on  a  caravan  track, 
whose  bare,  unfurnished  walls,  and  blank  almost 
oppressive  stillness,  would  be  a  grateful  ex- 
change for  the  luxury  and  the  noisy  riot  of 
Judah's  capital — "  that  I  might  leave  my  people 
and  go  away  from  among  them!"  The  same 
feeling  finds  expression  in  the  sigh  of  the  psalm- 
ist, who  is  perhaps  Jeremiah  himself:  "  O  for 
the  wings  of  a  dove!  "  (Ps.  W.  6  sqq.).  The  same 
feeling  has  often  issued  in  actual  withdrawal  from 
the  world.  And  under  certain  circumstances,  in 
certain  states  of  religion  and  society,  the  solitary 
life  has  its  peculiar  advantages.  The  life  of 
towns  is  doubtless  busy,  practical,  intensely  real; 
but  its  business  is  not  always  of  the  ennobling 
sort,  its  practice  in  the  strain  and  struggle  of 
selfish  competition  is  often  distinctly  hostile  to 
the  growth  and  play  of  the  best  instincts  of  hu- 
man nature;  its  intensity  is  often  the  mere  result 
of  confining  the  manifold  energies  of  the  mind 
to  one  narrow  channel,  of  concentrating  the 
whole  complex  of  human  powers  and  forces  upon 
the  single  aim  of  self-advancement  and  self- 
glorification;  and  its  reality  is  consequently  an 
illusion,  phenomenal  and  transitory  as  the  un- 
substantial prizes  which  absorb  all  its  interest, 
engross  its  entire  devotion,  and  exhaust  its  whole 
activity.  It  is  not  upon  the  broad  sea,  nor  in 
the  lone  wilderness,  that  men  learn  to  question 
the  goodness,  the  justice,  the  very  being  of  their 
Maker.  Atheism  is  born  in  the  populous  wastes 
of  cities,  where  human  beings  crowd  together, 
not  to  bless,  but  to  prey  upon  each  other;  where 
rich  and  poor  dwell  side  by  side,  but  are  sep- 
arated by  the   gulf  of   cynical    indifference   and 


social  disdain;  where  selfishness  in  its  ugliest 
forms  is  rampant,  and  is  the  rule  of  life  with 
multitudes  :^the  selfishness  which  grasps  at  per- 
sonal advantage  and  is  deaf  to  the  cries  of  hu- 
man pain:  the  selfishness  which  calls  all  manner 
of  fraud  and  trickery  lawful  means  for  the 
achievement  of  its  sordid  ends;  and  the  selfish- 
ness of  flagrant  vice,  whose  activity  is  not  only 
earthly  and  sensual,  but  also  devilish,  as  directly 
involving  the  degradation  and  ruin  of  human 
souls.  No  wonder  that  they  whose  eyes  have 
been  blinded  by  the  god  of  this  world,  fail  to  see 
evidence  of  any  other  God;  no  wonder  that  they 
in  whose  hearts  a  coarse  or  a  subtle  self-worship 
has  dried  the  springs  of  pity  and  love  can  scoff 
at  the  very  idea  of  a  compassionate  God;  no  won- 
der that  a  soul,  shaken  to  its  depths  by  the  con-  * 
templation  of  this  bewildering  medley  of  heart- 
lessness  and  misery,  should  be  tempted  to  doubt 
whether  there  is  indeed  a  Judge  of  all  the  earth, 
who  doeth  right. 

There  is  no  truth,  no  honour  in  their  dealings 
with  one  another;  falsehood  is  the  dominant  note 
of  their  social  existence:  "They  are  all  adulter- 
ers, a  throng  of  traitors!  "  The  charge  of 
adultery  is  no  metaphor  (v.  7,  8).  Where  the 
sense  of  religious  sanctions  is  weakened  or 
wanting,  the  marriage  tie  is  no  longer  respected; 
and  that  which  perhaps  lust  began,  is  ended  by 
lust,  and  man  and  woman  are  faithless  to  each 
other,  because  they  are  faithless  to  God. 

"  And  they  bend  their  tongue,  their  bow, 
falsely."  *  The  tongue  is  as  a  bow  of  which 
words  are  the  arrows.  Evildoers  "  stretch  their 
arrow,  the  bitter  word,  to  shoot  in  ambush  at 
the  blameless  man  "  (Ps.  Ixiv.  4;  cf.  Ps.  xi.  2). 
The  metaphor  is  common  in  the  language  of 
poetry;  we  have  an  instance  in  Longfellow's  "  I 
shot  an  arrow  into  the  air,"  and  Homer's  fa- 
miliar eirea  vrepbevra,  "  winged  words,"  is  'J 
kindred  expression.  (Others  render,  "  and  they 
bend  their  tongue  as  their  bow  of  falsehood,"  as 
though  the  term  "  sheqer,  mendacium  "  were  an 
epithet  qualifying  the  term  for  "  bow."  I  have 
taken  it  adverbia.lly,  a  use  justified  by  Pss. 
xx.xviii.  20,  Ixix.  5,  cxix.  78,  86.)  In  colloquial 
English  a  man  who  exaggerates  a  story  is  said 
to  "  draw  the  long  bow." 

Their  tongue  is  a  bow  with  which  they  shoot 
lies  at  their  neighbours,  "  and  it  is  not  by  truth  " 
— faithfulness,  honour,  integrity — "  that  they  wax 
mighty  in  the  land;  "  their  riches  and  power  are 
the  fruit  of  craft  and  fraud  and  overreaching. 
.A.S  was  said  in  a  former  discourse,  "  their  houses 
are  full  of  deceit,  therefore  they  become  great, 
and  amass  wealth  "  (v.  2";).  "  By  truth,"  or 
more  literally  "  unto  truth,  according  to  the  rule 
or  standard  of  truth  "  {cf.  Isa.  xxxii.  i,  "  ac- 
cording to  right;"  Gen.  i.  11,  "according  to  its 
kind  ").  With  the  idea  of  the  verb,  we  may  com- 
pare Ps.  cxii.  2:  "  Mighty  in  the  land  shall  his 
seed  become  "  {cf.  also  Gen.  vii.  18,  19).  The 
passage  chap.  v.  2,  3,  is  essentially  similar  to 
the  present,  and  is  the  only  one  besides  where  we 
find  the  term  "  by  truth  "  njioxi5  "  le'emunah  "). 
The  idiom  seems  certain,  and  the  parallel  pas- 
sages,  especially  v.   27,   appear  to  establish  the 

*  The  irregular  Niphil  torm  of  the  verb— </  i  Sam.  xiv. 
22  ;  Job  xix.  4 — may  be  justified  by  Job  xxviii.  8  ;  we  are 
not,  therefore,  bound  to  render  the  JIasoretic  text:  "and 
they  make  their  tongue  bend  their  lying  bow."  Prob- 
ably, however,  Qal  is  right,  the  Hiphil  being  due  to  • 
misunderstanding,  like  that  of  the  Targum,  "  And  thej 
taught  their  tongue  words  of  lying." 


56 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


translation  above  given;  otherwise  one  might  be 
tempted  to  render:  "  they  stretch  their  tongue, 
their  bow,  for  lying  "  "ipj^^,  v.  2),  "  and  it  is  not 
for  truth  that  they  are  strong  in  the  land." 
"Noblesse  oblige"  is  no  maxim  of  theirs;  they 
use  their  rank  and  riches  for  unworthy  ends. 

"  For  out  of  evil  unto  evil  they  go  forth  " — 
they  go  from  one  wickedness  to  another,  adding 
sin  to  sin.  Apparently,  a  military  metaphor. 
What  they  have  and  are  is  evil,  and  they  go  forth 
to  secure  fresh  conquests  of  the  same  kind. 
Neither  good  nor  evil  is  stationary;  progress  is 
the  law  of  each — "  and  Me  they  know  not,  saith 
lahvah  " — they  know  not  that  I  am  truth  itself, 
and  therefore  irreconcilably  opposed  to  all  this 
fraud  and  falsehood. 

"  Beware  ye,  every  one  of  his  companion,  and 
in  no  brother  confide  ye;  for  every  brother  will 
surely  play  the  Jacob, — and  every  companion  will 
go  about  slandering.  And  they  deceive  each  his 
neighbour,  and  truth  they  speak  not:  they  have 
trained  their  tongue  to  speak  falsehood,  to  per- 
vert "  (their  way,  iii.  21)  "  they  toil  "  (xx.  9;  cf. 
Gen.  xix.  11).  "  Thine  inhabiting  is  in  the  midst 
of  deceit;  through  deceit  they  refuse  to  know 
Me,  saith  lahvah"  (3-5).*  As  Micah  had  com- 
plained before  him  (Mic.  vii.  5),  and  as  bitter  ex- 
perience had  taught  our  prophet  (xi.  18  sqq., 
xii.  6),  neither  friend  nor  brother  was  to  be 
trusted;  and  that  this  was  not  merely  the  melan- 
choly characteristic  of  a  degenerate  age,  is  sug- 
gested by  the  reference  to  the  unbrotherly  in- 
trigues of  the  far-of¥  ancestor  of  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple, in  the  traditional  portrait  of  whom  the  best 
and  the  worst  features  of  the  national  character 
are  reflected  with  wonderful  truth  and  liveliness.! 
"  Every  brother  will  not  fail  to  play  the  Jacob  " 
(Gen.  xxv.  29  sqq.,  xxvii.  36;  Hos.  xii.  4),  to  out- 
wit, defraud,  supplant;  cunning  and  trickery  will 
subserve  acquisitiveness.  But  though  an  inordi- 
nate love  of  acquisition  may  still  seem  to  be 
specially  characteristic  of  the  Jewish  race,  as  in 
ancient  times  it  distinguished  the  Canaanite  and 
Semitic  nations  in  general,  the  tendency  to  cozen 
and  overreach  one's  neighbour  is  so  far  from  be- 
ing confined  to  it  that  some  modern  ethical  spec- 
ulators have  not  hesitated  to  assume  this  tend- 
ency to  be  an  original  and  natural  instinct  of 
humanity.  The  fact,  however,  for  which  those 
who  would  account  for  human  nature  upon 
purely  "  natural  "  grounds  are  bound  to  supply 
some  rational  explanation,  is  not  so  much  that 
aspect  of  it  which  has  been  well-known  to  re- 
semble the  instincts  of  the  lower  animals  ever 
since  observation  began,  but  the  aspect  of  revolt 
and  protest  against  those  lower  impulses  which 
we  find  reflected  so  powerfully  in  the  documents 
of  the  higher  religion,  and  which  makes  thou- 
sands of  lives  a  perpetual  warfare. 

Jeremiah  presents  his  picture  of  the  universal 
deceit  and  dissimulation  of  his  own  time  as 
something  peculiarly  shocking  and  startling  to 
the  common  sense  of  right,  and  unspeakably  re- 
volting in  the  sight  of  God,  the  Judge  of  all. 
And  yet  the  difficulty  to  the  modern  reader  is 
to    detect   any    essential    difference   between    hu- 

*  Ewald  prefers  the  reading  of  the  LXX.,  which  divides 
the  words  differently.  If  we  supijose  their  version  cor- 
rect, they  must  have  read:  "They  have  trained  their 
tongue  to  speak  falsehood,  to  distort.  They  are  weary 
of  returning.  Oppression  is  oppression,  deceit  in  deceit! 
They  refuse  to  know  Me,  saith  lahvah."  But  I  do  not 
think  this  an  improvement  on  the  present  Masoretic  text. 

tif  Jeremiah  wrote  Ps.  Iv.,  as  Hitzig  supposes,  he  may 
be  alluding  to  the  treachery  of  a  particular  friend  ;  cf.  Ps. 
Iv.  13,  14. 


man  nature  then  and  human  nature  now — 
between  those  times  and  these.  It  is  still 
true  that  avarice  and  lust  destroy  natural  af- 
fection; that  the  ties  of  blood  and  friendship 
are  no  protection  against  a  godless  love  of  self. 
The  work  of  slander  and  misrepresentation  is  not 
left  to  avowed  enemies;  your  own  acquaintance 
will  ratify  their  envy,  spite,  or  mere  ill-will  in 
this  unworthy  way.  A  simple  child  may  tell  the 
truth;  but  tongues  have  to  be  trained  to  ex- 
pertness  in  lying,  whether  in  commerce  or  in 
diplomacy,  in  politics  or  in  the  newspaper  press, 
in  the  art  of  the  salesman  or  in  that  of  the  agita- 
tor and  the  demagogue.  Men  still  make  a  toil 
of  perverting  their  way,  and  spend  as  much  pains 
in  becoming  accomplished  villains  as  honest  folk 
take  to  excel  in  virtue.  Deceit  is  still  the  social 
atmosphere  and  environment,  and  "  through  de- 
ceit "  men  "  refuse  to  know  lahvah."  The 
knowledge,  the  recognition,  the  steady  recollec- 
tion of  what  lahvah  is,  and  what  His  law  re- 
quires, does  not  suit  the  man  of  lies;  his  objects 
oblige  him  to  shut  his  eyes  to  the  truth.  Men 
"  do  not  will  "  and  "  will  not,"  to  know  the  moral 
impediments  that  lie  in  the  way  of  self-seeking 
and  self-pleasing.  Sinning  is  always  a  matter  of 
choice,  not  of  nature,  nor  of  circumstances  alone. 
To  desire  to  be  delivered  from  moral  evil  is,  so 
far,  a  desire  to  know  God. 

"  Thine  inhabiting  is  in  the  midst  of  deceit:  " 
who  that  ever  lifts  an  eye  above  the  things  of 
time  has  not  at  times  felt  thus?  "This  is  a 
Christian  country."  Why?  Because  the  ma- 
jority are  as  bent  on  self-pleasing,  as  careless  of 
God,  as  heartlessly  and  systematically  forgetful 
of  the  rights  and  claims  of  others,  as  they  would 
have  been  had  Christ  never  been  heard  of?  A 
Christian  country?  Why?  Is  it  because  we  can 
boast  of  some  two  hundred  forms  or  fashions  of 
supposed  Christian  belief,  differentiated  from 
each  other  by  heaven  knows  what  obscure  shib- 
boleths, which  in  the  lapse  of  time  have  become 
meaningless  and  obsolete;  while  the  old  ill-will 
survives,  and  the  old  dividing  lines  remain,  and 
Christians  stand  apart  from  Christians  in  a  state 
of  dissension  and  disunion  that  does  despite  and 
dishonour  to  Christ,  and  must  be  very  dear  to 
the  devil?  Some  people  are  bold  enough  to  de- 
fend this  horrible  condition  of  things  by  raising 
a  cry  of  Free  Trade  in  Religion.  But  religion 
is  not  a  trade,  not  a  thing  to  make  a  profit  of, 
except  with  Simon  Magus  and  his  numerous  fol- 
lowers both  inside  and  outside  of  the  Church. 

A  Christian  country!  But  the  rage  of  avarice,, 
the  worship  of  Mammon,  is  not  less  rampant  in 
London  than  in  old  Jerusalem.  If  the  more  vio- 
lent forms  of  oppression  and  extortion  are  re- 
strained among  us  by  the  more  complete  organ- 
isation of  public  justice,  the  fact  has  only  devel- 
oped new  and  more  insidious  modes  of  attack 
upon  the  weak  and  the  unwary.  Deceit  and 
fraud  have  been  put  upon  their  mettle  by  the 
challenge  of  the  law,  and  thousands  of  people 
are  robbed  and  plundered  by  devices  which  the 
law  can  hardly  reach  or  restrain.  Look  where 
the  human  spider  sits,  weaving  his  web  of  guile, 
that  he  may  catch  and  devour  men!  Look  at 
the  wonderful  baits  which  the  company-monger 
throws  out  day  by  day  to  human  weakness  and 
cupidity!  Do  you  call  him  shrewd  and  clever 
and  enterprising?  It  is  a  sorry  part  to  play  in 
life,  that  of  Satan's  decoy,  tempting  one's  fellow- 
creatures  to  their  ruin.  Look  at  the  lying  ad- 
vertisements, which  meet  your  eyes  wherever  you 


Jeremiah  vii,-x.,  xxvi.]        POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


57 


turn,  and  make  the  streets  of  this  great  city  al- 
most as  hideous  from  the  point  of  view  of  taste  as 
from  that  of  morality!  What  a  degrading  re- 
source! To  get  on  by  the  industrious  dissemina- 
tion of  lies,  by  false  pretences,  which  one  knows 
to  be  false!  And  to  trade  upon  human  misery — 
to  raise  hopes  that  can  never  be  fulfilled — to  add 
to  the  pangs  of  disease  the  smart  of  disappoint- 
ment and  the  woe  of  a  deeper  despair,  as  count- 
less quacks  in  this  Christian  country  do! 

A  Christian  country:  where  God  is  denied  on 
the  platform  and  through  the  press:  where  a 
novel  is  certain  of  widespread  popularity  if  its 
aim  be  to  undermine  the  foundations  of  the 
Christian  faith:  where  atheism  is  mistaken  for  in- 
telligence, and  an  inconsistent  Agnosticism  for 
the  loftiest  outcome  of  logic  and  reason;  where 
flagrant  lust  walks  the  streets  unrebuked,  un- 
abashed; where  every  other  person  you  meet  is 
a  gambler  in  one  form  or  another,  and  shopmen 
and  labourers  and  loafers  and  errand  boys  are 
all  eager  about  the  result  of  races,  and  all  agog 
to  know  the  forecasts  of  some  wily  tipster,  some 
wiseacre  of  tha  halfpenny  press! 

A  Christian  country:  where  the  rich  and  noble 
have  no  better  use  for  profuse  wealth  than  horse- 
training,  and  no  more  elevating  mode  of  recrea- 
tion than  hiViiting  and  shooting  down  innumera- 
ble birds  and  beasts;  where  some  must  rot  in 
fever-dens,  clothed  in  rags,  pining  for  food, 
stifling  for  lack  of  air  and  room;  while  others 
spend  thousands  of  pounds  upon  a  whim,  a  ban- 
quet, a  party,  a  toy  for  a  fair  woman.  I  am  not  a 
Socialist,  I  do  not  deny  a  man's  right  to  do  what 
he  will  with  his  own,  and  I  believe  that  state 
interference  would  be  in  the  last  degree  disas- 
trous to  the  country.  But  I  affirm  the  responsi- 
bility before  God  of  the  rich  and  great;  and  I 
deny  that  they  who  live  and  spend  for  themselves 
alone  are  worthy  of  the  name  of  Christian.  ♦ 

A  Christian  country:  where  human  beings  die, 
year  after  year,  in  the  unspeakable,  unimaginable 
agonies  of  canine  madness,  and  dogs  are  kept 
by  the  thousand  ia  crowded  cities,  that  the  sacri- 
fice to  the  fiend  of  selfishness  and  the  mocking 
devil  of  vanity  may  never  lack  its  victims!  There 
is  a  more  than  Egyptian  worship  of  Anubis,  in 
the  silly  infatuation  which  lavishes  tenderness 
upon  an  unclean  brute,  and  credulously  invests 
instinct  with  the  highest  attributes  of  reason;  and 
there  is  a  worse  than  heathenish  besottedness  in 
the  heart  that  can  pamper  a  dog,  and  be  utterly 
indififerent  to  the  helplessness  and  the  sufferings 
of  the  children  of  the  poor.  And  people  will  go 
to  church,  and  hear  what  the  preacher  has  to 
say,  and  "  think  he  said  what  he  ought  to  have 
said,"  or  not,  as  the  case  may  be.  and  return  to 
their  own  settled  habits  of  worldly  living,  as  a 
matter  of  course.  Oh  yes!  it  is  a  Christian  coun- 
try— the  name  of  Christ  has  been  named  in  it 
for  fifteen  centuries  past;  and  for  that  reason 
Christ  will  judge  it. 

"Therefore,  thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth:  Lo,  I 
am  about  to  melt  them  and  put  them  to  proof " 
(Job  xii.  II ;  Judg.  xvii.  4;  vi.  25);  "  for  how  am 
I  to  deal  in  face  of  "  ("  the  wickedness  of,"  LXX: 
the  term  has  fallen  out  of  the  Heb.  text:  cf.  iv.  4, 
vii.  12)  "the  daughter  of  My  people?"  This  is 
the  meaning  of  the  disasters  that  have  fallen  and 
are  even  now  falling  upon  the  country.  lahvah 
will  melt  and  assay  this  rough,  intractable  human 
ore  in  the  fiery  furnace  of  affliction;  the  strain  of 
insincerity  that  runs  through  it,  the  base  earthy 


nature,  can  only  thus  be  separated  and  purged 
away  (Isa.  xlviii.  •  10).  "A  deadly  arrow" 
(LXX.  a  "  wounding  "  one,  i.  e.,  one  which  does 
not  miss,  but  hits  and  kills)  "  is  their  tongue; 
deceit  it  spake:  with  his  mouth  peace  with  his 
companion  he  speaketh,  and  inwardly  he  layeth 
his  ambush  "  ( Ps.  Iv.  22).  The  verse  again  speci- 
fies the  wickedness  complained  of,  and  justifies 
our  restoration  of  that  word  in  the  previous 
verse. 

Perhaps,  with  the  Peshito  Syriac  "and  the  Tar- 
gum,  we  ought  rather  to  render:  "  a  sharp  arrow 
is  their  tongue."  There  is  an  Arabic  saying 
quoted  by  Lane.  "  Thou  didst  sharpen  thy  tongue 
against  us."  which  seems  to  present  a  kindred 
root*  {cf.  Ps.  Hi.  3,  Ivii.  4:  Prov.  xxv.  18).  The 
Septuagint  may  be  right,  with  its  probable  read- 
ing: "  deceit  are  the  words  of  his  mouth."  This 
certainly  improves  the  symmetry  of  the  verse. 

"  For  such  things  "  (emphatic)  "  shall  I  not  " 
— or  "  should  I  not,"  with  an  implied  "  ought — 
shall  I  not  punish  them,  saith  lahvah,  or  on 
such  a  nation  shall  not  My  soul  avenge  herself?  " 
(v.  9,  29,  after  which  the  LXX.  omits  "  them  " 
here).  These  cjuestions,  like  the  previous  one. 
"  How  am  I  to  deal  " — or,  "  how  could  I  act — in 
face  of  the  wickedness  of  the  daughter  of  My 
people?"  imply  the  moral  necessity  of  the 
threatened  evils.  If  lahweh  be  what  He  has 
taught  man's  conscience  that  He  is,  national  sin 
must  involve  national  suffering,  and  national  per- 
sistence in  sin  must  involve  national  ruin. 
Therefore  He  will  "  melt  and  try  "  this  people, 
both  for  their  punishment  and  their  reformation, 
if  it  may  be  so.  For  punishment  is  properly 
retributive,  whatever  may  be  alleged  to  the  con- 
trary. Conscience  tells  us  that  we  deserve  to  suf- 
fer for  ill-doing,  and  conscience  is  a  better  guide 
than  ethical  or  sociological  speculators  who  have 
lost  faith  in  God.  But  God's  chastisements  as 
known  to  our  experience,  that  is  to  say,  in  the 
present  life,  are  reformatory  as  well  as  retribu- 
tive; they  compel  us  to  recollect,  they  bring  us, 
like  the  Prodigal,  back  to  ourselves,  out  of  the 
distractions  of  a  sinful  career,  they  humble  us 
with  the  discovery  that  we  have  a  Master,  that 
there  is  a  Power  above  ourselves  and  our  appar- 
ently unlimited  capacity  to  choose  evil  and  to  do 
it:  and  so  by  Divine  grace  we  may  become  con- 
trite and  be  healed  and  restored. 

The  prophet  thus,  perhaps,  discerns  a  faint 
glimmer  of  hope,  but  his  sky  darkens  again  im- 
mediately. The  land  is  already  to  a  great  extent 
desolate,  through  the  ravages  of  the  invaders,  oH 
through  severe  droughts  {cf.  iv.  25,  viii.  2o(?), 
xii.  4).  "  Upon  the  mountains  will  I  lift  up 
weeping  and  wailing,  and  upon  the  pastures  of 
the  prairie  a  lamentation,  for  they  have  been 
burnt  up"  (ii.  15;  2  Kings  xxii.  13),  "so  that 
no  man  passeth  over  them,  and  they  have  not 
heard  the  cry  of  the  cattle:  from  the  birds  of  the 
air  to  the  beasts,  they  are  fled,  are  gone  "  (iv.  25). 
The  perfects  may  be  prophetic  and  announce 
what  is  certain  to  happen  hereafter.  The  next 
verse,  at  all  events,,  is  unambiguous  in  this  re- 
spect: "  And  I  will  make  Jerusalem  into  heaps, 
a  haunt  of  jackals;  and  the  cities  of  Judah  will 
I  make  a  desolation  without  inhabitant."  Not 
only  the  country  districts,  but  the  fortified  towns, 
and  Jerusalem  itself,  the  heart  and  centre  of  the 
nation,  will  be  desolated.  Sennacherib  boasts 
that  he  took  forty-six  strong  cities,  and  "  little 

*  Shahadhta  ^lisdnaka  alaina.  In  this  case,  we  shouid 
follow  the  Heb.  margin  or  Q're. 


58 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


towns  without  number,"  and  carried  of?  200,150 
male  and  female  captives,  and  an  immense  booty 
in  cattle,  before  proceeding  to  invest  Jerusalem 
itself;  a  statement  which  shows  how  severe  the 
sufferings  of  Judah  might  be,  before  the  enemy 
struck  at  its  vitals. 

In  the  words  "  I  will  make  Jerusalem  heaps," 
there  is  not  necessarily  a  change  of  subject. 
Jeremiah  was  authorised  to  "  root  up  and  pull 
down  and  destroy  "  in  the  name  of  lahvah. 

He  now  challenges  the  popular  wise  men  (viii. 
8,  9)  to  account  for  what,  on  their  principles, 
must  appear  an  inexplicable  phenomenon.  "  Who 
is  the  (true)  wise  man,  so  that  he  understands 
this  "  (Hos.  xiv.  9),  "  and  who  is  he  to  whom 
the  mouth  of  lahvah  hath  spoken,  so  that  he 
can  explain  it"  ("unto  you?"  LXX.).  "Why 
is  the  land  undone,  burnt  up  like  the  prairie, 
without  a  passer  by?  "  Both  to  Jeremiah  and  to 
his  adversaries  the  land  was  lahvah's  land;  what 
befell  it  must  have  happened  by  His  will,  or  at 
least  with  His  consent.  Why  had  He  suffered 
the  repeated  ravages  of  foreign  invaders  to  deso- 
late His  own  portion,  where,  if  anywhere  on 
earth.  He  must  display  His  power  and  the  proof 
of  His  deity?  Not  for  lack  of  sacrifices,  for 
these  were  not  neglected.  Only  one  answer  was 
possible,  to  those  who  recognised  the  validity  of 
the  Book  of  the  Law,  and  the  binding  character 
of  the  covenant  which  it  embodied.  The  people 
and  their  wise  men  cannot  account  for  the  na- 
tional calamities;  Jeremiah  himself  can  only  do 
so,  because  he  is  inwardly  taught  by  lahvah  him- 
self (ver.  12):  "And  lahvah  said."  It  may  be 
supposed  that  ver.  11  states  the  popular  dilemma, 
the  anxious  question  which  they  put  to  the  of- 
ficial prophets,  whose  guidance  they  accepted. 
The  prophets  could  give  no  reasonable  or  satis- 
fying answer,  because  their  teaching  hitherto 
had  been  that  lahvah  could  be  appeased  "  with 
thousands  of  rams,  and  ten  thousand  torrents  of 
oil  "  (Mic.  vi.  7).  On  such  conditions  they  had 
promised  peace,  and  their  teaching  had  been  falsi- 
fied by  events.  Therefore  Jeremiah  gives  the 
true  answer  for  lahvah.  But  why  did  not  the 
people  cease  to  believe  those  whose  word  was 
thus  falsified?  Perhaps  the  false  prophets  would 
reply  to  objectors,  as  the  refugees  in  Egypt  an- 
swered Jeremiah's  reproof  of  their  renewed  wor- 
ship of  the  Queen  of  Heaven:  "  It  was  in  the 
years  that  followed  the  abolition  of  this  wor- 
ship that  our  national  disasters  began  "  (xliv.  18). 
It  is  never  difficult  to  delude  those  whose  evil 
'and  corrupt  hearts  make  them  desire  nothing  so 
much  as  to  be  deluded. 

"  And  lahvah  said:  Because  they  forsook  "  (lit. 
"  upon  "  =  on  account  of  "  their  forsaking  ") 
My  Law  which  I  set  before  them  '  "  (Deut. 
iv.  18),  "  and  they  hearkened  not  unto  My 
voice "  (Deut.  xxviii.  15),  "  and  walked  not 
therein"  (in  My  Law;  LXX.  omits  the  clause); 
"  and  walked  after  the  obstinacy  of  their  own  " 
("evil:"  LXX.)  "heart,  and  after  the  Baals" 
(Deut.  iv.  3)  "  which  their  fathers  taught  them  " 
— instead  of  teaching  them  the  laws  of  lahvah 
(Deut.  xi.  19).  Such  were,  and  had  always  been, 
the  terms  of  the  answer  of  lahvah's  true  prophets. 
Do  you  ask  "  upon  what  ground  "  ("  'al  raah  ") 
misfortune  has  overtaken  you?  Upon  the 
ground  of  your  having  forsaken  lahvah's  "  law  " 
or  instruction,  His  doctrine  concerning  Himself 
and  your  consequent  obligations  towards  Him. 
They  had  this  teaching  in  the  Book  of  the  Law, 
and   had   solemnly  u:Klertaken   to   observe   it,   in 


that  great  national  assembly  of  the  eighteenth 
year  of  Josiah.  And  they  had  had  it  from  the 
first  in  the  living  utterances  of  the  prophets. 

This,  then,  is  the  reason  why  the  land  is  waste 
and  deserted.  And  therefore — because  past  and 
present  experience  is  an  index  of  the  future,  foi 
lahvah's  character  and  purpose  are  constant — 
therefore  the  desolation  of  the  cities  of  Judah  and 
of  Jerusalem  itself  will  ere  long  be  accomplished. 
"  Therefore  thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth,"  the  God 
of  Armies  and  "the  God  of  Israel;  Lo,  I  am 
about  to  feed  them  " — or,  "  I  continue  to  feed 
them  " — to  wit,  "  this  people  "  (an  epexegetical 
gloss  omitted  by  the  LXX.)  "  with  wormwood, 
and  I  will  give  them  to  drink  waters  of  gall  " 
(Deut.  xxix.  17.  An  Israelite  inclining  to  for- 
eign gods  is  "  a  root  bearnig  wormwood  and 
gall  " — bearing  a  bitter  harvest  of  defeat,  a  cup 
of  deadly  disaster  for  his  people;  cf.  Am.  vi.  12); 
"  and  I  will  '  scatter  them  among  the  nations,' 
'  whom  they  and  their  fathers  knew  not '  "  (Deut. 
xxviii.  36,  64).  The  last  phrase  is  remarkable 
as  evidence  of  the  isolation  of  Israel,  whose 
country  lay  off  the  beaten  track  between  the 
Trans-Euphratean  empires  and  Egypt,  which  ran 
along  the  sea-coast.  They  knew  not  Assyria,  un- 
til Tiglath  Pileser's  intervention  (circ.  734),  nor 
Babylon  till  the  times  of  the  New  Empire.  In 
Hezekiah's  day,  Babylon  is  still  "  a  far  country  " 
(2  Kings  XX.  14).  Israel  was  in  fact  an  agri- 
cultural people,  trading  directly  with  Phoenicia 
and  Egypt,  but  not  with  the  lands  beyond  the 
Great  River.  The  prophets  heighten  the  horror 
of  exile  by  the  strangeness  of  the  land  whither 
Israel  is  to  be  banished. 

"  And  I  will  send  after  them  the  sword,  until 
I  have  consumed  them."  The  survivors  are  to 
be  cut  off  (cf.  viii.  3) ;  there  is  no  reserve,  as  in 
iv.  27,  V.  10,  18;  a  "full  end"  is  announced; 
whicfh,  again,  corresponds  to  the  aggravation  of 
social  and  private  evils  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim, 
and  the  prophet's  despair  of  reform. 

The  judgment  of  Judah  is  the  ruin  of  her  cities, 
the  dispersion  of  her  people  in  foreign  lands,  and 
extermination  by  the  sword.  Nothing  is  left  for 
this  doomed  nation  but  to  sing  its  funeral  song; 
to  send  for  the  professional  wailing  women,  that 
they  may  come  and  chant  their  dirges,  not  over 
the  dead,  but  over  the  living  who  are  condemned 
to  die:  "  Thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth  "  (here  as  in 
ver.  6,  LXX.  omits  the  expressive  "  Sabaoth  "), 
"  Mark  ye  well  "  the  present  crisis,  and  what 
it  implies  (cf.  ii.  lO;  LXX.  wrongly  omits  this 
emphatic  term),  "  and  summon  the  women  that 
sing  dirges,  that  they  come,  and  unto  the  skilful 
women  send  ye,  that  they  come  "  (LXX.  omits), 
"and  hasten"  (LXX.  "and  speak  and")  "to 
life  up  the  death-wail  over  us,  that  our  eyes  may 
run  down  with  tears,  and  our  eyelids  pour  down 
waters."  The  "  singing  women  "  of  2  Chron. 
XXXV.  25,  or  the  "  minstrels  "  of  St.  Matt.  ix.  23, 
are  intended.  The  reason  assigned  for  thus  invit- 
ing them  assumes  that  the  prophet's  forecast  is 
already  fulfilled.  Already,  as  in  viii.  19,  Jeremiah 
hears  the  loud  wailing  of  the  captives  as  they  are 
driven  away  from  their  ruined  homes:  "  For  the 
sound  of  the  death-wail  is  heard  from  Sion, 
'  How  are  we  undone!  We  are  sore  ashamed  '  " 
— of  our  false  confidence  and  foolish  security  and 
deceitful  hopes — "  '  for,'  "  after  all,  "  '  we  have 
left  the  land,  for  our  dwellings  have  cast  (us) 
out!  '  "  The  last  two  fines  appear  to  be  parallels, 
which  is  against  the  rendering.  "  For  men  have 
cast  down  our  dwellings."     (Cf.   Lev.  xviii.  25; 


lereiniah  vii.-x..  xxvi.]       POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


59 


xxii.  28.)  From  the  wailing  women,  the  address 
now  seems  to  turn  to  the  Judean  women  gen- 
erally; but  perhaps  the  former  are  still  intended, 
as  their  peculiar  calling  was  probably  hereditary 
and  passed  on  from  mother  to  daughter:  "  For 
hear,  ye  women,  the  word  of  lahvah,  and  let 
your  ear  take  in  the  word  n[  His  mouth!  and 
teach  ye  your  daughters  the  d'^ath-wail,  and  each 
her  companion  the  lamentation; ;  for 

"Death  scales  our  iatt-c-es, 
Enters  our  paiace'j, 
To  cut  off  boy  vithout, 
The  young  rren  from  the  streets." 

"  And  the  corpseo  of  men  will  fall  " — the  tense 
certifies  the  future  reference  of  the  others — "  like 
dung"  (viii.  ^)  'on  the  face  of  the  field" 
(2  Kings  ix.  3/,  of  Jezebel's  corpse) — left  with- 
out burial  r\t^s  to  rot  and  fatten  the  soil — "  and 
like  the  corn-swath  behind  the  reaper,  and  none 
shall  gather  (them)."  The  quatrain  (ver.  20)  is 
possibly  quoted  from  some  familiar  elegy;  and 
the  allusion  seems  to  be  to  a  mysterious  visita- 
tion Jike  the  plague,  which  used  to  be  known  in 
Europe  as  "  the  Black  Death  "  (cf.  xv.  2,  xviii. 
21,  xliii.  11).  In  this  time  of  closed  gates  and 
baried  doors,  death  is  represented  as  entering  the 
house,  not  by  the  door,  but  "  climbing  up  some 
other  way  "  like  a  thief  (Joei  ii.  9;  St.  John  x.  i). 
Bars  and  bolts  will  be  futile  against  such  an  in- 
vader. The  figure  is  not  continued  in  the  sec- 
ond half  of  the  stanza.*  The  point  of  the  clos- 
ing comparison  seems  to  be  that  whereas  the 
corn-swaths  are  gathered  up  in  sheaves  and  taken 
home,  the  bodies  will  lie  where  the  reaper  Death 
cuts  them  down. 

"  Thus  said  lahvah:  Let  not  a  wise  man  glory 
in  his  wisdom,  and  let  not  the  mighty  man  glory 
in  his  might!  Let  not  a  rich  man  glory  in  his 
riches,  but  in  this  let  him  glory  that  glorieth, 
in  being  prudent  and  knowing  Me "  (LXX. 
omits  pronoun,  cf.  Gen.  i.  4),  "  that  I,  lahvah, 
do  lovingkindness "  C'and:"  LXX.  and  Ori- 
entals), "  justice  and  righteousness  upon  the 
earth;  for  in  these  I  delight,  saith  lahvah." 

It  is  not  easy,  at  first  sight,  to  see  the  con- 
nection of  this,  one  of  the  finest  and  deepest  of 
Jeremiah's  oracles,  with  the  sentence  of  destruc- 
tion which  precedes  it.  It  is  not  satisfactory  to 
regard  it  as  stating  "the  only  means  of  escape 
and  the  reason  why  it  is  not  used"  (the  latter 
being  set  forth  in  vv.  24,  25);  for  the  leading 
idea  of  the  whole  composition,  from  vii.  13  to 
ix  22,  is  that  retribution  is  coming,  and  no  es- 
cape, not  even  that  of  a  remnant,  is  contemplated. 
The  passage  looks  like  an  appendix  to  the  previ- 
ous pieces,  such  as  the  prophet  might  have  added 
at  a  later  period  when  the  crisis  was  over,  and 
the  country  had  begun  to  breathe  again,  after  the 
shock  of  invasion  had  rolled  away.  And  this 
impression  is  confirmed  by  its  contents.  We 
have  no  details  about  the  first  interference  of  the 
new  Chaldean  power  in  Judah  ;  we  only  read  that 
in  Jehoiakim's  days  "Nebuchadrezzar  the  king 
of  Babylon  came  up,  and  Jehoiakim  became  his 
servant  three  years:  then  he  turned  and  rebelled 
against  him"  (2  Kings  xxiv.  i).  But  before  this, 
for  some  two  or  three  years,  Jehoiakim  was  the 
vassal  of  the  king  of  Egypt  to  win  m  he  owed 
his  crown,  and  Nebuchadrezzar  had  to  reduce 
Necho  before  he  could  attend  to  Jehoiakim.     It 

*"  Speak  thou,  Thus  saith  lahweh,"  is  undoubtedlv  a 
spurious  addition,  and  does  not  appear  in  the  I. XX. 
Jeremiah  never  says  A'o/i  tie'um  Ja/tva/t,  and  never  uses 
the  imperative  dabber .' 


may  be,  therefore,  that  the  worst  apprehensions 
of  the  time  not  having  been  realised,  in  the  year 
or  two  of  lull  which  followed,  the  politicians  of 
Judah  began  to  boast  of  their  foresight  and  the 
caution  and  sagacity  of  their  measures  for  the 
public  safety,  instead  of  ascribing  the  respite  to 
God;  the  warrior  class  might  vaunt  the  bravery 
which  it  had  exhibited  or  intended  to  exhibit  in 
the  service  of  the  country;  and  the  rich  nobles 
might  exult  in  the  apparent  security  of  theii 
treasures  and  the  new  lease  of  enjoyment  ac- 
corded to  themselves.  To  these  various  classes, 
who  would  not  be  slow  to  ridicule  his  dark  fore- 
bodings as  those  of  a  moody  and  unpatriotic 
pessimist  (xx.  7,  xxvi.  11,  xxix.  26,  xxxvii.  13), 
Jeremiah  now  speaks,  to  remind  them  that  if  the 
danger  is  over  for  the  present,  it  is  the  loving- 
kindness  and  the  righteous  government  of  lahvah 
which  has  removed  it,  and  to  declare  that  it  is 
only  suspended  and  postponed,  not  abolished  for 
ever:  "  Behold,  days  are  coming,  saith  lahvah, 
when  I  will  visit  "  (his  guilt)  "  upon  every  one 
that  is  circumcised  in  foreskin  "  (only,  and  not 
"  in  heart  "  also) :  "  upon  Egypt  and  upon  Judah, 
and  upon  Edom  and  upon  the  bene  Ammon  and 
upon  Moab,  and  upon  all  the  tonsured  folk  that 
dwell  in  the  wilderness:  For  all  the  nations  are 
uncircumcised,  and  all  the  house  of  Israel  are  un- 
circumcised  in  heart."  Egypt  is  mentioned  first, 
as  the  leading  nation,  to  which  at  the  time  the 
petty  states  of  the  west  looked  for  help  in  their 
struggle  against  Babylon  {cf.  xxvii.  3).  The 
prophet  numbers  Judah  with  the  rest,  not  only  as 
a  member  of  the  same  political  group,  but  as 
standing  upon  the  same  level  of  unspiritual  life. 
Like  Israel,  Egypt  also  practised  circumcision, 
and  both  the  context  here  requires  and  their  kin- 
ship with  the  Hebrews  makes  it  probable  that 
the  other  peoples  mentioned  observed  the  same 
custom  (Herod.,  ii.  36,  104),  which  is  actually 
portrayed  in  a  wall-painting  at  Karnak.  The 
"  tonsured  folk  "  or  "  cropt-heads  "  of  the  wilder- 
ness are  north  Arabian  nomads  like  the  Ke- 
darenes  (xlix.  28,  32).  and  the  tribes  of  Dedan, 
Tema,  and  Buz  (xxv.  23),  whose  ancestor  was 
the  circumcised  Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv.  13  sqq.,  xvii. 
23).  Herodotus  records  their  custom  of  shaving 
the  temples  all  round,  and  leaving  a  tuft  of  hair 
on  the  top  of  the  head  (Herod.,  iii.  8),  which 
practice,  like  circumcision,  had  a  religious  signifi- 
cance, and  was  forbidden  to  the  Israelites  (Lev. 
xix.  27,  xxi.  5). 

Now  why  does  Jeremiah  mention  circumcision 
at  all?  The  case  is,  I  think,  parallel  to  his  men- 
tion of  another  external  distinction  of  the  popu- 
lar religion,  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  (iii.  15). 
Just  as  in  that  place  God  promises  "  shepherds 
according  to  Mine  heart  which  shall  shepherd  " 
the  restored  Israel  "  with  knowledge  and  pru- 
dence," and  then  directly  adds  that,  in  the  light 
and  truth  of  those  days,  the  ark  will  be  for- 
gotten (iii.  15,  16);  so  here,  he  bids  the  ruling 
classes,  the  actual  shepherds  of  the  nation,  not  to 
trust  in  their  own  wisdom  or  valour  or  wealth 
{cf.  xvii.  5  sqq.'),  but  in  "  being  prudent  and 
knowing  lahvah,"  and  then  adds  that  the  out- 
ward sign  of  circumcision,  upon  which  the  people 
prided  themselves  as  the  mark  of  their  dedication 
to  lahvah,  was  in  itself  of  no  value,  apart  from 
a  "  circumcised  heart,"  i.  e.,  a  heart  purified  of 
selfish  aims  and  devoted  to  the  will  and  glory  of 
God  (iv.  4).  So  far  as  lahvah  is  concerned,  all 
Judah's  heathen  neighbours  are  uncircumcised,  in 
spite   of  their   observance   of   the   outward   rite. 


6o 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


The  Jews  themselves  would  hardly  admit  the  va- 
lidity of  heathen  circumcision,  because  the  man- 
ner of  it  was  different,  just  as  at  this  day  the 
Muhammadan  method  differs  from  the  Jewish. 
But  Jeremiah  puts  "  all  the  house  of  Israel," 
who  were  circumcised  in  the  orthodox  manner, 
on  a  level  with  the  imperfectly  circumcised 
heathen  peoples  around  them.  All  alike  are  un- 
circumcised  before  God;  those  who  have  the 
orthodox  rite,  and  those  who  have  but  an  in- 
ferior semblance  of  it;  and  all  alike  will  in  the 
day  of  judgment  be  visited  for  their  sins  {cf. 
Amos  i.). 

With  the  increasing  carelessness  of  moral 
obligations,  an  increasing  importance  would  be 
attached  to  the  observance  of  such  a  rite  as  cir- 
cumcision, which  was  popularly  supposed  to  de- 
vote a  man  to  lahvah  in  such  sense  that  the  tie 
was  indissoluble.  Jeremiah  says  plainly  that  this 
is  a  mistaken  view.  The  outward  sign  must  have 
an  inward  and  spiritual  grace  corresponding 
thereto;  else  the  Judeans  are  no  better  than  those 
whose  circumcision  they  despise  as  defective. 
His  meaning  is  that  of  the  Apostle,  ''  Circum- 
cision verily  profiteth,  if  thou  keep  the  lazv ; 
but  if  thou  be  a  breaker  of  law,  thy  circumcision 
hath  become  uncircumcision  "  (Rom.  ii.  25). 
"  Circumcision  is  nothing,  and  uncircumcision  is 
nothing,  but  the  keeping  of  the  commandments 
of  God,"  scil,  is  everything  (i  Cor.  vii.  19).  It 
is  "  faith  working  by  love,"  it  is  the  "  new  crea- 
ture "  that  is  essential  in  spiritual  religion  (Gal. 
V.  6,  vi.  15). 

Hcec  dicit  Dominus:  Non  glorietur  sapiens  in 
sapientia  sua.  Glancing  back  over  the  whole  pas- 
sage, we  discern  an  inward  relation  between  these 
verses  and  the  preceding  discourse.  It  is  not  the 
outward  props  of  state-craft,  and  strong  bat- 
talions, and  inexhaustible  wealth,  that  really  and 
permanently  uphold  a  nation;  not  these,  but  the 
knowledge  of  lahvah,  a  just  insight  into  the  true 
nature  of  God,  and  a  national  life  regulated  in  all 
its  departments  by  that  insight.  At  the  outset 
of  this  third  section  of  his  discourse  (ix.  3-6), 
Jeremiah  declared  that  corrupt  Israel  "  knew 
not  "  and  "  refused  to  know  "  its  God.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  entire  piece  (vii.  3  sq.),  he  urged 
his  countrymen  to  "  amend  their  ways  and  their 
doings,"  and  not  go  on  trusting  in  "  lying 
words  "  and  doing  the  opposite  of  "  lovingkind- 
ness  and  justice  and  righteousness,"  which  alone 
are  pleasing  to  lahvah  (Mic.  vi.  8),  Who  "  de- 
lighteth  in  lovingkindness  and  not  sacrifice,  and 
in  the  knowledge  of  God  more  than  in  burnt- 
offerings  "  (Hos.  vi.  6).  And  just  as  in  the 
opening  section  the  sacrificial  worship  was  dis- 
paraged, taken  as  an  "  opus  operatum,"  so  here 
at  the  close  circumcision  is  declared  to  have  no 
independent  value  as  a  means  of  securing  Divine 
favour  (ix.  25).  Thus  the  entire  discourse  is 
rounded  off  by  the  return  of  the  end  to  the  be- 
ginning; and  the  main  thought  of  the  whole, 
which  Jeremiah  has  developed  and  enforced  with 
so  much  variety  of  feeling  and  oratorical  and 
poetical  ornament,  is  the  eternally  true  thought 
that  a  service  of  God  which  is  purely  external 
is  no  service  at  all,  and  that  rites  without  a  loving 
obedience  are  an  insult  to  the  Majesty  of  Heaven. 

X.  17-25.  The  latter  part  of  chap.  x.  resumes 
the  subject  suspended  at  ix.  22.  It  evidently 
contemplates  the  speedy  departure  of  the  people 
into  banishment.  "  Away  out  of  the  land  with 
thy  pack"  (or  "thy  goods";  LXX.  inr6ffTa<ns, 
"  property,"     Targ.     "  merchandise,"     the     Heb. 


term,  which  is  related  to  "  Canaan,"  occurs  here 
only),  "  O  thou  that  sittest  in  distress!  "  (or 
"  abidest  in  the  siege  ":  Hi.  5;  2  Kings  xxiv.  10). 
Sion  is  addressed,  and  bidden  to  prepare  her 
scanty  bundle  of  bare  necessaries  for  the  march 
into  exile.  So  Egypt  is  bidden  to  "  make  for 
herself  vessels  of  exile,"  xlvi.  19.  Some  think 
that  Sion  is  warned  to  withdraw  her  goods  from 
the  open  country  to  the  protection  of  her  strong 
walls,  before  the  siege  begins,  as  in  viii.  14;  but 
we  have  passed  that  stage  in  the  development  of 
the  piece,  and  the  next  verse  seems  to  show  the 
meaning:  "  For  thus  hath  lahvah  said,  Lo,  I  am 
about  to  sling  forth  the  inhabitants  of  the  land 
this  time " — as  opposed  to  former  occasions, 
when  the  enemy  retired  unsuccessful  (2  Kings 
xvi.  5,  xix.  36),  or  went  off  satisfied  with  plunder 
or  an  indemnity,  like  the  Scythians  (see  also 
2  Kings  xiv.  14) — "  and  I  will  distress  them  that 
they  may  find  out  "  the  truth,  which  now  they 
refuse  to  see.  The  aposiopesis  "  that  they  may 
find  out!  "  is  very  striking.  The  Vulgate  renders 
the  verb  in  the  passive:  Tribulabo  eos  ita  ut  in- 
z'eniantnr.  This,  however,  does  not  give  so  good 
a  sense  as  the  Masoretic  pointing,  and  Ewald's 
reference  of  the  term  to  the  goods  of  the  panic- 
stricken  fugitives  seems  fiat  and  tasteless  ("  the 
inhabitants  of  the  land  will  this  time  .  .  .  not 
be  able  to  hide  their  goods  from  the  enemy!  "). 
The  best  comment  on  the  phrase  is  supplied  by 
a  later  oracle:  "  Lo,  I  am  about  to  make  them 
know  this  time — I  will  make  them  know  My 
hand  and  My  might;  that  they  may  know  that 
My  name  is  lahvah"  (xvi.  21).  Cf.  also  xvii.  9; 
Eccles.  viii.  17. 

The  last  verse.  (17)  resembles  a  poetical  quota- 
tion; and  this  one  looks  like  the  explication  of 
it.  There  the  population  is  personified  as  a 
woman;  here  we  have  instead  the  plain  prose  ex- 
pression, "  inhabitants  of  the  land."  The  fig- 
urative, "  I  will  sling  them  forth  "  or  "  cast  them 
out,"  explains  the  bidding  of  Sion  to  "  pack  up 
her  bundle  "  or  "  belongings  " — there  seems  to 
be  a  touch  of  contempt  in  this  isolated  word,  as 
much  as  to  signify  that  the  people  must  go  forth 
into  exile  with  no  more  of  their  possessions  than 
they  can  carry  like  a  beggar  in  a  bundle.  The 
expression,  "  I  will  distress  them,"  seems  to  show 
that  "  thou  that  sittest  in  the  distress  "  is  pro- 
leptic,  or  to  be  rendered  "  thou  that  art  to  sit  in 
distress,"  which  comes  to  the  same  thing. 

And  now  the  prophet  imagines  the  distress  and 
the  remorse  of  this  forlorn  mother,  as  it  will 
manifest  itself  when  her  house  is  ruined  and  her 
children  are  gone  and  she  realises  the  folly  of 
the  past  (cf.  iv.  31) : — 

"  Woe's  me  for  my  wound  ! 
Fatal  is  my  stroke  !  " 

(perhaps  quoted  from  a  familiar  elegy).  "And 
yet  I — I  thought"  (chap.  xxii.  21:  Ps.  xxx.  7), 
"  Only  this  " — no  more  than  this — "  is  my  sick- 
ness: I  can  bear  it!  "  (ni  "[N  JNt^X  "'''^n;  LXX. 
a-ov,  Vulg.  "  niea ").  The  people  had  never 
fully  realised  the  threatenings  of  the  prophets, 
until  they  began  to  be  accomplished.  When  they 
heard  them,  they  had  said,  half-incredulously, 
half-mockingly.  Is  that  all?  Their  false  guides, 
too,  had  treated  apparent  danger  as  a  thing  of 
little  moment,  assuring  them  that  their  half  re- 
forms, and  zealous  outward  worship,  were  suf- 
ficient to  turn  away  the  Divine  displeasure  (vi. 
14).     And  so  they  said  to  themselves,  as  sinners 


Jeremiah  vii.-x.,  xxvi.]       POPULAR    AND    TRUE    RELIGION. 


6i 


are  still  in  the  habit  of  saying,  "  If  the  worst 
come  to  the  worst,  I  can  bear  it.  Besides,  God 
is  merciful,  and  things  may  turn  out  better  for 
frail  humanity  than  your  preachers  of  wrath  and 
woe  predict.  Meanwhile — I  shall  do  as  I  please, 
and  take  my  chance  of  the  issue." 

The  lament  of  the  mourning  mother  con- 
tinues: "  My  tent  is  laid  waste  and  all  my  cords 
are  broken;  My  sons  went  forth  of  me  "  (to  bat- 
tle) "and  are  not:  There  is  none  to  spread  my 
tent  any  more,  And  to  set  up  my  curtains  {cf. 
Amos  ix.  ii).  Overhearing,  as  it  were,  this  sor- 
rowful lamentation  ("  qinah  "),  the  prophet  in- 
terposes with  the  reason  of  the  calainity:  "  For 
the  shepherds  "became  brutish "  or  "  behaved 
foolishly,"  stultc  cgcrunt  (Vulg.) — the  leaders  of 
the  nation  showed  themselves  as  insensate  and 
silly  as  cattle — "  and  lahvah  they  sought  not  " 
(ii.  8) ;  "  Therefore  " — as  they  had  no  regard  for 
Divine  counsel — "  they  dealt  not  wisely  "  (iii.  15. 
ix.  22,  XX.  11),  "  and  all  their  flock  was  scattered 
abroad." 

Once  more,  and  for  the  last  time,  the  prophet 
sounds  the  alarm:  "  Hark!  a  rumour!  lo,  it  Com- 
eth! and  a  great  uproar  from  the  land  of  the 
north:  to  make  the  cities  of  Judah  a  desolation, 
a  haunt  of  jackals!  "  It  is  not  likely  that  the 
verse  is  to  be  regarded  as  spoken  by  the  mourn- 
ing country:  she  contemplates  the  evil  as  already 
done,  whereas  here  it  is  only  imminent  {cf.  iv. 
6,  vi.  22,  i.  15).  The  piece  concludes  with  a 
prayer  (vv.  23-25),  which  may  be  considered 
either  as  an  intercession  by  the  prophet  on  be- 
half of  the  nation  {cf.  xviii.  20).  or  as  a  form 
of  supplication  which  he  suggests  as  suitable  to 
the  existing  crisis.  "  I  know,  lahvah.  that  man's 
way  is  not  his  own;  That  it  pertaineth  not  to  a 
man  to  walk  and  direct  his  own  steps:  Correct 
me,  lahvah.  but  with  justice:  Not  in  Thine  anger, 
lest  Thou  make  me  small!  "  Partly  quoted.  Ps. 
vi.  I,  xxxviii.  i)  "  Pour  out  Thy  fury  upon  the 
nations  that  know  Thee  not.  And  upon  tribes 
that  have  not  called  upon  Thy  name:  For  they 
have  devoured  Jacob  "  ("  and  will  devour  him  ") 
("  and  consumed  him  "),  "  and  his  pasture  they 
have  desolated!  "  (Ps.  Ixxix.  6.  7.  quoted  from 
this  place.  In  Jer.  the  LXX.  omits  "  and  will 
devour  him;  "  while  the  psalm  omits  both  of  the 
bracketed  expressions.) 

The  Vulgate  renders  ver.  23:  "  Scio.  Domine, 
quia  non  est  hominis  via  ejus;  nee  viri  est  ut 
ambulet.  et  dirigat  gressus  suos."  I  think  this 
indicates  the  correct  reading  of  the  Hebrew  text 

I'S'Jl  V?;  cf.  ix.  23,  where  two  infinitives  absolute 
are  used  in  a  similar  way).  The  Septuagint  also 
must  have  had  the  same  text,  for  it  translates, 
"  nor  will  (=  can)  a  man  walk  and  direct  his 
own  walking."  The  Masoretic  punctuation  is 
certainly  incorrect;  and  the  best  that  can  be  made 
of  it  is  Hitzig's  version,  which,  however,  disre- 
gards the  accents,  although  their  authority  is 
the  same  as  that  of  the  vowel  points:  "  I  know 
lahvah  that  not  to  man  belongeth  his  way,  not 
to  a  perishing "  (lit.  "  going,"  "  departing ") 
"  man — and  to  direct  his  steps."  Any  reader  of 
Hebrew  may  see  at  once  that  this  is  a  very  un- 
usual form  of  expression.  (For  the  thought,  cf. 
Prov.  xvi.  9.  xix.  21;  Ps.  xxxvii.  2T).) 

The  words  express  humble  submission  to  the 
impending  chastisement.  The  penitent  people 
does  not  deprecate  the  penalty  of  its  sins,  but 
only  prays  that  the  measure  of  it  may  be  deter- 
mined by  right  rather  than  by  wrath  {cf.  xlvi. 
27,  28).     The  very  idea  of  right  and  justice  im- 


plies a  limit,  whereas  wrath,  like  all  passions,  is 
without  limit,  blind  and  insatiable.  "  In  the  Old 
Testament,  justice  is  opposed,  not  to  mercy,  but 
to  high-handed  violence  and  oppression,  which 
recognise  no  law  but  subjective  appetite  and  de- 
sire. The  just  man  owns  the  claims  of  an  ob- 
jective law  of  right." 

Kon  est  hominis  via  ejus.  Neither  individuals 
nor  nations  are  masters  of  their  own  fortunes  in 
this  world.  Man  has  not  his  fate,  in  his  own 
hands;  it  is  controlled  and  directed  by  a  higher 
Power.  By  sincere  submission,  by  a  glad,  un- 
swerving loyalty,  which  honours  himself  as  well 
as  its  Object,  man  may  co-operate  with  that 
Power,  to  the  furtherance  of  ends  which  are  of 
all  possible  ends  the  wisest,  the  loftiest,  the  most 
beneficial  to  his  kind.  Self-will  may  oppose 
those  ends,  it  cannot  thwart  them;  at  the  most 
it  can  but  momentarily  r^etard  their  accomplish- 
ment, and  exclude  itself  from  a  share  in  the  uni- 
versal blessing. 

Israel  now  confesses,  by  the  mouth  of  his  best 
and  truest  representative,  that  he  has  hitherto 
loved  to  choose  his  own  path,  and  to  walk  in  his 
own  strength,  without  reference  to  the  will  and 
way  of  God.  Now,  the  overwhelming  shock  of 
irresistible  calamity  has  brought  him  to  his 
senses,  has  revealed  to  him  his  powerlessness  in 
the  hands  of  the  Unseen  Arbiter  of  events,  has 
made  hmi  see,  as  he  never  saw,  that  mortal  man 
can  determine  neither  the  vicissitudes  nor  the 
goal  of  his  journey.  Now  he  sees  the  folly  of 
the  mighty  man  glorying  in  his  might,  and  the 
rich  man  glorying  in  his  riches;  now  he  sees 
that  the  hozv  and  the  whither  of  his  earthly 
course  are  not  matters  within  his  own  control; 
that  all  human  resources  are  nothing  against 
God.  and  are  only  helpful  when  used  for  anc 
zvith  God.  Now  he  sees  that  the  path  of  life  is 
not  one  which  we  enter  upon  and  traverse  of  our 
own  motion,  but  a  path  along  which  we  are  led; 
and  so,  resigning  his  former  pride  of  independent 
choice,  he  humbly  prays.  "'  Lead  Thou  me  on!  " 
Lead  me  whither  Thou  wilt,  in  the  way  of  trouble 
and  disaster  and  chastisement  for  my  sins;  but 
remember  my  human  frailty  and  weakness,  and 
let  not  Thy  wrath  destroy  me!  Finally,  the  sup- 
pliant ventures  to  remind  God  that  others  are 
guilty  as  well  as  he,  and  that  the  ruthless  de- 
stroyers of  Israel  are  themselves  fitted  to  be  ob- 
jects as  well  as  instruments  of  Divine  justice. 
They  are  such  (i)  because  they  have  not 
"known"  nor  "called  upon"  Iah\-ah;  and  (ii) 
because  they  have  "  devoured  Jacob  "  who  was 
a  thing  consecrated  to  lahvah  (ii.  3),  and  there- 
fore are  guilty  of  sacrilege  {cf.  1.  28,  29). 

It  has  never  been  our  lot  to  see  our  own  land 
overrun  by  a  barbarous  invader,  our  villages 
burnt,  our  peasantry  slaughtered,  our  towns 
taken  and  sacked  with  all  the  horrors  permitted 
or  enjoined  by  a  non-Christian  religion.  We 
read  of  but  hardly  realise  the  atrocities  of  ancient 
warfare.  If  we  did  realise  them,  we  might  even 
think  a  saint  justified  in  praying  for  vengeance 
upon  the  merciless  destroyers  of  his  country. 
But  apart  from  this.  I  see  a  deeper  meaning  in 
this  prayer.  The  justice  of  this  terrible  visitation 
upon  Judah  is  admitted  by  the  prophet.  Yet  in 
Judah  many  righteous  were  involved  in  the  gen- 
eral calamity.  On  the  other  hand.  Jeremiah  knew 
something  of  the  vices  of  the  Babylonians, 
against  which  his  contemporary  Habakkuk  in- 
veighs so  bitterly.  They  "  knew  not "  nor 
"  called  upon  "    lahvah;   but  a  base  polytheism 


62 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


reflected  and  sanctioned  the  corruption  of  their 
lives.  A  kind  of  moral  dilemma,  therefore,  is 
proposed  here.  If.  the  purpose  of  this  outpour- 
ing of  Divine  wrath  be  to  bring  Israel  to  "  find 
out  "  (ver.  i8)  and  to  acknowledge  the  truth  of 
God  and  his  own  guiltiness,  can  wrath  persist, 
when  that  result  is  attained?  Does  not  justice  de- 
mand that  the  torrent  of  destruction  be  diverted 
upon  the  proud  oppressor?  So  prayer,  the  for- 
lorn hope  of  poor  humanity,  strives  to  overcome 
and  compel  and  prevail  with  God,  and  to  wrest 
a  blessing  even  from  the  hand  of  Eternal  Jus- 
tice. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  IDOLS  OF  THE  HEATHEN  AND  THE 
GOD  OF  ISRAEL. 

Jeremiah  x.  i-i6. 

This  fine  piece  is  altogether  isolated  from  the 
surrounding  context,  which  it  interrupts  in  a  very 
surprising  manner.  Neither  the  style  nor  the 
subject,  neither  the  idioms  nor  the  thoughts  ex- 
pressed in  them,  agree  with  what  we  easily  rec- 
ognise as  Jeremiah's  work.  A  stronger  contrast 
can  hardly  be  imagined  than  that  which  exists 
between  the  leading  motive  of  this  oracle  as  it 
stands,  and  that  of  the  long  discourse  in  which 
it  is  embedded  with  as  little  regard  for  continuity 
as  an  aerolite  exhibits  when  it  buries  itself  in  a 
plain.  In  what  precedes,  the  prophet's  fellow- 
countrymen  have  been  accused  of  flagrant  and 
defiant  idolatry  (vii.  17  sqq.,  30  sqq.);  the  opening 
words  of  this  piece  imply  a  totally  different  sit- 
uation. "  To  the  way  of  the  nations  become  not 
accustomed,  and  of  the  signs  of  heaven  be  not 
afraid;  for  the  nations  are  afraid  of  them."  *  Jere- 
miah would  not  be  likely  to  warn  inveterate  apos- 
tates not  to  "  accustom  themselves  "  to  idolatry. 
The  words  presuppose,  not  a  nation  whose  idol- 
atry was  notorious,  and  had  just  been  the  sub- 
ject of  unsparing  rebuke  and  threats  of  imminent 
destruction;  they  presuppose  a  nation  free  from 
idolatry,  but  exposed  to  temptation  from  sur- 
rounding heathenism.  The  entire  piece  contains 
no  syllable  of  reference  to  past  or  present  un- 
faithfulness on  the  part  of  Israel.  Here  at  the 
outset,  and  throughout,  Israel  is  implicitly  con- 
trasted with  "  the  nations  "  (rk  edvt))  as  the  ser- 
vant of  lahvah  with  the  foolish  worshippers  of 
lifeless  gods.  There  is  a  tone  of  contempt  in  the 
use  of  the  term  "  goyim  " — "  To  the  way  of  the 
'  goyim  '  accustom  not  yourselves  .  .  .  for  the 
'  goyim  •■  are  afraid  of  them  "  (of  the  signs  of 
heaven) ;  or  as  the  Septuagint  puts  it  yet  more 
strongly,  "  for  they  "  (the  besotted  "'  goyim  ") 
"  are  afraid  "  {i.  e.,  worship)  "  before  them;  "  as 
though  that  alone — the  sense  of  Israel's  superi- 
ority— should  be  sufficient  to  deter  Israelites  from 
any  bowings  in  the  house  of  Rimmon.f  Neither 
this  contemptuous  use  of  the  term  "  goyim," 
"  Gentiles,"  nor  the  scathing  ridicule  of  the  false 
gods  and  their  devotees,  is  in  the  manner  of  Jere- 
miah. Both  are  characteristic  of  a  later  period. 
The  biting  scorn  of  image-worship,  the  intensely 
vivid  perception  of  the  utter  incommensurable- 
ness  of  lahvah,  the  Creator  of  all  things,  with 
the  handiwork  of  the  carpenter  and  the  silver- 

*  LXX.  "for /Atfyare afraid  before  them,";  DIT'JQ?  tXOVi 

inn'  '3. 

t  Tbis  is  the  most  natural  interpretation  of  the  passage 
accordiny  to  the  Hebrew  punctuation.    Another  is  given 


smith,  are  well-known  and  distinctive  features 
of  the  great  prophets  of  the  Exile  (see  especially 
Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.).  There  are  plenty  of  allusions 
to  idolatry  in  Jeremiah;  but  they  are  expressed  in 
a  tone  of  fervid  indignation,  not  of  ridicule.  It 
was  the  initial  oflfence,  which  issued  in  a  hopeless 
degradation  of  public  and  private  morality,  and 
would  have  for  its  certain  consequence  the  re- 
jection and  ruin  of  the  nation  (ii.  5-13,  20-28, 
iii.  1-9,  23  sqq.).  All  the  disasters,  past  and  pres- 
ent, which  had  befallen  the  country,  were  due  to 
it  (vii.  9,  17  sqq.,  30  sqq.,  viii.  2,  etc.).  The  people 
are  urged  to  repent  and  return  to  lahvah  with 
their  whole  heart  (iii.  12  sqq.,  iv.  3  sqq.,  v.  21 
sqq.,  vi.  8),  as  the  only  means  of  escape  from 
deadly  peril.  The  Baals  are  things  that  cannot 
help  or  save  (ii.  8,  11);  but  the  prophet  does  not 
say,  as  here  (x.  5),  "  Fear  them  not;  they  cannot 
harm  you!  "  The  piece  before  us  breathes  not 
one  word  about  Israel's  apostasy,  the  urgent 
need  of  repentance,  the  impending  ruin.  Taken 
as  a  whole,  it  neither  harmonises  with  Jeremiah's 
usual  method  of  argument,  nor  does  it  suit  the 
juncture  of  afifairs  implied  by  the  language  which 
precedes  and  follows  (vii.  i-ix.  26,  x.  17-25). 
For  let  us  suppose  that  this  oracle  occupies  its 
proper  place  here,  and  was  actually  written  by 
Jeremiah  at  the  crisis  which  called  forth  the  pre- 
ceding and  following  utterances.  Then  the  warn- 
ing cry,  "  Be  not  afraid  of  the  signs  of  heaven!  " 
can  only  mean  "  Be  not  afraid  of  the  Powers 
under  whose  auspices  the  Chaldeans  are  invading 
your  country;  lahvah,  the  true  and  living  God, 
will  protect  you!  "  But  consolation  of  this  kind 
would  be  diametrically  opposed  to  the  doctrine 
which  Jeremiah  shares  with  all  his  predecessors; 
the  doctrine  that  lahvah  Himself  is  the  prime 
cause  of  the  coming  trouble,  and  that  the  heathen 
invaders  are  His  instruments  of  wrath  (v.  9  sq., 
vi.  6);  it  would  imply  assent  to  that  fallacious 
confidence  in  lahvah,  which  the  prophet  has  al- 
ready done  his  utmost  to  dissipate  (vi.  14,  vii. 
4  sq.). 

The  details  of  the  idolatry  satirised  in  the 
piece  before  us  point  to  Chaldea  rather  than  to 
Canaan.  We  have  here  a  zealous  worship  of 
wooden  images  overlaid  and  otherwise  adorned 
with  silver  and  gold,  and  robed  in  rich  garments 
of  violet  and  purple  {cf.  Josh.  vii.  21).  This  does 
not  agree  with  what  we  know  of  Judean  prac- 
tice in  Jeremiah's  time,  when,  besides  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  the  people  adored 
"  stocks  and  stones;  "  probably  the  wooden  sym- 
bols of  the  goddess  Asherah  and  rude  sun-pillars, 
but  hardly  works  of  the  costly  kind  described 
in  the  text,  which  indicate  a  wealthy  people 
whose  religion  reflected  an  advanced  condition 
of  the  arts  and  commerce.  The  designation  of 
the  objects  of  heathen  worship  as  "  the  signs  of 
heaven,"  and  the  gibe  at  the  custom  of  carrying 
the  idol-statues  in  procession  (Isa.  xlvi.  i,  7), 
also  point  us  to  Babylon,  "  the  land  of  graven 
images  "  (1.  38),  and  the  home  of  star-worship 
and  astrological  superstition  (Isa.  xlvii.   13). 

From  all  these  considerations  it  would  appear 
that  not  Israel  in  Canaan  but  Israel  in  Chaldea 
is  addressed  in  this  piece  by  some  unknown 
prophet,  whose  leaflet  has  been  inserted  among 
the  works  of  Jeremiah.  In  that  case,  the  much 
disputed  eleventh  verse,  written  in  Aramaic,  and 
as  such  unique  in  the  volume  of  the  prophets 
proper,  may  really  have  belonged  to  the  orig- 
inal piece.  Aramaic  was  the  common  language 
of  intercourse  between  East  and  West  both  be- 


Jeremiah  x.  1-16.]         HEATHEN    IDOLS    AND    ISRAEL'S    GOD. 


63 


fore  and  during  the  captivity  {-cf.  2  Kings  xyiii. 
26) ;  and  the  suggestion  that  the  tempted  exiles 
should  answer  in  this  dialect  the  heathen  who 
pressed  them  to  join  in  their  worship,  seems 
suitable  enough.  The  verse  becomes  very  suspi- 
cious, if  we  suppose  that  the  whole  piece  is 
really  part  and  parcel  of  Jeremiah's  discourse, 
and  as  such  addressed  to  the  Judeans  in  the  reign 
of  Jehoiakim.  Ewald,  who  maintains  this  view 
upon  grounds  that  cannot  be  called  convincing, 
thinks  the  Aramaic  verse  was  originally  a  mar- 
ginal annotation  on  verse  15,  and  suggests  that 
it  is  a  quotation  from  some  early  book  similar  to 
the  Book  of  Daniel.  At  all  events,  it  is  improb- 
able that  the  verse  proceeded  from  the  pen  of 
Jeremiah,  who  writes  Aramaic  nowhere  else,  not 
even  in  the  letter  to  the  exiles  of  the  first  Judean 
captivity  (chap.  xxix.). 

But  might  not  the  piece  be  an  address  which 
Jeremiah  sent  to  the  exiles  of  the  Ten  Tribes, 
who  were  settled  in  Assyria,  and  with  whom  it 
is  otherwise  probable  that  he  cultivated  some  in- 
tercourse? The  expression  "  House  of  Israel  " 
(ver.  i)  has  been  supposed  to  indicate  this.  That 
expression,  however,  occurs  in  the  immediately 
preceding  context  (ix.  26),  as  does  also  that  of 
"  the  nations  "  ;  facts  which  may  partially  ex- 
plain why  the  passage  we  a'-e  discussing  occupies 
its  present  position.  The  unknown  author  of 
the  Apocryphal  Letter  of  Jeremiah  and  the 
Chaldee  Targumist  appear  to  have  held  the 
opinion  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the  piece  for  the 
benefit  of  the  exiles  carried  away  with  Jehoia- 
chin  in  the  first  Judean  captivity.  The  Targum 
introduces  the  eleventh  verse  thus:  "This  is  a 
copy  of  the  letter  which  Jeremiah  the  prophet 
sent  to  the  remnant  of  the  elders  of  the  captivity 
which  was  in  Babylon.  And  if  the  peoples 
among  whom  ye  are  shall  say  unto  you.  Fear  the 
Errors,  O  house  of  Israel!  thus  shall  ye  answer 
and  thus  shall  ye  say  unto  them:  The  Errors 
whom  ye  fear  are  (but)  errors,  in  which  there  is 
no  profit:  they  from  the  heavens  are  not  able 
to  bring  down  rain,  and  from  the  earth  they  can- 
not make  fruits  to  spring:  they  and  those  who 
fear  them  will  perish  from  the  earth,  and  will  be 
brought  to  an  end  from  under  these  heavens. 
And  thus  shall  ye  say  unto  them:  We  fear  Him 
that  maketh  the  earth  by  His  power,"  etc.  (ver. 
12).  The  phrase  "  the  remnant  of  the  elders  of 
the  captivity  which  was  "  (or  "  who  were  ")  "  in 
Babylon  "  is  derived  from  Jer.  xxix.  i.  But  how 
utterly  different. are  the  tone  and  substance  of 
that  message  from  those  of  the  one  before  us! 
Far  from  warning  his  captive  countrymen  against 
the  state-worship  of  Babylon,  far  from  satirising 
its  absurdity,  Jeremiah  bids  the -exiles  be  con- 
tented with  their  new  home,  and  to  pray  for 
the  peace  of  the  city.  The  false  prophets  who 
appear  at  Babylon  prophesy  in  lahvah's  name 
(vv.  IS,  21),  and  in  denouncing  them  Jeremiah 
says  not  a  word  about  idolatry.  It  is  evident 
from  the  whole  context  that  he  did  not  fear  it 
in  the  case  of  the  exiles  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity. 
(See  also  the  simile  of  the  Good  and  Bad  Figs, 
chap,  xxiv.,  which  further  illustrates  the  prophet's 
estimation  of  the  earlier  body  of  exiles.) 

The  Greek  Epistle  of  Jeremiah,  which  in  MSS. 
is  sometimes  appended  to  Baruch,  and  which 
Fritzsche  refers  to  the  Maccabean  times,  appear 
to  be  partially  based  upon  the  passage  we  are 
considering.  Its  heading  is:  "  Copy  of  a  letter 
which  Jeremiah  sent  unto  those  who  vt^ere  about 
to  be  carried  away  captives  to  Babylon,  by  the 


king  of  the  Babylonians;  to  announce  to  them 
as  was  enjoined  him  by  God."  It  then  begins 
thus:  "  On  account  of  your  sins  which  ye  have 
sinned  before  God  ye  will  be  carried  away  to 
Babylon  as  captives  by  Nabuchodonosor  king  of 
the  Babylonians.  Having  come,  then,  into  Baby- 
lon, ye  will  be  there  many  years,  and  a  long  time, 
until  seven  generations;  but  after  this  I  will  bring 
you  forth  from  thence  in  peace.  But  now  ye 
will  see  in  Babylon  gods,  silvern  and  golden  and 
wooden,  borne  upon  shoulders,  showing  fear " 
(an  object  of  fear)  "  to  the  nations.  Beware 
then,  lest  ye  also  become  like  unto  the  nations, 
and  fear  take  you  at  them,  when  ye  see  a  mul- 
titude before  and  behind  them  worshipping  them. 
But  say  ye  in  the  mind:  Thee  it  behoveth  us  to 
worship,  O  Lord!  For  Mine  angel  is  with  you, 
and  He  is  requiring  your  lives."  The  whole 
epistle  is  well  worth  reading  as  a  kind  of  para- 
phrase of  our  passage.  "  For  their  tongue  is 
carven  "  (or  polished)  "  by  a  carpenter,  and 
themselves  are  overlaid  with  gold  and  silver, 
but  lies  they  are  and  they  cannot  speak."  "  They 
being  cast  about  with  purple  apparel  have  their 
face  wiped  on  account  of  the  dust  from  the 
house,  which  is  plentiful  upon  them  "  (13).  "  But 
he  holds  a  dagger  with  right  hand  and  an  axe, 
but  himself  from  war  and  robbers  he  will  not  " 
(cannot)  "deliver"  (15,  cf.  Jer.  x.  15).  "He  is 
like  one  of  the  housebeains  "  (20,  cf.  Jer.  x.  8, 
and  perhaps  5).  "  Upon  their  body  and  upon 
their  head  alight  bats,  swallows,  and  the  birds, 
likewise  also  the  cats;  whence  ye  will  know  that 
they  are  not  gods;  therefore  fear  them  not" 
{cf.  Jer.  X.  5).  "  At  all  cost  are  they  purchased, 
in  which  there  is  no  spirit"  (25;  cf.  Jer.  x.  9-14). 
"  Footless,  upon  shoulders  they  are  carried,  dis- 
playing their  own  dishonour  to  men  "  (26). 
"  Neither  if  they  sufifer  evil  from  any  one,  nor  if 
good,  will  they  be  able  to  recompense  "  (34;  cf. 
ver.  5).  "  But  they  that  serve  them  will  be 
ashamed"  (30;  cf.  ver.  14).  "  By  carpenters  and 
goldsmiths  are  they  prepared;  they  become  noth- 
ing but  what  tlte  craftsmen  wish  them  to  become. 
And  the  very  men  that  prepare  them  cannot  last 
long;  how  then  are  the  things  prepared  by  them 
likely  to  do  so?  for  they  left  lies  and  a  reproach 
to  them  that  come  after.  For  whenever  war  and 
evils  come  upon  them,  the  priests  consult  to- 
gether where  to  hide  them.  How  then  is  it  pos- 
sible not  to  perceive  that  they  are  not  gods,  who 
neither  save  themselves  from  war  nor  from  evils? 
For  being  of  wood  and  overlaid  with  gold  and 
silver  they  will  be  known  hereafter,  that  they 
are  lies.  To  all  the  nations  and  to  the  kings  it 
will  be  manifest  that  they  are  not  gods  but  works 
of  men's  hands,  and  no  work  of  God  is  in  them  " 
(45-51;  cf.  Jer.  X.  14-15).  "A  wooden  pillar  in 
a  palace  is  more  useful  than  the  false  gods  "  (59). 
■■  Signs  among  nations  they  will  not  show  in 
heaven,  nor  yet  will  they  shine  like  the  sun,  nor 
give  light  as  the  moon  "  (67).  "  For  as  a  scare- 
crow in  a  cucumber-bed  guarding  nothing,  so 
their  gods  are  wooden  and  overlaid  with  gold  and 
silver"  (70  cf.  Jer.  x.  5).  The  mention  of  the 
sun,  moon,  and  stars,  the  lightning,  the  wind, 
the  clouds,  and  fire  "  sent  forth  from  above,"  as 
totally  unlike  the  idols  in  "  forms  and  powers." 
seems  to  show  that  the  author  had  verses  12,  ij 
before  him. 

When  we  turn  to  the  Septuagint,  we  are  im- 
mediately struck  by  its  remarkable  omissions. 
The  four  verses  6-8,  and  10  do  not  appear  at  all 
in  this  oldest  of  the  versions:  while  the  ninth 


64 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


is  inserted  between  the  first  clause  and  the  re- 
mainder of  the  fifth  verse.  Now,  on  the  one 
hand,  it  is  just  the  verses  which  the  LXX.  trans- 
lates, which  both  in  style  and  matter  contrast 
so  strongly  with  Jeremiah's  authentic  work,  and 
are  plainly  incongruous  with  the  context  and  oc- 
casion: while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  omitted 
verses  contain  nothing  which  points  positively  to 
another  author  than  Jeremiah,  and,  taken  by 
themselves,  harmonise  very  well  with  what  may 
be  supposed  to  have  been  the  prophet's  feeling 
at  the  actual  juncture  of  affairs. 

"There  is  none  at  all  like  Thee,  O  lahvah  ! 
Great  art  Thou,  and  great  is  Thy  Name  in  might ! 
Who  should  not  fear  Thee,  O  King  of  the  nations?  for 

'tis  Thy  due. 
For  among  all  the  wise  of  the  nations  and  in  all  their 

kingdom  there  is  none  at  all  like  Thee. 
And  in  one  thing  they  are  brute-like  and  dull ; 
In  the  doctrine  of  Vanities,  which  are  wood  ! 
But  lahvah  Elohim  is  truth  ; 
He  is  a  living  God.  and  an  eternal  King  : 
At  His  wrath  the  earth  quaketh, 
And  nations  abide  not  His  indignation." 

As  Hitzig  has  observed,  it  is  natural  that  now, 
as  the  terrible  decision  approaches,  the  prophet 
should  seek  and  find  comfort  in  the  thought  of 
the  all-overshadowing  greatness  of  the  God  of 
Israel.  If,  however,  we  suppose  these  verses  to 
be  Jeremiah's,  we  can  hardly  extend  the  same 
assumption  to  verses  12-ib,  in  spite  of  one  or  two 
expressions  of  his  which  occur  in  them;  and, 
upon  the  whole,  the  linguistic  argument  seems 
to  weigh  decisively  against  Jeremiah's  authorship 
of  this  piece  (see  Naegelsbach). 

It  may  be  true  enoug'h  that  "  the  basis  and 
possibility  of  the  true  prosperity  and  the  hope 
of  the  genuine  community  are  unfolded  in  these 
strophes  "  (Ewald);  but  that  does  not  prove  that 
they  belong  to  Jeremiah.  Nor  can  I  see  much 
force  in  the  remark  that  "  didactic  language  is  of 
another  kind  than  that  of  pure  prophecy."  But 
when  the  same  critic  afifirms  that  "  the  description 
of  the  folly  of  idolatry  ....  is  also  quite  new, 
and  clearly  serves  as  a  model  for  the  much  more 
elaborate  ones,  Isa.  xl.  19-24  (20),  xli.  7,  xliv.  8- 
20,  xlvi.  5-7;  "  he  is  really  giving  up  the  point 
in  dispute.  Verses  12-16  are  repeated  in  the 
prophecy  against  Babylon  (li.  i.s-19);  but  this 
hardly  proves  that  "  the  later  prophet,  chap.  1.  li., 
found  all  these  words  in  our  piece;"  it  is  only  evi- 
dence, so  far  as  it  goes,  for  those  verses  them- 
selves. 

The  internal  connection  which  Ewald  assumes, 
is  not  self-evident.  There  is  no  proof  that  "  the 
thought  that  the  gods  of  the  heathen  might  again 
rule  "  occurred  for  one  moment  to  Jeremiah  on 
this  occasion;  nor  the  thought  that  "the  main- 
tenance of  the  ancient  true  religion  in  conflict 
with  the  heathen  must  produce  the  regeneration 
of  Israel."  There  is  no  reference  throughout 
the  disputed  passage  to  the  spiritual  condition  of 
the  people,  which  is,  in  fact,  presupposed  to  be 
good;  and  the  return  in  verses  17-25  "to  the 
main  subject  of  the  discourse  "  is  inexplicable 
on  Ewald's  theory  that  the  whole  chapter,  omit- 
ting verse  11,  is  one  homogeneous  structure. 

"  Hear  ye  the  word  that  lahvah  spake  upon 
you,  O  house  of  Israel!  Thus  said  lahvah." 
The  terms  imply  a  particular  crisis  in  the  history 
of  Israel,  when  a  Divine  pronouncement  was  nec- 
essary to  the  guidance  of  the  people.  lahvah 
speaks  indeed  in  all  existence  and  in  all  events, 
but  His  voice  becomes  audible,  is  recognised  as 
His,  only  when  human  need  asserts  itself  in  some 


particular  juncture  of  affairs-.  Then,  in  view  of 
the  actual  emergency,  the  mind  of  lahweh  de- 
clares itself  by  the  mouth  of  His  proper  spokes- 
men; and  the  prophetic  "Thus  said  lahvah 
contrasts  the  higher  point  of  view  with  the  lower, 
the  heavenly  and  spiritual  with  the  earthly  and 
the  carnal;  it  sets  forth  the  aspect  of  things  as 
they  appear  to  God,  in  the  sharpest  antithesis 
to  the  aspect  of  things  as  they  appear  to  the 
natural  unilluminated  man.  "  Thus  said  lahvah:  " 
This  is  the  thought  of  the  Eternal,  this  is  His 
judgment  upon  present  conditions  and  passing 
events,  whatever  your  thought  and  your  judg- 
ment may  happen  or  incline  to  be!  Such,  I  think, 
is  the  essential  import  of  this  vox  solennis,  this 
customary  formula  of  the  dialect  of  prophecy. 

On  the  present  occasion,  the  crisis,  in  view  of 
whic'h  a  prophet  declares  the  mind  of  lahvah,  is 
not  a  political  emergency  but  a  religious  tempta- 
tion. The  day  for  the  former  has  long  since 
passed  away,  and  the  depressed  and  scattered 
communities  of  exiled  Israelites  are  exposed 
among  other  trials  to  the  constant  temptation  to 
sacrifice  to  present  expediency  the  only  treasure 
which  they  have  saved  from  the  wreck  of  their 
country,  the  faith  of  their  fathers,  the  religion 
of  the  prophets.  The  uncompromising  tone  of 
this  isolated  oracle,  the  abruptness  with  which 
the  writer  at  once  enters  in  medias  res,  the  solemn 
emphasis  of  his  opening  imperatives,  proves  that 
this  danger  pressed  at  the  time  with  peculiar  in- 
tensity. "Thus  said  lahvah:  Unto  the  way  of 
the  nations  use  not  yourselves.  And  of  the  signs 
of  heaven  stand  not  jn  awe,  for  that  the  nations 
stand  in  awe  of  them!  "  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  3;  Ezek. 
XX.  18).  The"  way"  of  the  nations  is  their  re- 
ligion, the  mode  and  manner  of  their  worship 
(v.  4,  5) ;  and  the  exiles  are  warned  not  to  suffer 
themselves  to  be  led  astray  by  example,  as  they 
had  been  in  the  land  of  Canaan;  they  are  not  to 
adore  the  signs  of  heaven,  simply  because  they 
see  their  conquerors  adoring  them.  The  "  signs 
of  heaven "  would  seem  to  be  the  sun,  moon, 
and  stars,  which  were  the  objects  of  Babylonian 
worship;  although  the  passage  is  unhappily  not 
free  from  ambiguity.  Some  expositors  have  pre- 
ferred to  think  of  celestial  phenomena  such  as 
eclipses  and  particular  conjunctions  of  the  heav- 
enly bodies,  which  in  those  days  were  looked 
upon  as  portents,  foreshadowing  the  course  of 
national  and  individual  fortunes.  That  there  is 
really  a  reference  to  the  astrological  observation 
of  the  stars,  is  a  view  which  finds  considerable 
support  in  the  words  addressed  to  Babylon  on 
the  eve  of  her  fall,  by  a  prophet,  who,  if  not 
identical  was  at  least  contemporary  with  him 
whose  message-  we  are  discussing.  In  the  forty- 
seventh  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah,  it  is  said 
to  Babylon:  "Let  now  them  that  parcel  out 
the  heavens,  that  gaze  at  the  stars,  arise  and  save 
thee,  prognosticating  month  by  month  the  things 
that  will  come  upon  thee"  (Isa.  xlvii.^13).  The 
"  signs  of  heaven  "  are,  in  this  case,  the  sup- 
posed indications  of  coming  events  furnished  by 
the  varying  appearances  of  the  heavenly  bodies; 
and  one  might  even  suppose  that  the  immedi- 
ate occasion  of  our  prophecy  was  some  eclipse 
of  the  sun  or  moon,  or  some  remarkable  conjunc- 
tion of  the  planets  which  at  the  time  was  exciting 
general  anxiety  among  the  motley  populations 
of  Babylonia.  The  prophecy  then  becomes  a 
remarkable  instance  of  the  manner  in  which  an 
elevated  sfjiritual  faith,  free  from  all  the  contam- 
inating and  blinding  influences  of  selfish  motives 


Jeremiah  X.  i-i6.]  HEATHEN    IDOLS    AND    ISRAEL'S    GOD. 


65 


and  desires,  may  rise  superior  to  universal  super- 
stition, and  boldly  contradict  the  suggestions  of 
what  is  accounted  the  highest  wisdom  of  the 
time,  anticipating  the  results  though  not  the 
methods  nor  the  evidence  of  science,  at  an  epoch 
when  science  is  as  yet  in  the  mythological  stage. 
And  the  prophet  might  well  exclaim  in  a  tone 
of  triumph,  "  Among  all  the  wise  of  the  nations 
none  at  all  is  like  unto  Thee,  O  Lord,  as  a  source 
of  true  wisdom  and  understanding  for  the  guid- 
ance of  life  "  (ver.  7). 

The  inclusion  of  eclipses  and  comets  among 
the  signs  of  heaven  here  spoken  of  has  been 
thought  to  be  barred  by  the  considerations  that 
these  are  sometimes  alleged  by  the  prop'hets 
themselves  as  signs  of  coming  judgment  exhib- 
ited by  the  God  of  Israel;  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
they  were  as  mysterious  and  awful  to  the  Jews 
as  to  their  heathen  neighbours;  and  that  what 
is  here  contemplated  is  not  the  terror  inspired 
by  rare  occasional  phenomena  of  this  kind,  but 
an  habitual  superstition  in  relation  to  some  ever- 
present  causes.  It  is  certain  that  in  another 
prophecy  against  Babylon,  preserved  in  the  Book 
of  Isaiah,  it  is  declared  that,  as  a  token  of  the 
impending  destruction,  "  the  stars  of  heaven  and 
the  Orions  thereof  shall  not  give  their  light:  the 
sun  shall  be  darkened  in  his  going  forth,  and 
the  moon  shall  not  cause  his  light  to  shine " 
(Isa.  xiii.  10) ;  and  the  similar  language  of  the 
prophet  Joel  is  well  known  (Joel  ii.  2,  10,  30,  31, 
iii.  15).  But  these  objections  are  not  conclusive, 
for  what  our  author  is  denouncing  is  the  heathen 
association  of  "  the  signs  of  the  heavens,"  what- 
ever may  be  intended  by  that  expression,  with  a 
false  system  of  religious  belief.  It  is  a  special 
kind  of  idolatry  that  he  contemplates,  as  is  clear 
from  the  immediate  context.  Not  only  does  the 
parallel  clause  "  Unto  the  way  of  the  nations  use 
not  yourselves  "  imply  a  gradual  conformity  to 
a  heathen  religion;  not  only  is  it  the  fact  that  the 
Hebrew  phrase  rendered  in  our  versions  "  Be  not 
dismayed!  "  may  imply  religious  awe  or  wor- 
ship (Mai.  ii.  5),  as  indeed  terms  denoting  fear 
or  dread  are  used  by  the  Semitic  languages  in 
general;  but  the  prophet  at  once  proceeds  to 
an  exposure  of  the  absurdity  of  image-worship: 
"  For  the  ordinances "  (established  modes  of 
worship;  2  Kings  xvii.  8;  here,  established  ob- 
jects of  worship)  "  of  the  peoples  are  a  mere 
breath  "  (i.  e.,  naught) !  "  for  it  "  (the  idol)  "  is 
a  tree,  which  out  of  the  forest  one  felled  "  (so  the 
accents) ;  "  the  handiwork  of  the  carpenter  with 
the  bill.  With  silver  and  with  gold  one  adorneth 
it"  (or,  "maketh  it  bright");  "with  nails  and 
with  hammers  they  make  them  fast,  that  one 
sway  not"  (or,  "that  there  be  no  shaking"). 
"  Like  the  scarecrow  of  a  garden  of  gourds  are 
they,  and  they  cannot  speak;  they  are  carried  and 
carried,  for  they  cannot  take  a  step "  (or, 
"  march  "):  "  be  not  afraid  of  them,  for  they  can- 
not hurt,  neither  is  it  in  their  power  to  benefit!  " 
"  Be  not  afraid  of  them!  "  returns  to  the  opening 
charge:  "  Of  the  signs  of  heaven  stand  not  in 
awe!  "  (cf.  Gen.  xxxi.  42,  53;  Isa.  viii.  12,  13). 
Clearly,  then,  the  signa  ccrli  are  the  idols  against 
whose  worship  the  prophet  warns  his  people; 
and  they  denote  "  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  constel- 
lations "  (of  the  Zodiac),  "  and  all  the  host  of 
heaven"  (2  Kings  xxiii.  5).  We  know  that  the 
kings  of  Judah,  from  Ahaz  onwards,  derived  this 
worship  from  Assyria,  and  that  its  original  home 
was  Babylon,  where  in  every  temple  the  exiles 
would  see  images  of  the  deities  presiding  over 
5  -Vol.  IV. 


the  heavenly  bodies,  such  as  Samas  (the  sun)  and 
his  consort  Aa  (the  moon)  at  Sippara,  Merodach 
(Jupiter)  and  his  son  Nebo  (Mercurius)  at  Baby- 
lon and  Borsippa,  Ncrgal  (Mars)  at  Cutha,  daily 
served  with  a  splendid  and  attractive  ritual,  and 
honoured  with  festivals  and  processions  on  the 
most  costly  and  magnificent  scale.  The  prophet 
looks  through  all  this  outward  display  to  the 
void  within,  he  draws  no  subtle  distinction  be- 
tween the  symbol  and  the  thing  symbolised;  he 
accepts  the  popular  confusion  of  the  god  with 
his  image,  and  identifies  all  the  deities  of  the 
heathen  with  the  materials  out  of  which  their 
statues  are  made  by  the  hands  of  men.  And  he 
is  justified  in  doing  this,  because  there  can  be 
but  one  god  in  his  sense  of  the  word;  a  multitude 
of  gods  is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  From  this 
point  of  view,  he  exposes  the  absurdity  of  the 
splendid  idolatry  which  his  captive  countrymen 
see  all  around  them.  Behold  that  thing,  he  cries, 
which  they  call  a  god,  and  before  which  they 
tremble  with  religious  fear!  It  is  nothing  but  a 
tree  trunk  hewn  in  the  forest,  and  trimmed  into 
shape  by  the  carpenter,  and  plated  with  silver 
and  gold,  and  fixed  on  its  pedestal  with  hammer 
and  nails,  for  fear  it  should  fall!  Its  terrors  are 
empty  terrors,  like  those  of  the  palm-trunk, 
rough-hewn  into  human  shape,  and  set  up  among 
the  melons  to  frighten  the  birds  away. 


"  Olim  truncus  eram  ficulnus,  inutile  lignum, 
Cum  faber,  incertus  scamnum  faceretne  Priapum, 
Maluit  esse  deum.    Deus  inde  ego,  furum  aviumque 
Maxima  formido."    (Hor.,  "  Sat."  i.  8,  i,  sgq.) 


Though  the  idol  has  the  outward  semblance  of 
a  man,  it  lacks  his  distinguishing  faculty  of 
speech;  it  is  as  dumb  as  the  scarecrow,  and  as 
powerless  to  move  from  its  place;  so  it  has  to  be 
borne  about  on  men's  shoulders  (a  mocking  allu- 
sion to  the  grand  processions  of  the  gods,  which 
distinguished  the  Babylonian  festivals).  Will 
you  then  be  afraid  of  things  that  can  do  neither 
good  nor  harm?  asks  the  prophet:  in  terms  that 
recall  the  challenge  of  another,  or  perchance  of 
himself,  to  the  idols  of  Babylon:  "  Do  good  or 
do  evil,  that  we  may  look  at  each  other  and  see 
it  together  "  (Isa.  xli.  23). 

In  utter  contrast  with  the  impotence,  the  noth- 
ingness of  all  the  gods  of  the  nations,  whether 
Israel's  neighbours  or  his  invaders,  stands  for 
ever  the  God  of  Israel.  "  There  is  none  at  all 
like  Thee,  O  lahweh!  great  art  Thou,  and  great 
is  Thy  Name  in  might!  "  With  dififerent  vowel 
points,  we  might  render,  "  Whence  (cometh) 
Thy  like,  O  lahvah?"  This  has  been  supported 
by  reference  to  chap.  xxx.  7:  "Alas!  for  great 
is  that  day.  Whence"  (is  one)  "like  it?" 
(me'ayin?);  but  there  too,  as  here,  we  may 
equally  well  translate,  "  there  is  none  like  it." 
The  interrogative,  in  fact,  presupposes  a  negative 
answer;  and  the  Hebrew  particle  usually  ren- 
dered "  there  is  not,  are  not "  ("  'ayin,  'en  ") 
has  been  explained  as  originally  identical  with 
the  interrogative  "where?"  ("'ayin,"  implied  in 
"me'ayin,"  "from  where?"  "whence?"  cf.  Job 
xiv.  10:  "where  is  he?"  =  "he  is  not").  The 
idiom  of  the  text  expresses  a  more  emphatic  ne- 
gation than  the  ordinary  form  would  do;  and, 
thoug'h  rare,  is  by  no  means  altogether  un- 
paralleled (see  Isa.  xl.  17,  xli.  24;  and  other  refer- 
ences in  Gesenius).  "  Great  art  Thou  and  great 
is  Thy  Name  in  might;  "  that  is  to  say.  Thou 
art  great  in  Thyself,  and  great  in  repute  or  mani- 


66 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


festation  among  men,  in  respect  of  "  might," 
virile  strength  or  prowess  (Ps.  xxi.  14).  Unlike 
the  do-nothing  idols,  lahvah  reveal?  His  strength 
in  deeds  of  strength  {cf.  Exod.  xv.  3  sqq.). 
"  Who  should  not  fear  Thee,  Thou  King  of  the 
nations?"  (cf.  v.  22)  "for  Thee  it  beseemeth  " 
(r=  it  is  Thy  due,  and  Thine  only) :  "  for  among 
all  the  wise  of  the  nations  and  in  all  their  realm, 
there  is  none  at  all  "  (as  in  ver.  6)  "  like  Thee." 
Religious  fear  is  instinctive  in  man;  but.  whereas 
the  various  nations  lavish  reverence  upon  in- 
numerable objects  utterly  unworthy  of  the  name 
of  deity,  rational  religion  sees  clearly  that  there 
can  be  but  One  God,  working  His  supreme  will 
in  heaven  and  earth;  and  that  this  Almighty  be- 
ing is  the  true  "  King  of  the  nations,"  and  dis- 
poses their  destinies  as  well  as  that  of  His  people 
Israel,  although  they  know  Him  not,  but  call 
other  imaginary  beings  their  "  kings  "  (a  com- 
mon Semitic  designation  of  a  national  god:  Ps. 
XX.  9;  Isa.  vi.  5,  viii.  21).  He,  then,  is  the  proper 
object  of  the  instinct  of  religious  awe;  all  the 
peoples  of  the  earth  owe  Him  adoration,  even 
though  they  be  ignorant  of  their  obligation;  wor- 
ship is  His  unshared  prerogative. 

"  Among  all  the  wise  of  the  nations  and  in  all 
their  realm,  not  one  is  like  Thee!  "  Who  are  the 
wise  thus  contrasted  with  the  Supreme  God? 
Are  the  false  gods  the  reputed  wise  ones,  giving 
pretended  counsel  to  their  deluded  worshippers 
through  the  priestly  oracle?  The  term  "  king- 
dom "  seems  to  indicate  this  view,  if  we  take 
"  their  kingdom  "  to  mean  the  kingdom  of  the 
wise  ones  of  the  nations,  that  is,  the  countries 
whose  "  kings  "  they  are,  where  they  are  wor- 
shipped as  such.  The  heathen  in  general,  and 
the  Babylonians  in  particular,  ascribed  wisdom 
to  their  gods.  But  there  is  no  impropriety  from 
an  Old  Testament  point  of  view  in  comparing 
lahvah's  wisdom  with  the  wisdom  of  man.  The 
meaning  of  the  prophet  may  be  simply  this,  that 
no  earthly  wisdom,  craft,  or  political  sagacity, 
not  even  in  the  most  powerful  empires  such  as 
Babylon,  can  be  a  match  for  lahvah  the  All-wise, 
or  avail  to  thwart  His  purposes  (Isa.  xxxi.  i,  2). 
"  Wise  "  and  "  sagacious  "  are  titles  which  the 
kings  of  Babylon  continually  assert  for  them- 
selves in  their  extant  inscriptions;  and  the  wis- 
dom and  learning  of  the  Chaldeans  were  famous 
in  the  ancient  world.  Either  view  will  agree  with 
what  follows:  "But  in  one  thing  they" — the 
nations,  or  their  wise  men — "  will  turn  out 
brutish  and  besotted:"  (in)  "the  teaching  of 
Vanities  which  are  wood."  The  verse  is  difficult; 
but  the  expression  "  the  teaching  (or  doctrine) 
of  Vanities  "  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  equiva- 
lent to  "  the  idols  taught  of;  "  and  then  the  sec- 
ond half  of  the  verse  is  constructed  like  the  first 
member  of  ver.  3:  "The  ordinances  of  the  peo- 
ples are  Vanity,"  and  may  be  rendered,  "  the 
idols  taught  of  are  mere  wood  "  (cf.  ver.  3  b, 
ii.  27,  iii.  9).  It  is  possible  also  that  the  right 
reading  is  "  foundation  "  ("  musad  ")  not  "  doc- 
trine "  ("  musar  ") :  "  the  foundation  "  (basis, 
substratum,  substance)  "  of  idols  is  wood." 
(The  term  "  Vanities  — "  habalim  " — is  used  for 
"idols,"  viii.  19,  xiv.  22;  Ps.  xxxi.  7).  And, 
lastly,  I  think,  the  clause  might  be  rendered:  "a 
doctrine  of  Vanities,  of  mere  wood,  it  " — their  re- 
ligion— "  is!  "  *    This  supreme  folly  is  the  "  one 

*  It  is  against  usage  to  divide  the  clause  as  Naegelsbach 
does,  ■'  Vain  instruction  !  It  is  wood  !  "  or  to  render  with 
Ewald  "  Simply  vain  doctrine  is  the  wood!"  which  would 
require  the  article  (ha'e(). 


thing  "  that  discredits  all  the  boasted  wisdom  of 
the  Chaldeans;  and  their  folly  will  hereafter  be 
demonstrated  by  events  (ver.  14). 

The  body  of  the  idol  is  wood,  and  outwardly  it 
is  decorated  with  silver  and  gold  and  costly  ap- 
parel; but  the  whole  and  every  part  of  it  is  the 
work  of  man.  "  Silver  plate "  (lit.  "  beaten 
out  ")  "  from  Tarshish  " — from  far  away  Tar- 
tessus  in  Spain — "  is  brought,  and  gold  from 
Uphaz  "  (Dan.  x.  5),  "  the  work  of  the  smith, 
and  of  the  hands  of  the  founder  " — who  have 
beaten  out  the  silver  and  smelted  the  gold:  "  blue 
and  purple  is  their  clothing"  (Ex.  xxvi.  31, 
xxviii.  8) :  "  the  work  of  the  wise  " — of  skilled 
artists  (Isa.  xl.  20) — "  is  every  part  of  them." 
Possibly  the  verse  might  better  be  translated: 
"  Silver  to  be  beaten  out " — argentum  malleo 
didiicendum — "  which  is  brought  from  Tarshish, 
and  gold  "  which  is  brought  "  from  Uphaz,"  are 
"  the  work  of  the  smith  and  of  the  hands  of  the 
smelter;  the  blue  and  purple"  which  are  "their 
clothing,"  are  "  the  work  of  the  wise  all  of 
them."  At  all  events,  the  point  of  the  verse 
seems  to  be  that,  whether  you  look  at  the  inside 
or  the  outside  of  the  idol,  his  heart  of  wood  or 
his  casing  of  gold  and  silver  and  his  gorgeous 
robes,  the  whole  and  every  bit  of  him  as  he 
stands  before  you  is  a  manufactured  article,  the 
work  of  men's  hands.  The  supernatural  comes 
in  nowhere.  In  sharpest  contrast  with  this  life- 
less fetish,  "  lahvah  is  a  God  that  is  truth,"  i.  e., 
a  true  God  (cf.  Prov.  xxii.  21),  or  "  lahvah  is 
God  in  truth  " — is  really  God — "  He  is  a  living 
God,  and  an  eternal  King;  "  the  sovereign  whose 
rule  is  independent  of  the  vicissitudes  of  time, 
and  the  caprices  of  temporal  creatures:  "  at  His 
wrath  the  earth  quaketh,  and  nations  cannot 
abide  His  indignation:  "  the  world  of  nature  and 
the  world  of  man  are  alike  dependent  upon  His 
Will,  and  He  exhibits  His  power  and  his  right- 
eous anger  in  the  disturbances  of  the  one  and 
the  disasters  of  the  other. 

According  to  the  Hebrew  punctuation,  we 
should  rather  translate:  "But  lahvah  Elohim  " 
(the  designation  of  God  in  the  second  account 
of  creation.  Gen.  ii.  4-iii.  24)  "  is  truth,"  i.  e., 
reality;  as  opposed  to  the  falsity  and  nothing- 
ness of  the  idols;  or  "permanence,"  "  lasting- 
ness  "  (Ps.  xix.  10),  as  opposed  to  their  transi- 
toriness  (vv.  11-15). 

The  statement  of  the  tenth  verse  respecting 
the  eternal  power  and  godhead  of  lahvah  is  con- 
firmed in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  by  instances 
of  His  creative  energy  and  continual  activity  as 
exhibited  in  the  world  of  nature.  "  The  Maker 
of  the  earth  by  His  power,  Establishing  the 
habitable  world  by  His  wisdom,  And  by  His 
insight  He  did  stretch  out  the  heavens:  At  the 
sound  of  His  giving  voice  "  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  18;  i.  e., 
thundering)  "  there  is  an  uproar  of  waters  in  the 
heavens,  And  He  causeth  the  vapours  to  rise 
from  the  end  of  the  earth;  Lightnings  for  the 
rain  He  maketh.  And  causeth  the  wind  to  go 
forth  out  of  His  treasuries."  There  is  no  break 
in  the  sense  between  these  sentences  and  the 
tenth  verse.  The  construction  resembles  that  of 
Amos  V.  8,  ix.  5,  6,  and  is  interrupted  by  the 
eleventh  verse,  which  in  all  probability  was,  to 
begin  with,  a  marginal  annotation. 

The  solid  earth  is  itself  a  natural  symbol  of 
strength  and  stability.  The  original  creation  of 
this  mighty  and  enduring  structure  argues  the 
omnipotence  of  the  Creator;  while  the  "estab- 
lishing "  or  "  founding "  of  it  upon  the  waters 


Jeremiah  X    1-16. J  HEATHEN    IDOLS    AND    ISRAEL'S    GOD. 


67 


of  the  great  deep  is  a  proof  of  supreme  wisdom 
(Ps.  xxiv.  2;  cxxxvi.  6),  and  the  "  spreading 
out  "  of  the  visible  heavens  or  atmosphere  like 
a  vast  canopy  or  tent  over  the  earth  (Ps.  civ.  2; 
Isa.  xl.  22),  is  evidence  of  a  perfect  insight  into 
the  conditions  essential  to  the  existence  and  well- 
being  of  man. 

It  is,  of  course,  clear  enough  that  physical 
facts  and  phenomena  are  here  described  in  popu- 
lar language  as  they  appear  to  the  eye,  and  by 
no  means  with  the  severe  precision  of  a  scientific 
treatise.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  this 
prophet  knew  more  about  the  actual  constitution 
of  the  physical  universe  than  the  wise  men  of 
his  time  could  impart.  But  such  knowledge  was 
not  necessary  to  the  enforcement  of  the  spiritual 
truths  which  it  was  his  mission  to  proclaim;  and 
the  fact  that  his  brief  oracle  presents  those  truths 
in  a  garb  which  we  can  only  regard  as  poetical, 
and  which  it  would  argue  a  want  of  judgment  to 
treat  as  scientific  prose,  does  not  affect  their 
eternal  validity,  nor  at  all  impair  their  universal 
importance.  The  passage  refers  us  to  God  as 
the  ultimate  source  of  the  world  of  nature.  It 
teaches  us  that  the  stability  of  things  is  a  re- 
flection of  His  eternal  being;  that  the  persistence 
of  matter  is  an  embodiment  of  His  strength;  that 
the  indestructibility  which  science  ascribes  to  the 
materials  of  the  physical  universe  is  the  seal 
which  authenticates  their  Divine  original.  Per- 
sistence, permanence,  indestructibleness,  are 
properly  sole  attributes  of  the  eternal  Creator, 
which  He  communicates  to  His  creation. 
Things  are  indestructible  as  regards  man,  not 
as  regards  the  Author  of  their  being. 

Thus  the  wisdom  enshrined  in  the  laws  of  the 
visible  world,  all  its  strength  and  all  its  stability, 
is  a  manifestation  of  the  Unseen  God.  Invisible 
in  themselves,  the  eternal  power  and  godhead  of 
lahvah  become  visible  in  His  creation.  And,  as 
the  Hebrew  mode  of  expression  indicates,  His 
activity  is  never  suspended,  nor  His  presence 
withdrawn.  The  conflict  of  the  elements,  the 
roar  of  the  thunder,  the  flash  of  the  lightning, 
the  downpour  of  waters,  the  rush  of  the  storm- 
wind,  are  His  work;  and  not  less  His  work,  be- 
cause we  have  found  out  the  "  natural  "  causes, 
that  is,  the  established  conditions  of  their  oc- 
currence; not  less  His  work,  because  we  have, 
in  the  exercise  of  faculties  really  though  remotely 
akin  to  the  Divine  Nature,  discovered  how  to 
imitate,  or  rather  mimic,  even  the  more  awful 
of  these  marvellous  phenomena.  Mimicry  it 
cannot  but  appear,  when  we  compare  the  over- 
whelming forces  that  rage  in  a  tropical  storm 
with  our  electric  toys.  The  lightnings  in  their 
glory  and  terror  are  still  God's  arrows,  and  man 
cannot  rob  His  quiver. 

Nowadays  more  is  known  about  the  machinery 
of  the  world,  but  hardly  more  of  the  Intelligence 
that  contrived  it,  and  keeps  it  continually  in 
working  order,  nay,  lends  it  its  very  existence. 
More  is  known  about  means  and  methods,  but 
hardly  more  about  aims  and  purposes.  The  re- 
flection, how  few  are  the  master-conceptions 
which  modern  speculation  has  added  to  the  treas- 
ury of  thought,  should  suggest  humility  to  the 
vainest  and  most  self-confident  of  physical  in- 
quirers. In  the  very  dawn  of  philosophy  the  hu- 
man mind  appears  to  have  anticipated  as  it  were 
by  sudden  flashes  of  insight  some  of  the  boldest 
hypotheses  of  modern  science,  including  that  of 
Evolution  itself. 

The   unchangeable   or   invariable   laws   of   na- 


ture, that  is  to  say,  the  uniformity  of  sequence 
which  we  observe  in  physical  phenomena,  is  not 
to  be  regarded  as  a  thing  that  explains  itself.  It 
is  only  intelligible  as  the  expression  of  the  un- 
changing will  of  God.  The  prophet's  word  is 
still  true.  It  is  God  who  "  causes  the  vapours  to 
rise  from  the  end  of  the  earth."  drawing  them  up 
into  the  air  from  oceans  and  lakes  by  the  simple 
yet  beautiful  and  efficient  action  of  the  solar  heat; 
it  is  God  who  "  makes  lightnings  fbr  the  rain," 
charging  the  clouds  with  the  electric  fluid,  to 
burst  forth  in  blinding  flashes  when  the  opposing 
currents  meet.  It  is  God  who  "  brings  the  wind 
out  of  His  treasuries."  In  the  prophet's  time 
the  winds  were  as  great  a  mystery  as  the  thunder 
and  lightning;  it  was  not  known  whence  they 
came  nor  whither  they  went.  But  the  knowl- 
edge that  they  are  but  currents  of  air  due  to 
variations  of  temperature  does  not  really  deprive 
them  of  their  wonder.  Not  only  is  it  impossible, 
in  the  last  resort,  to  comprehend  what  heat  is, 
what  motion  is,  what  the  thing  moved  is.  ^  far 
greater  marvel  remains,  which  cries  aloud  of 
God's  wisdom  and  presence  and  sovereignty  over 
all;  and  that  is  the  wonderful  consilience  of  all 
the  various  powers  and  forces  of  the  natural 
world  in  making  a  home  for  man,  and  enabling 
so  apparently  feeble  a  creature  as  he  to  live  and 
thrive  amidst  the  perpetual  interaction  and  col- 
lision of  the  manifold  and  mighty  elements  of 
the  universe. 

The  true  author  of  all  this  magnificent  system 
of  objects  and  forces,  to  the  wonder  and  the 
glory  of  which  only  custom  can  blind  us,  is  the 
God  of  the  prophet.  This  sublime,  this  just  con- 
ception of  God  was  possible,  for  it  was  actually 
realised,  altogether  apart  from  the  influence  of 
Hellenic  philosophy  and  modern  European  sci- 
ence. But  it  was  by  no  means  as  common  to 
the  Semitic  peoples.  In  Babylon,  which  was  at 
the  time  the  focus  of  all  earthly  wisdom  and 
power,  in  Babylon  the  ancient  mother  of  sciences 
and  arts,  a  crude  polytheism  stultified  all  the 
wisdom  of  the  wise,  and  lent  its  sanction  to  a 
profound  moral  corruption.  Rapid  and  universal 
conquests,  enormous  wealth  accruing  from  the 
spoils  and  tributes  of  all  nations,  only  subserved 
the  luxury  and  riotous  living  which  issued  in 
a  general  effeminacy  and  social  enervation;  until 
the  great  fabric  of  empire,  which  Nabopalassar 
and  Nebuchadrezzar  had  reared  by  their  military 
and  political  genius,  sank  under  the  weight  of 
its  own  vices. 

Looking  round  upon  this  spectacle  of  super- 
stitious folly,  the  prophet  declares  that  "  all  men 
are  become  too  brute-like  for  knowledge;  "  too 
degraded  to  appreciate  the  truth,  the  simplicity 
of  a  higher  faith;  too  besotted  with  the  worship 
of  a  hundred  vain  idols,  which  were  the  outward 
reflection  of  their  own  diseased  imaginations,  to 
receive  the  wisdom  of  the  true  religion,  and  to 
perceive  especially  the  truth  just  enunciated,  that 
it  is  lahvah  who  gives  the  rain  and  upon  whom 
all  atmospheric  changes  depend  {cf.  xiv.  22) :  and 
thus,  in  the  hour  of  need.  "  every  founder  blushes 
for  the  image,  because  his  molten  figure  is  a  lie, 
and  there  is  no  breath  in  them;  "  because  the  life- 
less idol,  the  work  of  his  hands,  can  lend  no  help. 
Perhaps  both  clauses  of  the  verse  rather  express 
a  prophecy:  "All  men  will  be  proven  brutish, 
destitute  of  knowledge;  every  founder  will  blush 
for  the  graven  image."  Wise  and  strong  as  the 
Babylonians  supposed  themselves  to  be,  the  logic 
of    events    would    undeceive    them.     They    were 


68 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


doomed  to  a  rude  awakening;  to  discover  in  the 
hour  of  defeat  and  surrender  that  the  molten  idol 
was  a  delusion,  that  the  work  of  their  hands  was 
an  embodied  lie,  void  of  life,  powerless  to  save. 
"  Vanity  " — a  mere  breath,  naught — "  are  they, 
a  work  of  knaveries  "  (a  term  recurring  only  in 
li.  i8:  the  root  seems  to  mean  "  to  stammer,"  "  to 
imitate");  "in  the  time  of  their  visitation  they 
will  perish!"  or  simply  "they  perish!" — in  the 
burning  temples,  in  the  crash  of  falling  shrines. 

It  has  happened  so.  At  this  day  the  temples 
of  cedar  and  marble,  with  their  woodwork  over- 
laid with  bronze  and  silver  and  gold,  of  whose 
glories  the  Babylonian  sovereigns  so  proudly 
boast  in  their  still  existing  records,  as  "  shining 
like  the  sun,  and  like  the  stars  of  heaven,"  are 
shapeless  heaps  or  rather  mountains  of  rubbish, 
where  Arabs  dig  for  building  materials  and  treas- 
ure trove,  and  European  explorers  for  the  relics 
of  a  civilisation  and  a  superstition  which  have 
passed  away  for  ever.  Vana  sunt,  ct  opus  risu- 
dignttm.  In  the  revolutions  of  time,  which  are 
the  Sutward  measures  of  the  eternally  self-un- 
folding purposes  of  God,  the  word  of  the  Judean 
prophets  has  been  amply  fulfilled.  Babylon  and 
her  idols  are  no  more. 

All  other  idols,  too,  must  perish  in  like  man- 
ner. "  Thus  shall  ye  say  of  them:  The  gods  who 
the  "  heavens  "  and  earth  did  not  make,  perish 
from  the  earth  and  from  under  the  heavens  shall 
these!  "  The  assertion  that  the  idols  of  Babylon 
were  doomed  to  destruction,  was  not  the  whole 
of  the  prophetic  message.  It  is  connected  with 
and  founded  upon  the  antithetic  assertion  of  the 
eternity  of  lahvah.  They  will  perish,  but  He 
endures.  The  one  eternal  is  El  Elyon,  the  Most 
High  God,  the  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth.  But 
heaven  and  earth  and  whatever  partakes  only  of 
their  material  nature  are  also  doomed  to  pass 
away.  And  in  that  day  of  the  Lord,  when  the 
elements  melt  with  fervent  heat,  and  the  earth 
and  the  works  that  are  therein  shall  be  burnt  up 
(2  Pet.  iii.  10),  not  only  will  the  idols  of  the 
heathen  world,  and  the  tawdry  dolls  which  a 
degenerate  church  sufifers  to  be  adored  as  a  kind 
of  magical  embodiment  of  the  Mother  of  God, 
but  all  other  idols  which  the  sensebound  heart 
of  man  makes  to  itself,  vanish  into  nothingness 
before  that  overwhelming  revelation  of  the  su- 
premacy of  God. 

There  is  something  amazing  in  the  folly  of 
worshipping  man,  whether  in  the  abstract  form 
of  the  cultus  of  "  Humanity,"  or  in  any  of  the 
various  forms  of  what  is  called  "  Hero-wor- 
ship," or  in  the  vulgar  form  of  self-worship, 
which  is  the  religion  of  the  selfish  and  the 
worldly.  To  ascribe  infallibility  to  any  mortal, 
whether  Pope  or  politician,  is  to  sin  in  the  spirit 
of  idolatry.  The  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth, 
and  He  alone,  is  worthy  of  worship.  "  Where 
wast  thou  when  I  laid  the  foundations  of  the 
earth?  declare,  if  thou  hast  understanding"  (Job 
xxxviii.  4).  No  human  wisdom  nor  power  pre- 
sided there;  and  to  produce  the  smallest  of  as- 
teroids is  still  a  task  which  lies  infinitely  beyond 
the  combined  resources  of  modern  science.  Man 
and  all  that  man  has  created  is  naught  in  the 
scale  of  God's  creation.  He  and  all  the  mighty 
works  with  which  he  amazes,  overshadows,  en- 
slaves his  little  world,  will  perish  and  pass  away; 
only  that  will  survive  which  he  builds  of  ma- 
terials which  are  imperishable,  fabrics  of  spiritual 
worth  and  excellence  and  glory  (i  Cor.  iii.  13). 
A  Nineveh,  a  Babylon,  a  London,  a  Paris,  may 


disappear;  "but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  God 
abideth  for  ever"  (i  John  ii.  17).  "Not  like 
these  "  (cf.  verse  11  ad  fin.)  "  is  Jacob's  Portion, 
but  the  Maker  and  Moulder  of  the  All — He  is  his 
heritage;  lahvah  Sabaoth  is  His  name!"  (Both 
here  and  at  li.  19  =  xxviii.  19  the  LXX.  omits: 
"  and  Israel  is  the  tribe,"  which  seems  to  have 
been  derived  from  Deut.  xxxii.  9.  Israel  is  else- 
where called  "  lahvah's  heritage,"  Ps.  xxxiii.  12, 
and  "portion,"  Deut.  xxxii.  9;  but  that  thought 
hardlv  suits  the  connection  here.) 

"  Not  like  these:  "  for  He  is  the  Divine  Potter 
who  moulded  all  things,  including  the  signs  of 
heaven,  and  the  idols  of  wood  and  metal,  and 
their  foolish  worshippers.  And  he  is  "Jacob's 
portion";  for  the  knowledge  and  worship  of 
Him  were,  in  the  Divine  counsels,  originally  as- 
signed to  Israel  (cf.  Deut.  iv.  19;  and  xxxii.  8, 
according  to  the  true  reading,  preserved  in  the 
LXX.);  and  therefore  Israel  alone  knows  Him 
and  His  glorious  attributes.  "  lahvah  Sabaoth 
is  His  name:  "  the  Eternal,  the  Maker  and  Mas- 
ter of  the  hosts  of  heaven  and  earth,  is  the  aspect 
under  which  He  has  revealed  Himself  to  the 
true  representatives  of  Israel,  His  servants  the 
prophets. 

The  portion  of  Israel  is  his  God — his  abiding 
portion;  of  which  neither  the  changes  of  time 
nor  the  misconceptions  of  man  can  avail  to  rob 
him.  When  all  that  is  accidental  and  transitory 
is  taken  away,  this  distinction  remains:  Israel's 
portion  is  his  God.  lahvah  was  indeed  the  na- 
tional God  of  the  Jews,  argue  some  of  our  mod- 
ern wise  ones;  and  therefore  He  cannot  be  identi- 
fied with  the  universal  Deity.  He  has  been  de- 
veloped, expanded,  into  this  vast  conception;  but 
originally  He  was  but  the  private  god  of  a  petty 
tribe,  the  Lar  of  a  wandering  household.  Now 
herein  is  a  marvellous  thing.  How  was  it  that 
this  particular  household  god  thus  grew  to  in- 
finite proportions,  like  the  genius  emerging  from 
the  unsealed  jar  of  Arab  fable,  until,  from  His 
prime  foothold  on  the  tent-floor  of  a  nomad  fam- 
ily, He  towered  above  the  stars  and  His  form 
overshadowed  the  universe?  How  did  it  come 
to  pass  that  His  prophet  could  ask  in  a  tone 
of  indisputable  truth,  recognised  alike  by  friend 
and  foe,  "  Do  not  I  fill  heaven  and  earth,  saith 
lahvah"?  (Jer.  xxiii.  24).  How,  that  this  im- 
mense, this  immeasurable  expansion  took  place 
in  this  instance,  and  not  in  that  of  any  one  of 
the  thousand  rival  deities  of  surrounding  and 
more  powerful  tribes  and  nations?  How  comes 
it  that  we  to-day  are  met  to  adore  lahvah,  and 
not  rather  one  of  the  forgotten  gods  of  Canaan 
or  Egypt  or  Babylon?  Merodach  and  Nebo 
have  vanished,  but  lahvah  is  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  certainly  looks  very  much 
as  if  the  Hebrew  prophets  were  right;  as  if  lah- 
vah were  really  the  God  of  the  creation  as  well 
as  the  Portion  of  Jacob. 

"  The  portion  of  Jacob."  Is  His  relation  to 
that  one  people  a  stumbling-block?  Can  we  see 
no  eternal  truth  in  the  statement  of  the  Psalmist 
that  "  the  Lord's  portion  is  His  people?  "  Who 
can  find  fault  with  the  enthusiastic  faith  of  holy 
men  thus  exulting  in  the  knowledge  and  love  of 
God?  It  is  a  characteristic  of  all  genuine  re- 
ligion, this  sweet,  this  elevating  consciousness 
that  God  is  our  God;  this  profound  sense  that 
He  has  revealed  Himself  to  us  in  a  special  and 
peculiar  and  individual  manntr.  But  the  actual 
historical  results,  as  well  as  the  sacred  books, 
prove  that  the  sense  of  possessing  God  and  being 


Jeremiah  X.  i-i6.]  HEATHEN    IDOLS    AND    ISRAEL'S    GOD. 


69 


possessed  by  Him  was  purer,  stronger,  deeper, 
more  effectual,  more  abiding,  in  Israel  than  in 
any  other  race  of  the  ancient  world. 

One  must  tread  warily  upon  slippery  ground; 
but  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  many  of  the  argu- 
ments alleged  against  the  probability  of  God  re- 
vealing Himself  to  man  at  all  or  to  a  single  na- 
tion in  particular,  are  sufficiently  met  by  the  sim- 
ple consideration  that  He  has  actually  done  so. 
Any  event  whatever  may  be  very  improbable  un- 
til it  has  happened;  and  assuming  that  God  has 
not  revealed  Himself,  it  may  perhaps  be  shown 
to  be  highly  improbable  that  He  would  reveal 
Himself.  But,  meanwhile,  all  religions  and  all 
faith  and  the  phenomena  of  conscience  and  the 
highest  intuitions  of  reason  presuppose  this  im- 
probable event  as  the  fact  apart  from  which  they 
are  insoluble  riddles.  This  is  not  to  say  that 
the  precise  manner  of  revelation — the  contact  of 
the  Infinite  with  the  Finite  Spirit — is  definable. 
There  are  many  less  lofty  experiences  of  man 
which  also  are  indefinable  and  mysterious,  but 
none  the  less  actual  and  certain.  Facts  are  not 
explained  by  denial,  which  is  about  the  most 
barren  and  feeble  attitude  a  man  can  take  up  in 
the  presence  of  a  baffling  mystery.  Nor  is  it 
for  man  to  prescribe  conditions  to  God.  He 
who  made  us  and  knows  us  far  better  than  we 
know  ourselves,  knows  also  how  best  to  reveal 
Himself  to  His  creatures. 

The  special  illumination  of  Israel,  however, 
does  not  imply  that  no  light  was  vouchsafed  else- 
where. The  religious  systems  of  other  nations 
furnish  abundant  evidence  to  the  contrary.  God 
"  left  not  Himself  without  witness,"  the  silent 
witness  of  that  beneficent  order  of  the  natural 
world,  which  makes  it  possible  for  man  to  live, 
and  to  live  happily.  St.  Paul  did  not  scruple  to 
compliment  even  the  degenerate  Athenians  of  his 
own  day  on  the  ground  of  their  attention  to  re- 
ligious matters,  and  he  could  cite  a  Greek  poet 
in  support  of  his  doctrine  that  man  is  the  off- 
spring of  the  one  God  and  Father  of  all. 

We  may  see  in  the  fact  a  sufficient  indication 
of  what  St.  Paul  would  have  said,  had  the  nobler 
non-Christian  systems  fallen  under  his  cog- 
nisance; had  heathenism  become  known  to  him 
not  in  the  heterogeneous  polytheism  of  Hellas, 
which  in  his  time  had  long  since  lost  what  little 
moral  influence  it  had  ever  possessed,  nor  in  the 
wild  orgiastic  nature  worships  of  the  Lesser  Asia, 
which  in  their  thoroughly  sensuous  basis  did 
dishonour  alike  to  God  and  to  man;  but  in  the 
sublime  tenets  of  Zarathustra,  with  their  noble 
morality  and  deep  reverence  for  the  One  God, 
the  spirit  of  all  goodness  and  truth,  or  in  the 
reformed  Brahmanism  of  Gautama  the  Buddha, 
with  its  grand  principle  of  self-renunciation  and 
universal  charity. 

The  peculiar  glories  of  Bible  religion  are  not 
dimmed  in  presence  of  these  other  lights.  Al- 
lowing for  whatever  is  valuable  in  these  systems 
of  beli^'.f,  we  may  still  allege  that  Bible  religion 
comprises  all  that  is  good  in  them,  and  has,  be- 
sides, many  precious  features  peculiar  to  itself; 
we  may  still  maintain  that  their  excellences  are 
rather  testimonies  to  the  truth  of  the  biblical 
teachings  about  God  than  difificulties  in  the  way 
of  a  rational  faith;  that  it  would  be  far  more 
difficult  to  a  thoughtful  mind  to  accept  the  reve- 
lation of  God  conveyed  in  the  Bible,  if  it  were 
the  fact  that  no  rays  of  Divine  light  had  cheered 
the  darkness  of  the  millions  of  struggling  mor- 
tals beyond  the  pale  of  Judaism,  than  it  is  under 


the  actual  circumstances  of  the  case:  in  short, 
that  the  truths  implicated  in  imperfect  religions, 
isolated  from  all  contact  with  Ilebrew  or  Chris- 
tian belief,  are  a  witness  to  and  a  foreshadowing 
of  the  truths  of  the  gospel. 

Our  prophet  declares  that  Jacob's  portion — 
the  God  of  Israel — is  not  like  the  gods  of  con- 
temporary peoples.  How,  then,  does  he  con- 
ceive of  Him?  Not  as  a  metaphysical  entity — 
a  naked,  perhaps  empty  abstraction  of  the  un- 
derstanding. Not  as  the  Absolute  and  Infinite 
Being,  who  is  out  of  all  relation  to  space  and  time. 
His  language — the  language  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment— possesses  no  adjectives  like  "  Infinite," 
"  Absolute,"  "  Eternal,"  "  Omniscient,"  "  Omni- 
present," nor  even  "  Almighty,"  although  that 
word  so  often  appears  in  our  venerable  Author- 
ised Version.  It  is  difficult  for  us,  who  are  the 
heirs  of  ages  of  thought  and  intellectual  toil,  and 
whose  thinking  is  almost  wholly  carried  on  by 
means  of  abstract  ideas,  to  realise  a  state  of  mind 
and  a  habit  of  thought  so  largely  different  from 
our  own  as  that  of  the  Hebrew  people  and  even 
of  the  Hebrew  prophets.  Yet  unless  we  make 
an  effort  to  realise  it,  however  inadequately,  un- 
less we  exert  ourselves,  and  strive  manfully  to 
enter  through  the  gate  of  an  instructed  imagina- 
tion into  that  far-off  stage  of  life  and  thought 
which  presents  so  many  problems  to  the  histori- 
cal student,  and  hides  in  its  obscurity  so  many 
precious  truths;  we  must  inevitably  fail  to  ap- 
nreciate  the  full  significance,  and  consequently 
fail  of  appropriating  the  full  blessing  of  those 
wonderful  prophecies  of  ancient  Israel,  which  are 
not  for  an  age  but  for  all  time. 

Let  us,  then,  try  to  apprehend  the  actual  point 
of  view  from  which  the  inspired  Israelite  re- 
garded his  God.  In  the  first  place,  that  point  of 
view  was  eminently  practical.  As  a  recent  writer 
has  forcibly  remarked,  "  The  primitive  mind  does 
not  occupy  itself  with  things  of  no  practical  im- 
portance, and  it  is  only  in  the  later  stages  of 
society  that  we  meet  with  traditional  beliefs 
nominally  accepted  by  every  one  but  practically 
regarded  by  none;  or  with  theological  specula- 
tions which  have  an  interest  for  the  curious,  but 
are  not  felt  to  have  a  direct  bearing  on  the  con- 
cerns of  life." 

The  pious  Israelite  could  not  indulge  a  mor- 
bidly acute  and  restlessly  speculative  intellect 
with  philosophical  or  scientific  theories  about 
the  Deity,  His  nature  in  Himself,  His  essential 
and  accidental  attributes.  His  relation  to  the  visi- 
ble world.  Neither  did  such  theories  then  exist 
ready  made  to  his  hand,  nor  did  his  inward  im- 
pulses and  the  natural  course  of  thought  urge 
him  to  pry  into  such  abstruse  matters,  and  with 
cold  irreverence  to  subject  his  idea  of  God  to 
critical  analysis.  Could  he  have  been  made  to 
understand  the  attitude  and  the  demands  of  some 
modern  disputants,  he  would  have  been  apt  to 
exclaim,  "  Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out  God? 
Canst  thou  find  out  Shaddai  unto  perfection?  It 
is  as  high  as  heaven,  what  canst  thou  do?  deeper 
than  hell,  what  canst  thou  know?"  To  find  out 
and  to  know  God  as  the  understanding  finds  out 
and  knows,  how  can  that  ever  become  possible 
to  man?  Such  knowledge  depends  entirely  upon 
processes  of  comparison;  upon  the  perception  of 
similarity  between  the  object  investigated  and 
other  known  objects:  upon  accurate  naming  and 
classification.  But  who  can  dream  of  success- 
fully referring  the  Deity  to  a  class?  "  To  what 
will  ve  liken  God.  or  what  likeness  will  ye  COCQr 


70 


XHE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


pare  unto  Him?  "  In  the  brief  prophecy  before 
us,  as  in  the  fortieth  chapter  of  Isaiah,  with 
which  it  presents  so  many  points  of  contact,  we 
have  a  splendid  protest  against  all  atternpts  at 
bringing  the  Most  High  within  the  limitations  of 
human  cognition,  and  reducing  God  to  the  cate- 
gory of  things  known  and  understood.  Directed 
in  the  first  instance  against  idolatry — against  vain 
efforts  to  find  an  adequate  likeness  of  the  Su- 
preme in  some  one  of  the  numberless  creations 
of  His  hand,  and  so  to  compare  and  gauge  and 
comprehend  Himself, — that  protest  is  still  ap- 
plicable, and  with  even  greater  force,  against  the 
idolatrous  tendencies  of  the  present  age:  when 
one  school  of  devotees  loudly  declares, 

"  Thou,  Nature,  art  our  goddess  ;  to  thy  law 
Our  services  are  bound  :  wherefore  should  we 
Stand  in  the  plague  of  custom  ?  " 

and  another  is  equally  loud  in  asserting  that  it 
has  found  the  true  god  in  man  himself;  and  an- 
other proclaims  the  divinity  of  brute  force,  and 
feels  no  shame  in  advocating  the  sovereignty  of 
those  gross  instincts  and  passions  which  man 
shares  with  the  beasts  that  perish.  It  is  an  un- 
worthy and  an  inadequate  conception  of  God, 
which  identifies  Him  with  Nature;  it  is  a  de- 
plorably impoverished  idea,  the  mere  outcome  of 
philosophic  despair,  which  identifies  him  with 
Humanity;  but  what  language  can  describe  the 
grovelling  baseness  of  that  habit  of  thought 
which  knows  of  nothing  higher  than  the  sensual 
appetite,  and  seeks  nothing  better  than  its  con- 
tinual indulgence;  which  sees  the  native  impress 
of  sovereignty  on  the  brow  of  passing  pleasure, 
and  recognises  the  image  and  likeness  of  God 
in  a  temporary  association  of  depraved  instincts? 
It  is  to  this  last  form  of  idolatry,  this  utter 
heathenism  in  the  moral  life,  that  all  other  forms 
really  converge,  as  St.  Paul  has  shown  in  the 
introduction  of  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  where, 
in  view  of  the  unutterable  iniquities  which  were 
familiar  occurrences  in  the  world  of  his  contem- 
poraries, he  affirms  that  moral  decadence  of  the 
most  appalling  character  is  ultimately  traceable 
to  a  voluntary  indulgence  of  those  idolatrous 
tendencies  which  ignore  God's  revelation  of 
Himself  to  the  heart  and  reason,  and  prefer  to 
find  their  deity  in  something  less  awful  in  purity 
and  holiness,  less  averse  to  the  defilements  of  sin, 
less  conversant  with  the  secrets  of  the  soul;  and 
so,  not  liking  to  retain  the  true  and  only  God  in 
knowledge,  change  His  truth  into  a  lie,  and  wor- 
ship and  serve  the  creature  more  than  the  Crea- 
tor: changing  the  glorv  of  the  incorruptible  God 
into  an  image  made  like  unto  corruptible  man, 
or  even  to  birds  and  fourfooted  beasts  and  creep- 
ing things. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  BROKEN  COVENANT. 

Jeremiah  xi.,  xii. 

There  is  no  visible  break  between  these  two 
chapters.  They  seem  to  summarise  the  history 
of  a  particular  episode  in  the  prophet's  career. 
At  the  same  time,  the  style  is  so  peculiar  that 
it  is  not  so  easy  as  it  might  appear  at  a  first 
glance  to  determine  exactly  what  it  is  that  the 
section  has  to  tell  us.  When  we  come  to  take 
a  closer  look  at  it,   we  find  a  thoroughly  char- 


acteristic mixture  of  direct  narrative  and  solil- 
oquy, of  statement  of  facts  and  reflection  upon 
those  facts,  of  aspiration  and  prayer  and 
prophecy,  of  self-communing  and  communing 
with  God.  Careful  analysis  may  perhaps  furnish 
us  with  a  clue  to  the  disentanglement  of  the 
general  sense  and  drift  of  this  characteristic 
medley.  We  may  thus  hope  to  get  a  clearer  in- 
sight into  the  bearing  of  this  old-world  oracle 
upon  our  own  needs  and  perplexities,  our  sins 
and  the  fruit  of  our  sins,  what  we  have  done  and 
what  we  may  expect  as  the  consequence  of  our 
doings.  For  the  Word  of  God  is  "  quick  and 
powerful."  Its  outward  form  and  vesture  may 
change  with  the  passing  of  time;  but  its  substance 
never  changes.  The  old  interpreters  die,  but  the 
Word  lives,  and  its  life  is  a  life  of  power.  By 
that  Word  men  live  in  their  successive  genera- 
tions; it  is  at  once  creative  and  regulative;  it  is 
the  seed  of  life  in  man,  and  it  is  the  law  of  that 
life.  Apart  from  the  Divine  Word,  man  would 
be  no  more  than  a  brute  gifted  with  understand- 
ing, but  denied  all  answer  to  the  higher  cravings 
of  soul  and  spirit;  a  being  whose  conscious  life 
was  a  mere  mockery;  a  self-tormentor,  tantalised 
with  vain  surmises,  tortured  with  ever-recurring 
problems;  longing  for  light,  and  beset  with 
never-lifting  clouds  of  impenetrable  darkness;  the 
one  sole  instance,  among  the  myriads  of  sentient 
beings,  of  a  creature  whose  wants  Nature  refuses 
to  satisfy,  and  whose  lot  it  is  to  consume  for  ever 
in  the  fires  of  hopeless  desire. 

The  sovran  Lord,  who  is  the  Eternal  Wisdom, 
has  not  made  such  a  mistake.  He  provides  sat- 
isfaction for  all  His  creatures,  according  to  the 
varying  degrees  of  their  capacity,  according  to 
their  rank  in  the  scale  of  being,  so  that  all  may 
rejoice  in  the  fulness  and  the  freedom  of  a  happy 
life  for  their  allotted  time.  Man  is  no  exception 
to  the  universal  rule.  His  whole  constitution,  as 
God  has  fashioned  it,  is  such  that  he  can  find  his 
perfect  satisfaction  in  the  Word  of  the  Lord. 
And  the  depth  of  his  dissatisfaction,  the  poign- 
ancy and  the  bitterness  of  his  disappointment 
and  disgust  at  himself  and  at  the  world  in  which 
he  finds  himself,  are  the  strongest  evidence  that 
he  has  sought  satisfaction  m  things  that  cannot 
satisfy;  that  he  has  foolishly  endeavoured  to  feed 
his  soul  upon  ashes,  to  still  the  cravings  of  his 
spirit  with  something  other  than  that  Word  of 
God  which  is  the  Bread  of  Life. 

You  will  observe  that  the  discourse  we  are 
to  consider,  is  headed:  "The  word  that  fell  to 
Jeremiah  from  lahvah  "  (lit.  "  from  with,"  that 
is,  "from  the  presence  of"  the  Eternal),  "say- 
ing." I  think  that  expression  "  saying  "  covers 
all  that  follows,  to  the  end  of  the  discourse.  The 
prophet's  preaching  the  Law,  and  the  conse- 
quences of  that  preaching  as  regarded  himself; 
his  experience  of  the  stubbornness  and  treachery 
of  the  people;  the  varying  moods  of  his  own 
mind  under  that  bitter  experience;  his  reflections 
upon  the  condition  of  Judah,  and  the  condition 
of  Judah's  ill-minded  neighbours;  his  forecasts 
of  the  after-course  of  events  as  determined  by 
the  unchanging  will  of  a  righteous  God;  all  these 
things  seem  to  be  included  in  the  scope  of  that 
"  Word  from  the  presence  of  lahvah,"  which  the 
prophet  is  about  to  put  on  record.  You  will  see 
that  it  is  not  a  single  utterance  of  a  precise  and 
definite  message,  which  he  might  have  delivered 
in  a  few  moments  of  time  before  a  single  audi- 
ence of  his  countrymen.  The  Word  of  the  Lord 
is     progressively     revealed;     it    begins    with     a 


Jeremiah  xi.,  xii.] 


THE    BROKEN    COVENANT. 


71 


thought  in  the  prophet's  mind,  but  its  entire  con- 
tent is  unfolded  gradually,  as  he  proceeds  to  act 
upon  that  thought  or  Divine  impulse;  it  is,  as  it 
were,  evolved  as  the  result  of  collision  between 
the  prophet  and  his  hearers;  it  emerges  into  clear 
light  out  of  the  darkness  of  storm  and  conflict; 
a  conflict  both  internal  and  external;  a  conflict 
within,  between  his  own  contending  emotions 
and  impulses  and  sympathies;  and  a  conflict  with- 
out, between  an  unpopular  teacher,  and  a  way- 
ward and  corrupt  and  incorrigible  people.  "  From 
with  lahvah."  There  may  be  strife  and  tumult 
and  the  darkness  of  ignorance  and  passion  upon 
earth;  but  the  star  of  truth  shines  in  the  firma- 
ment of  heaven,  and  the  eye  of  the  inspired  man 
sees  it.     This  is  his  difference  from  his  fellows. 

"  Hear  ye  the  words  of  this  covenant,  and 
speak  ye  unto  the  men  of  Judah,  and  upon  the 
dwellers  in  Jerusalem!  And  say  thou  unto  them, 
Thus  saith  lahvah,  the  God  of  Israel,  Accursed 
are  the  men  that  hear  not  the  words  of  this 
covenant,  which  I  lay  on  your  fathers,  in  the  day 
that  1  brought  them  forth  from  the  land  of 
Egypt,  from  the  furnace  of  iron,  saying.  Hearken 
unto  My  voice,  and  do  these  things,  according  to 
all  that  I  shall  charge  you:  that  ye  may  become 
for  Me  a  people,  and  that  I  Myself  may  become 
for  you  a  God.  That  I  may  make  good  "  (D^i^? 
vid.  ^fra)  "  the  oath  which  I  sware  to  your  fore- 
fathers, that  I  would  give  them  a  land  flowing 
with  milk  and  honey,  as  it  now  is  "  (or  simply, 
"  to-day  ").  '■  And  I  answered  and  said.  Amen, 
lahvah!  "  (xi.  1-5).  "  Hear  ye  .  .  .  speak  ye 
unto  the  men  of  Judah!  "  The  occasion  referred 
to  is  that  memorable  crisis  in  the  eighteenth  year 
of  king  Josiah,  when  Hilkiah  the  high  priest 
had  "  found  the  book  of  the  law  in  the  house  of 
the  Lord"  (2  Kings  xxii.  8  sqq.),  and  the  pious 
king  had  read  in  the  hearing  of  the  assembled 
people  those  fervid  exhortations  to  obedience, 
those  promises  fraught  with  all  manner  of  bless- 
ing, those  terrible  denunciations  of  wrath  and 
ruin  reserved  for  rebellion  and  apostasy,  which 
we  may  still  read  in  the  closing  chapters  of  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  (Deut.  xxvii.  sq.).  Jere- 
miah is  recalhng  the  events  of  his  own  ministry, 
and  passes  in  rapid  review  from  the  time  of  his 
preaching  upon  the  Book  of  the  Law,  to  the 
Chaldean  invasion  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin 
(xiii.  18  sqq.).  He  recalls  the  solemn  occasion 
when  the  king  and  people  bound  themselves  by 
oath  to  observe  the  law  of  their  God;  when 
"  the  king  stood  upon  the  platform,  and  made 
the  covenant  before  lahvah,  that  he  would  follow 
lahvah,  and  keep  his  commandments,  and  his 
laws  and  his  statutes,  with  whole  heart  and  with 
whole  soul;  to  make  good  (Q^pn^)  the  words  of 
this  covenant  that  were  written  upon  this  roll; 
and  all  the  people  stood  to  the  covenant " 
(2  Kings  xxiii.  3).  At  or  soon  after  this  great 
meeting,  the  prophet  gives,  in  the  name  of  lah- 
vah, an  emphatic  approval  to  the  public  under- 
taking; and  bids  the  leaders  in  the  movement  not 
to  rest  contented  with  this  good  beginning,  but 
to  impress  the  obligation  more  deeply  upon  the 
community  at  large,  by  sending  a  mission  of 
properly  qualified  persons,  including  himself, 
which  should  at  once  enforce  the  reforms  neces- 
sitated by  the  covenant  of  strict  obedience  to  the 
Law,  and  reconcile  the  people  both  of  the  capital 
and  of  the  rural  towns  and  hamlets  to  the  sud- 
den and  sweeping  changes  demanded  of  them, 
by  showing  their  entire  consonance  with  the  Di- 
vine precepts.     "  Hear  ye  " — princes  and  priests 


— "  the  words  of  this  covenant;  and  speak  ye  unto 
the  men  of  Judah!  "  Then  follows,  in  brief,  the 
prophet's  own  commission,  which  is  to  reiterate, 
with  all  the  force  of  his  impassioned  rhetoric,  the 
awful  menaces  of  the  Sacred  Book:  "  Cursed  be 
the  men  that  hear  not  the  words  of  this  cove- 
nant! "  Now  again,  in  these  last  years  of  their 
national  existence,  the  chosen  people  are  to  hear 
an  authoritative  proclamation  of  that  Divine  Law 
upon  which  all  their  weal  depends;  the  Law 
given  them  at  the  outset  of  their  history,  when 
the  memory  of  the  great  deliverance  was  yet 
fresh  in  their  minds;  the  Law  which  was  the  con- 
dition of  their  peculiar  relation  to  the  Universal 
God.  At  Sinai  they  had  solemnly  undertaken  to 
observe  that  Law:  and  lahweh  had  fulfilled  His 
promise  to  their  "  fathers  " — to  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob — and  had  given  them  a  goodly  land, 
in  which  they  had  now  been  established  for  at 
least  six  hundred  years.  The  Divine  truth  and 
righteousness  were  manifest  upon  a  retrospect  of 
this  long  period  of  eventful  history;  and  Jere- 
miah could  not  withhold  his  inward  assent,  in 
the  formula  prescribed  by  the  Book  of  the  Law 
(Deut.  xxvii.  15  sqq.),  to  the  perfect  justice  of  the 
sentence:  "  Cursed  be  the  men  that  hear  not  the 
words  of  this  covenant."  "  And  I  answered  and 
said,  Amen,  lahvah!  "  *  So  to  this  true  Israelite, 
thus  deeply  communing  with  his  own  spirit,  two 
things  had  become  clear  as  day.  The  one  was 
the  absolute  righteousness  of  God's  entire  deal- 
ing with  Israel,  from  first  to  last;  the  righteous- 
ness of  disaster  and  overthrow  as  well  as  of  vic- 
tory and  prosperity:  the  other  was  his  own  pres- 
ent duty  to  bring  this  truth  home  to  the  hearts 
and  consciences  of  his  fellow-countrymen.  This 
is  how  he  states  the  fact:  "  And  lahvah  said  unto 
me,  Proclaim  thou  all  these  words  in  the  cities 
of  Judah  and  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  saying, 
Hear  ye  the  words  of  this  covenant  and  do  them. 
For  I  earnestly  adjured  your  fathers,  when  I 
brought  them  up  from  the  land  of  Egypt  "  ("  and 
I  have  done  so  continually  ")  "  even  unto  this 
very  day,  saying,  Obey  ye  My  voice!  And  they 
obeyed  not,  nor  inclined  their  ear;  and  they 
walked,  each  and  all,  in  the  hardness  of  their 
wicked  heart.  So  I  brought  upon  them  all  the 
threats "  (lit.,  "  words ")  "  of  this  covenant, 
which  I  had  charged  them  to  keep,  and  they 
kept  it  not  "  (xi.  6-8).  God  is  always  self-con- 
sistent; man  is  often  inconsistent  with  himself; 
God  is  eternally  true,  man  is  ever  giving  fresh 
proofs  of  his  natural  faithlessness.  God  is  not 
only  just  in  keeping  His  promises;  He  is  also 
merciful,  in  labouring  ever  to  induce  man  to  be 
self-consistent,  and  true  to  moral  obligations. 
And  Divine  mercy  is  revealed  alike  in  the  plead- 
ings of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  mouth  of  prophets, 
by  the  voice  of  conscience,  and  in  the  retribution 
that  overtakes  persistence  in  evil.  The  Divine 
Law  is  life  and  health  to  them  that  keep  it;  it 
is  death  to  them  that  break  it.  "  Thou,  Lord, 
art  merciful;  for  thou  rewardest  every  man  ac- 
cording to  his  works." 

The  relation  of  the  One  God  to  this  one  peo- 
ple was  neither  accidental  nor  arbitrary.  It  is 
sometimes  spoken  of  as  a  thing  glaringly  unjust 
to  the  other  nations  of  the  ancient  world,  that 
the  Father  of  all  should  have  chosen  Israel  only 
to  be  the  recipient  of  His  special  favours. 
Sometimes  it  is  demanded,  as  an  unanswerable 

*  But  perhaps  it  is  rather  the  prophet's  love  for  his  peo- 
ple, which  fervently  prays  that  the  oath  of  blessing  may 
be  observed,  and  Jvidah  maintained  in  the  goodly  land. 


72 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


dilemma,  How  could  the  Universal  God  be  the 
God  of  the  Jews,  in  the  restricted  sense  implied 
by  the  Old  Testament  histories?  But  difficulties 
of  this  kind  rest  upon  misunderstanding,  due  to 
a  slavishly  literal  interpretation  of  certain  pas- 
sages, and  inability  to  take  a  comprehensive  vievir 
of  the  general  drift  and  tenor  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writings  as  they  bear  upon  this  subject. 
God's  choice  of  Israel  was  proof  of  His  love 
for  mankind.  He  did  not  select  one  people  be- 
cause He  was  indifferent  or  hostile  to  all  other 
peoples;  but  because  He  wished  to  bring  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  to  the  knowledge  of 
Himself,  and  the  observance  of  His  law.  The 
words  of  our  prophet  show  that  he  was  pro- 
foundly convinced  that  the  favour  of  lahvah  had 
from  the  outset  depended  upon  the  obedience  of 
Israel:  "  Hearken  unto  My  voice,  and  do  these 
things  .  .  .  that  ye  may  become  for  Me  a  peo- 
ple, and  that  I  Myself  may  become  for  you  a 
God."  How  strangely  must  such  words  have 
sounded  in  the  ears  of  people  who  believed,  as 
the  masses  both  in  town  and  country  appear  for 
the  most  part  to  have  done,  that  lahvah  as  the 
ancestral  god  was  bound  by  an  indissoluble  tie 
to  Israel,  and  that  He  could  not  suffer  the  nation 
to  perish  without  incurring  irreparable  loss,  if 
not  extinction,  for  Himself!  It  is  as  if  the 
prophet  had  said:  You  call  yourselves  the  people 
of  God;  but  it  is  not  so  much  that  you  are  His 
people,  as  that  you  may  become  such  by  doing 
His  will.  You  suppose  that  lahvah,  the  Eternal, 
the  Creator,  is  to  you  what  Chemosh  is  to 
Moab,  or  Molech  to  Ammon,  or  Baal  to  Tyre; 
but  that  is  just  what  He  is  not.  If  you  enter- 
tain such  ideas  of  lahvah,  you  are  worshipping 
a  figment  of  your  own  carnal  imaginations;  your 
god  is  not  the  universal  God,  but  a  gross  un- 
spiritual  idol.  It  is  only  upon  your  fulfilment  of 
His  conditions,  only  upon  your  yielding  an  in- 
ward assent  to  His  law,  a  hearty  acceptance  to 
His  rule  of  life,  that  He  Himself — the  One  only 
God — can  truly  become  your  God.  In  accept- 
ing His  law,  you  accept  Him,  and  in  rejecting 
His  law,  you  reject  Him;  for  His  law  is  a  re- 
flection of  Himself;  a  revelation,  so  far  as  suc'h 
can  be  made  to  a  creature  like  man,  of  His  es- 
sential being  and  character.  Therefore  think  not 
that  you  can  worship  Him  by  mere  external 
rites;  for  the  true  worship  is  "  righteousness, 
and  holiness  of  life." 

The  progress  of  the  reforming  movement, 
which  was  doubtless  powerfully  stimulated  by 
the  preaching  of  Jeremiah,  is  briefly  sketched  in 
the  chapter  of  the  book  of  Kings,  to  which  I 
have  already  referred  (2  Kings  xxiii.).  That 
summary  of  the  good  deeds  of  king  Josiah  re- 
cords apparently  a  very  complete  extirpation  of 
the  various  forms  of  idolatry,  and  even  a 
slaughter  of  the  idol-priests  upon  their  own 
altars.  Heathenism,  it  would  seem,  could  hardly 
have  been  practised  again,  at  least  openly,  during 
the  twelve  remaining  years  of  Josiah.  But  al- 
though a  zealous  king  might  enforce  outward 
conformity  to  the  Law,  and  although  the  earnest 
preaching  of  prophets  like  Zephaniah  and  Jere- 
miah might  have  considerable  effect  with  the 
better  part  of  the  people,  the  fact  remained  that 
those  whose  hearts  were  really  open  to  the  word 
of  the  Lord  were  still,  as  always,  a  small  minor- 
ity; and  the  tendency  to  apostasy,  though 
checked,  was  far  from  being  rooted  up.  Here 
and  there  the  forbidden  rites  were  secretly  ob- 
served; and  the  harsh  measures  which  had  ac- 


companied their  public  suppression  may  very 
probably  have  intensified  the  attachment  of  many 
to  the  local  forms  of  worship.  Sincere  con- 
versions are  not  effected  by  violence:  and  the 
martyrdom  of  devotees  may  give  new  life  even 
to  degraded  and  utterly  immoral  superstitions. 
The  transient  nature  of  Josiah's  reformation, 
radical  as  it  may  have  appeared  at  the  time  to 
the  principal  agents  engaged  in  it,  is  evident 
from  the  testimony  of  Jeremiah  himself.  "  And 
lahvah  said  unto  me.  There  exists  a  conspiracy 
among  the  men  of  Judah,  and  among  the  in- 
habitants of  Jerusalem.  They  have  returned  to 
the  old  sins  of  their  fathers,  who  refused  to  hear 
My  words;  and  they  too  have  gone  away  after 
other  gods,  to  serve  them:  the  house  of  Israel 
and  the  house  of  Judah  have  broken  My  cove- 
nant, which  I  made  with  their  forefathers. 
Therefore  thus  saith  lahvah.  Behold  I  am  about 
to  bring  unto  them  an  evil  from  which  they  can- 
not get  forth;  and  they  will  cry  unto  Me,  and  I 
will  not  listen  unto  them.  And  the  cities  of 
Judah  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  will  go 
and  cry  unto  the  gods  to  whom  they  burn  in- 
cense "  (i.  e.,  now;  ptcp.)  ;  "and  they  will  yield 
them  no  help  at  all  in  the  time  of  their  evil.  For 
many  as  thy  cities  are  thy  gods  become,  O 
Judah!  and  many  as  the  streets  of  Jerusalem Jiave 
ye  appointed  altars  to  the  Shame,  altars  for 
burning  incense  to  the  Baal.  And  as  for  thee, 
intercede  thou  not  for  this  people,  nor  lift  up 
for  them  outcry  "  (i.  e.,  mourning)  "  and  inter- 
cession; for  I  intend  not  to  hearken,  in  the  time 
when  they  call  unto  Me,  in  the  time  of  their 
evil"  (so  read:  cf.  vers.  12,  ny3  instead  of  "iy3) 
(vv.  9-14).  Ail  this  appears  to  indicate  the 
course  of  the  prophet's  reflection,  after  it  had  be- 
come clear  to  him  that  the  reformation  was  il- 
lusory, and  that  his  own  labours  had  failed  of 
their  purpose.  He  calls  the  relapse  of  the  people 
a  plot  or  conspiracy;  thereby  sugesting,  perhaps, 
the  secrecy  with  which  the  prohibited  worships 
were  at  first  revived,  and  the  intrigues  of  the  un- 
faithful nobles  and  priests  and  prophets,  in  order 
to  bring  about  a  reversal  of  the  policy  of  're- 
form, and  a  return  to  the  old  system;  and  cer- 
tainly suggesting  that  the  heart  of  the  nation, 
as  a  whole,  was  disloyal  to  its  Heavenly  King, 
and  that  its  renewed  apostasy  was  a  wicked  dis- 
avowal of  lawful  allegiance,  and  an  act  of  un- 
pardonable treason  against  God. 

But  the  word  further  signifies  that  a  bond 
has  been  entered  into,  a  bond  which  is  the  exact 
antithesis  of  the  covenant  with  lahvah;  and  it 
implies  that  this  bond  has  about  it  a  fatal 
strength  and  permanence,  involving  as  its  neces- 
sary consequence  the  ruin  of  the  nation. 
Breaking  covenant  with  lahvah  meant  making 
a  covenant  with  other  gods;  it  was  impossible 
to  do  the  one  thing  without  the  other.  And  that 
is  as  true  now,  under  totally  different  conditions, 
as  it  was  in  the  land  of  Judah,  twenty-four  cen- 
turies ago.  If  you  have  broken  faith  with  God  in 
Christ  it  is  because  you  have  entered  into  an 
agreement  with  another;  it  is  because  you  have 
foolishly  taken  the  tempter  at  his  word,  and  ac- 
cepted his  conditions,  and  surrendered  to  his  pro- 
posals, and  preferred  his  promises  to  the  prom- 
ises of  God.  It  is  because,  against  all  reason, 
against  conscience,  against  the  Holy  Spirit, 
against  the  witness  of  God's  Word,  against  the 
witness  of  His  Saints  and  Confessors  in  all  ages, 
you  have  believed  that  a  Being  less  than  the 
Eternal  God  could  ensure  your  weal  and  make 


Jeremiah  xi.,  xii.] 


THE    BROKEN    COVENANT. 


73 


you  happy.  And  now  your  heart  is  no  longer 
at  unity  in  itself,  and  your  allegiance  is  no  longer 
single  and  undivided.  "  Many  as  thy  cities  are 
thy  gods  become,  O  Judah!  "  The  soul  that  is 
not  unified  and  harmonised  by  the  fear  of  the 
One  God,  is  torn  and  distracted  by  a  thousand 
contending  passions:  and  vainly  seeks  peace  and 
deliverance  by  worship  at  a  thousand  unholy 
shrines.  But  Mammon  and  Belial  and  Ashtaroth 
and  the  whole  rout  of  unclean  spirits,  whose  se- 
ductions have  lured  you  astray,  will  fail  you  at 
last;  and  in  the  hour  of  bitter  need,  you  will 
learn  too  late  that  there  is  no  god  but  God,  and 
no  peace  nor  safety  nor  joy  but  in  Him. 

It  is  futile  to  pray  for  those  who  have  de- 
liberately cast  off  the  covenant  of  lahvah,  and 
made  a  covenant  with  His  adversary.  "  Inter- 
cede not  for  this  people,  nor  lift  up  outcry  and 
intercession  for  them!"  Prayer  cannot  save, 
nothing  can  save,  the  impenitent;  and  there  is  a 
state  of  mind  in  which  one's  own  prayer  is 
turned  into  sin;  the  state  of  mind  in  which  a  man 
prays,  merely  to  appease  God,  and  escape  the 
fire,  but  without  a  thought  of  forsaking  sin, 
without  the  faintest  aspiration  after  holiness. 
There  is  a  degree  of  guilt  upon  which  sentence 
is  already  passed,  which  is  "  unto  death,"  and  for 
which  intercession  is  interdicted  alike  by  the 
Apostle  of  the  New  as  to  the  prophet  of  the  Old 
Covenant. 

"  What  availeth  it  My  beloved,  that  she  ful- 
filleth  her  intent  in  Mine  house?  Can  vows  and 
hallowed  flesh  make  thine  evil  to  pass  from  thee? 
Then  mightest  thou  indeed  rejoice  "  *  (ver.  15). 
Such  appears  to  be  the  true  sense  of  this  verse, 
the  only  difificult  one  in  the  chapter.  The 
prophet  had  evidently  the  same  thought  in  his 
mind  as  in  ver.  11:  '"I  will  bring  unto  them  an 
evil,  from  which  they  cannot  get  forth;  and  they 
will  cry  unto  Me,  and  I  will  not  hearken  unto 
them."  The  words  also  recall  those  of  Isaiah 
(Isa.  i.  II  sqq.):  "  For  what  to  Me  are  your  many 
sacrifices,  saith  lahvah?  When  ye  enter  in  to 
see  My  face,  who  hath  sought  this  at  your  hand, 
to  trample  My  courts?  Bring  no  more  a  vain 
oblation;  loathly  incense  it  is  to  Me!  "  The 
term  which  I  have  rendered  "  intent,"  usually  de- 
notes an  evil  intention;  so  that,  like  Isaiah,  our 
prophet  implies  that  the  popular  worship  is  not 
only  futile  but  sinful.  So  true  it  is  that  "  He 
that  turneth  away  his  ear  from  hearing  the  law, 
even  his  prayer  is  an  abomination "  (Prov. 
xxviii.  9);  or,  as  the  Psalmist  puts  the  same 
truth,  "  If  I  incline  unto  wickedness  with  my 
heart,  the  Lord  will  not  hear  me." 

*Hit7,ig  supposed  that  the  "vows  "and  "hallowed 
flesh "  were  thank-oflferings  for  the  departure  of  the 
Scythians.  "  It  is  plain  that  the  people  are  really  present 
in  the  temple ;  they  bring,  presumably  after  the  retreat 
of  the  Scythians,  the  offerings  vowed  at  that  time."  But, 
considering  the  context,  the  reference  appears  to  be  more 
general.  I  have  partly  followed  the  LXX.  in  emending 
an  obviously  corrupt  verse  ;  the  only  one  in  the  chapter 
which  presents  any  textual  difficulty.   Read  :  113^  K'Tp 

-lE^ai  Dnnan  «"^ni3;on  nnib^j;  Tiui  -m^f'  no  :  n 


Sj?n  m  ^3nyT3'f)yD.  The 


I    :|- 


article  with  a  noun  with 


suffix,  and  the  peculiar  form  of  the  2  pers.  pron.  f., 
are  found  elsewhere  in  Jer.  But  I  incline  to  correct 
further  thus:  "What  avail  to  My  beloved  is  her  dealing 
(or  sacrificing  :  HB^V  2  Kings  xvii.  32)  in  My  house  ?  ^Jl 
K'np-IB'm  D^-l-in  ninaron.  -  can  the  many  altars  (ver. 

(13  and  hallowed  flesh  cause  thine  evil  to  pass  away  from 
thee  (or  pass  thee  by)?"  This  seems  very  apposite  to 
what  precedes.  The  Hebrew,  as  it  stands,  cannot  possibly 
mean  what  we  read  both  in  the  A.  V.  and  R.  V.,  nor 
indeed  anything  else. 


"  A  flourishing  olive,  fair  with  shapely  fruit, 
did  lahvah  call  thy  name.  To  the  sound  of  a 
great  uproar  will  He  set  her  on  fire;  and  his 
hanging  boughs  will  crackle  "  ("  in  the  flames  "). 
"  And  lahvah  Sabaoth,  that  planted  thee,  Him- 
self hath  pronounced  evil  upon  thee;  because  of 
the  evil  of  the  house  of  Israel  and  the  house  of 
Judah,  which  they  have  done  to  themselves  "  (iv. 
18,  vii.  19)  "  in  provoking  Me,  in  burning  incense 
to  the  Baal  "  (vers.  16-17).  The  figure  of  the 
olive  seems  a  very  natural  one  (cf.  Rom.  xi.  17), 
when  we  remember  the  beauty  and  the  utility  for 
which  that  trep  is  famous  in  Eastern  lands, 
"lahvah  called  thy  name;"  that  is,  called  thee 
into  determinate  being;  endowed  thee  at  thine 
origin  with  certain  characteristic  qualities.  Thine 
original  constitution,  as  thou  didst  leave  thy 
Maker's  hand,  was  fair  and  good.  Israel  among 
the  nations  was  as  beautiful  to  the  eye  as  the 
olive  among  trees;  and  his  "  fruit,"  his  doings, 
were  a  glory  to  God  and  a  blessing  to  men,  like 
that  precious  oil,  for  "  which  God  and  man 
honour"  the  olive  (Judg.  ix.  9;  Zech.  iv.  3; 
Hos.  xiv.  7;  Ps.  lii.  10.)  But  now  the  noble 
stock  had  degenerated;  the  "  green  olive  tree," 
planted  in  the  very  court  of  lahvah's  house,  had 
become  no  better  than  a  barren  wilding,  fit  only 
for  the  fire.  The  thought  is  essentially  similar 
to  that  of  an  earlier  discourse:  "I  planted  thee 
a  noble  vine,  wholly  a  right  seed;  how  then  hast 
thou  turned  into  the  degenerate  plant  of  a 
strange  vine  unto  Me?"  (ii.  21).  Here,  there  is 
an  abrupt  transition,  which  forcibly  expresses 
the  suddenness  of  the  destruction  that  must  de- 
vour this  degenerate  people:  "To  the  sound  of 
a  great  uproar  " — the  din  of  invading  armies — 
"  he  will  set  her  "  (the  beloved,  symbolised  by 
the  tree)  "  on  fire;  and  his  "  (the  olive's)  "  hang- 
ing boughs  will  crackle  in  the  flames."  And  this 
fierce  work  of  a  barbarous  soldiery  is  no  chance 
calamity;  it  is  the  execution  of  a  Divine  judg- 
ment: "  lahvah  Sabaoth  ....  Himself  hath  pro- 
nounced evil  upon  thee."  And  yet  further,  it  is 
the  nation's  own  doing;  the  two  houses  of  Israel 
have  persistently  laboured  for  their  own  ruin; 
they  have  brought  it  upon  themselves.  Man  is 
himself  the  author  of  his  own  weal  and  woe;  and 
they  who  are  not  "  working  out  their  own  sal- 
vation," are  working  out  their  own  destruction. 

"  And  it  was  lahvah  that  gave  me  knowledge, 
so  that  I  well  knew;  at  that  time.  Thou  didst 
show  me  their  doings.  But,  for  myself,  like  a 
favourite"  (lit.  tame,  friendly,  gentle:  iii.  4) 
"  lamb  that  is  led  to  the  slaughter,  I  wist  not 
that  against  me  they  had  laid  a  plot.  '  Let  us 
fell  the  tree  in  its  prime,*  and  let  us  cut  him  ofT 
out  of  the  land  of  the  living,  that  his  name  be  re- 
membered no  more.'  Yea,  but  lahvahf  Sabaoth 
judgeth  righteously,  trieth  reins  and  heart.  I 
shall  see  Thy  vengeance  on  them;  for  unto  Thee 
have  I  laid  bare  my  cause.  Therefore  thus  said 
lahvah:  Upon  the  men  of  Anathoth  that  were 
seeking  thy  life,  saying,  Thou  shaft  not  prophesy 
in  the  name  of  lahvah,  that  thou  die  not  by  our 
hand: — therefore  thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth,  Be- 
hold I  am  about  to  visit  it  upon  them:  the  young 
men  will  die  by  the  sword;  their  sons  and  their 

♦  Reading  ^^^^>  with  Hitzig,  instead  of  iDn?3  which  is 
meaningless.  Deut.  xxxiv.  7  ;  Ezek.  xxi.  3.  Perhaps  it 
would  be  better  to  keep  a//  the  letters,  and  point  ^^P?T' 
understanding  (V  as  cpllective,  "the  trees." 

tNot  a  vocative  :  xx.  m,  xvii.  10. 


74 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


daughters  will  die  by  the  famine.  And  a  rem- 
nant they  shall  not  have:  for  I  will  bring  an  evil 
unto  the  men  of  Anathoth,  the  year  of  their  vis- 
itation "  (vv.   18-23). 

The  prophet,  it  would  seem,  had  made  the 
round  of  the  country  places,  and  come  to  Ana- 
thoth, on  his  return  journey  to  Jerusalem.  Here, 
in  his  native  town,  he  proclaimed  to  his  own 
people  that  same  solemn  message  which  he  had 
delivered  to  the  country  at  lar<re.  It  is  very 
probable  that  the  preceding  verses  (9-17)  con- 
tain the  substance  of  his  address  to  his  kinsfolk 
and  acquaintance;  an  address  which  stirred  them, 
not  to  repentance  towards  God,  but  to  murder- 
ous wrath  against  His  prophet.  A  plot  was  laid 
for  Jeremiah's  life  by  his  own  neighbours  and 
even  his  own  family  (xii.  6);  and  he  owed  his 
escape  to  some  providential  circumstance,  some 
"  lucky  accident,"  as  men  might  say,  which  re- 
vealed to  him  their  unsuspected  perfidy.  What 
the  event  was  which  thus  suddenly  disclosed  the 
hidden  danger,  is  not  recorded;  and  the  whole 
episode  is  rather  alluded  to  than  described.  But 
it  is  clear  that  the  prophet  knew  nothing  about 
the  plot,  until  it  was  ripe  for  execution.  He  was 
as  wholly  unconscious  of  the  death  prepared  for 
him,  as  a  petted  lamb  on  the  way  to  the  altar. 
"  Then  " — when  his  fate  seemed  sure — then  it  was 
that  something  happened  by  which  "  lahvah 
gave  him  knowledge,"  and  "  showed  him  their 
doing  "  The  thought  or  saying  attributed  to 
his  enemies,  "  Let  us  fell  the  tree(s)  in  the  prime 
thereof!  "  may  contain  a  sarcastic  allusion  really 
made  to  the  prophet's  own  warning  (ver.  16): 
"  A  flourishing  olive,  fair  with  shapely  fruit,  did 
lahvah  call  thy  name:  to  the  noise  of  a  great  up- 
roar will  He  set  it  on  fire,  and  the  branches  there- 
of shall  crackle  in  the  flames."  The  words  that 
follow  (ver.  20),  "  yea,  but  "  (or,  and  yet)  "  lah- 
vah Sabaoth  judgeth  righteously;  trieth  reins 
and  heart"  {cf.  xx.  12),  is  the  prophet's  reply, 
in  the  form  of  an  unexpressed  thought,  or  a  hur- 
ried ejaculation  upon  discover'ing  their  deadly 
malice.  The  timely  warning  which  he  had  re- 
ceived, was  fresh  proof  to  him  of  the  truth  that 
human  designs  are,  after  all  that  their  authors 
can  do,  dependent  on  the  will  of  an  Unseen  Ar- 
biter of  events;  and  the  Divine  justice,  thus  man- 
ifested towards  himself,  inspired  a  conviction 
that  those  hardened  and  bloodthirsty  sinners 
would,  sooner  or  later,  experience  in  their  own 
destruction  that  display  of  the  same  Divine  at- 
tribute which  was  necessary  to  its  complete  man- 
ifestation. It  was  this  conviction,  rather  than 
personal  resentment,  however  excusable  under 
the  circumstances  that  feeling  would  have  been, 
which  led  Jeremiah  to  exclaim:  "  I  shall  see 
Thy  vengeance  on  them,  for  unto  Thee  have  I 
laid  bare  my  cause." 

He  had  appealed  to  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth, 
that  doeth  right;  and  he  knew  the  innocency  of 
his  own  heart  in  the  quarrel.  He  was  certain, 
therefore,  that  his  cause  would  one  day  be  vin- 
dicated, when  that  ruin  overtook  his  enemies,  of 
which  he  had  warned  them  in  vain.  Looked  at 
in  this  light,  his  words  are  a  confident  assertion 
of  the  Divine  justice,  not  a  cry  for  vengeance. 
They  reveal  what  we  may  perhaps  call  the  human 
basis  of  the  formal  prophecy  which  follows;  they 
show  by  what  steps  the  prophet's  mind  was  led 
on  to  the  utterance  of  a  sentence  of  destruction 
upon  the  men  of  Anathoth.  That  Jeremiah's  in- 
vectives and  threatenings  of  wrath  and  ruin 
should  nrovoke  hatred  and  opposition  was  per- 
haps not  wonderful.     Men  in  general  are  slow  to 


recognise  their  own  moral  shortcomings,  to  be- 
lieve evil  of  themselves;  and  they  are  apt  to  prefer 
advisers  whose  optimism,  though  ill-ioundcd  and 
misleading,  is  pleasant  and  reassuring  and  con- 
firmatory of  their  own  prejudices.  But  it  does 
seem  strange  that  it  should  have  been  reserved 
for  the  m.en  of  his  own  birthplace,  his  own 
"  brethren  and  his  father's  house,"  to  carry  op- 
position to  the  point  of  meditated  murder. 
Once  more  Jeremiah  stands  before  us,  a  visible 
type  of  Him  whose  Divine  wisdom  declared  that 
a  prophet  finds  no  honour  in  his  own  country, 
and  whose  life  was  attempted  on  that  Sabbath 
day  at  Nazareth  (St.  Luke  iv.  24  sqq.). 

The  sentence  was  pronounced,  but  the  cloud  of 
dejection  was  not  at  once  lifted  from  the  soul 
of  the  seer.  He  knew  that  justice  must  in  the 
end  overtake  the  guilty;  but,  in  the  meantime, 
"  his  enemies  lived  and  were  mighty,"  and  their 
criminal  designs  against  himself  remained  un- 
noticed and  unpunished.  The  more  he  brooded 
over  it,  the  more  difficult  it  seemed  to  reconcile 
their  prosperous  immunity  witn  the  justice  of 
God.  He  has  given  us  the  course  of  his  reflec- 
tions upon  this  painful  question,  ever  suggested 
anew  by  the  facts  of  life,  never  sufficiently  an- 
swered by  toiling  reason.  "  Too  lighteous  art 
Thou,  lahvah,  for  me  to  contend  with  Thee:  I 
will  but  lay  arguments  befor^  Thee  "  (i.  e.,  argue 
the  case  forensically).  "  Wherefore  doth  the  way 
of  the  wicked  prosper?  Wherefore  are  they  un- 
disturbed, all  that  deal  very  treacherously?  Thou 
plantest  them,  yea,  they  take  root;  they  grow 
ever,  yea,  they  bear  fruit:  Thou  art  nigh  in  their 
mouth,  and  far  from  their  reins.  And  Thou, 
lahvah,  knowest  me;  Thou  seest  me,  and  triest 
mine  heart  in  Thy  mind.  Separate  them  like 
sheep  for  the  slaughter,  and  consecrate  them  for 
the  day  of  killing!  How  long  shall  the  land 
mourn,  and  the  herbage  of  all  the  country  wither? 
From  the  evil  of  the  dwellers  therein,  beasts  and 
birds  perish:  for  they  have  said"  (or,  thought), 
He  cannot  see  our  end"  (xii.  1-4).  It  is  not 
merely  that  his  would-be  murderers  thrive;  it  is 
that  they  take  the  holy  Name  upon  their  unclean 
lips;  it  is  that  they  are  hypocrites  combining  a 
pretended  respect  for  God,  with  an  inward  and 
thorough  indifference  to  God.  He  is  nigh  in 
their  mouth  and  far  from  their  reins.  They 
"  honour  Him  with  their  lips,  but  have  removed 
their  heart  far  from  Him;  and  their  worship  of 
Him  is  a  mere  human  commandment,  learned 
by  rote  "  (Isa.  xxix.  13).  They  swear  by  His 
Name,  when  they  are  bent  on  deception  (chap. 
V.  2).  It  is  all  this  which  especially  rouses  the 
prophet's  indignation;  and  contrasting  therewith 
his  own  conscious  integrity  and  faithfulness  to 
the  Divine  law,  he  calls  upon  Divine  justice  to 
judge  between  himself  and  them:  "  Pull  them 
out  like  sheep  for  slaughter,  and  consecrate 
them  "  (set  them  apart — from  the  rest  of  the 
flock)  "  for  the  day  of  killing!  "  It  has  been 
said  that  Jeremiah  throughout  this  whole  para- 
graph speaks  not  as  a  prophet,  but  as  a  private 
individual;  and  that  in  this  verse  especially  he 
"  gives  way  to  the  natural  man,  and  asks  the  life 
of  his  enemies"  (i  Kings  iii.  11;  Job  xxxi.  30). 
This  is  perhaps  a  tenable  opinion.  We  have  to 
bear  in  mind  the  difference  of  standpoint  between 
the  writers  of  the  Old  Covenant  and  those  of  the 
New.  Not  much  is  said  by  the  former  about  the 
forgiveness  of  injuries,  about  withholding  the 
hand  from  vengeance.  The  most  ancient  law, 
indeed,  contained  a  noble  precept,  which  pointed 
in  this  direction:     "  If  thou  meet  thine  enemy's 


Jeremiah  xi.,  xii.] 


THE    BROKEN    COVENANT. 


75 


ox  or  his  ass  going  astray,  thou  shalt  surely 
bring  it  back  to  him  again.  If  thou  see  the  ass 
of  him  that  hateth  thee  lying  under  his  burden, 
and  wouldest  forbear  to  help  him,  thou  shalt 
surely  help  with  him"  (Ex.  xxiii.  4,  5).  And  in 
the  Book  of  Proverbs  we  read:  "  Rejoice  not 
when  thine  enemy  falleth.  And  let  ^^not  thine 
heart  be  glad  when  he  is  overthrown."  But  the 
impression  of  magnanimity  thus  produced  is 
somewhat  diminished  by  the  reason  which  is 
added  immediately:  "Lest  the  Lord  see  it  and 
it  displease  Him,  and  He  turn  away  His  wrath 
from  him:  "  a  motive  of  which  the  best  that  can 
be  said  is  that  it  is  characteristic  o.f  the  imper- 
fect morality  of  the  time  (Prov.  xxiv.  17  sq.). 
The  same  objection  mav  be  taken  to  that  other 
famous  passage  of  the  same  book:  "  If  thine 
enemy  be  hungry,  give  him  bread  to  eat:  And  if 
he  be  thirsty,  give  him  water  to  drink:  For  thou 
shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  his  head.  And  the 
Lord  shall  reward  thee  "  (Prov.  xxv.  21  sq.). 
The  reflection  that  the  relief  of  his  necessities 
will  mortify  and  humiliate  an  enemy  to  the  ut- 
most, which  is  what  seems  to  have  been  origi- 
nally meant  by  "  heaping  coals  of  fire  upon  his 
head,"  however  practically  useful  in  checking  the 
wild  impulses  of  a  hot-blooded  and  vindictive 
race,  such  as  the  Hebrews  were,  and  such  as 
their  kindred  the  Bedawi  Arabs  have  remained 
to  this  day  under  a  system  of  faith  which  has  not 
said,  "  Love  your  enemies  "  ;  and  however  capa- 
ble of  a  new  application  in  the  more  enlightened 
spirit  of  Christianity  (Rom.  xii.  19  sqq.)  ;  is  un- 
doubtedly a  motive  marked  by  the  limitations  of 
Old  Testament  ethical  thought.  And  edify- 
ing as  they  may  prove  to  be,  when  understood 
in  that  purely  spiritual  and  universal  sense,  to 
which  the  Church  has  lent  her  authority,  how 
many  of  the  psalms  were,  in  their  primary  inten- 
tion, agonising  cries  for  vengeance:  prayers  that 
the  human  victim  of  oppression  and  wrong  might 
"  see  his  desire  upon  his  enemies  "  ?  All  this 
must  be  borne  in  mind;  but  there  are  other  con- 
siderations also  which  must  not  be  omitted,  if  we 
would  get  at  the  exact  sense  of  our  prophet  in 
the  passage  before  us. 

We  must  remember  that  he  is  laying  a  case 
before  God.  He  has  admitted  at  the  outset  that 
God  is  absolutely  just,  in  spite  of  and  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  his  murderous  enemies  are  prosper- 
ous and  unpunished.  When  he  pleads  his  own 
sincerity  and  purity  of  heart,  in  contrast  with 
the  lip-service  of  his  adversaries,  it  is  perhaps 
that  God  may  grant,  not  so  much  their  perdition, 
as  the  salvation  of  the  country  from  the  evils 
they  have  brought  and  are  bringing  upon  it. 
Ascribing  the  troubles  already  present  and  those 
which  are  yet  to  come,  the  desolations  which  he 
sees  and  those  which  he  foresees,  to  their  steady 
persistence  in  wickedness,  he  asks.  How  long 
must  this  continue?  Would  it  not  be  better, 
would  it  not  be  more  consonant  with  Divine 
wisdom  and  righteousness  to  purify  the  land  of 
its  fatal  taint  by  the  sudden  destruction  of  those 
heinous  and  hardened  offenders,  who  scof¥  at 
the  very  idea  of  a  true  forecast  of  their  "  end  " 
(ver.  4)?  But  this  is  not  all.  There  would  be 
more  apparent  force  in  the  allegation  we  are  dis- 
cussing if  it  were.  The  cry  to  heaven  for  an  im- 
mediate act  of  retributive  justice  is  not  the  last 
thing  recorded  of  the  prophet's  experience  on 
this  occasion.  He  goes  on  to  relate,  for  our  sat- 
isfaction, the  Divine  answer  to  his  questionings, 
which  seems  to  have  satisfied  his  own  troubled 


mind.  "  If  thou  hast  run  with  but  footracers, 
and  they  have  wearied  thee,  how  then  wilt  thou 
compete  with  the  coursers?  And  if  thy  confi- 
dence be  in  a  land  of  peace  "  (or,  "  a  quiet 
land  "),  "  how  then  wilt  thou  do  in  the  thickets  " 
(jungles)  "of  Jordan?*  For  even  thine  own 
brethren  and  thy  father's  house,  even  they  will 
deal  treacherously  with  thee;  even  they  will  cry 
aloud  after  thee:  trust  thou  not  in  them,  though 
they  speak  thee  fair!"  (xii.  5,. 6),  The  meta- 
phors convey  a  rebuke  of  impatience  and  prema- 
ture discouragement.  Hitzig  aptly  quotes  De- 
mosthenes: "  If  they  cannot  face  the  candle,  what 
will  they  do  when  they  see  the  sun?"  (Pint,  de 
vitioso  piidore,  c.  5.)  It  is  "  the  voice  of  the 
prophet's  better  feeling,  and  of  victorious  self- 
possession,"  adds  the  critic;  and  we,  \yho  ear- 
nestly believe  that,  of  the  two  voices  which  plead 
against  each  other  in  the  heart  of  man,  the  voice 
that  whispers  good  is  the  voice  of  God,  find  it 
not  hard  to  accept  this  statement  in  that  sense. 
The  prophet  is  giving  us  the  upshot  of  his  re- 
flection upon  the  terrible  danger  from  which  he 
had  been  mercifully  preserved;  and  we  see  that 
his  thoughts  were  guided  to  the  conclusion  that, 
having  once  accepted  the  Divine  Call,  it  would 
be  unworthy  to  abdicate  his  miss-ion  on  the  first 
signal  of  danger.  Great  as  that  danger  had  been, 
he  now,  in  his  calmer  hour,  perceives  that,  if 
he  is  to  fulfil  his  high  vocation,  he  must  be  pre- 
pared to  face  even  worse  things.  With  serious 
irony  he  asks  himself,  if  a  runner  who  is  over- 
come with  a  footrace  can  hope  to  outstrip  horses? 
or  how  a  man,  who  is  only  bold  where  no  danger 
is,  will  face  the  perils  that  lurk  in  the  jungles 
of  the  Jordan?  He  remembers  that  he  has  to 
fight  a  more  arduous  battle  and  on  a  greater 
scene.  Jerusalem  is  more  than  Anathoth;  and 
"  the  kings  of  Judah  and  the  princes  thereof  " 
are  mightier  adversaries  than  the  conspirators 
of  a  country  town.  And  his  present  escape  is 
an  earnest  of  deliverance  on  the  wider  field: 
"  They  shall  fight  against  thee,  but  they 
shall  not  prevail  against  thee:  for  I  am 
with  thee,  said  lahvah,  to  deliver  thee " 
(see  i.  17-19).  But  to  a  deeply  affection- 
ate and  sensitive  nature  like  Jeremiah's,  the 
thought  of  being  forsaken  by  his  own  kindred 
might  well  appear  as  a  trial  worse  than  death. 
This  is  the  "  contending  with  horses,"  the 
struggle  that  is  almost  beyond  the  powers  of  man 
to  endure;  this  is  the  deadly  peril,  like  that  of 
venturing  into  the  lion-haunted  thickets  of  Jor- 
dan, which  he  clearly  foresees  as  awaiting  him: 
"  For  even  thine  own  brethren  and  thy  father's 
house,  even  they  will  deal  treacherously  with 
thee."f  It  would  seem  that  the  prophet,  with 
whose  "  timidity  "  some  critics  have  not  hesitated 
to  find  fault,  had  to  renounce  all  that  man  holds 
dear,  as  a  condition  of  faithfulness  to  his  call. 
Again  we  are  reminded  of  One,  of  whom  it  is 


*  That  "  the  swelling  "  or  "  the  pride  of  Jordan  "  should 
rather  be  read  "  the  wilds"  or  "jungles  of  Jordan,"  is 
clear  from  xlix.  19.  Zech  xi.  3 ;  quoted  by  Hitzig.  |1{<J 
means  "growth,"  "overgrowth,"  among  other  things; 
and  the  Heb.  phrase  coincides  with  the  'lapSriv  Spu/oidt  of 
Josephus  ("  Bell.  Jud.,"  vii.  6,  5). 

tThe  form  of  the  Heb.  verbs  implies  the  certaitity  of 
the  event.  Hitzig  supposes  that  \'^r.  6  simply  explains 
the  expression  "land  of  peace  "  in  ver.  5.  At  Anathoth 
the  prophet  was  at  home;  if  he  "ran  away"  (reading 
mill  "fleest"  for  nt313  "art  confident")  there,  what  wonld 
he  do,  when  he  had  gone  forth  as  a  "  sheep  among  wolves" 
(St.  Luke  X.  3)?  But  I  think  it  is  much  better  to  regard 
ver.  6  as  explaining  the  whole  of  ver.  5  in  the  manner  s-ug- 
gested  above. 


76 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


recorded  that  "  Neither  did  His  brethren  believe 
in  Him  "  (St.  John  vii.  5),  and  that  "  His  friends 
went  out  to  lay  hold  on  Him,  for  they  said,  He 
is  beside  Himself"  (St.  Mark  iii.  21).  The  close- 
ness of  the  parallel  between  type  and  antitype, 
between  the  sorrowful  prophet  and  the  Man  of 
Sorrows,  is  seen  yet  further  in  the  words, 
"  Even  they  will  cry  aloud  after  thee  "  (lit.  "  with 
full  cry").  The  meaning  may  be:  They  will  join 
in  the  hue  and  cry  of  thy  pursuers,  the  mad 
shouts  of  "  Stop  him!  "  or  "  Strike  him  down!  " 
such  as  may  perhaps  have  rung  in  the  prophet's 
ears  as  he  fled  from  Anathoth.  But  we  may 
also  understand  a  metaphorical  description  of 
the  efforts  of  his  family  to  recall  him  from  the 
unpopular  path  on  which  he  had  entered;  and 
this  perhaps  agrees  better  with  the  warning: 
"  Trust  them  not,  though  they  speak  thee  fair." 
And  understood  in  this  sense,  the  words  coincide 
with  what  is  told  us  in  the  Gospel  of  the  attempt 
of  our  Lord's  nearest  kin  to  arrest  the  progress 
of  His  Divine  mission,  when  His  mother  and  His 
brethren  "  standing  without,  sent  unto  Him, 
calling  Him"   (St.  Mark  iii.  31). 

The  lesson  for  ourselves  is  plain.  The  man 
who  listens  to  the  Divine  call,  and  makes  God 
his  portion,  must  be  prepared  to  surrender  every- 
thing else.  He  must  be  prepared,  not  only  to 
renounce  much  which  the  world  accounts  good; 
he  must  be  prepared  for  all  kinds  of  opposition 
passive  and  active,  tacit  and  avowed;  he  may  even 
find,  like  Jeremiah,  that  his  foes  are  the  members 
of  his  own  household  (St.  Matt.  x.  36).  And, 
like  the  prophet,  his  acceptance  of  the  Divine  call 
binds  him  to  close  his  ears  against  entreaties  and 
flatteries,  against  mockery  and  menace;  and  to 
act  upon  his  Master's  word:  "  If  any  man  would 
come  after  Me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take 
up  his  cross,  and  follow  Me.  For  whosoever 
would  save  his  life  shall  lose  it;  and  whosoever 
shall  lose  his  life  for  My  sake  and  the  gospel's 
shall  save  it"  (St.  Mark  viii.  34  sq.).  "If  any 
man  come  unto  Me,  and  hate  not  his  father  and 
mother  and  wife  and  children  and  brethren  and 
sisters,  yea  and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be 
My  disciple"  (St.  Luke  xi".  26).  A  great  prize 
is  worth  a  great  risk;  and  eternal  life  is  a  prize 
infinitely  great.  It  is  therefore  worth  the  hazard 
and  the  sacrifice  of  all  (St.  Luke  xviii.  29  sq.). 

The  section  which  follows  (vv.  7-17)  has  been 
supposed  to  belong  to  the  time  of  Jehoiakim,  and 
consequently  to  be  out  of  place  here,  having 
been  transposed  from  its  original  context,  be- 
cause the  peculiar  Hebrew  term  which  is  ren- 
dered "dearly  beloved"  (ver.  7),  is  akin  to  the 
term  rendered  "  My  beloved,"  chap.  xi.  15.  But 
this  supposition  depends  on  the  assumption  that 
the  "  historical  basis  of  the  section "  is  to  be 
found  in  the  passage  2  Kings  xxiv.  2,  which  re- 
lates briefly  that  in  Jehoiakim's  time  plundering 
bands  of  Chaldeans,  Syrians,  Moabites,  and  Am- 
monites overran  the  country.  The  prophecy 
concerning  lahvah's  "  evil  neighbours  "  is  under- 
stood to  refer  to  these  marauding  inroads,  and 
is  accordingly  supposed  to  have  been  uttered  be- 
tween the  eighth  and  eleventh  years  of  Jehoia- 
kim (Hitzig).  It  has,  however,  been  pointed  out 
(Naegelsbach)  that  the  prophet  does  not  once 
narne  the  Chaldeans  in  the  present  discourse; 
which  "  he  invariably  does  in  all  discourses 
subsequent  to  the  decisive  battle  of  Carchemish 
in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,"  which  gave  the 
Chaldeans  the  sovereignty  of  Western  Asia. 
This  discourse  must,  therefore,  be  of  earlier  date, 


and  belong  either  to  the  first  years  of  Jehoia- 
kim, or  to  the  time  immediately  subsequent  to 
the  eighteenth  of  Josiah.  The  history  as  pre- 
served in  Kings  and  Chronicles  is  so  incomplete 
that  we  are  not  bound  to  connect  the  reference 
to  "  evil  neighbours  "  with  what  is  so  sum- 
marily told  in  2  Kings  xxiv.  2.  There  may  have 
been  other  occasions  when  Judah's  jealous  and 
watchful  enemies  profited  by  her  internal  weak- 
ness and  dissensions  to  invade  and  ravage  the 
land;  and  throughout  the  whole  period  the  coun- 
try was  exposed  to  the  danger  of  plundering 
raids  by  the  wild  nomads  of  the  eastern  and 
southern  borders.  It  is  possible,  however,  that 
vv.  14-17  are  a  later  postscript,  added  by  the 
prophet  when  he  wrote  his  book  in  the  fifth  or 
sixth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (xxxvi.  9,  32). 

There  is,  in  reality,  a  close  connection  of 
thought  between  ver.  7  sqq.  and  what  precedes. 
The  relations  of  the  prophet  to  his  own  family 
are  made  to  symbolise  the  relations  of  lahvah 
to  His  rebellious  people;  just  as  a  former  prophet 
finds  in  his  own  merciful  treatment  of  a  faithless 
wife  a  parable  of  lahvah's  dealings  with  faithless 
Israel.  "  I  have  forsaken  My  house,  I  have  cast 
away  My  domain;  I  have  given  My  soul's  love 
into  the  grasp  of  her  foes.  My  domain  hath  be- 
come to  Me  like  the  lion  in  the  wood;  she  hath 
given  utterance  with  her  voice  against  Me;  there- 
fore I  hate  her."  It  is  lahvah  who  still  speaks, 
as  in  ver.  6;  the  "  house  "  is  His  holy  house,* 
the  temple;  the  land  is  His  domain,  the  land 
of  Judah;  His  "  soul's  love,"  is  the  Jewish  people. 
Yet  the  expressions,  "  my  house,"  "  my  domain," 
"  my  soul's  love,"  equally  suit  the  prophet's  own 
family  and  their  estate;  the  mention  of  the  "  lion 
in  the  wood  "  and  its  threatening  roar,  and  the 
enmity  provoked  thereby,  recalls  what  was  said 
about  the  "  wilds  of  the  Jordan  "  in  ver.  5,  and 
the  full  outcry  of  his  kindred  after  the  prophet 
in  ver.  6;  and  the  solemn  words  "  I  have  for- 
saken Mine  house,  I  have  cast  away  iS'Iy  do- 
main ....  I  hate  her."  clearly  correspond  with 
the  sentence  of  destruction  upon  Anathoth,  chap, 
xi.  21  sqq.  The  double  reference  of  the  language 
becomes  intelligible  when  we  remember  that  in 
rejecting  His  messengers,  Israel,  nay  mankind, 
rejects  God;  and  that  words  and  deeds  done  and 
uttered  by  Divine  authority  may  be  ascribed  di- 
rectly to  God  Himself.  And  regarded  in  the  light 
of  the  prophet's  commission  "  to  pluck  up  and 
to  break  down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  overthrow, 
to  build  and  to  plant "  nations  and  kingdoms 
(i.  10),  all  that  is  here  said  may  be  taken  to  be 
the  prophet's  own  deliverance  concerning  his 
country.  This,  at  all  events,  is  the  case  with 
verses  12,  13. 

"  What!  do  I  see  my  domain  (all)  vultures 
(and)  hyenas  ?t  Are  the  vultures  all  around 
her?  Go  ye,  assemble  all  the  beasts  of  the  field! 
Bring  them  to  devour"  (ver.  9).  The  questions 
express  astonishment  at  an  unlooked-for  and  un- 
welcome spectacle.  The  loss  of  Divine  favour 
has  exposed  Judah  to  the  active  hostility  of  man; 
and  her  neighbours  eagerly  fall  upon  her,  like 
birds  and  beasts  of  prey,  swarming  over  a  help- 
less quarry.     It  is — so  the  prophet  puts  it — it  is 

*  Or  perhaps  rather  the  holy  land  itself,  as  Hitzig  sug- 
gested :  Hos.  IX.  15. 

t Lit.  "Is  my  domain  vultures,  hyenas,  to  me?"  The 
dative  expresses  the  interest  of  the  speaker  in  the  fact 
(dat.  ethic).  The  Heb.  term  yUV  only  occurs  here.  It  is 
the  Arabic  dhabu',  "hyena"  (so  Sept.),  St.  Jerome 
renders  avis  discolor.  So  the  Targum  :  "a  strewn" 
"  sprinkled,"  or  "  spotted  fowl." 


Jereniiati  xi.,  xii.J 


THE    BROKEN    COVENANT 


77 


as  if  a  proclamation  had  Rone  forth  to  the  wolves 
and  jackals  of  the  desert,  bidding  them  come 
and  devour  the  fallen  carcase.*  In  another  or- 
acle he  speaks  of  the  heathen  as  "  devouring 
Jacob "  (x.  25).  The  people  of  lahvah  are 
their  natural  prey  (Ps.  xiv.  4:  "  who  eat  up  My 
people  as  they  eat  bread");  but  they  are  not 
suffered  to  devour  them,  until  they  have  forfeited 
His  protection. 

The  image  is  now  exchanged  for  another, 
which  approximates  more  nearly  to  the  fact 
portrayed.  "  Many  shepherds  have  marred  My 
vineyard;  they  have  trodden  down  My  portion; 
they  have  turned  My  pleasant  portion  into  a  des- 
olate wilderness.  He  "  (the  foe,  the  instrument 
of  this  ruin)  "hath  made  it  a  desolation;  it 
mourneth  against  Me,  being  desolate;  desolated 
is  all  the  land,  for  there  is  no  man  that  giveth 
heed"  (vv.  10,  11).  As  in  an  earlier  discourse, 
chap.  vi.  3,  the  invaders  are  now  compared  to 
hordes  of  nomad  shepherds,  who  enter  the  land 
with  their  flocks  and  herds,  and  make  havoc  of 
the  crops  and  pastures.  From  time  immemorial 
the  wandering  Bedawis  have  been  a  terror  to  the 
settled  peasantry  of  the  East,  whose  way  of  life 
they  despise  as  ignoble  and  unworthy  of  free 
men.  Of  this  traditional  enmity  we  perhaps  hear 
a  far-off  echo  in  the  story  of  Cain  the  tiller  of 
the  ground  and  Abel  the  keeper  of  sheep;  and 
certainly  in  the  statement  that  "  every  shepherd 
was  an  abomination  unto  the  Egyptians  "  (Gen. 
xlvi.  34).  The  picture  of  utter  desolateness, 
which  the  prophet  suggests  by  a  four-fold  repe- 
tition, is  probably  sketched  from  a  scene  which 
he  had  himself  witnessed;  if  it  be  not  rather  a 
representation  of  the  actual  condition  of  the 
country  at  the  time  of  his  writing.  That  the  lat- 
ter is  the  case  might  naturally  be  inferred  from  a 
consideration  of  the  whole  passage;  and  the 
twelfth  verse  seems  to  lend  much  support  to  this 
view:  "  Over  all  bare  hills  in  the  wilderness  have 
come  ravagers;  for  lahvah  hath  a  devouring 
sword:  from  land's  end  to  land's  end  no  fiesh  hath 
peace."  f  The  language  indeed  recalls  that  of 
chap.  iv.  10,  11;  and  the  entire  description  might 
be  taken  as  an  ideal  picture  of  the  ruin  that  must 
ensue  upon  lahvah's  rejection  of  the  land  and 
people,  especially  if  the  closing  verses  (14-17) 
be  considered  as  a  later  addition  to  the  prophecy, 
made  in  the  light  of  accomplished  facts.  But, 
upon  the  whole,  it  would  seem  to  be  more  prob- 
able that  the  prophet  is  here  reading  the  moral 
of  present  or  recent  experience.  He  affirms  (ver. 
11)  that  the  affliction  of  the  country  is  really  a 
punishment  for  the  religious  blindness  of  the  na- 
tion: "there  is  no  man  that  layeth  to  heart" 
the  Divine  teaching  of  events  as  interpreted  by 
himself  (cf.  ver.  4).  The  fact  that  we  are  unable, 
in  the  scantiness  of  the  records  of  the  time,  to 
specify  the  particular  troubles  to  which  allusion 
is  made,  is  no  great  objection  to  this  view,  which 
is  at  least  effectively  illustrated  by  the  brief  state- 
ment of  2  Kings  xxiv.  2.  The  reflection  appended 
in  ver.  13  points  in  the  same  direction:  "They 
have  sown  wheat,  and  have  reaped  thorns;  they 
have  put  themselves  to  pain "  (or,  "  exhausted 
themselves  ")  "  without  profit,"  (or,  "  made 
themselves  sick  with  unprofitable  toil  ") ;   "  and 

♦The  references  to  "birds  of  prey,"  "  beasts  of  the 
field,"  and  "spoilers"  (ver.  12),  are  interpreted  by  the 
phrase  "mine  evil  neighbours"  (ver.  14);  and  this  con- 
stitutes a  link  between  vv.  7-14  and  14-17. 

t  Such  seems  to  be  the  best  punctuation  of  the  sentence. 

It  involves  the  transfer  of  Athnach  to  np3N. 


they  are  ashamed  of  their  *  produce  "  (ingath- 
erings), "  through  the  heat  of  the  wrath  of  lah- 
vah." When  the  enemy  had  ravaged  the  crops, 
thorns  would  naturally  spring  up  on  the  wasted 
lands;  and  "the  heat  of  the  wrath  of  lahvah" 
api:)ears  to  have  been  further  manifested  in  a 
parching  drought,  which  ruined  what  the  enemy 
had  left  untouched   (ver.  4.   chap.   xiv.). 

Thus,  then,  Jeremiah  receives  the  answer  to 
his  doubts  in  a  painfully  visible  demonstration  of 
what  the  wrath  of  lahvah  means.  It  means 
drought  and  famine;  it  means  the  exposure  of  the 
country,  naked  and  defenceless,  to  the  will  of 
rapacious  and  vindictive  enemies.  For  lahvah's 
wrongs  are  far  deeper  and  more  bitter  than  the 
prophet's.  The  misdeeds  of  individuals  are 
lighter  in  the  balance  than  the  sins  of  a  nation; 
the  treachery  of  a  few  persons  on  a  particular 
occasion  is  as  nothing  beside  the  faithlessness 
of  many  generations.  The  partial  evils,  there- 
fore, under  which  the  country  groans,  can  only 
be  taken  as  indications  of  a  far  more  complete 
and  terrible  destruction  reserved  for  final  impen- 
itence. The  perception  of  this  truth,  we  may 
suppose,  sufficed  for  the  time  to  silence  the 
prophet's  complaints;  and  in  the  revulsion  of 
feeling  inspired  by  the  awful  vision  of  the  unim- 
peded outbreak  of  Divine  wrath,  he  utters  an 
oracle  concerning  his  country's  destroyers,  in 
which  retributive  justice  is  tempered  by  compas- 
sion and  mercy.  "  Thus  hath  Jehovah  said.  Upon 
all  Mine  evil  neighbours,  who  touch  the  heritage 
which  I  caused  My  people  Israel  to  inherit:  Lo 
I  am  about  to  uproot  "  (i.  10)  "  them  from  off 
their  own  land,  and  the  house  of  Judah  will  I 
uproot  from  their  midst.  And  after  I  have  up- 
rooted them,  I  will  have  compassion  on  them 
again,  and  will  restore  them  each  to  their  own 
heritage  and  their  own  land.  And  if  they  truly 
learn  the  ways  of  My  people,  to  swear  by  My 
name,  '  as  lahvah  liveth!  '  even  as  they  taught  My 
people  to  ^wear  by  the  Baal;  they  shall  be  rebuilt 
in  the  midst  of  My  people.  And  if  they  will  not 
hear,  I  will  uproot  that  nation,  utterly  and  fa- 
tally; it  is  an  oracle  of  lahvah"  (14-17).  The 
preceding  section  (vv.  7-14),  as  we  have  seen, 
rapidly  yet  vividly  sketches  the  calamities  which 
have  ensued  and  must  further  ensue  upon  the 
Divine  desertion  of  the  country.  lahvah  has  for- 
saken the  land,  left  her  naked  to  her  enemies, 
for  her  causeless,  capricious,  thankless  revolt 
against  her  Divine  Lord.  In  this  forlorn,  de- 
fenceless condition,  all  manner  of  evils  befall  her; 
the  vineyards  and  cornfields  are  ravaged,  the 
goodly  land  is  desolated,  by  hordes  of  savage 
freebooters  pouring  in  from  the  eastern  deserts. 
These  invaders  are  called  lahvah's  "  evil  neigh- 
bours; "  an  expression  which  implies,  not  indi- 
viduals banded  together  for  purposes  of  brigan- 
dage, but  hostile  nations.!  Upon  these  nations 
also  will  the  justice  of  God  be  vindicated;  for 
that  justice  is  universal  in  its  operation,  and  can- 
not therefore  be  restricted  to  Israel.  Judgment 
must  "begin  at  the  house  of  God;  "  but  it  will 
not  end  there.  The  "  evil  neighbours,"  the  sur- 
rounding heathen  kingdoms,  have  been  lahvah's 
instruments  for  the  chastisement  of  His  rebellious 
people;  but  they  are  not  on  that  account  ex- 
empted from  recompense.    They  too  must  reap 

*  So  the  LXX.  This  agrees  better  with  the  context  than 
"  So  be  ye  ashamed  oiyour  fruits." 

t  As  Hitzig  has  observed,  only  a  people,  or  a  king,  or  a 
national  god,  could  be  spoken  of  as  a  "  neighbour  "  to  the 
God  of  Israel. 


78 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


what  they  have  sown.  They  have  insulted  lah- 
vah,  by  violating  His  territory;  they  have  in- 
dulged their  malice  and  treachery  and  rapacity, 
in  utter  disregard  of  the  rights  of  neighbours, 
and  the  moral  claims  of  kindred  peoples.  As 
they  have  done,  so  shall  it  be  done  unto  them: 
ApdffavTi.  iradetv.  They  have  laid  hands  on  the 
possessions  of  their  neighbour,  and  their  own 
shall  be  taken  from  them;  "  I  am  about  to  up- 
root them  from  off  their  own  land  "  {cf.  Amos 
i-  3-ii-  3)-  And  not  only  so,  but  "  the  house  of 
Judah  will  I  pluck  up  from  their  midst."  The 
Lord's  people  shall  be  no  more  exoosed  to  their 
unneighbourly  ill-will;  the  butt  of  their  ridicule, 
the  victim  of  their  malice  will  be  removed  to 
a  foreign  soil  as  well  as  they:  but  oppressed  and 
oppressors  will  no  longer  be  together;  their  new 
settlements  will  lie  far  apart:  under  the  altered 
state  of  things,  under  the  shadow  of  the  great 
conqueror  of  the  future,  there  will  be  no  oppor- 
tunity for  the  old  injurious  dealings.  All  alike, 
Judah  and  the  enemies  of  Judah,  will  be  subject 
to  the  will  of  the  foreign  lord.  But  that  is  not 
the  end.  The  Judge  of  all  the  earth  is  merciful 
as  well  as  just.  He  is  ioath  to  blot  whole  peoples 
out  of  existence,  even  though  they  have  merited 
destruction  by  grievous  and  prolonged  trans- 
gression of  His  laws.  Therefore  banishment  will 
be  followed  by  restoration,  not  in  the  case  of 
Judah  only,  but  of  all  the  expatriated  peoples. 
After  enduring  the  Divine  probation  of  adversity, 
they  will  be  brought  again,  by  the  Divine  com- 
passion, "  each  to  their  own  heritage  and  their 
own  land."  And  then,  if  they  will  profit  by  the 
teaching  of  lahvah's  prophets,  and  "  learn  the 
ways,"  that  is,  the  religion  of  His  people,  making 
their  supreme  appeal  to  lahvah,  as  the  fountain 
of  all  truth  and  the  sovran  vindicator  of  right 
and  justice,  as  hitherto  they  have  appealed  to  the 
Baal,  and  misled  Israel  into  the  same  profane 
and  futile  course;  then  "they  shall  be  built  up," 
or  rebuilt,  or  brought  to  great  and  evergrowing 
prosperity,  "  in  the  midst  of  My  people."  Such 
is  to  be  the  blessing  of  the  Gentiles;  they  shall 
share  in  the  glorious  future  that  awaits  repentant 
Israel.  The  present  condition  of  things  is  to  be 
completely  reversed:  now  Judah  sojourns  in  their 
midst;  then  they  will  be  surrounded  on  every  side 
by  the  emancipated  and  triumphant  people  of 
God;  now  they  beset  Judah  with  jealousies,  sus- 
picions, enmities;  then  Judah  will  embrace  them 
all  with  the  arms  of  an  unselfish  and  protecting 
love.  A  last  word  of  warning  is  added.  The 
doom  of  the  nation  that  will  not  accept  the  Di- 
vine teaching  will  be  utter  and  absolute  extermi- 
nation. 

The  forecast  is  plainly  of  a  Messianic  nature; 
it  recognises  in  lahvah  the  Saviour,  not  of  a  na- 
tion, but  of  the  world.  It  perceives  that  the  dis- 
union and  mutual  hatred  of  peoples,  as  of  indi- 
viduals, is  a  breach  of  Divine  law;  and  it  pro- 
claims a  general  return  to  God,  and  submission 
to  His  guidance  in  all  political  as  well  as  private 
affairs,  as  the  sole  cure  for  the  numberless  evils 
that  flow  from  that  hatred  and  disunion.  It  is 
only  when  men  have  learnt  that  God  is  their 
common  Father  and  Lord  that  they  come  to 
see  with  the  clearness  and  force  of  practical  con- 
viction that  they  themselves  are  all  members  of 
one  family,  bound  as  such  to  mutual  offices  of 
kindness  and  charity;  it  is  only  when  there  is  a 
conscious  identity  of  interest  with  all  our  fellows, 
based  upon  the  recognition  that  all  alike  are 
children   of   God   and   heirs   of   eternal   life,   that 


true  freedom  and  universal  brotherhood  become 
possible  for  man. 


CHAPTER  Vni. 

THE  FALL  OF  PRIDE. 

Jeremiah  xiii. 

This  discourse  is  a  sort  of  appendix  to  the 
preceding;  as  is  indicated  by  its  abrupt  and  brief 
beginning  with  the  words  "  Thus  said  lahvah 
unto  me,"  without  the  addition  of  any  mark  of 
time,  or  other  determining  circumstance.  It 
predicts  captivity,  in  retribution  for  the  pride  and 
ingratitude  of  the  people;  and  thus  suitably  fol- 
lows the  closing  section  of  the  last  address, 
which  announces  the  coming  deportation  of 
Judah  and  her  evil  neighbours.  The  recurrence 
here  (ver.  9)  of  the  peculiar  term  rendered 
"swelling"  or  "pride"  in  our  English  versions 
(chap.  xii.  5),  points  to  the  same  conclusion. 
We  may  subdivide  it  thus:  It  presents  us  with 
(i)  a  symbolical  action,  or  acted  parable,  with 
its  moral  and  application  (vv.  i-ii);  (ii)  a  para- 
bolic saying  and  its  interpretation,  which  leads 
up  to  a  pathetic  appeal  for  penitence  (vv.  12-17); 
(iii)  a  message  to  the  sovereigns  (vv.  18,  19) ; 
and  (iv)  a  closing  apostrophe  to  Jerusalem — the 
gay  and  guilty  capital,  so  soon  to  be  made  deso- 
late for  her  abounding  sins  (vv.  20-27). 

In  the  first  of  these  four  sections,  we  are  told 
how  the  prophet  was  bidden  of  God  to  buy  a 
linen  girdle,  and  after  wearing  it  for  a  time,  to 
bury  it  in  a  cleft  of  the  rock  at  a  place  whose 
very  name  might  be  taken  to  symbolise  the 
doom  awaiting  his  people.  A  long  while 
afterwards  he  was  ordered  to  go  and  dig  it  up 
again,  and  found  it  altogether  spoiled  and  use- 
less. The  significance  of  these  proceedings  is 
clearly  enough  explained.  The  relation  between 
Israel  and  the  God  of  Israel  had  been  of  the 
closest  kind.  lahvah  had  chosen  this  people,  and 
bound  it  to  Himself  by  a  covenant,  as  a  man 
might  bind  a  girdle  about  his  body;  and  as  the 
girdle  is  an  ornament  of  dress,  so  had  the  Lord 
intended  Israel  to  display  His  glory  among  men 
(ver.  11).  But  now  the  girdle  is  rotten;  and  like 
that  rotten  girdle  will  He  cause  the  pride  of 
Judah  to  rot  and  perish  (vv.  9,  10). 

It  is  natural  to  ask  whether  Jeremiah  really  did 
as  he  relates;  or  whether  the  narrative  about  the 
girdle  be  simply  a  literary  device  intended  to 
carry  a  lesson  home  to  the  dullest  apprehension. 
If  the  prophet's  activity  had  been  confined  to  the 
pen;  if  he  had  not  been  wont  to  labour  by  word 
and  deed  for  the  attainment  of  his  purposes;  the 
latter  alternative  might  be  accepted.  For  mere 
readers,  a  parabolic  narrative  might  suffice  to 
enforce  his  meaning.  But  Jeremiah,  who  was 
all  his  life  a  man  of  action,  probably  did  the 
thing  he  professes  to  have  done,  not  in  thought 
nor  in  word  only,  but  in  deed  and  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  certain  competent  witnesses.  There  was 
nothing  novel  in  this  method  of  attracting  atten- 
tion, and  giving  greater  force  and  impressiveness 
to  his  prediction.  The  older  prophets  had  often 
done  the  same  kind  of  things,  on  the  principle 
that  deeds  may  be  more  effective  than  words. 
What  could  have  conveyed  a  more  vivid  sense  of 
the  Divine  intention,'  than  the  simple  act  of 
Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  when  he  suddenly  caught 
away  the  new  mantle  of  Solomon's  officer,  and 


Jeremiah  xiii.J 


THE    FALL    OF    PRIDE. 


79 


rent  it  into  twelve  pieces,  and  said  to  the  as- 
tonished courtier,  "Take  thee  ten  pieces!  for 
thus  saith  lahvah,  the  God  of  Israel,  Behold  I 
am  about  to  rend  the  kingdom  out  of  the  hand 
of  Solomon,  and  will  give  the  ten  tribes  to 
thee"  ?  (I  Kings  xi.  29  sqq.).  In  like  manner 
when  y\hab  and  Jehoshaphat,  dressed  in  their 
robes  of  state,  sat  enthroned  in  the  gateway  of 
Samaria,  and  "  all  the  prophets  were  prophesy- 
ing before  them  "  about  the  issue  of  their  joint 
expedition  to  Ramoth-gilead,  Zedekiah,  the  son 
of  a  Canaanitess — as  the  writer  is  careful  to  add 
of  this  false  prophet — "  made  him  horns  of 
iron,  and  said.  Thus  said  lahvah,  With  these 
shalt  thou  butt  the  Arameans,  until  thou  make 
an  end  of  them"  (i  Kings  xxii.  11).  Isaiah, 
Hosea,  and  Ezekiel,  record  similar  actions 
of  symbolical  import.  Isaiah  for  a  time  walked 
half-clad  and  bare-foot,  as  a  sign  that  the 
Egyptians  and  Ethiopians,  upon  whom  Judah 
was  inclined  to  lean,  would  be  led  away  cap- 
tive, in  this  comfortless  guise,  by  the  king 
of  Assyria  (Isa.  xx.).  Such  actions  may  be 
regarded  as  a  further  development  of  those 
significant  gestures,  with  which  men  in  what 
is  called  a  state  of  nature  are  wont  to  give 
emphasis  and  precision  to  their  spoken  ideas. 
They  may  also  be  compared  with  the  sym- 
bolism of  ancient  law.  "  An  ancient  convey- 
ance," we  are  told,  "  was  not  written  but  acted. 
Gestures  and  words  took  the  place  of  written 
technical  phraseology,  and  any  formula  mispro- 
nounced, or  symbolical  act  omitted,  would  have 
vitiated  the  proceeding  as  fatally  as  a  material 
mistake  in  stating  the  uses  or  setting  out  the 
remainders  would,  two  hundred  years  ago,  have 
vitiated  an  English  deed "  (Maine,  "  Ancient 
Law,"  p.  276.)  Actions  of  a  purely  symbolical 
nature  surprise  us,  when  we  first  encounter  them 
in  Religion  or  Law,  but  that  is  only  because 
they  are  survivals.  In  the  ages  when  they  orig- 
inated, they  were  familiar  occurrences  in  all 
transactions  between  man  and  man.  And  this 
general  consideration  tends  to  prove  that  those 
expositors  are  wrong  who  maintain  that  the 
prophets  did  not  really  perform  the  symbolical 
actions  of  which  they  speak.  Just  as  it  is 
argued  that  the  visions  which  they  describe  are 
merely  a  literary  device;  so  the  reality  of  these 
symbolical  actions  has  needlessly  enough  been 
called  in  question.  The  learned  Jews  Abenezra 
and  Maimonides  in  the  twelfth  century,  and 
David  Kimchi  in  the  thirteenth,  were  the  first 
to  afifirm  this  opinion.  Maimonides  held  that 
all  such  actions  passed  in  vision  before  the 
prophets;  a  view  which  has  found  a  modern  ad- 
vocate in  Hengstenberg:  and  Staudlin,  in  the 
last  century,  affirmed  that  they  had  neither  an 
objective  nor  a  subjective  reality,  but  were  simply 
a  "  literary  device."  This,  however,  is  only 
true,  if  true  at  all,  of  the  declining  period  of 
prophecy,  as  in  the  case  of  the  visions.  In  the 
earlier  period,  while  the  prophets  were  still  ac- 
customed to  an  oral  delivery  of  their  discourses, 
we  may  be  quite  sure  that  they  suited  the  action 
to  the  word  in  the  way  that  they  have  themselves 
recorded;  in  order  to  stir  the  popular  imagina- 
tion, and  to  create  a  more  vivid  and  lasting  im- 
pression. The  narratives  of  the  historical  books 
leave  no  doubt  about  the  matter.  But  in  later 
times,  when  spoken  addresses  had  for  the  most 
part  become  a  thing  of  the  past,  and  when 
prophets  published  their  convictions  in  manu- 
script, it  is  possible  that  they  were  content  with 


the  description  of  symbolical  doings,  as  a  sort 
of  parable,  without  any  actual  performance  of 
them.  Jeremiah's  hiding  his  girdle  in  a  cleft  of 
the  rock  at  "  Euphrates  "  has  been  regarded  by 
some  writers  as  an  instance  of  such  purely  ideal 
symbolism.  And  certainly  it  is  difficult  to  sup- 
pose that  the  prophet  made  the  long  and  arduous 
journey  from  Jerusalem  to  the  Great  River  for 
such  a  purpose.  It  is,  however,  a  highly  prob- 
able conjecture  that  the  place  whither  he  was 
directed  to  rep»air  was  much  nearer  home;  the 
addition  of  a  single  letter  to  the  name  rendered 
"  Euphrates  "  gives  the  far  preferable  reading 
"  Ephrath,"  that  is  to  say.  Bethlehem  in  Judah 
(Gen.  xlviii.  7).  Jeremiah  may  very  well  have 
buried  his  girdle  at  Bethlehem,  a  place  only  five 
miles  or  so  to  the  south  of  Jerusalem;  a  place, 
moreover,  where  he  would  have  no  trouble  in 
finding  a  "  cleft  of  the  rock,"  which  would  hardly 
be  the  case  upon  the  alluvial  banks  of  the 
Euphrates.  If  not  accidental,  the  difference  may 
be  due  to  the  intentional  employment  of  an  un- 
usual form  of  the  name,  by  way  of  hinting  at 
the  source  whence  the  ruin  of  Judah  was  to  flow. 
The  enemy  "  from  the  north "  (ver.  20)  is  of 
course  the  Chaldeans. 

The  mention  of  the  queen-mother  (ver.  18) 
along  with  the  king  appears  to  point  unmistak- 
ably to  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin  or  Jechoniah. 
The  allusion  is  compared  with  the  threat  of  ch. 
xxii.  26:  "I  will  cast  thee  out,  and  thy  mother 
that  bare  thee  into  another  country."  Like 
Josiah,  this  king  was  but  eight  years  old  when 
he  began  to  reign  (2  Chron.  xxxvi.  9,  after  which 
2  Kings  xxiv.  8  must  be  corrected) ;  and  he  had 
enjoyed  the  name  of  king  only  for  the  brief 
period  of  three  months,  when  the  thunderbolt 
fell,  and  Nebuchadrezzar  began  his  first  siege  of 
Jerusalem.  The  boy-king  can  hardly  have  had 
much  to  do  with  the  issue  of  aiifairs,  when  "  he 
and  his  mother  and  his  servants  and  his  princes 
and  his  eunuchs  "  surrendered  the  city,  and  were 
deported  to  Babylon,  with  ten  thousand  of  the 
principal  inhabitants  (2  Kings  xxiv.  12  sqq.). 
The  date  of  our  discourse  will  thus  be  the  begin- 
ning of  the  year  b.  c.  599,  which  was  the  eighth 
year  of  Nebuchadrezzar  (2  Kings  xxiv.   12). 

It  is  asserted,  indeed,  that  the  diflficult  verse 
21  refers  to  the  revolt  from  Babylon  as  an  ac- 
complished fact;  but  this  is  by  no  means  clear 
from  the  verse  itself.  "  What  wilt  thou  say  (de- 
mands the  prophet)  when  He  shall  appoint  over 
thee — albeit,  thou  thyself  hast  instructed  them 
against  thyself; — lovers  to  be  thy  head?  "  The 
term  "  lovers  "  or  "  lemans  "  applies  best  to  the 
foreign  idols,  who  will  one  day  repay  the  foolish 
attachment  of  lahvah's  people  by  enslaving  it 
(cf.  ch.  iii.  4,  where  lahvah  Himself  is  called 
the  "lover"  of  Judah's  youthful  days);  and  this 
question  might  as  well  have  been  asked  in  the 
days  of  Josiah.  as  at  any  later  period.  At  various 
times  in  the  past  Israel  and  Judah  had  courted 
the  favour  of  foreign  deities.  Ahaz  had  intro- 
duced Aramean  and  Assyrian  novelties;  Manas- 
seh  and  Amon  had  revived  and  aggravated  his 
apostasy.  Even  Hezekiah  had  had  friendly  deal- 
ings with  Babylon,  and  we  must  remember  that 
in  those  times  friendly  intercourse  with  a  foreign 
people  implied  some  recognition  of  their  gods, 
which  is  probably  the  true  account  of  Solomon's 
chapels  for  Tyrian  and  other  deities. 

The  queen  of  ver.  18  might  conceivably  be 
Jedidah,  the  mother  of  Josiah,  for  that  king  was 
only  eight  at  his  accession,  and  only  thirty-nine 


8o 


THE    PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


at  his  death  (2  Kings  xxii.  i).  And  the  message 
to  the  sovereigns  (ver.  18)  is  not  couched  in 
terms  of  disrespect  nor  of  reproach:  it  simply 
declares  the  imminence  of  overwhelming  disas- 
ter, and  bids  them  lay  aside  their  royal  pomp, 
and  behave  as  mourners  for  the  coming  woe. 
Such  words  might  perhaps  have  been  addressed 
to  Josiah  and  his  mother,  by  way  of  deepening 
the  impression  produced  by  the  Book  of  the 
Law,  and  the  rumoured  invasion  of  the  Scythi- 
ans. But  the  threat  against  "  the  kings  that  sit 
on  David's  throne  "  (ver.  13)  is  hardly  suitable 
on  this  supposition;  and  the  ruthless  tone  of 
this  part  of  the  address — "  I  will  dash  them  in 
pieces,  one  against  another,  both  the  fathers  and 
the  sons  together:  I  will  not  pity,  nor  spare, 
nor  relent  from  destroying  them  " — considered 
along  with  the  emphatic  prediction  of  an  utter 
and  entire  captivity  (ver.  19),  seems  to  indicate 
a  later  period  of  the  prophet's  ministry,  when 
the  obduracy  of  the  people  had  revealed  more 
fully  the  hopelessness  of  his  enterprise  for  their 
salvation.  The  mention  of  the  enemy  "  from 
the  north  "  will  then  be  a  reference  to  present 
circumstances  of  peril,  as  triumphantly  vindicat- 
ing the  prophet's  former  menaces  of  destruction 
from  that  quarter.  The  carnage  of  conquest  and 
the  certainty  of  exile  are  here  threatened  in  the 
plainest  and  most  direct  style;  but  nothing  is 
said  by  way  of  heightening  the  popular  terror  of 
the  coming  destroyer.  The  prophet  seems  to 
take  it  for  granted  that  the  nature  of  the  evil 
which  hangs  over  their  heads  is  well  known 
to  the  people,  and  does  not  need  to  be  dwelt 
upon  or  amplified  with  the  lyric  fervour  of 
former  utterances  (see  ch.  iv.,  v.  15  sqq.,  vi.  22 
sqq.).  This  appears  quite  natural,  if  we  suppose 
that  the  first  invasion  of  the  Chaldeans  was  now 
a  thing  of  the  past;  and  that  the  nation  was 
awaiting  in  trembling  uncertainty  the  conse- 
quences of  Jehoiakim's  breach  of  faith  with  his 
Babylonian  suzerain  (2  Kings  xxiv.  10).  The 
prophecy  may  therefore  be  assigned  with  some 
confidence  to  the  short  reign  of  Jehoiachin,  to 
which  perhaps  the  short  section,  ch.  x.  17-25, 
also  belongs;  a  date  which  harmonises  better 
than  any  other  with  the  play  on  the  name 
Euphrates  in  the  opening  of  the  chapter.  It 
agrees,  too,  with  the  emphatic  "  lahvah  hath 
spoken!"  (ver.  15),  which  seems  to  be  more 
than  a  mere  assertion  of  the  speaker's  veracity, 
and  to  point  rather  to  the  fact  that  the  course 
of  events  had  reached  a  crisis;  that  something 
had  occurred  in  the  political  world  which  sug- 
gested imminent  danger;  that  a  black  cloud  was 
looming  up  on  the  national  horizon,  and  signal- 
ling most  unmistakably  to  the  prophet's  eye  the 
intention  of  lahvah.  What  other  view  so  well 
explains  the  solemn  tone  of  warning,  the  vivid 
apprehension  of  danger,  the  beseeching  tender- 
ness, that  give  so  peculiar  a  stamp  to  the  three 
verses  in  which  the  address  passes  from  narrative 
and  parable  to  direct  appeal?  "  Hear  ye  and 
give  ear:  be  not  proud:  for  lahvah  hath  spoken! 
Give  glory  to  lahvah  your  God  " — the  glory  of 
confession,  of  avowing  your  own  guilt  and  His 
perfect  righteousness  (Josh.  vii.  19;  St.  John  ix. 
24) ;  of  recognising  the  due  reward  of  your 
deeds  in  the  destruction  that  threatens  you;  the 
glory  involved  in  the  cry,  "  God  be  merciful  to 
me  a  sinner!  " — Give  glory  to  lahvah  your  God, 
before  the  darkness  fall,  and  before  your  feet 
stumble  upon  the  twilight  mountains;  and  ye 
wait  for  dawn,  and  He  make  it  deepest  gloom, 


He  turn  it  to  utter  darkness."  The  day  was 
declining;  the  evening  shadows  were  descending 
and  deepening;  soon  the  hapless  people  would 
be  wandering  bewildered  in  the  twilight,  and  lost 
in  the  darkness,  unless,  ere  it  had  become  too 
late,  they  would  yield  their  pride,  and  throw 
themselves  upon  the  pity  of  Him  who  "  maketh 
the  seven  stars  and  Orion,  and  turneth  the  deep- 
est gloom  into  morning  "   (Amos  v.  8). 

The  verbal  allusiveness  of  the  opening  section 
does  not,  according  to  Oriental  taste,  diminish 
the  solemnity  of  the  speaker;  on  the  contrary, 
it  tends  to  deepen  the  impression  produced  by 
his  words.  And  perhaps  there  is  a  psychological 
reason  for  the  fact,  beyond  the  peculiar  partiality 
of  Oriental  peoples  for  such  displays  of  ingenu- 
ity. It  is,  at  all  events,  remarkable  that  the 
greatest  of  all  masters  of  human  feeling  has  not 
hesitated  to  make  a  dying  prince  express  his 
bitter  and  desponding  thoughts  in  what  may 
seem  an  artificial  toying  and  triffing  with  the  sug- 
gestiveness  of  his  own  familiar  name:  and  when 
the  king  asks:  "  Can  sick  men  play  so  nicely  with 
their  names?  "  the  answer  is:  "  No,  misery  makes 
sport  to  mock  itself"  (Rich.  II.,  Act.  2,  Sc. 
i.  72  sqq.).  The  Greek  tragedian,  too,  in  the 
earnestness  of  bitter  sport,  can  find  a  prophecy 
in  a  name.  '"  Who  was  for  naming  her  thus, 
with  truth  so  entire?  (Was  it  One  whom  we 
see  not,  wielding  tongue  happily  with  full  fore- 
sight of  what  was  to  be?)  the  Bride  of  Battles, 
fiercely  contested  Helen:  seeing  that,  in  full  ac- 
cord with  her  name,  haler  of  ships,  haler  of  men, 
haler  of  cities,  forth  of  the  soft  and  precious 
,  tapestries  away  she  sailed,  under  the  gale  of  the 
giant  West  "  (^Esch.,  "  Ag.,"  68,  sqq.).  And  so, 
to  Jeremiah's  ear,  Ephrath  is  prophetic  of 
Euphrates,  upon  whose  distant  banks  the  glory 
of  his  people  is  to  languish  and  decay.  "  I  to 
Ephrath,  and  you  to  Phrath!  "  is  his  melancholy 
cry.  Their  doom  is  as  certain  as  if  it  were  the 
mere  fulfilment  of  an  old-world  prophecy,  crys- 
tallised long  ages  ago  in  a  familiar  name;  a  word 
of  destiny  fixed  in  this  strange  form,  and  bear- 
ing its  solemn  witness  from  the  outset  of  their 
history  until  now  concerning  the  inevitable  goal. 

There  is  nothing  so  very  surprising,  as  Ewald 
seems  to  have  thought,  in  the  suggestion  that 
the  Perath  of  the  Hebrew  text  may  be  the 
same  as  Ephrath.  But  perhaps  the  valley  and 
spring  now  called  Furah  (or  Furdt)  which  lies 
at  about  the  same  distance  N.  E.  of  Jerusalem, 
is  the  place  intended  by  the  prophet.  The 
name,  which  means  fresh  or  szveet  ivater,  is 
identical  with  the  Arabic  name  of  the  Euphrates, 
which  again  is  philologically  identical  with 
the  Hebrew  Perath.  It  is  obvious  that  this 
place  would  suit  the  requirements  of  the  text 
quite  as  well  as  the  other,  while  the  coincidence 
of  name  enables  us  to  dispense  with  the  suppo- 
sition of  an  unusual  form  or  even  a  corruption 
of  the  original;  but  Furdt  or  Fordh  is  not  men- 
tioned elsewhere  in  the  Old  Testament.  The 
old  versions  send  the  prophet  to  the  river 
Euphrates,  which  Jeremiah  calls  simply  "  The 
River"  in  one  place  (ii.  18),  and  "The  riz'cr 
of  Perath"  in  three  others  (xlvi.  2,  6,  lo) ;  while 
the  rare  "  Perath,"  without  any  addition,  is  only 
found  in  the  second  account  of  the  Creation 
(Gen.  ii.  14),  in  2  Chron.  xxxv.  20,  and  in  a 
passage  of  this  book  which  does  not  belong,  nor 
profess  to  belong,  tojeremiah  (Ii.  63).  We  may, 
therefore,  conclude  that  "  Perath  "  in  the  present 
passage  means  not  the  great  river  of  that  name> 


Jeremiah  xiii.] 


THE    FALL    OF    PRIDE. 


8i 


but  a  place  near  Jerusalem,  although  that  place 
was  probably  chosen  with  the  intention,  as  above 
explained,  of  alluding  to  the  Euphrates. 

I  cannot  assent  to  the  opinion  which  regards 
this  narrative  of  the  spoiled  girdle  as  founded 
upon  some  accidental  experience  of  the  prophet's 
life,  in  which  he  afterwards  recognised  a  Divine 
lesson.  Ihc  precision  of  statement,  and  the  nice 
adaptation  of  the  details  of  the  story  to  the  moral 
which  the  prophet  wished  to  convey,  rather  in- 
dicate a  symbolical  course  of  action,  or  what 
may  be  called  an  acted  parable.  The  whole  pro- 
ceeding appears  to  have  been  carefully  thought 
out  beforehand.  The  intimate  connection  be- 
tween lahvah  and  Israel  is  well  symbolised  by 
a  girdle — that  part  of  an  Easter  dress  which 
"  cleaves  to  the  loins  of  a  man,"  that  is,  fits 
closest  to  the  body,  and  is  most  securely  attached 
thereto.  And  if  the  nations  be  represented  by 
the  rest  of  the  apparel,  as  the  girdle  secures 
and  keeps  that  in  its  place,  we  may  see  an  im- 
plication that  Israel  was  intended  to  be  the  chain 
that  bound  mankind  to  God.  The  girdle  was  of 
liitcn,  the  material  of  the  priestly  dress,  not  only 
because  Jeremiah  was  a  priest,  but  because  Israel 
was  called  to  be  "  a  kingdom  of  priests,"  or  the 
Priest  among  nations  (Ex.  xix.  6).  The  signifi- 
cance of  the  command  to  wear  the  girdle,  but 
not  to  put  it  into  water,  seems  to  be  clear 
enough.  The  unwashed  garment  which  the 
prophet  continues  to  wear  for  a  time  represents 
the  foulness  of  Israel;  just  as  the  order  to  bury 
it  at  Perath  indicates  what  lahvah  is  about  to 
do  with  His  polluted  people. 

1.  The  exposition  begins  with  the  words,  "Thus 
will  I  mar  the  great  pride  of  Judah  and  of  Je- 
rusalem!" The  spiritual  uncleanness  of  the  na- 
tion consisted  in  the  proud  selfwill  which  turned 
a  deaf  ear  to  the  warnings  of  lahvah's  prophets, 
and  obstinately  persisted  in  idolatry  (ver.  lo). 
It  continues:  "  For  as  the  girdle  cleaveth  to  the 
loins  of  a  man,  so  made  I  the  whole  house  of 
Israel  and  the  whole  house  of  Judah  to  cleave 
unto  Me,  saith  lahvah;  that  they  might  become 
to  Me  for  a  people,  and  for  a  name,  and  for  a 
praise,  and  for  an  ornament"  (Ex.  xxviii.  2). 
Then  their  becoming  morally  unclean,  through 
the  defilements  of  sin,  is  briefly  implied  in  the 
words,  "And  they  obeyed  not"  (ver.  11). 

It  is  not  the  pride  of  the  tyrant  king  Jehoiakim 
that  is  here  threatened  with  destruction.  It  is 
the  national  pride  which  had  all  along  evinced 
itself  in  rebellion  against  its  heavenly  King — 
"the  great  pride  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem;  "  and 
this  pride,  inasmuch  as  it  "  trusted  in  man  and 
made  flesh  its  arm  "  (xvii.  5),  and  boasted  in 
a  carnal  wisdom,  and  material  strength  and 
riches  (ix.  23,  xxi.  13),  was  to  be  brought  low 
by  the  complete  extinction  of  the  national  auton- 
omy, and  the  reduction  of  a  high-spirited  and 
haughty  race  to  the  status  of  humble  dependents 
upon  a  heathen  power. 

2.  A  parabolic  saying  follows,  with  its  inter- 
pretation. "  And  say  thou  unto  them  this  word: 
Thus  saith  lahvah,  the  God  of  Israel:  Every  jar 
is  wont  to  be  filled  (or  shall  be  filled)  with 
wine.  And  if  they  say  unto  thee.  Are  we  really 
not  aware  that  every  jar  is  wont  to  be  filled 
with  wine?  say  thou  unto  them,  Thus  saith 
lahvah,  Lo*,  I  am  about  to  fill  all  the  inhabitants 
of  this  land,  and  the  kings  that,  sit  for  David 
upon  his  throne,  and  the  priests  and  the  prophets, 
and  all  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  with  drunk- 
enness; and  I  will  dash  them  in  pieces  against 

6-Vol.  IV. 


one  another,  and  the  fathers  and  the  sons  to- 
gether, saith  lahvah:  I  will  not  forbear  nor  spare 
nor  pity,  so  as  not  to  mar  them  "  {cf.  vv.  7,  9). 

The  individual  members  of  the  nation,  of  all 
ranks  and  classes,  are  compared  to  earthenware 
jars,  not  "  skins,"  as  the  LXX.  gives  it,  for  they 
are  to  be  "  dashed  in  pieces,"  "  like  a  potter's 
vessel  "  (Ps.  ii.  9;  cf.  ver.  14).*  Regarding  them 
all  as  ripe  for  destruction-,  Jeremiah  exclaims, 
"  Every  jar  is  filled  with  wine,"  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  things;  that  is  its  destiny.  His  hearers 
answer  with  the  mocking  question,  "  Do  you 
suppose  that  we  don't  know  that?  "  They  would, 
of  course,  be  aware  that  a  prophet's  figure,  how- 
ever homely,  covered  an  inner  meaning  of  seri- 
ous import;  but  derision  was  their  favourite  re- 
tort against  unpopular  truths  (xvii.  15,  xx.  7, 
8).  They  would  take  it  for  granted  that  the 
thing  suggested  was  unfavourable,  from  their 
past  experience  of  Jeremiah.  Their  ill-timed 
banter  is  met  by  the  instant  application  of  the 
figure.  They,  and  the  kings  then  sitting  on 
David's  throne,  i.  e.,  the  young  Jehoiachin  and 
the  queen-mother  Nehushta  (who  probably  had 
all  the  authority  if  not  the  title  of  a  regent), 
and  the  priests  and  prophets  who  fatally  misled 
them  by  false  teachings  and  false  counsels,  are 
the  wine-jars  intended,  and  the  wine  that  is  to 
fill  them  is  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of  God  (Ps. 
Ixxv.  8;  Jer.  xxv.  15;  cf.  li.  7;  Rev.  xvi.  19; 
Isa.  xix.  14,  15).  The  effect  is  intoxication — 
a  fatal  bewilderment,  a  helpless  lack  of  decision, 
an  utter  confusion  and  stupefaction  of  the  fac- 
ulties of  wisdom  and  foresight,  in  the  very  mo- 
ment of  supreme  peril  {cf.  Isa.  xxviii.  7;  Ps. 
Ix.  s).  Like  drunkards,  they  will  reel  against 
and  overthrow  each  other.  The  strong  term, 
"  I  will  dash  them  in  pieces,"  is  used  to  indicate 
the  deadly  nature  of  their  fall,  and  because  the 
prophet  has  still  in  his  mind  the  figure  of  the 
wine-jars,  which  were  probably  amphorae, 
pointed  at  the  end,  like  those  depicted  in  Egyp- 
tian mural  paintings  so  that  they  could  not 
stand  upright  without  support.  By  their  fall  they 
are  to  be  utterly  "  marred  "  (the  term  used  of  the 
girdle,  ver.  9). 

But  even  yet  one  way  of  escape  lies  open.  It 
is  to  sacrifice  their  pride,  and  yield  to  the  will 
of  lahvah.  "  Hear  ye  and  give  ear,  be  not 
haughty!  for  lahvah  hath  spoken:  give  ye  to 
lahvah  your  God  the  glory,  before  it  grow  dark 
(or  He  cause  darkness),  and  before  your  feet 
stumble  upon  mountains  of  twilight;  and  ye  wait 
for  the  dawn,  and  He  make  it  gloom,  turning 
it  to  cloudiness!"  (Isa.  v.  30,  viii.  20,  22;  Amos 
viii.  9).  It  is  very  remarkable  that  even  now, 
when  the  Chaldeans  are  actually  in  the  country, 
and  blockading  the  strong  places  of  southern 
Judah  (ver.  19),  which  was  the  usual  preliminary 
to  an  advance  upon  Jerusalem  itself  (2  Chron.  xii. 
4,  xxxii.  9;  Isa.  xxxvi.  i,  2),  Jeremiah  should 
still  speak  thus;  assuring  his  fellow-citizens  that 
confession  and  self-humiliation  before  their  of- 
fended God  might  yet  deliver  them  from  the 
bitterest  consequences  of  past  misdoing.  lahvah 
had  indeed  spoken  audibly  enough,  as  it  seemed 
to  the  prophet,  in  the  calamities  that  had  already 
befallen  the  country;  these  were  an  indication  of 
more  and  worse  to  follow,  unless  they  should 
prove  elificacious  in  leading  the  people  to  re- 
pentance. If  they  failed,  nothing  would  be  left 
for  the  prophet  but  to  mourn  in  solitude  over 
his  country's  ruin  (ver.  17).  But  Jeremiah  was 
*  Also  xlviii.  12  ;  Lam.  iv.  2  ;  Isa.  xx.k.  14. 


82 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


fully  persuaded  that  the  Hand  that  had  stricken 
could  hoal;  the  Power  that  had  brought  the  in- 
vaders into  Judah,  could  cause  them  to  "return 
by  the  way  that  they  had  come  "  (Isa.  xxxvii. 
34).  Of  course  such  a  view  was  unintelligible 
from  the  standpoint  of  unbelief;  but  then  the 
standpoint  of  the  prophets  is  faith. 

3.  After  this  general  appeal  for  penitence,  the 
discourse  turns  to  the  two  exalted  persons  whose 
position  and  interest  in  the  country  were  the 
highest  of  all:  the  youthful  king,  and  the  em- 
press or  queen-mother.  They  are  addressed  in 
a  tone  which,  though  not  disrespectful,  is  cer- 
tainly despairing.  They  are  called  upon,  not  so 
much  to  set  the  example  of  penitence  {cf.  Jonah 
iii.  6),  as  to  take  up  the  attitude  of  mourners 
(Job  ii.  13;  Isa.  iii.  26;  Lam.  ii.  10;  Ezek.  xxvi. 
16)  in  presence  of  the  public  disasters.  "  Say 
thou  to  the  king  and  to  the  empress,  Sit  ye  low 
on  the  ground!  (lit.  make  low  your  seat;  cf. 
Isa.  vii.  for  the  construction)  for  it  is  fallen 
from  your  heads* — your  beautiful  crown!  (Lam. 
V.  16).  The  cities  of  the  south  are  shut  fast, 
and  there  is  none  that  openeth  (Josh.  vi.  i): 
Judah  is  carried  away  captive  all  of  her,  she  is 
wholly  carried  away."  There  is  no  hope;  it  is 
in  vain  to  expect  help;  nothing  is  left  but  to 
bemoan  the  irreparable.  The  siege  of  the  great 
fortresses  of  the  south  country  and  the  sweeping 
away  of  the  rural  population  were  sure  signs 
of  what  was  coming  upon  Jerusalem.  The  em- 
battled cities  themselves  may  be  suggested  by 
the  fallen  crown  of  beauty;  Isaiah  calls  Sarnaria 
"  the  proud  crown  of  the  drunkards  of  Ephraim  " 
(Isa.  xxviii.  i),  and  cities  are  commonly  repre- 
sented in  ancient  art  by  female  figures  wearing 
mural  crowns.  In  that  case,  both  verses  are 
addressed  to  the  sovereigns,  and  the  second  is 
exegetical  of  the  first. 

As  already  observed,  there  is  here  no  cen- 
sure, but  only  sorrowful  despair  over  the  dark 
outlook.  In  the  same  way,  Jeremiah's  utterance 
(xxii.  20  sqq.)  about  the  fate  of  Je'^oiachin  is 
less  a  malediction  than  a  lament.  And  when 
we  further  consider  his  favourable  judgment 
of  the  first  body  of  exiles,  who  were  car- 
ried away  with  this  monarch  soon  after  the 
time  of  the  present  oracle  (chap,  xxiv.),  we 
may  perhaps  see  reason  to  conclude  that  the 
surrender  of  Jerusalem  to  the  Chaldeans  on  this 
occasion  was  partly  due  to  his  advice.  The  nar- 
rative of  Kings,  however,  is  too  brief  to  enable 
us  to  come  to  any  certain  decision  about  the 
circumstances  of  Jehoiachin's  submission  (2 
Kings  xxiv.  10-12). 

4.  From  the  sovereigns  the  prophet  turns  to 
Jerusalem.  "  Lift  up  thine  eyes  (O  Jerusalem  f), 
and  behold  them  that  came  from  the  north! 
Where  is  the  flock  that  was  given  to  thee,  thy 
beautiful  sheep?  What  wilt  thou  say  when  He 
shall  appoint  over  thee — nay,  thou  thyself  hast 
spurred  them  against  thyself! — lovers  (iii.  4,  xi. 
19)   for  head?     Will  not  pangs  take  thee,   as  a 

♦  LXX.  aTTo  K«<(>aA^9  v/xii/.  Read  DD-flb^N^p  =  D3''E'K^p ; 
and  cf.  Assyrian  resu,  plur.  resitu  (=  niK'Nl). 

+  For  D3»J'y  we  might  read,  with  LXX.,  Vat.,  DC^K'n'') 
"I'J^y.  The  Arabic  has  Israel.  But  Vulg.  and  Targ,  agree 
with  the  Q're,  and  take  the  verbs  as  plur.  :  "  Lift  ye  up 
your  eyes  and  see  who  are  coming  from  the  north.''  The 
sing.  fern,  is  to  be  preferred  as  the  more  difficult  reading, 
and  on  account  of  ver.  21,  where  it  recurs.  Jerusalem  is 
addressed  (ver.  27),  and  '■^ your  eyes,"  plur.  masc.  pron., 
may  be  justified  as  indicating  the  collective  sense  of  the 
fem.  sing.  The  population  of  the  capital  is  meant.  Cf. 
Mic.  i.  II  ;  Jer.  xxi.  13,  14.  In  ver.  23,  the  masc.  plur.  ap- 
pears again,  the  figure  for  a  moment  being  dropped. 


woman  in  travail?  "  Jerusalem  sits  upon  her 
hills,  as  a  beautiful  shepherdess.  The  country 
towns  and  unwalled  villages  lay  about  her,  like 
a  fair  flock  of  sheep  and  goats  entrusted  to  her 
care  and  keeping.  But  now  these  have  been 
destroyed  and  their  pastures  are  made  a  silent 
solitude,  and  the  destroyer  is  advancing  against 
herself.  What  pangs  of  shame  and  terror  will 
be  hers,  when  she  recognises  in  the  enemy  tri- 
umphing over  her  grievous  downfall  the  heathen 
"  friends  "  whose  love  she  had  courted  so  long! 
Her  sin  is  to  be  her  scourge.  She  shall  be  made 
the  thrall  of  her  foreign  lovers.  lahvah  will 
"  appoint  them  over  her "  (xv.  3,  Ii.  27) ;  they 
will  become  the  "  head,"  and  she  the  "  tail  " 
(Lam.  i.  5;  Deut.  xxviii.  44).  Yet  this  will, 
in  truth,  be  her  own  doing,  not  lahvah's;  she 
has  herself  "  accustomed  them  to  herself "  (x. 
2),  or  "  instructed "  or  "  spurred  them  on " 
against  herself  (ii.  Z'ii  iv.  18).  The  revolt  of 
Jehoiakim,  his  wicked  breach  of  faith  with  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, had  turned  friends  to  enemies  (iv. 
30).  But  the  chief  reference  seems  to  be  more 
general — the  continual  craving  of  Judah  for  for- 
eign alliances  and  foreign  worships.  "  And  if 
thou  say  in  thine  heart,  '  Wherefore  did  these 
things  befall  me?'  through  the  greatness  of 
thy  guilt  were  thy  skirts  uncovered,  thine  heels 
violated  (Nah.  iii.  5)  or  exposed.  Will  a  Cushite 
change  his  skin,  or  a  leopard  his  spots?  ye,  too, 
are  ye  able  to  do  good,  O  ye  that  are  wont  to 
do  evil?  If,  amid  the  sharp  throes  of  suf- 
fering, Jerusalem  should  still  fail  to  recognise 
the  moral  cause  of  them  (v.  19),  she  may  be 
assured  beforehand  that  her  unspeakable  dis- 
honour is  the  reward  of  her  sins;  that  is  why 
"  the  virgin  daughter  of  Sion  "  is  surprised  and 
ravished  by  the  foe  (a  common  figure:  Isa.  xlvii. 
1-3).  Sin  has  become  so  ingrained  in  her  that 
it  can  no  more  be  eradicated  than  the  black- 
ness of  an  African  skin,  or  the  spots  of  a 
leopard's  hide.  The  habit  of  sinning  has  become 
"  a  second  nature,"  and,  like  nature,  is  not  to 
be  expelled  (c/.  viii.  4-7). 

The  effect  of  use  and  wont  in  the  moral 
sphere  could  hardly  be  expressed  more  forcibly, 
and  Jeremiah's  comparison  has  become  a  prov- 
erb. Custom  binds  us  all  in  every  department 
of  life;  it  is  only  by  enlisting  this  strange  in- 
fluence upon  the  side  of  virtue,  that  we  become 
virtuous.  Neither  virtue  nor  vice  can  be  pro- 
nounced perfect,  until  the  habit  of  either  has  be- 
come fixed  and  invariable.  It  is  the  tendency  of 
habitual  action  of  any  kind  to  become  automatic, 
and  it  is  certain  that  sin  may  attain  such  a 
mastery  over  the  active  powers  of  a  man  that 
its  indulgence  may  become  almost  an  uncon- 
scious exercise  of  his  will,  and  quite  a  matter 
of  course.  But  this  fearful  result  of  evil  habits 
does  not  excuse  them  at  the  bar  of  common 
sense,  much  less  at  the  tribunal  of  God.  The 
inveterate  sinner,  the  man  totally  devoid  of 
scruple,  whose  conscience  is,  as  it  were,  "  seared 
with  a  hot  iron,"  is  not  on  that  account  excused 
by  the  common  judgment  of  his  kind;  the  feel- 
ing he  excites  is  not  forbearance,  but  abhor- 
rence; he  is  regarded  not  as  a  poor  victim  of 
circumstances  over  which  he  has  no  control,  but 
as  a  monster  of  iniquity.  And  justly,  so;  for  if 
he  has  lost  control  of  his  passions,  if  he  is  no 
longer  master  of  hirnself,  but  the  slave  of  vice, 
he  is  responsible  for  the  long  course  of  self- 
indulgence  which  has  made  him  what  he  is.  The 
prophet's  comparison  cannot  be  applied  in  sup- 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.] 


THE    DROUGHT. 


83 


port  of  a  doctrine  of  immoral  fatalisrn.  The 
very  fact  that  he  makes  use  of  it,  implies  that 
he  did  not  intend  to  be  understood  in  such  a 
sense.  "  Will  a  Cushite  change  his  skin,  or  a 
leopard  his  spots?  Ye  also  (supposing  such  a 
change  as  that)  will  be  able  to  do  good,  O 
ye  that  are  taught  (trained,  accustomed)  to  do 
evil!"  (perhaps  the  preferable  rendering). 

Not  only  must  we  abstain  from  treating  a 
rhetorical  figure  as  a  colourless  and  rigorous 
proposition  of  mathematical  science;  not  only 
must  we  allow  for  the  irony  and  the  exaggeration 
of  the  preacher:  we  must  also  remember  his 
object,  which  is,  if  possible,  to  shock  his  hear- 
ers into  a  sense  of  their  condition,  and  to 
awaken  remorse  and  repentance  even  at  the 
eleventh  hour.  His  last  words  (ver.  27)  prove 
that  he  did  not  believe  this  result,  improbable 
as  it  was,  to  be  altogether  impossible.  Unless 
some  sense  of  sin  had  survived  in  their  hearts, 
unless  the  terms  "  good  "  and  "  evil,"  had  still 
retained  a  meaning  for  his  countrymen,  Jere- 
miah would  hardly  have  laboured  still  so  strenu- 
ously to  convince  them  of  their  sins. 

For  the  present,  when  retribution  is  already 
at  the  doors,  when  already  the  Divine  wrath 
has  visibly  broken  forth,  his  prevailing  purpose 
is  not  so  much  to  suggest  a  way  of  escape  as 
to  bring  home  to  the  heart  and  conscience  of 
the  nation  the  true  meaning  of  the  public  calam- 
ities. They  are  the  consequence  of  habitual  re- 
bellion against  God.  "  And  I  will  scatter  them 
like  stubble  passing  away  to  (^before:  cf.  xix. 
10)  the  wind  of  the  wilderness.  This  is  thy 
lot  (fern,  thine,  O  Jerusalem),  the  portion  of 
thy  measures  (others:  lap)  from  Me,  saith 
lahvah;  because  thou  forgattest  Me,  and  didst 
trust  in  the  Lie.  And  I  also — I  will  surely  strip 
thy  skirts  to  thy  face,  and  thy  shame  shall  be 
seen!  (Nah.  iii.  5).  Thine  adulteries  and  thy 
neighings,  the  foulness  of  thy  fornications  upon 
the  hills  in  the  field  (iii.  2-6) — I  have  seen  thine 
abominations.  (For  the  construction,  compare 
Isa.  i.  13.)  Woe  unto  thee,  O  Jerusalem!  After 
how  long  yet  wilt  thou  not  become  clean?  "  (2 
Kings  v.  12,  13).  That  which  lies  before  the 
citizens  in  the  near  future  is  not  deliverance, 
but  dispersion  in  foreign  lands.  The  onset  of 
the  foe  will  sweep  them  away,  as  the  blast  from 
the  desert  drives  before  it  the  dry  stubble  of 
the  corn-fields  (^cf.  iv.  11,  12).  This  is  no  chance 
calamity,  but  a  recompense  allotted  and  meted 
out  by  lahvah  to  the  city  that  forgot  Him  and 
"  trusted  in  the  Lie  "  of  Baal-worship  and  the 
associated  superstitions.  The  city  that  dealt 
shamefully  in  departing  from  her  God,  and  dal- 
lying with  foul  idols,  shall  be  put  to  shame  by 
Him  before  all  the  world  (ver.  26  recurring  to 
the  thought  of  ver.  22,  but  ascribing  the  expos- 
ure directly  to  lahvah).  Woe — certain  woe — 
awaits  Jerusalem;  and  it  is  but  a  faint  and  far- 
oflf  glimmer  of  hope  that  is  reflected  in  the  final 
question,  which  is  like  a  weary  sigh:  "After 
how  long  yet  wilt  thou  not  become  clean?" 
How  long  must  the  fiery  process  of  cleansing 
go  on,  ere  thou  be  purged  of  thine  inveterate 
sins?  It  is  a  recognition  that  the  punishment 
will  not  be  exterminative;  that  God's  chastise- 
ments of  His  people  can  no  more  fail  at  last 
than  His  promises;  that  the  triumph  of  a  heathen 
power  and  the  disappearance  of  lahvah's  Israel 
from  under  His  heaven  cannot  be  the  final  phase 
of  that  long  eventful  history  which  begins  with 
the  call  of  Abraham. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  DROUGHT  AND  ITS  MORAL  IMPLI- 
CATIONS. 

Jeremiah   xiv.,   xv.    (xvii.?). 

Various  opinions  have  been  expressed  about 
the  division  of  these  chapters.  They  have  been 
cut  up  into  short  sections,  supposed  to  be  more 
or  less  independent  of  each  other;  *  and  they 
have  been  regarded  as  constituting  a  well-or- 
ganised whole,  at  least  so  far  as  the  eighteenth 
verse  of  chap.  xvii.  The  truth  may  lie  between 
these  extremes.  Chapters  xiv.,  xv.  certainly 
hang  together;  for  in  them  the  prophet  repre- 
sents himself  as  twice  interceding  with  lahvah 
on  behalf  of  the  people,  and  twice  receiving  a 
refusal  of  his  petition  (xiv.  i-xv.  4),  the  latter 
reply  being  sterner  and  more  decisive  than  the 
first.  The  occasion  was  a  long  period  of  drought, 
involving  much  privation  for  man  and  beast. 
The  connection  between  the  parts  of  this  first 
portion  of  the  discourse  is  clear  enough.  The 
prophet  prays  for  his  people,  and  God  answers 
that  He  has  rejected  them,  and  that  intercession 
is  futile.  Thereupon,  Jeremiah  throws  the  blame 
of  the  national  sins  upon  the  false  prophets;  and 
the  answer  is  that  both  the  people  and  their 
false  guides  will  perish.  The  prophet  then  solilo- 
quises upon  his  own  hard  fate  as  a  herald  of 
evil  tidings,  and  receives  directions  for  his  own 
personal  guidance  in  this  crisis  of  affairs  (xv. 
lo-xvi.  9).  There  is  a  pause,  but  no  real  break, 
at  the  end  of  chap.  xv.  The  next  chapter  re- 
sumes the  subject  of  directions  personally  affect- 
ing the  prophet  himself;  and  the  discourse  is 
then  continuous  so  far  as  xvii.  18,  although, 
naturally  enough,  it  is  broken  here  and  there 
by  pauses  of  considerable  duration,  marking 
transitions  of  thought,  and  progress  in  the  argu- 
ment. 

The  heading  of  the  entire  piece  is  marked  in 
the  original  by  a  peculiar  inversion  of  terms, 
which    meets    us    again,    chap.    xlvi.    i,    xlvii.    i, 

*HITZIG:  (i)  xiv.  i-g,  19-22:  "Lament  and  Prayer  on 
occasion  of  a  Drought."  (2)  xiv.  10-18.  "Oracle  against 
the  false  Prophets  and  the  misguided  People."  (Hitzig 
mistakes  the  import  of  the  phrase  yijp  13nN  p,  "  T/ius 
have  they  loved  to  wander,"  ver.  10:  supposing  that  the 
"thus"  refers  to  xiii.  27,  and  that  xiv.  1-9  is  misplaced). 
C^)  XV.  i-g.  "The  incorrrigible  People  will  be  punished 
mercilessly."  Hitzig  thinks  C.  B.  Michaelis  wrong  in 
asserting  close  connection  with  the  end  of  the  preceding 
chapter,  because  the  intercession,  vv.  2-9,  does  not  agree 
with  the  prohibition,  xiv.  n  ;  and  because  xiv.  19-20, 
merely  prays  for  cessation  of  the  Drought ;  while  the 
rejection  of  "the  hypothetical  intercession,"  xv.  i  delivers 
the  people  over  to  all  the  horrors  which  follow  in  the  train 
of  war.  XV.  i-g  may  originally  have  followed  xiv.  18.  But 
this  is  far  from  cogent  reasoning.  There  is  nothing  sur- 
prising in  the  renewal  of  the  prophet's  intercession,  except 
on  a  theory  of  strictly  verbal  inspiration  ;  and  xv.  i  sgq. 
in  refusing  deliverance  from  the  Drought,  or  rather  in 
answer  to  the  prayer  imploring  it,  announces  further  and 
worse  evils  to  follow.  (4)  "Complaint  of  the  Seer  against 
lahvah,  and  Soothing!  of  his  Dejection,"  xv,  10-21.  Hitzig 
thinks  internal  evidence  here  points  to  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim  ;  and  that  .Kvii.  1-4  originally  preceded  this 
section,  especially  as  ch.  xvi.  connects  closely  with  xv.  9. 
(5)  .xvi.  1-20.  "  Prediction  of  an  imminent  general  judg- 
ment by  Plague  and  Captivity."  Written  immediately 
after  xv.  1-9,  and  falls  with  that  in  the  short  reign  of 
Jehoiachin.  (6)  xvii.  1-4.  "Judah's  unforgotten  Guilt 
will  be  punished  by  Captivity."  Wanting  in  LXX.  (as 
early  as  Jerome),  but  contains  original  of  xv.  13,  14,  and 
must  therefore  be  genuine.  Belongs  602  B.  C,  year  of 
Jehoiakim's  revolt.  (7)  xvii.  5-18.  "The  Vindication  of 
Trust  in  God  on  Despisers  and  Believers.  Prayers  for  its 
Vindication."  Date  immediately  after  death  of  Jehoia- 
kim. (8)19^27.  "  Warning  to  keep  the  Sabbath."  Time 
of  Jehoiachin. 


84 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


xlix.  34,  but  which,  in  spite  of  this  recurrence, 
wears  a  rather  suspicious  look.  We  might  ren- 
der it  thus:  "What  fell  as  a  word  of  lahvah 
to  Jeremiah,  on  account  of  the  droughts  "  (the 
plural  is  intensive,  or  it  signifies  the  long  con- 
tinuance of  the  trouble — as  if  one  rainless  period 
followed  upon  another).  Whether  or  not  the 
singular  order  of  the  words  be  authentic,  the 
recurrence  at  chap.  xvii.  8  of  the  remarkable 
term  for  "drought "  (Heb.  baccpreth  of  which 
baccaroth  here  is  plur.)  favours  the  view  that 
that  chapter  is  an  integral  portion  of  the  present 
discourse.  The  exordium  (xiv.  1-9)  is  a  poetical 
sketch  of  the  miseries  of  man  and  beast,  closing 
with  a  beautiful  prayer.  It  has  been  said  that 
this  is  not  "  a  word  of  lahvah  to  Jeremiah,"  but 
rather  the  reverse.  If  we  stick  to  the  letter, 
this  no  doubt  is  the  case;  but,  as  we  have  seen 
in  former  discourses,  the  phrase  "  lahvah's 
word  "  meant  in  prophetic  use  very  much  more 
than  a  direct  message  from  God,  or  a  prediction 
uttered  at  the  Divine  instigation.  Here,  as  else- 
where, the  prophet  evidently  regards  the  course 
of  his  own  religious  reflection  as  guided  by  Him 
who  "  fashioneth  the  hearts  of  men,"  and  "  know- 
eth  their  thoughts  long  before;  "  and  if  the  ques- 
tion had  suggested  itself,  he  would  certainly  have 
referred  his  own  poetic  powers — the  tenderness 
of  his  pity,  the  vividness  of  his  apprehension, 
the  force  of  his  passion, — to  the  inspiration  of 
the  Lord  who  had  called  and  consecrated  him 
from  the  birth,  to  speak  in  His  Name. 

There  lies  at  the  heart  of  many  of  us  a  feeling, 
which  has  lurked  there,  more  or  less  without 
our  cognisance,  ever  since  the  childish  days  when 
the  Old  Testament  was  read  at  the  mother's 
knee,  and  explained  and  understood  in  a  manner 
proportioned  to  the  faculties  of  childhood.  When 
we  hear  the  phrase  "  The  Lord  spake,"  we  in- 
stinctively think,  if  we  think  at  all,  of  an  actual 
voice  knocking  sensibly  at  the  door  of  the  out- 
ward ear.  It  was  not  so;  nor  did  the  sacred 
writer  mean  it  so.  A  knowledge  of  Hebrew 
idiom — the  modes  of  expression  usual  and  pos- 
sible in  that  ancient  speech — assures  us  that  this 
statement,  so  startlingly  direct  in  its  unadorned 
simplicity,  was  the  accepted  mode  of  conveying 
a  meaning  which  we,  in  our  more  complex  and 
artificial  idioms,  would  convey  by  the  use  of  a 
multitude  of  words,  in  terms  far  more  abstract, 
in  language  destitute  of  all  that  colour  of  life 
and  reality  which  stamps  the  idiom  of  the  Bible. 
It  is  as  though  the  Divine  lay  farther  ofif  from 
us  moderns;  as  though  the  marvellous  progress 
of  all  that  new  knowledge  of  the  measureless 
magnitude  of  the  world,  of  the  power  and  com- 
plexity of  its  machinery,  of  the  surpassing  sub- 
tlety and  the  matchless  perfection  of  its  laws  and 
processes,  had  become  an  impassable  barrier,  at 
least  an  impenetrable  veil,  between  our  minds 
and  God.  We  have  lost  the  sen?*^  of  His  near- 
ness, of  His  immediacy,  so  to  speak;  because 
we  have  gained,  and  are  ev^r  intensifying,  a 
sense  of  the  nearness  of  the  world  with  which 
He  environs  us.  Hence,  when  we  speak  of 
Him,  we  naturally  cast  about  either  for  poetical 
phrases  and  figures,  which  must  always  be  more 
or  lessvague  and  undefined,  or  for  highly  abstract 
expressions,  which  may  suggest  scientific  exact- 
ness, but  are,  in  truth,  scholastic  formulae,  dry 
as  the  dust  of  the  desert,  untouched  by  the  breath 
of  life;  and  even  if  they  affirm  a  Person,  desti- 
tute of  all  those  living  characters  by  which  we 
instinctively  and  without   effort   recognise    Per- 


sonality. We  make  only  a  conventional  use  of 
the  language  of  the  sacred  writers,  of  the 
prophets  and  prophetic  historians,  of  the  psalm- 
ists, and  the  legalists,  of  the  Old  Testament; 
the  language  which  is  the  native  expression  of 
a  peculiar  intensity  of  religious  faith,  realising 
the  Unseen  as  the  Actual  and,  in  truth,  the  only 
Real. 

"  Judah  raourneth  and  the  gates  thereof  languish, 
They  are  clad  in  black  down  to  the  ground  ; 
And  the  cry  of  Jerusalem  hath  gone  up. 
And  their  nobles  have  sent  their  lesser  folk  for  water ; 
They  have  been  to  the  pits,  and  found  no  water : 
Their  vessels  have  come  back  empty  ; 
Ashamed  and    confounded,   they   have  covered    their 
heads. 

"  Because  the  ground  is  chapt,  for  there  hath  not  been  raiii 
in  the  land, 
The  ploughmen  are  ashamed,  they  have  covered  their 
heads. 

"  For  even  the  hind  in  the  field  hath  yeaned  and  forsaken 
her  fawn, 
For  there  is  no  grass. 

And  the  wild  asses  stand  on  the  bare  fells ; 
They  snuff  the  wind  like  jackals ; 
Their  eyes  fail,  for  there  is  no  pasturage. 

"  If  our  sins  have  answered  against  us, 
lahweh,  act  for  Thine  own  Name  sake  ; 
For  our  relapses  are  many  : 
Against  Thee  have  we  trespassed. 

"  Hope  of  Israel,  that  savest  him  in  time  of  trouble, 
Wherefore  wilt  Thou  be  as  a  stranger  in  the  land, 
And  as  a  traveller  that  leaveth  the  road  but  for  the 

night  ? 
Wherefore  wilt  Thou  be  as  a  man  o'erpowered  with 

sleep, 
As  a  warrior  that  cannot  rescue  i 

"  Sith  Thou  art  in,  our  midst,  O  lahvah, 
And  Thy  Name  upon  us  hath  been  called  ; 
Cast  us  not  down  !  " 

How  beautiful  both  plaint  and  prayer!  The 
simple  description  of  the  efifects  of  the  drought 
is  as  lifelike  and  impressive  as  a  good  picture. 
The  whole  country  is  stricken;  the  city-gates,  the 
place  of  common  resort,  where  the  citizens  meet 
for  business  and  for  conversation,  are  gloomy 
with  knots  of  mourners  robed  in  black  from  head 
to  foot,  or,  as  the  Hebrew  may  also  imply,  sitting 
on  the  ground,  in  the  garb  and  posture  of  deso- 
lation (Lam.  ii.  10,  iii.  28).  The  magnates  of 
Jerusalern  send  out  their  retainers  to  find  water; 
and  we  see  them  returning  with  empty  vessels, 
their  heads  muffled  in  their  cloaks,  in  sign  of  grief 
at  the  failiire  of  their  errand  {cf.  i  Kings  xviii. 
5,  6).  The  parched  ground  everywhere  gapes 
with  fissures;  *  the  yeomen  go  about  with 
covered  heads  in  deepest  dejection.  The  dis- 
tress is  universal,  and  affects  not  man  only,  but 
the  brute  creation.  Even  the  gentle  hind,  that 
proverb  of  maternal  tenderness,  is  driven  by 
sorest  need  to  forsake  the  fruit  of  her  hard 
travail;  her  starved  dugs  are  dry,  and  she  flies 
from  her  helpless  offspring.  The  wild  asses  of 
the  desert,  fleet,  beautiful,  and  keen-eyed  crea- 
tures, scan  the  withered  landscape  from  the 
naked  cliffs,  and  snuff  the  wind,  like  jackals 
scenting  prey;  but  neither  sight  nor  smell  sug- 
gests relief.  There  is  no  moisture  in  the  air, 
no  glimpse  of  pasture  in  the  wide  sultry  land. 

The  prayer  is  a  humble  confession  of  sin,  an 
unreserved  admission  that  the  woes  of  man 
evince   the   righteousness   of   God.     Unlike   cer- 

*  The  Heb.  verb  HnH  "•  is  broken  "  may  probably  have 
this  meaning.  "Dismayed"  is  not  nearly  so  suitable, 
though  it  is  the  usual  meaning  of  the  term.     Cj.  Isa.  vii.  8. 


trr»;mif>.i7  rfv.    xv.  T 


THE    DROUGHT. 


85 


rain  modern  poecs,  vho  b«»w«Jl  ihe  sorrows  of  the 
wo»]J  rfS  the  rvitre  inriiction  oi  a  harsh  and  arbi- 
trary and  ine-'itahl.?  D«^hny,  Jeifmiah  makes  no 
doubt  that  human  sufferings  are  due  to  the  work- 
ing of  Divine  justice.  "  Our  sins  have  answered 
against  our  pleas  at  Thy  judgment  seai;  our  re- 
lapses are  many;  against  Thee  have  we  tres- 
passed," against  Thee,  the  sovereign  Disposer 
of  events,  the  Source  of  all  that  happens  ar.d 
all  that  is.  If  this  be  so,  what  plea  is  left? 
None,  but  that  appeal  to  the  Name  of  lahvah, 
with  which  the  prayer  begins  and  ends.  "  Act 
for  Thine  own  Name  sake."  ..."  Thy  Name 
upon  us  hath  been  called."  Act  for  Thine  own 
honour,  that  is,  for  the  honour  of  Mercy,  Com- 
passion, Truth,  Goodness:  which  Thou  hast  re- 
vealed Thyself  to  be,  and  which  are  parts  of  Thy 
glorious  Name  (Ex.  xxxiv.  6).  Pity  the 
wretched,  and  pardon  the  guilty:  for  so  will  Thy 
glory  increase  amongst  men;  so  will  man  learn 
that  the  relentings  of  love  are  diviner  affections 
than  the  ruthlessness  of  wrath  and  the  cravings 
of  vengeance. 

There  is  also  a  touching  appeal  to  the  past. 
The  very  name  by  which  Israel  was  sometimes 
designated  as  "  the  people  of  lahvah,"  just  as 
Moab  was  known  by  the  name  of  its  god  as  "  the 
people  of  Chemosh  "  (Num.  xxi.  29),  is  alleged 
as  proof  that  the  nation  has  an  interest  in  the 
compassion  of  Him  whose  name  it  bears;  and 
it  is  implied  that,  since  the  world  knows  Israel  as 
lahvah's  people,  it  will  not  be  for  lahvah's  hon- 
our that  this  people  should  be  suffered  to  perish 
in  their  sins.  Israel  had  thus,  from  the  outset 
of  its  history,  been  associated  and  identified  with 
lahvah;  however  ill  the  true  nature  of  the  tie 
has  been  understood,  however  unworthily  the  re- 
lation has  been  conceived  by  the  popular  mind, 
however  little  the  obligations  involved  in  the 
call  of  their  fathers  have  been  recognised  and 
appreciated.  God  must  be  true,  though  rnan  be 
false.  There  is  no  weakness,  no  caprice,  no 
vacillation  in  God.  In  bygone  "  times  of 
trouble  "  the  "  Hope  of  Israel  "  had  saved  Is- 
rael over  and  over  again;  it  was  a  truth  admitted 
by  all — even  by  the  prophet's  enemies.  Surely 
then  He  will  save  His  people  once  again,  and 
vindicate  His  Name  of  Saviour.  Surely  He  who 
has  dwelt  in  their  midst  so  many  changeful  cen- 
turies, will  not  now  behold  their  trouble  with  the 
lukewarm  feeling  of  an  alien  dwelling  amongst 
them  for  a  time,  but  unconnected  with  them  by 
ties  of  blood  and  kin  and  common  country;  or 
with  the  indifference  of  the  traveller  who  is  but 
coldly  affected  by  the  calamities  of  a  place  where 
he  has  only  lodged  one  night.  Surely  the  entire 
past  shows  that  it  would  be  utterly  inconsistent 
for  lahvah  to  appear  now  as  a  man  so  buried 
in  sleep  that  He  cannot  be  roused  to  save  His 
friends  from  imminent  destruction  (cf.  i  Kings 
xviii.  27,  St.  Mark  iv.  38).  He  who  had  borne 
Israel  and  carried  him  as  a  tender  nursling  all 
the  days  of  old  (Isa.  Ixiii.  9)  could  hardly  without 
changing  His  own  unchangeable  Name,  His 
character  and  purposes,  cast  down  His  people 
and  forsake  them  at  last. 

Such  is  the  drift  of  the  prophet's  first  prayer. 
To  this  apparently  unanswerable  argument  his 
religious  meditation  upon  the  present  distress 
has  brought  him.  But  presently  the  thought  re- 
turns with  added  force,  with  a  sense  of  utmost 
certitude,  with  a  conviction  that  it  is  lahvah's 
Word,  that  the  people  have  wrought  out  their 
own  affliction,  that  misery  is  the  hire  of  sin. 


"  Thus  hath  lahvah  said  of  this  people  : 
Even  so  have  they  loved  to  wander, 
Their  feet  they  have  not  refrained  ; 
And  as  for  lahvah.  He  accepteth  them  not ; 

"  He  now  remembereth  their  guilt, 
And  visiteth  their  trespasses. 
And  lahvah  said  unto  me, 
Intercede  thou  not  for  this  people  for  good  ! 
If  they  fast.  I  will  not  hearken  unto  their  cry; 
And  if  they  offer  whole-offering  and  oblation, 
I  will  not  accept  their  persons  ; 

But   by  the  sword,   the   famine,  and  the  plague,  will  I 
consume  them. 

'And  I  said.  Ah,  Lord  lahvah ! 
Behold   the    prophets  say  to    them,  Ye   shall  not  see 

sword. 
And  famine  shall  not  befall  you  ; 
For  peace  and  permanence  will  1  give  you  in  this  place. 

'  And  lahvah  said  unto  me  : 
Falsehood  it  is  that  the  prophets  prophesy  in  My  Name. 
I  sent  them  not,  and  I  charged  them  not,  and  I  spake 

not  unto  them. 
A  vision  of  falsehood  and  jugglery  and  nothingness, 

and  the  guile  of  their  own  heart, 
They,  for  their  part,  prophesy  you. 

■Therefore  thus  said  lahvah  : 
Concerning  the  prophets  who  prophesy  in  My  Name, 

albeit  I  sent  them  not. 
And  of  themselves  say.  Sword  and  famine  there  shall 

not  be  in  this  land  ; 
By  the  sword  and  by  the  famine  shall  those  prophets  be 

fordone. 
And  the  people  to  whom  they  prophesy  shall  lie  thrown 

out  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem, 
Because  of  the  famine  and  the  sword, 
With  none  to  bury  them, — 
Themselves,    their    wives,    and   their   sons   and    their 

daughters  : 
And  I  will  pour  upon  them  their  own  evil. 
And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them  this  word  : 
Let  mine  eyes  run  down  with  tears,  night  and  day. 
And  let  them  not  tire  ; 
For  with  mighty  breach  is  broken 
The  virgin  daughter  of  my  people— 
With  a  very  grievous  blow. 
If  I  go  forth  into  the  field. 
Then  behold  !  the  slain  of  the  sword  ; 
And  if  I  enter  the  city. 
Then  behold  !  the  pinings  of  famine  : 
For  both  prophet  and  priest  go  trafficking  about  the 

land. 
And  understand  not."* 

It  has  been  supposed  that  this  whole  section 
is  misplaced,  and  that  it  would  properly  follow 
the  close  of  chap.  xiii.  The  supposition  is  due 
to  a  misapprehension  of  the  force  of  the  pregnant 
particle  which  introduces  the  reply  of  lahvah  to 
the  prophet's  intercession.  "  Even  so  have  they 
loved  to  wander;  "  even  so,  as  is  naturally  im- 
plied by  the  severity  of  the  punishment  of  which 
thou  complainest.  The  dearth  is  prolonged;  the 
distress  is  widespread  and  grievous.  So  pro- 
longed, so  grievous,  so  universal,  has  been  their 
rebellion  against  Me.  The  penalty  corresponds 
to  the  offence.  It  is  really  "  their  own  evil " 
that  is  being  poured  out  upon  their  guilty  heads 
(ver.  16;  cf.  iv.  18).  lahvah  cannot  accept  them 
in  their  sin;  the  long  drought  is  a  token  that  their 
guilt  is  before  His  mind,  unrepented,  unatoned. 
Neither  the  supplications  of  another,  nor  their 
own  fasts  and  sacrifices,  avail  to  avert  the  visita- 
tion. So  long  as  the  disposition  of  the  heart 
remains  unaltered;  so  long  as  man  hates,  not  his 
darling  sins,  but  the  penalties  they  entail,  it  is 
idle  to  seek  to  propitiate  Heaven  by  such  means 
as  these.  And  not  only  so.  The  droughts  are 
but  a  foretaste  of  worse  evils  to  come:  "by  the 
sword,  the  famine,  and  the  plague  will  I  consume 
them."  The  condition  is  understood.  If  they  re- 
pent and  amend  not.  This  is  implied  by  the 
prophet's  seeking  to  palliate  the  national  guilt, 
as  he  proceeds  to  do.  by  the  suggestion  that  the 
♦  Cy.  viii.  q.    "  And  no  wisdom  is  in  them." 


86 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


people  are  more  sinned  against  than  sinning,  de- 
luded as  they  are  by  false  prophets;  as  also  by 
the  renewal  of  his  intercession  (ver.  19).  Had 
he  been  aware  in  his  inmost  heart  that  an  irre- 
versible sentence  had  gone  forth  against  his 
people,  would  he  have  been  likely  to  think  either 
excuses  or  intercessions  availing?  Indeed,  how- 
ever absolute  the  threats  of  the  prophetic  preach- 
ers may  sound,  they  must,  as  a  rule,  be  qualified 
by  this  limitation,  which,  whether  expressed  or 
not,  is  inseparable  from  the  object  of  their  dis- 
courses, which  was  the  moral  amendment  of 
those    who    heard    them. 

Of  the  "  false,"  that  is,  the  common  run  of 
prophets,  who  were  in  league  with  the  venal 
priesthood  of  the  time,  and  no  less  worldly  and 
self-seeking  than  their  allies,  we  note  that,  as 
usual,  they  foretell  what  the  people  wishes  to 
hear;  "  Peace  (Prosperity),  and  Permanence," 
is  the  burden  of  their  oracles.  They  knew  that 
invectives  against  prevailing  vices,  and  denun- 
ciations of  national  follies,  and  forecasts  of  ap- 
proaching ruin,  were  unlikely  means  of  winning 
popularity  and  a  substantial  harvest  of  offerings. 
At  the  same  time,  like  other  false  teachers,  they 
knew  how  to  veil  their  errors  under  the  mask 
of  truth;  or  rather,  they  were  themselves  de- 
luded by  their  own  greed,  and  blinded  by  their 
covetousness  to  the  plain  teaching  of  events. 
They  might  base  their  doctrine  of  "  Peace  and 
Permanence  in  this  place!  "  upon  those  utter- 
ances of  the  great  Isaiah,  which  had  been  so 
signally  verified  in  the  lifetime  of  the  seer  him- 
self; but  their  keen  pursuit  of  selfish  ends,  their 
moral  degradation,  caused  them  to  shut  their 
eyes  to  everything  else  in  his  teachings,  and,  like 
his  contemporaries,  they  "  regarded  not  the  work 
of  lahvah,  nor  the  operation  of  His  hand." 
Jeremiah  accuses  them  of  "  lying  visions;"  vi- 
sions, as  he  explains,  which  were  the  outcome  of 
magical  ceremonies,  by  aid  of  which,  perhaps, 
they  partially  deluded  themselves,  before  delud- 
ing others,  but  which  were  none  the  less,  "  things 
of  naught,"  devoid  of  all  substance,  and  mere 
fictions  of  a  deceitful  and  self-deceiving  mind 
(ver.  14).  He  expressly  declares  that  they  have 
no  mission;  in  other  words,  their  action  is  not 
due  to  the  overpowering  sense  of  a  higher  call, 
but  is  inspired  by  purely  ulterior  considerations 
of  worldly  gain  and  policy.  They  prophesy  to 
order;  to  the  order  of  man,  not  of  God.  If  they 
visit  the  country  districts,  it  is  with  no  spiritual 
end  in  view;  priest  and  prophet  alike  make  a 
trade  of  their  sacred  profession,  and,  immersed 
in  their  sordid  pursuits,  have  no  eye  for  truth, 
and  no  perception  of  the  dangers  hovering  over 
their  country.  Their  misconduct  and  misdirec- 
tion of  affairs  are  certain  to  bring  destruction 
upon  themselves  and  upon  those  whom  they  mis- 
lead. War  and  its  attendant  famine  will  devour 
them  all. 

But  the  day  of  grace  being  past,  nothing  is 
left  for  the  prophet  himself  but  to  bewail  the 
ruin  of  his  people  (ver.  17).  He  will  betake  him- 
self to  weeping,  since  praying  and  preaching  are 
vain.  The  words  which  announce  this  resolve 
may  portray  a  sorrowful  experience,  or  they  may 
depict  the  future  as  though  it  were  already  pres- 
ent (vv.  17,  18).  The  latter  interpretation  would 
suit  ver.  17,  but  hardly  the  following  verse,  with 
its  references  to  "  going  forth  into  the  field,"  and 
"entering  into  the  city."  The  way  in  which  these 
specific  actions  are  mentioned  seems  to  imply 
some  present  or  recent  calamity;   and  there   is 


apparently  no  reason  why  we  may  not  suppose 
that  the  passage  was  written  at  the  disastrous 
close  of  the  reign  of  Josiah,  in  the  troublous  in- 
terval of  three  months,  when  Jehoahaz  was  nom- 
inal king  in  Jerusalem,  but  the  Egyptian  arms 
were  probably  ravaging  the  country,  and  striking 
terror  into  the  hearts  of  the  people.  In  such  a 
time  of  confusion  and  bloodshed,  tillage  would 
be  neglected,  and  famine  would  natura.ly  follow; 
and  these  evils  would  be  greatly  aggravated  by 
drought.  The  only  other  period  which  suits  is 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim;  *  but 
the  former  seems  rather  to  be  indicated  by  chap. 
XV.  6-9. 

Heartbroken  at  the  sight  of  the  miseries  of 
his  country,  the  prophet  once  more  approaches 
the  eternal  throne.  His  despairing  mood  is  not 
so  deep  and  dark  as  to  drown  his  faith  in  God. 
He  refuses  to  believe  the  utter  rejection  of  Judah, 
the  revocation  of  the  covenant.  (The  measure 
is  Pentameter). 

"  Hast  Thou  indeed  cast  off  Judah  ? 
Hath  Thy  soul  revolted  from  Sion  ? 
Why  hast  Thou  smitten  us,  past  healing? 
Waiting  for  peace,  and  no  good  came, 
For  a  time  of  healing,  and  behold  terror ! 

"We  know,  lahvah,  our  wickedness,  our  fathers'  guilt ; 
For  we  have  trespassed  toward  Thee. 
Scorn  Thou  not,  for  Thy  Name  sake. 
Disgrace  not  Thy  glorious  throne  ! 
Remember,  break  not.  Thy  covenant  with  us  ! 

"  Are  there,  in  sooth,  among  the  Nothings  of  the  natioij 
senders  of  rain  ? 
And  is  it  the  heavens  that  bestow  the  showers? 
Is  it  not  Thou,  lahvah  our  God  ? 
And  we  wait  for  Thee, 
For  Thou  it  was  that  niadest  the  world."  t 

To  all  this  the  Divine  answer  is  stern  and  de- 
cisive. "And  lahvah  said  unto  me:  If  Moses 
and  Samuel  were  to  stand  "  (pleading)  '.'  before 
Me,  My  mind  would  not  be  towards  this  people: 
send  them  away  from  before  Me  "  (dismiss  them 
from  My  Presence),  "that  they  may  go  forth!  " 
After  ages  remembered  Jeremiah  as  a  mighty 
intercessor,  and  the  brave  Maccabeus  could 
see  him  in  his  dream  as  a  grey-haired  man  "  ex- 
ceeding glorious  "  and  "  of  a  wonderful  and  ex- 
cellent majesty,"  who  "  prayed  much  for  the  peo- 
ple and  for  the  holy  city  "  (2  Mace.  xv.  14). 
And  the  beauty  of  the  prayers  which  lie  like  scat- 
tered pearls  of  faith  and  love  among  the  proph- 
et's soliloquies  is  evident  at  a  glance.  But  here 
Jeremiah  himself  is  conscious  that  his  prayers 
are  unavailing;  and  that  the  of^ce  to  which  God 
has  called  him  is  rather  that  of  pronouncing 
judgment  than  of  interceding  for  mercy.  Even 
a  Moses  or  a  Samuel,  the  mighty  intercessors  of 
the  old  heroic  times,  whose  pleadings  had  been 
irresistible  with  God,  would  now  plead  in  vain 
(Ex.  xvii.  II  sqq.,  xxxii.  11  sqq.;  Num.  xiv. 
13  sqq.  for  Moses;  i  Sam.  vii.  9  sqq.,  xii.  16 
sqq.;  Ps.  xcix.  6;  Ecclus.  xlvi.  16  sqq.  for  Samuel). 
The  day  of  grace  has  gone,  and  the  day  of  doom 
ifi  come.  His  sad  function  is  to  "  send  them 
away  "  or  "  let  them  go  "  from  lahvah's  Pres- 
ence; to  pronounce  the  decree  of  their  banish- 
ment from  the  holy  land  where  His  temple  is, 
and  where  they  have  been  wont  to  "  see  His 
face."  The  main  part  of  his  commission  was  "  to 
root  out,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  destroy,  and  to 

*  So  Dathe,  Naegelsbach. 

t  Lit.  "all  these  things,"  2.  e.,  this  visible  world.    There 
is  no  Heb.  special  term  for  the  "  universe  "  or  "  world. 
"The  all  "or  "heaven  and  earth,"  or  the  phrase  in  the 
text,  are  used  in  this  sense. 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.J 


THE    DROUGHT. 


87 


overthrow  "  (i.  10).  "  And  if  they  say  unto  thee, 
Whither  are  we  to  go  forth?  Thou  shalt  say  unto 
them,  thus  hath  lahvah  said:  They  that  belong  to 
the  Death  "  (i.  e.,  the  Plague;  as  the  Black  Death 
was  spoken  of  in  mediaeval  Europe)  "to  death; 
and  they  that  belong  to  the  Sword,  to  the  sword; 
and  they  that  belong  to  the  Famine,  to  famine; 
and  they  that  belong  to  Captivity,  to  captivity!  " 
The  people  were  to  "  go  forth  "  out  of  their  own 
land,  which  was,  as  it  were,  the  Presence-cham- 
ber of  lahvah,  just  as  they  had  at  the  outset  of 
their  history  gone  forth  out  of  Egypt,  to  take 
possession  of  it.  The  words  convey  a  sentence 
of  exile,  though  they  do  not  indicate  the  place  of 
banishment.  The  menace  of  woe  is  as  general 
in  its  terms  as  that  lurid  passage  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law  upon  which  it  appears  to  be  founded 
(Deut.  xxviii.  21-26).  The  time  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  those  terrible  threatenings  ''  is  nigh, 
^ven  at  the  doors."  On  the  other  hand,  Ezekiel's 
"  four  sore  judgments "  (Ezek.  xiv.  21)  were 
suggested  by  this  passage  of  Jeremiah. 

The  prophet  avoids  naming  the  actual  desti- 
nation of  the  captive  people,  because  captivity 
is  only  one  element  in  their  punishment.  The 
horrors  of  war — sieges  and  slaughters  and  pesti- 
lence and  famine — must  come  first.  In  what 
follows,  the  intensity  of  these  horrors  is  realised 
in  a  single  touch.  The  slain  are  left  unburied, 
a  prey  to  the  birds  and  beasts.  The  elaborate 
care  of  the  ancients  in  the  provision  of  honour- 
able resting-places  for  the  dead  is  a  measure  of 
the  extremity  thus  indicated.  In  accordance 
with  the  feeling  of  his  age,  the  prophet  ranks 
the  dogs  and  vultures  and  hyenas  that  drag  and 
disfigure  i.nd  devour  the  corpses  of  the  slain, 
as  three  "  kinds  "  of  evil  equally  appalling  with 
the  sword  that  slays.  The  same  feeling  led  our 
Spenser  to  write: 

"  To  spoil  the  dead  of  weed 
Is  sacrilege,  and  doth  all  sin^  e.xceed." 

And  the  destruction  of  Moab  is  decreed  by 
the  earlier  prophet  Amos,  "  because  he  burned 
the  bones  of  the  king  of  Edom  into  lime,"  thus 
violating  a  law  universally  recognised  as  binding 
upon  the  conscience  of  nations  (Amos  ii.  i). 
Cf.  also  Gen.   xxiii. 

Thus  death  itself  was  not  to  be  a  suf^cient  ex- 
piation for  the  inveterate  guilt  of  the  nation. 
Judgment  was  to  pursue  them  even  after  death. 
But  the  prophet's  vision  does  not  penetrate  be- 
yond this  present  scene.  With  the  visible  world, 
so  far  as  he  is  aware,  the  punishment  terminates. 
He  gives  no  hint  here,  nor  elsewhere,  of  any 
further  penalties  awaiting  individual  sinners  in 
the  unseen  world.  The  scope  of  his  prophecy 
indeed  is  almost  purely  national,  and  limited  to 
the  present  life.  It  is  one  of  the  recognised  con- 
ditions of  Old  Testament  religious  thought. 

And  the  ruin  of  the  people  is  the  retribution 
reserved  for  what  Manasseh  did  in  Jerusalem. 
To  the  prophet,  as  to  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Kings,  who  wrote  doubtless  under  the  influence 
of  his  words,  the  guilt  contracted  by  Judah 
under  that  wicked  king  was  unpardonable.  But 
it  would  convey  a  false  impression  if  we  left  the 
matter  here;  for  the  whole  course  of  his  after- 
preaching — his  exhortations  and  promises,  as 
well  as  his  threats — prove  that  Jeremiah  did  not 
suppose  that  the  nation  could  not  be  saved  by 
genuine  repentance  and  permanent  amendment. 
What  he  intends  rather  to  affirm  is  that  the  sins 
of  the  fathers  will  be  visited  upon  children  who 


are  partakers  of  their  sins.  It  is  the  doctrine  of 
St.  Matt,  xxiii.  29  sqq. ;  a  doctrine  which  is  not 
merely  a  theological  opinion,  but  a  matter  of  his- 
torical  observation. 

"  And  I  will  set  over  them  four  kinds — It  is  an 
oracle  of  lahvah — the  sword  to  slay,  and  the 
dogs  to  hale,  and  the  fowls  of  the  air,  and  the 
beasts  of  the  earth,  to  devour  and  to  destroy. 
And  I  will  make  them  a  sport  for  all  the  realms 
of  earth;  on  account  of  Manasseh  ben  Hezekiah 
king  of  Judah,  for  what  he  did  in  Jerusalem." 

Jerusalem! — the  mention  of  that  magical  name 
touches  another  chord  in  the  prophet's  soul;  and 
the  fierce  tones  of  his  oracle  of  doom  change 
into  a  dirge-like  strain  of  pity  without  hope. 

"  For  who  will  have  compassion  on  Thee,  O  Jerusalem? 
And  who  will  yield  thee  comfort? 
And  who  will  turn  aside  to  ask  of  thy  welfare  ? 
'Twas  thou  that  rejectedst  Me  (it  is  lahvah's  word)  ; 
Backward  wouldst  thou  wend  : 
So  I  stretched  forth  My  hand  against  thee  and  destroyed 

thee  ; 
I  wearied  of  relenting. 
And  I  winnowed  them  with  a  fan  in  the  gates  of  the 

land  ; 
I  bereaved,  I  undid  My  people  : 
Yet  tlie^-  returned  not  from  their  own  ways. 
His  widows  outnumbered  before  Me  the  sand  of  seas : 
I  brought  them  against  the  Mother  of  Warriors  a  harrier 

at  high  noon  ; 
I  threw  upon  her  suddenly  anguish  and  horrors. 
She  that  had  borne  seven  sons  did  pine  away  ; 
She  breathed  out  her  soul. 
Her  sun  did  set,  while  it  yet  was  day  ; 
He  blushed  and  paled. 

But  their  remnant  will  I  give  to  the  sword 
Before  their  foes  :  (It  is  lahvah's  word)." 

The  fate  of  Jerusalem  would  strike  the  nations 
dumb  with  horror;  it  would  not  inspire  pity,  for 
man  would  recognise  that  it  was  absolutely  just. 
Or  perhaps  the  thought  rather  is.  In  proving 
false  to  Me,  thou  wert  false  to  thine  only  friend: 
Me  thou  hast  estranged  by  thy  faithlessness;  and 
from  the  envious  rivals,  who  beset  thee  on  every 
side,  thou  canst  expect  nothing  but  rejoicing  at 
thy  downfall  (Ps.  cxxxvi.;  Lam.  ii.  15-17;  Obad. 
ID  sqq.).  The  peculiar  solitariness  of  Israel 
among  the  nations  (Num.  xxiii.  9)  aggravated 
the   anguish   of   her   overthrow. 

In  what  follows,  the  dreadful  past  appears  as 
a  prophecy  of  the  yet  more  terrible  future.  The 
poetseer's  pathetic  monody  moralises  the  lost 
battle  of  Megiddo^ — that  fatal  day  when  the  sun 
of  Judah  set  in 'what  seemed  the  high  day  of  her 
prosperity,  and  all  the  glory  and  the  promise  of 
good  king  Josiah  vanished  like  a  dream  in  sud- 
den darkness.  Men  might  think — doubtless 
Jeremiah  thought,  in  the  first  moments  of  de- 
spair, when  the  news  of  that  overwhelming  disas- 
ter was  brought  to  Jerusalem,  with  the  corpse  of 
the  good  king,  the  dead  hope  of  the  nation — that 
this  crushing  blow  was  proof  that  lahvah  had 
rejected  His  people,  in  the  exercise  of  a  sover- 
eign caprice,  and  without  reference  to  their  own 
attitude  towards  Him.  But,  says  or  chants  the 
prophet,   in  solemn   rhythmic  utterance, 

"  'Twas  thou  that  rejectedst  Me  ; 
Backward  wouldst  thou  ^vend  : 
So  I  stretched  forth  Aly  hand  against  thee,  and  wrought 

thee  hurt ; 
I  wearied  of  relenting." 

The  cup  of  national  iniquity  was  full,  and  its 
baleful  contents  overflowed  in  a  devastating 
flood.  "  In  the  gates  of  the  land  " — the  point  on 
the  northwest  frontier  where  the  armies  met — 
lahvah  "winnowed  His  people  with  a  fan," 
separating  those  who  were  doomed  to  fall  from 
those  who  were  to  survive,  as  the  winnowing  fan 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


separates  the  chaff  from  the  wheat  in  the  thresh- 
ing-floor. There  He  "bereaved"  the  nation  of 
their  dearest  hope,-  "  the  breath  of  their  nostrils, 
the  Lord's  Anointed"  (Lam.  iv.  20);  there  He 
multipHed  their  widows.  And  after  the  lost  bat- 
tle He  brought  the  victor  in  hot  haste  against  the 
"  Mother "  of  the  fallen  warriors,  the  ill-fated 
city,  Jerusalem,  to  wreak  vengeance  upon  her 
for  her  ill-timed  opposition.  But,  for  all  this 
bitter  fruit  of  their  evil  doings,  the  people 
"turned  not  back  from  their  own  ways";  and 
therefore  the  strophe  of  lamentation  closes  with 
a  threat  of  utter  extermination:  "Their  rem- 
nant " — the  poor  survival  of  these  fierce  storms — 
"  Their  remnant  will  I  give  to  the  sword  before 
their  foes."  * 

If  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  verses  be  not 
a  mere  interpolation  in  this  chapter  (see  xvii. 
3,  4),  their  proper  place  would  seem  to  be  here, 
as  continuing  and  amplifying  the  sentence  upon 
the  residue  of  the  people.  The  text  is  unques- 
tionably corrupt,  and  must  be  amended  by  help 
of  the  other  passage,  where  it  is  partially  re- 
peated.    The  twelfth  verse  may  be  read  thus: 

"  Thy  wealth  and  tliy  treasures  will  I  make  a  prey, 
For  the  sin  of  thine  high  places  in  all  thy  borders."  + 

Then  the  fourteenth  verse  follows,  naturally 
enough,  with  an  announcement  of  the  Exile: 

"  And  I  will  enthral  thee  to  thy  foes 
In  a  land  thou  knowest  not  : 
'  For  a  fire  is  kindled  in  Mine  anger, 
That  shall  burn  for  evermore  !  "  t 

The  prophet  has  now  fulfilled  his  function  of 
judge  by  pronouncing  upon  his  people  the  ex- 
treme penalty  of  the  law.  His  strong  perception 
of  the  national  guilt  and  of  the  righteousness  of 
God  has  left  him  no  choice  in  the  matter.  But 
how  little  this  duty  of  condemnation  accorded 
with  his  own  individual  feeling  as  a  man  and 
a  citizen  is  clear  from  the  passionate  outbreak 
of  the  succeeding  strophe. 

"  Woe's  me,  my  mother,"  he  exclaims,  "that  thou  barest 

me, 
A  man   of  strife  and  a  man  of  contention  to  all  the 

country ! 
Neither  lender  nor  borrower  have  I  been  ; 
Yet  all  of  them  do  curse  me." 

A  desperately  bitter  tone,  evincing  the  anguish 
of  a  man  wounded  to  the  heart  by  the  sense  of 
fruitless  endeavour  and  unjust  hatred.  He  had 
done  his  utmost  to  save  his  country,  and  his 
reward  was  universal  detestation.  His  innocence 
and  integrity  were  requited  with  the  odium  of  the 
pitiless  creditor  who  enslaves  his  helpless  victim, 
and  appropriates  his  all;  or  the  fraudulent  bor- 
rower who  repays  a  too  ready  confidence  with 
ruin.§ 

*  The  reference  to  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  in  the  words 
"  Her  sun  went  down,  while  it  yet  was  day  ; 
He  blushed  and  paled," 
appears  fairly  certain.    Such  an  event  is  said  have  oc- 
curred in  that  part  of  the  world,  Sept.  30,  B.C.  610.  . 

+  13.  Read «]SJ-|J3D  "Thine  high  places"  for  TpID^  N? 
"  without  price  "  ;  and  transpose  nSlOnS  (xvii.  3). 

%  14.  Read  "l^m^yni  "and  I  will  make  thee  serve  "(xvii. 
4)  for  ^m^yni  "and  I  will  make  to  pass  through.  .  ." 

The  third  member  is  a  quotation  from  Deut.  xxxii.  22. 

In  the  fourth,  read  DPiyPJ?  "  for  ever  "  (xvii.  4)  instead  of 

D3^?y  "  upon  you." 

§  The  tone  of  all  this  indicates  that  the  prophet  was  no 
novice  in  his  office.  It  does  not  suit  the  time  of  Josiah: 
but  agrees  verj"-  well  with  the  time  of  confusion  and 
popular  dismay  which  followed  his  death.  That  event 
must  have  brought  great  discredit  upon  Jeremiah  and 
upon  all  who  had  been  instrumental  in  the  religious 
changes  of  his  reign. 


The  next  two  verses  answer  this  burst  of  grief 
and  despair: 

"  Said  lahvah.  Thine  oppression  shall  be  for  good  ; 
I  will  make  the  foe  thy  suppliant  in  time  of  evil  and  in 

time  of  distress. 
Can  one  break  iron, 
Iron  from  the  north,  and  brass? " 

In  other  words,  faith  counsels  patience,  and 
assures  the  prophet  that  all  things  work  together 
for  good  to  them  that  love  God.  The  wrongs 
and  bitter  treatment  which  he  now  endures  will 
only  enchance  his  triumph  when  the  truth  of 
his  testimony  is  at  last  confirmed  by  events,  and 
they  who  now  scoff  at  his  message  come  humbly 
to  beseech  his  prayers.  The  closing  lines  refer, 
with  grave  irony,  to  that  unflinching  firmness, 
that  inflexible  resolution,  which,  as  a  messenger 
of  God,  he  was  called  upon  to  maintain.  He 
is  reminded  of  what  he  had  undertaken  at  the 
outset  of  his  career,  and  of  the  Divine  Word 
which  made  him  "  a  pillar  of  iron  and  walls  of 
brass  against  all  the  land  "  (i.  18).  Is  it  possible 
that  the  pillar  of  iron  can  be  broken,  and  the 
walls  of  brass  beaten  down  by  the  present  as- 
sault? 

There  is  a  pause,  and  then  the  prophet  vehe- 
mently pleads  his  own  cause  with  lahvah.  Smart- 
ing with  the  sense  of  personal  wrong,  he  urges 
that  his  suffering  is  for  the  Lord's  own  sake; 
that  consciousness  of  the  Divine  calling  has 
dominated  his  entire  life,  ever  since  his  dedica- 
tion to  the  prophetic  office;  and  that  the  honoiir 
of  lahvah  requires  his  vindication  upon  his 
heartless  and  hardened  adversaries. 

"  T/iote  knowest,  lahvah! 
Remember  me,  and  visit  me,  and  avenge  me  on  my 

persecutors. 
Take  me  not  away  in  thy  longsuflfering ; 
Regard  my  bearing  of  reproach  for  Thee. 

"  Thy  words  were  found,  and  I  did  eat  them, 
And  it  became  to  me  a  joy  and  mine  heart's  gladness  ; 
For    I    was    called   by    Thy    Name,  O  lahvah,  God  of 
Sabaoth ! 

*'  I  sate  not  in  the  gathering  of  the  mirthful,  nor  rejoiced ; 
Because  of  Thine  hand  I  sate  solitary, 
For  with  indignation  Thou  didst  fill  me. 

"  Why  hath  my  pain  become  perpetual, 
And  my  stroke  malignant,  incurable? 
Wilt  Triou  indeed  become  to  me  like  a  delusive  stream. 
Like  waters  which  are  not  lasting?  " 

The  pregnant  expression,  "  Thou  knowest, 
lahvah!  "  does  not  refer  specially  to  anything 
that  has  been  already  said;  but  rather  lays  the 
whole  case  before  God  in  a  single  word.  The 
Thou  is  emphatic;  Thou,  Who  knowest  all  things, 
knowest  my  heinous  wrongs:  Thou  knowest  and 
seest  it  all,  though  the  whole  world  beside  be 
blind  with  passion  and  self-regard  and  sin  (Ps. 
X.  11-14).  Thou  knowest  how  pressing  is  my 
need;  therefore  "  Take  me  not  away  in  Thy  long- 
suffering:"  sacrifice  not  the  life  of  Thy  servant 
to  the  claims  of  forbearance  with  his  enemies 
and  Thine.  The  petition  shows  how  great  was 
the  peril  in  which  the  prophet  perceived  himself 
to  stand:  he  believes  that  if  God  delay  to  strike 
down^his  adversaries,  that  longsuffering  will  be 
fatal   to  his  own  life. 

The  strength  of  his  case  is  that  he  is  per- 
secuted because  he  is  faithful;  he  bears  reproach 
for  God.  He  has  not  abused  his  high  calling  for 
the  sake  of  worldly  advantage:  he  has  not  prosti- 
tuted the  name  of  prophet  to  the  vile  ends  of 
pleasing  the  people,  and  satisfying  personal 
covetousness.     He     has     not     feigned     smooth 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.] 


THE    DROUGHT. 


prophecies,  misleading  his  hearers  with  flattering 
falsehood;  but  he  has  considered  the  privilege  of 
being  called  a  prophet  of  lahvah  as  in  itself  an 
all-sufficient  reward;  and  when  the  Divine  Word 
came  to  him,  he  has  eagerly  received,  and  fed 
his  inmost  soul  upon  that  spiritual  aliment,  which 
was  at  once  his  sustenance  and  his  deepest  joy. 
Other  joys,  for  the  Lord's  sake,  he  has  abjured. 
He  has  withdrawn  himself  even  from  harmless 
mirth,  that  in  silence  and  solitude  he  might  listen 
intently  to  the  inward  Voice,  and  reflect  with 
indignant  sorrow  upon  the  revelation  of  his  peo- 
ple's corruption.  "  Because  of  Thine  Hand  " — 
under  Thy  influence;  conscious  of  the  impulse 
and  operation  of  thy  informing  Spirit; — "  I  sate 
solitary;  for  with  indignation  Thou  didst  fill  me." 
The  man  whose  eye  has  caught  a  glimpse  of 
eternal  Truth,  is  apt  to  be  dissatisfied  with  the 
shows  of  things;  and  the  lighthearted  merriment 
of  the  world  rings  hollow  upon  the  ear  that 
listens  for  the  Voice  of  God.  And  the  revelation 
of  sin — the  discovery  of  all  that  ghastly  evil  which 
lurks  beneath  the  surface  of  smooth  society — 
the  appalling  vision  of  the  grim  skeleton  hiding 
its  noisome  decay  behind  the  mask  of  smiles 
and  gaiety;  the  perception  of  the  hideous  incon- 
gruity of  revelling  over  a  grave;  has  driven 
others,  besides  Jeremiah,  to  retire  into  them- 
selves, and  to  avoid  a  world  from  whose  evil 
they  revolted,  and  whose  foreseen  destruction 
they  deplored. 

The  whole  passage  is  an  assertion  of  the 
prophet's  integrity  and  consistency,  with  which, 
it  is  suggested,  that  the  failure  which  has  at- 
tended his  efiforts,  and  the  serious  Reril  in  which 
he  stands,  are  morally  inconsistent,  and  para- 
doxical in  view  of  the  Divine  disposal  of  events. 
Here,  in  fact,  as  elsewhere,  Jeremiah  has  freely 
opened  his  heart,  and  allowed  us  to  see  the  whole 
process  of  his  spiritual  conflict  in  the  agony  of 
his  moments  of  doubt  and  despair.  It  is  an 
argument  of  his  own  perfect  sincerity;  and,  at 
the  same  time,  it  enables  us  to  assimilate  the  les- 
son of  his  experience,  and  to  profit  by  the 
heavenly  guidance  he  received,  far  more  effec- 
tually than  if  he  had  left  us  ignorant  of  the 
painful  struggles  at  the  cost  of  which  that  guid- 
ance was  won. 

The  seeming  injustice  or  indifference  of  Provi- 
dence is  a  problem  which  recurs  to  thoughtful 
minds  in  all  generations  of  men. 

"  O,  goddes  cruel,  that  governe 
This  world  with  byndyng  of  youre  word  eterne  .  .  . 
What  governance  is  in  youre  prescience 
That  gilteles  tormenteth  innocence?  .... 
Alas !  I  see  a  serpent  or  a  theif. 
That  many  a  trewe  man  hath  doon  mescheif, 
Gon  at  his  large,  and  wher  him  luste  may  turne ; 
But  I  moste  be  in  prisoun." 

That  such  apparent  anomalies  are  but  a  pass- 
ing trial,  from  which  persistent  faith  will  emerge 
victorious  in  the  present  life,  is  the  general  an- 
swer of  the  Old  Testament  to  the  doubts  which 
they  suggest'.  The  only  sufficient  explanation 
was  reserved,  to  be  revealed  by  Him,  who,  in  the 
fulness  of  time,  "  brought  life  and  immortality 
to  light." 

The  thought  which  restored  the  failing  con- 
fidence and  courage  of  Jeremiah  was  the  reflec- 
tion that  such  complaints  were  unworthy  of  one 
called  to  be  a  spokesman  for  the  Highest;  that 
the  supposition  of  the  possibility  of  the  Fountain 
of  Living  Waters  failing  like  a  winter  torrent, 
that  runs  dry  in  the  summer  heats,  was  an  act 
of  unfaithfulness  that  merited  reproof;  and  that 


the  true  God  could  not  fail  to  protect  His  mes- 
senger, and  to  secure  the  triumph  of  truth  in  the 
end. 

"  To  this  lahvah  said  thus  : 
If  thou  come  again, 

I  will  make  thee  again  to  stand  before  Me ; 
And  if  thou  utter  that  is  precious  rather  tht.n  that  is 

vile. 
As  My  mouth  shalt  thou  become  : 
They  shall  return  unto  thee. 
But  Thou  shalt  not  return  unto  them. 

"  And  I  will  make  thee  to  this  people  an  embattled  wall  of 

brass ; 
And  they  shall  fight  against  thee,  but  not  overcome 

thee, 
For  I  will  be  with  thee  to  help  thee  and  to  save  thee  ; 
It  is  lahvah's   vord. 

And  I  will  save  thee  out  of  the  grasp  of  the  wicked, 
And  will  ransom  thee  out  of  the  hand  of  the  terrible." 

In  the  former  strophe,  the  inspired  poet  set 
forth  the  claims  of  the  psychic  man,  and  poured 
out  his  heart  before  God.  Now  he  recognises  a 
Word  of  God  in  the  protest  of  h_;s  better  feeling. 
He  sees  that  where  he  remains  true  to  himself, 
he  will  also  stand  near  to  his  God.  Hence 
springs  the  hope,  which  he  cannot  renounce, 
that  God  will  protect  His  accepted  servant  in  the 
execution  of  the  Divine  commands.  Thus  the 
discords  are  resolved;  and  the  prophet's  spirit 
attains  to  peace,  after  struggling  through  the 
storm. 

It  was  an  outcome  of  earnest  prayer,  of  an 
unreserved  exposure  of  his  inmost  heart  before 
God.  What  a  marvel  it  is — that  instinct  of 
prayer!  To  think  that  a  being  whose  visible  life 
has  its  beginning  and  its  end,  a  being  who  mani- 
festly shares  possession  of  this  earth  with  the 
brute  creation,  and  breathes  the  same  air,  and 
partakes  of  the  same  elements  with  them  for 
the  sustenance  of  his  body;  who  is  organised 
upon  the  same  general  plan  as  they,  has  the 
same  principal  members  discharging  the  same 
essential  functions  in  the  economy  of  his  bodily 
system;  a  being  who  is  born  and  eats  and  drinks 
and  sleeps  and  dies  like  all  other  animals; — that 
this  being  and  this  being  only  of  all  the  multi- 
tudinous kinds  of  animated  creatures,  should 
have  and  exercise  a  faculty  of  looking  off  and 
above  the  visible  which  appears  to  be  the  sole 
realm  of  actual  existence,  and  of  holding  com- 
munion with  the  Unseen!  That,  following 
what  seems  to  be  an  original  impulse  of  his  na- 
ture, he  should  stand  in  greater  awe  of  this  In- 
visible than  any  power  that  is  palpable  to  sense; 
should  seek  to  win  its  favour,  crave  its  help  in 
times  of  pain  and  conflict  and  peril:  should  pro- 
fessedly live,  not  according  to  the  bent  of  com- 
mon nature  and  the  appetites  inseparable  from 
his  bodily  structure,  but  according  to  the  will 
and  guidance  of  that  Unseen  Power!  Surely 
there  is  here  a  consummate  marvel.  And  the 
wonder  of  it  does  not  diminish  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  this  instinct  of  turning  to  an 
unseen  Guide  and  Arbiter  of  events  is  not  pe- 
culiar to  any  particular  section  of  the  human 
race.  Wide  and  manifold  as  are  the  differences 
which  characterise  and  divide  the  families  of 
man,  all  races  possess  in  common  the  apprehen- 
sion of  the  Unseen  and  the  instinct  of  prayer. 
The  oldest  records  of  humanity  bear  witness  to 
its  primitive  activity,  and  whatever  is  known  of 
human  history  combines  with  what  is  known  of 
the  character  and  workings  of  the  human  mind 
to  teach  us  that  as  prayer  has  never  been  un- 
known, so  it  is  never  likel}'  to  become  obsolete. 

May   we   not   recognise   in   this   great   fact   of 


90 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


human  nature  a  sure  index  of  a  great  correspond- 
ing truth?  Can  we  avoid  taking  it  as  a  clear 
token  of  the  reality  of  revelation;  as  a  kind  of 
immediate  and  spontaneous  evidence  on  the  part 
of  nature  that  there  is  and  always  has  been  in 
this  lower  world  some  positive  knowledge  of  that 
which  far  transcends  it,  some  real  apprehension 
of  the  mystery  that  enfolds  the  universe?  a 
knowledge  and  an  apprehension  which,  however 
imperfect  and  fragmentary,  however  fitful  and 
fluctuating,  however  blurred  in  outline  and  lost 
in  infinite  shadow,  is  yet  incomparably  more  and 
belter  than  none  at  all.  Are  we  not,  in  short, 
morally  driven  upon  the  conviction  that  this 
powerful  instinct  of  our  nature  is  neither  blind 
nor  aimless;  that  its  Object  is  a  true,  substantive 
Being;  and  that  this  Being  has  discovered,  and 
yet  discovers,  some  precious  glimpses  of  Him- 
self and  His  essential  character  to  the  spirit  of 
mortal  man?  It  must  be  so,  unless  we  admit 
that  the  soul's  dearest  desires  are  a  mocking 
illusion,  that  hef  aspirations  towards  a  truth  and 
a  goodness  of  superhuman  perfection  are  moon- 
shine and  madness.  It  cannot  be  nothingness 
that  avails  to  evoke  the  deepest  and  purest  emo- 
tions of  our  nature;  not  mere  vacuity  and  chaos, 
wearing  the  semblance  of  an  azure  heaven.  It 
is  not  into  a  measureless  waste  of  outer  darkness 
that  we  reach  forth  trembling  hands. 

Surely  the  spirit  of  denial  is  the  spirit  that  fell 
from  heaven,  and  the  best  and  highest  of  man's 
thoughts  aim  at  and  afifirm  something  positive, 
something  that  is,  and  the  soul  thirsts  after  God, 
the  Living  God. 

We  hear  much  in  these  days  of  our  physical 
nature.  The  microscopic  investigations  of 
science  leave  nothing  unexamined,  nothing  un- 
explored, so  far  as  the  visible  organism  is  con- 
cerned. Rays  from  many  distinct  sources  con- 
verge to  throw  an  ever-increasing  light  upon  the 
mysteries  of  our  bodily  constitution.  In  all 
this,  science  presents  to  the  devout  mind  a  valu- 
able subsidiary  revelation  of  the  power  and  good- 
ness of  the  Creator.  But  science  cannot  advance 
alone  one  step  beyond  the  things  of  time  and 
sense;  her  facts  belong  exclusively  to  the  material 
order  of  existence;  her  cognition  is  limited  to 
the  various  modes  and  conditions  of  force  that 
constitute  the  realm  of  sight  and  touch;  she  can- 
not climb  above  these  to  a  higher  plane  of  being. 
And  small  blame  it  is  to  science  that  she  thus 
lacks  the  power  of  overstepping  her  natural 
boundaries.  The  evil  begins  when  the  men  of 
science  venture,  in  her  much-abused  name,  to 
ignore  and  deny  realities  not  amenable  to  scien- 
tific tests,  and  immeasurably  transcending  all 
merely  physical  standards  and  methods. 

Neither  the  natural  history  nor  the  physiology 
of  man,  nor  both  together,  are  competent  to  give 
a  complete  account  of  his  marvellous  and  many- 
sided  being.  Yet  some  thinkers  appear  to  im- 
agine that  when  a  place  has  been  assigned  him  in 
the  animal  kingdom,  and  his  close  relationship 
to  forms  below  him  in  the  scale  of  life  has  been 
demonstrated;  when  every  tissue  and  structure 
has  been  analysed,  and  every  organ  described 
and  its  function  ascertained;  then  the  last  word 
has  been  spoken,  and  the  subject  exhausted. 
Those  unique  and  distinguishing  faculties  by 
which  all  this  amazing  work  of  observation, 
comparison,  reasoning,  has  been  accomplished, 
appear  either  to  be  left  out  of  the  account  alto- 
gether, or  to  be  handled  with  a  meagre  inade- 
quacy of  treatment  that  contrasts  in  the  strongest 


manner  with  the  fulness  and  the  elaboration 
which  mark  the  other  discussion.  And  the  more 
this  physical  aspect  of  our  composite  nature  is 
emphasised;  the  more  urgently  it  is  insisted  that, 
somehow  or  other,  all  that  is  in  man  and  all  that 
comes  of  man  may  be  explained  on  the  assump- 
tion that  he  is  the  natural  climax  of  the  animal 
creation,  a  kind  of  educated  and  glorified  brute 
— that  and  nothing  more; — the  harder  it  becomes 
to  give  any  rational  account  of  those  facts  of  his 
nature  which  are  commonly  recognised  as  spirit- 
ual, and  among  them  of  this  instinct  of  prayer 
and  its  Object. 

Under  these  discouraging  circumstances,  men 
are  fatally  prone  to  seek  escape  from  their  self- 
involved  dilemma  by  a  hardy  denial  of  what 
their  methods  have  failed  to  discover  and  their 
favourite  theories  to  explain.  The  soul  and  God 
are  treated  as  mere  metaphysical  expressions,  or 
as  popular  designations  of  the  unknown  causes 
of  phenomena;  and  prayer  is  declared  to  be  an 
act  of  foolish  superstition  which  persons  of  cul- 
ture have  long  since  outgrown.  Sad  and  strange 
this  result  is;  but  it  is  also  the  natural  outcome 
of  an  initial  error,  which  is  none  the  less  real  be- 
cause unperceived.  Men  "  seek  the  living  among 
the  dead";  they  expect  to  find  the  soul  by  post 
mortem  examination,  or  to  see  God  by  help  of  an 
improved  telescope.  They  fail  and  are  disap- 
pointed, though  they  have  little  right  to  be  so, 
for  "  spiritual  things  are  discerned  spiritually," 
and  not  otherwise. 

In  speculating  on  the  reason  of  this  lamen- 
table issue,  we  must  not  forget  that  there  is  such 
a  thing  as  an  unpurified  intellect  as  well  as  a  cor- 
rupt and  unregenerate  heart.  Sin  is  not  re- 
stricted to  the  affections  of  the  lower  nature;  it 
has  also  invaded  the  realm  of  thought  and 
reason.  The  very  pursuit  of  knowledge,  noble 
and  elevating  as  it  is  commonly  esteemed,  is  not 
without  its  dangers  of  self-delusion  and  sin. 
Wherever  the  love  of  self  is  paramount,  wher- 
ever the  object  really  sought  is  the  delight,  the 
satisfaction,  the  indulgence  of  self,  no  matter 
in  which  of  the  many  departments  of  human  life 
and  action,  there  is  sin.  It  is  certain  that  the  in- 
tellectual consciousness  has  its  own  peculiar 
pleasures,  and  those  of  the  keenest  and  most 
transporting  character;  certain  that  the  incessant 
pursuit  of  such  pleasures  may  come  to  absorb 
the  entire  energies  of  a  man,  so  that  no  room  is 
left  for  the  culture  of  humility  or  love  or  wor- 
ship. Everything  is  sacrificed  to  what  is  called 
the  pursuit  of  truth,  but  is  in  sober  fact  a  pas- 
sionate prosecution  of  private  pleasure.  It  is 
not  truth  that  is  so  highly  valued;  it  is  the  keen 
excitement  of  the  race,  and  not  seldom  the 
plaudits  of  the  spectators  when  the  goal  is  won. 
Such  a  career  may  be  as  thoroughly  selfish  and 
sinful  and  alienated  from  God  as  a  career  of  com- 
mon wickedness.  And  thus  employed  or  en- 
thralled, no  intellectual  gifts,  however  splendid, 
can  bring  a  man  to  the  discernment  of  spiritual 
truth.  Not  self-pleasing  and  foolish  vanity  and 
arrogant  self-assertion,  but  a  self-renouncing 
iiunuiity,  an  inward  purity  from  idols  of  every 
kind,  a  reverence  of  truth  as  divine,  are  indis- 
pensable conditions  of  the  perception  of  things 
spiritual. 

The  representation  which  is  often  given  is  a 
mere  travesty.  Believers  in  God  do  not  want  to 
alter  His  laws  by  their  prayers — neither  His  laws 
physical,  nor  His  laws  moral  and  spiritual.  It  is 
their  chief  desire  to  be  brought  into  submission 


Jercmiali  xiv.,  xv.J 


THE    DROUGHT. 


91 


or  perfect  obedience  to  the  sum  of  His  laws. 
They  ask  their  Father  in  heaven  to  lead  and 
teach  them,  to  supply  their  wants  in  His  own 
way,  because  He  is  their  Father;  because  "  It  is 
He  that  made  us,  and  His  we  are."  Surely,  a 
reasonable  request,  and  grounded  in  reason. 

To  a  plain  man,  seeking  for  arguments  to 
justify  prayer  may  well  seem  like  seeking  a 
justification  of  breathing  or  eating  and  drinking 
and  sleeping,  or  any  other  natural  function.  Our 
Lord  never  does  anything  of  the  kind,  because 
His  teaching  takes  for  granted  the  ultimate  prev- 
alence of  common  sense,  in  spite  of  all  the 
subtleties  and  airspun  perplexities  in  which  a 
speculative  mind  delights  to  lose  itself.  So  long 
as  man  has  other  wants  than  those  which  he  can 
himself  supply,  prayer  will  be  their  natural  ex- 
pression. 

If  there  be  a  spiritual  as  distinct  from  a  mate- 
rial world,  the  difficulty  to  the  ordinary  mind  is 
not  to  conceive  of  their  contact  but  of  their  abso- 
lute isolation  from  each  other.  This  is  surely  the 
inevitable  result  of  our  own  individual  experi- 
ence, of  the  intimate  though  not  indissoluble 
union  of  body  and  spirit  in  every  living  person. 

How,  it  may  be  asked,  can  we  really  think  of 
his  Maker  being  cut  off  from  man,  or  man  from 
his  Maker?  God  were  not  God,  if  He  left  man 
to  himself.  But  not  only  are  His  wisdom,  justice, 
and  love  manifested  forth  in  the  beneficent  ar- 
rangements of  the  world  in  which  we  find  our- 
selves; not  only  is  He  "  kind  to  the  unjust  and 
the  unthankful."  In  pain  and  loss  He  quickens 
our  sense  of  Himself  (cf.  xiv.  19-22).  Even  in 
the  first  moments  of  angry  surprise  and  revolt, 
that  sense  is  quickened;  we  rebel,  not  against  an 
inanimate  world  or  an  impersonal  law,  but 
against  a  Living  and  Personal  Being,  whom  we 
acknowledge  as  the  Arbiter  of  our  destinies,  and 
whose  wisdom  and  love  and  power  we  affect  for 
the  time  to  question,  but  cannot  really  gainsay. 
The  whole  of  our  experience  tends  to  this  end — 
to  the  cohtinual  rousing  of  our  spiritu^al  con- 
sciousness. There  is  no  interference,  no  isolated 
and  capricious  interposition  or  interruption  of 
order  within  or  without  us.  Within  and  with- 
out us.  His  Will  is  always  energising,  always 
manifesting  forth  His  Being,  encouraging  our 
confidence,  demanding  our  obedience  and  hom- 
age. 

Thus  prayer  has  its  Divine  as  well  as  its  human 
side;  it  is  the  Holy  Spirit  drawing  the  soul,  as 
well  as  the  soul  drawing  nigh  unto  God.  The 
case  is  like  the  action  and  reaction  of  the  magnet 
and  the  steel.  And  so  prayer  is  not  a  foolish  act 
of  unauthorised  presumption,  not  a  rash  effort 
to  approach  unapproachable  and  absolutely  iso- 
lated Majesty.  Whenever  man  truly  prays,  his 
Divine  King  has  already  extended  the  sceptre  of 
His  mercy,  and  bidden  him  speak. 

xvi.-xvii.  After  the  renewal  of  the  promise 
there  is  a  natural  pause,  marked  by  the  formula 
with  which  the  present  section  opens.  When  the 
prophet  had  recovered  his  firmness,  through  the 
inspired  and  inspiring  reflections  which  took  pos- 
session of  his  soul  after  he  had  laid  bare  his  in- 
most heart  before  God  (xv.  20,  21),  he  was  in  a 
position  to  receive  further  guidance  from  above. 
What  now  lies  before  us  is  the  direction,  which 
came  to  him  as  certainly  Divine,  for  the  regula- 
tion of  his  own  future  behaviour  as  the  chosen 
minister  of  lahvah  at  this  crisis  in  the  history 
of  his  people.  "  And  there  fell  a  word  of  lahvah 
unto  me,  saying:  Thou  shalt  not  take  thee  a  wife; 


that  thou  get  not  sons  and  daughters  in  this 
place."  Such  a  prohibition  reveals,  with  the  ut- 
most possible  clearness  and  emphasis,  the  gravity 
of  the  existing  situation.  It  implies  that  the 
"  peace  and  permanence,"  so  glibly  predicted  by 
Jeremiah's  opponents,  will  never  more  be  known 
by  that  sinful  generation.  "  This  place,"  the 
holy  place  which  lahvah  had  "  chosen,  to  es- 
tablish His  name  there,"  as  the  Book  of  the  Law 
so  often  describes  it;  "  this  place,"  which 
had  been  inviolable  to  the  fierce  hosts  of 
the  Assyrian  in  the  time  of  Isaiah  (Isa.  xxxvii. 
33),  was  now  no  more  a  sure  refuge,  but  doomed 
to  utter  and  speedy  destruction.  To  beget  sons 
and  daughters  there  was  to  prepare  more  victims 
for  the  tooth  of  famine,  and  the  pangs  of  pesti- 
lence, and  the  devouring  sword  of  a  merciless 
conqueror.  It  was  to  fatten  the  soil  with  un- 
buried  carcases,  and  to  spread  a  hideous  banquet 
for  birds  and  beasts  of  prey.  Children  and 
parents  were  doomed  to  perish  together;  and 
lahvah's  witness  was  to  keep  himself  unencum- 
bered by  the  sweet  cares  of  husband  and  father, 
that  he  might  be  wholly  free  for  his  solemn 
duties  of  menace  and  warning,  and  be  ready  for 
every  emergency. 

"  For  thus  hath  lahvah  said  : 

Concerning  the  sons  and  concerning  the  daughters  that 
are  born  in  this  place. 

And  concerning  their  mothers  that  bear  them. 

And  concerning  their  fathers  that  beget  them,  in  this 
land  : 

By  deaths  of  agony  shall  they  die  ; 

They  shall  not  be  mourned  nor  buried  ; 

For  dung  on  the  face  of  the  ground  shall  they  serve  ; 

And  by  the  sword  and  by  the  famine  shall  they  be  for- 
done : 

And  their  carcase  shall  serve  for  food 

To  the  fowls  of  the  air  and  to  the  beasts  of  the  earth  " 
(xvi.  3-4). 

The  "  deaths  of  agony  "  seem  to  indicate  the 
pestilence,  which  always  ensued  upon  the  scarcity 
and  vile  quality  of  food,  and  the  confinement  of 
multitudes  within  the  narrow  bounds  of  a  be- 
sieged city  (see  Josephus'  well-known  account  of 
the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem). 

The  attitude  of  solitary  watchfulness  and  strict 
separation,  which  the  prophet  thus  perceived  to 
be  required  by  circumstances,  was  calculated  to 
be  a  warning  of  the  utmost  significance,  among 
a  people  who  attached  the  highest  importance 
to  marriage  and  the  permanence  of  the  family. 

It  proclaimed  more  loudly  than  words  could 
do,  the  prophet's  absolute  conviction  that  off 
spring  was  no  pledge  of  permanence;  that  uni- 
versal death  was  hanging  over  a  condemned  na- 
tion. But  not  only  this.  It  marks  a  point  of 
progress  in  the  prophet's  spiritual  life.  The 
crisis,  through  which  we  have  seen  him  pass,  has 
purged  his  mental  vision.  He  no  longer  re- 
pines at  his  dark  lot;  no  longer  half  envies  the 
false  prophets,  who  may  win  the  popular  love  by 
pleasing  oracles  of  peace  and  well-being;  no 
longer  complains  of  the  Divine  Will,  which  has 
laid  such  a  burden  upon  him.  He  sees  now 
that  his  part  is  to  refuse  even  natural  and  inno- 
cent pleasures  for  the  Lord's  sake;  to  foresee 
calamity  and  ruin;  to  denounce  unceasingly  the 
sin  he  sees  around  him;  to  sacrifice  a  tender  and 
affectionate  heart  to  a  life  of  rigid  asceticism; 
and  he  manfully  accepts  his  part.  He  knows 
that  he  stands  alone — the  last  fortress  of  truth  in 
a  world  of  falsehood:  and  that  for  truth  it  be- 
comes a  man  to  surrender  his  all. 

That  which  follows  tends  to  complete  the 
prophet's  social  isolation.     He  is  to  give  no  sign 


92 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


of  sympathy  in  the  common  joys  and  sorrows  of 
his  kind. 

'*  For  thus  hath  lahvah  said  : 
Enter  thou  not  into  the  house  of  mourning, 
Nor  go  to  lament,  nor  comfort  thou  them  : 
For  Ihave  taken  away  My  friendship  from  this  people 

('Tis  lahvah 's  utterance  !) 
The  lovingkindness  and  the  compassion  ; 
And  old  and  young  shall  die  in  this  land, 
They  shall  not  be  buried,  and  men   shall  not  wail  for 

them  ; 
Nor  shall  a  man  cut  himself,  nor  make  himself  bald,  for 

them  : 
Neither  shall  men  deal  out  bread  to  them  in  mourning. 
To  comfort  a  man  over  the  dead  ; 

Nor  shall  they  give  them  to  drink  the  cup  of  consolation. 
Over  a  man's  father  and  over  his  mother. 

"  And  the  house  of  feasting  thou  shalt  not  enter, 
To  sit  with  them  to  eat  and  to  drink. 
For  thus  hath  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel,  said  : 
Lo,  I  am  about  to  make  to  cease  from  this  place. 
Before  your  own  eyes  and  in  your  own  days. 
Voice  of  mirth  and  voice  of  gladness. 
The  voice  of  the  bridegroom  and  the  voice  of  the  bride." 

Acting  as  prophet,  that  is,  as  one  whose  public 
actions  were  symbolical  of  a  Divine  intent,  Jere- 
miah is  henceforth  to  stand  aloof,  on  occasions 
when  natural  feeling  would  suggest  participation 
in  the  outward  life  of  his  friends  and  acquaint- 
ance. He  is  to  quell  the  inward  stirrings  of  af- 
fection and  sympathy,  and  to  abstain  from  play- 
ing his  part  in  those  demonstrative  lamentations 
over  the  dead,  which  the  immemorial  custom  and 
sentiment  of  his  country  regarded  as  obligatory; 
and  this,  in  order  to  signify  unmistakably  that 
what  thus  appeared  to  be  the  state  of  his  own 
feelings,  was  really  the  aspect  under  which  God 
would  shortly  appear  to  a  nation  perishing  in  its 
guilt.  "  Enter  not  into  the  house  of  mourning 
.  .  .  for  I  have  taken  away  My  friendship  from 
this  people,  the  lovingkindness  and  the  compas- 
sion." An  estranged  and  alienated  God  would 
view  the  coming  catastrophe  with  the  cold  indif- 
ference of  exact  justice.  And  the  consequence 
of  the  Divine  aversion  would  be  a  calamity  so 
overwhelming  that  the  dead  would  be  left  with- 
out those  rites  of  burial  which  the  feeling  and 
conscience  of  all  races  of  mankind  have  always 
been  careful  to  perform.  There  should  be  no 
burial,  much  less  ceremonial  lamentation,  and 
those  more  serious  modes  of  evincing  grief  by 
disfigurement  of  the  person,*  which,  like  tearing 
the  hair  and  rending  the  garments,  are  natural 
tokens  of  the  first  distraction  of  bereavement. 
Not  for  wife  or  child  (J^^:  see  Gen.  xxiii.  3),  nor 
for  father  or  mother  should  the  funeral  feast  be 
held;  for  men's  hearts  would  grow  hard  at  the 
daily  spectacle  of  death,  and  at  last  there  would 
be  no  survivors. 

In  like  manner,  the  prophet  is  forbidden  to 
enter  as  guest  "  the  house  of  feasting."  He  is 
not  to  be  seen  at  the  marriage-feast, — that  occa- 
sion of  highest  rejoicing,  the  very  type  and  ex- 
ample of  innocent  and  holy  mirth;  to  testify  by 
his  abstention  that  the  day  of  judgment  was 
swiftly  approaching,  which  would  desolate  all 
homes,  and  silence  for  evermore  all  sounds  of 
joy  and  gladness  in  the  ruined  city.  And  it  is 
expressly  added  that  the  blow  will  fall  "  before 
your  own  eyes  and  in  your  own  days;"  showing 
that  the  hour  of  doom  was  very  near,  and  would 
no  more  be  delayed. 

In  all  this,  it  is  noticeable  that  the  Divine  an- 

*  Practices  forbidden.  Lev.  xxi.  5;  Deut.  xiv.  i.  Jere- 
miah mentions  them  as  ordinary  signs  of  mourning,  and 
doubtless  they  were  general  in  his  time.  An  ancient 
usage,  having  its  root  in  natural  feeling,  is  not  easily 
extirpated. 


swer  appears  to  bear  special  reference  to  the  pe- 
culiar terms  of  the  prophet's  complaint.  In  de- 
pairing  tones  he  had  cried  (xv.  10),  "  Woe's  me, 
my  mother,  that  thou  didst  bear  me!  "  and  novr 
he  is  himself  warned  not  to  take  a  wife  and  seek 
the  blessing  of  children.  The  outward  connec- 
tion here  may  be:  "  Let  it  not  be  that  thy  children 
speak  of  thee,  as  thou  hast  spoken  of  thy 
mother!"*  But  the  inner  link  of  thought  may 
rather  be  this,  that  the  prophet's  temporary,  un- 
faithfulness evinced  in  his  outcry  against  *God 
and  his  lament  that  ever  he  was  born  is  punished 
by  the  denial  to  him  of  the  joys  of  fatherhood — 
a  penalty  which  would  be  severe  to  a  loving, 
yearning  nature  like  his,  but  which  was  doubtless 
necessary  to  the  purification  of  his  spirit  from  all 
worldly  taint,  and  to  the  discipline  of  his  natural 
impatience  and  tendency  to  repine  under  the 
hand  of  God.  His  punishment,  like  that  of 
Moses,  may  appear  disproportionate  to  his  of- 
fence; but  God's  dealings  with  man  are  not  regu- 
lated by  any  mechanical  calculation  of  less  and 
more,  but  by  His  perfect  knowledge  of  the  needs 
of  the  case;  and  it  is  often  in  truest  mercy  that 
His  hand  strike  hard.  "  As  gold  in  the  furnace 
doth  He  try  them  ";  and  the  purest  metal  comes 
out  of  the  hottest  fire. 

Further,  it  is  not  the  least  prominent,  but  the 
leading  part  of  a  man's  nature  that  most  requires 
this  heavenly  discipline,  if  the  best  is  to  be  made 
of  it  that  can  be  made.  The  strongest  element, 
that  which  is  most  characteristic  of  the  person, 
that  which  constitutes  his  individuality,  is  the 
chosen  field  of  Divine  influence  and  operation; 
for  here  lies  the  greatest  need.  In  Jeremiah 
this  master  element  was  an  almost  feminine 
tenderness;  a  warmly  affectionate  disposition, 
craving  the  love  and  sympathy  of  his  fellows,  and 
recoiling  almost  in  agony  from  the  spectacle  of 
pain  and  sufi^ering.  And  therefore  it  was  that 
the  Divine  discipline  was  specially  applied  to  this 
element  in  the  prophet's  personality.  In  him,  as 
in  all  other  men,  the  good  was  mingled  with  evil, 
which,  if  not  purged  away,  might  spread  until  it 
spoiled  his  whole  nature.  It  is  not  virtue  to 
indulge  our  own  bent,  merely  because  it  pleases 
us  to  do  so;  nor  is  the  exercise  of  affection  any 
great  matter  to  an  affectionate  nature.  The  in- 
volved strain  of  selfishness  must  be  separated,  if 
any  naturally  good  gift  is  to  be  elevated  to  moral 
worth,  to  become  acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God. 
And  so  it  was  precisely  here,  in  his  most  sus- 
ceptible point,  that  the  sword  of  trial  pierced  the 
prophet  through.  He  was  saved  from  all  hazard 
of  becoming  satisfied  with  the  love  of  wife  and 
children,  and  forgetting  in  that  earthly  satisfac- 
tion the  love  of  his  God.  He  was  saved  from 
absorption  in  the  pleasures  of  friendly  intercourse 
with  neighbours,  from  passing  his  days  in  an 
agreeable  round  of  social  amenities;  at  a  time 
when  ruin  was  impending  over  his  country,  and 
well-nigh  ready  to  fall.  And  the  means  which 
God  chose  for  the  accomplishment  of  this  result 
were  precisely  those  of  which  the  prophet  had 
complained  (xv.  17) ;  his  social  isolation,  which 
though  in  part  a  matter  of  choice,  was  partly 
forced  upon  him  by  the  irritation  and  ill-will  of 
his  acquaintance.  It  is  now  declared  that  this 
trial  is  to  continue.  The  Lord  does  not  neces- 
sarily remove  a  trouble  when  entreated  to  do  it. 
He  manifests  His  love  by  giving  strength  to  bear 
it,  until  the  work  of  chastening  be  perfected. 

An  interruption  is  now  supposed,  such  as  may 
*  Naegelsbach. 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.] 


THE    DROUGHT. 


93 


often  have  occurred  in  the  course  of  Jeremiah's 
public  utterances.  The  audience  demands  to 
know  why  all  this  evil  is  ordained  to  fall  upon 
them.  "  What  is  our  guilt  and  what  our  tres- 
pass, that  we  have  trespassed  against  lahvah  our 
God?"  The  answer  is  a  twofold  accusation. 
Their  fathers  were  faithless  to  lahvah,  and  they 
have  outdone  their  fathers'  sin;  and  the  penalty 
will  be  expulsion  and  a  foreign  servitude. 

"  Because  your  fathers  forsook  Me  (It  is  lahvah's  word  !) 
And  went  after  other  gods,  and  served  them,  and  bowed 

down  to  them, 
And  Me  they  forsook,  and  My  teaching  they  observed 

not : 
And  ye  yourselves  (or.  as  for  you)  have  done  worse  than 

your  fathers ; 
And  lo,  ye  walk  each  after  the  stubbornness  of  his  evil 

heart. 
So  as  not  to  hearken  unto  Me. 
Therefore  will  I  hurl  you  from  off  this  land. 
On  to  the  land  tliat  ye  and  your  fathers  knew  not ; 
And  ye  may  serve  there  other  gods,  day  and  night, 
Since  I  will  not  grant  you  grace." 

The  damning  sin  laid  to  Israel's  charge  is 
idolatry,  with  all  the  moral  consequences  in- 
volved in  that  prime  transgression.  That  is  to 
say,  the  offence  consisted  not  barely  in  recognis- 
ing and  honouring  the  gods  of  the  nations  along 
with  their  own  God,  though  that  were  fault 
enough,  as  an  act  of  treason  against  the  sole  maj- 
esty of  Heaven;  but  it  was  aggravated  enor- 
mously by  the  moral  declension  and  depravity 
which  accompanied  this  apostasy.  They  and 
their  fathers  forsook  lahvah  "  and  kept  not  His 
teaching;  "  a  reference  to  the  Book  of  the  Law, 
considered  not  only  as  a  collection  of  ritual  and 
ceremonial  precepts  for  the  regulation  of  ex- 
ternal religion,  but  as  a  guide  of  life  and  conduct. 
And  there  had  been  a  progress  in  evil;  the  na- 
tion had  gone  from  bad  to  worse  with  fearful 
rapidity:  so  that  now  it  could  be  said  of  the  ex- 
isting generation  that  it  paid  no  heed  at  all  to 
the  monitions  which  lahvah  uttered  by  the  mouth 
of  His  prophet,  but  walked  simply  in  stubborn 
self-will  and  the  indulgence  of  every  corrupt  in- 
clination. And  here  too,  as  in  so  many  other 
cases,  the  sin  is  to  be  its  own  punishment.  The 
Book  of  the  Law  had  declared  that  revolt  from 
lahvah  should  be  punished  by  enforced  service 
of  strange  gods  in  a  strange  land  (Deut.  iv.  28. 
xxviii.  36,  64) ;  and  Jeremiah  repeats  this  threat, 
with  the  addition  of  a  tone  of  ironical  conces- 
son:  there,  in  your  bitter  banishment,  you  may 
have  your  wish  to  the  full;  you  may  serve  the 
foreign  gods,  and  that  without  intermission  (im- 
plying that  the  service  would  be  a  slavery). 

The  whole  theory  of  Divine  punishment  is  im- 
plicit in  these  few  words  of  the  prophet.  They 
who  sin  persistently  against  light  and  knowledge 
are  at  last  given  over  to  their  own  hearts'  lust, 
to  do  as  they  please,  without  the  gracious  check 
of  God's  inward  voice.  And  then  thcr:;  com»es 
a  strong  delusion,  so  thatvthey  believe  a  lie, 
and  take  evil  for  good  and  good  for  evil,  and 
hold  themselves  innocent  before  God,  when  their 
guilt  has  reached  its  climax;  so  that,  like  Jere- 
miah's hearers,  if  their  evil  be  denounced,  they 
can  ask  in  astonishment:  "  What  is  our  iniquity? 
or  what  is  our  trespass?  " 

They  are  so  ripe  in  sin  that  they  retain  no 
knowledge  of  it  as  sin,  but  hold  it  virtue. 

"  And  they,  so  perfect  is  their  misery. 
Not  once  perceive  their  foul  disfigurement. 
But  boast  themselves  more  comely  than  before." 

And  not  only  do  we  find  in  this  passage  a 
striking  instance  of  judicial  blindness  as  the  pen- 


alty of  sin.  We  may  see  also  in  the  penalty  pre- 
dicted for  the  Jews  a  plain  analogy  to  the  doc- 
trine that  the  permanence  of  the  sinful  state  in 
a  life  to  come  is  the  penalty  of  sin  in  the  pres- 
ent life.  "  He  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust 
still;  and  he  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still!  " 
and  know  himself  to  be  what  he  is. 

The  prophet's  dark  horizon  is  here  apparently 
lit  up  for  a  moment  by  a  gleam  of  hope.  The 
fourteenth  and  fifteenth  verses,  however,  with 
their  beautiful  promise  of  restoration,  really  be- 
long to  another  oracle,  whose  prevailing  tones 
are  quite  different  from  the  present  gloomy  fore- 
cast of  retribution  (xxiii.  7  sqq.).  Here  they 
interrupt  the  sense,  and  make  a  cleavage  in  the 
connection  of  thought,  which  can  only  be 
bridged  over  artificially,  by  the  suggestion  that 
the  import  of  the  two  verses  is  primarily  not 
consolatory  but  minatory;  that  is  to  say,  that 
they  threaten  Exile  rather  than  promise  Return; 
a  mode  of  understanding  the  two  verses  which 
does  manifest  violence  to  the  whole  form  of  ex- 
pression, and,  above  all,  to  their  obvious  force 
in  the  original  passage  from  which  they  have 
been  transferred  hither.  Probably  some  tran- 
scriber of  the  text  wrote  them  in  the  margin 
of  his  copy,  by  way  of  palliating  the  otherwise 
unbroken  gloom  of  this  oracle  of  coming  woe. 
Then,  at  some  later  time,  another  copyist,  sup- 
posing the  marginal  note  indicated  an  omission, 
incorporated  the  two  verses  in  his  transcription 
of  the  text,  where  they  have  remained  ever  since. 
(See  on  xxiii.  7,  8.) 

After  plainly  announcing  in  the  language  of 
Deuteronomy  the  expulsion  of  Judah  from  the 
land  which  they  had  desecrated  by  idolatry,  the 
prophet  develops  the  idea  in  his  own  poetic 
fashion;  representing  the  punishment  as  uni- 
versal, and  insisting  that  it  is  a  punishment,  and 
not  an  unmerited  misfortune. 

"  Lo,  I  am  about  to  send  many   fishers  (It   is  lahvah's 
word  !) 
And  they  shall  fish  them  ; 
And  afterwards  will  I  send  many  hunters. 
And  they  shall  hunt  them. 
From  off  every  mountain. 
And  from  off  every  hill. 
And  out  of  the  clefts  of  the  rocks." 

Like  silly  fish,  crowding  helplessly  one  over 
another  into  the  net,*  when  the  fated  moment 
arrives.  Judah  will  fall  an  easy  prey  to  the  de- 
stroyer. And  "  afterwards,"  to  ensure  complete- 
ness, those  who  have  survived  this  first  disaster 
will  be  hunted  like  wild  beasts,  out  of  all  the 
dens  and  caves  in  the  mountains,  the  Adullams 
and  Engedis,  where  they  have  found  a  refuge 
from  the  invader. 

There  is  clearly  reference  to  two  distinct  visi- 
tations of  wrath,  the  latter  more  deadly  than 
the  former;  else  why  the  use  of  the  emphatic 
note  of  time  "  afterwards  "  ?  If  we  understand 
by  the  "  fishing "  of  the  country  the  so-called 
first  captivity,  the  carrying  away  of  the  boy-king 
Jehoiachin  and  his  mother  and  his  nobles  and 
ten  thousand  principal  citizens,  by  Nebuchadrez- 
zar to  Babylon  (2  Kings  xxiv.  10  sqq.);  and  by 
the  "  hunting  "  the  final  catastrophe  in  the  time 
of  Zedekiah;  we  get,  as  we  shall  see,  a  probable 
explanation  of  a  difficult  expression  in  the 
eighteenth  verse,  which  cannot  otherwise  be  sat- 

*  The  figure  recalls  the  Persian  custom,  of  sweeping  off 
the  whole  population  of  an  island,  by  forming  a  line  and 
marching  over  it,  a  process  of  extermination  called  by 
the  Greek  writers o-aytji/eveiv,  "fishing  with  a  seine  or  drag- 
net "  (Herod.,  iii.  149,  iv.  9,  vi.  31). 


94 


THE    PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


isfactorily  accounted  for.  The  next  words  (ver. 
17)  refute  an  assumption,  implied  in  the  popular 
demand  to  know  wherein  the  guilt  of  the  nation 
consists,  that  lahvah  is  not  really  cognisant  of 
their  acts  of  apostasy. 

"  For  Mine  eyes  are  upon  all  their  ways, 
They  are  not  hidden  away  from  before  My  face  ; 
Nor  is  their  guilt  kept  secret  from  before  Mine  eyes." 

The  verse  is  thus  an  indirect  reply  to  the  ques- 
tions of  verse  10;  questions  which  in  some 
mouths  might  indicate  that  unconsciousness  of 
guilt  which  is  the  token  of  sin  finished  and  per- 
fected; in  others,  the  presence  of  that  unbelief 
which  doubts  whether  God  can,  or  at  least 
whether  He  does  regard  human  conduct.  But 
"  He  that  planted  the  ear.  can  He  not  hear? 
He  that  formed  the  eye,  can  He  not  see?"  (Ps. 
xciv.  9).  It  is  really  an  utterly  irrational  thought, 
that  sight,  and  hearing,  and  the  higher  faculties 
of  reflection  and  consciousness,  had  their  origin 
in  a  blind  and  deaf,  a  senseless  and  unconscious 
source  such  as  inorganic  matter,  whether  we 
consider  it  in  the  atom  or  in  the  enormous  mass 
of  an  embryo  system  of  stars. 

The  measure  of  the  penalty  is  now  assigned. 

*'  And  I  will  repay  first  the  double  of  their  guilt  and  their 

trespass 
For  that  they  profaned  My  land  with  the   carcases  of 

their  loathly  offerings. 
And  their  abominations  filled  Mine  heritage."  * 

"  I  will  repay  Urst."  The  term  "  first,"  which 
has  occasioned  much  perplexity  to  expositors, 
means  "  the  first  time  "  (Gen.  xxxviii.  28;  Dan. 
xi.  29),  and  refers,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  to  the 
first  great  blow,  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin,  of 
which  I  spoke  just  now;  an  occasion  which  is 
designated  again  (ver.  21),  by  the  expression 
"  this  once  "  or  rather  "  at  this  time."  And 
when  it  is  said  "  I  will  repay  the  double  of  their 
guilt  and  of  their  trespass,"  we  are  to  understand 
that  the  Divine  justice  is  not  satisfied  with  half 
measures;  the  punishment  of  sin  is  proportioned 
to  the  offence,  and  the  cup  of  self-entailed  mis- 
ery has  to  be  drained  to  the  dregs.  Even  peni- 
tence does  not  abolish  the  physical  and  temporal 
consequences  of  sin;  in  ourselves  and  in  others 
whom  we  have  influenced  they  continue — a  ter- 
rible and  ineffaceable  record  of  the  past.  The 
ancient  law  required  that  the  man  who  had 
wronged  his  neighbour  by  theft  or  fraud  should 
restore  double  (Ex.  xxii.  4,  7,  9);  and  thus  this 
expression  would  appear  to  denote  that  the  im- 
pending chastisement  would  be  in  strict  accord- 
ance with  the  recognised  rule  of  law  and  justice, 
and  that  Judah  must  repay  to  the  Lord  in  suf- 
fering the  legal  equivalent  for  her  offence.  In 
a  like  strain,  towards  the  end  of  the  Exile,  the 
great  prophet  of  the  captivity  comforts  Jerusa- 
lem with  the  announcement  that  "  her  hard  serv- 
ice is  accomplished,  her  punishment  is  held  suf- 
ficient; for  she  hath  received  of  lahvah's  hand 
twofold  for  all  her  trespasses  "  (Isa.  xl.  2).  The 
Divine  severity  is,  in  fact,  truest  mercy.  Only 
thus  does  mankind  learn  to  realise  "  the  exceed- 
ing sinfulness  of  sin,"  only  as  Judah  learned  the 
heinousness  of  desecrating  the  Holy  Land  with 
"  loathly  offerings  "  to  the  vile  Nature-gods,  and 
with  the  symbols  in  wood  and  stone  of  the 
cruel  and  obscene  deities  of  Canaan;  viz.  by  the 
fearful  issue  of  transgression,  the  lesson  of  a 
♦For  the  construction,  c/.  Gen.  i.  22  ;  Jer.  11.  11.  Or 
"With  their  abominations  they  filled,  etc.,"  a  double 
accusative. 


calamitous  experience,  confirming  the   ['^recasts 
of  its  inspired  prophets. 

"  lahvah  my  strength  and  my  stronghold  and  my  refuge 

in  the  day  of  distress  ! 
Unto  Thee  the  very  heathen  will  come  from  the  ends  of 

the  earth,  and  will  say  : 
'  Mere  fraud  did  our  fathers  receive  as  their  own, 
Mere  breath,  and  beings  among  whom  is  no  helper. 
Should  man  make  him  gods. 
When  such  things  are  not  gods?' 

"Therefore,  behold  I  am  about  to  let  them  know — 
And  this  time  will  I  let  them  know  My  hand  and  My 

might. 
And  they  shall  know  that  my  name  is  lahvah  !  " 

In  the  opening  words  Jeremiah  passionately 
recoils  from  the  very  mention  of  the  hateful 
idols,  the  loathly  creations,  the  lifeless  "  car- 
cases," which  his  people  have  put  in  the  place 
of  the  Living  God.  An  overmastering  access 
of  faith  lifts  him  off  the  low  ground  where  these 
dead  things  lie  in  their  helplessness,  and  bears 
him  in  spirit  to  lahvah,  the  really  and  eternally 
existing.  Who  is  his  "  strength  and  stronghold 
and  refuge  in  the  day  of  distress."  From  this 
height  he  takes  an  eagle  glance  into  the  dim 
future,  and  discerns — O  marvel  of  victorious 
faith! — that  the  very  heathen,  who  have  never  so 
much  as  known  the  Name  of  lahvah.  must  one 
day  be  brought  to  acknowledge  the  impotence 
of  their  hereditary  gods,  and  the  sole  deity  of 
the  Mighty  One  of  Jacob.  He  enjoys  a  glimpse 
of  Isaiah's  and  Micah's  glorious  vision  of  the 
latter  days,  when  "  the  mountain  of  the  Lord's 
House  shall  be  exalted  as  chief  of  mountains, 
and  all  nations  shall  flow  unto  it." 

In  the  light  of  this  revelation,  the  sin  and 
folly  of  Israel  in  dishonouring  the  One  only 
God,  by  associating  Him  with  idols  and  their 
symbols,  becomes  glaringly  visible.  The  very 
heathen  (the  term  is  emphatic  by  position),  will 
at  last  grope  their  way  out  of  the  night  of 
traditional  ignorance,  and  will  own  the  absurd- 
ity of  manufactured  gods.  Israel,  on  the  other 
hand,  has  for  centuries  sinned  against  knowl- 
edge and  reason.  They  had  "  Moses  and  the 
prophets";  yet  they  hated  warning  and  despised 
reproof.  They  resisted  the  Divine  teachings,  be- 
cause they  loved  to  walk  in  their  own  ways, 
after  the  imaginings  of  their  own  evil  hearts. 
And  so  they  soon  fell  into  that  strange  blindness, 
which  suffered  them  to  see  no  sin  in  giving 
companions  to  lahvah,  and  neglecting  His  se- 
verer worship  for  the  sensuous  rites  of  Canaan. 

A  rude  awakening  awaits  them.  Once  more 
will  lahvah  interpose  to  save  them  from  their 
infatuation.  "  This  time  "  they  shall  be  taught 
to  know  the  nothingness  of  idols,  not'  by  the 
voice  of  prophetic  pleadings,  not  by  the  fervid 
teachings  of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  but  by  the 
sword  of  the  enemy,  by  the  rapine  and  ruin, 
in  which  the  resistless  might  of  lahvah  will  be 
manifested  against  His  rebellious  people.  Then, 
when  the  warnings  which  they  have  ridiculed 
find  fearful  accomplishment,  then  will  they  know 
that  the  name  of  the  One  God  is  Iahvah — He 
Who  alone  was  and  is  and  shall  be  for  evermore. 
In  the  shock  of  overthrow,  in  the  sorrows  of 
captivity,  they  will  realise  the  enormity  of  assim- 
ilating the  Supreme  Source  of  events,  the  Foun- 
tain of  all  being  and  power,  to  the  miserable 
phantoms  of  a  darkened  and  perverted  imagina- 
tion. 

xvii.  I-18.  Jeremiah,  speaking  for  God,  re- 
turns to  the  af^rmation  of  Judah's  guiltiness. 
He  has  answered  the  popular  question  (xvi.  10), 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.] 


THE    DROUGHT. 


95 


so  far  as  it  implied  that  it  was  no  mortal  sin 
to  associate  the  worship  of  alien  gods  with  the 
worship  of  lahvah.  He  now  proceeds  to  answer 
it  with  an  indignant  contradiction,  so  far  as  it 
suggested  that  Judah  was  no  longer  guilty  of 
the  grossest  forms  of  idolatry. 

1  "The  trespass  of  Judah,"  he  affirms,  "is  written  with 
pen  of  iron,  with  point  of  adamant ; 
Graven  upon  the  taolet  of  their  heart, 
And  upon  the  horns  of  their  altars  : 
Even  as  their  sons  remember  their  altars, 
And  their  sacred  poles  by  the  evergreen  trees, 
Upon  the  high  hills. 

«  "  O  My  mountain  in  the  field  '. 

Thy  wealth  and    all  thy    treasures  will  I  give  for  a 

spoil. 
For  the  trespass  of  thine  high-places  in  all  thy  borders. 
And  thou  snalt  drop  thine  hand  *  from  thy  demesne 

which  I  gave  thee  ; 
And  I  will  enslave  thee  to  thine  enemies. 
In  the  land  that  thou  knowest  not ; 

"  For  a  fire  have  ye  kindled  in  Mine  anger  ; 
It  shall  burn  for  evermore." 

It  is  clear  from  the  first  strophe  that  the  out- 
ward forms  of  idolatry  were  no  longer  openly 
practised  in  the  country.  Where  otherwise  would 
be  the  point  of  affirming  that  the  national  sin 
was  "  written  with  pen  of  iron,  and  point  of 
adamant  " — that  it  was  "'  graven  upon  the  tablet 
of  the  people's  heart?"  Where  would  be  the 
point  of  alluding  td  the  children's  memory  of 
the  altars  and  sacred  poles,  which  were  the 
visible  adjuncts  of  idolatry?  Plainly  it  is  implied 
that  the  hideous  rites,  which  sometimes  involved 
the  sacrifice  of  children,  are  a  thing  of  the  past; 
yet  not  of  the  distant  past,  for  the  young  of  the 
present  generation  remember  them;  those  terrible 
scenes  are  burnt  in  upon  their  memories,  as  a 
haunting  recollection  which  can  no  more  be 
effaced,  than  the  guilt  contracted  by  their  pa- 
rents as  agents  in  those  abhorrent  rites  can  be 
done  away.  The  indelible  characters  of  sin  are 
graven  deeply  upon  their  hearts;  no  need  for 
a  prophet  to  remind  them  of  facts  to  which 
their  own  consciences,  their  own  inward  sense 
of  outraged  affections,  and  of  nature  sacrificed 
to  a  dark  and  bloody  superstition,  bears  irre- 
fragable witness.  Rivers  of  water  cannot  cleanse 
the  stain  of  innocent  blood  from  their  polluted 
altars.  The  crimes  of  the  past  are  unatoned  for, 
and  beyond  reach  of  atonement;  they  cry  to 
heaven  for  vengeance,  and  the  vengeance  will 
surely  fall   (xv.  4). 

Hitzig  rather  prosaically  remarks  that  Josiah 
had  destroyed  the  altars.  But  the  stains  of  which 
the  poet-seer  speaks  are  not  palpable  to  sense; 
he  contemplates  unseen  realities. 

"Will  all  great  Neptune's  ocean  wash  this  blood 
Clean  from  my  hand  ?    No,  this  my  hand  will  rather 
The  multitudinous  seas  incarnadine. 
Making  the  green  one  red." 

The  second  strophe  declares  the  nature  of  the 
punishment.  The  tender,  yearning,  hopeless  love 
of  the  cry  with  which  lahvah  resigns  His  earthly 
seat  to  profanation  and  plunder  and  red-handed 
ruin,  enhances  the  awful  impression  wrought  by 
the  slow,  deliberate  enunciation  of  the  details 
of  the  sentence — the  utter  spoliation  of  temple 
and  palaces;  the  accumulated  hordes  of  genera- 
tions—all that  represented  the  wealth  and  culture 
and  glory  of  the  time — carried  away  for  ever; 
*  t.  *.,  Loose  thine  hold  of  .  .  .  let  go  .  .  .  release.  Read 
11>  for']31.    The  uses  of  t30K'  "  to  throw  down,"  let  fall," 

resemble  those  of  the  Greek  Vrjui  and  its  compounds.  I 
corrected  the  passage  thus,  to  find  afterwards  that  I  had 
been  anticipated  by  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Graf,  and  others. 


the  enforced  surrender  of  home  and  country; 
the  harsh  servitude  to  strangers  in  a  far-off  land. 

It  is  difificult  to  fix  the  date  of  this  short 
lyrical  outpouring,  if  it  be  assumed,  with  Hitzig. 
that  it  is  an  independent  whole.  He  refers  it  to 
the  year  b.  c.  602,  after  Jehoiakim  had  revolted 
from  Babylon — "  a  proceeding  which  made  a 
future  captivity  well-nigh  certain,  and  made  it 
plain  that  the  sin  of  Judah  remained  still  to 
be  punished."  Moreover,  the  preceding  year  (b. 
c.  603)  was  what  was  known  to  the  Law  as  a 
Year  of  Release  or  Remission  (shenath  shemit- 
tah);  and  the  phrase  "thou  shalt  drop  thine 
hand,"  i.  e.,  "  loose  thine  hold  of  "  the  land  (xvii. 
4),  appears  to  allude  to  the  peculiar  usages  of 
that  year,  in  which  the  debtor  was  released  from 
his  obligations,  and  the  corn-lands  and  vineyards 
were  allowed  to  lie  fallow.  The  Year  of  Release 
was  also  called  the  Year  of  Rest  {shenath  shab- 
bathon.  Lev.  xxv.  5);  and  both  in  the  present 
passage  of  Jeremiah,  and  in  the  book  of  Leviti- 
cus, the  time  to  be  spent  by  the  Jews  in  exile 
is  regarded  as  a  period  of  rest  for  the  desolate 
land,  which  would  then  "  make  good  her  sab- 
baths "  (Lev.  xxvi.  34,  35,  43).  The  Chronicler 
indeed  seems  to  refer  to  this  very  phrase  of 
Jeremiah;  at  all  events,  nothing  else  is  to  be 
found  in  the  extant  works  of  the  prophet  with 
which  his  language  corresponds  (2  Chron.  xxxvi. 
21). 

If  the  rendering  of  the  second  verse,  which  we 
find  in  both  our  English  versions,  and  which 
I  liave  adopted  above,  be  correct,  there  arises 
an  obvious  objection  to  the  date  assigned  by 
Hitzig;  and  the  same  objection  lies  against  the 
view  of  Naegelsbach,  who  translates: 

"  As  their  children  remember  their  altars. 
And  their  images  of  Baal  by  (;'.  e.,  at  the  sight  of)  the 
green  trees,  by  the  high  hills." 

For  in  what  sense  could  this  have  been  written 
"  not  long  before  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim," 
which  is  the  date  suggested  by  this  commentator 
for  the  whole  group  of  chapters,  xiv.-xvii.  18? 
The  entire  reign  of  Josiah  had  intervened  be- 
tween the  atrocities  of  Manasseh  and  this  period; 
and  it  is  not  easy  to  suppose  that  any  sacrifice 
of  children  had  occurred  in  the  three  months' 
reign  of  Jehoahaz,  or  in  the  early  years  of  Je- 
hoiakim. Had  it  been  so,  Jeremiah,  who  de- 
nounces the  latter  king  severely  enough,  would 
certainly  have  placed  the  horrible  fact  in  the 
forefront  of  his  invective;  and  instead  of  speci- 
fying Manasseh  as  the  king  whose  offences 
lahvah  would  not  pardon,  would  have  thus 
branded  Jehoiakim,  his  own  contemporary.  This 
difificulty  appears  to  be  avoided  by  Hitzig,  who 
explains  the  passage  thus:  "  When  they  (the 
Jews)  think  of  their  children,  they  remember, 
and  cannot  but  remember,  the  altars  to  whose 
horns  the  blood  of  their  immolated  children 
cleaves.  In  the  same  way,  by  a  green  tree  on 
the  hills,  i.  e.,  when  they  come  upon  any  such, 
their  Asherim  are  brought  to  mind,  which  were 
trees  of  that  sort."  And  since  it  is  perhaps  pos- 
sible to  translate  the  Hebrew  as  this  suggests, 
"  When  they  remember  their  sons,  their  altars, 
and  their  sacred  poles,  by  "  (i.  e.,  by  means  of) 
"  the  evergreen  trees  "  (collective  term)  "  upon 
the  high  hills,"  and  this  translation  agrees  well 
with  the  statement  that  the  sin  of  Judah  is 
"  graven  upon  the  tablet  of  their  heart."  his 
view  deserves  further  consideration.  The  same 
objection,  however,   presses  again,  though   with 


96 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


somewhat  diminished  force.  For  if  the  date  of 
the  section  be  602,  the  eighth  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
more  than  forty  years  must  have  elapsed  be- 
tween the  time  of  Manasseh's  bloody  rites  and 
the  utterance  of  this  oracle.  Would  many  who 
were  parents  then,  and  surrendered  their  chil- 
dren for  sacrifice,  be  still  living  at  the  supposed 
date?  And  if  not,  where  is  the  appropriateness 
of  the  words  "  When  they  remember  their  sons, 
their  altars,  and  their  Asherim?  " 

There  seems  no  way  out  of  the  difficulty,  but 
either  to  date  the  piece  much  earlier,  assigning 
it,  e.  g.,  to  the  time  of  the  prophet's  earnest 
preaching  in  connection  with  the  reforming 
movement  of  Josiah,  when  the  living  generation 
would  certainly  remember  the  human  sacrifices 
under  Manasseh;  or  else  to  construe  the  passage 
in  a  very  different  sense,  as  follows.  The  first 
verse  declares  that  the  sin  of  Judah  is  graven 
upon  the  tablet  of  their  heart,  and  upon  the 
horns  of  their  altars.  The  pronouns  evidently 
show  that  it  is  the  guilt  of  the  nation,  not  of 
a  particular  generation,  that  is  asserted.  The 
subsequent  words  agree  with  this  view.  The  ex- 
pression, "  Their  sons  "  is  to  be  understood  in 
the  same  way  as  the  expressions  "  their  heart," 
"  their  altars."  It  is  equivalent  to  the  "  sons  of 
Judah  "  {bene  Jehudah),  and  means  simply  the 
people  of  Judah,  as  now  existing,  the  present 
generation.  Now  it  does  not  appear  that  image- 
worship  and  the  cultus  of  the  high  places  re- 
vived after  their  abolition  by  Josiah.  Accord- 
ingly, the  symbols  of  impure  worship  mentioned 
in  this  passage  are  not  high  places  and  images, 
but  altars  and  Asherim,  i.  e.,  the  wooden  poles 
which  were  the  emblems  of  the  reproductive 
principle  of  Nature.  What  the  passage  there- 
fore intends  to  say  would  seem  to  be  this:  "  The 
guilt  of  the  nation  remains,  so  long  as  its  chil- 
dren are  mindful  of  their  altars  and  Asherim 
erected  beside  *  the  evergreen  trees  on  the  high 
hills "  ;  i.  e.,  so  long  as  they  remain  attached 
to  the  modified  idolatry  of  the  day. 

The  general  force  of  the  words  remains  the 
same,  whether  they  accuse  the  existing  genera- 
tion of  serving  sun-pillars  {maggeboth)  and  sacred 
poles  {asherim),  or  merely  of  hankering  after  the 
old,  forbidden  rites.  For  so  long  as  the  popular 
heart  was  wedded  to  the  former  superstitions,  it 
could  not  be  said  that  any  external  abolition  of 
idolatry  was  a  sufficient  proof  of  national  repent- 
ance. The  longing  to  indulge  in  sin  is  sin;  and 
sinful  it  is  not  to  hate  sin.  The  guilt  of  the  na- 
tion remained,  therefore,  and  would  remain,  until 
blotted  out  by  the  tears  of  a  genuine  repentance 
towards  lahvah. 

But  understood  thus,  the  passage  suits  the  time 
of  Jehoiachin,  as  well  as  any  other  period. 

"  Why,"  asks  Naegelsbach,  "  should  not  Mo- 
loch have  been  the  terror  of  the  Israelitish  chil- 
dren, when  there  was  such  real  and  sad  ground 

*  There  is  something  strange  about  the  phrase  "by 
(upon,  'a/)  the  evergreen  tree."  Twenty-five  Heb.  MSS., 
the  Targ.,  and  the  Syriac,  read  "  every  "  (kol)  for  "  upon  " 
('a/).  We  still  feel  the  want  of  a  preposition,  and  may 
confidently  restore  "  under  "  (tahatn),  from  the  nine  other 
passages  in  which  "  evergreen  tree  "  (^ec  ra^anaTi)  occurs 
in  connection  with  idolatrous  worship.  In  all  these  in- 
stances the  expression  is"vinder  every  evergreen  tree  " 
(tahathkol  Vc  ra^anan) ;  from  the  Book  of  the  Law  (Deut. 
xii.  2),  whence  Jeremiah  probably  drew  the  phrase,  to  2 
Chron.  xxviii.  4.  Jeremiah  has  already  used  the  phrase 
thrice  (ii.  20,  iii.  6,  13),  in  exactly  the  same  form.  The 
other  passages  are  Ezek.  vi.  13  ;  Isa.  Ivii.  5  ;  2  Kings  xvi.  4, 
xvii.  10.  The  corruption  of  kol\x\\.o  '•al  is  found  elsewhere. 
Probably  tahath  had  dropped  out  of  the  text,  before  the 
change  took  place  here. 


for  it,  as  is  wanting  in  other  bugbears  which 
terrify  the  children  of  the  present  day?"  To 
this  we  may  reply,  (i)  Moloch  is  not  mentioned 
at  all,  but  simply  altars  and  asherim;  (2)  would 
the  word  "  remember "  be  appropriate  in  this 
case? 

The  beautiful  strophes  which  follow  (5-13)  are 
not  obviously  connected  with  the  preceding 
text.  They  wear  a  look  of  self-completeness, 
which  suggests  that  here  and  in  many  other 
places  Jeremiah  has  left  us,  not  whole  discourses, 
written  down  substantially  in  the  form  in  which 
they  were  delivered,  but  rather  his  more  finished 
fragments;  pieces  which  being  more  rhythmical 
in  form,  and  more  striking  in  thought,  had 
imprinted  themselves  more  deeply  upon  his 
memory. 

"  Thus  hath  lahvah  said  : 
Cursed  is  the  man  that  trusteth  in  human  kind, 
And  maketh  flesh  his  arm, 
And  whose  heart  swerveth  from  lahvah  ! 
And  he  shall  become  like  a  leafless  tree  in  the  desert, 
And  shall  not  see  when  good  cometh  ; 
And  shall  dwell  in  parched  places  in  the  steppe, 
A  salt  land  and  uninhabited. 

"  Blessed  is  the  man  that  trusteth  in  lahvah, 
And  whose  trust  lahvah  becometh  ! 
And  he  shall  become  like  a  tree  planted  by  water, 
That  spreadeth  its  roots  by  a  stream, 
And  is  not  afraid  when  heat  cometh, 
And  its  leaf  is  evergreen  ; 
And  in  the  year  of  drought  it  feareth  not, 
Nor  leaveth  off  from  making  fruit." 

The  form  of  the  thought  expressed  in  these 
two  octostichs,  the  curse  and-  the  blessing,  may 
have  been  suggested  by  the  curses  and  blessings 
of  that  Book  of  the  Law  of  which  Jeremiah 
had  been  so  faithful  an  interpreter  (Deut.  xxvii. 
15-xxviii.  20);  while  both  the  thought  and  the 
form  of  the  second  stanza  are  imitated  by  the 
anonymous  poet  of  the  first  psalm.  The  mention 
of  "  the  year  of  drought  "  in  the  penultimate  line 
may  be  taken,  perhaps,  as  a  link  of  connection 
between  this  brief  section  and  the  whole  of  what 
precedes  it  so  far  as  chap,  xiv.,  which  is  headed 
"  Concerning  the  droughts."  If,  however,  the 
group  of  chapters  thus  marked  out  really  con- 
stitute a  single  discourse,  as  Naegelsbach  as- 
sumes, one  can  only  say  that  the  style  is  epi- 
sodical rather  than  continuous;  that  the  prophet 
has  often  recorded  detached  thoughts,  worked 
up  to  a  certain  degree  of  literary  form,  but 
hanging  together  as  loosely  as  pearls  on  a  string. 
Indeed,  unless  we  suppose  that  he  had  kept  full 
notes  of  his  discourses  and  soliloquies,  or  that, 
like  certain  professional  lecturers  of  our  own 
day,  he  had  been  in  the  habit  of  indefinitely 
repeating  to  different  audiences  the  same  care- 
folly  elaborated  compositions,  it  is  difficult  to 
understand  how  he  would  be  able  without  the 
aid  of  a  special  miracle,  to  write  down  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  the  numerous  utter- 
ances of  the  previous  three  and  twenty  years. 
Neither  of  these  suppositions  appears  probable. 
But  if  the  prophet  wrote  from  memory,  so  long 
after  the  original  delivery  of  many  of  his  utter- 
ances, the  looseness  of  internal  connection,  which 
marks  so  much  of  his  book,  is  readily  under- 
stood. 

The  internal  evidence  of  the  fragment  before 
us,  so  far  as  any  such  is  traceable,  appears  to 
point  to  the  same  period  as  what  precedes,  the 
time  immediately  subsequent  to  the  death  of  Je- 
hoiakim. The  curse  pronounced  upon  trusting 
in  man  may  be  an  allusion  to  that  king's  con- 
fidence in  the  Egyptian  alliance,  which  probably 


Jeremiah  xiv.,  xv.] 


THE    DROUGHT. 


97 


induced  him  to  rc\oIt  from  Nebuchadrezzar,  and 
so  precipitate  the  final  catastrophe  of  his  country. 
He  owed  his  throne  to  the  Pharaoh's  appoint- 
ment (2  Kings  xxiii.  34),  and  may  perhaps  have 
regarded  this  as  an  additional  reason  for  de- 
fection from  Babylon.  But  the  chastisement  of 
Egypt  preceded  that  of  Judah;  and  when  the 
day  came  for  the  latter,  the  king  of  Egypt  durst 
no  longer  go  to  the  help  of  his  too  trustful  allies 
(2  Kings  xxiv.  7).  Jehoiakim  had  died,  but  his 
son  and  successor  was  carried  captive  to  Baby- 
lon. In  the  brief  interval  between  those  two 
events,  the  prophet  may  have  penned  these  two 
stanzas,  contrasting  the  issues  of  confidence  in 
man  and  confidence  in  God.  On  the  other  hand, 
they  may  also  be  referred  to  some  time  not  long 
before  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  when  that 
king,  egged  on  by  Egypt,  was  meditating  re- 
bellion against  his  suzerain;  an  act  of  which  the 
fatal  consequences  might  easily  be  foreseen  by 
any  thoughtful  observer,  who  was  not  blinded 
by  fanatical  passion  and  prejudice,  and  which 
might  itself  be  regarded  as  an  index  of  the 
kindling  of  Divine  wrath  against  the  country. 

"  Deep  is  the  heart  above  all  things  else  : 
And  sore-diseased  it  is  :  who  can  know  it  ? 
I,  lahvah,  search  the  heart,  I  try  the  reins. 
And  that,  to  give  to  a  man  according  to  his  own  ways, 
According  to  the  fruit  of  his  own  doings. 

"  A  partridge  that  gathereth  young  which  are  not  her«, 
Is  he  that  maketh  wealth  not  by  right. 
In  the  middle  of  his  days  it  will  leave  him, 
And  in  his  end  he  shall  prove  a  fool. 

"  A  throne  of  glory,  a  high  seat  from  of  old, 
Is  the  place  of  our  sanctuary. 
Hope  of  Israel,  lahvah  ! 
All  that  leave  Thee  shall  be  ashamed  ; 
Mine  apostates  shall  be  written  in  earth  ; 
For  they  left  the  Well  of  Living  Waters,  even  lahvah. 

"Heal  Thou  me,  lahvah,  and  I  shall  be  healed. 
Save  Thou  me,  and  I  shall  be  saved, 
For  Thou  art  my  praise. 

"  Lo,  tliey  say  unto  me, 
Where  is  the  Word  of  lahvah  ?    Prithee,  let  it  come ! 
Yet  I,  I  hasted  not  from  being  a  shepherd  after  Thee, 
And  woeful  day  I  desired  not— Thou  knowest ; 
The  issue  of  my  lips,  before  Thy  face  it  fell. 

**  Become  not  a  terror  to  me  ! 
Thou  art  my  refuge  in  the  day  of  evil. 
Let  my  pursuers  be  ashamed,  and  let  not  me  be  ashamed  ! 
Let  them  be  dismayed,  and  let  not  me  be  dismayed ; 
Let  Thou  come  upon  them  a  day  of  evil. 
And  doubly  with  breaking  break  Thou  them  !  " 

In  the  first  of  these  stanzas,  the  word  "  heart " 
is  the  connecting  link  with  the  previous  reflec- 
tions. The  curse  and  the  blessing  had  there 
been  pronounced  not  upon  any  outward  and  vis- 
ible distinctions,  but  upon  a  certain  inward  bent 
and  spirit.  He  is  called  accursed,  whose  confi- 
dence is  placed  in  changeable,  perishable  man, 
and  "  whose  heart  swerveth  from  lahvah."  And 
he  is  blessed,  who  pins  his  faith  to  nothing  visi- 
ble; who  looks  for  help  and  stay  not  to  the  seen, 
which  is  temporal,  but  to  the  Unseen,  which  is 
eternal. 

The  thought  now  occurs  that  this  matter  of 
inward  trust,  being  a  matter  of  the  heart,  and 
not  merely  of  the  outward  bearing,  is  a  hidden 
matter,  a  secret  which  baffles  all  ordinary  judg- 
ment. Who  shall  take  upon  him  to  say  whether 
this  or  that  man,  this  or  that  prince  confided  or 
not  confided  in  lahvah?  The  human  heart  is  a 
sea,  whose  depths  are  beyond  human  search;  or 
it  is  a  shifty  Proteus,  transforming  itself  from 
moment  to  moment  under  the  pressure  of  chang- 
ing circumstances,  at  the  magic  touch  of  impulse, 
r— Vol.  IV. 


under  the  spell  of  new  perceptions  and  new 
phases  of  its  world.  And  besides,  its  very  life 
is  tainted  with  a  subtle  disease,  whose  hered- 
itary influence  is  ever  interfering  with  the  will 
and  affections,  ever  tampering  with  the  con- 
science and  the  judgment,  and  making  difficult  a 
clear  perception,  much  more  a  wise  decision.  Nay, 
where  so  many  motives  press,  so  many  plausible 
suggestions  of  good,  so  many  palliations  of  evil, 
present  themselves  upon  the  eve  of  a-ction;  when 
the  colours  of  good  and  evil  mingle  and  gleam 
together  in  such  rich  profusion  before  the  daz- 
zled sight  that  the  mind  is  bewildered  by  the 
confused  medley  of  appearances,  and  wholly  at 
a  loss  to  discern  and  disentangle  them  one  from 
another;  is  it  wonderful,  if  in  such  a  case  the 
heart  should  take  refuge  in  the  comfortable  il- 
lusion of  self-deceit,  and  seek,  with  too  great 
success,  to  persuade  itself  into  contentment 
with  something  which  it  calls  not  positive  evil 
but  merely  a  less  sublime  good? 

It  is  not  for  man,  who  cannot  see  the  heart, 
to  pronounce  upon  the  degree  of  his  fellow's 
guilt.  All  sins,  all  crimes,  are  in  this  respect 
relative  to  the  intensity  of  passion,  the  force  of 
circumstances,  the  nature  of  surroundings,  the 
comparative  stress  of  temptation.  Murder  and 
adultery  are  absolute  crimes  in  the  eye  of  human 
law,  and  subject  as  such  to  fixed  penalties;  but 
the  Unseen  Judge  takes  cognisance  of  a  thousand 
considerations,  which,  though  they  abolish  not 
the  exceeding  sinfulness  of  these  hideous  results 
of  a  depraved  nature,  yet  modify  to  a  vast  extent 
the  degree  of  guilt  evinced  in  particular  cases 
by  the  same  outward  acts.  In  the  sight  of  God 
a  life  socially  correct  may  be  stained  with  a 
deeper  dye  than  that  of  profligacy  or  bloodshed; 
and  nothing  so  glaringly  shows  the  folly  of  in- 
quiring what  is  the  unpardonable  sin  as  the  re- 
flection that  any  sin  whatever  may  become  such 
in  an  individual  case. 

Before  God,  human  justice  is  often  the  liveli- 
est injustice.  And  how  many  flagrant  wrongs, 
how  many  monstrous  acts  of  cruelty  and  op- 
pression, how  many  wicked  frauds  and  perjuries, 
how  many  ot  those  vile  deeds  of  seduction  and 
corruption,  which  are,  in  truth,  the  murder  of 
immortal  souls;  how  many  of  those  fearful  sins, 
which  make  a  sorrow-laden  hell  beneath  the 
smiling  surface  of  this  pleasure-wooing  world, 
are  left  unheeded,  unavenged  by  any  earthly 
tribunal!  But  all  these  things  are  noted  in  the 
eternal  record  of  Him  who  searches  the  heart, 
and  penetrates  man's  inmost  being,  not  from  a 
motive  of  mere  curiosity,  but  with  fixed  intent 
to  award  a  righteous  recompense  for  all  choice 
and  all  conduct. 

The  calamities  which  marked  the  last  years  of 
Jehoiakim,  and  his  ignominious  end.  were  a 
signal  instance  of  Divine  retribution.  Here  that 
king's  lawless  avarice  is  branded  as  not  only 
wicked,  but  foolish.  He  is  compared  to  the 
partridge,  which  gathers  and  hatches  the  eggs 
of  other  birds,  only  to  be  deserted  at  once  by 
her  stolen  brood.*  "  In  the  middle  of  his  days, 
it  shall  leave  him  "  (or  "  it  may  leave  him," 
for  in  Hebrew  one  form  has  to  do  duty  for 
both  shades  of  meaning).  The  uncertainty  of 
possession,  the  certainty  of  absolute  surrender 
within  a  few  short  years,  this  is  the  point  which 
demonstrates  the  unreason  of  making  riches  the 
chief  end  of  one's  earthly  activity.  "  Truly  man 
walketh  in  a  vain  shadow,  and  disquieteth  him- 
*  A  popular  opinion  of  the  time. 


98 


JHE    PROPHECIES    OF   JEREMIAH. 


self  in  vain:  he  heapeth  up  riches,  and  cannot 
tell  who  shall  gather  them."  It  is  the  point 
which  is  put  with  such  terrible  force  in  the 
parable  of  the  Rich  Fool.  "  Soul,  thou  hast 
much  goods  laid  up  for  thyself  for  many  years; 
take  thine  ease,  eat,  drink,  and  be  merry."  "  And 
the  Lord  said  unto  him,  Thou  fool!  this  night 
shall  thy  soul  be  required  of  thee." 

The  covetousness,  oppression,  and  bloodthirst- 
iness  of  Jehoiakim  are  condemned  in  a  striking 
prophecy  (xxii.  13-19),  which  we  shall  have  to 
consider  hereafter.  A  vivid  light  is  thrown  upon 
the  words,  "  In  the  middle  of  his  days  it  shall 
leave  him,"  by  the  fact  recorded  in  Kings  (2 
Kings  xxiii.  36),  that  he  died  in  the  thirty-sixth 
year  of  his  age;  when,  that  is,  he  had  lulfilled 
but  half  of  the  threescore  years  and  ten  allotted 
to  the  ordinary  life  of  man.  We  are  reminded 
of  that  other  psalm  which  declares  that  "  bloody 
and  deceitful  men  shall  not  live  out  half  their 
days  "  (Iv.  23). 

Apart  indeed  from  all  consideration  of  the 
future,  and  apart  from  all  reference  to  that  loy- 
alty to  the  Unseen  Ruler  which  is  man's  inevi- 
table duty,  a  life  devoted  to  Mammon  is  essen- 
tially irrational.  The  man  is  mostly  a  "  fool  " 
— that  is,  one  who  fails  to  understand  his  own 
nature,  one  who  has  not  attained  to  even  a  tol- 
erable working  hypothesis  as  to  the  needs  of 
life,  and  the  way  to  win  a  due  share  of  happi- 
ness;— who  has  not  discovered  that 


"  riches  have  their  proper  stint 
In  the  contented  mind,  not  mint ; " 


and  that 

"those  who  have  the  itch 
Of  craving  more,  are  never  rich  ;" 

and    who    has    missed    all    apprehension    of   the 
grand  secret  that 

"  Wealth  cannot  make  a  life,  but  love." 

From  the  vanity  of  earthly  thrones,  whether 
of  Egypt  or  of  Judah,  thrones  whose  glory  is 
transitory,  and  whose  power  to  help  and  succour 
is  so  ill-assured,  the  prophet  lifts  his  eyes  to 
the  one  throne  whose  glory  is  everlasting,  and 
whose  power  and  permanence  are  an  eternal 
refuge. 

"Thou  Throne  of  Glory,  High  Seat  from  of  old, 
Place  of  our  Sanctuary,  Hope  of  Israel,  lahvah  1 
All  who  leave  Thee  blush  for  shame  : 
Mine  apostates  are  written  in  earth  ; 
For  they  have  forsaken  the  Well  of  Living  Water,  even 
lahvah  ! " 

It  is  his  concluding  reflection  upon  the  un- 
blest,  unhonoured  end  of  the  apostate  Jehoiakim. 
If  Isaiah  could  speak  of  Shebna  as  a  "  throne 
of  glory,"  *  i.  e.,  the  honoured  support  and  main- 
stay of  his  family,  there  seems  no  reason  why 
lahvah  might  not  be  so  addressed,  as  the  sup- 
porting power  and  sovereign  of  the  world. 

The  terms  "  Throne  of  Glory  "  .  .  .  "  Place 
of  our  Sanctuary "  seem  to  be  used  much  as 
we  use  the  expressions,  "  the  Cfown,"  "  the 
Court,"  "  the  Throne,"  when  we  mean  the  actual 
ruler  with  whom  these  things  are  associated. 
And  when  the  prophet  declares  "  Mine  f  apos- 
tates are  written  in  earth,"  he  asserts  that  ob- 
livion is  the  portion  of  those  of  his  people,  high 

*  Isa.  xxii.  23. 

+  The  Heb.  term  is  probably  written  with  omission  of 
the  final  mem,  a  common  abbreviation  ;  and  the  right 
reading  may  be  Q^TlDI  "  and  apostates." 


or  low,  who  forsake  lahvah  for  another  god. 
Their  names  are  not  written  in  the  Book  of  Life 
(Ex.  xxxii.  32;  Ps.  Ixix.  28),  but  in  the  sand 
whence  they  are  soon  effaced.  The  prophets  do 
not  attempt  to  expoce 

\ 

"The  sweet  strange  mystery 
Of  what  beyond  these  things  may  lie." 

They  do  not  in  express  terms  promise  eternal 
life  to  the  individual  believer. 

But  how  often  do  their  words  imply  that  com- 
fortable doctrine!  They  who  forsake  lahvah 
must  perish,  for  there  is  neither  permanence  nor 
stay  apart  from  Iahvah,  whose  very  Name  de- 
notes "  He  who  Is,"  the  sole  Principle  of  Be- 
ing and  Fountain  of  Life.  If  they — nations  and 
persons — who  revolt  from  Him  must  die,  the 
implication,  the  truth  necessary  to  complete  this 
affirmation,  is  that  they  who  trust  in  Him,  and 
make  Him  their  arm,  will  live;  for  union  with 
Him  is  eternal  life. 

In  this  Fountain  of  Living  Water  Jeremiah 
now  seeks  healing  for  himself.  The  malady  that 
afflicts  him  is  the  apparent  failure  of  his  oracles. 
He  suffers  as  a  prophet  whose  word  seems  idle 
to  the  multitude.  He  is  hurt  with  their  scorn, 
and  wounded  to  the  heart  with  their  scoffing. 
On  all  sides  men  press  the  mocking  question, 
"Where  i'.  the  word  of  lahvah?  Prithee,  let 
it  come  to  pass!  "  His  threats  of  national  over- 
throw had  not  been  speedily  realised;  and  men 
made  a  mock  of  the  delays  of  Divine  mercy. 
Conscious  of  his  own  integrity,  and  keenly  sensi- 
tive to  the  ridicule  of  his  triumphant  adversaries, 
and  scarcely  able  to  endure  longer  his  intolerable 
position,  he  pours  out  a  prayer  for  healing  and 
help.  "  Heal  me,"  he  cries,  "  and  I  shall  be 
healed.  Save  me  and  I  shall  be  saved  "  (really 
and  truly  saved,  as  the  form  of  the  Hebrew  verb 
implies);  "for  Thou  art  my  praise,"  my  boast 
and  my  glory,  as  the  Book  of  the  Law  affirms 
(Deut.  X.  21).  I  have  not  trusted  in  man,  but 
in  God;  and  if  this  my  sole  glory  be  taken  away, 
if  events  prove  me  a  false  prophet,  as  my  friends 
allege,  applying  the  very  test  of  the  sacred  Law 
(Deut.  xviii.  21  sq.),  then  shall  I  be  of  all  men 
most  forsaken  and  forlorn.  The  bitterness  of 
his  woe  is  intensified  by  the  consciousness  that 
he  has  not  thrust  himself  without  call  into  the 
prophetic  office,  like  the  false  prophets  whose 
aim  was  to  traffic  in  sacred  things  (xiv.  14,  15) ; 
for  then  the  consciousness  of  guilt  might  have 
made  the  punishment  more  tolerable,  and  the 
facts  would  have  justified  the  jeers  of  his  perse- 
cutors. But  the  case  was  far  otherwise.  He 
had  been  most  unwilling  to  assume  the  function 
of  prophet;  and  it  was  only  in  obedience  to  the 
stress  of  repeated  calls  that  he  had  yielded.  "  But 
as  for  me,"  he  protests,  "  I  hasted  not  from 
being  a  shepherd  to  follow  Thee."  It  would 
seem,  if  this  be  the  correct,  as  it  certainly  is 
the  simplest  rendering  of  his  words,  that,  at  the 
time  when  he  first  became  aware  of  his  true 
vocation,  the  young  prophet  was  engaged  in 
tending  the  flocks  that  grazed  in  the  priestly 
pasture-grounds  of  Anathoth.  In  that  case,  we 
are  reminded  of  David,  who  was  summoned  from 
the  sheepfold  to  camp  and  court,  and  of  Amos, 
the  prophet-herdsman  of  Tekoa.  But  the  He- 
brew term  translated  "  from  being  a  shepherd  " 
is  probably  a  disguise  of  some  other  original 
expression;  and  it  would  involve  no  very  violent 
change  to  read  "  I  made  no  haste  to  follow  after 


Jeremiah  xvii.  19-27.] 


THE    SABBATH— A    WARNING. 


99 


Thee  fully"  or  "entirely"*  (Dent.  i.  36);  a 
reading  which  is  partially  supported  by  the  old- 
est version.  Or  it  may  have  been  better,  as  in- 
volving a  mere  change  in  the  punctuation, t  to 
amend  the  text  thus:  "  But  as  for  me,  I  made 
no  haste,  in  following  Thee,"  more  literally,  "  in 
accompanying  Thee "  (Judg.  xiv.  20).  This, 
however,  is  a  point  of  textual  criticism,  which 
leaves  the  general  sense  the  same  in  any  case. 

When  the  proi)het  adds:  "and  the  ill  day  I 
desired  not,"  some  think  that  he  means  the  day 
when  he  surrendered  to  the  Divine  calling,  and 
accepted  his  mission.  But  it  seems  to  suit  the 
context  better,  if  we  understand  by  the  "  ill  day  " 
the  day  of  wrath  whose  coming  was  the  burden 
of  his  preaching;  the  day  referred  to  in  the 
taunts  of  his  enemies,  when  they  asked.  "  Where 
is  the  word  of  lahvah?  "  adding  with  biting  sar- 
casm: "Prithee,  let  it  come  to  pass."  They 
sneered  at  Jeremiah  as  one  who  seized  every 
occasion  to  predict  evil,  as  one  who  longed  to 
witness  the  ruin  of  his  country.  The  utter  in- 
justice of  the  charge,  in  view  of  the  frequent 
cries  of  anguish  which  interrupt  his  melancholy 
forecasts,  is  no  proof  that  it  was  not  made.  In 
all  ages,  God's  representatives  have  been  called 
upon  to  endure  false  accusations.  Hence  the 
prophet  appeals  from  man's  unrighteous  judg- 
ment to  God  the  Searcher  of  hearts.  "  Thou 
knowest;  the  utterance  of  my  lips"  (Deut.  xxiii. 
24)  "  before  Thy  face  it  fell  "  :  as  if  to  say.  No 
word  of  mine,  spoken  in  Thy  name,  was  a  figment 
of  my  own  fancy,  uttered  for  my  own  purposes, 
without  regard  of  Thee.  I  have  always  spoken 
as  in  Thy  presence,  or  rather,  in  Thy  presence. 
Thou,  who  hearest  all,  didst  hear  each  utterance 
of  mine;  and  therefore  knowest  that  all  I  said 
was  truthful  and  honest  and  in  perfect  accord 
with  my  commission. 

If  only  we  who,  like  Jeremiah,  are  called  upon 
to  speak  for  God,  could  always  remember  that 
every  word  we  say  is  uttered  in  that  Presence, 
what  a  sense  of  responsibility  would  lie  upon 
us;  with  what  labour  and  prayers  should  we  not 
make  our  preparation!  Too  often  alas!  it  is 
to  be  feared  that  our  perception  of  the  presence 
of  man  banishes  all  sense  of  any  higher  presence; 
and  the  anticipation  of  a  fallible  and  frivolous 
criticism  makes  us  forget  for  the  time  the  judg- 
ment of  God.  And  yet  "  by  our  words  we  shall 
be  justified,  and  by  our  words  we  shall  be  con- 
demned." 

In  continuing  his  prayer,  Jeremiah  adds  the 
remarkable  petition,  "  Become  not  Thou  to  me 
a  cause  of  dismay!  "  He  prays  to  be  delivered 
from  that  overwhelming  perplexity,  which 
threatens  to  swallow  him  up,  unless  God  should 
verify  by  events  that  which  His  own  Spirit  has 
prompted  him  to  utter.  He  prays  that  lahvah, 
his  only  "  refuge  in  the  day  of  evil,"  will  not 
bemock  him  with  vain  expectations;  will  not 
falsify  His  own  guidance;  will  not  suflfer  His 
messenger  to  be  "  ashamed,"  disappointed  and 
put  to  the  blush  by  the  failure  of  his  predictions. 
And  then  once  again,  in  the  spirit  of  his  time, 
he  implores  vengeance  upon  his  unbelieving  and 
cruel  persecutors:  "  Let  them  be  ashamed,"  dis- 
appointed in  their  expectation  of  immunity,  "  let 
them  be  dismayed,"  crushed  in  spirit  and  utterly 
overcome  by  the  fulfilment  of  his  dark  presages 
of  evil.  "  Let  Thou  come  upon  them  a  day 
of  evil.  And  doubly  with  breaking  break  Thou 

*  N^D  for  nyio.  ^  ^liy?  for  nvio. 


them!"  This  indeed  asks  no  more  than  that 
what  has  been  spoken  before  in  the  way  of 
prophecy — "  I  will  repay  the  double  of  their  guilt 
and  their  trespass  "  (xvi.  18) — may  be  forthwith 
accomplished.  And  the  provocation  was,  be- 
yond all  question,  immense.  The  hatred  that 
burned  in  the  taunt  "  where  is  the  word  of 
lahvah?  Prithee,  let  it  come  to  pass!"  was 
doubtless  of  like  kind  with  that  which  at  a 
later  stage  of  Jewish  history  expressed  itself  in 
the  words  "  He  trusted  in  God,  let  Him  deliver 
Him!  "  "  If  He  be  the  Son  of  God,  let  Him  now 
come  down  from  the  cross,  and  we  will  believe 
on  Him!  " 

And  how  much  fierce  hostility  that  one  term 
"  my  pursuers  "  may  cover,  it  is  easy  to  infer 
from  the  narratives  of  the  prophet's  evil  expe- 
rience in  chaps,  xx.,  xxvi.,  and  xxxviii.  But  al- 
lowing for  all  this,  we  can  at  best  only  ahirm 
that  the  prophet's  imprecations  on  his  foes  are 
natural  and  human;  we  cannot  pretend  that  they 
are  evangelical  and  Christ-like.*  Besides,  the 
latter  would  be  a  gratuitous  anachronism,  which 
no  intelligent  interpreter  of  Scripture  is  called 
upon  to  perpetrate.  It  is  neither  necessary 
to  the  proper  vindication  of  the  prophet's  writ- 
ings as  truly  inspired  of  God,  nor  helpful  to  a 
right  conception  of  the  method  of  revelation. 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  SABBATH— A    WARNING. 

Jeremiah  xvii.  19-27. 

"Thus  said  lahvah  unto  me:  Go  and  stand 
in  the  gate  of  Benjamin,  whereby  the  kings  of 
Judah  come  in,  and  whereby  they  go  out;  and 
in  all  the  gates  of  Jerusalem.  And  say  unto  them, 
Hear  ye  the  word  of  lahvah,  O  kings  of  Judah, 
and  all  Judah,  and  all  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem, 
who  come  in  by  these  gates! 

"Thus  said  lahvah:  Beware,  on  your  lives, 
and  bear  ye  not  a  burden  on  the  Day  of  Rest, 
nor  bring  it  in  by  the  gates  of  Jerusalem!  Nor 
shall  ye  bring  a  burden  forth  out  of  your  houses 
on  the  Day  of  Rest,  nor  shall  ye  do  any  work; 
but  ye  shall  hallow  the  Day  of  Rest,  as  I  com- 
manded your  fathers.  (Albeit,  they  hearkened 
not,  nor  inclined  their  ear,  but  stiffened  their 
neck  against  hearkening,  and  against  receiving 
instruction.) 

"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  ye  will  indeed 
hearken  unto  Me,  saith  lahvah,  not  to  bring  a 
burden  in  by  the  gates  of  this  city  on  the  Day 
of  Rest,  but  to  hallow  the  Day  of  Rest, 
not  to  do  therein  any  work;  then  there  shall 
come  in  by  the  gates  of  this  city  kings 
(and  princes)  sitting  upon  the  throne  of  David, 
riding  on  the  chariots  and  on  the  horses,  they 
and  their  princes,  O  men  of  Judah  and  inhab- 
itants of  Jerusalem!  and  this  city  shall  be  in- 
habited for  ever.  And  people  shall  come  in  from 
the  cities  of  Judah  and  from  the  places  round  Je- 
rusalem, and  from  the  land  of  Benjamin,  and  from 
the   lowlands,   and    from   the     hill-country,    and 

*  I  have  left  this  paragraph  as  I  wrote  it,  although  I  feel 
great  doubts  upon  the  subject.  What  I  have  remarked 
elsewhere  on  similar  passages  should  be  considered 
along  with  the  present  suggestions.  We  have  especially 
to  remember,  (i)  the  peculiar  status  of  the  speaker  as  a 
true  prophet  ;  and  (ii)  the  terrible  invectives  of  Christ 
Himself  on  certain  occasions  (St.  Matt,  xxiii.  33-35;  St. 
Luke  X.  IS  ;  St.  John  viii.  44). 


JOO 


TItE/ PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


r.^-- 


'^i 


from  the  south,  bringing  in  burnt-offering  and 
•thank-offering,  and  oblation  and  inceme;  and 
jbringing    a    thanksgiving  ,  into     the    houie  •  of 

.9,f' And  ifrfjfe'-hearken  irtotf*Mtto  Me'titJii  hallow 
•the  Day  of  Resi,  and  not  to  bear  a  bufdert  and 
icome  in  by  the  gates  of  Jerusalem  on  the  Day 
of  Rest:  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  her,  gates, , and  it 
shall  devour  the  palaces!iof>(Jer.il3aletB,  and  ishall 
not  be. quenched/'      ■■.:■■.:{   i-i    -^     .     ^    .. 

The  matter  and  manner  of  this  brief  oracle 
mark  it  off  from  those  which  precede  it  as  an 
independent  utterance,  and  a  whole  complete  in 
itself.  Its  position  may  be  accounted  for  by  its 
probable  date,  which  may  be  fixed  a  little  after 
the  previous  chapters,  in  the  three-months'  reign 
of  the  ill-starred  Jehoiachin;  and  by  the  writer's 
or  his  editor's  desire  to  break  the  monotony  of 
commination  by  an  occasional  gleam  of  hope  and 
promise.  At  the  same  time,  the  introductory 
formula  with  which  it  opens  is  so  similar  to  that  of 
the  following  oracles  (chaps,  xviii.,  xix.),  as  to 
suggest  the  idea  of  a  connection  in  time  between 
the  members  of  the  group.  Further,  there  is  an 
obvious  connection  of  thought  between  chaps, 
xviii.,  xix.  In  the  former,  the  house  of  Israel  is 
represented  as  clay  in  the  hand  of  the  Divine 
Potter;  in  the  latter,  Judah  is  a  potter's  vessel, 
destined  to  be  broken  in  pieces.  And  if  we  assume 
the  priority  of  the  piece  before  us,  a  logical  prog- 
ress is  observable,  from  the  alternative  here  pre- 
sented for  the  people's  choice,  to  their  decision 
for  the  worst  part  (xviii.  i2sqq.),  and  then  to  the 
corresponding  decision  on  the  part  of  lahvah 
(xix.).  Or,  as  Hitzig  puts  it  otherwise,  in  the 
piece  before  us  the  scales  are  still  in  equipoise; 
in  chap,  xviii.  one  goes  down;  lahvah  intends 
Uiisehief  (ver.  ii),  and  the  people  are  invited  to 
appease  His  anger.  But  the  warning  is  fruitless; 
and  therefore  the  prophet  announces  their  de- 
i^truction,  depicting  it  in  the  darkest  colours 
(ehap.  xix.).  The  immediate  consequence  to 
Jeremiah  himself  is  related  in  chap.  xx.  i-6;  atid 
.it  is  highly  probable  that  the  section,  chap.  xxi. 
ll-ixxii.  9,  is  the:  continuation  of  the  oracle  ad- 
■dressed  to  Pashchur:  so:  that  we  have  before  us 
ai;  whole  group  of  prophecies  belonging  to  the 
,same  eventful  pefiod  of  the  prophet's  activity 
(fxvfi.  i20  .agrees  closet;^  wlth/vxccat!  2Uir4nd/x!viil 
85rwith  Xxii.  4).  ""'A!  ,:-T)r(!;-]  -rrrov  !^'>':n'^rn 
•(iThe  circumstances  of  the  p'resent  oracle  are 
tteese.  Jeremiah  is  inwardly  bidden  to  station 
himself  first  in  "  the  gate  of  the  sons  o-f  the  peo- 
ple " — a  gate  of  Jerusalem  which  we  cannot  fur- 
ther determine,  as  it  is  not  mentioned  elsewhere 
under  .this  designation,  but  which  appears  to  have 
Iseen  a  special  resort  of. the  masses  of  the  popula- 
tion, because  it  .was  the  one  by  which  the  kings 
w»jpre  wont  to  eilter  and  leave  thfe  cityi  and  where 
they  doubtless  were  accustomed  to  hear  petitions 
*nd  to  administer  justice;  and  afterwards,  he  is 
to,  take  his  stand  in  all  the  gates  in- turn,  so  as 
rvot  to  miss  the  chance  of  delivering  his  message 
to  any  of  his  countrymen.  He  is  there  to  ad<ires3 
the  "kings  of  Judah"  (ver.  20);  :ah ;  expression 
which  may'  denote  the  young  king  Jehoiachin 
4U0id  hia 'mother  (xiit..  18),. or 'the  kingiand  tte 
princes  of  the  blood,  the  "  House  of  David " 
t>f  chap.  xxi.  12.  The  promise  "kings  shall 
fcbme  in  by  the  gates  of  this  city  .'.  .  and  this 
9ity  shall  be  inhabited  for  ever,"  and  the  threat 
y  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  her  gates,  and  it  shall 
^evour  the  palaces  of  J^rus.^,^P.<":  hiay^txi.tak;^?} 
to   imply   a   time   when  .'(tjiie/iipu^U*^  .wngeRywas 


generally  recognised.  The  first  part  of  the 
promise  may  be  intended  to  meet  an  apprehen- 
sion, such  as  might  naturally  be  felt  after  the 
death  of  JehoiakiiTL  that  the  incensed  Chaldeans 
would  come  and  take  away  the  Jewish  place  and 
nation.  In  raising  the  boy  Jehoiachin  to  the 
throne  of  his  fathers,  men  may  have  sorrowfully 
foreboded  that,  as  the  event  proved,  he  would 
never  keep  his  crown  till  manhoody  nor  beget 
a  race  of  future  kings.* 

■  The  matter  of  the  charge  to  rulers  and  people 
is  the  due  observance  of  the  fourth  command- 
ment: "ye  shall  hallow  the  Day  of  Rest,  as  I 
commanded  your  fathers"  (see  Ex.  xx.  8,  "  Re- 
member the  Day  of  Rest,  to  hallow  it"— which 
is  probably  the  original  form  of  the  precept. 
Jeremiah,  however,  probably  had  in  mind  the 
form  of  the  precept  as  it  appears  in  Deuter- 
onomy: "  Observe  the  Day  of  Rest  to  hallow  it, 
as  lahvah  thy  God  commanded  thee:"  Deut.  v. 
12).  The  Hebrew  term  for  "  hallow  "  means  to 
separate  a  thing  irom^icomjrrton  things,  aad  devote 

it     to     God.'        ;,;      •/:-.'.■.      :<\      .■.-':\yr    '      ;,■[-.       ' . ,       ^.^..m' 

To  hallow  the  Day  of  Rest,  therefore,  is  to 
make  a  marked  distinction  between  it  and  ordi- 
nary days,  and  to  connect  it  in  some  way  with 
religion.  What  is  here  commanded  is  to  ab- 
stain from  "  bearing  burdens,"  and  doing  any 
kind  of  work  (melakah,  Gen:  ij.-ijz,  .3;,  Ex.  xx..  9, 
10,  xxxi.  14,  15;  Gen.  xxxix.iii,,  "appointed 
task,"  "duty,"  "business").^  The  bearing  of 
burdens  into  the  gates  and  out,  of  the  houses 
clearly  describes  the  ordinary,  comnjerce  between 
town  and  country.  The  country  folk  are  for- 
bidden to  bring  their  farm  produce  to  the  market 
in  the  city  gates,  and  the  townspeople  to  convey 
thither  from  their  houses  and  shops  the  rnanu- 
factured  goods  which  they  were,  accustomed  .tp 
barter  for  these.  Nehemiah's  memoirs  furnisl^v?l 
good  illustration  of  the  general  sense,. of, the  pas- 
sage (Neh.  xiii.  15),  relating  hovv  he  sujppressed 
this  Sabbath'  traffic  between  town  and  country^ 
Dr.  Kuenen  has  observed  that  "  Jeremiah  is  ^p 
first  of  the  prophets  who  stands  up  for  a  .strictef 
sanctification  of  the  seventh  day,  treating  il^ 
however,  merely,  as  a,  day  of  rest.  ...  What  w^^ 
traditional-  appears  to, have  been  only  abstinent 
from  field-work,  and  perhaps  also  from  profe^^ 
signal  pursuits."  In  like  manner,  ho  had  .b.^7 
fore  stated  that  "  tendencies  to  such  an  exaggeJr?^- 
tipn;  of  the, Sabbath  rest  as  would  ma.ke  it  abs(;^ 
lute,  are  found  from  the  Chaldean  period.  l:-aiaH 
(i.  13)  regards  the  Sabbath  purely  as  a  sacrificial 
day."  The  last  statement  here  is  hardly  a  fair 
inference.  In  the  passage  referred  to  Isaiah  i^ 
inveighing  against  the  futile  worship  of  his  cofl^ 
temporaries;  and  he  only  mentions  the  Sabba|:f} 
in  this  .connection^  And  that  "  tradition  "  .r.^7 
quired  more  than  "  abstinence  from  field-worl^.^^ 
is  evident  from  words  of  the  prophet  Ampsj 
writteYi  at  least  a  century  and  a  half  before  tl^|t^ 
present  oracle,  and  implying  that  very  abstinen<;4 
from  trading  which  Jeremiah  prescribes.  Amp^ 
niajkes,; the  grasping, dealers;  of  hjs  time  .'cry  iif^r- 
pMi^ntilifl  I^Wi^Rp  ^sy'^ifienP.ew  moon  ',p^[,g^T\f, 

*The  context  iV again st'e.tii) posing,  with  Gra'fl'fHa't  im 
prophet's  call  "hear  ye!"  extends  also  to  princes  yet 
unborn  (cf.  xiii.  i^:; ;  xxv.  i8  is  different).  If,  however,  |it 
be  thought  that  Jeremiah  addressed  not  the  sovereigns 
personally,  but  only  the  people  parsing  in  and  out  of  the 
gates ;  then  the  expression  becomes  intelligible  as-  <sl 
generalised  plural,  like  thB  parallels  in  2  Chron.  Kxvii:.,3 
("his  children  "),  iWd-  16  ("the  kings  of  Assyria  ":=Ti:g; 
lath-pileser  II).  The  prophet  might  naturally  avoid  the 
singuiprss  too  persogal,  in  affirming  an  obligation  wh^ch 
lay  upon  the  Judeftn  kings  in  general.  ■''-(  ',.,:  '  t'I  CIC;)^ 


Jeremiah  xvii.  19-27.] 


.! '  the;  SABBA<TH::^A>  W'AfRWmcJHT 


iot 


that  we  may  sell  corn?  and  the  sabbath,  that  we 
may  set  out  wheat  for  sale?"  (Amos  viii.  5);  a 
clear  proof  that  buying  and  selling  were  sosr 
pended ' on' 'thei >Sabbath  1  ©stS-dii  ib'the' eighth! ' beiv-- 
tury  B. '<?."■'■  ■^■■i'  ''  ^''■''''  '"■•'  :"i-;,--'  -(.r![;o--' 
li'lt  is  hardly  likely  that;  when  law  or  ctistoni 
colnpelled  covetous  dealers  to  cease  op(?rations 
an  the  Sabbath,  and  buying  and  selling,  the 
principal  business  of  the  time,  were  suspended,  the 
artisans  of  town  or  country  would  be  allowed  by 
public  opinion  to  ply  their  everyday  tasks.'  Ac- 
cordingly, when  Jeremiah  adds  to  his  prohibi- 
tion of  Sabbath  trading,!  a  veto  upon  any  kind  of 
'-'fWork"-+-a  term  which  includes  this,  trafficking, 
bat'  also  covers  the  labour  of  handict-aftsmen  (cf. 
I -Kings  v.  30;  2  Kings  xii.  12;  Ex.  xxxv.  35)— 
lud  is  not  really  increasing  the  stringency  of  the 
traditional  riile  about  Sabbath  observance.-  •  .-:'' 
■Further,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  how'Dt^.' 
Kuencn  could  gather  from  this  passage  that  Jere- 
miah treats  the  Sabbath  "  merely  as  a  day  of 
refet."  This  negative  character  of  mere  cessatiori 
from  work,  of  enforced  idleness,'  is  far  from  be- 
ing the  sole  feature  of  the  Sabbath,  either  in 
Jererrlia'h'si  view  of  it,  or  as  other  more  ancient 
authorities  represent  it.  The  testimony  of  the 
passage  before  us  proves,  if  proof  were  needed, 
that;  the  Sabbath  was  a  day  of  worship.  This  is 
iimplied  bothiby  the  phrase  "ye  shall  hallow  the 
Day.of  Rpst,"  that  is,,  consecrate  it  tO'  lahvah; 
indi. by  thei  promise!  that  if  the  precept  be  ob-' 
served/ faiihfuUy,' abundant  offerings  shall  flow 
into  the  itemple  from  aU  parts  of  the  country, 
that'is,  as  .the:'cOjiitext  seems  to  reqiiire,  for  the 
due  celebration  of  the  Sabbath  festival'.  There  is 
an-  intentional  contrast  bdtiween  the  bringing  Of 
innumerable  victims,  Ind  "  bearing  burdens ''  of 
fiour  and  oil  and  incense  on  the  Sabbath*  for:the 
joyful  service  of  the  temple,  including  the  festal 
nile£^l  of  the  worshippers,' and  that  other  carriage 
ofiigoods  for  mereiy  secular  objects^ :  And  as  the 
weilth  of  the  Jeru-salem  priesthood  chiefly  de- 
pended upon  the  abilhdance'  of  the  sacrifices,  it 
niiay  be  supposed  that  Jeremiah  thus  gives  them 
a  hint  that. it 'is  really  their  interest  to  encourage 
the  observance  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath.  For 
vi  men  were -busy  With  their  buying  and  sellihg, 
their  making  and  mending,  upon  the  sevehth.  as 
eniiofher  days,  they  would  have  'no  more'  time  or 
inclination  for  religious  dtitaes  than  the  vSimday 
traders  of' our  large  towns  have  under  the  vastly 
chahged.  «ohditio:ris -bf .  the  present  day.  Morer 
over,' the  teaching  of  our  prophet  in  this  matter 
t^es  for  Ranted:  that  of' his  predecessors,  with 
whose  writings  he  was  thoroughly  acquainted. 
Ifinthis  passage  he  does  not, expressly  designate 
the  Sabbath  as  a  religious  festival^  it  is  because 
it' seemed  needless '  to  1  state  a  thing  so  obvious, 
soi  generally  recognised  in  theory,-  however 
Iboseiy  observed  in  practice.  .  The  elder  prophets 
Hosea,  Amos,  .Isaiah,  associate  Sabbath  and  new 
moon  together  as  days  of  festal  rejoicing,  when 
men  appeared  before  lahvah,  that  is,  repaired 
to  the  sanctuary  for  worship  and  sacrifice  (Hos. 
ii.  11;  Isa.  i.  11-14),  and  when  all  ordinary  busi- 
ness was  consequently  suspended  (Amos  viii.  5). 
■  It  is  clear,  then,  from  this  important  passage 
of. Jeremiah  that  inhis  time  and  by  himself  the 
Sabbath  was  still  regarded  under  the  double  as- 
pect of  a  religious  feast  and  a  day  of  cessation 
ip&tn  labour,  the  latter  being,  as  in  the  ancient 
world  generally,  a  natural  consequence  of  the 
former  characteristic.  Whether  the  abolition  of 
the  local   sanctuaries  in  the  eighteenth  year  of 


Josiah  resulted  Tti  any  practical  modification  of 
the  conception  oi'  the  Sabbath;  so  that,  in  the 
words  of  Professor  Robertson  Srriith,  "  it  be- 
came for  most  Israelites  an  institution  of  human- 
ity divorced  from  ritual,"  is  rendered  doubtfuV 
by  the  following  considerations.  The  period  b^-l 
tween  the  reform  of  Josiah  and  the  fall  of  J^'J 
rusalem  was  very  brief,  including  liot  more  thaW 
about  thirty-five  years  (621-586,  according  to' 
Wellhausen).  But  that  a  reaction  followed  the 
disastrous  end  of  the  royal  Reformer  is  both 
likely  under  the  circumstances,  and  implied  by 
the  express  assertions  of  the  author  of  Kings'," 
who  declares  of  the  succeeding  monarchs  that 
they  "  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  according! 
to  all  that  their  fathers  had  done."  As  Well-' 
hausen  writes:  "the  battle  of  Megiddo  had 
shown  that  in  spite  of  the  covenant  with  Jehovah 
the  possibilities  of  non-success  in  war  remained 
the  same  as  before":  so  at  least  it  would  appear 
to  the  unspiritual  mind  of  a  populace,  still  hank- 
ering after  the  old  forms  of  local  worship,  with" 
their  careless  connivance  at  riot  and  disorder.' 
It  is  not  probable  that  a  rapacious  and  bloody 
tyrant,  like  Jehoiakim,  would  evince  more  tender- 
ness for  the  ritual  laws  than  for  the  moral  pre- 
cepts of  Deuteronomy.  It  is  likely,  then,  that 
the  worship  at  the  local  high  places  revived  dur- 
ing this  and  the  following  reigns,  just  as  it  had 
revived  after  its  temporary  abolition  by  Heze- 
kiah  (2  Kings  xviii.  22).  Moreover,  it  is  with 
Judah,  not  ruined  and  depopulated  Israel,  that 
we  have  to  deal;  and  even  in  Judah  the  people 
mbst  by  this  time  have  b'een  greatly  reduced  by 
war  and  its  attendant  evils;  so  that  Jerusalem  it* 
self  and  its  irnmediate  neighbourhood  probably 
comprised  the  main  part  of  the  population  to 
which  Jeremiah  addressed  his  discourses  during 
this  period.  The  bulk  of  the  little  nation  would, 
in  fact,  naturally  concentrate  upon  Jerusalem,  in 
the  troublous  times  that  followed  the  death  of 
Josiah.  If  so,  it  is  superfluous  to  assume  that 
"most  men  could  only  visit  the  central  altar  at 
rare  intervals"  during  these  last  decades  of  the 
national  existence.*  The  change  of  view  belongs 
rather  to  the  sixth  than  the  seventh  century^  to 
Babylonia  rather  than  to  Judea.  '  '  i  /■'  ■  •! 
The  Sabbath  observance  prescribed  by  theold 
LaWv  and  recommended  by  Jeremiah,  was  in- 
deed a  very  different  thing  from  the  pedantic  and 
burdensome  obligation  which  it  afterwards  be*-) 
came  in  the  hands  of  .scribes  arid  Pharisees.' 
These,  with  their  Ibng  catalogue  of  prohibited, 
works,  and  their  grotesqxie  methods  of  evading 
the  rigour  of  theif  own  rules,  had  succeeded  in 
making  what  was'originally  a  joyous  festival  and- 
day  of  rest  for  the  weary,  into  an  intolerable, 
interlude  of  joyless  restraint;  when  our  Lord  ten 
minded  them  that  the  Sabbath  was  made  for  manii 
and  not  man  for  tlie  Sabbath  (St.  Mark  ii.  27)1! 
Treating  the  strict  observance  of  the  day  as  an! 
end  in  itself,  they  forgot  or  ignored  the  fact  that 
the  oldest  forms  of  the  sacred  Law  agreed  in 
justifying  the  institution  by  religious  and  human-j 
itarian  considerations  (Ex.  xx.  8,  10;  Deut.  Y.t 
12).  The  difference  in  the  grounds  assigned  byt 
the  different  legislations— rDeuteronomy  alleging 
neither  the  Divine  Rest  t>f  Exodus  xx.,  nor  the 
sign  of  Exodus  xxxi.  13,  but  the  enlightened  and 
enduring  motive  '*  that  thy  bondman  and  thine 
handmaid  may  rest  as  well  as  thou,"  coupled  with- 
the  feeling  injunction,  "Remember  that  thotlj 
wast  a  bondman  in  the  land  of  Egypt"  (Deut. 
•  "  Encycl.  Britann.,"  s.  v.  Sabbath,  p.  125. 


I02 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


V.  14,  15) — need  not  here  be  discussed;  for  in  any 
case,  the  different  motives  thus  suggested  were 
enough  to  make  it  clear  to  those  who  had  eyes 
to  see,  that  the  Sabbath  a.  as  not  anciently  con- 
ceived as  an  arbitrary  institution  established 
purely  for  its  own  sake,  and  without  reference 
to  ulterior  considerations  of  public  benefit.  The 
Book  of  the  Covenant  afifirmed  the  principle  of 
Sabbath  rest  in  these  unmistakable  terms:  "  Six 
days  thou  mayst  do  thy  works,  and  on  the 
seventh  day  thou  shalt  leave  off,  that  thine  ox 
and  thine  ass  may  rest,  and  the  son  of  thine  hand- 
maid " — the  home-born  slave — "'and  the  alien 
may  be  refreshed  "  (Ex.  xxiii.  12),  lit.  recover 
breath,  have  respite.  The  humane  care  of  the 
lawgiver  for  the  dumb  toilers  and  slaves  requires 
no  comment;  and  we  have  already  noticed  the 
same  spirit  of  humanity  in  the  later  precept  of 
the  Book  of  the  Law  (Deut.  v.  14,  15).  These 
older  rules,  it  will  be  observed,  are  perfectly 
general  in  their  scope,  and  forbid  not  particular 
actions  (Ex.  xvi.  23,  xxxv.  3;  Num.  xv.  32), 
but  the  continuance  of  ordinary  labour;  prescrib- 
ing a  merciful  intermission  alike  for  the  cattle 
employed  in  husbandry  and  as  beasts  of  burden, 
and  for  all  classes  of  dependents. 

The  origin  of  the  Sabbath  festival  is  lost  in 
obscurity.  When  the  unknown  writer  of  Gen. 
i.  so  beautifully  connects  it  with  the  creation  of 
the  world,  he  betrays  not  only  the  belief  of  his 
contemporaries  in  its  immemorial  antiquity,  but 
also  a  true  perception  of  the  utility  of  the  insti- 
tution, its  perfect  adaptation  to  the  wants  of  hu- 
manity. He  expresses  his  sense  of  the  fact  in  the 
most  emphatic  way  possible,  by  affirming  the 
Divine  origin  of  an  institution  whose  value  to 
man  is  divinely  great;  and  by  carrying  back  that 
origin  to  the  very  beginning,  he  implies  that  the 
Sabbath  was  made  for  mankind  and  not  merely 
for  Israel.  To  whom  indeed  could  an  ancient 
Jewish  writer  refer  as  the  original  source  of  this 
unique  blessing  of  a  Day  of  Rest  and  drawing 
near  to  God,  if  not  to  lahvah,  the  fountain  of 
all  things  good? 

That  Moses,  the  founder  of  the  nation,  gave 
Israel  the  Sabbath,  is  as  likely  as  anything  can 
be.  Whether,  in  doing  so,  he  simply  sanctioned 
an  ancient  and  salutary  custom  (investing  it  per- 
haps with  new  and  better  associations),  dating 
from  the  tribal  existence  of  the  fathers  in  Chal- 
dea,  or  ordered  the  matter  so  in  purposeful  con- 
trast to  the  Egyptian  week  of  ten  days,  cannot 
at  present  be  determined.  The  Sabbath  of  Is- 
rael, both  that  of  the  prophets  and  that  of  the 
scribes,  was  an  institution  which  distinguished 
the  nation  from  all  others  in  the  period  open  to 
historical  scrutiny;  and  with  this  knowledge  we 
may  rest  content.  That  which  made  Israel  what 
it  was,  and  what  it  became  to  the  world;  the 
total  of  the  good  which  this  people  realised,  and 
left  as  a  priceless  heritage  to  mankind  for  ever, 
was  the  outcome,  not  of  what  it  had  in  common 
with  heathen  antiquity,  but  of  what  was  peculiar 
to  itself  in  ideas  and  institutions.  We  cannot  be 
too  strongly  on  our  guard  against  assuming  ex- 
ternal, superficial,  and  often  accidental  resem- 
blances, to  be  an  index  of  inward  and  essential 
likeness  and  unity.  Whatever  approximations 
■imay  be  established  by  modern  arch?eology  be- 
tween Israel  and  kindred  peoples,  it  will  still  be 
true  that  those  points  of  contact  do  not  explain, 
though  to  the  apprehension  of  individuals  they 


may  obscure,  what  is  truly  characteristic  o'  T  •- 
rael,  and  what  alone  gives  that  nation  its  im- 
perishable significance  in  the  history  of  tht 
world.  After  all  deductions  made  upon  such 
grounds,  nothing  can  abolish  the  force  of  the 
fact  that  Moses  and  the  prophets  do  not  belong 
to  Moab,  Ammon,  or  Edom;  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, though  written  in  the  language  of  Canaan, 
is  not  a  monument  of  Candanite,  but  of  Israelite 
faith;  that  the  Christ  did  not  spring  out  of  Baby- 
lon or  Egypt,  and  that  Christianity  is  not  ex- 
plicable as  the  last  development  of  Accadian 
magic  or  Egyptian  animal  worship. 

To  those  who  believe  that  the  prophets  en- 
joyed a  higher  and  less  fallible  guidance  than 
human  fancy,  reflection,  experience;  who  recog- 
nise in  the  general  aim  and  effect  of  their  teach- 
ing, as  contrasted  with  that  of  other  teachers, 
the  best  proof  that  their  minds  were  subject  to 
an  influence  and  a  spirit  transcending  the  com- 
mon limits  of  humanity;  the  prominence  given 
by  Jeremiah  to  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  will  be 
sufficient  evidence  of  the  importance  of  that  law 
to  the  welfare  of  his  contemporaries,  if  not  of  all 
subsequent  generations.  If  we  have  rightly  as- 
signed the  piece  to  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin,  we 
may  suppose  that  among  the  contrary  currents 
which  agitated  the  national  life  at  that  crisis,  there 
were  indications  of  repentance  and  remorse  at 
the  misdoings  of  the  late  reign.  The  present  ut- 
terance of  the  prophet  might  then  be  regarded 
as  a  test  of  the  degree  and  worth  of  the  revulsion 
of  popular  feeling  towards  the  God  of  the 
Fathers.  The  nation  was  trembling  for  its  exist- 
ence, and  Jeremiah  met  its  fears  by  pointing  out 
the  path  of  safety.  Here  was  one  special  pre- 
cept hitherto  but  little  observed.  Would  they 
keep  it  now  and  henceforth,  in  token  of  a  genu- 
ine obedience?  Repentance  in  general  terms  is 
never  difficult.  The  rub  is  conduct.  Recogni- 
tion of  the  Divine  Law  is  easy,  so  long  as  life 
is  not  submitted  to  its  control.  The  prophet  thus 
proposes,  in  a  single  familiar  instance,  a  plain 
test  of  sincerity,  which  is  perhaps  not  less  appli- 
cable in  our  own  day  than  it  was  then. 

The  wording  of  the  final  threat  suggests  a 
thought  of  solemn  consequence  for  ourselves. 
"  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  her  gates,  and  it  shall  de- 
vour the  castles  of  Jerusalem — and  shall  not  be 
quenched !  "  The  gates  were  the  scene  of  Ju- 
dah's  sinful  breach  of  the  Sabbath  law,  and  in 
them  her  punishment  is  to  begin.  So  in  the 
after  life  of  the  lost  those  parts  of  the  physical 
and  mental  organism  which  have  been  the  prin- 
cipal seats  of  sin,  the  means  and  instruments  of 
man's  misdoing,  will  also  be  the  seat  of  keenest 
suffering,  the  source  and  abode  of  the  most 
poignant  misery.  "  The  fire  that  never  shall  be 
quenched " — Jesus  has  spoken  of  that  awful 
mystery,  as  well  as  Jeremiah.  It  is  the  ever- 
kindling,  never-dying  fire  of  hopeless  and  insati- 
able desire;  it  is  the  withering  flame  of  hatred  of 
self,  when  the  castaway  sees  with  open  eyes  what 
that  self  has  become;  it  is  the  burning  pain  of  a 
sleepless  memory  of  the  unalterable  past;  it  is 
the  piercing  sense  of  a  life  flung  recklessly  to 
ruin;  it  is  the  scorching  shame,  the  scathing  self- 
contempt,  the  quenchless,  raging  thirst  for  de- 
liverance from  ourselves;  it  is  the  fearful  con- 
sciousness of  self-destruction,  branded  upon  the 
soul   for  ever  and   ever! 


Jeremiah  xviii.] 


THE    DIVINE    POTTER. 


CHAPTER   XI. 

THE   DIVINE   FOTTER. 

Jeremiah  xviii. 

Jeremiah  goes  down  into  the  Lower  Town,  or 
the  valley  between  the  upper  and  lower  city;  and 
there  his  attention  is  arrested  by  a  potter  sitting 
at  work  before  his  wheel.  As  the  prophet 
watches,  a  vessel  is  spoiled  in  the  making  under 
the  craftsman's  hand;  so  the  process  begins 
afresh,  and  out  of  the  same  lump  of  clay  another 
vessel  is  moulded,  according  to  the  potter's 
fancy. 

Reflecting  upon  what  he  had  seen,  Jeremiah 
recognised  a  Divine  Word  alike  in  the  impulse 
which  led  him  thither,  and  in  the  familiar  actions 
of  the  potter.  Perhaps  as  he  sat  meditating  at 
home,  or  praying  in  the  court  of  the  temple,  the 
thought  had  crossed  his  mind  that  lahvah  was 
the  Potter,  and  mankind  the  clay  in  His  hands; 
a  thought  which  recurs  so  often  in  the  eloquent 
pages  of  the  second  Isaiah,  who  was  doubtless 
indebted  to  the  present  oracle  for  the  suggestion 
of  it.  Musing  upon  this  thought,  Jeremiah  wan- 
ered  half-unconsciously  down  to  the  workshop 
of  the  potter;  and  there,  under  the  influence  of 
the  Divine  Spirit,  his  thought  developed  itself 
into  a  lesson  for  his  people  and  for  us. 

"  Cannot  I  do  unto  you  like  this  potter,  O 
house  of  Israel?  saith  lahvah;  Behold,  as  the  clay 
in  the  potter's  hand,  so  are  ye  in  My  hand,  O 
house  of  Israel."  lahvah  has  an  absolute  con- 
trol over  His  people  and  over  all  peoples,  to 
shape  their  condition  and  to  alter  their  destiny; 
a  control  as  absolute  as  that  of  the  potter  over 
the  clay  between  his  hands,  which  he  moulds 
and  remoulds  at  will.  Men  are  wholly  malleable 
in  the  hands  of  their  Maker;  incapable,  by  the 
nature  of  things,  of  any  real  resistance  to  His 
purpose.  If  the  first  intention  of  the  potter  fail 
in  the  execution,  he  does  not  fail  to  realise  his 
plan  on  a  second  trial.  And  if  man's  nature  and 
circumstances  appear  for  a  time  to  thwart  the 
Maker's  design;  if  the  unyielding  pride  and  in- 
tractable temper  of  a  nation  mar  its  beauty  and 
worth  in  the  eyes  of  its  Creator,  and  render  it 
unfit  for  its  destined  uses  and  functions;  He  can 
take  away  the  form  He  has  given,  and  reduce 
His  work  to  shapelessness,  and  remodel  the 
ruined  mass  into  accordance  with  His  sovereign 
design.  lahvah,  the  supreme  Author  of  all  ex- 
istence, can  do  this.  It  is  evident  that  the  Crea- 
tor can  do  as  He  will  with  His  creature.  But  all 
His  dealings  with  man  are  conditioned  by  moral 
considerations.  He  meddles  with  no  nation 
capriciously,  and  irrespective  of  its  attitude  to- 
wards His  laws.  "  At  one  moment  I  threaten  a 
nation  and  a  kingdom  that  I  will  uproot  and  pull 
down  and  destroy.  And  that  nation  which  I 
threatened  returneth  from  its  evil,  and  I  repent 
of  the  evil  that  I  purposed  to  do  it.  And  at  an- 
other moment,  I  promise  a  nation  and  a  kingdom 
that  I  will  build  and  plant.  And  it  doeth  the 
Evil  in  Mine  eyes,  in  not  hearkening  unto  My 
voice;  and  I  repent  of  the  good  that  I  said  I 
would  do  it"   (vv.   7-10). 

This  is  a  bold  affirmation,  impressive  in  its 
naked  simplicity  and  directness  of  statement,  of 
a  truth  which  in  all  ages  has  taken  possession  of 
minds  at  all  capable  of  a  comprehensive  survey 
of  national  experience;  the  truth  that  there  is  a 


power  revealing  itself  in  the  changes  and  chances 
of  human  history,  shaping  its  course,  and  giving 
it  a  certain  definite  direction,  not  withowt  regard 
to  the  eternal  principles  of  morality.  When  in 
some  unexpected  calamity  which  strikes  down  an 
individual  sinner,  men  recognise  a  "  judgment  " 
or  an  instance  of  "  the  visitation  of  God,"  they 
infringe  the  rule  of  Christian  charity,  which  for- 
bids us  to  judge  our  brethren.  Yet  such  judg- 
ment, liable  as  it  is  to  be  too  readily  suggested 
by  private  ill-will,  envy,  and  other  evil  passions, 
which  warp  the  even  justice  that  should  guide 
our  decisions,  and  blind  the  mind  to  its  own  lack 
of  impartiality,  is  in  general  the  perversion  of  a 
true  instinct  which  persists  in  spite  of  all  scien- 
tific sophistries  and  philosophic  fallacies.  For 
it  is  an  irrepressible  instinct  rather  than  a  rea- 
soned opinion  which  makes  us  all  believe,  how- 
ever inconsistently  and  vaguely,  that  God  rules; 
that  Providence  asserts  itself  in  the  stream  of 
circumstance,  in  the  current  of  human  affairs. 
The  native  strength  of  this  instinctive  belief  is 
shown  by  its  survival  in  minds  that  have  long 
since  cast  ofif  allegiance  to  religious  creeds.  It 
only  needs  a  sudden  sense  of  personal  danger, 
the  sharp  shock  of  a  serious  accident,  the  fore- 
boding of  bitter  loss,  the  unexpected  but  utter 
overthrow  of  some  well-laid  scheme  that  seemed 
assured  of  success,  to  stir  the  faith  that  is  latent 
in  the  depths  of  the  most  callous  and  worldly 
heart,  and  to  force  the  acknowledgment  of  a 
righteous  Judge  enthroned  above. 

Compared  with  the  mysterious  Power  which 
evinces  itself  continuously  in  the  apparent  chaos 
of  conflicting  events,  man's  free  will  is  like  the 
eddy  whirling  round  upon  the  bosom  of  a  ma- 
jestic river  as  it  floats  irresistibly  onward  to  its 
■goal,  bearing  the  tiny  vortex  along  with  it. 
Man's  power  of  self-determination  no  more  in- 
terferes with  the  counsels  of  Providence  than 
the  diurnal  revolution  of  the  earth  on  its  axis 
interferes  with  its  annual  revolution  round  the 
sun.  The  greater  comprises  the  less;  and  God 
includes  the  world. 

The  Creator  has  implanted  in  the  creature  a 
power  of  choice  between  good  and  evil,  which  is 
a  pale  reflection  of  His  own  tremendous  Being. 
But  how  can  we  even  imagine  the  dependent,  the 
limited,  the  finite,  acting  independently  of  the 
will  of  the  Absolute  and  Infinite?  The  fish  may 
swim  against  the  ocean  current;  but  can  it  swim 
at  all  out  of  the  ocean?  Its  entire  activity  de- 
pends upon  the  medium  in  which  it  lives  and 
moves  and  has  its  being. 

But  Jeremiah  exposes  the  secret  of  Providence 
to  the  eyes  of  his  fellow-countrymen  for  a  par- 
ticular purpose.  His  aim  is  to  eradicate  certain 
prevalent  misconceptions,  so  as  to  enable  them 
to  rightly  apprehend  the  meaning  of  God's  pres- 
ent dealings  with  themselves.  The  popular  be- 
lief was  that  Zion  was  an  inviolable  sanctuary; 
that  whatever  disasters  might  have  befallen  the 
nation  in  the  past,  or  might  be  imminent  in  the 
future,  lahvah  could  not.  for  His  own  sake,  per- 
mit the  extinction  of  Judah  as  a  nation.  For 
then  His  worship,  the  worship  of  the  temple,  the 
sacrifices  of  the  one  altar,  would  be  abolished; 
and  His  honour  and  His  Name  would  be  for- 
gotten among  men.  These  were  the  thoughts 
which  comforted  them  in  the  trying  time  when 
a  thousand  rumours  of  the  coming  of  the  Chal- 
deans to  punish  their  revolt  were  flying  about  the 
land;  and  from  day  to  day  men  lived  in  tremb'ing 
expectation   of   impending   siege   and   slaughter. 


I04 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


These  were  the  beliefs  which  the  popular  proph- 
ets, themselves  probably  in  most  cases  fanatical 
believers  in  their  own  doctrine,  vehemently  main- 
tained in  opposition  to  Jeremiah.  Above  ^11, 
there  was  the  covenant  between  lahvah  and  His 
people,  admitted  as  a  fact  both  by  Jeremiah  and 
his  opponents.  Was  it  conceivable  that  the  God 
of  the  Fathers,  who  had  chosen  them  and  their 
posterity  to  be  His  people  for  ever,  would  turn 
from  His  purpose,  and  reject  His  chosen  ut- 
terly? 

Jeremiah  meets  these  popular  illusions  by  ap- 
plying his  analogy  of  the  potter.  The  potter 
fashions  a  mass  of  clay  into  a  vessel;  and  lahvah 
had  fashioned  Israel  into  a  nation.  But  as 
though  the  mass  of  inert  matter  had  proven  un- 
wieldy or  stubborn  to  the  touches  of  his  plastic 
hands;  as  the  wheel  revolved,  a  misshapen 
product  resulted,  which  the  artist  broke  up  again, 
and  moulded  afresh  on  his  wheel,  till  it  emerged 
a  fair  copy  of  his  ideal.  And  so,  in  the  revolu- 
tions of  time,  Israel  had  failed  of  realising  the 
design  of  his  Maker,  and  had  become  a  vessel 
of  wrath,  fitted  to  destruction.  But  as  the  re- 
bellious lump  was  fashioned  again  by  the  deft 
hand  of  the  master,  so  might  this  refractory  peo- 
ple be  broken  and  built  up  anew  by  the  Divine 
master  hand. 

In  the  light  of  this  analogy,  the  prophet  inter- 
prets the  existing  complications  of  the  political 
world.  The  serious  dangers  impending  over  the 
nation  are  a  sure  symptom  that  the  Divine 
Potter  is  at  work,  "  moulding "  an  evil  fate  for 
Judah  and  Jerusalem.  "  And  now  prithee  say 
unto  the  men  of  Judah  and  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem: 

"  Thus  hath  lahvah  said, 
Behold  I  am  moulding  evil  against  you, 
And  devising  a  device  against  you  J" 

But  lahvah's  menaces  are  not  the  mere  vent 
of  a  tyrant's  caprice  or  causeless  anger:  they  are 
a  deliberate  effort  to  break  the  hard  heart,  to  re- 
duce it  to  contrition,  to  prepare  it  for  a  new 
creation  in  a  more  glorious  likeness.  Therefore 
the  threat  closes  with  an  entreaty: 

"Return  ye,  I  pray  you,  each  from  his  evil  way, 
And  make  good  your  ways  and  your  doings  !  " 

If  the  prophetic  warning  fulfil  its  purpose,  and 
the  nation  repent,  then  as  in  the  case  ot  Nine- 
veh, which  repented  at  the  preaching  of  Jonah, 
the  sentence  of  destruction  is  revoked,  and  the 
doomed  nation  is  granted  a  new  lease  of  life. 
The  same  truth  holds  good  reversely.  God's 
promises  are  as  conditional  as  His  threats.  If  a 
nation  lapse  from  original  righteousness,  the  sure 
consequence  is  the  withdrawal  of  Divine  favour, 
and  all  of  blessing  and  permanence  that  it  con- 
fers. It  is  evident  that  the  prophet  directly  con- 
tradicts the  popular  persuasion,  which  was  also 
the  current  teaching  of  his  professional  oppo- 
nents, that  lahvah's  promises  to  Israel  are  abso- 
lute, that  is,  irrespective  of  moral  considerations. 
Jeremiah  is  revealing,  in  terms  suited  to  the  in- 
telligence of  his  time,  the  true  law  of  the  Divine 
dealings  with  Israel  and  with  man.  And  what 
he  has  here  written,  it  is  important  to  bear  in 
mind,  when  we  are  studying  other  passages  of  his 
writings  and  those  of  his  predecessors,  which 
foreshow  judgments  and  mercies  to  individual 
peoples.  However  absolute  the  language  of 
prediction,  the  qualification  here  supplied  must 
usually  be  understood;  so  that  it  is  not  too  much 


to  say  that  this  remarkable  utterance  is  one  of  the 
keys  to  the  comprehension  of  Hebrew  prophecy. 

But  now,  allowing  for  antique  phraseology, 
and  for  the  immense  difference  between  ancient 
and  modern  modes  of  thought  and  expression; 
allowing  also  for  the  new  light  shed  upon  the 
problems  of  life  and  history  by  the  teaching  of 
Him  who  has  supplemented  all  that  was  incom- 
plete in  the  doctrine  of  the  prophets  and  the 
revelation  granted  to  the  men  of  the  elder  dis- 
pensation; must  we  pronounce  this  oracle  of 
Jeremiah's  substantially  true  or  the  contrary? 
Is  the  view  thus  formulated  an  obsolete  opinion, 
excusable  in  days  when  scientific  thinking  was 
unknown;  useful  indeed  for  the  furtherance 
of  the  immediate  aims  of  its  authors,  but  now 
to  be  rejected  wholly  as  a  profound  mistake, 
which  modern  enlightenment  has  at  once  ex- 
posed and  rendered  superfluous  to  an  intelligent 
faith  in  the  God  of  the  prophets? 

Here  and  everywhere  else,  Jeremiah's  language 
is  in  form  highly  anthropomorphic.  If  it  was  to 
arrest  the  attention  of  the  multitude,  it  could  not 
well  have  been  otherwise.  He  seems  to  say  that 
God  changes  His  intentions,  according  as  a  na- 
tion changes  its  behaviour.  Something  must  be 
allowed  for  style,  in  a  writer  whose  very  prose  is 
more  than  half  poetry,  and  whose  utterances 
are  so  often  lyrical  in  form  as  well  as  matter. 
The  Israelite  thinkers,  however,  were  also  well 
aware  that  the  Eternal  is  superior  to  change; 
as  is  clear  from  that  striking  word  of  Samuel: 
"The  Glory  of  Israel  lieth  not  nor  repenteth; 
for  He  is  not  man,  that  He  should  repent"  (i 
Sam.  XV.  29).  And  prophetic  passages  like  that  in 
Kings,  which  so  nobly  declares  that  the  heaven 
and  the  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain  God  (c/^. 
Jer.  xxiii.  24),  or  that  of  the  second  Isaiah  which 
affirms  that  the  Divine  ways  and  purposes  are  as 
much  higher  than  those  of  His  people,  as  the 
heavens  are  higher  than  the  earth  (Isa.  Iv.  9), 
prove  that  the  vivid  anthropomorphic  expres- 
sions of  the  popular  teaching  of  the  prophets 
ought  in  mere  justice  to  be  limited  by  these  wider 
conceptions  of  the  Divine  Nature  and  attributes. 
These  passages  are  quite  enough  to  clear  the 
prophets  of  the  accusation  of  entertaining  such 
gross  and  crude  ideas  of  Deity  as  those  which 
Xenophanes  ridiculed,  and  which  find  their  em- 
bodiment in  most  mythologies. 

There  is  indeed  a  sense  in  which  all  thinking, 
not  only  thought  about  God,  but  about  the  nat- 
ural world,  must  be  anthropomorphic.  Man  is 
unquestionably  "  the  measure  of  all  things,"  and 
he  measures  by  a  human  standard.  He  inter- 
prets the  world  without  in  terms  of  his  own  con- 
sciousness; he  imposes  the  forms  and  moulds  of 
his  own  mind  upon  the  universal  mass  of  things. 
Time,  space,  matter,  motion,  number,  weight, 
organ,  function, — what  are  all  these  but  inward 
conceptions  by  which  the  mind  reduces  a  chaos 
of  conflicting  impressions  to  order  and  harmony? 
What  the  external  world  may  be,  apart  from  our 
ideas  of  it,  no  philosopher  pretends  to  be  able 
to  say;  and  an  equal  difficulty  embarrasses  those 
who  would  define  what  the  Deity  is,  apart  from 
His  relations  to  man.  But  then  it  is  only  those 
relations  that  really  concern  us;  everything  else 
is  idle  speculation,  little  becoming  to  creatures 
so  frail  and  ephemeral  as  we. 

From  this  point  of  view,  we  may  fairly  ask, 
what  difference  it  rhakes  whether  the  prophet 
affirm  that  lahvah  repents  of  retributive  designs, 
when  a  nation  repents  of  its  sins,  or  that  a  na- 


Jeremiah  xviii.] 


THE    DIVINE    POTTER.     :.{hT 


h°5 


tion's  repentance  will  be  followed  by  the  restora- 
tion of  temporal  prosperity.  It  is  a  mere  matter 
of  statement;  and  the  former  way  of  putting  the 
truth  was  the  more  intelligible  way  to  his  con- 
temporaries, and  has,  besides,  the  advantage  of 
implying  the  further  truth  that  the  fortunes  of 
nations  do  not  depend  upon  a  blind  and  inex- 
orable fate,  but  upon  the  Will  and  Law  of  a  holy 
God.  It  aflirms  a  Lawmaker  as  well  as  a  Law, 
a  Providence  as  well  as  an  uniform  sequence  of 
events. 

The  prophet  asserts,  then,  that  nations  reap 
what  they  have  sown;  that  their  history  is,  in 
general,  a  record  of  God's  judgments  upon  their 
ways  and  doings.  This  is,  of  course,  a  matter  of 
faith,  as  are  all  beliefs  about  the  Unseen;  but  it 
is  a  faith  which  has  its  root  in  an  apparently 
ineradicable  instinct  of  humanity.  Apdcravn  ira- 
0eiv,  "  The  doer  must  suffer,"  is  not  a  conviction 
of  Hebrew  religion  only;  it  belongs  to  the  uni- 
versal religious  consciousness.  Some  critics  are 
fond  of  pronouncing  the  "  policy  "  of  the  proph- 
ets a  mistaken  one.  They  commend  the  high 
tone  of  their  moral  teachings,  but  consider  their 
forecasts  of  the  future  and  interpretations  of 
passing  events,  as  erroneous  deductions  from 
their  general  views  of  the  Divine  nature.  We 
are  not  well  acquainted  with  the  times  and  cir- 
cumstances under  which  the  prophets  wrote  and 
spoke.  This  is  true  even  in  the  case  of  Jeremiah; 
the  history  of  the  time  exists  only  in  the  barest 
outline.  But  the  writings  of  an  Isaiah  or  an 
Amos  make  it  difificult  to  suppose  that  their  au- 
thors would  not  have  occupied  a  leading  position 
in  any  age  and  nation;  their  thought  is  the  high- 
est product  of  the  Hebrew  mind;  and  the  policy 
of  Isaiah  at  least,  during  the  Assyrian  crisis,  was 
gloriously    justified   by    the    event. 

We  need  not,  however,  stop  here  in  attempting 
to  vindicate  the  attitude  and  aims  of  the  proph- 
ets. Without  claiming  infallibility  for  every  in- 
dividual utterance  of  theirs — without  displaying 
the  bad  taste  and  entire  lack  of  literary  tact 
which  would  be  implied  by  insisting  upon  the 
minute  accuracy  and  close  correspondence  to  fact, 
of  all  that  the  prophets  forboded,  all  that  they 
suggested  as  possible  or  probable,  and  by  turn- 
ing all  their  poetical  figures  and  similes  into  bald 
assertions  of  literal  fact;  we  may,  I  think,  stead- 
fastly affirm  that  the  great  principles  of  revealed 
religion,  which  it  was  their  mission  to  enunciate 
and  impress  by  all  the  resources  of  a  fervid  ora- 
tory and  a  high-wrought  poetical  imagination, 
are  absolutely  and  eternally  true.  Man  does  reap 
as  he  sows;  all  history  records  it.  The  present 
welfare  and  future  permanence  of  a  nation  do 
depend,  and  have  always  depended,  upon  the 
strength  of  its  adhesion  to  religious  and  moral 
convictions.  What  was  it  that  enabled  Israel  to 
gain  a  footing  in  Canaan,  and  to  reduce,  one  after 
another,  nations  and  communities  far  more  ad- 
vanced in  the  arts  of  civilisation  than  they? 
What  but  the  physical  and  moral  force  gene- 
rated by  the  hardy  and  simple  life  of  the  desert, 
and  disciplined  by  wise  obedience  to  the  laws  of 
their  Invisible  King?  What  but  a  burning  faith 
in  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  true 
Leader  of  the  armies  of  Israel?  Had  they  only 
remained  uncontaminated  by  the  luxuries  and 
vices  of  the  conquered  races;  had  they  not 
yielded  to  the  soft  seduction  of  sensuous  forms  of 
worship;  had  they  continued  faithful  to  the  God 
who  had  brought  them  out  of  Egypt,  and  lived, 
on  the  whole,  by  the  teaching  of  the  true  proph- 


ets; who  can  say  that  ^h^y  p:^igb^j^iotha,v^;  51197, 
cessfully  withstood  the,  b(r,untv;Oi:  /^Syrian  C}i^ 
Chaldean  invasion?  .  ,■•,,, I, ;-)u  ■,-,<,  -/r.-"  -ino 
The  disruption  of  the  kingdom,  the  internecmj^ 
conflicts,  the  dynastic  revolutions,  the  entangl^,-^ 
ments  with  foreign  powers  which  mark  the  pro-;' 
gressive  decline,  of  the  empire  of  David  and 
Solomon,  would  hardly  have  found  place  in  a  na- 
tion that  steadily  lived  by  the  rule  of. the  proph- 
ets, clinging  to  lahvah  and  lahvah  only,  and 
"  doing  justice  and  loving  mercy "  in  all  the 
relations  of  life.  The  gradual  differentiation  of 
the  idea  of  lahvah  into  a  multitude  of  Baals  at 
the  local  sanctuaries  must  have  powerfully  tended 
to  disintegrate  the  national  unity.  Solomon's 
temple  and  the  recognition  of  the  one  God  of  all 
the  tribes  of  Israel  as  supreme,  which  that  reli- 
gious centre  implied,  was,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
real  bond  of  union  for  the  nation.  We  cannot 
forget  that,  at  the  outset  of  the  whole  history, 
Moses  created  or  resuscitated  the  sense  of  na- 
tional unity  in  the  hearts  of  the  Egyptian  serif, 
by  proclaiming  to  them  lahvah,  the  God  of  theif 
fathers.  It  is  a  one-sided  representation  which 
treats  the  policy  of  the  prophets  as  purely  nega- 
tive; as  confined  to  the  prohibition  of  leagues 
with  the  foreigner,  and  the  condemnation  of 
walls  and  battlements,  chariots  and  horses,  and 
all  the  elements  of  social  strength  and  display. 
The  prophets  condemn  these  things,  regarded 
as  substitutes  for  trust  in  the  One  God,  and  faith- 
ful obedience  to  His  laws.  They  condemn  the 
man  who  puts  his  confidence  in  man,  and  makes 
flesh  his  arm,  and  forgets  the  only  true  source  o^ 
strength  and  protection.  To  those  who  allege 
that  the  policy  of  the  prophets  was  a  failure,' we 
may  reply  that  it  never  had,  a  fulland  fair  trial.  . 

And  they  wiU^pAsf*  JJopelgiSS.ljfQr .we  will  fpnow.pfter 
our  own  devices,  and  will  each  practise  the  stubbornness 
of  his  own  ev!il  heart.    Therefore  thus  hath  lahvah  safa': 

1.  "Ask  ye  now  among  the  heathen, 

Who  hath  heard  the  like?  '   V"'>  "i'^nrTj,"'  o] 

The  virgin  (daughter)  of  Israel     ■!    riRm    n3ffV/ 
Hath  done  a  v'ery  horrible  thipg.    y;?n9Dni     mi;d  " 

2.  "Doth  the  snow  of  Lebanon  ceaseoriv/ oH      .Jri^lJisn 

From  overflowing  the  field?       Tjriiriion    ?airi?iow 
Do  the  running  waters  dry  up.f  '    "^M'^fi^w 

The  icy  streams?*    '    "  '''T-r.rriJijg   euij  yns  bbl^ 

3.  "  For  My  people  have  forgotj;en  rae,  ,     .  , 

To  vain  things  they  "burn'incense'i '  "'■'Qt-'  '^qon  ?  n 

And  they  have  made  them  stumbW  jilf  thdi)}  TV^yfli 

the  ancient  paths,  ,-ir    •iprirlw    ncrrt 

To  walk  in  bypaths,  a  way  not  cast  tip  f^^""^'    '">"! 

4.  "  To  make  their  Jand  a  desolation,.   ,:,[y  vfhliow  0I 

Perpetual  hissings ;  '  t       ^ 

Every  one  that  passeth  her'  by '4hW^  iUihaiM(  VTJ 

And  shall  shake  his  headv    vl'.nr.-/    .i^Trq?    to    ??on 

5.  "  Like  an  ^ast  wind  Will  rieStteil-'tii^?  Jfiffv/  ^0^.  " 

In  the  facie  of  the  foe  ;    :    'ini:    .b'no'u    aiodw    arlj 

The  baek.and  not  the  face  w;i)VI  ^pw  tiiem,.\^  ^-ff,,. 

In  the  day  of  their  overthrow.'^  ^'f"  ^^"?  J^nw 

■•■■  .1''..  J  r.?    ?  Inn?    on  I 

God  foresees  that  His  gracious  warning'  will 
be  rejected  as  heretofore;  the  prophet's  hearers 
will  cry  "It  is  hopeless!  "  thy  appeal  is  in  vain, 
thine  enterprise  desperate;  "for  after  our  own 
devices  "  or  thoughts  "will  we  walk,"  not  after 
thine,  though  thou  urge  them  as  lahvah's;  "  and 
we  will  each  practise  the  stubbornness  of  his  own 

♦Instead  6f  ^HK*  ")1V»  "from  the  roek  0f  th:e  -fiflld,"  ? 
have  ventured  to  rea4  HtJ'  PjlVO  (Lam.  iii.  54;  Deut.  xi. 
4;  2  Kings  vi.  6).  For  IKTIJ'  "plucked  up"  "uprooted," 
which  is  inappropriate  in  connection  with  water,  ychnur- 
rer's  iriEJ'J^  "dried  up"  <Isa.  xix.  5  ;  Jer.  li.  30),  is  prob- 
ably right.  In  the  second  couplet,  I  read  D''3T  for  D''^|, 
which  is  meaningless,  and  transpose  D^lp  wit^  {J^pdl^j 


io6 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


evil  heart  " — this  last  in  a  tone  of  irony,  as  if  to 
say,  Very  well;  we  accept  thy  description  of  us; 
our  ways  are  stubborn,  and  our  hearts  evil:  we 
will  abide  by  our  character,  and  stand  true  to 
your  unflattering  portrait.  Otherwise,  the  words 
may  be  regarded  as  giving  the  substance  of  the 
popular  reply,  in  terms  which  at  the  same  time 
convey  the  Divine  condemnation  of  it;  but  the 
former  view  seems  preferable. 

God  foresees  the  obstinacy  of  the  people,  and 
yet  the  prophet  does  not  cease  his  preaching. 
A  cynical  assent  to  his  invective  only  provokes 
him  to  more  strenuous  endeavours  to  convince 
them  that  they  are  in  the  wrong;  that  their  be- 
haviour is  against  reason  and  nature.  Once 
more  (ii.  lO  sgq.)  he  strives  to  shame  them  into 
remorse  by  contrasting  their  conduct  with  that 
of  other  nations.  These  were  faithful  to  their 
own  gods;  among  them  such  a  crime  as  national 
apostasy  was  unheard  of  and  unknown.  It  was 
reserved  for  Israel  to  give  the  first  example  of 
this  alDUormal  offence;  a  fact  as  strange  and 
fearful  in  the  moral  world  as  some  unnatural 
revolution  in  the  physical  sphere.  That  Israel 
should  forget  his  duty  to  lahvah  was  as  great  and 
inexplicable  a  portent  as  if  the  perennial  snows 
of  the  Lebanon  should  cease  to  supply  the  rivers 
of  the  land;  or  as  if  the  ice-cold  streams  of  its 
glens  and  gorges  should  suddenly  cease  to  flow. 
And  certainly,  when  we  look  at  the  matter  with 
the  eye  of  calm  reason,  the  prophet  cannot  be 
said  to  have  here  exaggerated  the  mystery  of  sin. 
For,  however  strong  the  temptation  that  lures 
man  from  the  path  of  duty,  however  occasion 
may  suggest,  and  passion  urge,  and  desire  yearn, 
these  influences  cannot  of  themselves  silence  con- 
science, and  obliterate  experience,  and  over- 
power judgment,  and  defeat  reason.  As  surely 
as  it  is  possible  to  know  anything,  man  knows 
that  his  vital  interests  coincide  with  duty;  and 
that  it  is  not  only  weak  but  absolutely  irrational 
to  sacrifice  duty  to  the  importunities  of  appetite. 
^  When  man  forsakes  the  true  God,  it  is  to 
"  burn  incense  to  vain  gods "  or  things  of 
naught.  He  who  worships  what  is  less  than  God, 
worships  nothing.  No  being  below  God  can 
yield  any  true  satisfaction  to  that  human  nature 
which  was  made  for  God.  The  man  who  fixes 
his  hope  upon  things  that  perish  in  the  using,  the 
man  who  seeks  happiness  in  things  material,  the 
man  whose  affections  have  sole  regard  to  the 
joys  of  sense,  and  whose  devotion  is  given  wholly 
to  worldly  objects,  is  the  man  who  will  at  the  last 
cry  out,  in  hopeless  disappointment  and  bitter- 
ness of  spirit,  vanity  of  vanities!  all  is  vanity! 
"  For  what  shall  it  profit  a  man,  if  he  shall  gain 
the  whole  world,  and  lose  his  own  soul?  Or 
what  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  soul?  " 
The  soul's  salvation  consists  in  devotion  to  its 
Lord  and  Maker;  its  eternal  loss  and  ruin,  in 
alienation  from  Him  who  is  its  true  and  only 
life.  The  false  gods  are  naught  as  regards  help 
and  profit;  they  are  powerless  tn  bless,  but  they 
are  potent  to  hurt  and  betray.  They  "  make  men 
stumble  out  of  their  ways,  out  of  the  ancient 
paths,  to  walk  in  bypaths,  in  a  way  not  cast  up." 
So  it  was  of  old;  so  it  is  now.  When  the  heart 
is  estranged  from  God,  and  devoted  to  some 
meaner  pursuit  than  the  advancement  of  His 
g'ory,  it  soon  deserts  the  straight  road  of  virtue, 
the  highway  of  honour,  and  falls  into  the  crooked 
and  uneven  paths  of  fraud  and  hypocrisy,  of  op- 
pression and  vice.  The  end  appears  to  sanctify 
the  means,  or  at  least  to  make  them  tolerable; 


and,  once  the  ancient  path  of  the  Law  is  for- 
saken, men  will   follow  the  most  tortuous,  and 

often  thorny  and  painful  courses,  to  the  goal 
of  their  choice.  The  path  which  leads  away  from 
God  leads  both  individuals  and  nations  to  final 
ruin.  Degraded  ideas  of  the  Deity,  false  ideas  of 
happiness,  a  criminal  indifference  to  the  we. fare 
of  others,  a  base  devotion  to  private  and  wholly 
selfish  ends,  must  in  the  long  run  sap  the  vigour 
of  a  nation,  and  render  it  incapable  of  any  effect- 
ual resistance  to  its  enemies.  Moral  declension  is 
a  sure  symptom  of  approaching  political  disso- 
lution; so  sure,  that  if  a  nation  chooses  and  per- 
sists in  evil,  in  the  face  of  all  dissuasion,  it  may 
be  assumed  to  be  bent  on  suicide  Like  Israel,  it 
may  be  said  to  do  thus,  "  in  order  to  make  its 
land  an  astonishment,  perpetual  hissings."  Men 
will  be  surprised  at  the  greatness  of  its  fall,  and 
at  the  same  time  will  acknowledge  by  voice  and 
gesture  that  its  doom  is  absolutely  just. 

So  far  as  his  immediate  hearers  were  con- 
cerned, the  effect  of  the  prophet's  words  was  ex- 
actly what  had  been  anticipated  (ver.  i8;  cf.  ver. 
12).  Jeremiah's  preaching  was  a  ministry  of 
hardening,  in  a  far  more  complete  sense  than 
Isaiah's  had  been.  On  the  present  occasion,  the 
popular  obduracy  and  unbelief  evinced  itself  in 
a  conspiracy  to  destroy  the  prophet  by  false  ac- 
cusation. They  would  doubtless  find  it  not  dffi- 
cult  to  construe  his  words  as  blasphemy  against 
lahvah,  and  treason  against  the  state.  And  they 
said:  "Come  and  let  us  devise  devices" — lay  a 
plot — "  against  Jeremiah."  Dispassionate  wis- 
dom, mere  worldly  prudence,  would  have  said. 
Let  us  weigh  well  the  probability  or  even  possi- 
bility of  the  truth  of  his  message.  Moral  ear- 
nestness, a  sincere  love  of  God  and  goodness, 
would  have  recognised  in  the  prophet's  fearful 
earnest  a  proof  of  good  faith,  a  claim  to  consider- 
ation. Unbiassed  common  sense  would  have 
asked.  What  has  Jeremiah  to  gain  by  persistence 
in  unpopular  teaching?  What  will  be  his  re- 
ward, supposing  his  words  come  true?  Is  it  to 
be  supposed  that  a  man  whose  woeful  tidings 
are  uttered  in  a  voice  broken  with  sobs,  and  in- 
terrupted by  bursts  of  wild  lamentation,  will  look 
with  glad  eyes  upon  destruction  when  it  comes, 
if  it  come  after  all?  But  habitual  sin  blinds  as 
well  as  pollutes  the  soul.  And  when  admonition 
is  unacceptable,  it  breeds  hatred.  The  heart  that 
is  not  touched  by  appeal  becomes  harder  than 
it  was  before.  The  ice  of  indifference  becomes 
the  adamant  of  malignant  opposition.  The  pop- 
ulace of  Jerusalem,  like  that  of  more  modern 
capitals,  was  enervated  by  ease  and  luxury,  al- 
together given  over  to  the  pursuit  of  wealth  and 
pleasure  as  the  end  of  life.  They  hated  the  man 
who  rebuked  in  the  gate,  and  abhorred  him  that 
spoke  uprightly  (Amos  v.  10).  They  could  not 
abide  one  whose  life  and  labours  were  a  contin- 
ual protest  against  their  own.  And  now  he  had 
done  his  best  to  rob  them  of  their  pleasant  confi- 
dence, to  destroy  the  delusion  of  their  fool's 
paradise.  He  had  burst  into  the  heathenish 
sanctuary  where  they  offered  a  worship  congenial 
to  their  hearts,  and  done  his  best  to  wreck  their 
idols,  and  dash  their  altars  to  the  ground.  He 
had  affirmed  that  the  accredited  oracles  were  all 
a  lie,  that  the  guides  whom  they  blindly  followed 
were  leading  them  to  ruin.  So  the  passive  dislike 
of  good  blazes  out  into  murderous  fury  against 
the  good  man  who  dares  to  be  good  alone  in  the 
face  of  a  sinful  multitude.  That  they  are  made 
thoroughly  uneasy  by  his  message  of  judgment, 


Jeremiah  xviii.J 


THE    DIVINE    POTTER. 


107 


that  they  are  more  than  half  convinced  that  he 
is  right,  is  plain  from  the  frantic  passion  with 
which  they  repeat  and  deny  his  words.  "  Law 
shall  not  perish  from  the  priest,  nor  counsel  from 
the  wise,  nor  the  word  from  the  prophet:  "  these 
things  cannot,  "  shall  not "  be.  When  people 
have  pinned  their  faith  to  a  false  system — a  sys- 
tem which  accords  with  their  worldly  prejudices, 
and  flatters  their  ungodly  pride,  and  winks  at  or 
even  sanctions  their  vices;  when  they  have  an- 
chored their  entire  confidence  upon  certain  men 
and  certain  teachings  which  are  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  their  own  aims  in  life  and  their  own 
selfish  predilections,  they  are  not  only  disturbed 
and  distressed,  but  often  enraged  by  a  demon- 
stration that  they  are  lulled  in  a  false  security. 
And  anger  of  this  kind  is  apt  to  be  so  irrational 
that  they  may  think  to  escape  from  the  threat- 
ened evil  by  silencing  its  prophet.  "  Come  and 
let  us  smite  him  with  the  tongue,  and  let  us  not 
hearken  to  any  of  his  words!"  They  will  first 
get  rid  of  him,  and  then  forget  his  words  of 
warning.  Their  policy  is  no  better  than  that  of 
the  bird  which  buries  its  head  in  the  sand,  when 
its  pursuers  have  run  it  down;  an  infatuated  Out 
of  sight,  out  of  mind.  And  Jeremiah's  recom- 
pense for  his  disinterested  zeal  is  another  con- 
spiracy against  his  life. 

Once  more  he  lays  his  cause  before  the  one 
impartial  Judge;  the  one  Being  who  is  exalted 
above  all  passion,  and  therefore  sees  the  truth  as 
it  is. 

"  Hearken  Thou,  O  lahvah,  unto  me, 
And  hear  Thou  the  voice  of  mine  adversaries. 
Should  evil  be  recon  pensed  for  trood  ? 
For  they  have  digged  a  pit  for  my  life. 
Remember  my   standing  before  Thee  to  speak  good 

about  them, 
To  turn  back  Thy  wrath  from  them." 

Hearken  Thou,  since  titcy  refuse  to  hearken;  hear 
both  sides,  and  pronounce  for  the  right.  Be- 
hold the  glaring  contrast  between  my  innocence 
of  all  hurtful  intent,  and  their  clamorous  injustice, 
between  my  truth  and  their  falsehood,  my  p^'ayers 
for  their  salvation  and  their  outcry  for  my  blood. 
As  we  read  this  prayer  of  Jeremiah's,  we  are 
reminded  of  the  very  similar  language  of  the 
thirty-fifth  and  hundred  and  ninth  psalms,  of 
which  he  was  himself  perhaps  the  author  (see 
'especially  Ps.  xxxv.  i,  4,  5,  7,  11,  12;  cix.  2,  5). 
We  have  already  partially  considered  the  moral 
aspect  of  such  petitions.  It  is  necessary  to  bear 
in  mind  that  the  prophet  is  speaking  of  persons 
who  have  persistently  rejected  warning,  and 
ridiculed  reproof;  and  now,  in  return  for  his  in- 
tercessions on  their  behalf,  are  attempting  his 
life,  not  in  a  sudden  outbreak  of  uncontrollable 
fury,  but  with  craft  and  deliberate  malice,  after 
seeking,  apparently,  like  their  spiritual  succes- 
sors in  a  later  age,  to  entrap  him  into  admissions 
that  might  be  construed  as  treason  or  blasphemy 
(Ps.  xxxv.   19-21). 

"Therefore  give  their  .sons  to  the  famine, 
And  pour  them  into  the  hands  of  the  sword  ; 
And  let  their  wives  be  bereaved  and  widows, 
And  let  their  husbands  be  slain  of  Death  ; 
Let  their  young  men  be  stricken  down  of  the  sword  in 
the  battle  ! 

*'Let  a  cry  be  heard  from  their  houses, 
When  n^hou  bringest  a  troop  upon  them  suddenly  ; 
For  they  digged  a  pit  to  catch  me. 
And  snares  they  hid  for  my  feet. 

"But  of  Thyself.  lahvah.  Thou  knowest  all  their  plan 
against  me  for  d^ath  ; 
Pardon  Thou  not  their  iniauitv. 


And  blot  not  out  their  trespass  from  before  Thee  ; 

Hut  let  them  be  made  to  .stumble  before  Thee, 

In  the  time  of  Thine  anger  deal  Thou  with  them  !  " 

The  passage  is  lyrical  in  form  and  expression, 
and  something  must  be  allowed  for  the  fact  in 
estimating  its  precise  significance.  Jeremiah 
had  entreated  God  and  man  that  all  these  things 
might  not  come  to  pass.  Now,  when  the  atti- 
tude of  the  people  towards  his  message  and  him- 
self at  last  leaves  no  doubt  that  their  obduracy  is 
invincible,  in  his  despair  and  distractioh  he  cries, 
Be  it  so,  then!  They  are  bent  on  destruction; 
let  them  have  their  will!  Let  the  doom  overtake 
them,  that  I  have  laboured  in  vain  to  avert! 
With  a  weary  sigh,  and  a  profound  sense  of  the 
ripeness  of  his  country  for  ruin,  he  gives  up  the 
struggle  to  save  it.  The  passage  thus  becomes 
a  rhetorical  or  poetical  expression  of  the  proph- 
et's despairing  recognition  of  the  inevitable. 

How  vivid  are  the  touches  with  which  he 
brings  out  upon  his  canvas  the  horrors  of  war! 
In  language  lurid  with  all  the  colours  of  destruc- 
tion, he  sets  before  us  the  city  taken  by  storm, 
he  makes  us  hear  the  cry  of  the  victims,  as  house 
after  house  is  visited  by  pillage  and  slaughter. 
But  stripped  of  its  poetical  form,  all  this  is  no 
more  than  a  concentrated  repetition  of  the  sen- 
tence which  he  has  over  and  over  again  pro- 
nounced against  Jerusalem  in  the  name  of  lahvah. 
The  imprecatory  manner  of  it  may  be  con- 
sidered to  be  simply  a  solemn  signification  of  the 
speaker's  own  assent  and  approval.  He  recalls 
the  sentence,  and  he  afiirms  its  perfect  conso- 
nance with  his  own  sense  of  justice.  Moreover 
all  these  terrible  things  actually  happened  in  the 
sequel.  The  prophet's  imprecations  received  the 
Divine  seal  of  accomplishment.  This  fact  alone 
seems  to  me  to  distinguish  his  prayer  from  a 
merely  human  cry  for  vengeance.  So  far  as  his 
feelings  as  a  man  and  a  patriot  were  concerned, 
we  cannot  doubt  that  he  would  have  averted  the 
catastrophe,  had  that  been  possible,  by  the  sacri- 
fice of  his  own  life.  That  indeed  was  the  object 
of  his  entire  ministry.  We  may  call  the  passage 
an  emotional  prediction;  and  it  was  probably  the 
predictive  character  of  it  which  led  the  prophet 
to  put  it  on  record. 

While  we  admit  that  no  Christian  may  ordina- 
rily pray  for  the  annihilation  of  any  but  spiritual 
enemies,  we  must  remember  that  no  Christian 
can  possibly  occupy  the  same  peculiar  position 
as  a  prophet  of  the  Old  Covenant;  and  we  may 
fairly  ask  whether  any  who  may  incline  to  judge 
harshly  of  Jeremiah  on  the  ground  of  passages 
like  this,  have  fully  realised  the  appalling  cir- 
cumstances which  wrung  these  prayers  from  his 
cruelly  tortured  heart?  We  find  it  hard  to  for- 
give small  personal  slights,  often  less  real  than 
imaginary;  how  should  we  comport  ourselves  to 
persons  whose  shameless  ingratitude  rewarded 
evil  for  good  to  the  extent  of  seeking  our  lives? 
Few  would  be  content,  as  Jeremiah  was,  with 
putting  the  cause  in  the  hand  of  God.  and  ab- 
staining from  all  attempts  at  personal  vindica- 
tion of  wrongs.  It  surely  betrays  a  failure  of 
imaginative  power  to  realise  the  terrible  diffi- 
culties which  beset  the  path  of  one  who,  in  a  far 
truer  sense  than  Elijah,  was  left  alone  to  uphold 
the  cause  of  true  religion  in  Israel,  and  not  less, 
a  very  inadequate  knowledge  of  our  own  spirit- 
ual weakness,  when  we  are  bold  to  censure  or 
even  to  apologise  for  the  utterances  of  Jeremiah. 

The  whole  question  assumes  a  dififerent  aspect, 
when   it   is   noticed   that   the   brief   "  Thus    said 


f9? 


THE    PE(iypH.IiCIE}S   OF    JEREMIAH. 


iivx  rliiirn3i3|_ 


Iahvah'!:"r  of  tjthe  .itext  chapter  (xtx.)  virtually 
introduces  the  DiWrie  reply  to  the  prophet's 
prayer.  He  is  now  bidden  to  foreshow  the  utter 
destruction  of  the  Jewish  polity  by  a  symbolic 
act  which  is  even  more  unambiguous  than  the 
language  of  the  prayer.  He  is  to  take  a  common 
earthenware  bottle  (baqbuq,  as  if  "pour-pour"; 
from  baqaq,  "  to  pour  out"),  and.  accompanied 
by  some  of  the  leading  personages  of  the  capital, 
heads  of  families  and  priests,  to  go  out  of  the  city 
to  the  valley  of  ben  Hinnom,  and  there,  after  a 
solemn  rehearsal  of  the  crimes  perpetrated  on 
that  very  spot  in  the  name  of  religion,  and  after 
predicting  the  consequent  retribution  which  will 
shortly  overtake  the  nation,  he  is  to  dash  the 
vessel  in  pieces  before  his  companions'  eyes,  in 
token  of  the  utter  and  irreparable  ruin  which 
awaits  their  city  and  people.         ,    :  •  '.■..-    ■    .'. 

Having  enacted  his  part  in  this:  striking  sicene, 
Jeremiah  returns  to  the  courts  of  thfe  temple,  and 
there  repeats  the  same  terrible  message  in  briefer 
terms  before  all  the  people;  adding  expressly  that 
it  is  the  reward  of  their  stubborn  obstinacy  and 
deafness  to  the  Divine  voice.  i 

:  Tthe  prophet's  imprecations  of  evil  thus  ap- 
pear to  have  been  ratified  at  the  time  of  their 
conception  by  the  Divine  voice,  which'  spoke  in 
the  stillness  of  his  after  reflection,  ^'ni'/r  ■^j-.vji 
.iij-;viu;i  It'  ■.inua  sii/  ii.i  nj-jiijr.'JTjl,  idfiicgs  b'ionrjori 
-noo  3d  ^Efn  il  \o  isnrtijm  xiolR-j5iqm\  orlT 
aril  }o  nctJBDfling[HA'P'I''E--Er  Xlf /■•?•  ad  oJ  baiabi?. 

illBDOl     oH       .IfiVOi  (I3gc£     nV/O     c'l-jAii'jq'i 

'^im  BmKEU  VESSEl^JtnSYMBOL>i(mi 
TovofiToM  .ooilauJUDGMENTlfO  ?.iri  riJiw  oonr^n 
aril  ni  bsn^qqad  v-  lirh  aldiiiDt  aaarlJ  He 

aril  53713391  gnoijEKBMnwit'jciobaOiq  3rfT  .fsripos 
3fiolK  ioB\  eidT  .inomrlsilqrnoiofi  lo  Ib3?.  anivjQ 
'■  T44lt ' result  6f  his  former  address',  founded  upon 
the  procedure  of  the  potter*  had  only  been  to 
bring  out  into  clearer  distinctness  the  appalling 
Extent  of  the  national  corruption.  It  was  evident 
that  Judah  was  incorrigible,  and  the  Potter's 
•vi^sisl  must  be  broken  in  pieces  by  its  Maker. 
''"''^Thtis'said  lahvah:  Go  and  buy  a- bottle" 
Xhaqbuq,  as  if  "  a  pour-pour  "  ;  the  meaning  is  al- 
luded to  in  the  first  word  of  ver.  7:  iibaqqothi, 
"and  I  will  pour  out")  "of  a  moulder  of  pot- 
tfe¥y*"'""(go  the  acceftt^;'  but  perhaps  the  Vtilgate 
16  !right^  '*  lagurtculam  figuli  testeam,"  ''  a  potter's 
earthen  vessel,"  A.  V.;  lit.  a  potter's  bottle,  viz., 
mHhenwqre),  "and''  (take:  LXX.  rightly  adds) 
*"  some  of  the  elders  of  the  people  and  of  the 
eMei-sOf  the  priests,  and  go  out  into  the  valley 
of  %en  Hinnom  at  the  entry  of  the  Pottery  Gate '' 
(a,  pOstern,  whel-e  broken  earthenware  and  rub- 
bish were  shot  forth  into  the  valle^y:  the  t^rm  is 
connected  with  that  for  "  pottery,"  Ver.  1,  which 
is  the  same  as  that  in  Job  ii.  8),  "  and  cry  there 
th^  words  that  I  shall  speak  unto  thee," — Jere- 
thiah  does  not  pause  here,  to  relate  how  he  fol- 
lowed the  Divine  impulse,  but  goes  on  at  once 
t'tj  communicate  the  tenor  of  the  Divine 
"  words  " ;  a  circumstance  which  poirits  to  the 
fact'  that  this  narrative !  was  only  written  sOme 
iitn^  after  the  symbolical  action  which  it  records; 
"and  say  thou,  Hear  ye  lahvah's  word,  O  kings 
6f  Judah  and  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem!  Thtis 
said  lahvah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel:  Loj'  I 
am' about  to  bring  an  evil  upon  this  place*  such 
that,  whoever  heareth  it,  his  ears  shall  tingle!" 
If  we  suppose,  as  seems  likely,  that  this  series  of 
oracles  (xviii.-xx.)  belongs  to  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiachin,  the  expression  "kings  of  Judah"  may 
denote   that   king   and   the   cfUieen'^fticfthei-.  "  Aft^ 


other  view,  is  that,  tJiekiogSr  of  Judah  in  gppef^i 
are  addressed  "  as  an  indefinite  class  of  persons,'; 
here  and  elsewhere  (xyii.  20,  xxii.  4),  because 
the  prophet  did  not  write  the  main  portior^  of  hi;S 
book  until  aft&rthe  siege  of  Jerusalem  (Ewald)^ 
The  announcement  of  this  verse  is  quoted  by.tte 
compiler  of  Kir^gs  in  relation  to  thf '!qifime^/Pj^ 
king  Manasseh  (2  Kings  xxi.  12).,'      :'   '.r.v  rrj\ 

"  Because  that  they  forsook  Me,  and  made  this 
place  strange  " — alienated  it  from  lahvah  by  con-^ 
secrating  it  to  "strange  gods";  or,,as  theTarguna, 
and  Syriac,  "  polluted  "  it — "  and  burnt  incense 
therein  to  other  gods,  whom  neither  they  nor 
their  fathers  knew  "  (xvi.  13) ;  "  and  the  kings  of 
Judah  did  fill  this  place  with  blood  of  inno- 
cents" (so:  the  LXX<  '  '' Nor  the ,  kipga  .of 
Judah  "  gives  a  poor  sense;  they  are  inclined,  iji 
the  preceding  phrase),  "  and  built  the  "bamoth 
Baal"  (High  places  of  Baal;  a  proper  name, 
Josh.  xiii.  17),  "  to  burn  their  sons  in  the  fire,'^ 
("  as  burnt-offerings  to  the  Baal;  "  LXX.^  omitSj 
and  it  is  wanting,  vii.  31,  xxxii,  35.  It  ma.y:be  a 
gloss,  but  is  probably  genuine,  as  there  are  sUghl 
variations  in  each  passage),  "which  1  com; 
manded  not"  ("  nor  spake:  "  LXX.  omit?), 
"  neither  came  it  into  My  mind:  therefore,  behold 
days  are  coming^  saith  lahvah,  when  this  place 
will  no  more  be  called  the  Tophet  and  valley  of 
bjen  Ilinnom  but  the  Valley  of  Slaughter,!" 
£"  land  in  Tophet  shall  they  bury,  go  i  that  theri? 
lie  "i-rrrem^in— ", no  room  to  bury!  "  This  cI^usBi 
preserved  at  the  end  of  ver.  11,  but  omitted 
there  by  the  LXX.,  probably  belongs  here:  see 
vii.  42).  ,"  And  ,1  will  pour  out"  (ver.  i;;' Jsa.' 
xix.  3)  "''?he"'c6Hnsel  of  Judah  and  jerusal^iii'liin 
this  place  " — that  is, .  I  will  empty,  the  land 'lof 
^1  'wisdom  and  fesOufce fulness,  as  one  empties 
a  bottle  of  its  water,  so  ,that  the'heads  of  ,.t^e 
state  shall  be  powerless  to  devise  any  effectual 
scheme  of  defence^  in  the  face  of  calamity  (;(:£ 
xiil.  I3)V-"  and  I  will  cause  them  to  fall  i)y'-tki 
sword  'before  their  enemies'"  (Deut.  xxviii..25)i^ 
"and  by  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  their  hfe; 
and  I  will  make  *  their  carcasesi  food  unto. th^ 
birds  of  the  air  and  the  beasts>  of  the  earthi' 7 
(Deut;  xxviii.  26;  chap.  vii.  33,  xvi;  4)1  '.'.And  I 
will  set  this  city  'ifor  an  astonishment '•'! (Dent 
xxviii.  37)  "and  a  hissing"  (xviii.  16);  "  evieity 
one  that  passeth  by  her  shall  be  astonished,  ah-d 
hiss  at  all  her  'strokes'"  (xlix.  17;  1.. .  :i3).uor 
"  plagues"  (Deut.  xxviii.  59).  ''And-I  wilhcaiiAfe 
them  to  '  eat  the  flesh  of  their  sons  and  the  fl-^sh 
of  their  daughters,'  and  each  the  flesh -of  his: ifelr 
low  shall  they  eat— '  in  the  stress  and  the' straiti- 
ness  wherewith  their  enemies'  and  they  that  seek 
their  life  'shall  straiten  them,'"  It  will  be  seen 
from  the  references  that  the  Denteronomic  coK 
curing  of  these  closing  threats  (vvi.  7-9)  is  very 
strong,  the  last  verse  being  practically  a. quota- 
tion (Deut.  xxviii.  53).  The  efifect  of  the  .whole 
oracle' would  thus  be  to  sugg-est  that  the.  tc:rribie 
sanctions  of  the  sacred  Law  would  not  remain 
inoperative;  but  that  the  shameless  violation  of 
the  solemn  covenant  under  Josiah,  by  which  the 
nation  undertook  to  observe  the  code  of  I^euter- 
onomy,  would  soon  be  visited  with  the  retribu- 
tive calamities  so  vividly  foreshadowed  in.  that 
book. 

"And  break  thOu  the  bottle,  to  the  eyes  ofthi^ 
men  that  go  with  thee,  and  say  unto  them:  Thus 
said  lahvah  Sabaoth;  So  will  I  break  this  people 
and  this  city,  as  one  breaketh  the  potter's  vessel 
so  that  it  cannot  be  mended  again!  Thus  will  I 
do  to  this  place,  saith  lahvah,  and  to  the  inhabit- 


Jeremiah  xix.]    THE  BROKEN  VESSEL— A  SYMBOL  OF  JUDGMENT 


109 


ants  thereof,  and  make  "  (infin.  constr.  as  in  xvii. 
10,  continuing  the  mood  and  person  of  the  pre- 
ceding verb;  which  is  properly  a  function  of  the 
infin.  absol.,  as  in  ver.  13)  "  this  city  like  a 
Tophet  "—make  it  one  huge  altar  of  human  sac^ 
rifice,  a  burning-place  for  thousands  of  human 
victims.  "  And  the  house's  of  Jerusalem,  and  the 
houses  of  tht  kings  of  Judah  "—the  palace  of 
David  and  Solomon,  in  which  king  after  king 
had  reigned,  and  "  done  the  evil  in  lahvah's 
eyes," — "  shall  become  like  the  place  of  the 
T6phet,  the  deliled  ones!  even  all  the  houses 
upon  the  roofs  of  which  they  burnt  incense  unto 
all  the  host  of  heaven,  and  poured  outpourings" 
^Hbations  of  wine  and  honey)  "  unto  other 
g&Sk."  (So  the  Heb.  punctuation,  which  seems 
to  'give  a  very  good  sense.  The  principal  houses, 
tfibSe  of  the  kings  and  grandees,  are  called  "  the 
defiled,"  because  their  roofs  especially  have  been 
polluted  with  idolatrous  rites.  The  last  clause 
of  the  v^rse  explains  the  epithet,  which  might 
have  been  referred  to  "  the  kings  of  Judah,"  had 
it  preceded  "  like  the  place  of  the  Tophet."  The 
houses  were  not  to  become  "  defiled  ";  they  were 
already  so;  past  all  cleansing;  they  were  to  be 
destroyed  with  fire,  and  in  their  destruction  to 
become  the  Tophet  or  sacrificial  pyre  of  their 
inhabitants.  We  need  not,  therefore,  read 
^'•Tophteh,"  after  Isa.  xxx.  33,  as  I  at  first 
ttiought  of  doing,  to  find  afterwards  that  Ewald 
h'id  already  suggested  it.  The  term  rendered 
•'•even  all."  is  lit.  "  unto  all,"  that  is,  "including 
M";  cf.  Ezek.  xliv.  9).*  i-i-    -•;:' 

Sf'The  command  "and  bfeak  th<i«:the  bottle 
1'-\L  .-and  say  unto  them  .  '.'  :"  tompared  with 
that  of  ver.  2,  "and  cry  there  the  words  that  I 
Ih^ll  speak  unto  thee!  "  seems  to  indicate  the 
i^foper  point  of  view  from  which  the  whole  piece 
is  to  be  regarded.  Jeremiah  is  recalling  and  de- 
scribing a  particular  episode  in  his  past  ministry; 
a'Hd  he  includes  the  whole  of  it,  with  the  attend- 
ant circumstances  and  all  that  he  said,  first  to  the 
Wders  in  the  vale  of  ben  Hinnom,  and  then  to 
the  {jeople  assembled  in  the  temple,  under  the 
feotnprehensive  "  Thus  said  Tahvah!  "  with  which 
he  begins  his  narrative.  In  other  words,  he 
affirms  that  he  was  throughout  the  entire  occur- 
rertce  guided  by  the  impulses  of  the  Spirit  of 
sGod.  Tt  is  very  possible  that  the  longer  first  ad- 
^bess  ;(vv.  2-g)  really  gives  the  substance  of  what 
M^  said  to  the  people  in  the  temple  on  his  return 
"f¥orrt  the  valley;  which  is  merely  summarised  in 
*^terie'ls.'  -■•  ■■■  i/Yv'  '-'■  '--  '■■^'-'■'■■^  -■■■::i.; 
-af^'^rtd  'Jere¥nia'hi'C&me'';i'nj'?^im©  th-e:;  tempk^e- 
^^'ftxim  the  Tophet;  whither  lahvah  had'stnt  him 
't^  prophesy,  and  took  his  stand  in  the  court  of 
lahvah's  House,  and  said  unto  all  the  people: 
Thus  said  lahvah  Sabaoth  Israel's  God;  Lo,  I 
"Stti  about  to  bring  upon  "  (ver,  3)  "  this  city  and 
iipbi^''!all  hef  cities"  -(■' and  upon  her  villages:" 
LXX.^adds)  "  all  thie '  evil  that  I  have  spoken 
«drlcetning  hef;  because  they  stiffened  their 
ileck  "  (vii.  26);  "not  to  hear  My  words!"'  In 
tws  apparent  epitome  of  His  discourse  to  the 
;^ebple  in  the  terriple,  the  prophet  seems  to  sum 
^^tJ'all  his  past  labours,  in  view  of  an  impending 
cfi'sis. '-■'' AH  the  evil"  spoken  hitherto  concerri'- 
•f^  Jerusalem  is  upon  the  pioint  of  being  aCcomlr 
lH}|hed'  (tf.  XXV.  5):'  '  '•'  '  ^^':  duwf  qifj-iov/  lo 
''"In  revie\vifig  the^  errtiM  c¥acte'?'W>e''mgy^note)a$ 
^fr'fbrmet"  instances,'  the  care  with  which  all  the 

-j*{vXX4  afo  ■faiy  oKa^jHT^v  avjMv  m^kes  it  posjijblethat  th^v 


circumstances  of  the  symbolical  action  are 
chosen,  in  order  to  enhance  the  effect  of  it  upotl 
the  minds  of  the  witnesses.  The  Oriental  mind) 
delights  in  everything  that  partakes  of  the  nature 
of  an  enigma;  it  loves  to  be  called  uponi  to  un- 
ravel the  meaning  of  dark  ijentences,  and  to  dis- 
entangle the  wisdom  wrapped  up  in  riddling 
words  and  significant  actions.  It  would  have 
found  eloquence  in  Tarquin's  unspoken  an.swer 
to  his  son's  messenger.  "  Rex  velut  delibera- 
bundus  in  hortum  medium  transit,  sequente 
nuncio  filii:  ibi  inambulans  tacitus  summa  papa- 
verum  capita  dicitur  baculo  decussisse  "  (Liv.  i. 
54).  No  doubt  Jeremiah's  companions  would 
watch  his  every  step,  and  would  not  miss  the 
fact  that  he  carried  his  earthenware  vessel  out  of 
the  city  by  the  "  Sherd  Gate."  Here  was  a  ves- 
sel yet  whole,  treated  as  though  it  were  already  a 
shattered  heap  of  fragments!  They  would  be 
prepared  for  the  oracle  in  the  valley.  ■  'i' 

It  is  worth  while,  by  the  way,  to  notice  who 
those  companions  were.  They  were  certain  of 
"  the  elders  of  the  people  "  and  of  "  the  elders 
of  the  priests."  Jeremiah,  it  seems,  was  no  wild 
revolutionary  dreamer  and  schemer,  whose  hand 
and  voice  were  against  all  established  authority 
in  Church  and  State.  This  was  not  the  character 
of  the  Hebrew  prophets  in  general,  though  some 
writers  have  conceived  thus  of  them.  There  is 
no  evidence  that  Jeremiah  ever  sought  to  divest 
himself  of  the  duties  and  privileges  of  his  heredi- 
tary priesthood;  or  that  he  looked  upon  the  mon- 
archy and  the  priestly  guilds  and  the  entire  social 
organisation  of  Israel,  as  other  than  institutions 
divinely  originated  and  divinely  preserved 
through  all  the  ages  of  the  national  history.  He 
did  not  believe  that  man  created  these  institu- 
tions, though  experience  taught  him  that  man 
might  abuse  and  pervert  them  from  their  lawful 
uses.  His  aim  w-as  always  to  reform,  to  restore, 
to  lead  the  people  back  to  "  the  old  paths  "  of 
primitive  simplicity  and  rectitude;  not  to  abolish 
hereditary  institutions,  and  substitute  for  the 
order  which  had  become  an  integral  part  of  the 
national  life,  some  brand-new  constitution  which 
had  never  been  tried,  and  would  be  no  more 
likely  to  fit  the  body  corporate  than  the  armour 
of  Satil  fitted  the  free  limbs  bf  the  young,  shep- 
herd who  was  to  slay  Goliath.  -     ■  ■  ■    ;^;    >J 

The  prophets  never  called  for  the  abolitron  of 
those  laws  and  customs,  civil  arid  ecdesiasticaJ', 
which  Were  the  very  framework  of  the  state, 
and  the  pillai-s  of  the  social  edifice.  TheV'did  not 
cry,  "  Down  with  kings  and  priestsi'''  biit  tb 
both  kings  and  priests  they  cried:,  "■  Hear-  ye 
lahvah's  word!  "  And  all  experience  proved  that 
they  v,ere  right.  Paper  constitutions  have  liever 
yet  redeemed  a  nation  from  its  vices, -nardte- 
livered  a  community  from  the  impotence  and  the 
decay  which  are  the  inevitable  fniits  of  iniarhri 
corruption.  Arbitrary  legi-slative  ■changes  Avill 
not  alter  the  inward  condition  oi  a  people;  c6t^ 
ousness  and  hypocrisy,  pride  and  selfishnesi.  in^^ 
temperance  and  uncleanness  and  cruelty,  may  be 
as  rampant  in  a  commonwealth  as  in  a  kingdom. 

The  contents  of  the  oracle  are  much  what  we 
have  had  many  times  already.  The  chief  diflFer- 
ence  lies  in  a  calm  definiteness  of  assurance,  a 
tone  of  distinct  certitude,  as  though  the  end  were 
so  near  at  hand  as  to  leav^  no  room  for  doubt 
or  hesitation.  And  this  diflference  is  fittingly 
and  impressively  suggested  by  the  i>articular 
symbol  chosen— the  shattering  of  an, earthenware 
vessel,    beyond'  the    possiibility    of    repair.     The 


no 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


direct  mention  of  the  king  of  Babylon  and  the 
Babylonian  captivity,  in  the  sequel  (chap,  xx.), 
points  to  the  presence  of  a  Babylonian  invasion, 
probably  that  which  ended  with  the  exile  of 
Jeconiah  and  the  chief  citizens  of  Jerusalem. 

The  fatal  sin,  from  which  the  oracle  starts 
and  to  which  it  returns,  is  forsaking  lahvah, 
and  making  the  city  of  His  choice  "  strange " 
to  Him,  that  is,  hateful  and  unclean,  by  contact 
with  foreign  and  bloody  superstitions,  which 
were  even  falsely  declared  by  their  promoters 
to  be  pleasing  to  lahvah,  the  Avenger  of  inno- 
cent blood!  (chap.  vii.  31).  The  punishment 
corresponds  to  the  offence.  The  sacrifices  of 
blood  will  be  requited  with  blood,  shed  in  tor- 
rents on  the  very  spot  which  had  been  so  foully 
polluted;  they  who  had  not  scrupled  to  slay  their 
children  for  the  sacrifice,  were  to  slay  them  again 
for  food  under  the  stress  of  siege  and  famine; 
the  city  and  its  houses,  defiled  with  the  foreign 
worships,  will  become  one  vast  Molech-fire 
(xxxii.  35),  in  which  all  will  perish  together. 

It  may  strike  a  modern  reader  that  there  is 
something  repulsive  and  cold-blooded  in  this  de- 
tailed enumeration  of  appalling  horrors.  But 
not  only  is  it  the  case  that  Jeremiah  is  quot- 
ing from  the  Book  of  the  Law,  at  a  time  when, 
to  an  unprejudiced  eye,  there  was  every  likeli- 
hood that  the  course  of  events  would  verify  his 
dark  forebodings;  in'  the  dreadful  experience  of 
those  times  such  incidents  as  those  mentioned 
(ver.  9)  were  familiar  occurrences  in  the  obsti- 
nate defence  and  protracted  sufferings  of  belea- 
guered cities.  The  prophet,  therefore,  simply  af- 
firms that  obstinate  persistence  in  following  their 
own  counsels  and  rejecting  the  higher  guidance 
will  bring  upon  the  nation  its  irretrievable  ruin. 
We  know  that  in  the  last  siege  he  did  his  utmost 
to  prevent  the  occurrence  of  these  unnatural 
horrors  by  urging  surrender;  but  then,  as  al- 
ways, the  people  "  stiffened  their  neck,  not  to 
hear  lahvah's  words." 

Jeremiah  knew  his  countrymen  well.  No 
phrase  could  have  better  described  the  resolute 
obstinacy  of  the  national  character.  How  were 
the  headstrong  self-will,  the  inveterate  sensual- 
ity, the  blind  tenacity  of  fanatical  and  non-moral 
conceptions  which  characterised  this  people,  to 
be  purified  and  made  serviceable  in  the  interests 
of  true  religion,  except  by  means  of  the  fiery 
ordeal  which  all  the  prophets  foresaw  and  fore- 
told? As  we  have  seen,  polytheism  exercised 
upon  the  popular  mind  a  spell  which  we  can 
hardly  comprehend  from  our  modern  point  of 
view;  a  polytheism  foul  and  murderous,  which 
violated  the  tenderest  affections  of  our  nature 
bv  demanding  of  the  father  the  sacrifice  of  his 
child,  and  violated  the  very  instinct  of  natural 
purity  by  the  shameless  indulgence  of  its  wor- 
ship. It  was  a  consecration  of  lust  and  cruelty, 
— that  worship  of  Molech,  those  rites  of  the 
Baals  and  Asheras.  Meagre  and  monotonous 
as  the  sacred  records  may  on  these  heads  ap- 
pear to  be,  their  witness  is  supplemented  by 
other  sources,  by  the  monuments  of  Babylon  and 
Phoenicia. 

It  is  hard  to  see  how  the  religious  instinct 
of  men  in  this  peculiar  stage  of  belief  and  prac- 
tice was  to  be  enlightened  and  purified  in  any 
other  way  than  the  actual  course  of  Providence. 
What  arguments  can  be  imagined  that  would 
have  appealed  to  minds  which  found  a  fatal  fas- 
cination, nay,  we  must  suppose  an  intense  sat- 
isfaction, in  rites  so  hideous  that  one  durst  not 


even  describe  them;  minds  to  which  the  lofty 
monotheism  of  .A.mos,  the  splendid  eloquence 
of  an  Isaiah,  the  plaintive  lyrical  strain  of  a 
Jeremiah,  appealed  in  vain?  Appeals  to  the 
order  of  the  world,  to  the  wonders  of  organic 
life,  were  lost  upon  minds  which  made  gods 
of  the  most  obvious  subjects  of  that  order,  the 
sun,  moon,  and  stars;  which  even  personified 
and  adored  the  physical  principle  whereby  the 
succession  of  life  after  life  is  perpetuated. 

Nothing  short  of  the  perception  "  that  the 
word  of  the  prophets  had  come  to  pass,"  the 
recognition,  therefore,  that  the  prophetic  idea 
of  God  was  the  true  idea,  could  have  succeeded 
in  keeping  the  remnant  of  Judah  safe  from  the 
contagion  of  surrounding  heathenism  in  the  land 
of  their  exile,  and  in  radically  transforming  once 
for  all  the  religious  tendencies  of  the  Jewish 
race. 

In-Jeremiah's  view,  the  heinousness  of  Judah's 
idolatry  is  heightened  by  the  consideration  that 
the  gods  of  their  choice  are  gods  "  whom 
neither  they  nor  their  fathers  knew"  (ver.  4). 
The  kings  Ahaz,  Manasseh,  Amon,  had  intro- 
duced novel  rites,  and  departed  from  "  the  old 
paths  "  more  decidedly  than  any  of  their  prede- 
cessors. In  this  connection,  we  may  remem- 
ber that,  while  modern  Romish  controversial- 
ists do  not  scruple  to  accuse  the  Church  of  this 
country  with  having  unlawfully  innovated  at  the 
Reformation,  the  Anglican  appeal  has  always 
been  to  Scripture  and  primitive  antiquity.  Such, 
too,  was  the  appeal  of  the  prophets  (Hos.  vi. 
I,  7,  xi.  i;  Jer.  ii.  2,  vi.  16,  xi.  3).  It  is  the 
glory  of  our  Church,  a  glory  of  which  neither 
the  lies  of  Jesuits  nor  the  envy  of  the  sectaries 
can  rob  her,  that  she  returned  to  "  the  old 
paths,"  boldly  overleaping  the  dark  ages  of 
medijeval  ignorance,  imposture,  and  corruption, 
and  planting  her  foot  firmly  on  the  rock  of 
apostolic  practice  and  the  consent  of  the  un- 
divided Church. 

Disunion  among  Christians  is  a  sore  evil,  but 
union  in  the  maintenance  and  propaganda  of 
falsehood  is  a  worse;  and  the  guilt  of  disunion 
lies  at  the  door  of  that  system  which  abused 
its  authority  to  crush  out  legitimate  freedom  of 
thought,  to  retard  the  advancement  of  learning, 
and  to  establish  those  monstrous  innovations  in 
doctrine  and  worship,  which  subtle  dialecticians 
may  prove  to  their  own  satisfaction  to  be  in- 
nocent and  non-idolatrous  in  essence  and  in- 
tention, though  all  the  world  can  see  that  in 
practice  they  are  grossly  idolatrous.  God  pre- 
serve England  from  that  toleration  of  serious 
error,  which  is  so  easy  to  sceptical  indifference! 
God  preserve  her  from  lending  an  ear  to  the 
siren  voices  that  would  seduce  her  to  yield  her 
hard-won  independence,  her  noble  freedom,  her 
manly  rational  piety,  to  the  unhistorical  and  un- 
scriptural  claims  of  the  Papacy! 

If  we  reverence  those  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
Testament  to  which  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles 
made  their  constant  appeal,  we  shall  keep  stead- 
ily before  our  minds  the  fact  that,  in  the  estima- 
tion of  a  prophet  like  Jeremiah,  the  sin  of  sins, 
the  sin  that  involved  the  ruin  of  Israel  and 
Judah,  was  the  sin  of  associating  other  objects 
of  worship  with  the  One  Only  God.  The  temp- 
tation is  peculiarly  strong  to  some  natures.  The 
continual  relapse  of  ancient  Israel  is  not  so  great 
a  wonder  to  those  of  us  who  have  any  knowledge 
of  mankind,  and  who  can  observe  what  is  pass- 
ing around  them  at  the  present  day.     It  is  the 


Jeremiah  xx.] 


JEREMIAH    UNDER    PERSECUTION. 


severe  demand  of  God's  holy  law,  which  makes 
men  cast  about  for  some  plausible  compromise 
— it  is  that  demand  which  also  makes  them  yearn 
after  some  intermediary  power,  whose  compas- 
sion will  be  less  subject  to  considerations  of 
justice,  whom  prayers  and'entreaties  and  presents 
may  overcome,  and  induce  to  wink  at  unrepented 
sin.  In  an  age  of  unsettlement,  the  more  daring 
spirits  will  be  prone  to  silence  their  inconven- 
ient scruples  by  rushing  into  atheism,  while  the 
more  timid  may  take  refuge  in  Popery.  "  For 
to  disown  a  Moral  Governour,  or  to  admit  that 
any  observances  of  superstition  can  release  men 
from  the  duty  of  obeying  Him,  equally  serves 
the  purpose  of  those,  who  resolve  to  be  as  wicked 
as  they  dare,  or  as  little  virtuous  as  they  can  " 
(Bp.  Hurd). 

Then  too  there  is  the  glory  of  the  saints  and 
angels  of  God.  Hew  can  frail  man  refuse  to 
bow  before  the  vision  of  their  power  and  splen- 
dour, as  they  stand,  the  royal  children  of  the 
King  of  kings,  around  the  heavenly  throne, 
deathless,  radiant  with  love  and  joy  and  purity, 
exalted  far  above  all  human  weakness  and  human 
sorrows?  If  the  holy  angels  are  "  ministering 
spirits,"  why  not  the  entire  community  of  the 
Blessed?  And  what  is  '")  hinder  us  from  cast- 
ing ourselves  at  the  feet  of  saint  or  angel,  one's 
own  appointed  guardian,  or  chosen  helper?  Let 
good  George  Herbert  answer  for  us  all. 

"  Oh  glorious  spirits,  who  after  all  your  bands 
See  the  smooth  face  of  God,  without  a  frown, 

Or  strict  command.s  ; 
Where  every  one  is  king,  and  hath  his  crown, 
If  not  upon  his  he3  J,  yet  in  his  hands  : 

"Not  out  of  envy  or  maliciousness 
Do  I  forbear  to  crave  your  special  aid. 

I  would  address 
My  vows  to  th"*?  most  gladly,  blessed  Maid, 
And  Mother  <"    my  God,  in  my  distress: 


"But  now,  (a'as  !)  I  dare  not  ;  for  our  King, 
Whom  we  Jo  all  jointly  adore  and  praise, 

Bids  no  such  thing  : 
And  wh'Jre  His  pleasure  no  injunction  lays, 
('Tis  y  ur  own  case)  ye  never  move  a  wing. 

"All  worship  is  prerogative,  and  a  flower 
Of  His  rich  crown,  from  whom  lies  no  appeal 

At  the  last  hour  : 
Therefore  we  dare  not  from  His  garland  steal. 
To  make  a  posy  for  inferior  power." 

In  this  sense  also,  as  in  many  others,  the  warn- 
t  of  St.  John  applies: 

tittle   children,   keep  yourselves  from, 
idols! 


CHAPTER   XIII. 

JEREMIAH  UNDER  PERSECUTION. 

Jeremiah  xx. 

The  prophet  has  now  to  endure  something 
more  than  a  scornful  rejection  of  his  message. 
"  And  Pashchur  ben  Immer  the  priest  "  (he  was 
chief  officer  in  the  house  of  lahvah)  "  heard 
Jeremiah  prophesying  these  words.  And  Pash- 
chur smote  Jeremiah  the  prophet  and  put  him 
in  the  stocks,  which  were  in  the  upper  gate 
of  Benjamin  in  the  house  of  lahvah."  Like  the 
priest  of  Bethel,  who  abruptly  put  an  end  to 
the  preaching  of  Amos  in  the  royal  sanctuary, 
Pashchur  suddenly  interferes,  apparently  before 


Jeremiah  has  finished  his  address  to  the  people; 
and  enraged  at  the  tenour  of  his  words,  he 
causes  him — "  Jeremiah  the  prophet,"  as  it  is 
significantly  added,  to  indicate  the  sacrilege  of 
the  act — to  be  beaten  in  the  cruel  Eastern  man- 
ner on  the  soles  of  the  feet,  inflicting  probably 
the  full  number  of  forty  blows  permitted  by  the 
Law  (Deut.),  and  then  leaving  him  in  his  agony 
of  mind  and  body,  fast  bound  in  "  the  stocks." 
For  the  remainder  of  that  day  and  all  night  long 
the  prophet  sat  there  in  the  gate,  at  first  exposed 
to  the  taunts  and  jeers  of  his  adversaries  and  the 
rabble  of  their  followers,  and  as  the  weary  hours 
slowly  crept  on,  becoming  painfully  cramped  in 
his  limbs  by  the  barbarous  machine  which  held 
his  hands  and  feet  near  together,  and  b.ent  his 
body  double.  This  cruel  punishment  seems  to 
have  been  the  customary  mode  of  dealing  with 
such  as  were  accounted  false  prophets  by  the 
authorities.  It  was  the  treatment  which  Hanani 
endured  in  return  for  his  warning  to  king  Asa 
(2  Chron.  xvi.  10),  some  three  centuries  earlier 
than  Jeremiah's  time;  and  a  few  years  later  in 
our  prophet's  history,  an  attempt  was  made  to 
enforce  it  again  in  his  case  (Jer.  xxix.  26). 
Thus,  like  the  holy  apostles  of  our  Lord,  was 
Jeremiah  "  counted  worthy  to  suffer  shame  " 
for  the  Name  in  which  he  spoke  (Acts  v.  40, 
41);  and  like  Paul  and  Silas  at  Philippi,  after 
enduring  "  many  stripes  "  his  feet  were  "'  made 
fast  in  the  stocks"  (Acts  xvi.  23,  24).  The 
message  of  Jeremiah  was  a  message  of  judgment, 
that  of  the  apostles  was  a  message  of  forgive- 
ness; and  both  met  with  the  same  response  from 
a  world  whose  heart  was  estranged  from  God. 
The  heart  that  loves  its  own  way  is  only  at 
ease  when  it  can  forget  God.  Any  reminder 
of  His  Presence,  of  His  perpetual  activity  in 
mercy  and  judgment,  is  unwelcome,  and  makes 
its  authors  odious.  From  the  outset,  transgress- 
ors of  the  Divine  law  have  sought  to  hide 
"  among  the  trees  of  the  garden  " — in  the  en- 
grossing pursuits  and  pleasures  of  life — from  the 
Presence  of  God. 

Pashchur's  object  was  not  to  destroy  Jeremiah, 
but  to  break  his  spirit,  and  discredit  him  with 
the  multitude,  and  so  silence  him  for  ever.  But  in 
this  expectation  he  was  as  signally  disappointed 
as  his  successor  was  in  the  case  of  St.  Peter 
(Acts  v.  24,  29).  Now  as  then,  God's  messenger 
could  not  be  turned  from  his  conviction  that 
"  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  men."  And 
as  he  sat  alone  in  his  intolerable  anguish,  brood- 
ing over  his  shameful  wrongs,  and  despairing 
of  redress,  a  Divine  Word  came  in  the  stillness 
of  night  to  this  victim  of  human  tyranny. 
For  it  "  came  to  pass  on  the  morrow  that  Pash- 
chur brought  Jeremiah  forth  out  of  the  stocks; 
and  Jeremiah  said  unto  him.  Not  Pashchur 
(as  if  "  Glad  and  free  ") — but  Magor-missabib 
— ("  Fear  on  every  side  ")  "  hath  Jehovah  called 
thy  name!"  Sharpened  with  misery,  the  seer's 
eye  pierces  through  the  shows  of  life,  and  dis- 
cerns the  grim  contrast  of  truth  and  appearance. 
Before  him  stands  this  great  man,  clothed  with 
all  the  dignity  of  high  office,  and  able  to  destroy 
him  with  a  word;  but  lahvah's  prophet  does  not 
quail  before  abused  authority.  He  sees  the  sword 
suspended  by  a  hair  over  the  head  of  this 
haughty  and  supercilious  official;  and  he  realises 
the  solemn  irony  of  circumstance,  which  has  con- 
nected a  name  suggestive  of  gladness  and  free- 
dom with  a  man  destined  to  become  the  thrall 
of   perpetual    terrors.      "  For   thus    hath    lahvah 


112 


THE    PROPHECIES    OF    JEREMIAH. 


said:  Lo,  I  am  about  to  make  thee  a  Fear  to 
thyself  and  to  all  thy  lovers;  and  they  will  fall 
by  the  sword  of  their  foes,  while  thine  eyes  look 
on  I"  This  "glad  and  free"  persecutor,  wan- 
toning in  the  abuse  of  power,  blindly  fearless  of 
the  future,  is  not  doomed  to  be  slain  out  of 
hand;  a  heavier  fate  is  in  store  for  him,  a  fate 
prefigured  and  ioreshadowed  by  his  present  sins. 
His  proud  confidence  is  to  give  place  to  a  haunt- 
ing sense  of  danger  and  insecurity;  he  is  to 
isee  his  followers  perish  one  after  another,  and 
evermore  to  be  expecting  the  same  end  for  him- 
self: while  the  freedom  which  he  has  enjoyed 
and  abused  so  long,  is  to  be  exchanged  for  a 
lifelong  captivity  in  a  foreign  land.  "  And  all 
Judah  will  I  give  into  the  hand  of  the  king  of 
Babylon,  and  he  will  transport  them  to  Baby- 
lon, and  smite  them  with  the  sword.  And  I 
will  give  all  the  store  of  this  city  "  (the  hoarded 
wealth  of  all  sorts,  which  constitutes  its  strength 
and  reserve  force)  "  and  all  the  gain  thereof  " 
;(,the  produce  of  labour)  "and  all  the  value 
•  t'hereof"  (things  rare  and  precious  of  every 
kind,  works  of  the  carver's  and  the  goldsmith's 
and  the  potter's  and  the  weaver's  art) ;"  and  all 
the  treasures  of  the  kings  of  Judah  will  I  give 
into  the  hand  of  their  foes,  that  they  may  spoil 
.them  and  take  them, and  bring  them  to  Baby- 

•iIoHj    .iqqiiidS    Jt    -.aVic    '.■■■ 

,:,'',  And  far  thy$elfjrPashchur,  and  all  that  dwell 
in  thine  house,  ye  shall  depart  among  the  cap- 
tives; and  to  Babylon  thou  shalt  come,  and  there 
thou  shalt  die,  and  there  be  buried,  thyself  and 
all  thy  lovers,  to  whom  thou  hast  prophesied 
with  untruth,"  or  rather  "  by  the  Lie,"  i.  e.,  "  by 
the  Baal  "  (ii.  8,  xxiii.  13,  cf.  xii.  16). 

The  play  on  the  name  of  Pashchur  is  like 
that  on  Perath  (ch.  xiii.),  and  the  change  to 
Magor-missabib  is  like  the  change  of  Tophet 
intOi;  "Valley  of  Slaughter"  (ch.  xix.).  Like 
Amos  (vii.  16),  Jeremiah  repeats  his  obnoxious 
prophecy,  with  a  special  application  to  his  cruel 
persecutor,  and  with  the  added  detail  that  all 
the  wealth  of  Jerusalem  wil  be  carried  as  spoil 
to  Babyloji;  a  detail  in  which  there  may  lie  an 
.oblique  reference  to  the  covetous  worldliness 
^and  .the  interested  opposition  of  such  men  as 
j'Pashchnr.  Riches  an4  ease  and  popularity  were 
:th§' 'things  for  which  he  and  those  like  him  had 
ibargained  away  their  rintegrity,  prophesying  with 
leO'nsoious  falsehood  to  ,the  deluded  people.  His 
h'ni'overs  "  arc  his  partisans,  who  eagerly  wel- 
comed his  presages  of  peace  and  prosperity, 
and  doubtless  actively  opposed  Jeremiah  with 
ridicule  and,. threats.  The  last  detail  is  remark- 
able, for  iWe  do  not  otherwise  know  that  Pash- 
Chur  aff^ctftd  to , iprophesy.  If  it  be  not  meant 
siniply  tlJ^tif.PashQhun  accepted  and  lent  the 
TWiaiglhfc' i  of;  his  (Official  sanction  to  the  false 
.pnophets,  and  especially  those  who  uttered  their 
jd.'i'Vinat'ions  in  the  name  of  "  the  Baal,"  that  is 
to  say,  either  Molech,  or  the  popular  and  de- 
lusive conception  of,  the  God  of  Israel,  we  see 
in  this  man  one  who  combined  a  steady  pro- 
ffe&sional  opposition  to  Jeremiah  with  power  to 
-.enforce  his.  hostility  by  legalised  acts  of  violence. 
jTihe  .conduct  o-f-  H&naniah  on  a  later  occasion 
{(•Kxyiii.  .to),  cleaiily  proves  that,  where  the  power 
was  present,  the., will  for  such  acts  was  not  want- 
ing in  Jeremiah'Si, professional  adversaries. 

It  is  generally  taken  for  granted  that  the 
name  of  "  Pashchur  "  has  been  substituted  for 
that  of,  V  Malchiiah"  in  the  list  of  the  priestly 
families  I jwhichr I  if^turned   with   Zerubbabel   from 


the  Babylonian  captivity  (Ezra  ii.  38;  Neh.  vii. 
41;  cf.  I  Chron.  xxiv.  9);  but  it  seems  quite 
possible  that  "the  sons  of  Pashchur"  were  a 
subdivision  of  the  family  of  Immer,  which  had 
increased  largely  during  the  Exile.  In  that  case, 
the  list  affords  evidence  of  the  fulfilment  of 
Jeremiah's  prediction  to  Pashchur.  The  prophet 
elsewhere  mentions  another  Pashchur,  who  was 
also  a  priest,  of  the  course  or  guild  of  Mal- 
chijah  (xxi.  i,  xxxviii.  i),  which  was  the  desig- 
nation of  the  fifth  class  of  the  priests,  as 
"Immer"  was  that  of  the  sixteenth  (i  Chron. 
xxiv.  9,  14).  The  prince  Gedaliah,  who  was 
hostile  to  Jeremiah,  was  apparently  a  son  of  the 
present  Pashchur  (Jer.  xxxviii.  1). 

It  is  not  easy  to  determine  the  relation  of 
the  lyrical  section  which  immediately  follows  the 
doom  of  Pashchur,  to  the  preceding  account 
(vv.  7-8).  If  the  seventh  verse  be  in  its  orig- 
inal place,  it  would  seem  that  the  prophet's  word 
had  failed  of  accomplishment,  with  the  result  of 
intensifying  the  unbelief  and  the  ridicule  which 
his  teachings  encountered.  There  is  also  some- 
thing very  strange  in  the  sequence  of  the  thir- 
teenth and  fourteenth  verses,  where,  as  the  text 
now  stands,  the  prophet  passes  at  once,  in  the 
most  abrupt  fashion  imaginable,  from  a  fervid 
ascription  of  praise,  a  heartfelt  cry  of  thanks- 
giving for  deliverance  either  actual  or  contem- 
plated as  such,  to  utterances  of  unrelieved  de- 
spair. I  do  not  think  that  this  is  in  the  manner 
of  Jeremiah;  nor  do  I  see  how  the  violent  con- 
trast of  the  two  sections  (7-13  and  14-18)  can 
fairly  be  accounted  for,  except  by  supposing 
either  that  we  have  here  two  unconnected  frag- 
ments, placed  in  juxtaposition  with  each  other 
because  they  belong  to  the  same  general  period 
of  the  prophet's  ministry;  or  that  the  two  pas- 
sages have  by  some  accident  of  transcription 
been  transposed,  which  is  by  no  means  an  un- 
common occurrence  in  the  MSS.  of  the  Biblical 
writers.  Assuming  this  latter  as  the  more  prob- 
able alternative,  we  see  in  the  entire  passage  a 
powerful  representation  of  the  mental  conflict 
into  which  Jeremiah  was  thrown  by  Pashchur's 
high-handed  violence  and  the  seeming  triumph 
of  his  enemies.  Smarting  with  the  sense  of  utter 
injustice,  humiliated  in  his  inmost  soul  by  shame- 
ful indignities,  crushed  to  the  earth  with  the 
bitter  consciousness  of  defeat  and  failure,  the 
prophet,  like  Job,  opens  his  mouth  and  curses  his 
day. 

I.  "  Cursed  be  the  day  wherein  I  was  born ! 
The  day  that  my  mother  bare  me, 
Let  it  not  be  blest ! 

3.  "Cursed  be  the  man  who  told  the  glad  tidings  to  my 
father. 
'  There  is  born  to  thee  a  male  child  '; 
Who  made  him  rejoice  greatly. 

3.  "And  let  that  man  become  like  the  cities  that  lahweh 

overthrew,  without  relenting, 
And  let  him  hear  a  cry  in  the  morning. 
And  an  alarm  at  the  hour  of  noon  ! 

4.  "  For  that  he  slew  me  not  in  the  womb, 

That  my  mother  might  have  become  my  grave, 
And  her  womb  have  been  laden  evermore ! 

5.  "  O  why  from  the  womb  came  I  forth 

To  see  labour  and  sorrow. 

And  my  days  foredone  with  shame  ?  " 

These  five  triplets  afford  a  glimpse  of  the  lively 
grief,  the  passionate,  despair,  which  agitated  the 
^prophet's  heart  as  the  first  effect  of  the   shame 
~and  the  torture  to  which  he  had  been  so  wick- 
edly  and   wantonly   subjected.      The    elegy,   of 


JeremialT  xx.] 


JEREMIAH    UNDER    PERSECUTION. 


113 


which  they  constitute  the  proem,  or  opening 
strophe,  is  not  introduced  by  any  formula  ascrib- 
ing it  to  Divine  inspiration;  it  is  simply  written 
down  as  a  faithful  record  of  Jeremiah's  own  feel- 
ings and  reflections  and  self-communings,  at  this 
painful  crisis  in  his  career.  The  poet  of  the 
book  of  Job  has  apparently  taken  the  hint  sup- 
plied by  these  opening  verses,  and  has  elaborated 
the  idea  of  cursing  the  day  of  birth  through 
seven  highly  wrought  and  imaginative  stanzas. 
The  higher  finish  and  somewhat  artificial  ex- 
pansion of  that  passage  leave  little  doubt  that 
it  was  modelled  upon  the  one  before  us.  But 
the  point  to  remember  here  is  that  both  are 
lyrical  effusions,  expressed  in  language  condi- 
tioned by  Oriental  rather  than  European  stand- 
ards of  taste  and  usage.  As  the  prophets  were 
not  inspired  to  express  their  thoughts  and  feel- 
ings in  modern  English  dress,  it  is  superfluous 
to  inquire  whether  Jeremiah  was  morally  justi- 
fied in  using  these  poetic  formulas  of  impreca- 
tion. To  insist  on  applying  the  doctrine  of  verbal 
inspiration  to  such  a  passage  is  to  evince  an 
utter  want  oC  literary  tact  and  insight,  as  well 
as  adhesion  to  an  exploded  and  pernicious  relic 
of  sectarian  theology.  The  prophet's  curses  are 
simply  a  highly  effective  form  of  poetical  rhet- 
oric, and  are  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  im- 
memorial modes  of  Oriental  expression;  and  the 
underlying  thought,  so  equivocally  expressed,  ac- 
cording to  our  ways  of  looking  at  things,  is 
simply  that  his  life  has  been  a  failure,  and  there- 
fore it  would  have  been  better  not  to  have  been 
born.  Who  that  is  at  all  earnest  for  God's 
truth,  nay,  for  far  lower  objects  of  human  inter- 
est and  pursuit,  has  not  in  moments  of  despond- 
ency and  discouragement  been  overwhelmed  for 
a  time  by  the  like  feeling?  Can  we  blame  Jere^ 
miah  for  allowing  us  to  see  in  this  faithful 
transcript  of  his  inner  life  how  intensely  human, 
how  entirely  natural  the  spiritual  experience  of 
the  prophets  really  was?  Besides,  the  revela- 
tion does  not  end  with  this  initial  outburst  of 
instinctive  astonishment,  indignation,  and  de- 
spair. The  proem  is  succeeded  by  a  psalm  in 
seven  stanzas  of  regular  poetical  form — six  qua- 
trains rounded  oflf  with  a  final  couplet — in  which 
the  prophet's  thought  rises  above  the  level  of 
nature,  and  finds  in  an  overruling  Providence 
both  the  source  and  the  justification  of  the 
enigma  of  his  life. 

t.  "  Thou  enticedst  me,  lahvah,  and  I  was  enticed, 
Thou  urgedst  *  me,  and  didst  prevail ! 
I  am  become  a  derision  all  the  day  long. 
Every  one  mocketh  at  me. 

t.  "  For  as  oft  as  I  speak,  I  cry  alarm. 
Violence  and  havoc  do  I  proclaim ; 
For  lahvah's  word  is  become  to  me  a  reproach, 
And  a  scoff  all  the  day  long. 

3.  "And  if  I  say,  I  will  not  mind  it, 

Nor  speak  any  more  in  His  Name; 

Then  it  becometh   in  my  heart  like  a  burning  fire 

prisoned  in  my  bones. 
And  I  weary  of  holding  it  in  t  and  am  not  able. 

4.  "  For  I  have  heard  the  defaming  of  many,  the  terror  on 

every  side !  t 
All  the  men  of  my  friendship  are  watching  for  my 

fall  ; 
'  Perchance  he  will  be  enticed,  and  we  shall  prevail 

over  him, 
And  take  our  revenge  of  him.' 

•Ex.  xii.  33 ;  Isa.  viii.  ii ;  Ezek.  iii.  14;  Jer.  xv.  17. 

t  vi.  II  Cor,  of  enduring,  Mai.  iii,  2). 

%  "  Denounce  ye,  and  we  will  denounce  him  I " 

»-Vol.  IV. 


5.  "Yet  lahvah  is  with  me  as  a  dread  warrior, 

Therefore  my  pursuers  shall  stumble  and  not  prevail; 
They  shall  be  greatly  ashamed,  for  that  they  have  not 

prospered. 
With  eternal  dishonour  that  shall  not  be  forgotten- 

6.  "  And  lahvah  Sabaoth  trieth  the  righteous, 

Seeth  the  reins  and  the  heart ; 

I  shall  see  Thy  revenge  of  them, 

For  unto  Thee  have  I  committed  my  quarrel. 

7.  "  Sing  ye  to  lahvah,  acclaim  ye  lahvah  ! 

For  He  hath  snatched  the  poor  man's"  life  out  of  the 
hand  of  evildoers." 

The  cause  was  of  God.  "  Thou  didst  lure  me, 
lahvah,  and  I  let  myself  be  lured;  Thou  urgedst 
me  and  wert  victorious."  He  had  not  rashly 
and  presumptuously  taken  upon  himself  this  of- 
fice of  prophet;  he  had  been  called,  and  had  re- 
sisted the  call,  until  his  scruples  and  his  pleadings 
were  overcome,  as  was  only  natural,  by  a  Will 
more  powerful  than  his  own  (chap.  i.  6).  In 
speaking  of  the  inward  persuasions  which  de- 
termined the  course  of  his  life,  he  uses  the  very 
terms  which  are  used  by  the  author  of  Kings 
in  connection  with  the  spirit  that  misled  the 
prophets  of  Ahab  before  the  fatal  expedition  to 
Ramoth  Gilead.  "  And  he  said.  Thou  shalt 
entice,  and  also  be  victorious"  (i  Kings  xxii. 
22).  lahvah,  therefore,  has  treated  him  as  an 
enemy  rather  than  a  friend,  for  He  has  lured 
him  to  his  own  destruction.  Half  in  irony,  half 
in  bitter  complaint,  the  prophet  declares'  that 
lahvah  has  succeeded  only  too  well  in  His  ma- 
lign purpose:  "  I  am  become  a  derision  all  the 
day  long;  Every  one  mocketh  at  me." 

In  the  second  stanza,  the  thought  appears  to 
be  continued  thus:  "Thou  overcamest  me;  for 
as  often  as  I  speak,"  I  am  a  prophet  of  evil, 
''I  cry  alarm"  ('ez' aq;  cf.  ze' aqah,  ver.  16); 
I  proclaim  the  imminence  of  invasion,  the 
"  violence  and  havoc  "  of  a  ruthless  conqueror. 
"Thou  overcamest  me"  also,  in  Thy  purpose 
of  making  me  a  laughing-stock  to  my  adversa- 
ries: "for  lahvah's  word  is  become  to  me  a 
reproach,  and  a  scoff  all  the  day  long  "  (the  re- 
lation between  the  two  halves  of  the  stanza  is 
that  of  coordination;  each  gives  the  reason  of 
the  corresponding  couplet  in  the  first  stanza). 
His  continual  threats  of  a  judgment  that  was 
still  delayed,  brought  upon  him  the  merciless 
ridicule  of  his  opponents. 

Or  the  prophet  may  mean  to  complain  that 
the  monotony  of  his  message,  his  ever-recurring 
denunciation  of  prevalent  injustice,  is  made  a 
reproach  against  him.  "  For  as  often  as  I  speak 
I  make  an  outcry  "  of  indignation  at  foul  wrong- 
doing (Gen.  iv.  10,  xviii.  21,  xix.  13);  "wrong 
and  robbery  do  I  proclaim  "  (Hab.  i.  2,  3)^ 
the  oppression  of  the  poor  by  the  covetous  and 
luxurious  ruling  classes.  A  third  view  is  that 
Jeremiah  complains  of  the  frequent  attacks  upon 
himself:  "  For  as  often  as  I  speak  I  have  to  ex- 
claim; Of  assault  and  violence  do  I  cry;"  but 
the  first  suggestion  appears  to  suit  best,  as  giv- 
ing a  reason  for  the  ridicule  which  the  prophet 
finds  so  intolerable  {cf.  xvii.  15). 

The  third  stanza  carries  this  plea  for  justice 
a  step  further.  Not  only  was  the  prophet's  over- 
whelming trouble  due  to  his  having  yielded  to 
the  persuasions  and  promises  of  lahvah;  not 
only  has  he  been  rewarded  with  scorn  and  the 
scourge  and  the  stocks  for  his  compliance  with 
a  Divine  call.  He  has  been  in  a  manner  forced 
and  driven  into  his  intolerable  position  by  the 
coercive  power  of   lahvah,   which   left   him   no 


"4 


THE    PROPHECIES   OF   JEREMIAH. 


choice  but  to  utter  the  word  that  burnt  like 
a  fire  within  him.  Sometimes  his  fears  of  per- 
fidy and  betrayal  suggested  the  thought  of  suc- 
cumbing to  the  insuperable  obstacles  which 
seemed  to  block  his  path;  of  giving  up  once 
for  all  a  thankless  and  fruitless  and  dangerous 
enterprise:  but  then  the  inward  flame  burnt  so 
fiercely  that  he  could  find  no  relief  for  his 
anguish  but  by  giving  it  vent  in  words  {cf. 
Ps.  xxxix.  1-3). 

The  verse  finely  illustrates  that  vivid  sense  of 
a  Divine  constraint  which  distinguishes  the  true 
prophet  from  pretenders  to  the  office.  Jeremiah 
does  not  protest  the  purity  of  his  motives;  in- 
directly and  unconsciously  he  expresses  it  with 
a  simplicity  and  a  strength  which  leave  no  room 
for  suspicion.  He  has  himself  no  doubt  at  all 
that  what  he  speaks  is  "  lahvah's  word."  The 
inward  impulse  is  overpowering;  he  has  striven 
in  vain  against  its  urgency;  like  Jacob  at 
Peniel,  he  has  wrestled  with  One  stronger  than 
himself.  He  is  no  vulgar  fanatic  or  enthusiast, 
in  whom  rooted  prejudices  and  irrational  frenzies 
overbalance  the  judgment,  making  him  incapable 
of  estimating  the  hazards  and  the  chances  of 
his  enterprise;  he  is  as  well  aware  of  the  perils 
that  beset  his  path  as  the  coolest  and  craftiest 
of  his  worldly  adversaries.  Thanks  to  his  natural 
quickness  of  perception,  his  developed  faculty 
of  reflection,  he  is  fully  alive  to  the  probable 
consequences  of  perpetually  thwarting  the  popu- 
lar will,  of  taking  up  a  position  of  permanent 
resistance  to  the  policy  and  the  aims  and  the 
interests  of  the  ruling  classes.  But  while  he 
has  his  mortal  hopes  and  fears,  his  human  ca- 
pacity for  anxiety  and  pain;  while  his  heart 
^  bleeds  at  the  sight  of  suffering,  and  aches  for 
the  woes  that  thickly  crowd  the  field  of  his 
prophetic  vision;  his  speech  and  his  behaviour 
are  dominated,  upon  the  whole,  by  an  altogether 
higher  consciousness.  His  emotions  may  have 
their  moments  of  mastery;  at  times  they  may 
overpower  his  fortitude,  and  lay  him  prostrate 
in  an  agony  of  lamentation  and  mourning  and 
woe;  at  times  they  may  even  interpose  clouds 
and  darkness  between  the  prophet  and  his  vi- 
sion of  the  Eternal;  but  these  effects  of  mortal- 
ity do  not  last:  they  shake  but  cannot  loosen 
his  grasp  of  spiritual  realities;  they  cannot  free 
him  from  the  constraining  influence  of  the  Word 
of  lahvah.  That  word  possesses,  leads  him  cap- 
tive, "  triumphs  over  him,"  over  all  the  natural 
resistance  of  flesh  and  blood;  for  he  is  "  not 
as  the  many  "  (the  false  prophets)  "  who  corrupt 
the  Word  of  God;  but  as  of  sincerity,  but  as 
of  God,  in  the  sight  of  God,  he  speaks  "  (2  Cor. 
ii..  14,   17)- 

And  still,  unless  a  man  be  thus  impelled  by 
the  Spirit;  unless  he  have  counted  the  cost  and 
is  prepared  to  risk  all  for  God;  unless  he  be 


ready  to  face  unpopularity  and  social  contempt 
and  persecution;  unless  he  knows  what  it  is  to 
suffer  for  and  with  Jesus  Christ;  I  doubt  if  he 
has  any  moral  right  to  speak  in  that  most  holy 
Name.  For  if  the  all-mastering  motive  be  ab- 
sent, if  the  love  of  Christ  constrain  him  not, 
how  can  his  desires  and  his  doings  be  such  as 
the  Unseen  Judge  will  either  approve  or  bless? 

The  fourth  stanza  explains  why  the  prophet 
laboured,  though  vainly,  to  keep  silence.  It 
was  because  of  the  malicious  reports  of  his  ut- 
terances, which  were  carefully  circulated  by  his 
watchful  antagonists.  They  beset  him  on  every 
side;  like  Pashchur,  they  were  to  him  a  "  magor- 
missabib,"  an  environing  terror  {cf.  vi.  25),  as 
they  listened  to  his  harangues,  and  eagerly  in- 
vited each  other  to  inform  against  him  as  a 
traitor  (The  words  "  Inform  ye,  and  let  us  in- 
form against  him!"  or  "Denounce  ye,  and  let 
us  denounce  him!  "  may  be  an  ancient  gloss 
upon  the  term  dibbah,  "  ill  report,"  "  calumny;  " 
Gen.  xxxvii.  2;  Num.  xiii.  32;  Job  xvii.  5.  For 
the  construction,  cf.  Job  xxxi.  37.'  They  spoil 
the  symmetry  of  the  line.  That  dibbah  really 
means  "  defaming,"  or  "  slander,"  appears  not 
only  from  the  passages  in  which  it  occurs,  but 
also  from  the  Arabic  dabub,  "  one  who  creeps 
about  with  slander,"  from  dabba,  "  to  move 
gently  or  slowly  about."  The  Heb.  ragal, 
riggel,  "  to  go  about  slandering,"  and  rakil, 
"  slander,"  are  analogous). 

And  not  only  open  enemies  thus  conspired 
for  the  prophet's  destruction.  Even  professed 
friends  (for  the  phrase,  cf.  xxxviii.  22;  Ps.  xli. 
10)  were  treacherously  watchful  to  catch  him 
tripping  (cf.  ix.  2,  xii.  6).  Those  on  whom 
he  had  a  natural  claim  for  sympathy  and  pro- 
tection, bore  a  secret  and  determined  grudge 
against  him.  His  unpopularity  was  complete, 
and  his  position-full  of  peril.  We  have  in  the 
thirty-first  and  several  of  the  following  psalms 
outpourings  of  feeling  under  circumstances  very 
similar  to  those  of  Jeremiah  on  the  present  oc- 
casion, even  if  they  were  not  actually  written 
by  him  at  the  same  crisis  in  his  career,  as  cer- 
tain striking  coincidences  of  expression  seem  to 
suggest  (ver.  10;  cf.  Ps.  xxxi.  13,  xxxv.  15, 
xxxviii.  17,  xli.  9;  ver.  13  with  Ps.  xxxv.  9,  10). 

The  prophet  closes  his  psalm-like  monologue 
with  an  act  of  faith.  He  remembers  that  he 
has  a  Champion  who  is  mightier  than  a  thousand 
enemies.  lahvah  is  with  him,  not  with  them 
(cf.  2  Kings  vi.  16) ;  their  plots,  therefore,  are 
foredoomed  to  failure,  and  themselves  to  the 
vengeance  of  a  righteous  God  (xi.  20).  The  last 
words  are  an  exultant  anticipation  of  deliverance. 

We  thus  see  that  the  whole  piece,  like  a  pre- 
vious one  (xv.  10-21),  begins  with  cursing  and 
ends  with  an  assurance  of  blessing. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JEREMIAR 


PREFACE. 


The  present  work  deals  primarily  with  Jeremiah  xxi,-Hi.,  thus  forming  a  supple- 
ment to  the  volume  of  the  "  Expositor's  Bible  "  on  Jeremiah  by  the  Rev.  C.  J.  Ball, 
M.  A.  References  to  the  earlier  chapters  are  only  introduced  where  they  are  neces- 
sary to  illustrate  3v\d  explain  the  later  sections. 

I  regret  that  two  important  works,  Professor  Skinner's  "  Ezekiel  '  in  this  series, 
and  Cornill's  '*  Jeremiah  "  in  Dr.  Haupt's  "  Sacred  Books  of  the  Old  Testament," 
were  published  too  late  to  be  used  in  the  preparation  of  this  volume. 

I  have  again  to  acknowledge  my  indebtedness  to  the  Rev.  T.  H.  Darlow,  M.  A., 
for  a  careful  reading  and  much  valuable  criticism  of  my  MS. 


CONTENTS. 


BOOK  I. 

PERSONAL  UTTERANCES  AND 
NARRATIVES. 

Chapter  I. 

PAGE 

Introductory:  Jehoahaz,  ....     123 


Chapter  II. 
A  Trial  for  Heresy, 


124 


Chapter   III. 
The  Roll 129 


Chapter  IV. 


The  Rechabites, 


Chapter  V. 


Baruch, 


133 


135 


Chapter  VI. 
The  Judgment  on  Jehoiakim,  .        ,        .     137 


Chapter  XIV. 

PAGE 

The  Descent  into  Egypt,        .        .        .        .168 

Chapter  XV. 
The  Queen  of  Heaven 170 


BOOK  11. 

PROPHECIES  CONCERNING  FOREIGN 
NATIONS. 

Chapter  XVI. 
Jehovah  and  the  Nations,       .        .        .        .173 

Chapter  XVII. 
Egypt 175 

Chapter   XVIII. 
The  Philistines, 178 


Chapter  XIX. 


Moab, 


179 


Chapter  XX. 
Ammon, 181 


181 


Chapter  VII. 

Jehoiachin 141 

Chapter  VIII. 

Bad  Shepherds  and  False  Prophets,      .        .  145 

Chapter  IX.  Chapter  XXI. 

Hananiah 150       Edom, 

Chapter  X.                                                                    Chapter  XXII. 
Correspondence  with  the  Exiles,  .        .        .154       Damascus, 182 

Chapter  XI.  Chapter  XXIII. 

A  Broken  Covenant, 156       Kedar  and  Hazor, 183" 

Chapter  XII.  Chapter  XXIV. 

Jeremiah's  Imprisonment 160       Elam, 184 

Chapter  XIII.  Chapter  XXV. 

Gedafiah, 164       Babylon, 184 

119 


I20 


BOOK  III. 


JEREMIAH'S  TEACHING  CONCERNING    ■ 
ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH. 

Chapter  XXVI. 

PAGE 

Introductory, i86 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  XXXI. 
Restoration — II.  The  New  Israel,  . 


Chapter  XXVII. 
Social  and  Religious  Corruption,  . 

CHAPTeR  XXVIII. 
Persistent  Apostasy, 

Chapter  XXIX. 
Ruin, 


Chaptf.r  XXX. 
Restoration — I.  The  Symbol, 


187 


IQO 


1QI 


Chapter  XXXII. 
Restoration — III.  Reunion,   . 

Chapter  XXXIII. 
Restoration — IV.  The  New  Covenant, 

Chapter  XXXIV. 
Restoration — V.  Review, 

EPILOGUE. 


Chapter  XXXV. 
.     196      Jeremiah  and  Christ, 


PAGE 

199 


206 


208 


210 


bn, 


CHRONOLOGICAL    TABLE 

In  the  present  stage  of  investij?ation  of  Old  Testament  Chronology,  absolute  accuracy  cannot  be  claimed  for  such 
a  table  as  the  followin><^.  Hirdly  any,  if  any,  of  these  dates  are  supported  by  a  general  consensus  of  opinion.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  ranjifc  of  variation  is,  for  the  most  part,  not  n'ore  than  three  or  four  years,  and  the  table  will  furnish 
an  approximately  accurate  idea  of  sequences  and  synchronisms.  In  other  respects  also  the  data  admit  of  alternative 
interpretations,  and  the  course  of  events  is  partly  matter  of  theory— hence  the  occasional  insertion  of  (?). 


CLASSICAL 
SYNCHRONISMS 


Traditional  date 
of  foundation 
of  Rome,  753 


r.olon's  legisla- 
tion, 594 


?isistratus,  560- 
527 


JUDAH  AND  JEREMIAH 


MANASSEH  (?) 


Jeremiah  born,  probably  between  6^5  and  645 

AMON,  640 
JOSIAH,  638 

Jeremiah's  call  in  the  13th  year  of  Josiah,  626 

Scythian  inroad 
Habakkuk  into  Western  Asia 

Zephaniah 

Publication  of  Deuteronomy,  621 
Josiah  slain  at  Megiddo,  608 

JEHOAHAZ,  608 

(xxii.  10-12,  Ch.  I.) 
Deposed  by  Necho,  who  appoints 

JEHOIAKIM,  608 

(xxii.  13-19,  xxxvi.  30,  31,  VI.) 

Jeremiah  predicts  ruin  of  Judah  and  is  tried  for  blas- 
phemy (xxvi.,  II.) 

FOURTH  YEAR  OF  JEHOIAKIM,  605-4 

Nebuchadnezzar*  advances  into  Syria,  is  suddenly 
recalled  to  Babylon— d<?/c'r^  subduing  Judah  (?) 

Baruch  writes  Jeremiah's  prophecies  in  a  roll,  which 
is  read  successively  to  the  people,  the  nobles,  and 
Jehoiakim,  and  destroyed  by  the  king  (xxxvi.,  III.: 
xlv.,  V.) 

Nebuchadnezzar  invades  Judah  (?),  the  Rechabites 
take  refuge  in  Jerusalem  (?),  the  Jews  rebuked  by  their 
example  (xxxv.,  IV.) 

Jehoiakim  submits  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  revolts  after 
three  years,  is  attacked  by  various  "bands,"  but  dies 
before  Nebuchadnezzar  arrives 

JEHOIACHIN,  597 
(xxii.  20-30,  VII.) 
Continues  revolt,  but  surrenders  to  Nebuchadnezzar 
on  his  arrival;  is  deposed  and  carried  to  Babylon  with 
many  of  his  subjects.    Nebuchadnezzar  appoints 

ZEDEKIAH,  596 

Jeremiah  attempts  to  keep  Zedekiah  loyal  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  contends  with  priests  and  prophets  who 
support  Egyptian  party  (xxiii.,  xxiv.,  VIIL) 

Proposed  confederation  against  Nebuchadnezzar  de- 
nounced by  Jeremiah,  but  supported  by  Hananiah;  pro- 
posal abandoned;  Hananiah  dies  (xxvii.,  xxviii.,  IX.), 
593-2 

Controversy  by  letter  with  hostile  prophets  at  Baby- 
lon (xxix.,  X.) 

Judah  revolts,  encouraged  by  Hophra.  Jerusalem  is 
besieged  by  Chaldeans.  There  being  no  prospect  of 
relief  by  Egypt,  Jeremiah  regains  his  influence  and 
pledges  the  people  by  covenant  to  release  their  slaves 

On  the  news  of  Hophra's  advance,  the  Chaldeans  raise 
the  siege;  the  Egyptian  party  again  become  supreme  and 
annul  the  covenant  (xxi.  i-io,  xxxiv.,  xxxvii.  i-io,  XI.) 

Jeremiah  attempts  to  leave  the  city,  is  arrested  and 
imprisoned 

Hophra  retreats  into  Egypt  and  the  Chaldeans  renew 
the  siege  (xxxvii.  11-21,  xxxviii.,  xxxix.,  15-18.  XII.) 

While  imprisoned  Jeremiah  buys  his  kinsman's  in- 
heritance (xxii.,  XXX.) 

DESTRUCTION  OF  JERUSALEM,  586 
Jeremiah  remains  for  a  month  a  prisoner  amongst  the 
other  captives.  Nebuzaradan  arrives;  arranges  for  de- 
portation of  bulk  of  population;  appoints  Gedaliah  gov- 
ernor of  residue:  releases  leremiah.  who  elects  to  join 
GedahahatMizpah  Gedaliah  murdered.  Jeremiah  ear- 
ned off,  but  rescued  by  Johanan  (xxxix. -xli..  lii.,  XIII.) 
Johanan,  in  spite  of  Jeremiah's  protest,  goes  down  to 
Egypt  and  takes  Jeremiah  with  him  (xlii..  xliii.,  XIV  ) 
Jews  m  Egypt  hold  festival  in  honour  of  Queen  of 
Heaven.    Ineffectual  protest  of  Jeremiah  (xliv.,  XV.) 


Esarhaddon, 68z 
Assurbanipal,  668 


Last  kings  of  As 
Syria,       number 
and    names    un 
certain,  626-607-6 


BABYLON 
Nabopolassar,  626 


FALL   OF 
NINEVEH.  607-6 


XXVIth  Dynasty 
Psammetichus  I.,  666 


Psammetichus  be- 
sieges Ashdod  for 
twenty-nine  years 


Necho,  6i2 


BATTLE  OF  CARCHEMISH 
(xlvi..  XVII.) 


Nebuchadnezzar, 
604 


Ezekiel 


Siege  of  Tyre 


Psammetichus  II. 

596 


Hophra,  591 


Release  of  Jehoiachin 
CYRUS  CONQUERS  BABYLON  AND  GIVES  THE  JEWS   PER- 
MISSION TO  RETURN,  538 


Amasis,  570 
Nebuchadnezzar  invades  Egypt,  (?)  568 
Evil-Merodach, 
56  £ 


*For  spelling,  see  note,  page  123. 


THE    BOOK    OF   JEREMIAH. 

BY   THE   REV.    VV.    H.    BENNETT,    M.    A. 


BOOK  I. 

PERSONAL    UTTERANCES    AND   NARRA- 
TIVES. 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY:  *  JEHOAHAZ. 

Jeremiah  xxii.  10-12. 

"  Weep  ye  not  for  the  dead,  neither  bemoan  him  :  but 
weep  sore  for  him  that  goeth  away :  for  he  shall  return 
no  more." — JER.  xxii.  10. 

As  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  are  not  arranged 
in  the  order  in  which  they  were  delivered,  there 
is  no  absolute  chronological  division  between 
the  first  twenty  chapters  and  those  which  fol- 
low. For  the  most  part,  however,  chaps,  xxi-lii. 
fall  in  or  after  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim 
(b.  c.  60s).  We  will  therefore  briefly  consider 
the  situation  at  Jerusalem  in  this  crisis.  The 
period  immediately  preceding  b.  c.  605  somewhat 
resembles  the  era  of  the  dissolution  of  the  Ro- 
man Empire  or  of  the  Wars  of  the  French 
Revolution.  An  old-established  international 
system  was  breaking  in  pieces,  and  men  were 
quite  uncertain  what  form  the  new  order  would 
take.  For  centuries  the  futile  assaults  of  the 
Pharaohs  had  only  served  to  illustrate  the  sta- 
bility of  the  Assyrian  supremacy  in  Western 
Asia.  Then  in  the  last  two  decades  of  the  sev- 
enth century  b.  c.  the  Assyrian  Empire  collapsed, 
like  the  Roman  Empire  under  Honorius  and 
his  successors.  It  was  as  if  by  some  swift  suc- 
cession of  disasters  modern  France  or  Germany 
were  to  become  suddenly  and  permanently  anni- 
hilated as  a  military  power.  For  the  moment, 
all  the  traditions  and  principles  of  European 
statesmanship  would  lose  their  meaning,  and 
the  shrewdest  diplomatist  would  be  entirely  at 
fault.  Men's  reason  would  totter,  their  minds 
would  lose  their  balance  at  the  stupendous 
spectacle  of  so  unparalleled  a  catastrophe.  The 
wildest  hopes  would  alternate  with  the  extremity 
of  fear;  everything  would  seem  possible  to  the 
conqueror. 

Such  was  the  situation  in  B.  c.  605,  to  which 
our  first  great  group  of  prophecies  belongs. 
Two  oppressors  of  Israel — Assyria  and  Egypt — 
had  been  struck  down  in  rapid  succession.  When 
Nebuchadnezzar  t  was  suddenly  recalled  to  Baby- 
lon by  the  death  of  his  father,  the  Jews  would 
readily  imagine  that  the  Divine  judgment  had 
fallen   upon    Chaldea    and   its    king.       Sanguine 

*C/.  Preface. 

t  We  know  little  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  campaigns.  In  2 
Kings  xxiv.  i  we  are  told  that  Nebuchadnezzar  "came 
up  "  in  the  days  of  Jehoiakim,  and  Jehoiakim  became  his 
servant  three  years.  It  is  not  clear  whether  Nebuchad- 
nezzar "came  up"  immediately  after  the  battle  of  Car- 
chemish,  or  at  a  later  time  after  his  return  to  Babylon 
In  either  case  the  impression  made  by  his  hasty  departure 
from  Syria  would  be  the  same.  Cf.  Cheyne,  "Jeremiah  " 
(Men  of  the  Bible),  p.  i;?2.  I  call  the  Chaldean  king 
Nebuchadnezzar— not  Nebuchadrezzar— because  the  for- 
mer has  been  an  English  household  word  for  centuries. 


prophets  announced  that  Jehovah  was  about  to 
deliver  His  people  from  all  foreign  dominion, 
and  establish  the  supremacy  of  the  Kingdom  of 
God.  Court  and  people  would  be  equally  pos- 
sessed with  patriotic  hope  and  enthusiasm.  Je- 
hoiakim, it  is  true,  was  a  nominee  of  Pharaoh 
Necho;  but  his  gratitude  would  be  far  too  slight 
to  override  the  hopes  and  aspirations  natural  to 
a  Prince  of  the  House  of  David. 

In  Hezekiah's  time,  there  had  been  an  Egyp- 
tian and  an  Assyrian  party  at  the  court  of 
Judah;  the  recent  supremacy  of  Egypt  had  prob- 
ably increased  the  number  of  her  partisans.  As- 
syria had  disappeared,  but  her  former  adherents 
would  retain  their  antipathy  to  Egypt,  and  their 
personal  feuds  with  Jews  of  the  opposite  fac- 
tion; they  were  as  tools  lying  ready  to  any  hand 
that  cared  to  use  them.  When  Babylon  suc- 
ceeded Assyria  in  the  overlordship  of  Asia,  she 
doubtless  inherited  the  allegiance  of  the  anti- 
Egyptian  party  in  the  various  Syrian  states. 
Jeremiah,  like  Isaiah,  steadily  opposed  any  de- 
pendence upon  Egypt;  it  was  probably  by  his 
advice  that  Josiah  undertook  his  ill-fated  ex- 
pedition against  Pharaoh  Necho.  The  partisans 
of  Egypt  would  be  the  prophet's  enemies;  and 
though  Jeremiah  never  became  a  mere  depend- 
ent and  agent  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  yet  the  friends 
of  Babylon  would  be  his  friends,  if  only  because 
her  enemies  were  his  enemies. 

We  are  told  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  37  that  Jehoia- 
kim did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah  according 
to  all  that  his  father  had  done.  Whatever  other 
sins  may  be  implied  by  this  condemnation,  we 
certainly  learn  that  the  king  favoured  a  corrupt 
form  of  the  religion  of  Jehovah  in  opposition 
to  the  purer  teaching  which  Jeremiah  inherited 
from  Isaiah. 

When  we  turn  to  Jeremiah  himself,  the  date 
"  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  "  reminds  us  that 
by  this  time  the  prophet  could  look  back  upon 
a  long  and  sad  experience;  he  had  been  called  in 
the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah,  some  twenty-four 
years  before.  With  what  sometimes  seems  to 
our  limited  intelligence  the  strange  irony  of 
Providence,  this  lover  of  peace  and  quietness  was 
called  to  deliver  a  message  of  ruin  and  condem- 
nation, a  message  that  could  not  fail  to  be  ex- 
tremely offensive  to  most  of  his  hearers,  and  to 
make  him  the  object  of  bitter  hostility. 

Much  of  this  Jeremiah  must  have  anticipated, 
but  there  were  some  from  whose  position  and 
character  the  prophet  expected  acceptance,  even 
of  the  most  unpalatable  teaching  of  the  Spirit 
of  Jehovah.  The  personal  vindictiveness  with 
which  priests  and  prophets  repaid  his  loyalty  to 
the  Divine  mission  and  his  zeal  for  truth  came 
to  him  with  a  shock  of  surprise  and  bewilder- 
ment, which  was  all  the  greater  because  his  most 
determined  persecutors  were  his  sacerdotal  kins- 
men and  neighbours  at  Anathoth.  "  Let  us  de- 
stroy the  tree,"  they  said.  "  with  the  fruit 
thereof,  and  let  us  cut  him  of?  from  the  land  of 
the  living,  that  his  name  may  be  no  more  re- 
membered." * 

He  was  not  only  repudiated  by  his  clan,  but 


♦  xi.  19. 


123 


124 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


also  forbidden  by  Jehovah  to  seek  consolation 
and  sympathy  in  the  closer  ties  of  family  life: 
"  Thou  shalt  not  take  a  wife,  thou  shalt  have  no 
sons  or  daughters."  *  Like  Paul,  it  was  good 
for  Jeremiah  "  by  reason  of  the  present  distress  " 
to  deny  himself  these  blessings.  He  found  some 
compensation  in  the  fellowship  of  kindred  souls 
at  Jerusalem.  We  can  well  believe  that,  in  those 
early  days,  he  was  acquainted  with  Zephaniah, 
and  that  they  were  associated  with  Hilkiah  and 
Shaphan  and  King  Josiah  in  the  publication  of 
Deuteronomy  and  its  recognition  as  the  law  of 
Israel.  Later  on  Shaphan's  son  Ahikam  pro- 
tected Jeremiah  when  his  life  was  in  imminent 
danger. 

The  twelve  years  that  intervened  between 
Josiah's  Reformation  and  his  defeat  at  Megiddo 
were  the  happiest  part  of  Jeremiah's  ministry. 
It  is  not  certain  that  any  of  the  extant  prophe- 
cies belong  to  this  period.  With  Josiah  on  the 
throne  and  Deuteronomy  accepted  as  the  stand- 
ard of  the  national  life,  the  prophet  felt  absolved 
for  a  season  from  his  mission  to  pluck  up  and 
break  down,  and  perhaps  began  to  indulge  in 
hopes  that  the  time  had  come  to  build  and  to 
plant.  Yet  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  he  had 
implicit  confidence  in  the  permanence  of  the  Ref- 
ormation or  the  influence  of  Deuteronomy.  The 
silence  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  as  to  the  ecclesias- 
tical reforms  of  Hezekiah  and  Josiah  stands  in 
glaring  contrast  to  the  great  importance  attached 
to  them  Ijy  the  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles. 
But,  in  any  case,  Jeremiah  must  have  found  life 
brighter  and  easier  than  in  the  reigns  that  fol- 
lowed. Probably,  in  these  happier  days,  he  was 
encouraged  by  the  sympathy  and  devotion  of 
disciples  like  Baruch  and  Ezekiel. 

But  Josiah's  attempt  to  realise  a  Kingdom  of 
God  was  short-lived;  and,  in  a  few  months,  Jere- 
miah saw  the  whole  fabric  swept  away  The  king 
was  defeated  and  slain;  and  his  religious  policy 
was  at  once  reversed  either  by  a  popular  revolu- 
tion or  a  court  intrigue.  The  people  of  the  land 
made  Josiah's  son  Shallum  king,  under  the  name 
of  Jehoahaz.  This  young  prince  of  twenty-three 
only  reigned  three  months,  and  was  then  deposed 
and  carried  into  captivity  by  Pharaoh  Necho;  yet 
it  is  recorded  of  him,  that  he  did  evil  in  the  sight 
of  Jehovah,  according  to  all  that  his  fathers  had 
done.f  He — or,  more  probably,  his  ministers, 
especially  the  queen-mother  t  must  have  been 
in  a  hurry  to  undo  Josiah's  work.  Jeremiah  ut- 
ters no  condemnation  of  Jehoahaz;  he  merely  de- 
clares that  the  young  king  will  never  return  from 
his  exile,  and  bids  the  people  lament  over  his 
captivity  as  a  more  grievous  fate  than  the  death 
of  Josiah: — 

"  Weep  not  for  the  dead, 
Neither  lament  over  him  : 

But  weep  sore  for  him  that  goeth  into  captivity  ; 
For  he  shall  return  no  more, 
Neither  shall  he  behold  his  native  land."  5 

Ezekiel  adds  admiration  to  sympathy:  Jehoahaz 
was  a  young  lion  skilled  to  catch  the  prey,  he 
devoured  men,  the  nations  heard  of  him,  he  was 
taken  in  their  pit,  and  they  brought  him  with 
hooks  into  the  land  of  Egypt.  ||  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  could  not  but  feel  some  tenderness  to- 
wards the  son  of  Josiah;  and  prohahlv  they  had 
faith  in  his  personal  character,  and  believed  that 
in  time  he  would  shake  ofT  the  yoke  of  evil  coun- 

•  xvi.  a.  t  2  Kings  xxiii.  30-32.  t  Cf.  xxii.  26. 

{xxii.  10-12.  li'Elzek.  xix.  3,  4, 


sellers  and  follow  in  his  father's  footsteps.  But 
any  such  hopes  were  promptly  disappointed  by 
Pharaoh  Necho,  and  Jeremiah's  spirits  bowed 
beneath  a  new  burden  as  he  saw  his  country 
completely  subservient  to  the  dreaded  influence 
of   Egypt. 

Thus,  at  the  time  when  we  take  up  the  narra- 
tive, the  government  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
party  hostile  to  Jeremiah,  and  the  king,  Jehoia- 
kim,  seems  to  have  been  his  personal  enemy. 
Jeremiah  himself  was  somewhere  between  forty 
and  fifty  years  old,  a  solitary  man  without  wife 
or  child.  His  awful  mission  as  the  herald  of 
ruin  clouded  his  spirit  with  inevitable  gloom. 
Men  resented  the  stern  sadness  of  his  words  and 
looks,  and  turned  from  him  with  aversion  and 
dislike.  His  unpopularity  had  made  him  some- 
what harsh;  for  intolerance  is  twice  curst,  in  that 
it  inoculates  its  victims  with  the  virus  of  its  own 
bitterness.  His  hopes  and  illusions  lay  behind 
him;  he  could  only  watch  with  melancholy  pity 
the  eager  excitement  of  these  stirring  times.  If 
he  came  across  some  group  busily  discussing  the 
rout  of  the  Egyptians  at  Carchemish,  or  the  re- 
port that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  posting  in  hot 
haste  to  Babylon,  and  wondering  as  to  all  that 
this  might  mean  for  Judah,  his  countrymen 
would  turn  to  look  with  contemptuous  curiosity 
at  the  bitter,  disappointed  man  who  had  had  his 
chance  and  failed,  and  now  grudged  them  their 
prospect  of  renewed  happiness  and  prosperity. 
Nevertheless  Jeremiah's  greatest  work  still  lay 
before  him.  Jerusalem  was  past  saving;  but 
more  was  at  stake  than  the  existence  of  Judah 
and  its  capital.  But  for  Jeremiah  the  religion  of 
Jehovah  might. have  perished  with  His  Chosen 
People.  It  was  his  mission  to  save  Revelation 
from  the  wreck  of  Israel.  Humanly  speaking, 
the  religious  future  of  the  world  depended  upon 
this  stern  solitary  prophet. 


CHAPTER  II. 
A   TRIAL  FOR  HERESY. 
Jeremiah  xxvi. :  cf.  vii.-x. 

"  When  Jeremiah  had  made  an  end  of  speaking  all  that 
Jehovah  had  commanded  him  to  speak  unto  all  the  people, 
the  priests  and  the  prophets  and  all  the  people  laid  hold 
on  him,  saying.  Thou  shalt  surely  die."— Jer.  xxvi.  8. 

The  date  of  this  incident  is  given,  somewhat 
vaguely,  as  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiakim.  It  was,  therefore,  earlier  than  b.  c. 
605,  the  point  reached  in  the  previous  chapter. 
Jeremiah  could  ofifer  no  political  resistance  to 
Jehoiakim  and  his  Egyptian  suzerain;  yet  it  was 
impossible  for  him  to  allow  Josiah's  policy  to  be 
reversed  without  a  protest.  Moreover,  some- 
thing, perhaps  much,  might  yet  be  saved  for 
Jehovah.  The  king,  with  his  court  and  prophets 
and  priests,  was  not  everything.  Jeremiah  was 
only  concerned  with  sanctuaries,  ritual,  and 
priesthoods  as  means  to  an  end.  For  him  the 
most  important  result  of  the  work  he  had  shared 
with  Josiah  was  a  pure  and  holy  life  for  the  na- 
tion and  individuals.  Renan — in  some  passages, 
for  he  is  not  always  consistent — is  inclined  to 
minimise  the  significance  of  the  change  from 
Josiah  to  Jehoiakim;  in  fact,  he  writes  very  much 
as  a  cavalier  might  have  done  of  the  change  from 
Cromwell  to  Charles  II.  Both  the  Jewish  kings 
worshipped  Jehovah,   each  in  his  own  fashion: 


Jeremiah  xxvi.] 


A    TRIAL    FOR    HERESY. 


125 


Josiah  was  inclined  to  a  narrow  puritan  severity 
of  life;  Jehoiakim  was  a  liberal,  practical  man 
of  the  world.  Probably  this  is  a  fair  modern 
equivalent  of  the  current  estimate  of  the  kings 
and  their  policy,  especially  on  the  part  of  Je- 
hoiakim's  friends.;  but  then,  as  unhappily  still  in 
some  quarters,  "  narrow  puritan  severity  "  was  a 
convenient  designation  for  a  decent  and  honour- 
able life,  for  a  scrupulous  and  self-denying  care 
for  the  welfare  of  others.  Jeremiah  dreaded  a 
relapse  into  the  old  half-heathen  ideas  that  Je- 
hovah would  be  pleased  with  homage  and  service 
that  satisfied  Baal,  Moloch,  and  Chemosh.  Such 
a  relapse  would  lower  the  ethical  standard,  and 
corrupt  or  even  destroy  any  beginnings  of  spirit- 
ual life.  Our  English  Restoration  is  an  object- 
lesson  as  to  the  immoral  effects  of  political  and 
ecclesiastical  reaction;  if  such  things  were  done 
in  sober  England,  what  must  have  been  possible 
to  hot  Eastern  blood!  In  protesting  against  the 
attitude  of  Jehoiakim,  Jeremiah  would  also  seek 
to  save  the  people  from  the  evil  effects  of  the 
king's  policy.  He  knew  from  his  own  experience 
that  a  subject  might  trust  and  serve  God  with 
his  whole  heart,  even  when  the  king  was  false 
to  Jehovah.  What  was  possible  for  him  was 
possible  for  others.  He  understood  his  country- 
men too  well  to  expect  that  the  nation  would 
continue  to  advance  in  paths  of  righteousness 
which  its  leaders  and  teachers  had  forsaken;  but, 
scattered  here  and  there  through  the  mass  of  the 
people,  was  Isaiah's  remnant,  the  seed  of  the 
New  Israel,  men  and  women  to  whom  the  Rev- 
elation of  Jehovah  had  been  the  beginning  of 
a  higher  life.  He  would  not  leave  them  without 
a  word  of  counsel  and  encouragement. 

At  the  command  of  Jehovah,  Jeremiah  ap- 
peared before  the  concourse  of  Jews,  assembled 
at  the  Temple  for  some  great  fast  or  festival. 
No  feast  is  expressly  mentioned,  but  he  is 
charged  to  address  "all  the  cities  of  Judah";* 
all  the  outlying  population  would  only  meet  at 
the  Temple  on  some  specially  holy  day.  Such  an 
occasion  would  naturally  be  chosen  by  Jeremiah 
for  his  deliverance,  just  as  Christ  availed  Himself 
of  the  opportunities  offered  by  the  Passover  and 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  just  as  modern  philan- 
thropists seek  to  find  a  place  for  their  favourite 
topics  on  the  platform  of  May  Meetings. 

The  prophet  was  to  stand  in  the  court  of  the 
Temple  and  repeat  once  more  to  the  Jews  his 
message  of  warning  and  judgment,  "  all  that  I 
have  charged  thee  to  speak  unto  them,  thou 
shalt  not  keep  back  a  single  word."  The  sub- 
stance of  this  address  is  found  in  the  various 
prophecies  which  expose  the  sin  and  predict  the 
ruin  of  Judah.  They  have  been  dealt  with  in  the 
Prophecies  of  Jeremiah, f  and  are  also  referred 
to  in  Book  III.  under  our  present  head. 

According  to  the  universal  principle  of  He- 
brew prophecy,  the  predictions  of  ruin  were  con- 
ditional; they  were  still  coupled  with  the  oflfer 
of  pardon  to  repentance,  and  Jehovah  did  not 
forbid  his  prophet  to  cherish  a  lingering  hope 
that  "  perchance  they  may  hearken  and  turn 
every  one  from  his  evil  way,  so  that  I  may  repent 
Me  of  the  evil  I  purpose  to  inflict  upon  them  be- 
cause of  the  evil  of  their  doings."  Probably  the 
phrase  "  every  one  from  his  evil  way  "  is  prima- 

♦The  expression  is  curious;  it  usually  means  all  the 
citie.-,  ..f  Judah,  except  Jerusalem;  the  LXX.  reading 
varies  between  "  all  the  Jews  "  and  "  all  Judah." 

tSee  especially  the  exposition  of  chaps,  vii.-x.,  which 
lire  often  supposed  to  be  a  reproduction  of  Jeremiah's 
utterance  on  this  occasion. 


rily  collective  rather  than  individual,  and  is  in- 
tended to  describe  a  national  reformation,  which 
would  embrace  all  the  individual  citizens;  but 
the  actual  words  suggest  another  truth,  which 
must  also  have  been  in  Jeremiah's  mind.  The 
nation  is,  after  all,  an  aggregate  of  men  and 
women;  there  can  be  no  national  reformation  ex- 
cept through  the  repentance  and  amendment  of 
individuals. 

Jeremiah's  audience,  it  must  be. observed,  con- 
sisted of  worshippers  on  the  way  to  the  Temple, 
and  would  correspond  to  an  ordinary  congrega- 
tion of  churchgoers,  rather  than  to  the  casual 
crowd  gathered  round  a  street  preacher,  or  to 
the  throngs  of  miners  and  labourers  who  listened 
to  Whitefield  and  Wesley.  As  an  acknowledged 
prophet,  he  was  well  within  his  rights  in  expect- 
ing a  hearer  from  the  attendants  at  the  feast,  and 
men  would  be  curious  to  see  and  hear  one  who 
had  been  the  dominant  influence  in  Judah  during 
the  reign  of  Josiah.  Moreover,  in  the  absence 
of  evening  newspapers  and  shop-windows,  a 
prophet  was  too  exciting  a  distraction  to  be 
lightly  neglected.  From  Jehovah's  charge  to 
speak  all  that  He  had  commanded  him  to  speak 
and  not  to  keep  back  a  word,  we  may  assume 
that  Jeremiah's  discourse  was  long:  it  was  also 
avowedly  an  old  sermon;.*  most  of  his  audience 
had  heard  it  before,  all  of  them  were  quite  famil- 
iar with  its  main  topics.  They  listened  in  the 
various  moods  of  a  modern  congregation  "  sit- 
ting under "  a  distinguished  preacher.  Jere- 
miah's friends  and  disciples  welcomed  the  ideas 
and  phrases  that  had  become  part  of  their  spirit- 
ual life.  Many  enjoyed  the  speaker's  earnest- 
ness and  eloquence,  without  troubling  them- 
selves about  the  ideas  at  all.  There  was  nothing 
specially  startling  about  the  well-known  threats 
and  warnings;  they  had  become 

"  A  tale  of  little  meaning  tho'  the  words  were  strong." 

Men  hardened  their  hearts  against  inspired 
prophets  as  easily  as  they  do  against  the  most 
pathetic  appeals  of  modern  evangelists.  Mingled 
with  the  crowd  were  Jeremiah's  professional 
rivals,  who  detested  both  him  and  his  teaching — 
priests  who  regarded  him  as  a  traitor  to  his 
own  caste,  prophets  who  envied  his  superior 
gifts  and  his  force  of  passionate  feeling.  To 
these  almost  every  word  he  uttered  was  offensive, 
but  for  a  while  there  was  nothing  that  roused 
them  to  very  vehement  anger.  He  was  allowed 
to  finish  what  he  had  to  say,  "  to  make  an  end 
of  speaking  all  that  Jehovah  had  commanded 
him."  But  in  this  peroration  he  had  insisted  on 
a  subject  that  stung  the  indifferent  into  resent- 
ment and  roused  the  priests  and  prophets  to 
fury. 

"  Go  ye  now  unto  My  place  which  was  in 
Shiloh,  where  I  caused  My  name  to  dwell  at  the 
first,  and  see  what  I  did  to  it  for  the  wickedness 
of  My  people  Israel.  And  now,  because  ye  have 
done  all  these  works,  saith  Jehovah,  and  I  spake 
unto  you,  rising  up  early  and  speaking,  but  ye 
heard  not;  and  I  called  you,  but  ye  answered 
not:  therefore  will  I  do  unto  the  house,  that  is 
called  by  My  name,  wherein  ye  trust,  and  unto 
the  place  which  I  gave  to  you  and  to  your 
fathers,  as  I  have  done  to  Shiloh."  f 

*  The  Hebrew  apparently  implies  that  the  discourse  was 
a  repetition  of  former  prophecies. 

tvii.  12-14.  Even  if  chaps,  vii.-x.  are  not  a  report  of 
Jeremiah's  discourse  on  this  occasion,  the  few  lines  in 
xxvi.  are  evidently  a  mere  summary,  and  vii.  will  best 


126 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


The  Ephraimite  sanctuary  of  Shiloh,  long  the 
home  of  the  Ark  and  its  priesthood,  had  been 
overthrown  in  some  national  catastrophe.  Ap- 
parently when  it  was  destroyed  it  was  no  mere 
tent,  but  a  substantial  building  of  stone,  and  its 
ruins  remained  as  a  permanent  monument  of  the 
fugitive  glory  of  even  the  most  sacred  shrine. 

The  very  presence  of  his  audience  in  the  place 
where  they  were  met  showed  their  reverence  for 
the  Temple:  the  priests  were  naturally  devotees 
of  their  own  shrine;  of  the  prophets  Jeremiah 
himself  had  said,  "  The  prophets  prophesy 
falsely,  and  the  priests  rule  in  accordance  with 
their  teaching."  *  Can  we  wonder  that  "  the 
priests  and  the  prophets  and  all  the  people  laid 
hold  on  him,  saying.  Thou  shalt  surely  die"? 
For  the  moment  there  was  an  appearance  of  re- 
ligious unity  in  Jerusalem;  the  priests,  the 
prophets,  and  the  pious  laity  on  one  side,  and 
only  the  solitary  heretic  on  the  other.  It  was, 
though  on  a  small  scale,  as  if  the  obnoxious 
teaching  of  some  nineteenth-century  prophet  of 
God  had  given  an  unexpected  stimulus  to  the 
movement  for  Christian  reunion;  as  if  cardinals 
and  bishops,  chairmen  of  unions,  presidents  of 
conferences,  moderators  of  assemblies,  with  great 
preachers  and  distinguished  laymen,  united  to 
hold  monster  meetings  and  denounce  the  Divine 
message  as  heresy  and  blasphemy.  In  like 
manner  Pharisees,  Sadducees,  and  Herodians 
found  a  basis  of  common  action  in  their  hatred 
of  Christ,  and  Pilate  and  Herod  were  reconciled 
by  His  cross. 

Meanwhile  the  crowd  was  increasing;  new 
worshippers  were  arriving,  and  others  as  they 
left  the  Temple  were  attracted  to  the  scene  of  the 
disturbance.  Doubtless  too  the  mob,  always  at 
the  service  of  persecutors,  hurried  up  in  hope  of 
finding  opportunities  for  mischief  and  violence. 
Some  six  and  a  half  centuries  later,  history  re- 
peated itself  on  the  same  spot,  when  the  Asiatic 
Jews  saw  Paul  in  the  Temple  and  "  laid  hands  on 
him,  crying  out.  Men  of  Israel,  help:  This  is  the 
man,  that  teacheth  all  men  everywhere  against 
the  people  and  the  law  and  this  place,  .  .  .  and 
all  the  city  was  moved,  and  the  people  ran  to- 
gether and  laid  hold  on  Paul."  f 

Our  narrative,  as  it  stands,  is  apparently  in- 
complete: we  find  Jeremiah  before  the  tribunal 
of  the  princes,  but  we  are  not  told  how  he  came 
there;  whether  the  civil  authorities  intervened  to 
protect  him,  as  Claudius  Lysias  came  down  with 
his  soldiers  and  centurions  and  rescued  Paul, 
or  whether  Jeremiah's  enemies  observed  legal 
forms,  as  Annas  and  Caiaphas  did  when  they  ar- 
rested Christ.  But,  in  any  case,  "  the  princes  of 
Judah,  when  they  heard  these  things,  came  up 
from  the  palace  into  the  Temple,  and  took  their 
seats  as  judges  at  the  entry  of  the  new  gate  of 
the  Temple."  The  "  princes  of  Judah  "  play  a 
conspicuous  part  in  the  last  period  of  the  Jewish 
monarchy:  we  have  little  definite  information 
about  them,  and  are  left  to  conjecture  that  they 
were  an  aristocratic  oligarchy  or  an  official 
clique,  or  both;  but  it  is  clear  that  they  were  a 
dominant  force  in  the  state,  with  recognised  con- 
stitutional status,  and  that  they  often  controlled 

indicate  the  substance  of  his  utterance.  The  verses 
quoted  occur  towards  the  beginning  of  vii.-x.,  but  from 
the  emphatic  reference  to  Shiloh  in  the  brief  abstract  in 
xxvi.,  Jeremiah  must  have  dwelt  on  this  topic,  and  the 
fact  that  the  outburst  followed  his  conclusion  suggests 
that  he  reserved  this  subject  for  his  peroration. 

*  V.  31. 

t  Acts  xxi.  27-30. 


the  king  himself.  We  are  also  ignorant  as  to 
the  "new  gate";  it  may  possibly  be  the  upper 
gate  built  by  Jotham  *  about  a  hundred  and  fifty 
years   earlier. 

Before  these  judges,  Jeremiah's  ecclesiastical 
accusers  brought  a  formal  chacge;  they  said,  al- 
most in  the  very  words  which  the  high  priest  and 
the  Sanhedrin  used  of  Christ,  "  This  man  is 
worthy  of  death,  for  he  hath  prophesied  against 
this  city,  as  ye  have  heard  with  your  ears  " — t.  e., 
when  he  said,  "  This  house  shall  be  like  Shiloh, 
and  this  city  shall  be  desolate  without  inhabit- 
ant." Such  accusations  have  been  always  on  the 
lips  of  those  who  have  denounced  Christ  and 
His  disciples  as  heretics.  One  charge  against 
Himself  was  that  He  said,  "  I  will  destroy  this 
Temple  that  is  made  with  hands,  and  in  three 
days  I  will  build  another  that  is  made  without 
hands."  f  Stephen  was  accused  of  speaking  in- 
cessantly against  the  Temple  and  the  Law,  and 
teaching  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  would  destroy  the 
Temple  and  change  the  customs  handed  down 
from  Moses.  When  he  asserted  that  "  the  Most 
High  dwelleth  not  in  temples  made  with  hands," 
the  impatience  of  his  audience  compelled  him  to 
bring  his  defence  to  an  abrupt  conclusion.^  Of 
Paul  we  have  already  spoken. 

How  was  it  that  these  priests  and  prophets 
thought  that  their  princes  might  be  induced  to 
condemn  Jeremiah  to  death  for  predicting  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple?  A  prophet  would 
not  run  much  risk  nowadays  by  announcing  that 
St.  Paul's  should  be  made  like  Stonehenge,  or 
St.  Peter's  like  the  Parthenon.  Expositors  of 
Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse  habitually  fix  the  end 
of  the  world  a  few  years  in  advance  of  the  date 
at  which  they  write,  and  yet  they  do  not  incur 
any  appreciable  unpopularity.  It  is  true  that 
Jeremiah's  accusers  were  a  little  afraid  that  his 
predictions  might  be  fulfilled,  and  the  most  bitter 
persecutors  are  those  who  have  a  lurking  dread 
that  their  victims  are  right,  while  they  themselves 
are  wrong.  But  such  fears  could  not  very  well 
be  evidence  or  argument  against  Jeremiah  before 
any  court  of  law. 

In  order  to  realise  the  situation  we  must  con- 
sider the  place  which  the  Temple  held  in  the 
hopes  and  affections  of  the  Jews.  They  had  al- 
ways been  proud  of  their  royal  sanctuary  at  Je- 
rusalem, but  within  the  last  hundred  and  fifty 
years  it  had  acquired  a  unique  importance  for 
the  religion  of  Israel.  First  Hezekiah,  and  then 
Josiah,  had  taken  away  the  other  high  places  and 
altars  at  which  Jehovah  was  worshipped,  and  had 
said  to  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  "  Ye  shall  worship 
before  this  altar."  §  Doubtless  the  kings  were 
following  the  advice  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah. 
These  prophets  were  anxious  to  abolish  the 
abuses  of  the  local  sanctuaries,  which  were  a 
continual  incentive  to  an  extravagant  and  cor- 
rupt ritual.  Yet  they  did  not  intend  to  assign 
any  supreme  importance  to  a  priestly  caste  or  a 
consecrated  building.  Certainly  for  them  the 
hope  of  Israel  and  the  assurance  of  its  salvation 
did  not  consist  in  cedar  and  hewn  stones,  in 
silver  and  gold.  And  yet  the  unique  position 
given  to  the  Temple  inevitably  became  the  start- 
ing-point for  fresh  superstition.  Once  Jehovah 
could  be  worshipped  not  only  at  Jerusalem,  but 
at  Beersheba  and  Bethel  and  many  other  places 
where  He  had  chosen  to  set  His  name.  Even 
then,  it  was  felt  that  the  Divine  Presence  must 

*  2  Kings  XV.  35.     1  Acts  vi.  13,  14,  vii.  ^8. 

tMark  xiv.  58.        §a  Kings  xviii.  4,  xxiii.;  Isa.  xxxvi.  7. 


Jeremiah  xxvi.] 


A    TRIAL    FOR    HERESY. 


J27 


afford  some  protection  for  His  dwelling-places. 
But  now  that  Jehovah  dwelt  nowhere  else  but 
at  Jerusalem,  and  only  accepted  the  worship  of 
His  people  at  this  single  shrine,  how  could  any 
one  doubt  that  He  would  protect  His  Temple  and 
His  Holy  City  against  all  enemies,  even  the  most 
formidable?     Had   He  not  done  so  already? 

When  Hezekiah  abolished  the  high  places,  did 
not  Jehovah  set  the  seal  of  approval  upon  his 
policy  by  destroying  the  army  of  Sennacherib? 
Was  not  this  great  deliverance  wrought  to  guard 
the  Temple  against  desecration  and  destruction, 
and  would  not  Jehovah  work  out  a  like  salvation 
in  any  future  time  of  danger?  The  destruction 
of  Sennacherib  was  essential  to  the  religious 
future  of  Israel  and  of  mankind;  but  it  had  a  very 
mingled  influence  upon  the  generations  imme- 
diately following.  They  were  like  a  man  who 
has  won  a  great  prize  in  a  lottery,  or  who  has, 
quite  unexpectedly,  come  into  an  immense  in- 
heritance. They  ignored  the  unwelcome  thought 
that  the  Divine  protection  depended  on  spiritual 
and  moral  conditions,  and  they  clung  to  the 
superstitious  faith  that  at  any  moment,  even  in 
the  last  extremity  of  danger  and  at  the  eleventh 
hour,  Jehovah  might,  nay,  even  must,  intervene. 
The  priests  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem 
could  look  on  with  comparative  composure  while 
the  country  was  ravaged,  and  the  outlying  towns 
were  taken  and  pillaged;  Jerusalem  itself  might 
seem  on  the  verge  of  falling  into  the  hands  of  the 
enemy,  but  they  still  trusted  in  their  Palladium. 
Jerusalem  could  not  perish,  because  it  contained 
the  one  sanctuary  of  Jehovah;  they  sought  to 
silence  their  own  fears  and  to  drown  the  warn- 
ing voice  of  the  prophet  by  vociferating  their 
watchword:  "  The  Temple  of  Jehovah!  the  Tem- 
ple of  Jehovah!  The  Temple  of  Jehovah  is  in 
our  midst!  "  * 

In  prosperous  times  a  nation  may  forget  its 
Palladium,  and  may  tolerate  doubts  as  to  its 
efficacy;  but  the  strength  of  the  Jews  was 
broken,  their  resources  were  exhausted,  and  they 
were  clinging  in  an  agony  of  conflicting  hopes 
and  fears  to  their  faith  in  the  inviolability  of  the 
Temple.  To  destroy  their  confidence  was  like 
snatching  away  a  plank  from  a  drowning  man. 
When  Jeremiah  made  the  attempt,  they  struck 
back  with  the  fierce  energy  of  despair.  It  does 
not  seem  that  at  this  time  the  city  was  in  any 
immediate  danger;  the  incident  rather  falls  in  the 
period  of  quiet  submission  to  Pharaoh  Necho 
that  preceded  the  battle  of  Carchemish.  But  the 
disaster  of  Megiddo  was  fresh  in  men's  memo- 
ries, and  in  the  unsettled  state  of  Eastern  Asia  no 
one  knew  how  soon  some  other  invader  might 
advance  against  the  city.  On  the  other  hand,  in 
the  quiet  interval,  hopes  began  to  revive,  and 
men  were  incensed  when  the  prophet  made  haste 
to  nip  these  hopes  in  the  bud,  all  the  more  so 
because  their  excited  anticipations  of  future 
glory  had  so  little  solid  basis.  Jeremiah's  ap- 
peal to  the  ill-omened  precedent  of  Shiloh  natu- 
rally roused  the  sang^uine  and  despondent  alike 
into  frenzy. 

Jeremiah's  defence  was  simple  and  direct: 
"  Jehovah  sent  me  to  prophesy  all  that  ye  have 
heard  against  this  house  and  against  this  city. 
Now  therefore  amend  your  ways  and  your  do- 
ings, and  hearken  unto  the  voice  of  Jehovah 
your  God,  that  He  may  repent  Him  of  the  evil 
that  He  hath  spoken  against  you.  As  for  me, 
behold,  I  am  in  your  hands:  do  unto  me  as  it 
♦  vii.  4. 


seems  good  and  right  unto  you.  Only  know  as- 
suredly that,  if  ye  put  me  to  death,  ye  will  bring 
the  guilt  of  innocent  blood  upon  yourselves,  and 
upon  this  city  and  its  inhabitants:  for  of  a  truth 
Jehovah  sent  me  unto  you  to  speak  all  these 
words  in  your  ears."  There  is  one  curious 
feature  in  this  defence.  Jeremiah  contemplates 
the  possibility  of  two  distinct  acts  of  wickedness 
on  the  part  of  his  persecutors:  they  may  turn  a 
deaf  ear  to  his  appeal  that  they  should  repent 
and  reform,  and  their  obstinacy  will  incur  all 
the  chastisements  which  Jeremiah  had  threat- 
ened; they  may  also  put  him  to  death  and  incur 
additional  guilt.  Scoffers  might  reply  that  his 
previous  threats  were  so  awful  and  comprehen- 
sive that  they  left  no  room  for  any  addition  to 
the  punishment  of  the  impenitent.  Sinners 
sometimes  find  a  grim  comfort  in  the  depth  of 
their  wickedness;  their  case  is  so  bad  tha,t  it  can- 
not be  made  worse,  they  may  now  indulge  their 
evil  propensities  witj^jukind  of  impunity.  But 
Jeremiah's  prophetic  '•'yillght  made  him  anxious 
to  save  his  countrymen  from  further  sin,  even  in 
their  impenitence;  the  Divine  discrimination  is 
not  taxed  beyond  its  capabilities  even  by  the  ex- 
tremity of  human  wickedness. 

But  to  return  to  the  main  feature  in  Jeremiah's 
defence.  His  accusers'  contention  was  that  his 
teaching  was  so  utterly  blasphemous,  so  entirely 
opposed  to  every  tradition  and  principle  of  true 
religion — or,  as  we  should  say,  so  much  at  vari- 
ance with  all  orthodoxy — that  it  could  not  be  a 
word  of  Jehovah.  Jeremiah  does  not  attempt  to 
discuss  the  relation  of  his  teaching  to  the  possible 
limits  of  Jewish  orthodoxy.  He  bases  his  de- 
fence on  the  bare  assertion  of  his  prophetic  mis- 
sion— ^Jehovah  had  sent  him.  He  assumes  that 
there  is  no  room  for  evidence  or  discussion;  it 
is  a  question  of  the  relative  authority  of  Jere- 
miah and  his  accusers,  whether  he  or  they  had 
the  better  right  to  speak  for  God.  The  im- 
mediate result  seemed  to  justify  him  in  this  atti- 
tude. He  was  no  obscure  novice,  seeking  for 
the  first  time  to  establish  his  right  to  speak 
in  the  Divine  name.  The  princes  and  peo- 
ple had  been  accustomed  for  twenty  years  to 
listen  to  him,  as  to  the  most  fully  acknowledged 
mouthpiece  of  Heaven;  they  could  not  shake  off 
their  accustomed  feeling  of  deference,  and  once 
more  succumbed  to  the  spell  of  his  fervid  and 
commanding  personality.  "  Then  said  the 
princes  and  all  the  people  unto  the  priests  and 
the  prophets.  This  man  is  not  worthy  of  death; 
for  he  hath  spoken  to  us  in  the  name  of  Jehovah 
our  God."  For  the  moment  the  people  were 
won  over  and  the  princes  convinced;  but  priests 
and  prophets  were  not  so  easily  influenced  by 
inspired  utterances:  some  of  these  probably 
thought  that  they  had  an  inspiration  of  their  own, 
and  their  professional  experience  made  them 
callous. 

At  this  point  again  the  sequence  of  events  is 
not  clear;  possibly  the  account  was  compiled 
from  the  imperfect  recollections  of  more  than 
one  of  the  spectators.  The  pronouncement  of 
the  princes  and  the  people  seems,  at  first  sight. 
a  formal  acquittal  that  should  have  ended  the 
trial,  and  left  no  room  for  the  subsequent  inter 
vention  of  "  certain  of  the  elders,"  otherwise  the 
trial  seems  to  have  come  to  no  definite  conclu- 
sion and  the  incident  simply  terminated  in  the 
personal  protection  given  to  Jeremiah  by  Ahi- 
kam  ben  Shaphan.  Possibly,  however,  the 
tribunal  of  the  princes  was  not  governed  by  any 


T28 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH 


strict  rules  of  procedure;  and  the  force  of  the 
argument  used  by  the  elders  does  not  depend  on 
the  exact  stage  of  the  trial  at  which  it  was  intro- 
duced. 

Either  Jeremiah  was  not  entirely  successful  in 
his  attempt  to  get  the  matter  disposed  of  on  the 
sole  ground  of  his  own  prophetic  authority,  or 
else  the  elders  were  anxious  to  secure  v/eight  and 
finality  for  the  acquittal,  by  bringing  forward 
arguments  in  its  support.  The  elders  were  an 
ancient  Israelite  institution,  and  probably  still 
represented  the  patriarchal  side  of  the  national 
life;  nothing  is  said  as  to  their  relation  to  the 
princes,  and  this  might  not  be  very  clearly  de- 
fined. The  elders  appealed,  by  way  of  precedent, 
to  an  otherwise  unrecorded  incident  of  the  reign 
of  Hezekiah.  Micah  the  Morasthite  had  uttered 
similar  threats  against  Jerusalem  and  the  Tem- 
ple: "  Zion  shall  be  ploughed  as  a  field,  and  Je- 
rusalem shall  become  heaps,  and  the  mountain  of 
the  house  as  the  high  places  of  the  forest."  * 
But  Hezekiah  and  his  people,  instead  of  slaying 
Micah,  had  repented,  and  the  city  had  been 
spared.  They  evidently  wished  that  the  prec- 
edent could  be  wholly  followed  in  the  present 
instance;  but,  at  any  rate,  it  was  clear  that  one 
of  the  most  honoured  and  successful  of  the  kings 
of  Judal^  had  accepted  a  threat  against  the  Tem- 
ple as  a  message  from  Jehovah.  Therefore  the 
mere  fact  that  Jeremiah  had  uttered  such  a  threat 
was  certainly  not  prima  facie  evidence  that  he 
was  a  false  prophet.  We  are  not  told  how  this 
argument  was  received,  but  the  writer  of  the 
chapter,  possibly  Baruch,  does  not  attribute 
Jeremiah's  escape  either  to  his  acquittal  by  the 
princes  or  to  the  reasoning  of  the  elders.  The 
people  apparently  changed  sides  once  more,  like 
the  common  people  in  the  New  Testament,  who 
heard  Christ  gladly  and  with  equal  enthusiasm 
clamoured  for  His  crucifixion.  At  the  end  of 
the  chapter  we  find  them  eager  to  have  the 
prophet  delivered  into  their  hands  that  they  may 
put  him  to  death.  Apparently  the  prophets  and 
priests,  having  brought  matters  into  this  satis- 
factory position,  had  retired  from  the  scene  of 
action;  the  heretic  was  to  be  delivered  over  to 
the  secular  arm.  The  princes,  like  Pilate,  seemed 
inclined  to  yield  to  popular  pressure;  but  Ahi- 
kam,  a  son  of  the  Shaphan  who  had  to  do  with 
the  finding  of  Deuteronomy,  stood  by  Jeremiah, 
as  John  of  Gaunt  stood  by  Wyclif,  and  the 
Protestant  Princes  by  Luther,  and  the  magis- 
trates of  Geneva  by  Calvin;  and  Jeremiah  could 
say  with  the   Psalmist: — 

"  I  have  heard  the  defaming  of  many. 
Terror  on  every  side: 

While  they  took  counsel  together  against  me. 
They  devised  to  take  away  my  life. 
But  I  trusted  in  Thee,  O  Jehovah  : 
I  said.  Thou  art  my  God. 
My  times  are  in  Thy  hand  : 
Deliver  me  from  the  hand  of  mine  enemies,  and  from 

them  that  persecute  me. 

» 
Let  the  lying  lips  be  dumb. 
Which  speak  against  the  righteous  insolently. 
With  pnde  and  contempt. 
Oh,  how  great  is  Thy  goodness,  which  Thou  hast  laid  up 

for  them  that  fear  Thee, 
Which  Thou  hast  wrought  for  them  that  put  their  trust 

in  Thee,  before  the  sons  of  men."  i 

♦  Micah  iii.  12.  As  the  quotation  exactly  agrees  with  the 
verse  in  our  extant  Book  of  Micah,  we  may  suppose  that 
the  elders  were  acquainted  with  his  prophecies  in  writing. 

t Psalm  xxxi.  13-15,  18  iq.  The  Psalm  is  .sometimes 
ascribed  to  Jeremiah,  because  it  can  be  so  readily  applied 
to  this  incident.  The  reader  will  recognise  his  character- 
istic phrase  "  Terror  on  every  side  "  (Magor-missabib). 


We  have  here  an  early  and  rudimentary  example 
of  religious  toleration,  of  the  willingness,  how- 
ever reluctant,  to  he^ar  as  a  possible  Divine  mes- 
sage unpalatable  teaching,  at  variance  with  cur- 
rent theology;  we  see  too  the  fountain-head  of 
that  freedom  which  since  has  "  broadened  down 
from  precedent  to  precedent." 

But  unfortunately  no  precedent  can  bind  suc- 
ceeding generations,  and  both  Judaism  and 
Christianity  have  sinned  grievously  against  the 
lesson  of  this  chapter.  Jehoiakim  himself  soon 
broke  through  the  feeble  restraint  of  this  new- 
born tolerance.  The  writer  adds  an  incident 
that  must  have  happened  somewhat  later,*  to 
show  how  real  was  Jeremiah's  danger,  and  how 
transient  was  the  liberal  mood  of  the  authorities. 
A  certain  Uriah  ben  Shemaiah  of  Kirjath  Jearim 
had  the  courage  to  follow  in  Jeremiah's  foot- 
steps and  speak  against  the  city  "  according  to  all 
that  Jeremiah  had  said."  With  the  usual  mean- 
ness of  persecutors,  Jehoiakim  and  his  captains 
and  princes  vented  upon  this  obscure  prophet  the 
ill-will  which  they  had  not  dared  to  indulge  in 
the  case  of  Jeremiah,  with  his  commanding 
personality  and  influential  friends.  Uriah  fled 
into  Egypt,  but  was  brought  back  and  slain,  and 
his  body  cast  out  unburied  into  the  common 
cemetery.  We  can  understand  Jeremiah's  fierce 
and  bitter  indignation  against  the  city  where 
such  things  were  possible. 

This  chapter  is  so  full  of  suggestive  teaching 
that  we  can  only  touch  upon  two  or  three  of  its 
more  obvious  lessons.  The  dogma  which  shaped 
the  charge  against  Jeremiah  and  caused  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Uriah  was  the  inviolability  of  the 
Temple  and  the  Holy  City.  This  dogma  was  a 
perversion  of  the  teaching  of  Isaiah,  and  es- 
pecially of  Jeremiah  himself,t  which  assigned  a 
unique  position  to  the  Temple  in  the  religion  of 
Israel.  The  carnal  man  shows  a  fatal  ingenuity 
in  sucking  poison  out  of  the  most  wholesome 
truth.  He  is  always  eager  to  discover  that  some- 
thing external,  material,  physical,  concrete — 
some  building,  organisation,  ceremony,  or  form 
of  words — is  a  fundamental  basis  of  the  faith  and 
essential  to  salvation.  If  Jeremiah  had  died 
with  Josiah,  the  "  priests  and  prophets  "  would 
doubtless  have  quoted  his  authority  against 
Uriah.  The  teaching  of  Christ  and  His  apostles, 
of  Luther  and  Calvin  and  their  fellow-reformers, 
has  often  been  twisted  and  forged  into  weapons 
to  be  used  against  their  true  followers.  We  are 
often  tempted  in  the  interest  of  our  favourite 
views  to  lay  undue  stress  on  secondary  and  ac- 
cidental statements  of  great  teachers.  We  fail  to 
keep  the  due  proportion  of  truth  which  they 
themselves  observed,  and  in  applying  their  pre- 
cepts to  new  problems  we  sacrifice  the  kernel  and 
save  the  husk.  The  warning  of  Jeremiah's  per- 
secutors might  often  "  give  us  pause."  We  need 
not  be  surprised  at  finding  priests  and  prophets 
eager  and  interested  champions  of  a  perversion 
of  revealed  truth.  Ecclesiastical  office  does  not 
necessarily  confer  any  inspiration  from  above. 
The  hereditary  priest  follows  the  traditions  of  his 
caste,  and  even  the  prophet  may  become  the 
mouthpiece    of   the    passions    and    prejudices    of 

*  This  incident  cannot  be  part  of  the  speech  of  the 
elders;  it  would  only  have  told  against  the  point  they 
were  trying  to  make.  The  various  phases— prophecy, 
persecution,  flight,  capture,  and  execution— must  have 
taken  some  time,  and  can  scarcely  have  preceded  Jere- 
miah's utterance  "at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  King 
Jehoiakim." 

t  Assuming  his  sympathy  with  Deuteronomy. 


Jeremiah  xxxvi.] 


THE    ROLL. 


129 


those  who  accept  and  applaud  him.  When  men 
will  not  endure  sound  doctrine,  they  heap  to 
themselves  teachers  after  their  own  lusts;  hav- 
ing itching  ears,  they  turn  away  their  ears  from 
the  truth  and  turn  unto  fables.*  Jeremiah's  ex- 
perience shows  that  even  an  apparent  consensus 
of  clerical  opinion  is  not  always  to  be  trusted. 
The  history  of  councils  and  synods  is  stained 
by  many  foul  and  shameful  blots;  it  was  the 
(Ecumenical  Council  at  Constance  that  burnt 
Huss,  and  most  Churches  have  found  thern- 
selves,  at  some  time  or  other,  engaged  in 
building  the  tombs  of  the  prophets  whom  their 
own  officials  had  stoned  in  days  gone  by.  We 
forget  that  "  Athanasius  contra  mundum  "  im- 
plies also  "  Athanasius  contra  ecclesiam." 


CHAPTER  HL 

THE   ROLL. 
Jeremiah  xxxvi. 

"Take  thee  a  roll  of  a  book,  and  write  therein  all  the 
words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee."— Jer.  xxxvi.  2. 

The  incidents  which  form  so  large  a  propor- 
tion of  the  contents  of  our  book  do  not  make  up 
a  connected  narrative;  they  are  merely  a  series  of 
detached  pictures:  we  can  only  conjecture  the 
doings  and  experiences  of  Jeremiah  during  the 
intervals.  Chapter  xxvi.  leaves  him  still  exposed 
to  the  persistent  hostility  of  the  priests  and 
prophets,  who  had  apparently  succeeded  in  once 
more  directing  popular  feeling  against  their 
antagonist.  At  the  same  time,  though  the 
princes  were  not  ill-disposed  towards  him,  they 
were  not  inclined  to  resist  the  strong  pressure 
brought  to  bear  upon  them.  Probably  the  atti- 
tude of  the  populace  varied  from  time  to  time, 
according  to  the  presence  among  them  of  the 
friends  or  enemies  of  the  prophet;  and,  in  the 
same  way,  we  cannot  think  of  "  the  princes " 
as  a  united  body,  governed  by  a  single  impulse. 
The  action  of  this  group  of  notables  might  be 
determined  by  the  accidental  preponderance  of 
one  or  other  of  two  opposing  parties.  Jere- 
miah's only  real  assurance  of  safety  lay  in  the 
personal  protection  extended  to  him  by  Ahikam 
ben  Shaphan.  Doubtless  other  princes  asso- 
ciated themselves  with  Ahikam  in  his  friendly 
action  on  behalf  of  the  prophet. 

Under  these  circumstances,  Jeremiah  would 
find  it  necessary  to  restrict  his  activity.  Utter 
indifference  to  danger  was  one  of  the  most  ordi- 
nary characteristics  of  Hebrew  prophets,  and 
Jeremiah  was  certainly  not  wanting  in  the  des- 
perate courage  which  may  be  found  in  any  Mo- 
hammedan dervish.  At  the  same  time  he  was 
far  too  practical,  too  free  from  morbid  self-con- 
sciousness, to  court  martyrdom  for  its  own  sake. 
If  he  had  presented  himself  again  in  the  Temple 
when  it  was  crowded  with  worshippers,  his  life 
might  have  been  taken  in  a  popular  tumult,  while 
his  mission  was  still  only  half  accomplished. 
Possibly  his  priestly  enemies  had  found  means  to 
exclude  him  from  the  sacred  precincts. 

Man's  extremity  was  God's  opportunity;  this 
temporary  and  partial  silencing  of  Jeremiah  led 
to  a  new  departure,  which  made  the  influence  of 
his  teaching  more  extensive  and  permanent.  He 
was   commanded    to    commit   his    prophecies   to 

*  2  Tim.  iv.  3. 
9— Vol.  IV. 


writing.  The  restriction  of  his  active  ministry 
was  to  bear  rich  fruit,  like  Paul's  imprisonment, 
and  Athanasius'  exile,  and  Luther's  sojourn  in 
the  Wartburg.  A  short  time  since  there  was 
great  danger  that  Jeremiah  and  the  Divine  mes- 
sage entrusted  to  him  would  perish  together. 
He  did  not  know  how  soon  he  might  become 
once  more  the  mark  of  popular  fury,  nor  whether 
y\hikam  would  still  be  able  to  protect  him.  The 
roll  of  the  book  could  speak  even  if  he  were 
put  to  death. 

But  Jeremiah  was  not  thinking  chiefly  about 
what  would  become  of  his  teaching  if  he  himself 
perished.  He  had  an  immediate  and  particular 
end  in  view.  His  tenacious  persistence  was  not 
to  be  baffled  by  the  prospect  of  mob  violence,  or 
by  exclusion  from  the  most  favourable  vantage- 
ground.  Renan  is  fond  of  comparing  the  proph- 
ets to  modern  journalists;  and  this  incident  is 
an  early  and  striking  instance  of  the  substitu- 
tion of  pen,  ink,  and  paper  for  the  orator's 
tribune.  Perhaps  the  closest  modern  parallel  is 
that  of  the  speaker  who  is  howled  down  at  a 
public  meeting  and  hands  his  manuscript  to  the 
reporters. 

In  the  record  of  the  Divine  command  to  Jere- 
miah, there  is  no  express  statement  as  to  what 
was  to  be  done  with  the  roll;  but  as  the  ob- 
ject of  writing  it  was  that  "  perchance  the  house 
of  Judah  might  hear  and  repent,"  it  is  evident 
that  from  the  first  it  was  intended  to  be  read  to 
the  people. 

There  is  considerable  difiference  of  opinion  * 
as  to  the  contents  of  the  roll.  They  are  de- 
scribed as:  "All  that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee 
concerningf  Jerusalem^  and  Judah,  and  all  the 
nations,  since  I  (first)  spake  unto  thee,  from  the 
time  of  Josiah  until  now."  At  first  sight  this 
would  seem  to  include  all  previous  utterances, 
and  therefore  all  the  extant  prophecies  of  a  date 
earlier  than  B.  c.  605,  t.  e.,  those  contained  in 
chapters  i.-xii.  and  some  portions  of  xiv.-xx. 
(we  cannot  determine  which  with  any  exactness), 
and  probably  most  of  those  dated  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  i.  e.,  xxv.  and  parts  of  xlv.- 
xlix.  Cheyne,§  however,  holds  that  the  roll 
simply  contained  the  striking  and  comprehensive 
prophecy  in  chapter  xxv.  The  whole  series  of 
chapters  might  very  well  be  described  as  dealin'g' 
with  Jerusalem,  Judah,  and  the  nations;  but  at 
the  same  time  xxv.  might  be  considered  equiva- 
lent, by  way  of  summary,  to  all  that  had  been 
spoken  on  these  subjects.  From  various  con- 
siderations which  will  appear  as  we  proceed  with 
the  narrative,  it  seems  probable  that  the  larger 
estimate  is  the  more  correct,  i.  e.,  that  the  roll 
contained  a  large  fraction  of  our  Book  of  Jere- 
miah, and  not  merely  one  or  two  chapters.  We 
need  not,  however,  suppose  that  every  previous 
utterance  of  the  prophet,  even  though  still  ex- 
tant, must  have  been  included  in  the  roll;  the 
"  all  "  would  of  course  be  understood  to  be  con- 
ditioned by  relevancy;  and  the  narratives  of  var- 
ious incidents  are  obviously  not  part  of  what  Je- 
hovah had  spoken. 

Jeremiah  -dictated  his  prophecies,  as  St.  Paul 
did  his  epistles,  to  an  amanuensis;  he  called  his 
disciple    Baruchfl     ben    Neriah,    and   dictated   to 

*See  Cheyne,  Giesebrecht,  Orelli,  etc. 

+  R.  V.  "  against."    The  Hebrew  is  ambiguous. 

t  So  Septuagint.  The  Hebrew  text  has  Israel,  which  is 
a  less  accurate  description  of  the  prophecies,  and  is  less 
relevant  to  this  particular  occasion. 

§  "Jeremiah  "  (Men  of  the  Bible),  p.  133. 

I  C/.  chap.  v.  on  "  Baruch." 


I30 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


him  "  all  that  Jehovah  had  spoken,  upon  a  book, 
in  the  form  of  a  roll." 

It  seems  clear  that,  as  in  xxvi.,  the  narrative 
does  not  exactly  follow  the  order  of  events,* 
and  that  verse  9,  which  records  the  proclamation 
of  a  fast  in  the  ninth  month  of  Jehoiakim's  fifth 
year,  should  be  read  before  verse  5,  which  begins 
the  account  of  the  circumstances  leading  up  to 
the  actual  reading  of  the  roll.  We  are  not  told 
in  what  month  of  Jehoiakim's  fourth  year  Jere- 
miah received  this  command  to  write  his  prophe- 
cies in  a  roll,  but  as  they  were  not  read  till  the 
ninth  month  of  the  fifth  year,  there  must  have 
been  an  interval  of  at  least  ten  months  or  a  year 
between  the. Divine  command  and  the  reading 
by  Baruch.  We  can  scarcely  suppose  that  all 
or  nearly  all  this  delay  was  caused  by  Jeremiah 
and  Baruch's  waiting  for  a  suitable  occasion. 
The  long  interval  suggests  that  the  dictation  took 
some  time,  and  that  therefore  the  roll  was  some- 
what voluminous  in  its  contents,  and  that  it  was 
carefully  compiled,  not  without  a  certain  amount 
of  revision. 

When  the  manuscript  was  ready,  its  authors 
had  to  determine  the  right  time  at  which  to  read 
it;  they  found  their  desired  opportunity  in  the 
fast  proclaimed  in  the  ninth  month.  This  was 
evidently  an  extraordinary  fast,  appointed  in  view 
of  some  pressing  danger;  and,  in  the  year  fol- 
lowing the  battle  of  Carchemish,  this  would 
naturally  be  the  advance  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  As 
our  incident  took  place  in  the  depth  of  winter, 
the  months  must  be  reckoned  according  to  the 
Babylonian  year,  which  began  in  April;  and  the 
ninth  month,  Kisleu,  would  roughly  correspond 
to  our  December.  The  dreaded  invasion  would 
be  looked  for  early  in  the  following  spring,  "  at 
the  time  when  kings  go  out  to  battle."  t 

Jeremiah  does  not  seem  to  have  absolutely 
determined  from  the  first  that  the  reading 
of  the  roll  by  Baruch  was  to  be  a  substitute  for 
his  own  presence.  He  had  probably  hoped  that 
some  change  for  the  better  in  the  situation  might 
justify  his  appearance  before  a  great  gathering 
in  the  Temple.  But  when  the  time  came  he  was 
"  hindered  "t  — we  are  not  told  how — and  could 
not  go  into  the  Temple.  He  may  have  been  re- 
strained by  his  own  prudence,  or  dissuaded  by 
his  friends,  like  Paul  when  he  would  have  faced 
the  mob  in  the  theatre  at  Ephesus;  the  hindrance 
may  have  been  some  ban  under  which  he  had 
been  placed  by  the  priesthood,  or  it  may  have 
been  some  unexpected  illness,  or  legal  unclean- 
ness,  or  some  other  passing  accident,  such  as 
Providence  often  uses  to  protect  its  soldiers  till 
their  warfare  is  accomplished. 

Accordingly  it  was  Baruch  who  went  up  to  the 
Temple.  Though  he  is  said  to  have  read  the 
book  "  in  the  ears  of  all  the  people,"  he  does  not 
seem  to  have  challenged  universal  attention  as 
openly  as  Jeremiah  had  done;  he  did  not  stand 
forth  in  the  court  of  the  Temple, §  but  betook 
himself   to   the    "chamber"    of   the    scribe, ||    or 

*  Verses  5-8  seem  to  be  a  brief  alternative  account  to 
9-26. 

+  1  Chron.  xx.  i. 

+  'ActJR:  A.  v.,  R.  v.,  "shut  up";  R.  V.  margin, 
"restrained."  The  term  is  used  in  xxxiii.  i,  xxxix.  15,  in 
the  sense  of  "  imprisoned,"  but  here  Jeremiah  appears  to 
be  at  liberty.  The  phrase  'AqOR  W  AZT^TBH,  A.  V. 
"shut  up  or  left"  (Deut.  xxxii.  36,  etc.),  has  been  under- 
stood, those  under  the  restraints  imposed  upon  cere- 
monial uncleanness  and  those  free  from  these  restraints, 
«.  e.,  everybody ;  the  same  meaning  has  been  given  to 
•AQCR  here. 

Sxxvi.  2. 

I  So    Cheyne ;   the    Hebrew    does    not    make   it  clear 


secretary  of  state,  Gemariah  ben  Shaphan,  the 
brother  of  Jeremiah's  protector  Ahikam.  This 
chamber  would  be  one  of  the  cells  built  round  the 
upper  court,  from  which  the  "  new  gate  "  *  led 
into  an  inner  court  of  the  Temple.  Thus  Baruch 
placed  himself  formally  under  the  protection  of 
the  owner  of  the  apartment,  and  any  violence 
offered  to  him  would  have  been  resented  and 
avenged  by  this  powerful  noble  with  his  kinsmen 
and  allies.  Jeremiah's  disciple  and  representa- 
tive took  his  seat  at  the  door  of  the  chamber, 
and,  in  full  view  of  the  crowds  who  passed  and 
repassed  through  the  new  gate,  opened  his  roll 
and  began  to  read  aloud  from  its  contents.  His 
reading  was  yet  another  repetition  of  the  exhor- 
tations, warnings,  and  threats  which  Jeremiah 
had  rehearsed  on  the  feast  day  when  he  spake  to 
the  people  "  all  that  Jehovah  had  commanded 
him";  and  still  both  Jehovah  and  His  prophet 
promised  deliverance  as  the  reward  of  repent- 
ance. Evidently  the  head  and  front  of  the  na- 
tion's ofifence  had  been  no  open  desertion  of 
Jehovah  for  idols,  else  His  servants  would  not 
have  selected  for  their  audience  His  enthusiastic 
worshippers  as  they  thronged  to  His  Temple. 
The  fast  itself  might  have  seemed  a  token  of 
penitence,  but  it  was  not  accepted  by  Jeremiah, 
or  put  forward  by  the  people,  as  a  reason  why 
the  prophecies  of  ruin  should  not  be  fulfilled. 
No  one  ofifers  the  very  natural  plea:  "  In  this  fast 
we  are  humbling  ourselves  under  the  mighty  hand 
of  God,  we  are  confessing  our  sins,  and  conse- 
crating ourselves  afresh  to  service  of  Jehovah. 
What  more  does  He  expect  of  us?  Why  does 
He  still  withhold  His  mercy  and  forgiveness? 
Wherefore  have  we  fasted,  and  Thou  seest  not? 
Wherefore  have  we  afiflicted  our  soul,  and  Thou 
takest  no  knowledge?  "  Such  a  plea  would  prob- 
ably have  received  an  answer  similar  to  that 
given  by  one  of  Jeremiah's  successors:  "  Behold, 
in  the  day  of  your  fast  ye  find  your  own  pleasure, 
and  oppress  all  your  labourers.  Behold,  ye  fast 
for  strife  and  contention,  and  to  smite  with  the 
fist  of  wickedness:  ye  fast  not  this  day  so  as  to 
make  your  voice  to  be  heard  on  high.  Is  such 
the  fast  that  I  have  chosen?  the  day  for  a  man 
to  afHict  his  soul?  Is  it  to  bow  down  his  head 
as  a  rush,  and  to  spread  sackcloth  and  ashes 
under  him?  wilt  thou  call  this  a  fast,  and  a  day 
acceptable  to  Jehovah? 

"  Is  not  this  the  fast  that  I  have  chosen?  to 
loose  the  bonds  of  wickedness,  to  undo  the 
bands  of  the  yoke,  and  to  let  the  oppressed  go 
free,  and  that  ye  break  every  yoke?  Is  it  not 
to  deal  thy  bread  to  the  hungry,  and  that  thou 
bring  the  poor  that  are  cast  out  to  thy  house? 
when  thou  seest  the  naked,  that  thou  cover  him; 
and  that  thou  hide  not  thyself  from  thine  own 
flesh?  Then  shall  thy  light  break  forth  as  the 
morning,  and  thy  healing  shall  spring  forth 
speedily:  and  thy  righteousness  shall  go  before 
thee;  the  glory  of  Jehovah  shall  be  thy  rear- 
ward."! 

Jeremiah's  opponents  did  not  grudge  Jehovah 
His  burnt-offerings  and  calves  of  a  year  old;  He 
was  welcome  to  thousands  of  rams,  and  ten  thou- 
sands of  rivers  of  oil.  They  were  even  willing 
to  give  their  firstborn  for  their  transgression,  the 

whether  the  title  "  scribe  "  refers  to  the  father  or  the  son. 
Giesebrecht  understands  it  of  Shaphan,  who  appears  as 
scribe  in  2  Kings  xxii.  8.  He  points  out  that  in  verse  20 
Elishama  is  called  the  scribe,  but  we  cannot  assume  that 
the  title  was  limited  to  a  single  officer  of  state. 

*  Cf.  xxvi.  10. 

t  Isa.  Iviii.  3-8. 


Jeremiah  xxxvi.] 


THE    ROLL. 


131 


fruit  of  their  body  for  the  sin  of  their  soul;  but 
they  were  not  prepared  "  to  do  justly,  and  to  love 
mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  their  God."* 

We  are  not  told  how  Jeremiah  and  the  priests 
and  prophets  formulated  the  points  at  issue  be- 
tween them,  which  were  so  thoroughly  and  uni- 
versally understood  that  the  record  takes  them 
for  granted.  Possibly  Jeremiah  contended  for 
the  recognition  of  Deuteronomy,  with  its  lofty 
ideals  of  pure  religion  and  a  humanitarian  order 
of  society.  But,  in  any  case,  these  incidents  were 
an  early  phase  of  the  age-long  struggle  of  the 
prophets  of  God  against  the  popular  attempt  to 
make  ritual  and  sensuous  emotion  into  excuses 
for  ignoring  morality,  and  to  offer  the  cheap 
sacrifice  of  a  few  unforbidden  pleasures,  rather 
than  surrender  the  greed  of  gain,  the  lust,  of 
power,  and  the  sweetness  of  revenge. 

When  the  multitudes  caught  the  sound  of 
Baruch's  voice  and  saw  him  sitting  in  the  door- 
way of  Gemariah's  chamber,  they  knew  exactly 
what  they  would  hear.  To  them  he  was  almost 
as  antagonistic  as  a  Protestant  evangelist  would 
be  to  the  worshippers  at  some  great  Romanist 
feast;  or  perhaps  wc  might  find  a  closer  parallel 
in  a  Low  Church  bishop  addressing  a  ritualistic 
audience.  For  the  hearts  of  these  hearers  were 
not  steeled  by  the  consciousness  of  any  formal 
schism.  Baruch  and  the  great  prophet  whom 
he  represented  did  not  stand  outside  the  recog- 
nised limits  of  Divine  inspiration.  While  the 
priests  and  prophets  and  their  adherents  repudi- 
ated his  teaching  as  heretical,  they  were  still 
haunted  by  the  fear  that,  at  any  rate,  his  threats 
might  have  some  Divine  authority.  Apart  from 
all  theology,  the  prophet  of  evil  always  finds  an 
ally  in  the  nervous  fears  and  guilty  conscience  of 
his  hearer. 

The  feelings  of  the  people  would  be  similar  to 
those  with  which  they  had  heard  the  same  threats 
against  Judah,  the  city  and  the  Temple,  from 
Jeremiah  himself.  But  the  excitement  aroused 
by  the  defeat  of  Pharaoh  and  the  hasty  return  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  to  Babylon  had  died  away. 
The  imminence  of  a  new  invasion  made  it  evi- 
dent that  this  had  not  been  the  Divine  deliverance 
of  Judah.  The  people  were  cowed  by  what 
must  have  seemed  to  many  the  approaching  ful- 
filments of  former  threatenings;  the  ritual  of  a 
fast  was  in  itself  depressing;  so  that  they  had 
little  spirit  to  resent  the  message  of  doom.  Per- 
haps too  there  was  less  to  resent:  the  prophecies 
were  the  same,  but  Baruch  may  have  been  less 
unpopular  than  Jeremiah,  and  his  reading  would 
be  tame  and  ineffective  compared  to  the  fiery 
eloquence  of  his  master.  Moreover  the  powerful 
protection  which  shielded  him  was  indicated  not 
only  by  the  place  he  occupied,  but  also  by  the 
presence  of  Gemariah's  son,  Micaiah. 

The  reading  passed  off  without  any  hostile 
demonstration  on  the  part  of  the  people,  and 
Micaiah  went  in  search  of  his  father  to  describe 
to  him  the  scene  he  had  just  witnessed.  He 
found  him  in  the  palace,  in  the  chamber  of  the 
secretary  of  state,  Elishama,  attending  a  council 
of  the  princes.  There  were  present,  amongst 
others,  Elnathan  ben  Achbor,  who  brought 
Uriah  back  from  Egypt,  Delaiah  ben  Shemaiah, 
and  Zedekiah  ben  Hananiah.  Micaiah  told  them 
what  he  had  heard.  They  at  once  sent  for  Baruch 
and  the  roll.  Their  messenger,  Jehudi  ben 
Nethaniah,  seems  to  have  been  a  kind  of  court- 
usher.  His  name  signifies  "  the  Jew,"  and  as 
•  Micah  vi.  i-8. 


his  great-grandfather  was  Cushi,  "  the  Ethio- 
pian," it  has  been  suggested  that  he  came  of  a 
family  of  Ethiopian  descent,  which  had  only  at- 
tained in  his  generation  to  Jewish  citizenship.* 

When  Baruch  arrived,  the  princes  greeted  him 
with  the  courtesy  and  even  deference  due  to  the 
favourite  disciple  of  a  distinguished  prophet. 
They  invited  him  to  sit  down  and  read  them  the 
roll.  Baruch  obeyed;  the  method  of  reading 
suited  the  enclosed  room  and  the  quiet,  interested 
audience  of  responsible  men,  better  than  the 
swaying  crowd  gathered  round  the  door  of 
Gemariah's  chamber.  Baruch  now  had  before 
him  ministers  of  state  who  knew  from  their  offi- 
cial information  and  experience  how  extremely 
probable  it  was  that  the  words  to  which  they 
were  listening  would  find 'a  speedy  and  complete 
fulfilment.  Baruch  must  almost  have  seemed  to 
them  like  a  doomster  who  announces  to  a  con- 
demned criminal  the  ghastly  details  of  his  com- 
ing execution.  They  exchanged  looks  of  dismay 
and  horror,  and  when  the  reading  was  over,  they 
said  to  one  another,!  "  We  must  tell  the  king  of 
all  these  words."  First,  however,  they  inquired 
concerning  the  exact  circumstances  under  which 
the  roll  had  been  written,  that  they  might  know 
how  far  responsibility  in  this  matter  was  to  be 
divided  between  the  prophet  and  his  disciple,  and 
also  whether  all  the  contents  rested  upon  the  full 
authority  of  Jeremiah.  Baruch  assured  them 
that  it  was  simply  a  case  of  dictation:  Jeremiah 
had  uttered  every  word  with  his  own  mouth,  and 
he  had  faithfully  written  it  down;  everything  was 
Jeremiah's  own.:]: 

The  princes  were  well  aware  that  the  prophet's 
action  would  probably  be  resented  and  punished 
by  Jehoiakim.  They  said  to  Baruch:  "Do  you 
and  Jeremiah  go  and  hide  yourselves,  and  let  no 
one  know  where  you  are."  They  kept  the  roll 
and  laid  it  up  in  Elishama's  room;  then  they 
went  to  the  king.  They  found  him  in  his  winter 
room,  in  the  inner  court  of  the  palace,  sitting  in 
front  of  a  brasier  of  burning  charcoal.  On  this 
fast-day  the  king's  mind  might  well  be  careful 
and  troubled,  as  he  meditated  on  the  kind  of 
treatment  that  he,  the  nominee  of  Pharaoh 
Necho,  was  likely  to  receive  from  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. We  cannot  tell  whether  he  contemplated 
resistance  or  had  already  resolved  to  submit  to 
the  conqueror.  In  either  case  he  would  wish  to 
act  on  his  own  initiative,  and  might  be  anxious 
lest  a  Chaldean  party  should  get  the  upper  hand 
in  Jerusalem  and  surrender  him  and  the  city  to 
the  invader. 

When  the  princes  entered,  their  number  and 
their  manner  would  at  once  indicate  to  him  that 
their  errand  was  both  serious  and  disagreeable. 
He  seems  to  have  listened  in  silence  while  they 
made  their  report  of  the  incident  at  the  door  of 
Gemariah's  chamber  and  their  own  interviewwith 
Baruch. §  The  king  sent  for  the  roll  by  Jehudi. 
who  had  accompanied  the  princes  into  the  pres- 
ence chamber; and  on  his  return  the  same  service- 
able official  read  its  contents  before  Jehoiakim  and 
the  princes,  whose  number  was  now  augmented 
by  the  nobles  in  attendance  upon  the  king. 
Jehudi  had  had  the  advantage  of  hearing  Baruch 

*  So  Orelli,  in  loco. 

+  Hebrew  text  "to  Baruch,"  which  LXX.  omits. 

jIn  verse  18  the  word  "with  ink"  is  not  in  the  LXX., 
and  may  be  an  accidental  repetition  of  the  similar  word 
for  "his  mouth." 

§  The  A.  V.  and  R.  V.  "  all  the  words"  is  misleading :  it 
should  rather  be  "everything";  the  princes  did  not  recite 
all  the  contents  of  the  roll. 


132 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


read  the  roll,  but  ancient  Hebrew  manuscripts 
were  not  easy  to  decipher,  and  probably  Jehudi 
stumbled  somewhat;  altogether  the  reading  of 
prophecies  by  a  court-usher  would  not  be  a  very 
edifying  performance,  or  very  gratifying  to  Jere- 
miah's friends.  Jehoiakim  treated  the  matter 
with  deliberate  and  ostentatious  contempt.  At 
the  end  of  every  three  or  four  columns,*  he  put 
out  his  hand  for  the  roll,  cut  away  the  portion 
that  had  been  read,  and  threw  it  on  the  fire;  then 
he  handed  the  remainder  back  to  Jehudi,  and 
the  reading  was  resumed  till  the  king  thought  fit 
to  repeat  the  process.  It  at  once  appeared  that 
the  audience  was  divided  into  two  parties.  When 
Gemariah's  father,  Shaphan,  had  read  Deuter- 
onomy to  Josiah,  the  king  rent  his  clothes;  but, 
now  the  writer  tells  us,  half  aghast,  that  neither 
Jehoiakim  nor  any  of  his  servants  were  afraid 
or  rent  their  clothes,  but  the  audience,  including 
doubtless  both  court  officials  and  some  of  the 
princes,  looked  on  with  calm  indifference.  Not 
so  the  princes  who  had  been  present  at  Baruch's 
reading:  they  had  probably  induced  him  to  leave 
the  roll  with  them,  by  promising  that  it  should 
be  kept  safely;  they  had  tried  to  keep  it  out  of  the 
king's  hands  by  leaving  it  in  Elishama's  room, 
and  now  they  made  another  attempt  to  save  it 
from  destruction.  They  entreated  Jehoiakim  to 
refrain  from  open  and  insolent  defiance  of  a 
prophet  who  might  after  all  be  speaking  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  But  the  king  persevered. 
The  alternate  reading  and  burning  went  on;  the 
unfortunate  usher's  fluency  and  clearness  would 
not  be  improved  by  the  extraordinary  conditions 
under  which  he  had  to  read;  and  we  may  well 
suppose  that  the  concluding  columns  were  hur- 
ried over  in  a  somewhat  perfunctory  fashion,  if 
they  were  read  at  all.  As  soon  as  the  last  shred 
of  parchment  was  shrivelling  on  the  charcoal, 
Jehoiakim  commanded  three  of  his  officers  f  to 
arrest  Jeremiah  and  Baruch.  But  they  had  taken 
the  advice  of  the  princes  and  were  not  to  be 
found:  "Jehovah  hid  them." 

Thus  the  career  of  Baruch's  roll  was  summa- 
rily cut  short.  But  it  had  done  its  work;  it  had 
been  read  on  three  separate  occasions,  first  be- 
fore the  people,  then  before  the  princes,  and  last 
of  all  before  the  king  and  his  court.  If  Jeremiah 
had  appeared  in  person,  he  might  have  been  at 
once  arrested,  and  put  to  death  like  Uriah.  No 
doubt  this  threefold  recital  was,  on  the  whole,  a 
failure;  Jeremiah's  party  among  the  princes  had 
listened  with  anxious  deference,  but  the  appeal 
had  been  received  by  the  people  with  indiffer- 
ence and  by  the  king  with  contempt.  Neverthe- 
^  less  it  must  have  strengthened  individuals  in  the 
true  faith,  and  it  had  proclaimed  afresh  that  the 
religion  of  Jehovah  gave  no  sanction  to  the 
policy  of  Jehoiakim:  the  ruin  of  Judah  would 
be  a  proof  of  the  sovereignty  of  Jehovah  and 
not  of  His  impotence.  But  probably  this  inci- 
dent had  more  immediate  influence  over  the  king 
than  we  might  at  first  sight  suppose.  When  Neb- 
uchadnezzar arrived  in  Palestine,  Jehoiakim  sub- 
mitted to  him  a  policy  entirely  in  accordance 
\yith  the  views  of  Jeremiah.  We  may  well  be- 
lieve that  the  experiences  of  this  fast  day  had 

*  The  English  tenses  "cut,"  "cast,"  are  ambiguous,  but 
the  Hebrew  implies  that  the  "cutting"  and  "casting  on 
the  fire  "  were  repeated  again  and  again. 

+  One  is  called  Jerahmeel  the  son  of  Hammelech  (A.  V.), 
or  "the  king's  son"  (R.  V.);  if  the  latter  is  correct  we 
must  understand  merely  a  prince  of  the  blood-royal  and 
not  a  son  of  Jehoiakim,  who  was  only  thirty. 


strengthened  the  hands  of  the  prophet's  friends, 
and  cooled  the  enthusiasm  of  the  court  for  more 
desperate  and  adventurous  courses.  Every  year's 
respite  for  Judah  fostered  the  growth  of  the  true 
religion  of  Jehovah. 

The  sequel  showed  how  much  more  prudent 
it  was  to  risk  the  existence  of  a  roll  rather  than 
the  life  of  a  prophet.  Jeremiah  was  only  en- 
couraged to  persevere.  By  the  Divine  command, 
he  dictated  his  prophecies  afresh  to  Baruch,  add- 
ing besides  unto  them  many  like  words.  Pos- 
sibly other  copies  were  made  of  the  whole  or 
parts  of  this  roll,  and  were  secretly  circulated, 
read,  and  talked  about.  We  are  not  told  whether 
Jehoiakim  ever  heard  this  new  roll;  but,  as  one 
of  the  many  like  things  added  to  the  older 
prophecies  was  a  terrible  personal  condemnation 
of  the  king,*  we  may  be  sure  that  he  was  not 
allowed  to  remain  in  ignorance,  at  any  rate,  of 
this  portion  of  it. 

The  second  roll  was,  doubtless,  one  of  the 
main  sources  of  our  present  Book  of  Jeremiah, 
and  the  narrative  of  this  chapter  is  of  consider- 
able importance  for  Old  Testament  criticism. 
It  shows  that  a  prophetic  book  may  not  go  back 
to  any  prophetic  autograph  at  all;  its  most  orig- 
inal sources  may  be  manuscripts  written  at  the 
prophet's  dictation,  and  liable  to  all  the  errors 
which  are  apt  to  creep  into  the  most  faithful 
work  of  an  amanuensis.  It  shows  further  that, 
even  when  a  prophet's  utterances  were  written 
down  during  his  lifetime,  the  manuscript  may 
contain  only  his  recollectionsf  of  what  he  said 
years  before,  and  that  these  might  be  either  ex- 
panded or  abbreviated,  sometimes  even  uncon- 
sciously modified,  in  the  light  of  subsequent 
events.  Verse  32  shows  that  Jeremiah  did  not 
hesitate  to  add  to  the  record  of  his  former 
prophecies  "  many  like  words  "  :  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  these  were  all  contained 
in  an  appendix;  they  would  often  take  the  form 
of  annotations. 

The  important  part  played  by  Baruch  as  Jere- 
miah's secretary  and  representative  must  have 
invested  him  with  full  authority  to  speak  for 
his  master  and  expound  his  views;  such  authority 
points  to  Baruch  as  the  natural  editor  of  our 
present  book,  which  is  virtually  the  "  Life  and 
Writings "  of  the  prophet.  The  last  words  of 
our  chapter  are  ambiguous,  perhaps  intention- 
ally. They  simply  state  that  many  like  words 
were  added,  and  do  not  say  by  whom;  they  might 
even  include  additions  made  later  on  by  Baruch 
from  his  own  reminiscences. 

In  conclusion,  we  may  notice  that  both  the 
first  and  second  copies  of  the  roll  were  written 
by  the  direct  Divine  command,  just  as  in  the 
Hexateuch  and  the  Book  of  Samuel  we  read  of 
Moses,  Joshua,  and  Samuel  committing  certain 
matters  to  writing  at  the  bidding  of  Jehovah. 
We  have  here  the  recognition  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  scribe,  as  ancillary  to  that  of  the  prophet. 
Jehovah  not  only  gives  His  word  to  His  serv- 
ants, but  watches  over  its  preservation  and  trans- 
mission.|  But  there  is  no  inspiration  to  write 
any  new  revelation:  the  spoken  word,  the  con- 
secrated life,  are  inspired;  the  book  is  only  a 
record  of  inspired  speech  and  action. 

*  For  verses  29-31  see  chap,  vi.,  where  they  are  dealt 
with  in  connection  with  xxii.  13-ig. 

tThe  supposition  that  Jeremiah  had  written  notes  o£ 
previous  prophecies  is  npt  an  impossible  one,  but  it  is  a 
pure  conjecture. 

i  Cf.  Orelli,  in  loco. 


Jeremiah  xxxv.] 


THE   RECHABITES. 


133 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  RECHABITES. 

Jeremiah  xxxv. 

"Jonadab  the  scm  of  Rechab  shall  not  want  a  man  to 
stand  before  Me  for  ever." — JER.  xxxv.  19. 

This  incident  is  dated  "  in  the  days  of  Je- 
hoiakim."  We  learn  from  verse  11  that  it  hap- 
pened at  a  time  when  the  open  country  of 
Judah  was  threatened  by  the  advance  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar with  a  Chaldean  and  Syrian  army. 
If  Nebuchadnezzar  marched  into  the  south  of 
Palestine  immediately  after  the  battle  of  Car- 
chetnish,  the  incident  may  have  happened,  as 
some  suggest,  in  the  eventful  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim;  or  if  he  did  not  appear  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Jerusalem  till  after  he  had  taken 
over  the  royal  authority  at  Babylon,  Jeremiah's 
interview  with  the  Rechabites  may  have  fol- 
lowed pretty  closely  upon  the  destruction  of 
Baruch's  roll.  But  we  need  not  press  the  words 
"  Nebuchadnezzar  .  .  .  came  up  into  the  land  "  ; 
they  may  only  mean  that  Judah  was  invaded  by 
an  army  acting  under  his  orders.  The  mention 
of  Chaldeans  and  Assyrians  suggests  that  this 
invasion  is  the  same  as  that  mentioned  in  2 
Kings  xxiv.  i,  2,  where  we  are  told  that  Jehoia- 
kim  served  Nebuchadnezzar  three  years  and  then 
rebelled  against  him,  whereupon  Jehovah  sent 
against  him  bands  of  Chaldeans,  Syrians,  Moab- 
ites,  and  Ammonites,  and  sent  them  against 
Judah  to  destroy  it.  If  this  is  the  invasion  re- 
ferred to  in  our  chapter  it  falls  towards  the  endP 
of  Jehoiakim's  reign,  and  sufficient  time  had 
elapsed  to  allow  the  king's  anger  against  Jere- 
miah to  cool,  so  that  the  prophet  could  venture 
out  of  his  hiding-place. 

The  marauding  bands  of  Chaldeans  and  their 
allies  had  driven  the  country  people  in  crowds 
into  Jerusalem,  and  among  them  the  nomad  clan 
of  the  Rechabites.  According  to  i  Chron.  ii. 
55,  the  Rechabites  traced  their  descent  to  a  cer- 
tain Hemath,  and  were  a  branch  of  the  Kenites, 
an  Edomite  tribe  dwelling  for  the  most  part  in 
the  south  of  Palestine.  These  Kenites  had  main- 
tained an  ancient  and  intimate  alliance  with  Ju- 
dah, and  in  time  the  allies  virtually  became  a 
single  people,  so  that  after  the  Return  from  the 
Captivity  all  distinction  of  race  between  Kenites 
and  Jews  was  forgotten,  and  the  Kenites  were 
reckoned  among  the  families  of  Israel.  In  this 
fusion  of  their  tribe  with  Judah,  the  Rechabite 
clan  would  be  included.  It  is  clear  from  all 
the  references  both  to  Kenites  and  to  Rechabites 
that  they  had  adopted  the  religion  of  Israel  and 
worshipped  Jehovah.  We  know  nothing  else  of 
the  early  history  of  the  Rechabites.  The  state- 
ment in  Chronicles  that  the  father  of  the  house 
of  Rechab  was  Hemath  perhaps  points  to  their 
having  been  at  one  time  settled  at  some  place 
called  Hemath  near  Jabez  in  Judah.  Possibly 
too  Rechab,  which  means  "  rider,"  is  not  a  per- 
sonal name,  but  a  designation  of  the  clan  as 
horsemen  of  the  desert. 

These  Rechabites  were  conspicuous  among 
the  Jewish  farmers  and  townsfolk  by  their  rigid 
adherence  to  the  habits  of  nomad  life;  and  it 
was  this  peculiarity  that  attracted  the  notice  of 
Jeremiah,  and  made  them  a  suitable  object-les- 
son to  the  recreant  Jews.     The  traditional  cus- 


toms of  the  clan  had  been  formulated  into  posi- 
tive commands  by  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab, 
i.  e.,  the  Rechabite.  This  must  be  the  same 
Jonadab  who  co-operated  with  Jehu  in  over- 
throwing the  house  of  Omri  and  suppressing  the 
worship  of  Baal.  Jehu's  reforms  concluded  the 
long  struggle  of  Elijah  and  Elisha  against  the 
house  of  Omri  and  its  half-heathen  religion. 
Hence  we  may  infer  that  Jonadab  and  his  Rech- 
abites had  come  under  the  influence  of  these 
great  prophets,  and  that  their  social  and  religious 
condition  was  one  result  of  Elijah's  work.  Jere- 
miah stood  in  the  true  line  of  succession  from 
the  northern  prophets  in  his  attitude  towards 
religion  and  politics;  so  that  there  would  be 
bonds  of  sympathy  between  him  and  these  nomad 
refugees. 

The  laws  or  customs  of  Jonadab,  like  the  Ten 
Commandments,  were  chiefly  negative:  "  Ye 
shall  drink  no  wine,  neither  ye  nor  your  sons 
for  ever:  neither  shall  ye  build  houses,  nor  sow 
seed,  nor  plant  vineyards,  nor  have  any:  but 
all  your  days  ye  shall  dwell  in  tents;  that  ye 
may  live  many  days  in  the  land  wherein  ye  are 
strangers." 

Various  parallels  have  been  found  to  the  cus- 
toms of  the  Rechabites.  The  Hebrew  Nazarites 
abstained  from  wine  and  strong  drink,  from 
grapes  and  grape  juice  and  everything  made  of 
the  vine,  "  from  the  kernels  even  to  the  husk."  * 
Mohammed  forbade  his  followers  to  drink  any 
sort  of  wine  or  strong  drink.  But  the  closest 
parallel  is  one  often  quoted  from  Diodorus 
Siculus,t  who,  writing  about  b.  c.  8,  tells  us  that 
the  Nabatean  Arabs  were  prohibited  under  the 
penalty  of  death  from  sowing  corn  or  planting 
fruit  trees,  using  wine,  or  building  houses.  Such 
abstinence  is  not  primarily  ascetic;  it  expresses 
the  universal  contempt  of  the  wandering  hunter 
and  herdsman  for  tillers  of  the  ground,  who  are 
tied  to  one  small  spot  of  earth,  and  for  burghers, 
who  further  imprison  themselves  in  narrow 
houses  and  behind  city  walls.  The  nomad  has 
a  not  altogether  unfounded  instinct  that  such 
acceptance  of  material  restraints  emasculates  both 
soul  and  body.  A  remarkable  parallel  to  the 
laws  of  Jonadab  ben  Rechab  is  found  in  the 
injunctions  of  the  dying  highlander,  Ranald  of 
the  Mist,  to  his  heir:  "  Son  of  the  Mist,  be 
free  as  thy  forefathers.  Own  no  lord — receive 
no  law — take  no  hire — give  no  stipend — build  no 
hut — enclose  no  pasture — sow  no  grain.":};  The 
Rechabite  faith  in  the  higher  moral  value  of 
their  primitive  habits  had  survived  their  alliance 
with  Israel,  and  Jonadab  did  his  best  to  protect 
his  clan  from  the  taint  of  city  life  and  settled 
civilisation.  Abstinence  from  wine  was  not  en- 
joined chiefly,  if  at  all,  to  guard  against  intoxi- 
cation, but  because  the  fascinations  of  the  grape 
might  tempt  the  clan  to  plant  vineyards,  or,  at 
any  rate,  would  make  them  dangerously  depend- 
ent upon  vine-dressers  and  wine-merchants. 

Till  this  recent  invasion,  the  Rechabites  had 
faithfully  observed  their  ancestral  laws,  but  the 
stress  of  circumstances  had  now  driven  them 
into  a  fortified  city,  possibly  even  into  houses, 
though  it  is  more  probable  that  they  were  en- 
camped in  some  open  space  within  the  walls.  § 
Jeremiah  was  commanded  to  go  and  bring  them 

*  Num.  vi.  2. 
t  xix.  94. 

t  Scott,  "  Legend  of  Montrose,'  chap.  xxii. 
8 The  term  "  house  of  the  Rechabites"  in  verse  2  means 
"  family  "  or  "  clan,"  and  does  not  refer  to  a  building. 


134 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


into  the  Temple,  that  is,  into  one  of  the  rooms 
in  the  Temple  buildings,  and  offer  them  wine. 
The  narrative  proceeds  in  the  first  person,  "  I 
took  Jaazaniah,"  so  that  the  chapter  will  have 
been  composed  by  the  prophet  himself.  In  some- 
what legal  fashion  he  tells  us  how  he  took 
"Jaazaniah  ben  Jeremiah,  ben  Habaziniah,  and 
his  brethren,  and  all  his  sons,  and  all  the  clan 
of  the  Rechabites."  All  three  names  are  com- 
pounded of  the  Divine  name  lah,  Jehovah,  and 
serve  to  emphasise  the  devotion  of  the  clan  to 
the  God  of  Israel.  It  is  a  curious  coincidence 
that  the  somewhat  rare  name  Jeremiah  *  should 
occur  twice  in  this  connection.  The  room  to 
which  the  prophet  took  his  friends  is  described 
as  the  chamber  of  the  disciples  of  the  man  of 
Godf  Hanan  ben  Igdaliah,  which  was  by  the 
chamber  of  the  princes,  which  was  above  the 
chamber  of  the  keeper  of  the  threshold,  Maaseiah 
ben  Shallum.  Such  minute  details  probably  in- 
dicate that  this  chapter  was  committed  to  writ- 
ing while  these  buildings  were  still  standing  and 
still  had  the  same  occupants  as  at  the  time  of 
this  incident,  but  to  us  the  topography  is  unin- 
telligible. The  "  majn  of  God  "  or  prophet  Hanan 
was  evidently  in  sympathy  with  Jeremiah,  and 
had  a  following  of  disciples  who  formed  a  sort 
of  school  of  the  prophets,  and  were  a  sufficiently 
permanent  body  to  have  a  chamber  assigned  to 
them  in  the  Temple  buildings.  The  keepers  of 
the  threshold  were  Temple  officials  of  high  stand- 
ing. The  "  princes  "  may  have  been  the  princes 
of  Judah,  who  might  very  well  have  a  chamber 
in  the  Temple  courts;  but  the  term  is  general, 
and  may  simply  refer  to  other  Temple  officials. 
Hanan's  disciples  seem  to  have  been  in  good 
company. 

These  exact  specifications  of  person  and  place 
are  probably  designed  to  give  a  certain  legal 
solemnity  and  importance  to  the  incident,  and 
seem  to  warrant  us  in  rejecting  Reuss'  sugges- 
tion that  our  narrative  is  simply  an  elaborate 
prophetic  figure.^ 

After  these  details  Jeremiah  next  tells  us  how 
he  set  before  his  guests  bowls  of  wine  and  cups, 
and  invited  them  to  drink.  Probably  Jaazaniah 
and  his  clansmen  were  aware  that  the  scene  was 
intended  to  have  symbolic  religious  significance. 
They  would  not  suppose  that  the  prophet  had 
invited  them  all,  in  this  solemn  fashion,  merely 
to  take  a  cup  of  wine;  and  they  would  welcome 
an  opportunity  of  showing  their  loyalty  to  their 
own  peculiar  customs.  They  said:  "We  will 
drink  no  wine:  for  our  father  Jonadab  the  son 
of  Rechab  commanded  us,  saying,  Ye  shall  drink 
no  wine,  neither  ye  nor  your  sons  for  ever." 
They  further  recounted  Jonadab's  other  com- 
mands and  their  own  scrupulous  obedience  in 
■every  point,  except  that  now  they  had  been  com- 
pelled to  seek  refuge  in  a  walled  city. 

Then  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  unto  Jere- 
miah; he  was  commanded  to  make  yet  another 
appeal  to  the  Jews,  by  contrasting  their  dis- 
obedience with  the  fidelity  of  the  Rechabites. 
The  Divine  King  and  Father  of  Israel  had  been 
untiring  in  His  instruction  and  admonitions: 
"  I  have  spoken  unto  you,  rising  up  early  and 
speaking."  He  had  addressed  them  in  familiar 
fashion    through    their    fellow-countrymen:      "  I 

*  Eight  Jeremiahs  occur  in  O.  T. 

t  Literally  "sons  of  Hanan." 

i  Jeremiah,  according  to  this  view,  had  no  interview 
with  the  Rechabites,  but  made  an  imaginary  incident 
fl  text  for  his  discourse. 


have  sent  also  unto  you  all  My  servants  the 
prophets,  rising  up  early  and  sending  them." 
Yet  they  had  not  hearkened  unto  the  God  of 
Israel  or  His  prophets.  The  Rechabites  had  re- 
ceived no  special  revelation;  they  had  not  been 
appealed  to  by  numerous  prophets.  Their  Torah 
had  been  simply  given  them  by  their  father 
Jonadab;  nevertheless  the  commands  of  Jonadab 
had  been  regarded  and  those  of  Jehovah  had 
been  treated  with  contempt. 

Obedience  and  disobedience  would  bring  forth 
their  natural  fruit.  "  I  will  bring  upon  Judah, 
and  upon  all  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  all 
the  evil  that  I  have  pronounced  against  them: 
because  I  have  spoken  unto  them,  but  they  have 
not  heard;  and  I  have  called  unto  them,  but  they 
have  not  answered."  But  because  the  Rechabites 
obeyed  the  commandment  of  their  father  Jo'ha- 
dab,  "  Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah  Sabaoth, 
Jonadab  the  son  of  Rechab  shall  not  want  a  man 
to  stand  before  Me  for  ever." 

Jehovah's  approval  of  the  obedience  of  the 
Rechabites  is  quite  independent  of  the  specific 
commands  which  they  obeyed.  It  does  not  bind 
us  to  abstain  from  wine  any  more  than  from 
building  houses  and  sowing  seed.  Jeremiah  him- 
self, for  instance,  would  have  had  no  more  hesi- 
tation in  drinking  wine  than  in  sowing  his  field 
at  Anathoth.  The  tribal  customs  of  the  Rechab- 
ites had  no  authority  whatever  over  him.  Nor 
is  it  exactly  his  object  to  set  forth  their  merit 
of  obedience  and  its  certain  and  great  reward. 
These  truths  are  rather  touched  upon  incident- 
ally. What  Jeremiah  seeks  to  emphasise  is  the 
gross,  extreme,  unique  wickedness  of  Israel's  dis- 
obedience. Jehovah  had  not  looked  for  any 
Special  virtue  in  His  people.  His  Torah  was  not 
made  up  of  counsels  of  perfection.  He  had  only 
expected  the  loyalty  that  Moab  paid  to  Chemosh, 
and  Tyre  and  Sidon  to  Baal.  He  would  have 
been  satisfied  if  Israel  had  observed  His  laws 
as  faithfully  as  the  nomads  of  the  desert  kept 
up  their  ancestral  habits.  Jehovah  had  spoken 
through  Jeremiah  long  ago  and  said:  "  Pass  over 
the  isles  of  Chittim,  and  see;  and  send  unto 
Kedar,  and  consider  diligently,  and  see  if  there 
be  any  such  thing.  Hath  a  nation  changed  their 
gods,  which  are  yet  no  gods?  but  My  people 
have  changed  their  glory  for  that  which  doth 
not  profit."  *  Centuries  later  Christ  found  Him- 
self constrained  to  upbraid  the  cities  of  Israel, 
"  wherein  most  of  His  mighty  works  were  done  " 
"Woe  unto  thee,  Chorazin!  woe  unto  thee, 
Bethsaida!  for  if  the  mighty  works  which  were 
done  in  you  had  been  done  in  Tyre  and  Sidon, 
they  would  have  repented  long  ago  in  sackcloth 
and  ashes.  ...  It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for 
Tyre  and  Sidon  at  the  day  of  judgment  than 
for  you."f  And  again  and  again  in  the  history 
of  the  Church  the  Holy  Spirit  has  been  grieved 
because  those  who  profess  and  call  themselves 
Christians,  and  claim  to  prophesy  and  do  many 
mighty  works  in  the  name  of  Christ,  are  less 
loyal  to  the  gospel  than  the  heathen  to  their 
own  superstitions. 

Buddhists  and  Mohammedans  have  been  held 
up  as  modern  examples  to  rebuke  the  Church, 
though  as  a  rule  with  scant  justification.  Per- 
haps material  for  a  more  relevant  contrast  may 
be  found  nearer  home.  Christian  societies  have 
been  charged  with  -conducting  their  affairs  by 
methods  to  which  a  respectable  business  firm 
would  not  stoop;  they  are  said  to  be  less  scrupu- 
t  Matt.  xi.  21,  29. 


'  11.   lO,   II. 


Jeremiah  xlv.] 


BARUCH. 


135 


lor.s  in  their  dealings  and  less  chivalrous  in  their 
honour  than  the  devotees  of  pleasure;  at  their 
gatherinprs  they  are  sometimes  supposed  to  lack 
the  mutual  courtesy  of  members  of  a  Legislature 
or  a  Chamber  of  Commerce.  The  history  of 
councils  and  synods  and  Church  meetings  gives 
colour  to  such  charges,  which  could  never  have 
been  made  if  Christians  had  been  as  jealous  for 
the  Name  of  Christ  as  a  merchant  is  for  his 
credit  or  a  soldier  for  his  honour. 

And  yet  these  contrasts  do  not  argue  any  real 
moral  and  religious  superiority  of  the  Rechabites 
over  the  Jews  or  of  unbelievers  over  professing 
Christians.  It  was  comparatively  easy  to  abstain 
from  wine  and  to  wander  over  wide  pasture 
lands  instead  of  living  cooped  up  in  cities — far 
easier  than  to  attain  to  the  great  ideals  of  Deuter- 
onomy and  the  prophets.  It  is  always  easier  to 
conform  to  the  code  of  business  and  society  than 
to  live  according  to  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  The 
fatal  sin  of  Judah  was  not  that  it  fell  so  far  short 
of  the  ideals,  but  that  it  repudiated  them.  So 
long  as  we  lament  our  own  failures  and  still 
cling  to  the  Name  and  Faith  of  Christ,  we 
are  not  shut  out  from  mercy;  our  supreme 
sin  is  to  crucify  Christ  afresh,  by  denying  the 
power  of  His  gospel,  while  we  retain  its  empty 
form. 

The  reward  promised  to  the  Rechabites  for  their 
obedience  was  that  "  Jonadab  the  son  of  Rechab 
shall  not  want  a  man  to  stand  before  Me  for 
ever "  ;  to  stand  before  Jehovah  is  often  used 
to  describe  the  exercise  of  priestly  or  prophetic 
ministry.  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  Rechab- 
ites were  hereby  promoted  to  the  status  of  the 
true  Israel,  "  a  kingdom  of  priests  "  ;  but  this 
phrase  may  merely  mean  that  their  clan  should 
continue  in  existence.  Loyal  observance  of  na- 
tional law,  the  subordination  of  individual  ca- 
price and  selfishness  to  the  interests  of  the  com- 
munity, make  up  a  large  part  of  that  righteous- 
ness that  establisheth  a  nation. 

Here,  as  elsewhere,  students  of  prophecy  have 
been  anxious  to  discover  some  literal  fulfilment; 
and  have  searched  curiously  for  any  tj"ace  of 
the  continued  existence  of  the  Rechabites.  The 
notice  in  Chronicles  implies  that  they  formed 
part  of  the  Jewish  community  of  the  Restora- 
tion. Apparently  Alexandrian  Jews  were  ac- 
quainted with  Rechabites  at  a  still  later  date. 
Psalm  Ixxi.  is  ascribed  by  the  Septuagint  to  "  the 
sons  of  Jonadab."  Eusebius  *  mentions  "  priests 
of  the  sons  of  Rechab,"  and  Benjamin  of  Tudela, 
a  Jewish  traveller  of  the  twelfth  century,  states 
that  he  met  with  them  in  Arabia.  More  recent 
travellers  have  thought  that  they  discovered  the 
descendants  of  Rechab  amongst  the  nomads  in 
Arabia  or  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  that  still  prac- 
tised the  old  ancestral  customs. 

But  the  fidelity  of  Jehovah  to  his  promises 
does  not  depend  upon  our  unearthing  obscure 
tribes  in  distant  deserts.  The  gifts  of  God  are 
without  repentance,  but  they  have  their  inexor- 
able conditions;  no  nation  can  flourish  for  cen- 
turies on  the  virtues  of  its  ancestors.  The 
Rechabites  may  have  vanished  in  the  ordinary 
stream  of  history,  and  yet  we  can  hold  that 
Jeremiah's  prediction  has  been  fulfilled  and  is 
still  being  fulfilled.  No  scriptural  prophecy  is 
limited  in  its  application  to  an  individual  or  a 
race,  and  every  nation  possessed  by  the  spirit 
of  true  patriotism  shall  "  stand  before  Jehovah 
for  ever." 

*  "Ch.  Hist.,"  ii.  23. 


CHAPTER  V. 

BARUCH. 
Jeremiah   xlv. 

"Thy  life  will  I  give  unto  thee  for  a  prey."— JER.  xlv.  5. 

The  editors  of  the  versions  and  of  the  Hebrew 
text  of  the  Old  Testament  have  assigned  a  sep- 
arate chapter  to  this  short  utterance  concerning 
Baruch;  thus  paying  an  unconscious  tribute  to 
the  worth  and  importance  of  Jeremiah's  disciple 
and  secretary,  who  was  the  first  to  bear  the 
familiar  Jewish  name,  which  in  its  Latinised  form 
of  Benedict  has  been  a  favourite  with  saints  and 
popes.  Probably  few  who  read  of  these  great 
ascetics  and  ecclesiastics  give  a  thought  to  the 
earliest  recorded  Baruch,  nor  can  we  suppose 
that  Christian  Benedicts  have  been  named  after 
him.  One  thing  they  may  all  have  in  common: 
either  their  own  faith  or  that  of  their  parents 
ventured  to  bestow  upon  a  "  man  born  unto 
trouble  as  the  sparks  fly  upward  "  the  epithet 
"  Blessed."  We  can  scarcely  suppose  that  the 
life  of  any  Baruch  or  Benedict  has  run  so 
smoothly  as  to  prevent  him  or  his  friends  from 
feeling  that  such  faith  has  not  been  outwardly 
justified  and  that  the  name  suggested  an  unkind 
satire.  Certainly  Jeremiah's  disciple,  like  his 
namesake  Baruch  Spinoza,  had  to  recognise  his 
blessings  disguised  as  distress  and  persecution. 

Baruch  ben  Neriah  is  said  by  Josephus  *  to 
have  belonged  to  a  most  distinguished  family, 
and  to  have  been  exceedingly  well  educated  in 
his  native  language.  These  statements  are  per- 
haps legitimate  deductions  from  the  information 
supplied  by  our  book.  His  title  "  scribe  "f  and 
his  position  as  Jeremiah's  secretary  imply  that 
he  possessed  the  best  culture  of  his  time;  and  we 
are  told  in  li.  59  that  Seraiah  ben  Neriah,  who 
must  be  Baruch's  brother,  was  chief  chamberlain 
(R.  V.)  to  Zedekiah.  According  to  the  Old 
Latin  Version  of  the  Apocryphal  Book  of  Baruch 
(i.  i)  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  a  statement 
by  no  means  improbable  in  view  of  the  close  con- 
nection between  Judah  and  Simeon,  but  needing 
the  support  of  some  better  authority. 

Baruch's  relation  to  Jeremiah  is  not  expressly 
defined,  but  it  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  various 
narratives  in  which  he  is  referred  to.  We  find 
him  in  constant  attendance  upon  the  prophet, 
acting  both  as  his  "  scribe,"  or  secretary,  and  as 
his  mouthpiece.  The  relation  was  that  of  Joshua 
to  Moses,  of  Elisha  to  Elijah,  of  Gehazi  to 
Elisha,  of  Mark  to  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  of 
Timothy  to  Paul.  It  is  described  in  the  case  of 
Joshua  and  Mark  by  the  term  "  minister,"  while 
Elisha  is  characterised  as  having  "  poured  water 
on  the  hands  of  Elijah."  The  "minister"  was 
at  once  personal  attendant,  disciple,  representa- 
tive, and  possible  successor  of  the  prophet.  The 
poition  has  its  analogue  in  the  service  of  the 
squire  to  the  mediaeval  knight,  and  in  that  of  an 
unpaid  private  secretary  to  a  modern  cabinet 
minister.  Squires  expected  to  become  knights, 
and  private  secretaries  hope  for  a  seat  in  future 
cabinets.  Another  less  perfect  parallel  is  the  re- 
lation of  the  members  of  a  German  theological 
"  seminar  "    to    their   professor. 

Baruch  is  first:}:  introduced  to  us  in  the  narra- 

*  "  Antt.,"  X.  9,  I.  txxxvi.  26,  32. 

X  In  order  of  time,  ch.  xxxvi. 


136 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


live  concerning  the  roll.  He  appears  as  Jere- 
miah's amanuensis  and  representative,  and  is  en- 
trusted with  the  dangerous  and  honourable  task 
of  publishing  his  prophecies  to  the  people  in  the 
Temple.  Not  long  before,  similar  utterances 
had  almost  cost  the  master  his  life,  so  that  the 
disciple  showed  high  courage  and  .devotion  in 
undertaking  such  a  commission.  He  was  called 
to  share  with  his  master  at  once  the  same  cup 
of  persecution — and  the  same  Divine  protection. 

We  next  hear  of  Baruch  in  connection  with 
the  symbolic  purchase  of  the  field  at  Anathoth.* 
He  seems  to  have  been  attending  on  Jeremiah 
during  his  imprisonment  in  the  court  of  the 
guard,  and  the  documents  corttaining  the  evi- 
dence of  the  purchase  were  entrusted  to  his  care. 
Baruch's  presence  in  the  court  of  the  guard  does 
not  necessarily  imply  that  he  was  himself  a  pris- 
oner. The  whole  incident  shows  that  Jeremiah's 
friends  had  free  access  to  him;  and  Baruch  prob- 
ably not  only  attended  to  his  master's  wants  in 
prison,  but  also  was  his  channel  of  communica- 
tion with  the  outside  world. 

We  are  nowhere  told  that  Baruch  himself  was 
either  beaten  or  imprisoned,  but  it  is  not  im- 
probable that  he  shared  Jeremiah's  fortunes  even 
to  these  extremities.  We  next  hear  of  him  as 
carried  down  to  Egyptf  with  Jeremiah,  when  the 
Jewish  refugees  fled  thither  after  the  murder  of 
Gedaliah,  Apparently  he  had  remained  with 
Jeremiah  throughout  the  whole  interval,  had 
continued  to  minister  to  him  during  his  impris- 
onment, and  had  been  among  the  crowd  of 
Jewish  captives  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  found  at 
Ramah.  Josephus  probably  makes  a  similar 
conjecture t  in  telling  us  that,  when  Jeremiah  was 
released  and  placed  under  the  protection  of 
Gedaliah  at  Mizpah.  he  asked  and  obtained  from 
Nebuzaradan  the  liberty  of  his  disciple  Baruch. 
At  any  rate  Baruch  shared  with  his  master  the 
transient  hope  and  bitter  disappointment  of  this 
period;  he  supported  him  in  dissuading  the  rem- 
nant of  Jews  from  fleeing  into  Egypt,  and  was 
also  compelled  to  share  their  flight.  According 
to  a  tradition  recorded  by  Jerome,  Baruch  and 
Jeremiah  died  in  Egypt.  But  the  Apocryphal 
Book  of  Baruch  places  him  at  Babylon,  whither 
another  tradition  takes  him  after  the  death  of 
Jeremiah  in  Egypt.§  These  legends  are  prob- 
ably mere  attempts  of  wistful  imagination  to  sup- 
ply unwelcome  blanks  in  history. 

It  has  often  been  supposed  that  our  present 
Book  of  Jeremiah,  in  some  stage  of  its  forma- 
tion, was  edited  or  compiled  by  Baruch,  and  that 
this  book  may  be  ranked  with  biographies — like 
Stanley's  Life  of  Arnold — of  great  teachers  by 
their  old  disciples.  He  was  certainly  the  amanu- 
ensis of  the  roll,  which  must  have  been  the  most 
valuable  authority  for  any  editor  of  Jeremiah's 
prophecies.  And  the  amanuensis  might  very 
easily  become  the  editor.  If  an  edition  of  the 
book  was  compiled  in  Jeremiah's  lifetime,  we 
should  naturally  expect  him  to  use  Baruch's  as- 
sistance; if  it  first  took  shape  after  the  prophet's 
death,  and  if  Baruch  survived,  no  one  would  be 
better  able  to  compile  the  "  Life  and  Works  of 
Jeremiah "  than  his  favourite  and  faithful  dis- 
ciple. The  personal  prophecy  about  Baruch  does 
not  occur  in  its  proper  place  in  connection  with 
the  episode  of  the  roll,  but  is  appended  at  the 
end  of  the  prophecies,!  possibly  as  a  kind  of  sub- 

•xxxii.  t  xliii.  t  "  Ant.,"  x.  q,  i. 

I  Bissell's  Introduction  to  Baruch  in  Lange's  Commen- 
tary. 
I  So  LXX.,  which  here  probably  gives  the  true  order. 


scription  on  the  part  of  the  editor.  These  data 
do  not  constitute  absolute  proof,  but  they  afford 
strong  probability  that  Baruch  compiled  a  book, 
which  was  substantially  our  Jeremiah.  The 
evidence  is  similar  in  character  to,  but  much 
more  conclusive  than,  that  adduced  for  the 
authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  by 
Apollos. 

Almost  the  final  reference  to  Baruch  suggests 
another  aspect  of  his  relation  to  Jeremiah.  The 
Jewish  captains  accused  him  of  unduly  influenc- 
ing his  master  against  Egypt  and  in  favour  of 
Chaldea.  Whatever  truth  there  may  have  been 
in  this  particular  charge,  we  gather  that  popular 
opinion  credited  Baruch  with  considerable  in- 
fluence over  Jeremiah,  and  probably  popular 
opinion  was  not  far  wrong.  Nothing  said  about 
Baruch  suggests  any  vein  of  weakness  in  his 
character,  such  as  Paul  evidently  recognised  in 
Timotjhy.  His  few  appearances  upon  the  scene 
rather  leave  the  impression  of  strength  and  self- 
reliance,  perhaps  even  self-assertion.  If  we  knew 
more  about  him,  possibly  indeed  if  any  one  else 
had  compiled  these  "  Memorabilia,"  we  might 
discover  that  much  in  Jeremiah's  policy  and 
teaching  was  due  to  Baruch,  and  that  the  master 
leaned  somewhat  heavily  upon  the  sympathy  of 
the  disciple.  The  qualities  that  make  a  success- 
ful man  of  action  do  not  always  exempt  their 
possessor  from  being  directed  or  even  controlled 
by  his  followers.  It  would  be  interesting  to  dis- 
cover how  much  of  Luther  is  Melanchthon.  Of 
many  a  great  minister,  his  secretaries  and  sub- 
ordinates might  say  safely,  in  private,  Cujus  pars 
magna  fuimus. 

The  short  prophecy  which  has  furnished  a  text 
for  this  chapter  shows  that  Jeremiah  was  not  un- 
aware of  Baruch's  tendency  to  self-assertion,  and 
even  felt  that  sometimes  it  required  a  check. 
Apparently  chapter  xlv.  once  formed  the  im- 
mediate continuation  of  chapter  xxxvi.,  the  nar- 
rative of  the  incident  of  the  roll.  It  was  "  the 
word  spoken  by  Jeremiah  the  prophet  to  Baruch 
ben  Neriah,  when  he  wrote  thes*".  words  in  a  book 
at  the  dictation  of  Jeremiah  in  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim."  The  reference  evidently  is  to 
xxxvi.  32,  where  we  are  told  that  Baruch  wrote 
at  Jeremiah's  dictation  all  the  words  of  the  book 
that  had  been  burnt,  and  many  like  words. 

Clearly  Baruch  had  not  received  Jeremiah's 
message  as  to  the  sin  and  ruin  of  Judah  without 
strong  protest.  It  was  as  distasteful  to  him  as 
to  all  patriotic  Jews  and  even  to  Jeremiah  him- 
self. Baruch  had  not  yet  been  able  to  accept  this 
heavy  burden  or  to  look  beyond  to  the  brighter 
promise  of  the  future.  He  broke  out  into  bitter 
complaint:  "  Woe  is  me  now!  for  Jehovah  hath 
added  sorrow  to  my  pain;  I  am  weary  with  my 
groaning,  and  find  no  rest."  *  Strong  as  these 
words  are,  they  are  surpassed  by  many  of  Jere- 
miah's complaints  to  Jehovah,  and  doubtless 
even  now  they  found  an  echo  in  the  prophet's 
heart.  Human  impatience  of  suffering  revolts 
desperately  against  the  conviction  that  calamity 
is  inevitable;  hope  whispers  that  some  unfore^ 
seen  Providence  will  yet  disperse  the  storm- 
clouds,  and  the  portents  of  ruin  will  dissolve  like 
some  evil  dream.  Jeremiah  had,  now  as  always, 
the  harsh,  unwelcome  task  of  compelling  himself 
and  his  fellows  to  face  the  sad  and  appalling 
reality.  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Behold,  I  am 
breaking  down  that  which  I  built,  I  am  pluck- 

♦The  clause  "I  am  weary  with  my  groaning"  also 
occurs  in  PsaJm  vi.  6. 


Jeremiah  xxii.,  xxxvi.]       THE    JUDGMENT    ON    JEHOIAKIM. 


137 


ing  up  that  which  I  planted."  *  This  was  his 
familiar  message  concerning  Judah,  but  he  had 
also  a  special  word  for  Baruch:  "And  as  for 
thee,  dost  thou  seek  great  things  for  thyself?  " 
What  "  great  things "  could  a  devout  and 
patriotic  Jew,  a  disciple  of  Jeremiah,  seek  for 
himself  in  those  disastrous  times?  The  answer 
is  at  once  suggested  by  the  renewed  prediction  of 
doom.  Baruch,  in  spite  of  his  master's  teaching, 
had  still  ventured  to  look  for  better  things,  and 
had  perhaps  fancied  that  he  might  succeed  where 
Jeremiah  had  failed  and  might  become  the  medi- 
ator who  should  reconcile  Israel  to  Jehovah.  He 
may  have  thought  that  Jeremiah's  threats  and 
entreaties  had  prepared  the  way  for  some  mes- 
sage of  reconcilation.  Gemariah  ben  Shaphan 
and  other  princes  had  been  greatly  moved  when 
Baruch  read  the  roll.  Might  not  their  emotion 
be  an  earnest  of  the  repentance  of  the  people? 
If  he  could  carry  on  his  master's  work  to  a  more 
blessed  issue  than  the  master  himself  had  dared 
to  hope,  would  not  this  be  a  "great  thing  "  in- 
deed? We  gather  from  the  tone  of  the  chapter 
that  Baruch's  aspirations  were  unduly  tinged 
with  personal  ambition.  While  kings,  priests, 
and  prophets  were  sinking  into  a  common  ruin 
from  which  even  the  most  devoted  servants  of 
Jehovah  would  not  escape,  Baruch  was  indulging 
himself  in  visions  of  the  honour  to  be  obtained 
from  a  glorious  mission,  successfully  accom- 
plished. Jeremiah  reminds  him  that  he  will  have 
to  take  his  share  in  the  common  misery.  Instead 
of  setting  his  heart  upon  "  great  things  "  which 
are  not  according  to  the  Divine  purpose,  he  must 
be  prepared  to  endure  with  resignation  the  evil 
which  Jehovah  "  is  bringing  upon  all  flesh."  Yet 
there  is  a  word  of  comfort  and  promise:  "  I  will 
give  thee  thy  life  for  a  prey  in  all  places  whither 
thou  goest."  Baruch  was  to  be  protected  from 
viclent  or  premature  death. 

According  to  Renan,t  this  boon  was  flung  to 
Baruch  half-contemptuously,  in  order  to  silence 
his  unworthy   and   unseasonable    importunity: — 

"  Dans  une  catastrophe  qui  va  englober 
I'humanite  tout  entiere,  il  est'  beau  de  venir 
reclamer  de  petites  faveurs  d'exception!  Baruch 
aura  la  vie  sauve  partout  ou  il  ira;  qu'il  s'en  con- 
tente !  " 

We  prefer  a  more  generous  interpretation.  To 
a  selfish  man,  unless  indeed  he  clung  to  bare  life 
in  craven  terror  or  mere  animal  tenacity,  such  an 
existence  as  Baruch  was  promised  would  have 
seemed  no  boon  at  all.  Imprisonment  in  a  be- 
sieged and  starving  city,  captivity  and  exile,  his 
fellow-countrymen's  ill-will  and  resentment  from 
first  to  last — these  experiences  would  be  hard 
to  recognise  as  privileges  bestowed  by  Je- 
hovah. Had  Baruch  been  wholly  self-centred, 
he  might  well  have  craved  death  instead,  like 
Job,  nay,  like  Jeremiah  himself.  But  life  meant 
for  him  continued  ministry  to  his  master,  the 
high  privilege  of  supporting  him  in  his  witness 
to  Jehovah.  If,  as  seems  almost  certain,  we  owe 
to  Baruch  the  preservation  of  Jeremiah's  proph- 
ecies, then  indeed  the  life  that  was  given  him  for 
a  prey  must  have  been  precious  to  him  as  the  de- 
voted servant  of  God.  Humanly  speaking,  the 
future  of  revealed  religion  and  of  Christianity 
depended  on  the  survival  of  Jeremiah's  teaching, 
and  this  hung  upon  the  frail  thread  of  Baruch's 

•The  concluding  clause  of  the  verse  is  omitted  by 
LXX.,  and  is  probably  a  gloss  added  to  indicate  that  the 
ruin  would  not  be  confined  to  Judah,  but  would  extend 
"over  the  whole  earth."     Cf.  Kautzsch. 

t  "  History  of  Israel,"  iii.  293. 


life.  After  all,  Baruch  was  destined  to  achieve 
"  great  things,"  even  though  not  those  which  he 
sought  after;  and  as  no  editor's  name  is  prefixed 
to  our  book,  he  cannot  be  accused  of  self-seek- 
ing. So  too  for  every  faithful  disciple,  his  life, 
even  if  given  for  a  prey,  even  if  spent  in  sorrow, 
poverty,  and  pain,  is  still  a  Divine  gift,  because 
nothing  can  spoil  its  opportunity  of  ministering 
to  men  and  glorifying  God,  even  if  only  by  pa- 
tient endurance  of  suffering. 

We  may  venture  on  a  wider  application  of  the 
promise,  "  Thy  life  shall  be  given  thee  for  a 
prey."  Life  is  not  merely  continued  existence  in 
the  body:  life  has  come  to  mean  spirit  and  char- 
acter, so  that  Christ  could  say,  "  He  that  loseth 
his  life  for  My  sake  shall  find  it."  In  this  sense 
the  loyal  servant  of  God  wins  as  his  prey,  out  of 
all  painful  experiences,  a  fuller  and  nobler  life. 
Other  rewards  may  come  in  due  season,  but  this 
is  the  most  certain  and  the  most  sufficient.  For 
Baruch,  constant  devotion  to  a  hated  and  perse- 
cuted master,  uncompromising  utterance  of  un- 
popular truth,  had  their  chief  issue  in  the  redemp- 
tion of  his  own  inward  life. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  JUDGMENT  ON  JEHOIAKIM. 
Jeremiah  xxii.  13-19,  xxxvi.  30,  31. 

"Jehoiakim  .  .  .  slew  him  (Uriah)  with  the  sword,  and 
cast  his  dead  body  into  the  graves  of  the  common  peo- 
pie." — JER.  xxvi.  23. 

"Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah  concerning  Jehoia- 
kim, .  .  .  He  shall  be  buried  with  the  burial  of  an  ass. 
drawn  and  cast  forth  beyond  the  gates  of  Jerusalem."— 
jER.  xxii.  18,  19. 

"Jehoiakim  .  .  .  did  that  which  was  evil  in  the  sight 
of  Jehovah,  according  to  all  that  his  fathers  had  done.'  — 
2  Kings  xxiii.  36,  37. 

Our  last  four  chapters  have  been  occupied  with 
the  history  of  Jeremiah  during  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiakim, and  therefore  necessarily  with  the  rela- 
tions of  the  prophet  to  the  king  and  his  gov- 
ernment. Before  we  pass  on  to  the  reigns  of  Je- 
hoiachin  and  Zedekiah,  we  must  consider  certain 
utterances  which  deal  with  the  personal  charac- 
ter and  career  of  Jehoiakim.  We  are  helped  to 
appreciate  these  passages  by  what  we  here  read, 
and  by  the  brief  paragraph  concerning  this  reign 
in  the  Second  Book  of  Kings.  In  Jeremiah  .the 
king's  policy  and  conduct  are  especially  illus- 
trated by  two  incidents,  the  murder  of  the 
prophet  Uriah  and  the  destruction  of  the  roll. 
The  historian  states  his  judgment  of  the  reign, 
but  his  brief  record  *  adds  little  to  our  knowl- 
edge of  the  sovereign. 

Jehoiakim  was  placed  upon  the  throne  as  the 
nominee  and  tributary  of  Pharaoh  Necho;  but 
he  had  the  address  or  good  fortune  to  retain  his 
authority  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  by  transferring 
his  allegiance  to  the  new  suzerain  of  Western 
Asia.  When  a  suitable  opportunity  offered,  the 
unwilling  and  discontented  vassal  naturally 
"  turned  and  rebelled  against  "  his  lord.  Even 
then  his  good  fortune  did  not  forsake  him;  al- 
though in  his  latter  days  Judah  was  harried  by 
predatory  bands  of  Chaldeans,  Syrians,  Moab- 
ites,  and  Ammonites,  yet  Jehoiakim  "  slept  with 
his  fathers  "  before  Nebuchadnezzar  had  set  to 
work  in  earnest  to  chastise  his  refractory  subject. 
*  2  Kings  xxiii.  34-xxiv.  7. 


138 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


He  was  not  reserved,  like  Zedekiah,  to  endure 
agonies  of  mental  and  physical  torture,  and  to 
rot  in  a  Babylonian  dungeon. 

Jeremiah's  judgment  upon  Jehoiakim  and  his 
doings  is  contained  in  the  two  oassages  which 
form  the  subject  of  this  chapter.  The  utterance 
in  xxxvi.  30,  31,  was  evoked  by  the  destruction 
of  the  roll,  and  we  may  fairly  assume  that  xxii. 
13-19  was  also  delivered  after  that  incident.  The 
immediate  context  of  the  latter  paragraph  throws 
no  light  on  the  date  of  its  origin.  Chapter  xxii. 
is  a  series  of  judgments  on  the  successors  of 
Josiah,  and  was  certainly  composed  after  the 
deposition  of  Jehoiachin,  probably  during  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah;  but  the  section  on  Jehoiakim 
must  have  been  uttered  at  an  earlier  period.  Re- 
nan  indeed  imagines  *  that  Jeremiah  delivered 
this  discourse  at  the  gate  of  the  royal  palace  at 
the  very  beginning  of  the  new  reign.  The  nom- 
inee of  Egypt  was  scarcely  seated  on  the  throne, 
his  "  new  name  "  Jehoiakim — "  He  whom  Jeho- 
vah establisheth  " — still  sounded  strange  in  his 
ears,  when  the  prophet  of  Jehovah  publicly 
menaced  the  king  with  condign  punishment. 
Renan  is  naturally  surprised  that  Jehoiakim  tol- 
erated Jeremiah  even  for  a  moment.  But,  here 
as  often  elsewhere,  the  French  critic's  dramatic 
instinct  has  warped  his  estimate  of  evidence.  We 
need  not  accept  the  somewhat  unkind  saying  that 
picturesque  anecdotes  are  never  true,  but,  at  the 
same  time,  we  have  always  to  guard  against  the 
temptation  to  accept  the  most  dramatic  inter- 
pretation of  history  as  the  most  accurate.  The 
contents  of  this  passage,  the  references  to  rob- 
bery, oppression,  and  violence,  clearly  imply 
that  Jehoiakim  had  reigned  long  eno-gh  for  his 
government  to  reveal  itself  as  hopelessly  corrupt. 
The  final  breach  between  the  king  and  the 
prophet  was  marked  by  the  destruction  of  the 
roll,  and  xxii.  13-19,  like  xxxvi.  30,  31,  may  be 
considered  a  consequence  of  this  breach. 

Let  us  now  consider  these  utterances.  In 
xxxvi.  300  we  read,  "  Therefore  thus  saith  Je- 
hovah concerning  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah,  He 
shall  have  none  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David." 
Later  on,*  a  like  judgment  was  pronounced  upon 
Jehoiakim's  son  and  successor  Jehoiachin.  The 
absence  of  this  threat  from  xxii.  13-19  is  doubt- 
less due  to  the  fact  that  the  chapter  was  com- 
piled when  the  letter  of  the  prediction  seemed  to 
have  been  proved  to  be  false  by  the  accession  of 
Jehoiachin.  Its  spirit  and  substance  were  amply 
satisfied  by  the  latter's  deposition  and  captivity 
after  a  brief  reign  of  a  hundred  days. 

The  next  clause  in  the  sentence  on  Jehoiakim 
runs:  "  His  dead  body  shall  be  cast  out  in  the 
day  to  the  heat,  and  in  the  night  to  the  frost." 
The  same  doom  is  repeated  in  the  later 
prophecy: — 

"  They  shall  not  lament  for  him, 

Alas  my  brother  !    Alas  my  brother! 
They  shall  not  lament  for  him, 

Alas  lord  !    Alas  lord  !  t 
He  shall  be  buried  with  the  burial  of  an  ass. 
Dragged  forth  and  cast  away  without  the  gates  of 
Jerusalem." 

Jeremiah  did  not  need  to  draw  upon  his  imag- 
ination for  this  vision  of  judgment.  When  the 
words  were  uttered,   his  memory  called  up  the 

*iii.  274. 

+  xxii.  30. 

$  R.  v.,  "Ah  my  brother  !  or  Ah  sister!  ...  Ah  lord  ! 
or  Ah  his  glory  !  "  The  text  is  based  on  an  emendation  of 
Graetz,  following  the  Syriac.    (.Giesebrecht.) 


murder  of  Uriah  ben  Shemaiah  and  the  dis- 
honour done  to  his  corpse.  Uriah's  only  guilt 
had  been  his  zeal  for  the  truth  that  Jeremiah  had 
proclaimed.  Though  Jehoiakim  and  his  party 
had  not  dared  to  touch  Jeremiah  or  had  not  been 
able  to  reach  him,  they  had  struck  his  influence 
by  killing  Uriah.  But  for  their  hatred  of  the 
master,  the  disciple  might  have  been  spared. 
And  Jeremiah  had  neither  been  able  to  protect 
him,  nor  allowed  to  share  his  fate.  Any  gen- 
erous spirit  will  understand  how  Jeremiah's 
whole  nature  was  possessed  and  agitated  by  a 
tempest  of  righteous  indignation,  how  utterly 
humiliated  he  felt  to  be  compelled  to  stand  by 
in  helpless  impotence.  And  now,  when  the  ty- 
rant had  filled  up  the  measure  of  his  iniquity, 
when  the  imperious  impulse  of  the  Divine  Spirit 
bade  the  prophet  speak  the  doom  of  his  king, 
there  breaks  forth  at  last  the  long-pent-up  cry 
for  vengeance:  "Avenge,  O  Lord,  Thy  slaugh- 
tered saint  " — let  the  persecutor  sufifer  the  agony 
and  shame  which  he  inflicted  on  God's  martyr, 
fling  out  the  murderer's  corpse  unburied,  let  it 
lie  and  rot  upon  the  dishonoured  grave  of  his 
victim. 

Can  we  say.  Amen?  Not  perhaps  without 
some  hesitation.  Yet  surely,  if  our  veins  run 
blood  and  not  water,  our  feelings,  had  we  been  in 
Jeremiah's  place,  would  have  been  as  bitter  and 
our  words  as  fierce.  Jehoiakim  was  more  guilty 
than  our  Queen  Mary,  but  the  memory  of  the 
grimmest  of  the  Tudors  still  stinks  in  English 
nostrils.  In  our  own  days,  we  have  not  had  time 
to  forget  how  men  received  the  news  of  Hanning- 
ton's  murder  at  Uganda,  and  we  can  imagine 
what  European  Christians  would  say  and  feel  if 
their  missionaries  were  massacred  in  China. 

And  yet,  when  we  read  such  a  treatise  as  Lac- 
tantius  wrote  "  Concerning  the  Deaths  of  Perse- 
cutors," we  cannot  but  recoil.  We  are  shocked 
at  the  stern  satisfaction  he  evinces  in  the  miser- 
able ends  of  Maximin  and  Galerius,  and  other 
enemies  of  the  true  faith.  Discreet  historians 
have  made  large,  use  of  this  work,  without  think- 
ing it  desirable  to  give  an  explicit  account  of 
its  character  and  spirit.  Biographers  of  Lactan- 
tius  feel  constrained  to  offer  a  half-hearted  apol- 
ogy for  the  "  De  Morte  Persecutorum."  Simi- 
larly we  find  ourselves  of  one  mind  with  Gibbon,* 
in  refusing  to  derive  edification  from  a  sermon 
in  which  Constantine  the  Great,  or  the  bishop 
who  composed  it  for  him,  affected  to  relate  the 
miserable  end  of  all  the  persecutors  of  the 
Church.  Nor  can  we  share  the  exultation  of 
the  Covenanters  in  the  Divine  judgment  which 
they  saw  in  the  death  of  Claverhouse;  and  we 
are  not  moved  to  any  hearty  sympathy  with  more 
recent  writers,  who  have  tried  to  illustrate  from 
history  the  danger  of  touching  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  the  Church.  Doubtless  God  will 
avenge  His  own  elect;  nevertheless  Nemo  me  vm- 
pune  lacessit  is  no  seemly  motto  for  the  Kingdom 
of  God.  Even  Greek  mythologists  taught  that  it 
was  perilous  for  men  to  wield  the  thunderbolts 
of  Zeus.  Still  less  is  the  Divine  wrath  a  weapon 
for  men  to  grasp  in  their  differences  and  dis- 
sensions, even  about  the  things  ot  God.  Michael 
the  Archangel,  even  when  contending  with  the 
devil  he  disputed  about  the  body  of  Moses,  durst 
not  bring  against  him  a  railing  judgment,  but 
said.  The  Lord  rebuke  thee.f 

How  far  Jeremiah  would  have  shared  such 
modern    sentiment,    it   is   hard   to    say.     At   any 

*  Chap.  xiii.  tjudeg. 


Jeremiah  xxii.,  xxxvi. J       THE    JUDGMENT    OF    JEHOIAKIM. 


139 


'  rate  his  personal  feeling  is  kept  in  the  back- 
ground; it  is  postponed  to  the  more  patient  and 
deliberate  judgment  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  and 
subordinated  to  broad  considerations  of  public 
morality.  We  have  no  right  to  contrast  Jere- 
miah with  our  Lord  and  His  proto-martyr 
Stephen,  because  we  have  no  prayer  of  the  an- 
cient prophet  to  rank  with,  "  Father,  forgive 
them:  for  they  know  not  what  they  do,"  or 
again  with,  "  Lord,  lay  not  this  sin  to  their 
charge."  Christ  and  His  disciple  forgave 
;  wrongs  done  to  themselves:  they  did  not  con- 
I  done  the  murder  of  their  brethren.  In  the 
I  Apocalypse,  which  concludes  the  English  Bible, 
and  was  long  regarded  as  God's  final  revelation, 
His  last  word  to  man,  the  souls  of  the  martyrs 
cry  out  from  beneath  the  altar:  "  How  long,  O 
Master,  the  holy  and  true,  dost  Thou  not  judge 
and  avenge  our  blood  on  them  that  dwell  on 
the  earth?  "  * 

Doubtless  God  will  avenge  His  own  elect,  and 
the  appeal  for  justice  may  be  neither  ignoble  nor 
vindictive.  But  such  prayers,  beyond  all  others, 
V  must  be  offered  in  humble  submission  to  the 
Judge  of  all.  When  our  righteous  indignation 
claims  to  pass  its  own  sentence,  we  do  well  to 
remember  that  our  halting  intellect  and  our  pur- 
blind conscience  are  ill  qualified  to  sit  as  as- 
sessors of  the  Eternal  Justice. 

When  Saul  set  out  for  Damascus,  "  breathing 
out  threatening  and  slaughter  against  the  disci- 
ples of  the  Lord,"  the  survivors  of  his  victims 
cried  out  for  a  swift  punishment  of  the  perse- 
cutor, and  believed  that  their  prayers  were 
echoed  by  martyred  souls  in  the  heavenly  Tem- 
ple. If  that  ninth  chapter  of  the  Acts  had  re- 
corded how  Saul  of  Tarsus  was  struck  dead  by 
the  lightnings  of  the  wrath  of  God,  preachers 
down  all  the  Christian  centuries  would  have 
moralised  on  the  righteous  Divine  judgment. 
Saul  would  have  found  his  place  in  the  homiletic 
Chamber  of  Horrors  with  Ananias  and  Sapphira, 
Herod  and  Pilate,  Nero  and  Diocletian.  Yet  the 
Captain  of  our  salvation,  choosing  His  lieuten- 
ants, passes  over  many  a  man  with  blameless 
record,  and  allots  the  highest  post  to  this  blood- 
stained persecutor.  No  wonder  that  Paul,  if 
only  in  utter  self-contempt,  emphasised  the  doc- 
trine of  Divine  election.  Verily  God's  ways  are 
not  our  ways  and  His  thoughts  are  not  our 
thoughts. 

Still,  however,  we  easily  see  that  Paul  and  Je- 
hoiakim  belong  to  two  different  classes.  The 
persecutor  who  attempts  in  honest  but  mis- 
guided zeal  to  make  others  endorse  his  own 
prejudices,  and  turn  a  deaf  ear  with  him  to  the 
teaching  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  must  not  be  ranked 
with  politicians  who  sacrifice  to  their  own  pri- 
vate interests  the  Revelation  and  the  Prophets  of 
God. 

This  prediction  which  we  have  been  discussing 
of  Jehoiakim's  shameful  end  is  followed  in  the 
passage  in  chapter  xxxvi.  by  a  general  announce- 
ment of  universal  judgment,  couched  in  Jere- 
miah's usual  comprehensive  style: — 

"  I  will  visit  their  sin  upon  him  and  upon 
his  children  and  upon  his  servants,  and  I  will 
bring  upon  them  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  men  of  Judah  all  the  evil  which  I 
spake  unto  them  and  they  did  not  hearken." 

In  chapter  xxii.  thev  sentence  upon  Jehoiakim 
is  prefaced  by  a  statement  of  the  crimes  for 
■which  he  was  punished.     His  eyes  and  his  heart 

*  Ape.  vi.  10. 


were  wholly  possessed  by  avarice  and  cruelty; 
as  an  administrator  he  was  active  in  oppression 
and  violence.*  But  Jeremiah  does  not  confine 
himself  to  these  general  charges;  he  specifies  and 
emphasises  one  particular  form  of  Jehoiakim's 
wrong-doing,  the  tyrannous  exaction  of  forced 
labour  for  his  buildings.  To  the  sovereigns  of 
petty  Syrian  states,  old  Memphis  and  Babylon 
were  then  what  London  and  Paris  are  to  modern 
Ameers,  Khedives,  and  Sultans.  Circumstances, 
indeed,  did  not  permit  a  Syrian  prince  to  visit 
the  Egyptian  or  Chaldean  capital  with  perfect 
comfort  and  unrestrained  enjoyment.  Ancient 
Eastern  potentates,  like  mediaeval  suzerains,  did 
not  always  distinguish  between  a  guest  and  a 
hostage.  But  the  Jewish  kings  would  not  be 
debarred  frorh  importing  the  luxuries  and  imi- 
tating the  vices  of  their  conquerors. 

Renan  saysf  of  this  period:  "  L'Egypte  etait, 
a  cette  epoque,  le  pays  ou  les  industries  de  luxe 
etaient  le  plus  developpees.  Tout  le  monde  raf- 
folaient,  en  particulier,  de  sa  carrosserie  et  de 
ses  meubles  ouvrag-ds.  Joiaquin  et  la  noblesse 
de  Jerusalem  ne  songeaient  qu'a  se  procurer  ces 
beaux  objets,  qui  realisaient  ce  qu'on  avait  vu 
de  plus  exquis  en  fait  de  goiit  jusque-la." 

The  supreme  luxury  of  vulgar  minds  is  the 
use  of  wealth  as  a  means  of  display,  and  mon- 
archs  have  always  delighted  in  the  erection  of 
vast  and  ostentatious  buildings.  At  this  time 
Egypt  and  Babylon  vied  with  one  another  in  pre- 
tentious architecture.  In  addition  to  much  useful 
engineering  work,  Psammetichus  I.  made  large 
additions  to  the  temples  and  public  edifices  at 
Memphis,  Thebes,  Sais,  and  elsewhere,  so  that 
"  the  entire  valley  of  the  Nile  became  little  more 
than  one  huge  workshop,  where  stone-cutters 
and  masons,  bricklayers  and  carpenters,  la- 
boured incessantly.":}:  This  activity  in  building 
continued  even  after  the  disaster  to  the  Egyptian 
arms  at  Carchemish. 

Nebuchadnezzar  had  an  absolute  mania  for 
architecture.  His  numerous  inscriptions  are 
mere  catalogues  of  his  achievements  in  building. 
His  home  administration  and  even  his  extensive 
conquests  are  scarcely  noticed;  he  held  them  of 
little  account  compared  with  his  temples  and 
palaces — "  this  great  Babylon,  which  I  have  built 
for  the  royal  dwelling-place,  by  the  might  of  my 
power  and  for  the  glory  of  my  majesty."  § 
Nebuchadnezzar  created  most  of  the  magnifi- 
cence that  excited  the  wonder  and  admiration  of 
Herodotus  a  century  later. 

Jehoiakim  had  been  moved  to  follow  the  nota- 
ble example  of  Chaldea  and  Egypt.  By  a 
strange  irony  of  fortune,  Egypt,  once  the  cyno- 
sure of  nations,  has  become  in  our  own  time  the 
humble  imitator  of  Western  civilisation,  and  now 
boulevards  have  rendered  the  suburbs  of  Cairo 
"  a  shabby  reproduction  of  modern  Paris."  Pos- 
sibly in  the  eyes  of  Egyptians  and  Chaldeans 
Jehoiakim's  efforts  only  resulted  in  a  "  shabby 
reproduction  "  of  Memphis  or  Babylon.  Nev- 
ertheless these  foreign  luxuries  are  always  ex- 
pensive: and  minor  states  had  not  then  learnt 
the  art  of  trading  on  the  resources  of  their  pow- 
erful neighbours  by  means  of  foreign  loans. 
Moreover  Judah  had  to  pay  tribute  first  to 
Pharaoh  Necho,  and  then  to  Nebuchadnezzar. 
The   times   were   bad,    and   additional    taxes   for 

*  xxii.  17.     The  exact  meaning  of  the  word  translated 
"  violence  "  (so  A.  V.,  R  V.,)  is  very  doubtful, 
t  ■•  Hist  ,"  etc.,  ill.  266. 

i  Rawlinson,  "Ancient  Egypt"  (Story  of  the  Nations). 
S  Dan.  iv.  30. 


X40 


THE    BOOK   OF   JEREMIAH. 


building  purposes  must  have  been  felt  as  an  in- 
tolerable oppression.  Naturally  the  king  did  not 
pay  for  his  labour;  like  Solomon  and  all  other 
great  Eastern  despots,  he  had  recourse  to  the 
corvee,  and  for  this  in  particular  Jeremiah  de- 
nounced him. 

"Woe  anto  him  that  buildeth  his  house  by  unrighteous- 
ness 
And  his  chambers  by  injustice  ; 
That  maketh  his  neighbour  toil  without  wages, 

And  giveth  him  no  hire  ; 
That  saith,  '  I  will  build  me  a  wide  house 

And  spacious  chambers,' 
And  openeth  out  broad    windows,  with  woodwork   of 
cedar 
And  vermilion  painting." 

Then  the  denunciation  passes  into  biting 
sarcasm : — 

"  Art  thou  indeed  a  king, 
Because  thou  strivest  to  excel  in  cedar?"* 

Poor  imitations  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  magnifi- 
cent structures  could  not  conceal  the  impotence 
and  dependence  of  the  Jewish  king.  The  pre- 
tentiousness of  Jehoiakim's  buildings  challenged 
a  comparison  which  only  reminded  men  that  he 
was  a  mere  puppet,  with  its  strings  pulled  now 
by  Egypt  and  now  by  Babylon.  At  best  he  was 
only  reigning  on  sufferance. 

Jeremiah  contrasts  Jehoiakim's  government 
both  as  to  justice  and  dignity  with  that  of 
Josiah: — 

"  Did  not  thy  father  eat  and  drink  ?  "  + 

(He  was  no  ascetic,  but,  like  the  Son  of  Man, 
lived  a  full,  natural,  human  life.) 

"And  do  judgment  and  justice? 
Then  did  he  prosper. 

He  judged  the  cause  of  the  poor  and  needy, 
Then  was  there  prosperity. 
Is  not  this  to  know  Me  ? 
Jehovah  hath  spoken  it." 

Probably  Jehoiakim  claimed  by  some  external 
observance,  or  through  some  subservient  priest 
or  prophet,  to  "know  Jehovah";  and  Jeremiah 
repudiates  the  claim. 

Josiah  had  reigned  in  the  period  when  the  de- 
cay of  Assyria  left  Judah  dominant  in  Palestine, 
until  Egypt  or  Chaldea  could  find  time  to  gather 
up  the  outlying  fragments  of  the  shattered  em- 
pire. The  wisdom  and  justice  of  the  Jewish  king 
had  used  this  breathing  space  for  the  advantage 
and  happiness  of  his  people;  and  during  part  of 
his  reign  Josiah's  power  seems  to  have  been  as 
extensive  as  that  of  any  of  his  predecessors  on 
the  throne  of  Judah.  And  yet,  according  to  cur- 
rent theology,  Jeremiah's  appeal  to  the  prosperity 
of  Josiah  as  a  proof  of  God's  approbation  was  a 
startling  anomaly.  Josiah  had  been  defeated  and 
slain  at  Megiddo  in  the  prime  of  his  manhood, 
at  the  age  of  thirty-nine.  None  but  the  most 
independent  and  enlightened  spirits  could  believe 
that  the  Reformer's  premature  death,  at  the  mo- 
ment when  his  policy  had  resulted  in  national 
disaster,  was  not  an  emphatic  declaration  of  Di- 
vine displeasure.  Jeremiah's  contrary  belief 
might  be  explained  and  justified.       Some  such 

*  I  have  followed  R.  V.,  but  the  text  is  probably  corrupt. 
Cheyne  follows  LXX.  (A)  in  reading  "  because  thou 
viest  with  Ahab":  LXX.  (B)  has  "  Ahaz "  (so  Ewald). 
Giesebrecht  proposes  to  neglect  the  accents  and  translate, 
"  viest  in  cedar  buildings  with  thy  father  "  (t.  e.,  Solomon). 

t  According  to  Giesebrecht  ic/.,  however,  the  last  note) 
this  clause  is  an  objection  which  the  prophet  puts  into  the 
mouth  t)f  the  king.  "  My  father  enjoyed  the  good  things 
of  life— why  should  not  I?"  The  prophet  rejoins,  "Nay, 
but  he  did  judgment,"  etc. 


justification  is  suggested  by  the  prophet's  utter- 
ance concerning  Jehoahaz:  "Weep  not  for  the 
dead,  neither  bemoan  him:  but  weep  sore  for  him 
that  goeth  away."  Josiah  had  reigned  with  real 
authority,  he  died  when  independence  was  no 
longer  possible;  and  therein  he  was  happier  and 
more  honourable  than  his  successors,  who  held 
a  vassal  throne  by  the  uncertain  tenure  of  time- 
serving duplicity,  and  were  for  the  most  part  car- 
ried into  captivity.  "  The  righteous  was  taken 
away  from  the  evil  to  come."  * 

The  warlike  spirit  of  classical  antiquity  and  of 
Teutonic  chivalry  welcomed  a  glorious  death 
upon  the  field  of  battle: — 

"  And  how  can  man  die  better 
Than  facing  fearful  odds, 
For  the  ashes  of  his  fathers, 
And  the  temples  of  his  Gods?  " 

No  one  spoke  of  Leonidas  as  a  victim  of  Divine 
wrath.  Later  Judaism  caught  something  of  the 
same  temper.  Judas  Maccabjeus,  when  in  ex- 
treme danger,  said,  "  It  is  better  for  us  to  die  in 
battle,  than  to  look  upon  the  evils  of  our  people 
and  our  sanctuary";  and  later  on,  when  he  re- 
fused to  flee  from  inevitable  death,  he  claimed 
that  he  would  leave  behind  him  no  stain  upon 
his  honour.f  Islam  also  is  prodigal  in  its  prom- 
ises of  future  bliss  to  those  soldiers  who  fall 
fighting  for  its  sake. 

But  the  dim  and  dreary  Sheol  of  the  ancient 
Hebrews  was  no  glorious  Valhalla  or  houri- 
peopled  Paradise.  The  renown  of  the  battle- 
field was  poor  compensation  for  the  warm,  full- 
blooded  life  of  the  upper  air.  When  David  sang 
his  dirge  for  Saul  and  Jonathan,  he  found  no 
comfort  in  the  thought  that  they  had  died  fight- 
ing for  Israel.  Moreover  the  warrior's  self- 
sacrifice  for  his  country  seems  futile  and  inglori- 
ous, when  it  neither  secures  victory  nor  post- 
pones defeat.  And  at  Megiddo  Josiah  and  his 
army  perished  in  a  vain  attempt  to  come 

"  Between  the  pass  and  fell  incensed  points 
Of  mighty  opposites." 

We  can  hardly  justify  to  ourselves  Jeremiah's 
use  of  Josiah's  reign  as  an  example  of  prosperity 
as  the  reward  of  righteousness;  his  contempo- 
raries must  have  been  still  more  difficult  to  con- 
vince. We  cannot  understand  how  the  words  of 
this  prophecy  were  left  without  any  attempt  at 
justification,  or  why  Jeremiah  did  not  meet  by 
anticipation  the  obvious  and  apparently  crush- 
ing rejoinder  that  the  reign  terminated  in  dis- 
grace and  disaster. 

Nevertheless  these  difficulties  do  not  affect  the 
terms  of  the  sentence  upon  Jehoiakim,  or  the 
ground  upon  which  he  was  condemned.  We 
shall  be  better  able  to  appreciate  Jeremiah's  atti- 
tude and  to  discover  its  lessons  if  we  venture  to 
reconsider  his  decisions.  We  cannot  forget  that 
there  was,  as  Cheyne  puts  it,  a  duel  between 
Jeremiah  and  Jehoiakim;  and  we  should  hesitate 
to  accept  the  verdict  of  Hildebrand  upon 
Henry  IV.  of  Germany,  or  of  Thomas  a  Becket 
on  Henry  II.  of  England.  Moreover  the  data 
upon  which  we  have  to  base  our  judgment,  in- 
cluding the  unfavourable  estimate  in  the  Book 
of  Kings,  come  to  us  from  Jeremiah  or  his  dis- 
ciples. Our  ideas  about  Queen  Elizabeth  would 
be  more  striking  than  .accurate  if  our  only  au- 
thorities for  her  reign  were  Jesuit  historians  of 

*Isa.  Ivii.  (English  Versions). 
tMacc.  ii.  59,  ix.  10 


Jeremiah  xxii.  20-30] 


JEHOIACHIN. 


141^ 


England.  But  Jeremiah  is  absorbed  in  lofty 
moral  and  spiritual  issues;  his  testimony  is  not 
tainted  with  that  sectarian  and  sacerdotal  casuis- 
try which  is  always  so  ready  to  subordinate  truth 
to  the  interests  of  "  the  Church."  He  speaks  of 
facts  with  a  simple  directness  which  leaves  us 
in  no  doubt  as  to  their  reality;  his  picture  of 
Jehoiakim  may  be  one-sided,  but  it  owes  noth- 
ing to  an  inventive  imagination.. 

Even  Renan,  who,  in  Ophite  fashion,  holds 
\  brief  for  the  bad  characters  of  the  Old  Testa- 
Jnent,  does  not  seriously  challenge  Jeremiah's 
Jtatements  of  fact.  But  the  judgment  of  the 
modern  critic  seems  at  first  sight  more  lenient 
than  that  of  the  Hebrew  prophet:'  the  former 
sees  in  Jehoiakim  "  un  prince  liberal  et  mo- 
dere,"  *  but  when  this  favourable  estimate  is 
coupled  with  an  apparent  comparison  with  Louis 
Philippe,  we  must  leave  students  of  modern  his- 
tory to  decide  whether  Renan  is  really  less  se- 
vere than  Jeremiah.  Cheyne,  on  the  other  hand, 
holds t  that  "we  have  no  reason  to  question 
Jeremiah's  verdict  upon  Jehoiakim,  who,  alike 
from  a  religious  and  a  political  point  of  view, 
appears  to  have  been  unequal  to  the  crisis  in 
the  fortunes  of  Israel."  No  doubt  this  is  true; 
and  yet  perhaps  Renan  is  so  far  right  that  Je- 
hoiakim's  failure  was  rather  his  misfortune  than 
his  fault.  We  may  doubt  whether  any  king  of 
Israel  or  Judah  would  have  been  equal  to  the 
supreme  crisis  which  Jehoiakim  had  to  face. 
Our  scanty  information  seems  to  indicate  a  man 
of  strong  will,  determined  character,  and  able 
statesmanship.  Though  the  nominee  of  Pharaoh 
Necho,  he  retained  his  sceptre  under  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  held  his  own  against  Jeremiah  and 
the  powerful  party  by  which  the  prophet  was 
supported.  Under  more  favourable  conditions 
he  might  have  rivalled  Uzziah  or  Jeroboam  II. 
In  the  time  of  Jehoiakim,  a  supreme  political 
and  military  genius  would  have  been  as  helpless 
on  the  throne  of  Judah  as  were  the  Palseologi  in 
the  last  days  of  the  Empire  at  Constantinople. 
Something  may  be  said  to  extenuate  his  religious 
attitude.  In  opposing  Jeremiah  he  was  not  de- 
fying clear  and  acknowledged  truth.  Like  the 
Pharisees  in  their  conflict  with  Christ,  the  perse- 
cuting king  had  popular  religious  sentiment  on 
his  side.  According  to  that  current  theology 
which  had  been  endorsed  in  some  measure  even 
by  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  the  defeat  at  Megiddo 
proved  that  Jehovah  repudiated  the  religious 
policy  of  Josiah  and  his  advisers.  The  inspira- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit  enabled  Jeremiah  to  re- 
sist this  shallow  conclusion,  and  to  maintain 
through  every  crisis  his  unshaken  faith  in  the 
profounder  truth.  Jehoiakim  was  too  conserva- 
tive to  surrender  at  the  prophet's  bidding  the 
long-accepted  and  fundamental  doctrine  of  ret- 
ribution, and  to  follow  the  forward  leading  of 
Revelation.  He  "  stood  by  the  old  truth "  as 
did  Charles  V.  at  the  Reformation.  "  Let  him 
that  is  without  sin  "  in  this  matter  "  first  cast 
a  stone  at  "  him. 

Though  we  extenuate  Jehoiakim's  conduct,  we 
are  still  bound  to  condemn  it;  not,  however,  be- 
cause he  was  exceptionally  wicked,  but  because 
he  failed  to  rise  above  a  low  spiritual  average: 
yet  in  this  judgment  we  also  condemn  ourselves 
for  our  own  intolerance,  and  for  the  prejudice 
and  self-will  which  have  often  blinded  our  eyes 
to  the  teachings  of  our  Lord  and  Master. 

But  Jeremiah  emphasises  one  special  charge 
*  iii.  269.  t  P.  142. 


against  the  king — his  exaction  of  forced  and 
unpaid  labour.  This  form  of  taxation  was  in  it- 
self so  universal  that  the  censure  can  scarcely  be 
directed  against  its  ordinary  and  moderate  ex- 
ercise. If  Jeremiah  had  intended  to  inaugurate 
a  new  departure,  he  would  have  approached  the 
subject  in  a  more  formal  and  less  casual  fashion. 
It  was  a  time  of  national  danger  and  distress, 
when  all  moral  and  material  resources  were 
needed  to  avert  the  ruin  of  the  state,  or  at  any 
rate  to  mitigate  the  sufferings  of  the  people; 
and  at  such  a  time  Jehoiakim  exhausted  and  em- 
bittered his  subjects — that  he  might  dwell  in 
spacious  halls  with  woodwork  of  cedar.  The 
Temple  and  palaces  of  Solomon  had  been  built 
at  the  expense  of  a  popular  resentment,  which 
survived  for  centuries,  and  with  which,  as  their 
silence  seems  to  show,  the  prophets  fully  sym- 
pathised. If  even  Solomon's  exactions  were 
culpable,  Jehoiakim  was  altogether  without  ex- 
cuse. 

His  sin  was  that  common  to  all  governments, 
the  use  of  the  authority  of  the  state  for  private 
ends.  This  sin  is  possible  not  only  to  sovereigns 
and  secretaries^  of  state,  but  to  every  town  coun- 
cillor and  every  one  who  has  a  friend  on  a  town 
council,  nay,  to  every  clerk  in  a  public  office 
and  to  every  workman  in  a  government  dock- 
yard. A  king  squandering  public  revenues  on 
private  pleasures,  and  an  artisan  pilfering  nails 
and  iron  with  an  easy  conscience  because  they 
only  belong  to  the  state,  are  guilty  of  crimes  es- 
sentially the  same.  On  the  one  hand,  Jehoiakim 
as  the  head  of  the  state  was  oppressing  individ- 
uals; and  although  modern  states  have  grown 
comparatively  tender  as  to  the  rights  of  the  in- 
dividual, yet  even  now  their  action  is  often  cru- 
elly oppressive  to  insignificant  minorities.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  right  of  exacting  labour 
was  only  vested  in  the  king  as  a  public  trust; 
its  abuse  was  as  much  an  injury  to  the  com- 
munity as  to  individuals.  If  Jeremiah  had  to 
deal  with  modern  civilisation,  we  might,  per- 
chance, be  startled  by  his  passing  lightly  over 
our  religious  and  political  controversies  to  de- 
nounce the  squandering  of  public  resources  in 
the  interests  ot  individuals  and  classes,  sects  and 
parties. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

JEHOIACHIN* 

Jeremiah  xxii.  20-30. 

"  A  despised  broken  vessel." — JER.  xxii.  28. 

"  A  young  lion.  And  he  went  up  and  down  among  the 
lions,  he  became  a  young  lion  and  he  learned  to  catch  the 
prey,  he  devoured  men." — EZEK.  xix.  5,  6. 

"Jehoiachin  .  .  .  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah, 
according  to  all  that  his  father  had  done."— 2  KINGS  xxiv. 
8,9. 

We  have  seen  that  our  book  does  not  furnish 
a  consecutive  biography  of  Jeremiah;  we  are 
not  even  certain  as  to  the  chronological  order  of 
the  incidents  narrated.  Yet  these  chapters  are 
clear  and  full  enough  to  give  us  an  accurate  idea 
of  what  Jeremiah  did  and  suffered  during  the 
eleven  years  of  Jehoiakim's  reign.  He  was 
forced  to  stand  by  while  the  king  lent  the 
weight  of  his  authority  to  the  ancient  corrup- 
tions of  the  national  religion,  and  conducted  his 
home  and  foreign  policy  without  any  regard  to 
the  will  of  Jehovah,  as  expressed  by  His  prophet. 
*  Also  called  Coniah  and  leconiah. 


,  U2 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


His  position  was  analogous  to  that  of  a  Roman- 
ist priest  under  Elizabeth  or  a  Protestant  divine 
in  the  reign  of  James  II.  According  to  some 
critics,  Nebuchadnezzar  was  to  Jeremiah  what 
Philip  of  Spain  was  to  the  priest  and  William  of 
Orange  to  the  Puritan. 

During  all  these  long  and  weary  years,  the 
prophet  watched  the  ever  multiplying  tokens  of 
approaching  ruin.  He  was  no  passive  spectator, 
but  a  faithful  watchman  to  the  house  of  Israel; 
again  and  again  he  risked  his  life  in  a  vain  at- 
tempt to  make  his  fellow-countrymen  aware  of 
their  danger.*  The  vision  of  the  coming  sword 
was  ever  before  his  eyes,  and  he  blew  the  trum- 
pet and  warned  the  people;  but  they  would  not 
be  warned,  and  the  prophet  knew  that  the  sword 
would  come  and  take  them  away  in  their  iniquity. 
He  paid  the  penalty  of  his  faithfulness;  at  one 
time  or  another  he  was  beaten,  imprisoned,  pro- 
scribed, and  driven  to  hide  himself;  still  he  per- 
severed in  his  mission,  as  time  and  occasion 
served.  Yet  he  survived  Jehoiakim,  partly  be- 
cause he  was  more  anxious  to  serve  Jehovah 
than  to  gain  the  glorious  deliverance  of  martyr- 
dom; partly  because  his  royal  enemy  feared  to 
proceed  to  extremities  against  a  prophet  of  Je- 
hovah, who  was  befriended  by  powerful  nobles, 
and  might  possibly  have  relations  with  Nebu- 
chadnezzar himself.  Jehoiakim's  religion^for 
like  the  Athenians  he  was  probably  "  very  re- 
ligious " — was  saturated  with  superstition,  and  it 
was  only  when  deeply  moved  that  he  lost  the 
sense  of  an  external  sanctity  attaching  to  Jere- 
miah's person.  In  Israel  prophets  were  hedged 
by  a  more  potent  divinity  than  kings. 

Meanwhile  Jeremiah  was  growing  old  in  years 
and  older  in  experience.  When  Jehoiakim  died, 
it  was  nearly  forty  years  since  the  young  priest 
had  first  been  called  "  to  pluck  up  and  to  break 
down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  overthrow;  to  build 
and  to  plant";  it  was  more  than  eleven  since 
his  brighter  hopes  were  buried  in  Josiah's  grave. 
Jehovah  had  promised  that  He  would  make  His 
servant  into  "  an  iron  pillar  and  brasen  walls."  f 
The  iron  was  tempered  and  hammered  into 
shape  during  these  days  of  conflict  and  endur- 
ance, like — 

"...  iron  dug  from  central  gloom, 

And  heated  hot  with  burning  fears 
And  dipt  in  baths  of  hissing  tears, 

And  battered  with  the  shocks  of  doom. 

To  shape  and  use." 

He  had  long  lost  all  trace  of  that  sanguine 
youthful  enthusiasm  which  promises  to  carry  all 
before  it.  His  opening  manhood'  had  felt  its 
happy  illusions,  but  they  did  not  dominate  his 
soul  and  they  soon  passed  away.  At  the  Di- 
vine bidding,  he  had  surrendered  his  most  in- 
grained prejudices,  his  dearest  desires.  He  had 
consented  to  be  alienated  from  his  brethren  at 
Anathoth.  and  to  live  without  home  or  family; 
although  a  patriot,  he  accepted  the  inevitable 
ruin  of  his  nation  as  the  just  judgment  of  Je- 
hovah; he  was  a  priest,  imbued  by  heredity  and 
education  with  the  religious  traditions  of  Is- 
rael, yet  he  had  yielded  himself  to  Jehovah,  to 
announce,  as  His  herald,  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple,  and  the  devastation  of  the  Holy  Land. 
He  had  submitted  his  shrinking  flesh  and  re- 
luctant spirit  to  God's  most  unsparing  demands, 

*  Considerable  portions  of  chaps,  i.-xx.  are  referred  to 
the  reigns  of  Jehoiakim  and  Jehoiachin  :  see  Prophecies 
of  Jeremiah,  antea. 

ti.  i8. 


and  had  dared  the  worst  that  man  could  inflict. 
Such  surrender  and  such  experiences  wrought  in 
him  a  certain  stern  and  terrible  strength,  and 
made  his  life  still  more  remote  from  the  hopes 
and  fears,  the  joys  and  sorrows  of  common  men. 
In  his  isolation  and  his  inspired  self-sufficiency 
he  had  become  an  "  iron  pillar."  Doubtless  he 
seemed  to  many  as  hard  and  cold  as  iron;  but 
this  pillar  of  the  faith  could  still  glow  with  white 
heat  of  indignant  passion,  and  within  the  shelter 
of  the  "  brasen  walls  "  there  still  beat  a  human 
heart,  touched  with  tender  sympathy  for  those 
less  disciplined  to  endure. 

We  have  thus  tried  to  estimate  the  develop- 
ment of  Jeremiah's  character  during  the  second 
period  of  his  ministry,  which  began  with  the 
death  of  Josiah  and  terminated  with  the  brief 
reign  of  Jehoiachin.  Before  considering  Jere- 
miah's judgment  upon  this  prince  we  will  review 
the  scanty  data  at  our  disposal  to  enable  us  to 
appreciate  the  prophet's  verdict. 

Jehoiakim  died  while  Nebuchadnezzar  was  on 
the  march  to  punish  his  rebellion.  His  son  Je- 
hoiachin, a  youth  of  eighteen,*  succeeded  his 
father  and  continued  his  policy.  Thus  the  ac- 
cession of  the  new  king  was  no  new  departure, 
but  merely  a  continuance  of  the  old  order;  the 
government  was  still  in  the  hands  of  the  party 
attached  to  Egypt,  and  opposed  to  Babylon  and 
hostile  to  Jeremiah.  Under  these  circumstances 
we  are  bound  to  accept  the  statement  of  Kings 
that  Jehoiakim  "  slept  with  his  fathers,"  i.  e.,  was 
buried  in  the  royal  sepulchre. f  There  was  no 
literal  fulfilment  of  the  prediction  that  he  should 
"  be  buried  with  the  burial  of  an  ass."  Jere- 
miah had  also  declared  concerning  Jehoiakim: 
"  He  shall  have  none  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of 
David."  t  According  to  popular  superstition, 
the  honourable  burial  of  Jehoiakim  and  the  suc- 
cession of  his  son  to  the  throne  further  dis- 
credited Jeremiah  and  his  teaching.  Men  read 
happy  omens  in  the  mere  observance  of  ordi- 
nary constitutional  routine.  The  curse  upon 
Jehoiakim  seemed  so  much  spent  breath:  why 
should  not  Jeremiah's  other  predictions  of  ruin 
and  exile  also  prove  a  mere  vox  et  praterea  nihil? 
In  spite  of  a  thousand  disappointments,  men's 
hopes  still  turned  to  Egypt;  and  if  earthly  re- 
sources failed  they  trusted  to  Jehovah  Himself 
to  intervene,  and  deliver  Jerusalem  from  the  ad- 
vancing hosts  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  from  the 
army  of  Sennacherib. 

Ezekiel's  elegy  over  Jehoiachin  suggests  that 
the  young  king  displayed  energy  and  courage 
worthy  of  a  better  fortune: — 

"  He  walked  up  and  down  among  the  lions, 

He  became  a  young  lion  ; 
He  learned  to  catch  the  prey, 

He  devoured  men. 
He  broke  down  §  their  palaces. 

He  wasted  their  cities  ; 
The  land  was  desolate,  and  the  fulness  thereof, 

At  the  noise  of  his  roaring."  |1 

*The  Chronicler's  account  of  Jehoiakim's  end  (2  Chron. 
xxviii.  6-8)  is  due  to  a  misunderstanding  of  the  older 
records.  According  to  Chronicles  Jehoiachin  was  only 
eight,  but  all  our  data  indicate  that  Kings  is  right. 

t  In  LXX.  of  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  8,  Jehoiakim,  hke  Manasseh 
and  Amon,  was  "buned  in  the  garden  of  Uzza":  B, 
Ganozae  ;  A,  Ganozan.  Cheyne  is  inclined  to  accept  this 
statement,  which  he  regards  as  derived  from  tradition. 

t  xxxvi.  ^o. 

§So  A.  B.  Davidson  in  Cambridge  Bible,  etc.,  by  a 
slight  conjectural  emendation ;  there  have  been  many 
other  suggested  corrections  of  the  text.  The  Hebrew 
text  as  it  stands  would  mean  literally  "he  knew  their 
widows  "  (R.  V.  margin)  ;  A.  V.,  R.  V„  by  a  slight  change, 
"he  knew  their  (A.  V.  desolate)  palaces." 

I  Ezek.  xix.  5-7. 


Jeremlan  xxll.  20-30.J 


JEHOIACHIN. 


143 


However  figurative  these  lines  may  be,  the 
hyperbole  must  have  had  some  basis  in  fact. 
Probably  before  the  regular  Babylonian  army 
entered  Judah,  Jehoiachin  distinguished  himself 
by  brilliant  but  useless  successes  against  the  ma- 
rauding bands  of  Chaldeans,  Syrians,  Moabites, 
and  Ammonites,  who  had  been  sent  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  main  body.  He  may  even  have 
carried  his  victorious  arms  into  the  territory  of 
Moab  or  Amnion.  But  his  career  was  speedily 
cut  short:  "The  servants  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
king  of  Babylon  came  up  to  Jerusalem  and  be- 
sieged the  city."  Pharaoh  Necho  made  no  sign, 
and  Jehoiachin  was  forced  to  retire  before  the 
regular  forces  of  Babylon,  and  soon  found  him- 
self shut  up  in  Jerusalem.  Still  for  a  time  he 
held  out,  but  when  it  was  known  in  the  be- 
leaguered city  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  present 
in  person  in  the  camp  of  the  besiegers,  the  Jew- 
ish captains  lost  heart.  Perhaps  too  they  hoped 
for  better  treatment,  if  they  appealed  to  the  con- 
queror's vanity  by  offering  him  an  immediate 
submission  which  they  had  refused  to  his  lieu- 
tenants. The  gates  were  thrown  open;  Jehoi- 
achin and  the  Queen  Mother,  Nehushta,  with  his 
ministers  and  princes  and  the  officers  of  his 
household,  passed  out  in  suppliant  procession, 
and  placed  themselves  and  their  city  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  conqueror.  In  pursuance  of  the 
policy  which  Nebuchadnezzar  had  inherited  from 
the  Assyrians,  the  king  and  his  court  and  eight 
thousand  picked  men  were  carried  away  captive 
to  Babylon.*  For  thirty-seven  years  Jehoiachin 
languished  in  a  Chaldean  prison,  till  at  last  his 
sufferings  were  mitigated  by  an  act  of  grace, 
which  signalised  the  accession  of  a  new  king  of 
Babylon.  Nebuchadnezzar's  successor  Evil  Me- 
rodach,  "  in  the  year  when  he  began  to  reign, 
lifted  up  the  head  of  Jehoiachin  king  of  Judah 
out  of  prison,  and  spake  kindly  to  him,  and  set 
his  throne  above  the  throne  of  the  kings  that 
were  with  him  in  Babylon.  And  Jehoiachin 
changed  his  prison  garments,  and  ate  at  the  royal 
table  continually  all  the  days  of  his  life,  and  had 
a  regular  allowance  given  him  by  the  king,  a 
daily  portion,  all  the  days  of  his  life."f  At  the 
age  of  fifty-five,  the  last  survivor  of  the  reigning 
princes  of  the  house  of  David  emerges  from  his 
dungeon,  broken  in  mind  and  body  by  his  long 
captivity,  to  be  a  grateful  dependent  upon  the 
charity  of  Evil  Merodach,  just  as  the  survivor 
of  the  house  of  Saul  had  sat  at  David's  table. 
The  young  lion  that  devoured  the  prey  and 
caught  men  and  wasted  cities  was  thankful  to  be 
allowed  to  creep  out  of  his  cage  and  die  in  com- 
fort— "  a  despised  broken  vessel." 

We  feel  a  shock  of  surprise  and  repulsion  as 
we  turn  from  this  pathetic  story  to  Jeremiah's 
fierce  invectives  against  the  unhappy  king.  But 
we  wrong  the  prophet  and  misunderstand  his 
utterance  if  we  forget  that  it  was  delivered  dur- 
ing that  brief  frenzy  in  which  the  young  king 
and  his  advisers  threw  away  the  last  chance  of 
safety  for  Judah.  Jehoiachin  might  have  re- 
pudiated his  father's  rebellion  against  Babylon; 
Jehoiakim's  death  had  removed  the  chief  of- 
fender, no  personal  blame  attached  to  his  suc- 
cessor, and  a  prompt  submission  might  have  ap- 
peased Nebuchadnezzar's  wrath  against  Judah 
and  obtained  his  favour  for  the  new  king.  If 
a  hot-headed  young  rajah  of  some  protected  In- 
dian state  revolted  against  the  English  suzerainty 

*  2  Kings  xxiv.  8-17. 

+  «  Kings  XXV.  27-30  ;  Jer.  lii.  31-34. 


and  exposed  his  country  to  the  misery  of  a  hope- 
less war,  we  should  sympathise  with  any  of  his 
counsellors  who  condemned  such  wilful  folly; 
we  have  no  right  to  find  fault  with  Jeremiah  for 
his  severe  censure  of  the  reckless  vanity  which 
precipitated  his  country's  fate. 

Jeremiah's  deep  and  absorbing  interest  in 
Judah  and  Jerusalem  is  indicated  by  the  form  of 
this  utterance;  it  is  addressed  to  the  "  Daughter 
of  Zion  "  *: — 

"  Go  up  to  Lebanon,  and  lament, 
And  lift  up  thy  voice  in  Bashan, 
And  lament  from  Abarim.t 
For  thy  lovers  are  all  destroyed  !  " 

Her  "  lovers,"  her  heathen  allies,  whether  gods 
or  men,  are  impotent,  and  Judah  is  as  forlorn 
and  helpless  as  a  lonely  and  unfriended  woman; 
let  her  bewail  her  fate  upon  the  mountains  of 
Israel,  like  Jephthah's  daughter  in  ancient  days. 

"  I  spake  unto  thee  in  thy  prosperity  ; 
Thou  saidst,  I  will  not  hearken. 
This  hath  been  thy  way  from  thy  youth, 
That  thou  hast  not  obeyed  My  voice. 
The  tempest  shall  be  the  shepherd  to  all  thy  shep- 
herds." 

Kings  and  nobles,  priests  and  prophets,  shall 
be  carried  off  by  the  Chaldean  invaders,  as  trees 
and  houses  are  swept  away  by  a  hurricane. 
These  shepherds  who  had  spoiled  and  betrayed 
their  flock  would  themselves  be  as  silly  sheep 
in  the  hands  of  robbers. 

"  Thy  lovers  shall  go  into  captivity. 
Then,  verily,  shalt  thou  be  ashamed  and  confounded 
Because  of  all  thy  wickedness. 
O  thou  that  dwellest  in  Lebanon  ! 
O  thou  that  hast  made  thy  nest  in  the  cedar  ! " 

The  former  mention  of  Lebanon  reminded  Jere- 
miah of  Jehoiakim's  halls  of  cedar.  With  grim 
irony  he  links  together  the  royal  magnificence 
of  the  palace  and  the  wild  abandonment  of  the 
people's  lamentation. 

"  How  wilt  thou  groan  J  when  pangs  come  upon  thee, 
Anguish  as  of  a  woman  in  travail !  " 

The  nation  is  involved  in  the  punishment  in- 
flicted upon  her  rulers.  In  such  passages  the 
prophets  largely  identify  the  nation  with  the 
governing  classes — not  without  justification.  No 
government,  whatever  the  constitution  may  be, 
can  ignore  a  strong  popular  demand  for  right- 
eous policy,  at  home  and  abroad.  A  special  re- 
sponsibility of  course  rests  on  those  who  actually 
wield  the  authority  of  the  state,  but  the  policy 
of  rulers  seldom  succeeds  in  effecting  much 
either  for  good  or  evil  without  some  sanction 
of  public  feeling.  Our  revolution  which  re- 
placed the  Puritan  Protectorate  by  the  restored 
Monarchy  was  rendered  possible  by  the  change 
of  popular  sentiment.  Yet  even  under  the 
purest  democracy  men  imagine  that  they  divest 
themselves  of  civic  responsibility  by  neglecting 
their  civic  duties;  they  stand  aloof,  and  blame 
officials  and  professional  politicians  for  the  in- 
justice and  crime  wrought  by  the  state.  Na- 
tional guilt  seems  happily  disposed  of  when  laid 
on  the  shoulders  of  that  convenient  abstraction 
"the  government";  but  neither  the  prophets 
nor  the  Providence  which  they  interpret  recog- 
nise this  convenient  theory  of  vicarious  atone- 

*The  Hebrew  verbs  are  in  2  s.  fem.;  the  person  ad- 
dressed is  not  named,  but  from  analogy  she  can  only  be 
the  "Daughter  of  Zion,"  i.  e.,  Jerusalem  personified. 

+  Identified  with  the  mountains  of  Moab. 

iR.  V.  margin,  with  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  Syr. 


144 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


ment:  the  king  sins,  but  the  prophet's  condemna- 
tion is  uttered  against  and  executed  upon  the 
nation. 

Nevertheless  a  special  responsibility  rests  upon 
the  ruler,  and  now  Jeremiah  turns  from  the  na- 
tion to  its  king. 

"  As  I  live — Jehovah  hath  spoken  it — 
Though  Coniah  ben  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  were  a 
signet  ring  upon  My  right  hand — — " 

By  a  forcible  Hebrew  idiom  Jehovah,  as  it  were, 
turns  and  confronts  the  king  and  specially  ad- 
dresses him: — 

"  Yet  I  would  pluck  thee  thence." 

A  signet  ring  was  valuable  in  itself,  and,  as  far 
as  an  inanimate  object  could  be,  was  an  "  altar 
ego"  of  the  sovereign;  it  scarcely  ever  left  his 
finger,  and  when  it  did,  it  carried  with  it  the 
authority  of  its  owner.  A  signet  ring  could  not 
be  lost  or  even  cast  away  without  some  reflec- 
tion upon  the  majesty  of  the  king.  Jehoiachin's 
character  was  by  no  means  worthless;  he  had 
courage,  energy,  and  patriotism.  The  heir  of 
David  and  Solomon,  the  patron  and  champion 
of  the  Temple,  dwelt,  as  it  were,  under  the  very 
shadow  of  the  Almighty.  Men  generally  be- 
lieved that  Jehovah's  honour  was  engaged  to 
defend  Jerusalem  and  the  house  of  DaviH.  He 
Himself  would  be  discredited  by  the  fall  of  the 
elect  dynasty  and  the  captivity  of  the  chosen 
people.  Yet  everything  must  be  sacrificed — the 
career  of  a  gallant  young  prince,  the  ancient  as- 
sociation of  the  sacred  Name  with  David  and 
Zion,  even  the  superstitious  awe  with  which  the 
heathen  regarded  the  God  of  the  Exodus  and 
of  the  deliverance  from  Sennacherib.  Nothing 
will  be  allowed  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the  Di- 
vine judgment.  And  yet  we  still  sometimes 
dream  that  the  working  out  of  the  Divine  right- 
eousness will  be  postponed  in  the  interests  of 
ecclesiastical  trjiditions  and  in  deference  to  the 
criticisms  of  ungodly  men! 

"  And  I  will  give  thee  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  thy 

life, 
Into  the  hand  of  them  of  whom  thou  art  afraid. 
Into  the  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon  and 

the  Chaldeans. 
And  I  will  hurl  thee  and  the  mother  that  bare  thee  into 

another  land,  where  ye  were  not  born  : 
There  shall  ye  die. 
And  unto  the  land  whereunto  their  soul    longeth  to 

return, 
Thither  they  shall  not  return." 

Again  the  sudden  change  in  the  person  ad- 
dressed emphasises  the  scope  of  the  Divine 
proclamation;  the  doom  of  the  royal  house  is  not 
only  announced  to  them,  but  also  to  the  world 
at  large.  The  mention  of  the  Queen  Mother, 
Nehushta,  reveals  what  we  should  in  any  case 
have  conjectured,  that  the  policy  of  the  young 
prince  was  largely  determined  by  his  mother. 
Her  importance  is  also  indicated  by  xiii.  i8, 
usually  suposed  to  be  addressed  to  Jehoiachin 
and  Nehushta: — 

"  Say  unto  the  king  and  the  queen  mother, 
Leave  your  thrones  and  sit  in  the  dust, 
For  your  glorious  diadems  are  fallen." 

The  Queen  Mother  is  a  characteristic  figure  of 
-polygamous  Eastern  dynasties,  but  we  may  be 
helped  to  understand  what  Nehushta  was  to  Je- 
hoiachin if  we  remember  the  influence  of  El- 
eanor of  Poitou  over  Richard  I.  and  John,  and 
the  determined  struggle  which  Margaret  of 
Anjou  made  on  behalf  of  her  ill-starred  son. 


The  next  verse  of  our  prophecy  seems  to  be 
a  protest  against  the  severe  sentence  pronounced 
in  the  preceding  clauses: — 

"  Is  then  this  man  Coniah  a  despised  vessel,  only  fit  to  be 
broken  ? 
Is  he  a  tool,  that  no  one  wants  ?  " 

Thus  Jeremiah  imagines  the  citizens  and  war- 
riors of  Jerusalem  crying  out  against  him,  for 
his  sentence  of  doom  against  their  darling  prince 
and  captain.  The  prophetic  utterance  seemed 
to  them  monstrous  and  incredible,  only  worthy 
to  be  met  with  impatient  scorn  We  may  find 
a  mediaeval  analogy  to  the  situation  at  Jerusale'm 
in  the  relations  of  Clement  IV.  to  Conradin,  the 
last  heir  of  the  house  of  Hohenstaufen.  When 
this  youth  of  sixteen  was  in  the  full  career  of 
victory,  the  Pope  predicted  that  his  army  would 
be  scattered  like  smoke,  and  pointed  out  the 
prince  and  his  allies  as  victims  for  the  sacrifice. 
When  Conradin  was  executed  after  his  defeat  at 
Tagliacozzo,  Christendom  was  filled  with  abhor- 
rence at  the  suspicion  that  Clement  had  coun- 
tenanced the  doing  to  death  of  the  hereditary 
enemy  of  the  Papal  See.  Jehoiachin's  friends 
felt  towards  Jeremiah  somewhat  as  these  thir- 
teenth-century Ghibellines  towards  Clement. 

Moreover  the  charge  against  Clement  was 
probably  unfounded;  Milman  *  says  of  him, 
"  He  was  doubtless  moved  with  inner  remorse 
at  the  cruelties  of  '  his  chkmpion  '  Charles  of 
Anjou."  Jeremiah  too  would  lament  the  doom 
he  was  constrained  to  utter.  Nevertheless  he 
could  not  permit  Judah  to  be  deluded  to  its 
ruin  by  empty  dreams  of  glory: — 

"  O  land,  land,  land. 
Hear  the  word  of  Jehovah." 

Isaiah  had  called  all  Nature,  heaven  and  earth 
to  bear  witness  against  Israel,  but  now  Jeremiah 
is  appealing  with  urgent  importunity  to  Judah. 
"  O  Chosen  Land  of  Jehovah,  so  richly  blessed 
by  His  favour,  so  sternly  chastised  by  His  dis- 
cipline, Land  of  prophetic  Revelation,  now  at 
last,  after  so  many  warnings,  believe  the  word 
of  thy  God  and  submit  to  His  judgment.  Has- 
ten not  thy  unhappy  fate  by  shallow  confidence 
in  the  genius  and  daring  of  Jehoiachin:  he  is  no 
true  Messiah." 

"  For  saith  Jehovah, 
Write  this  man  childless, 

A  man  whose  life  shall  not  know  prosperity  : 
For  none  of  his  seed  shall  prosper  ; 
None  shall  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David, 
Nor  rule  any  more  over  Judah." 

Thus,  by  Divine  decree,  the  descendants  of  Je- 
hoiakim were  disinherited;  Jehoiachin  was  to  be 
recorded  in  the  genealogies  of  Israel  as  having 
no  heir.  He  might  have  ofiFspring,t  but  the 
Messiah,  the  Son  of  David,  would  not  come  of 
his  line. 

Two  points  suggest  themselves  in  connection 
with  this  utterance  of  Jeremiah;  first  as  to  the 
circumstances  under  which  it  was  uttered,  then 
as  to  its  application  to  Jehoiachin. 

A  moment's  reflection  will  show  that  this 
prophecy  implied  great  courage  and  presence  of 
mind  on  the  part  of  Jeremiah — his  enemies  might 
even  have  spoken  of  his  barefaced  audacity.  He 
had  predicted  that  Jehoiakim's  corpse  should  be 

*  Milman's  "  Latin  Christianity,"  vi.  302. 

ti  Chron.  iii.  17  mentions  the  "sons"  of  Jeconiah,  and 
in  Matt.  i.  12  Shealtiel  is  called  his  "  son,"  but  in  Luke  iii. 
27  Shealtiel  is  called  the  son  of  Neri. 


Jeremiah  xxiii.,  xxiv.]    BAD    SHEPHERDS    AND    FALSE    PROPHETS, 


145 


•cast  forth  without  any  rites  of  honourable 
sepulture;  and  no  son  of  his  should  sit  upon 
the  throne.  Jehoiakim  had  been  buried  like 
other  kings,  he  slept  with  his  fathers,  and  Je- 
hoiachin  his  son  reigned  in  his  stead.  The 
prophet  should  have  felt  himself  utterly  discred- 
ited; and  yet  here  was  Jeremiah  coming  forward 
unabashed  with  new  prophecies  against  the  king 
whose  very  existence  was  a  glaring  disproof  of 
his  prophetic  inspiration.  Thus  the  friends  of 
Jehoiachin.  They  would  affect  towards  Jere- 
miah's message  the  same  indifference  which  the 
present  generation  feels  for  the  expositors  of 
Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse,  who  confidently  an- 
nounce the  end  of  the  world  for  1866,  and  in 
1867  fix  a  new  date  with  cheerful  and  undimin- 
ished assurance.  But  these  students  of  sacred 
records  can  always  save  the  authority  of  Scrip- 
ture by  acknowledging  the  fallibility  of  their 
calculations.  When  their  predictions  fail,  they 
confess  that  they  have  done  their  sum  wrong 
and  start  it  afresh.  But  Jeremiah's  utterances 
were  not  published  as  human  deductions  from 
inspired  data;  he  himself  claimed  to  be  inspired. 
He  did  not  ask  his  hearers  to  verify  and  ac- 
knowledge the  accuracy  of  his  arithmetic  or  his 
logic,  but  to  submit  to  the  Divine  message  from 
his  lips.  And  yet  it  is  clear  that  he  did  not 
stake  the  authority  of  Jehovah  or  even  his  own 
prophetic  status  upon  the  accurate  and  detailed 
fulfilment  of  his  predictions.  Nor  does  he  sug- 
gest that,  in  announcing  a  doom  which  was  not 
literally  accomplished,  he  had  misunderstood  or 
misinterpreted  his  message.  The  details  which 
both  Jeremiah  and  those  who  edited  and  trans- 
mitted his  words  knew  to  be  unfulfilled  were  al- 
lowed to  remain  in  the  record  of  Divine  Reve- 
lation— not,  surely,  to  illustrate  the  fallibility  of 
prophets,  but  to  show  that  an  accurate  forecast 
of  details  is  not  of  the  essence  of  prophecy;  such 
details  belong  to  its  form  and  not  to  its  sub- 
stance. Ancient  Hebrew  prophecy  clothed  its 
ideas  in  concrete  images;  its  messages  of  doom 
■were  made  definite  and  intelligible  in  a  glowing 
series  of  definite  pictures.  The  prophets  were 
realists  and  not  impressionists.  But  they  were 
also  spiritual  men,  concerned  with  the  great  is- 
sues of  history  and  religion.  Their  message  had 
to  do  with  these:  they  were  little  interested  in 
minor  matters;  and  they  used  detailed  imagery 
as  a  mere  mstrument  of  exposition.  Popular 
scepticism  exulted  when  subsequent  facts  did 
not  exactly  correspond  to  Jeremiah's  images,  but 
the  prophet  himself  was  unconscious  of  either 
failure  or  mistake.  Jehoiakim  might  be  magnifi- 
cently buried,  but  his  name  was  branded  with 
•eternal  dishonour;  Jehoiachin  might  reign  for  a 
hundred  days,  but  the  doom  of  Judah  was  not 
averted,  and  the  house  of  David  ceased  for  ever 
to  rule  in  Jerusalem. 

Our  second  point  is  the  application  of  this 
prophecy  to  Jehoiachin.  How  far  did  the  king 
deserve  his  sentence?  Jeremiah  indeed  does  not 
explicitly  blame  Jehoiachin,  does  not  specify  his 
sins  as  he  did  those  of  his  royal  sire.  The  esti- 
mate recorded  in  the  Book  of  Kings  doubtless 
expresses  the  judgment  of  Jeremiah,  but  it  may 
be  directed  not  so  much  against  the  young  king 
as  against  his  ministers.  Yet  the  king  cannot 
have  been  entirely  innocent  of  the  guilt  of  his 
policy  and  government.  In  chap,  xxiv.,  how- 
ever, Jeremiah  speaks  of  the  captives  at  Babylon, 
those  carried  away  with  Jehoiachin,  as  "  good 
figs";  but  we  scarcely  suppose  he  meant  to  in- 
10-Vol.  IV. 


elude  the  king  himself  in  this  favourable  esti- 
mate, otherwise  we  should  discern  some  note  of 
sympathy  in  the  personal  sentence  upon  him. 
We  are  left,  therefore,  to  conclude  that  Jere- 
rniah's  judgment  was  unfavourable;  although,  in 
view  of  the  prince's  youth  and  limited  oppor- 
tunities, his  guilt  must  have  been  slight,  com- 
pared to  that  of  his  father. 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  we  have  the  manifest 
sympathy  and  even  admiration  of  Ezekiel.  The 
two  estimates  stand  side  by  side  in  the  sacred 
record  to  remind  us  that  God  neither  tolerates 
man's  sins  because  there  is  a  better  side  to  his 
nature,  nor  yet  ignores  his  virtues  on  account  of 
his  vices.  For  ourselves  we  may  be  content  to 
leave  the  last  word  on  this  matter  with  Jeremiah. 
When  he  declares  God's  sentence  on  Jehoiachin, 
he  does  not  suggest  that  it  was  undeserved,  but 
he  refrains  from  any  explicit  reproach.  Proba- 
bly if  he  had  known  how  entirely  his  prediction 
would  be  fulfilled,  if  he  had  foreseen  the  seven- 
and-thirty  weary  years  which  the  young  lion  was 
to  spend  in  his  Babylonian  cage,  Jeremiah  would 
have  spoken  more  tenderly  and  pitifully  even  of 
the  son  of  Jehoiakim. 


CHAPTER  Vni. 

BAD  SHEPHERDS  AND  FALSE 
PROPHETS. 

Jeremiah  xxiii.,  xxiv. 

"  Woe  unto  the  shepherds  that  destroy  and  scatter  the 
sheep  of  My  pasture  !    — Jer.  x.xiii.  i. 

"Of  what  avail  is  straw  instead  of  grain?  .  .  .  Is  not 
My  word  like  fire,  .  .  .  like  a  hammer  that  shattereth 
the  rocks?"— jER.  xxiii.  28,  29. 

The  captivity  of  Jehoiachin  and  the  deporta- 
tion of  the  flower  of  the  people  marked  the 
opening  of  the  last  scene  in  the  tragedy  of  Judah 
and  of  a  new  period  in  the  ministry  of  Jeremiah. 
These  events,  together  with  the  accession  of 
Zedekiah  as  Nebuchadnezzar's  nominee,  very 
largely  altered  the  state  of  affairs  in  Jerusalem. 
And  yet  the  two  main  features  of  the  situation 
were  unchanged — the  people  and  the  govern- 
ment persistently  disregarded  Jeremiah's  ex- 
hortations. "  Neither  Zedekiah,  nor  his  serv- 
ants, nor  the  people  of  the  land,  did  hearken 
unto  the  words  of  Jehovah  which  He  spake  by 
the  prophet  Jeremiah."  *  They  would  not  obey 
the  will  of  Jehovah  as  to  their  life  and  worship, 
and  they  would  not  submit  to  Nebuchadnezzar. 
"  Zedekiah  .  .  .  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Je- 
hovah, according  to  all  that  Jehoiakim  had 
done;  .  .  .  and  Zedekiah  rebelled  against  the 
king  of  Babylon."  f 

It  is  remarkable  that  though  Jeremiah  con- 
sistently urged  submission  to  Babylon,  the  vari- 
ous arrangements  made  by  Nebuchadnezzar  did 
very  little  to  improve  the  prophet's  position  or 
increase  his  influence.  The  Chaldean  king  may 
have  seemed  ungrateful  only  because  he  was  ig- 
norant of  the  services  rendered  to  him — Jeremiah 
would  not  enter  into  direct  and  personal  co- 
operation with  the  enemy  of  his  country,  even 
with  him  whom  Jehovah  had  appointed  to  be  the 
scourge  of  His  disobedient  people — but  the 
Chaldean  policy  served  Nebuchadnezzar  as  little 
as  it  profited  Jeremiah.     Jehoiakim,  in  spite  of 


*  zxxvii.  t. 


+  2  Kings  xxiv.  18-20. 


- 146 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


his  forced  submission,  remained  the  able  and 
determined  foe  of  his  suzerain,  and  Zedekiah,  to 
the  best  of  his  very  limited  ability,  followed  his 
predecessor's  example. 

Zedekiah  was  uncle  *  of  Jehoiachin,  half-brother 
of  Jelioiakim,  and  own  brother  to  Jehoahaz. 
Possibly  the  two  brothers  owed  their  bias  against 
Jeremiah  and  his  teaching  to  their  mother, 
Josiah's  wife  Hamutal,  the  daughter  of  another 
Jeremiah,  the  Libnite.  Ezekiel  thus  describes 
the  appointment  of  the  new  king:  "The  king  of 
Babylon  .  .  .  took  one  of  the  seed  royal,  and 
made  a  covenant  with  him;  he  also  put  him  un- 
der an  oath,  and  took  away  the  mighty  of  the 
land:  that  the  kingdom  might  be  base,  that  it 
might  not  lift  itself  up.  but  that  by  keeping  of 
his  covenant  it  might  stand."  f  Apparently 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  careful  to  choose  a  feeble 
prince  for  his  "  base  kingdom  ";  all  that  we  read 
of  Zedekiah  suggests  that  he  was  weak  and  in- 
capable. Henceforth  the  sovereign  counted  for 
little  in  the  internal  struggles  of  the  tottering 
state.  Josiah  had  firmly  maintained  the  religious 
policy  of  Jeremiah,  and  Jehoiakim,  as  firmly, 
the  opposite  policy;  but  Zedekiah  had  neither 
the  strength  nor  the  firmness  to  enforce  a  con- 
sistent policy  and  to  make  one  party  permanently 
dominant.  Jeremiah  and  his  enemies  were  left 
to  fight  it  out  amongst  themselves,  so  that  now 
their  antagonism  grew  more  bitter  and  pro- 
nounced than  during  any  other  reign. 

But  whatever  advantage  the  prophet  might  de- 
rive from  the  weakness  of  the  sovereign  was 
more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  recent  de- 
portation. In  selecting  the  captives  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  soug'ht  merely  to  weaken  Judali  by 
carrying  away  every  one  who  would  have  been 
an  element  of  strength  to  the  "  base  kingdom." 
Perhaps  he  rightly  believed  that  neither  the 
prudence  of  the  wise  nor  the  honour  of  the  vir- 
tuous would  overcome  their  patriotic  hatred  of 
subjection;  weakness  alone  would  guarantee  the 
obedience  of  Judah.  He  forgot  that  even  weak- 
ness is  apt  to  be  foolhardy — when  there  is  no 
immediate  prospect  of  penalty. 

One  result  of  his  policy  was  that  the  enemies 
and  friends  of  Jeremiah  were  carried  away  in- 
discriminately; there  was  no  attempt  to  leave 
behind  those  who  might  have  counselled  sub- 
mission to  Babylon  as  the  acceptance  of  a  Di- 
vine judgment,  and  thus  have  helped  to  keep 
Judah  loyal  to  its  foreign  master.  On  the  con- 
trary Jeremiah's  disciples  were  chiefly  thoughtful 
and  honourable  men,  and  Nebuchadnezzar's  pol- 
icy in  taking  away  "  the  mighty  of  the  land  " 
bereft  the  prophet  of  many  friends  and  sup- 
porters, amongst  them  his  disciple  Ezekiel  and 
doubtless  a  large  class  of  whom  Daniel  and  his 
three  friends  might  be  taken  as  types.  When 
Jeremiah  characterises  the  captives  as  "  good 
figs,"  and  those  left  behind  as  "  bad  figs,"t  and 
the  judgment  is  confirmed  and  amplified  by 
Ezekiel, §  we  may  be  sure  that  most  of  the 
prophet's  adherents  were  in  exile. 

We  have  already  had  occasion  to  compare  the 
changes    in   the    religious    policy    of   the   Jewish 
government  to  the  alternations  of  Protestant  and' 
Romanist  sovereigns  among  the  Tudors;  but  no 

*2  Chron.  xxxvi.  10  makes  Zedekiah  tlie  brother  of 
Jehoiachin,  possibly  using  the  word  in  the  general  sense 
of  "relation."  Zedekiah's  age  shows  that  he  cannot  have 
been  the  son  of  Jehoiakim. 

tEzek.  xvii.  13,  14. 

t  xxiv. 

§  vii.-xi. 


Tudor  was  as  feeble  as  Zedekiah.  He  may 
rather  be  compared  to  Charles  IX.  of  France, 
helpless  between  the  Huguenots  and  the 
League.  Only  the  Jewish  factions  were  less 
numerous,  less  evenly  balanced;  and  by  the 
speedy  advance  of  Nebuchadnezzar  civil  dis- 
sensions were  merged  in  national  ruin. 

The  opening  years  of  the  new  reign  passed 
in  nominal  allegiance  to  Babylon.  Jeremiah's 
influence  would  be  used  to  induce  the  vassal 
king  to  observe  the  covenant  he  had  entered 
into  and  to  be  faithful  to  his  oath  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. On  the  other  hand  a  crowd  of  "  patri- 
otic "  prophets  urged  Zedekiah  to  set  up  once 
more  the  standard  of  national  independence,  to 
"  come  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the 
mighty."  Let  us  then  briefly  consider  Jere- 
miah's polemic  against  the  princes,  prophets, 
and  priests  of  his  people.  While  Ezekiel  in 
a  celebrated  chapter  *  denounces  the  idolatry 
of  the  princes,  priests,  and  women  of  Judah, 
their  worship  of  creeping  things  and  abomina- 
ble beasts,  their  weeping  for  Tamniuz,  their 
adoration  of  the  sun,  Jeremiah  is  chiefly  con- 
cerned with  the  perverse  policy  of  the  gov- 
ernment and  the  support  it  receives  from  priests 
and  prophets,  who  profess  to  speak  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  Jeremiah  does  not  utter 
against  Zedekiah  any  formal  judgment  like  those 
on  his  three  predecessors.  Perhaps  the  prophet 
did  not  regard  this  impotent  sovereign  as  the 
responsible  representative  of  the  state,  and  when 
the  long-expected  catastrophe  at  last  befell  the 
doomed  people,  neither  Zedekiah  nor  his  do- 
ings distracted  men's  attention  from  their  own 
personal  sufferings  and  patriotic  regrets.  At  the 
point  where  a  paragraph  on  Zedekiah  would  nat- 
urally have  followed  that  on  Jehoiachin,  we  have 
by  way  of  summary  and  conclusion  to  the  previ- 
ous sections  a  brief  denunciation  of  the  shep- 
herds'of  Israel. 

"  Woe  unto  the  shepherds  that  destroy  and 
scatter  the  sheep  of  My  pasture!  .  .  .  Ye  have 
scattered  My  flock,  and  driven  them  away,  and 
have  not  cared  for  them;  behold,  I  will  visit  upon 
you  the  evil  of  your  doings." 

These  "  shepherds "  are  primarily  the  kings, 
Jehoahaz,  Jehoiakim,  and  Jehoiachin,  who  have 
been  condemned  by  name  in  the  previous  chap- 
ter, together  with  the  unhappy  Zedekiah,  who 
is  too  insignificant  to  be  mentioned.  But  the 
term  shepherds  will  also  include  the  ruling  and 
influential  classes  of  which  the  king  was  the 
leading  representative. 

The  image  is  a  familiar  one  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  is  found  in  the  oldest  literature  of 
Israel,!  but  the  denunciation  of  the  rulers  of 
Judah  as  unfaithful  shepherds  is  characteristic 
of  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  one  of  the  prophecies 
appended  to  the  Book  of  Zechariah.t  Ezekiel 
xxxiv.  expands  this  figure  and  enforces  its  les- 
sons:— 


'  Woe  unto  the  shepherds  of  Israel  that  do  feed  them- 
selves ! 

Should  not  the  shepherds  feed  the  sheep  ?  Ye  eat  the 
fat,  and  ye  clothe  you  with  the  wool. 

Ye  kill  the  fatlings  :  but  ye  feed  not  the  sheep. 

The  diseased  have  ye  not  strengthened, 

Neither  have  ye  healed  the  sick, 

Neither  have  ye  bound  i:p  the  bruised. 

Neither  have  ye  brought  back  again  that  which  was 
driven  away, 

*  viii. 

t  Gen.  xlix.  24,  J.  from  older  source.    Micah  v  5 

jix.-xi.,  xiii.  7-9. 


Jeremiah  xxiii.,  xxiv.]    BAD    SHEPHERDS    AND    FALSE    PROPHETS. 


147 


Neither  have  ye  sought  for  that  which  was  lost, 
But  your  rule  over  them  has  been  harsh  and  violent, 
And  for  want  of  a  shepherd,  they  were  scattered, 
And  became  food  for  every  beast  of  the  field."* 

So  in  Zechariah  ix.,  etc.,  Jehovah's  anger  is 
kindled  against  the  shepherds,  because  they  do 
not  pity  His  flock. f  Elsewhere  J  Jeremiah 
speaks  of  the  kings  of  all  nations  as  shepherds, 
and  pronounces  against  them  also  a  like  doom. 
All  these  passages  illustrate  the  concern  of  the 
prophets  for  good  government.  They  were 
neither  Pharisees  nor  formalists;  their  religious 
ideals  were  broad  and  wholesome.  Doubtless 
the  elect  remnant  will  endure  through  all  con- 
ditions of  society;  but  the  Kingdom  of  God  was 
not  meant  to  be  a  pure  Church  in  a  rotten  state. 
This  present  evil  world  is  no  manure  heap  to 
fatten  the  growth  of  holiness:  it  is  rather  a  mass 
for  the  saints  to  leaven. 

Both  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  turn  from  the  un- 
faithful shepherds  whose  "  hungry  sheep  look  up 
and  are  not  fed  "  to  the  true  King  of  Israel,  the 
"  Shepherd  of  Israel  that  led  Joseph  like  a  flock, 
and  dwelt  between  the  Cherubim."  In  the  days 
of  the  Restoration  He  will  raise  up  faithful  shep- 
herds, and  over  them  a  righteous  Branch,  the 
real  Jehovah  Zidqenu,  instead  of  the  sapless 
twig  who  disgraced  the  name  "  Zedekiah." 
Similarly  Ezekiel  promises  that  God  will  set  up 
one  shepherd  over  His  people,  "  even  My  serv- 
ant David."  The  pastoral  care  of  Jehovah  for 
His  people  is  most  tenderly  and  beautifully  set 
forth  in  the  twenty-third  Psalm.  Our  Lord,  the 
root  and  the  offspring  of  David,  claims  to  be  the 
fulfilment  of  ancient  prophecy  when  He  calls 
Himself  "  the  Good  Shepherd."  The  words  of 
Christ  and  of  the  Psalmist  receive  new  force  and 
fuller  meaning  when  we  contrast  their  pictures 
of  the  true  Shepherd  with  the  portraits  of  the 
Jewish  kings  drawn  by  the  prophets.  Moreover 
the  history  of  this  metaphor  warns  us  against 
ignoring  the  organic  life  of  the  Christian  so- 
ciety, the  Church,  in  our  concern  for  the  spiritual 
life  of  the  individual.  As  Sir  Thomas  More  said, 
in  applying  this  figure  to  Henry  VIII.,  "  Of  the 
multitude  of  sheep  cometh  the  name  of  a  shep- 
herd." §  A  shepherd  implies  not  merely  a  sheep, 
but  a  flock;  His  relation  to  each  member  is  ten- 
der and  personal,  but  He  bestows  blessings  and 
requires  service  in  fellowship  with  the  Family  of 
God. 

By  a  natural  sequence  the  denunciation  of  the 
unfaithful  shepherds  is  followed  by  a  similar  ut- 
terance "  concerning  the  prophets."  It  is  true 
that  the  prophets  are  not  spoken  of  as  shep- 
herds; and  Milton's  use  of  the  figure  in  "  Lyci- 
das  "  suggests  the  New  Testament  rather  than 
the  Old.  \  et  the  prophets  had  a  large  share  in 
guiding  the  destinies  of  Israel  in  politics  as  well 
as  in  religion,  and  having  passed  sentence  on  the 
shepherds — the  kings  and  princes — Jeremiah 
turns  to  the  ecclesiastics,  chiefly,  as  the  heading 
implies,  to  the  prophets.  The  priests  indeed  do 
not  escape,  but  Jeremiah  seems  to  feel  that  they 
are  adequately  dealt  with  in  two  or  three  casual 
references.  We  use  the  term  "  ecclesiastics  "  ad- 
visedly; the  prophets  were  now  a  large  profes- 
sional class,  more  important  and  even  more 
clerical  than  the  priests.  The  prophets  and 
priests  together  were  the  clergy  of  Israel.  They 
claimed  to  be  devoted  servants  of  Jehovah,  and 
for  the  most  part  the  claim  was  made  in  all  sin- 


*  Ezek.  xxxiv.  "s 
t  Zech.  X.  >  X'   w 


txxv.  34-38. 
•8  Froude,  i.  205. 


cerity;  but  they  misunderstood  His  character, 
and  mistook  for  Divine  inspiration  the  sugges- 
tions of  their  own  prejudice  and  self-will. 

Jeremiah's  indictment  against  them  has  vari- 
ous counts.  He  accuses  them  of  speaking  with- 
out authority,  and  also  of  time-serving,  plagiar- 
ism, and  cant. 

First,  then,  as  to  their  unauthorised  utterances: 
Jeremiah  finds  them  guilty  of  an  unholy  license 
in  prophesying,  a  distorted  caricature  of  that 
"  liberty  of  prophesying  "  which  is  the  preroga- 
tive of  God's  accredited  ambassadors. 

"  Hearken    not   unto    the    words   of  the    prophets   that 

prophesy  unto  you. 
They  make  fools  of  you  : 
The  visions   which  they  declare  are   from  their  own 

hearts. 
And  not  from  the  mouth  of  Jehovah. 

Who  hath  stood  in  the  council  of  Jehovah, 
To  perceive  and  hear  His  word? 
Who  hath  marked  His  word  and  heard  it? 
T  sent  not  the  prophets— yet  they  ran  ; 
.     I  spake  not  unto  them — yet  they  prophesied." 

The  evils  which  Jeremiah  describes  are  such  as 
will  always  be  found  in  any  large  professional 
class.  To  use  modern  terms — in  the  Church,  as 
in  every  profession,  there  will  be  men  who  are 
not  qualified  for  the  vocation  which  they  follow. 
They  are  indeed  not  called  to  their  vocation; 
they  "  follow,"  but  do  not  overtake  it.  They  are 
not  sent  of  God,  yet  they  run;  they  have  no  Di- 
vme  message,  yet  they  preach.  They  have  never 
stood  in  the  council  of  Jehovah;  they  might  per- 
haps have  gathered  up  scraps  of  the  King's  pur- 
poses from  His  true  councillors;  but  when  they 
had  opportunity  they  neither  "  marked  nor 
heard";  and  yet  they  discourse  concerning 
heavenly  things  with  much  importance  and  as- 
surance. But  their  inspiration,  at  its  best,  has 
no  deeper  or  richer  source  than  their  own  shal- 
low selves;  their  visions  are  the  mere  product 
of  their  own  imaginations.  Strangers  to  the 
true  fellowship,  their  spirit  is  not  "  a  well  of 
water  springing  up  unto  eternal  life,"  but  a  stag- 
nant pool.  And,  unless  the  judgment  and  mercy 
of  God  intervene,  that  pool  will  in  the  end  be 
fed  from  a  fountain  whose  bitter  waters  are 
earthly,   sensual,   devilish. 

We  are  always  reluctant  to  speak  of  ancient 
prophecy  or  modern  preaching  as  a  "  profes- 
sion." We  may  gladly  dispense  with  the  word, 
if  we  do  not  thereby  ignore  the  truth  which  it 
inaccurately  expresses.  Men  lived  by  prophecy, 
as,  with  Apostolic  sanction,  men  live  by  "  the 
gospel."  They  were  expected,  as  ministers  are 
now,  though  in  a  less  degree,  to  justify  their 
claims  to  an  income  and  an  official  status,  by 
discharging  religious  functions  so  as  to  secure 
the  approval  of  the  people  or  the  authorities. 
Then,  as  now.  the  prophet's  reputation,  influ- 
ence, and  social  standing,  probably  even  his  in- 
come, depended  upon  the  amount  of  visible  suc- 
cess that  he  could  achieve. 

In  view  of  such  facts,  it  is  futile  to  ask  men  of 
the  world  not  to  speak  of  the  clerical  life  as  a 
profession.  They  discern  no  ethical  difiference 
between  a  curate's  dreams  of  a  bishopric  and  the 
aspirations  of  a  junior  barrister  to  the  woolsack. 
Probably  a  refusal  to  recognise  the  element  com- 
mon to  the  ministry  with  law,  medicine,  and 
other  professions,  injures  both  the  Church  and 
its  servants.  One  peculiar  difificulty  and  most 
insidious  temptation  of  the  Christian  ministry 
consists  in  its  mingled  resemblances  to  and  dif- 


148 


^    THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


ferences  from  the  other  professions.  The  min- 
ister has  to  work  under  similar  worldly  condi- 
tions, and  yet  to  control  those  conditions  by  the 
indwelling  power  of  the  Spirit.  He  has  to 
"  run,"  it  may  be  twice  or  even  three  times  a 
week,  whether  he  be  sent  or  no:  how  can  he 
always  preach  only  that  which  God  has  taught 
him?  He  is  consciously  dependent  upon  the 
exercise  of  his  memory,  his  intellect,  his  fancy: 
how  can  he  avoid  speaking  "  the  visions  of  his 
own  heart"?  The  Church  can  never  allow  its 
ministers  to  regard  themselves  as  mere  profes- 
sional teachers  and  lecturers,  and  yet  if  they 
claim  to  be  more,  must  they  not  often  fall  under 
Jeremiah's  condemnation? 

It  is  one  of  those  practical  dilemmas  which 
delight  casuists  and  distress  honest  and  earnest 
servants  of  God.  In  the  early  Christian  centu- 
ries similar  difficulties  peopled  the  Egyptian  and 
Syrian  deserts  with  ascetics,  who  had  given  up 
the  world  as  a  hopeless  riddle.  A  full  discussion 
of  the  problem  would  lead  us  too  far  away  from, 
the  exposition  of  Jeremiah,  and  we  will  only 
venture  to  make  two  suggestions. 

The  necessity,  which  most  ministers  are  under, 
of  "  living  by  the  gospel,"  may  promote  their 
own  spiritual  life  and  add  to  their  usefulness. 
It  corrects  and  reduces  spiritual  pride,  and  helps 
them  to  understand  and  sympathise  with  their 
lay  brethren,  most  of  whom  are  subject  to  a 
similar  trial. 

Secondly,  as  a  minister  feels  the  ceaseless  pres- 
sure of  strong  temptation  to  speak  from  and  live 
for  himself — his  lower,  egotistic  self — he  will  be 
correspondingly  driven  to  a  more  entire  and  per- 
sistent surrender  to  God.  The  infinite  fulness 
and  variety  of  Revelation  is  expressed  by  the 
manifold  gifts  and  experience  of  the  prophets. 
If  only  the  prophet  be  surrendered  to  the  Spirit, 
then  what  is  most  characteristic  of  himself  may 
become  the  most  forcible  expression  of  his  mes- 
sage. His  constant  prayer  will  be  that  he  may 
have  the  child's  heart  and  may  never  resist  the 
Holy  Ghost,  that  no  personal  interest  or  preju- 
dice, no  bias  of  training  or  tradition  or  current 
opinion,  may  dull  his  hearing  when  he  stands 
in  the  council  of  the  Lord,  or  betray  him  into 
uttering  for  Christ's  gospel  the  suggestions  of 
his  own  self-will  or  the  mere  watchwords  of  his 
ecclesiastical  faction. 

But  to  return  to  the  ecclesiastics  who  had  stirred 
Jeremiah's  wrath.  The  professional  prophets 
naturally  adapted  their  words  to  the  itching  ears 
of  their  clients.  They  were  not  only  officious, 
but  also  time-serving.  Had  they  been  true 
prophets,  they  would  have  dealt  faithfully  with 
Judah;  they  would  have  sought  to  convince  the 
people  of  sin,  and  to  lead  them  to  repentance; 
they  would  thus  have  given  them  yet  another 
opportunity  of  salvation. 

"  If  they  had  stood  in  My  council, 
They  would  have  caused  My  people  to  hear  My  words  ; 
They  would  have  turned  them  from  their  evil  way, 
And  from  the  evil  of  their  doings." 

But  now: — 

"  They  walk  in  lies  and  strengthen  the  hands  of  evildoers, 
That  no  one  may  turn  away  from  his  sin. 

They  say  continually  unto  them  that  despise  the  word 

of  Jehovah,* 
Ye  shall  have  peace  ; 
And  unto  every  one  that  walketh  in  the  stubbornness 

of  his  heart  they  say. 
No  evil  shall  come  upon  you." 

*  LXX.     See  R.  V.  margin. 


Unfortunately,  when  prophecy  becomes  profes- 
sional in  the  lowest  sense  of  the  word,  it  is  gov- 
erned by  commercial  principles.  A  sufficiently 
imperious  demand  calls  forth  an  abundant  sup- 
ply. A  sovereign  can  "  tune  the  pulpits  "  ;  and 
a  ruling  race  can  obtain  from  its  clergy  formal 
ecclesiastical  sanction  for  such  "  domestic  insti- 
tutions "  as  slavery.  When  evildoers  grow  nu- 
merous and  powerful,  there  will  always  be 
prophets  to  strengthen  their  hands  and  encour- 
age them  not  to  turn  away  from  their  sin.  But 
to  give  the  lie  to  these  false  prophets  God  sends 
Jeremiahs,  who  are  often  branded  as  heretics  and 
schismatics,  turbulent  fellows  who  turn  the  world 
upside-down. 

The  self-important,  self-seeking  spirit  leads 
further  to  the  sin  of  plagiarism: — 

"Therefore  I  am  against  the  prophets,  is  the  utterance  of 
Jehovah, 
Who  steal  My  word  from  one  another." 

The  sin  of  plagiarism  is  impossible  to  the  true 
prophet,  partly  because  there  are  no  rights  of 
private  property  in  the  word  of  Jehovah.  The 
Old  Testament  writers  make  free  use  of  the 
works  of  their  predecessors.  For  instance, 
Isaiah  ii.  2-4  is  almost  identical  with  Micah  iv. 
1-3;  yet  neither  author  acknowledges  his  indebt- 
edness to  the  other  or  to  any  third  prophet.* 
Uriah  ben  Shemaiah  prophesied  acording  to  all 
the  words  of  Jeremiah,f  who  himself  owes  much 
to  Hosea,  whom  he  never  mentions.  Yet  he  was 
not  conscious  of  stealing  from  his  predecessor, 
'  and  he  would  have  brought  no  such  charge 
against  Isaiah  or  Micah  or  Uriah.  In  the  New 
Testament  2  Peter  and  Jude  have  so  much  in 
common  that  one  must  have  used  the  other 
without  acknowledgment.  Yet  the  Church  has 
not,  on  that  ground,  excluded  either  Epistle 
from  the  Canon.  In  the  goodly  fellowship  of  the 
prophets  and  the  glorious  company  of  the  apos- 
tles no  man  says  that  the  things  which  he  utters 
are  his  own.  But  the  mere  hireling  has  no  part 
in  the  spiritual  communism  wherein  each  may 
possess  all  things  because  he  claims  nothing. 
When  a  prophet  ceases  to  be  the  messenger  of 
God,  and  sinks  into  the  mercenary  purveyor  of 
his  own  clever  sayings  and  brilliant  fancies,  then 
he  is  tempted  to  become  a  clerical  Autolycus,  "  a 
snapper-up  of  unconsidered  trifles."  Modern 
ideas  furnish  a  curious  parallel  to  Jeremiah's  in- 
difiference  to  the  borrowings  of  the  true  prophet, 
and  his  scorn  of  the  literary  pilferings  of  the 
false.  We  hear  only  too  often  of  stolen  sermons, 
but  no  one  complains  of  plagiarism  in  prayers. 
Doubtless  among  these  false  prophets  charges 
of  plagiarism  were  bandied  to  and  fro  with  much 
personal  acrimony.  But  it  is  interesting  to  no- 
tice that  Jeremiah  is  not  denouncing  an  injury 
done  to  himself;  he  does  not  accuse  them  of 
thieving  from  him,  but  from  one  another.  Prob- 
ably assurance  and  lust  of  praise  and  power 
would  have  overcome  any  awe  they  felt  for  Jere- 
miah. He  was  only  free  from  their  depreda- 
tions, because — from  their  point  of  view — his 
words  were  not  worth  stealing.  There  was 
nothing  to  be  gained  by  repeating  his  stern 
denunciations,  and  even  his  promises  were  not 
exactly  suited  to  the  popular  taste. 

*  Possibly,  however,  the  insertion  of  this  passage  in  one 
of  the  books  may  have  been  the  work  of  an  editor,  and 
we  cannot  be  sure  that,  in  Jeremiah's  time,  collections 
entitled  Isaiah  and  Micah  both  included  this  section. 

t  xxvi.  20. 


Jeremiah  xxiii..  xxiv.]    BAD    SHEPHERDS    AND    FALSE    PROPHETS. 


149 


These  prophets  were  prepared  to  cater  for  the 
average  religious  appetite  in  the  most  approved 
fashion— in  other  words,  they  were  masters  of 
cant.  Their  office  had  been  consecrated  by  the 
work  of  true  men  of  God  like  Elijah  and  Isaiah. 
They  themselves  claimed  to  stand  in  the  genuine 
prophetic  succession,  and  to  inherit  the  rever- 
ence felt  for  their  great  predecessors,  quoting 
their  inspired  utterances  and  adopting  their 
weighty  phrases.  As  Jeremiah's  contemporaries 
listened  to  one  of  their  favourite  orators,  they 
were  soothed  by  his  assurances  of  Divine  favour 
and  protection,  and  their  confidence  in  the 
speaker  was  confirmed  by  the  frequent  sound  of 
familiar  formulae  in  his  unctuous  sentences. 
These  had  the  true  ring;  they  were  redolent  of 
sound  doctrine,  of  what  popular  tradition  re- 
garded as  orthodox. 

The  solemn  attestation  NE'UM  YAHWE, 
"  It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah,"  is  continually 
appended  to  prophecies,  almost  as  if  it  were 
the  sign-manual  of  the  Almighty.  Isaiah  and 
other  prophets  frequently  use  the  term  MASSA 
(A.  v.,  R.  v.,  "  burden  ")  as  a  title,  especially 
for  prophecies  concerning  neighbouring  nations. 
The  ancient  records  loved  to  tell  how  Jehovah 
revealed  Himself  to  the  patriarchs  in  dreams. 
Jeremiah's  rivals  included  dreams  in  their  cleri- 
cal apparatus: — 

*'  Behold,  I  am  against  them  that  prophesy  lying  dreams 

— Ne'um  Ya/nue — 
And  tell  them,  and  lead  astray  My  people 
By  their  lies  and  their  rodomontade  ; 
It  was  not  I  who  sent  or  commanded  them, 
Neither  shall  they  profit  this  people  at  all, 

Ne'um  YahweJ^ 

These  prophets  "  thought  to  cause  the  Lord's 
people  to  forget  His  name,  as  their  fathers  for- 
got His  name  for  Baal,  by  their  dreams  which 
they   told   one   another." 

Moreover  they  could  glibly  repeat  the  sacred 
Ijhrases  as  part  of  their  professional  jargon: — 

"  Behold,  I  am  against  the  prophets. 
It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah  QNe'utn  Vahwe), 
That  use  their  tongues 
To  utter  utterances  (Wayyin'amu  Ne'itm.y 

"  To  Utter  utterances  " — the  prophets  uttered 
them,  not  Jehovah.  These  sham  oracles  were 
due  to  no  Diviner  source  than  the  imagination  of 
foolish  hearts.  But  for  Jeremiah's  grim  earnest- 
ness, the  last  clause  would  be  almost  blasphe- 
mous. It  is  virtually  a  caricature  of  the  most 
solemn  formula  of  ancient  Hebrew  religion.  But 
this  was  really  degraded  when  it  was  used  to  ob- 
tain credence  for  the  lies  which  men  prophesied 
out  of  the  deceit  of  their  own  heart.  Jeremiah's 
seeming  irreverence  was  the  most  forcible  way 
of  bringing  this  home  to  his  hearers.  There  are 
profanations  of  the  most  sacred  things  which  can 
scarcely  be  spoken  of  without  an  apparent  breach 
of  the  Third  Commandment.  The  most  awful 
taking  in  vain  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  God  is 
not  heard  among  the  publicans  and  sinners,  but 
in  pulpits  and  on  the  platforms  of  religious  meet- 
ings. 

But  these  prophets  and  their  clients  had  a  spe- 
cial fondness  for  the  phrase  "  The  burden  of 
Jehovah,"  and  their  unctuous  use  of  it  most  espe- 
cially provoked  Jeremiah's  indignation: — 

■'  When  this  people,  priest,  or  prophet  shall  ask  thee. 
What  is  the  burden  of  Jehovah  ? 
Then  say  unto  them,  Ye  are  the  burden.* 

*  So  LXX.  and  modern  editors  :  see  Giesebrecht,  t'n  hco, 
R.  V.  "  What  burden  i" 


But  I  will  cast  you  off,  Ne^ujn  Yahwe. 

If  priest  or  prophet  or  people  shall  say.  The  burden  of 

Jehovah, 
I  will  punish  that  man  and  his  house. 
And  ye  shall  say  to  one  another. 
What  hath  Jehovah  answered  ?  and,  What  hath  Jehovah 

spoken  ? 
And  ye  shall  no  more  make  mention  of  the  burden  of 

Jehovah : 
For  Of  ye  do)  men's  words  shall  become  a  burden  to 

themselves. 

Thus  shall  ye  inquire  of  a  prophet, 

What  hath  Jehovah  answered  thee? 

What  hath  Jehovah  spoken  unto  thee? 

But  if  ye  say.  The  burden  of  Jehovah, 

Thus    saith  Jehovah  :  Because    ye    say  this  -word,  The 

burden  of  Jehovah, 
When  I  have  sent  unto  you  the  command, 
Ye  shall  not  say.  The  burden  of  Jehovah, 
Therefore  I  will  assuredly  take  you  up. 
And  will  cast  away  from  before  Me  both  you  and  the 

city  which  I  gave  to  you  and  to  your  fathers. 
I  will  bring  upon  you  everlasting  reproach 
And  everlasting  shame,  that  shall  not  be  forgotten." 

Jeremiah's  insistence  and  vehemence  speak  for 
themselves.  Their  moral  is  obvious,  though  for 
the  most  part  unheeded.  The  most  solemn  for- 
mulje,  hallowed  by  ancient  and  sacred  associa- 
tions, used  by  inspired  teachers  as  the  vehicle  of 
revealed  truths,  may  be  debased  till  they  become 
the  very  legend  of  Antichrist,  blazoned  on  the 
VexUla  Regis  Infcrni.  They  are  like  a  motto  of 
one  of  Charles'  Paladins  flaunted  by  his  un- 
worthy descendants  to  give  distinction  to  cruelty 
and  vice.  The  Church's  line  of  march  is  strewn 
with  such  dishonoured  relics  of  her  noblest 
champions.  Even  our  Lord's  own  words  have 
not  escaped.  There  is  a  fashion  of  discoursing 
upon  "  the  gospel  "  which  almost  tempts  rever- 
ent Christians  to  wish  they  might  never  hear  that 
word  again.  Neither  is  this  debasing  of  the 
moral  currency  confined  to  religious  phrases; 
almost  every  political  and  social  watchword  has 
been  similarly  abused.  One  of  the  vilest  tyran- 
nies the  world  has  ever  seen — the  Reign  of  Ter- 
ror—claimed to  be  an  incarnation  of  "  Liberty, 
Equalitv,   and   Fraternity." 

Yet  the  Bible,  with  that  marvellous  catholicity 
which  lifts  it  so  high  above  the  level  of  all  other 
religious  literature,  not  only  records  Jeremiah's 
prohibition  to  use  the  term  "  Burden,"  but  also 
tells  us  that  centuries  later  Malachi  could  still 
speak  of  "  the  burden  of  the  word  of  Jehovah." 
A  great  phrase  that  has  been  discredited  by  mis- 
use may  yet  recover  itself;  the  tarnished  and  dis- 
honoured sword  of  faith  may  be  baptised  and 
burnished  anew,  and  flame  in  the  forefront  of 
the  holy  war. 

Jeremiah  does  not  stand  alone  in  his  unfa- 
vourable estimate  of  the  professional  prophets 
of  Judah;  a  similar  depreciation  seems  to  be  im- 
plied by  the  words  of  Amos:  "  I  am  neither  a 
prophet  nor  of  the  sons  of  prophets."  *  One  of 
the  unknown  authors  whose  writings  have  been 
included  in  the  Book  of  Zechariah  takes  up  the 
teaching  of  Amos  and  Jeremiah  and  carries  it 
a  stage  further: — 

"  In  that  day  (it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah  Sabaoth)  I 

will  cut  off  the  names  of  the  idols  from  the  land, 
They  shall  not  be  remembered  any  more ; 
Also  the  prophets  and  the  spirit  of  uncleanness 
Will  I  expel  from  the  land. 
When  any  shall  yet  prophesy, 
His  father  and  mother  that  begat  him  shall  say  unto 

him, 
Thou  shalt  not  live,  for  thou  speakest  lies  in  the  name 

of Jehovah  : 
And  his  father  and  mother  that  be^at  him  shall  thrust 

him  through  when  he  prophesieth. 

*  vii.  14 ;  but  cf.  R.  V.,  "  I  was,"  etc. 


'50 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


In  that  day  every  prophet  when  he  prophesieth  shall  be 

ashamed  of  his  vision  ; 
Neither  shall  any  wea,r  a  hairy  mantle  to  deceive  : 
He  shall  say,  I  am  no  prophet ; 
I  am  a  tiller  of  the  ground, 
I  was  sold  for  a  slave  in  my  youth."  * 

No  man  with  any  self-respect  would  allow  his 
fellows  to  dub  him  prophet;  slave  was  a  less  hu- 
miliating name.  No  family  would  endure  the 
disgrace  of  having  a  member  who  belonged  to 
this  despised  caste;  parents  would  rather  put 
their  son  to  death  than  see  him  a  prophet.  To 
such  extremities  may  the  spirit  of  time-serving 
and  cant  reduce  a  national  clergy.  We  are  re- 
minded of  Latimer's  words  in  his  famous  sermon 
to  Convocation  in  1536:  "  All  good  men  in  all 
places  accuse  your  avarice,  your  exactions,  your 
tyranny.  I  commanded  you  that  ye  should  feed 
my  sheep,  and  ye  earnestly  feed  yourselves  from 
day  to  day,  wallowing  in  delights  and  idleness. 
I  commanded  you  to  teach  my  law;  you  teach 
your  own  traditions,  and  seek  your  own  glory."  f 
Over  against  their  fluent  and  unctuous  cant 
Jeremiah  sets  the  terrible  reality  of  his  Divine 
message.  Compared  to  this,  their  sayings  are 
like  chafT  to  the  wheat;  nay,  this  is  too  tame  a 
figure — Jehovah's  word  is  like  fire,  like  a  hammer 
that  shatters  rocks.     He  says  of  himself: — 

"  My  heart  within  me  is  broken  ;  all  my  bones  shake  : 
I  am  like  a  drunken  man,  like  a  man  whom  wine  hath 

overcome. 
Because  of  Jehovah  and  His  holy  words." 

Thus  we  have  in  chaoter  xxiii.  a  full  and  forrnal 
statement  of  the  controversy  between  Jeremiah 
and  his  brother-prophets.  On  the  one  hand, 
self-seeking  and  self-assurance  winning  popu- 
larity by  orthodox  phrases,  traditional  doctrine, 
and  the  prophesying  of  smooth  things;  on  the 
other  hand,  a  man  to  whom  the  word  of  the 
Lord  was  like  a  fire  in  his  bones,  who  had  sur- 
rendered prejudice  and  predilection  that  he 
might  himself  become  a  hammer  to  shatter  the 
Lord's  enemies,  a  man  through  whom  God 
wrought  so  mightily  that  he  himself  reeled  and 
staggered  with  the  blows  of  which  he  was  the 
instrument. 

The  relation  of  the  two  parties  was  not  unlike 
that  of  St.  Paul  and  his  Corinthian  adversaries: 
the  prophet,  like  the  Apostle,  spoke  "  in  demon- 
stration of  the  Spirit  of  power  "  ;  he  considered 
"  not  the  word  of  them  which  are  pufifed  up,  but 
the  power.  For  the  kingdom  of  God  is  not  in 
word,  but  in  power."  In  our  next  chapter  we 
shall  see  the  practical  working  of  this  antago- 
nism which  we  have  here  set  forth. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

HANANIAH. 

Jeremiah  xxvii.,  xxviii. 

"  Hear  now,  Hananiah  ;  Jehovah  hath  not  sent  thee,  but 
thou  makest  this  people  to  trust  in  a  lie." — JER.  xxviii.  15. 

The  most  conspicuous  point  at  issue  between 
Jeremiah  and  his  opponents  was  political  rather 
than  ecclesiastical.  Jeremiah  was  anxious  that 
Zedekiah  should  keep  faith  with  Nebuchadnez- 
zar, and  not  involve  Judah  in  useless  misery  by 
another  hopeless  revolt.    The  prophets  preached 

*  Zech.  xiii.  2-5.    Post-exilic,  according  to  most  critics 
(Driver's  "  Introduction,"  in  loco). 
f  Froude,  ii.  474. 


the  popular  doctrine  of  an  imminent  Divine  in- 
tervention to  deliver  Judah  from  her  oppressors. 
They  devoted  themselves  to  the  easy  task  of 
fanning  patriotic  enthusiasm,  till  the  Jews  were 
ready  for  any  enterprise,  however  reckless. 

During  the  opening  years  of  the  new  reign, 
Nebuchadnezzar's  recent  capture  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  consequent  wholesale  deportation  were 
fresh  in  men's  minds;  fear  of  the  Chaldeans  to- 
gether with  the  influence  of  Jeremiah  kept  the 
government  from  any  overt  act  of  rebellion. 
According  to  li.  59,  the  king  even  paid  a  visit  to 
Babylon,  to  do  homage  to  his  suzerain. 

It  was  probably  in  the  fourth  year  of  his 
reign  *  that  the  tributary  Syrian  states  began  to 
prepare  for  a  united  revolt  against  Babylon. 
The  Assyrian  and  Chaldean  annals  constantly 
mention  such  combinations,  which  were  formed 
and  broken  up  and  reformed  with  as  much  ease 
and  variety  as  patterns  in  a  kaleidoscope.  On 
the  present  occasion  the  kings  of  Edom,  Moab, 
Ammon,  Tyre,  and  Zidon  sent  their  ambassadors 
to  Jerusalem  to  arange  with  Zedekiah  for  con- 
certed action.  But  there  were  more  important 
persons  to  deal  with  in  that  city  than  Zedekiah. 
Doubtless  the  princes  of  Judah  welcomed  the  op- 
portunity for  a  new  revolt.  But  before  the  nego- 
tiations were  very  far  advanced,  Jeremiah  heard 
what  was  going  on.  By  Divine  command,  he 
made  "  bands  and  bars,"  i.  e.,  yokes,  for  himself 
and  for  the  ambassadors  of  the  allies,  or  possibly 
for  them  to  carry  home  to  their  masters.  They 
received  their  answer  not  from  Zedekiah,  but 
from  the  true  King  of  Israel,  Jehovah  Himself. 
They  had  come  to  solicit  armed  assistance  to 
deliver  them  from  Babylon;  they  were  sent  back 
with  yokes  to  wear  as  a  symbol  of  their  entire 
and  helpless  subjection  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  This 
was  the  word  of  Jehovah: — 

"  The  nation  and  the  kingdom  that  will  not  put  its  neck 
beneath  the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon, 
That  nation  will  I  visit  with  sw^ord  and  famine  and  pes- 
tilence until  I  consume  them  by  his  hand." 

The  allied  kings  had  been  encouraged  to  revolt 
by  oracles  similar  to  those  uttered  by  the  Jew- 
ish prophets  in  the  name  of  Jehovah;  but: — 

"  As   for  you,  hearken  not  to  your  prophets,  diviners, 

dreams,  soothsayers  and  sorcerers, 
When  they  speak  unto  you,  saying.  Ye  shall  not  serve 

the  king  of  Babylon. 
They  prophesy  a  lie  unto  you,  to  remove  you  far  from 

your  land ; 
That  I  should  drive  you  out,  and  that  you  should  perish. 
But  the  nation  that  shall  bring  their  neck  under  the 

yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  serve  him, 
That  nation  will  I  maintain  in  their  own  land  (it  is  the 

utterance  of  Jehovah),  and  they  shall  till  it  and 

dwell  in  it." 

When  he  had  sent  his  message  to  the  foreign 
envoys,  Jeremiah  addressed  an  almost  identical 
admonition  to  his  own  king.  He  bids  him  sub- 
mit to  the  Chaldean  yoke,  under  the  same  penal- 
ties for  disobedience — sword,  pestilence,  and  fam- 
ine for  himself  and  his  people.  He  warns  him 
also  against  delusive  promises  of  the  prophets, 
especially  in  the  matter  of  the  sacred  vessels. 

The  popular  doctrine  of  the  inviolable  sanctity 
of  the  Temple  had  sustained  a  severe  shock  when 
Nebuchadnezzar  carried  off  the  sacred  vessels  to 
Babylon.  It  was  inconceivable  that  Jehovah 
would  patiently  submit  to  so  gross  an  indignity. 

*The  close  connection  between  xxvii.  and  xxviii.  shows 
that  the  date  in  xxviii.  i,  "  the  fourth  year  of  Zedekiah," 
covers  both  chapters.  "  Jehoiakim  "  in  xxvii.  j  is  a  mis- 
reading for  '■  Zedekiah  "  :  see  R.  V.  margin. 


Jeremiah  xxvii.,  xxviii.] 


HANANIAH. 


151 


In  ancient  days  the  Ark  had  plagued  its  Philis- 
tine captors  till  they  were  only  too  thankful  to 
be  rid  of  it.  Later  on  a  graphic  narrative  in  the 
Book  of  Daniel  told  with  what  swift  vengeance 
God  punished  Belshazzar  for  his  profane  use  of 
these  very  vessels.  So  now  patriotic  prophets 
were  convinced  that  the  golden  candlestick,  the 
bowls  and  chargers  of  gold  and  silver,  would 
soon  return  in  triumph,  like  the  Ark  of  old;  and 
their  return  would  be  the  symbol  of  the  final  de- 
liverance of  Judah  from  Babylon.  Naturally  the 
priests  above  all  others  would  welcome  such  a 
prophecy,  and  would  industriously  disseminate 
it.  But  Jeremiah  "  spake  to  the  priests  and  all 
this  people,  saying,  Thus  saith  Jehovah: — 

"  Hearken  not  unto  the  words  of  your  prophets,  which 
prophesy  unto  you. 
Behold,  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  Jehovah   shall   be 

brouR-ht  back  from  Babylon  now  speedily  : 
For  they  prophesy  a  lie  unto  you." 

How  could  Jehovah  grant  triumphant  deliver- 
ance to  a  carnally  minded  people  who  would  not 
understand  His  Revelation,  and  did  not  discern 
any  essential  difference  between  Him  and  Mo- 
loch and  Baal? 

"  Hearken  not  unto  them  ;  serve  the  king  of  Babylon  and 
live. 
Why  should  this  city  become  a  desolation  ?  " 

Possibly,  however,  even  now,  the  Divine  com- 
passion might  have  spared  Jerusalem  the  agony 
and  shame  of  her  final  siege  and  captivity.  God 
would  not  at  once  restore  what  was  lost,  but  He 
might  spare  what  was  still  left.  Jeremiah  could 
not  endorse  the  glowing  promises  of  the  proph- 
ets, but  he  would  unite  with  them  to  intercede 
for  mercy  upon   the   remnant  of   Israel. 

"  If  they  are  prophets  and  the  word  of  Jehovah  is  with 
them. 
Let  them  intercede  with  Jehovah  Sabaoth,  that  the  rest 
of  the  vessels  of  the  Temple,  the  Palace,  and  the 
City  may  not  go  to  Babylon." 

The  God  of  Israel  was  yet  ready  to  welcome  any 
beginning  of  true  repentance.  Like  the  father  of 
the  Prodigal  Son,  He  would  meet  His  people 
when  they  were  on  the  way  back  to  Him.  Any 
stirring  of  filial  penitence  would  win  an  instant 
and  gracious  response. 

We  can  scarcely  suppose  that  this  appeal  by 
Jeremiah  to  his  brother-prophets  was  merely 
sarcastic  and  denunciatory.  Passing  circum- 
stances may  have  brought  Jeremiah  into  friendly 
intercourse  with  some  of  his  opponents;  personal 
contact  may  have  begotten  something  of  mutual 
kindliness;  and  hence  there  arose  a  transient 
gleam  of  hope  that  reconciliation  and  co-opera- 
tion might  still  be  possible.  But  it  was  soon 
evident  that  the  "  patriotic  "  party  would  not  re- 
nounce their  vain  dreams:  Judah  must  drink  the 
cup  of  wrath  to  the  dregs:  the  pillars,  the  sea, 
the  bases,  the  rest  of  the  vessels  left  in  Jerusalem 
must  also  be  carried  to  Babylon,  and  remain 
there  till  Jehovah  should  visit  the  Jews  and  bring 
them  back  and  restore  them  to  their  own  land. 

Thus  did  Jeremiah  meet  the  attempt  of  the 
government  to  organise  a  Syrian  revolt  against 
Babylon,  and  thus  did  he  give  the  lie  to  the 
promises  of  Divine  blessing  made  by  the 
prophets.  In  the  face  of  his  utterances,  it  was 
difficult  to  maintain  the  popular  enthusiasm  nec- 
essary to  a  successful  revolt.  In  order  to  neu- 
tralise, if  possible,  the  impression  made  by  Jere- 
miah, the  government  put  forward  one  of  their 


prophetic  supporters  to  deliver  a  counter-blast. 
The  place  and  the  occasion  were  similar  to  those 
chosen  by  Jeremiah  for  his  own  address  to  the 
people  and  for  Baruch's  reading  of  the  roll — the 
court  of  the  Temple  where  the  priests  and  "  all 
the  people  "  were  assembled.  Jeremiah  himself 
was  there.  Possibly  it  was  a  feast-day.  The  in- 
cident came  to  be  regarded  as  of  special  impor- 
tance, and  a  distinct  heading  is  attached  to  it, 
specifying  its  exact  date,  "  in  the  same  year  " — 
as  the  incidents  of  the  previous  chapter — "  in  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  in  the  fourth 
year,  in  the  fifth  month." 

On  such  an  occasion,  Jeremiah's  opponents 
would  select  as  their  representative  some  strik- 
ing personality,  a  man  of  high  reputation  for 
ability  and  personal  character.  Such  a  man,  ap- 
parently, they  found  in  Hananiah  ben  Azzur  of 
Gibeon.  Let  us  consider  for  a  moment  this 
mouthpiece  and  champion  of  a  great  political  and 
ecclesiastical  party,  we  might  almost  say  of  a 
National  government  and  a  National  Church. 
He  is  never  mentioned  except  in  chapter  xxviii., 
but  what  we  read  here  is  sufficiently  character- 
istic, and  receives  much  light  from  the  other  lit- 
erature of  the  period.  As  Gibeon  is  assigned  to 
the  priests  in  Joshua  xxi.  17,  it  has  been  conjec- 
tured that,  like  Jeremiah  himself,  Hananiah  was 
a  priest.  The  special  stress  laid  on  the  sacred 
vessels  would  be  in  accordance  with  this  theory. 

In  our  last  chapter  we  expounded  Jeremiah's 
description  of  his  prophetic  contemporaries,  as 
self-important  and  time-serving,  guiltv  of  plagi- 
arism and  cant.  Now  from  this  dim,  inarticulate 
crowd  of  professional  prophets  an  individual 
steps  for  a  moment  into  the  light  of  history  and 
speaks  with  clearness  and  emphasis.  Let  us  gaze 
at  him,  and  hear  what  he  has  to  say. 

If  we  could  have  been  present  at  this  scene 
immediately  after  a  careful  study  of  chapter 
xxvii.  even  the  appearance  of  Hananiah  would 
have  caused  us  a  shock  of  surprise — such  as  is 
sometimes  experienced  by  a  devout  student  of 
Protestant  literature  on  being  introduced  to  a 
live  Jesuit,  or  by  some  budding  secularist  when 
he  first  makes  the  personal  acquaintance  of  a 
curate.  We  might  possibly  have  discerned  some- 
thing commonplace,  some  lack  of  depth  and 
force  in  the  man  whose  faith  was  merely  conven- 
tional: but  we  should  have  expected  to  read, 
"  liar  and  hypocrite  "  in  every  line  of  his  coun- 
tenance, and  we  should  have  seen  nothing  of  the 
sort.  Conscious  of  the  enthusiastic  support  of 
his  fellow-countrymen  and  especially  of  his  own 
order,  charged — as  he  believed — with  a  message 
of  promise  for  Jerusalem,  Hananiah's  face  and 
bearing,  as  he  came  forward  to  address  his  sym- 
pathetic audience,  betrayed  nothing  unworthy  of 
the  high  calling  of  a  prophet.  His  words  had  the 
true  prophetic  ring,  he  spoke  with  assured  au- 
thority:— 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel, 
I  have  broken  the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon." 

His  special  object  was  to  remove  the  unfa- 
vourable impression  caused  by  Jeremiah's  con- 
tradiction of  the  promise  concerning  the  sacred 
vessels.  Like  Jeremiah,  he  meets  this  denial  in 
the  strongest  and  most  convincing  fashion.  He 
does  not  argue — he  reiterates  the  promise  in  a 
more  definite  form  and  with  more  emphatic  as- 
severation. Like  Jonah  at  Nineveh,  he  ventures 
to  fix  an  exact  date  in  the  immediate  future  for 
the    fulfilment    of    the    prophecy.     "  Yet    forty 


152 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


days,"  said  Jonah,  but  the  next  day  he  had  to 
swallow  his  own  words;  and  Hananiah's  pro- 
phetic chronology  rriet  with  no  better  fate: — 

"  Within  two  full  years  will  I  bring  again  to 
this  place  all  the  vessels  of  the  Temple,  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Bnbylon  took  away." 

The  full  significance  of  this  promise  is  shown 
by  the  further  addition: — 

"  And  I  will  bring  again  to  this  place  the  king 
of  Judah,  Jeconiah  ben  Tehoiakim,  and  all  the 
captives  of  Judah  that  went  to  Babylon  (it  is 
the  utterance  of  Jehovah) ;  for  I  will  break  the 
yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon." 

This  bold  challenge  was  promptly  met: — 

"  The  prophet  Jeremiah  said  unto  the  prophet 
Hananiah  before  the  priests  and  all  the  people 
that  stood  in  the  Temple."  Not  "  the  true 
prophet  "  and  "  the  false  prophet,"  not  "  the  man 
of  God  "  and  "  the  impostor,"  but  simply  "  the 
prophet  Jeremiah "  and  "  the  prophet  Hana- 
niah." The  audience  discerned  no  obvious  dif- 
ference of  status  or  authority  between  the  two — 
if  anything  the  advantage  lay  with  Hananiah; 
they  watched  the  scene  as  a  modern  churchman 
might  regard  a  discussion  between  ritualistic  and 
evangelical  bishops  at  a  Church  Congress,  only 
Hananiah  was  their  ideal  of  a  "  good  church- 
man." The  true  parallel  is  not  debates  between 
atheists  and  the  Christian  Evidence  Society,  or 
between  missionaries  and  Brahmins,  but  contro- 
versies like  those  between  Arius  and  Athana- 
sius,  Jerome  and  Rufinus,  Cyril  and  Chrysos- 
tom. 

These  prophets,  however,  display  a  courtesy 
and  self-restraint  that  have,  for  the  most  part, 
been  absent  from  Christian  polemics. 

"Jeremiah  the  prophet  said,  Amen:  may  Jeho- 
vah bring  it  to  pass;  may  He  establish  the  words 
of  thy  prophecy,  by  bringing  back  again  from 
Babylon  unto  this  place  both  the  vessels  of  the 
Temple   and   all   the   captives." 

With  that  entire  sincerity  which  is  the  most 
consummate  tact,  Jeremiah  avows  his  sympathy 
with  his  opponent's  patriotic  aspirations,  and  rec- 
ognises that  they  were  worthy  of  Hebrew 
prophets.  But  patriotic  aspirations  were  not  a 
sufficient  reason  for  claiming  Divine  authority 
for  a  cheap  optimism.  Jeremiah's  reflection 
upon  the  past  had  led  him  to  an  entirely  oppo- 
site philosophy  of  history.  Behind  Hananiah's 
words  lay  the  claim  that  the  religious  traditions 
of  Israel  and  the  teaching  of  former  prophets 
guaranteed  the  inviolability  of  the  Temple  and 
the  Holy  City.  Jeremiah  appealed  to  their  au- 
thority for  his  message  of  doom: — 

"  The  ancient  prophets  who  were  our  prede- 
cessors prophesied  war  and  calamity  and  pesti- 
lence against  many  countries  and  great  king- 
doms." 

It  was  also  a  mark  of  the  true  prophet  that 
he  should  be  the  herald  of  disaster.  The  pro- 
phetical books  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon  fully 
confirm  this  startling  and  unwelcome  statement. 
Their  main  burden  is  the  ruin  and  misery  that 
await  Israel  and  its  neighbours.  The  presump- 
tion therefore  was  in  favour  of  the  prophet  of 
evil,  and  against  the  prophet  of  good.  Jeremiah 
does  not,  of  course,  deny  that  there  had  been, 
and  might  yet  be,  prophets  of  good.  Indeed 
every  prophet,  he  himself  included,  announced 
some   IDivine   promise,   but: — 

"  The  prophet  which  prophesieth  of  peace 
shall  be  known  as  truly  sent  of  Jehovah  when  his 
prophecy  is  fulfilled." 


It  seemed  a  fair  reply  to  Hananiah's  challenge. 
His  prophecy  of  the  return  of  the  sacred  vessels 
and  the  exiles  within  two  years  was  intended 
to  encourage  Judah  and  its  allies  to  persist  in 
revolt.  They  would  be  at  once  victorious,  and 
recover  all  and  more  than  all  which  they  had 
lost.  Under  such  circumstances  Jeremiah's  cri- 
terion of  "  prophecies  of  peace  "  was  eminently 
practical.  "  You  are  promised  these  blessings 
within  two  years:  very  well,  do  not  run  the  ter- 
rible risks  of  a  rebellion;  keep  quiet  and  see  if 
the  two  years  bring  the  fulfilment  of  this  proph- 
ecy— it  is  not  long  to  wait."  Hananiah  might 
fairly  have  replied  that  this  fulfilment  depended 
on  Judah's  faith  and  loyalty  to  the  Divine  prom- 
ise; and  their  faith  and  loyalty  would  be  best 
shown  by  rebelling  against  their  oppressors.  Je- 
hovah promised  Canaan  to  the  Hebrews  of  the 
Exodus,  but  their  carcases  mouldered  in  the  des- 
ert because  they  had  not  courage  enough  'to  at- 
tack formidable  enemies.  "  Let  us  not,"  Hana- 
niah might  have  said,  "  imitate  their  cowardice, 
and  thus  share  alike  their  unbelief  and  its  pen- 
altv." 

Neither  Jeremiah's  premises  nor  his  conclu- 
sions would  commend  his  words  to  the  audience, 
and  he  probably  weakened  his  position  by  leav- 
ing the  high  ground  of  authority  and  descending 
to  argument.  Hananiah  at  any  rate  did  not  fol- 
low his  example:  he  adheres  to  his  former 
method,  and  reiterates  with  renewed  emphasis 
the  promise  which  his  adversary  has  contra- 
dicted. Following  Jeremiah  in  his  use  of  the 
parable  in  action,  so  common  with  Hebrew 
prophets,  he  turned  the  symbol  of  the  yoke 
against  its  author.  As  Zedekiah  ben  Chenaanah 
made  him  horns  of  iron  and  prophesied  to  Ahab 
and  Jehoshaphat,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  With 
these  shaft  thou  push  the  Syrians  until  thou  have 
consumed  them,"  *  so  now  Hananiah  took  the 
yoke  off  Jeremiah's  neck  and  broke  it  before  the 
assembled  people  and  said: — 

"  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Even  so  will  I  break  the 
yoke  of  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon  from 
the  neck  of  all  nations  within  two  full  years." 

Naturally  the  promise  is  "  for  all  nations  " — 
not  for  Judah  only,  but  for  the  other  allies. 

"  And  the  prophet  Jeremiah  went  his  way." 
For  the  moment  Hananiah  had  triumphed;  he 
had  had  the  last  word,  and  Jeremiah  was  si- 
lenced. A  public  debate  before  a  partisan  audi- 
ence was  not  likely  to  issue  in  victory  for  the 
truth.  The  situation  may  have  even  shaken  his 
faith  in  himself  and  his  message;  he  may  have 
been  staggered  for  a  moment  by  Hananiah's  ap- 
parent earnestness  and  conviction.  He  could 
not  but  remember  that  the  gloomy  predictions 
of  Isaiah's  earlier  ministry  had  been  followed  by 
the  glorious  deliverance  from  Sennacherib.  Pos- 
sibly some  similar  sequel  was  to  follow  his  own 
denunciations.  He  betook  himself  anew  to  fel' 
lowship  with  God,  and  awaited  a  fresh  mandate 
from  Jehovah. 

"  Then  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  unto  Jere- 
miah, ....  Go  and  tell  Hananiah:  Thou  hast 
broken  wooden  yokes;  thou  shalt  make  iron 
yokes  in  their  stead.  For  thus  saith  Jehovah 
Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel:  I  have  put  a  yoke  of 
iron  upon  the  necks  of  afl  these  nations,  that 
they  may  serve  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Baby- 
lon."! 

*  I  Kings  xxii.  ii. 

t  The  rest  of  this  verse  has  apparently  been  inserted 
from  xxvii.  6  by  a  scribe.    It  is  omitted  by  the  LXX. 


Jeremiah  xxvii.,  xxviii.] 


HANANIAH. 


153 


We  are  not  told  how  long  Jeremiah  had  to 
wait  for  this  new  message,  or  under  what  cir- 
cumstances it  was  delivered  to  Hananiah.  Its 
symbolism  is  obvious.  When  Jeremiah  sent  the 
yokes  to  the  ambassadors  of  the  allies  and  ex- 
horted Zedekiah  to  bring  his  neck  under  the 
yoke  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  they  were  required  to 
accept  the  comparatively  tolerable  servitude  of 
tributaries.  Their  impatience  of  this  minor  evil 
would  expose  them  to  the  iron  yoke  of  ruin  and 
captivity. 

Thus  the  prophet  of  evil  received  new  Divine 
assurance  of  the  abiding  truth  of  his  message  and 
of  the  reality  of  his  own  inspiration..  The  same 
revelation  convinced  him  that  his  opponent  was 
either  an  impostor  or  woefully  deluded: — 

"  Then  said  the  prophet  Jeremiah  unto  the 
prophet  Hananiah,  Hear  now,  Hananiah;  Jeho- 
vah hath  not  sent  thee,  but  thou  makest  this 
people  to  trust  in  a  lie.  Therefore  thus  saith  Je- 
hovah: I  will  cast  thee  away  from  ofi  the  face  of 
the  earth;  this  year  thou  shalt  die,  because  thou 
hast  preached  rebellion  against  Jehovah." 

By  a  judgment  not  unmixed  with  mercy,  Han- 
aniah was  not  left  to  be  convicted  of  error  or 
imposture,  when  the  "  two  full  years  "  should 
have  elapsed,  and  his  glowing  promises  be  seen 
to  utterly  fail.  He  also  was  "  taken  away  from 
the  evil  to  come." 

"  So  Hananiah  the  prophet  died  in  the  same 
year  in  the  seventh  month  " — i.  e.,  about  two 
months  after  this  incident.  Such  personal  judg- 
ments were  most  frequent  in  the  case  of  kings, 
but  were  not  confined  to  them.  Isaiah  *  left  on 
record  prophecies  concerning  the  appointment 
to  the  treasurership  of  Shebna  and  Eliakim; 
and  elsewhere  Jeremiah  himself  pronounces  the 
doom  of  Pashhur  ben  Immer,  the  governor  of 
the  Temple;  but  the  conclusion  of  this  incident 
reminds  us  most  forcibly  of  the  speedy  execu- 
tion of  the  apostolic  sentence  upon  Ananias  and 
Sapphira. 

The  subjects  of  this  and  the  preceding  chapter 
raise  some  of  the  most  important  questions  as  to 
authority  in  religion.  On  the  one  hand,  on  the 
subjective  side,  how  may  a  man  be  assured  of  the 
truth  of  his  own  religious  convictions;  on  the 
other  hand,  on  the  objective  side,  how  is  the 
hearer  to  decide  between  conflicting  claims  on 
his   faith   and    obedience? 

The  former  question  is  raised  as  to  the  per- 
sonal convictions  of  the  two  prophets.  We  have 
ventured  to  assume  that,  however  erring  and  cul- 
pable Hananiah  may  have  been,  he  yet  had  an 
honest  faith  in  his  own  inspiration  and  in  the 
truth  of  his  own  prophecies.  The  conscious  im- 
postor, unhappily,  is  not  unknown  either  in 
ancient  or  modern  Churches;  but  we  should  not 
look  for  edification  from  the  study  of  this  branch 
of  morbid  spiritual  pathology.  There  were 
doubtless  Jewish  counterparts  to  "  Mr.  Sludge 
the  Medium  "  and  to  the  more  subtle  and  plaus- 
ible "  Bishop  Blougram  "  ;  but  Hananiah  was  of 
a  different  type.  The  evident  respect  felt  for  him 
by  the  people,  Jeremiah's  almost  deferential 
courtesy  and  temporary  hesitation  as  to  his  ri- 
val's Divine  mission,  do  not  suggest  deliberate 
hypocrisy.  Hananiah's  "  lie  "  was  a  falsehood  in 
fact  but  not  in  intention.  The  Divine  message 
"  Jehovah  hath  not  sent  thee  "  was  felt  by  Jere- 
miah to  be  no  mere  exposure  of  what  Hananiah 
had  known  all  along,  but  to  be  a  revelation  to 
his  adversary  as  well  as  to  himself. 
*  xxii.  15-25. 


The  sweeping  condemnation  of  the  prophets 
in  chapter  xxiii.  does  not  exclude  the  possibility 
of  Hananiah's  honesty,  any  more  than  our  Lord's 
denunciation  of  the  Pharisees  as  "  devourers  of 
widows'  houses  "  necessarily  includes  Gamaliel. 
In  critical  times,  upright,  earnest  men  do  not 
always  espouse  what  subsequent  ages  hold  to 
have  been  the  cause  of  truth.  Sir  Thomas  More 
and  Erasmus  remained  in  the  communion  which 
Luther  renounced:  Hampden  and  Falkland 
found  themselves  in  opposite  camps.  If  such 
men  erred  in  their  choice  between  right  and 
wrong,  we  may  often  feel  anxious  as  to  our  own 
decisions.  When  we  find  ourselves  in  opposition 
to  earnest  and  devoted  men,  we  may  well  pause 
to  consider  which  is  Jeremiah  and  which  Hana- 
niah. 

The  point  at  issue  between  these  two  prophets 
was  exceedingly  simple  and  practical — whether 
Jehovah  approved  of  the  proposed  revolt  and 
would  reward  it  with  success.  Theological 
questions  were  only  indirectly  and  remotely  in- 
volved. Yet,  in  face  of  his  opponent's  persistent 
asseverations,  Jeremiah — perhaps  the  greatest  of 
the  prophets — went  his  way  in  silence  to  obtain 
fresh  Divine  confirmation  of  his  message.  And 
the  man   who   hesitated   was   right. 

Two  lessons  immediately  follow:  one  as  to 
practice;  the  other  as  to  principle.  It  often 
happens  that  earnest  servants  of  God  find  them- 
selves at  variance,  not  on  simple  practical  ques- 
tions, but  on  the  history  and  criticism  of  the  re- 
mote past,  or  on  abstruse  points  of  transcenden- 
tal theology.  Before  any  one  ventures  to  de- 
nounce his  adversa''y  as  a  teacher  of  deadly 
error,  let  him,  like  Jeremiah,  seek,  in  humble 
and  prayerful  submission  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  a 
Divine  mandate  for  such  denunciation. 

But  again  Jeremiah  was  willing  to  reconsider 
his  position,  not  merely  because  he  himself 
might  have  been  mistaken,  but  because  altered 
circumstances  might  have  opened  the  way  for  a 
change  in  God's  dealings.  It  was  a  bare  possi- 
bility, but  we  have  seen  elsewhere  that  Jeremiah 
represents  God  as  willing  to  make  a  gracious  re- 
sponse to  the  first  movement  of  compunction. 
Prophecy  was  the  declaration  of  His  will,  and 
that  will  was  not  arbitrary,  but  at  every  moment 
and  at  every  point  exactly  adapted  to  conditions 
with  which  it  had  to  deal.  Its  principles  were  un- 
changeable and  eternal;  but  prophecy  was 
chiefly  an  application  of  these  principles  to  ex- 
isting circumstances.  The  true  prophet  always 
realised  that  his  words  were  for  men  as  they  were 
when  he  addressed  them.  Any  moment  might 
bring  a  change  which  would  abrogate  or  modify 
the  old  teaching,  and  require  and  receive  a  new 
message.  Like  Jonah,  he  might  have  to  proclaim 
ruin  one  day  and  deliverance  the  next.  A  physi- 
cian, even  after  the  most  careful  diagnosis,  may 
have  to  recognise  unsuspected  symptoms  which 
lead  him  to  cancel  his  prescription  and  write  a 
new  one.  The  sickening  and  healing  of  the  soul 
involve  changes  equally  unexpected.  The  Bible 
does  not  teach  that  inspiration,  any  more  than 
science,  has  only  one  treatment  for  each  and 
every  spiritual  condition  and  contingency.  The 
true  prophet's  message  is  always  a  word  in  sea- 
son. 

We  turn  next  to  the  objective  question:  How 
is  the  hearer  to  decide  between  conflicting  claims 
on  his  faith  and  obedience?  We  say  the  right 
was  with  Jeremiah;  but  how  were  the  Jews  to 
know  that?    They  were  addressed  by  two  proph- 


r54 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


ets,  or,  as  we  might  say,  two  accredited  ecclesi- 
astics of  the  national  Church:  each  with  apparent 
earnestness  and  sincerity  claimed  to  speak  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  and  of  the  ancient  faith  of 
Israel,  and  each  flatly  contradicted  the  other  on 
an  immediate  practical  question,  on  which  hung 
their  individual  fortunes  and  the  destinies  of 
their  country.  What  were  the  Jews  to  do? 
Which  were  they  to  believe?  It  is  the  standing 
difficulty  of  all  appeals  to  external  authority. 
You  inquire  of  this  supposed  Divine  oracle  and 
there  issues  from  it  a  babel  of  discordant  voices, 
and  each  demands  that  you  shall  unhesitatingly 
submit  to  its  dictate  on  peril  of  eternal  damna- 
tion; and  some  have  the  audacity  to  claim  obe- 
dience, because  their  teaching  is  "  quod  semper, 
quod  ubique,  quod  ab  oninibtis." 

One  simple  and  practical  test  is  indeed  sug- 
gested— the  prophet  of  evil  is  more  likely  to  be 
truly  inspired  than  the  prophet  of  good;  but 
Jeremiah  naturally  does  not  claim  that  this  is  an 
invariable  test.  Nor  can  he  have  meant  that  you 
can  always  believe  prophecies  of  evil  without  any 
hesitation,  but  that  you  are  to  put  no  faith  in 
promises  until  they  are  fulfilled.  Yet  it  is  not 
difificult  to  discern  the  truth  underlying  Jere- 
miah's words.  The  prophet  whose  words  are 
unpalatable  to  his  hearers  is  more  likely  to  have 
a  true  inspiration  than  the  man  who  kindles  their 
fancy  with  glowing  pictures  of  an  imminent  mil- 
lennium. The  divine  message  to  a  congregation 
of  country  squires  is  more  likely  to  be  an  ex- 
hortation to  be  just  to  their  tenants  than  a  ser- 
mon on  the  duty  of  the  labourer  to  his  betters. 
A  true  prophet  addressing  an  audience  of  work- 
ing men  would  perhaps  deal  with  the  abuses  of 
trades  unions  rather  than  with  the  sins  of  capi- 
talists. 

But  this  principle,  which  is  necessarily  of  lim- 
ited application,  does  not  go  far  to  solve  the 
great  question  of  authority  in  religion,  on  which 
Jeremiah  gives  us  no  further  help. 

There  is,  however,  one  obvious  moral.  No 
system  of  external  authority,  whatever  pains  may 
be  taken  to  secure  authentic  legitimacy,  can  al- 
together release  the  individual  from  the  respon- 
.sibility  of  private  judgment.  Unreserved  faith 
in  the  idea  of  a  Catholic  Church  is  quite  con- 
sistent with  much  hesitation  between  the  Angli- 
can, Roman,  and  Greek  communions;  and  the 
most  devoted  Catholic  may  be  called  upon  to 
choose  between  rival  antipopes. 

Ultimately  the  inspired  teacher  is  only  dis- 
cerned by  the  inspired  hearer:  it  is  the  answer 
of  the  conscience  that  authenticates  the  divine 
message. 


CHAPTER  X. 

CORRESPONDENCE    WITH    THE    EXILES. 

Jeremiah  xxix. 

"Jehovah  make  thee  like  Zedekiah  and  Ahab,  whom  the 
king  of  Babylon  roasted  in  the  fire."— JER.  xxix.  32. 

Nothing  further  is  said  about  the  proposed 
revolt,  so  that  Jeremiah's  vigorous  protest  seems 
to  have^  been  successful.  In  any  case,  unless 
irrevocable  steps  had  been  taken,  the  enterprise 
could  hardly  have  survived  the  death  of  its  ad- 
vocate, Hananiah.  Accordingly  Zedekiah  sent 
an  embassy  to  Babylon,  charged  doubtless  with 


plausible  explanations  and  profuse  professions 
of  loyalty  and  devotion.  The  envoys  were  Ela- 
sah  ben  Shaphan  and  Gemariah  ben  Hilkiah. 
Shaphan  and  Hilkiah  were  almost  certainly  the 
scribe  and  high  priest  who  discovered  Deuter- 
onomy in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah,  and  Ela- 
sah  was  the  brother  of  Ahikam  ben  Shaphan, 
who  protected  Jeremiah  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Jehoiakim,  and  of  Gemariah  ben  Shaphan,  in 
whose  chamber  Baruch  read  the  roll,  and  who 
protested  against  its  destruction.  Probably  Ela- 
sah  and  Gemariah  were  adherents  of  Jeremiah, 
and  the  fact  of  the  embassy,  as  well  as  the  choice 
of  ambassadors,  suggests  that,  for  the  moment, 
Zedekiah  was  acting  under  the  influence  of  the 
prophet.  Jeremiah  took  the  opportunity  of  send- 
ing a  letter  to  the  exiles  at  Babylon.  Hananiah 
had  his  allies  in  Chaldea:  Ahab  ben  Kolaiah, 
Zedekiah  ben  Maaseiah,  and  Shemaiah  the  Ne- 
helamite,  with  other  prophets,  diviners,  and 
dreamers,  had  imitated  their  brethren  in  Judah; 
they  had  prophesied  without  being  sent  and  had 
caused  the  people  to  believe  a  lie.  We  are  not 
expressly  told  what  they  prophesied,  but  the  nar- 
rative takes  for  granted  that  they,  like  Hananiah, 
promised  the  exiles  a  speedy  return  to  their  na- 
tive land.  Such  teaching  naturally  met  with 
much  acceptance,  the  people  congratulating 
themselves  because,  as  they  supposed,  "  Jehovah 
hath  raised  us  up  prophets  in  Babylon."  The 
presence  of  prophets  among  them  was  received 
as  a  welcome  proof  that  Jehovah  had  not  de- 
serted His  people  in  their  house  of  bondage. 

Thus  when  Jeremiah  had  confounded  his  op- 
ponents in  Jerusalem  he  had  still  to  deal  with 
their  friends  in  Babylon.  Here  again  the  issue 
was  one  of  immediate  practical  importance.  In 
Chaldea  as  at  Jerusalem  the  prediction  that  the 
exiles  would  immediately  return  was  intended  to 
kindle  the  proposed  revolt.  The  Jews  at  Babylon 
were  virtually  warned  to  hold  themselves  in  read- 
iness to  take  advantage  of  any  success  of  the 
Syrian  rebels,  and,  if  opportunity  offered,  to  ren- 
der them  assistance.  In  those  days  information 
travelled  slowly,  and  there  was  some  danger  lest 
the  captives  should  be  betrayed  into  acts  of  dis- 
loyalty, even  after  the  Jewish  government  had 
given  up  any  present  intention  of  revolting 
against  Nebuchadnezzar.  Such  disloyalty  might 
have  involved  their  entire  destruction.  Both 
Zedekiah  and  Jeremiah  would  be  anxious  to  in- 
form them  at  once  that  they  must  refrain  from 
any  plots  against  their  Chaldean  masters.  More- 
over the  prospect  of  an  immediate  return  had 
very  much  the  same  effect  upon  these  Jews  as 
the  expectation  of  Christ's  Second  Coming  had 
upon  the  primitive  Church  at  Thessalonica.  It 
made  them  restless  and  disorderly.  They  could 
not  settle  to  any  regular  work,  but  became  busy- 
bodies — wasting  their  time  over  the  glowing 
promises  of  their  popular  preachers,  and  whis- 
pering to  one  another  wild  rumours  of  success- 
ful revolts  in  Syria;  or  were  even  more  danger- 
ously occupied  in  planning  conspiracies  against 
their  conquerors. 

Jeremiah's  letter  sought  to  bring  about  a  bet- 
ter state  of  mind.  It  is  addressed  to  the  elders, 
priests,  prophets,  and  people  of  the  Captivity. 
The  enumeration  reminds  us  how  thoroughly 
the  exiled  community  reproduced  the  society  of 
the  ancient  Jewish  state — there  was  already  a 
miniature  Judah  in  Chaldea,  the  first  of  those 
Israels  of  the  Dispersion  which  have  since  cov- 
ered the  face  of  the  earth. 


Jeremiah  xxix.]          CORRESPONDENCE    WITH    THE    EXILES. 


'55 


This  is  Jehovah's  message  by  His  prophet: — 

"  Build  houses  and  dwell  in  them  ; 
Plant  gardens  and  eat  the  fruit  tliereof  ; 
Marry  and  beget  sons  and  daughters  ; 
Marry  your  sons  and  daughters, 
That  they  may  bear  sons  and  daughters, 
That  ye  may  multiply  there  and  not  grow  few. 
Seek  the  peace  of  the  city  whither  I  have  sent  you  into 

captivity  : 
Pray  for  it  unto  Jehovah  ; 
For  in  its  peace,  ye  shall  have  peace." 

There  was  to  be  no  immediate  return;  their 
captivity  would  last  long  enough  to  make  it 
Worth  their  while  to  build  houses  and  plant  gar- 
dens. For  the  present  they  were  t-  regard  Baby- 
lon as  their  home.  The  prospect  of  restoration 
to  Judah  was  too  distant  to  make  any  practical 
difference  to  their  conduct  of  ordinary  business. 
The  ccnoluding  command  to  "  seek  the  peace  of 
Babylon  "  is  a  distinct  warning  against  engaging 
in  plots,  which  could  only  ruin  the  conspirators. 
There  is  an  interesting  difference  between  these 
exhortations  and  those  addressed  by  Paul  to  his 
converts  in  the  first  century.  He  never  counsels 
them  to  marry,  but  rather  recommends  celibacy 
as  more  expedient  for  the  present  necessity.  Ap- 
parently life  w.^s  more  anxious  and  harassed  for 
the  early  Christians  than  for  the  Jews  in  Baby- 
lon. The  return  to  Canaan  was  to  these  exiles 
what  the  millennium  and  the  Second  Advent 
were  to  the  primitive  Church.  Jeremiah  having 
bidden  his  fellow-countrymen  not  to  be  agitated 
by  supposing  that  this  much-longed-for  event 
might  come  at  any  moment,  fortifies  their  faith 
and  patience  by  a  promise  that  it  should  not  be 
delayed    indefinitely. 

"  When  ye  have  fulfilled  seventy  years  in  Babylon  I  will 
visit  you. 
And  will  perform  for  you  My  gracious  promise  to  bring 
you  back  to  this  place."* 

Seventy  is  obviously  a  round  number.  More- 
over the  constant  use  of  seven  and  its  multiples 
in  sacred  symbolism  forbids  us  to  understand 
the  prophecy  as  an  exact  chronological  state- 
ment. 

We  should  adequately  express  the  prophet's 
meaning  by  translating  "  in  about  two  genera- 
tions." We  need  not  waste  time  and  trouble  in 
discovering  or  inventing  two  dates  exactly  sep- 
arated by  seventy  years,  one  of  which  will  serve 
for  the  beginning  and  the  other  for  the  end  of 
the  Captivity.  The  interval  between  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  and  the  Return  was  fifty  years 
(b.  c.  586-536),  but  as  our  passage  refers  more 
immediately  to  the  prospects  of  those  already  in 
exile,  we  should  obtain  an  interval  of  sixty-five 
years  from  the  deportation  of  Jehoiachin  and 
his  companions  in  b.  c.  601.  But  there  can  be  no 
question  of  approximation,  however  close. 
Either  the  "  seventy  years  "  merely  stands  for 
a  comparatively  long  period,  or  it  is  exact.  We 
do  not  save  the  inspiration  of  a  date  by  showing 
that  it  is  only  five  years  wrong,  and  not  twenty. 
For  an  inspired  date  must  be  absolutely  accurate; 
a  mistake  of  a  second  in  such  a  case  would  be 
as  fatal  as  a  mistake  of  a  century. 

Israel's  hope  is  guaranteed  by  God's  self- 
knowledge  of  His  gracious  counsel: — 

"  I  know  the  purposes  which  I  purpose  concerning  you,  is 
the  utterance  of  Jehovah, 
Purposes  of  peace  and  not  of  evil,  to  give  you  hope  for 
the  days  to  come." 

♦Doubts  have  been  expressed  as  to  whether  this  verse 
originally  formed  part  of  Jeremiah's  letter,  or  was  ever 
■written  by  him  ;  but  in  view  of  his  numerous  references 
to  a  coming  restoration  those  doubts  are  unnecessary. 


In  the  former  clause  "  I  "  is  emphatic  in  both 
places,  and  the  phrase  is  parallel  to  the  familiar 
formula  "  by  Myself  have  I  sworn,  saith  Jeho- 
vah." The  future  of  Israel  was  guaranteed  by 
the  divine  consistency.  Jehovah,  to  use  a  col- 
loquial phrase,  knew  His  own  mind.  His  ever- 
lasting purpose  for  the  Chosen  People  could  not 
be  set  aside.  "  Did  God  cast  off  His  People? 
God  forbid." 

Yet  this  persistent  purpose  is  not  fulfilled 
without  reference  to  character  and  conduct: — 

"Ye  shall  call  upon  Me,  and  come  and  pray  unto  Me, 
And  I  will  hearken  unto  you. 
Ye  shall  seek  Me,  and  find  Me, 

Because  ye  seek  Me  with  all  your  heart. 
I  will  be  found  of  you— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah. 
1  will  bring  back  your  captivity,  and  will  gather  you 
from  all  nations  and  places  whither  I  have  scattered 
you— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah. 
I  will  bring  you  back  to  this  place  whence  I  sent  you 
away  to  captivity."* 

As  in  the  previous  chapter,  Jeremiah  concludes 
with  a  personal  judgment  upon  those  prophets 
who  had  been  so  acceptable  to  the  exiles.  If 
verse  23  is  to  be  understood  literally,  Ahab  and 
Zedekiah  had  not  only  spoken  without  authority 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  but  had  also  been  guilty 
of  gross  immorality.  Their  punishment  was  to 
be  more  terrible  than  that  of  Hananiah.  They 
had  incited  the  exiles  to  revolt  by  predicting 
the  imminent  ruin  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Possibly 
the  Jewish  king  proposed  to  make  his  own  peace 
by  betraying  his  agents,  after  the  manner  of  our 
own   Elizabeth  and  other  sovereigns. 

They  were  to  be  given  over  to  the  terrible  ven- 
geance which  a  Chaldean  king  would  naturally 
take  on  such  offenders,  and  would  be  publicly 
roasted  alive,  so  that  the  malice  of  him  who  de- 
sired to  curse  his  enemy  might  find  vent  in  such 
words  as: — 

"  Jehovah  make  thee  like  Zedekiah  and  Ahab, 
whom  the  king  of  Babylon  roasted  alive." 

We  are  not  told  whether  this  prophecy  was 
fulfilled,  but  it  is  by  no  means  unlikely.  The 
Assyrian  king  Assurbanipal  says,  in  one  of  his 
inscriptions  concerning  a  viceroy  of  Babylon 
who  had  revolted,  that.  Assur  and  the  other  gods 
"  in  the  fierce  burning  fire  they  threw  him  and 
destroyed  his  life  " — possibly  through  the  agency 
of  Assurbanipal's  servants.f  One  of  the  seven 
brethren  who  were  tortured  to  death  in  the  per- 
secutions of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  said  to  have 
been  "  fried  in  the  pan."  X  Christian  hagiology 
commemorates  St.  Lawrence  and  many  other 
martyrs,  who  suffered  similar  torments.  Such 
punishments  remained  part  of  criminal  proce- 
dure until  a  comparatively  recent  date;  they  are 
still  sometimes  inflicted  by  lynch  law  in  the 
United  States,  and  have  been  defended  even  by 
Christian  ministers. 

Jeremiah's  letter  caused  great  excitement  and 
indignation  among  the  exiles.  We  have  no  re- 
joinder from  Ahab  and  Zedekiah;  probably  they 
were  not  in  a  position  to  make  any.  But  She- 
maiah  the  Nehelamite  tried  to  make  trouble  for 
Jeremiah  at  Jerusalem.  He,  in  his  turn,  wrote 
letters  to  "  all  the  people  at  Jerusalem  and  to  the 

*  The  Hebrew  Text  inserts  a  paragraph  (vv.  16-20)  sub- 
stantially identical  with  other  portions  of  the  book, 
especially  xxiv.  8-10,  announcingthe  approaching  ruin  and 
captivity  of  Zedekiah  and  the  Jews  still  remaining  in 
Judah.  This  section  is  omitted  by  the  LXX,,  and  breaks 
the  obvious  connection  between  verses  15  and  21. 

t  Smith's  "  Assurbanipal,"  p.  163. 

i  2  Mace.  vii.  5. 


iS6 


THE    BOOK   OF   JEREMIAH. 


priest  Zephaniah  ben  Maaseiah  and  to  all  the 
priests"  to  this  eflfect: — 

"  Jehovah  hath  made  thee  priest  in  the  room 
of  Jehoiada  the  priest,  to  exercise  supervision 
over  the  Temple,  and  to  deal  with  any  mad  fa- 
natic who  puts  himself  forward  to  prophesy,  by 
placing  him  in  the  stocks  and  the  collar.  Why 
then  hast  thou  not  rebuked  Jeremiah  of  Ana- 
thoth,  who  puts  himself  forward  to  prophesy 
unto  you?  Consequently  he  has  sent  unto  us  at 
Babylon:  It  (your  captivity)  will  be  long;  build 
houses  and  dwell  in  them,  plant  gardens  and  eat 
the  fruit  thereof." 

Confidence  in  a  speedy  return  had  already  been 
exalted  into  a  cardinal  article  of  the  exiles'  faith, 
and  Shemaiah  claims  that  any  one  who  denied 
this  comfortable  doctrine  must  be  ipso  facto  a 
dangerous  and  deluded  fanatic,  needing  to  be 
placed  under  strict  restraint.  This  letter  trav- 
elled to  Jerusalem  with  the  returning  embassy, 
and  was  duly  delivered  to  Zephaniah.  Zephaniah 
is  spoken  of  in  the  historical  section  common 
to  Kings  and  Jeremiah  as  "  the  second  priest,"  * 
Seraiah  being  the  High  Priest;  like  Pashhur  ben 
Immer,  he  seems  to  have  been  the  governor  of 
the  Temple.  He  was  evidently  well  disposed  to 
Jeremiah,  to  whom  Zedekiah  twice  sent  him  on 
important  missions.  On  the  present  occasion, 
instead  of  acting  upon  the  suggestions  made  by 
Shemaiah,  he  read  the  letter  to  Jeremiah,  in 
order  that  the  latter  might  have  an  opportunity 
of  dealing  with   it. 

Jeremiah  was  divinely  instructed  to  reply  to 
Shemaiah,  charging  him,  in  his  turn,  with  being 
a  man  who  put  himself  forward  to  prophesy 
without  any  commission  from  Jehovah,  and  who 
thus  deluded  his  hearers  into  belief  in  falsehoods. 
Personal  sentence  is  passed  upon  him,  as  upon 
Hananiah,  Ahab,  and  Zedekiah;  no  son  pf  his 
shall  be  reckoned  amongst  God's  people  or  see 
the  prosperity  which  they  shall  hereafter  enjoy. 
The  words  are  obscure:  it  is  said  that  Jehovah 
will  "  visit  Shemaiah  and  his  seed,"  so  that  it 
cannot  mean  that  he  will  be  childless;  but  it  is 
further  said  that  "  he  shall  not  have  a  man  to 
abide  amongst  this  people."  It  is  apparently  a 
sentence  of  excommunication  against  Shemaiah 
and  his  family. 

Here  the  episode  abruptly  ends.  We  are  not 
told  whether  the  letter  was  sent,  or  how  it  was 
received,  or  whether  it  was  answered.  We  gather 
that,  here  also,  the  last  word  rested  with  Jere- 
miah, and  that  at  this  point  his  influence  became 
dominant  both  at  Jerusalem  and  at  Babylon,  and 
that  King  Zedekiah  himself  submitted  to  his 
guidance. 

Chapters  xxviii.,  xxix.,  deepen  the  impression 
made  by  other  sections  of  Jeremiah's  intolerance 
and  personal  bitterness  towards  his  opponents. 
He  seems  to  speak  of  the  roasting  alive  of  the 
prophets  at  Babylon  with  something  like  grim 
satisfaction,  and  we  are  tempted  to  think  of  Tor- 
quemada  and  Bishop  iionner.  But  we  must  re- 
member that  the  stake,  as  we  have  already  said, 
has  scarcely  yet  ceased  to  be  an  ordinary  crim- 
inal punishment,  and  that,  after  centuries  of 
Christianity,  More  and  Cranmer,  Luther  and 
Calvin,  had  hardly  any  more  tenderness  for  their 
ecclesiastical  opponents  than  Jeremiah. 

Indeed   the   Church   is   only   beginning  to   be 

ashamed  of  the  complacency  with  which  she  has 

contemplated  the  fiery  torments  of  hell  as  the 

eternal  destiny  of  unrepentant  sinners.     One  of 

*  lii.  24  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  18. 


the  most  tolerant  and  catholic  of  our  religious 
teachers  has  written:  "  If  the  unlucky  malefac- 
tor, who  in  mere  brutality  of  ignorance  or  nar- 
rowness of  nature  or  of  culture  has  wronged  his 
neighbour,  excite  our  anger,  how  much  deeper 
should  be  our  indignation  when  intellect  and  el- 
oquence are  abused  to  selfish  purposes,  when 
studious  leisure  and  learning  and  thought  turn 
traitors  to  the  cause  of  human  well-being  and 
the  wells  of  a  nation's  moral  life  are  poisoned.'  * 
The  deduction  is  obvious:  society  feels  con- 
strained to  hang  or  burn  "  the  unlucky  malefac- 
tor"; consequently  such  punishments  a'-e,  if  any- 
thing, too  merciful  for  the  false  prophet.  More- 
over the  teaching  which  Jeremiah  denounced 
was  no  mere  dogmatism  about  abstruse  philo- 
sophical and  theological  abstractions.  Like  the 
Jesuit  propaganda  under  Elizabeth,  it  was  more 
immediately  concerned  with  politics  than  with 
religion.  We  are  bound  to  be  indignant  with  a 
man,  gifted  in  exploiting  the  emotions  of  his 
docile  audience,  who  wins  the  confidence  and 
arouses  the  enthusiasm  of  his  hearers,  only  to 
entice  them  into  hopeless  and  foolhardy  ven- 
tures. 

And  yet  we  are  brought  back  to  the  old  diffi- 
culty, how  are  we  to  know  the  false  prophet? 
He  has  neither  horns  nor  hoofs,  his  tie  may  be 
as  white  and  his  coat  as  long  as  those  of  the 
true  messenger  of  God.  Again.  Jeremiah's 
method  affords  us  some  practical  guidance.  He 
does  not  himself  order  and  superintend  the  pun- 
ishment of  false  prophets:  he  merely  an- 
nounces a  Divine  judgment,  which  Jehovah 
Himself  is  to  execute.  He  does  not  condemn 
men  by  the  code  of  any  Church,  but  each  sen- 
tence is  a  direct  and  special  revelation  from  Je- 
hovah. How  many  sentences  would  have  been 
passed  upon  heretics,  if  their  accusers  and  judges 
had  waited  for  a  similar  sanction? 


CHAPTER  XI. 

A   BROKEN   COVENANT. 

Jeremiah  xxi.  i-io,  xxxiv.,  xxxvii.  i-io. 

"  All  the  princes  and  people  .  .  .  changed  their  minds 
and  reduced  to  bondage  again  all  the  slaves  whom  they 
had  set  free."— JER.  xxxiv.  10,  11. 

In  our  previous  chapter  we  saw  that,  at  the 
point  where  the  fragmentary  record  of  the  abor- 
tive conspiracy  in  the  fourth  year  of  Zedekiah 
came  to  an  abrupt  conclusion,  Jeremiah  seemed 
to  have  regained  the  ascendency  he  enjoyed 
under  Josiah.  The  Jewish  government  had  re- 
linquished their  schemes  of  rebellion  and  ac- 
quiesced once  more  in  the  supremacy  of 
Babylon.  We  may  possibly  gather  from  a  later 
chapterf  that  Zedekiah  himself  paid  a  visit  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  to  assure  him  of  his  loyalty. 
If  so,  the  embassy  of  Elasah  ben  Shaphan  and 
Gemariah  ben  Hilkiah  was  intended  to  assure 
a  favourable  reception  for  their  master. 

The  history  of  the  next  few  years  is  lost  in 
obscurity,  but  when  the  curtain  again  rises  every- 
thing is  changed  and  Judah  is  once  more  in  re- 
volt against  the  Chaldeans.  No  doubt  one 
cause  of  this  fresh  change  of  policy  was  the  re- 

*  "  Ecce  Homo,"  xxi. 

t  li.  sq,  Hebrevir  Text.  According  to  the  LXX.,  Zedekiah 
sent  another  embassy  and  did  not  go  himself  to  Babylon. 
The  section  is  apparently  a  late  addition. 


Jeremiah  xxi.,  xxxi v.,  xxxvii.]       A    BROKEN    COVENANT. 


157 


newed  activity  of  Egypt.  In  the  account  of  the 
conspiracy  in  Zedekiah's  fourth  year,  there  is  a 
significant  absence  of  any  reference  to  Egypt. 
Jeremiah  succeeded  in  baffling  his  opponents 
partly  because  their  fears  of  Babylon  were  not 
quieted  by  any  assurance  of  Egyptian  support. 
Now  there  seemed  a  better  prospect  of  a  success- 
ful insurrection. 

About  the  seventh  year  of  Zedekiah,  Psam- 
metichus  II.  of  Egypt  was  succeeded  by  his 
brother  Pharaoh  Hophra,  the  son  of  Josiah's 
conqueror,  Pharaoh  Necho.  When  Hophra — 
the  Apries  of  Herodotus — had  completed  the  re- 
conquest  of  Ethiopia,  he  made  a  fresh  attempt 
to  carry  out  his  father's  policy  and  to  re-establish 
the  ancient  Egyptian  supremacy  in  Western 
Asia:  and.  as  of  old,  Egypt  began  by  tampering 
with  the  allegiance  of  the  Syrian  vassals  of  Bab- 
ylon. According  to  Ezekiel,*  Zedekiah  took  the 
initiative:  "he  rebelled  against  him  (Nebuchad- 
nezzar) by  sending  his  ambassadors  into  Egypt, 
that  they  might  give  him  horses  and  much 
people." 

The  knowledge  that  an  able  and  victorious 
general  was  seated  on  the  Egyptian  throne, 
along  with  the  secret  intrigues  of  his  agents  and 
partisans,  was  too  much  for  Zedekiah's  dis- 
cretion. Jeremiah's  advice  was  disregarded. 
The  king  surrendered  himself  to  the  guidance 
— we  might  almost  say,  the  control — of  the 
Egyptian  party  in  Jerusalem:  he  violated  his 
oath  of  allegiance  to  his  suzerain,  and  the  frail 
and  battered  ship  of  state  was  once  more  em- 
barked on  the  stormy  waters  of  rebellion. 
Nebuchadnezzar  promptly  prepared  to  grapple 
with  the  reviving  strength  of  Egypt  in  a  re- 
newed contest  for  the  lordship  of  Syria.  Proba- 
bly Egypt  and  Judah  had  other  allies,  but  they 
are  not  expressly  mentioned.  A  little  later 
Tyre  was  besieged  by  Nebuchadnezzar:  but  as 
Ezekiel  \  represents  Tyre  as  exulting  over  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem,  she  can  hardly  have  been  a 
benevolent  neutral,  much  less  a  faithful  ally. 
Moreover,  when  Nebuchadnezzar  began  his 
march  into  Syria,  he  hesitated  whether  he  should 
first  attack  Jerusalem  or  Rabbath  Ammon: — 

"  The  king  of  Babylon  stood  at  the  parting  of 
the  way,  ...  to  use  divination:  he  shook  the 
arrows  to  and  fro,  he  consulted  the  teraphim,  he 
looked   in  the  liver."  X 

Later  on  Baalis,  king  of  Ammon,  received  the 
Jewish  refugees  and  supported  those  who  were 
most  irreconcilable  in  their  hostility  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. Nevertheless  the  Ammonites  were 
denounced  by  Jeremiah  for  occupying  the  terri- 
tory of  Gad,  and  by  Ezekiel§  for  sharing  the 
exultation  of  Tyre  over  the  ruin  of  Judah. 
Probably  Baalis  played  a  double  part.  He  may 
have  promised  support  to  Zedekiah,  and  then 
purchased  his  own  pardon  by  betraying  his  ally. 

Nevertheless  the  hearty  support  of  Egypt  was 
worth  more  than  the  alliance  of  any  number  of 
the  petty  neighbouring  states,  and  Nebuchad- 
nezzar levied  a  great  army  to  meet  this  ancient 
and  formidable  enemy  of  Assyria  and  Babylon. 
He  marched  into  Judah  with  "  all  his  army, 
and  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  that  were 
under  his  dominion,  and  all  the  peoples,"  and 
"  fought  against  Jerusalem  and  all  the  cities 
thereof."  | 

*xvi:.  15.  t  Ezek.  xxi.  21. 

txxvi.  2.  §  XXV.  1-7. 

il  xxi.  i-io.  The  exact  date  of  this  section  is  not  given, 
bui  it  is  closely  parallel  to  xxxiv.  1-7,  and  seems  to  belong 
to  the  same  period. 


At  the  beginning  of  the  siege  Zedekiah's 
heart  began  to  fail  him.  The  course  of  events 
seemed  to  confirm  Jeremiah's  threats,  and  the 
king,  with  pathetic  inconsistency,  sought  to  be 
reassured  by  the  prophet  himself.  He  sent 
Pashhur  ben  Malchiah  and  Zcphaniah  ben 
Maaseiah  to  Jeremiah  with  the  message: — 

"  Inquire,  I  pray  thee,  of  Jehovah  for  us,  for 
Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon  maketh  war 
against  us:  peradventure  Jehovah  will  deal  with 
us  according  to  all  His  wondrous  works,  that 
he  may  go  up  from  us." 

The  memories  of  the  great  deliverance  from 
Sennacherib  were  fresh  and  vivid  in  men's 
minds.  Isaiah's  denunciations  had  been  as  un- 
compromising as  Jeremiah's,  and  yet  Hezekiah 
had  been  spared.  "  Peradventure,"  thought  his 
anxious  descendant,  "  the  prophet  may  yet  be 
charged  with  gracious  messages  that  Jehovah 
repents  Him  of  the  evil  and  will  even  now  rescue 
His  Holy  City."  But  the  timid  appeal  only 
called  forth  a  yet  sterner  sentence  of  doom. 
Formidable  as  were  the  enemies  against  whom 
Zedekiah  craved  protection,  they  were  to  be  re- 
inforced by  more  terrible  allies;  man  and  beast 
should  die  of  a  great  pestilence,  and  Jehovah 
Himself  should  be  their  enemy: — 

"  I  will  turn  back  the  weapons  of  war  that 
are  in  your  hands,  wherewith  ye  fight  against 
the  king  of  Babylon  and  the  Chaldeans.  ...  I 
Myself  will  fight  against  you  with  an  out- 
stretched hand  and  a  strong  arm,  in  anger  and 
fury  and  great  wrath." 

The  city  should  be  taken  and  burnt  with  fire, 
and  the  king  and  all  others  who  survived  should 
be  carried  away  captive.  Only  on  one  condition 
might  better  terms  be  obtained: — 

"  Behold,  I  set  before  you  the  way  of  life  and 
the  way  of  death.  He  tliat  abideth  in  this  city 
shall  die  by  the  sword,  the  famine,  and  the  pesti- 
lence: but  he  that  goeth  out,  and  falleth  to  the 
besieging  Chaldeans,  shall  live,  and  his  life  shall 
be  unto  him  for  a  prey."  * 

On  another  occasion  Zephaniah  ben  Maaseiah 
with  a  certain  Tehucal  ben  Shelemiah  was  sent 
by  the  king  to  the  prophet  with  the  entreaty, 
"  Pray  now  unto  Jehovah  our  God  for  us."  We 
are  not  told  the  sequel  to  this  mission,  but  it  is 
probably  represented  by  the  opening  verses  of 
chap,  xxxiv.  This  section  has  the  direct  and 
personal  note  which  characterises  the  dealings 
of  Hebrew  prophets  with  their  sovereigns. 
Doubtless  the  partisans  of  Egypt  had  had  a  se- 
vere struggle  with  Jererfiiah  before  they  cap- 
tured the  ear  of  the  Jewish  king,  and  Zedekiah 
was  possessed  to  the  very  last  with  a  half-super- 
stitious anxiety  to  keep  on  good  terms  with  the 
prophet.  Jehovah's  "  iron  pillar  and  brasen 
wall  "  would  make  no  concession  to  these  royal 
blandishments:  his  message  had  been  rejected, 
his  Master  had  been  slighted  and  defied,  the 
Chosen  People  and  the  Holy  City  were  being 
betrayed  to  their  ruin:  Jeremiah  would  not  re- 
frain from  denouncing  this  iniquity  because  the 
king  who  had  sanctioned  it  tried  to  flatter  his 
vanity  by  sending  deferential  deputations  of  im- 
portant notables.     This  is  the  Divine  sentence: — 

"  I  will  give  this  city  into  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon, 
And  he  shall  burn  it  with  fire. 
Thou  Shalt  not  escape  out  of  his  hand  ; 
Thou  Shalt  assuredly  be  taken  prisoner; 
Thou  Shalt  be  delivered  into  his  hand. 

*  xxi.  i-io. 


iS8 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


Thou  shalt  see  the  king  of  Babylon,  face  to  face  ; 
He  shall  speak  to  thee,  mouth  to  mouth. 
And  thou  shalt  go  to  Babylon." 

Yet  there  should  be  one  doubtful  mitigation  of 
his  punishment: — 

"  Thou  shalt  not  die  by  the  sword  ; 
Thou  shalt  die  in  peace  : 
With  the  burnings  of  thy  fathers,  the  former  kings  that 

were  before  thee, 
So  shall  they  make  a  burning  for  thee  ; 
And  they  shall  lament  thee,  saying,  Alas  lord  ! 
For  it  is  I  that  have  spoken  the  word — it  is  the  utterance 

of  Jehovah." 

King  and  people  were  not  proof  against  the 
combined  terrors  of  the  prophetic  rebukes  and 
the  besieging  enemy.  Jeremiah  regained  his  in- 
fluence, and  Jerusalem  gave  an  earnest  of  the 
sincerity  of  her  repentance  by  entering  into  a 
covenant  for  the  emancipation  of  all  Hebrew 
slaves.  Deuteronomy  had  re-enacted  the  an- 
cient law  that  their  bondage  should  terminate 
at  the  end  of  six  years,*  but  this  had  not  been 
observed:  "Your  fathers  hearkened  not  unto 
Me,  neither  inclined  their  ear."t  A  large  pro- 
portion of  those  then  in  slavery  must  have 
served  'more  than  six  years  ;t  and  partly  be- 
cause of  the  difficulty  of  discrimination  at  such 
a  crisis,  partly  by  way  of  atonement,  the  Jews 
undertook  to  liberate  all  their  slaves.  This 
solemn  reparation  was  made  because  the  limita- 
tion of  servitude  was  part  of  the  national  Torah, 
"  the  covenant  that  Jehovah  made  with  their 
fathers  in  the  day  that  He  brought  them  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  " — i.  e.,  the  Deutero- 
nomic  Code.  Hence  it  implied  the  renewed  rec- 
ognition of  Deuteronomy,  and  the  restoration  of 
the  ecclesiastical  order  established  by  Josiah's 
reforms. 

Even  Josiah's  methods  were  imitated.  He 
had  assembled  the  people  at  the  Temple  and 
made  them  enter  into  "  a  covenant  before  Je- 
hovah, to  walk  after  Jehovah,  to  keep  His  com- 
mandments and  testimonies  and  statutes  with  all 
their  heart  and  soul,  to  perform  the  words  of  this 
covenant  that  were  written  in  this  book.  And 
all  the  people  entered  into  the  covenant."§  So 
now  Zedekiah  in  turn  caused  the  people  to  make 
a  covenant  before  Jehovah,  "  in  the  house  which 
was  called  by  His  name,"  ||  "  that  every  one 
should  release  his  Hebrew  slaves,  male  and  fe- 
male, and  that  no  one  should  enslave  a  brother 
Jew."T[  A  further  sanction  had  been  given  to 
this  vow  by  the  observance  of  an  ancient  and  sig- 
nificant rite.  When  Jehovah  promised  to  Abra- 
ham a  seed  countless  as  the  stars  of  heaven,  He 
condescended  to  ratify  His  promise  by  causing 
the  symbols  of  His  presence — a  smoking  furnace 
and  a  burning  lamp — to  pass  between  the  divided 
halves  of  a  heifer,  a  she-goat,  a  ram,  and  between 
a  turtle-dove  and  a  young  pigeon.**  Now,  in  like 
manner,  a  calf  was  cut  in  twain,  the  two  halves 
laid  opposite  each  other,  and  "  the  princes  of 
Judah  and  Jerusalem,  the  eunuchs,  the  priests, 
and  all  the  people  of  the  land,  .  .  .  passed  be- 
tween the  parts  of  the  calf."  ft  Similarly,  after 
the  death  of  Alexander  the  Great,  the  contend- 
ing factions  in  the  Macedonian  army  ratified  a 
compromise  by  passing  between  the  two  halves 
of  a  dog.  Such  symbols  spoke  for  themselves: 
those   who   used  them  laid  themselves   under  a 

♦Deut.  XV.  12.    C/.  Exod.  xxi.  2,  xxiii.  10. 
+  xxxiv.  14. 

Jxxxiv.  13.  If  xxxiv.  9. 

§2  Kings  xxiii.  3-  **  Gen.  xv. 

H  xxxiv.  I  J.  ++ xxxiv.  iQ. 


curse;  they  prayed  that  if  they  violated  the  cove- 
nant they  might  be  slain  and  mutilated  like  the 
divided  animals. 

This  covenant  was  forthwith  carried  into  ef- 
fect, the  princes  and  people  liberating  their  He- 
brew slaves  according  to  their  vow.  We  can- 
not, however,  compare  this  event  with  the  abo- 
ition  of  slavery  in  British  colonies  or  with  Abra- 
ham Lincoln's  Decree  of  Emancipation.  The 
scale  is  altogether  different:  Hebrew  bondage 
had  no  horrors  to  compare  with  those  of  the 
American  plantations;  and  moreover,  even  at 
the  moment,  the  practical  results  cannot  have 
been  great.  Shut  up  in  a  beleaguered  city, 
harassed  by  the  miseries  and  terrors  of  a  siege, 
the  freedmen  would  see  little  to  rejoice  over  in 
their  new-found  freedom.  Unless  their  friends 
were  in  Jerusalem  they  could  not  rejoin  them, 
and  in  most  cases  they  could  only  obtain  suste- 
nance by  remaining  in  the  households  of  their 
former  masters,  or  by  serving  in  the  defending 
army.  Probably  this  special  ordinance  of  Deu- 
teronomy was  selected  as  the  subject  of  a  solemn 
covenant,  because  it  not  only  afforded  an  op- 
portunity of  atoning  for  past  sin,  but  also  pro- 
vided the  means  of  strengthening  the  national 
defence.  Such  expedients  were  common  in  an- 
cient states  in  moments  of  extreme  peril. 

In  view  of  Jeremiah's  persistent  efforts,  both 
before  and  after  this  incident,  to  make  his  coun- 
trymen loyally  accept  the  Chaldean  supremacy, 
we  cannot  doubt  that  he  hoped  to  make  terms 
between  Zedekiah  and  Nebuchadnezzar.  Ap- 
parently no  tidings  of  Pharaoh  Hophra's  ad- 
vance had  reached  Jerusalem;  and  the  non-ap- 
pearance of  his  "  horses  and  much  people  "  had 
discredited  the  Egyptian  party,  and  enabled  Jere- 
miah to  overthrow  their  influence  with  the  king 
and  people.  Egypt,  after  all  her  promises,  had 
once  more  proved  herself  a  broken  reed;  there 
was  nothing  left  but  to  throw  themselves  on 
Nebuchadnezzar's  mercy. 

But  the  situation  was  once  more  entirely 
changed  by  the  news  that  Pharaoh  Hophra  had 
come  forth  out  of  Egypt  "  with  a  mighty  army 
and  a  great  company."  *  The  sentinels  on  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem  saw  the  besiegers  break  up 
their  encampment,  and  march  away  to  meet  the 
relieving  army.  All  thought  of  submitting  to 
Babylon  was  given  up.  Indeed,  if  Pharaoh 
Hophra  were  to  be  victorious,  the  Jews  must 
of  necessity  accept  his  supremacy.  Meanwhile 
they  revelled  in  their  respite  from  present  dis- 
tress and  imminent  danger.  Surely  the  new 
covenant  was  bearing  fruit.  Jehovah  had  been 
propitiated  by  their  promise  to  observe  the 
Torah;  Pharaoh  was  the  instrument  by  which 
God  would  deliver  His  people;  or  even  if  the 
Egyptians  were  defeated,  the  Divine  resources 
were  not  exhausted.  When  Tirhakah  advanced 
to  the  relief  of  Hezekiah,  he  was  defeated  at 
Eltekeh,  yet  Sennacherib  had  returned  home 
baffled  and  disgraced.  Naturally  the  partisans 
of  Egypt,  the  opponents  of  Jeremiah,  recovered 
their  control  of  the  king  and  the  government. 
The  king  sent,  perhaps  at  the  first  news  of  the 
Egyptian  advance,  to  inquire  of  Jeremiah  con- 
cerning their  prospects  of  success.  What 
seemed  to  every  one  else  a  Divine  deliverance 
was  to  him  a  national  misfortune;  the  hopes  he 
had  once  more  indulged  of  averting  the  ruin  of 
Judah  were  again  dashed  to  the  ground.  His 
answer  is  bitter  and  gloomy: — 

*  Ezek.  xvii.  17. 


Jeremiah  xxi.,  xxxi v.,  xxxvii.]      A    BROKEN    COVENANT. 


159 


Behold,  Pharaoh's  army,  which  is  come  forth  to  help 
you, 

Shall  return  to  Egypt  into  their  own  land. 

The  Chaldeans  shall  come  again,  and  fight  against  this 
city  ; 

They  shall  take  itj  and  burn  it  with  fire. 

Thus  saith  Jehovah  : 

Do  not  deceive  yourselves,  saying, 

The  Chaldeans  shall  surely  depart  from  us  : 

They  shall  not  depart. 

Though  ye  had  smitten  the  whole  army  of  the  Chal- 
deans that  fight  against  you, 

And  there  remained  none  but  wounded  men  among 
them, 

Yet  should  they  rise  up  every  man  in  his  tent. 

And  burn  this  city  with  fire." 

Jeremiah's  protest  was  unavailing,  and  only  con- 
firmed the  king  and  princes  in  their  adherence  to 
Egypt.  Moreover  Jeremiah  had  now  formally 
disclaimed  any  sympathy  with  this  great  deliver- 
ance, which  Pharaoh— and  presumably  Jehovah 
— had  wrought  for  Judah.  Hence  it  was  clear 
that  the  people  did  not  owe  this  blessing  to  the 
covenant  to  which  they  had  submitted  themselves 
by  Jeremiah's  guidance.  As  at  Megiddo,  Jeho- 
vah had  shown  once  more  that  He  was  with 
Pharaoh  and  against  Jeremiah.  Probably  they 
would  best  please  God  by  renouncing  Jeremiah 
and  all  his  works — the  covenant  included. 
Moreover  they  could  take  back  their  slaves  with 
a  clear  conscience,  to  their  own  great  comfort 
and  satisfaction.  True,  they  had  sworn  in  the 
Temple  with  solemn  and  striking  ceremonies, 
but  then  Jehovah  Himself  had  manifestly  re- 
leased them  from  their  oath.  "  All  the  princes 
and  people  changed  their  mind,  and  reduced  to 
bondage  again  all  the  slaves  whom  they  had  set 
free.','  The  freedmen  had  been  rejoicing  with 
their  former  masters  in  the  prospect  of  national 
deliverance;  the  date  of  their  emancipation  was 
to  mark  the  beginning  of  a  new  era  of  Jewish 
happiness  and  prosperity.  When  the  siege  was 
raised  and  the  Chaldeans  driven  away,  they  could 
use  their  freedom  in  rebuilding  the  ruined  cities 
and  cultivating  the  wasted  lands.  To  all  such 
dreams  there  came  a  sudden  and  rough  awaken- 
ing: they  were  dragged  back  to  their  former 
hopeless  bondage — a  happy  augury  for  the  new 
dispensation  of  Divine  protection  and  blessing! 
Jeremiah  turned  upon  them  in  fierce  wrath, 
like  that  of  Elijah  against  Ahab  when  he  met 
him  taking  possession  of  Naboth's  vineyard. 
They  had  profaned  the  name  of  Jehovah,  and — 

"  Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah  : 
Ye  have  not  hearkened  unto  Me  to  proclaim  a  release 

every  one  to  his  brother  and  his  neighbour  : 
Behold,  I  proclaim  a  release  for  you — it  is  the  utterance 

of  Jehovah— unto  the    sword,  the  pestilence,  and 

the  famine  ; 
And  I  will  make  you  a  terror  among  all  the  kingdoms 

of  the  earth." 

The  prophet  plays  upon  the  word  "  release " 
with  grim  irony.  The  Jews  had  repudiated  the 
"  release  "  which  they  had  promised  under  sol- 
emn oath  to  their  brethren,  but  Jehovah  would 
not  allow  them  to  be  so  easily  quit  of  their 
covenant.  There  should  be  a  "  release "  after 
all,  and  they  themselves  should  have  the  benefit 
of  it — a  "  release  "  from  happiness  and  prosper- 
ity, from  the  sacred  bounds  of  the  Temple,  the 
Holy  City,  and  the  Land  of  Promise — a  "  re- 
lease "  unto  "  the  sword,  the  pestilence,  and  the 
famine." 

*'  I  will  give  the  men  that  have  transgressed  My  covenant 
;nto  the  hands  of  their  enemies.  .  .  . 
Their  dead  bodies  shall  be  ineat  for  the  fowls  of  heaven 
and  tor  the  beasts  of  the  earth. 


Zedekiah  king  of  Judah  and  his  princes  will  I  give  into 

the  hand  of  .  .   .  the  host  of  the  king  of  Babylon, 

which  are  gone  up  from  you. 
Behold,  I  will  command— it  is  the  u"  terance  of  Jehovah— 

and  will  bring  them  back  unci  this  city  : 
They  shall  fight  against  it,  and  take  it,  and  burn  it  with 

fire. 
I  will  lay  the  cities  of  Judah  waste,  without  inhabitant." 

Another  broken  covenant  was  added  to  the  list 
of  Judah's  sins,  another  promise  of  amendment 
speedily  lost  in  disappointment  and.  condemna- 
tion. Jeremiah  might  well  say  with  his  favourite 
Rosea: —  ^ 

"  Oh  Judah,  what  shall  I  do  unto  thee  ? 
Your  goodness  is  as  a  morning  cloud. 
And  as  the  dew  that  goeth  early  away."  * 

This  incident  has  many  morals;  one  of  the 
most  obvious  is  the  futility  of  the  most  stringent 
oaths  and  the  most  solemn  symbolic  ritual. 
Whatever  influence  oaths  may  have  in  causing 
a  would-be  liar  to  speak  the  truth,  they  are  very 
poor  guarantees  for  the  performance  of  con- 
tracts. William  the  Conqueror  profited  little  by 
Harold's  oath  to  help  him  to  the  crown  of  Eng- 
land, though  it  was  sworn  over  the  relics  of 
holy  saints.  Wulfnoth's  whisper  in  "Tennyson's 
drama — 

"  Swear  thou  to-day,  to-morrow  is  thine  own  "— 

states  the  principle  on  which  many  oaths  have 
been  taken.  The  famous  "  blush  of  Sigis- 
niund "  over  the  violation  of  his  safe-conduct 
to  Huss  was  rather  a  token  of  untisual  sensitive- 
ness than  a  confession  of  exceptional  guilt.  The 
Christian  Church  has  exalted  perfidy  into  a  sa- 
cred obligation.     As  Milman  says*; — 

"  The  fatal  doctrine,  confirmed  by  long  usage, 
by  the  decrees  of  Pontiffs,  by  the  assent  of  all 
ecclesiastics,  and  the  acquiescence  of  the  Chris- 
tian world,  that  no  promise,  no  oath,  was  bind- 
ing to  a  heretic,  had  hardly  been  questioned, 
never  repudiated." 

At  first  sight  an  oath  seems  to  give  firm  as- 
surance to  a  promise;  what  was  merely  a  promise 
to  man  is  made  into  a  promise  to  God.  What 
can  be  more  binding  upon  the  conscience  than 
a  promise  to  God?  True;  but  He  to  whom  the 
promise  is  made  may  always  release  from  its  per- 
formance. To  persist  in  what  God  neither  re- 
quires nor  desires  because  of  a  promise  to  God 
seems  absurd  and  even  wicked.  It  has  been  said 
that  men  "  have  a  way  of  calling  everything  they 
want  to  do  a  dispensation  of  Providence."  Sim- 
ilarly, there  are  many  ways  by  which  a  man  may 
persuade  himself  that  God  has  cancelled  his 
vows,  especially  if  he  belongs  to  an  infallible 
Church  with  a  Divine  commission  to  grant  dis- 
pensations. No  doubt  these  Jewish  slaveholders 
had  full  sacerdotal  absolution  from  their  pledge. 
The  priests  had  slaves  of  their  own.  Failing 
ecclesiastical  aid,  Satan  himself  will  play  the 
casuist — it  is  one  of  his  favourite  parts — and  will 
find  the  traitor  full  justification  for  breaking  the 
most  solemn  contract  with  Heaven.  If  a  man's 
whole  soul  and  purpose  go  with  his  promise, 
oaths  are  superfluous;  otherwise,  they  are  use- 
less. 

However,  the  main  lesson  of  the  incident  lies 
in  its  added  testimony  to  the  supreme  impor- 
tance which  the  prophets  attached  to  social 
righteousness.  When  Jeremiah  wished  to  knit 
together  again  the  bonds  of  fellowship  betweeo 

*  Hosea  vi.  4. 

tMilman's  "  Latin  Christianity,"  viii.  255. 


i6o 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


Judah  and  its  God,  he  did  not  make  them  enter 
into  a  covenant  to  observe  ritual  or  to  cultivate 
pious  sentiments,  but  to  release  their  slaves.  It 
has  been  said  that  a  gentleman  may  be  known  by 
the  way  in  which  he  treats  his  servants;  a  man's 
religion  is  better  tested  by  his  behaviour  to  his 
helpless  dependents  than  by  his  attendance  on 
the  means  of  grace  or  his  predilection  for  pious 
conversation.  If  we  were  right  in  supposing  that 
the  government  supported  Jeremiah  because  the 
act  of  emancipation  would  furnish  recruits  to 
man  the  walls,  this  illustrates  the  ultimate  de- 
pendence of  society  upon  the  working  classes. 
In  emergencies,  desperate  efforts  are  made  to 
coerce  or  cajole  them  into  supporting  govern- 
m.ents  by  which  they  have  been  neglected  or  op- 
pressed. The  sequel  to  this  covenant  shows  how 
barren  and  transient  are  concessions  begotten 
by  the  terror  of  imminent  ruin.  The  social 
covenant  between  all  classes  of  the  community 
needs  to  be  woven  strand  by  strand  through 
long  years  of  mutual  helpfulness  and  goodwill, 
of  peace  and  prosperity,  if  it  is  to  endure  the 
strain  of  national  peril  and  disaster. 


CHAPTER   XII. 

JEREMIAH'S  IMPRISONMENT. 

Jeremiah  xxxvii.   11-21,   xxxviii.,   xxxix.    15-18. 

"  Jeremiah  abode  in  the  court  of  the  guard  until  the 
day  that  Jerusalem  was  taken."— Jer.  xxxviii.  28. 

"When  the  Chaldean  army  was  broken  up  from 
Jerusalem  for  fear  of  Pharaoh's  army,  Jeremiah 
went  forth  out  of  Jerusalem  to  go  into  the  land 
of  Benjamin  "  to  transact  certain  family  business 
at  Anathoth.* 

He  had  announced  that  all  who  remained  in 
the  city  should  perish,  and  that  only  those  who 
deserted  to  the  Chaldeans  should  escape.  In 
these  troubled  times  all  who  sought  to  enter  or 
leave  Jerusalem  were  subjected  to  close  scrutiny, 
and  when  Jeremiah  wished  to  pass  through  the 
gate  of  Benjamin  he  was  stopped  by  the  officer 
in  charge — Irijah  ben  Shelemiah  ben  Hananiah 
— and  accused  of  being  about  to  practise  himself 
what  he  had  preached  to  the  people:  "Thou 
fallest  away  to  the  Chaldeans."  The  suspicion 
was  natural  enough;  for,  although  the  Chal- 
deans had  raised  the  siege  and  marched  away 
to  the  southwest,  while  the  gate  of  Benjamin  was 
on  the  north  of  the  city,  Irijah  might  reasonably 
suppose  that  they  had  left  detachments  in  the 
neighbourhood,  and  that  this  zealous  advocate 
of  sjibmission  to  Babylon  had  special  informa- 
tion on  the  subject.  Jeremiah  indeed  had  the 
strongest  motives  for  seeking  safety  in  flight. 
The  party  whom  he  had  consistently  denounced 
had  full  control  of  the  government,  and  even 
if  they  spared  him  for  the  present  any  decisive 
victory  over  the  enemy  would  be  the  signal  for 
his  execution.  When  once  Pharaoh  Hophra 
was  in  full  march  upon  Jerusalem  at  the  head 
of  a  victorious  army,  his  friends  would  show  no 
mercy  to  Jeremiah.  Probably  Irijah  was  eager 
to  believe  in  the  prophet's  treachery,  and  ready 
to  snatch  at  any  pretext  for  arresting  him.  The 
name  of  the  captain's  grandfather — Hananiah — 
is  too  common  to  suggest  any  connection  with 
the   prophet   who   withstood   Jeremiah;    but   we 

*  Cf.  xxxii.  6-8. 


may  be  sure  that  at  this  crisis  the  gates  were 
in  charge  of  trusty  adherents  of  the  princes  of 
the  Egyptian  party.  Jeremiah  would  be  sus- 
pected and  detested  by  such  men  as  these.  His 
vehement  denial  of  the  charge  was  received  with 
real  or  feigned  incredulity;  Irijah  '"  hearkened 
not  unto  him." 

The  arrest  took  place  "in  the  midst  of  the 
people."  *  The  gate  was  crowded  with  other 
Jews  hurrying  out  of  Jerusalem:  citizens  eager 
to  breathe  more  freely  after  being  cooped  up  in 
the  overcrowded  city;  countrymen  anxious  to 
find  out  what  their  farms  and  homesteads  had 
suffered  at  the  hands  of  the  invaders;  not  a  few, 
perhaps,  bound  on  the  very  errand  of  which  Jere- 
miah was  accused,  friends  of  Babylon,  convinced 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  would  ultimately  triumph, 
and  hoping  to  find  favour  and  security  in  his 
camp.  Critical  events  of  Jeremiah's  life  had 
often  been  transacted  before  a  great  assembly; 
for  instance,  his  own  address  and  trial  in  the 
Temple,  and  the  reading  of  the  roll.  He  knew 
the  practical  value  of  a  dramatic  situation.  This 
time  he  had  sought  the  crowd,  rather  to  avoid 
than  attract  attention;  but  when  he  was  chal- 
lenged by  Irijah,  the  accusation  and  denial  must 
have  been  heard  by  all  around.  The  soldiers 
of  the  guard,  necessarily  hostile  to  the  man  who 
had  counselled  submission,  gathered  round  to 
secure  their  prisoner;  for  a  time  the  gate  was 
blocked  by  the  guards  and  spectators.  The 
latter  do  not  seem  to  have  interfered.  Formerly 
the  priests  and  prophets  and  all  the  people  had 
laid  hold  on  Jeremiah,  and  afterwards  all  the 
people  had  acquitted  him  by  acclamation.  Now 
his  enemies  were  content  to  leave  him  in  the 
hands  of  the  soldiers,  and  his  friends,  if  he  had 
any,  were  afraid  to  attempt  a  rescue.  Moreover 
men's  minds  were  not  at  leisure  and  craving  for 
new  excitement,  as  at  Temple  festivals;  they 
were  preoccupied,  and  eager  to  get  out  of  the 
city.  While  the  news  quickly  spread  that  Jere- 
miah had  been  arrested  as  he  was  trying  to 
desert,  his  guards  cleared  a  way  through  the 
crowd,  and  brought  the  prisoner  before  the 
princes.  The  latter  seem  to  have  acted  as  a 
Committee  of  National  Defence;  they  may  either 
have  been  sitting  at  the  time,  or  a  meeting,  as 
on  a  previous  occasion,!  may  have  been  called 
when  it  was  known  that  Jeremiah  had  been  ar- 
rested. Among  them  were  probably  those  enu- 
merated later  on::]:  Shephatiah  ben  Mattan, 
Gedaliah  ben  Pashhur,  Jucal  ben  Shelemiah,  and 
Pashhur  ben  Malchiah.  Shephatiah  and  Geda- 
liah are  named  only  here;  possibly  Gedaliah's 
father  was  Pashhur  ben  Immer,  who  beat  Jere- 
miah and  put  him  in  the  stocks.  Both  Jucal  and 
Pashhur  ben  Malchiah  had  been  sent  by  the 
king  to  consult  Jeremiah.  Jucal  may  have  been 
the  son  of  the  Shelemiah  who  was  sent  to  arrest 
Jeremiah  and  Baruch  after  the  reading  of  the 
roll.  We  note  the  absence  of  the  princes  who 
then  formed  Baruch's  audience,  some  of  whom 
tried  to  dissuade  Jehoiakim  from  burning  the 
roll;  and  we  especially  miss  the  prophet's  former 
friend  and  protector,  Ahikam  ben  Shaphan. 
Fifteen  or  sixteen  years  had  elapsed  since  these 
earlier  events:  some  of  Jeremiah's  adherents  were 
dead,  others  in  exile,  others  powerless  to  help 
him.  We  may  safely  conclude  that  his  judges 
were  his  personal  and  political  enemies.    Jere- 

*  xxxvii.  12  ;  so  R.  V.,  Streane  (Camb.  Bible),  Kautzsch. 
etc. 

t  xxvi.  10.  t  xxxviii.  i. 


Jeremiah  xxxvii.-xxxix.]  JEREMIAH'S    IMPRISONMENT. 


lOl 


iiiiah  was  now  their  discomfited  rival.  A  few 
weeks  before  he  had  been  master  of  the  city 
and  the  court.  Pharaoh  Hophra's  advance  had 
enabled  them  to  overthrow  him.  We  can  un- 
derstand that  they  would  at  once  take  Irijah's 
view  of  the  case.  They  treated  their  fallen  an- 
tagonist as  a  criminal  taken  in  the  act:  "  they 
were  wroth  with  him."  i.  e.,  they  overwhelmed 
him  with  a  torrent  of  abuse;  "  they  beat  him,  and 
put  him  in  prison  in  the  house  of  Jonathan  the 
secretary."  But  this  imprisonment  in  a  private 
house  was  not  mild  and  honourable  confine- 
ment under  the  care  of  a  distinguished  noble, 
who  was  rather  courteous  host  than  harsh 
gaoler.  "  They  had  made  that  the  prison,"  duly 
provided  with  a  dungeon  and  cells,  to  which 
Jeremiah  was  consigned  and  where  he  remained 
"  many  days."  Prison  accommodation  at  Jeru- 
salem was  limited;  the  Jewish  government  pre- 
ferred more  summary  methods  of  dealing  with 
malefactors.  The  revolution  which  had  placed 
the  present  government  in  power  had  given  them 
special  occasion  for  a  prison.  They  had  de- 
feated rivals  whom  they  did  not  venture  to  ex- 
ecute publicly,  but  who  might  be  more  safely 
starved  and  tortured  to  death  in  secret.  For 
such  a  fate  they  destined  Jeremiah.  We  shall 
not  do  injustice  to  Jonathan  the  secretary  if  we 
compare  the  hospitality  which  he  extended  to 
his  unwilling  guests  with  the  treatment  of  mod- 
ern Armenians  in  Turkish  prisons.  Yet  the 
prophet  remained  alive  "for  many  days"; 
probably  his  enemies  reflected  that  even  if  he 
did  not  succumb  earlier  to  the  hardships  of  his* 
imprisonment,  his  execution  would  suitably 
adorn  the  looked-for  triumph  of  Pharaoh 
Hophra. 

Few  however  of  the  "  many  days  "  had  passed 
before  men's  exultant  anticipations  of  victory 
and  deliverance  began  to  give  place  to  anxious 
forebodings.  They  had  hoped  to  hear  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  been  defeated  and  was  in 
headlong  retreat  to  Chaldea;  they  had  been  pre- 
pared to  join  in  the  pursuit  of  the  routed  army, 
to  gratify  their  revenge  by  massacring  the  fugi- 
tives, and  to  share  the  plunder  with  their 
Egyptian  allies.  The  fortunes  of  war  belied  their 
hopes:  Pharaoh  retreated,  either  after  a  battle 
or  perhaps  even  without  fighting.  The  return 
of  the  enemy  was  announced  by  the  renewed 
influx  of  the  country  people  to  seek  the  shelter 
of  the  fortifications,  and  soon  the  Jews  crowded 
to  the  walls  as  Nebuchadnezzar's  vanguard  ap- 
peared in  sight  and  the  Chaldeans  occupied  their 
old  lines  and  re-formed  the  siege  of  the  doomed 
city. 

There  was  no  longer  any  doubt  that  prudence 
dictated  immediate  surrender.  It  was  the  only 
course  by  which  the  people  might  be  spared 
some  of  the  horrors  of  a  prolonged  siege,  fol- 
lowed by  the  sack  of  the  city.  But  the  princes 
who  controlled  the  government  were  too  deeply 
compromised  with  Egypt  to  dare  to  hope  for 
mercy.  With  Jeremiah  out  of  the  way,  they 
were  able  to  induce  the  king  and  the  people  to 
maintain  their  resistance,  and  the  siege  went  on. 

But  though  Zedekiah  was,  for  the  most  part, 
powerless  in  the  hands  of  the  princes,  he  ven- 
tured now  and  then  to  assert  himself  in  minor 
matters,  and,  like  other  feeble  sovereigns,  de- 
rived some  consolation  amidst  his  many  troubles 
from  intriguing  with  the  opposition  against  his 
own  ministers.  His  feeling  and  behaviour  to- 
wards Jeremiah  were  similar  to  those  of 
11— Vol.  IV. 


Charles  IX.  towards  Coligny,  only  circumstances 
made  the  Jewish  king  a  more  efficient  protector 
of  Jeremiah. 

At  this  new  and  disastrous  turn  of  affairs, 
which  was  an  exact  fulfilment  of  Jeremiah's 
warnings,  the  king  was  naturally  inclined  to  re- 
vert to  his  former  faith  in  the  prophet — if  in- 
deed he  had  ever  really  been  able  to  shake  him- 
self free  from  his  influence.  Left  to  himself  he 
would  have  done  his  best  to  make-  terms  with 
Nebuchadnezzar,  as  Jehoiakim  and  Jehoiachin 
had  done  before  him.  The  only  trustworthy 
channel  of  help,  human  or  divine,  was  Jeremiah. 
Accordingly  he  sent  secretly  to  the  prison  and 
had  the  prophet  brought  into  the  palace.  There 
in  some  inner  chamber,  carefully  guarded  from 
intrusion  by  the  slaves  of  the  palace,  Zedekiah 
received  the  man  who  now  for  more  than  forty 
years  had  been  the  chief  counsellor  of  the  kings 
of  Judah,  often  in  spite  of  thelnselves.  Like 
Saul  on  the  eve  of  Gilboa,  he  was  too  impatient 
to  let  disaster  be  its  own  herald;  the  silence  of 
Heaven  seemed  more  terrible  than  any  spoken 
doom,  and  again  like  Saul  he  turned  in  his  per- 
plexity and  despair  to  the  prophet  who  had  re- 
buked and  condemned  him.  "  Is  there  any  word 
from  Jehovah?  And  Jeremiah  said,  There  is: 
.  .  .  thou  shalt  be  delivered  into  the  hand  of 
the  king  of  Babylon." 

The  Church  is  rightly  proud  of  Ambrose  re- 
buking Theodosius  at  the  height  of  his  power 
and  glory,  and  of  Thomas  a  Becket,  unarmed 
and  yet  defiant  before  his  murderers;  but  the 
Jewish  prophet  showed  himself  capable  of  a  sim- 
pler and  grander  heroism.  For  "  many  days  " 
he  had  endured  squalor,  confinement,  and  semi- 
starvation.  His  body  must  have  been  enfeebled 
and  his  spirit  depressed.  Weak  and  contempti- 
ble as  Zedekiah  was,  yet  he  was  the  prophet's 
only  earthly  protector  from  the  malice  of  his 
enemies.  He  intended  to  utilise  this  interview 
for  an  appeal  for  release  from  his  present  prison. 
Thus  he  had  every  motive  for  conciliating  the 
man  who  asked  him  for  a  word  from  Jehovah. 
He  was  probably  alone  with  Zedekiah,  and  was 
not  nerved  to  self-sacrifice  by  any  opportunity 
of  making  public  testimony  to  the  truth,  and  yet 
he  was  faithful  alike  to  God  and  to  the  poor 
helpless  king — "  Thou  shalt  be  delivered  into 
the  hand  of  the  king  of  Babylon." 

And  then  he  proceeds,  with  what  seems  to  us 
inconsequent  audacity,  to  ask  a  favour.  Did 
ever  petitioner  to  a  king  preface  his  supplication 
with  so  strange  a  preamble?  This  was  the  re- 
quest:— 

"  Now  hear,  I  pray  thee,  O  my  lord  the  king: 
let  my  supplication,  I  pray  thee,  be  accepted  be- 
fore thee;  that  thou  do  not  cause  me  to  return 
to  the  house  of  Jonathan  the  secretary,  lest  I 
die  there. 

"  Then  Zedekiah  the  king  commanded,  and 
they  committed  Jeremiah  into  the  court  of  the 
guard,  and  they  gave  him  daily  a  loaf  of  bread 
out  of  the  bakers'  street." 

A  loaf  of  bread  is  not  sumptuous  fare,  but  it 
is  evidently  mentioned  as  an  improvement  upon 
his  prison  diet:  it  is  not  difficult  to  understand 
why  Jeremiah  was  afraid  he  would  die  in  the 
house  of  Jonathan. 

During  this  milder  imprisonment  in  the  court 
of  the  guard  occurred  the  incident  of  the  pur- 
chase of  the  field  of  Anathoth,  which  we  have 
dealt  with  in  another  chapter.  This  low  ebb  of 
the  prophet's  fortunes  was  the  occasion  of  Di- 


l63 


THE    BOOK    OF   JEREMIAH. 


vine  revelation  of  a  glorious  future  in  store  for 
judali.  But  this  future  was  still  remote,  and 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  conspicuous  in  his 
public  teaching.  On  the  contrary  Jeremiah 
availed  himself  of  the  comparative  publicity  of 
his  new  place  of  detention  to  reiterate  in  the 
ears  of  all  the  people  the  gloomy  predictions 
with  which  they  had  so  long  been  familiar: 
"  This  city  shall  assuredly  be  given  into  the  hand 
of  the  army  of  the  king  of  Babylon."  He  again 
urged  his  hearers  to  desert  to  the  enemy:  "  He 
that  abideth  in  this  city  shall  die  by  the  sword, 
the  famine,  and  the  pestilence;  but  he  that  goeth 
forth  to  the  Chaldeans  shall  live."  We  cannot 
but  admire  the  splendid  courage  of  the  solitary 
prisoner,  helpless  in  the  hands  of  his  enemies 
and  yet  openly  defying  them.  He  left  his  op- 
ponents only  two  alternatives,  either  to  give  up 
the  government  into  his  hands  or  else  to  silence 
him.  Jeremiah  in  the  court  of  the  guard  was 
really  carrying  on  a  struggle  in  which  neither 
side  either  would  or  could  give  quarter.  He  was 
trying  to  revive  the  energies  of  the  partisans  of 
Babylon,  that  they  might  overpower  the  govern- 
ment and  surrender  the  city  to  Nebuchadnezzar. 
If  he  had  succeeded,  the  princes  would  have  had 
a  short  shrift.  They  struck  back  with  the  prompt 
energy  of  men  fighting  for  their  lives.  No  gov- 
ernment conducting  the  defence  of  a  besieged 
fortress  could  have  tolerated  Jeremiah  for  a  mo- 
ment. What  would  have  been  the  fate  of  a 
French  politician  who  should  have  urged 
Parisians  to  desert  to  the  Germans  during  the 
siege  of  1870?  *  The  princes'  former  attempt  to 
deal  with  Jeremiah  had  been  thwarted  by  the 
king;  this  time  they  tried  to  provide  beforehand 
against  any  officious  intermeddling  on  the  part 
of  Zedekiah.  They  extorted  from  him  a  sanction 
of  their  proceedings. 

"  Then  the  princes  said  unto  the  king,  Let  this 
man,  we  pray  thee,  be  put  to  death:  for  he 
weakeneth  the  hands  of  the  soldiers  that  are  left 
in  this  city,  and  of  all  the  people,  by  speaking 
such  words  unto  them:  for  this  man  seeketh  not 
the  welfare  of  this  people,  but  the  hurt."  Cer- 
tainly Jeremiah's  word  was  enough  to  take  the 
heart  out  of  the  bravest  soldiers;  his  preach- 
ing would  soon  have  rendered  further  resistance 
impossible.  But  the  concluding  sentence  about 
the  "  welfare  of  the  people  "  was  merely  cheap 
cant,  not  without  parallel  in  the  sayings  of  many 
"  princes  "  in  later  times.  "  The  welfare  of  the 
people  "  would  have  been  best  promoted  by  the 
surrender  which  Jeremiah  advocated.  The  king 
does  not  pretend  to  sympathise  with  the  princes; 
he  acknowledges  himself  a  mere  tool  in  their 
hands.  "  Behold,"  he  answers,  "  he  is  in  your 
power,  for  the  king  can  do  nothing  against  you." 

"  Then  they  took  Jeremiah,  and  cast  him  into 
the  cistern  of  Malchiah  ben  Hammelech,  that 
was  in  the  court  of  the  guard;  and  they  let 
Jeremiah  down  with  cords.  And  there  was  no 
water  in  the  cistern,  only  mud,  and  Jeremiah 
sank  in  the  mud." 

The  depth  of  this  improvised  oubliette  is 
shown  by  the  use  of  cords  to  let  the  prisoner 
down  into  it.  How  was  it,  however,  that,  after 
the  release  of  Jeremiah  from  the  cells  in  the 
house  of  Jonathan,  the  princes  did  not  at  once 
execute  him?  Probably,  in  spite  of  all  that  had 
happened,  they  still  felt  a  superstitious  dread  of 
actually  shedding  the  blood  of  a  prophet.  In 
some  mysterious  way  they  felt  that  they  would 
*  Cf.  Renan,  iii.  333. 


be  less  guilty  if  they  left  him  in  the  empty  cis- 
lern  to  starve  to  death  or  be  suffocated  in  the 
nmd,  than  if  they  had  his  head  cut  off.  They 
acted  in  the  spirit  of  Reuben's  advice  concern- 
ing Joseph,  who  also  was  cast  into  an  empty 
pit,  with  no  water  in  it:  "  Shed  no  blood,  but 
cast  him  into  this  pit  in  the  wilderness,  and  lay 
no  hand  upon  him."  *  By  a  similar  blending  of 
hypocrisy  and  superstition,  the  mediaeval  Church 
thought  to  keep  herself  unstained  by  the  blood 
of  heretics,  by  handing  them  over  to  the  secular 
arm;  and  Macbeth,  having  hired  some  one  else 
to  kill  Banquo,  was  emboldened  to  confront  his 
ghost  with  the  words: — 

"Thou  canst  not  say  I  did  it.    Never  shake 
Thy  gory  locks  at  me." 

But  the  princes  were  again  baffled;  th^  prophet 
had  friends  in  the  royal  household  who  were 
bolder  than  their  master:  Ebed-melech  the 
Ethiopian,  an  eunuch,  heard  that  they  had  put 
Jeremiah  in  the  cistern.  He  went  to  the  king, 
who  was  then  sitting  in  the  gate  of  Benjamin, 
where  he  would  be  accessible  to  any  petitioner 
for  favour  or  justice,  and  interceded  for  the 
prisoner: — 

"  My  lord  the  king,  these  men  have  done  evil 
in  all  that  they  have  done  to  Jeremiah  the 
prophet,  whom  they  have  cast  into  the  cistern; 
and  he  is  like  to  die  in  the  place  where  he  is 
because  of  the  famine,  for  there  is  no  more 
bread  in  the  city." 

Apparently  the  princes,  busied  with  the  de- 
fence of  the  city  and  in  their  pride  "  too  much 
despising  "  their  royal  master,  had  left  him  for 
a  while  to  himself.  Emboldened  by  this  public 
appeal  to  act  according  to  the  dictates  of  his 
own  heart  and  conscience,  and  possibly  by  the 
presence  of  other  friends  of  Jeremiah,  the  king 
acts  with  unwonted  courage  and  decision. 

"  The  king  commanded  Ebed-melech  the 
Ethiopian,  saying,  Take  with  thee  hence  thirty 
men,  and  draw  up  Jeremiah  the  prophet  out  of 
the  cistern,  before  he  die.  So  Ebed-melech  took 
the  men  with  him,  and  went  into  the  palace 
under  the  treasury,  and  took  thence  old  cast 
clouts  and  rotten  rags,  and  let  them  down  by 
cords  into  the  cistern  to  Jeremiah.  And  he  said 
to  Jeremiah,  Put  these  old  cast  clouts  and  rotten 
rags  under  thine  armholes  under  the  cords.  And 
Jeremiah  did  so.  So  they  drew  him  up  with  the 
cords,  and  took  him  up  out  of  the  cistern:  and 
he  remained  in  the  court  of  the  guard." 

Jeremiah's  gratitude  to  his  deliverer  is  re- 
corded in  a  short  paragraph  in  which  Ebed- 
melech,  like  Baruch,  is  promised  that  "  his  life 
shall  be  given  him  for  a  prey."  He  should  es- 
cape with  his  life  from  the  sack  of  the  city — 
"  because  he  trusted "  in  Jehovah.  As  of  the 
ten  lepers  whom  Jesus  cleansed  only  the  Sa- 
maritan returned  to  give  glory  to  God,  so  when 
none  of  God's  people  were  found  to  rescue  His 
prophet,  the  dangerous  honour  was  accepted  by 
an  Ethiopian  proselyte.f 

Meanwhile  the  king  was  craving  for  yet  an- 
other "  word  with  Jehovah."  True,  the  last 
"  word "  given  him  by  the  prophet  had  been, 
"  Thou  shalt  be  delivered  into  the  hand  of  the 
king  of  Babylon."  But  now  that  he  had  just 
rescued  Jehovah's  prophet  from  a  miserable 
death  (he  forgot  that  Jeremiah  had  been  con- 
signed to  the  cistern  by  his  own  authority),  pos- 
sibly there  might  be  some  more  encouraging 
*  Gen.  xxxvii.  22-24.  txxxix.  ij-i8. 


Jeremiah  xxxvii-xxxix.]  JEREMIAH'S    IMPRISONMENT. 


163 


message  from  God  Accordingly  he  sent  and 
took  Jeremiah  unto  him  for  another  secret  in- 
terview, this  time  in  the  "  corridor  of  the  body- 
guard," *  a  passage  between  the  palace  and  the 
Temple. 

Here  he  implored  the  prophet  to  give  him  a 
faithful  answer  to  his  questions  concerning  his 
own  fate  and  that  of  the  city:  "  Hide  nothing 
Vom  me."  Bu*:  Jeremiah  did  not  respond  with 
liis  former  prompt  frankness.  He  had  had  too 
recent  a  warning  not  to  put  his  trust  in  princes. 
"  If  I  declare  it  unto  thee,"  said  he,  "  wilt  thou 
not  surely  put  me  to  death?  and  if  I  give  thee 
<:ounsel,  thou  wilt  not  hearken  unto  me.  So 
Zedekiah  the  king  sware  secretly  to  Jeremiah, 
As  Jehovah  liveth,  who  is  the  source  and  giver 
'of  our  life,  I  will  not  put  thee  to  death,  neither 
will  I  give  thee  into  the  hand  of  these  men  that 
Keek  thy  life. 

"  Then  said  Jeremiah  unto  Zedekiah,  Thus 
.saith  Jehovah,  the  God  of  hosts,  the  God  of 
Israel:  If  thou  wilt  go  forth  unto  the  king  of 
Babylon's  princes,  thy  life  shall  be  spared,  and 
^his  city  shall  not  be  burned,  and  thou  and  thine 
house  shall  live;  but  if  thou  wilt  not  go  forth, 
then  shall  this  city  be  given  into  the  hand  of 
^he  Chaldeans,  and  they  shall  burn  it,  and  thou 
shalt  not  escape  out  of  their  hand. 

"  Zedekiah  said  unto  Jeremiah,  I  am  afraid  of 
the  Jews  that  have  deserted  to  the  Chaldeans, 
lest  they  deliver  me  into  their  hand,  and  they 
mock  me." 

He  does  not,  however,  urge  that  the  princes 
will  hinder  any  such  surrender;  he  believed  him- 
self sufficiently  master  of  his  own  actions  to  be 
able  to  escape  to  the  Chaldeans  if  he  chose. 

But  evidently,  when  he  first  revolted  against 
Babylon,  and  more  recently  when  the  siege  was 
raised,  he  had  been  induced  to  behave  harshly 
towards  her  partisans:  they  had  taken  refuge  in 
considerable  numbers  in  the  enemy's  camp,  and 
now  he  was  afraid  of  their  vengeance.  Sim- 
ilarly, in  "  Quentin  Durward,"  Scott  represents 
Louis  XI.  on  his  visit  to  Charles  the  Bold  as 
startled  by  the  sight  of  the  banners  of  some  of 
his  own  vassals,  who  had  taken  service  with 
Burgundy,  and  as  seeking  protection  from 
Charles  against  the  rebel  subjects  of  France. 

Zedekiah  is  a  perfect  monument  of  the  mis- 
eries that  wait  upon  weakness:  he  was  every- 
body's friend  in  turn — now  a  docile  pupil  of 
Jeremiah  and  gratifying  the  Chaldean  party  by 
his  professions  of  loyalty  to  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  now  a  pliant  tool  in  the  hands  of  the 
Egyptian  party,  persecuting  his  former  friends. 
At  the  last  he  was  afraid  alike  of  the  princes  in 
the  city,  of  the  exiles  in  the  enemy's  camp,  and 
of  the  Chaldeans.  The  mariner  who  had  to  pass 
between  Scylla  and  Charybdis  was  fortunate 
compared  to  Zedekiah.  To  the  end  he  clung 
with  a  pathetic  blending  of  trust  and  fearfulness 
to  Jeremiah.  He  believed  him,  and  yet  he 
seldom  had  courage  to  act  according  to  his 
counsel. 

Jeremiah  made  a  final  eflfort  to  induce  this 
timid  soul  to  act  with  firmness  and  decision.  He 
tried  to  reassure  him:  "They  shall  not  deliver 
thee  into  the  hands  of  thy  revolted  subjects. 
Obey,  I  beseech  thee,  the  voice  of  Jehovah,  in 
that  which  I  speak  unto  thee:  so  it  shall  be  well 
with  thee,  and  tliy  life  shall  be  spared."     He  ap- 

*  So  Giesebrecht,  in  loco;  A.  V.,  R.  V.,  "third  entry.'' 
In  any  case  it  will  naturally  be  a  passage  from  the  palace 
to  the  Temple. 


pealed  to  that  very  dread  of  ridicule  which  the 
king  had  just  betrayed.  If  he  refused  to  sur- 
render, he  would  be  taunted  for  his  weakness 
and  folly  by  the  women  of  his  own  harem: — 

"  If  thou  refuse  to  go  forth,  this  is  the  word 
that  Jehovah  hath  showed  me:  Behold,  all  the 
women  left  in  the  palace  shall  be  brought  forth 
to  the  king  of  Babylon's  princes,  and  those 
women  shall  say.  Thy  familiar  friends  have 
duped  thee  and  got  the  better  of  thee;  thy  feet 
are  sunk  in  the  mire,  and  they  have  left  thee 
in  the  lurch."  He  would  be  in  worse  plight  than 
that  from  which  Jeremiah  had  only  just  been 
rescued,  and  there  would  be  no  Ebed-melech  to 
draw  him  out.  He  would  be  humiliated  by  the 
suffering  and  shame  of  his  own  family:  "They 
shall  bring  out  all  thy  wives  and  children  to  the 
Chaldeans."  He  himself  would  share  with  them 
the  last  extremity  of  suffering:  "Thou  shalt  not 
escape  out  of  their  hand,  but  shalt  be  taken  by 
the  hand  of  the  king  of  Babylon." 

And  as  Tennyson  makes  it  the  climax  of 
Geraint's  degeneracy  that  he  was  not  only — 

"  Forgetful  of  his  glory  and  his  name," 

but  also — 

"  Forgetful  of  his  princedom  and  its  cares," 

so  Jeremiah  appeals  last  of  all  to  the  king's  sense 
of  responsibility  for  his  people:  "Thou  wilt  be 
the  cause  of  the  burning  of  the  city." 

In  spite  of  the  dominance  of  the  Egyptian 
party,  and  their  desperate  determination,  not 
only  to  sell  their  own  lives  dearly,  but  also  to  in- 
volve king  and  people,  city  and  temple,  in  their 
own  ruin,  the  power  of  decisive  action  still 
rested  with  Zedekiah;  if  he  failed  to  use  it,  he 
would  be  responsible  for  the  consequences. 

Thus  Jeremiah  strove  to  possess  the  king  with 
some  breath  of  his  own  dauntless  spirit  and  iron 
will. 

Zedekiah  paused  irresolute.  A  vision  of  pos- 
sible deliverance  passed  through  his  mind.  His 
guards  and  the  domestics  of  the  palace  were 
within  call.  The  princes  were  unprepared;  they 
would  never  dream  that  he  was  capable  of  any- 
thing so  bold.  It  would  be  easy  to  seize  the 
nearest  gate,  and  hold  it  long  enough  to  admit 
the  Chaldeans.  But  no  !  he  had  not  nerve 
enough.  Then  his  predecessors  Joash,  Amaziah, 
and  Anion  had  been  assassinated,  and  for  the 
moment  the  daggers  of  the  princes  and  their 
followers  seemed  more  terrible  than  Chaldean 
instruments  of  torture.  He  lost  all  thought  of 
his  own  honour  and  his  duty  to  his  people  in  his 
anxiety  to  provide  against  this  more  immediate 
danger.  Never  was  the  fate  of  a  nation  decided 
by  a  meaner  utterance.  "  Then  said  Zedekiah 
to  Jeremiah,  No  one  must  know  about  our 
meeting,  and  thou  shalt  not  die.  If  the  princes 
hear  that  I  have  talked  with  thee,  and  come  and 
say  unto  thee.  Declare  unto  us  now  what  thou 
hast  said  unto  the  king;  hide  it  not  from  us, 
and  we  will  not  put  thee  to  death:  declare  unto 
us  what  the  king  said  unto  thee:  then  thou  shalt 
say  unto  them,  I  presented  my  supplication  unto 
the  king,  that  he  would  not  cause  me  to  return 
to  Jonathan's  house,  to  die  there. 

"  Then  all  the  princes  came  to  Jeremiah,  and 
asked  him;  and  he  told  them  just  what  the  king 
had  commanded.  So  they  let  him  alone,  for  no 
report  of  the  matter  had  got  abroad."  We  are 
a  little  surprised  that  the  princes  so  easily  aban- 
doned   their    purpose    of    putting    Jeremiah    to 


164 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


death,  and  did  not  at  once  consign  him  afresh  to 
the  empty  cistern.  Probably  they  were  too  dis- 
heartened for  vigorous  action;  the  garrison  were 
starving,  and  it  was  clear  that  the  city  could  not 
hold  out  much  longer.  Moreover  the  supersti- 
tion that  had  shrunk  from  using  actual  violence 
to  the  prophet  would  suspect  a  token  of  Divine 
displeasure  in  his  release. 

Another  question  raised  by  this  incident  is  that 
of  the  prophet's  veracity,  which,  at  first  sight, 
does  not  seem  superior  to  that  of  the  patriarchs. 
It  is  very  probable  that  the  prophet,  as  at  the 
earlier  interview,  had  entreated  the  king  not  to 
allow  him  to  be  confined  in  the  cells  in  Jona- 
than's house,  but  the  narrative  rather  suggests 
that  the  king  constructed  this  pretext  on  the 
basis  of  the  former  interview.  Moreover,  if  the 
princes  let  Jeremiah  escape  with  nothing  less 
innocent  than  a  supprcssio  veri,  if  they  were  sat- 
isfied with  anything  less  than  an  explicit  state- 
ment that  the  place  of  the  prophet's  confinement 
was  the  sole  topic  of  conversation,  they  must 
have  been  more  guileless  than  we  can  easily  im- 
agine. But,  at  any  rate,  if  Jeremiah  did  stoop 
to  dissimulation,  it  was  to  project  Zedekiah,  not 
to  save  himself. 

Zedekiah  is  a  conspicuous  example  of  the 
strange  irony  with  which  Providence  entrusts 
incapable  persons  with  the  decision  of  most  mo- 
mentous issues;  It  sets  Laud  and  Charles  I.  to 
adjust  the  Tudor  Monarchy  to  the  sturdy  self- 
assertion  of  Puritan  England,  and  Louis  XVI. 
to  cope  with  the  French  Revolution.  Such  his- 
tories are  after  all  calculated  to  increase  the  self- 
respect  of  those  who  are  weak  and  timid.  Mo- 
ments come,  even  to  the  feeblest,  when  their 
action  must  have  the  most  serious  results  for  all 
connected  with  them.  It  is  one  of  the  crowning 
glories  of  Christianity  that  it  preaches  a  strength 
that  is  made  perfect  in  weakness. 

Perhaps  the  most  significant  feature  in  this 
narrative  is  the  conclusion  of  Jeremiah's  first  in- 
terview with  the  king.  Almost  in  the  same 
breath  the  prophet  announces  to  Zedekiah  his 
approaching  ruin  and  begs  from  him  a  favour. 
He  thus  defines  the  true  attitude  of  the  believer 
towards  the  prophet. 

Unwelcome  teaching  must  not  be  allowed  to 
interfere  with  wonted  respect  and  deference,  or 
to  provoke  resentment.  Possibly,  if  this  truth 
were  less  obvious  men  would  be  more  willing 
to  give  it  a  hearing  and  it  might  be  less  per- 
sistently ignored.  But  the  prophet's  behaviour 
is  even  more  striking  and  interesting  as  a  reve- 
lation of  his  own  character  and  of  the  true  pro- 
phetic spirit.  His  faithful  answer  to  the  king 
involved  much  courage,  but  that  he  should  pro- 
ceed from  such  an  answer  to  such  a  petition 
shows  a  simple  and  sober  dignity  not  always  as- 
sociated with  courage.  When  men  are  wrought 
up  to  the  pitch  of  uttering  disagreeable  truths 
at  the  risk  of  their  lives,  they  often  develop  a 
spirit  of  defiance,  which  causes  personal  bitter- 
ness and  animosity  between  themselves  and  their 
hearers,  and  renders  impossible  any  asking  or 
granting  of  favours.  Many  men  would  have  felt 
that  a  petition  compromised  their  own  dignity 
and  weakened  the  authority  of  the  divine  mes- 
sage. The  exaltation  of  self-sacrifice  which  in- 
spired them  wovdd  have  suggested  that'  they 
ought  not  to  risk  the  crown  of  martyrdom  by 
any  such  appeal,  but  rather  welcome  torture  and 
death.  Thus  some  amongst  the  early  Christians 
would  present  themselves  before  the  Roman  tri- 


bunals and  try  to  provoke  the  magistrates  into 
condemning  them.  But  Jeremiah,  like  Polycarp 
and  Cyprian,  neither  courted  nor  shunned  mar- 
tyrdom; he  was  as  incapable  of  bravado  as  he 
was  of  fear.  He  was  too  intent  upon  serving  his 
country  and  glorifying  God,  too  possessed  with 
his  mission  and  his  message,  to  fall  a  prey  to  the 
self-consciousness  which  betrays  men.  sometimes 
even  martyrs,  into  theatrical  ostentation. 


CHAPTER  Xin. 

GEDALIAH. 

Jeremiah  xxxix.-xli..  Hi.* 

"Then  arose  Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah,  and  the  ten  men 
that  were  with  him,  and  smote  with  the  sword  and  slew 
Gedaliah  ben  Ahikam  ben  Shaphan,  whom  the  king  of 
Babylon  had  made  king  over  the  land."— Jer.  xli.  2. 

We  now  pass  to  the  concluding  period  of 
Jeremiah's  ministry.  His  last  interview  with 
Zedekiah  was  speedily  followed  by  the  capture  of 
Jerusalem.  With  that  catastrophe  the  curtain 
falls  upon  another  act  in  the  tragedy  of  the 
prophet's  life.  Most  of  the  chief  dramatis  per- 
soncB  make  their  final  exit;  only  Jeremiah  and 
Baruch  remain.  King  and  princes,  priests  and 
prophets,  pass  to  death  or  captivity,  and  new 
characters  appear  to  play  their  part  for  a  while 
upon  the  vacant  stage. 

We  would  gladly  know  how  Jeremiah  fared  on 
that  night  when  the  city  was  stormed,  and  Zede- 
kiah and  his  army  stole  out  in  a  vain  attempt 
to  escape  beyond  Jordan.  Our  book  preserves 
two  brief  but  inconsistent  narratives  of  his 
fortunes. 

One  is  contained  in  xxxix.  11-14.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, we  must  remember,  was  not  present  in 
person  with  the  besieging  army.  His  head- 
quarters were  at  Riblah,  far  away  in  the  north. 
He  had,  however,  given  special  instructions  con- 
cerning Jeremiah  to  Nebuzaradan,  the  general 
commanding  the  forces  before  Jerusalem:  "  Take 
him,  and  look  well  to  him,  and  do  him  no  harm; 
but  do  with  him  even  as  he  shall  say  unto  thee." 

Accordingly  Nebuzaradan  and  all  the  king  of 
Babylon's  princes  sent  and  took  Jeremiah  out 
of  the  court  of  the  guard,  and  committed  him 
to  Gedaliah  ben  Ahikam  ben  Shaphan,  to  take 
him  to  his  house. f  And  Jeremiah  dwelt  among 
the  people. 

This  account  is  not  only  inconsistent  with  that 
given  in  the  next  chapter,  but  it  also  represents 
Nebuzaradan  as  present  when  the  city  was  taken, 
whereas,  later  on,t  we  are  told  that  he  did  not 
come  upon  the  scene  till  a  month  later.  For 
these  and  similar  reasons,  this  version  of  the 
story  is  generally  considered  the  less  trust- 
worthy. It  apparently  grew  up  at  a  time  when 
the  other  characters  and  interests  of  the  period 
had  been  thrown  into  the  shade  by  the  reverent 
recollection  of  Jeremiah  and  his  ministry.  It 
seemed  natural  to  suppose  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  equally  preoccupied  with  the  fortunes  of  the 
great    prophet    who    had    consistently    preached 

♦Chapter  Hi.  =   2  Kings  xxiv.  18— xxv.  30,  and  xxxix. 

i-io  —  Hi.  4-16,  in  each  case  with  minor  variations  which 
do  not  specially  bear  upon  our  subject.  Cf.  Driver, 
'■  Introduction,"  in  loco.  The  detailed  treatment  of  this 
section  belongs  to  the  exposition  of  the  Book  of  Kings. 

t  Literally  "the  house  "—either  Jeremiah's  or  Geda- 
liah's,  or  possibly  the  royal  palace. 

%  Hi.  6,  12. 


Jeremiah  xxxix.-lii] 


GEDALIAH. 


^65 


obedience  to  his  authority.  The  section  records 
the  intense  reverence  which  the  Jews  of  the 
Captivity  felt  for  Jeremiah.  We  are  more  Hkely, 
however,  to  get  a  true  idea  of  what  happened 
by  following  the  narrative  in  chap.  xl. 

According  to  this  account,  Jeremiah  was  not 
at  once  singled  out  for  any  exceptionally  fa- 
vourable treatment.  When  Zedekiah  and  the 
soldiers  had  left  the  city,  there  can  have  been 
no  question  of  further  resistance.  The  history 
does  not  mention  any  massacre  by  the  con- 
querors, but  we  may  probably  accept  Lamenta- 
tions ii.  20,  21,  as  a  description  of  the  sack  of 
Jerusalem: — 

"  Shall  the  priest  and  the  prophet  be  slain  in  the  sanctu- 
ary of  the  Lord  ? 
The  youth  and  the  old  man  lie  on  the  ground  in  the 

streets  ; 
My  virgins  and  my  young  men  are  fallen  by  the  sword  : 
Thou  hast  slain  them  in  the  day  of  Thine  anger  ; 
Thou  hast  slaughtered,  and  not  pitied." 

Yet  the  silence  of  Kings  and  Jeremiah  as  to 
all  this,  combined  with  their  express  statements 
as  to  captives,  indicates  that  the  Chaldean  gen- 
erals did  not  order  a  massacre,  but  rather  sought 
to  take  prisoners.  The  soldiers  would  not  be 
restrained  from  a  certain  slaughter  in  the  heat 
of  their  first  breaking  into  the  city;  but  pris- 
oners had  a  market  value,  and  were  provided  for 
by  the  practice  of  deportation  which  Babylon 
had  inherited  from  Nineveh.  Accordingly  the 
soldiers'  lust  for  blood  was  satiated  or  bridled 
before  they  reached  Jeremiah's  prison.  The 
court  of  the  guard  probably  formed  part  of  the 
precincts  of  the  palace,  and  the  Chaldean  com- 
manders would  at  once  secure  its  occupants  for 
Nebuchadnezzar.  Jeremiah  was  taken  with 
other  captives  and  put  in  chains.  If  the  dates 
in  Hi.  6,  12,  be  correct,  he  must  have  remained  a 
prisoner  till  the  arrival  of  Nebuzaradan,  a  month 
later  on.  He  was  then  a  witness  of  the  burning 
of  the  city  and  the  destruction  of  the  fortifica- 
tions, and  was  carrried  with  the  other  captives 
to  Ramah.  Here  the  Chaldean  general  found 
leisure  to  inquire  into  the  deserts  of  individual 
prisoners  and  to  decide  how  they  should  be 
treated.  He  would  be  aided  in  this  task  by  the 
Jewish  refugees  from  whose  ridicule  Zedekiah 
had  shrunk,  and  they  would  at  once  inform  him 
of  the  distinguished  sanctity  of  the  prophet  and 
of  the  conspicuous  services  he  had  rendered  to 
the  Chaldean  cause. 

Nebuzaradan  at  once  acted  upon  their  repre- 
sentations. He  ordered  Jeremiah's  chains  to  be 
removed,  gave  him  full  liberty  to  go  where  he 
pleased,  and  assured  him  of  the  favour  and  pro- 
tection of  the  Chaldean  government: — 

"  If  it  seem  good  unto  thee  to  come  with  me 
into  Babylon,  come,  and  I  will  look  well  unto 
thee;  but  if  it  seem  ill  unto  thee  to  come  with 
me  into  Babylon,  forbear:  behold,  all  the  land 
is  before  thee;  go  whithersoever  it  seemeth  to 
thee  good  and  right." 

These  words  are,  however,  preceded  by  two 
remarkable  verses.  For  the  nonce,  the  prophet's 
mantle  seems  to  have  fallen  upon  the  Chaldean 
soldier.  He  speak?s  to  his  auditor  just  as  Jere- 
miah himself  had  been  wont  to  address  his  erring 
fellow-countrymen : — 

"  Thy  God  Jehovah  pronounced  this  evil  upon 
this  place:  and  Jehovah  hath  brought  it,  and 
done  according  as  He  spake;  because  ye  have 
sinned  against  Jehovah,   and   have   not   obeyed 


His    voice,    therefore    this    thing   is    come    unto 

you." 

Possibly  Nebuzaradan  did  not  include  Jere- 
miah personally  in  the  "ye"  and  "you";  and 
yet  a  prophet's  message  is  often  turned  upon 
himself  in  this  fashion.  Even  in  our  day  out- 
siders will  not  be  at  the  trouble  to  distinguish 
between  one  Christian  and  another,  and  will 
often  denounce  a  man  for  his  supposed  share  in 
Church  abuses  he  has  strenuously  combated. 

We  need  not  be  surprised  that  a  heathen  noble 
can  talk  like  a  pious  Jew.  The  Chaldeans  were 
eminently  religious,  and  their  worship  of  Bel 
and  Merodach  may  often  have  been  as  spiritual 
and  sincere  as  the  homage  paid  by  most  Jews 
to  Jehovah.  The  Babylonian  creed  could  rec- 
ognise that  a  foreign  state  might  have  its  own 
legitimate  deity  and  would  suffer  for  disloyalty 
to  him.  "Assyrian  and  Chaldean  kings  were 
quite  willing  to  accept  the  prophetic  doctrine 
that  Jehovah  had  commissioned  them  to  punish 
this  disobedient  people.  Still  Jeremiah  must 
have  been  a  little  taken  aback  when  one  of  the 
cardinal  points  of  his  own  teaching  was  ex- 
pounded to  him  by  so  strange  a  preacher;  but 
he  was  too  prudent  to  raise  any  discussion  on 
the  matter,  and  too  chivalrous  to  wish  to  estab- 
lish his  own  rectitude  at  the  expense  of  his 
brethren.  Moreover  he  had  to  decide  between 
the  two  alternatives  offered  him  by  Nebuzara- 
dan. Should  he  go  to  Babylon  or  re-main  in 
Judah? 

According  to  a  suggestion  of  Gratz,  accepted 
by  Cheyne,*  xv.  10-21  is  a  record  of  the  inner 
struggle  through  which  Jeremiah  came  to  a  de- 
cision on  this  matter.  The  section  is  not  very 
clear,  but  it  suggests  that  at  one  time  it  seemed 
Jehovah's  will  that  he  should  go  to  Babylon, 
and  that  it  was  only  after  much  hesitation  that 
he  was  convinced  that  God  required  him  to  re- 
main in  Judah.  Powerful  motives  drew  him  in 
either  direction.  At  Babylon  he  would  reap  the 
full  advantage  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  favour,  and 
would  enjoy  the  order  and  culture  of  a  great 
capital.  He  would  meet  with  old  friends  and 
disciples,  amongst  the  rest  Ezekiel.  He  would 
find  an  important  sphere  for  ministry  amongst 
the  large  Jewish  community  in  Chaldea,  where 
the  fiower  of  the  w'hole  nation  was  now  in  exile. 
In  Judah  he  would  have  to  share  the  fortunes  of 
a  feeble  and  suffering  remnant,  and  would  be 
exposed  to  all  the  dangers  and  disorder  conse- 
quent on  the  break-up  of  the  national  govern- 
ment— brigandage  on  the  part  of  native  guerilla 
bands  and  raids  by  the  neighbouring  tribes. 
These  guerilla  bands  were  the  final  effort  of  Jew- 
ish resistance,  and  would  seek  to  punish  as 
traitors  those  who  accepted  the  dominion  of 
Babylon. 

On  the  other  hand,  Jeremiah's  surviving  ene- 
mies, priests,  prophets,  and  princes,  had  been 
taken  en  masse  to  Babylon.  On  his  arrival  he 
would  find  himself  again  plunged  into  the  old 
controversies.  Many,  if  not  the  majority,  of  his 
countrymen  there  would  regard  him  as  a  traitor. 
The  protege  of  Nebuchadnezzar  was  sure  to  be 
disliked  and  distrusted  by  his  less  fortunate 
brethren.  And  Jeremiah  was  not  a  born  cour- 
tier like  Josephus.  In  Judah,  moreover,  he 
would  be  amongst  friends  of  his  own  way  of 
thinking;  the  remnant  left  behind  had  been 
placed  under  the  authority  of  his  friend  Geda- 

*"  Pulpit  Commentary,"  in  loco.  Cf.  the  Prophecies 
of  Jeremiah,  antea. 


i66 


^.   THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


liah,  the  son  of  his  former  protector  Ahikam, 
the  grandson  of  his  ancient  ally  Shaphan.  He 
would  be  free  from  the  anathemas  of  corrupt 
priests  and  the  contradiction  of  false  prophets. 
The  advocacy  of  true  religion  amongst  the  exiles 
might  safely  be  left  to  Ezekiel  and  his  school. 

But  probably  the  motives  that  decided  Jere- 
miah's course  of  action  were,  firstly,  that  devoted 
attachment  to  the  sacred  soil  which  was  a  pas- 
sion with  every  earnest  Jew;  and,  secondly,  the 
inspired  conviction  that  Palestine  was  to  be  the 
scene  of  the  future  development  of  revealed  re- 
ligion. This  conviction  was  coupled  with  the 
hope  that  the  scattered  refugees  who  were  rap- 
idly gathering  at  Mizpah  under  Gedaliah  might 
lay  the  foundations  of  a  new  community,  which 
should  become  the  instrument  of  the  divine  pur- 
pose. Jeremiah  was  no  deluded  visionary,  who 
would  suppose  that  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
had  exhausted  God's  judgments,  and  that  the 
millennium  would  forthwith  begin  for  the  special 
and  exclusive  benefit  of  his  surviving  com- 
panions in  Judah.  Nevertheless,  while  there  vvas 
an  organised  Jewish  community  left  on  native 
soil,  it  would  be  regarded  as  the  heir  of  the  na- 
tional religious  hopes  and  aspirations,  and  a 
prophet,  with  liberty  of  choice,  would  feel  it  his 
duty  to  remain. 

Accordingly  Jeremiah  decided  to  join  Geda- 
liah.* Nebuzaradan  gave  him  food  and  a  pres- 
ent, and  let  him  go. 

Gedaliah's  headquarters  were  at  Mizpah,  a 
town  not  certainly  identified,  but  lying  some- 
where to  the  northwest  of  Jerusalem,  and  play- 
ing an  important  part  in  the  history  of  Samuel 
and  Saul.  Men  would  remember  the  ancient 
record  which  told  how  the  first  Hebrew  king  had 
been  divinely  appointed  at  Mizpah,  and  might 
regard  the  coincidence  as  a  happy  omen  that 
Gedaliah  would  found  a  kingdom  more  pros- 
perous and  permanent  than  that  which  traced  its 
origin  to  Saul. 

Nebuzaradan  had  left  with  the  new  governor 
"  men,  women,  and  children,  ...  of  them  that 
were  not  carried  away  captive  to  Babylon." 
These  were  chiefly  of  the  poorer  sort,  but  not 
altogether,  for  among  them  were  "  royal  prin- 
cesses "  and  doubtless  others  belonging  to  the 
ruling  classes.  Apparently  after  these  arrange- 
ments had  been  made  the  Chaldean  forces  were 
almost  entirely  withdrawn,  and  Gedaliah  was  left 
to  cope  with  the  many  difficulties  of  the  situation 
by  his  own  unaided  resources.  For  a  time  all 
went  well.  It  seemed  at  first  as  if  the  scattered 
bands  of  Jewish  soldiers  still  in  the  field  would 
submit  to  the  Chaldean  government  and  ac- 
knowledge Gedaliah's  authority.  Various  cap- 
tains with  their  bands  came  to  him  at  Mizpah, 
amongst  them  Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah,  Johanan 
ben  Kareah  and  his  brother  Jonathan.  Geda- 
liah swore  to  them  that  they  should  be  par- 
doned and  protected  by  the  Chaldeans.  He  con- 
firmed them  in  their  possession  of  the  towns  and 
districts  they  had  occupied  after  the  departure 
of  the  enemy.  They  accepted  his  assurance,  and 
their  alliance  with  him  seemed  to  guarantee  the 
safety  and  prosperity  of  the  settlement.  Refu- 
gees from  Moab,  the  Ammonites,  Edom,  and  all 

♦The  sequence  of  verses  4  and  5  has  been  spoilt  by  some 
corruption  of  the  text.  The  versions  diverge  variously 
from  the  Hebrew.  Possibly  the  original  text  told  how- 
Jeremiah  found  himself  unable  to  give  an  immediate 
answer,  and  Nebuzaradan,  observing  his  hesitation,  bade 
him  return  to  Gedaliah  and  decide  at  his  leisure. 


the  neighbouring  countries  flocked  to  Mizpah, 
and  busied  themselves  in  gathering  in  the  prod- 
uce of  the  oliveyards  and  vineyards  which  had 
been  left  ownerless  when  the  nobles  were  slain 
or  carried  away  captive.  Many  of  the  poorer 
Jews  revelled  in  such  unwonted  plenty,  and  felt 
that  even  national  ruin  had  its  compensations. 

Tradition  has  supplemented  what  the  sacred 
record  tells  us  of  this  period  in  Jeremiah's  his- 
tory. We  are  told  *  that  "  it  is  also  found  in 
the  records  that  the  prophet  Jeremiah  "  com- 
manded the  exiles  to  take  with  them  fire  from 
the  altar  of  the  Temple,  and  further  exhorted 
them  to  observe  the  law  and  to  abstain  from 
idolatry;  and  that  "  it  was  also  contained  in  the 
same  writing,  that  the  prophet,  being  warned  of 
God,  commanded  the  tabernacle  and  the  ark  to 
go  with  him,  as  he  went  forth  unto  the  moun- 
tain, where  Moses  climbed  up,  and  saw  the  heri- 
tage of  God.  And  when  Jeremiah  came  thither, 
he  found  an  hollow  cave,  wherein  he  laid  the 
tabernacle  and  the  ark  and  the  altar  of  incense, 
and  so  stopped  the  door.  And  some  of  those 
that  followed  him  came  to  mark  the  way,  but 
they  could  not  find  it:  which  when  Jeremiah  per- 
ceived he  blamed  them,  saying,  As  for  that  place, 
it  shall  be  unknown  until  the  time  that  God 
gather  His  people  again  together  and  receive 
them  to  His  mercy." 

A  less  improbable  tradition  is  that  which  nar- 
rates that  Jeremiah  composed  the  Book  of  Lam- 
entations shortly  after  the  capture  of  the  city. 
This  is  first  stated  by  the  Septuagint;  it  has  been 
adopted  by  the  Vulgate  and  various  Rabbinical 
authorities,  and. has  received  considerable  sup- 
port from  Christian  scholars.!  Moreover,  as  the 
traveller  leaves  Jerusalem  by  the  Damascus  Gate, 
he  passes  great  stone  quarries,  where  Jeremiah's 
Grotto  is  still  pointed  out  as  the  place  where 
the  prophet  composed  his  elegy. 

Without  entering  into  the  general  question  of 
the  authorship  of  Lamentations,  we  may  venture 
to  doubt  whether  it  can  be  referred  to  any  period 
of  Jeremiah's  life  which  is  dealt  with  in  our 
book;  and  even  whether  it  accurately  represents 
his  feelings  at  any  such  period.  During  the  first 
month  that  followed  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  the 
Chaldean  generals  held  the  city  and  its  inhabi- 
tants at  the  disposal  of  their  king.  His  decision 
was  uncertain;  it  was  by  no  means  a  matter  of 
course  that  he  would  destroy  the  city.  Jerusa- 
lem had  been  spared  by  Pharaoh  Necho  after 
the  defeat  of  Josiah,  and  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
after  the  revolt  of  Jehoiakim.  Jeremiah  and  the 
other  Jews  must  have  been  in  a  state  of  extreme 
suspense  as  to  their  own  fate  and  that  of  their 
city,  very  different  from  the  attitude  of  Lamenta- 
tions. This  suspense  was  ended  when  Nebu- 
zaradan arrived  and  proceeded  to  burn  the  city. 
Jeremiah  witnessed  the  fulfilment  of  his  own 
prophecies  when  Jerusalem  was  thus  overtaken 
by  the  ruin  he  had  so  often  predicted.  As  he 
stood  there  chained  amongst  the  other  captives, 
many  of  his  neighbours  must  have  felt  towards 
him  as  we  should  feel  towards  an  anarchist 
gloating  over  the  spectacle  of  a  successful  dyna- 
mite explosion;  and  Jeremiah  could  not  be  igno- 
rant of  their  sentiments.  His  own  emotions 
would  be  sufficiently  vivid,  but  they  would  not 
be  so  simple  as  those  of  the  great  elegy.  Proba- 
bly  they   were   too   poignant   to   be   capable   of 


*2  Mace.  ii.  1-8. 

■^  Cf.  Professor  Adeney's  "  Canticles  and  Lamentatlohs, ' 


Jeremiah  xxxix.-lii.] 


GEDALIAH. 


i67 


articulate  expression;  and  the  occasion  was  not 
likely  to  be  fertile  in  acrostics. 

Doubtless  when  the  venerable  priest  and 
prophet  looked  from  Ramah  or  Mizpah  towards 
the  blackened  ruins  of  the  Temple  and  the  Holy 
City,  he  was  possessed  by  something  of  the  spirit 
of  Lamentations.  But  from  the  moment  when 
he  went  to  Mizpah  he  would  be  busily  occupied 
in  assisting  Gedaliah  in  his  gallant  effort  to 
gather  the  nucleus  of  a  new  Israel  out  of  the 
,  flotsam  and  jetsam  of  the  shipwreck  of  Judah. 
Busy  with  this  work  of  practical  beneficence,  his 
unconquerable  spirit  already  possessed  with 
visions  of  a  brighter  future,  Jeremiah  could  not 
lose  himself  in  mere  regrets  for  the  past. 

He  was  doomed  to  experience  yet  another  dis- 
appointment. Gedaliah  had  only  held  his  office 
for  about  two  months,*  when  he  was  warned  by 
Johanan  ben  Kareah  and  the  other  captains  that 
Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah  had  been  sent  by  Baalis, 
king  of  the  Ammonites,  to  assassinate  him. 
Gedaliah  refused  to  believe  them.  Johanan,  per- 
haps surmising  that  the  governor's  incredulity 
was  assumed,  came  to  him  privately  and  pro- 
posed to  anticipate  Ishmael:  "  Let  me  go,  I  pray 
thee,  and  slay  Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah,  and  no 
one  shall  know  it:  wherefore  should  he  slay  thee, 
that  all  the  Jews  which  are  gathered  unto  thee 
should  be  scattered,  and  the  remnant  of  Judah 
perish?  But  Gedaliah  ben  Ahikam  said  unto 
Johanan  ben  Kareah,  Thou  shalt  not  do  this 
thing:  for  thou  speakest  falsely  of  Ishmael." 

Gedaliah's  misplaced  confidence  soon  had  fatal 
consequences.  In  the  second  month,  about  Oc- 
tober, the  Jews  in  the  ordinary  course  of  events 
would  have  celebrated  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
to  return  thanks  for  their  plentiful  ingathering 
of  grapes,  olives,  and  summer  fruit.  Possibly 
this  occasion  gave  Ishmael  a  pretext  for  visiting 
Mizpah.  He  came  thither  with  ten  nobles  who, 
like  himself,  were  connected  with  the  royal  fam- 
ily and  probably  were  among  the  princes  who 
persecuted  Jeremiah.  This  small  and  distin- 
guished company  could  not  be  suspected  of  in- 
tending to  use  violence.  Ishmael  seemed  to  be 
reciprocating  Gedaliah's  confidence  by  putting 
himself  in  the  governor's  power.  Gedaliah  feasted 
his  guests.  Johanan  and  the  other  captains  were 
not  present:  they  had  done  what  they  could  to 
save  him,  but  they  did  not  wait  to  share  the  fate 
which  he  was  bringing  on  himself. 

"  Then  arose  Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah  and  his 
ten  companions  and  smote  Gedaliah  ben  Ahikam 
.  .  .  and  all  the  Jewish  and  Chaldean  soldiers 
that  were  with  him  at  Mizpah." 

Probably  the  eleven  assassins  were  supported 
by  a  larger  body  of  followers,  who  waited  out- 
side the  city  and  made  their  way  in  amidst  the 
confusion  consequent  on  the  murder;  doubtless, 
too,  they  had  friends  amongst  Gedaliah's  en- 
tourage. These  accomplices  had  first  lulled  any 
suspicions  that  he  might  feel  as  to  Ishmael,  and 
had  then  helped  to  betray  their  master. 

Not  contented  with  the  slaughter  which  he 
had  already  perpetrated.  Ishmael  took  measures 
to  prevent  the  news  getting  abroad,  and  lay  in 
wait  for  any  other  adherents  of  Gedaliah  who 
might  come  to  visit  him.  He  succeeded  in  en- 
trapping    a     company     of     eighty     men     from 

*  Cf.  Hi.  12,  "  fifth  month,"  and  xli.  i,  "  seventh  month." 
Cheyne,  however,  points  out  that  no  year  is  specified  in  xli. 
I,  and  holds  that  Gedaliah's  governorship  lasted  for  over 
four  years,  and  that  the  deportation  four  years  (lii.  30) 
after  the  destruction  of  the  city  was  the  prompt  punish- 
ment of  his  murdei. 


Northern  Israel:  ten  were  allowed  to  purchase 
their  lives  by  revealing  hidden  stores  of  wheat, 
barley,  oil,  and  honey;  the  rest  were  slain  and 
thrown  into  an  ancient  pit,  "  which  King  Asa 
had  made  for  fear  of  Baasha  king  of  Israel." 

These  men  were  pilgrims,  who  came  with 
shaven  chins  and  torn  clothes,  "  and  having  cut 
themselves,  bringing  meal  ofTerings  and  frankin- 
cense to  the  house  of  JehovaJi."  The  pilgrims 
were  doubtless  on  their  way  to,  celebrate  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles:  with  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  and  the  Temple,  all  the  joy  of  their 
festival  would  be  changed  to  mourning  and  its 
songs  to  wailing.  Possibly  they  were  going  to 
lament  on  the  site  of  the  ruined  temple.  But 
Mizpah  itself  had  an  ancient  sanctuary.  Hosea 
speaks  of  the  priests,  princes,  and  people  of  Is- 
rael as  having  been  "  a  snare  on  Mizpah." 
Jeremiah  may  have  sanctioned  the  use  of  this 
local  temple,  thinking  that  Jehovah  would  "  set 
His  name  there  "  till  Jerusalem  was  restored, 
even  as  He  had  dwelt  at  Shiloh  before  He  chose 
the  City  of  David.  But  to  whatever  shrine 
these  pilgrims  were  journeying,  their  errand 
should  have  made  them  sacrosanct  to  all  Jews. 
Ishmael's  hypocrisy,  treachery,  and  cruelty  in 
this  matter  go  far  to  justify  Jeremiah's  bitterest 
invectives  against  the  princes  of  Judah. 

But  after  this  bloody  deed  it  was  high  time 
for  Ishmael  to  be  gone  and  betake  himself  back 
to  his  heathen  patron,  Baalis  the  Ammonite. 
These  massacres  could  not  long  be  kept  a  se- 
cret. And  yet  Ishmael  seems  to  have  made  a 
final  effort  to  suppress  the  evidence  of  his  crimes. 
In  his  retreat  he  carried  with  him  all  the  people 
left  in  Mizpah,  "  soldiers,  women,  children,  and 
eunuchs,"  including  the  royal  princesses,  and 
apparently  Jeremiah  and  Baruch.  No  doubt  he 
hoped  to  make  money  out  of  his  prisoners  by 
selling  them  as  slaves  or  holding  them  to  ran- 
som. He  had  not  ventured  to  slay  Jeremiah:  the 
prophet  had  not  been  present  at  the  banquet  and 
had  thus  escaped  the  first  fierce  slaughter,  and 
Ishmael  shrank  from  killing  in  cold  blood  the 
man  whose  predictions  of  ruin  had  been  so  ex- 
actly and  awfully  fulfilled  by  the  recent  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem. 

When  Johanan  ben  Kareah  and  the  other  cap- 
tains heard  how  entirely  Ishmael  had  justified 
their  warning,  they  assembled  their  forces  and 
started  in  pursuit.  Ishmael's  band  seems  to  have 
been  comparatively  small,  and  was  moreover 
encumbered  by  the  disproportionate  number  of 
captives  with  which  they  had  burdened  them- 
selves. They  were  overtaken  "  by  the  great 
waters  that  are  in  Gibeon,"  only  a  very  short 
distance  from  Mizpah. 

However  Ishmael's  original  following  of  ten 
may  have  been  reinforced,  his  band  cannot  have 
been  very  numerous  and  was  manifestly  inferior 
to  Johanan's  forces.  In  face  of  an  enemy  of  su- 
perior strength,  Ishmael's  only  chance  of  escape 
was  to  leave  his  prisoners  to  their  own  devices 
— he  had  not  even  time  for  another  massacre. 
The  captives  at  once  turned  round  and  made 
their  way  to  their  deliverer.  Ishmael's  followers 
seem  to  have  been  scattered,  taken  captive,  or 
slain,  but  he  himself  escaped  with  eight  men 
— possibly  eight  of  the  original  ten — and  found 
refuge  with  the  Ammonites. 

Johanan  and  his  companions  with  the  recov- 
ered captives  made  no  attempt  to  return  to  Miz- 
pah. The  Chaldeans  would  exact  a  severe  pen- 
alty for  the  murder  of  their  governor  Gedaliah, 


i68 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


and  their  own  fellow-countrymen:  their  ven- 
geance was  not  likely  to  be  scrupulously  discrim- 
inating. The  massacre  would  be  regarded  as  an 
act  of  rebellion  on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  com- 
munity in  Judah,  and  the  community  would  be 
punished  accordingly.  Johanan  and  his  whole 
company  determined  that  when  the  day  of  retri- 
'^  bution  came  the  Chaldeans  should  fand  no  one 
to  punish.  They  set  out  for  Egypt,  the  natural 
asylum  of  the  enemies  of  Babylon.  On  the  way 
they  halted  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem 
at  a  caravanserai  *  which  bore  the  name  of  Chim- 
ham,f  the  son  of  David's  generous  friend  Bar- 
zillai.  So  far  the  fugitives  had  acted  on  their 
first  impulse  of  dismay;  now  they  paused  to  take 
breath,  to  make  a  more  deliberate  survey  of  their 
situation,  and  to  mature  their  plans  for  the  fu- 
ture. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  DESCENT  INTO  EGYPT. 

Jeremiah  xlii.,  xliii. 

"They  came  into  the  land  of  Egypt,  for  they  obeyed  not 
the  voice  of  Jehovah."— JER.  xliii.  7.  • 

Thus  within  a  few  days  Jeremiah  had  expe- 
rienced one  of  those  sudden  and  extreme 
changes  of  fortune  which  are  as  common  in  his 
career  as  in  a  sensational  novel.  Yesterday  the 
guide,  philosopher,  and  friend  of  the  governor 
of  Judah,  to-day  sees  him  once  more  a  helpless 
prisoner  in  the  hands  of  his  old  enemies.  To- 
morrow he  is  restored  to  liberty  and  authority, 
and  appealed  to  by  the  remnant  of  Israel  as  the 
mouthpiece  of  Jehovah.  Johanan  ben  Kareah 
and  all  the  captains  of  the  forces,  "  from  the  least 
even  unto  the  greatest,  came  near  "  and  besought 
Jeremiah  to  pray  unto  "  Jehovah  thy  God," 
"  that  Jehovah  thy  God  may  show  us  the  way 
wherein  we  may  walk,  and  the  thing  we  may  do." 
Jeremiah  promised  to  make  intercession  and  to 
declare  faithfully  unto  them  whatsoever  Jehovah 
should  reveal  unto  him. 

And  they  on  their  part  said  unto  Jeremiah: 
"  Jeliovah  be  a  true  and  faithful  witness  against 
'  us,  if  we  do  not  according  to  every  word  that 
Jehovah  thy  God  shall  send  unto  us  by  thee. 
We  will  obey  the  voice  of  Jehova'h  our  God,  to 
whom  we  send  thee,  w'hether  it  be  good  or  evil, 
that  it  may  be  well  with  us,  when  we  obey  the 
voice  of  Jehovah   our  God." 

The  prophet  returned  no  hasty  answer  to  this 
solemn  appeal.  As  in  his  controversy  with  Han- 
aniah,  he  refrained  from  at  once  announcing  his 
own  judgment  as  the  Divine  decision,  but  waited 
for  the  express  confirmation  of  the  Spirit.  For 
ten  days  prophet  and  people  were  alike  kept  in 
suspense.  The  patience  of  Johanan  and  his  fol- 
lowers is  striking  testimony  to  their  sincere  rev- 
erence for  Jeremiah. 

On  the  tenth  day  the  message  came,  and  Jere- 
miah called  the  people  together  to  hear  God's 
answer  to  their  question,  and  to  learn  that  Di- 
vine will  to  Which  they  had  promised  unreserved 
obedience.     It  ran  thus: — 

"  If  you  will  still  abide  in  this  land, 
I  will  build  you  and  not  pull  you  down, 
I  will  plant  you  and  not  pluck  you  up." 
♦The  reading  is  doubtful;  possibly  the  word  (geruth) 
translated  "caravanserai,"  or  some  similar  word  to  be 
read  instead  of  it,  merely  forms  a  compound  proper  name 
with  Chimham. 
1 2  Sam.  xix.  31-40. 


The  words  of  Jeremiah's  original  commission 
seem  ever  present  to  his  mind: — 

"  For  I  repent  Me  of  the  evil  I  have  done  unto  you." 

They  need  not  flee  from  Judah  as  an  accursed 
land;  Jehovah  had  a  new  and  gracious  purpose 
concerning  them,   and  therefore: — 

"  Be  not  afraid  of  the  king  of  Babylon, 
Of  whom  ye  are  afraid  ; 

Be  not  afraid  of  him— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah— 
For  I  am  with  you, 

To  save  j'ou  and  deliver  you  out  of  his  hand. 
I  will  put  kindness  in  his  heart  toward  you, 
And  he  shall  deal  kindly  with  you, 
And  restore  you  to  your  lands." 

It  was  premature  to  conclude  that  Ishmael's 
crime  finally  disposed  of  the  attempt  to  shape  the 
remnant  into  the  nucleus  of  a  new  Israel.  Hith- 
erto Nebuchadnezzar  had  shown  himself  willing 
to  discriminate;  when  he  condemned  the  princes, 
he  spared  and  honoured  Jeremiah,  and  the  Chal- 
deans might  still  be  trusted  to  deal  fairly  and 
generously  with  the  prophet's  friends  and  deliv- 
erers. Moreover  the  heart  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
like  that  of  all  earthly  potentates,  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  King  of  Kings. 

But  Jeremiah  knew  too  well  what  mingled 
hopes  and  fears  drew  his  hearers  towards  the 
fertile  valley  and  rich  cities  of  the  Nile.  He  sets 
before  them  the  reverse  of  the  picture:  they 
might  refuse  to  obey  God's  command  to  remain 
in  Judah;  they  might  say,  "  No,  we  will  go  into 
the  land  of  Egypt,  w*here  we  shall  see  no  war, 
nor  hear  the  sound  of  the  trumpet,  nor  hunger 
for  bread,  and  there  will  we  dwell."  As  of  old, 
they  craved  for  the  flesh-pots  of  Egypt;  and  with 
more  excuse  than  their  forefathers.  They  were 
worn  out  with  suffering  and  toil,  some  of  them 
had  wives  and  children;  the  childless  prophet 
was  inviting  them  to  make  sacrifices  and  incur 
risks  which  he  could  neither  share  nor  under- 
stand. Can  we  wonder  if  they  fell  short  of  his 
inspired  heroism,  and  hesitated  to  forego  the 
ease  and  plenty  of  Egypt  in  order  to  try  social 
experiments  in  Judah? 

"  Let  what  is  broken  so  remain. 
The  Gods  are  hard  to  reconcile  : 
'Tis  hard  to  settle  order  once  again. 

Sore  task  to  hearts  worn  out  by  many  wars." 

But  Jeremiah  had  neither  sympathy  nor  pa- 
tience with  such  weakness.  Moreover,  now  as 
often,  valour  was  the  better  part  of  discretion, 
and  the  boldest  course -was  the  safest.  The  peace 
and  security  of  Egypt  had  been  broken  in  upon 
again  and  again  by  Asiatic  invaders;  only  re- 
cently it  had  been  tributary  to  Nineveh,  till  the 
failing  strength  of  Assyria  enabled  the  Pharaohs 
to  recover  their  independence.  Now  that  Pal- 
estine had  ceased  to  be  the  seat  of  war  the  sound 
of  Chaldean  trumpets  wouM  soon  be  heard  in 
the  valley  of  the  Nile.  By  going  down  into 
Egypt,  they  were  leaving  Judah  where  they 
might  be  safe  under  the  broad  shield  of  Babylo- 
nian power,  for  a  country  that  would  soon  be 
afflicted  by  the  very  evils  they  sought  to  es- 
cape:— 

"  If  ye  finally  determine  to  go  to  Egypt  to  sojourn  there, 
The  sword,  which  ye  fear,  shall  overtake  you  there  in 

the  land  of  F-gypt. 
The   famine  whereof  ye   are  afraid,  shall  follow  hard 

after  you  there  in  Egypt, 
And  there  shall  ve  die." 


Jeremiah  xlii.,  xliii.] 


THE    DESCENT    INTO    EGYPT. 


169 


The  old  familiar  curses,  so  often  uttered 
against  Jerusalem  and  its  inhabitants,  are  pro- 
nounced against  any  of  his  hearers  who  should 
take  refuge  in  Egypt: — 

"As  Mine  anger  and  fury  hath  been  poured  forth  upon 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem, 
So  shall  My  fury  be  poured  forth  upon  you,  when  ye 
shall  enter  in  Egypt." 

They  would  die  "  by  the  sword,  the  famine,  and 
the  pestilence  "  ;  they  would  be  "  an  execration 
and  an  astonishment,  a  curse  and  a  reproach." 

He  had  set  before  them  two  alternative 
courses,  and  the  Divine  judgment  upon  each: 
he  had  known  beforehand  that,  contrary  to  his 
own  choice  and  judgment,  their  hearts  were  set 
upon  going  down  into  Egypt;  hence,  as  when 
confronted  and  contradicted  by  Hananiah,  he 
had  been  careful  to  secure  divine  confirmation 
before  he  gave  his  decision.  Already  he  could 
see  the  faces  of  his  hearers  hardening  into  ob- 
stinate resistance  or  kindling  into  hot  defiance; 
probably  they  broke  out  into  interruptions 
which  left  no  doubt  as  to  their  purpose.  With 
his  usual  promptness,  he  turned  upon  them  with 
fierce  reproof  and  denunciation: — 

"  Ye  have  been  traitors  to  yourselves. 
Ye  sent  me  unto  Jehovahyour  God,  saying, 
Pray  for  us  unto  Jehovah  our  God  ; 
According  unto  all  that  Jehovah  our  God  shall  say, 
Declare  unto  us,  and  we  will  do  it. 
I  have  this  day  declared  it  unto  you. 
But  ye    have  in  no  wise  obeyed  the  voice  of  Jehovah 
your  God. 

Ye  shall  die  by  the  sword,  the  famine,  and  the  pesti- 
lence. 
In  the  place  whither  ye  desire  to  go  to  sojourn." 

His  hearers  were  equally  prompt  with  their  re- 
joinder; Johanan  ben  Kereah  and  "  all  the  proud 
men"  answered  him: — 

"Thou  liest!  It  is  not  Jehovah  our  God  who 
hath  sent  thee  to  say,  Ye  shall  not  go  into  Egypt 
to  sojourn  there;  but  Baruch  ben  Neriah  setteth 
thee  on  against  us,  to  deliver  us  into  the  hand 
of  the  Chaldeans,  that  they  may  slav  us  or  carry 
us  away  captive  to  Babylon." 

Jeremiah  had  experienced  many  strange  vicis- 
situdes, but  this  was  not  the  least  striking.  Ten 
days  ago  the  people  and  their  leaders  had  ap- 
proached him  in  reverent  submission,  and  had 
solemnly  promised  to  accept  and  obey  his  de- 
cision as  the  word  of  God.  Now  they  called  him 
a  liar;  they  asserted  that  he  did  not  speak  by  any 
Divine  inspiration,  but  was  a  feeble  impostor,  an 
oracular  puppet,  whose  strings  were  pulled  by 
his  own  disciple.* 

Such  scenes  are,  unfortunately,  only  too  com- 
mon in  Church  history.  Religious  professors 
are  still  ready  to  abuse  and  to  impute  unworthy 
motives  to  prophets  whose  messages  they  dis- 
like, in  a  spirit  not  less  secular  than  that  which 
is  shown  when  .,ome  modern  football  team  tries 
to  mob  the  referee  who  has  given  a  decision 
against  its   hopes. 

Moreover  we  must  not  unduly  emphasise  the 
solemn  engagement  given  by  the  Jews  to  abide 
Jeremiah's  decision.  They  were  probably  sin- 
cere, but  not  very  much  in  earnest.  The  pro- 
ceedings and  the  strong  formulae  used  were 
largely  conventional.  Ancient  kings  and  gen- 
erals regularly  sought  the  approval  of  their 
prophets  or  augurs  before  taking  any  important 
step,  but  they  did  not  always  act  upon  their  ad- 
*  Cf.  chapter  on  "  Baruch." 


vice.  The  final  breach  between  Saul  and  the 
prophet  Samuel  seems  to  have  been  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  king  did  not  wait  for  his  presence 
and  counsel  before  engaging  the  Philistines.* 
Before  the  disastrous  expedition  to  Ramoth 
Gilcad,  Jehoshaphat  insisted  on  consulting  a 
prophet  of  Jehovah,  and  then  acted  in  the  teeth 
of  his  inspired  warning. f 

Johanan  and  his  company  felt  it  essential  to 
consult  some  divine  oracle;  and  Jeremiah  was 
not  only  the  greatest  prophet  of  Jehovah,  he 
was  also  the  only  prophet  available.  They  must 
have  known  from  his  consistent  denunciation  of 
all  alliance  with  Egypt  that  his  views  were  likely 
to  be  at  variance  with  their  own.  But  they  were 
consulting  Jehovah — Jeremiah  was  only  His 
mouthpiece;  hitherto  He  had  set  His  face 
against  any  dealings  with  Egypt,  but  circum- 
stances were  entirely  changed,  and  Jehovah's 
purpose  might  change  with  them.  He  might  "  re- 
pent." They  promised  to  obey,  because  there 
was  at  any  rate  a  chance  that  God's  commands 
would  coincide  with  their  own  intentions.  But- 
ler's remark  that  men  may  be  expected  to  act 
"  not  only  upon  an  even  chance,  but  upon  much 
less,"  specially  applies  to  such  promises  as  the 
Jews  made  to  Jeremiah.  Certain  tacit  conditions 
may  always  be  considered  attached  to  a  profes- 
sion of  willingness  to  be  guided  by  a  friend's 
advice.  Our  newspapers  frequently  record 
breaches  of  engagements  that  should  be  as  bind- 
ing as  that  entered  into  by  Johanan  and  his 
friends,  and  they  do  so  without  any  special  com- 
ment. For  instance,  the  verdicts  of  arbitrators 
in  trade  disputes  have  been  too  often  ignored  by 
the  unsuccessful  parties;  and — to  take  a  very  dif- 
ferent illustration — the  most  unlimited  profes- 
sions of  faith  in  the  infallibility  of  the  Bible  have 
sometimes  gone  along  with  a  denial  of  its  plain 
teaching  and  a  disregard  of  its  imperative  com- 
mands. While  Shylock  expected  a  favorable  de- 
cision, Portia  was  "  a  Daniel  come  to  judg- 
ment "  :  his  subsequent  opinion  of  her  judicial 
qualities  has  not  been  recorded.  Those  who 
have  never  refused  or  evaded  unwelcoime  de- 
mands made  by  an  authority  Whom  they  have 
promised  to  obey  may  cast  the  first  stone  at  Jo- 
hanan. 

After  the  scene  we  have  been  describing,  the 
refugees  set  out  for  Egypt,  carrying  with  them 
the  princesses  and  Jeremiah  and  Baruch.  They 
were  following  in  the  footsteps  of  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  of  Jeroboam,  and  many  afl- 
other  Jew  who  had  sought  protection  under  the 
shadow  of  Pharaoh.  They  were  the  forerun- 
ners of  that  later  Israel  in  Egypt  which,  through 
Philo  and  his  disciples,  exercised  so  powerful  an 
influence  on  the  doctrine,  criticism,  and  exegesis 
of  the  early   Christian   Church. 

Yet  this  exodus  in  the  wrong  direction  was  by 
no  means  complete.  Four  years  later  Nebuzar- 
adan  could  still  find  seven  hundred  and  forty- 
five  Jews  to  carry  away  to  Babylon.:]:  Johanan's 
movements  had  been  too  hurried  to  admit  of 
his  gathering  in  the  inhabitants  of  outlying  dis- 
tricts. 

When  Johanan's  company  reached  the  fron- 
tier, they  would  find  the  Egyptian  officials  pre 
pared  to  receive  them.  During  the:  last  few 
months  there  must  have  been  constant  arrivals 
of  Jewish  refugees,  and  rumour  must  have  an- 
nounced the  approach  of  so  large  a  company, 
consisting  of  almost  all  the  Jews  left  in  Palestine. 
♦Sam.xiii.  ti  Kings  xxii.  Jlii.  30. 


17© 


THE    BOOK   OF   JEREMIAH. 


The  very  circumstances  that  made  them  dread 
the  vengeance  of  Nebuchadnezzar  would  ensure 
them  a  hearty  welcome  in  Egypt.  Their  pres- 
ence was  an  unmistakable  proof  of  the  entire 
failure  of  the  attempt  to  create  in  Judah  a  docile 
and  contented  dependency  and  outpost  of  the 
Chaldean  Empire.  They  were  accordingly  set- 
tled at  Tahpanhes  and  in  the  surrounding  dis- 
trict. 

But  no  welcome  could  conciliate  Jeremiah's 
implacable  temper,  nor  could  all  the  splendour 
of  Egypt  tame  his  indomitable  spirit.  Amongst 
his  fellow-countrymen  at  Bethlehem,  he  had  fore- 
told the  coming  tribulations  of  Egypt.  He  now 
renewed  his  predictions  within  the  very  precincts 
of  Pharaoh's  palace,  and  enforced  them  by  a 
striking  symbol.  At  Tahpanhes — the  modern 
Tell  Defenneh — which  was  the  ancient  Egyptian 
frontier  fortress  and  settlement  on  the  more 
westerly  route  from  Syria,  "  the  word  of  Jehovah 
came  to  Jeremiah,  saying  Take  great  stones  in 
thine  hand,  and  hide  them  in  mortar  in  the  brick 
pavement,  at  the  entry  of  Pharaoh's  palace  in 
Tahpanhes,  in  the  presence  of  the  men  of  Judah; 
and  say  unto  them,  Thus  saith  Jehovah  Sabaoth, 
the  God  of  Israel: 

"  Behold,  I  will  send   and   take  My   servant  Nebuchad- 
nezzar king  of  Babylon  : 
I  will  set  his  throne  upon  these  stones  which  I  have  hid, 
And  he  shall  spread  his  state  pavilion  over  them." 

He  would  set  up  his  royal  tribunal,  and  decide 
the  fate  of  the  conquered  city  and  its  inhabi- 
tants. 

"  He  shall  come  and  smite  the  land  of  Egypt ; 
Such  as  are  for  death  shall  be  put  to  death, 
Such  as  are  for  captivity  shall  be  sent  into  captivity. 
Such  as  are  for  the  sword  shall  be  slain  by  the  sword. 
I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  the  temples  of  the  gods  of  Egypt ; 
He  shall   burn   their   temples,  and   carry   them  away 

captive  : 
He  shall  array  himself  with  the  land  of  Egypt, 
As  a  shepherd  putteth  on  his  garment." 

The  whole  country  would  become  a  mere  mantle 
for  his  dignity,  a  comparatively  insignificant  part 
of  his  vast  possessions. 

"  He  shall  go  forth  from  thence  in  peace." 

A  campaign  that  promised  well  at  the  beginning 
has  often  ended  in  despair,  like  Sennacherib's 
attack  on  Judah,  and  Pharaoh  Necho's  expedi- 
tion to  Carchemish.  The  invading  army  has 
been  exhausted  by  its  victories,  or  wasted  by  dis- 
eSse  and  compelled  to  beat  an  inglorious  retreat. 
No  such  misfortune  should  overtake  the  Chal- 
dean king.  He  would  depart  with  all  his  spoil, 
leaving  Egypt  behind  him  subdued  into  a  loyal 
province  of  his  empire. 

Then  the  prophet  adds,  apparently  as  a  kind  of 
afterthought: — 

"He  also  shall  break    the  obelisks  of  Heliopolis,  in  the 
land  of  Egypt" 

(so  styled  to  distinguish  this  Beth-Shemesh  from 
Beth-Shemesh  in  Palestine), 

"And    shall  burn  with    fire  the  temples  of  the    gods  of 
Egypt." 

The  performance  of  this  symbolic  act  and  the 
delivery  of  its  accompanying  message  are  not 
recorded,  but  Jeremiah  would  not  fail  to  make 
known  the  Divine  word  to  his  fellow-country- 
men. It  is  difficult  to  understand  how  the  exiled 
prophet  would  be  allowed  to  assemble  the  Jews 
in  front  of  the  main  entrance  of  the  palace,  and 


hide  "  great  stones  "  in  the  pavement.  Possibly 
the  palace  was  being  repaired,*  or  the  stones 
might  be  inserted  under  the  front  or  side  of  a 
raised  platform,  or  possibly  the  symbolic  act  was 
only  to  be  described  and  not  performed.  Mr. 
Flinders  Petrie  recently  discovered  at  Tell  De- 
fenneh a  large  brickwork  pavement,  with  great 
stones  buried  underneath,  which  he  supposed 
might  be  those  mentioned  in  our  narrative.  He 
also  found  there  another  possible  relic  of  these 
Jewish  emigres  in  the  shape  of  the  ruins  of  a 
large  brick  building  of  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty 
— to  which  Pharaoh  Hophra  belonged — still 
known  as  the  "  Palace  of  the  Jew's  Daughter." 
It  is  a  natural  and  attractive  conjecture  that  this 
was  the  residence  assigned  to  the  Jewish  prin- 
cesses whom  Johanan  carried  with  him  into 
Egypt. 

But  while  the  ruined  palace  may  testify  to 
Pharaoh's  generosity  to  the  Royal  House  that 
had  suffered  through  its  alliance  with  him,  the 
"  great  stones  "  remind  us  that,  after  a  brief  in- 
terval of  sympathy  and  co-operation,  Jeremiah 
again  found  himself  in  bitter  antagonism  to  his 
fellow-countrymen.  In  our  next  chapter  we  shall 
describe  one  final  scene  of  mutual  recrimination,  f 


CHAPTER  XV. 
THE  QUEEN  OF  HEAVEN. 


Jeremiah  xliv. 

"  Since  we  left  off  burning  incense  and  offering  liba. 
tions  to  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  we  have  been  in  want  of 
everything,  and  have  been  consumed  by  the  sword  and 
the  famine."— JER.  xliv.  i8. 

The  Jewish  exiles  in  Egypt  still  retained  a 
semblance  of  national  life,  and  were  bound  to- 
gether by  old  religious  ties.  Accordingly  we 
read  that  they  came  together  from  their  different 
settlements — from  Migdol  and  Tahpanhes  on  the 
northeastern  frontier,  from  Noph  or  Memphis 
on  the  Nile  south  of  the  site  of  Cairo,  and  from 
Pathros  or  Upper  Egypt — to  a  "  great  assem- 
bly," no  doubt  a  religious  festival.  The  list  of 
cities  shows  how  widelv  the  Jews  were  scattered 
throughout  Egypt. 

Nothing  is  said  as  to  where  and  when  this 
"great  assembly"  met;  but  for  Jeremiah,  such 
a  gathering  at  all  times  and  anywhere,  in  Egypt 
as  at  Jerusalem,  became  an  opportunity  for  ful- 
filling his  Divine  commission.  He  once  again 
confronted  his  fellow-countrymen  with  the  fa- 
miliar threats  and  exhortations.  A  new  climate 
had  not  created  in  them  either  clean  hearts  or 
a  right  spirit. 

Recent  history  had  added  force  to  his  warn- 
ings. He  begins  therefore  by  appealing  to  the 
direful  consequences  which  had  come  upon  the 
Holy  Land,  through  the  sins  of  its  inhabitants:^ 

"  Ye  have  seen  all  the  evil  that  I  have  brought  upon  Jeru- 
salem and  upon  all  the  cities  of  Judah. 
Behold,  this  day  they  are  an  uninhabited  waste, 
Because  of   their   wickedness  which   they   wrought  to 

provoke  Me  to  anger. 
By  going  to  burn  incense  and  to  serve  other  gods  whom 
neither  they  nor  their  fathers  knew." 

The  Israelites  had  enjoyed  for  centuries  inti- 
mate personal  relations,  with  Jehovah,  and  knew 

*  So  Orelli,  /a  loco. 

t  For  the  prophecy  against  Egypt  and  its  fulfilment  see 
further  chapter  xvii. 


jLTcmiah  xliv] 


THE    QUEEN    OF    HEAVEN. 


171 


Him  by  this  ancient  and  close  fellowship  and  by 
all  His  dealings  with  them.  They  had  no  such 
knowledge  of  the  gods  of  surrounding  nations. 
They  were  like  foolish  children  who  prefer  the 
enticing  blandishments  of  a  stranger  to  the  affec- 
tion and  discipline  of  their  home.  Such  children 
do  not  intend  to  forsake  their  home  or  to  break 
the  bonds  of  filial  affection,  and  yet  the  new 
friendship  may  wean  their  hearts  from  their 
father.  So  these  exiles  still  considered  them- 
selves worshippers  of  Jehovah,  and  yet  their  su- 
perstition led  them  to  disobey  and  dishonour 
Him. 

Before  its  ruin  Judah  had  sinned  against  light 
and  leading: — 

"  Howbeit  I  sent  unto  you  all  My  servants  the  prophets. 
Rising  up  early  and  sending  them,  saying, 
Oh  do  not  this  abominable  thing  that  I  hate. 
But  they  hearkened  not,  nor  inclined  their  ears,  so  as  to 

turn  from  their  evil, 
That  they  should  not  burn  incense  to  other  gods. 
Wherefore  My  fury  and  my  anger  was  poured  forth." 

Political  and  social  questions,  the  controversies 
with  the  prophets  who  contradicted  Jeremiah  in 
the  name  of  Jehovah,  have  fallen  into  the  back- 
ground; the  poor  pretence  of  loyalty  to  Jehovah 
which  permitted  His  worshippers  to  degrade 
Him  to  the  level  of  Baal  and  Moloch  is  ignored 
as  worthless:  and  Jeremiah,  like  Ezekiel,  finds 
the  root  of  the  people's  sin  in  their  desertion  of 
Jehovah.  Their  real  religion  was  revealed  by 
their  heathenish  superstitions.  Every  religious 
life  is  woven  of  many  diverse  strands;  if  the  web 
as  a  whole  is  rotten,  the  Great  Taskmaster  can 
take  no  account  of  a  few  threads  that  have  a 
form  and  profession  of  soundness.  Our  Lord 
declared  that  He  would  utterly  ignore  and  repu- 
diate men  upon  whose  lips  His  name  was  a  too 
familiar  word,  who  had  preached  and  cast  out 
devils  and  done  many  mighty  works  in  that  Holy 
Name.  These  were  men  who  had  worked  iniq- 
uity, who  had  combined  promising  externals 
with  the  worship  of  "  other  gods,"  Mammon  or 
Belial  or  some  other  of  those  evil  powers,  who 
place 

"  Within  His  sanctuary  itself  their  shrines. 
Abominations;  and  with  cursed  things 
His  holy  rites  and  solemn  feasts  profane  ; 
And  with  their  darkness  dare  affront  His  light." 

This  profuse  blending  of  idolatry  with  a  pro- 
fession of  zeal  for  Jehovah  had  provoked  the 
Divine  wrath  against  Judah:  and  yet  the  exiles 
had  not  profited  by  their  terrible  experience  of 
the  consequences  of  sin;  they  still  burnt  jncense 
unto  other  gods.  Therefore  Jeremiah  remon- 
strates with  them  afresh,  and  sets  before  their 
eyes  the  utter  ruin  which  will  punish  persistent 
sin.  This  discourse  repeats  and  enlarges  the 
threats  uttered  at  Bethlehem.  The  penalties 
then  denounced  on  disobedience  are  now  attrib- 
uted to  idolatry.  We  have  here  yet  another  ex- 
ample of  the  tacit  understanding  attaching  to  all 
the  prophet's  predictions.  Tlie  most  positive 
declarations  of  doom  are  often  warnings  and  not 
final  sentences.  Jehovah  does  not  turn  a  deaf  ear 
to  the  penitent,  and  the  doom  is  executed  not  be- 
cause He  exacts  the  uttermost  farthing,  but  be- 
cause the  culprit  perseveres  in  his  uttermost 
wrong.  Lack  of  faith  and  loyalty  at  Bethlehem 
and  idolatry  in  Egypt  were  both  symptoms  of 
the  same  deep-rooted  disease. 

On  this  occasion  there  was  no  rival  prophet 
to  beard  Jeremiah  and  relieve  his  hearers  from 
their   fears   and   scruples.      Probably   indeed   no 


professed  prophet  of  Jehovah  would  have  cared 
to  defend  the  worship  of  other  gods.  But,  as  at 
Bethlehem,  the  people  themselves  ventured  to 
defy  their  aged  mentor.  They  seem  to  have  been 
provoked  to  such  hardihood  by  a  stimulus  which 
often  prompts  timorous  men  to  bold  words. 
Their  wives  were  specially  devoted  to  the  su- 
perstitious burning  of  incense,  and  these  women 
were  present  in  large  numbers.  Probably,  like 
Lady  Macbeth,  they  had  already  in.  private 

"  Poured  their  spirits  in  their  husbands'  ears, 
And  chastised,  with  the  valour  of  their  tongues. 
All  that  impeded." 

those  husbands  from  speaking  their  minds  to 
Jeremiah.  In  their  presence,  the  men  dared  not 
shirk  an  obvious  duty,  for  fear  of  more  domes- 
tic chastisement.  The  prophet's  reproaches 
would  be  less  intolerable  than  such  inflictions. 
Moreover  the  fair  devotees  did  not  hesitate  to 
mingle  their  own  shrill  voices  in  the  wordy 
strife. 

These  idolatrous  Jews — male  and  female — car- 
ried things  with  a  very  high  hand  indeed: — 

"  We  will  not  obey  thee  in  that  which  thou 
hast  spoken  to  us  in  the  name  of  Jehovah.  We 
are  determined  to  perform  all  the  vows  we  have 
made  to  burn  incense  and  offer  libations  to  the 
Queen  of  Heaven,  exactly  as  we  have  said  and  as 
we  and  our  fathers  and  kings  and  princes  did  in 
the  cities  of  Judah  and  in  the  streets  of  Jeru- 
salem." * 

Moreover  they  were  quite  prepared  to  meet 
Jeremiah  on  his  own  ground  and  argue  with  him 
according  to  his  own  principles  and  methods. 
He  had  appealed  to  the  ruin  of  Judah  as  a  proof 
of  Jehovah's  condemnation  of  their  idolatry  and 
of  His  power  to  punish:  they  argued  that  these 
misfortunes  were  a  Divine  spretoc  injuria  formce, 
the  vengeance  of  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  whose 
worship  they  had  neglected.  When  they  duly 
honoured   her, — 

'■  Then  had  we  plenty  of  victuals,  and  were 
prosperous  and  saw  no  evil;  but  since  we  left  off 
burning  incense  and  offering  libations  to  the 
Queen  of  Heaven,  we  have  been  in  want  of 
everything,  and  have  been  consumed  by  the 
sword  and  the  famine." 

Moreover  the  women  had  a  special  plea  of  their 
own: — 

"  When  we  burned  incense  and  offered  liba- 
tions to  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  did  we  not  make 
cakes  to  symbolise  her  and  offer  libations  to  her 
with  our  husbands'  permission?" 

A  wife's  vows  were  not  valid  without  her  hus- 
band's sanction,  and  the  women  avail  themselves 
of  this  principle  to  shift  the  responsibility  for 
their  superstition  on  the  men's  shoulders.  Pos- 
sibly too  the  unfortunate  Benedicts  were  not  dis- 
playing sufficient  zeal  in  the  good  cause,  and 
these  words  were  intended  to  goad  them  into 
greater  energy.  Doubtless  they  cannot  be  en- 
tirely exonerated  of  blame  for  tolerating  their 
wives'  sins,  probably  they  were  guilty  of  partic- 
ipation as  well  as  connivance.  Nothing,  however, 
but  the  utmost  determination  and  moral  cour- 
age would  have  curbed  the  exuberant  religiosity 
of  these  devout  ladies.  The  prompt  suggestion 
that,  if  they  had  done  wrong,  their  husbands 
are  to  blame  for  letting  them  have  their  own 
way,  is  an  instance  of  the  meanness  which  re- 
sults from  the  worship  of  "  other  gods." 

But  these  defiant  speeches  raise  a  more  impor- 
*  Combined  from  verses,  16,  17,  and  25. 


172 


THE    BOOK    OF    JKUKMIAH. 


tant  question.  There  is  an  essential  difference 
between  regarding  a  national  catastrophe  as  a 
Divine  judgment  and  the  crude  superstition  to 
which  an  eclipse  expresses  the  resentment  of  an 
angry  god.  But  both  involve  the  same  practical 
uncertainty.  The  sufferers  or  the  spectators  ask 
what  god  wrought  these  marvels  and  what  sins 
they  are  intended  to  punish,  and  to  these  ques- 
tions neither  catastrophe  nor  eclipse  gives  any 
certain  answer. 

Doubtless  the  altars  of  the  Queen  of  Heaven 
had  been  destroyed  by  Josiah  in  his  crusade 
against  heathen  cults;  but  her  outraged  majesty 
had  been  speedily  avenged  by  the  defeat  and 
death  of  the  iconoclast,  and  since  then  the  history 
of  Judah  had  been  one  long  series  of  disasters. 
Jeremiah  declared  that  these  were  the  just  retri- 
bution inflicted  by  Jehovah  because  Judah  had 
been  disloyal  to  Him;  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh 
their  sin  had  reached  its  climax: — 

"  I  will  cause  them  to  be  tossed  to  and  fro 
among  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  because  of 
Manasseh  ben  Hezekiah,  king  of  Judah,  for  that 
which  he  did  in  Jerusalem."  * 

His  audience  were  equally  positive  that  the 
national  ruin  was  the  vengeance  of  the  Queen 
of  Heaven.  Josiah  had  destroyed  her  altars, 
and  now  the  worshippers  of  Istar  had  retaliated 
by  razing  the  Temple  to  the  ground.  A  Jew, 
with  the  vague  impression  that  Istar  was  as 
real  as  Jehovah,  might  find  it  difficult  to  decide 
between  these  conflicting  theories. 

To  us,  as  to  Jeremiah,  it  seems  sheer  nonsense 
to  speak  of  the  vengeance  of  the  Queen  of 
Heaven,  not  because  of  what  we  deduce  from 
the  circumstances  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  but 
because  we  do  not  believe  in  any  such  deity. 
But  the  fallacy  is  repeated  when,  in  somewhat 
similar  fashion,  Protestants  find  proof  of  the 
superiority  of  their  faith  in  the  contrast  between 
England  and  Catholic  Spain,  while  Romanists 
draw  the  opposite  conclusion  from  a  comparison 
of  Holland  and  Belgium.  In  all  such  cases  the 
assured  truth  of  the  disputant's  doctrine,  which 
is  set  forth  as  the  result  of  his  argument,  is  in 
reality  the  premiss  upon  which  his  reasoning 
rests.  Faith  is  not  deduced  from,  but  dictates  an 
interpretation  of  history.  In  an  individual  the 
material  penalties  of  sin  may  arouse  a  sleeping 
conscience,  but  they  cannot  create  a  moral  sense: 
apart  from  a  moral  sense  the  discipline  of  rewards 
and  punishments  would  be  futile: — 

"  Were  no  inner  eye  in  us  to  tell, 
Instructed  by  no  inner  sense, 
The  light  of  heaven  from  the  dark  of  hell, 
That  light  would  want  its  evidence." 

Jeremiah,  therefore,  is  quite  consistent  in  re- 
fraining from  argument  and  replying  to  his  op- 
ponents by  reiterating  his  former  statements  that 
sin  against  Jehovah  had  ruined  Judah  and  would 
yet  ruin  the  exiles.  He  spoke  on  the  authority 
of  the  "inner  sense,"  itself  instructed  by  Revela- 
tion. But,  after  the  manner  of  the  prophets,  he 
gave  them  a  sign — Pharaoh  Hophra  should  be 
delivered  into  the  hand  of  his  enemies  as  Zede- 
kiah  had  been.  Such  an  event  would  indeed  be 
an  unmistakable  sign  of  imminent  calamity  to  the 
fugitives  who  had  sought  the  protection  of  the 
Egyptian  king  against  Nebuchadnezzar.f 

We  have  reserved  for  separate  treatment  the 
question  suggested  by  the  referencs  to  the  Queen 

*  XV.  4. 

t  As  to  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy  see  chap.  xvii. 


of  Heaven.*  This  divine  name  only  occurs  again 
in  the  Old  Testament  in  vii.  18,  and  we  are 
startled,  at  first  sight,  to  discover  that  a  cult  about 
which  all  other  historians  and  prophets  have  been 
entirely  silent  is  described  in  these  passages  as 
an  ancient  and  national  worship.  It  is  even  pos- 
sible that  the  "  great  assembly  "  was  a  festival  in 
her  honour.  We  have  again  to  remind  ourselves 
that  the  Old  Testament  is  an  accoutit  of  the 
progress  of  Revelation  and  not  a  history  of  Is- 
rael. Probably  the  true  explanation  is  that  given 
by  Kuenen.  The  prophets  do  not,  as  a  rule, 
speak  of  the  details  of  false  worship;  they  use  the 
generic  "  Baal  "  and  the  collective  "  other  gods." 
Even  in  this  chapter  Jeremiah  begins  by  speak- 
ing of  "  other  gods,"  and  only  uses  the  term 
"  Queen  of  Heaven  "  when  he  quotes  the  reply 
made  to  him  by  the  Jews.  Similarly  when  Eze- 
kiel  goes  into  detail  concerning  idolatry!  he 
mentions  cults  and  ritual  t  which  do  not  occur 
elsewhere  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  prophets 
were  little  inclined  to  discriminate  between  dif- 
ferent forms  of  idolatry,  just  as  the  average 
churchman  is  quite  indifferent  to  the  distinctions 
of  the  various  Nonconformist  bodies,  which  are 
to  him  simply  "  dissenters."  One  might  read 
many  volumes  of  Anglican  sermons  and  even 
some  English  Church  History  without  meeting 
with  the  term  Unitarian. 

It  is  easy  to  find  modern  parallels — Christian 
and  heathen — to  the  name  of  this  goddess.  The 
Virgin  Mary  is  honoured  with  the  title  Regina 
Cceli,  and  at  Mukden,  the  Sacred  City  of  China, 
there  is  a  temple  to  the  Queen  of  Heaven.  But 
it  is  not  easy  to  identify  the  ancient  deity  who 
bore  this  name.  The  Jews  are  accused  elsewhere 
of  worshipping  "  the  sun  and  the  moon  and  all 
the  host  of  heaven,"  and  one  or  other  of  these 
heavenly  bodies — mostly  either  the  moon  or  the 
planet  Venus — has  been  supposed  to  have  been 
the  Queen  of  Heaven. 

Neither  do  the  symbolic  cakes  help  us.  Such 
emblems  are  found  in  the  ritual  of  many  ancient 
cults:  at  Athens  cakes  called  (xeXrjvai  and  shaped 
like  a  full-moon  were  offered  to  the  moon-god- 
dess Artemis;  a  similar  usage  seems  to  have  pre- 
vailed in  the  worship  of  the  Arabian  goddess 
Al-Uzza,  whose  star  was  Venus,  and  also  in  con- 
nection with  the  worship  of  the  sun.g 

Moreover  we  do  not  find  the  title  "  Queen  of 
Heaven  "  as  an  ordinary  and  well-established 
name  of  any  neighbouring  divinity.  "  Queen  " 
is  a  natural  title  for  any  goddess,  and  was  actu- 
ally given  to  many  ancient  deities.  Schrader  || 
finds  our  goddess  in  the  Atar-samain  (Athar- 
Astarte)  who  is  mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  de- 
scriptions as  worshipped  by  a  North  Arabian 
tribe  of  Kedarenes.  Possibly  too  the  Assyrian 
Istar  is  called  Queen  of  Heaven.^ 

Istar,  however,  is  connected  with  the  moon  as 
well  as  with  the  planet  Venus.**     For  the  present, 

*MELEKHETH  HASHSHAMAYIM.  The  iMasoretio 
pointing  seems  to  indicate  a  rendering  "  service  "  or  work 
of  heaven,  probably  in  the  sense  of  "  host  of  heaven,"  i.  e. 

the  stars,  ^?.?'P  being   written  defectively  for  ri35<?0, 

but  this  translation  is  now  pretty  generally  abandoned. 
Cf.  C.  J.  Ball,  Giesebrecht,  Orelli,  Cheyne,  etc.,  on  vii.  18, 
and  especially  Kuenen's  treatise  on  the  Queen  of  Heaven 
— in  the  "  Gesammelte  Abhandlungen,"  translated  by 
Budde— to  which  this  section  is  largely  indebted. 

t  Ezek.  viii. 

X  The  worship  of  Tammuz  and  of  "  creeping  things  and 
abominable  beasts,"  etc. 

S  Kuenen,  208. 

ii  Schrader  (Whitehouse's  translation),  ii.  207. 

1  Kuenen,  206. 

**  Sayce,  "  Higher  Criticism,"  etc.,  80. 


Jeremiah  xxv.  15-38.] 


JEHOVAH    AND    THE    NATIONS. 


^73 


therefore  we  must  be  content  to  leave  the  matter 
an  open  question,*  but  any  day  some  new  dis- 
covery may  solve  the  problem.  Meanwhile  it  is 
interesting  to  notice  how  little  religious  ideas 
and  practices  are  affected  by  differences  in  pro- 
fession. St.  Isaac  the  Great,  of  Antioch,  who 
died  about  a.  d.  460,  tells  us  that  the  Christian 
ladies  of  Syria — whom  he  speaks  of  very  ungal- 
lantly  as  "  fools  " — used  to  worship  the  planet 
Venus  from  the  roofs  of  their  houses,  in  the 
hope  that  she  would  bestow  upon  them  some 
portion  of  her  own  brightness  and  beauty.  This 
experience  naturally  led  St.  Isaac  to  interpret  the 
Queen  of  Heaven  as  the  luminary,  which  his 
countrywomen  venerated. f 

The  episode  of  the  "  great  assembly  "  closes 
the  history  of  Jeremiah's  life.  We  leave  him  (as 
we  so  often  met  with  him  before)  hurling  inef- 
fective denunciations  at  a  recalcitrant  audi- 
ence. Vagrant  fancy,  holding  this  to  be  a 
lame  and  impotent  conclusion,  has  woven 
romantic  stories  to  continue  and  complete 
the  narrative.  There  are  traditions  that  he 
was  stoned  to  death  at  Tahpanhes,  and 
that  his  bones  were  removed  to  Alexandria 
by  Alexander  the  Great;  that  he  and  Baruch 
returned  to  Judea  or  went  to  Babylon  and 
died  in  peace;  that  he  returned  to  Jerusalem 
and  lived  there  three  hundred  years, — and  other 
such  legends.  As  has  been  said  concerning  the 
Apocryphal  Gospels,  these  narratives  serve  as  a 
foil  to  the  history  they  are  meant  to  supplement: 
they  remind  us  of  the  sequels  of  great  novels 
written  by  inferior  pens,  or  of  attempts  made  by 
clumsy  mechanics  to  convert  a  bust  by  some  in- 
spired sculptor  into  a  full-length  statue. 

For  this  story  of  Jeremiah's  life  is  not  a  torso. 
Sacred  biography  constantly  disappoints  our 
curiosity  as  to  the  last  days  of  holy  men.  We  are 
scarcely  ever  told  how  prophets  and  apostles 
died.  It  is  curious  too  that  the  great  exceptions 
— Elijah  in  his  chariot  of  fire  and  Elisha  dying 
quietly  in  his  bed — occur  before  the  period  of 
written  prophecy.  The  deaths  of  Isaiah,  Jere- 
miah, and  Ezekiel,  Peter,  Paul,  and  John,  are 
passed  over  in  the  Sacred  Record,  and  when  we 
seek  to  follow  them  beyond  its  pages,  we  are 
taught  afresh  the  unique  wisdom  of  inspiration. 
If  we  may  understand  Deuteronomy  xxxiv.  to 
imply  that  no  eye  was  permitted  to  behold  Moses 
in  the  hour  of  death,  we  have  in  this  incident  a 
type  of  the  reticence  of  Scripture  on  such  mat- 
ters. Moreover  a  moment's  reflection  reminds 
us  that  the  inspired  method  is  in  accordance  with 
the  better  instincts  of  our  nature.  A  death  in 
opening  manhood,  or  the  death  of  a  soldier  in 
battle  or  of  a  martyr  at  the  stake,  rivets  our  at- 
tention; but  when  men  die  in  a  good  old  age, 
we  dwell  less  on  their  declining  years  than  on  the 
achievements  of  their  prime.  We  all  remember 
the  martyrdoms  of  Huss  and  Latimer,  but  how 
many  of  those  in  whose  mouths  Calvin  and  Lu- 
ther are  familiar  as  household  words  know  how 
those  great  Reformers  died? 

There  comes  a  time  when  we  may  apply  to 
the  aged  saint  the  words  of  Browning's  "  Death 
in  the  Desert "  : — 

"So  is  myself  withdrawn  into  my  depths, 
The  soul  retreated  from  the  perished  brain 
Whence  it  was  wont  to  feel  and  use  the  world 
Through  these  dull  members,  done  with  long  ago." 

*  So  Giesebrecht  on  vii.  18.  Kuenen  argues  for  the 
identification  of  the  Queen  of  Heaven  with  the  planet 
Venus. 

t  Kuenen,  211. 


And  the  poet's  comparison  of  his  soul  to 

"  A  stick  once  fire  from  end  to  end 
Now,  ashes  save  the  tip  that  holds  a  spark" 

Love   craves  to  watch  to  the  last,    because  the 
spark  may 

"Run  back,  spread  itself 
A  little  where  the  fire  was.  .  .  . 

And  we  would  not  lose 
The  last  of  what  might  happen  on  his  face." 

Sucii  privileges  may  be  granted  to  a  few 
chosen  disciples,  probably  they  were  in  this  case 
granted  to  iiaruch  ;  but  they  are  mostly  withheld 
from  the  world,  lest  blind  irreverence  should  see 
in  the  aged  saint  nothing  but 

"  Second  childishness,  and  mere  oblivion  ; 
Sans  teeth,  sans  eyes,  sans  taste,  sans  everything." 


BOOK  II. 

PROPHECIES  CONCERNING  FOREIGN  NA 
TIONS. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

JEHOVAH  AND  THE  NATIONS. 

Jeremiah  xxv.  15-38. 


"Jehovah  hath  a  controversy  with  the  nations."— JER. 
xxv.  31. 

As  the  son  of  a  king  only  learns  very  gradually 
that  his  father's  authority  and  activity  extend 
beyond  the  family  and  the  household,  so  Israel 
in  its  childhood  thought  of  Jehovah  as  exclu- 
sively concerned  with  itself. 

Such  ideas  as  omnipotence  and  universal  Prov- 
idence did  not  exist;  therefore  they  could  not  be 
denied;  and  the  limitations  of  the  national  faith 
were  not  essentially  inconsistent  with  later  Rev- 
elation. But  when  we  reach  the  period  of  re- 
corded prophecy  we  find  that,  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  prophets  had  begun  to 
recognise  Jehovah's  dominion  over  surrounding 
peoples.  There  was,  as  yet,  no  deliberate  and 
formal  doctrine  of  omnipotence,  but,  as  Israel 
became  involved  in  the  fortunes  first  of  one  for- 
eign power  and  then  of  another,  the  prophets  as- 
serted that  the  doings  of  these  heathen  states 
were  overruled  by  the  God  of  Israel.  The  idea 
of  Jehovah's  Lordship  of  the  Nations  enlarged 
with  the  extension  of  international  relations,  as 
our  conception  of  the  God  of  Nature  has  ex- 
panded with  the  successive  discoveries  of  science. 
Hence,  for  the  most  part,  the  prophets  devote 
special  attention  to  the  concerns  of  Gentile 
peoples.  Hosea,  Micah,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and 
Malachi  are  partial  exceptions.  Some  of  the 
minor  prophets  have  for  their  main  subject  the 
doom  of  a  heathen  empire.  Jonah  and  Nahum 
deal  with  Nineveh,  Habakkuk  with  Chaldea, 
and  Edom  is  specially  honoured  by  being  almost 
the  sole  object  of  the  denunciations  of  Obadiah. 
Daniel  also  deals  with  the'fate  of  the  kingdoms 
of  the  world,  but  in  the  Apocalyptic  fashion  of 
the  Pseudepigrapha.  Jewish  criticism  rightly  de- 
clined to  recognise  this  book  as  prophetic,  and 


174 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


relegated  it  to  the  latest  collection  of  canonical 
scriptures. 

Each  of  the  other  prophetical  books  contains 
a  longer  or  shorter  series  of  utterances  concern- 
ing the  neighbours  of  Israel,  its  friends  and  foes, 
its  enemies  and  allies.  The  fashion  was  appar- 
ently  set  by  Amos,  who  shows  God's  judgment 
upon  Damascus,  the  Philistines,  Tyre,  Edom, 
Ammon,  and  Moab.  This  list  suggests  the  range 
of  the  prophet's  religious  interest  in  the  Gentiles. 
Assyria  and  Egypt  were,  for  the  present,  beyond 
the  sphere  of  Revelation,  just  as  China  and  In- 
dia were  to  the  average  Protestant  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  When  we  come  to  the  Book  of 
Isaiah,  the  horizon  widens  in  every  direction. 
Jehovah  is  concerned  with  Egypt  and  Ethiopia, 
Assyria  and  Babylon.*  In  very  short  books  like 
Joel  and  Zephaniah  we  could  not  expect  exhaust- 
ive treatment  of  this  subject.  Yet  even  these 
prophets  deal  with  the  fortunes  of  the  Gentiles: 
Joel,  variously  held  one  of  the  latest  or  one  of 
the  earliest  of  canonical  books,  pronounces  a 
Divine  judgment  on  Tyre  and  Sidon  and  the 
Philistines,  on  Egvpt  and  Edom;  and  Zephaniah, 
an  elder  contemporary  of  Jeremiah,  devotes  sec- 
tions to  the  Philistines,  Moab  and  Ammon,  Ethi- 
opia and  Assyria. 

The  fall  of  Nineveh  revolutionised  the  interna- 
tional system  of  the  East.  The  judgment  on 
Asshur  was  accomplished,  and  her  name  disap- 
pears from  these  catalogues  of  doom.  In  other 
particulars  Jeremiah,  as  well  as  Ezekiel,  follows 
closely  in  the  footsteps  of  his  predecessors.  He 
deals,  like  them,  with  the  group  of  Syrian  and 
Palestinian  states— Philistines.  Moab,  Ammon, 
Edom,  and  Damascus  f  He  dwells  with  re- 
peated emphasis  on  Egypt,  and  Arabia  is  repre- 
sented by  Kedar  and  Hazor.  In  one  section  the 
prophet  travels  into  what  must  have  seemed  to 
his  contemporaries  the  very  far  East,  as  far  as 
Elam.  On  the  other  hand,  he  is  comparatively 
silent  about  Tyre,  in  which  Joel,  Amos,  the 
Book  of  Isaiah,!  and  above  all  Ezekiel  display 
a  lively  interest.  Nebuchadnezzar's  campaigns 
were  directed  against  Tyre  as  much  as  against 
Jerusalem;  and  Ezekiel,  living  in  Chaldea,  would 
have  attention  forcibly  directed  to  the  Phoeni- 
cian capital,  at  a  time  when  Jeremiah  was  ab- 
sorbed in  the  fortunes  of  Zion. 

But  in  the  passage  which  we  have  chosen  as 
the  subject  for  this  introduction  to  the  prophe- 
cies of  the  nations,  Jeremiah  takes  a  somewhat 
wider  range: — 

"  Thus  saith  unto  me  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel : 
Take  at  My  hand  this  cup  of  the  wine  of  fury. 
And  make  all  the  nations,  to  whom  I  send  thee,  drink  it. 
They  shall  drink,  and  reel  to  and  fro,  and  be  mad, 
Because  of  the  sword  that  I  will  send  among  them." 

First  and  foremost  of  these  nations,  pre-emi- 
nent in  punishment  as  in  privilege,  stand  "  Jeru- 
salem and  the  cities  of  Judah.  with  its  kings  and 
princes." 

This  bad  eminence  is  a  necessary  application 
of  the  principle  laid  down  by  Amos  ^  : — 

"  You  only  have  I  known  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth  : 
Therefore  I  will  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities." 

*  Doubts,  however,  have  been  raised  as  to  whether  any 
of  the  sections  about  Bab/lon  are  by  Isaiah  himself. 

t  Doubts  have  been  expressed  as  to  the  genuineness  of 
the  Damascus  prophecy. 

t  The  Isaianic  authorship  of  this  prophecy  (Isa.  xxiii.)  is 
rejected  bjr  very  many  critics. 

§  Amos  iii.  2. 


But  as  Jeremiah  says  later  on,  addressing  the 
Gentile  nations, — 

"I  begin  to  work  evil  at  the  city  which  is  called  by  My 
name. 
Should  ye  go  scot-free?    Ye  shall  not  go  scot-free." 

And  the  prophet  puts  the  cup  of  God's  fury  to 
their  lips  also,  and  amongst  them,  Egypt,  the 
bete  noir  of  Hebrew  seers,  is  most  conspicuously 
marked  out  for  destruction:  "  Pharaoh  king  of 
Egypt,  and  his  servants  and  princes  and  all  his 
people,  and  all  the  mixed  population  of  Egypt."  * 
Then  follows,  in  epic  fashion,  a  catalogue  of 
"  all  the  nations  "  as  Jeremiah  knew  them:  "  All 
the  kings  of  the  land  of  Uz,  all  the  kings  of  the 
land  of  the  Philistines;  Ashkelon,  Gaza,  Ekron, 
and  the  remnant  of  Ashdod;f  Edom,  Moab,  and 
the  Ammonites;  all  the  kings t  of  Tyre,  all  the 
kings  of  Zidon,  and  the  kings  of  their  colonies  S 
beyond  the  sea;  Dedan  and  Tema  and  Buz,  and 
all  that  have  the  corners  of  their  hair  polled,|| 
and  all  the  kings  of  Arabia,  and  all  the  kings  of 
the  mixed  populations  that  dwell  in  the  desert; 
all  the  kings  of  Zimri,  all  the  kings  of  Elam, 
and  all  the  kings  of  the  Medes."  Jeremiah's 
definite  geographical  information  is  apparently 
exhausted,  but  he  adds  by  way  of  summary  and 
conclusion:  "And  all  the  kings  of  the  north, 
far  and  near,  one  after  the  other;  and  all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  world,  which  are  on  the  face  of 
the  earth." 

There  is  one  notable  omission  in  the  list.  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, the  servant  of  Jehovah,^  was  the 
Divinely  appointed  scourge  of  Judah  and  its 
neighbours  and  allies.  Elsewhere  **  the  nations 
are  exhorted  to  submit  to  him,  and  here  appar- 
ently Chaldea  is  exempted  from  the  general 
doom,  just  as  Ezekiel  passes  no  formal  sentence 
on  Babylon.  It  is  true  that  "  all  the  kingdoms 
"of  the  earth  "  would  naturally  include  Babylon, 
possibly  were  even  intended  to  do  so.  But  the 
Jews  were  not  long  content  with  so  veiled  a  ref- 
erence to  their  conquerors  and  oppressors. 
Some  patriotic  scribe  added  the  explanatory 
note,  "  And  the  king  of  Sheshach  (i.  e.,  Babylon) 
shall  drink  after  them."  ft  Sheshach  is  obtained 
from  Babel  by  the  cipher  'Athbash,  according 
to  which  an  alphabet  is  written  out  and  a  re- 
versed alphabet  written  out  underneath  it,  and 
the  letters  of  the  lower  row  used  for  those  of  the 
upper  and  vice  versa.    Thus: 


Aleph     B 
T        SH 


K     L 
L    K 


The  use  of  cypher  seems  *-n  indicate  that  the 
note  was  added  in  Chaldea  during  the  Exile, 
when  it  was  not  safe  to  circulate  documents 
which  openly  denounced  Babylon.  Jeremiah's 
enumeration  of  the  peoples  and  rulers  of  his 
world  is  naturally  more  detailed  and  more  ex- 
haustive than  the  list  of  the  nations  against  which 
he  prophesied.  It  includes  the  Phoenician  states, 
details  the  Philistine  cities,  associates  with  Elam 
the  neighbouring  nations  of  Zimri  and  the 
Medes,    and    substitutes    for    Kedar    and    Hazor 

*So  Giesebrecht,  Orelli,  etc. 

t  Psammetichus  had  recently  taken  Ashdod,  after  a  con- 
tinuous siege  of  twenty-nine  years. 

tThe  plural  may  refer  to  dependent  chiefs  or  maybe 
used  for  the  sake  of  symmetry. 

§  Lit.  "the  coasts"  (/'.  e.,  islands  and  coastland)  where 
the  Phoenicians  had  planted  their  colonies. 

II  See  on  xlix.  28-32. 

1[  XXV.  Q. 

**  xxvii.  8. 

+t  Sheshach  (Sheshakh)  for  Babel  also  occurs  in  U.  41. 
This  explanatory  note  is  omitted  by  LXX. 


Jeremiah  xliii.,  xliv.,xlvi.] 


EGYPT. 


175 


Arabia  and  a  number  of  semi-Arab  states,  Uz, 
Dedan,  Tema,  and  Buz.*  Thus  Jeremiah's 
world  is  the  district  constantly  shown  in  Scrip- 
ture atlases  in  a  map  comprising  the  scenes  of 
Old  Testament  history,  Egypt,  Arabia,  and 
Western  Asia,  south  of  a  line  from  the  northeast 
^orner  of  the  Mediterranean  to  the  southern 
end  of  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  west  of  a  line  from 
the  latter  point  to  the  northern  end  of  the  Per- 
sian Gulf.  How  much  of  history  has  been 
crowded  into  this  narrow  area!  Here  science, 
art,  and  literature  won  those  primitive  triumphs 
which  no  subsequent  achievements  could  sur- 
pass or  even  equal.  Here,  perhaps  for  the  first 
time,  men  tasted  the  Dead  Sea  apples  of  civilisa- 
tion, and  learnt  how  little  accumulated  wealth 
and  national  splendour  can  do  for  the  welfare  of 
the  masses.  Here  was  Eden,  where  God  walked 
in  the  cool  of  the  day  to  commune  with  man; 
and  here  also  were  many  Mount  Moriahs,  where 
man  gave  his  firstborn  for  his  transgression,  the 
fruit  of  his  body  for  the  sin  of  his  soul,  and  no 
angel  voice  stayed  his  hand. 

And  now  glance  at  any  modern  map  and  see 
for  how  little  Jeremiah's  world  counts  among  the 
great  Powers  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Egypt 
indeed  is  a  bone  of  contention  between  Euro- 
pean states,  but  how  often  does  a  daily  paper 
remind  its  readers  of  the  existence  of  Syria  or 
Mesopotamia?  We  may  apply  to  this  ancient 
world  the  title  that  Byron  gave  to  Rome,  "  Lone 
mother  of  dead  empires,"  and  call  it: — 

"  The  desert,  where  we  steer 
Stumbling  o'er  recollections." 

It  is  said  that  Scipio's  exultation  over  the  fall 
of  Carthage  was  marred  by  forebodings  that 
Time  had  a  like  destiny  in  store  for  Rome. 
Where  Cromwell  might  have  quoted  a  text  from 
the  Bible,  the  Roman  soldier  applied  to  his  na- 
tive city  the  Homeric  lines: — 

"  Troy  shall  sink  in  fire. 
And  Priam's  city  with  himself  expire." 

The  epitaphs  of  ancient  civilisations  are  no  mere 
matters  of  archaeology;  like  the  inscriptions  on 
common  graves,  they  carry  a  Memento  mori  for 
their  successors. 

But  to  return  from  epitaphs  to  prophecy:  in 
the  list  which  we  have  just  given,  the  kings  of 
many  of  the  nations  are  required  to  drink  the 
cup  of  wrath,  and  the  section  concludes  with  a 
universal  judgment  upon  the  princes  and  rulers 
of  this  ancient  world  under  the  familiar  figure  of 
shepherds,  supplemented  here  by  another,  that 
of  the  "  principal  of  the  flock,"  or,  as  we  should 
say,  "  bell-wethers."  Jehovah  would  break  out 
upon  them  to  rend  and  scatter  like  a  lion  from 
his  covert.     Therefore: — 

"  Howl,  ye  shepherds,  and  cry  ! 
Roll  yourselves  in  the  dust,  ye  bell-wethers  I 
The  time  has  fully  come  for  you  to  be  slaughtered. 
I  will  cast  you  down  with  a  crash,  like  a  vas«  of  por- 
celain, t 
Ruin  hath  overtaken  the  refuge  of  the  shepherds, 
And  the  way  of  escape  of  the  bell-wethers." 

Thus  Jeremiah  announces  the  coming  ruin 
of  an  ancient  world,  with  all  its  states  and  sov- 
ereigns,  and  we   have   seen   that  the  prediction 

*  As  to  Damascus  cf.  note  on  p.  174. 

t  This  line  is  somewhat  paraphrased.  Lit.  "  I  will  shat- 
ter you,  and  ye  shall  fall  like  an  ornamental  vessel " 
(KELI  HEMDA). 


has   been   amply   fulfilled.     We   can   only   notice 
two  other  points  with  regard  to  this  section. 

First,  then,  we  have  no  right  to  accuse  the 
prophet  of  speaking  from  a  narrow  national 
standpoint.  His  words  are  not  the  expression 
of  the  Jewish  adversus  omnes  alios  hostile  odium;  * 
if'  they  were,  we  should  not  hear  so  much  of 
Judah's  sin  and  Judah's  punishment.  He  ap- 
plied to  heathen  states  as  he  did  to  his  own 
the  divine  standard  of  national  tighteousness, 
and  they  too  were  found  wanting.  All  history 
confirms  Jeremiah's  judgment.  This  brings  us 
to  our  second  point.  Christian  thinkers  have 
been  engrossed  in  the  evidential  aspect  of  these 
national  catastrophes.  They  served  to  fulfil 
prophecy,  and  therefore  the  squalor  of  Egypt 
and  the  ruins  of  Assyria  to-day  have  seemed  to 
make  our  way  of  salvation  more  safe  and  cer- 
tain. But  God  did  not  merely  sacrifice  these 
holocausts  of  men  and  nations  to  the  perennial 
craving  of  feeble  faith  for  signs.  Their  fate  must 
of  necessity  illustrate  His  justice  and  wisdom  and 
love.  Jeremiah  tells  us  plainly  that  Judah  and 
its  neighbours  had  filled  up  the  measure  of  their 
iniquity  before  they  were  called  upon  to  drink 
the  cup  of  wrath;  national  sin  justifies  God's 
judgments.  Yet  these  very  facts  of  the  moral 
failure  and  decadence  of  human  societies  per- 
plex and  startle  us.  Individuals  grow  old  and 
feeble  and  die,  but  saints  and  heroes  do  not  be- 
come slaves  of  vice  and  sin  in  their  last  days. 
The  glory  of  their  prime  is  not  buried  in  a  dis- 
honoured grave.  Nay  rather,  when  all  else  fails, 
the  beauty  of  holiness  grows  more  pure  and 
radiant.     But  of  what  nation  could  we  say: — 

"Let  me  die  the  death  of  the  righteous, 
Let  my  last  end  be  like  his  "  ? 

Apparently  the  collective  conscience  is  a  plant 
of  very  slow  growth;  and  hitherto  no  society  has 
been  worthy  to  endure  honourably  or  even  to 
perish  nobly.  In  Christendom  itself  the  ideals 
of  common  action  are  still  avowedly  meaner 
than  those  of  individual  conduct.  International 
and  collective  morality  is  still  in  its  infancy,  and 
as  a  matter  of  habit  and  system  modern  states 
are  often  wantonly  cruel  and  unjust  towards  ob- 
scure individuals  and  helpless  minorities.  Yet 
surely  it  shall  not  always  be  so;  the  daily  prayer 
of  countless  millions  for  the  coming  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God  cannot  remain  unanswered. 


CHAPTER   XVII 

EGYPT. 

Jeremiah  xliii.  8-13,  xliv.  30,  xlvi. 

"  I  will  visit  Amon  of  No,  and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with 
their  gods  and  their  kings:  even  Pharaoh  and  all  then? 
that  trust  in  him." — Jer.  xlvi.  25. 

The  kings  of  Egypt  with  whom  Jeremiah 
was  contemporary — Psammetichus  II.,  Pharaoh 
Necho,  and  Pharaoh  Hophra — belonged  to  the 
twenty-sixth  dynasty.  When  growing  distress 
at  home  compelled  Assyria  to  loose  her  hold 
on  her  distant  dependencies,  Egypt  still  retained 
something  of  her  former  vigorous  elasticity.  In 
the  rebound  from  subjection  under  the  heavy 
hand  of  Sennacherib,  she  resumed  her  ancient 
forms  of  life  and  government.  She  regained  her 
unity  and  independence,  and  posed  afresh  as  an 
S Tacitus,  "History,"  v.  5. 


276 


_  THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


equal  rival  with  Chaldea  for  the  supremacy  of 
Western  Asia.  At  home  there  was  a  renascence 
of  art  and  literature,  and,  as  of  old,  the  wealth 
and  devotion  of  powerful  monarchs  restored  the 
ancient  temples  and  erected  new  shrines  of  their 
own. 

But  this  revival  was  no  new  growth  springing 
up  with  a  fresh  and  original  life  from  the  seeds 
of  the  past;  it  cannot  rank  with  the  European 
Renascence  of  the  fifteenth  centurv.  It  is  rather 
to  be  compared  with  the  reorganisations  by 
which  Diocletian  and  Constantine  prolonged  the 
decline  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  rally  of  a 
strong  constitution  in  the  grip  of  mortal  disease. 
These  latter-day  Pharaohs  failed  ignominiously 
in  their  attempts  to  recover  the  Syrian  dominion 
of  the  Thothmes  and  Rameses;  and,  like  the 
Roman  Empire  in  its  last  centuries,  the  Egypt 
of  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty  surrendered  itself  to 
Greek  influence  and  hired  foreign  mercenaries 
to  fight  its  battles.  The  new  art  and  literature 
were  tainted  by  pedantic  archaism.  According 
to  Brugsch,*  "  Even  to  the  newly  created  dig- 
nities and  titles,  the  return  to  ancient  times  had 
become  the  general  watchword.  .  .  .  The  stone 
door-posts  of  this  age  reveal  the  old  Memphian 
style  of  art,  mirrored  in  its  modern  reflection 
after  the  lapse  of  fout  thousand  years."  Simi- 
larly Meyer  t  tells  us  that  apparently  the 
Egyptian  state  was  reconstituted  on  the  basis  of 
a  religious  revival,  somewhat  in  the  fashion  of 
the  establishment  of  Deuteronomy  by  Josiah. 

Inscriptions  after  the  time  of  Psammetichus 
are  written  in  archaic  Egyptian  of  a  very  ancient 
past;  it  is  often  difficult  to  determine  at  first 
sight  whether  inscriptions  belong  to  the  earliest 
or  latest  period  of  Egyptian  history. 

The  superstition  that  sought  safety  in  an  ex- 
act reproduction  of  a  remote  antiquity  could  not, 
however,  resist  the  fascination  of  Eastern  demo- 
nology.  According  to  Brugsch,:^  in  the  age 
called  the  Egyptian  Renascence  the  old  Egyptian 
theology  was  adulterated  with  Grseco-Asiatic 
elements — demons  and  genii  of  whom  the  older 
faith  and  its  purer  doctrine  had  scarcely  an  idea; 
exorcisms  became  a  special  science,  and  are  fa- 
vourite themes  for  the  inscriptions  of  this  period. 
Thus,  amid  many  differences,  there  are  also  to 
be  found  striking  resemblances  between  the  re- 
ligious movements  of  the  period  in  Egypt  and 
amongst  the  Jews,  and  corresponding  difficulties 
in  determining  the  dates  of  Egyptian  inscriptions 
and  of  sections  of  the  Old  Testament. 

This  enthusiasm  for  ancient  custom  and  tradi- 
tion was  not  likely  to  commend  the  Egypt  of 
Jeremiah's  age  to  any  student  of  Hebrew  his- 
tory. He  would  be  reminded  that  the  dealings 
of  the  Pharaohs  with  Israel  had  almost  always 
been  to  its  hurt;  he  would  remember  the  Op- 
pression and  the  Exodus — how,  in  the  time  of 
Solomon,  friendly  intercourse  with  Egypt  taught 
that  monarch  lessons  in  magnificent  tyranny, 
how  Shishak  plundered  the  Temple,  how  Isaiah 
had  denounced  the  Egyptian  alliance  as  a  con- 
tinual snare  to  Judah.  A  Jewish  prophet  would 
be  prompt  to  discern  the  omens  of  coming  ruin 
in  the  midst  of  renewed  prosperity  on  the  Nile. 
Accordingly  at  the  first  great  crisis  of  the  new 
international  system,  in  the  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim,  either  just  before  or  just  after  the  bat- 
tle of  Carchemish — it  matters  little  which — Jere- 

*  Second  edition,  ii.  291,  292. 

+  Meyer,  "Geschichte  des  alten  Agypten,"  371,  373. 


miah  takes  up  his  prophecy  against  Egypt.  First 
of  all,  with  an  ostensible  friendliness  which  only 
masks  his  bitter  sarcasm,  he  invites  the  Egyp- 
tians to  take  the  field: — 

"  Prepare  buckler  and  shield,  and  draw  near  to  battle. 
Harness  the  horses  to  the  chariots,  mount  the  chargers 

stand  forth  armed  cap-a-pie  for  battle  ; 
Furbish  the  spears,  put  on  the  coats  of  mail." 

This  great  host  with  its  splendid  equipment  must 
surely  conquer.  The  prophet  professes  to  await 
its  triumphant  return;  but  he  sees  instead  a 
breathless  mob  of  panic-stricken  fugitives,  and 
pours  upon  them  the  torrent  of  his  irony: — 

"  How  is  it  that  I  behold  this  ?    These  heroes  are  dismayed 
and  have  turned  their  backs ; 
Their  warriors  have  been  beaten  down  ; 
They  flee  apace,  and  do  not  look  behind  them  : 
Terror  on  every  side— is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 

Then  irony  passes  into  explicit  malediction: — 

"  Let  not  the  swift  flee  away,  nor  the  warrior  escape  ; 
Away  northward,  they   stumble  and  fall  by  the  river 
Euphrates." 

Then,  in  a  new  strophe,  Jeremiah  again  recurs 
in  imagination  to  the  proud  march  of  the  count- 
less hosts  of  Egypt: — 

"  Who  is  this  that  riseth  up  like  the  Nile, 
Whose  waters  toss  themselves  like  the  rivers  ? 
Egypt  riseth  up  like  the  Nile, 
His  waters  toss  themselves  like  the  rivers. 
And  he  saith,  I  will  go  up  and  cover  the  land" 

(like  the  Nile  in  flood); 

"I  will  destroy  the  cities  and  their  inhabitants" 

(and,  above  all  other  cities,  Babylon). 

Again  the  prophet  urges  them  on  with  ironical 
encouragement : — 

"  Go  up,  ye  horses ;  rage,  ye  chariots  ; 
Ethiopians  and  Libyans  that  handle  the  shield, 
Lydians  that  handle  and  bend  the  bow  " 

(the  tributaries  and  mercenaries  of  Egypt). 

Then,  as  before,  he  speaks  plainly  of  coming 
disaster: 

"That  day  is  a  day  of  vengeance  for  the  Lord  Jehovah 
Sabaoth,  whereon  He  will  avenge  Him  of  His  ad- 
versaries " 

(a  day  of  vengeance  upon  Pharaoh  Necho  for 
Megiddo  and  Josiah). 

"  The  sword  shall  devour  and  be  sated,  and  drink  its  fill 
of  their  blood : 
For  the  Lord  Jehovah  Sabaoth  hath  a  sacrifice  in  the 
northern  land,  by  the  river  Euphrates." 

In  a  final  strophe,  the  prophet  turns  to  the 
land  left  bereaved  and  defenceless  by  the  defeat 
at  Carchemish: — 

"  Go  up  to  Gileadand  get  thee  balm,  O  virgin  daughter  of 

Egypt : 
In  vain  dost  thou  multiply  medicines;  thou  canst  not  be 

healed. 
The  nations  have  heard  of  thy  shame,  the  earth  is  full  of 

thy  cry  : 
For  warrior  stumbles  against  warrior  ;  they  fall  both 

together." 

Nevertheless  the  end  was  not  yet.  Egypt  was 
wounded  to  death,  but  she  was  to  linger  on  for 
many  a  long  year  to  be  a  snare  to  Judah  and  to 
vex  the  righteous  soul  of  Jeremiah.  The  reed 
was  broken,  but  it  still  retained  an  appearance  of 
soundness,  which  more  than  once  tempted  the 
Jewish  princes  to  lean  upon  it  and  find  their 
hands   pierced   for   their   pains.      Hence,    as   we 


Jeremiah  xliii. ,  xliv. ,  xlvi.] 


EGYPT. 


177 


have  seen  already,  Jeremiah  repeatedly  found 
occasion  to  reiterate  the  doom  of  Egypt,  of 
Necho's  successor,  Pharaoh  Hophra,  and  of  the 
Jewish  refugees  who  had  sought  safety  under  his 
protection.  In  the  concluding  part  of  chap. 
xlvi.,  a  prophecy  of  uncertain  date  sets  forth  the 
ruin  of  Egypt  with  rather  more  literary  finish 
than  in  the  parallel  passages. 

This  word  of  Jehovah  was  to  be  proclaimed  in 
Egypt,  and  especially  in  the  frontier  cities,  which 
would  have  to  bear  the  first  brunt  of  invasion: — 

"  Declare  in  Ej^ypt,  proclaim  in  Migdol,  proclaim  in  Noph 
and  Tahpanhes : 
Say  ye.  Take  thy  stand  and   be   ready,  fpr  the  sword 

hath  devoured  round  about  thee. 
Why  hath    Apis*   fled    and   thy  calf   not  stood?     Be- 
cause Jehovah  overthrew  it." 

Memphis  was  devoted  to  the  worship  of  Apis, 
incarnate  in  the  sacred  bull;  but  now  Apis  must 
succumb  to  the  mightier  divinity  of  Jehovah, 
and  his  sacred  city  become  a  prey  to  the  in- 
vaders. 

"  He    maketh   many    to  stumble  ;   they   fall  one  against 

another. 
Then  they  say,  Arise,  and    let   us  return   to   our  own 

people 
And  to  our  native  land,  before  the  oppressing  sword." 

We  must  remember  that  the  Egyptian  armies 
were  largely  composed  of  foreign  mercenaries. 
In  the  hour  of  disaster  and  defeat  these  hirelings 
would  desert  their  employers  and  go  home. 

"  Give  unto  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt  the  name  t  Crash  ;  he 
hath  let  the  appointed  time  pass  by." 

The  form  of  this  enigmatic  sentence  is  probably 
due  to  a  play  upon  Egyptian  names  and  titles. 
When  the  allusions  are  forgotten,  such  parono- 
masia naturally  results  in  hopeless  obscurity. 
The  "  appointed  time  "  has  been  explained  as  the 
period  during  which  Jehovah  gave  Pharaoh  the 
opportunity  of  repentance,  or  as  that  within 
which  he  might  have  submitted  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar on  favourable  terms. 

"  As  I  live,  is  the  utterance  of  the  King,  whose  name  is 

Jehovah  Sabaoth, 
One  shall  come  like  Tabor  among  the  mountains  and  like 

Carmel  by  the  sea." 

It  was  not  necessary  to  name  this  terrible  in- 
vader; it  could  be  no  other  than  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. 

"  Get  thee  gear  for  captivity,  O  daughter  of  Egypt,  that 

dwellest  in  thine  own  land  : 
For  Noph  shall  become  a  desolation,  and  shall  be  burnt 

up  and  left  without  inhabitants. 
Egypt  is  a  very  fair  heifer,  but  destruction  is  come  upon 

her  from  the  north." 

This  tempest  shattered  the  Greek  phalanx  in 
which   Pharaoh   trusted: — 

"  Even  her  mercenaries  in  the  midst  of  her  are  like  calves 

of  the  stall ; 
Even  they  have  turned  and  fled  together,  they  have  not 

stood : 
For  their  day  of  calamity  hath  come  upon  them,  their 

day  of  reckoning." 

We  do  not  look  for  chronological  sequence  in 
such  a  poem,  so  that  this  picture  of  the  flight 
and  destruction  of  the  mercenaries  is  not  neces- 
sarily later  in  time  than  their  overthrow  and  con- 
templated desertion  in  verse  15.  The  prophet  is 
depicting  a  scene  of  bewildered  confusion;  the 
disasters  that  fell  thick  upon  Egypt  crowd  into 

*  Giesebrecht,  with  LXX. 

tGiesebrecht,  Orelli,  Kautzsch,  with  LXX.,  Syr.,  and 
Vulg.,  by  an  alteration  of  the  pointing-. 

13— Vol.  IT. 


his  vision  without  order  or  even  coherence. 
Now  he  turns  again  to  Egypt  herself: — 

"  Her  voice  gpeth  forth  like  the  (low  hissing  of)  the  ser- 
pent; 
For  they  come  upon  her  with  a  mighty  army,  and  with 
axes  like  woodcutters." 

A  like  fate  is  predicted  in  Isaiah  xxix.  4  for 
"Ariel,  the  city  where  David  dwelt": — 

"  Thou  shalt  be  l3rought  low  and  speak  from  the  ground  ; 
Thou  Shalt  speak  with  a  low  voice  out  of  the  dust ; 
Thy  voice  shall    come  from  the  ground,  like  that  of  a 

familiar  spirit. 
And  thou  shalt  speak  in  a  whisper  from  the  dust." 

Thus  too  Egypt  would  seek  to  writhe  herself 
from  under  the  heel  of  the  invader;  hissing  out 
the  while  her  impotent  fury,  she  would  seek  to 
glide  away  into  some  safe  refuge  amongst  the 
underwood.  Her  dominions,  stretching  far  up 
the  Nile,  were  surely  vast  enough  to  afford  her 
shelter  somewhere;  but  no!  the  "woodcutters" 
are  too  many  and  too  mighty  for  her: — 

"  They  cut  down  her  forest— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jeho- 
vah— for  it  is  impenetrable  ; 
For  they  are  more  than  the  locusts,  and  are  innumer- 
able." 

The  whole  of  Egypt  is  overrun  and  subjugated; 
no  district  holds  out  against  the  invader,  and 
remains  unsubjugated  to  form  the  nucleus  of  a 
new  and  independent  empire. 

"  The  daughter  of  Egypt  is  put  to  shame  ;  she  is  delivered 
into  the  hand  of  the  northern  people." 

Her  gods  share  her  fate;  Apis  had  succumbed 
at  Memphis,  but  Egypt  had  countless  other 
stately  shrines  whose  denizens  must  own  the 
overmastering  might  of  Jehovah: — 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel : 
Behold,  I  will  visit  Amon  of  No, 

And  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  and  all  her  gods  and  kings. 
Even  Pharaoh  and  all  who  trust  in  him." 

Amon  of  No,  or  Thebes,  known  to  the  Greeks 
as  Amnion  and  called  by  his  own  worshippers 
Amen,  or  "  the  hidden  one,"  is  apparently  men- 
tioned with  Apis  as  sharing  the  primacy  of  the 
Egyptian  divine  hierarchy.  On  the  fall  of  the 
twentieth  dynasty,  the  high  priest  of  the  Theban 
Amen  became  king  of  Egypt,  and  centuries 
afterwards  Alexander  the  Great  made  a  special 
pilgrimage  to  the  temple  in  the  oasis  of  Ammon 
and  was  much  gratified  at  being  there  hailed  son 
of  the  deity. 

Probably  the  prophecy  originally  ended  with 
this  general  threat  of  "  visitation  "  of  Egypt  and 
its  human  and  divine  rulers.  An  editor,  how- 
ever, has  added,*  from  parallel  passages,  the 
more  definite  but  sufficiently  obvious  statement 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  servants  were  to  be 
the  instruments  of  the  Divine  visitation. 

A  further  addition  is  in  striking  contrast  to  the 
sweeping  statements  of  Jeremiah: — 

"  Afterward  it  shall  be  inhabited,  as  in  the  days  of  old." 

Similarly,  Ezekiel  foretold  a  restoration  for 
Egypt:— 

"  At  the  end  of  forty  years,  I  will  gather  the 
Egyptians,  and  will  cause  them  to  return  .  .  . 
to  their  native  land;  and  thev  shall  be  there  a 
base  kingdom:  it  shall  be  the  basest  of  the  king- 
doms." f 

And  elsewhere  we  read  yet  more  gracious 
promises  to  Egypt: — 

*  LXX.  omits  verse  26.    Verses  27,  28  =  xxx.  i<%  xi,  and 

probably  are  an  insertion  here. 
■J  Ezek.  xxix.  13-15. 


178 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


"  Israel  shall  be  a  third  with  Egypt  and  As- 
syria, a  blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  land:  whom 
Jehovah  Sabaoth  shall  bless,  saying,  Blessed  be 
Egypt  My  people,  and  Assyria  the  'work  of  My 
hands,  and  Israel  Mine  inheritance."  * 

Probably  few  would  claim  to  discover  in  his- 
tory any  literal  fulfilment  of  this  last  prophecy. 
Perhaps  it  might  have  been  appropriated  for  the 
Christian  Church  in  the  days  of  Clement  and 
Origen.  We  may  take  Egypt  and  Assyria  as 
types  of  heathendom,  which  shall  one  day  re- 
ceive the  blessings  of  the  Lord's  people  and  of 
the  work  of  His  hands. .  Of  political  revivals 
and  restorations  Egypt  has  had  her  share.  But 
less  interest  attaches  to  these  general  prophecies 
than  to  more  definite  and  detailed  predictions; 
and  there  is  much  curiosity  as  to  any  evidence 
which  monuments  and  other  profane  witnesses 
may  furnish  as  to  a  conquest  of  Egypt  and  cap- 
ture of  Pharaoh  Hophra  by  Nebuchadnezzar. 

According  to  Herodotus,!  Apries  (Hophra) 
was  defeated  and  imprisoned  by  his  successor 
Amasis,  afterwards  delivered  up  by  him  to  the 
people  of  Egypt,  who  forthwith  strangled  their 
former  king.  This  event  would  be  an  exact  ful- 
filment of  the  words,  "  I  will  give  Pharaoh 
Hophra  king  of  Egypt  into  the  hand  of  his  ene- 
mies, and  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  his 
life,"^:  if  it  were  not  evident  from  parallel  pas- 
sages §  that  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  intends  Nebu- 
chadnezzar to  be  the  enemy  into  whose  hands 
Pharaoh  is  to  be  delivered.  But  Herodotus  is 
entirely  silent  as  to  the  relations  of  Egypt  and 
Babylon  during  this  period;  for  instance,  he 
mentions  the  victory  of  Pharaoh  Necho  at  Me- 
giddo — which  he  miscalls  Magdolium^ut  not 
his  defeat  at  Carchemish.  Hence  his  silence  as 
to  Chaldean  conquests  in  Egypt  has  little  weight. 
Even  the  historian's  explicit  statement  as  to  the 
death  of  Apries  might  be  reconciled  with  his  de- 
feat and  capture  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  if  we  knew 
all  the  facts.  At  present,  however,  the  inscrip- 
tions do  little  to  fill  the  gap  left  by  the  Greek 
historian;  there  are,  however,  references  which 
seem  to  establish  two  invasions  of  Egypt  by 
the  Chaldean  king,  one  of  which  fell  in  the 
reign  of  Pharaoh  Hophra.  But  the  spiritual  les- 
sons of  this  and  the  following  prophecies  con- 
cerning the  nations  are  not  dependent  on  the 
spade  of  the  excavator  or  the  skill  of  the  de- 
cipherers of  hieroglyphics  and  cuneiform  script; 
whatever  their  relation  may  be  to  the  details  of 
subsequent  historical  events,  they  remain  as 
monuments  of  the  inspired  insight  of  the  prophet 
into  the  character  and  destiny  alike  of  great  em- 
pires and  petty  states.  They  assert  the  Divine 
government  of  the  nations,  and  the  subordina- 
tion of  all  history  to  the  coming  of  the  Kingdom 
of  God. 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  PHILISTINES. 

Jeremiah  xlvii. 

"  O  sword  of  Jehovah,  how  long  will  it  be  ere  thou  be 
quiet?  put  up  thyself  into  thy  scabbard  ;  rest,  and  be 
Btill."— JER.  xlvii.  6. 

According  to  the  title  placed  at  the  head  of 
this  prophecy,  it  was  uttered  "  before  Pharaoh 
smote  Gaza."    The  Pharaoh  is  evidently  Pharaoh 


*  Isa.  xix.  2,s. 

t  Herodotus,  II.  clxix. 


X  xliv.  30. 
gxlvi.  25. 


Necho,  and  this  capture  of  Gaza  was  one  of  the 
incidents  of  the  campaign  which  opened  with  the 
victory  at  Megiddo  and  concluded  so  disas- 
trously at  Carchemish.  Our  first  impulse  is  to 
look  for  some  connection  between  this  incident 
and  the  contents  of  the  prophecy:  possibly  the 
editor  who  prefixed  the  ^heading  may  have  un- 
derstood by  the  northern  enemy  Pharaoh  Necho 
on  his  return  from  Carchemish;  but  would  Jere- 
miah have  described  a  defeated  army  thus? 

"  Behold,  waters  rise   out  of  the  north,  and  becom«  an 

overflowing  torrent ; 
They  overflow  the  land,  and  all  that  is  therein,  the  city 

and  its  inhabitants. 
Men  cry  out,  and  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  howl. 
At  the  sound  of  the  stamping  of  the  hoofs  of  his  stallions. 
At  the  rattling  of  his  chariots  and  the  rumbling  of  his 

wheels." 

Here  as  elsewhere  the  enemy  from  the  north 
is  Nebuchadnezzar.  Pharaohs  might  come  and 
go,  winning  victories  and  taking  cities,  but  these 
broken  reeds  count  for  little;  not  they,  but  the 
king  of  Babylon  is  the  instrument  of  Jehovah's 
supreme  purpose.  The  utter  terror  caused  by 
the  Chaldean  advance  is  expressed  by  a  striking 
figure: — 

"The  fathers  look  not  back  to  their  children  for  slackness 
of  hands." 

Their  very  bodies  are  possessed  and  crippled 
with  fear;  their  palsied  muscles  cannot  respond 
to  the  impulses  of  natural  affection;  they  can  do 
nothing  but  hurry  on  in  headlong  flight,  unable 
to  look  round  or  stretch  out  a  helping  hand  to 
their  children: — 

"  Because  of  the  day  that  cometh  for  the  spoiling  of  all 

the  Philistines, 
For  cutting  off  every  ally  that  remaineth  unto  Tyre  and 

Zidon  : 
For  Jehovah  spoileth  the  Philistines,  the  remnant  of  the 

coast  of  Caphtor.* 
Baldness  cometh  upon  Gaza  ;  Ashkelon  is  destroyed  : 
O  remnant  of  the  Anakim,t  how  long    wilt  thou  cut 

thyself?" 

This  list  is  remarkable  both  for  what  it  in- 
cludes and  what  it  omits.  In  order  to  under- 
stand the  reference  to  Tyre  and  Zidon,  we  must 
remember  that  Nebuchadnezzar's  expedition  was 
partly  directed  against  these  cities,  with  which 
the  Philistines  had  evidently  been  allied.  The 
Chaldean  king  would  hasten  the  submission  of 
the  Phoenicians,  by  cutting  of?  all  hope  of  suc- 
cour from  without.  There  are  various  possible 
reasons  why  out  of  the  five  Philistine  cities  only 
two — Ashkelon  and  Gaza — are  mentioned;  Ek- 
ron,  Gath,  and  Ashdod  may  have  been  reduced 
to  comparative  insignificance.  Ashdod  had  re- 
cently been  taken  by  Psammetichus  after  a 
twenty-nine  years'  siege.  Or  the  names  of  two 
of  these  cities  may  be  given  by  way  of  parono- 
masia in  the  text:  Ashdod  may  be  suggested  by 
the  double  reference  to  the  spoiling  and  the 
spoiler,  Shdod  and  Shoded;  Gath  may  be  hinted 
at  by  the  word  used  for  the  mutilation  practised 
by  mourners,  Tithgoddadi,  and  by  the  mention  of 
the  Anakim,  who  are  connected  with  Gath,  Ash- 
dod, and  Gaza  in  Joshua  xi.  22. 

As  Jeremiah  contemplates  this  fresh  array  of 
victims  of  Chaldean  cruelty,  he  is  moved  to  pro- 
test against  the  weary  monotony  of  ruin: — 

"  O  sword  of  Jehovah,  how  long  will  it  be  ere  thou  be 
quiet  ? 
Put  up  thyself  into  thy  scabbard  ;  rest,  and  be  still.' 

*  Referring  to  their  ancient  immigration  from  Caphtor, 
probably  Crete.  . 

tKautzsch,  Giesebrecht,  with  LXX.,  reading  'Nqm  for 
the  Masoretic  'Mqm  ;  Eng.  Vers.,  "their  valley." 


Jeremiah  xlviii.J 


MOAB. 


179 


The  prophet  ceases  to  be  the  mouthpiece  of  God, 
and  breaks  out  into  the  cry  of  human  anguish. 
How  often  since,  amid  the  barbarian  inroads 
that  overwhelmed  the  Roman  Empire,  amid  the 
prolonged  horrors  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
amid  the  carnage  of  the  French  Revolution,  men 
have  uttered  a  like  appeal  to  an  unanswering  and 
relentless  Providence!  Indeed,  not  in  war  only, 
but  even  in  peace,  the  tide  of  human  misery  and 
sin  often  seems  to  flow,  century  after  century, 
with  undiminished  volume,  and  ever  and  again 
a  vain  "  How  long  "  is  wrung  from  pallid  and 
despairing  lips.  For  the  Divine  purpose  may 
not  be  hindered,  and  the  sword  of  Jehovah  must 
still  strike  home. 

"  How  can  it  be  quiet,  seeing  that  Jehovah  hath  given  it 
a  charge  ? 
Against  A.shkelon  and  against  the  sea-shore,  there  hath 
He  appointed  it." 

Yet  Ashkelon  survived  to  be  a  stronghold  of 
the  Crusaders,  and  Gaza  to  be  captured  by  Alex- 
ander and  even  by  Napoleon.  Jehovah  has  other 
instruments  besides  His  devastating  sword;  the 
victorious  endurance  and  recuperative  vitality  of 
men  and  nations  also  come  from  Him. 

"  Come  and  let  us  return  unto  Jehovah  ; 
For  He  hath  torn,  and  He  will  heal  us; 
He  hath  smitten,  and  He  will  bind  us  up."* 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

MOAB. 

Jeremiah  xlviii. 

"  Moab  shall  be  destroyed  from  being  a  people,  because 
be  hath  magnified  himself  against  Jehovah." — ^Jer.  xlviii. 

42- 

"  Chemosh  said  to  me,  Go,  take  Nebo  against  Israel  .  .  . 
iind  I  took  it  .  .  .  and  I  took  from  it  the  vessels  of  Jeho- 
vah, and  offered  them  before  Chemosh." — Moabite 
Stone. 

"Yet  will  I  bring  again  the  captivity  of  Moab  in  the 
latter  days."— JER.  xlviii.  47. 

The  prophets  show  a  very  keen  interest  in 
Moab.  With  the  exception  of  the  very  short 
Book  of  Joel,  all  the  prophets  who  deal  in  de- 
tail with  foreign  nations  devote  sections  to 
Moab.  The  unusual  length  of  such  sections  in 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  is  not  the  only  resemblance 
between  the  utterances  of  these  two  prophets 
concerning  Moab.  There  are  many  parallels  \ 
of  idea  and  expression,  which  probably  indicate 
the  influence  of  the  elder  prophet  upon  his  suc- 
cessor; unless  indeed  both  of  them  adapted  some 
popular  poem  which  was  early  current  in  Judah.:): 

It  is  easy  to  understand  why  the  Jewish 
Scriptures  should  have  much  to  say  about  Moab, 
just  as  the  sole  surviving  fragment  of  Moabite 
literature  is  chiefly  occupied  with  Israel.  These 
two  Terahite  tribes — the  children  of  Jacob  and 
the  children  of  Lot — had  dwelt  side  by  side  for 
centuries,  like  the  Scotch  and  English  borderers 
before  the  accession  of  James  I.  They  had  ex- 
perienced many  alternations  of  enmity  and 
friendship,    and    had    shared    complex    interests, 

*  Hosea  vi.  i. 

t  E.  g:,  xlviii.  5,  "  For  by  the  ascent  of  Luhith  with  con- 
tinual weeping  shall  they  go  up  ;  for  in  going  down  of 
Horonaim  they  have  heard  the  distress  of  the  cry  of  de- 
struction," is  almost  identical  with  Isa.  xv.  5.  Cf.  also 
xlviii.  2Q-34  with  Isa.  .tv.  4,  xvi.  6-11. 

X  Verse  47  with  the  subscription,  "Thus  far  is  the  judg- 
ment of  Moab,"  is  wanting  in  the  LXX. 


com'mon  and  conflicting,  after  the  manner  of 
neighbours  who  are  also  kinsmen.  Each  in  its 
turn  had  oppressed  the  other;  and  Moab  had 
been  the  tributary  of  the  Israelite  monarchy  till 
the  victorious  arms  of  Mcsha  had  achieved  in- 
dependence for  his  people  and  firmly  established 
tneir  dominion  over  the  debatable  frontier  lands. 
There  are  traces,  too,  of  more  kindly  relations: 
the  House  of  David  reckoned  Ruth  the  Moabit- 
ess  amongst  its  ancestors,  and  Jesse,  like  Elim- 
elech  and  Naomi,  had  taken  refuge  in  Moab. 

Accordingly  this  prophecy  concerning  Moab, 
in  both  its  editions,  frequently  strikes  a  note  of 
sympathetic  lamentation  and  almost  becomes  a 
dirge. 

"Therefore  will  I  howl  for  Moab  ; 
Yea,  for  all  Moab  will  I  cry  out 
For  the  men  of  Kir-heres  shall  they  mourn. 
With  more  than  the  weeping  of  Jazer 
Will  I  weep  for  thee,  O  vine  of  Sibmah. 

Therefore  mine  heart  soundeth  like  pipes  for  Moab, 
Mine   heart   soundeth  like   pipes  for  the  men   of  Kir- 
heres." 

But  this  pity  could  not  avail  to  avert  the  doom 
of  Moab;  it  only  enabled  the  Jewish  prophet  to 
fully  appreciate  its  terrors.  The  picture  of  com- 
ing ruin  is  drawn  with  the  colouring  and  out- 
lines familiar  to  us  in  the  utterances  of  Jeremiah 
— spoiling  and  destruction,  fire  and  sword  and 
captivity,  dismay  and  wild  abandonment  of  wail- 
ing. 

"  Chemosh  shall  go  forth  into  captivity,  his  priests  and 

his  princes  together. 
Every  head  is  bald,  and  every  beard  clipped  ; 
Upon  all  the  hands  are  cuttings,  and   upon  the  loins 

sackcloth. 
On  all  the  housetops  and  in  all  the  streets  of  Moab  there 

is  everywhere  lamentation  ; 
For  I  have  broken  Moab  like  a  useless  vessel— it  is  the 

utterance  of  Jehovah. 
How  is  it  broken  down  !    Howl  ye  !    Be  thou  ashamed  ! 
How  hath  Moab  turned  the  back  ! 
All  the  neighbours  shall  laugh  and  shudder  at  Moab. 

The  heart  of  the  mighty  men  of  Moab  at  that  day 
Shall  be  like  the  heart  of  a  woman  in  her  pangs. 

This  section  of  Jeremiah  illustrates  the  dramatic 
versatility  of  the  prophet's  method.  He  identi- 
fies himself  now  with  the  blood-thirsty  invader, 
now  with  his  wretched  victims,  and  now  with  the 
terror-stricken  spectators;  and  sets  forth  the 
emotions  of  each  in  turn  with  vivid  realism. 
Hence  at  one  moment  we  have  the  pathos  and 
pity  of  such  verses  as  we  have  just  quoted,  and 
at  another  such  stern  and  savage  words  as 
these: — 

"  Cursed  be  he  that  doeth   the  work   of  Jehovah  negli. 
gently. 
Cursed  be  he  that  stinteth  his  sword  of  blood." 

These  lines  might  have  served  as  a  motto  for 
Cromwell  at  the  massacre  of  Drogheda,  for 
Tilly's  army  at  the  sack  of  Magdeburg,  or  for 
Danton  and  Robespierre  during  the  Reign  of 
Terror.  Jeremiah's  words  were  the  more  terri- 
ble because  they  were  uttered  with  the  full  con- 
sciousness that  in  the  dread  Chaldean  king  *  a 
servant  of  Jehovah  was  at  hand  who  would  be 
careful  not  to  incur  any  curse  for  stinting  his 
sword  of  blood.  We  shrink  from  what  seems  to 
us  the  prophet's  brutal  assertion  that  relentless 
and  indiscriminate  slaughter  is  sometimes  the 
service  which  man  is  called  upon  to  render  to 

♦  The  exact  date  of  the  prophecy  is  uncertain,  but  it 
must  have  been  written  during  the  reign  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. 


i8o 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


God.  Such  sentiment  is-  for  the  most  part 
worthless  and  unreal;  it  does  not  save  us  from 
epidemics  of  war  fever,  and  is  at  once  ignored 
under  the  stress  of  horrors  like  the  Indian  Mu- 
tiny. There  is  no  true  comfort  in  trying  to 
persuade  ourselves  that  the  most  awful  events  of 
history  lie  outside  of  the  Divine  purpose,  or  in 
forgetting  that  the  human  scourges  of  their  kind 
do  the  work  that  God  has  assigned  to  them. 

In  this  inventory,  as  it  were,  of  the  ruin  of 
Moab  our  attention  is  arrested  by  the  constant 
and  detailed  references  to  the  cities.  This  fea- 
ture is  partly  borrowed  from  Isaiah.  Ezekiel 
too  speaks  of  the  Moabite  cities  which  are  the 
glory  of  the  country;  *  but  Jeremiah's  prophecy 
is  a  veritable  Domesday  Book  of  Moab.  With 
his  epic  fondness  for  lists  of  sonorous  names — 
after  the  manner  of  Homer's  catalogue  of  the 
ships — he  enumerates  Nebo,  Kiriathaim,  Hesh- 
bon,  and  Horonaim,  city  after  city,  till  he  com- 
pletes a  tale  of  no  fewer  than  twenty-six,t  and 
then  summarises  the  rest  as  "  all  the  cities  of 
the  land  of  Moab,  far  and  near."  Eight  of  these 
cities  are  mentioned  in  Joshua^  as  part  of  the 
inheritance  of  Reuben  and  Gad.  Another,  Boz- 
rah,  is  usually  spoken  of  as  a  city  of  Edom.§ 

The  Moabite  Stone  explains  the  occurrence  of 
Reubenite  cities  in  these  lists.  It  tells  us  how 
Mesha  took  Nebo,  Jahaz,  and  Horonaim  from 
Israel.  Possibly  in  this  period  of  conquest  Boz- 
rah  became  tributary  to  Moab,  without  ceasing 
to  be  an  Edomite  city.  This  extension  of  terri- 
tory and  multiplication  of  towns  points  to  an 
era  of  power  and  prosperity,  of  which  there  are 
other  indications  in  this  chapter.  "  We  are 
mighty  and  valiant  for  war,"  said  the  Moabites. 
When  Moab  fell  "  there  was  broken  a  mighty 
sceptre  and  a  glorious  stafif."  Other  verses  ihi- 
ply  the  fertility  of  the  land  and  the  abundance  of 
its  vintage. 

Moab  in  fact  had  profited  by  the  misfortunes 
of  its  more  powerful  and  ambitious  neighbours. 
The  pressure  of  Damascus,  Assyria,  and  Chaldea 
prevented  Israel  and  Judah  from  maintaining 
their  dominion  over  their  ancient  tributary. 
Moab  lay  less  directly  in  the  track  of  the  in- 
vaders; it  was  too  insignificant  to  attract  their 
special  attention,  perhaps  too  prudent  to  pro- 
voke a  contest  with  the  lords  of  the  East. 
Hence,  while  Judah  was  declining,  Moab  had  en- 
larged her  borders  and  grown  in  wealth  and 
power. 

And  even  as  Jeshurun  kicked,  when  he  was 
waxen  fat,|i  so  Moab  in  its  prosperity  was  puffed 
up  with  unholy  pride.  Even  in  Isaiah's  time 
this  was  the  besetting  sin  of  Moab;  he  says  in 
an  indictment  which  Jeremiah  repeats  almost 
word  for  word: — 

"  We  have  heard  of  the  pride    of  Moab.  that  he  is  very 
proud. 
Even  of  his  arrogancy  and  his  pride  and  his  wrath."  T 

This  verse  is  a  striking  example  of  the  He- 
brew method  of  gaining  emphasis  by  accumulat- 
ing derivatives  of  the  same  and  similar  roots. 
The  verse  in  Jeremiah  runs  thus:  "  We  have 
heard  of  the  pride  (Ge'ON)  of  Moab,  that  he  is 
very     proud     (GE'EH);     his     loftiness     (GAB- 

*  Ezek.  XXV.  9. 

t  Some  of  the  names,  however,  may  be  variants. 

t  Josh.  xiii.  15-28  (possibly  on  JE.  basis). 

§  xlix.  13,  possibly  this  is  not  the  Edomite  Bozrah. 

II  Deut.  xxxii.  15. 

i  Isa.  xvi.  6. 


HeHO),    and    his    pride    CGe'ONO),    and    his 
proudfulness  (GA'aWATHO)." 
Jeremiah  dwells  upon  this  theme: — 

"  Moab  shall  be  destroyed  frorn  being  a  people, 
Because  he  hath  magnified  himself  against  Jehovah." 

Zephaniah  bears  like  testimony*: — 

"  This  shall  they  have  for  their  pride. 
Because  they  have  been  insolent,  and  have  magnified 

themselves 
Against  the  people  of  Jehovah  Sabaoth." 

Here  again  the  Moabite  Stone  bears  abundant 
testimony  to  the  justice  of  the  prophet's  accusa- 
tions; for  there  Mesha  tells  how  in  the  name 
and  by  the  grace  of  Chemosh  he  conquered  the 
cities  of  Israel;  and  how,  anticipating  Belshaz- 
zar's  sacrilege,  he  took  the  sacred  vessels  of 
Jehovah  from  His  temple  at  Nebo  and  conse- 
crated them  to  Chemosh.  Truly  Moab  had 
"  magnified  himself  against  Jehovah." 

Prosperity  had  produced  other  baleful  effects 
beside  a  haughty  spirit,  and  pride  was  not  the 
only  cause  of  the  ruin  of  Moab.  Jeremiah  ap- 
plies to  nations  the  dictum  of  Polonius — 

"  Home-keeping  youths  have  ever  homely  wits," 

and  apparently  suggests  that  ruin  and  captivity 
were  necessary  elements  in  the  national  disci- 
pline of  Moab: — 

"  Moab  hath  been  undisturbed  from  his  youth  ; 
He  hath  settled  on  his  lees  ; 

He  hath  not  been  emptied  from  vessel  to  vessel ; 
He  hath  not  gone  into  captivity  : 
Therefore  his  taste  remaineth  In  him. 
His  scent  is  not  changed. 
Wherefore,  behold,  the  days  come— it  is  the  utterance 

of  Jehovah  — 
That  I  will  send  men  unto  him  that  shall  tilt  him  up ; 
They  shall  empty  his  vessels  and  break  hist  bottles." 

As  the  chapter,  in  its  present  form,  concludes 
with  a  note — 

"  I  will  bring  again  the  captivity  of  Moab  in  the  latter 
days— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah  " — 

we  gather  that  even  this  rough  handling  was 
disciplinary;  at  any  rate,  the  former  lack  of  such 
vicissitudes  had  been  to  the  serious  detriment 
of  Moa'b.  It  is  strange  that  Jeremiah  did  not 
apply  this  principle  to  Judah.  For,  indeed,  the 
religion  of  Israel  and  of  mankind  owes  an  in- 
calculable debt  to  the  captivity  of  Judah,  a  debt 
which  later  writers  are  not  slow  to  recognise. 
"  Behold,"  says  the  prophet  of  the  Exile, — 

"  I  have  refined  thee,  but  not  as  silver  ; 
I  have  chosen  thee  in  the  furnace  of  afHiction."  t 

History  constantly  illustrates  how  when  Chris- 
tians were  undisturbed  and  prosperous  the  wine 
of  truth  settled  on  the  lees  and  came  to  taste  of 
the  cask;  and — to  change  the  figure — how  af- 
fliction and  persecution  proved  most  effectual 
tonics  for  a  debilitated  Church.  Continental 
critics  of  modern  England  speak  severely  of  the 
ill-effects  which  our  prolonged  freedom  from  in- 
vasion and  civil  war,  and  the  unbroken  continu- 
ity of  our  social  life  have  had  on  our  national 
character  and  manners.  In  their  eyes  England 
is  a  perfect  Moab,  concerning  which  they  are 
ever  ready  to  prophesy  after  the  manner  of  Jere- 
miah. The  Hebrew  Chronicler  blamed  Josiah 
because  he  would  not  listen  to  the  advice  and 

tKautzsch,  Giesebrecht,  with  LXX.  ;  A.  V.,  R.  V.,  with 
Hebrew  Text,  "their  bottles." 
tisa.  xlviii.  10. 


Jeremiah  xlix.  7-22.] 


EDOM. 


criticism  of  Pliaraoh  Necho.  There  may  be 
warnings  which  we  should  do  well  to  heed,  even 
in  the  acrimony  of  foreign  journalists. 

But  any  such  suggestion  raises  wider  and 
more  difficult  issues;  for  ordinary  individuals  and 
nations  the  discipline  of  calamity  seems  neces- 
sary. What  degree  of  moral  development  ex- 
empts from  such  discipline,  and  how  may  it  be 
attained?  Christians  cannot  seek  to  compound 
for  such  discipline  by  self-inflicted  loss  or  pain, 
like  Polycrates  casting  away  his  ring  or 
Browning's  Caliban,  who  in  his  hour  of  terror, 

"  Lo  !  'Lieth  flat  and  loveth  Setebos  ! 
'Maketh  his  teeth  meet  through  his  upper  lip. 
Will  let  those  quails  fly,  will  not  eat  this  month 
One  little  mess  of  whelks,  so  he  may  'scape." 

But  though  it  is  easy  to  counsel  resignation  and 
the  recognition  of  a  wise,  loving  Providence  in 
national  as  in  personal  suffering,  yet  mankind 
longs  for  an  end  to  the  period  of  pupilage  and 
chastisement  and  would  fain  know  how  it  may 
be  hastened. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

AMMON. 
Jeremiah  xlix.  1-6. 

"  Hath  Israel  no  sons  ?  hath  he  no  heir?  why  then  doth 
Moloch  possess  Gad,  and  his  people  dwell  in  the  cities 
thereof? "'— Jer.  xlix.  i. 

The  relations  of  Israel  with  Ammon  were  sim- 
ilar but  less  intimate  than  they  were  with  his 
twin-brother  Moab.  Hence  this  prophecy  is, 
mutatis  mutandis,  an  abridgment  of  that  concern- 
ing Moab.  As  Moab  was  charged  with  magni- 
fying himself  against  Jehovah,  and  was  found  to 
be  occupying  cities  which  Reuben  claimed  as  its 
inheritance,  so  Ammon  had  presumed  to  take 
possession  of  the  Gadite  cities,  whose  inhabitants 
had  been  carried  away  captive  by  the  Assyrians. 
Here  again  the  prophet  enumerates  Heshbon, 
Ai,  Rabbah,  and  the  dependent  towns,  "  the 
daughters  of  Rabbah."  Only  in  the  territory  of 
this  half-nomadic  people  the  cities  are  naturally 
not  so  numerous  as  in  Moab;  and  Jeremiah  men- 
tions also  the  fertile  valleys  wherein  the  Ammon- 
ites gloried.  The  familiar  doom  of  ruin  and  cap- 
tivity is  pronounced  against  city  and  country 
and  all  the  treasures  of  Ammon;  Moloch,*  like 
Chemosh,  must  go  into  captivity  with  his  priests 
and  princes.  This  prophecy  also  concludes  with 
a  promise  of  restoration: — 

"  Afterward  I  will  bring  again  the  captivity  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Ammon— it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

EDOM. 

Jeremiah  xlix.  7-22. 

"  Bozrah  shall  become  an  astonishment,  a  reproach,  a 
waste,  and  a  curse." — jER.  xlix.  13. 

The  prophecy  concerning  Edom  is  not  formu- 
lated along  the  same  line  as  those  which  deal 
with  the  twin  children  of  Lot,  Moab  and  Am- 

*xlix.  ^:  A.  v.,  "their  king"  ;  R.  V.,  "Malcam,"  which 
^ere  and  in  verse  i  is  a  form  of  Moloch. 


mon.  Edom  was  not  merely  the  cousin,  but  the 
brother  of  Israel.  His  history,  his  character  and 
conduct,  had  marked  peculiarities,  which  re- 
ceived special  treatment.  Edom  had  not  only  in- 
timate relations  with  Israel  as  a  whole,  but  was 
also  bound  by  exceptionally  close  ties  to  the 
Southern  Kingdom.  The  Edomite  clan  Kenaz 
had  been  incorporated  in  the  tribe  of  Judah;  * 
and  when  Israel  broke  up  into  two  states,  Edom 
was  the  one  tributary  which  was  retained  or  re- 
conquered by  the  House  of  David,  and  continued 
subject  to  Judah  till  the  reign  of  Jehoram  ben 
Jehoshaphat-t 

Much  virtuous  indignation  is  often  expressed 
at  the  wickedness  of  Irishmen  in  contemplating 
rebellion  against  England:  we  cannot  therefore 
be  surprised  that  the  Jews  resented  the  successful 
revolt  of  Edom,  and  regarded  the  hostility  of 
Mount  Seir  to  'ts  former  masters  as  ingratitude 
and  treachery.  In  moments  of  hot  indignation 
against  the  manifold  sins  of  Judah  Jeremiah 
might  have  announced  with  great  vehemence  that 
Judah  should  be  made  a  "  reproach  and  a  prov- 
erb "  ;  but  when,  as  Obadiah  tells  us,  the  Edom- 
ites  stood  gazing  with  eager  curiosity  on  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  and  rejoiced  and  exulted 
in  the  distress  of  the  Jews,  and  even  laid  hands 
on  their  substance  in  the  day  of  their  calamity, 
and  occupied  the  roads  to  catch  tugitives  and  de- 
liver them  up  to  the  Chaldeans, t  then  the  patri- 
otic fervour  of  the  prophet  broke  out  against 
Edom.  Like  Moab  and  Ammon,  he  was  puffed 
up  with  pride,  and  deluded  by  baseless  confidence 
into  a  false  security.  These  hardy  mountaineers 
trusted  in  their  reckless  courage  and  in  the 
strength  of  their  inaccessible  mountain  fast- 
nesses. 

"  Men  shall  shudder  at  thy  fate,§  the  pride  of  thy  heart 
hath  deceived  thee, 

0  thou  that  dwellest  in  the  clefts  of  the  rock,  that  holdest 

the  height  of  the  hill  ; 
Though  thou  shouldest  make  thy  nest  as  high  as  the 
eagle,  II 

1  will  bring  thee  down  from  thence— it  is  the  utterance 

of Jehovah." 

Pliny  speaks  of  the  Edomite  capital  as  "  oppi- 
dum  circumdatum  montibus  inaccessis,"*  and 
doubtless  the  children  of  Esau  had  often 
watched  fr'om  their  eyrie  Assyrian  and  Chal- 
dean armies  on  the  march  to  plunder  more 
defenceless  victims,  and  trusted  that  their 
strength,  their  good  fortune,  and  their  an- 
cient and  proverbial  wisdom  would  still 
hold  them  scatheless.  Their  neighbours — 
the  Jews  amongst  the  rest — might  be  plundered, 
massacred,  and  carried  away  captive,  but  Edom 
could  look  on  in  careless  security,  and  find  its 
account  in  the  calamities  of  kindred  tribes.     If 

*  Cf.  the  designation  of  Caleb  "ben  Jephunneh  the 
Kenizzite,"  Num.  xxxii.  12.,  etc.,  with  the  genealogies 
which  trace  the  descent  of  Kenaz  to  Esau,  Gen.  xxxvi.  n, 
etc.     Cf.  also  "  Expositor's  Bible,  Chronicles." 

t  Cf.  I  Kings  xxii.  47  with  2  Kings  viii.  20. 

X  Obadiah  11-15.  The  difference  between  A.  V.  and  R.  V. 
is  more  apparent  than  real.  The  prohibition  which  R.  V. 
gives  must  have  been  based  on  experience.  The  short 
prophecy  of  Obadiah  has  very  much  in  common  with  this 
section  of  Jeremiah  :  Obad.  1-6,  8,  are  almost  identical 
with  Jer.  xlix.  14-16,  q,  lort,  7.  The  relation  of  the  two 
passages  is  matter  of  controversy,  but  probably  both  use 
a  common  original.  Cf.  Driver's  "  Introduction "  on 
Obadiah. 

§Lit.  "  thy  terror,"  /.  e.,  the  terror  inspired  by  thy  fate. 
A.  v.,  R.  v.,  "thy  terribleness,"  suggests  that  Edom 
trusted  in  the  terror  felt  for  him  by  his  enemies,  but  we 
can  scarcely  suppose  that  even  the  fiercest  highlanders 
eqpected  Nebuchadnezzar  to  be  terrified  at  them. 

1  Obad.  4  :  "  Though  thou  set  thy  nest  among  the  stars.'* 

\  "  Hist.  Nat.,"  vi.  28.    Orelli. 


l82 


_THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


Jerusalem  was  shattered  by  the  Chaldean  tem- 
pest, the  Edomites  would  play  the  part  of  wreck- 
ers. But  all  this  shrewdness  was  mere  folly:  how 
could  these  Solons  of  Mount  Seir  prove  so  un- 
worthy of  their  reputation? 

"  Is  wisdom  no  more  in  Teman  ? 
Has  counsel  perished  from  the  prudent? 
Has  their  wisdom  vanished  i  " 

They  thought  that  Jehovah  would  punish  Jacob 
whom  He  loved,  and  yet  spare  Esau  whom  He 
hated.     But: — 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  : 
Behold,  they  to  whom  it  pertained  not  to  drink  of  the 

cup  shall  assuredly  drink. 
Art  thou  he  that  shall  go  altogether  unpunished? 
Thou  Shalt  not  go  unpunished,  but  thou  shalt  assuredly 

drink  "  (12). 

Aye,  and  drink  to  the  dreers: — - 

"If  grape-gatherers  come  to  thee,  would  they  not  leave 

gleanings  ? 
If  thieves  came  by  night,  they  would  only  destroy  till 

they  had  enough. 
But  I  have  made  Esau  bare,  I  have  stripped  him  stark 

naked  ;  he  shall  not  be  able  to  hide  himself 
His  children,  and  his  brethren,  and  his  neighbours  are 

given  up  to  plunder,  and  there  is  an  end  of  him" 

Cq,  lo) 
I  have  sworn  by  Myself— is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah— 
That  Bozrah  shall  become  an  astonishment,  a  reproach, 

a  desolation,  and  a  curse  ; 
All  her  cities  shall  become  perpetual  wastes, 
I  have  heard  tidings  from  Jehovah,  and  an  ambassador 

is  sent  among  the  nations,  saying. 
Gather  yourselves  together  and  come  against  her,  arise 

to  battle  "  (13,  14). 

There  was  obviously  but  one  leader  who  could 
lead  the  nations  to  achieve  the  overthrow  of 
Edom  and  lead  her  little  ones  away  captive,  who 
could  come  up  like  a  lion  from  the  thickets  of 
Jordan,  or  "  flying  like  an  eagle  and  spreading 
his  wings  against  Bozrah  "  (22) — Nebuchadnez- 
zar, king  of  Babylon,  who  had  come  up  against 
Judah  with  all  the  kingdoms  and  peoples  of  his 
dominions.* 

In  this  picture  of  chastisement  and  calamity, 
there  is  one  apparent  touch  of  pitifulness: — 

"Leave  thine  orphans,  I  will  preserve  their  lives; 
Let  thy  widows  put  their  trust  in  Me  "  (11). 

At  first  sight,  at  any  rate,  these  seem  to  be 
the  words  of  Jehovah.  All  the  adult  males  of 
Edom  would  perish,  yet  the  helpless  widows  and 
orphans  would  not  be  without  a  protector.  The 
God  of  Israel  would  watch  over  the  lambs  of 
Edom.f  when  they  were  dragged  away  into  cap- 
tivity. We  are  reluctant  to  surrender  this  beau- 
tiful and  touching  description  of  a  God,  who, 
though  he  may  visit  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers 
upon  the  children  unto  the  third  and  fourth  gen- 
eration, yet  even  in  such  judgment  ever  remem- 
bers mercy.  It  is  impossible,  however,  to  ig- 
nore the  fact  that  such  ideas  are  widely  different 
frorn  the  tone  and  sentiment  of  the  rest  of  the 
section.  These  words  may  be  an  immediate  se- 
quel to  the  previous  verse,  "  No  Edomite  sur- 
vives to  say  to  his  dying  brethren,  Leave  thine 
orphans  to  me,"  or  possibly  they  may  be  quoted, 
in  bitter  irony,  from  some  message  from  Edom 
to  Jerusalem,  inviting  the  Jews  to  send  their 
wives  and  children  for  safety  to  Mount  Seir. 
Edom,  ungrateful  and  treacherous  Edom,  shall 
utterly  perish — Edom  that  offered  an  asylum  to 
Jewish  refugees,  and  yet  shared  the  plunder  of 
Jerusalem  and  betrayed  her  fugitives  to  the  Chal- 
deans. 


*  xxxiv.  I. 


t  Verse  20. 


There  is  no  word  of  restoration.  Moab  and 
Amnion  and  Elam  might  revive  and  flourish 
again,  but  for  Esau,  as  of  old,  there  should  be 
no  place  of  repentance.  For  Edom,  in  the  days 
of  the  Captivity,  trespassed  upon  the  inheritance 
of  Israel  more  grievously  than  Ammon  and 
Moab  upon  Reuben  and  Gad.  The  Edomites 
possessed  themselves  of  the  rich  pastures  of  the 
south  of  Judah,  and  the  land  was  thenceforth 
called  Idumea.  Thus  they  earned  the  undying 
hatred  of  the  Jews,  in  whose  mouths  Edom  be- 
came a  curse  and  a  reproach,  a  term  of  oppro- 
brium. Like  Babylon,  Edom  was  used  as  a  se- 
cret name  for  Rome,  and  later  on  for  the  Chris- 
tian Church. 

Nevertheless,  even  in  this  prophecy,  there  is 
a  "hint  that  these  predictions  of  utter  ruin  must 
not  be  taken  too  literally: — 

"  For,  behold,  I  will  make  thee  small  among  the  nations. 
Despised  among  men  "  (15). 

These  words  are  scarcely  consistent  with  the 
other  verses,  which  imply  that,  as  a  people,  Edom 
would  utterly  perish  from  off  the  face  of  the 
earth.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Edom  flourished  in 
her  new  territory  till  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
and  when  the  Messiah  came  to  establish  the 
kingdom  of  God,  instead  of  "  saviours  standing 
on  Mount  Zion  to  judge  the  Mount  of  Esau,"  * 
an  Edomite  dynasty  was  reigning  in  Jerusalem. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

DAMASCUS. 

Jeremiah  xlix.  23-27. 

"  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  the  wall  of  Damascus,  and  it  shall 
devour  the  palaces  of  Benhadad." — Jer.  xlix.  27. 

We  are  a  little  surprised  to  meet  with  a  proph- 
ecy of  Jeremiah  concerning  Damascus  and  the 
palaces  of  Benhadad.  The  names  carry  our 
minds  back  for  more  than  a  couple  of  centu- 
ries. During  Elisha's  ministry  Damascus  and 
Samaria  were  engaged  in  their  long,  fierce  duel 
for  the  supremacy  over  Syria  and  Palestine. 
In  the  reign  of  Ahaz  these  ancient  rivals  com- 
bined to  attack  Judah,  so  that  Isaiah  is  keenly 
interested  in  Damascus  and  its  fortunes.  But 
about  B.  c.  745,  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  years 
before  Jeremiah's  time,  the  Assyrian  king  Tig- 
lath-Pileserf  overthrew  the  Syrian  kingdom 
and  carried  its  people  into  captivity.  We  know 
from  Ezekiel,t  what  we  might  have  surmised 
from  the  position  and  later  history  of  Damascus, 
that  this  ancient  city  continued  a  wealthy  com- 
mercial centre;  but  Ezekiel  has  no  oracle  con- 
cerning Damascus,  and  the  other  documents  of 
the  period  and  of  later  times  do  not  mention 
the  capital  of  Benhadad.  Its  name  does  not  even 
occur  in  Jeremiah's  exhaustive  list  of  the  coun- 
tries of  his  world  in  xxv.  15-26.  Religious  in- 
terest in  alien  races  depended  on  their  political 
relations  with  Israel;  vhen  the  latter  ceased,  the 
prophets  had  no  word  from  Jehovah  concern- 
ing foreign  nations.  Such  considerations  have 
suggested  doubts  as  to  the  authenticity  of  this 
section,  and  it  has  been  supposed  that  it  may 
be  a  late  echo  of  Isaiah's  utterances  concerning 
Damascus. 

We  know,   however,   too  little  of  the  history 

♦  Obadiab  21.        1 2  Kings  xvi.  9.        t  Ezek.  xxvii.  18. 


Jeremiah  xlix.  2S-33.] 


KEDAR    AND    RAZOR. 


of  the  period  to  warrant  such  a  conclusion.  Da- 
mascus would  continue  to  exist  as  a  tributary 
state,  and  might  furnish  auxiliary  forces  to  the 
enemies  of  Judah  or  join  with  her  to  conspire 
against  Babylon,  and  would  in  either  case  attract 
Jeremiah's  attention.  Moreover,  in  ancient  as 
in  modern  times,  commerce  played  its  part  in 
international  politics.  Doubtless  slaves  were 
part  of  the  merchandise  of  Damascus,  just  as 
they  were  among  the  wares  of  the  Apocalyptic 
Babylon.  Joel  *  denounces  Tyre  and  Zidon  for 
selling  Jews  to  the  Greeks,  and  the  Damascenes 
may  have  served  as  slave-agents  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar and  his  captains,  and  thus  provoked  the 
resentment  of  patriot  Jews.  So  many  pictur- 
esque and  romantic  associations  cluster  around 
Damascus,  that  this  section  of  Jeremiah  almost 
strikes  a  jarring  note.  We  love  to  think  of  this 
fairest  of  Oriental  cities,  "  half  as  old  as  time," 
as  the  "  Eye  of  the  East  "  which  Mohammed  re- 
fused to  enter — because  "  Man,"  he  said,  "  can 
have  but  one  paradise,  and  my  paradise  is  fixed 
abtove  " — and  as  the  capital  of  Noureddin  and  his 
still  more  famous  successor  Saladin.  And  so  we 
regret  that,  when  it  emerges  from  the  obscurity 
of  centuries  into  the  light  of  Biblical  narrative, 
the  brief  reference  should  suggest  a  disaster  such 
as  it  endured  in  later  days  at  the  hands  of  the 
treacherous  and  ruthless  Tamerlane. 

"  Damascus  hath  grown  feeble  : 
She  turneth  herself  to  flee  : 
TremblinR  hath  seized  on  her. 

How  is  the  city  of  praise  forsaken,t 

The  city  of  joy  ! 

Her  voung  men  shall  fall  in  the  streets, 

All  the  warriors  shall  be  put  to  silence  in  that  day." 

We  are  moved  to  sym.pathy  with  the  feelings  of 
Hamath  and  Arpad,  when  they  heard  the  evil 
tidings,  and  were  filled  with  sorrow,  "  like  the 
sea  that  cannot  rest." 

Yet  even  here  this  most  uncompromising  of 
prophets  may  teach  us,  after  his  fashion,  whole- 
some though  perhaps  unwelcome  truths.  We 
are  reminded  how  often  the  mystic  glamour  of 
romance  has  served  to  veil  cruelty  and  corrup- 
tion, and  how  little  picturesque  scenery  and  in- 
teresting associations  can  do  of  themselves  to 
promote  a  noble  life.  Feudal  castles,  with  their 
massive  grandeur,  were  the  strongholds  of  ava- 
rice and  cruelty;  and  ancient  abbeys  which,  even 
in  decay,  are  like  a  dream  of  fairyland,  were 
sometimes  the  home  of  abominable  corruption. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

KEDAR  AND  HAZOR. 

Jeremiah  xlix.  28-33. 

"Concerning  Kedar,  and  the  kingdoms  of  Hazor  which 
Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon  smote." — JER.  xlix.  28. 

From  an  immemorial  seat  of  human  culture, 
an  "  eternal  city  "  which  antedates  Rome  by  cen- 
turies, if  not  millenniums,  we  turn  to  those  Arab 
tribes  whose  national  life  and  habits  were  as 
ancient  and  have  been  as  persistent  as  the  streets 
of  Damascus.     While  Damascus  has  almost  al- 

*  Joel  iii.  4. 

+  So  Giesebrecht,  with  most  of  the  ancient  versions. 
^\.  v.,  R.  v.,  with  Masoretic  Text,  "  not  forsaken  .  .  .  my 
joy,"  possibly  meaning,  "  Why  did  not  the  inhabitants 
forsake  the  doomed  city  ? " 


ways  been  in  the  forefront  of  history,  the  Arab 
tribes — except  in  the  time  of  Mohammed  and  the 
early  Caliphs — have  seldom  played  a  more  im- 
portant part  than  that  of  frontier  marauders. 
Hence,  apart  from  a  few  casual  references,  the 
only  other  passage  in  the  Old  Testament  whici' 
deals,  at  any  length,  with  Kedar  is  the  parallel 
prophecy  of  Isaiah.  And  yet  Kedar  was  the 
great  northern  tribe,  which  ranged  .the  deserts 
between  Palestine  and  the  Euphrates,  and  which 
must  have  had  closer  relations  with  Judah  than 
most  Arab  peoples. 

"  The  kingdoms  of  Hazor  "  are  still  more  un- 
known to  history.  There  were  several  "  Ha- 
zors  "  in  Palestine,  besides  sundry  towns  whose 
names  are  also  derived  from  Hager,  a  village; 
and  some  of  these  are  on  or  beyond  the  southern 
frontier  of  Judah,  in  the  wilderness  of  the  Exo- 
dus, where  we  might  expect  to  find  nomad 
Arabs.  But  even  these  latter  cities  can  scarcely 
be  the  "  Hazor "  of  Jeremiah,  and  the  more 
northern  are  quite  out  of  the  question.  It  is  gen- 
erally supposed  that  Hazor  here  is  either  some 
Arabian  town,  or,  more  probably,  a  collective 
term  used  for  the  district  inhabited  by  Arabs, 
who  lived  not  in  tents,  but  in  Hagerim,  or  vil- 
lages. This  district  would  be  in  Arabia  itself, 
and  more  distant  from  Palestine  than  the  deserts 
over  which  Kedar  roamed.  Possibly  Isaiah's 
"  villages  {Hagerim)  that  Kedar  doth  inhabit " 
were  to  be  found  in  the  Hazor  of  Jeremiah,  and 
the  same  people  were  called  Kedar  and  Hazor 
respectively  according  as  they  lived  a  nomad 
life  or  settled  in  more  permanent  dwellings. 

The  great  warlike  enterprises  of  Egypt,  As- 
syria, and  Chaldea  during  the  last  centuries  of 
the  Jewish  monarchy  would  bring  these  desert 
horsemen  into  special  prominence.  They  could 
either  further  or  hinder  the  advance  of  armies 
marching  westward  from  Mesopotamia,  and 
could  command  their  lines  of  communication. 
Kedar,  and  possibly  Hazor  too,  would  not  be 
slack  to  use  the  opportunities  of  plunder  pre- 
sented by  the  calamities  of  the  Palestinian  states. 
Hence  their  conspicuous  position  in  the  pages  of 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah. 

As  the  Assyrians,  when  their  power  was  at  its 
height,  had  chastised  the  aggressions  of  the 
Arabs,  so  now  Nebuchadnezzar  "  smote  Kedar 
and  the  kingdoms  of  Hazor."  Even  the  wan- 
dering nomads  and  dwellers  by  distant  oases 
in  trackless  deserts  could  not  escape  the  sweep- 
ing activity  of  this  scourge  of  God.  Doubtless 
the  ravages  of  Chaldean  armies  might  serve  to 
punish  many  sins  besides  the  wrongs  they  were 
sent  to  revenge.  The  Bedouin  always  had  their 
virtues,  but  the  wild  liberty  of  the  desert  easily 
degenerated  into  unbridled  license.  Judah  and 
every  state  bordering  on  the  wilderness  knew  by 
painful  experience  how  large  a  measure  of  rapine 
and  cruelty  might  coexist  with  primitive  cus- 
toms, and  the  Jewish  prophet  gives  Nebuchad- 
nezzar a  Divine  commission  as  for  a  holy  war: — 

"  Arise,  go  up  to  Kedar  ; 
Spoil  the  men  of  the  east. 
Tney  (the  Chaldeans)  shall  take  away  their  tents  and 

flocks ; 
They  shall  take  for  themselves  their  tent-coverings, 
And  all  their  gear  and  their  camels  : 
Men  shall  cry  concerning  them, 
Terror  on  every  side."  * 

Then  the  prophet  turns  to  the  more  distant 
Hazor  with  words  of  warning: — 

*Magor-raissabib :  cf.  xlvi.  5. 


1 84 


-     THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


'*  Flee,  get  you  far  off,  dwell  in  hidden  recesses  of  the  land, 
.J  inhabitants  of  Jtlazor — 
It  if  the  utterance  of  Jehovah — 

For  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon  hath  counselled  a 
counsel  and  purposed  a  purpose  against  you." 

But  then,  as  if  this  warning  were  a  mere  taunt, 
he  renews  his  address  to  the  Chaldeans  and  di- 
rects  their  attack   against    Hazor: — 

"  Arise,  go  up  against  a  nation  that  is  at  ease,  that  dwelleth 
without  fear — it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah — 
Which  abide  alone,  without  gates  or  bars"— 

like  the  people  of  Laish  before  the  Danites  came, 
and  like  Sparta  before  the  days  of  Epaminon- 
das. 

Possibly  we  are  to  combine  these  successive 
"  utterances,"  and  to  understand  that  it  was  alike 
Jehovah's  will  that  the  Chaldeans  should  invade 
and  lay  waste  Hazor,  and  that  the  unfortunate 
inhabitants  should  escape — but  escape  plundered 
and  impoverished:   for 

•'Their  camels  shall  become  a  spoil, 
The  multitude  of  their  cattle  a  prey  : 
I  will  scatter  to  every  wind  them  that  have  the  corners 

of  their  hair  polled  ;* 
I  will  bring  their  calamity  upon  them  from  all  sides. 
Hazor  shall  be  a  haunt  of  jackals,  a  desolation  forever  : 
No  one  shall  dwell  there. 
No  soul  shall  sojourn  therein." 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

ELAM. 
Jeremiah  xlix.  34-39. 

"  I  will  break  the  bow  of  Elam,  the  chief  of  their 
might."— Jer.  xlix.  35. 

We  do  not  know  what  principle  or  absence  of 
principle  determined  the  arrangement  of  these 
prophecies;  but,  in  any  case,  these  studies  in 
ancient  geography  and  politics  present  a  series 
of  dramatic  contrasts.  From  two  ancient  and 
enduring  types  of  Eastern  life,  the  city  of  Damas- 
cus and  the  Bedouin  of  the  desert,  we  pass  to  a 
state  of  an  entirely  different  order,  only  slightly 
connected  with  the  international  system  of  West- 
ern Asia.  Elam  contended  for  the  palm  of  su- 
premacy with  Assyria  and  Babylon  in  the  far- 
ther east,  as  Egypt  did  to  the  southwest.  Before 
the  time  of  Abraham  Elamite  kings  ruled  over 
Chaldea,  and  Genesis  xiv.  tells  us  how  Chedor- 
laomer  with  his  subject-allies  collected  his  trib- 
ute in  Palestine.  Many  centuries  later,  the  As- 
syrian king  Ashur-bani-pal  (b.  c.  668-626)  con- 
quered Elam,  sacked  the  capital  Shushan,  and 
carried  away  many  of  the  inhabitants  into  cap- 
tivity. According  to  Ezra  iv.  9,  10,  Elamites 
were  among  the  mingled  population  whom  "  the 
great  and  noble  Asnapper "  (probably  Ashur- 
bani-pal)  settled  in  Samaria. 

When  we  begin  to  recall  even  a  few  of  the 
striking  facts  concerning  Elam  discovered  in  the 
last  fifty  years,  and  remember  that  for  millen- 
niums Elam  had  played  the  part  of  a  first-class 
Asiatic  power,  we  are  tempted  to  wonder  that 
Jeremiah  only  devotes  a  few  conventional  sen- 
tences to  this  great  nation.  But  the  prophet's 
interest  was  simply  determined  by  the  relations 
of  Elam  with  Judah;  and,  from  this  point  of 
view,  an  opposite  difficulty  arises.  How  came 
the  Jews  in  Palestine  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah  to 
have  any  concern  with  a  people  dwelling  beyond 
the  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  on  the  farther  side  of 
the  Chaldean  dominions?  One  answer  to  this 
question  has  already  been  suggested:  the  Jews 
*/.#.,  cut  ofif. 


may  have  learnt  from  the  Elamite  colonists  in 
Samaria  something  concerning  their  native  coun- 
try; it  is  also  probable  that  Elamite  auxiliaries 
served  in  the  Chaldean  armies  that  invaded  Ju- 
dah. 

Accordingly  the  prophet  sets  forth,  in  terms 
already  familiar  to  us,  how  Elamite  fugitives 
should  be  scattered  to  the  four  quarters  of  the 
earth  and  be  found  in  every  nation  under  heaven, 
how  the  sword  should  follow  them  into  their  dis- 
tant places  of  refuge  and  utterly  consume  them. 

"  I  will  set  My  throne  in  Elam  ; 
I  will  destroy  out  of  it  both  king  and  princes — 
It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah;" 

In  the  prophecy  concerning  Egypt,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  to  set  his  throne  at  Tahpanhes  to  de- 
cide the  fate  of  the  captives;  but  here  Jehovah 
Himself  is  pictured  as  the  triumphant  and  inex- 
orable conqueror,  holding  His  court  as  the  arbi- 
ter of  life  and  death.  The  vision  of  the  "  great 
white  throne  "  was  not  first  accorded  to  John  in 
his  Apocalypse.  Jeremiah's  eyes  were  opened  to 
see  beside  the  tribunals  of  heathen  conquerors 
the  judgment-seat  of  a  miehtier  Potentate;  and 
his  inspired  utterances  remind  the  believer  that 
every  battle  may  be  an  Armageddon,  and  that  at 
every  congress  there  is  set  a  mystic  throne  from 
which  the  Eternal  King  overrules  the  decisions 
of  plenipotentiaries. 

But  this  sentence  of  condemnation  was  not  to 
be  the  final  "  utterance  of  Jehovah  "  with  regard 
to  Elam.  A  day  of  renewed  prosperity  was  to 
dawn  for  Elam,  as  well  as  for  Moab,  Ammon, 
Egypt,  and  Judah: — 

"In  the  latter  days  I   will  bring  again  the  captivity  of 

Ealm— 
It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 

The  Apostle  Peter  *  tells  us  that  the  prophets 
"  sought  and  searched  diligently "  concerning 
the  application  of  their  words,  "  searching  what 
time  and  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  which  was  in  them  did  point  unto."  We 
gather  from  these  verses  that,  as  Newton  could 
not  have  foreseen  all  that  was  contained  in  the 
law  of  gravitation,  so  the  prophets  often  under- 
stood little  of  what  was  involved  in  their  own 
inspiration.  We  could  scarcely  have  a  better  ex- 
ample than  this  prophecy  affords  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  principles  of  God's  future  action 
combined  with  ignorance  of  its  circumstances 
and  details.  If  we  may  credit  the  current  theory, 
Cyrus,  the  servant  of  Jehovah,  the  deliverer  of 
Judah,  was  a  king  of  Elam.  If  Jeremiah  had 
foreseen  how  his  prophecies  of  the  restoration  of 
Elam  and  of  Judah  would  be  fulfilled,  we  may 
be  sure  that  this  utterance  would  not  have  been 
so  brief,  its  hostile  tone  would  have  been  miti- 
gated, and  the  concluding  sentence  would  not 
have  been  so  cold  and  conventional. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 
BABYLON. 

Jeremiah  1.,  li. 

"Babylon   is  taken,  Bel  is   confounded,  Merodach  is 
broken  in  pieces."— Jer.  1.  2. 

These  chapters  present  phenomena  analogous 
to  those  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.,  and  have  been  very 
commonly    ascribed    to    an    author    writing    at 
♦i  Peter  i.  10, 11. 


Jeremiah  1.,  li.] 


BABYLON. 


185 


Babylon  towards  the  close  of  the  Exile,  or  even 
at  some  later  date.  The  conclusion  has  been 
arrived  at  in  both  cases  by  the  application  of  the 
same  critical  principles  to  similar  data.  In  the 
present  case  the  argument  is  complicated  by  the 
concluding  paragraph  of  chapter  li.,  which  states 
that  "Jeremiah  wrote  in  a  book  all  the  evil  that 
should  come  upon  Babylon,  even  all  these  words 
that  are  written  against  Babylon,"  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Zedekiah,  and  gave  the  book  to  Seraiah 
ben  Neriah  to  take  to  Babylon  and  tie  a  stone  to 
it  and  throw  it  into  the  Euphrates. 

Such  a  statement,  however,  cuts  both  ways. 
On  the  one  hand,  we  seem  to  have — what  is 
wanting  in  the  case  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi. — a  definite 
and  circumstantial  testimony  as  to  authorship. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  this  very  testimony  raises 
new  difficulties.  If  1.  and  li.  had  been  simply  as- 
signed to  Jeremiah,  without  any  specification  of 
date,  we  might  possibly  have  accepted  the  tradi- 
tion according  to  which  he  spent  his  last  years 
at  Babylon,  and  have  supposed  that  altered  cir- 
cumstances and  novel  experiences  account  for 
the  differences  between  these  chapters  and  the 
rest  of  the  book.  But  Zedekiah's  fourth  year  is 
a  point  in  the  prophet's  ministry  at  which  it  is 
extremely  difficult  to  account  for  his  having 
composed  such  a  prophecy.  If,  however,  li.  59- 
64  is  mistaken  in  its  exact  and  circumstantial  ac- 
count of  the  origin  of  the  preceding  section,  we 
must  hesitate  to  recognise  its  authority  as  to  that 
section's  authorship. 

A  detailed  discussion  of  the  question  would  be 
out  of  place  here,*  but  we  may  notice  a  few  pas- 
sages which  illustrate  the  arguments  for  an  exilic 
date.  We  learn  from  Jeremiah  xxvii.-xxix.  that, 
in  the  fourth  year  of  Zedekiah.f  the  prophet  was 
denouncing  as  false  teachers  those  who  predicted 
that  the  Jewish  captives  in  Babylon  would  speed- 
ily return  to  their  native  land.  He  himself  as- 
serted that  judgment  would  not  be  inflicted  upon 
Babylon  for  seventy  years,  and  exhorted  the  ex- 
iles to  build  houses  and  marry,  and  plant  gar- 
dens, and  to  pray  for  the  peace  of  Babylon.  J 
We  can  hardly  imagine  that,  in  the  same  breath 
almost,  he  called  upon  these  exiles  to  flee  from 
the  city  of  their  captivity,  and  summoned  the 
neighbouring  nations  to  execute  Jehovah's  judg- 
ment against  the  oppressors  of  His  people.  And 
yet  we  read: — 

"There  shall  come  the  Israelites,  they  and  the  Jews  to- 
gether : 
They  shall  weep  continually,  as  they  go  to  seek  Jehovah 
their  God  ; 

They  shall  ask  their  way  to  Zion,  with  their  faces  hither- 
ward  "  §  (1.  4,  5). 

"  Remove  from  the  midst  of  Babylon,  and  be  ye  as  he- 
goats  before  the  flock  "  (1.  8). 

These  verses  imply  that  the  Jews  were  already  in 
Babylon,  and  throughout  the  author  assumes  the 
circumstances  of  the  Exile.  "  The  vengeance  of 
the  Temple,"  i.  e.,  vengeance  for  the  destruction 
of  the  Temple  at  the  final  capture  of  Jerusalem, 
iS  twice  threatened.!  The  ruin  of  Babylon  is  de- 
scribed as  imminent- 

_  *  See  against  the  authenticity  Driver's  "Introduction," 
in  loco;  and  in  support  of  it  "Speaker's  Commentary," 
Streane  (C.  B.  S.).  Cf.  also  Sayce,  "  Higher  Criticism," 
etc.,  pp.  484-486. 

tin  xxvii.  I  we  must  read,  "In  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah,"  not  Jehoiakim. 

±  xxix.  4-14. 

§  "  Hitherward  "  seems  to  indicate  that  the  writer's  lacal 
standpoint  is  that  of  Palestine.  * 

111.  28,  li.  II. 


"Set  up  a  standard  on  the  earth, 
Blow  the  trumpet  among  the  nations, 
Prepare  the  nations  against  her." 

If  these  words  were  written  by  Jeremiah  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Zedekiah,  he  certainly  was  not 
practising  his  own  precept  to  pray  for  the  peace 
of  Babylon. 

Various  theories  have  been  advanced  to  meet 
the  difficulties  which  are  raised  by  the  ascription 
of  this  prophecy  to  Jeremiah.  It  may  have  been 
expanded  from  an  auth>.ntic  original.  Or  again, 
li.  59-64  may  not  really  refer  to  1.  i-li.  58;  the 
two  sections  may  once  have  existed  separately, 
and  may  owe  their  connection  to  an  editor,  who 
met  with  1.  i-li.  58  as  an  anonymous  document, 
and  thought  he  recognised  in  it  the  "  book  " 
referred  to  in  li.  59-64.  Or  again,  1.  i-li.  58  may 
be  a  hypothetical  reconstruction  of  a  lost 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah;  li.  59-64  mentioned  such 
a  prophecy  and  none  was  extant,  and  some  stu- 
dent and  disciple  of  Jeremiah's  school  utilised 
the  material  and  ideas  of  extant  writings  to  sup- 
ply the  gap.  In  any  case,  it  must  have  been  ed- 
ited more  than  once,  and  each  time  with  modi- 
fications. Some  support  might  be  obtained  for 
any  one  of  these  theories  from  the  fact  that 
1.  I-li.  58  is  prima  facie  partly  a  cento  of  passages 
from  the  rest  of  the  book  and  from  the  Book 
of  Isaiah.* 

In  vieW  of  the  great  uncertainty  as  to  the 
origin  and  history  of  this  prophecy,  we  do  not 
intend  to  attempt  any  detailed  exposition.  Else- 
where whatever  non-Jeremianic  matter  occurs  in 
the  book  is  mostly  by  wav  of  expansion  and  in- 
terpretation, and  thus  lies  in  the  direct  line  of  the 
prophet's  teaching.  But  the  section  on  Baby- 
lon attaches  itself  to  the  new  departure  in  reli- 
gious thought  that  is  more  fully  expressed  in 
Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  Chaps.  1.,  li.,  may  possibly  be 
Jeremiah's  swan-song,  called  forth  by  one  of 
those  Pisgah  visions  of  a  new  dispensation 
sometimes  granted  to  aged  seers;  but  such 
visions  of  a  new  era  and  a  new  order  can  scarcely 
be  combined  with  earlier  teaching.  We  will 
therefore  only  briefly  indicate  the  character  and 
contents  of  this  section. 

It  is  apparently  a  mosaic,  compiled  from  lost 
as  well  as  extant  sources;  and  dwells  upon  a  few 
themes  with  a  persistent  iteration  of  ideas  and 
phrases  hardly  to  be  paralleled  elsewhere,  even 
in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.  It  has  been  reckoned  t 
that  the  imminence  of  the  attack  on  Babylon  is 
introduced  afresh  eleven  times,  and  its  conquest 
and  destruction  nine  times.  The  advent  of  an 
enemy  from  the  north  is  announced  four  times.  X 

The  main  theme  is  naturally  that  dwelt  upon 
most  frequently,  the  imminent  invasion  of 
Chaldea  by  victorious  enemies  who  shall  capture 
and  destroy  Babylon.  Hereafter  the  great  city 
and  its  territory  will  be  a  waste,  howling  wilder- 
ness:— 

"  Your  mother  shall  be  sore  ashamed, 
She  that  bare  you  shall  be  confounded  ; 
Behold,  she  shall  be  the  hindmost  of  the  nations, 
A  wilderness,  a  parched  land,  and  a  desert. 
Because  of  the  wrath  of  Jehovah,  it  shall  be  uninhabited  ; 
The  whole  land  shall  be  a  desolation. 
Every  one  that  goeth  by  Babylon 

Shall    hiss    with     astonishment    because    of    all    her 
plagues."  § 

♦  Cf.  1.  8,  li.  6,  with  Isa.  xlviii.  to ;  1.  13  with  xlix.  17  ;  1. 
41-43  with  vi.  22-24;  !•  44-46  with  xlix.  19-21 ;  M.  15-19  with 
X.  12-16. 

tBudde  ap.  Giesebrecht,  in  loco. 

1 1-  3i  9.  li.  41,  48. 

81.  12,  13  :  cf.  1.  39,  40,  li.  26,  29,  37,  41-43. 


1 86 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


The  gods  of  Babylon,  Bel  and  Merodach,  and 
all  her  idols,  are  involved  in  her  ruin,  and  refer- 
ence is  made  to  the  vanity  and  folly  of  idolatry.* 
But  the  wrath  of  Jehovah  has  been  chiefly  ex- 
cited, not  by  false  religion,  but  by  the  wrongs 
inflicted  by  the  Chaldeans  on  His  Chosen  Peo- 
ple.    He  is  moved  to  avenge  His  Temple  f: — 

"I  will  recompense  unto  Babylon 
And  all  the  inhabitants  of  Chaldea 
All  the  evil  which  they  wrought  in  Zion, 
And  ye  shall    see    it — it  is    the  utterance  of  Jehovah  " 
(li.24). 

Though  He  thus  avenge  Judah,  yet  its  former 
sins  are  not  yet  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  His 
remembrance : — 

"Their  adversaries  said,  We  incur  no  guilt. 
Because  they  have  sinned  against  Jehovah,  the  Pasture 

of  Justice, 
Against  the  Hope  of  their  fathers,  even  Jehovah  "  (1.  7). 

Yet  now  there  is  forgiveness: — 

"  The  iniquity  of  Israel  shall  be  sought  for,  and  there  shall 
be  none  ; 
And  the  sins  of  Judah,  and  they  shall  not  be  found  : 
For  I  will  pardon  the  remnant  that  I  preserve  "  (1.  20). 

The  Jews  are  urged  to  flee  from  Babylon,  lest 
they  should  be  involved  in  its  punishment,  and 
are  encouraged  to  return  to  Jerusalem  and  en- 
ter afresh  into  an  everlasting  covenant  with  Je- 
hovah. As  in  Jeremiah  xxxi.,  Israel  is  to  be 
restored  as  well  as  Judah: — 

"  I  will  bring  Israel  again  to  his  Pasture  -. 
He  shall  feed  on  Carmel  and  Bashan  ; 
His  desires  shall  be  satisfied  on  the  hills  of  Ephraim 
and  in  Gilead  "  (1.  19). 


BOOK  III. 


JEREMIAH'S    TEACHING    CONCERNING 
ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH. 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

"  I  will  be  the  God  of  all  the  families  of  Israel,  and  they 
shall  be  My  people."— Jer.  xxxi.  1. 

In  this  third  book  an  attempt  is  made  to  pre- 
sent a  general  view  of  Jeremiah's  teaching  on 
the  subject  with  which  he  was  most  preoccupied 
— the  political  and  religious  fortunes  of  Judah. 
Certain^  chapters  detach  themselves  from  the 
rest,  and  stand  in  no  obvious  connection  with 
any  special  incident  of  the  prophet's  life.  These 
are  the  main  theme  of  this  book,  and  have  been 
dealt  with  in  the  ordinary  method  of  detailed  ex- 
position. They  have  been  treated  separately,  and 
not  woven  into  the  continuous  narrative,  partly 
because  we  thus  obtain  a  more  adequate  emphasis 
upon  important  aspects  of  their  teaching,  but 
chiefly  because  their  date  and  occasion  cannot  be 
certainly  determined.  With  them  other  sections 
have  been  associated,  on  account  of  the  connec- 
tion of  subject.     Further  material  for  a  synopsis 

*  li.  17,  18. 

1 1.  28. 

$xxx.,  xxxi.,  and,  in  part,  xxxiii. 


of  Jeremiah's  teaching  has  been  collected  from 
chapters  xxi.-xlix.  generally,  suppcincuted  by 
brief*  references  to  the  previous  chapters.  In- 
asmuch as  the  prophecies  of  our  book  do  not 
form  an  ordered  treatise  on  dogmatic  theology, 
but  were  uttered  with  regard  to  individual  con- 
duct and  critical  events,  topics  are  not  exclus- 
ively dealt  with  in  a  single  section,  but  are  re- 
ferred to  at  intervals  throughout.  Moreover,  as 
both  the  individuals  and  the  crises  were  very 
much  alike,  ideas  and  phrases  are  constantly  re- 
appearing,, so  that  there  is  an  exceptionally  large 
amount  of  repetition  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah. 
The  method  we  have  adopted  avoids  some  of  the 
difficulties  which  would  arise  if  we  attempted  to 
deal  with  these  doctrines  in  our  continuous  ex- 
position. 

Our  general  sketch  of  the  prophet's  teaching 
is  naturally  arranged  under  categories  suggested 
by  the  book  itself,  and  not  according  to  the 
sections  of  a  modern  treatise  on  Systematic 
Theology.  No  doubt  much  may  legitimately  be 
extracted  or  deduced  concerning  Anthropology, 
Soteriology,  and  the  like;  but  true  proportion  is 
as  important  in  exposition  as  accurate  interpre- 
tation. If  we  wish  to  understand  Jeremiah,  we 
must  be  content  to  dwell  longest  upon  what  he 
emphasised  most,  and  to  adopt  the  standpoint 
of  time  and  race  which  was  his  own.  Accord- 
ingly in  our  treatment  we  have  followed  the  cycle 
of  sin,  punishment,  and  restoration,  so  familiar 
to  students  of  Hebrew  prophecy. 

NOTE. 

Some  Characteristic  Expressions  of  Jeremiah. 

This  note  is  added  partly  for  convenience  of  reference, 
and  partly  to  illustrate  the  repetition  just  mentioned  as 
characteristic  of  Jeremiah.  The  instances  are  chosen 
from  expressions  occurring  in  chapters  xxi.-lii.  The 
reader  will  find  fuller  lists  dealing  with  the  whole  book  in 
the  "  Speaker's  Commentary  "  and  the  "  Cambridge  Bible 
for  Schools  and  Colleges."  The  Hebrew  student  is  re- 
ferred to  the  list  in  Driver's  "  Introduction,"  upon  which 
the  following  is  partly  based. 

1.  "  Rising  up  early  "  :  vii.  13,  25  ;  xi.  7  ;  xxv.  3,  4 ;  xxvi. 
S;  xxix.  19;  xxxii.  33  ;  xxxv.  14,  15;  xliv.  4.  This  phrase, 
familiar  to  us  in  the  narratives  of  Genesis  and  in  the  his- 
torical books,  is  used  here,  as  in  1  Chron.  xxxvi.  15,  of  God 
addressing  His  people  on  sending  the  prophets. 

2.  "Stubbornness  of  heart"  (A.  V.  imagination  of 
heart) :  iii.  17  ;  vii.  24  ;  ix.  14  ;  xi.  8  ;  xiii.  10 ;  xvi.  12  ;  xviii. 
12  :  xxiii.  17  ;  also  found  Deut.  xxix.  19  and  Ps.  Ixxxi.  15. 

3.  "  The  evil  of  your  doings  "  :  iv.  4  ;  xxi.  12  :  xxiii.  2,  22  ; 
xxv.  5;  xxvi.  3;  xliv.  22;  also  Deut.  xxviii.  20:  i  Sam. 
xxv.  3  ;  Isa.  i.  16  ;  Hos.  ix.  15  ;  Ps.  xxviii.  4  ;  and  in  slightly 
different  form  in  xi.  18  and  Zech.  i.  4. 

"The  fruit  of  your  doings":  xvii.  10  ;  xxi.  14;  xxxii.  19; 
also  found  in  Micah  vii.  13. 

"  Doings,  your  doings,''^etc.,  are  also  found  in  Jeremiah 
and  elsewhere. 

4.  "  The  sword,  the  pestilence,  and  the  famine,"  in 
various  orders,  and  either  as  a  phrase  or  each  word  ocur- 
ring  in  one  of  three  successive  clauses :  xiv.  12  ;  xv.  2  ; 
xxi.  7,  9 ;  xxiv.  10 ;  xxvii.  8,  13  ;  xxix.  17,  i8  ;  xxxii.  24,  36 : 
xxxiv.  17  ;  xxxviii.  2  ;  xlii.  17,  22  ;  xliv.  13. 

"  The  sword  and  the  famime,"  with  similar  variations: 
v.  12;  xi.  22;  xiv.  13,  15,  16,  18;  xvi.  4;  xviii.  21;  xlii.  16; 
xliv.  12,  18,  27. 

C/'.  similar  lists,  etc.,  "death  .  .  .  sword  .  .  .  captiv- 
ity," in  xliii.  11:  "war  .  .  .  evil  .  .  .  pestilence,"  xxviii.  8. 

5.  "  Kings  .  .  .  princes  .  .  .  priests  .  .  .  prophets,"  in 
various  orders  and  combinations:  ii.  26;  iv.  9;  viii.  i; 
xiii.  13  ;  xxiv.  8  ;  xxxii.  32. 

C/.  "Prophet  .  .  .  priest  .  .  .  people,"  xxiii.  33,  34. 
"  Prophets  .  .  .  diviners  .  .  .  dreamers  .  .  .  enchanters 
.  .  .  sorcerers,"  xxvii.  9. 

*  Brief,  in  order  not  to  trespass  more  than  is  absolutely 
necessary  upon  the  ground  covered  by  the  "  Prophecies  of 
Jeremiah,"  antea. 


SOCIAL   AND    RELIGIOUS    CORRUPTION. 


187 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

I 

SOCIAL  AND  RELIGIOUS  CORRUPTION. 

"Very  bad  figs.  .  .  .  too  bad  to  be  eaten." — JER.  xxiv. 


2,  8,  xxix.  17. 


Prophets  and  preachers  have  taken  the  Is- 
raelites for  God's  helots,  as  if  the  Chosen  People 
had  been  made  drunk  with  the  cup  of  the  Lord's 
indignation,  in  order  that  they  might  be  held  up 
as  a  warning  to  His  more  favoured  children 
throughout  after  ages.  They  seemed  depicted  as 
"  sinners  above  all  men,"  that  by  this  supreme 
warning  the  heirs  of  a  better  covenant  may  be 
kept  in  the  path  of  righteousness.  Their  sin  is 
no  mere  inference  from  the  long  tragedy  of  their 
national  history,  "  because  they  have  suffered 
such  things  ";  their  own  prophets  and  their  own 
Messiah  testify  continually  against  them.  Reli- 
gious thought  has  always  singled  out  Jeremiah  as 
the  most  conspicuous  and  uncompromising  wit- 
ness to  the  sins  of  his  people.  One  chief  feature 
of  his  mission  was  to  declare  God's  condemna- 
tion of  ancient  Judah.  Jeremiah  watched  and 
shared  the  prolonged  agony  and  overwhelming 
catastrophes  of  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish  mon- 
archy, and  ever  and  anon  raised  his  voice  to  de- 
clare that  his  fellow-countrymen  suffered,  not  as 
martyrs,  but  as  criminals.  He  was  like  the 
herald  who  accompanies  a  condemned  man  on 
the  way  to  execution,  and  proclaims  his  crime  to 
the  spectators. 

What  were  these  crimes?  How  was  Jerusalem 
a  sink  of  iniquity,  an  Augean  stable,  only  to  be 
cleansed  by  turning  through  it  the  floods  of 
Divine  chastisement?  The  annalists  of  Egypt 
and  Chaldea  show  no  interest  in  the  morality  of 
Judah;  but  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  they 
regarded  Jerusalem  as  more  depraved  than 
Tyre,  or  Babylon,  or  Memphis.  If  a  citizen  of 
one  of  these  capitals  of  the  East  visited  the  city 
of  David  he  might  miss  something  of  accustomed 
culture,  and  might  have  occasion  to  complain  of 
the  inferiority  of  local  police  arrangements,  but 
he  would  be  as  little  conscious  of  any  extraor- 
dinary wickedness  in  the  city  as  a  Parisian  would 
in  London.  Indeed,  if  an  English  Christian 
familiar  with  the  East  of  the  nineteenth  century 
could  be  transported  to  Jerusalem  under  King 
Zedekiah,  in  all  probability  its  moral  condition 
would  not  affect  him  very  differently  from  that 
of  Cabul  or  Ispahan. 

When  we  seek  to  learn  from  Jeremiah  wherein 
the  guilt  of  Judah  lay,  his  answer  is  neither  clear 
nor  full:  he  does  not  gather  up  her  sins  into  any 
complete  and  detailed  indictment;  we  are 
obliged  to  avail  ourselves  of  casual  references 
scattered  through  his  prophecies.  For  the  most 
part  Jeremiah  speaks  in  general  terms;  a  precise 
and  exhaustive  catalogue  of  current  vices  would 
have  seemed  too  familiar  and  commonplace  for 
the  written  record. 

The  corruption  of  Judah  is  summed  up  by  Jere- 
miah in  the  phrase  "  the  evil  of  your  doings,"  * 
and  her  punishment  is  described  in  a  correspond- 
ing phrase  as  "  the  fruit  of  your  doings,"  or  as 
commg  upon  her  "  because  of  the  evil  of  your 
doings."  The  original  of  "  doings  "  is  a  peculiar 
wordt  occurring  most  frequently  in  Jeremiah, 
and  the  phrases  are  very  common  in  Jeremiah, 

♦"Characteristic  Expressions"  (i),  p.  269. 


and  hardly  occur  at  all  elsewhere.  The  constant 
reiteration  of  this  melancholy  refrain  is  an  elo- 
quent symbol  of  Jehovah's  sweeping  condem- 
nation. In  the  total  depravity  of  Judah,  no  spe- 
cial sin,  no  one  group  of  sins,  stood  out  from  the 
rest.     Their  "  doings  "  were  evil  altogether. 

The  picture  suggested  by  the  scattered  hints 
as  to  the  character  of  these  evil  doings  is  such  as 
might  be  drawn  of  almost  any  Eastern  state  in  its 
darker  days.  The  arbitrary  hand  of  the  govern- 
ment is  illustrated  by  Jeremiah's  own  experience 
of  the  bastinado  *  and  the  dungeon, f  and  by  the 
execution  of  Uriah  ben  Shemaiah.l  The  rights 
of  less  important  personages  were  not  likely  to 
be  more  scrupulously  respected.  The  reproach 
of  shedding  innocent  blood  is  more  than  once 
made  against  the  people  and  their  rulers;?  and 
the  more  general  charge  of  oppression  occurs 
still  more  frequently.! 

The  motive  for  both  these  crimes  was  natu- 
rally covetousness;^r  as  usual,  they  were  spe- 
cially directed  against  the  helpless, "the  poor,"  ** 
"the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow"; 
and  the  machinery  of  oppression  was  ready  to 
hand  in  venal  judges  and  rulers.  Upon  occasion, 
however,  recourse  was  had  to  open  violence — 
men  could  "  steal  and  murder,"  as  well  as 
"  swear  falsely  ";  ft  they  lived  in  an  atmosphere 
of  falsehood,  they  "  walked  in  a  lie."  XX  In- 
deed the  word  "  lie  "  is  one  of  the  keynotes  of 
these  prophecies. §§  The  last  days  ol  the  mon- 
archy offered  special  temptations  to  such  vices. 
Social  wreckers  reaped  an  unhallowed  harvest 
in  these  stormy  times.  Revolutions  were  fre- 
quent, and  each  in  its  turn  meant  fresh  plunder 
for  unscrupulous  partisans.  Flattery  and  treach- 
ery could  always  find  a  market  in  the  court  of  the 
suzerain  or  the  camp  of  the  invader.  Naturally, 
amidst  this  general  demoralization,  the  life  of  the 
family  did  not  remain  untouched:  "  the  land  was 
full  of  adulterers."  ||||  Zedekiah  and  Ahab,  the 
false  prophets  at  Babylon  are  accused  of  hav- 
ing committed  adultery  with  their  neighbours' 
wives.HIT  In  these  passages  "  adultery "  can 
scarcely  be  a  figure  for  idolatry;  and  even  if  it 
is,  idolatrv  always  involved  immoral  ritual. 

In  accordance  with  the  general  teaching  of  the 
Old  Testament,  Jeremiah  traces  the  roots  of  the 
people's  depravity  to  a  certain  moral  stupidity; 
they  are  "  a  foolish  people,  without  understand- 
ing," who,  like  the  idols  in  Psalm  cxv.  5,  6, 
"  have  eyes  and  see  not  "  and  "  have  ears  and 
hear  not."  ***  In  keeping  with  their  stupidity 
was  an  unconsciousness  of  guilt  which  even  rose 
into  proud  self-righteousness.  They  could  still 
come  with  pious  fervour  to  worship  in  the  temple 
of  Jehovah  and  to  claim  the  protection  of  its  in- 
violable sanctity.  They  could  still  assail  Jere- 
miah with  righteous  indignation  because  he  an- 
nounced the  coming  destruction  of  the  place 
where  Jehovah  had  chosen  to  set  His  name.ftt 
They  said  that  they  had  no  sin,  and  met  the 
prophet's  rebukes  with  protests  of  conscious  in- 
nocence: "Wherefore  hath  Jehovah  pronounced 

*  XX.  2,  xxxvit.  15.  I  V.  25,  vi.  6,  vii.  5. 

txxxvii.,  xxxviii.  ^  yi.  13. 

i  xxvi.  20-24.  **  "•  34- 

§ii.  34,  xix.  4,  xxil.  17.  t+ vii.  5-9. 

tX  xxiii.  14. 

§§  "  Characteristic  Expressions  "  (2),  p.  269. 

I'H  xxiii.  10,  14. 

5^  xxix.  23. 

***  V.  21,  quoted  by  Ezekiel.  xii.  2.  The  verse  is  also  the 
foundation  of  the  description  of  Israel  as  "the  blind  peo- 
ple that  have  eyes,  and  the  deaf  that  have  ears,"  in  Isa. 
.  xlii.  18  ff.,  xliii.  8.     Cf.  Giesebrecht  on  Jer.  v.  21. 

ttt  vii.,  xxvi. 


x88 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


all  this  great  evil  against  us?  or  what  is  our  ini- 
quity? or  what  is  our  sin  that  we  have  committed 
against  Jehovah  our  God?  "  * 

When  the  public  conscience  condoned  alike 
the  abuse  of  the  forms  of  law  and  its  direct 
violation,  actual  legal  rights  would  be  strained 
to  the  utmost  against  debtors,  hired  labourers, 
and  slaves.  In  their  extremity,  the  princes  and 
people  of  Judah  sought  to  propitiate  the  anger  of 
Jehovah  by  emancipating  their  Hebrew  slaves; 
when  the  immediate  danger  had  passed  away  for 
a  time,  they  revoked  the  emancipation.!  The 
form  of  their  submission  to  Jehovah  reveals  their 
consciousness  that  their  deepest  sin  lay  in  their 
behaviour  to  their  helpless  dependents.  This 
prompt  repudiation  of  a  most  solemn  covenant 
illustrated  afresh  their  callous  indifference  to  the 
well-being  of  their  inferiors. 

The  depravity  of  Judah  was  not  only  total,  it 
was  also  universal.  In  the  older  histories  we 
read  how  Achan's  single  act  of  covetousness  in- 
volved the  whole  people  in  misfortune,  and  how 
the  treachery  of  the  bloody  house  of  Saul  brought 
three  years'  famine  upon  the  land;  but  now  the 
sins  of  individuals  and  classes  were  merged  in 
the  general  corruption.  Jeremiah  dwells  with 
characteristic  reiteration  of  idea  and  phrase  upon 
this  melancholy  truth.  Again  and  again  he 
enumerates  the  different  classes  of  the  com- 
munity: "  kings,  princes,  priests,  prophets,  men 
of  Judah  and  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem."  They 
had  all  done  evil  and  provoked  Jehovah  to 
anger;  they  were  all  to  share  the  same  punish- 
ment.f  They  were  all  arch-rebels,  given  to 
slander;  nothing  but  base  metal ;§  corrupters, 
every  one  of  them.||  The  universal  extent  of 
total  depravity  is  most  forcibly  expressed  when 
Zedekiah  with  his  court  and  people  are  sum- 
marily described  as  a  basket  of  "  very  bad  figs, 
too  bad  to  be  eaten." 

The  dark  picture  of  Israel's  corruption  is  not 
yet  complete — Israel's  corruption,  for  now  the 
prophet  is  no  longer  exclusively  concerned  with 
Judah.  The  sin  of  these  last  days  is  no  new 
thing;  it  is  as  old  as  the  Israelite  occupation  of 
Jerusalem.  "  This  city  hath  been  to  Me  a  provo- 
cation of  My  anger  and  of  My  fury  from  the  day 
that  they  built  it  even  unto  this  day  "  ;  from  the 
earliest  days  of  Israel's  national  existence,  from 
the  time  of  Moses  and  the  Exodus,  the  people 
have  been  given  over  to  iniquity.  "  The  children 
of  Israel  and  the  children  of  Judah  have 
done  nothing  but  evil  before  Me  from  their 
youth  up."  IT  Thus  we  see  at  last  that  Jere- 
miah's teaching  concerning  the  sin  of  Judah 
can  be  summed  up  in  one  brief  and  com- 
prehensive proposition.  Throughout  their  whole 
history  all  classes  of  the  community  have  been 
wholly  given  over  to  every  kind  of  wickedness. 

This  gloomy  estimate  of  God's  Chosen  Peo- 
ple is  substantially  confirmed  by  the  prophets 
of  the  later  monarchy,  from  Amos  and  Hosea 
onwards.  Hosea  speaks  of  Israel  in  terms  as 
sweeping  as  those  of  Jeremiah.  "  Hear  the  word 
of  Jehovah,  ye  children  of  Israel;  for  Jehovah 
hath  a  controversy  with  the  inhabitants  of  the 
land,  because  there  is  no  truth,  nor  mercy,  nor 
knowledge  of  God  in  the  land.  Swearing  and 
lying  and  killing  and   stealing  and   committing 

*  xvi.  lo. 
t  xxxiv. 

txxxii.  26-35:  cf.  p.  269,  "Characteristic  Expressions"  (3). 
§  Literally  "  copper  and  iron." 
I  vi.  28. 
^  xxxii.  26-35. 


adultery,  they  cast  off  all  restraint,  and  blood 
toucheth  blood."  *  As  a  prophet  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom,  Hosea  is  mainly  concerned  with  his 
own  country,  but  his  casual  references  to  Judah 
include  her  in  the  same  condemnation. f  Amos 
again  condemns  both  Israel  and  Judah:  Judah, 
"  because  they  have  despised  the  law  of  Jehovah, 
and  have  not  kept  His  commandments,  and  their 
lies  caused  them  to  err,  after  th«.  which  their 
fathers  walked";  Israel,  "because  they  sold  the 
righteous  for  silver  and  the  poor  for  a  pair  of 
shoes,  and  pant  after  the  dust  of  the  earth  on 
the  head  of  the  poor  and  turn  aside  the  way  of 
the  meek."  t  The  first  chapter  of  Isaiah  is  in  a 
similar  strain:  Israel  is  "  a  sinful  nation,  a  people 
laden  with  iniquity,  a  seed  of  evil-doers";  "the 
whole  head  is  sick,  the  whole  heart  faint.  From 
the  sole  of  the  foot  even  unto  the  head  there  is 
no  soundness  in  it,  but  wounds  and  bruises  and 
putrefying  sores."  According  to  Micah,  "  Zion 
is  built  up  with  blood  and  Jerusalem  with 
iniquity.  The  heads  thereof  judge  for  reward, 
and  the  priests  thereof  teach  for  hire,  and  the 
prophets  thereof  divine  for  money."  § 

Jeremiah's  older  and  younger  contemporaries, 
Zephaniah  and  Ezekiel.  alike  confirm  his  testi- 
mony. In  the  spirit  and  even  the  style  after- 
wards used  by  Jeremiah,  Zephaniah  enumerates 
the  sins  of  the  nobles  and  teachers  of  Jerusalem. 
"  Her  princes  within  her  are  roaring  lions;  her 
judges  are  evening  wolves.  .  .  .  Her  prophets 
are  light  and  treacherous  persons:  her  priests 
have  polluted  the  sanctuary,  they  have  done  vio- 
lence to  the  law."  ||  Ezekiel  xx.  traces  the  defec- 
tions of  Israel  from  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  to  the 
Captivity.  Elsewhere  Ezekiel  says  that  "  the 
land  is  full  of  bloody  crimes,  and  the  city  is  full 
of  violence  ";  IT  and  in  xxii.  23-31  he  catalogues 
the  sins  of  priests,  princes,  prophets,  and  people, 
and  proclaims  that  Jehovah  "  sought  for  a  man 
among  them  that  should  make  up  the  hedge,  and 
stand  in  the  gap  before  Me  for  the  land,  that  I 
should  not  destroy  it:  but  I  found  none." 

We  have  now  fairly  before  us  the  teaching  of 
Jeremiah  and  the  other  prophets  as  to  the  con- 
dition of  Judah:  the  passages  quoted  or  referred 
to  represent  its  general  tone  and  attitude;  it  re- 
mains to  estimate  its  significance.  We  should 
naturally  suppose  that  such  sweeping  statements 
as  to  the  total  depravity  of  the  whole  people 
throughout  all  their  history  were  not  intended  to 
be  interpreted  as  exact  mathematical  formulse. 
And  the  prophets  themselves  state  or  imply 
qualifications.  Isaiah  insists  upon  the  existence 
of  a  righteous  remnant.  When  Jeremiah  speaks 
of  Zedekiah  and  his  subjects  as  a  basket  of  very 
bad  figs,  he  also  speaks  of  the  Jews  who  had  al- 
ready gone  into  captivity  as  a  basket  of  very 
good  figs.  The  mere  fact  of  going  into  captivity 
can  hardly  have  accomplished  an  immediate  and 
wholesale  conversion.  The  "  good  figs  "  among 
the  captives  were  presumably  good  before  they 
went  into  exile.  Jeremiah's  general  statements 
that  "  they  were  all  arch-rebels  "  do  not  therefore 
preclude  the  existence  of  righteous  men  in  the 
community.  Similarly,  when  he  tells  us  that  the 
city  and  people  have  always  been  given  over  to 

*  Hosea  iv.  i,  2  ;  also  Hosea's  general  picture  of  the 
kingdom  of  Samaria.  . 

t  The  A.  V.  translation  of  xi.  12  ("  Judah  yet  ruleth  with 
God,  and  is  faithful  with  the  saints  ")  must  be  set  aside. 
The  sense  is  obscure  and  the  text  doubtful. 

X  Amos  ii.  4-8. 

§  Micah  iii.  10,  11. 

llZeph.  iii.  3,  4.  _ 

•J  Ezek.  vii.  23  :  cf.  vu.  9,  xxii.  i-ia. 


SOCIAL   AND   RELIGIOUS   CORRUPTION. 


189 


iniquity,  Jeremiah  is  not  ignorant  of  Moses  and 
Joshua.  David  and  Solomon,  and  the  kings 
"who  did  right  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah";  nor 
does  he  intend  to  contradict  the  familiar  accounts 
of  ancient  history.  On  the  other  hand,  the  uni- 
versality which  the  prophets  ascribe  to  the  cor- 
ruption of  their  people  is  no  mere  figure  of  rhet- 
oric, and  yet  it  is  by  no  means  incompatible  with 
the  view  that  Jerusalem,  in  its  worst  days,  was 
not  more  conspicuously  wicked  than  Babylon  or 
Tyre;  or  even,  allowing  for  the  altered  circum- 
stances of  the  times,  than  London  or  Paris.  It 
would  never  have  occurred  to  Jeremiah  to  apply 
the  average  morality  of  Gentile  cities  as  a  stand- 
ard by  which  to  judge  Jerusalem;  and  Christian 
readers  of  the  Old  Testament  have  caught  some- 
thing of  the  old  prophetic  spirit.  The  very  in- 
troduction into  the  present  context  of  any  com- 
parison between  Jerusalem  and  Babyfon  may 
seem  to  have  a  certain  flavour  of  irreverence. 
We  perceive  with  the  prophets  that  the  City  of 
Jehovah  and  the  cities  of  the  Gentiles  must  be 
placed  in  different  categories.  The  popular 
modern  explanation  is  that  heathenism  was  so 
utterly  abominable  that  Jerusalem  at  its  worst 
was  still  vastly  superior  to  Nineveh  or  Tyre. 
However  exaggerated  such  views  may  be,  they 
still  contain  an  element  of  truth;  but  Jeremiah's 
estimate  of  the  moral  condition  of  Judah  was 
based  on  entirely  different  ideas.  His  standards 
were  not  relative,  but  absolute;  not  practical,  but 
ideal.  His  principles  were  the  very  antithesis 
of  the  tacit  ignoring  of  difificult  and  unusual 
duties,  the  convenient  and  somewhat  shabby 
compromise  represented  by  the  modern  word 
"  respectable."  Israel  was  to  be  judged  by  its 
relation  to  Jehovah's  purpose  for  His  people. 
Jehovah  had  called  them  out  of  Egypt,  and  de- 
livered them  from  a  thousand  dangers.  He  had 
raised  up  for  them  judges  and  kings,  Moses, 
David,  and  Isaiah.  He  had  spoken  to  them  by 
Torah  and  by  prophecy.  This  peculiar  munifi- 
cence of  Providence  and  Revelation  was  not 
meant  to  produce  a  people  only  better  by  some 
small  percentage  than  their  heathen  neighbours. 

The  comparison  between  Israel  and  its  neigh- 
bours would  no  doubt  be  much  more  favourable 
under  David  than  under  Zedekiah,  but  even  then 
the  outcome  of  Mosaic  religion  as  practically  em- 
bodied in  the  national  life  was  utterly  unworthy 
of  the  Divine  ideal;  to  have  described  the  Israel 
of  David  or  the  Judah  of  Hezekiah  as  Jehovah's 
specially  cherished  possession,  a  kingdom  of 
priests  and  a  holy  nation,*  would  have  seemed  a 
ghastly  ironj'^  even  to  the  sons  of  Zeruiah,  far 
more  to  Nathan,  Gad,  or  Isaiah.  Nor  had  any 
class,  as  a  class,  been  wholly  true  to  Jehovah  at 
any  period  of  the  history.  If  for  any  consider- 
able time  the  numerous  order  of  professional 
prophets  had  had  a  single  eye  to  the  glory  of 
Jehovah,  the  fortunes  of  Israel  would  have  been 
altogether  different,  and  where  prophets  faiied, 
priests  and  princes  and  common  people  were  not 
likely  to  succeed. 

Hence,  judged  as  citizens  of  God's  Kingdom 
on  earth,  the  Israelites  were  corrupt  in  every 
faculty  of  their  nature:  as  masters  and  servants, 
as  rulers  and  subjects,  as  priests,  prophets,  and 
worshippers  of  Jehovah,  they  succumbed  to  self- 
ishness and  cowardice,  and  perpetrated  the  ordi- 
nary crimes  and  vices  of  ancient  Eastern  life. 

The  reader  is  perhaps  tempted  to  ask:  Is  this 
all  that  is  meant  by  the  fierce  and  impassioned 

*  Exod.  -xix.  6. 


denunciations  of  Jeremiah?  Not  quite  all. 
Jeremiah  had  had  the  mortification  of  seeing  the 
great  religious  revival  under  Josiah  spend  itself, 
apparently  in  vain,  against  the  ingrained  corrup- 
tion of  the  people.  The  reaction,  as  under  Ma- 
nasseh,  had  accentuated  the  worst  features  of  the 
national  life.  At  the  same  time  the  constant  dis- 
tress and  dismay  caused  by  disastrous  invasions 
tended  to  general  license  and  anarchy.  A  long 
period  of  decadence  reached  its  nadir. 

But  these  are  mere  matters  of  degree  and  de- 
tail; the  main  thing  for  Jeremiah  was  not  that 
Judah  had  become  worse,  but  that  it  had  failed 
to  become  better.  One  great  period  of  Israel's 
probation  was  finally  closed.  The  kingdom  had 
served  its  purpose  in  the  Divine  Providence;  but 
it  was  impossible  to  hope  any  longer  that  the 
Jewish  monarchy  was  to  prove  the  earthly  em- 
bodiment of  the  Kingdom  of  God.  There  was 
no  prospect  of  Judah  attaining  a  social  order  ap- 
preciably better  than  that  of  the  surrounding  na- 
tions. Jehovah  and  His  Revelation  would  be 
disgraced  by  any  further  association  with  the 
Jewish  state. 

Certain  schools  of  socialists  bring  a  similar 
charge  against  the  modern  social  order;  that 
it  is  not  a  Kingdom  of  God  upon  earth  is 
sufBciently  obvious;  and  they  assert  that  our 
social  system  has  become  stereotyped  on  lines 
that  exclude  and  resist  progress  towards  any 
higher  ideal.  Now  it  is  certainly  true  that  every 
great  civilisation  hitherto  has  grown  old  and  ob- 
solete; if  Christian  society  is  to  establish  its  right 
to  abide  permanently,  it  must  show  itself  some- 
thing more  than  an  improved  edition  of  the 
Athens  of  Pericles  or  the  Empire  of  the  Anto- 
nines. 

All  will  agree  that  Christendom  falls  sadly 
short  of  its  ideal,  and  therefore  we  may  seek  to 
gather  instruction  from  Jeremiah's  judgment  on 
the  shortcomings  of  Judah.  Jeremiah  specially 
emphasises  the  universality  of  corruption  in  in- 
dividual character,  in  all  classes  of  society  and 
throughout  the  whole  duration  of  history. 
Similarly  we  have  to  recognise  that  prevalent 
social  and  moral  evils  lower  the  general  tone  of 
individual  character.  Moral  faculties  are  not  set 
apart  in  watertight  compartments.  "  Whosoever 
shall  keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  offend  in  one 
point,  is  guilty  of  all,"  is  no  mere  forensic  prin- 
ciple. The  one  offence  impairs  the  earnestness 
and  sincerity  with  which  a  man  keeps  the  rest  of 
the  law.  even  though  there  may  be  no  obvious 
lapse.  There  are  moral  surrenders  made  to  the 
practical  exigencies  of  commercial,  social,  po- 
litical, and  ecclesiastical  life.  Probably  we 
should  be  startled  and  dismayed  if  we  understood 
the  consequent  sacrifice  of  individual  character. 

We  might  also  learn  from  the  prophet  that  the 
responsibility  fo"r  our  social  evils  rests  with  all 
classes.  Time  was  when  the  lower  classes  were 
plentifully  lectured  as  the  chief  authors  of  public 
troubles;  now  it  is  the  turn  of  the  capitalist,  the 
parson,  and  the  landlord.  The  former  policy 
had  no  very  marked  success,  possibly  the  new 
method  may  not  fare  better. 

Wealth  and  influence  imply  opportunity  and 
responsibility  which  do  not  belong  to  the  poor 
and  feeble;  but  power  is  by  no  means  confined  to 
the  privileged  classes:  and  the  energy,  ability, 
and  self-denial  embodied  in  the  great  Trades 
Unions  have  sometimes  shown  themselves  as 
cruel  and  selfish  towards  the  weak  and  destitute 
as   any   association   of   capitalists.     A   necessary 


190 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


preliminary  to  social  amendment  is  a  General 
Confession  by  each  class  of  its  own  sins. 

Finally,  the  Divine  Spirit  had  taught  Jeremiah 
that  Israel  had  always  been  sadly  imperfect.  He 
did  not  deny  Divine  Providence  and  human  hope 
by  teaching-  that  the  Golden  Age  lay  in  the  past, 
that  the  Kingdom  of  God  had  been  realised  and 
allowed  to  perish.  He  was  under  no  foolish  de- 
lusion as  to  "the  good  old  times";  in  his  most 
despondent  moods  he  was  not  given  over  to 
wistful  reminiscence.  His  example  may  help  us 
not  to  become  discouraged  through  exaggerated 
ideas  about  the  attainments  of  past  generations. 

In  considering  modern  life  it  may  seem  that  we 
pass  to  an  altogether  different  quality  of  evil  to 
that  denounced  by  Jeremiah,  that  we  have  lost 
sight  of  anything  that  could  justify  his  fierce  in- 
dignation, and  thus  that  we  fail  in  appreciating 
his  character  and  message.  Any  such  illusion 
may  be  corrected  by  a  glance  at  the  statistics 
of  congested  town  districts,  sweated  industries, 
and  prostitution.  A  social  reformer,  living  in 
contact  with  these  evils,  may  be  apt  to  think 
Jeremiah's  denunciations  specially  adapted  to  the 
society  which  tolerates  them  with  almost  un- 
ruffled complacency. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 
PERSISTENT    APOSTASY. 

"They  have  forsaken  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  their 
God,  and  worshipped  other  gods,  and  served  them." — 
JER.  xxii.  9. 

"  Every  one  that  walketh  in  the  stubbornness  of  his 
heart."— jER.  xxiii.'iy. 

The  previous  chapter  has  been  intentionally 
confined,  as  far  as  possible,  to  Jeremiah's  teach- 
ing upon  the  moral  condition  of  Judah.  Reli- 
gion, in  the  narrower  sense,  was  kept  in  the  back- 
ground, and  mainly  referred  to  as  a  social  and 
political  influence.  In  the  same  way  the  priests 
and  prophets  were  mentioned  chiefly  as  classes 
of  notables — estates  of  the  realm.  This  method 
corresponds  with  a  stage  in  the  process  of  Rev- 
elation; it  is  that  of  the  older  prophets.  Hosea, 
as  a  native  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  may  have 
had  a  fuller  experience  and  clearer  understanding 
of  religious  corruption  than  his  contemporaries 
in  Judah.  But.  in  spite  of  the  stress  that  he 
lays  upon  idolatry  and  the  various  corruptions 
of  worship,  many  sections  of  his  book  simply 
deal  with  social  evils.  We  are  not  explicitly  told 
why  the  prophet  was  "  a  fool  "  and  "  a  snare  of 
a  fowler,"  but  the  immediate  context  refers  to 
the  abominable  immorality  of  Gibeah.*  The 
priests  are  not  reproached  with  incorrect  ritual, 
but  with  conspiracy  to  murder.f  In  Amos,  the 
land  is  not  so  much  punished  orr  account  of  cor- 
rupt worship,  as  the  sanctuaries  are  destroyed 
because  the  people  are  given  over  to  murder,  op- 
pression, and  every  form  of  vice.  In  Isaiah 
again  the  main  stress  is  constantly  upon  inter- 
national policies  and  public  and  private  moral- 
ity.t  For  instance,  none  of  the  woes  in  v.  8-24 
are  directed  against  idolatry  or  corrupt  worship, 
and  in  xxviii.  7  the  charge  brought  against 
Ephraim  does  not  refer  to  ecclesiastical  matters; 
they  have  erred  through  strong  drink. 

In  Jeremiah's  treatment  of  the  ruin  of  Judah, 

*  Hosea  ix.  7-9  :  c/.  Judges  xix.  22. 

+  Hosea  vi.  q. 

t  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  is  excluded  from  this  statement. 


he  insists,  as  Hosea  had  done  as  regards  Israel, 
on  the  fatal  consequences  of  apostasy  from  Je- 
hovah to  other  gods.  This  very  phrase  "  other 
gods  "  is  one  of  Jeremiah's  favourite  expressions, 
and  in  the  writings  of  the  other  prophets  only 
occurs  in  Hosea  iii.  i.  On  the  other  hand,  refer- 
ences to  idols  are  extremely  rare  in  Jeremiah. 
These  facts  suggest  a  special  difficulty  in  discuss- 
ing the  apostasy  of  Judah.  The  Jews  often  com- 
bined the  worship  of  other  gods  with  that  of 
Jehovah.  According  to  the  analogy  of  other  na- 
tions, it  was  quite  possible  to  worship  Baal  and 
Ashtaroth,  and  the  whole  heathen  Pantheon, 
without  intending  to  show  any  special  disrespect 
to  the  national  Deity.  Even  devout  worshippers, 
who  confined  their  adorations  to  the  one  true 
God,  sometimes  thought  they  did  honour  to  Him 
by  introducing  into  His  services  the  images  and 
all  the  paraphernalia  of  the  splendid  cults  of  the 
great  heathen  empires.  It  is  not  always  easy 
to  determine  whether  statements  about  idolatry 
imply  formal  apostasy  from  Jehovah,  or  merely 
a  debased  worship.  When  the  early  Moham- 
medans spoke  with  lofty  contempt  of  image- 
worshippers,  they  were  referring  to  the  Eastern 
Christians;  the  iconoclast  heretics  denounced  the 
idolatry  of  the  Orthodox  Church,  and  the 
Covenanters  used  similar  terms  as  to  prelacy. 
Ignorant  modern  Jews  are  sometimes  taught  that 
Christians  worship  idols. 

Hence  when  we  read  of  the  Jews,  "  They  set 
their  abominations  in  the  house  which  is  called 
by  My  name,  to  defile  it,"  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand that  the  Temple  was  transferred  from  Je- 
hovah to  some  other  deities,  but  that  the  corrupt 
practices  and  symbols  of  heathen  worship  were 
combined  with  the  Mosaic  ritual.  Even  the  high 
places  of  Baal,  in  the  Valley  of  Ben-Hinnom, 
where  children  were  passed  through  the  fire  unto 
Moloch,  professed  to  offer  an  opportunity  of 
supreme  devotion  to  the  God  of  Israel.  Baal  and 
Melech,  Lord  and  King,  had  in  ancient  times 
been  amongst  His  titles;  and  when  they  became 
associated  with  the  more  heathenish  modes  of 
worship,  their  misguided  devotees  still  claimed 
that  they  were  doing  homage  to  the  national 
Deity.  The  inhuman  sacrifices  to  Moloch  were  of- 
fered in  obedience  to  sacred  tradition  and  Divine 
oracles,  which  were  supposed  to  emanate  from  Je- 
hovah. In  three  different  places,  Jeremiah  ex- 
plicitly and  emphatically  denies  that  Jehovah 
had  required  or  sanctioned  these  sacrifices:  "  I 
commanded  them  not,  neither  came  it  into  My 
mind,  that  they  should  do  this  abomination,  to 
cause  Judah  to  sin."  *  The  Pentateuch  preserves 
an  ancient  ordinance  which  the  Moloch-wor- 
shippers probably  interpreted  in  support  of  their 
unholy  rites,  and  Jeremiah's  protests  are  partly 
directed  against  the  misinterpretation  of  the  com- 
mand "  the  first-born  of  thy  sons  shalt  thou  give 
Me."  The  immediate  context  also  commanded 
that  the  firstlings  of  sheep  and  oxen  should  be 
given  to  Jehovah.  The  beasts  were  killed;  must 
it  not  be  intended  that  the  children  should  be 
killed  too?t  A  similar  blind  literalism  has  been 
responsible  for  many  of  the  follies  and  crimes 
perpetrated  in  the  name  of  Christ.  The  Church 
is  apt  to  justify  its  most  flagrant  enormities  by 
appealing  to  a  misused  and  misinterpreted  Old 

*  xxxii.  34,  31;,  repeating  vii.  30,  31,  with  slight  variations. 
A  similar  statement  occurs  in  xix.  4,  5.  Cf.  2  Kings  xvi.  3. 
xxi.  6,  xxiii.  10  ;  also  Giesebrecht  and  Orelli  in  loco. 

t  Exod.  xxii.  2g  (JE).  Exod.  xxxiv.  20  is  probably  a 
later  interpretation  intended  to  guard  against  misunder- 
standings. 


PERSISTENT    APOSTASY. 


191 


Testament.  "  Thou  shalt  not  suffer  a  witch  to 
live  "  and  "  Cursed  be  Canaan  "  have  been  proof- 
texts  for  witch-hunting  and  negro-slavery;  and 
the  Book  of  Joshua  has  been  regarded  as  a 
Divine  charter,  authorising  the  unrestrained  in- 
dulgence of  the  passion  for  revenge  and  blood. 

When  it  was  thus  necessary  to  put  on  record 
reiterated  denials  that  inhuman  rites  of  Baal  and 
Moloch  ^ere  a  divinely  sanctioned  adoration  of 
Jehovah,  we  can  understand  that  the  Baal-wor- 
ship constantly  referred  to  by  Hosea,  Jeremi?.h, 
and  Zephaniah  *  was  not  generally  understood 
to  be  apostasy.  The  worship  of  "  other  gods," 
"the  sun,  the  moon,  and  all  the  host  of  heaven,"  f 
and  of  the  "  Queen  of  Heaven,"  would  be  more 
difficult  to  explain  as  mere  syncretism,  but  the 
assimilation  of  Jewish  worship  to  heathen  ritual 
and  the  confusion  of  the  Divine  Name  with  the 
titles  of  heathen  deities  masked  the  transition 
from  the  religion  of  Moses  and  Isaiah  to  utter 
apostasy. 

Such  assimilation  and  confusion  perplexed  and 
baffled  the  prophets.^  Social  and  moral  wrong- 
doing were  easily  exposed  and  denounced;  and 
the  evils  thus  brought  to  light  were  obvious 
symptoms  of  serious  spiritual  disease.  The  Di- 
vine Spirit  taught  the  prophets  that  sin  was 
often  most  rampant  in  those  who  professed  the 
greatest  devotion  to  Jehovah  and  were  most 
punctual  and  munificent  in  the  discharge  of  ex- 
ternal religious  duties.  When  the  prophecy  in 
Isaiah  i.  was  uttered  it  almost  seemed  as  if  the 
whole  system  of  Mosaic  ritual  would  have  to 
be  sacrificed,  in  order  to  preserve  the  religion  of 
Jehovah.  But  the  further  development  of  the 
disease  suggested  a  less  heroic  remedy.  The  pas- 
sion for  external  rites  did  not  confine  itself  to 
the  traditional  forms  of  ancient  Israelite  worship. 
The  practices  of  unspiritual  and  immoral  ritual- 
ism were  associated  specially  with  the  names  of 
Baal  and  Moloch  and  with  the  adoration  of  the 
host  of  heaven;  and  the  departure  from  the  true 
worship  became  obvious  when  the  deities  of  for- 
eign nations  were  openly  worshipped. 

Jeremiah  clearly  and  constantly  insisted  on  the 
distinction  between  the  true  and  the  corrupt 
worship.  The  worship  paid  to  Baal  and  Moloch 
was  altogether  unacceptable  to  Jehovah.  These 
and  other  objects  of  adoration  were  not  to  be 
regarded  as  forms,  titles,  or  manifestations  of 
the  one  God,  but  were  "  other  gods,"  distinct 
and  opposed  in  nature  and  attributes;  in  serving 
them  the  Jews  were  forsaking  Him.  So  far 
from  recognising  such  rites  as  homage  paid  to 
Jehovah,  Jeremiah  follows  Hosea  in  calling  them 
"  backsliding,"^  a  falling  away  from  true  loy- 
alty. When  they  addressed  themselves  to  their 
idols,  even  if  they  consecrated  them  in  the 
Temple  and  to  the  glory  of  the  Most  High, 
they  were  not  really  looking  to  Him  in  reverent 
supplication,  but  with  impious  profanity  were 
turning  their  backs  upon  Him:  "They  have 
turned  unto  Me  the  back,  and  not  the  face."  || 
These  proceedings  were  a  violation  of  the  cov- 
enant between  Jehovah  and  Israel.*y 

The  same  anxiety  to  discriminate  the  true  re- 
ligion from  spurious  imitations  and  adulterations 

*  Baal  is  not  mentioned  in  the  other  prophetical  books. 

t  vii  X. 

t  Here  and  elsewhere,  "  prophet,"  unless  specially  quali- 
fied by  the  context,  is  used  of  the  true  prophet,  the  mes- 
senger of  Divine  Revelation,  and  does  not  include  the 
mere  professional  prophets.     C/.  chap.  viii. 

§  ii.  ig,  etc. 

II  xxxii.  3;?,  etc. 

i'xxii.  q-  cf.  xi.  10,  xxxi.  32,  and  Hosea  vi.  7,  viii.  i. 


underlies  the  stress  which  Jeremiah  lays  upon 
the  Divine  Name.  His  favourite  formula,  "  Je- 
hovah Sabaoth  is  His  name,"  *  may  be  borrowed 
from  Amos,  or  may  be  an  ancient  liturgical  sen- 
tence; in  any  case,  its  use  would  be  a  convenient 
protest  against  the  doctrine  that  Jehovah  could 
be  worshipped  under  the  names  of  and  after  the 
manner  of  Baal  and  Moloch.  When  Jehovah 
speaks  of  the  people  forgetting  "  My  name,"  He 
does  not  mean  either  that  the  people  would  for- 
get all  about  Him,  or  would  cease  to  use  the 
name  Jehovah;  but  that  they  would  forget  the 
character  and  attributes,  the  purposes  and  or- 
dinances, which  were  properly  expressed  by  His 
Name.  The  prophets  who  "  prophesy  lies  in  My 
name  "  "  cause  My  people  to  forget  My  name."  + 
Baal  and  Moloch  had  sunk  into  fit  titles  for  a 
god  who  could  be  worshipoed  with  cruel,  ob- 
scene, and  idolatrous  rites,  but  the  religion  of 
Revelation  had  been  for  ever  associated  with  the 
one  sacred  Name,  when  "  Elohim  said  unto 
Moses,  Thou  shalt  say  unto  the  Israelites:  Je- 
hovah, the  God  of  your  fathers,  the  God  of 
Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob,  hath  sent  me  unto  you:  this  is  My  name 
for  ever,  and  this  is  My  memorial  unto  all  gen- 
erations." All  religious  life  and  practice  incon- 
sistent with  this  Revelation  given  tlirough  Moses 
and  the  prophets — ail  such  worship,  even  if  of- 
fered to  beings  which,  as  Jehovah,  sat  in  the 
Temple  of  Jehovah,  professing  to  be  Jehovah 
— were  nevertheless  service  and  obedience  paid 
to  other  and  false  gods.  Jeremiah's  mission  was 
to  hammer  these  truths  into  dull  and  unwilling 
minds. 

His  work  seems  to  have  been  successful. 
Ezekiel,  who  is  in  a  measure  his  disciple.t  drops 
the  phrase  "  other  gods,"  and  mentions  "  idols  " 
very  frequently. §  Argument  and  explanation 
were  no  longer  necessary  to  show  that  idolatry 
was  sin  against  Jehovah;  the  word  "  idol  "  could 
be  freely  used  and  universally  understood  as  in- 
dicating what  was  wholly  alien  to  the  religion 
of  Israelii  Jeremiah  was  too  anxious  to  con- 
vince the  Jews  that  all  syncretism  was  apostasy 
to  distinguish  it  carefully  from  the  avowed  neg- 
lect of  Jehovah  for  other  gods.  It  is  not  even 
clear  that  such  neglect  existed  in  his  day.  In 
chap.  xliv.  we  have  one  detailed  account  of  fal.se 
worship  to  the  Queen  of  Heaven.  It  was  of- 
fered by  the  Jewish  refugees  in  Egypt;  shortly 
before,  these  refugees  had  unanimously  entreated 
Jeremiah  to  pray  for  them  to  Jehovah,  and  had 
promised  to  obey  His  commands.  The  punish- 
ment of  their  false  worship  was  that  they  should 
no  longer  be  permitted  to  name  the  Holy  Name. 
Clearly,  therefore,  they  had  supposed  that  offer- 
ing incense  to  the  Queen  of  Heaven  was  not 
inconsistent  with  worshipping  Jehovah.  We 
need  not  dwell  on  a  distinction  which  is  largely 
ignored  by  Jeremiah:  the  apostasy  of  Judah  was 
real  and  widespread,  it  matters  little  how  far 
the  delinquents  ventured  to  throw  off  the  cloak 
of  orthodox  profession. 1  The  most  lapsed 
masses  in  a  Christian  country  do  not  utterly 
break  their  connection  with  the  Church;  they  con- 
sider themselves  legitimate  recipients  of  its  alms, 

*  X.  16  :  cf.  Amos  iv.  13. 

txxiii.  25-27:  cf.  Giesebrecht,  in  loco. 

tCheyne,  "'Jeremiah:  Life  and  Titnes,"p.  150. 

§  Jeremiah  hardly  mentions  idols. 

11  C/i.  on  this  whole  subject,  Chej-ne,  "Jeremiah:  Life 
and  Times,"  p.  319. 

^  The  stronge.st  expressions  are  in  chap,  ii.,  for  ■which 
see  previous  volume  on  Jeremiah. 


192 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


and  dimly  conteiriplate  as  a  vague  and  distant 
possibility  the  reformation  of  their  life  and  char- 
acter through  Christianity.  So  the  blindest  wor- 
shippers of  stocks  and  stones  claimed  a  vested 
interest  in  the  national  Deity,  and  in  the  time 
of  their  trouble  they  turned  to  Jehovah  with  the 
appeal  "  Arise  and  save  us."  * 

Jeremiah  also  dwells  on  the  deliberate  and  per- 
sistent character  of  the  apostasy  of  Judah.  Na- 
tions have  often  experienced  a  sort  of  satanic 
revival  when  the  fountains  of  the  nether  deep 
seemed  broken  up,  and  flood-tides  of  evil  in- 
fluence swept  all  before  them.  Such,  in  a  meas- 
ure, was  the  reaction  from  the  Puritan  Com- 
monwealth, when  so  much  of  English  society 
lapsed  into  reckless  dissipation.  Such  too  was 
the  carnival  of  wickedness  into  which  the  First 
French  Republic  was  plunged  in  the  Reign  of 
Terror.  But  these  periods  were  transient,  and 
the  domination  of  lust  and  cruelty  soon  broke 
down  before  the  reassertion  of  an  outraged  na- 
tional conscience.  But  we  noticed,  in  the  pre- 
vious chapter,  that  Israel  and  Judah  alike  steadily 
failed  to  attain  the  high  social  ideal  of  the  Mosaic 
dispensation.  Naturally,  this  continuous  failure 
is  associated  with  persistent  apostasy  from  the 
religious  teaching  of  the  Mosaic  and  prophetic 
Revelation.  Exodus,  Deuteronomy,  and  the 
Chronicler  agree  with  Jeremiah  that  the  Israelites 
were  a  stifif-necked  people;  f  and,  in  the  Chroni- 
cler's time  at  any  rate,  Israel  had  played  a  part 
in  the  world  long  enough  for  its  character  to 
be  accurately  ascertained;  and  subsequent  history 
has  shown  that,  for  good  or  for  evil,  the  Jews 
have  never  lacked  tenacity.  Syncretism,  the  ten- 
dency to  adulterate  true  teaching  and  worship 
with  elements  from  heathen  sources,  had  been  all 
along  a  morbid  affection  of  Israelite  religion. 
The  Pentateuch  and  the  historical  books  are  full 
of  rebukes  of  the  Israelite  passion  for  idolatry, 
which  must  for  the  most  part  be  understood  as 
introduced  into  or  associated  with  the  worship 
of  Jehovah.  Jeremiah  constantly  refers  to  "  the 
stubbornness  of  their  evil  heart  ":$  "they  .  .  . 
have  walked  after  the  stubbornness  of  their  own 
heart  and  after  the  Baalim."  This  stubbornness 
was  shown  in  their  resistance  to  all  the  means 
which  Jehovah  employed  to  wean  them  from 
their  sin.  Again  and  again,  in  our  book,  Jehovah 
speaks  of  Himself  as  "  rising  up  early "  §  to 
speak  to  the  Jews,  to  teach  them,  to  send  proph- 
ets to  them,  to  solemnly  adjure  them  to  sub- 
mit themselves  to  Him;  but  they  would  not 
hearken  either  to  Jehovah  or  to  His  prophets, 
they  would  not  accept  His  teaching  or  obey  His 
commands,  they  made  themselves  stiff-necked 
and  would  not  bow  to  His  will.  He  had  sub- 
jected them  to  the  discipline  of  affliction,  in- 
struction had  become  correction;  Jehovah  had 
wounded  them  "  with  the  wound  of  an  enemy, 
with  the  chastisement  of  a  cruel  one  ';  but  as 
they  had  been  deaf  to  exhortation,  so  they  were 
proof  against  chastisement — "  they  refused  to  re- 
ceive correction."  Only  the  ruin  of  the  state 
and  the  captivity  of  the  people  could  purge  out 
this   evil   leaven. 

Apostasy  from  the  Mosaic  and  prophetic  re- 
ligion was  naturally  accompanied  by  social  cor- 
ruption.    It   has    recently   been    maintained    that 

*  ii.  27. 

t.Kvii.  23  :  c/".   Exod.  xxxii.  9,  etc.  (JE.)  ;  Deut.   ix.   6;2 
Chron.  xxx.  8. 
t  "Characteristic  Exprer.sions,'-  p.  jbg- 
^Jbi'd.,  p.  26q. 


the  universal  instinct  which  inclines  man  to  be 
religious  is  not  necessarily  moral,  and  that  it 
is  the  distinguishing  note  of  the  true  faith,  or 
of  religion  proper,  that  it  enlists  this  somewhat 
neutral  instinct  in  the  cause  of  a  pure  morality. 
The  Phoenician  and  Syrian  cults,  with  which 
Israel  was  most  closely  in  contact,  sufficiently 
illustrated  the  combination  of  fanatical  religious 
feeling  with  gross  impurity.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  teaching  of  Revelation  to  Israel  consistently 
inculcated  a  high  morality  and  an  unselfish  be- 
nevolence. The  prophets  vehemently  affirmed  the 
worthlessness  of  religious  observances  by  men 
who  oppressed  the  poor  and  helpless.  Apostasy 
from  Jehovah  to  Baal  and  Moloch  involved  the 
same  moral  lapse  as  a  change  from  loyal  service 
to  Christ  to  a  pietistic  antinomianism.  Wide- 
spread apostasy  meant  general  social  corruption. 
The  most  insidious  form  of  apostasy  was  that 
specially  denounced  by  Jeremiah,  in  which  the 
authority  of  Jehovah  was  more  or  less  explicitly 
claimed  for  practices  and  principles  which  de- 
fied His  law.  The  Reformer  loves  a  clear  issue, 
and  it  was  more  difficult  to  come  to  close 
quarters  with  the  enemy  when  both  sides  pro- 
fessed to  be  fighting  in  the  King's  name.  More- 
over the  syncretism  which  still  recognised  Je- 
hovah was  able  without  any  violent  revolution 
to  control  the  established  institutions  and  orders 
of  the  state — palace  and  temple,  king  and  princes, 
priests  and  prophets.  For  a  moment  the  Ref- 
ormation of  Josiah,  and  the  covenant  entered 
into  by  the  king  and  people  to  observe  the  law 
as  laid  down  in  the  newly  discovered  Book  of 
Deuteronomy,  seemed  to  have  raised  Judah  from 
its  lov/  estate.  But  the  defeat  and  death  of 
Josiah  and  the  deposition  of  Jehoahaz  followed, 
to  discredit  Jeremiah  and  his  friends.  In  the 
consequent  reaction  it  seemed  as  if  the  religion 
of  Jehovah  and  the  life  of  His  people  had  become 
hopelessly  corrupt. 

We  are  too  much  accustomed  to  think  of  the 
idolatry  of  Israel  as  something  openly  and  avow- 
edly distinct  from  and  opposed  to  the  worship 
of  Jehovah.  Modern  Christians  often  suppose 
that  the  true  worshipper  and  the  ancient  idolater 
were  as  contrasted  as  a  pious  Englishman  and 
a  devotee  of  one  of  the  hideous  images  seen 
on  missionary  platforms;  or,  at  any  rate,  that 
they  were  as  easily  distinguishable  as  a  native 
Indian  evangelist  from  his  unconverted  fellow- 
countrymen. 

This  mistake  deprives  us  of  the  most  instruct- 
ive lessons  to  be  derived  from  the  record.  The 
sin  which  Jeremiah  denounced  is  by  no  means 
outside  Christian  experience;  it  is  much  nearer 
to  us  than  conversion  to  Buddhism — it  is  pos- 
sible to  the  Church  in  every  stage  of  its  history. 
The  missionary  finds  that  the  lives  of  his  con- 
verts continually  threaten  to  revert  to  a  nominal 
profession  which  cloaks  the  immorality  and  su- 
perstition of  their  old  heathenism.  The  Church 
of  the  Roman  Empire  gave  the  sanction  of 
Christ's  name  and  authority  to  many  of  the  most 
unchristian  features  of  Judaism  and  Paganism; 
once  more  the  rites  of  strange  gods  were  as- 
sociated with  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  a  new 
Queen  of  Heaven  was  honoured  with  unlimited 
incense.  The  Reformed  Churches  in  their  turn, 
after  the  first  "  kindness  of  their  youth,"  the 
first  "  love  of  their  espousals,"  have  often  fallen 
into  the  very  abuses  against  which  their  great 
leaders  protested;  they  have  given  way  to  the 
ritualistic  spirit,  have  put  the  Church  in  the  place 


Jeremiah  xxii.  1-9-xxvi.  14.] 


RUIN. 


193 


of  Christ,  and  have  claimed  for  human  formula; 
the  authority  that  can  only  belong  to  the  in- 
spired Word  of  God.  They  have  immolated 
their  victims  to  the  Baals  and  Molochs  of  creeds 
and  confessions,  and  thought  that  they  were  do- 
ing honour  to  Jehovah  thereby. 

JMoreover  we  have  still  to  contend  like  Jere- 
miah with  the  continual  struggle  of  corrupt 
human  nature  to  indulge  in  the  luxury  of  re- 
ligious sentiment  and  emotion  without  submit- 
ting to  the  moral  demands  of  Christ.  The 
Church  suffers  far  less  by  losing  the  allegiance 
of  the  lapsed  masses  than  it  does  by  those  who 
associate  with  the  service  of  Christ  those  malig- 
nant and  selfish  vices  which  are  often  canonised 
as  Respectability  and  Convention. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

RUIN. 
Jeremiah  xxii.  1-9,  xxvi.  14. 

"The  sword,  the  pestilence,  and  the  famine," — JER.  xxi. 
g  and  passim.* 

"Terror  on  every  side." — jER.  vi.  25,  xx.  10,  xlvi.  5,  xlix. 
29;  also  as  proper  namey  MAGOR-MISSABIB,  xx.  3. 

We  have  seen,  in  the  two  previous  chapters, 
that  the  moral  and  religious  state  of  Judah  not 
only  excluded  any  hope  of  further  progress 
towards  the  realisation  of  the  Kingdom  of  God, 
but  also  threatened  to  involve  Revelation  itself 
in  the  corruption  of  His  people.  The  Spirit 
that  opened  Jeremiah's  eyes  to  the  fatal  degrada- 
tion of  his  country  showed  him  that  ruin  must 
follow  as  its  swift  result.  He  was  elect  from  the 
first  to  be  a  herald  of  doom,  to  be  set  "  over 
the  nations  and  over  the  kingdoms,  to  pluck  up 
and  to  break  down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  over- 
throw."! In  his  earliest  vision  he  saw  the 
thrones  of  the  northern  conquerors  set  over 
against  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  and  the  cities  of 
Judah.t 

But  Jeremiah  was  called  in  the  full  vigor  of 
early  manhood  ;§  he  combined  with  the  uncom- 
promising severity  of  youth  its  ardent  affection 
and  irrepressible  hope.  The  most  unqualified 
threats  of  Divine  wrath  always  carried  the  im- 
plied condition  that  repentance  might  avert  the 
coming  judgment;!  and  Jeremiah  recurred  again 
and  again  to  the  possibility  that,  even  in  these 
last  days,  amendment  might  win  pardon.  Like 
Moses  at  Sinai  and  Samuel  at  Ebenezer,  he 
poured  out  his  whole  soul  in  intercession  for 
Judah,  only  to  receive  the  answer,  "  Though 
Moses  and  Samuel  stood  before  Me,  yet  My 
mind  could  not  be  toward  this  people:  cast  them 
out  of  My  sight  and  let  them  go  forth."  IT  The 
record  of  these  early  hopes  and  prayers  is  chiefly 
found  in  chapters  i.-xx.,and  is  dealt  with  in  ''The 
Prophecies  of  Jeremiah,"  preceding.  The  proph- 
ecies in  xiv.  i-xvii.  18  seem  to  recognise  the  des- 
tiny of  Judah  as  finally  decided,  and  to  belong  to 
the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,**  and 

*  "Characteristic  Expressions,"  p.  269. 

t  i.  10. 

ti.  IS. 

§i.  7.  The  word  for  "child  "  (na'ar)  is  an  elastic  term, 
equalling  "boy"  or  "young  man,"  with  all  the  range  or 
meaning  possible  in  English  to  the  latter  phrase. 

Il  Cf.  the  Book  of  Jonah. 

ixv.  I. 

♦*  Driver,  "  Introduction,"  p,  242. 

13-voi.  rv. 


there  is  little  in  the  later  chapters  of  an  earlier 
date.  In  xxii.  1-5  the  king  of  Judah  is  promised 
that  if  he  and  his  ministers  and  officers  will  re- 
frain from  oppression,  faithfully  administer  jus- 
tice, and  protect  the  helpless,  kings  of  the  elect 
dynasty  shall  still  pass  with  magnificent  retinues 
in  chariots  and  on  horses  through  the  palace 
gates  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David.  Possibly 
this  section  belongs  to  the  earlier  part  of  Jere- 
miah's career.  But  there  were  pauses  and  recoils 
in  the  advancing  tide  of  ruin,  alternations  of 
hope  and  despair;  and  these  varying  experiences 
were  reflected  in  the  changing  moods  of  the 
court,  the  people,  and  the  prophet  himself.  We 
may  well  believe  that  Jeremiah  hastened  to  greet 
any  apparent  zeal  for  reformation  with  a  renewed 
declaration  that  sincere  and  radical  amendment 
would  be  accepted  by  Jehovah.  The  proffer  of 
mercy  did  not  avert  the  ruin  of  the  state,  but 
it  compelled  the  people  to  recognise  that  Jehovah 
was  neither  harsh  nor  vindictive.  His  sentence 
was  only  irrevocable  because  the  obduracy  of 
Israel  left  no  other  way  open  for  the  progress 
of  Revelation,  except  that  which  led  through 
fire  and  blood.  The  Holy  Spirit  has  taught 
mankind  in  many  ways  that  when  any  govern- 
ment or  church,  any  school  of  thought  or  doc- 
trine, ossifies  so  as  to  limit  the  expansion  of  the 
soul,  that  society  or  system  must  be  shattered 
by  the  forces  it  seeks  to  restrain.  The  decad- 
ence of  Spain  and  the  distractions  of  France  suf- 
ficiently illustrate  the  fruits  of  persistent  refusal 
to  abide  in  the  liberty  of  the  Spirit. 

But,  until  the  catastrophe  is  clearly  inevitable, 
the  Christian,  both  as  patriot  and  as  churchman,* 
will  be  quick  to  cherish  all  those  symptoms  of 
higher  life  which  indicate  that  society  is  still 
a  living  organism.  He  will  zealously  believe  and 
teach  that  even  a  small  leaven  may  leaven  the 
whole  mass.  He  will  remember  that  ten  right- 
eous men  might  have  saved  Sodom;  that,  so 
long  as  it  is  possible,  God  will  work  by  encourag- 
ing and  rewarding  willing  obedience  rather  than 
by  chastising  and  coercing  sin. 

Thus  Jeremiah,  even  when  he  teaches  that  the 
day  cf  grace  is  over,  recurs  wistfully  to  the  pos- 
sibilities of  salvation  once  offered  to  repentance. t 
Was  not  this  the  message  of  all  the  prophets: 
"  Return  ye  now  every  one  from  his  evil  way, 
and  from  the  evil  of  your  doings,  and  dwell  in 
the  land  that  Jehovah  hath  given  unto  your 
fathers"  ?t  Even  at  the  beginning  of  Jehoia- 
kim's  reign  Jehovah  entrusted  Jeremiah  with  a 
message  of  mercy,  saying:  "  It  may  be  they  will 
hearken,  and  turn  every  man  from  his  evil  way; 
that  I  may  repent  Me  of  the  evil,  which  I 
purpose  to  do  unto  them  because  of  the  evil 
of  their  doings." S  When  the  prophet  multiplied 
the  dark  and  lurid  features  of  his  picture,  he 
was  not  gloating  with  morbid  enjoyment  over 
the  national  misery,  but  rather  hoped  that  the 
awful  vision  of  judgment  might  lead  them  to 
pause,  and  reflect,  and  repent.  In  his  age  his- 
tory had  not  accumulated  her  now  abundant 
proofs  that  the  guilty  conscience  is  panoplied  in 
triple  brass  against  most  visions  of  judgment. 
Tlie  sequel  of  Jeremiah's  own  mission  was  added 
evidence  for  this  truth. 

Yet    it    dawned  but  slowly  on   the  prophet's 

♦"Church"    is    used,  in   the   true    Catholic    sense,  to 
embrace  all  Christians. 
+  xxvii.  18. 
$xxv.  5,  xxxv.  15. 
%  xxvi.  3,  xxxvi.  2. 


194 


^  THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


mind.  The  covenant  of  emancipation  *  in  the 
last  days  of  Zedekiah  was  doubtless  proposed 
by  Jeremiah  as  a  possible  beginning  of  better 
things,  an  omen  of  salvation,  even  at  the  eleventh 
hour.  To  the  very  last  the  prophet  offered  the 
king  his  life  and  promised  that  Jerusalem  should 
not  be  burnt,  if  only  he  would  submit  to  the 
Chaldeans,  and  thus  accept  the  Divine  judgment 
and  acknowledge  its  justice. 

Faithful  friends  have  sometimes  stood  by  the 
drunkard  or  the  gambler,  and  striven  for  his 
deliverance  through  all  the  vicissitudes  of  his 
downward  career;  to  the  very  last  they  have 
hoped  against  hope,  have  welcomed  and  en- 
couraged every  feeble  stand  against  evil  habit, 
every  transient  flash  of  high  resolve.  But,  long 
before  the  end,  they  have  owned,  with  sinking 
heart,  that  the  only  way  to  salvation  lay  through 
the  ruin  of  health,  fortune,  and  reputation.  So, 
when  the  edge  of  youthful  hopefulness  had 
quickly  worn  itself  away,  Jeremiah  knew  in  his 
inmost  heart  that,  in  spite  of  prayers  and  prom- 
ises and  exhortations,  the  fate  of  Judah  was 
sealed.  Let  us  therefore  try  to  reproduce  the 
picture  of  coming  ruin  which  Jeremiah  kept  per- 
sistently before  the  eyes  of  his  fellow-country- 
men. The  pith  and  power  of  his  prophecies  lay 
in  the  prospect  of  their  speedy  fulfilment.  With 
him,  as  with  Savonarola,  a  cardinal  doctrine  was 
that  "  before  the  regeneration  must  come  the 
scourge,"  and  that  "  these  things  will  come 
quickly."  Here,  again,  Jeremiah  took  up  the 
burden  of  Hosea's  utterances.  The  elder  prophet 
said  of  Israel,  ''  The  days  of  visitation  are 
come  "  ;f  and  his  successor  announced  to  Judah 
the  coming  of  "the  year  of  visitation.":}:  The 
long-deferred  assize  was  at  hand,  when  the  Judge 
would  reckon  with  Judah  for  her  manifold  in- 
fidelities, would  pronounce  sentence  and  execute 
judgment. 

If  the  hour  of  doom  had  struck,  it  was  not 
difficult  to  surmise  whence  destruction  would 
come  or  the  man  who  would  prove  its  instru- 
ment. The  North  (named  in  Hebrew  the  hidden 
quarter)  was  to  the  Jews  the  mother  of  things 
unforeseen  and  terrible.  Isaiah  menaced  the 
Philistines  with  "  a  smoke  out  of  the  north,"  ^ 
i.  e.,  the  Assyrians.  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  both 
speak  very  frequently  of  the  destroyers  of  Judah 
as  coming  from  the  north.  Probably  the  early 
references  in  our  book  to  northern  enemies  de- 
note the  Scythians,  who  invaded  Syria  towards 
the  beginning  of  Josiah's  reign;  but  later  on  the 
danger  from  the  north  is  the  restored  Chaldean 
Empire  under  its  king  Nebuchadnezzar. 
"  North "  is  even  less  accurate  geographically 
for  Chaldea  than  for  Assyria.  Probably  it  was 
accepted  in  a  somewhat  symbolic  sense  for  As- 
syria, and  then  transferred  to  Chaldea  »s  her 
successor  in  the  hegemony  of  Western  Asia. 

Nebuchadnezzar  is  first  ||  introduced  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim;  after  the  decisive  de- 
feat of  Pharaoh  Necho  by  Nebuchadnezzar  at 
Carchemish,  Jeremiah  prophesied  the  devastation 
of  Judah  by  the  victor;  it  is  also  prophesied 
that  he  is  to   carry  Jehoiachin   away   captive,  IT 

*  Chap.  xi.  X  xxiii.  12. 

t  Hosea  ix.  7.  §  Isa.  xiv.  31. 

1  XXV.  1-14:  "first,"  /.  e.,  in  time,  not  in  the  order  of 
chapters  in  our  Book  of  Jeremiah. 

T^xxii.  25.  Jehoiachin  (Kings,  Chronicles,  and  Jer.  Hi. 
31)  is  also  called  Coniah  (Jer.  xxii.  24,  28,  xxxvii.  i)  and 
Jeconiah  (Chronicles,  Esther,  Jer.  xxiv.  i,  xxvii.  20,  xxviii. 
4.  xxix.  2).  They  are  virtually  forms  of  the  same  name, 
the  "  Yah  "  of  the  Divine  Name  being  prefixed  in  the  first 
and  affixed  in  the  last  two. 


and  similar  prophecies  were  repeated  during  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah.*  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his 
Chaldeans  very  closely  resembled  the  Assyrians, 
with  whose  invasions  the  Jews  had  long  been  only 
too  familiar;  indeed,  as  Chaldea  had  long  been 
tributary  to  Assyria,  it  is  morally  certain  that 
Chaldean  princes  must  have  been  present  with 
auxiliary  forces  at  more  than  one  of  the  many 
Assyrian  invasions  of  Palestine.  Under  Heze- 
kiah,  on  the  other  hand,  Judah  had  been  allied 
with  Merodach-baladan  of  Babylon  against  his 
Assyrian  suzerain.  So  that  the  circumstances  of 
Chaldean  invasions  and  conquests  were  familiar 
to  the  Jews  before  the  forces  of  the  restored 
empire  first  attacked  them;  their  imagination 
could  readily  picture  the  horrors  of  such  expe- 
riences. 

But  Jeremiah  does  not  leave  them  to  their 
unaided  imagination,  which  they  might  prefer- 
ably have  employed  upon  more  agreeable  sub- 
jects. He  makes  them  see  the  future  reign  of 
teror,  as  Jehovah  had  revealed  it  to  his  shudder- 
ing and  reluctant  vision.  With  his  usual  fre- 
quency of  iteration,  he  keeps  the  phrase  "  the 
sword,  the  famine,  and  the  pestilence  "  ringing 
in  their  ears.  The  sword  was  the  symbol  of 
the  invading  hosts,  "  the  splendid  and  awful  mili- 
tary parade  "  of  the  "  bitter  and  hasty  nation  " 
that  was  "  dreadful  and  terrible."  f  "  The 
famine "  inevitably  followed  from  the  ravages 
of  the  invaders,  and  the  impossibility  of 
ploughing,  sowing,  and  reaping.  It  became  most 
gruesome  in  the  last  desperate  agonies  of  be- 
sieged garrisons,  when,  as  in  Elisha's  time  and 
the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem,  "  men  ate  the  flesh 
of  their  sons  and  the  flesh  of  their  daugh- 
ters, and  ate  every  one  the  flesh  of  his  friend."  X 
Among  such  miseries  and  horrors,  the  stench 
of  unburied  corpses  naturally  bred  a  pestilence, 
which  raged  amongst  the  multitudes  of  refugees 
huddled  together  in  Jerusalem  and  the  fortified 
towns.  We  are  reminded  how  the  great  plague 
of  Athens  struck  down  its  victims  from  among 
the  crowds  driven  within  its  walls  during  the 
long  siege  of  the  Peloponrfesian  war. 

An  ordinary  Englishman  can  scarcely  do  jus- 
tice to  such  prophecies;  his  comprehension  is 
limited  by  a  happy  inexperience.  The  constant 
repetition  of  general  phrases  seems  meagre  and 
cold,  because  they  carry  few  associations  and 
awaken  no  memories.  Those  who  have  studied 
French  and  Russian  realistic  art,  and  have  read 
Erckmann-Chatrain,  Zola,  and  Tolstoi,  may  be 
stirred  somewhat  more  by  Jeremiah's  grim  rhet- 
oric. It  will  not  be  wanting  in  suggestiveness 
to  those  who  have  known  battles  and  sieges. 
For  students  of  missionary  literature  we  may 
roughly  compare  the  Jews,  when  exposed  to  the 
full  fury  of  a  Chaldean  attack,  to  the  inhabitants 
of  African  villages  raided  by  slave-hunters. 

The  Jews,  therefore,  with  their  extensive,  first- 
hand knowledge  of  the  miseries  denounced 
against  them,  could  not  help  filling  in  for  them- 
selves the  rough  outline  drawn  by  Jeremiah. 
Very  probably,  too,  his  speeches  were  more  de- 
tailed and  realistic  than  the  written  reports.  As 
time  went  on,  the  inroads  of  the  Chaldeans  and 
their  allies  provided  graphic  and  ghastly  illus- 
trations of  the  prophecies  that  Jeremiah  still  re- 
iterated. In  a  prophecy,  possibly  originally  re- 
ferring to  the  Scythian  inroads  and  afterwards 
adapted    to    the    Chaldean    invasions,   Jeremiah 


♦  xxi.  7,  xxviii.  14. 


t  Habakkuk  i.  6,  7. 


t  xix.  q. 


Jeremiah  xxii.  1-9-xxvi.  14.] 


RUIN. 


195 


speaks  of  himself:  "  I  am  pained  at  my  very 
heart;  my  heart  is  disquieted  in  me;  I  cannot 
hold  my  peace;  for  my  soul  heareth  *  the  sound 
of  the  trumpet,  the  alarm  of  war.  .  .  .  How 
long  shall  I  see  the  standard,  and  hear  the  sound 
of  the  trumpet?"!  Here,  for  once,  Jeremiah 
expressed  emotions  that  throbbed  in  every  heart. 
There  was  "  terror  on  every  hand  "  ;  men  seemed 
to  be  walking  "  through  slippery  places  in  dark- 
ness,"J  or  to  stumble  along  rough  paths  in  a 
dreary  twilight.  Wormwood  was  their  daily 
food,  and  their  drink  maddening  draughts  of 
poison. t^ 

Jeremiah  and  his  prophecies  were  no  mean 
part  of  the  terror.  To  the  devotees  of  Baal  and 
Moloch  Jeremiah  must  have  appeared  in  much 
the  same  light  as  the  fanatic  whose  ravings 
added  to  the  horrors  of  the  Plague  of  London, 
while  the  very  sanity  and  sobriety  of  his  utter- 
ances carried  a  conviction  of  their  fatal  truth. 

When  the  people  and  their  leaders  succeeded 
in  collecting  any  force  of  soldiers  or  store  of 
military  equipment,  and  ventured  on  a  sally. 
Jeremiah  was  at  once  at  hand  to  quencli  any  re- 
viving hope  of  effective  resistance.  How  could 
soldiers  and  weapons  preserve  the  city  which 
Jehovah  had  abandoned  to  its  fate?  ''  Thus  saith 
Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel:  Behold  I  will  turn 
back  the  weapons  in  your  hands,  with  which  ye 
fight  without  the  walls  against  your  besiegers, 
the  king  of  Babylon  and  the  Chaldeans,  and  will 
gather  them  into  the  midst  of  this  city.  I  My- 
self will  fight  against  you  in  furious  anger  and 
in  great  wrath,  with  outstretched  hand  and 
strong  arm.  I  will  smite  the  inhabitants  of  this 
city,  both  man  and  beast:  they  shall  die  of  a 
great  pestilence."! 

When  Jerusalem  was  relieved  for  a  time  by 
the  advance  of  an  Egyptian  army,  and  the  people 
allowed  themselves  to  dream  of  another  deliver- 
ance like  that  from  Sennacherib,  the  relentless 
prophet  only  turned  upon  them  with  renewed 
scorn:  "Though  ye  had  smitten  the  whole  hos- 
tile army  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  all  that  were 
left  of  them  were  desperately  wounded,  yet 
should  they  rise  up  every  man  in  his  tent  and 
burn  this  city."l  Not  even  the  most  complete 
victory  could  avail  to  save  the  city. 

The  final  result  of  invasions  and  sieges  was  to 
be  the  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  state,  the  cap- 
ture and  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  people.  This  unhappy  generation 
were  to  reap  the  harvest  of  centuries  of  sin  and 
failure.  As  in  the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem  there 
came  upon  the  Jews  "  all  the  righteous  blood 
shed  on  the  earth,  from  the  blood  of  righteous 
Abel  unto  the  blood  of  Zachariah  son  of  Bara- 
chiah,"  **  so  now  Jehovah  was  about  to  bring 
upon  His  Chosen  people  all  the  evil  that  He 
had  spoken  against  them  fj;— all  that  had  been 
threatened  by  Isaiah  and  his  brother-prophets, 
all  the  curses  written  in  Deuteronomy.  But  these 
threats  were  to  be  fully  carried  out,  not  because 
predictions  must  be  fulfilled,  nor  even  merely 
because  Jehovah  had  spoken  and  His  word  must 
not  return  to  Him  void,  but  because  the  people 
had  not  hearkened  and  obeyed.  His  threats 
were  never  meant  to  exclude  the  penitent  from 
the  possibility  of  pardon. 

As  Jeremiah   had   insisted   upon   the    guilt   of 


*  R.  V.  margin. 
+  iv.  21. 
Jxxiii.  12. 
§  xxiii.  15. 


II  xxi.  3-6. 

"rxxxvii.  10. 

**  Matt,  xxiii.  35. 

tt  XXXV.  17  :  cf.  kix.  15,  xxxvi.  31. 


every  class  of  the  community,  so  he  is  also  care- 
ful to  enumerate  all  the  classes  as  about  to 
suffer  from  the  coming  judgment:  "  Zedekiah 
king  of  Judah  and  his  princes  "  ;  *  "  the  people, 
the  prophet,  and  the  priest."  f  This  last  judg- 
ment of  Judah,  as  it  took  the  form  of  the  com- 
plete overthrow  of  the  State,  necessarily  included 
all  under  its  sentence  of  doom.  One  of  the 
mysteries  of  Providence  is  that  those  who  are 
most  responsible  for  national  ^ins  seem  to  suffer 
least  by  public  misfortunes.  Ambitious  states- 
men and  bellicose  journalists  do  not  generally 
fall  in  battle  and  leave  destitute  widows  and 
children.  When  the  captains  of  commerce  and 
manufacture  err  in  their  industrial  policy,  one 
great  result  is  the  pauperism  of  hundreds  of 
families  who  had  no  voice  in  the  matter.  A 
spendthrift  landlord  may  cripple  the  agriculture 
of  half  a  county.  And  yet,  when  factories 
are  closed  and  farmers  ruined,  the  manufacturer 
and  the  landlord  are  the  last  to  see  want.  In 
former  invasions  of  Judah,  the  princes  and 
priests  had  some  share  of  suffering;  but  wealthy 
nobles  might  incur  losses  and  yet  weather  the 
storm  by  which  poorer  men  were  overwhelmed. 
Fines  and  tribute  levied  by  the  invaders  would, 
after  the  manner  of  the  East,  be  wrung  from  the 
weak  and  helpless.  But  now  ruin  was  to  fall 
on  all  alike.  The  nobles  had  been  flagrant  in 
sin,  they  were  now  to  be  marked  out  for  most 
condign  punishment — "  To  whomsoever  much  is 
given,  of  him  shall  much  be  required." 

Part  of  the  burden  of  Jeremiah's  prophecy,  one 
of  the  sayings  constantly  on  his  lips,  was  that 
the  city  would  be  taken  and  destroyed  by  fire.  $ 
The  Temple  would  be  laid  in  ruins  like  the  an- 
cient sanctuary  of  Israel  at  Shiloh.^  The  pal- 
aces II  of  the  king  and  princes  would  be  special 
marks  for  the  destructive  fury  of  the  enemy, 
and  their  treasures  and  all  the  wealth  of  the  city 
would  be  for  a  spoil;  those  who  survived  the 
sack  -of  the  city  would  be  carried  captive  to 
Babylon. T[ 

In  this  general  ruin  the  miseries  of  the  people 
would  not  end  with  death.  All  nations  have 
attached  much  importance  to  the  burial  of  the 
dead  and  the  due  performance  of  funeral  rites. 
In  the  touching  Greek  story  Antigone  sacrificed 
her  life  in  order  to  bury  the  remains  of  her 
brother.  Later  Judaism  attached  exceptional  im- 
portance to  the  burial  of  the  dead,  and  the  Book 
of  Tobit  lays  great  stress  on  this  sacred  duty. 
The  angel  Raphael  declares  that  one  special 
reason  why  the  Lord  had  been  merciful  to 
Tobias  was  that  he  had  buried  dead  bodies,  and 
had  not  delayed  to  rise  up  and  leave  his  meal 
to  go  and  bury  the  corpse  of  a  murdered  Jew, 
at  the  risk  of  his  own  life.** 

Jeremiah  prophesied  of  the  slain  in  this  last 
overthrow:  "  They  shall  not  be  lamented,  neither 
shall  they  be  buried;  they  shall  be  as  dung  on 
the  face  of  the  ground;  .  .  .  their  carcases  shall 
be  meat  for  the  fowls  of  the  heaven,  and  for  the 
beasts  of  the  earth." 

When  these  last  had  done  their  ghastly  work, 
the  site  of  the  Temple,  the  city,  the  whole  land 
would  be  left  silent  and  desolate.  The  stranger, 
wandering  amidst  the  ruins,  would  hear  no 
cheerful  domestic  sounds;  when  night  fell,  no 
light  gleaming  through   chink  or  lattice  would 

♦xxxiv.  21.  §  vii.  and  xxvi. 

+  xxiii.  33,34.  II  vi.  5. 

(xxxiv.  2,  22,  xxxvii.  8.  ^  xx.  5. 

•♦Tobit  xii.  13  :  cf.  ii. 


196 


THE    BOOK   OF    JEREMIAH. 


give  the  sense  of  human  neighbourhood.  Je- 
hovah "  would  take  away  the  sound  of  the  mill- 
stones and  the  light  of  the  candle."  *  The  only 
sign  of  life  amidst  the  desolate  ruins  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  cities  of  Judah  would  be  the  melan- 
choly cry  of  the  jackals  round  the  traveller's 
tent.f 

The  Hebrew  prophets  and  our  Lord  Himself 
often  borrowed  their  symbols  from  the  scenes 
of  common  life,  a*  they  passed  before  their  eyes. 
As  in  the  days  of  Noah,  as  in  the  days  of  Lot, 
as  in  the  days  of  the  Son  of  Man,  so  in  the 
last  agony  of  Judah  there  was  marrying  and  giv- 
ing in  marriage.  Some  such  festive  occasion 
suggested  to  Jeremiah  one  of  his  favourite  form- 
ula?; it  occurs  four  times  in  the  Book  of  Jere- 
miah, and  was  probably  uttered  much  oftener. 
Again  and  again  it  may  have  happened  that,  as 
a  marriage  procession  passed  through  the  streets, 
the  gay  company  were  startled  by  the  grim  pres- 
ence of  the  prophet,  and  shrank  back  in  dismay 
as  they  found  themselves  made  the  text  for  a 
stern  homily  of  ruin:  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  Sa- 
baoth,  I  will  take  away  from  them  the  voice  of 
mirth  and  the  voice  of  gladness,  the  voice  of  the 
bridegroom  and  the  voice  of  the  bride."  At  any 
rate,  however,  and  whenever  used,  the  figure 
could  not  fail  to  arrest  attention,  and  to  serve  as 
an  emphatic  declaration  that  the  ordinary  social 
routine  would  be  broken  up  and  lost  in  the  com- 
ing calamity. 

Henceforth  the  land  would  be  as  some  guilty 
habitation  of  sinners,  devoted  to  eternal  destruc- 
tion, an  astonishment  and  a  hissing  and  a  per- 
petual desolation.^  When  the  heathen  sought 
some  curse  to  express  the  extreme  of  malignant 
hatred,  they  would  use  the  formula,  "  God  make 
thee  like  Jerusalem."  §  Jehovah's  Chosen  Peo- 
ple would  become  an  everlasting  reproach,  a 
perpetual  shame,  which  should  not  be  forgotten.  || 
The  wrath  of  Jehovah  pursued  even  captives  and 
fugitives.  In  chapter  xxix.  Jeremiah  predicts 
the  punishment  of  the  Jewish  prophets  at  Baby- 
lon. When  we  last  hear  of  him,  in  Egypt,  he 
is  denouncing  ruin  against  "  the  remnant  of 
Judah  that  have  set  their  faces  to  go  into  the 
land  of  Egypt  to  sojourn  there."  He  still  re- 
iterates the  same  familiar  phrases:  "  Ye  shall 
die  by  the  sword,  by  the  famine,  and  by  the  pesti- 
lence "  ;  they  shall  be  "  an  execration,  an  as- 
tonishment, and  a  curse,  and  a  reproach." 

We  have  now  traced  the  details  of  the  prophet's 
message  of  doom.  Fulfilment  followed  fast  upon 
the  heels  of  prediction,  till  Jeremiah  rather  in- 
terpreted than  foretold  the  thick-coming  disas- 
ters. When  his  book  was  compiled,  the  proph- 
ecies were  already,  as  they  are  now,  part  of  the 
history  of  the  last  days  of  Judah.  The  book 
became  the  record  of  this  great  tragedy,  in  which 
these  prophecies  take  the  place  of  the  choric  odes 
in  a  Greek  drama. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

RESTORATION— I.  THE  SYMBOL. 

Jeremiah  xxxii. 

"  And  I  bought  the  field  of  Kanameel."— JER.  xxxii.  9. 

When  Jeremiah   was   first   called   to   his   pro- 
phetic mission,  after  the  charge  "to  pluck  up  and 

*  XXV.  10.  fix.  II,  X.  22.  txxv.  9,  10. 

§xxvi.  6.  II  xxiii.  40. 


to  break  down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  over- 
throw," there  were  added — almost  as  if  they  were 
an  afterthought — the  words  "  to  build  and  to 
plant."  *  Throughout  a  large  part  of  the  book 
little  or  nothing  is  said  about  building  and  plant- 
ing; but,  at  last,  four  consecutive  chapters,  xxx.- 
xxxiii.,  are  almost  entirely  devoted  to  this  sub- 
ject. Jeremiah's  characteristic  phrases  are  not 
all  denunciatory;  we  owe  to  him  the  description 
of  Jehovah  as  "the  Hope  of  Israel." f  Sin  and 
ruin,  guilt  and  punishment,  could  not  quench  the 
hope  that  centred  in  Him.  Though  the  day  of 
Jehovah  might  be  darkness  and  not  light,t  yet, 
through  the  blackness  of  this  day  turned  into 
night,  the  prophets  beheld  a  radiant  dawn. 
When  all  other  building  and  planting  were  over 
for  Jeremiah,  when  it  might  seem  that  much  that 
he  had  planted  was  being  rooted  up  again  in  the 
overthrow  of  Judah,  he  was  yet  permitted  to 
plant  shoots  in  the  garden  of  the  Lord,  which 
have  since  become  trees  whose  leaves  are  for  the 
healing  of  the  nations. 

The  symbolic  act -dealt  with  in  this  chapter  is 
a  convenient  introduction  to  the  prophecies  of 
restoration,  especially  as  chapters  xxx.,  xxxi., 
have  no  title  and  are  of  uncertain  date. 

The  incident  of  the  purchase  of  Hanameel's 
field  is  referred  by  the  title  to  the  year  587  b.  c, 
when  Jeremiah  was  in  prison  and  the  capture 
of  the  city  was  imminent.  Verses  2-6  are  an 
introduction  by  some  editor,  who  was  anxious 
that  his  readers  should  fully  understand  the  nar- 
rative that  follows.  They  are  compiled  from  the 
rest  of  the  book,  and  contain  nothing  that  need 
detain  us. 

When  Jeremiah,  was  arrested  and  thrown  into 
prison,  he  was  on  his  way  to  Anathoth  "  to  re- 
ceive his  portion  there,"  ^  i.  e.^  as  we  gather  from 
this  chapter  to  take  possession  of  an  inheritance 
that  devolved  upon  him.  As  he  was  now  unable 
to  attend  to  his  business  at  Anathoth,  his  cousin 
Hanameel  came  to  him  in  the  prison,  to  give 
him  the  opportunity  of  observing  the  necessary 
formalities.  In  his  enforced  leisure  Jeremiah 
would  often  recur  to  the  matter  on  which  he  had 
been  engaged  when  he  was  arrested.  An  inter- 
rupted piece  of  work  is  apt  to  intrude  itself  upon 
the  mind  with  tiresome  importunity;  moreover 
his  dismal  surroundings  would  remind  him  of 
his  business — it  had  been  the  cause  of  his 
imprisonment.  The  bond  between  an  Israelite 
and  the  family  inheritance  was  almost  as  close 
and  sacred  as  that  between  Jehovah  and  the  Land 
of  Promise.  Naboth  had  died  a  martyr  to  the 
duty  he  owed  to  the  land.  "Jehovah  forbid  that  I 
should  give  thee  the  inheritance  of  my  fathers,"  || 
said  he  to  Ahab.  And  now,  in  the  final  crisis  of 
the  fortunes  of  Judah,  the  prophet  whose  heart 
was  crushed  by  the  awful  task  laid  upon  him  had 
done  what  he  could  to  secure  the  rights  of  his 
family  in  the  "  field  "  at  Anathoth. 

Apparently  he  had  failed.  The  oppression  of 
his  spirits  would  suggest  that  Jehovah  had  dis- 
approved and  frustrated  his  purpose.  His  failure 
was  another  sign  of  the  utter  ruin  of  the  nation. 
The  solemn  grant  of  the  Land  of  Promise  to  the 
Chosen  People  was  finally  revoked;  and  Jehovah 
no  longer  sanctioned  the  ancient  ceremonies 
which  bound  the  households  and  clans  of  Israel 
to  the  soil  of  their  inheritance. 

In  some  such  mood,  Jeremiah  received  the  in- 
timation that  his  cousin   Hanameel   was  on  his 


'  i.  10.  t  xiv.  8,  xvii.  13. 

Jxxxvii.  12  (R.  v.). 


t  Amos  V.  18,  20. 
1 1  Kings  xxi.  3. 


Jeremiah  xxxii.] 


RESTORATION— I.    THE    SYMBOL. 


197 


way  to  see  him  about  this  very  business.  "  The 
word  of  Jehovah  came  unto  him:  Behold,  thine 
uncle  Shallum's  son  Hanameel  is  coming  to  thee, 
to  say  unto  thee,  Buy  my  field  in  Anathoth,  for 
it  is  thy  duty  to  buy  it  by  way  of  redemption." 
The  prophet  was  roused  to  fresh  perplexity. 
The  opportunity  might  be  a  Divine  command  to 
proceed  with  the  redemption.  And  yet  he  was 
a  childless  man  doomed  to  die  in  exile.  What 
had  he  to  do  with  a  field  at  Anathoth  in  that 
great  and  terrible  day  of  the  Lord?  Death  or 
captivity  was  staring  every  one  in  the  face;  land 
was  worthless.  The  transaction  would  put 
money  into  Hanameel's  pocket.  The  eagerness 
of  a  Jew  to  make  sure  of  a  good  bargain  seemed 
no  very  safe  indication  of  the  will  of  Jehovah. 

In  this  uncertain  frame  of  mind  Hanameel 
found  his  cousin,  when  he  came  to  demand  that 
Jeremiah  should  buy  his  field.  Perhaps  the  pris- 
oner found  his  kinsman's  presence  a  temporary 
mitigation  of  his  gloomy  surroundings,  and  was 
inspired  with  more  cheerful  and  kindly  feelings. 
The  solemn  and  formal  appeal  to  fulfil  a  kins- 
man's duty  towards  the  family  inheritance  came 
to  him  as  a  Divine  command:  "  I  knew  that  this 
was  the  word  of  Jehovah." 

The  cousins  proceeded  with  their  business, 
which  was  in  no  way  hindered  by  the  arrange- 
ments of  the  prison.  We  must  be  careful  to  dis- 
miss from  our  minds  all  the  associations  of  the 
routine  and  discipline  of  a  modern  English  gaol. 
The  "  court  of  the  guard  "  in  which  they  were 
was  not  properly  a  prison;  it  was  a  place  of  de- 
tention, not  of  punishment.  The  prisoners  may 
have  been  fettered,  but  they  were  together  and 
could  communicate  with  each  other  and  with 
their  friends.  The  conditions  were  not  unlike 
those  of  a  debtors'  prison  such  as  the  old 
Marshalsea,  as  described  in  "  Little  Dorrit." 

Our  information  as  to  this  right  or  duty  of  the 
next-of-kin  to  buy  or  buy  back  land  is  of  the 
scantiest.*  The  leading  case  is  that  in  the  Book 
of  Ruth,  where,  however,  the  purchase  of  land 
is  altogether  secondary  to  the  levirate  marriage. 
The  land  custom  assumes  that  an  Israelite  will 
only  part  with  his  land  in  case  of  absolute  neces- 
sity, and  it  was  evidently  supposed  that  some 
member  of  the  clan  would  feel  bound  to  pur- 
chase. On  the  other  hand,  in  Ruth,  the  next-of- 
kin  is  readily  allowed  to  transfer  the  obligation 
to  Boaz.  Why  Hanameel  sold  his  field  we  can- 
not tell;  in  these  days  of  constant  invasion,  most 
of  the  small  landowners  must  have  been  reduced 
to  great  distress,  and  would  gladly  have  found 
purchasers  for  their  property.  The  kinsman  to 
whom  land  was  ofifered  would  pretty  generally 
refuse  to  pay  anything  but  a  nominal  price. 
Formerly  the  demand  that  the  next-of-kin  should 
buy  an  inheritance  was  seldom  made,  but  the 
exceptional  feature  in  this  case  was  Jeremiah's 
willingness  to  conform  to  ancient  custom. 

The  price  paid  for  the  field  was  seventeen 
shekels  of  silver,  but,  however  precise  this  in- 
formation may  seem,  it  really  tells  us  very  little. 
A  curious  illustration  is  furnished  by  modern 
currency  difficulties.  The  shekel,  in  the  time  of 
the  Maccabees,  when  we  are  first  able  to  de- 
termine its  value  with  some  certainty,  contained 
about  half  an  ounce  of  silver,  i.  e.,  about  the 
amount  of  metal  in  an  English  half-crown.  The 
commentaries  accordingly  continue  to  reckon  the 
shekel  as  worth  half-a-crown,  whereas  its  value 
by  weight  according  to  the  present  price  of  silver 
*  Lev.  XXV.  25,  Law  of  Holiness  ;  Ruth  iv. 


would  be  about  fourteenpence.  Probably  the 
purchasing  power  of  silver  was  not  more  stable 
in  ancient  Palestine  than  it  is  now.  Fifty  shekels 
seemed  to  David  and  Araunah  a  liberal  price  for 
a  threshing-floor  and  its  oxen,  but  the  Chronicler 
thought  it  quite  inadequate.*  We  know  neither 
the  size  of  Hanameel's  field  nor  the  quality  of 
the  land,  nor  yet  the  value  of  the  shekels;!  but 
the  symbolic  use  made  of  the  incident  implies 
that  Jeremiah  paid  a  fair  and  not  a  panic  price. 

The  silver  was  duly  weighed  in  the  presence  of 
witnesses  and  of  all  the  Jews  that  were  in  the 
court  of  the  guard,  apparently  including  the  pris- 
oners; their  position  as  respectable  members  of 
society  was  not  affected  by  their  imprisonment.  A 
deed  or  deeds  were  drawn  up,  signed  by  Jeremiah 
and  the  witnesses,  and  publicly  delivered  toBaruch 
to  be  kept  safely  in  an  earthen  vessel.  The  legal 
formalities  are  described  with  some  detail;  pos- 
sibly they  were  observed  with  exceptional  punc- 
tiliousness; at  any  rate,  great  stress  is  laid  upon 
the  exact  fulfilment  of  all  that  law  and  custom 
demanded.  Unfortunately,  in  the  course  of  so 
many  centuries,  much  of  the  detail  has  become 
unintelligible.  For  instance,  Jeremiah  the  pur- 
chaser signs  the  record  of  the  purchase,  but  noth- 
ing is  said  about  Hanameel  signing.  When 
Abraham  bought  the  field  of  Machpelah  of 
Ephron  the  Hittite  there  was  no  written  deed, 
the  land  was  simply  transferred  in  public  at 
the  gate  of  the  city.t  Here  the  written  rec- 
ord becomes  valid  by  being  publicly  delivered 
to  Baruch  in  the  presence  of  Hanameel  and  the 
witnesses.  The  details  with  regard  to  the  deeds 
are  very  obscure,  and  the  text  is  doubtful.  The 
Hebrew  apparently  refers  to  two  deeds,  but  the 
Septauagint  for  the  most  part  to  one  only.  The 
R.  V.  of  verse  11  nms:  "  So  I  took  the  deed  of 
the  purchase,  both  that  which  was  sealed,  accord- 
ing to  the  law  and  the  custom,  and  that  which 
was  open."  The  Septuagint  omits  everything 
after  "  that  which  was  sealed  ";  and,  in  any  case, 
the  words  "  the  law  and  the  custom  " — better,  as 
R.  V.  margin,  "  containing  the  terms  and  the  con- 
ditions " — are  a  gloss.  In  verse  14  the  R.  V. 
has:  "Take  these  deeds,  this  deed  of  the  pur- 
chase, both  that  which  is  sealed,  and  this  deed 
which  is  open,  and  put  them  in  an  earthen  ves- 
sel." The  Septuagint  reads:  "  Take  this  book  of 
the  purchase  and  this  book  that  has  been  read,§ 
and  thou  shalt  put  it  in  an  earthen  vessel."!  It 
is  possible  that,  as  has  been  suggested,  the  refer- 
ence to  two  deeds  has  arisen  out  of  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  description  of  a  single  deed. 
Scribes  may  have  altered  or  added  to  the  text  in 
order  to  make  it  state  explicitly  what  they  sup- 
posed to  be  implied.  No  reason  is  given  for 
having  two  deeds.  We  could  have  understood 
the  double  record  if  each  party  had  retained  one 
of  the  documents,  or  if  one  had  been  buried  in 
the  earthen  vessel  and  the  other  kept  for  refer- 
ence, but  both  are  put  into  the  earthen  vessel. 
The  terms  *'  that  which  is  sealed "  and  "  that 
which  is  open  "  may,  however,  be  explained  of 
either  of  one  or  two  documents  H  somewhat  as 
follows:  the  record  was  written,  signed,  and  wit- 

*  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24  :  cf.  1  Chron.  x.xi.  25,  where  the  price  is 
six  hundred  shekels  oi  gold.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to 
point  out  that  "threshing-floor"  (Sam.)  and  "place  of  the 
threshing-floor  "  (Chron.)  are  synon>;mous. 

t  By  value  here  is  meant  purchasing  power,  to  which 
the  weight  denoted  by  the  term  shekel  is  now  no  clue. 

X  Gen.  xxiii  (/".)• 

§  if  eyi'(i«r/n£i'oi'  probably  a  corruption  of  avfia-nkiv^v . 

il  The  text  varies  in  different  MSS.  of  the  LXX. 

"[  Cf,  Cheyne,  etc.,  in  loco. 


198 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


nessed;  it  was  then  foldea  up  and  sealed;  part  or 
the  whole  of  the  contents  of  this  sealed-up  rec- 
ord was  then  written  again  on  the  outside  or  on 
a  separate  parchment,  so  that  the  purport  of  the 
deed  could  easily  be  ascertained  without  expos- 
ing the  original  record.  The  Assyrian  and 
Chaldean  contract-tables  were  constructed  on 
this  principle;  the  contract  was  first  writtefi  on  a 
clay  tablet,  which  was  further  enclosed  in  an 
envelope  of  clay,  and  on  the  outside  was  en- 
graved an  exact  copy  of  the  writing  within.  If 
thi  outer  writing  became  indistinct  or  was  tam- 
pered with,  the  envelope  could  be  broken  and  the 
exact  terms  of  the  contract  ascertained  from  the 
first  tablet.  Numerous  examples  of  this  method 
can  be  seen  in  the  British  Museum.  The  Jews 
had  been  vassals  of  Assyria  and  Babylon  for 
about  a  century,  and  thus  must  have  had  ample 
opportunity  to  become  acquainted  with  their 
legal  procedure;  and,  in  this  instance,  Jeremiah 
and  his  friends  may  have  imitated  the  Chaldeans. 
Such  an  imitation  would  be  specially  significant 
in  what  was  intended  to  symbolise  the  transitori- 
ness  of  the  Chaldean  conquest. 

The  earthen  vessel  would  preserve  the  record 
from  being  spoilt  by  the  damp;  similarly  bottles 
are  used  nowadays  to  preserve  the  documents 
that  are  built  up  into  the  memorial  stones  of 
public  buildings.  In  both  cases  the  object  is  that 
"  they  may  continue  many  days." 

So  far  the  prophet  had  proceeded  in  simple 
obedience  to  a  Divine  command  to  fulfil  an  obli- 
gation which  otherwise  might  excusably  have 
been  neglected.  He  felt  that  his  action  was  a 
parable  which  suggested  that  Judah  might  retain 
its  ancient  inheritance,*  but  Jeremiah  hesitated 
to  accept  an  interpretation  seemingly  at  variance 
with  the  judgments  he  had  pronounced  upon  the 
guilty  people.  When  he  had  handed  over  the 
deed  to  Baruch,  and  his  mind  was  no  longer  oc- 
cupied with  legal  minutiae,  he  could  ponder  at 
leisure  on  the  significance  of  his  purchase.  The 
prophet's  meditations  naturally  shaped  them- 
selves into  a  prayer;  he  laid  his  perplexity  before 
Jehovah.f  Possibly,  even  from  the  court  of  the 
guard,  he  could  see  something  of  the  works  of 
the  besiegers;  and  certainly  men  would  talk  con- 
stantly of  the  progress  of  the  siege.  Outside 
the  Chaldeans  were  pushing  their  mounds  and 
engines  nearer  and  nearer  to  the  walls,  within 
famine  and  pestilence  decimated  and  enfeebled 
the  defenders;  the  city  was  virtually  in  the 
enemy's  hands.  All  this  was  in  accordance  with 
the  will  of  Jehovah  and  the  mission  entrusted  to 
His  prophet.  "  What  thou  hast  spoken  of  is 
come  to  pass,  and,  behold,  thou  seest  it."  And 
yet,  in  spite  of  all  this,  "  Thou  hast  said  unto 
me,  O  Lord  Jehovah,  Buy  the  field  for  money 
and  take  witnesses — and  the  city  is  in  the  hands 
of  the  Chaldeans!  " 

Jeremiah  had  already  predicted  the  ruin  of 
Babylon  and  the  return  of  the  captives  at  the  end 
of  seventy  years.:):     It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  he 

*  Verse  15  anticipates  by  way  of  summary  verses  42-44, 
and  is  apparently  ignored  in  verse  25.  It  probably 
represents  Jeremiah's  interpretation  of  God's  command 
at  the  time  when  he  wrote  the  chapter.  In  the  actual 
development  of  the  incident,  the  conviction  of  the  Divine 
promise  of  restoration  came  to  him  somewhat  later. 

t  What  was  said  of  verse  15  partly  applies  to  verses  17- 
23  (with  the  exception  of  the  introductory  words:  "Ah, 
Lord  Jehovah  ! ").  These  verses  are  not  dealt  with  in  the 
text,  because  they  largely  anticipate  the  ideas  and  lan- 
guage of  the  following  Divine  utterance.  Kautzsch  and 
Cornill,  following  Stade,  mark  these  verses  as  a  later 
addition  ;  Giesebrecht  is  doubtful.     Cf.  v.  20  ff.  and  xxvii. 

?XXV.  12,    XXIX.   10. 


did  not  at  first  understand  the  sign  of  the  pur- 
chase as  referring  to  restoration  from  the  Cap- 
tivity. His  mind,  at  the  moment,  was  preoccu- 
pied with  the  approaching  capture  of  Jerusalem; 
apparently  his  first  thought  was  that  his  prophe- 
cies of  doom  were  to  be  set  aside,  and  at  the 
last  moment  some  wonderful  deliverance  might 
be  wrought  out  for  Zion.  In  the  Book  of  Jonah, 
Nineveh  is  spared  in  spite  of  the  prophet's  un- 
conditional and  vehement  declaration:  "  Yet 
forty  days  and  Nineveh  shall  be  overthrown." 
Was  it  possible,  thought  Jeremiah,  that  after  all 
that  had  been  said  and  done,  buying  and  selling, 
building  and  planting,  marrying  and  giving  in 
marriage,  were  to  go  on  as  if  nothing  had  hap- 
pened? He  was  bewildered  and  confounded  by 
the  idea  of  such  a  revolution  in  the  Divine  pur- 
poses. 

Jehovah  in  His  answer  at  once  repudiates  this 
idea.  He  asserts  His  universal  sovereignty  and 
omnipotence;  these  are  to  be  manifested,  first  in 
judgment  and  then  in  mercy.  He  declares  afresh 
that  all  the  judgments  predicted  by  Jeremiah 
shall  speedily  come  to  pass.  Then  He  unfolds 
His  gracious  purpose  of  redemption  and  deliv- 
erance. He  will  gather  the  exiles  from  all  lands 
and  bring  them  back  to  Judah,  and  they  shall 
dwell  there  securely.  They  shall  be  His  people 
and  He  will  be  their  God.  Henceforth  He  will 
make  an  everlasting  covenant  with  them,  that 
He  will  never  again  abandon  them  to  misery  and 
destruction,  but  will  always  do  them  good.  By 
Divine  grace  they  shall  be  united  in  purpose  and 
action  to  serve  Jehovah;  He  Himself  will  put 
His  fear  in  their  hearts. 

And  then  returning  to  the  symbol  of  the  pur- 
chased field,  Jehovah  declares  that  fields  shall  be 
bought,  with  all  the  legal  formalities  usual  in 
settled  and  orderly  societies,  deeds  shall  be 
signed,  sealed,  and  delivered  in  the  presence  of 
witnesses.  This  restored  social  order  shall  ex- 
tend throughout  the  territory  of  the  Southern 
Kingdom,  Benjamin,  the  environs  of  Jerusalem, 
the  cities  of  Judah,  of  the  hill  country,  of  the 
Shephelah  and  the  Negeb.  The  exhaustive 
enumeration  partakes  of  the  legal  character  of 
the  purchase  of  Hanameel's  field. 

Thus  the  symbol  is  expounded:  Israel's  tenure 
of  the  Promised  Land  will  survive  the  Captivity; 
the  Jews  will  return  to  resume  their  inheritance, 
and  will  again  deal  with  the  old  fields  and  vine- 
yards and  oliveyards,  according  to  the  solemn 
forms  of  ancient  custom. 

The  familiar  classical  parallel  to  this  incident 
is  found  in  Livy,  xxvi.  il,  where  we  are  told 
that  when  Hannibal  was  encamped  three  miles 
from  Rome,  the  ground  he  occupied  was  sold  in 
the  Forum  by  public  auction,  and  fetched  a 
good    price. 

Both  at  Rome  and  at  Jerusalem  the  sale  of 
land  was  a  symbol  that  the  control  of  the  land 
would  remain  with  or  return  to  its  original  in- 
habitants. The  symbol  recognised  that  access 
to  land  is  essential  to  all  industry,  and  that  who- 
ever controls  this  access  can  determine  the  con- 
ditions of  national  life.  This  obvious  and  often 
forgotten  truth  was  constantly  present  to  the 
minds  of  the  inspired  writers:  to  them  the  Holy 
Land  was  almost  as  sacred  as  the  Chosen  Peo- 
ple; its  right  use  was  a  matter  of  religious  obli- 
gation, and  the  prophets  and  legislators  always 
sought  to  secure  for  every  Israelite  family  some 
rights  in  their  native   soil. 

The   selection    of   a    legal    ceremony    and   the 


Jeremiah  xxiii.-xxxiii.]      RESTORATION— II.    THE    NEW    ISRAEL. 


'99 


stress  laid  upon  its  forms  emphasise  the  truth 
that  social  order  is  the  necessary  basis  of  moral- 
ity and  religion.  The  opportunity  to  live  health- 
ily, honestly,  and  purely  is  an  antecedent  condi- 
tion of  the  spiritual  life.  This  opportunity  was 
denied  to  slaves  in  the  great  heathen  empires, 
just  as  it  is  denied  to  the  children  in  our  slums. 
Both  here  and  more  fully  in  the  sections  we 
shall  deal  with  in  the  following  chapters,  Jere- 
miah shows  that  he  was  chiefly  interested  in  the 
restoration  of  the  Jews  because  they  could  only 
fulfil  the  Divine  purpo  e  as  a  separate  commu- 
nity in  Judah. 

Moreover,  to  use  a  modern  term,  he  was  no 
anarchist;  spiritual  regeneration  might  come 
through  material  ruin,  but  the  prophet  did  not 
look  for  salvation  either  in  anarchy  or  through 
anarchy.  While  any  fragment  of  the  State  held 
together,  its  laws  were  to  be  observed;  as  soon 
as  the  exiles  were  re-establis)hed  in  Judah  they 
would  resume  the  forms  and  habits  of  an  organ- 
ised community.  The  discipline  of  society,  like 
that  of  an  army,  is  most  necessary  in  times  of 
difficulty  and  danger,  and,  above  all,  in  the  crisis 
of  defeat. 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

RESTORATION— II.  THE  NEW  ISRAEL. 

Jeremiah  xxiii.   3-8,  xxiv.  6,   7,  xxx.,  xxxi.. 


"In  those  days  shall  Judah  be  saved,  and  Jerusalem 
shall  dwell  safely  :  and  this  is  the  name  whereby  she  shall 
be  called."— JEK.  xxxiii.  16. 

The  Divine  utterances  in  chapter  xxxiii.  were 
given  to  Jeremiah  when  he  was  shut  up  in  the 
"  court  of  the  guard  "  during  the  last  days  of 
the  siege.  They  may,  however,  have  been  com- 
mitted to  writing  at  a  later  date,  possibly  in  con- 
nection with  c'hapters  xxx.  and  xxxi.,  when  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  already  past.  It 
is  in  accordance  with  all  analogy  that  the  final 
record  of  a  "  word  of  Jehovah  "  should  include 
any  further  light  which  had  come  to  the  prophet 
through  his  inspired  meditations  on  the  original 
message.  Chapters  xxx.,  xxxi.,  and  xxxiii. 
mostly  expound  and  enforce  leading  ideas  con- 
tained in  xxxii.  37-44  and  in  earlier  utterances 
of  Jeremiah.  They  have  much  in  common  with 
II.  Isaiah.  The  ruin  of  Judah  and  the  captivity 
of  the  people  were  accomplished  facts  to  both 
writers,  and  they  were  both  looking  forward  to 
the  return  of  the  exiles  and  the  restoration  of 
the  kingdom  of  Jehovah.  We  shall  have  occa- 
sion to  notice  individual  points  of  resemblance 
later  on. 

In  xxx.  2  Jeremiah  is  commanded  to  write 
in  a  book  all  that  Jehovah  has  spoken  to  him; 
and  according  to  the  present  context  the  "  all," 
in  this  case,  refers  merely  to  the  following  four 

*  Vatke  and  Stade  reject  chapters  xxx.,  xxxi.,  xxxiii., 
but  they  are  accepted  by  Driver,  Cornill  Kautzs^ch  (for 
the  most  part).  Giesebrecht  assigns  them,  partly  to 
Baruch  and  partly  to  a  later  editor.  It  is  on  this  account 
that  the  full  exposition  of  certain  points  in  xxxii.  and 
elsewhere  has  been  reserved  for  the  present  chapter. 
Moreover,  if  the  cardinal  ideas  come  from  Jeremiah,  we 
need  not  be  over-anxious  to  decide  whether  the  expan- 
sion, illustration,  and  enforcing  of  them  are  due  to  the 
prophet  himself,  or  to  his  disciple  Baruch.  or  to  some 
other  editor.  The  question  is  somewhat  parallel  to  that 
relating  to  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 


chapters.  These  prophecies  of  restoration  would 
be  specially  precious  to  the  exiles;  and  now  that 
the  Jews  were  scattered  through  many  distant 
lands,  they  could  only  be  transmitted  and  pre- 
served in  writing.  After  the  command  "  to  write 
in  a  book  "  there  follows,  by  way  of  title,  a 
repetition  of  the  statement  that  Jehovah  would 
bring  back  His  people  to  their  fatherland.  Here, 
in  the  very  forefront  of  the  Book  of  Promise, 
Israel  and  Judah  are  named  as  being  recalled 
together  from  exile.  As  we  read  twice  *  else- 
where in  Jeremiah,  the  promised  deliverance 
from  Assyria  and  Babylon  was  to  surpass  all 
other  manifestations  of  the  Divine  power  and 
mercy.  The  Exodus  would  not  be  named  in  the 
same  breath  with  it:  "  Behold,  the  days  come, 
saith  Jehovah,  that  it  shall  no  more  be  said.  As 
Jehovah  liveth,  that  brought  up  the  Israelites 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt:  but.  As  Jehovah  liv- 
eth, that  brought  up  the  Israelites  from  the  land 
of  the  north,  and  from  all  the  countries  whither 
He  had  driven  them."  This  prediction  has 
waited  for  fulfilment  to  our  own  times:  hitherto 
the  Exodus  has  occupied  men's  minds  much 
more  than  the  Return;  we  are  now  coming  to 
estimate  the  supreme  religious  importance  of 
the  latter  event. 

Elsewhere  again  Jeremiah  connects  his  prom- 
ise with  the  clause  in  his  original  commission 
"to  build  and  to  plant"  :t  "I  w'ill  set  My 
eyes  upon  them  "  (the  captives)  "  for  good,  and 
I  will  bring  them  again  to  this  land;  and 
I  will  build  them,  and  not  pull  them  down;  and 
I  wnll  plant  them,  and  not  pluck  them  up."  % 
As  in  xxxii.  28-35,  t'he  picture  of  restoration  is 
rendered  more  vivid  by  contrast  with  Judah's 
present  state  of  wretchedness;  the  marvellousness 
of  Jehovah's  mercy  is  made  apparent  by  remind- 
ing Israel  of  the  multitude  of  its  iniquities.  The 
agony  of  Jacob  is  like  that  of  a  woman  in  travail. 
But  travail  shall  be  followed  by  deliverance  and 
triumph.  In  the  second  Psalm  the  subject  na- 
tions took  counsel  against  Jehovah  and  against 
His  Anointed: — 

"  Let  us  break  their  bands  asunder, 
And  cast  away  their  cords  from  us  "  ; 

but  now  this  is  the  counsel  of  Jeliovah  con- 
cerning His  people  and  their  Babylonian  con- 
queror:— 

"  I  will  break  his  yoke  from  off  thy  neck. 
And  break  thy  bands  asunder."  § 

Judah's  lovers,  her  foreign  allies,  Assyria, 
Babylon,  Egypt,  and  all  the  other  states  with 
whom  she  had  intrigued,  had  betrayed  her;  they 
had  cruelly  chastised  her,  so  that  her  wounds 
were  grievous  and  her  bruises  incurable.  She 
was  left  without  a  champion  to  plead  her  cause, 
without  a  friend  to  bind  up  her  wounds,  without 
balm  to  allay  the  pain  of  her  bruises.  "  Be- 
cause thy  sins  were  increased,  I  have  done  these 
things  unto  thee,  saith  Jehovah."  Jerusalem  was 
an  outcast,  of  whom  men  said  contemptuously: 
"  This  is  Zion,  whom  no  man  seeketh  after."  || 
But  man's  extremity  is  God's  opportunity;  be- 
cause Judah  was  helpless  and  despised,  there- 
fore Jehovah  said,  "  I  will  restore  health  unto 
thee,  and  I  will  heal  thee  of  thy  wounds."  IF 


*  xvi.  14,  15,  xxiii.  7,  8. 

+  i.  10. 


%  xxiv.  6. 
§xxx.  5-8. 
II  .XXX.  12-17. 

i  The  two  verses  xxx.  10, 11,  present  some  difficulty  here. 
According  to  Kautzsch,  and  of  course  Giesebrecht,  they 
are  a  later  addition.    The  ideas  can  mostly  be  paralleled 


200 


THE    BOOK   OF   JEREMIAH. 


While  Jeremiah  was  still  watching  from  his 
prison  the  progress  of  the  siege,  he  had  seen 
the  houses  and  palaces  beyond  the  walls 
destroyed  by  the  Chaldeans  to  be  used  for  their 
mounds;  and  had  known  that  every  sally  of  the 
besieged  was  but  another  opportunity  for  the 
enemy  to  satiate  themselves  with  slaughter,  as 
they  executed  Jehovah's  judgments  upon  the 
guilty  city.  Even  at  this  extremity  He  an- 
nounced solemnly  and  emphatically  the  restora- 
tion and  pardon  of  His  people.  "  Thus  saith 
Jehovah,  who  established  the  earth,  -when  He 
made  and  fashioned  it — Jehovah  is  His  name: 
Call  upon  Me,  and  I  will  answer  thee,  and  will 
show  thee  great  mysteries,  which  thou  knowest 
not."* 

"  I  will  bring  to  this  city  healing  and  cure, 
and  will  cause  them  to  know  all  the  fulness  of 
steadfast  peace.  ...  I  will  cleanse  them  from 
all  their  iniquities,  and  will  pardon  all  .their  in- 
iquities, whereby  they  have  sinned  and  trans- 
gressed against  Me."f 

The  healing  of  Zion  naturally  involved  the 
punishment  of  her  cruel  and  treacherous  lovers.  :t 
The  Return,  like  other  revolutions,  was  not 
wrought  by  rose-water;  the  yokes  were  broken 
and  the  bands  rent  asunder  by  main  force.  Je- 
hovah would  make  a  full  end  of  all  the  nations 
whither  He  had  scattered  them.  Their  devour- 
ers  should  be  devoured,  all  their  adversaries 
should  go  into  captivity,  those  who  had  spoiled 
and  preyed  upon  them  should  become  a  spoil 
and  a  prey.  Jeremiah  had  been  commissioned 
from  the  beginning  to  pull  down  foreign  nations 
and  kingdoms  as  well  as  his  native  Judah.§ 
Judah  was  only  one  of  Israel's  evil  neighbours 
who  were  to  be  plucked  up  out  of  their  land.  || 
And  at  the  Return,  as  at  the  Exodus,  the  waves 
at  one  and  the  same  time  opened  a  path  of  safety 
for  Israel  and  overwhelmed  her  oppressors. 

Israel,  pardoned  and  restored,  would  again  be 
governed  by  legitimate  kings  of  the  House  of 
David.  In  the  dying  days  of  the  monarchy 
Israel  and  Judah  had  received  their  rulers  from 
the  hands  of  foreigners.  Menahem  and  Hoshea 
bought  the  confirmation  of  their  usurped  author- 
ity from  Assyria.  Jehoiakim  was  appointed  by 
Pharaoh  Necho,  and  Zedekiah  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zar. We  cannot  doubt  that  the  kings  of  Egypt 
and  Babylon  were  also  careful  to  surround  their 
nominees  with  ministers  who  were  devoted  to 
the  interests  of  their  suzerains.  But  now  "  their 
nobles  were  to  be  of  themselves,  and  their  ruler 
was  to  proceed  out  of  their  midst,"1I  i.  e.,  nobles 
and  rulers  were  to  hold  their  of^ces  according 
to  national  custom  and  tradition. 

elsewhere  in  Jeremiah.  Verse  ii  6,  "I  will  correct  thee 
with  judgment,  and  will  in  no  wise  leave  thee  unpun- 
ished," seems  inconsistent  with  the  context,  which  repre- 
sents the  punishment  as  actually  inflicted.  Still,  the 
verses  might  be  a  genuine  fragment  misplaced.  Driver 
("Introduction,"  246)  says:  "The  title  of  honour  'My 
servant "...  appears  to  have  formed  the  basis  upon 
which  II.  Isaiah  constructs  his  great  conception  of  Je- 
hovah's ideal  Servant." 

*  xxxiii.  2,  3  ;  "  earth  "  is  inserted  with  the  LXX.  Many 
regard  these  verses  as  a  later  addition,  based  on  II.  Isaiah  : 
c/.  Isa.  xlviii.  6.  The  phrase  "  Jehovah  is  His  name  "  and 
the  terms  "make"  and  "fashion"  are  specially  common 
in  II.  Isaiah,  xxxiii.  so  largely  repeats  the  ideas  of  xxx. 
that  it  is  most  convenient  to  deal  with  them  together. 

+  xxxiii.  6-8,  slightly  paraphrased  and  condensed. 

t  xxx.  8,  II,  16,  20.  C/.  also  the  chapters  on  the  prophe- 
cies concerning  foreign  nations. 

§  i.  10. 

llxii.  14.  xxx.  23,  24,  is  apparently  a  gloss,  added  as  a 
suitable  illustration  of  this  chapter,  from  xxii.  19,  so, 
•which  are  almost  identical  with  these  two  verses. 

^XXX.  21. 


Jeremiah  was  fond  of  speaking  of  the  leaders 
of  Judah  as  shepherds.  We  have  had  occasion 
already  *  to  consider  his  controversy  with  the 
"  shepherds  "  of  his  own  time.  In  his  picture 
of  the  New  Israel  he  uses  the  same  figure.  In 
denouncing  the  evil  shepherds  he  predicts  that, 
when  the  remnant  of  Jehovah's  flock  is  brought 
again  to  their  folds.  He  will  set  up  shepherds 
over  them  which  shall  feed  them,t  shepherds, 
according  to  Jehovah's  own  heart,  who  should 
feed  them  with  knowledge  and  understand- 
ing.t 

Over  them  Jehovah  would  establish  as  Chief 
Shepherd  a  Prince  of  the  House  of  David. 
Isaiah  had  already  included  in  his  picture  of 
Messianic  times  the  fertility  of  Palestine;  its 
vegetation, §  by  the  blessing  of  Jehovah,  should 
be  beautiful  and  glorious:  he  had  also  described 
the  Messianic  King  as  a  fruitful  Branch  ||  out  of 
the  root  of  Jesse.  Jeremiah  takes  the  idea  of 
the  latter  passage,  but  uses  the  language  of 
the  former.  For  him  the  King  of  the  New 
Israel  is,  as  it  were,  a  Growth  (gemah)  out 
of  the  sacred  soil,  or  perhaps  more  definitely 
from  the  roots  of  the  House  of  David,  that 
ancient  tree  whose  trunk  had  been  hewn  down 
and  burnt.  Both  the  Growth  (gemah)  and  the 
Branch  (neger)  had  the  same  vitaJ  connection 
with  the  soil  of  Palestine  and  the  root  of  David. 
Our  English  versions  exercised  a  wise  discretion 
when  they  sacrificed  literal  accuracy  and  indi- 
cated the  identity  of  idea  by  translating  both 
"  geniah  "  and  "  neqer  "  by  "  Branch." 

"  Behold,  the  days  come,  saith  Jehovah,  that 
I  will  raise  up  unto  David  a  righteous  Branch; 
and  He  shall  be  a  wise  and  prudent  King,  and 
He  shall  execute  justice  and  maintain  the  right. 
In  His  days  Judah  shall  be  saved  and  Israel 
shall  dwell  securely,  and  his  name  shall  be  Je- 
hovah '  Cidqenu,'  Jehovah  is  our  righteous- 
ness." IF  Jehovah  (^idqenu  might  very  well  be 
the  personal  name  of  a  Jewish  king,  though 
the  form  would  be  unusual;  but  what  is  chiefly 
intended  is  that  His  character  shall  be  such  as 
the  "  name  "  describes.  The  "  name  "  is  a  brief 
and  pointed  censure  upon  a  king  whose  charac- 
ter was  the  opposite  of  that  described  in  these 
verses,  yet  who  bore  a  name  of  almost  identical 
meaning — Zedekiah,  Jehovah  is  my  righteous- 
ness. The  name  of  the  last  reigning  Prince  of 
the  House  of  David  had  been  a  standing  con- 
demnation of  his  unworthy  life,  but  the  King  of 
the  New  Israel,  Jehovah's  true  Messiah,  would 
realise  in  His  administration  all  that  such  a 
name  promised.  Sovereigns  delight  to  accumu- 
late sonorous  epithets  in  their  official  designa- 
tions— Highness,  High  and  Mighty,  Majesty, 
Serene,  Gracious.  The  glaring  contrast  between 
character  and  titles  often  only  serves  to  adver- 
tise the  worthlessness  of  those  who  are  labelled 
with  such  epithets:  the  Majesty  of  James  I., 
the  Graciousness  of  Richard  III.  Yet  these 
titles  point  to  a  standard  of  true  royalty,  whether 
the  sovereign  be  an  individual  or  a  class  or  the 
people;  they  describe  that  Divine  Sovereignty 
which  will  be  realised  in  the  Kingdom  of  God.** 

*  C/.  chap.  viii. 
+  xxiii.  3,  4. 

§  Isa.  iV.  2,  5emah  ;  A.  V.  and  R.  V.  Branch,  R.  V.  margin 
Shoot  or  Bud. 

lllsa.  bi.  I.  .  . 

i  XXV.  5,  6 ;  repeated  in  xxxiii.  15,  i6,  with  slight  varia- 
tions. 

*•  In  xxxiii.  14-26  the  permanence  of  the  Davidic  dynastv- 
the  Levitical  priests,  and  the  people  of  I.srael  is  solemnly 


Jeremiah  xxxi.] 


RESTORATION    -III.    REUNION. 


The  material  prosperity  of  the  restored  com- 
munity is  set  forth  with  wealth  of  glowing 
imagery.  Cities  and  palaces  are  to  be  rebuilt 
on  their  former  sites  with  more  than  their  an- 
cient splendour.  "  Out  of  them  shall  proceed 
thanksgiving,  and  the  voice  of  them  that  make 
merry:  and  I  will  multiply  them,  and  they  shall 
not  be  few;  I  will  also  glorify  them,  and  they 
shall  not  be  small.  And  the  children  of  Jacob 
shall  be  as  of  old,  and  their  assembly  shall  be 
established  before  Me."  *  The  figure  often  used 
of  the  utter  desolation  of  the  deserted  country 
is  now  used  to  illustrate  its  complete  restoration: 
"  Yet  again  shall  there  be  heard  in  this  place 
.  .  .  the  voice  of  joy  and  the  voice  of  glad- 
ness, the  voice  of  the  bridegroom  and  the  voice 
of  the  bride."  Throughout  all  the  land  "  which 
is  waste,  without  man  and  without  beast,  and  in 
all  the  cities  thereof,"  shepherds  shall  dwell  and 
pasture  and  fold  their  flocks;  and  in  the  cities 
of  all  the  districts  of  the  Southern  Kingdom 
(enumerated  as  exhaustively  as  in  xxxii.  44) 
shall  the  flocks  again  pass  under  the  shepherd's 
hands  to  be  told.f 

Jehovah's  own  peculiar  flock,  His  Chosen 
People,  shall  be  fruitful  and  multiply  according 
to  the  primjeval  blessing;  under  their  new  shep- 
herds they  shall  no  more  fear  nor  be  dismayed, 
neither  shall  any  be  lacking.^  Jeremiah  recurs 
again  and  again  to  the  quiet,  the  restfulness, 
the  freedom  from  fear  and  dismay  of  the  re- 
stored Israel.  In  this,  as  in  all  else,  the  New 
Dispensation  was  to  be  an  entire  contrast  to 
those  long  we^ry  years  of  alternate  suspense 
and  panic,  when  men's  hearts  were  shaken  by 
the  sound  of  the  trumpet  and  the  alarm  of 
war.  v^  Israel  is  to  dwell  securely  at  rest  from 
fear  of  harm.||  When  Jacob  returns  he  "  shall 
be  quiet  and  at  ease,  and  none  shall  make  him 
afraid."  IT  Egyptian,  Assyrian,  and  Chaldean 
shall  all  cease  from  troubling;  the  memory  of 
past  misery  shall  become  dim  and  shadowy. 

The  finest  expansion  of  this  idea  is  a  passage 
which  always  fills  the  soul  with  a  sense  ot  utter 
rest.  "  He  shall  dwell  on  high:  his  refuge  shall 
be  the  inaccessible  rocks:  his  bread  shall  be 
given  him;  his  waters  shall  be  sure.  Thine  eyes 
shall  see  the  king  in  his  beauty:  they  shall  be- 
hold a  far-stretching  land.  Thine  heart  shall 
muse  on  the  terror:  where  is  he  that  counted, 
where  is  he  that  weighed  the  tribute?  where  is 
he  that  counted  the  towers?  Thou  shalt  not  see 
the  fierce  people,  a  people  of  a  deep  speech 
that  thou  canst  not  perceive;  of  a  strange  tongue 
that  thou  canst  not  understand.  Look  upon 
Zion,  the  city  of  our  solemnities:  thine  eyes 
shall  see  Jerusalem  a  quiet  habitation,  a  tent 
that  shall  not  be  removed,  the  stakes  whereof 
shall  never  be  plucked  up,  neither  shall  any  of 
the  cords  thereof  be  broken.  There  Jehovah 
will  be  with  us  in  majesty,  a  place  of  broad 
rivers  and  streams;  wherein  shall  go  no  galley 


assured  by  a  Divine  promise.  These  verses  are  not  found 
in  the  LXX.,  and  are  considered  by  many  to  be  a  later  ad- 
dition ;  see  Kautzsch,  Giesebrecht,  Cheyne,  etc.  They  are 
mostly  of  a  secondary  character — 15,  i6,=  xxiii.  5,  6;  here 
Jerusalem  and  not  its  king  is  called  Jehovah  Qidqenu, 
possibly  because  the  addition  was  made  when  there  was 
no  visible  prospect  of  the  restoration  of  the  Davidic 
dynasty.  Verse  17  is  based  on  the  original  promise  in  2 
Sam.  vii.  14-16,  and  is  equivalent  to  Jer  xxii.  4,  30.  The 
form  and  substance  of  the  Divine  promise  imitate  xxxi. 
35-37- 

*  XXX.  18-20.  §iv.  ig. 

t  xxxiii.  10-13.  II  xxiii.  6. 

t  xxiii.  3,4.  "ixxx.  lo. 


with  oars,  neither  shall  gallant  ship  pass  there- 
by.'-  * 

lM)r  Jeremiah  too  the  presence  of  Jehovah  in 
majesty  was  the  only  possible  guarantee  of  the 
peace  and  prosperity  of  Israel.  The  voices  of 
joy  and  gladness  in  the  New  Jerusalem  were 
not  only  those  of  bride  and  bridegroom,  but 
also  of  those  that  said,  "  Give  thanks  to  Je- 
hovah Sabaoth,  for  Jehovah  is  good,  for  His 
mercy  endureth  for  ever,"  and  of  those  that 
"  came  to  ofTer  sacrifices  of  thanksgiving  in  the 
house  of  Jehovah."!  This  new  David,  as  the 
Messianic  King  is  called, |  is  to  have  the  priestly 
right  of  immediate  access  to  God:  "  I  will  cause 
Him  to  draw  near,  and  He  shall  approach  unto 
Me:  for  else  who  would  risk  his  life  by  daring 
to  approach  Me?"§  Israel  is  liberated  from 
foreign  conquerors  to  serve  Jehovah  their  God 
and  David  their  King;  and  the  Lord  Himself 
rejoices  in  His  restored  and  ransomed  people. 

The  city  ihat  was  once  a  desolation,  an  aston- 
ishment, a  hissing,  and  a  curse  among  all  na- 
tions shall  now  be  to  Jehovah  "  a  name  of  joy, 
a  praise  and  a  glory,  before  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  which  shall  hear  all  the  good  that 
I  do  unto  them,  and  shall  tremble  with  fear 
for  all  the  good  and  all  the  peace  that  I  procure 
unto  it."i 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 
RESTORA  T ION— HI.  RE  UNION. 


Jeremiah  xxxi. 


"  I  will  sow  the  house  of  Israel  and  the  hou-se  of  Judah 
with  the  seed  of  man,  and  with  the  seed  of  beast.  —Jer. 


In  his  prophecies  of  restoration,  Jeremiah 
continually  couples  together  Judah  and  Israel,  ^j" 
Israel,  it  is  true,  often  stands  for  the  whole 
elect  nation,  and  is  so  used  by  Jeremiah.  After 
the  disappearance  of  the  Ten  Tribes,  the  Jewish 
community  is  spoken  of  as  Israel.  But  Israel, 
in  contrast  to  Judah,  will  naturally  mean  the 
Northern  Kingdom  or  its  exiled  inhabitants. 
In  this  chapter  Jeremiah  clearly  refers  to  this 
Israel:  he  speaks  of  it  under  its  distinctive  title 
of  Ephraim,  and  promises  that  vineyards  shall 
again  be  planted  on  the  mountains  of  Samaria. 
Jehovah  had  declared  that  He  would  cast  Judah 
out  of  His  sight,  as  He  had  cast  out  the  whole 
seed  of  Ephraim.**  In  the  days  to  come  Je- 
hovah would  make  His  new  covenant  with  the 
House  of  Israel,  as  well  as  with  the  House  of 
Judah.  Amos.tt  who  was  sent  to  declare  the 
captivity  of  Israel,  also  prophesied  its  return; 
and  similar  promises  are  found  in  Micah  and 
Isaiah. +t  But,  in  his  attitude  towards  Ephraim, 
Jeremiah,  as  in  so  much  else,  is  a  disciple  of 
Hosea.  Both  prophets  have  the  same  tender, 
affectionate  interest  in  this  wayward  child  of 
God.  Hosea  mourns  over  Ephraim's  sin  and 
punishment:  "  How  shall  I  give  thee  up, 
Ephraim?  how  shall  I  deliver  thee  to  thine  ene- 
mies, O  Israel?  How  shall  I  make  thee  as 
Admah?   how   shall   I   set  thee   as   Zeboim?"§§ 

*Isa.  xxxiii.  16-21  :  cf.  xxxii.  15-18. 

t  xxxiii.  II. 

t  XXX.  9.  **  vii.  15. 

§  XXX.  21,  as  Kautzsch.       ++Amos  ix.  14. 

Ii  xxxiii.  Q.  tt  Micah  ii.  12  ;  Isa.  xi.  10-16. 

^  xxxiii.  7,  etc.  jgHoseaxi.  8. 


302 


THE    BOOK   OF   JEREMIAH. 


Jeremiah  exults  in  the  glory  of  Ephraim's  res- 
toration. Hosea  barely  attains  to  the  hope  that 
Israel  will  return  from  captivity,  or  possibly  that 
its  doom  may  yet  be  averted.  "  Mine  heart  is 
turned  within  Me,  My  compassions  are  kindled 
together.  I  will  not  execute  the  fierceness  of 
Mine  anger,  I  will  not  again  any  more  destroy 
Ephraim:  for  I  am  God,  and  not  man;  the  Holy 
One  of  Israel  in  the  midst  of  thee."  *  But 
Jehovah  rather  longs  to  pardon  than  finds  any 
sign  of  the  repentance  that  makes  pardon  pos- 
sible; and  similarly  the  promise — "  I  will  be  as 
the  dew  unto  Israel:  he  shall  blossom  as  the 
lily,  and  cast  forth  his  roots  as  Lebanon.  His 
branches  shall  spread,  and  his  beauty  shall  be 
as  the  olive  tree,  and  his  smell  as  Lebanon " 
— is  conditioned  upon  the  very  doubtful  response 
to  the  appeal  "  O  Israel,  return  unto  Jehovah 
thy  God."f  But  Jeremiah's  confidence  in  the 
glorious  future  of  Ephraim  is  dimmed  by  no 
shade  of  misgiving.  "  They  shall  be  My  people, 
and  I  will  be  their  God,"  is  the  refrain  of  Jere- 
miah's prophecies  of  restoration;  this  chapter 
opens  with  a  special  modification  of  the  formula, 
which  emphatically  and  expressly  includes  both 
Ephraim  and  Judah — "  I  will  be  the  God  of  all 
the  clans  of  Israel,  and  they  shall  be  My  people." 

The  Assyrian  and  Chaldean  captivities  carried 
men's  thoughts  back  to  the  bondage  in  Egypt; 
and  the  experiences  of  the  Exodus  provided 
phrases  and  figures  to  describe  the  expected 
Return.  The  judges  had  delivered  individual 
tribes  or  groups  of  tribes.  Jeroboam  II.  had 
been  the  saviour  of  Samaria;  and  the  overthrow 
of  Sennacherib  had  rescued  Jerusalem.  But  the 
Exodus  stood  out  from  all  later  deliverances  as 
the  birth  of  the  whole  people.  Hence  the 
prophets  often  speak  of  the  Return  as  a  New 
Exodus. 

This  prophecy  takes  the  form  of  a  dialogue 
between  Jehovah  and  the  Virgin  of  Israel,  i.  e., 
the  nation  personified.  Jehovah  announces  that 
the  Israelite  exiles,  the  remnant  left  by  the 
sword  of  Shalmaneser  and  Sargon,  were  to  be 
more  highly  favoured  than  the  fugitives  from  the 
sword  of  Pharaoh,  of  whom  Jehovah  sware  in 
His  wrath  "  that  they  should  not  enter  into  My 
rest;  whose  carcases  fell  in  the  wilderness."  "A 
people  that  hath  survived  the  sword  hath  found 
favour  in  the  wilderness;  Israel  hath  entered  into 
his  rest,"  t — hath  found  favour — hath  entered — 
because  Jehovah  regards  His  purpose  as  already 
accomplished. 

Jehovah  speaks  from  His  ancient  dwelling- 
place  in  Jerusalem,  and,  when  the  Virgin  of  Is- 
rael   hears    Him    in    her   distant    exile,    she    an- 


"  From  afar  hath  Jehovah  appeared  unto  me  (saying), 
With  My  ancient  love  do  I  love  thee  ; 
Therefore    My    lovingkindness    is    enduring    toward 
thee."  § 


His  love  is  as  old  as  the  Exodus,  His  mercy  has 
endured  all  through  the  long,  weary  ages  of 
Israel's  sin  and  suffering. 

*  Hosea  xi.  q. 

+  Hosea  xiv. 

t  So  Giesebrecht,  reading  with  Jerome  and  Targum 
r»iarffd'd  for  the  obscure  and  obviously  corrupt  VhargVo. 
The  other  versions  varj^  widely  in  their  readings. 

§  R.  V.  "  with  lovingkindness  have  I  drawn  thee,"  R.  V. 
margin  "have  I  continued  lovingkindness  unto  thee"; 
the  word  for  "  drawn  "  occurs  also  in  Hosea  xi.  4,  *' I 
drew  them  .  .  .   with  bands  of  love." 


Then  Jehovah  replies: — 

"Again  will  I  build  thee,  and  thou  shalt  be  built,  O  Vir- 
gin of  Israel ; 

Again  shalt  thou  take  thy  tabrets,  and  go  forth  in  the 
dances  of  them  that  make  merry  ; 

Again  shalt  thou  plant  vineyards  on  the  mountains  of 
Samaria,  while  they  that  plant  shall  enjoy  the  fruit." 

This  contrasts  with  the  times  of  invasion  when 
the  vintage  was  destroyed  or  carried  off  by  the 
enemy.  Then  follows  the  Divine  purpose,  the 
crowning  mercy  of  Israel's  renewed  pros- 
perity:— 

"For  the  day  cometh  when  the  vintagers*  shall  cry  in 
the  hill-country  of  Ephraim, 
Arise,  let  us  go  up  to  Zion,  to  Jehovah  our  God." 

Israel  will  no  longer  keep  her  vintage  feasts  in 
schism  at  Samaria  and  Bethel  and  her  countless 
high  places,  but  will  join  with  Judah  in  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Temple,  which  Josiah's  covenant  had 
accepted  as  the  one  sanctuary  of  Jehovah. 

The    exultant    strain    continues,    stanza    after 
stanza: — 

"  Thus  saith  Jehovah  : 
E.^ult  joyously  for  Jacob,  and  shout  for  the  chief  of  the 

nations  ; 
Make  your  praises  heard,  and  say,  Jehovah  hath  saved 

Hi's  people, t  even  the  remnant  of  Israel. 
Behold,  I  bring  them  from  the  land  of  the  north,  and 

gather  them  from  the  uttermost  ends  of  the  earth  ; 
Among  them   blind   and  lame,   pregnant  women  and 

women  in  travail  together." 

None  are  left  behind,  not  even  those  least  fit  for 
the  journey. 

"  A  great  company  shall  return  hith*-. 
They  shall  come  with  weeping,  and  with  supplications 
will  I  lead  them." 

Of  old,  weeping  and  supplication  had  been  heard 
upon  the  heights  of  Israel  because  of  her  way- 
wardness and  apostasy;:}:  but  now  the  returning 
exiles  offer  prayers  and  thanksgiving  mingled 
with  tears,  weeping  partly  for  joy,  partly  for 
pathetic  memories. 

"  I  will  bring  them  to  streams  of  water,  by  a  plain  path, 
wherein  they  cannot  stumble  : 
For  I  am  become  once  more  a  father  to  Israel,  and 
Ephraim  is  My  first-born  son." 

Of  the  two  Israelite  states,  Ephraim,  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  had  long  been  superior  in 
power,  wealth,  and  religion.  Judah  was  often 
little  more  than  a  vassal  of  Samaria,  and  owed 
her  prosperity  and  even  her  existence  to  the 
barrier  which  Samaria  interposed  between 
Jerusalem  and  invaders  from  Assyria  or  Da- 
mascus. Until  the  latter  days  of  Samaria,  Judah 
had  no  prophets  that  could  compare  with  Elijah 
and  E'isha.  The  Jewish  prophet  is  tenacious  of 
the  rights  of  Zion,  but  he  does  not  base  any 
claim  for  the  ascendency  of  Judah  on  the  geo- 
graphical position  of  the  Temple;  he  does  not 
even  mention  the  sacerdotal  tribe  of  Levi.  Jew 
and  priest  as  he  was,  he  acknowledges  the  politi- 
cal and  religious  hegemony  of  Ephraim.  The 
fact  is  a  striking  illustration  of  the  stress  laid  by 

*  So  Giesebrecht's  conjecture  of  boceritn  (vintagers),  for 
the  jrocerim  (watchmen,  R.  V.).  The  latter  is  usually  ex- 
plained of  the  watcher  who  looked  for  the  appearance  of 
the  new  moon,  in  order  to  determine  the  time  of  the 
feasts.  The  practice  is  stated  on  negative  grounds  to  be 
post-exilic,  but  seems  likely  to  be  ancient.  On  the  other 
hand  "  vintagers"  seems  a  natural  sequel  t<~  the  preced- 
ing clauses. 

+  According  to  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  and  the  Targum, 
the  Hebrew  Text  has  (as  R.  V.)  "O  Jehovah,  save  Thy 
people." 

X\\\.  21. 


'eremiah  xxxi.] 


RESTORATION— III.    REUNION. 


203 


the  prophets  on  the  unity  of  Israel,  to  which  all 
sectional  interests  were  to  be  sacrificed.  If 
Ephraim  was  required  to  forsake  his  ancient 
shrines,  Jeremiah  was  equally  ready  to  forego 
any  pride  of  tribe  or  caste.  Did  we,  in  all  our 
different  Churches,  possess  the  same  generous 
spirit,  Christian  reunion  would  no  longer  be  a 
vain  and  distant  dream.  But,  passing  on  to  the 
next  stanza, — 

"  Hear  the  word  of  Jeliovah,  O  ye  nations,  and  make  it 

known  in  the  distant  islands. 
Say,   He  that   scattered   Israel  doth  gather  him,  and 

watcheth  over  him  as  a  shepherd  over  his  flock. 
Forjfehovah  hath  ransomed  Jacob  and  redeemed  him 

from  the  hand  of  him  that  was  too  strong  for  him. 
They  shall  come  and  sing  for  joy  in  the  height  of  Zion  ; 
They  shall  come  in  streams  to  the  bounty  of  Jehovah, 

tor  corn    and  new  wine    and  oil    and    lambs  and 

calves." 

Jeremiah  does  not  dwell,  in  any  grasping  sacer- 
dotal spirit,  on  the  contributions  which  these 
reconciled  schismatics  would  pay  to  the  Temple 
revenues,  but  rather  delights  to  make  mention 
of  their  share  in  the  common  blessings  of  God's 
obedient  children. 

"They  shall  be  like  a  well-watered  garden  ;  they  shall  no 
more  be  faint  and  weary  : 

Then  shall  they  rejoice— the  damsels  in  the  dance— the 
young  men  and  the  old  together. 

I  will  turn  their  mourning  into  gladness,  and  will  com- 
fort them,  and  will  bring  joy  out  of  their  wretched- 
ness. 

I  will  fill  the  priests  with  plenty,  and  My  people  shall 
be  satisfied  with  My  bounty — 

It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 

It  is  not  quite  clear  how  far,  in  this  chapter,  Is- 
rael is  to  be  understood  exclusively  of  Ephraim. 
If  the  foregoing  stanza  is,  as  it  seems,  perfectly 
general,  the  priests  are  simply  those  of  the  re- 
stored community,  ministering  at  the  Temple; 
but  if  the  reference  is  specially  to  Ephraim,  the 
priests  belong  to  families  involved  in  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  ten  tribes,  and  we  have  further 
evidence  of  the  catholic  spirit  of  the  Jewish 
prophet. 

Another  stanza: — 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  : 
A  voice   is  heard  in   Ramah,   lamentation  and  bitter 

weeping,  Rachel  weeping  for  her  children. 
She  refuseth  to  be  comforted  for  her  children,  for  they 
are  not." 

Rachel,  as  the  mother  of  Benjamin  and  Joseph, 
claimed  an  interest  in  both  the  Israelite  king- 
doms. Jeremiah  shows  special  concern  for  Ben- 
jamin, in  whose  territory  his  native  Anathoth 
was  situated.*  ^ 

"  Her  children  "  would  be  chiefly  the  Ephra- 
imites  and  Manassites,  who  formed  the  bulk 
of  the  Northern  Kingdom;  but  the  phrase  was 
doubtless  intended  to  include  other  Jews,  that 
Rachel  might  be  a  symbol  of  national  unity. 

The  connection  of  Rachel  with  Ramah  is  not 
obvious;  there  is  no  precedent  for  it.  Possibly 
Ramah  is  not  intended  for  a  proper  name,  and 
we  might  translate  "  A  voice  is  heard  upon  the 
heights."  In  Gen.  xxxv.  19.  Rachel's  grave  is 
placed  b'^tween  Bethel  and  Ephrath,+  and  in  i 
Sam.  X.  2,  in  the  border  of  Benjamin  at  Zelzah; 
only  here  has  Rachel  anything  to  do  with 
Ramah.  The  name,  however,  in  its  various 
forms,  was  not  uncommon.  Ramah,  to  the 
north  of  Jerusalem,  seems  to  have  been  a 
frontier  town,  and  debatable  territory:}:   between 

*  Isaiah  does  not  mention  Benjamin. 

+  •'  Which  is  Bethlehem,"  in  Genesis,  is  probably  a  later 
explanatory  addition  ;  and  the  explanation  is  not  neces- 
sarily a  mistake.     Cf.  Matt,  ii   18. 

X  I  Kings  XV.  17. 


the  two  kingdoms;  and  Rachel's  appearance 
there  might  symbolise  her  relation  to  both. 
This  Ramah  was  also  a  slave  depot  for  the  Chal- 
deans *  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  Rachel 
might  well  revisit  the  glimpses  of  the  moon  at 
a  spot  where  her  descendants  had  drunk  the  first 
bitter  draught  of  the  cup  of  exile.  In  any  case, 
the  lines  are  a  fresh  appeal  to  the  spirit  of  na- 
tional unity.  The  prophet  seems  to  say:  "  Chil- 
dren of  the  same  mother,  sharers,  in  the  same 
fate,  whether  of  ruin  or  restoration,  remember  the 
ties  that  bind  you,  and  forget  your  ancient  feuds." 
Rachel,  wailing  in  ghostly  fashion,  was  yet  a 
name  to  conjure  with,  and  the  prophet  hoped 
that  her  symbolic  tears  could  water  the  renewed 
growth  of  Israel's  national  life.  Christ,  present 
in  His  living  Spirit,  lacerated  at  heart  by  the 
bitter  feuds  of  those  who  call  Him  Lord,  should 
temper  the  harsh  judgments  that  Christians  pass 
on  servants  of  their  One  Master.  The  Jewish 
prophet  lamenting  the  miseries  of  schismatic  Is- 
rael contrasts  with  the  Pope  singing  Te  Deunts 
over  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew. 
Then  comes  the  answer: — 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  : 

Refrain  thy  voice  from  weeping,  and  ihine  eyes  from 
tears. 

Thou  shalt  have  wages  for  thy  labour— it  is  the  utter- 
ance of  Jehovah— they  shall  return  from  the  enemy's 
land. 

There  is  hope  for  thee  in  the  days  to  come— it  is  the 
utterance  of  Jehovah— thy  children  shall  return  to 
their  own  border."  + 

The  Niobe  of  the  nation  is  comforted,  but  now 
is  heard  another  voice: — 

"  Surely  I  hear  Ephraim  bemoaning  himself :  Thou  hast 
chastised  me  ;  1  am  chastised  like  a  calf  not  yet 
broken  to  the  yoke. 

Restore  me  to  Thy  favour,  that  I  may  return  unto  Thee, 
for  Thou  art  Jehovaji  my  God. 

In  returning  unto  Thee,  I  repent ;  when  I  come  to  my- 
self, I  smite  upon  my  thigh  in  penitence."  t 

The  image  of  the  calf  is  another  reminiscence  of 
Hosea,  with  whom  Israel  figures  as  a  "  back- 
sliding heifer '"  and  Ephraim  as  a  "  heifer  that 
has  been  broken  in  and  loveth  to  tread  out  the 
corn";  though  apparently  in  Hosea  Ephraim 
is  broken  in  to  wickedness.  Possibly  this  figure 
was  suggested  by  the  calves  at  Bethel  and  Dan. 
The  moaning  of  Ephraim,  like  the  wailing  of 
Rachel,  is  met  and  answered  by  the  Divine  com- 
passion. By  a  bold  and  touching  figure,  Je- 
hovah is  represented  as  surprised  at  the  depth  of 
His  passionate  aflfection  for  His  prodigal  son:— 

"  Can  it  be  that  Ephraim  is  indeed  a  son  that  is  precious 
to  Me  ?  is  he  mdeed  a  darling  child  ? 

As  often  as  I  speak  against  him,  I  cannot  cease  to  re- 
member him,§  . 

Wherefore  My  tender  compassion  is  moved  towards 
him  :  verily  I  will  have  mercy  on  him — 

It  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 

As  with  Hosea,  Israel  is  still  the  child  whom 
Jehovah  loved,  the  son  whom  He  called  out  of 
Egypt.  But  now  Israel  is  called  with  a  more 
effectual  calling: — 

"Set  thee  up  pillars  of  stone,!!  to  mark  the  way  ;  make 
thee  guideposts  :  set  thy  heart  toward  the  highway 
whereby  thou  wentest.  .  . 

Return,  O  "C'irgin  of  Israel,  return  unto  these  thy  cities. 

*  xl.  t. 

t  LXX.  omits  verse  17  6,  i.  e.,  from  "Jehovah  "  to  "  bor- 
der." 
J  Slightly  paraphrased. 
§  More  literally  as  R.  V.,  "  I  do  earnestly  remember  him 

still."  ,   ,,  .      „ 

1  The  Hebrew  Text  has  the  same  word,     tamrunm, 
here  that  is  used  in  verse  15  in  the  phrase  "bekhi  tarn- 


204 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


The  following  verse  strikes  a  note  of  discord, 
that  suggests  the  revulsion  of  feeling,  the  sud- 
den acceis  of  doubt,  that  sometimes  follows  the 
most  ecstatic  moods: — 

"How  long  wilt  thou  wander  to  and  fro,  O  backslidinjj 
daughter  ? 
Jehovah    hath    created  a  new    thing  in  the   earth— a 
woman  shall  compass  a  man." 

It  is  just  possible  that  this  verse  is  not  intended 
to  express  doubt  of  Israel's  cordial  response, 
but  is  merely  an  affectionate  urgency  that  presses 
the  immediate  appropriation  of  the  promised 
blessings.  But  such  an  exegesis  seems  forced, 
and  the  verse  is  a  strange  termination  to  the 
glowing  stanzas  that  precede.  It  may  have  been 
added  when  all  hope  of  the  return  of  the  ten 
tribes  was  over.* 

The  meaning  of  the  concluding  enigma  is  a's 
profound  a  mystery  as  the  fate  of  the  lost  tribes, 
and  the  solutions  rather  more  unsatisfactory. 
The  words  apparent!-/  denote  that  the  male  and 
the  female  shall  interchange  functions,  and  an 
explanation  often  giver,  is  that,  in  the  profound 
peace  of  the  New  Dispensation,  the  women  will 
protect  the  men.  This  portent  seems  to  be  the 
sign  which  is  to  win  the  Virgin  of  Israel  from 
her  vacillation  and  induce  her  to  return  at  once 
to  Palestine. 

In  Isaiah  xliii.  19  the  "  new  thing  "  which  Je- 
hovah does  is  to  make  a  way  in  the  untrodden 
desert  and  rivers  in  the  parched  wilderness.  A 
parallel  interpretation,  suggested  for  our  pas- 
sage, is  that  women  should  develop  manly 
strength  and  courage,  as  abnormal  to  them  as 
roads  and  rivers  to  a  wilderness.  When  women 
were  thus  endowed,  men  could  not  for  shame 
shrink  from  the  perils  of  the  Return. 

In  Isaiah  iv.  i  seven  women  court  one  man, 
and  it  has  been  suggestedf  that  the  sense  here  is 
"  women  shall  court  men,"  but  it  is  difScuIt  to 
see  how  this  would  be  relevant.  Another 
parallel  has  been  sought  for  in  the  Immanuel 
and  other  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  in  which  the 
birth  of  a  child  is  set  forth  as  a  sign.  Our  pas- 
sage would  then  assume  a  Messianic  character; 
the  return  of  the  Virgin  of  Israel  would  be  post- 
poned till  her  doubts  and  difBculties  should  be 
solved  by  the  appearance  of  a  new  Moses,  t 
This  view  has  much  to  commend  it,  but  does 
not  very  readily  follow  from  the  usage  of  the 
word  translated  "  compass."  Still  less  can  we 
regard  these  words  as  a  prediction  of  the  miracu- 
lous conception  of  our  Lord. 

The  next  stanza  connects  the  restoration  of 
Judah  with  that  of  Ephraim,  and,  for  the  most 
part,  goes  over  ground  already  traversed  in  our 
previous  chapters;  one  or  two  points  only  need 
be  noticed  here.  It  is  in  accordance  with  the 
catholic  and  gracious  spirit  which  characterises 
this  chapter  that  the  restoration  of  Judah  is  ex- 
J)ressly   connected   with   that  of   Ephraim.     The 

rurim,"  "  weeping  of  bitternesses  "  or  "  bitter  weeping." 
It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  coincidence  is  accidental, 
and  Hebrew  literature  is  given  to  paronomasia ;  at  the 
same  time  the  distance  of  the  words  and  the  complete 
absence  of  point  in  this  particular  instance  are  remark- 
able. The  LXX..  not  understanding  the  word,  repre- 
sented it  more  sito  by  the  similar  Greek  word  ny-opiav 
which  may  indicate  that  the  original  reading  was  "tim- 
orim,"  and  the  assimilation  to  "  tamrurim  may  be  a 
scribe's  caprice.  In  any  case,  the  word  here  connects 
with  "  tamar,"  a  palm,  the  post  being  made  of  or  like  a 
palm  tree.     Cf.  Giesbrecht,  Orelli,  Cheyne,  etc. 

*  Giesbrecht  treats  verses  21-26  as  a  later  addition,  but 
this  seems  unnecessary.  t 

t  So  Kautzsch. 

i  Cf.  Streane,  Cambridge  Bible. 


combination  of  the  future  fortunes  of  both  in  a 
.single  prophecy  emphasises  their  reunion.  The 
heading  of  this  stanza,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah 
Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel,"  is  different  from 
that  hitherto  used,  and  has  a  special  significance 
in  its  present  context.  It  is  "  the  God  of  Is- 
rael "  to  whom  Ephraim  is  a  darling  child  and  a 
first-born  son,  the  God  of  that  Israel  which  for 
centuries  stood  before  the  world  as  Ephraim;  it 
is  this  God  who  blesses  and  redeems  Judah. 
Her  faint  and  weary  soul  is  also  to  be  satisfied 
with  His  plenty;  Zion  is  to  be  honoured  as  the 
habitation  of  justice  and  the  mountain  of  holi- 
ness. 

"  Hereupon,"  saith  the  prophet,  "  I  awaked 
and  looked  about  me,  and  felt  that  my  sleep  had 
been  pleasant  to  me."  The  vision  had  come  to 
him,  in  some  sense,  as  a  dream.  Zechariah  * 
had  to  be  aroused,  like  a  man  wakened  out  of  his 
sleep,  in  order  to  receive  the  Divine  message; 
and  possibly  Zechariah's  sleep  was  the  ecstatic 
trance  in  which  he  had  beheld  previous  visions. 
Jeremiah,  however,  shows  scant  confidence  f  in 
the  inspiration  of  those  who  dream  dreams,  and 
it  does  not  seem  likely  that  this  is  a  unique  ex- 
ception to  his  ordinary  experience.  Perhaps  we 
may  say  with  Orelli  that  the  prophet  had  become 
lost  in  the  vision  of  future  blessedness  as  in 
some  sweet  dream. 

In  the  following  stanza  Jehovah  promises  to 
recruit  the  dwindled  numbers  of  Israel  and 
Judah;  with  a  sowing  more  gracious  and  fortu- 
nate than  that  of  Cadmus,  He  will  scatter t  over 
the  land,  not  dragons'  teeth,  but  the  seed  of  rnan 
and  beast.  Recurring^  to  Jeremiah's  original 
commission,  He  promises  that  as  He  watched 
over  Judah  to  pluck  up  and  to  break  down,  to 
overthrow  and  to  destroy  and  to  afflict,  so  now 
He  will  watch  over  them  to  build  and  to  plant. 

The  next  verse  is  directed  against  a  lingering 
dread,  by  which  men's  minds  were  still  pos- 
sessed. More  than  half  a  century  elapsed  be- 
tween the  death  of  Manasseh  and  the  fall  of  Je- 
rusalem. He  was  succeeded  by  Josiah,  who 
"  turned  to  Jehovah  with  all  his  heart,  and  with 
all  his  soul,  and  with  all  his  might."  ||  Yet  Je- 
hovah declared  to  Jeremiah  that  Manasseh's 
sins  had  irrevocably  fixed  the  doom  of  Judah,  so 
that  not  even  the  intercession  of  Moses  and 
Samuel  could  procure  her  pardon.lF  Men  might 
well  doubt  whether  the  guilt  of  that  wicked  reign 
wj\s  even  yet  fully  expiated,  whether  their  teeth 
might  not  still  be  set  on  edge  because  of  the 
sour  grapes  which  Manasseh  had  eaten.  There- 
fore the  prophet  continues:  "  In  those  days  men 
shall  no  longer  say.  The  fathers  have  eaten  sour 
grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge; 
but  every  man  shall  die  for  his  own  transgres- 
sion, all  who  eat  sour  grapes  shall  have  their 
own  teeth  set  on  edge."  Or  to  use  the  explicit 
words  of  Ezekiel,  in  the  great  chapter  in  which 
he  discusses  this  permanent  theological  diffi- 
culty: "The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die.  The 
son  shall  not  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  father, 
neither  shall  the  father  bear  the  iniquity  of  the 
son;  the  righteousness  of  the  righteous  shall  be 
upon   him,    and   the   wickedness    of    the    wicked 

*  Zech.  iv.  I. 

+  xxiii.  25-32,  xxvii.  q,  xxix.  8  :  cf.  Deut.  xiii.  1-5. 

i  Cf.  Hosea  ii.  23,  "  I  will  sow  her  unto  Me  m  the  earth 
(or  land),  in  reference  to fezreel,  understood  as  "Whom 
God  soweth  "  (R.  V.  margin,). 

§  i.  10-12. 

ll  2  Kings  xxiii.  25. 

1[  XV.  1-4. 


Jeremiah  xxxi.] 


RESTORATION— III.    REUNION. 


205 


shall  be  upon  him."  *  With  the  fall  of  Jeru- 
salem, a  chapter  in  the  history  of  Israel  was  con- 
cluded for  ever;  Jehovah  blotted  out  the  damn- 
ing record  of  the  past,  and  turned  over  a  new 
leaf  in  the  annals  of  His  people.  The  account 
between  Jehovah  and  the  Israel  of  the  monarchy 
was  finally  closed,  and  no  penal  balance  was 
carried  over  to  stand  against  the  restored  com- 
munity. 

The  last  portion  of  this  chapter  is  so  important 
that  we  must  reserve  it  for  separate  treatment, 
but  we  may  pause  for  a  moment  to  consider  the 
prophecy  of  the  restoration  of  Ephraim  from 
two  points  of  view — the  unity  of  Israel  and  the 
return  of  the  ten  tribes. 

In  the  first  place,  this  chapter  is  an  eirenicon, 
intended  to  consign  to  oblivion  the  divisions  and 
feuds  of  the  Chosen  People.  After  the  fall  of 
Samaria,  the  remnant  of  Israel  had  naturally 
looked  to  Judah  for  support  and  protection,  and 
the  growing  weakness  of  Assyria  had  allowed 
the  Jewish  kings  to  exercise  a  certain  authority 
over  the  territory  of  northern  tribes.  The  same 
fate — the  sack  of  the  capital  and  the  deportation 
of  most  of  the  inhabitants — had  successively  be- 
fallen Ephraim  and  Judah.  His  sense  of  the 
unity  of  the  race  was  too  strong  to  allow  the 
prophet  to  be  satisfied  with  the  return  of  Judah 
and  Benjamin,  apart  from  the  other  tribes.  Yet 
it  would  have  been  monstrous  to  suppose  that 
Jehovah  would  bring  back  Ephraim  from  As- 
syria, and  Judah  from  Babylon,  only  that  they 
might  resume  their  mutual  hatred  and  suspicion. 
Even  wild  beasts  are  said  not  to  rend  one  an- 
other when  they  are  driven  by  floods  to  the  same 
hill-top. 

Thus  various  causes  contributed  to  produce  a 
kindlier  feeling  between  the  survivors  of  the 
catastrophes  of  Samaria  and  Jerusalem; and  from 
henceforth  those  of  the  ten  tribes  who  found 
their  way  back  to  Palestine  lived  in  brotherly 
union  with  the  other  Jews.  And,  on  the  whole, 
the  Jews  have  since  remained  united  both  as  a 
race  and  a  religious  community.  It  is  true  that 
the  relations  of  the  later  Jews  to  Samaria  were 
somewhat  at  variance  both  with  the  letter  and 
spirit  of  this  prophecy,  but  that  Samaria  had 
only  the  slightest  claim  to  be  included  in  Israel. 
Otherwise  the  divisions  between  Hillel  and 
Shammai,  Sadducees  and  Pharisees,  Karaites, 
Sephardim  and  Ashkenazim,  Reformed  and  Un- 
reformed  Jews,  have  rather  been  legitimate 
varieties  of  opinion  and  practice  within  Juda- 
ism than  a  rendering  asunder  of  the  Israel  of 
God. 

Matters  stand  very  differently  with  regard  to 
the  restoration  of  Ephraim.  We  know  that  in- 
dividual members  and  families  of  the  ten  tribes 
were  included  in  the  new  Jewish  community,  and 
that  the  Jews  reoccupied  Galilee  and  portions  of 
Eastern  Palestine.  But  the  husbandmen  who 
had  planted  vineyards  on  the  hills  of  Samaria 
were  violently  repulsed  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
and  were  denied  any  part  or  lot  in  the  restored 
Israel.  The  tribal  inheritance  of  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh  was  never  reoccupied  by  Ephraimites 
and   Manassites  who  came  to  worship  Jehovah 

*Ezek.  xviii.  ao:  cf.  Cheyne  "Jeremiah"  (Men  of  the 
Bible),  X.  ISO. 


in  His  Temple  at  Jerusalem.  There  was  no  re- 
turn of  the  ten  tribes  that  in  any  way  corre- 
sponded to  the  terms  of  this  prophecy  or  that 
could  rank  with  the  return  of  their  brethren. 
Our  growing  acquaintance  with  the  races  of  the 
world  seems  likely  to  exclude  even  the  possi- 
bility of  any  such  restoration  of  Ephraim.  Of 
the  two  divisions  of  Israel,  so  long  united  in 
common  experiences  of  grace  and  chastisement, 
the  one  has  been  taken  and  the  other  left. 

Christendom  is  the  true  heir  of  the  ideals  of 
Israel,  but  she  is  mostly  content  to  inherit  them 
as  counsels  of  perfection.  Isaiah  *  struck  the 
keynote  of  this  chapter  when  he  prophesied  that 
Ephraim  should  not  envy  Judah,  nor  Judah  vex 
Ephraim.  Our  prophet,  in  the  same  generous 
spirit,  propounds  a  programme  of  reconciliation. 
It  might  serve  for  a  model  to  those  who  con- 
struct schemes  for  Christian  Reunion.  When 
two  denominations  are  able  to  unite  on  such 
terms  that  the  one  admits  the  other  to  be  the 
first-born  of  God,  His  darling  child  and  precious 
in  His  sight,  and  the  latter  is  willing  to  accept 
the  former's  central  sanctuary  as  the  head- 
quarters of  the  united  body,  we  shall  have  come 
some  way  towards  realising  this  ancient  Jewish 
ideal.  Meanwhile  Ephraim  remains  consumed 
with  envy  of  Judah;  and  Judah  apparently  con- 
siders it  her  most  sacred  duty  to  vex  Ephraim. 

Moreover  the  disappearance  of  what  was  at 
one  time  the  most  flourishing  branch  of  the  He- 
brew Church  has  many  parallels  in  Church  His- 
tory. Again  and  again  religious  dissension  has 
been  one  of  the  causes  of  political  ruin,  and 
the  overthrow  of  a  Christian  state  has  some- 
times involved  the  extinction  of  its  religion. 
Christian  thought  and  doctrine  owe  an  immense 
debt  to  the  great  Churches  of  Northern  Africa 
and  Egypt.  But  these  provinces  were  torn  by 
the  dissensions  of  ecclesiastical  parties;  and  the 
quarrels  of  Donatists,  Arians,  and  Catholics  in 
North  Africa,  the  endless  controversies  over  the 
Person  of  Christ  in  Egypt,  left  them  helpless 
before  the  Saracen  invader.  To-day  the  Church 
of  Tertullian  and  Augustine  is  blotted  out,  and 
the  Church  of  Origen  and  Clement  is  a  miser- 
able remnant.  Similarly  the  ecclesiastical  strife 
between  Rome  and  Constantinople  lost  to  Chris- 
tendom some  of  the  fairest  provinces  of  Europe 
and  Asia,  and  placed  Christian  races  under  the 
rule  of  the  Turk. 

Even  now  the  cause  of  Christians  in  heathen 
and  Mohammedan  countries  suffers  from  the 
jealousy  of  Christian  states,  and  modern 
Churches  sometimes  avail  themselves  of  this 
jealousy  to  try  and  oust  their  rivals  from  prom- 
ising fields  for  mission  work. 

It  is  a  melancholy  reflection  that  Jeremiah's 
effort  at  reconciliation  came  too  late,  when  the 
tribes  whom  it  sought  to  reunite  were  hopelessly 
set  asunder.  Reconciliation,  which  involves  a 
kind  of  mutual  repentance,  can  ill  afford  to  be 
deferred  to  the  eleventh  hour.  In  the  last 
agonies  of  the  Greek  Empire,  there  was  more 
than  on^  formal  reconciliation  between  the 
Eastern  and  Western  Churches;  but  they  also 
came  too  late,  and  could  not  survive  the  Empire 
which  they  failed  to  preserve. 
+  Isa.  xi.  13. 


2o6 


_  THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


CHAPTER  XXXni. 

RESTORATION— IV.    THE   NEW   COV- 
ENANT. 

Jeremiah  xxxi.  31-38:  cf.  Hebrews  viii. 

"  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel 
and  the  house  of  Judah."— JER.  xxxi.  31. 

The  religious  history  of  Israel  in  the  Old 
Testament  has  for  its  epochs  a  series  of  cov- 
enants: Jehovah  declared  His  gracious  purposes 
towards  His  people,  and  made  known  the  con- 
ditions upon  which  they  were  to  enjoy  His  prom- 
ised blessings;  they,  on  their  part,  undertook  to 
observe  faithfully  all  that  Jehovah  commanded. 
We  are  told  that  covenants  were  made  with 
Noah,  after  the  Flood;  with  Abraham,  when  he 
was  assured  that  his  descendants  should  inherit 
the  land  of  Canaan;  at  Sinai,  when  Israel  first 
became  a  nation;  with  Joshua,  after  the  Promised 
Land  was  conquered;  and,  at  the  close  of  Old 
Testament  history,  when  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
established  the  Pentateuch  as  the  Code  and 
Canon  of  Judaism. 

One  of  the  oldest  sections  of  the  Pentateuch, 
Exodus  XX.  20-xxiii.  ^3,  is  called  the  ''  Book  of 
the  Covenant,"  *  and  Ewald  named  the  Priestly 
Code  the  "  Book  of  the  Four  Covenants." 
Judges  and  Samuel  record  no  covenants  between 
Jehovah  and  Israel;  but  the  promise  of  perma- 
nence to  the  Davidic  dynasty  is  spoken  of  as  an 
everlasting  covenant.  Isaiah,f  Amos,  and  Micah 
make  no  mention  of  the  Divine  covenants.  Jere- 
miah, however,  imitates  Hoseat  in  emphasising 
this  aspect  of  Jehovah's  relation  to  Israel,  and  is 
followed  in  his  turn  by  Ezekiel  and  II.  Isaiah. 

Jeremiah  had  played  his  part  in  establishing 
covenants  between  Israel  and  its  God.  He  is 
not,  indeed,  even  so  much  as  mentioned  in  the 
account  of  Josiah's  reformation;  and  it  is  not 
clear  that  he  himself  makes  any  express  reference 
to  it;  so  that  some  doubt  must  still  be  felt  as_to 
his  share  in  that  great  movement.  At  the  same 
time  indirect  evidence  seems  to  af¥ord  proof  of 
the  common  opinion  that  Jeremiah  was  active 
in  the  proceedings  which  resulted  in  the  solemn 
engagement  to  observe  the  code  of  Deuter- 
onomy. But  yet  another  covenant  occupies  a 
chapter§  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah,  and  in  this 
case  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  prophet  was  the 
prime  mover  in  inducing  the  Jews  to  release  their 
Hebrew  slaves.  This  act  of  emancipation  was 
adopted  in  obedience  to  an  ordinance  of  Deuter- 
onomy,||  so  that  Jeremiah's  experience  oi  former 
covenants  was  chiefly  connected  with  the  code  of 
Deuteronomy  and  the  older  Book  of  the  Cov- 
enant upon  which  it  was  based. 

The  Restoration  to  which  Jeremiah  looked  for- 
ward was  to  throw  the  Exodus  into  the  shade, 
and  to  constitute  a  new  epoch  in  the  history  of 
Israel  more  remarkable  than  the  first  settlement 
in  Canaan.  The  nation  was  to  be  founded  anew, 
and  its  regeneration  would  necessarily  #est  upon 
a  New  Covenant,  which  would  supersede  the 
Covenant  of  Sinai. 

"  Behold,  the  days  come — it  is  the  utterance  of 
Jehovah — when  I  will  enter  into  a  new  covenant 
with    the    House    of    Israel    and    the    House    of 

*  Exod.  xxiv.  7. 

+  /.  e.,  in  the  sections  generally  acknowledged. 

i  Hosea  ii.  18,  vi.  7,  viii.  i. 

§  xxxiv. 

f  Cf.  xxxiv.  14  with  Deut.  xv.  12  and  Exod.  xxi.  2. 


Judah:  not  according  to  the  covenant  into  which 
I  entered  with  your  fathers,  when  I  took  them 
by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt." 

The  Book  of  the  Covenant  and  Deuteronomy 
had  both  been  editions  of  the  Mosaic  Covenant, 
and  had  neither  been  intended  nor  regarded  as 
anything  new.  Whatever  was  fresh  in  them, 
either  in  form  or  substance,  was  merely  the 
adaptation  of  existing  ordinances  to  altered  cir- 
cumstances. But  now  the  Mosaic  Covenant  was 
declared  obsolete,  the  New  Covenant  was  not  to 
be,  like  Deuteronomy,  merely  a  fresh  edition  of 
the  earliest  code.  The  Return  from  Babylon, 
like  the  primitive  Migration  from  Ur  and  like 
the  Exodus  from  Egypt,  was  to  be  the  occasion 
of  a  new  Revelation,  placing  the  relations  of  Je- 
hovah and  His  people  on  a  new  footing. 

When  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  established,  as  the 
Covenant  of  the  Restoration,  yet  another  edition 
of  the  Mosaic  ordinances,  they  were  acting  in 
the  teeth  of  this  prophecy — not  because  Jehovah 
had  changed  His  purpose,  but  because  the  time 
of   fulfilment   had   not  yet   come.* 

The  rendering  of  the  next  clause  is  uncertain, 
and,  in  any  case,  the  reason  given  for  setting 
aside  the  old  covenant  is  not  quite  what  might 
have  been  expected.  The  Authorised  and  Re- 
vised Versions  translate:  "  Which  My  cov- 
enant they  brake,  although  I  was  an  husband 
unto  them  ";f  thus  introducing  that  Old  Testa- 
ment figure  of  marriage  between  Jehovah  and 
Israel  which  is  transferred  in  Ephesians  and  the 
Apocalypse  to  Christ  and  the  Church.  Th« 
margin  of  the  Revised  Version  has:  "  Foras- 
much as  they  brake  My  covenant,  although  I 
was  lord  over  them."  There  is  little  difference 
between  these  two  translations,  both  of  which 
imply  that  in  breaking  the  covenant  Israel  was 
setting  aside  Jehovah's  legitimate  claim  to 
obedience.  A  third  translation,  on  much  the 
same  lines,  would  be  "  although  I  was  Baal  unto 
or  over  them";:!:  Baal  or  ba'al  being  found  for 
lord,  husband,  in  ancient  times  as  a  name  of 
Jehovah,  and  in  Jeremiah's  time  as  a  name  of 
heathen  gods.  Jeremiah  is  fond  of  parono- 
masia, and  frequently  refers  to  Baal,  so  that  he 
may  have  been  here  deliberately  ambiguous. 
The  phrase  might  suggest  to  the  Hebrew  reader 
that  Jehovah  was  the  true  lord  or  husband  of 
Israel,  and  the  true  Baal  or  God,  but  that 
Israel  had  come  to  regard  Him  as  a  mere  Baal, 
like  one  of  the  Baals  of  the  heathen.  "  Foras- 
much as  they,  on  their  part,  set  at  nought  My 
covenant;  so  that  I,  their  true  Lord,  became  to 
them  as  a  mere  heathen  Baal."  The  covenant 
and  the  God  who  gave  it  were  alike  treated  with 
contempt. 

The  Septuagint,  which  is  quoted  in  Hebrews 
viii.  9,  has  another  translation:  "  And  I  regarded 
them  not."§  Unless  this  represents  a  different 
reading,!!  it  is  probably  due  to  a  feeling  that  the 
form  of  the  Hebrew  sentence  required  a  close 
parallelism.  Israel  neglected  to  observe  the 
covenant,  and  Jehovah  ceased  to  feel  any  inter- 
est in  Israel.  But  the  idea  of  the  latter  clause 
seems  alien  to  the  context. 

*  Cf.  Prof.  Adeney's  "  Ezra,  Nehemiah,"  etc.,  in  Vol.  III. 
t  So  also  Kautzsch,  Reuss,  Sugfried,  and  Stade.    The 
same  phrase  is  thus  translated  in  iii.  14. 
$  "  I  was  Baal ''  =  "  ba'alti." 

i^n?yj;  ?yj  occurs  in  xiv.  19,  and  is  trarslated  hy  A, 
and  R.  V.  "loathed." 


Jeremiah  xxxi.]        RESTORATION— IV.    THE    NEW    COVENANT. 


207 


In  any  case,  the  new  and  better  covenant  is 
offered  to  Israel,  after  it  has  failed  to  observe 
the  first  covenant.  This  Divine  procedure  is  not 
quite  according  to  many  of  our  theories.  The 
law  of  ordinances  is  often  spoken  of  as  adapted 
to  the  childhood  of  the  race.  We  set  children 
easy  tasks,  and  when  these  are  successfully  per- 
formed we  require  of  them  something  more  diffi- 
cult. We  grant  them  limited  privileges,  and  if 
they  make  a  good  use  of  them  th^  children  are 
promoted  to  higher  opportunities.  We  might 
perhaps  have  expected  that  when  the  Israelites 
failed  to  observe  the  Mosaic  ordinances,  they 
would  have  been  placed  under  a  narrower  and 
harsher  dispensation;  yet  their  very  failure  leads 
to  the  promise  of  a  better  covenant  still.  Sub- 
sequent history,  indeed,  qualifies  the  strangeness 
of  the  Divine  dealing.  Only  a  remnant  of  Israel 
survived  as  the  people  of  God.  The  Covenant  of 
Ezra  was  very  different  from  the  New  Covenant 
of  Jeremiah; and  the  later  Jews, as  a  community,* 
did  not  accept  that  dispensation  of  grace  which 
ultimately  realised  Jeremiah's  prophecy.  In  a 
narrow  and  unspiritual  fashion  the  Jews  of  the 
Restoration  observed  the  covenant  of  external 
ordinances;  so  that,  in  a  certain  sense,  the  Law 
was  fulfilled  before  the  new  Kingdom  of  God 
was  inaugurated.  But  if  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
had  reviewed  the  history  of  the  restored  com- 
munity, they  would  have  declined  to  receive  it 
as,  in  any  sense,  the  fulfilling  of  a  Divine  cov- 
enant. The  Law  of  Moses  was  not  fulfilled,  but 
made  void,  by  the  traditions  of  the  Pharisees. 
The  fact  therefore  remains,  that  failure  in  the 
lower  forms,  so  to  speak,  of  God's  school  is  still 
followed  by  promotion  to  higher  privileges. 
However  little  we  may  be  able  to  reconcile  this 
truth  with  o  priori  views  of  Providence,  it  has 
analogies  in  nature,  and  reveals  new  depths  of 
Divine  love  and  greater  resourcefulness  of  Di- 
vine grace.  Boys  whose  early  life  is  unsatis- 
factory nevertheless  grow  up  into  the  responsi- 
bilities and  privileges  of  manhood;  and  the  wil- 
ful, disobedient  child  does  not  always  make  a 
bad  man.  We  are  apt  to  think  that  the  highest 
form  of  development  is  steady,  continuous,  and 
serene,  from  good  to  better,  from  better  to  best. 
The  real  order  is  more  awful  and  stupendous, 
combining  good  and  evil,  success  and  failure, 
victory  and  defeat,  in  its  continuous  advance 
through  the  ages.  The  wrath  of  man  is  not  the 
only  evil  passion  that  praises  God  by  its  ulti- 
mate subservience  to  His  purpose.  We  need 
not  fear  lest  such  Divine  overruling  of  sin  should 
prove  any  temptation  to  wrongdoing,  seeing  that 
it  works,  as  in  the  exile  of  Israel,  through  the 
anguish  and  humiliation  of  the  sinner. 

The  next  verse  explains  the  character  of  the 
New  Covenant;  once  Jehovah  wrote  His  law 
on  tables  of  stone,  but  now: — 

"  This  is  the  covenant  which  I  will  conclude  with  the 
House  of  Israel  after  those  days— it  is  the  utterance 
of  Jehovah — 

I  will  put  My  law  within  them,  and  will  write  it  upon 
their  heart ; 

And  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  My  people." 

These  last  words  were  an  ancient  formula  for 
the  immemorial  relation  of  Jehovah  and  Israel, 
but  they  were  to  receive  new  fulness  of  mean- 
ing.    The  inner  law,  written  on  the  heart,  is  in 

*  We  usually  underrate  the  proportion  of  Jews  who 
embraced  Christianity.  Hellenistic  Judaism  disappeared 
as  Christianity  became  widely  diffused,  and  was  probably 
for  the  most  part  absorbed  into  the  new  faith. 


contrast  to  Mosaic  ordinances.  It  has,  there- 
fore, two  essential  characteristics:  first,  it  gov- 
erns life,  not  by  fixed  external  regulations,  but 
by  the  continual  control  of  heart  and  conscience 
by  the  Divine  Spirit;  secondly,  obedience  is  ren- 
dered to  the  Divine  Will,  not  from  external  com- 
pulsion, but  because  man's  inmost  nature  is  pos- 
sessed by  entire  loyalty  to  God.  The  new  law 
involves  no  alteration  of  the  standards  of  mo- 
rality or  of  theological  doctrine,  butit  lays  stress 
on  the  spiritual  character  of  man's  relation  to 
God,  and  therefore  on  the  fact  that  God  is  a 
spiritual  and  moral  being.  When  man's  obe- 
dience is  claimed  on  the  ground  of  God's  irre- 
sistible power,  and  appeal  is  made  to  material 
rewards  and  punishments,  God's  personality  is 
obscured  and  the  way  is  opened  for  the  deifica- 
tion of  political  or  material  Force.  This  doc- 
trine of  setting  aside  of  ancient  codes  by  the 
authority  of  the  Inner  Law  is  implied  in  many 
passages  of  our  book.  The  superseding  of  the 
Mosaic  Law  is  set  forth  by  a  most  expressive 
symbol,*  "  When  ye  are  multiplied  and  increased 
in  the  land,  '  The  Ark  of  the  Covenant  of  Je- 
hovah '  shall  no  longer  be  the  watchword  of 
Israel:  men  shall  neither  think  of  the  ark  nor 
remember  it;  they  shall  neither  miss  the  ark  nor 
make  another  in  its  place."  The  Ark  and  the 
Mosaic  Torah  were  inseparably  connected;  if 
the  Ark  was  to  perish  and  be  forgotten,  the  Law 
must  also  be  annulled. 

Jeremiah  moreover  discerned  with  Paul  that 
there  was  a  law  in  the  members  warring  against 
the  Law  of  Jehovah:  "  The  sin  of  Judah  is  writ- 
ten with  a  pen  of  iron,  and  with  the  point  of  a 
diamond:  it  is  graven  upon  the  table  of  their 
heart,  and  upon  the  horns  of  their  altars."  f 

Hence  the  heart  of  the  people  had  to  be 
changed  before  they  could  enter  into  the  bless- 
ings of  the  Restoration:  "  I  will  give  them  an 
heart  to  know  Me,  that  I  am  Jehovah:  and  they 
shall  be  My  people,  and  I  will  be  their  God:  for 
they  shall  return  unto  Me  with  their  whole 
heart."  t  In  the  exposition  of  the  symbolic 
purchase  of  Hanameel's  field.  Jehovah  promises 
to  make  an  everlasting  covenant  with  His  peo- 
ple, that  He  will  always  do  them  good  and  never 
forsake  them.  Such  continual  blessings  imply 
that  Israel  will  always  be  faithful.  Jehovah  no 
longer  seeks  to  ensure  their  fidelity  by  an  ex- 
ternal law,  with  its  alternate  threats  and  prom- 
ises: He  will  rather  control  the  inner  life  by 
His  grace.  "  I  will  give  them  one  heart  and 
one  way,  that  they  may  fear  Me  for  ever;  .  .  . 
I  will  put  My  fear  in  their  hearts,  that  they  may 
not  depart  from    Me."§ 

We  must  not,  of  course,  suppose  that  these 
principles — of  obedience  from  loyal  enthusiasm, 
and  of  the  guidance  of  heart  and  conscience  by 
the  Spirit  of  Jehovah — were  new  to  the  religion 
of  Israel.  They  are  implied  in  the  idea  of  pro- 
phetic inspiration.  When  Saul  went  home  to 
Gibeah,  "  there  went  with  him  a  band  of  men, 
whose  hearts  God  had  touched."  ||  In  Deuter- 
onomy, Israel  is  commanded  to  "  love  Jehovah 
thy  God  with  all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  th> 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  might.  And  these  words, 
which  I  command  thee  this  day,  shall  be  in  thine 
heart."  IF 

The  novelty  of  Jeremiah's  teaching  is  that 
these   principles   are   made   central   in   the    New 


*  iii.  14,  slightly  paraphrased, 
txvii.  I. 
^xxxiv.  7. 


§xxxii.  39,  40. 
1 1  Sam.  X.  26. 
"T  Deut.  vi.  5,  6. 


2o8 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


Covenant.  Even  Deuteronomy,  which  ap- 
proaches so  closely  to  the  teaching  of  Jeremiah, 
was  a  new  edition  of  the  Covenant  of  the  Ex- 
odus, an  attempt  to  secure  a  righteous  life  by 
exhaustive  rules  and  by  external  sanctions. 
Jeremiah  had  witnessed  and  probably  assisted 
the  effort  to  reform  Judah  by  the  enforcement 
of  the  Deuteronomic  Code.  But  when  Josiah's 
religious  policy  collapsed  after  his  defeat  and 
death  at  Megiddo,  Jeremiah  lost  faith  in  elabo- 
rate codes,  and  turned  from  the  letter  to  the 
spirit. 

The  next  feature  of  the  New  Covenant  natu- 
rally follows  from  its  being  written  upon  men's 
hearts  by  the  finger  of  Jehovah: — 

"Men  shall  no  longer  teach  one  another  and  teach  each 
other,  saying.  Know  ye  Jehovah  ! 
For  all  shall  know  Me,  from  the  least  to  the  greatest- 
it  is  the  utterance  of  Jehovah." 

In  ancient  times  men  could  only  "  know  Je- 
hovah "  and  ascertain  His  will  by  resorting  to 
some  sanctuary,  where  the  priests  preserved  and 
transmitted  the  sacred  tradition  and  delivered 
the  Divine  oracles.  Written  codes  scarcely  al- 
tered the  situation;  copies  would  be  few  and  far 
between,  and  still  mostly  in  the  custody  of  the 
priests.  Whatever  drawbacks  arise  from  attach- 
ing supreme  religious  authority  to  a  printed 
book  were  multiplied  a  thousandfold  when  codes 
could  only  be  copied.  But,  in  the  New  Israel, 
men's  spiritual  life  would  not  be  at  the  mercy  of 
pen,  ink,  and  paper,  of  scribe  and  priest.  The 
man  who  had  a  book  and  could  read  would  no 
longer  be  able,  with  the  self-importance  of  ex- 
clusive knowledge,  to  bid  his  less  fortunate 
brethren  to  know  Jehovah.  He  Himself  would 
be  the  one  teacher,  and  His  instruction  would 
fall,  like  the  sunshine  and  the  rain,  upon  all 
hearts  alike. 

And  yet  again  Israel  is  assured  that  past  sin 
shall  not  hinder  the  fulfilment  of  this  glorious 
vision: — 

"  For  1  will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and  their  sin  will  I 
remember  no  more." 

Recurring  to  the  general  topic  of  the  Restora- 
tion of  Israel,  the  prophet  affixes  the  double  seal 
of  two  solemn  Divine  asseverations.  Of  old, 
Jehov'ah  had  promised  Noah:  "  While  the  earth 
remaineth,  seedtime  and  harvest,  cold  and  heat, 
summer  and  winter,  day  and  night,  shall  not 
cease."  *  Now  He  promises  that  while  sun  and 
moon  and  stars  and  sea  continue  in  their  ap- 
pointed order,  Israel  shall  not  cease  from  being 
a  nation.  And,  again,  Jehovah  will  not  cast  off 
Israel  on  account  of  its  sin  till  the  height  of 
heaven  can  be  measured  and  the  foundations  of 
the  earth  searched  out.f 

*  Gen.  viii.  22  (J.). 

t  Verses  35-37  occur  in  the  LXX.  in  the  order  37,  35,  36. 
Taey  are  considered  by  many  critics  to  be  a  later  addi- 
tion. Ttie  most  remarkable  feature  of  the  paragraph  is 
the  clause  translated  by  the  Authorised  Version  "  which 
divideth  [Revised  Version,  text  "  stirreth  up,"  margin 
'"stilleth"]  the  sea  when  the  waves  thereof  roar;  The 
Lord  of  Hosts  is  His  name."  This  whole  clause  is  taken 
word  for  word  from  Isa.  li.  15,  "I  am  Jehovah  thy  God, 
which  stirreth  up,"  etc.  It  seems  clear  that  either  this 
clause  or  35-37  as  a  whole  were  added  by  an  editor 
acquainted  with  II.  Isaiah.  The  prophecy,  as  it  stands  in 
the  Masoretic  te.xt,  is  concluded  by  a  detailed  description 
of  the  site  of  the  restored  Jerusalem.  The  contrast 
between  the  glorious  vision  of  the  New  Israel  and  these 
architectural  specifications  is  almost  grotesque.  Verses 
58-40  are  regarded  by  many  as  a  later  addition  ;  and  even 
if  they  are  by  Jeremiah,  they  form  an  independent 
prophecy  and  have  no  connection  with  the  rest  of  the 
chapter.      Our    knowledge    of   the    geographical  points 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

RESTORATION— V.  REVIEW. 

Jeremiah  xxx.-xxxiii. 

In  reviewing  these  chapters  we  must  be  care- 
ful not  to  suppose  that  Jeremiah  knew  all  that 
would  ultirn^tely  result  from  his  teaching. 
When  he  declared  that  the  conditions  of  the 
New  Covenant  would  be  written,  not  in  a  few 
parchments,  but  on  every  heart,  he  laid  down  a 
principle  which  involved  the  most  characteristic 
teaching  of  the  New  Testament  and  the  Reform- 
ers, and  which  might  seem  to  justify  extreme 
mysticism.  When  we  read  these  prophecies  in 
the  light  of  history,  they  seem  to  lead  by  a  short 
and  direct  path  to  the  Pauline  doctrines  of  Faith 
and  Grace.  Constraining  grace  is  described  in 
the  words:  "  I  will  put  My  fear  in  their  hearts, 
that  they  shall  not  depart  from  Me."  *  Justifi- 
cation by  faith  instead  of  works  substitutes  the 
response  of  the  soul  to  the  Spirit  of  God  for 
conformity  to  a  set  of  external  regulations — the 
writing  on  the  heart  for  the  carving  of  ordi- 
nances on  stone.  Yet,  as  Newton's  discovery  of 
the  law  of  gravitation  did  not  make  him  aware 
of  all  that  later  astronomers  have  discovered,  so 
Jeremiah  did  not  anticipate  Paul  and  Augustine, 
Luther  and  Calvin:  h^  was  only  their  fore- 
runner. Still  less  did  he  intend  to  afifirm  all  that 
has  been  taught  by  the  Brothers  of  the  Common 
Life  or  the  Society  of  Friends.  We  have  fol- 
lowed the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  in  interpret- 
ing his  prophecy  of  the  New  Covenant  as  abro- 
gating the  Mosaic  code  and  inaugurating  a  new 
departure  upon  entirely  different  lines.  This 
view  is  supported  by  his  attitude  towards  the 
Temple,  and  especially  the  Ark.  At  the  same 
time  we  must  not  suppose  that  Jeremiah  con- 
templated the  summary  and  entire  abolition  of 
the  previous  dispensation.  He  simply  delivers 
his  latest  message  from  Jehovah,  without  bring- 
ing its  contents  into  relation  with  earlier  truth, 
without  indeed  waiting  to  ascertain  for  himself 
how  the  old  and  the  new  were  to  be  combined. 
But  we  may  be  sure  that  the  Divine  writing  on 
the  heart  would  have  included  much  that  was 
already  written  in  Deuteronomy,  and  that  both 
books  and  teachers  would  have  had  their  place 
in  helping  men  to  recognise  and  interpret  the 
inner  leadings  of  the  Spirit. 

In  rising  from  the  perusal  of  these  chapters  the 
reader  is  tempted  to  use  the  prophet's  words 
with  a  somewhat  different  meaning:  "  I  awaked 
and  looked  about  me,  and  felt  that  I  had  had  a 
pleasant  dream."  f  Renan,  with  cynical  frank- 
ness, heads  a  chapter  on  such  prophecies  with 
the  title  "  Pious  Dreams."  While  Jeremiah's 
glowing  utterances  rivet  our  attention,  the 
gracious  words  fall  like  balm  upon  our  aching 
hearts,  and  we  seem,  like  the  Apostle,  caught 
up  into  Paradise.  But  as  soon  as  we  try  to  con- 
nect our  visions  with  any  realities,  past,  present, 
or  in  prospect,  there  comes  a  rude  awakening. 
The  restored  community  attained  to  no  New 
Covenant,  but  was  only  found  worthy  of  a  fresh 
edition   of   the   written   code.     Instead   of  being 

mentioned  is  not  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  define  the  site 
assigned  to  the  restored  city.  The  point  of  verse  40  is 
that  the  most  unclean  districts  of  the  ancient  city  shall 
partake  of  the  sanctity  of  the  New  Jerusalem. 

*  xxxii.  40. 

t  xxxi.  26. 


Jeremiah  xxx.-xxxiii.] 


RESTORATION— V.    REVIEW. 


209 


committed  to  the  guidance  of  the  ever-present 
Spirit  of  Jehovah,  they  were  placed  under  a 
rigid  and  elaborate  system  of  externals — "  carnal 
ordinances,  concerned  with  meats  and  drinks 
and  divers  washings,  imposed  until  a  time  of 
reformation."  *  They  still  remained  under  the 
covenant  "  from  Mount  Sinai,  bearing  children 
unto  bondage,  which  is  Hagar.  Now  this 
Hagar  is  Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia,  and  answereth 
to  the  Jerusalem  that  now  is:  for  she  is  in 
bondage  with  her  children."! 

For  these  bondservants  of  the  letter,  there  arose 
no  David,  no  glorious  Scion  of  the  ancient  stock. 
For  a  moment  the  hopes  of  Zechariah  rested  on 
Zerubbabel,  but  this  Branch  quickly  withered 
away  and  was  forgotten.  We  need  not  under- 
rate the  merits  and  services  of  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah,  of  Simon  the  Just  and  Judas  Maccabaeus; 
and  yet  we  cannot  find  any  one  of  them  who 
answers  to  the  Priestly  King  of  Jeremiah's  vi- 
sions. The  new  growth  of  Jewish  royalty  came 
to  an  ignominious  end  in  Aristobulus,  Hyrcanus, 
and  the  Herods,  Antichrists  rather  than  Mes- 
siahs. 

The  Reunion  of  long-divided  Israel  is  for  the 
most  part  a  misnomer;  there  was  no  healing  of 
the  wound,  and  the  offending  member  was  cut 
off. 

Even  now,  when  the  leaven  of  the  Kingdom 
has  been  working  in  the  lump  of  humanity  for 
nearly  two  thousand  years,  any  suggestion  that 
these  chapters  are  realised  in  Modern  Christianity 
would  seem  cruel  irony.  Renan  accuses  Christi- 
anity of  having  quickly  forgotten  the  programme 
which  its  Founder  borrowed  from  the  prophets, 
and  of  having  become  a  religion  like  other  reli- 
gions, a  religion  of  priests  and  sacrifices,  of  ex- 
ternal observances  and  superstitions,  t  It  is 
sometimes  asserted  that  Protestants  lack  faith 
and  courage  to  trust  to  any  law  written  on  the 
heart,  and  cling  to  a  printed  book,  as  if  there 
were  no  Holy  Spirit — as  if  the  Branch  of  David 
had  borne  fruit  once  for  all,  and  Christ  were 
dead.  The  movement  for  Christian  Reunion 
seems  thus  far  chiefly  to  emphasise  the  feuds 
that  make  the  Church  a  kingdom  divided  against 
itself. 

But  we  must  not  allow  the  obvious  shortcom- 
ings of  Christendom  to  blind  us  to  brighter  as- 
pects of  truth.  Both  in  the  Jews  of  the  Restora- 
tion and  in  the  Church  of  Christ  we  have  a  real 
fulfilment  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies.  The  fulfil- 
ment is  no  less  real  because  it  is  utterly  inade- 
quate. Prophecy  is  a  guide-post  and  not  a  mile- 
stone; it  shows  the  way  to  be  trodden,  not  the 
duration  of  the  journey.  Jews  and  Christians 
have  fulfilled  Jeremiah's  prophecies  because  they 
have  advanced  by  the  road  along  which  he 
pointed  towards  the  spiritual  city  of  his  vision. 
The  "  pious  dreams  "  of  a  little  group  of  en- 
thusiasts have  become  the  ideals  and  hopes  of 
humanity.  Even  Renan  ranks  himself  among 
the  disciples  of  Jeremiah:  "  The  seed  sown  in  re- 
ligious tradition  by  inspired  Israelites  will  not 
perish;  all  of  us  who  seek  a  God  without  priests, 
a  revelation  without  prophets,  a  covenant  written 
in  the  heart,  are  in  many  respects  the  disciples  of 
these  ancient  fanatics  (ces  vieux  egares)."% 

The  Judaism  of  the  Return,  with  all  its  faults 
''nd  shortcomings,   was  still  an  advance   in  the 

♦  Heb.  ix.  10. 

+  Gal.  iv.  24,  25. 

±  "  Histoire  du  Peuple  d'Israel,"  iii.  340. 

I  Renan,  iii.  340. 

14-yol.  IV. 


direction  Jeremiah  had  indicated.  However 
ritualistic  the  Pentateuch  may  seem  to  us,  it  was 
far  removed  from  exclusive  trust  in  ritual. 
Where  the  ancient  Israelite  had  relied  upon  cor- 
rect observance  of  the  forms  of  his  sanctuary, 
the  Torah  of  Ezra  introduced  a  large  moral 
and  spiritual  element,  which  served  to  bring 
the  soul  into  direct  fellowship  with  Jehovah. 
"  Pity  and  humanity  are  pushed  to  their  utmost 
limits,  always  of  course  in  the  bosom  of  the 
family  of  Israel."  *  The  Torah  moreover  in- 
cluded the  great  commands  to  love  God  and 
man,  which  once  for  all  placed  the  religion  of 
Israel  on  a  spiritual  basis.  If  the  Jews  often  at- 
tached more  importance  to  the  letter  and  form 
of  Revelation  than  to  its  substance,  and  were 
more  careful  for  ritual  and  external  observances 
than  for  inner  righteousness;  we  have  no  right 
to  cast  a  stone  at  them. 

It  is  a  curious  phenomenon  that  after  the  time 
of  Ezra  the  further  developments  of  the  Torah 
were  written  no  longer  on  parchment,  but,  in 
a  certain  sense  on  the  heart.  The  decisions  of 
the  rabbis  interpreting  the  Pentateuch,  "  the 
fence  which  they  made  round  the  law,"  were  not 
committed  to  writing,  but  learnt  by  heart  and 
handed  down  by  oral  tradition.  Possibly  this 
custom  was  partly  due  to  Jeremiah's  prophecy. 
It  is  a  strange  illustration  of  the  way  in  which 
theology  sometimes  wrests  the  Scriptures  to  its 
own  destruction,  that  the  very  prophecy  of  the 
triumph  of  the  spirit  over  the  letter  was  made 
of  none  effect  by  a  literal  interpretation. 

Nevertheless,  though  Judaism  moved  only  a 
very  little  way  towards  Jeremiah's  ideal,  yet  it 
did  move,  its  religion  was  distinctly  more  spir- 
itual than  that  of  ancient  Israel.  Although 
Judaism  claimed  finality  and  did  its  best  to  se- 
cure that  no  future  generation  should  make 
further  progress,  yet  in  spite  of,  nay,  even  by 
means  of,  Pharisee  and  Sadducee,  the  Jews  were 
prepared  to  receive  and  transmit  that  great 
resurrection  of  prophetic  teaching  which  came 
through  Christ. 

If  even  Judaism  did  not  altogether  fail  to  con- 
form itself  to  Jeremiah's  picture  of  the  New  Is- 
rael, clearly  Christianity  must  have  shaped  itself 
still  more  fully  according  to  his  pattern.  In  the 
Old  Testament  both  the  idea  and  the  name  of  a 
"New  Covenant,"!  superseding  that  of  Moses, 
are  peculiar  to  Jeremiah,  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment consistently  represents  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation as  a  fulfilment  of  Jeremiah's  prophecy. 
Besides  the  express  and  detailed  application  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  Christ  instituted  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  the  Sacrament  of  His  New 
Covenant — "  This  cup  is  the  New  Covenant  in 
My  Blood  "  ;  t  and  St.  Paul  speaks  of  himself 
as  "  a  minister  of  the  New  Covenant."  t^  Christi- 
anity has  not  been  unworthy  of  the  claim  made 
on  its  behalf  by  its  Founder,  but  has  realised, 
at  any  rate  in  some  measure,  the  visible  peace, 
prosperity,  and  unity  of  Jeremiah's  New  Israel, 


*  Renan,  iii.  425. 

t  We  have  the  idea  of  a  spiritual  covenant  in  Isa.  lix.  21, 
"This  is  M)'  covenant  with  them  :  .  .  .  My  spirit  that  is 
upon  thee,  and  My  words  which  I  have  put  in  thy  mouth, 
shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of 
thy  seed,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed's  seed,  .  .  .  from 
henceforth  and  for  ever  "  ;  but  nothing  is  said  as  to  a  new 
covenant. 

♦Luke  xxii.  20;  i  Cor.  xi.  25.  The  word  "new"  is 
omitted  by  Codd.  Sin.  and  Vat.  and  the  R.  V.  in  Matt.  xxvi. 
28  and  Mark  xiv.  24. 

§  2  Cor.  iii.  6. 


2IO 


THE    BOOK    OF    JEREMIAH. 


as  well  as  the  spirituality  of  his  New  Covenant. 
Christendom  has  its  hideous  blots  of  misery  and 
sin,  but,  on  the  whole,  the  standard  of  material 
comfort  and  intellectual  culture  has  been  raised 
to  a  high  average  throughout  the  bulk  of  a  vast 
population.  Internal  order  and  international 
concord  have  made  enormous  strides  since  the 
time  of  Jeremiah.  If  an  ancient  Israelite  could 
witness  the  happy  security  of  a  large  proportion 
of  English  workmen  and  French  peasants,  he 
would  think  that  many  of  the  predictions  of  his 
prophets  had  been  fulfilled.  But  the  advance 
of  large  classes  to  a  prosperity  once  beyond  the 
dreams  of  the  most  sanguine  only  brings  out 
in  darker  relief  the  wretchedness  of  their  less 
fortunate  brethren.  In  view  of  the  growing 
knowledge  and  enormous  resources  of  modern 
society,  any  toleration  of  its  cruel  wrongs  is 
an  unpardonable  sin.  Social  problems  are 
doubtless  urgent  because  a  large  minority  are 
miserable,  but  they  are  rendered  still  more 
urgent  by  the  luxury  of  many  and  the  comfort 
of  most.  The  high  average  of  prosperity  shows 
that  we  fail  to  right  our  social  evils,  not  for 
want  of  power,  but  for  want  of  devotion.  Our 
civilisation  is  a  Dives,  at  whose  gate  Lazarus 
often  finds  no  crumbs. 

Again  Christ's  Kingdom  of  the  New  Cove- 
nant has  brought  about  a  larger  unity.  We 
have  said  enough  elsewhere  on  the  divisions  of 
the  Church.  Doubtless  we  are  still  far  from 
realising  the  ideals  of  chapter  xxxi.,  but,  at  any 
rate,  they  have  been  recognised  as  supreme, 
and  have  worked  for  harmony  and  fellowship 
in  the  world.  Ephraim  and  Judah  are  forgotten, 
but  the  New  Covenant  has  united  into  brother- 
hood a  worldwide  array  of  races  and  nations. 
There  are  still  divisions  in  the  Church,  and  a 
common  religion  will  not  always  do  away  with 
national  enmities;  but  in  spite  of  all,  the  in- 
fluence of  our  common  Christianity  has  done 
much  to  knit  the  nations  together  and  promote 
mutual  amity  and  goodwill.  The  vanguard  of 
the  modern  world  has  accepted  Christ  as  its 
standard  and  ideal,  and  has  thus  attained  an 
essential  unity,  which  is  not  destroyed  by  minor 
differences  and  external  divisions. 

And,  finally,  the  promise  that  the  New  Cove- 
nant should  be  written  on  the  heart  is  far  on 
the  way  towards  fulfilment.  If  Roman  and 
Greek  orthodoxy  interposes  the  Church  between 
the  soul  and  Christ,  yet  the  inspiration  claimed 
for  the  Church  to-day  is,  at  any  rate  in  sorne 
measure,  that  of  the  living  Spirit  of  Christ 
speaking  to  the  souls  of  living  men.  On  the 
other  hand,  a  predilection  for  Rabbinical 
methods  of  exegesis  sometimes  interferes  with 
the  influence  and  authority  of  the  Bible.  Yet  in 
reality  there  is  no  serious  attempt  to  take  away 
the  key  of  knowledge  or  to  forbid  the  individual 
soul  to  receive  the  direct  teaching  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  Reformers  established  the  right  of 
private  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures;  and  the  interpretation  of  the  Li- 
brary of  Sacred  Literature,  the  spiritual  harvest 
of  a  thousand  years,  afTords  ample  scope  for 
reverent  development  of  our  knowledge  of 
God. 

One  group  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies  has  in- 
deed been  entirely  fulfilled.  In  Christ  God  has 
raised  up  a  Branch  of  Righteousness  unto  David, 
and  through  Him  judgment  and  righteousness 
are  wrought  in  the  earth.* 
*  xxxiii.  15. 


EPILOGUE. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 
JEREMIAH  AND  CHRIST. 

"Jehovah  thy  God  will  raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet 
from  amongst  thee,  of  thy  brethren,  like  unto  me ;  unto 
him  shall  ye  hearken."— Deut.  xviii.  15. 

"Jesus  .  .  .  asked  His  disciples,  saying  Who  do  men  say 
that  the  Son  of  Man  is  ?  And  they  said,  Some  say  John  the 
Baptist;  some,  Elijah:  and  others,  Jeremiah,  or  one  of 
the  prophets."— Matt.  xvi.  13.  14. 

English  feeling  about  Jeremiah  has  long  ago 
been  summed  up  and  stereotyped  in  the  single 
word  "  jeremiad."  The  contempt  and  dislike 
which  this  word  implies  are  partly  due  to  his 
supposed  authorship  of  Lamentations;  but,  to 
say  the  least,  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  is  not  suf- 
ficiently cheerful  to  remove  the  impression  cre- 
ated by  the  linked  wailing,  long  drawn  out, 
which  has  been  commonly  regarded  as  an  ap- 
pendix to  its  prophecies.  We  can  easily  under- 
stand the  unpopularity  of  the  prophet  of  doom 
in  inodern  Christendom.  Such  prophets  are 
seldom  acceptable,  except  to  the  enemies  of  the 
people  whom  they  denounce;  and  even  ardent 
modern  advocates  of  Jew-baiting  would  not  be 
entirely  satisfied  with  Jeremiah — they  would  re- 
sent his  patriotic  sympathy  with  sinful  and  suf- 
fering Judah.  Most  modern  Christians  have 
ceased  to  regard  the  Jews  as  monsters  of  in- 
iquity, whose  chastisement  should  give  pro- 
found satisfaction  to  every  sincere  believer. 
History  has  recorded  but  few  of  the  crimes 
which  provoked  and  justified  our  prophet's 
fierce  indignation,  and  those  of  which  we  do 
read  repel  our  interest  by  a  certain  lack  of  the 
picturesque,  so  that  we  do  not  take  the  trouble 
to  realise  their  actual  and  intense  wickedness. 
Ahab  is  a  by-word,  but  how  many  people  know 
anything  about  Ishmael  ben  Nethaniah?  The 
cruelty  of  the  nobles  and  the  unctuous  cant  of 
their  prophetic  allies  are  forgotten  in — nay,  they 
seem  almost  atoned  for  by — the  awful  calamities 
that  befell  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  Jeremiah's 
memory  may  even  be  said  to  have  suffered  from 
the  speedy  and  complete  fulfilment  of  his  prophe- 
cies. The  national  ruin  was  a  triumphant  vin- 
dication of  his  teaching,  and  his  disciples  were 
eager  to  record  every  utterance  in  which  he  had 
foretold  the  coming  doom.  Probably  the  book, 
in  its  present  form,  gives  an  exaggerated  im- 
pression of  the  stress  which  Jeremiah  laid  upon 
this  topic. 

Moreover,  while  the  prophet's  life  is  essen- 
tially tragic,  its  drama  lacks  an  artistic  close 
and  climax.  Again  and  again  Jeremiah  took 
his  life  in  his  hand,  but  the  good  confession 
which  he  witnessed  for  so  long  does  not  cul- 
minate in  the  crown  of  martyrdom.  A  final 
scene  like  the  death  of  John  the  Baptist  would 
have  won  our  sympathy  and  conciliated  our  crit- 
icism. 

We  thus  gather  that  the  popular  attitude  to- 
wards Jeremiah  rests  on  a  superficial  apprecia- 
tion of  his  character  and  work;  it  is  not  difficult 
to  discern  that  a  careful  examination  of  his  his- 
tory establishes  important  claims  on  the  venera- 
tion and  gratitude  of  the  Christian  Church. 

For  Judaism  was  not  slow  to  pay  her  tribute 
of  admiration  and  reverence  to  Jeremiah  as  to  a 
Patron  Saint  and  Confessor.  His  prophecy  of 
the  Restoration  of  Israel  is  appealed  to  in  Ezra 


JEREMIAH    AND    CHRIST, 


and  Daniel;  and  the  Hebrew  Chronicler,  who 
says  as  little  as  he  can  of  Isaiah,  adds  to  the 
references  made  by  the  Book  of  Kings  to  Jere- 
miah. We  have  already  seen  that  apocryphal 
legends  clustered  round  his  honoured  name. 
He  was  credited  with  having  concealed  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  Ark  in  the  caves  of  Sinai.* 
On  the  eve  of  a  great  victory  he  appeared  to 
Judas  Maccabaeus,  in  a  vision,  as  "  a  man  dis- 
tinguished by  grey  hairs,  and  a  majestic  ap- 
pearance; but  something  wonderful  and  exceed- 
ingly magnificent  was  the  grandeur  about  him," 
and  was  made  known  to  Judas  as  a  "  lover  of 
the  brethren,  who  prayeth  much  for  the  people 
and  for  the  holy  city,  to  wit,  Jeremiah  the 
prophet  of  God.  And  Jeremiah  stretching  forth 
his  right  hand  delivered  over  to  Judas  a  sword 
of  gold."f  The  Son  of  Sirach  does  not  fail 
to  include  Jeremiah  in  his  praise  of  famous 
men;  and  there  is  an  apocryphal  epistle  pur- 
porting to  be  written  by  our  prophet. >^  It  is 
noteworthy  that  in  the  New  Testament  Jere- 
miah is  only  mentioned  by  name  in  the  Judaistic 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew. 

In  the  Christian  Church,  notwithstanding  the 
lack  of  popular  sympathy,  earnest  students  of 
the  prophet's  life  and  words  have  ranked  him 
with  some  of  the  noblest  characters  of  history. 
A  modern  writer  enumerates  as  amongst  those 
with  whom  he  has  been  compared  Cassandra, 
Phocion,  Demosthenes,  Dante,  Milton,  and  Sav- 
onarola.ll  The  list  might  easily  be  enlarged,  but 
another  parallel  has  been  drawn  which  has  su- 
preme claims  on  our  consideration.  The  Jews 
in  New  Testament  times  looked  for  the  return 
of  Elijah  or  Jeremiah  to  usher  in  Messiah's 
reign;  and  it  seemed  to  some  among  them  that 
the  character  and  teaching  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
identified  him  with  the  ancient  prophet  who  had. 
been  commissioned  "  to  root  out,  pull  down, 
destroy  and  throw  down,  to  build  and  to  plant." 
The  suggested  comparison  has  often  been  de- 
veloped, but  undue  stress  has  been  laid  on  such 
accidental  and  external  circumstances  as  the 
prophet's  celibacy  and  the  statement  that  he  was 
"  sanctified  from  the  womb."  The  discussion  of 
such  details  does  not  greatly  lend  itself  to  edi- 
fication. But  it  has  also  been  pointed  out  that 
there  is  an  essential  resemblance  between  the 
circumstances  and  mission  of  Jeremiah  and  his 
Divine  Successor,  and  to  this  some  little  space 
may  be  devoted. 

Jeremiah  and  our  Lord  appeared  at  similar 
crises  in  the  history  of  Israel  and  of  revealed 
religion.  The  prophet  foretold  the  end  of  the 
Jewish  monarchy,  the  destruction  of  the  First 
Temple  and  of  ancient  Jerusalem;  Christ,  in  like 
manner,  announced  the  end  of  the  restored 
Israel,  the  destruction  of  the  Second  Temple 
and  of  the  newer  Jerusalem.  In  both  cases  the 
doom  of  the  city  was  followed  by  the  dispersion 
and  captivity  of  the  people.  At  both  eras  the 
religion  of  Jehovah  was  supposed  to  be  indis- 
solubly  bound  up  with  the  Temple  and  its  ritual; 
and,  as  we  have  seen,  Jeremiah,  like  Stephen  and 
Paul  and  our  Lord  Himself,  was  charged  with 
blasphemy  because  he  predicted  its  coming  ruin. 
The  prophet,  like  Christ,  was  at  variance  with 
the  prevalent  religious  sentiment  of  his  time  and 
with  what  claimed  to  be  orthodoxy.  Both  were 
regarded  and  treated  by  the  great  body  of  con- 

*2  Mace.  ii.  i-8.     +2  Mace.  xv.  12-16.      J  Ecclus.  xlix.  6,  7. 

§  Sometimes  appended  to  the  Book  of  Baruch  as  a  sixth 
chapter. 

11  Smith's  'Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  art.  "Jeremiah." 


temporary   religious  teachers  as  dangerous   and 

intolerable  heretics;  and  their  heresy,  as  we  have 
said,  was  practically  one  and  the  same.  To  the 
champions  of  the  Temple  their  teaching  seemed 
purely  destructive,  an  irreverent  attack  upon 
fundamental  doctrines  and  indispensable  institu- 
tions. But  the  very  opposite  was  the  truth; 
they  destroyed  nothing  but  what  deserved  to  per- 
ish. Both  in  Jeremiah's  time  and  in  our  Lord's, 
men  tried  to  assure  themselves  of  the  perma- 
nence of  erroneous  dogmas  and  obsolete  rites 
by  proclaiming  that  these  were  of  the  essence 
of  Divine  Revelation.  In  either  age  to  succeed 
in  this  effort  would  have  been  to  plunge  the 
world  into  spiritual  darkness:  the  light  of  He- 
brew prophecy  would  have  been  extinguished 
by  the  Captivity,  or,  again,  the  hope  of  the 
Messiah  would  have  melted  away  like  a  mirage, 
when  the  legions  of  Titus  and  Hadrian  dispelled 
so  many  Jewish  dreams.  But  before  the  catas- 
trophe came,  Jeremiah  had  taught  men  that  Je- 
hovah's Temple  and  city  were  destroyed  of  His 
own  set  purpose,  because  of  the  sins  of  His 
people;  there  was  no  excuse  for  supposing  that 
He  was  discredited  by  the  ruin  of  the  place 
where  He  had  once  chosen  to  set  His  Name. 
Thus  the  Captivity  was  not  the  final  page  in  the 
history  of  Hebrew  religion,  but  the  opening  of 
a  new  chapter.  In  like  manner  Christ  and  His 
Apostles,  more  especially  Paul,  finally  disso- 
ciated Revelation  from  the  Temple  and  its  ritual, 
so  that  the  light  of  Divine  truth  was  not  hidden 
under  the  bushel  of  Judaism,  but  shone  forth 
upon  the  whole  world  from  the  many-branched 
candle-stick  of  the  Universal  Church. 

Again,  in  both  cases,  not  only  was  ancient 
faith  rescued  from  the  ruin  of  human  corrup- 
tion and  commentary,  but  the  purging  away  of 
the  old  leaven  made  room  for  a  positive  state- 
ment of  new  teaching.  Jeremiah  announced  a 
new  covenant — that  is,  a  formal  and  complete 
change  in  the  conditions  and  method  of  man's 
service  to  God  and  God's  beneficence  to  men. 
The  ancient  Church,  with  its  sanctuary,  its 
clergy,  and  its  ritual,  was  to  be  superseded  by 
a  new  order,  without  sanctuary,  clergy,  or  ritual, 
wherein  every  man  would  enjoy  immediate  fel- 
lowship with  his  God.  This  great  idea  was  vir- 
tually ignored  by  the  Jews  of  the  Restoration, 
but  it  was  set  forth  afresh  by  Christ  and  His 
Apostles.  The  "  New  Covenant  "  was  declared 
to  be  ratified  by  His  sacrifice,  and  was  confirmed 
anew  at  every  commemoration  of  His  death. 
We  read  in  John  iv.  21-23:  "The  hour  cometh, 
when  neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  in  Jerusalem, 
shall  ye  worship  the  Father.  .  .  .  The  hour 
cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the  true  worshippers 
shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  truth." 

Thus  when  we  confess  that  the  Church  is 
built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  Prophets  and 
Apostles,  we  have  to  recognise  that  to  this  foun- 
dation Jeremiah's  ministry  supplied  indispens- 
able elements,  alike  by  its  positive  and  in  its 
negative  parts.  This  fact  was  manifest  even  to 
Renan,  who  fully  shared  the  popular  prejudices 
against  Jeremiah.  Nothing  short  of  Christian- 
ity, according  to  him,  is  the  realisation  of  the 
prophet's  dream:  "  II  ajoute  un  facteur  essentiel 
a  I'oeuvre  humaine;  Jeremie  est,  avant  Jean- 
Baptiste,  I'homme  qui  a  le  plus  contribue  a  la 
fondation  du  Christianisme;  il  doit  compter, 
malgre  la  distance  des  siecles,  entre  les  pre- 
curseurs  immediats  de  Jesus."  * 

**  Hist.,"  iii.  251,  305. 


THE  BOOK  OF  EZEKIEL. 


}    /    ^       j.  -  J...i  ?  V/  /l\y\y 


k       I- 


/Ci-  ziVi 


PREFACE. 


In  this  volume  I  have  endeavoured  to  present  the  substance  of  Ezekiel's  proph- 
ecies in  a  form  intelligible  to  students  of  the  English  Bible.  I  have  tried  to  make 
the  exposition  a  fairly  adequate  guide  to  the  sense  of  the  text,  and  to  supply  such 
information  as  seemed  necessary  to  elucidate  the  historical  importance  of  the 
prophet's  teaching.  Where  I  have  departed  from  the  received  text  I  have  usually 
indicated  in  a  note  the  nature  of  the  change  introduced.  Whilst  I  have  sought  to 
exercise  an  independent  judgment  on  all  the  questions  touched  upon,  the  book  has 
no  pretensions  to  rank  as  a  contribution  to  Old  Testament  scholarship. 

The  works  on  Ezekiel  to  which  I  am  chiefly  indebted  are:  Ewald's  "  Propheten 
des  Alten  Bundes"  (vol.  ii.) ;  Smend's  "  Der  Prophet  Ezechiel  erklart  "  ("  Kurzge- 
fasstes  Exegetiscnes  Handbuch  zum  A.  T.");  Cornill's  "  Das  Buch  des  Proph.  Eze- 
chiel " ;  and,  above  all.  Dr.  A.  B.  Davidson's  commentary  in  the  **  Cambridge  Bible 
for  Schools,"  my  obligations  to  which  are  almost  continuous.  In  a  less  degree  I 
have  been  helped  by  the  commentaries  of  Havernick  and  Orelli,  by  Valeton's  '*  Vier- 
tal  Voorlezingen  "  (iii.),  and  by  Gautier's  "  La  Mission  du  Proph^te  Ezechiel." 
Amongst  works  of  a  more  general  character  special  acknowledgment  is  due  to  "  The 
Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church  "  and  "  The  Religion  of  the  Semites  "  by  the 
late  Dr.  Robertson  Smith. 

I  wish  also  to  express  my  gratitude  to  two  friends — the  Rev.  A.  Alexander, 
Dundee,  and  the  Rev.  G.  Steven,  Edinburgh — who  have  read  most  of  the  work  in 
manuscript  or  in  proof,  and  made  many  valuable  suggestions. 


2*b 


CONTENTS. 


PART  I. 

THE  PREPARATION  AND  CALL  OF  THE 
PROPHET. 


PART  III. 

PROPHECIES  AGAINST  FOREIGN 
NATIONS. 


Chapter  XV. 
Chai'tkr  I. 

PAGE      Ammon,  Moab,  Edom,  and  Philistia,    . 
Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Jewish  State,  .        .    219 


PAGE 

1.74 


Chapter  II. 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,     .        .        .        .        .    221 

Chapter  III. 
The  Vision  of  the  Glory  of  God,  .        .        .225 

Chapter  IV. 
Ezekiel's  Prophetic  Commission,  .        .        .    229 

PART  II. 

PROPHECIES  RELATING  MAINLY  TO  THE 
DESTRUCTION  OF  JERUSALEM. 

Chapter  V. 


Chapter  XVI. 
Tyre, 275* 

Chapter  XVII. 
Tyre  (continued):  Sidon,        ....    283 

Chapter  XVIII. 
Egypt, 287 

PART  IV. 

THE  FORMATION  OF  THE  NEW  ISRAEL. 

Chapter  XIX. 
The  Prophet  a  Watchman,     ....    293 

Chaptkr  XX. 
The  Messianic  Kingdom, 

Chapter  XXI, 


The  End  Foretold, 233      Jehovah's  Land, 

Chapter  VI.  Chapter  XXII. 

Your  House  is  Left  unto  You  Desolate,      .    239       ^ife  from  the  Dead, 

Chapter  XXIII. 


Chapter  VII. 
The  End  of  the  Monarchy,     ....     244 

Chapter  VIII. 
Prophecy  and  Its  Abuses, 

Chapter  IX. 
Jerusalem — an  Ideal  History, 

Chapter  X. 
The  Religion  of  the  Individual,    . 

Chapter  XI. 
The  Sword  Unsheathed, 

Chapter  XII. 
Jehovah's  Controversy  with  Israel, 

Chapter  XIII. 
Ohola  and  Oholibah, 268 

Chapter  XIV. 
Final  Oracles  against  Jerusalem,  . 


The  Conversion  of  Israel, 

Chapter  XXIV. 
Jehovah's  Final  Victory, 


.  298 

•  .303 

.  308 

.  312 

.  31S 


248 

251 
256 
260 
264 


PART  V. 
THE  IDEAL  THEOCRACY 

Chapter  XXV. 
The  Import  of  the  Vision, 

Chapter  XXVI. 
The  Sanctuary, 

Chapter  XXVII. 
The  Priesthood, 

Chapter  XXVIII 
Prince  and  People,  . 

Chapter  XXIX. 
The  Ritual,        .... 

Chapter  XXX. 
270       Renewal  and  Allotment  of  the  Land, 


318 
324 
329 
336 
340 
346 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


BY   THE   REV,    JOHN    SKINNER,    M.    A. 


■PART     I. 

THE  PREPARATION  AND   CALL  OF   THE 
PROPHET. 


CHAPTER  I. 

DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  JEWISH 
STATE. 

EzEKiEL  is  a  prophet  of  the  Exile.  He  was 
one  of  the  priests  who  went  into  captivity  with 
King  Jehoiachin  in  the  year  597,  and  the  whole 
of  his  prophetic  career  falls  after  that  event.  Of 
his  previous  life  and  circumstances  we  have  no 
direct  information,  beyond  the  facts  that  he  was 
a  priest  and  that  his  father's  name  was  Buzi. 
One  or  two  inferences,  however,  may  be  re- 
garded as  reasonably  certain.  We  know  that 
the  first  deportation  of  Judaeans  to  Babylon 
was  confined  to  the  nobility,  the  men  of  war, 
and  the  craftsmen  (2  Kings  xxiv.  14-16);  and 
since  Ezekiel  was  neither  a  soldier  nor  an  artisan, 
his  place  in  the  train  of  captives  must  have  been 
due  to  his  social  position.  He  must  have  be- 
longed to  the  upper  ranks  of  the  priesthood,  who 
formed  part  of  the  aristocracy  of  Jerusalem.  He 
was  thus  a  member  of  the  house  of  Zadok;  and 
his  familiarity  with  the  details  of  the  Temple 
ritual  makes  it  probable  that  he  had  actually 
ofhciated  as  a  priest  in  the  national  sanctuary. 
Moreover,  a  careful  study  of  the  book  gives  the 
impression  that  he  was  no  longer  a  young  man 
at  the  time  when  he  received  his  call  to  the 
prophetic  office.  He  appears  as  one  whose  views 
of  life  are  already  matured,  who  has  outlived  the 
buoyancy  and  enthusiasm  of  youth,  and  learned 
to  estimate  the  moral  possibilities  of  life  with 
the  sobriety  that  comes  through  experience. 
This  impression  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  he 
was  married  and  had  a  house  of  his  own  from  the 
commencement  of  his  work,  and  probably  at  the 
time  of  his  captivity.  But  the  most  important 
fact  of  all  is  that  Ezekiel  had  lived  through  a 
period  of  unprecedented  public  calamity,  and 
one  fraught  with  the  most  momentous  conse- 
quences for  the  future  of  religion.  Moving  in 
the  highest  circles  of  society,  in  the  centre  of 
the  national  life,  he  must  have  been  fully  cog- 
nisant of  the  grave  events  in  which  no  thoughtful 
observer  could  fail  to  recognise  the  tokens  of 
the  approaching  dissolution  of  the  Hebrew  state. 
Amongst  the  influences  that  prepared  him  for 
his  prophetic  mission,  a  leading  place  must 
therefore  be  assigned  to  the  teaching  of  history; 
and  we  cannot  commence  our  study  of  his 
prophecies  better  than  by  a  brief  survey  of  the 
course  of  events  that  led  up  to  the  turning-point 
of  his  own  career,  and  at  the  same  time  helped 
to  form  his  conception  of  God's  providential 
dealings  with  His  people  Israel. 

At  the  time  of  the  prophet's  birth  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  was  still  a  nominal  dependency  of 
the  great  Assyrian  empire.  From  about  the 
middle    of    the    seventh    century,    however,    the 


power  of  Nineveh  had  been  on  the  wane.  Her 
energies  had  been  exhausted  in  the  suppression 
of  a  determined  revolt  in  Babylonia.  Media  and 
Egypt  had  recovered  their  independence,  and 
there  were  many  signs  that  a  new  crisis  in  the 
affairs  of  nations  was  at  hand. 

The  first  historic  event  which  has  left  discerni- 
ble traces  in  the  writings  of  Ezekiel  is  an  irrup- 
tion of  Scythian  barbarians,  which  took  place 
in  the  reign  of  Josiah  {cir.  626).  Strangely 
enough,  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment contain  no  record  of  this  remarkable  in- 
vasion, although  its  effects  on  the  political  situ- 
ation of  Judah  were  important  and  far-reaching. 
According  to  Herodotus,  Assyria  was  already 
hard  pressed  by  the  Medes,  when  suddenly  the 
Scythians  burst  through  the  passes  of  the  Cau- 
casus, defeated  the  Medes,  and  committed  ex- 
tensive ravages  throughout  Western  Asia  for  a 
period  of  twenty-eight  years.  They  are  said  to 
have  contemplated  the  invasion  of  Egypt,  and  to 
have  actually  reached  the  Philistine  territory, 
when  by  some  means  they  were  induced  to  with- 
draw.* Judah  therefore  was  in  imminent  dan- 
ger, and  the  terror  inspired  by  these  destructive 
hordes  is  reflected  in  the  prophecies  of  Zepha- 
niah  and  Jeremiah,  who  saw  in  the  northern  in- 
vaders the  heralds  of  the  great  day  of  Jehovah. 
The  force  of  the  storm,  however,  was  probably 
spent  before  it  reached  Palestine,  and  it  seems 
to  have  swept  past  along  the  coast,  leaving  the 
mountain  land  of  Israel  untouched.  Although 
Ezekiel  was  not  old  enough  to  have  remembered 
the  panic  caused  by  these  movements,  the  re- 
port of  them  would  be  one  of  the  earliest  mem- 
ories of  his  childhood,  and  it  made  a  lasting  im- 
pression on  his  mind.  One  of  his  later  proph- 
ecies, that  against  Gog,  is  coloured  by  such 
reminiscences,  the  last  judgment  on  the  heathen 
being  represented  under  forms  suggested  by  a 
Scythian  invasion  (chaps,  xxxviii.,  xxxix.). 
We  may  note  also  that  in  chap,  xxxii.  the  names 
of  Meshech  and  Tubal  occur  in  the  list  of  con- 
quering nations  who  have  already  gone  down  to 
the  under-world.  These  northern  peoples  formed 
the  kernel  of  the  army  of  Gog,  and  the  only 
occasion  on  which  they  can  be  supposed  to  have 
played  the  part  of  great  conquerors  in  the  past 
is  in  connection  with  the  Scythian  devastations., 
in  which  they  probably  had  a  share. 

The  withdrawal  of  the  Scythians  from  the 
neighbourhood  of  Palestine  was  followed  by  the 
great  reformation  which  made  the  eighteenth 
year  of  Josiah  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  Israel. 
The  conscience  of  the  nation  had  been  quick- 
ened by  its  escape  from  so  great  a  peril,  and 
the  time  was  favourable  for  carrying  out  the 
changes  which  were  necessary  in  order  to  bring 
the  religious  practice  of  the  country  into  con- 
formity with  the  requirements  of  the  Law.  The 
outstanding  feature  of  the  movement  was  the 
discovery  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  in  the 
Temple,  and  the  ratification  of  a  solemn  league 
and  covenant,  by  which  the  king,  princes,  and 
people  pledged  themselves  to  carry  out  its  de- 
mands. This  took  place  in  the  year  621,  some- 
•  Herodotus,  i.  103-106. 


219 


220 


THE    BOOK   OF   EZEKIEL. 


where  near  the  time  of  Ezekiel's  birth.*  The 
prophet's  youth  was  therefore  spent  in  the  wake 
of  the  reformation;  and  although  the  first  hopes 
cherished  by  its  promoters  may  have  died  away 
before  he  was  able  to  appreciate  its  tendencies, 
we  may  be  sure  that  he  received  from  it  impulses 
which  continued  with  him  to  the  end  of  his  life. 
We  may  perhaps  allow  ourselves  to  conjecture 
that  his  father  belonged  to  that  section  of  the 
priesthood  which,  under  Hilkiah  its  head,  co- 
operated with  the  king  in  the  task  of  reform, 
and  desired  to  see  a  pure  worship  established  in 
the  Temple.  If  so,  we  can  readily  understand 
how  the  reforming  spirit  passed  into  the  very 
fibre  of  Ezekiel's  mind.  To  how  gres^t  an  extent 
his  thinking  was  influenced  by  the  ideas  of 
Deuteronomy  appears  from  almost  every  page 
of  his  prophecies. 

There  was  yet  another  way  in  which  the 
Scythian  invasion  influenced  the  prospects  of  the 
Hebrew  kingdom.  Although  the  Scythians  ap- 
pear to  have  rendered  an  immediate  service  to 
Assyria  by  saving  Nineveh  from  the  first  attack 
of  the  Medes,  there  is  little  doubt  that  their  rav- 
ages throughout  the  northern  and  western  parts 
of  the  empire  prepared  the  way  for  its  ultimate 
collapse,  and  weakened  its  hold  on  the  outlying 
provinces.  Accordingly  we  find  that  Josiah,  in 
pursuance  of  his  scheme  of  reformation,  exer- 
cised a  freedom  of  action  beyond  the  boundaries 
of  his  own  land  which  would  not  have  been 
tolerated  if  Assyria  had  retained  her  old  vigour. 
Patriotic  visions  of  an  independent  Hebrew  mon- 
archy seem  to  have  combined  with  new-born  zeal 
for  a  pure  national  religion  to  make  the  latter 
part  of  Josiah's  reign  the  short  "  Indian  sum- 
mer "  of  Israel's  national  existence. 

The  period  of  partial  independence  was 
brought  to  an  end  about  607  by  the  fall  of  Nine- 
veh before  the  united  forces  of  the  Medes  and 
Babylonians.  In  itself  this  event  was  of  less 
consequence  to  the  history  of  Judah  than  might 
be  supposed.  The  Assyrian  empire  vanished 
from  the  earth  with  a  completeness  which  is  one 
of  the  surprises  of  history;  but  its  place  was 
taken  by  the  new  Babylonian  empire,  which  in- 
herited its  policy,  its  administration,  and  the  best 
part  of  its  provinces.  The  seat  of  empire  was 
transferred  from  Nineveh  to  Babylon;  but  any 
other  change  which  was  felt  at  Jerusalem  was 
due  solely  to  the  exceptional  vigour  and  ability 
of  its  first  monarch,  Nebuchadnezzar. 

The  real  turning-point  in  the  destinies  of  Israel 
came  a  year  or  two  earlier  with  the  defeat  and 
death  of  Josiah  at  Megiddo.  About  the  year 
608,  while  the  fate  of  Nineveh  still  hung  in  the 
balance,  Pharaoh  Necho  prepared  an  expedition 
to  the  Euphrates,  with  the  object  of  securing 
himself  in  the  possession  of  Syria.  It  was  as- 
suredly no  feeling  of  loyalty  to  his  Assyrian 
suzerain  which  prompted  Josiah  to  throw  him- 
self across  Necho's  path.  He  acted  as  an  inde- 
pendent monarch,  and  his  motives  were  no  doubt 
the  loftiest  that  ever  urged  a  king  to  a  danger- 
ous, not  to  say  foolhardy,  enterprise.  The  zeal 
with  which  the  crusade  against  idolatry  and  false 
worship  had  been  prosecuted  seems  to  have  be- 
gotten a  confidence  on  the  part  of  the  king's 
advisers  that  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  with  them, 

*  If  the  "thirtieth  year  "  of  chap.  i.  i  could  refer  to  the 
prophet's  age  at  the  time  of  his  call,  his  birth  would  fall 
in  the  very  year  in  which  the  Law  Book  was  found. 
Although  that'  interpretation  is  extremely  improbable, 
he  can  hardly  have  been  much  more,  or  less,  than  thirty 
years  old  at  the  time. 


and  that  His  help  might  be  reckoned  on  in  any 
undertaking  entered  upon  in  His  name.  One 
would  like  to  know  what  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
said  about  the  venture;  but  probably  the  defence 
of  Jehovah's  land  seemed  so  obvious  a  duty  of 
the  Davidic  king  that  he  was  not  even  con- 
sulted. It  was  the  determination  to  maintain  the 
inviolability  of  the  land  which  was  Jehovah's 
sanctuary  that  encouraged  Josiah,  in  defiance  of 
every  prudential  consideration,  to  endeavour  by 
force  to  intercept  the  passage  of  the  Egyptian 
army.  The  disaster  that  followed  gave  the 
death-blow  to  this  illusion  and  the  shallow 
optimism  which  sprang  from  it.  There  was  an 
end  of  idealism  in  politics;  and  the  ruling  class 
in  Jerusalem  fell  back  on  the  old  policy  of  vacil- 
lation between  Egypt  and  her  eastern  rival  which 
had  always  been  the  snare  of  Jewish  statesman- 
ship. And  with  Josiah's  political  ideal  the  faith 
on  which  it  was  based  also  gave  way.  It  seemed 
that  the  experiment  of  exclusive  reliance  on  Je- 
hovah as  the  guardian  of  the  nation's  interests 
had  been  tried  and  had  failed,  and  so  the  death 
of  the  last  good  king  of  Judah  was  a  signal  for 
a  great  outburst  of  idolatry,  in  which  every  di- 
vine power  was  invoked  and  every  form  of  wor- 
ship sedulously  practised,  in  order  to  sustain  the 
courage  of  men  who  were  resolved  to  fight  to 
the  death  for  their  national  existence. 

By  the  time  of  Josiah's  death  Ezekiel  was  able 
to  take  an  intelligent  interest  in  public  affairs. 
He  lived  through  the  troubled  period  that  en- 
sued in  the  full  consciousness  of  its  disastrous 
import  for  the  fortunes  of  his  people,  and  occa- 
sional references  to  it  are  to  be  found  in  his 
writings.  He  remembers  and  commiserates  the 
sad  fate  of  Jehoahaz,  the  king  of  the  people's 
choice,  who  was  dethroned  and  imprisoned  by 
Pharaoh  Necho  during  the  short  interval  of 
Egyptian  supremacy.  The  next  king,  Jehoi- 
akim,  received  the  throne  as  a  vassal  of  Egypt, 
on  the  condition  of  paying  a  heavy  annual  trib- 
ute. After  the  battle  of  Carchemish,  in  which 
Necho  was  defeated  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
driven  out  of  Syria,  Jehoiakim  transferred  his 
allegiance  to  the  Babylonian  monarch;  but  after 
three  years'  service  he  revolted,  encouraged  no 
doubt  by  the  usual  promises  of  support  from 
Egypt.  The  incursions  of  marauding  bands  of 
Chaldaeans,  Syrians,  Moabites,  and  Ammonites, 
instigated  doubtless  from  Babylon,  kept  him  in 
play  until  Nebuchadnezzar  was  free  to  devote  his 
attention  to  the  western  part  of  his  empire.  Be- 
fore that  time  arrived,  however,  Jehoiakim  had 
died,  and  was  followed  by  his  son  Jehoiachin. 
This  prince  was  hardly  seated  on  the  throne, 
when  a  Babylonian  army,  with  Nebuchadnezzar 
at  its  head,  appeared  before  the  gates  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  siege  ended  in  a  capitulation,  and 
the  king,  the  queen-mother,  the  army  and  no- 
bility, a  section  of  the  priests  and  the  prophets, 
and  all  the  skilled  artisans  were  transported  to 
Babylonia  (597). 

With  this  event  the  history  of  Ezekiel  may  be 
said  to  begin.  But  in  order  to  understand  the 
conditions  under  which  his  ministry  was  ex- 
ercised, we  must  try  to  realise  the  situation 
created  by  this  first  removal  of  Judaean  captives. 
From  this  time  to  the  final  capture  of  Jerusalem, 
a  period  of  eleven  years,  the  national  life  was 
broken  into  two  streams,  which  ran  in  parallel 
channels,  one  in  Judah  and  the  other  in  Baby- 
lon. The  object  of  the  captivity  was  of  course 
to  deprive  the  nation  of  its  natural  leaders,  its 


JEREMIAH    AND    EZEKIEL. 


head  and  its  hands,  and  leave  it  incapable  of 
organised  resistance  to  the  Chaldaeans.  In  this 
respect  Nebuchadnezzar  simply  adopted  the 
traditional  policy  of  the  later  Assyrian  kings, 
only  he  applied  it  with  much  less  rigour  than 
they  were  accustomed  to  display.  Instead  of 
making  nearly  a  clean  sweep  of  the  conquered 
population,  and  filling  the  gap  by  colonists  from 
a  distant  part  of  his  empire,  as  had  been  done 
in  the  case  of  Samaria,  he  contented  himself  with 
removing  the  more  dangerous  elements  of  the 
state,  and  making  a  native  prince  responsible  for 
the  government  of  the  country.  The  result 
showed  how  greatly  he  had  underrated  the  fierce 
and  fanatical  determination  which  was  already 
a  part  of  the  Jewish  character.  Nothing  in  the 
whole  story  is  more  wonderful  than  the  rapidity 
with  which  the  cnleebled  remnant  in  Jerusalem 
recovered  their  military  efficiency,  and  prepared 
a  more  resolute  defence  than  the  unbroken  na- 
tion had  been  able  to  offer. 

The  exiles,  on  the  otiier  hand,  succeeded  in 
preserving  most  of  their  national  peculiarities  un- 
der the  very  eyes  of  their  conquerors.  Of  their 
temporal  condition  very  little  is  known  beyond 
the  fact  that  they  found  themselves  in  tolerably 
easy  circumstances,  with  the  opportunity  to  ac- 
quire property  and  amass  wealth.  The  advice 
which  Jeremiah  sent  them  from  Jerusalem,  that 
they  should  identify  themselves  with  the  inter- 
ests of  Babylon,  and  live  settled  and  orderly 
lives  in  peaceful  industry  and  domestic  happi- 
ness (Jer.  xxix.  5-7),  shows  that  they  were  not 
treated  as  prisoners  or  as  slaves.  They  appear 
to  have  been  distributed  in  villages  in  the  fertile 
territory  of  Babylon,  and  to  have  formed  them- 
selves into  separate  communities  under  the 
elders,  who  were  the  natural  authorities  in  a  sim- 
ple Semitic  society.  The  colony  in  which 
Ezekiel  lived  was  located  in  Tel  Abib,  near  the 
Nahr  (river  or  canal)  Kebar,  but  neither  the 
river  nor  the  settlement  can  now  be  identified. 
The  Kebar,  if  not  the  name  of  an  arm  of  the 
Euphrates  itself,  was  probably  one  of  the  nu- 
merous irrigating  canals  which  intersected  in  all 
parts  the  great  alluvial  plain  of  the  Euphrates 
and  Tigris.*  In  this  settlement  the  prophet  had 
his  own  house,  where  the  people  were  free  to 
visit  him,  and  social  life  in  all  probability  dif- 
fered little  from  that  in  a  small  provincial  town 
in  Palestine.  That,  to  be  sure,  was  a  great 
change  for  the  quondam  aristocrats  of  Jerusa- 
lem, but  it  was  not  a  change  to  which  they  could 
not  readily  adapt  themselves. 

Of  much  greater  importance,  however,  is  the 
state  of  mind  which  prevailed  amongst  these 
exiles.  And  here  again  the  remarkable  thing  is 
their  intense  preoccupation  with  matters  national 
and  Israelitic.  A  lively  intercourse  with  the 
mother  country  was  kept  up,  and  the  exiles  were 
perfectly  informed  of  all  that  was  going  on  in 
Jerusalem.  There  were,  no  doubt,  personal  and 
selfish  reasons  for  their  keen  interest  in  the  do- 
ings of  their  countrymen  at  home.  The  an- 
tipathy which  existed  between  the  two  branches 
of  the  Jewish  people  was  extreme.  The  exiles 
had  left  their  children  behind  them  (xxiv.  21,  25) 
to  suffer  under  the  reproach  of  their  fathers' 
misfortunes.  They  appear  also  to  have  been 
compelled  to  sell   their  estates  hurriedly  on  the 

*  The  opinion,  once  prevalent,  that  it  was  the  Chaboras 
in  Northern  Mesopotamia,  where  colonies  of  Northern 
Israelites  had  been  settled  a  century  and  a  half  before, 
has  nothing  to  justify  it,  and  is  now  universally 
abandoned. 


eve  of  their  departure,  and  stich  transactions, 
necessarily  turning  to  the  advantage  of  the  pur- 
chasers, left  a  deep  grudge  in  the  breasts  of  the 
tellers.  Those  who  remained  in  the  land  ex- 
ulted in  the  calamity  which  had  brought  so  much 
profit  to  themselves,  and  thought  themselves 
perfectly  secure  in  so  doing  because  they  re- 
garded their  brethren  as  men  driven  out  for  their 
sins  from  Jehovah's  heritage.  The  exiles  on 
their  part  affected  the  utmost  contempt  for  the 
pretensions  of  the  upstart  plebeians  who  were 
carrying  things  with  a  high  hand  in  Jerusalem. 
Like  the  French  Emigres  in  the  time  of  the  Revo- 
lution, they  no  doubt  felt  that  their  country  was 
being  ruined  for  want  of  proper  guidance  and 
experienced  statesmanship.  Nor  was  it  alto- 
gether patrician  prejudice  that  gave  them  this 
feeling  of  their  own  superiority.  Both  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel  regard  the  exiles  as  the  better  part 
of  the  nation,  and  the  nucleus  of  the  Messianic 
community  of  the  future.  For  the  present,  in- 
deed, there  does  not  seem  to  have  been  much 
to  choose,  in  point  of  religious  belief  and  prac- 
tice, between  the  two  sections  of  the  people.  In 
both  places  the  majority  were  steeped  in  idola- 
trous and  superstitious  notions;  some  appear 
even  to  have  entertained  the  purpose  of  assimilat- 
ing themselves  to  the  heathen  around,  and  only 
a  small  minority  were  steadfast  in  their  allegiance 
to  the  national  religion.  Yet  the  exiles  could 
not,  any  more  than  the  remnant  in  Judah,  aban- 
don the  hope  that  Jehovah  would  save  His 
sanctuary  from  desecration.  The  Temple  was 
"  the  excellency  of  their  strength,  the  desire  of 
their  eyes,  and  that  which  their  soul  pitied  " 
\(xxiv.  21).  False  prophets  appeared  in  Babylon 
to  prophesy  smooth  things,  and  assure  the  exiles 
of  a  speedy  restoration  to  their  place  in  the  peo- 
ple of  God.  It  was  not  till  Jerusalem  was  laid  in 
ruins,  and  the  Jewish  state  had  disappeared  from 
the  earth,  that  the  Israelites  were  in  a  mood  to 
understand  the  meaning  of  God's  judgment,  or 
to  learn  the  lessons  which  the  prophecy  of  nearly 
two  centuries  had  vainly  striven  to  inculcate. 

We  have  now  reached  the  point  at  which  the 
Book  of  Ezekiel  opens,  and  what  remains  to  be 
told  of  the  history  of  the  time  will  be  given  in 
connection  with  the  prophecies  on  which  it  is 
fitted  to  throw  light.  But  before  proceeding  to 
consider  his  entrance  on  the  prophetic  office,  it 
will  be  useful  to  dwell  for  a  little  on  what  was 
probably  the  most  fruitful  influence  of  Ezekiel's 
youth — the  personal  influence  of  his  contempo- 
rary and  predecessor  Jeremiah.  This  will  form 
the  subject  of  the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  II. 

JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL. 

Each  of  the  communities  described  in  the  last 
chapter  was  the  theatre  of  the  activity  of  a  great 
prophet.  When  Ezekiel  began  to  prophesy  at 
Tel  Abib,  Jeremiah  was  aoproaching  the  end  of 
his  great  and  tragic  career.  For  five-and-thirty 
years  he  had  been  known  as  a  prophet,  and  dur- 
ing the  latter  part  of  that  time  had  been  the  most 
prominent  figure  in  Jerusalem.  For  the  next 
five  years  their  ministries  were  contemporaneous, 
and  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  they  ignore 
each  other  in  their  writings  so  completely  as 
they  do.  We  would  give  a  good  deal  to  have 
some   reference   by   Ezekiel   to   Jeremiah   or   by 


222 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


Jeremiah  to  Ezekiel,  but  we  find  none.  Scrip- 
ture does  not  often  favour  us  with  those  cross- 
lights  which  prove  so  instructive  in  the  hands 
of  a  modern  historian.  While  Jeremiah  knows 
of  the  rise  of  false  prophets  in  Babylonia,  and 
Ezekiel  denounces  those  he  had  left  behind  in 
Jerusalem,  neither  of  these  great  men  betrays 
the  slightest  consciousness  of  the  existence  of 
the  other.  This  silence  is  specially  noticeable 
on  Ezekiel's  part,  because  his  frequent  de- 
scriptions of  the  state  of  society  in  Jerusalem 
give  him  abundant  opportunity  to  express 
his  sympathy  with  the  position  of  Jeremiah. 
<When  we  read  in  the  twenty-second  chapter 
that  there  was  not  found  a  man  to  make  up 
the  fence  and  stand  in  the  breach  before  God,  we 
might  be  tempted  to  conclude  that  he  really  was 
not  aware  of  Jeremiah's  noble  stand  for  right- 
eousness in  the  corrupt  and  doomed  city.  And 
yet  the  points  of  contact  between  the  two 
prophets  are  so  numerous  and  so  obvious  that 
they  cannot  fairly  be  explained  by  the  common 
operation  of  the  Spirit  of  God  on  the  minds  of 
both.  There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of 
prophecy  to  forbid  the  view  that  one  prophet 
learned  from  another,  and  built  on  the  founda- 
tion which  his  predecessors  had  laid;  and  when 
we  find  a  parallelism  so  close  as  that  between 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  we  are  driven  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  influence  was  unusually  direct, 
and  that  the  whole  thinking  of  the  younger 
writer  had  been  moulded  by  the  teaching  and  ex- 
■  ample  of  the  older. 

In  what  way  this  influence  was  communicated 
is  a  question  on  which  some  difiference  of  opinion 
y  may  exist.  Some  writers,  such  as  Kuenen,  think 
that  the  indebtedness  of  Ezekiel  to  Jeremiah  was 
mainly  literary.  That  is  to  say,  they  hold  that 
it  must  be  accounted  for  by  prolonged  study  on 
Ezekiel's  part  of  the  written  prophecies  of  him 
/who  was  his  teacher.  Kuenen  surmises  that  this 
happened  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
when  some  friends  of  Jeremiah  arrived  in  Bab- 
ylon, bringing  with  them  the  completed  volume 
of  his  prophecies.  Before  Ezekiel  proceeded  to 
write  his  own  prophecies,  his  mind  is  supposed 
to  have  been  so  saturated  with  the  ideas  and 
language  of  Jeremiah  that  every  part  of  his  book 
bears  the  impress  and  betrays  the  influence  of 
his  predecessor.  In  this  fact,  of  course,  Kuenen 
finds  an  argument  for  the  view  that  Ezekiel's 
prophecies  were  written  at  a  comparatively  late 
period  of  his  life.  It  is  difficult  to  speak  with 
confidence  on  some  of  the  points  raised  by  this 
hypothesis.  That  the  influence  of  Jeremiah  can 
be  traced  in  all  parts  of  the  book  of  Ezekiel  is 
undoubtedly  true;  but  it  is  not  so  clear  that  it 
can  be  assigned  equally  to  all  periods  of  Jere- 
miah's activity.  Many  of  the  prophecies  of  Jere- 
miah cannot  be  referred  to  a  definite  date:  and 
we  do  not  know  what  means  Ezekiel  had  of  ob- 
taining copies  of  those  which  belong  to  the 
period  after  the  two  prophets  were  separated. 
■  We  know,  however,  that  a  great  part  of  the 
book  of  Jeremiah  was  in  writing  several  years 
before  Ezekiel  was  carried  away  to  Babylon; 
and  we  may  safely  assume  that  amongst  the 
treasures  which  he  took  with  him  into  exile  was 
the  roll  written  by  Baruch  to  the  dictation  of 
Jeremiah  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer. 
xxxvi.).  Even  later  oracles  may  have  reached 
Ezekiel  either  before  or  during  his  prophetic 
career  through  the  active  correspondence  main- 
tained between  the  exiles  and  Jerusalem.     It  is 


possible,  therefore,  that  even  the  literary  de- 
pendence of  Ezekiel  on  Jeremiah  may  belong  to 
a  much  earlier  time  than  the  final  issue  of  the 
book  of  Ezekiel;  and  if  it  should  be  found  that 
ideas  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  book  suggest  ac- 
(luaintance  with  a  later  utterance  of  Jeremiah, 
the  fact  need  not  surprise  us.  It  is  certainly  no 
sufficient  reason  for  concluding  that  the  whole 
substance  of  Ezekiel's  prophecy  had  been  recast 
under  the  influence  of  a  late  perusal  of  the  work 
of  Jeremiah. 

But,  setting  aside  verbal  coincidences  and> 
other  phenomena  which  suggest  literary  de- 
pendence, there  remains  an  affinity  of  a  much 
deeper  kind  between  the  teaching  of  the  two 
prophets,  which  can  only  be  explained,  if  it  is 
to  be  explained  at  all,  by  the  personal  influence 
of  the  older  upon  the  younger.  And  it  is  these 
more  fundamental  resemblances  which  are  of 
most  interest  for  our  present  purpose,  because 
they  may  enable  us  to  understand  something  of 
the  settled  convictions  with  which  Ezekiel  en- 
tered on  the  prophet's  calling.  Moreover,  a 
comparison  of  the  two  prophets  will  bring  out 
more  clearly  than  anything  else  certain  aspects 
of  the  character  of  Ezekiel  which  it  is  important 
to  bear  in  mind.  Both  are  men  of  strongly 
marked  individuality,  and  no  conception  of  the 
age  in  which  they  lived  can  safely  be  formed  from 
the  writings  of  either,  taken  alone.  ' 

It  has  been  already  remarked  that  Jeremiah 
was  the  most  conspicuous  public  character  of  his 
day.  If  it  be  the  case  that  he  threw  his  spell 
over  the  youthful  mind  of  Ezekiel,  the  fact  is 
the  most  striking  tribute  to  his  influence  that 
could  be  conceived.  No  two  men  could  differ 
more  widely  in  natural  temperament  and  char- 
acter. Jeremiah  is  the  prophet  of  a  dying  na- 
tion, and  the  agony  of  Judah's  prolonged  death- 
struggle  is  reproduced  with  tenfold  intensity  in 
the  inward  conflict  which  rends  the  heart  of  the 
prophet.  Inexorable  in  his  prediction  of  the 
coming  doom,  he  confesses  that  this  is  because 
he  is  over-mastered  by  the  Divine  power  which 
urges  him  into  a  path  from  which  his  nature  re- 
coiled. He  deplores  the  isolation  which  is 
forced  upon  him,  the  alienation  of  friends  and 
kinsmen,  and  the  constant  strife  of  which  he 
is  the  reluctant  cause.  He  feels  as  if  he  could 
gladly  shake  ofif  the  burden  of  prophetic  responsi- 
bility and  become  a  man  amongst  common  men. 
His  human  sympathies  go  forth  towards  his  un- 
happy country,  and  his  heart  bleeds  for  the  mis- 
ery which  he  sees  hanging  over  the  misguided 
people,  for  whom  he  is  forbidden  even  to  pray. 
The  tragic  conflict  of  his  life  reaches  its  height 
in  those  expostulations  with  Jehovah  which  are 
amongst  the  most  remarkable  passages  of  the 
Old  Testament.  They  express  the  shrinking  of 
a  sensitive  nature  from  the  inward  necessity  in 
which  he  was  compelled  to  recognise  the  higher 
truth;  and  the  wrestling  of  an  earnest  spirit  for 
the  assurance  of  his  personal  standing  with  God, 
when  all  the  outward  institutions  of  religion 
were  being  dissolved. 

To  such  mental  conflicts  Ezekiel  was  a^ 
stranger,  or  if  he  ever  passed  through  them  the 
traces  of  them  have  almost  vanished  from  his 
written  words.  He  can  hardly  be  said  to  be 
more  severe  than  Jeremiah;  but  his  severity 
seems  more  a  part  of  himself,  and  more  in  keep- 
ing with  the  bent  of  his  disposition.  He  is 
wholly  on  the  side  of  the  divine  sovereignty; 
there  is  no   reaction   of  the   human   sympathies 


JEREMIAH    AND    EZEKIEL. 


against  the  imperative  dictates  of  the  prophetic 
inspiration;  he  is  one  in  whom  every  thought 
seems  brought  into  captivity  to  the  word  of 
Jehovah.  It  is  possible  that  the  completeness 
with  which  Ezekiel  surrendered  himself  to  the 
judicial  aspect  of  his  message  may  be  partly  due 
to  the  fact  that  he  had  been  familiar  with  its 
leading  conceptions  from  the  teaching  of  Jere- 
miah; but  it  must  also  be  due  to  a  certain  auster- 
ity natural  to  him.  Less  emotional  than  Jere- 
miah, his  mind  was  more  readily  taken  posses- 
sion of  by  the  convictions  that  formed  the  sub- 
stance of  his  prophetic  message.  He  was  evi- 
dently a  man  of  profoundly  ethical  habits  of 
thought,  stern  and  uncompromising  in  his 
judgments,  both  on  himself  and  other  men,  and 
gifted  with  a  strong  sense  of  human  responsi- 
bility. As  his  captivity  cut  him  ofif  from  living 
contact  with  the  national  life,  and  enabled  him  to 
survey  his  country's  condition  with  something 
of  the  dispassionate  scrutiny  of  a  spectator,  so 
his  natural  disposition  enabled  him  to  realise  in 
his  own  person  that  breach  with  the  past  which 
was  essential  to  the  purification  of  religion.  He 
had  the  qualities  which  marked  him  out  for  the 
prophet  of  the  new  order  that  was  to  be,  as 
clearly  as  Jeremiah  had  those  which  fitted  him 
to  be  the  prophet  of  a  nation's  dissolution. 

In  social  standing,  also,  and  professional  train- 
ing, the  men  were  far  removed  from  each  other. 
Both  were  priests,  but  Ezekiel,  belonged  to  the 
house  of  Zadok,  who  ofiticiated  in  the  central 
sanctuary,  while  Jeremiah's  family  may  have 
been  attached  to  one  of  the  provincial  sanctu- 
aries.* The  interests  of  the  two  classes  of  priests 
came  into  sharp  collision  as  a  consequence  of 
Josiah's  reformation.  The  law  provided  that  the 
rural  priesthood  should  be  admitted  to  the  serv- 
ice of  the  Temple  on  equal  terms  with  their 
brethren  of  the  sons  of  Zadok;  but  we  are  ex- 
pressly informed  that  the  Temple  priests  success- 
fully resisted  this  encroachment  on  their  peculiar 
privileges.  It  has  been  adduced  by  several  ex- 
positors as  a  proof  of  Ezekiel's  freedom  from 
caste  prejudice,  that  he  was  willing  to  learn  from 
a  man  who  was  socially  his  inferior,  and  who 
belonged  to  an  order  which  he  himself  was  to 
declare  unworthy  of  full  priestly  rights  in  the 
restored  theocracy.  But  it  must  be  said  that 
there  was  little  in  Jeremiah's  public  work  to  call 
attention  to  the  fact  that  he  was  by  birth  a 
priest.  In  the  profound  spiritual  sense  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  we  may  indeed  say  that 
he  was  at  heart  a  priest,  "  having  compassion  on 
the  ignorant  and  them  that  are  out  of  the  way, 
forasmuch  as  he  himself  was  compassed  with  in- 
firmity." But  this  quality  of  spiritual  sympathy 
sprang  from  his  calling  as  a  prophet  rather  than 
from  his  priestly  training.  One  of  the  contrasts 
between  him  and  Ezekiel  lies  just  in  the  re- 
spective estimates  of  the  worth  of  ritual  which 
underlie  their  teaching.  Jeremiah  is  distin- 
guished even  among  the  prophets  by  his  indiffer- 
ence to  the  outward  institutions  and  symbols  of 
religion  which  it  is  the  priest's  function  to  con- 
serve. He  stands  in  the  succession  of  Amos  and 
Isaiah  as  an  upholder  of  the  purely  ethical  char- 
acter of  the  service  of  God.  Ritual  forms  no 
essential  element  of  Jehovah's  covenant  with  Is- 
rael, and  it  is  doubtful  if  his  prophecies  of  the 
future  contain  any  reference  to  a  priestly  class  or 

*This,  however,  is  not  certain.  Although  Jeremiah'* 
property  and  residence  were  in  Anathoth,his  official  con- 
nection may  have  been  with  the  Temple  in  Jerusalem. 


priestly  ordinances.*  In  the  present  he  repudi- 
ates the  actual  popular  worship  as  offensive  to 
Jehovah,  and,  except  in  so  far  as  he  may  have 
given  his  support  to  Josiah's  reforms,  he  does 
not  concern  himself  to  put  anything  better  in  its 
place.  To  Ezekiel,  on  the  contrary,  a  pure  wor- 
ship is  a  primary  condition  of  Israel's  enjoyment 
of  the  fellowship  of  Jehovah.  All  through  his 
teaching  we  detect  his  deep  sense  of  the  religious 
value  of  priestly  ceremonies,  and  in  the  conclud- 
ing vision  that  underlying  thought  comes  out 
clearly  as  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  new 
religious  constitution.  Here  again  we  can  see 
how  each  prophet  was  providentially  fitted  for 
the  special  work  assigned  him  to  do.  To  Jere- 
miah it  was  given,  amidst  the  wreck  of  all  the 
material  embodiments  in  which  faith  had  clothed 
itself  in  the  past,  to  realise  the  essential  truth 
of  religion  as  personal  communion  with  God,  and 
so  to  rise  to  the  conception  of  a  purely  spiritual 
religion,  in  which  the  will  of  God  should  be 
written  in  the  heart  of  every  believer.  To 
Ezekiel  was  committed  the  different,  but  not  less 
necessary,  task  of  organising  the  religion  of  the 
immediate  future,  and  providing  the  forms  which 
were  to  enshrine  the  truths  of  revelation  until 
the  coming  of  Christ.  And  that  task  could  not, 
humanly  speaking,  have  been  performed  but  by 
one  whose  training  and  inclination  taught  him 
to  appreciate  the  value  of  those  rules  of  cere- 
monial sanctity  which  were  the  tradition  of  the 
Hebrew  priesthood. 

Very  closely  connected  with  this  is  the  attitude 
of  the  two  prophets  to  what  we  may  call  the  legal 
aspect  of  religion.  Jeremiah  seems  to  have  be-  * 
come  convinced  at  a  very  early  date  of  the  in- 
sufficiency and  shallowness  of  the  revival  of  re- 
ligion which  was  expressed  in  the  establishment 
of  the  national  covenant  in  the  reign  of  Josiah.  • 
He  seems  also  to  have  discerned  some  of  the 
evils  which  are  inseparable  from  a  religion  of  the 
letter,  in  which  the  claims  of  God  are  presented 
in  the  form  of  external  laws  and  ordinances. 
And  these  convictions  led  him  to  the  conception 
of  a  far  higher  manifestation  of  God's  redeem- 
ing grace  to  be  realised  in  the  future,  in  the 
form  of  a  new  covenant,  based  on  God's  forgiv- 
ing love,  and  operative  through  a  personal 
knowledge  of  God,  and  the  law  written  on  the 
heart  and  mind  of  each  member  of  the  covenant 
people.  That  is  to  say,  the  living  principle  of 
religion  must  be  implanted  in  the  heart  of  each 
true  Israelite,  and  his  obedience  must  be  what 
we  call  evangelical  obedience,  springing  from 
the  free  impulse  of  a  nature  renewed  by  the 
knowledge  of  God.  Ezekiel  is  also  impressed 
by  the  failure  of  the  Deuteronomic  covenant  and 
the  need  of  a  new  heart  before  Israel  is  able  to 
comply  with  the  high  requirements  of  the  holy 
law  of  God.  But  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  led  to  connect  the  failure  of  the  past  with 
the  inherent  imperfection  of  a  legal  dispensation 
as  such.  Although  his  teaching  is  full  of  evan- 
gelical truths,  amongst  which  the  doctrine  of 
regeneration  holds  a  conspicuous  place,  we  yet 
observe  that  with  him  a  man's  righteousness 
before  God  consists  in  acts  of  obedience  to  the 
objective  precepts  of  the  divine  law.  This  of 
course  does  not  mean  that  Ezekiel  was  con- 
cerned only  about  the  outward  act  and  indifferent 

*  The  passage  xxxiii.  14-2*5  is  wanting  in  the  LXX.,  and 
may  possibly  be  a  later  insertion.  Even  if  genuine  it 
would  hardly  alter  the  general  estimate  of  the  prophet's 
teaching  expressed  above. 


334 


THE   BOOK   OF   EZEKIEL. 


to  the  spirit  in  which  the  law  was  observed.  But 
it  does  mean  that  the  end  of  God's  dealings 
with  His  people  was  to  bring  them  into  a  con- 
dition for  fulfilling  His  law,  and  that  the  great 
aim  of  the  new  Israel  was  the  faithful  observ- 
ance of  tTie  law  which  expressed  the  conditions 
on  which  they  could  remain  in  communion  with 
God.  Accordingly  Ezekiel's  final  ideal  is  on  a 
lower  plane,  and  therefore  more  immediately 
practicable,  than  that  of  Jeremiah.  Instead  of  a 
purely  spiritual  anticipation  expressing  the  es- 
sential nature  of  the  perfect  relation  between  God 
and  man,  Ezekiel  presents  us  with  a  definite, 
clearly  conceived  vision  of  a  new  theocracy — a 
state  which  is  to  be  the  outward  embodiment  of 
Jehovah's  will  and  in  which  life  is  minutely  regu- 
lated by  His  law. 

If  in  spite  of  such  wide  differences  of  tempera- 
ment, of  education,  and  of  religious  experience, 
we  find  nevertheless  a  substantial  agreement  in 
the  teaching  of  the  two  prophets,  we  must  cer- 
tainly recognise  in  this  a  striking  evidence  of 
the  stability  of  that  conception  of  God  and  His 
providence  which  was  in  the  main  a  product  of 
Hebrew  prophecy.  It  is  not  necessary  here  to 
enumerate  all  the  points  of  coincidence  between 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel;  but  it  will  be  of  advan- 
tage to  indicate  a  few  salient  features  which  they 
have  in  common.  Of  these  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant is  their  conception  of  the  prophetic  of- 
fice. It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  on  this  sub- 
ject Ezekiel  had  learned  much  both  from  ob- 
servation of  Jeremiah's  career  and  from  the  study 
of  his  writings.  He  knew  something  of  what  it 
meant  to  be  a  prophet  to  Israel  before  he  him- 
self received  the  prophet's  commission;  and  after 
he  had  received  it  his  experience  ran  closely 
parallel  with  that  of  his  master.  The  idea  of  the 
prophet  as  a  man  standing  alone  for  God  amidst 
a  hostile  world,  surrounded  on  every  side  by 
threats  and  opposition,  was  impressed  on  each  of 
them  from  the  outset  of  his  ministry.  To  be  a 
true  prophet  one  must  know  how  to  confront 
men  with  an  inflexibility  equal  to  theirs,  sus- 
tained only  by  a  divine  power  which  assures 
him  of  ultimate  victory.  He  is  cut  off,  not  only 
from  the  currents  of  opinion  which  play  around 
him,  but  from  all  share  in  common  joys  and  sor- 
rows, living  a  solitary  life  in  sympathy  with  a  God 
justly  alienated  from  His  people.  This  attitude 
of  antagonism  to  the  people,  as  Jeremiah  well 
knew,  had  been  the  com'mon  fate  of  all  true 
prophets.  What  is  characteristic  of  him  and 
Ezekiel  is  that  they  both  enter  on  their  work  in 
the  full  consciousness  of  the  stern  and  hopeless 
nature  of  their  task.  Isaiah  knew  from  the  day 
he  became  a  prophet  that  the  efitect  of  his  teach- 
ing would  be  to  harden  the  people  in  unbelief; 
but  he  says  nothing  of  personal  enmity  and  per- 
secution to  be  faced  from  the  outset.  But  now 
the  crisis  of  the  people's  fate  has  arrived,  and 
the  relations  between  the  prophet  and  his  age 
become  more  and  more  strained  as  the  great 
controversy  approaches  its  decision. 

Another  point  of  agreement  which  may  be  here 
mentioned  is  the  estimate  of  Israel's  sin.  Ezekiel 
goes  further  than  Jeremiah  in  the  way  of  con- 
demnation, regarding  the  whole  history  of  Israel 
as  an  unbroken  record  of  apostasy  and  rebellion, 
while  Jeremiah  at  least  looks  back  to  the  desert 
wandering  as  a  time  when  the  ideal  relation  be- 
tween Israel  and  Jehovah  was  maintained.  But 
on  the  whole,  and  especially  with  respect  to  the 
present  state  of  the  nation,  their  judgment  is  sub- 


stantially one.  The  source  of  all  the  religious 
and  moral  disorders  of  the  nation  is  infidelity 
to  Jehovah,  which  is  manifested  in  the  worship 
of  false  gods  and  reliance  on  the  help  of  foreign 
nations.  Specially  noteworthy  is  the  frequent  re- 
currence in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  of  the  figure  of 
"  whoredom,"  an  idea  introduced  into  prophecy 
by  Hosea  to  describe  these  two  sins.  The  ex-' 
tension  of  the  figure  to  the  false  worship  of  Je- 
hovah by  images  and  other  idolatrous  emblems 
can  also  be  traced  to  Hosea;  and  in  Ezekiel  it  is 
sometimes  difficult  to  say  which  species  of 
idolatry  he  has  in  view,  whether  it  be  the  actual 
worship  of  other  gods  or  the  unlawful  worship 
of  the  true  God.  His  position  is  that  an  un- 
spiritual  worship  implies  an  unspiritual  deity, 
and  that  such  service  as  was  performed  at  the 
ordinary  sanctuaries  could  by  no  possibility  be 
regarded  as  rendered  to  the  true  God  who  spoke 
through  the  prophets.  From  this  fountain-head 
of  a  corrupted  religious  sense  proceed  all  those 
immoral  practices  which  both  prophets  stigma- 
tise as  "  abominations  "  and  as  a  defilement  of 
the  land  of  Jehovah.  Of  these  the  most  startling 
is  the  prevalent  sacrifice  of  children  to  which 
they  both  bear  witness,  although,  as  we  shall 
afterwards  see,  with  a  characteristic  diflference  in 
their  point  of  view. 

The  whole  picture,  indeed,  which  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  present  of  contemporary  society  is  ap- 
palling in  the  extreme.  Making  all  allowance  for 
the  practical  motive  of  the  prophetic  invective, 
which  always  aims  at  conviction  of  sin,  we  can- 
not doubt  that  the  state  of  things  was  sufficiently 
serious  to  mark  Judah  as  ripe  for  judgment.  The 
very  foundations  of  society  were  sapped  by  the 
spread  of  license  and  high-handed  violence 
through  all  classes  of  the  community.  The  re- 
straints of  religion  had  been  loosened  by  the 
feeling  that  Jehovah  had  forsaken  the  land,  and 
nobles,  priests,  and  prophets  plunged  into  a  ca- 
reer of  wickedness  and  oppression  which  made 
salvation  of  the  existing  nation  impossible.  The 
guilt  of  Jerusalem  is  symbolised  to  both  prophets 
in  the  innocent  blood  which  stains  her  skirts  and 
cries  to  heaven  for  vengeance.  The  tendencies 
which  are  uppermost  are  the  evil  legacy  of  the 
days  of  Manasseh,  when,  in  the  judgment  of 
Jeremiah  and  the  historian  of  the  books  of 
Kings,*  the  nation  sinned  beyond  hope  of 
mercy.  In  painting  his  lurid  pictures  of  social 
degeneracy  Ezekiel  is  no  doubt  drawing  on  his 
own  memory  and  information;  nevertheless  the 
forms  in  which  his  indictment  is  cast  show  that 
even  in  this  matter  he  has  learned  to  look  on 
things  with  the  eyes  of  his  great  teacher. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  both 
prophets  anticipate  a  speedy  downfall  of  the 
state  and  its  restoration  in  a  more  glorious  form 
after  a  short  interval,  fixed  by  Jeremiah  at  sev- 
enty years  and  by  Ezekiel  at  forty  years.  The 
restoration  is  regarded  as  final,  and  as  embracing 
both  branches  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  the  king- 
dom of  the  ten  tribes  as  well  as  the  house  of 
Judah.  The  Messianic  hope  in  Ezekiel  appears 
in  a  form  similar  to  that  in  which  it  is  presented 
by  Jeremiah;  in  neither  prophet  is  the  figure  of 
the  ideal  King  so  prominent  as  in  the  prophecies 
of  Isaiah.  The  similarity  between  the  two  is  all 
the  more  noteworthy  as  an  evidence  of  depend- 
ence, because  Ezekiel's.  final  outlook  is  towards 
a  state  of  things  in  which  the  Prince  has  a  some- 
what subordinate  position  assigned  to  Him. 
*  Jer.  XV.  4  ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  a6. 


Ezekiel  i.] 


THE    VISION    OF    THE    GLORY    OF    GOD. 


ijoth  prophets,  again  following  Hosea,  regard 
tile  spiritual  renewal  of  the  people  as  the  effect 
of  chastisement  in  exile.  Those  parts  of  the  na- 
tion which  go  first  into  banishment  are  the  first 
to  be  brought  under  the  salutary  influences  of 
God's  providential  discipline;  and  hence  we  find 
that  Jeremiah  adopts  a  more  hopeful  tone  in 
speaking  of  Samaria  and  the  captives  of  597  than 
in  his  utterances  to  those  who  remained  in  the 
land.  This  conviction  was  shared  by  Ezekiel,  in 
spite  of  his  daily  contact  with  abominations  from 
which  his  whole  nature  revolted.  It  has  been 
supposed  that  Ezekiel  lived  long  enough  to  see 
that  no  such  spiritual  transformation  was  to  be 
wrought  by  the  mere  fact  of  captivity,  and  that, 
despairing  of  a  general  and  spontaneous  con- 
version, he  put  his  hand  to  the  work  of  practical 
reform  as  if  he  would  secure  by  legislation  the 
results  which  he  had  once  expected  as  fruits  of 
repentance.  If  the  prophet  had  ever  expected 
that  punishment  of  itself  would  work  a  change 
in  the  religious  condition  of  his  countrymen, 
there  might  have  been  room  for  such  a  disen- 
chantment as  is  here  assumed.  But  there  is  no 
evidence  that  he  ever  looked  for  anything  else 
than  a  regeneration  of  the  people  in  captivity  by 
the  supernatural  working  of  the  divine  Spirit; 
and  that  the  final  vision  is  meant  to  help  out  the 
divine  plan  by  human  policy  is  a  suggestion 
negatived  by  the  whole  scope  of  the  book.  It 
may  be  true  that  his  practical  activity  in  the 
present  was  directed  to  preparing  individual  men 
for  the  coming  salvation;  but  that  was  no  more 
than  any  spiritual  teacher  must  have  done  in  a 
time  recognised  as  a  period  of  transition.  The 
vision  of  the  restored  theocracy  presupposes  a 
national  resurrection  and  a  national  repentance. 
And  on  the  face  of  it  it  is  such  that  man  can 
take  no  step  towards  its  accomplishment  until 
God  has  prepared  the  way  by  creating  the  con- 
ditions of  a  perfect  religious  community,  both 
the  moral  conditions  in  the  mind  of  the  people 
and  the  outward  conditions  in  the  miraculous 
transformation  of  the  land  in  which  they  are 
to  dwell. 

Most  of  the  points  here  touched  upon  will  have 
to  be  more  fully  treated  in  the  course  of  our  ex- 
position, and  other  affinities  between  the  two 
great  prophets  will  have  to  be  noticed  as  we  pro- 
ceed. Enough  has  perhaps  been  said  to  show 
that  Ezekiel's  thinking  has  been  profoundly  in- 
fluenced by  Jeremiah,  that  the  influence  extends 
not  only  to  the  form  but  also  to  the  substance 
of  his  teaching,  and  can  therefore  only  be  ex- 
plained by  early  impressions  received  by  the 
younger  prophet  in  the  days  before  the  word  of 
the  Lord  had  come  to  him. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  VISION  OF  THE  GLORY  OF  GOD. 

Ezekiel  i. 

It  might  be  hazardous  to  attempt,  from  the 
general  considerations  advanced  in  the  last  two 
chapters,  to  form  a  conception  of  Ezekiel's  state 
of  mind  during  the  first  few  years  of  his  captivity. 
If,  as  we  have  found  reason  to  believe,  he  had  al- 
ready come  under  the  influence  of  Jeremiah,  he 
must  have  been  in  some  measure  prepared  for 
the  blow  which  had  descended  on  him.  Torn 
from  the  duties  of  the  office  which  he  loved,  and 
15-Vol.  lY. 


driven  in  upon  himself,  Ezekiel  must  no  doubt 
have  meditated  deeply  on  the  sin  and  the  pros- 
pects of  his  people.  From  the  first  he  must 
have  stood  aloof  from  his  fellow-exiles,  who,  led 
by  their  false  prophets,  began  to  dream  of  the 
fall  of  Babylon  and  a  speedy  return  to  their  own 
land.  He  knew  that  the  calamity  which  had  be- 
fallen them  was  but  the  first  instalment  of  a 
sweeping  judgment  before  which  the  old  Israel 
must  utterly  perish.  Those  who-  remained  in 
Jerusalem  were  reserved  for  a  worse  fate  than 
those  who  had  been  carried  away;  but  so  long 
as  the  latter  remained  impenitent  there  was  no 
hope  even  for  them  of  an  alleviation  of  the  bit- 
terness of  their  lot.  Such  thoughts,  working  in 
a  mind  naturally  severe  in  its  judgments,  may 
have  already  produced  that  attitude  of  alienation 
from  the  wIkjIc  life  of  his  companions  in  mis- 
fortune which  dominates  the  first  period  of  his 
prophetic  career.  But  these  convictions  did  not 
make  Ezekiel  a  prophet.  He  had  as  yet  no  inde- 
pendent message  from  God,  no  sure  perception 
of  the  issue  of  events,  or  the  path  which  Israel 
must  follow  in  order  to  reach  the  blessedness  of 
the  future.  It  was  not  till  the  fifth  year  of  his 
captivity  *  that  the  inward  change  took  place 
which  brought  him  into  Jehovah's  counsel,  and 
disclosed  to  him  the  outlines  of  all  his  future 
work,  and  endowed  him  with  the  courage  to 
stand  forth  amongst  his  people  as  the  spokes- 
man of  Jehovah. 

Like  other  great  prophets  whose  personal  ex- 
perience is  recorded,  Ezekiel  became  conscious 
of  his  prophetic  vocation  through  a  vision  of 
God.  The  form  in  which  Jehovah  first  appeared 
to  him  is  described  with  great  minuteness  of  de- 
tail in  the  first  chapter  of  his  book.  It  would 
seem  that  in  some  hour  of  solitary  meditation 
by  the  river  Kebar  his  attention  was  attracted  to 
a  storm-cloud  forming  in  the  north  and  advanc- 
ing toward  him  across  the  plain.  The  cloud  may 
have  been  an  actual  phenomenon,  the  natural 
basis  of  the  theophany  which  follows.  Falling 
into  a  state  of  ecstasy,  the  prophet  sees  the  cloud 
grow  luminous  with  an  unearthly  splendour. 
From  the  midst  of  it  there  shines  a  brightness 
which  he  compares  to  the  lustre  of  electron,  f 
Looking  more  closely,  he  discerns  four  living 
creatures,  of  strange  composite  form, — human  in 
general  appearance,  but  winged;  and  each  having 
four  heads  combining  the  highest  types  of  ani- 
mal life — man,  lion,  ox,  and  eagle.  These  are 
afterwards  identified  with  the  cherubim  of  the 
Temple  symbolism  (x.  20) ;  but  some  features  of 
the  conception  may  have  been  suggested  by  the 
composite  animal  figures  of  Babylonian  art,  with 
which  the  prophet  must  have  been  already  fa- 
miliar.    The    interior    space    is    occupied    by    a 

*  In  the  superscription  of  the  book  (i.  1-3)  a  double  date 
is  given  for  this  occurrence.  In  ver.  i  it  is  said  to  have 
taken  place  "  in  the  thirtieth  year  ";  but  this  expression 
has  never  been  satisfactorily  explained.  The  principal 
suggestions  are:  (i)  that  it  is  the  year  of  Ezekiel's  life; 
(2)  that  the  reckoning  is  from  the  year  of  Josiah's  refor- 
mation ;  and  (3)  that  it  is  according  to  some  Babylonian 
era.  But  none  of  these  has  much  probability,  unless, 
with  Klostermann,  we  go  further  and  assume  that  the 
explanation  was  given  in  an  earlier  part  of  the  prophet's 
autobiography  now  lost— a  view  which  is  supported  by  no 
evidence  and  is  contrary  to  all  analogy.  Cornill  pro- 
poses to  omit  ver.  1  entirely,  chiefly  on  the  ground  that 
the  use  of  the  first  person  before  the  writer's  nctme  has 
been  mentioned  is  unnatural.  That  the  superscription 
does  not  read  smoothly  as  it  stands  has  been  felt  by  many 
critics;  but  the  rejection  of  the  verse  is  perhaps  a  too 
facile  solution. 

t  Not  "  amber,"  but  a  natural  alloy  of  silver  and  gold, 
highly  esteemed  in  antiquity. 


226 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


hearth  of  glowing  coals,  from  which  lightning- 
flashes  constantly  dart  to  and  fro  between  the 
cherubim.  Beside  each  cherub  is  a  wheel, 
formed  apparently  of  two  wheels  intersecting 
each  other  at  right  angles.  The  appearance  of 
the  wheels  is  like  "  chrysolite,"  and  their  rims 
are  filled  with  eyes,  denoting  the  intelligence  by 
which  their  motions  are  directed.  The  wheels 
and  the  cherubim  together  embody  the  spontane- 
ous energy  by  which  the  throne  of  God  is  trans- 
ported whither  He  wills;  although  there  is  no 
mechanical  connection  between  them,  they  are 
represented  as  animated  by  a  common  spirit, 
directing  all  their  motions  in  perfect  harmony. 
Over  the  heads  and  outstretched  wings  of  the 
cherubim  is  a  rigid  pavement  or  "  firmament," 
like  crystal:  and  above  this  a  sapphire  stone* 
supporting  the  throne  of  Jehovah.  The  divine 
Being  is  seen  in  the  likeness  of  a  man;  and 
around  Him,  as  if  to  temper  the  fierceness  of 
the  light  in  which  He  dwells,  is  a  radiance  like 
that  of  the  rainbow.  It  will  be  noticed  that  while 
Ezekiel's  imagination  dwells  on  what  we  must 
consider  the  accessories  of  the  vision — the  fire, 
the  cherubim,  the  wheels — he  hardly  dares  to 
lift  his  eyes  to  the  person  of  Jehovah  Himself 
The  full  meaning  of  what  he  is  passing  through 
only  dawns  on  him  when  he  realises  that  he  is 
in  the  presence  of  the  Alm.ighty.  Then  he  falls 
on  his  face,  overpowered  by  the  sense  of  his  own 
insignificance. 

There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  what  is  thus 
described  represents  an  actual  experience  on  the 
part  of  the  prophet.  It  is  not  to  be  regarded 
merely  as  a  conscious  clothing  of  spiritual  truths 
in  symbolic  imagery.  The  description  of  a  vision 
is  of  course  a  conscious  exercise  of  literary 
faculty;  and  in  all  such  cases  it  must  be  difftcult 
to  distinguish  what  a  prophet  actually  saw  and 
heard  in  the  moment  of  inspiration  from  the 
details  which  he  was  compelled  to  add  in  order 
to  convey  an  intelligible  picture  to  the  minds  of 
his  readers.  It  is  probable  that  in  the  case  of 
Ezekiel  the  element  of  free  invention  has  a  larger 
range  than  in  the  less  elaborate  descriptions 
which  other  prophets  give  in  their  visions.  But 
this  does  not  detract  from  the  force  of  the 
prophet's  own  assertion  that  what  he  relates  was 
based  on  a  real  and  definite  experience  when  in 
a  state  of  prophetic  ecstasy.  This  is  expressed 
by  the  words  "  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  upon 
him  "  (ver.  3) — a  phrase  which  is  invariably  used 
throughout  the  book  to  denote  the  prophet's 
peculiar  mental  condition  when  the  communica- 
tion of  divine  truth  was  accompanied  by  experi- 
ences of  a  visionary  order.  Moreover,  the  account 
given  of  the  state  in  which  this  vision  left  him 
shows  that  his  natural  consciousness  had  been 
overpowered  by  the  pressure  of  supersensible 
realities  on  his  spirit.  He  tells  us  that  he  went 
"  in  bitterness,  in  the  heat  of  his  spirit,  the  hand 
of  the  Lord  being  heavy  upon  him;  and  came  to 
the  exiles  at  Tel-abib,  .  .  .  and  sat  there  seven 
days  stupefied  in  their  midst"  (iii.  14,  15). 

Now  whatever  be  the  ultimate  nature  of  the 
prophetic  vision,  its  significance  for  us  would 
appear  to  lie  in  the  untrammelled  working  of  the 
prophet's  imagination  under  the  influence  of 
spiritual  perceptions  which  are  too  profound  to 
be  expressed  as  abstract  ideas.  The  prophet's 
consciousness  is  not  suspended,  for  he  remem- 
bers his  vision  and  reflects  on  its  meaning  after- 

*  C/.  Exod.  xxiv.  lo :  "  like  the  very  heavens  for  pure- 
ness." 


wards;  but  his  intercourse  with  the  outer  world 
through  the  senses  is  interrupted,  so  that  his 
mind  moves  freely  amongst  images  stored  in  his 
memory,  and  new  combinations  are  formed 
which  embody  a  truth  not  previously  appre- 
hended. The  tableau  of  the  vision  is  therefore 
always  capable  to  some  extent  of  a  psychological 
explanation.  The  elements  of  which  it  is  com- 
posed must  have  been  already  present  in  the 
mind  of  the  prophet,  and  in  so  far  as  these  can 
be  traced  to  their  sources  we  are  enabled  to  un- 
derstand their  symbolic  import  in  the  novel  com- 
bination in  which  they  appear.  But  the  real  sig- 
nificance of  the  vision  lies  in  the  immediate  im- 
pression left  on  the  mind  of  the  prophet  by  the 
divine  realities  which  govern  his  life,  and  this  is 
especially  true  of  the  vision  of  God  Himself 
which  accompanies  the  call  to  the  prophetic  of- 
fice. Although  no  vision  can  express  the  whole 
of  a  prophet's  conception  of  God,  yet  it  repre- 
sents to  the  imagination  certain  fundamental  as- 
pects of  the  divine  nature  and  of  God's  relation 
to  the  world  and  to  men;  and  through  all  his 
subsequent  career  the  prophet  will  be  influenced 
by  the  form  in  which  he  once  beheld  the  great 
Being  whose  words  come  to  him  from  time  to 
time.  To  his  later  reflection  the  vision  becomes 
a  symbol  of  certain  truths  about  God,  although 
in  the  first  instance  the  symbol  was  created  for 
him  by  a  mysterious  operation  of  the  divine 
Spirit  in  a  process  over  which  he  had  no  control. 
In  one  respect  Ezekiel's  inaugural  vision  seems 
to  possess  a  greater  importance  for  his  theology 
than  is  the  case  with  any  other  prophet.  With 
the  other  prophets  the  vision  is  a  momentary 
experience,  of  which  the  spiritual  meaning  passes 
into  the  thinking  of  the  prophet,  but  which  does 
not  recur  again  in  the  visionary  form.  With 
Ezekiel,  on  the  other  hand,  the  vision  becomes 
a  fixed  and  permanent  symbol  of  Jehovah,  ap- 
pearing again  and  again  in  precisely  the  same 
form  as  often  as  the  reality  of  God's  presence  is 
impressed  on  his  mind. 

The  essential  question,  then,  with  regard  to 
Ezekiel's  vision  is,  What  revelation  of  God  or 
what  ideas  respecting  God  did  it  serve  to  impress 
on  the  mind  of  the  prophet?  It  may  help  us  to 
answer  that  question  if  we  begin  by  considering 
certain  affinities  which  it  presents  to  the  great 
vision  which  opened  the  ministry  of  Isaiah.  It 
must  be  admitted  that  Ezekiel's  experience  is 
much  less  intelligible  as  well  as  less  impressive 
than  Isaiah's.  In  Isaiah's  delineation  we  recog- 
nise the  presence  of  qualities  which  belong  to 
genius  of  the  highest  order.  The  perfect  balance 
of  form  and  idea,  the  reticence  which  suggests 
without  exhausting  the  significance  of  what  is 
seen,  the  fine  artistic  sense  which  makes  every 
touch  in  the  picture  contribute  to  the  render- 
ing of  the  emotion  which  fills  the  prophet's  soul, 
combine  to  make  the  sixth  chapter  of  Isaiah  one 
of  the  most  sublime  passages  in  literature.  No 
sympathetic  reader  can  fail  to  catch  the  impres- 
sion which  the  passage  is  intended  to  convey  of 
the  awful  majesty  of  the  God  of  Israel,  and  the 
effect  produced  on  a  frail  and  sinful  mortal 
ushered  into  that  holy  Presence.  We  are  made 
to  feel  how  inevitably  such  a  vision  gives  birth 
to  the  prophetic  impulse,  and  how  both  vision 
and  impulse  inform  the  mind  of  the  seer  with 
the  clear  and  definite  purpose  which  rules  all 
his  subsequent  work. 

The  point  in  which  Ezekiel's  vision  diflfers 
most  strikingly  from  Isaiah's  is  the  almost  entire 


Ezekiel  i.J 


THE    VISION    OF    THE    GLORY    OF    GOD. 


22'/ 


suppression  of  his  subjectivity.  This  is  so  com- 
plete that  it  becomes  difficult  to  apprehend  the 
meaning  of  the  vision  in  relation  to  his  thought 
and  activity.  Spiritual  realities  are  so  overlaid 
with  symbolism  that  the  narrative  almost  fails 
to  reflect  the  mental  state  in  which  he  was  con- 
secrated for  the  work  of  his  life.  Isaiah's  vision 
is  a  drama,  Ezekiel's  is  a  spectacle;  in  the  one 
religious  truth  is  expressed  in  a  series  of  signifi- 
cant actions  and  words,  in  the  other  it  is  em- 
bodied in  forms  and  splendours  that  appeal  only 
to  the  eye.  One  fact  may  be  noted  in  illustra- 
tion of  the  diversity  between  the  two  representa- 
tions. The  scenery  of  Isaiah's  vision  is  inter- 
preted and  spiritualised  by  the  medium  of  lan- 
guage. The  seraphs'  hymn  of  adoration  strikes 
the  note  which  is  the  central  thought  of  the 
vision,  and  the  exclamation  which  breaks  from 
the  prophet's  lips  reveals  the  impact  of  that  great 
truth  on  a  human  spirit.  The  whole  scene  is 
thus  lifted  out  of  the  region  of  mere  symbolism 
into  that  of  pure  religious  ideas.  Ezekiel's,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  like  a  song  without  words. 
His  cherubim  are  speechless.  While  the  rustling 
of  their  wings  and  the  thunder  of  the  revolving 
wheels  break  on  his  ear  like  the  sound  of  mighty 
waters,  no  articulate  voice  bears  home  to  the 
mind  the  inner  meaning  of  what  he  beholds. 
Probably  he  himself  felt  no  need  of  it.  The 
pictorial  character  of  his  thinking  appears  in 
many  features  of  his  work;  and  it  is  not  surpris- 
ing to  find  that  the  import  of  the  revelation  is 
expressed  mainly  in  visual  images. 

Now  these  differences  are  in  their  own  place 
very  instructive,  because  they  show  how  inti- 
mately the  vision  is  related  to  the  individuality 
of  him  who  receives  it,  and  how  even  in  the 
most  exalted  moments  of  inspiration  the  mind 
displays  the  same  tendencies  which  characterise 
its  ordinary  operations.  Yet  Ezekiel's  vision 
represents  a  spiritual  experience  not  less  real 
than  Isaiah's.  His  mental  endowments  are  of  a 
different  order,  of  a  lower  order  if  you  will,  than 
those  of  Isaiah;  but  the  essential  fact  that  he 
too  saw  the  glory  of  God  and  in  that  vision  ob- 
tained the  insight  of  the  true  prophet  is  not  to 
be  explained  away  by  analysis  of  his  literary 
talent  or  of  the  sources  from  which  his  images 
are  derived.  It  is  allowable  to  write  worse 
Greek  than  Plato;  and  it  is  no  disqualification  for 
a  Hebrew  prophet  to  lack  the  grandeur  of  imagi- 
nation and  the  mastery  of  style  which  are  the 
notes  of  Isaiah's  genius. 

In  spite  of  their  obvious  dissimilarities  the 
two  visions  have  enough  in  common  to  show 
that  Ezekiel's  thoughts  concerning  God  had 
been  largely  influenced  by  the  study  of  Isaiah. 
Truths  that  had  perhaps  long  been  latent  in  his 
mind  now  emerge  into  clear  consciousness, 
clothed  in  forms  which  bear  the  impress  of  the 
mind  in  which  they  were  first  conceived.  The 
fundamental  idea  is  the  same  in  each  vision:  the 
absolute     and     universal     sovereignty     of     God. 

Mine  eyes  have  seen  the  King,  Jehovah  of 
liosts."  Jehovah  appears  in  human  form,  seated 
on  a  throne  and  attended  by  ministering  crea- 
tures which  serve  to  show  forth  some  part  of 
His  glory.  In  the  one  case  they  are  seraphim, 
in  the  other  cherubim;  and  the  functions  imposed 
on  them  by  the  structure  of  the  vision  are  very 
diverse  in  the  two  cases.  But  the  points  in  which 
they  agree  are  more  significant  than  those  in 
which  they  differ.  They  are  the  agents  through 
whom  Jehovah  exercises  His  sovereign  authority, 


beings  full  of  life  and  intelii),ence  and  moving  in 
swift  response  to  His  will.  Although  free  from 
earthly  imperfection  they  cover  themselves  with 
their  wings  before  His  majesty,  in  token  of  the 
reverence  which  is  due  from  the  creature  in 
presence  of  the  Creator.  For  the  rest  they  are 
symbolic  figures  embodying  in  themselves  cer- 
tain attributes  of  the  Deity,  or  certain  aspects  of 
His  kingship.  Nor  can  Ezekiel  any  more  than 
Isaiah  think  of  Jehovah  as  the  Kirrg  apart  from 
the  emblems  associated  with  the  worship  of  His 
earthly  sanctuary.  The  cherubim  themselves  are 
borrowed  from  the  imagery  of  the  Temple,  al- 
though their  forms  are  different  from  those 
which  stood  in  the  Holy  of  Holies.  So  again 
the  altar,  which  was  naturally  suggested  to 
Isaiah  by  the  scene  of  his  vision  being  laid  in 
the  Temple,  appears  in  Ezekiel's  vision  in  the 
form  of  the  hearth  of  glowing  coals  which  is 
under  the  divine  throne.  It  is  true  that  the  fire 
symbolises  destructive  might  rather  than  purify- 
ing energy  (see  x.  2),  but  it  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  the  origin  of  the  symbol  is  the 
altar-hearth  of  the  sanctuary  and  of  Isaiah's 
vision.  It  is  as  if  the  essence  of  the  Temple  and 
its  worship  were  transferred  to  the  sphere  of 
heavenly  realities  where  Jehovah's  glory  is  fully 
manifested.  All  this,  therefore,  is  nothing  more 
than  the  embodiment  of  the  fundamental  truth 
of  the  Old  Testament  religion — that  Jehovah  is 
the  almighty  King  of  heaven  and  earth,  that  He 
executes  His  sovereign  purposes  with  irresistible 
power,  and  that  it  is  the  highest  privilege  of 
men  on  earth  to  render  to  Him  the  homage  and 
adoration  which  the  sight  of  His  glory  draws 
forth  from  heavenly  beings. 

The  idea  of  Jehovah's  kingship,  however,  is 
presented  in  the  Old  Testament  under  two  as- 
pects. On  the  one  hand,  it  denotes  the  moral 
sovereignty  of  God  over  the  people  whom  He 
had  chosen  as  His  own  and  to  whom  His  will 
was  continuously  revealed  as  the  guide  of  their 
national  and  social  life.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
denotes  God's  absolute  dominion  over  the  forces 
of  nature  and  the  events  of  history,  in  virtue  of 
which  all  things  are  the  unconscious  instruments 
of  His  purposes.  These  two  truths  can  never 
be  separated,  although  the  emphasis  is  laid 
sometimes  on  the  one  and  sometimes  on 
the  other.  Thus  in  Isaiah's  vision  the  em- 
phasis lies  perhaps  more  on  the  doctrine  of 
Jehovah's  kingship  over  Israel.  It  is  true  that 
He  is  at  the  same  time  represented  as  One  whose 
glory  is  the  "  fulness  of  the  whole  earth,"  and 
who  therefore  manifests  His  power  and  presence 
in  every  part  of  His  world-wide  dominions.  But 
the  fact  that  Jehovah's  palace  is  the  idealised 
Temple  of  Jerusalem  suggests  at  once,  what  all 
the  teaching  of  the  prophet  confirms,  that  the 
nation  of  Israel  is  the  special  sphere  within 
which  His  kingly  authority  is  to  obtain  practical 
recognition.  While  no  man  had  a  firmer  grasp 
of  the  truth  that  God  wields  all  natural  forces 
and  overrules  the  actions  of  men  in  carrying  out 
His  providential  designs,  yet  the  leading  ideas  of 
His  ministry  are  those  which  spring  from  the 
thought  of  Jehovah's  presence  in  the  midst  of 
His  people  and  the  obligation  that  lies  on  Is- 
rael to  recognise  His  sovereignty.  He  is,  to  use 
Isaiah's  own  expression,  the  "  Holy  One  of 
Israel." 

This  aspect  of  the  divine  kingship  is  undoubt- 
edly represented  in  the  vision  of  Ezekiel.  We 
have  remarked  that  the  imagery  of  the  vision  is 


228 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


to  some  extent  moulded  on  the  idea  of  the  sanc- 
tuary as  the  seat  of  Jehovah's  government,  and 
we  shall  find  later  on  that  the  final  resting-place 
of  this  emblem  of  Flis  presence  is  a  restored 
sanctuary  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  But  the  cir- 
cumstances under  which  Ezekiel  was  called  lo 
be  a  prophet  required  that  prominence  should  be 
given  to  the  complementary  truth  that  the  king- 
ship of  Jehovah  was  independent  of  His  special 
relation  to  Israel.  For  the  present  the  tie  be- 
tween Jehovah  and  His  land  was  dissolved.  Is- 
rael had  disowned  her  divine  King,  and  was  left 
to  suffer  the  consequences  of  her  disloyalty. 
Hence  it  is  that  the  vision  appears,  not  from 
the  direction  of  Jerusalem,  but  "  out  of  the 
north,"  in  token  that  God  has  departed  from  His 
Temple  and  abandoned  it  to  its  enemies.  '  In  this 
way  the  vision  granted  to  the  exiled  prophet  on 
the  plain  of  Babylonia  embodied  a  truth  opposed 
to  the  religious  prejudices  of  his  time,  but  re- 
assuring to  himself — that  the  fall  of  Israel  leaves 
the  essential  sovereignty  of  Jehovah  untouched; 
that  He  still  lives  and  reigns,  although  His  peo- 
ple are  trodden  underfoot  by  worshippers  of 
other  gods.  But  more  than  this,  we  can  see 
that  on  the  whole  the  tendency  of  Ezekiel's 
vision,  as  distinguished  from  that  of  Isaiah,  is  to 
emphasise  the  universality  of  Jehovah's  relations 
to  the  world  of  nature  and  of  mankind.  His 
throne  rests  here  on  a  sapphire  stone,  the  symbol 
of  heavenly  purity,  to  signify  that  His  true 
dwelling-place  is  above  the  firmament,  in  the 
heavens,  which  are  equally  near  to  every  region 
of  the  earth.  Moreover,  it  is  mounted  on  a 
chariot,  by  which  it  is  moved  from  place  to 
place  with  a  velocity  which  suggests  ubiquity, 
and  the  chariot  is  borne  by  "  living  creatures  " 
whose  forms  unite  all  that  is  symbolical  of  power 
and  dignity  in  the  living  world.  Further,  the 
shape  of  the  chariot,  which  is  foursquare,  and 
the  disposition  of  the  wheels  and  cherubim, 
which  is  such  that  there  is  no  before  or  behind, 
but  the  same  front  presented  to  each  of  the  four 
quarters  of  the  globe,  indicate  that  all  parts  of 
the  universe  are  alike  accessible  to  the  presence 
of  God.  Finally,  the  wheels  and  the  cherubim 
are  covered  with  eyes,  to  denote  that  all  things 
are  open  to  the  view  of  Him  who  sits  on  the 
throne.  The  attributes  of  God  here  symbolised 
are  those  which  express  His  relations  to  created 
existence  as  a  whole — ^omnipresence,  omnipo- 
tence, omniscience.  These  ideas  are  obviously 
incapable  of  adequate  representation  by  any 
sensuous  image — they  can  only  be  suggested  to 
the  mind:  and  it  is  just  the  eflfort  to  suggest  such 
transcendental  attributes  that  imparts  to  the 
vision  the  character  of  obscurity  which  attaches 
to  so  many  of  its  details. 

Another  point  of  comparison  between  Isaiah 
and  Ezekiel  is  suggested  by  the  name  which  the 
latter  constantly  uses  for  the  appearance  which 
he  sees,  or  rather  perhaps  for  that  part  of  it 
which  represents  the  personal  appearance  of 
God.  He  calls  it  the  "  glory  of  Jehovah,"  or 
"  glory  of  the  God  of  Israel."  The  word  for 
glory  (kabod)  is  used  in  a  variety  of  senses  in 
the  Old  Testament.  Etymologically  it  comes 
from  a  root  expressing  the  idea  of  heaviness. 
When  used,  as  here,  concretely,  it  signifies  that 
which  is  the  outward  manifestation  of  power  or 
worth  or  dignity.  In  human  affairs  it  may  be 
used  of  a  man's  wealth,  or  the  pomp  and  cir- 
cumstance of  military  array,  or  the  splendour  and 
pageantry  of  a  royal  court — those  things  which 


oppress  the  minds  of  common  men  with  a  sense 
of  magnificence.  In  like  manner,  when  applied 
to  God,  it  denotes  some  reflection  in  the  outer 
world  of  His  majesty,  something  that  at  once 
reveals  and  conceals  His  essential  Godhead. 
Now  we  remember  that  the  second  line  of  the 
seraphs'  hymn  conveyed  to  Isaiah's  mind  this 
thought,  that  "  that  which  fills  the  whole  earth 
is  His  glory."  What  is  this  "  filling  of  the  whole 
earth  "  in  which  the  prophet  sees  the  effulgence 
of  the  divine  glory?  Is  his  feeling  akin  lu 
Wordsworth's 

"  sense  sublime 
Of  something  far  more  deeply  interfused, 
Whose  dwelling  is  the  light  of  setting  suns, 
And  the  round  ocean,  and  the  living  air. 
And  the  blue  sky,  and  in  the  mind  of  man  "? 

At  least  the  words  must  surely  mean  that  all 
through  nature  Isaiah  recognised  that  which  de- 
clares the  glory  of  God,  and  therefore  in  some 
sense  reveals  Him.  Although  they  do  not  teach 
a  doctrine  of  the  divine  immanence,  they  contain 
all  that  is  religiously  valuable  in  that  doctrine. 
In  Ezekiel,  however,  we  find  nothing  that  looks 
in  this  direction.  It  is  characteristic  of  his 
thoughts  about  God  that  the  very  word  "  glory  " 
which  Isaiah  uses  of  something  diffused  throug'h 
the  earth  is  here  employed  to  express  the  con- 
centration of  all  divine  qualities  in  a  single  im- 
age of  dazzling  splendour,  but  belonging  to 
heaven  rather  than  to  earth.  Glory  is  here 
equivalent  to  brightness,  as  in  the  ancient  con- 
ception of  the  bright  cloud  which  led  the  people 
through  the  desert  and  that  which  filled  the  Tem- 
ple with  overpowering  light  when  Jehovah  took 
possession  of  it  (2  Chron.  vii.  1-3).  In  a  strik- 
ing passage  of  his  last  vision  Ezekiel  describes 
how  this  scene  will  be  repeated  when  Jehovah 
returns  to  take  up  His  abode  amongst  His  peo- 
ple and  the  earth  will  be  lighted  up  with  His 
glory  (xliii.  2).  But  meanwhile  it  may  seem  to 
us  that  earth  is  left  poorer  by  the  loss  of  that 
aspect  of  nature  in  which  Isaiah  discovered  a 
revelation  of  the  divine. 

Ezekiel  is  conscious  that  what  he  has  seen  is 
after  all  but  an  imperfect  semblance  of  th.e  es- 
sential glory  of  God  on  which  no  mortal  eye 
can  gaze.  All  that  he  describes  is  expressly  said 
to  be  an  "  appearance  "  and  a  "  likeness."  When 
he  comes  to  speak  of  the  divine  form  in  which 
the  whole  revelation  culminates  he  can  say  no 
more  than  that  it  is  the  "  appearance  of  the  like- 
ness of  the  glory  of  Jehovah."  The  prophet  ap- 
pears to  realise  his  inability  to  penetrate  behind 
the  appearance  to  the  reality  which  it  shadows 
forth.  The  clearest  vision  of  God  which  the 
mind  of  man  can  receive  is  an  after-look  like 
that  which  was  vouchsafed  to  Moses  when  the 
divine  presence  had  passed  by  (Exod.  xxxiii.  23). 
So  it  was  with  Ezekiel.  The  true  revelation  that 
came  to  him  was  not  in  what  he  saw  with  his 
eyes  in  the  moment  of  his  initiation,  but  in  the 
intuitive  knowledge  of  God  which  from  that  hour 
he  possessed,  and  which  enabled  him  to  inter- 
pret more  fully  than  he  could  have  done  at  the 
time  the  significance  of  his  first  memorable 
meeting  with  the  God  of  Israel.  What  he  re- 
tained in  his  waking  hours  was  first  of  all  a  vivid 
sense  of  the  reality  of  God's  being,  and  then  a 
mental  picture  suggesting  those  attributes  which 
lay  at  the  foundation  of  his  prophetic  ministry. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  this  vision  dominates  all 
Ezekiel's  thinking  about  the  divine  nature.  The 
God  whom  he  saw  was  in  the  form  of  a  man, 


Ezekiel  ii.,  iii.] 


EZEKIEL'S    PROPHETIC    COMMISSION. 


229 


and  so  the  God  of  his  conscience  is  a  moral 
person  to  whom  he  fearlessly  ascribes  the  parts 
and  even  the  passions  of  humanity.  He  speaks 
through  the  prophet  in  the  language  of  royal 
authority,  as  a  king  who  will  brook  no  rival  in 
the  affections  of  his  people.  As  King  of  Israel 
He  asserts  His  determination  to  reign  over  them 
with  a  mighty  hand,  and  by  mingled  goodness 
and  severity  to  break  their  stubborn  heart  and 
bend  them  to  His  purpose.  There  are  perhaps 
other  and  more  subtle  affinities  between  the  sym- 
bol of  the  vision  and  the  prophet's  inner  con- 
sciousness of  God.  Just  as  the  vision  gathers 
up  all  in  nature  that  suggests  divinity  into  one 
resplendent  image,  so  it  i''  also  with  the  moral 
action  of  God  as  conceived  by  Ezekiel.  His 
government  of  the  world  is  self-centred;  all  the 
ends  which  He  pursues  in  His  providence  lie 
within  Himself.  His  dealings  with  the  nations, 
and  with  Israel  in  particular,  are  dictated  by 
regard  for  His  own  glory,  or,  as  Ezekiel  ex- 
presses it,  by  pity  for  His  great  name.  "  Not 
for  your  sake  do  I  act,  O  house  of  Israel,  but 
for  My  holy  name,  which  ye  have  profaned 
among  the  heathen  whither  ye  went  "  (xxxvi. 
22).  The  relations  into  which  He  enters  with 
men  are  all  subordinate  to  the  supreme  purpose 
of  "  sanctifying  "  Himself  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world  or  manifesting  Himself  as  He  truly  is.  It 
is  no  doubt  possible  to  exaggerate  this  feature 
of  Ezekiel's  theology  in  a  way  that  would  be  un- 
just to  the  prophet.  After  all,  Jehovah's  desire 
to  be  known  as  He  is  implies  a  regard  for  His 
creatures  which  includes  the  ultimate  intention 
to  bless  them.  It  is  but  an  extreme  expression 
in  the  form  necessary  for  that  time  of  the  truth 
to  which  all  the  prophets  bear  witness,  that  the 
knowledge  of  God  is  the  indispensable  condition 
of  true  blessedness  to  men.  Still,  the  difference 
is  marked  between  the  "  not  for  your  sake  "  of 
Ezekiel  and  the  "  human  bands,  the  cords  of 
love  "  of  which  Hosea  speaks,  the  yearning  and 
compassionate  affection  that  binds  Jehovah  to 
His  erring  people. 

In  another  respect  Che  symbolism  of  the 
vision  may  be  taken  as  an  emblem  of  the  Hebrew 
conception  of  the  universe.  The  Bible  has  no 
scientific  theory  of  God's  relation  to  the  world; 
but  it  is  full  of  the  practical  conviction  that  all 
nature  responds  to  His  behests,  that  all  occur- 
rences are  indications  of  His  mind,  the  whole 
realm  of  nature  and  history  being  governed  by 
one  Will  which  works  for  moral  ends.  That 
conviction  is  as  deeply  rooted  in  the  thinking 
of  Ezekiel  as  in  that  of  any  other  prophet,  and, 
consciously  or  unconsciously,  it  is  reflected  in 
the  structure  of  the  merkaba,  or  heavenly  chariot, 
which  has  no  mechanical  connection  between  its 
different  parts,  and  yet  is  animated  by  one  spirit 
and  moves  altogether  at  the  impulse  of  Jehovah's 
will. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  general  tendency  of 
Ezekiel's  conception  of  God  is  what  might  be 
described  in  modern  language  as  "  transcen- 
dental." In  this,  however,  the  prophet  does  not 
stand  alone,  and  the  difference  between  him 
and  earlier  prophets  is  not  so  great  as  is  some- 
times represented.  Indeed,  the  contrast  between 
transcendent  and  immanent  is  hardly  applicable 
in  the  Old  Testament  religion.  If  by  transcen- 
dence it  is  meant  that  God  is  a  being  distinct 
from  the  world,  not  losing  Himself  in  the  life  of 
nature,  but  ruling  over  it  and  controlling  it  as 
His  instrument,  then  all  the  inspired  writers  of 


the  Old  Testament  are  transcendentalists.  But 
this  does  not  mean  that  God  is  separated  from 
the  human  spirit  by  a  dead,  mechanical  universe 
which  owes  nothing  to  its  Creator  but  its  initial 
impulse  and  its  governing  laws.  The  idea  that 
a  world  could  come  between  man  and  God  is 
one  that  would  never  have  occurred  to  a  prophet. 
Just  because  God  is  above  the  world  He  can  re- 
veal Himself  directly  to  the  spirit  -of  man,  speak- 
ing to  His  servants  face  to  face  as  a  man  speak- 
etn  to  his  friend.  s^ 

But  frequently  in  the  prophets  the  thought 
is  expressed  that  Jehovah  is  "  far  off "  or 
"  comes  from  far  "  in  the  crises  of  His  people's 
history.  "  Am  I  a  God  at  hand,  saith  Jehovah, 
and  not  a  God  afar  off?  "  is  Jeremiah's  ciuestion 
to  the  false  prophets  of  hjs  day;  and  the  answer 
is,  "  Do  not  I  fill  heaven  and  earth?  saith  Jeho- 
vah." On  this  subject  we  may  quote  the  sug- 
gestive remarks  of  a  recent  commentator  on 
Isaiah:  "  The  local  deities,  the  gods  of  the  tribal 
religions,  are  near;  Jehovah  is  far,  but  at  the 
same  time  everywhere  present.  The  remoteness 
of  Jehovah  in  space  represented  to  the  prophets 
belter  than  our  transcendental  abstractions  Jeho- 
vah's absolute  ascendency.  This  '  far  off '  is 
spoken  with  enthusiasm.  Everywhere  and  no- 
where, Jehovah  comes  when  His  hour  is  come."  * 
That  is  the  idea  of  Ezekiel's  vision.  God  comes 
to  him  "  from  far,"  but  He  conies  very  near. 
Our  difficulty  may  be  to  realise  the  nearness  of 
God.  Scientific  discovery  has  so  enlarged  our 
view  of  the  material  universe  that  we  feel  the 
need  of  every  consideration  that  can  bring  home 
to  us  a  sense  of  the  divine  condescension  and 
interest  in  man's  earthly  history  and  his  spiritual 
welfare.  But  the  difficulty  which  beset  the  ordi- 
nary Israelite  even  so  late  as  the  Exile  was  as 
nearly  as  possible  the  opposite  of  ours.  His 
temptation  was  to  think  of  God  as  only  a  God 
"  at  hand,"  a  local  deity,  whose  range  of  influ- 
ence was  limited  to  a  particular  spot,  and  whose 
power  was  measured  by  the  fortunes  of  His  own 
people.  Above  all  things  he  needed  to  learn  that 
God  was  "  afar  off,"  filling  heaven  and  earth, 
that  His  power  was  exerted  everywhere,  and  that 
there  was  no  place  where  either  a  man  could  hide 
himself  from  God  or  God  was  hidden  from  man. 
When  we  bear  in  mind  these  circumstances  we 
can  see  how  needful  was  the  revelation  of  the 
divine  omnipresence  as  a  step  towards  the  per- 
fect knowledge  of  God  which  comes  to  us 
throug'h  Jesus  Christ. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

EZEKIEL S  PROPHETIC  COMMISSION. 

Ezekiel  ii.,  iii. 

The  call  of  a  prophet  and  the  vision  of  God 
which  sometimes  accompanied  it  are  the  two 
sides  of  one  complex  experience.  The  man  who 
has  truly  seen  God  necessarily  has  a  message 
to  men.  Not  only  are  his  spiritual  perceptions 
quickened  and  all  the  powers  of  his  being  stirred 
to  the  highest  activity,  but  there  is  laid  on  his 
conscience  the  burden  of  a  sacred  duty  and  a 
lifelong  vocation  to  the  service  of  God  and 
man.  The  true  prophet  therefore  is  one  who 
can  say  with  Paul,  "  I  was  not  disobedient  to 
the  heavenly  vision,"  for  that  cannot  be  a  real 

*  Duhm  on  Isa.  x.k.k.  27. 


23° 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


vision  of  God  which  does  not  demand  obedience. 
And  of  the  two  elements  the  call  is  the  one  that 
is  indispensable  to  the  idea  of  a  prophet.  We 
can  conceive  a  prophet  without  an  ecstatic  vision, 
but  not  without  a  consciousness  of  being  chosen 
by  God  for  a  special  work  or  a  sense  of  moral 
responsibility  for  the  faithful  declaration  of  His 
truth.  Whether,  as  with  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  the 
call  springs  out  of  the  vision  of  God,  or  whether, 
as  with  Jeremiah,  the  call  comes  first  and  is  sup- 
plemented by  experiences  of  a  visionary  kind, 
the  essential  fact  in  the  prophet's  initiation  al- 
ways is  the  conviction  that  from  a  certain  period 
in  his  life  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  to  him,  and 
along  with  it  the  feeling  of  personal  obligation 
to  God  for  the  discharge  of  a  mission  entrusted 
to  him.  While  the  vision  merely  serves  to  im- 
press on  the  imagination  by  means  of  symbols  a 
certain  conception  of  God's  being,  and  may  be 
dispensed  with  when  symbols  are  no  longer  the 
necessary  vehicle  of  spiritual  truth,  the  call,  as 
conveying  a  sense  of  one's  true  place  in  the  king- 
dom of  God,  can  never  be  wanting  to  any  man 
who  has  a  prophetic  work  to  do  for  God  amongst 
his  fellow-men. 

It  has  been  already  hinted  that  in  the  case  of 
Ezekiel  the  connection  between  the  call  and  the 
vision  is  less  obvious  than  in  that  of  Isaiah.  The 
character  of  the  narrative  undergoes  a  change 
at  the  beginning  of  chap.  ii.  The  first  part  is 
moulded,  as  we  have  seen,  very  largely  on  the 
inaugural  vision  of  Isaiah;  the  second  betrays 
with  equal  clearness  the  influence  of  Jeremiah. 
The  appearance  of  a  break  between  the  first 
chapter  and  the  second  is  partly  due  to  the 
prophet's  laborious  manner  of  describing  what 
he  had  passed  through.  It  is  altogether  unfair 
to  represent  him  as  having  first  curiously  in- 
spected the  m^echanism  of  the  merkaba,  and  then 
bethought  himself  that  it  .was  a  fitting  thing  to 
fall  on  his  face  before  it.  The  experience  of  an 
ecstasy  is  one  thing,  the  relating  of  it  is  an- 
other. In  much  less  time  than  it  takes  us  to 
master  the  details  of  the  picture,  Ezekiel  had 
seen  and  been  overpowered  by  the  glory  of  Je- 
hovah, and  had  become  aware  of  the  purpose 
for  which  it  had  been  revealed  to  him.  He 
knew  that  God  had  come  to  him  in  order  to 
send  him  as  a  prophet  to  his  fellow-exiles.  And 
just  as  the  description  of  the  vision  draws  out 
in  detail  those  features  which  were  significant 
of  God's  nature  and  attributes,  so  in  what  fol- 
lows he  becomes  conscious  step  by  step  of  cer- 
tain aspects  of  the  work  to  which  he  is  called. 
In  the  form  of  a  series  of  addresses  of  the  Al- 
mighty there  are  presented  to  his  mind  the  out- 
lines of  his  prophetic  career — its  conditions,  its 
hardships,  its  encouragements,  and  above  all  its 
binding  and  peremptory  obligation.  Some  of 
the  facts  now  set  before  him,  such  as  the  spiritual 
condition  of  his  audience,  had  long  been  fa- 
miliar to  his  thoughts — others  were  new;  but 
now  they  all  take  their  proper  place  in  the 
scheme  of  his  life;  he  is  made  to  know  their 
bearing  on  his  work,  and  what  attitude  he  is 
to  adopt  in  face  of  them.  All  this  takes  place  in 
the  prophetic  trance;  but  the  ideas  remain  with 
him  as  the  sustaining  principles  of  his  subse- 
quent work. 

I.  Of  the  truths  thus  presented  to  the  mind  of 
Ezekiel  the  first,  and  the  one  that  directly  arises 
out  of  the  impression  which  the  vision  made  on 
him,  is  his  personal  insignificance.  As  he  lies 
prostrate  before  the  glory  of  Jehovah  he  hears 


for  the  first  time  the  name  which  ever  afterwards 
signalises  his  relation  to  the  God  who  speaks 
through  him.  It  hardly  needs  to  be  said  that  the 
term  "  son  of  man  "  in  the  Book  of  Ezekiel  is 
no  title  of  honour  or  of  distinction.  It  is  pre- 
cisely the  opposite  of  this.  It  denotes  the  ab- 
sence of  distinction  in  the  person  of  the  prophet. 
It  signifies  no  more  than  "  member  of  the  human 
race  "  ;  its  sense  might  almost  be  conveyed  if  we 
were  to  render  it  by  the  word  "  mortal."  It  ex- 
presses the  infinite  contrast  between  the  heavenly 
and  the  earthly,  between  the  glorious  Being  who 
speaks  from  the  throne  and  the  frail  creature  who 
needs  to  be  supernaturally  strengthened  before 
he  can  stand  upright  in  the  attitude  of  service 
(ii.  i).  He  felt  that  there  was  no  reason  in  him- 
self for  the  choice  which  God  made  of  him  to  be 
a  prophet.  He  is  conscious  only  of  the  attributes 
which  he  has  in  common  with  the  race — of  hu- 
man weakness  and  insignificance;  all  that  distin- 
guishes him  from  other  men  belongs  to  his  of- 
fice, and  is  conferred  on  him  by  God  in  the  act 
of  his  consecration.  There  is  no  trace  of  the  gen- 
erous impulse  that  prompted  Isaiah  to  offer  him- 
self as  a  servant  of  the  great  King  as  soon  as  he 
realised  that  there  was  work  to  be  done.  He 
is  equally  a  stranger  to  the  shrinking  of  Jere- 
miah's sensitive  spirit  from  the  responsibilities 
of  the  prophet's  charge.  To  Ezekiel  the  Divine 
Presence  is  so  overpowering,  the  command  is  so 
definite  and  exacting,  that  no  room  is  left  for 
the  play  of  personal  feeling;  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  is  heavy  on  him,  and  he  can  do  nothing 
but  stand  still  and  hear. 

2.  The  next  thought  that  occupies  the  attention 
of  the  prophet  is  the  painful  spiritual  condition 
of  those  to  whom  he  is  sent.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  his  mission  presents  itself  to  him  from  the 
outset  in  two  aspects.  In  the  first  place,  he  is  a 
prophet  to  the  whole  house  of  Israel,  including 
the  lost  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes,  as  well  as  the 
two  sections  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  those  now 
in  exile  and  those  still  remaining  in  their  own 
land.  This  is  his  ideal  audience;  the  sweep  of 
his  prophecy  is  to  embrace  the  destinies  of  the 
nation  as  a  whole,  although  but  a  small  part  be 
within  the  reach  of  his  spoken  words.  But  in 
literal  fact  he  is  to  be  the  prophet  of  the  exiles 
(iii.  ii);  that  is  the  sphere  in  which  he  has  to 
make  proof  of  his  ministry.  These  two  audi- 
ences are  for  the  most  part  not  distinguished  in 
the  mind  of  Ezekiel;  he  sees  the  ideal  in  the  real, 
regarding  the  little  colony  in  which  he  lives  as 
an  epitome  of  the  national  life.  But  in  both  as- 
pects of  his  work  the  outlook  is  equally  dispir- 
iting. If  he  looks  forward  to  an  active  career 
amongst  his  fellow-captives,  he  is  given  to  know 
that  "  thorns  and  thistles  "  are  with  him  and  that 
his  dwelling  is  among  scorpions  (ii.  6).  Petty 
persecution  and  rancorous  opposition  are  the  in- 
evitable lot  of  a  prophet  there.  And  if  he  ex- 
tends his  thoughts  to  the  idealised  nation  he  has 
to  think  of  a  people  whose  character  is  revealed 
in  a  long  history  of  rebellion  and  apostasy:  they 
are  "  the  rebels  who  have  rebelled  against  Me, 
they  and  their  fathers  to  this  very  day  "  (ii.  3). 
The  greatest  difficulty  he  will  have  to  contend 
with  is  the  impenetrability  of  the  minds  of  his 
hearers  to  the  truths  of  his  message.  The  barrier 
of  a  strange  language  suggests  an  illustration  of 
the  impossibility  of  communicating  spiritual 
ideas  to  such  men  as  he  is  sent  to.  But  it  is  a 
far  more  hopeless  barrier  that  separates  him  from 
his  people.     "  Not  to  a  people  of  deep  speech 


Ezekiel  ii.,  iii.] 


EZEKIEL'S    PROPHETIC    COMMISSION. 


!3' 


and  heavy  tongue  art  thou  sent;  and  not  to  many 
peoples  whose  language  thou  canst  not  un- 
derstand: if  I  had  sent  thee  to  them,  they 
would  hear  thee.  But  the  house  of  Is- 
rael will  refuse  to  hear  thee;  for  they  re- 
fuse to  hear  Me:  for  the  whole  house  of 
Israel  are  hard  of  forehead  and  stout  of  heart  " 
(iii.  5-7).  The  meaning  is  that,  the  incapacity  of 
the  people  is  not  intellectual,  but  moral  and  spir- 
itual. They  can  understand  the  prophet's  words, 
but  they  will  not  hear  them  because  they  dislike 
the  truth  which  he  utters  and  have  rebelled 
against  the  God  who  sent  him.  The  hardening 
of  the  national  conscience  which  Isaiah  foresaw 
as  the  inevitable  result  of  his  own  ministry  is  al- 
ready accomplished,  and  Ezekiel  traces  it  to  its 
source  in  a  defect  of  the  will,  an  aversion  to  the 
truths  which  express  the  character  of  Jehovah. 

This  fixed  judgment  on  his  contemporaries 
with  which  Ezekiel  enters  on  his  work  is  con- 
densed into  one  of  those  stereotyped  expressions 
which  aboi-  d  in  his  writings:  "  house  of  diso- 
bedience "  * — a  phrase  which  is  afterwards  ampli- 
fied in  more  than  one  elaborate  review  of  the  na- 
tion's past.  It  no  doubt  sums  up  the  result  of 
much  previous  meditation  on  the  state  of  Israel 
and  the  possibility  of  a  national  reformation.  If 
any  hope  had  hitherto  lingered  in  Ezekiel's  mind 
that  the  exiles  might  now  respond  to  a  true  word 
from  Jehovah,  it  disappears  in  the  clear  insight 
which  he  obtains  into  the  state  of  their  hearts. 
He  sees  that  the  time  has  not  yet  come  to  win 
the  people  back  to  God  by  assurances  of  His 
compassion  and  the  nearness  of  His  salvation. 
The  breach  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  was  not 
begun  to  be  healed,  and  the  prophet  who  stands 
on  the  side  of  God  must  look  for  no  sympathy 
from  men.  In  the  very  act  of  his  consecration 
his  mind  is  thus  set  in  the  attitude  of  uncompro- 
mising severity  towards  the  obdurate  house  of 
Israel:  "  Behold,  I  make  thy  face  hard  like  their 
faces,  and  thy  forehead  hard  like  theirs,  like  ad- 
amant harder  than  flint.  Thou  shalt  not  fear 
them  nor  be  dismayed  at  their  countenance,  for  a 
disobedient  house  are  they"  (iii.  8,  9). 

3.  The  significance  of  the  transaction  in  which 
he  takes  part  is  still  further  impressed  on  the 
mind  of  the  prophet  by  a  symbolic  act  in  which 
he  is  made  to  signify  hs  acceptance  of  the  com- 
mission entrusted  to  him  (ii.  8-iii.  3).  He  sees 
3  hand  extended  to  him  holding  the  roll  of  a 
book,  and  when  the  roll  is  spread  out  before  him 
it  is  found  to  be  written  on  both  sides  with  "  lam- 
entations and  mourning  and  woe."  In  obedience 
to  the  Divine  command  he  opens  his  mouth  and 
eats  the  scroll,  and  finds  to  his  surprise  that  in 
spite  of  its  contents  its  taste  is  "  like  honey  for 
sweetness." 

The  meaning  of  this  strange  symbol  appears 
to  include  two  things.  In  the  first  place  it  de- 
notes the  removal  of  the  inward  hindrance  of 
which  every  man  must  be  conscious  when  he  re- 
ceives the  call  to  be  a  prophet.  Something 
similar  occurs  in  the  inaugural  vision  of  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah.  The  impediment  of  which  Isaiah 
was  conscious  was  the  uncleanness  of  his  lips; 
and  this  being  removed  by  the  touch  of  the 
hot  coal  from  the  altar,  he  is  filled  with  a  new 
feeling  of  freedom  and  eagerness  to  engage  in 
the  service  of  God.  In  the  case  of  Jeremiah  the 
hindrance  was  a  sense  of  his  own  weakness  and 

*  £eih  meri,  or  simply  meri,  occurring  about  fifteen 
times  in  the  first  half  of  the  book,  but  only  once  after  chap. 
?  xiv. 


unfitness  for  the  arduous  duties  which  were  im- 
posed on  him;  and  this  agam  was  taken  away 
by  the  consecrating  touch  of  Jehovah's  hand  on 
his  lips.  The  part  of  Ezekiel's  experience  with 
which  we  are  dealing  is  obviously  parallel  to 
these,  although  it  is  not  possible  to  say  what 
feeling  of  incapacity  was  uppermost  in  his 
mind.  Perhaps  it  was  the  dread  lest  in 
him  there  should  lurk  something  of  that 
rebellious  spirit  which  was  the  characteris- 
tic of  the  race  to  which  he  belonged.  He 
who  had  been  led  to  form  so  hard  a  judgment 
of  his  people  could  not  but  look  with  a  jealous 
eye  on  his  own  heart,  and  could  not  forget  that 
he  shared  the  same  sinful  nature  which  made 
their  rebellion  possible.  Accordingly  the  book 
is  presented  to  him  in  the  first  instance  as  a  test 
of  his  obedience.  "  But  thou,  son  of  man,  hear 
what  I  say  to  thee;  Be  not  disobedient  like  the 
disobedient  house:  open  thy  mouth,  and  eat  what 
I  give  thee "  (ii.  8).  When  the  book  proves 
sweet  to  his  taste,  he  has  the  assurance  that  he 
has  been  endowed  with  such  sympathy  with  the 
thoughts  of  God  that  things  which  to  the  nat- 
ural mind  are  unwelcome  become  the  source  of 
a  spiritual  satisfaction.  Jeremiah  had  expressed 
the  same  strange  delight  in  his  work  in  a  striking 
passage  which  was  doubtless  familiar  to  Ezekiel: 
"  When  Thy  words  were  found  I  did  eat  them; 
and  Thy  word  was  to  me  the  joy  and  rejoicing 
of  my  heart:  for  I  was  called  by  Thy  name,  O 
Jehovah  God  of  hosts  "  (Jer.  xv.  16).  We  have 
a  still  higher  illustration  of  the  same  fact  in  the 
life  of  our  Lord,  to  whom  it  was  meat  and  drink 
to  do  the  will  of  His  Father,  and  who  experi- 
enced a  joy  in  the  doing  of  it  which  was  pecu- 
liarly His  own.  It  is  the  reward  of  the  true 
service  of  God  that  amidst  all  the  hardships  and 
discouragements  which  have  to  be  endured  the 
heart  is  sustained  by  an  inward  joy  springing 
from  the  consciousness  of  working  in  fellowship 
with  God. 

But  in  the  second  place  the  eating  of  the 
book  undoubtedly  signifies  the  bestowal  on  the 
prophet  of  the  gift  of  inspiration — that  is,  the 
power  to  speak  the  words  of  Jehovah.  "  Son  of 
man,  eat  this  roll,  and  go  speak  to  the  children 
of  Israel.  .  .  .  Go,  get  thee  to  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  speak  with  My  words  to  them  "  (iii. 
I,  4).  Now  the  call  of  a  prophet  does  not  mean 
that  his  mind  is  charged  with  a  certain  body  of 
doctrine,  which  he  is  to  deliver  from  time  to 
time  as  circumstances  require..  All  that  can 
safely  be  said  about  the  prophetic  inspiration  is 
that  it  implies  the  faculty  of  distinguishing  the 
truth  of  God  from  the  thoughts  that  naturally 
arise  in  the  prophet's  own  mind.  Nor  is  there 
anything  in  Ezekiel's  experience  which  neces- 
sarily goes  beyond  this  conception;  although  the 
incident  of  the  book  has  been  interpreted  in  ways 
that  burden  him  with  a  very  crude  and  mechani- 
cal theory  of  inspiration.  Some  critics  have  be- 
lieved that  the  book  which  he  swallowed  is  the 
book  he  was  afterwards  to  write,  as  if  he  had 
reproduced  in  instalments  what  was  delivered  to 
him  at  this  time.  Others,  without  going  so  far 
as  this,  find  it  at  least  significant  that  one  who 
was  to  be  pre-eminently  a  literary  orophet  should 
conceive  of  the  word  of  the  Lord  as  communi- 
cated to  him  in  the  form  of  a  book.  When  one 
writer  speaks  of  "  eigenthiimliche  Empfindungen 
im  Schlunde "  *  as  the  basis  of  the  figure,  he 
seems  to  come  perilously  near  to  resolving  in- 
*  Klostermann. 


232 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


spiration  into  a  nervoii<;  disease.  All  these  rep- 
resentations go  beyond  a  fair  construction  of  the 
prophet's  meaning.  The  act  is  purely  symbolic. 
The  book  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  subject- 
matter  of  his  prophecy,  nor  does  the  eating  of  it 
mean  anything  more  than  the  self-surrender  of 
the  prophet  to  his  vocation  as  a  vehicle  of  the 
word  of  Jehovah.  The  idea  that  the  word  of 
God  becomes  *a  living  power  in  the  inner  being 
of  the  prophet  is  also  expressed  by  Jeremiah 
when  he  speaks  of  it  as  a  "  burning  fire  shut  up 
in  his  bones  "  (Jer.  xx.  9) ;  and  Ezekiel's  con- 
ception is  similar.  Although  he  speaks  as  if  he 
had  once  for  all  assimilated  the  word  of  God, 
although  he  was  conscious  of  a  new  power  work- 
ing within  him,  there  is  no  proof  that  he  thought 
of  the  word  of  the  Lord  as  dwelling  in  him 
otherwise  than  as  a  spiritual  impulse  to  utter 
the  truth  revealed  to  him  from  time  to  time. 
That  is  the  inspiration  which  all  the  prophets 
possess:  "Jehovah  God  hath  spoken,  who  can 
but  prophesy?  "  (Amos  iii.  8). 

4.  It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  a  prophet  so 
practical  in  his  aims  as  Ezekiel  should  be  left 
altogether  without  some  indication  of  the  end 
to  be  accomplished  by  his  work.  The  ordinary 
incentives  to  an  arduous  public  career  have  in- 
deed been  denied  to  him.  He  knows  that  his 
mission  contains  no  promise  of  a  striking  or  an 
immediate  success,  that  he  will  be  misjudged  and 
opposed  by  nearly  all  who  hear  him,  and  that  he 
will  have  to  pursue  his  course  without  apprecia- 
tion or  sympathy.  It  has  been  impressed  on 
him  that  to  declare  God's  message  is  an  end  in 
itself,  a  duty  to  be  discharged  with  no  regard 
to  its  issues,  "  whether  men  hear  or  whether 
they  forbear."  Like  Paul  he  recognises  that 
"  necessity  is  laid  upon  him  "  to  preach  the  word 
of  God.  But  there  is  one  word  which  reveals 
to  him  the  way  in  which  his  ministry  is  to  be 
made  effective  in  the  working  out  of  Jehovah's 
purpose  with  Israel.  "  Whether  they  hear  or 
whether  they  forbear,  they  shall  know  that  a 
prophet  hath  been  among  them  "  (ii.  5).  The 
reference  is  mainly  to  the  destruction  of  the  na- 
tion which  Ezekiel  well  knew  must  form  the 
chief  burden  of  any  true  prophetic  message  de- 
livered at  that  time.  He  will  be  approved  as  a 
prophet,  and  recognised  as  what  he  is,  when  his 
words  are  verified  by  the  event.  Does  it  seem 
a  poor  reward  for  years  of  incessant  contention 
with  prejudice  and  unbelief?  It  was  at  all  events 
the  only  reward  that  was  possible,  but  it  was 
also  to  be  the  beginning  of  better  days.  For 
these  words  have  a  wider  significance  than  their 
bearing  on  the  prophet's  personal  position. 

It  has  been  truly  said  that  the  preservation  of 
the  true  religion  after  the  downfall  of  the  nation 
depended  on  the  fact  that  the  event  had  been 
clearly  foretold.  Two  religions  and  two  con- 
ceptions of  God  were  then  struggling  for  the 
mastery  in  Israel.  One  was  the  religion  of  the 
prophets,  who  set  the  moral  holiness  of  Jeho- 
vah above  every  other  consideration,  and  af- 
firmed that  His  righteousness  must  be  vindi- 
cated even  at  the  cost  of  His  people's  destruction. 
The  other  was  the  popular  religion  which  clung 
to  the  belief  that  Jehovah  could  not  for  any 
reason  abandon  His  people  without  ceasing  to 
be  God.  This  conflict  of  principles  reached  its 
climax  in  the  time  of  Ezekiel,  and  it  also  found 
its  solution.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
cleared  the  issues.  It  was  then  seen  that  the 
teaching  of  the  prophets  afforded  the  only  possi- 


ble explanation  of  the  course  of  events.  The  Je- 
hovah of  the  opposite  religion  was  proved  to 
be  a  figment  of  the  popular  imagination;  and 
there  was  no  alternative  between  accepting  the 
prophetic  interpretation  of  history  and  resigning 
all  faith  in  the  destiny  of  Israel.  Hence  the  rec- 
ognition of  Ezekiel,  the  last  of  the  old  order  of 
prophets,  who  had  carried  their  threatenings  on 
to  the  eve  of  their  accomplishment,  was  really 
a  great  crisis  of  religion.  It  meant  the  triumph 
of  the  only  conception  of  God  on  which  the 
hope  of  a  better  future  could  be  built.  Although 
the  people  might  still  be  far  from  the  state  of 
heart  in  which  Jehovah  could  remove  His  chas- 
tening hand,  the  first  condition  of  national  re- 
pentance was  given  as  soon  as  it  was  perceived 
that  there  had  been  prophets  among  them  who 
had  declared  the  purpose  of  Jehovah.  The 
foundation  was  also  laid  for  a  more  fruitful  de- 
velopment of  Ezekiel's  activity.  The  word  of 
the  Lord  had  been  in  his  hands  a  power  ''  to 
pluck  up  and  to  break  down  and  to  destroy  "  the 
old  Israel  that  would  not  know  Jehovah;  hence- 
forward it  was  destined  to  "  build  and  plant  " 
a  new  Israel  inspired  by  a  new  ideal  of  holiness 
and  a  whole-hearted  repugnance  to  every  form 
of  idolatry. 

5.  These  then  are  the  chief  elements  which  en- 
ter into  the  remarkable  experience  that  made 
Ezekiel  a  prophet.  Further  disclosures  of  the 
nature  of  his  office  were,  however,  necessary  be- 
fore he  could  translate  his  vocation  into  a  con- 
scious plan  of  work.  The  departure  of  the  the- 
ophany  appears  to  have  left  him  in  a  state  of 
mental  prostration.*  In  "  bitterness  and  heat  of 
spirit  "  he  resumes  his  place  amongst  his  fellow- 
captives  at  Tel-abib,  and  sits  among  them  like 
a  man  bewildered  for  seven  days.  At  the  end 
of  that  time  the  effects  of  the  ecstasy  seem  to  pass 
away,  and  more  light  breaks  on  him  with  regard 
to  his  mission.  He  realises  that  it  is  to  be  largely 
a  mission  to  individuals.  He  is  appointed  as  a 
watchman  to  the  house  of  Israel,  to  warn  the 
wicked  from  his  way;  and  as  such  he  is  held  ac- 
countable for  the  fate  of  any  soul  that  might 
miss  the  way  of  life  through  failure  of  duty  on 
his  part. 

It  has  been  supposed  that  this  passage  (iii. 
16-21)  describes  the  character  of  a  short  period 
of  public  activity,  in  which  Ezekiel  endeavoured 
to  act  the  part  of  a  "  reprover  "  (ver.  26)  among 
the  exiles.  This  is  considered  to  have  been  his 
first  attempt  to  act  on  his  commission,  and  to 
have  been  continued  until  the  prophet  \vas  con- 
vinced of  its  hopelessness  and  in  obedience  to 
the  divine  command  shut  himself  up  in  his  own 
house.  But  this  view  does  not  seem  to  be  suf- 
ficiently borne  out  by  the  terms  of  the  narrative 
The  words  rather  represent  a  point  of  view  from 
which  his  whole  ministry  is  surveyed,  or  an 
aspect  of  it  which  possessed  peculiar  importance 
from  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed. 
The  idea  of  his  position  as  a  watchman  responsi- 
ble for  individuals  may  have  been  present  to  the 
prophet's  mind  from  the  time  of  his  call;  but  the 
practical  development  of  that  idea  was  not  possi- 
ble until  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  had  pre- 
pared men's  minds  to  give  heed  to  his  admoni* 
tions.  Accordingly  the  second  period  of  Eze- 
kiel's work  opens  with  a  fuller  statement  of  the 
principles  indicated  in  this  section  (chap,  xxxiii.). 

*  In  iii.  12  read  "As  the  glory  of  Jehovali  arose  from  ita 
place  "  instead  of  "  Blessed  be  the  glory."  etc.    ( 2113  for 

inn). 


Ezekiel  iv.-vii.] 


THE    END    FORETOLD. 


233 


We  shall  therefore  defer  the  consideration  of 
these  principles  till  we  reach  the  stage  of  the 
prophet's  ministry  at  which  their  practical  sig- 
nificance emerges. 

6.  The  last  six  verses  of  the  third  chapter  may 
be  regarded  either  as  closing  the  account  of 
Ezekiel's  consecration  or  as  the  introduction  to 
the  first  part  of  his  ministry,  that  which  pre- 
ceded the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  They  contain  the 
description  of  a  second  trance,  which  appears  to 
have  happened  seven  days  after  the  first.  The 
prophet  seemed  to  himself  to  be  carried  out  in 
spirit  to  a  certain  plain  near  his  residence  in 
Tel-abib.  There  the  glory  of  Jehovah  appears 
to  him  precisely  as  he  had  seen  it  in  his  former 
vision  by  the  river  Kcbar.  He  then  receives  the 
command  to  shut  himself  up  within  his  house. 
He  is  to  be  like  a  man  bound  with  ropes,  unable 
to  move  about  among  his  fellow-exiles.  More- 
over, the  free  use  of  speech  is  to  be  interdicted; 
his  tongue  will  be  made  to  cleave  to  his  palate, 
so  that  he  is  as  one  "  dumb."  But  as  often  as 
he  receives  a  message  from  Jehovah  his  mouth 
will  be  opened  that  he  may  declare  it  to  the  re- 
bellious house  of  Israel. 

Now  if  we  compare  ver.  26  with  xxiv.  27  and 
xxxiii.  22,  we  find  that  this  state  of  intermittent 
dumbness  continued  till  the  day  when  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem  began,  and  was  not  finally  removed 
till  tidings  were  brought  of  the  capture  of  the 
city.  The  verses  before  us  therefore  throw  light 
on  the  prophet's  demeanour  during  the  first  half 
of  his  ministry.  What  they  signify  is  his  almost 
entire  withdrawal  from  public  life.  Instead  of 
being  like  his  great  predecessors,  a  man  living 
full  in  the  public  view,  and  thrusting  himself  on 
men's  notice  when  they  least  desired  him,  he  is 
to  lead  an  isolated  and  a  solitary  life,  a  sign  to 
the  people  rather  than  a  living  voice.*  From  the 
sequel  we  gather  that  he  excited  sufficient  inter- 
est to  induce  the  elders  and  others  to  visit  him 
in  his  house  to  inquire  of  Jehovah.  We  must 
also  suppose  that  from  time  to  time  he  emerged 
from  his  retirement  with  a  message  for  the  whole 
community.  It  cannot,  indeed,  be  assumed  that 
the  chaps,  iv.-xxiv.  contain  an  exact  reproduc- 
tion of  the  addresses  delivered  on  these  occa- 
sions. Few  of  them  profess  to  have  been  ut- 
tered in  public,  and  for  the  most  part  they  give 
the  impression  of  having  been  intended  for  pa- 
tient study  on  the  written  page  rather  than  for 
immediate  oratorical  effect.  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  in  the  main  they  embody  the  re- 
sults of  Ezekiel's  prophetic  experiences  during 
the  period  to  which  they  are  referred,  although 
it  may  be  impossible  to  determine  how  far  they 
were  actually  spoken  at  the  time,  and  how  far 
they  are  merely  written  for  the  instruction  of 
a  wider  audience. 

The  strong  figures  used  here  to  describe  this 
state  of  seclusion  appear  to  reflect  the  prophet's 
consciousness  of  the  restraints  providentially  im- 
posed on  the  exercise  of  his  office.  These  re- 
straints, however,  were  moral,  and  not,  as  has 
sometimes  been  maintained,  physical.  The  chief 
element  was  the  pronounced  hostility  and  in- 
credulity of  the  people.  This,  combined  with 
the  sense  of  doom  hanging  over  the  nation, 
seems  to  have  weighed  on  the  spirit  of  Ezekiel, 
and  in  the  ecstatic  state  the  incubus  lying  upon 
him  and  paralysing  his  activity  presents  itself  to 

*  A  somewhat  similar  episode  seems  to  have  occurred 
in  the  life  of  Isaiah.    See  the  commentaries  on  Isa.  viii 


his  imagination  as  if  he  were  bound  with  ropes 
and  afflicted  with  dumbness.  The  representation 
finds  a  partial  parallel  in  a  later  passage  in  the 
prophet's  history.  From  xxix.  21  (which  is  the 
latest  prophecy  in  the  whole  book)  we  learn  that 
the  apparent  non-fulfilment  of  his  predictions 
against  Tyre  had  caused  a  similar  hindrance  to 
his  public  work,  depriving  him  of  the  boldness 
of  speech  characteristic  of  a  prophet.  And  the 
opening  of  the  mouth  given  to  him  on  that  oc- 
casion by  the  vindication  of  his  words  is  clearly 
analogous  to  the  removal  of  his  silence  by  the 
news  that  Jerusalem  had  fallen.* 


PART   II. 

PROPHECIES      RELATING      MAINLY      TO 
THE   DESTRUCTION    OF   JERUSALEM. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  END  FORETOLD. 

Ezekiel  iv.-vii. 

With  the  fourth  chapter  we  enter  on  the  ex- 
position of  the  first  great  division  of  Ezekiel's 
prophecies.  The  chaps,  iv.-xxiv.  cover  a  period 
of  about  four  and  a  half  years,  extending  from 
the  time  of  the  prophet's  call  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem.  During  this 
time  Ezekiel's  thoughts  revolved  round  one  great 
theme — the  approaching  judgment  on  the  city 
and  the  nation.  Through  contemplation  of  this 
fact  there  was  disclosed  to  him  the  outline  of  a 
comprehensive  theory  of  divine  providence,  in 
which  the  destruction  of  Israel  was  seen  to  be 
the  necessary  consequence  of  her  past  history 
and  a  necessary  preliminary  to  her  future  restora- 
tion. The  prophecies  may  be  classified  roughly 
under  three  heads.  In  the  first  class  are  those 
which  exhibit  the  judgment  itself  in  ways  fitted 
to  impress  the  prophet  and  his  hearers  with  a 
conviction  of  its  certainty;  a  second  class  is  in- 
tended to  demolish  the  illusions  and  false  ideals 
which  possessed  the  minds  of  the  Israelites  and 
made  the  announcement  of  disaster  incredible; 

♦These  verses  (iii.  22-27)  furni.sh  one  of  the  chief  sup- 
ports of  Klostermann's  peculiar  theory  of  Ezekiel's  con- 
dition during  the  first  period  of  his  career.  Taking-  the 
word  "dumb"  in  its  literal  sense,  he  considers  that  the 
prophet  was  afflicted  with  the  malady  known  as  alalia, 
that  this  was  intermittent  down  to  the  date  of  chap.  xxiv. 
and  then  became  chronic  till  the  fugitive  arrived  from 
Jerusalem  (xxxiii.  21),  when  it  finally  disappeared.  This 
is  connected  with  the  remarkable  series  of  symbolic 
actions  related  in  chap,  iv.,  which  are  regarded  as  exhib- 
iting all  the  symptoms  of  catalepsy  and  hemiplegia. 
These  facts,  together  with  the  prophet's  liability  to  ecstatic 
visions,  justify,  in  Klostermann  s  view,  the  hypothesis 
that  for  seven  years  Ezekiel  laboured  under  serious 
nervous  disorders.  The  partiality  shown  by  a  few  writers 
to  this  view  probably  springs  from  a  desire  to  maintain 
the  literal  accuracy  of  the  prophet's  descriptions.  But  in 
that  aspect  the  theory  breaks  down.  Even  Klostermann 
admits  that  the  binding  with  ropes  had  no  existence  save 
in  Ezekiel's  imagination.  But  if  we  are  obliged  to  take 
into  account  what  seemed  to  the  prophet,  it  is  better  to 
explain  the  whole  phenomena  on  the  same  principle. 
There  can  be  no  good  grounds  for  taking  the  dumbness 
as  real  and  the  ropes  as  imaginary.  Besides,  it  is  surely 
a  questionable  expedient  to  vindicate  a  prophet's  literal 
ism  at  the  expense  of  his  sanity.  In  the  hands  of  Kloster- 
mann and  Orelli  the  hypothesis  assumes  a  stupendous 
miracle ;  but  it  is  obvious  that  a  critic  of  another  school 
might  readily  "  wear  his  rue  with  a  difference,"  and  treat 
the  whole  of  Ezekiel's  prophetic  e.-cperiences  as  halluoiaa- 
lions  of  a  deranged  intellect. 


234 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


and  a  third  and  very  important  class  expounds 
the  moral  principles  which  were  illustrated  by 
the  judgment,  and  which  show  it  to  be  a  divine 
necessity.  In  the  passage  which  forms  the  sub- 
ject of  the  present  lecture  the  bare  fact  and 
certainty  of  the  judgment  are  set  forth  in  word 
and  symbol  and  with  a  minimum  of  commen- 
tary, although  even  here  the  conception  which 
Ezekiel  had  formed  of  the  moral  situation  is 
clearly  discernible. 

I. 

The  certainty  of  the  national  judgment  seems 
to  have  been  first  impressed  on  Ezekiel's  mind 
in  the  form  of  a  singular  series  of  symbolic  acts 
which  he  conceived  himself  to  be  commanded  to 
perform.  The  peculiarity  of  these  signs  is  that 
they  represent  simultaneously  two  distinct  as- 
pects of  the  nation's  fate — on  the  one  hand  the 
horrors  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  on  the 
other  hand  the  state  of  exile  which  was  to 
follow.* 

That  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  should  oc- 
cupy the  first  place  in  the  prophet's  picture  of 
national  calamity  requires  no  explanation.  Je- 
rusalem was  the  heart  and  brain  of  the  nation, 
the  centre  of  its  life  and  its  religion,  and  in  the 
eyes  of  the  prophets  the  fountain-head  of  its 
sin.  The  strength  of  her  natural  situation,  the 
patriotic  and  religious  associations  which  had 
gathered  round  her,  and  the  smallness  of  her 
subject  province  gave  to  Jerusalem  a  unique  po- 
sition among  the  mother-cities  of  antiquity.  And 
Ezekiel's  hearers  knew  what  he  meant  when  he 
employed  the  picture  of  a  beleaguered  city  to 
set  forth  the  judgment  that  was  to  overtake 
them.  That  crowning  horror  of  ancient  warfare, 
the  siege  of  a  fortified  town,  meant  in  this  case 
something  more  appalling  to  the  imagination 
than  the  ravages  of  pestilence  and  famine  and 
sword.  The  fate  of  Jerusalem  represented  the 
disappearance  of  everything  that  had  constituted 
the  glory  and  excellence  of  Israel's  national  ex- 
istence. That  the  light  of  Israel  should  be  ex- 
tinguished amidst  the  anguish  and  bloodshed 
which  must  accompany  an  unsuccessful  defence 
of  the  capital  was  the  most  terrible  element  in 
Ezekiel's  message,  and  here  he  sets  it  in  the  fore- 
front of  his  prophecy. 

The  manner  in  which  the  prophet  seeks  to  im- 
press this  fact  on  his  countrymen  illustrates  a 
peculiar  vein  of  realism  which  runs  through  all 
his  thinking  (iv.  1-3).  Being  at  a  distance  from 
Jerusalem,  he  seems  to  feel  the  need  of  some 
visible  emblem  of  the  doomed  city  before  he  can 
adequately  represent  the  import  of  his  predic- 
tion. He  is  commanded  to  take  a  brick  and  por- 
tray upon  it  a  walled  city,  surrounded  by  the 
towers,  mounds,  and  battering-rams  which 
marked  the  usual  operations  of  a  besieging  arrny. 
Then  he  is  to  erect  a  plate  of  iron  between  him 
and  the  city,  and  from  behind  this,  with  menacing 
gestures,  he  is  as  it  were  to  press  on  the  siege. 
The  meaning  of  the  symbols  is  obvious.  As  the 
engines  of  destruction  appear  on  Ezekiel's  dia- 
gram, at  the  bidding  of  Jehovah,  so  in  due  time 
the  Chaldaean  armv  will  be  seen  from  the  walls 

*An  ingenious  attempt  has  been  made  by  Professor 
Cornill  to  rearrange  the  verses  so  as  to  bring  out  two 
separate  series  of  actions,  one  referring  exclusively  to 
the  exile  and  the  other  to  the  siege.  But  the  proposed 
reading  requires  a  somewhat  violent  handling  of  the  text, 
and  does  not  seem  to  have  met  with  much  acceptance. 
The  blending  of  diverse  elements  in  a  single  image  appears 
also  in  xii.  ^-i6. 


of  Jerusalem,  led  by  the  same  unseen  Power 
which  now  controls  the  acts  of  the  prophet.  In 
the  last  act  Ezekiel  exhibits  the  attitude  of  Je- 
hovah Himself,  cut  ofif  from  His  people  by  the 
iron  wall  of  an  inexorable  purpose  which  no 
prayer  could  penetrate. 

Thus  far  the  prophet's  actions,  however 
strange  they  may  appear  to  us,  have  been  simple 
and  intelligible.  But  at  this  point  a  second  sign 
is  as  it  were  superimposed  on  the  first,  in  order 
to  symbolise  an  entirely  different  set  of  facts— 
the  hardship  and  duration  of  the  Exile  (vv.  4-8). 
While  still  engaged  in  prosecuting  the  siege  of 
the  city,  the  prophet  is  supposed  to  become  at 
the  same  time  the  representative  of  the  guilty 
people  and  the  victim  of  the  divine  judgment. 
He  is  to  "  bear  their  iniquity  "—that  is,  the  pun- 
ishment due  to  their  sin.  This  is  represented  by 
his  lying  bound  on  his  left  side  for  a  number  of 
days  equal  to  the  years  of  Ephraim's  banish- 
ment, and  then  on  his  right  side  for  a  time  pro- 
portionate to  the  captivity  of  Judah.  Now  the 
time  of  Judah  s  exile  is  fixed  at  forty  years,  dat- 
ing of  course  from  the  fall  of  the  city.  The  cap- 
tivity of  North  Israel  exceeds  that  of  Judah  by 
the  interval  between  the  destruction  of  Samaria 
(722)  and  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  a  period  which 
actually  measured  about  a  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  years.  In  the  Hebrew  text,  however,  the 
length  of  Israel's  captivity  is  given  as  three  hun- 
dred and  ninety  years — that  is,  it  must  have  lasted 
for  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  that  of 
Judah  begins.  This  is  obviously  quite  irrecon- 
cilable with  the  facts  of  history,  and  also  with 
the  prophet's  intention.  He  cannot  mean  that 
the  banishment  of  the  northern  tribes  was  to  be 
protracted  for  two  centuries  after  that  of  Judah 
had  come  to  an  end,  for  he  uniformly  speaks  of 
the  restoration  of  the  two  branches  of  the  nation 
as  simultaneous.  The  text  of  the  Greek  trans- 
lation helps  us  past  this  difificulty.  The  Hebrew 
manuscript  from  which  that  version  was  made 
had  the  reading  a  "  hundred  and  ninety "  in- 
stead of  "  three  hundred  and  ninety  "  in  ver.  5. 
This  alone  yields  a  satisfactory  sense,  and  the 
reading  of  the  Septuagint  is  now  generally  ac- 
cepted as  representing  what  Ezekiel  actually 
wrote.  There  is  still  a  slight  discrepancy  be- 
tween the  hundred  and  thirty-five  years  of  the 
actual  history  and  the  hundred  and  fifty  years 
expressed  by  the  symbol;  but  we  must  remember 
that  Ezekiel  is  using  round  numbers  throughout, 
and  moreover  he  has  not  as  yet  fixed  the  precise 
date  of  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  when  the  last 
forty  years  are  to  commence.* 

In  the  third  symbol  (vv.  9-17)  the  two  aspects 
of  the  judgment  are  again  presented  in  the 
closest  possible  combination.  The  prophet's 
food  and  drink  during  the  days  when  he  is  im- 
agined to  be  lying  on  his  side  represents  on  the 
one  hand,  by  its  being  small  in  quantity  and 
carefully  weighed  and  measured,  the  rigours  of 
famine  in  Jerusalem  during  the  siege—"  Behold, 
I  will  break  the  staff  of  bread  in  Jerusalem:  and 
they  shall  eat  bread  by  weight,  and  with  anxiety; 
and  drink  water  by  measure,  and  with  horror  " 
(ver.  16);  on  the  other  hand,  by  its  mixed  in- 
gredients and  by  the  fuel  used  in  its  preparation, 
it  typifies  the  unclean  religious  condition  of  the 
people  when  in  exile—"  Even  so  shall  the  chil- 

*  The  correspondence  would  be  almost  exact  if  we  date 
the  commencement  of  the  northern  captivity  from  734, 
when  Tiglath-pileser  carried  away  the  inhabitants  of  the 
northern  and  eastern  parts  of  the  country.  This  is  a 
possible  view,  although  hardlj  necessary. 


Ezekiel  iv.-vii.l 


THE    END    FORETOLD. 


'35 


dren  of  Israel  eat  their  food  unclean  among  the 
heathen  "  (ver.  13).     The  meaning  of  this  threat 
is  best   explained   by   a   passage   in   the   book   of 
Hosea.     Speaking    of    the     Exile,     Hosea    says: 
"They  shall  not  remain  in  the  land  of  Jehovah; 
but    the    children    of    Ephraim    shall    return    to 
Egypt,   and   shall   eat   unclean    food   in   Assyria. 
They  shall   pour  out  no   wine  to  Jehovah,   nor 
shall  they  lay  out  their  sacrifices  for  Him:  like 
the  food  of  mourners  shall  their  food  be;  all  that 
eat  thereof  shall  be  defiled:  for  their  bread  shall 
only  satisfy  their  hunger;  it  shall  not  come  into 
the  house  of  Jehovah  "  'Hos.  ix.  3,  4).     The  idea 
is  that  all  food  which  has  not  been  consecrated 
by  being  presented  to  Jehovah  in  the  sanctuary 
is  necessarily  unclean,   and   those  who  eat   of  it 
contract  ceremonial  defilement.     In  the  very  act 
of  satisfying  his  natural  appetite  a  man  forfeits 
his   religious   standing.       This   was   the   peculiar 
hardship  of  the  state  of  exile,  that  a  man  must 
become  unclean,  he  must  eat  unconsecrated  food 
unless  he  renounced  his  religion  and  served  the 
gods   of  the  land   in   which   he   dwelt.     Between 
the  time  of  Hosea  and  Ezekiel  these  ideas  may 
have  been   somewhat  modified  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  the   Deuteronomic  law,   which  expressly 
permits  secular  slaughter  at  a  distance  from  the 
sanctuary.     But   this   did   not   lessen   the   impor- 
tance of  a  legal  sanctuary  for  the  common   life 
of  an    Israelite.     The    whole   of  a   man's   flocks 
and  herds,  the  whole  produce  of  his  fields,  had  to 
be  sanctified  by  the  presentation  of  firstlings  and 
firstfruits  at  the  Temple  before  he  could  enjoy 
the    reward    of   his    industry   with    the    sense    of 
standing   in  Jehovah's   favour.      Hence   the   de- 
struction of  the  sanctuary  or  the  permanent  ex- 
clusion of  the  worshippers  from  it  reduced  the 
whole  life  of  the  people  to  a  condition  of  un- 
cleanness  which  was  felt  to  be  as  great  a  calam- 
ity as  was  a  papal  interdict  in  the  IMiddle  Ages. 
This  is  the  fact  which  is  expressed  in   the  part 
of  Ezekiel's  symbolism  now  before  us.     What  it 
meant  for  his  fellow-exiles  was  that  the  religious 
disability  under  which  they  laboured  was  to  be 
continued  for  a  generation.     The  whole  life  of 
Israel   was   to   become   unclean   until   its   inward 
state   was   made   worthy   of   the   religious   privi- 
leges now  to  be  withdrawn.     At  the  same  time 
no  one  could  have  felt  the  penalty  more  severely 
than   Ezekiel   himself,   in   whom   habits   of   cere- 
monial purity  had  become  a  second  nature.     The 
repugnance  which  he  feels  at  the  loathsome  man- 
ner in  which  he  was  at  first  directed  to  prepare 
his  food,  and  the  profession  of  his  own  practice 
in  exile,  as  well  as  the  concession  made  to  his 
scrupulous  sense  of  propriety  (vv.  14-16),  are  all 
characteristic  of  one  whose  priestly  training  had 
made   a   defect   of   ceremonial    cleanness   almost 
equivalent  to  a  moral  delinquency. 

The  last  of  the  symbols  (v.  1-4)  represents  the 
fate  of  the  population  of  Jerusalem  when  the  city 
is  taken.  The  shaving  of  the  prophet's  head  and 
beard  is  a  figure  for  the  depopulation  of  the  city 
and  country.  By  a  further  series  of  acts,  whose 
meaning  is  obvious,  he  shows  how  a  third  of  the 
inhabitants  shall  die  of  famine  and  pestilence  dur- 
ing the  siege,  a  third  shall  be  slain  by  the  enemy 
when  the  city  is  captured,  while  the  remaining 
third  shall  be  dispersed  among  the  nations. 
Even  these  shall  be  pursued  by  the  sword  of 
vengeance  until  but  a  few  numbered  individuals 
survive,  and  of  them  again  a  part  passes  through 
the  fire.  The  passage  reminds  us  of  the  last 
verse  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  Isaiah,  which  was 


perhaps  in  Ezekiel's  mind  when  he  wrote:  "  And 
if  a   tenth   still   remain   in   it   [the   land],   it  shall 
again  pass  through  the  fire:  as  a  terebinth  or  an 
oak  whose  stump  is  left  at  their  felling:  a  holy 
seed   shall   be  the   stock  thereof"    (Isa.   vi.    13). 
At  least  the  conception  of  a  succession  of  sifting 
judgments,  leaving  only  a  remnant  to  inherit  the 
promise    of    the    future,    is    common    to    both 
prophets,    and   the    symbol    in    Ezekiel    is   note- 
worthy as   the   first   expression   of  his   steadfast 
conviction  that  further  punishments  were  in  store 
for  the  exiles  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
Tt  is  clear  that  these  signs  could  never  have 
been  enacted,  either  in  view  of  the  people  or  in 
solitude,  as  they  are  here  described.     It  may  be 
doubted   whether  the  whole    description    is   not 
purely  ideal,  representing  a  process  which  passed 
through   the   prophet's   mind,   or   was   suggested 
to  him  in  the  visionary  state  but  never  actually 
performed.     That   will   always   remain   a   tenable 
view.     An   imaginary   symbolic   act   is   as   legiti- 
mate a  literary  device  as  an  imaginary  conversa- 
tion.    It   is  absurd   to   mix   up   the   question    of 
the    prophet's    truthfulness    with     the     question 
whether  he  did  or  did  not  actually  do  what  he 
conceives  himself  as  doing.     The  attempt  to  ex- 
plain his  action  by  catalepsy  would  take  us  but 
a  little  way,  even  if  the  arguments  adduced  in 
favour  of  it  were  stronger  than  they  are.     Since 
even    a    cataleptic    patient    could    not    have    tied 
himself  down  on  his  side  or  prepared  and  eaten 
his  food  in  that  posture,   it   is  necessary  in  any 
case  to  admit  that  there  must  be  a  considerable, 
though  indeterminate,  element  of  literary  imagi- 
nation in  the  account  given  of  the  symbols.     It 
is  not  impossible  that  some  symbolic  representa- 
tion of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  may  have  actually 
been  the  first  act  in   Ezekiel's  ministry.     In  the 
interpretation   of  the   vision   which   immediately 
follows  we  shall  find  that  no  notice  is  taken  of  the 
features  which  refer  to  exile,  but  only  of  those 
which  announce  the  siege  of  Jerusalem.     It  may 
therefore  be  the  case  that  Ezekiel  did  some  such 
action  as  is  here  described,   pointing  to  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem,  but  that  the  whole  was  taken  up 
afterwards  in  his  imagination  and  made  into  an 
ideal  representation  of  the  two  great  facts  which 
formed  the  burden  of  his  earlier  prophecy. 

II. 

It  is  a  relief  to  turn  from  this  somewhat  fan- 
tastic, though  for  its  own  purpose  effective,  ex- 
hibition of  prophetic  ideas  to  the  impassioned 
oracles  in  which  the  doom  of  the  city  and  the 
nation  is  pronounced.  The  first  of  these  (vv. 
5-17)  is  introduced  here  as  the  explanation  of  the 
signs  that  have  been  described,  in  so  far  as  they 
bear  on  the  fate  of  Jerusalem;  but  it  has  a  unity 
of  its  own,  and  is  a  characteristic  specimen  of 
Ezekiel's  oratorical  style.  It  consists  of  two 
parts:  the  first  (vv.  5-10)  deals  chiefly  with  the 
reasons  for  the  judgment  on  Jerusalem,  and  the 
second  (vv.  11-17)  with  the  nature  of  the  judg- 
ment itself.  The  chief  thought  of  the  passage 
is  the  unexampled  severity  of  the  punishment 
which  is  in  store  for  Israel,  as  represented  by  the 
fate  of  the  capital.  A  calamity  so  unprecedented 
demands  an  explanation  as  unique  as  itself. 
Ezekiel  finds  the  ground  of  it  in  the  signal  hon- 
our conferred  on  Jerusalem  in  her  being  set  in 
the  midst  of  the  nations,  in  the  possession  of  a 
religion  which  expressed  the  will  of  the  one 
God,  and  in  the  fact  that  she  had  proved  herself 


236 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


unworthy  of  her  distinction  and  privileges  and 
tried  to  live  as  the  nations  around.  '■'  This  is 
Jerusalem  which  I  have  set  in  the  midst  of  the 
nations,  with  the  lands  round  about  her.  But 
she  rebelled  against  My  judgments  wickedly  * 
more  than  the  nations,  and  My  statutes  more 
than  [other]  lands  round  about  her:  for  they 
rejected  My  judgments,  and  in  My  statutes  they 
did  not  walk.  .  .  .  Therefore  thus  saitli  the 
Lord  Jehovah:  Behold,  even  I  am  against  you; 
and  I  will  execute  in  thy  midst  judgments  before 
the  nations,  and  will  do  in  thy  case  what  I  have 
not  done  [heretofore],  and  what  I  shall  not  do 
the  like  of  any  more,  according  to  all  thy 
abominations"  (vv.  5-9).  The  central  position 
of  Jerusalem  is  evidently  no  figure  of  speech  in 
the  mouth  of  Ezekiel.  It  means  that  she  is  so 
situated  as  to  fulfil  her  destiny  in  the  view  of  all 
the  nations  of  the  world,  who  can  read  in  her 
wonderful  history  the  character  of  the  God  who 
is  above  all  gods.  Nor  can  the  prophet  be 
fairly  accused  of  provincialism  in  thus  speaking 
of  Jerusalem's  unrivalled  physical  and  moral  ad- 
vantages. The  mountain  ridge  on  which  she 
stood  lay  almost  across  the  great  highways  of 
communication  between  the  East  and  the  West, 
between  the  hoary  seats  of  civilisation  and  the 
lands  whither  the  course  of  empire  took  its  way. 
Ezekiel  knew  that  lyre  was  the  centre  of  the 
old  world's  commerce,*  but  he  also  knew  that 
Jerusalem  occupied  a  central  situation  in  the 
civilised  world,  and  in  that  fact  he  rightly  saw  a 
providential  mark  of  the  grandeur  and  univer- 
sality of  her  religious  mission.  Her  calamities, 
too,  were  pro'bably  such  as  no  other  city  experi- 
enced. The  terrible  prediction  of  ver.  10, 
"  Fathers  shall  eat  sons  in  the  midst  of  thee, 
and  sons  shall  eat  fathers,"  seems  to  have  been 
literally  fulfilled.  "The  hands  of  the  pitiful 
women  have  sodden  their  own  children:  they 
were  their  meat  in  the  destruction  of  the  daugh- 
ter of  My  people "  (Lam.  iv.  10).  It  is  likely 
enough  that  the  annals  of  Assyrian  conquest 
cover  many  a  tale  of  woe  which  in  point  of  mere 
physical  suffering  paralleled  the  atrocities  of  the 
siege  of  Jerusalem.  But  no  other  nation  had  a 
conscience  so  sensitive  as  Israel,  or  lost  so  much 
by  its  political  annihilation.  The  humanising  in- 
fluences of  a  pure  religion  had  made  Israel  sus- 
ceptible of  a  kind  of  anguish  which  ruder  com- 
munities were  spared. 

The  sin  of  Jerusalem  is  represented  after 
Ezekiel's  manner  as  on  the  one  hand  transgres- 
sion of  the  divine  commandments,  and  on  the 
other  defilement  of  the  Temple  through  false 
worship.  These  are  ideas  which  we  shall  fre- 
quently meet  in  the  course  of  the  book,  and  they 
need  not  detain  us  here.  The  prophet  proceeds 
(vv.  11-17)  to  describe  in  detail  the  relentless 
punishment  which  the  divine  vengeance  is  to  in- 
flict on  the  inhabitants  and  the  city.  The  jeal- 
ousy, the  wrath,  the  indignation  of  Jehovah, 
which  are  represented  as  "  satisfied "  by  the 
complete  destruction  of  the  people,  belong  to  the 
limitations  of  the  conception  of  God  which  Eze- 
kiel had.  It  was  impossible  at  that  time  to  in- 
terpret such  an  event  as  the  fall  of  Jerusalem 
in  a  religious  sense  otherwise  than  as  a  vehe- 
ment outburst  of  Jehovah's  anger,  expressing  the 
reaction  of  His  holy  nature  against  the  sin  of 
idolatry.     There  is  indeed  a  great  distance  be- 

*  Or,  with  a  different  pointing,  "  She  changed  my  judg- 
ments to  wickedness." 
tSee  chap,  xxvii. 


tween  the  attitude  of  Ezekiel  towards  the  hap- 
less city  and  the  yearning  pity  of  Christ's  lament 
over  the  sinful  Jerusalem  of  His  time.  Yet  the 
first  was  a  step  towards  the  second.  Ezekiel 
realised  intensely  that  part  of  God's  character 
which  it  was  needful  to  enforce  in  order  to  beget 
in  his  countrymen  the  deep  horror  at  the  sin 
of  idolatry  which  characterised  the  later  Judaism. 
The  best  commentary  on  the  latter  part  of  this 
chapter  is  found  in  those  parts  of  the  book  of 
Lamentations  which  speak  of  the  state  of  the  city 
and  the  survivors  after  its  overthrow.  There  we 
see  how  quickly  the  stern  judgment  produced  a 
more  chastened  and  beautiful  type  of  piety  than 
had  ever  been  prevalent  before.  Those  pathetic 
utterances,  in  which  patriotism  and  religion  are 
so  finely  blended,  are  like  the  timid  and  tentative 
advances  of  a  child's  heart  towards  a  parent  who 
has  ceased  to  punish  but  has  not  begun  to  caress. 
This,  and  much  else  that  is  true  and  ennobling  in 
the  later  religion  of  Israel,  is  rooted  in  the  terri- 
fying sense  of  the  divine  anger  against  sin  so 
powerfully  represented  in  the  preaching  of 
Ezekiel. 


III. 


The  next  two  chapters  may  be  regarded  as 
pendants  to  the  theme  which  is  dealt  with  in  this 
opening  section  of  the  book  of  Ezekiel.  In  the 
fourth  and  fifth  chapters  the  prophet  had  mainly 
the  city  in  his  eye  as  the  focus  of  the  nation's  life; 
in  the  sixth  he  turns  his  eye  to  the  land  which 
had  shared  the  sin,  and  must  suffer  the  punish- 
ment, of  the  capital.  It  is,  in  its  first  part 
(vv.  2-10),  an  apostrophe  to  the  mountain  land 
of  Israel,  which  seems  to  stand  out  before  the 
exile's  mind  with  its  mountains  and  hills,  its 
ravines  and  valleys,  in  contrast  to  the  monot- 
onous plain  of  Babylonia  which  stretched  around 
him.  But  these  mountains  were  familiar  to  the 
prophet  as  the  seats  of  the  rural  idolatry  in  Is- 
rael. The  word  hamah,  which  means  properly 
"  the  height,"  had  come  to  be  used  as  the  name 
of  an  idolatrous  sanctuary.  These  sanctuaries 
were  probably  Canaanitish  in  origin;  and  al- 
though by  Israel  they  had  been  consecrated  to 
the  worship  of  Jehovah,  yet  He  was  worshipped 
there  in  ways  which  the  prophets  pronounced 
hateful  to  Him.  They  had  been  destroyed  by 
Josiah,  but  must  have  been  restored  to  their 
former  use  during  the  revival  of  heathenism 
which  followed  his  death.  It  is  a  lurid  picture 
which  rises  before  the  prophet's  imagination  as 
he  contemplates  the  judgment  of  this  provincial 
idolatry:  the  altars  laid  waste,  the  "  sun-pillars  "  * 
broken,  and  the  idols  surrounded  by  the  corpses 
of  men  who  had  fled  to  their  shrines  for  protec- 
tion and  perished  at  their  feet.  This  demonstra- 
tion of  the  helplessness  of  the  rustic  divinities  to 
save  their  sanctuaries  and  their  worshippers  will 
be  the  means  of  breaking  the  rebellious  heart 
and  the  whorish  eyes  that  had  led  Israel  so  far 
astray  from  her  true  Lord,  and  will  produce  in 
exile  the  self-loathing  which  Ezekiel  always  re- 
gards as  the  beginning  of  penitence. 

But  the  prophet's  passion  rises  to  a  higher  pitch, 
and  he  hears  the  command  "  Clap  thy  hands,  and 
stamp  with  thy  foot,  and  say,  Aha  for  the 
abominations   of  the   house   of   Israel!"     Thest 

*  Hanimdnim — a  word  of 'doubtful  meaning,  however 
The  word  for  \6.o\s,gillulim,  is  all  but  peculiar  to  Ezekiel 
It  is  variously  explained  as  block-j^ods  or  dung-gods— va 
any  case  an  epithet  of  contempt.  The  asherali,  or  sacred 
pole,  is  never  referred  to  by  Ezekiel. 


Ezekiel  iv.-vii.] 


THE    END    FORETOLD. 


237 


are  gestures  and  exclamations,  not  of  indigna- 
tion, bu:  of  contempt  and  triumphant  scorn. 
The  same  feehng  and  even  the  same  gestures  are 
ascribed  to  Jehovah  Himself  in  another  passage 
of  highly  charged  emotion  (xxi.  17).  And  it  is 
only  fair  to  remember  that  it  is  the  anticipation 
of  the  victory  of  Jeliovah's  cause  that  fills  the 
mind  of  the  prophet  at  such  moments  and  seerns 
to  deaden  the  sense  of  human  sympathy  within 
him.  At  the  same  time  the  victory  of  Jehovah 
was  the  victory  of  prophecy,  and  in  so  far 
Smend  may  be  right  in  regarding  the  words  as 
throwing  light  on  the  intensity  of  the  antago- 
nism in  which  prophecy  and  the  popular  religion 
then  stood.  The  devastation  of  the  land  is  to 
be  effected  by  the  same  instruments  as  were  at 
work  in  the  destruction  of  the  city:  first  the 
sword  of  the  Chaldacans,  then  famine  and  pesti- 
lence among  those  who  escape,  until  the  whole 
of  Israel's  ancient  territory  lies  desolate  from 
the   southern   steppes   to   Riblah   in   the   north.* 

Chap.  vii.  is  one  of  those  singled  out  by  Ewald 
as  preserving  most  faithfully  the  spirit  and  lan- 
guage of  Ezekiel's  earlier  utterances.  Both  in 
thought  and  expression  it  exhibits  a  freedom  and 
animation  seldom  attained  in  Ezekiel's  writings, 
and  it  is  evident  that  it  must  have  been  composed 
under  keen  emotion.  It  is  comparatively  free 
from  those  stereotyped  phrases  which  are  else- 
where so  common,  and  the  style  falls  at  times 
into  the  rhythm  which  is  characteristic  of  He- 
brew poetry.  Ezekiel  hardly  perhaps  attains  to 
perfect  mastery  of  poetic  form,  and  even  here 
we  may  be  sensible  of  a  lack  of  power  to  blend 
a  series  of  impressions  and  images  into  an  artistic 
unity.  The  vehemence  of  his  feeling  hurries  him 
from  one  conception  to  another,  without  giving 
full  expression  to  any,  or  indicating  clearly  the 
connection  that  leads  from  one  to  the  other. 
This  circumstance,  and  the  corrupt  condition  of 
the  text  together,  make  the  chapter  in  some  parts 
unintelligible,  and  as  a  whole  one  of  the  most 
difficult  in  the  book.  In  its  present  position  it 
forms  a  fitting  conclusion  to  the  opening  sec- 
tion of  the  book.  All  the  elements  of  the  judg- 
ment which  have  just  been  foretold  are  gathered 
up  in  one  outburst  of  emotion,  producing  a  song 
of  triumph  in  which  the  prophet  seems  to  stand 
in  the  uproar  of  the  final  catastrophe  and  exult 
amid  the  crash  and  wreck  of  the  old  order  which 
is  passing  away. 

The  passage  is  divided  into  five  stanzas,  which 
may  originally  have  been  approximately  equal 
in  length,  although  the  first  is  now  nearly  twice 
as  long  as  any  of  the  others.f 

i.  2-9. — The  first  verse  strikes  the  keynote  of 
the  whole  poem;  it  is  the  inevitableness  and 
the  finality  of  the  approaching  dissolution.  A 
striking  phrase  of  Amos  %  is  first  taken  up  and 
expanded  in  accordance  with  the  anticipations 
with  which  the  previous  chapters  have  now  fa- 
miliarised us:  ■'  An  end  is  come,  the  end  is  come 
on  the  four  skirts  of  the  land."  The  poet  already 
hears  the  tumult  and  confusion  of  the  battle;  the 
vintage  songs  of  the  Judaean  peasant  are  si- 
lenced, and  with  the  din  and  fury  of  war  the  day 
of  the  Lord  draws  near. 

ii.  10-13. — The  prophet's  thoughts  here  revert 
to  the  present,  and  he  notes  the  eager  interest 

♦In  ver.  14  the  true  sense  has  been  lost  by  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  word  Riblah  into  Diblah. 

t  The  reason  may  be  that  two  different  recensions  of  the 
text  have  been  combined  and  mixed  up.  So  Hitzig  and 
Cornill. 

t  \;-ii'v;  viii.  2. 


with  which  men  both  in  Judah  and  Babylon  are 
pursuing  the  ordinary  business  of  life  and  the 
vain  dreams  of  political  greatness.  "  The  diadem 
flourishes,  the  sceptre  blossoms,  arrogance 
shoots  up."  These  expressions  must  refer  to  the 
efiforts  of  the  new  rulers  of  Jerusalem  to  restore 
the  fortunes  of  the  nation  and  the  glories  of  the 
old  kingdom  which  had  been  so  greatly  tar- 
nished by  the  recent  captivity.  Things  are  go- 
ing bravely,  they  think;  they  are  surprised  at 
their  own  success;  they  hope  that  the  day  of 
small  things  will  grow  into  the  day  of  things  1 
greater  than  those  which  are  past.  The  follow- 
ing verse  is  untranslatable;  probably  the  original 
words,  if  we  could  recover  them,  would  contain 
some  pointed  and  scornful  antithesis  to  these 
futile  and  vain-glorious  anticipations.  The  al- 
lusion to  "  buyers  and  sellers "  (ver.  12)  may 
possibly  be  quite  general,  referring  only  to  the 
absorbing  interest  which  men  continue  to  take 
in  their  possessions,  heedless  of  the  impending 
judgment.*  But  the  facts  that  the  advantage  is 
assumed  to  be  on  the  side  of  the  buyer  and  that 
the  seller  expects  to  return  to  his  heritage  make 
it  probable  that  the  prophet  is  thinking  of  the 
forced  sales  by  the  expatriated  nobles  of  their 
estates  in  Palestine,  and  to  their  deeply  cherished 
resolve  to  right  themselves  when  the  time  of 
their  exile  is  over.  All  such  ambitions,  says  the 
prophet,  are  vain — "  the  seller  shall  not  return 
to  what  he  sold,  and  a  man  shall  not  by  wrong 
preserve  his  living."  In  any  case  Ezekiel  evinces 
here,  as  elsewhere,  a  certain  sympathy  with  the 
exiled  aristocracy,  in  opposition  to  the  preten- 
sions of  the  new  men  who  had  succeeded  to  their 
honours. 

iii.  14-18. — The  next  scene  that  rises  before  the 
prophet's  vision  is  the  collapse  of  Judah's  mili- 
tary preparations  in  the  hour  of  danger.  Their 
army  exists  but  on  paper.  There  is  much  blow- 
ing of  trumpets  and  much  organising,  but  no 
men  to  go  forth  to  battle.  A  blight  rests  on  all 
their  efiforts;  their  hands  are  paralysed  and  their 
hearts  unnerved  by  the  sense  that  "  wrath  rests 
on  all  their  pomp."  Sword,  famine,  and  pesti- 
lence, the  ministers  of  Jehovah's  vengeance,  shall 
devour  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  and  the  coun- 
try, until  but  a  few  survivors  on  the  tops  of  the 
mountains  remain  to  mourn  over  the  universal 
desolation. 

iv.  19-22. — At  present  the  inhabitants  of  Jeru- 
salem are  proud  of  the  ill-gotten  and  ill-used 
wealth  stored  up  within  her,  and  doubtless  the 
exiles  cast  covetous  eyes  on  the  luxury  which 
may  still  have  prevailed  amongst  the  upper 
classes  in  the  capital.  But  of  what  avail  will  all 
this  treasure  be  in  the  evil  day  now  so  near  at 
hand?  It  will  but  add  mockery  to  their  sufferings 
to  be  surrounded  by  gold  and  silver  which  can 
do  nothing  to  allay  the  pangs  of  hunger.  It  will 
be  cast  in  the  streets  as  refuse,  for  it  cannot  save 
them  in  the  day  of  Jehovah's  anger.  Nay,  more, 
it  will  become  the  prize  of  the  most  ruthless  of 
the  heathen  (the  Chaldseans) ;  and  when  in  the 
eagerness  of  their  lust  for  gold  they  ransack  the 
Temple  treasury  and  so  desecrate  the  Holy  Place, 
Jehovah  will  avert  His  face  and  suffer  them  to 
work  their  will.  The  curse  of  Jehovah  rests  on 
the  silver  and  gold  of  Jerusalem,  which  has  been 
used  for  the  making  ot  idolatrous  images,  and 
now  is  made  to  them  an  unclean  thing. 

V.  23-27. — The  closing  strophe  contains  a  pow- 
erful description  of  the  dismay  and  despair  that 
*  C/'.  Luke  xvii.  26-30. 


238 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


will  seize  all  classes  in  the  state  as  the  day  of 
wrath  draws  near.  Calamity  after  calamity 
comes,  rumour  follows  hard  on  rumour,  and  the 
heads  of  the  nation  are  distracted  and  cease  to 
exercise  the  functions  of  leadership.  The  rec- 
ognised guides  of  the  people — the  prophets,  the 
priests,  and  the  wise  men — have  no  word  of 
counsel  or  direction  to  ofifer;  the  prophet's 
vision,  the  priest's  traditional  lore,  and  the  wise 
man's  sagacity  are  alike  at  fault.  So  the  king 
and  the  grandees  are  filled  with  stupefaction; 
and  the  common  people,  deprived  of  their  nat- 
ural leaders,  sit  down  in  helpless  dejection.  Thus 
shall  Jerusalem  be  recompensed  according  to  her 
doings.  "  The  land  is  full  of  bloodshed,  and  the 
city  of  violence";  and  in  the  correspondence  be- 
tween desert  and  retribution  men  shall  be  made 
to  acknowledge  the  operation  of  the  divine 
righteousness.  "  They  shall  know  that  I  am 
Jehovah." 

IV. 

It  may  be  useful  at  this  point  to  note  certain 
theological  principles  which  already  begin  to  ap- 
pear in  this  earliest  of  Ezekiel's  prophecies.  Re- 
flection on  the  nature  and  purpose  of  the  divine 
dealings  we  have  seen  to  be  a  characteristic  of 
his  work;  and  even  those  passages  which  we  have 
considered,  although  chiefly  devoted  to  an  en- 
forcement of  the  fact  of  judgment,  present  some 
features  of  the  conception  of  Israel's  history 
which  had  been  formed  in  his  mind. 

1.  We  observe  in  the  first  place  that  the 
prophet  lays  great  stress  on  the  world-wide  sig- 
nificance of  the  events  which  are  to  befall  Israel. 
This  thought  is  not  as  yet  developed,  but  it  is 
clearly  present.  The  relation  between  Jehovah 
and  Israel  is  so  peculiar  that  He  is  known  to 
the  nations  in  the  first  instance  only  as  Israel's 
God,  and  thus  His  being  and  character  have  to 
be  learned  from  His  dealings  with  His  own  peo- 
ple. And  since  Jehovah  is  the  only  true  God 
and  must  be  worshipped  as  such  everywhere,  the 
history  of  Israel  has  an  interest  for  the  world 
such  as  that  of  no  other  nation  has.  She  was 
placed  in  the  centre  of  the  nations  in  order  that 
the  knowledge  of  God  might  radiate  from  her 
through  all  the  world;  and  now  that  she  has 
proved  unfaithful  to  her  mission,  Jehovah  must 
manifest  His  power  and  His  character  by  an  un- 
exampled work  of  judgment.  Even  the  destruc- 
tion of  Israel  is  a  demonstration  to  the  universal 
conscience  of  mankind  of  what  true  divinity  is. 

2.  But  the  judgment  has  of  course  a  purpose 
and  a  meaning  for  Israel  herself,  and  both  pur- 
poses are  summed  up  in  the  recurring  formula 
"Ye  [they I  shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah,"  or 
"  that  I,  Jehovah,  have  spoken."  These  two 
phrases  express  precisely  the  same  idea,  although 
from  slightly  different  starting-points.  It  is  as- 
sumed that  Jehovah's  personality  is  to  be  identi- 
fied by  His  word  spoken  through  the  prophets. 
He  is  known  to  men  through  the  revelation  of 
Himself  in  the  prophet's  utterances.  "  Ye  shall 
know  that  I,  Jehovah,  have  spoken "  means 
therefore.  Ye  shall  know  that  it  is  I,  the  God 
of  Israel  and  the  Ruler  of  the  universe,  who 
speak  these  things.  In  other  words,  the  har- 
mony between  prophecy  and  providence  guar- 
antees the  source  of  the  prophet's  message.  The 
shorter  phrase  "  Ye  shall  know  that  I  am  Jeho- 
vah "  may  mean  Ye  shall  know  that  I  who  now 
speak  am  truly  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel.  The 
prejudices   of  the  people  would  have  led  them 


to  deny  that  the  power  which  dictated  Ezekiel's 
prophecy  could  be  their  God;  but  this  denial,  to- 
gether with  the  false  idea  of  Jehovah  on  which 
it  rests,  shall  be  destroyed  for  ever  when  the 
prophet's  words  come  true. 

There  is  of  course  no  doubt  that  Ezekiel  con- 
ceived Jehovah  as  endowed  with  the  plenitude 
of  deity,  or  that  in  his  view  the  name  expressed 
all  that  we  mean  by  the  word  God.  Neverthe- 
less, historically  the  name  Jehovah  is  a  proper 
name,  denoting  the  God  who  is  the  God  of  Is- 
rael. Renan  has  ventured  on  the  assertion  that 
a  deity  with  a  proper  name  is  necessarily  a  false 
god.  The  statement  perhaps  measures  the  dif- 
ference between  the  God  of  revealed  religion  and 
the  god  who  is  an  abstraction,  an  expression  of 
the  order  of  the  universe,  who  exists  only  in  the 
mind  of  the  man  who  names  him.  The  God  of 
revelation  is  a  living  person,  with  a  character 
and  will  of  His  own,  capable  of  being  known  by 
man.  It  is  the  distinction  of  revelation  that  it 
dares  to  regard  God  as  an  individual  with  an 
inner  life  and  nature  of  His  own,  independent  of 
the  conception  men  may  form  of  Him.  Applied 
to  such  a  Being,  a  personal  name  may  be  as  true 
and  significant  as  the  name  which  expresses  the 
character  and  individuality  of  a  man.  Only  thus 
can  we  understand  the  historical  process  by 
which  the  God  who  was  first  manifested  as  the 
deity  of  a  particular  nation  preserves  His  per- 
sonal identity  with  the  God  who  in  Christ  is  at 
last  revealed  as  the  God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh. 
The  knowledge  of  Jehovah  of  which  Ezekiel 
speaks  is  therefore  at  once  a  knowledge  of  the 
character  of  the  God  whom  Israel  professed  to 
serve,  and  a  knowledge  of  that  which  constitutes 
true  and  essential  divinity.* 

3.  The  prophet,  in  vi.  8-10,  proceeds  one  step 
further  in  delineating  the  effect  of  the  judgment 
on  the  minds  of  the  survivors.  The  fascination 
of  idolatry  for  the  Israelites  is  conceived  as  pro- 
duced by  that  radical  perversion  of  the  religious 
sense  which  the  prophets  call  "  whoredom  " — 
a  sensuous  delight  in  the  blessings  of  nature,  and 
an  indifference  to  the  moral  element  which  can 
alone  preserve  either  religion  or  human  love 
from  corruption.  The  spell  shall  at  last  be 
broken  in  the  new  knowledge  of  Jehovah  which 
is  produced  by  calamity;  and  the  heart  of  the 
people,  purified  from  its  delusions,  shall  turn  to 
Him  who  has  smitten  them,  as  the  only  true 
God.  "  When  your  fugitives  from  the  sword  are 
among  the  nations,  when  they  are  scattered 
through  the  lands,  then  shall  your  fugitives  re- 
member Me  amongst  the  nations  whither  they 
have  been  carriied  captive,  when  I  break  their 
heart  that  goes  awhoring  from  Me,  and  their 
whorish  eyes  which  went  after  their  idols." 
When  the  idolatrous  propensity  is  thus  eradi- 
cated, the  conscience  of  Israel  will  turn  inwards 
on  itself,  and  in  the  light  of  its  new  knowledge 
of  God  will  for  the  first  time  read  its  own  his- 
tory aright.     The  beginnings  of  a  new  spiritual 

*  Ezekiel's  use  of  the  divine  names  would  hardly 
be  satisfactory  to  Renan.  Outside  of  the  prophecies 
addressed  to  heathen  nations  the  generic  name  Q'inflK  's 
never  used  absolutely,  except  in  the  phrases  "  visions  of 
God"  (three  times)  and  "  spirit  of  God  "  (once,  in  chap.  xi. 
24,  where  the  text  may  be  doubtful).  Elsewhere  it  is  used 
only  of  God  in  His  relation  to  men,  as,  e.  g.,  in  the 
expression  "  be  to  you  for  a  God."  HK'  occurs  once  (chap. 
X.  5)  and  ^{ij  alone  three  times  in  chap,  xxviii.  (addressed  to 
the  prince  of  Tyre).  The  prophet's  word,  when  he  wishes 
to  express  absolute  divinity,  is  just  the  "proper"  name 
niiT,  in  accordance  no  doubt  with  the  interpretation  given 
in  Exod.  iii.  13,  14. 


Ezekiel  viii.-.\i.] 


YOUR    HOUSE    IS    LEFT    DESOLATE. 


239 


life  will  be  made  in  the  bitter  self-condemnation 
which  is  one  side  of  the  national  repentance. 
"  They  shall  loathe  themselves  for  all  the  evil 
that  they  have  committed  in  all  their  abomina- 
tions." 


CHAPTER  VL 

YOUR  HOUSE  IS  LEFT  UNTO  YOU 
DESOLATE. 

Ezekiel  viii.-xi. 

One  of  the  most  instructive  phases  of  religious 
belief  among  the  Israelites  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury was  the  superstitious  regard  in  which  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem  was  held.  Its  prestige  as 
the  metropolitan  sanctuary  had  no  doubt  steadily 
increased  from  the  time  when  it  was  built.  But 
it  was  in  the  crisis  of  the  Assyrian  invasion  that 
the  popular  sentiment  in  favour  of  its  peculiar 
sanctity  was  transmuted  into  a  fanatical  faith  in 
its  inherent  inviolability.  It  is  well  known  that 
during  the  whole  course  of  this  invasion  the 
prophet  Isaiah  had  consistently  taught  that  the 
enemy  should  never  set  foot  within  the  precincts 
of  the  Holy  City — that,  on  the  contrary,  the  at- 
tempt to  seize  it  would  prove  to  be  the  signal 
for  his  annihilation.  The  striking  fulfilment  of 
this  prediction  in  the  sudden  destruction  of  Sen- 
nacherib's army  had  an  immense  effect  on  the  re- 
ligion of  the  time.  It  restored  the  faith  in  Je- 
hovah's omnipotence  which  was  already  giving 
way,  and  it  granted  a  new  lease  of  life  to  the  very 
errors  which  it  ought  to  have  extinguished.  For 
here,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  what  was  a  spirit- 
ual faith  in  one  generation  became  a  supersti- 
tion in  the  next.  Indifferent  to  the  divine  truths 
which  gave  meaning  to  Isaiah's  prophecy,  the 
people  changed  his  sublime  faith  in  the  living 
God  working  in  history  into  a  crass  confidence 
in  the  material  symbol  which  had  been  the 
means  of  expressing  it  to  their  minds.  Hence- 
forth it  became  a  fundamental  tenet  of  the  cur- 
rent creed  that  the  Temple  and  the  city  which 
guarded  it  could  never  fall  into  the  hands  of  an 
enemy;  and  any  teaching  which  assailed  that 
belief  was  felt  to  undermine  confidence  in  the 
national  deity.  In  the  time  of  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  this  superstition  existed  in  unabated 
vigour,  and  formed  one  of  the  greatest  hin- 
drances to  the  acceptance  of  their  teaching. 
"  The  Temple  of  the  Lord,  the  Temple  of  the 
Lord,  the  Temple  of  the  Lord  are  these!  "  was 
the  cry  of  the  benighted  worshippers  as  they 
thronged  to  its  courts  to  seek  the  favour  of  Je- 
hovah (Jer.  vii.  4).  The  same  state  of  feeling 
must  have  prevailed  among  Ezekiel's  fellow- 
exiles.  To  the  prophet  himself,  attached  as  he 
was  to  the  worship  of  the  Temple,  it  may  have 
been  a  thought  almost  too  hard  to  bear  that 
Jehovah  should  abandon  the  only  place  of  His 
legitimate  worship.  Amongst  the  rest  of  the 
captives  the  faith  in  its  infallibility  was  one  of 
the  illusions  which  must  be  overthrown  before 
their  minds  could  perceive  the  true  drift  of  his 
teaching.  In  his  first  prophecy  the  fact  had  just 
been  touched  on,  but  merely  as  an  incident  in  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem.  About  a  year  later,  however, 
he  received  a  new  revelation,  in  which  he  learned 
that  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  was  no  mere 
incidental  consequence  of  the  capture  of  the  city, 


but  a  main  object  of  the  calamity.  The  time  was 
come  when  judgment  must  begin  at  the  house 
of  God. 

The  weird  vision  in  which  this  truth  was  con- 
veyed to  the  prophet  is  said  to  have  occurred 
during  a  visit  of  the  elders  to  Ezekiel  in  his 
own  house.  In  their  presence  he  fell  into  a 
trance,  in  which  the  events  now  to  be  considered 
passed  before  him;  and  after  the  trance  was  re- 
moved he  recounted  the  substance  of  the  vision 
to  the  exiles.  This  statement  has  been  some- 
what needlessly  called  in  question,  on  the  ground 
that  after  so  protracted  an  ecstasy  the  prophet 
would  not  be  likely  to  find  his  visitors  still  in 
their  places.  But  this  matter-of-fact  criticism 
overreaches  itself.  We  have  no  means  of  deter- 
mining how  long  it  would  take  for  this  series  of 
events  to  be  realised.  If  we  may  trust  anything 
to  the  analogy  of  dreams — and  of  all  conditions 
to  wh'ch  ordinary  men  are  subject  the  dream  is 
surely  the  closest  analogy  to  the  prophetic 
ecstasy — the  whole  may  have  passed  in  an  in- 
credibly short  space  of  time.  If  the  statement 
were  untrue,  it  is  difiticult  to  see  what  Ezekiel 
would  have  gained  by  making  it.  If  the  whole 
vision  were  a  fiction,  this  must  of  course  be 
fictitious  too;  but  even  so  it  seems  a  very  super- 
fluous piece  of  invention. 

We  prefer,  therefore,  to  regard  the  vision  as 
real,  and  the  assigned  situation  as  historical;  and 
the  fact  that  it  is  recorded  suggests  that  there 
must  be  some  connection  between  the  object  of 
the  visit  and  the  burden  of  the  revelation  which 
was  then  communicated.  It  is  not  difificult  to 
imagine  points  of  contact  between  them.  Ewald 
has  conjectured  that  the  occasion  of  the  visit 
may  have  been  some  recent  tidings  from  Jerusa- 
l^em  which  had  opened  the  eyes  of  the  "  elders  " 
to  the  real  relation  that  existed  between  them 
and  their  brethren  at  home.  If  they  had  ever 
cherished  any  illusions  on  the  point,  they  had 
certainly  been  disabused  of  them  before  Ezekiel 
had  this  vision.  They  were  aware,  whether  the 
information  was  recent  or  not,  that  they  were 
absolutely  disowned  by  the  new  authorities  in 
Jerusalem,  and  that  it  was  impossible  that  they 
should  ever  come  back  peaceably  to  their  old 
place  in  the  state.  This  created  a  pro'blem  which 
they  could  not  solve,  and  the  fact  that  Ezekiel 
had  announced  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  may  have 
formed  a  bond  of  sympathy  between  him  and 
his  brethren  in  exile  which  drew  them  to  him 
in  their  perplexity.  Some  such  hypothesis  gives 
at  all  events  a  fuller  significance  to  the  closing 
part  of  the  vision,  where  the  attitude  of  the  men 
in  Jerusalem  is  described,  and  where  the  exiles 
are  taught  that  the  hope  of  Israel's  future  lies 
with  them.  It  is  the  first  time  that  Ezekiel  has 
distinguished  between  the  fates  in  store  for  the 
two  sections  of  the  people,  and  it  would  almost 
appear  as  if  the  promotion  of  the  exiles  to  the 
first  place  in  the  true  Israel  was  a  new  revelation 
to  him.  Twice  during  this  vision  he  is  moved 
to  intercede  for  the  "  remnant  of  Israel,"  as  if  the 
only  hope  of  a  new  people  of  God  lay  in  spar- 
ing at  least  some  of  those  who  were  left  in  the 
land.  But  the  burden  of  the  message  that  now 
comes  to  him  is  that  in  the  spiritual  sense  the 
true  remnant  of  Israel  is  not  in  Judaea,  but 
among  the  exiles  in  Babylon.  It  was  there  that 
the  new  Israel  was  to  be  formed,  and  the  land 
was  to  be  the  heritage,  not  of  those  who  clung 
to  it  and  exulted  in  the  misfortunes  of  their  ban- 
ished larethren,  but  of  those  who  under  the  dis- 


240 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


cipline  of  exile  were  first  prepared  to  use  the 
land  as  Jehovah's  holiness  demanded. 

The  vision  is  interesting,  in  the  first  place,  on 
account  of  the  glimpse  it  affords  of  the  state  of 
mind  prevailing  in  influential  circles  in  Jerusalem 
at  this  time.  There  is  no  reason  whatever  to 
doubt  that  here  in  the  form  of  a  vision  we  have 
reliable  information  regarding  the  actual  state 
of  matters  when  Ezekiel  wrote.  It  has  been  sup- 
posed by  some  critics  that  the  description  of  the 
idolatries  in  the  Temple  does  not  refer  to  con- 
temporary practices,  but  to  abuses  that  had  been 
rife  in  the  days  of  Manasseh  and  had  been  put 
a  stop  to  by  Josiah's  reformation.  But  the  vision 
loses  half  its  meaning  if  it  is  taken  as  merely  an 
idealised  representation  of  all  the  sins  that  had 
polluted  the  Temple  in  the  course  of  its  history^ 
The  names  of  those  who  are  seen  must  be  names 
of  living  men  known  to  Ezekiel  and  his  contem- 
poraries, and  the  sentiments  put  in  their  mouth, 
especially  in  the  latter  part  of  the  vision,  are 
suitable  only  to  the  age  in  which  he  lived.  It  is 
very  probable  that  the  description  in  its  general 
features  would  also  apply  to  the  days  of  Manas- 
seh; but  the  revival  of  idolatry  which  followed 
the  death  of  Josiah  would  naturally  take  the  form 
of  a  restoration  of  the  illegal  cults  which  had 
flourished  unchecked  under  his  grandfather. 
Ezekiel's  own  experience  before  his  captivity, 
and  the  steady  intercourse  which  had  been  main- 
tained since,  would  supplv  him  with  the  material 
which  in  the  ecstatic  condition  is  wrought  up 
into  this  powerful  picture. 

The  thing  that  surprises  us  most  is  the  pre- 
vailing conviction  amongst  the  ruling  classes  that 
"  Je'hovah  had  forsaken  the  land."  These  men 
seem  to  have  partly  emancipated  themselves,  as 
politicians  in  Israel  were  apt  to  do,  from  the  re^ 
straints  and  narrowness  of  the  popular  religion. 
To  them  it  was  a  conceivable  thing  that  Jeho- 
vah should  abandon  His  people.  And  yet  life 
was  worth  living  and  fighting  for  apart  from 
Jehovah.  It  was  of  course  a  merely  selfish  life, 
not  inspired  by  national  ideals,  but  simply  a 
clinging  to  place  and  power.  The  wish  was 
father  to  the  thought;  men  who  so  readily 
yielded  to  the  belief  in  Jehovah's  absence  were 
very  willing  to  be  persuaded  of  its  truth.  The 
religion  of  Jehovah  had  always  imposed  a  check 
on  social  and  civic  wrong,  and  men  whose  power 
rested  on  violence  and  oppression  could  not  but 
rejoice  to  be  rid  of  it.  So  they  seem  to  have 
acquiesced  readily  enough  in  the  conclusion  to 
which  so  many  circumstances  seemed  to  point, 
that  Jehovah  had  ceased  to  interest  Himself 
either  for  good  or  evil  in  them  and  their  affairs. 
Still,  the  wide  acceptance  of  a  belief  like  this, 
so  repugnant  to  all  the  religious  ideas  of  the 
ancient  world,  seems  to  require  for  its  explana- 
tion some  fact  of  contemporary  history.  It  has 
been  thought  that  it  arose  from  the  disappear- 
ance of  the  ark  of  Jehovah  from  the  Temple. 
It  seems  from  the  third  chapter  of  Jeremiah  that 
the  ark  was  no  longer  in  existence  in  Josiah's 
reign,  and  that  the  want  of  it  was  felt  as  a  grave 
religious  loss.  It  is  not  improbable  that  this  cir- 
cumstance, in  connection  with  the  disasters  which 
had  marked  the  last  days  of  the  kingdom,  led  in 
many  minds  to  the  tear  and  in  some  to  the  hope 
that  along  with  His  most  venerable  symbol  Je- 
hovah  Himself  had  vanished  from  their  midst. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  the  feeling  described 
was  only  one  of  several  currents  that  ran  in  the 
divided  society  of  Jerusalem.     It  is  quite' a  dif- 


ferent point  of  view  that  is  presented  in  the  tatnt 
quoted  in  chap.  xi.  15,  that  the  exiles  were  far 
from  Jehovah,  and  had  therefore  lost  their  right 
to  tlieir  possessions.  But  the  religious  despair 
is  not  only  the  most  startlmg  fact  that  we  have 
to  look  at;  it  is  also  the  one  that  is  made  most 
prominent  in  the  vision.  And  the  Divine  answer 
to  it  given  through  Ezekiel  is  that  the  conviction 
is  true;  Jehovah  has  forsaken  the  land.  But  in 
the  first  place  the  cause  of  His  departure  is  found 
in  those  very  practices  for  which  it  was  made  the 
excuse;  and  in  the  second,  although  He  has 
ceased  to  dwell  in  the  midst  of  His  people.  He 
has  lost  neither  the  power  nor  the  will  to  punish 
their  iniquities.  To  impress  these  truths  first  on 
his  fellow-exiles  and  then  on  the  whole  nation 
is  the  chief  object  of  the  chapter  before  us. 

Now  we  fina  that  the  general  sense  of  God- 
forsakenness  expressed  itself  principally  in  two 
directions.  On  the  one  hand  it  led  to  the  multi- 
plication of  false  objects  of  worship  to  supply  the 
place  of  Him  who  was  regarded  as  the  proper 
tutelary  Divinity  of  Israel;  on  the  other  hand,  it 
produced  a  reckless,  devil-may-care  spirit  of  re- 
sistance against  any  odds,  such  as  was  natural 
to  men  who  had  only  material  interests  to  fight 
for,  and  nothing  to  trust  in  but  their  own  right 
hand.  Syncretism  in  religion  and  fatalism  in  pol- 
itics— these  were  the  twin  symptoms  of  the  decay 
of  faith  among  the  upper  classes  in  Jerusalem. 
But  these  belong  to  two  different  parts  of  the 
vision  which  we  must  now  distinguish. 


The  first  part  deals  with  the  departure  of  Je- 
hovah as  caused  by  religious  offences  perpe- 
trated in  the  Temple,  and  with  the  return  of  Je- 
hovah to  destroy  the  city  on  account  of  these 
offences.  The  prophet  is  transported  in  "  visions 
of  God  "  to  Jerusalem  and  placed  in  the  outer 
court  near  the  northern  gate,  outside  of  which 
was  the  site  where  the  "  image  of  Jealousy  "  had 
stood  in  the  time  of  Manasseh.  Near  him  stands 
the  appearance  which  he  had  learned  to  recog- 
nise as  the  glory  of  Jehovah,  signifying  that  Je- 
hovah has,  for  a  purpose  not  yet  disclosed,  re- 
visited His  Temple.  But  first  Ezekiel  must  be 
made  to  see  the  state  of  things  which  exists  in 
this  Temple  which  had  once  been  the  seat  of 
God's  presence.  Looking  through  the  gate  to 
the  north,  he  discovers  that  the  image  of  Jeal- 
ousy *  has  been  restored  to  its  old  place.  This 
is  the  first  and  apparently  the  least  heinous  of 
the  abominations  that  defiled  the  sanctuary. 

The  second  scene  is  the  only  one  of  the  four 
which  represents  a  secret  cult.  Partly  perhaps 
for  that  reason  it  strikes  our  minds  as  the  most 
repulsive  of  all;  but  that  was  obviously  not  Eze- 
kiel's estimate  of  it.  There  are  greater  abomi- 
nations to  follow.  It  is  difficult  to  understand 
the  particulars  of  Ezekiel's  description,  especially 
in  the  Hebrew  text  (the  LXX.  is  simpler);  but 
it  seems  impossible  to  escape  the  impression  that 
there  was  something  obscene  in  a  worship  where 
idolatry  appears  as  ashamed  of  itself.  The  essen- 
tial fact,  however,  is  that  the  very  highest  and 

*  Of  what  nature  this  idolatrous  symbol  was  we  cannot 
certainly  determine.  The  word  used  for  "  image  "  (semel) 
occurs  in  onlv  two  other  passages.  The  writer  of  the 
books  of  Chroiiicles  uses  it  of  the  asherah  which  was  set 
up  by  Manasseh  in  the  Temple,  and  it  is  possible  that  he 
means  thus  to  identify  that  object  with  what  Ezekiel  saw 
icf.  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  7,  and  2  Kings  xxi.  7).  This  interpre- 
tation is  as  satisfactory  as  any  that  has  been  proposed. 


Ezekiel  viii  -xi.] 


YOUR    HOUSE    IS    LEFT    DESOLATE. 


241 


most  influential  men  in  the  land  were  addicted  to 
a  form  of  heathenism,  whose  objects  of  worship 
were  pictures  of  "  horrid  creeping  things,  and 
cattle,  and  all  the  gods  of  the  house  of  Israel." 
The  name  of  one  of  these  men,  the  leader  in 
this  superstition,  is  given,  and  is  significant  of 
the  state  of  life  in  Jerusalem  shortly  before  its 
fall.  Jaazaniah  was  the  son  of  Shaphan,  who  is 
probably  identical  with  the  chancellor  of  Josiah's 
reign  whose  sympathy  with  the  prophetic  teach- 
ing was  evinced  by  his  zeal  in  the  cause  of  re- 
form. We  read  of  other  members  of  the  family 
who  were  faithful  to  the  national  religion,  such 
as  his  son  Ahikam,  also  a  zealous  reformer,  and 
his  grandson  Gedaliah,  Jeremiah's  friend  and 
patron,  and  the  governor  appointed  over  Judah 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  after  the  taking  of  the  city. 
The  family  was  thus  divided  both  in  religion  and 
politics.  While  one  branch  was  devoted  to  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  and  favoured  submission  to 
the  king  of  Babylon,  Jaazaniah  belonged  to  the 
opposite  party  and  was  the  ringleader  in  a  pecu- 
liarly obnoxious  form  of  idolatry.* 

The  third  "  abomination  "  is  a  form  of  idolatry 
widely  diffused  over  Western  Asia — the  annual 
mourning  for  Tammuz.  Tammuz  was  originally 
a  Babylonian  deity  (Dumuzi).  but  his  worship  is 
specially  identified  with  Phoenicia,  whence  under 
the  name  Adonis  it  was  introduced  into  Greece. 
The  mourning  celebrates  the  death  of  the  god, 
which  is  an  emb'em  of  the  decay  of  the  earth's 
productive  powers,  whether  due  to  the  scorch- 
ing heat  of  the  sun  or  to  the  cold  of  winter.  It 
seems  to  have  been  a  comparatively  harmless  rite 
of  nature-religion,  and  its  popularity  among  the 
women  of  Jerusalem  at  this  time  may  be  due  to 
the  prevailing  mood  of  despondency  which  found 
vent  in  the  sympathetic  contemplation  of  that 
aspect  of  nature  which  most  suggests  decay  and 
death. 

The  last  and  greatest  of  the  abominations  prac- 
tised in  and  near  the  Temple  is  the  worship  of 
the  sun.  The  peculiar  enormity  of  this  species 
of  idolatry  can  hardly  lie  in  the  object  of  adora- 
tion; it  is  to  be  sought  rather  in  the  place  where 
it  was  practised,  and  in  the  rank  of  those  who 
took  part  in  it,  who  were  probably  priests. 
Standing  between  the  porch  and  the  altar,  with 
their  backs  to  the  Temple,  these  men  uncon- 
sciously expressed  the  deliberate  rejection  of  Je- 
hovah which  was  involved  in  their  idolatry.  The 
worship  of  the  heavenly  bodies  was  probably  im- 
ported into  Israel  from  Assyria  and  Babylon, 
and  its  prevalence  in  the  later  years  of  the  mon- 
archy was  due  to  political  rather  than  religious 
influences.  The  gods  of  these  imperial  nations 
were  esteemed  more  potent  than  those  of  the 
states  which  succumbed  to  their  power,  and 
hence  men  who  were  losing  confidence  in  their 
national  deity  naturally  sought  to  imitate  the  re- 
ligions of  the  most  powerful  peoples  known  to 
them.f 

*  The  nature  of  the  cults  is  best  explained  by  Professor 
Robertson  Smith,  who  supposes  that  they  are  a  survival 
of  aboriginal  totemistic  superstitions  which  had  been 
preserved  in  secret  circles  till  now,  but  suddenly  assumed 
a  new  importance  with  the  collapse  of  the  national  religion 
and  the  belief  that  Jehovah  had  left  the  land.  Others, 
however,  have  thought  that  it  is  Egyptian  rites  which  are 
referred  to.  This  view  might  best  explain  its  prevalence 
among  the  elders,  but  it  has  little  positive  support. 

t  Tt  has  been  supposed,  however,  that  the  sun-worship 
referred  to  here  is  of  Persian  origin,  chiefly  because  of  the 
obscure  expression  in  ver.  17  :  "  Behold  they  put  the  twig 
to  their  nose."  This  has  been  explained  by  a  Persian 
custom  of  holding  up  a  branch  before  the  face,  lest  the 
breath  of  the  worshipper  should  contaminate  the  purity  of 

16— Vol.  IV. 


In  the  arrangement  of  the  four  specimens  of 
the  religious  practices  which  prevailed  in  Jeru- 
salem, Ezekiel  seems  to  proceed  from  the  most 
familiar  and  explicable  to  the  more  outlandish 
defections  from  the  purity  of  the  national 
faith.  At  the  same  time  his  description 
shows  how  different  classes  of  society  were 
implicated  in  the  sin  of  idolatry — the  el- 
ders, the  women,  and  the  priests.  During 
all  this  time  the  glory  of  Jehovah  has  stood 
in  the  court,  and  there  is  something  very  im- 
pressive in  the  picture  of  these  infatuated  men 
and  women  preoccupied  with  their  unholy  devo- 
tions and  all  unconscious  of  the  presence  of  Him 
whom  they  deemed  to  have  forsaken  the  land. 
To  the  open  eye  of  the  prophet  the  meaning  of 
the  vision  must  be  already  clear,  but  the  sen- 
tence comes  from  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  Himself: 
"  Hast  thou  seen,  Son  of  man?  Is  it  too  small  a 
thing  for  the  house  of  Judah  to  practise  the 
abominations  which  they  have  here  practised, 
that  they  must  also  fill  the  land  with  violence, 
and  (so)  provoke  Me  again  to  anger?  So  will  I 
act  towards  them  in  anger:  My  eye  shall  not 
pity,  nor  will  I  spare  "  (viii.  17,  18). 

The  last  words  introduce  the  account  of  the 
punishment  o''  Jerusalem,  which  is  given  of 
course  in  the  symbolic  form  suggested  by  the 
scenery  of  the  vision.  Jehovah  has  meanwhile 
risen  from  His  throne  near  the  cherubim,  and 
stands  on  the  threshold  of  the  Temple.  There 
He  summons  to  His  side  the  destroyers  who  are 
to  execute  His  purpose — six  angels,  each  with  a 
weapon  of  destruction  in  his  hand.  A  seventh 
of  higher  rank  clothed  in  linen  appears  with  the 
implements  of  a  scribe  in  his  girdle.  These 
stand  "  beside  the  brasen  altar,"  and  await  the 
commands  of  Jehovah.  The  first  act  of  the  judg- 
ment is  a  massacre  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  city, 
without  distinction  of  age  or  rank  or  sex.  But, 
in  accordance  with  his  strict  view  of  the  Divine 
righteousness,  Ezekiel  is  led  to  cwonceive  of  this 
last  judgment  as  discriminating  carefully  between 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  All  those  who 
have  inwardly  separated  themselves  from  the 
guilt  of  the  city  by  hearty  detestation  of  the  in- 
iquities perpetrated  in  its  midst  are  distinguished 
by  a  mark  on  their  foreheads  before  the  work 
of  slaughter  begins.  What  became  of  this  faith- 
ful remnant  it  does  not  belong  to  the  vision  to  de- 
clare. Beginning  with  the  twenty  men  before  the 
porch,  the  destroying  angels  follow  the  man  with 
the  inkhorn  through  the  streets  of  the  city,  and 
slay  all  on  whom  ne  has  not  set  his  mark.  When 
the  messengers  have  gone  out  on  their  dread 
errand,  Ezekiel,  realising  the  full  horror  of  a 
scene  which  he  dare  not  describe,  falls  prostrate 
before  Jehovah,  deprecating  the  outbreak  of  in- 
dignation which  threatened  to  extinguish  "  the 
remnant  of  Israel."  He  is  reassured  by  the  dec- 
laration that  the  guilt  of  Judah  ana  Israel  de- 
mands no  less  a  punishment  than  this,  because 
the  notion  that  Jehovah  had  forsaken  the  b'ld 
had  opened  the  floodgates  of  iniquity,  and  filled 
the  land  with  bloodshed  and  the  city  with  oppres- 
sion. Then  the  man  in  the  linen  robes  returns 
and  announces,  "  It  is  done  as  Thou  hast  com- 
manded." 

the  deity.  But  Persia  had  not  yet  plaved  any  great  part 
in  history,  and  it  is  hardly  credible  that  a  distinctively 
Persian  custom  should  have  found  its  way  into  the  ritual 
of  Jerusalem.  Moreover,  the  words  do  not  occur  in  the 
description  of  the  sun-worshippers,  hor  do  they  refer 
particularly  to  them. 


242 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


The  second  act  of  the  judgment  is  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  by  fire.  This  is  symboHsed  by 
the  scattering  over  the  city  of  burning  coals 
taken  from  the  altar-hearth  under  the  throne  of 
God.  The  man  with  the  linen  garments  is  di- 
rected to  step  between  the  wheels  and  take  out 
fire  for  this  purpose.  The  description  of  the  ex- 
ecution of  this  order  is  again  carried  no  further 
than  what  actually  takes  place  before  the  proph- 
et's eyes:  the  man  took  the  fire  and  went  out. 
In  the  place  where  we  might  have  expected  to 
have  an  account  of  the  destruction  of  the  city, 
we  have  a  second  description  of  the  appearance 
and  motions  of  the  merkaba,  the  purpose  of  which 
it  is  difficult  to  divine.  Although  it  deviates 
slightly  from  the  account  in  chap,  i.,  the  differ- 
ences appear  to  have  no  significance,  and  indeed 
it  is  expressly  said  to  be  the  same  phenomenon. 
The  whole  passage  is  certainly  superfluous, 
and  might  be  omitted  but  for  the  difficulty  of 
imagining  any  motive  that  would  have  tempted 
a  scribe  to  insert  it.  We  must  keep  in  mind  the 
possibility  that  this  part  of  the  book  had  been 
committed  to  writing  before  the  final  redaction 
of  Ezekiel's  prophecies,  and  the  description  in 
vv.  8-17  may  have  served  a  purpose  there  which 
is  superseded  by  the  fuller  narrative  which  we 
now  possess  in  chap.   i. 

In  this  way  Ezekiel  penetrates  more  deeply 
into  the  inner  meaning  of  the  judgment  on  city 
and  people  whose  external  form  he  had  an- 
nounced in  his  earlier  prophecy.  It  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  Jehovah's  strange  work  bears  to  our 
minds  a  more  appalling  aspect  when  thus  pre- 
sented in  symbols  than  the  actual  calamity  would 
bear  when  effected  through  the  agency  of  sec- 
ond causes.  Whether  it  had  the  same  effect  on 
the  mind  of  a  Hebrew,  who  hardly  believed  in 
second  causes,  is  another  question.  In  any  case 
it  gives  no  ground  for  the  charge  made  against 
Ezekiel  of  dwelling  with  a  malignant  satisfaction 
on  the  most  repulsive  features  of  a  terrible  pic- 
ture. He  is  indeed  capable  of  a  rigorous  logic 
in  exhibiting  the  incidence  of  the  law  of  retribu- 
tion which  was  to  him  the  necessary  expression 
of  the  Divine  righteousness.  That  it  included 
the  death  of  every  sinner  and  the  overthrow  of 
a  city  that  had  become  a  scene  of  violence  and 
cruelty  was  to  him  a  self-evident  truth,  and  more 
than  this  the  vision  does  not  teach.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  contains  traits  which  tend  to  moderate 
the  inevitable  harshness  of  the  truth  conveyed. 
With  great  reticence  it  allows  the  execution  of 
the  judgment  to  take  pkce  behind  the  scenes, 
giving  only  those  details  which  were  necessary 
to  suggest  its  nature.  While  it  is  being  carried 
out  the  attention  of  the  reader  is  engaged  in 
the  presence  of  Jehovah,  or  his  mind  is  occu- 
pied with  the  principles  which  made  the  punish- 
ment a  moral  necessity.  The  prophet's  expostu- 
lations with  Jehovah  show  that  he  was  not  in- 
sensible to  the  miseries  of  his  people,  although 
he  saw  them  to  be  inevitable.  Further,  this 
vision  shows  as  clearly  as  any  passage  in  his 
writings  the-  injustice  of  the  view  which  repre- 
sents him  as  more  concerned  for  petty  details  of 
ceremonial  than  for  the  great  moral  interests  of 
a  nation.  If  any  feeling  expressed  in  the  vision 
is  to  be  regarded  as  Ezekiel's  own,  then  indig- 
nation against  outrages  on  human  life  and 
liberty  must  be  allowed  to  weigh  more  with 
him  than  ofifences  against  ritual  purity.  And, 
finally,  it  is  clearly  one  object  of  the  vision  to 
show  that  in  the   destruction   of  Jerusalem  no 


individual  shall  be  involved  who  is  not  also 
implicated  in  the  guilt  which  calls  down  wrath 
upon  her. 

li. 

The  second  part  of  the  vision  (chap,  xi.)  is  but 
loosely  connected  with  the  first.  Here  Jerusalem 
still  exists,  and  men  are  alive  who  must  certainly 
have  perished  in  the  "  visitation  of  the  city  "  if 
the  writer  had  still  kept  himself  within  the  limits 
of  his  previous  conception.  But  in  truth  the  two 
have  little  in  common,  except  the  Temple,  which 
is  the  scene  of  both,  and  the  cherubim,  whose 
movements  mark  the  transition  from  the  one  to 
the  other.  The  glory  of  Jehovah  is  already  de- 
parting from  the  house  when  it  is  stayed  at  the 
entrance  of  the  east  gate,  to  give  the  prophet  his 
special  message  to  the  exiles. 

Here  we  are  introduced  to  the  more  political 
aspect  of  the  situation  in  Jerusalem.  The  twenty- 
five  men  who  are  gathered  in  the  east  gate  of 
the  Temple  are  clearly  the  leading  statesmen  in 
the  city;  and  two  of  them,  whose  names  are 
given,  are  expressly  designated  as  "  princes  of 
the  people."  They  are  apparently  met  in  con- 
clave to  deliberate  on  public  matters,  and  a  word 
from  Jehovah  lays  open  to  the  prophet  the  nature 
of  their  projects.  "  These  are  the  men  that  plan 
ruin,  and  hold  evil  counsel  in  this  city."  The 
evil  counsel  is  undoubtedly  the  project  of  rebel- 
lion against  the  king  of  Babylon  which  must 
have  been  hatched  at  this  time  and  which  broke 
out  into  open  revolt  about  three  years  later.  The 
counsel  was  evil  because  directly  opposed  to  that 
which  Jeremiali  was  giving  at  the  time  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  But  Ezekiel  also  throws  in- 
valuable light  on  the  mood  of  the  men  who  were 
urging  the  king  along  the  path  which  led  to  ruin. 
"  Are  not  the  houses  recently  built?  "  *  they  say, 
congratulating  themselves  on  their  success  in  re- 
pairing the  damage  done  to  the  city  in  the  time 
of  Jehoiachin.  The  image  of  the  pot  and  the 
flesh  is  generally  taken  to  express  the  feeling  of 
easy  security  in  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem 
with  which  these  light-hearted  politicians  em- 
barked on  a  contest  with  Nebuchadnezzar.  But 
their  mood  must  be  a  gloomier  one  than  that  if 
there  is  any  appropriateness  in  the  language  they 
use.  To  stew  in  their  own  juice,  and  over  a  fire 
of  their  own  kindling,  could  hardly  seem  a  de- 
sirable policy  to  sane  men,  however  strong  the 
pot  might  be.  These  councillors  are  well  aware 
of  the  dangers  they  incur,  and  of  the  misery 
which  their  purpose  must  necessarily  bring  on 
the  people.  But  they  are  determined  to  hazard 
everything  and  endure  everything  on  the  chance 
that  the  city  may  prove  strong  enough  to  baffle 
the  resources  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  Once  the 
fire  is  kindled,  it  will  certainly  be  better  to  be  in 
the  pot  than  in  the  fire;  and  so  long  as  Jerusalem 
holds  out  they  will  remain  behind  her  walls.  The 
answer  which  is  put  into  the  prophet's  mouth 
is  that  the  issue  vnll  not  be  such  as  they  hope 
for.  The  only  "  flesh  "  that  will  be  left  in  the 
city  will  be  the  dead  bodies  of  those  who  have 
been  slain  within  her  walls  by  the  very  men  who 
hope  that  their  lives  will  be  given  them  for  a 
prey.  They  themselves  shall  be  dragged  forth  to 
meet  their  fate  far  away  from  Jerusalem  on  the 
"  borders  of  Israel."  It  is  not  unlikely  that  these 
conspirators  kept  their  word.  Although  the  king 
and  all  the  men  of  war  fled  from  the  city  as  soon 
*  Following  the  LXX. 


Ezekiel  viii  -xi.j 


YOUR    HOUSE    IS    LEFT    DESOLATE. 


243 


as  a  breach  was  made,  we  read  of  certain  high 
officials  who  allowed  themselves  to  be  taken  in 
the  city  (Jer.  Hi.  7).  Ezekiel's  prophecy  was  in 
their  case  literally  fulfilled;  for  these  men  and 
many  others  were  brought  to  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon at  Riblah,  "  and  he  smote  them  and  put  them 
to  death  at  Riblah  in  the  land  of  Hamath." 

While  Ezekiel  was  uttering  this  prophecy  one 
of  the  councillors,  named  Pelatiah,  suddenly  fell 
down  dead.  Whether  a  man  of  this  name  had 
suddenly  died  in  Jerusalem  under  circumstances 
that  had  deeply  impressed  the  prophet's  mind, 
or  whether  the  death  belongs  to  the  vision,  it  is 
impossible  for  us  to  tell.  To  Ezekiel  the  occur- 
rence seemed  an  earnest  of  the  complete  destruc- 
tion of  the  remnant  of  Israel  by  the  wrath  of 
God,  and.  as  before,  he  fell  on  his  face  to  inter- 
cede for  them.  It  is  then  that  he  receives  the 
message  which  seems  to  form  the  Divine  answer 
to  the  perplexities  which  haunted  the  minds  of 
the  exiles  in  Babylon. 

In  their  attitude  towards  the  exiles  the  new 
leaders  in  Jerusalcfm  took  up  a  position  as  highly 
privileged  religious  persons,  quite  at  variance 
with  the  scepticism  which  governed  their  con- 
duct at  home.  When  they  were  following  the 
bent  of  their  natural  inclinations  by  practising 
idolatry  and  perpetrating  judicial  murders  in  the 
city,  their  cry  was,  "  Jehovah  hath  forsaken  the 
land;  Jehovah  seeth  it  not."  When  they  were 
eager  to  justify  their  claim  to  the  places  and  pos- 
sessions left  vacant  by  their  banished  country- 
men, they  said,  "They  are  far  from  Jehovah:  to 
us  the  land  is  given  in  possession."  They  were 
probably  equally  sincere  and  equally  insincere  in 
both  professions.  They  had  simply  learned  the 
art  which  comes  easily  to  men  of  the  world  of 
using  religion  as  a  cloak  for  greed,  and  throw- 
ing it  of¥  when  greed  could  be  best  gratified  with- 
out it.  The  idea  which  lay  under  their  religious 
attitude  was  that  the  exiles  had  gone  into  cap- 
tivity because  their  sins  had  incurred  Jehovah's 
anger,  and  that  now  His  wrath  was  exhausted 
and  the  blessing  of  His  favour  would  rest  on 
those  who  had  been  left  in  the  land.  There  was 
sufficient  plausibility  in  the  taunt  to  make  it  pecu- 
liarly galling  to  the  mind  of  the  exiles,  who  had 
hoped  to  exercise  some  influence  over  the  gov- 
ernment in  Jerusalem,  and  to  find  their  places 
kept  for  them  when  they  should  be  permitted  to 
return.  It  may  well  have  been  the  resentment 
produced  by  tidings  of  this  hostility  towards 
them  in  Jerusalem  that  brought  their  elders  to 
the  house  of  Ezekiel  to  see  if  he  had  not  some 
message  from  Jehovah  to  reassure  them. 

In  the  mind  of  Ezekiel,  however,  the  problem 
took  another  form.  To  him  a  return  to  the  old 
Jerusalem  had  no  meaning;  neither  buyer  nor 
seller  should  have  cause  to  congratulate  himself 
on  his  position.  The  possession  of  the  land  of 
Israel  belonged  to  those  in  whom  Jehovah's  ideal 
of  the  new  Israel  was  realised,  and  the  only  ques- 
tion of  religious  importance  was.  Where  is  the 
germ  of  this  new  Israel  to  be  found?  Amongst 
those  who  survive  the  judgment  in  the  old  land, 
or  amongst  those  who  have  experienced  it  in  the 
form  of  banishment?  On  this  point  the  prophet 
receives  an  explicit  revelation  in  answer  to  his 
intercession  for  "  the  remnant  of  Israel."  "  Son 
of  man,  thy  brethren,  thy  brethren,  thy  fellow- 
captives,  and  the  whole  house  of  Israel  of  whom 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  have  said.  They  are 
far  from  Jehovah:  to  us  it  is  given — the  land  for 
an     inheritance!    ....    Because     I     have     re- 


moved them  far  among  the  nations,  and 
have  scattered  them  among  the  lands,  and 
have  been  to  them  but  little  of  a  sanc- 
tuary in  the  lands  where  they  have  gone, 
therefore  say.  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  so  will 
I  gather  you  from  the  peoples,  and  bring  you 
from  the  lands  where  ye  have  been  scattered, 
and  will  give  you  the  land  of  Israel."  The  dif- 
ficult expression  "  I  have  been  but  little  of  a 
sanctuary  "  refers  to  the  curtailment  of  religious 
privileges  and  means  of  access  to  Jehovah  which 
was  a  necessary  consequence  of  exile.  It  implies, 
however,  that  Israel  in  banishment  had  learned 
in  some  measure  to  preserve  that  separation  from 
other  peoples  and  that  peculiar  relation  to  Je- 
hovah which  constituted  its  national  holiness. 
Religion  perhaps  perishes  sooner  from  the  over- 
growth of  ritual  than  from  its  deficiency.  It  is 
an  historical  fact  that  the  very  meagreness  of  the 
religion  which  could  be  practised  in  exile  was  the 
means  of  strengthening  the  more  spiritual  and 
permanent  elements  which  constitute  the  essence 
of  religion.  The  observances  which  could  be 
maintained  apart  from  the  Temple  acquired  an 
importance  which  they  never  afterwards  lost; 
and  although  some  of  these,  such  as  circum- 
cision, the  Passover,  the  abstinence  from  forbid- 
den food,  were  purely  ceremonial,  others,  such 
as  prayer,  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  com- 
mon worship  of  the  synagogue,  represent  the 
purest  and  most  indispensable  forms  in  w'hich 
communion  with  God  can  find  expression.  That 
Jehovah  Himself  became  even  in  small  measure 
what  the  word  "  sanctuary "  denotes  indicates 
an  enrichment  of  the  religious  consciousness  of 
which  perhaps  Ezekiel  himself  did  not  perceive 
the  full  import. 

The  great  lesson  which  Ezekiel's  message 
seeks  to  impress  on  his  hearers  is  that  the  tenure 
of  the  land  of  Israel  depends  on  religious  condi- 
tions. The  land  is  Jehovah's,  and  He  bestows 
it  on  those  who  are  prepared  to  use  it  as  His 
holiness  demands.  A  pure  land  inhabited  by  a 
pure  people  is  the  ideal  that  underlies  all  Eze- 
kiel's visions  of  the  future.  It  is  evident  that  in 
such  a  conception  of  the  relation  between  God 
and  His  people  ceremonial  conditions  must  oc- 
cupy a  conspicuous  place.  The  sanctity  of  the 
land  is  necessarily  of  a  ceremonial  order,  and  so 
the  sanctity  of  the  people  must  consist  partly  in 
a  scrupulous  regard  for  ceremonial  requirements. 
But  after  all  the  condition  of  the  land  with  re- 
spect to  purity  or  uncleanness  only  reflects  the 
character  of  the  nation  whose  home  it  is.  The 
things  that  defile  a  land  are  such  things  as  idols 
and  other  emblems  of  heathenism,  innocent 
blood  unavenged,  and  unnatural  crimes  of  vari- 
ous kinds.  These  things  derive  their  whole  sig- 
nificance from  the  state  of  mind  and  heart  which 
they  embody;  they  are  the  plain  and  palpable 
emblems  of  human  sin.  It  is  conceivable  that  to 
some  minds  the  outward  emblems  may  have 
seemed  the  true  seat  of  evil,  and  their  removal  an 
end  in  itself  apart  from  the  direction  of  the  will 
by  which  it  was  brought  about.  But  it  would  be 
a  mistake  to  charge  Ezekiel  with  any  such  ob- 
liquity of  moral  vision.  Although  he  conceives 
sin  as  a  defilement  that  leaves  its  mark  on  the 
material  world,  he  clearly  teaches  that  its  essence 
lies  in  the  opposition  of  the  human  will  to  the 
will  of  God.  The  ceremonial  purity  required  of 
every  Israelite  is  only  the  expression  of  certain 
aspects  of  Jehovah's  holy  nature,  the  bearing  of 
which  on  man's  spiritual  life  may  have  been  ob- 


244 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


scure  to  the  prophet,  and  is  still  more  obscure  to 
us.  And  the  truly  valuable  element  in  compli- 
ance with  such  rules  was  the  obedience  to  Je- 
hovah's expressed  will  which  flowed  from  a  na- 
ture in  sympathy  with  His.  Hence  in  this  chap- 
ter, while  the  first  thing  that  the  restored  exiles 
have  to  do  is  to  cleanse  the  land  of  its  abomi- 
nations, this  act  will  be  the  expression  of  a  na- 
ture radically  changed,  doing  the  will  of  God 
from  the  heart.  As  the  emblems  of  idolatry  that 
defile  the  land  were  the  outcome  of  an  irresist- 
ible national  tendency  to  evil,  so  the  new  and 
sensitive  spirit,  taking  on  the  impress  of  Jeho- 
vah's holiness  through  the  law,  shall  lead  to  the 
purification  of  the  land  from  those  things  that 
had  provoked  the  eyes  of  His  glory.  ''  They 
shall  come  thither,  and  remove  thence  all  its  de- 
testable things  and  all  its  abominations.  And  I 
will  give  them  another  heart,  and  put  a  new 
spirit  within  them.  I  will  take  away  the  stony 
heart  from  their  flesh,  and  give  them  a  heart  of 
flesh:  that  they  may  walk  in  My  statutes,  and 
keep  My  judgments,  and  do  them:  and  so  shall 
they  be  My  people,  and  I  will  be  their  God " 
(xi.  18-20). 

Thus  in  the  mind  of  the  prophet  Jerusalem 
and  its  Temple  are  already  virtually  destroyed. 
He  seemed  to  linger  in  the  Temple  court  until 
he  saw  the  chariot  of  Jehovah  withdrawn  from 
the  city  as  a  token  that  the  glory  had  departed 
from  Israel.  Then  the  ecstasy  passed  away,  and 
he  found  himself  in  the  presence  of  the  men  to 
whom  the  hope  of  the  future  had  been  offered, 
but  who  were  as  yet  unworthy  to  receive  it. 


CHAPTER  VH. 

THE  END  OF   THE  MONARCHY. 

EzEKiEL  xii.  I  15,  xvii.,  xix. 

In  spite  of  the  interest  excited  by  Ezekiel's 
prophetic  appearances,  the  exiles  still  received 
his  prediction  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  with  the 
most  stolid  incredulity.  It  proved  to  be  an  im- 
possible task  to  disabuse  their  minds  of  the  pre- 
possessions which  made  such  an  event  absolutely 
incredible.  True  to  their  character  as  a  disobe- 
dient house,  they  had  "  eyes  to  see,  and  saw  not; 
and  ears  to  hear,  but  heard  not"  (xii.  2).  They 
were  intensely  interested  in  the  strange  signs  he 
performed,  and  listened  with  pleasure  to  his  fer- 
vid oratory;  but  the  inner  meaning  of  it  all  never 
sank  into  their  minds.  Ezekiel  was  well  aware 
that  the  cause  of  this  obtuseness  lay  in  the  false 
ideals  which  nourished  an  overweening  confi- 
dence in  the  destiny  of  their  nation.  And  these 
ideals  were  the  more  difficult  to  destroy  because 
they  each  contained  an  element  of  truth,  so  in- 
terwoven with  the  falsehood  that  to  the  mind  of 
the  people  the  true  and  the  false  stood  and  fell 
together.  If  the  great  vision  of  chaps,  viii.-xi. 
had  accomplished  its  purpose,  it  would  doubt- 
less have  taken  away  the  main  support  of  these 
delusive  imaginations.  But  the  belief  in  the'  in- 
destructibility of  the  Temple  was  only  one  of 
a  number  of  roots  through  which  the  vain  con- 
fidence of  the  nation  was  fed;  and  so  long  as  any 
of  these  remained  the  people's  sense  of  security 
was  likely  to  remain.  These  spurious  ideals, 
therefore,  Ezekiel  sets  himself  with  characteristic 
thoroughness  to  demolish,  one  after  another. 

This  appears  tp  be  in  the  main  the  purpose  of 


the  third  subdivision  of  his  prophecies  on  whicli 
we  now  enter.  It  extends  from  chap.  xii.  to  chap, 
xix.;  and  in  so  far  as  it  can  be  taken  to  represent 
a  phase  of  his  actual  spoken  ministry,  it  must  be 
assigned  to  the  fifth  year  before  the  capture  of 
Jerusalem  (August,  591-August,  590  b.  c).  But 
since  the  passage  is  an  exposition  of  ideas  more 
than  a  narrative  of  experiences,  we  may  expect  to 
find  that  chronological  consistency  has  been  even 
less  observed  than  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  book. 
Each  idea  is  presented  in  the  completeness  which 
it  finally  possessed  in  the  prophet's  mind,  and  his 
allusions  may  anticipate  a  state  of  things  which 
had  not  actually  arisen  till  a  somewhat  later  date. 
Beginning  with  a  aescription  and  interpretation 
of  two  symbolic  actions  intended  to  impress  more 
vividly  on  the  people  the  certainty  of  the  impend- 
ing catastrophe,  the  prophet  proceeds  in  a  series 
of  set  discourses  to  expose  the  hollowness  of  the 
illusions  which  his  fellow-exiles  cherished,  such 
as  disbelief  in  prophecies  of  evil,  faith  in  the  des- 
tiny of  Israel,  veneration  for  the  Davidic  king 
dom,  and  reliance  on  the  solidarity  of  the  nation 
in  sin  and  in  judgment.  These  are  the  principal 
topics  which  the  course  of  exposition  will  bring 
before  us,  and  in  dealing  with  them  it  will  be 
convenient  to  depart  from  the  order  in  which 
they  stand  in  the  book  and  adopt  an  arrangement 
according  to  subject.  By  so  doing  we  run  the 
risk  of  missing  the  order  of  the  ideas  as  it  pre- 
sented itself  to  the  prophet's  mind,  and  of  ig- 
noring the  remarkable  skill  with  which  the  tran- 
sition from  one  theme  to  another  is  frequently 
effected.  But  if  we  have  rightly  understood  the 
scope  of  the  passage  as  a  whole,  this  will  not  pre- 
vent us  from  grasping  the  substance  of  his  teach- 
ing or  its  bearing  on  the  final  message  which  he 
had  to  deliver.  In  the  present  chapter  we  shall 
accordingly  group  together  three  passages  which 
deal  with  the  fate  of  the  monarchy,  and  es- 
pecially of  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah. 

That  reverence  for  the  royal  house  would  form 
an  obstacle  to  the  acceptance  of  such  teaching  as 
Ezekiel's  was  to  be  expected  from  all  we  know 
of  the  popular  feeling  on  this  subject.  The  fact 
that  a  few  royal  assassinations  which  stain  t'he 
annals  of  Judah  were  sooner  or  later  avenged  by 
the  people  shows  that  the  monarchy  was  re- 
garded as  a  pillar  of  the  state,  and  that  great  im- 
portance was  attached  to  the  possession  of  a  dy- 
nasty which  perpetuated  the  glories  of  David's 
reign.  And  there  is  one  verse  in  the  Book  of 
Lamentations  w*hich  expresses  the  anguish  Which 
the  fall  of  the  kingdom  caused  to  godly  men  in 
Israel,  although  its  representatives  were  so  un- 
worthy of  his  office  as  Zedekiah:  "The  breath 
of  our  nostrils,  the  anointed  of  Jehovah,  was 
taken  in  their  pits,  of  whom  we  said.  Under  his 
shadow  shall  we  live  among  the  nations  "  (Lam. 
iv.  20).  So  long  therefore  as  a  descendant  of 
David  sat  on  the  throne  of  Jerusalem  it  would 
seem  the  duty  of  every  patriotic  Israelite  to  re- 
main true  to  him.  The  continuance  of  the  mon- 
archy would  seem  to  guarantee  the  existence  of 
the  state;  the  prestige  of  Zedekiah's  position  as 
the  anointed  of  Jehovah,  and  the  heir  of  David's 
covenant,  would  warrant  the  hope  that  even  yet 
Jehovah  would  intervene  to  save  an  institution  of 
His  own  creating.  Indeed,  we  can  see  from  Eze- 
kiel's own  pages  that  the  historic  monarchy  in 
Israel  was  to  him  an  object  of  the  highest  venera- 
tion and  regard.  He  speaks  of  its  dignity  in 
terms  whose  very  exaggeration  shows  how 
largely  the  fact  bulked  in  his  imagination.     He 


Ezekielxii.,  xvii.,  xix.]         THE    END    OF    THE    MONARCHY. 


245 


compares  it  to  the  noblest  of  the  wild 
beasts  of  the  earth  and  the  most  lordly 
tree  of  the  forest.  But  his  contention  is 
that  this  monarchy  no  longer  exists.  Ex- 
cept in  one  doubtful  passage,  he  never  applies 
the  title  king  (mclek)  to  Zedekiah.  The  kingdom 
came  to  an  end  with  the  deportation  of  Jehoia- 
chin,  the  last  king  who  ascended  the  throne  in 
legitimate  succession.  The  present  holder  of  the 
office  is  in  no  sense  king  by  Divine  right;  he  is- 
a  creature  and  vassal  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  has 
no  rights  against  his  suzerain.*  His  very  name 
has  been  changed  by  the  caprice  of  his  master. 
As  a  religious  symbol,  therefore,  the  royal  power 
is  defunct;  the  glory  has  departed  from  it  as 
surely  as  from  the  Temple.  The  makeshift  ad- 
ministration organised  under  Zedekiah  had  a 
peaceful  if  inglorious  future  before  it,  if  it  were 
content  to  recognise  facts  and  adapt  itself  to  its 
humble  position.  But  if  it  should  attempt  to  raise 
its  head  and  assert  itself  as  an  independent  king- 
dom, it  would  only  seal  its  own  doom.  And  for 
men  in  Chaldea  to  transfer  to  this  shadow  of 
kingly  dignity  the  allegiance  due  to  the  heir  of 
David's  house  was  a  waste  of  devotion  as  little 
demanded  by  patriotism  as  by  prudence. 


The  first  of  the  passages  in  which  the  fate  of 
the  monarchy  is  foretold  requires  little  to  be  said 
by  way  of  explanation.  It  is  a  symbolic  action  of 
the  kind  with  which  we  are  now  familiar,  exhib- 
iting the  certainty  of  the  fate  in  store  both  for 
the  people  and  the  king.  The  prophet  again  be- 
comes a  "  sign  "  or  portent  to  the  people — this 
time  in  a  character  which  every  one  of  his  audi- 
ence understood  from  recent  experience.  He  is 
seen  by  daylight  collecting  "  articles  of  captiv- 
ity ": — i.  e.,  such  necessary  articles  as  a  person  go- 
ing into  exile  would  try  to  take  with  him — and 
bringing  them  out  to  the  door  of  his  house. 
Then  at  dusk  he  breaks  through  the  wall  with 
his  goods  on  his  shoulder;  and,  with  face  muf- 
fled, he  removes  "  to  another  place."  In  this  sign 
we  have  again  two  different  facts  indicated  by 
a  series  of  not  entirely  congruous  actions.  The 
mere  act  of  carrying  out  his  most  necessary  fur- 
niture and  removing  from  one  place  to  another 
»  suggests  quite  unambiguously  the  captivity  that 
awaits  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem.  But  the  ac- 
cessories of  the  action,  such  as  breaking  through 
the  wall,  the  muffling  of  the  face,  and  the  doing 
of  all  this  by  night,  point  to  quite  a  different 
event — viz.,  Zedekiah's  attempt  to  break  through 
the  Chaldsean  lines  by  night,  his  capture,  his 
blindness,  and  his  imprisonment  in  Babylon. 
The  most  remarkable  thing  in  the  sign  is  the  cir- 
cumstantial manner  in  which  the  details  of  the 
king's  flight  and  capture  are  anticipated  so  long 
before  the  event.  Zedekiah,  as  we  read  in  the 
Second  Book  of  Kings,  as  soon  as  a  breach  was 
made  in  the  walls  by  the  Chaldaeans,  broke  out 
with  a  small  party  of  horsemen,  and  succeeded  in 
reaching  the  plain  of  Jordan.  There  he  was  over- 
taken and  caught,  and  sent  before  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's presence  at  Riblah.  The  Babylonian 
•MUg  punished  his  perfidy  with  a  cruelty  common 
enough  amongst  the  Assyrian  kings:  he  caused 
his  eyes  to  be  put  out,  and  sent  him  thus  to  end 

*  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  the  dirge  of  chap.  xix.  Ezekiel 
ignores  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim.  Is  this  because  he  too 
owed  his  elevation  to  the  intervention  of  a  foreign 
power? 


his  days  in  prison  at  Babylon.  All  this  is  so 
clearly  hinted  at  in  the  signs  that  the  whole  rep- 
resentation is  often  set  aside  as  a  prophecy  after 
the  event.  That  is  hardly  probable,  because  the 
sign  does  not  bear  the  marks  of  having  been  orig- 
inally conceived  with  the  view  of  exhibiting  the 
details  of  Zedekiah's  punishment.  But  since  we 
know  that  the  book  was  written  after  the  event, 
it  is  a  perfectly  fair  question  whether  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  symbols  Ezekiel  may  not  have 
read  into  it  a  fuller  meaning  than  was  present  to 
his  own  mind  at  the  time.  Thus  the  covering 
of  his  head  does  not  necessarily  suggest  anything 
more  than  the  king's  attempt  to  disguise  his  per- 
son.* Possibly  this  was  all  that  Ezekiel  origi- 
nally meant  by  it.  When  the  event  took  place 
he  perceived  a  further  meaning  in  it  as  an  allu- 
sion to  the  blindness  inflicted  on  the  king,  and 
introduced  this  into  the  explanation  given  of 
the  symbol.  The  point  of  it  lies  in  the  degrada- 
tion of  the  king  through  his  being  reduced  to 
such  an  ignominious  method  of  securing  his  per- 
sonal safety.  "  The  prince  that  is  among  them 
shall  bear  upon  his  shoulder  in  the  darkness,  and 
shall  go  forth:  they  shall  dig  through  the  wall 
to  carry  out  thereby:  he  shall  cover  his  face,  that 
he  may  not  be  seen  by  any  eye,  and  he  himself 
shall  not  see  the  earth  "  (xii.  12). 


II. 

In  chap.  xvii.  the  fate  of  the  monarchy  is  dealt 
with  at  greater  length  under  the  form  of  an  al- 
legory. The  kingdom  of  Judah  is  represented  as 
a  cedar  in  Lebanon — a  comparison  which  shows 
how  exalted  were  Ezekiel's  conceptions  of  the 
dignity  of  the  old  regime  which  had  now  passed 
away.  But  the  leading  shoot  of  the  tree  has  been 
cropped  ofif  by  a  great,  broad-winged,  speckled 
eagle,  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  carried  away  to 
a  "  land  of  traffic,  a  city  of  merchants."  t  The 
insignificance  of  Zedekiah's  government  is  indi- 
cated by  a  harsh  contrast  which  almost  breaks 
the  consistency  of  the  figure.  In  place  of  the 
cedar  which  he  has  spoiled  the  eagle  plants  a 
low  vine  trailing  on  the  ground,  such  as  may  be 
seen  in  Palestine  at  the  present  day.  His  inten- 
tion was  that  "  its  branches  should  extend  to- 
wards him  and  its  roots  be  under  him  " — i.  e., 
that  the  new  principality  should  derive  all  its 
strength  from  Babylon  and  yield  all  its  produce 
to  the  power  which  nourished  it.  For  a  time  all 
went  well.  The  vine  answered  the  expectations 
of  its  owner,  and  prospt;red  under  the  favourable 
conditions  which  he  had  provided  for  it.  But  an- 
other great  eagle  appeared  on  the  scene,  the  king 
of  Egypt,  and  the  ungrateful  vine  began  to  send 
out  its  roots  and  turn  its  branches  in  his  direction. 
The  meaning  is  obvious:  Zedekiah  had  sent  pres- 
ents to  Egypt  and  sought  its  help,  and  by  so 
doing  had  violated  the  conditions  of  his  tenure 
of  royal  power.  Such  a  policy  could  not  pros- 
per. "  The  bed  where  it  was  planted  "  was  in 
possession  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  he  could  not 
tolerate  there  a  state,  however  feeble,  which  em- 
ployed the  resources  with  which  he  had  endowed 

♦Especially  if  we  read  ver.  12,  as  in  LXX.,  "  That  he 
may  not  be  seen  by  any  eye,  and  he  shall  not  see  the 
earth.". 

+  By  this  name  for  Chaldasa  Ezekiel  seems  to  express 
his  contempt  for  the  commercial  activity  which  formed  so 
large  an  element  in  the  greatness  of  Babylon  (chap.  xvi.  xg 
R.  v.),  perhaps  also  his  sense  of  the  uncongenial  environ- 
ment in  which  the  disinherited  king  and  the  nobility  of 
Judah  now  found  themselves. 


246 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


it  to  further  the  interests  of  his  rival,  Hophra, 
the  king  of  Egypt.  Its  destruction  shall  come 
from  the  quarter  whence  it  derived  its  origin: 
"  when  the  east  wind  smites  it,  it  shall  wither 
in  the  furrow  where  it  grew." 

Throughout  this  passage  Ezekiel  shows  that 
he  possessed  in  full  measure  that  penetration 
and  detachment  from  local  prejudices  which  all 
the  prophets  exhibit  when  dealing  with  political 
affairs.  The  interpretation  of  the  riddle  contains 
a  statement  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  policy  in  his 
dealings  with  Judah,  whose  impartial  accuracy 
could  not  be  improved  on  by  the  most  dis- 
interested historian.  The  carrying  away  of  the 
Judaean  king  and  aristocracy  was  a  heavy  blow 
to  religious  susceptibilities  which  Ezekiel  fully 
shared,  and  its  severity  was  not  mitigated  by  the 
arrogant  assumptions  by  which  it  was  explained 
in  Jerusalem.  Yet  here  he  shows  himself  capa- 
ble of  contemplating  it  as  a  measure  of  Baby- 
lonian statesmanship  and  of  doing  absolute  jus- 
tice to  the  motives  by  which  it  was  dictated. 
Nebuchadnezzar's  purpose  was  to  establish  a 
petty  state  unable  to  raise  itself  to  independence, 
and  one  on  whose  fidelity  to  his  empire  he  could 
rely.  Ezekiel  lays  great  stress  on  the  solemn 
formalities  by  which  the  great  king  had  bound 
his  vassal  to  his  allegiance:  "  He  took  of  the 
royal  seed,  and  made  a  covenant  with  him,  and 
brought  him  under  a  curse;  and  the  strong  ones 
of  the  land  he  took  away:  that  it  might  be  a 
lowly  kingdom,  not  able  to  lift  itself  up,  to  keep 
his  covenant  that  it  might  stand  "  (vv.  13,  14). 
In  all  this  Nebuchadnezzar  is  conceived  as  act- 
ing within  his  rights;  and  here  lay  the  difference 
between  the  clear  vision  of  the  prophet  and  the 
infatuated  policy  of  his  contemporaries.  The 
politicians  of  Jerusalem  were  incapable  of  thus 
discerning  the  signs  of  the  times.  They  fell  back 
on  the  time-honoured  plan  of  checkmating  Bab- 
ylon by  means  of  an  Egyptian  alliance — a  policy 
which  had  been  disastrous  when  attempted 
against  the  ruthless  tyrants  of  Assyria,  and  which 
was  doubly  imbecile  when  it  brought  down  on 
them  the  wrath  of  a  monarch  who  showed  every 
desire  to  deal  fairly  with  his  subject  provinces. 

The  period  of  intrigue  with  Egypt  had  already 
begun  when  this  prophecy  was  written.  We 
have  no  means  of  knowing  how  long  the  nego- 
tiations went  on  before  the  overt  act  of  re- 
bellion; and  hence  we  cannot  say  with  certainty 
that  the  appearance  of  the  chapter  in  this  part 
of  the  book  is  an  anachronism.  It  is  possible 
that  Ezekiel  may  have  known  of  a  secret  mis- 
sion which  was  not  discovered  by  the  spies  of 
the  Babylonian  court;  and  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  supposing  that  such  a  step  may  have  been 
taken  as  early  as  two  and  a  half  years  before  the 
outbreak  of  hostilities.  At  whatever  time  it 
took  place,  Ezekiel  saw  that  it  sealed  the  doom 
of  the  nation.  He  knew  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
could  not  overlook  such  flagrant  perfidy  as 
Zedekiah  and  his  councillors  had  been  guilty  of; 
he  knew  also  that  Egypt  could  render  no  ef- 
fectual help  to  Jerusalem  in  her  death-struggle. 
"  Not  with  a  strong  army  and  a  great  host  will 
Pharaoh  act  for  him  in  the  war,  when  mounds 
are  thrown  up,  and  the  towers  are  built,  to  cut 
ofif  many  lives"  (ver.  17).  The  writer  of  the 
Lamentations  again  shows  us  how  sadly  the 
prophet's  anticipation  was  verified:  "  As  for  us, 
our  eyes  as  yet  failed  for  our  vain  help:  in  our 
watching  we  have  watched  for  a  nation  that  could 
not  save  us  "  (Lam.  iv.  17). 


But  Ezekiel  will  not  allow  it  to  be  supposed 
that  the  fate  of  Jerusalem  is  merely  the  result  of 
a  mistaken  forecast  of  political  proV)abilities. 
Such  a  mistake  had  been  made  by  Zedekiah's 
advisers  when  they  trusted  to  Egypt  to  deliver 
them  from  Babylon,  and  ordinary  prudence 
might  have  warned  them  against  it.  But  that 
was  the  most  excusable  part  of  their  folly.  The 
thing  that  branded  their  policy  as  infamous  and 
put  them  absolutely  in  the  wrong  before  God  and 
man  alike  was  their  violation  of  the  solemn  oath 
by  which  they  had  bound  themselves  to  serve  the 
king  of  Babylon.  The  prophet  seizes  on  this 
act  of  perjury  as  the  determining  fact  of  the 
situation,  and  charges  it  home  on  the  king  as 
the  cause  of  the  ruin  that  is  to  overtake  him: 
"  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  As  I  live,  surely  My  oath 
which  he  hath  despised,  and  My  covenant  which 
he  has  broken,  I  will  return  on  his  head;  and  I 
will  spread  My  net  over  him,  and  in  My  snare 
shall  he  be  taken,  .  .  .  and  ye  shall  know  that 
I  Jehovah  have  spoken  it"  (vv.  19-21). 

In  the  last  three  verses  of  the  chapter  the 
prophet  returns  to  the  allegory  with  whirfi  he 
commenced,  and  completes  his  oracle  with  a 
beautiful  picture  of  the  ideal  monarchy  of  the 
future.  The  ideas  on  which  the  picture  is 
framed  are  few  and  simple;  but  they  are  those 
which  distinguished  the  Messianic  hope  as  cher- 
ished by  the  prophets  from  the  crude  form  which 
it  assumed  in  the  popular  imagination.  In  con- 
trast to  Zedekiah's  kingdom,  which  was  a  human 
institution  without  ideal  significance,  that  of  the 
Messianic  age  will  be  a  fresh  creation  of  Jeho- 
vah's power.  A  tender  shoot  shall  be  planted 
in  the  mountain  land  of  Israel,  where  it  shall 
flourish  and  increase  until  it  overshadow  the 
whole  earth.  Further,  this  shoot  is  taken  from 
the  "  top  of  the  cedar  " — that  is,  the  section  of 
the  royal  house  which  had  been  carried  away 
to  Babylon — indicating  that  the  hope  of  the  fu- 
ture lay  not  with  the  king  de  facto  Zedekiah,  but 
with  Jehoiachin  and  those  who  shared  his  ban- 
ishment. The  passage  leaves  no  doubt  that 
Ezekiel  conceived  the  Israel  of  the  future  as  a 
state  with  a  monarch  at  its  head,  although  it 
may  be  doubtful  whether  the  shoot  refers  to  a 
personal  Messiah  or  to  the  aristocracy,  who> 
along  with  the  king,  formed  the  governing  body 
in  an  Eastern  kingdom.  This  question,  however, 
can  be  better  considered  when  we  have  to  deal 
with  Ezekiel's  Messianic  conceptions  in  their 
fully  developed  form  in  chap,  xxxiv. 

III. 

Of  the  last  four  kings  of  Judah  there  were  two 
whose  melancholy  fate  seems  to  have  excited  a 
profound  feeling  of  pity  amongst  their  country- 
men. Jehoahaz  or  Shallum,  according  to  the 
Chronicler  the  youngest  of  Josiah's  sons,  ap- 
pears to  have  been  even  during  his  father's  life- 
time a  popular  favourite.  It  was  he  who  after 
the  fatal  day  of  Megiddo  v»'as  raised  to  the 
throne  by  the  "  people  of  the  land  "  at  the  age 
of  twenty-three  years.  He  is  said  by  the  his- 
torian of  the  books  of  Kings  to  have  done  "  that 
which  was  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord";  but  he 
had  hardly  time  to  display  his  qualities  as  a 
ruler  when  he  was  deposed  and  carried  to  Egypt 
by  Pharaoh  Necho,  having  worn  the  crown  for 
only  three  months  (608  B.  c).  The  deep  at- 
tachment felt  for  him  seems  to  have  given  rise 
to  an  expectation  that  he  would  be  restored  to 


Ezekielxii.,  xvii.,  xix.]         THE    END    OF    THE    MONARCHY. 


247 


his  kingdom,  a  delusion  against  which  the 
prophet  Jeremiah  found  it  necessary  to  protest 
(Jer.  xxii.  10-12).  He  was  succeeded  by  his 
elder  brother,  Eliakim,*  the  headstrong  and  self- 
ish tyrant,  whose  character  stands  revealed  in 
some  passages  of  the  books  of  Jeremiah  and 
Habakkuk.  His  reign  of  nine  years  gave  little 
occasion  to  his  subjects  to  cherish  a  grateful 
memory  of  his  administration.  He  died  in  the 
crisis  of  the  conflict  he  had  provoked  with  the 
king  of  Babylon,  leaving  his  youthful  son  Je- 
•hoiachin  to  expiate  the  folly  of  his  rebellion. 
Jehoiachin  is  the  second  idol  of  the  populace  to 
whom  we  have  referred.  He  was  only  eighteen 
years  old  when  he  was  called  to  the  throne,  and 
within  three  months  he  was  doomed  to  exile 
in  Babylon.  In  his  room  Nebuchadnezzar  ap- 
pointed a  third  son  of  Josiah — Mattaniah — whose 
name  he  changed  to  Zedekiah.  He  was  appar- 
ently a  man  of  weak  and  vacillating  character; 
but  he  fell  ultimately  into  the  hands  of  the  Egyp- 
tian and  anti-prophetic  party,  and  so  was  the 
means  of  involving  his  country  in  the  hopeless 
struggle  in  which  it  perished. 

The  fact  that  two  of  their  native  princes  were 
languishing,  perhaps  simultaneously,  in  foreign 
confinement,  one  in  Egypt  and  the  other  in  Bab- 
ylon, was  fitted  to  evoke  in  Judah  a  sympathy 
with  the  misfortunes  of  royalty  something  like 
the  feeling  embalmed  in  the  Jacobite  songs  of 
Scotland.  It  seems  to  be  an  echo  of  this  senti- 
ment that  we  find  in  the  first  part  of  the  lament 
with  which  Ezekiel  closes  his  references  to  the 
fall  of  the  monarchy  (chap.  xix.).  Many  critics 
have  indeed  found  it  impossible  to  suppose  that 
Ezekiel  should  in  any  sense  have  yielded  to  sym- 
pathy with  the  fate  of  two  princes  who  are  both 
branded  in  the  historical  books  as  idolaters,  and 
whose  calamities  on  Ezekiel's  own  view  of  indi- 
vidual retribution  proved  them  to  be  sinners 
against  Jehovah.  Yet  it  is  certainly  unnatural 
to  read  the  dirge  in  any  other  sense  than  as  an 
expression  of  genuine  pity  for  the  woes  that  the 
nation  sufifered  in  the  fate  of  her  two  exiled 
kings.  If  Jeremiah,  in  pronouncing  the  doom 
of  Shallum  or  Jehoahaz,  could  say,  "  Weep  ye 
sore  for  him  that  goeth  away;  for  he  shall  not 
return  any  more,  nor  see  his  native  country," 
there  is  no  reason  why  Ezekiel  should  not  have 
given  lyrical  expression  to  the  universal  feeling 
of  sadness  which  the  blighted  career  of  these 
two  youths  naturally  produced.  The  whole  pas- 
sage is  highly  poetical,  and  represents  a  side  of 
Ezekiel's  nature  which  we  have  not  hitherto  been 
led  to  study.  But  it  is  too  much  to  expect  of 
even  the  most  logical  of  prophets  that  he  should 
experience  no  personal  emotion  but  what  fitted 
into  his  system,  or  that  his  poetic  gift  should  be 
chained  to  the  wheels  of  his  theological  con- 
victions. The  dirge  expresses  no  moral  judg- 
ment on  the  character  or  deserts  of  the  two 
kings  to  which  it  refers:  it  has  but  one  theme — 
the  sorrow  and  disappointment  of  the  "  mother  " 
who  nurtured  and  lost  them,  that  is,  the  nation 
of  Israel,  personified  according  to  a  usual  Hebrew 
figure  of  speech.  All  attempts  to  go  beyond 
this  and  to  find  in  the  poem  an  allegorical  por- 
trait of  Jehoahaz  and  Jehoiachin  are  irrelevant. 
The  mother  is  a  lioness,  the  princes  are  young 
lions  and  behave  as  stalwart  young  lions  do, 
but  whether  their  exploits  are  praiseworthy  or 
the  reverse  is  a  question  that  was  not  present  to 
the  writer's  mind. 

♦  Jehoiakim. 


The  chapter  is  entitled  "  A  Dirge  on  the 
Princes  of  Israel,"  and  embraces  not  only  the 
fate  of  Jehoahaz  and  Jehoiachin,  but  also  of 
Zedekiah,  with  whom  the  old  monarchy  expired. 
Strictly  speaking,  however,  the  name  qhiali,  or 
dirge,  is  applicable  only  to  the  first  part  of  the 
chapter  (vv.  2-9),  where  the  rhythm  character- 
istic of  the  Hebrew  elegy  is  clearly  traceable.* 
With  a  few  slight  changes  of  the  .text  t  the  pas- 
sage may  be  translated  thus: — 

i.  Jehoahaz. 

*' How  was  thy  mother  a  lioness  ! — 

Among  the  lions, 
In  the  midst  of  young  lions  she  couched — 

She  reared  her  cubs; 
And  she  brought  up  one  of  her  cubs — 

A  young  lion  he  became, 
And  he  learned  to  catch  the  prey — 

He  ate  men. 

"  And  nations  raised  a  cry  against  him — 
In  their  pit  he  was  caught; 
And  they  brought  him  with  hooks— 

To  the  land  of  Egypt  (vv.  2-4). 

ii.  Jehoiachin. 

"  And  when  she  saw  that  she  was  disappointed]:— 
Her  hope  was  lost. 

She  took  another  of  her  cubs — 

A  young  lion  she  made  him  ; 

And  he  walked  in  the  midst  of  lions — 
A  young  lion  he  became  ; 

And  he  learned  to  catch  prey- 
He  ate  men. 

"  And  he  lurked  in  his  lair— 

The  forests  he  ravaged  : 
Till  the  land  was  laid  waste  and  its  fulness— 
With  the  noise  of  his  roar. 

"The  nations  arraj'ed  themselves  against  him— 

From  the  countries  around  ; 
'*  And  spread  over  him  their  net- 
In  their  pit  he  was  caught. 
And  they  brought  him  with  hooks— 

To  the  king  of  Babylon  ; 
And  he  put  him  in  a  cage,  .  .  . 
That  his  voice  might  no  more  be  heard — 

On  the  mountains  of  Israel  "  (vv.  s-q). 


The  poetry  here  is  simple  and  sincere.  The 
mournful  cadence  of  the  elegiac  measure,  which 
is  maintained  throughout,  is  adapted  to  the  tone 
of  melancholy  which  pervades  the  passage  and 
culminates  in  the  last  beautiful  line.  The  dirge 
is  a  form  of  composition  often  employed  in  songs 
of  triumph  over  the  calamities  of  enemies;  but 
there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  here  it  is  true 
to  its  original  purpose,  and  expresses  genuine 
sorrow  for  the  accumulated  misfortunes  of  the 
royal  house  of  Israel. 

The  closing  part  of  the  "  dirge  "  dealing  with 
Zedekiah  is  of  a  somewhat  different  character. 
The  theme  is  similar,  but  the  figure  is  abruptly 
changed,  and  the  elegiac  rhythm  is  abandoned. 
The  nation,  the  mother  of  the  monarchy,  is  here 
compared  to  a  luxuriant  vine  planted  beside 
great  waters;  and  the  royal  house  is  likened  to 
a  branch  towering  above  the  rest  and  bearing 
rods  which  were  kingly  sceptres.  But  she  has 
been  plucked  up  by  the  roots,  withered,  scorched 
by  the  fire,  and  finally  planted  in  an  arid  region 
where  she  cannot  thrive.  The  application  of  the 
metaphor  to  the  ruin  of  the  nation  is  very  obvi- 
ous.    Israel,    once    a   prosperous    nation,    richly 

*The  long  line  is  divided  into  two  unequal  parts  by  a 
caesura  over  the  end. 

+  Mostly  adopted  from  Cornill .  The  English  reader  may 
refer  to  Dr.  Davidson's  commentary. 

}  This  word  is  uncertain. 


248 


^THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


endowed  with  all  the  conditions  of  a  vigorous 
national  life,  and  glorying  in  her  race  of  native 
kings,  is  now  humbled  to  the  dust.  Misfortune 
after  misfortune  has  destroyed  her  power  and 
blighted  her  prospects,  till  at  last  she  has  been 
removed  from  her  own  land  to  a  place  where 
national  life  cannot  be  maintained.  But  the 
point  of  the  passage  lies  in  the  closing  words: 
fire  went  out  from  one  of  her  twigs  and  con- 
sumed her  branches,  so  that  she  has  no  longer 
a  proud  rod  to  be  a  ruler's  sceptre  (ver.  14). 
The  monarchy,  once  the  glory  and  strength  of 
Israel,  has  in  its  last  degenerate  representative 
involved  the  nation  in  ruin. 

Such  is  Ezekiel's  final  answer  to  those  of  his 
hearers  who  clung  to  the  old  Davidic  kingdom 
as  their  hope  in  the  crisis  of  the  people's  fate. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

PROPHECY  AND  ITS  ABUSES. 
EzEKiEL  xii.  2i-xiv.   II. 

There  I3  perhaps  nothing  more  perplexing  to 
the  student  of  Old  Testament  history  than  the 
complicated  phenomena  which  may  be  classed 
under  the  general  name  of  "  prophecy."  In  Is- 
rael, as  in  every  ancient  state,  there  was  a  body 
of  men  who  sought  to  influence  public  opinion 
by  prognostications  of  the  future.  As  a  rule  the 
repute  of  all  kinds  of  divination  declined  with 
the  advance  of  civilisation  and  general  intelli- 
gence, so  that  in  the  more  enlightened  communi- 
ties matters  of  importance  came  to  be  decided 
on  broad  grounds  of  reason  and  political  ex- 
pediency. The  peculiarity  in  the  case  of  Israel 
was  that  the  very  highest  direction  in  politics, 
as  well  as  religion  and  morals,  was  given  in  a 
form  capable  of  being  confounded  with  supersti- 
tious practices  which  flourished  alongside  of  it. 
The  true  prophets  were  not  merely  profound 
moral  thinkers,  who  announced  a  certain  issi!ie 
as  the  probable  result  of  a  certain  line  of  con- 
duct. In  many  cases  their  predictions  are  abso- 
lute, and  their  political  programme  is  an  appeal 
to  the  nation  to  accept  the  situation  which  they 
foresee,  as  the  basis  of  its  public  action.  For 
this  reason  prophecy  was  readily  brought  into 
competition  with  practices  with  which  it  had 
really  nothing  in  common.  The  ordinary  indi- 
vidual who  cared  little  for  principles  and  only 
wished  to  know  what  was  likely  to  happen  might 
readily  think  that  one  way  of  arriving  at  knowl- 
edge of  the  future  was  as  good  as  another,  and 
when  the  spiritual  prophet's  anticipations  dis- 
pleased him  he  was  apt  to  try  his  luck  with  the 
sorcerer.  It  is  not  improbable  that  in  the  last 
days  of  the  monarchy  spurious  prophecy  of  vari- 
ous kinds  gained  an  additional  vitality  from  its 
rivalry  with  the  great  spiritual  teachers  who  in 
the  name  of  Jehovah  foretold  the  ruin  of  the 
state. 

This  is  not  the  place  for  an  exhaustive  account 
of  the  varied  developments  in  Israel  of  what 
may  be  broadly  termed  prophetic  manifestations. 
For  the  understanding  of  the  section  of  Ezekiel 
now  before  us  it  will  be  enough  to  distinguish 
three  classes  of  phenomena.  At  the  lowest  end 
of  the  scale  there  was  a  rank  growth  of  pure 
magic  or  sorcery,  the  ruling  idea  of  which  is 
the  attempt  to  control  or  forecast  the  future  by 
occult  arts  which  are  believed  to  influence  the 


supernatural  powers  which  govern  human  des- 
tiny. In  the  second  place  we  have  prophecy  in 
a  stricter  sense — that  is,  the  supposed  revela- 
tion of  the  will  of  the  deity  in  dreams  or 
"  visions  "  or  half-articulate  words  uttered  in  a 
state  of  frenzy.  Last  of  all  there  is  the  true 
prophet,  who,  though  subject  to  extraordinary 
mental  experiences,  yet  had  always  a  clear  and 
conscious  grasp  of  moral  principles,  and  pos- 
sessed an  incommunicable  certainty  that  what 
he  spoke  was  not  his  own  word  but  the  word  of 
Jehovah.  • 

It  is  obvious  that  a  people  subjected  to  such 
influences  as  these  was  exposed  to  temptations 
both  intellectual  and  moral  from  which  modern 
life  is  exempt.  One  thing  is  certain — the  exist- 
ence of  prophecy  did  not  tend  to  simplify  the 
problems  of  national  life  or  individual  conduct. 
We  are  apt  to  think  of  the  great  prophets  as 
men  so  signally  marked  out  by  God  as  His  wit- 
nesses that  it  must  have  been  impossible  for 
any  one  with  a  shred  of  sincerity  to  question 
their  authority.  In  reality  it  was  quite  otherwise. 
It  was  no  more  an  easy  thing  then  than  now  to 
distinguish  between  truth  and  error,  between  the 
voice  of  God  and  the  speculations  of  men. 
Then,  as  now,  divine  truth  had  no  available 
credentials  at  the  moment  of  its  utterance  ex- 
cept its  self-evidencing  power  on  hearts  that 
were  sincere  in  their  desire  to  know  it.  The 
fact  that  truth  came  in  the  guise  of  prophecy  only 
stimulated  the  growth  of  counterfeit  prophecy, 
so  that  only  those  who  were  "of  the  truth"  could 
discern  the  spirits  whether  they  were  of  God. 

The  passage  which  forms  the  subject  of  this 
chapter  is  one  of  the  most  important  passages  of 
the  Old  Testament  in  its  treatment  of  the  errors 
and  abuses  incident  to  a  dispensation  of 
prophecy.  It  consists  of  three  parts:  the  first 
deals  with  difficulties  occasioned  by  the  appar- 
ent failure  of  prophecy  (xii.  21-28);  the  second 
with  the  character  and  doom  of  the  false 
prophets  (chap,  xiii.);  and  the  third  with  the 
state  of  mind  which  made  a  right  use  of  prophecy 
impossible   (xiv.   i-ii). 


It  is  one  of  Ezekiel's  peculiarities  that  he  pays 
close  attention  to  the  proverbial  sayings  which 
indicated  the  drift  of  the  national  mind.  Such 
sayings  were  like  straws,  showing  how  the 
stream  flowed,  and  had  a  special  significance  for 
Ezekiel,  inasmuch  as  he  was  not  in  the  stream 
himself,  but  only  observed  its  motions  from  a 
distance.  Here  he  quotes  a  current  proverb,  giv- 
ing expression  to  a  sense  of  the  futility  of  all 
prophetic  warnings:  "The  days  are  drawn  out, 
and  every  vision  faileth  "  (xii.  22).  It  is  difficult 
to  say  what  the  feeling  is  that  lies  behind  it, 
whether  it  is  one  of  disappointment  or  of  relief. 
If,  as  seems  probable,  ver.  27  is  the  application 
of  the  general  principle  to  the  particular  case 
of  Ezekiel,  the  proverb  need  not  indicate  abso- 
lute disbelief  in  the  truth  of  prophecy.  "  The 
vision  which  he  sees  is  for  many  days,  and  re- 
mote times  does  he  prophesy  " — that  is  to  say. 
The  prophet's  words  are  no  doubt  perfectly  true, 
and  come  from  God;  but  no  man  can  ever  tell 
when  they  are  to  be  fulfilled:  all  experience 
shows  that  they  relate  to  a  remote  future  which 
we  are  not  likely  to  see.  For  men  whose  con- 
cern was  to  find  direction  in  the  present  emer- 


Ezekiel  xii.  21-xiv.  11.] 


PROPHECY    AND    ITS    ABUSES. 


249 


ency,  that  was  no  doubt  equivalent  to  a  re- 
nunciation of  the  guidance  of  prophecy. 

There  are  several  things  which  may  have 
tended  to  give  currency  to  this  view  and  make 
it  plausible.  First  of  all,  of  course,  the  fact  that 
many  of  the  "visions"  that  were  published  had 
nothing  in  them;  they  were  false  in  their  origin, 
and  were  bound  to  fail.  Accordingly  one  thing 
necessary  to  rescue  prophecy  from  the  discredit 
into  which  it  had  fallen  was  the  removal  of  those 
who  uttered  false  predictions  in  the  name  of  Je- 
hovah: "  There  shall  no  more  be  any  false  vision 
or  flattering  divination  in  the  midst  of  the  house 
of  Israel  "  (ver.  24).  But  besides  the-  prevalence 
of  false  prophecy  there  were  features  of  true 
prophecy  which  partly  explained  the  common 
misgiving  as  to  its  trustworthiness.  Even  in 
true  prophecy  there  is  an  element  of  idealism, 
the  future  being  depicted  in  f6rms  derived  from 
the  prophet's  circumstances,  and  represented  as 
the  immediate  continuation  of  the  events  of  his 
own  time.  In  support  of  the  proverb  it  might 
have  been  equally  apt  to  instance  the  M.essianic 
oracles  of  Isaiah,  or  the  confident  predictions 
of  Hananiah,  the  opponent  of  Jeremiah.  Fur- 
ther, there  is  a  contingent  element  in  prophecy: 
the  fulfilment  of  a  threat  or  promise  is  condi- 
tional on  the  moral  effect  of  the  prophecy  itself 
on  the  people.  These  things  were  perfectly  un- 
derstood by  thoughtful  men  in  Israel.  The  prin- 
ciple of  contingency  is  clearly  expounded  in  the 
eighteenth  chapter  of  Jeremiah,  and  it  was  acted 
on  by  the  princes  who  on  a  memorable  occasion 
saved  him  from  the  doom  of  a  false  prophet 
(Jer.  xxvi.).  Those  who  used  prophecy  to  de- 
termine their  practical  attitude  towards  Jeho- 
vah's purposes  found  it  to  be  an  unerring  guide 
to  right  thinking  and  action.  But  those  who 
only  took  a  curious  interest  in  questions  of  ex- 
ternal fulfilment  found  much  to  disconcert  them; 
and  it  is  hardly  surprising  that  many  of  them 
became  utterly  sceptical  of  its  divine  origin.  It 
must  have  been  to  this  turn  of  mind  that  the 
proverb  with  which  Ezekiel  is  dealing  owed  its 
origin. 

It  is  not  on  these  lines,  however,  that  Ezekiel 
vindicates  the  truth  of  the  prophetic  word,  but 
on  lines  adapted  to  the  needs  of  his  own  gen- 
eration. After  all  prophecy  is  not  wholly  con- 
tingent. The  bent  of  the  popular  character  is 
one  of  the  elements  which  it  takes  into  account, 
and  it  foresees  an  issue  which  is  not  dependent 
on  anything  that  Israel  might  do.  The  prophets 
rise  to  a  point  of  view  from  which  the  destruction 
of  the  sinful  people  and  the  establishment  of  a 
perfect  kingdom  of  God  are  seen  to  be  facts 
unalterably  decreed  by  Jehovah.  And  the  point 
of  Ezekiel's  answer  to  his  contemporaries  seems 
to  be  that  a  final  demonstration  of  the  truth  of 
prophecy  was  at  hand.  As  the  fulfilment  drew 
near  prophecy  would  increase  in  distinctness  and 
precision,  so  that  when  the  catastrophe  came  it 
would  be  impossible  for  any  man  to  deny  the 
inspiration  of  those  who  had  announced  it: 
"  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  I  will  suppress  this  prov- 
erb, and  it  shall  no  more  circulate  in  Israel; 
but  say  unto  them.  The  days  are  near,  and  the 
content  [literally  zvord  or  matter]  of  every 
vision  "  (ver.  23).  After  the  extinction  of  every 
form  of  lying  prophecy,  Jehovah's  words  shall 
still  be  heard,  and  the  proclamation  of  them  shall 
be  immediately  followed  by  their  accomplish- 
ment: '■  For  I  Jehovah  will  speak  My  words;  I 
will  speak  and  perform,  it  shall  not  be  deferred 


any  more:  in  your  days,  O  house  of  rebellion, 
I  will  speak  a  word  and  perform  it,  saith  Jeho- 
vah "  (ver.  25).  The  immediate  reference  is  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  which  the  prophet 
saw  to  be  one  of  those  events  which  were  un- 
conditionally decreed,  and  an  event  which  must 
bulk  more  and  more  largely  in  the  vision  of  the 
true  prophet  until  it  was  accomplished. 

II. 

The  thirteenth  chapter  deals  with  what  was 
undoubtedly  the  greatest  obstacle  to  the  influ- 
ence of  prophecy — viz.,  the  existence  of  a  di- 
vision in  the  ranks  of  the  prophets  themselves. 
That  division  had  been  of  long  standing.  The 
earliest  indication  of  it  is  the  story  of  the  con- 
test between  Micaiah  and  four  hundred  prophets 
of  Jehovah,  in  presence  of  Ahab  and  Jehoshaphat 
(i  Kings  xxii.  5-28).  All  the  canonical  prophets 
show  in  their  writings  that  they  had  to  contend 
against  the  mass  of  the  prophetic  order — men 
who  claimed  an  authority  equal  to  theirs,  but 
used  it  for  diametrically  opposite  interests.  It 
is  not,  however,  till  we  come  to  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  N;hat  we  find  a  formal  apologetic  of  true 
prophecy  against  false.  The  problem  was  seri- 
ous: where  two  sets  of  prophets  systematically 
and  fundamentally  contradicted  each  other,  both 
might  be  false,  but  both  could  not  be  true.  The 
prophet  who  was  convinced  of  the  truth  of  his 
own  visions  must  be  prepared  to  account  for 
the  rise  of  false  visions,  and  to  lay  down  some 
criterion  by  which  men  might  discriminate  be- 
tween the  one  and  the  other.  Jereiniah's  treat- 
ment of  the  question  is  of  the  two  perhaps  the 
more  profound  and  interesting.  It  is  thus  sum- 
marised by  Professor  Davidson:  "  In  his  encoun- 
ters with  the  prophets  of  his  day  Jeremiah  op- 
poses them  in  three  spheres — that  of  policy,  that 
of  morals,  and  that  of  personal  experience.  In 
policy  the  genuine  prophets  had  some  fixed 
principles,  all  arising  out  of  the  idea  that  the 
kingdom  of  the  Lord  was  not  a  kingdom  of  this 
world.  Hence  they  opposed  military  prepara- 
tion, riding  on  horses,  and  building  of  fenced 
cities,  and  counselled  trust  in  Jehovah.  .  .  .  The 
false  prophets,  on  the  other  hand,  desired  their 
country  to  be  a  military  power  among  the 
powers  around,  they  advocated  alliance  with  the 
eastern  empires  and  with  Egypt,  and  relied  on 
their  national  strength.  Again,  the  true  prophets 
had  a  stringent  personal  and  state  morality.  In 
their  view  the  true  cause  of  the  destruction  of 
the  state  was  its  immoralities.  But  the  false 
prophets  had  no  such  deep  moral  convictions, 
and  seeing  nothing  unwonted  or  alarming  in  the 
condition  of  things  prophesied  of  '  peace.'  They 
were  not  necessarily  irreligious  men;  but  their 
religion  had  no  truer  insight  into  the  nature 
of  the  God  of  Israel  than  that  of  the  common 
people.  .  .  .  And  finally  Jeremiah  expresses 
his  conviction  that  the  prophets  whom  he  op- 
posed did  not  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the 
Lord  as  he  did:  they  had  not  "his  experiences 
of  the  word  of  the  Lord,  into  whose  counsel  they 
had  not  been  admitted;  and  they  were  without 
that  fellowship  of  mind  with  the  mind  of  Je- 
hovah which  was  the  true  source  of  prophecy. 
Hence  he  satirises  their  pretended  supernatural 
■  dreams,'  and  charges  them  from  conscious 
want  of  any  true  prophetic  word  with  stealing 
words  from  one  another."  * 

*  "  Ezekiel,"  p.  85. 


25° 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


The  passages  in  Jeremiah  on  which  this  state- 
ment is  mainly  founded  may  have  been  known 
to  Ezekiel,  who  in  this  matter,  as  in  so  many 
others,  follows  the  lines  laid  down  by  the  elder 
prophet. 

The  first  thing,  then,  that  deserves  attention 
in  Ezekiel's  judgment  on  false  prophecy  is  his 
assertion  of  its  purely  subjective  or  human 
origin.  In  the  opening  sentence  he  pronounces 
a  woe  upon  the  prophets  "  who  prophesy  from 
their  own  mind  without  having  seen  "  *  (ver.  3). 
The  words  put  in  italics  rum  up  Ezekiel's  theory 
of  the  genesis  of  false  prophecy.  The  visions 
these  men  see  and  the  oracles  they  utter  simply 
reproduce  the  thoughts,  the  emotions,  the  aspira- 
tions, natural  to  their  own  minds.  That  the 
ideas  came  to  them  in  a  peculiar  form,  which 
was  mistaken  for  the  direct  action  of  Jehovah, 
Ezekiel  does  not  deny.  He  admits  that  the  men 
were  sincere  in  their  professions,  for  he  describes 
them  as  "  waiting  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  word  " 
(ver.  6).  But  in  this  belief  they  were  the  victims 
of  a  delusion.  Whatever  there  might  be  in  their 
prophetic  experiences  that  resembled  those  of  a 
true  prophet,  there  was  nothing  in  their  oracles 
that  did  not  belong  to  the  sohere  of  worldly 
interests  and  human   speculation. 

If  we  ask  how  Ezekiel  knew'  this,  the  only 
possible  answer  is  that  he  knew  it  because  he  was 
sure  of  the  source  of  his  own  inspiration.  He 
possessed  an  inward  experience  which  certified 
to  him  the  genuineness  of  the  communications 
which  came  to  him,  and  he  necessarily  inferred 
that  those  who  held  different  beliefs  about  God 
must  lack  that  experience.  Thus  far  his  criticism 
of  false  prophecy  is  purely  subjective.  The  true 
prophet  knew  that  he  had  that  within  him  which 
authenticated  his  inspiration,  but  the  false 
prophet  could  not  know  that  he  wanted  it.  The 
difiiculty  is  not  peculiar  to  prophecy,  but  arises 
in  connection  with  religious  belief  as  a  whole. 
It  IS  an  interesting  question  whether  the  assent 
to  a  truth  is  accompanied  by  a  feeling  of  certi- 
tude differing  in  quality  from  the  confidence 
which  a  man  may  have  in  giving  assent  to  a 
delusion.  But  it  is  not  possible  to  elevate  this 
internal  criterion  to  an  objective  test  of  truth. 
A  man  who  is  awake  may  be  quite  ^ure  he  is  not 
dreaming,  but  a  man  in  a  dream  may  readily 
enough   fancy   himself  awake. 

But  there  were  other  and  more  obvious  tests 
which  could  be  applied  to  the  professional  proph- 
ets, and  which  at  least  showed  them  to  be  men 
of  a  different  spirit  from  the  few  who  were  "  full 
of  power  by  the  spirit  of  the  Lord,  and  of  judg- 
ment, and  of  might,  to  declare  to  Israel  his  sin  " 
(Mic.  iii.  8).  In  two  graphic  figures  Ezkeiel 
sums  up  the  character  and  policy  of  these  para- 
sites who  disgraced  the  order  to  which  they  be- 
longed. In  the  first  place  he  compares  them  to 
jackals  burrowing  in  ruins  and  undermining  the 
fabric  which  it  was  their  professed  function  to 
uphold  (vv.  4,  s).  The  existence  of  such  a  class 
of  men  is  at  once  a  symptom  of  advanced  social 
degeneration  and  a  cause  of  greater  ruin  to  fol- 
low. A  true  prophet  fearlessly  speaking  the 
words  of  God  is  a  defence  to  the  state;  he  is 
like  a  man  who  stands  in  the  breach  or  builds 
a  wall  to  ward  off  the  danger  which  he  foresees. 
Such  were  all  genuine  prophets  whose  names 
were  held  in  honour  in  Israel — men  of  moral 
courage,  never  hesitating  to  incur  personal  risk 
for  the  welfare  of  the  nation  they  loved.  If  Is- 
*  Translating  with  LXX. 


rael  now  was  like  a  heap  of  ruins,  the  fault  lay 
with  the  selfish  crowd  of  hireling  prophets  who 
had  cared  more  to  find  a  hole  in  which  they 
could  shelter  themselves  than  to  build  up  a  stable 
and  righteous  polity. 

The  prophet's  simile  calls  to  mind  the  type  of 
churchman  represented  by  Bishop  Blougram  in 
Browning's  powerful  satire.  He  is  one  who  is 
content  if  the  corporation  to  which  he  belongs 
can  provide  him  with  a  comfortable  and  dignified 
position  in  which  he  can  spend  good  days;  he  is 
triumphant  if,  in  addition  to  this,  he  can  defy 
any  one  to  prove  him  more  of  a  fool  or  a  hypo- 
crite than  an  average  man  of  the  world.  Such 
utter  abnegation  of  intellectual  sincerity  may  not 
be  common  in  any  Church;  but  the  temptation 
which  leads  to  it  is  one  to  which  ecclesiastics 
are  exposed  in  every  age  and  every  communion. 
The  tendency  to  shirk  difficult  problems,  to  shut 
one's  eyes  to  grave  evils,  to  acquiesce  in  things 
as  they  are,  and  calculate  that  the  ruin  will  last 
one's  own  time,  is  what  Ezekiel  calls  playing  the 
jackal;  and  it  hardly  needs  a  prophet  to  tell  us 
that  there  could  not  be  a  more  fatal  symptom  of 
the  decay  of  religion  than  the  prevalence  of  such 
a  spirit  in  its  official  representatives. 

The  second  image  is  equally  suggestive.  It 
exhibits  the  false  prophets  as  following  where 
they  pretended  to  lead,  as  aiding  and  abetting 
the  men  into  whose  hands  the  reins  of  govern- 
ment had  fallen.  The  people  build  a  wall  and  the 
prophets  cover  it  with  plaster  (ver.  10) — that  is 
to  say,  when  any  project  or  scheme  of  policy  is 
being  promoted  they  stand  by,  glozing  it  over 
with  fine  words,,  flattering  its  promoters,  and  ut- 
tering profuse  assurances  of  its  success.  The 
uselessness  of  the  whole  activity  of  these  proph- 
ets could  not  be  more  vividly  described.  The 
white-washing  of  the  wall  may  hide  its  defects, 
but  will  not  prevent  its  destruction;  and  when 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem's  shaky  prosperity  tumbles 
down,  those  who  did  so  little  to  build  and  so 
much  to  deceive  shall  be  overwhelmed  with  con- 
fusion. "  Behold,  when  the  wall  is  fallen,  shall 
it  not  be  said  to  them.  Where  is  the  plaster  which 
ye  plastered?"  (ver.  12). 

This  will  be  the  beginning  of  the  judgment  on 
false  prophets  in  Israel.  The  overthrow  of  their 
vaticinations,  the  collapse  of  the  hopes  they  fos- 
tered, and  the  demolition  of  the  edifice  in  which 
they  found  a  refuge  shall  leave  them  no  more  a 
name  or  a  place  in  the  people  of  God.  "  I  will 
stretch  out  My  hand  against  the  prophets  that 
see  vanity  and  divine  falsely:  in  the  council  of 
My  people  they  shall  not  be,  and  in  the  register 
of  the  house  of  Israel  they  shall  not  be  written, 
and  into  the  land  of  Israel  they  shall  not  come  " 
(ver.  9). 

There  vras,  however,  a  still  more  degraded  type 
of  prophecy,  practised  chiefly  by  women,  which 
must  have  been  exceedingly  prevalent  in  Eze- 
kiel's time.  The  prophets  spoken  of  in  the  first 
sixteen  verses  were  public  functionaries  who  ex- 
erted their  evil  influence  in  the  arena  of  politics. 
The  prophetesses  spoken  of  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  chapter  are  private  fortune-tellers  who  prac- 
tised on  the  credulity  of  individuals  who  con- 
sulted them.  Their  art  was  evidently  magical 
in  the  strict  sense,  a  trafficking  with  the  dark 
powers  which  were  supposed  to  enter  into  alli- 
ance with  men  irrespective  of  moral  considera- 
tions. Then,  as  now,  such  courses  were  fol- 
lowed for  gain,  and  doubtless  proved  a  lucrative 
means  of  livelihood.     The  "fillets"  and  "veils" 


Ezekiel  xvi.J 


JERUSALEM— AN    IDEAL    HISTORY, 


251 


mentioned  in  ver.  18  are  either  a  professional 
garb  worn  by  the  women,  or  else  implements  of 
divination  whose  precise  significance  cannot  now 
be  ascertained.  To  the  imagination  of  the 
prophet  they  appear  as  the  snares  and  weapons 
with  which  these  wretched  creatures  "  hunted 
souls";  and  the  extent  of  the  evil  which  he  at- 
tacks is  indicated  by  his  speaking  of  the  whole 
people  as  being  entangled  in  their  meshes. 
Ezekiel  naturally  bestows  special  attention  on  a 
class  of  practitioners  whose  whole  influence 
tended  to  efface  moral  landmarks  and  to  deal 
out  to  men  weal  or  woe  without  regard  to  char- 
acter. "  They  slew  souls  that  should  not  die, 
and  saved  alive  souls  that  should  not  live;  they 
made  sad  the  heart  of  the  righteous,  and 
strengthened  the  hands  of  the  wicked,  that  he 
should  not  return  from  his  wicked  way  and  be 
saved  alive "  (ver.  22).  That  is  to  say,  while 
Ezekiel  and  all  true  prophets  were  exhorting 
men  to  live  resolutely  in  the  light  of  clear  ethical 
conceptions  of  providence,  the  votaries  of  occult 
superstitions  seduced  the  ignorant  into  making 
private  compacts  with  the  powers  of  darkness 
in  order  to  secure  their  personal  safety.  If  the 
prevalence  of  sorcery  and  witchcraft  was  at  all 
times  dangerous  to  the  religion  and  public  order 
of  the  state,  it  was  doubly  so  at  a  time  when,  as 
Ezekiel  perceived,  everything  depended  on  main- 
taining the  strict  rectitude  of  God  in  His  deal- 
ings with  individual  men. 


HI. 

Having  thus  disposed  of  the  external  manifes- 
tations of  false  prophecy,  Ezekiel  proceeds  in  the 
fourteenth  chapter  to  deal  with  the  state  of  mind 
amongst  the  people  at  large  which  rendered  such 
a  condition  of  things  possible.  The  general  im- 
port of  the  passage  is  clear,  although  the  precise 
connection  of  ideas  is  somewhat  difificult  to  ex- 
plain. The  following  observations  may  suffice 
to  bring  out  all  that  is  essential  to  the  under- 
standing of  the  section. 

The  oracle  was  occasioned  by  a  particular  in- 
cident, undoubtedly  historical — namely,  a  visit, 
such  as  was  perhaps  now  common,  from  the 
elders  to  inquire  of  the  Lord  through  Ezekiel. 
As  they  sit  before  him  it  is  revealed  to  the 
prophet  that  the  minds  of  these  men  are  pre- 
occupied with  idolatry,  and  therefore  it  is  not 
fitting  that  any  answer  should  be  given  to  them 
by  a  prophet  of  Jehovah.  Apparently  no  an- 
swer was  given  by  Ezekiel  to  the  particular 
question  they  had  asked,  whatever  it  may  have 
been.  Generalising  from  the  incident,  however, 
he  is  led  to  enunciate  a  principle  regulating  the 
intercourse  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  through 
the  medium  of  a  prophet:  "  Whatever  man  of 
the  house  of  Israel  sets  his  thoughts  upon  his 
idols,  and  puts  his  guilty  stumbling-block  before 
him,  and  comes  to  the  prophet,  I  Jehovah  will 
make  Myself  intelligible  to  him;*  that  I  may 
take  the  house  of  Israel  in  their  own  heart,  be- 
cause they  are  all  estranged  from  Me  by  their 
idols  "  (vv.  4,  5).  It  seems  clear  that  one  part  of 
the  threat  here  uttered  is  that  the  very  withhold- 
ing of  the  answer  will  unmask  the  hypocrisy  of 
men  who  pretend  to  be  worshippers  of  Jehovah, 
but  in  heart  are  unfaithful  to  Him  and  servants 
of  false  gods.     The  moral  prmciple  involved  in 

*  The  exact  force  of  the  refle.\ive  form  used  (na'anetAt, 
niphal)  is  doubtful.  The  translation  given  is  that  of 
Cornill,  which  is  certainly  forcible. 


the  prophet's  dictum  is  clear  and  of  lasting  value. 
It  is  that  for  a  false  heart  there  can  be  no  fel- 
lowship with  Jehovah,  and  therefore  no  true  and 
sure  knowledge  of  His  will.  The  prophet  occu- 
pies the  point  of  view  of  Jehovah,  and  when 
consulted  by  an  idolater  he  finds  it  impossible 
to  enter  into  the  point  of  view  from  which  the 
question  is  put,  and  therefore  cannot  answer  it.* 
Ezekiel  assumes  for  the  most  part  that  the 
prophet  consulted  is  a  true  prophet  of  Jehovah 
like  himself,  who  will  give  no  answer  to  such 
questions  as  he  has  before  him.  He  must,  how- 
ever, allow  for  the  possibility  that  men  of  this 
stamp  may  receive  answers  in  the  name  of  Je- 
hovah from  those  reputed  to  be  His  true 
prophets.  In  that  case,  says  Ezekiel,  the  prophet 
is  "  deceived  "  by  God;  he  is  allowed  to  give  a 
response  which  is  not  a  true  response  at  all,  but 
only  confirms  the  people  in  their  delusions  and 
unbelief.  But  this  deception  does  not  take  place 
until  the  prophet  has  incurred  the  guilt  of  de- 
ceiving himself  in  the  first  instance.  It  is  his 
fault  that  he  has  not  perceived  the  bent  of  his 
questioners'  minds,  that  he  has  accommodated 
himself  to  their  ways  of  thought,  has  consented 
to  occupy  their  standpoint  in  order  to  be  able 
to  say  something  coinciding  with  the  drift  of 
their  wishes.  Prophet  and  inquirers  are  involved 
in  a  common  guilt  and  share  a  common  fate, 
both  being  sentenced  to  exclusion  from  the 
commonwealth   of   Israel. 

The  purification  of  the  institution  of  prophecy 
necessarily  appeared  to  Ezekiel  as  an  indispensa- 
ble feature  in  the  restoration  of  the  theocracy. 
The  ideal  of  Israel's  relation  to  Jehovah  is  "  that 
they  may  be  My  people,  and  that  I  may  be  their 
God  "  (ver.  11).  That  implies  that  Jehovah  shall 
be  the  source  of  infallible  guidance  in  all  things 
needful  for  the  religious  life  of  the  individual  and 
the  guidance  of  the  state.  But  it  was  impossible 
for  Jehovah  to  be  to  Israel  all  that  a  God  should 
be,  so  long  as  the  regular  channels  of  communi- 
cation between  Him  and  the  nation  were  choked 
by  false  conceptions  in  the  minds  of  the  people 
and  false  men  in  the  position  of  prophets. 
Hence  the  constitution  of  a  new  Israel  demands 
such  special  judgments  on  false  prophecy  and 
the  false  use  of  true  prophecy  as  have  been  de- 
nounced in  these  chapters.  When  these  judg- 
ments have  been  executed,  the  ideal  will  have 
become  possible  which  is  described  in  the  words 
of  another  prophet:  "  Thine  eyes  shall  see  thy 
teachers:  and  thine  ears  shall  hear  a  word  be- 
hind thee,  saying.  This  is  the  way,  walk  ye  in 
it "    (Isa.   XXX.  20,   21). 


CHAPTER  IX. 

JERUSALEM— AN  IDEAL  HISTORY. 

Ezekiel  xvi. 

In  order  to  understand  the  place  which  the 
sixteenth  chapter  occupies  in  this  section!  of 
the  book,  we  must  remember  that  a  chief  source 
of  the  antagonism  between  Ezekiel  and  his  hear- 
ers was  the  proud  national  consciousness  which 
sustained  the  courage  of  the  people  through  all 
their    humiliations.     There    were,    perhaps,    few 

*  The  same  rule  is  applied  to  direct  communion  with 
God  in  prayer  in  Psalm  Ixvi.  18  :  "  If  I  regard  iniquity  in 
my  heart,  the  Lord  will  not  hear." 

t  See  above,  p.  244  f. 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


nations  of  antiquity  in  which  the  flame  of  patri- 
otic feeling  burned  more  brightly  than  in  Is- 
rael. No  people  with  a  past  such  as  theirs  could 
be  indifferent  to  the  many  elements  of  greatness 
embalmed  in  their  history.  The  beauty  and  fer- 
tility of  their  land,  the  martial  exploits  and  sig- 
nal deliverances  of  the  nation,  the  great  kings 
and  heroes  she  had  reared,  her  prophets  and 
lawgivers — these  and  many  other  stirring  mem- 
ories were  witnesses  to  Jehovah's  peculiar  love 
for  Israel  and  His  power  to  exalt  and  bless  His 
people.  To  cherish  a  deep  sense  of  the  unique 
privileges  which  Jehovah  had  conferred  on  her 
in  giving  her  a  distinct  place  among  the  na- 
tions of  the  earth  was  thus  a  religious  duty  often 
insisted  on  in  the  Old  Testament.  But  in  order 
that  this  sense  might  work  for  good  it  was 
necessary  that  it  should  take  the  form  of  grateful 
recognition  of  Jehovah  as  the  source  of  the  na- 
tion's greatness,  and  be  accompanied  by  a  true 
knowledge  of  His  character.  When  allied  with 
false  conceptions  of  Jehovah's  nature,  or  en- 
tirely divorced  from  religion,  patriotism  degen- 
erated into  racial  prejudice  and  became  a  seri- 
ous moral  and  political  danger.  That  this  had 
actually  taken  place  is  a  common  complaint  of 
the  prophets.  They  feel  that  national  vanity  is 
a  great  obstacle  to  the  acceptance  of  their  mes- 
sage, and  pour  forth  bitter  and  scornful  words 
intended  to  humble  the  pride  of  Israel  to  the 
dust.  No  prophet  addresses  himself  to  the  task 
so  remorselessly  as  Ezekiel.  The  utter  worth- 
lessness  of  Israel,  both  absolutely  in  the  eyes  of 
Jehovah  and  relatively  in  comparison  with  other 
nations,  is  asserted  by  him  with  a  boldness  and 
emphasis  which  at  first  startle  us.  From  a  dif- 
ferent point  of  view  prophecy  and  its  results 
might  have  been  regarded  as  fruits  of  the  na- 
tional life,  under  the  divine  education  vouch- 
safed to  that  people.  But  that  is  not  Ezekiel's 
standpoint.  He  seizes  on  the  fact  that  prophecy 
was  in  opposition  to  the  natural  genius  of  the 
people,  and  was  not  to  be  regarded  as  in  any 
sense  an  expression  of  it.  Accepting  the  final 
attitude  of  Israel  toward  the  word  of  Jehovah 
as  the  genuine  outcome  of  her  natural  proclivi- 
ties, he  reads  her  past  as  an  unbroken  record 
of  ingratitude  and  infidelity.  All  that  was  good 
in  Israel  was  Jehovah's  gift,  freely  bestowed  and 
justly  withdrawn;  all  that  was  Israel's  own  was 
her  weakness  and  her  sin.  It  was  reserved  for  a 
later  prophet  to  reconcile  the  condemnation  of 
Israel's  actual  history  with  the  recognition  of 
the  divine  power  working  there  and  moulding 
a  spiritual  kernel  of  the  nation  into  a  true 
"  servant  of  the  Lord  "  (Isa.  xl.  fi.). 

In  chaps,  xv.  and  xvi.,  therefore,  the  prophet 
exposes  the  hollowness  of  Israel's  confidence  in 
her  national  destiny.  The  first  of  these  appears 
to  be  directed  against  the  vain  hopes  cherished 
in  Jerusalem  at  the  time.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
dwell  on  it  at  length.  The  image  is  simple  and 
its  application  to  Jerusalem  obvious.  Earlier 
prophets  had  compared  Israel  to  a  vine,  partly 
to  set  forth  the  exceptional  privileges  she  en- 
joyed, but  chiefiy  to  emphasise  the  degeneration 
she  had  undergone,  as  shown  by  the  bad  moral 
fruits  which  she  had  borne  (cf.  Isa.  v.  i  ff. ;  Jer. 
ii.  21 ;  Hos.  x.  i).  The  popular  imagination  had 
laid  hold  of  the  thought  that  Israel  was  the 
vine  of  God's  planting,  ignoring  the  question  of 
the  fruit.  But  Ezekiel  reminds  his  hearers  that 
apart  from  its  fruit  the  vine  is  the  most  worth- 
less  of  trees.     Even   at   the   best   its   wood   can 


l)e  employed  for  no  useful  purpose;  it  is  fit  only 
for  fuel.  Such  was  the  people  of  Israel,  con- 
sidered simply  as  a  state  among  other  states, 
without  regard  to  its  religious  vocation.  Even 
in  its  pristine  vigour,  when  the  national  energies 
were  fresh  and  unimpaired,  it  was  but  a  weak 
nation,  incapable  of  attaining  the  dignity  of  a 
great  power.  But  now  the  strength  of  the  na- 
tion has  been  worn  away  by  a  long  succession 
of  disasters,  until  only  a  shadow  of  her  former 
glory  remains.  Israel  is  no  longer  like  a  green 
and  living  vine,  but  like  a  branch  burned  at 
both  ends  and  charred  in  the  middle,  and  there- 
fore doubly  unfit  for  any  worthy  function  in  the 
affairs  of  the  world.  By  the  help  of  this  illus- 
tration men  may  read  in  the  present  state  of 
the  nation  the  irrevocable  sentence  of  rejection 
which  Jehovah  has  passed  on  His  people. 

We  now  turn  to  the  striking  allegory  of  chap. 
xvi.,  where  the  same  subject  is  treated  with  far 
greater  penetration  and  depth  of  feeling.  There 
is  no  passage  in  the  book  of  Ezekiel  at  once  so 
powerful  and  so  full  of  religious  significance  as 
the  picture  of  Jerusalem,  the  foundling  child,  the 
unfaithful  spouse,  and  the  abandoned  prostitute, 
which  is  here  presented.  The  general  concep- 
tion is  one  that  might  have  been  presented  in 
a  form  as  beautiful  as  it  is  spiritually  true.  But 
the  features  which  offend  our  sense  of  propriety 
are  perhaps  introduced  with  a  stern  purpose.  It 
13  the  deliberate  intention  of  Ezekiel  to  present 
Jerusalem's  wickedness  in  the  most  repulsive 
light,  in  order  that,  if  possible,  he  might  startle 
men  into  abhorrence  of  their  national  sin.  In 
his  own  mind  the  feelings  of  moral  indignation 
and  physical  disgust  were  very  close  together, 
and  here  he  seems  to  work  on  the  minds  of  his 
readers,  so  that  the  feeling  excited  by  the  image 
may  call  forth  the  feeling  appropriate  to  the 
reality. 

The  allegory  is  a  highly  idealised  history  of  the 
city  of  Jerusalem  from  its  origin  to  its  destruc- 
tion, and  then  onward  to  its  future  restoration. 
It  falls  naturally  into  four  divisions: — 

i.  Vv.  I- 14. — The  first  emergence  of  Jerusalem 
into  civic  life  is  compared  to  a  new-born  female 
infant,  exposed  to  perish,  after  a  cruel  custom 
which  is  known  to  have  prevailed  among  some 
Semitic  tribes.  None  of  the  offices  customary 
on  the  birth  of  a  child  were  performed  in  her 
case,  whether  those  necessary  to  preserve  life 
or  those  which  had  a  merely  ceremonial  signifi- 
cance. Unblessed  and  unpitied  she  lay  in  the 
open  field,  weltering  in  blood,  exciting  only 
repugnance  in  all  who  passed  by,  until  Jehovah 
Himself  passed  by,  and  pronounced  over  her  the 
decree  that  she  should  live.  Thus  saved  from 
death,  she  grew  up  and  reached  maturity,  but 
still  "  naked  and  bare,"  destitute  of  wealth  and 
the  refinements  of  civilisation.  These  were  be- 
stowed on  her  when  a  second  time  Jehovah 
passed  by  and  spread  His  skirt  over  her,  and 
claimed  her  for  His  own.  Not  till  then  had  she 
been  treated  as  a  human  being,  with  the  possi- 
bilities of  honourable  life  before  her.  But  now 
she  becomes  the  bride  of  her  protector,  and  is 
provided  for  as  a  high-born  maiden  might  be, 
with  all  the  ornaments  and  luxuries  befitting  her 
new  rank.  Lifted  from  the  lowest  depth  of  deg- 
radation, she  is  now  transcendently  beautiful, 
and  has  "  attained  to  royal  estate."  The  fame  of 
her  loveliness  went  abroad  among  the  nations: 
"  for  it  was  perfect  through  My  glory,  which  I 
put  upon  thee,  saith  Jehovah  "   (ver.  14). 


Ezckiel  xvi.J 


JERUSALEM— AN    IDEAL    HISTORY. 


253 


It  will  be  seen  that  the  points  of  contact  with 
actual  history  are  here  extremely  few  as  well 
as  vague.  It  is  indeed  doubtful  whether  the  sub- 
ject of  the  allegory  be  the  city  of  Jerusalem  con- 
ceived as  one  through  all  its  changes  of  popula- 
tion, or  the  Hebrew  nation  of  which  Jerusalem 
ultimately  became  the  capital.  The  latter  inter- 
pretation is  certainly  favoured  by  chap,  xxiii., 
where  both  Jerusalem  and  Samaria  are  repre- 
sented as  having  spent  their  youth  in  Egypt. 
That  parallel  may  not  be  decisive  as  to  the 
meaning  of  chap.  xvi. ;  and  the  statement  "thy 
father  was  the  Amorite  and  thy  mother  an 
Hittite  "  may  be  thought  to  support  the  other 
alternative.  Amorite  and  Hittite  are  general 
names  for  the  pre-Israelite  population  of  Canaan, 
and  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  Jerusalem  was 
originally  a  Canaanitish  city.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary to  suppose  that  the  prophet  has  any  infor- 
mation about  the  early  fortunes  of  Jerusalem 
when  he  describes  the  stages  of  the  process  by 
which  she  was  raised  to  royal  magnificence. 
The  chief  question  is  whether  these  details  can 
be  fairly  applied  to  the  history  of  the  nation  be- 
fore it  had  Jerusalem  as  its  metropolis.  It  is 
usually  held  that  the  first  "  passing  by  "  of  Je- 
hovah refers  to  the  preservation  of  the  people 
in  the  patriarchal  period,  and  the  second  to  the 
events  of  the  Exodus  and  the  Sinaitic  covenant. 
Against  this  it  may  be  urged  that  Ezekiel  would 
hardly  have  presented  the  patriarchal  period  in 
a  hateful  light,  although  he  does  go  further  in 
discrediting  antiquity  than  any  other  prophet. 
Besides,  the  description  of  Jerusalem's  be- 
trothal to  Jehovah  contains  points  which  are 
more  naturally  understood  of  the  glories  of  the 
age  of  David  and  Solomon  than  of  the  events  of 
Sinai,  which  were  not  accompanied  by  an  ac- 
cess of  material  prosperity  such  as  is  suggested. 
It  may  be  necessary  to  leave  the  matter  in  the 
vagueness  with  which  the  prophet  has  sur- 
rounded it,  and  accept  as  the  teaching  of  the 
allegory  the  simple  truth  that  Jerusalem  in  her- 
self was  nothing,  but  had  been  preserved  in  ex- 
istence by  Jehovah's  will,  and  owed  all  her 
splendour  to  her  association  with  His  cause  and 
His  kingdom. 

ii.  Vv.  15-34. — The  dainties  and  rich  attire  en- 
joyed by  the  highly  favoured  bride  become  a 
snare  to  her.  These  represent  blessings  of  a  ma- 
terial order  bestowed  by  Jehovah  on  Jerusalem. 
Throughout  the  chapter  nothing  is  said  of  the 
imparting  of  spiritual  privileges,  or  of  a  moral 
change  wrought  in  the  heart  of  Jerusalem.  The 
gifts  of  Jehovah  are  conferred  on  one  incapa- 
ble of  responding  to  the  care  and  affection  that 
had  been  lavished  on  her.  The  inborn  taint  of 
her  nature,  the  hereditary  immorality  of  her 
heathen  ancestors,  breaks  out  in  a  career  of 
licentiousness  in  which  all  the  advantages  of  her 
proud  position  are  prostituted  to  the  vilest  ends. 
"  .A.S  IS  the  mother,  so  is  her  daughter "  (ver. 
44) ;  and  Jerusalem  betrayed  her  true  origin  by 
the  readiness  with  which  she  took  to  evil 
courses  as  soon  as  she  had  the  opportunity. 
The  "  whoredom  "  in  which  the  prophet  sums 
up  his  indictment  against  his  people  is  chiefly 
the  sin  of  idolatry.  The  figure  may  have  been 
suggested  by  the  fact  that  actual  lewdness  of  the 
most  flagrant  kind  was  a  conspicuous  element 
in  the  form  of  idolatry  to  which  Israel  first  suc- 
cumbed— the  worship  of  the  Canaanite  Baals. 
But  in  the  hands  of  the  prophets  it  has  a  deeper 
and  more  spiritual  import  than  this.     It  signified 


the  violation  of  all  the  sacred  moral  obligations 
which  are  enshrined  in  human  marriage,  or,  in 
other  words,  the  abandonment  of  an  ethical  re- 
ligion for  one  in  which  the  powers  of  nature 
were  regarded  as  the  highest  revelation  of  the 
divine.  To  the  mind  of  the  prophet  it  made  no 
difference  whether  the  object  of  worship  was 
called  by  the  name  of  Jehovah  or  of  Baal:  the 
character  of  the  worship  determined  the  quality 
of  the  religion;  and  in  the  one  case,  as  in  the 
other,  it  was  idolatry,  yDr  "  whoredom." 

Two  stages  in  the  idolatry  of  Israel  appear  to 
be  distinguished  in  this  part  of  the  chapter.  The 
first  is  the  naive,  half-conscious  heathenism 
which  crept  in  insensibly  through  contact  with 
Phcenician  and  Canaanite  neighbours  (vv.  15- 
25).  The  tokens  of  Jerusalem's  implication  in 
this  sin  were  everywhere.  The  "  high  places " 
with  their  tents  and  clothed  images  (ver.  17), 
and  the  offerings  set  forth  before  these  objects 
of  adoration,  were  undoubtedly  of  Canaanitish 
origin,  and  their  preservation  to  the  fall  of  the 
kingdom  was  a  standing  witness  to  the  source 
to  which  Israel  owed  her  earliest  and  dearest 
"  abominations."  We  learn  that  this  phase  of 
idolatry  culminated  in  the  atrocious  rite  of  hu- 
man sacrifice  (vv.  20,  21).  The  immolation  of 
children  to  Baal  or  Molech  was  a  common  prac- 
tice amongst  the  nations  surrounding  Israel,  and 
when  introduced  there  seems  to  have  been  re- 
garded as  part  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah.* 
What  Ezekiel  here  asserts  is  that  the  practice 
came  through  Israel's  illicit  commerce  with  the 
gods  of  Canaan,  and  there  is  no  question  that 
this  is  historically  true.  The  allegory  exhibits 
the  sin  in  its  unnatural  heinousness.  The  ideal- 
ised city  is  the  mother  of  her  citizens,  the  chil- 
dren are  Jehovah's  children  and  her  own,  yet  she 
has  taken  them  and  offered  them  up  to  the  false 
lovers  she  so  madly  pursued.  Such  was  her 
feverish  passion  for  idolatry  that  the  dearest  and 
most  sacred  ties  of  nature  were  ruthlessly  sev- 
ered at  the  bidding  of  a  perverted  religious 
sense. 

The  second  form  of  idolatry  in  Israel  was  of 
a  more  deliberate  and  politic  kind  (vv.  23-34). 
It  consisted  in  the  introduction  of  the  deities 
and  religious  practices  of  the  great  world-powers 
— Egypt,  Assyria,  and  Chaldasa.  The  attraction 
of  these  foreign  rites  did  not  lie  in  the  fascina- 
tion of  a  sensuous  type  of  religion,  but  rather  in 
the  impression  of  power  produced  by  the  gods 
of  the  conquering  peoples.  The  foreign  gods 
came  in  mostly  in  consequence  of  a  political  al- 
liance with  the  nations  whose  patrons  they  were; 
in  other  cases  a  god  was  worshipped  simply  be- 
cause he  had  shown  himself  able  to  do  great 
things  for  his  servants.  Jerusalem  as  Ezekiel 
knew  it  was  full  of  monuments  of  this  com- 
paratively recent  type  of  idolatry.  In  every 
street  and  at  the  head  of  every  way  there  were 
erections  (here  called  "  arches  "  or  "  heights  ") 
which,  from  the  connection  in  which  they  are 
mentioned,  must  have  been  shrines  devoted  to 
the  strange  gods  from  abroad.  It  is  character- 
istic of  the  political  idolatry  here  referred  to 
that  its  monuments  were  found  in  the  capital, 
while  the  more  ancient  and  rustic  worship  was 
typified  by  the  "  high  places "  throughout  the 
provinces.  It  is  probable  that  the  description 
applies  mainly  to  the  later  period  of  the  mon- 
archy, when  Israel,  and  especially  Judah,  began 
to  lean  for  support  on  one  or  other  of  the  great 
*  See  below,  pp.  266  f. 


254 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


empires  on  either  side  of  her.  At  the  same  time 
it  must  be  remembered  that  Ezekiel  elsewhere 
teaches  distinctly  that  the  influence  of  Egyptian 
religion  had  been  continuous  from  the  days  of 
the  Exodus  (chap,  xxiii.).  There  may,  however, 
have  been  a  revival  of  Egyptian  influence,  due 
to  the  political  exigencies  which  arose  in  the 
eighth  century. 

Thus  Jerusalem  has  "  played  the  harlot";  nay, 
she  has  done  worse — "  she  has  been  as  a  wife 
that  committeth  adultery,  who  though  under 
her  husband  taketh  strangers."  *  And  the  result 
has  been  simply  the  impoverishment  of  the  land. 
The  heavy  exactions  levied  on  the  country  by 
Egypt  and  Assyria  were  the  hire  she  had  paid 
to  her  lovers  to  come  to  her.  If  false  religion 
had  resulted  in  an  increase  of  wealth  or  ma- 
terial prosperity,  there  might  have  been  some 
excuse  for  the  eagerness  with  which  she  plunged 
into  it.  But  certainly  Israel's  history  bore  the 
lesson  that  false  religion  means  waste  and  ruin. 
Strangers  had  devoured  her  strength  from  her 
youth,  yet  she  never  would  heed  the  voice  of 
her  prophets  when  they  sought  to  guide  her  into 
the  ways  of  peace.  Her  infatuation  was  un- 
natural; it  goes  almost  beyond  the  bounds  of  the 
allegory  to  exhibit  it:  "The  contrary  is  in  thee 
from  other  women,  in  that  thou  committest 
whoredoms,  and  none  goeth  awhoring  after  thee: 
and  in  that  thou  givest  hire,  and  no  hire  is  given 
to  thee,  therefore  thou  art  contrary  "   (ver.  34). 

iii.  Vv.  35-58. — Having  thus  made  Jerusalem  to 
"  know  her  abominations  "  (ver.  2),  the  prophet 
proceeds  to  announce  the  doom  which  must  in- 
evitably follow  such  a  career  of  wickedness. 
The  figures  under  which  the  judgment  is  set 
forth  appear  to  be  taken  from  the  punishment 
meted  out  to  profligate  women  in  ancient  Is- 
rael. The  public  exposure  of  the  adulteress  and 
her  death  by  stoning  in  the  presence  of  "  many 
women  "  supply  images  terribly  appropriate  of 
the  fate  in  store  for  Jerusalem.!  Her  punish- 
ment is  to  be  a  warning  to  all  surrounding  na- 
tions, and  an  exhibition  of  the  jealous  wrath 
of  Jehovah  against  her  infidelity.  These  nations, 
some  of  them  hereditary  enemies,  others  old 
allies,  are  represented  as  assembled  to  witness 
and  to  execute  the  judgment  of  the  city.  The 
remorseless  realism  of  the  prophet  spares  no  de- 
tail which  could  enhance  the  horror  of  the  situ- 
ation. Abandoned  to  the  ruthless  violence  of 
her  former  lovers,  Jerusalem  is  stripped  of  her 
royal  attire,  the  emblems  of  her  idolatry  are  de- 
stroyed, and  so,  left  naked  to  her  enemies,  she 
suffers  the  ignominious  death  of  a  city  that  has 
been  false  to  her  religion.  The  root  of  her  sin 
had  been  the  forgetfulness  of  what  she  owed  to 
the  goodness  of  Jehovah,  and  the  essence  of  her 
punishment  lies  in  the  withdrawal  of  the  gifts 
He  had  lavished  upon  her  and  the  protection 
which,  amid  all  her  apostasies,  she  had  never 
ceased  to  expect. 

At  this  point  (ver.  44  fT.)  the  allegory  takes 
a  new  turn  through  the  introduction  of  the  sis- 
ter cities  of  Samaria  and  Sodom.  Samaria,  al- 
though as  a  city  much  younger  than  Jerusalem, 
is  considered  the  elder  sister  because  she  had 
once  been  the  centre  of  a  greater  political  power 

•  Ver.  33  may,  however,  be  an  interpolation  (Cornill). 

+  In  ver.  41  the  Syriac  Version  reads,  with  a  slight  altera- 
tion of  the  text,  "they  shall  burn  thee  in  the  midst  of 
the  fire."  The  reading  has  something^  to  recommend  it. 
Death  by  burning  was  an  ancient  punishnaent  of  harlotry 
(Gen.  xxxviii.  24),  although  it  is  not  likely  that  it  was  stil) 
inflicted  in  the  time  of  Ezekiel. 


than  Jerusalem,  and  Sodom,  which  was  probably 
older  than  either,  is  treated  as  the  youngest  be- 
cause of  her  relative  insignificance.  The  order, 
however,  is  of  no  importance.  The  point  of  the 
comparison  is  that  all  three  had  manifested  in 
different  degrees  the  same  hereditary  tendency 
to  immorality  (ver.  45).  All  three  were  of 
heathen  origin — their  mother  a  Hittite  and  their 
father  an  Amorite — a  description  which  it  is  even 
more  difficult  to  understand  in  the  case  of  Sa- 
maria than  in  that  of  Jerusalem.  But  Ezekiel 
is  not  concerned  about  history.  What  is  promi- 
nent in  his  mind  is  the  family  likeness  observed 
in  their  characters,  which  gave  point  to  the 
proverb  "  Like  mother,  like  daughter  "  when  ap- 
plied to  Jerusalem.  The  prophet  affirms  that 
the  wickedness  of  Jerusalem  had  so  far  ex- 
ceeded that  of  Samaria  and  Sodom  that  she  had 
"  justified  "  her  sisters — i.  e.,  she  had  made  their 
moral  condition  appear  pardonable  by  compari- 
son with  hers.  He  knows  that  he  is  saying  a 
bold  thing  in  ranking  the  iniquity  of  Jerusalem 
as  greater  than  that  of  Sodom,  and  so  he  ex- 
plains his  judgment  on  Sodom  by  an  analysis 
of  the  cause  of  her  notorious  corruptness.  The 
name  of  Sodom  lived  in  tradition  as  that  of 
the  foulest  city  of  the  old  world,  a  nc  plus  ultra 
of  wickedness.  Yet  Ezekiel  dares  to  raise  the 
question.  What  zvas  the  sin  of  Sodom?  "  This 
was  the  sin  of  Sodom  thy  sister,  pride,  super- 
abundance of  food,  and  careless  ease  was  the 
lot  of  her  and  her  daughters,  but  they  did  not 
succour  the  poor  and  needy.  But  they  became 
proud,  and  committed  abominations  before  Me: 
therefore  I  took  them  away  as  thou  hast  seen  " 
(vv.  49,  50).  The  meaning  seems  to  be  that 
the  corruptions  of  Sodom  were  the  natural  out- 
come of  the  evil  principle  in  the  Canaanitish 
nature,  favoured  by  easy  circumstances  and  un- 
checked by  the  saving  influences  of  a  pure  re- 
ligion. Ezekiel's  judgment  is  like  an  anticipation 
of  the  more  solemn  sentence  uttered  by  One  who 
knew  what  was  in  man  when  He  said,  "  If  the 
mighty  works  which  have  been  done  in  you  had 
been  done  in  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  they  would 
have  remained  until  this  day." 

It  is  remarkable  to  observe  how  some  of  the 
profoundest  ideas  in  this  chapter  attach  them- 
selves to  the  strange  conception  of  these  two 
vanished  cities  as  still  capable  of  being  restored 
to  tlieir  place  in  the  world.  In  the  ideal  future 
of  the  prophet's  vision  Sodom  and  Samaria  shall 
rise  from  their  ruins  through  the  same  power 
which  restores  Jerusalem  to  her  ancient  glory. 
The  promise  of  a  renewed  existence  to  Sodom 
and  Samaria  is  perhaps  connected  with  the  fact 
that  they  lay  within  the  sacred  territory  of  which 
Jerusalem  is  the  centre.  Hence  Sodom  and  Sa- 
maria are  no  longer  sisters,  but  daughters  of  Je- 
rusalem, receiving  through  her  the  blessings  of 
the  true  religion.  And  it  is  her  relation  to  these 
her  sisters  that  opens  the  eyes  of  Jerusalem  to 
the  true  nature  of  her  own  relation  to  Jehovah. 
Formerly  she  had  been  proud  and  self-sufificient, 
and  counted  her  exceptional  prerogatives  the 
natural  reward  of  some  excellence  to  which  she 
could  lay  claim.  The  name  of  Sodom,  the  dis- 
graced sister  of  the  family,  was  not  heard  in  her 
mouth  in  the  days  of  her  pride,  when  her  wick- 
edness had  not  been  disclosed  as  it  is  now 
(ver.  57).  But  when  she  realises  that  her  con- 
duct has  justified  and  comforted  her  sister,  and 
when  she  has  to  take  guilty  Sodom  to  her  heart 
as  a  daughter,  she  will  understand  that  she  owes 


Ezekiel  xvi.] 


JERUSALEM— AN    IDEAL    HISTORY. 


255 


all  her  greatness  to  the  same  sovereign  grace  of 
Jehovah  which  is  manifested  in  the  restoration 
of  the  most  abandoned  community  known  to  his- 
tory. And  out  of  this  new  consciousness  of 
grace  will  spring  the  chastened  and  penitent 
temper  of  mind  which  makes  possible  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  bond  which  unites  her  to  Je- 
hovah. 

iv.  Vv.  59-63. — The  way  is  thus  prepared  for 
the  final  promise  of  forgiveness  with  which  the 
chapter  closes.  The  reconciliation  between  Je- 
hovah and  Jerusalem  will  be  effected  by  an  act 
of  recollection  on  both  sides:  "/  will  remember 
My  covenant  with  thee.  .  .  .  Thou  shalt  remem- 
ber thy  ways  "  (vv.  60,  61).  The  mind  of  Je- 
hovah and  the  mind  of  Jerusalem  both  go  back 
on  the  past;  but  while  Jehovah  thinks  only  of  the 
purpose  of  love  which  he  had  entertained  to- 
wards Jerusalem  in  the  days  of  her  youth  and 
the  indissoluble  bond  between  them,  Jerusalem 
retains  the  memory  of  her  own  sinful  history, 
and  finds  in  the  remembrance  the  source  of  abid- 
ing contrition  and  shame.  It  does  not  fall  within 
the  scope  of  the  prophet's  purpose  to  set  forth 
in  this  place  the  blessed  consequences  which 
flow  from  this  renewal  of  loving  intercourse  be- 
tween Israel  and  her  God.  He  has  accomplished 
his  object  when  he  has  shown  how  the  electing 
love  of  Jehovah  reaches  its  end  in  spite  of  hu- 
man sin  and  rebellion,  and  how  through  the 
crushing  power  of  divine  grace  the  failures  and 
transgressions  of  the  past  are  made  to  issue  in  a 
relation  of  perfect  harmony  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people.  The  permanence  of  that  rela- 
tion is  expressed  by  an  idea  borrowed  from  Jere- 
miah— ^the  idea  of  an  everlasting  covenant,  which 
cannot  be  broken  because  based  on  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin  and  a  renewal  of  heart.  The  prophet 
knows  that  when  once  the  power  of  evil  has  been 
broken  by  a  full  disclosure  of  redeeming  love  it 
cannot  resume  its  old  ascendency  in  human  life. 
So  he  leaves  us  on  the  threshold  of  the  new  dis- 
pensation with  the  picture  of  Jerusalem  hum- 
bled and  bearing  her  shame,  yet  in  the  abjectness 
of  her  self-accusation  realising  the  end  towards 
which  the  love  of  Jehovah  had  guided  her  from 
the  beginning:  "  I  will  establish  My  covenant 
with  thee;  and  thou  shalt  know  that  I  am  Je- 
hovah: that  thou  mayest  remember,  and  be 
ashamed,  and  not  open  thy  mouth  any  more 
for  very  shame,  when  I  expiate  for  thee  all  that 
thou  hast  done,  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah  "  (vv.  62, 
63). 

Throughout  this  chapter  we  see  that  the 
prophet  moves  in  the  region  of  national  reli- 
gious ideas  which  are  distinctive  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Of  the  influences  that  formed  his 
conceptions  that  of  Hosea  is  perhaps  most  dis- 
cernible. The  fundamental  thoughts  embodied 
in  the  allegory  are  the  same  as  those  by  which 
the  older  prophet  learned  to  interpret  the  nature 
of  God  and  the  sin  of  Israel  through  the  bitter 
experiences  of  ihis  family  life.  These  thoughts 
are  developed  by  Ezekiel  with  a  fertility  of  im- 
agination and  a  grasp  of  theological  principles 
which  were  adapted  to  the  more  complex  situ- 
ation with  which  he  had  to  deal.  But  the  con- 
ception of  Israel  as  the  unfaithful  wife  of  Jeho- 
vah, of  the  false  gods  and  the  world-powers  as 
her  lovers,  of  her  conversion  through  affliction, 
and  her  final  restoration  by  a  new  betrothal 
which  is  eternal,  are  all  expressed  in  the  first 
three  chapters  of  Hosea.  And  the  freedom  with 
which   Ezekiel  handles  and  expands  these  con- 


ceptions shows  how  thoroughly  he  was  at  home 
in  that  national  view  of  religion  which  he  did 
much  to  break  through.  In  the  next  chapter  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  examine  his  treatment  of 
the  problem  of  the  individual's  relation  to  God, 
and  we  cannot  fail  to  be  struck  by  the  contrast. 
The  analysis  of  individual  religion  may  seem 
meagre  by  the  side  of  this  most  profound  and 
suggestive  chapter.  This  arises  from  the  fact 
that  the  full  meaning  of  religion  could  not  then 
be  expressed  as  an  experience  of  the  individual 
soul.  The  subject  of  religion  being  the  nation 
of  Israel,  the  human  side  of  it  could  only  be  un- 
folded in  terms  of  what  we  should  call  the  na- 
tional consciousness.  The  time  was  not  yet 
come  when  the  great  truths  which  the  prophets 
and  psalmists  saw  embodied  in  the  history  of 
their  people  could  be  translated  in  terms  of  in- 
dividual fellowship  with  God.  Yet  the  God  who 
spake  to  the  fathers  by  the  prophets  is  the  same 
who  has  spoken  to  us  in  His  Son;  and  when  from 
the  standpoint  of  a  higher  revelation  we  turn 
back  to  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  to  find  in  the 
form  of  a  nation's  history  the  very  same  truths 
which  we  realise  as  matters  of  personal  experi- 
ence. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  chapter  we  have 
considered  is  one  of  the  most  evangelical  pas- 
sages in  the  writings  of  Ezekiel.  The  prophet's 
conception  of  sin,  for  example,  is  singularly  pro- 
found and  true.  He  has  been  charged  with  a 
somewhat  superficial  conception  of  sin,  as  if  he 
saw  nothing  more  in  it  than  the  transgression  of 
a  law  arbitrarily  imposed  by  divine  authority. 
There  are  aspects  of  Ezekiel's  teaching  which 
give  some  plausibility  to  that  charge,  especially 
those  which  deal  with  the  duties  of  the  individual. 
But  we  see  that  to  Ezekiel  the  real  nature  of  sin 
could  not  possibly  be  manifested  except  as  a 
factor  in  the  national  life.  Now  in  this  allegory 
it  is  obvious  that  he  sees  something  far  deeper  in 
it  than  the  mere  transgression  of  positive  com- 
mandments. Behind  all  the  outward  offences  of 
which  Israel  had  been  guilty  there  plainly  lies 
the  spiritual  fact  of  national  selfishness,  unfaith- 
fulness to  Jehovah,  insensibility  to  His  love,  and 
ingratitude  for  His  benefits.  Moreover,  the 
prophet,  like  Jeremiah  before  him,  has  a  strong 
sense  of  sin  as  a  tendency  in  human  life,  a  power 
which  is  ineradicable  save  by  the  mingled  sever- 
ity and  goodness  of  God.  Through  the  whole 
history  of  Israel  it  is  one  evil  disposition  which 
he  sees  asserting  itself,  breaking  out  now  in  one 
form  and  then  in  another,  but  continually  gain- 
ing strength,  until  at  last  the  spirit  of  repent- 
ance is  created  by  the  experience  of  God's  for- 
giveness. It  is  not  the  case,  therefore,  that 
Ezekiel  failed  to  comprehend  the  nature  of  sin, 
or  that  in  this  respect  he  falls  below  the  most 
spiritual  of  the  prophets  who  had  gone  before 
him. 

In  order  that  this  tendency  to  sin  may  be  de- 
stroyed, Ezekiel  sees  that  the  consciousness  of 
guilt  must  take  its  place.  In  the  same  way  the 
apostle  Paul  teaches  that  "  every  mouth  must 
be  stopped,  and  all  the  world  become  guilty  be- 
fore God."  Whether  the  subject  be  a  nation  or 
an  individual,  the  dominion  of  sin  is  not  broken 
till  the  sinner  has  taken  home  to  himself  the 
full  responsibility  for  his  acts  and  felt  himself 
to  be  "  without  excuse."  But  the  most  striking 
thing  in  Ezekiel's  representation  of  the  process 
of  conversion  is  the  thought  that  this  saving 
sense  of  sin  i.-:  produced  less  by  judgment  th^-- 


256 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEI,. 


by  free  and  undeserved  forgiveness.  Punishment 
he  conceives  to  be  necessary,  being  demanded 
alike  by  the  righteousness  of  God  and  the  good 
of  the  sinful  people.  But  the  heart  of  Jerusalem 
is  not  changed  till  she  finds  herself  restored  to 
her  former  relation  to  God,  with  all  the  sin  of 
her  past  blotted  out  and  a  new  life  before  her. 
It  is  through  the  grace  of  forgiveness  that  she 
is  overwhelmed  with  shame  and  sorrow  for  sin, 
and  learns  the  humility  which  is  the  germ  of  a 
new  hope  towards  God.  Here  the  prophet 
strikes  one  of  the  deepest  notes  of  evangelical 
doctrine.  All  experience  confirms  the  lesson 
that  true  repentance  is  not  produced  by  the  ter- 
rors of  the  law,  but  by  the  view  of  God's  love 
in  Christ  going  forth  to  meet  the  sinner  and 
bring  him  back  to  the  Father's  heart  and  home. 
Another  question  of  great  interest  and  dif^- 
culty  is  the  attitude  towards  the  heathen  world 
assumed  by  Ezekiel.  The  prophecy  of  the  res- 
toration of  Sodom  is  certainly  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  things  in  the  book.  It  is  true  that 
Ezekiel  as  a  rule  concerns  himself  very  little  with 
the  religious  state  of  the  outlying  world  under 
the  Messianic  dispensation.  Where  he  speaks 
of  foreign  nations  it  is  only  to  announce  the 
manifestation  of  Jehovah's  glory  in  the  judg- 
ments He  executes  upon  them.  The  efifect  of 
these  judgments  is  that  "  they  shall  know  that 
I  am  Jehovah";  but  how  much  is  included  in 
the  expression  as  applied  to  the  heathen  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  This,  however,  may  be  due 
to  the  peculiar  limitation  of  view  which  leads 
him  to  concentrate  his  attention  on  the  Holy 
Land  in  his  visions  of  the  perfect  kingdom  of 
God.  We  can  hardly  suppose  that  he  con- 
ceived all  the  rest  of  the  world  as  a  blank  or  filled 
with  a  seething  mass  of  humanity  outside  the 
government  of  the  true  God.  It  is  rather  to  be 
supposed  that  Canaan  itself  appeared  to  his 
mind  as  an  epitome  of  the  world  such  as  it  must 
be  when  the  latter-day  glory  was  ushered  in. 
And  in  Canaan  he  finds  room  for  Sodom,  but 
Sodom  turned  to  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God  and  sharing  in  the  blessings  bestowed  on 
Jerusalem.  It  is  surely  allowable  to  see  in  this 
the  symptom  of  a  more  hopeful  view  of  the 
future  of  the  world  at  large  than  we  should 
gather  from  the  rest  of  the  prophecy.  If  Ezekiel 
could  think  of  Sodom  as  raised  from  the  dead 
and  sharing  the  glories  of  the  people  of  God,  the 
idea  of  the  conversion  of  heathen  nations  could 
not  have  been  altogether  foreign  to  his  mind. 
It  is  at  all  events  significant  that  when  he  medi- 
tates most  profoundly  on  the  nature  of  sin  and 
God's  method  of  dealing  with  it,  he  is  led  to 
the  thought  of  a  divine  mercy  which  embraces  in 
its  sweep  those  communities  which  had  reached 
the  lowest  depths  of  moral  corruption. 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL. 

Ezekiel  xviii. 

In  the  sixteenth  chapter,  as  we  have  seen, 
Ezekiel  has  asserted  in  the  most  unqualified 
terms  the  validity  of  the  principle  of  national 
retribution.  The  nation  is  dealt  with  as  a  moral 
unit,  and  the  catastrophe  which  closes  its  his- 
tory is  the  punishment  for  the  accumulated  guilt 


incurred  by  the  past  generations.  In  the 
eighteenth  chapter  he  teaches  still  more  explicitly 
the  freedom  and  the  independent  responsibility 
of  each  individual  before  God.  No  attempt  is 
made  to  reconcile  the  two  principles  as  methods 
of  the  divine  government;  from  the  prophet's 
standpoint  they  do  not  require  to  be  reconciled. 
They  belong  to  different  dispensations.  So  long 
as  the  Jewish  state  existed  the  principle  of  sol- 
idarity remained  in  force.  Men  suffered  for  the 
sins  of  their  ancestors;  individuals  shared  the 
punishment  incurred  by  the  nation  as  a  wliole. 
But  as  soon  as  the  nation  is  dead,  when  the 
bonds  that  unite  men  in  the  organism  of  na- 
tional life  are  dissolved,  then  the  idea  of  indi- 
vidual responsibility  comes  into  immediate  opera- 
tion. Each  Israelite  stands  isolated  before  Je- 
hovah, the  burden  of  hereditary  guilt  falls  away 
from  him,  and  he  is  free  to  determine  his  own 
relation  to  God.  He  need  not  fear  that  the 
iniquity  of  his  fathers  will  be  reckoned  against 
him;  he  is  held  accountable  only  for  his  own 
sins,  and  these  can  be  forgiven  on  the  condition 
of  his  own  repentance. 

The  doctrine  of  this  chapter  is  generally  re- 
garded as  Ezekiel's  most  characteristic  contri- 
bution to  theology.  It  might  be  nearer  the 
truth  to  say  that  he  is  dealing  with  one  of  the 
great  religious  problems  of  the  age  in  which  he 
lived.  The  difficulty  was  perceived  by  Jeremiah, 
and  treated  in  a  manner  which  shows  that  his 
thoughts  were  being  led  in  the  same  direction  as 
those  of  Ezekiel  (Ter.  xxxi.  29,  30).  If  in  any 
respect  the  teaching  of  Ezekiel  makes  an  ad- 
vance on  that  of  Jeremiah,  it  is  in  his  applica- 
tion of  the  new  truth  to  the  duty  of  the  present: 
and  even  here  the  difference  is  more  apparent 
than  real.  Jeremiah  postpones  the  introduction 
of  personal  religion  to  the  future,  regarding  it  as 
an  ideal  to  be  realised  in  the  Messianic  age. 
His  own  life  and  that  of  his  contemporaries  was 
bound  up  with  the  old  dispensation  which  was 
passing  away,  and  he  knew  that  he  was  destined 
to  share  the  fate  of  his  people.  Ezekiel,  on  the 
other  hand,  lives  already  under  the  powers  of  the 
world  to  come.  The  one  hindrance  to  the  per- 
fect manifestation  of  Jehovah's  righteousness  has 
been  removed  by  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  henceforward  it  will  be  made  apparent  in  the 
correspondence  between  the  desert  and  the  fate 
of  each  individual.  The  new  Israel  must  be 
organised  on  the  basis  of  personal  religion,  and 
the  time  has  already  come  when  the  task  of  pre- 
paring the  religious  community  of  the  future 
must  be  earnestly  taken  up.  Hence  the  doc- 
trine of  individual  responsibility  has  a  peculiar 
and  practical  importance  in  the  mission  of  Eze- 
kiel. The  call  to  repentance,  which  is  the  key- 
note of  his  ministry,  is  addressed  to  individual 
men,  and  in  order  that  it  may  take  efifect  their 
minds  must  be  disabused  of  all  fatalistic  pre- 
conceptions which  would  induce  paralysis  of  the 
moral  faculties.  It  was  necessary  to  affirm  in  all 
their  breadth  and  fulness  the  two  fundamental 
truths  of  personal  religion — ^the  absolute  right- 
eousness of  God's  dealings  with  individual  men, 
and  His  readiness  to  welcome  and  pardon  the 
penitent. 

The  eighteenth  chapter  falls  accordingly  into 
two  divisions.  In  the  first  the  prophet  sets  the 
individual's  immediate  relation  to  God  against 
the  idea  that  guilt  is  transmitted  from  father  to 
children  (vv.  2-20).  In  the  second  he  tries  to 
dispel  the  notion  that  a  man's  fate  is  so  deter- 


Ezekiel  xviii.] 


THE    RELIGION    OF    THE    INDIVIDUAL. 


25) 


mined  by  his  own  past  life  as  to  make  a  change 
of  moral  condition  impossible  (vv.  21-32). 

I. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  both  Jeremiah  and  Eze- 
kiel, in  dealing  with  the  question  of  retribution, 
start  from  a  popular  proverb  which  had  gained 
currency  in  the  later  years  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah:  "  The  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes,  and 
the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge."  In  what- 
ever spirit  this  saying  may  have  been  first 
coined,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  had  come  to  be 
used  as  a  witticism  at  the  expense  of  Providence. 
It  indicates  that  influences  were  at  work  besides 
the  word  of  prophecy  which  tended  to  undermine 
men's  faith  in  the  current  conception  of  the  di- 
vine government.  The  doctrine  of  transmitted 
guilt  was  accepted  as  a  fact  of  experience,  but 
it  no  longer  satisfied  the  deeper  moral  instincts 
of  men.  In  early  Israel  it  was  otherwise.  There 
the  idea  that  the  son  should  bear  the  iniquity  of 
the  father  was  received  without  challenge  and 
applied  without  misgiving  in  judicial  procedure. 
The  whole  family  of  Achan  perished  for  the  sin 
of  their  father;  the  sons  of  Saul  expiated  their 
father's  crime  long  after  he  was  dead.  These 
are  indeed  but  isolated  facts,  yet  they  are  suffi- 
cient to  prove  the  ascendency  of  the  antique 
conception  of  the  tribe  or  family  as  a  unit  whose 
individual  members  are  involved  in  the  guilt  of 
the  head.  With  the  spread  of  purer  ethical  ideas 
among  the  people  there  came  a  deeper  sense  of 
the  value  of  the  individual  life,  and  at  a  later 
time  the  principle  of  vicarious  punishment  was 
banished  from  the  administration  of  human  jus- 
tice {cf.  2  Kings  xiv.  6  with  Deut.  xxiv.  16). 
Within  that  sphere  the  principle  was  firmly  es- 
tablished that  each  man  shall  be  put  to  death 
for  his  own  sin.  But  the  motives  which  made 
this  change  intelligible  and  necessary  in  purely 
human  relations  could  not  be  brought  to  bear 
immediately  on  the  question  of  divine  retribu- 
tion. The  righteousness  of  God  was  thought  to 
act  on  different  lines  from  the  righteousness  of 
man.  The  experience  of  the  last  generation  of 
the  state  seemed  to  furnish  fresh  evidence  of  the 
operation  of  a  law  of  providence  by  which  men 
were  made  to  inherit  the  iniquity  of  their  fathers. 
The  literature  of  the  period  is  filled  with  the 
conviction  that  it  was  the  sins  of  Manasseh  that 
had  sealed  the  doom  of  the  nation.  These  sins 
had  never  been  adequately  punished,  and  subse- 
quent events  showed  that  they  were  not  forgiven. 
The  reforming  zeal  of  Josiah  had  postponed  for 
a  time  the  final  visitation  of  Jehovah's  anger; 
but  no  reformation  and  no  repentance  could  avail 
to  roll  back  the  flood  of  judgment  that  had  been 
set  in  mqtion  by  the  crimes  of  the  reign  of  Ma- 
nasseh. "  Notwithstanding  Jehovah  turned  not 
from  the  fierceness  of  His  great  wrath,  where- 
with His  anger  was  kindled  against  Judah,  be- 
cause of  all  the  provocations  that  Manasseh  had 
provoked  Him  withal  "   (2  Kings  xxiii.  26). 

The  proverb  about  the  sour  grapes  shows  the 
efifect  of  this  interpretation  of  providence  on  a 
large  section  of  the  people.  It  means  no  doubt 
that  there  is  an  irrational  element  in  God's 
method  of  dealing  with  men,  something  not  in 
harmony  with  natural  laws.  In  the  natural 
sphere  if  a  man  eats  sour  grapes  his  own  teeth 
are  blunted  or  set  on  edge;  the  consequences  are 
immediate,  and  they  are  transitory.  But  in  the 
mo'-^l  sphere  a  man  may  eat  sour  grapes  all  his 
IT— Vol.  iV. 


life  and  suflfer  no  evil  consequences  whatever; 
the  consequences,  however,  appear  in  his  chil- 
dren who  have  committed  no  such  indiscretion. 
There  is  nothing  there  which  answers  to  the 
ordinary  sense  of  justice.  Yet  the  proverb  ap- 
pears to  be  less  an  arraignment  of  the  divine 
righteousness  than  a  mode  of  self-exculpation 
on  the  part  of  the  people.  It  expresses  the 
fatalism  and  despair  which  settled  down  on  the 
minds  of  that  generation  when  they  realised  the 
full  extent  of  the  calamity  that  had  overtaken 
them:  "  If  our  transgressions  and  our  sins  be 
upon  us,  and  we  pine  away  in  them,  how  then 
should  we  live?  '  (xxxiii.  10).  So  the  exiles 
reasoned  in  Babylon,  where  they  were  in  no 
mood  for  quoting  facetious  proverbs  about  the 
ways  of  Providence;  but  they  accurately  ex- 
pressed the  sense  of  the  adage  that  had  been 
current  in  Jerusalem  before  its  fall.  The  sins 
for  which  they  suffered  were  not  their  own,  and 
the  judgment  that  lay  on  them  was  no  summons 
to  repentance,  for  it  was  caused  by  sins  of  which 
they  were  not  guilty  and  for  which  they  could 
not  in  any  real  sense  repent. 

Ezekiel  attacks  this  popular  theory  of  retribu- 
tion at  what  must  have  been  regarded  as  its 
strongest  point — the  relation  between  the  father 
and  son.  "  Why  S'hould  the  son  not  bear  the 
iniquity  of  his  father?  "  the  people  asked  in  as- 
tonishment (ver.  19).  "  It  is  good  traditional 
theology,  and  it  has  been  confirmed  by  our  own 
experience."  Now  Ezekiel  would  probably  not 
have  admitted  that  in  any  circumstances  a  son 
suffers  because  his  father  has  sinned.  With  that 
notion  he  appears  to  have  absolutely  broken. 
He  did  not  deny  that  the  Exile  was  the  punish- 
ment for  all  the  sins  of  the  past  as  well  as  for 
those  of  the  present;  but  that  was  because  the 
nation  was  treated  as  a  m'oral  unit,  and  not  be- 
cause of  any  law  of  heredity  which  bound  up 
the  fate  of  the  child  with  that  of  the  father.  It 
was  essential  to  his  purpose  to  show  that  the 
principle  of  social  guilt  or  collective  retribu- 
tion came  to  an  end  with  the  fall  of  the  state; 
whereas  in  the  form  in  which  the  people  held 
to  it,  it  could  never  come  to  an  end  so  long  as 
there  are  parents  to  sin  and  children  to  suffe,'- 
But  the  important  point  in  the  prophet's  teaching 
is  that,  whether  in  one  form  or  in  another,  the 
principle  of  solidarity  is  now  superseded.  God 
will  no  longer  deal  with  men  in  the  mass,  but  as 
individuals;  and  facts  which  gave  plausibility  and 
a  relative  justification  to  cynical  views  of  God's 
providence  shall  no  more  occur.  There  will  be 
no  more  occasion  to  use  that  objectionable  prov- 
erb in  Israel.  On  the  contrary,  it  will  be  mani- 
fest in  the  case  of  each  separate  individual  that 
God's  righteousness  is  discriminating,  and  that 
each  man's  destiny  corresponds  with  his  own 
character.  And  the  new  principle  is  embodied 
in  words  which  may  be  called  the  charter  of  the 
individual  soul — words  whose  significance  is 
fully  revealed  only  in  Christianity:  "  All  souls 
are  Mine.   .   .   .  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die." 

What  is  here  asserted  is  of  course  not  a  dis- 
tinction between  the  soul  or  spiritual  part  of  a 
man's  being  and  another  oart  of  his  being  which 
is  subject  to  physical  necessity,  but  one  between 
the  individual  and  his  moral  environment.  The 
former  distinction  is  real,  and  it  may  be  necessary 
for  us  in  our  day  to  insist  on  it,  but  it  was  cer- 
tainly not  thought  of  by  Ezekiel  or  perhaps  by 
any  other  Old  Testament  writer.  The  word 
"  soul  "  denotes  simply  the  principle  of  individual 


258 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


life.  "  All  persons  are  Mine "  expresses  the 
whole  meaning  which  Ezekiel  meant  to  convey. 
Consequently  the  death  threatened  to  the  sin- 
ner is  not  what  we  call  spiritual  death,  but  death 
in  the  literal  sense — the  death  of  the  individual. 
The  truth  taught  is  the  independence  and  free- 
dom of  the  individual,  or  his  moral  personality. 
And  that  truth  involves  two  things.  First,  each 
individual  belongs  to  God,  stands  in  immediate 
personal  relation  to  Him.  In  the  old  economy 
the  individual  belonged  to  the  nation  or  the  fam- 
ily, and  was  related  to  God  only  as  a  member 
of  a  larger  whole.  Now  he  has  to  deal  with  God 
directly — possesses  independent  personal  worth 
in  the  eye  of  God.  Secondly,  as  a  result  of  this, 
each  man  is  responsible  for  his  own  acts,  and  for 
these  alone.  So  long  as  his  religious  relations 
are  determined  by  circumstances  outside  of  his 
own  life  his  personality  is  incomplete.  The  ideal 
relation  to  God  must  be  one  in  which  the  des- 
tiny of  every  man  depends  on  his  own  free  ac- 
tions. These  are  the  fundamental  postulates  of 
personal  religion  as  formulated  by  Ezekiel. 

The  first  part  of  the  chapter  is  nothing  more 
than  an  illustration  of  the  second  of  these  truths 
in  a  sufficient  number  of  instances  to  show  both 
sides  of  its  operation.  There  is  first  the  case  of 
a  man  perfectly  righteous,  who  as  a  matter  of 
course  lives  by  his  righteousness,  the  state  of  his 
father  not  being  taken  into  account.  Then  this 
good  man  is  supposed  to  have  a  son  who  is  in 
all  respects  the  opposite  of  his  father,  who  an- 
swers none  of  the  tests  of  a  righteous  man;  he 
must  die  for  his  own  sins,  and  his  father's  right- 
eousness avails  him  nothing.  Lastly,  if  the  son 
of  this  wicked  man  takes  warning  by  his  father's 
fate  and  leads  a  good  life,  he  lives  just  as  the 
first  man  did  because  of  his  own  righteousness, 
and  suffers  no  diminution  of  his  reward  because 
his  father  was  a  sinner.  In  all  this  argument 
there  is  a  tacit  appeal  to  the  conscience  of  the 
hearers,  as  if  the  case  only  required  to  be  put 
clearly  before  them  to  command  their  assent. 
This  is  what  shall  be,  the  prophet  says;  and  it 
is  what  ought  to  be.  It  is  contrary  to  the  idea 
of  perfect  justice  to  conceive  of  Jehovah  as  acting 
otherwise  than  as  here  represented.  To  cling 
to  the  idea  of  collective  retribution  as  a  perma- 
nent truth  of  religion,  as  the  exiles  were  disposed 
to  do,  destroys  belief  in  the  Divine  righteous- 
ness by  making  it  different  from  the  righteous- 
ness which  expresses  itself  in  the  moral  judg- 
ments of  men. 

Before  we  pass  from  this  part  of  the  chapter 
we  may  take  note  of  some  characteristics  of  the 
moral  ideal  by  which  Ezekiel  tests  the  conduct 
of  the  individual  man.  It  is  given  in  the  form  of 
a  catalogue  of  virtues,  the  presence  or  absence 
of  which  determines  a  man's  fitness  or  unfitness 
to  enter  the  future  kingdom  of  God.  Most  of 
these  virtues  are  defined  negatively;  the  code 
specifies  sins  to  be  avoided  rather  than  duties 
to  be  performed  or  graces  to  be  cultivated.  Nev- 
ertheless they  are  such  as  to  cover  a  large  sec- 
tion of  human  life,  and  the  arrangement  of  them 
embodies  distinctions  of  permanent  ethical  sig- 
nificance. They  may  be  classed  under  the  three 
heads  of  piety,  chastity,  and  beneficence.  Under 
the  first  head,  that  of  directly  religious  duties, 
two  offences  are  mentioned  which  are  closely 
connected  with  each  other,  although  to  our 
minds  they  may  seem  to  involve  different  degrees 
of  guilt  (ver.  6).  One  is  the  acknowledgment 
of  other  gods  than  Jehovah,  and  the   other  is 


participation  in  ceremonies  which  denoted  fel- 
lowship with  idols.*  To  us  who  "  know  that 
an  idol  is  nothing  in  the  world  "  the  mere  act 
of  eating  with  the  blood  has  no  religious  signifi- 
cance. But  in  Ezekiel's  time  it  was  impossible 
to  divest  it  of  heathen  associations,  and  the  man 
who  performed  it  stood  convicted  of  a  sin  against 
Jehovah.  Similarly  the  idea  of  sexual  purity  is 
illustrated  by  two  outstanding  and  prevalent  of- 
fences (ver.  6).  The  third  head,  which  includes 
by  far  the  greater  number  of  particulars,  deals 
with  the  duties  which  we  regard  as  moral  in  a 
stricter  sense.  They  are  embodiments  of  the 
love  which  "  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neighbour," 
and  is  therefore  "  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  It  is 
manifest  that  the  list  is  not  meant  to  be  an  ex- 
haustive enumeration  of  all  the  virtues  that  a 
good  man  must  practise,  or  all  the  vices  he  must 
shun.  The  prophet  has  before  his  mind  two 
broad  classes  of  men — ^those  who  feared  God, 
and  those  who  did  not;  and  what  he  does  is  to  lay 
down  outward  marks  which  were  practically  suf- 
ficient to  discriminate  between  the  one  class  and 
the  other. 

The  supreme  moral  category  is  Righteousness, 
and  this  includes  the  two  ideas  of  right  char- 
acter and  a  right  relation  to  God.  The  distinc- 
tion between  an  active  righteousness  manifested 
in  the  life  and  a  "  righteousness  which  is  by 
faith  "  is  not  explicitly  drawn  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Hence  the  passage  contains  no  teaching 
on  the  question  whether  a  man's  relation  to  God 
is  determined  by  his  good  works,  or  whether 
good  works  are  the  fruit  and  outcome  of  a  right 
relation  to  God.  The  essence  of  morality,  ac- 
cording to  the  Old  Testament,  is  loyalty  to  God, 
expressed  by  obedience  to  His  will;  and  from 
that  point  of  view  it  is  self-evident  that  the  man 
who  is  loyal  to  Jehovah  stands  accepted  in  His 
sight.  In  other  connections  Ezekiel  makes  it 
abundantly  clear  that  the  state  of  grace  does  not 
depend  on  any  merit  which  man  can  have  to- 
wards God. 

The  fact  that  Ezekiel  defines  righteousness  in 
terms  of  outward  conduct  has  led  to  his  being 
accused  of  the  error  of  legalism  in  his  moral 
conceptions.  He  has  been  charged  with  resolv- 
ing righteousness  into  "  a  sum  of  separate 
tzedaqoth,"  or  virtues.  But  this  view  strains  his 
language  unduly,  and  seems  moreover  to  be  neg- 
atived by  the  presuppositions  of  his  argument. 
As  a  man  must  either  live  or  die  at  the  day  of 
judgment,  so  he  must  at  any  moment  be  either 
righteous  or  wicked.  The  problematic  case  of 
a  man  who  should  conscientiously  observe  some 
of  these  requirements  and  deliberately  violate 
others  would  have  been  dismissed  by  Ezekiel 
as  an  idle  speculation:  "Whosoever  shall  keep 
the  whole  law,  and  yet  offend  in  one  point,  he 
is  guilty  of  all  "  (James  ii.  lo).  The  very  fact 
that  former  good  deeds  are  not  remembered 
to  a  man  in  the  day  when  he  turns  from  his 
righteousness  shows  that  the  state  of  righteous- 
ness   is    something    different    from    an    average 

*  "  To  eat  upon  the  mountains  "  (if  that  reading  can  be 
retained)  must  mean  to  take  part  in  the  sacrificial  feasts 
which  were  held  on  the  high  places  in  honour  of  idols. 
But  if  with  W.  R.  Smith  and  others  we  substitute  the 
phrase  "eat  with  the  blood,"  assimilating  the  reading  to 
that  of  ch.  xxxiii.  25.  the  offence  is  still  of  the  same  nature. 
In  the  time  of  Ezekiel  to  eat  with  the  blood  probably 
meant  not  merely  to  eat  that  which  had  not  been  sacri- 
ficed to  Jehovah,  but  to  engage  in  a  rite  of  distinctly 
heathenish  character.  Cf.  Lev.  xix.  20,  and  see  the  notp^ 
in  Smith's  "Kinship  and  Marriage  in  Early  Arabia."  o 


Ezekiel  xviii.] 


THE    RELIGION    OF    THE    INDIVIDUAL. 


259 


struck  from  the  statistics  of  his  moral  career. 
The  bent  of  the  character  towards  or  away  from 
goodness  is  no  doubt  spoken  of  as  subject  to 
sudden  fluctuations,  but  for  the  time  being  each 
man  is  conceived  as  dominated  by  the  one  ten- 
dency or  the  other;  and  it  is  the  bent  of  the 
whole  nature  towards  the  good  that  constitutes 
the  righteousness  by  which  a  man  shall  live.  It  is 
at  all  events  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the 
prophet  is  concerned  only  about  the  external 
act  and  indifferent  to  the  state  of  heart  from 
which  it  proceeds.  It  is  true  that  he  does 
not  attempt  to  penetrate  beneath  the  surface 
of  the  outward  life.  He  does  not  analyse  mo- 
tives. But  this  is  because  he  assumes  that  if  a 
man  keeps  God's  law  he  does  it  from  a  sincere 
desire  to  please  God  and  wifh  a  sense  of  the 
rightness  of  the  law  to  which  he  subjects  his 
life.  When  we  recognise  this  the  charge  of  ex- 
ternalism  amounts  to  very  little.  We  can  never 
get  behind  the  principle  that  "  he  that  doeth 
righteousness  is  righteous"  (i  John  iii.  7),  and 
that  principle  covers  all  that  Ezekiel  really 
teaches.  Compared  with  the  more  spiritual 
teaching  of  the  New  Testament  his  moral  ideal 
is  no  doubt  defective  in  many  directions,  but 
his  insistence  on  action  as  a  test  of  character  is 
hardly  one  of  them.  We  must  remember  that  the 
New  Testament  itself  contains  as  many  warn- 
ings against  a  false  spirituality  as  it  does  against 
the  opposite  error  of  reliance  on  good  works. 

II. 

The  second  great  truth  of  personal  religion  is 
the  moral  freedom  of  the  individual  to  determine 
his  own  destiny  in  the  day  of  judgment.  This  is 
illustrated  in  the  latter  part  of  the  chapter  by  the 
two  opposite  cases  of  a  wicked  man  turning  from 
his  wickedness  (vv.  21,  22)  and  a  righteous  man 
turning  from  his  righteousness  (ver.  24).  And 
the  teaching  of  the  passage  is  that  the  effect  of 
such  a  change  of  mind,  as  regards  a  man's  re- 
lation to  God,  is  absolute.  The  good  life  subse- 
quent to  conversion  is  not  weighed  against  the 
sins  of  past  years;  it  is  the  index  of  a  new  state 
of  heart  in  which  the  guilt  of  the  former  trans- 
gressions is  entirely  blotted  out:  "  All  his  trans- 
gressions that  he  hath  committed  shall  not  be 
remembered  in  regard  to  him;  in  his  righteous- 
ness that  he  hath  done  he  shall  live.'"  But  in 
like  manner  the  act  of  apostasy  effaces  the  re- 
membrance of  good  deeds  done  in  an  earlier 
period  of  chc  man's  life.  The  standing  of  each 
so-il  before  God,  its  righteousness  or  its  wick- 
fi-iness,  is  thus  wholly  determined  by  its  final 
"hoice  of  good  or  evil,  and  is  revealed  by  the 
conJact  which  follows  that  great  moral  decision. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Ezekiel  regards  these 
two  possibilities  as  equally  real,  falling  away 
from  righteousness  being  as  much  a  fact  of  ex- 
perience as  repentance.  In  the  light  of  the  New 
Testament  we  should  perhaps  interpret  both 
cases  somewhat  differently.  In  genuine  conver- 
sion we  must  recognise  the  imparting  of  a  new 
spiritual  principle  which  is  ineradicable,  contain- 
ing the  pledge  of  perseverance  in  the  state  of 
grace  to  the  end.  In  the  case  of  final  apostasy 
we  are  compelled  to  judge  that  the  righteousness 
which  is  renounced  was  only  apparent,  that  it 
was  no  true  indication  of  the  man's  character 
or  of  his  condition  in  the  sight  of  God.  But 
these  are  not  the  questions  with  which  the 
prophet  is  directly  dealing.     The  essential  truth 


which  he  inculcates  is  the  emancipation  of  the 
individual,  through  repentance,  from  his  own 
past.  In  virtue  of  his  immediate  personal  rela- 
tion to  God  each  man  has  the  power  to  accept 
the  offer  of  salvation,  to  break  away  from  his 
sinful  life  and  escape  the  doom  which  hangs 
over  the  impenitent.  To  this  one  point  the 
whole  argument  of  the  chapter  tends.  It  is  a 
demonstration  of  the  possibility  and  efficacy  of 
individual  repentance,  culminating-  in  the  decla- 
ration which  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  evan- 
gelical religion,  that  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  him  that  dieth,  but  will  have  all  men 
to  repent  and  live   (ver.  32). 

It  is  not  easy  for  us  to  conceive  the  effect  of 
this  revelation  on  the  minds  of  people  so 
utterly  unprepared  for  it  as  the  generation  in 
which  Ezekiel  lived.  Accustomed  as  they  were 
to  think  of  their  individual  fate  as  bound  up 
in  that  of  their  nation,  they  could  not  at  once 
adjust  themselves  to  a  doctrine  which  had  never 
previously  been  enunciated  with  such  incisive 
clearness.  And  it  is  not  surprising  that  one  ef- 
fect of  Ezekiel's  teaching  was  to  create  fresh 
doubts  of  the  rectitude  of  the  Divine  govern- 
ment. "  The  way  of  the  Lord  is  not  equal,"  it 
was  said  (vv.  25,  29).  So  long  as  it  was  ad- 
mitted that  men  suffered  for  the  sins  of  their 
ancestors  or  that  God  dealt  with  them  in  the 
mass,  there  was  at  least  an  appearance  of  con- 
sistency in  the  methods  of  Providence.  The  jus- 
tice of  God  might  not  be  visible  in  the  life  of 
the  individual,  but  it  could  be  roughly  traced  in 
the  history  of  the  nation  as  a  whole.  But  when 
that  principle  was  discarded,  then  the  question 
of  the  Divine  righteousness  was  raised  in  the 
case  of  each  separate  Israelite,  and  there  im- 
mediately appeared  all  those  perplexities  abovji 
the  lot  of  the  individual  which  so  sorely  e::er- 
cised  the  faith  of  Old  Testament  believe'3. 
Experience  did  not  show  that  correspondence 
between  a  man's  attitude  towards  God  and  his 
earthly  fortunes  which  the  doctrine  of  individual 
freedom  seemed  to  imply;  and  even  in  Ezekiel's 
time  it  must  have  been  evident  that  the  calami- 
ties which  overtook  the  state  fell  indiscrimi- 
nately on  the  righteous  and  the  wricked.  The 
prophet's  purpose,  however,  is  a  practical  one, 
and  he  does  not  attempt  to  offer  a  theoretical 
solution  of  the  difficulties  which  thus  arose. 
There  were  several  considerations  in  his  mind 
which  turned  aside  the  edge  of  the  people's  com- 
plaint against  the  righteousness  of  Jehovah. 
One  was  the  imminence  of  the  final  judgment, 
in  which  the  absolute  rectitude  of  the  Divine  pro- 
cedure would  be  clearly  manifested.  Another 
seems  to  be  the  irresolute  and  unstable  attitude  of 
the  people  themselves  towards  the  great  moral 
issues  which  were  set  before  them.  While  they 
professed  to  be  more  righteous  than  their  fathers, 
they  showed  no  settled  purpose  of  amendment 
in  their  lives.  A  man  might  be  apparently  right- 
eous to-day  and  a  sinner  to-morrow:  the  "ine- 
quality "  of  which  they  complained  was  in  their 
own  ways,  and  not  in  the  way  of  the  Lord  (vv. 
25,  29).  But  the  most  important  element  in  the 
case  was  the  prophet's  conception  of  the  char- 
acter of  God  as  one  who,  though  strictly  just,  yet 
desired  that  men  should  live.  The  Lord  is  long- 
suffering,  not  willing  that  any  should  perish: 
and  He  postpones  the  day  of  decision  that  His 
goodness  may  lead  men  to  repentance.  "  Have 
I  any  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked?  saith 
the  Lord:  and  not  that  he  should  turn  from  his 


26o 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


ways,  and  live?  "  (ver.  23).  And  all  these  con- 
siderations lead  up  to  the  urgent  call  to  repent- 
ance with  which  the  chapter  closes. 

The  importance  of  the  questions  dealt  with  in 
this  eighteenth  chapter  is  shown  clearly  enough 
by  the  hold  which  they  have  over  the  minds 
of  men  in  the  present  day.  The  very  same  dif- 
ficulties which  Ezekiel  had  to  encounter  in  his 
time  confront  us  still  in  a  somewhat  altered  form, 
and  are  often  keenly  felt  as  obstacles  to  faith  in 
God.  The  scientific  doctrine  of  heredity,  for  ex- 
ample, seems  to  be  but  a  more  precise  modern 
rendering  of  the  old  proverb  about  the  eating 
of  sour  grapes.  The  biological  contioversy  over 
the  possibility  of  the  transmission  of  acquired 
characteristics  scarcely  touches  the  moral  prob- 
lem. In  whatever  way  that  controversy  may 
be  ultimately  settled,  it  is  certain  that  in  all  cases 
a  man's  life  is  affected  both  for  good  and  evil  by 
influences  which  descend  upon  him  from  his  an- 
cestry. Similarly  within  the  sphere  of  the  indi- 
vidual life  the  law  of  habit  seems  to  exclude  the 
possibility  of  complete  emancipation  from  the 
penalty  due  to  past  transgressions.  Hardly  any- 
thing, in  short,  is  better  established  by  experi- 
ence than  that  the  consequences  of  past  actions 
persist  through  all  changes  of  spiritual  condi- 
tion, and,  further,  that  children  do  suffer  from 
the  consequences  of  their  parents'  sin. 

Do  not  these  facts,  it  may  be  asked,  amount 
practically  to  a  vindication  of  the  theory  of  ret- 
ribution against  which  the  prophet's  argument 
is  directed?  How  can  we  reconcile  them  with 
the  great  principles  enunciated  in  this  chapter? 
Dictates  of  morality,  fundamental  truths  of  re- 
ligion, these  may  be:  but  can  we  say  in  the 
face  of  experience  that  tfiey  are  true? 

It  must  be  admitted  that  a  complete  answer 
to  these  questions  is  not  given  in  the  chapter  be- 
fore us,  nor  perhaps  anywhere  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. So  long  as  God  dealt  with  men  mainly 
by  temporal  rewards  and  punishments,  it  was 
impossible  to  realise  fully  the  separateness  of  the 
soul  in  its  spiritual  relations  to  God;  the  fate  of 
the  individual  is  necessarily  merp'ed  in  that  of  the 
community,  and  Ezekiel's  doctrine  remains  a 
prophecy  of  better  things  to  be  revealed.  This 
indeed  is  the  light  in  which  he  himself  teaches  us 
to  regard  it;  although  he  applies  it  in  all  its 
strictness  to  the  men  of  his  own  generation,  it  is 
nevertheless  essentially  a  feature  of  the  ideal 
kingdom  of  God,  and  is  to  be  exhibited  in  the 
judgment  by  which  that  kingdom  is  introduced. 
The  great  value  of  his  teaching  therefore  lies 
in  his  having  formulated  with  unrivalled  clear- 
ness principles  which  are  eternally  true  of  the 
spiritual  life,  although  the  perfect  manifestation 
of  these  principles  in  the  experience  of  believers 
was  reserved  for  the  final  revelation  of  salvation 
in   Christ. 

The  solution  of  the  contradiction  referred  to 
lies  in  the  separation  between  the  natural  and  the 
penal  consequences  of  sin.  There  is  a  sphere 
within  which  natural  laws  have  their  course, 
modified,  it  may  be,  but  not  wholly  suspended 
by  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ.  The 
physical  effects  of  vicious  indulgence  are  not 
turned  aside  by  repentance,  and  a  man  may  carry 
the  scars  of  sin  upon  him  to  the  grave.  But 
there  is  also  a  sphere  into  which  natural  law 
does  not  enter.  In  his  immediate  personal  rela- 
tion to  God  a  believer  is  raised  above  the  evil 
consecjuences  which  flow  from  his  past  life,  so 
that  they  have  no  power  to   separate  him   from 


the  love  of  God.  And  within  that  sphere  his 
moral  freedom  and  independence  are  as  much 
matter  of  experience  as  is  his  subjection  to  law  in 
another  sphere.  He  knows  that  all  things  work 
together  for  his  good,  and  that  tribulation  itself 
is  a  means  of  bringing  him  nearer  to  God. 
Amongst  those  tribulations  which  work  out  his 
salvation  there  may  be  the  evil  conditions  im- 
posed on  him  by  the  sin  of  others,  or  even  the 
natural  consequences  of  his  own  former  trans- 
gressions. But  tribulations  no  longer  bear  the 
aspect  of  penalty,  and  are  no  longer  a  token  of 
the  wrath  of  God.  They  are  transformed  into 
chastisements  by  which  the  Father  of  spirits 
makes  His  children  perfect  in  holiness.  The 
hardest  cross  to  bear  will  always  be  that  which 
is  the  result  of  one's  own  sin;  but  He  who  has 
borne  the  guilt  of  it  can  strengthen  us  to  bear 
even  this  and  follow  Him.* 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  SWORD  UNSHEATHED. 

Ezekiel  xxi. 

The  date  at  the  beginning  of  chap.  xx.  intro- 
duces the  fourth  and  last  section  of  the  prophe- 
cies delivered  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem. It  also  divides  the  first  period  of  Ezekiel's 
ministry  into  two  equal  parts.  The  time  is  the 
month  of  August,  590  b.  c,  two  years  after  his 
prophetic  inauguration  and  two  years  before  the 
investment  of  Jerusalem.  It  follows  that  if  the 
Book  of  Ezekiel  presents  anything  like  a  faith- 
ful picture  of  his  actual  work,  by  far  his  most 
productive  year  was  that  which  had  just  closed. 
It  embraces  the  long  and  varied  series  of  dis- 
courses from  chap.  viii.  to  chap.  xix. ;  whereas 
five  chapters  are  all  that  remain  as  a  record  of 
his  activity  during  the  next  two  years.  This  re- 
sult is  not  so  improbable  as  at  first  sight  it  might 
appear.  From  the  character  of  Ezekiel's  proph- 
ecy, which  consists  largely  of  homiletic  amplifi- 
cations of  one  great  theme,  it  is  quite  intelligible 
that  the  main  lines  of  his  teaching  should  have 
taken  shape  in  his  mind  at  an  early  period  of  his 
ministry.  The  discourses  in  the  earlier  part  of 
the  book  may  have  been  expanded  in  the  act  of 
committing  them  to  writing;  but  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  ideas  they  contain  were 
present  to  the  prophet's  mind  and  were  actually 
delivered  by  him  within  the  period  to  which  they 

*  In  the  striking  passage  ch.  xiv.  12-23  the  application  of 
the  doctrine  of  individual  retribution  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  is  discussed.  It  is  treated  as  "an  exception  to 
the  rule  "  (Sraend)  perhaps  the  exception  which  proves 
the  rule.  The  rule  is  that  in  a  national  judgment  the 
most  eminent  saints  save  neither  son  nor  daughter  by 
their  righteousness,  but  only  their  own  lives  (vv.  13-20). 
At  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  however,  a  remnant  escapes  and 
goes  into  captivity  with  sons  and  daughters,  in  order  that 
their  corrupt  lives  may  prove  to  the  earlier  exiles  how 
necessary  the  destruction  of  the  city  was  (vv.  21-23)  Tne 
argument  is  an  admission  that  the  judgment  on  Israel 
was  not  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the  strict  principle 
laid  down  in  ch.  xviii.  It  is  difficult,  indeed,  to  reconcile 
the  various  utterances  of  Ezekiel  on  this  subject.  Inch, 
xxi.  3,  4,  he  expressly  announces  that  in  the  downfall  of  the 
s':ate  righteous  and  wicked  shall  perish  together.  In  the 
vi  ;ion    of    ch.  ix.,  on   the  other  hand,  the   righteous  are 

larked  for  exemption  from  the  fate  of  the  city.  The 
truth  appears  to  be  that  the  prophet  is  conscious  of  stand- 
ing between  two  dispensations,  and  does  not  hold  a  con- 
sistent view  regarding  the.time  when  the  law  proper  to 
the  perfect  dispensation  comes  into  operation.  The  point 
on  which  there  is  no  ambiguity  is  that  in  the  final  judg- 
ment which  ushers  in  the  Messianic  age  the  principle  of 
individual  retribution  shall  be  fully  manifested. 


Ezekiel  xxi.] 


THE    SWORD    UNSHEATHED. 


261 


are  assigned.  We  may  therefore  suppose  that 
Ezekiel's  public  exhortations  became  less  fre- 
quent during  the  two  years  that  preceded  the 
siege,  just  as  we  know  that  for  two  years  after 
that  event  they  were  altogether  discontinued. 

In  this  last  division  of  the  prophecies  relating 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  we  can  easily  dis- 
tinguish two  different  classes  of  oracles.  On  the 
one  hand  we  have  two  chapters  dealing  with  con- 
temporary incidents — the  march  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's army  against  Jerusalem  (chap,  xxi.),  and 
the  commencement  of  the  siege  of  the  city  (chap, 
xxiv.).  In  spite  of  the  confident  opinion  of  some 
critics  that  these  prophecies  could  not  have  been 
composed  till  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  they 
seem  to  me  to  bear  the  marks  of  having  been 
written  under  the  immediate  influence  of  the 
events  they  describe.  It  is  difficult  otherwise 
to  account  for  the  excitement  under  which  the 
prophet  labours,  especially  in  chap,  xxi.,  which 
stands  by  the  side  of  chap.  vii.  as  the  most  agi- 
tated utterance  in  the  whole  book.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  have  three  discourses  of  the  nature  of 
formal  indictments — one  directed  against  the  ex- 
iles (chap.  XX.),  one  against  Jerusalem  (chap, 
xxii.),  and  one  against  the  whole  nation  of  Is- 
rael (chap,  xxiii.).  It  is  impossible  in  these  chap- 
ters to  discover  any  advance  in  thought  upon 
Similar  passages  that  have  already  been  before 
us.  Two  of  them  (chaps,  xx.  and  xxiii.)  are  his- 
torical retrospects  after  the  manner  of  chap,  xvi., 
and  there  is  no  obvious  reason  why  they  should 
be  placed  in  a  different  section  of  the  book.  The 
key  to  the  unity  of  the  section  must  therefore 
be  sought  in  the  two  historical  prophecies  and 
in  the  situation  created  by  the  events  they  de- 
scribe.* It  will  therefore  help  to  clear  the  ground 
if  we  commence  with  the  oracle  which  throws 
most  light  on  the  historical  background  of  this 
group  of  prophecies — the  oracle  of  Jehovah's 
sword  against  Jerusalem  in  chap,  xxi.f 

The  long-projected  rebellion  has  at  length  bro- 
ken out.  Zedekiah  has  renounced  his  allegiance 
to  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  the  army  of  the 
Chaldeans  is  on  its  way  to  suppress  the  insur- 
rection. The  precise  date  of  these  events  is  not 
known.  For  some  reason  the  conspiracy  of  the 
Palestinian  states  had  hung  fire;  many  years  had 
been  allowed  to  slip  away  since  the  time  when 
their  envoys  had  met  in  Jerusalem  to  concert 
measures  of  united  resistance  (Jer.  xxvii.).  This 
procrastination  was,  as  usual,  a  sure  presage  of 
disaster.  In  the  interval  the  league  had  dissolved. 
Some  of  its  members  had  made  terms  with  Neb- 
uchadnezzar; and  it  would  appear  that  only 
Tyre,  Judah,  and  Ammon  ventured  on  open  defi- 
ance of  his  power.  The  hope  was  cherished  in 
Jerusalem,   and  probably  also  among  the  Jews 

*  This  is  true  whether  (as  some  expositors  think)  the 
date  in  ch.  xx.  is  merely  an  external  mark  introducing  a 
new  division  of  the  book,  or  whether  (as  seems  more 
natural)  it  is  due  to  the  fact  that  here  Ezekiel  recognised 
a  turning-point  of  his  ministry.  Such  visits  of  the  elders 
as  that  here  recorded  must  have  been  of  frequent  occur- 
rence. Two  others  are  mentioned,  and  of  these  one  is 
undated  (ch.  xiv.  i)  ;  the  other  at  least  admits  the  sup- 
position that  it  was  connected  with  a  very  definite  change 
of  opinion  among  the  exiles  (ch.  viii.  i :  see  above,  p.  239). 
We  may  therefore  reasonably  suppose  that  the  precise 
note  of  time  here  introduced  marks  this  particular  incident 
as  having  possessed  a  peculiar  significance  in  the  relations 
between  the  prophet  and  his  fellow-exiles.  What  its  sig- 
nificance may  have  been  we  shall  consider  in  the  next 
chapter,  seep.  264. 

tThe  verses  xx.  45-49  of  the  English  Version  really 
belong  to  ch.  xxi.  and  are  so  placed  in  the  Hebrew.  In 
what  follows  the  verses  will  be  numbered  according  to  the 
Hebrew  text. 


in  Babylon,  that  the  first  assault  of  the  Chaldeans 
would  be  directed  against  the  Ammonites,  and 
that  time  would  thus  be  gained  to  complete  the 
defences  of  Jerusalem.  To  dispel  this  illusion  is 
one  obvious  purpose  of  the  prophecy  before  us. 
The  movements  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  army  are 
directed  by  a  wisdom  higher  tlian  his  own;  he 
is  the  unconscious  instrument  by  which  Jehovah 
is  executing  His  own  purpose.  "Tiic  real  ob- 
ject of  his  expedition  is  not  to  punish  a  few  re- 
fractory tribes  for  an  act  of  disloyalty,  but  to 
vindicate  the  righteousness  of  Tehovah  in  the  de- 
struction of  the  city  which  had  profaned  his  holi- 
ness. No  human  calculations  will  be  allowed 
even  for  a  moment  to  turn  aside  the  blow  which 
is  aimed  directly  at  Jerusalem's  sins,  or  to  ob- 
scure the  lesson  taught  by  its  sure  and  unerring 
aim. 

We  can  imagine  the  restless  suspense  and  anxi- 
ety with  which  the  final  struggle  for  the  national 
cause  was  watched  by  the  exiles  in  Babylon. 
In  imagination  they  would  follow  the  long  march 
of  the  Chaldean  hosts  by  the  Euphrates  and  their 
descent  by  the  valleys  of  the  Orontes  and  Le- 
ontes  upon  the  city.  Eagerly  would  they  wait 
for  some  tidings  of  a  reverse  which  would  revive 
their  drooping  hope  of  a  speedy  collapse  of  the 
great  world-empire  and  a  restoration  of  Israel 
to  its  ancient  freedom.  And  when  at  length  they 
heard  that  Jerusalem  was  enclosed  in  the  iron 
grip  of  these  victorious  legions,  from  which  no 
human  deliverance  was  possible,  their  mood 
would  harden  into  one  in  which  fanatical  hope 
and  sullen  despair  contended  for  the  mastery. 
Into  an  atmosphere  charged  with  such  excite- 
ment Ezekiel  hurls  the  series  of  predictions  com- 
prised in  chaps,  xxi.  and  xxiv.  With  far  other 
feelings  than  his  fellows,  but  w-ith  as  keen  an 
interest  as  theirs,  he  follows  the  development  of 
what  he  knows  to  be  the  last  act  in  the  long 
controversy  between  Jehovah  and  Israel.  It  is 
his  duty  to  repeat  once  more  the  irrevocable  de- 
cree— the  Divine  delenda  est  against  the  guilty 
Jerusalem.  But  he  does  so  in  this  instance  in 
language  whose  vehemence  betrays  the  agitation 
of  his  mind,  and  perhaps  also  the  restlessness 
of  the  society  in  which  he  lived.  The  twenty-first 
chapter  is  a  series  of  rhapsodies,  the  product  of 
a  state  bordering  on  ecstasy,  where  different  as- 
pects of  the  impending  judgment  are  set  forth 
by  the  help  of  vivid  images  which  pass  in  quick 
succession  through  the  prophet's  mind. 

I. 

The  first  vision  which  the  prophet  sees  of  the 
approaching  catastrophe  (vv.  1-4)  is  that  of  a  for- 
est conflagration,  an  occurrence  which  must  have 
been  as  frequent  in  Palestine  as  a  prairie  fire  in 
America.  He  sees  a  fire  break  out  in  the  "  for- 
est of  the  south,"  and  rage  with  such  fierceness 
that  "  every  green  tree  and  every  dry  tree  "  is 
burned  up;  the  faces  of  all  who  are  near  it  are 
scorched,  and  all  men  are  convinced  that  so  ter- 
rible a  calamity  must  be  the  work  of  Jehovah 
Himself.  This  we  may  suppose  to  have  been  the 
form  in  which  the  truth  first  laid  hold  of  Eze- 
kiel's imagination;  but  he  appears  to  have  hesi- 
tated to  proclaim  his  message  in  this  form.  His 
figurative  manner  of  speech  had  become  noto- 
rious among  the  exiles  (vcr.  5),  and  he  was  con- 
scious that  a  "  parable  "  so  vague  and  general 
as  this  would  be  dismissed  as  an  ingenious  riddle 
which  might  mean  anj'thing  or  nothing.     What 


262 


THE    BOOK   OF   EZEKIEL. 


follows  (vv.  7-10)  gives  the  key  to  the  original 
vision.  Although  it.  is  in  form  an  independent 
oracle,  it  is  closely  parallel  to  the  preced- 
ing and  elucidates  each  feature  in  detail.  The 
"  forest  of  the  south  "  is  explained  to  mean  the 
land  of  Israel;  and  the  mention  of  the  sword  of 
Jehovah  instead  of  the  fire  intimates  less  ob- 
scurely that  the  instrument  01  the  threatened 
calamity  is  the  Babylonian  army.  It  is  interest- 
ing to  observe  that  Ezekiel  expressly  admits  that 
there  were  righteous  men  even  in  the  doomed 
Israel.  Contrary  to  his  conception  of  the  normal 
methods  of  the  Divine  righteousness,  he  con- 
ceives of  this  judgment  as  one  which  involves 
righteous  and  wicked  in  a  common  ruin.  Not 
that  God  is  less  than  righteous  in  this  crowning 
act  of  vengeance,  but  His  justice  is  not  brought 
to  bear  on  the  fate  of  individuals.  He  is  dealing 
with  the  nation  as  a  whole,  and  in  the  extermi- 
nating judgment  of  the  nation  good  men  will  no 
more  be  spared  than  the  green  tree  of  the  forest 
escapes  the  fate  of  the  dry.  It  was  the  fact  that 
righteous  men  perished  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem; 
and  Ezekiel  does  not  shut  his  eyes  to  it,  firmly 
as  he  believed  that  the  time  was  come  when  God 
would  reward  every  man  according  to  his  own 
character.  The  indiscriminateness  of  the  judg- 
ment in  its  bearing  on  different  classes  of  persons 
is  obviously  a  feature  which  Ezekiel  here  seeks 
to  emphasise. 

But  the  idea  of  the  sword  of  Jehovah  drawn 
from  its  scabbard,  to  return  no  more  till  it  has 
accqmplished  its  nMssi»n,  is  the  one  that  has 
fixed  itself  most  deeply  in  the  prophet's  imagi- 
nation, and  forms  the  connecting  link  between 
this  vision  and  the  other  amplifications  of  the 
same  theme  which  follow. 


II. 

Passing  over  the  symbolic  action  of  vv.  11-13, 
representing  the  horror  and  astonishment  with 
which  the  dire  tidings  of  Jerusalem's  fall  will  be 
received,  we  come  to  the  point  w'here  the  prophet 
breaks  into  the  wild  strain  of  dithyrambic  poetry, 
which  has  been  called  the  "  Song  of  the  Sword  " 
(vv.  14-22).  The  following  translation,  although 
necessarily  imperfect  and  in  some  places  uncer- 
tain, may  convey  some  idea  both  of  the  struc- 
ture and  the  rugged  vigour  of  the  original.  It 
will  be  seen  that  there  is  a  clear  division  into 
four  stanz;as:  * — 

(0  Vv.  14-16. 

'*  A  sword, a  sword  !  It  is  sharpened  and  burnished  withal. 
For  a  work  of  slaughter  is  it  sharpened  ! 
To  gleam  like  lightning  burnished  ! 

And  'twas  given  to  be  smoothed  for  the  grip  of  the  hand, 
— Sharpened  is  it,  and  furbished — 
To  put  in  the  hand  of  the  slayer." 

(ii)  Vv.  17,  18. 

"Cry  and  howl,  son  of  man  ! 

For  it  has  come  among  my  people  ; 

Come  among  all  the  princes  of  Israel ! 

Victimsof  the  sword  are  they,  they  and  my  people  ; 

Therefore  smite  upon  thy  thigh  ! 

It  shall  not  be,  saith  Jehovah  the  Lord." 

(iii)  Vv.  ig,  20. 

"  But,  thou  son  of  man,  prophesy,  and  smite  hand  on  hand; 
Let  the  sword  be  doubled  and  tripled  (?). 

*  At  three  places  the  meaning  is  entirely  lost,  through 
corruption  of  the  text. 


A  sword  of  the  slain  is  it,  the  great  sword  of  the  slain 

whirling  around  them, — 
That  hearts  may  fail,  and  many  be  the  fallen  in  all  their 
gates. 

It  is  made  like  lightning,  furbished  for  slaughter  !  " 

(iv)  Vv.  21,  22. 

'•  Gather  thee  together  !    Smite  to  the  right,  to  the  left. 
Whithersoever  thine  edge  is  appointed  ! 
And  I  also  will  smite  hand  on  hand. 
And  appease  iSIy  wrath  : 

I  Jehovah  have  spoken  it." 

In  spite  of  its  obscurity,  its  abrupt  transitions, 
and  its  strange  blending  of  the  divine  with  the 
human  personality,  the  ode  exhibits  a  definite 
poetic  form  and  a  real  progress  of  thought  from 
the  beginning  to  the  close.  Throughout  the 
passage  we  observe  that  the  prophet's  gaze  is 
fascinated  by  the  glittering  sword  which  sym- 
bolised the  instrument  of  Jehovah's  vengeance. 
In  the  opening  stanza  (i)  he  describes  the 
preparation  of  the  sword;  he  notes  the  keenness 
of  its  edge  and  its  glittering  sheen  with  an  awful 
presentiment  that  an  implement  so  elaborately 
fashioned  is  destined  for  some  terrible  day  of 
slaughter.  Then  (ii)  he  announces  the  purpose 
for  which  the  sword  is  prepared,  and  breaks  into 
loud  lamentation  as  he  realises  that  its  doomed 
victims  are  his  own  people  and  the  princes  ot 
Israel.  In  the  next  stanza  (iii)  he  sees  the 
sword  in  action;  wielded  by  an  invisible  hand, 
it  flashes  hither  and  thither,  circlmg  round  its 
hapless  victims  as  if  two  or  three  swords  were 
at  work  instead  of  one.  All  hearts  are  paralysed 
with  fear,  but  the  sword  does  not  cease  its  rav- 
ages until  it  has  filled  the  ground  with  slain. 
Then  at  length  the  sword  is  at  rest  (iv),  having 
accomplished  its  work.  The  divine  Speaker  calls 
on  it  in  a  closing  apostr*-  phe  "  to  gather  itself 
together  "  as  if  for  a  final  sweep  to  right  and 
left,  indicating  the  thoroughness  with  which  the 
judgment  has  been  executed.  In  the  last  verse 
the  vision  of  the  sword  fades  away,  and  the  poem 
closes  with  an  announcement,  in  the  usual  pro- 
phetic manner,  of  Jehovah's  fixed  purpose  to 
"  assuage "  His  wrath  against  Israel  by  the 
crowning  act  of  retribution. 

III. 

If  any  douibt  still  remained  as  to  what  the 
sword  of  Jehovah  meant,  it  is  removed  in  the 
next  section  (vv.  23-32),  where  the  prophet  in- 
dicates the  way  by  which  the  sword  is  to  come 
on  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  The  Chaldsean 
monarch  is  represented  as  pausing  on  his 
march,  perhaps  at  Riblah  or  some  place  to  the 
north  of  Palestine,  and  deliberating  whether  he 
shall  advance  first  against  Judah  or  the  Am- 
monites. He  stands  at  the  parting  of  the  ways 
— on  the  left  hand  is  the  road  to  Rabbath- 
ammon,  on  the  right  that  to  Jerusalem.  In  his 
perplexity  he  invokes  supernatural  guidance,  re- 
sorting to  various  expedients  then  in  use  for 
ascertaining  the  will  of  the  gods  and  the  path 
of  good  fortune.  He  "  rattles  the  arrows  "  (two 
of  them  in  some  kind  of  vessel,  one  for  Jerusalem 
and  the  other  for  Riblah);  he  consults  the  ter- 
aphim  and  inspects  the  entrails  of  a  sacrificial 
victim.  This  consulting  of  the  omens  was  no 
doubt  an  invariable  preliminary  to  every  cam- 
paign, and  was  resorted  to  whenever  an  impor- 
tant military  decision  had  to  be  made.  It  might 
seem  a  matter  of  indifference  to  a  powerful  mon- 


Ezekiel  xxi.] 


THE    SWORD    UNSHEATHED. 


263 


arch  like  Nebuchadnezzar  which  of  two  petty 
opponents  he  determined  to  crush  first.  But  the 
kings  of  Babylon  were  religious  men  in  their 
wriy,  and  never  doubted  that  success  depended 
on  their  following  the  indications  that  were  given 
by  the  higher  powers.  In  this  case  Nebuchad- 
nezzar gets  a  true  answer,  but  not  from  the 
deities  whose  aid  he  had  invoked.  In  his  right 
hand  he  finds  the  arrow  marked  "  Jerusalem." 
The  die  is  cast,  his  resolution  is  taken,  but  it 
is  Jehovah's  sentence  sealing  the  fate  of  Jeru- 
salem that  has  been  uttered. 

Such  is  the  situation  which  Ezekiel  in  Bab- 
ylon is  directed  to  represent  through  a  piece  of 
obvious  symbolism.  A  road  diverging  into  two 
is  drawn  on  the  ground,  and  at  the  meeting- 
point  a  sign-post  is  erected,  indicating  that  the 
one  leads  to  Ammon  and  the  other  to  Judah. 
It  is  of  course  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the 
incident  so  graphically  described  actually  oc- 
carred.  The  divination  scene  may  only  be  im- 
aginary, although  it  is  certainly  a  true  reflection 
cf  Babylonian  ideas  and  customs.  The  truth 
conveyed  is  that  the  Babylonian  army  is  moving 
under  the  immediate  guidance  of  Jehovah,  and 
that  not  only  the  political  projects  of  the  king, 
but  his  secret  thoughts  and  even  his  superstitious 
reliance  on  signs  and  omens,  are  all  overruled 
for  the  furtherance  of  the  one  purpose  for  which 
Jehovah   has   raised  him  up. 

Meanwhile  Ezekiel  is  well  aware  that  in  Jeru- 
salem a  very  different  interpretation  is  put  on  the 
course  of  events.  When  the  news  of  the  great 
king's  decision  reaches  the  men  at  the  head  of 
affairs  they  are  not  dismayed.  They  view  the 
decision  as  the  result  of  "false  divination"; 
they  laugh  to  scorn  the  superstitious  rites  which 
have  determined  the  course  of  the  campaign,— 
not  that  they  suppose  the  king  will  not  act  on 
his  omens,  but  they  do  not  believe  they  are  an 
augury  of  success.  They  had  hoped  for  a  short 
breathing  space  while  Nebuchadnezzar  was  en- 
gaged on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  but  they  will 
not  shrink  from  the  conflict  whether  it  be  to- 
day or  to-morrow.  Addressing  himself  to  this 
state  of  mind,  Ezekiel  once  more  *  reminds  those 
who  hear  him  that  these  men  are  fighting  against 
the  moral  laws  of  the  universe.  The  existing 
kingdom  of  Judah  occupies  a  false  position  be- 
fore God  and  in  the  eyes  of  just  men.  It  has 
no  religious  foundation;  for  the  hope  of  the 
^^essiah  does  not  lie  with  that  wearer  of  a  dis- 
honoured crown,  the  king  Zedekiah,  but  with 
the  legitimate  heir  of  David  now  in  exile.  The 
state  has  no  right  to  be  except  as  part  of  the 
Chaldasan  empire,  and  this  right  it  has  forfeited 
by  renouncing  its  allegiance  to  its  earthly  su- 
perior. Tliese  men  forget  that  in  this  quarrel 
the  just  cause  is  that  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  whose 
enterprise  only  seems  to  "  call  to  mind  their 
iniquity  "  (ver.  28) — i.  e.,  their  political  crime. 
In  provoking  this  conflict,  therefore,  they  have 
put  themselves  in  the  wrong;  they  shall  be 
caught   in  the  toils  of  their  own  villainy. 

The  heaviest  censure  is  reserved  for  Zedekiah, 
tl'ie  "  wicked  one,  the  prince  of  Israel,  whose 
day  is  coming  in  the  time  of  final  retribution." 
This  part  of  the  prophecy  has  a  close  resem- 
blance to  the  latter  part  of  chap.  xvii.  The 
prophet's  sympathies  are  still  with  the  exiled 
king,  or  at  least  with  that  branch  of  the  royal 
f&mily  which  he  represents.  And  the  sentence 
0  i  rejection  on  Zedekiah  is  again  accompanied 
*  Of.  ch.  xvii. 


by  a  promise  of  the  restoration  of  the  kingdom 
in  the  person  of  the  Messiah.  The  crown  which 
has  been  dishonoured  by  the  last  king  of  Judah 
shall  be  taken  from  his  head;  that  which  is  low 
shall  be  exalted  (the  exiled  branch  of  the  Da- 
vidic  house),  and  that  which  is  high  shall  be 
abased  (the  reigning  king);  the  whole  existing 
order  of  things  shall  be  overturned  "  until  He 
comes  who  has  the  right."  * 

IV. 

The  last  oracle  is  directed  against  the  children 
of  Ammon.  By  Nebuchadnezzar's  decision  to 
subdue  Jerusalem  first  the  Ammonites  had 
gained  a  short  respite.  They  even  exulted  in  the 
humiliation  of  their  former  ally,  and  had  appar- 
ently drawn  the  sword  in  order  to  seize  part  of 
the  land  of  Judah.  Misled  by  false  diviners,  they 
had  dared  to  seek  their  own  advantage  in  the 
calamities  which  Jehovah  had  brought  on  His 
own  people.  The  prophet  threatens  the  com- 
plete annihilation  of  Ammon,  even  in  its  own 
land,  and  the  blotting  out  of  its  remembrance 
among  the  nations.  That  is  the  substance  of  the 
prophecy;  but  its  form  presents  several  points  of 
difficulty.  It  begins  with  what  appears  to  be  an 
echo  of  the  "  Song  of  the  Sword  "  in  the  earlier 
part  of  the  chapter: — 

"  A  sword  !  a  sword  ! 
It  is  drawn  for  slaughter  ;  it  is  furbished  to  shine  like 
lightning  "  (ver.  33). 

But  as  we  proceed  we  find  that  it  is  the  sword 
of  the  Ammonites  that  is  meant,  and  they  are 
ordered  to  return  it  to  its  sheath.  If  this  be  so, 
the  tone  of  the  passage  must  be  ironical.  It  is 
in  mockery  that  the  prophet  uses  such  magnifi- 
cent language  of  the  puny  pretensions  of  Am- 
mon to  take  a  share  in  the  work  for  which  Je- 
hovah has  fashioned  the  mighty  weapon  of  the 
Chaldaean  army.  There  are  other  reminiscences 
of  the  earlier  part  of  the  chapter,  such  as  the 
"  lying  divination  "  of  ver.  34,  and  the  "  time  of 
final  retribution  "  in  the  same  verse.  The  allu- 
sion to  the  "  reproach  "  of  Ammon  and  its  ag- 
gressive attitude  seems  to  point  to  the  time  after 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  withdrawal 
of  the  army  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Whether  the 
Ammonites  had  previously  made  their  submis- 
sion or  not  we  cannot  tell;  but  the  fortieth  and 
forty-first  chapters  of  Jeremiah  show  that  Am- 
mon was  still  a  hotbed  of  conspiracy  against 
the  Babylonian  interest  in  the  days  after  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem.  These  appearances  make  it  proba- 
ble that  this  part  of  the  chapter  is  an  appendix, 
added  at  a  later  time,  and  dealing  with  a  situ- 
ation which  was  developed  aiter  the  destruction 
of  the  city.  Its  insertion  in  its  present  place  is 
easily  accounted  for  by  the  circumstance  that 
the  fate  of  Ammon  had  been  linked  with  that 
of  Jerusalem  in  the  previous  part  ot  the  chapter. 
The  vindictive  little  nationality  had  used  its  res- 
pite to  gratify  its  hereditary  hatred  of  Israel,  and 
now  the  judgment,  suspended  for  a  time,  shall 
return  with  redoubled  fury  and  sweep  it  from 
the  earth. 

Looking  back  over  this  series  of  prophecies, 
there  seems  reason  to  believe  that,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  last,  they  are  really  contemporane- 
ous with  the  events  they  deal  with.  It  is  true 
that  they  do  not  illuminate  the  historical   situ- 

*  The  reference  is  to  the  Messiah,  and  seems  to  be  based 

on  the  ancient  prophecy  of  Gen.  xlix.  lo,  reading  there  i^V^ 
instead  of  H^C'. 


264 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


ation  to  the  same  degree  as  those  in  which 
Isaiah  depicts  the  advance  of  another  invader  and 
the  development  of  another  crisis  in  the  people's 
history.  This  is  due  partly  to  the  bent  of  Eze- 
kiel's  genius,  but  partly  also  to  the  very  peculiar 
circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed.  The 
events  which  form  the  theme  of  his  prophecy 
were  transacted  on  a  distant  stage;  neither  he 
nor  his  immediate  hearers  were  actors  in  the 
drama.  He  addresses  himself  to  an  audience 
wrought  to  the  highest  pitch  of  excitement,  but 
swayed  by  hopes  and  rumours  and  vague  sur- 
mises as  to  the  probable  issue  of  events.  It 
was  inevitable  in  these  circumstances  that  his 
prophecy,  even  in  those  passages  which  deal 
with  contemporary  facts,  should  present  but  a 
pale  reflection  of  the  actual  situation.  In  the  case 
before  us  the  one  historical  event  which  stands 
out  clearly  is  the  departure  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
with  his  army  to  Jerusalem.  But  what  we  read 
is  genuine  prophecy;  not  the  artifice  of  a  man 
using  prophetic  speech  as  a  literary  form,  but  the 
utterance  of  one  who  discerns  the  finger  of  God 
in  the  present,  and  interprets  His  purpose  be- 
forehand to  the  men  of  his  day. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

JEHOVAH'S  CONTROVERSY  WITH 
ISRAEL. 

EZEKIEL    XX. 

By  far  the  hardest  trial  of  Ezekiel's  faith  must 
have  been  the  conduct  of  his  fellow-exiles.  It 
was  amongst  them  that  he  looked  for  the  great 
spiritual  change  which  must  precede  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  kingdom  of  God;  and  he  had  al- 
ready addressed  to  them  words  of  consolation 
based  on  the  knowledge  that  the  hope  of  the 
future  was  theirs  (xi.  18).  Yet  the  time  passed 
on  without  bringing  any  indications  that  the 
promise  was  about  to  be  fulfilled.  There  were 
no  symptoms  of  national  repentance;  there  was 
nothing  even  to  show  that  the  lessons  of  the 
Exile  as  interpreted  by  the  prophet  were  be- 
ginning to  be  laid  to  heart.  For  these  men, 
among  whom  he  lived,  were  still  inveterately  ad- 
dicted to  idolatry.  Strange  as  it  must  seem  to 
us,  the  very  men  who  cherished  a  fanatical  faith 
in  Jehovah's  power  to  save  His  people  were  as- 
siduously practising  the  worship  of  other  gods. 
It  is  too  readily  assumed  by  some  writers  that 
the  idolatry  of  the  exiles  was  of  the  ambiguous 
kind  which  had  prevailed  so  long  in  the  land  of 
Israel,  that  it  was  the  worship  of  Jehovah  under 
the  form  of  images — a  breach  of  the  second  com- 
mandment, but  not  of  the  first.  The  people  who 
carried  Jeremiah  down  to  Egypt  were  as  eager 
as  Ezekiel's  companions  to  hear  a  word  from 
Jehovah;  yet  they  were  devoted  to  the  worship 
of  the  "  Queen  of  Heaven,"  and  dated  all  their 
misfortunes  from  the  time  when  their  women 
had  ceased  to  pay  court  to  her.  There  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  the  Jews  in  Babylon  were 
less  catholic  in  their  superstitions  than  those  of 
Judaea;  and  indeed  the  whole  drift  of  Ezekiel's 
expostulations  goes  to  show  that  he  has  the 
worship  of  false  gods  in  view.  The  ancient  be- 
lief, that  the  worship  of  Jehovah  was  specially 
associated  with  the  land  of  Canaan,  is  not  likely 
to  have  been  without  influence  on  the  minds  of 
those  who  felt  the  fascination  of  idolatry,  and 


must  have  strengthened  the  tendency  to  seek  the 
aid  of  foreign  gods  in  a  foreign  land. 

The  twentieth  chapter  deals  with  this  matter 
of  idolatry;  and  the  fact  that  this  important  dis- 
course was  called  forth  by  a  visit  from  the  elders 
of  Israel  shows  how  heavily  the  subject  weighed 
on  the  prophet's  mind.  Whatever  the  purpose 
of  the  deputation  may  have  been  (and  of  that 
we  have  no  information),  it  was  certainly  not 
to  consult  Ezekiel  about  the  propriety  of  wor- 
shipping false  gods.  It  is  only  because  this 
great  question  dominates  all  his  thoughts  con- 
cerning them  and  their  destiny  that  he  connects 
the  warning  against  idolatry  with  a  casual  in- 
quiry addressed  to  him  by  the  elders.  The  cir- 
cumstances are  so  similar  to  those  of  chap  xiv. 
that  Ewald  was  led  to  conjecture  that  both  ora- 
cles originated  in  one  and  the  same  incident,  and 
were  separated  from  each  other  in  writing  be- 
cause of  the  difference  of  their  subjects.  Chap. 
xiv.  on  that  view  justifies  the  refusal  of  an  an- 
swer from  a  consideration  of  the  true  function 
of  prophecy,  while  chap.  xx.  expands  the  ad- 
monition of  the  sixth  verse  of  chap.  xiv.  into  an 
elaborate  review  of  the  religious  history  of  Is- 
rael. But  there  is  really  no  good  reason  for 
identifying  the  two  incidents.  In  neither  pas- 
sage does  the  prophet  think  it  worth  while  to 
record  the  object  of  the  inquiry  addressed  to 
him,  and  therefore  conjecture  is  useless. 

But  the  very  fact  that  a  definite  date  is  given 
for  this  visit  leads  us  to  consider  whether  it  had 
not  some  peculiar  significance  to  lodge  it  so 
firmly  in  Ezekiel's  mind.  Now  the  most  sug- 
gestive hint  which  the  chapter  affords  is  the 
idea  put  into  the  lips  of  the  exiles  in  ver.  32: 
"  And  as  for  the  thought  which  arises  in  your 
mind,  it  shall  not  be,  in  that  ye  are  thinking. 
We  will  become  like  the  heathen,  like  the  fami- 
lies of  the  lands,  in  worshipping  wood  and 
stone."  These  words  contain  the  key  to  the 
whole  discourse.  It  is  difficult,  no  doubt,  to  de- 
cide how  much  exactly  is  implied  in  them.  They 
may  mean  no  more  than  the  determination  to 
keep  up  the  external  conformity  to  heathen  cus- 
toms which  already  existed  in  matters  of  wor- 
ship— as,  for  example,  in  the  use  of  images.  But 
the  form  of  expression  used,  "  that  which  is 
coming  up  in  your  mind,"  almost  suggests  that 
the  prophet  was  face  to  face  with  an  incipient 
tendency  among  the  exiles,  a  deliberate  resolve 
to  apostatise  and  assimilate  themselves  for  all 
religious  purposes  to  the  surrounding  heathen. 
It  is  by  no  means  improbable  that,  amidst  the 
many  conflicting  tendencies  that  distracted  the 
exiled  community,  this  idea  of  a  complete  aban- 
donment of  the  national  religion  should  have 
crystallised  into  a  settled  purpose  in  the  event 
of  their  last  hope  being  disappointed.  If  this  was 
the  situation  with  which  Ezekiel  had  to  deal,  we 
should  be  able  to  understand  how  his  denuncia- 
tion takes  the  precise  form  which  it  assumes  in 
this   chapter. 

For  what  is,  in  the  main,  the  purport  of  the 
chapter?  Briefly  stated  the  argument  is  as  fol- 
lows. The  religion  of  Jehovah  had  never  been 
the  true  expression  of  the  national  genius  of  Is- 
rael. Not  now  for  the  first  time  has  the  pur- 
pose of  Israel  come  into  conflict  with  the  im- 
mutable purpose  of  Jehovah;  but  from  the  very 
beginning  the  history  had  been  one  long  strug- 
gle between  the  natural  inclinations  of  the  peo- 
ple and  the  destiny  which  was  forced  on  it  by  the 
will   of   God.     The   love  of  idols   had   been   the 


Ezekiel  xx.] 


JEHOVAH'S    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ISRAEL. 


265 


distinguishing  feature  of  the  national  character 
from  the  beginning;  and  if  it  had  been  suffered 
to  prevail,  Israel  would  never  have  been  known 
as  Jehovah's  people.  Why  had  it  not  been  suf- 
fered to  prevail?  Because  of  Jehovah's  regard 
for  the  honour  of  His  name;  because  in  the  eyes 
of  the  heathen  His  glory  was  identified  with  the 
fortunes  of  this  particular  people,  to  whom  He 
had  once  revealed  Himself.  And  as  it  has  been 
in  the  past,  so  it  will  be  in  the  future.  The  time 
has  come  for  the  age-long  controversy  to  be 
brought  to  an  issue,  and  it  cannot  be  doubtful 
what  the  issue  will  be.  "  That  which  comes  up 
in  their  mind  " — this  new  resolve  to  live  like  the 
heathen — cannot  turn  aside  the  purpose  of  Je- 
hovah to  make  of  Israel  a  people  for  His  own 
glory.  Whatever  further  judgments  may  be 
necessary  for  that  end,  the  land  of  Israel  shall  yet 
be  the  seat  of  a  pure  and  acceptable  worship  of 
the  true  God,  and  the  people  shall  recognise  with 
shame  and  contrition  that  the  goal  of  all  its  his- 
tory has  been  accomplished  in  spite  of  its  per- 
versity by  the  "  irresistible  grace  "  of  its  divine 
King. 


The  Lesson  of  History  (vv.  S-29). — It  is  a 
magnificent  conception  of  national  election  which 
the  prophet  here  unfolds.  It  takes  the  form  of 
a  parallel  between  twio  desert  scenes,  one  at  the 
beginning  and  the  other  at  the  close  of  Israel's 
history.  The  first  part  of  the  chapter  deals  with 
the  religious  significance  of  the  transactions  in 
the  wilderness  of  Sinai  and  the  events  in  Egypt 
which  were  introductory  to  them.  It  starts  from 
Jehovah's  free  choice  of  the  people  while  they 
were  still  living  as  idolaters  in  Egypt.  Jehovah 
there  revealed  Himself  to  them  as  their  God,  and 
entered  into  a  covenant*  with  them;  and  the 
covenant  included  on  the  one  hand  the  promise 
of  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  on  the  other  hand 
ji  requirement  that  the  people  should  separate 
ihemselves  from  all  forms  of  idolatry  whether 
native  or  Egyptian.  "  In  the  day  that  I  chose 
Israel,  .  .  .  and  made  Myself  known  to  them 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  .  .  .  saying,  I  am  Jehovah 
your  God;  in  that  day  I  lifted  up  My  hand  to 
them,  to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
into  a  land  which  I  had  sought  out  for  them. 
And  I  said  to  them.  Cast  away  each  man  the 
abomination  of  his  eyes,  and  defile  not  your- 
selves with  the  block-gods  of  Egypt.  I  am 
Jehovah  your  God  "  (vv.  5-7).  The  point  which 
Ezekiel  specially  emphasises  is  that  this  voca- 
tion to  be  the  people  of  the  true  God  was  thrust 
on  Israel  without  its  consent,  and  that  the  reve- 
lation of  Jehovah's  purpose  evoked  no  response 
m  the  heart  of  the  people.  By  persistence  in 
idolatry  they  had  virtually  renounced  the  king- 
ship of  Jehovah  and  forfeited  their  right  to  the 
fulfilment  of  the  promise  He  had  given  them. 
And  only  from  regard  to  His  name,  that  it  might 
not  be  profaned  in  the  sight  of  the  nations,  be- 
fore whose  eyes  He  had  made  Himself  known 
to  them,  did  He  turn  from  the  purpose  He  had 
formed  to  destroy  them  in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

In  several  respects  this  account  of  the  oc- 
currences in  Egypt  goes  beyond  what  we  learn 
from  any  other  source.  The  historical  books 
contain  no  reference  to  the  prevalence  of  spe- 
cifically Egyptian  forms  of  idolatry  among  the 
Hebrews,  nor  do  they  mention  any  threat  to  ex- 
*  The  word  "  covenant "  is  not  here  used. 


terminate  the  people  for  their  rebellion.  It  is 
not  to  be  supposed,  however,  that  Ezekiel  pos- 
sessed other  records  of  the  period  before  the 
Exodus  than  those  preserved  in  the  Pentateuch. 
The  fundamental  conceptions  are  those  attested 
by  the  history,  that  God  first  revealed  Himself 
to  Israel  by  the  name  Jehovah  through  Moses, 
and  that  the  revelation  was  accompanied  by  a 
promise  of  deliverance  from  Egypt.  That  the 
people  in  spite  of  this  revelation  continued  to 
worship  idols  is  an  inference  from  the  whole  of 
their  subsequent  history.  And  the  conflict  in 
the  mind  of  Jehovah  between  anger  against  the 
people's  sin  and  jealousy  for  His  own  name  is 
not  a  matter  of  history  at  all,  but  is  an  inspired 
interpretation  of  the  history  in  the  light  of  the 
divine  holiness,  which  embraces  both  these  ele- 
ments. 

In  the  wilderness  Israel  entered  on  the  second 
and  decisive  stage  of  its  probation  which  falls 
into  two  acts,  and  whose  determining  factor  was 
the  legislation.  To  the  generation  of  the  Ex- 
odus Jehovah  made  known  the  way  of  life  in  a 
code  of  law  which  on  its  own  intrinsic  merits 
ought  to  have  commended  itself  to  their  moral 
sense.  The  statutes  and  judgments  that  were 
then  given  were  such  that  "  if  a  man  do  them 
he  shall  live  by  them"  (ver.  11).  This  thought 
of  the  essential  goodness  of  the  law  as  originally 
given  reveals  Ezekiel's  view  of  God's  relation 
to  men.  It  derives  its  significance  no  doubt 
from  the  contrast  with  legislation  of  an  opposite 
character  afterward  mentioned.  Yet  even  that 
contrast  expresses  a  conviction  in  the  prophet's 
mind  that  morality  is  not  constituted  by  arbi- 
trary enactments  on  the  part  of  God,  but  that 
there  are  eternal  conditions  of  ethical  fellow- 
ship between  God  and  man,  and  that  the  law 
first  offered  for  Israel's  acceptance  was  the  em- 
bodiment of  those  ethical  relations  which  flow 
from  the  nature  of  Jehovah.  It  is  probable  that 
Ezekiel  has  in  view  the  moral  precepts  of  the 
Decalogue.  If  so,  it  is  instructive  to  notice  that 
the  Sabbath  law  is  separately  mentioned,  not 
as  one  of  the  laws  by  which  a  man  lives,  but  as 
a  sign  of  the  covenant  between  Jehovah  and  Is- 
rael. The  divine  purpose  was  again  defeated  by 
the  idolatrous  proclivities  of  the  people:  "They 
despised  My  judgments,  and  they  did  not  walk 
in  My  statutes,  and  they  profaned  My  Sabbaths, 
because  their  heart  went  after  their  idols  "  (ver. 
16). 

To  the  second  generation  in  the  wilderness  the 
offer  of  the  covenant  was  renewed,  with  the 
same  result  (vv.  18-24).  It  should  be  observed 
that  in  both  cases  the  disobedience  of  the  people 
is  answered  by  two  distinct  utterances  of  Jeho- 
vah's wrath.  The  first  is  a  threat  of  immediate 
extermination,  which  is  expressed  as  a  momen- 
tary purpose  of  Jehovah,  no  sooner  formed  than 
withdrawn  for  the  sake  of  His  honour  (vv.  14, 
21).  The  other  is  a  judgment  of  a  more  limited 
character,  uttered  in  the  form  of  an  oath,  and  in 
the  first  case  at  least  actually  carried  out.  For 
the  threat  of  exclusion  from  the  Promised  Land 
(ver.  15)  wa.  enforced  so  far  as  the  first  gen- 
eration was  concerned.  Now  the  parallelism  be- 
tween the  two  sections  leads  us  to  expect  that 
the  similar  threat  of  dispersion  in  ver.  23  is 
meant  to  be  understood  of  a  judgment  actually 
inflicted.  We  may  conclude,  therefore,  that 
ver.  2.3  refers  to  the  Babylonian  exile  and  the 
dispersion  among  the  nations,  which  hung  like 
a  doom  over  the  nation  during  its  whole  history 


266 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


in  Canaan,  and  is  represented  as  a  direct  con- 
sequence of  their  transgressions  in  the  wilder- 
ness. There  seems  reason  to  believe  that  the 
particular  allusion  is  to  the  twenty-eighth  chap- 
ter of  Deuteronomy,  where  the  threat  of  a  dis- 
persion among  the  nations  concludes  the  long  list 
of  curses  which  will  follow  disobedience  to  the 
law  (Deut.  xxviii.  64-68).  It  is  true  that  in  that 
chapter  the  threat  is  only  conditional;  but  in 
the  time  of  Ezekiel  it  had  already  been  fulfilled, 
and  it  is  in  accordance  with  his  whole  con- 
ception of  the  history  to  read  the  final  issue  back 
into  the  early  period  when  the  national  char- 
acter was  determined. 

But  in  addition  to  this,  as  if  effectually  to 
"  conclude  them  under  sin,"  Jehovah  met  the 
hardness  of  their  hearts  by  imposing  on  them 
laws  of  an  opposite  character  to  those  first  given, 
and  laws  which  accorded  only  too  well  with  their 
baser  inclinations:  "  And  I  aLso  gave  them  stat- 
utes that  were  not  good,  and  judgments  by  which 
they  should  not  live;  and  I  rendered  them  un- 
clean in  their  offerings,  by  making  over  all  that 
opened  the  womb,  that  I  might  horrify  them  " 
(vv.  25,  26). 

This  division  of  the  wilderness  legislation  into 
two  kinds,  one  good  and  life-giving  and  the 
other  not  good,  presents  difficulties  both  moral 
and  critical  which  cannot  perhaps  be  altogether 
removed.  The  general  direction  in  which  the 
solution  must  be  sought  is  indeed  tolerably  clear. 
The  reference  is  to  the  law  which  required  the 
consecration  of  the  firstborn  of  all  animals  to 
Jehovah.  This  was  interpreted  in  the  most 
rigorous  sense  as  dedication  in  sacrifice;  and  then 
the  principle  was  extended  to  the  case  of  hu- 
man beings.  The  divine  purpose  in  appearing 
to  sanction  this  atrocious  practice  was  to  "  hor- 
rify "  the  people — that  is  to  say,  the  punishment 
of  their  idolatry  consisted  in  the  shock  to  their 
natural  instincts  and  affections  caused  by  the 
worst  development  of  the  idolatrous  spirit  to 
which  they  were  delivered.  We  are  not  to  in- 
fer from  this  that  human  sacrifice  was  an  ele- 
ment of  the  original  Hebrew  religion,  and  that 
it  was  actually  based  on  legislative  enactment. 
The  truth  appears  to  be  that  the  sacrifice  of 
children  was  originally  a  feature  of  Canaanitish 
worship,  particularly  of  the  god  Melek  or  Mo- 
lech,  and  was  only  introduced  into  the  religion 
of  Israel  in  the  evil  days  which  preceded  the 
fall  of  the  state.*  The  idea  took  hold  of  men's 
minds  that  this  terrible  rite  alone  revealed  the 
full  potency  of  the  sacrificial  act;  and  when  the 
ordinary  means  of  propitiation  seemed  to  fail, 
it  was  resorted  to  as  the  last  desperate  expedi- 
ent for  appeasmg  an  offended  deity.  All  that 
Ezekiel's  words  warrant  us  in  assuming  is  that 
when  once  the  practice  was  established  it  was 
defended  by  an  appeal  to  the  ancient  law  of  the 
firstborn,  the  principle  of  which  was  held  to 
cover  the  case  of  human  sacrifices.  These  laws, 
relating  to  the  consecration  of  firstborn  animals, 
are  therefore  the  statutes  referred  to  by  Ezekiel; 
and  their  defect  lies  in  their  being  open  to  such 
an  immoral  misinterpretation.  This  view  is  in 
accordance  with  the  probabilities  of  the  case. 
When  we  consider  the  tendency  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament writers  to  refer  all  actual  events  imme- 
diately to  the  will  of  God,  we  can  partly  under- 
stand the  form  in  which  Ezekiel  expresses  the 

*  Apart  from  the  case  of  Jephthah,  which  is  entirely  ex- 
ceptional, the  first  historical  instance  is  that  of  Ahaz  (2 
Kings  xvi.  3). 


facts;  and  this  is  perhaps  all  that  can  be  said  on 
the  moral  aspect  of  the  difficulty.  It  is  but  an 
application  of  the  principle  that  sin  is  punished 
by  moral  obliquity,  and  precepts  which  are  ac- 
commodated to  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts  are 
by  that  same  hardness  perverted  to  fatal  issues. 
It  cannot  even  be  said  that  there  is  a  radical 
divergence  of  view  between  Ezekiel  and  Jere- 
miah on  this  subject.  For  when  the  older 
prophet,  speaking  of  child-sacrifice,  says  that 
"Jehovah  commanded  it  not.  neither  came  it 
into  His  mind  "  (vii.  31  and  xix.  5),  he  must  have 
in  view  men  who  justified  the  custom  by  an  ap- 
peal to  ancient  legislation.  And  although  Jere- 
miah indignantly  repudiates  the  suggestion  that 
such  horrors  were  contemplated  by  the  law  of 
Jehovah,  he  hardly  in  this  goes  beyond  Ezekiel, 
who  declares  that  the  ordinance  in  question  does 
not  represent  the  true  mind  of  Jehovah,  but  be- 
longs to  a  part  of  the  law  which  was  intended  to 
punish  sin  by  delusion.* 

In  consequence  of  these  transactions  in  the 
desert  Israel  entered  the  land  of  Canaan  under 
the  threat  of  eventual  exile  and  under  the  curse 
of  a  polluted  worship.  The  subsequent  history 
has  little  significance  from  the  point  of  view  oc- 
cupied throughout  this  discourse;  and  accord- 
ingly Ezekiel  disposes  of  it  in  three  verses 
(27-29).  The  entrance  on  the  Promised  Land, 
he  says,  furnished  the  opportunity  for  a  new 
manifestation  of  disloyalty*  to  Jehovah.  He  re- 
fers  to   the   multiplication   of   heathen   or   semi- 

*  There  still  remain  the  critical  difficulties.  What  are 
the  ambiguous  laws  to  which  the  prophet  refers  ?  It  is  of 
course  not  to  be  assumed  as  certain  that  they  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Pentateuch,  at  least  in  the  exact  form  which 
Ezekiel  has  in  view.  There  may  have  been  at  that  time  a 
considerable  amount  of  uncodified  legislative  material 
which  passed  vaguely  as  the  law  of  Jehovah.  The  "'  lying 
pen  of  the  scribes  "  seems  to  have  been  busy  in  the  multi- 
plication of  such  enactments  (Jer.  viii.  8).  Still,  it  is  a 
legitimate  inquiry  whether  any  of  the  extant  laws  of  the 
Pentateuch  are  open  to  the  interpretation  which  Ezekiel 
seems  to  have  in  view.  The  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  in 
which  the  regulation  about  the  dedication  of  the  firstborn 
occurs  are  the  so-called  Book  of  the  Covenant  (Exod.  xxii. 
2q,  30),  the  short  code  of  Exod.  xxxiv.  17-26  (vv.  19  f.),  the 
enactment  connected  with  the  institution  of  the  Passover 
(Exod.  xiii.  12  f.),  and  the  priestly  ordinance  (Numb,  xviii. 
15).  Now,  in  three  of  these  four  passages,  the  inference 
to  which  Ezekiel  refers  is  expressly  excluded  by  the  pro- 
vision that  the  firstborn  of  men  shall  be  redeemed.  The 
only  one  which  bears  the  appearance  of  ambiguity  is  that 
in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  where  we  read  :  "  The  first- 
born of  thy  sons  shalt  thou  give  unto  Me  ;  likewise  shalt 
thou  do  with  thine  oxen  and  thy  sheep  :  seven  days  it 
shall  be  with  its  dam,  on  the  eighth  day  thou  shalt  give  it 
to  Me."  Here  the  firstborn  children  and  the  firstlings  of 
animals  are  put  on  a  level ;  and  if  any  passage  in  our 
present  Pentateuch  would  lend  itself  to  the  false  construc- 
tion which  the  later  Israelites  favoured,  it  would  be  this. 
On  the  other  hand  this  passage  does  not  contain  the  par- 
ticular technical  word  (he^ehtr)  used  by  Ezekiel.  The 
word  probably  means  simply  "  dedicate,"  although  this 
was  understood  in  the  sense  of  dedication  by  sacrifice. 
The  only  passage  of  the  four  where  the  verb  occurs  is 
Exod.  xiii.  12  ;  and  this  accordingly  is  the  one  generally 
fixed  on  by  critics  as  having  sanctioned  the  abuse  in 
question.  But  apart  from  its  eqpress  eqemption  of  first- 
born children  from  the  rule,  the  passage  fails  in  another 
respect  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  case.  The  prophet 
appears  to  speak  here  of  legislation  addressed  to  the 
second  generation  in  the  wilderness,  and  this  could  not 
refer  to  the  Passover  ordinance  in  its  present  setting. 
On  the  whole,  we  seem  to  be  driven  to  the  conclusion  that 
Ezekiel  is  not  thinking  of  any  part  of  our  present  Penta- 
teuch, but  to  some  other  law  similar  in  its  terms  to  that  of 
Exod.  xiii.  12  f.,  although  equivocal  in  the  same  way  as 
Exod.  xxii.  29  f. 

In  the  text  above  I  have  given  what  appears  to  me  the 
most  natural  interpretation  of  the  passage,  without  refer- 
ring to  the  numerous  other  views  which  have  been  put 
forward.  Van  Hoonacker,  in  Le  Miiseoji  (1893),  subjects 
the  various  theories  to  a  searching  criticism,  and  arrives 
himself  at  the  nebulous  conclusion  that  the  "statutes 
which  were  not  good  "  are  not  statutes  at  all,  but  provi- 
dential chastisements.  That  cuts  the  knot ;  it  does  not 
untie  it. 


Ezekiel  xx.] 


JEHOVAH'S    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ISRAEL. 


267 


heathen  sanctuaries  throughout  the  land. 
Wherever  they  saw  a  high  hill  or  a  leafy  tree, 
they  made  it  a  place  of  sacrifice,  and  there  they 
practised  the  impure  rites  which  were  the  out- 
come of  their  false  conception  of  the  Deity.  To 
the  mind  of  Ezekiel  the  unity  of  Jehovah  and 
the  unity  of  the  sanctuary  were  inseparable 
ideas:  the  offence  here  alluded  to  is  therefore  of 
the  same  kind  as  the  abominations  practised  in 
Egypt  and  the  desert;  i't  is  a  violation  of  the 
holiness  of  Jehovah.  The  prophet  condenses  his 
scorn  for  the  whole  system  of  religion  which 
led  to  a  multiplication  of  sanctuaries  into  a  play 
on  the  etymology  of  the  word  batnah  (high 
places),  the  point  of  which,  however,  is  obscure.* 

II. 

The  Application  (vv.  30-44). — Having  thus 
described  the  origin  of  idolatry  in  Israel,  and 
having  shown  that  the  destiny  of  the  nation  had 
been  determined  neither  by  its  deserts  nor  by  its 
inclinations,  but  by  Jehovah's  consistent  regard 
for  the  honour  of  His  name,  the  prophet  pro- 
ceeds to  bring  the  lesson  of  the  history  to  bear 
on  his  contemporaries.  The  Captivity  has  as 
yet  produced  no  change  in  their  spiritual  condi- 
tion; in  Babylon  they  still  defile  themselves  with 
the  same  abominations  as  their  ancestors,  even 
to  the  crowning  atrocity  of  child-sacrifice.  Their 
idolatry  is  if  anything  more  conscious  than  be- 
fore, for  it  takes  the  shape  of  a  deliberate  in- 
tention to  be  as  other  nations,  worshipping  wood 
and  stone.  It  is  necessary  therefore  that  once 
for  all  Jehovah  should  assert  His  sovereignty 
over  Israel,  and  bend  their  stubborn  will  to  the 
accomplishment  of  His  purpose.  "  As  I  live, 
saith  the  Lord  Jehovah,  surely  with  a  strong 
hand,  and  with  an  outstretched  arm,  and  wrath 
poured  out,  will  I  be  king  over  you  "  (ver.  s^)- 
But  how  was  this  to  be  done?  A  heavier  chas- 
tisement than  that  which  had  been  inflicted  on 
the  exiles  could  hardly  be  conceived,  yet  it  had 
effected  nothing  for  the  regeneration  of  Israel. 
Surely  the  time  is  come  when  the  divine  method 
must  be  changed,  when  those  who  have  hardened 
themselves  against  the  severity  of  God  must  be 
won  by  His  goodness?  Such,  however,  is  not 
the  thought  expressed  in  Ezekiel's  delineation  of 
the  future.  It  is  possible  that  the  description 
which  follows  (vv.  .34-38)  may  only  be  meant  as 
an  ideal  picture  of  spiritual  processes  to  be  ef- 
fected by  ordinary  providential  agencies.  But 
certain  it  is  that  what  Ezekiel  is  chiefly  con- 
vinced of  is  the  necessity  for  further  acts  of 
judgment — judgment  which  shall  be  decisive,  be- 
cause discriminating,  and  issuing  in  the  annihila- 
tion of  all  who  cling  to  the  evil  traditions  of  the 
past.  This  idea,  indeed,  of  further  chastisement 
in  store  for  the  exiles  is  a  fixed  element  of  Eze- 
kiel's prophecy.  It  appears  in  his  earliest  public 
utterance  (chap,  v.),  although  it  is  perhaps  only 
in  this  chapter  that  we  perceive  its  full  signifi- 
cance. 

The  scene  of  God's  final  dealings  with  Israel's 
sin  is  to  be  the  "  desert  of  the  nations."  That 
great  barren  plateau  which  stretches  between 
the  Jordan  and  the  Euphrates  valley,  round 
which  lay  the  nations  chiefly  concerned  in  Is- 
rael's history,  occupies  a  place  in  the  restoration 
analogous  to  that  of  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  (here 

*  None  of  the  interpretations  of  ver.  zq  gives  a  satisfac- 
tof)- sense.  Cornill  rejects  it  as  '•  absonderlich  und  aus 
dem  Tenor  des  ganzen  Cap.  herausfallend." 


called  the  "  wilderness  of  Egypt  ")  at  the  time 
of  the  Exodus.  Into  that  vast  solitude  Jeho- 
vah will  gather  His  people  from  the  lands  of 
their  exile,  and  there  He  will  once  more  judge 
them  face  to  face.  This  judgment  will  be  con- 
ducted on  the  principle  laid  down  in  chap,  xviii. 
Each  individual  shall  be  dealt  with  according  to 
his  own  character  as  a  righteous  man  or  a 
wicked.  They  shall  be  made  to  "  pass  under 
the  rod,"  like  sheep  when  they  are  counted  by 
the  shepherd.*  The  rebels  and  transgressors 
shall  perish  in  the  wilderness;  for  "out  of  the 
land  of  their  sojournings  will  I  bring  them,  and 
into  the  land  of  Israel  they  shall  not  come  "  (ver. 
38).  Those  that  emerge  from  the  trial  are  the 
righteous  remnant,  who  are  to  be  brought  into 
the  land  by  number:  f  these  constitute  the  new 
Israel,  for  whom  is  reserved  the  glory  of  the 
latter  days. 

The  idea  that  the  spiritual  transformation  of 
Israel  was  to  be  effected  during  a  second  sojourn 
in  the  wilderness,  although  a  very  striking  one, 
occurs  only  here  in  the  book  of  Ezekiel,  and  it 
can  hardly  be  considered  as  one  of  the  cardinal 
ideas  of  his  eschatology.  It  is  in  all  probability 
derived  from  the  prophecies  of  Hosea,  although 
it  is  modified  in  accordance  with  the  very  dif- 
ferent estimate  of  the  nation's  history  repre- 
sented by  Ezekiel.  It  is  instructive  to  compare 
the  teaching  of  these  two  prophets  on  this  point. 
To  Hosea  the  idea  of  a  return  to  the  desert  pre- 
sents itself  naturally  as  an  element  of  the 
process  by  which  Israel  is  to  be  brought 
back  to  its  allegiance  to  Jehovah.  The  re- 
turn to  the  desert  restores  the  conditions  under 
which  the  nation  had  first  known  and  fol- 
lowed Jehovah.  He  looks  back  to  the  so- 
journ in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  as  the  time  of 
uninterrii^)ted  communion  between  Jehovah  and 
Israel — a  time  of  youthful  innocence,  when  the 
sinful  tendencies  which  may  have  been  latent 
in  the  nation  had  not  developed  into  actual  in- 
fidelity. The  decay  of  religion  and  morality 
dates  from  the  possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan, 
and  is  traced  to  the  corrupting  influence  of  Ca- 
naanitish  idolatry  and  civilisation.  It  was  at 
Baal-peor  that  they  first  succumbed  to  the  at- 
tractions of  a  false  religion  and  became  con- 
taminated with  the  spirit  of  heathenism.  Then 
the  rich  produce  of  the  land  came  to  be  regarded 
as  the  gift  of  the  deities  who  were  worshipped 
at  the  local  sanctuaries,  and  this  worship  with 
its  sensuous  accompaniments  was  the  means  of 
estranging  the  people  more  and  more  from  the 
knowledge  of  Jehovah.  Hence  the  first  step  to- 
wards a  renewal  of  the  relation  between  God  and 
Israel  is  the  withdrawal  of  the  gifts  of  nature, 
the  suppression  of  religious  ordinances  and  po- 
litical institutions;  and  this  is  represented  as  ef- 
fected by  a  return  to  the  primitive  life  of  the 
desert.  Then  in  her  desolation  and  affliction  the 
heart  of  Israel  shall  respond  once  more  to  the 
love  of  Jehovah,  who  has  never  ceased  to  yearn 
after  His  unfaithful  people.  "  I  will  allure  her, 
and  bring  her  into  the  wilderness,  and  speak  to 
her  heart:  .  .  .  and  she  shall  make  answer 
there,  as  in  the  days  of  her  youth,  and  as  in  the 
day  when  she  came  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt  "  (Hos.  ii.  14,  15)-  Here  there  may  be  a 
doubt  whether  the  wilderness  is  to  be  taken  lit- 
erally or  as  a  figure  for  exile,  but  in  either  case 

*  See  Dillmann's   note    on   Lev.   xxvii.   32,  quoted    by 
Davidson, 
t  Reading  IQDIDa  for  niDD3  with  the  LXX. 


268 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


the  image  naturally  arises  out  of  Hosea's  pro- 
foundly simple  conception  of  religion. 

To  Ezekiel,  on  the  other  hand,  the  "  wilder- 
ness "  is  a  synonym  for  contention  and  judgment. 
It  is  the  scene  where  the  meanness  and  perversity 
of  man  stand  out  in  unrelieved  contrast  with  the 
majesty  and  purity  of  God.     He  recognises  no 
glad  springtime  of  promise  and  hope  in  the  his- 
tory of  Israel,  no  "  kindness  of  her  youth  "  or 
"  love   of  her   espousals "   when    she   went  after 
Jehovah    in   the   land   that   was   not   sown    (Jer. 
ii.  2).     The  difference  between  Hosea's  concep- 
tion  and    Ezekiel's   is   that   in    the   view   of   the 
exilic    prophet    there   never    has   been    any   true 
response    on    the   part    of   Israel   to   the   call    of 
God.     Hence   a   return   to   the   desert  can    only 
mean    a    repetition    of   the   judgments   that    had 
marked  the   first   sojourn   of   the   people   in   the 
wilderness  of  Sinai,  and  the  carrying  of  them  to 
the  point  of  a  final  decision  between  the  claims 
of  Jehovah  and  the  stubbornness  of  His  people. 
If  it  be  asked  which  of  these  representations 
of  the  past  is  the  true  one,  the  only  answer  possi- 
ble is  that  from  the  standpoint  from  which  the 
prophets   viewed   history   both   are   true.     Israel 
did  follow  Jehovah  through  the  wilderness,  and 
took  possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan  animated 
by  an  ardent  faith  in  His  power.     It  is  equally 
true  that  the  religious  condition   of  the   people 
had  its  dark  side,  and  that  they  were  far  from 
understanding  the  nature  of  the  God  whose  name 
they  bore.     And  a  prophet  might  emphasise  the 
one   truth    or   the   other   according  to   the   idea 
of  God  which  it  was  given  him  to  teach.     Hosea, 
reading  the  religious  symptoms  of  his  own  time, 
sees  in  it  a  contrast  to  the  happier  period  when 
life  was  simple  and  religion  comparatively  pure, 
and  finds  in  the  desert  sojourn  an  image  of  the 
purifying  process  by  which  the  national  life  must 
be   renewed.     Ezekiel    had  to    do   with    a   more 
difficult    problem.     He    saw    that    there    was    a 
power   of   evil    which    could    not    be    eradicated 
merely  by  banishment  from   the  land  of  Israel 
— a   hard  bed-rock   of  unbelief  and  superstition 
in  the  national  character  which  had  never  yielded 
to  the  influence  of  revelation;  and  he  dwells  on 
all  the  manifestations  of  this  which  he  read  in 
the  past.     His  hope  for  the  future  of  the  cause 
of  God  rests  no  longer  on  the  moral  influence 
of  the  divine  love  on  the  heart  of  man,  but  on  the 
power  of  Jehovah  to  accomplish  his  purpose  in 
spite  of  the  resistance  of  human  sin.     That  was 
not  the  whole  truth  about  God's  relation  to  Is- 
rael, but  it  was  the  truth  that  needed  to  be  im- 
pressed on  the  generation  of  the  Exile. 

Of  the  final  issue  at  all  events  Ezekiel  is  not 
doubtful.  He  is  a  man  who  is  "  very  sure  of 
God "  and  sure  of  nothing  else.  In  man  he 
finds  nothing  to  inspire  him  with  confidence  in 
the  ultimate  victory  of  the  true  religion  over 
polytheism  and  superstition.  His  own  genera- 
tion has  shown  itself  fit  only  to  perpetuate  the 
evils  of  the  past — the  love  of  sensuous  worship, 
the  insensibility  to  the  claims  and  nature  of  Je- 
hovah, which  had  marked  the  whole  history  of 
Israel.  He  is  compelled  for  the  present  to  aban- 
don   them    to    their    corrupt    inclinations,*    ex- 

*  The  transition  ver.  39  is,  however,  very  difficult.  As 
it  stands  in  the  Hebrew  text  it  contains  an  ironical  con- 
cession (a  good-natured  one,  Smend  thinks)  to  the  per- 
sistent advocates  of  idolatry,  the  only  tolerable  translation 
being,  "So  serve  ye  every  man  his  idols,  but  hereafter 
ye  shall  surely  hearken  to  Me,  and  My  holy  name  ye  shall 
no  longer  f)rofane  with  your  gifts  and  your  idols."  But 
this  sens?  is  not  in  itself  very  natural,  and  the  Hebrew 
construction  by  which  it  is  expressed  would  be  somewhat 


pecting  no  signs  of  amendment  until  his  appeal 
is  enforced  by  signal  acts  of  judgment. 

But  all  this  does  not  shake  his  sublime  faith 
in  the  fulfilment  of  Israel's  destiny.  Despairing 
of  men,  he  falls  back  on  what  St.  Paul  calls  the 
"  purpose  of  God  according  to  election  "  (Rom. 
ix.  11).  And  with  an  insight  akin  to  that  of 
the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  he  discerns  through 
all  Jehovah's  dealing  with  Israel  a  principle  and 
an  ideal  which  must  in  the  end  prevail  over  the 
sin  of  men.  The  goal  to  which  the  history  points 
stands  out  clear  before  the  mind  of  the  prophet; 
and  already  he  sees  in  vision  the  restored  Israel 
— a  holy  people  in  a  renovated  land — rendering 
acceptable  worship  to  the  one  God  of  heaven 
and  earth.  "  For  in  My  holy  mountain,  in  the 
mountain  heights  of  Israel,  saith  the  Lord  Je- 
hovah, there  shall  serve  Me  the  whole  house  of 
Israel:  there  will  I  be  gracious  to  them,  and 
there  will  I  require  your  oblations,  and  the  first- 
fruits  of  your  offerings,  in  all  your  holy  things  " 
(ver.  40). 

There  we  have  the  thought  which  is  expanded 
in  the  vision  of  the  purified  theocracy  which  oc- 
cupies the  closing  chapters  of  the  book.  And  it 
is  important  to  notice  this  indication  that  the  idea 
of  that  vision  was  present  to  Ezekiel  during  the 
earlier  part  of  his  ministry. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 
OHOLA   AND   OHOLIBAH. 


Ezekiel  xxiii. 

The  allegory  of  chap,  xxiii.  adds  hardly  any 
new  thought  to  those  which  have  already  been 
expounded  in  connection  with  chap.  xvi.  and 
chap.  XX.  The  ideas  which  enter  into  it  are  all 
such  as  we  are  now  familiar  with.  They  are: 
the  idolatry  of  Israel,  learned  in  Egypt  and  per- 
sisted in  to  the  end  of  her  history;  her  fondness 
for  alliances  with  the  great  Oriental  empires, 
which  was  the  occasion  of  new  developments  of 
idolatry;  the  corruption  of  religion  by  the  intro- 
duction of  human  sacrifice  into  the  service  of 
Jehovah;  and,  finally,  the  destruction  of  Israel  by 
the  hands  of  the  nations  whose  friendship  she 
had  so  eagerly  courted.  The  figure  under  which 
these  facts  are  presented  is  the  same  as  in  chap, 
xvi.,  and  many  of  the  details  of  the  earlier 
prophecy  are  reproduced  here  with  little  varia- 
tion. But  along  with  these  resemblances  we  find 
certain  characteristic  features  in  this  chapter 
which  require  attention,  and  perhaps  some  ex- 
planation. 

In  its  treatment  of  the  history  this  passage  is 
distinguished  from  the  other  two  by  the  recog- 
nition of  the  separate  existence  of  the  northern 
and  southern  kingdoms.  In  the  previous  retro- 
spects Israel  has  either  been  treated  as  a  unit 
(as  in  chap,  xx.),  or  attention  has  been  wholly 
concentrated  on  the  fortunes  of  Judah,  Samaria 
being  regarded  as  on  a  level  with  a  purely 
heathen  city  like  Sodom  (chap.  xvi.).  Ezekiel 
may  have  felt  that  he  has  not  yet  done  justice 
to  the  truth  that  the  history  of  Israel  ran  in 
two  parallel    lines,  and  that  the  full  significance 

strained.  The  most  satisfactory  renderingisperhaps  that 
given  in  the  Syriac  Version,  where  two  clauses  of  our 
Hebrew  text  are  transposed  :  "  But  as  for  you,  O  house 
of  Israel,  if  ye  will  not  hearken  to  Me,  go  serve  every  man 
his  idols!  Yet  hereafter  ye  shall  no  more  profane  My 
holy  name  in  you,"  etc. 


Ezekiel  xxiii.J 


OHOLA    AND    OHOLIBAH. 


269 


of  God's  dealings  with  the  nation  can  only  be 
understood  when  the  fate  of  Samaria  is  placed 
alongside  of  that  of  Jerusalem.  He  did  not  for- 
get that  he  was  sent  as  a  prophet  to  the  "  whole 
house  of  Israel,"  and  indeed  all  the  great  pre- 
exilic  prophets  realised  that  their  message  con- 
cerned "  the  whole  family  which  Jehovah  had 
brought  up  out  of  Egypt"  (Amos  iii.  i).  Be- 
sides this  the  chapter  affords  in  many  ways  an 
interesting  illustration  of  the  workings  of  the 
prophet's  mind  in  the  effort  to  realise  vividly  the 
nature  of  his  people's  sin  and  the  meaning  of  its 
fate.  In  this  respect  k  is  perhaps  the  most  fin- 
ished and  comprehensive  product  of.  his  imagi- 
nation, although  it  may  not  reveal  the  depth  of 
religious  insight  exhibited  in  the  sixteenth 
chapter. 

The  main  idea  of  the  allegory  is  no  doubt  bor- 
rowed from  a  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  belonging  to 
the  earlier  part  of  his  ministry  (Jer.  iii.  6-13). 
The  fall  of  Samaria  was  even  then  a  somewhat 
distant  memory,  but  the  use  which  Jeremiah 
makes  of  it  seems  to  show  that  the  lesson  of  it 
had  not  altogether  ceased  to  impress  the  mind 
of  the  southern  kingdom.  In  the  third  chapter 
he  reproaches  Judah  the  "  treacherous  "  for  not 
having  taken  warning  from  the  fate  of  her  sis- 
ter the  "  apostate  "  Israel,  who  has  long  since 
received  the  reward  of  her  infidelities.  The 
same  lesson  is  implied  in  the  representation  of 
Ezekiel  (ver.  11);  but,  as  is  usual  with  our 
prophet,  the  simple  image  suggested  by  Jere- 
miah is  drawn  out  in  an  elaborate  allegory,  into 
which  as  many  details  are  crowded  as  it  will 
bear.  In  place  of  the  epithets  by  which  Jeremiah 
characterises  the  moral  condition  of  Israel  and 
Judah,  Ezekiel  coins  two  new  and  somewhat 
obscure  names — Ohola  for  Samaria,  and  Oholibah 
for  Jerusalem.* 

These  women  are  children  of  one  mother,  and 
afterwards  become  wives  of  one  husband — Je- 
hovah. This  need  occasion  no  surprise  in  an 
allegorical  representation,  although  it  is  contrary 
to  a  law  which  Ezekiel  doubtless  knew  (Lev. 
xviii.  18).  Nor  is  it  strange,  considering  the 
freedom  with  which  he  handles  the  facts  of  his- 
tory, that  the  division  between  Israel  and  Judah 
is  carried  back  to  the  time  of  the  oppression  in 
Egypt.  We  have  indeed  no  certainty  that  this 
view  is  not  historical.  The  cleavage  between  the 
north  and  the  south  did  not  originate  with  the 
revolt   of   Jeroboam.      That    great    schism    only 

*  It  is  not  certain  what  is  the  exact  meaning  wrapped  up 
in  these  designations.  A  very  slight  change  in  the  point- 
ing of  the  Hebrew  would  give  the  sense  "//«/' tent"  for 
Ohola  and  "wv  tent  in  her"  for  Oholibah.  This  is  the 
interpretation  adopted  bj'  most  commentators,  the  idea 
being  that  while  the  tent  or  temple  of  Jehovah  was  in 
Judah,  Samaria's  "tent"  (religious  system)  was  of  her 
own  making.  It  is  not  likely,  however,  that  Ezekiel  has 
any  such  sharp  contrast  in  his  mind,  since  the  whole  of 
the  argument  proceeds  on  the  similarity  of  the  course 
pursued  by  the  two  kingdoms.  It  is  simpler  to  take  the 
word  Ohola  as  meaning  "  tent,"  and  Oholibah  as  '"tent 
in  her,"  the  signification  of  the  names  being  practically 
identical.  The  allusion  is  supposed  to  be  to  the  tents  of 
the  high  places  which  formed  a  marked  feature  of  the 
idolatrous  worship  practised  in  both  divisions  of  the 
country  (c/.  ch.  xvi.  i6)  This  is  better,  though  not 
entirely  convincing,  since  it  does  not  explain  how  Ezekiel 
came  to  ix  on  this  particular  emblem  as  a  mark  of  the 
religious  condition   of   Israel.    It    may  be  worth  noting 

that  the  word  n/HN  contains  the  same  number  of  con- 
sonants as  pOJJ'  *  —  Samaria,  although  the  word  is  always 
written  pij:)^'  in   the  Old  Testaments  and  n:i^i5nK  the 

same  number  as  D^tJ'Tl^.  The  Eastern  custom  of  giving 
similar  names  to  children  of  the  same  family  (like  Hasan 
and  Husein)is  aptly  instanced  by  Smend  and  Davidson. 


brought  out  elements  of  antagonism  which  were 
latent  in  the  relations  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  to  the 
northern  tribes.  Of  this  there  are  many  indica- 
tions in  the  earlier  history,  and  for  what  we 
know  the  separation  might  have  existed  among 
the  Hebrews  in  Goshen.  Still,  it  is  not  proba- 
ble that  Ezekiel  was  thinking  of  any*  such  thing. 
He  is  bound  by  the  limits  of  his  allegory;  and 
there  was  no  other  way  by  which  he  could  com- 
bine the  presentation  of  the  two  essential  ele- 
ments of  his  conception — that  Samaria  and  Je- 
rusalem were  branches  of  the  one  people  of  Je- 
hovah, and  that  the  idolatry  which  marked  their 
history  had  been  learned  in  the  youth  of  the  na- 
tion in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

That  neither  Israel  nor  Judah  ever  shook  off 
the  spell  of  their  adulterous  connection  with 
Egypt,  but  returned  to  it  again  and  again  down 
to  the  close  of  their  history,  is  certainly  one 
point  which  the  prophet  means  to  impress  on  the 
minds  of  his  readers  (vv.  8,  19,  27).  With  this 
exception  the  earlier  part  of  the  chapter  (to 
ver.  35)  deals  exclusively  with  the  later  develop- 
ments of  idolatry  from  the  eighth  century  and 
onwards.  And  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
things  in  it  is  the  description  of  the  manner  in 
which  first  Israel  and  then  Judah  was  entangled 
in  political  relations  with  the  Oriental  empires. 
There  seems  to  be  a  vein  of  sarcasm  in  the  sketch 
of  the  gallant  Assyrian  officers  who  turned  the 
heads  of  the  giddy  and  frivolous  sisters  and 
seduced  them  from  their  allegiance  to  Jehovah: 
"  Ohola  doted  on  her  lovers,  on  the  Assyrian 
warriors  *  clad  in  purple,  governors  and  satraps, 
charming  youths  all  of  them,  horsemen  riding 
on  horses;  and  she  lavished  on  them  her  forni- 
cations, the  elite  of  the  sons  of  Asshur  all  of 
them,  and  with  all  the  idols  of  all  on  whom 
she  doted  she  defiled  herself  "  (vv.  6,  7).  The 
first  intimate  contact  of  North  Israel  with  As- 
syria was  in  the  reign  of  Menahem  (2  Kings 
XV.  19),  and  the  explanation  of  it  given  in  these 
words  of  Ezekiel  must  be  historically  true.  It 
was  the  magnificent  equipment  of  the  Assyrian 
armies,  the  imposing  display  of  military  power 
which  their  appearance  suggested,  that  impressed 
the  politicians  of  Samaria  with  a  sense  of  the 
value  of  their  alliance.  The  passage  therefore 
throws  light  on  what  Ezekiel  and  the  prophets 
generally  mean  by  the  figure  of  "  whoredom." 
What  he  chiefly  deplores  is  the  introduction  of 
Assyrian  idolatry,  which  was  the  inevitable  se- 
quel to  a  political  union.  But  that  was  a  sec- 
ondary consideration  in  the  intention  of  those 
who  were  responsible  for  the  alliance.  The  real 
motive  of  their  policy  was  undoubtedly  the  de- 
sire of  one  party  in  the  state  to  secure  the  power- 
ful aid  of  the  king  of  Assyria  against  the  rival 
party.  None  the  less  it  was  an  act  of  infidelity 
and   rebellion    against   Jehovah. 

Still  more  striking  is  the  account  of  the  first 
approaches  of  the  southern  kingdom  to  Babylon. 
After  Samaria  had  been  destroyed  by  the  lovers 
whom  she  had  gathered  to  her  side,  Jerusalem 
still  kept  up  the  illicit  connection  with  the  As- 
syrian empire.  After  Assyria  had  vanished  from 
the  stage  of  history,  she  eagerly  sought  an  op- 
portunity to  enter  into  friendly  relations  with 
the  new  Babylonian  empire.  She  did  not  even 
wait  till  she  had  made  their  acquaintance,  but 
"  when  she  saw  men  portrayed  on  the  wall,  pic- 
tures of  Chaldaeans  portrayed  in  vermilion,  girt 
with  waist-cloths  on  their  loins,  with  flowing 
*  This  word  is  of  doubtful  meaning. 


270 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


turbans  on  their  heads,  all  of  them  champions 
to  look  upon,  the  likeness  of  the  sons  of  Babel 
whose  native  land  is  Chaldsea — then  she  doted 
upon  them  when  she  saw  them  with  her  eyes, 
and  sent  messengers  to  them  to  Chaldsea  "  (vv. 
14-16).  The  brilliant  pictures  referred  to  are 
those  with  which  Ezekiel  must  have  been  fa- 
miliar on  the  walls  of  the  temples  and  palaces  of 
Babylon.  The  representation,  however,  cannot 
be  understood  literally,  since  the  Jews  could 
have  had  no  opportunity  of  even  seeing  the  Bab- 
ylonian pictures  "  on  the  wall  "  until  they  had 
sent   ambassadors  there.* 

The  meaning  of  the  prophet  is  clear.  The 
mere  report  of  the  greatness  of  Babylon  was 
sufificient  to  excite  the  passions  of  Oholibah,  and 
she  began  with  blind  infatuation  to  court  the 
advances  of  the  distant  strangers  who  were  to  be 
her  ruin.  The  exact  historic  reference,  however, 
is  uncertain.  It  cannot  be  to  the  compact  be- 
tween Merodach-baladan  and  Hezekiah,  since  at 
that  time  the  initiative  seems  to  have  been  taken 
by  the  rebel  prince,  whose  sovereignty  over  Bab- 
ylon proved  to  be  of  short  duration.  It  may 
rather  be  some  transaction  about  the  time  of 
the  battle  of  Carchemish  (604)  that  Ezekiel  is 
thinking  of;  but  we  have  not  as  yet  sufificient 
knowledge  of  the  circumstances  to  clear  up  the 
allusion. 

Before  the  end  came  the  soul  of  Jerusalem  was 
alienated  from  her  latest  lovers — another  touch 
of  fidelity  to  the  historical  situation.  But  it  was 
now  too  late.  The  soul  of  Jehovah  is  alienated 
from  Oholibah  (vv.  17,  18),  and  she  is  already 
handed  over  to  the  fate  which  had  overtaken  her 
less  guilty  stster  Ohola.  The  principal  agents  of 
her  punishment  are  the  Babylon'ans  and  all  the 
Chaldaeans;  but  under  their  banner  marches  a 
host  of  other  nations — Pekod  and  Shoa  and 
Koa,f  and,  somewhat  strangely,  the  sons  of  As- 
shur.  In  the  pomp  and  circumstance  of  war 
which  had  formerly  fascinated  her  imagination, 
they  shall  come  against  her,  and  after  their  cruel 
manner  execute  upon  her  the  judgment  meted 
out  to  adulterous  women:  "Thou  hast  walked 
in  the  way  of  thy  sister,  and  I  will  put  her  cup 
into  thy  hand.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah, 
The  cup  of  thy  sister  shalt  thou  drink, — deep 
and  wide,  and  of  large  content, — filled  with 
drunkenness  and  anguish — the  cup  of  horror 
and  desolation,  the  cup  of  thy  sister  Samaria. 
And  thou  shalt  drink  it  and  drain  it  out,t  .  .  . 
for  I  have  spoken  it,  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah  " 
(vv.  31-34). 

Up  to  this  point  the  allegory  has  closely  fol- 
lowed the  actual  history  of  the  two  kingdoms. 
The  remainder  of  the  chapter  (vv.  36-49)  forms 
a  pendant  to  the  principal  picture,  and  works  out 
the  central  theme  from  a  different  point  of  view. 
Here  Samaria  and  Jerusalem  are  regarded  as  still 
existent,  and  judgment  is  pronounced  on  both 
as  if  it  were  still  future.  This  is  thoroughly  in 
keeping  with  Ezekiel's  ideal  delineations.  The 
limitations   of   space   and   time   are   alike    trans- 

*  Smend  thinks  that  the  illustration  is  explained  by  the 
secluded  life  of  females  in  the  East,  which  makes  it  quite 
intelligible  that  a  woman  might  be  captivated  by  the 
picture  of  a  man  she  had  never  seen,  and  try  to  induce 
him  to  visit  her. 

+  On  these  names  of  nations  see  Davidson's  Commen- 
tary, p.  i68,  and  the  reference  there  to  Delitzsch. 

JThe  words  rendered  in  E.  V.,  "thou  shalt  be  laughed 
to  scorn  and  had  in  derision  "  (ver.  32),  "and  pluck  off 
thy  own  breasts  "  (ver.  34),  are  wanting  in  the  LXX.  The 
passage  gains  in  force  by  the  omission.  The  words  trans- 
lated "break  the  sherds  thereof"  Cver.  a^  are  unintelli- 
gible. 


cended.  The  image,  once  clearly  conceived, 
fixes  itself  in  the  writer's  mind,  and  must  be  al- 
lowed to  exhaust  its  meaning  before  it  is  finally 
dismissed.  The  distinctions  of  far  and  near,  of 
past  and  present  and  future,  are  apt  to  disap- 
pear in  the  intensity  of  his  reverie.  It  is  so 
here.  The  figures  of  Ohola  and  Oholibah  are 
so  real  to  the  prophet  that  they  are  summoned 
once  more  to  the  tribunal  to  hear  the  recital  of 
their  "  abominations  "  and  receive  the  sentence 
which  has  in  fact  been  already  partly  executed. 
Whether  he  is  thinking  at  all  of  the  ten  tribes 
then  in  exile  and  awaiting  further  punishment 
it  would  be  difficult  to  say.  We  see,  however, 
that  the  picture  is  enriched  with  many  features 
for  which  there  was  no  room  in  the  more  historic 
form  of  the  allegory,  and  perhaps  the  desire  for 
completeness  was  the  chief  motive  for  thus  am- 
plifying the  figure.  The  description  of  the  con- 
duct of  the  two  harlots  (vv.  40-44)  is  exceed-^ 
ingly  graphic,*  and  is  no  doubt  a  piece  of  real- 
ism drawn  from  life.  Otherwise  the  section 
contains  nothing  that  calls  for  elucidation.  The 
ideas  are  those  which  we  have  already  met  with 
in  other  connections,  and  even  the  setting  in 
which  they  are  placed  presents  no  element  of 
novelty. 

Thus  with  words  of  judgment,  and  without  a 
ray  of  hope  to  lighten  the  darkness  of  the  pic- 
ture, the  prophet  closes  this  last  survey  of  his 
people's  history. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

FINAL    ORACLES    AGAINST   JERUSALEM. 

Ezekiel  xxii.,  xxiv. 

The  close  of  the  first  period  of  Ezekiel's  work 
was  marked  by  two  dramatic  incidents,  which 
made  the  day  memorable  both  in  the  private  life 
of  the  prophet  and  in  the  history  of  the  nation. 
In  the  first  place  it  coincided  exactly  with  the 
commencement  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem.  The 
prophet's  mysterious  knowledge  of  what  was 
happening  at  a  distance  was  duly  recorded,  in 
order  that  its  subsequent  confirmation  through 
the  ordinary  channels  of  intelligence  might 
prove  the  divine  origin  of  his  message  (xxiv. 
I,  2).  That  Ezekiel  actually  did  this  we  have 
no  reason  to  doubt.  Then  the  sudden  death  of 
his  wife  on  the  evening  of  the  same  day,  and  his 
unusual  behaviour  under  the  bereavement,  caused 
a  sensation  among  the  exiles  which  the  prophet 
was  instructed  to  utilise  as  a  meins  of  driving 
home  the  appeal  just  made  to  them.  These 
transactions  must  have  had  a  profound  efifect  or 
Ezekiel's  fellow-captives.  They  made  bis  per- 
sonality the  centre  of  absorbing  inttrest  to  the 
Jews  in  Babylon;  and  the  two  ye»rs  of  silence 
on  his  part  which  ensued  were  to  them  years 
of  anxious  foreboding  about  the  result  of  the 
siege. 

At  this  juncture  the  prophet's  thoughts  nat- 
urally are  occupied  with  the  subject  which  hith- 
erto formed  the  principal  burden  of  his  prophecy. 
The  first  part  of  his  career  accordingly  closes, 
as  it  had  begun,  with  a  symbol  of  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem.  Before  this,  however,  he  had  drawn 
o'Jt  the  solemn  indictment  against  Jerusalem 
which  is  given  in  chap,  xxii.,  although  the  fin- 
♦  Although  the  text  in  parts  of  vv.  42,  43  is  very  itfioer 


Ezekiel  xxii.,  xxiv.]     FINAL    ORACLES    AGAINST    JERUSALEM. 


271 


ishing  touches  were  probably  added  after  the  de- 
struction of  the  city.  The  substance  of  that 
chapter  is  so  closely  related  to  the  symbolic  rep- 
resentation in  the  first  part  of  chap.  xxiv.  that  it 
will  be  convenient  to  consider  it  here  as  an  in- 
troduction to  the  concluding  oracles  addressed 
more  directly  to  the  exiles  of  Tel-abib. 


The  purpose  of  this  arraignment — the  most 
stately  of  Ezekiel's  orations — is  to  exhibit  Jeru- 
salem in  her  true  character  as  a  city  whose  social 
condition  is  incurably  corrupt.  It  begins  with 
an  enumeration  of  the  prevalent  sins  of  the  capi- 
tal (vv.  2-16);  it  ends  with  a  denunciation  of  the 
various  classes  into  which  society  was  divided 
(vv.  23-31);  while  the  short  intervening  passage 
is  a  figurative  description  of  the  judgment  which 
is  now  inevitable  (vv.  17-22). 

I.  The  first  part  of  the  chapter,  then,  is  a 
catalogue  of  the  "  abominations "  which  called 
down  the  vengeance  of  heaven  upon  the  city  of 
Jerusalem.  The  ofifences  enumerated  are  nearly 
the  same  as  those  mentioned  in  the  definitions 
of  personal  righteousness  and  wickedness  given 
in  chap,  xviii.  It  is  not  necessary  to  repeat  what 
was  there  said  about  the  characteristics  of  the 
moral  ideal  which  had  been  formed  in  the  mind 
of  Ezekiel.  Although  he  is  dealing  now  with  a 
society,  his  point  of  view  is  quite  different  from 
that  represented  by  purely  allegorical  passages 
like  chaps,  xvi.  and  xxiii.  The  city  is  not  ideal- 
ised and  treated  as  a  moral  individual,  whose 
relations  with  Jehovah  have  to  be  set  forth  in 
symbolic  and  figurative  language.  It  is  con- 
ceived as  an  aggregate  of  individuals  bound  to- 
gether in  social  relations;  and  the  sins  charged 
against  it  are  the  actual  transgressions  of  the 
men  who  are  members  of  the  community. 
Hence  the  standard  of  public  morality  is  pre- 
cisely the  same  as  that  which  is  elsewhere  ap- 
plied to  the  individual  in  his  personal  relation 
to  God;  and  the  sins  enumerated  are  attributed 
to  the  city  merely  because  they  are  tolerated  and 
encouraged  in  individuals  by  laxity  of  public 
opinion  and  the  force  of  evil  example.  Jeru- 
salem is  a  community  in  which  these  different 
crimes  are  perpetrated:  "  Father  and  mother  are 
despised  in  thee;  the  stranger  is  oppressed  in  the 
midst  of  thee;  orphan  and  widow  are  wronged 
in  thee;  slanderous  men  seeking  blood  have  been 
in  thee;  flesh  with  the  blood  is  eaten  in  thee; 
lewdness  is  committed  in  the  midst  of  thee;  the 
father's  shame  is  uncovered  in  thee;  she  that  was 
unclean  in  her  separation  hath  been  humbled 
in  thee."  So  the  grave  and  measured  indictment 
runs  on.  It  is  because  of  these  things  that  Je- 
rusalem as  a  whole  is  "  guilty  "  and  "  unclean  " 
and  has  brought  near  her  day  of  retribution 
(ver.  4).  Such  a  conception  of  corporate  guilt 
undoubtedly  appeals  more  directly  to  our  ordi- 
nary conscience  of  public  morality  than  the  more 
poetic  representations^where  Jerusalem  is  com- 
pared to  a  faithless  and  treacherous  woman.  We 
have  no  difficulty  in  judging  of  any  modern  city 
in  the  very  same  way  as  Ezekiel  here  judges  Jeru- 
salem; and  in  this  respect  it  is  interesting  to  no- 
tice the  social  evils  which  he  regards  as  marking 
out  that  city  as  ripe  for  destruction. 

There  are  three  features  of  the  state  of  things 
in  Jerusalem  in  which  the  prophet  recognises 
the  symptoms  of  an  incurable  social  condition. 
Tl't  first  is  the  loss  of  a  true  conception  of  God. 


In  ancient  Israel  this  defect  necessarily  assumed 
the  form  of  idolatry.  Hence  the  multiplication 
of  idols  appropriately  finds  a  place  among  the 
marks  of  the  "  uncleanness  "  which  made  Jeru- 
salem hateful  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah  (ver.  3). 
But  the  root  of  idolatry  in  Israel  was  the  inca- 
pacity or  the  unwillingness  of  the  people  to  live 
up  to  the  lofty  conception  of  the  Divine  nature 
which  was  taught  by  the  prophets.  Throughout 
the  ancient  world  religion  was  felt  to  be  the  in- 
dispensable bond  of  society,  and  the  gods  that 
were  worshipped  reflected  more  or  less  fully  the 
ideals  that  swayed  the  life  of  the  community. 
To  Israel  the  religion  of  Jehovah  represented 
the  highest  social  ideal  that  was  then  known  on 
earth.  It  meant  righteousness,  and  purity,  and 
brotherhood,  and  compassion  for  the  poor  and 
distressed.  When  these  virtues  decayed  she  for- 
got Jehovah  (ver.  12) — forgot  His  character  even 
if  she  remembered  His  name — and  the  service  of 
false  gods  was  the  natural  and  obvious  expres- 
sion of  the  fact.  There  is  therefore  a  profound 
truth  in  Ezekiel's  mind  when  he  numbers  the 
idols  of  Jerusalem  amongst  the  indications  of  a 
degenerate  society.  They  were  the  evidence  that 
she  had  lost  the  sense  of  God  as  a  holy  and  right- 
eous spiritual  presence  in  her  midst,  and  that  loss 
was  at  once  the  source  and  symptom  of  wide- 
spread moral  declension.  It  is  one  of  the  chief 
lessons  of  the  Old  Testament  that  a  religion 
which  was  neither  the  product  of  national  genius 
nor  the  embodiment  of  national  aspiration,  but 
was  based  on  supernatural  revelation,  proved  it- 
self in  the  history  of  Israel  to  be  the  only  possible 
safeguard  against  the  tendencies  which  made  for 
social  disintegration. 

A  second  mark  of  depravity  which  Ezekiel 
discovers  in  the  capital  is  the  perversion  of  cer- 
tain moral  instincts  which  are  just  as  essential 
to  the  preservation  of  society  as  a  true  conception 
of  God.  For  if  society  rests  at  one  end  on  re- 
ligion, it  rests  at  the  other  on  instinct.  The 
closest  and  most  fundamental  of  human  rela- 
tions depend  on  innate  perceptions  which  may 
be  easily  destroyed,  but  which  when  destroyed 
can  scarcely  be  recovered.  The  sanctities  of 
marriage  and  the  family  will  hardly  bear  the 
coarse  scrutiny  of  utilitarian  ethics;  yet  they  are 
the  foundation  on  which  the  whole  social  fabric 
is  built.  And  there  is  no  part  of  Ezekiel's  in- 
dictment of  Jerusalem  which  conveys  to  our 
minds  a  more  vivid  sense  of  utter  corruption 
than  where  he  speaks  of  the  loss  of  filial  piety  and 
revolting  forms  of  sexual  impurity  as  prevalent 
sins  in  the  city.  Here  at  least  he  carries  the 
conviction  of  every  moralist  with  him.  He  in- 
stances no  offence  of  this  kind  which  would  not 
be  branded  as  unnatural  by  any  system  of  ethics 
as  heartily  as  it  is  by  the  Old  Testament.  It 
is  possible,  on  the  other  hand,  that  he  ranks  on 
the  same  level  with  these  sins  ceremonial  impur- 
ities appealing  to  feelings  of  a  different  order, 
to  which  no  permanent  moral  value  can  be  at- 
tached. When,  for  example,  he  instances  eating 
with  the  blood  *  as  an  "  abomination,"  he  ap- 
peals to  a  law  which  is  no  longer  bindmg  on  us. 
But  even  that  regulation  was  not  so  worthless, 
from  a  moral  point  of  view,  at  that  time  as  we 
are  apt  to  suppose.  The  abhorrence  of  eating 
blood  was  connected  with  certain  sacrificial  ideas 
which  attributed  a  mystic  significance  to  the 
blood  as  the  seat  of  animal  life.  So  long  as  these 
ideas  existed  no  man  could  commit  this  offence 
*  On  the  reading  here  see  above,  p.  258. 


2-J2 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


without  injuring  his  moral  nature  and  loosening 
the  Divine  sanctions  of  morality  as  a  whole.  It  is 
a  false  illuminism  which  seeks  to  disparage  the 
moral  insight  of  the  prophet  on  the  ground  that 
he  did  not  teach  an  abstract  system  of  ethics 
in  which  ceremonial  precepts  were  sharply  dis- 
tinguished from  duties  which  we  consider  moral.* 

The  third  feature  of  Jerusalem's  guilty  con- 
dition is  lawless  violation  of  human  rights. 
Neither  life  nor  property  was  secure.  Judicial 
murders  were  frequent  in  the  city,  and  minor 
forms  of  oppression,  such  as  usury,  spoliation  of 
the  unprotected,  and  robbery,  were  of  daily  oc- 
currence. The  administration  of  justice  was  cor- 
rupted by  systematic  bribery  and  perjury,  and  the 
lives  of  innocent  men  were  ruthlessly  sacrificed 
under  the  forms  of  law.  This  after  all  is  the 
aspect  of  things  which  bulks  most  largely  in  the 
prophet's  indictment.  Jerusalem  is  addressed 
as  a  "  city  shedding  blood  in  her  midst,"  and 
throughout  the  accusation  the  charge  of  blood- 
shed is  that  which  constantly  recurs.  Misgov- 
ernment  and  party  strife,  and  perhaps  religious 
persecution,  had  converted  the  city  into  a  vast 
human  shambles,  and  the  blood  of  the  innocent 
slain  cried  aloud  to  heaven  for  vengeance.  "  Of 
what  avail,"  asks  the  prophet,  "  are  the  stores 
of  wealth  piled  up  in  the  hands  of  a  few  against 
this  damning  witness  of  blood?  Jehovah  smites 
His  hand  [in  derision]  against  her  gains  that 
she  has  made,  and  against  her  blood  which  is  in 
her  midst.  How  can  her  heart  stand  or  her 
hands  be  strong  in  the  days  when  He  deals  with 
her?"  (vv.  13,  14).  Drained  of  her  best'blood, 
given  over  to  internecine  strife,  and  stricken  with 
the  cowardice  of  conscious  guilt,  Jerusalem,  al- 
ready disgraced  among  the  nations,  must  fall  an 
easy  victim  to  the  Chaldaean  invaders,  who  are 
the  agents  of  Jehovah's  judgments. 

2.  But  the  most  serious  aspect  of  the  situation 
is  that  which  is  dealt  with  in  the  peroration  of 
the  chapter  (vv.  23-31).  Outbursts  of  vice  and 
lawlessness  such  as  has  been  described  may  occur 
in  any  society,  but  they  are  not  necessarily  fatal 
to  a  community  so  long  as  it  possesses  a  con- 
science which  can  be  roused  to  eflfective  protest 
against  them.  Now  the  worst  thing  about  Jeru- 
salem was  that  she  lacked  this  indispensable  con- 
dition of  recovery.  No  voice  was  raised  on  the 
side  of  righteousness,  no  man  dared  to  stem  the 
tide  of  wickedness  that  swept  through  her  streets. 
Not  merely  that  she  harboured  within  her  walls 
men  guilty  of  incest  and  robbery  and  murder, 
but  that  her  leading  classes  were  demoralised, 
that  public  spirit  had  decayed  among  her  citi- 
zens, marked  her  as  incapable  of  reformation. 
She  was  "  a  land  not  watered,"!  "  and  not  rained 
upon  in  a  day  of  indignation  "  (ver.  24) ;  the 
springs  of  her  civic  virtue  were  dried  up,  and  a 
blight  spread  through  all  sections  of  her  popu- 
lation.! Ezekiel's  impeachment  of  different 
classes  of  society  brings  out  this  fact  with  great 

*The  eighth  verse,  referring  to  the  Sabbath  and  the 
sanctuary,  is  rejected  by  Cornill  on  internal  grounds,  but 
for  that  there  is  no  justification  If  the  verse  is  retained, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  enumeration  of  sins  corresponds 
pretty  closely  in  substance,  though  not  in  arrangement, 
wi'.h  the  precepts  of  the  Decalogue. 

t  Read  with  the  LXX  HIDD-  instead  of  mnOO,  "  puri- 
fied." 

t  This  appears  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  simile  in  ver. 
24  ;  the  judgment  is  conceived  as  a  parching  drought,  and 
the  point  of  the  comparison  is  that  its  severity  is  not 
tempered  by  the  fertilising  streams  which  should  have 
descended  on  the  people  in  the  shape  of  sound  political 
and  religious  guidance. 


force.  First  of  all  the  ancient  institutions  of 
social  order,  government,  priesthood,  and  proph- 
ecy were  in  the  hands  of  men  who  had  lost  the 
spirit  of  their  ofifice  and  abused  their  position 
for  the  advancement  of  private  interests.  Her 
princes  *  have  been,  instead  of  humane  rulers 
and  examples  of  noble  living,  cruel  and  rapacious 
tyrants,  enriching  themselves  at  the  cost  of  their 
subjects  (ver.  25).  The  priests,  whose  function 
was  to  maintain  the  outward  ordinances  of  re- 
ligion and  foster  the  spirit  of  reverence,  have 
done  their  utmost,  by  falsification  of  the  Torah, 
to  bring  religion  into  contempt  and  obliterate 
the  distinction  between  the  holy  and  the  pro- 
fane (ver.  26).  The  nobles  had  been  a  pack  of 
ravening  wolves,  imitating  the  rapacity  of  the 
court,  and  hunting  down  prey  which  the  royal 
lion  would  have  disdained  to  touch  (ver.  27). 
As  for  the  professional  prophets — those  degener- 
ate representatives  of  the  old  champions  of  truth 
and  mercy — we  have  already  seen  what  they  were 
worth  (chap.  xiii.).  They  who  should  have  been 
foremost  to  denounce  civil  wrong  are  fit  for 
nothing  but  to  stand  by  and  bolster  up  with 
lying  oracles  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  a  constitu- 
tion which  sheltered  crimes  like  these  (ver.  28). 
From  the  ruling  classes  the  prophet's  glance 
turns  for  a  moment  to  the  "  people  of  the  land," 
the  dim  common  population,  where  virtue  might 
have  been  expected  to  find  its  last  retreat.  It  is 
characteristic  of  the  age  of  Ezekiel  that  the 
prophets  begin  to  deal  more  particularly  with 
the  sins  of  the  masses  as  distinct  from  the  classes. 
This  was  due  partly  perhaps  to  a  real  increase  of 
ungodliness  in  the  body  of  the  people,  but  partly 
also  to  a  deeper  sense  of  the  importance  of  the 
individual  apart  from  his  position  in  the  state. 
These  prophets  seem  to  feel  that  if  there  had 
been  anywhere  among  rich  or  poor  an  honest 
response  to  the  will  of  Jehovah  it  would  have 
been  a  token  that  God  had  not  altogether  re- 
jected Israel.  Jeremiah  puts  this  view  very 
strongly  when  in  the  fifth  chapter  he  says  that 
if  one  man  could  be  found  in  Jerusalem  who  did 
justice  and  sought  truth  the  Lord  would  pardon 
her;  and  his  vain  search  for  that  one  man  be- 
gins among  the  poor.  It  is  this  same  motive 
that  leads  Ezekiel  to  include  the  humble  citizen 
in  his  survey  of  the  moral  condition  of  Jerusa- 
lem. It  is  little  wonder  that  under  such  leaders 
they  had  cast  off  the  restraints  of  humanity,  and 
oppressed  those  who  were  still  more  defenceless 
than  themselves.  But  it  showed  nevertheless  that 
real  religion  had  no  longer  a  foothold  in  the  city. 
It  proved  that  the  greed  of  gain  had  eaten  into 
the  very  heart  of  the  people  and  destroyed  the 
ties  of  kindred  and  mutual  sympathy,  through 
which  alone  'the  will  of  Jehovah  could  be  real- 
ised. No  matter  although  they  were  obscure 
householders,  without  political  power  or  respon- 
sibility, if  they  had  been  good  men  in  their  pri- 
vate relations,  Jerusalem  would  have  been  a  bet- 
ter place  to  live  in.  Ezekiel  indeed  does  not  go 
so  far  as  to  say  that  a  single  good  life  would 
have  saved  the  city.  He  expects  of  a  good  man 
that  he  be  a  man  in  the  full  sense — a  man  who 
speaks  boldly  on  behalf  of  righteousness  and  re- 
sists the  prevalent  evils  with  all  his  strength: 
"  I  sought  among  them  a  man  to  build  up  a 
fence,  and  to  stand  in  the  breach  before  Me  on 

*  Following  the  LXX.  we  should  read  "  whose  princes" 
(n^N^Ei^J  IEJ'N)   for  "the  conspiracy  of   her  proph«t& 
(n^S'aj  ncrp)  in  ver.  25. 


Ezekiel  xxii.,  xxiv  ]      FINAL    ORACLES    AGAINST    JERUSALEM. 


273 


behalf  of  the  land,  tliat  it  might  not  be  destroyed; 
and  I  found  none.  So  I  poured  out  My  indigna- 
tion upon  them;  with  the  fire  of  My  wrath  I  con- 
sumed them:  I  have  returned  their  way  upon 
their   head,    saith    the    Lord  Jehovah "    (vv.    30, 

3.  But  we  should  misunderstand  Ezekiel  s  po- 
sition if  we  supposed  that  his  prediction  of  the 
speedy  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  merely  an 
inference  from  his  clear  insight  into  the  necessary 
conditions  of  social  welfare  which  were  being 
violated  by  her  rulers  and  her  citizens.  That 
is  one  part  of  his  message,  but  it  could  not  stand 
alone.  The  purpose  of  the  indictment  we  have 
considered  is  simply  to  explain  the  moral  reason- 
ableness of  Jehovah's  action  in  the  great  act  of 
judgment  which  the  prophet  knows  to  be  ap- 
proaching. It  is  no  doubt  a  general  law  of  his- 
tory that  moribund  communities  are  not  allowed 
to  die  a  natural  death.  Their  usual  fate  is  to 
perish  in  the  struggle  for  existence  before  some 
other  and  sounder  nation.  But  no  human  sagac- 
ity can  foresee  how  that  law  will  be  verified  in 
any  particular  case.  It  may  seem  clear  to  us 
now  that  Israel  must  have  fallen  sooner  or  later 
before  the  advance  of  the  great  Eastern  empires, 
but  an  ordinary  observer  could  not  have  foretold 
with  the  confidence  and  precision  which  mark 
the  predictions  of  Ezekiel  in  what  manner  and 
within  what  time  the  end  would  come.  Of  that 
aspect  of  the  prophet's  mind  no  explanation  can 
be  given  save  that  God  revealed  His  secret  to 
His   servants  the   prophets. 

Now  this  element  of  the  prophecy  seems  to  be 
brought  out  by  the  image  of  Jerusalem's  fate 
which  occupies  the  middle  verses  of  the  chap- 
ter (vv.  17-22).  The  city  is  compared  to  the 
crucible  in  which  all  the  refuse  of  Israel's  national 
life  is  to  undergo  its  final  trial  by  fire.  The 
prophet  sees  in  imagination  the  terror-stricken 
provincial  population  swept  into  the  capital  be- 
fore the  approach  of  the  Chaldeans:  and  he  says, 
"  Thus  doth  Jehovah  cast  His  ore  into  the  fur- 
nace— the  silver,  the  brass,  the  iron,  the  lead, 
and  the  tin;  and  He  will  kindle  the  fire  with  His 
anger,  and  blow  upon  it  till  He  have  consumed 
the  impurities  of  the  land."  The  image  of  the 
smelting-pot  had  been  used  by  Isaiah  as  an  em- 
blem of  purifying  judgment,  the  object  of  which 
was  the  removal  of  injustice  and  the  restoration 
of  the  state  to  its  former  splendour:  "  I  will 
again  bring  My  'hand  upon  thee,  smelting  out 
thy  dross  with  lye  and  taking  away  all  thine  al- 
loy; and  I  will  make  thy  judges  to  be  again  as 
aforetime,  and  thy  counsellors  as  at  the  begin- 
ning: thereafter  thou  shalt  be  called  the  city  of 
righteousness,  the  faithful  city  "  (Isa.  i.  25,  26). 
Ezekiel,  however,  can  hardly  have  contemplated 
such  a  happy  result  of  the  operation.  The  whole 
house  of  Israel  has  become  dross,  from  which 
no  precious  metal  can  be  extracted;  and  the  ob- 
ject of  the  smelting  is  only  the  demonstration 
of  the  utter  worthlessness  of  the  people  for  the 
ends  of  God's  kingdom.  The  more  refractory  the 
material  to  be  dealt  with  the  fiercer  must  be  the 
fire  that  tests  it;  and  ilie  severity  of  the  extermi- 
nating judgment  is  the  only  thing  symbolised 
by  the  metaphor  as  used  by  Ezekiel.  In  this  he 
follows  Jeremiah,  who  applies  the  figure  in  pre- 
cisely the  same  sense:  "  The  bellows  snort,  the 
lead  is  consumed  of  the  fire:  in  vain  he  smelts 
and  smelts:  but  the  wicked  are  not  taken  away. 
Refuse  silver  shall  men  call  them,  for  the  Lord 
hath  rejected  them  "  (Jer.  vi.  29,  30).  In  this 
18— Vol.  IV, 


way  the  section  supplements  the  teaching  of  the 
rest  of  the  chapter.  Jerusalem  is  full  of  dross — 
that  has  been  proved  by  the  enumeration  of  her 
crimes  and  the  estimate  of  her  social  condition. 
But  the  fire  which  consumes  the  dross  represents 
a  special  providential  intervention  bringing  the 
history  of  the  state  to  a  summary  and  decisive 
conclusion.  And  the  Refiner  who  superintends 
the  process  is  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One  of  Israel, 
whose  righteous  will  is  executed  by  the  march 
of  conquering  hosts,  and  revealed  to  men  in  His 
dealings  with  the  people  whom  He  had  known 
of  all  the  families  of  the  earth. 

IL 

The  chapter  we  have  just  studied  was  evi- 
dently not  composed  with  a  view  to  immediate 
publication.  It  records  the  view  of  Jerusalem's 
guilt  and  punishment  which  was  borne  in  upon 
the  mind  of  the  prophet  in  the  solitude  of  his 
chamber,  but  it  was  not  destined  to  see  the  light 
until  the  whole  of  his  teaching  could  be  submit- 
ted in  its  final  form  to  a  wider  and  more  recep- 
tive audience.  It  is  equally  obvious  that  the 
scenes  described  in  chap.  xxiv.  were  really  en- 
acted in  the  full  view  of  the  exiled  community. 
We  have  reached  the  crisis  of  Ezekiel's  ministry. 
For  the  last  time  until  his  warnings  of  doom 
shall  be  fulfilled  he  emerges  from  his  partial  se- 
clusion, and  in  symbolism  whose  vivid  force 
could  not  have  failed  to  impress  the  most  list- 
less hearer  he  announces  once  more  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  nation.  The  burden  of  his 
mesage  is  that  that  day — the  tenth  day  of  the 
tenth  month  of  the  ninth  year — marked  the  be- 
ginning of  the  end.  "  On  that  very  day  " — a 
day  to  be  commemorated  for  seventy  long  years 
by  a  national  fast  (Zech.  viii.  19:  cf.  vii.  5) — 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  drawing  his  lines  around 
Jerusalem.  The  bare  announcement  to  men  who 
knew  what  a  Chaldaean  siege  meant  must  have 
sent  a  thrill  of  consternation  through  their 
minds.  If  this  vision  of  what  was  happening  in 
a  distant  land  should  prove  true,  they  must  have 
felt  that  all  hope  of  deliverance  was  now  cut 
off.  Sceptical  as  they  may  have  been  of  the 
moral  principles  that  lay  behind  Ezekiel's  pre- 
diction, they  could  not  deny  that  the  issue  he 
foresaw  was  only  the  natural  sequel  to  the  fact 
he    so    confidently    announced. 

The  image  here  used  of  the  fate  of  Jerusalem 
would  recall  to  the  minds  of  the  exiles  the  ill- 
omened  saying  which  expressed  the  reckless 
spirit  prevalent  in  the  city:  "This  city  is  the 
pot,  and  we  are  the  flesh  "  (xi.  3).  It  was  well 
understood  in  Babylon  that  these  men  were  play- 
ing a  desperate  game,  and  did  not  shrink  from 
the  horrors  of  a  siege.  "  Set  on  the  pot,"  then, 
cries  the  prophet  to  his  listeners,  "  set  it  on,  and 
pour  in  water  also,  and  gather  the  pieces  into 
it,  every  good  joint,  leg,  and  shoulder;  fill  it 
with  the  choicest  bones.  Take  them  from  the 
best  of  the  flock,  and  then  pile  up  the  wood  * 
under  it;  let  its  pieces  be  boiled  and  its  bones 
cooked  within  it  "  (vv.  3-5).  This  part  of  the 
parable  required  no  explanation;  it  simply  rep- 
resents the  terrible  miseries  endured  by  the  pop- 
ulation of  Jerusalem  during  the  siege  now  com- 
mencing. But  then  by  a  sudden  transition  the 
speaker  turns  the  thoughts  of  his  hearers  to  an- 
other aspect   of   the   judgment    (vv.   6-8).     The 

♦Read  D'Vy.  "wood,"  instead  of  D'DXy,  "bones" 
(Boettcher  and  others). 


274 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


city  itself  is  like  a  rusty  caldron,  unfit  for  any 
useful  purpose  until  by  some  means  it  has  been 
cleansed  from  its  impurity.  It  is  as  if  the  crimes 
that  had  been  perpetrated  in  Jerusalem  had 
stained  her  very  stones  with  blood.  She  had  not 
even  taken  steps  to  conceal  the  traces  of  her 
wickedness:  they  lie  like  blood  on  the  bare  rock, 
an  open  witness  to  her  guilt.  Often  Jehovah 
had  sought  to  purify  her  by  more  measured  chas- 
tisements, but  it  has  now  been  proved  that  "  her 
much  rust  will  not  go  from  her  except  by  fire  "  * 
(ver.  12).  Hence  the  end  of  the  siege  will  be 
twofold.  First  of  all  the  contents  of  the  caldron 
will  be  indiscriminately  thrown  out — a  figure  for 
the  dispersion  and  captivity  of  the  inhabitants; 
and  then  the  pot  must  be  set  empty  on  the  glow- 
ing coals  till  its  rust  is  thoroughly  burned  out — 
a  symbol  of  the  burning  of  the  citV  and  its  sub- 
sequent desolation  (ver.  11).  The  idea  that  the 
material  world  may  contract  defilement  through 
the  sins  of  those  who  live  in  it  is  one  that  is 
hard  for  us  to  realise,  but  it  is  in  keeping  with 
the  view  of  sin  presented  by  Ezekiel,  and  indeed 
by  the  Old  Testament  generally.  There  are  cer- 
tain natural  emblems  of  sin,  such  as  uncleanness 
or  disease  or  uncovered  blood,  etc.,  which  had 
to  be  largely  used  in  order  to  educate  men's 
moral  perceptions.  Partly  these  rest  on  the  anal- 
ogy between  physical  defect  and  moral  evil;  but 
partly,  as  here,  they  result  from  a  strong  sense 
of  association  between  human  deeds  and  their 
efifects  or  circumstances.  Jerusalem  is  unclean 
as  a  place  where  wicked  deeds  have  been  done, 
and  even  the  destruction  of  the  sinners  cannot, 
in  the  mind  of  Ezekiel,  clear  her  from  the  un- 
hallowed associations  of  her  history.  She  must 
lie  empty  and  dreary  for  a  generation,  swept  by 
the  winds  of  heaven,  before  devout  Israelites  can 
again  twine  their  afifections  round  the  hope  of 
her  glorious  future.f 

Even  while  delivering  this  message  of  doom  to 
the  people  the  prophet's  heart  was  burdened  by 
the  presentiment  of  a  great  personal  sorrow.  He 
had  received  an  intimation  that  his  wife  was  to 
be  taken  from  him  by  a  sudden  stroke,  and  along 
with  the  intimation  a  command  to  refrain  from 
all  the  usual  signs  of  mourning.  "  So  I  spake 
to  the  people  "  (as  recorded  in  vv.  1-14)  "  in  the 
morning,  and  my  wife  died  in  the  evening " 
(ver.  18).  Just  one  touch  of  tenderness  escapes 
him  in  relating  this  mysterious  occurrence.  She 
was  the  "  delight  of  his  eyes  "  :  that  phrase  alone 
reveals  that  there  was  a  fountain  of  tears  sealed 
up  within  the  breast  of  this  stern  preacher.  How 
the  course  of  his  life  may  have  been  influenced 
by  a  bereavement  so  strangely  coincident  with 
a  change  in  his  whole  attitude  to  his  people,  we 
cannot  even  surmise.  Nor  is  it  possible  to  say 
how  far  he  merely  used  the  incident  to  convey 
a  lesson  to  the  exiles,  or  how  far  his  private 
grief  was  really  swallowed  up  in  concern  for  the 
calamity  of  his  country.  All  we  are  told  is  that 
"  in  the  morning  he  did  as  he  was  commanded." 
He  neither  uttered  loud  lamentations,  nor  dis- 
arranged his  raiment,  nor  covered  his  head,  nor 
ate  the  "  bread  of  men,"  %  nor  adopted  any  of 
the  customary  signs  of  mourning  for  the  dead. 
When    the    astonished    neighbours    inquire    the 

•The  words  "  except  by  fire  "  represent  an  emendation 
proposed  by  Cornill.  which  may  be  somewhat  bold,  but 
certainly  expresses  an  idea  in  the  passage. 

t  C/.  Jer.  xiii.  27  :  "  Thou  shalt  not  be  pronounced  clean, 
for  how  long  a  time  yet !  " 

X  I.  e.,  as  generally  explained,  bread  brought  by  sym- 
pathising friends,  to  be  shared  with  the  mourning  house- 


meaning  of  his  Strange  demeanour,  he  assures 
them  that  his  conduct  now  is  a  sign  of  what 
theirs  will  be  when  his  words  have  come  true. 
When  the  tidings  reach  them  that  Jerusalem  has 
actually  fallen,  when  they  realise  how  many  in- 
terests dear  to  them  have  perished — the  desola- 
tion of  the  sanctuary,  the  loss  of  their  own  sons 
and  daughters — they  will  experience  a  sense  of 
calamity  which  will  instinctively  discard  all  the 
conventional  and  even  the  natural  expressions 
of  grief.  They  shall  neither  mourn  nor  weep, 
but  sit  in  dumb  bewilderment,  haunted  by  a  dull 
consciousness  of  guilt  which  yet  is  far  removed 
from  genuine  contrition  of  heart.  They  shall 
pine  away  in  their  iniquities.  For  while  their 
sorrow  will  be  too  deep  for  words,  it  will  not 
yet  be  the  godly  sorrow  that  worketh  repentance. 
It  will  be  the  sullen  despair  and  apathy  of  men 
disenchanted  of  the  illusions  on  whidh  their 
national  life  was  based,  of  men  left  without  hope 
and   without   God   in   the   world. 

Here  the  curtain  falls  on  the  first  act  of  Eze- 
kiel's  ministry.  He  appears  to  have  retired  for 
the  space  of  two  years  into  complete  privacy, 
ceasing  entirely  his  public  appeals  to  the  people, 
and  waiting  for  the  time  of  his  vindication  as 
a  prophet.  The  sense  of  restraint  under  which 
he  has  hitherto  exercised  the  function  of  a  pub- 
lic teacher  cannot  be  removed  until  the  tidings 
have  reached  Babylon  that  the  city  has  fallen. 
Meanwhile,  with  the  delivery  of  this  message, 
his  contest  with  the  unbelief  of  his  fellow-cap- 
tives conies  to  an  end.  But  when  that  day  ar- 
rives "  his  mouth  shall  be  open,  and  he  shall  be 
no  more  dumb."  A  new  career  will  open  out 
before  him,  in  which  'he  can  devote  all  his  powers 
of  mind  and  heart  to  the  inspiring  work  of  re- 
viving faith  in  the  promises  of  God,  and  so  build- 
ing up  a  new  Israel  out  of  the  ruins  of  the  old. 


PART  III. 

PROPHECIES  AGAINST  FOREIGN  NA- 
TIONS. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

AMMON,  MOAB,   EDOM,   AND  PHILISTIA. 

Ezekiel    xxv. 

The  next  eight  chapters  (xxv.-xxxii.)  form  an 
intermezzo  in  the  Book  of  Ezekiel.  They  are 
inserted  in  this  place  with  the  obvious  inten- 
tion of  separating  the  two  sharply  contrasted 
situations  in  which  our  prophet  found  himself 
before  and  after  the  siege  of  Jerusalem.  The 
subject  with  which  they  deal  is  indeed  an  essen- 
tial part  of  the  prophet's  message  to  his  time, 
but  it  is  separate  from  the  central  interest  of  the 
narrative,  which  lies  in  the  conflict  between  the 
word  of  Jehovah  in  the  hands  of  Ezekiel  and  the 
unbelief  of  the  exiles  among  whom  he  lived. 
The  perusal  of  this  group  of  chapters  is  intended 
to  prepare  the  reader  for  the  completely  altered 
conditions  under  which  Ezekiel  was  to  resume 
hold  :  cf.  Jer.  xvi.  7  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  35.  Wellhausen,  however, 
proposes   to   read  "bread   of   mourners"    (D'CJK    fo' 


Ezekiel  xxv.] 


AMMON,    MOAB,    EDOM,    AND    PHILISTIA. 


^75 


his  public  ministrations.  The  cycle  of  prophe- 
cies on  foreign  peoples  is  thus  a  sort  of  literary 
analogue  of  the  period  of  suspense  which  inter- 
rupted the  continuity  of  Ezekiel's  work  in  the 
way  we  have  seen.  It  marks  the  shifting  of  the 
scenes  behind  the  curtain  before  the  principal 
actors  again  step  on  the  stage. 

It  is  natural  enough  to  suppose  that  the  proph- 
et's mind  was  really  occupied  during  this  time 
with  the  fate  of  Israel's  heathen  neighbours;  but 
that  alone  does  not  account  for  the  grouping 
of  the  oracles  before  us  in  this  particular  section 
of  the  book.  Not  only  do  some  of  the  chrono- 
logical notices  carry  us  far  past  the  limit  of  the 
time  of  silence  referred  to,  but  it  will  be  found 
that  nearly  all  the  prophecies  assume  that  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem  is  already  known  to  the  nations 
addressed.  It  is  therefore  a  mistaken  view  which 
holds  that  in  these  chapters  we  have  simply  the 
result  of  Ezekiel's  meditations  during  his  period 
of  enforced  seclusion  from  public  duty.  What- 
ever the  nature  of  his  activity  at  this  time  may 
have  been,  the  principle  of  arrangement  here  is 
not  chronological,  but  literary;  and  no  better 
motive  for  it  can  be  suggested  than  the  writer's 
sense  of  dramatic  propriety  in  unfolding  the  sig- 
nificance of  his  prophetic  life. 

In  uttering  a  series  of  oracles  against  heathen 
nations,  Ezekiel  follows  the  example  set  by  some 
of  his  greatest  predecessors.  The  Book  of  Amos, 
for  example,  opens  with  an  impressive  chapter 
of  judgments  on  the  peoples  lying  immediately 
round  the  borders  of  Palestine.  The  thunder- 
cloud of  Jehovah's  anger  is  represented  as  mov- 
ing over  the  petty  states  of  Syria  before  it  finally 
breaks  in  all  its  fury  over  the  two  kingdoms  of 
Judah  and  Israel.  Similarly  the  Books  of  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah  contain  continuous  sections  dealing 
with  various  heathen  powers,  while  the  Book  of 
Nahum  is  wholly  occupied  with  a  prediction  of 
the  ruin  of  the  Assyrian  empire.  And  these  are 
but  a  few  of  the  more  striking  instances  of  a 
phenomenon  which  is  apt  to  cause  perplexity  to 
close  and  earnest  students  of  the  Old  Testament. 
We  have  here  to  do,  therefore,  with  a  standing 
theme  of  Hebrew  prophecy;  and  it  may  help  us 
better  to  understand  the  attitude  of  Ezekiel  if  we 
consider  for  a  moment  some  of  the  principles 
involved  in  this  constant  pre-occupation  of  the 
prophets  with  the  affairs  of  the  outer  world. 

At  the  outset  it  must  be  understood  that  proph- 
ecies of  this  kind  form  part  of  Jehovah's  message 
to  Israel.  Although  they  are  usually  cast  in  the 
form  of  direct  address  to  foreign  peoples,  this 
must  not  lead  us  to  imagine  that  they  were  in- 
tended for  actual  publication  in  the  countries  to 
which  they  refer.  A  prophet's  real  audience 
always  consisted  of  his  own  countrymen, 
whether  his  discourse  was  about  themselves  or 
about  their  neighbours.  And  it  is  easy  to  see 
that  it  was  impossible  to  declare  the  purpose  of 
God  concerning  Israel  in  words  that  came  home 
to  men's  business  and  bosoms,  without  taking 
account  of  the  state  and  destiny  of  other  nations. 
Just  as  it  would  not  be  possible  nowadays  to 
forecast  the  future  of  Egypt  wit^hout  alluding  to 
the  fate  of  the  Ottoman  empire,  so  it  was  not 
possible  then  to  describe  the  future  of  Israel  in 
the  concrete  manner  characteristic  of  the  proph- 
ets without  indicating  the  place  reserved  for 
those  peoples  with  whom  it  had  close  inter- 
course. Besides  this,  a  large  part  of  the  national 
consciousness  of  Israel  was  made  up  of  interests, 
friendly  or  the  reverse,   in  neighbouring  states. 


The  Hebrews  had  a  keen  eye  for  national  idio- 
syncrasies, and  the  simple  international  relations 
of  those  days  were  almost  as  vivid  and  personal 
as  of  neighbours  living  in  the  same  village.  To 
be  an  Israelite  was  to  be  something  characteris- 
tically dififerent  from  a  Moabite,  and  that  again 
from  an  Edomite  or  a  Philistine,  and  every  patri- 
otic Israelite  had  a  shrewd  sense  of  what  the  dif- 
ference was.  We  cannot  read  the  .utterances  of 
the  prophets  with  regard  to  any  of  these  nation- 
alities without  seeing  that  they  often  appeal  to 
perceptions  deeply  lodged  in  the  popular  mind, 
which  could  be  utilised  to  convey  the  spiritual 
lessons  which  the  prophets  desired  to  teach. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  such 
prophecies  are  in  any  degree  the  expression  of 
national  vanity  or  jealousy.  What  the  prophets 
aim  at  is  to  elevate  the  thoughts  of  Israel  to  the 
sphere  of  eternal  truths  of  the  kingdom  of  God; 
and  it  is  only  in  so  far  as  these  can  be  made  to 
touch  the  conscience  of  the  nation  at  this  point 
that  they  appeal  to  what  we  may  call  its  interna- 
tional sentiments.  Now  the  question  we  have 
to  ask  is.  What  spiritual  purpose  for  Israel  is 
served  by  the  announcements  of  the  destiny  of 
the  outlying  heathen  populations?  There  are  of 
course  special  interests  attaching  to  each  partic- 
ular prophecy  which  it  would  be  dif^cult  to  clas- 
sify. But,  speaking  generally,  prophecies  of  this 
class  had  a  moral  value  for  two  reasons.  In  the 
first  place,  they  re-echo  and  confirm  the  sen- 
tence of  judgment  passed  on  Israel  herself.  They 
do  this  in  two  ways:  they  illustrate  the  principle 
on  which  Jehovah  deals  with  His  own  people, 
and  His  character  as  the  righteoi's  judge  of  men. 
Israel  was  to  be  destroyed  for  her  national  sins, 
her  contempt  of  Jehovah,  and  her  breaches  of 
the  moral  law.  But  other  nations,  though  more 
excusable,  were  not  less  guilty  than  Israel.  The 
same  spirit  of  ungodliness,  in  different  forms, 
was  manifested  by  Tyre,  by  Egypt,  by  Assyria, 
and  by  the  petty  states  of  Syria.  Hence,  if  Je- 
hovah was  really  the  righteous  ruler  of  the  world. 
He  must  visit  upon  these  nations  their  iniquities. 
Wherever  a  "  sinful  kingdom  "  was  found, 
whether  in  Israel  or  elsewhere,  that  kingdom 
must  be  removed  from  its  place  among  the  na- 
tions. This  appears  most  clearly  in  the  Book 
of  Amos,  who,  though  he  enunciates  the  para- 
doxical truth  that  Israel's  sin  must  be  punished 
just  because  it  was  the  only  peopje  that  Jehovah 
had  known,  nevertheless,  as  we  have  seen,  thun- 
dered forth  similar  judgments  on  other  nations 
for  their  flagrant  violation  of  the  universal  law 
written  in  the  human  heart.  In  this  way  there- 
fore the  prophets  enforced  on  their  contempora- 
ries the  fundamental  lesson  of  their  teaching  that 
the  disasters  which  were  coming  on  them  were 
not  the  result  of  the  caprice  or  impotence  of 
their  Deity,  but  the  execution  of  His  moral  pur- 
pose, to  which  all  men  everywhere  are  subject. 
But  again,  not  only  was  the  principle  of  the 
judgment  emphasised,  but  the  manner  in  which  it 
was  to  be  carried  out  was  more  clearly  exhib- 
ited. In  all  cases  the  pre-exilic  prophets  an- 
nounce that  the  overthrow  of  the  Hebrew  states 
was  to  be  effected  either  by  the  Assyrians  or 
the  Babylonians.  These  great  world-powers 
were  in  succession  the  instruments  fashioned  and 
used  by  Jehovah  for  the  performance  of  His 
great  work  in  the  earth.  Now  it  was  manifest 
that  if  this  anticipation  was  well  founded  it  in- 
volved the  overthrow  of  all  the  nations  in  imme- 
diate  contact    with    Israel.      The    policy    of    the 


-76 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


Mesopotamian  monarchs  was  well  understood; 
and  if  their  wonderful  successes  were  the  revela- 
tion of  the  Divine  purpose,  then  Israel  would 
not  be  judged  alone.  Accordingly  we  find  in 
most  instances  that  the  chastisement  of  the 
heathen  is  either  ascribed  directly  to  the  in- 
vaders or  else  to  other  agencies  set  in  motion 
by  their  approach.  The  people  of  Israel  or  Ju- 
dah  were  thus  taught  to  look  on  their  fate  as 
involved  in  a  great  scheme  of  Divine  providence, 
overturning  all  the  existing  relations  which  gave 
them  a  place  among  fhe  nations  of  the  world 
and  preparing  for  a  new  development  of  the  pur- 
pose of  Jehovah  in  the  future. 

When  we  turn  to  that  ideal  future  we  find  a 
second  and  more  suggestive  aspect  of  these 
prophecies  against  the  heathen.  All  the  prophets 
teacli  that  the  destmy  of  Israel  is  inseparably 
bound  up  with  the  future  of  God's  kingdom  on 
earth.  The  Old  Testament  never  wholly  shakes 
off  the  idea  that  the  preservation  and  ultimate 
victory  of  the  true  religion  demands  the  con- 
tinued existence  of  the  one  people  to  whom  the 
revelation  of  the  true  God  had  been  committed. 
The  indestructibility  of  Israel's  national  life  de- 
pends on  its  unique  position  in  relation  to  the 
purposes  of  Jehovah,  and  it  is  for  this  reason 
that  the  prophets  look  forward  with  unwavering 
confidence  to  a  time  when  the  knowledge  of  Je- 
hovah shall  go  forth  from  Israel  to  all  the  na- 
tions of  mankind.  And  this  point  of  view  we 
must  try  to  enter  into  if  we  are  to  understand 
the  meaning  of  their  declarations  concerning  the 
fate  of  the  surrounding  nations.  If  we  ask 
whether  an  independent  future  is  reserved  in  the 
new  dispensation  for  the  peoples  with  whom  Is- 
rael had  dealings  in  the  past,  we  find  that  dif- 
ferent and  sometimes  conflicting  answers  are 
given.  Thus  Isaiah  predicts  a  restoration  of 
Tyre  after  the  lapse  of  seventy  years,  w'hile  Eze- 
kiel  announces  its  complete  and  final  destruction. 
It  is  only  when  we  consider  these  utterances  in 
the  light  of  the  prophets'  general  conception  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  that  we  discern  the  spiritual 
truth  that  gives  them  an  abiding  significance  for 
the  instruction  of  all  ages.  It  was  not  a  matter  of 
supreme  religious  importance  to  know  whether 
Phoenicia  or  Egypt  or  Assyria  would  retain  their 
old  place  in  the  world,  and  share  indirectly  in  the 
blessings  of  the  Messianic  age.  What  men 
needed  to  be  taught  then,  and  what  we  need  to 
remember  still,  is  that  each  nation  holds  its  po- 
sition in  subordination  to  the  ends  of  God's  gov- 
ernment, and  no  power  or  wisdom  or  refinement 
will  save  a  state  from  destruction  when  it  ceases 
to  serve  the  interests  of  His  kingdom.  The  for- 
eign peoples  that  come  under  the  survey  of  the 
prophets  are  as  yet  strangers  to  the  true  God, 
and  are  therefore  destitute  of  that  which  could 
secure  them  a  place  in  the  reconstruction  of  po- 
litical relationships  of  which  Israel  is  to  be  the 
religious  centre.  Sometimes  they  are  represented 
as  having  by  their  hostility  to  Israel  or  their 
pride  of  heart  so  encroached  on  the  sovereignty 
of  Jehovah  that  their  doom  is  already  sealed. 
At  other  times  they  are  conceived  as  converted 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God,  and  as  gladly 
accepting  the  place  assigned  to  them  in  the  hu- 
manity of  the  future  by  consecrating  their  wealth 
and  power  to  the  service  of  His  people  Israel. 
In  all  cases  it  is  their  attitude  to  Israel  and  the 
God  of  Israel  that  determines  their  destiny:  that 
is  the  great  truth  which  the  prophets  design  to 
impress  on  their  countrymen.     So  long  as  the 


cause  of  religion  was  identified  with  the  fortunes 
of  the  people  of  Israel  no  higher  conception  of 
the  redemption  of  mankind  could  be  formed  than 
that  of  a  willing  subjection  of  the  nations  of  the 
earth  to  the  word  of  Jehovah  which  went  forth 
from  Jerusalem  {cf.  Isa.  ii.  2-4).  And  whether 
any  particular  nation  should  survive  to  partici- 
pate in  the  glories  of  that  latter  day  depends  on 
the  view  taken  of  its  present  condition  and  its 
fitness  for  incorporation  in  the  universal  empire 
of  Jehovah  soon  to  be  established. 

We  now  know  that  this  was  not  the  form  in 
which  Jehovah's  purpose  of  salvation  was  des- 
tined to  be  realised  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
Since  the  coming  of  Christ  the  people  of  Israel 
has  lost  its  distinctive  and  central  position  as 
the  bearer  of  the  hopes  and  promises  of  the  true 
religion.  In  its  place  we  have  a  spiritual  king- 
dom of  men  united  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  and 
in  the  worship  of  one  Father  in  spirit  and  in 
truth — a  kingdom  which  from  its  very  nature 
can  have  no  local  centre  or  political  organisatioti. 
Hence  the  conversion  .of  the  heathen  can  no 
longer  be  conceived  as  national  homage  paid  to 
the  seat  of  Jehovah's  sovereignty  on  Zion;  nor 
is  the  unfolding  of  the  Divine  plan  of  universal 
salvation  bound  up  with  the  extinction  of  the 
nationalities  which  once  symbolised  the  hostility 
of  the  world  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  This  fact 
has  an  important  bearing  on  the  question  of  the 
fulfilment  of  the  foreign  prophecies  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Literal  fulfilment  is  not  to  be  looked 
for  in  this  case  any  more  than  in  the  delineations 
of  Israel's  future,  which  are  after  all  the  predom- 
inant element  of  Messianic  prediction.  It  is  true 
that  the  nations  passed  under  review  have  now 
vanished  from  history,  and  in  so  far  as  their 
fall  was  brought  about  by  causes  operating  in 
the  world  in  which  the  prophets  moved,  it  must 
be  recognised  as  a  partial  but  real  vindication 
of  the  truth  of  their  words.  But  the  details  of 
the  prophecies  have  not  been  historically  veri- 
fied. All  attempts  to  trace  their  accomplishment 
in  events  that  took  place  long  afterwards  and  in 
circumstances  which  the  prophets  themselves 
never  contemplated  only  lead  us  astray  from  the 
real  interest  which  belongs  to  them.  As  con- 
crete embodiments  of  the  eternal  principles  ex- 
hibited in  the  rise  and  fall  of  nations  they  have 
an  abiding  significance  for  the  Church  in  all 
ages;  but  the  actual  working  out  of  these  prin- 
ciples in  history  could  not  in  the  nature  of  things 
be  complete  within  the  limits  of  the  world  known 
to  the  inhabitants  of  Judaea.  If  we  are  to  look  for 
their  ideal  fulfilment,  we  shall  only  find  it  in 
the  progressive  victory  of  Christianity  over  all 
forms  of  error  and  superstition,  and  in  the  dedi- 
cation of  all  the  resources  of  human  civilisation 
— its  wealth,  its  commercial  enterprise,  its  polit- 
ical power — to  tlie  advancement  of  the  kingdom 
of  our  God  and  His  Christ. 

It  was  natural  from  the  special  circumstances 
in  which  he  wrote,  as  well  as  from  the  general 
character  of  his  teaching,  that  Ezekiel,  in  his 
oracles  against  the  heathen  powers,  should  pre- 
sent only  the  dark  side  of  God's  providence. 
Except  in  the  case  of  Egypt,  the  nations  ad- 
dressed are  threatened  with  annihilation,  and 
even  Egypt  is  to  be  reduced  to  a  condition  of 
utter  impotence  and  humiliation.  Very  charac- 
teristic also  is  his  representation  of  the  purpose 
which  comes  to  light  in  this  series  of  judgments. 
It  is  to  be  a  great  demonstration  to  all  the  earth 


Ezekiel  xxv.] 


AMMON,    MOAB,    EDOM,    AND    PHILISTIA. 


277 


of  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  Jehovah.  "  Ye 
shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah  "  is  the  formula 
that  sums  up  the  lesson  of  each  nation's  fall.  We 
observe  that  the  prophet  starts  from  the  situation 
created  by  the  tall  of  Jerusalem.  That  great  ca- 
lamity bore  in  the  first  instance  the  appearance 
of  a  triumph  of  heathenism  over  Jehovah  the 
God  of  Israel.  It  was,  as  the  prophet  elsewhere 
expresses  it,  a  profanation  of  His  holy  name  in 
the  eyes  of  the  nations.  And  in  this  light  it  was 
undoubtedly  regarded  by  the  petty  principalities 
around  Palestine,  and  perhaps  also  by  the  more 
distant  and  powerful  spectators,  such  as  Tyre  and 
Egypt.  From  the  standpoint  of  heathenism  the 
downfall  of  Israel  meant  the  defeat  of  its  tutelary 
Deity;  and  the  neighbouring  nations,  in  exulting 
over  the  tidings  of  Jerusalem's  fate,  'had  in  their 
minds  the  idea  of  the  prostrate  Jehovah  unable 
to  save  His  people  in  their  hour  of  need.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  Ezekiel  attrib- 
utes to  them  any  consciousness  of  Jehovah's 
claim  to  be  the  only  living  and  true  God.  It  is 
the  paradox  of  revelation  that  He  who  is  the 
Eternal  and  Infinite  first  revealed  Himself  to  the 
world  as  the  God  of  Israel;  and  all  the  miscon- 
ceptions that  sprang  out  of  that  fact  had  to  be 
cleared  away  by  His  self-manifestation  in  histori- 
cal acts  thatr  appealed  to  the  world  at  large. 
Amongst  these  acts  the  judgment  of  the  heathen 
nations  holds  the  first  place  in  the  mind  of  Eze- 
kiel. A  crisis  has  been  reached  at  which  it  be- 
comes necessary  for  Jehovah  to  vindicate  His  di- 
vinity by  the  destruction  of  those  who  have  ex- 
alted themselves  against  Him.  The  world  must 
learn  once  for  all  that  Jehovah  is  no  mere  tribal 
god,  but  the  omnipotent  ruler  of  the  universe. 
And  this  is  the  preparation  for  the  final  disclo- 
sure of  His  power  and  Godhead  in  the  restora- 
tion of  Israel  to  its  own  land,  which  will  speed- 
ily follow  the  overthrow  of  its  ancient  foes.  This 
series  of  prophecies  forms  thus  an  appropriate 
introduction  to  the  third  division  of  the  book, 
which  deals  with  the  formation  of  the  new  people 
of  Jehovah. 

It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  Ezekiel's  sur- 
vey of  the  heathen  nations  is  restricted  to  those 
in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  land  of  Canaan. 
Although  he  had  unrivalled  opportunities  of  be- 
coming acquainted  with  the  remote  countries  of 
the  East,  he  confines  his  attention  to  the  Medi- 
terranean states  which  had  long  played  a  part  in 
Hebrew  history.  The  peoples  dealt  with  are 
seven  in  number — Amnion,  Moab,  Edom,  the 
Philistines,  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Egypt.  The  order 
of  the  enumeration  is  geographical:  first  the  in- 
ner circle  of  Israel's  immediate  neighbours,  from 
Ammon  on  the  east  round  to  Sidon  in  the  ex- 
treme north;  then  outside  the  circle  the  prepon- 
derating world-power  of  Egypt.  It  is  not  alto- 
gether an  accidental  circumstance  that  five  of 
these  nations  are  named  in  the  twenty-seventh 
chapter  of  Jeremiah  as  concerned  in  the  project 
of  rebellion  against  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  early 
part  of  Zedekiah's  reign.  Egypt  and  Philistia 
are  not  mentioned  there,  but  we  may  surmise  at 
least  that  Egyptian  diplomacy  was  secretly  at 
work  pulling  the  wires  which  set  the  puppets  in 
motion.  This  fact,  together  with  the  omission 
of  Babylon  from  the  list  of  threatened  nations, 
shows  that  Ezekiel  regards  the  judgment  as  fall- 
ing within  the  period  of  Chaldean  supremacy, 
which  he  appears  to  have  estimated  at  forty  years. 
What  is  to  be  the  fate  of  Babylon  itself  he  no- 
where  intimates,    a   conflict   between   that   great 


world-power  and  Jehovah's  purpose  being  no 
part  of  his  system.  That  Nebuchadnezzar  is  to 
be  the  agent  of  the  overthrow  of  Tyre  and  the 
humiliation  of  Egypt  is  expressly  stated;  and  al- 
though the  crushing  of  the  smaller  states  is  as- 
cribed to  other  agencies,  we  can  hardly  doubt 
that  these  were  conceived  as  indirect  conse- 
quences of  the  upheaval  caused  by  the  Babylo- 
nian   invasion. 

Chap,  xxv.,  then,  consists  of  four  brief  proph- 
ecies addressed  respectively  to  Ammon,  Moab, 
Edom,  and  the  Philistines.  A  few  words  on  the 
fate  prefigured  for  each  of  these  countries  will 
suffice  for  the  explanation  of  the  chapter. 

1.  Ammon  (vv.  2-7)  lay  on  the  edge  of  the  des- 
ert, between  the  upper  waters  of  the  Jabbok  and 
the  Arnon,  separated  from  the  Jordan  by  a  strip 
of  Israelitish  territory  from  twenty  to  thirty  miles 
wide.  Its  capital,  Rabbah,  mentioned  here  (ver. 
5),  was  situated  on  a  southern  tributary  of  the 
Jabbok,  and  its  ruins  still  bear  amongst  the 
Arabs  the  ancient  national  name  'Amman.  Al- 
though their  country  was  pastoral  (milk  is  re- 
ferred to  in  ver.  4  as  one  of  its  chief  products), 
the  Ammonites  seem  to  have  made  some  prog- 
ress in  civilisation.  Jeremiah  (xlix.  4^  speaks  of 
them  as  trusting  in  their  treasures:  and  in  this 
chapter  Ezekiel  announces  that  they  shall  be  for 
a  spoil  to  the  nations  (ver.  7).  After  the  depor- 
tation of  the  transjordanic  tribes  by  Tiglath- 
pileser,  Ammon  seized  the  country  that  had  be- 
longed to  the  tribe  of  Gad,  its  nearest  neighbour 
on  the  west.  This  encroachment  is  denounced 
by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  in  the  opening  words 
of  his  oracle  against  Ammon:  "  Hath  Israel  no 
children?  or  has  he  no  heir?  why  doth  Miicom  " 
(the  national  deity  of  the  Ammonites)  "  inherit 
Gad,  why  hath  his  "  (Milcom's)  "  folk  settled 
in  his"  (Gad's)  "cities"  (Jer.  xlix.  i).  We 
have  already  seen  (chap,  xxi.)  that  the  Ammon- 
ites took  part  in  the  rebellion  against  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  stood  out  after  the  other  members 
of  the  league  had  gone  back  from  their  purpose. 
But  this  temporary  union  with  Jerusalem  did 
nothing  to  abate  the  old  national  animosity,  and 
the  disaster  of  Judah  was  a  signal  for  an  exhi- 
bition of  malignant  satisfaction  on  the  part  of 
Ammon.  "  Because  thou  hast  said.  Aha,  against 
My  sanctuary  when  it  was  profaned,  and  the  land 
of  Israel  when  it  was  laid  waste,  and  the  house 
of  Judah  when  it  went  into  captivity,"  etc.  (ver. 
3) — for  this  crowning  ofifence  against  the  majesty 
of  Jehovah,  Ezekiel  denounces  an  exterminating 
judgment  on  Ammon.  The  land  shall  be  given 
up  to  the  "  children  of  the  East  " — i.  e.,  the 
Bedouin  Arabs — who  shall  pitch  their  tent  en- 
campments in  it,  eating  its  fruits  and  drinking 
its  milk,  and  turning  the  "  great  city  "  Rabbah 
itself  into  a  resting-place  for  camels  (vv.  4,  5). 
It  is  not  quite  clear  (though  it  is  commonly  as- 
sumed) that  the  children  of  the  East  are  regarded 
as  the  actual  conquerors  of  Ammon.  Their  pos- 
session of  the  country  may  be  the  consequence 
rather  than  the  cause  of  the  destruction  of  civ- 
ilisation, the  encroachment  of  the  nomads  being 
as  inevitable  under  these  circumstances  as  the 
extension  of  the  desert  itself  where  water  fails. 

2.  Moab*  (vv.  8-1  i)  comes  next  in  order.  Its 
proper  territory,  since  the  settlement  of  Israel  in 
Canaan,  was  the  elevated  tableland  south  of  the 
Arnon,  along  the  lower  part  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

♦The  words  "and  Seir  "  in  ver.  8  are  wanting  in  the 
true  text  of  the  LXX.,  and  should  probably  be  omitted. 


278 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


But  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  which  bordered  it  on 
the  north,  was  never  able  to  hold  its  ground 
against  the  superior  strength  of  Moab,  and  hence 
the  latter  nation  is  found  in  possession  of  the 
lower  and  more  fertile  district  stretching  north- 
wards from  the  Arnon,  now  called  the  Belka. 
All  the  cities,  indeed,  which  are  mentioned  in  this 
chapter  as  belonging  to  Moab — Bethjeshimoth, 
Baal-meon,  and  Kirjathaim — were  situated  in  this 
northern  and  properly  Israelite  region.  These 
were  the  "  glory  of  the  land,"  which  were  now 
to  be  taken  away  from  Moab  (ver.  9).  In  Is- 
rael Moab  appears  to  have  been  regarded  as  the 
incarnation  of  a  peculiarly  offensive  form  of 
national  pride,*  of  which  we  happen  to  have  a 
monument  in  the  famous  Moabite  Stone,  which 
was  erected  by  the  Mesha  in  the  ninth  century 
B.  c.  to  commemorate  the  victories  of  Chemosh 
over  Jehovah  and  Israel.  The  inscription  shows, 
moreover,  that  in  the  arts  of  civilised  life  Moab 
was  at  that  early  time  no  unworthy  rival  of  Is- 
rael itself.  It  is  for  a  special  manifestation  of 
this  haughty  and  arrogant  spirit  in  the  day  of 
Jerusalem's  calamity  that  Ezekiel  pronounces 
Jehovah's  judgment  on  Moab:  "  Because  Moab 
hath  said.  Behold,  the  house  of  Judah  is  like  all 
the  nations  "  (ver.  8).  These  words  no  doubt 
reflect  accurately  the  sentiment  of  Moab  towards 
Israel,  and  they  presuppose  a  consciousness  on 
the  part  of  Moab  of  some  unique  distinction 
pertaining  to  Israel  in  spite  of  all  the  humilia- 
tions it  had  undergone  since  the  time  of  David. 
And  the  thought  of  Moab  may  have  been  more 
widely  disseminated  among  the  nations  than  we 
are  apt  to  suppose:  "The  kings  of  the  earth 
believed  not,  neither  all  the  inhabitants  of  the 
world,  that  the  adversary  and  the  enemy  should 
enter  into  the  gates  of  Jerusalem "  (Lam.  iv. 
12).  The  Moabites  at  all  events  breathed  a  sigh 
of  relief  when  Israel's  pretensions  to  religious 
ascendency  seemed  to  be  confuted,  and  thereby 
they  sealed  their  own  doom.  They  share  the 
fate  of  the  Ammonites,  their  land  being  handed 
over  for  a  possession  to  the  sons  of  the  East 
(ver.  10). 

Both  these  nations,  Ammon  and  Moab,  were 
absorbed  by  the  Arabs,  as  Ezekiel  had  foretold; 
but  Ammon  at  least  preserved  its  separate  name 
and  nationality  through  many  changes  of  for- 
tune down  to  the  second  century  after  Christ. 

3.  Edom  (vv.  12-14),  famous  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment for  its  wisdom  (Jer.  xlix.  7;  Obad.  8),  oc- 
cupied the  country  to  the  south  of  Moab  from 
the  Dead  Sea  to  the  head  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba. 
In  Old  Testament  times  the  centre  of  its  power 
was  in  the  region  to  the  east  of  the  Arabah 
Valley,  a  position  of  great  commercial  impor- 
tance, as  commanding  the  caravan  route  from 
the  Red  Sea  port  of  Elath  to  Northern  Syria. 
From  this  district  the  Edomites  were  afterwards 
driven  (about  300  b.  c.)  by  t'he  Arabian  tribe  of 
the  Nabatseans,  when  they  took  up  their  abode 
in  the  south  of  Judah.  None  of  the  surround- 
ing nations  were  so  closely  akin  to  Israel  as 
Edom,  and  with  none  were  its  relations  more 
embittered  and  hostile.  The  Edomites  had  been 
subjugated  and  nearly  exterminated  by  David, 
had  been  again  subdued  by  Amaziah  and  Uz- 
ziah,  but  finally  recovered  their  independence 
during  the  attack  of  the  Syrians  and  Ephraimites 
on  Judah  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz.  The  memory 
of  this  long  struggle  produced  in  Edom  a  "  per- 
petual enmity,"  an  undying  hereditary  hatred  to- 
♦  Isa.  xvi.  6,  XXV.  ii  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  29,  42. 


wards  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  But  that  which 
made  the  name  of  Edom  to  be  execrated  by  the 
later  Jews  was  its  conduct  after  the  fall  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  prophet  Obadiah  represents  it  as 
sharing  in  the  spoil  of  Jerusalem  (ver.  10),  and 
as  "  standing  in  the  crossway  to  cut  off  those 
that  escaped "  (ver.  14).  Ezekiel  also  alludes 
to  this  in  the  thirty-fifth  chapter  (ver.  5),  and 
tells  us  further  that  in  the  time  of  the  captivity 
the  Edomites  seized  part  of  the  territory  of  Is- 
rael (vv.  10-12),  from  whic'h  indeed  the  Jews 
were  never  able  altogether  to  dislodge  them. 
For  the  guilt  they  thus  incurred  by  taking  advan- 
tage of  •  the  humiliation  of  Jehovah's  people, 
Ezekiel  here  threatens  them  with  extinction;  and 
the  execution  of  the  divine  vengeance  is  in  their 
case  entrusted  to  the  children  of  Israel  them- 
selves (vv.  13,  14).  They  were,  in  fact,  finally 
subdued  by  John  Hyrcanus  in  126  b.  c,  and  com- 
pelled to  adopt  the  Jewish  religion.  But  long 
before  then  they  had  lost  their  prestige  and  in- 
fluence, their  ancient  seats  having  passed  under 
the  dominion  of  the  Arabs  in  common  with  all 
the  neighbouring  countries. 

4.  The  Philistines  (vv.  15-17) — the  "  immi- 
grants "  who  had  settled  along  the  Mediter- 
ranean coast,  and  who  were  destined  to  leave 
their  name  to  the  whole  country — had  evidently 
played  a  part  very  similar  to  the  Edomites  at 
the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem;  but  of 
this  nothing  is  known  beyond  what  is  here  said 
by  Ezekiel.  They  were  at  this  time  a  mere 
"  remnant  "  (ver.  16),  having  been  exhausted  by 
the  Assyrian  and  Egyptian  wars.  Their  fate  is 
not  precisely  indicated  in  the  prophecy.  They 
were  in  point  of  fact  gradually  extinguished  by 
the  revival  of  Jewish  domination  under  the  As- 
monean  dynasty. 

One  other  remark  may  here  be  made,  as  show- 
ing the  discrimination  which  Ezekiel  brought  to 
bear  in  estimating  the  characteristics  of  each 
separate  nation.  He  does  not  ascribe  to  the 
greater  powers.  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Egypt,  the  same 
petty  and  vindictive  jealousy  of  Israel  which 
actuated  the  diminutive  nationalities  dealt  with 
in  this  chapter.  These  great  heathen  states, 
which  played  so  imposing  a  part  in  ancient  civil- 
isation, had  a  wide  outlook  over  the  aflfairs  of 
the  world;  and  the  injuries  they  inflicted  on  Is- 
rael were  due  less  to  the  blind  instinct  of  national 
hatred  than  to  the  pursuit  of  far-reaching 
schemes  of  selfish  interest  and  aggrandisement. 
If  Tyre  rejoices  over  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  it  is 
because  of  the  removal  of  an  obstacle  to  the 
expansion  of  her  commercial  enterprise.  When 
Egypt  is  descVibed  as  having  been  an  occasion 
of  sin  to  the  people  of  God,  what  is  meant  is 
that  she  had  drawn  Israel  into  the  net  of  her 
ambitious  foreign  policy,  and  led  her  away  from 
the  path  of  safety  pointed  out  by  Jehovah's  will 
through  the  prophets.  Ezekiel  pays  a  tribute  to 
the  grandeur  of  their  position  by  the  care  he 
bestows  on  the  description  of  their  fate.  The 
smaller  nations  embodying  nothing  of  permanent 
value  for  the  advancement  of  humanity,  he  dis- 
misses each  with  a  short  and  pregnant  oracle 
announcing  its  doom.  But  when  he  comes  to 
the  fall  of  Tyre  and  of  Egypt  his  imagination  is 
evidently  impressed;  he  lingers  over  all  the  de- 
tails of  the  picture*,  he  returns  to  it  again  and 
again,  as  if  he  would  penetrate  the  secret  of 
their  greatness  and  understand  the  potent  fasci- 
nation which  their  names  exercised  throughout 
the   world.     It   would   be   entirely  erroneous   to 


Ezekiel  xxvi.,  xxix.  17-21.] 


TYRE. 


279 


suppose  that  he  sympathises  with  them  in  their 
calamity,  but  certainly  he  is  conscious  of  the 
blank  wliich  will  be  caused  by  their  disappear- 
ance from  history;  he  feels  that  something  will 
have  vanished  from  the  earth  whose  loss  will  be 
mourned  by  the  nations  far  and  near.  This  is 
most  apparent  in  the  prophecy  on  Tyre,  to  which 
we  now  proceed. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

TYRE. 

Ezekiel  xxvi.,  xxix.  17-21. 

In  the  time  of  Ezekiel  Tyre  was  still  at  the 
height  of  her  commercial  prosperity.  Although 
not  the  oldest  of  the  Phoenician  cities,  she  held 
a  supremacy  among  them  which  dated  from  the 
thirteenth  century  b.  c.,*  and  she  had  long  been 
regarded  as  the  typical  embodiment  of  the  gen- 
ius of  the  remarkable  race  to  which  she  be- 
longed. The  Phoenicians  were  renowned  in  an- 
tiquity for  a  combination  of  all  the  qualities  on 
which  commercial  greatness  depends.  Their  ab- 
sorbing devotion  to  the  material  interests  of  civ- 
ilisation, their  amazing  industry  and  persever- 
ance, their  resourcefulness  in  assimilating,  and 
improving  the  inventions  of  other  peoples,  the 
technical  skill  of  their  artists  and  craftsmen,  but 
above  all  their  adventurous  and  daring  seaman- 
ship, conspired  to  give  them  a  position  in  the 
old  world  such  as  has  never  been  quite  rivalled 
by  any  other  nation  of  ancient  or  modern  times. 
In  the  grey  dawn  of  European  history  we  find 
them  actmg  ?s  pioneers  of  art  and  culture  along 
the  shores  ol  the  Mediterranean,  although  even 
then  they  had  been  displaced  from  their  earliest 
settlements  in  the  .(Egean  and  the  coast  of  Asia 
Minor  by  the  rising  commerce  of  Greece. 
Matthew  Arnold  has  drawn  a  brilliant  imagi- 
native picture  of  this  collision  between  the  two 
races,  and  the  effect  it  had  on  the  dauntless  and 
enterprising  spirit  of  Phoenicia: — 

"  As  some  grave  Tyrian  trader,  from  the  sea, 
Descried  at  sunrise  an  emerging  prow 
Lifting  the  cool-hair'd  creepers  stealthily. 
The  fringes  of  a  southward-facing  brow 
Among  the  JEgasa.!)  isles  ; 
And  saw  the  merry  Grecian  coaster  come, 
Freighted  with  amber  grapes,  and  Chian  wine. 
Green,  bursting  figs,  and  tunnies  steep'd  in  brine — 
And  knew  the  intruders  on  his  ancient  home. 
The  young  light-hearted  masters  of  the  waves — 
And  snatch'd  his  rudder  and  shook  out  more  sail ; 

And  day  and  night  held  on  indignantly 
O'er  the  blue  Midland  waters  with  the  gale. 
Betwixt  the  Syrtes  and  soft  Sicily, 
To  where  the  Atlantic  raves 
Outside  the  western  straits;  and  unbent  sails 
There,   where  down  cloudy  cliffs,  through  sheets  of 

foam. 
Shy  traffickers,  the  dark  Iberians,  come  ; 
And  on  the  beach  undid  his  corded  bales."t 

It  is  that  Spirit  of  masterful  and  untiring  ambi- 
tion kept  up  for  so  many  centuries  that  throws 
a  halo  of  romance  round  the  story  of  Tyre. 

In  the  oldest  Greek  literature,  however,  Tyre 
is  not  mentioned,  the  place  which  she  afterwards 
held  being  then  occupied  by  Sidon.  But  after 
the  decay  of  Sidon  the  rich  harvest  of  her 
labours  fell  into  the  lap  of  Tyre,  which  thence- 
forth stands  out  as  the  foremost  city  of  Phoe- 
nicia. She  owed  her  pre-eminence  partly  to  the 
wisdom  and  energy  with  which  her  affairs  were 

♦Rawlinson,  "History  of  Phoenicia." 

t  Closing  stanzas  of  "  The  Scholar  Gipsy." 


administered,  but  partly  also  to  the  strength  of 
her  natural  situation.  The  city  was  built  both 
on  the  mainland  and  on  a  row  of  islets  about 
half  a  mile  from  the  shore.  This  latter  portion 
contained  the  principal  buildings  (temples  and 
palaces),  the  open  place  where  business  was 
transacted,  and  the  two  harbours.  It  was  no 
doubt  from  it  that  the  city  derived  its  name 
(I'lV  =Rock) ;  and  it  always  was  looked  on  as 
the  central  part  of  Tyre.  There  was  something 
in  the  appearance  of  the  island  city — the  Venice 
of  antiquity,  rising  from  mid-ocean  with  her 
"  tiara  of  proud  towers  " — which  seemed  to  mark 
her  out  as  destined  to  be  mistress  of  the  sea. 
It  also  made  a  siege  of  Tyre  an  arduous  and  a 
tedious  undertaking,  as  many  a  conqueror  found 
to  his  cost.  Favoured  then  by  these  advan- 
tages. Tyre  speedily  gathered  the  traffic  of  Phoe- 
nicia into  her  own  hands,  and  her  wealth  and 
luxury  were  the  wonder  of  the  nations.  She  was 
known  as  "  the  crowning  city,  whose  merchants 
were  princes,  and  her  traffickers  the  honourable 
of  the  earth  "  (Isa.  xxiii.  8).  She  became  the 
great  commercial  emporium  of  the  world.  Her 
colonies  were  planted  all  over  the  islands  and 
coasts  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  the  one  most 
frequently  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  Tarshish,  was 
in  Spain,  beyond  Gibraltar.  Her  seamen  had 
ventured  beyond  the  Pillars  of  Hercules,  and 
undertook  distant  Atlantic  voyages  to  the  Ca- 
nary Islands  on  the  south  and  the  coasts  of 
Britain  on  the  north.  The  most  barbarous  and 
inhospitable  regions  were  ransacked  for  the 
metals  and  other  products  needed  to  supply  the 
requirements  of  civilisation,  and  everywhere  she 
found  a  market  for  her  own  wares  and  manufac- 
tures. The  carrying  trade  of  the  Mediterranean 
was  almost  entirely  conducted  in  her  ships, 
while  her  richly  laden  caravans  traversed  all  the 
great  routes  that  led  into  the  heart  of.  Asia  and 
Africa. 

It  so  happens  that  the  twenty-seventh  chap- 
ter of  Ezekiel  is  one  of  the  best  sources  of 
information  we  possess  as  to  the  varied  and  ex- 
tensive commercial  relations  of  Tyre  in  the 
sixth  century  b.  c*  It  will  therefore  be  better 
to  glance  shortly  at  its  contents  here  rather 
than  in  its  proper  connection  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  prophet's  thought.  It  will  easily  be 
seen  that  the  description  is  somewhat  idealised; 
no  details  are  given  of  the  commodities  which 
Tyre  sold  to  the  nations — only  as  an  after- 
thought (ver.  S3)  is  it  intimated  that  by  send- 
ing forth  her  wares  she  has  enriched  and  sat- 
isfied many  nations.  So  the  goods  she 
bought  of  them  are  not  represented  as  given 
in  exchange  for  anything  else;  Tyre  is  poetically 
conceived  as  an  empress  ruling  the  peoples  by 
the  potent  spell  of  her  influence,  compelling 
them  to  drudge  for  her  and  bring  to  her  feet 
the  gains  they  have  acquired  by  their  heavy 
labour.  Nor  can  the  list  of  nationsf  or  their 
gifts  be  meant  as  exhaustive;  it  only  includes 
such  things  as  served  to  exhibit  the  immense 
variety  of  useful  and  costly  articles  which  min- 
istered to  the  wealth  and  luxury  of  Tyre.  But 
making  allowance  for  this,  and  for  the  numer- 
ous difficulties  which  the  text  presents,  the  pas- 
sage  has   evidently   been    compiled    with   great 

*  Both  Movers  and  Rawlinson  make  it  the  basis  of  their 
survey  of  Tyrian  commerce. 

t  Babylon  and  Egypt  are  probably  omitted  because  of 
the  peculiar  point  of  view  assumed  by  the  prophet.  They 
were  too  powerful  to  be  represented  as  slaves  of  Tyre, 
even  in  poetry. 


28o 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


care;  it  shows  a  minuteness  of  detail  and  ful- 
ness of  knowledge  which  could  not  have  been 
got  from  books,  but  displays  a  lively  personal 
interest  in  the  affairs  of  the  world  which  is  sur- 
prising in  a  man  like  Ezekiel. 

The  order  followed  in  the  enumeration  of  na- 
tions is  not  quite  clear,  but  is  on  the  whole 
geographical.  Starting  from  Tarshish  in  the  ex- 
treme west  (ver.  12),  the  prophet  mentions  in 
succession  Javan  (Ionia),  Tubal,  and  Meshech 
(two  tribes  to  the  southeast  of  the  Black  Sea), 
and  Togarmah  (usually  identified  with  Armenia) 
(vv.  13,  14).  These  represent  the  northern  limit 
of  the  Phoenician  markets.  The  reference  in  the 
next  verse  (15)  is  doubtful,  on  account  of  a  dif- 
ference between  the  Septuagint  and  the  Hebrew 
text.  If  with  the  former  we  read  "  Rhodes  " 
instead  of  "  Dedan,"  it  embraces  the  nearer 
coasts  and  islands  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  this 
is  pei*haps  on  the  whole  the  more  natural  sense. 
In  this  case  it  is  possible  that  up  to  this  point 
the  description  has  been  confined  to  the  sea 
trade  of  Phoenicia,  if  we  may  suppose  that  the 
products  of  Armenia  reached  Tyre  by  way  of 
the  Black  Sea.  At  all  events  the  overland  traf- 
fic occupies  a  space  in  the  list  out  of  proportion 
to  its  actual  importance,  a  fact  which  is  easily 
explained  from  the  prophet's  standpoint.  First, 
in  a  line  from  south  to  north,  we  lia-«e  the 
nearer  neighbours  of  Phoenicia — Edom,  Judah, 
Israel,  and  Damascus  (vv.  16-18).  Then  the  re- 
moter tribes  and  districts  of  Arabia — Uzal  *  (the 
chief  city  of  Yemen),  Dedan  (on  the  eastern 
side  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba),  Arabia  and  Kedar 
(nomads  of  the  eastern  desert),  Havilah,+  Sheba, 
and  Raamah  (in  the  extreme  south  of  the  Ara- 
bian peninsula)  (vv.  19-22).  Finally  the  countries 
tapped  by  the  eastern  caravan  route — Haran  (the 
great  trade  centre  in  Mesopotamia),  Canneh 
(?  Calneh,  unknown),  Eden  (differently  spelt 
from  the  garden  of  Eden,  also  unknown),  As- 
syria, and  Chilmad  (unknown)  (ver.  23).  These 
were  the  "  merchants  "  and  "  traders  "  of  Tyre, 
who  are  represented  as  thronging  her  market- 
place with  the  produce  of  their  respective  coun- 
tries. 

The  imports,  so  far  as  we  can  follow  the 
prophet's  enumeration,  are  in  nearly  all  cases 
characteristic  products  of  the  regions  to  which 
they  are  assigned.  Spain  is  known  to  have 
furnished  all  the  metals  here  mentioned — 
silver,  iron,  lead,  and  tin.  Greece  and  Asia 
Minor  were  centres  of  the  slave  traffic  (one  of 
the  darkest  blots  on  the  commerce  of  Phoenicia), 
and  also  supplied  hardware.  Armenia  was  fa- 
mous as  a  horse-breeding  country,  and  thence 
Tyre  procured  her  supply  of  horses  and  mules. 
The  ebony  and  tusks  of  ivory  must  have  come 
from  Africa;  and  if  the  Septuagint  is  right  in 
reading  "  Rhodes  "  in  ver.  m.  these  articles  can 
only  have  been  collected  there  for  shipment  to 
Tyre.J  Through  Edom  come  pearls  and  pre- 
cious stones.§  Judah  and  Israel  furnished  Tyre 
with  agricultural  and  natural  produce,  as  they 
had  done  from  the  days  of  David  and  Solomon 
— wheat  and  oil,  wax  and  honey,  balm  and 
spices.     Damascus  yields  the  famous  "  wine   of 

*  E.  v.,  "  going  to  and  fro." 

+  So  Cornill,  rf?''^^^  for  ">{52T  (=  merchants). 

+  See  ch.  xxvii.  6.  where  ivory  is  said  to  come  from  Chit- 
tim  or  Cyprus. 

§The  Hebrew  text  adds  "purple,  embroidered  work, 
and  byssus  "  ;  but  most  of  these  things  are  omitted  in  the 
LXX. 


Helbon  " — said  to  be  the  only  vintage  that  the 
Persian  kings  would  drink — perhaps  also  other 
choice  wines.*  A  rich  variety  of  miscellaneous 
articles,  both  natural  and  manufactured,  is  con- 
tributed by  Arabia, — wrought  iron  (perhaps 
sword-blades)  from  Yemen;  saddle-cloths  from 
Dedan;  sheep  and  goats  from  the  Bedouin 
tribes;  gold,  precious  stones,  and  aromatic  spices 
from  the  caravans  of  Sheba.  Lastly,  the  Meso- 
potamian  countries  provide  the  costly  textile 
fabrics  from  the  looms  of  Babylon  so  highly 
prized  in  antiquity — "  costly  garments,  mantles 
of  blue,  purple,  and  broidered  work,"  "  many- 
coloured  carpets,"  and" ''cords  twisted  and  dur- 
able."! 

This  survey  of  the  ramifications  of  Tyrian 
commerce  will  have  served  its  purpose  if  it  en- 
ables us  to  realise  in  some  measure  the  concep- 
tion which  Ezekiel  had  formed  of  the  power 
and  prestige  of  the  maritime  city,  whose  de- 
struction he  so  confidently  announced.  He 
knew,  as  did  Isaiah  before  him,  how  deeply 
Tyre  had  struck  her  roots  in  the  life  of  the  old 
world,  how  indispensable  her  existence  seemed 
to  be  to  the  whole  fabric  of  civilisation  as  then 
constituted.  Both  prophets  represent  the  na- 
tions as  lamenting  the  downfall  of  the  city  which 
had  so  long  ministered  to  their  material  welfare. 
The  "overthrow  of  Tyre  would  be  felt  as  a  world- 
wide calamity;  it  could  hardly  be  contemplated 
except  as  part  of  a  radical  subversion  of  the 
established  order  of  things.  This  is  what  Ezek- 
iel has  in  view,  and  his  attitude  towards  Tyre 
is  governed  by  his  expectation  of  a  great  shak- 
ing of  the  nations  which  is  to  usher  in  the 
perfect  kingdom  of  God.  In  the  new  world  to 
which  he  looks  forward  no  place  will  be  found 
for  Tyre,  not  even  the  subordinate  position  of 
a  handmaid  to  the  people  of  God  which  Isaiah's 
vision  of  the  future  had  assigned  to  her.  Be- 
neath all  her  opulence  and  refinement  the 
prophet's  eye  detected  that  which  was  opposed 
to  the  mind  of  Jehovah — the  irreligious  spirit 
which  is  the  temptation  of  a  mercantile  com- 
munity, manifesting  itself  in  overweening  pride 
and  self-exaltation,  and  in  sordid  devotion  to 
gain  as  the  highest  end  of  a  nation's  existence. 

The  twenty-sixth  chapter  is  in  the  main  a 
literal  prediction  of  the  siege  and  destruction 
of  Tyre  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  It  is  dated  from 
the  year  in  which  Jerusalem  was  captured,  and 
was  certainly  written  after  that  event.  The  num- 
ber of  the  month  has  accidentally  dropped  out  of 
the  text,  so  that  we  cannot  tell  whether  at  the 
time  of  writing  the  prophet  had  received  actual 
intelligence  of  the  fall  of  the  city.  At  all  events 
it  is  assumed  that  the  fate  of  Jerusalem  is  al- 
ready known  in  Tyre,  and  the  manner  in  which 
the  tidings  were  sure  to  have  been  received 
there  is  the  immediate  occasion  of  the  prophecy. 
Like  many  other  peoples.  Tyre  had  rejoiced 
over  the  disaster  which  had  befallen  the  Jewish 
state;  but  her  exultation  had  a  peculiar  note 
of  selfish  calculation,  which  did  not  escape  the 

*  The  text  of  vv.  18,  19  is  in  confusion,  and  Cornill,  from 
a  comparison  with  a  contemporary  wine-list  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  also  an  A.ssyrian  one  from  the  library  of 
Asshurbanipal,  makes  it  read  thus  :  "  Wine  of  Helbon  and 
Zimin  and  Arnaban  they  furnished  in  thy  markets.  From 
Uzal,"  etc.  Both  lists  are  quoted  in  Schrader's  "Cunei 
form  Inscriptions  and  the  Old  Testament,"  under  this 
verse. 

t  The  latter  half  of  this  verse,  however,  is  of  very 
uncertain  interpretation.  For  full  explanation  of  the 
archaeological  details  in  this  chapter  it  will  be  necessary 
to  consult  the  commentaries  and  the  lexicon.  See  also 
Rawlinson's  "  History  of  Phoenicia,"  pp.  285  ff. 


Ezekiel  xxvi.,  xxix.  17-21. J 


TYRE. 


281 


notice  of  the  prophet.  Ever  mindful  of  her  own 
interest,  she  sees  that  a  barrier  to  the  free  de- 
velopment of  her  commerce  has  been  removed, 
and  she  congratulates  herself  on  the  fortunate 
turn  which  events  have  taken:  "Aha!  the  door 
of  the  peoples  is  broken,  it  is  turned  towards 
me;  she  that  was  full  hath  been  laid  waste!  "  * 
(ver.  2).  Although  the  relations  of  the  two 
countries  had  often  been  friendly  and  some- 
times highly  advantageous  to  Tyre,  she  had 
evidently  felt  herself  hampered  by  the  existence 
of  an  independent  state  on  the  mountain  ridge 
of  Palestine.  The  kingdom  of  Judah,  especially 
in  days  when  it  was  strong  enough  to  hold 
Edom  in  subjection,  commanded  the  caravan 
routes  to  the  Red  Sea,  and  doubtless  prevented 
the  Phoenician  merchants  from  reaping  the  full 
profit  of  their  ventures  in  that  direction.  It  is 
probable  that  at  all  times  a  certain  proportion 
of  the  revenue  of  the  kings  of  Judah  was  de- 
rived from  toll  levied  on  the  Tyrian  merchan- 
dise that  passed  through  their  territory;  and 
what  they  thus  gained  represented  so  much  loss 
to  Tyre.  It  was,  to  be  sure,  a  small  item  in 
the  mass  of  business  transacted  on  the  exchange 
of  Tyre.  But  nothing  is  too  trivial  to  enter 
into  the  calculations  of  a  community  given  over 
to  the  pursuit  of  gain;  and  the  satisfaction  with 
which  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  was  regarded  in 
Tyre  showed  how  completely  she  was  debased 
by  her  selfish  commercial  policy,  how  oblivious 
she  was  to  the  spiritual  interests  bound  up  with 
the  future  of  Israel. 

Having  thus  exposed  the  sinful  cupidity  and 
insensibility  of  Tyre,  the  prophet  proceeds  to 
describe  in  general  terms  the  punishment  that 
is  to  overtake  her.  Many  nations  shall  be 
brought  up  against  her,  irresistible  as  the  sea 
when  it  comes  up  with  its  waves;  her  walls  and 
fortifications  shall  be  rased;  the  very  dust  shall 
be  scraped  from  her  site,  so  that  she  is  left 
"  a  naked  rock  "  rising  out  of  the  sea,  a  place 
where  fishermen  spread  their  nets  to  dry,  as 
in  the  days  before  the  city  was  built. 

Then  follows  (vv.  7-14)  a  specific  announce- 
ment of  the  manner  in  which  judgment  shall 
be  executed  on  Tyre.  The  recent  political  at- 
titude of  the  city  left  no  doubt  as  to  the  quarter 
from  which  immediate  danger  was  to  be  appre- 
hended. The  Phoenician  states  had  been  the 
most  powerful  members  of  the  confederacy  that 
was  formed  about  596  to  throw  off  the  yoke  of 
the  Chalda^ans,  and  they  were  in  open  revolt  at 
the  time  when  Ezekiel  wrote.  They  had  appar- 
ently thrown  in  their  lot  with  Egypt,  and  a  con- 
flict with  Nebuchadnezzar  was  therefore  to  be 
expected.  Tyre  had  every  reason  to  avoid  a 
war  with  a  first-rate  power,  which  could  not 
fail  to  be  disastrous  to  her  commercial  interests. 
But  her  inhabitants  were  not  destitute  of  martial 
spirit;  they  trusted  in  the  strength  of  their  po- 
sition and  their  command  of  the  sea,  and  they 
were  in  the  mood  to  risk  everything  rather  than 
again  renounce  their  independence  and  their 
freedom.  But  all  this  avails  nothing  against  the 
purpose  which  Jehovah  has  purposed  concern- 
ing Tyre.  It  is  He  who  brings  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  king  of  kings,  from  the  north  with  his 
army  and  his  siege-train,  and  Tyre  shall  fall 
before  his  assault,  as  Jerusalem  has  already 
fallen.     First  of  all,  the  Phoenician  cities  on  the 

*  With  a  change  of  one  letter  in  the  Hebrew  text, 
nX^On  for  HN^ON,  as  in  the  LXX.  and  Targum. 


mainland  shall  be  ravaged  and  laid  waste,  and 
then  operations  commence  against  the  mother- 
city  herself.  The  description  of  the  siege  and 
capture  of  the  island  fortress  is  given  with  an 
abundance  of  graphic  details,  although,  strangely 
enough,  without  calling  attention  to  the*  peculiar 
method  of  attack  that  was  necessary  for  the  re- 
duction of  Tyre.  The  great  feature  of  the  siege 
would  be  the  construction  of  a  huge  mole  be- 
tween the  shore  and  the  island;  once  the  wall 
was  reached  the  attack  would  proceed  precisely 
as  in  the  case  of  an  inland  town,  in  the  manner 
depicted  on  Assyrian  monuments.  When  the 
breach  is  made  in  the  fortifications  the  whole 
army  pours  into  the  city,  and  for  the  first  time 
in  her  history  the  walls  of  Tyre  shake  with 
the  rumbling  of  chariots  in  her  streets.  The 
conquered  city  is  then  given  up  to  slaughter 
and  pillage,  her  songs  and  her  music^  are  stilled 
for  ever,  her  stones  and  timber  and  dust  are 
cast  into  the  sea,  and  not  a  trace  remains  of  the 
proud  mistress  of  the  waves. 

In  the  third  strophe  (vv.  15-21)  the  prophet 
describes  the  dismay  which  will  be  caused  when 
the  crash  of  the  destruction  of  Tyre  resounds 
along  the  coasts  of  the  sea.  All  the  "  princes 
of  the  sea  "  (perhaps  the  rulers  of  the  Phoeni- 
cian colonies  in  the  Mediterranean)  are  repre- 
sented as  rising  from  their  thrones,  and  putting 
off  their  stately  raiment,  and  sitting  in  the  dust 
bewailing  the  fate  of  the  city.  The  dirge  in  which 
they  lift  up  their  voices  (vv.  17,  18)  is  given 
by  the  Septuagint  in  a  form  which  preserves 
more  nearly  than  the  Hebrew  the  structure  as 
well  as  the  beauty  which  we  should  expect  in 
the  original: — 

"  How  is  perished  from  the  sea — 

The  city  renowned ! 
She  that  laid  her  terror — 

On  all  its  inhabitants  ! 
[Now]  are  the  isles  affrighted — 

In  the  day  of  thy  falling!  " 

But  this  beautiful  image  is  not  strong  enough 
to  express  the  prophet's  sense  of  the  irretriev- 
able ruin  that  hangs  over  Tyre.  By  a  bold 
flight  of  imagination  he  turns  from  the  mourn- 
ers on  earth  to  follow  in  thought  the  descent 
of  the  city  into  the  under-world  (vv.  19-21). 
The  idea  that  Tyre  might  rise  from  her  ruins 
after  a  temporary  eclipse  and  recover  her  old 
place  in  the  world  was  one  that  would  readily 
suggest  itself  to  any  one  who  understood  the 
real  secret  of  her  greatness.  To  the  mind  of 
Ezekiel  the  impossibility  of  her  restoration  lies 
in  the  fixed  purpose  of  Jehovah,  which  includes, 
not  only  her  destruction,  but  her  perpetual 
desolation.  "  When  I  make  thee  a  desolate  city, 
like  the  cities  that  are  not  inhabited;  when  I 
bring  up  against  thee  the  deep,  and  the  great 
waters  cover  thee;  then  I  will  bring  thee  down 
with  them  that  go  down  to  the  pit,  with  the 
people  of  old  time,  and  I  will  make  thee  dwell 
in  the  lowest  parts  of  the  earth,  like  the  im- 
memorial waste  places,  with  them  that  go  down 
to  the  pit,  that  thou  be  not  inhabited  nor  es- 
tablish thyself  in  the  land  of  the  living."  The 
whole  passage  is  steeped  in  weird  poetic 
imagery.  The  "  deep  "  *  suggests  something 
more  than  the  blue  waters  of  the  Mediterranean; 
it  is  the  name  of  the  great  primeval  Ocean,  out 
of  which  the  habitable  world  was  fashioned, 
and  which  is  used  as  an  emblem  of  the  irresist- 
*  Hebrew,  Tehom  ;  Babylonian,  Tiamat. 


282 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


ible  judgments  of  God.*  The  "  pit  "  is  the  realm 
of  the  dead,  Sheoi,  conceived  as  situated  under 
the  earth,  where  the.  shades  of  the  departed  drag 
out  a  feeble  existence  from  which  there  is  no  de- 
liverance. The  idea  of  Sheol  is  a  frequent  sub- 
ject of  poetical  embellishment  in  the  later  books 
of  the  Old  Testament;  and  of  this  we  have  an 
example  here  when  the  prophet  represents  the 
once  populous  and  thriving  city  as  now  a  deni- 
zen of  that  dreary  place.  But  the  essential 
meaning  he  wishes  to  convey  is  that  Tyre  is 
numbered  among  the  things  that  were.  She 
"  shall  be  sought,  and  shall  not  be  found  any 
more  for  ever,"  because  she  has  entered  the 
dismal  abode  of  the  dead,  whence  there  is  no 
return  to  the  joys  and  activities  of  the  upper 
world. 

Such  then  is  the  anticipation  which  Ezekiel 
in  the  year.  586  had  formed  of  the  fate  of  Tyre. 
No  candid  reader  will  suppose  that  the  prophecy 
is  anything  but  what  it  professes  to  be — a  bona- 
fide  prediction  of  the  total  destruction  of  the 
city  in  the  immediate  future  and  by  the  hands 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  When  Ezekiel  wrote,  the 
siege  of  Tyre  had  not  begun;  and  however  clear 
it  may  have  been  to  observant  men  that  the 
next  stage  in  the  campaign  would  be  the  re- 
duction of  the  Phoenician  cities,  the  prophet  is 
at  least  free  from  the  suspicion  of  having  prophe- 
sied after  the  event.  The  remarkable  absence 
of  characteristic  and  special  details  from  the  ac- 
count of  the  siege  is  the  best  proof  that  he  is 
dealing  with  the  future  from  the  true  prophetic 
standpoint  and  clothing  a  divinely  imparted  con- 
viction in  images  supplied  by  a  definite  histori- 
cal situation.  Nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt 
that  in  some  form  the  prophecy  was  actually 
published  among  his  fellow-exiles  at  the  date  to 
which  it  is  assigned.  On  this  point  critical 
opinion  is  fairly  unanimous.  But  when  we 
come  to  the  question  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prediction  we  find  ourselves  in  the  region  of  con- 
troversy, and,  it  must  be  admitted,  of  uncer- 
tainty. Some  expositors,  determined  at  all 
hazards  to  vindicate  Ezekiel's  prophetic  author- 
ity, maintain  that  Tyre  was  actually  devastated 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  manner  described  by 
the  prophet,  and  seek  for  confirmations  of  their 
view  in  the  few  historical  notices  we  possess  of 
this  period  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign.  Others, 
reading  the  history  differently,  arrive  at  the  con- 
clusion that  Ezekiel's  calculations  were  entirely 
at  fault,  that  Tyre  was  not  captured  by  the 
Babylonians  at  all,  and  that  his  oracle  against 
Tyre  must  be  reckoned  amongst  the  unfulfilled 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament.  Others  again 
seek  to  reconcile  an  impartial  historical  judg- 
ment with  a  high  conception  of  the  function  of 
prophecy,  and  find  in  the  undoubted  course  of 
events  a  real  though  not  an  exact  verification 
of  the  words  uttered  by  Ezekiel.  It  is  indeed 
almost  by  accident  that  we  have  any  independent 
corroboration  of  Ezekiel's  anticipation  with  re- 
gard to  the  immediate  future  of  Tyre.  Oriental 
discoveries  have  as  yet  brought  to  light  no  im- 
portant historical  monuments  of  the  reign  of 
Nebuchadnezzar;  and  outside  the  book  of 
Ezekiel  itself  we  have  nothing  to  guide  us  ex- 
cept the  statement  of  Josephus,  based  on  Phoe- 
nician and  Greek  authorities,!  that  Tyre  under- 
went a  thirteen  years'  siege  by  the  Babylonian 
conqueror.    There  is  no  reason  whatever  to  call 

*  Psalm  xxxvi.  6    c/.  Gen.  vii.  ii. 

+  Contra  "  Ap.,"  I.  21  ;  "Ant.,"  X.  qi.  i. 


in  question  the  reliability  of  this  important  in- 
formation, although  the  accompanying  state- 
ment that  the  siege  began  in  the  seventh  year 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  certainly  erroneous.  But 
unfortunately  we  are  not  told  how  the  siege 
ended.  Whether  it  was  successful  or  unsuccess- 
ful, whether  Tyre  was  reduced  or  capitulated, 
or  was  evacuated  or  beat  ofif  her  assailants,  is 
nowhere  indicated.  To  argue  from  the  silence 
of  the  historians  is  impossible;  for  if  one  man 
argues  that  a  catastrophe  that  took  place  "  be- 
fore the  eyes  of  all  Asia  "  would  not  have  passed 
unrecorded  in  historical  books,  another  might 
urge  with  equal  force  that  a  repulse  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  too  uncommon  an  event  to  be 
ignored  in  the  Phoenician  annals.*  On  the 
whole  the  most  reasonable  hypothesis  is  perhaps 
that  after  the  thirteen  years  the  city  surrendered 
on  not  unfavourable  terms;  but  this  conclusion 
is  based  on  other  considerations  than  the  data 
or  the  silence  of  Josephus. 

The  chief  reason  for  believing  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  not  altogether  successful  in  his  at- 
tack on  Tyre  is  found  in  a  supplementary 
prophecy  of  Ezekiel's,  given  in  the  end  of  the 
twenty-ninth  chapter  (vv.  17-21).  It  was  evi- 
dently written  after  the  siege  of  Tyre  was  con- 
cluded, and  so  far  as  it  goes  it  confirms  the 
accuracy  of  Josephus'  sources.  It  is  dated  from 
the  year  570,  sixteen  years  after  the  fall  of  Jeru- 
salem; and  it  is,  in  fact,  the  latest  oracle  in  the 
whole  book.  The  siege  of  Tyre,  therefore, 
which  had  not  commenced  in  586,  when  chap, 
xxvi.  was  written,  was  finished  before  570;  and 
between  these  terminal  dates  there  is  just  room 
for  the  thirteen  years  of  Josephus.  The  invasion 
of  Phoenicia  must  have  been  the  next  great  en- 
terprise of  the  Babylonian  army  in  Western 
Asia  after  the  destruction  of  Judah,  and  it  wajS 
only  the  extraordinary  strength  of  Tyre  that 
enabled  it  to  protract  the  struggle  so  long. 
Now  what  light  does  Ezekiel  throw  on  the  issue 
of  the  siege?  His  words  are:  "Nebuchadnez- 
zar, king  of  Babylon,  has  made  his  army  to 
serve  a  great  service  against  Tyre;  every  head 
made  bald  and  every  shoulder  peeled,  yet  he 
and  his  army  got  no  wages  out  of  Tyre  for  the 
service  which  he  served  against  her."  The 
prophet  then  goes  on  to  announce  that  the  spoils 
of  Egypt  should  be  the  recompense  to  the  army 
for  their  unrequited  labour  against  Tyre,  inas- 
much as  it  was  work  done  for  Jehovah.  Here 
then,  we  have  evidence  first  of  all  that  the  long 
siege  of  Tyre  had  taxed  the  resources  of  the 
besiegers  to  the  utmost.  The  "  peeled  shoul- 
ders "  and  the  "  heads  made  bald  "  is  a  graphic 
detail  which  alludes  not  obscurely  to  the  monot- 
onous navvy  work  of  carrying  loads  of  stones 
and  earth  to  fill  up  the  narrow  channel  between 
the  mainland  and  the  island, f  so  as  to  allow  the 
engines  to  be  brought  up  to  the  walls.  Ezekiel 
was  well  aware  of  the  arduous  nature  of  the 
undertaking,  the  expenditure  of  human  effort 
and  life  which  was  involved,  in  the  struggle  with 
natural  obstacles;  and  his  striking  conception  of 
these  obscure  and  toiling  soldiers  as  uncon- 
scious   servants    of    the    Almighty    shows    how 

*  C/.  Havernick  against  Hitzig  and  Winer,  "  Ezekiel," 
pp.  436  f . 

tThe  same  engineering  feat  was  accomplished  by 
Alexander  the  Great  in  seven  months,  but  the  Greek 
general  probably  adopted  more  scientific  methods  (such 
as  pile-driving)  than  the  Babylonians  :  and,  besides,  it  is 
possible  that  the  remains  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  embank* 
ment  may  have  facilitated  the  operation. 


Ezekiel  xxvii.    xxviii.] 


TYRE:    SIDON. 


283 


steadfast  was  his  faith  in  the  word  he  proclaimed 
against  Tyre.  But  the  important  point  is  that 
they  obtained  from  Tyre  no  reward — at  least  no 
adequate  reward — for  their  herculean  labours. 
The  expression  used  is  no  doubt  capable  of  va- 
rious interpretations.  It  might  mean  that  the 
siege  had  to  be  abandoned,  or  that  the  city  was 
able  to  make  extremely  easy  terms  of  capitula- 
tion, or,  as  Jerome  suggests,  that  the  Tyrians  had 
carried  off  their  treasures  by  sea  and  escaped  to 
one  of  their  colonies.  In  any  case  it  shows  that 
the  historical  event  was  not  in  accordance  with 
the  details  of  the  earlier  prophecy.  That  the 
wealth  of  Tyre  would  fall  to  the  conquerors  is 
there  assumed  as  a  natural  consequence  of  the 
capture  of  the  city.  But  whether  the  city  was 
actually  captured  or  not,  the  victors  were  some- 
how disappointed  in  their  expectation  of  plunder. 
The  rich  spoil  of  Tyre,  which  was  the  legitimate 
reward  of  their  exhausting  toil,  had  slipped  from 
their  eager  grasp;  to  this  extent  at  least  the 
reality  fell  short  of  the  prediction,  and  Nebu- 
chadnezzar had  to  be  compensated  for  his  losses 
at  Tyre  by  the  promise  of  an  easy  conquest  of 
Egypt. 

But  if  this  had  been  all  it  is  not  probable  that 
Ezekiel  would  have  deemed  it  necessary  to  sup- 
plement his  earlier  prediction  in  the  way  we  have 
seen  after  an  interval  of  sixteen  years.  The 
mere  circumstance  that  the  sack  of  Tyre 
had  failed  to  yield  the  booty  that  the  besiegers 
counted  on  was  not  of  a  nature  to  attract  atten- 
tion amongst  the  prophet's  auditors,  or  to  throw 
doubt  on  the  genuineness  of  his  inspiration. 
And  we  know  that  there  was  a  much  more  se- 
rious difference  between  the  prophecy  and  the 
event  than  this.  It  is,  from  what  has  just  been 
said,  extremely  doubtful  whether  Nebuchadnez- 
zar actually  destroyed  Tyre,  but  even  if  he  did 
she  very  quickly  recovered  much  of  her  former 
prosperity  and  glory.  That  her  commerce  was 
seriously  crippled  during  the  struggle  with 
Babylonia  we  may  well  believe,  and  it  is  possible 
that  she  never  again  was  what  she  had  been  be- 
fore this  humiliation  came  upon  her.  But  for 
all  that  the  enterprise  and  prosperity  of  Tyre 
continued  for  many  ages  to  excite  the  admira- 
tion of  the  most  enlightened  nations  of  antiquity. 
The  destruction  of  the  city,  therefore,  if  it  took 
place,  had  not  the  finality  which  Ezekiel  had 
anticipated.  Not  till  after  the  lapse  of  eighteen 
centuries  could  it  be  said  with  approximate 
truth  that  she  was  like  "  a  bare  rock  in  the  midst 
of  the  sea." 

The  most  instructive  fact  for  us,  however,  is 
that  Ezekiel  reissued  his  original  prophecy, 
knowing  that  it  had  not  been  literally  fulfilled. 
In  the  minds  of  his  hearers  the  apparent  falsifi- 
cation of  his  predictions  had  revived  old  prej- 
udices against  him,  which  interfered  with  the 
prosecution  of  his  work.  They  reasoned  that  a 
prophecy  so  much  out  of  joint  with  the  reality 
was  sufficient  to  discredit  his  claim  to  be  an 
authoritative  exponent  of  the  mind  of  Jehovah; 
and  so  the  prophet  found  himself  embarrassed 
by  a  recurrence  of  the  old  unbelieving  attitude 
which  had  hindered  his  public  activity  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  He  has  not  for  the 
present  "  an  open  mouth  "  amongst  them,  and 
he  feels  that  his  words  will  not  be  fully  received 
until  they  are  verified  by  the  restoration  of  Is- 
rael to  its  own  land.  But  it  is  evident  that  he 
himself  did  not  share  the  view  of  his  audience, 
otherwise  he  would  certainly  have  suppressed  a 


prophecy  which  lacked  the  mark  of  authenticity. 
On  the  contrary  he  published  it  for  the  perusal 
of  a  wider  circle  of  readers,  in  the  conviction 
that  what  he  had  spoken  was  a  true  word  of  God, 
and  that  its  essential  truth  did  not  depend  on  its 
exact  correspondence  with  the  facts  of  history. 
In  other  words,  he  believed  in  it  as  a  true  read- 
ing of  the  principles  revealed  in  God's  moral 
government  of  the  world — a  reading  which  had 
received  a  partial  verification  in  the  blow  which 
had  been  dealt  at  the  pride  of  Tyre,  and  which 
would  receive  a  still  more  signal  fulfilment  in  the 
final  convulsions  which  were  to  introduce  the 
day  of  Israel's  restoration  and  glory.  Only  we 
must  remember  that  the  prophet's  horizon  was 
necessarily  limited;  and  as  he  did  not  contem- 
plate the  slow  development  and  extension  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  through  long  ages,  so  he  could 
not  have  taken  into  account  the  secular  opera- 
tion of  historic  causes  which  eventually  brought 
about  the  ruin  of  Tyre. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

TYRE  (CONTINUED):  SIDON. 

Ezekiel  xxvii.,  xxviii. 

The  remaining  oracles  on  Tyre  (chaps,  xxvii., 
xxviii.  I- 19)  are  somewhat  different  both  in  sub- 
ject and  mode  of  treatment  from  the  chapter  we 
have  just  finished.  Chap.  xxvi.  is  in  the  main 
a  direct  announcement  of  the  fall  of  Tyre,  de- 
livered in  the  oratorical  style  which  is  the  usual 
vehicle  of  prophetic  address.  She  is  regarded 
as  a  state  occupying  a  definite  place  among  the 
other  states  of  the  world,  and  sharing  the  fate 
of  other  peoples  who  by  their  conduct  towards 
Israel  or  their  ungodliness  and  arrogance  have 
incurred  the  anger  of  Jehovah.  The  two  great 
odes  which  follow  are  purely  ideal  delineations 
of  what  Tyre  is  in  herself;  her  destruction  is 
assumed  as  certain  rather  than  directly  predicted, 
and  the  prophet  gives  free  play  to  his  imagina- 
tion in  the  effort  to  set  forth  the  conception  of 
the  city  which  was  impressed  on  his  mind.  In 
chap,  xxvii.  he  dwells  on  the  external  greatness 
and  magnificence  of  Tyre,  her  architectural 
splendour,  her  political  and  military  power,  and 
above  all  her  amazing  commercial  enterprise. 
Chap,  xxviii.,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  meditation 
on  the  peculiar  genius  of  Tyre,  her  inner  spirit 
of  pride  and  self-sufficiency,  as  embodied  in  the 
person  of  her  king.  From  a  literary  point  of 
view  the  two  chapters  are  amongst  the  most 
beautiful  in  the  whole  book.  In  the  twenty- 
seventh  chapter  the  fiery  indignation  of  the 
prophet  almost  disappears,  giving  place  to  the 
play  of  poetic  fancy  and  a  flow  of  lyric  emotion 
more  perfectly  rendered  than  in  any  other  part 
of  Ezekiel's  writings.  The  distinctive  feature  of 
each  passage  is  the  elegy  pronounced  over  the 
fall  of  Tyre;  and  although  the  elegy  seems  just 
on  the  point  of  passing  into  the  taunt-song,  yet 
the  accent  of  triumph  is  never  suffered  to  over- 
whelm the  note  of  sadness  to  which  these  poems 
owe  their  special  charm. 


Chap,  xxvii.  is  described  as  a  dirge  over  Tyre. 
In  the  previous  chapter  the  nations  were  repre- 
sented as  bewailing  her  fall,  but  here  th'"  prophet 


284 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


himself  takes  up  a  lamentation  for  her;  and,  as 
may  have  been  usual  in  real  funeral  dirges,  he 
commences  by  celebrating  the  might  and  riches 
of  the  doomed  city.  The  fine  image  which  is 
maintained  throughout  the  chapter  was  proba- 
bly suggested  to  Ezekiel  by  the  picturesque  sit- 
uation of  Tyre  on  her  sea-girt  rock  at  "  the  en- 
tries of  the  sea."  He  compares  her  to  a  stately 
vessel  riding  at  anchor*  near  the  shore, taking  on 
board  her  cargo  of  precious  merchandise,  and 
ready  to  start  on  the  perilous  voyage  from  which 
she  is  destined  never  to  return.  Meanwhile  the 
gallant  ship  sits  proudly  in  the  water,  tight  and 
seaworthy  and  sumptuously  furnished;  and  the 
prophet's  eye  runs  rapidly  over  the  chief  points 
of  her  elaborate  construction  and  equipment  (vv. 
3-11).  Her  timbers  are  fashioned  of  cypress 
from  Hermon,t  her  mast  is  a  cedar  of  Lebanon, 
her  oars  are  made  of  the  oak  of  Bashan,  her 
deck  of  sherbin-woodt  (a  variety  of  cedar)  in- 
laid with  ivory  imported  from  Cyprus.  Her  can- 
vas fittings  are  still  more  exquisite  and  costly. 
The  sail  is  of  Egyptian  byssus  with  embroid- 
ered work,  and  the  awning  over  the  deck  was  of 
cloth  resplendent  in  the  two  purple  dyes  pro- 
cured from  the  coasts  of  Elishah.^  The  ship  is 
fitted  up  for  pleasure  and  luxury  as  well  as  for 
traffic,  the  fact  symbolised  being  obviously  the 
architectural  and  other  splendours  which  justi- 
fied the  city's  boast  that  she  was  "  the  perfection 
of  beauty." 

But  Tyre  was  wise  and  powerful  as  well  as 
beautiful;  and  so  the  prophet,  still  keeping  up 
the  metaphor,  proceeds  to  describe  how  the 
great  ship  is  manned.  Her  steersmen  are  the 
experienced  statesmen  whom  she  herself  has 
bred  and  raised  to  power;  her  rowers  are  the 
men  of  Sidon  and  Aradus,  who  spend  their 
strength  in  her  service.  The  elders  and  wise 
men  of  Gebal  are  her  shipwrights  (literally 
"stoppers  of  leaks");  and  so  great  is  her  in- 
fluence that  all  the  naval  resources  of  the  world 
are  subject  to  her  control.  Besides  this  Tyre 
employs  an  army  of  mercenaries  drawn  from  the 
remotest  quarters  of  the  earth — from  Persia  and 
North  Africa,  as  well  as  the  subordinate  towns 
of  Phoenicia;  and  these,  represented  as  hanging 
their  shields  and  helmets  on  her  sides,  make  her 
beauty  complete. ||  In  these  verses  the  prophet 
pays  a  tribute  of  admiration  to  the  astuteness 
with  which  the  rulers  of  Tyre  used  their  re- 
sources to  strengthen  her  position  as  the  head 
of    the    Phoenician    confederacy.     Three    of    the 

*  For  the  word  "]'7"|23  rendered  "  thy  borders,"  Cornill 
proposes  to  read  "I^l^fi  which  he  thinks   might    mean 

"  thine  anchorage."'  The  translation  is  doubtful,  but  the 
sense  is  certainly  appropriate. 

t  Senir  was  the  Amorite  name  of  Mount  Hermon,  the 
Phoenician  name  being  Sirion  (Deut.  iii.  9).  Senir,  how- 
ever, occurs  on  the  Assyrian  monuments,  and  was  prob- 
ably widely  known. 

f'Teasshur"  (read  D^lt^^'j^nS  instead  of  D"''}1tS'N"n3) 

a  kind  of  tree  mentioned  several  times  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, is  generally  identified  with  the  sherbin  tree. 

§  Elishah  is  one  of  the  sons  of  Javan  (Ionia)  fGen.  x.  4), 
and  must  have  been  some  part  of  the  Mediterranean  coast, 
subject  to  the  influence  of  Greece.  Italy,  Sicily,  and  the 
Peloponnesus  have  been  suggested. 

II  The  details  of  the  description  are  nearly  all  illustrated 
in  pictures  of  Phoenician  war-galleys  found  on  Assyrian 
monuments.  They  show  the  single  mast  with  its  square 
sail,  the  double  row  of  oars,  the  fighting  men  on  the  deck, 
and  the  row  of  shields  along  the  bulwarks.  In  an  Egyp- 
tian picture  we  have  a  representation  of  the  embroidered 
sail  (ancient  ships  are  said  not  to  have  carried  2^  flag). 
The  canvas  is  riahly  ornamented  with  various  devices 
over  its  whole  surface,  and  beneath  the  sail  we  see  the 
cabin  or  awning  of  coloured  stuff  mentioned  in  the  text. 


cities  mentioned — Sidon,  Aradus,  and  Gebal  or 
Byblus — were  the  most  important  in  Phoenicia; 
two  of  them  at  least  had  a  longer  history  than 
herself,  yet  they  are  here  truly  represented  as 
performing  the  rough  menial  labour  which 
brought  wealth  and  renown  to  Tyre.  It  re- 
quired no  ordinary  statecraft  to  preserve  the 
balance  of  so  many  complex  and  conflicting  in- 
terests, and  make  them  all  co-operate  for  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  glory  of  Tyre;  but  hitherto  her 
"  wise  men  "  had  proved  equal  to  the  task. 

The  second  strophe  (vv.  12-25)  contains  the 
survey  of  Tyrian  commerce,  which  has  already 
been  analysed  in  another  connection.*  At  first 
sight  it  appears  as  if  the  allegory  were  here 
abandoned,  and  the  impression  is  partly  correct. 
In  reality  the  city,  although  personified,  is  re- 
garded as  the  emporium  of  the  world's  com- 
merce, to  which  all  the  nations  stream  with  their 
produce.  But  at  the  end  it  appears  that  the 
various  commodities  enumerated  represent  the 
cargo  with  which  the  ship  is  laden.  Ships  of 
Tarshish — i.  e.,  the  largest  class  of  merchant 
vessels  then  afloat,  used  for  the  long  Atlantic 
voyage — wait  upon  her,  and  fill  her  with  all  sorts 
of  precious  things  (ver.  25).  Then  in  the  last 
strophe  (vv.  26-36),  which  speaks  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  Tyre,  the  figure  of  the  ship  is  boldly  re- 
sumed. The  heavily  freighted  vessel  is  rowed 
into  the  open  sea;  there  she  is  struck  by  an  east 
wind  and  founders  in  deep  water.  The  image 
suggests  two  ideas,  which  must  not  be  pressed, 
although  they  may  have  an  element  of  historic 
truth  in  them:  one  is  that  Tyre  perished  under 
the  weight  of  her  own  commercial  greatness,  and 
the  other  that  her  ruin  was  hastened  through  the 
folly  of  her  rulers.  But  the  main  idea  is  that 
the  destruction  of  the  city  was  wrought  by  the 
power  of  God,  which  suddenly  overwhelmed  her 
at  the  height  of  her  prosperity  and  activity.  As 
the  waves  close  over  the  doomed  vessel  the  cry 
of  anguish  that  goes  up  from  the  drowning 
mariners  and  passengers  strikes  terror  into  the 
hearts  of  all  seafaring  men.  They  forsake  their 
ships,  and  having  reached  the  safety  of  the  shore 
abandon  themselves  to  frantic  demonstrations  of 
grief,  joining  their  voices  in  a  lamentation  over 
the  fate  of  the  goodly  ship  which  symbolised  the 
mistress  of  the  sea  (vv.  32-36)!: — 

"  Who  was  like  Tyre  [so  glorious] — 

In  the  midst  of  the  sea? 

When  thy  wares  went  forth  from  the  seas — 
Thou  filledst  the  peoples  ; 

With  thy  wealth  and  th}'  merchandise — 

Thou  enrichedst  the  earth. 

Now  art  thou  broken  from  the  seas— 

In  depths  of  the  waters  ; 

Thy  merchandise  and  all  thy  multitude- 
Are  fallen  therein. 

All  the  inhabitants  of  the  islands- 
Are  shocked  at  thee, 

And  their  kings  shudder  greatly — 

With  tearful  countenances. 

They  that  trade  among  the  peoples  .  .  . — 
Hiss  over  thee  ; 

Thou  art  become  a  terror — 

And  art  no  more  for  ever." 

Such  is  the  end  of  Tyre.  She  has  vanished 
utterly  from  the  earth;  the  imposing  fabric  of 
her  greatness  is  like  an  unsubstantial  pageant 
faded;  and  nothing  remains  to  tell  of  her  former 

*  See  above,  pp.  279  ff . 

+  It  is  not  clear  whether  the  dirge  is  continued  to  the 
end  of  the  chapter,  or  whether  vv.  33  ff.  are  spoken  by  the 
prophet  in  explanation  of  the  distress  of  the  nations.  The 
proper  elegiac  measures  cannot  be  made  out  without  some 
alteration  of  the  text. 


Ezekie!  xxvii.,  xxviii.J 


TYRE:    SIDON. 


285 


glory  but  the  mourning  of  the  nations  who  were 
once  enriched  by  her  commerce. 

II. 

Chap,  xxviii.  1-19. — Here  the  prophet  turns  to 
the  prince  of  Tyre,  who  is  addressed  throughout 
as  the  impersonation  of  the  consciousness  of  a 
great  commercial  community.  We  happen  to 
know  from  Josephus  that  the  name  of  the  reign- 
ing king  at  this  time  was  Ithobaal  or  Ethbaal  II. 
But  it  is  manifest  that  the  terms  of  Ezekiel's 
message  have  no  reference  to  the  individuality 
of  this  or  any  other  prince  of  Tyre.  It  is  not 
likelythat  the  kingcould  have  exercised  anygreat 
political  influence  in  a  city  "  whose  merchants 
were  all  princes";  indeed,  we  learn  from 
Josephus  that  the  monarchy  was  abolished  in 
favour  of  some  sort^of  elective  constitution  not 
long  after  the  death  of  Ithobaal.  Nor  is  there 
any  reason  to  suppose  that  Ezekiel  has  in  view 
any  special  manifestation  of  arrogance  on  the 
part  of  the  royal  house,  such  as  a  pretension  to 
be  descended  from  the  gods.  The  king  here  is 
simply  the  representative  of  the  genius  of  the 
community,  the  sins  of  heart  charged  against 
him  are  the  expression  of  the  sinful  principle 
which  the  prophet  detected  beneath  the  refine- 
ment and  luxury  of  Tyre,  and  his  shameful  death 
only  symbolises  the  downfall  of  the  city.  The 
prophecy  consists  of  two  parts:  first,  an  accusa- 
tion against  the  prince  of  Tyre,  ending  with  a 
threat  of  destruction  (vv.  2-10);  and  second,  a 
lament  over  his  fall  (vv.  11-19).  The  point  of 
view  is  very  different  in  these  two  sections.  In 
the  first  the  prince  is  still  conceived  as  a  man, 
and  the  language  put  into  his  mouth,  although 
extravagant,  does  not  exceed  the  limits  of  purely 
human  arrogance.  In  the  second,  however,  the 
king  appears  as  an  angelic  being,  an  inhabitant 
of  Eden  and  a  companion  of  the  cherub,  sinless 
at  first,  and  falling  from  his  high  estate  through 
his  own  transgression.  It  almost  seems  as  if 
the  prophet  had  in  his  mind  the  idea  of  a  tute- 
lary spirit  or  genius  of  Tyre,  like  the  angelic 
princes  in  the  book  of  Daniel  who  preside  over 
the  destinies  of  different  nations.*  But  in  spite 
of  its  enhanced  idealism,  the  passage  only  clothes 
in  forms  drawn  from  Babylonian  mythology  the 
boundless  self-glorification  of  Tyre,  and  the  ex- 
pulsion of  the  prince  from  paradise  is  merely  the 
ideal  counterpart  of  the  overthrow  of  the  city 
which  is  his  earthly  abode. 

The  sin  of  Tyre  is  an  overweening  pride,  which 
culminated  in  an  attitude  of  self-deification  on 
the  part  of  its  king.  Surrounded  on  every  hand 
by  the  evidences  of  man's  mastery  over  the 
world,  by  the  achievements  of  human  art  and 
industry  and  enterprise,  the  king  feels  as  if  his 
throne  on  the  sea-girt  island  were  a  veritable 
seat  of  the  gods,  and  as  if  he  himself  were  a  be- 
ing truly  divine.  His  heart  is  lifted  up;  and, 
forgetful  of  the  limits  of  his  mortality,  he  "  sets 
his  mind  like  the  mind  of  a  god."  The  godlike 
quality  on  which  he  specially  prides  himself  is 
the  superhuman  wisdom  evinced  by  the  extra- 
ordinary prosperity  of  the  city  with  which  he 
identifies  himself.  Wiser  than  Daniel!  the 
prophet  ironically  exclaims;  "no  secret  thing  is 
too  dark  for  thee!  "  "  By  thy  wisdom  and  thine 
insight  thou  hast  gotten  thee  wealth,  and  hast 
gathered  gold  and  silver  into  thy  treasuries:  by 
thy  great  wisdom  in  thy  commerce  thou  hast 
*  Dan  X.  20,  21,  xii.  i. 


multiplied  thy  wealth,  and  thy  heart  is  lifted  up 
because  of  thy  riches."  The  prince  sees  in  the 
vast  accumulation  of  material  resources  in  Tyre 
nothing  but  the  reflection  of  the  genius  of  her 
inhabitants;  and  being  himself  the  incarnation 
of  the  spirit  of  the  city,  he  takes  the  glory  of  it 
to  himself  and  esteems  himself  a  god.  Such  im- 
pious self-exaltation  must  inevitably  call  down 
the  vengeance  of  Him  who  is  the  only  living 
God;  and  Ezekiel  proceeds  to  announce  the  hu- 
miliation of  the  prince  by  the  "  most  ruthless  of 
the  nations " — i.  e.,  the  Chaldaeans.  He  shall 
then  know  how  much  of  divinity  doth  hedge  a 
king.  In  face  of  them  that  seek  his  life  he  shall 
learn  that  he  is  man  and  mot  God,  and  that  there 
are  forces  in  the  world  against  which  the  vaunted 
wisdom  of  Tyre  is  of  no  avail.  An  ignominious 
death  *  at  the  hand  of  strangers  is  the  fate  re- 
served for  the  mortal  who  so  proudly  exalted 
himself  against  all  that  is  called  God. 

The  thought  thus  expressed,  when  disengaged 
from  its  peculiar  setting,  is  one  of  permanent 
importance.  To  Ezekiel,  as  to  the  prophets  gen- 
erally. Tyre  is  the  representative  of  commercial 
greatness,  and  the  truth  which  he  here  seeks  to 
illustrate  is  that  the  abnormal  development  of 
the  mercantile  spirit  had  in  her  case  destroyed 
the  capacity  of  faith  in  that  which  is  truly  divine. 
Tyre  no  doubt,  like  every  other  ancient  state, 
still  maintained  a  public  religion  of  the  type 
common  to  Semitic  paganism.  She  was  the 
sacred  seat  of  a  special  cult,  and  the  temple  of 
Melkarth  was  considered  the  chief  glory  of  the 
city.  But  the  public  and  perfunctory  worship 
which  was  there  celebrated  had  long  ceased  to 
express  the  highest  consciousness  of  the  com- 
munity. The  real  god  of  Tyre  was  not  Baal  nor 
Melkarth,  but  the  kmg,  or  any  other  object  that 
might  serve  as  a  symbol  of  her  civic  greatness. 
Her  religion  was  one  that  embodied  itself  in  no 
outward  ritual;  it  was  the  enthusiasm  which  was 
kindled  in  the  heart  of  every  citizen  of  Tyre  by 
the  magnificence  of  the  imperial  city  to  which  he 
belonged.  The  state  of  mind  which  Ezekiel  re- 
gards as  characteristic  of  Tyre  was  perhaps  the 
inevitable  outcome  of  a  high  civilisation  in- 
formed by  no  loftier  religious  conceptions  than 
those  common  to  heathenism.  It  is  the  idea 
which  afterwards  found  expression  in  the  deifi- 
cation of  the  Roman  emperors — the  idea  that 
the  state  is  the  only  power  higher  than  the  indi- 
vidual to  which  he  can  look  for  the  furtherance 
of  his  material  and  spiritual  interests,  the  only 
power,  therefore,  which  rightly  claims  his  hom- 
age and  his  reverence.  None  the  less  it  is  a 
state  of  mind  which  is  destructive  of  all  that  is 
essential  to  living  religion;  and  Tyre  in  her  proud 
self-sufficiency  was  perhaps  further  from  a  true 
knowledge  of  God  than  the  barbarous  tribes 
who  in  all  sincerity  worshipped  the  rude  idols 
which  represented  the  invisible  power  that  ruled 
their  destinies.  And  in  exposing  the  irreligious 
spirit  which  lay  at  the  heart  of  the  Tyrian  civi- 
lisation ihe  prophet  laj'^s  his  finger  on  the  spir- 
itual danger  which  attends  the  successful  pursuit 
of  the  finite  interests  of  human  life.  The  thought 
of  God,  the  sense  of  an  immediate  relation  of  the 
spirit  of  man  to  the  Eternal  and  the  Infinite,  are 
easily  displaced  from  men's  minds  by  undue  ad- 
miration for  the  achievements  of  a  culture  based 

*  "  The  death  of  the  uncircumcised  "— «'.  e.,  a  death  which 
involves  exclusion  from  the  rites  of  honourable  burial; 
like  burial  in  unconsecrated  ground  among  Christian 
nations. 


266 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


on  material  progress,  and  supplying  every  need 
of  human  nature  except  the  very  deepest,  the 
need  of  God.  "  For  that  is  truly  a  man's  religion, 
the  object  of  vi^hich  fills  and  holds  captive  his 
soul  and  heart  and  mind,  in  which  he  trusts 
above  all  things,  which  above  all  things  he 
longs  for  and  hopes  for."  *  The  commercial 
spirit  is  indeed  but  one  of  the  forms  in 
which  men  devote  themselves  to  the  service 
of  this  present  world;  but  in  any  commu- 
nity where  it  reigns  supreme  we  may  confi- 
dently look  for  the  same  signs  of  religious  decay 
which  Ezekiel  detected  in  Tyre  in  his  own  day. 
At  all  events  his  message  is  not  superfluous  in 
an  age  and  country  where  energies  are  well-nigh 
exhausted  in  the  accumulation  of  the  means  of 
living,  and  whose  social  problems  all  run  up 
into  the  great  question  of  the  distribution  of 
wealth.  It  is  essentially  the  same  truth  which 
Ruskin,  with  something  of  the  power  and  insight 
of  a  Hebrew  prophet,  has  so  eloquently  enforced 
on  the  men  who  make  modern  England — that 
the  true  religion  of  a  community  does  not  live 
in  the  venerable  institutions  to  which  it  yields 
a  formal  and  conventional  deference,  but  in  the 
objects  which  inspire  its  most  eager  ambitions, 
the  ideals  which  govern  its  standard  of  worth,  in 
those  things  wherein  it  finds  the  ultimate  ground 
of  its  confidence  and  the  reward  of  its  work.-f- 

The  lamentation  over  the  fall  of  the  prince  of 
Tyre  (vv.  11-19)  reiterates  the  same  lesson  with 
a  boldness  and  freedom  of  imagination  not  usual 
with  this  prophet.  The  passage  is  full  of  ob- 
scurities and  diiSculties  which  cannot  be  ade- 
quately discussed  here,  but  the  main  lines  of  the 
conception  are  easily  grasped.  It  describes  the 
original  state  of  the  prince  as  a  semi-divine  be- 
ing, and  his  fall  from  that  state  on  account  of 
sin  that  was  found  in  him.  The  picture  is  no 
doubt  ironical;  Ezekiel  actually  means  nothing 
more  than  that  the  soaring  pride  of  Tyre  en- 
throned its  king  or  its  presiding  genius  in  the 
seat  of  the  gods,  and  endowed  him  with  attri- 
butes more  than  mortal.  The  prophet  accepts  the 
idea,  and  shows  that  there  was  sin  in  Tyre 
enough  to  hurl  the  most  radiant  of  celestial 
creatures  from  heaven  to  hell.  The  passage  pre- 
sents certain  obvious  affinities  with  the  account 
of  the  Fall  in  the  second  and  third  chapters  of 
Genesis;  but  it  also  contains  reminiscences  of  a 
mythology  the  key  to  which  is  now  lost.  It  can 
hardly  be  supposed  that  the  vivid  details  of  the 
imagery,   such  as  the   "  mountain  of   God,"  the 

♦Dean  Church,  "Cathedral  and  University  Sermons," 
p.  ISO. 

t  "  We  have,  indeed,  a  nominal  religion,  to  which  we 
pay  tithes  of  property  and  sevenths  of  time  ;  but  we  have 
also  a  practical  and  earnest  religion,  to  which  we  devote 
nine-tenths  of  our  property,  and  six-sevenths  of  our  time. 
And  we  dispute  a  great  deal  about  the  nominal  religion  : 
but  we  are  all  unanimous  about  this  practical  one  ;  of 
■which  I  think  you  will  admit  that  the  ruling  goddess  may 
be  best  generally  described  as  the  '  Goddess  of  Getting- 
on,  or  '  Britannia  of  the  Market.'  The  Athenians  had  an 
Athena  Agoraia,'  or  Athena  of  the  Market  ;  but  she  was 
a  subordinate  type  of  their  goddess,  while  our  Britannia 
Agoraia  is  the  principal  type  of  ours.  And  all  your  great 
architectural  works  are,  of  course,  built  to  her.  It  is  long 
since  you  built  a  great  cathedral  ;  and  how  you  would 
laugh  at  me  if  I  proposed  building  a  cathedral  on  the  top 
of  one  of  these  hills  of  yours,  to  make  it  an  Acropolis  !  But 
your  railroad  mound,  vaster  than  the  walls  of  Babylon  ; 
your  railroad  stations,  vaster  than  the  temple  of  Ephesus, 
and  innumerable  ;  your  chimneys,  how  much  more  mighty 
and  costly  than  cathedral  spires  !  your  harbour-piers  ; 
your  warehouses  ;  your  exchanges  !— all  these  are  built  to 
your  great  Goddess  of  '  Getting-on  '  ;  and  she  has  formed, 
and  will  continue  to  form,  your  architecture,  as  long  as 
you  worship  her  ;  and  it  is  quite  vain  to  ask  me  to  tell 
you  how  to  build  to  her ;  you  know  far  better  than  I  "— 
"■'The  Crown  of  Wild  Olive." 


"  Stones  of  fire,"  "  the  precious  gems,"  are  alto- 
gether due  to  the  prophet's  imagination.  The 
mountain  of  the  gods  is  now  known  to  have  been 
a  prominent  idea  of  the  Babylonian  religion; 
and  there  appears  to  have  been  a  widespread 
notion  that  in  the  abode  of  the  gods  were  treas- 
ures of  gold  and  precious  stones,  jealously 
guarded  by  grififins,  of  which  small  quantities 
found  their  way  into  the  possession  of  men.  It 
is  possible  that  fragments  of  these  mythical  no- 
tions may  have  reached  the  knowledge  of  Ezek- 
iel during  his  sojourn  in  Babylon  and  been  used 
by  him  to  fill  up  his  picture  of  the  glories  which 
surrounded  the  first  estate  of  the  king  of  Tyre. 
It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  the  prince 
is  not  to  be  identified  with  the  cherub  or  one  of 
the  cherubim.  The  words  "  Thou  art  the  an- 
ointed cherub  that  covereth,  and  I  have  set  thee 
so  "  (ver.  14)  may  be  translated  "  With  the  .  .  . 
cherub  I  set  thee";  and  similarly  the  words  of 
ver.  16,  "  I  will  destroy  thee,  O  covering  cherub,'' 
should  probably  be  rendered  "  And  the  cherub 
hath  destroyed  thee."  The  whole  conception  is 
greatly  simplified  by  these  changes,  and  the  prin- 
cipal features  of  it,  so  far  as  they  can  be  made 
out  with  clearness,  are  as  follows:  The  cherub 
is  the  warden  of  the  "  holy  mountain  of  God," 
and  no  doubt  also  (as  in  chap,  i.)  the  symbol  and 
bearer  of  the  divine  glory.  When  it  is  said  that 
the  prince  of  Tyre  was  placed  with  the  cherub, 
the  meaning  is  that  he  had  his  place  in  the  abode 
of  God,  or  was  admitted  to  the  presence  of  God, 
so  long  as  he  preserved  the  perfection  in  which 
he  was  created  (ver.  15).  The  other  allusions  to 
his  original  glory,  such  as  the  "  covering "  of 
precious  stones  ind  the  "  walking  amidst  fiery 
stones,"  cannot  be  explained  with  any  degree  ' 
of  certainty.*  When  iniquity  is  found  in  him 
so  that  he  must  be  banished  from  the  presence 
of  God,  the  cherub  is  said  to  destroy  him  from 
the  midst  of  the  stones  of  fire — i.  e.,  is  the  agent 
of  the  divine  judgment  which  descends  on  the 
prince.  It  is  thus  doubtful  whether  the  prince  is 
conceived  as  a  perfect  human  being,  like  Adam 
before  his  fall,  or  as  an  angelic,  superhuman 
creature;  but  the  point  is  of  little  importance  in 
ideal  delineation  such  as  we  have  here.  It  will 
be  seen  that  even  on  the  first  supposition  there 
is  no  very  close  correspondence  with  the  story  of 
Eden  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  for  there  the 
cherubim  are  placed  to  guard  the  way  of  the 
tree  of  life  only  after  man  has  been  expelled 
from  the  garden. 

But  what  is  the  sin  that  tarnished  the  sanctity 
of  this  exalted  personage  and  cost  him  his  place 
among  the  immortals?  Ideally,  it  was  an  access 
of  pride  that  caused  his  ruin,  a  spiritual  sin,  such 
as  might  originate  in  the  heart  of  an  angelic 
being. 

"  By  that  sin  fell  the  angels  :  how  can  man,  then, 
The  image  of  his  Maker,  hope  to  win  by  it?  " 

His  heart  was  lifted  up  because  of  his  beauty, 
and  he  forfeited  his  godlike  wisdom  over  his 
brilliance  (ver.  17).  But  really,  this  change 
passing  over  the  spirit  of  the  prince  in  the  seat 

*  The  "  fiery  stones"  may  represent  the  thunderbolts, 
which  were  harmless  to  the  prince  in  virtue  of  his  inno- 
cence. It  may  be  noted  that  the  "precious  stones"  that 
were  his  covering  (ver.  13)  correspond  with  nine  out  of 
twelve  jewels  that  covered  the  high-priestly  breast-plate 
(Exod.  xxviii.  17-ig),  the  stonesof  the  third  row  being  those 
not  here  represented.  This  suggests  that  the  alius/ Dn  is 
rather  to  bejewelled  garments  than  to  the  plumage  of  the 
wings  of  the  cherub  with  whom  the  prince  has  oeett 
wrongly  identified. 


Ezekiel  xxix.-xxxii] 


EGYPT. 


.87 


of  God  is  only  the  reflection  of  what  is  done  on 
earth  in  Tyre.  As  her  commerce  increased,  the 
proofs  of  her  unjust  and  unscrupulous  use  of 
wealth  were  accumulated  against  her,  and  her 
midstwas  filledwith  violence  (ver.  16).  This  is  the 
only  allusion  in  the  three  chapters  to  the  wrong 
and  oppression  and  the  outrages  on  humanity 
which  were  the  inevitable  accompaniments  of  that 
greed  of  gain  which  had  taken  possession  of  the 
Tyrian  community.  And  these  sins  arc  regarded 
as  a  demoralisation  taking  place  in  the  nature 
of  the  prince,  who  is  the  representative  of  the 
city;  by  the  "  iniquity  of  his  traffic  he  has  pro- 
faned his  holiness,"  and  is  cast  down  from  his 
lofty  seat  to  the  earth,  a  spectacle  of  abject  hu- 
miliation for  kings  to  gloat  over.  By  a  sudden 
change  of  metaphor  the  destruction  of  the  city 
is  also  represented  as  a  fire  breaking  out  in  the 
vitals  of  the  prince,  and  reducing  his  body  to 
ashes — a  conception  which  has  not  unnaturally 
suggested  to  some  commentators  the  fable  of 
the  phcenix  which  was  supposed  periodically  to 
immolate  herself  in  a  fire  of  her  own  kindling. 

III. 

A  short  oracle  on  Sidon  completes  the  series 
of  prophecies  dealing  with  the  future  of  Israel's 
immediate  neighbours  (vv.  20-23).  Sidon  lay 
about  twenty  miles  farther  north  than  Tyre,  and 
was,  as  we  have  seen,  at  this  time  subject  to  the 
authority  of  the  younger  and  more  vigorous 
city.  From  the  book  of  Jeremiah,*  however,  we 
see  that  Sidon  was  an  autonomous  state,  and 
preserved  a  measure  of  independence  even  in 
matters  of  foreign  policy.  There  is  therefore 
nothing  arbitrary  in  assigning  a  separate  oracle 
to  this  most  northerly  of  the  states  in  immediate 
contact  with  the  people  of  Israel,  although  it 
must  be  admitted  that  Ezekiel  has  nothing  dis- 
tinctive to  say  of  Sidon.  Phoenicia  was  in  truth 
so  overshadowed  by  Tyre  that  all  the  character- 
istics of  the  people  have  been  amply  illustrated 
in  the  chapters  that  have  dealt  with  the  latter 
city.  The  prophecy  is  accordingly  delivered  in 
the  most  general  terms,  and  indicates  rather  the 
purpose  and  effect  of  the  judgment  than  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  to  come  or  the  character 
of  the  people  ag:ainst  whom  it  is  directed.  It 
passes  insensibly  into  a  prediction  of  the  glorious 
future  of  Israel,  which  is  important  as  revealing 
the  underlying  motive  of  all  the  preceding  utter- 
ances against  the  heathen  nations.  The  restora- 
tion of  Israel  and  the  destruction  of  her  old 
neighbours  are  both  parts  of  one  comprehensive 
scheme  of  divine  providence,  the  ultimate  ob- 
ject of  which  is  a  demonstration  before  the  eyes 
of  the  world  of  the  holiness  of  Jehovah.  That 
men  might  know  that  He  is  Jehovah,  God  alone, 
is  the  end  alike  of  His  dealings  with  the  heathen 
and  with  His  own  people.  And  the  two  parts 
of  God's  plan  are  in  the  mind  of  Ezekiel  inti- 
mately related  to  each  other;  the  one  is  merely 
a  condition  of  the  realisation  of  the  other.  The 
crowning  proof  of  Jehovah's  holiness  will  be  seen 
in  His  faithfulness  to  the  promise  made  to  the 
patriarchs  of  the  possession  of  the  land  of  Ca- 
naan, and  in  the  security  and  prosperity  enjoyed 
by  Israel  when  brought  back  to  their  land  a  puri- 
fied nation.  Nowin  the  past  Israel  had  been  con- 
stantly interfered  with,  crippled,  humiliated,  and 
seduced  by  the  petty  heathen  powers  around  her 
borders.  These  had  been  a  pricking  brier  and  a 
*  Jer.  XXV.  22,  xxvii.  3. 


Stinging  thorn  (ver.  24),  constantly  annoying  and 
harassing  her  and  impeding  the  free  develop- 
ment of  her  national  life.  Hence  the  judgments 
here  denounced  against  them  are  no  doubt  in 
the  first  instance  a  punishment  for  what  they 
had  been  and  done  in  the  past;  but  they  are  also 
a  clearing  of  the  stage  that  Israel  might  be  iso- 
lated from  the  rest  of  the  world,  and  be  free  to 
mould  her  national  life  and  her  religious  insti- 
tutions in  accordance  with  the  will  of  her  God. 
That  is  the  substance  of  the  last  three  verses  of 
the  chapter;  and  while  they  exhibit  the  peculiar 
limitations  of  the  prophet's  thinking,  they  enable 
us  at  the  same  time  to  do  justice  to  the  singular 
unity  and  consistency  of  aim  which  guided  him 
in  his  great  forecast  of  the  future  of  the  kingdom 
of  God.  There  remains  now  the  case  of  Egypt 
to  be  dealt  with;  but  Egypt's  relations  to  Israel 
and  her  position  in  the  world  were  so  unique 
that  Ezekiel  reserves  consideration  of  her  future 
for  a  separate  group  of  oracles  longer  than  those 
on  all  the  other  nations  put  together. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

EGYPT. 

Ezekiel   xxix.-xxxii. 

Egypt  figures  in  the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel  as 
a  great  world-power  cherishing  projects  of  uni- 
versal dominion.  Once  more,  as  in  the  age  of 
Isaiah,  the  ruling  factor  in  Asiatic  politics  was 
the  duel  for  the  mastery  of  the  world  between  the 
rival  empires  of  the  Nile  and  the  Euphrates. 
The  intiuence  of  Egypt  was  perhaps  even  greater 
in  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century  than  it  had 
been  in  the  end  of  the  eighth,  although  in  the 
interval  it  had  suffered  a  signal  eclipse.  Isaiah 
(chap,  xix.)  had  predicted  a  subjugation  of 
Egypt  by  the  Assyrians,  and  this  prophecy  had 
been  fulfilled  in  the  year  672,  when  Esarhaddon 
invaded  the  country  and  incorporated  it  in  the 
Assyrian  empire.  He  divided  its  territory  into 
twenty  petty  principalities  governed  by  Assyrian 
or  native  rulers,  and  this  state  of  things  had 
lasted  with  little  change  for  a  generation.  Dur- 
ing the  reign  of  Asshurbanipal  Egypt  was  fre- 
quently overrun  by  Assyrian  armies,  and  the  re- 
peated attempts  of  the  Ethiopian  monarchs,  aided 
by  revolts  among  the  native  princes,  to  reassert 
their  sovereignty  over  the  Nile  Valley  were  all 
foiled  by  the  energy  of  the  Assyrian  king  or  the 
vigilance  of  his  generals.  At  last,  however,  a 
new  era  of  prosperity  dawned  for  Egypt  abouf: 
the  year  645.  Psammetichus,  the  ruler  of  Sals, 
with  the  help  of  foreign  mercenaries,  succeeded 
in  uniting  the  whole  land  under  his  sway;  he 
expelled  the  Assyrian  garrison,  and  became  the 
founder  of  the  brilliant  twenty-sixth  (Saite) 
dynasty.  From  this  time  Egypt  possessed  in  a 
strong  central  administration  the  one  indispens- 
able condition  of  her  material  prosperity.  Her 
power  was  consolidated  by  a  succession  of  vigor- 
ous rulers,  and  she  immediately  began  jto  play 
a  leading  part  in  the  affairs  of  Asia.  The  most 
distinguished  king  of  the  dynasty  was  Necho 
II.,  the  son  and  successor  of  Psammetichus. 
Two  striking  facts  mentioned  by  Herodotus  are 
worthy  of  mention,  as  showing  the  originality 
and  vigour  with  which  the  Egyptian  administra- 
tion was  at  this  time  conducted.  One  is  the 
project  of  cutting  a  canal  between  the  Nile  and 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


the  Red  Sea,  an  undertaking  which  was  aban- 
doned by  Necho  in  consequence  of  an  oracle 
warning  him  that  he  was  only  working  for  the 
advantage  of  foreigners — meaning  no  doubt  the 
Phoenicians.  Necho,  however,  knew  how  to 
turn  the  Phoenician  seamanship  to  good  account, 
as  is  proved  by  the  other  great  stroke  of  genius 
with  which  he  is  credited — the  circumnavigation 
of  Africa.  It  was  a  Phoenician  fleet,  despatched 
from  Suez  by  his  orders,  which  first  rounded  the 
Cape  of  Good  Hope,  returning  to  Egypt  by  the 
straits  of  Gibraltar  after  a  three  years'  voyage. 
And  if  Necho  was  less  successful  in  war  than  in 
the  arts  of  peace,  it  was  not  from  want  of  activ- 
ity. He  was  the  Pharaoh  who  defeated  Josiah 
in  the  plain  of  Megiddo,  and  afterwards  con- 
tested the  lorship  of  Syria  with  Nebuchadnezzar. 
His  defeat  at  Carchemish  in  604  compelled  him 
to  retire  to  his  own  land;  but  the  power  of 
Egypt  was  still  unbroken,  and  the  Chaldsean 
king  knew  that  he  would  yet  have  to  reckon  with 
her  in  his  schemes  for  the  conquest  of  Palestine. 

At  the  time  to  which  these  prophecies  belong 
the  king  of  Egypt  was  Pharaoh  Hophra  (in 
Greek,  Apries),  the  grandson  of  Necho  II.  As- 
cending the  throne  in  588  b.  c,  he  found  it  neces- 
sary for  the  protection  of  his  own  interests  to 
take  an  active  part  in  the  politics  of  Syria.  He 
is  said  to  have  attacked  Phoenicia  by  sea  and 
land,  capturing  Sidon  and  defeating  a  Tyrian 
fleet  in  a  naval  engagement.  His  object  must 
have  been  to  secure  the  ascendency  of  the 
Egyptian  party  in  the  Phoenician  cities;  and  the 
stubborn  resistance  which  Nebuchadnezzar  en- 
countered from  Tyre  was  no  doubt  the  result 
of  the  political  arrangements  made  by  Hophra 
after  his  victory.  No  armed  intervention  was 
needed  to  ensure  a  spirited  defence  of  Jerusalem; 
and  it  was  only  after  the  Babylonians  were  en- 
camped around  the  city  that  Hophra  sent  an 
Egyptian  army  to  its  relief.  He  was  unable, 
however,  to  effect  more  than  a  temporary  sus- 
pension of  the  siege,  and  returned  to  Egypt, 
leaving  Judah  to  its  fate,  apparently  without 
venturing  on  a  battle  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5-7).  No 
further  hostilities  between  Egypt  and  Babylon 
are  recorded  during  the  lifetime  of  Hophra.  He 
continued  to  reign  with  vigour  and  success  till 
571,  when  he  was  dethroned  by  Amasis,  one  of 
his  own  generals. 

These  circumstances  show  a  remarkable  par- 
allel to  the  political  situation  with  which  Isaiah 
had  to  deal  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib's  invasion. 
Judah  was  again  in  the  position  of  the  "  earthen 
pipkin  between  two  iron  pots."  It  is  certain 
that  neither  Jehoiakim  nor  Zedekiah,  any  more 
than  the  advisers  of  Hezekiah  in  the  earlier  pe- 
riod, would  have  embarked  on  a  conflict  with 
the  Mesopotamian  empire  but  for  delusive  prom- 
ises of  Egyptian  support.  There  was  the  same 
vacillation  and  division  of  counsels  in  Jerusalem, 
the  same  dilatoriness  on  the  part  of  Egypt,  and 
the  same  futile  effort  to  retrieve  a  desperate  situa- 
tion after  the  favourable  moment  had  been  al- 
lowed to  slip.  In  both  cases  the  conflict  was 
precipitated  by  the  triumph  of  an  Egyptian  party 
in  the  Jud?ean  court;  and  it  is  probable  that  in 
both  cases  the  king  was  coerced  into  a  policy  of 
which  his  judgment  did  not  approve.  And  the 
prophets  of  the  later  period,  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel,  adhere  closely  to  the  lines  laid  down  by 
Isaiah  in  the  time  of  Sennacherib,  warning  the 
people  against  putting  their  trust  in  the  vain  help 
of  Egypt,  'and  counselling  passive  submission  to 


the  course  of  events  which  expressed  the  un- 
alterable judgment  of  the  Almighty.  Ezekiel 
indeed  borrows  an  image  that  had  been  cur- 
rent in  the  days  of  Isaiah  in  order  to  set  forth 
the  utter  untrustworthiness  and  dishonesty  of 
Egypt  towards  the  nations  who  were  induced  to 
rely  on  her  power.  He  compares  her  to  a  staff 
of  reed,  which  breaks  when  one  grasps  it,  pierc- 
ing the  hand  and  making  the  loins  to  totter 
when  it  is  leant  upon.*  Such  had  Egypt  been  to 
Israel  through  all  her  history,  and  such  she  will 
again  prove  herself  to  be  in  her  last  attempt  to 
use  Israel  as  the  tool  of  her  selfish  designs.  The 
great  difference  between  Ezekiel  and  Isaiah  is 
that,  whereas  Isaiah  had  access  to  the  councils 
of  Hezekiah  and  could  bring  his  influence  to 
bear  on  the  inception  of  schemes  of  state,  not 
without  hope  of  averting  what  he  saw  to  be  a 
disastrous  decision,  Ezekiel  could  only  watch  the 
development  of  events  from  afar,  and  throw  his 
warnings  into  the  form  of  predictions  of  the 
fate  in  store  for  Egypt. 

The  oracles  against  Egypt  are  seven  in  num- 
ber: (i)  xxix.  1-16;  (ii)  17-21;  (iii)  xxx.  1-19; 
(iv)  20-26;  (v)  xxxi.;  (vi)  xxxii.  1-16;  (vii) 
17-32.  They  are  all  variations  of  one  theme,  the 
annihilation  of  the  power  of  Egypt  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  little  progress  of  thought  can  be 
traced  from  the  first  to  the  last.  Excluding  the 
supplementary  prophecy  of  xxix.  17-21,  which 
is  a  later  addition,  the  order  appears  to  be 
strictly  chronological. f  The  series  begins  seven 
months  before  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  (xxix. 
i),  and  ends  about  eight  months  after  that 
event. :t  How  far  the  dates  refer  to  actual  oc- 
currences coming  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
prophet  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  say.  It  is  clear 
that  his  interest  is  centred  on  the  fate  of  Je- 
rusalem then  hanging  in  the  balance;  and  it  is 
possible  that  the  first  oracles  (xxix.  1-16,  xxx. 
1-19)  may  be  called  forth  by  the  appearance  of 
Hophra's  army  on  the  scene,  while  the  next  (xxx. 
20-26)  plainly  alludes  to  the  repulse  of  the  Egyp- 
tians by  the  Chaldseans.  But  no  attempt  can  be 
made  to  connect  the  prophecies  with  incidents 
of  the  campaign;  the  prophet's  thoughts  are 
wholly  occupied  with  the  moral  and  religious  is- 
sues involved  in  the  contest,  the  vindication  of 
Jehovah's  holiness  in  the  overthrow  of  the  great 
world-power  which  sought  to  thwart  His  pur- 
poses. 

Chap.  xxix.  1-16  is  an  introduction  to  all  that 
follows,  presenting  a  general  outline  of  the 
prophet's  conceptions  of  the  fate  of  Egypt.  It 
describes  the  sin  of  which  she  has  been  guilty, 
and  indicates  the  nature  of  the  judgment  that 
is  to  overtake  her  and  her  future  place  among 
the  nations  of  the  world.  The  Pharaoh  is  com- 
pared to  a  "  great  dragon,"  wallowing  in  his 
native  waters,  and  deeming  himself  secure  from 
molestation  in  his  reedy  haunts.  The  crocodile 
was  a  natural  symbol  of  Egypt,  and  the  image 
conveys   accurately   the    impression    of    sluggish 

*  Er.ek.  x.xix.  6,  7  :  cf.  Isa.  xxxvi.  6  (the  words  of  Kab- 
shakeh).  In  ver.  7  read  P]3  "  hand,"  for  r|n3,  "  -shoulder." 
and  rnV^i^'  "  madest  to  totter,"  for  rnOyH,  "  niadest  to 
stand." 

t  This  is  probable  according  to  the  Hebrew  text,  which, 
however,  omits  the  number  ot  Che  viontli  in  ch.  xxxii.  17. 
The  Septuagint  reads  "in  \.\\^  Jirst  month  ";  if  this  is 
accepted,  it  would  be  better  to  read  the  elevetith  year 
instead  of  the  twelfth  in  ch.  xxxii.  i,  as  is  done  by  some 
ancient  versions  and  Hebrew  codices.  The  change  in- 
volves a  difference  of  oniv  one  letter  in  Hebrew. 

X  Ch.  xxxii.  17,  following  the  LXX.  reading. 


Ezekiel  xxix.-xxxii.] 


EGYPT. 


2J59 


and  unwieldy  strength  which  Egypt  in  the  days 
of  Ezekiel  had  long  produced  on  shrewd  ob- 
servers of  her  policy.  Pharaoh  is  the  incarnate 
genius  of  the  country;  and  as  the  Nile  was  the 
strength  and  glory  of  Egypt,  he  is  here  repre- 
sented as  arrogating  to  himself  the  ownership 
und  even  the  creation  of  the  wonderful  river. 
■'  My  river  is  mine,  and  I  have  made  it  "  is  the 
proud  and  blasphemous  thought  which  expresses 
his  consciousness  of  a  power  that  owns  no 
superior  in  earth  or  heaven.  That  the  Nile  was 
worshipped  by  the  Egyptians  with  divine 
honours  did  not  alter  the  fact  that  beneath  all 
their  ostentatious  religious  observances  there 
was  an  immoral  sense  of  irresponsible  power  in 
the  use  of  the  natural  resources  to  which  the 
land  owed  its  prosperity.  For  this  spirit  of  un- 
godly self-exaltation  the  king  and  people  of 
Egypt  are  to  be  visited  with  a  signal  judgment, 
from  which  they  shall  learn  who  it  is  that  is  God 
over  all.  The  monster  of  the  Nile  shall  be 
drawn  from  his  waters  with  hooks,  with  all  his 
fishes  sticking  to  his  scales,  and  left  to  perish 
ignominiously  on  the  desert  sands.  The  rest  of 
the  prophecy  (vv.  8-16)  gives  the  explanation  of 
the  allegory  in  literal,  though  still  general,  terms. 
The  meaning  is  that  Egypt  shall  be  laid  waste 
by  the  sword,  its  teeming  population  led  into 
captivity,  and  the  land  shall  lie  desolate,  un- 
trodden by  the  foot  of  man  or  beast  for  the 
space  of  forty  years.  "From  Migdol  to  Syene"* 
— the  extreme  limits  of  the  country — the  rich 
valley  of  the  Nile  shall  be  uncultivated  and  unin- 
habited for  that  period  of  time. 

The  most  interesting  feature  of  the  prophecy 
is  the  view  which  is  given  of  the  final  condition 
of  the  Egyptian  empire  (vv.  13-16).  In  all  cases 
the  prophetic  delineations  of  the  future  of  differ- 
ent nations  are  coloured  by  the  present  circum- 
stances of  those  nations  as  known  to  the  writers. 
Ezekiel  \:new  that  the  fertile  soil  of  Egypt 
would  always  be  capable  of  supporting  an  indus- 
trious peasantry,  and  that  her  existence  did  not 
depend  on  her  continuing  to  play  the  role  of  a 
great  power.  Tyre  depended  on  her  commerce, 
and  apart  from  that  which  was  the  root  of  her 
sin  could  never  be  anything  but  the  resort  of 
poor  fishermen,  who  would  not  even  make  their 
dwelling  on  the  barren  rock  in  the  midst  of  the 
sea.  But  Egypt  could  still  be  a  country,  though 
shorn  of  the  glory  and  power  which  had  made 
her  a  snare  to  the  people  of  God.  On,  the  other 
hand  the  geographical  isolation  of  the  land 
rnade  it  impossible  that  she  should  lose  her  in- 
dividuality amongst  the  nations  of  the  world. 
Unlike  the  small  states,  such  as  Edom  and  Am- 
mon,  which  were  obviously  doomed  to  be  swal- 
lowed up  by  the  surrounding  population  as  soon 
as  their  power  was  broken.  Egypt  would  retain 
her  distinct  and  characteristic  life  as  long  as 
the  physical  condition  of  the  world  remained 
what  it  was.  Accordingly  the  prophet  does  not 
contemplate  an  utter. annihilation  of  Egypt,  but 
only  a  temporary  chastisement,  succeeded  by  her 
permanent  degradation  to  the  lowest  rank 
among  the  kingdoms.  The  forty  years  of  her 
desolation  represent  in  round  numbers  the  pe- 
riod of  Chaldean  supremacy  during  which  Jeru- 
salem lies  in  ruins.  Ezekiel  at  this  time  ex- 
pected the  invasion  of  Egypt  to  follow  soon  after 
*  Migdol  was  on  the  northeast  border  of  Egypt.^twelve 
miles  south  of  Pelusium  (Sin),  at  the  mouth  of  the  eastern 
arm  of  the  Nile.  Syene  is  the  modern  Assouan,  at  the 
first  cataract  of  the  Nile,  and  has  always  been  the  bound- 
ary between  Egypt  proper  and  Ethiopia. 

19-Voi.  rv. 


the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  so  that  the  restoration 
of  the  two  peoples  would  be  simultaneous.  At 
the  end  of  forty  years  the  whole  world  will  be 
reorganised  on  a  new  basis,  Israel  occupying 
the  central  position  as  the  people  of  God,  and 
in  that  new  world  Egypt  shall  have  a  separate 
but  subordinate  place.  Jehovah  will  bring  back 
the  Egyptians  from  their  captivity,  and  cause 
them  to  return  to  "  Pathros,*  the  land  of  their 
origin,"  and  there  make  them  a  ".lowly  state," 
no  longer  an  imperial  power,  but  humbler  than 
the  surrounding  kingdoms.  The  righteousness 
of  Jehovah  and  the  interest  of  Israel  alike  de- 
mand that  Egypt  should  be  thus  reduced  from 
her  former  greatness.  In  the  old  days  her  vast 
and  imposing  power  had  been  a  constant  temp- 
tation to  the  Israelites,  "  a  confidence,  a  re- 
minder of  iniquity,"  leading  them  to  put  their 
trust  in  human  power  and  luring  them  into 
paths  of  danger  by  deceitful  promises  (vv.  6-7). 
In  the  final  dispensation  of  history  this  shall 
no  longer  be  the  case:  Israel  shall  then  know 
Jehovah,  and  no  form  of  human  power  shall 
be  suffered  to  lead  their  hearts  astray  from  Him 
who  is  the  rock  of  their  salvation. 

Chap.  XXX.  1-19. — The  judgment  on  Egypt 
spreads  terror  and  dismay  among  all  the  neigh- 
bouring nations.  It  signalises  the  advent  of  the 
great  day  of  Jehovah,  the  day  of  His  final 
reckoning  with  the  powers  of  evil  everywhere. 
It  is  the  "  time  of  the  heathen  "  that  has  come 
(ver.  3).  Egypt  being  the  chief  embodiment  of 
secular  power  on  the  basis  of  pagan  religion, 
the  sudden  collapse  of  her  might  is  equivalent 
to  a  judgment  on  heathenism  in  general,  and 
the  moral  efifect  of  it  conveys  to  the  world  a 
demonstration  of  the  omnipotence  of  the  one 
true  God  whom  she  had  ignored  and  defied.  The 
nations  immediately  involved  in  the  fall  of 
Egypt  are  the  allies  and  mercenaries  whom  she 
has  called  to  her  aid  in  the  time  of  her  calamity. 
Ethiopians,  and  Lydian^,  and  Libyans,  and 
Arabs,  and  Cretans,!  the  "  helpers  of  Egypt," 
who  have  furnished  contingents  to  her  motley 
army,  fall  by  the  sword  along  with  her,  and 
their  countries  share  the  desolation  that  over- 
takes the  land  of  Egypt.  Swift  messengers  are 
then  seen  speeding  up  the  Nile  in  ships  to  convey 
to  the  careless  Ethiopians  the  alarming  tidings  of 
the  overthrow  of  Egypt  (ver.  9).  From  this 
point  the  prophet  confines  his  attention  to  the 
fate  of  Egypt,  which  he  describes  with  a  fulness 
of  detail  that  implies  a  certain  acquaintance  both 
with  the  topography  and  the  social  circum- 
stances of  the  country.  In  ver.  10  Nebuchad- 
nezzar and  the  Chaldseans  are  for  the  first  time 
mentioned  by  name  as  the  human  instruments 
employed  by  Jehovah  to  execute  His  judgments 
on   Egypt.     After  the   slaughter  of   the   inhabi- 

*  Pathros  is  the  name  of  Upper  Egypt,  the  narrow  valley 
of  the  Nile  above  the  Delta.  In  the  Egyptian  tradition  it 
was  regarded  as  the  original  home  of  the  nation  and  the 
seat  of  the  oldest  dynasties.  Whether  Ezekiel  means  that 
the  Egyptians  shall  recover  on/y  Pathros,  while  the  Delta 
is  allowed  to  remain  uncultivated,  is  a  question  that  must 
be  left  undecided. 

t  Hebrew,  "  Cush,  and  Put,  and  Lud,  and  all  the  mixed 
multitude,  and  Chub,  and  the  sons  of  the  land  of  the 
covenant."  Cornill  reads,  "Cush,  and  Put,  and  Lud,  and 
Lub,  and  all  Arabia,  and  the  sons  of  Crete."  The  emen- 
dations are  partly  based  on  somewhat  intricate  reasoning 
from  the  text  of  the  Greek  and  Ethiopic  versions;  but 
they  have  the  advantage  of  yielding  a  series  of  proper 
names,  as  the  context  seems  to  demand.  Put  and  Lud  are 
tribes  lying  to  the  west  of  Eg5'pt,  and  so  also  is  Lub, 
which  may  be  safely  substituted  for  the  otherwise 
unknown  Chub  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


290 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


tants  the  next  consequence  of  the  invasion  is 
the  destruction  of  the  canals  and  reservoirs  and 
the  decay  of  the  system  of  irrigation  on  which 
the  productiveness  of  the  country  depended. 
"  The  rivers  "  (canals)  "  are  dried  up,  and  the 
land  is  made  waste,  and  the  fulness  thereof,  by 
the  hand  of  strangers  "  (ver.  12).  And  with  the 
material  fabric  of  her  prosperity  the  complicated 
system  of  religious  and  civil  institutions  which 
was  entwined  with  the  hoary  civilisation  of 
Egypt  vanishes  for  ever.  "The  idols  are  de- 
stroyed; the  potentates*  are  made  to  cease  from 
Memphis,  and  princes  from  the  land  of  Egypt, 
so  that  they  shall  be  no  more  "  (ver.  13).  Faith 
in  the  native  gods  shall  be  extinguished,  and  a 
trembling  fear  of  Jehovah  shall  fill  the  whole 
land.  The  passage  ends  with  an  enumeration  of 
various  centres  of  the  national  life,  which 
formed,  as  it  were,  the  sensitive  ganglia  where 
the  universal  calamity  was  most  acutely  felt. 
On  these  cities, f  each  of  which  was  identified 
with  the  worship  of  a  particular  deity,  Jehovah 
executes  the  judgments,  in  which  He  makes 
known  to  the  Egyptian  His  sole  divinity  and 
destroys  their  confidence  in  false  gods.  They 
also  possessed  some  special  military  or  political 
importance,  so  that  with  their  destruction  the 
sceptres  of  Egypt  were  broken  and  the  pride  of 
her  strength  was  laid  low  (ver.   18). 

Chap.  xxx.  20-26. — A  new  oracle  dated  three 
months  later  than  the  preceding.  Pharaoh  is 
represented  as  a  combatant,  already  disabled 
in  one  arm  and  sore  pressed  by  his  powerful 
antagonist,  the  king  of  Babylon.  Jehovah  an- 
nounces that  the  wounded  arm  cannot  be 
healed,  although  Pharaoh  has  retired  from 
the  contest  for  that  purpose.  On  the  con- 
trary, both  his  arms  shall  be  broken  and  the 
sword  struck  from  his  grasp,  while  the  arms 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  are  strengthened  by  Je- 
hovah, who  puts  His  own  sword  into  his  hand. 
The  land  of  Egypt,  thus  rendered  defenceless, 
falls  an  easy  prey  to  the  Chaldaeans,  and  its 
people  are  dispersed  among  the  nations.  The 
occasion  of  the  prophecy  is  the  repulse  of 
Hophra's  expedition  for  the  relief  of  Jerusalem, 
which  is  referred  to  as  a  past  event.  The  date 
may  either  mark  the  actual  time  of  the  occur- 
rence (as  in  xxiv.  i),  or  the  time  when  it  came 
to  the  knowledge  of  Ezekiel.  The  prophet  at 
all  events  accepts  this  reverse  to  the  Egyptian 
arms  as  an  earnest  of  the  speedy  realisation  of 
his  predictions  in  the  total  submission  of  the 
proud  empire  of  the  Nile. 

Chap.  xxxi.  occupies  the  same  position  in  the 
prophecies  against  Egypt  as  the  allegory  of  the 
richly  laden  ship  in  those  against  Tyre  (chap, 
xxvii.).  The  incomparable  majesty  and  over- 
shadowing power  of  Egypt  are  set  forth  under 

♦Reading  D>7X.  "strong  ones,"  instead  of  Q^-j^pKi 
"  not  gods,"  as  in  the  LXX.  The  latter  term  is  common  in 
Isaiah,  but  does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  Ezekiel,  although 
he  had  constant  occasion  to  use  it. 

+  The  cities  are  not  mentioned  in  any  geographical 
order.  Memphis  (Noph)  and  Thebes  (No)  are  the  ancient 
and  populous  capitals  of  Lower  and  Upper  Egypt  respec- 
tively ;  Tanis  (Zoan)  was  the  city  of  the  Hyksos,  and 
subsequently  a  royal  seat ;  Pelusium  (Sin),  "  the  bulwark 
of  Egypt,"  and  Daphne  (Tahpanhes)  guarded  the  approach 
to  the  Delta  from  the  East  :  Heliopolis  (On,  wrongly 
pointed  Aven)  was  the  famous  centre  of  Egyptian  wisdom, 
and  the  chief  seat  of  the  worship  of  the  sun-god  Ra  ;  and 
Bubastis  (Pi-beseth),  besides  being  a  celebrated  religious 
centre,  was  one  of  the  possessions  of  the  Egyptian  mili- 
tary caste. 


the  image  of  a  lordly  cedar  in  Lebanon,  whose 
top  reaches  to  the  clouds  and  whose  branches 
attord  shelter  to  all  the  beasts  of  the  earth.  The 
exact  force  of  the  allegory  is  somewhat  ob- 
scured by  a  slight  error  of  the  text,  which  must 
have  crept  in  at  a  very  early  period.  As  it 
stands  in  the  Hebrew  and  in  all  the  ancient  ver- 
sions the  whole  chapter  is  a  description  of  the 
greatness  not  of  Egypt  but  of  Assyria.  "  To 
whom  art  thou  like  in  thy  greatness?"  asks  the 
prophet  (ver.  2) ;  and  the  answer  is,  "  Assyria 
was  great  as  thou  art,  yet  Assyria  fell  and  is 
no  more."  There  is  thus  a  double  comparison: 
Assyria  is  compared  to  a  cedar,  and  then  Egypt 
is  tacitly  compared  to  Assyria.  This  interpreta- 
tion may  not  be  altogether  indefensible.  That 
the  fate  of  Assyria  contained  a  warning  against 
the  pride  of  Pharaoh  is  a  thought  in  itself  in- 
telligible, and  such  as  Ezekiel  might  very  well 
have  expressed.  But  if  he  had  wished  to  ex- 
press it  he  would  not  have  done  it  so  awkwardly 
as  this  interpretation  supposes.  When  we  fol- 
low the  connection  of  ideas  we  cannot  fail  to 
see  that  Assyria  is  not  in  the  prophet's  thoughts 
at  all.  The  image  is  consistently  pursued  with- 
out a  break  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  and  then 
we  learn  that  the  subject  of  the  description  is 
"  Pharaoh  and  all  his  multitude  "  (ver.  18).  But 
if  the  writer  is  thinking  of  Egypt  at  the  end, 
he  must  have  been  thinking  of  it  from  the  be- 
ginning, and  the  mention  of  Assyria  is  out  of 
place  and  misleading.  The  confusion  has  been 
caused  by  the  substitution  of  the  word  "  Asshur  " 
(in  ver.  3)  for  "  T'asshur,"  the  name  of  the 
sherbin  tree,  itself  a  species  of  cedar.  We  should 
therefore  read,  "Behold  a  T'asshur,  a  cedar  in 
Lebanon,"  etc.;*  and  the  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion of  ver.  2  is  that  the  position  of  Egypt  is 
as  unrivalled  among  the  kingdoms  of  the  world 
as  this  stately  tree  among  the  trees  of  the  forest. 
With  this  alteration  the  course  of  thought  is 
perfectly  clear,  although  incongruous  elements 
are  combined  in  the  representation.  The  tower- 
ing height  of  the  cedar  with  its  top  in  the 
clouds  symbolises  the  imposing  might  of  Egypt 
and  its  ungodly  pride  {cf.  vv.  10,  14).  The  waters 
of  the  flood  which  nourish  its  roots  are  those 
of  the  Nile,  the  source  of  Egypt's  wealth  and 
greatness.  The  birds  that  build  their  nests  in 
its  branches  and  the  beasts  that  bring  forth  their 
young  under  its  shadow  are  the  smaller  nations 
that  looked  to  Egypt  for  protection  and  support. 
Finally,  the  trees  in  the  garden  of  God  who 
envy  the  luxuriant  pride  of  this  monarch  of  the 
forest  represent  the  other  great  empires  of  the 
earth  who  vainly  aspired  to  emulate  the  pros- 
perity and  magnificence  of  Egypt  (vv.  3-9). 

In  the  next  strophe  (vv.  10-14)  we  see  the 
great  trunk  lying  prone  across  mountain  and 
valley,  while  its  branches  lie  broken  in  all  the 
water-courses.  A  "  mighty  one  of  the  nations  " 
(Nebuchadnezzar)  has  gone  up  against  it,  and 
felled  it  to  the  earth.  The  nations  have  been 
scared  from  under  its  shadow;  and  the  tree 
which  "  but  yesterday  might  have  stood  against 
the  world  "  now  lies  prostrate  and  dishonoured 
— "  none  so  poor  as  do  it  reverence."  And  the 
fall  of  the  cedar  reveals  a  moral  principle  and 
conveys  a  moral  lesson  to  all  other  proud  and 
stately  trees.  Its  purpose  is  to  remind  the  other 
*  It  is  only  fair  to  say  that  .the  construction  "  a  T'asshur, 
a  cedar,"  or,  still  more,  "  a  T'asshur  of  a  cedar,"  is  some- 
what harsh.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  word  "  cedar  " 
may  have  been  added  after  the  reading  "  Ass^Tinn  •"  had 
been  established,  in  order  to  complete  the  sense. 


Ezekiel  xxix.-xxxii.] 


EGYPT. 


291 


great  empires  that  they  too  are  mortal,  and  to 
warn  them  against  the  soaring  ambition  and  lift- 
ing up  of  the  heart  which  had  brought  about  the 
humiliation  of  Egypt:  "that  none  of  the  trees 
by  the  water  should  exalt  themselves  in  stature 
or  shoot  their  tops  between  the  clouds,  and  that 
their  mighty  ones  should  not  stand  proudly  in 
their  loftiness  (all  who  are  fed  by  water);  for 
they  are  all  delivered  to  death,  to  the  under- 
world with  the  children  of  men,  to  those  that 
go  down  to  the  pit."  In  reality  there  is  no 
more  impressive  intimation  of  the  vanity  of 
earthly  glory  than  the  decay  of  those  mighty 
empires  and  civilisations  which  once  stood  in 
the  van  of  human  progress;  nor  is  there  a  fitter 
emblem  of  their  fate  than  the  sudden  crash  of 
some  great  forest  tree  before  the  woodman's 
axe. 

The  development  of  the  prophet's  thought, 
however,  here  reaches  a  point  where  it  breaks 
through  the  allegory,  which  has  been  hitherto 
consistently,  maintained.  All  nature  shudders  in 
sympathy  with  the  fallen  cedar:  the  deep  mourns 
and  withholds  her  screams  from  the  earth; 
Lebanon  is  clothed  with  blackness,  and  all  the 
trees  languish.  Egypt  was  so  much  a  part  of 
the  established  order  that  the  world  does  not 
know  itself  when  she  has  vanished.  While  this 
takes  place  on  earth,  the  cedar  itself  has  gone 
down  to  Sheol,  where  the  other  shades  of  van- 
ished dynasties  are  comforted  because  this 
mightiest  of  them  all  has  become  like  to  the 
rest.  This  is  the  answer  to  the  question  that  in- 
troduced the  allegory.  To  whom  art  thou  like? 
None  is  fit  to  be  compared  to  thee;  yet  "thou 
shalt  be  brought  down  with  the  trees  of  Eden 
to  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,  thou  shalt  lie 
in  the  midst  of  the  uncircumcised,  with  them 
that  are  slain  of  the  sword."  It  is  needless  to 
enlarge  on  this  ides,  which  is  out  of  keeping 
here,  and  is  more  adequately  treated  in  the  next 
chapter. 

Chap,  xxxii.  consists  of  two  lamentations  to 
be  chanted  over  the  fall  of  Egypt  by  the 
prophet  and  the  daughters  of  the  nations  (vv. 
16,  18).  The  first  (vv.  1-16)  describes  the  de- 
struction of  Pharaoh,  and  the  effect  which  is 
produced  on  earth;  while  the  second  (vv.  17-32) 
follows  his  shade  into  the  abode  of  the  dead, 
and  expatiates  on  the  welcome  that  awaits  him 
there.  Both  express  the  spirit  of  exultation  over 
a  fallen  foe,  which  was  one  of  the  uses  to 
which  elegiac  poetry  was  turned  amongst  the 
Hebrews.  The  first  passage,  however,  can 
hardly  be  considered  a  dirge  in  any  proper  sense 
of  the  word.  It  is  essential  to  a  true  elegy 
that  the  subject  of  it  should  be  conceived  as 
dead,  and  that  whether  serious  or  ironical  it 
should  celebrate  a  glory  that  has  passed  away. 
In  this  case  the  elegiac  note  (of  the  elegiac 
"  measure "  there  is  hardly  a  trace)  is  just 
struck  in  the  opening  line:  "  O  young  lion  of 
the  nations!"  (How)  "art  thou  undone!"  But 
this  is  not  sustained:  the  passage  immediately 
falls  into  the  style  of  direct  prediction  and 
threatening,  and  is  indeed  closely  parallel  to  the 
opening  prophecy  of  the  series  (chap.  xxix.). 
The  fundamental  image  is  the  same:  that  of  a 
great  Nile  monster  spouting  from  his  nostrils 
and  fouling  the  waters  with  his  feet  (ver.  2). 
His  rapture  by  many  nations  and  his  lingering 
death  on  the  open  field  are  described  with  the 
realistic  and  ghastly  details  naturally  suggested 


by  the  figure  (vv.  3-6).  The  image  is  then  ab- 
ruptly changed  in  order  to  set  forth  the  eflfect 
of  so  great  a  calamity  on  the  world  of  nature 
and  of  mankind.  Pharaoh  is  compared  to  a 
brilliant  luminary,  whose  sudden  extinction  is 
followed  by  a  darkening  of  all  the  lights  of 
heaven  and  by  consternation  amongst  the  na- 
tions and  kings  of  earth  (vv.  7-10).  It  is  thought 
by  some  that  the  violence  of  the  transition  is 
to  be  explained  by  the  idea  of  the  heavenly 
constellation  of  the  dragon,  answering  to  the 
dragon  of  the  Nile,  to  which  Egypt  has  just 
been  likened.*  Finally  all  metaphors  are 
abandoned,  and  the  desolation  of  Egypt  is  an- 
nounced in  literal  terms  as  accomplished  by  the 
sword  of  the  king  of  Babylon  and  the  "  most 
terrible  of  the  nations"  (vv.   11-16). 

But  all  the  foregoing  orac'es  are  surpassed  in 
grandeur  of  conception  by  the  remarkable  Vision 
of  Hades  which  concludes  the  series — "  one  of 
the  most  weird  passages  in  literature  "  (David- 
son). In  form  it  is  a  dirge  supposed  to  be 
sung  at  the  burial  of  Pharaoh  and  his  host  by 
the  prophet  along  with  the  daughters  of  famous 
nations  (ver.  18).  But  the  theme,  as  has  been 
already  observed,  is  the  entrance  of  the  de- 
ceased warriors  into  the  under-world,  and  their 
reception  by  the  shades  that  have  gone  down 
thither  before  them.  In  order  to  understand  it 
we  must  bear  in  mind  some  features  of  the  con- 
ception of  the  under-world,  which  it  is  difficult 
for  the  modern  mind  to  realise  distinctly.  First 
of  all,  Sheol,  or  the  "  pit,"  the  realm  of  the 
dead,  is  pictured  to  the  imagination  as  an  adum- 
bration of  the  grave  or  sepulchre,  in  which  the 
body  finds  its  last  resting-place;  or  rather  it 
is  the  aggregate  of  all  the  burying-grounds 
scattered  over  the  earth's  surface.  There  the 
shades  are  grouped  according  to  their  clans  and 
nationalities,  just  as  on  earth  the  members  of 
the  same  family  would  usually  be  interred  in 
one  burying-place.  The  grave  of  the  chief  or 
king,  the  representative  of  the  nation,  is  sur- 
rounded by  those  of  his  vassals  and  subjects, 
earthly  distinctions  being  thus  far  preserved. 
The  condition  of  the  dead  appears  to  be  one  of 
rest  or  sleep;  yet  they  retain  some  conscious- 
ness of  their  state,  and  are  visited  at  least  by 
transient  gleams  of  human  emotion,  as  when  in 
this  chapter  the  heroes  rouse  themselves  to  ad- 
dress the  Pharaoh  when  he  comes  among  them. 
The  most  material  point  is  that  the  state  of 
the  soul  in  Hades  reflects  the  fate  of  the  body 
after  death.  Those  who  have  received  the  hon- 
our of  decent  burial  on  earth  enjoy  a  corre- 
sponding honour  among  the  shades  below.  They 
have,  as  it  were,  a  definite  status  and  individual- 
ity in  their  eternal  abode,  whilst  the  spirits  of 
the  unburied  slain  are  laid  in  the  lowest  recesses 
of  the  pit,  in  the  limbo  of  the  uncircumcised. 
On  this  distinction  the  whole  significance  of  the 
passage  before  us  seems  to  depend.  The  dead 
are  divided  into  two  great  classes:  on  the  one 
hand  the  "  mighty  ones,"  who  lie  in  state  with 
their  weapons  of  war  around  them;  and  on  the 
other  hand  the  multitude  of  "  the  uncircum- 
cised,f  slain  by  the  sword  " — i.  e.,  those  who 
have   perished   on   the   field   of  battle   and   been 

♦SeeSmend  on  the  passage.  Dr.  Davidson,  however, 
doubts  the  possibility  of  this  :  see  his  commentary. 

t  This  use  of  the  word  "  uncircumcised  "  is  peculiar. 
The  idea  seems  to  be  that  circumcision,  among  nations 
which  like  the  Israelites  practised  the  rite,  was  an  indis- 
pensable mark  of  membership  in  the  community  :  and 
those  who  lacked  this  mark  were  treated  as  social  outcasts 


292 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


huried  promiscuously  without  due  funeral  rites.* 
There  is,  however,  no  moral  distinction  between 
the  two  classes.  The  heroes  are  not  in  a  state  of 
blessedness;  nor  is  the  condition  of  the  uncir- 
cumcised  one  of  acute  suffering.  The  whole  of 
existence  in  Sheol  is  essentially  of  one  character; 
it  is  on  the  whole  a  pitiable  existence,  destitute 
of  joy  and  of  all  that  makes  up  the  fulness  of 
life  on  earth.  Only  there  is  "  within  that  deep 
a  lower  deep,"  and  it  is  reserved  for  those  who 
in  the  manner  of  their  death  have  experienced 
the  penalty  of  great  wickedness.  The  moral 
truth  of  Ezekiel's  representation  lies  here.  The 
real  judgment  of  Egypt  was  enacted  in  the  his- 
torical scene  of  its  final  overthrow;  and  it  is 
the  consciousness  of  this  tremendous  visitation 
of  divine  justice,  perpetuated  amongst  the  shades 
to  all  eternity,  that  gives  ethical  sienificance 
to  the  lot  assigned  to  the  nation  in  the  other 
world.  At  the  same  time  it  should  not  be  over- 
looked that  the  passage  is  in  the  highest  degree 
poetical,  and  cannot  be  taken  as  an  exact  state- 
ment of  what  was  known  or  believed  about  the 
state  after  death  in  Old  Testament  times.  It 
deals  only  with  the  fate  of  armies  and  nationali- 
ties and  great  warriors  who  filled  the  earth  with 
their  renown.  These,  having  vanished  from 
history,  preserve  through  all  time  in  the  under- 
world the  memory  of  Jehovah's  mighty  acts  of 
judgment;  but  it  is  impossible  to  determine 
whether  this  sublime  vision  implies  a  real  belief 
in  the  persistence  of  national  identities  in  the 
region  of  the  dead. 

These,  then,  are  the  principal  ideas  on  which 
the  ode  is  based,  and  the  course  of  thought  is 
as  follows.  Ver.  18  briefly  announces  the  oc- 
casion for  which  the  dirge  is  composed;  it  is 
to  celebrate  the  passage  of  Pharaoh  and  his  host 
to  the  lower  world,  and  consign  him  to  his  ap- 
pointed place  there.  Then  follows  a  scene  which 
has  a  certain  resemblance  to  a  well-known  rep- 
resentation in  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  Isaiah 
(vv.  9-1 1).  The  heroes  who  occupy  the  place 
of  honour  among  the  dead  are  supposed  to  rouse 
themselves  at  the  approach  of  this  great  multi- 
tude, and  hailing  them  from  the  midst  of  Sheol, 
direct  them  to  their  proper  place  amongst  the 
dishonoured  slain.  "  The  mighty  ones  speak  to 
him:  '  Be  thou  in  the  recesses  of  the  pit:  whom 
dost  thou  excel  in  beauty?  Go  down  and  be 
laid  to  rest  with  the  uncircumcised,  in  the  midst 
of  them  that  are  slain  with  the  sword.'  "  f 
Thither  Pharaoh  has  been  preceded  by  other 
great  conquerors  who  once  set  their  terror  in 
the  earth,  but  now  bear  their  shame  amongst 
those  that  go  down  to  the  pit.  For  there  is 
Asshur  and  all  his  company;  there  too  are  Elam 
and  Meshech  and  Tubal,  each  occupying  its  own 
allotment  amongst  nations  that  have  perished 
by  the  sword  (vv.  22-26).  Not  theirs  is  the  en- 
viable lot  of  the  heroes  of  old  timet  who  went 
down  to  Sheol  in  their  panoply  of  war,  and  rest 
with  their  swords  under  their  heads  and  their 

not  entitled  to  honourable  sepulture.  Hence  the  word 
could  be  used,  as  here,  in  the  sense  of  unhallowed. 

*  Cf.  Isa.  xiv.  18-20:  "  All  of  the  kings  of  the  nations,  all  of 
them,  sleep  in  glory,  every  one  in  his  own  house.  But  thou 
art  cast  forth  away  from  thy  sepulchre,  like  an  abomina- 
ble branch,  clothed,  with  the  slam,  that  are  thrust  through 
with  the  sword,  that  go  down  to  the  stones  of  the  pit  ;  as 
a  carcase  trodden  underfoot.  Thou  shalt  not  be  joined 
with  them  in  burial,"  etc 

"tThe  text  of  these  verses  (iq-2i>  is  in  some  confusion. 
The  above  is  a  translation  of  the  reading  proposed  by 
Cornill.  who  in  the  main  follows  the  LXX 

X  LXX.  D^iyO  for  D^iyO  =  "  of  the  uncircumcised." 


shields  *  covering  their  bones.  And  so  Egypt, 
which  has  perished  like  these  other  nations, 
must  be  banished  with  them  to  the  bottom  of 
the  pit  (vv.  2"],  28).  The  enumeration  of  the 
nations  of  the  uncircumcised  is  then  resumed; 
Israel's  immediate  neighbours  are  amongst 
them — Edom  and  the  dynasties  of  the  north  (the 
Syrians),  and  the  Phoenicians,  inferior  states 
which  played  no  great  part  as  conquerors,  but 
nevertheless  perished  in  battle  and  bear  their 
humiliation  along  with  the  others  (vv.  29,  30). 
These  are  to  be  Pharaoh's  companions  in  his 
last  resting-place,  and  at  the  sight  of  them  he 
will  lay  aside  his  presumptuous  thoughts  and 
comfort  himself  over  the  loss  of  his  mighty 
army  (vv.  31  f.). 

It  is  necessary  to  say  a  few  words  in  conclu- 
sion about  the  historical  evidence  for  the  ful- 
filment of  these  prophecies  on  Egypt.  The  sup- 
plementary oracle  of  chap.  xxix.  17-21  shows 
us  that  the  threatened  invasion  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  not  taken  place  sixteen  years  after 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  Did  it  ever  take  place 
at  all?  Ezekiel  was  at  that  time  confident  that 
his  words  were  on  the  point  of  being  fulfilled, 
and  indeed  he  seems  to  stake  his  credit  with  his 
hearers  on  their  verification.  Can  we  suppose 
that  he  was  entirely  mistaken?  Is  it  likely  that 
the  remarkably  definite  predictions  uttered  both 
by  him  and  Jeremiah  f  failed  of  even  the  partial 
fulfilment  which  that  on  Tyre  received?  A 
number  of  critics  have  strongly  maintained  that 
we  are  shut  up  by  the  historical  evidence  to 
this  conclusion.  They  rely  chiefly  on  the  silence 
of  Herodotus,  and  on  the  unsatisfactory  char- 
acter of  the  statement  of  Josephus.  The  latter 
writer  is  indeed  sufficiently  explicit  in  his  af- 
firmations. He  tells  usj  that  five  years  after 
the  capture  of  Jerusalem  Nebuchadnezzar  in- 
vaded Egypt,  put  to  death  the  reigning  king, 
appointed  another  in  his  stead,  and  carried  the 
Jewish  refugees  in  Egypt  captive  to  Babylon. 
But  it  is  pointed  out  that  the  date  is  impossible, 
being  inconsistent  with  Ezekiel's  own  testimony, 
that  the  account  of  the  death  of  Hophra  is  con- 
tradicted by  what  we  know  of  the  matter  from 
other  sources  (Herodotus  and  Diodorus),  and 
that  the  whole  passage  bears  the  appeararice  of 
a  translation  into  history  of  the  prophecies  of 
Jeremiah  which  it  professes  to  substantiate.  That 
is  vigorous  criticism,  but  the  vigour  is  perhaps 
not  altogether  unwarrantable,  especially  as  Jo- 
sephus does  not  mention  any  authority.  Other 
allusions  by  secular  writers  hardly  count  for 
much,  and  the  state  of  the  question  is  such  that 
historians  would  probably  have  been  content  to 
confess  their  ignorance  if  the  credit  of  a  prophet 
had  not  been  mixed  up  with  it. 

Within  the  last  seventeen  years,  however,  a 
new  turn  has  been  given  to  the  discussion 
through  the  discovery  of  monumental  evidence 
which  was  thought  to  have  an  important  bearing 
on  the  point  in  dispute.  In  the  same  volume 
of  an  Egyptological  magazine^  Wiedemann 
directed  the  attention  of  scholars  to  two  inscrip- 
tions, one  in  the  Louvre  and  the  other  in  the 
British  Museum,  both  of  which  he  considered 
to  furnish  proof  of  an  occupation  of  Egypt  by 

*  "  Shields,"  a  conjecture  of  Cornill,  seems  to  be 
demanded  bv  the  parallelism. 

tjer.  xliii  '8-13;  xliv.  12-14.  27-30;  xlvi.  13-26. 

1  "  Antt.,"  X.  ix.  7.  a        ji 

§  Zeitschrift  fur  Aegyptische  Sprache,  1878,  pp.  2  ff.  ana 
pp.  87  ff. 


Ezekiel  xxxiii.] 


THE    PROPHET    A    WATCHMAN. 


293 


Nebucliadnczzar.  The  first  was  an  Egyptian  in- 
scription of  the  reign  of  Hophra.  It  was  written 
by  an  official  of  the  highest  rank,  named  "  Nes- 
hor,"  to  whom  was  entrusted  the  responsible 
task  of  defending  Egypt  on  its  southern  or 
Ethiopian  frontier.  According  to  Wiedemann's 
translation,  it  relates  among  other  things  an  ir- 
ruption of  Asiatic  bands  (Syrians,  people  of  the 
north,  Asiatics),  which  penetrated  as  far  as  the 
first  cataract,  and  did  some  damage  to  the  temple 
of  Chnum  in  Elephantine.  There  they  were 
checked  by  Nes-hor,  and  afterwards  they  were 
crushed  or  repelled  by  Hophra  himself.  Now 
the  most  natural  explanation  of  thi.s'  incident,  in 
connection  with  the  circumstances  of  the  time, 
would  seem  to  be  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  finding 
himself  fully  occupied  for  the  present  with  the 
siege  of  Tyre,  incited  roving  bands  of  Arabs 
and  Syrians  to  plunder  Egypt,  and  that  they 
succeeded  so  far  as  to  penetrate  to  the  extreme 
south  of  the  country.  But  a  more  recent  ex- 
amination of  the  text,  by  Maspero  and  Brugsch,* 
reduces  the  incident  to  much  smaller  dimen- 
sions. They  find  that  it  refers  to  a  mutiny  of 
Egyptian  mercenaries  (Syrians,  lonians,  and 
Bedouins)  stationed  on  the  southern  frontier. 
The  governor,  Nes-hor,  congratulates  himself 
on  a  successful  stratagem  by  which  he  got  the 
rebels  into  a  position  where  they  were  cut  down 
by  the  king's  troops.  In  any  case  it  is  evi- 
dent that  it  falls  very  far  short  of  a  confirma- 
tion of  Ezekiel's  prophecy.  Not  only  is  there 
no  mention  of  Nebuchadnezzar  or  a  regular 
Babylonian  army,  but  the  invaders  or  mutineers 
are  actually  said  to  have  been  annihilated  by 
Hophra.  It  may  be  said,  no  doubt,  that  an 
Egyptian  governor  was  likely  to  be  silent  about 
an  event  which  cast  discredit  on  his  country's 
arms,  and  would  be  tempted  to  magnify  some 
temporary  success  into  a  decisive  victory.  But 
still  the  inscription  must  be  taken  for  what  it 
is  worth,  and  the  story  it  tells  is  certainly  not 
the  story  of  a  Chaldean  supremacy  in  the  val- 
ley of  the  Nile.  The  only  thing  that  suggests 
a  connection  between  the  two  is  the  general 
probability  that  a  campaign  against  Egypt  must 
have  been  contemplated  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
about  that  time. 

The  second  and  more  important  document  is 
a  cuneiform  fragment  of  the  annals  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. It  is  unfortunately  in  a  very  muti- 
lated condition,  and  all  that  the  Assyriologists 
have  made  out  is  that  in  the  thirty-seventh  year 
of  his  reign  Nebuchadnezzar  fought  a  battle  with 
the  king  of  Egypt.  As  the  words  of  the  in- 
scription are  those  of  Nebuchadnezzar  himself, 
we  may  presume  that  the  battle  ended  in  a  vic- 
tory for  him,  and  a  few  disconnected  words  in 
the  latter  part  are  thought  to  refer  to  the  tribute 
or  booty  which  he  acquired.f  The  thirty-sev- 
enth year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  the  year  568 
B.  c,  about  two  years  after  the  date  of  Ezekiel's 
last  utterance  against  Egypt.  The  Egyptian 
king  at  this  time  was  Amasis,  whose  name  (only 
the  last  syllable  of  which  is  legible)  is  supposed 
to  be  that  mentioned  in  the  inscription.];     What 

*  Zeitschrift  filr  Aegyptische  Sprache,   1884,   pp.  87  ff., 

93  ff- 

t  See  Schrader,  "  Keilinschriftliche  Bibliothek,"  III.  ii., 
pp.  140  f. 

X  The  hypothesis  of  a  joint  reign  of  Hophra  and  Amasis 
from  570  to  564  ("Wiedemann)  may  or  may  not  be  necessary 
to  establish  a  connection  between  the  Babylonian  inscrip- 
tion and  that  of  Nes-hor  ;  it  is  certain  that  Amasis  began 
to  reign  in  570,  and  that  Hophra  is  not  the  Pharaoh 
mentioned  by  Nebuchadnezzar. 


the  ulterior  consequences  of  this  victory  were 
on  Egyptian  history,  or  how  long  the  Baby- 
lonian domination  lasted,  we  cannot  at  present 
say.  These  are  questions  on  which  we  may 
reasonably  look  for  further  light  from  the  re- 
searches of  Assyriology.  In  the  meantime  it 
appears  to  be  established  beyond  reasonable 
doubt  that  Nebuchadnezzar  did  attack  Egypt, 
and  the  probable  issue  of  his  expedition  was  in 
accordance  with  Ezekiel's  last  prediction:  "Be- 
hold. I  give  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Baby- 
lon, the  land  of  Egypt;  and  he  sKall  spoil  her 
spoil,  and  plunder  her  plunder,  and  it  shall  be 
the  wages  for  his  army"  (xxix.  19).  There  can 
of  course  be  no  question  of  a  fulfilment  of  the 
earlier  prophecies  in  their  literal  terms.  History 
knows  nothing  of  a  total  captivity  of  the  popu- 
lation of  Egypt,  or  a  blank  of  forty  years  in  her 
annals  when  her  land  was  untrodden  by  the  foot 
of  man  or  of  beast.  These  are  details  belong- 
ing to  the  dramatic  form  in  which  the  prophet 
clothed  the  spiritual  lesson  which  it  was  neces- 
sary to  impress  on  his  countrymen — the  inherent 
weakness  of  the  Egyptian  empire  as  a  power 
based  on  material  resources  and  rearing  itself 
in  opposition  to  the  great  ends  of  God's  king- 
dom. And  it  may  well  have  been  that  for  the 
illustration  of  that  truth  the  humiliation  that 
Egypt  endured  at  the  hands  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  as  effective  as  her  total  destruction  would 
have  been. 


PART    IV. 
THE  FORMATION  OF  THE  NEW  ISRAEL. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE   PROPHET   A    WATCHMAN. 

Ezekiel  xxxiii. 

One  day  in  January  of  the  year  586  the  tidings 
circulated  through  the  Jewish  colony  at  Tel-abib 
that  "  the  city  was  smitten."  The  rapidity  with 
which  in  the  East  intelligence  is  transmitted 
through  secret  channels  has  often  excited  the 
surprise  of  European  observers.  In  this  case 
there  is  no  extraordinary  rapidity  to  note,  for 
the  fate  of  Jerusalem  had  been  decided  nearly 
six  months  before  it  was  known  in  Babylon.* 
But  it  is  remarkable  that  the  first  intimation  of 
the  issue  of  the  siege  was  brought  to  the  exiles 
by  one  of  their  own  countrymen,  who  had  es- 
caped at  the  capture  of  the  city.  It  is  probable 
that  the  messenger  did  not  set  out  at  once,  but 
waited  until  he  could  bring  some  information  as 
to  how  matters  were  settling  down  after  the  war. 
Or  he  may  have  been  a  captive  who  had  trudged 
the  weary  road  to  Babylon  in  chains  under  the 
escort  of   Nebuzaradan,   captain   of  the   guard,  f 

*  Jerusalem  was  taken  in  the  fourth  month  of  the 
eleventh  year  of  Zedekiah  or  of  Ezekiel's  captivity.  The 
announcement  reached  Ezekiel,  according  to  the  reading 
of  the  Hebrew  text,  in  the  tenth  month  of  the  twelfth 
year  (ch.  xxxiii.  21)— that  is,  about  eighteen  months  after 
the  event.  It  is  hardly  credible  that  the  transmission  of 
the  news  should  have  been  delayed  so  long  as  this  ;  and 
therefore  the  reading  "eleventh  year,"  found  in  some 
manuscripts  and  in  the  Syriac  Version,  is  now  generally 
regarded  as  correct. 

t  Jer.  xxxix.  9. 


294 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


and  afterwards  succeeded  in  making  his  escape 
to  the  older  settlement  where  Ezekiel  lived.  All 
we  know  is  that  his  message  was  not  delivered 
with  the  despatch  which  would  have  been  pos- 
sible if  his  journey  had  been  unimpeded,  and  that 
in  the  meantime  the  official  intelligence  which 
must  have  already  reached  Babylon  had  not 
transpired  among  the  exiles  who  were  waiting 
so  anxiously  for  tidings  of  the  fate  of  Jeru- 
salem.* 

The  immediate  efifect  of  the  announcement  on 
the  mind  of  the  exiles  is  not  recorded.  It  was 
doubtless  received  with  all  the  signs  of  public 
mourning  which  Ezekiel  had  anticipated  and 
foretold. t  They  would  require  some  time  to  ad- 
just themselves  to  a  situation  for  which,  in  spite 
of  all  the  warnings  that  had  been  sent  them, 
they  were  utterly  unprepared;  and  it  must  have 
been  uncertain  at  first  what  direction  their 
thoughts  would  take.  Would  they  carry  out 
their  half-formed  intention  of  abandoning  their 
national  faith  and  assimilating  themselves  to 
the  surrounding  heathenism?  Would  they  sink 
into  the  lethargy  of  despair,  and  pine  away  under 
a  confused  consciousness  of  guilt?  Or  would 
they  repent  of  their  unbelief,  and  turn  to  em- 
brace the  hope  which  God's  mercy  held  out  to 
them  in  the  teaching  of  the  prophet  whom  they 
had  despised?  All  this  was  for  the  moment  un- 
certain; but  one  thing  was  certain — they  could  no 
more  return  to  the  attitude  of  complacent  indif- 
ference and  incredulity  in  which  they  had 
hitherto  resisted  the  word  of  Jehovah.  The  day 
on  which  the  tidings  of  the  city's  destruction  fell 
like  a  thunderbolt  in  the  community  of  Tel-abib 
was  the  turning-point  of  Ezekiel's  ministry.  In 
the  arrival  of  the  "  fugitive  "  he  recognises  the 
sign  which  was  to  break  the  spell  of  silence 
which  had  lain  so  long  upon  him,  and  set  him 
free  for  the  ministry  of  consolation  and  upbuild- 
ing which  was  henceforth  to  be  his  chief  voca- 
tion. A  presentiment  of  what  was  coming  had 
visited  him  the  evening  before  his  interview 
with  the  messenger,  and  from  that  time  "  his 
mouth  was  opened,  and  he  was  no  more  dumb  " 
(ver.  22).  Hitherto  he  had  preached  to  deaf 
ears,  and  the  echo  of  his  ineffectual  appeals  had 
come  back  in  a  deadening  sense  of  failure  which 
had  paralysed  his  activity.  But  now  in  one 
moment  the  veil  of  prejudice  and  vain  self-con- 
fidence is  torn  from  the  heart  of  his  hearers,  and 
gradually  but  surely  the  whole  burden  of  his 
message  must  disclose  itself  to  their  intelligence. 
The  time  has  come  to  work  for  the  formation  of 
a  new  Israel,  and  a  new  spirit  of  hopefulness 
stimulates  the  prophet  to  throw  himself  eagerly 
into  the  career  which  is  thus  opened  up  before 
him. 

It  may  be  well  at  this  point  to  try  to  realise 
the  state  of  mind  which  emerged  amongst 
Ezekiel's  hearers  after  the  first  shock  of  con- 
sternation had  passed  away.  The  seven  chapters 
(xxxiii.-xxxix.)  with  which  we  are  to  be  occu- 
pied in  this  section  all  belong  to  the  second 
period  of  the  prophet's  work,  and  in  all  probabil- 
ity to  the  earlier  part  of  that  period.  It  is  ob- 
vious, however,  that  they  were  not  written 
under  the  first  impulse  of  the  tidings  of  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem.  They  contain  allusions  to  certain 
changes  which  must  have   occupied   some  time; 

*  It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  word  happaUt,  "  the 
fugitive,"  may  be  used  in  a  collective  sense,  of  the  whole 
body  of  captives  carried  away  after  the  destruction  of  the 
city. 

t  Ch.  xxiv.  21-24. 


and  simultaneously  a  change  took  place  in  the 
temper  of  the  people  resulting  ultim.ately  in  a  defi- 
nite spiritual  situation  to  which  the  prophet  had 
to  address  himself.  It  is  this  situation  which 
we  have  to  try  to  understand.  It  supplies  the 
external  conditions  of  Ezekiel's  ministry,  and 
unless  we  can  in  some  measure  interpret  it  we 
shall  lose  the  full  meaning  of  his  teaching  in  this 
important  period  of  his  ministry. 

At  the  outset  we  may  glance  at  the  state  of 
those  who  were  left  in  the  land  of  Israel,  who 
in  a  sense  formed  part  of  Ezekiel's  audience. 
The  very  first  oracle  uttered  by  him  after  he 
had  received  his  emancipation  was  a  threat  of 
judgment  against  these  survivors  of  the  nation's 
calamity  (vv.  23-29).  The  fact  that  this  is  re- 
corded in  connection  with  the  interview  with  the 
"  fugitive  "  may  mean  that  the  information  on 
which  it  is  based  was  obtained  from  that  some- 
what shadowy  personage.  Whether  in  this  way 
or  through  some  later  channel,  Ezekiel  had  ap- 
parently some  knowledge  of  the  disastrous  feuds 
which  had  followed  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
These  events  are  minutely  described  in  the  end 
of  the  book  of  Jeremiah  (chaps,  xl.-xliv.).  With 
a  clemency  which  in  the  circumstances  is  sur- 
prising the  king  of  Babylon  had  allowed  a  small 
remnant  of  the  people  to  settle  in  the  land,  and 
had  appointed  over  them  a  native  governor, 
Gedaliah,  the  son  of  Ahikam,  who  fixed  his  resi- 
dence at  Mizpah.  The  prophet  Jeremiah  elected 
to  throw  in  his  lot  with  this  remnant,  and  for  a 
time  it  seemed  as  if  through  peaceful  submission 
to  the  Chaldsean  supremacy  all  might  go  well 
with  the  survivors.  The  chiefs  who  had  con- 
ducted the  guerilla  warfare  in  the  open  against 
the  Babylonian  army  came  in  and  placed  them- 
selves under  the  protection  of  Gedaliah,  and 
there  was  every  prospect  that  by  refraining  from 
projects  of  rebellion  they  might  be  left  to  enjoy 
the  fruits  of  the  land  without  disturbance.  But 
this  was  not  to  be.  Certain  turbulent  spirits 
under  Ishmael,  a  member  of  the  royal  family, 
entered  into  a  conspiracy  with  the  king  of  Am- 
mon  to  destroy  this  last  refuge  of  peace-loving 
Israelites.  Gedaliah  was  treacherously  murdered; 
and  although  the  murder  was  partially  avenged, 
Ishmael  succeeded  in  making  his  escape  to  the 
Ammonites,  while  the  remains  of  the  party  of 
order,  dreading  the  vengeance  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar, took  their  departure  for  Egypt  and  carried 
Jeremiah  forcibly  with  them.  What  happened 
after  this  we  do  not  know;  but  it  is  not  improb- 
able that  Ishmael  and  his  followers  may  have 
held  possession  of  the  land  by  force  for  some 
years.  We  read  of  a  fresh  deportation  of 
Judsean  captives  to  Babylon  five  years  after  the 
capture  of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  Hi.  30) ;  and  this  may 
have  been  the  result  of  an  expedition  to  suppress 
the  depredations  of  the  robber  band  that  Ishmael 
had  gathered  round  him.  How  much  of  this 
story  had  reached  the  ears  of  Ezekiel  we  do 
not  know;  but  there  is  one  allusion  in  his  oracle 
which  makes  it  probable  that  he  had  at  least 
heard  of  the  assassination  of  Gedaliah.  Those 
he  addresses  are  men  who  "  stand  upon 
their  sword " — that  is  to  say,  they  hold  that 
might  is  right,  and  glory  in  deeds  of  blood 
and  violence  that  gratify  their  passionate  de- 
sire for  revenge.  Such  language  could  hardly 
be  used  of  any  section-  of  the  remaining  popula- 
tion of  Judrea  except  the  lawless  banditti  that 
enrolled  themselves  under  the  banner  of  Ish- 
mael, the  son  of  Nethaniah. 


Kzekiel  xxxiii.j 


THE    PROPHET    A    WATCHMAN. 


295 


What  Ezekiel  is  mainly  concerned  with,  how- 
ever, is  the  moral  and  religious  condition  of 
those  to  whom  he  speaks.  Strange  to  say,  they 
were  animated  by  a  species  of  religious  fanati- 
cism, which  led  them  to  regard  themselves  as 
the  legitimate  heirs  to  whom  the  reversion  of 
the  land  of  Israel  belonged.  "  Abraham  was 
one,"  so  reasoned  these  desperadoes,  "  and  yet 
he  inherited  the  land:  but  we  are  many;  to  us 
the  land  is  given  for  a  possession  "  (ver.  24). 
Their  meaning  is  that  the  smallness  of  their  num- 
ber is  no  argument  against  the  validity  of  their 
claim  to  the  heritage  of  the  land.  They  are  still 
many  in  comparison  with  the  solitary  patriarch 
to  whom  it  was  first  promised;  and  if  he  was 
multiplied  so  as  to  take  possession  of  it,  why 
should  they  hesitate  to  claim  the  mastery  of 
it?  This  thought  of  the  wonderful  multiplica- 
tion of  Abraham's  seed  after  he  had  received  the 
promise  seems  to  have  laid  fast  hold  ot  the  men 
of  that  generation.  It  is  applied  by  the  great 
teacher  who  stands  next  to  Ezekiel  in  the  pro- 
phetic succession  to  comfort  the  little  flock  who 
followed  after  righteousness  and  could  hardly  ~ 
believe  that  it  was  God's  good  pleasure  to  give 
them  the  kingdom.  "  Look  unto  Abraham  your 
father,  and  unto  Sarah  that  bare  you:  for  I 
called  him  alone,  and  blessed  him,  and  increased 
him  "  (Isa.  li.  2).  The  words  of  the  infatuated 
men  who  exulted  in  the  havoc  they  were  mak- 
ing on  the  mountains  of  Judrea  may  sound  to 
us  like  a  blasphemous  travesty  of  this  argument; 
but  they  were  no  doubt  seriously  meant.  They 
afford  one  more  instance  of  the  boundless  ca- 
pacity of  the  Jewish  race  for  religious  self-de- 
lusion, and  their  no  less  remarkable  insensibil- 
ity to  that  in  which  the  essence  of  religion  lay. 
The  men  who  uttered  this  proud  boast  were  the 
precursors  of  those  who  in  the  days  of  the  Bap- 
tist thought  to  say  within  thernselves,  "  We  have 
Abraham  to  our  father,"  not  understanding  that 
God  was  able  "  of  these  stones  to  raise  up  chil- 
dren to  Abraham"  (Matt.  iii.  9).  All  the  while 
they  were  perpetuating  the  evils  for  which  the 
judgment  of  God  had  descended  on  the  city  and 
the  Hebrew  state.  Idolatry,  ceremonial  impur- 
ity, bloodshed,  and  adultery  were  rife  amongst 
them  (vv.  25,  26) ;  and  no  misgiving  seems  to 
Viave  entered  their  minds  that  because  of  these 
things  the  wrath  of  God  comes  on  the  children 
of  disobedience.  And  therefore  the  prophet  re- 
pudiates their  pretensions  with  indignation. 
"Shall  ye  possess  the  land?"  Their  conduct 
simply  showed  that  judgment  had  not  had 
its  perfect  work,  and  that  Jehovah's  purpose 
would  not  be  accomplished  until  "  the  land  was 
laid  waste  and  desolate,  and  the  pomp  of  her 
strength  should  cease,  and  the  mountains  of 
Israel  be  desolate,  so  that  none  passed  through  " 
(ver.  28).  We  have  seen  that  in  all  likelihood 
this  prediction  was  fulfilled  by  a  punitive  expe- 
dition from  Babylonia  in  the  twenty-third  year 
of  Nebuchadnezzar. 

But  we  knew  before  that  Ezekiel  expected  no 
good  thing  to  come  of  the  survivors  of  the 
judgment  in  Judjea.  His  hope  was  in  those  who 
had  passed  through  the  fires  of  banishment,  the 
nren  amongst  whom  his  own  work  lay,  and 
amongst  whom  he  looked  for  the  first  signs  of 
the  outpouring  of  the  divine  Spirit.  We  must 
n  Dw  return  to  the  inner  circle  of  Ezekiel's  im- 
mediate hearers,  and  consider  the  change  which 
tl  le  calamitj-  had  produced  on  them.  The  cliap- 
t'.r  now  before  us  yields  two  glimpses  into  the 


inner  life  of  the  people  which  help  us  to  realise 
the  kind  of  men  with  whom  the  prophet  had  to 
do. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  interesting  tc;  learn 
that  in  his  more  frequent  public  appearances  the 
prophet  rapidly  acquired  a  considerable  reputa- 
tion as  a  popular  preacher  (vv.  30-33).  It  is 
true  that  the  interest  which  he  excited  was  not 
of  the  most  wholesome  kind.  It  became  a  fa- 
vourite amusement  of  the  people  hanging  about 
the  walls  and  doors  to  come  and  listen  to  the 
fervid  oratory  of  their  one  remaining  prophet 
as  he  declared  to  them  "  the  word  that  came 
forth  from  Jehovah."  It  is  to  be  feared  that 
the  substance  of  his  message  counted  for  little 
in  their  appreciative  and  critical  listening.  He 
was  to  them  "  as  a  very  lovely  song  of  one 
that  hath  a  pleasant  voice,  and  can  play  well 
on  an  instrument "  :  "  they  heard  his  words,  but 
did  them  not."  It  was  pleasant  to  subject 
oneself  now  and  then  to  the  influence  of  this 
powerful  and  heart-searching  preacher;  but 
somehow  the  heart  was  never  searched,  the  con- 
science was  never  stirred,  and  the  hearing  never 
ripened  into  serious  cdfiviction  and  settled  pur- 
pose of  amendment.  The  people  were  thor- 
oughly respectful  in  their  demeanour  and  ap- 
parently devout,  coming  in  crowds  and  sitting 
before  him  as  God's  people  should.  But  they 
were  preoccupied:  "their  heart  went  after  their 
gain  "  (ver.  31)  or  their  advantage.  Self-inter- 
est prevented  them  from  receiving  the  word  of 
God  in  honest  and  good  hearts,  and  no  change 
was  visible  in  their  conduct.  Hence  the  prophet 
is  not  disposed  to  regard  the  evidences  of  his 
newly  acquired  popularity  with  much  satisfac- 
tion. It  presents  itself  to  his  mind  as  a  danger 
against  which  he  has  to  be  on  his  guard.  He 
has  been  tried  by  opposition  and  apparent  fail- 
ure; now  he  is  exposed  to  the  more  insidious 
temptation  of  a  flattering  reception  and  super- 
ficial success.  It  is  a  tribute  to  his  power,  and 
an  opportunity  such  as  he  had  never  before  en- 
joyed. Whatever  may  have  been  the  case  here- 
tofore, he  is  now  sure  of  an  audience,  and  his 
position  has  suddenly  become  one  of  great  in- 
fluence in  the  community.  But  the  same  reso- 
lute confidence  in  the  truth  of  his  message 
which  sustained  Ezekiel  amidst  the  discourage- 
ments of  his  earlier  career  saves  him  now  from 
the  fatal  attractions  of  popularity  to  which  many 
men  in  similar  circumstances  have  yielded.  He 
is  not  deceived  by  the  favourable  disposition  of 
the  people  towards  himself,  nor  is  he  tempted 
to  cultivate  his  oratorical  gifts  with  a  view  to 
sustaining  their  admiration.  His  one  concern 
is  to  utter  the  word  that  shall  come  to  pass, 
and  so  to  declare  the  counsel  of  God  that  men 
shall  be  compelled  in  the  end  to  acknowledge 
that  he  has  been  "  a  prophet  among  them  "  (ver. 
33).  We  may  be  thankful  to  the  prophet  for 
this  little  glimpse  from  a  vanished  past — one  of 
those  touches  of  nature  that  make  the  whole 
world  kin.  But  we  ought  not  to  miss  its  ob- 
vious moral.  Ezekiel  is  the  prototype  of  all 
popular  preachers,  and  he  knew  their  peculiar 
trials.  He  was  perhaps  the  first  man  who 
ministered  regularly  to  an  attached  congrega- 
tion, who  came  to  hear  him  because  they  liked 
it  and  because  they  had  nothing  better  to  do. 
If  he  passed  unscathed  through  the  dangers  of 
the  position,  it  was  through  his  overpowering 
sense  of  the  reality  of  divine  things  and  the 
importance  of  men's  spiritual  destiny;  and  also 


296 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


we  may  add  through  his  fidelity  in  a  department 
of  ministerial  duty  which  popular  preachers  are 
sometimes  apt  to  neglect — the  duty  of  close  per- 
sonal dealing  with  individual  men  about  their 
sins  and  their  state  before  God.  To  this  subject 
we  shall  revert  by-and-by. 

This  passage  reveals  to  us  the  people  in  their 
lighter  moods,  when  they  are  able  to  cast  of? 
the  awful  burden  of  life  and  destiny  and  take 
advantage  of  such  sources  of  enjoyment  as  their 
circumstances  afforded.  Mental  dejection  in  a 
community,  from  whatever  cause  it  originates, 
is  rarely  continuous.  The  natural  elasticity  of 
the  mind  asserts  itself  in  the  most  depressing 
circumstances;  and  the  tension  of  almost  unen- 
durable sorrow  is  relieved  by  outbursts  of  un- 
natural gaiety.  Hence  we  need  not  be  surprised 
to  find  that  beneath  the  surface  levity  of  these 
exiles  there  lurked  the  feeling  of  despair  ex- 
pressed in  the  words  of  ver.  10  and  more  fully 
in  those  of  xxxvii.  ii:  "Our  transgressions  and 
our  sins  are  upon  us,  and  we  waste  away  in 
them:  how  should  we  then  live?"  "  Our  bones 
are  dried,  and  our  hope  is  lost:  we  are  cut  off." 
These  accents  of  desp#ndency  reflect  the  new 
mood  into  which  the  more  serious-minded  por- 
tion of  the  community  had  been  plunged  by  the 
calamities  that  had  befallen  them.  The  bitter- 
ness of  unavailing  remorse,  the  consciousness 
of  national  death,  had  laid  fast  hold  of  their 
spirits  and  deprived  them  of  the  power  of  hope. 
In  sober  truth  the  nation  was  dead  beyond  ap- 
parent hope  of  revival;  and  to  an  Israelite,  whose 
spiritual  interests  were  all  identified  with  those 
of  his  nation,  religion  had  no  power  of  conso- 
lation apart  from  a  national  future.  The  people 
therefore  abandoned  themselves  to  despair,  and 
hardened  themselves  against  the  appeals  which 
the  prophet  addressed  to  them  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah.  They  looked  on  themselves  as  the 
victims  of  an  inexorable  fate,  and  were  disposed 
perhaps  to  resent  the  call  to  repentance  as  a 
trifling  with  the  misery  of  the  unfortunate. 

And  yet,  although  this  state  of  mind  was  as 
far  removed  as  possible  from  the  godly  sorrow 
that  worketh  repentance,  it  was  a  step  towards 
the  accomplishment  of  the  promise  of  redemp- 
tion. For  the  present,  indeed,  it  rendered  the 
people  more  impenetrable  than  ever  to  the  word 
of  God.  But  it  meant  that  they  had  accepted 
in  principle  the  prophetic  interpretation  of  their 
history.  It  was  no  longer  possible  to  deny  that 
Jehovah  the  God  of  Israel  had  revealed  His 
secret  to  His  servants  the  prophets.  He  was 
not  such  a  Being  as  the  popular  imagination 
had  figured.  Israel  had  not  known  Him;  only 
the  prophets  had  spoken  of  Him  the  thing  that 
was  right.  Thus  for  the  first  time  a  general 
conviction  of  sin,  a  sense  of  being  in  the  wrong, 
was  produced  in  Israel.  That  this  conviction 
should  at  first  lead  to  the  verge  of  despair  was 
perhaps  inevitable.  The  people  were  not  famil- 
iar with  the  idea  of  the  divine  righteousness, 
and  could  not  at  once  perceive  that  anger  against 
sin  was  consistent  in  God  with  pity  for  the  sin- 
ner and  mercy  towards  the  contrite.  The  chief 
task  that  now  lay  before  the  prophet  was  to 
transform  their  attitude  of  sullen  impenitence 
into  one  of  submission  and  hope  by  teaching 
them  the  efificacy  of  repentance.  They  have 
learned  the  meaning  of  judgment;  they  have 
now  to  learn  the  possibility  and  the  conditions 
of  forgiveness.  And  this  can  only  be  taught  to 
them  through  a  revelation  of  the  free  and   in- 


finite grace  of  God.  who  has  "  no  pleasure  in 
the  death  of  the  wicked,  but  that  the  wicked 
should  turn  from  his  way  and  live"  (ver.  11). 
Only  thus  can  the  hard  and  stony  heart  be 
taken  away  from  their  flesh  and  a  heart  of  flesh 
given  to  them. 

We  can  now  understand  the  significance  of 
the  striking  passage  which  stands  as  the  intro- 
duction to  this  whole  section  of  the  book  (xxxiii. 
1-20).  At  this  juncture  of  his  ministry  Ezekiel's 
thoughts  went  back  on  an  aspect  of  his  pro- 
phetic vocation  which  had  hitherto  been  in  abey- 
ance. From  the  first  '  e  had  been  conscious  of 
a  certain  responsibility  for  the  fate  of  each  indi- 
vidual within  reach  of  his  words  (iii.  16-21). 
This  truth  had  been  one  of  the  keynotes  of  his 
ministry;  but  the  practical  developments  which 
it  suggested  had  been  hindered  by  the  solidarity 
of  the  opposition  which  he  had  encountered.  As 
long  as  Jerusalem  stood  the  exiles  had  been 
swayed  by  one  common  current  of  feeling — their 
thoughts  were  wholly  occupied  by  the  expecta- 
tion of  an  issue  that  would  annul  the  gloomy 
predictions  of  Ezekiel;  and  no  man  dared  to 
break  away  from  the  general  sentiment  and 
range  himself  on  the  side  of  God's  prophet. 
In  these  circumstances  anything  of  the  nature 
of  pastoral  activity  was  obviously  out  of  the 
question.  But  now  that  this  great  obstacle  to 
faith  was  removed  there  was  a  prospect  that 
the  solidity  of  popular  opinion  would  be  broken 
up,  so  that  the  word  of  God  might  find  an  en- 
trance here  and  there  into  susceptible  hearts. 
The  time  was  come  to  call  for  personal  deci- 
sions, to  appeal  to  each  man  to  embrace  for 
himself  the  offer  of  pardon  and  salvation.  Its 
watchword  might  have  been  found  in  words  ut- 
tered in  another  great  crisis  of  religious  destiny: 
'■  The  kingdom  of  heaven  sufifereth  violence,  and 
the  violent  take  it  by  force."  Out  of  such  "  vio- 
lent men,"  who  act  for  themselves  and  have  the 
courage  of  their  convictions,  the  new  people  of 
God  must  be  formed;  and  the  mission  of  the 
prophet  is  to  gather  round  him  all  those  who 
are  warned  by  his  words  to  "  flee  from  the  wrath 
to  come." 

Let  us  look  a  little  more  closely  at  the  teach- 
ing of  these  verses.  We  find  that  Ezekiel  re- 
states in  the  most  emphatic  manner  the  the- 
ological principles  which  underlie  this  new  de- 
velopmetjt   of  his   prophetic   duties    (vv.    10-20). 

These  principles  have  been  considered  already 
in  the  exposition  of  chap,  xviii. ;  and  it  is  not 
necessary  to  do  more  than  refer  to  them  here. 
They  are  such  as  these:  the  exact  and  absolute 
righteousness  of  God  in  His  dealings  with  in- 
dividuals; His  unwillingness  that  any  should  per- 
ish, and  His  desire  that  all  should  be  saved  and 
live;  the  necessity  of  personal  repentance;  the 
freedom  and  independence  of  the  individual  soul 
through  its  immediate  relation  to  God.  On  this 
closely  connected  body  of  evangelical  doctrine 
Ezekiel  bases  the  appeal  which  he  now  makes 
to  his  hearers.  What  we  are  specially  concerned 
with  here,  however,  is  the  direction  which  they 
imparted  to  his  activity.  We  may  study  in  the 
light  of  Ezekiel's  example  the  manner  in  which 
these  fundamental  truths  of  personal  religion  are 
to  be  made  effective  in  the  ministry  of  the  gospel 
for  the  building  up  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

The  general  conception  is  clearly  set  forth  in 
the  figure  of  the  watchman,  with  which  the  chap- 
ter opens  (vv.  1-9).  The  duties  of  the  watch- 
man are  simple,  but  responsible.     He  is  set  apart 


Ezekiel  xxxiii.] 


THE    PROPHET    A    WATCHMAN. 


297 


in  a  time  of  public  danger  to  warn  the  city  of 
the  approach  of  an  enemy.  The  citizens  trust 
him  and  go  about  their  ordinary  occupations  in 
security  so  long  as  the  trumpet  is  not  sounded. 
Should  he  sleep  at  his  post  or  neglect  to  give 
the  signal,  men  are  caught  unprepared  and  lives 
are  lost  through  his  fault.  Their  blood  is  re- 
quired at  the  watchman's  hand.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  gives  the  alarm  as  soon  as  he  sees 
the  sword  coming,  and  any  man  disregards  the 
warning  and  is  cut  down  in  his  iniquity,  his 
blood  is  upon  his  own  head.  Nothing  could 
be  clearer  than  this.  Ofifice  always  involves  re- 
sponsibility, and  no  responsibility ,  could  be 
greater  than  that  of  a  watchman  in  time  of  in- 
vasion. Those  who  sufTer  are  in  either  case  the 
citizens  whom  the  sword  cuts  off;  but  it  makes 
all  the  difference  in  the  world  whether  the  blame 
of  their  death  rests  on  themselves  for  their  fool- 
hardiness  or  on  the  watchman  for  his  unfaithful- 
ness. Such,  then,  as  Ezekiel  goes  on  to  ex- 
plain, is  his  own  position  as  a  prophet.  The 
prophet  is  one  who  sees  further  into  the  spirit- 
ual issues  of  things  than  other  men,  and  discov- 
ers the  coming  calamity  which  is  to  them  in- 
visible. We  must  notice  that  a  background  of 
danger  is  presupposed.  In  what  form  it  was 
to  come  is  not  indicated;  but  Ezekiel  knows 
that  judgment  follows  hard  at  the  heels  of  sin, 
and  seeing  sin  in  his  fellow-men  he  knows  that 
their  state  is  one  of  spiritual  peril.  The  prophet's 
course  therefore  is  clear.  His  business  is  to 
announce  as  in  trumpet  tones  the  doom  that 
hangs  over  every  man  who  persists  in  his  wick- 
edness, to  re-echo  the  divine  sentence  which 
he  alone  may  have  heard,  "  O  wicked  man.  thou 
shall  surely  die."  And  again  the  main  ques- 
tion is  one  of  responsibility.  The  watchman 
cannot  ensure  the  safety  of  every  citizen,  because 
any  man  may  refuse  to  take  the  warning  he 
gives.'  No  more  can  the  prophet  ensure  the 
salvation  of  all  his  hearers,  for  each  one  is  free 
to  accept  or  despise  the  message.  But  whether 
men  hear  or  whether  they  forbear,  it  is  of  the 
utmost  moment  for  himself  that  that  warning 
be  faithfully  proclaimed  and  that  he  should  thus 
"  deliver  his  soul."  Ezekiel  seems  to  feel  that 
it  is  only  by  frankly  accepting  the  responsibility 
which  thus  devolves  on  himself  that  he  can  hope 
to  impress  on  his  hearers  the  responsibility  that 
rests  on  them  for  the  use  they  make  of  his  mes- 
sage. 

These  thoughts  appear  to  have  occupied  the 
mind  of  Ezekiel  on  the  eve  of  his  emancipation, 
and  must  have  influenced  his  subsequent  action 
to  an  extent  which  we  can  but  vaguely  estimate. 
It  is  generally  considered  that  this  description 
of  the  prophet's  functions  covers  a  whole  de- 
partment of  work  of  which  no  express  account 
is  given.  Ezekiel  writes  no  '"  Pastor's  Sketches," 
and  records  no  instances  of  individual  conversion 
through  his  ministry.  The  unwritten  history  of 
the  Babylonian  captivity  must  have  been  rich 
in  such  instances  of  spiritual  experience,  and 
nothing  could  have  been  more  instructive  to 
us  than  the  study  of  a  few  typical  cases  had  it 
been  possible.  One  of  the  most  interesting 
features  of  the  early  history  of  Mohammedanism 
is  found  in  the  narratives  of  personal  adhesion  to 
the  new  religion;  and  the  formation  of  the  new 
Israel  in  the  age  of  the  Exile  is  a  process  of 
infinitely  greater  importance  for  humanity  at 
large  than  tue  genesis  of  Islam.  But  neither 
in  this  book  nor  elsewhere  are  we  permitted  to 


follow  that  process  in  its  details.  Ezekiel  may 
have  witnessed  the  beginnings  of  it,  but  he  was 
not  called  upon  to  be  its  historian.  Still,  the 
inference  is  probably  correct  that  a  conception 
of  the  prophet's  ofifice  which  holds  him  account- 
able to  God  for  the  fate  of  individuals  led  to 
something  more  than  mere  general  exhortations 
to  repentance.  The  preacher  must  have  taken 
a  personal  interest  in  his  hearers;  he  must  have 
watched  for  the  first  signs  of  a  response  to  his 
message,  and  been  ready  to  advise  and  en- 
courage those  who  turned  to  him  for  guidance 
in  their  perplexities.  And  since  the  sphere  of 
his  influence  and  responsibility  included  the 
whole  Hebrew  community  in  which  he  lived,  he 
must  have  been  eager  to  seize  every  opportunity 
to  warn  individual  sinners  of  the  error  of  their 
ways,  lest  their  blood  should  be  required  at  his 
hand.  To  this  extent  we  may  say  that  Ezekiel 
held  a  position  amongst  the  exiles  somewhat 
analogous  to  that  of  a  spiritual  director  in  the 
Catholic  Church  or  the  pastor  of  a  Protestant 
congregation.  But  the  analogy  must  not  be 
pressed  too  far.  The  nurture  of  the  spiritual  life 
of  individuals  could  not  have  presented  itself 
to  him  as  the  chief  end  of  his  ministrations.  His 
business  was  first  to  lay  down  the  conditions  of 
entrance  into  the  new  kingdom  of  God,  and 
then  out  of  the  ruins  of  the  old  Israel  to  make 
ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord.  Perhaps 
the  nearest  parallel  to  this  department  of  his 
work  which  history  affords  is  the  mission  of  the 
Baptist.  The  keynote  of  Ezekiel's  preaching 
was  the  same  as  that  of  John:  '"  Repent,  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  Both  prophets 
were  alike  animated  by  a  sense  of  crisis  and 
urgency,  based  on  the  conviction  that  the  im- 
pending Messianic  age  would  be  ushered  in  by  a 
searching  judgment  in  which  the  chaff  would  be 
separated  from  the  wheat.  Both  laboured  for 
the  same  end — the  formation  of  a  new  circle  of 
religious  fellowship,  in  anticipation  of  the  ad- 
vent of  the  ^^.essianic  kingdom.  And  as  John, 
by  an  inevitable  spiritual  selection,  gathered 
round  him  a  band  of  disciples,  amongst  whom 
our  Lord  found  some  of  His  most  devoted  fol- 
lowers, so  we  may  believe  that  Ezekiel,  by 
a  similar  process,  became  the  acknowledged 
leader  of  those  whom  he  taught  to  wait  for  the 
hope   of   Israel's   restoration. 

There  is  nothing  in  Ezekiel's  ministry  that  ap- 
peals more  directly  to  the  Christian  conscience 
than  the  serious  and  profound  sense  of  pastoral 
responsibility  to  which  this  passage  bears  wit- 
ness. It  is  a  feeling  which  would  seem  to  be 
inseparable  from  the  right  discharge  of  the 
ministerial  ofifice.  In  this,  as  in  many  other  re- 
spects, Ezekiel's  experience  is  repeated,  on  a 
higher  level,  in  that  of  the  apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, who  could  take  his  hearers  to  record  that 
he  was  "  pure  from  the  blood  of  all  men,"  inas- 
much as  he  had  "  taught  them  publicly  and  from 
house  to  house,"  and  "  ceased  not  to  warn  every 
one  night  and  day  with  tears  "  (Acts  xx.  l7-^S)■ 
That  does  not  mean,  of  course,  that  a  preacher 
is  to  occupy  himself  with  nothing  else  than 
the  personal  salvation  of  his  hearers.  St.  Paul 
would  have  been  the  last  to  agree  to  such  a 
limitation  of  the  range  of  his  teaching.  But  it 
does  mean  that  the  salvation  of  men  and  women 
is  the  supreme  end  which  the  minister  of  Christ 
is  to  set  before  him,  and  that  to  which  all  other 
instruction  is  subordinated.  And  unless  a  man 
realises  that  the  truth   he   utters   is   of  tremen- 


298 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


dotis  importance  on  the  (i.<:Stiny  of  those  to  whom 
he  speaks,  he  can  hardly  hope  to  approve  him- 
self as  an  ambassador  for  Christ.  There  are 
doubtless  temptations,  not  in  themselves  igno- 
ble, to  use  the  pulpit  for  other  purposes  than 
this.  The  desire  for  public  influence  may  be 
one  of  them,  or  the  desire  to  utter  one's  mind 
on  burning  questions  of  the  day.  To  say  that 
these  are  temptations  is  not  to  say  that  matters 
of  public  interest  are  to  be  rigorously  excluded 
from  treatment  in  the  pulpit.  There  are  many 
questions  of  this  kind  on  which  the  will  of  God 
is  as  clear  and  imperative  as  it  can  possibly  be 
on  any  point  of  private  conduct;  and  even  in 
matters  as  to  which  there  is  legitimate  difference 
of  opinion  amongst  Christian  men  there  are 
underlying  principles  of  righteousness  which 
may  need  to  be  fearlessly  enunciated  at  the  risk 
of  obloquy  and  misunderstanding.  Nevertheless 
it  remains  true  that  the  great  end  of  the  gospel 
ministry  is  to  reconcile  men  to  God  and  to 
cultivate  in  individual  lives  the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit,  so  as  at  the  last  to  present  every  man 
perfect  in  Christ.  And  the  preacher  who  may 
be  most  safely  entrusted  with  the  handling  of 
all  other  questions  is  he  who  is  most  intent  on 
the  formation  of  Christian  character  and  most 
deeply  conscious  of  his  responsibility  for  the 
effect  of  his  teaching  on  the  eternal  destiny  of 
those  to  whom  he  ministers.  What  is  called 
preaching  to  the  age  may  certainly  become  a 
very  poor  and  empty  thing  if  it  is  forgotten  that 
the  age  is  made  up  of  individuals  each  of  whom 
has  a  soul  to  save  or  lose.  What  shall  it  profit 
a  man  if  the  preacher  teaches  him  how  to  win 
the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  life?  It  is 
fashionable  to  hold  up  the  prophets  of  Israel 
as  models  of  all  that  a  Christian  minister  ought 
to  be.  If  that  is  true,  prophecy  must  at  least  be 
allowed  to  speak  its  whole  lesson;  and  amongst 
other  elements  Ezekiel's  consciousness  of  re- 
sponsUiility  for  the  individual  life  must  receive 
due  recognition. 

CHAPTER  XX, 
THE  MESSIANIC  KINGDOM 

EZEKIEL   XXXiv. 

The  term  "  Messianic  "  as  commonly  applied 
to  Old  Testament  prophecy  bears  two  different 
senses,  a  wider  and  a  narrower.  In  its  wider 
use  it  is  almost  equivalent  to  the  modern  word 
"  eschatological."  It  denotes  that  unquenchable 
hope  of  a  glorious  future  for  Israel  and  the 
world  which  is  an  all  but  omnipresent  feature  of 
the  prophetic  writings,  and  includes  all  predic- 
tions of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  final  and  per- 
fect manifestation.  In  its  stricter  sense  it  is  ap- 
plied only  to  the  promise  of  the  ideal  king  of  the 
house  of  David,  which,  although  a  very  con- 
spicuous element  of  prophecy,  is  by  no  means 
universal,  and  perhaps  does  not  bulk  quite  so 
largely  in  the  Old  Testament  as  is  generally  sup- 
posed. The  later  Jews  were  guided  by  a  true 
instinct  when  they  seized  on  this  figure  of  the 
ideal  ruler  as  the  centre  of  the  nation's  hope; 
and  to  them  we  owe  this  special  application  of 
the  name  "  Messiah,"  the  "  Anointed,"  which  is 
never  used  of  the  Son  of  David  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment itself.  To  a  certain  extent  we  follow  in 
their  steps  when  we  enlarge  the  meaning  of  the 
word  "  Messianic  "  so  as  to  embrace  the  whole 


prophetic  delineation  of  the  future  glories  of  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

This  distinction  may  be  illustrated  from  the 
prophecies  of  Ezekiel.  If  we  take  the  word  in 
its  more  general  sense  we  may  say  that  all  the 
chapters  from  the  thirty-fourth  to  the  end  of 
the  book  are  Messianic  in  character.  That  is  to 
say,  they  describe  under  various  aspects  the  final 
condition  of  things  which  is  introduced  by  the 
restoration  of  Israel  to  its  own  land.  Let  us 
glance  for  a  moment  at  the  elements  which  enter 
into  this  general  conception  of  the  last  things 
as  they  are  set  forth  in  the  section  of  the  book 
with  which  we  are  now  dealing.  We  exclude 
from  view  for  the  present  the  last  nine  chapters, 
because  there  the  prophet's  point  of  view  is 
somewhat  different,  and  it  is  better  to  reserve 
them  for  separate  treatment. 

The  chapters  from  the  thirty-fourth  to  the 
thirty-seventh  are  the  necessary  complement  of 
the  call  to  repentance  in  the  first  part  of  chap, 
xxxiii.  Ezekiel  has  enunciated  the  conditions  of 
entrance  to  the  new  kingdom  of  God,  and  has 
urged  his  hearers  to  prepare  for  its  appearing. 
He  now  proceeds  to  unfold  the  nature  of  that 
kingdom,  and  the  process  by  which  Jehovah  is 
to  bring  it  to  pass.  As  has  been  said,  the  cen- 
tral fact  is  the  restoration  of  Israel  to  the  land 
of  Canaan.  Here  the  prophet  found  a  point  of 
contact  with  the  natural  aspirations  of  his  fel- 
low-exiles. There  was  no  prospect  to  which 
they  had  clung  with  more  eager  longing  than 
that  of  a  return  to  national  independence  in  their 
own  land;  and  the  feeling  that  this  was  no  longer 
possible  was  the  source  of  the  abject  despair 
from  which  the  prophet  sought  t:>  rouse  them. 
How  was  this  to  be  done?  Not  simply  by  as- 
serting in  the  face  of  all  human  probability  that 
the  restoration  would  take  place,  but  by  present- 
ing it  to  their  minds  in  its  religious  aspects  as 
an  object  worthy  of  the  exercise  of  almighty 
power,  and  an  object  in  which  Jehovah  was  in- 
terested for  the  glory  of  His  great  name.  Only 
by  being  brought  round  to  Ezekiel's  faith  in 
God  could  the  exiles  recover  their  lost  hope  in 
the  future  of  the  nation.  Thus  the  return  to 
which  Ezekiel  looks  forward  has  a  Messianic 
significance:  it  is  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  a  symbol  of  the  final  and  perfect 
union  betwen  Jehovah  and  Israel. 

Now  in  the  chapters  before  us  this  general 
conception  is  exhibited  in  three  separate  pictures 
of  the  Restoration,  the  leading  ideas  being  the 
Monarchy  (chap,  xxxiv.),  the  Land  (chap. 
XXXV.,  xxxvi.),  and  the  Nation  (chap,  xxxvii.). 
The  order  in  which  they  are  arranged  is  not 
that  which  might  seem  most  natural.  We 
should  have  expected  the  prophet  to  deal  first 
with  the  revival  of  the  nation,  then  with  its  set- 
tlement on  the  soil  of  Palestine,  and  last  of  all 
with  its  political  organisation  under  a  Davidic 
king.  Ezekiel  follows  the  reverse  order.  He 
begins  with  the  kingdom,  as  the  most  complete 
embodiment  of  the  Messianic  salvation,  and  then 
falls  back  on  its  two  presuppositions — the  re- 
covery and  purification  of  the  land  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  restitution  of  the  nation  on  the 
other.  It  is  doubtful,  indeed,  whether  any  logi- 
cal connection  between  the  three  pictures  is  in- 
tended. It  is  perhaps  better  to  regard  them  as 
expressing  three  distinct  and  collateral  aspe-^*'* 
of  the  idea  of  redemption,  to  each  of  whicK  «> 
certain  permanent  religious  significance  is  at- 
tached.    They  are  at  all  events  the  outstandips' 


Ezekiel  xxxiv  j 


THE    MESSIANIC    KINGDOM. 


!99 


elements  of  Ezekiel's  eschatology  so  far  as  it 
is  expoundod   in   this   section   of   his  prophecies. 

We  thus  see  that  the  promise  of  the  perfect 
king — the  Messianic  idea  in  its  more  restricted 
signification — ^Jiolds  a  distinct  but  not  a  supreme 
place  in  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the  future.  It  ap- 
pears for  the  first  time  in  chap.  xvii.  at  the  end 
of  an  oracle  denouncing  the  perfidy  of  Zedekiah 
and  forcteliing  the  overthrow  of  his  kingdom; 
and  again,  in  a  similar  connection,  in  an  obscure 
verse  of  chap,  xxi.*  Both  these  prophecies  be- 
long to  the  time  before  the  fall  of  the  state,  when 
the  prophet's  thoughts  were  not  continuously 
•occupied  with  the  hope  of  the  future.  The 
former  is  remarkable,  nevertheless,  for  the  glow- 
ing terms  in  which  the  greatness  of  the  future 
kingdom  is  depicted.  From  the  top  of  the  lofty 
■cedar  which  the  great  eagle  had  carried  away  to 
Babylon  Jehovah  will  take  a  tender  shoot  and 
plant  it  in  the  mountain  height  of  Israel.  There 
it  will  strike  root  and  grow  up  into  a  lordly 
cedar,  under  whose  branches  all  the  birds  of  the 
air  find  refuge.  The  terms  of  the  allegory  have 
been  explained  in  the  proper  place.f  The  great 
-cedar  is  the  house  of  David;  the  topmost  bough 
which  was  taken  to  Babylon  is  the  family  of 
Jehoiachin,  the  direct  heirs  to  the  throne.  The 
planting  of  the  tender  shoot  in  the  land  of  Is- 
rael represents  the  founding  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom,  which  is  thus  proclaimed  to  be  of 
transcendent  earthly  magnificence,  overshadow- 
ing all  the  other  kingdoms  of  the  world,  and 
■convincing  the  nations  that  its  foundation  is  the 
work  of  Jehovah  Himself.  In  this  short  passage 
we  have  the  Messianic  idea  in  its  simplest  and 
most  characteristic  expression.  The  hope  of  the 
future  is  bound  up  with  the  destiny  of  the  house 
of  David;  and  the  re-establishrnent  of  the  king- 
dom in  more  than  its  ancient  splendour  is  the 
great  divine  act  to  which  all  the  blessings  of  the 
final  dispensation  are   attached. 

But  it  is  in  the  thirty-fourth  chapter  that  we 
find  the  most  comprehensive  exposition  of  Eze- 
kiel's teaching  on  the  subject  of  the  monarchy 
and  the  Messianic  kingdom.  It  is  perhaps  the 
most  political  of  all  his  prophecies.  It  is  per- 
vaded by  a  spirit  of  genuine  sympathy  with  the 
sufferings  of  the  common  people,  and  indigna- 
tion against  the  tyranny  practised  and  tolerated 
by  the  ruling  classes.  The  disasters  that  have 
befallen  the  nation  down  to  its  final  dispersion 
among  the  heathen  are  all  traced  to  the  mis- 
government  and  anarchy  for  which  the  mon- 
archy was  primarily  responsible.  In  like  manner 
the  blessings  of  the  coming  age  are  summed  up 
in  the  promise  of  a  perfect  king,  ruling  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  and  maintaining  order  and 
righteousness  throughout  his  realm.  Nowhere 
■else  does  Ezekiel  approach  so  nearly  to  the  po- 
litical ideal  foreshadowed  by  the  statesman- 
prophet  Isaiah  of  a  "  king  reigning  in  righteous- 
ness and  princes  ruling  in  judgment "  (Isa. 
xxxii.  i)  securing  the  enjoyment  of  universal 
prosperity  and  peace  to  the  redeemed  people  of 
God.  It  must  be  remembered  of  course  that 
this  is  only  a  partial  expression  of  Ezekiel's  con- 
ception both  of  the  past  condition  of  the  nation 
and  of  its  future  salvation.  We  have  had  abun- 
dant evidencet-  to  show  that  he  considered  all 
classes  of  the  community  to  be  corrupt,  and  the 
people  as  a  whole  implicated  in  the  guilt  of  re- 
bellion against  Jehovah.     The  statement  that  the 


*  Chs.  xvii.  22-24,  xxi.  26.  27.  t  See  xx. 

t  Cf.  especially  ch.  xxii. 


245  ff. 


kings  have  brought  about  the  dispersion  of  the 
nation  must  not  therefore  be  pressed  to  the  con- 
clusion that  civic  injustice  wa«  the  sole  cause 
of  Israel's  calamities.  Similarly  we  shall  find 
that  the  redemption  of  the  people  depends  on 
other  and  more  fundamental  conditions  than  the 
establishment  of  good  government  under  a  right- 
eous king.  But  that  is  no  reason  for  minimis- 
ing the  significance  of  the  passage  before  us 
as  an  utterance  of  Ezekiel's  profound  interest  in 
social  order  and  the  welfare  of  the  poor.  It 
shows  moreover  that  the  prophet  at  this  time 
attached  real  importance  to  the  promise  of  the 
Messiah  as  the  organ  of  Jehovah's  rule  over 
His  people.  If  civil  wrongs  and  legalised 
tyranny  were  not  the  only  sins  which  had 
brought  about  the  destruction  of  the  state,  they 
were  at  least  serious  evils,  which  could  not  be 
tolerated  in  the  new  Israel;  and  the  chief  safe- 
guard against  their  recurrence  is  found  in  the 
character  of  the  ideal  ruler  whom  Jehovah  will 
raise  up  from  the  seed  of  David.  How  far  this 
high  conception  of  the  functions  of  the  mon- 
archy was  modified  in  Ezekiel's  subsequent 
teaching  we  shall  see  when  we  come  to  consider 
the  position  assigned  to  the  prince  in  the  great 
vision  at  the  end  of  the  book.* 

In  the  meantime  let  us  examine  somewhat 
more  closely  the  contents  of  chap,  xxxiv.  Its 
leading  ideas  seem  to  have  been  suggested  by  a 
Messianic  prophecy  of  Jeremiah's  with  which 
Ezekiel  was  no  doubt  acquainted:  "Woe  to  the 
shepherds  that  destroy  and  scatter  the  flock  of 
My  pasture!  saith  Jehovah.  Therefore  thus 
saith  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  against  the 
shepherds  that  tend  My  people,  Ye  have  scat- 
tered My  flock,  and  dispersed  them,  and  have 
not  visited  them:  behold,  I  will  visit  upon  you 
the  evil  of  your  doings,  saith  Jehovah.  And  I 
will  gather  the  remnant  of  My  flock  from  all 
the  lands  whither  I  have  dispersed  them,  and 
will  restore  them  to  their  folds;  and  they  shall 
be  fruitful  and  multiply.  And  I  will  set  shep- 
herds over  them  who  shall  feed  them:  and  they 
shall  not  fear  any  more,  nor  be  frightened,  nor 
be  lacking,  saith  Jehovah  "  (Jer.  xxiii.  1-4). 
Here  we  have  the  simple  image  of  the  flock  and 
its  shepherds,  which  Ezekiel,  as  his  manner  is, 
expands  into  an  allegory  of  the  past  history  and 
future  prospects  of  the  nation.  How  closely  he 
follows  the  guidance  of  his  predecessor  will  be 
seen  from  the  analysis  of  the  chapter.  It  may 
be  divided   into   four  parts. 

I.  The  first  ten  verses  are  a  strongly  worded 
denunciation  of  the  misgovernment  to  which  the 
people  of  Jehovah  had  been  subjected  in  the 
past.  The  prophet  goes  straight  to  the  root  of 
the  evil  when  he  indignantly  asks,  ''  Should  not 
the  shepherds  feed  the  flock? "  (ver.  2).  The 
first  principle  of  all  true  government  is  that  it 
must  be  in  the  interest  of  the  governed.  But 
the  universal  vice  of  Oriental  despotism,  as  we 
see  in  the  case  of  the  Turkish  empire  at  the 
present  day,  or  Egypt  before  the  English  oc- 
cupation, is  that  the  rulers  rule  for  their  own 
advantage,  and  treat  the  people  as  their  lawful 
spoil.  So  it  had  been  in  Israel:  the  shepherds 
had  fed  themselves,  and  not  the  flock.  Instead 
of  carefully  tending  the  sick  and  the  maimed, 
and  searching  out  the  strayed  and  the  lost,  they 
had  been  concerned  only  to  eat  the  milkf    and 

*  See  below,  pp.  318  f. ,  and  ch.  xxviii. 
■*•  Pointing    the  Hebre-w  te.xt  in  accordance  with    the 
rendering  of  the  LXX. 


300 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


clothe  themselves  with  the  wool  and  slaughter 
the  fat;  they  had  ruled  with  "  violence  and  rig- 
our." That  is  to  say,  instead  of  healing  the 
sores  of  the  body  politic,  they  had  sought  to 
enrich  themselves  at  the  expense  of  the  people. 
Such  misconduct  in  the  name  of  government 
always  brings  its  own  penalty;  it  kills  the 
goose  that  lays  the  golden  eggs.  The  flock 
which  is  spoiled  by  its  own  shepherds  is  scat- 
tered on  the  mountain  and  becomes  the  prey  of 
wild  beasts;  and  so  the  nation  that  is  weakened 
by  internal  misrule  loses  its  powers  of  defence 
and  succumbs  to  the  attacks  of  some  foreign 
invader.  But  the  shepherds  of  Israel  have  to 
reckon  with  Him  who  is  the  owner  of  the  flock, 
whose  affection  still  watches  over  them,  and 
whose  compassion  is  stirred  by  the  hapless  con- 
dition of  His  people.  "  Therefore,  O  ye  shep- 
herds, hear  the  word  of  Jehovah;  .  .  .  Behold, 
I  am  against  the  shepherds;  and  I  will  require 
My  flock  at  their  hand;  and  I  will  make  them  to 
cease  from  feeding  [My]  flock,  that  they  who 
feed  themselves  may  no  longer  shepherd  them; 
and  I  will  deliver  My  flock  from  their  mouth; 
that  they  be  not  food  for  them  "  (vv.  9,  10). 

II.  But  Jehovah  not  only  removes  the  un- 
worthy shepherds;  He  Himself  takes  on  Him 
the  office  of  shepherd  to  the  flock  that  has  been  so 
mishandled  (vv.  11-16).  As  the  shepherd  goes  out 
after  the  thunderstorm  to  call  in  his  frightened 
sheep,  so  will  Jehovah  after  the  storm  of  judgment 
is  over  go  forth  to  "  gather  together  the  outcasts 
of  Israel  "  (Psalm  cxlvii.  2).  He  will  seek  them 
out  and  deliver  them  from  all  places  whither 
they  were  scattered  in  the  day  of  clouds  and 
darkness;  then  He  will  lead  them  back  to  the 
mountain  height  of  Israel,  where  they  shall  en- 
joy abundant  prosperity  and  security  under  His 
just  and  beneficent  rule.  By  what  agencies  this 
deliverance  is  to  be  accomplished  is  nowhere  in- 
dicated. It  is  the  unanimous  teaching  of  the 
prophets  that  the  final  salvation  of  Israel  will 
be  effected  in  a  "  day  of  Jehovah  " — i.  e.,  a  d_ay 
in  which  Jehovah's  own  power  will  be  specially 
manifested.  Hence  there  is  no  need  to  describe 
the  process  by  which  the  Almighty  works  out 
His  purpose  of  salvation;  it  is  indescribable:  the 
results  are  certain,  but  the  intermediate  agencies 
are  supernatural,  and  the  precise  method  of 
Jehovah's  intervention  is,  as  a  rule,  left  indefinite. 
It  is  particularly  to  be  noted  that  the  Messiah 
plays  no  part  in  the  actual  work  of  deliverance. 
He  is  not  the  hero  of  a  national  struggle  for 
independence,  but  comes  on  the  scene  and  as- 
sumes the  reins  of  government  after  Jehovah 
has  gotten  the  victory  and  restored  peace  to 
Israel.* 

III.  The  next  six  verses  (17-22)  add  a  feature 
to  the  allegory  which  is  not  found  in  the  corre- 
sponding passage  in  Jeremiah.  Jehovah  will 
judge  between  one  sheep  and  another,  especially 
between  the  rams  and  he-goats  on  the  one  hand 
and  the  weaker  animals  on  the  other.  The 
strong  cattle  had  monopolised  the  fat  meadows 
and  clear  settled  waters,  and  as  if  this  were  not 
enough,  they  had  trampled  down  the  residue  of 
the  pastures  and  fouled  the  waters  with  their 
feet.  Those  addressed  are  the  wealthy  and 
powerful  upper  class,  whose  luxury  and  wanton 
extravagance    had    consumed    the    resources    of 

♦This  seems  to  me  to  be  the  clear  meaning  of  Isaiah's 
prophecy  of  the  Messiah  in  the  beginning  of  the  ninth 
chapter,  although  the  contrary  is  often  asserted.  Micah 
V.  1-6  may,  however,  be  an  exception  to  the  rule  stated 
above. 


the  country,  and  left  no  sustenance  for  the 
poorer  members  of  the  community.  Allusions 
to  this  kind  of  selfish  tyranny  are  frequent  in  the 
older  prophets.  Amos  speaks  of  the  nobles  as 
panting  after  the  dust  on  the  head  of  the  poor, 
and  of  the  luxurious  dames  of  Samaria  as  oppress- 
ing the  poor  and  crushing  the  needy,  and  saying 
to  their  lords,  "  Bring  us  to  drink  "  (Amos  ii.  7, 
iv.  i).  Micah  says  of  the  same  class  in  the 
southern  kingdom  that  they  cast  out  the  women 
of  Jehovah's  people  from  their  pleasant  houses, 
and  robbed  their  children  of  His  glory  for  ever 
(Micah  ii.  9).  And  Isaiah,  to  take  one  other 
example,  denounces  those  who  "  take  away  the 
right  from  the  poor  of  My  people,  that  widows 
may  be  their  prey,  and  that  they  may  rob  the 
orphans "  (Isa.  x.  2).  Under  the  corrupt  ad- 
ministration of  justice  which  the  kings  had 
tolerated  for  their  own  convenience  litigation 
had  been  a  farce;  the  rich  man  had  always 
the  ear  of  the  judge,  and  the  poor  found  no  re- 
dress. But  in  Israel  the  true  fountain  of  justice 
could  not  be  polluted;  it  was  only  its  channels 
that  were  obstructed.  For  Jehovah  Himself 
was  the  supreme  judge  of  His  people;  and  in  the 
restored  commonwealth  to  which  Ezekiel  looks 
forward  all  civil  relations  will  be  regulated  by  a 
regard  to  His  righteous  will.  He  will  ''  save  His 
flock  that  they  De  no  more  a  prey,  and  will  judge 
between  cattle  and  cattle." 

IV.  Then  follows  in  the  last  section  (vv.  23- 
31)  the  promise  of  the  Messianic  king,  and  a 
description  of  the  blessings  that  accompany  his 
reign:  "  I  will  set  up  one  shepherd  over  them, 
and  he  shall  feed  them — My  servant  David:  he 
shall  feed  them,  and  he  shall  be  their  shepherd. 
And  I  Jehovah  will  be  their  God,  and  My  serv- 
ant David  shall  be  a  prince  in  their  midst:  I  Je- 
hovah have  spoken  it."  There  are  one  or  two 
difficulties  connected  with  the  interpretation  of 
this  passage,  the  consideration  of  which  may 
be  postponed  till  we  have  finished  our  analysis 
of  the  chapter.  It  is  sufficient  in  the  meantime 
to  notice  that  a  Davidic  kingdom  in  some  sense 
is  to  be  the  foundation  of  social  order  in  the 
new  Israel.  A  prince  will  arise,  endowed  with 
the  spirit  of  his  exalted  office,  to  discharge  per- 
fectly the  royal  functions  in  which  the  former 
kings  had  so  lamentably  failed.  Through  him 
the  divine  government  of  Israel  will  become  a 
reality  in  the  national  life.  The  Godhead  of 
Jehovah  and  the  kingship  of  the  Messiah  will 
be  inseparably  associated  in  the  faith  of  the  peo- 
ple: "Jehovah  their  God,  and  David  their  king" 
(Hosea  iii.  5)  is  the  expression  of  the  ground 
of  Israel's  confidence  in  the  latter  days.  And 
this  kingdom  is  the  pledge  of  the  fulness  of 
divine  blessing  descending  on  the  land  and  the 
people.  The  people  shall  dwell  in  safety,  none 
making  them  afraid,  because  of  the  covenant  of 
peace  which  Jehovah  will  make  for  them,  secur- 
ing them  against  the  assaults  of  other  nations.* 
The  heavens  shall  pour  forth  fertilising 
"showers  of  blessing";  and  the  land  shall  be 
clothed  with  a  luxuriant  vegetation  which  shall 


*  Ver.  25.  The  idea  is  based  on  Hosea  ii.  18,  where  God 
promises  to  make  a  covenant  for  Israel  "with  the  beasts 
of  the  field,  and  the  birds  of  heaven,  and  the  creeping 
things  of  the  ground."  This  is  to  be  understood  quite 
literally:  it  means  immunity  from  the  ravages  of  wild 
beasts  and  other  noxious  .creatures.  Ezekiel's  promise, 
however,  is  probably  to  be  explained  in  accordance  with 
the  terms  of  the  allegory:  the  "evil  beasts"  are  the 
foreign  nations  from  whom  Israel  had  suffered  so  severely 
in  the  past. 


Ezekiel  xxxiv.] 


THE    MESSIANIC    KINGDOM. 


301 


be  the  admiration  of  the  whole  earth.*  Thus 
happily  situated  Israel  shall  shake  off  the  re- 
proach of  the  heathen,  which  they  had  formerly 
to  endure  because  of  the  poverty  of  their  land 
and  their  unfortunate  history.  In  the  plenitude 
of  material  prosperity  they  shall  recognise  that 
Jehovah  their  God  is  with  them,  and  they  shall 
know  what  it  is  to  be  His  people  and  the  flock 
of   His   pasture. t 

We  have  now  before  us  the  salient  features  of 
the  Messianic  hope,  as  it  is  presented  in  the 
pages  of  Ezekiel.  We  see  that  the  idea  is  devel- 
oped in  contrast  with  the  abuses  that  had  char- 
acterised the  historic  monarchy  in.  Israel.  It 
represents  the  ideal  of  the  kingdom  as  it  exists 
in  the  mind  of  Jehovah,  an  ideal  which  no 
actual  king  had  fully  realised,  and  which  most 
of  them  had  shamefully  violated.  The  Messiah 
is  the  vicegerent  of  Jehovah  on  earth,  and  the 
representative  of  His  kingly  authority  and 
righteous  government  over  Israel.  We  see 
further  that  the  promise  is  based  on  the  "  sure 
mercies  of  David,"  the  covenant  which  secured 
the  throne  to  David's  descendants  for  ever. 
Messianic  prophecy  is  legitimist,  the  ideal  king 
being  regarded  as  standmg  in  the  direct  line 
of  succession  to  the  crown.  And  to  these  fea- 
tures we  may  add  another  which  is  explicitly 
developed  in  chap,  xxxvii.  22-26,  although  it  is 
implied  in  the  expression  "  one  shepherd  "  in  the 
passage  with  which  we  have  been  dealing.  The 
Messianic  kingdom  represents  the  unity  of  all 
Israel,  and  particularly  the  reunion  of  the  two 
kingdoms  under  one  sceptre.  The  prophets  at- 
tach great  importance  to  this  idea.^  The  ex- 
istence of  two  rival  monarchies,  divided  in 
interest  and  often  at  war  with  each  other,  al- 
though it  had  never  effaced  the  consciousness  of 
the  original  unity  of  the  nation,  was  felt  by  the 
prophets  to  be  an  anomalous  state  of  things, 
and  seriously  detrimental  to  the  national  reli- 
gion. The  ideal  relation  of  Jehovah  to  Israel 
was  as  incompatible  with  two  "kingdoms  as  the 
ideal  of  marriage  is  incompatible  with  two  wives 
to  one  husband.  Hence  in  the  glorious  future  of 
the  Messianic  age  the  schism  must  be  healed, 
and  the  Davidic  dynasty  restored  to  its  original 
position  at  the  head  of  an  undivided  empire. 
The  prominence  given  to  this  thought  in  the 
teaching  of  Hosea  shows  that  even  in  the  north- 
ern kingdom  devout  Israelites  cherished  the 
hope  of  reunion  with  their  brethren  under  the 
house  of  David  as  the  only  form  in  which  the 
redemption  of  the  nation  could  be  achieved. 
And  although,  long  before'  Ezekiel's  day,  the 
kingdom  of  Samaria  had  disappeared  from  his- 
tory, he  too  looks  forward  to  a  restoration  of  the 
ten  tribes  as  an  essential  element  of  the  Mes- 
sianic salvation. 

In  these  respects  the  teaching  of  Ezekiel  re- 
flects the  general  tenor  of  the  Messianic  proph- 
ecy of  the  Old  Testament.  There  are  just  two 
questions  on  which  some  obscurity  and  un- 
certainty must  be  felt  to  rest.  In  the  first  place, 
what  is  the  precise  meaning  of  the  expression 
"  My    servant    David "  ?     It    will    not    be    sup- 

*  This  'S  the  sense  of  the  expression  Dti^7  ]}Df2  in  ver.  ag 
(literally  "a  plantation  for  a  name  ").  The  LXX.,  how- 
ever, read  QpU  ytOfD,  which  may  be  translated  "a  perfect 
vegetation  "  At  all  events  the  phrase  is  not  a  title  of  the 
Messiah. 

tT'ne  word  "men"  in  ver.  31  should  be  omitted,  as  in 
the  LXX. 

t  C/.  .\mos  ix.  II  f. ;  Hosea  ii.  2,  iii.  5;  Isa.  xi.  13;  Micah 
ii.  ■  •  f.    \-   -^, 


posed  that  the  prophet  expected  David,  the 
founder  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy,  to  reappear 
in  person  and  inaugurate  the  new  dispensation. 
Such  an  interpretation  would  be  utterly  false  to 
Eastern  modes  of  thought  and  expression,  be- 
sides being  opposed  to  every  indication  we  have 
of  the  prophetic  conception  of  the  Messiah. 
Even  in  popular  language  the  name  of  David 
was  current,  after  he  had  been  long  dead,  as 
the  name  of  the  dynasty  which  he  had  founded. 
When  the  ten  tribes  revolted  from  Rehoboam 
they  said,  exactly  as  they  had  said  in  David's 
lifetime,  "  What  portion  have  we  in  David? 
neither  have  we  inheritance  in  the  son  of  Jesse: 
to  your  tents,  O  Israel;  now  see  to  thine  own 
house,  David."  *  If  the  name  of  David  could 
thus  be  invoked  in  popular  speech  at  a  time  of 
great  political  excitement,  we  need  not  be  sur- 
prised to  find  it  used  in  a  similar  sense  in  the 
figurative  style  of  the  prophets.  All  that  the 
word  means  is  that  the  Messiah  will  be  one 
who  comes  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  David, 
a  representative  of  the  ancient  family  who  car- 
ries to  completion  the  work  so  nobly  begun  by 
his  great  ancestor. 

The  real  difficulty  is  whether  the  title 
"  David  "  denotes  a  unique  individual  or  a  line 
of  Davidic  kings.  To  that  question  it  is  hardly 
possible  to  return  a  decided  answer.  That  the 
idea  of  a  succession  of  sovereigns  is  a  possible 
form  of  the  Messianic  hope  is  shown  by  a  pas- 
sage in  the  thirty-third  chapter  of  Jeremiah. 
There  the  promise  of  the  righteous  sprout  of 
the  house  of  David  is  supplemented  by  the  as- 
surance that  David  shall  never  want  a  man  to 
sit  on  the  throne  of  Israel  :f  the  allusion  there- 
fore appears  to  be  to  the  dynasty,  and  not  to 
a  single  person.  And  this  view  finds  some  sup- 
port in  the  case  of  Ezekiel  from  the  fact  that 
in  the  later  vision  of  chaps,  xl.-xlviii.  the  prophet 
undoubtedly  anticipates  a  perpetuation  of  the 
dynasty  through  successive  generations.^  On 
the  other  hand  it  is  difficult  to  reconcile  this 
view  with  the  expressions  used  in  this  and  the 
thirty-seventh  chapters.  When  we  read  that 
"  My  servant  David  shall  be  their  prince  for 
ever,"§  we  can  scarcely  escape  the  impression 
that  the  prophet  is  thinking  of  a  personal  Mes- 
siah reigning  eternally.  If'it  were  necessary  to 
decide  between  these  two  alternatives,  it  might 
be  safest  to  adhere  to  the  idea  of  a  personal 
Messiah,  as  conveying  the  fullest  rendering  of 
the  prophet's  thought.  There  is  reason  to  think 
that  in  the  interval  between  this  prophecy  and 
his  final  vision  Ezekiel's  conception  of  the  Mes- 
siah underwent  a  certain  modification,  and  there- 
fore the  teaching  of  the  later  passage  cannot 
be  used  to  control  the  explanation  of  this.  But 
the  obscurity  is  of  such  a  nature  that  we  cannot 
hope  to  remove  it.  In  the  prophet's  delinea- 
tions of  the  future  there  are  many  points  on 
which  the  light  of  revelation  had  not  been  fully 
cast;  for  they,  like  the  Christian  apostle,  '"  knew 
in  part  and  prophesied  in  part."  And  the  ques- 
tion of  the  way  in  which  the  Messiah's  office 
is  to  be  prolonged  is  precisely  one  of  those 
which  did  not  greatly  occupy  the  mind  of  the 
prophets.     There  is  no  perspective  in  Messianic 

*  I  Kings  xii.  i6(c/.  2  Sam.  xx.  i).  It  should  be  mentioned, 
however,  that  the  last  clause  in  the  LXX.  is  replaced  by  a 
more  prosaic  sentence:  "  for  this  man  is  not  fit  to  be  a 
ruler  nor  a  prince." 

t  Jer.  xxxiii.  15-17. 

t  Cf.  oh.  xliii.  7,  xlv.  8,  xlvi.  16  ff. 

§  Ch.  xxxvii.  25. 


302 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


prophecy:  the  future  kingdom  of  God  is  seen, 
as  it  were,  in  one  plane,  and  how  it  is  to  be 
transmitted  from  one  age  to  another  is  never 
thought  of.  Thus  it  may  become  difficult  to 
say  whether  a  particular  prophet,  in  speaking 
of  the  Messiah,  has  a  single  individual  in  view 
or  whether  he  is  thinking  of  a  dynasty  or  a 
succession.  To  Ezekiel  the  Messiah  was  a  di- 
vinely revealed  ideal,  which  was  to  be  fulfilled 
in  a  person;  whether  the  prophet  himself  dis- 
tinctly understood  this  is  a  matter  of  inferior 
importance. 

The  second  question  is  one  that  perhaps  would 
not  readily  occur  to  a  plain  man.  It  relates  to 
the  meaning  of  the  word  "  prince  "  as  applied 
to  the  Messiah.  It  has  been  thought  by  some 
critics  that  Ezekiel  had  a  special  reason  for 
avoiding  the  title  "  king  "  ;  and  from  this  sup- 
posed reason  a  somewhat  sweeping  conclusion 
has  been  deduced.  We  are  asked  to  believe  that 
Ezekiel  had  in  principle  abandoned  the  Mes- 
sianic hope  of  his  earlier  prophecies — i.  e.,  the 
hope  of  a  restoration  of  the  Davidic  kingdom 
in  its  ancient  splendour.  What  he  really  con- 
templates is  the  abolition  of  the  Hebrew  mon- 
archy, and  the  institution  of  a  new  political  sys- 
tem entirely  dififerent  from  anything  that  had 
existed  in  the  past.  Although  the  Davidic  prince 
will  hold  the  first  place  in  the  restored  commu- 
nity, his  dignity  will  be  less  than  royal;  he  will 
only  be  a  titular  monarch,  his  power  being  over- 
shadowed by  the  presence  of  Jehovah,  the  true 
king  of  Israel.  Now  so  far  as  this  view  is  sug- 
gested by  the  use  of  the  word  "  prince  "  (lit- 
erally "  leader  "  or  "  president  ")  in  preference 
to  "  king,"  *  it  is  sufficiently  answered  by  point- 
ing to  the  Messianic  passage  in  chap,  xxxvii., 
where  the  name  "  king  "  is  used  three  times  and 
in  a  peculiarly  emphatic  manner  of  the  Mes- 
sianic prince. f  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  Ezekiel  drew  a  distinction  between 
"  princely  "  and  "  kingly  "  rank,  and  deliberately 
withheld  the  higher  dignity  from  the  Messiah. 
Whatever  may  be  the  exact  relation  of  the  Mes- 
siah to  Jehovah,  there  is  no  doubt  that  he  is 
conceived  as  a  king  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
term,  possessed  of  all  regal  qualitie-s,  and  shep- 
herding his  people  with  the  authority  which  be- 
longed to  a  true  son  of  David. 

But  there  is  another  consideration  which 
weighs  more  seriously  with  the  writers  referred 
to.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  Ezekiel's 
conception  of  the  final  kingdom  of  God  under- 
went a  change  which  might  not  unfairly  be  de- 
scribed as  an  abandonment  of  the  Messianic  ex- 
pectation in  its  more  restricted  sense.  In  his 
latest  vision  the  functions  of  the  prince  are  de- 
fined in  such  a  way  that  his  position  is  shorn 
of  the  ideal  significance  which  properly  invests 
the  office  of  the  Messiah.  The  change  does 
not  indeed  affect  his  merely  political  status.  He 
is  still  the  son  of  David  and  the  king  of  Israel, 
and  all  that  is  here  said  about  his  duty  towards 
his  subjects  is  there  presupposed.  But  his  char- 
acter seems  to  be  no  longer  regarded  as  thor- 
oughly reliable,  or  equal  to  all  the  temptations 
that   arise    wherever    absolute    power    is    lodged 

**'Das  Konigthum  wird  diese  [the  Davidic]  Familie 
nicht  wieder  erhalten,  denn  Ezechiel  fahrt  fort:  'Ich 
lahwe  werde  ihnen  Gott  sein  und  mein  Knecht  David 
wird  nasi  d.  h.  Fiirst  in  ihrer  Mitte  sein.'  Also  nur  ein 
Furstenthiim  wird  der  Familie  Davids  in  der  besseren 
Zukunft  Israel's  zu  Theil."— Stade,  "Geschichte  des 
Volkes  Israel,"  vol.  ii.  p.  39. 

t  Ch.  xxxvii.  22-24. 


in  human  hands.  The  possibility  that  the  king 
may  abuse  his  authority  for  his  private  advan- 
tage is  distinctly  contemplated,  and  provision  is 
made  against  it  in  the  statutory  constitution 
to  which  the  king  himself  is  subject.  Such  pre- 
cautions are  obviously  inconsistent  with  the 
ideal  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  which  we  find, 
for  example,  in  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah.  The 
important  question  therefore  comes  to  be, 
whether  this  lower  view  of  the  monarchy  is 
anticipated  in  the  thirty-fourth  and  thirty-sev- 
enth chapters.  This  does  not  appear  to  be  the 
case.  The  prophet  still  occupies  the  same  stand- 
point as  in  chap,  xvii.,  regarding  the  Davidic 
monarchy  as  the  central  religious  institution  of 
the  restored  state.  The  Messiah  of  these  chap- 
ters is  a  perfect  king,  endowed  with  the  spirit 
of  God  for  the  discharge  of  his  great  office, 
one  whose  personal  character  affords  an  absolute 
security  for  the  maintenance  of  public  righteous- 
ness, and  who  is  the  medium  of  communica- 
tion between  God  and  the  nation.  In  other 
words,  what  we  have  to  do  with  is  a  Messianic 
prediction  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  term. 

In  concluding  our  study  of  Ezekiel's  Mes- 
sianic teaching,  we  may  make  one  remark 
bearing  on  its  typological  interpretation.  The 
attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  trace  a  gradual 
development  and  enrichment  of  the  Messianic 
idea  in  the  hands  of  successive  prophets.  From 
that  point  of  view  Ezekiel's  contribution  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Messiah  must  be  felt  to  be  dis- 
appointing. No  one  can  imagine  that  his  por- 
trait of  the  coming  king  possesses  anything  like 
the  suggestiveness  and  religious  meaning  con- 
veyed by  the  ideal  which  stands  out  so  clearly 
from  the  pages  of  Isaiah.  And,  indeed,  no  sub- 
sequent prophet  excels  or  even  equals  Isaiah  in 
the  clearness  and  profundity  of  his  directly  Mes- 
sianic conceptions.  This  fact  shows  us  that  the 
endeavour  to  find  in  the  Old  Testament  a 
regular  progress  along  one  particular  line  pro- 
ceeds on  too  narrow  a  view  of  the  scope  of 
prophecy.  The  truth  is  that  the  figure  of  the 
king  is  only  one  of  many  types  of  the  Christian 
dispensation  which  the  religious  institutions  of 
Israel  supplied  to  the  prophets.  It  is  the  most 
perfect  of  all  types,  partly  because  it  is  personal, 
and  partly  because  the  idea  of  kingship  is  the 
most  comprehensive  of  the  offices  which  Christ 
executes  as  our  Redeemer.  But,  after  all,  it 
expresses  only  one  aspect  of  the  glorious  future 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  towards  which  prophecy 
steadily  points.  We  must  remember  also  that 
the  order  in  which  these  types  emerge  is  de- 
termined not  altogether  by  their  intrinsic  im- 
portance, but  partly  by  their  adaptation  to  the 
needs  of  the  age  in  which  the  prophet  lived. 
The  main  function  of  prophecy  was  to  fur- 
nish present  and  practical  direction  to  the  people 
of  God;  and  the  form  under  which  the  ideal  was 
presented  to  any  particular  generation  was  al- 
ways that  best  fitted  to  help  it  onwards,  one 
stage  nearer  to  the  great  consummation.  Thus 
while  Isaiah  idealises  the  figure  of  the  king, 
Jeremiah  grasps  the  conception  of  a  new  religion 
under  the  form  of  a  covenant,  the  second  Isaiah 
unfolds  the  idea  of  the  prophetic  servant  of  Je- 
hovah, Zechariah  and  the  writer  of  the  iioth 
Psalm  idealise  the  priesthood.  All  these  are 
Messianic  prophecies,  if  we  take  the  word  in 
its  widest  acceptation;  but  they  are  not  all  cast 
in  one  mould,  and  the  attempt  to  arrange  them 
in  a  single  series  is  obviously  misleading.     So 


Ezekiel  xxxv.,  xxxvi.J 


JEHOVAH'S    LAN'O. 


303 


with  regard  to  Ezekiel  we  may  say  that  his  chief 
Messianic  ideal  (still  using  the  expression  in  a 
general  sense)  is  the  sanctuary,  the  symbol  of 
Jehovah's  presence  in  the  midst  of  His  people. 
At  the  end  of  chap,  xxxvii.  the  kingdom  a-^d 
the  sanctuary  are  mentioned  together  as  pk  ^s 
of  the  glory  of  the  latter  days.  But  while  the  idea 
of  the  Messianic  monarchy  was  a  legacy  inher- 
ited from  his  prophetic  precursors,  the  Temple 
was  an  institution  whose  typical  significance 
Ezekiel  was  the  first  to  unfold.  It  was  moreover 
the  one  that  met  the  religious  requirements  of 
the  age  in  which  Ezekiel  lived.  Ultimately  the 
hope  of  the  personal  -Messiah  loses  the  impor- 
tance which  it  still  has  in  the  present  section  of 
the  book;  and  th  prophet's  vision  of  the  future 
concentrates  itself  on  the  sanctuary  as  the  centre 
of  the  restored  theocracy,  and  the  source  from 
which  the  regenerating  influences  of  the  divine 
grace  flow  forth  to  Israel  and  the  world. 


CHAPTER   XXI. 
JEHOVAH'S  LAND. 
Ezekiel  xxxv.,  xxxvi 

The  teaching  of  this  important  passage  turns 
on  certain  ideas  regarding  the  land  of  Canaan 
which  enter  very  deeply  into  the  religion  of 
Israel.  These  ideas  are  no  doubt  familiar  in 
a  general  way  to  all  thoughtful  readers  of  the 
Old  Testament;  but  their  full  import  is  scarcely 
realised  until  we  understand  that  they  are  not 
peculiar  to  the  Bible,  but  form  part  of  the  stock 
of  religious  conceptions  common  to  Israel  and 
its  heathen  neighbours.*  In  the  more  advanced 
Semitic  religions  of  antiquity  each  nation  had 
its  own  god  as  well  as  its  own  land,  and  the 
bond  between  the  god  and  the  land  was  sup- 
posed to  be  quite  as  strong  as  that  between  the 
god  nd  the  nation.  The  god,  the  land,  and 
the  people  formed  a  triad  of  religious  relation- 
ship, and  so  closely  were  these  three  elements 
associated  that  the  expulsion  of  a  people  from 
its  land  was  held  to  dissolve  the  bond  between 
it  and  the  god.  Thus  while  in  practice  the  land 
of  a  god  was  coextensive  with  the  territory  in- 
habited by  his  worshippers,  yet  in  theory  the 
relation  of  the  god  to  his  land  is  independent 
of  his  relation  to  the  inhabitants;  it  was  his 
land  whether  the  people  in  it  were  his  worship- 
pers or  not.  The  peculiar  confusion  of  ideas 
that  arose  when  the  people  of  one  god  came  to 
reside  permanently  in  the  territory  of  another 
is  well  illustrated  by  the  case  of  the  heathen 
colony  which  the  king  of  Assyria  planted  in 
Samaria  after  the  exile  of  the  ten  tribes.  These 
settlers  brought  their  own  gods  with  them;  but 
when  some  of  them  were  slain  by  lions,  they 
perceived  that  they  were  making  a  mistake  in 
ignoring  the  rights  of  the  god  of  the  land.  They 
sent  accordingly  for  a  priest  to  instruct  them 
in  the  religion  of  the  god  of  the  land;  and  the 
result  was  that  they  "  feared  Jehovah  and  served 
their  own  gods"  (2  Kings  xvii.  24-41).  It  was 
expected  no  doubt  that  in  course  of  time  the 
foreign  deities  would  be  acclimatised. 

In  the  Old  Testament  we  find  many  traces 
of  the  influence  of  this  conception  on  the  He- 

*  On  the  whole  subject  of  the  relation  of  the  gods  to  the 
land  see  Robertson  Smith,  "  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  pp. 
91  ff. 


brew  religion.  Canaan  was  the  land  of  Jehovah 
(Hosea  ix.  3)  apart  altogether  from  its  posses- 
sion by  Israel,  the  people  of  Jehovah.  It  was 
Jehovah's  land  before  Israel  entered  it,  the  in- 
heritance which  He  had  selected  for  His  people 
out  of  all  the  countries  of  the  world,  the  Land 
of  Promise,  given  to  the  patriarchs  while  as 
yet  they  were  but  strangers  and  sojourners  in 
it.  Although  the  Israelites  took  possession  of 
it  as  a  nation  of  conquerors,  they  did  so  in  the 
consciousness  that  they  were  expelling  from  Je- 
hovah's dwelling-place  a  population  which  had 
polluted  it  by  their  abominations.  From  that 
time  onwards  the  tenure  of  the  soil  of  Palestine 
was  regarded  as  an  essential  factor  of  the  na- 
tional religion.  The  idea  that  Jehovah  could 
not  be  rightly  worshipped  outside  of  Hebrew 
territory  was  firmly  rooted  in  the  minds  of  the 
people,  and  was  accepted  by  the  prophets  as 
a  principle  involved  in  the  special  relations  that 
Jehovah  maintained  with  the  people  of  Israel* 
Hence  no  threat  could  be  more  terrible  in  the 
ears  of  the  Israelites  than  that  of  expatriation 
from  their  native  soil;  for  it  meant  nothing  less 
than  the  dissolution  of  the  tie  that  subsisted  be- 
tween them  and  their  God.  When  that  threat 
was  actually  fulfilled  there  was  no  reproach 
harder  to  bear  than  the  taunt  which  Ezekiel 
here  puts  into  the  mouth  of  the  heathen:  "  These 
are  Jehovah's  people — and  yet  they  are  gone 
forth  out  of  His  land  "  (xxxvi.  20).  They  felt 
all  that  was  implied  in  that  utterance  of  ma- 
licious satisfaction  over  the  collapse  of  a  re- 
ligion and  the  downfall  of  a  deity. 

There  is  another  way  in  which  the  thought  of 
Canaan  as  Jehovah's  land  enters  into  the  re- 
ligious conceptions  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
very  markedly  into  those  of  Ezekiel.  As  the 
God  of  the  land  Jehovah  is  the  source  of 
its  productiveness  and  the  author  of  all  the 
natural  blessings  enjoyed  by  its  inhabitants.  It 
is  He  who  gives  the  rain  in  its  season  or  else 
withholds  it  in  token  of  His  displeasure;  it  is 
He  who  multiplies  or  diminishes  the  flocks  and 
herds  which  feed  on  its  pastures,  as  well  as 
the  human  population  sustained  by  its  produce. 
This  view  of  things  was  a  primary  factor  in 
the  religious  education  of  an  agricultural  people, 
as  the  ancient  Hebrews  mainly  were.  They  felt 
their  dependence  on  God  most  directly  in  the 
influences  of  their  uncertain  climate  on  the  fer- 
tility of  their  land,  with  its  great  possibilities 
of  abundant  provision  for  man  and  beast,  and 
on  the  other  hand  its  extreme  risk  of  famine 
and  all  the  hardships  that  follow  in  its  train. 
In  the  changeful  aspects  of  nature  they  thus 
read  instinctively  the  disposition  of  Jehovah 
towards  themselves.  Fruitful  seasons  and  golden 
harvests,  diflfusing  comfort  and  affluence  through 
the  community,  were  regarded  as  proofs  that 
all  was  well  between  them  and  their  God;  while 
times  of  barrenness  and  scarcity  brought  home 
to  them  the  conviction  that  Jehovah  was  alien- 
ated. From  the  allusions  in  the  prophets  to 
droughts  and  famines,  to  blastings  and  mildew, 
to  the  scourge  of  locusts,  we  seem  to*  gather 
that,  on  the  whole,  the  later  history  of  Israel 
had  been  marked  by  agricultural  distress. 
The  impression  is  confirmed  by  a  hint  of 
Ezekiel's  in  the  passage  now  before  us.  The 
land  of  Canaan  had  apparently  acquired  an  un- 
enviable reputation  for  barrenness.  The  re- 
proach of  the  heathen  lay  upon  it  as  a  land 
♦Josh.  xxii.  19;  I  Sam.  xxvi.  19;  Hosea  ix.  3-5. 


3°4 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


that  "  devoured  men  and  bereaved  its  popula- 
tion."* The  reference  may  be  partly  (as  Smend 
thinks)  to  the  ravages  of  war,  to  which  Pales- 
tine was  peculiarly  exposed  on  account  of  its 
important  strategic  situation.  But  the  "  re- 
proach of  famine  "t  was  certainly  one  point  in 
•ts  ill  fame  among  the  surrounding  nations,  and 
it  is  quite  sufficient  to  explain  the  strong  lan- 
guage in  which  they  expressed  their  contempt. 
Now  this  state  of  things  was  plainly  inconsist- 
ent with  the  amicable  relations  between  the  na- 
tion and  its  God.  It  was  evidence  that  the  land 
lay  under  the  blight  of  Jehovah's  displeasure, 
and  the  ground  of  that  displeasure  lay  in  the 
sin  of  the  people.  Where  the  land  counted  for 
so  much  as  an  index  to  the  mind  of  God,  it 
was  a  postulate  of  faith  that  in  the  ideal  future 
when  God  and  Israel  were  perfectly  reconciled 
the  physical  condition  of  Canaan  should  be 
worthy  of  Him  whose  land  it  was.  And  we 
have  already  seen  that  amongst  the  glories  of 
the  Messianic  age  the  preternatural  fertility  of 
the  Holy  Land  holds  a  prominent  place. 

This  conception  of  Canaan  as  the  Land  of 
Jehovah  undoubtedly  has  its  natural  affinities 
with  religious  notions  of  a  somewhat  primitive 
kind.  It  belongs  to  the  stage  of  thought  at 
which  the  power  of  a  god  is  habitually  regarded 
as  subject  to  local  limitations,  and  in  which 
accordingly  a  particular  territory  is  assigned  to 
every  deity  as  the  sphere  of  his  influence.-  It 
is  probable  that  the  great  mass  of  the  Hebrew 
people  had  never  risen  above  this  idea,  but  con- 
tinued to  think  of  their  country  as  Jehovah's 
land  in  precisely  the  same  way  as  Assyria  was 
Asshur's  land  and  Moab  the  land  of  Chemosh. 
The  monotheism  of  the  Old  Testament  reve- 
lation breaks  through  this  system  of  ideas,  and 
interprets  Jehovah's  relation  to  the  land  in  an 
entirely  different  sense.  It  is  not  as  the  exclusive 
sphere  of  His  influence  that  Canaan  is  peculiarly 
associated  with  Jehovah's  presence,  but  mainly 
because  it  is  the  scene  of  His  historical  manifes- 
tation of  Himself,  and  the  stage  on  which 
events  were  transacted  which  revealed  His  God- 
head to  all  the  world.  No  prophet  has  a  clearer 
perception  of  the  universal  sweep  of  the  divine 
government  than  Ezekiel,  and  yet  no  prophet 
insists  more  strongly  than  he  on  the  possession 
of  the  land  of  Canaan  as  an  indispensable  symbol 
of  communion  between  God  and  His  people. 
He  has  met  with  God  in  the  "  unclean  land " 
of  his  exile,  and  he  knows  that  the  moral  gov- 
ernment of  the  universe  is  not  suspended  by 
the  departure  of  Jehovah  from  His  earthly  sanc- 
tuary. Nevertheless  he  cannot  think  of  this  sep- 
aration as  other  than  temporary.  The  final  rec- 
onciliation must  take  place  on  the  soil  of  Pales- 
tine. The  kingdom  of  God  can  only  be  estab- 
lished by  the  return  both  of  Israel  and  Jehovah 
to  their  own  land;  and  their  joint  possession 
of  that  land  is  the  seal  of  the  everlasting  cove- 
nant of  peace  that  subsists  between  them. 

We  must  now  proceed  to  study  the  way  in 
which  these  conceptions  influenced  the  Mes- 
sianic expectations  of  Ezekiel  at  this  period  of 
his  life.  The  passage  we  are  to  consider  con- 
sists of  three  sections.  The  thirty-fifth  chap- 
ter is  a  prophecy  of  judgment  on  Edom.  The 
first  fifteen  verses  of  chap,  xxxvi.  contain  a 
promise  of  the  restoration  of  the  land  of  Israel 
to  its  rightful  owner.  And  the  remainder  of 
that  chapter  presents  a  comprehensive  view  of 
*  Ch.  xxxvi.  13.  tCh.  xxxvi.  30  :  cf.  xxxiv.  2q. 


the  divine  necessity  for  the  restoration  and  the 
power  by  which  the  redemption  of  the  people  is 
to  be  accomplished. 


At  the  time  when  these  prophecies  were  writ- 
ten the  land  of  Israel  was  in  the  possession  of 
the  Edomites.  By  what  means  they  had  suc- 
ceeded in  effecting  a  lodgment  in  the  country 
we  do  not  know.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  Nebu- 
chadnezzar may  have  granted  them  this  exten- 
sion of  their  territory  as  a  reward  for  their  ser- 
vices to  his  army  during  the  last  siege  of  Je- 
rusalem. At  all  events  their  presence  there  was 
an  accomplished  fact,  and  it  appeals  to  the  mind 
of  the  prophet  in  two  aspects.  In  the  first  place 
it  was  an  outrage  on  the  majesty  of  Jehovah 
which  filled  the  cup  of  Edom's  iniquity  to  the 
brim.  In  the  second  place  it  was  an  obstacle 
to  the  restoration  of  Israel  which  had  to  be 
removed  by  the  direct  intervention  of  the  Al- 
mighty. These  are  the  two  themes  which  oc- 
cupy the  thoughts  of  Ezekiel,  the  one  in  chap, 
xxxv.  and  the  other  in  chap,  xxxvi.  Hitherto 
he  had  spoken  of  the  return  to  the  land  of 
Canaan  as  a  matter  of  course,  as  a  thing  neces- 
sary and  self-evident  and  not  needing  to  be  dis- 
cussed in  detail.  But  as  the  time  draws  near  he 
is  led  to  think  more  clearly  of  the  historical 
circumstances  of  the  return,  and  especially  of 
the  hindrances  arising  from  the  actual  situation 
of  affairs. 

But  besides  this  one  cannot  fail  to  be  struck 
by  the  effective  contrast  which  the  two  pictures 
— one  of  the  mountain  land  of  Israel,  and  the 
other  of  the  mountain  land  of  Seir — present  to 
the  imagination.  It  is  like  a  prophetic  amplifi- 
cation of  the  blessing  and  curse  which  Isaac 
pronounced  on  the  progenitors  of  these  two  na- 
tions.    Of  the  one  it  is  said: — 

"  God  give  thee  of  the  dew  of  heaven,  and  of  the  fatness  of 
the  earth, 
And  abundance  of  corn  and  wine." 

And  of  the  other: — 

"  Surely  far  from  the  fatness  of  the  earth  shall  thy  dwell- 
ing be, 
And  far  from  the  dew  of  heaven  from  above.*  " 

In  that  forecast  of  the  destiny  of  the  two 
brothers  the  actual  characteristics  of  their  re- 
spective countries  are  tersely  and  accurately  ex- 
pressed. But  now,  when  the  history  of  both 
nations  is  about  to  be  brought  to  an  issue,  the 
contrast  is  emphasised  and  perpetuated.  The 
blessing  of  Jacob  is  confirmed  and  expanded 
into  a  promise  of  unimagined  felicity,  and  the 
equivocal  blessing  on  Esau  is  changed  into  an 
unqualified  and  permanent  curse.  Thus,  when 
the  mountains  of  Israel  break  forth  into  sing- 
ing, and  are  clothed  with  all  the  luxuriance  of 
vegetation  in  which  the  Oriental  imagination 
revels,  and  cultivated  by  a  happy  and  contented 
people,  those  of  Seir  are  doomed  to  perpetual 
sterility  and  become  a  horror  and  desolation  to 
all  that  pass  by. 

Confining  ourselves,  however,  to  the  thirty- 
fifth  chapter,  what  we  have  first  to  notice  is  the 
sins  by  which  the  Edomites  had  incurred 
this  judgment.  These  may  be  summed  up  under 
three  heads:  first,  their  unrelenting  hatred  of 
Israel,  which  in  the  day  of  Judah's  calamity 
*  Gen.  xxvii.  28,  3Q. 


Ezekiel  xxxv.,  xxxvi.] 


JEHOVAH'S    LAND. 


305 


had  broken  out  in  savage  acts  of  revenge  (ver. 
S);  second,  their  rejoicing  over  the  misfortunes 
of  Israel  and  the  desolation  of  its  land  (ver. 
15);  and  third,  their  eagerness  to  seize  the  land 
fs  soon  as  it  was  vacant  (ver.  10).  The  first 
and  second  of  these  have  been  already  spoken 
of  under  the  prophecies  on  foreign  nations;  it 
is  only  the  last  that  is  of  special  interest  in  the 
present  connection.  Of  course  the  motive  that 
prompted  Edom  was  natural,  and  it  may  be 
difficult  to  say  how  far  real  moral  guilt  was  in- 
volved in  it.  The  annexation  of  vacant  terri- 
to<-y,  as  the  land  of  Israel  practically  was  at 
this  time,  would  be  regarded  according  to 
modern  ideas  as  not  only  justifiable  but  praise- 
worthy. Edom  had  the  excuse  of  seeking  to 
better  its  condition  by  the  possession  of  a  more 
fertile  country  than  its  own,  and  perhaps  also 
the  still  stronger  pica  of  pressure  by  the 
Arabs  from  behind.  But  in  the  consciousness 
of  an  ancient  people  there  was  always  another 
thought  present;  and  it  is  here  if  anywhere  that 
the  sin  of  Edom  lies.  The  invasion  of  Israel 
did  not  cease  to  be  an  act  of  aggression  because 
there  were  no  human  defenders  to  bar  the  way. 
It  was  still  Jehovah's  land,  although  it  was  un- 
occupied; and  to  intrude  upon  it  was  a  conscious 
defiance  of  His  power.  The  arguments  by 
which  the  Edomites  justified  their  seizure  of 
it  were  none  of  those  which  a  modern  state 
might  use  in  similar  circumstances,  but  were 
based  on  the  religious  ideas  which  were  common 
to  all  the  world  in  those  days.  They  were  aware 
that  by  the  unwritten  law  which  then  prevailed 
the  step  they  meditated  was  sacrilege;  and  the 
spirit  that  animated  them  was  arrogant  exulta- 
tion over  what  was  esteemed  the  humiliation  of 
Israel's  national  deity:  "The  two  nations  and 
the  two  countries  shall  be  mine,  and  I  will  pos- 
sess them,  although  Jehovah  was  there  "  (ver. 
10:  cf.  \v.  12,  13).  That  is  to  say,  the  defeat 
and  captivity  of  Israel  had  proved  the  impotence 
of  Jehovah  to  guard  His  land;  His  power  is 
broken,  and  the  two  countries  called  by  His 
name  lie  open  to  the  invasion  of  any  people 
that  dares  to  trample  religious  scruples  under- 
foot. This  was  the  way  in  which  the  action 
of  Edom  would  be  interpreted  by  universal  con- 
sent; and  the  prophet  is  only  reflecting  the  gen- 
eral sense  of  the  age  when  he  charges  them  with 
this  impiety.  Now  it  is  true  that  the  Edomites 
could  not  be  expected  to  understand  all  that 
was  involved  in  a  defiance  of  the  God  of  Israel. 
To  them  He  was  only  one  among  many  national 
gods,  and  their  religion  did  not  teach  them  to 
reverence  the  gods  of  a  foreign  state.  But 
though  they  were  not  fully  conscious  of  the  de- 
gree of  guilt  they  incurred,  they  nevertheless 
sinned  against  the  light  they  had;  and  the  con- 
sequences of  transgression  are  never  measured 
by  the  sinner's  own  estimate  of  his  culpability. 
There  was  enough  in  the  history  of  Israel  to 
have  impressed  the  neighbouring  peoples  with 
a  sense  of  the  superiority  of  its  religion  and  the 
difference  in  character  between  Jehovah  and  all 
other  gods.  If  the  Edomites  had  utterly  failed 
to  learn  that  lesson,  they  were  themselves  partly 
to  blame;  and  the  spiritual  insensibility  and  dul- 
ness  of  conscience  which  everywhere  suppressed 
the  knowledge  of  Jehovah's  name  is  the  very 
thing  which  in  the  view  of  Ezekiel  needs  to  be 
removed  by  signal  and  exemplary  acts  of  judg- 
ment. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  minutely  into  the 
20— Vol.  IV. 


details  of  the  judgment  threatened  against 
Edom.  We  may  simply  note  that  it  corresponds 
point  for  point  with  the  demeanour  exhibited 
by  the  Edomites  in  the  time  of  Israel's  final 
retribution.  The  "  perpetual  hatred "  is  re- 
warded by  perpetual  desolation  (ver.  9) ;  their 
seizure  of  Jehovah's  land  is  punished  by  their 
annihilation  in  the  land  that  was  their  own  (vv. 
6-8);  and  their  malicious  satisfaction  over  the 
depopulation  of  Palestine  recoils  on  their  own 
heads  when  their  mountain  land  is  made  desolate 
"  to  the  rejoicing  of  the  whole  earth  "  (vv.  14, 
15).  And  the  lesson  that  will  be  taught  to  the 
world  by  the  contrast  between  the  renewed 
Israel  and  the  barren  mountain  of  Seir  will  be 
the  power  and  holiness  of  the  one  true  God: 
"  they  shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah." 

II. 

The  prophet's  mind  is  still  occupied  with  the 
sin  of  Edom  as  he  turns  in  the  thirty-sixth  chap- 
ter to  depict  the  future  of  the  land  of  Israel. 
The  opening  verses  of  the  chapter  (vv.  1-7)  be- 
tray an  intensity  of  patriotic  feeling  not  often 
expressed  by  Ezekiel.  The  utterance  of  the 
single  idea  which  he  wishes  to  express  seems 
to  be  impeded  by  the  multitude  of  reflections 
that  throng  upon  him  as  he  apostrophises  "  the 
mountains  and  the  hills,  the  watercourses  and 
the  valleys,  the  desolate  ruins  and  deserted 
cities "  of  his  native  country  (ver.  4).  The 
land  is  conceived  as  conscious  of  the  shame 
and  reproach  that  rest  upon  it;  and  all  the  ele- 
ments that  might  be  supposed  to  make  up  the 
consciousness  of  the  land — its  naked  desolation, 
the  tread  of  alien  feet,  the  ravages  of  war,  and 
the  derisive  talk  of  the  surrounding  heathen 
(Edom  being  specially  in  view) — present  them- 
selves to  the  mind  of  the  prophet  before  he 
can  utter  the  message  with  which  he  is  charged: 
"Thus  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah;  Behold,  I  speak 
in  My  jealousy  and  My  anger,  because  ye  have 
borne  the  shame  of  the  heathen:  therefore  .  .  . 
I  lift  up  My  hand.  Surely  the  nations  that  are 
round  about  you — even  they  shall  bear  their 
shame  "   (vv.  6,  7). 

The  jealousy  of  Jehovah  is  here  His  holy  re- 
sentment against  indignities  done  to  Himself, 
and  this  attribute  of  the  divine  nature  is  now 
enlisted  on  the  side  of  Israel  because  of  the 
despite  which  the  heathen  had  heaped  on  His 
land.  But  it  is  noteworthy  that  it  is  through 
the  land  and  not  the  people  that  this  feeling 
is  first  called  into  operation.  Israel  is  still  sin- 
ful and  alienated  from  God;  but  the  honour  of 
Jehovah  is  bound  up  with  the  land  not  less  than 
with  the  nation,  and  it  is  in  reference  to  it  that 
the  necessity  of  vindicating  His  holy  name  first 
becomes  apparent.  There  is  what  we  might  al- 
most venture  to  call  a  divine  patriotism,  which 
is  stirred  into  activity  by  the  desolate  condition 
of  the  land  where  the  worship  of  the  true  God 
should  be  celebrated.  On  this  feature  of  Je- 
hovah's character  Ezekiel  builds  the  assurance 
of  his  people's  redemption.  The  idea  expressed 
by  the  verses  is  simply  the  certainty  that  Canaan 
shall  be  recovered  from  the  heathen  dominion 
for  the  purposes  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 

The  following  verses  (8-15)  speak  of  the  posi- 
tive aspects  of  the  approaching  deliverance. 
Continuing  his  apostrophe  to  the  mountains  of 
Israel,  the  prophet  describes  the  transformation 
which  is  to  pass  over  them   in  view  of  the  re- 


3o6 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


turn  o\  the  exiled  nation,  which  is  now  on  the 
eve  of  accomplishment  (ver.  8).  It  might  almost 
seem  as  if  the  return  of  the  inhabitants  were 
here  treated  as  a  mere  incident  of  the  rehabilita- 
tion of  the  land.  That  of  course  is  only  an  ap- 
pearance caused  by  the  peculiar  standpoint  as- 
sumed throughout  these  chapters.  Ezekiel  was 
not  one  who  could  look  on  complacently 

'  Where  wealth  accumulates  and  men  decay  ; " 

nor  was  he  indifferent  to  the  social  welfare  of 
his  people.  On  the  contrary  we  have  seen  from 
chap,  xxxiv.  that  he  regards  that  as  a  supreme 
interest  in  the  future  kingdom  of  God.  And 
even  in  this  passage  he  does  not  make  the  in- 
terests of  humanity  subservient  to  those  of  na- 
ture. His  leading  idea  is  a  reunion  of  land  and 
people  under  happier  auspices  than  had  obtained 
of  old.  Formerly  the  land,  in  mysterious  sym- 
pathy with  the  mind  of  Jehovah,  had  seemed 
to  be  animated  by  a  hostile  disposition  towards 
its  inhabitants.  The  reluctant  and  niggardly 
subsistence  that  had  been  wrung  from  the  soil 
justified  the  evil  report  which  the  spies  had 
brought  up  of  it  at  the  first  as  a  "  land  that 
eateth  up  the  inhabitants  thereof."  *  Its  inhos- 
pitable character  was  known  among  the  heathen, 
so  that  it  bore  the  reproach  of  being  a  land  that 
"  devoured  men  and  bereaved  its  nation."  But 
in  the  glorious  future  all  this  will  be  changed 
in  harmony  with  Jehovah's  altered  relations 
with  His  people.  In  the  language  of  a  later 
prophet,!  the  land  shall  be  "  married "  to  Je- 
hovah, and  endowed  with  exuberant  fertility. 
Yielding  its  fruits  freely  and  generously,  it  will 
wipe  off  the  reproach  of  the  heathen;  its  cities 
shall  be  inhabited,  its  ruins  rebuilt,  and  man  and 
beast  multiplied  on  its  surface,  so  that  its  last 
state  shall  be  better  than  its  first  (ver.  ii).  And 
those  who  till  it  and  enjoy  the  benefits  of  its 
wonderful  transformation  shall  be  none  other 
than  the  house  of  Israel,  for  whose  sins  it  had 
borne  the  reproach  of  barrenness  in  the  past 
(vv.  12-15). 

III. 

The  next  passage  (vv.  16-38)  deals  more  with 
the  renewal  of  the  nation  than  with  that  of  the 
land;  and  thus  forms  a  link  of  connection  be- 
tween the  main  theme  of  this  chapter  and  that 
of  chap,  xxxvii.  It  contains  the  clearest  and 
most  comprehensive  statement  of  the  process  of 
redemption  to  be  found  in  the  whole  book,  ex- 
hibiting as  it  does  in  logical  order  all  the  ele- 
ments which  enter  into  the  divime  scheme  of 
salvation.  The  fact  that  it  is  inserted  just  at 
this  point  affords  a  fresh  illustration  of  the  im- 
portance attached  by  the  prophet  to  the  reli- 
gious associations  which  gathered  round  the 
Holy  Land.  The  land  indeed  is  still  the  pivot  on 
which  his  thoughts  turn;  he  starts  from  it  in 
his  short  review  of  God's  past  judgments  on 
His  people,  and  finally  returns  to  it  in  summing 
up  the  world-wide  effects  of  His  gracious  deal- 
ings with  them  in  the  immediate  future.  Al- 
though the  connection  of  ideas  is  singularly 
clear,  the  passage  throws  so  much  light  on  the 
deepest  theological  conceptions  of  Ezekiel  that 
it  will  be  well  to  recapitulate  the  principal  steps 
of  the  argument. 

We  need  not  linger  on  the  cause   of  the  re- 


*Numb.  xiii.  32. 


t  Isa.  Ixii.  4. 


jection  of  Israel,  for  here  the  prophet  only  re- 
peats the  main  lesson  which  we  have  found  so 
often  enforced  in  the  first  part  of  his  book. 
Israel  went  into  exile  because  its  manner  of  life 
as  a  nation  had  been  abhorrent  to  Jehovah,  and 
it  had  defiled  the  land  which  was  Jehovah's 
house.  As  in  chap.  xxii.  and  elsewhere,  blood- 
shed and  idols  are  the  chief  emblems  of  the 
people's  sinful  condition;  these  constitute  a  real 
physical  defilement  of  the  land,  which  must  be 
punished  by  the  eviction  of  its  inhabitants:  "  So 
I  poured  out  My  wrath  upon  them  [on  ac- 
count of  the  blood  which  they  had  shed  upon 
the  land,  and  the  idols  wherewith  they  had  pol- 
luted it] :  and  I  scattered  them  among  the 
nations,  and  they  were  dispersed  through  the 
countries."  * 

Thus  the  Exile  was  necessary  for  the  vindica- 
tion of  Jehovah's  holiness  as  reflected  in  the 
sanctity  of  His  land.  But  the  effect  of  the  dis- 
persion on  other  nations  was  such  as  to  com- 
promise the  honour  of  Israel's  God  in  another 
direction.  Knowing  Jehovah  only  as  a  tribal 
god,  the  heathen  naturally  concluded  that  He 
had  been  too  feeble  to  protect  His  land  from 
invasion  and  His  people  from  captivity.  They 
could  not  penetrate  to  the  moral  reasons  which 
rendered  the  chastisement  inevitable;  they  only 
saw  that  these  were  Jehovah's  people,  and  yet 
they  were  gone  forth  out  of  His  land  (ver.  20), 
and  drew  the  natural  inference.  The  impression 
thus  produced  by  the  presence  of  Israelites 
amongst  the  heathen  was  derogatory  to  the 
majesty  of  Jehovah,  and  obscured  the  knowledge 
of  the  true  principles  of  His  government  which 
was  destined  to  extend  to  all  the  earth.  This 
is  all  that  seems  to  be  meant  by  the  expression 
"profaned  My  holy  name."t  It  is  not  implied 
that  the  exiles  scandalised  the  heathen  by  their 
vicious  lives,  and  so  brought  disgrace  on  "  that 
glorious  name  by  which  they  were  called,"  t  al- 
though that  idea  is  implied  in  chap.  xii.  16. 
The  profanation  spoken  of  here  was  caused  di- 
rectly not  by  the  sin  but  by  the  calamities  of 
Israel.  Yet  it  was  their  sins  which  brought 
down  judgment  upon  them,  and  so  indirectly 
gave  occasion  to  the  enemies  of  the  Lord  to 
blaspheme.  There  were  probably  already  some 
of  Ezekiel's  compatriots  who  realised  the  bitter- 
ness of  the  thought  that  their  fate  was  the  means 
of  bringing  discredit  on  their  God.  Their  ex- 
perience would  be  similar  to  that  of  the  lonely 
exile  who  composed  the  forty-second  psalm: — 

"  As  with  a  sword  in  my  bones,  mine  enemies  reproach 
me  ;  While  they  say  daily  unto  me.  Where  is  thy  God  ?  §  " 

Now  in  this  fact  the  prophet  recognises  an 
absolute  ground  of  confidence  in  Israel's  res- 
toration. Jehovah  cannot  endure  that  His  name 
should  thus  be  held  up  to  derision  before  the 
eyes  of  mankind.  To  allow  this  would  be  to 
frustrate  the  end  of  His  government  of  the 
world,  which  is  to  manifest  His  Godhead  in 
such  a  way  that  all  men  shall  be  brought  to 
acknowledge  it.  Although  He  is  known  as  yet 
only  as  the  national  God  of  a  particular  people, 
He  must  be  disclosed  to  the  world  as  all  that 
the  inspired  teachers  of  Israel  know  Him  to 
be — the  one  Being  worthy  of  the  homage  of 
the  human  heart.  There  must  be  some  way  by 
which   His   name    can   be    sanctified   before   the 

*  Vv.  i8,  19.    The  words  in  brackets  are  wanting  in  the 
LXX. 
t  Vv.  20,  22,  23.  J  James  ii.  7.  §  Psalm  xlii.  10. 


Ezekiel  xxxv.,  xxxvi.J 


JEHOVAH'S    LAND. 


307 


heathen,  some  means  of  reconciling  the  partial 
revelation  of  His  holiness  in  Israel's  dispersion 
with  the  complete  manifestation  of  His  power 
to  the  world  at  large.  And  this  reconciliation 
can  only  be  effected  through  the  redemption  of 
Israel.  God  cannot  disown  His  ancient  peQple, 
for  that  would  be  to  stultify  the  whole  past 
revelation  of  His  character  and  leave  the  name 
by  which  He  had  made  Himself  known  to  con- 
tempt. That  is  divinely  impossible;  and  there- 
fore Jehovah  must  carry  through  His  purpose 
by  sanctifying  Himself  in  the  salvation  of  Israel. 
The  outward  token  of  salvation  will  be  their 
restoration  to  their  own  land  (ver.  24) ;  but  the 
inward  reality  of  it  will  be  a  change  in  the  na- 
tional character  which  will  make  their  dwelling 
in  the  land  consistent  with  the  revelation  of  Je- 
hovah's holiness  already  given  by  their  banish- 
ment from  it. 

At  this  point  accordingly  (ver.  25)  Ezekiel 
passes  to  speak  of  the  spiritual  process  of  re- 
generation by  which  Israel  is  to  be  transformed 
into  a  true  people  of  God.  This  is  a  necessary 
part  of  the  sanctification  of  the  divine  name  be- 
fore the  world.  The  new  life  of  the  people 
will  reveal  the  character  of  the  God  whom  they 
serve,  and  the  change  will  explain  the  calamities 
that  had  befallen  them  in  the  past.  The  world 
will  thus  see  "  that  the  house  of  Israel  went 
into  captivity  for  their  iniquity,"  *  and  will  un- 
derstand the  holiness  which  the  true  God  re- 
quires in  His  worshippers.  But  for  the  present 
the  prophet's  thoughts  are  concentrated  on  the 
operations  of  the  divine  grace  by  which  the  re- 
newal is  effected.  His  analysis  of  the  process 
of  conversion  is  profoundly  instructive,  and  an- 
ticipates to  a  remarkable  degree  the  teaching 
of  the  Old  Testament.  We  shall  content  our- 
selves at  present  with  merely  enumerating  the 
different  parts  of  the  process.  The  fi,rst^  step 
IS  the  removal  of  the  impurities  contracted  by 
past  transgressions.  This  is  represented  under 
the  figure  of  sprinkling  with  clean  water,  sug- 
gested by  the  ablutions  or  lustrations  which  are 
io  common  a  feature  of  the  Levitical  ritual  (ver. 
35).  The  truth  symbolised  is  the  forgiveness 
of  sins,  the  act  of  grace  which  takes  away  the 
effect  of  moral  uncleanness  as  a  barrier  to  fel- 
lowship with  God.  The  aacaiid  point  is  what 
is  properly  called  regeneration,  the  giving  of 
a  new  heart  and  spirit  (ver.  26).  The  stony 
heart  of  the  old  nation,  whose  obduracy  had 
dismayed  so  many  prophets,  making  them  feel 
that  they  had  spent  their  labour  for  nought  and 
in  vain,  shall  be  taken  away,  and  instead  of  it 
they  shall  receive  a  heart  of  flesh,  sensitive  to 
spiritual  influences  and  responsive  to  the  divine 
will.  And  to  this  is  added  in  the  tbijd  place 
the  promise  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  be  in  them 
as  the  ruling  principle  of  a  new  life  of  obedience 
to  the  law  of  God  (ver.  27).  The  law,  both 
moral  and  ceremonial,  is  the  expression  of  Je- 
hovah's holy  nature,  and  both  the  will  and  the 
power  to  keep  it  perfectly  must  proceed  from 
the  indwelling  of  His  Holy  Spirit  in  the  people,  f 
It  is  thus  Jehovah  Himself  who  "  saves  "  the 
people  "  out  of  all  their  uncleanness  "  (ver.  29), 
caused  by  the  depravity  and  infirmity  of  their 
natural  hearts.  When  these  conditions  are 
realised     the    harmony    between    Jehovah     and 

*  Ch.  xxxix   23. 

I-The  phrv.>e  "cause  you  to  walk"  (ver.  27)15  very 
strong  in  th^  Hebrew,  almost  "  I  will  bring  it  about  that 
ye  walk." 


Israel  will  be  completely  restored:  He  will  be 
their  God,  and  they  shall  be  His  people.  They 
shall  dwell  for  ever  in  the  land  promised  to  their 
fathers;  and  the  blessing  of  God  resting  on 
land  and  people  will  multiply  the  fruit  of  the 
tree  and  the  produce  of  the  field,  so  that  they 
receive  no  more  the  reproach  of  famine  among 
the  nations  (vv.  28-30). 

Having  thus  described  the  process  of  salva- 
tion as  from  first  to  last  the  work  of  Jehovah, 
the  prophet  proceeds  to  consider  the  impression 
which  it  will  produce  first  on  Israel  and  then  on 
the  surrounding  nations  (vv.  31-36).  On  Israel 
the  effect  of  the  goodness  of  God  will  be  to 
lead  them  to  repentance.  Remembering  what 
their  past  history  has  been,  and  contrasting  it  ^ 
with  the  blessedness  they  now  enjoy,  they  shall 
be  filled  with  shame  and  self-contempt,  loath- 
ing themselves  for  their  iniquities  and  their 
abominations.  It  is  not  meant  that  all  feelings 
of  joy  and  gratitude  will  be  swallowed  up  in 
the  consciousness  of  unworthiness;  but  this  is 
the  feeling  that  will  be  called  forth  by  the  mem- 
ory of  their  past  transgressions.  Their  horror 
of  sin  will  be  such  that  they  cannot  think  of 
what  they  have  been  without  the  deepest  com- 
punction and  self-abasement.  And  this  sense 
of  the  exceeding  sinfulness  of  sin,  reacting  on 
their  consciousness  of  themselves,  will  be  the 
best  moral  guarantee  against  their  relapse  into 
the  uncleanness  from  which  they  have  been  de- 
livered. 

To  the  heathen,  on  the  other  hand,  the  state 
of  Israel  will  be  a  convincing  demonstration  of 
the  power  and  godhead  of  Jehovah.  Men  will 
say,  "  Yonder  land,  which  was  desolate,  has  be- 
come like  the  garden  of  Eden;  and  the  cities 
that  were  ruined  and  waste  and  destroyed  are 
fenced  and  inhabited "  (ver.  35).  They  will 
know  that  it  is  Jehovah's  doing,  and  it  will  be 
marvellous  in  their  eyes. 

The  last  two  verses  seem  to  be  an  appendix. 
They  deal  with  a  special  feature  of  the  restora- 
tion, about  which  the  minds  of  the  exiles  may 
have  been  exercised  in  thinking  of  the  possibility 
of  their  deliverance.  Where  was  the  population 
of  the  new  Israel  to  come  from?  The  popula- 
tion of  Judah  must  have  been  terribly  reduced 
by  the  disastrous  wars  that  had  desolated  the 
country  since  the  time  of  Hezekiah.  How  was 
it  possible,  with  a  few  thousands  in  exile,  and 
a  miserable  remnant  left  in  the  land,  to  build 
up  a  strong  and  prosperous  nation?  This 
thought  of  theirs  is  met  by  the  announcement  of 
a  great  increase  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  land. 
Jehovah  is  ready  to  meet  the  questionings  of 
human  anxiety  on  this  point:  He  will  "  let  Him- 
self be  inquired  of "  for  this.*  The  remem- 
brance of  the  sacrificial  flocks  that  used  to 
throng  the  streets  leading  to  the  Temple  at  the 
time  of  the  great  festivals  supplies  Ezekiel  with 
an  image  of  the  teeming  population  that  shall 
be  in  all  the  cities  of  Canaan  when  this 
prophecy  is  fulfilled. 

Such  is  in  outline  the  scheme  of  redemption 
which  Ezekiel  presents  to  the  minds  of  his  read- 
ers.    We  shall  reserve  a  fuller  consideration  of 

*  The  thirty-seventh  verse  hardly  bears  the  sense  which 
is  sometimes  put  upon  it :  "I  am  ready  to  do  this  for  the 
house  of  Israel,  yet  I  will  not  do  it  until  they  have  learned 
to  pray  for  it."  That  is  true  of  spiritual  blessings 
generally  ;  but  Ezekiel's  idea  is  simpler.  The  particle 
"j-et"  is  not  adversative  but  temporal,  and  the  "  this  ' 
refers  to  what  follows,  and  not  to  what  precedes.  'I'ne 
meaning  is,  "The  time  shall  come  when  I  will  answer  the 
prayer  of  the  house  of  Israel,"  etc. 


3o8 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


its  more  important  doctrines  for  a  separate 
chapter.*  One  general  application  of  its  teach- 
ing, however,  may  be  pointed  out  before  leav- 
ing the  subject.  We  see  that  for  Ezekiel  the 
mysteries  and  perplexities  of  the  divine  govern- 
ment find  their  solution  in  the  idea  of  redemp- 
tion. He  is  aware  of  the  false  impression  neces- 
sarily produced  on  the  heathen  mind  by  God's 
dealings  with  His  people,  as  long  as  the  process 
is  incomplete.  On  account  of  Israel's  sin  the 
revelation  of  God  in  providence  is  gradual  and 
fragmentary,  and  seems  even  for  a  time  to  defeat 
its  own  end.  The  omnipotence  of  God  was  ob- 
scured by  the  very  act  of  vindicating  His  holi- 
ness; and  what  was  in  itself  a  great  step  towards 
the  complete  revelation  of  His  character  came 
^  on  the  world  in  the  first  instance  as  an  evidence 
of  His  impotence.  But  the  prophet,  looking  be- 
yond this  to  the  final  effect  of  God's  work  upon 
the  world,  sees  that  Jehovah  can  be  truly  known 
only  in  the  manifestation  of  His  redeeming 
grace.  All  the  enigmas  and  contradictions  that 
arise  from  imperfect  comprehension  of  His 
purpose  find  their  answer  in  this  truth,  that  God 
will  yet  redeem  Israel  from  its  iniquities.  God 
is  His  own  interpreter,  and  when  His  work  of 
salvation  is  finished  the  result  will  be  a  con- 
clusive demonstration  of  that  lofty  conception 
of  God  to  which  the  prophet  had  attained. 

Now  this  argument  of  Ezekiel's  illustrates  a 
principle  of  wide  application.  Many  objections 
that  are  advanced  against  the  theistic  view  of 
the  universe  seem  to  proceed  on  the  assumption 
that  the  actual  state  of  the  world  adequately  rep- 
resents the  mind  of  its  Creator.  The  heathen 
of  Ezekiel's  day  have  their  modern  representa- 
tives amongst  dispassionate  critics  of  Providence 
like  J.  S.  Mill,  who  prove  to  their  own  satisfac- 
tion that  the  world  cannot  be  the  work  of  a  be- 
ing answering  to  the  Christian  idea  of  God. 
Do  what  you  will,  they  say,  to  minimise  the  evils 
of  existence,  there  is  still  an  amount  of  undenia- 
ble pain  and  misery  in  the  world  which  is  fatal 
to  your  doctrine  of  an  all-powerful  and  perfectly 
good  Creator.  Omnipotence  could,  and  benev- 
olence would  find  a  remedy;  the  Author  of  the 
universe,  therefore,  cannot  possess  both.  God, 
in  short,  if  there  be  a  God,  may  be  benevolent, 
or  He  may  be  omnipotent;  but  if  benevolent 
He  is  not  omnipotent,  and  if  omnipotent  He 
cannot  ber  benevolent.  How  very  convincing 
this  is — from  the  standpoint  of  the  neutral,  non- 
Christian  observer!  And  how  poor  a  defence 
is  sometimes  made  by  the  optimism  which  tries 
to  make  out  that  most  evils  are  blessings  in  dis- 
guise, and  the  rest  not  worth  minding!  The 
Christian  religion  rises  superior  to  such  criticism 
mainly  in  virtue  of  its  living  faith  in  redemption. 
It  does  not  explain  away  evil,  nor  does  it  pro- 
fess to  account  for  its  origin.  It  speaks  of  the 
whole  creation  groaning  and  travailing  in  pain 
together  even  until  now.  But  it  also  describes 
the  creation  as  waiting  for  the  manifestation  of 
the  sons  of  God.  It  teaches  us  to  discover  in 
history  the  unfolding  of  a  purpose  of  redemption 
the  end  of  which  will  be  the  deliverance  of  man- 
kind from  the  dominion  of  sin  and  their  eternal 
blessedness  in  the  kingdom  of  our  God  and  His 
Christ.  What  Ezekiel  foresaw  in  the  form  of  a 
national  restoration  will  be  accomplished  in  a 
world-wide  '  salvation,  in  a  new  heavens  and 
a  new  earth,  where  there  shall  be  no  more 
curse.  But  meanwhile  to  judge  of  God  from 
*  Chapter  xxiii.  below. 


what  is,  apart  from  what  is  yet  to  be  re-^ 
vealed.  is  to  repeat  the  mistake  of  those  who 
judge  Jehovah  to  be  an  effete  tribal  deity  be- 
cause He  had  suffered  His  people  to  go  forth 
out  of  their  land.  Those  who  have  been 
brought  into  sympathy  with  the  divine  purpose, 
and  have  experienced  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  in  subduing  the  evil  of  their  own  hearts, 
can  hold  with  unwavering  confidence  the  hope 
of  a  universal  victory  of  good  over  evil;  and  in 
the  light  of  that  hope  the  mysteries  that  sur- 
round the  moral  government  of  God  cease  to 
disturb  their  faith  in  the  eternal  Love  which 
labours  patiently  and  unceasingly  for  the  re- 
demption of  man. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

LIFE    FROM    THE    DEAD. 

Ezekiel  xxxvii. 

The  most  formidable  obstacle  to  faith  on  the 
part  of  the  exiles  in  the  possibility  of  a  national 
redemption  was  the  complete  disintegration  of 
the  ancient  people  of  Israel.  Hard  as  it  was  to 
realise  that  Jehovah  still  lived  and  reigned  in 
spite  of  the  cessation  of  His  worship,  and  hard 
to  hope  for  a  recovery  of  the  land  of  Canaan 
from  the  dominion  of  the  heathen,  these  things 
were  still  conceivable.  What  almost  surpassed 
conception  was  the  restoration  of  national  life 
to  the  feeble  and  demoralised  remnant  who  had 
survived  the  fall  of  the  state.  It  was  no  mere 
figure  of  speech  that  these  exiles  employed  when 
they  thought  of  their  nation  as  dead.  Cast  off 
by  its  God,  driven  from  its  land,  dismembered 
and  deprived  of  its  political  organisation,  Israel 
as  a  people  had  ceased  to  exist.  Not  only  were 
the  outward  symbols  of  national  unity  destroyed, 
but  the  national  spirit  was  extinct.  Just  as  the 
destruction  of  the  bodily  organism  implies  the 
death  of  each  separate  member  and  organ  and 
cell,  so  the  individual  Israelites  felt  themselves 
to  be  as  dead  men,  dragging  out  an  aimless  ex- 
istence without  hope  in  the  world.  While  Israel 
was  alive  they  had  lived  in  her  and  for  her;  all 
the  best  part  of  their  life,  religion,  duty,  liberty, 
and  loyalty  had  been  bound  up  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  belonging  to  a  nation  with  a  proud 
history  behind  them  and  a  brilliant  future  for 
their  posterity.  Now  that'  Israel  had  perished 
all  spiritual  and  ideal  significance  had  gone  out 
of  their  lives;  there  remained  but  a  selfish  and 
sordid  struggle  for  existence,  and  this  they  felt 
was  not  life,  but  death  in  life.  And  thus  a  prom- 
ise of  deliverance  which  appealed  to  them  as 
members  of  a  nation  seemed  to  them  a  mockery, 
because  they  felt  in  themselves  that  the  bond  of 
national  life  was  irrevocably  broken. 

The  hardest  part  of  Ezekiel's  task  at  this  time 
was  therefore  to  revive  the  national  sentiment, 
so  as  to  meet  the  obvious  objection  that  even  if 
Jehovah  were  able  to  drive  the  heathen  from 
His  land  there  was  still  no  people  of  Israel  to 
whom  He  could  give  it.  If  only  the  exiles  could 
be  brought  to  believe  that  Israel  had  a  future, 
that  although  now  dead  it  could  be  raised  from 
the  dead,  the  spiritual  meaning  of  their  life 
would  be  given  back  to  them  in  the  form  of 
hope,  and  faith  in  God  would  be  possible.  Ac- 
cordingly the  prophet's  thoughts  are  now  di- 
rected to  the  idea  of  the  nation  as  the  third  factor 


Ezekiel  xxxvii.] 


LIFE    FROM    THE    DEAD. 


309 


of  the  Messianic  hope.  He  has  spoken  of  the 
kingdom  and  the  land,  and  each  of  these  ideas 
has  led  him  on  to  the  contemplation  of  the  final 
condition  of  the  world,  in  which  Jehovah's  pur- 
pose is  fully  manifested.  So  in  this  chapter  he 
finds  in  the  idea  of  the  nation  a  new  point  of 
departure,  from  which  he  proceeds  to  delineate 
once  more  the  Messianic  salvation  in  its  com- 
pleteness. 


The  vision  of  the  valley  of  dry  bones  dessribed 
in  the  first  part  of  the  chapter  contains  the  an- 
swer to  the  desponding  thoughts  of  the  exiles, 
and  seems  indeed  to  be  directly  sug:gestcd  by  the 
figure  in  which  the  popular  feeling  was  cur- 
rently expressed:  "Our  bones  are  dried;  our 
hope  is  lost:  we  feel  ourselves  cut  ofi"  (ver. 
11).  The  fact  that  the  answer  came  to  the 
prophet  in  a  state  of  trance  may  perhaps  indicate 
that  his  mind  had  brooded  over  these  words  of 
the  people  for  some  time  before  the  moment 
of  inspiration.  Recognising  how  faithfully  they 
represented  the  actual  situation,  he  was  yet  un- 
able to  suggest  an  adequate  solution  of  the  dififi- 
culty  by  means  of  the  prophetic  conceptions 
hitherto  revealed  to  him.  Such  a  vision  as  this 
seems  to  presuppose  a  period  of  intense  mental 
activity  on  the  part  of  Ezekiel,  during  which  the 
despairing  utterance  of  his  compatriots  sounded 
in  his  ears;  and  the  image  of  the  dried  bones 
of  the  house  of  Israel  so  f-xed  itself  in  his  mind 
that  he  could  not  escape  its  gloomy  associations 
except  by  a  direct  communication  from  above. 
When  at  last  the  hand  of  the  Lord  came  upon 
him,  the  revelation  clothed  itself  in  a  form  corre- 
sponding to  his  previous  meditations;  the  em- 
blem of  death  and  despair  is  transformed  into 
a  symbol  of  assured  hope  through  the  astound- 
ing vision  which  unfolds  itself  before  his  inner 
eye. 

In  the  ecstasy  he  feels  himself  led  out  in  spirit 
to  the  plain  which  had  been  the  scene  of  former 
appearances  of  God  to  His  prophet.  But  on  this 
occasion  he  sees  it  covered  with  bones — "  very 
many  on  the  surface  of  the  valley,  and  very  dry." 
He  is  made  to  pass  round  about  them,  in  order 
that  the  full  impression  of  this  spectacle  of  deso- 
lation might  sink  into  his  mind.  His  attention 
is  engrossed  by  two  facts — their  exceeding  great 
number,  and  their  parched  appearance,  as  if  they 
had  lain  there  long.  In  other  circumstances  the 
question  might  have  suggested  itself,  How  came 
these  bones  there?  What  countless  host  has 
perished  here,  lea.ving  its  unburied  bones  to 
bleach  and  wither  on  the  open  plain?  But  the 
prophet  has  no  need  to  think  of  this.  They  are 
the  bones  which  had  been  familiar  to  his  waking 
thoughts,  the  dry  bones  of  the  house  of  Israel. 
The  question  he  hears  addressed  to  him  is  not, 
Whence  are  these  bones?  but.  Can  these  bones 
live?  It  is  the  problem  which  had  exercised  his 
faith  in  thinking  of  a  national  restoration  which 
thus  comes  back  to  him  in  vision,  to  receive  its 
final  solution  from  Him  who  alone  can  give  it. 

The  prophet's  hesitating  answer  probably  re- 
veals the  struggle  between  faith  and  sight,  be- 
tween hope  and  fear,  which  was  latent  in  his 
mind.  He  dare  not  say  No,  for  that  would  be 
to  limit  the  power  of  Him  whom  he  knows  to 
be  omnipotent,  and  also  to  shut  out  the  last 
gleam  of  hope  from  his  own  mind.  Yet  in 
presence  of  that  appalling  scene  of  hopeless  de- 


cay and  death  he  cannot  of  his  own  initiative  as- 
sert the  possibility  of  resurrection.  In  the  ab- 
stract all  things  are  possible  with  God;  but 
whether  this  particular  thing,  so  inconceivable 
to  men,  is  within  the  active  purpose  of  God,  is 
a  question  which  none  can  answer  save  God 
Himself.  Ezekiel  does  what  man  must  always 
do  in  such  a  case — he  throws  himself  back  on 
God,  and  reverently  awaits  the  disclosure  of  His 
will,  saying,  "  O  Jehovah  God,  Thou  Knowest." 

It  is  instructive  to  notice  that  the  divine  an- 
swer comes  through  the  consciousness  of  a  duty. 
Ezekiel  is  commanded  first  of  all  to  prophesy 
over  these  dry  bones;  and  in  the  words  given 
him  to  utter  the  solution  of  his  own  inward 
perplexity  is  wrapped  up.  "  Say  unto  them,  O 
ye  dry  bones,  hear  the  word  of  Jehovah.  .  .  . 
Behold,  I  will  cause  breath  to  enter  into  you, 
and  ye  shall  live  "  (vv.  4,  5).  In  this  way  he  is 
not  only  taught  that  the  agency  by  which  Je- 
hovah will  effect  His  purpose  is  the  prophetic 
word,  but  he  is  also  reminded  that  the  truth  now 
revealed  to  him  is  to  be  the  guide  of  his  practical 
ministry,  and  that  only  in  the  steadfast  discharge 
of  his  prophetic  duty  can  he  hold  fast  the  hope 
of  Israel's  resurrection.  The  problem  that  has 
exercised  him  is  not  one  that  can  be  settled  in 
retirement  and  inaction.  What  he  receives  is 
not  a  mere  answer,  but  a  message,  and  the  de- 
livery of  the  message  is  the  only  way  in  which  he 
can  realise  the  truth  of  it;  his  activity  as  a 
prophet  being  indeed  a  necessary  element  in  the 
fulfilment  of  his  words.  Let  him  preach  the 
word  of  God  to  these  dry  bones,  and  he  will 
know  that  they  can  live;  but  if  he  fails  to  do  this, 
he  will  sink  back  into  the  unbelief  to  which  all 
things  are  impossible.  Faith  comes  in  the  act 
of  prophesying. 

Ezekiel  did  as  he  was  commanded;  he  prophe- 
sied over  the  dry  bones,  and  immediately  he  was 
sensible  of  the  effect  of  his  words.  He  heard 
a  rustling,  and  looking  he  saw  that  the  bones 
were  coming  together,  bone  to  his  tone.  He 
does  not  need  to  tell  us  how  his  heart  rejoiced 
at  this  first  sign  of  life  returning  to  these  dead 
bones,  and  as  he  watched  the  whole  process  by 
which  they  were  built  up  into  the  semblance  of 
men.  It  is  described  in  minute  detail,  so  that 
no  feature  of  the  impression  produced  by  the 
stupendous  miracle  may  be  lost.  It  is  divided 
into  two  stages,  the  restoration  of  the  bodily 
frame  and  the  imparting  of  the  principle  of  life. 

This  division  cannot  have  any  special  signif- 
icance when  applied  to  the  actual  nation,  such  as 
that  the  outward  order  of  the  state  must  be  first 
established,  and  then  the  national  consciousness 
renewed.  It  belongs  to  the  imagery  of  the  vision 
and  follows  the  order  observed  in  the  original 
creation  of  man  as  described  in  the  second  chap- 
ter of  Genesis.  God  first  formed  man  of  the  dust 
of  the  ground,  and  afterwards  breathed  into  his 
nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  so  that  he  became 
a  living  soul.  So  here  we  have  first  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  process  by  which  the  bodies  were 
built  up,  the  skeletons  being  formed  from  the 
scattered  bones,  and  then  clothed  successively 
with  sinews  and  flesh  and  skin.  The  reanimation 
of  these  still  lifeless  bodies  is  a  separate  act  of 
creative  energy,  in  which,  however,  the  agency 
is  still  the  word  of  God  in  the  mouth  of  the 
prophet.  He  is  bidden  call  for  the  breath  to 
"  come  from  the  four  winds  of  heaven,  and 
breathe  upon  these  slain  that  they  may  live." 
In    Hebrew    the    words    for    wind,    breath,    and 


3IO 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


spirit  are  identical;  and  thus  the  wind  becomes 
a  symbol  of  the  universal  divine  Spirit  which  is 
the  source  of  all  life,  while  the  breath  is  a  symbol 
of  that  Spirit  as,  so  to  speak,  specialised  in  the 
individual  man,  or  in  other  words  of  his  personal 
life.  In  the  case  of  the  first  man  Jehovah 
breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  and 
the  idea  here  is  precisely  the  same.  The  wind 
from  the  four  quarters  of  heaven  which  becomes 
the  breath  of  this  vast  assemblage  of  men  is  con- 
ceived as  the  breath  of  God,  and  symbolises  the 
life-giving  Spirit  which  makes  each  of  them  a 
living  person.  The  resurrection  is  complete. 
The  men  live,  and  stand  up  upon  their  feet,  an 
exceeding  great  army. 

This  is  the  simplest,  as  well  as  the  most  sug- 
gestive, of  Ezekiel's  visions,  and  carries  its  inter- 
pretation on  the  face  of  it.  The  single  idea 
which  it  expresses  is  the  restoration  of  the  He- 
brew nationality  through  the  quickening  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  on  the  surviving 
members  of  the  old  house  of  Israel.  It  is  not  a 
prophecy  of  the  resurrection  of  individual  Is- 
raelites who  have  perished.  The  bones  are  "the 
whole  house  of  Israel  "  now  in  exile;  they  are 
alive  as  individuals,  but  as  members  of  a  nation 
they  ar6  dead  and  hopeless  of  revival.  This  is 
made  clear  by  the  explanation  of  the  vision  given 
in  vv.  11-14.  It  is  addressed  to  those  who  think 
of  themselves  as  cut  ofi  from  the  higher  inter- 
ests and  activities  of  the  national  life.  By  a 
slight  change  of  figure  they  are  conceived  as 
dead  and  buried;  and  the  resurrection  is  repre- 
sented as  an  opening  of  their  graves.  But  the 
grave  is  no  more  to  be  understood  literally  than 
the  dry  bones  of  the  vision  itself;  both  are  syrn- 
bols  of  the  gloomy  and  despairing  view  which 
the  exiles  take  of  their  own  condition.  The  sub- 
stance of  the  prophet's  message  is  that  the  God 
who  raises  the  dead  and  calls  the  things  that  are 
not  as  though  they  were  is  able  to  bring  to- 
gether the  scattered  members  of  the  house  of 
Israel  and  form  them  into  a  new  people  through 
the  operation  of  His  life-giving  Spirit. 

It  has  often  been  supposed  that,  although  the 
passage  may  not  directly  teach  the  resurrection 
of  the  body,  it  nevertheless  implies  a  certain 
familiarity  with  that  doctrine  on  the  part  of 
Ezekiel,  if  not  of  his  hearers  likewise.  If  the 
raising  of  dead  men  to  life  could  be  used  as  an 
analogy  of  a  national  restoration,  the  former 
conception  must  have  been  at  least  more  obvious 
than  the  latter,  otherwise  the  prophet  would  be 
explaining  obscnrum  per  obscurius.  This  argu- 
ment, however,  has  only  a  superficial  plausibility. 
It  confounds  two  things  which  are  distinct — the 
mere  conception  of  resurrection,  which  is  all 
that  was  necessary  to  make  the  vision  intelligi- 
ble, and  settled  faith  in  it  as  an  element  of  the 
Messianic  expectation.  That  God  by  a  miracle 
could  restore  the  dead  to  life  no  devout  Israelite 
ever  doubted.*  But  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the 
recorded  instances  of  such  miracles  are  all  of 
those  recently  dead;  and  there  is  no  evidence  of 
a  general  belief  in  the  possibility  of  resurrection 
for  those  whose  bones  were  scattered  and  dry. 
It  is  this  very  impossibility,  indeed,  that  gives 
point  to  the  metaphoi  under  which  the  people 
here  express  their  sense  of  hopelessness.  More- 
over, if  the  prophet  had  presupposed  the  doc- 
trine of  individual  resurrection,  he  could  hardly 
have  used  it  as  an  illustration  in  the  way  he 
does.  The  mere  prospect  of  a  resuscitation  of 
*  C/.  I  Kings  xvii.  ;  2  Kings  iv.  13  ff.,  xiii.  21. 


the  multitudes  of  Israelites  who  had  perished 
would  of  itself  have  been  a  sufificient  answer 
to  the  despondency  of  the  exiles;  and  it  would 
have  been  an  anti-climax  to  use  it  as  an  argu- 
ment for  something  much  less  wonderful.  We 
must  also  bear  in  mind  that  while  the  resurrec- 
tion of  a  nation  may  be  to  us  little  more  than  a 
figure  of  speech,  to  the  Hebrew  mind  it  was  an 
object  of  thought  more  real  and  tangible  than 
the  idea  of  personal  immortality. 

It  would  appear  therefore  that  in  the  order 
of  revelation  the  hope  of  the  resurrection  is  first 
presented  in  the  promise  of  a  resurrection  of  the 
dead  nation  of  Israel,  and  only  in  the  second  in- 
stance as  the  resurrection  of  individual  Israel- 
ites who  should  have  passed  away  without  shar- 
ing in  the  glory  of  the  latter  days.  Like  the 
early  converts  to  Christianity,  the  Old  Testa- 
ment believers  sorrowed  for  those  who  fell  asleep 
when  the  Messiah's  kingdom  was  supposed  to  be 
just  at  hand,  until  they  found  consolation  in  the 
blessed  hope  of  a  resurrection  with  which  Paul 
comforted  the  Church  at  Thessalonica.*  In 
Ezekiel  we  find  that  doctrine  as  yet  only  in  its 
more  general  form  of  a  national  resurrection;  but 
it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  form  in  which 
he  expressed  it  prepared  the  way  for  the  fuller 
revelation  of  a  resurrection  of  the  individual.  In 
two  later  passages  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures 
we  seem  to  find  clear  indications  of  progress 
in  this  direction.  One  is  a  difficult  verse  in  the 
twenty-sixth  chapter  of  Isaiah — part  of  a  proph- 
ecy usually  assigned  to  a  period  later  than 
Ezekiel — where  the  writer,  after  a  lamentation 
over  the  disappointments  and  wasted  efforts  of 
the  present,  suddenly  breaks  into  a  rapture  of 
hope  as  he  thinks  of  a  time  when  departed  Is- 
raelites shall  be  restored  to  life  to  join  the  ranks 
of  the  ransomed  people  of  God:  "  Let  thy  dead 
live  again!  Let  my  dead  bodies  arise!  Awake 
and  rejoice,  ye  that  dwell  in  the  dust,  for  thy 
dew  is  a  dew  of  light,  and  the  earth  shall  yield 
up  [her]  shades. "t  There  does  not  seem  to  be 
any  doubt  that  what  is  here  predicted  is  the 
actual  resurrection  of  individual  members  of  the 
people  of  Israel  to  share  in  the  blessings  of  the 
kingdom  of  God.  The  other  passage  referred 
to  is  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  where  we  have  the 
first  explicit  prediction  of  a  resurrection  both  of 
the  just  and  the  unjust.  In  the  time  of  trouble, 
when  the  people  is  delivered  "  many  of  them  that 
sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some 
to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and  ever- 
lasting contempt."  :f 

These  remarks  are  made  merely  to  show  in 
what  sense  Ezekiel's  vision  may  be  regarded  as 
a  contribution  to  the  Old  Testament  doctrine 
of  personal  immortality.  It  is  so  not  by  its 
direct  teaching,  nor  yet  by  its  presuppositions, 
but  by  the  suggestiveness  of  its  imagery;  open- 
ing out  a  line  of  thought  which  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  Spirit  of  truth  led  to  a  fuller  dis- 
closure of  the  care  of  God  for  the  individual 
life,  and  His  purpose  to  redeem  from  the  power 
of  the  grave  those  who  had  departed  this  life  in 
His  faith  and  fear. 

But  this  line  of  inquiry  lies  somewhat  apart 
from  the  main  teaching  of  the  passage  before  us 
as  a  message  for  the  Church  in  all  ages.  The 
passage  teaches  with  striking  clearness  the  con- 
tinuity of  God's  redeeming  work  in  the  world, 
in  spite  of  hindrances  which  to  human  eyes  seem 
insurmountable.  The  gravest  hindrance,  both 
*  I  Thess.  iv.  13  ff.  +  Isa.  xxvi.  19.  t  Dan.  xii.  a. 


Ezekiel  xxxvii.] 


LIFE    FROM    THE    DEAD. 


3" 


in  appearance  and  in  reality,  is  the  decay  of  faith 
and  vital  religion  in  the  Church  itself.  There 
are  times  when  earnest  men  are  tempted  to  say 
that  the  Church's  hope  is  lost  and  her  bones 
are  dried — when  laxity  of  life  and  lukewarmness 
in  devotion  pervade  all  her  members,  and  she 
ceases  to  influence  the  world  for  good.  And 
yet  when  we  consider  that  the  whole  history  of 
God's  cause  is  one  long  process  of  raising  dead 
souls  to  spiritual  life  and  building  up  a  kingdom 
of  God  out  of  fallen  humanity,  we  see  that  the 
true  hope  of  the  Church  can  never  be  lost.  It 
lies  in  the  life-giving,  regenerating  power  of 
the  divine  Spirit,  and  the  promise  that  the  word 
of  God  does  not  return  to  Him  void  but  prospers 
in  the  thing  whereto  He  sends  it.  That  is  the 
great  lesson  of  Ezekiel's  vision,  and  although 
its  immediate  application  may  be  limited  to  the 
occasion  that  called  it  forth,  yet  the  analogy  on 
which  it  is  founded  is  taken  up  by  our  Lord 
Himself  and  extended  to  the  proclamation  of 
His  truth  to  the  world  at  large:  "The  hour  is 
coming,  and  now  is,  when  the  dead  shall  hear 
the  voice  of  the  ,Son  of  God;  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live."  *  We  perhaps  too  readily 
empty  these  strong  terms  of  their  meaning. 
The  Spirit  of  God  is  apt  to  become  a  mere  ex- 
pression for  the  religious  and  moral  influences 
lodged  in  a  Christian  society,  and  we  come  to 
rely  on  these  agencies  for  the  dissemination  of 
Christian  principles  and  the  formation  of  Chris- 
tian character.  We  forget  that  behind  all  this 
there  is  something  which  is  compared  to  the 
imparting  of  life  where  there  was  none,  some- 
thing which  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit  of  which 
we  cannot  tell  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it 
goeth.  But  in  times  of  low  spirituality,  when 
the  love  of  many  waxes  cold,  and  there  are  few 
signs  of  zeal  and  activity  in  the  service  of  Christ, 
men  learn  to  fall  back  in  faith  on  the  invisible 
power  of  God  to  make  His  word  effectual  for 
the  revival  of  His  cause  among  men.  And  this 
happens  constantly  in  narrow  spheres  which  may 
never  attract  the  notice  of  the  world.  There  are 
positions  in  the  Church  still  where  Christ's  serv- 
ants are  called  to  labour  in  the  faith  of  Ezekiel, 
with  appearances  all  against  them,  and  nothing 
to  inspire  them  but  the  conviction  that  the  word 
they  preach  is  the  power  of  God  and  able  even 
to  bring  life  to  the  dead. 

n. 

The  second  half  of  the  chapter  speaks  of  a 
special  feature  of  the  national  restoration,  the 
reunion  of  the  kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel 
under  one  sceptre.  This  is  represented  first  of 
all  by  a  symbolic  action.  The  prophet  is  di- 
rected to  take  two  pieces  of  wood,  apparently 
in  the  form  of  sceptres,  and  to  write  upon  them 
inscriptions  dedicating  them  respectively  to 
Judah  and  Joseph,  the  heads  of  the  two  confed- 
eracies out  of  which  the  rival  monarchies  were 
formed.  The  "  companions "  (ver.  i6) — t.  e., 
allies — of  Judah  are  the  two  tribes  of  Benjamin 
and  Simeon;  those  of  Joseph  are  all  the  other 
tribes,  who  stood  under  the  hegemony  of 
Ephraim.  If  the  second  inscription  is  rather 
more  complicated  than  the  first,  it  is  because  of 
the  fact  that  there  was  no  actual  tribe  of  Joseph. 
It  therefore  runs  thus:  "  For  Joseph,  the  staff  of 
Ephraim,  and  all  the  house  of  Israel  his  con- 
federates." These  two  staves  then  he  is  to  put 
*  John  V.  25  :  cf.  vv.  28,  29. 


together  so  that  they  become  one  sceptre  in 
his  hand.  It  is  a  little  difficult  to  decide  whether 
this  was  a  sign  that  was  actually  performed  be- 
fore the  people,  or  one  that  is  only  imagined. 
It  depends  partly  on  what  we  take  to  be 
meant  by  the  joining  of  the  two  pieces.  If 
Ezekiel  merely  took  two  sticks,  put  them  end 
to  end,  and  made  them  look  like  one,  then  no 
doubt  he  did  this  in  public,  for  otherwise  there 
would  be  no  use  in  mentioning  the  circumstance 
at  all.  But  if  the  meaning  is,  as  seems  more 
probable,  that  when  the  rods  are  put  together 
they  miraculously  grow  into  one,  then  we  see 
that  such  a  sign  has  a  value  for  the  prophet's 
own  mind  as  a  symbol  of  the  truth  revealed  to 
him,  and  it  is  no  longer  necessary  to  assume 
that  the  action  was  really  performed.  The  pur- 
pose of  the  sign  is  not  merely  to  suggest  the 
idea  of  political  unity,  which  is  too  simple  to  re- 
quire any  such  illustration,  but  rather  to  indicate 
the  completeness  of  the  union  and  the  divine 
force  needed  to  bring  it  about.  The  difficulty 
of  conceiving  a  perfect  fusion  of  the  two  parts 
of  the  nation  was  really  very  great,  the  cleavage 
between  Judah  and  the  North  being  much  older 
than  the  monarchy,  and  having  been  accentuated 
by  centuries  of  political  separation  and  rivalry. 

To  us  the  most  noteworthy  fact  is  the  stead- 
fastness with  which  the  prophets  of  this  period 
cling  to  the  hope  of  a  restoration  of  the  north- 
ern tribes,  although  nearly  a  century  and  a  half 
had  now  elapsed  since  "  Ephraim  was  broken 
from  being  a  people."  *  Ezekiel,  like  Jeremiah, 
is  unable  to  think  of  an  Israel  which  does  not 
include  the  representatives  of  the  ten  northern 
tribes.  Whether  any  communication  was  kept 
up  with  the  colonies  of  Israelites  that  had  been 
transported  from  Samaria  to  Assyria  we  do  not 
know,  but  they  are  regarded  as  still  existing, 
and  still  remembered  by  Jehovah.  The  resur- 
rection of  the  nation  which  Ezekiel  has  just  pre- 
dicted is  expressly  said  to  apply  to  the  whole 
house  of  Israel,  and  now  he  goes  on  to  announce 
that  this  "exceeding  great  army  "  shall  march 
to  its  land  not  under  two  banners,  but  under 
one. 

We  have  touched  already,  in  speaking  of  the 
Messianic  idea,  on  the  reasons  which  led  the 
prophets  to  put  so  much  emphasis  on  this  union. 
They  felt  as  strongly  on  the  point  as  a  High 
Churchman  does  about  the  sin  of  schism,  and  it 
would  not  be  difficult  for  the  latter  ^o  show  that 
his  point  of  view  and  his  ideals  closely  resemble 
those  of  the  prophets.  The  rending  of  the  body 
of  Christ  which  is  supposed  to  be  involved  in  a 
breach  of  external  unity  is  paralleled  by  the  dis- 
ruption of  the  Hebrew  state,  which  violates  the 
unity  of  the  one  people  of  Jehovah.  The  idea 
of  the  Church  as  the  bride  of  Christ  is  the  same 
idea  under  which  Hosea  expresses  the  relations 
between  Jehovah  and  Israel,  and  it  necessarily 
carries  with  it  the  unity  of  the  people  of  Israel 
in  the  one  case  and  of  the  Church  in  the  other. 
It  must  be  admitted  also  that  the  evils  resulting 
from  the  division  between  Judah  and  Israel  have 
been  reproduced,  with  consequences  a  thousand 
times  more  disastrous  to  religion,  in  the  strife 
and  uncharitableness,  the  party  spirit  and  jeal- 
ousies and  animosities,  which  different  denomi- 
nations of  Christians  have  invariably  exhibited 
towards  each  other  when  they  were  close  enough 
for  mutual  interest.  But  granting  all  this,  and 
granting  that  what  is  called  schism  is  essentially 
*Isa.  vii.  8. 


312 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


the  same  thing  that  the  prophets  desired  to  see 
removed,  it  does  not  at  once  follow  that  dissent 
is  in  itself  sinful,  and  still  less  that  the  sin  is 
necessarily  on  the  side  of  the  Dissenter.  The 
question  is  whether  the  national  standpoint  of^ 
the  prophets  is  altogether  applicable  to  the 
communion  of  saints  in  Christ,  whether  the  body 
of  Christ  is  really  torn  asunder  by  differences 
in  organisation  and  opinion,  whether,  in  short, 
anything  is  necessary  to  avoid  the  guilt  of  schism 
beyond  keeping  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the 
bond  of  peace.  The  Old  Testament  dealt  with 
men  in  the  mass,  as  members  of  a  nation,  and 
its  standards  can  hardly  be  adequate  to  the 
polity  of  a  religion  which  has  to  provide  for  the 
freedom  of  the  individual  conscience  before  God. 
At  the  worst  the  Dissenter  may  point  out  that 
the  Old  Testament  schism  was  necessary  as  a 
protest  against  tyranny  and  despotism,  that  in 
this  aspect  it  was  sanctioned  by  the  inspired 
prophets  of  the  age,  that  its  undoubted  evils 
were  partly  compensated  by  a  freer  expansion  of 
religious  life,  and  finally  that  even  the  prophets 
did  not  expect  it  to  be  healed  before  the  millen- 
nium. 

From  the  idea  of  the  reunited  nation  Ezekiel 
returns  easily  to  the  promise  of  the  Davidic  king 
and  the  blessings  of  the  Messianic  dispensation. 
The  one  people  implies  one  shepherd,  and  also 
one  land,  and  one  spirit  to  walk  in  Jehovah's 
judgments  and  to  observe  His  statutes  to  do 
them.  The  various  elements  which  enter  into 
the  conception  of  national  salvation  are  thus 
gathered  up  and  combined  in  one  picture  of  the 
people's  everlasting  felicity.  And  the  whole  is 
crowned  by  the  promise  of  Jehovah's  presence 
with  the  people,  sanctifyng  and  protecting  them 
from  His  sanctuary.  This  final  condition  of 
things  is  permanent  and  eternal.  The  sources 
of  internal  dispeace  are  removed  by  the  washing 
away  of  Israel's  iniquities,  and  the  impossibility 
of  any  disturbance  from  without  is  illustrated  by 
the  onslaught  of  the  heathen  nations  described 
in  the  following  chapters. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

THE  CONVERSION  OF  ISRAEL. 

In  one  of  our  earlier  chapters  *  we  had  occa- 
sion to  notice  some  theological  principles  which 
appear  to  have  guided  the  prophet's  thinking 
from  the  beginning.  It  was  evident  even  then 
that  these  principles  pointed  towards  a  defi- 
nite theory  of  the  conversion  of  Israel  and  the 
process  by  which  it  was  to  be  effected.  In  sub- 
sequent prophecies  we  have  seen  how  constantly 
Ezekiel's  thoughts  revert  to  this  theme,  as  now 
one  aspect  of  it  and  then  another  is  disclosed  to 
him.  We  have  also  glanced  at  one  passage  \ 
which  seemed  to  be  a  connected  statement  of 
the  divine  procedure  as  bearing  on  the  restora- 
tion of  Israel.  But  we  have  now  reached  a  stage 
in  the  exposition  where  all  this  lies  behind  us. 
In  the  chapters  that  remain  to  be  considered  the 
regeneration  of  the  people  is  assumed  to  have 
taken  place;  their  religion  and  their  morality  are 
regarded  as  established  on  a  stable  and  perma- 
nent basis,  and  all  that  has  to  be  done  is  to  de- 
scribe the  institutions  by  which  the  benefits  of 
salvation  may  be  conserved  and  handed  down 
from  age  to  age  of  the  Messianic  dispensation. 
♦Chapter  v.,  above.  t  Ch.  xxxvi.  16-38. 


The  present  is  therefore  a  fitting  opportunity  for 
an  attempt  to  describe  Ezekiel's  doctrine  of 
conversion  as  a  whole.  It  is  all  the  more  de- 
sirable that  the  attempt  should  be  made  because 
the  national  salvation  is  the  central  interest  of 
the  whole  book;  and  if  we  can  understand  the 
prophet's  teaching  on  this  subject,  we  shall  have 
the  key  to  his  whole  system  of  theology. 

I.  The  first  point  to  be  noticed,  and  the  one 
most  characteristic  of  Ezekiel,  is  the  divine 
motive  for  the  redemption  of  Israel — Jehovah's 
regard  for  His  own  name.  This  thought  finds 
expression  in  many  parts  of  the  book,  but  no- 
where more  clearly  than  in  the  twenty-second 
verse  of  the  thirty-sixth  chapter:  "  Not  for  your 
sakes  do  I  act,  O  house  of  Israel,  but  for  My 
holy  name,  which  ye  have  profaned  among  the 
heathen,  whither  ye  went."  Similarly  in  the 
thirty-second  verse:  "  Not  for  your  sakes  do  I 
act,  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah,  be  it  known  unto 
you:  be  ashamed  and  confounded  for  your  own 
ways,  O  house  of  Israel."  There  is  an  apparent 
harshness  in  these  declarations  which  makes  it 
easy  to  present  them  in  a  repellent  light.  They 
have  been  taken  to  mean  that  Jehovah  is  abso- 
lutely indifferent  to  the  weal  or  woe  of  the  peo- 
ple except  in  so  far  as  it  reflects  on  His  own 
credit  with  the  world;  that  He  accepts  the  rela- 
tionship between  Him  and  Israel,  but  does  so 
in  the  spirit  of  a  selfish  parent  who  exerts  himself 
to  save  his  child  from  disgrace  merely  in  order 
to  prevent  his  own  name  from  being  dragged 
in  the  mire.  It  would  be  difficult  to  explain 
how  such  a  Being  should  be  at  all  concerned 
about  what  men  think  of  Him.  If  Jehovah  has 
no  interest  in  Israel,  it  is  hard  to  see  why  He 
should  be  sensitive  to  the  opinion  of  the  rest  of 
mankind.  That  is  an  idea  of  God  which  no  man 
can  seriously  hold,  and  we  may  be  certain  that  it 
is  a  perversion  of  Ezekiel's  meaning.  Every- 
thing depends  on  how  much  is  included  in  the 
"  name  "  of  Jehovah.  If  it  denotes  mere  arbi- 
trary power,  delighting  in  its  own  exercise  and 
the  awe  which  it  excites,  then  we  might  conceive 
of  the  divine  action  as  ruled  by  a  boundless 
egotism,  to  which  all  human  interests  are  alike 
indifferent.  But  that  is  not  the  conception  of 
God  which  Ezekiel  has.  He  is  a  moral  Being, 
one  who  has  compassion  on  other  things  be- 
sides His  own  name,*  one  who  has  no  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  but  that  he  should 
turn  from  his  way  and  live.}  But  when  this  as- 
pect of  His  character  is  included  in  the  name  of 
God,  we  see  that  regard  for  His  name  cannot 
mean  mere  regard  for  His  own  interests,  as  if 
these  were  opposed  to  the  interests  of  His  crea- 
tures; but  means  the  desire  to  be  known  as  He 
is,  as  a  God  of  mercy  and  righteousness  as  well 
as  of  infinite  power. 

The  name  of  God  is  that  by  which  He  is 
known  amongst  men.  It  is  more  than  His 
honour  or  reputation,  although  that  is  included 
in  it  according  to  Hebrew  idiom;  it  is  the  ex- 
pression of  His  character  or  His  personality. 
To  act  for  His  name's  sake,  therefore,  is  to  act 
so  that  His  true  character  may  be  more  fully 
revealed,  and  so  that  men's  thoughts  of  Him 
may  more  truly  correspond  to  that  which  in 
Himself  He  is.  There  is  plainly  nothing  in  this 
inconsistent  with  the  deepest  interest  in  men's 
spiritual  well-being.  Jehovah  is  the  God  of  sal- 
vation, and  desires  to  reveal  Himself  as  such; 
and  whether  we  say  that  He  saves  men  in  order 
*  Ch.  xxxvi.  21.  t  Chs.  xviii.  23,  xxxiii.  11. 


THE    CONVERSION    OF    ISRAEL. 


3^3 


that  He  may  be  known  as  a  Saviour,  or  that  He 
makes  Himself  known  in  order  to  save  them, 
does  not  make  any  real  difference.  Revelation 
and  redemption  are  one  thing.  And  when  Ezek- 
iel  says  that  regard  for  His  own  name  is  the  su- 
preme motive  of  Jehovah's  action,  he  does  not 
teach  that  Jehovah  is  uninfluenced  by  care  for 
man;  if  the  question  had  been  put  to  him,  he 
would  have  said  that  care  for  man  is  one  of  the 
attributes  included  in  the  Name  which  Jehovah  is 
concerned  to  reveal. 

The  real  meaning  of  Ezekiel's  doctrine  will 
perhaps  be  best  understood  from  its  negative 
statement.  What  is  meant  to  be  excluded  by  the 
expression  "  not  for  your  sakes  "  ?  It  might  no 
doubt  mean,  "  not  because  I  care  at  all  for 
you";  but  that  we  have  seen  to  be  inconsistent 
with  other  aspects  of  Ezekiel's  teaching  about 
the  divine  character.  All  that  it  necessarily  im- 
plies is  "  not  for  any  good  that  I  find  in  you." 
It  is  a  protest  against  the  idea  of  Pharisaic 
self-righteousness  that  a  man  may  have  a  legal 
claim  upon  God  through  his  own  merits.  It  is 
true  that  that  was  not  a  prevalent  notion 
amongst  the  people  in  the  time  of  Ezekiel.  But 
their  state  of  mind  was  one  in  which  such  a 
thought  might  easily  arise.  They  were  con- 
vinced of  having  been  entirely  in  the  wrong  in 
their  conceptions  of  the  relation  between  them 
and  Jehovah.  The  pagan  notion  that  the  people 
is  indispensable  to  the  god  on  account  of  a  phys- 
ical bond  betwteen  them  had  broken  down  in 
the  recent  experience  of  Israel,  and  with  it  had 
vanished  every  natural  ground  for  the  hope  of 
salvation.  In  such  circumstances  the  promise  of 
deliverance  would  naturally  raise  the  thought 
that  there  must  after  all  be  something  in  Israel 
that  was  pleasing  to  Jehovah,  and  that  the 
prophet's  denunciations  of  their  past  sins  were 
overdone.  In  order  to  guard  against  that  error 
Ezekiel  explicitly  asserts,  what  was  involved  in 
the  whole  of  his  teaching,  that  the  mercy  of  God 
was  not  called  forth  by  any  good  in  Israel,  but 
that  nevertheless  there  are  immutable  reasons  in 
the  divine  nature  on  which  the  certainty  of  Is- 
rael's redemption  may  be  built. 

The  truth  here  taught  is  therefore,  in  theolog- 
ical language,  the  sovereignty  of  the  divine 
grace.  Ezekiel's  statement  of  it  is  liable  to  all 
the  distortions  and  misrepresentations  to  which 
that  doctrine  has  been  subjected  at  the  hands 
both  of  its  friends  and  its  enemies;  but  when 
fairly  treated  it  is  no  more  objectionable  than 
any  other  expression  of  the  same  truth  to  be  found 
in  Scripture.  In  Ezekiel's  case  it  was  the  result 
of  a  penetrating  analysis  of  the  moral  condition 
of  his  people  which  led  him  to  see  that  there 
was  nothing  in  them  to  suggest  the  possibility 
of  their  being  restored.  It  is  only  when  he  falls 
back  on  the  thought  of  what  God  is,  on  the  di- 
vine necessity  of  vindicating  His  holiness  in  the 
salvation  of  His  people,  that  his  faith  in  Israel's 
future  finds  a  sure  point  of  support.  And  so  in 
general  a  profound  sense  of  human  sinfulness 
will  always  throw  the  mind  back  on  the  idea  of 
God  as  the  one  immovable  ground  of  confidence 
in  the  ultimate  redemption  of  the  individual  and 
the  world.  When  the  doctrine  is  pressed  to  the 
conclusion  that  God  saves  men  in  spite  of  them- 
selves, and  merely  to  display  His  power  over 
them,  it  becomes  false  and  pernicious,  and  in- 
deed self-contradictory.  But  so  long  as  we  hold 
fast  to  the  truth  that  God  is  love,  and  that  the 
glory  of  God  is  the  manifestation  of  His  love, 


the  doctrine  of  the  divine  sovereignty  only  ex- 
presses the  unchangeableness  of  that  love  and 
its  final  victory  over  the  sin  of  the  world. 

2.  The  intellectual  side  of  the  conversion  of 
Israel  is  the  acceptance  of  that  idea  of  God  which 
to  the  prophet  is  summed  up  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah.  This  is  expressed  in  the  standing 
formula  which  denotes  the  eflfect  of  all  God's 
dealings  with  men,  "  They  shall  know  that  I  am 
Jehovah."  We  need  not,  however,  repeat  what 
has  been  already  said  as  to  the  meaning  of  these 
words.*  Nor  shall  we  dwjell  on  the  effect  of  the 
national  judgment  as  a  means  towards  produc- 
ing a  right  impression  of  Jehovah's  nature.  It 
is  possible  that  as  time  went  on  Ezekiel  came 
to  see  that  chastisement  alone  would  not  effect 
the  moral  change  in  the  exiles  which  was  neces- 
sary to  bring  them  into  sympathy  with  the  divine 
purposes.  In  the  early  prophecy  of  chap.  vi.  the 
knowledge  of  Jehovah  and  the  self-condemna- 
tion which  accompanies  it  are  spoken  of  as  the 
direct  result  of  His  judgment  on  sin,f  and  this 
undoubtedly  was  one  element  in  the  conversion 
of  the  people  to  right  thoughts  about  God.  But 
in  all  other  passages  this  feeling  of  self-loathing 
is  not  the  beginning  but  the  end  of  conversion;  it 
is  caused  by  the  experience  of  pardon  and  re- 
demption following  upon  punishment.t  There 
is  also  another  aspect  of  judgment  which  may 
be  mentioned  in  passing  for  the  sake  of  com- 
pleteness. It  is  that  which  is  expounded  in  the 
end  of  the  twentieth  chapter.  There  the  judg- 
ment which  still  stands  between  the  exiles  and 
the  return  to  t^eir  own  land  is  represented  as 
a  sifting  process,  in  which  those  who  have 
undergone  a  spiritual  change  are  finally  sepa- 
rated from  those  who  perish  in  their  impenitence. 
This  idea  does  not  occur  in  the  prophecies  sub- 
sequent to  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  it  may  be 
doubtful  how  it  fits  into  the  scheme  of  redemp- 
tion there  unfolded.  The  prophet  here  regards 
conversion  as  a  process  wholly  carried  through 
by  the  operation  of  Jehovah  on  the  mind  of  the 
people;  and  what  we  have  next  to  consider  is  the 
steps  by  which  this  great  end  is  accomplished. 
They  are  these  two — forgiveness  and  regenera- 
tion. 

3.  The  forgiveness  of  sins  is  denoted  in  the 
thirty-sixth  chapter,  as  we  have  already  seen,  by 
the  symbol  of  sprinkling  with  clean  water.  But 
it  must  not  be  supposed  that  this  isolated  figure 
is  the  only  form  in  which  the  doctrine  appears 
in  Ezekiel's  exposition  of  the  process  of  salva- 
tion. On  the  contrary  forgiveness  is  the  funda- 
mental assumption  of  the  whole  argument,  and 
is  present  in  every  promise  of  future  blessedness 
to  the  people.  For  the  Old  Testament  idea  of 
forgiveness  is  extremely  simple,  resting  as  it 
does  on  the  analogy  of  forgiveness  in  human 
life.  The  spiritual  fact  which  constitutes  the  es- 
sence of  forgiveness  is  the  change  in  Jehovah's 
disposition  towards  His  people  which  is  mani- 
fested by  the  renewal  of  those  indispensable 
conditions  of  national  well-being  which  in  His 
anger  He  had  taken  away.  The  restoration  of 
Israel  to  its  own  land  is  thus  not  simply  a  token 
of  forgiveness,  but  the  act  of  forgiveness  itself, 
and  the  only  form  in  which  the  fact  could  be 
realised  in  the  experience  of  the  nation.  In  this 
sense  the  whole  of  Ezekiel's  predictions  of  the 
Messianic  deliverance  and  the  glories  that  fol- 
low it  are  one  continuous  promise  of   forgive- 

*  See  pp.  238  f.  above.  +  Ch.  vi.  8-10. 

tChs.  xvi.  61-63,  XX.  43,  44,  xxxvi.  31,  32. 


314 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


ness,  setting  forth  the  truth  that  Jehovah's  love 
to  His  people  persists  in  spite  of  their  sin,  and 
works  victoriously  for  their  redemption  and 
restoration  to  the  full  enjoyment  of  His  favour. 
There  is  perhaps  one  point  in  which  we  discover 
a  difference  between  Ezekiel's  conception  and 
that  of  his  predecessors.  According  to  the 
common  prophetic  doctrine  penitence,  including 
amendment,  is  the  moral  effect  of  Jehovah's 
chastisement,  and  is  the  necessary  condition  of 
pardon.  We  have  seen  that  there  is  some  doubt 
whether  Ezekiel  regarded  repentance  as  the  re- 
sult of  judgment,  and  the  same  doubt  exists  as 
to  whether  in  the  order  of  salvation  repentance 
is  a  preliminary  or  a  consequence  of  forgiveness. 
The  truth  is  that  the  prophet  appears  to  combine 
both  conceptions.  In  urging  individuals  to  pre- 
pare for  the  coming  of  the  "kingdom  of  God  he 
makes  repentance  a  necessary  condition  of  enter- 
ing it;  but  in  describing  the  whole  process  of 
salvation  as  the  work  of  God  he  makes  contri- 
tion for  sin  the  result  of  reflection  on  the  good- 
ness of  Jehovah  already  experienced  in  the 
peaceful  occupation  of  the  land  of  Canaan. 

4.  The  idea  of  regeneration  is  very  prominent 
in  Ezekiel's  teaching.  The  need  for  a  radical 
change  in  the  national  character  was  impressed 
on  him  by  the  spectacle  which  he  witnessed 
daily  of  evil  tendencies  and  practices  persisted 
in,  in  spite  of  the  clearest  demonstration  that 
they  were  hateful  to  Jehovah  and  had  been  the 
cause  of  the  nation's  calamities.  And  he  does 
not  ascribe  this  state  of  things  merely  to  the 
influence  of  tradition  and  public  opinion  and  evil 
example,  but  traces  it  to  its  source  in  the  hard- 
ness and  corruption  of  the  individual  nature.  It 
was  evident  that  no  mere  change  of  intellectual 
conviction  would  avail  to  alter  the  currents  of 
life  among  the  exiles;  the  heart  must  be  re- 
newed, out  of  which  are  the  issues  both  of  per- 
sonal and  national  life.  Hence  the  promise  of 
regeneration  is  expressed  as  a  taking  away  of  the 
stony,  unimpressible  heart  that  was  in  them,  and 
putting  within  them  a  heart  of  flesh,  a  new  heart 
and  a  new  spirit.  In  exhorting  individuals  to 
repentance  Ezekiel  calls  on  them  to  make  them- 
selves a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit,*  meaning 
that  their  repentance  must  be  genuine,  extending 
to  the  inner  motives  and  springs  of  action,  and 
not  be  confined  to  outward  signs  of  mourning,  f 
But  in  other  connections  the  new  heart  and 
spirit  are  represented  as  a  gift,  the  result  of  the 
operation  of  the  divine  grace.lj: 

Closely  connected  with  this,  perhaps  only  the 
same  truth  in  another  form,  is  the  promise  of 
the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  of  God.^  The  gen- 
eral expectation  of  a  new  supernatural  power  in- 
fused into  the  national  life  in  the  latter  days  is 
common  in  the  prophets.  It  appears  in  Hosea 
under  the  beautiful  image  of  the  dew,||  and  in 
Isaiah  it  is  expressed  in  the  consciousness  that 
the  desolation  of  the  land  must  continue  "  until 
spirit  be  poured  upon  us  from  on  high."1[  But 
no  earlier  prophet  presents  the  idea  of  the  Spirit 
as  a  principle  of  regeneration  with  the  precision 
and  clearness  which  the  doctrine  assumes  in  the 
hands  of  Ezekiel.  What  in  Hosea  and  Isaiah 
may  be  only  a  divine  influence,  quickening  and 
developing  the  flagging  spiritual  energies  of  the 

*  Ch.  xviii.  31. 

t  Cf.  Joel's  "  Rend  your  heart,  and  not  your  garments  " 
(Joel  ii.  13). 
X  Chs   xi.  ig,  xxxvi.  26.  27.  ||  Hosea  xiv.  5. 

§Chs.  xxxvi.  27,  xxxvii.  14.  \  Isa.  xxxii.  15. 


people,  is  here  revealed  as  a  creative  power, 
the  source  of  a  new  life,  and  the  beginning  of 
all  that  possesses  moral  or  spiritual  worth  in  the 
people  of  God. 

5.  It  only  remains  for  us  now  to  note  the 
twofold  effect  of  these  operations  of  Jehovah's 
grace  in  the  religious  and  moral  condition  of  the 
nation.  There  will  be  produced,  in  the  first 
place,  a  new  readiness  and  power  of  obedience 
to  the  divine  commandments.*  Like  the  apos- 
tle, they  will  not  only  "  consent  unto  the  law 
that  it  is  good";t  but  in  virtue  of  the  new 
"  Spirit  of  life  "  given  to  them,  they  will  be  in 
a  real  sense  "  free  from  the  law,"t  because  the 
inward  impulse  of  their  own  regenerate  nature 
will  lead  them  to  fulfil  it  perfectly.  The  inefifi- 
ciency  of  law  as  a  mere  external  authority,  acting 
on  men  by  hope  of  reward  and  fear  of  punish- 
ment, was  perceived  both  by  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  almost  as  clearly  as  by  Paul,  although 
this  conviction  on  the  part  of  the  prophets  was 
based  on  observation  of  national  depravity 
rather  than  on  their  personal  experience.  It  led 
Jeremiah  to  the  conception  of  a  new  covenant 
under  which  Jehovah  will  write  His  law  on 
men's  hearts  ;§  and  Ezekiel  expresses  the  same 
truth  in  the  promise  of  a  new  Spirit  inclining 
the  people  to  walk  in  Jehovah's  statutes  and  to 
keep   His  judgments. 

The  second  inward  result  of  salvation  is  shame 
and  self-loathing  on  account  of  past  transgres- 
sions.! It  seems  strange  that  the  prophet  should 
dwell  so  much  on  this  as  a  mark  of  Israel's  saved 
condition.  His  strong  protest  against  the  doc- 
trine of  inherited  guilt  in  the  eighteenth  chapter 
would  have  led  us  to  expect  that  the  members 
of  the  new  Israel  would  not  be  conscious  of  any 
responsibility  for  the  sins  of  the  old.  But  here, 
as  in  other  instances,  the  conception  of  the  per- 
sonified nation  proves  itself  a  better  vehicle  of 
religious  truth  from  the  Old  Testament  stand- 
point than  the  religious  relations  of  the  individ- 
ual. The  continuity  of  the  national  conscious- 
ness sustains  that  profound  sense  of  unworthi- 
ness  which  is  an  essential  element  of  true  recon- 
ciliation to  God,  although  each  individual  Is- 
raelite in  the  kingdom  of  God  knows  that  he  is 
not  accountable  for  the  iniquity  of  his  fathers. 

This  outline  of  the  prophet's  conception  of 
salvation  illustrates  the  truth  of  the  remark  that 
Ezekiel  is  the  first  dogmatic  theologian.  In  so 
far  as  it  is  the  business  of  a  theologian  to  ex- 
hibit the  logical  connection  of  the  ideas  which 
express  man's  relation  to  God,  Ezekiel  more 
than  any  other  prophet  may  claim  the  title. 
Truths  which  are  the  presuppositions  of  all 
prophecy  are  to  him  objects  of  conscious  reflec- 
tion, and  emerge  from  his  hands  in  the  shape  of 
clearly  formulated  doctrines.  There  is  probably 
no  single  element  of  his  teaching  which  may 
not  be  traced  in  the  writings  of  his  predecessors, 
but  there  is  none  which  has  not  gained  from 
him  a  more  distinct  intellectual  expression.  And 
what  is  specially  remarkable  is  the  manner  in 
which  the  doctrines  are  bound  together  in  the 
unity  of  a  system.  In  grounding  the  necessity 
of  redemption  in  the  divine  nature,  Ezekiel  may 
be  said  to  foreshadow  the  theology  which  is 
often  called  Calvinistic  or  Augustinian,  but 
which  might  more  truly  be  called  Pauline.     Al- 

*  Chs.  xi.  20,  xxxvi.  27.  %  Rom.  viii.  2. 

t  Rom.  vii.  16.  §  Jet.  xxxi.  33. 

II  Chs.  vi.  9,  xvi.  63,  XX.  43,  xxxvi.  31,  32. 


Ezekiel  xxxviii.,  xxxix.] 


JEHOVAH'S    FINAL    VICTORY. 


315 


though  the  final  remedy  for  the  sin  of  the  world 
had  not  yet  been  revealed,  the  scheme  of  re- 
demption disclosed  to  Ezekiel  agrees  with  much 
of  the  teaching  of  the  New  Testament  regarding 
the  effects  of  the  work  of  Christ  on  the  individ- 
ual. Speaking  of  the  passage  xxxvi.  16-38  Dr. 
Davidson  writes  as  follows: — 

"  Probably  no  passage  in  the  Old  Testament 
of  the  same  extent  ofYers  so  complete  a  parallel 
to  New  Testament  doctrine,  particularly  to  that 
of  St.  Paul.  It  is  doubtful  if  the  apostle  quotes 
Ezekiel  anywhere,  but  his  line  of  thought  en- 
tirely coincides  with  his.  The  same  conceptions 
and  in  the  same  order  belonging  to.  both, — for- 
giveness (ver.  25) ;  regeneration,  a  new  heart 
and  spirit  (ver.  26);  the  Spirit  of  God  as  the 
ruling  power  in  the  new  life  (ver.  27);  the  issue 
of  this,  the  keeping  of  the  requirements  of  God's 
law  (ver.  2"};  Rom.  viii.  4);  the  effect  of  being 
'  under  grace  '  in  softening  the  human  heart  and 
leading  to  obedience  (ver.  31;  Rom.  vi.,  vii.); 
and  the  organic  connection  of  Israel's  history 
with  Jehovah's  revelation  of  Himself  to  the  na- 
tions (vv.  33-36;  Rom.  xi.)."' 


CHAPTER    XXIV. 
JEHOVAH'S    FINAL    VICTORY. 
Ezekiel  xxxviii.,  xxxix. 

These  chapters  give  the  impression  of  having 
been  intended  to  stand  at  the  close  of  the  book 
Cif  Ezekiel.  Their  present  position  is  best  ex- 
plained on  the  supposition  that  the  original  col- 
lection of  Ezekiel's  prophecies  actually  ended 
here,  and  that  the  remaining  chapters  (xl.-xlviii.) 
form  an  appendix,  added  at  a  later  period  with- 
<iut  disturbing  the  plan  on  which  the  book  had 
been  arranged.  In  chronological  order,  at  all 
<;vents,  the  oracle  on  Gog  comes  after  the  vision 
of  the  last  nine  chapters.  It  marks  the  utmost 
limit  of  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the  future  of  the 
kingdom  of  God.  It  represents  the  denoue- 
ment of  the  great  drama  of  Jehovah's  self-mani- 
festation to  the  nations  of  the  world.  It  de- 
scribes an  event  which  is  to  take  place  in  the  far- 
distant  future,  long  after  the  Messianic  age  has 
begun  and  after  Israel  has  long  been  settled 
peacefully  in  its  own  land.  Certain  considera- 
tions, which  we  shall  notice  at  the  end  of  this 
lecture,  brought  home  to  the  prophet's  mind 
the  conviction  that  the  lessons  of  Israel's  resto- 
ration did  not  afiford  a  sufficient  illustration  of 
Jehovah's  glory  or  of  the  meaning  of  His  past 
dealings  with  His  people.  The  conclusive  dem- 
onstration of  this  is  therefore  to  be  furnished 
by  the  destruction  of  Gog  and  his  myrmidons 
when  in  the  latter  days  they  make  an  onslaught 
on  the  Holy  Land. 

The  idea  of  a  great  world-catastrophe,  follow- 
ing after  a  long  interval  the  establishment  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  is  peculiar  to  Ezekiel 
amongst  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament. 
According  to  other  prophets  the  judgment  of  the 
nations  takes  place  in  a  "  day  of  Jehovah  " 
which  is  the  crisis  of  history;  and  the  Messianic 
era  which  lollows  is  a  period  of  undisturbed 
tranquillity  in  which  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God  penetrates  to  the  remotest  regions  of  the 
earth.  In  Ezekiel,  on  the  other  hand,  the  judg- 
ment of  the  world  is  divided  into  two  acts.     The 


nearer  nations  which  have  played  a  part  in  the 
history  of  Israel  in  the  past  form  a  group  by 
themselves;  their  punishment  is  a  preliminary 
to  the  restoration  of  Israel,  and  the  impression 
produced  by  that  restoration  is  for  therh  a 
signal,  though  not  perhaps  a  complete,*  vindica- 
tion of  the  Godhead  of  Jehovah.  But  the  out- 
lying barbarians,  who  hover  on  the  outskirts 
of  civilisation,  are  not  touched  by  this  revelation 
of  the  divine  power  and  goodness;  they  seem 
to  be  represented  as  utterly  ignorant  of  the 
marvellous  course  of  events  by  which  Israel  has 
been  brought  to  dwell  securely  in  the  midst  of 
the  nations.!  These,  accordingly,  are  reserved 
for  a  final  reckoning,  in  which  the  power  of  Je- 
hovah will  be  displayed  with  the  terrible  physi- 
cal convulsions  which  mark  the  great  day  of  the 
Lord.t  Only  then  will  the  full  meaning  of 
Israel's  history  be  disclosed  to  the  world;  in 
particular  it  will  be  seen  that  it  was  for  their 
sin  that  they  had  fallen  under  the  power  of  the 
heathen,  and  not  because  of  Jehovah's  inability 
to  protect  them.§ 

These  are  some  general  features  of  the  proph- 
ecy which  at  once  attract  attention.  We  shall 
now  examine  the  details  of  the  picture,  and  then 
proceed  to  consider  its  significance  in  relation  to 
other  elements  of  Ezekiel's  teaching. 

I. 

The  thirty-eighth  chapter  may  be  divided  into 
three  sections  of  seven  verses  each. 

i.  Vv.  3-9. — The  prophet  having  been  com- 
manded to  direct  his  face  towards  Gog  in  the 
land  of  Magog,  is  commissioned  to  announce 
the  fate  that  is  in  store  for  him  and  his  hosts 
in  the  latter  days.  The  name  of  this  mysterious 
and  formidable  personage  was  evidently  familiar 
to  the  Jewish  world  of  Ezekiel's  time,  although 
to  us  its  origin  is  altogether  obscure.  The 
most  plausible  suggestion,  on  the  whole,  is 
perhaps  that  which  identifies  it  with  the  name 
of  the  Lydian  monarch  Gyges,  which  appears 
on  the  Assyrian  monuments  in  the  form  of 
Gugu,  corresponding  as  closely  as  is  possible  to 
the  Hebrew  Gog.  ||  But  in  the  mind  of  Ezekiel 
Gog  is  hardly  an  historical  figure.  He  is  but 
the  impersonation  of  the  dreaded  power  of  the 
northern  barbarians,  already  recognised  as  a  se- 
rious danger  to  the  peace  of  the  world.  His 
designation  as  prince  of  Rosh,  Meshech,  and 
Tubal  points  to  the  region  east  of  the  Black 
Sea  as  the  seat  of  his  power.*[  He  is  the  captain 
of  a  vast  multitude  of  horsemen,  gorgeously  ar- 
rayed, and  armed  with  shield,  helmet,  and  sword. 
But  although  Gog  himself  belongs  to  the  "  ut- 
termost north,"  he  gathers  under  his  banner  all 
the  most  distant  nations  both  of  the  north  and 
the  south.  Not  only  northern  peoples  like  the 
Cimmerians  and  Armenians.**  but  Persians  and 
Africans, tt  all  of  them  with  shield  and  helmet, 
swell  the  ranks  of  his  motley  army.  The  name 
of  Gog  is  thus  on  the  way  to  become  a  symbol 
of  the  implacable  enmity  of  this  world  to  the 
kingdom  of  God;  as  in  the  book  of  the  Revela- 

*  Cf.  ch.  xx.xix.  23.  J  Ch.  xxxviii.  ig-23. 

t  See  ch.  xxxviii.  11,  12.  §Ch.  xxxix.  23. 

II  See  E.  Meyer,  "  Geschichte  des  Alterthums,"  p.  558  ; 
Schrader,  "  Cuneiform  Inscriptions,"  etc.,  on  this  passage. 

^  Meshech  and  Tubal  are  the  Moschi  and  Tibareni  of 
the  Greek  geographers,  lying  southeast  of  the  Black  Sea. 
A  country  or  tribe  Rosli  has  not  been  found. 

**  Gomer  (according  to  others,  however,  Cappadocia) 
and  Togarmah  (ver.  6). 

t+  Cush  and  Put  (ver.  5). 


3i6 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


tion  it  appears  as  the  designation  of  the  ungodly 
world-power  which  perishes  in  conflict  with  the 
saints  of  God  (Rev.  xx.  7  ff.). 

Gog  therefore  is  summoned  to  hold  himself 
in  readiness,  as  Jehovah's  reserve,*  against  the 
last  days,  when  the  purpose  for  which  he  has 
been  raised  up  will  be  made  manifest.  After 
many  days  he  shall  receive  his  marching  orders: 
Jehovah  Himself  will  lead  forth  his  squadrons 
and  the  innumerable  hosts  of  nations  that  follow 
in  his  train,!  and  bring  them  up  against  the 
mountains  of  Israel,  now  reclaimed  from  deso- 
lation, and  against  a  nation  gathered  from 
among  many  peoples,  dwelling  in  peace  and  se- 
curity. The  advance  of  these  destructive  hordes 
is  likened  to  a  tempest,  and  their  innumerable 
multitude  is  pictured  as  a  cloud  covering  all  the 
land  (ver.  9). 

ii.  Vv.  10-16. — But  like  the  Assyrian  in  the 
time  of  Isaiah,  Gog  "  meaneth  not  so  ";  he  is  not 
aware  that  he  is  Jehovah's  instrument,  his  pur- 
pose being  to  "  destroy  and  cut  ofT  nations  not 
a  few."  I  Hence  the  prophet  proceeds  to  a  new 
description  of  the  enterprise  of  Gog,  laying 
stress  on  the  "  evil  thought  "  that  will  arise  in 
his  heart  and  lure  him  to  his  doom.  What  urges 
him  on  is  the  lust  of  plunder.  The  report  of  the 
people  of  Israel  as  a  people  that  has  amassed 
wealth  and  substance,  and  is  at  the  same  time  de- 
fenceless, dwelling  in  a  land  without  walls  or 
bolts  or  gates,  will  have  reached  him.  These 
two  verses  (11,  12)  are  interesting  as  giving  a 
picture  of  Ezekiel's  conception  of  the  final  state 
of  the  people  of  God.  They  dwell  in  the 
"navel  of  the  world";  they  are  rich  and  pros- 
perous, so  that  the  fame  of  them  has  gone  forth 
through  all  lands;  they  are  destitute  of  military 
resources,  yet  are  unmolested  in  the  enjoyment 
of  their  favoured  lot  because  of  the  moral  effect 
of  Jehovah's  name  on  all  nations  that  know 
their  history.  To  Gog,  however,  who  knows 
nothing  of  Jehovah,  they  will  seem  an  easy  con- 
quest, and  he  will  come  up  confident  of  victory 
to  seize  spoil  and  take  booty  and  lay  his  hand 
on  waste  places  reinhabited  and  a  people 
gathered  out  of  the  heathen.  The  news  of  the 
great  expedition  arid  the  certainty  of  its  suc- 
cess will  rouse  the  cupidity  of  the  trading  com- 
munities from  all  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  they 
will  attach  themselves  as  camp-followers  to  the 
army  of  Gog.  In  historic  times  this  role  would 
naturally  have  fallen  to  the  Phoenicians,  who  had 
a  keen  eye  for  business  of  this  description. ^5  But 
Ezekiel  is  thinking  of  a  time  when  Tyre  shall 
be  no  more;  and  its  place  is  taken  by  the  mer- 
cantile tribes  of  Arabia  and  the  ancient  Phoeni- 
cian colony  of  Tarshish.  The  whole  world  will 
then  resound  with  the  fame  of  Gog's  expedition, 
and  the  most  distant  nations  will  await  its  issue 
with  eager  expectation.  This  then  is  the  mean- 
ing of  Gog's  destiny.  In  the  time  when  Israel 
dwells  peacefully  he  will  be  restless  and  eager 

*  Ver.  7.  The  LXX.  reads  "  for  me  "  instead  of  "  unto 
them,"  giving  to  the  word  mishmar  the  sense  of  "  reserve 
force." 

tThe  words  of  ver.  4,  "I  will  turn  thee  back,  and  put 
hooks  into  thy  jaws,"  are  wanting  in  the  best  manuscripts 
of  the  LXX.,  and  are  perhaps  better  omitted.  Gog  does 
not  need  to  be  dragged  forth  with  hooks ;  he  comes  up 
willingly  enough,  as  soon  as  the  opportunity  presents 
itself  (vv.  II,  12.) 

1  Isa.  X.  7. 

§  An  actual  parallel  is  furnished  by  the  crowds  of  slave- 
dealers  who  followed  the  army  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
when  it  set  out  to  crush  the  Maccabaean  insurrection  in 
i«6  B.  C. 


for  spoil;*  his  multitudes  will  be  set  irt  motion, 
and  throw  themselves  on  the  land,  covering  it 
like  a  cloud.  But  this  is  Jehovah's  doing,  and 
the  purpose  of  it  is  that  the  nations  may  know 
Him  and  that  He  may  be  sanctified  in  Gog  be- 
fore   their   eyes. 

iii.  Vv.  17-23. — These  verses  are  in  the  main 
a  description  of  the  annihilation  of  Gog's  host 
by  the  fierce  wrath  of  Jehovah;  but  this  is  in- 
troduced by  a  reference  to  unfulfilled  prophe- 
cies which  are  to  receive  their  accomplishment 
in  this  great  catastrophe.  It  is  difficult  to  say 
what  particular  prophecies  are  meant.  Those 
which  most  readily  suggest  themselves  are  per- 
haps the  fourth  chapter  of  Joel  and  the  twelfth 
and  fourteenth  of  Zechariah;  but  these  probably 
belong  to  a  later  date  than  Ezekiel.  The  proph- 
ecies of  Zephaniah  and  Jeremiah,  called  forth 
by  the  Scythian  invasion, f  have  also  been 
thought  of,  although  the  point  of  view  there  is 
different  from  that  of  Ezekiel.  In  Jeremiah  and 
Zephaniah  the  Scythians  are  the  scourge  of  God, 
appointed  for  the  chastisement  of  the  sinful  na- 
tion; whereas  Gog  is  brought  up  against  a  holy 
people,  and  for  the  express  purpose  of  having 
judgment  executed  on  himself.  On  the  suppo- 
sition that  Ezekiel's  vision  was  coloured  by  his 
recollection  of  the  Scythians,  this  view  has  no 
doubt  the  greatest  likelihood.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  the  allusion  is  not  to  any  particu- 
lar group  of  prophecies,  but  to  a  general  idea 
which  pervades  prophecy — the  expectation  of  a 
great  conflict  in  which  the  power  of  the  world 
shall  be  arrayed  against  Jehovah  and  Israel,  and 
the  issue  of  which  shall  exhibit  the  sole  sover- 
eignty of  the  true'  God  to  all  mankind.:}:  It  is  of 
course  unnecessary  to  suppose  that  any  prophet 
had  mentioned  Gog  by  name  in  a  prediction  of 
the  future.  All  that  is  meant  is  that  Gog  is  the 
person  in  whom  the  substance  of  previous  ora- 
cles  is  to  be  accomplished. 

The  question  of  ver.  17  leads  thus  to  the  an- 
nouncement of  the  outpouring  of  Jehovah's  in- 
dignation on  the  violators  of  His  territory.  As 
soon  as  Gog  sets  foot  on  the  soil  of  Israel,  Je- 
hovah's wrath  is  kindled  against  him.  A  mighty 
earthquake  shall  shatter  the  mountains  and  level 
every  wall  to  the  ground  and  strike  terror  into 
the  hearts  of  all  creatures.  The  host  of  Gog 
shall  be  panic-stricken, §  each  man  turning  his 
sword  against  his  fellow;  while  Jehovah  com- 
pletes the  slaughter  by  pestilence  and  blood,  rain 
and  hailstones,  fire  and  brimstone.  The  deliver- 
ance of  Israel  is  effected  without  the  help  of  any 
human  arm;  it  is  the  doing  of  Jehovah,  who 
thus  magnifies  and  sanctifies  Himself  and  makes 
Himself  known  before  the  eyes  of  many  peoples, 
so  that  they  may  know  Him  to  be  Jehovah. 

iv.  Chap,  xxxix.  1-8.— Commencing  afresh 
with  a  new  apostrophe  to  Gog,  Ezekiel  here 
recapitulates  the  substance  of  the  previous  chap- 
ter— the  bringing  up  of  Gog  from  the  farthest 
north,  his  destruction  on  the  mountains  of  Is- 
rael, and  the  effect  of  this  on  the  surrounding 
nations.  Mention  is  expressly  made  of  the  bow 
and  arrows  which  were  the  distinctive  weapons 
of   the    Scythian    horsemen.  ||     These   are    struck 

*In  ver.  14  the  LXX.  has  "he  stirred  up"  instead  of 
"know,"  and  gives  a  more  forcible  sense. 

t  Zeph.  i.-iii.  8;  Jer.  iv.-vi. 

t  Cf.,  besides  the  passages  already  cited,  Isa.  x.  5-34.  xvii. 
12-14;  Micah  iv.  11-13. 

§Ver.  21.  LXX.:  "  I  will  summon  against  him  every 
terror." 

Ii  tn-TTOTofoTat  (mounted  archers)  is  the  term  applied  to 
them  by  Herodotus  (iv.  46). 


Ezekiel  xxxviii.,  xxxix.J  JKHOVAH'S    FINAL    VICTORY. 


317 


from  the  grasp  of  Gog,  and  the  mighty  host 
falls  on  the  open  field  to  be  devoured  by  wild 
beasts  and  by  ravenous  birds  of  every  feather. 
But  the  judgment  is  universal  in  its  extent;  it 
reaches  to  Magog,  the  distant  abode  of  Gog,  and 
all  the  remote  lands  whence  his  auxiliaries  were 
drawn.  This  is  the  day  whereof  Jehovah  has 
spoken  by  His  servants  the  prophets  of  Israel, 
the  day  which  finally  manifests  His  glory  to  all 
the  ends  of  the  earth. 

V.  Vv.  9-16. — Here  the  prophet  falls  into  a 
more  prosaic  strain,  as  he  proceeds  to  describe 
with  characteristic  fulness  of  detail  the  sequel 
of  the  great  invasion.  As  the  English  story  of 
the  Invincible  Armada  would  be  incomplete 
without  a  reference  to  the  treasures  cast  ashore 
from  the  wrecked  galleons  on  the  Orkneys  and 
the  Hebrides,  so  the  fate  of  Gog's  ill-starred 
enterprise  is  vividly  set  forth  by  the  minute  de- 
scription of  the  traces  it  left  behind  in  the  peace- 
ful life  of  Israel.  The  irony  of  the  situation  is 
unmistakable,  and  perhaps  a  touch  of  conscious 
exaggeration  is  permissible  in  such  a  picture. 
In  the  first  place  the  weapons  of  the  slain  war- 
riors furnish  wood  enough  to  serve  for  fuel  to 
the  Israelites  for  the  space  of  seven  years.  Then 
follows  a  picture  of  the  process  of  cleansing  the 
land  from  the  corpses  of  the  fallen  enemy.  A 
burying-place  is  assigned  to  them  in  the  valley 
of  Abarim  *  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
outside  of  the  sacred  territory.  The  whole  peo- 
ple of  Israel  will  be  engaged  for  seven  months 
in  the  operation  of  burying  them;  after  this  the 
mouth  of  the  valley  will  be  sealed, f  and  it  will 
be  known  ever  afterwards  as  the  Valley  of  thf 
Host  of  Gog.  But  even  after  the  seven  months 
have  expired  the  scrupulous  care  of  the  people 
for  the  purity  of  their  land  will  be  shown  by 
the  precautions  they  take  against  its  continued 
defilement  by  any  fragment  of  a  skeleton  that 
may  have  been  overlooked.  They  will  appoint 
permanent  officials,  whose  business  will  be  to 
search  for  and  remove  relics  of  the  dead  bodies, 
that  the  land  may  be  restored  to  its  purity. 
Whenever  any  passer-by  lights  on  a  bone  he 
will  set  up  a  mark  beside  it  to  attract  the  atten- 
tion of  the  buriers.  "  Thus "  (in  course  of 
time)  "  they  shall  cleanse  the  land." 

vi.  Vv.  17-24. — The  overwhelming  magnitude 
of  the  catastrophe  is  once  more  set  forth  under 
the  image  of  a  sacrificial  feast,  to  which  Jehovah 
summons  all  the  birds  of  the  air  and  every  beast 
of  the  field  (vv.  17-20).  The  feast  is  represented 
as  a  sacrifice  not  in  any  religious  sense,  but 
simply  in  accordance  with  ancient  usage,  in 
which  the  slaughtering  of  animals  was  invariably 
a  sacrificial  act.  The  only  idea  expressed  by  the 
figure  is  that  Jehovah  has  decreed  this  slaughter 
of  Gog  and  his  host,  and  that  it  will  be  so  great 
that  all  ravenous  beasts  and  birds  will  eat  flesh 
to  the  full  and  drink  the  blood  of  princes  of 
the  earth  to  intoxication.  But  we  turn  with  re- 
lief from  these  images  of  carnage  and  death  to 
the  moral  purpose  which  they  conceal  (vv. 
21-24).  This  is  stated  more  distinctly  here  than 
in    earlier   passages    of    this   prophecy.       It    will 

*  This  translation,  which  is  given  by  Hitzig  and  Cornill, 
is  obtained  by  a  change  in  the  punctuation  of  the  word 
rendered  "passengers"  in  ver.  11  :  cf.  the  "mountains  of 
Abarim,"  Numb,  xxxiii.  47,  48;  Deut.  xxxii.  49. 

t  "  It  shall  stop  the  noses  of  the  passengers  "  (ver.  11) 
gives  no  sense ;  and  the  te.xt,  as  it  stands,  is  almost 
untranslatable.  The  LXX.  reads  "and  they  shall  seal  up 
the  valley,"  which  gives  a  good  enough  meaning,  so  far 
as  it  goes. 


teach  Israel  that  Jehovah  is  indeed  their  God; 
the  lingering  sense  of  insecurity  caused  by  the 
remembrance  of  their  former  rejection  will  be 
finally  taken  away  by  this  signal  deliverance. 
And  through  Israel  it  will  teach  a  lesson  to  the 
heathen.  They  will  learn  something  of  the 
principles  on  which  Jehovah  has  dealt  with  His 
people  when  they  contrast  this  great  salvation 
with  His  former  desertion  of  them.  It  will  then 
fully  appear  that  it  was  for  their  sins  that  they 
went  into  captivity;  and  so  the  knowledge  of 
God's  holiness  and  His  displeasure  against  sin 
will  be  extended  to  the  nations  of  the  world. 

vii.  Vv.  25-29. — The  closing  verses  do  not 
strictly  belong  to  the  oracle  on  Gog.  The 
prophet  returns  to  the  standpoint  of  the  pres- 
ent, and  predicts  once  more  the  restoration  of 
Israel,  which  has  heretofore  been  assumed  as  an 
accomplished  fact.  The  connection  with  what 
precedes  is,  however,  very  close.  The  divine  at- 
tributes, whose  final  manifestation  to  the  world 
is  reserved  for  the  far-off  day  of  Gog's  defeat, 
are  already  about  to  be  revealed  to  Israel.  Je- 
hovah's compassion  for  His  people  and  His 
jealousy  for  His  own  name  will  speedily  be 
shown  in  "  turning  the  fortunes "  of  Israel, 
bringing  them  back  from  the  peoples,  and  gath- 
ering them  from  the  land  of  their  enemies.  The 
consequences  of  this  upon  the  nation  itself  are 
described  in  more  gracious  terms  than  in  any 
other  passage.  They  shall  forget  their  shame 
and  all  their  trespasses  when  they  dwell  securely 
in  their  own  land,  none  making  them  afraid.* 
The  saving  knowledge  of  Jehovah  as  their  God, 
who  led  them  into  captivity  and  brought  them 
back  again,  will  as  far  as  Israel  is  concerned  be 
complete;  and  the  gracious  relation  thus  estab- 
lished shall  no  more  be  interrupted,  because  oi 
the  divine  Spirit  which  has  been  poured  out  on 
the  house  of   Israel. 

11. 

It  will  be  seen  from  this  summary  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  prophecy  that,  while  it  presents 
many  features  peculiar  to  itself,  it  also  contains 
much  in  common  with  the  general  drift  of  the 
prophet's  thinking.  We  must  now  try  to  form 
an  estimate  of  its  significance  as  an  episode  in 
the  great  drama  of  Providence  which  unfolded 
itself  before  his  inspired  imagination. 

The  ideas  peculiar  to  the  passage  are  for  the 
most  part  such  as  might  have  been  suggested 
to  the  mind  of  Ezekiel  by  the  remembrance 
of  the  great  Scythian  invasion  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah.  Although  it  is  not  likely  that  he  had 
himself  lived  through  that  time  of  terror,  he 
must  have  grown  up  whilst  it  was  still  fresh 
in  the  public  recollection,  and  the  rumour  of 
it  had  apparently  left  upon  him  impressions 
never  afterwards  effaced.  Several  circum- 
stances, none  of  them  perhaps  decisive  by  itself, 
conspire  to  show  that  at  least  in  its  imagery 
the  oracle  on  Gog  is  based  on  the  conception  of 

*  Ver.  26.  The  choice  between  the  rendering  "  forget  " 
and  that  of  the  English  Version,  "bear,"  depends  on  the 
position  of  a  single  dot  in  the  Hebrew.  In  the  former 
case  "shame"  must  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  reproach 
{schande)  ;  in  the  latter  it  means  the  inward  feeling  of 
self-abasement  (schaani).  The  forgetting  of  past  tres- 
passes, if  that  is  the  right  reading,  can  only  mean  that 
they  are  entirely  broken  off  and  dismissed  from  mind_; 
there  is  nothing  inconsistent  with  passages  like  ch.  xxxvi. 
31.  It  must  be  understood  that  in  any  event  the  reference  is 
to  the  future  ;  after  that  "  they  have  borne  "  is  altogether 
wrong. 


3^8 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


an  irruption  of  Scythian  barbarians.  The  name 
of  Gog  may  be  too  obscure  to  serve  as  an  in- 
dication; but  his  location  in  the  extreme  north, 
the  description  of  his  army  as  composed  mainly 
of  cavalry  armed  with  bows  and  arrows,  their 
innumerable  multitude,  and  the  love  of  pillage 
and  destruction  by  which  they  are  animated,  all 
point  to  the  Scythians  as  the  originals  from 
whom  the  picture  of  Gog's  host  is  drawn.  Be- 
sides the  light  which  it  casts  on  the  genesis  of 
the  prophecy,  this  fact  has  a  certain  biographical 
interest  for  the  reader  of  Ezekiel.  That  the 
prophet's  furthest  vista  into  the  future  should 
be  a  reflection  of  his  earliest  memory  reminds 
us  of  a  common  human  experience.  "  The 
thoughts  of  youth  are  long,  long  thoughts," 
reaching  far  into  manhood  and  old  age;  and 
the  mind  as  it  turns  back  upon  them  may  often 
discover  in  them  that  which  carries  it  furthest 
in  reading  the  divine  mysteries  of  life  and  des- 
tiny. 

"  Thus  while  the  Sun  sinks  down  to  rest 
Far  in  the  regions  of  the  west. 
Though  to  the  vale  no  parting  beam 
Be  given,  not  one  memorial  gleam, 
A  lingering  light  he  fondly  throws 
On  the  dear  hills  where  first  he  rose." 

For  it  is  not  merely  the  imagery  of  the 
prophecy  that  reveals  the  influence  of  these 
early  associations;  the  thoughts  which  it  em- 
bodies are  themselves  partly  the  result  of  the 
prophet's  meditation  on  questions  suggested  by 
the  invasion.  His  youthful  impressions  of  the 
descent  of  the  northern  hordes  were  afterwards 
illuminated,  as  we  see  from  his  own  words,  by 
the  study  of  contemporary  prophecies  of  Jere- 
miah and  Zephaniah  called  forth  by  the  event. 
From  these  and  other  predictions  he  learned  that 
Jehovah  had  a  purpose  with  regard  to  the  re- 
motest nations  of  the  earth  which  yet  awaited 
its  accomplishment.  That  purpose,  in  accord- 
ance with  his  general  conception  of  the  ends 
of  the  divine  government,  could  be  nothing  else 
than  the  manifestation  of  Jehovah's  glory  before 
the  eyes  of  the  world.  That  this  involved  an 
act  of  judgment  was  only  too  certain  from  the 
universal  hostility  of  the  heathen  to  the  kingdom 
of  God.  Hence  the  prophet's  reflections  would 
lead  directly  to  the  expectation  of  ^  final  on- 
slaught of  the  powers  of  this  world  on  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel,  which  would  give  occasion  for  a 
display  of  Jehovah's  might  on  a  grander  scale 
than  had  yet  been  seen.  And  this  presentiment 
of  an  impending  conflict  between  Jehovah  and 
the  pagan  world  headed  by  the  Scythian  bar- 
barians forms  the  kernel  of  the  oracle  against 
Gog. 

But  we  must  further  observe  that  this  idea, 
from  Ezekiel's  point  of  view,  necessarily  pre- 
supposes the  restoration  of  Israel  to  its  own 
land.  The  peoples  assembled  under  the  standard 
of  Gog  are  those  which  have  never  as  yet  come 
in  contact  with  the  true  God,  and  consequently 
have  had  no  opportunity  of  manifesting  their 
disposition  towards  Him.  They  have  not  sinned 
as  Edom  and  Tyre,  as  Egyot  and  Assyria  have 
sinned,  by  injuries  done  to  Jehovah  through  His 
people.  Even  the  Scythians  themselves,  al- 
though they  had  approached  the  confines  of  the 
sacred  territory,  do  not  seem  to  have  invaded 
it.  Nor  could  the  opportunity  present  itself  so 
long  as  Israel  was  in  Exile.  While  Jehovah 
was  without  an  earthly  sanctuary  or  a  visible 
emblem  of  His  government,  there  was  no  pos- 


sibility of  such  an  mfringement  of  His  holiness 
on  the  part  of  the  heathen  as  would  arrest  the 
attention  of  the  world.  The  judgment  of  Gog, 
therefore,  could  not  be  conceived  as  a  prelim- 
inary to  the  restoration  of  Israel,  like  that  on 
Egypt  and  the  nations  immediately  surrounding 
Palestine.  It  could  only  take  place  under  a  state 
of  things  in  which  Israel  was  once  more  "  holi- 
ness to  the  Lord,  and  the  firstfruits  of  His  in- 
crease," so  that  "  all  that  devoured  him  were 
counted  guilty"  (Jer.  ii.  t,).  This  enables  us 
partly  to  understand  what  appears  to  us  the 
most  singular  feature  of  the  prophecy,  the  pro- 
jection of  the  final  manifestation  of  Jehovah  into 
the  remote  future,  when  Israel  is  already  in  pos- 
session of  all  the  blessings  of  the  Messianic 
dispensation.  It  is  a  consequence  of  the  ex- 
tension of  the  prophetic  horizon,  so  as  to  em- 
brace the  distant  peoples  that  had  hitherto  been 
beyond  the  pale  of  civilisation. 

There  are  other  aspects  of  Ezekiel's  teaching 
on  which  light  is  thrown  by  this  anticipation 
of  a  world-judgment  as  the  final  scene  of  his- 
tory. The  prophet  was  evidently  conscious  of 
a  certain  inconclusiveness  and  want  of  finality 
in  the  prospect  of  the  restoration  as  a  justifi- 
cation of  the  ways  of  God  to  men.  Although 
all  the  forces  of  the  world's  salvation  were 
wrapped  up  in  it,  its  effects  were  still  limited 
and  measurable,  both  as  to  their  range  of  in- 
fluence and  their  inherent  significance.  Not 
only  did  it  fail  to  impress  the  more  distant  na- 
tions, but  its  own  lessons  were  incompletely 
taught.  He  felt  that  it  had  not  been  made  clear 
to  the  dull  perceptions  of  the  heathen  why  the 
God  of  Israel  had  ever  suffered  His  land  to  be 
desecrated  and  His  people  to  be  led  into  captiv- 
ity. Even  Israel  itself  will  not  fully  know  all  that 
is  meant  by  having  Jehovah  for  its  God  until 
the  history  of  revelation  is  finished.  Only  in 
the  summing  up  of  the  ages,  and  in  the  light  of 
the  last  judgment,  will  men  truly  realise  all  that 
is  implied  in  the  terms  God  and  sin  and  re- 
demption. The  end  is  needed  to  interpret  the 
process;  and  all  religious  conceptions  await  their 
fulfilment  in  the  light  of  eternity  which  is  yet 
to  break  on  the  issues  of  human  history. 


PART    V. 
THE  IDEAL  THEOCRACY. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

THE  IMPORT  OF  THE  VISION. 

We  have  now  reached  the  last  and  in  every 
way  the  most  important  section  of  the  book 
of  Ezekiel.  The  nine  concluding  chapters  record 
what  was  evidently  the  crowning  experience  of 
the  prophet's  life.  His  ministry  began  with  a 
vision  of  God;  it  culminates  in  a  vision  of  the 
people  of  God,  or  rather  of  God  in  the  midst 
of  His  people,  reconciled  to  them,  ruling  over 
them,  and  imparting  the  blessings  and  glories  of 
the  final  dispensation.  Into  that  vision  are 
thrown  the  ideals  which  had  been  gradually  ma- 
tured through  twenty  years  of  strenuous  action 
and  intense  meditation.  We  have  traced  some 
of  the  steps  by  which  the  prophet  was  led  to- 


THE    IMPORT    OF    THE    VISION. 


319 


wards  this  consummation  of  his  work.  We  have 
seen  how,  under  the  idea  of  God  which  had  been 
revealed  to  him,  he  was  constrained  to  announce 
the  destruction  of  that  which  called  itself  the 
people  of  Jehovah,  but  was  in  reality  the  means 
of  obscuring  His  character  and  profaning  His 
holiness  (chaps,  iv.-xxiv.).  We  have  seen 
further  how  the  same  fundamental  conception 
led  him  on  in  his  prophecies  against  foreign  na- 
tions to  predict  a  great  clearing  of  the  stage  of 
history  for  the  manifestation  of  Jehovah  (chaps, 
xxv.-xxxii.).  And  we  have  seen  from  the  pre- 
ceding section  what  are  the  processes  by  which 
the  divine  Spirit  breathes  new  life  into  a  dead 
nation  and  creates  out  of  its  scattered  members 
a  people  worthy  of  the  God  whom  the  prophet 
has  seen. 

But  there  is  still  something  more  to  accomplish 
before  his  task  is  finished.  All  through,  Eze- 
kie!  holds  fast  the  truth  that  Jehovah  and  Israel 
are  necessarily  related  to  each  other,  and  that 
Israel  is  to  be  the  medium  through  which  alone 
the  nature  of  Jehovah  can  be  fully  disclosed  to 
mankind.  It  remains,  therefore,  to  sketch  the 
outline  of  a  perfect  theocracy — in  other  words, 
to  describe  the  permanent  forms  and  institutions 
which  shall  express  the  ideal  relation  between 
God  and  men.  To  this  task  the  prophet  ad- 
dresses himself  in  the  chapters  now  before  us. 
That  great  New  Year's  Vision  may  be  regarded 
as  the  ripe  fruit  of  all  God's  training  of  His 
prophet,  as  it  is  also  the  part  of  Ezekiel's  work 
which  most  directly  influenced  the  subsequent 
development  of  religion  in  Israel. 

It  cannot  be  doubted,  then,  that  these  chapters 
are  an  integral  part  of  the  book,  considered  as 
a  record  of  Ezekiel's  work.  But  it  is  certainly 
a  significant  circumstance  that  they  are  separated 
from  the  body  of  the  prophecies  by  an  interval 
of  thirteen  years.  For  the  greater  part  of  that 
time  Ezekiel's  literary  activity  was  suspended. 
It  is  probable,  at  all  events,  that  the  first  thirty- 
nine  chapters  had  been  committed  to  writing 
soon  after  the  latest  date  they  mentioned,  and 
that  the  oracle  on  Gog,  which  marks  the  ex- 
treme limit  of  Ezekiel's  prophetic  vision,  was 
really  the  conclusion  of  an  earlier  form  of  the 
book.  And  we  may  be  certain  that,  since  the 
eventful  period  that  followed  the  arrival  of  the 
fugitive  from  Jerusalem,  no  new  divine  com- 
munication had  visited  the  prophet's  mind.  But 
at  last,  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  the  captivity, 
and  on  the  first  day  of  a  new  year,*  he  falls  into 
a  trance  more  prolonged  than  any  he  had  yet 
passed  through,  and  he  emerged  from  it  with  a 
new  message  for  his  people. 

In  what  direction  were  the  prophet's  thoughts 
moving  as  Israel  passed  into  the  midnight  of  her 
exile?  That  they  have  moved  in  the  interval — 
that  his  standpoint  is  no  longer  quite  identical 
with  that  represented  in  his  earlier  prophecies — 
seems  to  be  shown  by  one  slight  modification  of 
his  previous  conceptions,  which  has  been  already 
mentioned.!  I  refer  to  the  position  of  the  prince 
in  the  theocratic  state.  We  find  that  the  king 
is  still  the  civil  head  of  the  commonwealth,  but 
that  his  position  is  hardly  reconcilable  with  the 
exalted  functions  assigned  to  the  Messianic  king 

*Tlie  beginning  of  the  year  is  that  referred  to  in  Lev. 
x.w.  9,  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month  (September- 
October).  From  the  Exile  downwards  two  calendars 
■wtre  in  use,  the  beginning  of  the  sacred  year  falling  in 
the  seventh  month  of  the  civil  year.  It  was  not  necessary 
for  Ezekiel  to  mention  the  number  of  the  month. 

+  See  pp.  302  f. 


in  chap,  xxxiv.  The  inference  seems  irresistible 
that  I'lzekiel's  point  of  view  has  somewhat 
changed,  so  that  the  objects  in  his  picture  present 
themselves  in  a  different  perspective. 

It  is  true  that  this  change  was  effected  by  a 
vision,  and  it  may  be  said  that  that  fact  lorbids 
our  regarding  it  as  indicating  a  progress  in 
Ezekiel's  thoughts.  But  the  vision  of  a  prophet 
is  never  out  of  relation  to  his  previous  think- 
ing. The  prophet  is  always  prepared  for  his 
vision;  it  comes  to  him  as  the  answer  to  ques- 
tions, as  the  solution  of  difficulties,  whose  force 
he  has  felt,  and  apart  from  which  it  would  con- 
vey no  revelation  of  God  to  his  mind.  It  marks 
the  point  at  which  reflection  gives  place  to  in- 
spiration, where  the  incommunicable  certainty  of 
the  divine  word  lifts  the  soul  into  the  region  of 
spiritual  and  eternal  truth.  And  hence  it  may 
help  us,  from  our  human  point  of  view,  to  under- 
stand the  true  import  of  this  vision,  if  from  the 
answer  we  try  to  discover  the  questions  which 
were  of  pressing  interest  to  Ezekiel  in  the  later 
part  of  his  career. 

Speaking  generally,  we  may  say  that  the  prob- 
lem that  occupied  the  mind  of  Ezekiel  at  this 
time  was  the  problem  of  a  religious  constitution. 
How  to  secure  for  religion  its  true  place  in 
public  life,  how  to  embody  it  in  institutions 
which  shall  conserve  its  essential  ideas  and  trans- 
mit them  from  one  generation  to  another,  how 
a  people  may  best  express  its  national  responsi- 
bility to  God — these  and  many  kindred  questions 
are  real  and  vital  to-day  amongst  the  nations 
of  Christendom,  and  they  were  far  more  vital 
in  the  age  of  Ezekiel.  The  conception  of  reli- 
gion as  an  inward  spiritual  power,  moulding  the 
life  of  the  nation  and  of  each  individual  member, 
was  at  leas*'  as  strong  in  him  as  in  any  other 
prophet;  and  it  h?A  been  adequately  expressed 
in  the  section  of  his  book  dealing  with  the 
forination  of  the  new  Israel.  But  he  saw  that 
this  was  not  for  that  time  sufficient.  The  mass 
of  the  community  were  dependent  on  the  educa- 
tive influence  of  the  institutions  under  which  they 
lived,  and  there  was  no  way  of  impressing  on  a 
whole  people  the  character  of  Jehovah  except 
through  a  system  of  laws  and  observances  which 
should  constantly  exhibit  it  to  their  minds.  The 
time  was  not  yet  come  when  religion  could  be 
trusted  to  work  as  a  hidden  leaven,  transforming 
life  from  within  and  bringing  in  the  kingdom  of 
God  silently  by  the  operation  of  spiritual  forces. 
Thus,  while  the  last  section  insists  on  the  moral 
change  that  must  pass  over  Israel,  and  the  need 
of  a  direct  influence  from  God  on  the  heart  of 
the  people,  that  which  now  lies  before  us  is  de- 
voted to  the  religious  and  political  arrangements 
by  which  the  sanctity  of  the  nation  must  be  pre 
served. 

Starting  from  this  general  notion  of  what  the 
prophet  sought,  we  can  see,  in  the  next  place, 
that  his  attention  must  be  mainly  concentrated 
on  matters  belonging  to  public  worship  and 
ritual.  Worship  is  the  direct  expression  in  word 
and  act  of  man's  attitude  to  God.  and  no  public 
religion  can  maintain  a  higher  level  of  spirituality 
than  the  symbolism  which  gives  it  a  place  in 
the  life  of  the  people.  That  fact  had  been  abun- 
dantly illustrated  by  the  experience  of  centuries 
before  the  Exile.  The  popular  worship  had  al- 
ways been  a  stronghold  of  false  religion  in  Is- 
rael. The  high  places  were  the  nurseries  of  all 
the  corruptions  against  which  the  prophets  had 
to  contend,   not  simply  because   of  the   immoral 


320 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


elements  that  mingled  with  their  worship,  but 
because  the  worship  itself  was  regulated  by 
conceptions  of  the  deity  which  were  opposed 
to  the  religion  of  revelation.  Now  the  idea 
of  using  ritual  as  a  vehicle  of  the  highest 
spiritual  truth  is  certainly  not  peculiar  to  Eze- 
kiel's  vision.  But  it  is  there  carried  through 
with  a  thoroughness  which  has  no  parallel  else- 
where except  in  the  priestly  legislation  of  the 
Pentateuch.  And  this  bears  witness  to  a  clear 
perception  on  the  part  of  the  prophet  of  the 
value  of  that  whole  side  of  things  for  the  future 
development  of  religion  in  Israel.  No  one  was 
more  deeply  impressed  with  the  evils  that  had 
flowed  from  a  corrupt  ritual  in  the  past,  and  he 
conceives  the  final  form  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
to  be  one  in  which  the  blessings  of  salvation  are 
safeguarded  by  a  carefully  regulated  system  of 
religious  ordinances.  It  will  become  manifest  as 
we  proceed  that  he  regards  the  Temple  ritual  as 
the  very  centre  of  theocratic  life,  and  the  highest 
function  of  the  community  of  the  true  religion. 
But  Ezekiel  was  prepared  for  the  reception  of 
this  vision,  not  only  by  the  practical  reforming 
bent  of  his  mind,  but  also  by  a  combination  in 
his  own  experience  of  the  two  elements  which 
must  always  enter  into  a  conception  of  this  na- 
ture. If  we  may  employ  philosophical  language 
to  express  a  very  obvious  distinction,  we  have  to 
recognise  in  the  vision  a  material  and  a  formal 
element.  The  matter  of  the  vision  is  derived 
from  the  ancient  religious  and  political  constitu- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  state.  All  true  and  lasting 
reformations  are  conservative  at  heart;  their  ob- 
ject never  is  to  make  a  clean  sweep  of  the  past, 
but  so  to  modify  what  is  traditional  as  to  adapt 
it  to  the  needs  of  a  new  era.  Now  Ezekiel  was  a 
priest,  and  possessed  all  a  priest's  reverence  for  an- 
tiquity, as  well  asapriest's  professional  knowledge 
of  ceremonial  and  of  consuetudinary  law.  No 
man  could  have  been  better  fitted  than  he  to  secure 
the  continuity  of  Israel's  religious  life  alo_ng  the 
particular  line  on  which  it  was  destined  to  move. 
Accordingly  we  find  that  the  new  theocracy  is 
modelled  from  beginning  to  end  after  the  pat- 
tern of  the  ancient  institutions  which  had  been 
destroyed  by  the  Exile.  If  we  ask,  for  example, 
what  is  the  meaning  of  some  detail  of  the  Temple 
building,  such  as  the  cells  surrounding  the  main 
sanctuary,  the  obvious  and  sufficient  answer  is 
that  these  things  existed  in  Solomon's  Temple, 
and  there  was  no  reason  for  altering  them.  On 
the  other  hand,  whenever  we  find  the  vision  de- 
parting from  what  had  been  traditionally  estab- 
lished, we  may  be  sure  that  there  is  a  reason  for 
it,  and  in  most  cases  we  can  see  what  that  reason 
was.  In  such  departures  we  recognise  the  work- 
ing of  what  we  have  called  the  formal  element 
of  the  vision,  the  moulding  influence  of  the  ideas 
which  the  system  was  intended  to  express. 
What  these  ideas  were  we  shall  consider  in  sub- 
sequent chapters;  here  it  is  enough  to  say  that 
they  were  the  fundamental  ideas  which  had  been 
communicated  to  Ezekiel  in  the  course  of  his 
prophetic  work,  and  which  have  found  expres- 
sion in  various  forms  in  other  parts  of  his  writ- 
ings. That  they  are  not  peculiar  to  Ezekiel,  but 
are  shared  by  other  prophets,  is  true,  just  as  it 
is  true  on  the  other  hand  that  the  priestly  con- 
ceptions which  occupy  so  large  a  place  in  .his 
mind  were  an  inheritance  from  the  whole  past 
history  of  the  nation.  Nor  was  this  the  first  time 
when  an  alliance  between  the  ceremonialism  of 
the  priesthood  and  the  more  ethical  and  spiritual 


teaching  of  prophecy  had  proved  of  the  utmost 
advantage  to  the  religious  life  of  Israel.*  The 
unique  importance  of  Ezekiel's  vision  lies  in  the 
fact  that  the  great  development  of  prophecy  was 
now  almost  complete,  and  that  the  time  was 
come  for  its  results  to  be  embodied  in  institu- 
tions which  were  in  the  main  of  a  priestly  char- 
acter. And  it  was  fitting  that  this  new  era  of 
religion  should  be  inaugurated  through  the 
agency  of  one  who  combined  in  his  own  person 
the  conservative  instincts  of  the  priest  with  the 
originality  and  the  spiritual  intuition  of  the 
prophet. 

It  is  not  suggested  for  a  moment  that  these 
considerations  account  for  the  inception  of  the 
vision  in  the  prophet's  mind.  We  are  not  to  re- 
gard it  as  merely  the  brilliant  device  of  an  in- 
genious man,  who  was  exceptionally  qualified  to 
read  the  signs  of  the  times,  and  to  discover  a  so- 
lution for  a  pressing  religious  problem.  In  order 
that  it  might  accomplish  the  end  in  view,  it  was 
absolutely  necessary  that  it  should  be  invested 
with  a  supernatural  sanction  and  bear  the  stamp 
of  divine  authority.  Ezekiel  himself  was  well 
aware  of  this,  and  would  never  have  ventured  to 
publish  his  vision  if  he  had  thought  it  all  out  for 
himself.  He  had  to  wait  for  the  time  when  "  the 
hand  of  the  Lord  was  upon  him,"  and  he  saw  in 
vision  the  new  Temple  and  the  river  of  life  pro- 
ceeding from  it,  and  the  renovated  land,  and  the 
glory  of  God  taking  up  its  everlasting  abode  in 
the  midst  of  His  people.  Until  that  moment  ar- 
rived he  was  without  a  message  as  to  the  form 
which  the  life  of  the  restored  Israel  must  as- 
sume. Nevertheless  the  psychological  conditions 
of  the  vision  were  contained  in  those  parts  of  the 
prophet's  experience  which  have  just  been  indi- 
cated. Processes  of  thought  which  had  long  oc- 
cupied his  mind  suddenly  crystallised  at  the 
touch  of  the  divine  hand,  and  the  result  was  the 
marvellous  conception  of  a  theocratic  state 
which  was  Ezekiel's  greatest  legacy  to  the  faith 
and  hopes  of  his  countrym.en. 

That  this  vision  of  Ezekiel's  profoundly  in- 
fluenced the  development  of  post-exilic  Judaism 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  all  the  best 
tendencies  of  the  restoration  period  were  to- 
wards the  realisation  of  the  ideals  which  the 
vision  sets  forth  with  surpassing  clearness.  It 
is  impossible,  indeed,  to  say  precisely  how  far 
Ezekiel's  influence  extended,  or  how  far  the  re- 
turning exiles  consciously  aimed  at  carrying  out 
the  ideas  contained  in  his  sketch  of  a  theocratic 
constitution.  That  they  did  so  to  some  extent 
is  inferred  from  a  consideration  of  some  of  the 
arrangements  established  in  Jerusalem  soon  after 
the  return  from  Babylon. I  But  it  is  certain  that 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  the  actual  institutions 
of  the  restored  community  must  have  differed 
very  widely  in  many  points  from  those  described 
in  the  last  nine  chapters  of  Ezekiel.  When  we 
look  more  closely  at  the  composition  of  this 
vision,  we  see  that  it  contains  features  which 
neither  then  nor  at  any  subsequent  time  have 
been  historically  fulfilled.  The  most  remarkable 
thing  about  it  is  that  it  unites  in  one  picture  two 
characteristics  which  seem  at  first  sight  difficult 
to  combine.  On  the  one  hand  it  bears  the  as- 
pect of  a  rigid  legislative  system  intended  to 
regulate  human  conduct  in  all  matters  of  vital 
moment  to   the   religious   standing   of   the   com- 

*  Cf.  Davidson,  "Ezekiel,"  pp.  liv.  f. 
tSee   Prof.  W.  R.  Smith,  "The  Old  Testament  in  the 
Jewish  Church,"  pp.  442  f. 


THE    IMPORT    OF    THE    VISION. 


321 


munity;  on  the  other  hand  it  assumes  a  miracu- 
lous transformation  of  the  physical  aspect  of  the 
country,  a  restoration  of  all  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel  under  a  native  king,  and  a  return  of  Je- 
hovah in  visible  glory  to  dwell  in  the  midst  of 
the  children  of  Israel  for  ever.  Now  these  super- 
natural conditions  of  the  perfect  theocracy  could 
not  be  realised  by  any  effort  on  the  part  of  the 
people,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  were  never  liter- 
ally fulfilled  at  all.  It  must  have  been  plain 
to  the  leaders  of  the  Return  that  for  this  reason 
alone  the  details  of  Ezekiel's  legislation  were 
not  binding  for  them  in  the  actual  circumstances 
in  which  they  were  placed.  Even  in  matters 
clearly  within  the  province  of  human  administra- 
tion we  know  that  they  considered  themselves 
free  to  modify  his  regulations  in  accordance  with 
the  requirements  of  the  situation  in  which  they 
found  themselves.  It  does  not  follow  from  this, 
however,  that  they  were  ignorant  of  the  book 
of  Ezekiel,  or  that  it  gave  them  no  help  in  the 
difficult  task  to  which  they  addressed  themselves. 
It  furnished  them  with  an  ideal  of  national  holi- 
ness, and  the  general  outline  of  a  constitution  in 
which  that  ideal  should  be  embodied;  and  this 
outline  they  seem  to  have  striven  to  fill  up  in  the 
way  best  adapted  to  the  straitened  and  discourag- 
ing circumstances  of  the  time. 

But  this  throws  us  back  on  some  questions  of 
fundamental  importance  for  the  right  under- 
standing of  Ezekiel's  vision.  Taking  the  vision 
as  a  whole,  we  have  to  ask  whether  a  fulfilment 
of  the  kind  just  indicated  was  the  fulfilment  that 
the  prophet  himself  anticipated.  Did  he  lay 
stress  on  the  legislative  or  the  supernatural  as- 
pect of  the  vision — on  man's  agency  or  on  God's? 
In  other  words,  does  he  issue  it  as  a  programme 
to  be  carried  out  by  the  people  as  soon  as  the 
opportunity  is  presented  by  their  return  to  the 
land  of  Canaan?  or  does  he  mean  that  Jehovah 
Himself  must  take  the  initiative  by  miraculously 
preparing  the  land  for  their  reception,  and  taking 
up  His  abode  in  the  finished  Temple,  the  "  place 
of  His  throne,  and  the  place  of  the  soles  of  His 
feet "  ?  The  answer  to  that  question  is  not 
difficult,  if  only  we  are  careful  to  look  at  things 
from  the  prophet's  point  of  view,  and  disregard 
the  historical  events  in  which  his  predictions 
were  partly  realised.  It  is  frequently  assumed 
that  the  elaborate  description  of  the  Temple 
buildings  in  chaps,  xl.-xlii.  is  intended  as  a  guide 
to  the  builders  of  the  second  Temple,  who  are  to 
make  it  after  the  fashion  of  that  which  the 
prophet  saw  on  the  mount.  It  is  quite  probable 
that  in  some  degree  it  may  have  served  that  pur- 
pose; but  it  seems  to  me  that  this  view  is  not  in 
keeping  with  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  vision. 
The  Temple  that  Ezekiel  saw,  and  the  only  one 
of  which  he  speaks,  is  a  house  not  made  with 
hands;  it  is  as  much  a  part  of  the  supernatural 
preparation  for  the  future  theocracy  as  the  "  very 
high  mountain  "  on  which  it  stands,  or  the  river 
that  flows  from  it  to  sweeten  the  waters  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  In  the  important  passage  where  the 
prophet  is  commanded  to  exhibit  the  plan  of 
the  house  to  the  children  of  Israel  (xliii.  10,  11), 
there  is  unfortunately  a  discrepancy  between  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  texts  which  throws  some  ob- 
scurity on  this  particular  point.  According  to 
the  Hebrew  there  can  hardlv  be  a  doubt  that  a 
sketch  is  shown  to  them  which  is  to  be  used  as 
a  builder's  plan  at  the  time  of  the  Restoration.* 

♦See  ver.  10,  "let  them  measure  the  pattern  "  ;  ver.  u, 
"that  they  may  keep  the  whole  form  thereof." 

21— Vol.  IV. 


But  in  the  Septuagint,  which  seems  on  the  whole 
to  give  a  more  correct  text,  the  passage  runs 
thus:  "  And,  thou  son  of  man,  describe  the  house 
to  the  house  of  Israel  (and  let  them  be  ashamed 
of  their  iniquities),  and  its  form,  and  its  con- 
struction: and  they  shall  be  ashamed  of  all  that 
they  have  done.  And  do  thou  sketch  the  house, 
and  its  exits,  and  its  outline;  and  all  its  ordi- 
nances and  all  its  laws  make  known  to  them; 
and  write  it  before  them,  that  they,  may  keep  all 
its  commandments  and  all  its  ordinances,  and 
do  them."  There  is  nothing  here  to  suggest 
that  the  construction  of  the  Temple  was  left  for 
human  workmanship.  The  outline  of  it  is 
shown  to  the  people  only  that  they  may 
be  ashamed  of  all  their  iniquities.  When 
the  arrangements  of  the  ideal  Temple  are  ex- 
plained to  them,  they  will  see  how  far  those  of 
the  first  Temple  transgressed  the  requirements 
of  Jehovah's  holiness,  and  this  knowledge  will 
produce  a  sense  of  shame  for  the  dulness  of 
heart  which  tolerated  so  many  abuses  in  connec- 
tion with  His  worship.  No  doubt  that  impres- 
sion sank  deep  into  the  minds  of  Ezekiel's  hear- 
ers, and  led  to  certain  important  modifications 
in  the  structure  of  the  Temple  when  it  had  to  be 
built;  but  that  is  not  what  the  prophet  is  think- 
ing of.  At  the  same  time  we  see  clearly  that  he 
is  very  much  in  earnest  with  the  legislative  part 
of  his  vision.  Its  laws  are  real  laws,  and  are 
given  that  they  may  be  obeyed — only  they  do 
not  come  into  force  until  all  the  institutions  of 
the  theocracy,  natural  and  supernatural  alike,  are 
in  full  working  order.  And  apart  from  the 
doubtful  question  as  to  the  erection  of  the 
Temple,  that  general  conclusion  holds  good  for 
the  vision  as  a  whole.  Whilst  it  is  pervaded 
throughout  by  the  legislative  spirit,  the  miracu- 
lous features  are  after  all  its  central  and  essential 
elements.  When  these  conditions  are  realised, 
it  will  be  the  duty  of  Israel  to  guard  her  sacred 
institutions  by  the  most  scrupulous  and  devoted 
obedience;  but  till  then  there  is  no  kingdom  of 
God  established  on  earth,  and  therefore  no  sys- 
tem of  laws  to  conserve  a  state  of  salvation, 
which  can  only  be  brought  about  by  the  direct 
and  visible  interposition  of  the  Almighty  in  thf 
sphere  of  nature  and  history. 

This  blending  of  seemingly  incongruous  ele- 
ments reveals  to  us  the  true  character  of  the  vi- 
sion with  which  we  have  to  deal.  It  is  in  the 
strictest  sense  a  Messianic  prophecy — that  is, 
a  picture  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  final  state 
as  the  prophet  was  led  to  conceive  it.  It  is  com- 
mon to  all  such  representations  that  the  human 
authors  of  them  have  no  idea  of  a  long  historical 
development  gradually  leading  up  to  the  perfect 
manifestation  of  God's  purpose  with  the  world. 
The  impending  crisis  in  the  affairs  of  the  people 
of  Israel  is  always  regarded  as  the  consummation 
of  human  history  and  the  establishment  of  God's 
kingdom  in  the  plenitude  of  its  power  and  glory. 
In  the  time  of  Ezekiel  the  next  step  in  the  un- 
folding of  the  divine  plan  of  redemption  was  the 
restoration  of  Israel  to  its  own  land;  and  in  so 
far  as  his  vision  is  a  prophecy  of  that  event,  it 
was  realised  in  the  return  of  the  exiles  with 
Zerubbabel  in  the  first  year  of  Cyrus.  But  to 
the  mind  of  Ezekiel  this  did  not  present  itself  as 
a  mere  step  towards  something  immeasurably 
higher  in  the  remote  future.  It  is  to  include 
everything  necessary  for  the  complete  and  final 
inbringing  of  the  Messianic  dispensation,  and  all 
the  powers  of  the  world  to  come  are  to  be  dis- 


322 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


played  in  the  acts  by  which  Jehovah  brings  back 
the  scattered  members  of  Israel  to  the  enjoyment 
of  blessedness  in  His  own  presence. 

The  thing  that  misleads  us  as  to  the  real  na- 
ture of  the  vision  is  the  emphasis  laid  on  matters 
which  seem  to  us  of  merely  temporal  and  earthly 
significance.  We  are  apt  to  think  that  what  we 
have  before  us  can  be  nothing  else  than  a  legis- 
lative scheme  to  be  carried  out  more  or  less  fully 
in  the  new  state  that  should  arise  after  the  Exile. 
The  miraculous  features  in  the  vision  are  apt  to 
be  dismissed  as  mere  symbolisms  to  which  no 
great  significance  attaches.  Legislating  for  the 
millennium  seems  to  us  a  strange  occupation  for 
a  prophet,  and  we  are  hardly  prepared  to  credit 
even  Ezekiel  with  so  bold  a  conception.  But 
that  depends  entirely  on  his  idea  of  what  the  mil- 
lennium will  be.  If  it  is  to  be  a  state  of  things 
in  which  religious  institutions  are  of  vital  im- 
portance for  the  maintenance  of  the  spiritual  in- 
terests of  the  community  of  the  people  of  God, 
then  legislation  is  the  natural  expression  for  the 
ideals  which  are  to  be  realised  in  it.  And  we 
must  remember,  too,  that  what  we  have  to  do 
with  is  a  vision.  Ezekiel  is  not  the  ultimate 
source  of  this  legislation,  however  much  it  may 
bear  the  impress  of  his  individual  experience. 
He  has  seen  the  city  of  God,  and  all  the  minute 
and  elaborate  regulations  with  which  these  nine 
chapters  are  filled  are  but  the  exposition  of  prin- 
ciples that  determine  the  character  of  a  people 
amongst  whom  Jehovah  can  dwell. 

At  the  same  time  we  see  that  a  separation  of 
dififerent  aspects  of  the  vision  was  inevitably  ef- 
fected by  the  teaching  of  history.  The  return 
from  Babylon  was  accomplished  without  any  of 
those  supernatural  adjuncts  with  which  it  had 
been  invested  in  the  rapt  imagination  of  the 
prophet.  No  transformation  of  the  land  preceded 
it;  no  visible  presence  of  Jehovah  welcomed  the 
exiles  back  to  their  ancient  abode.  They  found 
Jerusalem  in  ruins,  the  holy  and  beautiful  house 
a  desolation,  the  land  occupied  by  aliens,  the 
seasons  unproductive  as  of  old.  Yet  in  the 
hearts  of  these  men  there  was  a  vision  even  more 
impressive  than  that  of  Ezekiel  in  his  solitude. 
To  lay  the  foundations  of  a  theocratic  state  in 
the  dreary,  discouraging  daylight  of  the  present 
was  an  act  of  faith  as  heroic  as  has  ever  been  per- 
formed in  the  history  of  religion.  The  building 
of  the  Temple  was  undertaken  amidst  many  diffi- 
culties, the  ritual  was  organised,  the  rudiments 
of  a  religious  constitution  appeared,  and  in  all 
this  we  see  the  influence  of  those  principles  of 
national  holiness  that  had  been  formulated  by 
Ezekiel.  But  the  crowning  manifestation  of  Je- 
hovah's glory  was  deferred.  Prophet  after 
prophet  appeared  to  keep  alive  the  hope  that  this 
Temple,  poor  in  outward  appearance  as  it  was, 
would  yet  be  the  centre  of  a  new  world,  and  the 
dwelling-place  of  the  Eternal.  Centuries  rolled 
past,  and  still  Jehovah  did  not  come  to  His  Tem- 
ple, and  the  eschatological  features  which  had 
bulked  so  largely  in  Ezekiel's  vision  remained  an 
unfulfilled  aspiration.  And  when  at  length  in  the 
fulness  of  time  the  complete  revelation  of  God 
was  given,  it  was  in  a  form  that  superseded  the 
old  economy  entirely,  and  transformed  its  most 
stable  and  cherished  institutions  into  adumbra- 
tions of  a  spiritual  kingdom  which  knew  no 
earthly  Temple  and  had  need  of  none. 

This  brings  us  to  the  most  diflficirit  and  most 
important  of  all  the  questions  arising  in  connec- 


tion with  Ezekiel's  vision — What  is  its  rela- 
tion to  the  Pentateuchal  Legislation?  It  is  ob- 
vious at  once  that  the  significance  of  this  section 
of  the  book  of  Ezekiel  is  immensely  enhanced  if 
we  accept  the  conclusion  to  which  the  critical 
study  of  the  Old  Testament  has  been  steadily 
driven,  that  in  the  chapters  before  us  we  have 
the  first  outline  of  that  great  conception  of  a 
theocratic  constitution  which  attained  its  finished 
expression  in  the  priestly  regulations  of  the 
middle  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  discus- 
sion of  this  subject  is  so  intricate,  so  far-reach- 
ing in  its  consequences,  and  ranges  over  so  wide 
an  historical  field,  that  one  is  tempted  to  leave 
it  in  the  hands  of  those  who  have  addressed 
themselves  to  its  special  treatment,  and  to  try 
to  get  on  as  best  one  may  without  assuming  a 
definite  attitude  on  one  side  or  the  other.  But 
the  student  of  Ezekiel  cannot  altogether  evade 
it.  Again  and  again  the  question  will  force  itself 
on  him  as  he  seeks  to  ascertain  the  meaning  of 
the  various  details  of  Ezekiel's  legislation.  How 
does  this  stand  related  to  corresponding  require- 
ments in  the  Mosaic  law?  It  is  necessary,  there- 
fore, in  justice  to  the  reader  of  the  following 
pages,  that  an  attempt  should  be  made,  however 
imperfectly,  to  indicate  the  position  which  the 
present  phase  of  criticism  assigns  to  Ezekiel  in 
the  history  of  the  Old  Testament  legislation. 

We  may  begin  by  pointing  out  the  kind  of 
difficulty  that  is  felt  to  arise  on  the  supposition 
that  Ezekiel  had  before  him  the  entire  body  of 
laws  contained  in  our  present  Pentateuch.  We 
should  expect  in  that  case  that  the  prophet 
would  contemplate  a  restoration  of  the  divine 
institutions  established  under  Moses,  and  that  his 
vision  would  reproduce  with  substantial  fidelity 
the  minute  provisions  of  the  law  by  which  these 
institutions  were  to  be  maintained.  But  this  is 
very  far  from  being  the  case.  It  is  found  that 
while  Ezekiel  deals  to  a  large  extent  with  the 
subjects  for  which  provision  is  made  by  the  law, 
there  is  in  no  instance  perfect  correspondence  be- 
tween the  enactments  of  the  vision  and  those  of 
the  Pentateuch,  while  on  some  points  they  differ 
very  materially  from  one  another.  How  are  we 
to  account  for  these  numerous  and,  on  the  sup- 
position, evidently  designed  divergencies?  It 
has  been  suggested  that  the  law  was  found  to  be 
in  some  respects  unsuitable  to  the  state  of  things 
that  would  arise  after  the  Exile,  and  that  Ezekiel 
in  the  exercise  of  his  prophetic  authority  under- 
took to  adapt  it  to  the  conditions  of  a  late  age. 
The  suggestion  is  in  itself  plausible,  but  it  is  not 
confirmed  by  the  history.  For  it  is  agreed  on  all 
hands  that  the  law  as  a  whole  had  never  been  put 
in  force  for  any  considerable  period  of  Israel's 
history  previous  to  the  Exile.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  we  suppose  that  Ezekiel  judged  its  pro- 
visions unsuitable  for  the  circumstances  that 
would  emerge  after  the  Exile,  we  are  confronted 
by  the  fact  that  where  Ezekiel's  legislation  dif- 
fers from  that  of  the  Pentateuch  it  is  the  latter 
and  not  the  former  that  regulated  the  practice  of 
the  post-exilic  community.  So  far  was  the  law 
from  being  out  of  date  in  the  age  of  Ezekiel  that 
the  time  was  only  approaching  when  the  first  ef- 
fort would  be  made  to  accept  it  in  all  its  length 
and  breadth  as  the  authoritative  basis  of  an  actual 
theocratic  polity.  Unless,  therefore,  we  are  to 
hold  that  the  legislation  of  the  vision  is  entirely 
in  the  air,  and  that  it  takes  no  account  whatever 
of  practical  considerations,  we  must  feel  that  a 
certain  difficulty  is  presented  by  its  unexplained 


THE    IMPORT    OF    THE    VISION. 


323 


deviatJC/ns  from  the  carefully  drawn  ordinances 
of  the  Pentateuch. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  Pentateuch  itself  is 
not  a  unity.  It  consists  of  dififerent  strata  of 
legislation  which,  while  irreconcilable  in  details, 
are  held  to  exhibit  a  continuous  progress  towards 
a  clearer  definition  of  the  duties  that  devolve  on 
dififerent  classes  in  the  community,  and  a  fuller 
exposition  of  the  principles  that  underlay  the 
system  from  the  beginning.  The  analysis  of  the 
Mosaic  writings  into  dififerent  legislative  codes 
has  resulted  in  a  scheme  which  in  its  main  out- 
lines is  now  accepted  by  critics  of  all  shades  of 
opinion.  The  three  great  codes  which  we  have 
to  distinguish  are:  (i)  the  so-called  Book  of 
the  Covenant  (Exod.  xx.  24-xxiii.,  with  which 
may  be  classed  the  closely  allied  code  of  Exod. 
xxxiv.  10-28);  (2)  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy; 
and  (3)  the  Priestly  Code  (found  in  Exod.  xxv.- 
xxxi.,  XXXV. -xl.,  the  whole  book  of  Leviticus,  and 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  book  of  Numbers).* 
Now  of  course  the  mere  separation  of  these  dif- 
ferent documents  tells  us  nothing,  or  not  much, 
as  to  their  relative  priority  or  antiquity.  But  we 
possess  at  least  a  certain  amount  of  historical  and 
independent  evidence  as  to  the  times  when  some 
of  them  became  operative  in  the  actual  life  of  the 
nation.  We  know,  for  example,  that  the  Book 
of  Deuteronomy  attained  the  force  of  statute  law 
under  the  most  solemn  circumstances  by  a  na- 
tional covenant  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah. 
The  distinctive  feature  of  that  book  is  its  impres- 
sive enforcement  of  the  principle  that  there  is  but 
one  sanctuary  at  which  Jehovah  can  be  legiti- 
mately worshipped.  When  we  compare  the  list 
of  reforms  carried  out  by  Josiah,  as  given  in  the 
twenty-third  chapter  of  2  Kings,  with  the  provi- 
sions of  Deuteronomy,  we  see  that  it  must  have 
been  that  book  and  it  alone  that  had  been  found 
in  the  Temple  and  that  governed  the  reforming 
policy  of  the  king.  Before  that  time  the  law  of 
the  one  sanctuary,  if  it  was  known  at  all,  was 
certainly  more  honoured  in  the  breach  than  the 
observance.  Sacrifices  were  freely  ofifered  at 
local  altars  throughout  the  country,  not  merely 
by  the  ignorant  common  people  and  idolatrous 
kings,  but  by  men  who  were  the  inspired  reli- 
gious leaders  and  teachers  of  the  nation.  Not 
only  so,  but  this  practice  is  sanctioned  by  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant,  which  permits  the  erec- 
tion of  an  altar  in  every  place  where  Jehovah 
causes  His  name  to  be  rerhembered,  and  only 
lays  down  injunctions  as  to  the  kind  of  altar 
that  might  be  used  (Exod.  xx.  24-26).  The  evi- 
dence is  thus  very  strong  that  the  Book  of  Deu- 
teronomy, at  whatever  time  it  may  have  been 
written,  had  not  the  force  of  public  law  until  the 
year  621  b.  c,  and  that  down  to  that  time  the 
accepted  and  authoritative  expression  of  the  di- 
vine will  for  Israel  was  the  law  embraced  in  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant. 

To  find  similar  evidence  of  the  practical  adop- 
tion of  the  Priestly  Code  we  have  to  come  down 
to  a  much  later  period.  It  is  not  till  the  year 
444  B.  c,  in  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  that 
we  read  of  the  people  pledging  themselves  by  a 
solemn  covenant  to  the  observance  of  regula- 
tions which  are  clearly  those  of  the  finished  sys- 
tem of  Pentateuchal  law  (Neh.  viii.-x).  It  is  there 

*  This  last  group  is  considered  to  be  composed  of  several 
layers  of  legislation,  and  one  of  its  sections  is  of  particular 
interest  for  us  because  of  its  numerous  affinities  with  the 
book  of  Ezekiel.  It  is  the  short  code  contained  in  Lev. 
xvii.-xxvi.,  now  generally  known  as  the  Law  of  Holiness. 


expressly  stated  that  this  law  had  not  been  ob- 
served in  Israel  up  to  that  time  (Neh.  ix.,  34), 
and  in  particular  that  the  great  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles had  not  been  celebrated  in  accordance 
with  the  requirements  of  the  law  since  the  days 
of  Joshua  (Neh.  viii.  17).  This  is  quite  con- 
clusive as  to  actual  practice  in  Israel;  and  the 
fact  that  the  observance  of  the  law  was  thus 
introduced  by  instalments,  and  on  occasions  of 
epoch-making  importance  in  the  history  of  the 
community,  raises  a  strong  presumption  against 
the  hypothesis  that  the  Pentateuch  was  an  in- 
separable literary  unit,  which  must  be  known  in 
its  entirety  where  it  was  known  at  all. 

Now  the  date  of  Ezekiel's  vision  (572)  lies 
between  these  two  historic  transactions — the 
inauguration  of  the  law  of  Deuteronomy  in  621, 
and  that  of  the  Priestly  Code  in  444;  and  in 
spite  of  the  ideal  character  which  belongs  to 
the  vision  as  a  whole,  it  contains  a  system  of 
legislation  which  admits  of  being  compared  point 
by  point  with  the  provisions  of  the  other  two 
codes  on  a  variety  of  subjects  common  to  all 
three.  Some  of  the  results  of  this  comparison 
will  appear  as  we  proceed  with  the  exposition 
of  the  chapters  before  us.  But  it  will  be  con- 
venient to  state  here  the  important  conclusion 
to  which  a  number  of  critics  have  been  led  by 
discussion  of  this  question.  It  is  held  that 
Ezekiel's  legislation  represents  on  the  whole  a 
transition  from  the  law  of  Deuteronomy  to  the 
more  complex  system  of  the  Priestly  document. 
The  three  codes  exhibit  a  regular  progression, 
the  determining  factor  of  which  is  a  growing 
sense  of  the  importance  of  the  Temple  worship 
and  of  the  necessity  for  a  careful  regulation  of 
the  acts  which  express  the  religious  standing  and 
privileges  of  the  community.  On  such  matters 
as  the  feasts,  the  sacrifices,  the  distinction  be- 
tween priests  and  Levites,  the  Temple  dues,  and 
the  provision  for  the  maintenance  of  ordinances, 
it  is  found  that  Ezekiel  lays  down  enactments 
which  go  beyond  those  of  Deuteronomy  and  an- 
ticipate a  further  development  in  the  same  di- 
rection in  the  Levitical  legislation.*  The  legis- 
lation of  Ezekiel  is  accordingly  regarded  as  a 
first  step  towards  the  codification  of  the  ritual 
laws  which  regulated  the  usage  of  the  first 
Temple.  It  is  not  of  material  consequence  to 
know  how  far  these  laws  had  been  already  com- 
mitted to  writing,  or  how  far  they  had  been 
transmitted  by  oral  tradition.  The  important 
point  is  that  down  to  the  time  of  Ezekiel  the 
great  body  of  ritual  law  had  been  the  possession 
of  the  priests,  who  communicated  it  to  the  people 
in  the  shape  of  particular  decisions  as  occasion 
demanded.  Even  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  ex- 
cept on  one  or  two  points,  such  as  the  law  of 
leprosy  and  of  clean  and  unclean  animals,  does 
not  encroach  on  matters  of  ritual,  which  it  was 
the  special  province  of  the  priesthood  to  ad- 
minister. But  now  that  the  time  was  drawing 
near  when  the  Temple  and  its  worship  were  to 
be  the  very  centre  of  the  religious  life  of  the 
nation,  it  was  necessary  that  the  essential  ele- 
ments of  the  ceremonial  law  should  be  systemat- 
ised  and  published  in  a  form  understanded  of 
the  people.  The  last  nine  chapters  of  Ezekiel, 
then,  contain  the  first  draft  of  such  a  scheme, 
drawn  from  an  ancient  priestly  tradition  which 
in  its  origin  went  back  to  the  time  of  Moses. 

*  This  argument  is  most  fully  worked  out  by  Wellhaus'en 
in  the  first  division  of  his  "Prolegomena  zur  Geschichte 
Israels"  :  I.,  "Geschichte  des  Cultus." 


324 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


It  is  true  that  this  was  not  the  precise  form 
in  which  the  law  was  destined  to  be  put  in  prac- 
tice in  the  post-exilic  community.  But  Ezekiel's 
legislation  served  its  purpose  when  it  laid  down 
clearly,  with  the  authority  of  a  prophet,  the  fun- 
damental ideas  that  underlie  the  conception  of 
ritual  as  an  aid  to  spiritual  religion.  And  these 
ideas  were  not  lost  sight  of,  though  it  was  re- 
served for  others,  working  under  the  impulse 
supplied  by  Ezekiel,  to  perfect  the  details  of 
the  system,  and  to  adapt  the  principles  of  the 
vision  to  the  actual  circumstances  of  the  second 
Temple.  Through  what  subsequent  stages  the 
work  was  carried  we  can  hardly  hope  to  de- 
termine with  exactitude;  but  it  was  finished  in 
all  essential  respects  before  the  great  covenant 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  in  the  year  444-* 

Let  us  now  consider  the  bearing  of  this  the- 
ory on  the  interpretation  of  Ezekiel's  vision.  It 
enables  us  to  do  justice  to  the  unmistakable  prac- 
tical purpose  which  pervades  its  legislation.  It 
frees  us  from  the  grave  difficulties  involved  in 
the  assumption  that  Ezekiel  wrote  with  the  fin- 
ished Pentateuch  before  him.  It  vindicates  the 
prophet  from  the  suspicion  of  arbitrary  devia- 
tions from  a  standard  of  venerable  antiquity  and 
of  divine  authority,  which  was  afterwards  proved 
by  experience  to  be  suited  to  the  requirements 
of  that  restored  Israel  in  whose  interest  Ezekiel 
legislated.  And  in  doing  so  it  gives  a  new 
meaning  to  his  claim  to  speak  as  a  prophet  or- 
daining a  new  system  of  laws  with  divine  author- 
ity. Whilst  perfectly  consistent  with  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Mosaic  books,  it  p. aces  that  of  Ezekiel 
on  a  surer  footing  than  does  the  supposition 
that  the  whole  Pentateuch  was  of  Mosaic  author- 
ship. It  involves,  no  doubt,  that  the  details  of 
the  Priestly  law  were  in  a  more  or  less  fluid 
condition  down  to  the  time  of  the  Exile;  but 
it  explains  the  otherwise  unaccountable  fact  that 
the  several  parts  of  the  law  became  operative 
at  different  times  in  Israel's  history,  and  ex- 
plains it  in  a  manner  that  reveals  the  working 
of  a  divine  purpose  through  all  the  ages  of  the 
national  existence.  It  becomes  possible  to  see 
that  Ezekiel's  legislation  and  that  of  the  Levit- 
ical  books  are  in  their  essence  alike  Mosaic,  as 
iseing  founded  on  the  ins'-itutions  and  principles 
established  by  Moses  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nation's  history.  And  an  altogether  new  inter- 
est is  imparted  to  the  former  when  we  learn 
to  regard  it  as  an  epoch-making  contribution 
to  the  task  which  laid  the  foundation  of  the  post- 
exilic  theocracy — the  task  of  codifying  and  con- 
solidating the  laws  which  expressed  the  charac- 

*  It  should  perhaps  be  stated,  even  in  so  incomplete  a 
sketch  as  this,  that  there  is  still  some  difiference  of  opinion 
among  critics  as  to  Ezekiel's  relation  to  the  so-called 
"Law  of  Holiness"  in  Lev.  xvii.-xxvi.  It  is  agreed  that 
this  short  but  extremely  interesting  code  is  the  earliest 
complete,  or  nearly  complete,  document  that  has  been 
incorporated  in  the  body  of  the  Levitical  legislation.  Its 
affinities  with  Ezekiel  both  in  thought  and  style  are  so 
striking  that  Colenso  and  others  have  maintained  the 
theory  that  the  author  of  the  Law  of  Holiness  was  no 
other  than  the  prophet  himself.  This  view  is  now  seen  to 
be  untenable  ;  but  whether  the  code  is  older  or  more 
recent  than  the  vision  of  Ezekiel  is  still  a  subject  of  dis- 
cussion among  scholars.  Some  consider  that  it  is  an 
advance  upon  Ezekiel  in  the  direction  of  the  Priests'  Code  ; 
while  others  think  that  the  book  of  Ezekiel  furnishes 
evidence  that  the  prophet  was  acquainted  with  the  Law 
of  Holiness,  and  had  it  before  him  as  he  wrote.  That  he 
was  acquainted  with  its  /a-vs  seems  certain  ;  the  question 
is  whether  he  had  them  before  him  in  their  present  written 
form.  For  fuller  information  on  this  and  other  points 
touched  on  in  the  above  pages,  the  reader  may  consult 
Driver's  "  Introducti m  "  and  Robertson  Smith's  "  Old 
Testament  in  the  Jewisli  Church  " 


ter  of  the  new  nation  as  a  holy  people  conse- 
crated to  the  service  of  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One 
of  Israel. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

THE  SANCTUARY. 

Ezekiel  xl.-xliii. 

The  fundamental  idea  of  the  theocracy  as  con- 
ceived by  Ezekiel  is  the  literal  dwelling  of  Je- 
hovah in  the  midst  of  His  people.  The  Temple 
is  in  the  first  instance  Jehovah's  palace,  where 
He  manifests  His  gracious  presence  by  receiving 
the  gifts  and  homage  of  His  subjects.  But  the 
enjoyment  of  this  privilege  of  access  to  the  pres- 
ence of  God  depends  on  the  fulfilment  of  certain 
conditions  which,  in  the  prophet's  view,  had  been 
systematically  violated  in  the  arrangements  that 
prevailed  under  the  first  Temple.  Hence  the 
vision  of  Ezekiel  is  essentially  the  vision  of  a 
Terriple  corresponding  in  all  respects  to  the  re- 
quirements of  Jehovah's  holiness,  and  then  of 
Jehovah's  entrance  into  the  house  so  prepared 
for  His  reception.  And  the  first  step  towards 
the  realisation  of  the  great  hope  of  the  future 
was  to  lay  before  the  exiles  a  full  description  of 
this  building,  so  that  they  might  understand  the 
conditions  on  which  alone  Israel  could  be  re- 
stored to  its  own  land. 

To  this  task  the  prophet  addresses  himself  in 
the  first  four  of  the  chapters  before  us,  and  he 
executes  it  in  a  manner  which,  considering  the 
great  technical  difficulties  to  be  surmounted, 
must  excite  our  admiration.  He  tells  us  first  in 
a  brief  introduction  how  he  was  transported  in 
prophetic  ecstasy  to  the  land  of  Israel,  and  there 
on  the  site  of  the  old  Temple,  now  elevated  into 
a  "  very  high  mountain,"  he  sees  before  him  an 
imposing  pile  of  buildings  like  the  building  of 
a  city  (ver.  2).  It  is  the  future  Temple,  the  city 
itself  having  been  removed  nearly  two  miles  to 
the  south.  At  the  east  gate  he  is  met  by  an  an- 
gel, who  conducts  him  from  point  to  point  of 
the  buildings,  calling  his  attention  to  significant 
structural  details,  and  measuring  each  part  as 
he  goes  along  with  a  measuring-line  which  he 
carries  in  his  hand.  It  is  probable  that  the  whole 
description  would  be  perfectly  intelligible  but 
for  the  state  of  the  text,  which  is  defective 
throughout  and  in  some  places  hopelessly  cor- 
rupt. This  is  hardly  surprising  when  we  con- 
sider the  technical  and  unfamiliar  nature  of  the 
terms  employed;  but  it  has  been  suspected  that 
some  parts  have  been  deliberately  tampered  with 
in  order  to  bring  them  into  harmony  with  the 
actual  construction  of  the  second  Temple. 
Whether  that  is  so  or  not,  the  description  as  a 
whole  remains  in  its  way  a  masterpiece  of  lit- 
erary exposition,  and  a  remarkable  proof  of  the 
versatility  of  Ezekiel's  accomplishments.  When 
it  is  necessary  to  turn  himself  into  an  archi- 
tectural draughtsman  he  discharges  the  duty  to 
perfection.  No  one  can  study  the  detailed 
measurements  of  the  buildings  without  being 
convinced  that  the  prophet  is  working  from  a 
ground  plan  which  he  has  himself  prepared;  in- 
deed his  own  words  leave  no  doubt  that  this  was 
the  case  (see  xliii.  10,  11).  And  it  is  a  con- 
vincing demonstration  of  his  descriptive  powers 
that  we  are  able,  after  the  labours  of  many  gen- 
erations of  scholars,  to  reproduce  this  plan  with 


Ezekiel  xl.-xliii.] 


THE    SANCTUARY. 


325 


a  certainty  which,  except  with  regard  to  a  few 
minor  features,  leaves  little  to  be  desired.  It 
has  been  remarked  as  a  curious  fact  that  of  the 
three  temples  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament 
the  only  one  of  whose  construction  we  can  form 
a  clear  conception  is  the  one  that  was  never 
built;  *  and  certainly  the  knowledge  we  have  of 
Solomon's  Temple  from  the  first  book  of  Kings 
is  very  incomplete  compared  with  what  we  know 
of  the  Temple  which  Ezekiel  saw  only  in  vision. 
It  is  impossible  in  this  chapter  to  enter  into 
all  the  minuti.'e  of  the  description,  or  even  to 
discuss  all  the  difficulties  of  interpretation  which 
arise  in  connection  with  different  parts.  Full  in- 
formation of  these  points  will  be  found  in  short 
compass  in  Dr.  Davidson's  commentary  on  the 
passage.  All  that  can  be  attempted  here  is  to 
convey  a  general  idea  of  the  arrangements  of 
the  various  buildings  and  courts  of  the  sanctu- 
ary, and  the  extreme  care  with  which  they  have 
been  thought  out  by  the  prophet.  After  this  has 
been  done  we  shall  try  to  discover  the  meaning 
of  these  arrangements  in  so  far  as  they  differ 
from  the  model  supplied  by  the  first  Temple. 

I. 

Let  the  reader,  then,  after  the  manner  of  Eu- 
clid, draw  a  straight  line  a  b,  and  describe 
thereon  a  square  a  b  c  d.  Let  him  divide  two 
adjacent  sides  of  the  square  (say  a  b  and  a  d) 
into  ten  equal  parts,  and  let  lines  be  drawn  from 
the  points  of  section  parallel  to  the  sides  of  the 
square  in  both  directions.  Let  a  side  of  the 
small  squares  represent  a  length  of  fifty  cubits, 
and  the  whole  consequently  a  square  of  five 
hundred  cubits. f  It  will  now  be  found  that  the 
bounding  lines  of  Ezekiel's  plan  run  throughout 
on  the  lines  of  this  diagram  ;t  and  this  fact 
gives  a  better  idea  than  anything  else  of  the 
symmetrical  structure  of  the  Temole  and  of  the 
absolute  accuracy  of  the  measurements. 

The  sides  of  the  large  square  represent  of 
course  the  outer  boundary  of  the  enclosure, 
which  is  formed  by  a  wall  six  cubits  thick  and 
six  high.§  Its  sides  are  directed  to  the  four 
points  of  the  compass,  and  at  the  middle  of 
the  north,  east,  and  south  sides  the  wall  is 
pierced  by  the  three  gates,  each  with  an  as- 
cent of  seven  steps  outside.  The  gates,  how- 
ever, are  not  mere  openings  in  the  wall  fur- 
nished with  doors,  but  covered  gateways,  similar 
to  those  that  penetrate  the  thick  wall  of  a  forti- 

♦Gautier,  "  La  Mission  du  Prophfete  Ezekiel."  p.  n8. 

t  The  cubit  which  is  the  unit  of  measurement  is  said  to 
be  a  hand-breadth  longer  than  the  cubit  in  common  use 
(ver.  5).  The  length  of  the  larger  cubit  is  variously  esti- 
mated as  from  eighteen  to  twenty-two  inches.  If  we 
adopt  the  smaller  estimate,  we  have  only  to  take  the  half 
of  Ezekiel's  dimensionsto  getthe  measurement  in  English 
yards.  The  other,  however,  is  more  probable.  Both  the 
Egyptians  and  Babylonians  had  a  larger  and  a  smaller 
cubit,  their  respective  lengths  being  approximately  as 
follows:— 

Egypt.  Babjrlon. 

Common  cubit,       .        17.8  in.        .        jq.$  in. 
Royal  cubit,    .        .        20.7  in.        .        21. g  in. 

In  Egypt  the  royal  cubit  exceeded  the  common  by  a 
handbreadth,  just  as  in  Ezekiel.  It  is  probable  in  any 
case  that  the  large  cubit  used  by  the  angel  was  of  the 
same  order  of  magnitude  as  the  royal  cubit  of  Egypt  and 
Babylon— z".  e.,  was  between  twenty  and  a  half  and  twenty- 
two  inches  long.  Cf.  Benzinger,  "Hebraische  Archa- 
ologie,"  pp.  178  ff. 

t  See  the  plan  in  Benzinger  "  Archaologie,"  p.  394. 

§  The  outer  court,  however,  is  some  feet  higher  than  the 
level  of  the  ground,  being  entered  by  an  ascent  of  seven 
steps  ;  the  height  of  the  wall  inside  must  therefore  be  less 
by  this  amount  than  the  six  cubits,  which  is  no  doubt  an 
outside  measurement. 


fied  town.  In  this  case  they  are  large  separate 
buildings  projecting  into  the  court  to  a  distance 
of  fifty  cubits,  and  twenty-five  cubits  broad,  ex- 
actly half  the  size  of  the  Temple  proper.  On 
either  side  of  the  passage  are  three  recesses  in 
the  wall  six  cubits  square,  which  were  to  be  used 
as  guard-rooms  by  the  Temple  police.  Each 
gateway  terminates  towards  the  court  in  a  large 
hall  called  "  the  porch,"  eight  cubits  broad 
(along  the  line  of  entry)  by  "twenty  long 
(across) :  the  porch  of  the  east  gate  was  reserved 
for  the  use  of  the  prince;  the  purpose  of  the 
other  two  is  nowhere  specified. 

Passing  through  the  eastern  gateway,  the 
prop'hel  stands  in  the  outer  court  of  the  Tem- 
ple, the  place  where  the  people  assembled  for 
worship.  It  seems  to  have  been  entirely  desti- 
tute of  buildings,  with  the  exception  of  a  row 
of  thirty  cells  along  the  three  walls  in  which 
the  gates  were.  The  outer  margin  of  the  court 
was  paved  with  stone  up  to  the  line  of  the  in- 
side of  the  gateways  (i.  e.,  fifty  cubits,  less  the 
thickness  of  the  outer  wall);  and  on  this  pave- 
ment stood  the  cells,  the  dimensions  of  which, 
however,  are  not  given.  There  were,  moreover, 
in  the  four  corners  of  the  court  rectangular  en- 
closures forty  cubits  by  thirty,  where  the  Levites 
were  to  cook  the  sacrifices  of  the  people  (xlvi. 
21-24).  The  purpose  of  the  cells  is  nowhere 
specified;  but  there  is  little  doubt  that  they  were 
intended  for  those  sacrificial  feasts  of  a  semi- 
private  character  which  had  always  been  a 
prominent  feature  of  the  Temple  worship.  From 
the  edge  of  the  pavement  to  the  inner  court  was 
a  distance  of  a  hundred  cubits;  but  this  space 
was  free  only  on  three  sides,  the  western  side 
being  occupied  by  buildings  to  be  afterwards 
described. 

The  inner  court  was  a  terrace  standing  proba- 
bJy  about  five  feet  above  the  level  of  the  outer, 
and  approached  by  flights  of  eight  steps  at  the 
three  gates.  It  was  reserved  for  the  exclusive 
use  of  the  priests.  It  had  three  gateways  in  a 
line  with  those  of  the  outer  court,  and  precisely 
similar  to  them,  with  the  single  exception  that 
the  porches  were  not,  as  we  might  have  ex- 
pected, towards  the  inside,  but  at  the  ends  next 
to  the  outer  court.  The  free  space  of  the  inner 
court,  within  the  line  of  the  gateways,  was  a 
square  of  a  hundred  cubits,  corresponding  to  the 
four  middle  squares  of  the  diagram.  Right  in 
the  middle,  so  that  it  could  be  seen  through  the 
gates,  was  the  great  altar  of  burnt-offering,  a 
huge  stone  structure  rising  in  three  terraces  to 
a  height  apparently  of  twelve  cubits  and  having  a 
breadth  and  length  of  eighteen  cubits  at  the  base. 
That  this,  rather  than  the  Temple,  should  be  the 
centre  of  the  sanctuary,  corresponds  to  a  con- 
sciousness in  Israel  that  the  altar  was  the  one 
indispensable  requisite  for  the  performance  of 
sacrificial  worship  acceptable  to  Jehovah.  Ac- 
cordingly, when  the  first  exiles  returned  to  Jeru- 
salem, before  they  were  in  a  position  to  set  about 
the  erection  of  the  Temple,  they  reared  the  altar 
in  its  place,  and  at  once  instituted  the  daily  sacri- 
fice and  the  stated  order  of  the  festivals.  And 
even  in  Ezekiel's  vision  we  shall  find  that  the 
sacrificial  consecration  of  the  altar  is  consid- 
ered as  equivalent  to  the  dedication  of  the  whole 
sanctuary  to  the  chief  purpose  for  which  it  was 
erected.  Besides  the  altar  there  were  in  the  in- 
ner court  certain  other  objects  of  special  sig- 
nificance for  the  priestly  and  sacrificial  service. 
By  the  side  of  the  north  and  south  gates  were 


326 


.-    THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


two  cells  or  chambers  opening  towards  the  mid- 
dle space.  The  purpose  for  which  these  cells 
were  intended  clearly  points  to  a  division  of  the 
priesthood  (which,  however,  may  have  been 
temporary  and  not  permanent)  into  two  classes — 
one  of  which  was  entrusted  with  the  service  of 
the  Temple,  and  the  other  with  the  service  of 
the  ahar.  The  cell  on  the  north,  we  are  told, 
was  for  the  priests  engaged  in  the  service  of  the 
house,  and  that  on  the  south  for  those  who  of- 
ficiated at  the  altar  (xl.  45,  46).  There  is  men- 
tion also  of  tables  on  which  different  classes  of 
sacrificial  victims  were  slaughtered,  and  of  a 
chamber  in  which  the  burnt-offering  was  washed 
(xl.  38-43) ;  but  so  obscure  is  the  text  of  this 
passage  that  it  cannot  even  be  certainly  deter- 
mined whether  these  appliances  were  situated  at 
the  east  gate  or  the  north  gate,  or  at  each  of  the 
three  gates. 

The  four  small  squares  immediately  adjoining 
the  inner  court  on  the  west  are  occupied  by  the 
Temple  proper  and  its  adjuncts.  The  Temple 
itself  stands  on  a  solid  basement  six  cubits  above 
the  level  of  the  inner  court,  and  is  reached  by 
a  flight  of  ten  steps.  The  breadth  of  the  base- 
ment (north  to  south)  is  sixty  cubits:  this  leaves 
a  free  space  of  twenty  cubits  on  either  side, 
Which  is  really  a  continuation  of  the  inner  court, 
although  it  bears  the  special  name  of  the  gisra 
("  separate  place ").  In  length  the  basenient 
measures  a  hundred  and  five  cubits,  projecting, 
as  we  immediately  see,  five  cubits  into  the  inner 
court  in  front.*  The  inner  space  of  the  Temple 
was  divided,  as  in  Solomon's  Temple,  into  three 
compartments,  communicating  with  each  other 
by  folding-doors  in  the  middle  of  the  partitions 
that  separated  them.  Entering  by  the  outer 
door  on  the  east,  we  come  first  to  the  vestibule, 
which  is  twenty  cubits  broad  (north  to  south) 
by  twelve  cubits  east  to  west.  Next  to  this  is 
the  hall  or  "  palace  "  (hekal),  twenty  cubits  by 
forty.  Beyond  this  again  is  the  innermost  shrine 
of  the  Temple,  the  Most  Holy  Place,  where  the 
glory  of  the  God  of  Israel  is  to  take  the  place 
occupied  by  the  ark  and  cherubim  of  the  first 
Temple.  It  is  a  square  of  twenty  cubits;  but 
Ezekiel,  although  himself  a  priest,  is  not  allowed 
to  enter  this  sacred  space;  the  angel  goes  in 
alone,  and  announces  the  measurements  to  the 
prophet,  who  waits  without  in  the  great  hall  of 
the  Temple.  The  only  piece  of  furniture  men- 
tioned in  the  Temple  is  an  altar  or  table  in  the 
hall,  immediately  in  front  of  the  Most  Holy 
Place  (xli.  22).  The  reference  is  no  doubt  to  the 
table  on  which  the  shewbread  was  laid  out  be- 
fore Jehovah  {cf.  Exod.  xxv.  23-30).  Some  de- 
tails are  also  given  of  the  wood-carving  with 
which  the  interior  was  decorated  (xli.  16-20, 
25),  consisting  apparently  of  cherubs  and  palm 
trees  in  alternate  panels.  This  appears  to  be 
simply  a  reminiscence  of  the  ornamentation  of 
the  old  Temple,  and  to  have  no  direct  religious 
significance  in  the  mind  of  the  prophet. 

The  Temple  was  enclosed  first  by  a  wall  six 
cubits  thick,  and  then  on  each  side  except  the 
east  by  an  outer  wall  of  five  cubits,  separated 
from  the  inner  by  an  interval  of  four  cubits. 
This   intervening   space   was   divided   into   three 

*  Smend  and  Stade  assume  that  it  was  a  hundred  and 
ten  cubit.s  long,  and  extended  five  cubits  to  the  west 
beyond  the  line  of  the  square  to  which  it  belong.s.  This 
was  not  necessary,  and  it  would  imply  that  the  binya 
behind  the  Temple,  to  be  afterwards  described,  was 
without  a  wall  on  its  eastern  side,  which  is  extremely 
improbable.    (So  Davidson.) 


ranges  of  small  cells  rising  in  three  stories  one 
over  another.  The  second  and  third  stories 
were  somewhat  broader  than  the  lowest,  the  in- 
ner wall  of  the  house  being  contracted  so  as  to 
allow  the  beams  to  be  laid  upon  it  without 
breaking  into  its  surface.  We  must  further  sup- 
pose that  the  inner  wall  rose  above  the  cells  and 
the  outer  wall,  so  as  to  leave  a  clear  space  for 
the  windows  of  the  Temple.  The  entire  length 
of  the  Temple  on  the  outside  is  a  hundred  cubits, 
and  the  breadth  fifty  cubits.  This  leaves  room 
for  a  passage  of  five  cubits  broad  round  the  edge 
of  the  elevated  platform  on  which  the  main 
building  stood.  The  two  doors  which  gave  ac- 
cess to  the  cells  opened  on  this  passage,  and 
were  placed  in  the  north  and  south  sides  of  the 
outer  wall.  There  was  obviously  no  need  to 
continue  the  passage  round  the  west  side  of  the 
house,  and  this  does  not  appear  to  be  contem^ 
plated. 

It  will  be  seen  that  there  still  remains  a  square 
of  a  hundred  cubits  behind  the  Temple,  between 
it  and  the  west  wall.  The  greater  part  of  this 
was  taken  up  by  a  structure  vaguely  designated 
as  the  "  building "  (binya  or  binyan),  which  is 
commonly  supposed  to  have  been  a  sort  of  lum- 
ber-room, although  its  function  is  noc  indicated. 
Nor  does  it  appear  whether  it  stood  on  the 
level  of  the  inner  court  or  of  the  outer.  But 
while  this  building  fills  the  whole  breadth  of 
the  square  from  north  to  south  (a  hundred  cu- 
bits), the  other  dimension  (east  to  west)  is  cur- 
tailed by  a  space  of  twenty  cubits  left  free  be- 
tween it  and  the  Temple,  the  gizra  (see  supra) 
being  thus  continuous  round  three  sides  of  the 
house. 

The  most  troublesome  part  of  the  description 
is  that  of  two  blocks  of  cells  *  situated  north  and 
south  of  the  Temple  building  (xlii.  1-14).  It 
seems  clear  that  they  occupied  the  oblong^  spaces 
between  the  gizra  north  and  south  of  the  Temple 
and  the  walls  of  the  inner  court.  Their  length 
is  said  to  be  a  hundred  cubits,  and  their  breadth 
fifty  cubits.  But  room  has  to  be  found  for  a 
passage  ten  cubits  broad  and  a  hundred  long,  so 
that  the  measurements  do  not  exhibit  in  this  case 
Ezekiel's  usual  accuracy.  Moreover,  we  are  told 
that  while  their  length  facing  the  Temple  was 
a  hundred  cubits,  the  length  facing  the  outer 
court  was  only  fifty  cubits.  It  is  ext'/emely  dif- 
ficult to  gain  a  clear  idea  of  what  the  prophet 
meant.  Smend  and  Davidson  suppose  that  each 
block  was  divided  longitudinally  into  two  sec- 
tions, and  that  the  passage  of  ten  cubits  ran  be- 
tvi^een  them  from  east  to  west.  The  inner  sec- 
tion would  then  be  a  hundred  cubits  in  length 
and  twenty  in  breadth.  But  the  other  section 
towards  the  outer  court  would  have  only  half 
this  length,  the  remaining  fifty  cubits  along  the 
edge  of  the  inner  court  being  protected  by  a 
wall.  This  is  perhaps  the.  best  solution  that  has 
been  proposed,  but  one  can  hardly  help  think- 
ing that  if  Ezekiel  had  had  such  an  arrangement 
in  view  he  would  have  expressed  himself  more 
clearly.  The  one  thing  that  is  perfectly  unam- 
biguous is  the  purpose  for  which  these  cells  were 
to  be  used.  Certain  sacrifices  to  which  a  high 
degree  of  sanctity  attached  were  consumed  by 
the  priests,  and  being  "  most  holy  "  things  they 
had  to  be  eaten  in  a  holy  place.  These  cham- 
bers, then,  standing  within  the  sacred  enclosure 
of  the  inner  court,  were  assigned  to  the  priests 

*  According  to  the  Septuagint  they  were  either  five  or 
fifteen  in  number  in  each  block. 


Ezekiel  xl.-xliii.] 


THE    SANCTUARY. 


327 


for  this  purpose.*  In  them  also  the  priests  were 
to  deposit  the  sacred  garments  in  which  they 
ministered,  before  leaving  the  inner  court  to 
mingle  with  the  people. 

II. 

Such,  then,  are  the  leading  features  presented 
by  Ezekiel's  description  of  an  ideal  sanctuary. 
What  are  the  chief  impressions  suggested  to  the 
mind  by  its  perusal?  The  fact  no  doubt  that 
surprises  us  most  is  that  our  attention  is  almost 
exclusively  directed  to  the  ground-plan  of  the 
buildings.  It  is  evident  that  the  prophet  is  in- 
different to  what  seems  to  us  the  noblest  ele- 
ment of  ecclesiastical  architecture,  the  effect  of 
lofty  spaces  on  the  imagination  of  the  wor- 
shipper. It  is  no  part  of  his  purpose  to  inspire 
devotional  feeling  by  the  aid  of  purely  c-esthetic 
impressions.  "  The  height,  the  span,  the  gloom, 
the  glory  "  of  some  venerable  Gothic  cathedral 
do  not  enter  into  his  conception  of  a  place  of 
worship.  The  impressions  he  wishes  to  convey, 
although  religious,  are  intellectual  rather  than 
aesthetic,  and  are  such  as  could  be  expressed  by 
the  sharp  outlines  and  mathematical  precision  of 
a  ground-plan.  Now  of  course  the  sanctuary 
was,  to  begin  with,  a  place  of  sacrifice,  and  to 
a  large  extent  its  arrangements  were  necessarily 
dictated  by  a  regard  for  practical  convenience 
and  utility.  But  leaving  this  on  one  side,  it  is 
obvious  enough  that  the  design  is  influenced  by 
certain  ruling  principles,  of  which  the  most  con- 
spicuous are  these  three:  separation,  gradation, 
and  symmetry.  And  these  again  symbolise  three 
aspects  of  the  one  great  idea  of  holiness,  which 
the  prophet  desired  to  see  embodied  in  the  whole 
constitution  of  the  Hebrew  state  as  the  guaran- 
tee of  lasting  fellowship  between  Jehovah  and 
Israel. 

In  Ezekiel's  teaching  on  the  subject  of  holi- 
ness there  is  nothing  that  is  absolutely  new  or 
peculiar  to  himself.  That  Jehovah  is  the  one 
truly  holy  Being  is  the  common  doctrine  of  the 
prophets,  and  it  means  that  He  alone  unites  in 
Himself  all  the  attributes  of  true  Godhead.  The 
Hebrew  language  does  not  admit  of  the  forma- 
tion of  an  adjective  from  the  name  for  God  like 
our  word  "  divine,"  or  an  abstract  noun  cor- 
responding to  "  divinity."  What  we  denote  by 
tl  ese  terms  the  Hebrews  expressed  by  the  words 
qv.dosh,  "  holy,"  and  qodesh,  "  holiness."  All  that 
constitutes  true  divinity  is  therefore  summed  up 
in  the  Old  Testament  idea  of  the  holiness  of 
God.  The  fundamental  thought  expressed  by 
the  word  when  applied  to  God  appears  to  be 
the  separation  or  contrast  between  the  divine 
and  the  human — that  in  God  which  inspires  awe 
and  reverence  on  the  part  of  man,  and  forbids 
approach  to  Him  save  under  restrictions  which 
flow  from  the  nature  of  the  Deity.  In  the  light 
of  the  New  Testament  revelation  we  see  that 
the  only  barrier  to  communion  with  God  is  sin; 
and  hence  to  us  holiness,  both  in  God  and  man, 
is  a  purely  ethical  idea  denoting  moral  purity  and 
perfectness.  But  under  the  Old  Testament  ac- 
cess to  God  was  hindered  not  only  by  sin,  but 
also  by  natural  disabilities  to  which  no  moral 
guilt  attaches.     The  idea  of  holiness  is  therefore 

*  From  a  later  passage  (ch.  .xlvi.  iq,  20)  we  learn  that  in 
some  recess  to  the  west  of  the  northern  block  of  cells 
tliere  was  a  place  where  these  sacrifices  (the  sin-,  guilt-, 
a  ad  meal-offerings)  were  cooked, ,  o  that  the  people  in  the 
outer  court  might  not  run  any  risk  of  being  brought  in 
c  jntact  with  them. 


partly  ethical  and  partly  ceremonial,  physical  un- 
cleanness  being  as  really  a  violation  of  the  di- 
vine holiness  as  offences  against  the  moral  law. 
The  consequences  of  this  view  appear  nowhere 
more  clearly  than  in  the  legislation  of  Ezekiel. 
His  mind  was  penetrated  with  the  prophetic  idea 
of  the  unique  divinity  or  holiness  of  Jehovah, 
and  no  one  can  doubt  that  the  moral  attributes 
of  God  occupied  the  supreme  place  in  his  con- 
ception of  what  true  Godhead  is.  But  along 
with  this  he  has  a  profound  sense  of  what  the 
nature  of  Jehovah  demands  in  the  way  of  cere- 
monial purity.  The  divine  holiness,  in  fact,  con- 
tains a  physical  as  well  as  an  ethical  element; 
and  to'  guard  against  the  intrusion  of  anything 
unclean  into  the  sphere  of  Jehovah's  worship  is 
the  chief  design  of  the  elaborate  system  of  ritual 
laws  laid  down  in  the  closing  chapters  of  Eze- 
kiel. Ultimately  no  doubt  the  whole  system 
served  a  moral  purpose  by  furnishing  a  safe- 
guard against  the  introduction  of  heathen  prac- 
tices into  the  worship  of  Israel.  But  its  imme- 
diate effect  was  to  give  prominence  to  that  as- 
pect of  the  idea  of  holiness  which  seems  to  us 
of  least  value,  although  it  could  not  be  dis- 
pensed with  so  long  as  the  worship  of  God  took 
the  form  of  material  offerings  at  a  local  sanc- 
tuary. 

Now,  in  reducing  this  idea  to  practice,  it  is  ob- 
vious that  everything  depends  on  the  strict  en- 
forcement of  the  principle  of  separation  that  lies 
at  the  root  of  the  Hebrew  conception  of  holiness. 
The  thought  that  underlies  Ezekiel's  legislation 
is  that  the  holiness  of  Jehovah  is  communicated 
in  different  degrees  to  everything  connected  with 
His  worship,  and  in  the  first  instance  to  the 
Temple,  which  is  sanctified  by  His  presence. 
The  sanctity  of  the  place  is  of  course  not  fully 
intelligible  apart  from  the  ceremonial  rules  which 
regulate  the  conduct  of  those  who  are  permitted 
to  enter  it.  Throughout  the  ancient  world  we 
find  evidence  of  the  existence  of  sacred  enclo- 
sures which  could  only  be  entered  by  those  who 
fulfilled  certain  conditions  of  physical  purity. 
The  conditions  might  be  extremely  simple,  as 
when  Moses  was  commanded  to  take  his  shoes 
off  his  feet  as  he  stood  within  the  holy  ground 
on  Mount  Sinai.  But  obviously  the  first  essen- 
tial of  a  permanently  sacred  place  was  that  it 
should  be  definitely  marked  off  from  common 
ground,  as  the  sphere  within  which  superior  re- 
quirements of  holiness  became  binding.  A  holy 
place  is  necessarily  a  place  "  cut  off,"  separated 
from  ordinary  use  and  guarded  from  intrusion 
by  supernatural  sanctions.  The  idea  of  the 
sanctuary  as  a  separate  place  was  therefore  per- 
fectly familiar  to  the  Israelites  long  before  the 
time  of  Ezekiel,  and  had  been  exhibited  in  a  lax 
and  imperfect  way  in  the  construction  of  the  first 
Temple.  But  what  Ezekiel  did  was  to  carry  out 
the  idea  with  a  thoroughness  never  before  at- 
tempted, and  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  whole 
arrangements  of  the  sanctuary  an  impressive  ob- 
ject lesson  on  the  holiness  of  Jehovah. 

How  important  this  notion  of  separateness  was 
to  Ezekiel's  conception  of  the  sanctuary  is  best 
seen  from  the  emphatic  condemnation  of  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  old  Temple  pronounced  by  Je- 
hovah Himself  on  His  entrance  into  the  house: 
"  Son  of  man,  [hast  thou  seen]  *  the  place  of 
My  throne,  and  the  place  of  the  soles  of  My  feet, 
where  I  shall  dwell  in  the  midst  of  the  children 
of  Israel  for  ever?  No  longer  shall  the  house 
*  So  in  the  LXX. 


328 


-    THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


of  Israel  defile  My  holy  name,  they  and  their 
kings,  by  their  whoredom  [idolatry],  and  by  the 
corpses  of  their  kings  in  their  death;  by  placing 
their  threshold  alongside  of  My  threshold,  and 
their  post  beside  My  post,  with  only  the  wall 
between  Me  and  them,  and  defiling  My  holy 
name  by  their  abominations  which  they  com- 
mitted; so  that  I  consumed  them  in  My  anger. 
But  now  they  must  remove  their  whoredom  and 
the  corpses  of  their  kings  from  Me,  and  I  will 
dwell  amongst  them  for  ever"  (xliii.  7-9). 
There  is  here  a  clear  allusion  to  defects  in  the 
structure  of  the  Temple  which  were  inconsistent 
with  a  due  recognition  of  the  necessary  separa- 
tion between  the  holy  and  the  profane  (xlii.  20). 
It  appears  that  the  first  Temple  had  only  one 
court,  corresponding  to  the  inner  court  of  Eze- 
kiel's  vision.  What  answered  to  the  outer  court 
was  simply  an  enclosure  surrounding,  not  only 
the  Temple,  but  also  the  royal  palace  and  the 
other  buildings  of  state.  Immediately  adjoining 
the  Temple  area  on  the  south  was  the  court  in 
which  the  palace  stood,  so  that  the  only  division 
between  the  dwelling-place  of  Jehovah  and  the 
residence  of  the  kings  of  Judah  was  the  single 
wall  separating  the  two  courts.  This  of  itself 
was  derogatory  to  the  sanctity  of  the  Temple, 
according  to  the  enhanced  idea  of  holiness  which 
it  was  Ezekiel's  mission  to  enforce.  But  the 
prophet  touches  on  a  still  more  flagrant  trans- 
gression of  the  law  of  holiness  when  he  speaks 
of  the  dead  bodies  of  the  kings  as  being  interred 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Temple.  Contact 
with  a  dead  body  produced  under  all  circum- 
stances the  highest  degree  of  ceremonial  un- 
cleanness,  and  nothing  could  have  been  more 
abhorrent  to  Ezekiel's  priestly  sense  of  propriety 
than  the  close  proximity  of  dead  men's  bones 
to  the  house  in  which  Jehovah  was  to  dwell. 
In  order  to  guard  against  the  recurrence  of  these 
abuses  in  the  future  it  was  n'^cessary  that  all 
secular  buildings  should  be  removed  to  a  safe 
distance  from  the  Temple  precincts.  The  "  law 
of  the  house "  is  that  "  upon  the  top  of  the 
mountain  it  shall  stand,  and  all  its  precincts 
round  about  shall  be  most  holy "  (xliii.  12). 
And  it  is  characteristic  of  Ezekiel  that  the  sep- 
aration is  effected,  not  by  changing  the  situation 
of  the  Temple,  but  by  transporting  the  city 
bodily  to  the  southward;  so  that  the  new  sanc- 
tuary stood  on  the  site  of  the  old,  but  isolated 
from  the  contact  of  that  in  human  life  which  was 
common  and  unclean.* 

The  effect  of  this  teaching,  however,  is  im- 
mensely enhanced  by  the  principle  of  gradation, 
which  is  the  second  feature  exhibited  in  Ezekiel's 
description  of  the  sanctuary.  Holiness,  as  a 
predicate  of  persons  or  things,  is  after  all  a  rela- 
tive idea.  That  which  is  "  most  holy  "  in  rela- 
tion to  the  profane  every-day  life  of  men  may 
be  less  holy  in  comparison  with  something  still 

*  The  actual  building  of  the  second  Temple  had  of  course 
to  be  carried  out  irrespective  of  the  bold  idealism  of 
Ezekiel's  vision.  The  miraculous  transformation  of  the 
land  had  not  taken  place,  and  it  was  altogether  impossible 
to  build  a  new  metropolis  in  the  region  marked  out  for  it 
by  the  vision.  The  Temple  had  to  be  erected  on  its  old 
site,  and  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  city. 
To  a  certain  extent,  however,  the  requirements  of  the 
ideal  sanctuary  could  bccomplied  with  Since  the  new 
community  had  no  use  for  royal  buildings,  the  whole  of 
the  old  Temple  plateau  was  available  for  the  sanctuary, 
and  was  actually  devoted  to  this  purpose.  The  new 
Temple  accordingly  had  two  courts,  set  apart  for  sacred 
uses ;  and  in  all  probability  these  were  laid  out  in  a 
manner  closely  corresponding  to  the  plan  prepared  by 
Ezekiel. 


more  closely  associated  with  the  presence  of 
God.  Thus  the  whole  land  of  Israel  was  holy  'n 
contrast  with  the  world  lying  outside.  But  it 
was  impossible  to  maintain  the  whole  land  in  a 
state  of  ceremonial  purity  corresponding  to  the 
sanctity  of  Jehovah.  The  full  compass  of  the 
idea  could  only  be  illustrated  by  a  carefully 
graded  series  of  sacred  spaces,  each  of  which 
entailed  provisions  of  sanctity  peculiar  to  itself. 
First  of  all  an  "  oblation  "  is  set  apart  in  the 
middle  of  the  tribes;  and  of  this  the  central  por- 
tion is  assigned  for  the  residence  of  the  priestly 
families.  In  the  midst  of  this,  again,  stands  the 
sanctuary  with  its  wall  and  precinct,  dividing 
the  holy  from  the  profane  (xlii.  20).  Within  the 
wall  are  the  two  courts,  of  which  the  outer  could 
only  be  trodden  by  circumcised  Israelites  and 
the  inner  only  by  the  priests.  Behind  the  inner 
court  stands  the  Temple  house,  cut  off  from  the 
adjoining  buildings  by  a  "  separate  place,"  and 
elevated  on  a  platform,  which  still  further  guards 
its  sanctity  from  profane  contact.  And  finally 
the  interior  of  the  house  is  divided  into  three 
compartments,  increasing  in  holiness  in  the  order 
of  entrance — first  the  porch,  then  the  main  hall, 
and  then  the  Most  Holy  Place,  where  Jehovah 
Himself  dwells.  It  is  impossible  to  mistake  the 
meaning  of  all  this.  The  practical  object  is  to 
secure  the  presence  of  Jehovah  against  the  pos- 
sibility of  contact  with  those  sources  of  impurity 
which  are  inseparably  bound  up  with  the  inci- 
dents of  man's  natural  existence  on  earth.* 

Before  we  pass  on  let  us  return  for  a  moment 
to  the  primary  notion  of  separation  in  space  as 
an  emblem  of  the  Old  Testament  conception  of 
holiness.  What  is  the  permanent  religious  truth 
underlying  this  representation?  We  may  find 
it  in  the  idea  conveyed  by  the  familiar  phrase 
"  draw  near  to  God."  What  we  have  just  seen 
reminds  us  that  there  was  a  stage  in  the  history 
of  religion  when  these  words  could  be  used  in 
the  most  literal  sense  of  every  act  of  complete 
worship.  The  worshipper  actually  came  to  the 
place  where  God  was;  it  was  impossible  to  realise 
His  presence  in  any  other  way.  To  us  the  ex- 
pression has  only  a  metaphorical  value;  yet  the  ' 
metaphor  is  one  that  we  cannot  dispense  with, 
for  it  covers  a  fact  of  spiritual  experience.  It 
may  be  true  that  with  God  there  is  no  far  or  near, 
that  He  is  omnipresent,  that  His  eyes  are  in  1 
every  place  beholding  the  evil  and  the  good.  j 
But  what  does  that  mean?  Not  surely  that  all  1 
men  everywhere  and  at  all  times  are  equally 
under  the  influence  of  the  divine  Spirit?  No; 
but  only  that  God  may  be  found  in  any  place 
by  the  soul  that  is /open  to  receive  His  grace 
and  truth,  that  place  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  1 
conditions  of  true  fellowship  with  Him.     Trans-      1 

*  It  is  not  necessary  to  dwell  on  the  third  feature  of  the 
Temple  plan,  its  symmetry.  Although  this  has  not  the 
same  direct  religious  significance  as  the  other  two,  it  is 
nevertheless  a  point  to  which  considerable  importance  is 
attached  even  in  matters  of  minute  detail.  Solomon's 
Temple  had,  for  example,  only  one  door  to  the  side 
chambers,  in  the  wall  facing  the  south,  and  this  was 
sufficient  for  all  practical  purposes.  But  Ezekiel's  plan 
provides  for  two  such  doors,  one  in  the  south  and  the 
other  in  the  north,  for  no  assignable  reason  but  to  make 
the  two  sides  of  the  house  exactly  alike.  There  are  just 
two  slight  deviations  from  a  strictly  symmetrical  arrange- 
ment that  can  be  discerned  ;  one  is  the  washing-chamber 
bv  the  side  of  one  of  the  gates  of  the  inner  court,  and  the 
other  the  space  for  cooking  the  most  holy  class  of  sacri- 
fices near  the  block  of  cells  on  the  north  side  of  the  Temple. 
With  these  insignificant  exceptions,  all  the  parts  of  the 
sanctuary  are  disposed  with  mathematical  regularity; 
nothing  is  left  to  chance,  regard  for  convenience  is  every- 
where subordinated  to  the  sense  of  proportion  which  ' 
expresses  the  ideal  order  and  perfection  of  the  whole. 


Ezekiel  xliv] 


THE    PRIESTHOOD. 


329 


lated  into  terms  of  the  spiritual  life,  drawing  near 
to  God  denotes  the  act  of  faith  or  prayer  or  con- 
secration, tlirough  which  we  seek  the  manifesta- 
tion of  His  love  in  our  experience.  Religion 
knows  nothing  of  "  action  at  a  distance  "  ;  God 
is  near  in  every  place  to  the  soul  that  knows 
Him,  and  distant  in  every  place  from  the  heart 
that   loves   darkness   rather   than   light. 

Now  when  the  idea  of  access  to  God  is  thus 
spiritualised  the  conception  of  holiness  is  neces- 
sarily transformed,  but  it  is  not  superseded.  At 
every  stage  of  revelation  holiness  is  that  "  with- 
out which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord."  *  In 
other  words,  it  expresses  the  conditions  that  reg- 
ulate all  true  fellowship  with  God.  So  long  as 
worship  was  confined  to  an  earthly  sanctuary 
these  conditions  were,  so  to  speak,  materialised. 
They  resolved  themselves  into  a  series  of  "  car- 
nal ordinances  " — gifts  and  sacrifices,  meats, 
drinks,  and  divers  washings — 'that  could  never 
make  the  worshipper  perfect  as  touching  the 
conscience.  These  things  were  "  imposed  until 
a  time  of  reformation,"  the  "  Holy  Ghost  this 
signifying,  that  the  way  into  the  holy  place  had 
not  been  made  manifest  while  as  the  first  taber- 
nacle was  yet  standing."!  And  yet  when  we 
consider  what  it  was  that  gave  such  vitality  to 
that  persistent  sense  of  distance  from  God,  of 
His  unapproachableness,  of  danger  in  contact 
with  Him,  what  it  was  that  inspired  such  con- 
stant attention  to  ceremonial  purity  in  all  an- 
cient religions,  we  cannot  but  see  that  it  was  the 
obscure  workings  of  the  conscience,  the  haunt- 
ing sense  of  moral  defect  cleaving  to  a  man's 
common  life  and  all  his  common  actions.  In 
heathenism  this  feeling  took  an  entirely  wrong 
direction;  in  Israel  it  was  gradually  liberated 
from  its  material  associations  and  stood  forth  as 
an  ethical  fact.  And  when  at  last  Christ  came 
to  reveal  God  as  He  is.  He  taught  men  to  call 
nothing  common  or  unclean.  But  He  taught 
them  at  the  same  time  that  true  holiness  can  only 
be  attained  through  His  atoning  sacrifice,  and  by 
the  indwelling  of  that  Spirit  which  is  the  source 
of  moral  purity  and  perfection  in  all  His  people. 
These  are  the  abiding  conditions  of  fellowship 
with  the  Father  of  our  spirits;  and  under  the  in- 
fluence of  these  great  Christian  facts  it  is  our 
duty  to  perfect  holiness  in  the  tear  of  God. 

III. 

No  sooner  has  the  prophet  completed  his  tour 
of  inspection  of  ♦^he  sacred  buildings  than  he  is 
conducted  to  the  eastern  gate  to  witness  the 
theophany  by  which  the  Temple  is  consecrated 
to  the  service  of  the  true  God.  "  He  (the  angel) 
led  me  to  the  gate  that  looks  eastward,  and, 
lo,  the  glory  of  the  God  of  Israel  came  from  the 
east;  its  sound  was  as  the  sound  of  many  waters, 
and  the  earth  shone  with  its  glory.  The  appear- 
ance which  I  saw  was  like  that  which  I  had  seen 
when  He  came  to  destroy  the  city,  and  like  the 
appearance  which  I  saw  by  the  river  Kebar,  and 
I  fell  on  my  face.  And  the  glory  of  Jehovah  en- 
tered the  house  by  the  gate  that  looks  towards 
the  east.  The  Spirit  caught  me  up,  and  brought 
me  to  the  inner  court;  and,  behold,  the  glory  of 
Jehovah  filled  the  house.  Then  I  heard  a  voice 
from  the  house  speaking  to  me — the  man  was 
standing  beside  me — and  saying.  Son  of  man. 
hast  thou  seen  the  place  of  My  throne,  and  the 
place  of  the  soles  of  My  feet,  where  I  shall  dwell 
*  Heb.  xii.  14.  t  Heb.  ix.  8-10. 


in  the  midst  of  the  children  of  Israel  for  ever?  " 
^^xliii.  1-7). 

This  great  scene,  so  simply  described,  is  really 
the  culmination  of  Ezekiel's  prophecy.  Its  spir- 
itual meaning  is  suggested  by  the  prophet  him- 
self when  he  recalls  the  terrible  act  of  judgment 
which  he  had  seen  in  vision  on  that  very  spot 
some  twenty  years  before  (ix.-xi.).  The  two 
episodes  stand  in  clear  and  conscious  parallelism 
with  each  other.  They  represent  in  dramatic 
form  the  sum  of  Ezekiel's  teaching  in  the  two 
periods  into  which  his  ministry  was  divided.  On 
the  former  occasion  he  had  witnessed  the  exit  of 
Jehovah  from  a  Temple  polluted  by  heathen 
abominations  and  profaned  by  the  presence  of 
men  who  had  disowned  the  knowledge  of  the 
Holy  One  of  Israel.  The  prophet  had  read  in 
this  the  death  sentence  of  the  old  Hebrew  state, 
and  the  truth  of  his  visio'U  had  been  established 
in  the  tale  of  horror  and  disaster  which  the  sub- 
sequent years  had  unfolded.  Now  he  has  been 
privileged  to  see  the  return  of  Jehovah  to  a  new 
Temple,  corresponding  in  all  respects  to  the  re- 
quirements of  His  holiness;  and  he  recognises  it 
as  the  pledge  of  restoration  and  peace  and  all 
the  blessings  of  the  Messianic  age.  The  future 
worshippers  are  still  in  exile  bearing  the  chas- 
tisement of  their  former  iniquities;  but  "the 
Lord  is  in  His  holy  Temple,"  and  the  dispersed 
of  Israel  shall  yet  be  gathered  home  to  enter 
His  courts  with   praise  and  thanksgiving. 

To  us  this  part  of  the  vision  symbolises,  under 
forms  derived  fro'm  the  Old  Testament  econ- 
omy, the  central  truth  of  the  Christian  dispensa- 
tion. We  do  no  injustice  to  the  historic  import 
of  Ezekiel's  mission  when  we  say  that  the  dwell- 
ing of  Jehovah  in  the  midst  of  His  people  is  an 
emblem  of  reconciliation  between  God  and  man, 
and  that  his  elaborate  system  of  ritual  observ- 
ances points  towards  the  sanctification  of  hu- 
man life  in  all  its  relations  through  spiritual  com- 
munion with  the  Father  revealed  in  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  Christian  interpreters  have  differed 
widely  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  vision  is  to 
be  realised  in  the  history  of  the  Church;  but  on 
one  point  at  least  they  are  agreed,  that  through 
the  veil  of  legal  institutions  the  prophet  saw  the 
day  of  Christ.  And  although  Ezekiel  himself 
does  not  distinguish  between  the  symbol  and  the 
reality,  it  is  nevertheless  possible  for  us  to  see, 
in  the  essential  ideas  of  his  vision,  a  prophecy 
of  that  eternal  union  between  God  and  man 
which  is  brought  to  pass  by  the  work  of  Christ. 


CHAPTER   XXVII. 

THE  PRIESTHOOD. 

Ezekiel  xliv. 

In  the  last  chapter  we  saw  how  the  principle 
of  holiness  through  separation  was  exhibited 
in  the  plan  of  a  new  Temple,  round  which  the 
Theocracy  of  the  future  was  to  be  constituted. 
We  have  now  to  consider  the  application  of  the 
same  principle  to  the  personnel  of  the  Sanctu- 
ary, the  priests  and  others  who  are  to  officiate 
within  its  courts.  The  connection  between  the 
two  is  obvious.  As  has  been  already  remarked, 
the  sanctity  of  the  Temple  is  not  intelligible  apart 
from  the  ceremonial  purity  required  of  the  per- 
sons who  are  permitted  to  enter  it.  The  de- 
grees of  holiness  pertaining  to  its  different  areas 


330 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


imply  an  ascending  scale  of  restrictions  on  access 
to  the  more  sacred  parts.  We  may  expect  to 
find  that  in  the  observance  of  these  conditions 
the  usage  of  the  first  Temple  left  much  to  be 
desired  from  the  point  of  view  represented  by 
Ezekiel's  ideal.  Where  the  very  construction  of 
the  sanctuary  involved  so  many  departures  from 
the  strict  idea  of  holiness  it  was  inevitable  that 
a  corresponding  laxity  should  prevail  in  the  dis- 
charge of  sacred  functions.  Temple  and  priest- 
hood in  fact  are  so  related  that  a  reform  of  the 
one  implies  of  necessity  a  reform  of  the  other. 
It  is  therefore  not  in  itself  surprising  that  Eze- 
kiel's legislation  should  include  a  scheme  for  the 
reorganisation  of  the  Temple  priesthood.  But 
these  general  considerations  hardly  prepare  us 
for  the  sweeping  and  drastic  changes  contem- 
plated in  the  forty-fourth  dhapter  of  the  book. 
It  requires  an  efifort  of  imagination  to  realise  the 
situation  with  which  the  prophet  has  to  deal. 
The  abuses  for  which  he  seeks  a  remedy  and  the 
measures  which  he  adopts  to  counteract  them 
are  alike  contrary  to  preconceived  notions  of  the 
order  of  worship  in  an  Israelite  sanctuary.  Yet 
there  is  no  part  of  the  prophet's  programme 
which  shows  the  character  of  the  earnest  practi- 
cal reformer  more  clearly  than  this.  If  we  might 
regard  Ezekiel  as  a  mere  legislator  we  should 
say  that  the  boldest  task  to  which  he  set  his  hand 
was  a  reformation  of  the  Temple  ministry,  in- 
volving the  degradation  of  an  influential  class 
from  the  priestly  status  and  privileges  to  which 
they  aspired. 


The  first  and  most  noteworthy  feature  of  the 
new  scheme  is  the  distinction  between  priests  and 
Levites.  The  passage  in  which  this  instruction 
is  given  is  so  important  that  it  may  be  quoted 
here  at  length.  It  is  an  oracle  communicated  to 
the  prophet  in  a  peculiarly  impressive  manner. 
He  has  been  brought  into  the  inner  court  in 
front  of  the  Temple,  and  there,  in  full  view  of 
the  glory  of  God,  he  falls  on  his  face,  when  Je- 
hova'h  speaks  to  him  as  follows: — 

"  Son  of  man,  give  heed  and  see  with  thine 
eyes  and  hear  with  thine  ears  all  that  I  speak  to 
thee  concerning  all  the  ordinances  and  all  the 
laws  of  Jehovah's  house.  Mark  well  the  [rule  of] 
entrance  into  the  house,  and  all  the  outgoings 
in  the  sanctuary.  And  say  to  the  house  of  re- 
bellion, the  house  of  Israel:  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
Jehovah,  It  is  high  time  to  desist  from  all  your 
abominations,  O  house  of  Israel,  in  that  ye  bring 
in  aliens  uncircumcised  in  heart  and  uncircum- 
cised  in  flesh  to  be  in  My  sanctuary,  profaning 
it,  while  ye  ofifer  My  bread,  the  fat  and  the  blood; 
thus  ye  have  broken  My  covenant,  in  addition  to 
all  your  (ofher)  abominations;  and  ye  have  not 
kept  the  charge  of  My  holy  things,  but  have  ap- 
pointed them  as  keepers  of  My  charge  in  My 
sanctuary.  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  Jeho- 
vah, No  alien  uncircumcised  in  heart  and  flesh 
shall  enter  into  My  sanctuary,  of  all  the  for- 
eigners who  are  amongst  the  Israelites.  But  the 
Levites  who  departed  from  Me  when  Israel  went 
astray  from  Me  after  their  idols,  they  shall  bear 
their  guilt,  and  shall  minister  in  My  sanctuary 
in  charge  at  the  gates  of  the  house  and  as  minis- 
ters of  the  house;  they  shall  slay  the  burnt  offer- 
ing and  the  sacrifice  for  the  people,  and  stand  be- 
fore them  to  minister  to  them.  Because  they  min- 
istered to  them  before  their  idols,  and  were  to  the 


house  of  Israel  an  occasion  of  guilt,  therefore  I 
lift  My  hand  against  them,  saith  the  Lord  Jeho- 
vah, and  they  shall  '  ear  their  guilt,  and  shall  not 
draw  near  to  Me  to  act  as  priests  to  Me  or  to 
touch  any  of  My  holy  things,  the  most  holy 
things,  but  shall  bear  their  shame  and  the  abom- 
inations which  they  have  committed.  I  will  make 
them  keepers  of  the  charge  of  the  house,  for  all 
its  servile  work  and  all  that  has  to  be  done  in 
it.  But  the  priest-Levites,  the  sons  of  Zadok, 
who  kept  the  charge  of  My  sanctuary  when  the 
Israelites  strayed  from  Me — they  shall  draw  near 
to  Me  to  minister  to  Me,  and  shall  stand  before 
Me  to  present  to  Me  the  fat  and  the  blood,  saith 
the  Lord  Jehovah.  They  shall  enter  into  My 
sanctuary,  and  they  shall  draw  near  to  My  table 
to  minister  to  Me,  and  s'hall  keep  My  charge  " 
(xliv.  5-16). 

Now  the  first  thing  to  be  noticed  here  is  that 
the  new  law  of  the  priesthood  is  aimed  directly 
against  a  particular  abuse  in  the  practice  of  the 
first  Temple.  It  appears  that  down  to  the  time 
of  the  Exile  uncircumcised  aliens  were  not  only 
admitted  to  the  Temple,  but  were  entrusted  with 
certain  important  functions  in  maintaining  order 
in  the  sanctuary  (ver.  8).  It  is  not  expressly 
stated  that  they  took  any  part  in  the  performance 
of  the  worship,  although  this  is  suggested  by  the 
fact  that  the  Levites  who  are  installed  in  their 
place  had  to  slay  the  sacrifices  for  the  people 
and  render  other  necessary  services  to  the  wor- 
shippers (ver.  11).  In  any  case  the  mere  pres- 
ence of  foreigners  while  sacrifice  was  being  of- 
fered (ver.  7)  was  a  profanation  of  the  sanctity 
of  the  Temple  which  was  intolerable  to  a  strict 
conception  of  Jehovah's  holiness.  It  is  therefore 
of  some  consequence  to  discover  who  these 
aliens  were,  and  how  they  came  to  be  engaged  in 
the  Temple. 

For  a  partial  answer  to  this  question,  we  may 
turn  first  to  the  memorable  scene  of  the  corona- 
tion of  the  young  king  Joash  as  described  in  the 
eleventh  chapter  of  the  Second  Book  of  Kings 
(cir.  B.  c.  837).  The  moving  spirit  in  that  transac- 
tion was  the  chief  priest  Jehoiada,  a  man  who 
was  honourably  distinguished  by  his  zeal  for  the 
purity  of  the  national  religion.  But  although  the 
priest's  motives  were  pure  he  could  only  accom- 
plish his  object  by  a  palace  revolution,  carried 
out  with  the  assistance  of  the  captains  of  the 
royal  bodyguard.  Now  from  fhe  time  of  David 
the  royal  guard  had  contained  a  corps  of  for- 
eign mercenaries  recruited  from  the  Philistine 
country;  and  on  the  occasion  with  which  we  are 
dealing  we  find  mention  of  a  body  of  Carians, 
showing  that  the  custom  was  kept  up  in  the  end 
of  the  ninth  century.  During  the  coronation 
ceremony  these  guards  were  drawn  up  in  the 
most  sacred  part  of  the  inner  court,  the  space 
between  the  Temple  and  the  altar,  with  the  new 
king  in  their  midst  (ver.  11).  Moreover  we  learn 
incidentally  that  keeping  watch  in  the  Temple 
was  part  of  the  regular  duty  of  the  king's  body- 
guard, just  as  much  as  the  custody  of  the  palace 
(vv.  5-7).  In  order  to  understand  the  full  sig- 
nificance of  this  arrangement,  it  must  be  borne 
in  mind  that  the  Temple  was  in  the  first  instance 
the  royal  sanctuary,  maintained  at  the  king's  ex- 
pense and  subject  to  his  authority.  Hence  the 
duty  of  keeping  order  in  the  Temple  courts  nat- 
urally devolved  on  the. troops  that  attended  the 
king's  person  and  acted  as  the  palace  guard.  So 
at  an  earlier  period  of  the  history  we  read  that 
as  often  as  the  king  went  into  the  house  of  Je- 


Ezekiel  xliv.] 


THE    PRIESTHOOD. 


331 


hovah,  he  was  accompanied  by  the  guard  that 
kept  the  door  of  the  king's  house  (i  Kings  xiv. 
27,  28). 

Here,  then,  we  have  historical  evidence  of  the 
admission  to  the  sanctuary  of  a  class  of  foreign- 
ers answering  in  all  respects  to  the  uncircumcised 
aliens  of  Ezekiel's  legislation.  That  the  practice 
of  enlisting  foreign  mercenaries  for  the  guard 
continued  till  the  reign  of  Josiah  seems  to  be 
indicated  by  an  allusion  in  the  Book  of  Zeph- 
anjah,  where  the  prophet  denounces  a  body  of 
men  in  the  service  of  tl.e  king  who  observed  the 
Philistine  custom  of  "  leaping  over  the  thresh- 
old "  (Zeph.  i.  9:  cf.  I  Sam.  v.  5).  We  have 
only  to  suppose  that  this  usage,  along  with  the 
subordination  of  the  Temple  to  the  royal  au- 
thority, persisted  to  the  close  of  the  monarchy, 
in  order  to  explain  fully  the  abuse  which  excited 
the  indignation  of  our  prophet.  It  is  possible 
no  doubt  that  he  had  in  view  other  uncircumcised 
pet  sons  as  well,  suc'h  as  the  Gibeonites  (Josh, 
ix.  27),  who  were  employed  m  the  menial  serv- 
ice of  the  sanctuary.  But  we  have  seen  enough 
to  show  alt  all  events  that  pre-exilic  usage  toler- 
ated a  freedom  of  access  to  the  sanctuary  and  a 
looseness  of  administration  within  it  which  would 
have  been  sacrilegious  under  the  law  of  the  sec- 
ond Temple.  It  need  not  be  supposed  that  Eze- 
kiel was  the  only  one  who  felt  this  state  of  things 
to  be  a  scandal  and  an  injury  to  religion.  We 
may  believe  that  in  this  respect  he  only  ex- 
pressed the  higher  conscience  of  his  order. 
Amongst  the  more  devout  circles  of  the  Temple 
priesthood  there  was  probably  a  growing  con- 
viction similar  to  that  which  animated  the  early 
Tractarian  party  in  the  Church  of  England,  a 
conviction  that  the  whole  ecclesiastical  system 
with  whic'h  their  spiritual  interests  were  bound 
up  fell  short  of  the  ideal  of  sanctity  essential  to  it 
as  a  Divine  institution.  But  no  scheme  of  re- 
form had  any  chance  of  success  so  long  as  the 
palace  of  the  kings  stood  hard  by  the  Temple, 
with  only  a  wall  between  them.  The  opportunity 
for  reconstruction  came  with  the  Exile,  and  one 
ol  the  leading  principles  of  the  reformed  Temple 
is  that  here  enuncia'ted  by  Ezekiel,  that  no  "  alien 
uncircumcised  in  heart  and  uncircumcised  in 
flesh  "  shall  henceforth  enter  the  sanctuary. 

In  order  to  prevent  a  recurrence  of  these 
abuses  Ezekiel  ordains  that  for  the  future  the 
functions  of  the  Temple  guard  and  other  menial 
offices  shall  be  discharged  by  the  Levites  who 
had  hitherto  acted  as  priests  of  the  idolatrous 
shrines  throughout  the  kingdom  (vv.  11-14). 
This  singular  enactment  becomes  at  once  intel- 
ligible when  we  understand  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances brought  about  by  the  enforcement  of  the 
Deuteronomic  Law  in  the  reformation  of  the 
year  621.  Let  us  once  more  recall  the  fact  that 
the  chief  object  of  that  reformation  was  to  do 
away  with  all  the  provincial  sanctuaries  and  to 
concentrate  the  worship  of  the  nation  in  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem.  It  is  obvious  that  by  this 
measure  the  priests  of  the  local  sanctuaries  were 
deprived  of  their  means  of  livelihood.  The  rule 
that  they  who  serve  the  altar  shall  live  by  the 
altar  applied  equally  to  the  priests  of  the  high 
places  and  to  those  in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem. 
All  the  priests  indeed  throughout  the  country 
were  members  of  a  landless  caste  or  tribe;  the 
Levites  had  no  portion  or  inheritance  like  the 
other  tribes,  but  subsisted  on  the  offerings  of  the 
worshippers  at  the  various  shrines  where  they 
ministered.     Now  the  law  of  Deuteronomy  rec- 


ognises the  principle  of  compensation  for  the 
vested  interests  that  were  thus  abolished.  Two 
alternatives  were  offered  to  the  Levites  of  the 
high  places:  they  might  either  remain  in  the  vil- 
lages or  townships  where  they  were  known,  or 
they  might  proceed  to  the  central  sanctuary  and 
obtain  admission  to  the  ranks  of  the  pries^thood 
there.  In  the  former  case,  the  Lawgiver  com- 
mends them  earnestly,  along  with  other  desti- 
tute members  of  the  community,  to  the  charity 
of  their  well-to-do  fellow-townsmen  and  neigh- 
bours. If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  elected  to 
try  their  fortunes  in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem, 
he  secures  their  full  priestly  status  and  equal 
rights  with  their  brethren  who  regularly  offici- 
ated there.  On  this  point  the  legislation  is  quite 
explicit.  Any  Levite  from  any  district  of  Israel 
who  came  of  his  own  free  will  to  the  place  which 
Jehovah  had  chosen  might  minister  in  the  name 
of  Jehovah  his  God,  as  all  his  brethren  the  Le- 
vites did  who  sitood  there  before  Jehovah,  and 
have  like  portions  to  eat  (Deut.  xviii.  6-8).  In 
this  matter,  however,  the  humane  intention  of 
the  law  was  partly  frustrated  by  the  exclusive- 
ness  of  the  priests  who  were  already  in  posses- 
sion of  the  sacred  offices  in  the  Temple.  The 
Levites  who  were  brought  up  from  the  provinces 
to  Jerusalem  were  allowed  their  proper  share  of 
the  priestly  dues,  but  were  not  permitted  to  of- 
ficiate at  the  altar.*  It  is  not  probable  that  a 
large  number  of  the  provincial  Levites  availed 
themselves  of  this  grudging  provision  for  their 
maintenance.  In  the  idolatrous  reaction  which 
set  in  after  the  death  of  Josiah  the  worship  of 
the  high  places  was  revived,  and  the  great  body 
of  the  Levites  would  naturally  be  favourable  to 
the  re-establishment  of  the  old  order  of  things 
with  which  their  professional  interests  were  iden- 
tified. Still,  there  would  be  a  certain  number 
who  for  conscientious  motives  attached  them- 
selves to  the  movement  for  a  purer  and  stricter 
conception  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  were 
willing  to  submit  to  the  irksome  conditions 
which  this  movement  imposed  on  them.  They 
might  hope  for  a  time  when  the  generous  pro- 
visions of  the  Deuteronomic  Code  would  be  ap- 
plied to  them;  but  their  position  in  the  mean- 
time was  both  precariois  and  humiliating.  They 
had  to  bear  the  doom  pronounced  long  ago  on 
the  sinful  house  of  F'-':  "  Every  one  that  is  left 
in  thine  house  shall  come  and  bow  down  to  him 
(the  high  priest  of  the  line  of  Zadok)  for  a  piece 
of  silver  and  a  loaf  of  bread,  and  shall  say.  Thrust 
me,  I  pray  thee,  into  one  of  the  priests  offices, 
that  I  may  eat  a  morsel  of  bread."  f 

We  see  thus  that  Ezekiel's  legislation  on  the 
subject  of  the  Levites  starts  from  a  state  of  things 
created  by  Josiah's  reformation,  and,  let  us  re- 
member, a  state  of  things  with  which  the  prophet 
was  familiar  in  his  earlier  days  when  he  was  him- 
self a  priest  in  the  Temple.  On  the  w'hole  he 
justifies  the  exclusive  attitude  of  the  Temple 
priesthood  towards  the  new-comers,  and  carries 
forward  the  application  of  the  idea  of  sanctity 
from  the  point  where  it  had  been  left  by  the  law 
of  Deuteronomy.  That  law  recognises  no  sacer- 
dotal distinctions  within  the  ranks  of  the  priest- 
hood.    Its  regular  designation  of  the  priests  of 

*  2  Kings  xxiii.  g.  The  sense  of  the  passage  is  undoubt- 
edly that  given  above;  but  the  expression  "unleavened 
bread  "  as  a  general  name  for  the  priests'  portion  is  pecu- 
liar.   It  has  been  proposed  to  read,  with  a  change  merely 

of  the  punctuation,  instead  of  'ii2fD,  JiiVw  _  "  statutory 

portions,"  as  in  Neh.  xiii.  5. 
1 1  Sam.  ii.  36. 


332 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


the  Temple  is  "  the  priests,  the  Levites  "  ;  that 
of  the  provincial  priests  is  simply  "  the  Levites." 
All  priests  are  brethren,  all  belong  to  the  same 
tribe  of  Levi;  and  it  is  assumed,  as  we  have  seen, 
that  any  Levite,  whatever  his  antecedents,  is 
qualified  for  the  full  privileges  of  the  priesthood 
in  the  central  sanctuary  if  he  choose  to  claim 
them.  But  we  have  also  seen  that  the  distinc- 
tion emerged  as  a  consequence  of  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  fundamental  law  of  the  single  sanc- 
tuary. There  came  to  be  a  class  of  Levites  in 
the  Temple  whose  position  was  at  first  indeter- 
minate. They  themselves  claimed  the  full  stand- 
ing of  the  priesthood,  and  they  could  appeal  in 
support  of  their  claim  to  the  authority  of  the 
Deuteronomic  legislation.  But  the  claim  was 
never  conceded  in  practice,  the  influence  of  the 
legitimate  Temple  priests  being  strong  enough 
to  exclude  them  from  the  supreme  privilege  of 
ministering  at  the  altar.  This  state  of  things 
could  not  continue.  Either  the  disparity  of  the 
two  orders  must  be  efifaced  by  the  admission  of 
the  Levites  to  a  footing  of  equality  with  the 
other  priests,  or  else  it  must  be  emphasised  and 
based  on  some  higher  principle  than  the  jeal- 
ousy of  a  close  corporation  for  its  traditional 
rights.  Now  such  a  principle  is  supplied  by  the 
section  of  Ezekiel's  vision  with  which  we  are 
dealing.  The  permanent  exclusion  of  the  Le- 
vites from  the  priesthood  is  founded  on  the  un- 
assailable moral  ground  that  they  had  forfeited 
their  rights  by  their  unfaithfulness  to  the  funda- 
mental truths  of  the  national  religion.  They  had 
been  a  "  stumbling-block  of  iniquity "  to  the 
house  of  Israel  through  their  disloyalty  to  Jeho- 
vah's cause  during  the  long  period  of  national 
apostasy,  when  they  lent  themselves  to  the  pop- 
ular inclination  towards  impure  and  idolatrous 
worship.  For  this  great  betrayal  of  their  trust 
they  must  bear  the  guilt  and  shame  in  their 
degradation  to  the  lowest  offices  in  the  service 
of  the  new  sanctuary.  They  are  to  fill  the  place 
formerly  occupied  by  uncircumcised  foreigners, 
as  keepers  of  the  gates  and  servants  of  the  house 
and  the  worshi"pping  congregation;  but  they  may 
not  draw  near  to  Jehovah  in  the  exercise  of 
priestly  prerogatives,  nor  put  their  hands  to  the 
most  holy  things.  The  priesthood  of  the  new 
Temple  is  finally  vested  in  the  "  sons  of  Zadok  " 
— i.  e.,  the  body  of  Levitical  priests  who  had 
ministered  in  the  Temple  since  its  foundation  by 
Solomon.  Whatever  the  faults  of  these  Zadok- 
ites  had  been — and  Ezekiel  certainly  does  not 
judge  them  leniently  * — they  had  at  least  stead- 
fastly maintained  the  ideal  of  a  central  sanctu- 
ary, and  in  comparison  with  the  rural  clergy  they 
were  doubtless  a  purer  and  better-disciplined 
body.  The  judgment  is  only  a  relative  one,  as 
all  class  judgments  necessarily  are.  There  must 
have  been  individual  Zadokites  worse  than  an 
ordinary  Levite  from  the  country,  as  well  as  in- 
dividual Levites  who  were  superior  to  the  aver- 
age Temple  priest.  But  if  it  was  necessary  that 
in  the  future  the  interest  of  religion  should  be 
mainly  confided  to  a  priesthood,  there  could  be 
no  question  that  as  a  class  the  old  priestly 
aristocracy  of  the  central  sanctuary  were  those 
best  qualified  for  spirituaul  leadership. 

In  Ezekiel's  vision  we  thus  seem  to  find  the 
beginning  of  a  statutory  and  official  distinction 
between  priests  and  Levites.  This  fact  forms 
one  of  the  arguments  chiefly  relied  on  by  those 
who  hold  that  the  book  of  Ezekiel  precedes  the 

*  Cf.  ch.  xxii.  26. 


introduction  of  the  Priestly  Code  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. Two  things,  indeed,  appear  to  be  clearly 
established.  In  the  first  place  the  tendency  and 
significance  of  Ezekiel's  legislation  are  ade- 
quately explained  by  the  historical  situation  that 
existed  in  the  generation  immediately  preceding 
the  Exile.  In  the  second  place  the  Mosaic 
books,  apart  from  Deuteronomy,  had  no  influ- 
ence on  the  scheme  Dropounded  in  the  vision.  It 
is  felt  that  these  results  are  difficult  to  reconcile 
with  the  view  that  the  middle  books  of  the 
Pentateuch  were  known  to  the  prophet  as  part 
of  a  divinely  ordained  constitution  for  the  Is- 
raelite theocracy.  We  should  have  expected  in 
that  case  that  the  prophet  would  simply  have 
fallen  back  on  the  provisions  of  the  earlier  legis- 
lation, where  the  division  between  priests  and 
Levites  is  formulated  with  perfect  clearness  and 
precision.  Or,  looking  at  the  matter  from  the 
divine  point  of  view,  we  should  have  expected 
that  the  revelation  given  to  Ezekiel  would  en- 
dorse the  principles  of  the  revelation  that  had 
already  been  given.  It  is  equally  hard  to  sup- 
pose that  any  existing  law  should  have  been  un- 
known to  Ezekiel,  or  to  suggest  a  reason  for  his 
ignoring  it  if  it  was  known.  The  facts  that  have 
come  before  us  seem  thus,  so  far  as  they  go,  to 
be  in  favour  of  the  theory  that  Ezekiel  stands 
midway  between  Deuteronomy  and  the  Priestly 
Code,  and  that  the  final  codification  and  pro- 
mulgation of  the  latter  took  place  after  his  time. 
It  is  nearer  our  purpose,  however,  to  note  the 
probable  effect  of  these  regulations  on  the  per- 
sonnel of  the  second  Temple.  In  the  book  of 
Ezra  we  are  told  that  in  the  first  colony  of  re- 
turning exiles  there  were  four  thousand  two  hun- 
dred and  eighty-nine  priests  and  only  seventy- 
four  Levites.*  One  man  in  every  ten  was  a 
priest,  and  the  total  number  was  probably  in 
excess  of  the  requirements  of  a  fully  equipped 
Temple.  The  number  of  Levites,  on  the  other 
hand,  would  have  been  quite  insufficient  for  the 
duties  required  of  them  under  the  new  arrange- 
ments, had  there  not  been  a  contingent  of  nearly 
four  hundred  of  the  old  Temple  servants  to  sup- 
ply their  lack  of  service. f  Again,  when  Ezra 
came  up  from  Babylon  in  the  year  458,  we  find 
that  not  a  single  Levite  volunteered  to  accom- 
pany him.  It  was  only  after  some  negotiations 
that  about  forty  Levites  were  induced  to  go  up 
with  him  to  Jerusalem;  and  again  they  were 
far  outnumbered  by  the  Nethinim  or  Temple 
slaves. t  These  figures  cannot  possibly  represent 
the  proportionate  strength  of  the  tribe  of  Levi 
under  the  old  monarchy.  They  indicate  unmis- 
takably that  there  was  a  great  reluctance  on  the 
part  of  the  Levites  to  share  the  perils  and  glory 
of  the  founding  of  the  new  Jerusalem.  Is  it  not 
probable  that  the  new  conditions  laid  down  by 
Ezekiel's  legislation  were  the  cause  of  this  re- 
luctance? That,  in  short,  the  prospect  of  being 
servants  in  a  Temple  where  they  had  once 
claimed  to  be  priests  was  not  sufficiently  attract- 
ive to  the  majority  to  lead  them  to  break  up  their 
comfortable  homes  in  exile,  and  take  their  proper 
place  in  the  raiks  of  those  who  were  forming  the 
new  community  of  Israel?  And  ought  we  not 
to  spare  a  moment's  admiration  even  at  this  dis- 
tance of  time  for  the  public-spirited  few  who  in 
self-sacrificing  devotion  to  the  cause  of  God  will- 
ingly accepted  a  position  which  was  scorned  by 
the  great  mass  of  their  tribesmen?  If  this  was 
their    spirit,    they    had   their    reward.     Although 


*  Ezra  ii.  36- -40. 


tEzra  ii.  s8. 


t  Ezra  viii.  ii;-2o. 


Ezekicl  xliv.] 


thp:  priesthood. 


333 


the  position  of  a  Levite  was  at  first  a  symbol  of 
inferiority  and  degradation,  it  ultimately  became 
one  of  very  great  honour.  When  the  Temple 
service  was  fully  organised,  the  Levites  were  a 
large  and  important  order,  second  in  dignity  in 
the  community  only  to  the  priests.  Their  ranks 
were  swelled  by  the  incorporation  of  the  Temple 
musicians,  as  well  as  other  functionaries;  and 
thus  the  Levites  are  for  ever  associated  in  our 
minds  with  the  magnificent  service  of  praise 
which  was  the  chief  glory  of  the  second  Temple. 

II. 

The  remainder  of  the  forty-fourth  chapter  lays 
down  the  rules  of  ceremonial  holiness  to  be  ob- 
served by  the  priests,  the  duties  they  have  to 
perform  towards  the  community,  and  the  pro- 
vision to  be  made  for  their  maintenance.  A  few 
words  must  here  suffice  on  each  of  these  topics. 

I.  The  r-anctity  of  the  priests  is  denoted,  first 
of  all,  by  the  obligation  to  wear  special  linen 
g'arments  when  they  enter  the  inner  court,  which 
is  the  sphere  of  their  peculiar  ministrations. 
Vestries  were  provided,  as  we  have  seen  from  the 
description  of  the  Temple,  between  the  inner  and 
outer  courts,  where  these  garments  were  to  be 
put  on  and  of¥  as  the  priests  passed  to  and  from 
the  discharge  of  their  sacred  duties.  The  general 
idea  underlying  this  regulation  is  too .  obvious 
to  require  explanation.  It  is  but  an  application 
of  the  fundamental  principle  that  approach  to  the 
Deity,  or  entrance  into  a  place  sanctified  by  His 
presence,  demands  a  condition  of  ceremonial 
purity  which  cannot  be  maintained  and  must  not 
be  imitated  by  persons  of  a  lower  degree  of  re- 
ligious privilege.  A  strange  but  very  suggestive 
extension  of  the  principle  is  found  in  the  in- 
junction to  put  off  the  garments  before  going 
into  the  outer  court,  lest  the  ordinary  worshipper 
should  be  sanctified  by  chance  contact  with  them. 
That  both  holiness  and  uncleanness  are  propa- 
gated by  contagion  is  of  the  very  essence  of  the 
ancient  idea  of  sanctity;  but  the  remarkable 
thing  is  that  in  some  circumstances  communi- 
cated holiness  is  as  much  to  be  dreaded  as  com- 
municated uncleanness.  It  is  not  said  what 
would  be  the  fate  of  an  Israelite  who  should  by 
chance  touch  the  sacred  vestments,  but  evidently 
he  must  be  disqualified  for  participation  in  wor- 
ship until  he  had  purged  himself  of  his  illegiti- 
mate sanctity.* 

In  the  next  place  the  priests  are  under  certain 
permanent  obligations  with  regard  to  signs  of 
mourning,  marriage,  and  contact  with  death, 
which  again  are  the  mark  of  the  peculiar  sanc- 
tity of  their  caste.  The  rules  as  to  mourning — 
prohibition  of  shaving  the  head  and  letting  the 
hair  flow  dishevelled  f- — have  been  thought  to  be 
directed  against  heathen  customs  arising  out  of 
the  worship  of  the  dead.  In  marriage  the  priest 
may  only  take  a  virgin  of  the  house  of  Israel  or 
the  widow  of  a  priest.  And  only  in  the  case  of 
his  nearest  relatives — parent,  child,  brother,  and 
unmarried  sister — may  he  defile  himself  by  ren- 
dering the  last  offices  to  the  departed,  and  even 

*  On  this  peculiar  affinity  between  holiness  and  unclean- 
ness see  the  interesting  argument  in  Robertson  Smith's 
I'  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  pp.  427  ff.  The  passage  Hag. 
ii.  12-14  does  not  appear  to  be  inconsistent  with  what  is 
there  said.  The  meaning  is  that  "very  indirect  con- 
tact with  the  holy  does  not  make  holy,  but  very  direct 
contact  with  the  unclean  makes  unclean  "  iWellhausen, 
"Die  Kleinen  Propheten,"  p.  170). 

t  Cf.  ch.  xxiv.  17  ;  Lev.  x.  6,  xxi.  5,  ic. 


these  exceptions  involve  exclusion  from  the 
sacred  office  for  seven  days.* 

The  relations  of  these  requirements  to  the  cor- 
responding parts  of  the  Levitical  law  are  some- 
what complicated.  The  great  point  of  differ- 
ence is  that  Ezekiel  knows  nothing  of  the  unique 
privileges  and  sanctity  of  the  high  priest.  It 
might  seem  at  first  sight  as  if  this  implied  a  de- 
liberate departure  from  the  known  usage  of  the 
first  Temple.  It  is  certain  that  thefe  were  high 
priests  under  the  monarchy,  and  indeed  we  can 
discover  the  rudiments  of  a  hierarchy  in  a  dis- 
tribution of  authority  between  the  high  priest, 
second  priest,  keepers  of  the  threshold,  and  chief 
officers  of  the  house. f  But  the  silence  of  Eze- 
kiel does  not  necessarily  mean  that  he  contem- 
plated any  innovation  on  th6  established  order 
of  things.  The  historical  books  afford  no 
ground  for  supposing  that  the  high  priest  in  the 
old  Temple  had  a  religious  standing  distin- 
guished from  that  of  his  colleagues.  He  was 
primus  inter  pares,  the  president  of  the  priestly 
college  and  the  supreme  authority  in  the  internal 
administration  of  the  Temple  affairs,  but  proba- 
bly nothing  more.  Such  an  office  was  almost 
necessary  in  the  interest  of  order  and  authority, 
and  there  is  nothing  in  Ezekiel's  regulation's 
inconsistent  with  its  continuance,  t  On  the  other 
hand,  it  must  be  admitted  that  his  silence  would 
be  strange  if  he  had  in  view  the  position  assigned 
to  the  high  priest  under  the  law.  For  there  the 
high  priest  is  as  far  elevated  above  his  col- 
leagues as  these  are  above  the  Levites.  He  is 
the  concentration  of  all  that  is  holy  in  Israel, 
and  the  sole  mediator  of  the  nearest  approach 
to  God  which  the  symbolism  of  Temple  worship 
permitted.  He  is  bound  by  the  strictest  condi- 
tions of  ceremonial  sanctity,  and  any  transgres- 
sion on  his  part  has  to  be  atoned  for  by  a  rite 
similar  to  that  required  for  a  transgression  of 
the  whole  congregation. §  The  omission  of  this 
striking  figure  from  the  pages  of  Ezekiel  makes 
a  comparison  between  his  enactments  concern- 
ing the  priesthood  and  those  of  the  law  difficult 
and  in  some  degree  uncertain.  Nevertheless 
there  are  points  both  of  likeness  and  contrast 
which  cannot  escape  observation.  Thus  the  laws 
of  this  chapter  on  defilement  by  a  dead  body  are 
identical  with  those  enjoined  in  Lev.  xxi.  1-3 
(the  "Law  of  Holiness")  for  ordinary  priests; 
while  the  high  priest  is  there  forbidden  to  touch 
any  dead  body  whatsoever.  On  the  other  hand 
Ezekiel's  regulations  as  to  priestly  marriages 
seem  as  it  were  to  strike  an  average  between 
the  restrictions  imposed  in  the  law  on  ordinary 
priests  and  those  binding  on  the  high  priest. 
The  former  may  marry  any  woman  that  is  not 
violated  or  a  harlot  or  a  divorced  wife;  but  the 
high  priest  is  forbidden  to  marry  any  one  but  a 
virgin  of  his  6wn  people.  Again,  the  priestly 
garments,  according  to  Exod.  xxviii.  39-42, 
xxxix.  .2?,  are  made  partly  of  linen  and  partly  of 
byssus  (?  cotton),  which  certainly  looks  like  a 
refinement  on  the  simpler  attire  prescribed  by 
Ezekiel.  But  it  is  impossible  to  pursue  this  sub- 
ject further  here. 

2.  The  duties  of  the  priests  towards  the  people 

*  It  is  remarkable  that  neither  here  nor  in  Leviticus 
(ch.  xxi.  1-3)  is  the  priest's  wife  mentioned  as  one  for  whom 
he  may  defile  himself  at  her  death. 

t  C/.  2  Kings  xii.  11,  xxiii.  14,  xxv.  18  ;  Jer.  xx.  i. 

J  Hence  it  does  not  seem  to  me  that  any  argument  can 
be  based  on  the  fact  that  a  high  priest  was  at  the  head  of 
the  returning  exiles  either  for  or  against  the  existence  of 
the  Priestly  Code  at  that  date. 

§  Lev.  iv.  3,  13  :  c/.  Lev.  xvi.  6. 


334 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


are  few,  but  exceedingly  important.  In  the  first 
place  they  have  to  instruct  the  people  in  the  dis- 
tinctions between  the  holy  and  the  profane  and 
between  the  clean  and  the  unclean.  It  will  not 
be  supposed  that  this  instruction  took  the  form 
of  set  lectures  or  homilies  on  the  principles 
of  ceremonial  religion.  The  verb  translated 
"  teach  "  in  ver.  23  means  to  give  an  authorita- 
tive decision  in  a  special  case;  and  this  had  al- 
ways been  the  form  of  priestly  instruction  in 
Israel.  The  subject  of  the  teaching  was  of  the 
utmost  importance  for  a  community  whose  whole 
life  was  regulated  by  the  idea  of  holiness  in  the 
ceremonial  sense.  To  preserve  the  land  in  a 
state  of  purity  befitting  the  dwelling-place  of  Je- 
hovah required  the  most  scrupulous  care  on  the 
part  of  all  its  inhabitants;  and  in  practice  diffi- 
cult questions  would  constantly  occur  which 
could  only  be  settled  by  an  appeal  to  the  superior 
knowledge  of  the  priest.  Hence  Ezekiel  con- 
templates a  perpetuation  of  the  old  ritual  Torah 
or  direction  of  the  priests  even  in  the  ideal  state 
of  things  to  w'hich  his  vision  looks  forward.  Al- 
though the  people  are  assumed  to  be  all  right- 
eous in  heart  and  responsive  to  the  will  of  Je- 
hovah, yet  they  could  not  all  have  the  profes- 
sional knowledge  of  ritual  laws  which  was  nec- 
essary to  guide  them  on  all  occasions,  and  errors 
of  inadvertence  were  unavoidable.  Jeremiah 
could  look  forward  to  a  time  when  none  should 
teadh  his  neighbour  or  his  brother,  saying.  Know 
Jehovah,  because  the  religion  which  consists  in 
spiritual  emotions  and  affections  becomes  the  in- 
dependent possession  of  every  one  who  is  the 
subject  of  saving  grace.  But  Ezekiel,  from  his 
point  of  view,  could  not  anticipate  a  time  when 
all  the  Lord's  people  should  be  priests;  for  ritual 
is  essentially  an  affair  of  tradition  and  technique, 
and  can  only  be  maintained  by  a  class  of  experts 
specially  trained  for  their  office.  Ritualism  and 
sacerdotalism  are  natural  allies;  and  it  is  not 
wholly  accidental  that  the  great  ritualistic 
Churches  of  Christendom  are  those  organised  on 
the  sacerdotal  principle. 

But,  secondly,  the  priests  have  to  act  as  judges 
or  arbitrators  in  cases  of  disagreement  between 
man  and  man  (ver.  24).  This  again  was  an  im- 
portant department  of  priestly  Torah  in  ancient 
Israel,  the  origin  of  which  went  back  to  the 
personal  legislation  of  Moses  in  the  wilderness.* 
Cases  too  hard  for  human  judgment  were  re- 
ferred to  the  decision  of  God  at  the  sanctuary, 
and  the  judgment  was  conveyed  through  the 
agency  of  the  priest.  It  is  impossible  to  over- 
estimate the  service  thus  rendered  by  the  priest- 
hood to  the  cause  of  religion  in  Israel;  and 
Hosea  bitterly  complains  of  the  defection  of  the 
priests  from  the  Torah  of  their  God  as  the 
source  of  the  widespread  moral  corruption  of  his 
time.f  In  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  tlie  Leviti- 
cal  priests  of  the  central  sanctuary  are  associated 
with  the  civil  magistrate  as  a  court  of:  ultimate 
appeal  in  matters  of  controversy  that  arise  within 
the  community;  and  this  is  by  no  means  a  tribute 
to  the  superior  legal  acumen  of  the  clerical  mind, 
but  a  reassertion  of  the  old  principle  that  the 
priest  is  the  mouthpiece  of  Jehovah's  judgment,  t 
That  the  priests  should  be  the  sole  judges  in 
Ezekiel's  ideal  polity  was  to  be  expected  from 
the  high  position  assigned  to  the  order  generally; 
but  there  is  another  reason  for  it.  We  have 
once  more  to  keep  in  mind  that  we  are  dealing 

*Exod.  xviii.  25  ff.  tHoseaiv.  6. 

t  Cf.  Dent.  i.  17  :  "  judgment  is  God's." 


with  the  Messianic  community,  when  the  people 
are  anxious  to  do  the  right  when  they  know 
it,  and  only  cases  of  honest  perplexity  require 
to  be  resolved.  The  priests'  decision  had  never 
been  backed  up  by  executive  authority,  and  in 
the  kingdom  of  God  no  such  sanction  will  be 
necessary.  By  this  simple  judicial  arrangement 
the  ethical  demands  of  Jehovah's  holiness  will 
be  made  effective  in  the  ordinary  life  of  the 
community. 

Finally,  the  priests  have  complete  control  of 
public  worship,  and  are  responsible  for  the  due 
observance  of  the  festivals  and  for  the  sanctifica- 
tion  of  the  Sabbath  (ver.  24). 

3.  With  regard  to  the  provisions  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  priesthood,  the  old  law  continues  in 
force  that  the  priests  can  hold  no  landed  prop- 
erty and  have  no  possession  like  the  other  tribes 
of  Israel  (ver.  28).  It  is  true  that  a  strip  of 
land,  measuring  about  twenty-seven  square 
miles,  was  set  apart  for  their  residence;  *  but  this 
was  probably  not  to  be  cultivated,  and  at  all 
events  it  is  not  reckoned  as  a  possession  yield- 
ing revenue  for  their  maintenance.  The  priests' 
inheritance  is  Jehovah  Himself,  which  means 
that  they  are  to  live  on  the  offerings  of  the 
community  presented  to  Jehovah  at  the  sanc- 
tuary. In  the  practice  of  the  first  Temple  this 
ancient  rule  appears  to  have  been  interpreted  in 
a  broad  and  liberal  spirit,  greatly  to  the  advan- 
tage of  the  Zadokite  priests.  The  Temple  dues 
consisted  partly  of  money  payments  by  the  wor- 
shippers; and  at  least  the  fines  for  ceremonial 
trespasses  whidi  took  the  place  of  the  sin-  and 
guilt-offerings  were  counted  the  lawful  per- 
quisites of  the  priests. I  Ezekiel  knows  nothing 
of  this  system;  and  if  it  remained  in  force  down 
to  his  time,  he  undoubtedly  meant  to  abolish  it. 
The  tribute  of  the  sanctuary  is  to  be  paid  wholly 
in  kind,  and  out  of  this  the  priests  are  to  receive 
a  stated  allowance.  In  the  first  place  those  sacri- 
fices which  are  wholly  made  over  to  the  Deity, 
and  yet  are  not  consumed  on  the  altar,  have  to 
be  eaten  by  the  priests  in  a  holy  place.  These 
are  the  meal-offering,  the  sin-offering,  and  the 
guilt-offering,  of  which  more  hereafter.  For 
precisely  the  same  reason  all  that  is  herem — i.  e., 
"  devoted  "  irrevocably  to  Jehovah — becomes  the 
possession  of  the  priests.  His  representatives, 
except  in  the  cases  where  it  had  to  be  absolutely 
destroyed.  Besides  this  they  have  a  claim  to  the 
best  (an  indefinite  portion)  of  the  firstfruits  and 
"  oblations  "  (terumah)  brought  to  the  sanctuary 
in  accordance  with  ancient  custom  to  be  con- 
sumed by  the  worshipper  and  his  friends. t 

These  regulations  are  undoubtedly  based  on 
pre-exilic  usages,  and  consequently  leave  much 
to  be  supplied  from  the  people's  knowledge  of 
use  and  wont.  They  do  not  differ  very  greatly 
from  the  enumeration  of  the  priestly  dues  in  the 
eighteenth  chapter  of  Deuteronomy.  There,  as 
in  Ezekiel,  we  find  that  the  two  great  sources 
from  which  the  priests  derive  their  maintenance 
are  the  sacrifices  and  the  firstfruits.  The  Deu- 
teronomic  Code,  however,  knows  nothing  of  the 
special  class  of  sacrifices  called  sin-  and  guilt- 
offerings,  but  simply  assigns  to  the  priest  cer- 
tain portions  of  each  victim,§  except  of  course 

♦  See  below,  p.  348. 

t  2  Kings  xii.  4-16. 

$Thej^  also  receive  the  best  of  the  ''arisoth^  a  word  of 
uncertain  meaning,  probably  either  'dough  or  coarse 
meal.  This  offering  is  said  to  bring  a  blessing  on  the 
household. 

§Deut.  xviii.  3. 


Ezekiel  xliv.] 


THE    PRIESTHOOD. 


335 


the  burnt-oflferings,  which  were  consumed  entire 
on  the  altar.  The  priest's  share  of  natural  prod- 
uce is  the  "  best  "  of  corn,  new  wine,  oil,  and 
wool,*  and  would  be  selected  as  a  matter  of 
course  from  the  tithe  and  terumah  brought  to  the 
sanctuary;  so  that  on  this  point  there  is  practi- 
cally complete  agreement  between  Ezekiel  and 
Deuteronomy.  On  the  other  hand  the  differ- 
ences of  the  Levitical  legislation  are  considerable, 
and  all  in  the  direction  of  a  fuller  provision  for 
the  Temple  establishment.  Such  an  increased 
provision  was  called  for  by  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  the  second  Temple.  The  revenue  of 
the  sanctuary  obviously  depended  op  the  size 
and  prosperity  of  the  constituency  to  w'hich  it 
ministered.  The  stipulations  of  Deut.  xviii.  were 
no  doubt  sufficient  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
priesthood  in  the  old  kingdom  of  Judah;  and 
similarly  those  of  Ezekiel's  legislation  would  am- 
ply suffice  in  the  ideal  condition  of  the  people 
and  land  presupposed  by  the  vision.  But  neither 
could  have  been  adequate  for  the  support  of  a 
costly  ritual  in  a  small  community  like  that 
which  returned  from  Babylon,  where  one  man 
in  ten  was  a  priest.  Accordingly  we  find  that 
the  arrangements  made  under  Nehemiah  for  the 
endowment  of  the  Temple  ministry  are  con- 
formed to  the  extended  provisions  of  the 
Priestly  Code  (Neh.  x.  32-39).! 


ni. 

In  conclusion,  let  us  briefly  consider  the  sig- 
nificance of  this  great  institution  of  the  priest- 
hood in  Ezekiel's  scheme  of  an  ideal  theocracy. 
It  would  of  course  be  an  utter  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  the  prophet  is  merely  legislating  in 
the  interests  of  fhe  sacerdotal  order  to  which  he 
himself  belonged.  It  was  necessary  for  him  to 
insist  on  the  peculiar  sanctity  and  privileges  of 
the  priests,  and  to  draw  a  sharp  line  of  division 

*  Deut.  xviii.  ^. 

+  The  regulations  of  the  Priests'  Code  with  regard  to 
the  revenues  of  the  Temple  clergy  are  most  comprehen- 
sively given  in  Numb,  xviii.  8-32.  The  first  thing  that 
strikes  us  there  is  the  distinction  between  the  due  of  the 
priests  and  that  of  the  Levites.  The  absence  of  any 
express  provision  for  the  latter  is  a  somewhat  remark- 
able feature  in  Ezekiel's  legislation,  when  we  consider 
the  care  with  which  he  has  defined  the  status  and  duties 
of  the  order.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  no  complete 
arrangements  could  be  made  for  the  Temple  service 
without  some  law  on  this  point  such  as  is  contained  in 
the  passage  Numb,  xviii.  and  referred  to  in  Neh.  x.  37-3q ; 
and  this  is  closely  connected  with  a  disposition  of  the  tithes 
and  firstlings  different  from  the  directions  of  Deuter- 
onomy, and  probably  also  from  the  tacit  assumption  of 
Ezekiel.  The  book  of  Deuteronomy  leaves  no  doubt  that 
both  the  tithes  of  natural  produce  and  the  firstlings  of  the 
flock  and  herd  were  intended  to  furnish  the  material  for 
sacrificial  feasts  at  the  sanctuary  (c/i  chs.  xii.  6,  7,  11,  12, 
xiv.  22-27).  The  priest  received  the  lisual  portions  of  the 
firstlings  (ch.  xviii.  3),  and  also  a  share  of  the  tithe  ;  but 
the  rest  was  eaten  by  the  worshipper  and  his  guests.  In 
Numb,  xviii.,  on  the  other  hand,  all  the  firstlings  are  the 
property  of  the  priest  (ver.  15),  and  the  whole  of  the  tithes 
IS  assigned  to  the  Levites,  who  in  turn  are  required  to 
hand  over  a  tenth  of  the  tithe  to  the  priests  (vv.  24-32). 
The  portion  of  the  priests  consists  of  the  following  items  : 
(i)  The  meal-offering,  sin-offering,  and  guilt-offering  (as 
in  Ezekiel)  j  (2)  the  best  of  oil,  new  wine,  and  corn  (as  in 
Deuteronomy  (ver.  12) ;  (3)  all  the  first  fruits  (an  advance 
on  Ezekiel)(ver.  14);  (4)  every  devoted  thing  (Ezekiel)  (ver. 
14)  ;  (5)  all  the  firstlings  (vv.  15-18) ;  (6)  the  breast  and 
right  thigh  of  all  ordinary  private  sacrifices  (ver.  18  :  cf. 
Lev.  vii.  31-34)  (like  Deuteronomy  but  choicer  portions) ; 
(7)  the  tenth  of  the  Levites'  tithe.  It  will  be  seen  from 
this  enumeration  that  the  Temple  tariff  of  the  Priestly 
law  includes,  with  some  slight  modification,  all  the 
requirements  of  Deuteronomy  and  Ezekiel,  besides  the 
two  important  additions  referred  to  above. 


between  them  and  ordinary  members  of  the  com- 
munity. But  he  does  this,  not  in  the  interest  of 
a  privileged  caste  within  the  nation,  but  in  the 
interest  of  a  religious  ideal  which  embraced 
priests  and  people  alike  and  had  to  be  realised 
in  the  life  of  fhe  nation  as  a  whole.  That  ideal 
is  expressed  by  the  word  "  holiness,"  and  we 
have  already  seen  how  the  idea  of  holiness  de- 
manded ceremonial  conditions  of  immediate  ac- 
cess to  Jehovah's  presence  which  the  ordinary 
Israelite  could  not  observe.  But  "  exclusion  " 
could  not  possibly  be  the  last  word  of  a  religion 
which  seeks  to  bring  men  into  fellowship 
with  God.  Access  to  God  mig-ht  be  hedged 
about  by  restrictions  and  conditions  of  the  most 
onerous  kind,  but  access  there  must  be  if  wor- 
ship was  to  have  any  meaning  and  value  for 
the  nation  or  the  individual.  Although  the  wor- 
shipper might  not  himself  lay  his  victim  on  the 
altar,  he  must  at  least  be  permitted  to  offer  his 
gift  and  receive  the  assurance  that  it  was  ac- 
cepted. If  the  priest  stood  between  him  and 
God,  it  was  not  merely  to  separate  but  also  to 
mediate  between  them,  and  through  the  fulfilment 
of  superior  conditions  of  holiness  to  establish  a 
communication  between  him  and  the  holy  Being 
whose  face  he  sought.  Hence  the  great  function 
of  the  priesthood  in  the  theocracy  is  to  maintain 
the  intercourse  between  Jehovah  and  Israel 
which  was  exhibited  in  the  Temple  ritual  by  acts 
of  sacrificial  worship. 

Now  it  is  manifest  that  this  system  of  ideas 
rests  on  the  representative  character  of  the 
priestly  office.  If  the  principal  idea  symbolised 
in  tJie  sanctuary  is  that  of  holiness  through  sep- 
aration, the  fundamental  idea  of  priesfhood  is 
holiness  through  representation.  It  is  the  holi- 
ness of  Israel,  concentrated  in  the  priesthood, 
which  qualifies  the  latter  for  entrance  within  the 
inner  circle  of  the  divine  presence.  Or  perhaps 
it  would  be  more  correct  to  say  that  the  presence 
of  Jehova'h  first  sanctifies  the  priests  in  an  emi- 
nent degree,  and  then  through  them,  though  in 
a  less  degree,  the  whole  body  of  the  people.  The 
idea  of  national  solidarity  was  too  deeply  rooted 
in  the  Hebrew  consciousness  to  admit  of  any 
other  interpretation  of  the  priesthood  than  this. 
The  Israelite  did  not  need  to  be  told  that  his 
standing  before  God  was  secured  by  his  member- 
ship in  the  religious  community  on  whose  be- 
half the  priests  ministered  at  the  altar  and  before 
the  Temple.  It  would  not  occur  to  him  to  think 
of  his  personal  exclusion  from  the  most  sacred 
offices  as  a  religious  disability;  it  was  enough  for 
him  to  know  that  the  nation  to  which  he  be- 
longed was  admitted  to  the  presence  of  Jehovah 
in  the  persons  of  its  representatives,  and  that  he 
as  an  individual  shared  in  the  blessings  which 
accrued  to  Israel  through  the  privileged  ministry 
of  the  priests.  Thus  to  a  Temple  poet  of  a  later 
age  than  Ezekiel's  the  figure  of  the  high  priest 
supplies  a  striking  image  of  the  communion  of 
saints  and  the  blessing  of  Jehovah  resting  on 
the  whole  people: — 

"Behold,  how  good  and  how  pleasant  it  is 
That  they  who  are  brethren  should  also  dwell  together' 
Like  the  precious  oil  on  the  head. 
That  flows  down  on  the  beard. 
The  beard  of  Aaron,  ' 

That  flows  down  on  the  hem  of  his  garments- 
Like  the  Hermon-dew  that  descends  on  the  hills  of  Zion ; 
For  there  hath  Jehovah  ordained  the  blessing, 
Life  for  evermore."  ♦ 

*  Psalm  cxxxiii. 


336 


THE    BOOK   OF   EZEKIEL. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

PRINCE  AND  PEOPLE., 
EzEKiEL  xliv.-xlvi.  passim. 

It  was  remarked  in  a  previous  chapter  that 
the  "  prince  "  of  the  closing  vision  appears  to 
occupy  a  less  exalted  position  than  the  Mes- 
sianic king  of  chap,  xxxiv.  or  chap,  xxxvii. 
The  grounds  on  which  this  impression  rests  re- 
quire, however,  to  be  carefully  considered,  if  we 
are  not  to  carry  away  a  thoroughly  false  con- 
ception of  the  theocratic  state  foreshadowed  by 
Ezekiel.  It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  prince 
is  a  personage  of  less  than  royal  rank,  or  that 
his  authority  is  overshadowed  by  that  of  a 
priestly  caste.  He  is  undoubtedly  the  civil  head 
of  the  nation,  owing  no  allegiance  within  his 
own  province  to  any  earthly  superior.  Nor  is 
there  any  reason  to  doubt  that  he  is  the  heir 
of  the  Davidic  house  and  holds  his  ofifice  in 
virtue  of  the  divine  promise  which  secured  the 
throne  to  David's  descendants.  It  would  there- 
fore be  a  mistake  to  imagine  that  we  have  here 
an  anticipation  of  the  Romish  theory  of  the  sub- 
ordination of  the  secular  to  the  spiritual  power. 
It  may  be  true  that  in  the  state  of  things  presup- 
posed by  the  vision  very  little  is  left  for  the  king 
to  do,  whilst  a  variety  of  important  duties  falls 
to  the  priesthood;  but  at  all  events  the  king  is 
there  and  is  supreme  in  his  own  sphere.  Ezekiel 
does  not  show  the  road  to  Canossa.  If  the  king 
is  overshadowed,  it  is  by  the  personal  presence 
of  Jehovah  in  the  midst  of  His  people;  and  that 
which  limits  his  prerogative  is  not  the  sacerdotal 
power,  but  the  divine  constitution  of  the  theoc- 
racy as  revealed  in  the  vision  itself,  under  which 
both  king  and  priests  have  their  functions  de- 
fined and  regulated  with  a  view  to  the  religious 
ends  for  which  the  community  as  a  whole 
exists. 

'Our  purpose  in  the  present  chapter  is  to  put 
together  the  scattered  references  to  the  duties  of 
the  prince  which  occnr  in  chaps,  xliv.-xlvi.,  so  as 
to  gain  as  clear  a  picture  as  possible  of  the  posi- 
tion of  the  monarchy  in  the  theocratic  state.  It 
must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  picture 
will  necessarily  be  incomplete.  National  life  in 
its  secular  aspects,  with  which  the  king  is  chiefly 
concerned,  is  hardly  touched  on  in  the  vision. 
Everything  being  looked  upon  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  Temple  and  its  worship,  there  are  but 
few  allusions  in  which  we  can  detect  anything 
of  the  nature  of  a  civil  constitution.  And  these 
few  are  introduced  incidentally,  not  for  their  own 
sake,  but  to  explain  some  arrangement  for  se- 
curing the  sanctity  of  the  land  or  the  community. 
This  fact  must  never  be  lost  sight  of  in  judging 
of  Ezekiel's  conception  of  the  monarchy.  From 
all  that  appears  in  these  pages  we  might  con- 
clude that  the  prince  is  a  mere  ornamental 
figurehead  of  the  constitution,  and  that  the  few 
real  duties  assigned  to  him  could  have  been 
equally  well  performed  by  a  committee  of  priests 
or  laymen  elected  for  the  purpose.  But  this  is 
to  forget"  that  outside  the  range  of  subjects  here 
touched  upon  there  is  a  whole  world  of  secular 
interests,  of  political  and  social  action,  where  the 
king  has  his  part  to  play  in  accordance  with  the 
precedents  furnished  by  the  best  days  of  the  an- 
cient monarchy. 

Let  us  glance  first  of  all  at  Ezekiel's  institutes 


of  the  kingdom  in  its  more  political   relations. 
The  notices  here  are  all  in  the  form  of  constitu- 
tional checks  and  safeguards  against  an  arbitrary 
and  oppressive  exercise  of  the  royal   authority. 
They  are  instructive,  not  only  as  showing  the  in- 
terest which  the  prop'het  had  in   good  govern- 
ment and  his  care  for  the  rights  of  the  subject, 
but  also  for  the  light  they  cast  on  certain  admin- 
istrative methods  in  force  previous  to  the  Exile. 
The  first  point  that  calls   for  attention   is  the 
provision  made  for  the  maintenance  of  the  prince 
and  his  court.     It  would  seem  that  the  revenue  of 
the    prince    was    to    be    derived    mainly,    if    not 
wholly,  from  a  portion  of  territory  reserved  as 
his  exclusive  property  in  the  division  of  the  coun- 
try among  the  tribes.*     These  crown  lands  are 
situated  on  either  side  of  the  sacred  "  oblation  " 
around  the  sanctuary,  set  apart  for  the  use  of  the 
priests  and  Levites;  and  they  extend  to  the  sea 
on  the  west  and  to  the  Jordan  Valley  on   the 
east.     Out  of  these  he  is  at  liberty  to  assign  a 
possession   to   his    sons   in   perpetuity,    but   any 
estate  bestowed  on  his  courtiers  reverts  to  the 
prince  in  the  "  year  of  liberty."  f    The  object  of 
this  last  regulation  apparently  is  to  prevent  the 
formation   of  a   new   hereditary   aristocracy   be- 
tween the  royal  family  and  the  peasantry.     A  life 
peerage,    so    to    speak,    or    something    less,    is 
deemed  a  sufficient  reward  for  the  most  devoted 
service  to  the  king  or  the  state.     And  no  doubt 
the  certainty  of  a   revision   of  all   royal    grants 
every  seventh  year  would  tend  to  keep  some  per- 
sons mindful  of  their  duty.     The  whole  system 
of  royal  demesnes,  which  the  king  might  dispose 
of  as  appanages  for  his  younger  children  or  his 
faithful  retainers,  presents  a  curious  resemblance 
to  a  well-known  feature  of  feudalism  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages;  but  it  was  never  practically  enforced 
in  Israel.     Before  the  Exile  it  was  evidently  un- 
known, and  after  the   Exile  there  was  no  king 
to  provide  for.     But  why  does  the  prophet  be- 
stow so  much  care  on  a  mere  detail  of  a  political 
system  in  which,  as  a  whole,  he  takes  so  little 
interest?     It  is  because   of  his  concern   for  the 
rights  of  the  common  people  against  the  high- 
handed tyranny  of  the  king  and  his  nobles.     He 
recalls  the  bad  times  of  the  old  monarchy  when 
any  man  was  liable  to  be  ejected  from  his  land 
for  the  benefit  of  some  court  favourite,  or  to  pro- 
vide a  portion  for  a  younger  son  of  the  king. 
The  cruel  evictions  of  the  poorer  peasant  pro- 
prietors, which  all  the  early  prophets  denounce 
as  an  outrage  against  humanity,  and  of  which 
the  story  of  Naboth  furnished  a  typical  example, 
must  be  rendered  impossible  in  the  new  Israel; 
and  as  the  king  had  no  doubt  been  the  principal 
offender  in  the  past,  the  rule  is  firmly  laid  down 
in  his  case  that  on  no  pretext  must  he  take  the 
people's  inheritance.     And  this,  be  it  observed,  is 
an   application   of  the   religious   principle   which 
underlies  the  constitution  of  the  theocracy.     The 
land  is  Jehovah's,  and  all  interference  with  the 
ancient  landmarks  which  guard  the  rights  of  pri- 
vate ownership  is  an  offence  against  the  holiness 
of   the    true    divine    King   who    has    His    abode 
amongst  the  tribes  of  Israel.     This  suggests  de- 
velopments of  the  idea  of  holiness  which  reach 
to  the  very  foundations  of  social  well-being.     A 
conception  of  holiness  which  secures  each  man 
in  the  possession  of  his  own  vine  and  fig  tree  is 

*  Chs.  xlv.  7,  8,  xlviii.  21,  22. 

t/.^.,  either  the  seventh  year,  as  in  Jer.  xxxiv.  14,  or 
the  year  of  Jubilee,  the  fiftieth  vear  (Lev.  xxv.  10);  more 
probably  the  former. 


Ezekiel  xliv.-xlvi] 


PRINCE    AND    PEOPLE. 


337 


at  all  events  not  open  to  the  charge  of  ignoring 
the  practical  interests  of  common  life  for  the  sake 
of  an  unprofitable  ceremonialism. 

In  the  next  place  we  come  across  a  much  more 
startling  revelation  of  the  injustice  habitually 
practised  by  the  Hebrew  monarchs.  Just  as 
later  sovereigns  were  wont  to  meet  their  deficits 
by  debasing  the  currency,  so  the  kings  of  Judah 
had  learned  to  augment  their  revenue  by  a  sys- 
tematic falsification  of  weights  and  measures. 
We  know  from  the  prophet  Amos  *  that  this 
was  a  common  trick  of  the  wealthy  landowners 
who  sold  grain  at  exorbitant  prices  to  the  poor 
whom  they  had  driven  from  their  possessions. 
They  "  made  the  ephah  small  and  the  shekel 
great,  and  dealt  falsely  with  balances  of  deceit." 
But  it  was  left  for  Ezekiel  to  tell  us  that  the 
same  fraud  was  a  regular  part  of  the  fiscal  sys- 
tem of  the  Judsean  kingdom.  There  is  no  mis- 
taking the  meaning  of  his  accusation:  "Have 
done,  O  princes  of  Israel,  with  your  violent  and 
oppressive  rule;  execute  judgment  and  justice, 
and  take  away  your  exactions  from  My  people, 
saith  Jehovah  God.  Ye  shall  have  just  balances. 
and  a  just  ephah,  and  a  just  bath."  \  That  is  to 
say,  the  taxes  were  surreptitiously  increased  by 
the  use  of  a  large  shekel  (for  weighing  out 
money  payments)  and  a  large  bath  and  ephah 
(for  measuring  tribute  paid  in  kind).  And  if  it' 
was  impossible  for  the  poor  to  protect  them- 
selves against  the  rapacity  of  private  dealers, 
poor  and  rich  alike  were  helpless  when  the  fraud 
was  openly  practised  in  the  king's  name.  This 
Ezekiel  had  seen  with  his  own  eyes,  and  the 
shameful  injustice  of  it  was  so  branded  on  his 
spirit  that  even  in  a  vision  of  the  late  days  it 
comes  back  to  him  as  an  evil  to  be  sedulously 
guarded  against.  It  was  eminently  a  case  for 
legislation.  If  there  was  to  be  such  a  thing  as 
fair  dealing  and  commercial  probity  in  the  com- 
munity, the  system  of  weights  and  measurement 
must  be  fixed  beyond  the  power  of  the  royal 
caprice  to  alter  it.  It  was  as  sacred  as  any  prin- 
ciple of  the  constitution.  Accordingly  he  finds 
a  place  in  his  legislation  for  a  corrected  scale  of 
weights  and  measures,  restored  no  doubt  to  their 
original  values.  The  ephah  for  dry  measure  and 
the  bath  or  liquid  measure  are  each  fixed  at  the 
tenth  part  of  a  homer.  "  The  shekel  shall  be 
twenty  geras::}:  five  shekels  shall  be  five,  and  ten 
shekels  shall  be  ten,  and  fifty  shekels  shall  be 
your  maneh."^ 

These  regulations  extend  far  beyond  the  im- 
mediate object  for  which  they  are  introduced,  and 
have  both  a  moral  and  a  religious  bearing.  They 
express  a  truth  often  insisted  on  in  the  Old 
Testament,  that  commercial  morality  is  a  matter 
in  which  the  holiness  of  Jehovah  is  involved: 
"  A  false  balance  is  an  abomination  to  Jehovah, 
but  a  just  weight  is  His  delight."  ||  In  the  Law 
of  Holiness  an  ordinance  very  similar  to  Ezek- 
iel's  occurs  amongst  the  conditions  by  which 
the  precept  is  to  be  fulfilled:  "  Be  ye  holy,  for 
I   am  holy." If    It  is  evident  that  the   Israelites 

*  Amos  viii.  5. 

+  Ezek.  xlv.  g,  10.  In  the  translation  of  ver.  g  I  have  fol- 
lowed an  emendation  proposed  by  Cornill.  The  sense  is 
not  affected,  but  the  grammatical  construction  seems  to 
demand  some  alteration  in  the  Massoretic  text. 

t  In  Exod  XXX.  13,  Lev.  xxvii.  25,  Numb.  iii.  47  (Priests' 
Code)  the  shekel  of  twenty  geras  is  described  as  the 
"shekel  of  the  sanctuary,'*^ or  "sacred  shekel,"  clearly 
implying  that  another  shekel  was  in  common  use. 

§  Ezek.  xlv.  12,  according  to  the  LXX. 

II  Prov.  xi.  I. 

iLev.  xix.  3S,  36. 

2sJ— Vol.  IV. 


had  learned  to  regard  with  a  religious  abhor- 
rence all  tampering  with  the  fixed  standards  of 
value  on  which  the  purity  of  commercial  life  de- 
pended. To  overreach  by  lying  words  was  a  sin; 
but  to  cheat  by  the  use  of  a  false  balance  was  a 
species  of  profanity  comparable  to  a  false  oath 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah. 

These  rules  about  weights  and  measures  re- 
quired, however,  to  be  supplemented  by  a  fixed 
tariff,  regulating  the  taxes  which-  the  prince 
might  impose  on  the  people.*  It  is  not  quite 
clear  whether  any  part  of  the  prince's  own  in- 
come was  to  be  derived  from  taxation.  The 
tribute  is  called  an  "  oblation,"  and  there  is  no 
doubt  that  it  was  intended  principally  for  the 
support  of  the  Temple  ritual,  which  in  any  case 
must  have  been  the  heaviest  charge  on  the  royal 
exchequer.  But  the  oblation  was  rendered  to  the 
prince  in  the  first  instance;  and  the  prophet's 
anxiety  to  prevent  unjust  exactions  springs  from 
a  fear  that  the  king  might  make  the  Temple  tax 
a  pretext  for  increasing  his  own  revenue.  At  all 
events  the  people's  duty  to  contribute  to  the 
support  of  public  ordinances  according  to  their 
ability  is  here  explicitly  recognised.  Compared 
with  the  provision  of  the  Levitical  law  the  scale 
of  charges  here  proposed  must  be  pronounced 
extremely  moderate.  The  contribution  of  each 
householder  varies  from  one-sixtieth  to  one-two- 
hundredth  of  his  income,  and  is  wholly  paid  in 
kind.f  The  proper  equivalent  under  the  second 
Temple  of  Ezekiel's  "  oblation  "  was  a  poll-tax 
of  one-third  of  a  shekel,  voluntarily  undertaken 
at  the  time  of  Nehemiah's  covenant  "  for  the 
service  of  the  house  of  our  God;  for  the  shew- 
bread  and  for  the  continual  meal-offering,  and 
for  the  continual  burnt-offering,  of  the  Sab- 
baths, of  the  new  moons,  for  the  set  feasts,  and 
for  the  holy  things,  and  for  the  sin-offerings  to 
make  atonement  for  Israel,  and  for  all  the  work 
of  the  house  of  our  God."  J  In  the  Priestly 
Code  this  tax  is  fixed  at  half  a  shekel  for  each 
man.§  But  in  addition  to  this  money  payment 
the  law  required  a  tenth  of  all  produce  of  the 
soil  and  the  flock  to  be  given  to  the  priests  and 
Levites.  In  Ezekiel's  legislation  the  tithes  and 
firstfruits  are  still  left  for  the  use  of  the  owner, 
who  is  expected  to  consume  them  in  sacrificial 
feasts  at  the  sanctuary.  The  only  charge,  there- 
fore, of  the  nature  of  a  fixed  tribute  for  religious 
purposes  is  the  oblation  here  required  for  the 
regular  sacrifices  which  represent  the  stated  wor- 
ship rendered  on  behalf  of  the  community  as  a 
whole. 

This  brings  us  now  to  the  more  important  as- 
pect of  the  kingly  office — its  religious  privileges 
and  duties.  Here  there  are  three  points  which 
require  to  be  noticed. 

I.  In  the  first  place  it  is  the  duty  of  the  prince 
to  supply  the  material  of  the  public  sacrifices  of- 
fered in  the  name  of  the  people.  ||  Out  of  the 
tribute  levied  on  the  people  for  this  purpose  he 
has  to  furnish  the  altar  with  the  stated  number  of 
victims  for  the  daily  service,  the  Sabbaths,  and 

*  Ezek.  xlv.  13-16. 

+  The  exact  figures,  are,  one  part  in  sixty  of  cereal 
produce  (wheat  and  barley),  one  share  in  a  hundred  of  oil, 
and  one  animal  out  of  every  two  hundred  from  the  flock 
(ch.  xlv.  13-15). 

t  Neh.  X.  32,  3:; :  c/.    Ezek.  xlv.  15. 

§  Exod.  XXX.  ii-i6.  Whether  the  third  of  a  shekel  in  the 
book  of  Nehemiah  is  a  concession  to  the  poverty  of  the 
people,  or  whether  the  law  represents  an  increased  charge 
found  necessary  for  the  full  Temple  service,  is  a  question 
that  need  not  be  discussed  here. 

I  Ch.  xlv.  17. 


338 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


new  moons,  and  the  great  yearly  festivals.  It  is 
clear  that  some  one  must  be  charged  with  the 
responsibility  of  this  important  part  of  the  wor- 
ship, and  it  is  significant  of  Ezekiel's  relations 
to  the  past  that  the  duty  does  not  yet  devolve 
directly  on  the  priests.  They  seem  to  exercise 
no  authority  outside  of  the  Temple,  the  king 
standing  between  them  and  the  community  as  a 
sort  of  patron  of  the  sanctuary.  But  the  posi- 
tion of  the  prince  is  not  simply  that  of  an  of- 
ficial receiver,  collecting  the  tribute  and  then 
handing  it  over  to  the  Temple  as  it  was  required. 
He  is  the  representative  of  the  religious  unity 
of  the  nation,  and  in  this  capacity  he  presents 
in  person  the  regular  sacrifices  offered  on  behalf 
of  the  community.  Thus  on  the  day  of  the  Pass- 
over he  presents  a  sin-oflfering  for  himself  and 
the  people,*  as  the  high  priest  does  in  the  cere- 
monial of  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement.f  And 
so  all  the  sacrifices  of  the  stated  ritual  are  his 
sacrifices,  officiating  as  the  head  of  the  nation 
in  its  acts  of  common  worship.  In  this  respect 
the  prince  succeeds  to  the  rights  exercised  by 
the  kings  of  Judah  in  the  ritual  of  the  first  Tem- 
ple, although  on  a  different  footing.  Before  the 
Exile  the  king  had  a  proprietary  interest  in  the 
central  sanctuary,  and  the  expense  of  the  stated 
service  was  defrayed  as  a  matter  of  course  out 
of  the  royal  revenues.  Part  of  this  revenue,  as 
we  see  in  the  case  of  Joash,  was  raised  by  a  sys- 
tem of  Temple  dues  paid  by  the  worshippers  and 
expended  on  the  repairs  of  the  house;  but  at  a 
much  later  date  than  this  we  find  Ahaz  assum- 
ing absolute  control  over  the  daily  sacrifices,!: 
which  were  doubtless  maintained  at  his  expense. 

Now  the  tendency  of  Ezekiel's  legislation  is 
to  bring  the  whole  community  into  a  closer  and 
more  personal  connection  with  the  worship  of 
the  sanctuary,  and  to  leave  no  part  of  it  subject 
to  the  arbitrary  will  of  the  prince.  But  still  the 
idea  is  preserved  that  the  prince  is  the  religious 
as  well  as  the  civil  representative  of  the  nation; 
and  although  he  is  deprived  of  all  control  over 
the  performance  of  the  ritual,  he  is  still  required 
to  provide  the  public  sacrifices  and  to  offer  them 
in  the  name  of  his  people. 

2.  In  virtue  of  his  representative  character  the 
prince  possesses  certain  privileges  in  his  ap- 
proaches to  God  in  the  sanctuary  not  accorded 
to  ordinary  wors'hippers.  In  this  connection  it 
is  necessary  to  explain  some  details  regulating 
the  use  of  the  sanctuary  by  the  people.  The 
outer  court  might  be  entered  by  prince  or  peo- 
ple either  through  the  north  or  south  gate,  but 
not  from  the  east.  The  eastern  gate  was  that 
by  which  Jehovah  had  entered  His  dwelling- 
place,  and  the  doors  of  it  are  for  ever  closed. 
No  foot  might  cross  its  threshold.  But-  the 
prince — and  this  is  one  of  his  peculiar  rights — 
might  enter  the  gateway  from  the  court  to  eat 
his  sacrificial  meals.  §  It  seems  therefore  to  have 
served  the  same  purpose  for  the  prince  as  the 
thirty  cells  along  the  wall  did  for  common  wor- 
shippers. The  east  gate  of  the  inner  court  was 
also  shut,  as  a  rule,  and  was  probably  never  used 
as  a  passage  even  by  the  priests.  But  on  the 
Sabbaths  and  new  moons  it  was  thrown  open  to 
receive  the  sacrifices  which  the  prince  had  to 
bring  on  these  days,  and  it  remained  open  till 
the  evening.  On  days  when  the  gate  was  open 
the  worshipping  congregation  assembled  at  its 
door,    while   the   prince    entered   as    far   as    the 


•Ch.  Xlv.  22. 

+  Lev.  xvi.  II,  15. 


t  2  Kings  xvi.  15,  16. 
S  Ch.  xliv.  1-3. 


threshold  and  looked  on  while  the  priests  pre- 
sented his  offering;  then  he  went  out  by  the  way 
he  had  entered.  If  on  any  other  occasion  he 
presented  a  voluntary  sacrifice  in  his  private  ca- 
pacity, the  east  gate  was  opened  for  him  as  be- 
fore, but  was  shut  as  soon  as  the  ceremony  was 
over.  On  those  occasions  when  the  eastern  gate 
was  not  opened,  as  at  the  great  annual  festivals, 
the  people  probably  gathered  round  the  north 
and  south  gates,  from  which  they  could  see  the 
altar;  and  at  these  seasons  the  prince  enters  and 
departs  in  the  common  throng  of  worshippers. 
A  very  peculiar  regulation,  for  which  no  obvious 
reason  appears,  is  that  each  man  must  leave  the 
Temple  by  the  gate  opposite  to  that  at  which  he 
entered;  if  he  entered  by  the  north,  he  must  leave 
by  the  south,  and  vice  versa* 

Many  of  these  arrangements  were  no  doubt 
suggested  by  Ezekiel's  acquaintance  with  the 
practice  in  the  first  Temple,  and  their  precise 
object  is  lost  to  us.  But  one  or  two  facts  stand 
out  clearly  enough,  and  are  very  instructive  as 
to  the  whole  conception  of  Temple  worship. 
The  chief  thing  to  be  noticed  is  that  the  prin- 
cipal sacrifices  are  representative.  The  people 
are  merely  spectators  of  a  transaction  with  God 
on  their  behalf,  the  efficacy  of  which  in  no  way 
depends  on  their  co-operation.  Standing  at  the 
gates  of  the  inner  court,  they  se:  the  priests 
performing  the  sacred  ministrations;  they  bow 
themselves  in  humble  reverence  before  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Most  High;  and  these  acts  of  devo- 
tion may  have  been  of  the  utmost  importance  for 
the  religious  life  of  the  individual  Israelite.  But 
the  congregation  takes  no  real  part  in  the  wor- 
ship; it  is  done  for  them,  but  not  by  them;  it  is 
on  opus  operatum  performed  by  the  prince  and  the 
priests  for  the  good  of  the  community,  and  is 
equally  necessary  and  equally  valid  whether  there 
is  a  congregation  present  to  witness  it  or  not. 
Those  who  attend  are  themselves  but  representa- 
tives of  the  nation  of  Israel,  in  whose  interest 
the  ritual  is  kept  up.  But  the  supreme  represen- 
tative of  the  people  is  the  king,  and  we  note 
how  everything  is  done  to  emphasise  his  peculiar 
dignity  within  the  sanctuary.  It  was  necessary 
perhaps  to  do  something  to  compensate  for  the 
loss  of  distinction  caused  by  the  exclusion  of  the 
royal  body-guard  from  the  Temple.  The  prince 
is  still  the  one  conspicuous  figure  in  the  outer 
court.  Even  his  private  sacrificial  meals  are 
eaten  in  solitary  state,  in  the  eastern  gateway, 
which  is  used  for  no  other  purpose.  And  in  the 
great  functions  where  the  prince  appears  in  his 
representative  character,  he  approaches  nearer  to  j 
the  altar  than  is  permitted  to  any  other  layman.  j 
He  ascends  the  steps  of  the  eastern  gateway  in  ! 
the  sight  of  the  people,  and  passing  through  he 
presents  his  offerings  on  the  verge  of  the  inner 
court  which  none  but  the  priests  may  enter.  His 
whole  position  is  thus  one  of  great  importance 
in  the  celebration  of  public  ordinances.  In  de- 
tail his  functions  are  no  doubt  determined  by 
ancient  prescriptive  usages  not  known  to  us,  but 
modified  in  accordance  with  the  stricter  ideal  of 

♦  See  ch.  xlvi.  1-12.  The  Syriac  Version  indeed  makes 
an  exception  to  this  rule  in  the  case  of  the  prince.  Ver. 
10  reads  :  "  But  the  prince  in  their  midst  shall  go  out  by 
the  gate  by  which  he  entered."  But  why  the  prince  morb 
than  any  other  body  should  go  back  by  the  road  he  came, 
or  what' particular  honour  there  was  in  that,  is  a  mystery  ; 
and  it  is  probable  that  the  reading  is  an  error  originating 
in  repetition  of  ver.  8.  The  real  meaning  of  the  verse 
seems  to  be  that  the  prince  must  go  in  and  out  without 
the  retinue  of  foreigners  who  used  to  give  ec/a^  to  royal 
visits  to  the  sanctuary. 


Ezekiel  xliv.-xlvi.] 


PRINCE    AND    PEOPLE. 


339 


holiness  which  Ezekiel's  vision  was  intended  to 
enforce. 

3.  Finally,  we  have  to  observe  that  the  prince 
is  rigorously  excluded  from  properly  priestly  of- 
fices. It  is  true  that  in  some  respects  his  posi- 
tion is  analogous  to  that  of  the  high  priest  un- 
der the  law.  But  the  analogy  extends  only  to 
that  aspect  of  the  high  priest's  functions  in  which 
he  appears  as  the  head  and  representative  of  the 
religious  community,  and  ceases  the  moment  he 
enters  upon  priestly  duties.  So  far  as  the  special 
degree  of  sanctity  which  characterises  the  priest- 
hood is  concerned,  the  prince  is  a  layman,  and 
as  such  he  is  jealously  debarred  from  aproach- 
ing  the  altar,  and  even  from  intruding  into  the 
sacred  inner  court  where  the  priests  minister. 
Now  this  fact  has  perhaps  a  deeper  historical  im- 
portance than  we  are  apt  to  imagine.  There  is 
good  reason  to  believe  that  in  the  old  Temple 
the  kings  of  Judah  frequently  officiated  in  person 
at  the  altar.  At  the  time  when  the  monarchy 
was  established  it  was  the  rule  that  any  man 
might  sacrifice  for  himself  and  his  household, 
and  that  the  king  as  the  representative  of  the 
nation  should  sacrifice  on  its  behalf  was  an  ex- 
tension of  the  principle  too  obvious  to  require 
express  sanction.  Accordingly  we  find  that  both 
Saul  and  David  on  public  occasions  built  altars 
and  offered  sacrifice  to  Jehovah.  The  older 
theory  indeed  seems  to  have  been  that  priestly 
rights  were  inherent  in  the  kingly  office,  and  that 
the  acting  priests  were  the  ministers  to  whom 
the  king  delegated  the  greater  part  of  his  priestly 
functions.  Although  the  king  might  not  ap- 
point any  one  to  this  duty  without  respect  to  the 
Levitical  qualification,  he  exercised  within  cer- 
tain limits  the  right  of  deposing  one  family  and 
installing  another  in  the  priesthood  of  the  royal 
sanctuary.  The  house  of  Zadok  itself  owed  its 
position  to  such  an  act  of  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity on  the  part  of  David  and  Solomon. 

The  last  occasion  on  which  we  read  of  a  king 
of  Judah  officiating  in  person  in  the  Temple  is 
at  the  dedication  of  the  new  altar  of  Ahaz,  when 
the  king  not  only  himself  sacrificed,  but  gave  di- 
rections to  the  priests  as  to  the  future  observance 
of  the  ritual.  The  occasion  was  no  doubt  un- 
usual, but  there  is  not  a  word  in  the  narrative 
to  indicate  that  the  king  was  committing  an  ir- 
regular action  or  exceeding  the  recognised  pre- 
rogatives of  his  position.  It  would  be  unsafe, 
however,  to  conclude  that  this  state  of  things 
continued  unchanged  till  the  close  'of  the  mon- 
archy. After  the  time  of  Isaiah  the  Temple  rose 
greatly  in  the  religious  estimation  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  a  very  probable  result  of  this  would  be 
an  increasing  sense  of  the  importance  of  the 
ministration  of  the  official  priesthood.  The  si- 
lence of  the  historical  books  and  of  Deuteron- 
omy may  not  count  for  much  in  an  argument  on 
this  question;  but  Ezekiel's  own  decisions  lack 
the  emphasis  and  solemnity  with  which  he  in- 
troduces an  absolute  innovation  like  the  separa- 
tion between  priests  and  Levites  in  chap.  xliv. 
It  is  at  least  possible  that  the  later  kings  had 
gradually  ceased  to  exercise  the  right  of  sacri- 
fice, so  that  the  privilege  had  lapsed  through 
desuetude.  Nevertheless  it  was  a  great  step  to 
have  the  principle  affirmed  as  a  fundamental  law 
of  the  theocracy;  and  this  Ezekiel  undoubtedly 
does.  If  no  other  practical  object  were  gained, 
it  served  at  least  to  illustrate  in  the  most  em- 
phatic way  the  idea  of  holiness,  which  demanded 
the  exclusion  of  every  lavman  from  unhaJlowed 


contact  with   the   most   sacred   emblems   of  Je- 
hovah's presence. 

It  will  be  seen  from  all  that  has  been  said  that 
the  real  interest  of  Ezekiel's  treatment  of  the 
monarchy  lies  far  apart  from  modern  problems 
which  might  seem  to  have  a  superficial  affinity 
with  it.  No  lessons  can  fairly  be  deduced  from 
it  on  the  relations  between  Church  and  State,  or 
the  propriety  of  endowing  and  establishing  the 
Christian  religion,  or  the  duty  of  rulers  to  main- 
tain ordinances  for  the  benefit  of  their  subjects. 
Its  importance  lies  in  another  direction.  It 
shows  the  transition  in  Israel  from  a  state  of 
things  in  which  the  king  is  both  de  jure  and  de 
facto  the  source  of  power  and  the  representative 
of  the  nation  and  where  his  religious  status  is 
the  natural  consequence  of  his  civic  dignity,  to 
a  very  diflferent  state  of  things,  where  the  forms 
of  the  ancient  constitution  are  retained  although 
the  power  has  largely  vanished  from  them.  The 
prince  now  requires  to  have  his  religious  duties 
imposed  on  him  by  an  abstract  political  system 
whose  sole  san-ction  is  the  authority  of  the  Deity. 
It  is  a  transition  which  has  no  precise  parallel 
anywhere  else,  although  resemblances  more  or 
less  instructive  might  doubtless  be  instanced 
from  the  history  of  Catholicism.  Nowhere  does 
Ezekiel's  idealism  appear  more  wonderfully 
blended  with  his  equally  characteristic  conserva- 
tism than  here.  There  is  no  real  trace  of  the 
tendency  attributed  to  the  prophet  to  exalt  the 
priesthood  at  the  expense  of  the  monarchy.  The 
prince  is  after  all  a  much  more  imposing  per- 
sonage even  in  the  ceremonial  worship  than  any 
priest.  Although  he  lacks  the  priestly  quality  of 
holiness,  his  duties  are  quite  as  important  as 
those  of  the  priests,  while  his  dignity  is  far 
greater  than  theirs.  The  considerations  that  en- 
ter in  to  limit  his  power  and  importance  come 
from  another  quarter.  They  are  such  as  these: 
first,  the  loss  of  military  leadership,  which  is  at 
least  to  be  presumed  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
Messianic  kingdom;  second,  the  welfare  of  the 
people  at  large;  and  third,  the  principle  of  holi- 
ness, whose  supremacy  has  to  be  vindicated  in 
the  person  of  the  king  no  less  than  in  that  of 
his  meanest  subject. 

Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  thing  is  that  the 
transition  referred  to  was  not  actually  accom- 
plished even  in  the  history  of  Israel  itself.  It 
was  only  in  a  vision  that  the  monarchy  was  ever 
to  be  represented  in  the  form  which  it  bears 
here.  From  the  time  of  Ezekiel  no  native  king 
was  ever  to  rule  over  Israel  again  save  the  priest- 
princes  of  the  Asmonean  dynasty,  whose  con- 
stitutional position  was  defined  by  their  high- 
priestly  dignity.  Ezekiel's  vision  is  therefore  a 
preparation  for  the  kingless  state  of  post-exilic 
Judaism.  The  foreign  potentates  to  whom  the 
Jews  were  subject  did  in  some  instances  provide 
materials  for  the  Temple  worship,  but  their  local 
representatives  were  of  course  unqualified  to  fill 
the  position  assigned  to  the  prince  by  the  great 
prophet  of  the  Exile.  The  community  had  to 
get  along  as  best  it  could  without  a  king,  and 
the  task  was  not  difficult.  The  Temple  dues 
were  paid  directly  to  the  priests  and  Levites,  and 
the  function  of  representing  the  community  be- 
fore the  altar  was  assigned  to  the  High  Priest. 
It  was  then  indeed  that  the  High  Priesthood 
came  to  the  front  and  blossomed  out  into  all  the 
magnificence  of  its  legal  position.  It  was  not 
oply  the  religious  part  of  the  prince's  duties  that 


340 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIKI. 


fell  to  it,  but  a  considerable  share  of  his  political 
importance  as  well.  As  the  only  hereditary  in- 
stitution that  had  survived  the  Exile,  it  naturally 
became  the  chief  centre  of  social  order  in  the 
community.  By  degrees  the  Persian  and  Greek 
kings  found  it  expedient  to  deal  with  the  Jews 
through  the  High  Priest,  whose  authority  they 
were  bound  to  respect,  and  thus  to  leave  him  a 
free  hand  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the  common- 
wealth. The  High  Priesthood,  in  fact,  was  a  civil 
as  well  as  a  priestly  dignity.  We  can  see  that 
this  great  revolution  would  have  broken  the 
continuity  of  Hebrew  history  far  more  violently 
than  it  did  but  for  the  stepping-stone  furnished 
by  the  ideal  "  prince  "  of  Ezekiel's  vision. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

THE  RITUAL. 

EZEKIEL  xlv.,   xlvi. 

It  is  difficult  to  go  back  in  imagination  to  a 
time  when  sacrifice  was  the  sole  and  sufficient 
form  of  every  complete  act  of  worship.*  That 
the  slaughter  of  an  animal,  or  at  least  the  pre- 
sentation of  a  material  offering  of  some  sort, 
should  ever  have  been  considered  of  the  essence 
of  intercourse  with  the  Deity  may  seem  to  us 
incredible  in  the  light  of  the  idea  of  God  which 
we  now  possess.  Yet  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
there  was  a  stage  of  religious  development  which 
recognised  no  true  approach  to  God  except  as 
consummated  in  a  sacrificial  action.  The  word 
"  sacrifice "  itself  preserves  a  memorial  of  this 
crude  and  early  type  of  religious  service.  Ety- 
mologically  it  denotes  nothing  more  than  a  sa- 
cred act.  But  amongst  the  Romans,  as  amongst 
ourselves,  it  was  regularly  applied  to  the  offer- 
ings at  the  altar,  which  were  thus  marked  out  as 
the  sacred  actions  par  excellence  of  ancient  reli- 
gion. It  would  be  impossible  to  explain  the  ex- 
traordinary persistence  and  vitality  of  the  insti- 
tution amongst  races  that  had  attained  a  rela- 
tively high  degree  of  civilisation,  unless  we  un- 
derstand that  the  ideas  connected  with  it  go  back 
to  a  time  when  sacrifice  was  the  typical  and 
fundamental  form  of  primitive  worship. 

By  the  time  of  Ezekiel,  however,  the  age  of 
sacrifice  in  this  strict  and  absolute  sense  may  be 
said  to  have  passed  away,  at  least  in  principle. 
Devout  Jews  who  had  lived  through  the  captivity 
in  Babylon  and  found  that  Jehovah  was  there  to 
them  "  a  little  of  a  sanctuary,"  f  could  not  possi- 
bly fall  back  into  the  belief  that  their  God  was 
only  to  be  approached  and  found  through  the 
ritual  of  the  altar.  And  long  before  the  Exile, 
the  ethical  teaching  of  the  prophets  had  led  Is- 
rael to  appreciate  the  external  rites  of  sacrifice 
at  their  true  value. 

"  Wherewithal  shall  I  come  before  Jehovah, 
Or  bow  myself  before  God  on  high  ? 
Shall  I  come  before  Him  with  burnt-oflferings, 
With  calves  of  a  year  old  ? 
Is  Jehovah  pleased  with  thousands  of  rams, 
With  myriads  of  rivers  of  oil  ? 

Shall  I  give  my  firstborn  as  an  atonement  for  me, 
The  fruit  of  my  body  as  a  sin-offering  for  my  life? 
He  hath  showed  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good  ; 
And  what  does  Jehovah  require  of  thee, 
But  to  do  justice  and  to  love  mercy. 
And  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God  1"  % 

*  Smith,  "  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  pp.  ig6  f. 
+  Ch.  xi.  i6. 
X  Micah  vi.  6-8. 


This  great  word  of  spiritual  religion  had  been 
uttered  long  before  Ezekiel,  as  a  protest  against 
the  senseless  multiplication  of  sacrifices  which 
came  in  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh.  Nor  can  we 
suppose  that  Ezekiel,  with  all  his  engrossment  in 
matters  of  ritual,  was  insensible  to  the  lofty 
teaching  of  his  predecessors,  or  that  his  con- 
ception of  God  was  less  spiritual  than  theirs.  As 
a  matter  of  fact  the  worship  of  Israel  was  never 
afterwards  wholly  absorbed  in  the  routine  of  the 
Temple  ceremonies.  The  institution  of  the  syna- 
gogue, with  its  purely  devotional  exercises  of 
prayer  and  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  must  have 
been  nearly  coeval  with  the  second  Temple,  and 
prepared  the  way  far  more  than  the  latter  for  the 
spiritual  worship  of  the  New  Testament.  But 
even  the  Temple  worship  was  spiritualised  by  the 
service  of  praise  and  the  marvellous  develop- 
ment of  devotional  poetry  which  it  called  forth. 
"  The  emotion  with  which  the  worshipper  ap- 
proaches the  second  Temple,  as  recorded  in  the 
Psalter,  has  little  to  do  with  sacrifice,  but  rests 
rather  on  the  fact  that  the  whole  wondrous  his- 
tory of  Jehovah's  grace  to  Israel  is  vividly  and 
personally  realised  as  he  stands  amidst  the  festal 
crowd  at  the  ancient  seat  of  God's  throne,  and 
adds  his  voice  to  the  swelling  song  of  praise."  * 

How  then,  it  may  be  asked,  are  we  to  account 
for  the  fact  that  the  prophet  shows  such  intense 
interest  in  the  details  of  a  system  which  was  al- 
ready losing  its  religious  significance?  If  sacri- 
fice was  no  longer  of  the  essence  of  worship, 
why  should  he  be  so  careful  to  legislate  for 
a  scheme  of  ritual  in  which  sacrifice  is  the 
prominent  feature,  and  say  nothing  of  the  in- 
ward state  of  heart  which  alone  is  an  ac- 
ceptable offering  to  God?  The  chief  reason  no 
doubt  is  that  the  ritual  elements  of  religion  were 
the  only  matters,  apart  from  moral  duties,  which 
admitted  of  being  reduced  to  a  legal  system,  and 
that  the  formation  of  such  a  system  was  de- 
manded by  the  circumstances  with  which  the 
prophet  had  to  deal.  The  time  was  not  yet 
come  when  the  principle  of  a  central  national 
sanctuary  could  be  abandoned,  and  if  such  a 
sanctuary  was  to  be  maintained  without  danger 
to  the  highest  interests  of  religion  it  was  neces- 
sary that  its  service  should  be  regulated  with  a 
view  to  preserve  the  deposit  of  revealed  truth 
that  had  been  committed  to  the  nation  through 
the  prophets.  The  essential  features  of  the  sacri- 
ficial institutions  were  charged  with  a  deep  re- 
ligious significance,  and  there  existed  in  the  pop- 
ular mind  a  great  mass  of  sound  religious  im- 
pression and  sentiment  clustering  around  that 
central  rite.  To  dispense  with  the  institution  of 
sacrifice  would  have  rendered  worship  entirely 
impossible  for  the  great  body  of  the  people,  while 
to  leave  it  unregulated  was  to  invite  a  recurrence 
of  the  abuses  which  had  been  so  fruitful  a  source 
of  corruption  in  the  past.  Hence  the  object  of 
the  ritual  ordinances  which  we  are  about  to  con- 
sider is  twofold:  in  the  first  place  to  provide  an 
authorised  code  of  ritual  free  from  everything 
that  savoured  of  pagan  usages,  and  in  the  second 
to  utilise  the  public  worship  as  a  means  of  deep- 
ening and  purifying  the  religious  conceptions  of 
those  who  could  be  influenced  in  no  other  way. 
Ezekiel's  legislation  has  a  special  regard  for  the 
wants  of  the  "  common  rude  man  "  whose  reli- 
gious life  needs  all  the  help  it  can  get  from 
external  observances.  Such  persons  form  the 
majority  of  every  religious  society;  and  to  train 
*  Smith,  "  Old  Testament  in  Jewish  Church,"  p.  379. 


Ezekiel  xlv.-xlvi.] 


THE    RITUAL. 


341 


their  minds  to  a  deeper  sense  of  sin  and  a  more 
vivid  apprehension  of  the  divine  holiness  proved 
to  be  the  only  way  in  which  the  spiritual  teach- 
ing of  the  prophets  could  be  made  a  practical 
power  in  the  community  at  large.  It  is  true  that 
the  highest  spiritual  needs  were  not  satisfied  by 
the  legal  ritual.  But  the  irrepressible  longings 
of  the  soul  for  nearer  fellowship  with  God  can- 
not be  dealt  with  by  rigid  formal  enactments. 
Ezekiel  is  content  to  leave  them  to  the  guidance 
of  that  Spirit  whose  saving  operations  will  have 
changed  the  heart  of  Israel  and  made  it  a  true 
people  of  God.  The  system  of  external  observ- 
ances which  he  foreshadows  in  his  vision  was 
not  meant  to  be  the  life  of  religion,  but  it  was, 
so  to  speak,  the  trellis-work  which  was  necessary 
to  support  the  delicate  tendrils  of  spiritual  piety 
until  the  time  when  the  spirit  of  filial  worship 
should  be  the  possession  of  every  true  member 
of  the  Church  of  God. 

Bearing  these  facts  in  mind,  we  may  now  pro- 
ceed to  examine  the  scheme  of  sacrificial  worship 
contained  in  chaps,  xlv.  and  xlvi.  Only  its  lead- 
ing features  can  here  be  noticed,  and  the  points 
most  deserving  of  attention  may  be  grouped  un- 
der three  heads:  the  Festivals,  the  Representative 
Service,  and  the  Idea  of  Atonement. 

I.  The  Yearly  Feasts. — The  most  striking 
thing  in  Ezekiel's  festal  calendar  *  is  the  di- 
vision of  the  ecclesiastical  year  into  two  pre- 
cisely similar  parts.  Each  half  of  the  year  com- 
mences with  an  atoning  sacrifice  for  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  sanctuary  from  defilement  contracted 
during  the  previous  half.f  Each  contains  a 
great  festival — in  the  one  case  the  Passover,  be- 
ginning on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  first  month 
and  lasting  seven  days,  and  in  the  other  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  (simply  called  the  Feast), 
beginning  on  the  hfteenth  day  of  the  seventh 
month  and  also  lasting  for  seven  days.|:  The 
passage  is  chiefly  devoted  to  a  minute  regulation 
of  the  public  sacrifices  to  be  offered  on  these 
occasions,  other  and  more  characteristic  fea- 
tures of  the  celebration  being  assumed  as  well 
known  from  tradition. 

It  is  difficult  to  see  what  is  the  precise  mean- 
ing of  the  proposed  rearrangement  of  the  feasts 
in  two  parallel  series.  It  may  be  due  simply  to 
the  prophet's  love  of  symmetry  in  all  depart- 
ments of  public  life,  or  it  may  have  been  sug- 
gested by  the  fact  that  at  this  time  the  Baby- 
lonian calendar,  according  to  which  the  year  be- 
gins in  spring,  was  superimposed  on  the  old 
Hebrew  year  commencing  in  the  autumn. J^  At 
all  events  it  involved  a  breach  with  pre-exilic 
tradition,  and  was  never  carried  out  in  practice. 
The  earlier  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch  recog- 
nises a  cycle  of  three  festivals — Passover  and 
Unleavened  Bread,  the  Feast  of  Harvest  or  of 
Weeks  (Pentecost),  and  ,the  Feast  of  Ingather- 
ing or  of  Tabernacles.  ||  In  order  to  carry 
through  his  symmetrical  division   of  the  sacred 

*  Ch.  xlv.  18-25. 

t  Vv.  18-20.  In  ver.  20  we  should  read  with  the  LXX. 
"in the  seventh  month,  on  the  first  day  of  the  month," 
etc. 

t  Vv.  21-25.  Some  critics,  as  Sraend  and  Cornill,  think 
that  in  ver.  14  we  should  read  fifteenth  instead  of  four- 
teenth, to  perfect  the  symmetry  of  the  two  halves  of  the 
year.  There  is  no  MS.  authority  for  the  proposed 
change. 

§  Smend. 

B  Exod.  xxiii.  14-17  (Book  of  the  Covenant,  with  which 
the  other  code — Exod.  xxxiv.  18-22 — agrees)  ;  Deut.  xvi. 
i-17. 


year  Ezekiel  has  to  ignore  one  of  these,  the 
Feast  of  Pentecost,  which  seems  to  have  always 
been  counted  the  least  important  of  the  three. 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  he  contemplated 
its  abolition,  for  he  is  careful  not  to  alter  in  any 
particular  the  positive  regulations  of  Deuteron- 
omy; only  it  did  not  fall  into  his  scheme,  and 
so  he  does  not  think  it  of  sufificient  importance 
to  prescribe  regular  public  sacrifices  for  it. 
After  the  Exile,  however,  Jewish  practice  was 
regulated  by  the  canons  of  the  Priestly  Code, 
in  which,  along  with  other  festivals,  the  ancient 
threefold  cycle  is  continued,  and  stated  sacri- 
fices are  prescribed  for  Pentecost,  just  as  for  the 
other  two.*  Similarly,  the  two  atoning  cere- 
monies in  the  beginning  of  the  first  and  seventh 
months, t  which  are  not  mentioned  in  the  older 
legislation,  are  replaced  in  the  Priests'  Code  by 
the  single  Day  of  Atonement  on  the  tenth  day 
of  the  seventh  month,  whilst  the  beginning  of 
the  year  is  celebrated  by  the  Feast  of  Trumpets 
on  the  first  day  of  the  same  month. t 

But  although  the  details  of  Ezekiel's  system 
thus  proved  to  be  impracticable  in  the  circum- 
stances of  the  restored  Jewish  community,  it  suc- 
ceeded in  the  far  more  important  object  of  in- 
fusing a  new  spirit  into  the  celebration  of  the 
feasts,  and  impressing  on  them  a  different  char- 
acter. The  ancient  Hebrew  festivals  were  all  as- 
sociated with  joyous  incidents  of  the  agricultural 
year.  The  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread  marked 
the  beginning  of  harvest,  when  "'  the  sickle  first 
was  put  into  the  corn."§  At  this  time  also  the 
firstlings  of  the  fiock  and  herd  were  sacrificed. 
The  seven  weeks  which  elapse  till  Pentecost  are 
the  season  of  the  cereal  harvest,  which  is  then 
brought  to  a  close  by  the  Feast  of  Harvest,  when 
the  goodness  of  Jehovah  is  acknowledged  by  the 
presentation  of  part  of  the  produce  at  the  sanc- 
tuary. Finally  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  cele- 
brates the  most  joyous  occasion  of  the  year,  the 
storing  of  the  produce  of  the  winepress  and  the 
threshing-fioor.ll  The  nature  of  the  festivals  is 
easily  seen  from  the  events  with  which  they  are 
thus  associated.  They  are  occasions  of  social 
mirth  and  festivity,  and  the  religious  rites  ob- 
served are  tlie  expressions  of  the  nation's  heart- 
felt gratitude  to  Jehovah  for  the  blessing  that 
has  rested  on  the  labours  of  husbandman  and 
shepherd  throughout  the  year.  The  Passover 
with  its  memories  of  anxiety  and  escape  was  no 
doubt  of  a  more  sombre  character  than  the 
others,  but  the  joyous  and  festive  nature  of 
Pentecost  and  Tabernacles  is  strongly  insisted 
on  in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.     By  these  in- 

*  C/l  Lev.  xxiii.  4-44  (Law  of  Holiness);  Numb,  xxviii., 
xxix. 

t  It  is  usual  to  speak  of  these  ceremonies  in  Ezekiel  as 
festivals.  But  this  seems  to  go  beyond  the  prophet's 
meaning.  Only  a  single  sacrifice,  a  sin-offering,  is  men- 
tioned ;  and  there  is  no  hint  of  any  public  assemblage  of 
the  people  on  these  days.  It  was  the  priests'  business  to 
see  that  the  sanctuary  was  purified,  and  there  was  no 
occasion  for  the  people  to  be  present  at  the  ceremony. 
The  congregation  would  be  the  ordinary  congregation 
at  the  new  moon  feast,  which  of  course  did  not  represent 
the  whole  population  of  the  country.  No  doubt,  as  we  see 
from  the  references  below,  the  ceremony  developed  into 
a  special  feast  after  the  Exile. 

1  Cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  23-32  ;  Numb.  xxix.  i-n. 

%Cf.  Deut.  xvi.  g,  with  Lev.  xxiii.  10  f.,  15  f.  In  the  one 
case  the  seven  weeks  to  Pentecost  are  reckoned  from  the 
putting  of  the  sickle  into  the  corn,  in  the  other  from  the 
presentation  of  a  first  sheaf  of  ripe  corn  in  the  Temple, 
which  falls  within  the  Passover  week.  The  latter  can 
only  be  regarded  as  a  more  precise  determination  of  the 
former,  and  thus  Unleavened  Bread  must  have  coincided 
with  the  beginning  of  barley  harvest. 

1  Deut.  xvi.  13. 


342 


_     THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


stitutions  religion  was  closely  intertwined  with 
the  great  interests  of  every-day  life,  and  the  fact 
that  the  sacred  seasons  of  the  Israelites'  year 
were  the  occasions  on  which  the  natural  joy  of 
life  was  at  its  fullest,  bears  witness  to  the  simple- 
minded  piety  which  was  fostered  by  the  old  He- 
brew worship.  There  was,  however,  a  danger 
that  in  such  a  state  of  things  religion  should  be 
altogether  lost  sight  of  in  the  exuberance  of  natu- 
ral hilarity  and  expressions  of  social  good-will. 
And  indeed  no  great  height  of  spirituality  could 
be  nourished  by  a  type  of  worship  in  which  de- 
votional feeling  was  concentrated  on  the  expres- 
sion of  gratitude  to  God  for  the  bountiful  gifts 
of  His  providence.  It  was  good  for  the  child- 
hood of  the  nation,  but  when  the  nation  became 
a  man  it  must  put  away  childish  things. 

The  tendency  of  the  post-exilic  ritual  was  to 
detach  the  sacred  seasons  more  and  more  from 
the  secular  associations  which  had  once  been 
their  chief  significance.  This  was  done  partly 
by  the  addition  of  new  festivals  which  had  no 
such  natural  occasion,  and  partly  by  a  change  in 
the  point  of  view  from  which  the  older  celebra- 
tions were  regarded.  No  attempt  was  made  to 
obliterate  the  traces  of  the  afifinity  with  events  of 
common  life  which  endeared  them  to  the  hearts 
of  the  people,  but  increasing  importance  was  at- 
tached to  their  historic  significance  as  memo- 
rials of  Jehovah's  gracious  dealings  with  the  na- 
tion in  the  period  of  the  Exodus.  At  the  same 
time  they  take  on  more  and  more  the  character 
of  religious  symbols  of  the  permanent  relations 
between  Jehovah  and  His  people.  The  begin- 
nings of  this  process  can  be  clearly  discerned  in 
the  legislation  of  Ezekiel.  Not  indeed  in  the  di- 
rection of  a  historic  interpretation  of  the  feasts, 
for  this  is  ignored  even  in  the  case  of  the  Pass- 
over, where  it  was  already  firmly  established  in 
the  national  consciousness.  But  the  institution 
of  a  special  series  of  public  sacrifices,  which  was 
the  same  for  the  Passover  and  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles,  and  particularly  the  prominence 
given  to  the  sin-offering,  obviously  tended  to 
draw  the  mind  of  the  people  away  from  the 
passing  interest  of  the  occasion,  and  fix  it  on 
those  standing  obligations  imposed  by  the  holi- 
ness of  Jehovah  on  which  the  continuance  of  all 
His  bounties  depended.  We  cannot  be  mistaken 
in  thinking  that  one  design  of  the  new  ritual  was 
to  correct  the  excesses  of  unrestrained  animal 
enjoyment  by  deepening  the  sense  of  guilt  and 
the  fear  of  possible  offences  against  the  sanctity 
of  the  divine  presence.  For  it  was  at  these  festi- 
vals that  the  prince  was  required  to  offer  the 
atoning  sacrifice  for  himself  and  the  people.* 
Thus  the  effect  of  the  whole  system  was  to  fos- 
ter the  sensitive  and  tremulous  tone  of  piety 
which  was  characteristic  of  Judaism,  in  contrast 
to  the  hearty,  if  undisciplined,  religion  of  the 
ancient  Hebrew  feasts. 

II.  The  Stated  Service. — In  the  course  of 
this  chapt-er  we  have  had  occasion  more  than 
once  to  touch  on  the  prominence  given  in  Ezek- 
iel's  vision  to  sacrifices  offered  in  accordance 
with  a  fixed  rubric  in  the  name  of  the  whole  com- 
munity. The  significance  of  this  fact  may  best 
be  seen  from  a  comoarison  with  the  sacrificial 
regulations  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  These 
are  not  numerous,  but  they  deal  exclusively  with 
private  sacrifices.  The  person  addressed  is  the 
individual  householder,  and  the  sacrifices  which 

*Ch.    XIV.    22. 


he  is  enjoined  to  render  are  for  himself  and  his 
family.  There  •  is  no  explicit  allusion  in  the 
whole  book  to  the  official  sacrifices  which  were 
offered  by  the  regular  priesthood  and  maintained 
at  the  king's  expense.  In  Ezekiel's  scheme  of 
Temple  worship  the  case  is  exactly  the  reverse. 
Here  there  is  no  mention  of  private  sacrifice  ex- 
cept in  the  incidental  notices  as  to  the  free-will 
offerings  and  the  sacrificial  meal  of  the  prince,* 
while  on  the  other  hand  great  attention  is  paid 
to  the  maintenance  of  the  regular  offerings  pro- 
vided by  the  prince  for  the  congregation.  This  of 
course  does  not  mean  that  there  were  no  statu- 
tory sacrifices  in  the  old  Temple,  or  that  Ezekiel 
contemplated  the  cessation  of  private  sacrifice 
in  the  new.  Deuteronomy  passes  over  the  public 
sacrifices  because  they  were  under  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  king,  and  the  people  at  large  were 
not  directly  responsible  for  them;  and  similarly 
Ezekiel  is  silent  as  to  private  offerings  because 
their  observance  was  assured  by  all  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  sanctuary.  Still  it  is  a  noteworthy 
fact  that  of  two  codes  of  Temple  worship,  sep- 
arated by  only  half  a  century,  each  legislates  ex- 
clusively for  that  element  of  the  ritual  which  is 
taken  for  granted  by  the  other. 

What  it  indicates  is  nothing  less  than  a  change 
in  the  ruling  conception  of  public  worship.  Be- 
fore the  Exile  the  idea  that  Jehovah  could  desert 
His  sanctuary  hardly  entered  into  the  mind  of 
the  people,  and  certainly  did  not  in  the  least 
affect  the  confidence  with  which  they  availed 
themselves  of  the  privileges  of  worship.  The 
Temple  was  there  and  God  was  present  within 
it,  and  all  that  was  necessary  was  that  the  spon- 
taneous devotion  of  the  worshippers  should  be 
regulated  by  the  essential  conditions  of  cere- 
monial propriety.  But  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  had  proved  that  the  mere  existence  of 
a  sanctuary  was  no  guarantee  of  the  favour  and 
protection  of  the  God  who  was  supposed  to  dwell 
within  it.  Jehovah  might  be  driven  from  His 
Temple  by  the  presence  of  sin  among  the  peo- 
ple, or  even  by  a  neglect  of  the  ceremonial  pre- 
cautions which  were  necessary  to  guard  against 
the  profanation  of  His  holiness.  On  this  idea 
the  whole  edifice  of  the  later  ritual  is  built  up, 
and  here  as  in  other  respects  Ezekiel  has  shown 
the  way.  In  his  view  the  validity  and  efficiency 
of  the  whole  Temple  service  hangs  on  the  due 
performance  of  the  public  rites  which  preserve 
the  nation  in  a  condition  of  sanctity  and  con- 
tinually represent  it  as  a  holy  people  before  God. 
Under  cover  of  this  representative  service  the  in- 
dividual may  draw  near  with  confidence  to  seek 
the  face  of  his  God  in  acts  of  private  homage,  but 
apart  from  the  regular  official  ceremonial  his 
worship  has  no  reality,  because  he  can  have  no 
assurance  that  Jehovah  will  accept  his  offer- 
ing. His  right  of  access  to  God  springs 
from  his  fellowship  with  the  religious  com- 
munity of  Israel,  and  hence  the  indispensable 
presupposition  of  every  act  of  worship  is  that 
the  standing  of  the  community  before  Jeho- 
vah be  preserved  intact  by  the  rites  appointed 
for  that  purpose.  And,  as  has  been  already  said, 
these  rites  are  representative  in  character.  Be- 
ing performed  on  behalf  of  the  nation,  the  obli- 
gation of  presenting  them  rests  with  the  prince 
in  his  representative  capacity,  and  the  share  of 
the  people  in  them  is  indicated  by  the  tribute 
which  the  prince  is  empowered  to  levy  for  this 
end.     In  this  way  the  ideal  unity  of  the  nation 

*Ch.  xlvi.  12  :  cf.  xliv.  3. 


Ezekiel  xlv.-xlvi.] 


THE    RITUAL. 


343 


finds  continual  expression  in  the  worship  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  the  supreme  interest  of  religion 
is  transferred  from  the  mere  act  of  personal 
homage  to  the  abiding  conditions  of  acceptance 
with  God  symbolised  by  the  stated  service. 

Let  us  now  look  at  some  details  of  the  scheme 
in  which  this  important  idea  is  embodied.  The 
foundation  of  the  whole  system  is  the  daily 
burnt-offering — the  tamtd.  Under  the  first  Tem- 
ple the  daily  offering  seems  to  have  been  a  burnt- 
offering  in  the  morning  and  a  meal-offering 
(minhah)  in  the  evening,*  and  this  practice  seems 
to  have  continued  down  to  the  time  of  Ezra,  t 
According  to  the  Levitical  law  it  consists  of  a 
lamb  morning  and  evening,  accompanied  on  each 
occasion  by  a  minhah  and  a  libation  of  wine,  t 
Ezekiel's  ordinance  occupies  a  middle  position 
between  these  two.  Here  the  tamid  is  a  lamb 
for  a  burnt-offering  in  the  morning,  along  with 
a  minhah  of  flour  mingled  with  oil;  and  there 
is  no  provision  for  an  evening  sacrifice.^  The 
presentation  of  this  sacrifice  on  the  altar  in  the 
morning,  as  the  basis  on  which  all  other  offer- 
ings through  the  day  were  laid,  may  be  taken 
to  symbolise  the  truth  that  the  acceptance  of  all 
ordinary  acts  of  worship  depended  on  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  community  before  God  in  the 
regular  service.  To  the  spiritual  perception  of 
a  Psalmist  it  may  have  suggested  the  duty  of 
commencing  each  day's  work  with  an  act  of 
devotion: — 

"Jehovah,  in  the  morning  shalt  Thou  hear  my  voice  ; 
In  the  morning  will   I  set  [my  prayer]   in  order  before 
Thee,  and  will  look  out."  |1 

The  offerings  for  the  Sabbaths  and  new  moons 
may  be  considered  as  amplifications  of  the  daily 
sacrifice.  They  consist  exclusively  of  burnt-of- 
ferings. On  the  Sabbath  six  lambs  are  pre- 
sented, perhaps  one  for  each  working-day  of  the 
week,  together  with  a  ram  for  the  Sabbath  it- 
self (Smend).  At  the  new  moon  feast  this  offer- 
ing is  repeated  with  the  addition  of  a  bullock. 
It  may  be  noted  here  once  for  all  that  each  burnt 
sacrifice  is  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  min- 
hah, according  to  a  fixed  scale.  For  sin-offer- 
ings, on  the  other  hand,  no  minhah  seems  to  be 
appointed. 

At  the  annual  (or  rather  half-yearly)  cele- 
brations the  sin-offering  appears  for  the  first 
time  among  the  stated  sacrifices.  The  sacrifice 
for  the  cleansing  of  the  sanctuary  at  the  begin- 
ning of  each  half  of  the  year  consists  of  a  young 
bullock  for  a  sin-offering,  in  addition  of  course 
to  the  burnt-offerings  which  were  prescribed  for 
the  first  day  of  the  month.  For  the  Passover  and 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  the  daily  oflfering  is  a 
he-goat  for  a  sin-offering,  and  seven  bullocks 
and  seven  rams  for  a  burnt-offering  during  the 
week  covered  by  these  festivals.  Besides  this, 
at  Passover,  and  probably  also  at  Tabernacles, 
the  prince  presents  a  bullock  as  a  sin-offering 
for  himself  and  the  people.  We  have  now  to  con- 
sider more  particularly  the  place  which  this  class 
of  sacrifices  occupies  in  the  ritual. 

III.  Atoning  Sacrifices. — It  is  evident,  even 
from  this  short  survey,  that  the  idea  of  atone- 

*2  Kings  xvi.  15 :  cf.  i  Kings  xviii.  29,  36. 

t  Ezra  ix.  5. 

t  Numb,  xxviii.  3-8  ;  Exod.  xxix.  38-42. 

§  Ch.  xlvi.  13-15. 

i  Psalm  V.  3,  probably  used  at  the  presentation  of  the 
morning  tamid.  A  more  distinct  recognition  of  the 
spiritual  significance  of  the  evening  sacrifice  is  found  in 
Psalm  cxli.  2. 


ment  holds  a  conspicuous  place  in  the  symbolism 
of  Ezekiel's  Temple.  He  is,  indeed,  the  earliest 
writer  (setting  aside  the  Levitical  Code)  who 
mentions  the  special  class  of  sacrifices  known 
as  sin-  and  guilt-offerings.  Under  the  first 
Temple  ceremonial  offences  were  regularly 
atoned  for  at  one  time  by  money  payments  to 
the  priests,  and  these  fines  were  called  by  the 
names  afterwards  applied  to  the  expiatory  sac- 
rifices.* It  does  not  follow,  of  course,  that  such 
sacrifices  were  unknown  before  the  time  of  Eze- 
kiel, nor  is  such  a  conclusion  probable  in  itself. 
The  manner  in  which  the  prophet  alludes  to  them 
rather  shows  that  the  idea  was  perfectly  familiar 
to  his  contemporaries.  But  the  prominence  of 
the  sin-offering  in  the  public  ritual  may  be  safely 
set  down  as  a  new  departure  in  the  Temple  serv- 
ice, as  it  is  one  of  the  most  striking  symptoms 
of  the  change  that  passed  over  the  spirit  of  Is- 
rael's religion  at  the  time  of  the  Exile. 

Of  the  elements  that  contributed  to  this  change 
the  most  important  was  the  deepened  conscious- 
ness of  sin  that  had  been  produced  by  the  teach- 
ing of  the  prophets  as  verified  in  the  terrible 
calamity  of  the  Exile.  We  have  seen  how  fre- 
quently Ezekiel  insists  on  this  effect  of  the  Di- 
vine judgment;  how,  even  in  the  time  of  her 
pardon  and  restoration,  he  represents  Israel  as 
ashamed  and  confounded,  not  opening  her  mouth 
any  more  for  the  remembrance  of  all  that  she 
had  done.  We  are  therefore  prepared  to  find 
that  full  provision  is  made  for  the  expression 
of  this  abiding  sense  of  guilt  in  the  revised 
scheme  of  worship.  This  was  done  not  by  new 
rites  invented  for  the  purpose,  but  by  seizing 
on  those  elements  of  the  old  ritual  which  repre- 
sented the  wiping  out  of  iniquity,  and  by  so 
remodelling  the  whole  sacrificial  system  as  to 
place  these  prominently  in  the  foreground.  Such 
elements  were  found  chiefly  in  the  sin- 
offering  and  guilt-offering,  which  occupied 
a  subsidiary  position  in  the  old  Temple, 
but  are  elevated  to  a  place  of  command- 
ing importance  in  the  new.  The  precise  dis- 
tinction between  these  two  kinds  of  sacrifice  is 
an  obscure  point  of  the  Levitical  ritual  which 
has  never  been  perfectly  cleared  up.  In  the  sys- 
tern  of  Ezekiel,  however,  we  observe  that  the 
guilt-offering  plays  no  part  in  the  stated  service, 
and  must  therefore  have  been  reserved  for  pri- 
vate transgressions  of  the  law  of  holiness.  And 
in  general  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  atoning 
sacrifices  differ  from  others,  not  in  their  mate- 
rial, but  in  certain  features  of  the  sacred  actions 
to  be  observed  with  regard  to  them.  We  can- 
not here  enter  upon  the  details  of  the  symbol- 
ism, but  the  most  important  fact  is  that  the  flesh 
of  the  victims  is  neither  offered  on  the  altar  as 
in  the  burnt-offering,  nor  eaten  by  the  worship- 
pers as  in  the  peace-offering,  but  belongs  to  the 
category  of  most  holy  things,  and  must  be  con- 
sumed by  the  priests  in  a  holy  place.  In  cer- 
tain extreme  cases,  however,  it  has  to  be  burned 
without  the  sanctuary. f 

Now  in  the  chapters  before  us  the  idea  of  sac- 
rificial atonement  is  chiefly  developed  in  connec- 
tion with  the  material  fabric  of  the  sanctuary. 
The  sanctuary  may  contract  defilement  by  invol- 
untary lapses  from  the  stringent  rules  of  ceremo- 
nial purity  on  the  part  of  those  who  use  it, 
whether  priests  or  laymen.  Such  errors  of  inad- 
vertence were  almost  unavoidable  under  the  com- 
plicated set  of  formal  regulations  into  which  the 
♦  2  Kings  xii.  17.  +  Cf.  ch.  xliii.  31. 


344 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


fundamental  idea  of  holiness  branched  out,  yet 
they  are  regarded  as  endangering  the  sanctity  of 
the  Temple,  and  require  to  be  carefully  atoned 
for  from  time  to  time,  lest  by  their  accumulation 
the  worship  should  be  invalidated  and  Jehovah 
driven  from  His  dwelling-place.  But  besides  this 
the  Temple  (or  at  least  the  altar)  is  unfit  for 
its  sacred  functions  until  it  has  undergone  an 
initial  process  of  purification.  The  principle  in- 
volved still  survives  in  the  consecration  of  eccle- 
siastical buildings  in  Christendom,  although  its 
application  had  doubtless  a  much  more  serious 
import  under  the  old  dispensation  than  it  can 
possibly  have  under  the  new. 

A  full  account  of  this  initial  ceremony  of  puri- 
fication is  given  in  the  end  of  the  forty-third 
chapter,  and  a  glance  at  the  details  of  the  ritual 
may  be  enough  to  impress  on  us  the  conceptions 
that  underlie  the  process.  It  is  a  protracted  op- 
eration, extending  apparently  over  eight  days.* 
The  first  and  fundamental  act  is  the  offering  of 
a  sin-offering  of  the  highest  degree  of  sanctity, 
the  victim  being  a  bullock  and  the  flesh  being 
burned  outside  the  sanctuary.  The  blood  alone 
is  sprinkled  on  the  four  horns  of  the  altar,  the 
four  corners  of  the  "  settle,"  and  the  "  border  "  : 
this  is  the  first  stage  in  the  dedication  of  the 
altar.  Then  for  seven  days  a  he-goat  is  offered 
for  a  sin-offering,  the  same  rites  being  observed, 
and  after  it  a  burnt-offering  consisting  of  a  bul- 
lock and  a  ram.  These  sacrifices  are  intended 
only  for  the  purification  of  the  altar,  and  only 
on  the  day  after  their  completion  is  the  altar 
ready  to  receive  ordinary  public  or  private  gifts 
— burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings.  Now  four 
expressions  are  used  to  denote  the  effect  of  these 
ceremonies  on  the  altar.  The  most  general  is 
"  consecrate,"  literally  "  fill  its  hand  "  f — a  phrase 
used  originally  of  the  installation  of  a  priest  into 
his  ofiice,  and  then  applied  metaphorically  to 
consecration  or  initiation  in  general.  The  others 
are  "  purify,"  f  "  unsin,"§  (the  special  effect  of 
the  sin-offering)  and  "  expiate."  ||  Of  these  the 
last  is  the  most  important.  It  is  the  technical 
priestly  term  for  atonement  for  sin,  the  refer- 
ence being  of  course  generally  to  persons.  As 
to  the  fundamental  meaning  of  the  word,  there 
has  been  a  great  deal  of  discussion,  which  has 
not  yet  led  to  a  decisive  result.  The  choice 
seems  to  lie  between  two  radical  ideas,  either 
to  "  wipe  out  "  or  to  "  cover,"  and  so  render  in- 
operative.H  But  either  etymology  enables  us  to 
understand  the  use  of  the  word  in  legal  termi- 
nology. It  means  to  undo  the  effect  of  a  trans- 
gression on  the  religious  status  of  the  offender, 
or,  as  in  the  case  before  us,  to  remove  natural  or 
contracted  impurity  from  a  material  object.  And 
whether  this  is  conceived  as  a  covering  up  of  the 
fault  so  as  to  conceal  it  from  view,  or  a  wiping 
out  of  it,  amounts  in  the  end  to  the  same  thing. 

*  Another  explanation,  however,  is  possible,  and  is 
adopted  by  Smend  and  Davidson.  Assuming  that  a 
iy"""^i^°i  '"'"^  "^^^  offered  on  the  first  day,  and  holding 
the  whole  description  to  be  somewhat  elliptical,  they  bring 
the  entire  process  within  the  limits  of  the  week.  This 
^"^^'"i  K  '°°'^^  more  satisfactory  in  itself.  But  would 
b/zekiel  be  likely  to  admit  an  ellipsis  in  describing  so 
ipiportant  a  function  ?  I  have  taken  for  granted  above 
that  the  seven  days  of  the  double  sacrifice  are  counted 
from  the  "  second  day  "  of  ver.  22. 
t  Ver.  26. 

t  "'i?P  (ver.  20). 

S  "  „  .   a  denominative  form  from  ^PO  =  sin  (ver.  22). 

I ""??  (ver.  26). 

1  See  Smith,  "  Old  Testament  in  Jewish  Church,"  p.  381. 


The  significant  fact  is  that  the  same  word  is  ap- 
plied both  to  persons  and  things.  It  furnishes 
another  illustration  of  the  intimate  way  in  which 
the  ideas  of  moral  guilt  and  physical  defect  are 
blended  in  the  ceremonial  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  meaning  of  the  two  atoning  services  ap- 
pointed for  the  beginning  of  the  first  and 
the  seventh  month  is  now  clear.  They  are 
intended  to  renew  periodically  the  holiness 
of  the  sanctuary  established  by  the  initia- 
tory rites  just  described.  For  it  is  evi- 
dent that  no  indelible  character  can  attach 
to  the  kind  of  sanctity  with  which  we  are  here 
dealing.  It  is  apt  to  be  lost,  if  not  by  mere  lapse 
of  time,  at  least  by  the  repeated  contact  of  frail 
men  who  with  the  best  intentions  are  not  always 
able  to  fulfil  the  conditions  of  a  right  use  of 
sacred  things.  Every  failure  and  mistake  detract 
from  the  holiness  of  the  Temple,  and  even  unno- 
ticed and  altogether  unconscious  offences  would 
in  course  of  time  profane  it  if  not  purged  away. 
Hence  "  for  every  one  that  erreth  and  for  him 
that  is  simple  "  *  atonement  has  to  be  made  for 
the  house  twice  a  year.  The  ritual  to  be  ob- 
served on  these  occasions  bears  a  general  resem- 
blance to  that  of  the  inaugural  ceremony,  but  is 
simpler,  only  a  single  bullock  being  presented 
for  a  sin-offering.  On  the  other  hand,  it  ex- 
pressly symbolises  a  purification  of  the  Temple 
as  well  as  of  the  altar.  The  blood  is  sprinkled 
not  only  on  the  "  settle  "  of  the  altar,  but  also 
on  the  doorposts  of  the  house,  and  the  posts  of 
the  eastern  gate  of  the  inner  court. 

We  may  now  pass  on  to  the  second  application 
made  by  Ezekiel  of  the  idea  of  sacrificial  atone- 
ment. These  purifications  of  the  sanctuary, 
which  bulk  so  largely  in  his  system,  have  their 
counterpart  in  atonements  made  directly  for  the 
faults  of  the  people.  For  this  purpose,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  a  sin-offering  was  to  be  pre- 
sented at  each  of  the  great  annual  festivals  by  the 
prince,  for  himself  and  the  nation  which  he  rep- 
resented. But  it  is  important  to  observe  that  the 
idea  of  atonement  is  not  confined  to  one  partic- 
ular class  of  sacrifices.  It  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  the  whole  system  of  the  stated  service,  the 
purpose  of  which  is  expressly  said  to  be  "  to 
make  atonement  for  the  house  of  Israel."  f  Thus 
while  the  half-yearly  sin-offering  afforded  a 
special  opportunity  for  confession  of  sin  on  the 
part  of  the  people,  we  are  to  understand  that 
the  holiness  of  the  nation  was  secured  by  the  ob- 
servance of  every  part  of  the  prescribed  ritual 
which  regulated  its  intercourse  with  God.  And 
since  the  nation  is  in  itself  imperfectly  holy  and 
stands  in  constant  need  of  forgiveness,  the  main- 
tenance of  its  sanctity  by  sacrificial  rites  was 
equivalent  to  a  perpetual  act  of  atonement.  Spe- 
cial offences  of  individuals  had  of  course  to  be 
expiated  by  special  sacrifices,  but  beneath  all  par- 
ticular transgressions  lay  the  broad  fact  of  hu- 
man impurity  and  infirmity;  and  in  the  constant 
"  covering  up  "  of  this  by  a  Divinely  instituted 
system  of  religious  ordinances  we  recognise  an 
atoning  element  in  the  regular  Temple  service. 

The  sacrificial  ritual  may  therefore  be  regarded 
as  a  barrier  interposed  between  the  natural  un- 
cleanness  of  the  people  and  the  awful  holiness 
of  Jehovah  seated  in  His  Temple.  That  men 
should  be  permitted  to  approach  Him  at  all  is  an 
unspeakable  privilege  conferred  on  Israel  in  vir- 
tue of  its  covenant  relation  to  God.  But  that 
the  approach  is  surrounded  by  so  many  precau- 
*Ch.  xlv.  20.  +Ch.  xlv.  IS,  17. 


Eiiekiel  xlv.-xlvi.] 


THE    RITUAL. 


345 


tions  and  restrictions  is  a  perpetual  witness  to 
the  truth  that  God  is  of  purer  eyes  than  to  be- 
hold iniquity  and  one  with  whom  evil  cannot 
dwell.  If  these  precautions  could  have  been  al- 
ways perfectly  observed,  it  is  probable  that  no 
periodical  purification  of  the  sanctuary  would 
have  been  enjoined.  The  ordinary  ritual  would 
have  sufficed  to  maintain  the  nation  in  a  state 
of  holiness  corresponding  with  the  requirements 
of  Jehovah's  nature.  But  this  was  impossible  on 
account  of  the  slowness  of  men's  minds  and  their 
liability  to  err  in  their  most  sacred  duties.  Sin 
is  so  subtle  and  pervasive  that  it  is  conceived  as 
penetrating  the  network  of  ordinances  destined 
to  intercept  it,  and  reaching  even  to  the  dwell- 
ing-place of  Jehovah  Himself.  It  is  to  remove 
such  accidental,  though  inevitable,  violations  of 
the  majesty  of  God  that  the  ritual  edifice  is 
crowned  by  ceremonies  for  the  purification  of 
the  sanctuary.  They  are,  so  to  speak,  atone- 
ments in  the  second  degree.  Their  object  is  to 
compensate  for  defects  in  the  ordinary  routine 
of  worship,  and  to  remove  the  arrears  of  guilt 
which  had  accumulated  through  neglect  of  some 
part  of  the  ceremonial  scheme.  This  idea  appears 
quite  clearly  in  Ezekiel's  legislation,  but  it  is  far 
more  impressively  exhibited  in  the  Levitical  law, 
where  dififerent  elements  of  Ezekiel's  ritual  are 
gathered  up  into  one  celebration  in  the  Great 
Day  of  Atonement,  the  most  solemn  and  impos- 
ing of  the  whole  year. 

Hence  we  see  that  the  whole  system  of  sacri- 
ficial worship  is  firmly  knit  together,  being  per- 
vaded from  end  to  end  by  the  one  principle  of 
expiation,  behind  which  lay  the  assurance  of  par- 
don and  acceptance  to  all  who  approached  God 
in  the  use  of  the  appointed  means  of  grace. 
Herein  lay  the  chief  value  of  the  Temple  ritual 
for  the  religious  life  of  Israel.  It  served  to  im- 
press on  the  mind  of  the  people  the  great  real- 
ities of  sin  and  forgiveness,  and  so  to  create  that 
profound  consciousness  of  sin  which  has  passed 
over,  spiritualised  but  not  weakened,  into  Chris- 
tian experience.  Thus  the  law  proved  itself  a 
schoolmaster  to  bring  men  to  Christ,  in  whose 
atoning  death  the  evil  of  sin  and  the  eternal  con- 
ditions of  forgiveness  are  once  for  all  and  per- 
fectly revealed. 

The  positive  truths  taught  or  suggested  by  the 
ritual  of  atonement  are  too  numerous  to  be  con- 
sidered here.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  neither 
in  Ezekiel  nor  in  any  other  part  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament is  an  authoritative  interpretation  given 
of  the  most  essential  features  of  the  ritual.  The 
people  seem  to  have  been  left  to  explain  the 
symbolism  as  best  they  could,  and  many  points 
which  are  obscure  and  uncertain  to  us  must  have 
been  perfectly  intelligible  to  the  least  instructed 
amongst  them.  For  us  the  only  safe  rule  is  to 
follow  the  guidance  of  the  New  Testament 
writers  in  their  use  of  sacrificial  institutions  as 
types  of  the  death  of  Christ.  The  investigation 
is  too  large  and  intricate  to  be  attempted  in  this 
place.  But  it  may  be  well  in  conclusion  to  point 
out  one  or  two  general  principles,  which  ought 
never  to  be  overlooked  in  the  typical  interpreta- 
tion of  the  expiatory  sacrifices  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. 

In  the  first  place  atonement  is  provided  only 
for  sins  committed  in  ignorance;  and  moral  and 
ceremonial  offences  stand  precisely  on  the  same 
footing  in  the  eye  of  the  law.  In  Ezekiel's  sys- 
tem, indeed,  it  was  only  sins  of  inadvertence  that 
needed  to  be  considered.     He  has  in  view  the 


final  state  of  things  in  which  the  people,  though 
not  perfect  nor  exempt  from  liability  to  error, 
are  wholly  inclined  to  obey  the  law  of  Jehovah 
so  far  as  their  knowledge  and  ability  extend. 
But  even  in  the  Levitical  legislation  there  is  no 
legal  dispensation  for  guilt  incurred  through 
wanton  and  deliberate  defiance  of  the  law  of 
Jehovah.  To  sin  thus  is  to  sin  "  with  a  high 
hand,"  *  and  such  offences  have  to  be  expiated 
by  the  death  of  the  sinner,  or  at  least  his  ex- 
clusion from  the  religious  community.  And 
whether  the  precept  belong  to  what  we  call  the 
ceremonial  or  to  the  moral  side  of  the  law,  the 
same  principle  holds  good,  although  of  course 
its  application  is  one-sided;  strictly  moral  trans- 
gressions being  for  the  most  part  voluntary, 
while  ritual  offences  may  be  either  voluntary  or 
inadvertent.  But  for  wilful  and  high-handed  de- 
parture from  any  precept,  whether  ethical  or  cer- 
emonial, no  atonement  is  provided  by  the  law; 
the  guilty  person  "  falls  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God,"  and  forgiveness  is  possible  only  in 
the  sphere  of  personal  relations  between  man 
and  God,  into  which  the  law  does  not  enter. 

This  leads  to  a  second  consideration.  Aton- 
ing sacrifices  do  not  purchase  forgiveness.  That 
is  to  say,  they  are  never  regarded  as  exercising 
any  influence  on  God,  moving  Him  to  Mercy 
towards  the  sinner.  They  are  simply  the  forms 
to  which,  by  Jehovah's  own  appointment,  the 
promise  of  forgiveness  is  attached.  Hence  sac- 
rifice has  not  the  fundamental  significance  in 
Old  Testament  religion  that  the  death  of  Christ 
has  in  the  New.  The  whole  sacrificial  system, 
as  we  see  quite  clearly  fro'm  Ezekiel's  prophecy, 
presupposes  redemption;  the  people  are  already 
restored  to  their  land  and  sanctified  by  Jeho- 
vah's presence  amongst  them  before  these  insti- 
tutions come  into  operation.  The  only  purpose 
that  they  serve  in  the  system  of  religion  to  which 
they  belong  is  to  secure  that  the  blessings  of  sal- 
vation shall  not  be  lost.  Both  in  this  vision 
and  throughout  the  Old  Testament  the  ultimate 
ground  of  confidence  in  God  lies  in  historic  acts 
of  redemption  in  which  Jehovah's  sovereign 
grace  and  love  to  Israel  are  revealed.  Through 
the  sacrifices  the  individual  was  enabled  to  as- 
sure himself  of  his  interest  in  the  covenant  bless- 
ings promised  to  his  nation.  They  were  the  sac- 
raments of  his  personal  acceptance  with  Jehovah, 
and  as  such  were  of  the  highest  importance  for 
his  normal  religious  life.  But  they  were  not  and 
could  not  be  the  basis  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
nor  did  later  Judaism  ever  fall  into  the  error  of 
seeking  to  appease  the  Deity  by  a  multiplication 
of  sacrificial  gifts.  When  the  insufficiency  of  the 
ritual  system  to  give  true  peace  of  conscience 
or  to  bring  back  the  outward  tokens  of  God's 
favour  is  dwelt  upon,  the  ancient  Church  falls 
back  on  the  spiritual  conditions  of  forgiveness 
already  enunciated  by  the  prophets. 

"  Thou  desirest  not  sacrifice  that  I  should  give  it. 
Thou  delightest  not  in  burnt-offering. 
The  sacrifices  of  God  are  a  broken  spirit : 
A  broken  and  a  contrite  heart,  O  God,  Thou   wilt  not 
despise."  t 

Finally  we  have  learned  from  Ezekiel  that  the 
idea  of  atonement  is  not  lodged  in  any  partic- 
ular rite,  but  pervades  the  sacrificial  system  as  a 
whole.     Suggestive  as  the  ritual  of  the  sin-oflfer- 

*  As  distinguished  from  sins,  '^•'J?'?'  or  through  inad- 
vertence.   See  Numb.  xv.  30,  31. 
+  Psalm  li.  16,  17. 


346 


THE   BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL. 


ing  is  to  the  Christian  conscience,  it  must  not 
be  isolated  from  other  developments  of  the  sac- 
rificial idea  or  taken  to  embody  the  whole  per- 
manent meaning  of  the  institution.  There  are 
at  least  two  other  aspects  of  sacrifice  which  are 
clearly  expressed  in  the  ritual  legislation  of  the 
Old  Testament — that  of  homage,  chiefly  symbol- 
ised by  the  burnt-offering,  and  that  of  com- 
munion, symbolised  by  the  peace-oflfering  and 
the  sacrificial  feast  observed  in  connection  with 
it.  And  although,  both  in  Ezekiel  and  the  Le- 
vitical  law,  these  two  elements  are  thrown  into 
the  shade  by  the  idea  of  expiation,  yet  there  are 
subtle  links  of  affinity  between  all  three,  which 
will  have  to  be  traced  out  before  we  are  in  a  po- 
sition to  understand  the  first  principles  of  sacri- 
ficial worship.  The  brilliant  and  learned  re- 
searches of  the  late  Professor  Robertson  Smith 
have  thrown  a  flood  of  light  on  the  original  rite 
of  sacrifice  and  the  important  place  which  it  oc- 
cupies in  ancient  religion.*  He  has  sought  to 
explain  the  intricate  system  of  the  Levitical  leg- 
islation as  an  unfolding,  under  varied  historical 
influences,  of  diflferen't  aspects  of  the  idea  of 
communion  between  God  and  men,  which  is  the 
essence  of  primitive  sacrifice.  In  particular  he 
has  shown  how  special  atoning  sacrifices  arise 
through  emphasising  by  appropriate  symbolism 
the  element  of  reconciliation  which  is  implicitly 
contained  in  every  act  of  religious  communion 
with  God.  This  at  least  enables  us  to  under- 
stand how  the  atoning  ritual  with  all  its  distinc- 
tive features  yet  resembles  so  closely  that  which 
is  common  to  all  types  of  sacrifice,  and  how  the 
idea  of  expiation,  although  concentrated  in  a  par- 
ticular class  of  sacrifices,  is  nevertheless  spread 
over  the  whole  surface  of  the  sacrificial  ritual. 
It  would  be  premature  as  well  as  presumptuous 
to  attempt  here  to  estimate  the  consequences  of 
this  theory  for  Christian  theology.  But  it  cer- 
tainly seems  to  open  up  the  prospect  of  a  wider 
and  deeper  apprehension  of  the  religious  truths 
which  are  differentiated  and  specialised  in  the 
Old  Testament  dispensation,  to  be  reunited  in 
that  great  Atoning  Sacrifice,  in  which  the  blood 
of  the  new  covenant  has  been  shed  for  many  for 
the  remission  of  sins. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

RENEWAL    AND    ALLOTMENT    OF    THE 
LAND. 

Ezekiel  xlvii.,  xlviii. 

In  the  first  part  of  the  forty-seventh  chapter 
the  visionary  form  of  the  revelation,  which  had 
been  interrupted  by  the  important  series  of  com- 
munications on  which  vvC  have  been  so  long  en- 
gaged, is  again  resumed.  The  prophet,  once 
more  under  the  direction  of  his  angelic  guide, 
sees  a  stream  of  water  issuing  from  the  Temple 
buildings  and  flowing  eastward  into  the  Dead 
Sea.f  Afterwards  he  receives  another  series  of 
directions  relating  to  the  boundaries  of  the  land 
and  its  division  among  the  twelve  tribes. t  With 
this  the  vision  and  the  book  find  their  appropri- 
ate close. 

*  See  his  Burnet  Lectures  on  the  "  Religion  of  the 
Semites,"  to  which,  as  well  as  to  his  "  Old  Testament  in 
the  Jewish  Church,"  the  present  chapter  is  largely 
indebted. 

tCh.  xlvii.  I-I2. 

jChs.  xlvii.  13-xlviii.  35. 


The  Temple  stream,  to  which  Ezekiel's  atten- 
tion is  now  for  the  first  time  directed,  is  a  sym- 
bol of  the  miraculous  transformation  which  the 
land  of  Canaan  is  to  undergo  in  order  to  fit  it 
for  the  habitation  of  Jehovah's  ransomed  people. 
Anticipations  of  a  renewal  of  the  face  of  nature 
are  a  common  feature  of  Messianic  prophecy. 
They  have  their  roots  in  the  religious  interpreta- 
tion of  the  possession  of  the  land  as  the  chief 
token  of  the  Divine  blessing  on  the  nation.  In 
the  vicissitudes  of  agricultural  or  pastoral  life  the 
Israelite  read  the  reflection  of  Jehovah's  atti- 
tude towards  Himself  and  His  people:  fertile 
seasons  and  luxuriant  l.arves*  were  the  sign  of 
His  favour;  drought  and  famine  were  the  proof 
that  He  was  offended.  Even  at  the  best  of  times, 
however,  the  condition  of  Palestine  left  much  to 
be  desired  from  the  husbandman's  point  of  view, 
especially  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  Nature  was 
often  stern  and  unpropitious,  the  cultivation  of 
the  soil  was  always  attended  with  hardship  and 
uncertainty,  large  tracts  of  the  country  were 
given  over  to  irreclaimable  barrenness.  There 
was  always  a  vision  of  better  things  possible, 
and  in  the  last  days  the  prophets  cherished  the 
expectation  that  that  vision  would  be  realised. 
When  all  causes  of  offence  are  removed  from 
Israel  and  Jehovah  smiles  on  His  people,  the 
land  will  blossom  into  supernatural  fertility,  the 
ploughman  overtaking  the  reaper,  and  the 
treader  of  grapes  him  that  soweth  seed,  the 
mountains  dropping  new  wine  and  the  hills 
melting.*  Such  idyllic  pictures  of  universal 
plenty  and  comfort  abound  in  the  writings  of 
the  prophets,  and  are  not  wanting  in  the  pages 
of  Ezekiel.  We  have  already  had  one  in  the  de- 
scription of  the  blessings  of  the  Messianic  king- 
dom;! and  we  shall  see  that  in  this  closing 
vision  a  complete  remodelling  of  the  land  is  pre- 
supposed, rendering  it  all  alike  suitable  for  the 
habitation  of  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

The  river  of  life  is  the  most  striking  presenta- 
tion of  this  general  conception  of  Messianic  fe- 
licity. It  is  one  of  those  vivid  images  from  East- 
ern life  which,  through  the  Apocalypse,  have 
passed  into  the  symbolism  ot  Christian  eschatol- 
ogy.  "  And  He  showed  me  a  pure  river  of  water 
of  life,  clear  as  crystal,  proceeding  out  of  the 
throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb.  In  the  midst 
of  the  street  of  it,  and  on  either  side  of  the  river, 
was  there  the  tree  of  life,  which  bare  twelve 
manner  of  fruits,  and  yielded  her  fruits  every 
month:  and  the  leaves  of  the  tree  were  for  the 
healing  of  the  nations."  $  So  writes  the  seer  of 
Patmos,  in  words  whose  music  charms  the  ear 
even  of  those  to  whom  running  water  means 
much  less  than  it  did  to  a  native  of  thirsty  Pal- 
estine. But  John  had  read  of  the  mystic  river 
in  the  pages  of  his  favourite  prophet  before  he 
saw  it  in  vision.  The  close  resemblance  between 
the  two  pictures  leaves  no  doubt  that  the  origin 
of  the  conception  is  to  be  sought  in  Ezekiel's 
vision.  The  underlying  religious  truth  is  the 
same  in  both  representations,  that  the  presence 
of  God  is  the  source  from  which  the  influences 
flow  forth  that  renew  and  purify  human  exist- 
ence. The  tree  of  life  on  each  bank  of  the  river, 
which  yields  its  fruit  every  month  and  whose 
leaves  are  for  healing,  is  a  detail  transferred  di- 
rectly from  Ezekiel's  imagery  to  fill  out  the  de- 
scription of  the  glorious  city  of  God  into  which 

*  Amos  ix.  13.        t  Ch.  xxxiv.  25-29.        t  Rev.  xxii.  1,  >. 


Ezekielxlvii.,  xlviii.J     RENEWAL    AND    ALLOTMENT    OF    LAND. 


347 


the   nations    of   them   that   are   saved   are   gath- 
ered. 

But  with  all  its  idealism,  Ezekiel's  conception 
presents  many  points  of  contact  with  the  actual 
physiography  of  Palestine;  it  is  less  universal 
and  abstract  in  its  significance  than  that  of  the 
Apocalypse.  The  first  thing  that  might  have 
suggested  the  idea  to  the  prophet  is  that  the 
Temple  mount  had  at  least  one  small  stream, 
whose  "  soft-flowing "  waters  were  already  re- 
garded as  a  symbol  of  the  silent  and  unobtru- 
sive influence  of  the  Divine  presence  in  Israel.* 
The  waters  of  this  stream  flowed  eastward,  but 
they  were  too  scanty  to  have  any  appreciable  ef- 
fect on  the  fertility  of  the  region  through  which 
they  passed.  Further,  to  the  southeast  of  Jeru- 
salem, between  it  and  the  Dead  Sea,  stretched 
the  great  wilderness  of  Judah,  the  most  desolate 
and  inhospitable  tract  in  the  whole  country. 
There  the  steep  declivity  of  the  limestone  range 
refuses  to  detain  sufficient  moisture  to  nourish 
the  most  meagre  vegetation,  although  the  few 
spots  where  wells  are  found,  as  at  Engedi,  are 
clothed  with  almost  tropical  luxuriance.  To  re- 
claim these  barren  slopes  and  render  them  fit 
for  human  industry,  the  Temple  waters  are  sent 
eastward,  making  the  desert  to  blossom  as  the 
rose.  Lastly,  there  was  the  Dead  Sea  itself,  in 
whose  bitter  waters  no  living  thing  can  exist, 
the  natural  emblem  of  resistance  to  the  pur- 
poses of  Him  who  is  the  God  of  life.  These 
different  elements  of  the  physical  reality  were  fa- 
miliar to  Ezekiel,  and  come  back  to  mind  as  he 
follows  the  course  of  the  new  Temple  river,  and 
observes  the  wonderful  transformation  which  it 
is  destined  to  effect.  He  first  sees  it  breaking 
forth  from  the  wall  of  the  Temple  at  the  right- 
hand  side  of  the  entrance,  and  f.owing  eastward 
through  the  courts  by  the  south  side  of  the  altar. 
Then  at  the  outer  wall  he  meets  it  rushing 
from  the  south  side  of  the  eastern  gate,  and  still 
pursuing  its  easterly  course.  At  a  thousand  cu- 
bits from  the  sanctuary  it  is  only  ankle-deep, 
but  at  successive  distances  of  a  thousand  cubits 
it  reaches  to  the  knees,  to  the  loins,  and  becomes 
finally  an  impassable  river.  The  stream  is  of 
course  miraculous  from  source  to  mouth. 
Earthly  rivers  do  not  thus  broaden  and  deepen  as 
they  flow,  except  by  the  accession  of  tributaries, 
and  tributaries  are  out  of  the  question  here. 
Thus  it  flows  on,  with  its  swelling  volume  of 
water,  through  "  the  eastern  circuit,"  "  down  to 
the  Arabah  "  (the  trough  of  the  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea),  and  reaching  the  sea  it  sweetens  its 
waters  so  that  they  teem  with  fishes  of  all  kinds 
like  those  of  the  Mediterranean.  Its  uninviting 
shores  become  the  scene  of  a  busy  and  thriving 
industry;  fishermen  ply  their  craft  from  Engedi 
to  Eneglaim,t  and  the  food  supply  of  the  country 
is  materially  increased.  The  prophet  may  not 
have  been  greatly  concerned  about  this,  but  one 
characteristic  detail  illustrates  his  careful  fore- 
thought in  matters  of  practical  utility.  It  is  from 
the  Dead  Sea  that  Jerusalem  has  always  obtained 
its  supply  of  salt.  The  purification  of  this  lake 
might  have  its  drawbacks  if  the  production  of 
this  indispensable  commodity  should  be  inter- 
fered with.  Salt,  besides  its  culinary  uses,  played 
an  important  part  in  the  Temple  ritual,  and  Eze- 
kiel   was    not    likely    to    forget    it.      Hence     the 

*  Isa   viii.  6. 

t  Engedi,  "well  of  the  kid,"  is  at  the  middle  of  the 
western  shore  ;  Eneg-laim.  "  well  of  two  calves,"  is  un- 
known, but  probably  lay  at  the  north  end.  The  eastern 
side  i.*;  left  to  the  Arabian  nomads. 


strange  but  eminently  practical  provision  that  the 
shallows  and  marshes  at  the  south  end  of  the 
lake  shall  be  exempted  from  the  influence  of  the 
healing  waters.     "  They  are  given  for  salt."  * 

We  may  venture  to  draw  one  lesson  for  our 
own  instruction  from  this  beautiful  prophetic 
image  of  the  blessings  that  flow  from  a  pure  re- 
ligion. The  river  of  God  has  its  source  high  up 
in  the  mount  where  Jehovah  dwells  in  inacces- 
sible holiness,  and  where  the  white-robed  priests 
minister  ceaselessly  before  Him;  but  in  its  de- 
scent it  seeks  out  the  most  desolate  and  unprom- 
ising region  in  the  country  and  turns  it  into  a 
garden  of  the  Lord.  Whlie  the  whole  land  of 
Israel  is  to  be  renewed  and  made  to  minister 
to  the  good  of  man  in  fellowship  with  God,  the 
main  stream  of  fertility  is  expended  in  the  ap- 
parently hopeless  task  of  reclaiming  the  Judean 
desert  and  purifying  the  Dead  Sea.  It  is  an  em- 
blem of  the  earthly  ministry  of  Him  who  made 
Himself  the  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners,  and 
lavished  the  resources  of  His  grace  and  the 
wealth  of  His  affection  on  those  who  vvere 
deemed  beyond  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation. 
It  is  to  be  feared,  however,  that  the  practice  of 
most  Churches  has  been  too  much  the  reverse 
of  this.  They  have  been  tempted  to  confine  the 
water  of  life  within  fairly  respectable  channels, 
amongst  the  prosperous  and  contented,  the  oc- 
cupants of  happy  homes,  where  the  advantages  of 
religion  are  most  likely  to  be  appreciated.  That 
seems  to  have  been  found  the  line  of  least  re- 
sistance, and  in  times  when  spiritual  life  has  run 
low  it  has  been  counted  enough  to  keep  the  old 
ruts  filled  and  leave  the  waste  places  and  stag- 
nant waters  of  our  civilisation  ill  provided  with 
the  means  of  grace.  Nowadays  we  are  some- 
times reminded  that  the  Dead  Sea  must  be 
drained  before  the  gospel  can  have  a  fair  chance 
of  influencing  human  lives,  and  there  may  be 
much  wisdom  in  the  suggestion.  A  vast  deal 
of  social  drainage  may  have  to  be  accomplished 
before  the  word  of  God  has  free  course.  Un- 
healthy and  impure  conditions  of  life  may  be 
mitigated  by  wise  legislation,  temptations  to  vice 
may  be  removed,  and  vested  interests  that  thrive 
on  the  degradation  of  human  lives  may  be 
crushed  by  the  strong  arm  of  the  community. 
But  the  true  spirit  of  Christianity  can  neither 
be  confined  to  the  watercourses  of  religious 
habit,  nor  wait  for  the  schemes  of  the  social  re- 
former. Nor  will  it  display  its  powers  of  social 
salvation  until  it  carries  the  energies  of  the 
Church  into  the  lowest  haunts  of  vice  and  mis- 
ery with  an  earnest  desire  to  seek  and  to  save 
that  w'hich  is  lost.  Ezekiel  had  his  vision,  and  he 
believed  in  it.  He  believed  in  the  reality  of  God's 
presence  in  the  sanctuary  and  in  the  stream  of 
blessings  that  flowed  from  His  throne,  and  he 
believed  in  the  possibility  of  reclaiming  the 
waste  places  of  his  country  for  the  kingdom  of 
God.  When  Christians  are  united  in  like  faith 
in  the  power  of  Christ  and  the  abiding  pres- 
ence of  His  Spirit,  we  may  expect  to  see  times 
of  refreshing  from  the  presence  of  God  and  the 
whole  earth  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  the 
Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea. 

IL 

Ezekiel's  map  of  Palestine  is  marked  by  sortie- 
thing  of  the  same  mathematical  regularity  which 
was  exhibited  in  his  plan  of  the  Temple.     His 
*  Ver.  II. 


348 


THE    BOOK    OF    EZEKIEL. 


boundaries  are  like  those  we  sometimes  see  on 
the  map  of  a  newly  setttled  country  like  America 
or  Australia — that  is  to  say,  they  largely  follow 
the  meridian  lines  and  parallels  of  latitude,  but 
take  advantage  here  and  there  of  natural  frontiers 
supplied  by  rivers  and  mountain  ranges.  This  is 
absolutely  true  of  the  internal  divisions  of  the 
land  between  the  tribes.  Here  the  northern  and 
southern  boundaries  are  straight  lines  running 
east  and  west  over  hill  and  dale,  and  terminating 
at  the  Mediterranean  Sea  and  the  Jordan  Val- 
ley, which  form  of  course  the  western  and  east- 
ern limits.  As  to  the  external  delimitation  of  the 
country  it  is  unfortunately  not  possible  to  speak 
with  certainty.  The  eastern  frontier  is  fixed  by 
the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea  so  far  as  they  go, 
and  the  western  is  the  sea.  But  on  the  north 
and  south  the  lines  of  demarcation  cannot  be 
traced,  the  places  mentioned  being  nearly  all  un- 
known. The  north  frontier  extends  from  the  sea 
to  a  place  called  Hazar-enon,  said  to  lie  on  the 
border  of  Hauran.  It  passes  the  "  entrance  to 
Hamath,"  and  has  to  the  north  not  only  Ha- 
math,  but  also  the  territory  of  Damascus.  But 
none  of  the  towns  through  which  it  passes — 
Hethlon,  Berotha,  Sibraim — can  be  identified, 
and  even  its  general  direction  is  altogether  un- 
certain.* 

From  Hazar-enon  the  eastern  border  stretches 
southward  till  it  reaches  the  Jordan,  and  is  pro- 
longed south  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  a  place  called 
Tamar,  also  unknown.  From  this  we  proceed 
westwards  by  Kadesh  till  we  strike  the  river  of 
Egypt,  the  Wady  el-Arish,  which  carries  the 
boundary  to  the  sea.  It  will  be  seen  that  Ezekiel, 
for  reasons  on  which  it  is  idle  to  speculate,  ex- 
cludes the  transjordanic  territory  from  the  Holy 
Land.  Speaking  broadly,  we  may  say  that  he 
treats  Palestine  as  a  rectangular  strip  of  country, 
which  he  divides  into  transverse  sections  of  in- 
determinate breadth,  and  then  proceeds  to  par- 
cel   out  these  amongst  the  twelve  tribes. 

A  similar  obscurity  rests  on  the  motives  which 
determined  the  disposition  of  the  different  tribes 
within  the  sacred  territory.  We  can  understand, 
indeed,  why  seven  tribes  are  placed  to  the  north 
and  only  five  to  the  south  of  the  capital  and  the 
sanctuary.  Jerusalem  lay  much  nearer  the  south 
of  the  land,  and  in  the  original  distribution  all 
the  tribes  had  their  settlements  to  the  north  of 
it  except  Judah  and  Simeon.  Ezekiel's  arrange- 
ment seems  thus  to  combine  a  desire  for  symme- 
try with  a  recognition  of  the  claims  of  historical 
and  geographic  reality.  We  can  also  see  that  to 
a  certain  extent  the  relative  positions  of  the 
tribes  correspond  with  those  they  held  before 
the  Exile,  although  of  course  the  system  requires 
that  they  shall  lie  in  a  regular  series  from  north 
to  south.  Dan,  Asher,  and  Naphtali  are  left  in 
the  extreme  north,  Manasseh  and  Ephraim  to  the 
south  of  them,  while  Simeon  lies  as  of  old  in 
the  south  with  one  tribe  between  it  and  the  capi- 
tal. But  we  cannot  tell  why  Benjamin  should 
*I  do  not  myself  see  much  objection  to  supposing  that 
it  leaves  the  sea  near  Tyre  and  proceeds  about  due  east 
to  Hazar-enon,  which  may  be  near  the  foot  of  Hermon, 
where  Robinson  located  it.  In  this  case  the  "entrance 
to  Hamath  "  would  be  the  south  end  of  the  Beka",  where 
one  strikes  north  to  go  to  Hamath.  This  would  corre- 
spond nearly  to  the  extent  of  the  country  actually  occu- 
pied by  the  Hebrews  under  the  judges  and  the  inonarchy. 
The  statement  that  the  territory  of  Damascus  lies  to  the 
north  presents  some  difficulty  on  any  theory.  It  may  be 
added  that  Hazar-hattikon  in  ver.  i6ts  the  same  as  Hazar- 
enon  ;  it  is  probably,  as  Cornill  suggests,  a  scribe's  error 
for  pjy  mVn  (the  locative  ending  being  mistaken  for  the 
article). 


be  placed  to  the  south  and  Judah  to  the  north  of 
Jerusalem,  why  Issachar  and  Zebulun  are  trans- 
ferred from  the  far  north  to  the  south,  or  why 
Reuben  and  Gad  are  taken  from  the  east  of  the 
Jordan  to  be  settled  one  to  the  north  and  the 
other  to  the  south  of  the  city.  Some  principle 
of  arrangement  there  must  have  been  in  the 
mind  of  the  prophet,  and  several  have  been  sug- 
gested; but  it  is  perhaps  better  to  confess  that 
we  have  lost  the  key  to  his  meaning.* 

The  prophet's  interest  is  centred  on  the  strip 
of  land  reserved  for  the  sanctuary  and  public  pur- 
poses, which  is  subdivided  and  measured  out 
vidth  the  utmost  precision.  It  is  twenty-five 
thousand  cubits  (about  eight  and  one-third 
miles)  broad,  and  extends  right  across  the  coun- 
try. The  two  extremities  east  and  west  are  the 
crown  lands  assigned  to  the  prince  for  the  pur- 
poses we  have  already  seen.     In   the   middle  a 

JUDAH 


CROWN 

LAND 

LEVITES 

CROWN 

LAND 

■    Temple 
PRIESTS 

CITY 

CITY 

LANDS 

BENJAMIN 

square  of  twenty-five  thousand  cubits  is  marked 
off;  this  is  the  "  oblation "  or  sacred  offering 
of  land,  in  the  middle  of  which  the  Temple 
stands.  This  again  is  subdivided  into  three  paral- 
lel sections,  as  shown  in  the  accompanying  dia- 
gram. The  most  northerly,  ten  thousand  cubits 
in  breadth,  is  assigned  to  the  Levites;  the  cen- 
tral portion,  including  the  sanctuary,  to  the 
priests;  and  the  remaining  five  thousand  cubits 
is  a  "  profane  place  "  for  the  city  and  its  com- 
mon lands.  The  city  itself  is  a  square  of  four 
thousand  five  hundred  cubits,  situated  in  the 
middle  of  this  southmost  section  of  the  oblation. 
With  its  free  space  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  cu- 
bits in  widtn  belting  the  wall  it  fills  the  entire 
breadth  of  the  section;  the  communal  posses- 
sions flanking  it  on  either  hand,  just  as  the 
prince's  domain  does  the  "  oblation  "  as  a  whole. 
The  produce  of  these  lands  is  "  for  food  to  them 
that  '  serve '  (i.  e.,  inhabit)  the  city."  t  Resi- 
dence in  the  capital,  it  appears,  is  to  be  regarded 
as  a  public  service.  The  maintenance  of  the 
civic  life  of  Jerusalem  was  an  object  in  which  the 
whole  nation  was  interested,  a  truth  symbolised 
by  naming  its  twelve  gates  after  the  twelve  sons 
of  Jacob. $  Hence,  also,  its  population  is  to  be 
representative  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and  who- 

*Smend,  for  example,  points  out  that  if  we  count  the 
Levites'  portion  as  a  tribal  inheritance,  and  include 
Manasseh  and  Ephraim  undei  the  house  of  Joseph  (as  is 
done  in  the  naming  of  the  gates  of  the  city),  we  have  the 
sons  of  Rachel  and  Leah  evenly  distributed  on  either  side 
of  the  "oblation."  Then  at  the  farthest  distance  from 
the  Temple  are  the  sons  of  Jacob's  handmaids,  Gad  in  the 
extreme  south,  and  Dan,  Asjier,  and  Naphtali  in  the  north. 
This  is  ingenious,  but  not  ia  the  least  convincing. 

+  Ver.  18. 

tVv.  31-34.  It  is  difficult  to  trace  a  clear  connection 
between  the  positions  of  the  gates  and  the  geographical 
distribution  of  the  tribes  in  the  country.    The  fact  that 


Ezekielxlvii..xlviii.J     RENEWAL    AND    ALLOTMENT    OF    LAND. 


349 


ever  comes  to  dwell  there  is  to  have  a  share  in 
the  land  beloneing  to  the  city.*  But  evidently 
the  legislation  on  this  point  is  incomplete.  How 
were  the  inhabitants  of  the  capital  to  be  chosen 
out  of  all  the  tribes?  Would  its  citizenship  be 
regarded  as  a  privilege  or  as  an  onerous  respon- 
sibility? Would  it  be  necessary  to  make  a  selec- 
tion out  of  a  host  of  applications,  or  would  spe- 
cial inducements  have  to  be  oflfered  to  procure 
a  sufficient  population?  To  these  questions  the 
vision  furnishes  no  answer,  and  there  is  nothing 
to  show  whether  Ezekiel  contemplated  the  pos- 
sibility that  residence  in  the  new  city  might  pre- 
sent few  attractions  and  many  disadvantages  to 
an  agricultural  community  such  as  he  had  in 
view.  It  is  a  curious  incident  of  the  return  from 
the  Exile  that  the  problem  of  peopling  Jerusa- 
lem emerged  in  a  more  serious  form  than  Eze- 
kiel from  his  ideal  point  of  view  could  have  fore- 
seen. We  read  that  "  the  rulers  of  the  people 
dwelt  at  Jerusalem:  the  rest  of  the  people  also 
cast  lots,  to  bring  one  of  ten  to  dwell  in  Jeru- 
salem, the  holy  city,  and  nine  parts  in  [other] 
cities.  And  the  people  blessed  all  the  men  that 
willingly  offered  themselves  to  dwell  at  Jerusa- 
lem." t  There  may  have  been  causes  for  this 
general  reluctance  which  are  unknown  to  us, 
but  the  principal  reason  was  doubtless  the  one 
which  has  been  hinted  at,  tnat  the  new  colony 
lived  mainly  by  agriculture,  and  the  district  in 
the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  capital  was  not 
sufficiently  fertile  to  support  a  large  agricultural 
population.  The  new  Jerusalem  was  at  first  a 
somewhat  artificial  foundation,  and  a  city  too 
largely  developed  for  the  resources  of  the  com- 
munity of  which  it  was  the  centre.  Its  exist- 
ence was  necessary  more  for  the  protection  and 
support  of  the  Temple  than  for  the  ordinary 
ends  of  civilisation;  and  hence  to  dwell  in  it  was 
for  the  majority  an  act  of  self-sacrifice  by  which 
a  man  was  felt  to  deserve  well  of  his  country. 
And  the  only  important  difiference  between  the 
actual  reality  and  Ezekiel's  ideal  is  that  in  the 
latter  the  supernatural  fertility  of  the  land  and 
the  reign  of  universal  peace  obviate  the  diffi- 
culties which  the  founders  of  the  post-exilic  the- 
ocracy had  to  encounter. 

This  seeming  indifference  of  the  prophet  to  the 
secular  interests  represented  by  the  metropolis 
strikes  us  as  a  singular  feature  in  his  programme. 
It  is  strange  that  the  man  who  was  so  thoughtful 
about  the  salt-pans  of  the  Dead  Sea  should  pass 
so  lightly  over  the  details  of  the  reconstruction 
of  a  city.  But  we  have  had  several  intimations 
that  this  is  not  the  department  of  things  in 
which  Ezekiel's  hold  on  reality  is  most  con- 
spicuous. We  have  already  remarked  on  the 
boldness  of  the  conception  which  changes  the 
site  of  the  capital  in  order  to  guard  the  sanctity 
of  the  Temple.  And  now,  when  its  situation 
and  form  are  accurately  defined,  we  have  no 
sketch  of  municipal  institutions,  no  hint  of  the 
purposes  for  which  the  city  exists,  and  no 
glimpse  of  the  busy  and  varied  activities  which 
we  naturally  connect  with  the  name.  If  Eze- 
kiel thought  of  it  at  all,  except  as  existing  on 
paper,  he  was  probably  interested  in  it  as  fur- 
nishing the  representative  congregation  on 
minor  occasions  of  public  worship,  such  as  the 

here  Levi  is  counted  as  a  tribe  and  Ephraim  and  Manasseh 
are  united  under  the  name  of  Joseph  indicates  perhaps 
that  none  was  intended. 

*  Ver  iq. 

tNeh.  xi.  I,  2. 


Sabbaths  and  new  moons,  when  the  whole  peo- 
ple could  not  be  expected  to  assemble.  The 
truth  is  that  the  idea  of  the  city  in  the  vision 
is  simply  an  abstract  religious  symbol,  a  sort  of 
epitome  and  concentration  of  theocratic  life. 
Like  the  figure  of  the  prince  in  earlier  chapters, 
it  is  taken  from  the  national  institutions  which 
perished  at  the  Exile;  the  outline  is  retained,  the 
typical  significance  is  enhanced,  but  the  form  is 
shadowy  and  indistmct,  the  colour  and  variety 
of  concrete  reality  are  absent.  It  was  perhaps  a 
stage  through  which  political  conceptions  had  to 
pass  before  their  religious  meaning  could  be  ap- 
prehended. And  yet  the  fact  that  the  symbol 
of  the  Holy  City  is  preserved  is  deeply  sug- 
gestive and  indeed  scarcely  less  important  in  its 
own  way  than  the  retention  of  the  type  of  the 
king.  Ezekiel  can  no  mo^e  think  of  the  land 
without  a  capital  than  of  the  state  without  a 
prince.  The  word  "  city  " — synonym  of  the  full- 
est and  most  intense  form  of  life,  of  life  regu- 
lated by  law  and  elevated  by  devotion  to  a  com- 
mon ideal,  in  which  every  worthy  faculty  of  hu- 
man nature  is  quickened  by  the  close  and  varied 
intercourse  of  men  with  each  other — has  defi- 
nitely taken  its  place  in  the  vocabulary  of  reli- 
gion. It  is  there,  not  to  be  superseded,  but  to 
be  refined  and  spiritualised,  until  the  city  of  God, 
glorified  in  the  praises  of  Israel,  becomes  the  in- 
spiration of  the  loftiest  thought  and  the  most 
ardent  longing  of  Christendom.  And  even  for 
the  perplexing  problems  that  the  Church  has  to 
face  at  this  day  there  is  hardly  a  more  profitable 
exercise  of  the  Christian  imagination  than  to 
dream  with  practical  intent  of  the  consecration 
of  civic  life  through  the  subjection  of  all  its  influ- 
ences to  the  ends  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom. 
On  the  other  hand  we  must  surely  recognise 
that  this  vision  of  a  Temple  and  a  city  separated 
from  each  other — where  religious  and  secular  in- 
terests are  as  it  were  concentrated  at  different 
points,  so  that  the  one  may  be  more  effectually 
subordinated  to  the  other — is  not  the  final  and 
perfect  vision  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  That 
ideal  has  played  a  leading  and  influential  part  in 
the  history  of  Christianity.  It  is  essentially  the 
ideal  formulated  in  Augustine's  great  work  on 
the  city  of  God,  which  ruled  the  ecclesiastical 
polity  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  The  State  is  an 
unholy  institution;  it  is  an  embodiment  of  the 
power  of  this  present  evil  world:  the  true  city 
of  God  is  the  visible  Catholic  Church,  and  only 
by  subjection  to  the  Church  can  the  State  be 
redeemed  from  itself  and  be  made  a  means  of 
blessing.  That  theory  served  a  providential 
purpose  in  preserving  the  traditions  of  Chris- 
tianity through  dark  and  troubled  ages,  and 
training  the  rude  nations  of  Europe  in  purity  and 
righteousness  and  reverence  for  that  by  which 
God  makes  Himself  known.  But  the  Reforma- 
tion was,  amongst  other  things,  a  protest  against 
this  conception  of  the  relation  of  Church  to 
State,  of  the  sacred  to  the  secular.  By  assert- 
ing the  right  of  each  believer  to  deal  with  Christ 
directly  without  the  mediation  of  Church  or 
priest  it  broke  down  the  middle  wall  of  parti- 
tion between  religion  and  every-day  duty;  it 
sanctified  common  life  by  showing  how  a  man 
may  serve  God  as  a  citizen  in  the  family  or  the 
workshop  better  than  in  the  cloister  or  at  the 
altar.  It  made  the  kingdom  of  God  to  be  a 
present  power  wherever  there  are  lives  trans- 
formed by  love  to  Christ  and  serving  their  fel- 
low-men for  His  sake.     And  if  Catholicism  may 


35^ 


THE    BOOK   OF    EZEKIEL, 


find  some  plausible  support  for  its  theory  in 
Ezekiel  and  the  Old  Testament  theocracy  in  gen- 
eral, Protestants  may  perhaps  with  better  right 
appeal  to  the  grander  ideal  represented  by  the 
new  Jerusalem  of  the  Apocalypse — the  city  that 
needs  no  Temple,  because  the  Lord  Himself  is 
in  her  midst. 

"  And  I  John  saw  the  holy  city,  new  Jerusa- 
lem, coming  down  from  God  out  of  heaven, 
prepared  as  a  bride  adorned  for  her  husband. 
And  I  heard  a  great  voice  out  of  heaven  saying. 
Behold,  the  tabernacle  of  God  is  with  men,  and 
He  will  dwell  with  them,  and  they  shall  be  His 
people,  and  God  Himself  shall  be  with  them, 
and  be  their  God.  .  .  .  And  I  saw  no  temple 
therein:  for  the  Lord  God  Almighty  and  the 
Lamb  are  the  temple  of  it.  And  the  city  had 
no  need  of  the  sun,  neither  'of  the  moon,  to  shine 
in  it:  for  the  glory  of  God  did  lighten  it,  and 
the  Lamb  is  the  light  thereof."  * 

It  may  be  difficult  for  us  amid  the  entangle- 
ments of  the  present  to  read  that  vision  aright — 
*  Rev.  xxi.  2,  3,  22,  23. 


difficult  to  say  ^vhether  it  is  on  earth  or  in 
heaven  that  we  are  to  look  for  the  city  in  which 
there  is  no  Tem^ple.  Worship  is  an  essential 
function  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  and  so  long 
as  we  are  in  our  earthly  abode  worship  will  re- 
quire external  symbols  and  a  visible  organisation. 
But  this  at  least  we  know,  that  the  will  of  God 
must  be  done  on  earth  as  it  is  in  heaven.  The 
true  kingdom  of  God  is  within  us;  and  His 
presence  with  men  is  realised,  not  in  special  re- 
ligious services  w'hich  stand  apart  from  our 
common  life,  but  in  the  constant  influence  of 
His  Spirit,  forming  our  characters  after  the  im- 
age of  Christ,  and  permeating  all  the  channels  of 
social  intercourse  and  public  action,  until  every- 
thing done  on  earth  is  to  the  glory  of  our 
Father  which  is  in  heaven.  That  is  the  ideal  set 
forth  by  the  coming  of  the  holy  city  of  God, 
and  only  in  this  way  can  we  look  for  the  ful- 
filment of  the  promire  embodied  in  the  new 
name  of  Ezekiel's  city,  Jihovah-shammah, — 

The  Lord  "S  Tk^b- 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 


CONTENTS. 


PART  I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

ClIAI'TKR    I. 

PAGE 

The    Historic    Existence    of    the    Prophet 

Daniel 355 


Chapter  II. 
General  Survey  of  the  Book,  .... 

Chapter  III. 
Peculiarities  of  the  Historical  Section,  . 

Chapter  IV. 
General  Structure  of  the  Book, 

Chaptkr  V. 
The  Theology  of  the  Book,  .... 

Chapter  VI. 
Peculiarities    of    the    Apocalyptic    and    Pro- 


357 
364 
370 
371 

371 


phetic  Section  of  the  Book,    . 

Chapter  VII. 
Internal  Evidence, 373 

Chapter  VIII. 

Evidence  in  Favour  of  the  Genuineness  Un- 
certain and  Inadequate,  ....     376 

Chapter  IX. 

External  Evidence  and  Reception  into  the 

Canon, 378 

Chapter  X. 
Summary  and  Conclusion,      ....    382 

PART  II. 

COMMENTARY  ON  THE  HISTORIC 
SECTION. 

Chapter  XI. 
The  Prelude, 383 

Chapter  XII. 
The  Dream-Image  of  Ruined  Empires,        .     387 


Chapter  XIII. 

PAGE 

The  Idol  of  Gold,  and  the  Faithful  Three,  .    394 

Chapter  XIV. 

The    Babylonian    Cedar,   and   the   Stricken 

Despot, 398 

Chapter  XV. 
The   Fiery  Inscription 402 

Chapter  XVI. 
Stopping  the  Mouths  of  Lions,      .        .        .    406 

PART  III. 

THE  PROPHETIC  SECTION  OF  THE  BOOK. 

Chapter  XVII. 
Vision  of  the  Four  Wild  Beasts,  .        .        .    409 

Chapter   XVIII. 
The  Ram  and  the  He-Goat,  ....    414 

Chapter  XIX. 
The  Seventy  Weeks 417 

Chapter  XX. 
Introduction  to  the  Concluding  Vision,      .    423 

Cmapper  XXI. 

An  Enigmatic  Prophecy  Passing  into  De- 
tails of  the  Reign  of  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes, 424 


Chapter  XXII. 


The  Epilogue; 


APPENDIX. 


Approximate  Chronological  Tables,     .         .     431 
Genealogical    Table  nf    the    Lagidae,    Ptol- 
emies, and  Seleucida:,       ....    432 


353 


23- Vol.  IV. 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


BY  THE  REV.    F.    W.   FARRAR,  D.   D.,   F.   R.    S. 


PART     I. 

INTRODUCTION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  HISTORIC  EXISTENCE  OF  THE 
PROPHET  DANIEL. 

'Trothe  is  the  hiest  thinge  a  man  may  kepe."— Chaucer. 

We  propose  in  the  following  pages  to  ex- 
amine the  Book  of  the  Prophet  Daniel  by  the 
same  general  methods  which  have  been  adopted 
in  other  volumes  of  the  Expositor's  Bible.  It 
may  well  happen  that  the  conclusions  adopted  as 
regards  its  origin  and  its  place  in  the  Sacred 
Volume  will  not  command  the  assent  of  all  our 
readers.  On  the  other  hand,  we  may  feel  a  rea- 
sonable confidence  that,  even  if  some  are  unable 
to  accept  the  views  at  which  we  have  arrived,  and 
which  we  have  here  endeavoured  to  present  with 
fairness,  they  will  still  read  them  with  interest, 
as  opinions  which  have  been  calmly  and  con- 
scientiously formed,  and  to  which  the  writer  has 
been  led  by  strong  conviction. 

All  Christians  will  acknowledge  the  sacred 
and  imperious  duty  of  sacrificing  every  other 
consideration  to  the  unbiased  acceptance  of  that 
which  we  regard  as  truth.  Further  than  this 
our  readers  will  find  much  to  elucidate  the  Book 
of  Daniel  chapter  by  chapter,  apart  from  any 
questions  which  affect  its  authorship  or  age. 

But  I  should  like  to  say  on  the  threshold  that, 
though  I  am  compelled  to  regard  the  Book  of 
Daniel  as  a  work  which,  in  its  present  form,  first 
saw  the  light  in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
and  though  I  believe  that  its  six  magnificent 
opening  chapters  were  never  meant  to  be  re- 
garded in  any  other  light  than  that  of  moral  and 
religious  Haggadoth,  yet  no  words  of  mine  can 
exaggerate  the  value  which  I  attach  to  this  part 
of  our  Canonical  Scriptures.  The  Book,  as  we 
shall  see,  has  exercised  a  powerful  influence  over 
Christian  conduct  and  Christian  thought.  Its 
right  to  a  place  in  the  Canon  is  undisputed  and 
indisputable,  and  there  is  scarcely  a  single  book 
of  the  Old  Testament  which  can  be  made  more 
richly  "  profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for 
correction,  for  instruction  in  righteousness,  that 
the  man  of  God  may  be  complete,  completely 
furnished  unto  every  good  work."  Such  reli- 
gious lessons  are  eminently  suitable  for  the  aims 
of  the  Expositor's  Bible.  They  are  not  in  the 
slightest  degree  impaired  by  those  results  of 
arch^ological  discovery  and  "  criticism  "  which 
are  now  almost  universally  accepted  by  the 
scholars  of  the  Continent,  and  by  many  of  our 
chief  English  critics.  Finally  unfavourable  to 
the  authenticity,  they  are  yet  in  no  way  deroga- 
tory to  the  preciousness  of  this  Old  Testament 
Apocalypse. 


The  first  question  which  we  must  consider  is, 
"  What  is  known  about  the  Prophet  Daniel?  " 


I.  If  we  accept  as  historical  the  particulars 
narrated  of  him  in  this  Book,  it  is  clear  that  few 
Jews  have  ever  risen  to  so  splendid  an  eminence. 
Under  four  powerful  kings  and  conquerors,  of 
three  dififerent  nationalities  and  dynasties,  he  held 
a  position  of  high  authority  among  the  haughti- 
est aristocracies  of  the  ancient  world.  At  a  very 
early  age  he  was  not  only  a  satrap,  but  the 
Prince  and  Prime  Minister  over  all  the  satraps 
in  Babylonia  and  Persia;  not  only  a  Magian,  but 
the  Head  Magian,  and  Chief  Governor  over  all 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon.  Not  even  Joseph,  as 
the  chief  ruler  over  all  the  house  of  Pharaoh, 
had  anything  like  the  extensive  sway  exercised 
by  the  Daniel  of  this  Book.  He  was  placed  by 
Nebuchadrezzar  "  over  the  whole  province  of 
Babylon";*  under  Darius  he  was  President  of 
the  Board  of  Three  to  "  whom  all  the  satraps  " 
sent  their  accounts;!  and  he  was  continued  in 
office  and  prosperity  under  Cyrus  the  Persian.:}: 

II.  It  is  natural,  then,  that  we  should  turn  to 
the  monuments  and  inscriptions,  of  the  Baby- 
lonian, Persian,  and  Median  Empires  to  see  if 
any  mention  can  be  found  of  so  prominent  a 
ruler.  But  hitherto  neither  has  his  name  been 
discovered,  nor  the  faintest  trace  of  his  existence. 

III.  If  we  next  search  other  non-Biblical 
sources  of  information,  we  find  much  respect- 
ing him  in  the  Apocrypha — "  The  Song  of  the 
Three  Children,"  "  The  Story  of  Susanna,"  and 
"  Bel  and  the  Dragon."  But  these  additions  to 
the  Canonical  Books  are  avowedly  valueless  for 
any  historic  purpose.  They  are  romances,  in 
which  the  vehicle  of  fiction  is  used,  in  a  manner 
which  at  all  times  was  popular  in  Jewish  litera- 
ture, to  teach  lessons  of  faith  and  conduct  by 
the  example  of  eminent  sages  or  saints.^  The 
few  other  fictitious  fragments  preserved  by  Fa- 
bricius  have  not  the  smallest  importance.!  Jo- 
sephus,  beyond  mentioning  that  Daniel  and  his 
three  companions  were  of  the  family  of  King 
Zedekiah,T[  adds  nothing  appreciable  to  our  in- 
formation. He  narrates  the  story  of  the  Book, 
and  in  doing  so  adopts  a  somewhat  apologetic 
tone,  as  though  he  specially  declined  to  vouch  for 
its  historic  exactness.  For  he  says:  "  Let  no  one 
blame  me  for  writing  down  everything  of  this 
nature,  as  I  find  it  in  our  ancient  books:  for 
as  to  that  matter,  I  have  plainly  assured  those 
that  think  me  defective  in  any  such  point,  or 
complain    of    my    management,    and    have    told 

*Dan.  ii.  48. 

t  Dan.  V.  2g,  vi.  2. 

i  Dan.  vi.  28.  There  is  a  Daniel  of  the  sons  of  Ithamar 
in  Ezra  viii.  2,  and  among  those  who  sealed  the  covenant 
in  Neh.  x.  6. 

§  For  a  full  account  of  the  Agada  Calso  called  Agadtha 
and  Haggada),  I  must  refer  the  reader  to  Hamburger's 
"  Real-Eucyklopadie  ftir  Bibel  und  Talmud,"  ii.  19-27, 
921-934.  The  first  two  forms  of  the  words  are  Aramaic; 
the  third  was  a  Hebrew  form  in  use  among  the  Jews  in 

Babylonia.    The  word  is  derived  from    'ii,  "  to  say  "  or 

"explain."  Halacha  was  the  rule  of  religious  praxis,  a 
sort  of  Directorium  Judaicum  :  Haggada  was  the  result 
of  free  religious  reflection.  See  further  Strack,  "  Einl.  in 
den  Thalmud,"  iv.  122. 

|!  Fabricius,  "Cod.  Pseudepigr.  Vet.  Test.,"  i.  1124. 

t  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  X.  xi.  7.  But  Pseudo-Epiphanius  ("  De 
Vit.  Dan.,"  x.)says:  Teyove  riov  €(6xi»v  rfi^  fia<Ti.\iKfi^  iinriptciai. 
So  to  the  "  Midrash  "  on  Ruth,  7. 


3S5 


356 


^     THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


them,  in  the  beginning  of  this  history,  that  I 
intended  to  do  no  more  than  to  translate  the 
Hebrew  books  into  the  Greek  language,  and 
promised  them  to  explain  these  facts,  without 
adding  anything  to  them  of  my  own,  or  taking 
anything  away  from  them."  * 

IV.  In  the  Talmud,  again,  we  find  nothing 
historical.  Daniel  is  always  mentioned  as  a 
champion  against  idolatry,  and  his  wisdom  is  so 
highly  esteemed,  that,  "  if  all  the  wise  men  of 
the  heathen,"  we  are  told,  "  were  on  one  side, 
and  Daniel  on  the  other,  Daniel  would  still  pre- 
vail." f  He  is  spoken  of  as  an  example  of  God's 
protection  of  the  innocent,  and  his  three  daily 
prayers  are  taken  as  our  rule  of  life.t  To  him 
are  applied  the  verses  of  Lam.  iii.  SS-57:  "  I 
called  upon  Thy  name,  O  Lord,  out  of  the  low- 
est pit.  .  .  .  Thou  drewest  near  in  the  day 
that  I  called:  Thou  saidst.  Fear  not.  O  Lord, 
Thou  hast  pleaded  the  causes  of  my  soul;  Thou 
hast  redeemed  my  life."  We  are  assured  that  he 
was  of  Davidic  descent;  obtained  permission  for 
the  return  of  the  exiles;  survived  till  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  Temple;  lived  to  a  great  age,  and 
finally  died  in  Palestine.g  Rav  even  went  so  far 
as  to  say,  "  If  there  be  any  like  the  Messiah 
among  the  living,  it  is  our  Rabbi  the  Holy:  if 
among  the  dead,  it  is  Daniel."  ||  In  the  "  Avoth  " 
of  Rabbi  Nathan  it  is  stated  that  Daniel  exer- 
cised himself  in  benevolence  by  endowing  brides, 
following  funerals,  and  giving  alms.  One  of  the 
Apocryphal  legends  respecting  him  has  been 
widely  spread.  It  tells  us  that,  when  he  was  a 
second  time  cast  into  the  den  of  lions  under 
Cyrus,  and  was  fasting  from  lack  of  food,  the 
Prophet  Habakkuk  was  taken  by  a  hair  of  his 
head  and  carried  by  the  angel  of  the  Lord  to 
Babylon,  to  give  to  Daniel  the  dinner  which  he 
had  prepared  for  his  reapers. If  It  is  with  refer- 
ence to  this  Haggada  that  in  the  catacombs 
Daniel  is  represented  in  the  lions'  den  standing 
naked  between  two  lions — an  emblem  of  the  soul 
between  sin  and  death — and  that  a  youth  with  a 
pot  of  food  is  by  his  side. 

There  is  a  Persian  apocalypse  of  Daniel  trans- 
lated by  Merx  ("  Archiv,"  i.  387),  and  there  are 
a  few  worthless  Mohammedan  legends  about 
him  which  are  given  in  D'Herbelot's  "  Bibli- 
otheque  Orientale."  They  only  serve  to  show 
how  widely  extended  was  the  reputation  which 
became  the  nucleus  of  strange  and  miraculous 
stories.  As  in  the  case  of  Pythagoras  and  Em- 
pedocles,  they  indicate  the  deep  reverence  which 
the  ideal  of  his  character  inspired.  They  are  as 
the  fantastic  clouds  which  gather  about  the  lofti- 
est mountain  peaks.  In  later  days  he  seems  to 
have  been  comparatively  forgotten.** 

These  references  would  not,  however,  suffice  to 

*Jos.,  "  Antt.,"'  X.  X.  6. 

+     Yoma,"  f.  77. 

t  "  Beraclioth."  f.  31. 

§  "  Sanhedrin,"  f.  93.  "  Midrash  Rabba  "  on  Ruth,  7,  etc., 
quoted  by  Hamburger,  "  Real-Encyclopadie,"  i.  225. 

II  "  Kiddushin,"  £.  72,  6:  Hershon,  "Genesis  ace.  to  the 
Talmud,"  p.  471. 

If  Pel  and  the  Dragon,  33-39.  It  seems  to  be  an  old 
Midrashic  legend.  It  is  quoted  by  Dorotheus  and  Pseudo- 
Epipbanius,  and  referred  to  by  some  of  the  Fathers 
Eusebius  supposes  another  Habakkuk  and  another 
Daniel;  but  anachronisms,  literary  extravagances,  or 
legendary  character  are  obvious  on  the  face  of  such  nar- 
ratives. Such  faults  as  these,  though  valid  against  any 
pretensions  to  the  rank  of  authentic  history,  do  not  render 
the  stories  less  effective  as  pieces  of  Haggadic  satire,  or 
less  interesting  as  preserving  vestiges  of  a  cycle  of  pop- 
ular legends  relating  to  Daniel  "  (Rev.  C.  J.  Ball, 
■'Speaker's  Commentary,"  on  Apocrypha,  ii.  350). 

**  Hottinger,  "  Hist.  Orientalis,"  p.  g2. 


prove  Daniel's  liiskirical  existence.  They  might 
merely  result  from  the  literal  acceptance  of  the 
story  narrated  in  the  Book.  From  the  name 
"  Daniel,"  which  is  by  no  means  a  common  one, 
and  means  "  Judge  of  God,"  nothing  can  be 
learnt.     It  is  only  found  in  three  other  instances.* 

Turning  to  the  Old  Testament  itself,  we  have 
reason  for  surprise  both  in  its  allusions  and  its 
silences.  One  only  of  the  sacred  writers  refers 
to  Daniel,  and  that  is  Ezekiel.  In  one  passage 
(xxviii.  3)  the  Prince  of  Tyrus  is  apostrophised 
in  the  words,  "  Behold,  thou  art  wiser  than 
Daniel;  there  is  no  secret  that  they  can  hide 
from  thee."  In  the  other  (xiv.  14,  20)  the  word 
of  the  Lord  declares  to  the  guilty  city,  that 
"  though  these  three  men,  Noah,  Daniel,  and 
Job,  were  in  it,  they  should  deliver  but  their  own 
souls  by  their  righteousness";  "they  shall  de- 
liver neither  son  nor  daughter." 

The  last  words  may  be  regarded  as  a  general 
allusion,  and  therefore  we  may  pass  over  the 
circumstance  that  Daniel — who  was  undoubtedly 
a  eunuch  in  the  palace  of  Babvlon,  and  who  is 
often  pointed  to  as  a  fulfilment  of  the  stern 
prophecy  of  Isaiah  to  Hezekiah  f — could  never 
have  had  either  son  or  daughter. 

But  in  other  respects  the  allusion  is  surprising. 

i.  It  was  very  unusual  among  the  Jews  to 
elevate  their  contemporaries  to  such  a  height  of 
exaltation,  and  it  is  indeed  startling  that  Ezekiel 
should  thus  place  his  youthful  contemporary  on 
such  a  pinnacle  as  to  unite  his  name  to  those  of 
Noah  the  antediluvian  patriarch  and  the  mys- 
terious man  of  IJz. 

ii.  We  might,  with  Theodoret,  Jerome,  and 
Kimchi,  account  for  the  mention  of  Daniel's 
name  at  all  in  this  connection  by  the  peculiar 
circumstances  of  his  life;t  but  there  is  little 
probability  in  the  suggestions  of  bewildered  com- 
mentators as  to  the  reason  why  his  name  should 
be  placed  between  those  of  Noah  and  Job.  It  is 
difficult,  with  Havernick,  to  recognise  any  climax 
in  the  order;  §  nor  can  it  be  regarded  as  quite 
satisfactory  to  say,  with  Delitzsch,  that  the  col- 
location is  due  to  the  fact  that  "  as  Noah  was 
a  righteous  man  of  the  old  world,  and  Job  of  the 
ideal  world,  Daniel  represented  immediately  the 
contemporaneous  world."!  If  Job  was  a  purely 
ideal  instance  of  ejtemplary  goodness,  why  may 
not  Daniel  have  been  the  same? 

To  some  critics  the  allusion  has  appeared  so 
strange  that  they  have  referred  it  to  an  imagi- 
nary Daniel  who  had  lived  at  the  Court  of 
Nineveh  during  the  Assyrian  exile; If  or  to  some 
mythic  hero  who  belonged  to  ancient  days — per- 
haps, like  Melchizedek,  a  contemporary  of  the 
ruin  of  the  cities  of  the  Plain.**  Ewald  tries  to 
urge  something  for  the  former  conjecture;  yet 
neither  for  it  nor  for  the  latter  is  there  any  tittle 
of  real  evidence. ft  This,  however,  would  not  be 
decisive  against  the  hypothesis,  since  in  i  Kings 
iv.  31  we  have  references  to  men  of  pre-eminent 

*  Ezra  viii.  2  ;  Neh.  x.  6.  In  i  Chron.  iii.  i  Daniel  is  an 
alternative  name  for  David's  son  Chileab — perhaps  a 
clerical  error.  If  so,  the  names  Daniel,  Mishael,  Azariah, 
and  Hananiah  are  only  found  in  the  two  post-exilic 
books,  whence  Kamphausen  supposes  them  to  have  been 
borrowed  by  the  writer. 

t  Isa   xxxix.  7. 

tSee  Rosenmiiller,  "  Scholia,"  ad  ioc. 

i  "  Ezek.,"  p.,  207. 

II  Herzog,  "  R.  E.,"  s.  v. 

1  Ewald,  "Proph.  d.  Alt.  Bund.,"  ii.  560;  De  Wette, 
"  Einleit.,"  §  253. 

**  So  Von  Lehgerke,  "Dan  ,"  xciii.  ff.;  Hitzig,  "Dan.," 
viii. 

tt  He  is  followed  by  Runsen,  "  Gott  in  der  Gesch,"  i.  514. 


GENERAL  SURVEY  OF  THE  BOOK. 


357 


wisdom  respecting  whom  no  breath  of  tradition 
has  come  down  to  us.* 

iii.  But  if  we  accept  the  Book  of  Daniel  as 
literal  history,  the  allusion  of  Ezekiel  becomes 
still  more  difficult  to  explain;  for  Daniel  must 
have  been  not  only  a  contemporary  of  the 
prophet  of  the  Exile,  but  a  very  youthful  one. 
We  are  told — a  difficulty  to  which  we  shall  sub- 
sequently allude — that  Daniel  was  taken  captive 
in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  (Dan.  i.  i),  about 
the  year  b.  c.  6o6.  Ignatius  says  that  he  was 
twelve  years  old  when  he  foiled  the  elders;  and 
the  narrative  shows  that  he  could  not  have  been 
much  older  when  taken  captive.-f  If  Ezekiel's 
prophecy  was  uttered  B.  c.  584,  Daniel  at  that 
time  could  only  have  been  twenty-two;  if  it  was 
uttered  as  late  as  b.  c.  572^  Daniel  would  still 
have  been  only  thirty-four,  and  therefore  little 
more  than  a  youth  in  Jewish  eyes.  It  is  un- 
doubtedly surprising  that  among  Orientals,  who 
regard  age  as  the  chief  passport  to  wisdom,  a 
living  youth  should  be  thus  canonised  between 
the  Patriarch  of  the  Deluge  and  the  Prince 
of  Uz. 

iv.  Admitting  that  this  pinnacle  of  eminence 
may  have  been  due  to  the  peculiar  splendour  of 
Daniel's  career,  it  becomes  the  less  easy  to  ac- 
count for  the  total  silence  respecting  him  in  the 
other  books  of  the  Old  Testament — in  the 
Prophets  who  were  contemporaneous  with  the 
Exile  and  its  close,  like  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and 
Malachi;  and  in  the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah,  which  give  us  the  details  of  the  Return. 
No  post-exilic  prophets  seem  to  know  anything 
of  the  Book  of  Daniel.^  Their  expectations  of 
Israel's  future  are  very  different  from  his.  I  The 
silence  of  Ezra  is  specially  astonishing.  It  has 
often  been  conjectured  that  it  was  Daniel  who 
showed  to  Cyrus  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.^ 
Certainly  it  is  stated  that  he  held  the  very  high- 
est position  in  the  Court  of  the  Persian  King; 
yet  neither  does  Ezra  mention  his  existence,  nor 
does  Nehemiah — himself  a  high  functionary  in 
the  Court  of  Artaxerxes — refer  to  his  illustrious 
predecessor.  Daniel  outlived  the  first  return  of 
the  exiles  under  Zerubbabel,  and  he  did  not  avail 
himself  of  this  opportunity  to  revisit  the  land 
and  desolate  sanctuary  of  his  fathers  which  he 
loved  so  well.**  We  might  have  assumed  that 
patriotism  so  burning  as  his  would  not  have 
preferred  to  stay  at  Babylon,  or  at  Shushan, 
when  the  priests  and  princes  of  his  people  were 
returning  to  the  Holy  City.  Others  of  great  age 
faced  the  perils  of  the  Restoration;  and  if  he 
stayed  behind  to  be  of  greater  use  to  his  country- 
men, we  cannot  account  for  the  fact  that  he  is 
not  distantly  alluded  to  in  the  record  which  tells 
how  "  the  chief  of  the  fathers,  with  all  those 
whose  spirit  God  had  raised,  rose  up  to  go  to 
build  the  House  of  the  Lord  which  is  in  Jerusa- 
lem." ft  That  the  difficulty  was  felt  is  shown  by 
the  Mohammedan  legend  that  Daniel  did  return 
with  Ezra,$t  and  that  he  received  the  office  of 

♦  Renss,  "  Heil.  Schrift.,"  p.  570. 

tignat.,  "Ad  Magnes,"  3  (Long  Revision:  see  Light- 
foot,  ii.,  §  ii.,  p.  749).  So  too  in  "  Ps.  Mar.  ad  Ignat.,  3. 
Lightfoot  thinks  that  this  is  a  transference  from  Solomon 
{/.  c,  p.  727). 

tSee  Ezek.  xxix.  17. 

jSee  Zech.  ii.  6-io ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  g,  etc. 

I  See  Hag.  ii.  6-g,  20-23  ;  Zech.  ii,  5-17,  iii.  8-10  ;  Mai.  iii.  i. 

1  Ezra  (i.  i)  does  not  mention  the  striking  prophecies  of 
the  later  Isaiah  (xliv.  28,  xlv.  i),  but  refers  to  Jeremiah 
only  (xxv.  12,  xxix.  10). 

*•  Dan.  X.  1-18,  vi.  10. 

++  Ezra  i.  5. 

UD'Herbelot, /.  c. 


Governor  of  Syria,  from  which  country  he  went 
back  to  Susa,  where  his  tomb  is  still  yearly 
visited  by  crowds  of  adoring  pilgrims. 

V.  If  we  turn  to  the  New  Testament,  the  name 
of  Daniel  only  occurs  in  the  reference  to  "  the 
abomination  of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel 
the  prophet."  *  The  Book  of  Revelation  does 
not  name  him,  but  is  profoundly  influenced  by 
the  Book  of  Daniel  both  in  its  form  and  in  the 
symbols  which  it  adopts.f 

vi.  In  the  Apocrypha  Daniel  is  passed  over  in 
complete  silence  among  the  lists  of  Hebrew 
heroes  enumerated  by  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach. 
We  are  even  told  that  "  neither  was  there  a  man 
born  like  unto  Joseph,  a  leader  of  his  brethren, 
a  stay  of  the  people"  (Ecclus.  xlix.  15).  This 
is  the  more  singular  because  not  only  are  the 
achievements  of  Daniel  under  four  heathen  po- 
tentates greater  than  those  of  Joseph  under  one 
Pharaoh,  but  also  several  of  the  stories  of 
Daniel  at  once  remind  us  of  the  story  of  Joseph, 
and  even  appear  to  have  been  written  with  silent 
reference  to  the  youthful  Hebrew  and  his  for- 
tunes as  an  Egyptian  slave  who  was  elevated  to 
be  governor  of  the  land  of  his  exile. 


CHAPTER   II. 

GENERAL  SURVEY  OF  THE  BOOK. 

I.  The  Language. 

Unable  to  learn  anything  further  respecting 
the  professed  author  of  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
we  now  turn  to  the  Book  itself.  In  this  section 
I  shall  merely  give  a  general  sketch  of  its  main, 
external  phenomena,  and  shall  chiefly  pass  in  re- 
view those  characteristics  which,  though  they 
have  been  used  as  arguments  respecting  the  age 
in  which  it  originated,  are  not  absolutely  ir- 
reconcilable with  the  supposition  of  any  date  be- 
tween the  termination  of  the  Exile  (b.  c.  536) 
and  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (b.  c. 
164). 

I.  First  we  notice  the  fact  that  there  is  an 
interchange  of  the  first  and  third  person.  In 
chapters  i.-vi.  Daniel  is  mainly  spoken  of  in  the 
third  person;  in  chaps,  vii.-xii.  he  speaks  mainly 
in  the  first. 

Kranichfeld  tries  to  account  for  this  by  the 
supposition  that  in  chaps,  i.-vi.  we  practically 
have  extracts  from  Daniel's  diaries,t  whereas  in 
the  remainder  of  the  Book  he  describes  his  own 
visions.  The  point  cannot  be  much  insisted 
upon,  but  the  mention  of  his  own  high  praises 
(e  g.,  in  such  passages  as  vi.  4)  is  perhaps  hardly 
what  we  should  have  expected. 

II.  Next  we  observe  that  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
like  the  Book  of  Ezra,§  is  written  partly  in  the 
sacred  Hebrew,  partly  in  the  vernacular  Aramaic, 
which  is  often,  but  erroneously,  called  Chaldee.  H 

*  Matt.  xxiv.  15;  Mark  xiii.  14.  There  can  be  of  course 
no  certainty  that  the  "  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet  " 
is  not  the  comment  of  the  Evangelist. 

t  See  Elliott,  "  Horae  Apocalypticss,"  passtnt . 

t  Kranichfeld,  "  Das  Buch  Daniel,"  p.  4. 

§  See  Ezra  iv.  7,  vi.  18.  vii.  12-26. 

I!  '1  The  term  '  Chaldee  '  for  the  Aramaic  of  either  the 
Bible  or  the  Targuras  is  a  misnomer,  the  use  of  which  is 
only  a  source  of  confusion  "  (Driver,  p.  471).  A  single 
verse  of  Jeremiah  (x.  n)  is  in  Aramaic  :  "Thus  shall  ye 
say  unto  them.  The  gods  who  made  not  heaven  and  earth 
shall  perish  from  the  earth  and  from  under  heaven." 
Perhaps  Jeremiah  gave  the  verse  "to  the  Jews  as  an 
answer  to  the  heathen  among  whom  they  were  "  (Pusey. 
y.  II). 


358 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


The  first  section  (i.  i-ii.  4a)  is  in  Hebrew. 
The  language  changes  to  Aramaic  after  the 
words,  "  Then  spake  the  Chaldeans  to  the  king 
in  Syriac  "  (ii.  40) ;  and  this  is  continued  to  vii. 
28.  The  eighth  chapter  begins  with  the  words, 
"  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Bel- 
shazzar  a  vision  appeared  unto  me,  even  unto 
nie  Daniel";  and  here  the  Hebrew  is  resumed, 
and  is  continued  till  the  end  of  the  Book. 

The  question  at  once  arises  why  the  two  lan- 
guages were  used  in  the  same  Book. 

It  is  easy  to  understand  that,  during  the  course 
of  the  seventy  years'  Exile,  many  of  the  Jews 
became  practically  bilingual,  and  would  be  able 
to  write  with  equal  facility  in  one  language  or 
in  the  other. 

This  circumstance,  then,  has  no  bearing  on  the 
date  of  the  Book.  Down  to  the  Maccabean  age 
some  books  continued  to  be  written  in  Hebrew. 
These  books  must  have  found  readers.  Hence 
the  knowledge  of  Hebrew  cannot  have  died 
away  so  completely  as  has  been  supposed.  The 
notion  that  after  the  return  from  the  Exile  He- 
brew was  at  once  superseded  by  Aramaic  is  un- 
tenable. Hebrew  long  continued  to  be  the  lan- 
guage normally  spoken  at  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xiii. 
24),  and  the  Jews  did  not  bring  back  Aramaic 
with  them  to  Palestine,  but  found  it  there.* 

But  it  is  not  clear  why  the  linguistic  divisions 
in  the  Book  were  adopted.  Auberlen  says  that, 
after  the  introduction,  the  section  ii.  4  a-vii.  28 
was  written  in  Chaldee,  because  it  describes  the 
development  of  the  power  of  the  world  from  a 
world-historic  point  of  view;  and  that  the  re- 
mainder of  the  Book  was  written  in  Hebrew,  be- 
cause it  deals  with  the  development  of  the  world- 
powers  in  their  relation  to  Israel  the  people  of 
God.f  There  is  very  little  to  be  said  in  favour 
of  a  structure  so  little  obvious  and  so  highly 
artificial.  A  simpler  solution  of  the  difficulty 
would  be  that  which  accounts  for  the  use  of 
Chaldee  by  saying  that  it  was  adopted  in  those 
parts  which  involved  the  introduction  of  Ara- 
maic documents.  This,  however,  would  not  ac- 
count for  its  use  in  chap.  vii..  which  is  a  chapter 
of  visions  in  which  Hebrew  might  have  been 
naturally  expected  as  the  vehicle  of  prophecy. 
Strack  and  Meinhold  think  that  the  Aramaic  and 
Hebrew  parts  are  of  different  origin.  Konig 
supposes  that  the  Aramaic  sections  were  meant 
to  indicate  special  reference  to  the  Syrians  and 
Antiochus.J  Some  critics  have  thought  it  possi- 
ble that  the  Aramaic  sections  were  once  written 
in  Hebrew.  That  the  text  of  Daniel  has  not  been 
very  carefully  kept  becomes  clear  from  the  lib- 
erties to  which  it  was  subjected  by  the  Septu- 
agint  translators.  If  the  Hebrew  of  Jer.  x.  11 
(a  verse  which  only  exists  in  Aramaic)  has  been 
lost,  it  is  not  inconceivable  that  the  same  may 
have  happened  to  the  Hebrew  of  a  section  of 
Daniel. S 

The  Talmud  throws  no  light  on  the  question. 
It  only  says  that — 

i.  "  The  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue  wrote  "  || 
— by  which  is  perhaps  meant  that  thev  "  edited  " 

*  Driver,  p.  471  ;  Noldeke,  "  Enc.  Brit.,"  xxi.  647  ;  Wright, 
"Grammar,"  p.  16.  Ad.  Mer.x  has  a  treatise  on  "Cur  in 
lib.  Dan.  juxta  Hebr.  Aramaica  sit  adhibita  dialectus," 
1865  ;  but  his  solution,  '•  Scriptorem  omnia  qute  rudioribus 
vulgi  ingeniis  apta  viderentur  Aramaica  prseposuisse  "  is 
wholly  untenable. 

t  Auberlen,  "  Dan.,"  pp.  28,  2q  CE.  Tr.) 

t  "Einleit.,"  §  38 ^j. 

gCheyne,  "Enc.  Brit.,"  J.  v.  "Daniel." 

1113713.  See  2  Esdras  xiv.  22-48:  "In  forty  days  they 
wrote  two  hundred  and  four  books." 


— "  the  Book  of  Ezekiel,  the  Twelve  Minor 
Prophets,  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  the  Book 
of  Ezra";*  and  that — 

ii.  "  The  Chaldee  passages  in  the  Book  of  Ezra 
and  the  Book  of  Daniel  defile  the  hands."  f 

The  first  of  these  two  passages  is  merely  an 
assertion  that  the  preservation,  the  arrangement, 
and  the  admission  into  the  Canon  of  the  books 
mentioned  was  due  to  the  body  of  scribes  and 
priests — a  very  shadowy  and  unhistorical  body 
— known  as  the  Great  Synagogue. .f 

The  second  passage  sounds  startling,  but  is 
nothing  more  than  an  authoritative  declaration 
that  the  Chaldee  sections  of  Daniel  and  Ezra  are 
still  parts  of  Holy  Scripture,  though  not  written 
in  the  sacred  language. 

It  is  a  standing  rule  of  the  Talmudists  that 
"  All  Holy  Scripture  defiles  the  hands  " — even 
the  long-disputed  Books  of  Ecclesiastes  and 
Canticles.§  Lest  any  should  misdoubt  the  sa- 
credness  of  the  Chaldee  sections,  they  are  ex- 
pressly included  in  the  rule.  It  seems  to  have 
originated  thus:  The  eatables  of  the  heave  offer- 
ings were  kept  in  close  proximity  to  the  scroll 
of  the  Law,  for  both  were  considered  equally 
sacred.  If  a  mouse  or  rat  happened  to  nibble 
either,  the  offerings  and  the  books  'became  de- 
filed, and  therefore  defiled  the  hands  that  touched 
them.  II  To  guard  against  this  hypothetical  de- 
filement it  was  decided  that  all  handling  of  the 
Scriptures  should  be  followed  by  ceremonial  ab- 
lutions. To  say  that  the  Chaldee  chapters  "  de- 
file the  hands  "  is  the  Rabbinic  way  of  declaring 
their   Canonicity. 

Perhaps  nothing  certain  can  be  inferred  from 
the  philological  examination  either  of  the  He- 
brew or  of  the  Chaldee  portions  of  the  Book; 
but  they  seem  to  indicate  a  date  earlier  than  the 
age  of  Alexander  (b.  c.  2i2i3)-  On  this  part  of 
the  subject  there  has  been  a  great  deal  of  rash 
and  incompetent  assertion.  It  involves  delicate 
problems  on  which  an  independent  and  avaluable 
opinion  can  only  be  offered  by  the  merest  hand- 
ful of  living  scholars,  and  respecting  which  even 
these  scholars  sometimes  disagree.  In  deciding 
upon  such  points  ordinary  students  can  only 
weigh  the  authority  and  the  arguments  of  spe- 
cialists who  have  devoted  a  minute  and  lifelong 
study  to  the  grammar  and  history  of  the  Se- 
mitic  languages. 

I  know  no  higher  contemporary  authorities  on 
the  date  of  Hebrew  writings  than  the  late 
veteran  scholar  F.  Delitzsch  and  Professor 
Driver. 

I.  Nothing  was  more  beautiful  and  remarkable 
in  Professor  Delitzsch  than  the  open-minded 
candour  which  compelled  him  to  the  last  to  ad- 
vance with  advancing  thought;  to  admit  all  fresh 
elements  of  evidence;  to  continue  his  education 
as  a  Biblical  inquirer  to  the  latest  days  of  his 
life;  and  without  hesitation  to  correct,  modify, 
or  even  reverse  his  previous  conclusions  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  results  of  deeper  study  and 
fresh  discoveries.  He  wrote  the  article  on  Daniel 
in  Herzog's  "  Real-Encyclopiidie,"  and  in  the 
first  edition  of  that  work  maintained  its  genu- 
ineness;  but   in   the   later  editions    (iii.   470)    his 

*"Baba-Hathra,"  f.  15,  6:  comp.  "Sanhedrin,"  £.  83,  6. 

+  "  Yaddayim,"  iv.;  "  Mish.,"  5. 

tSee  Rau,  "  De  Synag.  Magna.,"  ii.  66  ff.;  Kuenen, 
"  Over  de  Mannen  der  Groote  Synagoge,"  1876 ;  Ewald, 
"Hist,  of  Israel,"  v.  168-170  (E.  Tr.) :  Westcott,  s.  v. 
"Canon  "  (Smith's  "  Diet,"  i.  500). 

§  "Yaddayim,"  iii.;  "Mish.,"  5;  Hershon,  "Treasures 
of  the  Talmud,"  pp.  41-4^. 

II  Hershon  (/.  c.)  refers  to  "  Shabbath,"  f.  14,  i. 


GENERAL  SURVEY  OF  THE  BOOK. 


359 


views  approximate  more  and  more  to  those  of 
the  Higher  Criticism.  Of  the  Hebrew  of  Dan- 
iel he  says  that  "  it  attaches  itself  here  and  there 
to  Ezekiel,  and  also  to  Habakkuk;  in  general 
character  it  resembles  the  Hebrew  of  the  Chron- 
icler who  wrote  shortly  before  the  beginning  of 
the  Greek  period  (b.  c.  332),  and  as  compared 
either  with  the  ancient  Hebrew  of  the  '  Mish- 
nah  '  is  full  of  singularities  and  harshnesses  of 
style."  * 

So  far,  then,  it  is  clear  that,  if  the  Hebrew 
mainly  resembles  that  of  B.  c.  332,  it  is  hardly 
likely  that  it  should  have  been  written  before  B. 
c.  536. 

Professor  Driver  says,  "  The  Hebrew  of  Dan- 
iel in  all  distinctive  features  resembles,  not  the 
Hebrew  of  Ezekiel,  or  even  of  Haggai  and  Zech- 
ariah,  but  that  of  the  age  subsequent  to  Nehe- 
miah  " — whose  age  forms  the  great  turning- 
point  in  Hebrew  style. 

He  proceeds  to  give  a  list  of  linguistic  pecu- 
liarities in  support  of  this  view,  and  other  spec- 
imens of  sentences  constructed,  not  in  the  style 
of  classical  Hebrew,  but  in  "  the  later  uncouth 
style "  of  the  Book  of  Chronicles.  He  points 
out  in  a  note  that  it  is  no  explanation  of  these 
peculiarities  to  argue  thit,  during  his  long  exile, 
Daniel  may  have  partially  forgotten  the  language 
of  his  youth;  "for  this  would  not  account  for 
the  resemblance  of  the  new  and  decadent  idioms 
to  those  which  appeared  in  Palestine  independ- 
ently two  hundred  and  fifty  years  afterwards."  f 
Behrmann,  in  the  latest  commentary  on  Daniel, 
mentions,  in  proof  of  the  late  character  of  the 
Hebrew:  (i)  the  introduction  of  Persian  words 
which  could  not  have  been  used  in  Babylonia  be- 
fore the  conquest  of  Cyrus  (as  in  i.  3,  5,  xi.  45, 
etc.);  (2)  many  Aramaic  or  Aramaising  words, 
expressions  and  grammatical  forms  (as  in  i.  5,  10, 
12,  16,  viii.  18,  22,  X.  17  21,  etc.);  (3)  neglect  of 
strict  accuracy  in  the  use  of  the  Hebrew  tenses 
(as  in  viii.  14,  ix.  3  f.,  xi.  4  f.,  etc.);  (4)  the  bor- 
rowing  of  archaic  expressions  from  ancient 
sources  (as  in  viii.  26,  ix.  2,  xi.  10,  40,  etc.);  (5) 
the  use  of  technical  terms  and  periphrases  com- 
mon in  Jewish  apocalypses  (xi.  6,  13,  35,  40, 
etc.).t 

2.  These  views  of  the  character  of  the  Hebrew 
agree  with  those  of  previous  scholars.  Bertholdt 
and  Kirms  declare  that  its  character  dififers  toto 
gencre  from  what  might  have  been  expected  had 
the  Book  been  genume.  Gesenius  says  that  the 
language  is  even  more  corrupt  than  that  of  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  Malachi.  Professor  Driver  says 
the  Persian  words  presuppose  a  period  after  the 
Persian  empire  had  been  well  established;  the 
Greek  words  demand,  the  Hebrew  supports,  and 
the  Aramaic  permits  a  date  after  the  conquest  of 
Palestine  by  Alexander  the  Great.  De  Wette 
and  Ewald  have  pointed  out  the  lack  of  the  old 
passionate  spontaniety  of  early  prophecy;  the  ab- 
S';nce  of  the  numerous  and  profound  paronoma- 
s  i3e,  or  plays  on  words,  which  characterised  the 
burning  oratory  of  the  prophets;  and  the  pecu- 
liarities of  the  style — which  is  sometimes  obscure 


*  Herzog-,  /.  c.\  so  too  Konig,  "Einleit.,"  §  387:  ''Das 
Hebr.  der  B.  Dan.  ist  nicht  bios  nachexilisch  sondern 
aiich  nachchronistisch."  He  instances  ribbo  (Dan.  xi. 
12)  for  rebuba,  "myriads"  (Ezek.  xvi.  7);  and  tamid, 
"  ■the  daily  burnt  offering  "  (Dan.  viii.  11),  as  post-Biblical 
H  ebrew  for  'olath  hatamid  i'Heh.  x.  34),  etc.  Margoliouth 
(livposi'/or,  April,  i8go)  thinks  that  the  Hebrew  proves  a 
d  ite  before  B.  c.  168  ;  on  which  view  see  Driver,  p.  483. 

t  "  Lit.  of  Old  Test.,"  pp.  473-476. 

t  "  Das  Buch  Dan.,"  iii. 


and  careless,  sometimes  pompous,  iterative,  and 
artificial.* 

3.  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  this  Book  the  name 
of  the  great  Babylonian  conqueror,  with  whom, 
in  the  narrative  part,  Daniel  is  thrown  into  such 
close  connection,  is  invariably  written  in  the  ab- 
solutely erroneous  form  which  his  name  assumed 
in  later  centuries — Nebuchadnezzar.  A  contem- 
porary, familiar  with  the  Babylonian  language, 
could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  the  fact  that 
the  only  correct  form  of  the  name  is  Nebuchad- 
rezzar— i.  e.,  Nebu-kiidurri-utsur,  "  Nebo  protect 
the  throne."  f 

4.  But  the  erroneous  form  Nebuchadnezzar  is 
not  the  only  one  which  entirely  militates  against 
the  notion  of  a  contemporary  writer.  There 
seem  to  be  other  mistakes  about  Babylonian  mat- 
ters into  which  a  person  in  Daniel's  position 
could  not  have  fallen.  Thus  the  name  Belte- 
shazzar  seems  to  be  connected  in  the  writer's 
mind  with  Bel,  the  favourite  deity  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar; but  it  can  ^^nly  mean  Balatu-utsur,  "  his 
life  protect,"  which  looks  like  a  mutilation. 
Ahed-nego  is  an  astonishingly  corrupt  form  of 
Abed-nafcM,  "  the  servant  of  Nebo."  Hammel- 
zar,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  Ashpenaz,  are  declared 
by  Assyriologists  to  be  "  out  of  keeping  with 
Babylonian  science."  In  ii.  48  signtn  means  a 
civil  ruler; — does  not  imply  Archimagus,  as  the 
context  seems  to  require,  but,  according  to  Le- 
normant,  a  high  civil  officer. 

5.  The  Aramaic  of  Daniel  closely  resembles 
that  of  Ezra.  Noldeke  calls  it  a  Palestinian  or 
Western  Aramaic  dialect,  later  than  that  of  the 
Book  of  Ezra.t  It  is  of  earlier  type  than  that 
of  the  Targums  of  Jonathan  and  Onkelos;  but 
that  fact  has  very  little  bearing  on  the  date  of 
the  Book,  because  the  differences  are  slight,  and 
the  resemblances  manifold,  and  the  Targums  did 
not  appear  till  after  the  Christian  Era,  nor  as- 
sume their  present  shape  perhaps  before  the 
fourth  century.  Further,  "  recently  discovered 
inscriptions  have  shown  that  many  of  the  forms 
in  which  the  Aramaic  of  Daniel  dififers  from  that 
of  the  Targums  were  actually  in  use  in  neigh- 
bouring   countries    down    to    the    first    century 

A.     D."§ 

6.  Two  further  philological  considerations 
bear  on  the  age  of  the  Book. 

i.  One  of  these  is  the  existence  of  no  less  than 
fifteen  Persian  words  (according  to  Noldeke  and 
others),  especially  in  the  Aramaic  part.  These 
words,  which  would  not  be  surprising  after  the 
complete  establishment  of  the  Persian  empire, 
are  surprising  in  passages  which  describe  Babylo- 
nian institutions  before  the  conquest  of  Cyrus.  || 
Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  account  for 
this  phenomenon.     Protessor  Fuller  attempts  to 

*See  Glassius,  "Philol.  Sacr.,"  p.  031;  Ewald,  "Die 
Proph.  d.  A.  Bundes,"  i.  48  ;  De  Wette,  "  Einleit.,"  §  347. 

t  Ezekiel  always  uses  the  correct  form  (xxvi.  7,  xxix.  iS, 
XXX.  10.)  Jeremiah  uses  the  correct  form  except  in  pas- 
sages which  properly  belong  to  the  Book  of  Kings. 

t  Noldeke,  "  Semit.  Spr.,"  p.  30;  Driver,  p.  472;  Konig, 
P-  387. 

§  Driver,  p.  472,  and  the  authorities  there  quoted  ;  as 
against  McGill  and  Pusey  ("Daniel,"  pp.  45  ff.,  602  ff.). 
Dr  Pusey's  is  the  fullest  repertory  of  arguments  in  favour 
of  the  authenticity  of  Daniel,  many  of  which  have  be- 
come more  and  more  obviously  untenable  as  criticism 
advances.  But  he  and  Keil  add  little  or  nothing  to  what 
had  been  ingeniously  elaborated  by  Hengstenberg  and 
Havernick.  For  a  sketch  of  the  peculiarities  in  the  Ara- 
maic see  Behrmann.  "  Daniel,"  v.-x.  Renan  ("  Hist.  Gen. 
des  Langues  Sem.,"  p.  2iq)  exaggerates  when  he  says, 
"Lalangue  des  parties  chaldennesest  beaucoupplus  basse 
que  celle  des  fragments  chaldeens  du  Livre  d'Esdras, 
et  s'incline  beaucoup  vers  la  langue  du  Talmud." 

II  Meinhold,  "  Beitrage,"  pp.  30-32  ;  Driver,  p.  470. 


360 


--    THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


show,  but  with  little  success,  that  some  of  them 
may  be  Semitic*  Others  argue  that  they  are 
amply  accounted  for  by  the  Persian  trade  which, 
as  may  be  seen  from  the  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  f 
existed  between  Persia  and  Babylonia  as  early  as 
the  days  of  Belshazzar.  To  this  it  is  replied  that 
some  of  the  words  are  not  of  a  kind  which  one 
nation  would  at  once  borrow  from  another,  and 
that  "  no  Persian  words  have  hitherto  been  found 
in  Assyrian  or  Babylonian  inscriptions  prior  to 
the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  except  the 
name  of  the  god  Mithra." 

ii.  But  the  linguistic  evidence  unfavourable  to 
the  genuineness  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  far 
stronger  than  this,  in  the  startling  fact  that  it 
contains  at  least  three  Greek  words.  After  giv- 
ing the  fullest  consideration  to  all  that  has  been 
urged  in  refutation  of  the  conclusion,  this  cir- 
cumstance has  always  been  to  me  a  strong  con- 
firmation of  the  view  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  in 
its  present  form  is  not  older  than  the  days  of 
Antiochus   Epiphanes. 

Those  three  Greek  words  occur  in  the  list  of 
musical  instruments  mentioned  in  iii.  5,  7,  lO, 
15.  They  are  DirT'p  kitharos,  Kldapis,  "harp"; 
I'inJDD,  psanterin,  fakr'ftpiov,  "  psaltery ";  t 
N^JDQID,  sUtnpdnyah,  ffvfKpwvla,  A.  V.  "  dulcimer," 
but  perhaps  "  bagpipes."  § 

Be  it  remembered  that  these  musical  instru- 
ments are  described  as  having  been  used  at  the 
great  idol-festival  of  Nebuchadrezzar  (b.  c.  550). 
Now,  this  is  the  date  at  which  Pisistratus  was 
tyrant  at  Athens,  in  the  days  of  Pythagoras  and 
Polycrates,  before  Athens  became  a  fixed  democ- 
racy. It  is  just  conceivable  that  in  those  days 
the  Babylonians  might  have  borrowed  from 
Greece  the  word  kitharis.\\  It  is,  indeed,  su- 
premely unlikely,  because  the  harp  had  been 
known  in  the  East  from  the  earliest  days;  and  it 
is  at  least  as  probable  that  Greece,  which  at  this 
time  was  only  beginning  to  sit  as  a  learner  at  the 
feet  of  the  immemorial  East,  borrowed  the  idea 
of  the  instrument  from  Asia.  Let  it,  however,  be 
admitted  that  such  words  as  yaytn,  "  wine " 
(ohos),  lappid,  "a  torch"  (Xo/xTrdy),  and  a  few 
others,  may  indicate  some  early  intercourse  be- 
tween Greece  and  the  East,  and  that  some  com- 
mercial relations  of  a  rudimentary  kind  were  ex- 
istent even  in  prehistoric  days.^I 

But  what  are  we  to  say  of  the  two  other  words? 
Both  are  derivatives.  Psalterion  does  not  occur 
in  Greek  before  Aristotle  (d.  322);  nor  sumpho- 
nia  before  Plato  (d.  347).  In  relation  to  music, 
and  probably  as  the  name  of  a  musical  instru- 
ment, sumphonia  is  first  used  by  Polybius  (xxvi. 
10,  §  5,  xxxi.  4,  §  8),  and  in  express  connection 
with  the  festivities  of  the  very  king  with  whom 
the  apocalyptic  section  of  Daniel  is  mainly  oc- 
cupied— Antiochus    Epiphanes.**     The  attempts 

•  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vi.  24&-250. 

+  New  Series,  iii.  124. 

$  The  change  of  n  for  /  is  not  uncommon  :  comp.  ^ivriov, 
^ivTaros,   etc. 

S  The  word  KSSK',   Sab'ka,   also    bears    a    suspicious 

resemblance  to  o-afi/Suxr),  but  Athenaeus  says  ("  Deipnos.," 
iv.  173)  that  the  instrument  was  invented  by  the  Syrians. 
Some  have  seen  in  kdroz  (iii.  4,  "herald  )  the  Greek 
(c^puf,  and  in  hamtiik,  "  chain,"  the  Greek  y.aixia.Kr\% -,  but 
these  cannot  be  pressed. 

II  It  is  true  that  there  was  some  small  intercourse  be- 
tween even  the  Assyrians  and  lonians  (Ja-am-na-a)  as 
far  back  as  the  days  of  Sargon  (B.  C.  722-705) ;  but  not 
enough  to  account  for  such  words. 

^Sayce,  Contemf.  Rev.,  December,  1878. 

**  Some  argue  that  in  this  passage  o-v^^xovi'a  means  "  a 
concert"  (comp.  Luke  xv.  25) ;  but  Polybius  mentions  it 
with  "a  horn  (xepaTioi').  Behrmann  (p.  ix.)  connects  it 
with  o'li^iui',  and  makes  it  mean  "  a  pipe." 


of  Professor  Fuller  and  others  to  derive  these 
words  from  Semitic  roots  are  a  desperate  re- 
source, and  cannot  win  the  assent  of  a  single 
trained  philologist.  "  These  words,"  says  Pro- 
fessor Driver,  "  could  not  have  been  used  in  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  unless  it  had  been  written  after 
the  dissemination  of  Greek  influence  in  Asia 
through  the  conquest  of  Alexander  the  Great."  * 

2.  The  Unity  of  the  Book. 

The  Unity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  now  gen- 
erally admitted.  No  one  thought  of  question- 
ing it  in  days  before  the  dawn  of  criticism,  but 
in  1772  Eichhorn  and  Corrodi  doubted  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  Book.  J.  D.  Michaelis  endeav- 
oured to  prove  that  it  was  "  a  collection  of  fugi- 
tive pieces,"  consisting  of  six  historic  pictures, 
followed  by  four  prophetic  visions.f  Bertholdt, 
followed  the  erroneous  tendency  of  criticism 
which  found  a  foremost  exponent  in  Ewald,  and 
imagined  the  possibility  of  detecting  the  work 
of  many  different  hands.  He  divided  the  Book 
into  fragments  by  nine  different  authors. 

Zockler,  in  Lange's  "  Bibelwerk,"  persuaded 
himself  that  the  old  "  orthodox "  views  of 
Hengstenberg  and  Auberlen  were  right;  but  he 
could  only  do  this  by  sacrificing  the  authenticity 
of  part  of  the  Book,  and  assuming  more  than 
one  redaction.  Thus  he  supposes  that  xi.  5-39 
are  an  interpolation  by  a  writer  in  the  days  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Similarly,  Lenormant  ad- 
mits interpolations  in  the  first  half  of  the  Book. 
But  to  concede  this  is  practically  to  give  up  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  as  it  now  stands. 

The  unity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  still  admit- 
ted or  assumed  by  most  critics.  It  has  only  been 
recently  questioned  in  two  directions. 

Meinhold  thinks  that  the  Aramaic  and  historic 
sections  are  older  than  the  rest  of  the  Book, 
and  were  written  about  b.  c.  300  to  convert  the 
Gentiles  to  monotheism. $  He  argues  that  the 
apocalyptic  section  was  written  later,  and  was 
subsequently  incorporated  with  the  Book.  A 
somewhat  similar  view  is  held  by  Zockler,^  and 
some  have  thought  that  Daniel  could  never  have 
written  of  himself  in  such  highly  favourable 
terms  as,  e.  g.,  in  Dan.  vi.  4.II  The  first  chapter, 
which  is  essential  as  an  introduction  to  the  Book, 
and  the  seventh,  which  is  apocalyptic,  and  is  yet 
in  Aramaic,  create  objections  to  the  acceptance 
of  this  theory.  Further,  it  is  impossible  not  to 
observe  a  certain  unity  of  style  and  parallelism 
of  treatment  between  the  two  parts.  Thus,  if  the 
prophetic  section  is  mainly  devoted  to  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  the  historic  section  seems  to  have  an 
allusive    bearing   on    his    impious   madness.      In 


*  Pusey  says  all  he  can  on  the  other  side  (pp.  23-28),  and 
has  not  changed  the  opinion  of  scholars  (pp.  27-33).  Fabre 
d'Envieu  (i.  loi)  also  desperately  denies  the  existence  of 
any  Greek  words.  On  the  other  side  see  Derenbour^, 
"  Les  Mots  grecs  dans  le  Livre  biblique  de  Daniel  "  (Me- 
langes Graux,  1884). 

t  "  Orient,  u.  Exeg.  Bibliothek,"  1772,  p.  141.  This  view 
was  revived  by  Lagarde  in  the  "Gottingen  Gel.  An- 
zeigen,"  i8gi. 

%  "  Beitrage,"  1888.  See  too  Kranichfeld,  "  Das  Buch 
Daniel,"  p.  4.  The  view  is  refuted  by  Budde,  Theol.  Lit. 
Zeitungy  1888,  No.  26.  The  conjecture  has  often  occurred 
to  critics.  Thus  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  believing  that  Daniel 
wrote  the  last  six  chapters,  thought  that  the  six  first  "are 
a  collection  of  hi.storical  papers  written  by  others" 
("Observations,"  i.  10). 

§"  Einleit.,"  p.  6. 

II  Other  critics  who  incline  to  one  or  other  modification 
of  this  view  of  the  two  Daniels  are  Tholuck,  "d.  A.  T.  in 
N.  T."  1872;  C.  V.  Orelli,  "  Alttest.  Weissag.,"  1882:  and 
Strack. 


GENERAL  SURVEY  OF  THE  BOOK. 


361 


ii.  10,  II,  and  vi.  8,  we  have  descriptions  of  daring 
Pagan  edicts,  which  might  be  intended  to  furnish 
a  contrast  with  the  attempts  of  Antiochus  to 
suppress  the  worship  of  God.  The  feast  of  Bel- 
shazzar  may  well  be  a  "  reference  to  the  Syrian 
despot's  revelries  at  Daphne."  Again,  in  ii.  43 
— where  the  mixture  of  iron  and  clay  is  explained 
by  "  they  shall  mingle  themselves  with  the  seed 
of  men  " — it  seems  far  from  improbable  that 
there  is  a  reference  to  the  unhappy  intermar- 
riages of  Ptolemies  and  Seleucidjc.  Berenice, 
daughter  of  Ptolemy  II.  ( Philadelphus),  married 
Antiochus  II.  (Theos),  and  this  is  alluded  to  in 
this  vision  of  xi.  6.  Cleopatra,  daughter  of  An- 
tiochus III.  (the  Great),  married  Ptolemy  V. 
(Epiphanes),  which  is  alluded  to  in  xi.  17.*  The 
style  seems  to  be  stamped  throughout  with  the 
characteristics  of  an  individual  mind,  and  the 
most  cursory  glance  suffices  to  show  that  the 
historic  and  prophetic  parts  are  united  by  many 
points  of  connection  and  resemblance.  Mein- 
hold  is  quite  successful  in  the  attempt  to  prove 
a  sharp  contrast  of  views  between  the  sections. 
The  interchange  of  persons — the  third  person 
being  mainly  used  in  the  first  seven  chapters, 
and  the  first  person  in  the  last  five — may  be  partly 
due  to  the  final  editor;  but  in  any  case  it  may 
easily  be  paralleled,  and  is  found  in  other  writers, 
as  in  Isaiah  (vii.  3,  xx.  2)  and  the  Book  of  Enoch 
(xii.). 

But  it  may  be  said  in  general  that  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  Book  is  now  rarely  defended  by  any 
competent  critic,  except  at  the  cost  of  abandon- 
ing certain  sections  of  it  as  interpolated  addi- 
tions; and  as  Mr.  Bevan  somewhat  caustically 
remarks,  "  the  defenders  of  Daniel  have,  during 
the  last  few  years,  been  employed  chiefly  in  cut- 
ting Daniel  to  pieces."! 

3.  The  General  Tone  of  the  Book. 

The  general  tone  of  the  Book  marks  an  era 
in  the  education  and  progress  of  the  Jews.  The 
lessons  of  the  Exile  uplifted  them  from  a  too 
narrow  and  absorbing  particularism  to  a  wider 
interest  in  the  destinies  of  humanity.  They  were 
led  to  recognise  that  God  "  has  made  of  one 
every  nation  of  men  for  to  dwell  on  all  the  face 
of  the  earth,  having  determined  their  appointed 
seasons,  and  the  bounds  of  their  habitation; 
that  they  should  seek  God,  if  haply  they  might 
feel  after  Him,  and  find  Him,  though  He 
is  not  far  from  each  one  of  us."  t  The 
standpoint  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  larger 
and  more  cosmopolitan  in  this  respect  than 
that  of  earlier  prophecy.  Israel  had  begun 
to  mingle  more  closely  with  other  nations,  and 
to  be  a  sharer  in  their  destinies.  Politically  the 
Hebrew  race  no  longer  formed  a  small  though 
independent  kingdom,  but  was  reduced  to  the 
position  of  an  entirely  insignificant  sub-province 
in  a  mighty  empire.  The  Messiah  is  no  longer 
the  Son  of  David,  but  the  Son  of  Man;  no  longer 
only  the  King  of  Israel,  but  of  the  world.  Man- 
kind— not  only  the  seed  of  Jacob- — fills  the  field 
of  prophetic  vision.  Amid  widening  horizons  of 
thought  the  Jews  turned  their  eyes  upon  a  great 
past,  rich  in  events,  and  crowded  with  the  figures 
of  heroes,  saints,  and  sages.     At  the  same  time 

*Hengstenberg  also  points  to  verbal  resemblances  be- 
tween ii.  44  and  vii.  14  ;  iv.  5  and  vii.  1  ;  ii.  31  and  vii.  2  ;  ii. 
38  and  vii.  17.  etc.  ("  Genuineness  of  Daniel,"  E.  Tr.,  pp. 
186  ff.). 

+  "  A  Short  Commentary,"  p.  8. 

X  Acts  xvii.  26,  27. 


the  world  seemed  to  be  growing  old,  and  its 
ever-deepening  wickedness  seemed  to  call  for 
some  final  judgment.  We  begin  to  trace  in  the 
Hebrew  writings  the  colossal  conceptions,  the 
monstrous  imagery,  the  daring  conjectures,  the 
more  complex  religious  ideas,  of  an  exotic 
fancy.* 

"  The  giant  forms  of  Empires  on  their  way 
To  ruin,  dim  and  vast, 

begin  to  fling  their  weird  and  sombre  shadows 
over  the  page  of  sacred  history  and  prophetic 
anticipation. 

4.  The  Style  of  the  Book. 

The  style  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  new,  and 
has  very  marked  characteristics,  indicating  its 
late  position  in  the  Canon.  It  is  rhetorical 
rather  than  poetic.  "  Totum  Danielis  librum," 
says  Lowth,  "  e  poetarum  censu  excludo."  + 
How  widely  does  the  style  dififer  from  the  rapt 
passion  and  glowing  picturesqueness  of  Isaiah, 
from  the  elegiac  tenderness  of  Jeremiah,  from 
the  lyrical  sweetness  of  many  of  the  Psalms! 
How  very  little  does  it  correspond  to  the  three 
great  requirements  of  poetry,  that  it  should  be, 
as  Milton  so  finely  said,  "  simple,  sensuous,  pas- 
sionate "  !  A  certain  artificiality  of  diction,  a 
sounding  oratorical  stateliness,  enhanced  by  dig- 
nified periphrases  and  leisurely  repetitions,  must 
strike  the  most  casual  reader;  and  this  is  some- 
times carried  so  far  as  to  make  the  movement 
of  the  narrative  heavy  and  pompous. $  This  pe- 
culiarity is  not  found  to  the  same  extent  in  any 
other  book  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon,  but  it 
recurs  in  the  Jewish  writings  of  a  later  age. 
From  the  apocryphal  books,  for  instance,  the 
poetical  element  is  with  trifling  exceptions,  such 
as  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  entirely  ab- 
sent, while  the  taste  for  rhetorical  ornamentation, 
set  speeches,  and  dignified  elaborateness  is  found 
in  many  of  them. 

This  evanescence  of  the  poetic  and  impassioned 
element  separates  Daniel  from  the  Prophets,  and 
marks  the  place  of  the  Book  among  the  Hagi- 
ographa,  where  it  was  placed  by  the  Jews  them- 
selves. In  all  the  great  Hebrew  seers  we  find 
something  of  the  ecstatic  transport,  the  fire  shut 
up  within  the  bones  and  breaking  forth  from 
the  volcanic  heart,  the  burning  lips  touched  by 
the  hands  of  the  seraphim  with  a  living  coal  from 
off  the  altar.  The  word  for  prophet  {tiabi,  J'ates) 
implies  an  inspired  singer  rather  than  a  sooth- 
sayer or  seer  (roeh,  chozeh).  It  is  applied  to  Deb- 
orah and  Miriam  §  because  they  poured  forth 
from  exultant  hearts  the  paean  of  victory.  Hence 
arose  the  close  connection  between  music  and 
poetry. II  Elisha  required  the  presence  of  a  min- 
strel to  soothe  the  agitation  of  a  heart  thrown 
into  tumult  by  the  near  presence  of  a  revealing 
Power.lT  Just  as  the  Greek  word  fidvTis,  from 
iialvofiai,  implies  a  sort  of  madness,  and  recalls 
the  foaming  lip  and  streaming  hair  of  the  spirit- 
dilated  messenger,  so  the  Hebrew  verb  naba 
meant,  not  only  to  proclaim  God's  oracles,  but 

♦See  Hitzig,  p.  xii.;  Auberien,  p.  41. 

tReuss  says  too  severely,  "Die  Schilderungen  aller 
dieser  Vorgange  machen  keinen  gewinnerden  Eindruck. 
.  .  .  Der  Stil  ist  unbeholfen,  die  Figuren  grotesk,  die 
Farben  grell."  He  admits,  however,  the  suitableness  of 
the  Book  for  the  Maccabean  epoch,  and  the  deep  impres- 
sion it  made  ("  Heil.  Schrift.  A.  T.,"  p.  571). 

*  See  iii.  2,  3,  5,  7 ;  viii   i,  10,  19 ;  xi.  15,  22,  31,  etc. 

§Exod.  XV.  20;  Judg.  iv.  4. 

1 1  Sam.  X.  5  ;  i  Chron.  xxv.  i,  2,  3. 

^2  Kings  iii.  15. 


362 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


to  be  inspired  by  His  possession  as  with  a  Di- 
vine frenzy.*  "  Madman "  seemed  a  natural 
term  to  apply  to  the  messenger  of  Elisha.f  It  is 
easy  therefore  to  see  whv  the  Book  of  Daniel 
was  not  placed  among  the  prophetic  rolls.  This 
vera  passio,  this  ecstatic  elevation  of  thought  and 
feeling,  are  wholly  wanting  in  this  earliest  at- 
tempt at  a  philosophy  of  history.  We  trace  in 
it  none  of  that  "  blasting  with  excess  of  light," 
none  of  that  shuddering  sense  of  being  uplifted 
out  of  self,  which  marks  the  higher  and  earlier 
forms  of  prophetic  inspiration.  Daniel  is  ad- 
dressed through  the  less  exalted  medium  of  vi- 
sions, and  in  his  visions  there  is  less  of  "  the  fac- 
ulty Divine."  .The  instinct — if  instinct  it  were 
and  not  knowledge  of  the  real  origin  of  the 
Book — which  led  the  "  Men  of  the  Great  Syna- 
gogue "  to  place  this  Book  among  the  Ketubhtm, 
not  among  the  prophets  was  wise  and  sure.^ 

0.  The  Standpoint  of  the  Author. 

"In  Daniel  offnet  sich  eine  ganz  neue  Welt."— ElCH- 
HORN,  "  Einleit.,"  iv.  472. 

The  author  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  seems  natu- 
rally to  place  himself  on  a  level  lower  than  that 
of  the  prophets  who  had  gone  before  him.  He 
does  not  count  himself  among  the  prophets;  on 
the  contrary,  he  puts  them  far  higher  than  him- 
self, and  refers  to  them  as  though  they  belonged 
to  the  dim  and  distant  past  (ix.  2,  6).  In  his 
prayer  of  penitence  he  confesses,  "  Neither  have 
we  hearkened  unto  thy  servants  the  prophets, 
which  spake  in  Thy  Name  to  our  kings,  our 
princes,  and  our  fathers  "  ;  "  Neither  have  we 
obeyed  the  voice  of  the  Lord  our  God,  to  walk 
in  His  laws,  which  He  set  before  us  by  His  ser- 
vants the  prophets."  Not  once  does  he  use  the 
mighty  formula  "Thus  saith  Jehovah" — not 
once  does  he  assume,  in  his  prophecies,  a  tone  of 
high  personal  authority.  He  shares  the  view  of 
ithe   Maccabean  age   that  prophecy  is   dead.^ 

In  Dan.  ix.  2  we  find  yet  another  decisive  in- 
dication of  the  late  age  of  this  writing.  He  tells 
us  that  he  "  understood  bv  books  "  (more  cor- 
rectly, as  in  the  A.  V.,  "  by  the  books  "||  )  "  the 
number  of  the  years  whereof  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet."  The  writer 
here  represents  himself  as  an  humble  student  of 
previous  prophets,  and  this  necessarily  marks  a 
position  of  less  freshness  and  independence. 
■'  To  the  old  prophets,"  says  Bishop  Westcott, 
"  Daniel  stands  in  some  sense  as  a  commenta- 
tor." No  doubt  the  possession  of  those  living 
oracles  was  an  immense  blessing,  a  rich  inheri- 
tance; but  it  involved  a  danger.  Truths  estab- 
lished bv  writings  and  traditions,  safe-guarded 
by  schools  and  institutions,  are  too  apt  to  come 

*Jer.  xxix.  26;  i  Sam.  xviii.  10,  xix.  21-24. 

+  2  Kings  ix.  11.  See  Expositor's  Bible,  "Second  Book 
of  Kings."  p.  113. 

t  On  this  subject  see  Ewald,  "  Proph.  d.  A.  Bundes,"  i. 
6;  Novalis,  "  Schriften,"  ii.  472;  Herder,  "Geist  der  Ebr. 
Poesie,"  ii.  61  ;  Knobel,  "  Prophetismus,"  i.  103.  Even  the 
Latin  poets  were  called  prophetcc,  "  bards  "  (Varro,  "  Da 
Ling.  Lat.,"  vi.  3).  Epimenides  is  called  "a  prophet"  in 
Tit.  i.  12.  See  Plato,  "Tim.,"  72,  A.;  "  Phsedr.,"  262,  D.; 
Pind.,  "  Pr.,"  118  ;  and  comp.  Eph.  iii.  5,  iv.  n. 

§  Dan.  ix.  6,  to.  So  conscious  was  the  Maccabean  age  of 
the  absence  of  prophets,  that  just  as  after  the  Captivity  a 
question  is  postponed  "till  there  should  arise  a  priest 
with  the  Urim  and  Thummim,"  so  Judas  postponed  the 
decision  about  the  stones  of  the  desecrated  altar  "  vintil 
there  should  come  a  prophet  to  show  what  should  be 
done  with  them  "  (i  Mace.  iv.  45,  46,  ix.  27,  xiv.  41).  Comp. 
Song  of  the  Three  Children,  15  ;  Psalm  Ixxiv.  g  ;  "  Sota," 
f.  48,  2.     See  infra,  Introd.,  chap.  viii. 

1  Dan.  ix.  2,  nassepharini,  to.  /Si/SAia. 


to  men  only  as  a  power  from  without,  and  less 
as  "  a  hidden  and  inly  burning  flame."  * 

By  "  the  books  "  can  hardly  be  meant  anything 
but  some  approach  to  a  definite  Canon.  If  so, 
the  Book  of  Daniel  in  its  present  form  can  only 
have  been  written  subsequently  to  the  days  of 
Ezra.  "  The  account  which  assigns  a  collection 
of  books  to  Nehemiah  (2  Mace.  ii.  13),"  says 
Bishop  Westcott,  "  is  in  itself  a  confirmation  of 
the  general  truth  of  the  gradual  formation  of  the 
Canon  during  the  Persian  period.  The  various 
classes  of  books  were  completed  in  succession; 
and  this  view  harmonises  with  what  must  have 
been  the  natural  development  of  the  Jev^ish  faith 
after  the  Return.  The  persecution  of  Antiochus 
(b.  c.  168)  was  for  the  Old  Testament  what  the 
persecution  of  Diocletian  was  for  the  New — the 
final  crisis  which  stamped  the  sacred  writings 
with  their  peculiar  character.  The  king  sought 
out  the  Books  of  the  Law  (i  Mace.  i.  56)  and 
burnt  them;  and  the  possession  of  a  '  Book  of 
the  Covenant '  was  a  capital  crime.  According 
to  the  common  tradition,  the  proscription  of  the 
Law  led  to  the  public  use  of  the  writings  of  the 
prophets."  f 

The  whole  method  of  Daniel  differs  even  from 
that  of  the  later  and  inferior  prophets  of  the  Ex- 
ile—Haggai,  Malachi,  and  the  second  Zechariah. 
The  Book  is  rather  an  apocalypse  than  a  proph- 
ecy: "  the  eye  and  not  the  ear  is  the  organ  to 
which  the  chief  appeal  is  made."  Though  sym- 
bolism in  the  form  of  visions  is  not  unknown  to 
Ezekiel  and  Zechariah,  yet  those  prophets  are 
far  from  being  apocalyptic  in  character.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  grotesque  and  gigantic 
emblems  of  Daniel — these  animal  combinations, 
these  interventions  of  dazzling  angels  who  float 
in  the  air  or  over  the  water,  these  descriptions 
of  historical  events  under  the  veil  of  material 
types  seen  in  dreams — are  a  frequent  phenome- 
non in  such  late  apocryphal  writings  as  the  Sec- 
ond Book  of  Esdras,  the  Book  of  Enoch,  and 
the  pre-Christian  Sibylline  oracles,  in  which 
talking  lions  and  eagles,  etc.,  are  frequent.  In- 
deed, this  style  of  symbolism  originated  among 
the  Jews  from  their  contact  with  the  graven 
mysteries  and  colossal  images  of  Babylonian 
worship.  The  Babylonian  Exile  formed  an  epoch 
in  the  intellectual  development  of  Israel  fully  as 
important  as  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.  It  was  a 
stage  in  their  moral  and  religious  education.  It 
was  the  psychological  preparation  requisite  for 
the  moulding  of  the  last  phase  of  revelation — 
that  apocalyptic  form  which  succeeds  to  theoph- 
any  and  prophecy,  and  embodies  the  final  re- 
sults of  national  religious  inspiration.  That  the 
apocalyptic  method  of  dealing  with  history  in  a 
religious  and  an  imaginative  manner  naturally 
arises  towards  the  close  of  any  great  cycle  of 
special  revelation  is  illustrated  by  the  flood  of 
apocalypses  which  overflowed  the  early  litera- 
ture of  the  Christian  Church.  But  the  Jews 
clearly  saw  that,  as  a  rule,  an  apocalypse  is  in- 
herently inferior  to  a  prophecy,  even  when  it  is 
made  the  vehicle  of  genuine  prediction.  In  es- 
timating the  grades  of  inspiration  the  Jews  placed 
highest  the  inward  illumination  of  the  Spirit, 
the  Reason,  and  the  Understanding;  next  to  this 

*  Ewald,  "Proph.  d.  A.  B.,"  p.  10.  Judas  Maccabaeus  is 
also  said  to  have  "  restored "  {einavvriyaye)  the  lost 
(SianeKTuiKara)  sacred  writings  (2  Mace.  ii.  14). 

t  Smith's  "  Diet,  of  the  Bible,"  i.  501.  The  daily  lesson 
from  the  Prophets  was  called  the  Haphtarah  (Ham« 
burger,  "  Real-Encycl.,"  ii.  334). 


GENERAL  SURVEY  OF  THE  ROOK. 


36: 


they  placed  dreaijis  and  visions;  and  lowest  of  all 
they  placed  the  accidental  auguries  derived  from 
the  JSatli  Qol.  An  apocalypse  may  be  of  priceless 
value,  like  the  Revelation  of  St.  John;  it  may, 
like  the  Book  of  Daniel,  abound  in  the  noblest 
and  most  thrilling  lessons;  but  in  intrinsic  dig- 
nity and  worth  it  is  always  placed  by  the  instinct 
and  conscience  of  mankind  on  a  lower  grade 
than  such  outpourings  of  Divine  teachings  as 
breathe  and  burn  through  the  pages  of  a  David 
and  an  Isaiah. 

6.  The  Moral  Element. 

Lastly,  among  these  salient  phenomena  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel  we  are  compelled  to  notice  the 
absence  of  the  predominantly  moral  element 
from  its  prophetic  portion.  The  author  does 
not  write  in  the  tone  of  a  preacher  of  repentance, 
or  of  one  whose  immediate  object  is  to  amelio- 
rate the  moral  and  spiritual  condition  of  his  peo- 
ple. His  aims  were  different.*  The  older  proph- 
ets were  the  ministers  of  dispensations  between 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  They  were,  in  the  beau- 
tiful language  of  Herder, — 

"  Die  Saitenspiel  in  Gottes  machtigen  Handen." 

Doctrine,  worship,  and  consolation  were  their 
proper  sphere.  They  were  "  oratores  Legis,  advo- 
cati  Patrice."  In  them  prediction  is  wholly  sub- 
ordinate to  moral  warning  and  instruction.  They 
denounce,  they  inspire:  they  smite  to  the  dust 
with  terrible  invective;  they  uplift  once  more 
into  glowing  hope.  The  announcement  of  events 
yet  future  is  the  smallest  part  of  the  prophet's 
office,  and  rather  its  sign  than  its  substance.  The 
highest  mission  of  an  Amos  or  an  Isaiah  is  not 
to  be  a  prognosticator,  but  to  be  a  religious 
teacher.  He  makes  his  appeals  to  the  conscience, 
not  to  the  imagination— to  the  spirit,  not  to  the 
sense.  He  deals  with  eternal  principles,  and  is 
almost  wholly  indifferent  to  chronological  veri- 
fications. To  awaken  the  death-like  slumber  of 
sin,  to  fan  the  dying  embers  of  faithfulness,  to 
smite  down  the  selfish  oppressions  of  wealth  and 
power,  to  startle  the  sensual  apathy  of  greed, 
were  the  ordinary  and  the  noblest  aims  of  the 
greater  and  the  minor  prophets.  It  was  their 
task  far  rather  to  forth-tell  than  to  fore-tell;  and 
if  they  announce,  in  general  outline  and  uncer- 
tain perspective,  things  which  shall  be  hereafter, 
it  is  only  in  subordination  to  high  ethical  pur- 
poses, or  profound  spiritual  lessons.  So  it  is  also 
in  the  Revelation  of  St.  John.  But  in  the 
"  prophetic  "  part  of  Daniel  it  is  difficult  for  the 
keenest  imagination  to  discern  any  deep  moral, 
or  any  special  doctrinal  significance,  in  all  the 
details  of  the  obscure  wars  and  petty  diplomacy 
of  the  kings  -of  the   North  and   South. 

In  point  of  fact  the  Book  of  Daniel,  even  as 
an  apocalypse,  suffers  severely  by  comparison 
with  that  latest  canonical  Apocalypse- of  the  Be- 
loved Disciple  which  it  largely  influenced.  It 
is  strange  that  Luther,  who  spoke  so  slightingly 
of  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  should  have  placed 
the  Book  of  Daniel  so  high  in  his  estimation. 
It  is  indeed  a  noble  book,  full  of  glorious  les- 
sons. Yet  surely  it  has  but  little  of  the  sublime 
and  mysterious  beauty,  little  of  the  heart-shak- 
ing pathos,  little  of  the  tender  sweetness  of  con- 
solatory power,   which  fill   the   closing  book   of 

*  On  this  subject  see  Kuenen,  "  The  Prophets,"  iii.  g5  ff.; 
Davison,  "On  Prophecy,"  pp.  34-67;  Herder,  "  Hebr. 
Poesie,"  ii.  64;  De  Wette,  "  Christl.  Sittenlehre,"  ii.  1. 


the  New  Testament.  Its  imagery  is  far  less  ex- 
alted, its  hope  of  immortality  far  less  distinct 
and  unquenchable.  Yet  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
while  it  is  one  of  the  earliest,  still  remains  one 
of  the  greatest  specimens  of  this  form  of  sacred 
literature.  It  inaugurated  the  new  epoch  of  "apoc- 
alyptic "  which  in  later  days  was  usually  pseu- 
depigraphic,  and  sheltered  itself  under  the  names 
of  Enoch,  Noah,  Moses,  Ezra,  and  even  the 
heathen  sibyls.  These  apocalypses-  are  of  very 
unequal  value.  "  Some,"  as  Kuenen  says, 
"  stand  comparatively  high;  others  are  far  below 
mediocrity."  But  the  genus  to  which  they  be- 
long has  its  own  peculiar  defect.  They  are  works 
of  art:  they  are  not  spontaneous;  they  smell  of 
the  lamp.  A  fruitless  and  an  unpractical  peering 
into  the  future  was  encouraged  by  these  writ- 
ings, and  became  predominant  in  some  Jewish 
circles.  But  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  incomparably 
superior  in  every  possible  respect  to  Baruch,  or 
the  Book  of  Enoch,  or  the  Second  Book  of  Es- 
dras;  and  if  we  place  it  for  a  moment  by  the  side 
of  such  books  as  those  co'^tained  in  the  "  Codex 
Pseudepigraphus  "  of  Fabricius,  its  high  worth 
and  Canonical  authority  are  vindicated  with  ex- 
traordinary force.  How  lofty  and  enduring  are 
the  lessons  to  be  learnt  alike  from  its  historic  and 
predictive  sections  we  shall  have  abundant  op- 
portunities of  seeing  in  the  following  pages.  So 
far  from  undervaluing  its  teaching,  I  have  al- 
ways been  strongly  drawn  to  this  Book  of  Scrip- 
ture. It  has  never  made  the  least  difference  in 
my  reverent  acceptance  of  it  that  I  have,  for 
many  years,  been  convinced  that  it  cannot  be 
regarded  as  literal  history  or  ancient  prediction. 
Reading  it  as  one  of  the  noblest  specimens  of 
the  Jewish  Haggada  or  moral  Ethiopoeia,  I  find 
it  full  of  instruction  in  righteousness,  and  rich 
in  examples  of  life.  That  Daniel  was  a  real  per- 
son, that  he  lived  in  the  days  of  the  Exile,  and 
that  his  life  was  distinguished  by  the  splendour 
of  its  faithfulness  I  hold  to  'be  entirely  possible. 
When  we  regard  the  stories  here  related  of  him 
as  moral  legends,  possibly  based  on  a  ground- 
work of  real  tradition,  we  read  the  Book  with  a 
full  sense  of  its  value,  and  feel  the  power  of  the 
lessons  which  it  was  designed  to  teach,  without 
being  perplexed  by  its  apparent  improbabilities, 
or  worried  by  its  immense  historic  and  other 
difficulties. 

The  Book  is  in  all  respects  unique,  a  writing 
sni  generis ;  for  the  many  limitations  to  which  it 
led  are  but  imitations.  But,  as  the  Jewish 
writer  Dr.  Joel  truly  says,  the  unveiling  of  the 
secret  as  to  the  real  lateness  of  its  date  and  ori- 
gin, so  far  from  causing  any  loss  in  its  beauty 
and  interest,  enhance  both  in  a  remarkable  de- 
gree. It  is  thus  seen  to  be  the  work  of  a  brave 
and  gifted  anonymous  author  about  b.  c.  167, 
who  brought  his  piety  and  his  patriotism  to  bear 
on  the  troubled  fortunes  of  his  people  at  an 
epoch  in  which  such  piety  and  patriotism  were 
of  priceless  value.  We  have  in  its  later  sections 
no  voice  of  enigmatic  prediction,  foretelling  the 
minutest  complications  of  a  distant  secular  fu- 
ture, but  mainly  the  review  of  contemporary 
events  by  a  wise  and  an  earnest  writer,  whose 
faith  and  hope  remained  unquenchable  in  the 
deepest  night  of  persecution  and  apostasy.* 
IMany  passages  of  the  Book  are  dark,  and  will 
remain  dark,  owing  partly  perhaps  to  corrup- 
tions and  uncertainties  of  the  text,  and  partly  to 
imitation  of  a  style  which  had  become  archaic, 
*  Joel,  "  Notizen,"  p.  7. 


3^4 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


as  well  as  to  the  peculiarities  of  the  apocalyptic 
form.  But  the  general  idea  of  the  Book  has  now 
been  thoroughly  elucidated,  and  the  interpreta- 
tion of  it  in  the  following  pages  is  accepted  by 
the  great  majority  of  earnest  and  faithful  stu- 
dents of  the  Scriptures. 


CHAPTER  III. 

PECULIARITIES  OF  THE  HISTORIC  SEC- 
TION. 

No  one  can  have  studied  the  Book  of  Daniel 
without  seeing  that,  alike  in  the  character  of  its 
miracles  and  the  minuteness  of  its  supposed  pre- 
dictions, it  makes  a  more  stupendous  and  a  less 
substantiated  claim  upon  our  credence  than  any 
other  book  of  the  Bible,  and  a  claim  wholly  dif- 
ferent in  character.  It  has  over  and  over  again 
been  asserted  by  the  uncharitableness  of  a  merely 
traditional  orthodoxy  that  inability  to  accept  the 
historic  verity  and  genuineness  of  the  Book  arises 
from  secret  faithlessness,  and  antagonism  to  the 
admission  of  the  supernatural.  No  competent 
scholar  will  think  it  needful  to  refute  such  cal- 
umnies. It  suffices  us  to  know  before  God  that 
we  are  actuated  simply  by  the  love  of  truth,  by 
the  abhorrence  of  anything  which  in  us  would 
be  a  pusillanimous  rpirit  of  falsity.  We  have  too 
deep  a  belief  in  the  God  of  the  Amen,  the  God 
of  eternal  and  essential  verity,  t'o  ofifer  to  Him 
"  the  unclean  sacrifice  of  a  lie."  An  error  is  not 
sublimated  into  a  tfuth  even  when  that  lie  has 
acquired  a  quasi-consecration,  from  its  supposed 
desirability  for  purposes  of  orthodox  contro- 
versy, or  from  its  innocent  acceptance  by  gen- 
erations  of  Jewish  and  Christian  Churchmen 
through  long  ages  of  uncritical  ignorance. 
Scholars,  if  they  be  Christians  at  all,  can  have 
no  possible  a  priori  objection  to  belief  in  the 
supernatural.  If  they  believe,  for  instance,  in 
the  Incarnation  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  they  believe  in  the  most  mysterious  and 
unsurpassable  of  all  miracles,  and  beside  that 
miracle  all  minor  questions  of  God's  power  or 
willingness  to  manifest  His  immediate  interven- 
tion in  the  affairs  of  men  sink  at  once  into  abso- 
lute insignificance. 

But  our  belief  in  the  Incarnation,  and  in  the 
miracles  of  Christ,  rests  on  evidence  which,  after 
repeated  examination,  is  to  us  overwhelming. 
Apart  from  all  questions  of  personal  verification, 
or  the  Inward  Witness  of  the  Spirit,  we  can  show 
that  this  evidence  is  supported,  not  only  by  exist- 
ing records,  but  bv  myriads  of  external  and  inde- 
pendent testimonies.  The  very  same  Spirit  which 
makes  men  believe  where  the  demonstration  is 
decisive,  compels  them  to  refuse  belief  to  the 
literal  verity  of  unique  miracles  and  unique  pre- 
dictions which  come  before  them  without  any 
convincing  evidence.  The  narratives  and  visions 
of  this  Book  present  difficulties  on  every  page. 
They  were  in  all  probability  never  intended  for 
anything  but  what  they  are — Haggadoth,  which, 
like  the  parables  of  Christ,  convey  their  own  les- 
sons without  depending  on  the  necessity  for  ac- 
cordance with  historic  fact. 

Had  it  been  any  part  of  the  Divine  will  that 
we  should  accept  these  stories  as  pure  history, 
and  these  visions  as  predictions  of  events  which 
were  not  to  take  place  till  centuries  afterwards, 
we  should  have  been  provided  with  some  aids  to 
such  belief.     On  the  contrary,  in  whatever  light 


we  examine  the  Book  of  Daniel,  the  evidence 
in  its  favour  is  weak,  dubious,  hypothetical,  and 
a  priori;  while  the  evidence  against  it  acquires 
increased  intensity  with  every  fresh  aspect  in 
which  it  is  examined.  The  Book  which  would 
make  the  most  extraordinary  demands  upon  our 
credulity,  if  it  were  meant  for  history,  is  the  very 
Book  of  which  the  genuineness  and  authenticity 
are  decisively  discredited  by  every  fresh  discov- 
ery and  by  each  new  examination.  There  is 
scarcely  one  learned  European  scholar  by  whom 
they  are  maintained,  except  with  such  conces- 
sions to  the  Higher  Criticism  as  practically  in- 
volve the  abandonment  of  all  that  is  essential  in 
the  traditional  theory. 

And  we  have  come  to  a  time  when  it  will  not 
avail  to  take  refuge  in  such  transferences  of  the 
discussions  in  alteram  materiam,  and  such  purely 
vulgar  appeals  ad  invidiam,  as  are  involved  in 
saying,  "  Then  the  Book  must  be  a  forgery,"  and 
"  an  imposture,"  and  "  a  gross  lie."  To  assert 
that  "  to  give  up  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  to  be- 
tray the  cause  of  Christianity  "  is  a  coarse  and 
dangerous  misuse  of  the  weapons  of  contro- 
versy. Such  talk  may  still  have  been  excusable 
even  in  the  days  of  Dr.  Pusey  (with  whom  it  was 
habitual) ;  it  is  no  longer  excusable  now.  Now 
it  can  only  prove  the  uncharitableness  of  the 
apologist,  and  the  impotence  of  a  defeated 
cause.  Yet  even  this  abandonment  of  the  sphere 
of  honourable  argument  is  only  one  degree  more 
painful  than  the  tortuous  subterfuges  and  wild 
assertions  to  which  such  apologists  as  Hengsten- 
berg,  Keil,  and  their  followers  were  long  com- 
pelled to  have  recourse.  Anything  can  be 
proved  about  anything  if  we  call  to  our  aid 
indefinite  suppositions  of  errors  of  transcription, 
interpolations,  transpositions,  extraordinary  si- 
lences, still  more  extraordinary  methods  of 
presenting  events,  and  (in  general)  the  un- 
consciously disingenuous  resourcefulness  of  tra- 
ditional harmonics.  To  maintain  that  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  as  it  now  stands,  was 
written  by  Daniel  in  the  days  of  the  Ex- 
ile is  to  cherish  a  belief  which  can  only, 
at  the  utmost,  be  extremely  uncertain,  and 
which  must  be  maintained  in  defiance  of  masses 
of  opposing  evidence.  There  can  be  little  in- 
trinsic value  in  a  determination  to  believe  his- 
torical and  literary  assumptions  which  can  no 
longer  be  maintained  except  by  preferring  the 
flimsiest  hypotheses  to  the  most  certain  facts. 

My  own  conviction  has  long  been  that  in  these 
Haggadoth,  in  which  Jewish  literature  de- 
lighted in  the  pre-Christian  era,  and  which  con- 
tinued to  be  written  even  till  the  Middle  Ages, 
there  was  not  the  least  pretence  or  desire  to 
deceive  at  all.  I  believe  them  to  have  been  put 
forth  as  moral  legends — as  avowed  fiction  nobly 
used  for  the  purposes  of  religious  teaching  and 
encouragement.  In  ages  of  ignorance,  in  which 
no  such  thing  as  literary  criticism  existed,  a  pop- 
ular Haggada  might  soon  come  to  be  re- 
garded as  historical,  just  as  the  Homeric  lays 
were  among  the  Greeks,  or  just  as  Defoe's  story 
of  the  Plague  of  London  was  taken  for  literal 
histo'ry  by  many  readers  even  in  the  seventeenth 
century. 

Ingenious  attempts  have  been  made  to  show 
that  the  author  of  this  Book  evinces  an  intimate 
familiarity  with  the  circumstances  of  the  Baby- 
lonian religion,  society,  and  history.  In  many 
cases  this  is  the  reverse  of  the  fact.  The  in- 
stances adduced  in  favour  of  any  knowledge,  ex- 


PECULIARITIES    OF    THE"  HISTORIC    SECTION. 


365 


cept  of  the  most  general  description,  are  entirely 
delusive.  It  is  frivolous  to  maintain,  with  Le- 
normant,  that  an  exceptional  acquaintance  with 
Babylonian  custom  was  required  to  describe 
Nebuchadrezzar  as  consulting  diviners  for  the 
interpretation  of  a  dream!  To  say  nothing  of 
the  fact  that  a  similar  custom  has  prevailed  in 
all  nations  and  all  ages  from  the  days  of  Samuel 
to  those  of  Lobengula,  the  writer  had  the  pro- 
totype of  Phaiaoh  before  him,  and  has  evidently 
been  influenced  by  the  story  of  Joseph.*  Again, 
so  far  from  showing  surprising  acquaintance 
with  the  organisation  of  the  caste  of  Babylonian 
diviners,  the  writer  has  made  a  mistake  in  their 
very  name,  as  well  as  in  the  statement  that  a 
faithful  Jew,  like  Daniel,  was  made  the  chief  of 
their  college !f  Nor,  again,  was  there  anything 
so  unusual  in  the  presence  of  women  at  feasts 
— also  recognised  in  the  Haggada  of  Esther 
— as  to  render  this  a  sign  of  extraordinary  in- 
formation. Once  more,  is  it  not  futile  to  ad- 
duce the  allusion  to  punishment  by  burning  alive 
as  a  proof  of  insight  into  Babylonian  peculiari- 
ties? This  punishment  had  already  been  men- 
tioned by  Jeremiah  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadrez- 
zar. "  Then  shall  be  taken  up  a  curse  by  all  the 
captivity  of  Judah  which  are  in  Babylon,  saying, 
The  Lord  make  thee  like  Zedekiah  and  like 
Ahab  "  (two  false  prophets),  "  whom  the  King 
of  Babylon  roasted  in  the  fire."  t  Moreover, 
it  occurs  in  the  Jewish  traditions  which  described 
a  miraculous  escape  of  exactly  the  same  char- 
acter in  the  legend  of  Abraham.  He,  too,  had 
been  supernaturally  rescued  from  the  burning 
fiery  furnace  of  Nimrod,  to  which  he  had  been 
consigned  because  he  refused  to  worship  idols 
in  Ur  of  the  Chaldees.§ 

When  the  instances  mainly  relied  upon  prove 
to  be  so  evidentially  valueless,  it  would  be  waste 
of  time  to  follow  Professor  Fuller  through  the 
less  important  and  more  imaginary  proofs  of 
accuracy  which  his  industry  has  amassed. 
Meanwhile  the  feeblest  reasoner  will  see  that 
while  a  writer  may  easily  be  accurate  in  general 
facts,  and  even  in  details,  respecting  an  age  long 
previous  to  that  in  which  he  wrote,  the  existence 
of  violent  errors  as  to  matters  with  which  a  con- 
temporary must  have  been  familiar  at  once  re- 
futes all  pretence  of  historic  authenticity  in  a 
book  professing  to  have  been  written  by  an 
author  in  the  days  and  country  which  he  de- 
scribes. 

Now  such  mistakes  there  seem  to  be,  and  not  a 
few  of  them,  in  the  pages  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 
One  or  two  of  them  can  perhaps  be  explained 
away  by  processes  which  would  amply  suffice 
to  show  that  "  yes "  means  "  no."  or  that 
"black"  is  a  description  of  "white";  but  each 
repetition  of  such  processes  leaves  us  more  and 
more  incredulous.  If  errors  be  treated  as  cor- 
ruptions of  the  text,  or  as  later  interpolations, 
such  arbitrary  methods  of  treating  the  Book  are 
practically  an  admission  that,  as  it  stands,  it 
cannot  be  regarded  as  historical. 

I.  We  are,   for  instance,   met  by  what   seems 

♦  Gen.  xli. 

+  See  Lenorraant,  "  La  Divination,"  p.  219. 

t  Jer.  xxix.  22.  The  tenth  verse  of  t/iis  very  chapter  is 
referred  to  in  Dan.  ix.  2.  The  custom  continued  in  the 
East  centuries  afterwards.  "  And  if  it  was  known  to  a 
Roman  writer  (Quintus  Curtius,  v.  i)  in  the  days  of  Ves- 
pasian, why"  (Mr.  Bevan  pertinently  asks  "should  it 
not  have  been  known  to  a  Palestinian  writer  who  lived 
centuries  earlier?"  (A.  A.  Bevan,  "Short  Commentary." 
p.  22). 

§"  Avodah-Zarah,"  f.3, 1 ;  "  Sanhedrin,"  f.  93,  i ;  "  Pesa- 
chim,"  f.  118,  I ;  "Eiruvin,    f.  53,  i. 


to  be  a  remarkable  error  in  the  very  first  verse 
of  the  Book,  which  tells  us  that  "  In  the  third 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  King  of  Judah,  came  Nebu- 
chadnezzar " — as  in  later  days  he  was  incorrectly 
called — "  King  of  Babylon,  unto  Jerusalem,  and 
besieged  it." 

It  is  easy  to  trace  whence  the  error  sprang. 
Its  source  lies  in  a  book  which  is  the  latest  1  n 
the  whole  Canon,  and  in  many  details  difficult 
to  reconcile  with  the  Book  of  Kings — a  book  of 
which  the  Hebrew  resembles  that  of  Daniel — 
the  Book  of  Chronicles.  In  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6 
we  are  told  that  Nebuchadnezzar  came  up  against 
Jehoiakim,  and  "  bound  him  in  fetters  to  carry 
him  to  Baljylon  ";  and  also — to  which  the  author 
of  Daniel  directly  refers — that  he  carried  off 
some  of  the  vessels  of  the  House  of  God,  to  ptit 
them  in  the  treasure-house  of  his  god.  In  this 
passage  it  is  not  said  that  this  occiirred  "  in  the 
third  year  of  Jehoiakim,"  who  reigned  eleven 
years;  but  in  2  Kings  xxiv.  i  we  are  told  that 
"  in  his  days  Nebuchadnezzar  came  up,  and  Je- 
hoiakim became  his  servant  three  years."  The 
passage  in  Daniel  looks  like  a  confused  reminis- 
cence of  the  "  three  years  "  with  "  the  third  year 
of  Jehoiakim."  The  elder  and  better  authority 
(the  Book  of  Kings)  is  silent  about  any  deporta- 
tion having  taken  place  in  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiakim, and  so  is  the  contemporary  Prophet 
Jeremiah.  But  in  any  case  it  seems  impossible 
that  it  should  have  taken  place  so  early  as  the 
third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  for  at  that  time  he  was 
a  simple  vassal  of  the  King  of  Egypt.  If  this 
deportation  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim, 
it  would  certainly  be  singular  that  Jeremiah,  in 
enumerating  three  others,  in  the  seventh, 
eighteenth,  and  twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar,* should  make  no  allusion  to  it.  But  it 
is  hard  to  see  how  it  could  have  taken  place  be- 
fore Egypt  had  been  defeated  in  the  Battle  of 
Carchemish,  and  that  was  not  till  b.  c.  597,  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim.f  Not  only  does  Jere- 
miah make  no  mention  of  so  remarkable  a  de- 
portation as  this,  which  as  the  earliest  would 
have  caused  the  deepest  anguish,  but,  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxxvi.  i),  he 
writes  a  roll  to  threaten  evils  which  are  still 
future,  and  in  the  fifth  year  proclaims  a  fast  in  the 
hope  that  the  imminent  peril  may  even  yet  be 
averted  (Jer.  xxxvi.  6-10).  It  is  only  after  the 
violent  obstinacy  of  the  king  that  the  destructive 
advance  of  Nebuchadrezzar  is  finally  prophesied 
(Jer.  xxxvi.  29)  as  something  which  has  not  yet 

occurred. t 

II.  Nor  are  the  names  in  this  first  chapter 
free  from  difficulty.  Daniel  is  called  Belteshaz- 
zar,  and  the  remark  of  the  King  of  Babylon— 
"  whose  name  was  Belteshazzar,  according  to 
the  name  of  my  god  " — certainly  suggests  that 
the  first  syllable  is  (as  the  Massorets  assume) 
connected  with  the  god  Bel.  But  the  name  has 
nothing  to  do  with  Bel.  No  contemporary 
could  have  fallen  into  such  an  error;§   still  less 

*  Jer.  Hi.  28-30.    These  were  in  vhe  reign  of  Jehoiachin. 

t  Jer  xlvi.  2  :  comp.  Jer.  xxv.  The  passage  of  Berossus. 
quoted  in  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  X.  xi.  i,  is  not  trustworthy,  and 
does  not  remove  the  difficulty. 

t  The  attempts  of  Keil  and  Pusey  to  get  over  the  diffi- 
culty, if  they  were  valid,  would  reduce  Scripture  to  a 
hopeless  riddle.  The  reader  will  see  all  the  latest  efforts 
in  this  direction  in  the  "  Speaker's  Commentary  "  and  the 
work  of  Fabre  d'Envieu.  Even  such  "  orthodox  "  writers 
as  Dorner.  Delitzsch,  and  Gess,  not  to  mention  hosts  of 
other  great  critics,  have  long  seen  the  desperate  impossi- 
bility of  these  arguments. 

%Balatsu-utsur,  "protect  his  life."  The  root  balatu, 
"  l>te,"  is  common  in  Assyrian  names.    The  mistake  comes 


366 


rHE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


a  king  who  spoke  Babylonian.  Shadrach  may 
be  "  Shudur-aku,"  "command  of  Aku,"  the 
moon-god;  but  Meshach  is  inexplicable;  and 
Abed-nego  is  a  strange  corruption  for  the  obvi- 
ous and  common  Abed-nebo,  "  servant  of  Nebo." 
Such  a  corruption  could  hardly  have  arisen  till 
Nebo  was  practically  forgotten.  And  what  is 
the  meaning  of  "the  Melsar"  (Dan.  i.  ii)? 
The  A.  V.  takes  it  to  be  a  proper  name;  the 
R.  V.  renders  it  "the  steward."  But  the  title  is 
unique  and  obscure.*  Nor  can  anything  be 
made  of  the  name  of  Ashpenaz,  the  prince  of  the 
eunuchs,  whom,  in  one  manuscript,  the  LXX. 
call  Abiesdri.f 

III.  Similar  difficulties  and  uncertainties  meet 
us  at  every  step.  Thus,  in  the  second  chapter 
(ii.  i),  the  dream  of  Nebuchadrezzar  is  fixed  in 
the  second  year  of  his  reign.  This  does  not  seem 
to  be  in  accord  with  i.  3,  18,  which  says  that 
Daniel  and  his  three  companions  were  kept  un- 
der the  care  of  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  for 
three  years.  Nothing,  of  course,  is  easier  than 
to  invent  harmonistic  hypotheses,  such  as  that 
of  Rashi,  that  "  the  second  year  of  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadrezzar "  has  the  wholly  different 
meaning  of  "  the  second  year  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple  "  ;  or  as  that  of  Hengsten- 
berg,  followed  by  many  modern  apologists,  that 
Nebuchadrezzar  had  previously  been  associated 
in  the  kingdom  with  Nabopolassar,  and  that  this 
was  the  second  year  of  his  independent  reign. 
Or,  again,  we  may,  with  Ewald,  read  "  the 
twelfth  year."  But  by  these  methods  we  are  not 
taking  the  Book  as  it  stands,  but  are  supposing 
it  to  be  a  network  of  textual  corruptions  and 
conjectural  combinations. 

IV.  In  ii.  2  the  king  summons  four  classes  of 
hierophants  to  disclose  his  dream  and  its  inter- 
pretation. They  are  the  magicians  ("_  Chartum- 
mim  "),  the  enchanters  ("  Ashshaphim  "),  the 
sorcerers  ("  Mechashsh'phim  "),  and  the  Chal- 
deans ("Kasdim").t  The  "  Chartummirn  "  oc- 
cur in  Gen.  xli.  8  (which  seems  to  be  in  the 
writer's  mind);  and  the  "Mechashsh'phim"  oc- 
cur in  Exod.  vii.  11,  xxii.  18;  but  the  mention  of 
Kasdim,  "  Chaldeans,"  is,  so  far  as  we  know, 
an  immense  anachronism.  In  much  later  ages 
the  name  was  used,  as  it  was  among  the  Roman 
writers,  for  wandering  astrologers  and  quacks  § 
But  this  degenerate  sense  of  the  word  was,  so 
far  as  we  can  judge,  wholly  unknown  to  the  age 
of  Daniel.  It  never  once  occurs  in  this  sense 
on  any  of  the  monuments.  Unknown  to  the 
Assyrian-Babylonian  language,  and  only  ac- 
quired long  after  the  end  of  the  Babylonian 
Empire,  such  a  usage  of  the  word  is,  as  Schrader 
says,  "  an  indication  of  the  post-exilic  composi- 
tion of  the  Book."  ||  In  the  days  of  Daniel 
"  Chaldeans  "  had  no  meaning  resembling  that 
of  "  magicians "  or  "  astrologers."  In  every 
other  writer  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  all 
contemporary  records,  "  Kasdim  "  simply  means 
the  Chaldean  nation  and  never  a  learned  caste.  1| 

from  the  wrong  vocalisation  adopted  by  the  Massorets 
(Meinhold,  "  Beitrage,"  p.  27). 

*  Schrader  dubiously  connects  it  with  matstsara, 
"  guardian." 

tLenormant,  p.  182,  regards  it  as  a  corruption  of  Ash- 
benazar,  "the  goddess  has  pruned  the  seed"  (??)  ;  but 
assumed  corruptions  of  the  text  are  an  uncertain 
expedient. 

$On  these  see  Rob.  Smith,  Cambr.Journ.  of  Philol.,  No. 
27.  P-  "5. 

Sjuv.,  "Sat.,'  X.  96:  "Cum  grege  Chaldaeo " :  Val. 
Max.,  iii.  i  ;  Cic,  "  De  Div.,"  i.  1,  etc. 

II  "  Keilinschr.,"  p.  429  ;  Meinhold,  p.  28. 

*  T.<ia.  ar.viii.  i.^ ;  Jer.  XXV.  12 ;  Ezek.  xii.  13  ;  Hab.  i.  6. 


This  single  circumstance  has  decisive  weight  in 
proving  the  late  age  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

V.  Again,  we  find  in  ii.  14,  "  Arioch.  the  chief 
of  the  executioners."  Schrader  precariously  de- 
rives the  name  from  "  Eri-aku,"  "  servant  of  the 
moon-god";  but,  however  that  may  be,  we  al- 
ready find  the  name  as  that  of  a  king  Ellasar  in 
Gen.  xiv.  i,  and  we  find  it  again  for  a  king  of 
the  Elymaeans  in  Judith  i.  6.  In  ver.  16  Daniel 
"  went  in  and  desired  of  the  king  "  a  little  respite; 
but  in  ver.  25  Arioch  tells  the  king,  as  though 
it  were  a  sudden  discovery  of  his  own,  "  I  have 
found  a  man  of  the  captives  of  Judah,  that  will 
make  known  unto  the  king  the  interpretation." 
This  was  a  surprising  form  of  introduction,  after 
we  have  been  told  that  the  king  himself  had, 
by  personal  examination,  found  that  Daniel  and 
his  young  companions  were  "  ten  times  better 
than  all  the  magicians  and  astrologers  that  were 
in  all  his  realm."  It  seems,  however,  as  if  each 
of  these  chapters  were  intended  to  be  recited  as 
a  separate  Haggada. 

VI.  In  ii.  46,  after  the  interpretation  of  the 
dream,  "  the  King  Nebuchadnezzar  fell  upon 
his  face,  and  worshipped  Daniel,  and  commanded 
that  they  should  of¥er  an  oblation  and  sweet 
odours  unto  him."  This  is  another  of  the  im- 
mense surprises  of  the  Book.  It  is  exactly  the 
kind  of  incident  in  which  the  haughty  theocratic 
sentiment  of  the  Jews  found  delight,  and  we  find 
a  similar  spirit  in  the  many  Talmudic  inventions 
in  which  Roman  emperors,  or  other  potentates, 
are  represented  as  paying  extravagant  adulation 
to  Rabbinic  sages.  There  is  (as  we  shall  see)  a 
similar  story  narrated  by  Josephus  of  Alexander 
the  Great  prostrating  himself  before  the  high 
priest  Jaddua,  tut  it  has  long  been  relegated  to 
the  realm  of  fable  as  an  outcome  of  Jewish  self- 
esteem.*  It  is  probably  meant  as  a  concrete  il- 
lustration of  the  glowing  promises  of  Isaiah,  that 
"  kings  and  queens  shall  bow  down  to  thee  with 
their  faces  towards  the  earth,  and  lick  up  the 
dust  of  thy  feet";t  and  "the  sons  of  them  that 
despised  thee  shall  bow  themselves  down  at  the 
soles   of  thy   feet."  % 

VII.  We  further  ask  in  astonishment  whether 
Daniel  could  have  accepted  without  indignant 
protest  the  offering  of  "  an  oblation  and  sweet 
odours."  To  say  that  they  were  only  ofifercd 
to  God  in  the  person  of  Daniel  is  the  idle  pre- 
tence of  all  idolatry.  They  are  expressly  said 
to  be  offered  "  to  Daniel."  A  Herod  could  ac- 
cept blasphemous  adulations  ;§  but  a  Paul  and  a 
Barnabas  deprecate  such  devotions  with  intense 
disapproval.! 

VIII.  In  ii.  48  Nebuchadrezzar  appoints 
Daniel,  as  a  reward  for  his  wisdom,  to  rule  over 
the  whole  province  of  Babylon,  and  to  be  Rah- 
signin,  "  chief  ruler,"  and  to  be  over  all  the 
wise  men  ("  Khakamim  ")  of  Babylon.  Lenor- 
mant  treats  this  statement  as  an  interpolation, 
because  he  regards  it  as  "  evidently  impossible." 
We  know  that  in  the  Babylonian  priesthood,  and 
especially  among  the  sacred  caste,  there  was  a 
passionate  religious  intolerance.  It  is  incon- 
ceivable that  they  should  have  accepted  as  their 
religious  superior  a  monotheist  who  was  the 
avowed  and  uncompromising  enemy  to  their 
whole  system  of  idolatry.  It  is  equally  incon- 
ceivable that  Daniel  should  have  accepted  the 
position  of  a  hierophant  in  a  polytheistic  cult. 

*  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  XL  viii.  5.         t  Isa.  Ix.  14. 
+  Isa.  xlix.  23.  §  Acts  xii.  22,  23. 

i  Acts  xiv.  II,  12,  xxviii.  6. 


PECULIARITIES    OF    THE    HISTORIC    SECTION. 


367 


In  the  next  three  chapters  there  is  no  allusion 
to  Daniel's  tenure  of  these  strange  and  exalted 
offices,  either  civil  or  religious.* 

IX.  The  third  chapter  contains  another  story, 
told  in  a  style  of  wonderful  stateliness  and 
splendour,  and  full  of  glorious  lessons;  but  here 
again  we  encounter  linguistic  and  other  diffi- 
culties. Thus  in  iii.  2,  though  "  all  the  rulers  of 
the  provinces  "  and  officers  of  all  ranks  are  sum- 
moned to  the  dedication  of  Nebuchadrezzar's 
colossus,  there  is  not  an  allusion  to  Daniel 
throughout  the  chapter.  Four  of  the  names  of 
the  officers  in  iii.  2,  3,  appear,  to  our  surprise, 
to  be  Persian;!  and,  of  the  six  musical  instru- 
ments, three — the  lute,  psaltery,  and  bagpipe  1;. 
— have  obvious  Greek  names,  two  of  which  (as 
already  stated)  are  of  late  origin,  while  another, 
the  "  sab'ka,"  resembles  the  Greek  (ra/u/Si/xr/,  but 
may  have  come  to  the  Greeks  from  the  Ara- 
mreans.§  The  incidents  of  the  chapter  are 
such  as  find  no  analogy  throughout  the  Old  or 
New  Testament,  but  exactly  resemble  those  of 
Jewish  moralising  fiction,  of  which  they  furnish 
the  most  perfect  specimen.  It  is  exactly  the  kind 
of  concrete  comment  which  a  Jewish  writer  of 
piety  and  genius,  for  the  encouragement  of  his 
affiicted  people,  might  have  based  upon  such  a 
passage  as  Isa.  xliii.  2,  3:  "When  thou  walkest 
through  the  fire,  thou  shalt  not  be  burned; 
neither  shall  the  flame  kindle  upon  thee.  For 
I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  the  Holy  One  of  Is- 
rael, thy  Saviour."  Nebuchadrezzar's  decree, 
"  That  every  people,  nation,  and  language, 
which  speak  anything  amiss  against  the  God 
of  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  shall 
be  cut  in  pieces,  and  their  houses  shall  be  made 
a  dunghill,"  can  only  be  paralleled  out  of  the 
later  Jewish  literature.! 

X.  In  chap.  iv.  we  have  another  monotheistic 
decree  of  the  King  of  Babylon,  announcing  to 
"  all  people,  nations,  and  languages  "  what  "  the 
high  God  hath  wrought  towards  me."  It  gives 
us  a  vision  which  recalls  Ezek.  xxxi.  3-18,  and 
may  possibly  have  been  suggested  by  that  fine 
chapter.lf  The  language  varies  between  the  third 
and  the  first  person.  In  iv.  13  Nebuchadrezzar 
speaks  of  "  a  watcher  and  a  holy  one."  This  is 
the  first  appearance  in  Jewish  literature  of  the 
word  'ir,  "  watcher,"  which  is  so  common  in 
the  Book  of  Enoch.**  In  ver.  26  the  expression 
"  after  thou  shalt  have  known  that  the  heavens 
do  rule  "  is  one  which  has  no  analogue  in  the 
Old  Testament,  though  exceedingly  common  in 
the  superstitious  periphrases  of  the  later  Jewish 
literature.  As  to  the  story  of  the  strange  ly- 
canthropy  with  which  Nebuchadrezzar  was  af- 
flicted, though  it  receives  nothing  but  the  faint- 
est shadow  of  support  from  any  historic  record,  it 
may  be  based  on  some  fact  preserved  by  tradition. 

♦  See  Jer.  xxxix.  3.  And  if  he  held  this  position,  how 
could  he  be  absent  m  chap.  iii.  ? 

t  Namely,  the  words  for  "satraps,"  "governors," 
"counsellors,"  and  "  judges,"  as  well  as  the  courtiers  in 
iii.  24.  Bleek  thinks  that  to  enhance  the  stateliness  of  the 
occasion  the  writer  introduced  as  many  official  names  as 
he  knew. 

$  Supra,  p.  260. 

§  Athen.,  "Deipnos.,"  iv.  175. 

II  The  Persian  titles  in  iii.  24  alone  suffice  to  indicate  that 
this  could  not  be  Nebuchadrezzar's  actual  decree.  See 
further.  Meinhold,  pp.  30.  31.  We  are  evidently  dealing 
with  a  writer  who  introduces  many  Persian  words,  with 
no  consciousness  that  they  could  not  have  been  used  by 
Babylonian  kings. 

^  The  writer  of  Daniel  was  evidently  acquainted  with 
the  Book  of  Ezekiel.  See  Delitzsch  in  herzog,  s.  v. 
"  Daniel,"  and  Driver,  p.  476. 

♦*  See  iv.  16,  25-3a 


It  is  probably  meant  to  reflect  on  the  mad  ways 
of  Antiochus.  The  general  phrase  of  Berossus, 
which  tells  us  that  Nebuchadrezzar  "  fell  into  a 
sickness  and  died,"  *  has  been  pressed  into  an 
historical  verification  of  this  narrative!  But  the 
phrase  might  have  been  equally  well  used  in  the 
most  ordinary  case,t  which  shows  what  fancies 
have  been  adduced  to  prove  that  we  are  here 
dealing  with  history.  The  fragment  of  Abydenus 
in  his  "  Assyriaca,"  preserved  by  Eusebius,  t 
shows  that  there  was  some  story  about  Nebu- 
chadrezzar having  uttered  remarkable  words 
upon  his  palace-roof.  The  announcement  of  a 
coming  irrevocable  calamity  to  the  kingdom 
from  a  Persian  mule,  "  the  son  of  a  Median 
woman,"  and  the  wish  that  "  the  alien  con- 
queror "  might  be  driven  "  through  the  desert 
where  wild  beasts  seek  their  food,  and  birds  fly 
hither  and  thither,"  has,  however,  very  little  to 
do  with  the  story  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  madness. 
Abydenus  says  that,  "  when  he  had  thus  prophe- 
sied, he  suddenly  vanished  "  ;  and  he  adds  noth- 
ing about  any  restoration  to  health  or  to  his 
kingdom.  All  that  can  be  said  is  that  there  was 
current  among  the  Babylonian  Jews  some  popu- 
lar legend  of  which  the  writer  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel  availed  himself  for  the  purpose  of  his 
edifying  "  Midrash." 

XL  When  we  reach  the  fifth  chapter  we  are 
faced  by  a  new  king,  Belshazzar,  who  is  some- 
what emphatically  called  the  son  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar.^ 

History  knows  of  no  such  king.||  The  prince 
of  whom  it  does  know  was  never  king,  and  was  a 
son,  not  of  Nebuchadrezzar,  but  of  the  usurper 
Nabunaid;  and  between  Nebuchadrezzar  and 
Nabunaid  there  were  three  other  kings.^ 

There  was  a  Belshazzar^ — ■"  Bel-sar-utsur," 
"  Bel  protect  the  prince  " — and  we  possess  a  clay 
cylinder  of  his  father  Nabunaid,  the  last  king  of 
Babylon,  praying  the  moon-god  that  "  my  son, 
the  offspring  of  my  heart,  might  honour  his  god- 
Itead,  and  not  give  himself  to  sin."**  But  if  we 
follow  Herodotus,  this  Belshazzar  never  came  to 
the  throne;  and  according  to  Berossus  he  was 
conquered  in  Borsippa.  Xenophon,  indeed, 
speaks  of  "  an  impious  king  "  as  being  slain  in 
Babylon;  but  this  is  only  in  an  avowed  romance 
which  has  not  the  smallest  historic  validity. ft 
Schrader  conjectures   that   Nabunaid   may   have 

*  Preserved  by  Jos. :  comp.  "  Ap.,"  I.  20. 

t  The  phrase  is  common  enough  :  e.  g.,  in  Jcs.,  "  Antt.," 
X.  xi.  I  (comp.  "c.  Ap.,"  I.  ig) ;  and  a  similar  phrase, 
e/xn-€(7u)v  eis  op^axrTi'ac,  is  Used  of  Antioclius  Epiphaiies  in 
I  Mace.  vi.  8. 

f'Praep.  Ev.,"  ix.  41.  Schrader  ("  K.  A.  T.,"  ii.  432) 
thinks  that  Berossus  and  the  Book  of  Daniel  may  both 
point  to  the  same  tradition  ;  but  the  Chaldee  tradition 
quoted  by  the  late  writer  Abydenus  errs  likewise  in  only 
recognising  two  Babylonish  kings  instead  oifour,  exclu- 
sive of  Belshazzar.  See,  too,  Schrader,  "  Jahrb.  fiir  Prot. 
Theol.,"  1881,  p.  618. 

§  Dan.  V.  II.  The  emphasis  seems  to  show  that  "  son  " 
is  really  meant— not  grandson.  This  is  a  little  strangs, 
for  Jeremiah  (xxvii.  7)  had  said  that  the  nations  should 
serve  Nebuchadrezzar,  "  and  his  son,  and  his  son's  son  "  ; 
and  in  no  case  was  Belshazzar  Nebuchadrezzar's  ww'jjow, 
for  his  father  Nabunaid  was  an  usurping  son  of  a  Rab- 
mag. 

II  Schrader^  p.  434  ff . ;  and  in  Riehm,  "  Handworterb.," 
ii.  163;  Pincnes.  in  Smith's  "  Bibl.  Diet.,"  i.  388.  2d  ed. 
The  contraction  into  Belshazzar  from  Bel-sar-uisur  se^ms 
to  show  a  late  date. 

^  That  the  author  of  Daniel  should  have  fallen  into  these 
errors  is  the  more  remarkable  because  Evil-merodach  is 
mentioned  in  2  Kings  xxv.  27  ;  and  Jeremiah  in  his  round 
number  of  seventy  years  includes  three  generations  (Jer. 
xxvii.  7).  Herodotus  and  Abydenus  made  the  same  mis- 
take.    See  Kamphausen,  pp.  30,  31. 

**  Herod.,  i.  igi.    See  Rawfinson,  "  Herod.,"  ;.  414. 

t+Xen.,  "Cyrop.,"  VII.  v.  ^. 


368 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


gone  to  take  the  field  aprainst  Cyrus  (who  con- 
quered and  pardoned  him,  and  allowed  him  to 
end  his  days  as  governor  of  Karamania),  and 
that  Belshazzar  may  have  been  killed  in  Baby- 
lon. These  are  mere  hypotheses;  as  are  those  of 
Josephus,*  who  identifies  Belshazzar  with  Na- 
bunaid  (whom  he  calls  Naboandelon) ;  and  of 
Babelon,  who  tries  to  make  him  the  same  as 
Maruduk-shar-utsur  (as  though  Bel  was  the 
same  as  Maruduk),  which  is  impossible,  as  this 
king  reigned  before  Nabunaid.  No  contempo- 
rary writer  could  have  fallen  into  the  error  either 
of  calling  Belshazzar  "  king";  or  of  insisting  on 
his  being  "  the  son  "  of  Nebuchadrezzar;  t  or  of 
representing  him  as  Nebuchadrezzar's  successor. 
Nebuchadrezzar  was  succeeded  by — 


ctrc.  B.  c. 


Evil-merodach, 
Nergal-sharezer, 
Lakhabbashi-marudu 
(Laborosoarchod) 
Nabunaid, 


561  (Avil-marduk).t 
559  (Nergal-sar-utsur). 

555  (an  infant). 
554- 


Nabunaid  reigned  till  about  b.  c.  538,  when 
Babylon  was  taken  by  Cyrus. 

The  conduct  of  Belshazzar  in  the  great  feast 
of  this  chapter  is  probably  meant  as  an  allusive 
contrast  to  the  revels  and  impieties  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  especially  in  his  infamous  festival  at 
the  grove  of  Daphne. 

XII.  "  That  night,"  we  are  told,  "  Belshazzar, 
the  Chaldean  king,  was  slain."  It  has  always 
been  supposed  that  this  was  an  incident  of  the 
capture  of  Babylon  by  assault,  in  accordance  with 
the  story  of  Herodotus,  repeated  by  so  many 
subsequent  writers.  But  on  this  point  the  in- 
scriptions of  Cyrus  have  "  revolutionised  "  our 
knowledge.  "  Thet-e  was  no  siege  and  capture 
of  Babylon;  the  capital  of  the  Babylonian  Em- 
pire opened  its  gates  to  the  general  of  Cyrus. 
Gobryas  and  his  soldiers  entered  the  city  with- 
out fighting,  and  the  daily  services  in  the  great 
temple  of  Bel-merodach  suffered  no  interruption. 
Three  months  later  Cyrus  himself  arrived,  and 
made  his  peaceful  entry  into  the  new  capital  of 
his  empire.  We  gather  from  the  contract-tablets 
that  even  the  ordinary  business  of  the  place  had 
not  been  affected  by  the  war.  The  siege  and 
capture  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  is  really  a  reflec- 
tion into  the  past  of  the  actual  sieges  undergone 
by  the  city  in  the  reigns  of  Darius,  son  of  Hys- 
taspes  and  Xerxes.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the 
editor  of  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 
could  have  been  as  little  a  contemporary  of  the 
events  he  professes  to  record  as  Herodotus.  For 
both  alike,  the  true  history  of  the  Babylonian 
Empire  has  been  overclouded  and  foreshortened 
by  the  lapse  of  time.  The  three  kings  who 
reigned  between  Nebuchadrezzar  and  Nabunaid 
have  been  forgotten,  and  the  last  king  of  the 
Babylonian  Empire  has  become  the  son  of  its 
founder."  ^ 

Snatching  at  the  merest  straws,  those  who  try 
to  vindicate  the  accuracv  of  the  writer — although 
he  makes  Belshazzar  a  king,  which  he  never  was; 
and  the  son  of  Nebuchadrezzar,  whiclf  is  not  the 

* "  Antt.,"  X.  xi  2.  In  "  c.  Ap.,"  I.  20,  he  calls  him 
Nabonnedus. 

tThis  is  now  supposed  to  mean  "grandson  by  mar- 
riage," by  inventing  the  hypothesis  that  Nabunaid 
married  a  daughter  of  Nebuchadrezzar.  But  this  does 
not  accord  with  Dan.  v.  2, 11,  22  ;  and  so  in  Baruch  i.  11, 12. 

t  2  Kings  XXV.  27. 

§Sayce,  "The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments," 
P-  527. 


case;  or  his  grandson,  of  which  there  is  no  tittle 
of  evidence;  and  his  successor,  whereas  four 
kings  intervened; — think  that  they  improve  the 
case  by  urging  that  Daniel  was  made  "  the  third 
ruler  in  the  kingdom  " — Nabunaid  being  the 
first,  and  Belshazzar  being  the  second!  Unhap- 
pily for  their  very  precarious  hypothesis,  the 
translation  "  third  ruler  "  appears  to  be  entirely 
untenable.     It  means  "  one  of  a  board  of  three." 

XIII.  In  the  sixth  chapter  we  are  again  met 
by  difficulty  after  difficulty. 

Who,  for  instance,  was  Darius  the  Mede?  We 
are  told  (v.  30,  31)  that,  on  the  night  of  his 
impious  banquet,  "  Belshazzar  the  king  of  the 
Chaldeans  "  was  slain,  "  and  Darius  the  Median 
took  the  kingdom,  being  about  threescore  and 
two  years  old."  We  are  also  told  that  Daniel 
"  prospered  in  the  reign  of  Darius,  and  in  the 
reign  of  Cyrus  the  Persian  "  (vi.  28).  But  this 
Darius  is  not  even  noticed  elsewhere.  Cyrus 
was  the  conqueror  of  Babylon,  and  between 
B.  c.  538-536  there  is  no  room  or  possibility  for 
a  Median  ruler. 

The  inference  which  we  should  naturally  draw 
from  these  statements  in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and 
which  all  readers  have  drawn,  was  that  Babylon 
had  been  conquered  by  the  Medes,  and  that  only 
after  the  death  of  a  Median  king  did  Cyrus  the 
Persian  succeed. 

But  historic  monuments  and  records  entirely 
overthrow  this  supposition.  Cyrus  was  the  king 
of  Babylon  from  the  day  that  his  troops  entered 
it  without  a  blow  He  had  conquered  the  Medes 
and  suppressed  their  royalty.  "  The  numerous 
contract-tables  of  the  ordinary  daily  business 
transactions  of  Babylon,  dated  as  they  are  month 
by  month,  and  almost  day  by  day  from  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadrezzar  to  that  of  Xerxes,  prove  that 
between  Nabonidus  and  Cyrus  there  was  no 
intermediate  ruler."  The  contemporary  scribes 
and  merchants  of  Babylon  knew  nothing  of  any 
King  Belshazzar,  and  they  knew  even  less  of  any 
King  Darius  the  Mede.  No  contemporary 
writer  could  possibly  have  fallen  into  such  an 
error.* 

And  against  this  obvious  conclusion  of  what 
possible  avail  is  it  for  Hengstenberg  to  quote  a 
late  Greek  lexicographer  (Harpocration,  a.  d. 
170?),  who  says  that  the  coin  "a  daric "  was 
named  after  a  Darius  earlier  than  the  father  of 
Xerxes? — or  for  others  to  identify  this  shad- 
owy Darius  the  Mede  with  AstyagesPf — or  with 
Cyaxares  II.  in  the  romance  of  Xenophon?| — 
or  to  say  that  Darius  the  Mede  is  Gobryas  (Ug- 
baru)  of  Gutium  § — a  Persian,  and  not  a  king  at 

*  I  need  not  enter  here  upon  the  confusion  of  the  Manua 
with  the  Medes,  on  which  see  Sayce,  "Higher  Criticism 
and  Monuments,"  p.  519  ff. 

+  Winer,  "  Realw6rterb.,".f.  v.  "  Darius." 

X  So  Bertholdt,  Von  Lengerke,  Auberlen .  It  is  decidedly 
rejected  by  Schrader  (Riehm,  "  Handworterb.,"  i.  259). 
Even  Cicero  said,  "Cyrus  ille  a  Xenophonte  non  ad 
historiae  fidem  scriptus  est  "("  Ad  Quint.  Fratr.,"Ep.  i.  3). 
Niebuhr  called  the  "  Cyropaedia  "  "  einen  elenden  und  lap- 
pischen  Roman  "  ("Alt.  Gesch.,"  i.  116).  He  classes  it  with 
"  Telemaque  "  or  "Rasselas."  Xenophon  was  probably 
the  ultimate  authority  for  the  statement  of  Josephus 
("  Antt.,"  X.  xi.  4),  which  has  no  weight.  Herodotus  and 
Ktesias  know  nothing  of  the  existence  of  any  Cyaxares 
II.,  nor  does  the  Second  Isaiah  (xlv),  who  evidently  con- 
templates Cyrus  as  the  conqueror  and  the  first  king  of 
Babylon.  Are  we  to  set  a  professed  romancer  like  Xeno- 
phon, and  a  late  compiler  like  Josephus,  against  these 
authorities? 

§  T.  W.  Pinches,  in  Smith's  "  Bibl.  Diet.,"  i.  716,  2d  ed. 
Into  this  theory  are  pressed  the  general  expressions  that 
Darius  "  received  the  kingdom  "  and  was  "  made  king," 
which  have  not  the  least  bearing  on  it.  They  may  simply 
mean  that  he  became  king  by  conquest,  and  not  in  the 
ordinary  course— so  Rosenmiiller,  Hitzig,  Von  Lengerke, 


PECULIARITIES    OF    THE    HISTORIC    SECTION. 


369 


all — who  under  no  circumstances  could  have  been 
called  "  the  king "  by  a  contemporary  (vi.  12, 
ix.  i),  and  whom,  apparently  for  three  months 
only,  Cyrus  made  governor  of  Babylon?  How 
could  a  contemporary  governor  have  appointed 
"  one  hundred  and  twenty  princes  which  should 
be  over  the  whole  kingdom,"  *  when,  even  in  the 
days  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  there  were  only  twenty 
or  twenty-three  satrapies  in  tlic.  Persian  Em- 
pire?! And  how  could  a  mere  provincial 
viaeroy  be  approached  by  "  '  all  the  presidents  of 
the  kingdom,'  tlie  governors,  and  the  princes, 
the  counsellors,  and  the  captains,"  to  pass  a  de- 
cree that  any  one  who  for  tliirty  days  offered 
any  prayer  to  God  or  man,  except  to  him,  should 
be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions?  The  fact  that  such 
a  decree  could  only  be  made  by  "  a  king "  is 
emphasised  in  the  narrative  itself  (vi.  12:  comp. 
iii.  29).  The  supposed  analogies  offered  by  Pro- 
fessor Fuller  and  others  in  favour  of  a  decree  so 
absurdly  impossible — except  in  the  admitted 
license  and  for  the  high  moral  purpose  of  a  Jew- 
ish Haggada — are  to  the  last  degree  futile.  In 
any  ordinary  criticism  they  would  be  set  down 
as  idle  special  pleading.  Yet  this  is  only  one 
of  a  multitude  of  wildly  improbable  incidents, 
which,  from  misunderstanding  of  the  writer's 
age  and  purpose,  have  been  taken  for  sober  his- 
tory, though  they  receive  from  historical  records 
and  monuments  no  shadow  of  confirmation,  and 
are  in  not  a  few  instances  directly  opposed  to 
all  that  we  now  know  to  be  certain  history. 
Even  if  it  were  conceivable  that  this  hypothetic 
"  Darius  the  Mede  "  was  Gobryas,  or  Astyages, 
or  Cyaxares,  it  is  plain  that  the  author  of  Daniel 
gives  him  a  name  and  national  designation  which 
lead  to  mere  confusion,  and  speaks  of  him  in 
a  way  which  would  have  been  surely  avoided  by 
■my  contemporary. 

"  Darius  the  Mede,"  says  Professor  Sayce,  "  is 
in  fact  a  rejection  into  the  past  of  '  Darius  the 
son  of  Hystaspes,'t  just  as  the  siege  and  capture 
of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  are  a  reflection  into  the 
past  of  its  siege  and  capture  by  the  same  prince. 
The  name  of  Darius  and  the  story  of  the 
slaughter  of  the  Chaldean  king  go  together. 
They  are  alike  derived  from  the  unwritten  his- 
tory which,  in  the  East  of  to-day,  is  still  made 
by  the  people,  and  which  'blends  together  in  a 
single  picture  the  manifold  events  and  person- 
ages of  the  past.  It  is  a  history  which  has  no 
perspective,  though  it  is  based  on  actual  facts; 
the  accurate  combinations  of  the  chronologer 
have  no  meaning  for  it,  and  the  events  of  a 
century  are  crowded  into  a  few  years.  This  is 
the  kind  of  history  which  the  Jewish  mind  in 
the  age  of  the  Talmud  loved  to  adapt  to  moral 
and  religious  purposes.  This  kind  of  history 
then  becomes  as  it  were  a  parable,  and  under 

€tc.  ;  or  perhaps  the  words  show  some  sense  of  uncer- 
tainty as  to  the  exact  course  of  events.  The  sequence  of 
Persian  kings  in  "Seder  Olam,"  28-30,  and  in  Rashi  on 
Dan.  V.  I,  i.x.  i,  is  equally  unhistorical. 

*  This  is  supported  by  the  remark  that  this  three-months 
viceroy  "appointed  governors  in  Babylon  "  ! 

+  Herod.,  iii.  8q  ;  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  viii.  88. 

X  See,  too,  Meinhold  ("  Beitrage,"  p.  46),  who  concludes 
his  survey  with  the  words,  "  Sprachliche  wie  sachliche 
Griinde  machen  es  niclit  fiiir  ivahrsclieinlich  sondern 
gevuiss  dass  an  danielsche  Autorschaft  von  Dan.  ii.-vi., 
tiberhaupt  an  die  Entstehung  zur  Zeit  der  jiidischen  Ver- 
bannung  nicht  zu  denken  ist."  He  adds  that  almost  all 
scholars  believe  the  chapters  to  be  no  older  than  the  age 
of  the  Maccabees,  and  that  even  Kahnis  ("Dogmatik,"  i. 
376)  and  Delitzsch  (Herzog,  s.  v.  "Dan.")  give  up  their 
genuineness.  He  himself  believes  that  these  Aramaic 
chapters  were  incorporated  by  a  later  writer,  who  wrote 
the  introduction. 

24— Vol.  rv. 


the  name  of  Haggada  serves  to  illustrate  that 
teaching  of  the  law."  * 

The  favourable  view  given  of  the  character 
of  the  imaginary  Darius  the  Mede,  and  his  re- 
gard for  Daniel,  may  have  been  a  confusion  with 
the  Jewish  reminiscences  of  Darius,  son  of  Hys- 
taspes,  who  permitted  the  rebuilding  of  the  Tem- 
ple under  Zerubbabel.f 

If  we  look  for  the  source  of  the  confusion  we 
see  it  perhaps  in  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  (xiii. 
17,  xiv.  6-22),  that  the  Medes  should  be  the  de- 
stroyers of  Babylon;  or  in  that  of  Jeremiah — a 
prophet  of  whom  the  author  had  made  a  special 
study  (Dan.  ix.  2) — to  the  same  effect  (Jer.  li. 
11-28);  together  with  the  tradition  that  o  Darius 
— namely,  the  son  of  Hystaspes — had  once  con- 
quered  Babylon. 

XIV.  But  to  make  confusion  worse  con- 
founded, if  these  chapters  were  meant  for  his- 
tory, the  problematic  "  Darius  the  Mede  "  is  in 
Dan.  ix.  i  called  "  the  son  of  Ahasuerus." 

Now  Ahasuerus  (Achashverosh)  is  the  same 
as  Xerxes,  and  is  the  Persian  name  Khshyarsha; 
and  Xerxes  was  the  son,  not  the  father,  of 
Darius  Hystaspis,  who  was  a  Persian,  not  a 
Mede.  Before  Darius  Hystaspis  could  have 
been  transformed  into  the  son  of  his  own  son 
Xerxes,  the  reigns,  not  only  of  Darius,  but  also 
of  Xerxes,  must  have  long  been  past. 

XV.  There  is  yet  another  historic  sign  that 
this  Book  did  not  originate  till  the  Persian  Em- 
pire had  long  ceased  to  exist.  In  xi.  2  the 
writer  only  knows  of  four  kings  of  Persia.  | 
These  are  evidently  Cyrus,  Cambyses,  Darius 
Hystaspis,  and  Xerxes — whom  he  describes  as 
the  richest  of  them.  This  king  is  destroyed  by 
the  kingdom  of  Grecia — an  obvious  confusion  of 
popular  tradition  between  the  defeat  inflicted  on 
the  Persians  by  the  Republican  Greeks  in  the 
days  of  Xerxes  (b.  c.  480),  and  the  overthrow 
of  the  Persian  kingdom  under  Darius  Codo- 
mannus  by  Alexander  the  Great  (b.  c.  Z23)- 

These,  then,  are  some  of  the  apparent  historic 
impossibilities  by  which  we  are  confronted  when 
we  regard  this  Book  as  professed  history.  The 
doubts  suggested  by  such  seeming  errors  are  not 
in  the  least  removed  by  the  acervation  of  end- 
less conjectures.  They  are  greatly  increased  by 
the  fact  that,  so  far  from  standing  alone,  they 
are  intensified  by  other  difficulties  which  arise 
under  every  fresh  aspect  under  which  the  Book 
is  studied.  Behrmann,  the  latest  editor,  sums 
up  his  studies  with  the  remark  that  "  there  is 
an  almost  universal  agreement  that  the  Book, 
in  its  present  form  and  as  a  whole,  had  its 
origin  in  the  Maccabean  age;  while  there  is  a 
widening  impression  that  in  its  purpose  it  is  not 
an  exclusive  product  of  that  period."  No 
amount  of  casuistical  ingenuity  can  long  prevail 
to  overthrow  the  spreading  conviction  that  the 
views  of  Hengstenberg,  Havernick,  Keil,  Pusey, 
and  their  followers,  have  been  refuted  by  the 
light  of  advancing  knowledge — which  is  a  light 
kindled  for  us  by  God  Himself. 

*  Sayce,  /.  c,  p.  529. 

tKamphausen,  p.  45. 

X  Sayce,  /.  c.  The  author  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  seems 
only  to  have  known  of  three  kings  of  Persia  after  Cyrus 
(xi.  2).  But  five  are  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament- 
Cyrus,  Darius,  Artaxerxes,  Xerxes,  and  Darius  HI. 
(Codomannus,  Neh.  xii.  22).  There  were  three  Dariuses 
and  three  Artaxerxes,  but  he  only  knows  one  of  each 
name  (Kamphausen,  p.  32).  He  might  easily  have  over- 
looked the  fact  that  the  Darius  of  Neh.  xii.  22  was  a  wholly 
different  person  from  the  Darius  of  Ezra  vi.  i. 


370 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
GENERAL  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  BOOK. 

In  endeavouring  to  see  the  idea  and  construc- 
tion of  a  book  there  is  always  much  room  for 
the  play  of  subjective  considerations.  Meinhold 
has  especially  studied  this  subject,  but  we  cannot 
be  certain  that  his  views  are  more  than  imag- 
inative. He  thinks  that  chap,  ii.,  in  which  we 
are  strongly  reminded  of  the  story  of  Joseph  and 
of  Pharaoh's  dreams,  is  intended  to  set  forth 
God  as  Omniscient,  and  chap.  iii.  as  Omnipo- 
tent. To  these  conceptions  is  added  in  chap.  iv. 
the  insistence  upon  God's  All-holiness.  The 
fifth  and  sixth  chapters  form  one  conception. 
Since  the  death  of  Belshazzar  is  assigned  to  the 
night  of  his  banquet  no  edict  could  be  ascribed 
to  him  resembling  those  attributed  to  Nebu- 
chadrezzar. The  efifect  of  Daniel's  character 
and  of  the  Divine  protection  accorded  to  him 
on  the  mind  of  Darius  is  expressed  in  the  strong 
edict  of  the  latter  in  vi.  26,  27.  This  is  meant 
to  illustrate  that  the  All-wise,  Almighty,  All- 
holy  God  is  the  Only  Living  God.  The  con- 
sistent and  homogeneous  object  of  the  whole 
historic  section  is  to  set  forth  the  God  of  the 
Hebrews  as  exalting  Himself  in  the  midst 
of  heathendom,  and  extorting  submission  by 
mighty  portents  from  heathen  potentates.  In 
this  the  Book  offers  a  general  analogy  to  the 
section  of  the  history  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt 
narrated  in  Exod.  i.  12.  The  culmination  of  rec- 
ognition as  to  the  power  of  God  is  seen  in  the 
decree  of  Darius  (vi.  26,  27),  as  compared  with 
that  of  Nebuchadrezzar  in  iv.  a.  According  to 
this  view,  the  meaning  and  essence  of  each  sep- 
arate chapter  are  given  in  its  closing  section, 
and  there  is  artistic  advance  to  the  great  climax, 
marked  alike  by  the  resemblances  of  these  four 
paragraphs  (ii.  47,  iii.  28,  29,  iv.  27 j  vi.  26,  27), 
and  by  their  dififerences.  To  this  main  purpose 
all  the  other  elements  of  these  splendid  pictures — 
the  faithfulness  of  Hebrew  worshippers,  the 
abasement  of  blaspheming  despots,  the  mission 
of  Israel  to  the  nations — are  subordinated.  The 
chief  aim  is  to  set  forth  the  helpless  humiliation 
of  all  false  gods  before  the  might  of  the  God 
of  Israel.  It  might  be  expressed  in  the  words, 
"  Of  a  truth.  Lord,  the  kings  of  Assyria  have 
laid  waste  all  the  nations,  and  cast  their  gods 
into  the  fire;  for  they  were  no  gods,  but  the 
work  of  men's  hands,  wood  and  stone." 

A  closer  glance  at  these  chapters  will  show 
some  grounds  for  these  conclusions. 

Thus,  in  the  second  chapter,  the  magicians 
and  sorcerers  repudiate  all  possibility  of  reveal- 
ing the  king's  dream  and  its  interpretation,  be- 
cause they  are  but  men,  and  the  gods  have  not 
their  dwelling  with  mortal  flesh  (ii.  11);  but 
Daniel  can  tell  the  dream  because  he  stands  near 
to  his  God,  who,  though  He  is  in  heaven,  yet  is 
All-wise,  and  revealeth  secrets. 

In  the  third  chapter  the  destruction  of  the 
strongest  soldiers  of  Nebuchadrezzar  by  lire,  and 
the  absolute  deliverance  of  the  three  Jews  whom 
they  have  iiung  into  the  furnace,  convince  Nebu- 
chadrezzar that  no  god  can  deliver  as  the  Al- 
mighty does,  and  that  therefore  it  is  blasphemy 
deservine-  oi  death  to  utter  a  word  against  Him. 


In  chap.  iv.  the  supremacy  of  Daniel's  wis- 
dom as  derived  from  God,  the  fulfilment  of  the 
threatened  judgment,  and  the  deliverance  of  the 
mighty  King  of  Babylon  from  his  degrading 
madness  when  he  lifts  up  his  eyes  to  heaven, 
convince  Nebuchadrezzar  still  more  deeply  that 
God  is  not  only  a  Great  God,  but  that  no  other 
being,  man  or  god,  can  even  be  compared  to 
Him.  He  is  the  Only  and  the  Eternal  God. 
who  "  doeth  according  to  His  will  in  the  army 
of  heaven,"  as  well  as  "  among  the  inhabitants 
of  the  earth,"  and  "  none  can  stay  His  hand." 
This  is  the  highest  point  of  conviction.  Nebu- 
chadrezzar confesses  that  God  is  not  only 
"  Primus  inter  pares,"  but  the  Irresistible  God, 
and  his  own  God.  And  after  this,  in  the  fifth 
chapter,  Daniel  can  speak  to  Belshazzar  of  "  the 
Lord  of  heaven"  (v.  23);  and  as  the  king's 
Creator;  and  of  the  nothingness  of  gods  of  silver, 
and  gold,  and  brass,  and  wood,  and  stone; — 
as  though  those  truths  had  already  been  de- 
cisively proved.  And  this  belief  finds  open  ex- 
pression in  the  decree  of  Darius  (vi.  26,  27), 
which  concludes  the  historic  section. 

It  is  another  indication  of  this  main  purpose 
of  these  histories  that  the  plural  form  of  the 
Name  of  God — "  Elohim  " — does  not  once  occur 
in  chaps,  ii.-vi.  It  is  used  in  i.  2,  9,  17;  but  not 
again  till  the  ninth  chapter,  where  it  occurs 
twelve  times;  once  in  the  tenth  (x.  12);  and 
twice  of  God  in  the  eleventh  chapter  (xi.  32,  ^7). 
In  the  prophetic  section  (vii.  18,  22,  25,  27)  we 
have  "  Most  High  "  in  the  plural  ("  'elionin  ");  * 
but  with  reference  only  to  the  One  God  (see 
vii.  25).  But  in  all  cases  where  the  heathen  are 
addressed     this     plural     becomes     the     singular 

("  ehlleh,"'"'?.^),  as  throughout  the  first  six  chap- 
ters. This  avoidance  of  so  common  a  word  as 
the  plural  "  Elohim  "  for  God,  because  the  plural 
form  might  conceivably  have  been  misunder- 
stood by  the  heathen,  shows  the  elaborate  con- 
struction of  the  Book.t  God  is  called  Eloah 
Shamain,  "  God  of  heaven,"  in  the  second  and 
third  chapters;  but  in  later  chapters  we  have  the 
common  post-exilic  phrase  in  the  plural.:^ 

In  the  fourth  and  fifth  chapters  we  have  God's 
Holiness  first  brought  before  us,  chiefly  on  its 
avenging  side;  and  it  is  not  till  we  have  wit- 
nessed the  proof  of  His  Unity,  Wisdom,  Om- 
nipotence, and  Justice,  which  it  is  the  mission 
of  Israel  to  make  manifest  among  the  heathen, 
that  all  is  summed  up  in  the  edict  of  Darius  to 
all  people,  nations,  and  languages. 

The  omission  of  any  express  recognition  of 
God's  tender  compassion  is  due  to  the  structure 
of  these  chapters;  for  it  would  hardly  be  possible 
for  heathen  potentates  to  recognise  that  attribute 
in  the  immediate  presence  of  His  judgments.  It 
is  somewhat  remarkable  that  the  name  "  Jeho- 
vah "  is  avoided.^  As  the  Jews  purposely  pro- 
nounced it  with  wrong  vowels,  and  the  LXX. 
render  it  by  Kdpios,  the  Samaritan  by  nKD''CJ',  and 
the  Rabbis  by  "  the  Name,"  so  we  find  in  the 
Book  of  Daniel  a  similar  avoidance  of  the  awful 
Tetragrammaton. 

*  Literally,  as  in  margin,  "■most  high  things"  or 
places." 

t  In  iv.  5,  6  ;  and  elohin  means  "gods  in  the  mouth  of  a 
heathen  ("  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  ')• 

X  Elohin  occurs  repeatedly  in  chap,  ix.,  and  in  x.  12,  xu 

32>  J7.  .    ^        . 

ij  It  only  occurs  in  Dan.  ix. 


PECULIARITIES    OF    APOCALYPTIC    AND    PROPHETIC    SECTION.     371 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF 
DANIEL. 

As  regards  the  religious  views  of  the  Book 
of  Danie]  some  of  them  at  any  rate  are  in  full 
accordance  with  the  belief  in  the  late  origin  of 
the  Book  to  which  we  are  led  by  so  many  indi- 
cations.* 

I.  Thus  in  Dan.  xii.  2  (for  we  may  here  so  far 
anticipate  the  examination  of  the  second  section 
of  the  Book)  we  meet,  for  the  first  time  in 
Scripture,  with  a  distinct  recognition  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  individual  dead.f  This,  as'all 
know,  is  a  doctrine  of  which  we  only  find  the 
faintest  indication  in  the  earlier  books  of  the 
Canon.  Although  the  doctrine  is  still  but  dimly 
formulated,  it  is  clearer  in  this  respect  than  Isa. 
XXV.  8,  xxvi.   19. 

II.  Still  more  remarkable  is  the  special  prom- 
inence of  angels.  It  is  not  God  who  goes  forth 
to  war  (Judg.  v.  13,  22,),  or  takes  personal  part 
in  the  deliverance  or  punishment  of  nations  (Isa. 
v.  26,  vii.  18).  Throned  in  isolated  and  unap- 
proachable transcendence.  He  uses  the  agency  of 
intermediate   beings    (Dan.   iv.    14). t 

In  full  accordance  with  late  developments  of 
Jewish  opinion  angels  are  mentioned  by  special 
names,  and  appear  as  Princes  and  Protectors  of 
special  lands. §  In  no  other  book  in  the  Old 
Testament  have  we  any  names  given  to  angels, 
or  any  distinction  between  their  dignities,  or 
any  trace  of  their  being  in  mutual  rivalry  as 
Princes  or  Patrons  of  different  nationalities. 
These  remarkable  features  of  angelology  only 
occur  in  the  later  epoch,  and  in  the  apocalyptic 
literature  to  which  this  Book  belongs.  Thus 
they  are  found  in  the  LXX.  translations  of  Deut. 
xxxii.  8  and  Isa.  xxx.  4,  and  in  such  post- 
Maccabean  books  as  those  of  Enoch  and 
Esdras.ll 

III.  Again,  we  have  the  fixed  custom  of  three 
daily  formal  prayers,  uttered  towards  the  Kibleh 
of  Jerusalem.  This  may,  possibly,  have  begun 
during  the  Exile.  It  became  a  normal  rule  for 
later  ages. IT  The  Book,  however,  like  that  of 
Jonah,  is,  as  a  whole,  remarkably  free  from  any 
extravagant  estimate  of  Levitical  minutiae. 

IV.  Once  more,  for  the  first  time  in  Jewish 
story,  we  find  extreme  importance  attached  to 
the  Levitical  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean 
meats,  which  also  comes  into  prominence  in  the 
age  of  the  Maccabees,  as  it  afterwards  constituted 
a  most  prominent  element  in  the  ideal  of  Tal- 
mudic  religionism.**  Daniel  and  the  Three 
Children  are  vegetarians,  like  the  Pharisees  after 
the  destruction  of  the  Second  Temple,  mentioned 
in  "  Baba  Bathra,"  f.  60,  2. 

♦  The  description  of  God  as  "  the  Ancient  of  Days  "  with 
garments  white  as  snow,  and  of  His  throne  of  names  on 
burning  wheels,  is  found  again  in  the  Book  of  Enoch, 
written  about  B.  C.  141  (Enoch  xiv.). 

t  See  Dan.  xii  2.  Comp.  Jos.,  "  B.  J.,"  II.  viii.  14;  Enoch 
xxii.  13,  Ix.  1-5,  etc. 

tComp.  Smend,  "  Alttest.  Relig.  Gesch.,"  p.  530.  For 
references  to  angels  in  Old  Testament  see  Job.  i.  6,  xxxviii. 
7  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  18  ;  Psalm  Ixxxix.  7  ;  Josh.  v.  13-15;  Zech.  i. 
12,  lii.  I.    See  further  Behrmann,  "Dan.,"  p.  xxiii. 

§  Dan.  iv.  14,  ix.  21,  x.  13,  20. 

I  See  Enoch  Ixxi.  17,  Ixviii.  10,  and  the  six  archangels 
Uriel,  Raphael,  Reguel,  Michael,  Saragael,  and  Gabriel  in 
Enoch  xx.-xxxvi.  See  "  Rosh  Hashanah,"  f.  56,  i ;  "  Bere- 
shith  Rabba,"  c.  48;   Hamburger,  i.  305-312. 

5  "  Berachoth,"  f.  31;  Dan.  vi.  11.  Comp.  Psalm  Iv.  18  ;  i 
Kings  viii.  38-48. 

**  I  Mace-  J.  6a :  Dan.  i.  8 ;  2  Mace.  v.  27,  vi.  i8-vii.  42. 


V.  We  have  already  noticed  the  avoidance  of 
the  sacred  name  "  Jehovah  "  even  in  passages 
addressed  to  Jews  (Dan.  ii.  18),  though  we  find 
"  Jehovah  "  in  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7.  Jehovah  only 
occurs  in  reference  to  Jer.  xxv.  8-11,  and  in  the 
prayer  of  the  ninth  chapter,  where  we  also  find 
"  Adonai  "  and  "  Elohim." 

Periphrases  for  God,  like  "  the  Ancient  of 
Days,"  become  normal  in  Talmudic  literature. 

VI.  Again,  the  doctrine  of  the  Messiah,  like 
these  other  doctrines,  is,  as  Professor  Driver 
says,  "  taught  with  greater  distinctness  and  in 
a  more  developed  form  than  elsewhere  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  with  features  approximating 
to,  though  not  identical  with,  those  met  with  in 
the  earlier  parts  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  (b.  c. 
100).  In  one  or  two  instances  these  develop- 
ments may  have  been  partially  moulded  by  for- 
eign influences."  *  They  undoubtedly  mark  a 
later  phase  of  revelation  than  that  which  is  set 
before  us  in  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
And  the  conclusion  indicated  by  these  special  fea- 
tures in  the  Book  is  confirmed  by  the  general 
atmosphere  which  we  breathe  throughout  it. 
The  atmosphere  and  tone  are  not  those  of  any 
other  writings  belonging  to  the  Jews  of  the 
Exile;  it  is  rather  that  of  the  Maccabean  "  Cha- 
sidim."  How  far  the  Messianic  "  Bar  Enosh  " 
(vii.  13)  is  meant  to  be  a  person  will  be  considered 
in   the  comment  on  that  passage. 

We  shall  see  in  later  pages  that  the  supreme 
value  and  importance  of  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
rightly  understood,  consists  in  this — that  "  it  is 
the  first  attempt  at  a  Philosophy,  or  rather  at 
a  Theology  of  History."  f  Its  main  object  was 
to  teach  the  crushed  and  afflicted  to  place  un- 
shaken confidence  in  God. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

PECULIARITIES  OF  THE  APOCALYPTIC 
AND  PROPHETIC  SECTION  OF  THE 
BOOK. 

If  we  have  found  much  to  lead  us  to  serious 
doubts  as  to  the  authenticity  and  genuineness — 
i.  e.,  as  to  the  literal  historicity  and  the  real 
author — of  the  Book  of  Daniel  in  its  historic 
section,  we  shall  find  still  more  in  the  prophetic 
section.  If  the  phenomena  already  passed  in  re- 
view are  more  than  enough  to  indicate  the  im- 
possibility that  the  Book  could  have  been  written 
by  the  historic  Daniel,  the  phenomena  now  to 
be  considered  are  such  as  have  sufficed  to  con- 
vince the  immense  majority  of  learned  critics 
that,  in  its  present  form,  the  Book  did  not  appear 
before  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.t  The 
probable  date  is  b.  c.  164.  As  in  the  Book  of 
Enoch  xc.  15,  16,  it  contains  history  written  un- 
der the  form  of  prophecy. 

Leaving  minuter  examinations  to  later  chap- 
ters of  commentary,  we  will  now  take  a  brief  sur- 
vey of  this  unique  apocalypse. 

I.  As  regards  the  style  and  method  the  only 
distant   approach   to   it   in  the   rest   of  the   Old 

*  Introd.,  p.  477.  Comp.  2  Esdras  xiii.  31-45,  and  passim  ; 
Enoch  xl.,  xlv.,  xlvi.,  xlix.,  and  passim ;  Hamburger, 
"  Real-Encycl.,"  ii.  267  flf.  With  "  the  time  of  the  end  " 
and  the  numerical  calculations  comp.  2  Esdras  vi.  6,  7. 

tRoszmann,  "  Die  Makkabaische  Erhebung,"  p.  45-  See 
Wellhausen,  "  Die  Pharis.  u.  d.  Sadd.."  77  ff 

{Among  these  critics  are  Delitzsch,  Riehm,  Ewald, 
Bunsen,  Hilgenfeld,  Cornill,  Lucke,  Strack.  .Schiirer, 
Kuenen,  Meinhold,  Orelli,  Joel,  Reuss,  Konig.  Kamp- 
hausen,  Cheyne,  Driver,  Briggs,  Bevan,  Behtir:.:.:i,  ctj. 


372 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


Testament  is  in  a  few  visions  of  Ezekiel  and 
Zechariah,  which  differ  greatly  from  the  clear, 
and  so  to  speak  classic,  style  of  the  older 
prophets.  But  in  Daniel  we  find  visions  far 
more  enigmatical,  and  far  less  full  of  passion  and 
poetry.  Indeed,  as  regards  style  and  intellectual 
force,  the  splendid  historic  scenes  of  chaps,  i.-vi. 
far  surpass  the  visions  of  vii.-xii.,  some  of  which 
have  been  described  as  "  composite  logographs," 
in  which  the  ideas  are  forcibly  juxtaposed  with- 
out care  for  any  coherence  in  the  symbols — as, 
for  instance,  when  a  horn  speaks  and  has  eyes.* 

Chap.  vii.  contains  a  vision  of  four  different 
wild  beasts  rising  from  the  sea:  a  lion,  with 
eagle-wings,  which  afterwards  becomes  semi- 
human;  a  bear,  leaning  on  one  side,  and  having 
three  ribs  in  its  mouth;  a  four-winged,  four- 
headed  panther;  and  a  still  more  terrible  crea- 
ture, with  iron  teeth,  brazen  claws,  and  ten  horns, 
among  which  rises  a  little  horn,  which  de- 
stroyed three  of  the  others — it  has  man's  eyes 
and  a  mouth  speaking  proud  things. 

There  follows  an  epiphany  of  the  Ancient  of 
Days,  who  destroys  the  little  horn,  but  prolongs 
for  a  time  the  existence  of  the  other  wild  beasts. 
Then  comes  One  in  human  semblance,  who  is 
brought  before  the  Ancient  of  Days,  and  is 
clothed  by  Him  with  universal  and  eternal 
power. 

We  shall  see  reasons  for  the  view  that  the 
four  beasts — in  accordance  with  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  vision  given  to  Daniel  himself — rep- 
resent the  Babylonian,  the  Median,  the  Persian, 
and  the  Greek  empires,  issuing  in  the  separate 
kingdoms  of  Alexander's  successors;  and  that 
the  little  horn  is  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  whose 
overthrow  is  to  be  followed  immediately  by  the 
Messianic  Kingdom.! 

The  vision  of  the  eighth  chapter  mainly  pur- 
sues the  history  of  the  fourth  of  these  kingdoms. 
Daniel  sees  a  ram  standing  eastward  of  the 
river-basin  of  the  Ulai,  having  two  horns,  of 
which  one  is  higher  than  the  other.  It  butts 
westward,  northward,  and  southward,  and 
seemed  irresistibly  until  a  he-goat  from  the 
West,  with  one  horn  between  its  eyes,  confronted 
it,  and  stamped  it  to  pieces.  After  this  its  one 
horn  broke  into  four  towards  the  four  winds  of 
heaven,  and  one  of  them  shot  forth  a  puny  horn, 
which  grew  great  towards  the  South  and  East, 
and  acted  tyrannously  against  the  Holy  People, 
and  spoke  blasphemously  against  God.  Daniel 
hears  the  holy  ones  declaring  that  its  powers 
shall  only  last  two  thousand  three  hundred  even- 
ing-mornings. An  angel  bids  Gabriel  to  explain 
the  vision  to  Daniel;  and  Gabriel  tells  the  seer 
that  the  ram  represents  the  Medo-Persian  and 
the  he-goat  the  Greek  Kingdom.  Its  great  horn 
is  Alexander;  the  four  horns  are  the  kingdoms 
of  his  successors,  the  Diadochi;  the  little  horn 
is  a  king  bold  of  vision  and  versed  in  enigmas, 
whom  all  agree  to  be  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

In  the  ninth  chapter  we  are  told  that  Daniel 
has  been  meditating  on  the  prophecy  of  Jere- 
miah that  Jerusalem  should  be  rebuilt  after  sev- 

*  Renan,  "History  of  Israel,"  iv.  354.  He  adds,  "  L'es- 
sence  du  genre  c'est  le  pseudonyme,  ou  si  Ton  veut 
I'apocryphisme  "  (p.  356). 

tLagarde,  "  Gott.  Gel.  Anzieg.,"  1891,  pp.  497-520,  stands 
almost,  if  not  quite,  alone  in  arguing  that  Dan.  vii.  was 
not  written  till  a.  d.  69,  and  that  the  "little  horn"  is 
meant  for  Vespasian.  The  relation  of  the  fourth  empire 
of  Dan.  vii.  to  the  iron  part  of  the  image  in  Dan.  ii.  refutes 
this  view:  both  can  only  refer  to  the  Greek  Empire. 
Josephus  ("  Antt.,"  X.  xi.  7)  does  not  refer  to  Dan.  vii.  ; 
but  neither  does  he  to  ix.-xii.,  for  reasons  already  men- 
tioned.   See  Cornill,  "Einleit,"  p.  26a. 


enty  years,  and  as  the  seventy  years  seem  to  be 
drawing  to  a  close  he  humbles  himself  with 
prayer  and  fasting.  But  Gabriel  comes  flying  to 
him  at  the  time  of  the  evening  sacrifice,  and  ex- 
plains  to  him  that  the  seventy  years  is  to  mean 
seventy  zveeks  of  years — i.  e.,  four  hundred  and 
ninety  years,  divided  into  three  periods  of 
7  -\-  62  -\-  I.  At  the  end  of  seven  (t.  c,  forty-nine) 
years  an  anointed  prince  will  order  the  restoration 
of  Jerusalem.  The  city  will  continue,  though  in 
humiliation,  for  sixty-two  (i.  e.,  four  hundred  and 
thirty-four)  years,  when  "  an  anointed  "  will  be 
cut  off,  and  a  prince  will  destroy  it.  During  half 
a  week  (i.  e.,  for  three  and  a  half  years)  he  will 
cause  the  sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease;  and  he 
will  make  a  covenant  with  many  for  one  week, 
at  the  end  of  which  he  will  be  cut  off. 

Here,  again,  we  shall  have  reason  to  see  that 
the  whole  prophecy  culminates  in,  and  is  mainly 
concerned  with,  Antioclius  Epiphanes.  In  fact, 
it  furnishes  us  with  a  sketch  of  his  fortunes, 
which,  in  connection  with  the  eleventh  chapter, 
tells  us  more  about  him  than  we  learn  from  any 
extant  history. 

In  the  tenth  chapter  Daniel,  after  a  fast  of 
twenty-one  days,  sees  a  vision  of  Gabriel,  who 
explains  to  him  why  his  coming  has  been  de- 
layed, soothes  his  fears,  touches  his  lips,  and  pre- 
pares him  for  the  vision  of  chapter  eleven.  That 
chapter  is  mainly  occupied  with  a  singularly 
minute  and  circumstantial  history  of  the  mur- 
ders, intrigues,  wars,  and  intermarriages  of  the 
Lagidse  and  Seleucidse.  So  detailed  is  it  that  in 
some  cases  the  history  has  to  be  reconstructed 
out  of  it.  This  sketch  is  followed  by  the  doings 
and  final  overthrow  of  Antiochus   Epiphanes. 

The  twelfth  chapter  is  the  picture  of  a  resur- 
rection, and  of  words  of  consolation  and  ex- 
hortation addressed  to  Daniel. 

Such  in  briefest  outline  are  the  contents  of 
these  chapters,  and  their  peculiarities  are  very 
marked.  Until  the  reader  has  studied  the  more 
detailed  explanation  of  the  chapters  separately, 
and  especially  of  the  eleventh,  he  will  be  unable 
to  estimate  the  enormous  force  of  the  arguments 
adduced  to  prove  the  impossibility  of  such 
"  prophecies "  having  emanated  from  Babylon 
and  Susa  about  b.  c.  536.  Long  before  the  as- 
tonishing enlargement  of  our  critical  knowledge 
which  has  been  the  work  of  the  last  generation 
— nearly  fifty  years  ago — the  mere  perusal  of  the 
Book  as  it  stands  produced  on  the  manly  and 
honest  judgment  of  Dr.  Arnold  a  strong  impres- 
sion of  uncertainty.  He  said  that  the  latter  chap- 
ters of  Daniel  would,  if  genuine,  be  a  clear  ex- 
ception to  the  canons  of  interpretation  which  he 
laid  down  in  his  "  Sermons  on  Prophecy,"  since 
"  there  can  be  no  reasonable  spiritual  meaning 
made  out  of  the  kings  of  the  North  and  South." 
"  But,"  he  adds,  "  I  have  long  thought  that  the 
greater  part  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  most  cer- 
tainly a  very  late  work  of  the  time  of  the  Mac- 
cabees; and  the  pretended  prophecies  about  the 
kings  of  Grecia  and  Persia,  and  of  the  North  and 
South,  are  mere  history,  like  the  poetical  prophe- 
cies in  Virgil  and  elsewhere.  In  fact,  you  can 
trace  distinctly  the  date  when  it  was  written,  be- 
cause the  events  up  to  that  date  are  given  with 
historical  minuteness,  totally  unlike  the  character 
of  real  prophecy;  and  beyond  that  date  all  is 
imaginary."  * 

The  Book  is  the  earliest  specimen  of  its  kind 
known  to  us.  It  inaugurated  a  new  and  impor- 
*  Stanley,  "  Life  of  Arnold,"  p.  505. 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE. 


373 


tant  branch  of  Jewish  literature,  which  influ- 
enced many  subsequent  writers.  An  apocalypse, 
so  far  as  its  literary  form  is  concerned,  "  claims 
throughout  to  be  a  supernatural  revelation  given 
to  mankind  by  the  mouth  of  those  men  in  whose 
names  the  various  writings  appear."  An  apoc- 
alypse— such,  for  instance,  as  the  Books  of 
Enoch,  the  Assumption  of  Moses,  Baruch,  i, 
2  Esdras,  and  the  Sibylline  Oracles — is  char- 
acterised by  its  enigmatic  form,  which  shrouds 
its  meaning  in  parables  and  symbols.  It  indi- 
cates persons  without  naming  them,  and  shadows 
forth  historic  events  under  animal  forms,  or  as 
operations  of  Nature.  Even  the  ■  explanations 
which  follow,  as  in  this  Book,  are  still  mys- 
terious and  indirect. 

II.  In  the  next  place  an  apocalypse  is  literary, 
not  oral.  Schiirer,  who  classes  Daniel  among 
the  oldest  and  most  original  of  "  pseudepigraphic 
prophecies,"  etc.,  rightly  says  that  "  the  old 
prophets  in  their  teachings  and  exhortations  ad- 
dressed themselves  directly  to  the  people  first 
and  foremost  through  their  oral  utterances;  and 
then,  but  only  as  subordinate  to  these,  by  written 
discourses  as  well.  But  now,  when  men  felt 
themselves  at  any  time  compelled  by  their  reli- 
gious enthusiasm  to  influence  their  contempo- 
raries, instead  of  directly  addressing  them  in 
person  like  the  prophets  of  old,  they  did  so  by 
a  writing  purporting  to  be  the  work  of  some 
one  or  other  of  the  great  names  of  the  past,  in 
the  hope  that  in  this  way  the  efifect  would  be  all 
the  surer  and  all  the  more  powerful."  *  The 
Daniel  of  this  Book  represents  himself,  not  as  a 
prophet,  but  as  a  humble  student  of  the  prophets. 
He  no  longer  claims,  as  Isaiah  did,  to  speak  in 
the  Name  of  God  Himself  with  a  "  Thus  saith 
Jehovah." 

III.  Thirdly,  it  is  impossible  not  to  notice  that 
Daniel  differs  from  all  other  prophecies  by  its 
all-but-total  indifference  to  the  circumstances 
and  surroundings  in  the  midst  of  which  the  pre- 
diction is  supposed  to  have  originated.  The 
Daniel  of  Babylon  and  Susa  is  represented  as 
the  writer;  yet  his  whole  interest  is  concentrated, 
not  in  the  events  which  immediately  interest  the 
Jews  of  Babylon  in  the  days  of  Cyrus,  or  of 
Jerusalem  under  Zerubbabel,  but  deals  with  a 
number  of  predictions  which  revolve  almost  ex- 
clusively about  the  reign  of  a  very  inferior  king 
four  centuries  afterwards.  And  with  this  king 
the  predictions  abruptly  stop  short,  and  are  fol- 
lowed by  the  very  general  promise  of  an  imme- 
diate Messianic  age. 

We  may  notice  further  the  constant  use  of 
round  and  cyclic  numbers,  such  as  three  and  its 
compounds  (i.  5,  iii.  i,  vi.  7,  10,  vii.  5,  8);  four 
(ii.,  vii.  6,  and  viii.  8,  xi.  12) ;  seven  and  its  com- 
pounds (iii.  19,  iv.  16,  23,  ix.  24.  etc.).  The 
apocalyptic  symbols  of  Bears,  Lions,  Eagles, 
Horns,  Wings,  etc.,  abound  in  the  contemporary 
and  later  Books  of  Enoch,  Baruch,  4  Esdras,  the 
Assumption  of  Moses,  and  the  Sibyllines,  as  well 
as  in  the  early  Christian  apocalypses,  like  that 
of  Peter.  The  authors  of  the  Sibyllines  (b.  c. 
140)  were  acquainted  with  Daniel;  the  Book  of 
Enoch  breathes  exactly  the  same  spirit  with  this 
Book,  in  the  transcendentalism  which  avoids  the 
name  Jehovah  (vii.  13;  Enoch  xlvi.  i,  xlvii.  3). 
in  the  number  of  angels  (vii.  10;  Enoch  xl.  i, 
Ix.  2),  their  names,  the  title  of  "  watchers  "  given 
to  them,  and  their  guardianship  of  men  (Enoch 
XX.  5).     The  Judgment  and  the   Books   (vii.  9, 

♦  Schiiren  "  Hist-  of  the  Jew.  People,"  iii.  24  (E.  Tr.). 


ID,  xii.  i)  occur  again  in  Enoch  xlvii.  3,  Ixxxi.  i, 
as  in  the  Book  of  Jubilees,  and  the  Testament 
of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs.* 


CHAPTER  VII. 

INTERNAL  EVIDENCE. 

I.  Other  prophets  start  from  the  ground  of 
the  present,  and  to  exigencies  of  the  present  their 
prophecies  were  primarily  directed.  It  is  true 
that  their  lofty  moral  teaching,  their  rapt  poetry, 
their  impassioned  feeling,  had  its  inestimable 
value  for  all  ages.  But  these  elements  scarcely 
exist  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  Almost  the  whole 
of  its  prophecies  bear  on  one  short  particular 
period  nearly  four  hundred  years  after  the  sup- 
posed epoch  of  their  delivery.  What,  then,  is 
the  phenomenon  they  present?  Whereas  other 
prophets,  by  studying  the  problems  of  the  pres- 
ent in  the  light  flung  upon  them  by  the  past,  are 
enabled,  by  combining  the  present  with  the  past, 
to  gain,  with  the  aid  of  God's  Holy  Spirit,  a 
vivid  glimpse  of  the  immediate  future,  for  the 
instruction  of  the  living  generation,  the  reputed 
author  of  Daniel  passes  over  the  immediate  future 
with  a  few  words,  and  spends  the  main  part  of 
his  revelations  on  a  triad  of  years  separated  by 
centuries  from  contemporary  history.  Occupied 
as  this  description  is  with  the  wars  and  negotia- 
tions of  empires  which  were  yet  unborn,  it  can 
have  had  little  practical  significance  for  Daniel's 
fellow-exiles.  Nor  could  these  "  predictions  " 
have  been  to  prove  the  possibility  of  supernatural 
foreknowledge,!  since,  even  after  their  supposed 
fulfilment,  the  interpretation  of  them  is  open  to 
the  greatest  difficulties  and  the  gravest  doubts. 
If  to  a  Babylonian  exile  was  vouchsafed  a  gift  of 
prevision  so  minute  and  so  marvellous  as  en- 
abled him  to  describe  the  intermarriages  of 
Ptolemies  and  Seleucidje  four  centuries  later, 
surely  the  gift  must  have  been  granted  for  some 
decisive  end.  But  these  predictions  are  precisely 
the  ones  which  seem  to  have  the  smallest  sig- 
nificance. We  must  say,  with  Semler,  that  no 
such  benefit  seems  likely  to  result  from  this  pre- 
determination of  comparatively  unimportant 
minuti^se  as  God  must  surely  intend  when  He 
makes  use  of  means  of  a  very  extraordinary  char- 
acter. It  might  perhaps  be  said  that  the  Book 
was  written,  four  hundred  years  before  the  crisis 
occurred,  to  console  the  Jews  under  their  brief 
period  of  persecution  by  the  Seleucidae.  It 
would  be  indeed  extraordinary  that  so  curious, 
distant,  and  roundabout  a  method  should  have 
been  adopted  for  an  end  which,  in  accordance 
with  the  entire  economy  of  God's  dealings  with 
men  in  revelation,  could  have  been  so  much  more 
easily  and  so  much  more  effectually  accomplished 
in  simpler  ways.  Further,  unless  we  accept  an 
isolated  allusion  to  Daniel  in  the  imaginary 
speech  of  the  dying  Mattathias,  there  is  no  trace 
whatever  that  the  Book  had  the  smallest  influ- 
ence in  inspiring  the  Jews  in  that  terrible  epoch. 
And  the  reference  of  Mattathias,  if  it  was  ever 
made  at  all,  may  be  to  old  tradition,  and  does 

*  On  the  close  resemblance  between  Daniel  and  other 
apocryphal  books  see  Behrmann,  "Dan.,"  pp.  37-3g  ;  Dill- 
inann,  "  Das  Buch  Henoch."  For  its  relation  to  the  Book 
of  Baruch  see  Schrader,  "  Keilinschriften,"  435  f.  Philo 
does  not  allude  to  Daniel. 

t  Any  apparently  requisite  modification  of  these  words 
will  be  considered  hereafter. 


374 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


not   allude   to   the   prophecies   about  Antiochus 
and  his  fate. 

But,  as  Hengstenberg,  the  chief  supporter  of 
the  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  well 
observes,*  "  Prophecy  can  never  entirely  sep- 
arate itself  from  the  ground  of  the  present,  to 
influence  which  is  always  its  more  immediate 
object,  and  to  which  therefore  it  must  con- 
stantly construct  a  bridge. t  On  this  also  rests 
all  certainty  of  exposition  as  to  the  future.  And 
that  the  means  should  be  provided  for  such  a 
certainty  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the 
Divine  nature  of  prophecy.  A  truly  Divine 
prophecy  cannot  possibly  swim  in  the  air; 
nor  can  the  Church  be  left  to  mere  guesses  in 
the  exposition  of  Scripture  which  has  been  given 
to  her  as  a  light  amid  the  darkness." 

II.  And  as  it  does  not  start  from  the  ground 
of  the  present,  so  too  the  Book  of  Daniel  re- 
verses the  method  of  prophecy  with  reference  to 
the  future. 

For  the  genuine  predictions  of  Scripture  ad- 
vance by  slow  and  gradual  degrees  from  the  un- 
certain and  the  general  to  the  definite  and  the 
special.  Prophecy  marches  with  history,  and 
takes  a  step  forward  at  each  new  period.^  So  far 
as  we  know  there  is  not  a  single  instance  in 
which  any  prophet  alludes  to,  much  less  dwells 
upon,  any  kingdom  which  had  not  then  risen 
above  the  political  horizon. § 

In  Daniel  the  case  is  reversed:  the  only  king- 
dom which  was  looming  into  sipht  is  dismissed 
with  a  few  words,  and  the  kingdom  most  dwelt 
upon  is  the  most  distant  and  quite  the  most  insig- 
nificant of  all,  of  the  very  existence  of  which 
neither  Daniel  nor  his  contemporaries  had  even 
remotely  heard.|| 

III.  Then  again,  although  the  prophets,  with 
their  Divinely  illuminated  souls,  reached  far  be- 
yond intellectual. sagacity  and  political  foresight, 
yet  their  hints  about  the  future  never  distantly 
approach  to  detailed  history  like  that  of  Daniel. 
They  do  indeed  so  far  lift  the  veil  of  the  Unseen 
as  to  shadow  forth  the  outline  of  the  near  fu- 
ture, but  they  do  this  only  on  general  terms 
and  on  general  principles. U  Their  object,  as  I 
have  repeatedly  observed,  was  mainly  moral,  and 
it  was  also  confessedly  conditional,  even  when  no 
hint  is  given  of  the  implied  condition.**  Nothing 
is  more  certain  than  the  wisdom  and  beneficence 
of  that  Divine  provision  which  has  hidden  the 
future  from  men's  eyes,  and  even  taught  us  to 
regard  all  prying  into  its  minute  events  as  vul- 
gar and  sinful.tt  Stargazing  and  monthly  prog- 
nostication were  rather  the  characteristics  of 
false  religion  and  unhallowed  divinations  than  of 
faithful  and  holy  souls.  Nitzsch  tJ  most  justly 
lays  it  down  as  an  esential  condition  of  proph- 
ecy that  it  "  should  not  disturb  man's  relation  to 
history."  Anything  like  detailed  description  of 
the  future  would  intolerably  perplex  and  confuse 

*  "  On  Revelations,"  vol.  i  p.  408  (E.  Tr.). 

1-  "  Dient  bei  ihnen  die  Zukunft  der  Gegenwart,  und  ist 
selbst  fortgesetzte  Geg'e^iuiari  "  (Behrmann,  "Dan.,"  p. 
xi). 

X  See  M.  de  Pressense,  "Hist,  des  Trois  Prem.  Siecles," 
p.  283. 

§  See  some  admirable  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Ewald, 
"Die  Proph.  d  Alt.  Bund.,"  i.  23,  24;  Winer,  "  Realwor- 
terb."  s.  V   "  Propheten  "  Stahelin,  "  Einleit,"  §  197, 

I  Comp  Enoch  i.  ?. 

1  Ewald,  "  Die  Propn.,"  i.  27  ;  Michel  Nicolas,  "  Etudes 
sur  la  Bible,"  pp.  336  flf. 

**  Comp.  Mic.  lii.  12  ;  Jer.  xxvi.  i-ig;  Ezek.  i.  21.  Comp 
yxix.  18,  iq. 

tt  Deut.  xviii.  10. 

iX  "System  der  christlichen  Lehre,"  p.  66. 


our  sense  of  human  free-will.  It  would  drive 
us  to  the  inevitable  conclusion  that  men  are  but 
puppets  moved  irresponsibly  by  the  hand  of  in- 
evitable fate.  Not  one  such  prophecy,  unless  this 
be  one,  occurs  anywhere  in  the  Bible.  We  do 
not  think  that  (apart  from  Messianic  proph- 
ecies) a  single  instance  can  be  given  in  which 
any  prophet  distmctly  and  minutely  predicts  a 
future  series  of  events  of  which  the  fulfilment 
was  not  near  at  hand.  In  the  few  cases  when 
some  event,  already  imminent,  is  predicted  ap- 
parently with  some  detail,  it  is  not  certain 
whether  some  touches — names,  for  instance — 
may  not  have  been  added  by  editors  living  sub- 
sequently to  the  occurrence  of  the  event.*  That 
there  has  been  at  all  times  a  gift  of  prescience, 
whereby  the  Spirit  of  God,  "  entering  into  holy 
souls,  has  made  them  sons  of  God  and  proph- 
ets," is  indisputable.  It  is  in  virtue  of  this  high 
foreknowledge  f  that  the  voice  of  the  Hebrew 
Sibyl  has 

"  Rolled  sounding  onwards  through  a  thousand  years. 
Her  deep  prophetic  bodiments." 

Even  Demosthenes,  by  virtue  of  a  statesman's 
thoughtful  experience,  can  describe  it  as  his  of- 
fice and  duty  "  to  see  events  in  their  beginnings, 
to  discern  their  purport  and  tendencies  from  the 
first,  and  to  forewarn  his  countrymen  accord- 
ingly." Yet  the  power  of  Demosthenes  was  as 
nothing  compared  with  that  of  an  Isaiah  or  a  Na- 
hum;  and  we  may  safely  say  that  the  writings 
alike  of  the  Greek  orator  and  the  Hebrew  proph- 
ets would  have  been  comparatively  valueless  had 
they  merely  contained  anticipations  of  future  his- 
tory, instead  of  dealing  with  truths  whose  value 
is  equal  for  all  ages — truths  and  principles  which 
give  clearness  to  the  oast,  security  to  the  pres- 
ent, and  guidance  to  the  future.  Had  it  been  the 
function  of  prophecy  to  remove  the  veil  of  ob- 
s  urity  which  God  in  His  wisdom  has  hung  over 
the  destinies  of  men  and  kingdoms,  it  would 
never  have  attained,  as  it  has  done,  to  the  love 
and  reverence  of  mankind. 

IV.  Another  unique  and  abnormal  feature  is 
found  in  the  close  and  accurate  chronological  cal- 
culations in  which  the  Book  of  Daniel  abounds. 
We  shall  see  later  on  that  the  dates  of  the  Macca- 
bean  reconsecration  of  the  Temple  and  the  ruin 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  are  indicated  almost  to 
the  day.  The  numbers  of  prophecy  are  in  all 
other  cases  symbolical  and  general.  They  are 
intentional  compounds  of  seven — the  sum  of 
three  and  four,  which  are  the  numbers  that  mys- 
tically shadow  forth  God  and  the  world — a  num- 
ber which  even  Cicero  calls  "  rerum  omnium  fere 
modus  "  ;  and  of  ten,  the  number  of  the  world.  X 
If  we  except  the  prophecy  of  the  seventy  years' 
captivity — which  was  a  round  number,  and  is  in 
no  respect  parallel  to  the  periods  of  Daniel — there 
is  no  other  instance  in  the  Bible  of  a  chronolog- 
ical prophecy.  We  say  no  other  instance,  be- 
cause one  of  the  commentators  who,  in  writing 
upon  Daniel,  objects  to  the  remark  of  Nitzsch 
that  the  numbers  of  prophecy  are  mystical,  yet 
observes  on  the  one  thousand  two  hundred  and 
sixty  days  of  Rev.  xii.  that  '  e  number  one  thou- 
sand two  hundred  and  sixty,  or  three  and  a  half 

*  E.  g-.,  in  the  case  of  Josiah  (i  Kings  xiii.  2). 

t  "  Ue  Corona,"  73  :  iSeiv  rd  Trpay/nara  apxoiJ.evaL  koX  irpo- 
aitrdiaBai  koCi  TrpoetTTctv  roi?  aAAot?. 

JThe  symbolism  of  numbers  is  carefully  and  learnedly- 
worked  out  in  Hahr's  "  Symbolik  "  :  cj.  Auberlen,  p.  133. 
The  several  fulfilments  of  the  prophesied  seventy  years' 
captivity  illustrate  this. 


INTERNAL   EVIDENCE. 


375 


years,  "  has  no  historical  signification  whatever, 
and  is  only  to  be  viewed  in  its  relation  to  the 
number  seven — viz.,  as  symbolising  the  apparent 
victory  of  the  world  over  the  Church."  * 

V.  Alike,  then,  in  style,  in  matter,  and  in  what 
has  been  called  by  V.  Orelli  its  "  exoteric  "  man- 
ner,— alike  in  its  definiteness  and  its  indefi- 
niteness — in  the  point  from  which  it  starts 
and  the  period  at  which  it  terminates — 
in  its  minute  details  and  its  chronologi- 
cal indications — in  the  absence  of  the  moral 
and  the  impassioned  element,  and  in  the 
sense  of  fatalism  which  it  must  have  intro- 
duced into  history  had  it  been  a  genuine  proph- 
ecy,— the  Book  of  Daniel  differs  from  all  the 
other  books  which  compose  that  prophetic 
canon.  From  that  canon  it  was  rightly  and  de- 
liberately excluded  by  the  Jews.  Its  worth  and 
dignity  can  only  be  rationally  vindicated  or 
rightly  understood  by  supposing  it  to  have  been 
the  work  of  an  unknown  moralist  and  patriot 
of  the  Maccabean  age. 

And  if  anything  further  were  wanting  to  com- 
plete the  cogency  of  the  internal  evidence  which 
forces  this  conclusion  upon  us,  it  is  amply  found 
in  a  study  of  those  books,  confessedly  apocry- 
phal, which,  although  far  inferior  to  the  Book 
before  us,  are  yet  of  value,  and  which  we  believe 
to  have  emanated  from  the  same  era. 

They  resemble  this  book  in  their  language, 
both  Hebrew  and  Aramaic,  as  well  as  in 
certain  recurring  expressions  and  forms  to 
be  found  in  the  Books  of  Maccabees  and 
the  Second  Book  of  Esdras; — in  their  style 
— rhetorical  rather  than  poetical,  stately 
rather  than  ecstatic,  diffuse  rather  than 
pointed,  and  wholly  inferior  to  the  proph- 
ets in  depth  and  power; — in  the  use  of  an  apoc- 
alyptic method,  and  the  strange  combination 
of  dreams  and  symbols; — in  the  insertion,  by  way 
of  embellishment,  of  speeches  and  formal  docu- 
ments which  can  at  the  best  be  only  semi-histori- 
cal;— finally,  in  the  whole  tone  of  thought,  espe- 
cially in  the  quite  peculiar  doctrine  of  archangels, 
of  angels  guarding  kingdoms,  and  of  opposing 
evil  spirits.  In  short,  the  Book  of  Daniel  may 
be  illustrated  by  the  Apocryphal  books  in  every 
single  particular.  In  the  adoption  of  an  illus- 
trious name — which  is  the  most  marked  charac- 
teristic of  this  period — it  resembles  the  additions 
to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  the  Books  of  Esdras,  the 
Letters  of  Baruch  and  Jeremiah,  and  the  Wis- 
dom of  Solomon.  In  the  imaginary  and  quasi- 
legendary  treatment  of  history  it  finds  a  paral- 
lel in  Wisdom  xvi.-xix.,  and  parts  of  the  Second 
Book  of  Maccabees  and  the  Second  Book  of 
Esdras.  As  an  allusive  narrative  bearing  on  con- 
temporaneous events  under  the  guise  of  describ- 
ing the  past,  it  is  closely  parallel  to  the  Book 
of  Judith. t  while  the  character  of  Daniel  bears 
the  same  relation  to  that  of  Joseph  as  the  repre- 
sentation of  Judith  does  to  that  of  Jael.  As  an 
ethical  development  of  a  few  scattered  historical 
data,  tending  to  the  mavellous  and  supernatural, 
but  rising  to  the  dignity  of  a  very  noble  and  im- 
portant religious  fiction,  it  is  analogous,  though 
incomparably  superior,  to  Bel  and  the  Dragon, 
and  to  the  stories  of  Tobit  and  Susanna.]: 

The  conclusion  is  obvious;  and  it  is  equally  ob- 

*  Hengstenberg,  "  On  Revelations,"  p.  609. 

+  All  these  particulars  may  be  found,  without  any  allu- 
sion to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  in  the  admirable  article  on  the 
Apocrypha  by  Dean  Plumptre  in  Dr.  Smith's  "  Diet,  of 
the  Bible." 

i  Evvald,  "Gesch.  Isr.,"  iv.  541. 


vious  that,  when  we  suppose  the  name  of  Daniel 
to  have  been  assumed,  and  the  assumption  to 
have  been  supported  by  an  antique  colouring, 
we  do  not  for  a  moment  charge  the  unknown  au- 
thor— who  may  very  well  have  been  Onias  IV. 
— with  any  dishonesty.  Indeed,  it  appears  to  us 
that^  tiiero  are  many  traces  in  the  Book — 
Xwi'tti'Ttt  ffvvfTotcriv — which  exonerate  the  writer 
)rom  any  suspicion  of  intentional-  deception. 
They  may  have  been  meant  to  remove  any  ten- 
dency to  error  in  understanding  the  artistic 
guise  which  was  adopted  for  the  better  and  more 
forcible  inculcation  of  the  lessons  to  be  conveyed. 
That  the  stories  of  Daniel  offered  peculiar  op- 
portunities for  this  treatment  is  shown  by  the 
apocryphal  additions  to  the  Book;  and  that  the 
practice  was  well  understood  even  before  the 
closing  of  the  Canon  is  sufficiently  shown  by  the 
Book  of  Ecclesiastes.  The  writer  of  that  strange 
and  fascinating  book,  with  its  alternating  moods 
of  cynicism  and  resignation,  merely  adopted  the 
name  of  Solomon,  and  adopted  it  with  no  dis- 
honourable purpose;  for  he  could  not  have 
dreamed  that  utterances  which  in  page  after  page 
betray  to  criticism  their  late  origin  would  really 
be  identified  with  the  words  of  the  son  of  David 
a  thousand  years  before  Christ.  This  may  now 
be  regarded  as  an  indisputable,  and  is  indeed  a 
no  longer  disputed,  result  of  all  literary  and  phi- 
lological inquiry. 

It  is  to  Porphyry,  a  Neoplatonist  of  the  third 
century  (born  at  Tyre,  a.  d.  233;  died  in  Rome, 
A.  D.  303),  that  we  owe  our  ability  to  write  a 
continuous  historical  commentary  on  the  sym- 
bols of  Daniel.  That  writer  devoted  the  twelfth 
book  of  his  A6'yol  kutcl  XpiaTiavuv  to  a  proof 
that  Daniel  was  not  written  till  after  the  epoch 
which  it  so  minutely  described.*  In  order  to  do 
this  he  collected  with  great  learning  and  industry 
a  history  of  the  obscure  Antiochian  epoch  from 
authors  most  of  whom  have  perished.  Of  these 
authors  Jerome — the  most  valuable  part  of  whose 
commentary  is  derived  from  Porphyry — gives  a 
formidable  list,  mentioning  among  others  Calli- 
nicus,  Diodorus,  Polybius,  Posidonius,  Claudius, 
Theo,  and  Andronicus.  It  is  a  strange  fact  that 
the  exposition  of  a  canonical  book  should  have 
been  mainly  rendered  possible  by  an  avowed  op- 
ponent of  Christianity.  It  was  the  object  of  Por- 
phyry to  prove  that  the  apocalyptic  portion  of 
the  Book  was  not  a  prophecy  at  all.f  It  used 
to  be  a  constant  taunt  against  those  who  adopt 
his  critical  conclusions  that  their  weapons  are 
borrowed  from  the  armoury  of  an  infidel.  The 
objection  hardly  seems  worth  answering.  "  Fas 
est  et  ab  hoste  doceri."  If  the  enemies  of  our 
religion  have  sometimes  helped  us  the  bet- 
ter to  understand  our  sacred  books,  or  to 
judge  more  correctly  respecting  them,  we 
should  be  grateful  that  their  assaults  have 
been  overruled"  to  our  instruction.  The  re- 
proach is  wholly  beside  the  question.  We 
may  apply  to  it  the  manly  words  of  Grotius: 
"  Neque  me  ptideat  consentire  Porphyria,  quando  is 

*  "  Et  non  tarn  Danielem  ventura  dtxisse  quam  ilium 
narrasse praterita  "  (Jer.). 

t  "  Ad  intelliRendas  autem  extremas  Danielis  partes 
multiplex  Graecorum  historia  necessaria  est "  (Jer., 
"  Prooem.  Explan.  in  Dan.  Proph.,"  ad /.).  Among-  these 
Greek  historians  he  mentions  ^z;^//./ whom  Porphyry  had 
consulted,  and  adds.  "  Et  si  quando  cogimur  litterarum 
saecularium  recordari  .  .  .  non  nostrae  est  voluntatis,  sed 
ut  dicam.  gravissimce  necessitatis."  We  know  Porphyry's 
arguments  mainly  through  the  commentary  of  Jerome, 
who.  indeed,  derived  from  Porphyry  the  historic  data 
without  which  the  eleventh  chapter,  among  others,  would 
have  been  wholly  unintelligible. 


376 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


in  veram  sententiam  incidit."  Moreover,  St. 
Jerome  himself  could  not  have  written  his  com- 
mentary, as  he  himself  admits,  without  availing 
himself  of  the  aid  of  the  erudition  of  the  heathen 
philosopher,  whom  no  less  a  person  than  St. 
Augustine  called  "  doctissimus  philosophorum," 
though  unhappily  he  was  "  acerrimus  christiano- 
rum  inimicus." 

CHAPTER  Vni. 

EVIDENCE  IN  FAVOUR  OF  THE  GENUINE- 
NESS UNCERTAIN  AND  INADEQUATE. 

We  have  seen  that  there  are  many  circum- 
stances which  force  upon  us  the  gravest  doubts 
as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 
We  now  proceed  to  examine  the  evidence  urged 
in  its  favour,  and  deemed  adequate  to  refute  the 
conclusion  that  in  its  present  form  it  did  not 
see  the  light  before  the  time  of  Antiochus  IV. 

Taking  Hengstenberg  as  the  most  learned  rea- 
soner  in  favour  of  the  genuineness  of  Daniel, 
we  will  pass  in  review  all  the  positive  arguments 
which  he  has  adduced.*  They  occupy  no  less 
than  one  hundred  and  ten  pages  (pp.  182-291) 
of  the  English  translation  of  his  work  on  the 
genuineness  of  Daniel.  Most  of  them  are  tor- 
tuous specimens  of  special  pleading  inadequate 
in  themselves,  or  refuted  by  increased  knowl- 
edge derived  from  the  monuments  and  from  fur- 
ther inquiry.  To  these  arguments  neither  Dr. 
Pusey  nor  any  subsequent  writer  has  made  any 
material  addition.  Some  of  them  have  been  al- 
ready answered,  and  many  of  them  are  so  unsatis- 
factory that  they  may  be  dismissed  at  once. 

I.  Such,  for  instance,  is  the  testimony  of  the 
author  himself.  In  one  of  those  slovenly  trea- 
tises which  only  serve  to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes 
of  the  ignorant  we  find  it  stated  that,  "  although 
the  name  of  Daniel  is  not  prefixed  to  his  Book, 
the  passages  in  which  he  speaks  in  the  first  person 
sufficiently  prove  that  he  was  the  author  "  !  Such 
assertions  deserve  no  answer.  If  the  mere  as- 
sumption of  a  name  be  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  au- 
thorship of  the  book,  we  are  rich  indeed  in  Jew- 
ish authors — and,  not  to  speak  of  others,  our  list 
includes  works  by  Adam,  Enoch,  Eldad,  Medad, 
and  Elijah.  "  Pseudonymity,"  says  Behrmann, 
"  was  a  very  common  characteristic  of  the  lit- 
erature of  that  day,  and  the  conception  of  liter- 
ary property  was  alien  to  that  epoch,  and  espe- 
cially to  the  circle  of  writings  of  this  class." 

II.  The  character  of  the  language,  as  we  have 
seen  already,  proves  nothing.  Hebrew  and  Ara- 
maic long  continued  in  common  use  side  by 
side,  at  least  among  the  learned, f  and  the  diverg- 
ence of  the  Aramaic  in  Daniel  from  that  of  the 
Targums  leads  to  no  definite  result,  considering 
the  late  and  uncertain  age  of  those  writings. 

III.  How  any  argument  can  be  founded  on 
the  exact  knowledge  of  history  displayed  by  local 
colouring  we  cannot  understand.  Were  the 
knowledge  displayed  ever  so  exact  it  would  only 
prove  that  the  author  was  a  learned  man,  which 
is  obvious  already.  But  so  far  from  any  re- 
markable accuracy  being  shown  by  the  author, 
it  is,  on  the  contrary,  all  but  impossible  to  recon- 

♦  Havernick  is  another  able  and  sincere  supporter  ;  but 
Droysen  truly  says  ("  Gesch.  d.  Hellenismus,"  ii.  211), 
"  Die  Havernickschen  AufEassung  kann  kein  vernunftiger 
Mensch  bestimmen." 

fSee  Grimm,  "Comment.,  zum  I.  Buch  der  Makk., 
Einleit.,"  xvii.  ;  Movers  in  Bonner  Zeitschr.,  Heft  13,  pp. 
31  flf.  ;  Stahelin,  "  Einleit.,"  p.  356. 


cile  many  of  his  statements  with  acknowledged 
facts.  The  elaborate  and  tortuous  explanations, 
the  frequent  subauditur,  the  numerous  assump- 
tions required  to  force  the  text  into  accord- 
ance with  the  certain  historic  data  of  the  Baby 
Ionian  and  Persian  empires,  tell  far  more  against 
the  Book  than  for  it.  The  methods  of  account- 
ing for  these  inaccuracies  are  mostly  self-con- 
futing, for  they  leave  the  subject  in  hopeless  con- 
fusion, and  each  orthodox  commentator  shows 
how  untenable  are  the  views  of  others. 

IV.  Passing  over  other  arguments  of  Keil, 
Hengstenberg,  etc.,  which  have  been  either  re- 
futed already,  or  which  are  too  weak  to  deserve 
repetition,  we  proceed  to  examine  one  or  two  of 
a  more  serious  character.  Great  stress,  for  in- 
stance, is  laid  on  the  reception  of  the  Book  into 
the  Canon.  We  acknowledge  the  canonicity  of 
the  Book,  its  high  value  when  rightly  appre- 
hended, and  its  rightful  acceptance  as  a  sacred 
book:  but  this  in  nowise  proves  its  authenticity. 
The  history  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon  is  in- 
volved in  the  deepest  obscurity.  The  belief  that 
it  was  finally  completed  by  Ezra  and  the  Great 
Synagogue  rests  on  no  foundation;  indeed,  it  i? 
irreconcilable  with  later  historic  notices  and 
other  facts  conected  with  the  Books  of  Ezra. 
Nehemiah,  Esther,  and  the  two  Books  of  Chron- 
icles. The  Christian  Fathers  in  this,  as  in  some 
other  cases,  implicitly  believed  what  came  to 
them  from  the  most  questionable  sources,  and 
was  mixed  up  with  mere  Jewish  fables.  One  of 
the  oldest  Talmudic  books,  the  "  Pirke  Aboth," 
is  entirely  silent  on  the  collection  of  the  Old 
Testament,  though  in  a  vague  way  it  connects 
the  Great  Synagogue  with  the  preservation  of 
the  Law.  The  earliest  mention  of  the  legend 
about  Ezra  is  the  Second  Book  of  Esdras  (xiv. 
29-48).  This  book  does  not  possess  the  slight- 
est claim  to  authority,  as  it  was  not  completed 
till  a  century  after  the  Christian  era;  and  it  min- 
gles up  with  this  very  narrative  a  number  of  par- 
ticulars thoroughly  fabulous  and  characteristic 
of  a  period  when  the  Jewish  writers  were  always 
ready  to  subordinate  history  to  imaginative 
fables.  The  account  of  the  magic  cup,  the  forty 
days'  and  forty  nights'  dictation,  the  ninety  books 
of  which  seventy  were  secret  and  intended  only 
for  the  learned,  form  part  of  the  very  passage 
from  which  we  are  asked  to  believe  that  Ezra 
established  our  existing  Canon,  though  the  gen- 
uine Book  of  Ezra  is  wholly  silent  about  his 
having  performed  any  such  inestimable  service. 
It  adds  nothing  to  the  credit  of  this  fable  that 
it  is  echoed  by  Irenaeus,  Clemens  Alexandrinus. 
and  Tertullian.*  Nor  are  there  any  external  con- 
siderations which  render  it  probable.  The  Tal- 
mudic tradition  in  the  "  Baba  Bathra,"t  which 
says  (among  other  remarks  in  a  passage  of  which 
"  the  notorious  errors  prove  the  unreliability  of 
its  testimony  ")  that  the  "  men  of  the  Great  Syn- 
agogue wrote  the  Books  of  Ezekiel,  the  Twelve 
Minor  Prophets,  Daniel,  and  Ezra."  |  It  is  evi- 
dent that,  so  far  as  this  evidence  is  worth  any- 
thing, it  rather  goes  against  the  authenticity  of 
Daniel  than  for  it.  The  "  Pirke  Aboth  "  makes 
Simon  the  Just  (about  b.  c.  290)  a  member  of 
this  Great  Synagogue,  of  which  the  very  exist- 
ence is  dubious.^ 

♦Iren.,  "Adv.  Haeres.,"  iv.  2s;  Clem.,  "  Strom."  i.  21,  | 
146  ;  Tert.,  "  De  Cult.  Faem.,"  i.  3  ;  Jerome,  "  Adv.  Helv.," 
7;  Ps.  August.,  "  De  Mirab.,"  ii.  32,  etc 

t  "  Baba  Bathra,"  f .  13  d.  14  b. 

tSeeOehler,  s.  v.  "Kanon"  (Herzog,  "Encycl."). 

I  Rau  "  De  Synag.  Magna,"  ii.  66. 


FAVOURABLE    EVIDENCE    UNCERTAIN. 


377 


Again,  the  author  of  the  forged  letter  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees — 
"  the  work  "  says  Hengstcnberg,  "  of  an  arrant 
impostor  "  * — attributes  the  connection  of  certain 
books  first  to  Nehemiah,  and  then,  when  they 
had  been  lost,  to  Judas  Maccaba^us  (2  Mace.  ii. 
13,  14).  The  canonicity  of  the  Old  Testament 
books  does  not  rest  on  such  evidence  as  this,  f 
and  it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  pursue  it  further. 
That  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  regarded  as  authen- 
tic by  Josephus  is  clear;  but  this  by  no  means 
decides  its  date  or  authorship.  It  is  one  of  the 
very  few  books  of  which  Philo  makes  no  men- 
tion whatever. 

V.  Nor  can  the  supposed  traces  of  the  early 
existence  of  the  Book  be  considered  adequate 
to  prove  its  genuineness.  With  the  most  impor- 
tant of  these,  the  story  of  Josephus  ("  Antt.,"  XI. 
viii.  5)  that  the  high  priest  Jaddua  showed  to 
Alexander  the  Great  the  prophecies  of  Daniel 
respecting  himself,  we  shall  deal  later.  The  al- 
leged traces  of  the  Book  in  Ecclesiasticus  are 
very  uncertain,  or  rather  wholly  question- 
able; and  the  allusion  to  Daniel  in  Mace, 
ii.  60  decides  nothing,  because  there  is 
nothing  to  prove  that  the  speech  of  the 
dying  Mattathias  is  authentic,  and  because 
we  know  nothing  certain  as  to  the  date  of 
the  Greek  translator  of  that  book  or  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel.  The  absence  of  all  allusion  to 
the  prophecies  of  Daniel  is,  on  the  other  hand, 
a  far  more  cogent  point  against  the  authenticity. 
Whatever  be  the  date  of  the  Books  of  Macca- 
bees, it  is  inconceivable  that  they  should  offer 
no  vestige  of  proof  that  Judas  and  his  brothers 
received  any  hope  or  comfort  from  such  explicit 
predictions  as  Dan.  xi.,  had  the  Book  been  in  the 
hands  of  those  pious  and  noble  chiefs. 

The  First  Book  of  Maccabees  cannot  be  cer- 
tainly dated  more  than  a  century  before  Christ, 
nor  have  we  reason  to  believe  that  the  Septuagint 
version  of  the  Book  is  much  older. t: 

VI.  The  badness  of  the  Alexandrian  version, 
and  the  apocryphal  additions  to  it,  seem  to  be 
rather  an  argument  for  the  late  age  and  less  es- 
tablished authority  of  the  Book  than  for  its  gen- 
uineness.J$  Nor  can  we  attach  much  weight  to 
the  assertion  (though  it  is  endorsed  by  the  high 
authority  of  Bishop  Westcott)  that  "  it  is  far 
more  difficult  to  explain  its  composition  in  the 
Maccabean  period  than  to  meet  the  peculiarities 
which  it  exhibits  with  the  exigencies  of  the  Re- 
turn." So  far  is  this  from  being  the  case  that, 
as  we  have  seen  already,  it  resembles  in  almost 
every  particular  the  acknowledged  productions 
of  the  age  in  which  we  believe  it  to  have  been 
written.  Many  of  the  statements  made  on  this 
subject  by  those  who  defend  the  authenticity 
cannot  be  maintained.  Thus  Hengstenberg  || 
remarks  that  (i)  "'  at  this  time  the  Messianic 
hopes  are  dead,"  and  (2)  "  that  no  great  literary 
work  appeared  between  the  Restoration  from  the 

*  "  On  Daniel,"  p.  195. 

+ "  Even  after  the  Captivity,"  says  Bishop  Westcott, 
"  the  history  of  the  Canon,  like  all  Jewish  history  up  to 
the  date  of  the  Maccabees,  is  wrapped  in  great  obscurity. 
Faint  traditions  alone  remain  to  interpret  results  which 
are  found  realised  when  the  darkness  is  first  cleared 
away  "  (j>-.  v.  "  Canon,"  Smith's  "  Diet,  of  Bible  "). 

t  See  Konig,  "  Einleit.,"  §80,  2. 

§  "  In  propheta  Daniele  Septuaginta  interpretesmultum 
ab  Hebraica  veritate  discordant "  (Jerome,  ed.  Vallarsi, 
V.  6^6).  In  the  LXX.  are  first  found  the  three  apocryphal 
additions.  For  this  reason  the  version  of  Theodotion 
was  substituted  for  the  LXX.,  which  latter  was  only  re- 
discovered in  1772  in  a  manuscript  in  the  library  of 
Cardinal  Chigi. 

II  "On  the  Authenticity  of  Daniel,"  pp.  159,  290  (E.  Tr.). 


Captivity  and  the  time  of  Christ."  Now  the  facts 
are  precisely  the  reverse  in  each  instance.  For  (i) 
the  little  book  called  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,* 
which  belongs  to  this  period,  contains  the  strang- 
est and  clearest  Messianic  hopes,  and  the  Book  of 
Enoch  most  closely  resembles  Daniel  in  its  Mes- 
sianic predictions.  Thus  it  speaks  of  the  pre- 
existence  of  the  Messiah  (xlviii.  6,  Ixii.  7),  of 
His  sitting  on  a  throne  of  glory  (Iv.  4,  Ixi.  8), 
and  receiving  the  power  of  rule. 

(ii)  Still  less  can  we  attach  any  force  to  Heng- 
stenberg's  argument  that,  in  the  Maccabean  age, 
the  gift  of  prophecy  was  believed  to  have  de- 
parted for  ever.  Indeed,  that  is  an  argument  in 
favour  of  the  pseudonymity  of  the  Book.  For 
in  the  age  at  which — for  purposes  of  literary 
form — it  is  represented  as  having  appeared  the 
spirit  of  prophecy  was  far  from  being  dead.  Eze- 
kiel  was  still  living,  or  had  died  but  recently. 
Zechariah,  Haggai,  and  long  afterwards  Malachi, 
were  still  to  continue  the  succession  of  the 
mighty  prophets  of  their  race.  Now,  if  predic- 
tion be  an  element  in  the  prophet's  work,  no 
prophet,  nor  all  the  prophets  together,  ever  dis- 
tantly approached  any  such  power  of  minutely 
foretelling  the  events  of  a  distant  future — even 
the  half-meaningless  and  all-but-trivial  events 
of  four  centuries  later,  in  kingdoms  which  had 
not  yet  thrown  their  distant  shadows  on  the  hori- 
zon— as  that  which  Daniel  must  have  possessed, 
if  he  were  indeed  the  author  of  this  Book.f  Yet, 
as  we  have  seen,  he  never  thinks  of  claiming 
the  functions  of  the  prophets,  or  speaking  in  the 
prophet's  commanding  voice,  as  the  foreteller  of 
the  message  of  God.  On  the  contrary,  he  adopts 
the  comparatively  feebler  and  more  entangled 
methods  of  the  literary  composers  in  an  age 
when  men  saw  not  their  tokens  and  there  was 
no  prophet   more.t 

We  must  postpone  a  closer  examination  of  the 
questions  as  to  the  "  four  kingdoms  "  intended 
by  the  writer,  and  of  his  curious  and  enigmatic 
chronological  calculations;  but  we  must  reject  at 
once  the  monstrous  assertion — excusable  in  the 
days  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  but  which  has  now 
become  unwise  and  even  portentous — that  "  to 
reject  Daniel's  prophecies  would  be  to  under- 
mine the  Christian  religion,  zvhich  is  all  but 
founded  on  his  prophecies  respecting  Christ "  ! 
Happily  the  Christian  religion  is  not  built  on 
such  foundations  of  sand.  Had  it  been  so,  it 
would  long  since  have  been  swept  away  by  the 
beating  rain  and  the  rushing  floods.  Here,  again, 
the  arguments  urged  by  those  who  believe  in  the 
authenticity  of  Daniel  recoil  with  tenfold  force 
upon  themselves.  Sir  Isaac  Newton's  observa- 
tions on  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  only  show 
how  little  transcendent  genius  in  one  domain 
of  inquiry  can  save  a  great  thinker  from  absolute 
mistakes  in  another.  In  writing  upon  prophecy 
the  great  astronomer  was  writing  on  the  assump- 
tion of  baseless  premisses  which  he  had  drawn 
from  stereotyped  tradition;  and  he  was  also  writ- 
ing at  an  epoch  when  the  elements  for  the  final 
solution  of  the  problem  had  not  as  yet  been  dis- 
covered or  elaborated.  It  is  as  certain  that,  had 
he  been  living  now,  he  would  have  accepted  the 
conclusion  of  all  the  ablest  and  most  candid  in- 

*  Psalms  of  Sol.,  xvii.  36,  xviii.  8,  etc.  See  Fabric,  "Cod. 
Pseudep.,"  i.  917-972;  Ewald,  "Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Isr.,"  iv. 
244. 

t  Even  Auberlen  says  ("Dan.,"  p.  3,  E.  Tr.),  "  If  proph- 
ecy  is  anywhere  a  history  of  the  future,  it  is  here." 

X  See  Vitrmga,  "  De  defectu  Prophetiae  post  Malachiae 
tempora  Obss.  Sacr.,"  ii.  336. 


378 


^.      TPIE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


quirers,  as  it  is  certain  that  Bacon,  had  he  now 
been  living,  would  have  accepted  the  Copernican 
theory.  It  is  absurdly  false  to  say  that  "  the 
Christian  religion  is  all  but  founded  on  Daniel's 
prophecies  respecting  Christ."  if  it  were  not  ab- 
surdly false,  we  might  well  ask,  How  it  came  that 
neither  Christ  nor  His  Apostles  ever  once  al- 
luded to  the  existence  of  any  such  argument,  or 
ever  pointed  to  the  Book  of  Daniel  and  the 
prophecy  of  the  seventy  weeks  as  containing  the 
least  germ  of  evidence  in  favour  of  Christ's  mis- 
sion or  the  Gospel  teaching?  No  such  argument 
is  remotely  alluded  to  till  long  afterwards  by 
some  of  the  Fathers. 

But  so  far  from  finding  any  agreement  in  the 
opinions  of  the  Christian  Fathers  and  commenta- 
tors on  a  subject  which,  in  Newton's  view,  was 
so  momentous,  we  only  find  ourselves  weltering 
in  a  chaos  of  uncertainties  and  contradictions. 
Thus  Eusebius  records  the  attempt  of  some  early 
Christian  commentators  to  treat  the  last  of  the 
seventy  weeks  as  representing,  not,  like  all  the 
rest,  seven  years,  but  seventy  years,  in  order  to 
bring  down  the  prophecy  to  the  days  of  Trajan! 
Neither  Jewish  nor  Christian  exegetes  have  ever 
been  able  to  come  to  the  least  agreement  be- 
tween themselves  or  with  one  another  as  to  the 
beginning  or  end — the  terminus  a  quo  or  the  ter- 
minus ad  quern — with  reference  to  which  the  sev- 
enty weeks  are  to  be  reckoned.  The  Christians 
naturally  made  great  efforts  to  make  the  seventy 
weeks  end  with  the  Crucifixion.  But  Julius  Af- 
ricanus  *  (fA.  d.  232),  beginning  with  the  twenti- 
eth year  of  Artaxerxes  (Neh.  ii.  1-9,  b.  c.  444), 
gets  only  four  hundred  and  seventy-five  to  the 
Crucifixion,  and  to  escape  the  difficulty  makes 
the  years  hmar  years. I 

Hippolytust  separates  the  last  week  from  all 
the  rest,  and  relegates  it  to  the  days  of  Anti- 
christ and  the  end  of  the  world.  Eusebius  him- 
self refers  "  the  anointed  one  "  to  the  line  of 
Jewish  high  priests,  separates  the  last  week  from 
the  others,  ends  it  with  the  fourth  year  after  the 
Crucifixion,  and  rei'ers  the  ceasing  of  the  sacri- 
fice (Deut.  ix.  2,)  to  the  rejection  of  Jewish 
sacrifices  by  God  after  the  death  of  Christ.  Apol- 
linaris  makes  the  seventy  weeks  begin  with  the 
birth  of  Christ,  and  argues  that  Elijah  and  Anti- 
christ were  to  appear  a.  d.  490!  None  of  these 
views  found  general  acceptances^  Not  one  of 
them  was  sanctioned  by  Church  authority.  Ev- 
erv  one,  as  Jerome  says,  argued  in  this  direction 
or  that  pio  captu  ingenii  sui.  The  climax  of  arbi- 
trariness is  reached  by  Keil — the  last  prominent 
defender  of  the  so-called  "  orthodoxy  "  of  criti- 
cism— when  he  makes  the  weeks  not  such  com- 
monplace things  as  "  earthly  chronological 
weeks,"  but  Divine,  symbolic,  and  therefore  un- 
known and  unascertainable  periods.  And  are 
we  to  be  told  that  it  is  on  such  fantastic,  self- 
contradictory,  and  mutually  refuting  calculations 


*  '•  Demonstr.  Evang.."  viii. 

t  Of  the  Jews,  the  LXX.  translators  seem  to  make  the 
seventy  weeks  end  with  Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  but  in 
lerome's  day  they  made  the  first  year  of  "Darius  the 
Mede"  the  tertninus  a  quo.  and  brought  down  the  ter- 
minus ad  quern  to  Hadrian's  description  of  the  Temple. 
Saadia  the  Gaon  and  Rashi  reckon  the  seventy  weeks 
from  Nebuchadrezzar  to  Titus,  and  make  Cyrus  the 
anointed  one  of  ix.  25.  Abn  Ezra,  on  the  other,  takes 
Nehemiah  for  "  the  anointed  one."  What  can  be  based 
on  such  varying:  and  undemonstrable  guesses  ?  See  Behr- 
mann,  "Dan.,"  p.  xliii. 

%  Hippolytus,  "  Fragm.  in  Dan."  (Migne,  "  Patr.  Graec," 

X.). 

§  See  Bevan,  pp.  141-145. 


that  "  the  Christian  religion  is  all  but  founded  "  ? 
Thank  God,  the  assertion  is  entirely  wild. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

EXTERNAL   EVIDENCE   AND    RECEPTION 
INTO   THE  CANON. 

The  reception  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  any- 
where into  the  Canon  might  be  regarded  as  an 
argument  in  favour  of  its  authenticity,  if  the  case 
of  the  Books  of  Jonah  and  Ecclesiastes  did  not 
suf^ciently  prove  that  canonicity,  while  it  does 
constitute  a  proof  of  the  value  and  sacred  signif- 
icance of  a  book,  has  no  weight  as  to  its  tradi- 
tional authorship.  But  in  point  of  fact  the  posi- 
tion assigned  by  the  Jews  to  the  Book  of  Daniel 
— not  among  the  Prophets,  where,  had  the  Book 
been  genuine,  it  would  have  had  a  supreme  right 
to  stand,  but  only  with  the  Book  of  Esther, 
among  the  latest  of  the  Hagiographa  * — is  a 
strong  argument  for  its  late  date.  The  division 
of  the  Old  Testament  into  Law,  Prophets,  and 
Hagiographa  first  occurs  in  the  Prologue  to 
Ecclesiasticus  (about  b.  c.  131) — "  the  Law,  the 
Prophecies,  and  the  rest  of  the  books."  +  In 
spite  of  its  peculiarities,  its  prophetic  claims 
among  those  who  accepted  it  as  genuine  were 
so  strong  that  the  LXX.  and  the  later  transla- 
tions unhesitatingly  reckon  the  author  among 
the  four  greater  prophets.  If  the  Daniel  of  the 
Captivity  had  written  this  Book,  he  would  have 
had  a  far  greater  claim  to  this  position  among 
the  prophets  than.  Haggai,  Malachi,  or  the  later 
Zechariah.  Yet  the  Jews  deliberately  placed  the 
Book  among  the  Kethubim,  to  the  writers  of 
which  they  indeed  ascribe  the  Holy  Spirit 
(Ruach  Hakkodesh),  but  whom  they  did  not  credit 
with  the  higher  degree  of  prophetic  inspiration. 
Josephus  expresses  the  Jewish  conviction  that, 
since  the  days  of  Artaxerxes  onwards,  the  writ- 
ings which  had  appeared  had  not  been  deemed 
worthy  of  the  same  reverence  as  those  which 
had  preceded  them,  because  there  had  occurred 
no  unquestionable  succession  of  prophets.}:  The 
Jews  who  thus  decided  the  true  nature  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel  must  surely  have  been  guided 
by  strong  traditional,  critical,  historical,  or  other 
grounds  for  denying  (as  they  did)  to  the  author 
the  gift  of  prophecy.  Theodoret  denounces 
this  as  "  shameless  impudence  "  {dvaiffx^vrlav)  on 
their  part;§  but  may  it  not  rather  have  been 
fuller  knowledge  or  simple  honesty?  At  any 
rate,  on  any  other  grounds  it  would  have  been 
strange  indeed  of  the  Talmudists  to  decide  that 
the  most  minutely  predictive  of  the  prophets — 
if  indeed  this  were  a  prophecy — wrote  without 
the  gift  of  prophecy.il  It  can  only  have  been  the 
late  and  suspected  appearance  of  the  Book,  and 
its  marked  phenomena,  which  led  to  its  relega- 
tion to  the  lowest  place  in  the  Jewish  Canon. 
Already  in  i  Mace.  iv.  46  we  find  that  the  stones 

♦Jacob  Perez  of  Valentia  accounted  for  this  by  the 
hatred  of  the  Jews  for  Christianity  !  (Diestel,  "  Gesch.  d. 
A.  T.,"  p.  211). 

tComp.  Luke  xxiv.  44;  Acts  xxviii.  23  ;  Philo,  "  De  Vit. 
Cont.,"  3.    See  Oehler  in  Herzog,  s.  v.  "Kanon." 

X  "Jos.  c.  Ap.,"  I.  8.       _ 

§ "  Opp,"  ed.  Migne,  ii.  1260:  Et?  roaavTqv  avai<j\vvriav 
r]\a(Tav  ws  koX  tou  x°P°^  ''''»"'  Tpo^ririav  toOtoi'  aitoaxoivl^eiv.  He 
may  well  add,  on  his  view  of  the  date,  ei  y^p  TcfUTa  t^s 
Trpo^TjTctas  aAAoTpta,  TtVa  irpo<^7jTctas  Tol  i5ia  ; 

II  "  Megilla,"  3,  i.  Josephus,  indeed,  regards  apocalyptic 
visions  as  the  highest  form  of  prophecy  ("  Antt.,"  X.  xi, 
7)  ;  but  the  Rabbis  Kimchi,  Maimonides,  Joseph  Albo,  etc., 
are  strongly  against  him.    See  Behrmann,  p.  xxxix. 


RECEPTION    INTO    THE    CANON. 


379 


of  the  demolished  pagan  altar  are  kept  "  until 
there  should  arise  a  prophet  to  show  what  should 
be  done  with  them  "  ;  and  in  i  Mace.  xiv.  41 
we  again  meet  the  phrase  "  until  there  should 
arise  a  faithful  prophet."  Before  this  epoch  there 
is  no  trace  of  the  existence  of  the  Book  of  Dan- 
iel, and  not  only  so,  but  the  prophecies  of  the 
post-exilic  prophets  as  to  the  future  contem- 
plate a  wholly  different  horizon  and  a  wholly 
different  order  of  events.  Had  Daniel  ex- 
isted before  the  Maccabean  epoch,  it  is  im- 
possible that  the  rank  of  the  Book  should 
have  been  deliberately  ignored.  The  Jewish 
Rabbis  of  the  age  in  which  it  appeared  saw,  quite 
correctly,  that  it  had  points  of  affinity  with  other 
pseudepigraphic  apocalypses  which  arose  in  the 
same  epoch.  The  Hebrew  scholar  Dr.  Joel  has 
pointed  out  how,  amid  its  immeasurable  superi- 
ority to  such  a  poem  as  the  enigmatic  "  Cassan- 
dra "  of  the  Alexandrian  poet  Lycophron,*  it  re- 
sembles that  book  in  it^  indirectness  of  nomen- 
clature. Lycophron  is  one  of  the  pleiad  of  poets 
in  the  days  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus;  but  his 
writings,  like  the  Book  before  us,  have  probably 
received  interpolations  from  later  hands.  He 
never  calls  a  god  or  a  hero  by  his  name,  but  al- 
ways describes  him  by  a  periphrasis,  just  as  here 
we  have  "  the  Kmg  of  the  North  "  and  "  the 
King  of  the  South,"  though  the  name  "  Egypt  " 
slips  in  (Dan.  xi.  8).  Thus  Hercules  is  "  a  three- 
nights'  lion  "  {rpUffirepoi  X^uv),  and  Alexander 
the  Great  is  "  a  wolf."  A  son  is  always  "  an  off- 
shoot "  {<^iTi/;ito).  or  is  designed  by  some  other 
metaphor.  When  Lycophron  wants  to  allude  to 
Rome,  the  Greek  'Pw/xij  is  used  in  its  sense  of 
"  strength."  The  name  Ptolemaios  becomes  by 
anagram  dnb  /aAiroj ,  "from  honey"  ;  and  the 
name  Arsinoe  becomes  lop  "Hpaj,  "  the  violet  of 
Hera."  We  may  find  some  resemblances  to  these 
procedures  when  we  are  considering  the  elev- 
enth chapter  of  Daniel. 

It  is  a  serious  abuse  of  argument  to  pretend, 
as  is  done  by  Hengstenberg,  by  Dr.  Pusey,  and 
by  many  of  their  feebler  followers,  that  "  there 
are  few  books  whose  Divine  authority  is  so  fully 
established  by  the  testimonv  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  in  particular  by  our_  Lord  Himself, 
as  the  Book  of  Daniel."!  It  is' to  the  last  de- 
gree dangerous,  irreverent,  and  unwise  to  stake 
tlie  Divine  authority  of  our  Lord  on  the  main- 
tenance of  those  ecclesiastical  traditions  of  which 
so  many  have  been  scattered  to  the  winds  for 
ever.  Our  Lord,  on  one  occasion,  in  the  dis- 
course on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  warned  His 
disciples  that,  "  when  they  should  see  the  abom- 
ination of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet,  standing  in  the  holy  place,  they  should 
flee  from  Jerusalem  into  the  mountain  district."  t 
There  is  nothing  to  prove  that  He  Himself  ut- 
tered either  the  words  "  let  him  that  readeth  un- 
derstand." or  even  "  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet."  Both  of  those  may  belong  to  the  ex- 
planatory narrative  of  the  Evangelist,  and  the 
latter  does  not  occur  in  St.  Mark.  Further,  in 
St.  Luke  (xxi.  20)  there  is  no  specific  allusion  to 
Daniel  at  all;  but  instead  of  it  we  find,  "  When 
ye  see  Jerusalem  being  encircled  by  armies,  then 
know  that  its  desolation  is  near."  We  cannot 
be  certain  that  the  specific  reference  to  Daniel 
may  not  be  due  to  the  Evangelist.     But  without 


so  rnuch  as  raising  these  questions,  it  is  fully 
admitted  that,  whether  exactly  in  its  present  form 
or  not,  the  Book  of  Daniel  formed  part  of  the 
Canon  in  the  days  of  Christ.  If  He  directly  re- 
fers to  it  as  a  book  known  to  His  hearers,  His 
reference  lies  as  wholly  outside  all  questions  of 
genuineness  and  authenticity  as  does  St.  Jude's 
quotation  from  the  Book  of  Enoch,  or  St.  Paul's 
(possible)  allusions  fb  the  Assumption  of  Eli- 
jah,* or  Christ's  own  passing  reference  to  the 
Book  of  Jonah.  Those  who  attempt  to  drag  in 
these  allusions  as  decisive  critical  dicta  transfer 
them  to  a  sphere  wholly  different  from  that  of 
the  moral  application  for  which  they  were  in- 
tended. They  not  only  open  vast  and  indistinct 
questions  as  to  the  self-imposed  limitations  of 
our  Lord's  human  knowledge  as  part  of  His 
own  voluntary  "  emptying  Himself  of  His 
glory,"  but  rhey  also  do  a  deadly  disservice  to  the 
most  essential  cause  of  Christianity.!  The  only 
thing  which  is  acceptable  to  the  God  of  truth  is 
truth;  and  since  He  has  given  us  our  reason  and 
our  conscience  as  lights  which  light  every  man 
who  is  born  into  the  world,  we  must  walk  by 
these  lights  in  all  questions  which  belong  to 
these  domains.  History,  literature  and  criticism, 
and  the  interpretation  of  human  language  do  be- 
long to  the  domain  of  pure  reason;  and  we  must 
not  be  bribed  by  the  misapplication  of  hypothet- 
ical exegesis  to  give  them  up  for  the  support  of 
traditional  views  which  advancing  knowledge  no 
longer  suflfers  us  to  maintain.  It  may  be  true  or 
not  that  our  Lord  adopted  the  title  "  Son  of 
Man  "  (Bar  Enosh)  from  the  Book  of  Daniel; 
but  even  if  He  did,  which  is  at  least  disputable, 
that  would  only  show,  what  we  all  already  ad- 
mit, that  in  His  time  the  Book  was  an  acknowl- 
edged part  of  the  Canon.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  regarded  the  Book 
of  Daniel  as  containing  the  most  explicit  proph- 
ecies of  Himself  and  of  His  kingdom,  why  did 
they  never  appeal  or  even  allude  to  it  to  prove 
that  He  was  the  promised  Messiah? 

Again,  Hengstenberg  and  his  school  try  to 
prove  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  existed  before 
the  Maccabean  age,  because  Josephus  says  that 
the  high  priest  Jaddua  showed  to  Alexander  the 
Great,  in  the  year  b.  c.  332,  the  prophecy  of  him- 
self as  the  Grecian  he-goat  in  the  Book  of  Dan- 
iel; and  that  the  leniency  which  Alexander 
showed  towards  the  Jews  was  due  to  the  favour- 
able impression  thus  produced.:}: 

The  story,  which  is  a  beautiful  and  an  inter- 
esting one,  runs  as  folllows: — 

On  his  way  from  Tyre,  after  capturing  Gaza, 
Alexander  decided  to  advance  to  Jerusalem.  The 
news  threw  Jaddua  the  high  priest  into  an  agony 
of  alarm.  He  feared  that  the  king  was  displeased 
with  the  Jews,  and  would  inflict  severe  vengeance 
upon  them.  He  ordered  a  general  supplication 
with  sacrifices,  and  was  encouraged  by  God  in  a 
dream  to  decorate  the  city,  throw  open  the  gates, 
and  go  forth  in  procession  at  the  head  of  priests 
and  people  to  meet  the  dreaded  conqueror.  The 
procession,  so  unlike  that  of  any  other  nation, 
went  forth  as  soon  as  they  heard  that  Alexander 
was  approaching  the  city.  They  met  the  king 
on  the  summit  of  Scopas,  the  watch-tower — the 
height  of  Mizpah,  from  which  the  first  glimpse 
of  the  city  is  obtained.     It  is  the  famous  Blanca 


*  It  has  been  described  as  "  ein  Versteck  fur  Belesenheit, 
und  ein  j^rammatischer  Monstrum.'' 
t  Hengstenberg,  p.  209. 
t  Matt.  xxiv.  15  ;  Mark  xiii.  14, 


*  I  Cor.  ii.  g  ;  Eph.  v.  11. 

t  Hengstenberg's  reference  to  i  Peter  i.  10-12,  1  Thess. 
ii.  3,  I  Cor.  vi.  2,  Heb.  xi.  12,  deserve  no  further  notice 
iJos.,  "  Antt.,"  XI.  viii.  •■■ 


38o 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


Guarda  cf  the  Crusaders,  on  the  summit  of  which 
Richard  I.  turned  away,  and  did  not  deem  him- 
self worthy  to  glance  at  the  city  which  he  was 
too  weak  to  rescue  from  the  infidel.  The 
Phoenicians  and  Chaldeans  in  Alexander's  army 
promised  themselves  that  they  would  now  be 
permitted  to  plunder  the  city  and  torment  the 
high  priest  to  death.  But  it  happened  far  other- 
wise. For  when  the  kin^  saw  the  white-robed 
procession  approaching,  headed  by  Jaddua  in  his 
purple  and  golden  array,  and  wearing  on  his 
head  the  golden  pctalon,  with  its  inscription 
"  Holiness  to  Jehovah,"  he  advanced,  saluted  the 
priest,  and  adored  the  Divine  Name.  The  Jews 
encircled  and  saluted  him  with  unanimous  greet- 
ing, while  the  King  of  Syria  and  his  other  fol- 
lowers fancied  that  he  must  be  distraught. 
"  How  is  it,"  asked  Parmenio,  "  that  you,  whom 
all  others  adore,  yourself  adore  the  Jewish  high 
priest?"  "  I  did  not  adore  the  high  priest,"  said 
Alexander,  "  but  God,  by  whose  priesthood  He 
has  been  honoured.  When  I  was  at  Dium  in 
Macedonia,  meditating  on  the  conquest  of  Asia, 
I  saw  this  very  man  in  this  same  apparel,  who 
invited  me  to  march  boldly  and  without  delay, 
and  that  he  would  conduct  me  to  the  conquest 
of  the  Persians."  Then  he  took  Jaddua  by  the 
hand,  and  in  the  midst  of  the  rejoicing  priests 
entered  Jerusalem,  where  he  sacrificed  to  God.* 
Jaddua  showed  him  the  prediction  about  him- 
self in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  in  extreme  satis- 
faction he  granted  to  the  Jews,  at  the  high 
priest's  request,  all  the  petitions  which  they  de- 
sired of  him. 

But  this  story,  so  grateful  to  Jewish  vanity,  is 
a  transparent  fiction.  It  does  not  find  the  least 
support  from  any  other  historic  source,  and  is 
evidently  one  of  the  Jewish  Haggadoth  in 
which  the  intense  national  self-exaltation  of  that 
strange  nation  delighted  to  depict  the  homage 
which  they,  and  their  national  religion,  extorted 
from  the  supernaturally  caused  dread  of  the 
greatest  heathen  potentates.  In  this  respect  it 
resembles  the  earlier  chapters  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel  itself,  and  the  numberless  stories  of  the 
haughty  superiority  of  great  Rabbis  to  kings 
and  emperors  in  which  the  Talmud  delights. 
Roman  Catholic  historians,  like  Jahn  and  Hess, 
and  older  writers,  like  Prideaux,f  accept  the 
story,  even  when  they  reject  the  fable  about 
Sanballat  and  the  Temple  on  Gerizim  which  fol- 
lows it.  Stress  is  naturally  laid  upon  it  by 
apologists  like  Hengstenberg;  but  an  historian 
like  Grote  does  not  vouchsafe  to  notice  it  by  a 
single  word,  and  most  modern  writers  reject  it. 
The  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  thinks  that  these 
stories  are  "  probably  derived  from  some  apocry- 
phal book  of  Alexandrian  growth,  in  which 
chronology  and  history  gave  way  to  romance 
and  Jewish  vanity.":]:  All  the  historians  except 
Josephus  say  that  Alexander  went  straight  from 
Gaza  to  Egypt,  and  make  no  mention  of  Jeru- 
salem or  Samaria;  and  Alexander  was  by  no 
means  "  adored "  by  all  men  at  that  period 
of  his  career,  for  he  never  received  TrpoffKOvrja-is  till 
after  his   conquest  of   Persia.     Nor  can   we   ac- 

*  There  is  nothing  to  surprise  us  in  this  circumstance, 
for  Ptolemy  III.  ("  [os.  c.  Ap.,"  II.  5)  and  Antiochus  VII. 
(Sidetes,  "  Antt.,'*  XlII.  viii.  2),  Marcus  Agrippa  {id.,  XVI. 
ii.  I.),  and  Vitellius  z'o'.,  XVIII.  v.  3)  are  said  to  have  done 
the  same.  Comp.  Suet.,  "Aug.,"  93  ;  Tert.,  "  Apolog.,"  6  ; 
and  other  passages  adduced  by  Schtirer,  i.,  §  24. 

tjahn,  ''Hebr.  Commonwealth,"  71;  Hess,  "Gesch.," 
ii.  37  ;  Prideaux,  "Connection,"  i.  540  ff. 

t"Dict.  of  Bih\,"  s.  V.  "Jaddua."  See  Schiirer,  i.  187; 
Van  Dale,  "Dissert,  de  LXX.  Interpr.,"  68  ff. 


count  for  the  presence  of  "  Chaldeans  "  in  his 
army  at  this  time,  for  Chaldea  was  then  under 
the  rule  of  Babylon.  Besides  which,  Daniel  wa,s 
expressly  bidden,  as  Bleek  observes,  to  "  seal  up 
his  prophecy  till  the  time  of  the  end";  and  the 
"  time  of  the  end  "  was  certainly  not  the  era 
of  Alexander, — not  to  mention  the  circumstance 
that  Alexander,  if  the  prophecies  were  pointed 
out  to  him  at  all,  would  hardly  have  been  con- 
tent with  the  single  verse  or  two  about  himself, 
and  would  have  been  anything  but  gratified  by 
what  immediately  follows.* 

I  pass  over  as  meaningless  Hengstenberg's 
arguments  in  favour  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
Book  from  the  predominance  of  symbolism; 
from  the  moderation  of  tone  towards  Nebuchad- 
rezzar; from  the  political  gifts  shown  by  the 
writer;  and  from  his  prediction  that  the  Mes- 
sianic Kingdom  would  at  once  appear  after  the 
death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes!  When  we  are 
told  that  these  circumstances  "  can  only  be  ex- 
plained on  the  assumption  of  a  Babylonian 
origin";  that  "they  are  directly  opposed  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Maccabean  time";  that  the  artifice 
with  which  the  writing  is  pervaded,  supposing  it 
to  be  a  pseudepigraphic  book,  "  far  surpasses  the 
powers  of  the  most  gifted  poet  ";  and  that  "  such 
a  distinct  expectation  of  the  near  advent  of  the 
Messianic  Kingdom  is  utterly  without  analogy 
in  the  whole  of  prophetic  literature," — such  argu- 
ments can  only  be  regarded  as  appeals  to  igno- 
rance. They  are  either  assertions  which  float  in 
the  air,  or  are  disproved  at  once  alike  by  the 
canonical  prophets  and  by  the  apocryphal  litera- 
ture of  the  Maccabean  age.  Symbolism  is  the 
distinguishing  characteristic  of  apocalypses,  and 
is  found  in  those  of  the  late  post-exilic  period. 
The  views  of  the  Jews  about  Nebuchadrezzar 
varied.  Some  writers  were  partially  favourable 
to  him,  others  were  severe  upon  him.  It  does 
not  in  the  least  follow  that  a  writer  during  the 
Antiochian  persecution,  who  freely  adapted 
traditional  or  imaginative  elements,  should  neces- 
sarily represent  the  old  potentates  as  irredeema- 
bly wicked,  even  if  he  meant  to  satirise  Epiph- 
anes in  the  siory  of  their  extravagances.  It 
was  necessary  for  his  purpose  to  bring  out  the 
better  features  of  their  characters,  in  order  to 
show  the  conviction  wrought  in  them  by  Divine 
interpositions.  The  notion  that  the  Book  of 
Daniel  could  only  have  been  written  by  a  states- 
man or  a  consummate  politician  is  mere  fancy. 
And,  lastly,  in  making  the  Messianic  reign  begin 
immediately  at  the  close  of  the  Seleucid  perse- 
cution, the  writer  both  expresses  his  own  faith 
and  hope,  and  follows  the  exact  analogy  of 
Isaiah  and  all  the  other  Messianic  prophets. 

But  though  it  is  common  with  the  prophets 
to  pass  at  once  from  the  warnings  of  destruc- 
tion to  the  hopes  of  a  Messianic  Kingdom  which 
is  to  arise  immediately  beyond  the  horizon  which 
limits  their  vision,  it  is  remarkable — and  the  con- 
sideration tells  strongly  against  the  authenticity 
of  Daniel — that  not  one  of  them  had  the  least 
glimpse  of  the  four  successive  kingdoms  or  of 
the  four  hundred  and  ninety  years; — not  even 
those  prophets  "  who,  if  the  Book  of  Daniel 
were  genuine,  must  have  had  it  in  their  hands." 
To  imagine  that  Daniel  took  means  to  have  hi? 
Book  left  undiscovered  for  some  four  hundred 
years,  and  then  brought  to  light  during  the  Mac- 
cabean struggle,  is  a  grotesque  impossibility,     h 

♦  This  part  of  the  story  is  a  mere  doublet  of  that  about 
Cyrus  and  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  ("Antt.,"  XI.  i.  2). 


RECEPTION    INTO    THE    CANON. 


381 


the  Book  existed,  it  must  have  been  known. 
Yet  not  only  is  there  no  real  trace  of  its  exist- 
ence before  b.  c.  167,  but  the  post-exilic  prophets 
pay  no  sort  of  regard  to  its  detailed  predictions, 
and  were  evidently  unaware  that  any  such  pre- 
dictions had  ever  been  uttered.  What  room  is 
there  for  Daniel's  four  empires  and  four  hundred 
and  ninety  years  in  such  a  prophecy  as  Zcch.  ii. 
6-13?  The  pseudepigraphic  Daniel  possibly  took 
the  symbolism  of  four  horns  from  Zech.  i.  18, 
19;  but  there  is  not  the  slightest  connection  be- 
tween Zechariah's  symbol  and  that  of  the  pseudo- 
Daniel.  If  the  number  four  in  Zechariah  be  not 
a  mere  number  of  completeness  with  reference 
to  the  four  quarters  of  the  world  (comp.  Zech.  i. 
18),  the  four  horns  symbolise  either  Assyria, 
Babylonia.  Egypt,  and  Persia,  or  more  generally 
the  nations  which  had  then  scattered  Israel 
(Zech.  ii.  8.  vi.  1-8;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  9);  so  that  the 
following  promise  does  not  even  contemplate  a 
victorious  succession  of  heathen  powers.  Again, 
what  room  is  there  for  Daniel's  four  successive 
pagan  empires  in  any  natural  interpretation  of 
Haggai's  "  yet  a  little  while  and  I  will  shake 
all  nations"  (Hag.  ii.  7),  and  in  the  promise 
that  this  shaking  shall  take  place  in  the  lifetime 
of  Zerubbabel  (Hag.  ii.  20-23)?  And  can  we 
suppose  that  Malachi  wrote  that  the  messenger 
of  the  Lord  should  "  suddenly "  come  to  His 
Temple  with  such  prophecies  as  those  of  Daniel 
before   him?  * 

But  if  it  be  thought  extraordinary  that  a 
pseudepigraphic  prophecy  should  have  been  ad- 
mitted into  the  Canon  at  all,  even  when  placed 
low  among  the  "  Kethubim,"  and  if  it  be  argued 
that  the  Jews  would  never  have  conferred  such 
an  honour  on  such  a  composition,  the  answer 
is  that  even  when  compared  with  such  fine  books 
as  those  of  Wisdom  and  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach, 
the  Book  has  a  right  to  such  a  place  by  its 
intrinsic  superiority.  Taken  as  a  whole  it  is  far 
superior  in  moral  and  spiritual  instructiveness  to 
any  of  the  books  of  the  Apocrypha.  It  was  pro- 
foundly adapted  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  age 
in  which  it  originated.  It  was  in  its  favour  that 
it  was  written  partly  in  Hebrew  as  well  as  in 
Aramaic,  and  it  came  before  the  Jewish  Church 
under  the  sanction  of  a  famous  ancient  name 
which  was  partly  at  least  traditional  and  histori- 
cal. There  is  nothing  astonishing  in  the  fact 
that  in  an  age  in  which  literature  was  rare  and 
criticism  unknown  it  soon  came  to  be  accepted 
as  genuine.  Similar  phenomena  are  quite  com- 
mon in  much  later  and  more  comparatively 
learned  ages.  One  or  two  instances  will  sufBce. 
Few  books  have  exercised  a  more  powerful  in- 
fluence on  Christian  literature  than  the  spurious 
letters  of  Ignatius  and  the  pseudo-Clementines. 
They  were  accepted,  and  their  genuineness  was 
defended  for  centuries;  yet  in  these  days  no  sane 
critic  would  imperil  his  reputation  by  an  at- 
tempt to  defend  their  genuineness.  The  -book  of 
the  pseudo-Dionysius  the  Areopagite  was  re- 
garded as  genuine  and  authoritative  down  to  the 
days  of  the  Reformation,  and  the  author  pro- 
fesses to  have  seen  the  supernatural  darkness  of 
the  Crucifixion:  yet  "  Dionysius  the  Areopagite  " 
did  not  write  before  a.  d.  532!  The  power  of 
the  Papal  usurpation  was  mainly  built  on  the 
Forged  Decretals,  and  for  centuries  no  one  ven- 
tured to  question  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity  of   those    gross    forgeries,    till    Laurentius 

*  Mai.  iii.  i.  LXX.,  €'|a<:<<>i'T)s ;  Vulg.,  statini;  but  it  is 
rather  "  unawares  "  (unversehens'). 


Valla  exposed  the  cheat  and  flung  the  tatters 
of  the  Decretals  to  the  winds.  In  the  eight- 
eenth century  Ireland  could  deceive  even  the 
acutest  critics  into  the  belief  that  his  paltry  "  Vor- 
tigern  "  was  a  rediscovered  play  of  Shakespeare; 
and  a  Cornish  clergyman  wrote  a  ballad  which 
even  Macaulay  took  for  a  genuine  production  of 
the  reign  of  James  II.  Those  who  read  the 
Book  of  Daniel  in  the  light  of  Seleucid  and 
Ptolemaic  history  saw  that  the  writer  was  well 
acquainted  with  the  events  of  those  days,  and 
that  his  words  were  full  of  hope,  consolation, 
and  instruction.  After  a  certain  lapse  of  time 
they  were  in  no  position  to  estimate  the  many 
indications  that  by  no  possibility  could  the  Book 
have  been  written  in  the  days  of  the  Babylonian 
Exile;  nor  had  it  yet  become  manifest  that  all 
the  detailed  knowledge  stops  short  with  the  close 
of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The 
enigmatical  character  of  the  Book,  and  the  vary- 
ing elements  of  its  calculations,  led  later  com- 
mentators into  the  error  that  the  fourth  beast 
and  the  iron  legs  of  the  image  stood  for  the 
Roman  Empire,  so  that  they  did  not  expect  the 
Messianic  reign  at  the  close  of  the  Greek  Em- 
pire, which,  in  the  prediction,  it  immediately 
succeeds.* 

How  late  was  the  date  before  the  Jewish 
Canon  was  finally  settled  we  see  from  the  Tal- 
mudic  stories  that  but  for  Hananiah  ben-Hiz- 
kiah,  with  the  help  of  his  three  hundred  bottles 
of  oil  burnt  in  nightly  studies,  even  the  Book 
of  Ezekiel  would  have  been  suppressed,  as  being 
contrary  to  the  Law  ("  Shabbath,"  f.  13,  2) ;  and 
that  but  for  the  mystic  line  of  interpretation 
adopted  by  Rabbi  Aqiba  (a.  b.  120)  a  similar 
fate  might  have  befallen  the  Song  of  Songs 
("  Yaddayim,"  c.  iii.;  "  Mish.,"  5). 

There  is,  then,  the  strongest  reason  to  adopt 
the  conclusion  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  the 
production  of  one  of  the  "  Chasidim  "  towards 
the  beginning  of  the  Maccabean  struggle,  and 
that  its  immediate  object  was  to  warn  the  Jews 
against  the  apostasies  of  commencing  Hellenism. 
It  was  meant  to  encourage  the  faithful,  who  were 
waging  a  fierce  battle  against  Greek  influences 
and  against  the  mighty  and  persecuting  heathen 
forces  by  which  they  were  supported.!  Al- 
though the  writer's  knowledge  of  history  up  to 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great  is  vague  and 
erroneous,  and  his  knowledge  of  the  period 
which  followed  Antiochus  entirely  nebulous,  on 
the  other  hand  his  acquaintance  with  the  period 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  so  extraordinarily 
precise  as  to  furnish  our  chief  information  on 
some  points  of  that  king's  reign.  Guided  by 
these  indications,  it  is  perhaps  possible  to  fix  the 
exact  year  and  month  in  which  the  Book  saw 
the  light — namely,  about  January,  b.  c.  164.^ 

From  Dan.  viii.  14  it  seems  that  the  author 
had  lived  till  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple  after 
its  pollution  by  the  Seleucid  King  (i   Mace.  iv. 

*  That  the  fourth  empire  could  not  be  the  Roman  has 
long^  been  seen  by  manj'  critics,  as  far  back  as  Grotius, 
'  —        ■        -    "  •■        ^  Becmann,   etc. 


j'Empereur,  Chamier,  J.  Voss,  Bodinus 
Diestel,  "  Gesch.  A.  T.,'"'  p.  523). 


( 

t  See  Hamburger,  "  Real-Encvcl.,"  s.  v.  "  Geheimlehre," 
ii.  265.  The  "Geheimlehre"  (Heb.  "  Sithri  Thorah ") 
embraces  a  whole  region  of  Jewish  literature,  of  which 
the  Book  of  Daniel  forms  the  earliest  beginning.  See 
Dan.  xii.  4-9.  The  phrases  of  Dan.  vii.  22  are  common  in 
the  "  Zohar." 

t "  Plotzlich  bei  Antiochus  IV.  angekommen  hort  alle 
seine  Wissenschaft  auf,  so  dass  wir,  den  Kalendar  in  den 
YiSinA^Jast  den  Tag'  anj^eben  konnen  ■wo  dies  oder  jenes 
niedergeschrieben  worden  ist"  (Reuss,  "Gesch.  d.  Hetl. 
Schrift.,"  §  464). 


382 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


42-58).  For  though  the  Maccabean  uprising  is 
only  called  "  a  little  help  "  (xi.  34),  this  is  in 
comparison  with  the  splendid  future  triumph  and 
epiphany  to  which  he  looked  forward.  It  is  suf- 
ficiently clear  from  i  Mace.  v.  15,  16,  that  the 
Jews,  even  after  the  early  victories  of  Judas,  were 
in  evil  case,  and  that  the  nominal  adhesion  of 
many  Hellenising  Jews  to  the  national  cause  was 
merely  hypocritical   (Dan.  xi.  34). 

Now  the  Temple  was  dedicated  on  December 
25,  B.  c.  165;  and  the  Book  appeared  before  the 
death  of  Antiochus,  which  the  writer  expected 
to  happen  at  the  end  of  the  seventy  weeks,  or,  as 
he  calculated  them,  in  June,  164.  The  king  did 
not  actually  die  till  the  close  of  164  or  the  be- 
ginning of  163  (i  Mace.  vi.  i-i6).* 


CHAPTER  X. 

SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSION. 

The  contents  of  the  previous  sections  may  be 
briefly  summarised. 

I.  The  objections  to  the  authenticity  and  gen- 
uineness of  Daniel  do  not  arise,  as  is  falsely  as- 
serted, from  any  a  priori  objection  to  admit  to 
the  full  the  reality  either  of  miracles  or  of  gen- 
uine prediction.  Hundreds  of  critics  who  have 
long  abandoned  the  attempt  to  maintain  the 
early  date  of  Daniel  believe  both  in  miracles 
and  prophecy. 

n.  The  grounds  for  regarding  the  Book  as  a 
pseudepigraph  are  many  and  striking.  The 
very  Book  which  would  most  stand  in  need  of 
overwhelming  evidence  in  its  favour  is  the  one 
which  furnishes  the  most  decisive  arguments 
against  itself,  and  has  the  least  external  testi- 
mony in  its  support. 

III.  The  historical  errors  in  which  it  abounds 
tell  overwhelmingly  against  it.  There  was  no 
deportation  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim;  there 
was  no  King  Belshazzar;  the  Belshazzar  son  of 
Nabunaid  was  not  a  son  of  Nebuchadrezzar;  the 
names  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Abed-nego  are  er- 
roneous in  form;  there  was  no  "  Darius  the^ 
Mede  "  who  preceded  Cyrus  as  king  and  con- 
queror of  Babylon,  though  there  was  a  later 
Darius,  the  son  of  Hystaspes,  who  conquered 
Babylon;  the  demands  and  decrees  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar are  unlike  anything  which  we  find  in  his- 
tory, and  show  every  characteristic  of  the  Jewish 
Haggada;  and  the  notion  that  a  faithful  Jew 
could  become  President  of  the  Chaldean  Magi 
is  impossible.  It  is  not  true  that  there  were  only 
two  Babylonian  kings — there  were  five:  nor  were 
there  only  four  Persian  kings — there  were  twelve. 
Xerxes  seems  to  be  confounded  alike  with 
Darius  Hystaspis  and  Darius  Codomannus  as 
the  last  king  of  Persia.  All  correct  accounts  of 
the  reign,  even  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  seem  to 
end  about  b.  c.  164,  and  the  indications  in  vii. 
11-14,  viii.  25,  xi.  40-45,  do  not  seem  to  accord 
with  the  historic  realities  of  the  time  indicated. 

IV.  The  philological  peculiarities  of  the  Book 
are  no  less  unfavourable  to  its  genuineness.  The 
Hebrew  is  pronounced  by  the  majority  of  ex- 
perts to  be  of  a  later  character  than  the  time  as- 
sumed  for   it.     The   Aramaic   is   not   the    Baby- 

*  For  arguments  in  favour  of  this  view  see  Cornill, 
"  Theol.  Stud  aus  Ostpreussen,"  i88q,  pp.  1-32,  and 
"Einleit.,"  p.  261.  He  reckons  tw^elve  generations,  sixty- 
nine  "  weeks,"  from  the  destruction  ot  Jerusalem  to  the 
murder  of  the  high  priest  Onias  III. 


Ionian  East-Aramaic,  but  the  later  Palestinian 
West-Aramaic.  The  word  "  Kasdim  "  is  used 
for  "  diviners,"  whereas  at  the  period  of  the 
Exile  it  was  a  national  name.  Persian  words 
and  titles  occur  in  the  decrees  attributed  to 
Nebuchadrezzar.  At  least  three  Greek  words  oc- 
cur, of  which  one  is  certainly  of  late  origin,  and 
is  known  to  have  been  a  favourite  instrument 
with  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

V.  There  are  no  traces  of  the  existence  of  the 
Book  before  the  second  century  b.  c.,*  although 
there  are  abundant  traces  of  the  other  books — 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  the  Second  Isaiah — which  be- 
long to  the  period  of  the  Exile.  Even  in  Ec- 
clesiasticus,  while  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and 
the  twelve  Minor  Prophets  are  mentioned  (Ec- 
clus.  xlviii.  20-25,  xlix.  6-10),  not  a  syllable  is 
said  about  Daniel,  and  that  although  the  writer 
erroneously  regards  prophecy  as  mainly  con- 
cerned with  prediction.  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach, 
even  goes  out  of  his  way  to  say  that  no  man 
like  Joseph  had  risen  since  Joseph's  time,  though 
the  story  of  Daniel  repeatedly  recalls  that  of 
Joseph,  and  though,  if  Dan.  i.-vi.  had  been  au- 
thentic history,  Daniel's  work  was  far  more 
marvellous  and  decisive,  and  his  faithfulness 
more  striking  and  continuous,  than  that  of 
Joseph.  The  earliest  trace  of  the  Book  is  in  an 
imaginary  speech  of  a  book  written  about  b.  c. 
100  (i  Mace.  ii.  59,  60). 

VI.  The  Book  was  admitted  by  the  Jews  into 
the  Canon;  but  so  far  from  being  placed  where, 
if  genuine,  it  would  have  had  a  right  to  stand — 
among  the  four  Great  Prophets — it  does  not 
even  receive  a  place  among  the  twelve  Minor 
Prophets,  such  as  is  accorded  to  the  much 
shorter  and  far  inferior  Book  of  Jonah.  It  is 
relegated  to  the  '"  Kethubim,"  side  by  side  with 
such  a  book  as  Esther.  If  it  originated  during 
the  Babylonian  Exile,  Josephus  might  well  speak 
of  its  "  undeviating  prophetic  accuracy."!  Yet 
this  absolutely  unparalleled  and  even  unap- 
proached  foreteller  of  the  minute  future  is  not 
allowed  by  the  Jews  any  place  at  all  in  their 
prophetic  Canon!  In  the  LXX.  it  is  treated 
with  remarkable  freedom,  and  a  number  of  other 
Haggadoth  are  made  a  part  of  it.  It  resem- 
bles Old  Testament  literature  in  very  few  re- 
spects, and  all  its  peculiarities  are  such  as 
abound  in  the  later  apocalypses  and  Apochry- 
pha.t  Philo,  though  he  quotes  so  frequently 
both  from  the  Prophets  and  the  Hagiographa, 
does  not  even  allude  to  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

VII.  Its  author  seems  to  accept  for  himself 
the  view  of  his  age  that  the  spirit  of  genuine 
prophecy  had  departed  for  evermore. ^i;  He 
speaks  of  himself  as  a  student  of  the  older 
prophecies,  and  alludes  to  the  Scriptures  as 
an  authoritative  Canon — Hassepharim,  "  the 
books."  His  views  and  practices  as  regards 
three  daily  prayers  towards  Jerusalem  (vi.  11); 
the  importance  attached  to  Levitical  rules  about 
food  (i.  8-21);  the  expiatory  and  other  value 
attached  to  alms  and  fasting  (iv.  24,  ix.  3,  x.  3) ; 
the  angelology  involving  even  the  names,  distinc- 
tions, and  rival  offices  of  angels;  the  form  taken 
by  the  Messianic  hope;  the  twofold  resurrection 
of  good  and  evil, — are  all  in  close  accord  with 

*  It  is  alluded  to  about  B.  C.  140  in  the  Sibylline  Oracles 
(iii.  391-416),  and  in  i  Mace.  ii.  S9i  60- 

+  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  X.  xi.  7.- 

t  Ewald  ("  Hist,  of  Israel,"  v.  208)  thinks  that  the  author 
had  read  Baruch  in  Hebrew,  because  Dan.  ix.  4-19  is  an 
abbreviation  of  Baruch  i.  15-ii.  17. 

§  Psalm  Ixxiv.  g,  i  Mace.  iv.  46,  ix.  27,  xiv.  41. 


THE    PRRT.UDE. 


383 


the    standpoint    of    the    second    century    before 
Christ  as  shown  distinctly  in  its  literature.* 

VIII.  When  we  liave  been  led  by  decisive 
arguments  to  admit  the  real  date  of  the  Book 
of  Daniel,  its  place  among  the  Hagiographa  con- 
firms all  our  conclusions.  The  Law,  the  Proph- 
ets, and  the  Hagiographa  represent,  as  Professor 
Sanday  has  pointed  out,  three  layers  or  stages 
in  the  history  of  the  collection  of  the  Canon.  If 
the  Book  of  Chronicles  was  not  accepted  among 
the  Histories  (which  were  designated  "  The 
Former  Prophets "),  nor  the  Book  of  Daniel 
among  the  Greater  or  Lesser  Prophets,  the  rea- 
son was  that,  at  the  date  when  the  Prophets 
were  formally  collected  into  a  division  of  the 
Canon,  these  books  were  not  yet  in  existence,  or 
at  any  rate  had  not  been  accepted  on  the  same 
level  with  the  other  books.f 

IX.  All  these  circumstances,  and  others  which 
have  been  mentioned,  have  come  home  to  ear- 
nest, unprejudiced,  and  profoundly  learned  critics 
with  so  irresistible  a  force,  and  the  counter-argu- 
ments which  are  adduced  are  so  little  valid  that 
the  defenders  of  the  genuineness  are  now  an 
ever-dwindling  body,  and  many  of  them  can  only 
support  their  basis  at  all  by  the  hypothesis  of 
interpolations  or  twofold  authorship.  Thus  C. 
V.  Orelli  I  can  only  accept  a  modified  genuine- 
ness, for  which  he  scarcely  offers  a  single  argu- 
ment; but  even  he  resorts  to  the  hypothesis  of 
a  late  editor  in  the  Maccabean  age  who  put  to- 
gether the  traditions  and  general  prophecies  of 
the  real  Daniel.  He  admits  that  without  such 
a  supposition — by  which  it  does  not  seem  that 
we  gain  much — the  Book  of  Daniel  is  wholly  ex- 
ceptional, and  without  a  single  analogy  in  the 
Old  Testament.  And  he  clearly  sees  that  all 
the  rays  of  the  Book  are  focussed  in  the  struggle 
against  Antiochus  as  in  their  central  point,.?  and 
that  the  best  commentary  on  the  prophetic  sec- 
tion of  the  Book  is  the  First  Book  of  Macca- 
bees.|| 

X.  It  may  then  be  said  with  confidence  that 
the  critical  view  has  finally  won  the  day.  The 
human  mind  will  in  the  end  accept  that  theory 
which  covers  the  greatest  number  of  facts,  and 
harmonises  best  with  the  sum-total  of  knowl- 
edge. Now,  in  regard  to  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
these  conditions  appear  to  be  far  better  satisfied 
by  the  supposition  that  the  Book  was  written 
in  the  second  century  than  in  the  sixth.  The 
history,  imperfect  as  to  the  pseudepigraphic 
date,  but  very  precise  as  it  approaches  b.  c.  176- 
164,  the  late  characteristics  which  mark  the  lan- 
guage, the  notable  silence  respecting  the  Book 
from  the  sixth  to  the  second  century,  and  its 
subsequent  prominence  and  the  place  which  it 
occupies  in  the  "  Kethubim,"  are  arguments 
which  few  candid  minds  can  resist.  The  critics 
of  Germany,  even  the  most  moderate,  such  as 
Delitzsch,  Cornill,   Riehm,  Strack,  C.  v.   Orelli, 

♦See  Cornill,  "  Einleit.,"  pp.  257-260. 

t Sanday,  "Inspiration,"  p.  loi.  The  name  of  "  Earlier 
Prophets  was  given  to  the  two  Books  of  Samuel,  of 
Kings,  and  of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel  ;  and  the 
twelve  Minor  Prophets  (the  latter  regarded  as  one  book) 
were  called  "The  Later  Prophets.  Cornill  places  the 
collection  of  the  Prophets  into  the  Canon  about  B.  C.  250. 

t"  Alttestament.  Weissagung,"  pp.  5i^-s3o(  Vienna,  1882). 

§  "  AUe  strahlen  des  Buches  sich  in  dieser  Epoche  als  in 
ihrem  Brennpunkte  vereinigen  "  (C.  v.  Orelli,  p.  514). 

II  Compare  the  following  passages :  Unclean  meats,  i 
Mace,  i.  62-64,  "  Many  in  Israel  were  fully  resolved  not  to 
eat  any  unclean  thing,"  etc.  ;  2  Mace.  vi.  18-^1,  vii.  1-42. 
The  decrees  of  Nebuchadrezzar  (Dan.  iii.  .j-6)  and  Darius 
(Dan.  vi.  6-9)  with  the  proceedings  of  Antiochus  (i  Mace, 
i.  47-51).  Belshazzar's  profane  use  of  the  Temple  vessels 
(Dan.  V.  2.)  with  i  Mace.  i.  23  ;  2  Mace.  v.  16,  etc. 


Meinhold,  are  unanimous  as  to  the  late  date  of, 
and  even  in  the  far  more  conservative  criticism 
of  England  there  is  no  shadow  of  doubt  on  the 
subject  left  in  the  minds  of  such  scholars  as 
Driver,  Cheyne,  Sanday,  Bevan,  and  Robertson 
Smith.  Yet.  so  far  from  detracting  from  the 
value  of  the  Book,  we  add  to  its  real  value  and 
to  its  accurate  apprehension  when  we  regard  it, 
not  as  the  work  of  a  prophet  in  the  Exile,  but 
of  some  faithful  "  Chasid  "  in  the  days  of  the 
Seleucid  tyrant,  anxious  to  inspire"  the  courage 
and  console  the  suflferings  of  his  countrymen. 
Thus  considered,  the  Book  presents  some  anal- 
ogy to  St.  Augustine's  "  City  of  God."  It  sets 
forth,  in  strong  outlines,  and  with  magnificent 
originality  and  faith,  the  contrast  between  the 
kingdoms  of  this  world  and  the  kingdoms  of  our 
God  and  of  His  Christ,  to  which  the  eternal 
victory  hac  been  foreordained  from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world.  In  this  respect  we  must  com- 
pare it  with  the  Apocalypse.  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  vv^as  an  anticipated  Nero.  And  just  as  the 
agonies  of  the  Neronian  persecutions  wrung  from 
the  impassioned  spirit  of  St.  John  the  Divine 
those  visions  of  glory  and  that  denunciation  of 
doom,  in  order  that  the  hearts  of  Christians  in 
Rome  and  Asia  might  be  encouraged  to  the  en- 
durance of  martyrdom,  and  to  the  certain  hope 
that  the  irresistible  might  of  their  weakness 
would  ultimately  shake  the  world,  so  the  folly 
and  fury  of  Antiochus  led  the  holy  and  gifted 
Jew  who  wrote  the  Book  of  Daniel  to  set  forth 
a  similar  faith,  partly  in  Haggadoth,  which 
may,  to  some  extent,  have  been  drawn  from 
tradition,  and  partly  in  prophecies,  of  which  the 
central  conception  was  that  which  all  history 
teaches  us — namely,  that  "  for  every  false  word 
and  unrighteous  deed,  for  cruelty  and  oppres- 
sion, for  lust  and  vanity,  the  price  has  to  be  paid 
at  last,  not  always  by  the  chief  offenders,  but 
paid  by  some  one.  Justice  and  truth  alone  en- 
dure and  live.  Injustice  and  oppression  may  be 
long-lived,  but  doomsday  comes  to  them  at 
last."  *  And  when  that  doom  has  been  carried 
to  its  ultimate  issues,  then  begins  the  Kingdom 
of  the  Son  of  Man,  the  reign  of  God's  Anointed, 
and  the  inheritance  of  the  earth  by  the  Saints 
of  God. 


PART    II. 

COMMENTARY  ON  THE  HISTORIC 
SECTION. 


CHAPTER  XL 
THE  PRELUDE. 

"His  loyalty  he  kept,  his  faith,  his  love."— MiLTON. 

The  first  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  serves 
as  a  beautiful  introduction  to  the  whole,  and 
strikes  the  keynote  of  faithfulness  to  the  institu- 
tions of  Judaism  which  of  all  others  seemed  most 
important  to  the  mind  of  a  pious  Hebrew  in  the 
days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  At  a  time  when 
many  were  wavering,  and  many  had  lapsed  into 
open  apostasy,  the  writer  wished  to  set  before 
his  countrymen  in  the  most  winning  and  vivid 

*  Froude,  "  Short  Studies,"  i.  17. 


384 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


manner  the  nobleness  and  the  reward  of  obey- 
ing God  rather  than  man. 

He  had  read  in  2  Kings  xxiv.  i,  2,  that  Je- 
hoiakim  had  been  a  vassal  of  Nebuchadrezzar 
for  three  years,  which  were  not,  however,  the 
first  three  years  of  his  reign,  and  then  had  re- 
belled, and  been  subdued  by  "  bands  of  the  Chal- 
deans "  and  their  allies.  In  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6 
he  read  that  Nebuchadrezzar  had  "  bound  Je- 
hoiakim  in  fetters  to  carry  him  to  Babylon."  * 
Combining  these  two  passages,  he  seems  to  have 
inferred,  in  the  absence  of  more  accurate  his- 
torical indications,  that  the  Chaldeans  had  be- 
sieged and  captured  Jerusalem  in  the  third  year 
of  Jehoiakim.  That  the  date  is  erroneous  there 
can  hardly  be  a  question,  for,  as  already  stated,! 
neither  Jeremiah,  the  contemporary  of  Jehoi- 
akim, nor  the  Book  of  Kings,  nor  any  other  au- 
thority, knows  anything  of  any  siege  of  Jeru- 
salem by  the  Babylonian  King  in  the  third  year 
of  Jehoiakim.  The  Chronicler,  a  very  late 
writer,  seems  to  have  heard  some  tradition  that 
Jehoiakim  had  been  taken  captive,  but  he  does 
not  date  this  capture;  and  in  Jehoiakim's  third 
year  the  king  was  a  vassal,  not  of  Babylon,  but 
of  Egypt.  Nabopolassar,  not  Nebuchadrezzar, 
was  then  King  of  Babylon.  It  was  not  till  the 
following  year  (b.  c.  605),  when  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, acting  as  his  father's  general,  had  de- 
feated Egypt  at  the  Battle  of  Carchemish,  that 
any  siege  of  Jerusalem  would  have  been  possi- 
ble. Nor  did  Nebuchadrezzar  advance  against 
the  Holy  City  even  after  the  Battle  of  Carche- 
mish, but  dashed  home  across  the  desert  to  se- 
cure the  crown  of  Babylon  on  hearing  the  news 
of  his  father's  death.  The  only  two  considerable 
Babylonian  deportations  of  which  we  know  were 
apparently  in  the  eighth  and  nineteenth  years  of 
Nebuchadrezzar's  reign.  In  the  former  Jehoi- 
achin  was  carried  captive  with  ten  thousand  citi- 
zens (2  Kings  xxiv.  14-16;  Jer.  xxvii.  20);  in 
the  latter  Zedekiah  was  slain,  and  eight  hundred 
and  thirty-two  persons  carried  to  Babylon  (Jer. 
Hi.  29;  2  Kings  xxv.   11). t 

There  seems  then  to  be,  on  the  very  threshold, 
every  indication  of  an  historic  inaccuracy  such 
as  could  not  have  been  committed  if  the  historic 
Daniel  had  been  the  true  author  of  this  Book; 
and  we  are  able,  with  perfect  clearness,  to  point 
to  the  passages  by  which  the  Maccabean  writer 
was  misled  into  a  mistaken  inference.  To  him, 
however,  as  to  all  Jewish  writers,  a  mere  varia- 
tion in  a  date  would  have  been  regarded  as  a 
matter  of  the  utmost  insignificance.  It  in  no 
way  concerned  the  high  purpose  which  he  had  in 
view,  or  weakened  the  force  of  his  moral  fiction. 
Nor  does  it  in  the  smallest  degree  diminish  from 
the  instructiveness  of  the  lessons  which  he  has 
to  teach  to  all  men  for  all  time.  A  fiction  which 
is  true  to  human  experience  may  be  as  rich  in 
spiritual  meaning  as  a  literal  history.  Do  we 
degrade  the  majesty  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  if 
we  regard  it  as  a  Haggada  any  more  than 
we  degrade  the  story  of  the  Prodigal  Son  when 
we  describe  it  as  a  Parable? 

The  writer  proceeds  to  tell  us  that,  after 
the  siege,  Nebuchadrezzar — whom  the  historic 
Daniel  could  never  have  called  by  the  erroneous 

*  Comp.  Jer.  xxii.  18,  iq,  xxxvi.  30. 

+  .See  supra,  p.  365. 

t  Jeremiah  (Hi.  28-30)  mentions.Mr^s  deportations,  in  the 
seventh,  eighteenth,  and  twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar ;  but  there  are  great  difficulties  about  the  historic 
verification,  and  the  paragraph  (which  is  of  doubtful 
genuineness)  is  omitted  by  the  LXX. 


name  Nebuchadnezzar — took  Jehoiakim  (for 
this  seems  to  be  implied),  with  some  of  the 
sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple  (comp.  v.  2,  3),  "  into 
the  land  of  Shinar,*  to  the  house  of  his  god." 
This  god,  as  we  learn  from  Babylonian  inscrip- 
tion, was  Eel  or  Bel-merodach,  in  whose  temple, 
built  by  Nebuchadrezzar,  was  also  "  the  treasure- 
house  of  his  kingdom."  f 

Among  the  captives  were  certain  "  of  the 
king's  seed,  and  of  the  princes "  ("  Parthe- 
mim  ").t  They  were  chosen  from  among  such 
boys  as  were  pre-eminent  for  their  beauty  and 
intelligence,  and  the  intention  was  to  train  them 
as  pages  in  the  royal  service,  and  also  in  such 
a  knowledge  of  the- Chaldean  language  and  litera- 
ture as  should  enable  them  to  take  their  places 
in  the  learned  caste  of  priestly  diviners.  Their 
home  was  in  the  vast  palace  of  the  Babylonian 
King,  of  which  the  ruins  are  now  called  Kasr. 
Here  they  may  have  seen  the  hapless  Jehoiachin 
still  languishing  in  his  long  captivity. 

They  are  called  "  children,"  and  the  word, 
together  with  the  context,  seems  to  imply  that 
they  were  boys  of  the  age  of  from  twelve  to 
fourteen.  The  king  personally  handed  them 
over  to  the  care  of  Ashpenaz,g  the  Rabsaris,  or 
"  master  of  the  eunuchs,"  who  held  the  position 
of  lord  high  chamberlain.  ||  It  is  probably  im- 
plied that  the  boys  were  themselves  made 
eunuchs,  for  the  incident  seems  to  be  based  on 
the  rebuke  given  by  Isaiah  to  the  vain  ostenta- 
tion of  Hezekiah  in  showing  the  treasures  of  his 
temple  and  palace  to  Merodach-baladan:  "  Be- 
hold the  days  come,  that  all  that  is  in  thine 
house  .  .  .  shall  be  carried  to  Babylon:  nothing 
shall  be  left,  saith  the  Lord.  And  of  thy  sons 
that  shall  issue  from  thee,  which  thou  shaft  beget, 
shall  they  take  away;  and  they  shall  be  eunuchs 
in  the  palace  of  the  King  of  Babylon. "'[ 

They  were  to  be  trained  in  the  learning  (lit. 
"  the  book  ")  and  language  of  Chaldea  for  three 
years;  at  the  end  of  which  period  they  were  to 
be  admitted  into  the  king's  presence,  that  he 
might  see  how  they  looked  and  what  progress 
they  had  made.  During  those  three  years  he 
provided  them  with  a  daily  maintenance  of  food 
and  wine  from  his  table.  Those  who  were  thus 
maintained  in  Eastern  courts  were  to  be  counted 
by  hundreds,  and  even  by  thousands,  and  their 
position  was  often  supremely  wretched  and  de- 
graded, as  it  still  is  in  such  Eastern  courts.     The 

*  Shinar  is  an  archaism,  supposed  by  Schrader  to  be  a 
corruption  of  Suniir,  or  Northern  Chaldea  ("  Keilinschr.," 
p.  34) :  but  see  Hommel,  "  Gesch.  Bab.  u.  Assyr.,"  220;  F. 
Delitzsch,  "  Assyr.  Gram.,"  115.  The  more  common  name 
in  the  exilic  period  was  Babel  (Jer.  li.  9,  etc.)  or  Eretz 
Kasdim  (  Ezek.  xii.  13). 

I  On  this  god— Marduk  or  Maruduk  (Jer.  1.  2)— comp.  2 
Chron.  xxxvi.  7.  See  Schrader,  "  K.  A.  T.,"  pp.  273,  276; 
and  Riehm,  "  Handwurterb.,"  ii.  982. 

%  This  seems  to  be  a  Persian  vioT&,/ratatna,  "  first."  It 
is  only  found  in  Esther.  Josephus  says  that  the  four 
boys  were  connected  with  Zedekiah  ("  Antt.,"  X.  x.  i). 
Comp.  Jer.  xli.  i. 

§Dan.  i.  3;  LXX., 'A|3teo-5pi'.  The  name  is  of  quite  uncer- 
tam  derivation.  Lenormant  connects  it  with  Abai-Istar, 
"astronomer  of  the  goddess  Istar  "  ("  La  Divination,"  p. 
182).  Hitzig  sees  in  this  strange  rendering  Abiesdri  the 
meaning  "  eunuch."  A  eunuch  could  have  no  son  to  help 
him,  so  that  his  father  ishis  help  i'ezer).  Ephraem  Syrus, 
in  his  Commentary,  preserves  both  names  (Schleusner, 
"Thesaurus,"  5.  v.  'ApUcrep).  We  find  the  name  Ash^enaz 
inGen.  X.  3.  Theodot.  has'Ao-cfjai'c^.  Among  other  guesses 
Lenormant  makes  Ashpenaz  =  Assa-ibni-zir.  Dr.  Joel 
("  Notizen  zum  Buche  Daniel,"  p.  17)  says  that  since  the 
Vulgate  reads  Abriesri,  "  ob  nicht  der  Wort  von  rechts 
zu  links  gelesen  miisste  ?  V 

II  Called  in  i.  7-11  the  Sarhassarisim  (comp  Jer.  xxxix. 
3  ;  Gen.  xxxvii.  36.  marg.  :  2  Kings  xviii.  17  ;  Esther  ii.  0) 
This  officer  now  bears  the  title  of  Gyzlar  Agha. 

^  Isa.  xxxix.  6,  7. 


THE    PRELUDE. 


385 


wine  was  probably  imported.  The  food  con- 
sisted of  meat,  game,  fish,  joints,  and  wheaten 
bread.  The  word  used  for  "  provision  "  is  in- 
teresting. It  is  "  path-bag,"  and  seems  to  be  a 
transliteration,  or  echo  of  a  Persian  word,  "  pati- 
baga  "  (Greek  irorf/Saftj),  a  name  applied  by  the 
historian  Deinon  (b.  c.  340)  to  barley  bread 
and  "  mixed  wine  in  a  golden  egg  from  which 
the  king  drinks." 

But  among  these  captives  were  four  young 
Jews  named  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  and 
Azariah. 

Their  very  names  were  a  witness  not  only  to 
their  nationality,  but  to  their  religion.  Daniel 
means  "  God  is  my  judge  ";  Hananiah,  "  Jehovah 
is  gracious";  Mishael  (perhaps),  "who  is  equal 
to  God?"  Azariah,  "God  is  a  helper." 

It  is  hardly  likely  that  the  Chaldeans  would 
have  tolerated  the  use  of  such  names  among 
their  young  pupils,  since  every  repetition  of 
them  would  have  sounded  like  a  challenge  to  the 
supremacy  of  Bel,  Merodach,  and  Nebo.  It  was 
a  common  thing  to  change  names  in  heathen 
courts,  as  the  name  of  Joseph  had  been  changed 
by  the  Egyptians  to  Zaphnath-paaneah  (Gen. 
xli.  45),  and  the  Assyrians  changed  the  name  of 
Psammetichus  II.  into  "  Nebo-serib-ani,"  "  Nebo 
save  me."  They  therefore  made  the  names  of 
the  boys  echo  the  names  of  the  Babylonian 
deities.  Instead  of  "  God  is  my  judge,"  Daniel 
was  called  Belteshazzar,  "  protect  Thou  his  life." 
Perhaps  the  prayer  shows  the  tender  regard  in 
which  he  was  held  by  Ashpenaz.  Hananiah  was 
called  Shadrach,  perhaps  Shudur-aku,  "  com- 
mand of  Aku,"  the  moon-deity;  Mishael  was 
called  Meshach,  a  name  which  we  cannot  inter- 
pret; and  Azariah,  instead  of  "  God  is  a  help," 
was  called  Abed-nego,  a  mistaken  form  for 
Abed-nebo,  or  "  servant  of  Nebo."  Even  in  this 
slight  incident  there  may  be  an  allusion  to  Mac- 
cabean  days.  It  appears  that  in  that  epoch  the 
apostate  Hellenising  Jews  were  fond  of  changing 
their  names  into  Gentile  names,  which  had  a 
somewhat  similar  sound.  Thus  Joshua  was 
called  "  Jason,"  and  Onias  "  Menelaus."  This 
was  done  as  part  of  the  plan  of  Antiochus  to 
force  upon  Palestine  the  Greek  language.  So 
far  the  writer  may  have  thought  the  practice  a 
harmless  one,  even  though  imposed  by  heathen 
potentates.  Such  certainly  was  the  view  of  the 
later  Jews,  even  of  the  strictest  sect  of  the 
Pharisees.  Not  only  did  Saul  freely  adopt  the 
name  of  Paul,  but  Silas  felt  no  scruple  in  being 
called  by  the  name  Sylvanus,  though  that  was 
the  name  of  a  heathen  deity. 

It  was  far  otjierwise  with  acquiescence  in  the 
■eating  of  heathen  meats,  which,  in  the  days  of 
the  Maccabees,  was  forced  upon  many  of  the 
Jews,  and  which,  since  the  institution  or  reinstitu- 
tion  of  Levitism  after  the  return  from  the  Exile, 
had  come  to  be  regarded  as  a  deadly  sin.  It  was 
during  the  Exile  that  such  feelings  had  acquired 
fresh  intensity.  At  first  they  do  not  seem  to 
have  prevailed.  Jehoiachin  was  a  hero  among 
the  Jews.  They  remembered  him  with  intense 
love  and  pity,  and  it  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
regarded  as  any  stain  upon  his  memory  that, 
for  years  together,  he  had,  almost  in  the  words 
of  Dan.  i.  5,  received  a  daily  allowance  from  the 
table  of  the  King  of  Babylon.* 

In  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  the  ordi- 

*  See  Ewald,  "  Gesch.  Isr.,"  vi.  654.  "They  shall  eat 
unclean  things  in  Assj'ria  "  (Hosea  ix.  3).  "  The  children 
of  Israel  shall  eat  their  defiled  bread  among  the  Gentiles  " 
■\Ezek.  iv.  13,  14). 

25 -Vol.  IV. 


nary  feeling  on  this  subject  was  very  difterent, 
for  the  religion  and  nationality  of  the  Jews  were 
at  stake.  Hence  we  read:  "  Howbeit  many  in 
Israel  were  fully  resolved  and  confirmed  in  them- 
selves not  to  eat  any  unclean  thing.  Where- 
fore they  chose  rather  to  die,  that  they  might 
not  be  defiled  with  meats,  that  they  might 
not  profane  the  holy  covenant:  so  then  they 
died."  * 

And  in  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees  we  are 
told  that  on  the  king's  birthday  Jews  "  were 
constrained  by  bitter  constraint  to  eat  of  the 
sacrifices,"  and  that  Eleazar,  one  of  the  principal 
scribes,  an  aged  and  noble-looking  man,  pre- 
ferred rather  to  be  tortured  to  death,  "  leaving 
his  death  for  an  example  of  noble  courage,  and 
a  memorial  of  value,  not  only  unto  young  men, 
but  unto  all  his  nation."  In  the  following  chap- 
ter is  the  celebrated  story  of  the  constancy  and 
cruel  death  of  seven  brethren  and  their  mother, 
when  they  preferred  martyrdom  to  tasting 
swine's  flesh.  The  brave  Judas  Maccab^eus,  with 
some  nine  companions,  withdrew  himself  into 
the  wilderness,  and  "  lived  in  the  mountains 
after  the  manner  of  beasts  with  his  company, 
who  fed  on  herbs  continually,  lest  they  should  be 
partakers  of  the  pollution."  The  tone  and  ob- 
ject of  these  narratives  are  precisely  the  same 
as  the  tone  and  object  of  the  stories  in  the  Book 
of  Daniel:  and  we  can  well  imagine  how  the 
heroism  of  resistance  would  be  encouraged  in 
every  Jew  who  read  those  narratives  or  traditions 
of  former  days  of  persecution  and  difficulty. 
"  This  Book,"  says  Ewald,  "  fell  like  a  glowing 
spark  from  a  clear  heaven  upon  a  surface  which 
was  already  intensely  heated  far  and  wide,  and 
waiting  to  burst  into  flames." 

It  may  be  doubtful  whether  such  views  as  to 
ceremonial  defilement  were  already  developed 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Babylonian  Captivity.! 
The  Maccabean  persecution  left  them  ingrained 
in  the  habits  of  the  people,  and  Josephus  tells 
us  a  contemporary  story  which  reminds  us  of 
that  of  Daniel  and  his  companions.  He  says  that 
certain  priests,  who  were  friends  of  his  own,  had 
been  imprisoned  in  Rome,  and  that  he  en- 
deavoured t9  procure  their  release,  "  especially 
because  I  was  informed  that  they  were  not  un- 
mindful of  piety  towards  God,  but  supported 
themselves  with  figs  and  nuts,"  because  in  such 
eating  of  dry  food  {^■r]po<payla.  as  it  was  called) 
there  was  no  chance  of  heathen  defilement.:}:  It 
need  hardly  be  added  that  when  the  time  came 
to  break  down  the  partition-wall  which  separated 
Jewish  particularism  from  the  universal  brother- 
hood of  mankind  redeemed  in  Christ,  the  Apos- 
tles— especially  St.  Paul — had  to  show  the 
meaningless  nature  of  many  distinctions  to  which 
the  Jews  attached  consummate  importance.  The 
Talmud  abounds  in  stories  intended  to  glorify 
the  resoluteness  with  which  the  Jews  maintained 
their  stereotyped  Levitism;" but  Christ  taught,  to 
the  astonishment  of  the  Pharisees  and  even  of 
the  disciples,  that  it  is  not  what  entereth  into 
a  man  which  makes  him  unclean,  but  the  un- 
clean  thoughts  which  come  from  within,   from 

,    *  Mace.  i.  62,  63. 

tMr.  Bevan  says  that  the  verb  for  "defile  "  (7XJ).  as  a 
ritual  term  for  the  idea  of  ceremonial  uncleanness,  is  post- 
exilic  :  the  Pentateuch  and  Ezekiel  used  ^<C0  ("Com- 
ment.," p.  61.)  The  idea  intended  is  that  the  three  boys 
avoided  meat  which  might  have  been  killed  with  the 
blood  and  offered  to  idols,  and  therefore  was  not 
"  Kashar  "  (Exod.  xxxiv.  15). 

±  Jos..  "  Vit.."  iii.    Comp.  Isa.  lii.  11. 


386 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL 


the  heart.*  And  this  He  said,  Kadapl^(i)v  irdvra 
Tct  ppii/Mara — i.  e.,  abolishing  thereby  the  Le- 
vitic  Law,  and  "  making  all  meats  clean."  Yet, 
even  after  this,  it  required  nothing  less  than  that 
Divine  vision  on  the  tanner's  roof  at  Joppa  to 
convince  Peter  that  he  was  not  to  call  "  com- 
mon "  what  God  had  cleansed, f  and  it  required 
all  the  keen  insight  and  fearless  energy  of  St. 
Paul  to  prevent  the  Jews  from  keeping  an  in- 
tolerable yoke  upon  their  own  necks,  and  also 
laying  it  upon  the  necks  of  the  Gentiles. t 

The  four  princely  boys — they  may  have  been 
from  twelve  to  fourteen  years  old  § — determined 
not  to  share  in  the  royal  dainties,  and  begged 
the  Sar-hassarisim  to  allow  them  to  live  on  pulse 
and  water,  rather  than  on  the  luxuries  in  which 
— for  them — lurked  a  heathen  pollution.  The 
eunuch  not  unnaturally  demurred.  The  daily 
rations  were  provided  from  the  royal  table.  He 
was  responsible  to  the  king  for  the  beauty  and 
health,  as  well  as  for  the  training,  of  his  young 
scholars;  and  if  Nebuchadrezzar  saw  them  look- 
ing more  meagre  or  haggard  ||  than  the  rest  of 
the  captives  and  other  pages,  the  chamberlain's 
head  might  pay  the  forfeit. it  But  Daniel,  like 
Joseph  in  Egypt,  had  inspired  afifection  among 
his  captors;  and  since  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 
regarded  him  "  with  favour  and  tender  love,"  he 
was  the  more  willing  to  grant,  or  at  least  to 
connive  at,  the  fulfilment  of  the  boy's  wish.  So 
Daniel  gained  over  the  Melzar  (or  steward?),** 
who  was  in  immediate  charge  of  the  boys,  and 
begged  him  to  try  the  experiment  for  ten  days. 
If  at  the  end  of  that  time  their  health  or  beauty 
had  suffered,  the  question  might  be  reconsidered. 

So  for  ten  days  the  four  faithful  children  were 
fed  on  water,  and  on  the  "  seeds  " — i.  e.,  vege- 
tables, dates,  raisins,  and  other  fruits,  which  are 
here  generally  called  "  pulse."  tf  At  the  end  of 
the  ten  days— a  sort  of  mystic  Persian  week  $$ — 
they  were  found  to  be  fairer  and  fresher  than  all 
the  other  captives  of  the  palace. §§  Thenceforth 
they  were  allowed  without  hindrance  to  keep 
the  customs  of  their  country. 

Nor  was  this  all.  During  the  three  proba- 
tionary years  they  continued  to  flourish  intel- 
lectually as  well  as  physically.  They  attained 
to  conspicuous  excellence  "  in  all  kinds  of  books 
and  wisdom,"  and  Daniel  also  had  understanding 
in  all  kinds  of  dreams  and  visions,  to  which  the 
Chaldeans  attached  supreme  importance.||||     The 

*  Mark  vii.  19  (according  to  the  tru-«  reading  and 
translation). 

+  Acts  X.  14. 

X  I  Cor.  xi.  25.  This  rigorism  was  specially  valued  by 
the  Essenes  and  Therapeutae.  See  Derenbourg,  "  Pales- 
tine," note,  vi. 

§  Plato,  "Alcib.,"  i.  37;Xen.,  "  Cyrop.,"  i.  a.  Youths 
entered  the  king's  service  at  the  a^e  of  .seventeen. 

II  Lit.  "sadder."     LXX.,  <ricv9pa)7rot'. 

1  LXX.,  Kt.vSvvev(T<t>  Tw  i£i'(i)  Tpap^TjAo). 

**  Perhaps  the  Assyrian  matstsara,  "guardian"  (De- 
litzsch).  There  are  various  other  guesses  (Behrmann, 
p.  5). 

t+ Heb.,2"'V  V. '  LXX.,  o-Trep/iiaTa;  VnXs-y  legumtna.    Abn 

Ezra  took  the  word  to  mean  "  rice."  Com.  Deut.  xii.  15, 
16;  I  Sam.  xvii.  17,  18.  Comp.  Josephus("  Vit.,"  iii.),  who 
tells  us  how  the  Jewish  priests,  prisoners  in  Rome,  fed  on 
cruKoi^  Kal  Kapvois. 

XX  Ewald,  "Antiquities,"  p.  131  f. 

§4  Pusey  (p.  17)  quotes  from  Chardin's  notes  in  Harmer 
("  Obs.,"  lix.) :  "  I  have  remarked  that  the  countenance  of 
the  Kechicks  (monks)  are,  in  fact,  more  rosy  and  smooth 
than  those  of  others,  and  that  those  who  fast  much  are, 
notwithstanding,  very  beautiful,  sparkling  with  health, 
with  a  clear  and  lively  countenance." 

nil  The  Chartutnmitn  are  like  the  Egyptian  tepoypon^iaTeis. 
It  is  difficult  to  conceive  that  there  was  less  chance  of 
pollution  in  being  elaborately  trained  in  heathen  magic 
and  dream-interpretation  than  in  eating  Babylonian  food. 


Jews  exulted  in  these  pictures  of  four  youths  of 
their  own  race  who,  though  they  were  strangers 
in  a  strange  land,  excelled  all  their  alien  com- 
peers in  their  own  chosen  fields  of  learning. 
There  were  already  two  such  pictures  in  Jewish 
history, — that  of  the  youthful  Moses,  learned  in 
all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  and  a  great 
man  and  a  prince  among  the  magicians  of 
Pharaoh;  and  that  of  Joseph,  who,  though  there 
were  so  many  Egyptian  diviners,  alone  could 
interpret  dreams,  whether  in  the  dungeon  or  at 
the  foot  of  the  throne.  A  third  picture,  that  of 
Daniel  at  the  court  of  Babylon,  is  now  added  to 
them,  and  in  all  three  cases  the  glory  is  given 
directly,  not  to  them,  but  to  the  God  of  heaven, 
the  God  of  their  fathers. 

At  the  close  of  the  three  years  the  prince  of  the 
eunuchs  brought  all  his  young  pages  into  the 
presence  of  the  King  Nebuchadrezzar.  He 
tested  them  by  familiar  conversation,*  and 
found  the  four  Jewish  lads  superior  to  all  the 
rest.  They  were  therefore  chosen  "  to  stand  be- 
fore the  king  " — in  other  words,  to  become  his 
personal  attendants.  As  this  gave  free  access 
to  his  presence,  it  involved  a  position  not  only 
of  high  honour,  but  of  great  influence.  And 
their  superiority  stood  the  test  of  time.  When- 
ever the  king  consulted  them  on  matters  which 
required  "  wisdom  of  understanding,"  he  found 
them  not  only  better,  but  "  ten  times  better," 
than  all  the  "  magicians  "  and  "  astrologers  " 
that  were  in  all   his  realm. f 

The  last  verse  of  the  chapter,  "  And  Daniel 
continued  even  unto  the  first  year  of  King  Cy- 
rus," is  perhaps  a  later  gloss,  for  it  appears  from 
x.  I  that  Daniel  lived,  at  any  rate,  till  the  third 
year  of  Cyrus.  Abn  Ezra  adds  the  words  "  con- 
tinued in  Babylon,"  and  Ewald  "  at  the  king's 
court."  Some  interpret  "  continued  "  to  mean 
"  remained  alive."  The  reason  for  mentioning 
"  the  first  year  of  Cyrus  "  may  be  to  show  that 
Daniel  survived  the  return  from  the  Exile,t  and 
also  to  mark  the  fact  that  he  attained  a  great 
age.  For  if  he  were  about  fourteen  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  narrative,  he  would  be  eighty-five 
in  the  first  year  of  Cyrus.  Dr.  Pusey  remarks: 
"  Simple  words,  but  what  a  volume  of  tried 
faithfulness  is  unrolled  by  them!  Amid  all  the 
intrigues  indigenous  at  all  times  in  dynasties  of 
Oriental  despotism,  amid  all  the  envy  towards  a 
foreign  captive  in  high  office  as  a  king's  coun- 
cillor, amid  all  the  trouble  incidental  to  the  in- 
sanity of  the  king  and  the  murder  of  two  of  his 
successors,  in  that  whole  critical  period  for  his 
people,   Daniel  continued."  § 

But  this  was,  so  to  speak,  extra  fabtilam.  It  did  not  enter 
into  the  writer's  scheme  of  moral  edification.  If,  how- 
ever, the  story  is  meant  to  imply  that  these  youths 
accepted  the  heathen  training,  though  (as  we  know  from 
tablets  and  inscriptions)  the  incantations,  etc.,  in  which  it 
abounded  were  intimately  connected  with  idolatry,  and 
were  en'.ire'.y  unharmed  by  it,  this  may  indicate  that  the 
writer  did  not  disapprove  of  the  "Greek  training"  which 
Antiochus  tried  to  introduce,  so  far  as  it  merely  involved 
an  acquaintance  with  Greek  learning  and  literature. 
This  is  the  view  of  Gratz.  If  so,  the  writer  belonged  to  the 
more  liberal  Jewish  school  which  did  not  object  to  a  study 
of  the  "Chokmath  Javanith,"  or  "Wisdom  of  Javan  " 
(Derenbourg,  "  Palestine,  p.  361). 

*  LXX.,  iMKriae  |u,€t'  cvtujv.  Considering  the  normal 
degradation  of  pages  at  Oriental  courts,  of  which  Rycaut 
(referred  to  by  Pusey,  p.  18)  "  gives  a  horrible  account," 
their  escape  from  the  corruption  around  them  was  a 
blessed  reward  of  their  faithfulness.  They  may  now 
have  been  seventeen,  the  age  for  entering  the  king's 
service  (Xen.,  "Cyrop.,"  I.  ii.  8).  On  the  ordinary  curse 
of  the  rule  of  eunuchs  at  Eastern  courts  see  an  interesting 
note  in  Pusey,  p.  21. 

t  On  the  names  see  Gesenius,  "  Isaiah,"  ii.  355. 

X  Alluded  to  in  ix.  25.  §  '*  Daniel,"  pp.  20.  at. 


THE    DREAM-IMAGE    OF    RUINED    EMPIRES. 


3«7 


The  domestic  anecdote  of  this  chapter,  like 
the  other  more  splendid  narratives  which  suc- 
ceed it,  has  a  value  far  beyond  the  circumstances 
in  which  it  may  have  originated.  It  is  a  beauti- 
ful moral  illustration  of  the  blessings  which  at- 
tend on  faithfulness  and  on  temperance,  and 
whether  it  be  an  Haggada  or  an  historic 
tradition,  it  equally  enshrines  the  same  noble 
lesson  as  that  which  was  taught  to  all  time  by 
the  early  stories  of  the  Books  of  Genesis  and 
Exodus.* 

It  teaches  the  crown  and  blessing  of  faithful- 
ness. It  was  the  highest  glory  of  Israel  "  to 
uplift  among  the  nations  the  banner  Of  righteous- 
ness." It  matters  not  that,  in  this  particular  in- 
stance, the  Jewish  boys  were  contending  for  a 
mere  ceremonial  rule  which  in  itself  was  imma- 
terial, or  at  any  rate  of  no  eternal  significance. 
Suffice  it  that  this  rule  presented  itself  to  them 
in  the  guise  of  a  principle  and  of  a  sacred  duty, 
exactly  as  it  did  to  Eleazar  the  Scribe,  and  Judas 
the  Maccabee,  and  the  Mother  and  her  seven 
strong  sons  in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
They  regarded  it  as  a  duty  to  their  laws,  to  their 
country,  to  their  God;  and  therefore  upon  them 
it  was  sacredly  incumbent.  And  they  were  faith- 
ful to  it.  Among  the  pampered  minions  and 
menials  of  the  vast  Babylonian  palace — undaz- 
zled  by  the  glitter  of  earthly  magnificence,  un- 
tempted  by  the  allurements  of  pomp,  pleasure, 
and  sensuous  indulgence — 

"  Amid  innumerable  false,  unmoved, 
Unshaken,  unseduced,  unterrified. 
Their  lo}'alty  they  kept,  their  faith,  their  love." 

And  because  God  loves  them  for  their  con- 
stancy, because  they  remain  pure  and  true,  all 
the  Babylonian  varletry  around  them  learns  the 
lesson  of  simplicity,  the  beauty  of  holiness. 
Amid  the  outpourings  of  the  Divine  favour  they 
flourish,  and  are  advanced  to  the  highest  hon- 
ours. This  is  one  great  lesson  which  dominates 
the  historic  section  of  this  Book:  "  Them  that 
honour  Me  I  will  honour,  and  they  that  despise 
Me  shall  be  lightly  esteemed."  It  is  the  lesson 
of  Joseph's  superiority  to  the  glamour  of  tempta- 
tion in  the  house  of  Potiphar;  of  the  choice  of 
Moses,  preferring  to  suffer  affliction  with  the 
people  of  God  rather  than  all  the  treasures  of 
Egypt  and  "  to  be  called  the  son  of  Pharaoh's 
daughter";  of  Samuel's  stainless  innocence  be- 
side the  corrupting  example  of  Eli's  sons;  of 
David's  strong,  pure,  ruddy  boyhood  as  a 
shepherd-lad  on  Bethlehem's  hills.  It  is  the  an- 
ticipated story  of  that  yet  holier  childhood  of 
Him  who — subject  to  His  parents  in  the  sweet 
vale  of  Nazareth — blossomed  "  like  the  flower 
of  roses  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  and  as  lilies 
by  the  water-courses."  The  young  human  be- 
ing who  grows  up  in  innocence  and  self-control 
grows  up  also  in  grace  and  beauty,  in  wisdom 
and  "  in  favour  with  God  and  man."  The  Jews 
specially  delighted  in  these  pictures  of  boyish 
continence  and  piety,  and  they  lay  at  the  basis 
of  all  that  was  greatest  in  their  national 
character. 

But  there  also  lay  incidentally  in  the  story  a 
warning  against  corrupting  luxury,  the  lesson 
of  the  need  for,  and  the  healthfulness  of, 

"The  rule  of  not  too  much  by  temperance  taught." 

"  The  love  of  sumptuous  food  and  delicious 
drinks   is  never  good,"   says   Ewald,   "  and   with 

*Comp.  Gen.  xxxix.  21;  i  Kings  viii.  50;  Neb.  i.  i; 
Psalm  cvi.  46. 


the  use  of  the  most  temperate  diet  body  and 
soul  can  flourish  most  admirably,  as  experience 
had  at  that  time  sufficiently  taught." 

To  the  value  of  this  lesson  the  Nazarites 
among  the  Jews  were  a  perpetual  witness.  Jere- 
miah seems  to  single  them  out  for  the  special 
beauty  which  resulted  from  their  youthful  absti- 
nence when  he  writes  of  Jerusalem,  "  Her  Naz- 
arites were  purer  than  snow,  they  were  whiter 
than  milk,  they  were  more  ruddy  in  body  than 
rubies,  their  polishing  was  of  sapphires."  * 

It  is  the  lesson  which  Milton  reads  in  the 
story  of  Samson, — 

"  O  madness  !  to  think  use  of  strongest  wines 
And  strongest  drinks  our  chief  support  of  health, 
When  God,  with  these  forbidden,  made  choice  to  rear 
His  mighty  champion,  strong  above  compare. 
Whose  drink  was  only  from  the  liquid  brook  ! '' 

It  is  the  lesson  which  Shakespeare  inculcates 
when  he  makes  the  old  man  say  in  "  As  You 
Like  It,"— 

"  When  I  was  young  I  never  did  apply 
Hot  and  rebellious  liquors  in  my  blood. 
Nor  did  not  with  unblushful  forehead  woo 
The  means  of  weakness  and  debility  ; 
Therefore  mine  age  is  as  a  lusty  winter, 
Frosty,  yet  kindly." 

The  writer  of  this  Book  connects  intellectual 
advance  as  well  as  physical  strength  with  this 
abstinence,  and  here  he  is  supported  even  by  an- 
cient and  pagan  experience.  Something  of  this 
kind  may  perhaps  lurk  in  the  Apiffrov  fi^u  vdoip 
of  Pindar;  and  certainly  Horace  saw  that  glut- 
tony and  repletion  are  foes  to  insight  when  he 
wrote, — 

"Nam  corpus  onustum 
Hesternis  vitiis  animum  quoque  praegravat  una, 
Atque  affigit  humo  di  vinae   particulam  auras."  t 

Pythagoras  was  not  the  only  ancient  philosopher 
who  recommended  and  practised  a  vegetable  diet, 
and  even  Epicurus,  whom  so  many  regard  as 

"  The  soft  garden's  rose-encircled  child. 

placed  over  his  garden  door  the  inscription  that 
those  who  came  would  only  be  regaled  on 
barley-cakes  and  fresh  water,  to  satisfy,  but  not 
to  allure,  the  appetite. 

But  the  grand  lesson  of  the  picture  is  meant 
to  be  that  the  fair  Jewish  boys  were  kept  safe 
in  the  midst  of  every  temptation  to  self- 
indulgence,  because  they  lived  as  in  God's  sight: 
and  "  he  that  holds  himself  in  reverence  and  due 
esteem  for  the  dignity  of  God's  image  upon  him, 
accounts  himself  both  a  fit  person  to  do  the 
noblest  and  godliest  deeds,  and  much  better 
worth  than  to  deject  and  defile,  with  such  de- 
basement and  pollution  as  Sin  is,  himself  so 
highly  ransomed  and  ennobled  to  a  new  friend- 
ship and  filial  relation  with  God."  + 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE  DREAM-IMAGE  OF  RUINED 
EMPIRES. 

"  With  thee  will  I  break  in  pieces  rulers  and  captains." 
— JER.  li.  23. 

The  Book  of  Daniel  is  constructed  with  con- 
summate skill  to  teach  the  mighty  lessons  which 
it  was  designed  to  bring  home  to  the  minds  of 

*  Lam.  iv.  7.  +  Hor.,  "  Sat.,"  II.  ii.  77. 

X  Milton,  "  Reason  of  Church  Government." 


388 


^.      THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


its  readers,  not  only  in  the  age  of  its  first  ap- 
pearance, but  for  ever.  It  is  a  book  which,  so 
far  from  being  regarded  as  unworthy  of  its  place 
in  the  Canon  by  those  who  cannot  accept  it  as 
either  genuine  or  authentic,  is  valued  by  many 
such  critics  as  a  very  noble  work  of  inspired 
genius,  from  which  all  the  difficulties  are  re- 
moved when  it  is  considered  in  the  light  of  its 
true  date  and  origin.  This  second  chapter  be- 
longs to  all  time.  All  that  might  be  looked  upon 
as  involving  harshnesses,  difficulties,  and  glaring 
impossibilities,  if  it  were  meant  for  literal  his- 
tory and  prediction,  vanishes  when  we  contem- 
plate it  in  its  real  perspe^rtive  as  a  lofty  specimen 
of  imaginative  fiction,  used,  like  the  parables 
of  our  Blessed  Lord,  as  the  vehicle  for  the  deep- 
est truths.  We  shall  see  how  the  imagery  of 
the  chapter  produced  a  deep  impress  on  the  im- 
agination of  the  holiest  thinkers — how  mag- 
nificent a  use  is  made  of  it  fifteen  centuries  later 
by  the  great  poet  of  medise-val  Catholicism.*  It 
contains  the  germs  of  the  only  philosophy  of 
history  which  has  stood  the  test  of  time.  It  sym- 
bolises that  ultimate  conviction  of  the  Psalmist 
that  "  God  is  the  Governor  among  the  nations." 
No  other  conviction  can  suffice  to  give  us  con- 
solation amid  the  perplexity  which  surrounds  the 
passing  phases  of  the  destinies  of  empires. 

The  first  chapter  serves  as  a  keynote  of  soft, 
simple,  and  delightful  music  by  way  of  over- 
ture. It  calms  us  for  the  contemplation  of  the 
awful  and  tumultuous  scenes  that  are  now  in 
succession  to  be  brought  before  us. 

The  model  which  the  writer  has  had  in  view  in 
this  Haggadah  is  the  forty-first  chapter  of  the 
Book  of  Genesis.  In  both  chapters  we  have 
magnificent  heathen  potentates — Pharaoh  of 
Egypt,  and  Nebuchadrezzar  of  Babylon.  In 
both  chapters  the  kings  dream  dreams  by  which 
they  are  profoundly  troubled.  In  both,  their 
spirits  are  saddened.  In  both,  they  send  for  all 
the  "  Chakamim  "  and  all  the  "  Chartummim  " 
of  their  kingdoms  to  interpret  the  dreams.  In 
both,  these  professional  magicians  prove  them- 
selves entirely  incompetent  to  furnish  the  inter- 
pretation. In  both,  the  failure  of  the  heathen 
oneirologists  is  emphasised  by  the  immediate 
success  of  a  Jewish  captive.  In  both,  the  cap- 
tives are  described  as  young,  gifted,  and  beauti- 
ful. In  both,  the  interpretation  of  the  King's 
dream  is  rewarded  by  the  elevation  to  princely 
civil  honours.  In  both,  the  immediate  elevation 
to  ruling  position  is  followed  by  life-long  faith- 
fulness and  prosperity.  When  we  add  that  there 
are  even  close  verbal  resemblances  between  the 
chapters,  it  is  difficult  not  to  believe  that  the 
one  has  been  influenced  by  the  other. 

The  dream  is  placed  "  in  the  second  year  of 
the  reign  of  Nebuchadrezzar."  The  date  is  sur- 
prising; for  the  first  chapter  has  made  Nebuchad- 
rezzar a  king  of  Babylon  after  the  siege  of  Je- 
rusalem "in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim";  and 
setting  aside  the  historic  impossibilities  involved 
in  that  date,  this  scene  would  then  fall  in  the 
second  year  of  the  probation  of  Daniel  and  his 
companions,  and  at  a  time  when  Daniel  could 
only  have  been  a  boy  of  fifteen. f     The  apologists 

fet  over  the  difficulty  with  the  ease  which  suf- 
•es    superficial    readers    who    are    already    con- 
"'•nced.     Thus   Rashi  says  "  the  second  year  of 

*  Dante,  "Inferno,"  xiv.  04-120. 

+  The  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  kings,  however,  only 
dated  their  reigns  f'-om  •■he  first  new  year  after  their 
accessioQ. 


Nebuchadnezzar,"  meaning  "  the  second  year 
after  the  destruction  of  the  Temple,"  i.  e.,  his 
twentieth  year!  Josephus,  no  less  arbitrarily, 
makes  it  mean  "  the  second  year  after  the  dev- 
astation of  Egypt."  *  By  suc'h  devices  anything 
may  stand  for  anything.  Hengstenberg  and  his 
school,  after  having  made  Nebuchadrezzar  a 
king,  conjointly  with  his  father — a  fact  of  which 
history  knows  nothing,  and  indeed  seems  to  ex- 
clude— say  that  the  second  year  of  his  reign 
does  not  mean  the  second  year  after  he  became 
king,  but  the  second  year  of  his  independent 
rule  after  the  death  of  Nabopolassar.  This  style 
of  interpretation  is  very  familiar  among  har- 
monists, and  it  makes  the  interpretation  of 
Scripture  perpetually  dependent  on  pure  fancy. 
It  is  perhaps  sufficient  to  say  that  Jewish  writers, 
in  works  meant  for  spiritual  teaching,  troubled 
themselves  extremely  little  with  minutiae  of  this 
kind.  Like  the  Greek  dramatists,  they  were  un- 
concerned with  details,  to  which  they  attached 
no  importance,  which  they  regarded  as  lying  out- 
side the  immediate  purpose  of  their  narrative. 
But  if  any  explanation  be  needful,  the  simplest 
way  is,  with  Ewald,  Herzfeld,  and  Lenormant, 
to  make  a  slight  alteration  in  the  text,  and  to 
read  "  in  the  tivelfth  "  instead  of  "  in  the  second 
year  of  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar." 

There  was  nothing  strange  in  the  notion  that 
God  should  have  vouchsafed  a  prophetic  dream 
to  a  heathen  potentate.  Such  instances  had  al- 
ready been  recorded  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh  (Gen. 
xli.),  as  well  as  of  his  chief  courtiers  (Gen.  xl.); 
and  in  the  case  of  Abimelech  (Gen.  xx.  5-7). 
It  was  also  a  Jewish  tradition  that  it  was  in  con- 
sequence of  a  dream  that  Pharaoh  Necho  had 
sent  a  warning  to  Josiah  not  to  advance  against 
him  to  the  Battle  of  Megiddo.f  Such  dreams  are 
recorded  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  as  having 
occurred  to  Assyrian  monarchs.  Ishtar,  the 
goddess  of  battles,  had  appeared  to  Assur-bani- 
pal,  and  promised  him  safety  in  his  war  against 
Teumman,  King  of  Elam;  and  the  dream  of  a 
seer  had  admonished  him  to  take  severe  steps 
against  his  rebel  brother,  the  Viceroy  of  Bab- 
ylon. Gyges,  King  of  Lydia,  had  been  warned 
in  a  dream  to  make  alliance  with  Assur-bani-pal. 
In  Egypt  Amen-meri-hout  had  been  warned  by 
a  dream  to  unite  Egypt  against  the  Assyrians.  5: 
Similarly  in  Persian  history  Afrasiab  has  an 
ominous  dream,  and  summons  all  the  astrologers 
to  interpret  it;  and  some  of  them  bid  him  pay 
no  attention  to  it.§  Xerxes  (Herod.,  iii.  19) 
and  Astyages  (Herod.,  i.  108)  have  dreams  in- 
dicative of  future  prosperity  or  adversity.  The 
fundamental  conception  of  the  chapter  was 
therefore  in  accordance  with  history  || — though 
to  say,  with  the  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  that 
these  parallels  "  endorse  the  authenticity  of  the 
Biblical  narratives,"  is  either  to  use  inaccurate 
terms,  or  to  lay  the  unhallowed  fire  of  false 
argument  on  the  sacred  altar  of  truth.  It  is  im- 
possible to  think  without  a  sigh  of  the  vast 
amount  which  would  have  to  be  extracted  from 
so-called  "  orthodox  "  commentaries,  if  such  pas- 

*"  Antt.,"  X.  X.  3.  ,  _  ,  ^,. 

t  2  Chron.  xxxv.  21.     See  "  The  Second  Book  of  King^, 
p   440  (Expositor's  Bible), 
t  See  Professor  Fuller,  "Speaker  s    Commentary,'    vi. 

265.  .    „  . 

§  Malcolm,  "Hist,  of  Persia,    1.39.      ^    ,. 

li  The  belief  that  dreams  come  from  God  is  not  peculiar 
to  the  Jews,  or  to  Egypt,  or  Assyria,  or  Greece  (Horn., 
"II.,"  i.  62:  ■' Od.,"  iv.  841),  or  Rome  (Cic,  "  De  Div.," 
passim).,  but  to  every  nation  of  mankind,  even  the  most 
savage. 


THE    DREAM-IMAGE    OF    RUINED    EMPIRES. 


389 


sages  were  rigidly  reprobated  as  a  dishonour  to 
the  cause  of  God. 

Nebuchadrezzar  then — in  the  second  or  twelfth 
year  of  his  reign — dreamed  a  dream,  by  which 
(as  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh)  his  spirit  was  trou- 
bled and  his  sleep  interrupted.*  His  state  of 
mind  on  waking  is  a  psychological  condition 
with  which  we  are  all  familiar.  We  awake  in  a 
tremor.  We  have  seen  something  which  dis- 
quieted us,  but  we  cannot  recall  what  it  was;  we 
have  had  a  frightful  dream,  but  we  can  only 
remember  the  terrifying  impression  which  it  has 
left  upon  our  minds. 

Pharaoh,  in  the  story  of  Joseph,  remembered 
his  dreams,  and  only  asked  the  professors  of 
necromancy  to  furnish  him  with  its  interpreta- 
tion. But  Nebuchadrezzar  is  here  represented 
as  a  rasher  and  fiercer  despot,  not  without  a  side- 
glance  at  the  raging  folly  and  tyranny  of  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes.  He  has  at  his  command  an 
army  of  priestly  prognosticators.  whose  main 
function  it  is  to  interpret  the  various  omens  of 
the  future.  Of  what  use  were  they,  if  they  could 
not  be  relied  upon  in  so  serious  an  exigency?^ 
Were  they  to  be  maintained  in  opulence  and 
dignity  all  their  lives,  only  to  fail  him  at  a 
crisis?  It  was  true  that  he  had  forgotten  the 
dream,  but  it  was  obviously  one  of  supreme  im- 
portance; it  was  obviously  an  intimation  from 
the  gods:  was  it  not  clearly  their  duty  to  say 
what  it  meant? 

So  Nebuchadrezzar  summoned  together  the 
whole  class  of  Babylonian  augurs  in  all  their 
varieties — the  Chartummim,  "  magicians,"  or 
book-learned;  f  the  Ashshaphm,  "  enchant- 
ers "  ;  X  the  Mekashaphim,  "  sorcerers  "  ;  §  and 
the  Kasdhn,  to  which  the  writer  gives 
the  long  later  sense  of  "  dream-interpreters," 
which  had  become  prevalent  in  his  own  day.  || 
In  later  verses  he  adds  two  further  sections  of 
the  students — the  Khakhamim,  "  wise  men,"  and 
the  Gazerim,  or  "  sooth-sayers."  Attempts 
have  often  been  made,  and  most  recently 
by  Lenormant,  to  distinguish  accurately  be- 
tween these  classes  of  magi,  but  the  attempts 
evaporate  for  the  most  part  into  shadowy  ety- 
mologies.^ It  seems  to  have  been  a  literary 
habit  with  the  author  to  amass  a  number  of 
names  and  titles  together.**  It  is  a  part  of  the 
stateliness  and  leisureliness  of  style  which  he 
adopts,  and  he  gives  no  indication  of  any  sense 
of  diflference  between  the  classes  which  he  enu- 
merates, either  here  or  when  he  describes  various 
ranks  of  Babylonian  officials. 

When  they  were  assembled  before  him,  the 
king  informed  them  that  he  had  dreamed  an  im- 
portant dream,  but  that  it  produced  such  agita- 
tion  of  spirit  as   had  caused  him   to   forget  its 

♦Dan.  ii.  i:  "His  dreaming  brake  from  him."  Comp. 
vi.  18;  Esther vi.  i  :  Jerome  says,  "Umbra  quaedam,  et, 
ut  ita  dicam,  aura  somnii  atque  vestigium  remansit  in 
corde  regis,  ut,  referentibus  aliis  posset  reminisci  eorum 
quae  viderat." 

+  Gen.  xli.  8  ;  Schrader,  "  K.  A.  T.,"  p.  26  ;  "  Records  of 
the  Past,"  i.  136. 

tThe  word  is  peculiar  to  Daniel,  both  here  in  the 
Hebrew  and  in  the  Aramaic.  Pusey  calls  it  "a  common 
Syriac  term,  representing  some  form  of  divination  with 
which  Daniel  had  become  familiar  in  Babylonia  "  (p.  40.). 

§  Exod.  vii.  II ;  Deut.  xviii.  10  ;  Isa.  xlvii.  g,  12.  Assyrian 
Jiashs/iapu. 

II  As  in  the  rule,  Chaldceos  ne  consulito.     See  supra,  p.  366. 

^The  equivalents  in  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  A.  V.,  and 
other  versions  are  mostly  based  on  uncertain  guess-work. 
See  E.  Meyer,  "  Gesch.  d.  Alterth.,"'  i.  185;  Hommel, 
"Gesch.  Bab.  u.  Assyr.,"  v.  386  ;  Behrmann,  p.  2. 

**  E.g..  iii.  2,  3,  officers  of  state  ;  iii.  4,  5,  etc.,  instru- 
ments of  music  ;  iii.  21,  clothes. 


import.*  He  plainl}^  expected  them  to  supply 
the  failure  of  his  rnemory,  for  "  a  dream  not 
interpreted,"  say  the  Rabbis,  "  is  like  a  letter 
not  read."f 

Then  spake  the  Chaldeans  to  the  king,  and 
their  answer  follows  in  Aramaic  ("  Aramith  "), 
a  language  which  continues  to  be  used  till  the 
end  of  chap.  vii.  The  Western  Aramaic,  how- 
ever, here  employed  could  not  have  been  the 
language  in  which  they  spoke,  but  their  native 
Babylonian,  a  Semitic  dialect  more  akin  to 
Eastern  Aramaic.  The  word  "  Aramith  "  here, 
as  in  Ezra  iv.  7,  is  probably  a  gloss  or  marginal 
note,  to  point  out  the  sudden  change  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Book. 

With  the  courtly  phrase,  "  O  king,  live  for 
ever,"  they  promised  to  tell  the  king  the  inter- 
pretation, if  he  would  tell  them  the  dream. 

"  That  I  cannot  do,"  said  the  king,  "  for  it  is 
gone  from  me.  Nevertheless,  if  you  do  not  tell 
me  both  the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  you 
shall  be  hacked  limb  by  limb,  and  your  houses 
shall  be  made  a  dunghill."  % 

The  language  was  that  of  brutal  despotism 
such  as  had  been  customary  for  centuries  among 
the  ferocious  tyrants  of  Assyria.  The  punish- 
ment of  dismemberment,  dichotomy,  or  death  by 
mutilation  was  comm  n  among  them,  and  had 
constantly  been  depicted  on  their  monuments. 
It  was  doubtless  known  to  the  Babylonians  also, 
being  familiar  to  the  apathetic  cruelty  of  the 
East.  Similarly  the  turning  of  the  houses  of 
criminals  into  draught-houses  was  a  vengeance 
practised  among  other  nations. §  On  the  other 
hand,  if  the  "  Chaldeans "  arose  to  the  occa- 
sion, the  king  would  give  them  rewards  and 
great  honours.  It  is  curious  to  observe  that  the 
Septuagint  translators,  with  Antiochus  in  their 
mind,  render  the  verse  in  a  form  which  would 
more  directly  remind  their  readers  of  Seleucid 
methoSs.  "  If  you  fail,"  they  make  the  king 
say,  "  you  shall  be  made  an  example,  and  your 
goods  shall  be  forfeited  to  the  crown."  !| 

With  "  nervous  servility  "  the  magi  answer  to 
the  king's  extravagantly  unreasonable  demand, 
that  he  must  tell  them  the  dream  before  they 
can  tell  him  the  interpretation.  Ewald  is  proba- 
bly not  far  wrong  in  thinking  that  a  subtle  ele- 
ment of  irony  and  humour  underlies  this  scene. 
It  was  partly  intended  as  a  satirical  reflection  on 
the  mad  vagaries  of  Epiphanes. 

For  the  king  at  once  breaks  out  into  fury, 
and  tells  them  that  they  only  want  to  gain  (lit. 
■'buy")  time;^  but  that  this  should  not  avail 
them.  The  dream  had  evidently  been  of  crucial 
significance  and  extreme  urgency;  something  im- 

*  ii.  5  :  "  The  dream  is  gone  from  me,"  as  in  ver.  8 
(Theodotion,  an-eo-n)).  But  the  meaning  may  be  the  decree 
(or  word)  is  "  sure  "  :  for,  according  to  Noldeke,  azda  is  a 
Persian  word  iox  ^^  certain.'"  Comp.  Esther  vii.  7;  Isa. 
xlv.  23. 

t"  Berachoth,"  f.  10,  2.  This  book  supplies  a  charm  tc 
be  spoken  by  one  who  has  forgottenhis  dream  (f.  55,  2). 

JDan.  ii.  5,  iii.  20.  Theodot.,  ti?  aTrojAfi'ai/  i<jt<j9i.  Lit. 
"  ye  shall  be  made  into  limbs."  The  LXX.  render  it  by 
Sta/ueAt'^o/Liai,  membratint  concidor,  in  frusta  fio.  Comp. 
Matt.  xxiv.  51;  Smith's  "  Assur-bani-pal,"  p.  137,  The 
word  haddant,  "  a  limb,"  seems  to  be  of  Persian  origin — 
in  modern  Persian  andam.  Hence  the  verb  haditn  in  the 
Tar^um  of  i  Kings  xviii.  33.  Comp.  2  Mace.  i.  16,  /xe'ATj 
■noK.nv. 

JComp.  Ezra  vi.  11  ;  2  Kings  x.  27:  "Records  of  the 
Past,"  i.  27.  43. 

I  In  iii.  q6,  xai  i\  oiKi'a  avToO  5ijju.«u9i)<r€Tai.  Comp.  2  Macc. 
iii.  13:  "But  Heliodorus,  because  of  the  king's  command- 
ment, said,  That  in  anywise  it  must  be  brought  into  the 
king's  treasury." 

1  LXX.  Theodot.,  itatpbv  i^ayopd^erf  (not  in  a  good  sense, 
as  in  Eph.  v.  16 ,  Col.  iv.  5X 


39° 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


portant,  and  perhaps  even  dreadful,  must  be  in 
the  air.  The  very  raison  d'etre  of  these  thau- 
maturgists  and  stargazers  was  to  read  the  omens 
of  the  future.  If  the  stars  told  of  any  human 
events,  they  could  not  fail  to  indicate  something 
about  the  vast  trouble  which  overshadowed  the 
monaich's  dream,  even  though  he  had  forgotten 
its  details.  The  king  gave  them  to  understand 
that  he  looked  on  them  as  a  herd  of  impostors; 
that  their  plea  for  delay  was  due  to  mere  ter- 
giversation; *  and  that,  in  spite  of  the  lying  and 
corrupt  words  which  they  had  prepared  in  order 
to  gain  respite  "  till  the  time  be  changed  "  f — 
that  is,  until  they  were  saved  by  some  "  lucky 
day  "  or  change  of  fortune  t — there  was  but  one 
sentence  for  them,  which  could  only  be  averted 
by  their  vindicating  their  own  immense  preten- 
sions, and  telling  him  his  dream. 

The  "  Chaldeans  "  naturally  answered  that  the 
king's  request  was  impossible.  The  adoption  of 
the  Aramaic  at  this  point  may  be  partly  due  to 
the  desire  for  local  colouring.§  No  king  or 
ruler  in  the  world  had  ever  imposed  such  a  test 
on  any  "  Kartum "  or  "  Ashshaph "  in  the 
world.ll  No  living  man  could  possibly  achieve 
anything  so  difficult.  There  were  some  gods 
whose  dwelling  is  with  flesh;  they  tenant  the 
souls  of  their  servants.  But  it  is  not  in  the 
power  of  these  genii  to  reveal  what  the  king 
demands;  they  are  limited  by  the  weakness  of 
the  souls  which  they  inhabit. ^f  It  can  only  be 
done  by  those  highest  divinities  whose  dwelling 
is  not  with  flesh,  but  who 

" haunt 
The  lucid  interspace  of  world  and  world," 

and  are  too  far  above  mankind  to  mingle  with 
their  thoughts.** 

Thereupon  the  unreasonable  king  was  angry 
and  very  furious,  and  the  decree  went  forth  that 
the  magi  were  to  be  slain  en  masse. 

How  it  was  that  Daniel  and  his  companions 
were  not  summoned  to  help  the  king,  although 
they  had  been  already  declared  to  be  ''  ten  times 
wiser  "  than  all  the  rest  of  the  astrologers  and 
magicians  put  together,  is  a  feature  in  the  story 
with  which  the  writer  does  not  trouble  himself, 
because  it  in  no  way  concerned  his  main  pur- 
pose.. Now,  however,  since  they  were  prominent 
members  of  the  magian  guild,  they  are  doomed 
to  death  among  their  fellows.  Thereupon 
Daniel  sought  an  interview  with  Arioch,  "  the 
chief  of  the  bodyguard,"  ft  and  asked  with  gentle 
prudence  why  the  decree  was  so  harshly  urgent. 
By  Arioch's  intervention  he  gained  an  interview 
with  Nebuchadrezzar,  and  promised  to  tell  him 
the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  if  only  the  king 

*Theodot.,  a-weOeaSe.     Cf.  John  ix.  22. 

tTheodot.,  «'<os  of  o  xaipbs  napiKdj]. 

t  Esther  iii.  7. 

§The  word  Aramith  may  be  (as  Lenormant  thinks)  a 
gloss,  as  in  Ezra  iv.  7. 

\  A  curious  parallel  is  adduced  by  Behrmann  ("Dan- 
iel," p.  7).  Rabia-ibn-nazr.  King  of  Yemen,  has  a  dream 
which  he  cannot  recall,  and  acts  precisely  as  Nebuchad- 
rezzar does  (Wiistenfeid.  p.  q). 

11  See  Lenormant,  "  La  Magie,"  pp.  181-183. 

*"■  "  LXX.,  ii.  II  :  ei  juij  ti;  o.yyi\o<;. 

tt  Lit.  "  chief  of  the  slaughter-men  "  or  "  executioners." 
lyXX  ,  apxtAtdyeipo?.  The  title  is  perhaps  taken  from  the 
■story,  which  in  this  chapter  is  so  prominently  in  the 
writer's  mind,  where  the  same  title  is  given  to  Potiphar 
'(Gen.  xxxvii.  j6).  Comp.  2  Kings  xxv.  8  ;  Jer.  xxxix.  9. 
Tne  name  Arioch  has  been  derived  from  "  Eri-aku," 
"'servant  of  the  moon-god  "  [supra,  p.  366),  but  is  found  in 
'Gen.  xiv.  I  as  the  name  of  'the  King  of  Ellasar."  It  is 
also  found  in  Judith  i.  6,  "  Arioch,  King  of  the  Elymaeans." 
An  Erim-akfl,  King  of  Larsa,  is  found  in  cuneiform. 


would  grant  him  a  little  time — perhaps  but  a 
single  night.* 

The  delay  was  conceded,  and  Daniel  went  to 
his  three  companions,  and  urged  them  to  join  in 
prayer  that  God  would  make  known  the  secret 
to  them  and  spare  their  lives.  Christ  tells  us 
that  "  if  two  shall  agree  on  earth  as  touching 
anything  that  they  ask,  it  shall  be  done  for 
them."f  The  secret  was  revealed  to  Daniel  in 
a  vision  of  the  night,  and  he  blessed  "  the  God 
of  heaven."  %  Wisdom  and  might  are  his.  Not 
dependent  on  "  lucky  "  or  "  unlucky  "  days,  He 
changeth  the  times  and  seasons;  $i  He  setteth 
down  one  king  and  putteth  up  another.  By  His 
revelation  of  deep  and  sacred  things — for  the 
light  dwelleth  with  Him — He  had,  in  answer  to 
their  common  prayer,  made  known  the  secret.  || 

Accordingly  Daniel  bids  Arioch  not  to  exe- 
cute the  magians,  but  to  go  and  tell  the  king 
that  he  will  reveal  to  him  the  interpretation  of 
his  dream. 

Then,  by  an  obvious  verbal  inconsistency  in 
the  story,  Arioch  is  represented  as  going  with 
^haste  to  the  king,  with  Daniel,  and  saying  that 
he  had  found  a  captive  Jew  who  would  answer 
the  king's  demands.  Arioch  could  never  have 
claimed  any  such  merit,  seeing  that  Daniel  had 
already  given  his  promise  to  Nebuchadrezzar  in 
person,  and  did  not  need  to  be  described.  The 
king  formally  puts  to  Daniel  the  question 
whether  he  could  fulfil  his  pledge;  and  Daniel 
answers  that,  though  none  of  the  "  Kha- 
khamim,"  "  Ashshaphim,"  "  Chartummim,"  or 
"  Gazerim"ir  could  tell  the  king  his  dream,  yet 
there  is  a  God  in  heaven — higher,  it  is  implied, 
than  either  the  genii  or  those  whose  dwelling 
is  not  with  mortals — who  reveals  secrets,  and  has 
made  known  to  the  king  what  shall  be  in  the 
latter  days.** 

The  king,  before  he  fell  asleep,  had  been  deeply 
pondering  the  issues  of  the  future;  and  God, 
"the  revealer  of  secrets,"  ft  had  revealed  those 
issues  to  him,  not  because  of  any  supreme  wis- 
dom possessed  by  Daniel,  but  simply  that  the 
interpretation  might  be  made  known. |t 

The  king  had  seen  §§  a  huge,  gleaming,  terrible 
colossus  of  many  colours  and  of  different  metals, 
but  otherwise  not  unlike  the  huge  colossi  which 
guarded  the  portals  of  his  own  palace.  Its  head 
was  of  fine  gold;  its  torso  of  silver;  its  belly 
and   thighs   of   brass;    its   legs   of   iron;    its   feet 

*  If  Daniel  went  (as  the  text  savs)  in  person^  he  must 
have  been  already  a  very  high  official.  (Comp.  Esther  v. 
I  ;  Herod.,  i.  gg.)  If  so,  it  would  have  been  strange  that 
he  should  not  have  been  consulted  among  the  magians. 
All  these  details  are  regarded  as  insignificant,  being 
extraneous  to  the  general  purport  of  the  story  (Ewald, 
"  Hist.,"  iii.  1Q4). 

t  Matt,  xviii.  19.  The  LXX.  interpolate  a  ritual  gloss: 
Kal  TrapTJyyeiAe  vy\<miav  koX  Ser)aLV  /cal  Tiixiapiav  fr)T^(roi  Trapd  toO 
Kvpiou. 

JThe  title  is  found  in  Gen.  xxiv.  7,  but  only  became 
common  after  the  Exile  (Ezra  i.  2,  vi.  9,  10 ;  Neh.  i.  5,  ii.  4). 

§  Comp  Dan.  vii.  12;  Jer.  xxvii.  7;  Acts  i.  7,  xpoi-oi  ^ 
Kaipoi :  I  Thess.  v.  i  ;  Acts  xvii.  26,  opiVas  irpoTeraynivovi 
Katpoiis. 

II  With  the  phraseology  of  this  prayer  comp.  Psalm 
xxxvi.  g,  xli.,  cxxxix.  12;  Neh.  ix.  s  ;  i  Sam.  ii.  8;  Jer. 
xxxii.  ig  ;  Job  xii.  22. 

t  Here  the  new  title  Gazeriffi,  "  prognosticators,"  is 
added  to  the  others,  and  is  equally  vague.  It  may  be 
derived  from  "  Gazar"  "to  cut  "—that  is,  "  to  determine." 

**  Comp.  Gen.  xx.  3,  xli.  25  ;  Numb.  xxii.  35. 

+t<"omp.  Gen.  xli.  45. 

XX  Dan.  ii.  30  :  "'  For  their  sakes  that  shall  make  known 
the  interpretation  to  the,  king"  CA  V.).  But  the  phrase 
seems  merely  to  be  one  of  the  vague  forms  for  the  imper- 
sonal which  are  common  in  the  "  Mishnah."  The  R.  V. 
and  Ewald  rightly  render  it  as  in  the  text. 

S§Here  we  have  (ver  31)  aloo!  "behold  !"  as  in  iv.  7,  lo, 
vii.  8  ;  but  in  vii.  2,  5,  6,  7,  13,  we  have  aroo! 


THE    DREAM-IMAGE    OF    RUINED    EMPIRES. 


;9i 


partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  clay.*  But  while  he 
gazed  upon  it  as  it  reared  into  the  sunlight,  as 
though  in  mute  defiance  and  insolent  security, 
its  grim  metallic  glare,  a  mysterious  and  unfore- 
seen fate  fell  upon  it.f  The  fragment  of  a  rock 
broke  itself  loose,  not  with  hands,  smote  the 
image  upon  its  feet  of  iron  and  clay,  and  broke 
them  to  pieces.  It  had  now  nothing  left  to  stand 
upon,  and  instantly  the  hollow  multiform  mon- 
ster collapsed  into  promiscuous  ruins.t  Its 
shattered  fragments  became  like  the  chaff  of  the 
summer  threshing-floor,  and  the  wind  swept 
them  away:>^  but  the  rock,  unhewn  by  any 
earthly  hands,  grew  over  the  fragments  into  a 
mountain  that  filled  the  earth. 

That  was  the  haunting  and  portentous  dream; 
and  this  was  its  interpretation: — 

The  head  of  gold  was  Nebuchadrezzar  himself, 
the  king  of  what  Isaiah  had  called  "  the  golden 
city  "  II — a  King  of  kings,  ruler  over  the  beasts 
of  the  field,  and  the  fowls  of  heaven,  and  the 
children  of  men.H 

After  him  should  come  a  second  and  an  in- 
ferior kingdom,  symbolised  by  the  arms  and 
heart  of  silver. 

Then  a  third  kingdom  of  brass. 

Finally  a  fourth  kingdom,  strong  and  destruc- 
tive as  iron.  But  in  this  fourth  kingdom  was  an 
element  of  weakness,  symbolked  by  the  fact  that 
the  feet  are  partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  weak 
clay.  An  attempt  should  be  made,  by  intermar- 
riages, to  give  greater  coherency  to  these  ele- 
ments; but  it  should  fail,  because  they  could  not 
intermix.  In  the  days  of  these  kings,  indicated 
by  the  ten  toes  of  the  image,  swift  destruction 
should  come  upon  the  kingdoms  from  on  high; 
for  the  King  of  heaven  should  set  up  a  kingdom 
indestructible  and  eternal,  which  should  utterly 
supersede  all  former  kingdoms.  "  The  intense 
nothingness  and  transitoriness  of  man's  might 
in  its  highest  estate,  and  the  might  of  God's 
kingdom,  are  the  chief  subjects  of  this  vision."  ** 

Volumes  have  been  written  about  the  four  em- 
pires indicated  by  the  constituents  of  the  colossus 
in  this  dream;  but  it  is  entirely  needless  to  enter 
into  them  at  length.  The  vast  majority  of  the 
interpretations  have  been  simply  due  to  a  priori 
prepossessions,  which  are  arbitrary  and  baseless. 
The  object  has  been  to  make  the  interpretations 
fit  in  with  preconceived  theories  of  prophecy,  and 
with  the  traditional  errors  about  the  date  and 
object  of  the   Book  of  Daniel.     If  we  first  see 

*  In  the  four  metals  there  is  perhaps  the  same  under- 
lying thought  as  in  the  Hesiodic  and  ancient  conceptions 
of  the  four  ages  of  the  world  (Ewald.  "  Hist.,"  i.  368). 
Comp  the  vision  of  Zoroaster  quoted  from  Delitzsch  by 
Pusey,  p  97 .  "  Zoroaster  saw  a  tree  from  whose  roots 
sprang  four  trees  of  gold,  silver,  steel,  and  brass  ;  and 
Ormuzd  said  to  him,  'This  is  the  world;  and  the  four 
trees  are  the  four  "  times  "  which  are  coming.'  After  the 
fourth  comes,  according  to  Persian  doctrine,  Sosiosh,  the 
Saviour."  Behrmann  refers  also  to  Bahman  Yesht 
(Spiegel,  "  Eran.  Alterth.,"  ii.  152';  the  Laws  of  Manu 
(Schroder,  "  Ind  Litt.,"  448) ;  and  Roth  ('•  Mythos  von  den 
Weltaltern,"  i860). 

t  Much  of  the  imagery  seems  to  have  been  suggested  by 
Jer.  li. 

t  Comp.  Rev.  XX.  11  :  koX  toito?  ovx  evpeBri  avrois. 

§  Psalm  i.  4,  ii.  9  ;  Isa.  xli.  15  ;  Jer.  li.  33,  etc. 

11  Isa.  xiv.  4. 

If  King  of  kings.  Comp.  Ezek.  xxvi.  7  :  Ezra  vii.  12  ;  Isa. 
-xx.xvi.  4.  It  is  the  Babylonian  Shar-siiarycini,  or  Sltarru- 
rabbu  (Behrmann).  The  Rablais  tried  (impossibly)  to 
construe  this  title,  which  they  thought  only  suitable  to 
God,  with  the  following  clause.  But  Nebuchadrezzar 
was  so  addressed  lEzek.  xxvi  7),  as  the  Assyrian  kings 
had  been  before  him  (Ish  x.  8),  and  the  Persian  kings 
were  after  him  (Ezra  vii.  12).  The  expression  seems 
strange,  but  comp.  Jer.  xxvii.  6,  xxviii.  14.  The  LXX.  and 
Theodotion  mistakenly  interpolate  tx9u«  t^s  floAoo-oTjs. 

**  Pusey,  p.  63. 


the  irresistible  evidence  that  the  Book  appeared 
in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  and  then 
observe  that  all  its  earthly  "  predictions "  cul- 
minate in  a  minute  description  of  his  epoch,  the 
general  explanation  of  the  four  empires,  apart 
from  an  occasional  and  a  subordinate  detail,  be- 
comes perfectly  clear.  In  the  same  way  the 
progress  of  criticism  has  elucidated  in  its  gen- 
eral outlines  the  interpretation  of  the  Book  which 
has  been  so  largely  influenced  by  the  Book  of 
Daniel— the  Revelation  of  St.  John.  The  all- 
but-unanimous  consensus  of  the  vast  majority 
of  the  sanest  and  most  competent  exegetes  now 
agrees  in  the  view  that  the  Apocalypse  was 
written  in  the  age  of  Nero,  and  that  its  tone  and 
visions  were  predominantly  influenced  by  his 
persecution  of  the  early  Christians,  as  the  Book 
of  Daniel  was  by  the  ferocities  of  Antiochus 
against  the  faithful  Jews.  Ages  of  persecution, 
in  which  plain-speaking  was  impossible  to  the 
oppressed,  were  naturally  prolific  of  apocalyptic 
cryptographs.  What  has  been  called  the  "  fu- 
turist "  interpretation  of  these  books — which, 
for  instance,  regards  the  fourth  empire  of  Daniel 
as  some  kingdom  of  Antichrist  as  yet  unmani- 
fested — is  now  universally  abandoned.  It  be- 
longs to  impossible  forms  of  exegesis,  which 
have  long  been  discredited  by  the  boundless 
variations  of  absurd  conjectures,  and  by  the  re- 
peated refutation  of  the  predictions  which  many 
have  ventured  to  base  upon  these  erroneous 
methods.  Even  so  elaborate  a  work  as  Elliott's 
"  Horae  Apocalypticas  "  would  now  be  regarded 
as  a  curious  anachronism. 

That  the  first  empire,  represented  by  the  head 
of  gold,  is  the  Babylonian,  concentrated  in  Nebu- 
chadrezzar himself,  is  undisputed,  because  it  is 
expressly  stated  by  the  writer  (ii.  7,-],  38). 

Nor  can  there  be  any  serious  doubt,  if  the 
Book  be  one  coherent  whole,  written  by  one 
author,  that  by  the  fourth  empire  is  meant,  as 
in  later  chapters,  that  of  Alexander  and  his  suc- 
cessors— "  the  Diadochi,"  as  they  are  often  called. 

For  it  must  be  regarded  as  certain  that  the 
four  elements  of  the  colossus,  which  indicate 
the  four  empires  as  they  are  presented  to  the 
imagination  of  the  heathen  despot,  are  closely 
analogous  to  the  same  four  empires  which  in  the 
seventh  chapter  present  themselves  as  wild  beasts 
out  of  the  sea  to  the  imagination  of  the  Hebrew 
seer.  Since  the  fourth  empire  is  there,  beyond 
all  question,  that  of  Alexander  and  his  successors, 
the  syrnmetry  and  purpose  of  the  Book  prove 
conclusively  that  the  fourth  empire  here  is  also 
the  Grseco-Macedonian,  strongly  and  irresistibly 
founded  by  Alexander,  but  gradually  sinking  to 
utter  weakness  by  its  own  divisions,  in  the  per- 
sons of  the  kings  who  split  his  dominion  into 
four  parts.  If  this  needed  any  confirmation,  we 
find  it  in  the  eighth  chapter,  which  is  mainly 
concerned  with  Alexander  the  Great  and  Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes;  and  in  the  eleventh  chapter, 
which  enters  with  startling  minuteness  into  the  ' 
wars,  diplomacy,  and  intermarriages  of  the  Ptol- 
emaic and  Seleucid  dynasties.  In  viii.  21  we 
are  expressly  told  that  the  strong  he-goat  is 
"  the  King  of  Grecia,"  who  puts  an  end  to  the 
kingdoms  of  Media  and  Persia.  The  arguments 
of  Hengstenberg,  Pusey,  etc.,  that  the  Greek 
Empire  was  a  civilising  and  an  ameliorating 
power,  apply  at  least  as  strongly  to  the  Roman 
Empire.  But  when  Alexander  thundered  his 
way  across  the  dreamy  East,  he  was  looked  upon 
as  a  sort  of  shattering  levin-bolt.     The  intercon- 


392 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


nection  of  these  visions  is  clearly  marked  even 
here,  for  the  juxtaposition  of  iron  and  miry  clay 
is  explained  by  the  clause  "  they  shall  mingle 
themselves  with  the  seed  of  men:  *  but  they  shall 
not  cleave  one  to  another,  even  as  iron  is  not 
mixed  with  clay."  This  refers  to  the  same  at- 
tempts to  consolidate  the  rival  powers  of  the 
Kings  of  Egypt  and  Syria  which  are  referred  to 
in  xi.  6,  7,  and  17.  It  is  a  definite  allusion  which 
becomes  meaningless  in  the  hands  of  those  in- 
terpreters who  attempt  to  explain  the  iron  em- 
pire to  be  that  of  the  Romans.  "  That  the  Greek 
Empire  is  to  be  the  last  of  the  Gentile  empires 
appears  from  viii.  17,  where  the  vision  is  said 
to  refer  to  '  the  time  of  the  end.'  Moreover,  in 
the  last  vision  of  all  (x.-xii.),  the  rise  and  prog- 
ress of  the  Greek  Empire  are  related  with  many 
details,  but  nothmg  whatever  is  said  of  any  sub- 
sequent empire.  Thus  to  introduce  the  Roman 
Empire  into  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  to  set  at 
naught  the  plainest  rules  of  exegesis."  f 

The  reason  of  the  attempt  is  to  make  the  ter- 
mination of  the  prophecy  coincide  with  the  com- 
ing of  Christ,  which  is  then — quite  unhistorically 
— regarded  as  followed  by  the  destruction  of  the 
fourth  and  last  empire.  But  the  interpretation 
can  only  be  thus  arrived  at  by  a  falsification  of 
facts.  For  the  victory  of  Christianity  over  Pa- 
ganism, so  decisive  and  so  Divine,  was  in  no 
sense  a  destruction  of  the  Roman  Empire.  In 
the  first  place  that  victory  was  not  achieved  til' 
three  centuries  after  Christ's  advent,  and  in  the 
second  place  it  was  rather  a  continuation  aud 
defence  of  the  Roman  Empire  than  its  destruc- 
tion. The  Roman  Empire,  in  spite  of  Alaric  and 
Genseric  and  Attila,  and  because  of  its  alliance 
with  Christianity,  may  be  said  to  have  practically 
continued  down  to  modern  times.  So  far  from 
being  regarded  as  the  shatterers  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  the  Christian  popes  and  bishops  were, 
and  were  often  called,  the  "  Defensores  Civi- 
tatis."  That  many  of  the  Fathers,  following 
many  of  the  Rabbis,  regarded  Rome  as  the  iron 
empire,  and  the  fourth  wild  beast,  was  due  to 
the  fact  that  until  modern  days  the  science  of 
criticism  was  unknown,  and  exegesis  was  based 
on  the  shifting  sand.J  If  we  are  to  accept  their 
authority  on  this  question,  we  must  accept  it 
on  many  others,  respecting  views  and  methods 
which  have  now  been  unanimously  abandoned 
by  the  deeper  insight  and  advancing  knowledge 
of  mankind.  The  influence  of  Jewish  exegesis 
over  the  Fathers — erroneous  as  were  its  princi- 
ples and  fluctuating  as  were  its  conclusions — was 
enormous.  It  was  not  unnatural  for  the  later 
Jews,  living  under  the  hatred  and  oppression  of 
Rome,  and  still  yearning  for  the  fulfilment  of 
Messianic  promises,  to  identify  Rome  with  the 
fourth  empire.  And  this  seems  to  have  been 
the  opinion  of  Josephus,  whatever  that  may  be 
worth.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  corre- 
sponds to  another  and  earlier  Jewish  tradition. 
For  among  the  Fathers  even  Ephrsem  Syrus 
identifies  the  Macedonian  Empire  with  the  fourth 
empire,  and  he  may  have  borrowed  this  from 
Jewish  tradition.  But  of  how  little  value  were 
early  conjectures  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that, 
for  reasons  analogous  to  those  which  had  made 
earlier  Rabbis  regard  Rome  as  the  fourth  empire, 
two  mediaeval  exegetes  so  famous  as  Saadia  the 

*  Comp.  Jer.  xxxi.  27. 
t  Bevan,  p.  66. 

X  The  interpretation  is  first  found,  amid  a  chaos  of  false 
exegesis,  in  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  iv.  4,  §  6. 


Gaon  and  Abn  Ezra  had  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  fourth  empire  was — the  Mohammedan!  * 

Every  detail  of  the  vision  as  regards  the  fourth 
kingdom  is  minutely  in  accord  with  the  kingdom 
of  Alexander.  It  can  only  be  applied  to  Rome 
by  deplorable  shifts  and  sophistries,  the  untena- 
bility  of  which  we  are  now  more  able  to  esti- 
mate than  was  possible  in  earlier  centuries.  So 
far  indeed  as  the  iron  is  concerned,  that  might 
by  itself  stand  equally  well  for  Rome  or  for 
Macedon,  if  Dan.  vii.  7,  8,  viii.  3,  4,  and  xi.  3 
did  not  definitely  describe  the  conquests  of  Alex- 
ander. But  all  which  follows  is  meaningless  as 
applied  to  Rome,  nor  is  there  anything  in  Ro- 
man history  to  explain  any  division  of  the  king- 
dom (ii.  41),  or  attempt  to  strengthen  it  by  inter- 
marriage with  other  kingdoms  (ver.  43).  In  the 
divided  Grasco-Macedonian  Empires  of  the  Di- 
adochi,  the  dismemberment  of  one  mighty  king- 
dom into  the  four  much  weaker  ones  of  Cas- 
sander,  Ptolemy,  Lysimachus,  and  Seleucus  be- 
gan immediately  after  the  death  of  Alexander 
(b.  c.  323).  It  was  completed  as  the  result  of 
twenty-two  years  of  war  after  the  Battle  of  Ipsus 
(b.  c.  301).  The  marriage  of  Antiochus  Theos 
to  Berenice,  daughter  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus 
(b.  c.  249,  Dan.  xi.  6),  was  as  ineffectual  as  the 
later  marriage  of  Ptolemy  V.  (Epiphanes)  to 
Cleopatra,  the  daughter  of  Antiochus  the  Great 
(b.  c.  193),  to  introduce  strength  or  unity  into 
the  distracted  kingdoms   (xi.   17,   18). 

The  two  legs  and  feet  are  possibly  meant  to 
indicate  the  two  most  important  kingdoms — that 
of  the  Seleucidse  in  Asia,  and  that  of  the  Pto- 
lemies in  Egypt.  If  we  are  to  press  the  sym- 
bolism still  more  closely,  the  ten  toes  may 
shadow  forth  the  ten  kings  who  are  indicated  by 
the  ten  horns  in  vii.  7. 

Since,  then,  we  are  told  that  the  first  empire 
represents  Nebuchadrezzar  by  the  head  of  gold, 
and  since  we  have  incontestably  verified  the 
fourth  empire  to  be  the  Greek  Empire  of  Alex- 
ander and  his  successors,  it  only  remains  to 
identify  the  intermediate  empires  of  silver  and 
brass.  And  it  becomes  obvious  that  they  can 
only  be  the  Median  and  the  Persian.  That  the 
writer  of  Daniel  regarded  these  empires  as  dis- 
tinct is  clear  from  v.  31  and  vi. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  silver  is  meant  for  the 
Median  Empire,  because,  closely  as  it  was  allied 
with  the  Persian  in  the  view  of  the  writer  (vi.  9, 
13,  16,  viii.  7),  he  yet  spoke  of  the  two  as  sep- 
arate. The  rule  of  "  Darius  the  Mede,"  not  of 
"  Cyrus  the  Persian,"  is,  in  his  point  of  view,  the 
"  other  smaller  kingdom  "  which  arose  after  that 
of  Nebuchadrezzar  (v.  31).  Indeed,  this  is  also 
indicated  in  the  vision  of  the  ram  (viii.  3);  for 
it  has  two  horns,  of  which  the  higher  and 
stronger  (the  Persian  Empire)  rose  up  after  the 
other  (the  Median  Empire);  just  as  in  this 
vision  the  Persian  Empire  represented  by  the 
thighs  of  brass  is  clearly  stronger  than  the  Me- 
dian Empire,  which,  being  wealthier,  is  repre- 
sented as  being  of  silver,  but  is  smaller  than  the 
other.f  Further,  the  second  empire  is  repre- 
sented later  on  by  the  second  beast  (vii.  5),  and 

*  See  Bevan,  p.  63. 

+  On  the  distinction  in  the  writer's  mind  between  the 
Median  and  Persian  Empires  see  v.  28,  31,  vi,  8.  12,  15,  ix.  i, 
xi.  I,  compared  with  vi.  28,  x.  i.  In  point  of  fact,  the 
Persians  and  Medians  were  long  spoken  of  as  distinct, 
though  they  were  closely  allied  ;  and  to  the  Medes  had 
ijeen  specially  attributed  the  forthcoming  overthrow  of 
Babylon  :  Jer.  li.  28,  "  Prepare  against  her  the  nations 
with  the  kings  of  the  Medes."  Comp.  Jer.  li.  xi,  and  Isa. 
xiii.  17,  xxi.  2,  "Besiege,  O  Media." 


THE    DREAM-IMAGE    OF    RUINED    EMPIRES. 


393 


the  three  ribs  in  its  mouth  may  be  meant  for  the 
three  satrapies  of  vi.  2. 

It  may  then  be  regarded  as  a  certain  result  of 
exegesis  that  the  four  empires  are — (i)  the  Bab- 
ylonian; (2)  the  Median;  (3)  the  Persian;  (4)  the 
Grseco-Macedonian. 

But  what  is  the  stone  cut  without  hands  which 
smote  the  image  upon  his  feet?  It  brake  them 
in  pieces,  and  made  the  collapsing  debris  of  the 
colossus  like  chaflf  scattered  by  the  wind  from 
the  summer  threshing-floor.  It  grew  till  it  be- 
came a  great  mountain  which  filled  the  earth. 

The  meaning  of  the  image  being  first  smitten 
upon  its  feet  is  that  the  overthrow  falls  on  the 
iron  empire. 

All  alike  are  agreed  that  by  the  mysterious 
rock-fragment  the  writer  meant  the  Messianic 
Kingdom.  The  "  mountain  "  out  of  which  (as 
is  here  first  mentioned)  the  stone  is  cut  is  "  the 
Mount  Zion."  *  It  commences  "  in  the  days  of 
these  kings."  Its  origin  is  not  earthly,  for  it  is 
"  cut  without  hands."  It  represents  "  a  king- 
dom "  which  "  shall  be  set  up  by  the  God  of 
heaven,"  and  shall  destroy  and  supersede  all  the 
kingdoms,  and  shall  stand  for  ever. 

Whether  a  personal  Messiah  was  definitely 
prominent  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  is  a  question 
which  will  come  before  us  when  we  consider  the 
seventh  chapter.  Here  there  is  only  a  Divine 
Kingdom;  and  that  this  is  the  dominion  of  Is- 
rael seems  to  be  marked  by  the  expression,  "  the 
kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  another  people." 

The  prophecy  probably  indicates  the  glowing 
hopes  which  the  writer  conceived  of  the  future 
of  his  nation,  even  in  the  days  of  its  direst  ad- 
versity, in  accordance  with  the  predictions  of 
the  mighty  prophets  his  predecessors,  whose 
writings  he  had  recently  studied.  Very  few  of 
those  predictions  have  as  yet  been  literally  ful- 
filled; not  one  of  them  was  fulfilled  with  such 
immediateness  as  the  prophets  conceived,  when 
they  were  "  rapt  into  future  times."  To  the 
prophetic  vision  was  revealed  the  glory  that 
should  be  hereafter,  but  not  the  times  and  sea- 
sons, which  God  hath  kept  in  His  own  power, 
and  which  Jesus  told  His  disciples  were  not  even 
known  to  the  Son  of  Man  Himself  in  His  hu- 
man capacity. 

Antiochus  died,  and  his  attempts  to  force  Hel- 
lenism upon  the  Jews  were  so  absolute  a  failure 
that,  in  point  of  fact,  his  persecution  only  served 
to  stereotype  the  ceremonial  institutions  which 
— not  entirely  propria  motu,  but  misled  by  men 
like  the  false  high  priests  Jason  and  Menelaus — 
he  had  attempted  to  obliterate.  But  the  mag- 
nificent expectations  of  a  golden  age  to  follow 
were  indefinitely  delayed.  Though  Antiochus 
died  and  failed,  the  Jews  became  by  no  means 
unanimous  in  their  religious  policy.  Even  under 
the  Hasmonaean  princes  fierce  elements  of  dis- 
cord were  at  work  in  the  midst  of  them.  For- 
eign usurpers  adroitly  used  these  dissensions  for 
their  own  objects,  and  in  b.  c.  ;i7  Judaism  ac- 
quiesced in  the  national  acceptance  of  a  depraved 
Edomite  usurper  in  the  person  of  Herod,  and  a 
section  of  the  Jews  attempted  to  represent  him 
as  the  promised  Messiah  If 

Not  only  was  the  Messianic  prediction  unful- 
filled in  its  literal  aspect  "  in  the  days  of  these 


*  See  Isa.  ii.  2,  xxvii.  16  ;  Matt.  xxi.  42-44.  "Le  mot  de 
Messie  n'est  pas  dans  Daniel.  Le  mot  de  Meshiach,  ix. 
26,  designe  I'autorite  (probabletnent  sacerdotale)  de  la 
Judee"  (Renan,  "Hist.,"  iv.  358). 

t  See  Kuenen,  "  The  Prophets,"  iii. 


kings,"  *  but  even  yet  it  has  by  no  means 
received  its  complete  accomplishment.  The 
"  stone  cut  without  hands  "  indicated  the  king- 
dom, not — as  most  of  the  prophets  seem  to  have 
imagined  when  they  uttered  words  which  meant 
more  than  they  themselves  conceived — of  the  lit- 
eral Israel,  but  of  that  ideal  Israel  which  is  com- 
posed, not  of  Jews,  but  of  Gentiles.  The  divinest 
side  of  Messianic  prophecy  is  the  expression  of 
that  unquenchable  hope  and  of  that  indomitable 
faith  which  are  the  most  glorious  outcome  of  all 
that  is  most  Divine  in  the  spirit  of  man.  That 
faith  and  hope  have  never  found  even  an  ideal 
or  approximate  fulfilment  save  in  Christ  and  in 
His  kingdom,  which  is  now,  and  shall  be  without 
end. 

But  apart  from  the  Divine  predictions  of  the 
eternal  sunlight  visible  on  the  horizon  over  vast 
foreshortened  ages  of  time  which  to  God  are  but 
as  one  day,  let  us  notice  how  profound  is  the 
symbolism  of  the  vision — how  well  it  expresses 
the  surface  glare,  the  inward  hoUowness,  the  in- 
herent weakness,  the  varying  successions,  the 
predestined  transience  of  overgrown  empires. 
The  great  poet  of  Catholicism  makes  magnificent 
use  of  Daniel's  image,  and  sees  its  deep  signifi- 
cance. He  too  describes  the  ideal  of  all  earthly 
empire  as  a  colossus  of  gold,  silver,  brass,  and 
iron,  which  yet  mainly  rests  on  its  right  foot  of 
baked  and  brittle  clay.  But  he  tells  us  that  every 
part  of  this  image,  except  the  gold,  is  crannied 
through  and  through  by  a  fissure,  down  which 
there  flows  a  constant  stream  of  tears.f  These 
effects  of  misery  trickle  downwards,  working 
their  way  through  the  cavern  in  Mount  Ida  in 
which  the  image  stands,  till,  descending  from 
rock  to  rock,  they  form  those  four  rivers  of 
hell,— 

"  Abhorred  Styx,  the  flood  of  deadly  hate ; 
Sad  Acheron  of  sorrow,  black  and  deep  ; 
Cocytus,  named  of  lamentation  loud 
Heard  on  the  rueful  stream  ;  fierce  Phlegethon 
Whose  waves  of  torrent  fire  inflame  with  rage."  J 

There  is  a  terrible  grandeur  in  the  emblem. 
Splendid  and  venerable  looks  the  idol  of  human 
empire  in  all  its  pomp  and  pricelessness.  But 
underneath  its  cracked  and  fissured  weakness 
drop  and  trickle  and  scream  the  salt  and  bitter 
runnels  of  misery  and  anguish,  till  the  rivers  of 
agony  are  swollen  into  overflow  by  their  coagu- 
lated scum. 

It  was  natural  that  Nebuchadrezzar  should 
have  felt  deeply  impressed  when  the  vanished 
outlines  of  his  dream  were  thus  recalled  to  him 
and  its  awful  interpretation  revealed.  The  man- 
ner in  which  he  expresses  his  amazed  reverence 
may  be  historically  improbable,  but  it  is  psy- 
chologically true.  We  are  told  that  "  he  fell 
upon  his  face  and  worshipped  Daniel,"  and  the 
word  "  worshipped  "  implies  genuine  adoration. 
That  so  magnificent  a  potentate  should  have  lain 
on  his  face  before  a  captive  Jewish  youth  and 
adored  him  is  amazing.§  It  is  still  more  so  that 
Daniel,  without  protest,  should  have  accepted, 
not   only   his    idolatrous   homage,    but   also   the 

♦No  kings  have  been  mentioned,  but  the  ten  toes  sym- 
bolise ten  kings.    Comp.  vii.24. 

+  Dante,  "Inferno,"   xiv.  04-120. 

X  Milton,  "  Paradise  Lost,     ii.  575. 

§  It  may  be  paralleled  by  the  legendary  prostrations  of 
Alexander  the  Great  before  the  high  priest  Jaddua  (Jos., 
"  Antt.,"  XI.  viii.  5),  and  of  Edwin  of  Deii  a  before  Paulinus 
of  York  (Baeda,  •'  Hist.,"*  ii.  14-16). 


394 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


offering  of  "  an  oblation  and  sweet  incense."  * 
That  a  Nebuchadrezzar  should  have  been  thus 
prostrate  in  the  dust  before  their  young  coun- 
tryman would  no  doubt  be  a  delightful  picture 
to  the  Jews,  and  if,  as  we  believe,  the  story  is 
an  unconnected  Haggada,  it  may  well  have 
been  founded  on  such  passages  as  Isa.  xlix.  23, 
"  Kings  shall  bow  down  to  thee  with  their  faces 
toward  the  earth,  and  lick  up  the  dust  of  thy 
feet":t  together  with  Isa.  Hi.  15,  "Kings  shall 
shut  their  mouths  at  him:  for  that  which  had  not 
been  told  them  shall  they  see;  and  that  which 
they  had  not  heard  shall  they  perceive." 

But  it  is  much  more  amazing  that  Daniel,  who, 
as  a  boy,  had  been  so  scrupulous  about  the 
Levitic  ordinance  of  unclean  meats,  in  the 
scruple  against  which  the  gravamen  lay  in  the 
possibility  of  their  having  been  offered  to  idols,  t 
should,  as  a  man,  have  allowed  himself  to  be 
treated  exactly  as  the  king  treated  his  idols! 
To  say  that  he  accepted  this  worship  be- 
cause the  king  was  not  adoring  him,  but  the 
God  whose  power  had  been  manifested  in 
him,§  is  an  idle  subterfuge,  for  that  excuse  is 
offered  by  all  idolaters  in  all  ages.  Very  differ- 
ent was  the  conduct  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  when 
the  rude  population  of  Lystra  wished  to  wor- 
ship them  as  incarnations  of  Hermes  and  Zeus. 
The  moment  they  heard  of  it  they  rent  their 
clothes  in  horror,  and  leapt  at  once  among  the 
people,  crying  out,  "  Sirs,  why  do  ye  such  things? 
We  also  are  men  of  like  passions  with  you,  and 
are  preaching  unto  you  that  ye  should  turn  from 
these  vain  ones  unto  the  living  God."  || 

That  the  King  of  Babylon  should  he  repre- 
sented as  at  once  acknowledging  the  God  ot 
Daniel  as  "  a  God  of  gods,"  though  he  was  a 
fanatical  votary  of  Bel-merodach,  belongs  to  the 
general  plan  of  the  Book.  Daniel  received  in 
reward  many  great  gifts,  and  is  made  "  ruler 
of  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon,  and  chief  of 
the  governors  (signin)  over  all  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon."  About  his  acceptance  of  the  civil 
office  there  is  no  difficulty;  but  there  is  a  quite 
insuperable  historic  difficulty  in  his  becoming  a 
chief  magian.  All  the  wise  men  of  Babylon, 
whom  the  king  had  just  threatened  with  dis- 
memberment as  a  pack  of  impostors,  were,  at 
any  rate,  a  highly  sacerdotal  and  essentially  idol- 
atrous caste.  That  Daniel  should  have  objected 
to  particular  kinds  of  food  from  peril  of  defile- 
ment, and  yet  that  he  should  have  consented 
to  be  chief  hierarch  of  a  heathen  cult,  would 
indeed  have  been  to  strain  at  gnats  and  to  swal- 
low camels! 

And  so  great  was  the  distinction  which  he 
earned  by  his  interpretation  of  the  dream,  that, 
at  his  further  request,  satrapies  were  conferred 
on  his  three  companions;  but  he  himself,  like 
Mordecai,  afterwards  "  sat  in  the  gate  of  the 
king."11 

♦Isa.  xlvi.  6.  The  same  verbs,  "  they  fall  down,  yea 
they  worship,"  are  there  used  of  idols. 

t  Comp.  isa.  Ix.  14  :  "  The  sons  also  of  them  that  afBicted 
thee  shall  come  bending  unto  thee  ;  and  all  they  that 
despised  thee  shall  bow  themselves  down  at  the  soles  of 
thy  feet." 

f  Comp.  Rom.  xiv.  23  ;  Acts  xv.  29  :  Heb.  xiii.  9  ;  i  Cor. 
viii.  I  ;  Rev.  ii.  14,  20. 

§  So  Jerome  :  "  Non  tam  Danielem  cjuam  in  Daniele 
adorat  Deinn,  qui  mysteria  revelavit."  Comp.  Jos., 
"  Antt.,"  XI.  viii.  5,  where  Alexander  answers  the  taunt 
of  Parmenio  about  his  npocrKvyrjcns  of  the  high  priest :  ov 
ToiiTOv  rrpotreKvvriaa,  toi'  5e  @e6v. 

II  Acts  xiv.  14,  15. 

^  Esther  iii.  2.  Comp.  i  Chron.  xxvi.  30.  This  corre- 
sponds to  what  Xenophon  calls  ai  cn-l  ras  dvpa;  ^oirija-en,  and 
to  our  "  right  of  entree."  ^ 


CHAPTER  Xni. 

THE  IDOL  OF  GOLD,  AND  THE  FAITHFUL 
THREE. 

Regarded  as  an  instance  of  the  use  of  his- 
toric fiction  to  inculcate  the  noblest  truths,  the 
third  chapter  of  Daniel  is  not  only  superb  in  its 
imaginative  grandeur,  but  still  more  in  the  man- 
ner in  which  it  sets  forth  the  piety  of  ultimate 
faithfulness,  and  of  that 

"  Death-defying  utterance  of  truth  " 

which  is  the  essence  of  the  most  heroic  and  in- 
spiring forms  of  martyrdom.  So  far  from  slight- 
ing it,  because  it  does  not  come  before  us  with 
adequate  evidence  to  prove  that  it  was  even  in- 
tended to  be  taken  as  literal  history,  I  have 
always  regarded  it  as  one  of  the  most  precious 
among  the  narrative  chapters  of  Scripture.  It 
is  of  priceless  value  as  illustrating  the  deliver- 
ance of  undaunted  faithfulness — as  setting  forth 
the  truth  that  they  who  love  God  and  trust  in 
Him  must  love  Him  and  trust  in  Him  even  till 
the  end,  in  spite  not  only  of  the  most  over- 
whelming peril,  but  even  when  they  are  brought 
face  to  face  with  apparently  hopeless  defeat. 
Death  itself,  by  torture  or  sword  or  flame, 
threatened  by  the  priests  and  tyrants  and  mul- 
titudes of  the  earth  set  in  open  array  against 
them,  is  impotent  to  shake  the  purpose  of  God's 
saints.  When  the  servant  of  God  can  do  noth- 
ing else  against  the  banded  forces  of  sin,  the 
world,  and  the  devil,  he  at  least  can  die,  and 
can  say  like  the  Maccabees,  "  Let  us  die  in  our 
simplicity!  "  He  may  be  saved  from  death;  but 
even  if  not,  he  must  prefer  death  to  apostasy,  and 
will  save  his  own  soul.  That  the  Jews  were  ever 
reduced  to  such  a  choice  during  the  Babylonian 
exile  there  is  no  evidence;  indeed,  all  evidence 
points  the  other  way,  and  seems  to  show  that 
they  were  allowed  with  perfect  tolerance  to  hold 
and  practise  their  own  religion.*  But  in  the 
days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  the  question  which 
to  choose — martyrdom  or  apostasy — became  a 
very  burning  one.  Antiochus  set  up  at  Jerusa- 
lem "  the  abomination  of  desolation,"  and  it 
is  easy  to  understand  "what  courage  and  con- 
viction a  tempted  Jew  might  derive  from  the 
study  of  this  splendid  defiance.  That  the  story 
is  of  a  kind  well  fitted  to  haunt  the  imagination 
is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Firdausi  tells  a  similar 
story  from  Persian  tradition  of  "  a  martyr  hero 
who  came  unhurt  out  of  a  fiery  furnace."  f 

This  immortal  chapter  breathes  exactly  the 
same  spirit  as  the  forty-fourth  Psalm. 

"  Our  heart  is  not  turned  back. 
Neither  our  steps  gone  out  of  Thy  wajr : 
No,  not  when  Thou  hast  smitten  us  into  the  place  of 

dragons. 
And  covered  us  with  the  shadow  of  death. 
If  we  have  forgotten  the  Name  of  our  God, 
And  holden  up  our  hands  to  any  strange  god, 
Shall  not  God  search  it  out  ? 
For  He  knoweth  the  very  secrets  of  the  heart." 

*  The  false  prophets  Ahab  and  Zedekiah  were  "  roasted 
in  the  fire  "  (Jer.  xxix.  22),  which  may  have  suggested  the 
idea  of  this  punishment  to  the  writer ;  but  it  was  for 
committing  "  lewdness  "—"  folly,"  Judg.  xx.  6— in  Israel, 
and  for  adultery  and  lies,  which  were  regarded  as  trea- 
sonable. In  some  traditions  they  are  identified  with  the 
two  elders  of  the  Story  of  Susanna.  Assur-bani-pal  bui-nt 
Samas-sum-ucin,  his  brother,  who  was  Viceroy  of  Baby- 
lon (about  B.C.  648),  and  Te-Umman,who  cursed  his 
gods  (Smith,  "Assur-bani-pal,"  p.  138).  Comp.  Ewald, 
"Prophets,"  iii.  240.    See  supra,  p.  365. 

t  Malcolm.  "Persia."  i.  29,  30. 


THE    IDOL    OF    GOLD,    AND    THE    FAITHFUL    THREE. 


395 


"  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king,"  we  are  told  in 
one  of  the  stately  overtures  in  which  this  writer 
rejoices,  "  made  an  image  of  gold,  whose  height 
was  threescore  cubits,  and  the  breadth  thereof 
six  cubits,  and  he  set  it  up  in  the  plains  of 
Dura,  in  the  province  of  Babylon." 

No  date  is  given,  but  the  writer  may  well  have 
supposed  or  have  traditionally  heard  that  some 
such  event  took  place  about  the  eighteenth  year 
of  Nebuchadrezzar's  reign,  when  he  had  brought 
to  conclusion  a  series  of  great  victories  and  con- 
quests.* Nor  are  we  told  whom  the  image  rep- 
resented. We  may  imagine  that  it  was  an  idol 
of  Bel-merodach,  the  patron  deity  of  Babylon, 
to  whom  we  know  that  he  did  erect  an  image;  f 
or  of  Nebo,  from  whom  the  king  derived  his 
name.  When  it  is  said  to  be  "  of  gold,"  the 
writer,  in  the  grandiose  character  of  his  imagin- 
ative faculty,  may  have  meant  his  words  to  be 
taken  literally,  or  he  may  merely  have  meant  that 
it  was  gilded,  or  overlaid  with  gold.}:  There 
were  colossal  images  in  Egypt  and  in  Nineveh, 
but  we  never  read  in  history  of  any  other  gilded 
image  ninety  feet  high  and  nine  feet  broad.^^ 
The  name  of  the  plain  or  valley  in  which  it  was 
erected — Dura — has  been  found  in  several  Baby- 
lonian localities. 

Then  the  king  proclaimed  a  solemn  dedicatory 
festival,  to  which  he  invited  every  sort  of  func- 
tionary, of  which  the  writer,  with  his  usual 
■irijpyuffis  and  rotundity  of  expression,  accumu- 
lates the  eight  names.     They  were: — 

1.  The  Princes,  "  satraps,"  or  wardens  of  the 
realm. 

2.  The  Governors  (ii.  48). 

3.  The  Captains. 

4.  The  Judges. 

5.  The  Treasurers  or  Controllers. 

6.  The   Counsellors. 

7.  The  Sheriffs. 

8.  All  the  Rulers  of  the  Provinces. 

Any  attempts  to  attach  specific  values  to  these 
titles  are  failures.  They  seem  to  be  a  catalogue 
of  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  and  Persian  titles,  and 
may  perhaps  (as  Ewald  conjectured)  be  meant 
to  represent  the  various  grades  of  three  classes 
of  functionaries — civil,  military,  and  legal. 

Then  all  these  officials,  who  with  leisurely 
stateliness  are  named  again,  came  to  the  festival, 
and  _^stood  before  the  image.  It  is  not  improb- 
able' that  the  writer  may  have  been  a  witness 
of  some  such  splendid  ceremony  to  which  the 
Jewish  magnates  were  invited  in  the  reign  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

Then  a  herald   (kerooza)   cried  aloud  a  proc- 

f  Both  in  Theodotion  and  the  LXX.  we  have  ctovs  oktw- 
«aiS€(caTov.  The  siege  of  Jerusalem  was  not,  however, 
finished  till  the  nineteenth  year  of  Nebuchadrezzar  (2 
Kings  XXV.  8).  Otliers  conjecture  that  the  scene  occurred 
in  his  thirty-first  year,  when  he  was  "at  rest  in  his  house, 
and  flourishing  in  his  palace"  ("Dan.  iv.  4). 

t  "  Records  of  the  Past."' v.  113.  The  inscriptions  of 
Nebuchadrezzar  are  full  of  glorification  of  Marduk 
(Merodach.  t'ef.,  v.  115,  135.  vii.  75. 

JComp.  Isa  xliv  g-20.  Mr.  Hormuzd  Rassan  discovered 
a  colossal  statue  of  Nebo  at  Nimroud  in  1853.  Shalman- 
ezer  III.  says  on  his  obelisk.  "I  made  an  image  of  my 
royalty  ;  upon  it  I  inscribed  the  praise  of  Asshur  my 
rnaster.  and  a  true  account  of  my  exploits."  Herodotus 
(i.  183)  mentions  a  statue  of  Zeus  in  Babylon,  on  which 
was  spent  eight  hundred  talents  of  gold,  and  of  another 
made  of  "  solid  gold  "  twelve  ells  high. 

§  Hy  the  apologists  the  "  image  "  or  "  statue  "  is  easily 
toned  down  into  a  bust  on  a  hollow  pedestal  (Archdeacon 
Rose,  "  Speaker's  Commentary."  p.  270)  The  colossus  of 
Nero  is  said  to  have  been  a  hundred  and  ten  feet  high,  but 
was  of  marble.  Nestle  ("Marginalia,"  35)  quotes  a  pas- 
sage from  .Ammianus  Marce'linus,  which  mentions  a 
colossal  statue  of  Apollo  reared  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
to  which  there  may  be  aside-allusion  here. 


lamation  "  to  all  peoples,  nations,  and  lan- 
guages." Such  a  throng  might  easily  have  con- 
tained Greeks,  Phoenicians,  Jews,  Arabs,  and  As- 
syrians, as  well  as  Babylonians.  At  the  out- 
burst of  a  blast  of  "  boisterous  janizary-music  " 
they  are  all  to  fall  down  and  worship  the  golden 
image. 

Of  the  six  different  kinds  of  musical  instru- 
ments, which,  in  his  usual  style,  the  writer  names 
and  reiterates,  and  which  it  is  neither  possible 
nor  very  important  to  distinguish,  three — the 
harp,  psaltery,  and  bagpipe — are  Greek;  two,  the 
horn  and  sackbut,  have  names  derived  from 
roots  found  in  both  Aryan  and  Semitic  lan- 
guages; and  one,  "the  pipe,"  is  Semitic.  As 
to  the  list  of  officials,  the  writer  had  added 
"  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces  "  ;  so  here 
he  adds  "  and  all  kinds  of  music."  * 

Any  one  who  refused  to  obey  the  order  was 
to  be  flung,  the  same  hour,  into  the  burning 
furnace  of  fire.  Professor  Sayce,  in  his  "  Hib- 
bert  Lectures,"  connects  the  whole  scene  with 
an  attempt,  first  by  Nebuchadrezzar,  then  by 
Nabunaid,  to  make  Merodach — who,  to  concil- 
iate the  prejudices  of  the  worshippers  of  the 
older  deity  Bel,  was  called  Bel-merodach — the 
chief  deity  of  Babylon.  He  sees  in  the  king's 
proclamation  an  underlying  suspicion  that  some 
would  be  found  to  oppose  his  attempted  cen- 
tralisation of  worship.! 

The  music  burst  forth,  and  the  vast  throng 
all  prostrated  themselves,  except  Daniel's  three 
companions,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego. 

We  naturally  pause  to  ask  where  then  was 
Daniel?  If  the  narrative  be  taken  for  literal  his- 
tory, it  is  easy  to  answer  with  the  apologist  that 
he  was  ill;  or  was  absent;  or  was  a  person 
of  too  much  importance  to  be  required  to  pros- 
trate himself;  or  that  "the  Chaldeans"  were 
afraid  to  accuse  him.  "  Certainly,"  says  Pro- 
fessor Fuller,  "  had«this  chapter  been  the  compo- 
sition of  a  pseudo-Daniel,  or  the  record  of  a 
fictitious  event,  Daniel  would  have  been  intro- 
duced and  his  immunity  explained."  Apologetic 
literature  abounds  in  such  fanciful  and  value- 
less arguments.  It  would  be  just  as  true,  and 
just  as  false,  to  say  that  "  certainly,"  if  the  nar- 
rative were  historic,  his  absence  would  have  been 
explained;  and  all  the  more  because  he  was  ex- 
pressly elected  to  be  "  in  the  gate  of  the  king." 
But  if  we  regard  the  chapter  as  a  noble  Haggada, 
there  is  not  the  least  difficulty  in  accounting  for 
Daniel's  absence.  The  separate  stories  were 
meant  to  cohere  to  a  certain  extent;  and  though 
the  writers  of  this  kind  of  ancient  imaginative 
literature,  even  in  Greece,  rarely  trouble  them- 
selves with  any  questions  which  lie  outside  the 
immediate  purpose,  yet  the  introduction  of  Dan- 
iel into  the  story  would  have  been  to  violate 
every  vestige  of  verisimilitude.  To  represent 
Nebuchadrezzar  worshipping  Daniel  as  a  god, 
and  offering  oblations  to  him  on  one  page,  and 
on  the  next  to  represent  the  king  as  throwing 
him  into  a  furnace  for  refusing  to  worship  an 
idol,  would  have  involved  an  obvious  incon- 
gruity. Daniel  is  represented  in  the  other  chap- 
ters  as   playing   his   part   and   bearing   his   testi- 

*  See  supra,  p.  360.  The  qar'na  (horn,  xepa^)  and  sad'ka 
{a-aix^vKTi)  are  in  root  both  Greek  and  Aramean.  The 
'•  pipe  "  (masli'rokitha)  is  Semitic.  Brandig  tries  to  prove 
that  even  in  Nebuchadrezzar's  time  these  three  Greek 
names  (even  the  svmphonia)  had  been  borrowed  by  the 
Babylonians  from  the  Greeks;  but  the  combinea  weight 
of  philological  authority  is  against  him. 

\  See  "  Hibbert  Lectures,"  chap.  Ixxxix.,  etc. 


396 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


mony  to  the  God  of  Israel;  this  chapter  is  sep- 
arately devoted  tc  the  heroism  and  the  testi- 
mony of  his  three  friends. 

Observing   the   defiance    of    the   king's   edict, 
certain   Chaldeans,  actuated    by    jealousy,  came 
'        near  to  the  king  and  "  accused  "  the  Jews.* 

The  word  for  "  accused  "  is  curious  and  in- 
teresting. It  is  literally  "  ate  the  pieces  of  the 
Jews,"\  evidently  involving  a  metaphor  of  fierce 
devouring  malice.|  Reminding  the  king  of  his 
^decree,  they  inform  him  that  three  of  the  Jews 
to  whom  he  has  given  such  high  promotion 
"thought  well  not  to  regard  thee;  thy  god  will 
they  not  serve,  nor  worship  the  golden  image 
which  thou  hast  set  up."^ 

Nebuchadrezzar,  like  other  despots  who  suffer 
from  the  vertigo  of  autocracy,  was  liable  to  sud- 
den outbursts  of  almost  spasmodic  fury.  We  read 
of  such  storms  of  rage  in  the  case  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  of  Nero,  of  Valentinian  I.,  and  even 
of  Theodosius.  The  double  insult  to  himself 
and  to  his  god  on  the  part  of  men  to  whom 
he  had  shown  such  conspicuous  favour  trans- 
ported him  out  of  himself.  For  Bel-merodach, 
whom  he  had  made  the  patron  god  of  Babylon, 
was,  as  he  says  in  one  of  his  own  inscriptions, 
"  the  lord,  the  joy  of  my  heart  in  Babylon,  which 
is  the  seat  of  my  sovereignty  and  empire."  It 
seemed  to  him  too  intolerable  that  this  god,  who 
had  crowned  him  with  glory  and  victory,  and 
that  he  himself,  arrayed  in  the  plenitude  of 
his  imperial  power,  should  be  defied  and  set  at 
naught  by  three  miserable  and  ungrateful  cap- 
tives. 

He  puts  it  to  them  whether  it  was  their  set 
purpose  II  that  they  would  not  serve  his  gods 
or  worship  his  image.  Then  he  offers  them  a 
locus  pcenitentia:.  The  music  should  sound  forth 
again.  If  they  would  then  worship — but  if  not, 
they  should  be  flung  into  the  furnace, — "  and 
who  is  that  God  that  shall  deliver  you  out  of  my 
hands?"  • 

The  question  is  a  direct  challenge  and  defiance 
of  the  God  of  Israel,  like  Pharaoh's  "  And  who 
is  Jehovah,  that  I  shall  obey  His  voice?"  or 
like  Sennacherib's  "  Who  are  they  among  all 
the  gods  that  have  delivered  their  land  c^t  of 
my  hand?""[l  It  is  answered  in  each  instance 
by  a  decisive  interposition. 

The  answer  of  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego  is  truly  magnificent  in  its  unflinching  cour- 
age. It  is:  "  O  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  have  no 
need  to  answer  thee  a  word  concerning  this.** 
If  our  God  whom  we  serve  be  able  to  deliver 
us.  He  will  deliver  us  from  the  burning  fiery 
furnace,  and  out  of  thy  hand,  O  king.  But  if 
not,tt  be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king,$|  that  we 
will  not  serve  thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden 
miage  which  thou  hast  set  up." 

By  the  phrase  "  if  our  God  be  able  "  no  doubt 

»  Comp.  vi.  13,  14. 

t  "  Akaloo  Qar'tsihin." 

X  It  is  "  found  in  the  Targutn  rendering  of  Lev.  xix.  16 
for  a  tale-bearer,  and  is  frequent  as  a  Syriac  and  Arabic 
idiom  "  (Fuller). 

§  Jerome  emphasises  the  element  of  jealousy,  "  Quos 
praetulisti  nobis  et  captivos  ac  servos  principes  fectsti,  ii 
elati  in  superbiam  tua  praecepta  contemnunt." 

II  The  phrase  is  unique  and  of  uncertain  meaning. 

\  Exod.  V.  2  ;  Isa.  xxxvi.  20  ;  2  Chron.  xxxii.  13-17. 

**  Dan.  iii.  16.  LXX.,  ov  xpei'av  exo^tei/;  Vulg.,  non  oportet 
nos.  To  soften  the  brusqueness  of  the  address,  in  which 
the  Rabbis  (<r.  g..  Rashi)  rejoice,  the  LXX.  add  another 
/SacriAeO. 

■tt  Jerome  explains  "But  if  not"  by  "Quodsi  noluerit"; 
and  Theodoret  by  eirs  ovv  puerai  eire  koX  my. 

XX  iii .  i8.  LXX.^  <di  Tore  <(>a.vep6v  <roi  Icrrai.  Tert.,  from  the 
Vet.  Itala,  "  tunc  manifestum  erit  tibi  "  ("Scorp.,"  8). 


as  to  God's  power  is  expressed.  Tlie  word 
"  able  "  merely  means  "  able  in  accordance  with 
His  own  plans."  *  The  three  children  knew  well 
that  God  can  deliver,  and  that  He  has  repeatedly 
delivered  His  saints.  Such  deliverances  abound 
on  the  sacred  page,  and  are  mentioned  in  the 
"  Dream  of  Gerontius  ": — 

"  Rescue  him,  O  Lord,  in  this  his  evil  hour. 

As  of  old  so  many  by  Thy  mighty  Power  : 

Enoch  and  Elias  from  the  common  doom  ; 

Noe  from  the  waters  in  a  saving  home  ; 

Abraham  from  th'  abounding  guilt  of  Heathenesse, 

Job  from  all  his  multiform  and  fell  distress  ; 

Isaac,  when  his  father's  knife  was  raised  to  slay  ; 

Lot  from  burning  Sodom  on  its  judgment-day  ; 

Moses  from  the  land  of  bondage  and  despair  ; 

Daniel  from  the  hungry  lions  in  their  lair  ; 

David  from  Golia,  and  the  wrath  of  Saul ; 
.    And  the  two  Apostles  from  their  prison-thrall." 

But  the  willing  martyrs  were  also  well  aware 
that  in  many  cases  it  has  not  been  God's  purpose 
to  deliver  His  saints  out  of  the  peril  of  death; 
and  that  it  has  been  far  better  for  them  that 
they  should  be  carried  heavenwards  on  the  fiery 
chariot  of  martyrdom.  They  were  therefore  per- 
fectly prepared  to  find  that  it  was  the  will  of 
God  that  they  too  should  perish,  as  thousands 
of  God's  faithful  ones  had  perished  before  them, 
from  the  tyrannous  and  cruel  hands  of  man;  and 
they  were  cheerfully  willing  to  confront  that 
awful  extremity.  Thus  regarded,  the  three  words 
"  And  if  not  "  are  among  the  sublimest  words 
uttered  in  all  Scripture.  They  represent  the 
truth  that  the  man  who  trusts  in  God  will  con- 
tinue to  say  even  to  the  end,  "  Though  He  slay 
me,  yet  will  I  trust  in  Him."  They  are  the  triumph 
of  faith  over  all. adverse  circumstances.  It  has 
been  the  glorious  achievement  of  man  to  have 
attained,  by  the  inspiration  of  the  breath  of  the 
Almighty,  so  clear  an  insight  into  the  truth  that 
the  voice  of  duty  must  be  obeyed  to  the  very 
end,  as  to  lead  him  to  defy  every  com"bination 
of  opposing  forces.  The  gay  lyrist  of  heathen- 
dom expressed  it  in  his  famous  ode, — 

"  Justum  et  tenacem  propositi  virum 
Non  civium  ardor  prava  jubentium, 
Non  vultus  instantis  tyranni, 
Mente  quatit  solida  " 

It  is  man's  testimony  to  his  indomitable  be- 
lief that  the  things  of  sense  are  not  to  be  valued 
in  comparison  to  that  high  happiness  which 
arises  from  obedience  to  the  law  of  conscience, 
and  that  no  extremities  of  agony  are  commen- 
surate with  apostasy.  This  it  is  which,  more 
than  anything  else,  has,  in  spite  of  appearances, 
shown  that  the  spirit  of  man  is  of  heavenly 
birth,  and  has  enabled  him  to  unfold 

"The  wings  within  him  wrapped,  and  proudly  rise 
Redeemed  from  earth,  a  creature  of  the  skies." 

For  wherever  there  is  left  in  man  any  true 
manhood,  he  has  never  shrunk  from  accepting 
death  rather  than  the  disgrace  of  compliance 
with  what  he  despises  and  abhors.  This  it  is 
which  sends  our  soldiers  on  the  forlorn  hope, 
and  makes  them  march  with  a  smile  upon  the 
batteries  which  vomit  their  cross-fires  upon  them; 
"  and  so  die  by  thousands  the  unnamed  demi- 
gods." By  virtue  of  this  it  has  been  that  all 
the  martyrs  have.  "  with  the  irresistible  might 
of  their  weakness,"  shaken  the  solid  world. 

On  hearing  the  defiance  of  the  faithful  Jews 
— absolutely  firm  in  its  decisiveness,  yet  perfectly 

*Comp.  Gen.  xix.  22  :  "/  cannot  do  anything  until  thou 
be  come  thither." 


THE    IDOL    OF    GOLD,    AND    THE    FAITHFUL    THREE. 


397 


respectful  in  its  tone — the  tyrant  was  so  much 
beside  himself,  that,  as  he  glared  on  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abcd-nego,  his  very  countenance 
was  disfigured.  The  furnace  was  probably  one 
used  for  the  ordinary  cremation  of  the  dead.* 
He  ordered  that  it  should  be  heated  seven  times 
hotter  than  it  was  wont  to  be  heated,!  and  cer- 
tain men  of  mighty  strength  who  were  in  his 
army  were  bidden  to  bind  the  three  youths  and 
rting  them  into  the  raging  flames.  So,  bound 
in  their  hosen,  their  tunics,  their  long  mantles, 
and  their  other  garments,  they  were  cast  into 
the  seven-times-heated  furnace.  The  king's  com- 
mandment was  so  urgent,  and  the  ."  tongue  of 
flame  "  was  darting  so  fiercely  from  the  horrible 
kiln,  that  the  executioners  perished  in  planting 
the  ladders  to  throw  them  in,  but  they  them- 
selves fell  into  the  midst  of  the  furnace. 

The  death  of  the  executioners  seems  to  have 
attracted  no  special  notice,  but  immediately  af- 
terwards Nebuchadrezzar  started  in  amazement 
and  terror  from  his  throne,  and  asked  his  cham- 
berlains, "  Did  we  not  cast  three  men  bound 
into  the  midst  of  the  fire?  " 

"  True,  O  king,"  they  answered. 

"  Behold,"  he  said,  "  I  see  four  men  loose, 
walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  they  have 
no  hurt,  and  the  aspect  of  the  fourth  is  like  a 
son  of  the  gods!  "  t 

Then  the  king  approached  the  door  of  the 
furnace  of  fire,  and  called,  "  Ye  servants  of  the 
Most  High  God,  come  forth."  Then  Shadrach, 
Meshach.  and  Abed-nego  came  out  of  the  midst 
of  the  fire;  and  all  the  satraps,  prefects,  presi- 
dents, and  court  chamberlains  gathered  round  to 
stare  on  men  who  were  so  completely  untouched 
by  the  fierceness  of  the  fiames  that  not  a  hair 
of  their  heads  had  been  singed,  nor  their  hosen 
shrivelled,  nor  was  there  even  the  smell  of  burn- 
ing upon  them.§  According  to  the  version  of 
Theodotion,  the  king  worshipped  the  Lord  be- 
fore them,  and  he  then  published  a  decree  in 
which,  after  blessing  God  for  sending  His  angel 
to  deliver  His  servants  who  trusted  in  Him,  he 
somewhat  incoherently  ordained  that  "  every 
people,  nation,  or  language  which  spoke  any  blas- 
phemy against  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abed-nego,  should  be  cut  in  pieces,  and  his 
house  made  a  dunghill:  since  there  is  no  other 
god  that  can  deliver  after  this  sort." 

Then  the  king — as  he  had  done  before — pro- 
moted Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  in 
the  province  of  Babylon.  || 

Henceforth  they  disappear  alike  from  history, 
tradition,  and  legend;  but  the  whole  magnificent 

*  Cremation  prevailed  among  the  Accadians,  and  was 
adopted  by  the  Babylonians  (G.  Bertin, '' Bab.  and  Orient, 
Records,"  i.  17-21).  Fire  was  regarded  as  the  great  purifier. 
In  the  Catacombs  the  scene  of  the  Three  Children  in  the 
fire  is  common.  They  are  painted  walking  in  a  sort  of 
open  cistern  full  of  flames,  with  doors  beneath.  The 
Greek  word  is  Ka/in-o?  (Matt.  xiii.  42),  "  a  calcining  fur- 
nace." 

t  It  seems  very  needless  to  introduce  here,  as  Mr.  Deane 
does  in  Bishop  Ellicott's  commentary,  the  notion  of  the 
seven  A/askim  or  demons  of  Babylonian  mythology.  In 
the  Song  of  the  Three  Children  the  flames  stream  out 
forty-nine  (7  x  7)  cubits     Comp  Isa  xxx.  26. 

tThe  A.  v.,  "like  the  Son  of  God."  is  quite  untenable. 
The  expression  may  mean  a  heavenly  or  an  angelic  being 
(Gen.  vi.  2  ;  Job  i.  6).  So  ordinary  an  expression  does 
not  need  to  be  superfluously  illustrated  by  references  to 
the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  inscriptions,  but  they  may 
be  found  in  Sayce,  "  Hibbert  Lectures,"  128  and  fasstffi. 

§  So  in  Persian  history  the  Prince  Siawash  clears  him- 
self from  a  false  accusation  in  the  reign'of  his  father  Kai 
Kaoos  by  passing  through  the  fire  (Malcolm,  "  Hist,  of 
Persia,"  i.  38). 

li  Comp.  Psalm  xvi.  12:  "We  went  through  fire  and 
water,  and  Thou  broughtest  us  out  into  a  safe  place." 


Haggada  is  the  most  powerful  possible  com- 
mentary on  the  words  of  Isa.  xliii.  2:  "When 
thou  walkest  through  the  fire  thou  shalt  not  be 
burned,  neither  shall  the  flame  kindle  upon 
thee."  * 

How  powerfully  the  story  struck  the  imagina- 
tion of  the  Jews  is  shown  by  the  not  very  ap- 
posite Song  of  the  Three  Children,  with  the 
other  apocryphal  additions.  Here  we  are  told 
that  the  furnace  was  heated  "  with-  rosin,  pitch, 
tow,  and  small  wood;  so  that  the  flame  streamed 
forth  above  the  furnace  forty  and  nine  cubits. 
And  it  passed  through  and  burned  those  Chal- 
deans it  found  about  the  furnace.  But  the  angel 
of  the  Lord  came  down  into  the  furnace  together 
with  Azarias  and  his  fellows,  and  smote  the  flame 
of  the  fire  out  of  the  oven;  and  made  the  midst 
of  the  furnace  as  it  had  been  a  moist  whistling 
wind,  so  that  the  fire  touched  them  not  at  all, 
neither  hurt  nor  troubled  them."  f 

In  the  Talmud  the  majestic  limitations  of  the 
Biblical  story  are  sometimes  enriched  with 
touches  of  imagination,  but  more  often  coars- 
ened by  tasteless  exhibitions  of  triviality  and 
rancour.  Thus  in  the  "  Vayyikra  Rabba  "  Neb- 
uchadrezzar tries  to  persuade  the  youths  by  fan- 
tastic misquotations  of  Isa.  x.  10,  Ezek.  xxiii.  14, 
Deut.  iv.  28,  Jer.  xxvii.  8;  and  they  refute  him 
and  end  with  clumsy  plays  on  his  name,  telling 
him  that  he  should  bark  (nabach)  like  a  dog, 
swell  like  a  water-jar  {cod),  and  chirp  like  a 
cricket  ^tsirtsir),  which  he  immediately  did — i.  e., 
he  was  smitten  with  lycanthropy.J 

In  "  Sanhedrin,"  f.  93,  i,  the  story  is  told  of 
the  adulterous  false  prophets  Ahab  and  Zede- 
kiah,  and  it  is  added  that  Nebuchadrezzar  offered 
them  the  ordeal  of  fire  from  which  the  Three 
Children  had  escaped.  They  asked  that  Joshua 
the  high  priest  might  be  with  them,  thinking 
that  his  sanctity  would  be  their  protection. 
When  the  king  asked  why  Abraham,  though 
alone,  had  been  saved  from  the  fire  of  Nimrod, 
and  the  Three  Children  from  the  burning  fur- 
nace, and  yet  the  high  priest  should  have  been 
singed  (Zech.  iii.  2),  Joshua  answered  that  the 
presence  of  two  wicked  men  gave  the  fire  power 
over  him,  and  quoted  the  proverb,  "  Two  dry 
sticks  kindle  one  green  one." 

In  "  Pesachin,"  f.  118,  i,  there  is  a  fine  imagin- 
ative passage  on  the  subject,  attributed  to  Rabbi 
Samuel  of  Shiloh: — 

"  In  the  hour  when  Nebuchadrezzar  the 
wicked  threw  Hananiah,  Mishrael,  and  Azariah 
into  the  midst  of  the  furnace  of  fire.  Gorgemi, 
the  prince  of  the  hail,  stood  before  the  Holy  One 
(blessed  be  He!)  and  said,  '  Lord  of  the  world, 
let  me  go  down  and  cool  the  furnace.'  '  No,' 
answered  Gabriel;  "all  men  know  that  hail 
quenches  fire;§  but  I,  the  prince  of  fire,  will  go 
down  and  make  the  furnace  cool  within  and 
hot  without,  and  thus  work  a  miracle  within 
a  miracle.'  The  Holy  One  (blessed  be  He!) 
said  unto  him,  '  Go  down.'    In  the  self-same  hour 

*Comp.  Gen.  xxiv.  7;  Exod.  xxiii.  20;  Deut.  xxxvi.  i. 
The  phrase  applied  to  Joshua  the  high  priest  (Zech.  iii.  2), 
"  Is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  out  of  the  burning  ?  "  origi- 
nated the  legend  that,  when  the  false  prophets  Ahab  and 
Zedekiah  had  been  burnt  by  Nebuchadrezzar  (Jer.  xxix. 
22K  Joshua  had  been  saved,  though  singed.  This  and 
other  apocryphal  stories  illustrate  the  evolution  of 
"  Haggadoth  "  out  of  metaphoric  allusions. 

t  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  23-27. 

{  "  Vay.  Rab.,"  xxv.  i  (Wiinsche,  "  Bibliotheca  Rab- 
binica").  ,  .. 

§  Ecclus.  xviii.  16 :  "  Shall  not  the  dew  assuage  tne 
heat?" 


398 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


Gabriel  opened  his  mouth  and  said,  *  And  the 
truth  of  the  Lord  endureth  for  ever.'  " 

Mr.  Ball,  who  quotes  these  passages  from 
Wiinsche's  "  Bibliotheca  Rabbinica  "  in  his  In- 
troduction to  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,* 
very  truly  adds  that  many  Scriptural  commen- 
tators wholly  lack  the  orientation  derived  from 
the  studv  of  Talmudic  and  Midrashic  literature 
which  is  an  indispensable  preliminary  to  a  right 
understanding  of  the  treasures  of  Eastern 
thought.  They  do  not  grasp  the  inveterate  ten- 
dency of  Jewish  teachers  to  convey  doctrine  by 
concrete  stories  and  illustrations,  and  not  in  the 
form  of  abstract  thought.  "  The  doctrine  is  every- 
thing; the  mode  of  presentation  has  no  independ- 
ent value."  To  make  the  story  the  first  consid- 
eration, and  the  doctrine  it  was  intended  to  con- 
vey an  after-thought,  as  we,  with  our  dry  West- 
ern literalness,  are  predisposed  to  do,  is  to  re- 
verse the  Jewish  order  of  thinking,  and  to  in- 
flict unconscious  injustice  on  the  authors  of 
many  edifying  narratives  of  antiquity. 

The  part  played  by  Daniel  in  the  apocryphal 
Story  of  Susanna  is  probably  suggested  by  the 
meaning  of  his  name:  "Judgment  of  God." 
Both  that  story  and  Bel  and  the  Dragon  are 
in  their  way  efifective  fictions,  though  incom- 
parably inferior  to  the  canonical  part  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel. 

And  the  startling  decree  of  Nebuchadrezzar 
finds  its  analogy  in  the  decree  published  by  An- 
tiochus  the  Great  to  all  his  subjects  in  honour 
of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  in  which  he  threat- 
ened the  infliction  of  heavy  fines  on  any  foreigner 
who  trespassed  within  the  limits  of  the  Holy 
Court.t 


CHAPTER   XIV. 

THE  BABYLONIAN  CEDAR,  AND   THE 
STRICKEN  DESPOT. 

Thrice  already,  in  these  magnificent  stories, 
had  Nebuchadrezzar  been  taught  to  recognise 
the  existence  and  to  reverence  the  power  of  God. 
In  this  chapter  he  is  represented  as  having  been 
brought  to  a  still  more  overwhelming  conviction, 
and  to  an  open  acknowledgment  of  God's  su- 
premacy, by  the  lightning-stroke  of  terrible 
calamity. 

The  chapter  is  dramatically  thrown  into  the 
form  of  a  decree  which,  alier  his  recovery  and 
shortly  before  his  death,  the  king  is  represented 
as  l)„ving  promulgated  to  "  all  people,  na- 
tions, and  languages  that  dwell  in  all  the  earth."  | 
But  the  literary  form  is  so  absolutely  subordi- 
nated to  the  general  purpose — which  is  to  show 
that  where  God's  "  judgments  are  in  the  earth 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  will  learn  righteous- 
ness," § — that  the  writer  passes  without  any  dif- 
ficulty from  the  first  to  the  third  person  (iv. 
20-30).  He  does  not  hesitate  to  represent  Ne- 
buchadrezzar as  addressing  all  the  subject  na- 
tions in  favour  of  the  God  of  Israel,  even  plac- 
ing in  his  imperial  decree  a  cento  of  Scriptural 
phraseology. 

*  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  on  the  Apocrypha,  ii.  305- 
307- 

tjos.,  "  Antt.,"  XII.  iii.  3;  Jahn,  "  Hebr.  Common- 
wealth," §  xc. 

t  Comp.  I  Mace.  i.  41,  42:  "And  the  king  [Antiochus 
Epiphanes]  wrote  to  his  whole  kingdom,  that  all  should 
be  one  people,  and  every  one  should  leave  his  laws." 

S  Isa.  xxvi.  9. 


Readers  unbiassed  by  a-priori  assumptions, 
which  are  broken  to  pieces  at  every  step,  will 
ask,  "  Is  it  even  historically  conceivable  that 
Nebuchadrezzar  (to  whom  the  later  Jews  com- 
monly gave  the  title  of  Ha-Rashang.  '  the 
wicked  ')  could  ever  have  issued  such  a  decree?  " 
They  will  further  ask,  "  Is  there  any  shadow 
of  evidence  to  show  that  the  king's  degrading 
madness  and  recovery  rest  upon  any  real  tradi- 
tion? " 

As  to  the  monuments  and  inscriptions,  they 
are  entirely  silent  upon  the  subject;  nor  is  there 
any  trace  of  these  events  in  any  historic  record. 
Those  who,  with  the  school  of  Hengstenberg 
and  Pusey,  think  that  the  narrative  receives  sup- 
port from  the  phrase  of  Berossus  that  Nebu- 
chadrezzar "  fell  sick  and  departed  this  life  when 
he  had  reigned  forty-three  years,"  must  be  eas- 
ily satisfied,  since  he  says  very  nearly  the  same 
of  Nabopolassar.  Such  writers  too  much  as- 
stune  that  immemorial  prejudices  on  the  sub- 
ject have  so  completely  weakened  the  independ- 
ent intelligence  of  their  readers,  that  they  may 
safely  make  assertions  which,  in  matters  of 
secular  criticism,  would  be  set  aside  as  almost 
childishly   nugatory. 

It  is  different  with  the  testimony  of  Abydenus, 
quoted  by  Eusebius.*  Abydenus,  in  his  book 
on  the  Assyrians,  quoted  from  Megasthenes 
the  story  that,  after  great  conquests,  "  Nebuchad- 
rezzar "  (as  the  Chaldean  story  goes),  "  when 
he  had  ascended  the  roof  of  his  palace,  was  in- 
spired by  some  god  or  other,  and  cried  aloud,  '  I, 
Nebuchadrezzar,  announce  to  you  the  future  ca- 
lamity which  neither  Bel,  my  ancestor,  nor  our 
queen  Beltis,  can  persuade  the  Fates  to  avert. 
There  shall  come  a  Persian,  a  mule,  who  shall 
have  your  own  gods  as  his  allies,  and  he  shall 
make  you  slaves.  Moreover,  he  who  shall  help 
to  bring  this  about  shall  be  the  son  of  a  Me- 
dian woman,  the  boast  of  the  Assyrian.  Would 
that  before  his  countrymen  perish  some  whirl- 
pool or  fiood  might  seize  him  and  destroy  him 
utterly:!  or  else  would  that  he  might  betake 
himself  to  some  other  place,  and  might  be  driven 
to  the  desert,  where  is  no  city  nor  track  of 
men,  where  zuild  beasts  seek  their  food  and  birds 
fly  hither  and  thither!  Would  that  among  rocks 
and  mountain  clefts  he  might  wander  alone!  And 
as  for  me,  may  I,  before  he  imagines  this,  meet 
with  some  happier  end!  '  When  he  had  thus 
prophesied,  he  suddenly  vanished." 

I  have  italicised  the  passages  which,  amid 
immense  differences,  bear  a  remote  analogy  to 
the  story  of  this  chapter.  To  quote  the  passage 
as  any  proof  that  the  writer  of  Daniel  is  nar- 
rating literal  history  is  an  extraordinary  mis- 
use of  it. 

Megasthenes  flourished  b.  c.  323,  and  wrote 
a  book  which  contained  many  fabulous  stories, 
three  centuries  after  the  events  to  which  he  al- 
ludes. Abydenus,  author  of  "  Assyriaca,"  was 
a  Greek  historian  of  still  later,  and  uncertain, 
date.  The  writer  of  Daniel  may  have  met  with 
their  works,  or,  quite  independently  of  them, 
he  may  have  learned  from  the  Babylonian  Jews 
that  there  was  some  strange  legend  or  other 
about  the  death  of  Nebuchadrezzar.  The  Jews 
in  Babylonia  were  more  numerous  and  more 
distinguished  than  those  in  Palestine,  and  kept 
up  constant  communication  with  them.     So  far 

*  "  Praep.  Ev.,"  Ix.  41. 

1 1  follow  the  better  readings  which  Mr.  Bevan  adopts 
from  Von  Gutschmid  and  Toup. 


THE    BABYLONIAN    CEDAR,    AND    THE    STRICKEN    DESPOT. 


399 


from  any  historical  accuracy  about  Babylon  in 
a  Palestinian  Jew  of  the  age  of  the  Maccabees 
being  strange,  or  furnishing  any  proof  that  he 
was  a  contemporary  of  Nebuchadrezzar,  the 
only  subject  of  astonishment  would  be  that  he 
should  have  fallen  into  so  many  mistakes  and 
inaccuracies,  were  it  not  that  the  ancients  in  gen- 
eral, and  the  Jews  particularly,  paid  little  atten- 
tion  to   such   matters. 

Aware,  then,  of  some  dim  traditions  that  Ne- 
buchadrezzar at  the  close  of  his  life  ascended  his 
palace  roof  and  there  received  some  sort  of  in- 
spiration, after  which  he  mysteriously  disap- 
peared, the  writer,  giving  free  play  to  his  imagi- 
nation for  didactic  purposes,  after  the  common 
fashion  of  his  age  and  nation,  worked  up  these 
slight  elements  into  the  stately  and  striking 
Midrash  of  this  chapter.  He  too  makes  the  king 
mount  his  palace  roof  and  receive  an  inspira- 
tion; but  in  his  pages  the  inspiration  does  not 
refer  to  the  "  mule "  or  half-breed,  Cyrus,  nor 
to  Nabunaid,  the  son  of  a  Median  woman,  nor 
to  any  imprecation  pronounced  upon  them,  but 
is  an  admonition  to  himself;  and  the  impre- 
cation which  he  denounced  upon  the  future  sub- 
verters  of  Babylon  is  dimly  analogous  to  the 
fate  which  fell  on  his  own  head.  Instead  of 
making  him  "  vanish  "  immediately  afterwards, 
the  writer  makes  him  fall  into  a  beast-madness 
for  "  seven  times,"  after  which  he  suddenly  re- 
covers and  publishes  a  decree  that  all  mankind 
should  honour  the  true  God. 

Ewald  thinks  that  a  verse  has  been  lost  at 
the  beginning  of  the  chapter,  indicating  the 
nature  of  the  document  which  follows;  but  it 
seems  more  probable  that  the  author  began  this, 
as  he  begins  other  chapters,  with  the  sort  of  im- 
posing overture  of  the  first  verse. 

Like  Assur-bani-pal  and  the  ancient  despots, 
Nebuchadrezzar  addresses  himself  to  "  all  peo- 
ple in  the  earth,"  and  after  the  salutation  of 
peace  *  says  that  he  thought  it  right  to  tell  them 
"  the  signs  and  wonders  that  the  High  God 
hath  wrought  towards  me.  How  great  are  His 
signs,  and  how  mighty  are  His  wonders!  His 
kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  His  do- 
minion is  from  generation  to  generation."} 

He  goes  on  to  relate  that,  while  he  was  at 
ease  and  secure  in  his  palace,^  he  saw  a  dream 
which  aflfrighted  him,  and  left  a  train  of  gloomy 
forebodings.  As  usual  he  summoned  the  whole 
train  of  "  Khakhamim,  Ashshaphim,  Mekash- 
shaphim,  Kasdim,  Chartummim,"  and  "  Gazer- 
im,"  to  interpret  his  dream,  and  as  usual  they 
failed  to  do  so.  Then,  lastly,  Daniel,  surnamed 
Belteshazzar,  after  Bel,  Nebuchadrezzar's  god,;:^ 
and  "  chief  of  the  magicians,"  ||  in  whom  was 
"  the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods,"  is  summoned.  To 
him  the  king  tells  his  dream. 

The  writer  probably  derives  the  images  of  the 
dream  from  the  magnificent  description  of  the 
King  of  Assyria  as  a  spreading  cedar  in  Ezek. 
xxxi.   3-18: — 

"  Behold,  the  Assyrian  was  a  cedar  in  Leb- 
anon with  fair  branches,  and  with  a  shadowing 
shroud,  and  of  an  high  stature;  and  his  top  was 

*  Comp  Ezra  iv.  7,  vii.  12. 

tif  Nebuchadrezzar  wrote  this  edict,  he  must  have 
been  very  familiar  with  the  language  of  Scripture.  See 
Deut.  vi.'  22  ;  Isa.  viii.  18  ;  Psalm  Ixxviii.  12-16,  cvi.  2  ; 
Mic.  iv.  7,  etc. 

XHeykal,  "palace  "  ;  Bab.,  ikallu.  Comp.  Amos  viii.  3. 
See  the  palace  described  in  Layard,  "  Nineveh  and  Baby- 
lon." 

§  A  mistake  of  the  writer.     See  supra,  p.  385. 

I  '■  Rab-chartummava.  ■■ 


among  the  thick  boughs.  The  waters  nourished 
him,  the  deep  made  him  to  grow.  .  .  .  There- 
fore his  stature  was  exalted  above  all  the  trees 
of  the  field;  and  his  boughs  were  multiplied, 
and  his  branches  became  long  by  reason  of  many 
waters.  AH  the  fowls  of  the  air  made  their  nests 
in  his  boughs,  and  under  his  branches  did  all 
the  beasts  of  the  field  bring  forth  their  young, 
and  under  his  shadow  dwelt  all  great  nations. 
.  .  .  The  cedars  in  the  garden  o-f  God  could 
not  hide  him  .  .  .  nor  was  any  tree  in  the 
garden  of  God  like  him  in  his  beauty.  .  .  . 
Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  God:  Because 
thou  art  exalted  in  stature  ...  I  will  deliver 
him  into  the  hand  of  the  mighty  one  of  the 
nations.  .  .  .  And  strangers,  the  terrible  of 
the  nations,  have  cut  him  ofif,  and  have  left 
him.  Upon  the  mountains  and  in  all  the  val- 
leys his  branches  are  broken  .  .  .  and  all  the 
people  of  the  earth  are  gone  down  from  his 
shadow,  and  have  left  him.  ...  I  made  the 
nations  to  shake  at  the  sound  of  his  fall." 

We  may  also  compare  this  dream  with  that 
of  Cambyses  narrated  by  Herodotus  *  :  "  He 
fancied  that  a  vine  grew  from  the  womb  of 
his  daughter  and  overshadowed  the  whole  of 
Asia.  .  .  .  The  magian  interpreter  expounded 
the  vision  to  foreshow  that  the  offspring  of  his 
daughter  would  reign  over  Asia  in  his  stead." 

So  too  Nebuchadrezzar  in  his  dream  had  seen 
a  tree  in  the  midst  of  the  earth,  of  stately 
height,  which  reached  to  heaven  and  over- 
shadowed the  world,  with  fair  leaves  and  abund- 
ant fruit,  giving  large  nourishment  to  all  man- 
kind, and  shade  to  the  beasts  of  the  field  and 
fowls  of  the  heaven.  The  LXX.  adds  with 
glowing  exaggeration,  "  The  sun  and  moon 
dwelled  in  it,  and  gave  light  to  the  whole  earth. 
And,  behold,  a  watcher  {"ir)  and  a  holy  one 
(qaddish)  came  down  from  heaven,  and  bade, 
Hew  down,  and  lop,  and  strip  the  tree,  and 
scatter  his  fruit,  and  scare  away  the  beasts  and 
birds  from  it,  but  leave  the  stump  in  the  green- 
ing turf  bound  by  a  band  of  brass  and  iron, 
and  let  it  be  wet  with  heaven's  dews," — and 
then,  passing  from  the  image  to  the  thing  sig- 
nified, "  and  let  his  portion  be  with  the  beasts 
in  the  grass  of  the  earth.  Let  his  heart  be 
changed  from  man's,  and  let  a  beast's  heart  be 
given  unto  him,  and  let  seven  times  pass  over 
him."  We  are  not  told  to  whom  the  mandate 
is  given — that  is  left  magnificently  vague.  The 
object  of  this  "  sentence  of  the  watchers,  and 
utterance  of  the  'holy  ones,"  is  that  the  living 
may  know  that  the  Most  High  is  the  Supreme 
King,  and  can,  if  He  will,  give  rule  even  to 
the  lowliest.  Nebuchadrezzar,  who  tells  us  in 
his  inscription  that  "  he  never  forgave  impiety," 
has  to  learn  that  he  is  nothing,  and  that  God 
is  all, — that  "  He  puUeth  down  the  mighty  from 
their  seat,  and  exalteth  the  humble  and  meek." 

This  dream  Nebuchadrezzar  bids  Daniel  to 
interpret,  "  because  thou  hast  the  spirit  of  a 
Holy  God  in  thee." 

Before  we  proceed  let  us  pause  for  a  moment 
to  notice  the  agents  of  the  doom.  It  is  one  of 
the  never-sleeping  ones — an  'ir  and  a  holy  one 
— who  flashes  down  from  heaven  with  the  man- 
date; and  he  is  only  the  mouthpiece  of  the  whole 
body  of  the  watchers  and  holy  ones. 

Generally,  no  doubt,  the  phrase  means  an  an- 
gelic denizen  of  heaven.  The  LXX.  translates 
watcher   by   ''  angel."     Theodotion,    feeling   that 

*  Herod.,"'  i.  108. 


400 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


there  is  something  technical  in  the  word,  which 
only  occurs  in  tiiis  chapter,  renders  it  by  etp.  This 
is  the  first  appearance  of  the  term  in  Jewish 
literature,  but  it  becomes  extremely  comrnon  in 
later  Jewish  writings — as,  for  instance,  in  the 
Book  of  Enoch.  The  term  "  a  holy  one "  * 
connotes  the  dedicated  separation  of  the  angels; 
for  in  the  Old  Testament  holiness  is  used  to 
express  consecration  and  setting  apart,  rather 
than,  moral  stainlessness.f  The  "seven  watch- 
ers "  are  alluded  to  in  the  )ost-exilic  Zechariah 
(iv.  lo) :  "They  see  with  ,'oy  the  plummet  in 
the  hand  of  Zerubbabel,  even  those  seven,  the 
eyes  of  the  Lord;  they  run  to  and  fro  through 
the  whole  earth."  In  this  verse  Kohut  I  and 
Kuenen  read  "  watchers  "  ('irim)  for  "  eyes  " 
('inim),  and  we  find  these  seven  watchers  in  the 
Book  of  Enoch  (chap.  xx.).  We  see  as  an 
historic  fact  that  the  familiarity  of  the  Jews 
with  Persian  angelology  and  demonology  seems 
to  have  developed  their  views  on  the  subject. 
It  is  only  after  the  Exile  that  we  find  angels 
and  demons  playing  a  more  prominent  part  than 
before,  divided  into  classes,  and  even  marked 
out  by  special  names.  The  Apocrypha  becomes 
more  precise  than  the  cat  onical  books,  and  the 
later  pseudepigraphic  books,  which  advance  still 
further,  are  left  behind  by  the  Talmud.  Some 
have  supposed  a  connection  between  the  seven 
watchers  and  the  Persian  "  amschashpands."  J^ 
The  "  shedim,"  or  evil  spirits,  are  also  seven  in 
number, — 

"  Seven  are  they,  seven  are  they  ! 
In  the  channel  of  the  deep  seven  are  they, 
In  the  radiance  of  heaven  seven  are  they  !  "  !| 

It  is  true  that  in  Enoch  (xc.  gi)  the  prophet 
sees  "  the  first  six  white  ones,"  and  we  find  six 
also  in  Ezek.  ix.  2.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
find  seven  in  Tobit:  "  I  am  Raphael,  one  of 
the  seven  holy  angels  which  present  the  prayers 
of  the  saints,  and  which  go  in  and  out  before 
the  glory  of  the  Holy  One."  IF  The  names  are 
variously  given;  but  perhaps  the  commonest  are 
Michael,  Gabriel,  Uriel,  Raphael,  and  Raguel.** 
In  the  Babylonian  mythology  seven  deities  stood 
at  the  head  of  all  Divine  beings,  and  the  seven 
planetary  spirits  watched  the  gates  of  Hades. ft 

To  Daniel,  when  he  had  heard  the  dream,  it 
seemed  so  full  of  portentous  omen  that  "  he 
was  astonished  for  one  hour."  tt  Seeing  his 
agitation,  the  king  bids  him  take  courage  and 
fearlessly  interpret  the  dream.  But  it  is  an  augury 
of  fearful  visitation;  so  he  begins  with  a  formula 
intended  as  it  were  to  avert  the  threatened  con- 
sequences. "  My  Lord,"  he  exclaimed,  on  re- 
covering voice,  "  the  dream  be  to  them  that  hate 
thee,  and  the  interpretation  to  thine  enemies."  §§ 

*Comp.  Zech.  xiv.  5;  Psalm  Ixxxix.  6. 

t  See  Job  xv.  15. 

t  Dr.  A.  Kohut,  "  Die  jiidische  Angelologie,"  p.  6,  n.  17. 

§  For  a  full  examination  of  the  subject  see  Oehler, 
"Theol.  of  the  O.  T.,"  §  59,  pp.  195  ff.;  Schultz,  "  Alttest. 
Theol.,"  p.  555;  Hamburger,  "  Real-Encycl.,"  i.,  s.  v. 
"Engel";  Professor  Puller,  "Speaker's  Commentary" 
on  the  Apocrypha.  Tobit,  i.,  171-183. 

II  Sayce,  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  ix.  140. 

^  The  number  seven  is  not,  however,  found  in  all  texts, 

**The  Jewish  tradition  admits  that  the  names  of  the 
angels  came  from  Persia  ("Rosh  Hashanah."  f.  56,  i; 
"  Bereshith  Rabba,"  c.  48  ;  Kiehm,  "  R.  W.  B.,"  i.  381). 

tt  Descent  of  Islitar,  "Recordsof  the  Past,"  i.  141.  Botta 
found  seven  rude  figures  buried  under  the  thresholds  of 
doors. 

tt  The  Targum  understands  it  "  for  a  moment." 

§§The  wish  was  quite  natural.  It  is  needless  to  follow 
Rashi,  etc.,  in  making  this  an  address  to  God,  as  though 
it  were  a  prayer  to  Him  that  ruin  might  fall  on  His  enemy 
Nebuchadrezzar.  Comp.  Ov.,  "Fast.,"  iii.  494:  "  Eveniat 
nostris  hostibus  ille  color." 


The  king  would  regard  it  as  a  sort  of  appeal 
to  the  averting  deities  (the  Roman  Di  Averrunci), 
and  as  analogous  to  the  current  formula  of  his 
hymns,  "  From  the  noxious  spirit  may  the  King 
of  heaven  and  the  king  of  earth  preserve 
thee!  "  *  He  then  proceeds  to  tell  the  king  that 
the  fair,  stately,  sheltering  tree — "  it  is  thou,  O 
king  "  ;  and  the  interpretation  of  the  doom  pro- 
nounced upon  it  that  he  should  be  driven  from 
men,  and  should  dwell  with  the  beasts  of  the 
field,  and  be  reduced  to  eat  grass  like  the  oxen, 
and  be  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  "  and  seven 
times  shall  pass  over  thee,  till  thou  shalt  know 
that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of 
men,  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  He  will." 
But  as  the  stump  of  the  tree  was  to  be  left  in 
the  fresh  green  grass,  so  the  kingdom  should 
be  restored  to  him  when  he  had  learnt  that  the 
Heavens   do  rule. 

The  only  feature  of  the  dream  which  is  left 
uninterpreted  is  the  binding  of  the  stump  with 
bands  of  iron  and  brass.  Most  commentators 
follow  Jerome  in  making  it  refer  to  the  fetters 
with  which  maniacs  are  bound, t  but  there  is  no 
evidence  that  Nebuchadrezzar  was  so  restrained, 
and  the  bands  round  the  stumo  are  for  its  pro- 
tection from  injury.  This  seen.s  preferable  to 
the  view  which  explains  them  as  "  the  stern  and 
crushing  sentence  under  which  t'he  king  is  to 
lie."  X  Josephus  and  the  Jewish  exegetes  take 
the  "seven  times"  to  be  "seven  years";  but 
the  phrase  is  vague,  and  the  event  is  evidently 
represented  as  taking  place  at  the  close  of  the 
king's  reign.  Instead  of  using  the  awful  name 
of  Jehovah,  the  prophet  uses  the  distant  peri- 
phrases of  "  the  Heavens."  It  was  a  phrase 
which  became  common  in  later  Jewish  literature, 
and  a  Babylonian  king  would  be  familiar  with 
it;  for  in  the  inscriptions  we  find  Maruduk  ad- 
dressed as  the  "  great  Heavens,"  the  father  of 
the  gods.§ 

Having  faithfully  interpreted  the  fearful  warn- 
ing of  the  dream,  Daniel  points  out  that  the 
menaces  of  doom  are  sometimes  conditional, 
and  may  be  averted  or  delayed.  "  Wherefore," 
he  says,  "  O  king,  let  my  counsel  be  acceptable 
unto  thee,  and  break  ofif  thy  sins  by  righteous- 
ness, and  thine  iniquities  by  showing  mercy  to 
the  poor;  if  so  be  there  may  be  a  healing  of  thy 
error."  1| 

This  pious  exhortation  of  Daniel  has  been 
severely  criticised  from  opposite  directions. 

The  Jewish  Rabbis,  in  the  very  spirit  of  big- 
otry and  false  religion,  said  that  Daniel  was  sub- 
sequently thrown  into  the  den  of  lions  to  punish 
him  for  the  crime  of  tendering  good  advice  to 
Nebuchadrezzar;  IF  and,  moreover,  the  advice 
could  not  be  of  any  real  use;  "  for  even  if  the 
nations  of  the  world  do  righteousness  and  mercy 
to  prolong  their  dominion,  it  is  only  sin  to 
them."  ** 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Roman  Catholics  have 
made  it  their  chief  support  for  the  doctrine  of 
good  works,  which  is  so  severely  condemned  in 
the   twelfth  of  our  Articles. 

Probably    no    such    theological    questions    re- 

*  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  i.  133. 

t  Mark  v.  3. 

i  Bevan,  p.  92. 

§  In  the  ••  Mishnah"  often  Shamayim  ;  N.  T.,  ^  pa(ri\eia 
Tto)V  ovpavuiv. 

II  Or,  as  in  A.  V.  and  Hi-tzig,  "  if  it  may  be  a  lengthening 
of  thy  tranquillity  "  ;  but  Ewald  reads  arukah^  "  healing  " 
(Isa.  Iviii.  8),  for  ar'kah. 

\  "  Baba  Bathra,"  f.  4,  i. 

**  "  Berachoth,"  f.  10,  2  :  f.  57,  2. 


THE    BABYLONIAN    CEDAR,    AND    THE    STRICKEN    DESPOT.         401 


motely  entered  into  the  mind  of  the  writer.  Per- 
haps the  words  should  be  rendered  "  break  off 
thy  sins  by  righteousness,"  rather  than  (as 
Theodotion  renders  them)  "  redeem  thy  sins  by 
almsgiving."  *  It  is,  however,  certain  that 
among  the  Pharisees  and  the  later  Rabbis  there 
was  a  grievous  limitation  of  the  sense  of  the 
word  tzedakah,  "  righteousness,"  to  mean 
merely  almsgiving.  In  Matt.  vi.  i  it  is  well 
known  tliat  the  reading  "  alms  "  (i\€r)fw<Tijvr)v) 
has  in  the  received  text  displaced  the  reading 
"righteousness"  (SiKawo-iJcrjc);  and  in  the  Tal- 
mud "  righteousness  " — like  our  shrunken  mis- 
use of  the  word  "  charity  " — means  almsgiving. 
The  value  of  "  alms  "  has  often  been  extrava- 
gantly exalted.  Thus  we  read:  "  Whoever  shears 
his  substance  for  the  poor  escapes  the  condem- 
nation of  hell  "  ("  Nedarim,"  f.  22,  i). 

In  "  Baba  Bathra,"  f.  10,  i,  and  "  Rosh  Has- 
hanah,"  f.  16,  2,  we  have  "  alms  delivered  from 
death,"  as  a  gloss  on  the  meaning  of  Prov.  xi.  4.  f 

We  cannot  tell  that  the  writer  shared  these 
views.  He  probably  meant  no  more  than  that 
cruelty  and  injustice  were  the  chief  vices  of 
despots,  and  that  the  only  way  to  avert  a  threat- 
ened calamity  was  by  repenting  of  them.  The 
necessity  for  compassion  in  the  abstract  was 
recognised  even  by  the  most  brutal  Assyrian 
kings. 

We  are  next  told  the  fulfilment  of  the  dark 
dream.  The  interpretation  had  been  meant  to 
warn  the  king;  but  the  warning  was  soon  forgot- 
ten by  one  arrayed  in  such  absolutism  of  im- 
perial power.  The  intoxication  of  pride  had  be- 
come habitual  in  his  heart,  and  twelve  months 
sutificed  to  obliterate  all  solemn  thoughts.  The 
Septuagint  adds  that  "  he  kept  the  words  in  his 
heart";  but  the  absence  of  any  mention  of  re- 
wards or  honours  paid  to  Daniel  is  perhaps  a 
sign  that  he  was  rather  offended  that  impressed. 

A  year  later  he  was  walking  on  the  fiat  roof 
of  the  great  palace  of  the  kingdom  of  Babylon. 
The  sight  of  that  golden  city  in  the  zenith  of 
its  splendour  may  well  have  dazzled  the  soul  of 
its  founder.  He  tells  us  in  an  inscription  that 
he  regarded  that  city  as  the  apple  of  his  eye, 
and  that  the  palace  was  its  most  glorious  orna- 
ment.t  It  was  in  the  centre  of  the  whole  country; 
it  covered  a  vast  space,  and  was  visible  far  and 
wide.  It  was  built  of  brick  and  bitumen,  en- 
riched with  cedar  and  iron,  decorated  with  in- 
scriptions and  paintings.  The  tower  "  con- 
tained the  treasures  of  my  imperishable  royalty; 
and  silver,  gold,  metals,  gems,  nameless  and 
priceless,  and  immense  treasures  of  rare  value," 
had  been  lavished  upon  it.  Begun  "  in  a  happy 
month,  and  on  an  auspicious  day,"  it  had  been 
finished  in  fifteen  days  by  armies  of  slaves.  This 
palace  and  its  celebrated  hanging  gardens  were 
one   of  the   wonders   of  the   world. 

Beyond  this  superb  edifice,  where  now  the 
hyena  prowls  amid  miles  of  debris  and  mounds  of 
ruin,  and  where  the  bittern  builds  amid  pools  of 
water,  lay  the  unequalled  city  Its  walls  were 
three  hundred  and  eighty  feet  high  and  eighty- 

*Theodot.,  rds  afiapria;  crov  iv  eAfjj^oo'ui'ais  AuTptocrat  ; 
Vulg.,  peccata  tua  eleeniosynis  redime.  Comp.  Psalm 
cxii.  9.  This  exaltation  of  almsgiving  is  a  characteristic 
of  later  Judaism  CEcclus.  iv.  5-10  ;  Tobit  iv.  11). 

t  Comp.  Prov.  X.  2,  xvi.  6  ;  "  Sukka,"  f.  49,  2.  The  theo- 
logical and  ethical  question  involved  is  discussed  by 
Calvin.  "  Instt.,"  iii.  4  ;  Bellarmine,  "  De  Poenitent.,"  ii.  6 
(Behrmann). 

X  It  is  now  called  Kasr,  but  the  Arabs  call  it  Mujelibe. 
"The  Ruined." 

26— Vol.  IV. 


five  feet  thick,  and  each  side  of  the  quadrilateral 
they  enclosed  was  fifteen  miles  in  length.  The 
mighty  Euphrates  flowed  through  the  midst  of 
the  city,  which  is  said  to  have  covered  a  space 
of  two  hundred  square  miles;  and  on  its  farther 
bank,  terrace  above  terrace,  up  to  its  central 
altar,  rose  the  huge  Temple  of  Bel,  with  all  its 
dependent  temples  and  palaces.*  The  vast  cir- 
cuit of  the  walls  enclosed  no  mere  wilderness  of 
houses,  but  there  were  interspaces  of  gardens, 
and  palm-groves,  and  orchards,  and  corn-land, 
sufficient  to  maintain  the  whole  population. 
Here  and  there  rose  the  temples  reared  to  Nebo, 
and  Sin  the  moon-god,  and  Mylitta,  and  Nana, 
and  Samas,  and  other  deities;  and  there  were 
aqueducts  or  conduits  for  water,  and  forts  and 
palaces;  and  the  walls  were  pierced  with  a  hun- 
dred brazen  gates.  When  Milton  wanted  to  find 
some  parallel  to  the  city  of  Pandemonium  in 
"  Paradise  Lost,"  he  could  only  say, — 

"Not  Babylon, 
Nor  great  Alcairo  such  magnificence 
Equaird  in  all  their  glories,  to  enshrine 
Belus  or  Serapis  their  gods,  or  seat  _ 

Their  kings,  when  Egypt  with  Assyria  strove 
In  wealth  and  luxury." 

Babylon,  to  use  the  phrase  of  Aristotle,  included, 
not  a  city,  but  a  nation. f 

Enchanted  by  the  glorious  spectacle  of  this 
house  of  his  royalty  and  abode  of  his  majesty, 
the  despot  exclaimed  almost  in  the  words  of 
some  of  his  own  inscriptions,  "  Is  not  this  great 
Babylon,  that  I  have  built  for  the  house  of  the 
kingdom  by  the  might  of  my  treasures  and  for 
the  honour  of  my  majesty  ?  " 

The  Bible  always  represents  to  us  that  pride 
and  arrogant  self-confidence  are  an  ofTence 
against  God.  The  doom  fell  on  Nebuchadrezzar 
"  while  the  haughty  boast  was  still  in  the  king's 
mouth."  The  suddenness  of  the  Nemesis  of 
pride  is  closely  paralleled  by  the  scene  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  which  Herod  Agrippa  I. 
is  represented  as  entering  the  theatre  at  Caesarea 
to  receive  the  deputies  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  He 
was  clad,  says  Josephus,  in  a  robe  of  intertissued 
silver,  and  when  the  sun  shone  upon  it  he  was 
surrounded  with  a  blaze  of  splendour.  Struck 
by  the  scene,  the  people,  when  he  had  ended  his 
harangue  to  them,  shouted,  "  It  is  the  voice  of 
a  god,  and  not  of  a  man!  "  Herod,  too,  in  the 
story  of  Josephus,  had  received,  just  before,  an 
ominous  warning;  but  it  came  to  him  in  vain. 
He  accepted  the  blasphemous  adulation,  and  im- 
mediately, smitten  by  the  angel  of  God,  he  was 
eaten  of  worms,  and  in  three  days  was  dead.t 

And  something  like  this  we  see  again  and 
again  in  what  the  late  Bishop  Thirlwall  called 
the  "  irony  of  history  " — the  very  cases  in  which 
men  seem  to  have  been  elevated  to  the  very  sum- 
mit of  power  only  to  heighten  the  dreadful  preci- 
pice over  which  they  immediately  fall.  He  men- 
tions the  cases  of  Persia,  which  was  on  the  verge 
of  ruin,  when  with  lordly  arrogance  she  dictated 
the  Peace  of  Antalcidas;  of  Boniface  VIII.,  in 
the  Jubilee  of  1300,  immediately  preceding  his 
deadly  overthrow;  of  Spain,  under  Philip  II., 
struck  down  by  the  ruin  of  the  Armada  at  the 
zenith  of  her  wealth  and  pride.  He  might  have 
added  the  instances  of  Ahab,  Sennacherib,  Nebu- 

*  Birs-Nimrod  (Grote,  "Hist,  of  Greece,"  III.,  chap, 
xix.;  Layard    "  Nin   and  Bab.,"  chap.  ii.). 

tArist'.,  "Polit.,"  III.  i.  12.  He  says  that  three  days 
after  its  capture  .some  of  its  inhabitants  were  still  una- 
ware of  the  fact. 

X  Acts  xii.  20-23  i  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  XIV.  viii.  2. 


402 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


chadrezzar,  and  Herod  Antipas;  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  dying  as  the  fool  dieth.  drunken  and  mis- 
erable, in  the  supretne  hour  of  his  conquests;  of 
Napoleon,  hurled  into  the  dust,  first  by  the  re- 
treat from  Moscow,  then  by  the  overthrow  at 
Waterloo. 

"  While  the  word  was  yet  in  the  king's  mouth, 
there  fell  a  voice  from  heaven."  It  was  what 
the  Talmudists  alluded  to  so  frequently  as  the 
"  Bath  Q61,"  or  "  daughter  of  a  voice,"  which 
came  sometimes  for  the  consolation  of  suffering, 
sometimes  for  the  admonition  of  overweening 
arrogance.  It  announced  to  him  the  fulfilment 
of  the  dream  and  its  interpretation.  As  with  one 
lightning-flash  the  glorious  cedar  was  blasted,  its 
leaves  scattered,  its  fruits  destroyed,  its  shelter 
reduced  to  burning  and  barrenness.  Then  some- 
how the  man's  heart  was  taken  from  him.  He 
was  driven  forth  to  dwell  among  the  beasts  of 
the  field,  to  eat  grass  like  oxen.  Taking  himself 
for  an  animal  in  his  degrading  humiliation  he 
lived  in  the  open  field.  The  dews  of  heaven  fell 
upon  him.  His  unkempt  locks  grew  rough  like 
eagles'  feathers,  his  uncut  nails  like  claws.  In 
this  condition  he  remained  till  "  seven  times " 
— some  vague  and  sacred  cycle  of  days — passed 
over  him. 

His  penalty  was  nothing  absolutely  abnormal. 
His  illness  is  well  known  to  science  and  national 
tradition  as  that  form  of  hypochondriasis  in 
which  a  man  takes  himself  for  a  wolf  (lycan- 
thropy),  or  a  dog  (kynanthropy),  or  some  other 
animal.*  Probably  the  fifth-century  monks,  who 
were  known  as  "  Boskoi,"  from  feeding  on  grass, 
may  have  been,  in  many  cases,  half  maniacs  who 
in  time  took  themselves  for  oxen.  Cornill,  so 
far  as  I  know,  is  the  first  to  point  out  the  curi- 
ous circumstance  that  a  notion  as  to  the  points 
of  analogy  between  Nebuchadwezzar  (thus  spelt) 
and  Antiochus  Epiphanes  may  have  been 
strengthened  by  the  Jewish  method  of  mystic 
commentary  known  in  the  Talmud  as  "  Ge- 
matria,"  and  in  Greek  as  "  Isopsephism."  That 
such  methods,  in  other  forms,  were  known  and 
practised  in  early  times  we  find  from  the  substi- 
tution of  Sheshach  for  Babel  in  Jer.  xxv.  26, 
li.  41,  and  of  Tabeal  (by  some  cryptogram)  for 
Remaliah  in  Isa.  vii.  6;  and  of  lebh  kamai  ("  them 
that  dwell  in  the  midst  of  them  ")  for  Kasdim 
(Chaldeans)  in  Jer.  li.  i.  These  forms  are  only 
explicable  by  the  interchange  of  letters  known 
as  Athbash,  Albam,  etc.  Now  Nebuchadnez- 
zar =  423 : — 

J  =  50  ;     3  =  2;    1  =  6;    3  =  20  ;    T  =  4  ; 
J  =  50 ;  K  =  I  ;  X  =  90  ;  1  =  200  =  423. 

And  Antiochus  Epiphanes  =  423 : — 

N=i;   3  =  50;    13  =  9;  ••  =  10;  1  =  6; 

3=2o;1  =  6;D  =  6o  = 
K  =91 :  Q  =  70 ;  ••  =  10 ;  B  =  70  ;  J  = 

D  =  60  = 

The  madness  of  Antiochus  was  recognised  in 
the  popular  change  of  his  name  from  Epiphanes 
to  Epimanes.  But  there  were  obvious  points  of 
resemblance  between  these  potentates.  Both  of 
them  conquered  Jerusalem.  Both  of  them 
robbed  the  Temple  of  its  holy  vessels.  Both 
of  them  were  liable  to  madness.  Both  of  them 
tried  to  dictate  the  religion  of  their  subjects. 

*  For  further  information  on  this  subject  I  may  refer  to 
my  paper  on  "  Rabbinic  Exegesis,"  Expositor,  v.  362-378. 
The  fact  that  there  are  slight  variations  in  spelling  Nebu- 
chadwezzar and  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  of  no  importance. 


:  o  ; 

162) 

50  ;  V  =  423. 
261  ) 


What  happened  to  the  kingdom  of  Babylon 
during  the  interim  is  a  point  with  which  the 
writer  does  not  trouble  himself.  It  formed  no 
part  of  his  story  or  of  his  moral.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  the  chief 
mages  and  courtiers  may  have  continued  to  rule 
in  the  king's  name — a  course  rendered  all  the 
more  easy  by  the  extreme  seclusion  in  which 
most  Eastern  monarchs  pass  their  lives,  often 
unseen  by  their  subjects  from  one  year's  end  to 
the  other.  Alike  in  ancient  days  as  in  modern 
— witness  the  cases  of  Charles  VI.  of  France, 
Christian  VII.  of  Denmark,  George  III.  of  Eng- 
land, and  Otho  of  Bavaria — a  king's  madness  is 
not  allowed  to  interfere  with  the  normal  admin- 
istration of  the  kingdom. 

When  the  seven  "  times  " — whether  years  or 
brief  periods — were  concluded,  Nebuchadrezzar 
"  lifted  up  his  eyes  to  heaven,"  and  his  under- 
standing returned  to  him.  No  further  light  is 
thrown  on  his  recovery,  which  (as  is  not  infre- 
quently the  case  in  madness)  was  as  sudden  as 
his  aberration.  Perhaps  the  calm  of  the  infinite 
azure  over  his  head  flowed  into  his  troubled  soul, 
and  reminded  him  that  (as  the  inscriptions  say) 
"  the  Heavens  "  are  "  the  father  of  the  gods."  * 
At  any  rate,  with  that  upward  glance  came  the 
restoration    of  his   reason. 

He  instantly  blessed  the  Most  High,  "  and 
praised  and  honoured  Him  who  Hveth  for  ever, 
whose  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  and 
His  kingdom  is  from  generation  to  generation.! 
And  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  are  reputed 
as  nothing;  and  He  doeth  according  to  His  will  X 
in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  earth  ;^  and  none  can  stay  His  hand, 
or  say  unto  Him,  What  doest  Thou?  "  || 

Then  his  lords  and  counsellors  reinstated  him 
in  his  former  majesty;  his  honour  and  brightness 
returned  to  him;  he  was  once  more  "that  head 
of  gold  "  in  his  kingdom. ■fT 

He  concludes  the  story  with  the  words:  "  Now 
I  Nebuchadnezzar  praise  and  extol  and  honour 
the  King  of  heaven,  all  whose  works  are  truth 
and  His  ways  judgment;  **  and  those  that  walk 
in  pride  He  is  able  to  abase. "ft 

He  died  b.  c.  561,  and  was  deified,  leaving  be- 
hind him  an  invincible  name. 


CHAPTER  XV. 
THE  FIERY  INSCRIPTION. 

In  this  chapter  again  we  have  another  mag- 
nificent fresco-picture,  intended,  as  was  the  last 
— but  under  circumstances  of  aggravated  guilt 
and  more  terrible  menace — to  teach  the  lesson 
that  "  verily  there  is  a  God  that  judgeth  the 
earth." 

The  truest  way  to  enjoy  the  chapter,  and  to 
grasp  the  lessons  which  it  is  meant  to  inculcate 
in  their  proper  force  and  vividness,  is  to  con- 
sider it  wholly  apart  from  the  difficulties  as  to 

*  Psalm  exxiii.  i.    See  Eurypides,  "  Bacchae,"  699. 

tExod.  xvii.  16. 

X  Psalm  cxlv.  13. 

§  Isa.  xxiv.  21,  xl.  IS,  17.  For  the  "host  of  heaven" 
(o-Tparia  ovpavtos,  Luke  ii.  13)  see  Isa.  xl.  26 ;  Job  xxxviii. 
7  ;  I  Kings  xxii.  iq  ;  Enoch  xviii.  14-16  ;  Matt.  xi.  25. 

II  Isa.  xliii.  13,  xlv.  9  ;  Psalm  cxxxv.  6  ;  Job  ix.  12  ;  Eccles. 
viii.  4.  The  phrase  for  "to  reprove"  is  literally  "to 
strike  on  the  hand,"  and  is  common  in  later  Jewish 
writers. 

1|  Dan.  ii.  38. 

**  Psalm  xxxiii.  4. 

tt  Exod.  xviii.  11. 


THE    FIRRY    INSCRIPTION. 


403 


i 


its 'literal  truth.  To  read  it  aright,  and  duly  esti- 
mate its  grandeur,  we  must  relegate  to  the  con- 
clusion of  the  story  all  worrying  questions,  im- 
possible of  ^nal  solution,  as  to  whom  the  writer 
intended  by  Belshazzar,  or  whom  by  Darius  the 
Mede.*  All  such  discussions  are  extraneous  to 
edification,  and  in  no  way  affect  either  the  con- 
summate skill  of  the  picture  or  the  eternal  truths 
of  which  it  is  the  symbolic  expression.  To  those 
who,  with  the  present  writer,  are  convinced,  by 
evidence  from  every  quarter — from  philology, 
history,  the  testimony  of  the  inscriptions,  and 
the  manifold  results  obtained  by  the  Higher  Crit- 
icism— that  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  the  work  of 
some  holy  and  highly  gifted  "Chasid"  in  the  days 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  it  becomes  clear  that 
the  story  of  Belshazzar,  whatever  dim  fragments 
of  Babylonian  tradition  it  may  enshrine,  is  really 
suggested  by  the  profanity  of  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes in  carrying  off,  and  doubtless  subjecting  to 
profane  usage,  many  of  the  sacred  vessels  of 
the  Temple  of  Jerusalem.!  The  retribution 
which  awaited  the  wayward  Seleucid  tyrant  is 
prophetically  intimated  by  the  menace  of  doom 
which  received  such  immediate  fulfilment  in  the 
case  of  the  Babylonian  King.  The  humiliation 
of  the  guilty  conqueror,  "  Nebuchadrezzar  the 
Wicked,"  who  founded  the  Empire  of  Babylon, 
is  followed  by  the  overthrow  of  his  dynasty  in 
the  person  of  his  "  son,''  and  the  capture  of  his 
vast  capital. 

"  It  is  natural,"  says  Ewald,  "  that  thus  the 
picture  drawn  in  this  narrative  should  become, 
under  the  hands  of  our  author,  a  true  night- 
piece,  with  all  the  colours  of  the  dissolute,  ex- 
travagant riot,  of  luxurious  passion  and  growing 
madness,  of  ruinous  bewilderment,  and  of  the 
mysterious  horror  and  terror  of  such  a  night  of 
revelry  and  death." 

The  description  of  the  scene  begins  with  one 
of  those  crashing  overtures  of  which  the  writer 
duly  estimated  the  effect  upon  the  imagination. 

"  Belshazzar  the  king  made  a  great  feast  to 
a  thousand  of  his  lords,  and  drank  wine  before 
the  thousand."  t     The  banquet  may  have  been 

*  The  question  has  already  been  fully  discussed  (supra. 
pp.  367-368).    The  apologists  say  that— 

1.  Belshazzar  was  Evil-merodach  (Niebuhr,  Wolff, 
Bishop  Westcott,  Zockler,  Keil,  etc.),  as  the  son  of  Nebu- 
chadrezzar (Dan.  V.  2,  II,  18,  22),  and  his  successor  (Ba- 
ruch  i.  II,  12,  where  he  is  called  Balthasar,  as  in  the  LXX.). 
The  identification  is  impossible  (see  Dan.  v.  28,  31);  for 
Ev'il-merodach  (B.  c.  561)  was  murdered  by  his  brother- 
in-law  Neriglissar  (B.  c.  ssg).  Besi  ies,  the  Jews  were 
well  acquainted  with  Evil-merodach  (2  Kings  xxv.  27  ; 
Jer.  lii.  31). 

2.  Belshazzar  was  Nabunaid  (St.  Jerome,  Ewald,  Winer, 
Herzfeld,  Auberlen,  etc.).  But  the  usurper  Nabunaid, 
son  of  a  Rab-mag,  was  wholly  unlike  Belshazzar;  and  so 
far  from  being  slain,  he  was  pardoned,  and  sent  by  Cyrus 
to  be  Governor  of  Karmania,  in  which  position  he  died. 

3.  Belshazzar  was  t/ie  son  of  Nabunaid.  But  though 
Nabunaid  had  a  son  of  the  name  he  was  never  king.  We 
know  nothing  of  any  relationship  between  him  and  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, nor  does  Cyrus  in  his  records  make  the  most 
distant  allusion  to  him.  The  attempt  to  identify  Nebu- 
chadrezzar with  an  unknown  Marduk-sar-utsur,  men- 
tioned in  Babylonian  tablets,  breaks  down  ;  for  Mr. 
Boscawen  {Soc.  BibL,  in  §  vi.,  p.  108)  finds  that  he  reigned 
d</i?r<?  Nabunaid.  Further,  the  son  of  Nabunaid  perished, 
not  in  Babylon,  but  in  Accad. 

tSee  I  Mace.  i.  21-24.  He  "entered  proudly  into  the 
sanctuary,  and  took  away  the  golden  altar,  and  the 
candlestick  of  light,  and  all  the  vessels  thereof,  and  the 
table  of  the  showbread,  and  the  pouring  vessels,  and  the 
vials,  and  the  censers  of  gold.  .  .  He  took  also  the  silver 
and  the  gold,  and  the  precious  vessels:  also  he  took  the 
hidden  treasures  which  he  found,"  etc.  Comp.  2  Mace, 
v.  11-14  ;  Diod  Sic,  XXXI.  i.  48.  The  value  of  precious 
metals  which  he  carried  off  was  estimated  at  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  silver  talents — about  £350,000  (2  Mace, 
v.  21). 

X  The  LXX.  says  "  two  thousand."    Comp.  Esther  i.  3,  4. 


intended  as  some  propitiatory  feast  in  honour 
of  Bel-merodach.  It  was  celebrated  in  that 
palace  which  was  a  wonder  of  the  world,  with 
its  winged  statues  and  splendid  spacious  halls. 
The  walls  were  rich  with  images  of  the  Chal- 
deans, painted  in  vermilion  and  exceeding  in  dyed 
attire — those  images  of  goodly  youths  riding  on 
goodly  horses,  as  in  the  Panathenaic  procession 
on  the  frieze  of  the  Acropolis — the. frescoed  pic- 
tures, on  which,  in  the  prophet's  vision,  Aholah 
and  Aholibah,  gloated  in  the  chambers  of  secret 
imagery.*  Belshazzar's  princes  were  there,  and 
his  wives,  and  his  concubines,  whose  presence 
the  Babylonian  custom  admitted,  though  the  Per- 
sian regarded  it  as  unseemly. f  The  Babylonian 
banquets,  like  those  of  the  Greeks,  usually  ended 
by  a  "  Komos  "  or  revelry,  in  which  intoxication 
was  regarded  as  no  disgrace.  Wine  flowed  freely. 
Doubtless,  as  in  the  grandiose  picture  of  Mar- 
tin, there  were  brasiers  of  precious  metal,  which 
breathed  forth  the  fumes  of  incense  ;t  and  doubt- 
less, too,  there  were  women  and  boys  and  girls 
with  flutes  and  cymbals,  to  which  the  dancers 
danced  in  all  the  orgiastic  abandonment  of  East- 
ern passion.  All  this  was  regarded  as  an  ele- 
ment in  the  religious  solemnity;  and  while  the 
revellers  drank  their  wine,  hymns  were  being 
chanted,  in  which  they  praised  "  the  gods  of  gold 
and  silver,  of  brass,  of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of 
stone."  That  the  king  drank  wine  before  the 
thousand  is  the  more  remarkable  beAuse  usually 
the  kings  of  the  East  banquet  in  solitary  state  in 
their   own   apartments. § 

Then  the  wild  king,  with  just  such  a  burst 
of  folly  and  irreverence  as  characterised  the  ban- 
quets of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  bethought  him  of 
yet  another  element  of  splendour  with  which  he 
might  make  his  banquet  memorable,  and  prove 
the  superiority  of  his  own  victorious  gods  over 
those  of  other  nations.  The  Temple  of  Jerusa- 
lem was  famous  over  all  the  world,  and  there 
were  few  monarchs  who  had  not  heard  of  the 
marvels  and  the  majesty  of  the  God  of  Israel. 
Belshazzar,  as  the  "  son "  of  Nebuchadrezzar, 
must — if  there  was  any  historic  reality  in  the 
events  narrated  in  the  previous  chapter — have 
heard  of  the  "  signs  and  wonders  "  displayed  by 
the  King  of  heaven,  whose  unparalleled  awful- 
ness  his  "  father  "  had  publicly  attested  in  edicts 
addressed  to  all  the  world.  He  must  have  known 
of  the  Rab-mag  Daniel,  whose  wisdom,  even 
as  a  boy,  had  been  found  to  be  superior 
to  that  of  all  the  "  Chartummim  "  and 
"  Ashshaphim  "  ;  and  how  his  three  com- 
panions had  been  elevated  to  supreme  sa- 
trapies; and  how  they  had  been  delivered 
unsinged  from  the  seven-times-heated  furnace, 
whose  flames  had  killed  his  father's  exe- 
cutioners. Under  no  conceivable  circumstances 
could  such  marvels  have  been  forgotten;  under 
no  circumstances  could  they  have  possibly  failed 
to  create  an  intense  and  profound  impression. 
And  Belshazzar  could  hardly  fail  to  have  heard 

Jerome  adds,  "Unusquisque  secundum  suam  bibit 
setatem." 

*  Ezek  xxiii.  15. 

t  Herod.,  i.  iqi,  v.  18  ;  Xen.,  "Cyrop.,"  V.  ii.  28  ;  Q.  Curt., 
V.  i.  38.  Theodotion,  perhaps  scandalised  by  the  fact, 
omits  the  wives,  and  the  LXX.  omits  both  wives  and  con- 
cubines. 

X  Layard,  "Nin.  and  Bab.,"  ii.  262-26q. 

§Athen.,  "Deipnos,"  iv.  145.  See  the  bas-relief  in  the 
British  Museum  of  King  Assur-bani-pal  drinking  wine 
with  his  queen,  while  the  head  of  his  vanquished  enemy, 
Te-Umman,  King  of  Elam,  dangles  from  a  palm-branch 
full  in  his  view,  so  that  he  can  feast  his  eyes  upon  it. 
None  others  are  present  e.^cept  the  attendant  eunuchs. 


404 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


of  the  dreams  of  the  golden  image  and  of  the 
shattered  cedar,  and  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  un- 
speakably degrading  lycanthropy.  His  "  father  " 
had  publicly  acknowledged — in  a  decree  pub- 
lished "  to  all  peoples,  nations,  and  languages 
that  dwell  in  all  the  earth  " — that  humiliation  had 
come  upon  him  as  a  punishment  for  his  over- 
weening pride.  In  that  same  decree  the  mighty 
Nebuchadrezzar — only  a  year  or  two  before,  if 
Belshazzar  succeeded  him — had  proclaimed  his 
allegiance  to  the  King  of  heaven;  and  in  all  pre- 
vious decrees  he  had  threatened  "  all  people,  na- 
tions, and  languages  "  that,  if  they  spake  any- 
thing amiss  against  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Me- 
shach,  and  Abed-nego,  they  should  be  cut  in 
pieces,  and  their  houses  made  a  dunghill.*  Yet 
now  Belshazzar,  in  the  flush  of  pride  and  drunk- 
enness,! gives  his  order  to  insult  this  God  with 
deadly  impiety  by  publicly  defiling  the  vessels  of 
His  awful  Temple,t  at  a  feast  in  honour  of  his 
own  idol  deities! 

Similarly  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  if  he  had  not 
been  half  mad,  might  have  taken  warning,  be- 
fore he  insulted  the  Temple  and  the  sacred  ves- 
sels of  Jerusalem,  from  the  fact  that  his  father, 
Antiochus  the  Great,  had  met  his  death  in  at- 
tempting to  plunder  the  Temple  at  Elymais  (b.  c. 
187).  He  might  also  have  recalled  the  celebrated 
discomfiture — however  caused — of  Heliodorus  in 
the  Temple  of  Jerusalem.^ 

Such  insulting  and  reckless  blasphemy  could 
not  go  unpunished.  It  is  fitting  that  the  Divine 
retribution  should  overtake  the  king  on  the  same 
night,  and  that  the  same  lips  which  thus  profaned 
with  this  wine  the  holiest  things  should  sip  the 
wine  of  the  Divine  poison-cup,  whose  fierce  heat 
must  in  the  same  night  prove  fatal  to  himself. 
But  even  such  sinners,  drinking  as  it  were  over 
the  pit  of  hell,  "  according  to  a  metaphor  used 
elsewhere,!  must  still  at  the  last  moment  be 
warned  by  a  suitable  Divine  sign,  that  it  may  be 
known  whether  they  will  honour  the  truth."  ^ 
Nebuchadrezzar  had  received  his  warning,  and  in 
the  end  it  had  not  been  wholly  in  vain.  Even  for 
Belshazzar  it  might  perhaps  not  prove  to  be  too 
late. 

For  at  this  very  moment,**  when  the  revelry 
was  at  its  zenith,  when  the  whirl  of  excited  self- 
exaltation  was  most  intense,  when  Judah's  gold 
was  "  treading  heavy  on  the  lips  " — the  profane 
lips — of  satraps  and  concubines,  thens  appeared 
a  portent,  which  seems  at  first  to  have  been  vis- 
ible  to   the   king  alone. 

Seated  on  his  lofty  and  jewelled  throne,  which 

"  Outshone  the  wealth  of  Ormuz  or  of  Ind, 
Or  where  the  gorgeous  East  with  richest  hand 
Showers  on  its  kings  barbaric  pearl  and  gold," 

his  eye  caught  something  visible  on  the  white 
stucco  of  the  wall  above  the  line  of  frescoes. 
He  saw  it  over  the  lights  which  crowned  the 
huge  golden  "  Nebrashta,"  or  chandelier.  The 
fingers  of  a  man's  hand  were  writing  letters  on 
the  wall,  and  the  king  saw  the  hollow  of  that 
gigantic  supernatural  palm. 

The  portent  astounded  and  horrified  him.  The 
flush  of  youth  and  of  wine  faded  from  his  cheek; 
— •"  his  brightnesses  were  changed  "  ;  his 
thoughts   troubled   him;   the   bands   of   his   loins 

*  Dan.  iii.  29. 

t  The  Babylonians  were  notorious  for  drunken  revels. 
Q.  Curt  ,  V.  i.,  "  Babylonii  maxime  in  vinumet  quae  ebrie- 
tatem  sequuntur,  effusi  sunt." 

$Dan   i.  2.     Comp.  i  Mace.  i.  21  ff. 

§2  Mace.  iii.  1  Ewald. 

I  Psalm  Iv.  15.  **  Comp,  Dan.  iii.  7. 


were  loosed,  his  knees  smote  one  against  an- 
other in  his  trembling  attitude,  as  he  stood  ar- 
rested by  the  awful   sight. 

With  a  terrible  cry  he  ordered  that  the  whole 
familiar  tribe  of  astrologers  and  soothsayers 
should  be  summoned.  For  though  the  hand  had 
vanished,  its  trace  was  left  on  the  wall  of  the 
banqueting-chamber  in  letters  of  fire.  And  the 
stricken  king,  anxious  to  know  above  all  things 
the  purport  of  that  strange  writing,  proclaims 
that  he  who  could  interpret  it  should  be  clothed 
in  scarlet,  and  have  a  chain  of  gold  about  his 
neck,  and  should  be  one- of  the  triumvirs  of  the 
kingdom.* 

It  was  the  usual  resource;  and  it  failed  as  it 
had  done  in  every  previous  instance.  The  Bab- 
ylonian magi  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  prove  them- 
selves to  be  more  futile  even  than  Pharaoh's 
magicians  with  their  enchantments. 

The  dream-interpreters  in  all  their  divisions 
entered  the  banquet-ball.  The  king  was  per- 
turbed, the  omen  urgent,  the  reward  magnifi- 
cent. But  it  was  all  in  vain.  As  usual  they 
failed,  as  in  very  instance  in  which  they  are  in- 
troduced in  the  Old  Testament.  And  their  fail- 
ure added  to  the  visible  confusion  of  the  king, 
whose  livid  countenance  retained  its  pallor.  The 
banquet,  in  all  its  royal  magnificence,  seemed 
likely  to  end  in  tumult  and  confusion;  for  the 
princes,  and  satraps,  and  wives,  and  concubines 
all  shared  in  the  agitation  and  bewilderment  of 
their   sovereign. 

Meanwhile  the  tidings  of  the  startling  prodigy 
had  reached  the  ears  of  the  Gebirah — the  queen- 
mother — who,  as  always  in  the  East,  held  a 
higher  rank  than  even  the  reigning  sultana,  f 
She  had  not  been  present  at — perhaps  had  not 
approved  of — the  luxurious  revel,  held  when  the 
Persians  were  at  the  very  gates.  But  now  in 
her  young  son's  extremity,  she  comes  forward 
to  help  and  advise  him.  Entering  the  hall  with 
her  attendant  maidens,  she  bids  the  king  to  be  j 
no  longer  troubled,  for  there  is  a  man  of  the  ' 
highest  rank — invariably,  as  would  appear,  over- 
looked and  forgotten  till  the  critical  moment, 
in  spite  of  his  long  series  of  triumphs  and  J 
achievements — who  was  quite  able  to  read  the  ^ 
fearful  augury,  as  he  had  often  done  before, 
when  all  others  had  been  foiled  by  Him  who 
"  frustrateth  the  tokens  of  the  liars  and  maketh 
diviners  mad."  J  Strange  that  he  should  not 
have  been  thought  of,  though  "  the  king  thy 
father,  the  king,  I  say,  thy  father,  made  him 
master  of  the  whole  college  of  mages  and  as- 
trologers. Let  Belshazzar  send  for  Belteshazzar, 
and  he  would  untie  the  knot  and  read  the  awful 
enigma."  § 

*  Doubtless  suggested  by  Gen.  xli.  42  (comp.  Herod., 
iii.  20;  Xen.,  "  Anab.,"  I.  ii.  27;  "Cyrop."  VIII.  v.  18),  as 
other  parts  of  Daniel's  story  recall  that  of  Joseph.  Comp. 
Esther  vi.  8,  9.  The  word  for  "  scarlet  "  or  red-purple  is 
argona.  The  word  for  "chain"  (Q'l'i.  ha7ii'niha)  is  in 
Theodotion  rendered  /aai'taxj)?,  and  occurs  in  later  Ara- 
maic. The  phrase  rendered  "third  ruler  "  is  very  uncer- 
tain. The  inference  drawn  from  it  in  the  "Speaker's 
Commentary,"  that  Nabunaid  was  king,  and  Belshazzar 
second    ruler— is    purely    nugatory.    For    the    Hebrew 

word  talti  cannot  mean  "  third,"  which  would  be   n  Pri. 

Ewald  and  most  Hebraists  take  it  to  mean  "rule,  as  one 
of  the  board  of  three."     For  "  triumvir  "  comp.  vi.  2. 

1 1  Kings  XV.  13.  She  is  precariously  identified  by  the 
apologists  with  the  Nitocris  of  Herodotus;  and  it  is  im- 
agined that  she  may  have,  been  a  daughter  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, married  to  Nabunaid  before  the  murder  of  Neri- 
glissar. 

X  Isa.  xliv.  25. 

§The  word  QisfriHy  "knots,"  may  mean  "hard  ques- 
tions "  ;  but  Mr.  Bevan  (p.  104)  thinks  there  may  be  aa 


THE    FIERY    INSCRIPTION. 


405 


Then  Daniel  was  summoned;  and  since  the 
king  "  has  heard  of  him,  that  the  spirit  of  the 
gods  is  in  him,  and  that  light  and  understanding 
and  excellent  wisdom  is  found  in  him,"  and  that 
he  is  one  who  can  interpret  dreams,  and  un- 
riddle hard  sentences  and  untie  knots,  he  shall 
have  the  scarlet  robe,  and  the  golden  chain,  and 
the  seat  among  the  triumvirs,  if  he  will  read  and 
interpret  the  writing. 

"  I-ct  thy  gifts  be  thine,  and  thy  rewards  to 
another,"  *  answered  the  seer,  with  fearless  forth- 
rightness:  "  yet,  O  king,  I  will  read  and  interpret 
the  writing."  Then,  after  reminding  him  of  the 
consummate  power  and  majesty  of  his  father 
Nebuchadrezzar;  and  how  his  mind  had  l^ecumc 
indurated  with  pride;  and  how  he  had  been 
stricken  with  lycanthropy,  "  till  he  knew  that 
the  Most  High  God  ruled  in  the  kingdom  of 
men  "  ;  and  that,  in  spite  of  all  this,  he,  Bel- 
shazzar,  in  his  infatuation,  had  insulted  the  Most 
High  God  by  profaning  the  holy  vessels  of  His 
Temple  in  a  licentious  revelry  in  honour  of  idols 
of  gold,  silver,  brass,  iron,  and  stone,  which 
neither  see,  nor  know,  nor  hear, — for  this  reason 
(said  the  seer)  had  the  hollow  hand  been  sent 
and  the  writing  stamped  upon  the  wall. 

And  now  what  was  the  writing?  Daniel  at 
the  first  glance  had  read  that  fiery  quadrilateral 
of  letters,  looking  like  the  twelve  gems  of  the 
high  priest's  epliod  with  the  mystic  light  gleam- 
ing upon  them. 


M. 

N. 

A. 

M. 

N. 

A. 

T. 

Q. 

L. 

P. 

R. 

S. 

Four  names  of  weight.f 


A  Mina. 

A  Mina. 

A   Shekel. 

A  Half-mina 

t 

What  possible  meaning  could  there  be  in  that? 
Did  it  need  an  archangel's  colossal  hand,  flash- 
ing forth  upon  a  palace-wall  to  write  the  menace 
of  doom,  to  have  inscribed  no  more  than  the 
names  of  four  coins  or  weights?  No  wonder 
that  the  Chaldeans  could  not  interpret  such  writ- 
ing! 

It  may  be  asked  why  they  could  not  even 
read  it,  since  the  words  are  evidently  Aramaic, 
and  Aramaic  was  the  common  language  of  trade. 
The  Rabbis  say  that  the  words,  instead  of  being 
written  from  right  to  left,  were  written  KiovuSbv, 
"  pillar-wise,"  as  the  Greeks  called  it,  from  above 
downwards:  thus — 


allusion  to  knots  used  as  magic  spells.  (Corap.  Sen., 
"  CEdip.,"  loi,  '^Nodosa  sortis  verba  et  implexos  dolos.") 
He  quotes  Al-Baidawi  on  the  Koran,  Ixiii.  4,  who  says 
that  "a  Jew  casts  a  spell  on  Mohammed  by  tying  knots 
in  a  cord,  and  hiding  it  in  a  well."  But  Gabriel  told  the 
prophet  to  send  for  the  cord,  and  at  each  verse  of  the 
Koran  recited  over  it  a  knot  untied  itself.  See  "Records 
of  the  Past,"  iii.  141;  and  Duke,  "Rabb.  Blumenlehre," 
231. 

♦So  Elisha,  2  Kings  v.  16. 

+  The  Mene  is  repeated  for  emphasis.  In  the  Upharsin 
(ver.  25)  the  u  is  merely  the  "and,"  and  the  word  is 
slightly  altered,  perhaps  to  make  the  paronomasia  with 
"  Persians  "  more  obvious.  According  to  Buxtorf  and 
Gesenius,  peras,  in  the  sense  of  "  divide,"  is  very  rare 
in  the  Targums. 

X  Journal  Asiatique,  1886.  (Comp.  Noldeke,  Ztsch. 
fiir  Assyriologie,  i.   414-418 ;    Kamphausen,    p.  46.)    It  is 


1 

n 

tt 

0 

P 

J 

J 

D 

h 

N 

N 

Read  from  left  to  right,  they  would  look  like 
gibberish;  read  from  above  downwards,  they  be- 
came clear  as  far  as  the  reading  was  concerned, 
though  their  interpretation  might  still  be  surpass- 
ingly enigmatic. 

But  words  may  stand  for  all  sorts  of  myste- 
rious meanings;  and  in  the  view  of  analogists — 
as  those  are  called  who  not  only  believe  in  the 
mysterious  force  and  fascination  of  words,  but 
even  in  the  physiological  quality  of  sounds — they 
may  hide  awful  indications  under  harmless  voca- 
bles.    Herein  lay  the  secret. 

A  mina!  a  mina!  Yes;  but  the  names  of  the 
weights  recall  the  word  m'nah,  "  hath  num- 
bered ":  and  "  God  hath  numbered  thy  kingdom 
and  finished  it." 

A  shekel!  Yes;  fqilta:  "Thou  hast  been 
weighed  in  a  balance  and  found  wanting." 

Peres — a  half-mina!  Yes;  but  p'risath:  "Thy 
kingdom  has  been  divided,  and  given  to  the 
Medes  and   Persians."  * 

M.  Clermont-Ganneau  who  has  the  credit  of  discovering 
what  seems  to  be  the  true  interpretation  of  these  mys- 
terious words.  M'lie  (Heb.  Maneli)  is  the  Greek  /ni'd,  Lat. 
mina,  which  the  Greeks  borrowed  from  the  Assyrians. 
"Tekel  "  (in  the  Targum  of  Onkelos  tikla)  is  the  Hebrew 
shekel.  In  the  "Mishnah"  a  half-mina  is  called  peras, 
and  an  Assyrian  weight  in  the  British  Museum  bears  the 
inscription  perash  in  the  Aramaic  character.  (See  Bevan, 
p.  106;  Schrader,  s.  v.  "Mene"  in  Riehm,  "R.  \V.  B.") 
Peres  is  used  for  a  half-mina  in  "  Yoma,"  f.  4,  4  ;  often  in 
the  Talmud;  and  in  "Corp.  Inscr.  Sem.,"  ii.  10  (Behr* 
mann). 

*  The  word  occurs  in  Perez  Uzza.  There  still,  however, 
remain  some  obviously  unexplored  mysteries  about  these 
words.  Paronomasia,  as  I  showed  long'  ago  in  other 
works,  plays  a  noble  and  profound  part  in  the  language 
of  emotion  ;  and  that  the  interpretation  should  here  be 
made  to  turn  upon  it  is  not  surprising  by  any  means. 
We  find  it  in  the  older  prophets.  Thus  in  Jer.  i.  u,  12  : 
"  What  seest  thou  ?  And  I  said,  I  see  a  rod  of  an  almond 
tree.  Then  said  the  Lord  unto  me,  Thou  hast  well  seen  : 
for  I  will  hasten  My  word  to  perform  it."  The  meaning 
here  depends  on  the  resemblance  in  Hebrew  between 
shaqeed,  "an  almond  tree  "  ("  a  wakeful,  or  early  tree  "), 
and  shoqeed,  "  I  will  hasten,"  or  "  am  wakeful  over." 

And  that  the  same  use  of  plays  on  words  was  still  com- 
mon in  the  Maccabean  epoch  we  see  in  the  Story  of 
Susanna._  There  Daniel  plays  on  the  resemblance  be- 
tween (Txivo^,  "  a  mastick  tree,"  and  o-xtVei,  "  shall  cut  thee 
in  two";  and  n-pit'os,  "a  holm  oak,"  and  npiirai,  "to  cut 
asunder."  We  may  also  point  to  the  fine  paronomasia  in 
the  Hebrew  of  Isa.  v.  7,  Mic.  i.  10-15,  ^"^  other  passages. 
"Such  a  conceit,"  says  Mr.  Ball,  "may  seem  to  us  far- 
fetched and  inappropriate  ;  but  the  Orient a1  mind  de- 
lights in  such  lusus  verborum,  and  the  pecujiar  force  of 


4o6 


^     THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


At  this  point  the  story  is  very  swiftly  brought 
to  a  conclusion,  for  its  essence  has  been  already 
given.  Daniel  is  clothed  in  scarlet,  and  orna- 
mented with  the  chain  of  gold,  and  proclaimed 
triumvir.* 

But  the  king's  doom  is  sealed!     "That  night 

was     Belshazzar,  'king  of  the  Chaldeans,  slain." 

His  name  meant,  "  Bel!  preserve  thou  the  king!  " 

But  Bel   bowed  down,  and   Nebo   stooped,   and 

\  gave  no  help  to  their  votary. 

"  Evil  things  in  robes  of  sorrow 

Assailed  the  monarch's  high  estate; 
Ah,  woe  is  me  !  for  never  morrow 

Shall  dawn  upon  him  desolate  ! 
And  all  about  his  throne  the  glory 

That  blushed  and  bloomed 
Is  but  an  ill-remembered  story 

Of  the  old  time  entombed." 


"  And  Darius  the  Mede  took  the  kingdom, 
being  about  sixty-two  years  old." 

As  there  is  no  such  person  known  as  "  Darius 
the  Mede,"  the  age  assigned  to  him  must  be  due 
either  to  some  tradition  about  some  other  Da- 
rius, or  to  chronological  calculations  to  which  we 
no  longer  possess  the  key.f 

He  is  called  the  son  of  Achashverosh,  Ahas- 
uerus  (ix.  i),  or  Xerxes.  The  apologists  have 
argued  that — 

1.  Darius  was  Cyaxares  H.,  father  of  Cyrus, 
on  the  authority  of  Xenaphon's  romance,^  and 
Josephus's  echo  of  it.§  But  the  "  Cyropsedia  " 
is  no  authority,  being,  as  Cicero  said,  a  non- 
historic  fiction  written  to  describe  an  ideal 
kingdom.  II  History  knows  nothing  of  a 
Cyaxares  II. 

2.  Darius  was  Astyages.lf  Not  to  mention 
other  impossibilities  which  attach  to  this  view, 
Astyages  would  have  been  far  older  than  sixty- 
two  at  the  capture  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus.  Cyrus 
had  suppressed  the  Median  dynasty  altogether 
some  years  before  he  took  Babylon. 

3.  Darius  was  the  satrap  Gobryas,  who,  so  far 
as  we  know,  only  acted  as  governor  for  a  few 
months.  But  he  is  represented  on  the  contrary 
as  an  extremely  absolute  king,  setting  one 
hundred  and  twenty  princes  "  over  the  whole 
kingdom,"  and  issuing  mandates  to  "  all  people, 
nations,  and  languages  that  dwell  in  all  the 
earth."  Even  if  such  an  identification  were  ad- 
missible, it  would  not  in  the  least  save  the  his- 
toric accuracy  o^  the  writer.  This  "  Darius  the 
Mede  "  is  ignored  by  history,  and  Cyrus  is  rep- 
resented by  the  ancient  records  as  having  been 
the  sole  and  undisputed  king  of  Babylon  from  the 
time   of   his    conquest.**     "  Darius    the    Mede " 

all  such  passages  in  the  Hebrew  prophets  is  lost  in  our 
version  because  they  have  not  been  preserved  in  transla- 
tion." 

As  regards  the  Medes.  they  are  placed  affer  the  Persians 
in  Isa  xxi._2,  Esther  i.  3,  but  generally  before  them. 

*  LXX..  ihuiKiv  e^ovaiav  avrta  toO  Tpirov  /aepous  ;  Theodot., 
apxovTa  Tpirov.     See  supra,  p. '404. 

+  The  LXX.  evidently  felt  some  difficulty  or  followed 
«ome  other  text,  for  they  render  it.  "  And  Artaxerxes  of 
the  Medes  took  the  kingdom,  and  Darius  full  of  davs  and 
glorious  in  old  age:'  So,  too,  Josephus  >."  Antt.,"  X.  xi. 
4),  who  says  that  "he  was  called  by  another  name  among 
the  Greeks." 

$"  Cyrop.,"  I.  v.  2. 

§  "  Antt.,"  X.  xl.  4.  This  was  the  view  of  Vitringa,  Ber- 
tholdt,  Gesenius,  Winer,  Keil,  Hengstenberg,  Havernick, 
etc. 

II"  Ad.  Q.  Fratr  ."  i.  8. 

t  The  view  of  Niebuhr  and  Westcott. 

**See  Herod.,  i.  109.  The  Median  Empire  fell  B.  C.  550; 
Babylon  was  taken  about  B.  c.  539.  It  is  regarded  as 
"important "  that  a  late  Greek  lexicographer,  long  after 
the  Christian  era,  makes  the  vague  and  wholly  unsup- 
ported assertion  that  the  "  Daric"  was  named  after  some 


probably  owes  his  existence  to  a  literal  under- 
standing of  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (xiii.  17) 
and  Jeremiah  (li.  11,  28). 

We  can  now  proceed  to  the  examination  of  the 
next  chapter  unimpeded  by  impossible  and  half- 
hearted hypotheses.  We  understand  it,  and  it 
was  meant  to  be  understood,  as  a  moral  and 
spiritual  parable,  in  which  unverified  historic 
names  and  traditions  are  utilised  for  the  purpose 
of  inculcating  lessons  of  courage  and  faithfuiness. 
The  picture,  however,  falls  far  below  those  of 
the  other  chapters  in  power,  finish,  and  even 
an  approach  to  natural  verisimiltude. 


CHAPTER    XVI. 
STOPPING   THE  MOUTHS  OF  LIONS. 

On  the  view  which  regards  these  pictures  as 
powerful  parables,  rich  in  spiritual  instructive- 
ness,  but  not  primarily  concerned  with  historic 
accuracy,  nor  even  necessarily  with  ancient  tra- 
dition, we  have  seen  how  easily  "  the  great  strong 
fresco-strokes  "  which  the  narrator  loves  to  use 
"  may  have  been  suggested  to  him  by  his  dili- 
gent study  of  the  Scriptures." 

The  first  chapter  is  a  beautiful  picture  which 
serves  to  set  forth  the  glory  of  moderation  and 
to  furnish  a  vivid  concrete  illustration  of  such 
passages  as  those  of  Jeremiah:  "  Her  Nazarites 
were  purer  than  snow;  they  were  whiter  than 
milk;  they  were  more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies; 
their  polishing  was  of  sapphire."  * 

The  second  chapter,  closely  reflecting  in  many 
of  its  details  the  story  of  Joseph,  illustrated  how 
God  "  frustrateth  the  tokens  of  the  liars,  and 
maketh  diviners  mad;  turneth  wise  men  back- 
ward, and  maketh  their  knowledge  foolish;  con- 
firmeth  the  word  of  His  servant,  and  performeth 
the  counsel  of  His  messengers."f 

The  third  chapter  gives  vividness  to  the  prom- 
ise, "  When  thou  walkest  through  the  fire,  thou 
shaft  not  be  burned,  neither  shall  the  fiame  kindle 
upon  thee."  X 

The  fourth  chapter  repeats  the  apologue  of 
Ezekiel,  in  which  he  compares  the  King  of  As- 
syria to  a  cedar  in  Lebanon  with  fine  branches, 
and  with  a  shadowy  shroud,  and  fair  by  the 
multitude  of  his  branches,  so  that  all  the  trees  of 
Eden  that  were  in  the  garden  of  God  envied  him, 
but  whose  boughs  were  "  broken  by  all  the 
watercourses  until  the  peoples  of  the  earth  left 
his  shadow."  §  It  was  also  meant  to  show  that 
"  pride  goeth  before  destruction,  and  a  haughty 
spirit  before  a  fall."||  It  illustrates  the  words 
of  Isaiah:  "  Behold,  the  Lord,  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
shall  lop  the  bough  with  terror;  and  the  high 
ones  of  stature  shall  be  hewn  down,  and  the 
haughty  shall  be  humbled."  1[ 

The  fifth  chapter  gives  a  vivid  answer  to  Isai- 
ah's challenge:  "  Let  now  the  astrologers,  the 
stargazers,  the  monthly  prognosticators,  stand 
up  and  save  thee  from  these  things  which  shall 
come  upon  thee."  **  It  describes  a  fulfilment  of 
his  vision:  "  A  grievous  vision  is  declared  unto 
thee;  the  treacherous  dealer  dealeth  treacher- 
ously, and  the  spoiler  spoileth.     Go  up,  O  Eiam: 

Darius  other  than  the  father  of  Xerxes !    See  supra,  pp. 
368-36q. 

*  Lam.  iv.  7. 

t  Isa   xliv.  25,  26.  II  Prov.  xvi.  i8. 

t  Isa.  xliii.  2.  If  Isa.  x.  33. 

§  Ezek.  xxxi.  2-15.  **  Isa.  xlvii.  13. 


I 


STOPPING    THE    MOUTHS    OF    LIONS. 


407 


besiege,  O  Media."  *  The  more  detailed  proph- 
ecy ot  Jeremiah  had  said:  "  Prepare  against 
Babylon  the  nations  with  the  kings  of  the  Medes. 
.  .  .  The  mighty  men  of  Babylon  have  forborne 
to  fight.  .  .  .  One  post  shall  run  to  meet  another, 
and  one  messenger  to  meet  another,  to  show  the 
King  of  Babylon  that  his  city  is  taken  at  one 
end.  ...  In  their  heat  I  will  make  their  feasts, 
and  I  will  make  them  drunken,  that  they  shall 
rejoice,  and  sleep  a  perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake, 
saith  the  Lord.  .  .  .  How  is  Sheshach  taken!  f 
and  how  is  the  praise  of  the  whole  earth  sur- 
prised I  .  .  .  And  1  will  make  drunk  her  princes, 
and  her  wise  men;  her  captains,  and  her  rulers, 
and  her  mighty  men;  and  they  shall  sleep  a 
perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake,  saith  the  King, 
whose  name  is  the  Lord  of  hosts."  :j: 

The  sixth  chapter  puts  into  concrete  form  such 
passages  of  the  Psalmist  as:  "  My  soul  is  among 
lions:  and  I  lie  even  among  them  that  are  set  on 
fire,  even  the  sons  of  men,  whose  teeth  are  spears 
and  arrows,  and  their  tongue  a  sharp  sword";  § 
and — "  Break  the  jaw-bones  of  the  lions,  O 
Lord  ";|  and — "  They  have  cut  ofif  my  life  in  the 
dungeon,  and  cast  a  stone  upon  me  "  Ij  : — and 
more  generally  such  promises  as  those  in  Isaiah. 
"  No  weapon  that  is  formed  against  thee  shall 
prosper;  and  every  tongue  that  shall  rise  against 
thee  in  judgment  thou  shalt  condemn.  This  is 
the  heritage  of  the  servants  of  the  Lord,  and 
their  righteousness  is  of  Me,  saith  the  Lord."** 

This  genesis  of  Haggadoth  is  remarkably 
illustrated  by  the  apocryphal  additions  to  Daniel. 
Thus  the  History  of  Susanna  was  very  probably 
suggested  by  Jeremiah's  allusion  (xxix.  22)  to 
the  two  false  prophets  Ahab  and  Zedekiah,  whom 
Nebuchadrezzar  burnt.ff  Similarly  the  story  of 
Bel  and  the  Dragon  is  a  fiction  which  expounds 
Jer.  li.  44:  "  And  I  will  punish  Bel  in  Babylon, 
and  I  will  bring  forth  out  of  his  mouth  that 
which  he  hath  swallowed  up."  if:}: 

Hitherto  the  career  of  Daniel  had  been  person- 
ally prosperous.  We  have  seen  him  in  perpetual 
honour  and  exaltation,  and  he  had  not  even  in- 
curred— though  he  may  now  have  been  ninety 
years  old — such  early  trials  and  privations  in  a 
heathen  land  as  had  fallen  to  the  lot  of  Joseph, 
his  youthful  prototype.  His  three  companions 
had  been  potential  martyrs;  he  had  not  even 
been  a  confessor.  Terrible  as  was  the  doom 
which  he  had  twice  been  called  upon  to  pro- 
nounce upon  Nebuchadrezzar  and  upon  his  king- 
dom, the  stern  messages  of  prophecy,  so  far  from 
involving  him  in  ruin,  had  only  helped  to  uplift 
him  to  the  supremest  honours.  Not  even  the 
sternness  of  his  bearing,  and  the  terrible  severity 
of  his  interpretations  of  the  flaming  message  to 
Belshazzar,  had  prevented  him  from  being  pro- 
claimed triumvir,  and  clothed  in  scarlet,  and  dec- 
orated with  a  chain  of  gold,  on  the  last  night  of 
the  Babylonian  Empire.  And  now  a  new  king 
of  a  new  dynasty  is  represented  as  seated  on  the 
throne;  and  it  might  well  have  seemed  that  Dan- 
iel was  destined  to  close  his  days,  not  only  in 
peace,  but  in  consummate  outward  felicity. 

*  Isa.  xxi.  2. 

t  The  word  is  a  cabalistic  cryptogram— an  instance  of 
Gematria  —  iox  Babel. 

T.ler.  li.  28-57. 

§  Psalm  Ivii.  4. 

II  Psalm  Iviii.  6.    / 

•(  Lam.  iii.  53. 

**  Isa.  liv.  17. 

t+  "  Sanhedrin,"  f.  93,  i.  See  another  story  in  "  Vayyikra 
Kabba."  c.  xix. 

tX  "  Bereshith  Rabba,"  §  68. 


Darius  the  Mede  began  his  reign  by  appoint- 
ing one  hundred  and  twenty  princes  over  thf 
whole  kingdom;  *  and  over  these  he  placed  three 
presidents.  Daniel  is  one  of  these  "  eyes "  of 
the  king.f  "  Because  an  excellent  spirit  was  in 
him,"  he  acquired  preponderant  influence  among 
the  presidents;  and  the  king,  considering  that 
Daniel's  integrity  would  secure  him  from  damage 
in  the  royal  accounts,  designed  to  set  him  over 
the  whole  realm. 

But  assuming  that  the  writer  is  dealing,  not 
with  the  real,  but  with  the  ideal,  something  would 
be  lacking  to  Daniel's  eminent  saintliness,  if  he 
were  not  set  forth  as  no  less  capable  of  martyrdom 
on  behalf  of  his  convictions  than  his  three  com- 
panions had  been.  From  the  fiery  trial  in  which 
their  faithfulness  had  been  proved  like  gold  in 
the  furnace,  he  had  been  exempt.  His  life  thus 
far  had  been  a  course  of  unbroken  prosperity. 
But  the  career  of  a  pre-eminent  prophet  and  saint 
hardly  seems  to  have  won  its  final  crown,  unless 
he  also  be  called  upon  to  mount  his  Calvary,  and 
to  share  with  all  prophets  and  all  saints  the  per- 
secutions which  are  the  invariable  concomitants 
of  the  hundredfold  reward.^  Shadrach,  Meshach^ 
and  Abed-nego  had  been  tested  in  early  youth: 
the  trial  of  Daniel  is  reserved  for  his  extreme 
old  age.  It  is  not,  it  could  not  be,  a  severer 
trial  than  that  which  his  friends  braved,  nor 
could  his  deliverance  be  represented  as  more 
supernatural  or  more  complete,  unless  it  were 
that  they  endured  only  for  a  few  moments  the 
semblable  violence  of  the  fire,  while  he  was  shut 
up  for  all  the  long  hours  of  night  alone  in  the 
savage  lions'  den.  There  are,  nevertheless,  two 
respects  in  which  this  chapter  serves  as  a  climax 
to  those  which  preceded  it.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  virtue  of  Daniel  is  of  a  marked  character  in 
that  it  is  positive,  and  not  negative — in  that  it 
consists,  not  in  rejecting  an  overt  sin  of  idolatry, 
but  in  continuing  the  private  duty  of  prayer;  on 
the  other,  the  decree  of  Darius  surpasses  even 
those  of  Nebuchadrezzar  in  the  intensity  of  its 
acknowledgment  of  the  supremacy  of  Israel's 
God. 

Daniel's  age — for  by  this  time  he  must  have 
passed  the  allotted  limit  of  man's  threescore  years 
and  ten — might  have  exempted  him  from  envy, 
even  if,  as  the  LXX.  adds,  "  he  was  clad  in  pur- 
ple." But  jealous  that  a  captive  Jew  should  be 
exalted  above  all  the  native  satraps  and  potentates 
by  the  king's  favour,  his  colleagues  the  presidents 
(whom  the  LXX.  calls  "  two  young  men  ")  and 
the  princes  "  rushed  "  before  the  king  with  a  re- 
quest which  they  thought  would  enable  them  to 
overthrow  Daniel  by  subtlety.  Faithfulness  is 
required  in  stewards  ;§  and  they  knew  that  his 
faithfulness  and  wisdom  were  such  that  they 
would  be  unable  to  undermine  him  in  any  ordi- 
nary way.  There  was  but  one  point  at  which 
they  considered  him  to  be  vulnerable,  and  that 
was  in  any  matter  which  affected  his  allegiance 
to  an  alien  worship.  But  it  was  difificult  to  in- 
vent an  incident  which  would  give  them  the 
sought-for  opportunity.  All  polytheisms  are  as 
tolerant  as  their  priests  will  let  them  be.  The 
worship  of  the  Jews  in  the  Exile  was  of  a  neces- 

*The  LXX.  says  127,  and  Josephus  ("  Antt.,"  X  xi.  4) 
says  360  (comp.  Esther  i.  i,  viii.  g,  ix.  3).  Under  Darius 
son  of  Hystaspes,  there  were  only  twenty  divisions  of  the 
empire  (Herod.,  iii.  8q). 

tDan.  vi.  2;  "Of  whom  Daniel  was  "—not  "firsi,"  an 
in  A.  V  ,  but  "one,"  R.  V, 

t  Matt.  xix.  29. 

5 1  Cor.  iv.  2. 


4o8 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


sarily  private  nature.  They  had  no  Temple,  and 
such  religious  gatherings  as  they  held  were  in  no 
sense  unlawful.  The  problem  of  the  writer  was 
to  manage  his  Haggada  in  such  a  way  as  to 
make  private  prayer  an  act  of  treason;  and  the 
difficulty  is  met — not,  indeed,  without  violent  im- 
probability, for  which,  however,  Jewish  haggad- 
ists  cared  little,  but  with  as  much  skill  as  the 
circumstances  permitted. 

The  phrase  that  they  "  made  a  tumult "  or 
"  rushed  "  *  before  the  king,  which  recurs  in  vi. 
II  and  i8,  is  singular,  and  looks  as  if  it  were 
intentionally  grotesque  by  way  of  satire.  The  eti- 
quette of  Oriental  courts  is  always  most  elabor- 
ately stately,  and  requires  solemn  obeisance. 
This  is  why  ^schylus  makes  Agamemnon  say, 
in  answer  to  the  too-obsequious  fulsomeness  of 
his  false  wife, — 

"  Kai  TaAAa,  firi  yvvaiKo^  iv  rpdrrots  e/ne 
;(a/oiai)r€T«5  ^dajLia  Trpo<T\a.i'jl':  e^ot." 

"  Besides,  prithee,  use  not  too  fond  a  care 
To  me,  as  to  some  virgin  whom  thou  strivest 
To  deck  with  ornaments,  whose  softness  looks 
Softer,  hung  round  the  softness  of  her  youth  ; 
Ope  not  the  mouth  to  me,  nor  cry  amain 
As  at  the  footstool  of  a  man  of  the  East 
Prone  on  the  ground  :  so  stoop  not  thou  to  me  !  " 

That  these  "  presidents  and  satraps,"  instead  of 
trying  to  win  the  king  by  such  flatteries  and 
"  gaping  upon  him  an  earth-grovelling  howl," 
should  on  each  occasion  have  "  rushed  "  into  his 
presence,  must  be  regarded  either  as  a  touch  of 
intentional  sarcasm,  or,  at  any  rate,  as  being 
more  in  accord  with  the  rude  familiarities  of 
license  permitted  to  the  courtiers  of  the  half- 
mad  Antiochus,  than  with  the  prostrations  and 
solemn  approaches  which  since  the  days  of 
De'ioces  would  alone  have  been  permitted  by  any 
conceivable  "  Darius  the  Mede." 

However,  after  this  tumultuous  intrusion  into 
the  king's  presence,  "  all  the  presidents,  govern- 
ors, chief  chamberlains,"  present  to  him  the  mon- 
strous but  unanimous  request  that  he  would,  by 
an  irrevocable  interdict,  forbid  that  any  man 
should,  for  thirty  days,  ask  any  petition  of  any 
god  or  man,  on  peril  of  being  cast  into  the  den 
of  lions. f 

Professor  Fuller,  in  the  "  Speaker's  Com- 
mentary," considers  that  "  this  chapter  gives  a 
valuable  as  well  as  an  interesting  insight  into 
Median  customs,"  because  the  king  is  represented 
as  living  a  secluded  life,  and  keeps  lions,  and 
is  practically  deified!  The  importance  of  the  re- 
mark is  far  from  obvious.  The  chapter  presents 
no  particular  picture  of  a  secluded  life.  On  the 
contrary,  the  king  moves  about  freely,  and  his 
courtiers  seem  to  have  free  access  to  him  when- 
ever they  choose.  As  for  the  semi-deification 
of  kings,  it  was  universal  throughout  the  East, 
and  even  Antiochus  II.  had  openly  taken  the 
surname  of  Theos,  the  "  god."  Again,  every  Jew 
throughout  the  world  must  have  been  very  well 
aware,  since  the  days  of  the  Exile,  that  Assyrian 
and  other  monarchs  kept  dens  of  lions,  and  oc- 
casionally flung  their  enemies  to  them.^:     But  so 

♦Dan.  vi.  6,  char''ggishoo  ;  Vulg.,  surripuerunt  regi ; 
A.  V.  marg.,  "came  tumultuously."  The  word  is  found 
in  the  Targum  in  Ruth  i.  iq  (Bevan). 

+  The  den  t^goob  or  gubba')  seems  to  mean  a  vault.  The 
Hebrew  word  for  "  pit  "  is  boor. 

JSee  Layard,  "  Nin.  and  Bab.,"  i.  335,  447,475;  Smith, 
"  Hist,  of  Assur-bani-pal,"  xxiv. 


far  as  the  decree  of  Darius  is  concerned,  it  may 
well  be  said  that  throughout  all  history  no  single 
parallel  to  it  can  be  quoted.  Kings  have  very 
often  been  deified  in  absolutism;  but  not  even  a 
mad  Antiochus,  a  mad  Caligula,  a  mad  Elagaba- 
lus,  or  a  mad  Commodus  ever  dreamt  of  passing 
an  interdict  that  no  one  was  to  prefer  any  petition 
either  to  God  or  man  for  thirty  days,  except  to 
himself!  A  decree  so  preposterous,  which  might 
be  violated  by  millions  many  times  a  day  without 
the  king  being  cognisant  of  it,  would  be  a  proof  of 
positive  imbecility  in  any  king  who  should  dream 
of  making  it.  Strange,  too — though  a  matter  of 
indifference  to  the  writer,  because  it  did  not 
afifect  his  moral  lesson — that  Darius  should  not 
have  noticed  the  absence  of  his  chief  official,  and 
the  one  man  in  whom  he  placed  the  fullest  and 
deepest  confidence. 

The  king,  without  giving  another  thought  to 
the  matter,  at  once  signs  the  irrevocable  de- 
cree. 

It  naturally  does  not  make  the  least  difference 
to  the  practices  or  the  purposes  of  Daniel.  His 
duty  towards  God  transcends  his  duty  to  man. 
He  has  been  accustomed,  thrice  a  day,  to  kneel 
and  pray  to  God,  with  the  window  of  his  upper 
chamber  open,  looking  towards  the  Kibleh  of  Je- 
rusalem; and  the  king's  decree  makes  no  change 
in  his  manner  of  daily  worship. 

Then  the  princes  "  rushed  "  thither  again,  and 
found  Daniel  praying  and  asking  petitions  be- 
fore his  God. 

Instantly  they  go  before  the  king,  and  de- 
nounce Daniel  for  his  triple  daily  defiance  of  the 
sacrosanct  decree,  showing  that  "  he  regardeth 
not  thee,  O  king,  nor  the  decree  that  thou  hast 
signed." 

Their  denunciations  produced  an  effect  very 
dilj'erent  from  what  they  had  intended.  They 
had  hoped  to  raise  the  king's  wrath  and  jealousy 
against  Daniel,  as  one  who  lightly  esteemed  his 
divine  autocracy.  But  so  far  from  having  any 
such  ignoble  feeling,  the  king  only  sees  that  he 
has  been  an  utter  fool,  the  dupe  of  the  worthless- 
ness  of  his  designing  courtiers.  All  his  anger 
was  against  himself  for  his  own  folly;  his  sole 
desire  was  to  save  the  man  whom  for  his  integrity 
and  ability  he  valued  more  than  the  whole  crew 
of  base  plotters  who  had  entrapped  him  against 
his  will  into  a  stupid  act  of  injustice.  All  day,  till 
sunset,  he  laboured  hard  to  deliver  Daniel.  The 
whole  band  of  satraps  and  chamberlains  feel  that 
this  will  not  do  at  all;  so  they  again  "  rush  "  to 
the  king  to  remind  him  of  the  Median  and  Per- 
sian law  that  no  decree  which  the  king  has  passed 
can  be  altered.  To  alter  it  would  be  a  confession 
of  fallibility,  and  therefore  an  abnegation  of 
godhead!  Yet  the  strenuous  action  which  he 
afterwards  adopted  shows  that  he  might,  even 
then,  have  acted  on  the  principle  which  the 
mages  laid  down  to  Cambyses,  son  of  Cyrus,  that 
"  the  king  can  do  no  wrong."  There  seems  to 
be  no  reason  why  he  should  not  have  told  these 
"  tumultuous  "  princes  that  if  they  interfered  with 
Daniel  they  should  be  fiung  into  the  lions'  den. 
This  would  probably  have  altered  their  opinion 
as  to  pressing  the  royal  infallibility  of  irreversi- 
ble decrees. 

But  as  this  resource  did  not  suggest  itself  to 
Darius,  nothing  could  be  done  ^except  to  cast 
Daniel  into  the  den  or  "pit"  of  lions;  but  in 
sentencing  him  the  king  offers  the  prayer,  "  May 
the  God  whom  thou  servest  continually  deliver 
thee!"    Then  a  stone  is  laid  over  the  mouth  of 


VISION    OF     THE    FOUR    WILD    BEASTS 


409 


the  pit,  and,  for  the  sake  of  double  security,  that 
even  the  king  may  not  have  the  power  of  tamper- 
ing with  it,  it  is  sealed,  not  only  with  his  own 
seal,  but  also  with  that  of  his  lords. 

From  the  lion-pit  the  king  went  back  to  his 
palace,  but  only  to  spend  a  miserable  night.  He 
could  take  no  food.  No  dancing-women  were 
summoned  to  his  harem;  no  sleep  visited  his  eye- 
lids. At  the  first  glimpse  of  morning  he  rose, 
and  went  with  haste  to  the  den — taking  the 
satraps  with  him,  adds  the  LXX. — and  cried  with 
a  sorrowful  voice,  "  O  Daniel,  servant  of  the  liv- 
ing God,  hath  thy  God  whom  thou  servest  con- 
tinually been  able  to  deliver  thee  from  the 
lions?  " 

And  the  voice  of  the  prophet  answered,  "  O 
king,  live  for  ever!  My  God  sent  His  angel,  and 
shut  the  mouths  of  the  lions,  that  they  should 
not  destroy  me;  forasmuch  as  before  Him  inno- 
cency  was  found  in  me;  and  also  before  thee,  O 
king,  have  I  committed  no  offence." 

Thereupon  the  happy  king  ordered  that  Daniel 
should  be  taken  up  out  of  the  lion-pit;  and  he 
was  found  to  be  unhurt,  because  he  believed  in 
his  God. 

We  would  have  gladly  spared  the  touch  of 
savagery  with  which  the  story  ends.  The  de- 
liverance of  Daniel  made  no  difference  in  the 
guilt  of  his  accusers.  What  they  had  charged 
him  with  was  a  fact,  and  was  a  transgression  of 
the  ridiculous  decree  which  they  had  caused  the 
king  to  pass.  But  his  deliverance  was  regarded 
as  a  Divine  judgment  upon  them — as  proof  that 
vengeance  should  fall  on  them.  Accordingly, 
not  they  only,  but,  with  the  brutal  solidarity  of 
revenge  and  punishment  which,  in  savage  and 
semi-civilised  races,  confounds  the  innocent  with 
the  guilty,  their  wives  and  even  their  children 
were  also  cast  into  the  den  of  lions,  and  they  did 
not  reach  the  bottom  of  the  pit  before  "  the  lions 
got  hold  of  them  and  crushed  all  their  bones."  * 
They  are  devoured,  or  caught,  by  the  hungry 
lions  in  mid-air. 

"  Then  King  Darius  wrote  to  all  the  nations, 
communities,  and  tongues  who  dwell  in  the  whole 
world,  May  your  peace  be  multiplied!  I  make  a 
decree.  That  in  every  dominion  of  my  kingdom 
men  tremble  and  fear  before  the  God  of  Daniel: 
for  He  is  the  living  God,  and  steadfast  for  ever, 
and  His  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  de- 
stroyed, and  His  dominion  even  unto  the  end. 
He  delivereth  and  He  rescueth,  and  He  work- 
eth  signs  and  wonders  in  heaven  and  in  earth, 
who  delivered  Daniel  from  the  power  of  the 
lions." 

The  language,  as  in  Nebuchadrezzar's  decrees, 
is  purely  Scriptural. f  What  the  Median  mages 
and  the  Persian  fire-worshippers  would  think  of 
such  a  decree,  and  whether  it  produced  the  slight- 
est effect  before  it  vanished  without  leaving  a 
trace  behind,  are  questions  with  which  the  author 
of  the  story  is  not  concerned. 

He  merely  adds  that  Daniel  prospered  in  the 
reign  of  Darius  and  of  Cyrus  the  Persian. 


*  Comp.  Esther  ix.  13,  14;  Josh.  vii.  24  ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  1-6. 
The  LXX.  modifies  the  savagery  of  the  story  by  making 
the  vengeance  fall  only  on  the  two  young  men  who  were 
Daniel's  fellow-presidents.  But  comp.  Herod.,  iii.  ng; 
Am.  Marcell.,  xxiii.  6;  and  "Ob  noxam  unius  omnis 
propinquitas  perit,"  etc. 

+  Psalm  xxix.  i,  .x.  16,  etc.  Professor  Fuller  calls  it  "a 
Mazdean  colouring  in  the  language  "  ! 


PART    III. 
THE  PROPHETIC  SECTION  OF  THE  BOOK. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 
VISION  OF  THE  FOUR  WILD  BEASTS. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  second  division  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel — the  apocalyptic.  It  is  unques- 
tionably inferior  to  the  first  part  in  grandeur  and 
importance  as  a  whole,  but  it  contains  not  a  few 
great  conceptions,  and  it  was  well  adapted  to  in- 
spire the  hopes  and  arouse  the  heroic  courage 
of  the  persecuted  Jews  in  the  terrible  days  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Daniel  now  speaks  in  the 
first  person,*  whereas  throughout  the  historical 
section  of  the  Book  the  third  person  has  been 
used. 

In  the  form  of  apocalypse  which  he  adopts  he 
had  already  had  partial  precursors  in  Ezekiel  and 
Zechariah;  but  their  symbolic  visions  were  far 
less  detailed  and  developed — it  may  be  added  far 
more  poetic  and  classical — than  his.  And  in 
later  apocalypses,  for  which  this  served  as  a 
model,  little  regard  is  paid  to  the  grotesqueness 
or  incongruity  of  the  symbols,  if  only  the  in- 
tended conception  is  conveyed.  In  no  previous 
writer  of  the  grander  days  of  Hebrew  literature 
would  such  symbols  have  been  permitted  as 
horns  which  have  eyes  and  speak,  or  lions  from 
which  the  wings  are  plucked,  and  which  there- 
after stand  on  their  feet  as  a  man,  and  have  a 
man's  heart  given  to  them. 

The  vision  is  dated,  "  In  the  first  year  of  Bel- 
shazzar,  King  of  Babylon."  It  therefore  comes 
chronologically  between  the  fourth  and  fifth 
chapters.  On  the  pseudepigraphic  view  of  the 
Book  we  may  suppose  that  this  date  is  merely 
a  touch  of  literary  verisimilitude,  designed  to  as- 
similate the  prophecies  to  the  form  of  those  ut- 
tered by  the  ancient  prophets;  or  perhaps  it 
may  be  intended  to  indicate  that  with  three  of 
the  four  empires — the  Babylonian,  the  Median, 
and  the  Persian — Daniel  had  a  personal  acquaint- 
ance. Beyond  this  we  can  see  no  significance 
in  the  date;  for  the  predictions  which  are  here 
recorded  have  none  of  that  immediate  relation  to 
the  year  in  which  they  originated  which  we  see  in 
the  writings  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.  Perhaps 
the  verse  itself  is  a  later  guess  or  gloss,  since 
there  are  slight  variations  in  Theodotion  and 
the  LXX.  Daniel,  we  are  told,  both  saw  and 
wrote  and  narrated  the  dream. f 

In  the  vision  of  the  night  he  had  seen  the 
four  winds  of  heaven  travelling,  or  bursting 
forth,  on  the  great  sea;  t  and  from  those  tumultu- 
ous waves  came  four  immense  wild  beasts,  each 
unlike  the  other. 

The  first  was  a  lion,  with  four  eagles'  wings. 
The  wings  were  plucked  off,  and  it  then  raised 

*  Except  in  the  heading  of  chap.  x. 

t  In  the  opinion  of  Lagarde  and  others  this  chapter— 
which  Is  not  noticed  by  Josephus,  and  which  Meinhold 
thinks  cannot  have  been  written  by  the  author  of  chap, 
ii.,  since  it  says  nothing  of  the  sufferings  or  deliverance 
of  Israel — did  not  belong  to  the  original  form  of  the  Book. 
Lagarde  thinks  that  it  was  written  A.  D.  69,  after  the  per- 
secution of  the  Christians  by  Nero. 

X  St.  Ephrsem  Syrus  says,  "  The  sea  is  the  world."  Isa. 
xvii.  12,  xxvii.  i,  xxxii.  2.  But  compare  Dan.  vii.  17' 
Ezek.  xxix.  3;  Rev.  xiii.  i,  xvii.  1-8.  xxi.  i. 


4IO 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


itself  from  the  earth,  stood  on  its  feet  like  a  man, 
and  a  man's  heart  was  given  to  it. 

The  second  was  like  a  bear,  raising  itself  on 
one  side,  and  having  three  ribs  between  its  teeth; 
and  it  is  bidden  to  "arise  and  devour  much  flesh." 

The  third  is  a  leopard,  or  panther,  with  four 
wings  and  four  heads,  to  which  dominion  is 
given. 

The  fourth — a  yet  more  terrible  monster,  which 
is  left  undescribed,  as  though  indescribable — has 
great  devouring  teeth  of  iron,  and  feet  that 
stamp  and  crush.*  It  has  ten  horns,  and  among 
them  came  up  a  little  horn,  before  which  three 
of  the  others  are  plucked  up  by  the  roots;  and 
this  horn  has  eyes,  and  a  mouth  speaking  great 
things. 

Then  the  thrones  were  set  for  the  Divine 
judges,!  and  the  Ancient  of  Days  seats  Himself 
— His  raiment  as  white  snow,  His  hair  as  bright 
wool,  His  throne  of  flames,  His  wheels  of  burn- 
ing fire.  A  stream  of  dazzling  fire  goes  out  be- 
fore Him.  Thousand  thousands  stand  before 
Him;  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  minister 
to  Him.  The  judgment  is  set;  the  books  are 
opened.  The  fourth  monster  is  then  slain  and 
burned  because  of  the  blaspheming  horn;  the 
other  beasts  are  suffered  to  live  for  a  season  and 
a  time,  but  their  dominion  is  taken  away.^ 

But  then,  in  the  night  vision,  there  came  "  one 
even  as  a  son  of  man  "  with  the  clouds  of  heaven, 
and  is  brought  before  the  Ancient  of  Days,  and 
receives  from  Him  power  and  glory  and  a  king- 
dom— an  everlasting  dominion,  a  kingdom  that 
shall  not  be  destroyed — over  all  people,  nations, 
and  languages. 

Such  is  the  vision,  and  its  interpretation  fol- 
lows. The  heart  of  Daniel  "  is  pierced  in  the 
midst  of  its  sheath  "  by  what  he  has  seen,  and 
the  visions  of  his  head  troubled  him.  Coming 
near  to  one  of  them  that  stood  by — the  angelic 
ministrants  of  the  Ancient  of  Days — he  begs  for 
an  interpretation  of  the  vision. 

It  is  given  him  with  extreme  brevity. 

The  four  wild  beasts  represent  four  kings, 
the  founders  of  four  successive  kingdoms.  But 
the  ultimate  and  eternal  dominion  is  not  to  be 
with  them.  It  is  to  be  given,  till  the  eternities 
of  the  eternities,  to  "  the  holy  ones  of  the  Lofty 
One."§ 

What  follows  is  surely  an  indication  of  the  date 
of  the  Book.  Daniel  is  quite  satisfied  with  this 
meagre  interpretation,  in  which  no  single  detail 
is  given  as  regards  the  first  three  world-empires, 
which  one  would  have  supposed  would  chiefly 
interest  the  real  Daniel.  His  whole  curiosity  is 
absorbed  in  a  detail  of  the  vision  of  the  fourth 
monster.  It  is  all  but  inconceivable  that  a  con- 
temporary prophet  should  have  felt  no  further 
interest  in  the  destinies  which  affected  the  great 
,  golden  Empire  of  Babylon  under  which  he  lived, 
nor  in  those  of  Media  and  Persia,  which  were  al- 
ready beginning  to  loom  large  on  the  horizon, 
and  should  have  cared  only  for  an  incident  in  the 
story  of  a  fourth  empire  as  yet  unheard  of,  which 
was  only  to  be  fulfilled  four  centuries  later.  The 
interests  of  every  other  Hebrew  prophet  are  al- 

*  In  the  vision  of  the  colossus  in  ii.  41-43  stress  is  laid  on 
the  division  of  the  fourth  empire  into  .stronger  and 
weaker  elements  (iron  and  clay).  That  point  is  here 
passed  over. 

1  A.  v.,  "  the  thrones  were  cast  down." 

tin  ii.  55,  44,  the  four  empires  are  represented  as  finally 
destroyed. 

§A,  V.  marg.,  "high  ones"— ?'.  e.,  things  or  places. 


ways  mainly  absorbed,  so  far  as  earthly  things 
are  concerned,  in  the  immediate  or  not-far- 
distant  future.  That  is  true  also  of  the  author  of 
Daniel,  if,  as  we  have  had  reason  to  see,  he  wrote 
under  the  rule  of  the  persecuting  and  blasphem- 
ing horn. 

In  his  appeal  for  the  interpretation  of  this  sym- 
bol there  are  fresh  particulars  about  this  horn 
which  had  eyes  and  spake  very  great  things.  We 
are  told  that  "  his  look  was  more  stout  than  his 
fellows  "  ;  and  that  "  he  made  war  against  the 
saints  and  prevailed  against  them,  until  the  An- 
cient of  Days  came.  Then  judgment  was  given 
to  the  saints,  and  the  time  came  that  the  saints 
possessed  the  kingdom." 

The  interpretation  is  that  the  fourth  beast  is 
an  earth-devouring,  trampling,  shattering  king- 
dom, diverse  from  all  kingdoms;  its  ten  horns 
are  ten  kings  that  shall  arise  from  it.*  Then  an- 
other king  shall  arise,  diverse  from  the  first,  who 
shall  subdue  three  kings,  shall  speak  blasphemies, 
shall  wear  out  the  saints,  and  will  strive  to 
change  times  and  laws.  But  after  "  a  time,  two 
times,  and  a  half,"t  the  judgment  shall  sit,  and 
he  will  be  annihilated,  and  his  dominion  shall  be 
given  for  ever  to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High. 

Such  was  the  vision;  such  its  interpretation; 
and  there  can  be  no  difficulty  as  to  its  general 
significance. 

I.  That  the  four,  empires,  and  their  founders, 
are  not  identical  with  the  four  empires  of  the 
metal  colossus  in  Nebuchadrezzar's  dream,  is  an 
inference  which,  apart  from  dogmatic  bias,  would 
scarcely  have  occurred  to  any  unsophisticated 
reader.  To  the  imagination  of  Nebuchadrezzar, 
the  heathen  potentate,  they  would  naturally 
present  themselves  in  their  strength  and  tower- 
ing grandeur,  splendid  and  impassive  and  secure, 
till  the  mysterious  destruction  smites  them.  To 
the  Jewish  seer  they  present  themselves  in  their 
cruel  ferocity  and  headstrong  ambition  as  de- 
stroying wild  beasts.  The  symbolism  would  nat- 
urally occur  to  all  who  were  familiar  with  the 
winged  bulls  and  lions  and  other  gigantic  rep- 
resentations of  monsters  which  decorated  the 
palace-walls  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  Indeed, 
similar  imagery  had  already  found  a  place  on 
the  prophetic  page.t 

II.  The  turbulent  sea,  from  which  the  immense 
beasts  emerge  after  the  struggling  of  the  four 
winds  of  heaven  upon  its  surface,  is  the  sea  of 
nations. § 

III.  The  first  great  beast  is  Nebuchadrezzar 
and  the  Babylonian  Empire. ||  There  is  nothirig 
strange  in  the  fact  that  there  should  be  a  certain 
transfusion  or  overlapping  of  the  symbols,  the 
object  not  being  literary  congruity,  but  the  crea- 
tion of  a  general  impression.  He  is  represented 
as  a  lion,  because  lions  were  prevalent  in  Baby- 
lonia, and  were  specially  prominent  in  Babylo- 
nian decorations.  His  eagle-wings  symbolise 
rapacity  and  swiftness.lT    But,  according  to  the 

*  Not  kingdoms,  as  in  viii.  8. 

t  Comp.  Rev.  xii.  14  ;  Luke  iv.  25  ;  James  v.  i-. 

ilsa.  xxvii  i,  Ii.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  3,  xxxii.  2. 

§  Comp.  Job  xxxviii.  16,  17  ;  Isa.  viii.  7,  xvii.  12. 

II  Comp.  Dan.  ii.  38.  Jeremiah  had  likened  Nebuchad- 
rezzar both  to  the  lion  (iv.  7,  xlix.  19,  etc.)  and  to  the 
eagle  (xlviii.  40,  xlix.  22).  Ezekiel  had  compared  the 
king  (xvii.  3),  and  Habakkuk  his  armies  (i.  8),  as  also 
Jeremiah  (iv.  13  ;  Lam.  iv.  ig),  to  the  eagle  (Pusey,  p.  690). 
See  too  Layard,  "  Nin.  and  Bab.,"  ii.  460.  For  other  beast- 
symbols  see  Isa.  xxvii.  i,  Ii.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  3  ;  Psalm  Ixxiv. 

^  Comp.  Jer.  iv.  7,  13,  xlix.  16  ;  Ezek.  xvii.  3,  12  ;  Hab.  i. 
a ;  Lam.  iv.  19. 


VISION    OF    THE    FOUR   WILD    BEASTS. 


411 


narrative  already  given,  a  change  had  come  over 
the  spirit  of  Nebuchadrezzar  in  his  latter  days. 
That  subduing  and  softening  by  the  influence  of 
a  Divine  power  is  represented  by  the  plucking  off 
of  the  lion's  eagle-vi'ings,  and  its  fall  to  earth. 
But  it  was  not  left  to  lie  there  in  impotent 
degradation.  It  is  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  and 
humanised,  and  made  to  stand  o,n  its  feet  as  a 
man,  and  a  man's  heart  is  given  to  it.* 

IV.  The  bear,  which  places  itself  upon  one 
side,  is  the  Median  Empire,  smaller  than  the 
Chaldean,  as  the  bear  is  smaller  and  less  for- 
midable than  the  lion.  The  crouching  on  one  side 
is  obscure.  It  is  explained  by  some  as  implying 
that  it  was  lower  in  exaltation  than  the  Baby- 
lonian Empire;  by  others  that  "it  gravitated,  as 
regards  its  power,  only  towards  the  countries  west 
of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates."!  The  meaning  of 
the  "  three  ribs  in  its  mouth  "  is  also  uncertain. 
Some  regard  the  number  three  as  a  vague  round 
number;  others  refer  it  to  the  three  countries 
over  which  the  Median  dominion  extended — 
Babylonia,  Assyria,  and  Syria;  others,  less  prob- 
ably, to  the  three  chief  cities.  The  command, 
"  Arise,  devour  much  flesh,"  refers  to  the  proph- 
ecies of  Median  conquest,^  and  perhaps  to  un- 
certain historical  reminiscences  which  confused 
"  Darius  the  Mede  "  with  Darius  the  son  of 
Hystaspes.  Those  who  explain  this  monster  as 
an  emblem,  not  of  the  Median  but  of  the  Medo- 
Persian  Empire,  neglect  the  plain  indications  of 
the  Book  itself,  for  the  author  regards  the 
Median  and  Persian  Empires  as  distinct.^ 

V.  The  leopard  or  panther  represents  the  Per- 
sian kingdom.il  It  has  four  wings  on  its  back, 
to  indicate  how  freely  and  swiftly  it  soared  to  the 
four  quarters  of  the  world.  Its  four  heads  indi- 
cate four  kings.  There  were  indeed  twelve  or 
thirteen  kings  of  Persia  between  b.  c.  536  and 
B.  c.  333;  but  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
who  of  course  had  no  books  of  history  before 
him,  only  thinks  of  the  four  who  were  most 
prominent  in  popular  tradition — namely  (as  it 
would  seem),  Cyrus,  Darius,  Artaxerxes,  and 
Xerxes. 1[  These  are  only  four  names  which  the 
writer  knew,  because  they  are  the  only  ones 
which  occur  in  Scripture.  It  is  true  that  the 
Darius  of  Neh.  xii.  22  is  not  the  Great  Darius, 
son  of  Hystaspes,  but  Darius  Codomannus  (^b.  c. 
424-404).  But  this  fact  may  most  easily  have 
been  overlooked  in  uncritical  and  unhistoric 
times.  And  "  power  was  given  to  it,"  for  it  was 
far  stronger  than  the  preceding  kingdom  of  the 
Medes. 

VI.  The  fourth  monster  won  its  chief  aspect  of 
terribleness  from  the  conquest  of  Alexander, 
which  blazed  over  the  East  with  such  irresistible 
force  and  suddenness.**  The  great  Macedonian, 
after  his  massacres  at  Tyre,  struck  into  the  East- 
ern world  the  intense  feeling  of  terror  which  we 
still  can  recognise  in  the  narrative  of  Josephus. 
His  rule  is  therefore  symbolised  by  a  monster 
diverse  from  all  the  beasts  before  it  in  its  sudden 

*  The  use  of  enosh — not  ^^i'//— indicates  chastening  and 
weakness. 

t  Ewald. 

X  Isa.  xiii,  17  ;  Jer.  li.  11,  28.  Aristotle,  "  H.  N  ,"  viii.  5. 
calls  the  bear  7rd/Li<<)ayos,  "all-devouring."  A  bear  appears 
as  a  dream  symbol  in  an  Assyrian  book  of  auguries 
(Lenormant,  "  Magie,"  492). 

§  Dan.  V.  28,  31,  vi  8.  12,  15,  28,  viii.  20,  ix   i,  xi.  i. 

II  The  composite  beast  of  Rev.  xiii.  2  combines  leopard, 
bear,  and  lion. 

ICoinp    viii   4-8. 

**  Battle  of  the  Granicus,  B.  c.  334 ;  Battle  of  Issus.  333  ; 
Siege  of  Tyre.  332  ;  Battle  of  Arbela,  331 ;  Death  of  Darius, 
330.    Alexander  died  B.  c.  323. 


leap  out  of  obscurity,  in  the  lightning-like 
rapidity  of  its  flash  from  West  to  East,  and  in  its 
instantaneous  disintegration  into  four  separate 
kingdoms.  It  is  with  one  only  of  those  four 
kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi,  the  one  which  so 
terribly  affected  the  fortunes  of  the  Holy  Land, 
that  the  writer  is  predominantly  concerned — 
namely,  the  empire  of  the  Seleucid  kings.  It  is 
in  that  portion  of  the  kingdom — namely,  from 
the  Euxine  to  the  confines  of  Arabia — that  the 
ten  horns  arise  which,  we  are  told,  symbolise  ten 
kings.  It  seems  almost  certain  that  these  ten 
kings  are  intended  for: — 

B.  c. 

1.  Seleucus  I.  (Nicator)  *  .     312-280 

2.  Antiochus  I.  (Soter)      .        .     280-261 

3.  Antiochus  II.  (Theos)  .        .     261-246 

4.  Seleucus  II.  (Kallinikos)       .     246-226 

5.  Seleucus  III.  (Keraunos)      .     226-223 

6.  Antiochus  III.  (Megas)         .     223-187 

7.  Seleucus  IV.  (Philopator)     .     187-176 

Then  followed  the  three  kings  (actual  or  po- 
tential) who  were  plucked  up  before  the  little 
horn:  namely — 

B.  C. 

8.  Demetrius        ....     175 

9.  Heliodorus      ....     176 

10.  Ptolemy  Philometor      .        .     181-146 

Of  these  three  who  succumbed  to  the  mach- 
inations of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  or  the  little 
horn,f  the  first,  Demetrius,  was  the  only  son  of 
Seleucus  Philopator,  and  true  heir  to  the  crown. 
His  father  sent  him  to  Rome  as  a  hostage,  and 
released  his  brother  Antiochus.  So  far  from 
showing  gratitude  for  this  generosity,  Anti- 
ochus, on  the  murder  of  Seleucus  IV.  (b.  c.  175), 
usurped  the  rights  of  his  nephew  (Dan.  xi.  21). 

The  second,  Heliodorus,  seeing  that  Demetrius 
the  heir  was  out  of  the  way,  poisoned  Seleucus 
Philopator,  and  himself  usurped  the  kingdom. 

Ptolemy  Philometor  was  the  son  of  Cleopatra, 
the  sister  of  Seleucus  Philopator.  A  large  party 
was  in  favour  of  uniting  Egypt  and  Persia  under 
his  rule.  But  Antiochus  Epiphanes  ignored  the 
compact  which  had  made  Coele-Syria  and 
Phoenicia  the  dower  of  Cleopatra,  and  not  only 
kept  Philometor  from  his  rights,  but  would  have 
deprived  him  of  Egypt  also  but  for  the  strenuous 
interposition  of  the  Romans  and  their  ambassa- 
dor M.  Popilius  Lsenas. 

When  the  three  horns  had  thus  fallen  before 
him,  the  little  horn — Antiochus  Epiphanes — 
sprang  into  prominence.  The  mention  of  his 
'■  eyes  "  seems  to  be  a  reference  to  his  shrewd- 
ness, cunning,  and  vigilance.  The  "  mouth  that 
spoke  very  great  things  "  alludes  to  the  boastful 
arrogance  which  led  him  to  assume  the  title  of 
Epiphanes,  or  "  the  illustrious " — which  his 
scornful  subjects  changed  into  Epimanes,  "  the 
mad  " — and  to  his  assumption  even  of  the  title 
Theos,  "  the  god,"  on  some  of  his  coins.  His 
look  "  was  bigger  than  his  fellows,"  for  he  in- 
spired the  kings  of  Egypt  and  other  countries 
with  terror.  "  He  made  war  against  the  saints," 
with  the  aid  of  "  Jason  and  Menelaus,  those 
ungodly  wretches,"  and  "  prevailed  against 
them."     He  "  wore  out  the  saints  of  the  Most 

*  This  was  the  interpretation  given  by  the  great  father 
Ephraem  Svrus  in  the  first  century.  Hitzig,  Kuenen,  and 
others  count  from  Alexander  the  Great,  and  omit  Ptolemy 
P'lilometor. 

t  Dan.  xi.  21 


412 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


High,"  for  he  took  Jerusalem  by  storm,  plun- 
dered it,  slew  eighty  thousand  men,  women,  and 
children,  took  forty  thousand  prisoners,  and  sold 
as  many  into  slavery  (b.  c.  170).  "  As  he  entered 
the  sanctuary  to  plunder  it,  under  the  guidance 
of  the  apostate  high  priest  Menelaus,  he  uttered 
words  of  blasphemy,  and  he  carried  off  all  the 
gold  and  silver  he  could  find,  including  the 
golden  table,  altar  of  incense,  candlesticks,  and 
vessels,  and  even  rified  the  subterraneous  vaults, 
so  that  he  seized  no  less  than  eighteen  hundred 
talents  of  gold."  He  then  sacrificed  swine  upon 
the  altar,  and  sprinkled  the  whole  Temple  with 
the  broth. 

Further  than  all  this,  "  he  thought  to  change 
times  and  laws  ";  and  they  were  "  given  into  his 
hand  until  a  time,  and  two  times,  and  a  half." 
For  he  made  a  determined  attempt  to  put  down 
the  Jewish  feasts,  the  Sabbath,  circumcision,  and 
all  the  most  distinctive  Jewish  ordinances.  In 
B.  c.  167,  two  years  after  his  cruel  devastation  of 
the  city,  he  sent  Apollonius,  his  chief  collector 
of  tribute,  against  Jerusalem,  with  an  army  of 
twenty-two  thousand  men.  On  the  first  Sabbath 
after  his  arrival,  Apollonius  sent  his  soldiers 
to  massacre  all  the  men  whom  they  met  in  the 
streets,  and  to  seize  the  women  and  children  as 
slaves.  He  occupied  the  castle  on  Mount  Zion, 
and  prevented  the  Jews  from  attending  the  pub- 
lic ordinances  of  their  sanctuary.  Hence  in  June 
B.  c.  167  the  daily  sacrifice  ceased,  and  the  Jews 
fled  for  their  lives  from  the  Holy  City.  Anti- 
ochus  then  published  an  edict  forbidding  all  his 
subjects  in  Syria  and  elsewhere — even  the  Zoro- 
astrians  in  Armenia  and  Persia — to  worship  any 
gods,  or  acknowledge  any  religion  but  his.*  The 
Jewish  sacred  books  were  burnt,  and  not  only  the 
Samaritans  but  many  Jews  apostatised,  while 
others  hid  themselves  in  mountains  and  deserts,  f 
He  sent  an  old  philosopher  named  Athenseus  to 
instruct  the  Jews  in  the  Greek  religion,  and  to 
enforce  its  observance.  He  dedicated  the  Tem- 
ple to  Zeus  Olympios,  and  built  on  the  altar  of 
Jehovah  a  smaller  altar  for  sacrifice  to  Zeus,  to 
whom  he  must  also  have  erected  a  statue.  This 
heathen  altar  was  set  up  on  Kisleu  (December) 
15,  and  the  heathen  sacrifice  began  on  Kisleu  25. 
All  observance  of  the  Jewish  Law  was  now 
treated  as  a  capital  crime.  The  Jews  were 
forced  to  sacrifice  in  heathen  groves  at  heathen 
altars,  and  to  walk,  crowned  with  ivy,  in  Bacchic 
processions.  Two  women  who  had  braved  the 
despot's  wrath  by  circumcising  their  children 
were  flung  from  the  Temple  battlements  into  the 
vale  below. t 

The  triumph  of  this  blasphemous  and  despotic 
savagery  was  arrested,  first  by  the  irresistible 
force  of  determined  martyrdom  which  preferred 
death  to  unfaithfulness,  and  next  by  the  armed 
resistance  evoked  by  the  heroism  of  Mattathias, 
the  priest  at  Modin.  When  Apelles  visited  the 
town,  and  ordered  the  Jews  to  sacrifice,  Matta- 
thias struck  down  with  his  own  hand  a  Jew  who 
was  preparing  to  obey.  Then,  aided  by  his 
strong  heroic  sons,  he  attacked  Apelles,  slew  him 
and  his  soldiers,  tore  down  the  idolatrous  altar, 
and  with  his  sons  and  adherents  fied   into   the 


*  I  Mace.  i.  29-40  ;  2  Mace.  v.  24-26  ;  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  XII. 
V.  4.    Comp.  Dan.  xi.  30,  31.    See  Schiirer,  i.  155  ff. 

t  Jerome,  "  Comm.  in  Dan.,"  viii.,  ix.;  Tac,  "  Hist.,"  v. 
8;  I  Mace.  i.  41-53,  2  Maec.  v.  27,  vi.  2  ;  Jos.,  "Antt.,"  XII. 

V.  4. 

ti  Mace.  ii.  41-64,  iv.  54;  2  Mace.  vi.  i-g,  x.  5;  Jos., 
"  Antt.,"  XII.  V.  4  ;  Dan.  xi.  31. 


wilderness,  where  they  were  joined  by  many  of 
the  Jews. 

The  news  of  this  revolt  brought  Antiochus  to 
Palestine  in  b.  c.  166,  and  among  his  other 
atrocities  he  ordered  the  execution  by  torture  of 
the  venerable  scribe  Eleazar,  and  of  the  pious 
mother  with  her  seven  sons.  In  spite  of  all  his 
efforts  the  party  of  the  Chasidim  grew  in  num- 
bers and  in  strength.  When  Mattathias  died, 
Judas  the  Maccabee  became  their  leader,  and  his 
brother  Simon  their  counsellor.*  While  Anti- 
ochus was  celebrating  his  mad  and  licentious 
festival  at  Daphne,  Judas  inflicted  a  severe  defeat 
on  Apollonius,  and  won  other  battles,  which 
made  Antiochus  vow  in  an  access  of  fury  that 
he  would  exterminate  the  nation  (Dan.  xi.  44). 
But  he  found  himself  bankrupt,  and  the  Persians 
and  Armenians  were  revolting  from  him  in  dis- 
gust. He  therefore  sent  Lysias  as  his  general  to 
Judaea,  and  Lysias  assembled  an  immense  army 
of  forty  thousand  foot  and  seven  thousand  horse, 
to  whom  Judas  could  only  oppose  six  thousand 
men.f  Lysias  pitched  his  camp  at  Beth-shur, 
south  of  Jerusalem.  There  Judas  attacked  him 
with  irresistible  valour  and  confidence,  slew  five 
thousand  of  his  soldiers,  and  drove  the  rest  to 
flight. 

Lysias  retired  to  Antioch,  intending  to  renew 
the  invasion  next  year.  Thereupon  Judas  and 
his  army  recaptured  Jerusalem,  and  restored  and 
cleansed  and  reconsecrated  the  dilapidated  and 
desecrated  sanctuary.  He  made  a  new  shew- 
bread-table,  incense-altar,  and  candlestick  of  gold 
in  place  of  those  which  Antiochus  had  carried  off, 
and  new  vessels  .of  gold,  and  a  new  veil  before 
the  Holiest  Place.  All  this  was  completed  on 
Kisleu  25,  B.  c.  165,  about  the  time  of  the  winter 
solstice,  "  on  the  same  day  of  the  year  on  which, 
three  years  before,  it  had  been  profaned  by 
Antiochus,  and  just  three  years  and  a  half — '  a 
time,  two  times,  and  half  a  time  ' — after  the  city 
and  Temple  had  been  desolated  by  Apollonius."  % 
They  began  the  day  by  renewing  the  sacrifices, 
kindling  the  altar  and  the  candlestick  by  pure 
fire  struck  by  flints.  The  whole  law  of  the  Tem- 
ple service  continued  thenceforward  without  in- 
terruption till  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  by 
the  Romans.  It  was  a  feast  in  commemoration 
of  this  dedication — called  the  Encaenia  and  "  the 
Lights  " — which  Christ  honoured  by  His  pres- 
ence at  Jerusalem. § 

The  neighbouring  nations,  when  they  heard  of 
this  revolt  of  the  Jews,  and  its  splendid  success, 
proposed  to  join  with  Antiochus  for  their  exter- 
mination. But  meanwhile  the  king,  having  been 
shamefully  repulsed  in  his  sacrilegious  attack  on 
the  Temple  of  Artemis  at  Elymais,  retired  in 
deep  chagrin  to  Ecbatana,  in  Media.  It  was 
there  that  he  heard  of  the  Jewish  successes  and 
set  out  to  chastise  the  rebels.  On  his  way  he 
heard  of  the  recovery  of  Jerusalem,  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  heathen  altars,  and  the  purification 
of  the  Temple.  The  news  flung  him  into  one 
of  those  paroxysms  of  fury  to  which  he  was 
liable,  and,  breathing  out  threatenings  and 
slaughter,  he  declared  that  he  would  turn  Je- 
rusalem into  one  vast  cemetery  for  the  whole 
Jewish   race.     Suddenly   smitten    with    a   violent 

*  Maccabee  perhaps  means  "  the  Hammerer  "  (eomp. 
the  names  Charles  Martel  and  Malleus  hareticorum). 
Simeon  was  called  Tadshz,  '-'he  increases"  (?  Gk.,  ©oo-iris). 

+  The  numbers  vary  in  the  records. 

$  Prideaux,  "Connection,"  ii.  212.  Comp.  Rev.  xii.  14, 
xi.  2,  J. 

§John  X.  22. 


VISION    OF    THE    FOUR    WILD    BEASTS. 


413 


internal  malady,  he  would  not  stay  his  course, 
but  still  urged  his  charioteer  to  the  utmost 
speed.*  In  consequence  of  this  the  chariot  was 
overturned,  and  he  was  flung  violently  to  the 
ground,  receiving  severe  injuries.  He  was 
placed  in  a  litter,  but,  unable  to  bear  the  agonies 
caused  by  its  motion,  he  stopped  at  Tab;e,  in  the 
mountains  of  Paractacene,  on  the  borders  of  Per- 
sia and  Babylonia,  where  he  died,  b.  c.  164,  in 
very  evil  case,  half  mad  with  the  furies  of  a  re- 
morseful conscience. f  The  Jewish  historians  say 
that,  before  his  death,  he  repented,  acknowledged 
the  crimes  he  had  committed  against  the  Jews, 
and  vowed  that  he  would  repair  them  if  he  sur- 
vived. The  stories  of  his  death  resemble  those  of 
the  deaths  of  Herod,  of  Galerius,.of  Philip  II., 
and  of  other  bitter  persecutors  of  the  saints  of 
God.  Judas  the  Maccabee,  who  had  overthrown 
his  power  in  Palestine,  died  at  Eleasa  in  b.  c. 
161,   after  a   series   of   brilliant   victories. 

Such  were  the  fortunes  of  the  king  whom  the 
writer  shadows  forth  under  the  emblem  of  the 
little  horn  with  human  eyes  and  a  mouth  which 
spake  blasphemies,  whose  power  was  to  be  made 
transitory,  and  to  be  annihilated  and  destroyed 
imto  the  end.t  And  when  this  wild  beast  was 
slain,  and  its  body  given  to  the  burning  fire,  the 
rest  of  the  beasts  were  indeed  to  be  deprived 
of  their  splendid  dominions,  but  a  respite  of 
life  is  given  them,  and  they  are  suffered  to  en- 
dure for  a  time  and  a  period. § 

But  the  eternal  life,  and  the  imperishable  do- 
minion, which  were  denied  to  them,  are  given  to 
another  in  the  epiphany  of  the  Ancient  of  Days. 
The  vision  of  the  seer  is  one  of  a  great  scene  of 
judgment.  Thrones  are  set  for  the  heavenly  as- 
sessors, and  the  Almighty  appears  in  snow-white 
raiment,  and  on  His  chariot-throne  of  burning 
flame  which  flashes  round  Him  like  a  vast  pho- 
tosphere.! The  books  of  everlasting  record  are 
opened  before  the  glittering  faces  of  the  myriads 
of  saints  who  accompany  Him,  and  the  fiery 
doom  is  passed  on  the  monstrous  world-powers 
who  would  fain  usurp  His  authority.  1" 

But  who  is  the  '"  one  even  as  a  son  of  man," 
who  "  comes  with  the  clouds  of  heaven,"  and 
who  is  brought  before  "  the  Ancient  of  Days,"  ** 
to  whom  is  given  the  imperishable  dominion? 
That  he  is  not  an  angel  appears  from  the  fact 
that  he  seems  to  be  separate  from  all  the .  ten 
thousand  times  ten  thousand  who  stand  around 
the  cherubic  chariot.  He  is  not  a  man,  but 
something  more.  In  this  respect  he  resembles 
the  angels  described  in  Dan.  viii.  15,  x.  16-18. 
He  has  "  the  appearance  of  a  man,"  and  is  "  like 
the  similitude  of  the  sons  of  men."ff 

We  should  naturally  answer,  in  accordance  with 
the  multitude  of  ancient  and  modern  commen- 

*On  the  death  of  Antiochus  see  i  Mace.  vi.  8;  2  Mace. 
ix.;  Polvbius,  xxxi.  n  ;  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  XII.  ix.  i,  2. 

tPolybius,  "De  Virt.  et  Vit.,"  Exc.  Vales,  p.  144;  Q. 
Curtius,  V.  13;  Strabo,  xi.  522;  Appian,  "  Syriaca,"  xlvi. 
80;  I  Mace,  vi.;  2  Mace,  ix.;  Jos.,  "Antt.,"  XII.  ix.  i; 
Prideaux,  ii.  217  ;  Jahn,  "  Hebr.  Commonwealth  "  §  xcvi. 

t  Dan.  vii.  26. 

§Dan.  vii.  12.  This  is  only  explicable  at  all— and  then 
not  clearly— on  the  supposition  that  the  fourth  beast  rep- 
resents Alexander  and  the  Diadochi.  See  even  Pusey, 
p.  78. 

II  E/.ek.  i.  26;  Psalm  1.  3.  Comp.  the  adaptation  of  this 
vision  in  Enoch  xlvi.  1-3. 

If  Isa.  1.  II.  Ix.  10-12,  Ixvi.  24,  Joel  iii.  i,  2.  See  Rev.  i.  13. 
In  the  Gospels  it  is  not  "a  son  of  man,"  but  generally 
611109  Tov  av9pu>nov.  Comp.  Matt,  xvi  13,  xxiv.  30;  John 
xii.  :)+  ;  Acts  vii;  56 ;  Justin.  "  Dial  c.  Tryph.,"  31. 

**  Comp.  Mark  xiv.  62;  Rev.  i.  7;  Horn.,  "  II.,"  v.  867,  bfiov 
v((t>((tT(ri.i'. 

ttComp.  Ezek.  i.  26. 


tators  both  Jewish  and  Christian,  that  the  Mes- 
siah is  intended;  *  and,  indeed,  our  Lord  alludes 
to  the  prophecy  in  Matt.  xxvi.  64.  That  the 
vision  is  meant  tc  indicate  the  establishment  of 
the  Messianic  theocracy  cannot  be  doubted.  But 
if  we  follow  the  interpretation  given  by  the  angel 
himself  in  answer  to  Daniel's  entreaty,  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Messiah  seems  to  be  at  least  some- 
what subordinate  or  indisitinct.  For  the  inter- 
pretation, without  mentioning  any  person,  seems 
to  point  only  to  the  saints  of  Israel  who  are  to 
inherit  and  maintain  that  Divine  kingdom  which 
has  been  already  thrice  asserted  and  prophesied. 
It  is  the  "holy  ones"  (Qaddishin),  "the  holy 
ones  of  the  Most  High  "  (Qaddishi  Elohiin), 
upon  whom  the  never-ending  sovereignty  is  con- 
ferred ;■)■  and  who  these  are  cannot  be  misunder- 
stood, for  they  are  the  very  same  as  those  against 
whom  the  little  horn  has  been  engaged  in  war.:}: 
The  Messianic  kingdom  is  here  predominantly 
represented  as  the  spiritual  supremacy  of  the 
chosen  people.  Neither  here,  nor  in  ii.  44,  nor  in 
xii.  3,  does  the  writer  separately  indicate  any 
Davidic  king,  or  priest  upon  his  throne,  as  had 
been  already  done  by  so  many  previous  proph- 
ets.§  This  vision  does  not  seem  to  have  brought 
into  prominence  the  rule  of  any  Divinely  In- 
carnate Christ  over  the  kingdom  of  the  Highest. 
In  this  respect  the  interpretation  of  the  "  one 
even  as  a  son  of  man  "  comes  upon  us  as  a  sur- 
prise, and  seems  to  indicate  that  the  true  inter- 
pretation of  that  element  of  the  vision  is  that  the 
kingdom  of  the  saints  is  there  personified;  so 
that  as  wild  beasts  were  appropriate  emblems  of 
the  world-powers,  the  reasonableness  and  sane-  , 
tity  of  the  saintly  theocracy  are  indicated  by  a 
human  form,  which  has  its  origin  in  the  clouds 
of  heaven,  not  in  the  miry  and  troubled  sea. 
This  is  the  view  of  the  Christian  father  Ephrsem 
Syrus,  as  well  as  of  the  Jewish  exegete  Abn 
Ezra;  and  it  is  supported  by  the  fact  that  in  other 
apocryphal  books  of  the  later  epoch,  as  in  the 
Assumption  of  Moses  and  the  Book  of  Jubilees, 
the  Messianic  hope  is  concentrated  in  the  con- 
ception that  the  holy  nation  is  to  have  the  domi- 
nance over  the  Gentiles.  At  any  rate,  it  seems 
that,  if  truth  is  to  guide  us  rather  than  theolog- 
ical prepossession,  we  must  take  the  significance 
of  the  writer,  not  from  the  elements  of  the  vi- 
sion, but  from  the  divinely  imparted  interpreta- 
tion of  it;  and  there  the  figure  of  "  one  as  a  son 
of  man  "  is  persistently  (vv.  18,  22,  27)  explained 
to  stand,  not  for  the  Christ  Himself,  but  for 
"the  holy  ones  of  the  Most  High,"||  whose 
dominion  Christ's  coming  should  inaugurate  and 
secure. 

The  chapter  closes  with  the  words:  "  Here  is 

*It  is  so  understood  by  the  Book  of  Enoch  ;  the  Talmud 
("Sanhedrin,"  f.  98,  i)  ;  the  early  father  Justin  Martyr, 
"Dial.  c.  Tryph."  31,  etc.  Some  of  the  Jewish  commen- 
tators (_e.  ^.,  Abn  Ezra)  understood  it  of  the  people  of  God, 
and  so  Hofmann,  Hitzig,  Meiuhold,  etc.  See  Behrmann, 
"  Dan.,"  p.  48. 

tDan.  iv.  3,  34,  vi.  26.  See  Schilrer,  ii.  247  ;  Wellhausen. 
"Die  Pharis.  u.  Sadd.,"  24  ff. 

t  Dan.  vii.  16,  22,  23,  27. 

§  Zech.  ix.  q. 

11  See  Schiirer,  ii.  138-187,  "The  Messianic  Hope":  he 
refers  to  Ecclus.  xxxii.  18,  19,  xxxiii.  i-ii,  xl.  13,  1.  24; 
Judith  xvi.  12  ;  2  Mace.  ii.  18  ;  Baruch  ii.  27-35  j  Tobit  xiii. 
ii-x8;  Wisdom  iii.  8,  v.  i,  etc.  The  Messianic  King  ap- 
pears more  distinctlj'-  in  "  Orac.  Sibyll.,"  iii.;  in  parts  of 
the  Book  of  Enoch  (of  which,  however  xlv.-lvii.  are  of 
unknown  date) ;  and  the  Psalms  of  Solomon.  In  Philo  we 
seem  to  have  traces  of  the  King  as  well  as  of  the  king- 
dom See  Drummond,  "  The  Jewish  Messiah,"  pp.  196  ff.; 
Stanton,  "The  Jewish  and  Christian  Messiah,"  pp.  109- 
118. 


414 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


the  end  of  the  matter.  As  for  me,  Daniel,  my 
thoughts  much  troubled  me,  and  my  brightness 
was  changed  in  me:  but  I  kept  the  matter  in  my 
heart." 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  RAM  AND   THE  HE-GOAT. 

This  vision  is  dated  as  having  occurred  in  the 
third  year  of  Belshazzar;  but  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
the  significance  of  the  date,  since  it  is  almost 
exclusively  occupied  with  the  establishment  of 
the  Greek  Empire,  its  dissolution  into  the  king- 
doms of  the  Diadochi,  and  the  godless  despotism 
of  King  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

The  seer  imagines  himself  to  be  in  the  palace 
of  Shushan:  "  As  I  beheld  I  was  in  the  castle  of 
Shushan."  *  It  has  been  supposed  by  some  that 
Daniel  was  really  there  upon  some  business  con- 
nected with  the  kingdom  of  Babylon.  But  this 
view  creates  a  needless  difficulty.  Shushan, 
which  the  Greeks  called  Susa,  and  the  Persians 
Shush  (now  Shushter),  "  the  city  of  the  lily," 
was  "  the  palace "  or  fortress  (birah  f)  of  the 
Achsemenid  kings  of  Persia,  and  it  is  most  un- 
likely that  a  chief  officer  of  the  kingdom  of  Baby- 
lon should  have  been  there  in  the  third  year  of 
the  imaginary  King  Belshazzar,  just  when  Cyrus 
was  on  the  eve  of  capturing  Babylon  without  a 
blow.  If  Belshazzar  is  some  dim  reflection  of 
the  son  of  Nabunaid  (though  he  never  reigned), 
Shushan  was  not  then  subject  to  the  King  of 
Babylonia.  But  the  ideal  presence  of  the  prophet 
there,  in  vision,  is  analogous  to  the  presence  of 
the  exile  Ezekiel  in  Jerusalem  (Ezek.  xl.  i);  and 
these  transferences  of  the  prophets  to  the  scenes 
of  their  operation  were  sometimes  even  regarded 
as  bodily,  as  in  the  legend  of  Habakkuk  taken  to 
the  lions'  den  to  support  Daniel. 

Shushan  is  described  as  being  in  the  province 
of  Elam  or  Elymais,  which  may  be  here  used  as 
a  general  designation  of  the  district  in  which 
Susiana  was  included.  The  prophet  imagines 
himself  as  standing  by  the  river-basin  {oobalX) 
of  the  Ulai,  which  shows  that  we  must  take  the 
words  "  in  the  castle  of  Shushan  "  in  an  ideal 
sense;  for,  as  Ewald  says,  "  it  is  only  in  a  dream 
that  images  and  places  are  changed  so  rapidly." 
The  Ulai  is  the  river  called  by  the  Greeks  the 
Eulseus,  now  the  Kariin.§ 

Shushan  is  said  by  Pliny  and  Arrian  to  have 
been  on  the  river  Eulseus,  and  by  Herodotus  to 
have  been  on  the  banks  of 

"  Choaspes,  amber  stream, 
The  drink  of  none  but  kings." 

It  seems  now  to  have  been  proved  that  the  Ulai 
was  merely  a  branch  of  the  Choaspes  or  Kerk- 
hah.ll 

*  Ezra  vi.  2  ;  Neh.  i.  i  ;  Herod.,  v.  49  ;  Polyb.,  v.  48.  A 
supposed  tomb  of  Daniel  has  long  been  revered  at  Shu- 
shan. 

t  Pars.,  baru ;  Skr.,  bura :  Assyr.,  birtu ;  Gk.,  /Sapts. 
Comp  .iEsch.,  "Pers.,"  554;  Herod.,  ii.  06. 

tTheodot.,  ovfiaK  :  Ewald,  Stromgebiet—s.  place  where 
several  rivers  meet.  The  Jews  prayed  on  river-banks 
(Acts  xvi.  13),  and  Ezekiel  had  seen  his  vision  on  the 
Chebar  (Ezek.  i.  i,  iii.  15,  etc.) ;  but  this  Ulai  is  here  men- 
tioned because  the  palace  stood  on  its  bank.  Both  the 
LXX.  and  Theodotion  omit  the  word  Ulai. 

§  "  Susianam  ab  Elymaide  disterminat  amnis  Eulasus  " 
(Plin.,  "H.  N.,"  vi.  27). 

!|  See  Loftus,  "Chaldsea,"  p.  346,  who  visited  Shush  in 
1854  ;  Herzog,  "  R.  E.,"  i-.  v.  "  Susa."  A  tile  was  found  by 
Layard  at  Kuyunjik  representing  a  large  city  between 
two  rivers.  It  probably  represents  Susa.  Loftus  says 
that  the  city  stood  between  the  Choaspes  and  the  Ko- 
pratas  (now  the  Dizfulj. 


Lifting  up  his  eyes,  Daniel  sees  a  ram  stand- 
ing eastward  of  the  river-basin.  It  has  two  lofty 
horns,  the  loftier  of  the  two  being  the  later  in 
origin.  It  butts  westward,  northward,  and  south- 
ward, and  does  great  things.*  But  in  the  midst 
of  its  successes  a  he-goat,  with  a  conspicuous 
horn  between  its  eyes,t  comes  from  the  West  so 
swiftly  over  the  face  of  all  the  earth  that  it 
scarcely  seems  even  to  touch  the  ground,:}:  and 
runs  upon  the  ram  in  the  fury  of  his  strength,  § 
comiuering  and  trampling  upon  him,  and  smash- 
ing in  pieces  his  two  horns.  But  his  impetuosity 
was  shortlived,  for  the  great  horn  was  speedily 
broken,  and  four  othersf  rose  in  its  place  to- 
wards the  four  winds  of  heaven.  Out  of  these 
four  horns  shot  up  a  puny  horn,1[ which  grew  ex- 
ceedingly great  towards  the  South,  and  towards 
the  East,  and  towards  the  "  Glory,"  i.  e.,  towards 
the  Holy  Land.**  It  became  great  even  to  the 
host  of  heaven,  and  cast  down  some  of  the  host 
and  of  the  stars  to  the  ground,  and  trampled  on 
them. ft  He  even  behaved  proudly  against  the 
prince  of  the  host,  took  away  from  him  %%  "  the 
daily  "  (sacrifice),  polluted  the  dismantled  sanc- 
tuary with  sacrilegious  arms,§§  and  cast  the  truth 
to  the  ground  and  prospered.  Then  "  one  holy 
one  called  to  another  and  asked.  For  how  long 
is  the  vision  of  the  daily  [sacrifice],  and  the 
horrible  sacrilege,  that  thus  both  the  sanctuary 
and  host  are  surrendered  to  be  trampled  under- 
foot? "  nil  And  the  answer  is,  "  Until  two  thou- 
sand three  hundred  'erebh-boqer,  '  evening-morn- 
ing'; then  will  the  sanctuary  be  justified." 

Daniel  sought  to  understand  the  vision,  and 
immediately  there  stood  before  him  one  in  the 
semblance  of  a  m  in,  and  he  hears  the  distant  voice 
of  some  one  11^  standing  between  the  Ulai — i.  e., 
between  its  two  banks,***  or  perhaps  between 
its  two  branches  the  Euloeus  and  the  Choaspes — 
who  called  aloud  to  "  Gabriel."  The  archangel 
Gabriel  is  here  first  mentioned  in  Scripture. ttt 

♦The  Latin  word  for  "to  butt"  \s  arietare,  from  aries, 
"  a  ram."  It  butts  in  three  directions  (comp.  Dan.  vii.  5). 
Its  conquests  in  the  East  were  apart  from  the  writer's 
purpose.  Croesus  called  the  Persians  uPpio-rai,  and  JS.^- 
chylus  uTrep/conxiToi.  a.yav,  "  Pers."  (Stuart).  For  horns  as 
the  symbol  of  strength  see  Amos  vi.  13  ;  Psalm  Ixxv.  5. 

t  Unicorns  are  often  represented  on  Assyrio-Babylonian 
sculptures. 

X  I  Mace.  i.  3  ;  Isa.  xii.  2  ;  Hosea  xiii.  7,  8 ;  Hab.  i.  6. 

§  Fury  {c/ie?nah),  "heat,"  "  violence  "—also  of  deadly 
venom  (Deut.  xxxii.  24). 

II  A.  V,  "four  notable  horns";  but  the  word  chazoth 
means  literally  "a  sight  of  four "— z.  e^  "four  other 
horns "  (comp.  ver.  8).  Gratz  reads  acheroth ;  LXX., 
'iiifia.  Tecrtrapa  (comp.  xi.  4). 

t  Lit.  "  out  of  littleness." 

**  Hatstsebi.  Comp.  xi.  45  ;  Ezek.  xx.  6  :  Jer.  iii.  19  ;  Zech. 
vii.  14 ;  Psalm  cvi.  24.  The  Rabbis  make  the  word  mean 
"the  gazelle"  for  fanciful  reasons  ("Taanith,"  69,  a). 

+  1  The  physical  image  implies  the  war  against  the  spirit- 
ual host  of  heaven,  the  holy  people  with  their  leaders.  See 
I  Mace.  i.  24-30;  2  Mace.  ix.  10.  The  Tsebaotli  mean  pri- 
marily the  stars  and  angels,  but  next  the  Israelites  (Exod. 
vii.  4). 

XX  So  in  the  Hebrew  margin  i.Q'ri),  followed  by  Theod- 
cret  and  Ewald  ;  but  in  the  text  (K'etliibh)  it  is,  "  by  him 
the  daily  was  abolished";  and  with  this  reading  the 
Peshito  and  Vulgate  agree.  Hattamzd,  "  the  daily " 
sacrifice;  LXX.,  ei'6eAexi(r/u-os  ;  Numb,  xxviii.  3;  i  Mace, 
i.  39,  415,  iii.  4S. 

§§The  Hebrew  is  here  corrupt.  The  R.  V.  renders  it, 
"And  the  host  was  given  over  to  it,  together  with  the 
continual  burnt  offering  through  transgression  ;  and  it 
cast  down  truth  to  the  ground,  and  it  did  its  pleasure  and 
prospered." 

nil  Dan.  viii.  13.  I  follow  Ewald  in  this  difficult  verse, 
and  with  him  Von  Lengerke  and  Hitzig  substantially 
agree  :  but  the  text  is  again  corrupt,  as  appears  also  in 
the  LXX.  It  would  be  useless  here  to  enter  into  minute 
philological  criticism.     "How  long?"  (comp.  Isa.  vi.  n). 

^"i  LXX.,  <i>eKix<avi ;  nescio  guis  (Vulg.,  viri). 

***  Comp.  for  the  expression  xii.  6. 

+tt  We  find  no  names  in  Gen.  xxxii.  30  ;  Judg.  xiii.  18. 


THE    RAM    AND    THE    HE-GOAT. 


415 


"  Gabriel,"  cried  the  voice,  "  explain  to  him  what 
he  has  seen."  So  Gabriel  came  and  stood  beside 
him;  but  he  was  terrified,  and  fell  on  his  face. 
"  Observe,  thou  son  of  man,"  *  said  the  angel  to 
him;  "for  unto  the  time  of  the  end  is  the  vi- 
sion." But  since  Daniel  still  lay  prostrate  on  his 
face,  and  sank  into  a  swoon,  the  angel  touched 
him,  and  raised  him  up,  and  said  that  the  great 
wrath  was  only  for  a  fixed  time,  and  he  would 
tell  him  what  would  happen  at  the  end  of  it. 

The  two-horned  ram,  he  said,  the  Baal- 
keranaim,  or  "  lord  of  two  horns,"  represents  the 
King  of  Media  and  Persia;  the  shaggy  goat  is 
the  Empire  of  Greece;  and  the  great  horn  is  its 
first  king — Alexander  the  Great. f 

The  four  horns  rising  out  of  the  broken  great 
horn  are  four  inferior  kingdoms.  In  otie  of 
these,  sacrilege  would  culminate  in  the  person 
of  a  king  of  bold  face,t  and  skilled  in  cunning, 
who  would  become  powerful,  though  not  by  his 
own  strength. §  He  would  prosper  and  destroy 
mighty  men  and  the  people  of  the  holy  ones,  || 
and  deceit  would  succeed  by  his  double-dealing. 
He  would  contend  against  the  Prince  of  princes, If 
and  yet  without  a  hand  would  he  be  broken  in 
pieces. 

Such  is  the  vision  and  its  interpretation;  and 
though  there  is  here  and  there  a  difficulty  in 
the  details  and  translation,  and  though  there  is 
a  necessary  crudeness  in  the  emblematic  imagery, 
the  general  significance  of  the  whole  is  perfectly 
clear. 

The  scene  of  the  vision  is  ideally  placed  in 
Shushan,  because  the  Jews  regarded  it  as  the 
royal  capital  of  the  Persian  dominion,  and  the 
dream  begins  with  the  overthrow  of  the  Medo- 
Persian  Empire.**  The  ram  is  a  natural  symbol 
of  power  and  strength,  as  in  Isa.  Ix.  7.  The  two 
horns  represent  the  two  divisions  of  the  empire, 
of  which  the  later — the  Persian— is  the  loftier 
and  the  stronger.  It  is  regarded  as  being  already 
the  lord  of  the  East,  but  it  extends  its  conquests 
by  butting  westward  over  the  Tigris  into  Europe, 
and  southwards  to  Egypt  and  Africa,  and  north- 
wards towards  Scythia,  with  magnificent  success. 

The  he-goat  is  Greece. ft  Its  one  great  horn 
represents  "  the  great  Emathian  conqueror."  %% 
So  swift  was  the  career  of  Alexander's  conquests, 
that  the  goat  seems  to  speed  along  without  so 

For  the  presence  of  arigels  at  the  vision  comp.  Zech.  i.  9, 
13,  etc.  Gabriel  means  "man  of  God."  In  Tobit  iii.  17 
Raphael  is  mentioned  ;  in  2  Esdras  v.  20.  Uriel.  This  is 
the  first  mention  of  any  angel's  name.  Michael  is  the 
highest  archangel  (Weber,  "System.,"  162  ff.),  and  in 
lewish  angelolo^y  Gabriel  is  identified  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  iRuach  Haqqodesh).  As  such  he  appears  in  the 
Quran,  ii.  qi  (Behrmann). 

*  Ben-Adam  (Ezek.  ii.  1). 

tComp.  Isa.  xiv.  9:  "  All  the  great  goats  of  the  earth." 
A  ram  is  a  natural  symbol  for  a  chieftain— Horn.,  "II.," 
xiii.  491-493;  Cic,  "De  Div.,"  i.  22  ;  Plut.,  "Sulla,"  c.  27; 
Jer.  1.  8:  Ezek.  xxxiv.  17;  Zech.  x.  3,  etc.  See  Vaux, 
"Persia,  '  p.  72. 

t"  Strength  of  face"  (LXX.,  ai/aiSrjs  n-poo-wTrw ;  Deut. 
xxviii.  50.  etc.).  "  Understanding  dark  sentences  "  (Judg. 
>iiy.  12  ;  Ezek.  xvii.  2  :  comp.  v.  12). 

§  The  meaning  is  uncertain.  It  may  mean  (i)  that  he  is 
orly  strong  by  God's  permission  ;  or  (2)  only  by  cunning, 
Bot  by  strength. 

II  Comp.  2  Mace.  iv.  9-15  :  "The  priests  had  no  courage 
to  serve  any  more  at  the  altar,  but  despising  the  Temple, 
and  neglecting  the  .sacrifices,  hastened  to  be  partakers  of 
the  unlawful  allowance  in  the  place  of  exercise  .  .  .  not 
setting  by  the  honours  of  their  fathers,  but  liking  the 
glory  of  the  Grecians  best  of  all.'' 

^  Not  marely  the  angelic  prince  of  the  host  (Josh.  v.  14), 
but  (iod— ■'  Lord  of  lords." 

**Conip.  Esther  i.  2.  Though  the  vision  took  place 
under  Babylon,  the  seer  is  strangely  unconcerned  with 
the  prejent,  or  with  the  fate  of  the  Babylonian  Empire. 

++It  is  said  to  be  the  national  emblem  of  Macedonia. 

■fi  He  U  La.l'^dthe  "  King  of  Javan  "— ?.  ^.,  of  the  lonians. 


much  as  touching  the  ground.*  With  irresisti- 
ble fury,  in  the  great  battles  of  the  Granicus  (b.  c. 
334).  Issus  (b.  c.  2>Z2>),  and  Arbela  (b.  c.  331,  he 
stamps  to  pieces  the  power  of  Persia  and  of  its 
king,  Darius  Codomannus.f  In  this  short  space 
of  time  Alexander  conquers  Syria,  Phoenicia, 
Cyprus,  Tyre,  Gaza,  Egypt,  Babylonia,  Persia, 
Media,  Hyrcania,  Aria,  and  Arachosia.  In  b.  c. 
330  Darius  was  murdered  by  Bessus,  and  Alex- 
ander became  lord  of  his  kingdom.  In  b.  c. 
329  the  Greek  King  conquered  Bactria,  crossed 
the  Oxus  and  Jaxartes,  and  defeated  the  Scyth- 
ians. In  B.  c.  328  he  conquered  Sogdiana.  In 
B.  c.  327  and  326  he  crossed  the  Indus,  Hydaspes, 
and  Akesines,  subdued  Northern  and  Western 
India,  and — compelled  by  the  discontent  of  his 
troops  to  pause  in  his  career  of  victory — sailed 
down  the  Hydaspes  and  Indus  to  the  Ocean.  He 
then  returned  by  land  through  Gedrosia,  Kar- 
mania,  Persia,  and  Susiana  to  Babylon. 

There  the  great  horn  is  suddenly  broken  with- 
out hand.t  Alexander  in  B.  c.  323,  after  a  reign 
of  twelve  years  and  eight  months,  died  as  a  fool 
dieth,  of  a  fever  brought  on  by  fatigue,  exposure, 
drunkenness,  and  debauchery.  He  was  only 
thirty-two  years  old. 

The  dismemberment  of  his  empire  immediately 
followed.  In  b.  c.  322  its  vast  extent  was  divided 
among  his  principal  generals.  Twenty-two 
years  of  war  ensued;  and  in  b.  c.  301,  after  the 
defeat  of  Antigonus  and  his  son  Demetrius  at 
the  Battle  of  Ipsus,  four  horns  are  visible  in  the 
place  of  one.  The  battle  was  won  by  the  con- 
federacy of  Cassander,  Lysimachus,  Ptolemy,  and 
Seleucus,  and  they  founded  four  kingdoms.  Cas- 
sander ruled  in  Greece  and  Macedonia;  Lysim- 
achus in  Asia  Minor;  Ptolemy  in  Egypt,  Ccele- 
Syria,  and  Palestine;  Seleucus  in  Upper  Asia. 

With  one  only  of  the  four  kingdoms,  and  with 
one  only  of  its  kings,  is  the  vision  further  con- 
cerned— with  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleucidae,  and 
with  the  eighth  king  of  the  Dynasty,  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.  In  this  chapter,  however,  a  brief 
sketch  only  of  him  is  furnished.  Many  details 
of  the  minutest  kind  are  subsequently  added. 

He  is  called  "  a  puny  horn,"  because,  in  his 
youth,  no  one  could  have  anticipated  his  future 
greatness.  He  was  only  a  younger  son  of  Anti- 
ochus III.  (the  Great).  When  Antiochus  III. 
was  defeated  in  the  Battle  of  Magnesia  under 
Mount  Sipylus  (b.  c.  190),  his  loss  was  terrible. 
Fifty  thousand  foot  and  four  thousand  horse 
were  slain  on  the  battlefield,  and  fourteen 
hundred  were  taken  prisoners.  He  was  forced 
to  make  peace  with  the  Romans,  and  to  give 
them  hostages,  one  of  whom  was  Antiochus  the 
Younger,  brother  of  Seleucus,  who  was  heir  to 
the  throne.  Antiochus  for  thirteen  years  lan- 
guished miserably  as  a  hostage  at  Rome.  His 
father,  Antiochus  the  Great,  was  either  slain  in 
B.  c.  187  by  the  people  of  Elymais,  after  his  sacri- 
legious plundering  of  the  Temple  of  Jupiter- 
Belus;§  or  murdered  by  some  of  his  own  attend- 
ants whom  he  had  beaten  during  a  fit  of  drunken- 
ness. ||     Seleucus  Philopator  succeeded  him,  and 

*Isa.  v.  26-29.    Comp.  i  Mace.  i.  3. 

tThey/z^y  of  the  he-goat  represents  the  vengeance 
cherished  by  the  Greeks  against  Persia  since  the  old  days 
of  Marathon,  Thermopylae,  Salamis,  Platsea,  and  Mycale. 
Persia  had  invaded  Greece  under  Mardonius  (B.  C.  492), 
under  Datis  and  Artaphernes  (B.  C.  490),  and  under  Xerxes 
(B.  C.  480). 

$1  Mace.  vi.  i-i6  ;  Mace.  ix.  9;  Job  vii.  6,  Prov.  xxvi.  20. 

§  So  DiodorusSiculus(Exc.  Vales.,  p.  293)  ;  Justin,  xxxii. 
2  ;  Jer.  '"  in  Dan.,"  xi.  ;  Strabo.  xvi.  744. 

II  Aurel.  Vict.,  "  De  Virr.  lUustr.,"  c.  liv. 


4i6 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


after  having  reigned  for  thirteen  years,  wished 
to  see  his  brother  Antiochus  again.  He  therefore 
sent  his  son  Demetrius  in  exchange  for  him,  per- 
haps desiring  that  the  boy,  who  was  then  twelve 
years  old,  should  enjoy  the  advantage  of  a  Ro- 
man education,  or  thinking  that  Antiochus  would 
be  of  more  use  to  him  in  his  designs  against 
Ptolemy  Philometor,  the  child-king  of  Egypt. 
When  Demetrius  was  on  his  way  to  Rome,  and 
Antiochus  had  not  yet  reached  Antioch,  Helio- 
dorus,  the  treasurer,  seized  the  opportunity  to 
poison  Seleucus  and  usurp  the  crown. 

The  chances,  therefore,  of  Antiochus  seemed 
very  forlorn.  But  he  was  a  man  of  ability, 
though  with  a  taint  of  folly  and  madness  in  his 
veins.  By  allying  himself  with  Eumenes,  King 
of  Pergamum,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  he  sup- 
pressed Heliodorus,  secured  the  kingdom,  and 
"  becoming  very  great,"  though  only  by  fraud, 
cruelty,  and  stratagem,  assumed  the  title  of 
Epiphanes  "  the  Illustrious."  He  extended  his 
power  "  towards  the  South  "  by  intriguing  and 
warring  against  Egypt  and  his  young  nephew, 
Ptolemy  Philometor;  *  and  "  towards  the  Sun- 
rising  "  by  his  successes  in  the  direction  of 
Media  and  Persia;  f  and  towards  "the  Glory" 
or  "  Ornament "  (hatstscbl) — i.  e.,  the  Holy 
Land.J  Inflated  with  insolence,  he  now  set  him- 
self against  the  stars,  the  host  of  heaven — i.  e., 
against  the  chosen  people  of  God  and  their 
leaders.  He  cast  down  and  trampled  on  them,§ 
and  defined  the  Prince  of  the  host;  for  he 

"  Not  e'en  against  the  Holy  One  of  heaven 
Refrained  his  tongue  blasphemous  " 

His  chief  enormity  was  the  abolition  of  "  the 
daily  "  (tamid) — i.  e.,  the  sacrifice  daily  offered  in 
the  Temple;  and  the  desecration  of  the  sanctuary 
itself  by  violence  and  sacrilege,  which  will  be 
more  fully  set  forth  in  the  next  chapters.  He 
also  seized  and  destroyed  the  sacred  books  of  the 
Jews.  As  he  forbade  the  reading  of  the  Law — 
of  which  the  daily  lesson  was  called  the  Parashah 
— there  began  from  this  time  the  custom  of  se- 
lecting a  lesson  from  the  Prophets,  which  was 
called  the  Haphtarah.\\ 

It  was  natural  to  make  one  of  the  holy  ones, 
who  are  supposed  to  witness  this  horrible  in- 
iquity,^ inquire  how  long  it  was  to  be  permitted. 
The  enigmatic  answer  is,  "  Until  an  evening- 
morning  two  thousand  three  hundred." 

In  the  further  explanation  given  to  Daniel  by 
Gabriel  a  few  more  touches  are  added. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  described  as  a  king 
"  bold  of  visage,  and  skilled  in  enigmas."  His 
boldness  is  sufficiently  illustrated  by  his  many 
campaigns  and  battles,  and  his  braggart  insolence 
has  been  already  alluded  to  in  vii.  8.  His  skill 
in  enigmas  is  illustrated  by  his  dark  and  tortuous 
diplomacy,  which  was  exhibited  in  all  his  pro- 
ceedings,**  and   especially   in   the   whole   of   his 

*  He  conquered  Egypt  B.  C   170  (i  Mace.  i.  17-20). 

t  See  I  Mace.  iii.  29-37. 

$  Comp.  Ezek.  .xx.  6,  "  which  is  the  glory  of  all  lands  "  ; 
Psalm  1.  2  ;  Lam.  ii.  15. 

§:  Mace.  i.  24-30.  Dr.  Pusey  endeavours,  without  even 
the  smallest  success,  to  show  that  many  things  .said  of 
Antiochus  in  this  book  do  not  apply  to  him.  The  argu- 
ment is  based  on  the  fact  that  the  characteristics  of 
Antiochus— who  was  a  man  of  versatile  impulses— are 
somewhat  differently  described  by  different  authors; 
but  here  we  have  the  aspect  he  presented  to  a  few  who 
regarded  him  as  the  deadliest  of  tyrants  and  persecutors. 

|l  .See  Hamburger,  ii.  334  {s.  v.  "  Haftara  "). 

^  Comp.  opy'r)  ^le-yaAr;  (i  Macc.  1.  64  ;  Isa.  X.  5,  25,  xxvi.  20  ; 
Jer.  1.  5  ;   Rom.  ii.  5,  etc.) 

**  Comp.  xi.  21. 


dealings  with  Egypt,  in  vrhich  country  he  de- 
sired to  usurp  the  throne  from  his  young  nephew 
Ptolemy  Philometor.  The  statement  that  "  he 
will  have  mighty  strength,  but  not  by  his  own 
strength,"  may  either  mean  that  his  transient 
prosperity  was  due  only  to  the  permission  of 
God,  or  that  his  successes  were  won  rather  by 
cunning  than  by  prowess.  After  an  allusion  to 
his  cruel  persecution  of  the  holy  people,  Gabriel 
adds  that  "  without  a  hand  shall  he  be  broken 
in  pieces";  in  other  words,  his  retribution  and 
destruction  shall  be  due  to  no  human  interven- 
tion, but  will  come  from  God  Himself.* 

Daniel  is  bidden  to  hide  the  vision  for  many 
days — a  sentence  which  is  due  to  the  literary  plan 
of  the  Book;  and  he  is  assured  that  the  vision 
concerning  the  "  evening-morning "  was  true. 
He  adds  that  the  vision  exhausted  and  almost  an- 
nihilated him;  but,  afterwards,  he  arose  and  did 
the  king's  business.  He  was  silent  about  the 
vision,  for  neither  he  nor  any  one  else  understood 
it.f  Of  course,  had  the  real  date  of  the  chapter 
been  in  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  it  was  wholly  im- 
possible that  either  the  seer  or  any  one  else 
should  have  been  able  to  attach  any  significance 
to  it.t 

Emphasis  is  evidently  attached  to  the  "  two 
thousand  three  hundred  evening-morning  "  dur- 
ing which  the  desolation  of  the  sanctuary  is  to 
continue. 

What  does  the  phrase  "  evening-morning " 
{' erehh-hoqer)   mean? 

In  ver.  26  it  is  called  "  the  vision  concerning 
the  evening  and  the  morning." 

Do€s  "  evening-morning  "  mean  a  whole  day, 
like  the  Greek  wxHt^^po",  or  half  a  day?  The 
expression  is  doubly  perplexing.  If  the  writer 
meant  "  days,"  why  does  he  not  say  "  days,"  as 
in  xii.  II,  12?  §  And  why,  in  any  case,  does  he 
here  use  the  solecism  'erebh-boqer  (Abendmorgen) , 
and  not,  as  in  ver.  26,  "  evening  and  morning  "  ? 
Does  the  expression  mean  two  thousand  three 
hundred  days?  or  eleven  hundred  and  fifty  days? 

It  is  a  natural  supposition  that  the  time  is 
meant  to  correspond  with  the  three  years  and  a 
half  ("  a  time,  two  times,  and  half  a  time  ")  of 
vii.  25.  But  here  again  all  certainty  of  detail  is 
precluded  by  our  ignorance  as  to  the  exact  length 
of  years  by  which  the  writer  reckoned;  and  how 
he  treated  the  month  Ve-adar,  a  month  of  thirty 
days,  which  was  intercalated  once  in  every  six 
years. 

Supposing  that  he  allowed  an  intercalary  fif- 
teen days  for  three  and  a  half  years,  and  took  the 
Babylonian  reckoning  of  twelve  months  of 
thirty  days,  then  three  and  a  half  years  gives  us 
twelve  hundred  and  seventy-five  days,  or,  omit- 
ting any  allowance  for  intercalation,  twelve 
hundred  and  sixty  days. 

*  Comp.  ii.  34,  xi.  4=;.  Antiochus  died  of  a  long  and  terri- 
ble illness  in  Persia.  Polybius  (xxxi.  ii)  describes  his 
sickness  bj^  the  word  Soi/aoi'^cras.  Arrian  ("  Syriaca,"  66) 
says(i)Su'u)i'eTeAtuTr/(re.  In  i  Macc.  vi.  8-16  he  dies  confessing 
his  sins  against  the  Jews,  but  there  is  another  story  in  2 
Macc.  ix.  4-28. 

t  Ver.  27,  "  I  was  gone  "  (or,  "  came  to  an  end  ")  "whole 
days."  With  this  e/co-Tao-iscomp.  ii.  I,  vii.  28  ;  Exod.  xxxiii. 
20  ;  Isa.  vi.  15 ;  Luke  ix.  32  ;  Acts  ix.  4,  etc  Comp.  xii.  8 ; 
Jer.  xxxii.  14,  and  (contra)  Rev.  xxii.  10. 

X  In  ver.  26  the  R.  V.  renders  "  it  belongeth  to  many  days 
io  come. " 

§  Comp.  Gen.  i.  5 ;  2  Cor.  xi.  25.  The  word  ta7nid 
includes  both  the  morning  and  evening  sacrifice  (Exod. 
xxix.  41).  Pusey  says  fp.  220),  "The  shift  of  halving  the 
days  is  one  of  those  monsters  which  have  disgraced  scien- 
tific expositions  'of  HebJew.' "  Yet  this  is  the  view  of 
such  scholars  as  Ewald,  Hit/Jg,  Kuenen,  Cornill,  Behr- 
niann.  The  latter  quotes  a  parallel:  "vgl.  ini  Hilde- 
brandsliede  sumaro  ente  wintio  sehstie  =  30  Jahr.'' 


THE    SEVENTY   WEEKS. 


417 


If,  then,  "  two  thousand  three  hundred  even- 
ing-morning "  means  two  thousand  three  hun- 
dred half  days,  we  have  one  hmidrcd  and  ten 
lays  too  many  for  the  three  and  a  half  years. 

And  if  the  phrase  means  two  thousand  three 
hundred  full  days,  that  gives  us  (counting  thirty 
intercalary  days  for  Ve-adar)  too  little  for  seven 
years  by  two  hundred  and  fifty  days.  Some  see 
in  this  a  mystic  intimation  that  the  period  of 
chastisement  shall  for  the  elect's  sake  be  short- 
ened.* Some  commentators  reckon  seven  years 
roughly,  from  the  elevation  of  Menelaus  to  the 
high-priesthood  (Kisleu,  B.  c.  168:  2  Mace.  v. 
11)  to  the  victory  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  over 
Nicanor  at  Adasa,  March,  b.  c.  161  (i  Mace.  vii. 
25-50;  2  Mace.  XV.  20-35). 

In  neither  case  do  the  calculations  agree  with 
the  twelve  hundred  and  ninety  or  the  thirteen 
hundred  and  thirty-five  days  of  xii.  12,  13. 

Entire  volumes  of  tedious  and  wholly  incon- 
clusive comment  have  been  written  on  these  com- 
binations, but  by  no  reasonable  supposition  can 
we  arrive  at  close  accuracy.  Strict  chronological 
accuracy  was  difficult  of  attainment  in  those  days, 
and  was  never  a  matter  about  which  the  Jews, 
in  particular,  greatly  troubled  themselves.  We 
do  not  know  either  the  terminus  a  quo  from  which 
or  the  terminus  ad  quern  to  which  the  writer  reck- 
oned. All  that  can  be  said  is  that  it  is  perfectly 
impossible  for  us  to  identify  or  exactly  equiparate 
the  three  and  a  half  years  (vii.  25),  the  "  two 
thousand  three  hundred  evening-morning  "  (viii. 
14),  the  seventy-two  weeks  (ix.  26),  and  the 
twelve  hundred  and  ninety  days  (xii.  11).  Yet 
all  those  dates  have  this  point  of  resemblance 
about  them,  that  they  very  roughly  indicate  a 
space  of  about  three  and  a  half  years  (more  or 
less)  as  the  time  during  which  the  daily  racrifice 
should  cease,  and  the  Temple  be  polluted  and 
desolate.f 

Turning  now  to  the  dates,  we  know  that  Judas 
the  Maccabee  cleansed^  ("'  justified  "  or  "  vindi- 
cated," viii.  14)  the  Temple  on  Kisleu  25  (De- 
cember 25th,  B.  c.  165).  If  we  reckon  back  two 
thousand  three  hundred  full  days  from  this  date, 
it  brings  us  to  b.  c.  171,  in  which  Menelaus,  who 
bribed  Antiochus  to  appoint  him  high  priest, 
robbed  the  Temple  of  some  of  its  treasures,  and 
procured  the  murder  of  the  high  priest  Onias 
III.  In  this  year  Antiochus  sacrificed  a  great 
sow  on  the  altar  of  burnt  offerings,  and  sprinkled 
its  broth  over  the  sacred  building.  These  crimes 
provoked  the  revolt  of  the  Jews  in  which  they 
killed  Lysimachus,  governor  of  Syria,  and 
brought  on  themselves  a  heavy  retribution. § 

If  we  reckon  back  two  thousand  three  hundred 
/ifl//^-days,  eleven  hundred  and  fifty  whole  days,  we 
must  go  back  three  years  and  seventy  days,  but 
we  cannot  tell  what  exact  event  the  writer  had 
in  mind  as  the  starting-point  of  his  calculations. 
The  actual  time  which  elapsed  from  the  final 
defilement  of  the  Temple  by  Apollonius,  the 
general  of  Antiochus,  in  b.  c.  168,  till  its  re- 
purification  was  roughly  three  years.  Perhaps, 
however — for  all  is  uncertain — the  writer  reck- 
oned from  the  earliest  steps  taken,  or  contem- 

*Matt.  xxiv.  22. 

t  These  five  passages  agree  in  making  the  final  distress 
last  during  three  years  and  a  fraction  :  the  only  difJerence 
lies  in  the  magnitude  of  the  fraction  "  (Bevan,  p.  127.) 

±  I  Mace.  iv.  41-56  ;  2  Mace.  x.  i-c. 

S  See  on  this  period  Diod.  Sic,  "Fr.,"  xxvi.  79  ;  Liv.,  xlii. 
29  ;  Polyb..  "  Legat.,"  71 ;  Justin,  xxxiv.  2  ;  Jer.,  "  Comm. 
I?  P.***'  *'•  22  ;  Jahn,  "  Hebr.  Commonwealth,"  6  xciv.  ; 
Pndeaux,  "Connection,"  ii.  146. 

87— Vol.  IV. 


plated,  by  Antiochus  for  the  suppression  of 
Judaism.  The  purification  of  the  Temple  did  not 
end  the  time  of  persecution,  which  was  to  con- 
tinue, first,  for  one  hundred  and  forty  days 
longer,  and  then  forty-five  days  more  (xii.  11, 
12).  It  is  clear  from  this  that  the  writer  reckoned 
the  beginning  and  the  end  of  troubles  from  dif- 
ferent epochs  which  we  have  no  longer  sufficient 
data  to  discover. 

It  must,  however,  be  borne  in  mind  that  no 
minute  certainty  about  the  exact  dates  is  attain- 
able. Many  authorities,  from  Prideaux  *  down 
to  Schurer,f  place  the  desecration  of  the  Temple 
towards  the  close  of  b.  c.  168.  Kuenen  sees 
reason  to  place  it  a  year  later.  Our  authorities 
for  this  period  of  history  are  numerous,  but  they 
are  fragmentary,  abbreviated,  and  often  inexact. 
Fortunately,  so  far  as  we  are  able  to  see,  no 
very  important  lesson  is  lost  by  our  inability  to 
furnish  an  undoubted  or  a  rigidly  scientific  ex- 
planation of  the  minuter  details. 

Approximate  Dates  a.s  Inferred  by  Cornill 
AND  Others.^ 

B.  c. 
Jeremiah's   prophecy   in   Jer.    xxv. 

605 


Jeremiah's   prophecy   in  Jer.   xxix, 

10 594 

Destruction  of  the  Temple         586  or  588 

Return  of  the  Jewish  exiles      .        .  537 
Decree  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus 

(Ezra  vii.    i)  .        .        .        .  458 

Second  decree  (Neh.  ii.  i)       .        .  445 
Accession  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 

(August,  Clinton)  .        .        .  175 

Usurpation  of  the  high-priesthood 

by  Jason 175 

Jason  displaced  by  Menelaus    .        .  172  (?) 

Murder  of  Onias  III.    .        .     (June)  171 

Apollonius  defiles  the  Temple        .  168 

War  of  Independence        .        .        .  166 
Purification  of  the  Temple  by  Judas 

the  Maccabee    .        .     (December)  165 

Death  of  Antiochus         .        .        .  163 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
THE  SEVENTY  WEEKS. 

This  chapter  is  occupied  with  the  prayer  of 
Daniel,  and  with  the  famous  vision  of  the 
seventy  weeks  which  has  led  to  such  intermi- 
nable controversies,  but  of  which  the  interpreta- 
tion no  longer  admits  of  any  certainty,  because 
accurate  data  are  not  forthcoming. 

The  vision  is  dated  in  the  first  year  of  Darius, 
the  son  of  Achashverosh,  of  the  Median  stock.§ 
We  have  seen  already  that  such  a  person  is  un- 
known to  history.  The  date,  however,  accords 
well  in  this  instance  with  the  literary  standpoint 
of  the  writer.  The  vision  is  sent  as  a  consolation 
of  perplexities  suggested  by  the  writer's  study  of 
the  Scriptures;  and  nothing  is  more  naturally  im- 
agined than  the  fact  that  the  overthrow  of  the 
Babylonian  Empire  should  have  sent  a  Jewish 
exile  to  the  study  of  the  rolls  of  his  holy  proph- 

♦  "  Connection,"  ii.  188. 

+  "  Gesch.  d.  V.  Isr.,"  i.  iss. 

X  Some  of  these  dates  are  uncertain,  and  are  variously 
given  by  different  authorities. 

§  Achashverosh,  Esther  viii.  10;  perhaps  connected 
with  "  Kshajarsha,  "  eye  of  the  kingdom  "  ("  Corp.  Inscr. 
Sem.,"  ii.  125). 


41 S 


THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


ets,  to  see  what  light  they  threw  on  the  exile  of 
his  people. 

He  understood  from  "  the  books  "  the  number 
of  the  years  "  whereof  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet  for  the  accomplish- 
ing of  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem,  even  seventy 
years."  *  Such  is  the  rendering  of  our  Re- 
visers, who  here  follow  the  A.  V.  ("  I  under- 
stood by  books  "),  except  that  they  rightly  use 
the  definite  article  (LXX.,^*-  roU  /3//3Xotj).  Such 
too  is  the  view  of  Hitzig.  Mr.  Bevan  seems  to 
have  pointed  out  the  real  meaning  of  the  passage, 
by  referring  not  only  to  the  Pentateuch  generally, 
as  helping  to  interpret  the  words  of  Jeremiah,  but 
especially  to  Lev.  xxvi.  i8,  21,  24,  28. f  It  was 
there  that  the  writer  of  Daniel  discovered  the 
method  of  interpreting  the  "  seventy  years " 
spoken  of  by  Jeremiah.  The  Book  of  Leviticus 
had  four  times  spoken  of  a  sevenfold  punish- 
ment— a  punishment  "  seven  times  more  "  for 
the  sins  of  Israel.  Now  this  thought  flashed 
upon  the  writer  like  a  luminous  principle.  Dan- 
iel, in  whose  person  he  wrote,  had  arrived  at  the 
period  at  which  the  literal  seventy  years  of  Jere- 
miah were — on  some  methods  of  computation — 
upon  the  eve  of  completion;  the  writer  himself 
is  living  in  the  dreary  times  of  Antiochus.  Jere- 
miah had  prophesied  that  the  nations  should  serve 
the  King  of  Babylon  seventy  years  (Jer.  xxv. 
11),  after  which  time  God's  vengeance  should 
fall  on  Babylon;  and  again  (Jer.  xxix.  10,  11), 
that  after  seventy  years  the  exiles  should  return 
to  Palestine,  since  the  thoughts  of  Jehovah  to- 
wards them  were  thoughts  of  peace  and  not 
of  evil,  to  give  them  a  future  and  a  hope. 

The  writer  of  Daniel  saw,  nearly  four  centuries 
later,  that  after  all  only  a  mere  handful  of  the 
exiles,  whom  the  Jews  themselves  compared  to 
the  chaff  in  comparison  with  the  wheat,  had  re- 
turned from  exile;  that  the  years  which  followed 
had  been  cramped,  dismal,  and  distressful;  that 
the  splendid  hopes  of  the  Messianic  kingdom, 
which  had  glowed  so  brightly  on  the  fore- 
shortened horizon  of  Isaiah  and  so  many  of  the 
prophets,  had  never  yet  been  fulfilled;  and  that 
these  anticipations  never  showed  fewer  signs  of 
fulfilment  than  in  the  midst  of  the  persecuting 
furies  of  Antiochus,  supported  by  the  widespread 
apostasies  of  the  Hellenising  Jews,  and  the  vile 
ambition  of  such  renegade  high  priests  as  Jason 
and  Menelaus. 

That  the  difficulty  was  felt  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  the  Epistle  of  Jeremy  (ver.  2)  extends  the 
epoch  of  captivity  to  two  hundred  and  ten  years 
(7  X  30),  whereas  in  Jer.  xxix.  10  "  seventy 
years  "  are  distinctly  mentioned.^ 

What  was  the  explanation  of  this  startling  ap- 
parent discrepancy  between  "  the  sure  word  of 
prophecy  "  and  the  gloomy  realities  of  history? 

The  writer  saw  it  in  a  mystic  or  allegorical  in- 
terpretation of  Jeremiah's  seventy  years.  The 
prophet  could  not  (he  thought)  have  meant 
seventy  literal  years.     The  number  seven  indeed 

*  By  "  the  books  "  is  here  probably  meant  the  Thorah 
or  Pentateuch,  in  \yhich  the  writer  discovered  the  key  to 
the  mystic  meaning  of  the  seventy  years.  It  was  not  in 
the  two  sections  of  Jeremiah  himself  (called,  according 
\o  Kimchi,  Sepher  Hamattanah  and  Sepher  Hacralon)  that 
he  found  this  key.  Jeremiah  is  here  Vtr'myan,  as  in  Jer. 
xxvii.-xxix.  See  Jer.  xxv.  ii  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  21  ;  Zech.  i. 
12-  In  the  Epistle  of  Jeremy  (ver.  2.)  the  seventy  years 
become  seven  generations  (vpoi/os  ixaucpb^  «<os  «Trjro  yevewv). 
See  too  Dtllmann's  "  Enoch,    p.  293. 

f-"Dan.,"  p.. 146.  Comp.  a  similar  usage  in  Aul  Gel!., 
"Noct.  Att.  iii.  10,  "Sejam  undectmam  annorum  hebdo- 
warf^w  ingressum  esse  "  ;  and  Arist.,  "Polit.,"  vii.  16. 

X  See  Fritzsche  ad  he.  ;  Ewald,  "  Hist,  of  Isr.,"  v.  140. 


played  its  usual  mystic  part  in  the  epoch  of 
punishment.  Jerusalem  had  been  taken  b.  c.  588; 
the  first  return  of  the  exiles  had  been  about  B.  c. 
538.  The  Exile  therefore  had,  from  one  point 
of  view,  lasted  forty-nine  years — i.  e.,  7  y,  7. 
But  even  if  seventy  years  were  reckoned  from  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (b.  c.  606?)  to  the  de- 
cree of  Cyrus  (b.  c.  536),  and  if  these  seventy 
years  could  be  made  out,  still  the  hopes  of 
the  Jews  were  on  the  whole  miserably  frus- 
trated.* 

Surely  then — so  thought  the  writer — the  real 
meaning  of  Jeremiah  must  have  been  misunder- 
stood; or,  at  any  rate,  only  partially  understood. 
He  must  have  meant,  not  "  years,"  but  weeks  of 
years — Sabbatical  years.  And  that  being  so,  the 
real  Messianic  fulfilments  were  not  to  come  till 
four  hundred  and  ninety  years  after  the  beginning 
of  the  Exile;  and  this  clue  he  found  in  Leviticus. 
It  was  indeed  a  clue  which  lay  ready  to  the  hand 
of  any  one  who  was  perplexed  by  Jeremiah's 
prophecy,  for  the   word    J?''^^'    e/35o/«li,   means, 

not  only  the  week,  but  also  "  seven."  and  the 
seventh  year;j;  and  the  Chronicler  had  already 
declared  that  the  reason  why  the  land  was  to  lie 
waste  for  seventy  years  was  that  "  the  land  "  was 
"to  enjoy  her  Sabbaths";  in  other  words,  that, 
as  seventy  Sabbatical  years  had  been  wholly 
neglected  (and  indeed  unheard  of)  during  the 
period  of  the  monarchy — which  he  reckoned  at 
four  hundred  and  ninety  years — therefore  it  was 
to  enjoy  those  Sabbatical  years  continuously 
while  there  was  no  nation  in  Palestine  to  culti- 
vate the  soil.:}: 

Another  consideration  may  also  have  led  the 
writer  to  his  discovery.  From  the  coronation  of 
Saul  to  the  captivity  of  Zachariah,  reckoning  the 
recorded  length  of  each  reign  and  giving  seven- 
teen years  to  Saul  (since  the  "  forty  years  "  of 
Acts  xiii.  21  is  obviously  untenable),  gave  four 
hundred  and  ninety  years,  or,  as  the  Chronicler 
implies,  seventy  unkept  Sabbatic  years.  The 
writer  had  no  means  for  an  accurate  computation 
of  the  time  which  had  elapsed  since  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple.  But  as  there  were  four 
hundred  and  eighty  years  and  twelve  high  priests 
from  Aaron  to  Ahimaaz,  and  four  hundred  and 
eighty  years  and  twelve  high  priests  from 
Azariah  I.  to  Jozadak,  who  was  priest  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Captivity, — so  there  were  twelve 
high  priests  from  Jozadak  to  Onias  III.;  and 
this  seemed  to  imply  a  lapse  of  some  four  hun- 
dred and  ninety  years  in  round  numbers.^ 

The  writer  introduces  what  he  thus  regarded 
as  a  consoling  and  illuminating  discovery  in  a 
striking  manner.  Daniel,  coming  to  understand 
for  the  first  time  the  real  meaning  of  Jeremiah's 
"  seventy  years,"   "  set  his  face  unto   the   Lord 


♦The  writer  of  2  Chron  xxxv.  17,  18,  xxxvi.  21,22,  evi- 
dently supposed  that  seventy  years  had  elapsed  between 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  decree  of  Cyrus— 
which  is  only  a  period  of  fifty  years.  The  Jewish  writers 
were  wholly  without  means  for  forming  an  accurate 
chronology.  For  instance,  the  Prophet  Zechariah  (i.  12). 
writing  in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  son  of  Hystaspes 
(B.  c.  520),  thinks  that  the  seventy  years  were  only  then 
concluding.  In  fact,  the  seventy  years  may  be  dated 
from  B.  C.  606  (fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim)  ;  or  B.  C.  sqS 
(Jehoiachin) ;  or  from  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  (B.  C. 
588)  ;  and  may  be  supposed  to  end  at  the  decree  of  Cyrus 
(B.  C.  536) ;  or  the  days  of  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  v.  i)  ;  or  the 
decree  of  Darius  (B.  C.  518,  Ezra  vi.  1-12). 

tLev.  xxv.  2,  4. 

$2  Chron  xxxvi.  21.    See  Bevan,  p.  14. 

SSee  Cornill,  "Die  Siebzig  Jahrwochen  Daniels,"  pp. 
14-18. 


THE    SEVENTY   WEEKS. 


419 


God,  to  seek  prayer  and  supplication  with  fast- 
ing and  sackcloth  and  ashes."  * 

His  prayer  is  thus  given: — 

It  falls  into  three  strophes  of  equal  length,  and 
is  "  all  alive  and  aglow  with  a  pure  fire  of  genu- 
ine repentance,  humbly  assured  faith,  and  most 
intense  petition."!  At  the  same  time  it  is  the 
composition  of  a  literary  writer,  for  in  phrase 
after  phrase  it  recalls  various  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture.j:  It  closely  resembles  the  prayers  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  and  is  so  nearly  parallel  with  the 
prayer  of  the  apocryphal  Baruch  that  Ewald  re- 
gards it  as  an  intentional  abbreviation  of  Baruch 
ii.  i-iii.  39.  Ezra,  however,  confesses  the  sins 
of  his  nation  without  asking  for  forgiveness;  and 
Nehemiah  likewise  praises  God  for  His  mercies, 
but  does  not  plead  for  pardon  or  deliverance; 
but  Daniel  entreats  pardon  for  Israel  and  asks 
that  his  own  prayer  may  be  heard.  The  sins  of 
Israel  in  vv.  5,  6,  fall  under  the  heads  of  wander- 
ing, lawlessness,  rebellion,  apostasy,  and  heed- 
lessness. It  is  one  of  the  marked  tendencies  of 
the  later  Jewish  writings  to  degenerate  into 
centos  of  phrases  from  the  Law  and  the  Proph- 
ets. It  is  noticeable  that  the  name  Jehovah  oc- 
curs in  this  chapter  of  Daniel  alone  (in  vv.  2,  4, 
10,  13,  14,  20);  and  that  he  also  addresses  God  as 
El,  Elohim,  and  Adonai. 

In  the  first  division  of  the  prayer  (vv.  4-10) 
Daniel  admits  the  faithfulness  and  mercy  of 
God,  and  deplores  the  transgressions  of  his  peo- 
ple from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  in  all  lands. 

In  the  second  part  (vv.  11-14)  he  sees  in  these 
transgressions  the  fulfilment  of  "  the  curse  and 
the  oath "  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  with 
special  reference  to  Lev.  xxvi.  14,  18,  etc.  In 
.spite  of  all  their  sins  and  miseries  they  had  not 
"  stroked  the  face  "  of  the  Lord  their  God. 

The  third  section  (vv.  15-19)  appeals  to  God 
by  His  past  mercies  and  deliverances  to  turn 
away  His  wrath  and  to  pity  the  reproach  of  His 
people.  Daniel  entreats  Jehovah  to  hear  his 
prayer,  to  make  His  face  shine  on  His  desolated 
sanctuary,  and  to  behold  the  horrible  condition 
of  His  people  and  of  His  holy  city.  Not  for 
their  sakes  is  He  asked  to  show  His  great  com- 
passion, but  because  His  Name  is  called  upon 
His  city  and  His  people. 
Such  is  the  prayer;  and  while  Daniel  was  still 

*  The  LXX.  and  Theodotion,  with  a  later  ritual  bias, 
make  they'a.r/'iV/.^  a  means  towards  the  prayer  :  evpeii'  npo<r- 
tv\r)v  (cat  €Aeos  iv  I'ljcTTeiais. 

t  Ewald,  p.  278.  The  first  part  (vv.  4-14)  is  mainly 
occupied  with  confessions  and  acknowledgment  of  God's 
justice  ;  the  last  part(vv.  is-ig)  with  entreaty  for  pardon  : 
confessto  (vv.  4-14)  ;  consolatio  (vv.  15-19)  (Melancthoni. 

\  Besides  the  parallels  which  follow,  it  has  phrases  from 

Exod.  XX.  6 ;  Deut.   vii.  21,  x.  17  ;  Jer.  vii.   ig  ;  Psalm  xliv. 

16.  cxxx.  4:2  Chron.   xxxvi.   15,16.    Mr.  Deane   (Bishop 

>    Ellicott's  "  Commentary,"  p.  407)  thus  exhibits  the  details 

of  special  resemblances  :— 


Dan.  ix. 

Ezra  ix. 

Neh.  ix. 

Baruch. 

Verse. 

Verse. 

Verse. 

4 

7 

32 

S 

7 

33.  .14 

i.  II 

6 

7 

32.  33 

7 

6,7 

32.  33 

i.  15-17 

8 

6,7 

33 

9 

17 

13 

ii.  7 

14 

IS 

33 

15 

10 

ii'.'li 

18 

ii.  19 

19 

ii.  IS 

speaking,  praying,  confessing  his  own  and  Is- 
rael's sins,  and  interceding  before  Jehovah  for  the 
holy  mountain — yea,  even  during  the  utterance  of 
his  prayer — the  Gabriel  of  his  former  visior* 
came  speeding  to  him  in  full  flight  at  the  time  of 
the  evening  sacrifice.  The  archangel  tells  him 
that  no  sooner  had  his  supplication  begun  than 
he  sped  on  his  way,  for  Daniel  is  a  dearly  be- 
loved one.  Therefore  he  bids  hini  take  heed  to 
the  word  and  to  the  vision: — 

1.  Seventy  weeks  are  decreed  upon  thy  people, 
and  upon  thy  holy  city —  ' 

(  a  )  to  finish  (or  "  restrain  ")  the  transgres- 
sion; 

(  /3)  to  make  an  end  of  (or  "  seal  up," 
Theodot.   ff<ppayl<rai)   sins; 

(7  )  to  make  reconciliation  for  (or  "  to  purge 
away  ")  iniquity; 

( 5  )  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness; 

(  c  )  to  seal  up  vision  and  prophet  (Heb.,  nabi 
LXX.,   irpo<f>i)T7)v);  and 

(  f )  to  anoint  the  Most  Holy  (or  "a  Most 
Holy  Place";  LXX.,  ev<f>p3.pai  dyiov  ayluv). 

2.  From  the  decree  to  restore  Jerusalem  unto 
the  Anointed  One  (or  "  the  Messiah "),  the 
Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks.  For  sixty-two 
weeks  Jerusalem  shall  be  built  again  with  street 
and  moat,  though  in  troublous  times. 

3.  After  these  sixty-two  weeks — 

(o  )  an  Anointed  One  shall  be  cut  off,  and 
shall  have  no  help  (?)  (or  "there  shall  be  none 
belonging  to  him");* 

(/3)  the  people  of  the  prince  that  shall  come 
shall  destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary; 

(7  )  his  end  and  the  end  shall  be  with  a  flood, 
and  war,  and  desolation; 

(  5  )  for  one  week  this  alien  prince  shall  make 
a  covenant  with  many; 

(  6 )  for  half  of  that  week  he  shall  cause  the 
sacrifice  and  burnt  offering  to  cease; 

(  f )  and  upon  the  wing  of  abominations 
[shall  come]   one  that  maketh  desolate; 

( V )  and  unto  the  destined  consummation 
[ivrath]  shall  be  poured  out  upon  a  desolate  one 
(?)  (or  "  the  horrible  one  "). 

Much  is  uncertain  in  the  text,  and  much  in  the 
translation;  but  the  general  outline  of  the  decla- 
ration is  clear  in  many  of  the  chief  particulars, 
so  far  as  they  are  capable  of  historic  verification. 
Instead  of  being  a  mystical  prophecy  which 
floated  purely  in  the  air,  and  in  which  a  week 
stands  (as  Keil  supposes)  for  unknown, 
heavenly,  and  symbolic  periods — in  which  case 
no  real  information  would  have  been  vouchsafed 
— we  are  expressly  told  that  it  was  intended  to 
give  the  seer  a  definite,  and  even  a  minutely  de- 
tailed, indication  of  the  course  of  events. 

Let  us  now  take  the  revelation  which  is  sent 
to  the  perplexed  mourner  step  by  step. 

I.  Seventy  weeks  are  to  elapse  before  any  per- 
fect deliverance  is  to  come.  We  are  nowhere  ex- 
pressly told  that  year-weeks  are  meantj  but  this 
is  implied  throughout,  as  the  only  possible  means 
of  explaining  either  the  vision  or  the  history. 
The  conception,  as  we  have  seen,  would  come 
to  readers  quite  naturally,  since  Shabbath  meant 
in  Hebrew,  not  only  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week,  but  the  seventh  year  in  each  week  of  years. 
Hence  "  seventy  weeks "  means  four  hundred 
and  ninety  years. f     Not  until  the  four  hundred 

•Perhaps  because  neither  Jason  nor  MeneTaus  (being 
apostate)  were  regarded  as  genuine  successors  of  Onias 
III. 

+  Numb.  xiv.  34  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  34  ;  Ezek.  iv.  6. 


420 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL 


and  ninety  years — the  seventy  weeks  of  years — 
are  ended  will  the  time  have  come  to  complete 
the  prophecy  vi^hich  only  had  a  sort  of  initial  and 
imperfect  fulfilment  in  seventy  actual  years. 

The  precise  meaning  attached  in  the  writer's 
mind  to  the  events  which  are  to  mark  the  close 
of  the  four  hundred  and  ninety  years — namely, 

(a)  the  ending  of  transgression;  ()3)  the  seal- 
ing up  of  sins;  (7)  the  atonement  for  iniquity; 
(  S)  the  bringing  in  of  everlasting  righteousness; 
and  (  e  )  the  sealing  up  of  the  vision  and  prophet 
(or  prophecy  *) — cannot  be  further  defined  by 
us.  It  belongs  to  the  Messianic  hope.f  It  is  the 
prophecy  of  a  time  which  may  have  had  some 
dim  and  partial  analogies  at  the  end  of  Jeremiah's 
seventy  years,  but  which  the  writer  thought 
would  be  more  richly  and  finally  fulfilled  at  the 
close  of  the  Antiochian  persecution.  At  the 
actual  time  of  his  writing  that  era  of  restitution 
had  not  yet  begun. 

But  (f)  another  event,  which  would  mark 
the  close  of  the  seventy  year-weeks,  was  to  be 
"  the  anointing  of  a  Most  Holy." 

What  does  this  mean? 

Theodotion  and  the  ancient  translators  render 
it  "  a  Holy  of  Holies."  But  throughout  the 
whole  Old  Testament  "  Holy  of  Holies "  is 
never  once  used  of  a  person,  though  it  occurs 
forty-four  times.:]:  Keil  and  his  school  point  to 
I  Chron.  xxiii.  13  as  an  exception;  but  "Nil  agit 
exemphim  quod  litem  lite  resolvit.'' 

In  that  verse  some  propose  the  rendering,  "  to 
sanctify,  as  most  holy,  Aaron  and  his  sons  for 
ever";  but  both  the  A.  V.  and  the  R.  V.  render 
it,  "  Aaron  was  separated  that  he  should  sanctify 
the  most  holy  things,  he  and  his  sons  for  ever." 
If  there  be  a  doubt  as  to  the  rendering,  it  is  per- 
verse to  adopt  the  one  which  makes  the  usage 
differ  from  that  of  every  other  passage  in  Holy 
Writ. 

Now  the  phrase  "  most  holy "  is  most  fre- 
quently applied  to  the  great  altar  of  sacrifice.  § 
It  is  therefore  natural  to  explain  the  present  pas- 
sage as  a  reference  to  the  reanointing  of  the  altar 
of  sacrifice,  primarily  in  the  days  of  Zerubbabel, 
and  secondarily  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  after  its 
profanation  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes.|| 

2.  But  in  the  more  detailed  explanation  which 
follows,  the  seventy  year-weeks  are  divided  into 
7  +  62  +  1. 

(a)  At  the  end  of  the  first  seven  week-years 
(after  forty-nine  years)  Jerusalem  should  be  re- 
stored, and  there  should  be  "  an  Anointed,  a 
Prince." 

Some  ancient  Jewish  commentators,  followed 
by  many  eminent  and  learned  modems,  under- 
stand this  Anointed  One  {Mashiach)  and  Prince 
(Nagid)  to  be  Cyrus;  and  that  there  can  be  no 
objection  to  conferring  on  him  the  exalted  title 
of  "  Messiah  "  is  amply  proved  by  the  fact  that 
Isaiah  himself  bestows  it  upon  him  (Isa.  xlv.  i). 

Others,  however,  both  ancient  (like  Eusebius) 
and  modern  (like  Gratz),  prefer  to  explain  the 
term  of  the  anointed  Jewish  high  priest,  Joshua, 
the  son  of  Jozadak.  For  the  term  "  Anointed  " 
is  given  to  the  high  priest- in  Lev.  iv.  3,  vi.  20; 

*  Comp.  Jer.  xxxii.  11,  ^4. 

t  See  Isa:  xlvi.  3,  li   5,  liii.  n  ;  J«r.  xxiii.  6,  etc. 

t  For  th?  <i«m'«//"«^  of  the  altar  see  Exod.  xxix.  36,  xl. 
10;  Lev.  viii.  11  f  Numb.  vii.  i.  It  would  make  no  differ- 
ence in  the  usus  loquendi  if  neither  Zerubbabel's  nor 
Judas's  altar  yr&s,  actually  anointed, 

§  It  is  only  used  thirteen  times  of  the  Debhtr,  or  Holiest 
place 

\  I  Mace.  iv.  54.  ■      - 


and  Joshua's  position  among  the  exiles  might 
well  entitle  him,  as  much  as  Zerubbabel  himself, 
to  the  title  of  Nagid  or  Prince.* 

( j8 )  After  this  restoration  of  Temple  and 
priest,  sixty-two  weeks  {i.  e.,  four  hundred  and 
thirty-four  years)  are  to  elapse,  during  which  Je- 
rusalem is  indeed  to  exist  "  with  street  and 
trench  " — but  in  the  straitness  of  the  times. f 

This,  too,  is  clear  and  easy  of  comprehension. 
It  exactly  corresponds  with  the  depressed  con- 
dition of  Jewish  life  during  the  Persian  and  early 
Grecian  epochs,  from  the  restoration  of  the 
Temple,  b.  c.  538,  to  b.  c.  171,  when  the  false 
high  priest  Menelaus  robbed  the  Temple  of  its 
best  treasures.  This  is  indeed,  so  far  as  accurate 
chronology  is  concerned,  an  unverifiable  period, 
for  it  only  gives  us  three  hundred  and  sixty- 
seven  years  instead  of  four  hundred  and  thirty- 
four: — but  of  that  I  will  speak  later  on.  The 
punctuation  of  the  original  is  disputed.  Theodo- 
tion, the  Vulgate,  and  our  A.  V.  punctuate  in  ver. 
25,  "  From  the  going  forth  of  the  command- 
ment "  ("  decree  "  or  "  word  ")  "  that  Jerusalem 
should  be  restored  and  rebuilt,  unto  an  Anointed, 
a  Prince,  are  seven  weeks,  and  sixty-two  weeks." 
Accepting  this  view,  Von  Lengerke  and  Hitzig 
make  the  seven  weeks  run  parallel  with  the  first 
seven  in  the  sixty-two.  This  indeed  makes  the 
chronology  a  little  more  accurate,  but  introduces 
an  unexplained  and  a  fantastic  element.  Con- 
sequently most  modern  scholars,  including  even 
such  writers  as  Keil,  arid  our  Revisers  follow  the 
Masoretic  punctuation,  and  put  the  stop  after  the 
seven  weeks,  separating  them  entirely  from  the 
following  sixty-two. 

3.  After  the  sixty-two  weeks  is  to  follow  a 
series  of  events,  and  all  these  point  quite  dis- 
tinctly to  the  epoch  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

(  a)  Ver.  26. — An  Anointed  One  shall  be  cut 
off  with  all  that  belongs  to  him. 

There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  this 
is  a  reference  to  the  deposition  of  the  high  priest 
Onias  III.,  and  his  murder  by  Andronicus  (a.  c. 
171).  This  startling  event  is  mentioned  in  2 
Mace.  iv.  34,  and  by  Josephus  ("  Antt.,"  XII.  v. 
i),  and  in  Dan.  xi.  22.  It  is  added,  "  and  no  .  .  . 
to  him."  Perhaps  the  word  "  helper  "  (xi.  45)  has 
fallen  out  of  the  text,  as  Gratz  supposes;  or  the 
words  may  mean,  "  there  is  no  [priest]  for  it 
[the  people]."  The  A.  V. renders  it,  "  but  not  for 
himself  "  ;  and  in  the  margin,  "  and  shall  have 
nothing";  or,  "and  they  [the  Jews]  shall  be  no 
more  his  people."  The  R.  V.  renders  it,  "  and 
shall  have  nothing."  I  believe,  with  Dr.  Joel, 
that  in  the  Hebrew  words  z^eeyn  Id  there  may 
be  a  sort  of  cryptographic  allusion  to  the  name 
Onias. 

(/3)  The  people  of  the  coming  prince  shall 
devastate  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  (translation 
uncertain). 

This  is  an  obvious  allusion  to  the  destruction 
and  massacre  inflicted  on  Jerusalem  by  ApoUo- 
nius  and  the  army  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (e.  c. 
167).  .Antiochus  is  called  "  the  prince  that  shall 
come,"  because  he  was  at  Rome  when  Onias  III. 
was  murdered  (b.  c.  171). 

( 7  )  "  And  until  the  end  shall  be  a  war,  a  sen- 

*  Hag.  i.  I ;  Zech.  iii.  i ;  Ezra  iii.  2.  Comp.  Ecclus.  xlv. 
24  ;  Jos.,  "  Antt.,"  XII.  iv.  2,  ttpocttott)?  ;  and  see  Bevan,  p. 

+  We  see  from  Zech.  i.  12,  ii.  4.  that  even  in  the  second 
year  of  Darius  Hystaspis  Jerusalem  had  neither  walls 
nor  gates  ;  and  even  in  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes 
the  wall  was  still  broken  down  and  the  gates  burnt 
(Neh.  3^ 


THE    SEVENTY    WEEKS. 


421 


tcnce  of  desolation"  (Hitzig,  etc.);  or,  as  Ewald 
renders  it,  "  Until  the  end  of  the  war  is  the  deci- 
sion concerning  the  horrible  thing." 

This  alludes  to  the  troubles  of  Jerusalem  until 
the  heaven-sent  Nemesis  fell  on  the  profane 
enemy  of  the  sr.ints  in  the  miserable  death  of 
Antiochus  in  Persia. 

(  5)  But  mea.i while  he  will  have  concluded  a 
covenant  with  riany  for  one  week. 

In  any  case,  A^hatever  be  the  exact  reading  or 
rendering,  this  seems  to  be  an  allusion  to  the 
fact  that  Antiochus  was  confirmed  in  his  perver- 
sity and  led  on  *,o  extremes  in  the  enforcement  of 
his  attempt  to  Hellenise  the  Jews  and  to  abolish 
their  national  religion  by  the  existence  of  a  large 
party  of  flagrant  apostates.  These  were  headed 
by  their  godless  and  usurping  high  priests,  Jason 
and  Menelaus.  All  this  is  strongly  emphasised 
in  the  narrative  of  the  Book  of  Maccabees.  This 
attempted  apostasy  lasted  for  one  week — i.  e.,  for 
seven  years;  the  years  intended  being  probably 
the  first  seven  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus,  from 
B.  c.  175  to  B.  c.  168.  During  this  period  he  was 
aided  by  wicked  men,  who  said,  "  Let  us  go  and 
make  a  covenant  with  the  heathen  round  about 
us;  for  since  we  departed  from  them  we  have 
had  much  sorrow."  Antiochus  "  gave  them 
license  to  do  after  the  ordinances  of  the 
heathen,"  so  that  they  built  a  gymnasium  at  Je- 
rusalem, obliterated  the  marks  of  circumcision, 
and  were  joined  to  the  heathen  (i  Mace.  i.   10- 

15).- 

(  e  )  For  the  half  of  this  week  {i.  e.,  for  three 
and  a  half  years)  the  king  abolished  the  sacrifice 
and  the  oblation  or  meat  ofifering. 

This  alludes  to  the  suppression  of  the  most 
distinctive  ordinances  of  Jewish  worship,  and  the 
general  defilement  of  the  Temple  after  the  setting 
up  of  the  heathen  altar.  The  reckoning  seems 
to  be  from  the  edict  promulgated  some  months 
before  December,  168,  to  December,  165,  when 
Judas  the   Maccabee  reconsecrated  the  Temple. 

(  f )  The  sentence  which  follows  is  surrounded 
with  every  kind  of  uncertainty. 

The  R.  V.  renders  it,  "  And  upon  the  wing  [or, 
pinnacle]  of  abominations  shall  come  [or,  be] 
one  that  maketh  desolate." 

The  A.  V.  has,  "  And  for  the  overspreading 
of  abominations  "  (or  marg.,  "  with  the  abomi- 
nable armies  ")  "  he  shall  make  it  desolate." 

It  is  from  the  LXX.  that  we  derive  the  famous 
expression,  "  abomination  of  desolation,"  re- 
ferred to  by  St.  Matthew  (xxiv.  15:  cf.  Luke  xxi. 
20)  in  the  discourse  of  our  Lord. 

Other  translations  are  as  follows: — 

Gesenius:  "  Desolation  comes  upon  the  hor- 
rible wing  of  a  rebel's  host." 

Ewald:  "  And  above  will  be  the  horrible  wing 
of  abominations." 

Wieseler:  "  And  a  desolation  shall  arise  against 
the  wing  of  abominations." 

Von  Lengerke,  Hengstenberg,  Pusey:  "And 
over  the  edge  [or,  pinnacle  *]  of  abominations 
[comethj  the  desolator"; — which  they  under- 
stand to  mean  that  Antiochus  will  rule  over  the 
Temple  defiled  by  heathen  rites. 

Kranichfeld  and  Keil:  "  And  a  destroyer  comes 
on  the  wings  of  idolatrous  abominations." 

Kuenen,  followed  by  others,  boldly  alters  the 
text  from  ve'al  k'naph,  "  and  upon  the  wing," 
into  ve'al  kanno,  "and  instead  thereof." f 

"  And  instead  thereof  "  (t.  e.,  in  the  place  of  the 

*Comp.  TTTfpxJyLov  (Matt.  iv.  5). 

t  Kuenen,  "Hist.  Cr;*    Onder'^ok.  "  >i.  i.v» 


sacrifice    and    meat    offering)     "  there    shall    be 
abominations." 

It  is  needless  to  weary  the  reader  with  further 
attempts  at  translation;  but  however  uncertain 
may  be  the  exact  reading  or  rendering,  few 
modern  commentators  doubt  that  the  allusion 
is  to  the  smaller  heathen  altar  built  by  Antiochus 
above  (i.  e.,  on  the  summit)  of  the  "  Most  Holy  " 
— i:  e.,  the  great  altar  of  burnt  -sacrifice — over- 
shadowing it  like  "a  wing"  (kanaph),  and  caus- 
ing desolations  or  abominations  (shiqqootsim) 
That  this  interpretation  is  the  correct  one  can 
hardly  be  doubted  in  the  light  of  the  clearer  ref- 
erences to  "  the  abomination  that  maketh  deso- 
late "  in  xi.  31  and  xii.  11.  In  favour  of  this  we 
have  the  almost  contemporary  interpretation  of 
the  Book  of  Maccabees.  The  author  of  that  his- 
tory directly  applies  the  phrase  "  the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation  "  to  the  idol  altar  set  up  by 
Antiochus  (i  Mace.  i.  54,  vi.  7). 

(  V )  Lastly,  the  terrible  drama  shall  end  by 
an  outpouring  of  wrath,  and  a  sentence  of  judg- 
ment on  "  the  desolation  "  (R.  V.)  or  '•'  the  deso- 
late "   (A.  v.). 

This  can  only  refer  to  the  ultimate  judgment 
with  which  Antiochus  is  menaced. 

It  will  be  seen  then  that,  despite  all  uncertain- 
ties in  the  text,  in  the  translation,  and  in  the  de- 
tails, we  have  in  these  verses  an  unmistakably 
clear  foreshadowing  of  "the  same  persecuting 
king,  and  the  same  disastrous  events,  with  which 
the  mind  of  the  writer  is  so  predominantly 
haunted,  and  which  are  still  more  clearly  indi- 
cated in  the  subsequent  chapter. 

Is  it  necessary,  after  an  inquiry  inevitably  tedi- 
ous, and  of  little  or  no  apparent  spiritual  profit 
or  significance,  to  enter  further  into  the  intoler- 
ably and  interminably  perplexed  and  voluminous 
discussions  as  to  the  beginning,  the  ending,  and 
the  exactitude  of  the  seventy  weeks?  Even  St. 
Jerome  gives,  by  way  of  specimen,  nine  different 
interpretations  in  his  time,  and  comes  to  no  de- 
cision of  his  own.  After  confessing  that  all  the 
interpretations  were  individual  guesswork,  he 
leaves  every  reader  to  his  own  judgment,  and 
adds:  "  Dicam  quid  unusquisque  senserit,  lectoris 
arbitrio  derelinquens  cujus  expositionem  sequi 
debeat." 

I  cannot  think  that  the  least  advantage  can 
be  derived  from  doing  so. 

For  scarcely  any  two  leading  commentators 
agree  as  to  details; — or  even  as  to  any  fixed  prin- 
ciples by  which  they  profess  to  determine  the  date 
at  which  the  period  of  seventy  weeks  is  to  begin 
or  is  to  end; — or  whether  they  are  to  be  reckoned 
continuously,  or  with  arbitrary  misplacements  or 
discontinuations; — or  even  whether  they  are  not 
purely  symbolical,  so  as  to  have  no  reference  to 
any  chronological  indications; — or  whether  they 
are  to  be  interpreted  as  referring  to  one  special 
series  of  events,  or  to  be  regarded  as  having 
many  fulfilments  by  "  springing  and  germinal 
developments."  The  latter  view  is,  however,  dis- 
tinctly tenable.  It  applies  to  all  prophecies,  in- 
asmuch as  history  repeats  itself;  and  our  Lord 
referred  to  another  "  abomination  of  desolation  " 
which  in  His  days  was  yet  to  come. 

There  is  not  even  an  initial  agreement — or 
even  the  data  as  to  an  agreement — whethc  the 
"  years  "  to  be  counted  are  solar  years  of  three 
hundred  and  forty-three  days,  or  lunar  years,  or 
"  mystic  "  years,  or  Sabbath  years  of  forty-nine 
years,  or  "  indefinite  "  years;  or  where  they  are 
tc   bcgfin  and  end.   or  ip   what  fashion   they   are 


422 


--     THE    BOOK   OF    DANIEL. 


to  be  divided.  All  is  chaos  in  the  existing  com- 
mentaries. 

As  for  any  received  or  authorised  interpreta- 
tion, there  not  only  is  none,  but  never  has  been. 
The  Jewish  interpreters  differ  from  one  another 
as  widely  as  the  Christian.  Even  in  the  days 
of  the  Fathers,  the  early  exegetes  were  so  hope- 
lessly at  sea  in  their  methods  of  application  that 
St.  Jerome  contents  himself,  just  as  I  have  done, 
with  giving  no  opinion  of  his  own. 

The  attempt  to  refer  the  prophecy  of  the 
seventy  weeks  primarily  or  directly  to  the  com- 
ing and  death  of  Christ,  or  the  desolation  of  the 
Temple  by  Titus,  can  only  be  supported  by  im- 
mense manipulations,  and  by  hypotheses  so 
crudely  impossible  that  they  would  have  made 
the  prophecy  practically  meaningless  both  to 
Daniel  and  to  any  subsequent  reader.  The  hope- 
lessness of  this  attempt  of  the  so-called  "  ortho- 
dox "  interpreters  is  proved  by  their  own  funda- 
mental disagreements.  It  is  finally  discredited  by 
the  fact  that  neither  our  Lord,  nor  His  Apostles, 
nor  any  of  the  earliest  Christian  writers  once 
appealed  to  the  evidence  of  this  prophecy,  which, 
on  the  principles  of  Hengstenberg  and  Dr. 
Pusey,  would  have  been  so  decisive!  If  such  a 
proof  lay  ready  to  their  hand — a  proof  definite 
and  chronological — why  should  they  have  de- 
liberately passed  it  over,  while  they  referred  to 
other  prophecies  so  much  more  general,  and  so 
much  less  precise  in  dates? 

Of  course  it  is  open  to  any  reader  to  adopt 
the  view  of  Keil  and  others,  that  the  prophecy 
is  Messianic,  but  only  typically  and  generally  so. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  objected  that  the 
Antiochian  hypothesis  breaks  down,  because — 
though  it  does  not  pretend  to  resort  to  any  of  the 
wild,  arbitrary,  and  I  had  almost  said  preposter- 
ous, hypotheses  invented  by  those  who  approach 
the  interpretation  of  the  Book  with  a-priori  and 
a-posteriori  *  assumptions — it  still  does  not  ac- 
curately correspond  to  ascertainable   dates. 

But  to  those  who  are  guided  in  their  exegesis, 
not  by  unnatural  inventions,  but  by  the  great 
guiding  principles  of  history  and  literature,  this 
consideration  presents  no  difficulty.  Any  exact 
accuracy  of  chronology  would  have  been  far 
more  surprising  in  a  writer  of  the  Maccabean  era 
than  round  numbers  and  vague  computations. 
Precise  computation  is  nowhere  prevalent  in  the 
sacred  books.  The  object  of  those  books  always 
is  the  conveyance  of  eternal,  moral,  and  spiritual 
instruction.  To  such  purely  mundane  and  sec- 
ondary matters  as  close  reckoning  of  dates  the 
Jewish  writers  show  themselves  manifestly  indif- 
ferent. It  is  possible  that,  if  we  were  able  to  as- 
certain the  data  which  lay  before  the  writer,  his 
calculations  might  seem  less  divergent  from  exact 
numbers  than  they  now  appear.  More  than  this 
we  cannot  affirm. 

What  was  the  date  from  which  the  writer  cal- 
culated his  seventy  weeks?  Was  it  from  the 
date  of  Jeremiah's  first  prophecy  (xxv.  12),  b.  c. 
605?  or  his  second  prophecy  (xxix.  10),  eleven 
years  later,  b.  c.  594?  or  from  the  destruction  oi 
the  first  Temple,  b.  c.  586?  or,  as  some  Jews 
thought,  from  the  first  year  of  "  Darius  the 
Mede  "  ?  or  from  the  decree  of  Artaxerxes  in 
Neh.  ii.  1-9?  or  from  the  birth  of  Christ — the  date 
assumed  by  Apollinaris?  All  these  views  have 
been   adopted   by   various    Rabbis   and    Fathers; 

♦Thus  Eusebius,  without  a  shadow  of  any  pretence  at 
argument,  makes  the  iasi  week  mean  seventy  years ! 
C'Dem.  Evan.,"  viii.). 


but  it  is  obvious  that  not  one  of  them  accords 
with  the  allusions  of  the  narrative  and  prayer, 
except  that  which  makes  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  the  terminus  a  quo.  In  the  confusion  of 
historic  reminiscences  and  the  rarity  of  written 
documents,  the  writer  may  not  have  consciously 
distinguished  this  date  (b.  c.  588)  from  the  date 
of  Jeremiah's  prophecy  (b.  c.  594).  That  there 
were  differences  of  computation  as  regards  Jere- 
miah's seventy  years,  even  in  the  age  of  the 
Exile,  is  sufficiently  shown  by  the  different  views 
as  to  their  termination  taken  by  the  Chronicler 
(2  Chron.  xxxvi.  22),  who  fixes  it  b.  c.  536,  and 
by  Zechariah  (Zech.  i.  12),  who  fixes  it  about 
B.  c.  519. 

As  to  the  terminus  ad  quern,  it  is  open  to  any 
commentator  to  say  that  the  prediction  may  point 
to  many  subsequent  and  analogous  fulfilments; 
but  no  competent  and  serious  reader  who  judges 
of  these  chapters  by  the  chapters  themselves  and 
by  their  own  repeated  indications  can  have  one 
moment's  hesitation  in  the  conclusion  that  the 
writer  is  thinking  mainly  of  the  defilement  of  the 
Temple  in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and 
its  reconsecration  (in  round  numbers)  three  and 
a  half  years  later  by  Judas  Maccabseus  (Decem- 
ber 25th,  B.  c.  164). 

It  is  true  that  from  b.  c.  588  to  b.  c.  164  only 
gives  us  four  hundred  and  twenty-four  years,  in- 
stead of  four  hundred  and  ninety  years.  How  is 
this  to  be  accounted  for?  Ewald  supposes  the 
loss  of  some  passage  in  the  text  which  would 
have  explained  the  discrepancy;  and  that  the  text 
is  in  a  somewhat  chaotic  condition  is  proved  by 
its  inherent  philological  difficulties,  and  by  the 
appearance  which  it  assumes  in  the  Septuagint. 
The  first  seven  weeks  indeed,  or  forty-nine  years, 
approximately  correspond  to  the  time  between 
B.  c.  588  (the  destruction  of  the  Temple)  and 
B.  c.  536  (the  decree  of  Cyrus) ;  but  the  following 
sixty-two  weeks  should  give  us  four  hundred  and 
thirty-four  years  from  the  time  of  Cyrus  to  the 
cutting  off  of  the  Anointed  One,  by  the  murder 
of  Onias  III.  in  b.  c.  171,  whereas  it  only  gives 
us  three  hundred  and  sixty-five.  How  are  we 
to  account  for  this  miscalculation  to  the  extent 
of  at  least  sixty-five  years? 

Not  one  single  suggestion  has  ever  accounted 
for  it,  or  has  ever  given  exactitude  to  these  com- 
putations on  any  tenable  hypothesis.* 

But  Schiirer  has  shown  that  exactly  similar 
mistakes  of  reckoning  are  made  even  by  so  learned 
and  industrious  an  historian  as  Josephus. 

1.  Thus  in  his  "Jewish  War"  (VI.  iv.  8)  he 
says  that  there  were  six  hundred  and  thirty-nine 
years  between  the  second  year  of  Cyrus  and  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple  by  Titus  (a.  d.  70). 
Here  is  an  error  of  more  than  thirty  years. 

2.  In  his  "Antiquities"  (XX.  x.)  he  says  that 
there  were  four  hundred  and  thirty-four  years 
between  the  Return  from  the  Captivity  (b.  c. 
536)  and  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator  (b.  c. 
164-162).  Here  is  an  error  of  more  than  sixty 
years. 

3.  In  "  Antt.,"  XIII.  xi.  i,  he  reckons  tour 
hundred  and  eighty-one  years  between  the  Return 
from  the  Captivity  and  the  time  of  Aristobulus 
(b.  c.  105-104).  Here  is  an  error  of  some  fifty 
years. 

*  Tost  ("  Gesch.  d.  Tudenthums,"  i.  gq)  contents  himself 
wit'h  speaking  of  "  die  Liebe  zu  prophetischer  Auffassung 
der  Vergangenheit,  mit  moglichst  genauen  Zahlenagaben, 
befriedigt,  die  uns  /eider  nicht  mehr  verstandlich 
erscheinen." 


INrRODUCTlON    TO    THE    CONCLUDING    VISION. 


423 


Again,  the  Jewish  Hellenist  Demetrius  * 
reckons  five  hundred  and  seventy-three  years 
from  the  Captivity  of  the  Ten  Tribes  (b.  c.722)  to 
the  time  of  Ptolemy  IV.  (b.  c.  222),  which  is 
seventy  years  too  many.  In  other  words,  he 
makes  as  nearly  as  possible  the  same  miscalcu- 
lations as  the  writer  of  Daniel.  This  seems  to 
show  that  there  was  some  traditional  error  in 
the  current  chronology;  and  it  cannot  be  over- 
looked that  in  ancient  days  the  means  for  com- 
ing to  accurate  chronological  conclusion  were 
exceedingly  imperfect.  "  Until  the  establishment 
of  the  Seleucid  era  (b.  c.  312),  the  Jew  had  no 
fixed  era  whatsoever";!  and  nothing  is  less 
astonishing  than  that  an  apocalyptic  writer  of 
the  date  of  Epiphanes,  basing  his  calculations  on 
uncertain  data  to  give  an  allegoric  interpretation 
to  an  ancient  prophecy,  should  have  lacked  the 
records  which  would  alone  have  enabled  him  to 
calculate  with  exact  precision.^ 

And,  for  the  rest,  we  must  say  with  Grotius, 
"  Modicum  nee  prator  curat,  nee  propheta." 


CHAPTER   XX. 

INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  CONCLUDING 
VISION. 

The  remaining  section  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 
forms  but  one  vision,  of  which  this  chapter  is 
the  Introduction  or  Prologue. 

Daniel  is  here  spoken  of  in  the  third  person. 

It  is  dated  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  (b.  c. 
535)§  We  have  already  been  told  that  Daniel 
lived  to  see  the  first  year  of  Cyrus  (i.  21).  This 
verse,  if  accepted  historically,  would  show  that 
at  any  rate  Daniel  did  not  return  to  Palestine 
with  the  exiles.  Age,  high  rank,  and  oppo*"- 
tunities  of  usefulness  in  the  Persian  Court  may 
have  combined  to  render  his  return  undesirable 
for  the  interests  of  his  people.  The  date — the 
last  given  in  the  life  of  the  real  or  ideal  Daniel 
— is  perhaps  here  mentioned  to  account  for  the 
allusions  which  follow  to  the  kingdom  of  Persia. 
But  with  the  great  and  moving  fortunes  of  the 
Jews  after  the  accession  of  Cyrus,  and  even  with 
the  beginning  of  their  new  national  life  in  Je- 
rusalem, the  author  is  scarcely  at  all  concerned. 
He  makes  no  mention  of  Zerubbabel  the  prince, 
nor  of  Joshua  the  priest,  nor  of  the  decree  of 
Cyrus,  nor  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple;  his 
whole  concern  is  with  the  petty  wars  and  diplo- 
macy of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  of 
which  an  account  is  given,  so  minute  as  either 
to  furnish  us  with  historical  materials  unknown 
to  any  other  historian,  or  else  is  difficult  to  rec- 
oncile with  the  history  of  that  king's  reign  as 
it  has  been  hitherto  understood. 

In  this  chapter,  as  in  the  two  preceding,  there 
are  great  difficulties  and  uncertainties  about  the 
exact  significance  of  some  of  the  verses,  and 
textual  emendations  have  been  suggested.  The 
readers  of  the  Expositor's  Bible  would  not,  how- 

♦In  Clem.  Alex.,  "Strom.,"  i.  ai. 

t  Cornill,  p.  14  ;  Bevan,  p.  54. 

tSchurer,  "  Hist,  of  Jewish  People,"  iii.  53,  54  (E.  Tr.). 
This  is  also  the  view  of  Graf,  Noldeke,  Cornfll,  and  many 
others.  In  any  case  we  must  not  be  misled  into  an 
impossible  style  of  exegesis  of  which  Bleek  says  that  "  bei 
ihr  alles  moglich  ist  und  alles  ftir  erlaubt  gilt." 

§  The  LXX.  date  it  in  "  thejirst  year  of  Cyrus,"  perhaps 
an  intentional  alteration  (i.  21).  We  see  from  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  the  latest  of  the  Minor  Prophets  that  there 
was  scarcely  even  an  attempt  to  restore  the  ruined  walls 
of  Jerusalem  before  B.  C.  444. 


ever,  be  interested  in  the  minute  and  dreary 
philological  disquisitions,  which  have  not  the 
smallest  moral  significance,  an4  lead  to  no  cer- 
tam  result.  The  difficulties  affect  points  of  no 
doctrinal  importance,  and  the  greatest  scholars 
have  been  unable  to  arrive  at  any  agreement 
respecting  them.  Such  difficulties  will,  there- 
fore, merely  be  mentioned,  and  I  shall  content 
myself  with  furnishing  what  appears  to  be  the 
best  authenticated  opinion. 

The  first  and  second  verses  are  rendered  partly 
by  Ewald  and  partly  by  other  scholars,  "  Truth 
is  the  revelation,  and  distress  is  great;  therefore 
understand  thou  the  re-velation,  since  there  is  under- 
standing of  it  in  the  vision."  The  admonition 
calls  attention  to  the  importance  of  "  the  word," 
and  the  fact  that  reality  lies  beneath  its  enig- 
matic and  apocalyptic  form. 

Daniel  had  been  mourning  for  three  full 
weeks,  during  which  he  ate  no  dainty  bread, 
nor  flesh,  nor  wine,  nor  did  he  anoint  himself 
with  oil.  But  in  the  Passover  month  of  Abib 
or  Nisan,  the  first  month  of  the  year,  and  on 
the  twenty-fourth  day  of  that  month,  he  was 
seated  on  the  bank  of  the  great  river,  Hiddekel 
or  Tigris,  when,  lifting  up  his  eyes,  he  saw  a 
certain  man  clothed  in  fine  linen  like  a  Jewish 
priest,  and  his  loins  girded  with  gold  of  Uphaz. 
His  body  was  like  chrysolite,  his  face  flashed 
like  lightning,  his  eyes  were  like  torches  of  fire, 
his  arms  and  feet  gleamed  like  polished  brass, 
and  the  sound  of  his  words  was  as  the  sound 
of  a  deep  murmur.  Daniel  had  companions  with 
him;  they  did  not  see  the  vision,  but  some 
supernatural  terror  fell  upon  them,  and  they  fled 
to  hide  themselves. 

At  this  great  spectacle  his  strength  departed, 
and  his  brightness  was  changed  to  corruption; 
and  when  the  vision  spoke  he  fell  to  the  earth 
face  downwards.  A  hand  touched  him,  and 
partly  raised  him  to  the  trembling  support  of 
his  knees  and  the  palms  of  his  hands,  and  a 
voice  said  to  him,  "  Daniel,  thou  greatly  be- 
loved, stand  upright,  and  attend;  for  I  am  sent 
to  thee."  The  seer  was  still  trembling;  but  the 
voice  bade  him  fear  not,  for  his  prayer  had 
been  heard,  and  for  that  reason  this  message 
had  been  sent  to  him.  Gabriel's  coming  had, 
however,  been  delayed  for  three  weeks,  by  his 
having  to  withstand  for  twenty  days  the  prince 
of  the  kingdom  of  Persia.  The  necessity  of  con- 
tinuing the  struggle  was  only  removed  by  the 
arrival  of  Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes,  to 
help  him,  so  that  Gabriel  was  no  longer  needed 
to  resist  the  kings  of  Persia.  The  vision  was 
for  many  days,  and  he  had  come  to  enable 
Daniel  to  understand  it. 

Once  more  Daniel  was  terrified,  remained  si- 
lent, and  fixed  his  eyes  on  the  ground,  until 
one  like  the  sons  of  men  touched  his  lips,  and 
then  he  spoke  to  apologise  for  his  timidity  and 
faintheartedness. 

A  third  time  the  vision  touched,  strengthened, 
blessed  him,  and  bade  him  be  strong.  "  Know- 
est  thou,"  the  angel  asked,  "  why  I  am  come 
to  thee?  I  must  return  to  fight  against  the 
Prince  of  Persia,  and  while  I  am  gone  the 
Prince  of  Greece  (Javan)  will  come.  I  will, 
however,  tell  thee  what  is  announced  in  the 
writing  of  truth,  the  book  of  the  decrees  of 
heaven,  though  there  is  no  one  to  help  me 
against  these  hostile  princes  of  Persia  and  Javan, 
except  Michael  your  prince." 

The  difficulties  of  the  chapter  are,  as  w»  have 


424 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


said,  of  a  kind  that  the  expositor  cannot  easily 
remove.  I  have  given  what  appears  to  be  the 
general  sense.  The  questions  which  the  vision 
raises  bear  on  matters  of  angelology,  as  to  which 
all  is  purposely  left  vague  and  indeterminate, 
or  which  lie  in  a  sphere  wholly  beyond  our 
cognisance. 

It  may  first  be  asked  whether  the  splendid 
angel  of  the  opening  vision  is  also  the  being 
in  the  similitude  of  a  man  who  thrice  touches, 
encourages,  and  strengthens  Daniel.  It  is  per- 
haps simplest  to  suppose  that  this  is  the  case, 
and  that  the  Great  Prince  tones  down  his  over- 
powering glory  to  more  familiar  human  sem- 
blance in  order  to  dispel  the  terrors  of  the 
seer. 

The  general  conception  of  the  archangels  as 
princes  of  the  nations,  and  as  contending  with 
each  other,  belongs  to  the  later  developments 
of  Hebrew  opinion  on  such  subjects.  Some 
have  supposed  that  the  "  princes  "  of  Persia  and 
Javan,  to  whom  Gabriel  and  Michael  are  op- 
posed, are  not  good  angels,  but  demoniac  pow- 
ers,— "  the  world-rulers  of  this  darkness  " — sub- 
ordinate to  the  evil  spirit  whom  St.  Paul  does 
not  hesitate  to  call  "  the  god  of  this  world," 
and  "the  prince  of  the  powers  of  the  air."  This 
is  how  they  acount  for  this  "  war  in  heaven," 
so  that  "  the  dragon  and  his  angels "  fight 
against  "  Michael  and  his  angels."  Be  that  as 
it  may,  this  mode  of  presenting  the  guardians 
of  the  destinies  of  nations  is  one  respecting 
which  we  have  no  further  gleams  of  revelation 
to  help  us. 

Ewald  regards  the  two  last  verses  of  the  chap- 
ter as  a  sort  of  soliloquy  of  the  angel  Gabriel 
with  himself.  He  is  pressed  for  time.  His  com- 
ing had  already  been  delayed  by  the  opposition 
of  the  guardian  power  of  the  destinies  of  Persia. 
If  Michael,  the  great  archangel  of  the  Hebrews, 
had  not  come  to  his  aid,  and  (so  to  speak)  for 
a  time  relieved  guard,  he  would  have  been  un- 
able to  come.  But  even  the  respite  leaves  him 
anxious.  He  seems  to  feel  it  almost  necessary 
that  he  should  at  once  return  to  contend  against 
the  Prince  of  Persia,  and  against  a  new  adver- 
sary, the  Prince  of  Javan,  who  is  on  his  way 
to  do  mischief.  Yet  on  the  whole  he  will  stay 
and  enlighten  Daniel  before  he  takes  his  flight, 
although  there  is  no  one  but  Michael  who  aids 
him  against  these  menacing  princes.  It  is  dif- 
ficult to  know  whether  this  is  meant  to  be  ideal 
or  real — whether  it  represents  a  struggle  of  an- 
gels against  demons,  or  is  merely  meant  for 
a  sort  of  parable  which  represents  the  to-and- 
fro  conflicting  impulses  which  sway  the  des- 
tinies of  earthly  kingdoms.  In  any  case  the  rep- 
resentation is  too  unique  and  too  remote  from 
earth  to  enable  us  to  understand  its  spiritual 
meaning,  beyond  the  bare  indication  that  God 
sitteth  above  the  water-floods  and  God  remain- 
eth  a  king  for  ever.  It  is  another  way  of  show- 
ing us  that  the  heathen  rage,  and  the  people 
imagine  a  vain  thing;  that  the  kings  of  the  earth 
set  themselves  and  the  rulers  take  counsel  to- 
gether; but  that  they  can  only  accomplish  what 
God's  hand  and  God's  counsel  have  predeter- 
mined to  be  done;  and  that  when  they  attempt  to 
overthrow  the  destinies  which  God  has  fore- 
ordained, "  He  that  sitteth  in  the  heavens  shall 
laugh  them  to  scorn,  the  Lord  shall  have  them 
in  derision."  These,  apart  from  all  complica- 
tions or  developments  of  iingelology  or  demon- 
ology,   are  the  continuous  lesson  of  the  Word 


of  God,  and  are  confirmed  by  all  that  we  de- 
cipher of  His  providence  in  His  ways  of  dealing 
with  nations  and  with  men. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

AN  ENIGMATIC  PROPHECY  PASSING 
INTO  DETAILS  OF  THE  REIGN  OF  AN- 
TIOCHUS  EPIPHANES. 

If  this  chapter  were  indeed  the  utterance  of  a 
prophet  in  the  Babylonian  Exile,  nearly  four 
hundred  years  before  the  events — events  of  which 
many  are  of  small  comparative  importance  in  the 
world's  history — which  are  here  so  enigmatically 
and  yet  so  minutely  depicted,  the  revelation 
would  be  the  most  unique  and  perplexing  in  the 
whole  Scriptures.  It  would  represent  a  sudden 
and  total  departure  from  every  method  of  God's 
providence  and  of  God's  manifestation  of  His 
will  to  the  minds  of  the  prophets.  It  would 
stand  absolutely  and  abnormally  alone  as  an 
abandonment  of  the  limitations  of  all  else  which 
has  ever  been  foretold.  And  it  would  then 
be  still  more  surprising  that  such  a  reversal 
of  the  entire  economy  of  prophecy  should 
not  only  be  so  widely  separated  in  tone  from 
the  high  moral  and  spiritual  lessons  which  it 
was  the  special  glory  of  prophecy  to  incCilcate, 
but  should  come  to  us  entirely  devoid  of  those 
decisive  credentials  which  could  alone  suffice  to 
command  our  conviction  of  its  genuineness  and 
authenticity.  "  We  find  in  this  chapter,"  says 
Mr.  Bevan,  "  a-  complete  survey  of  the  history 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Persian  period  down 
to  the  time  of  the  author.  Here,  even  more 
than  in  the  earlier  vision,  we  are  alhle  to  per- 
ceive how  the  account  gradually  becomes  more 
definite  as  it  approaches  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  how  it  then 
passes  suddenly  from  the  domain  of  historical 
facts  to  that  of  ideal  expectations."  *  In  recent 
days,  when  the  force  of  truth  has  compelled 
so  many  earnest  and  honest  thinkers  to  the  ac- 
ceptance of  historic  and  literary  criticism,  the 
few  scholars  who  are  still  able  to  maintain  the 
traditional  views  about  the  Book  of  Daniel  find 
themselves  driven,  like  Zockler  and  others,  to 
admit  that  even  if  the  Book  of  Daniel  as  a 
whole  can  be  regarded  as  a  production  of  the 
exiled  seer  five  and  a  half  centuries  before 
Christ,  yet  in  this  chapter  at  any  rate  there  must 
be  large  interpolations.! 

There  is  here  an  unfortunate  division  of  the 
chapters.  The  first  verse  of  chap.  xi.  clearly 
belongs  to  the  last  verses  of  chap.  x.  It  seems 
to  furnish  the  reason  why  Gabriel  could  rely 
on  the  help  of  Michael,  and  therefore  may  de- 
lay for  a  few  moments  his  return  to  the  scene 
of  conflict  with  the  Prince  of  Persia  and  the 
coming  King  of  Javan.  Michael  will  for  that 
brief  period  undertake  the  sole  responsibility  of 
maintaining  the  struggle,  because  Gabriel  has 
put  him  under  a  direct  obligation  by  special  as- 
sistance which  he  rendered  to  him  only  a  little 
while  previously  in  the  first  year  of  the  Median 
Darius.i  Now,  therefore,  Gabriel,  though  in 
haste,  will  announce  to  Daniel  the  truth. 

The  announcement  occupies  five  sections. 

♦  "  Daniel,"  p.  162.  „  . 

+  On  this  chapter  see  Smend,   "  Zeitschr.  fiir  Alttest 
Wissenschaft,"  v.  241. 
t  Ewald,  "  Prophets,"  v.  293  (E.  Tr.). 


AN    ENIGMATIC   PROPHECY. 


425 


First  Section  (xi.  2-g). — Events  from  the  rise 
of  Alexander  the  Great  (b.  c.  336)  to  the  death 
of  Seleucus  Nicator  (b.  c.  280).  Tlierc  arc  to 
be  three  kings  of  Persia  after  Cyrus  (who  is 
then  reigning),  of  whom  tlic  third  is  to  be  the 
richest;  and  "when  he  is  waxed  strong  through 
his  riches,  he  shall  stir  up  the  all  against  the 
realm  of  Javan." 

There  were  of  course  many  more  than  four 
kings  of  Persia:  viz. — 

B.  c. 

Cyrus 536 

Cambyses  529 

Pseudo-Smerdis  ,        .        . '       .     522 

Darius  Hystaspis       ....     521 

Xerxes    I. 485 

Artaxerxes  I.   (Longimanus)  .     464 

Xerxes    II 425 

Sogdianus 425 

Darius   Nothus  ....     424 

Artaxerxes  II.   (Mnemon)       .        .     405 
Artaxerxes   III.  ....     359 

Darius   Codomannus         .        .        .     336 

But  probably  the  writer  had  no  historic  sources 
to  which  to  refer,  and  only  four  Persian  kings 
are  prominent  in  Scripture — Cyrus,  Darius, 
Xerxes,  and  Artaxerxes.  Darius  Codomannus 
is  indeed  mentioned  in  Neh.  xii.  22,  but  might 
have  easily  been  overlooked,  and  even  con- 
founded with  another  Darius  in  uncritical  and 
unhistorical  times.  The  rich  fourth  king  who 
"  stirs  up  the  all  against  the  realm  of  Grecia  " 
might  be  meant  for  Artaxerxes  I.,  but 
more  probably  refers  to  Xerxes  (Achashverosh, 
or  Ahaseurus),  and  his  immense  and  ostenta- 
tious invasion  of  Greece  (b.  c.  480).  His  enor- 
mous wealth  is  dwelt  upon  by  Herodotus. 

Ver.  3  (b.  c.  336-323). — Then  shall  rise  a 
mighty  king  (Alexander  the  Great),  and  shall 
rule  with  great  dominion,  and  do  according  to 
his  will.  "  Fortunam  solus  omnium  mortalium 
in  potestate  habuit,"  says  his  historian,  Quintus 
Curtius. 

Ver.  4  (b.  c.  323). — But  when  he  is  at  the  ap- 
parent zenith  of  his  strength  his  kingdom  shall 
be  broken,  and  shall  not  descend  to  any  of  his 
posterity,  but  (b.  c.  323-301)  shall  be  for  others, 
and  shall  ultimately  (after  the  Battle  of  Ipsus, 
B.  c.  301)  be  divided  towards  the  four  winds 
of  heaven,  into  the  kingdoms  of  Cassander 
(Greece  and  Macedonia),  Ptolemy  (Egypt, 
Ccele-Syria,  and  Palestine),  Lysimachus  (Asia 
Minor),  and  Seleucus  (Upper  Asia). 

Ver.  5. — Of  these  four  kingdoms  and  their 
kings  the  vision  is  only  concerned  with  two — 
the  kings  of  the  South  (i.  e.,  the  Lagidae,  or 
Egyptian  Ptolemies,  who  sprang  from  Ptolemy 
Lagos),  and  the  kings  of  the  North  (i.  e.,  the 
Antiochian  Seleucidae).  They  alone  are  singled 
out  because  the  Holy  Land  became  a  sphere  of 
contentions  between  these  rival  dynasties. 

B.  c.  306. — The  King  of  the  South  (Ptolemy 
Soter,  son  of  Lagos)  shall  be  strong,  and  shall 
ultimately  assume  the  title  of  Ptolemy  I.,  King 
of  Egypt. 

But  one  of  his  princes  or  generals  (Seleucus 
Nicator)  shall  be  stronger  and,  asserting  his  in- 
dependence, shall  establish  a  great  dominion  over 
Northern  Syria  and  Babylonia. 

Ver.  6  (b.  c.  250). — The  vision  then  passes 
over  the  reign  of  Antiochus  II.  (Soter),  and  pro- 
ceeds to  say  that  "  at  the  end  of  years  "  (i.  e., 
some  half-century  later,  B.  c.  250)  the  kings  of 


the  North  and  South  should  form  a  matrimonial 
alliance.  The  daughter  of  the  King  of  the  South 
—the  Egyptian  Princess  Berenice,  daughter  of 
Ptolemy  II.  (Philadelphus),  should  come  to  the 
King  of  the  North  (Antiochus  Theos)  to  make 
an  agreement.  This  agreement  (marg.,  "  equit- 
able conditions")  was  that  Aniochus  Theos 
should  divorce  his  wife  and  half-sister  Laodice, 
and  disinherit  her  children,  and  bequeath  the 
throne  to  any  future  child  of  Berenice,  who 
would  thus  unite  the  empires  of  the  Ptolemies 
and  the  Seleucida;.  Berenice  took  with  her  so 
vast  a  dowry  that  she  was  called  "  the  dowry- 
bringer "  (^€pv6<popos).  Antiochus  himself  ac- 
companied her  as  far  as  Pelusium  (b.  c.  247). 
But  the  compact  ended  in  nothing  but  calamity. 
For,  two  years  after,  Ptolemy  II.  died,  leaving 
an  infant  child  by  Berenice.  But  Berenice  did 
"  not  retain  the  strength  of  her  arm,"  since  the 
military  force  which  accompanied  her  proved 
powerless  for  her  protection;  nor  did  Ptolemy 
II.  abide,  nor  any  support  which  he  could  ren- 
der. On  the  contrary,  there  was  overwhelming 
disaster.  Berenice's  escort,  her  father,  her  hus- 
band, all  perished,  and  she  herself  and  her  infant 
child  were  murdered  by  her  rival  Laodice  (b.  c. 
246),  in  the  sanctuary  of  Daphne,  whither  she- 
had  f^ed  for  refuge. 

Ver.  7  (b.  c.  285-247). — But  the  murder  of 
Berenice  shall  be  well  avenged.  For  "  out  of 
a  shoot  from  her  roots  "  stood  up  one  in  his 
office,  even  her  brother  Ptolemy  III.  (Euer- 
getes),  who,  unlike  the  effeminate  Ptolemy  II., 
did  not  entrust  his  wars  to  his  generals,  but  came 
himself  to  his  armies.  He  shall  completely  con- 
quer the  King  of  the  North  (Seleucus  II.,  Kal- 
linikos,  son  of  Antiochus  Theos  and  Laodice), 
shall  seize  his  fortress  (Seleucia,  the  port  of  An- 
tioch). 

Ver.  8  (b.  c.  247). — In  this  campaign  Ptolemy 
Euergetes,  who  earned  the  title  of  "  Benefactor  " 
by  this  vigorous  invasion,  shall  not  only  win 
immense  booty — four  thousand  talents  of  gold 
and  many  jewels,  and  forty  thousand  talents  of 
silver — but  shall  also  carry  back  with  him  to 
Egypt  the  two  thousand  five  hundred  molten 
images,  and  idolatrous  vessels,  which,  two  hun- 
dred and  eighty  years  before  (b.  c.  527),  Cam- 
byses had  carried  away  from  Egypt. 

After  this  success  he  will,  for  some  years,  re- 
frain from  attacking  the  Seleucid  kings. 

Ver.  9  (b.  c.  240). — Seleucus  Kallinikos  makes 
an  attempt  to  avenge  the  shame  and  loss  of  the 
invasion  of  Syria  by  invading  Egypt,  but  he 
returns  to  his  own  land  totally  foiled  and  de- 
feated, for  his  fleet  was  destroyed  by  a  storm. 

Second  Section  (vv.  10-19). — Events  from  the 
death  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes  (b.  c.  247)  to  the 
death  of  Antiochus  III.  (the  Great,  b.  c.  175). 
In  the  following  verses,  as  Behrmann  observes, 
there  is  a  sort  of  dance  of  shadows,  only  fully 
intelligible  to  the  initiated. 

Ver.  10. — The  sons  of  Seleucus  Kallinikos 
were  Seleucus  IH.  (Keraunos,  b.  c.  227-224)  and 
Antiochus  the  Great  (b.  c.  224-187).  Keraunos 
only  reigned  two  years,  and  in  B.  c.  224  his 
brother  Antiochus  III.  succeeded  him.  Both 
kings  assembled  immense  forces  to  avenge  the 
insult  of  the  Egyptian  invasion,  the  defeat  of 
their  father,  and  the  retention  of  their  port  and 
fortress  of  Seleucia.  It  was  only  sixteen  miles 
from  Antioch,  and  being  still  garrisoned  by 
Egyptians,  constituted  a  standing  danger  and  in- 
sult to  their  capital  city. 


426 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


Ver.  II. — After  twenty-seven  years  the  port  of 
Seleucia  is  wrested  from  the  Egyptians  by  An- 
tiochus  the  Great,  and  he  so  completely  reverses 
the  former  successes  of  the  King  of  the  South 
as  to  conquer  Syria  as  far  as  Gaza. 

Ver.  T2  (b.  c.  217). — But  at  last  the  young 
Egyptian  King,  Ptolemy  IV.  (Philopator),  is 
roused  from  his  dissipation  and  effeminacy,  ad- 
vances to  Raphia  (southwest  of  Gaza)  with  a 
great  army  of  twenty  thousand  foot,  five  thou- 
sand horse,  and  seventy-three  elephants,  and 
there,  to  his  own  immense  self-exaltation,  he 
inflicts  a  severe  defeat  on  Antiochus,  and  "casts 
dozvn  tens  of  thousands."  Yet  the  victory  is  il- 
lusive, although  it  enables  Ptolemy  to  annex 
Palestine  to  Egypt.  For  Ptolemy  "  shall  not 
show  himself  strong,"  but  shall,  by  his  supineness, 
and  by  making  a  speedy  peace,  throw  away  all 
the  fruits  of  his  victory,  while  he  returns  to  his 
past  dissipation  (b.  c.  217-204). 

Ver.  13. — Twelve  years  later  (b.  c.  205)  Ptol- 
emy Philopator  died,  leaving  an  infant  son,  Ptol- 
emy Epiphanes.  Antiochus,  smarting  from  his 
defeat  at  Raphia,  again  assembled  an  army,  which 
was  still  greater  than  before  (b.  c.  203),  and 
much  war-material.  In  the  intervening  years  he 
had  won  great  victories  in  the  East  as  far  as 
India. 

Ver.  14. — Antiochus  shall  be  aided  by  the  fact 
that  many — including  his  ally  Philip,  King  of 
Macedon,  and  various  rebel-subjects  of  Ptolemy 
Epiphanes — stood  up  against  the  King  of  Egypt 
and  wrested  Phoenicia  and  Southern  Syria  from 
him.  The  Syrians  were  further  strengthened 
by  the  assistance  of  the  "  children  of  the  violent  " 
among  the  Jews,  "  who  shall  lift  themselves  up 
to  fulfil  the  vision  of  the  oracle;  but  they  shall  fall." 
We  read  in  Josephus  that  many  of  the  Jews 
helped  Antiochus;  but  the  allusion  to  "the  vi- 
sion "  is  entirely  obscure.  Ewald  supposes  a 
reference  to  some  prophecy  no  longer  extant. 
Dr.  Joel  thinks  that  the  Hellenising  Jews  may 
have  referred  to  Isa.  xix.  in  favour  of  the  plans 
of  Antiochus  against  Egypt. 

Vv.  15,  16. — But  however  much  any  of  the 
Jews  may  have  helped  Antiochus  under  the  hope 
of  ultimately  regaining  their  independence,  their 
hopes  were  frustrated.  The  Syrian  King  came, 
besieged,  and  took  a  well-fenced  city — perhaps 
an  allusion  to  the  fact  that  he  wrested  Sidon 
from  the  Egyptians.  After  his  great  victory 
over  the  Egyptian  general  Scopas  at  Mount 
Panium  (b.  c.  198),  the  routed  Egyptian  forces, 
to  the  number  of  ten  thousand,  flung  themselves 
into  that  city.  This  campaign  ruined  the  inter- 
ests of  Egypt  in  Palestine,  "  the  glorious  land." 
Palestine  now  passed  to  Antiochus,  who  took 
possession  "  with  destruction  in  his  hand." 

Ver.  17  (b.  c.  198-195).— After  this  there  shall 
again  be  an  attempt  at  "  equitable  negotia- 
tions"; by  which,  however,  Antiochus  hoped  to 
get  final  possession  of  Egypt  and  destroy  it. 
He  arranged  a  marriage  between  '  a  daughter 
of  women  " — his  daughter  Cleopatra — and  Ptol- 
emy Epiphanes.  But  this  attempt  also  entirely 
failed. 

Ver.  18  (b.  c.  190).— Antiochus  therefore  "sets 
his  face  in  another  direction,"  and  tries  to  con- 
quer the  islands  and  coasts  of  Asia  Minor.  But 
a  captain — the  Roman  general,  Lucius  Cornelius 
Scipio  Asiaticus — puts  an  end  to  the  insolent 
scorn  with  which  he  had  spoken  of  the  Romans, 
and  pays  him  back  with  equal  scorn,  utterly  de- 
feating  him    in    the    great   Battle    of   Magnesia 


(b.  c.  190),  and  forcing  him  to  ignominious 
terms. 

Ver.  19  (b.  c.  175). — Antiochus  next  turns  his 
attention  ("  sets  his  face  "">  to  strengthen  the 
fortress  of  his  own  land  in  the  east  and  west; 
but  making  an  attempt  to  recruit  his  dissipated 
wealth  by  the  plunder  of  the  Temple  of  Belus 
in  Elymais,  "  stumbles  and  falls,  and  is  not 
found." 

Third  Section  (vv.  20-27). — Events  under 
Seleucus  Philopator  down  to  the  first  attempts 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  against  Egypt  (b.  c. 
170). 

Ver.  20. — Seleucus  Philopator  (b.  c.  187-176) 
had  a  character  the  reverse  of  his  father's.  He 
was  no  restless  seeker  for  glory,  but  desired 
wealth  and  quietness.  Among  the  Jews,  how- 
ever, he  had  a  very  evil  reputation,  for  he  sent 
an  "  exactor  " — a  mere  tax-collector,  Heliodorus 
— "  to  pass  through  the  glory  of  the  kingdom." 
He  only  reigned  twelve  years,  and  then  was 
"  broken " — i.  e.,  murdered  by  Heliodorus, 
neither  in  anger  nor  in  battle,  but  by  poison  ad- 
ministered by  this  "  tax-collector."  The  ver- 
sions all  vary,  but  I  feel  little  doubt  that  Dr. 
Joel  is  right  when  he  sees  in  the  curious  phrase 
"  nogesh  heder  malkooth,"  "  one  that  shall  cause 
a  raiser  of  taxes  to  pass  over  the  kingdom  " — of 
which  neither  Theodotion  nor  the  Vulgate  can 
make  anything — a  cryptographic  allusion  to  the 
name  "  Heliodorus";  and  possibly  the  predicted 
fate  may  (by  a  change  of  subject)  also  refer  to 
the  fact  that  Heliodorus  was  checked,  not  by 
force,  but  by  the  vision  in  the  Temple  (2  Mace. 
V.  18,  iii.  24-29).  We  find  from  2  Mace.  iv.  i  that 
Simeon,  the  governor  of  the  Temple,  charged 
Onias  with  a  trick  to  terrify  Heliodorus.  This 
is  a  very  probable  view  of  what  occurred. 

Ver.  21. — Seleucus  Philopator  died  b.  c.  175 
without  an  heir.  This  made  room  for  a  con- 
temptible person,  a  reprobate,  who  had  no  real 
claim  to  royal  dignity,  being  only  a  younger 
son  of  Antiochus  the  Great.  He  came  by  sur- 
prise, "  in  time  of  security,"  and  obtained  the 
kingdom  by  flatteries. 

Ver.  22. — Yet  "  the  overflowing  wings  of 
Egypt "  (or  "  the  arms  of  a  flood ")  "  were 
swept  away  before  him  and  broken;  yea,  and 
even  a  covenanted  or  allied  prince."  Some  ex- 
plain this  of  his  nephew  Ptolemy  Philometor, 
others  of  Onias  III.,  "  the  prince  of  the  cove- 
nant " — i.  e.,  the  princely  high  priest,  whom 
Antiochus  displaced  in  favour  of  his  brother, 
the  apostate  Joshua,  who  Grsecised  his  name  into 
Jason,  as  his  brothe ;  Onias  did  in  calling  him- 
self Menelaus. 

Ver.  23. — This  mean  king  should  prosper  by 
deceit  which  he  practised  on  all  connected  with 
him;  and  though  at  first  he  had  but  few  ad- 
herents, he  should  creep  into  power. 

Ver.  24. — "  In  time  of  security  shall  he  come, 
even  upon  the  fattest  places  of  the  province." 
By  this  may  be  meant  his  invasions  of  Galilee 
and  Lower  Egypt.  Acting  unlike  any  of  his 
royal  predecessors,  he  shall  lavishly  scatter  his 
gains  and  his  booty  among  needy  followers,  and 
shall  plot  to  seize  Pelusium,  Naucratis,  Alex- 
andria, and  other  strongholds  of  Egypt  for  a 
time. 

Ver.  25. — After  this  (b.  c.  171)  he  shall,  with  a 
"  great  army,"  seriously  undertake  his  first  in- 
vasion of  Egypt,  and  shall  be  met  by  his  nephew 
Ptolemy  Philometor  with  another  immense 
army.     In    spite    of    this,    the    young    Egyptian 


AN    ENIGMATIC    PROPHECY. 


427 


King  shall  fail  through  the  treachery  of  his  own 
courtiers.  He  shall  be  outwitted  and  treacher- 
ously undermined  by  his  uncle  Antiochus.  Yes! 
even  while  his  army  is  fighting,  and  many  are 
being  slain,  the  very  men  who  "  eat  of  his 
dainties,"  even  his  favourite  and  trusted  cour- 
tiers, Eulseus  and  Lenaeus,  will  be  devising  his 
ruin,  and  his  army  shall  be  swept  away. 

Vv.  26,  27  (b.  c.  174). — The  Syrians  and  the 
Egyptian  King,  nephew  and  uncle,  shall  in 
nominal  amity  sit  at  one  banquet,  eating  from 
one  table;  but  all  the  while  they  will  be  dis- 
trustfully plotting  against  each  other  and 
"  speaking  lies  "  to  each  other.  Antiochus  will 
pretend  to  ally  himself  with  the  young  Philo- 
metor  against  his  brother  Ptolemy  Euergetes  II. 
— generally  known  by  his  derisive  nickname  as 
Ptolemy  Physkon — whom  after  eleven  months 
the  Alexandrians  had  proclaimed  king.  But  all 
these  plots  and  counter-plots  should  be  of  none 
•effect,  for  the  end  was  not  yet. 

Fourth  Section  (vv.  28-35). — Events  between 
the  first  attack  of  Antiochus  on  Jerusalem  (b.  c. 
170)  and  his  plunder  of  the  Temple  to  the  first 
revolt  of  the  Maccabees  (b.  c.  167). 

Ver.  28  (b.  c.  168). — Returning  from  Egypt 
with  great  plunder.  Antiochus  shall  set  himself 
against  the  Holy  Covenant.  He  put  down  the 
usurping  high  priest  Jason,  who,  with  much 
slaughter,  had  driven  out  his  rival  usurper  and 
brother,  Menelaus.  He  massacred  many  Jews, 
and  returned  to  Antioch  enriched  with  golden 
vessels  seized  from  the  Temple. 

Ver.  29. — In  b.  c.  168  Antiochus  again  invaded 
Egypt,  but  with  none  of  the  former  splendid 
results.  For  Ptolemy  Philometor  and  Physkon 
had  joined  in  sending  an  embassy  to  Rome  to 
ask  for  help  and  protection.  In  consequence  of 
this,  "  ships  from  Kittim " — namely,  the  Ro- 
man fleet — came  against  him.  bringing  the 
Roman  commissioner,  Gaius  Popilius  Laenas. 
When  Popilius  met  Antiochus,  the  king  put  out 
his  hand  to  embrace  him;  but  the  Roman  merely 
held  out  his  tablets,  and  bade  Antiochus  read  the 
Roman  demand  that  he  and  his  army  should  at 
once  evacuate  Egypt.  "  I  will  consult  my  friends 
on  the  subject,"  said  Antiochus.  Popilius,  with 
infinite  haughtiness  and  audacity,  simply  drew  a 
■circle  in  the  sand  with  his  vine-stick  round  the 
spot  on  which  the  king  stood,  and  said,  "  You 
must  decide  before  you  step  out  of  that  circle." 
Antiochus  stood  amazed  and  humiliated;  but 
seeing  that  there  was  no  help  for  it,  promised  in 
despair  to  do  all  that  the  Romans  demanded. 

Ver.  30. — Returning  from  Egypt  in  an  indig- 
nant frame  of  mind,  he  turned  his  exasperation 
against  the  Jews  and  the  Holy  Covenant,  espe- 
cially extending  his  approval  to  those  who 
apostatised  from  it. 

Ver.  31. — Then  (b.  c.  168)  shall  come  the 
climax  of  horror.  Antiochus  shall  send  troops 
to  the  Holy  Land,  who  shall  desecrate  the 
sanctuary  and  fortress  of  the  Temple,  and  abol- 
ish the  daily  sacrifice  (Kisleu  15),  and  set  up  the 
abomination  that  maketh  desolate. 

Ver.  32. — To  carry  out  these  ends  the  better, 
and  with  the  express  purpose  of  putting  an  end 
to  the  Jewish  religion,  he  shall  pervert  or  "  make 
profane  "  by  flatteries  the  renegades  who  are 
ready  to  apostatise  from  the  faith  of  their  fathers. 
But  there  shall  be  a  faithful  remnant  who  will 
bravely  resist  him  to  the  uttermost.  "  The  peo- 
ple who  know  their  God  will  be  valiant,  and  do 
g»-eat  deeds." 


Ver.  33. — To  keep  alive  the  national  faith 
"  wise  teachers  of  the  people  shall  instruct 
many,"  and  will  draw  upon  their  own  heads  the 
fury  of  persecution,  so  that  many  shall  fall  by 
sword,  and  by  flame,  and  by  captivity,  and  by 
spoliation  for  many  days. 

Ver.  34. — But  in  the  midst  of  this  fierce  on- 
slaught of  cruelty  they  shall  be  "  holpen  with 
a  little  help."  There  shall  arise  the  sect  of  the 
"  Chasidim,"  or  "  the  Pious,"  bound  together 
by  "  Tugendbund  "  to  maintain  the  Laws  which 
Israel  received  from  Moses  of  old.  These  good 
and  faithful  champions  of  a  righteous  cause  will 
indeed  be  weakened  by  the  false  adherence  of 
waverers  and  flatterers. 

Ver.  35. — To  purge  the  party  from  such  spies 
and  Laodiceans,  the  teachers,  like  the  aged  priest 
Mattathias  at  Modin,  and  the  aged  scribe  Ele- 
azar,  will  have  to  brave  even  martyrdom  itself 
till  the  time  of  the  end. 

Fifth  Section  (vv.  36-45,  b.  c.  147-164). — 
Events  from  the  beginning  of  the  Maccabean 
rising  to  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

Ver.  36. — Antiochus  will  grow  more  arbitrary, 
more  insolent,  more  blasphemous,  from  day  to 
day,  calling  himself  '  God "  (Theos)  on  his 
coins,  and  requiring  all  his  subjects  to  be  of  his 
religion,  and  so  even  more  kindling  against  him- 
self the  wrath  of  the  God  of  gods  by  his  mon- 
strous utterances,  until  the  final  doom  has  fallen. 

Ver.  37. — He  will,  in  fact,  make  himself  his 
own  god,  paying  no  regard  (by  comparison)  to 
his  national  or  local  god,  the  Olympian  Zeus, 
nor  to  the  Syrian  deity,  Tammuz- Adonis,  "  the 
desire  of  women." 

"Tammuz  came  next  behind, 
Whose  yearly  wound  in  Lebanon  allured 
The  Syrian  damsels  to  lament  his  fate 
In  amorous  ditties  all  a  summer  day. 
While  smooth  Adonis  from  his  native  rock 
Ran  purple  to  the  sea— supposed  with  blood 
Of  Tammuz  yearly  wounded.    The  love  tale 
Infected  Zion's  daughters  with  like  heat." 

Ver.  38. — The  only  God  to  whom  he  shall  pay 
marked  respect  shall  be  the  Roman  Jupiter,  the 
god  of  the  Capitol.  To  this  god,  to  Jupiter 
Capitolinus,  not  to  his  own  Zeus  Olympios,  the 
god  of  his  Greek  fathers,  he  shall  erect  a  temple 
in  his  capital  city  of  Antioch,  and  adorn  it  with 
gold  and  silver  and  precious  stones. 

Ver.  39. — "  And  he  shall  deal  with  the  strong- 
est fortresses  by  the  help  of  a  strange  god  " — 
namely,  the  Capitoline  Jupiter  (Zeus  Polieus) — • 
and  shall  crowd  the  strongholds  of  Judsa  with 
heathen  colonists  who  worship  the  Tyrian  Her- 
cules (Melkart)  and  other  idols;  and  to  these 
heathen  he  shall  give  wealth  and  power. 

Ver.  40. — But  his  evil  career  shall  be  cut  short. 
Egypt,  under  the  now-allied  brothers  Philometor 
and  Physkon,  shall  unite  to  thrust  at  him.  An- 
tiochus will  advance  against  them  like  a  whirl- 
wind, with  many  chariots  and  horsemen,  and 
with  the  aid  of  a  fleet. 

Vv.  41-45. — In  the  course  of  his  march  he  shall 
pass  through  Palestine,  "  the  glorious  land," 
with  disastrous  injury;  but  Edom,  Moab,  and 
the  bloom  of  the  kingdom  of  Ammon  shall  es- 
cape his  hand.  Egypt,  however,  shall  not  escape. 
By  the  aid  of  the  Libyans  and  Ethiopians  who 
are  in  his  train  he  shall  plunder  Egypt  of  its 
treasures. 

How  far  these  events  correspond  to  historic 
realities  is  uncertain.  Jerome  says  that  Anti- 
ochus invaded  Egypt  a  third  time  in  b.  c.  165, 
the  eleventh  year  of  his  reign;  but  there  are  no 


428 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


historic  traces  of  such  an  invasion,  and  most 
certainly  Antiochus  towards  the  close  of  his 
reign,  instead  of  being  enriched  with  vast  Egyp- 
tian spoils,  was  struggling  with  chronic  lack  of 
means.  Some  therefore  suppose  that  the  writer 
composed  and  published  his  enigmatic  sketch  of 
;hese  events  before  the  close  of  the  reign  of 
Antiochus,  and  that  he  is  here  passing  from  con- 
temporary fact  into  a  region  of  ideal  anticipa- 
tions which  were  never  actually  fulfilled. 

Ver.  43  (b.  o.  165). — In  the  midst  of  this  dev- 
astating invasion  oi  Egypt,  Antiochus  shall  be 
troubled  with  disquieting  rumours  of  troubles 
in  Palestine  and  other  realms  of  his  kingdom. 
He  will  set  out  with  utter  furj  to  subjugate  and 
to  destroy,  determining  above  all  to  suppress  the 
heroic  Maccabean  -evolt  which  had  intiicted  such 
humiliating  disasters  upon  his  generals,  Seron, 
Apollonius,  and  Lysias. 

Ver.  45  (b.  c.  164). — He  shall  indeed  advance 
so  far  as  to  pitch  his  palatial  tent  "  between  the 
sea  and  the  mountain  of  the  High  Glory  ":_  buv 
he  will  come  to  a  disastrous  and  an  unassistec 
end. 

These  latter  events  either  do  not  correspond 
with  the  actual  history,  or  cannot  be  verified.  So 
far  as  we  know  Antiochus  did  not  invade  Egypt 
at  all  after  b.  c.  168.  Still  less  did  he  advance 
from  Egypt,  or  pitch  his  tent  anywhere  near 
Mount  Zion.  Nor  did  he  die  in  Palestine,  but 
in  Persia  (b.  c.  165).  The  writer,  indeed,  strong 
in  faith,  anticipated,  and  rightly,  that  Antiochus 
would  come  to  an  ignominious  and  a  sudden 
end — God  shooting  at  him  with  a  swift  arrow, 
so  that  he  should  be  wounded.  But  all  accurate 
details  seem  suddenly  to  stop  short  with  the  do- 
ings in  the  fourth  section,  which  may  refer  to  the 
strange  conduct  of  Antiochus  in  his  great  festival 
in  honour  of  Jupiter  at  Daphne.  Had  the 
writer  published  nis  book  after  this  date,  he 
could  not  surely  have  failed  to  speak  with  tri- 
umphant gratitude  and  exultation  of  the  heroic 
stand  made  by  Judas  Maccabseus  and  the  splen- 
did victories  which  restored  hope  and  glory  to 
the  Holy  Land.  I  therefore  regard  these  verses 
as  a  description  rather  of  ideal  expectation  than 
of  historic  facts. 

We  find  notices  of  Antiochus  in  the  Books  of 
Maccabees,  in  Josephus,  in  St.  Jerome's  Com- 
mentary on  Daniel,  and  in  Appian's  "  Syriaca." 
We  should  know  more  of  him  and  be  better  able 
to  explain  some  of  the  allusions  in  this  chapter 
if  the  writings  of  the  secular  historians  had  not 
come  down  to  us  in  so  fragmentary  a  condi- 
tion. The  relevant  portions  of  Callinicus  Suto- 
ricus,  Diodorus  Siculus,  Polybius,  Posidonius, 
Claudius,  Theon,  Andronicus,  Alypius,  and 
others  are  all  lost — except  a  few  fragments  which 
we  have  at  second  or  third  hand.  Porphyry  in- 
troduced quotations  from  these  authors  into  the 
twelfth  book  of  his  "  Arguments  against  the 
Christians";  but  we  only  know  his  book  from 
Jerome's  ex-parte  quotations.  Other  Christian 
treatises,  written  in  answer  to  Porphyry  by  Apol- 
linaris,  Eusebius,  and  Methodius,  are  only  pre- 
served in  a  few  sentences  by  Nicetas  and  John 
of  Damascus.  The  loss  of  Porphyry  and  Apol- 
linarius  is  especially  to  be  regretted.  Jerome 
says  that  it  was  the  extraordinarily  minute  cor- 
respondence of  this  chapter  of  Daniel  with  the 
history  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  that  led  Por- 
phyry to  the  conviction  that  it  only  contained 
vaticinia  ex  eventu* 

* Jahn,  S  xcv. 


Antiochus  died  at  Tab<x  in  Paratacaene  on  the 
frontiers  of  Persia  and  Babylonia  about  B.  c. 
163.  The  Jewish  account  of  his  remorseful  death- 
bed may  be  read  in  i  Mace.  vi.  1-16:  "  He  laid 
him  down  upon  his  bed,  and  fell  sick  for  grief; 
and  there  he  continued  many  days,  for  his  grief 
was  ever  more  and  more:  and  he  made  account 
that  he  should  die."  He  left  a  son,  Antiochus 
Eupator,  aged  nine,  under  the  charge  of  his  flat- 
terer and  foster-brother  Philip.  Recalling  the 
wrongs  he  had  inflicted  on  Judsea  and  Jerusalem, 
he  said:  "  I  perceive,  therefore,  that  for  this  cause 
these  troubles  are  come  upon  me;  and,  behold, 
I  perish  through  great  grief  in  a  strange  land." 


CHAPTER  XXIL 

THE  EPILOGUE. 

Thf  twelfth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 
serves  as  a  general  eoilogue  to  the  Book,  and  is 
as  little  free  from  difficulties  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  details  as  are  the  other  apocalyptic 
chapters. 

fhe  keynote,  however,  to  their  right  under- 
standing must  be  given  in  the  words  "  At  that 
time,"  with  which  the  first  verse  opens.  The 
words  can  only  mean  "  the  time  "  spoken  of  at 
the  end  of  the  last  chapter,  the  days  of  that 
final  effort  of  Antiochus  against  the  holy  people 
which  ended  in  his  miserable  death. 

"At  that  time,"  then — i.  e.,  about  the  year 
B.  c.  163 — the  guardian  archangel  of  Israel, 
"  Michael,  the  great  prince  which  standeth  for 
the  children  of  thy  people,"  shall  stand  up  for 
their  deliverance. 

But  this  deliverance  should  resemble  many 
similar  crises  in  its  general  characteristics.  It 
should  not  be  immediate.  On  the  contrary,  it 
should  be  preceded  by  days  of  unparalleled  dis- 
order and  catastrophe — "  a  time  of  trouble,  such 
as  never  was  since  there  was  a  nation  even  to 
that  same  time."  We  may,  for  instance,  compare 
with  this  the  similar  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  (xxx. 
4-1 1):  "And  these  are  the  words  which  the  Lord 
spake  concerning  Israel  and  concerning  Judah. 
For  thus  saith  the  Lord;  We  have  heard  a  voice 
of  trembling,  of  fear,  and  not  of  peace.  .  .  . 
Alas!  for  that  day  is  great,  so  that  none  is  like 
it:  it  is  even  the  time  of  Jacob's  trouble;  but  he 
shall  be  saved  out  of  it.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass  in  that  day,  saith  the  Lord,  that  I  will 
burst  thy  bonds.  .  .  .  Therefore  fear  thou  not, 
O  Jacob,  My  servant,  saith  the  Lord;  neither  be 
dismayed,  O  Israel.  .  .  .  For  I  am  with  thee, 
saith  the  Lord,  to  save  thee.  For  I  will  make  a 
full  end  of  all  the  nations  whither  I  have  scat- 
tered thee,  but  I  will  not  make  a  full  end  of 
thee:  but  I  will  correct  thee  with  judgment,  and 
will  in  nowise  leave  thee  unpunished."  * 

The  general  conception  is  so  common  as  even 
to  have  found  expression  in  proverbs, — such  as, 
"The  night  is  darkest  just  before  the  dawn"; 
and,  "  When  the  tale  of  bricks  is  doubled,  Moses 
comes."  Some  shadow  of  similar  individual  and 
historic  experiences  is  found  also  among  the 
Greek  and  Romans.  It  lies  in  the  expres- 
sion 0ei)$  d,n6  /^T/xai'^s,  and  also  in  the  lines  of 
Horace, — 

"  Nee  Deus  intersit  nisi  dignus  vindice  nodus 
Intersil." 

*  See  too  Joel  ii.  2. 


THE    EPILOGUE. 


429 


Wc  find  the  same  expectation  in  the  apocryphal 
Book  of  Enoch,*  and  we  find  it  reflected  in  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John.f  where  he  describes  the 
devil  as  let  loose  and  the  powers  of  evil  as  gath- 
ering themselves  together  for  the  great  final  bat- 
tle of  Armageddon  before  the  eternal  triumph  of 
the  Lamb  and  of  His  saints.  In  Rabbinic  lit- 
erature there  was  a  fixed  anticipation  that  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah  must  inevitably  be  pre- 
ceded by  "  pangs  "  or  "  birth-throes,"  of  which 
they  spoke  as  the  n^^O  ^is^.J  These  views  may 
partly  have  been  founded  on  individual  and  na- 
tional experience,  but  they  were  doubtless  deep- 
ened by  the  vision  of  Zechariah   (xii.). 

"  Behold,  a  day  of  the  Lord  cometh,  when 
thy  spoil  shall  be  divided  in  the  midst  of  thee. 
For  I  will  gather  all  nations  against  Jerusalem 
to  battle;  and  the  city  shall  be  taken,  and  the 
houses  rifled,  and  the  women  ravished;  and  half 
of  the  people  shall  go  forth  into  captivity,  and 
the  residue  of  the  people  shall  not  be  cut  ofi 
from  the  city.  Then  shall  the  Lord  go  forth, 
and  fight  against  those  nations,  as  when  He 
fought  in  the  day  of  battle.  And  His  feet  shall 
stand  in  that  day  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives. 
.  .  .  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day, 
that  the  light  shall  not  be  light,  but  cold  and 
ice:§  but  it  shall  be  one  day  that  is  known  unto 
the  Lord,  not  day  and  not  night:  but  it  shall 
come  to  pass  that  at  evening  time  there  shall  be 

light."! 

The  anticipation  of  the  saintly  writer  in  the 
days  of  the  early  Maccabean  uprising,  while  all 
the  visible  issues  were  still  uncertain,  and  hopes 
as  yet  unaccomplished  could  only  be  read  by  the 
eyes  of  faith,  were  doubtless  of  a  similar  char- 
acter. When  he  wrote  Antiochus  was  already 
concentrating  his  powers  to  advance  with  the  ut- 
most wrath  and  fury  against  the  Holy  City.  Hu- 
manly speaking,  it  was  certain  that  the  holy 
people  could  oppose  no  adequate  resistance  to 
his  overwhelming  forces,  in  which  he  would 
doubtless  be  able  to  enlist  contingents  from  many 
allied  nations.  What  could  ensue  but  immeas- 
urable calamity  to  the  great  majority?  Michael 
indeed,  their  prince,  should  do  his  utmost  for 
them;  but  it  would  not  be  in  his  power  to  avert 
the  misery  which  should  fall  on  the  nation 
generally. 

Nevertheless,  they  should  not  be  given  up  to 
utter  or  to  final  destruction.  As  in  the  days  of 
the  Assyrians  the  name  Shear-jashub,  which 
Isaiah  gave  to  one  of  his  young  sons,  was  a 
sign  that  "  a  remnant  should  be  left,"  so  now 
the  seer  is  assured  that  "  thy  people  shall  be 
delivered  " — at  any  rate  "  every  one  that  shall 
be  found  written  in  the  book." 

"  Written  in  the  book  " — for  all  true  Israelites 
had  ever  believed  that  a  book  of  record,  a  book 
of  remembrance,  lies  ever  open  before  the  throne 
of  God,  in  which  are  inscribed  the  names  of 
God's  faithful  ones;  as  well  as  that  awful  book 
in  which  are  written  the  evil  deeds  of  men.Tf 
Thus  in  Exodus  (xxxii.  33)  we  read,  "  Whoso- 
ever hath  sinned  against  Me,  him  will  I  blot  out 
of  My  book,"  which  tells  us  of  the  records 
against  the  guilty.  In  Psalm  Ixix.  28  we  read, 
"  Let  them  be  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  life, 

♦  Enoch  xc.  16. 
t  Rev   xvi.  14,  xix.  ig. 
t  Comp.  Matt   xxiv.  6,  7,  21,  22. 

§  Such  is  the  reading  of  the   LXX.,  Vulgate,  Peshitta, 
Symmachus,  etc. 
II  Zech.'xiv.  1-7. 
*|  Comp.  vii.  10 :  "  And  the  books  were  opened." 


and  not  be  written  with  the  righteous."  That 
book  of  the  righteous  is  specially  mentioned  by 
Malachi:  "  Then  they  that  feared  the  Lord  spake 
one  with  another:  and  the  Lord  hearkened  and 
heard,  and  a  book  of  remembrance  was  written 
before  him  for  them  that  feared  the  Lord  and 
called  upon  His  Name."  *  And  St.  John  refers 
to  these  books  at  the  close  of  the  Apocalypse: 
"  And  I  saw  the  dead,  the  great  and  the  small, 
standing  before  the  throne;  and  books  were 
opened:  and  another  book  was  opened,  which 
is  the  book  of  life:  and  the  dead  were  judged  out 
of  the  things  which  were  written  in  the  books, 
according  to  their  works.  .  .  .  And  if  any  one 
was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life,  he 
was  cast  in  the  lake  of  fire." 

In  the  next  verse  the  seer  is  told  that  "  many 
of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall 
awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to 
shame  and  everlasting  abhorrence." 

It  is  easy  to  glide  with  insincere  confidence 
over  the  difificulties  of  this  verse,  but  they  are 
many. 

We  should  naturally  connect  it  with  what  goes 
before  as  a  reference  to  "that  time";  and  if 
so,  it  would  seem  as  though — perhaps  with  renii- 
niscences  of  the  concluding  prophecy  of  Isaiah 
— the  writer  contemplated  the  end  of  all  things 
and  the  final  resurrection.  If  so,  we  have  here 
another  instance  to  be  added  to  the  many  in 
which  this  prophetic  vision  of  the  future  passed 
from  an  immediate  horizon  to  another  infinitely 
distant.  And  if  that  be  the  correct  interpreta- 
tion, this  is  the  earliest  trace  in  Scripture  of 
the  doctrine  of  individual  immortality.  Of  that 
doctrine  there  was  no  full  knowledge — there  were 
only  dim  prognostications  or  splendid  hopes — 
until  in  the  fulness  of  the  times  Christ  brought 
life  and  immortality  to  light.  For  instance,  the 
passage  here  seems  to  be  doubly  limited.  It 
does  not  refer  to  mankind  in  general,  but  only 
to  members  of  the  chosen  people;  and  it  is  not 
said  that  all  men  shall  rise  again  and  receive 
according  to  their  works,  but  only  that  "  many  " 
shall  rise  to  receive  the  reward  of  true  life,  while 
others  shall  live  indeed,  but  only  in  everlasting 
shame. 

To  them  that  be  wise — to  "  the  teacher,"  and 
to  those  that  turn  the  many  to  "  righteousness  " 
— there  is  a  further  promise  of  glory.  They 
"  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament, 
and  as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever."  There  is  here, 
perhaps,  a  reminiscence  of  Prov.  iv.  18,  19,  which 
tells  us  that  the  way  of  the  wicked  is  as  dark- 
ness, whereas  the  path  of  the  just  is  as  the  shin- 
ing light  that  shineth  more  and  more  unto  the 
perfect  day.  Our  Lord  uses  a  similar  metaphor 
in  his  explanation  of  the  Parable  of  the  Tares: 
"  Then  shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as  the  sun 
in  the  kingdom  of  their  Father."  We  find  it 
once  again  in  the  last  verse  of  the  Epistle  of 
St.  James:  "  Let  him  know,  that  he  who  hath 
converted  a  sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way 
shall  save  a  soul  from  death,  and  shall  hide  a 
multitude  of  sins." 

But  there  is  a  further  indication  that  the  writer 
expected  this  final  consummation  to  take  place 
immediately  after  the  troubles  of  the  Antiochian 
assault;  for  he  describes  the  angel  Gabriel  as 
bidding  Daniel  "  to  seal  the  Book  even  to  the 
time  of  the  end."  Now  as  it  is  clear  that  the 
Book  was,  on  any  hypothesis,  meant  for  the 
special  consolation  of  the  persecuted  Jews  under 

*  Mai.  iii.  16. 


430 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


the  cruel  sway  of  the  Seleucid  King,  and  that 
then  first  could  the  Book  be  understood,  the 
writer  evidently  looked  for  the  fulfilment  of  his 
last  prophecies  at  the  termination  of  these  trou- 
bles. This  meaning  is  a  little  obscured  by  the 
rendering.  "  many  shall  run  to  and  fro,  and  knowl- 
edge shall  be  increased."  Ewald,  Maurer,  and 
Hitzig  take  the  verse,  which  literally  implies 
movement  hither  and  thither,  in  the  sense, 
"  many  shall  peruse  the  Book."  *  Mr.  Bevan, 
however,  from  a  consideration  of  the  Septuagint 
Version  of  the  words,  "  and  knowledge  shall  be 
increased  " — for  which  they  read,  "  and  the  land 
be  filled  with  injustice  " — thinks  that  the  original 
rendering  would  be  represented  by,  "  many  shall 
rush  hither  and  thither,  and  many  shall  be  the 
calamities."  In  other  words,  "  the  revelation 
must  remain  concealed,  because  there  is  to  ensue 
a  long  period  of  commotion  and  distress."!  If 
we  have  been  convinced  by  the  concurrence  of 
many  irresistible  arguments  that  the  Book  of 
Daniel  is  the  product  of  the  epoch  which  it  most 
minutely  describes,  we  can  only  see  in  this  verse 
a  part  of  the  literary  form  which  the  Book  neces- 
sarily assumed  as  the  vehicle  for  its  lofty  and 
encouraging  messages. 

The  angel  here  ceases  to  speak,  and  Daniel, 
looking  round  him,  becomes  aware  of  the  pres- 
ence of  two  other  celestial  beings,  one  of  whom 
stood  on  either  bank  of  the  river.  "  And  one 
said  to  the  man  clothed  in  linen,  which  was 
above  the  waters  of  the  river.  How  long  to  the 
end  of  these  wonders? "  There  is  a  certain 
grandeur  in  the  vagueness  of  description,  but 
the  speaker  seems  to  be  one  of  the  two  angels 
standing  on  either  "  lip  "  of  the  Tigris.  "  The 
man  clothed  in  linen,"  who  is  hovering  in  the 
air  above  the  waters  of  the  river,  is  the  same 
being  who  in  viii.  i6  wears  "  the  appearance  of 
a  man,"  and  calls  "  from  between  the  banks  of 
Ulai  "  to  Gabriel  that  he  is  to  make  Daniel  un- 
derstand the  vision.  He  is  also,  doubtless,  the 
"  one  man  clothed  in  linen,  whose  loins  were 
girded  with  fine  gold  of  Uphaz,  his  body  like  the 
beryl,  his  face  as  flashing  lightning,  his  eyes  as 
burning  torches,  and  his  voice  like  the  deep 
murmur  of  a  multitude,"  who  strikes  such  terror 
into  Daniel  and  his  comrades  in  the  vision  of 
chap.  X.  5,  6; — and  though  all  is  left  uncertain, 
"  the  great  prince  Michael "  may  perhaps  be 
intended. 

The  question  how  long  these  marvels  were  to 
last,  and  at  what  period  the  promised  deliverance 
should  be  accomplished,  was  one  which  would 
naturally  have  the  intensest  interest  to  those 
Jews  who — in  the  agonies  of  the  Antiochian 
persecution  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  "  little 
help  "  caused  by  the  Maccabean  uprising — read 
for  the  first  time  the  fearful  yet  consolatory  and 
inspiring  pages  of  this  new  apocalypse.  The  an- 
swer is  uttered  with  the  most  solemn  emphasis. 
The  Vision  of  the  priest-like  and  gold-girded 
angel,  as  he  hovers  above  the  river-flood,  "  held 
up  both  his  hands  to  heaven,"  and  swears  by 
Him  that  liveth  for  ever  and  ever  that  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  affliction  shall  be  "  for  a  time, 
times,  and  a  half."  So  Abraham,  to  emphasise 
his  refusal  of  any  gain  from  the  King  of  Sodom, 
says  that  he  has  "  lifted  up  his  hand  unto  the 
Lord,  the  Most  High  God,  that  he  would  not 
take  from  a  thread  to  a  shoe-latchet."     And  in 

*Comp.  Zech.  iv.  lo.  This  sense  cannot  be  rigidly- 
established. 

+  He  refers  to  i  Mace.  i.  q,  which  sa)^s  of  the  successors 
of  Alexander,  koX  i-nkr^Bwav  xoxd  iv  TJi  y^. 


Exod.  vi.  8,  when  Jehovah  says  "  I  did  swear," 
the  expression  means  literally,  "  I  lifted  up  My 
hand."  *  It  is  the  natural  attitude  of  calling  God 
to  witness;  and  in  Rev.  x.  5,  6.  with  a  reminis- 
cence of  this  passage,  the  angel  is  described  as 
standing  on  the  sea,  and  lifting  his  right  hand 
to  heaven  to  swear  a  mighty  oath  that  there 
should  be  no  longer  delay. 

The  "  time,  two  times,  and  half  a  time "  of 
course  means  three  years  and  a  half,  as  in  vii.  25. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  their  commence- 
ment is  the  terminus  a  quo  which  is  expressly 
mentioned  in  ver.  11:  "the  time  that  the  daily 
sacrifice  shall  be  taken  away."  We  have  already 
had  occasion  to  see  that  three  years,  with  a 
margin  which  seems  to  have  been  variously  com- 
puted, does  roughly  correspond  to  the  continu- 
ance of  that  total  desecration  of  the  Temple,  and 
extinction  of  the  most  characteristic  rites  of 
Judaism,  which  preceded  the  death  of  Antiochus 
and  the  triumph  of  the  national  cause. 

Unhappily  the  reading,  rendering,  and  inter- 
pretation of  the  next  clause  of  the  angel's  oath 
are  obscure  and  uncertain.  It  is  rendered  in  the 
R.  v.,  "  and  when  they  have  made  an  end  of 
breaking  in  pieces  the  power  of  the  holy  people, 
all  these  things  shall  be  finished."  As  to  the 
exact  translation  many  scholars  diflfer.  Von 
Lengerke  translates  it,  "  and  when  the  scatter- 
ing of  a  part  of  the  holy  people  should  come  to 
an  end.  all  this  should  be  ended."  The  Septu- 
agint Version  is  wholly  unintelligible.  Mr. 
Bevan  suggests  an  alteration  of  the  text  which 
would  imply  that,  "  when  the  power  of  the  shat- 
terer  of  the  holy  .people  [i.  e.,  Antiochus]  should 
come  to  an  end,  all  these  things  should  be 
ended."  This  no  doubt  would  not  only  give  a 
very  clear  sense,  but  also  one  which  would  be 
identical  with  the  prophecy  of  vii.  25,  that  "  they 
[the  times  and  the  law]  shall  be  given  unto  his 
hand  until  a  time  and  times  and  half  a  time."  f 
But  if  we  stop  short  at  the  desperate  and  uncer- 
tain expedient  of  correcting  the  original  He- 
brew, we  can  only  regard  the  words  as  implying 
(in  the  rendering  of  our  A.  V.  and  R.  V.)  that 
the  persecution  and  suppression  of  Israel  should 
proceed  to  their  extremest  limit,  before  the  woe 
was  ended;  and  of  this  we  have  already  been. 
assured. t 

The  writer,  in  the  person  of  Daniel,  is  per- 
plexed by  the  angel's  oath,  and  yearns  for  further 
enlightenment  and  certitude.  He  makes  an  ap- 
peal to  the  vision  with  the  question,  "  O  my  lord, 
what  shall  be  the  issue  [or,  latter  end]  of  these 
things?"  In  answer  he  is  simply  bidden  to  go 
his  way — i.  e.,  to  be  at  peace,  and  leave  all  these 
events  to  God,  since  the  words  are  shut  up  and 
sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end.  In  other  words, 
the  Daniel  of  the  Persian  Court  could  not  possi- 
bly have  attached  any  sort  of  definite  meaning  to 
minutely  detailed  predictions  affecting  the  ex- 
istence of  empires  which  would  not  so  much  as 
emerge  on  the  horizon  till  centuries  after  his 
death.  These  later  visions  could  only  be  appre- 
hended by  the  contemporaries  of  the  events 
which  they  shadowed  forth. 

"  Many,"   continued   the  angel,   "  shall   purify 

*  Comp.  Gen.  xiv.  22  :  Deut.  xxxii.  40,  "  For  I  lift  up  My 
hand  unto  heaven,  and  say,  I  live  for  ever  "  ;  Ezek.  xx.  5, 
6,  etc. 

+  Those  who  can  rest  content  with  such  exegesis  may 
explain  this  to  imply  that  "  the  reign  oi  antichrist  will  be 
divided  into  three  periods— the  first  long,  the  second 
longer,  the  third  shortest  of  all,"  just  as  the  seventy 
weeks  of  chap.  ix.  are  composed  of  7  x  62  x  i. 

X  By  way  of  comment  see  i  Mace.  v. ;  2  Mace.  viii. 


THE    EPILOGUE. 


43 1 


themselves,  and  make  themselves  white,  and  be 
refined;  but  the  wicked  shall  do  wickedly:  and 
none  of  the  wicked  shall  understand;  the  teach- 
ers  shall    understand." 

The  verse  describes  the  deep  divisions  which 
should  be  cleft  among  the  Jews  by  the  intrigues 
and  persecutions  of  Antiochus.  Many  would 
cling  to  their  ancient  and  sacred  institutions, 
and  purified  by  pain,  purged  from  all  dross  of 
worldliness  and  hypocrisy  in  the  fires  of  affliction, 
like  gold  in  the  furnace,  would  form  the  new 
parties  of  the  Chasidim  and  the  Anavim,  "  the 
pious  "  and  "  the  poor."  They  would  be  such 
men  as  the  good  high  priest  Onias,  Mattathias 
of  Modin  and  his  glorious  sons,  the  scribe  Elea- 
zar,  and  the  seven  dauntless  martyrs,  sons  of 
the  holy  woman  who  unflinchingly  watched 
their  agonies  and  encouraged  them  to  die  rather 
than  to  apostatise.  But  the  wicked  would  con- 
tinue to  be  void  of  all  understanding,  and  would 
go  on  still  in  their  wickedness,  like  Jason  and 
Menelaus,  the  renegade  usurpers  of  the  high- 
priesthood.  These  and  the  whole  Hellenising 
party  among  the  Jews,  for  the  sake  of  gain, 
plunged  into  heathen  practices,  made  abominable 
offerings  to  gods  which  were  no  gods,  and  in 
order  to  take  part  in  the  naked  contests  of  the 
Greek  gymnasium  which  they  had  set  up  in  Jeru- 
salem, deliberately  attempted  to  obliterate  the  seal 
of  circumcision  which  was  the  covenant  pledge 
of  their  national  consecration  to  the  Jehovah  of 
their  fathers. 

"  And  from  the  time  that  the  continual  burnt 
offering  shall  be  taken  away,  and  the  abomina- 
tion that  maketb  desolate  set  up,  there  shall  be 
a  thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days." 

If  we  suppose  the  year  to  consist  of  twelve 
months  of  thirty  days,  then  (with  the  insertion 
of  one  intercalary  month  of  thirty  days)  twelve 
hundred  and  ninety  days  is  exactly  three  and  a 
half  years.  We  are,  however,  faced  by  the  diffi- 
culty that  the  time  from  the  desecration  of  the 
Temple  till  its  reconsecration  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  seems  to  have  been  exactly  three  years;  * 
and  if  that  view  be  founded  on  correct  chro- 
nology we  can  give  no  exact  interpretation  of  the 
very  specific  date  here  furnished. 

Our  difficulties  are  increased  by  the  next 
clause:  "  Blessed  is  he  that  waiteth.  and  cometh 
to  the  thousand  three  hundred  and  five  and  thirty 
days." 

All  that  we  can  conjecture  from  this  is  that, 
at  the  close  of  twelve  hundred  and  ninety  days, 
by  the  writer's  reckoning  from  the  cessation 
of  the  daily  burnt  oflf.ering,  and  the  erection  of 
the  heathen  abomination  which  drove  all  faith- 
ful Jews  from  the  Temple,  up  to  the  date  of 
some  marked  deliverance,  would  be  three  and 
a  half  years,  but  that  this  deliverance  would  be 
less  complete  and  beatific  than  another  and  later 
deliverance  which  would  not  occur  till  forty- 
five  days  later,  f 

*  The  small  heathen  altar  to  Zeus  was  built  by  Antioch  us 
upon  the  great  altar  of  burnt  offering  on  Kisleu  15,  B.  c. 
168.  The  revolt  of  Mattathias  and  his  seven  sons  began 
B.  C.  167.  JudastheMaccabee  defeated  the  Syrian  generals 
Apollonius,  Seron,  and  Gorgias  B.  C.  166,  and  Lysias  at 
Beth-sur  in  B.  c.  165.  He  cleansed  and  rededicated  the 
Temple  on  Kisleu  25,  B.  C.  165. 

+  The  "time,  times,  and  a  half."  The  1290  days,  1335 
days,  and  the  1150  days,  and  the  2300  days  of  viii.  14  all 
agree  in  indicating  three  years  with  a  shorter  or  longer 
fraction.  It  will  be  observed  that  in  each  case  there  is  a 
certain  reticence  or  vagueness  as  to  the  ternttnusad  qiietn. 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  in  Rev.  xi.  2,  3,  the  period  of 
42  months  =  1260  days  =  ■x\^  years  of  months  or  30  days 
with  no  intercalary  month. 


Reams  of  conjecture  and  dubious  history  and 
imaginative  chronology  have  been  expended 
upon  the  effort  to  give  any  interpretation  of 
these  precise  data  which  can  pretend  to  the  dig- 
nity of  firm  or  scientific  exegesis.  Some,  for 
instance,  like  Keil,  regard  the  numbers  as  sym- 
bolical, which  is  equivalent  to  the  admission  that 
they  have  little  or  no  bearing  on  literal  history; 
others  suppose  that  they  are  conjectural,  having 
been  penned  before  the  actual  termination  of  the 
Seleucid  troubles.  Others  regard  them  as  only 
intended  to  represent  round  numbers.  Others 
again  attempt  to  give  them  historic  accuracy  by 
various  manipulations  of  the  dates  and  events 
in  and  after  the  reign  of  Antiochus.  Others 
relegate  the  entire  vision  to  periods  separated 
from  the  Maccabean  age  by  hundreds  of  years, 
or  even  into  the  remotest  future.  And  none  of 
these  commentators,  by  their  researches  and 
combinations,  have  succeeded  in  establishing  the 
smallest  approach  to  conviction  in  the  minds 
of  those  who  take  the  other  views.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  to  the  writer  and  his 
readers  the  passage  pointed  either  to  very  con- 
fident expectations  or  very  well-understood  real- 
ities; but  for  us  the  exact  clue  to  the  meaning  is 
lost.  All  that  can  be  said  is  that  we  should 
probably  understand  the  dates  better  if  our 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  b.  c.  165-164  was 
more  complete.  We  are  forced  to  content  our- 
selves with  their  general  significance.  It  is  easy 
to  record  and  to  multiply  elaborate  guesses,  and 
to  deceive  ourselves  with  the  merest  pretence  and 
semblance  of  certainty.  For  reverent  and  se- 
verely honest  inquiries  it  seems  safer  and  wiser 
to  study  and  profit  by  the  great  lessons  and 
examples  clearly  set  before  us  in  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  but,  as  regards  many  of  its  unsolved 
difficulties,  to  obey  the  wise  exhortation  of  the 
Rabbis, — 

"  Learn  to  say,  '  I  do  not  know.'  " 


APPROXIMATE  CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLES. 


B.  C. 

Jehoiakim,       .        .        608-5Q7 
Zedekiah.         .        .        597-588 
Jerusalem  taken,       .        .  588 
Death    of  Nebuchadrez- 
zar,      561 

Evil-merodach,  .        .  561 

Neriglissar,  .  .  .  559 
Laborosoarchod,  .  .  555 
Nabunaid,  ....  555 
Capture  of  Babylon,  .  538 
Decree  of  Cyrus,  .  .  536 
Cambyses,  ....  529 
Darius,  son   of    Hystas- 

pes 521 

Dedication  of  the  Second 

Temple,    ....  516 
Battle  of  Salamis,  .  480 

Ezra, 458 

Nehemiah 444 

Nehemiah's  reforms,       .  428 


B.  c. 

420 


Malachi,    .... 

Alexander  the  Great  in- 
vades Persia, 

Battle  of  Granicus, 

Battle  of  Issus, 

Battle  of  Arbela,    . 

Death  of  Darius  Codo- 
mannus. 

Death  of  Alexander, 

Ptolemy  Soter  cap- 
tures Jerusalem, 

Simon  the  Just  high 
priest 

Beginning  of  Septua- 
gint  translation.     .     . 

Antiochus  the  Great 
quers  Palestine,  .    (?)  202 


334 
334 
333 
331 

330 
323 

320 
310 
284 


Accession  of  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes, 176    Dan.  vii.  8,  ao, 

Joshua  (Jason),  brother  of 
Onias  III.,  ^ets  the  priest- 
hood by  bribery,  and  pro- 
motes Hellenism  among  the 
Jews,  174    Dan.  xi.  22-24,  ix?26. 


THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL. 


B.  C. 


171 
170 


170    Dan.  viii.  g,  10  ;  xi.  28. 


Dan.  vii.  21,  24,  35 ; 
viii.  11-13,  24,  25  ; 
Jii-  30-3S1  etc. 


First  e.Kpedition  of  Antiochus 
against  Egypt.— Murder  of 
Onias  III., 

His  second  expedition,       .      (?) 

His  plunder  of  the  Temple  and 
massacre  at  Jerusalem, 

Third  expedition  of  Antiochus,  169    Dan.  xi.  29,  30. 

Apollonius,  the  general  of  An- 
tiochus, advances  against 
Jerusalem  with  an  army  of 
22,000.  —  Massacre.  —  The 
abomination  of  desolation  in 
the  Temple. — Antiochus  car- 
ries off  some  of  the  holy  ves- 
sels (i  Mace.  i.  25)  ;  forbids 
circumcision  ;  burns  the 
books  of  the  Law ;  puts 
down  the  daily  sacrifice,  .     169-8 

Desecration  of  the  Temple. — 
Jews  compelled  to  pay  pub- 
lic honour  to  false  gods. — 
Faithfulness  of  scribes  and 
CAasidim.— Revolt  of  Macca- 
bees,      167    Dan.  xi.  34,  35 ;  xii.  3. 

Jewish  war  of  independence. — 
Death  of  the  priest  Matta- 
thias. — Judas  Maccabaeus  de- 
feats Lysias 166 

Battles  of  Beth-zur  and  Em- 
maus.— Purification  of  Tem- 
ple (Kisleu  2s)   •        .        .        .  165 

Death  of  Antiochus Epiphanes  163 

Judas  Maccabseus  dies  in  bat- 
tle at  Eleasa,     .        .        .        .161 


GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OF  THE  LAGID^, 
PTOLEMIES,   AND   SELEUCID-(E. 


Seleucus  Nicator, 

B.  C.  312-280. 


Ptolemy  Soter  (Dan.  xi.  s). 


Antiochus  I.  (Soter),      Ptolemy  Philadelphus. 

B.  C.  280.  I 

I 


r 


Laodice= Antiochus  II.  (Theos)= Berenice. 


B.  C.  260-246. 


Ptolemy 
Euergetes, 
B.  C.  28S-247  (Dan. 
xi.  7,  8). 
An  infant,  murdered  I 

by  Laodice. 

Seleucus  II.    Antiochus.  Ptolemy  Philopator 

(Kallinikos),  B.  C.  2..2-205  (Dan.  xi.  10-12). 

d.  B.  C.  226. 


I ! 

Seleucus  III.      Antiochus  III.  ("the  Great '  ), 
(Keraunos).  B.  C.  224  (Dan.  xi.  10-12,  14). 

I  


r 


Seleucus       Antiochus  IV.      Cleopatra=Ptolemy  Epipb 
Philopator.    (Epiphanes),  B.  C.  175.  I  anes, 

I  I  B.  C.  205-181 

Demetrius.       Antiochus  V.,  |     (Dan.  xi.  14). 

1 


B.  C.  164. 


r 


Dan.  vii.  11,  26;  viii. 
14  ;  xi.  45,  etc. 


Ptolemy  Philometor, 
B.  C.  181-146  Ptolemy 

(Dan.  xi.  25-30).    Euergetes  IL 

For  a  fuller  list  and  further  identifications  see  Driver, 
Dp.  461,  462,  and  supra.  For  the  genealogical  table  see 
Mr.  Deane  (Bishop  Ellicott's  "  Commentary,  v.  402). 


THE  BOOK  OF  THE 

TWELVE  PROPHETS 

PART  I. 


I 


»-VoLIV. 


PREFACE. 


The  Prophets,  to  whom  this  and  a  following  Part  are  dedicated,  have,  to  our 
loss,  been  haunted  for  centuries  by  a  peddling  and  ambiguous  title.  Their  Twelve 
Books  are  in  size  smaller  than  those  of  the  great  Three  which  precede  them,  and 
doubtless  none  of  their  chapters  soar  so  high  as  the  brilliant  summits  to  which  we 
are  swept  by  Isaiah  and  the  Prophet  of  the  Exile.  But  in  every  other  respect  they 
are  undeserving  of  the  niggardly  name  of  "  Minor."  Two  of  them,  Amos  and  Hosea, 
were  the  first  of  all  prophecy — rising  cliff-like,  with  a  sheer  and  magnificent  original- 
ity, to  a  height  and  a  mass  sufficient  to  set  after  them  the  trend  and  slope  of  the  whole 
prophetic  range.  The  Twelve  together  cover  the  extent  of  that  range,  and  illustrate 
the  development  of  prophecy  at  almost  every  stage  from  the  eighth  century  to  the 
fourth.  Yet  even  more  than  in  the  case  of  Isaiah  or  Jeremiah,  the  Church  has  been 
content  to  use  a  passage  here  and  a  passage  there,  leaving  the  rest  of  the  books  to 
absolute  neglect  or  the  almost  equal  oblivion  of  routine-reading.  Among  the  causes 
of  this  disuse  have  been  the  more  than  usually  corrupt  state  of  the  text ;  the  conse- 
quent disorder  and  in  parts  unintelligibleness  of  all  the  versions;  the  ignorance  of  the 
various  historical  circumstances  out  of  which  the  books  arose  ;  the  absence  of  suc- 
cessful efforts  to  determine  the  periods  and  strophes,  the  dramatic  dialogues  (with 
the  names  of  the  speakers),  the  lyric  effusions  and  the  passages  of  argument,  of  all 
of  which  the  books  are  composed. 

The  following  exposition  is  an  attempt  to  assist  the  bettering  of  all  this.  As  the 
Twelve  Prophets  illustrate  among  them  the  whole  history  of  written  prophecy,  ^ 
have  thought  it  useful  to  prefix  a  historical  sketch  of  the  Prophet  in  early  Israel,  or 
as  far  as  the  appearance  of  Amos.  The  Twelve  are  then  taken  in  chronological 
order.  Under  each  of  them  a  chapter  is  given  of  historical  and  critical  introduction 
to  his  book ;  then  some  account  of  the  prophet  himself  as  a  man  and  a  seer;  then  a 
complete  translation  of  the  various  prophecies  handed  down  under  his  name,  with 
textual  footnotes,  and  an  exposition  and  application  to  the  present  day  in  harmony 
with  the  aim  of  the  series  to  which  these  volumes  belong :  finally,  a  discussion  of  the 
main  doctrines  the  prophet  has  taught,  if  it  has  not  been  found  possible  to  deal  with 
these  in  the  course  of  the  exposition. 

An  exact  critical  study  of  the  Twelve  Prophets  is  rendered  necessary  by  the 
state  of  the  entire  text.  The  present  work  is  based  on  a  thorough  examination  of 
this  in  the  light  of  the  ancient  versions  and  of  modern  criticism.  The  emendations 
which  I  have  proposea  are  few  and  insignificant,  but  I  have  examined  and  discussed 
in  footnotes  all  that  have  been  suggested,  and  in  many  cases  my  translation  will  be 
found  to  differ  widely  from  that  of  the  Revised  Version.  To  questions  of  integrity 
and  authenticity  more  space  is  devoted  than  may  seem  to  many  to  be  necessary. 
But  it  is  certain  that  the  criticism  of  the  prophetic  books  has  now  entered  on  a 
period  of  the  same  analysis  and  discrimination  which  is  almost  exhausted  in  the  case 

435 


436  -  PREFACE. 

of  the  Pentateuch.  Some  hints  were  given  of  this  in  a  previous  book  on  Isaiah, 
chapters  xl.-lxvi.,  which  are  evidently  a  composite  work.  Among  the  books  now 
before  us,  the  same  fact  has  long  been  clear  in  the  case  of  Obadiah  and  Zecha- 
riah,  and  also  since  Ewald's  time  with  regard  to  Micah.  But  Duhm's  "  Theology  of 
the  Prophets,"  which  appeared  in  1875,  suggested  interpolations  in  Amos.  Wellhau- 
sen  (in  1873)  and  Stade  (from  1883  onwards)  carried  the  discussion  further  both  on 
those,  and  others,  of  the  Twelve ;  while  a  recent  work  by  Andr^e  on  Haggai  proves 
that  many  similar  questions  may  still  be  raised  and  have  to  be  debated.  The  gen- 
eral fact  must  be  admitted  that  hardly  one  book  has  escaped  later  additions — addi- 
tions of  an  entirely  justifiable  nature,  which  supplement  the  point  of  view  of  a  single 
prophet  with  the  richer  experience  or  the  riper  hopes  of  a  later  day,  and  thus  afford 
to  ourselves  a  more  catholic  presentment  of  the  doctrines  of  prophecy  and  the  Divine 
purposes  for  mankind.  This  general  fact,  I  say,  must  be  admitted.  But  the  ques- 
tions of  detail  are  still  in  process  of  solution.  It  is  obvious  that  settled  results  can 
be  reached  (as  to  some  extent  they  have  been  already  reached  in  the  criticism  of  the 
Pentateuch)  only  after  years  of  research  and  debate  by  all  schools  of  critics.  Mean- 
time it  is  the  duty  of  each  of  us  to  offer  his  own  conclusions,  with  regard  to  every 
separate  passage,  on  the  understanding  that,  however  final  they  may  at  present  seem 
to  him,  the  end  is  not  yet.  In  previous  criticism  the  defects,  of  which  work  in  the 
same  field  has  made  me  aware,  are  four:  i.  A  too  rigid  belief  in  the  exact  paral- 
lelism and  symmetry  of  the  prophetic  style,  which  I  feel  has  led,  for  instance,  WelK 
hausen,  to  whom  we  otherwise  owe  so  much  on  the  Twelve  Prophets,  into  many 
unnecessary  emendations  of  the  text,  or,  where  some  amendment  is  necessary,  to 
absolutely  unprovable  changes.  2.  In  passages  between  which  no  connection  exists, 
the  forgetfulness  of  the  principle  that  this  fact  may  often  be  explained  as  justly  by 
the  hypothesis  of  the  omission  of  some  words,  as  by  the  favourite  theory  of  the  later 
intrusion  of  portions  of  the  extant  text.  3.  Forgetfulness  of  the  possibility,  which 
in  some  cases  amounts  almost  to  certainty,  of  the  incorporation,  among  the  authentic 
words  of  a  prophet,  of  passages  of  earlier  as  well  as  of  later  date.  And,  4,  deprecia. 
tion  of  the  spiritual  insight  and  foresight  of  pre-exilic  writers.  These,  I  am  per- 
suaded, are  defects  in  previous  criticism  of  the  prophets.  Probably  my  own  criticism 
will  reveal  many  more.  In  the  beginnings  of  such  analysis  as  we  are  engaged  on,  we 
must  be  prepared  for  not  a  little  arbitrariness  and  want  of  proportion ;  these  are  often 
necessary  for  insight  and  fresh  points  of  view,  but  they  are  as  easily  eliminated  by 
the  progress  of  discussion. 

All  criticism,  however,  is  preliminary  to  the  real  work  which  the  immortal  prophets 
demand  from  scholars  and  preachers  in  our  age.  In  a  review  of  a  previous  volume,  I 
was  blamed  for  applying  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah  to  a  problem  of  our  own  day.  This 
was  called  "  prostituting  prophecy."  T/ie  prostitution  of  the  prophets  is  their  con- 
finement to  academic  uses.  One  cannot  conceive  an  ending,  at  once  more  pathetic 
and  more  ridiculous,  to  those  great  streams  of  living  water,  than  to  allow  them  to 
run  out  in  the  sands  of  criticism  and  exegesis,  however  golden  these  sands  may  be. 
The  prophets  spoke  for  a  practical  purpose  ;  they  aimed  at  the  hearts  of  men;  and 
everything  that  scholarship  can  do  for  their  writings  has  surely  for  its  final  aim  the 
illustration  of  their  witness  to  the  ways  of  God  with  men,  and  its  application  to  liv- 
ing questions  and  duties  and  hopes.  Besides,  therefore,  seeking  to  tell  the  story  of 
that  wonderful  stage  in   the  history  of  the  human  spirit' — surely  next  in  wonder  to 


PREFACE.  437 

« 

the  story  of  Christ  Himself — I  have  not  feared  at  every  suitable  point  to  apply  its 
truths  to  our  lives  to-day.  The  civilisation  in  which,  prophecy  flourished  was  in  its 
essentials  marvellously  like  our  own.  To  mark  only  one  point,  the  rise  of  prophecy 
in  Israel  came  fast  upon  the  passage  of  the  nation  from  an  agricultural  to  a  com- 
mercial basis  of  society,  and  upon  the  appearance  of  the  very  thing  which  gives  its 
name  to  civilisation — city-life,  with  its  unchanging  sins,  problems,  and  ideals. 

A  recent  Dutch  critic,  whose  exact  scholarship  is  known  to  all  readers  of  Stade's 
"  Journal  of  Old  Testament  Science,"  has  said  of  Amos  and  Hosea:  "These  prophe- 
cies have  a  word  of  God,  as  for  all  times,  so  also  especially  for  our  own.  Before  all 
it  is  relevant  to  'the  social  question'  of  our  day,  to  the  relation  of  religion  and 
morality.  .  .  Often  it  has  been  hard  for  me  to  refrain  from  expressly  pointing  out 
the  agreement  between  Then  and  To-day."*  This  feeling  will  be  shared  by  all  stu- 
dents of  prophecy  whose  minds  and  consciences  are  quick ;  and  I  welcome  the  liberal 
plan  of  the  series  in  which  this  book  appears,  because,  while  giving  room  for  the 
adequate  discussion  of  critical  and  historical  questions,  its  chief  design  is  to  show  the 
eternal  validity  of  the  Books  of  the  Bible  as  the  Word  of  God,  and  their  meaning  for 
ourselves  to-day. 

Previous  works  on  the  Minor  Prophets  are  almost  innumerable.  Those  to  which 
I  owe  most  will  be  found  indicated  in  the  footnotes.  The  translation  has  been  exe- 
cuted upon  the  purpose,  not  to  sacrifice  the  literal  meaning  or  exact  emphasis  of  the 
original  to  the  frequent  possibility  of  greater  elegance.  It  reproduces  every  word, 
with  the  occasional  exception  of  a  copula.  With  some  hesitation  I  have  retained 
the  traditional  spelling  of  the  Divine  Name,  Jehovah,  instead  of  the  more  correct 
Jahve  or  Yahweh  ;  but  where  the  rhythm  of  certain  familiar  passages  was  disturbed 
by  it,  I  have  followed  the  English  versions  and  written  LORD.  The  reader  will 
keep  in  mind  that  a  line  may  be  destroyed  by  substituting  our  pronunciation  of 
proper  names  for  the  more  musical  accents  of  the  original.  Thus,  for  instance,  we 
obliterate  the  music  of  "  Isra'el "  by  making  it  two  syllables  and  putting  the 
accent  on  the  first :  it  has  three  syllables  with  the  accent  on  the  last.  We  crush 
Verushalayim  into  Jerusalem  ;  we  shred  off  Asshur  into  Assyria,  and  dub  Misraim 
Egypt.  Hebrew  has  too  few  of  the  combinations  which  sound  most  musical  to 
our  ears  to  afford  the  suppression  of  any  one  of  them. 

*J.  J.  P.  Valeton,  jun.,  "Amos  en  Hosea,"  1894;  quoted  by  Budde  in  the  Theologische  Literaturtettung^ 
September,  1 894, 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION.  HOSEA. 

Chapter  I.  Chapter  XII. 

PAGE  ^AOE 

The  Book  of  the  Twelve 443     The  Book  of  Hosea, 494 

Chapter  II.  Chapter  XIII. 

The  Prophet  in  Early  Israel,        ...    445      "^^^  Problem  that  Amos  Left,      ...    498 

Chapter  III.  Chapter   XIV. 

The  Eighth  Century  in  Israel,      ...    450     The  Story  of  the  Prodigal  Wife,  .       .       .    4» 

Chapter  IV.  Chapter  XV. 

The  Influence  of  Assyria  upon  Prophecy,  .    453      The  Thick  Night  of  Israel,  ....    504 

Chapter  XVI. 

A  People  in  Decay:  I.  Morally,    .       .       .    505 
Chapter  V. 

The  Book  of  Amos, 456 

A  People  in  Decay:  II.  Politically,      .        .    508 
Chapter  VI. 

The  Man  and  the  Prophet,  ....    460 

The  Fatherhood  and  Humanity  of  God,    .    514 

Chapter  XIX. 
The  Final  Argument, 516 

Chapter  XX. 
I  Will  Be  as  the  Dew,"      .        .        .        .518 

Chapter  XXI. 
The  Knowledge  of  God,        ....    521 
Chapter  X.                                                                    Chapter  XXII. 
Doom  or  Discipline? 487      Repentance 524 

Chapter  XI.  Chapter  XXIII. 

Common-sense  and  the  Reign  of  Law,      .    4Q1      The  Sin  against  Love, 528 

439 


Chapter  VII. 
Atrocities  and  Atrocities 472 

Chapter  VIII. 
Civilisation  and  Judgment,    ....    477 

Chapter  IX. 
The  False  Peace  of  Ritual,  ....    481 


440 

MICAH. 
Chapter  XXIV. 
The  Book  of  Micah, 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  XXVIII. 
The  King  to  Come, 


Cmaptkr  XXV. 
Micah  the  Morasthite,  . 

Cmaptkr  XXVI. 
The   Prophet  of  the   Poor,   . 

Chapter  XXVII. 
C'n  Time's  Horizon, 


PAGE 

530 


534 


537 


Chapter  XXIX. 
The  Reasonableness  oi  True  Religion, 

Chapter  XXX. 
The  Sin  of  the  Scant  Measure.    . 


PAGE 

542 


545 


.    546 


Chapter  XXXI. 
540      Our  Mother  of  Sorrows. 


S48 


CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  DOUBLE  KINGDOM  OF  ISRAEL,  c.  940-639  b.  a 

r=  circa:  it  refers  only  to  the  accession  of  the  kings  of  Judaii  and  Israel;  the  years  are  exact  so  far  aa 
they  concern  the  Assyrian  data.  A  date  opposite  the  mere  name  of  a  king  signifies  the  year  of  hii 
accession. 


Disruption    of    thelKiiigrdom 
Rehoboam  Jeroboam  I 


923  0 
920  c 
91K.. 
910 
Sill  c 

msc 

870  c 
k74c 
RM 
.SS3c 
802  c 


850 
819  0 
U« 
Mic 
812  c 

839 
836  c 
811  0 

812 
800 
803 

798  c 
797  0 
783  c 
778  c 
7-6 
773 
772 


763 
716 
713 


712 
741 
710 
736! 

738 
737  c 
736  c 
736 
731 

733 

732 
731 
730  c 
727  c 
725 
722  oi- 1 
720  or  19 


Abijam 
lAsa 


iJehoshaphat 


Ahaziah 
Athaliah 


Joash 


Afloazi&li 
XTzziah  (Azariah) 


Total   eclipse    of 


Estnltlixhrneiit  of  calf  iinu|irfs 
!i  N.  Israel 


Nadal- 
Baasna 
£tah 

Zimri    Omri 
Ahab 

First  contact  of  Israel 
Abaziah 
Joram 
Invades  Moab    with    Judah 
and  Kdom 


The   year    Kiner 

XTzziah  died '' 

Jotham  sole  niler 


715 
711 


67H 
676 
671 


Ahaz 

Abaz  is  attacked 


Ahaz  pays  homag^e 
Hezekiah 


Jehoahaz 


Joasb 
Jeroboam  II 

'  Jeroboamre-conquers 
J  Moab,  Gilead,  and 
)       part  of  Aram 

the  sun  on  June  15th, 


Zechariah,  son  of  Jeroboam 

(6  months) 
Sballum  (1  month) 
Henahem 


Iffeuahem  is 
Pekahiah 
Pekah,  the  Gileadite 
both  by  Pekah  and 
Captivity  of  Gilead,  G  lilee, 
etc. 


Hoshea 

Siege  of  Samaria  bef^ins 
Fall  of  Samaria 


Elijah 


'Samaria  peopled 


Invasion  of  Judah 
Deliverance  of  Jemsalem 
Manasseh 


tributary  to 


BCanasa«h 
Amon 


Josiah 


Amos 


Hosea 


)  Campaigns    in    all     these    three 

>■     Assyria    against     Dadidri    or 

)  Revolt    of    Edom     from    Judah 

(2  Kings  viii.  20  ff.) 

War  of  Hazael  with 

War  of  Ha2»tel  with 

)  Hazael  subdues    Gilead    (Amos 

y    i.  3);  attacks  Gath,  but  is  bought 

)     oflf  from  Jerusalem 

Arpad,  campaign  against,  by 
Damascus,  under  Jtteri, 
A  year  of  pestilence 


I  Isaiah 


Hicah 


■TKU,  no. 


Revolt   of  Mesha  of  Moab : 

Moabite  Stone  (circa  860) 
and    Syria    with   Assyria    at   the 


Damascus,  campaign  against, 

Hadrach,  campaign  against, 

A  pestilence 

Hadrach,  campaign  against, 

visible  in  Syria  and  at 

A  pestileme  in  Western  Asia 

Hadrach  suffers  attack  from 

Arpad  suffers  attack  from 


Arpad  besieged,  and  after  two 


mentioned  as  tributary  to 


by  Rezin  of  Damascus  (Isa.  vii.) 


Damascus  besiegeil  and   taken 
at  Damascus  to  the  King  of 


Gaza  overthrown  by 
Ashdod  taken  by 


and  of  all  Syria 

Siege  of  Ekron.      Battle  of  Eltekeh 


Phoenicia  subdued  by 
Tyre  taken  by 


othpr  Syrian  kings 

Tvre  assists 

the  Phoenician    Arv.ifl 


Battle  of  Earkar 


years  bv  Shalmaneser  II  of 
Hadadezer  of  DamaecuB 


Tribute  from  Jehu 

Assyria 

Assyria 


Acces  ion  of  Ilamman-Nirari 

Assyria 

besieged  and  taken  by  Assyria 


Shalmaneser  III 

Expedition  to  ('edar  Country 

by  Ai^syria 

by  Assyria 

Accession  of  Assur-dan-il 

by  Assyria 

Nineveh 

Assyria 

Assyria 

Accession  of  Assur-Nirari 

Accession  of  Tiglath-  Pileser  III 


or  three  years  taken  by  Assyria 


Assyria 


by  Assyria  (Isa.  vill.,  ix.), 

by  Assyria 

Assyria  ^ 

Tiglath-Plleser  becomes  King  of 

Babylon  under  the  name  of  1^1 
Shalmaneser  IV 

Sargon  takes  Samaria 

Sarf  on  as  he  inarches  past  Judah 

and  defeats  Egypt  at  Raphia 
by  subjugated  ti  ibes  deported  from 

Assjria 
Sargon 
Sargon  takes  Babylon  from 

Merodach-Baladan 
Death  of  Sargon 
Accession  of  Sennacherib 
War  with  Merodach-Baladan 
by  Seunactaerib 

[haddon  succeeds 
Sennacherib    murdered.     Asar- 
Asar haddon 
.Assyria 

Asarbaddon    on    his    inarch    to 
t;gypt,  and  conquest  of  Memphis 
Assurbanipal 
tributary  to  .Assyria 
Assurbanipal  against 


(ISO 

Ism 


83* 
(ISC 

•jsu 

81S 
800 
8«t 


775 
773 
772 
766 

763 
759 
755 
751 
753 


712 
.7« 


731 
733 
732 


722  or  1 
20  or  It 


70i 

701 


S81 
678 
«7« 
(71 


Ml 


•  This  date  is  very  uncertain.    It  maj  have  baen  6(0,  or  aeeording  to  soom  U6. 


t    fH 


n       H  »-(  H 


5^     s 


o 

w 
►J 

<: 

o 
o 

o 
z 
o 

u 


.  <1> 

1-4     U 


32 
•g   Ul 

<-2 


.s- 

-iS 

S   p. 

n.  xi.  13  ff 

ty  with  latl 
ilopator). 

IV.  tomak 
xi.  20). 
piphanes) 

<n    .w 

3  c-' 

3  Sx;>- 

'.§  113 

-  -so 

J3  J2C/20J 


w^       •§' 


3n> 


•^  ^"^        3 


O  C5 
53 


2-2 
•Sis 

o  o 


k> 


11 


^•2 

S.| 
•s-a 

O*  OS 


n 


C   (U 

rt  j3 


e2 

s.s 


c  «5  c 

•J  li  ra 
.S'fe.S  3 

<u  <u  4>  .5 


03  *c3 

•r  u 
C 

~  ja 

C   00 

IS 

CO 


:  rt  3  a. 

<fl  Si  « 
P'cS 

O   (U   4> 


i"  ^  2 


E-5  ^ 

DSC 

ho   O) 


•I- 

'  O   60  -  - 


E3  <u 


3'u 


•g  o 

w  2  <=! 

c,g.2 


s 

X 

s 

e 

*^ 

^ 

eJ 

nl 

a 

c 

0 

Cl   N         CI   M   «  ( 


M    M    Q 

C«  M   « 


>&  s 


\0        vo  ^O  O  u^  V) 
»•«  H    H    H    M    M   I 


t  ti'sasss  fis  3 


inm  1^1  oii  ii  lUs  III  t  ?==S8  ss » sBgg  s  s^s 


&"     §  _i 


?tJl-iili 


ei? 


m 


f|»2sCS 


1 1  "I 

let; 

3    1.       ^ 
11^ 


rl  1^1 


li    if 
si    s| 


"I  pi 


III 
III 

sii 


I    III 
f    ill 


esi'    no=5;s 

Pit  iili^E 

Sf  °  5  2    B-^i-l"a 
f  f  ■?   lit 


5    I3 


Si 


^1       I 


lit  i'l 


80  = 


|ifSs._o5«ii1 


=  3  5.fJ»?S     2." 

gl  '-if    Is. 


P?5-?Q8sa 


Hi    §        S|       ^B£       I       s^l 


it  2    l^sJHS  a    USsal  ISHS 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


BY     GEORGE     ADAM     SMITH,     D.     D.,     LL.     D. 


PART  I. 

INTRODUCTION. 


CHAPTER  I. 
THE  BOOK  OF   THE   TWELVE. 

In  the  order  of  our  English  Bible  the  Minor 
Prophets,  as  they  are  usually  called,  form  the 
last  twelve  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  They 
are  immediately  preceded  by  Daniel,  and  before 
him  by  the  three  Major  Prophets.  Isaiah,  Jere- 
miah (with  Lamentations),  and  Ezekiel.  Why 
all  sixteen  were  thus  gathered  at  the  end  of  the 
other  sacred  books  we  do  not  know.  Perhaps, 
because  it  was  held  fitting  that  prophecy  should 
occupy  the  last  outposts  of  the  Old  Testament 
towards  the  New. 

In  the  Hebrew  Bible,  however,  the  order  dif- 
fers, and  is  much  more  significant.  The 
Prophets  *  form  the  second  division  of  the 
threefold  Canon:  Law,  Prophets,  and  Writings; 
and  Daniel  is  not  among  them.  The  Minor 
follow  immediately  after  Ezekiel.  Moreover, 
they  are  not  twelve  books,  but  one.  They  are 
gathered  under  the  common  title  "  Book  of  the 
Twelve;  "t  and  although  each  of  them  has  the 
usual  colophon  detailing  the  number  of  its  own 
verses,  there  is  also  one  colophon  for  all  the 
twelve,  placed  at  the  end  of  Malachi  and  reckon- 
ing the  sum  of  their  verses  from  the  first  of 
Hosea  onwards.  This  unity,  which  there  is 
reason  to  suppose  was  given  to  them  before 
their  reception  into  the  Canon.t  they  have  never 
since  lost.  However  much  their  place  has 
changed  in  the  order  of  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  however  much  their  own  internal  ar- 
rangement has  differed,  the  Twelve  have  always 
stood  together.  There  has  been  every  tempta- 
tion to  scatter  them  because  of  their  various 
dates.  Yet  they  never  have  been  scattered;  and 
in  spite  of  the  fact  that  they  have  not  preserved 
their  common  title  in  any  Bible  outside  the  He- 
brew, that  title  has  lived  on  in  literature  and 
common  talk.  Thus  the  Greek  Canon  omits 
it;  but  Greek  Jews  and  Christians  always  counted 
the  books  as  one  volume.^  calling  them  "  The 
Twelve  Prophets,"  or  "  The  Twelve-Prophet " 
Book.i     It  was  the  Latins  who  designated  them 

♦Including,  of  course,  the  historical  books,  Joshua  to  2 
Kings,  which  were  known  as  "the  Former  Prophets"; 
while  what  we  call  the  prophets,  Isaiah  to  Malachi,  were 
known  as  "the  Latter." 

tlt^'J?  nn  ~IDD.  the  Aramaic  form  of  the  Hebrew  ItJ^y 
D'JCy,  which  appears  with  the  other  in  the  colophon  to 
the  book.  .-V  later  contraction  is  "ID^n.  This  is  the 
form  transliterated  in  Epiphanius  :  fiaSopiao-apa. 

i  See  Ryle,  "  Canon  of  the  O.  T.,"  p.  105. 

§  So  Josephus,  "  Contra  Apion,"  i.  8  (circa  go  A.  D.), 
reckons  the  prophetical  books  as  thirteen,  of  which  the 
Minor  Prophets  could  only  ha%'e  been  counted  as  one — 
whatever  the  other  twelve  may  have  been.  Melito  of 
Sardis  Cf.  170),  quoted  bj'  Eusebius  ("  Hist.  Eccl.,"  iv.  26). 
speaks  of  rtoi'  6io8e<taei';u.oi'o/3c^A<j.  To  Origen  (c.  250:  apud 
Ibid,  vi.  25)  they  could  onlv  have  been  one  out  of  the 
twenty-two  he  gives  for  the  O.  T.  Cf.  Jerome  {"  Prolog. 
Galeatus"),  ■'  Liber  duodecim  Prophetarum." 

II  Oi  AuiSexa  npo<<>iJTai :  Jesus  son  of  Sirach  xlix.  10 ;  To 
6»)5e/caTrpd4>r)T0i'. 


"  The  Minor  Prophets  "  :  "  on  account  of  their 
brevity  as  compared  with  those  who  are  called 
the  Major  because  of  their  ampler  volumes."  * 
And  this  name  has  passed  into  most  modern 
languages,!  including  our  own.  But  surely  it 
is  better  to  revert  to  the  original,  canonical  and 
unambiguous  title  of  "  The  Twelve." 

The  collection  and  arrangement  of  "  The 
Twelve  "  are  matters  of  obscurity,  from  which, 
however,  three  or  four  facts  emerge  that  are  tol- 
erably certain.  The  inseparableness  of  the  books 
is  a  proof  of  the  ancient  date  of  their  union. 
They  must  have  been  put  together  before  they 
were  received  into  the  Canon.  The  Canon  of  the 
Prophets — ^Joshua  to  Second  Kings  and  Isaiah  to 
Malachi — was  closed  by  200  b.  c.  at  the  latest, 
and  perhaps  as  early  as  250;  but  if  we  have 
(as  seems  probable)  portions  of  "The  Twelve,"  X 
which  must  be  assigned  to  a  little  later  than  300, 
this  may  be  held  to  prove  that  the  whole  collec- 
tion cannot  have  long  preceded  the  fixing  of 
the  Canon  of  the  Prophets.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  fact  that  these  latest  pieces  have  not  been 
placed  under  a  title  of  their  own,  but  are  at- 
tached to  the  Book  of  Zechariah,  is  pretty  suf- 
ficient evidence  that  they  were  added  after  the 
collection  and  fixture  of  twelve  books — a  round 
number  which  there  would  be  every  disposition 
not  to  disturb.  That  would  give  us  for  the  date 
of  the  first  edition  (so  to  speak)  of  our  Twelve 
some  year  before  300;  and  for  the  date  of  the 
second  edition  some  year  towards  250.  This  is 
a  question,  however,  which  may  be  reserved  for 
final  decision  after  we  have  examined  the  date 
of  the  separate  books,  and  especially  of  Joel  and 
the  second  half  of  Zechariah.  That  there  was  a 
previous  collection,  as  early  as  the  Exile,  of  the 
books  written  before  then,  may  be  regarded  as 
more  than  probable.  But  we  have  no  means  of 
fixing  its  exact  limits.  Why  the  Twelve  were 
all  ultimately  put  together  is  reasonably  sug- 
gested by  Jewish  writers.  They  are  small,  and, 
as  separate  rolls,  might  have  been  lost.§  It 
is  possible  that  the  desire  of  the  round  number 
twelve  is  responsible  for  the  admission  of  Jonah, 
a  book  very  different  in  form  from  all  the  others; 
just  as  we  have  hinted  that  the  fact  of  there 
bemg  already  twelve  may  account  for  the  attach- 
ment of  the  late  fragments  to  the  Book  of 
Zechariah.  But  all  this  is  only  to  guess,  where 
we  have  no  means  of  certain  knowledge. 

"  The  Book  of  the  Twelve  "  has  not  always 
held  the  place  which  it  now  occupies  in  the  He- 
brew Canon,  at  the  end  of  the  Prophets.  The 
rabbis  taught  that  Hosea.  but  for  the  compara- 
tive smallness  of  his  prophecy,  should  have 
stood  first  of  all  the  writing  prophets,  of  whom 
they  regarded  him  as  the  oldest.!  And  doubt- 
less it  was  for  the  same  chronological  reasons 
that  early  Christian  catalogues  of  the  Scriptures 

♦Augustine,  "  De  Civ.  Dei,"  xviii.  29:  cf.  Jerome, 
"  Proem,  in  Esaiam." 

t  The  German  usage  generally  preserves  the  numeral, 
"Die  zwolf  kleinen  Propheten. 

tSee  Vol.  II.  on  Zech.  ix.  fl. 

§•' Talmud":  Baba  Bathra,  14a:  c/.  Rashi's  Commen- 
tary. 

["Talmud,"  <■*/</. 


443 


444 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and    various   editions   of   the    Septuagint   placed 
the  whole  of  "  The  Twelve  "  in  front  of  Isaiah.* 

The  internal  arrangement  of  "  The  Twelve " 
in  our  English  Bible  is  the  same  as  that  of  the 
Hebrew  Canon,  and  was  probably  determined 
by  what  the  compilers  thought  to  be  the  respec- 
tive ages  of  the  books.  Thus,  first  we  have  six, 
all  supposed  to  be  of  the  earlier  Assyrian  period, 
before  700 — Hosea,  Joel,  Amos.  Obadiah,  Jonah, 
and  Micah;  then  three  from  the  late  Assyrian 
and  the  Babylonian  periods — Nahum,  Habak- 
kuk,  and  Zephaniah;  and  then  three  from  the 
Persian  period  after  the  Exile — Haggai,  Zecha- 
riah,  and  Malachi.  The  Septuagint  have  altered 
the  order  of  the  first  six,  arranging  Hosea,  Amos, 
Micah,  Joel,  and  Obadiah  according  to  their 
size,  and  setting  Jonah  after  them,  probably  be- 
cause of  his  different  form.  The  remaining  six 
are  left  as  in  the  Hebrew. 

Recent  criticism,  however,  has  made  it  clear 
that  the  Biblical  order  of  "  The  Twelve  Proph- 
ets "  is  no  more  than  a  very  rough  approxima- 
tion to  the  order  of  their  real  dates;  and,  as 
it  is  obviously  best  for  us  to  follow  in  their 
historical  succession  prophecies  which  illustrate 
the  whole  history  of  prophecy  from  its  rise  with 
Amos  to  its  fall  with  Malachi  and  his  success- 
ors, I  propose  to  do  this.  Detailed  proofs  of 
the  separate  dates  must  be  left  to  each  book. 
All  that  is  needful  here  is  a  general  statement  of 
the  order. 

Of  the  first  six  prophets  the  dates  of  Amos, 
Hosea,  and  Micah  (but  of  the  latter's  book  in 
part  only)  are  certain.  The  Jews  have  been  able 
to  defend  Hosea's  priority  only  on  fanciful 
grounds.!  Whether  or  not  he  quotes  from 
Amos,  his  historical  allusions  are  more  recent. 
With  the  exception  of  a  few  fragments  incorpo- 
rated by  later  authors,  the  Book  of  Amos  is 
thus  the  earliest  example  of  prophetic  literature, 
and  we  take  it  first.  The  date  we  shall  see  is 
about  755.  Hosea  begins  five  or  ten  years  later, 
and  Micah  just  before  722.  The  three  are  in 
every  respect — originality,  comprehensiveness, 
influence  upon  other  prophets — the  greatest  of 
our  Twelve,  and  will  therefore  be  treated  with 
most  detail,  occupying  the  whole  of  the  first 
volume. 

The  rest  of  the  first  six  are  Obadiah,  Joel,  and 
Jonah.  But  the  Book  of  Obadiah,  although  it 
opens  with  an  early  oracle  against  Edom,  is  in 
its  present  form  from  after  the  Exile.  The  Book 
of  Joel  is  of  uncertain  date,  but,  as  we  shall 
see,  the  great  probability  is  that  it  is  late;  and 
the  Book  of  Jonah  belongs  to  a  form  of  literature 
so  different  from  the  others  that  we  may,  most 
conveniently,  treat  of  it  last. 

This  leaves  us  to  follow  Micah,  at  the  end 
of  the  eighth  century,  with  the  group  Zephaniah, 
Nahum,  and  Habakkuk  from  the  second  half  of 
the  seventh  century;  and  finally  to  take  in  their 
order  the  post-exilic  Haggai,  Zechariah  i.-ix., 
Malachi,  and  the  other  writings  which  we  feel 
obliged  to  place  about  or  even  after  that  date. 

One  other  word  is  needful.  This  assignment 
of  the  various  books  to  different  dates  is  not 
♦So  the  Codices  Vaticanus  and  Alexandrinus,  but  not 
Cod.  Sin.  So  also  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (,t  386),  Athanasius 
(365),  Gregory  Naz.  (t  390),  and  the  spurious  Canon  of  the 
Council  of  Laodicea  (c.  400)  and  Epiphanius  (403).  See 
Ryle,  "  Canon  of  the  O.  T.,"  215  ff. 

+  By  a  forced  interpretation  of  the  phrase  in  chap.  i.  2, 
"When  the  Lord  spake  at  the  first  by  Hosea"  (R.  V.) 
"  Talmud  "  :  Baba  Bathra,  14a. 


to  be  held  as  implying  that  the  whole  of  a  book 
belongs  to  such  a  date  or  to  the  author  whose 
name  it  bears.  We  shall  find  that  hands  have 
been  busy  with  the  texts  of  the  books  long  after 
the  authors  of  these  must  have  passed  away;  tha' 
besides  early  fragments  incorporated  by  latei 
writers,  prophets  of  Israel's  new  dawn  mitigated 
the  judgments  and  enlightened  the  gloom  of  the 
watchmen  of  her  night;  that  here  and  there  are 
passages  which  are  evidently  intrusions,  both  be- 
cause they  interrupt  the  argument  and  because 
they  reflect  a  much  later  historical  environment 
than  their  context.  This,  of  course,  will  require 
discussion  in  each  case,  and  such  discussion  will 
be  given.  The  text  will  be  subjected  to  an  in- 
dependent examination.  Some  passages  hitherto 
questioned  we  may  find  to  be  unjustly  so;  others 
not  hitherto  questioned  we  may  see  reason  to 
suspect.  But  in  any  case  we  shall  keep  in  mind 
that  the  results  of  an  independent  inquiry  are 
uncertain;  and  that  in  this  new  criticism  of  the 
prophets,  which  is  comparatively  recent,  we  can- 
not hope  to  arrive  for  some  time  at  so  general  a 
consensus  as  is  being  rapidly  reached  in  the  far 
older  and  more  elaborated  criticism  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch.* 

Such  is  the  extent  and  order  of  the  journey 
which  lies  before  us.  If  it  is  not  to  the  very 
summits  of  Israel's  outlook  that  we  climb — 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  the  great  Prophet  of  the 
Exile — we  are  yet  to  traverse  the  range  of 
prophecy  from  beginning  to  end.  We  start  with 
its  first  abrupt  elevations  in  Amos.  We  are 
carried  by  the  side  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  yet 
at  a  lower  altitude,  on  to  the  Exile.  With  the 
returned  Israel  we  pursue  an  almost  immediate 
rise  to  vision,  and  then  by  Malachi  and  others 
are  conveyed  down  dwindling  slopes  to  the  very 
end.  Beyond  the  land  is  flat.  Though  Psalms 
are  sung  and  brave  deeds  done,  and  faith  is 
strong  and  bright,  there  is  no  height  of  out- 
look; "  there  is  no  more  any  prophet  "t  in  Israel. 

But  our  "  Twelve  "  do  more  than  thus  carry 
us  from  beginning  to  end  of  the  Prophetic 
Period.  Of  second  rank  as  are  most  of  the 
heights  of  this  mountain  range,  they  yet  bring 
forth  and  speed  on  their  way  not  a  few  of  the 
streams  of  living  water  which  have  nourished 
later  ages  and  are  flowing  to-day.  Impetuous 
cataracts  of  righteousness — "  let  it  roll  on  like 
water,  and  justice  as  an  everlasting  stream  "  ; 
the  irrepressible  love  of  God  to  sinful  men;  the 
perseverance  and  pursuits  of  His  grace;  His 
mercies  that  follow  the  exile  and  the  outcast; 
His  truth  that  goes  forth  richly  upon  the 
heathen;  the  hope  of  the  Saviour  of  mankind; 
the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit;  counsels  of  pa- 
tience; impulses  of  tenderness  and  of  healing; 
melodies  innumerable, — all  sprang  from  these 
lower  hills  of  prophecy,  and  sprang  so  strongly 
that  the  world  hears  and  feels  them  still. 

And  from  the  heights  of  our  present  pilgrim- 
age there  are  also  clear  those  great  visions  of 
the  Stars  and  the  Dawn,  of  the  Sea  and  the 
Storm,  concerning  which  it  is  true  that  as  long 
as  men  live  they  shall  seek  out  the  places 
whence  they  can  be  seen,  and  thank  God  for  His 
prophets. 

*  For  further  considerations  on  this  point  see  pp.  477, 
491.  493  ff-  497  ff-.  518  ff.,  etc. 
+  Psalm  Ixxiv.  9. 


THE    PROPHET    IN    EARLY    ISRAEL. 


445 


CHAPTER    II. 
THE  PROPHET  IN  EARLY  ISRAEL. 

Our  "  Twelve  Prophets "  will  carry  us,  as 
we  have  seen,  across  the  whole  extent  of  the 
Prophetical  period — the  period  when  prophecy 
became  literature,  assuming  the  form  and  rising 
;o  the  intensity  of  an  imperishable  influence  on 
the  world.  The  earliest  of  the  Twelve,  Amos 
and  Hosea,  were  the  inaugurators  of  this  period. 
They  were  not  only  the  first  (so  far  as  we  know) 
to  commit  prophecy  to  writing,  but  we  find  in 
them  the  germs  of  all  its  subsequent  develop- 
ment. Yet  Amos  and  Hosea  were  not  unfa- 
thered. Behind  them  lay  an  older  dispensation, 
and  their  own  was  partly  a  product  of  this,  and 
partly  a  revolt  against  it.  Amos  says  of  him- 
self: "  The  Lord  hath  spoken,  who  can  but 
prophesy?" — but  again:  "No  prophet  I,  nor 
prophet's  son!  "  Who  were  those  earlier  proph- 
ets whose  office  Amos  Assumed  while  repudiat- 
ing their  spirit — whose  name  he  abjured,  yet 
could  not  escape  from  it?  And,  while  we  are 
about  the  matter,  what  do  we  mean  by 
"prophet"   in  general? 

In  vulgar  use  the  name  "  prophet "  has  de- 
generated to  the  meaning  of  "  one  who  fore- 
tells the  future."  Of  this  meaning  it  is,  per- 
haps, the  first  duty  of  every  student  of  prophecy 
earnestly  and  stubbornly  to  rid  himself.  In  its 
native  Greek  tongue  "  prophet  "  meant  not  "  one 
who  speaks  before,"  but  "  one  who  speaks  for, 
or  on  behalf  of,  another."  At  the  Delphic  oracle 
"  The  Prophetes  "  was  the  title  of  the  official  who 
received  the  utterances  of  the  frensied  Pytho- 
ness and  expounded  them  to  the  people;*  but 
Plato  says  that  this  is  a  misuse  of  the  word, 
and  that  the  true  prophet  is  the  inspired  person 
himself,  he  who  is  in  communication  with  the 
Deity  and  vi^ho  speaks  directly  for  the  Deity. t 
So  Tiresias,  the  seer,  is  called  by  Pindar  the 
"  prophet  "  or  "  interpreter  of  Zeus,"  t  and  Plato 
even  styles  poets  "  the  prophets  of  the  Muses."  § 
It  is  in  this  sense  that  we  must  think  of  the 
"  Prophet "  of  the  Old  Testament.  He  is  a 
speaker  for  God.  The  sharer  of  God's  counsels, 
as  Amos  calls  him,  he  becomes  the  bearer  and 
preacher  of  God's  Word.  Prediction  of  the 
future  is  only  a  part,  and  often  a  subordinate 
and  accidental  part,  of  an  office  whose  full  func- 
tion is  to  declare  the  character  and  the  will  of 
God.    But  the  prophet  does  this  in  no  systematic 

•  Herodotus,  viii.  36,  37. 

+  "Timaeus,"  71,  72.  The  whole  passage  is  worth  tran- 
scribing : 

"No  man,  when  in  his  senses,  attains  prophetic  truth 
and  inspiration  ;  but  when  he  receives  the  inspired  word 
either  his  intelligence  is  enthralled  by  sleep,  or  he  is  de- 
mented by  some  distemper  or  possession.  And  he  who 
would  understand  what  he  remembers  to  have  been  said, 
whether  in  dream  or  when  he  was  awake,  by  the  pro- 
phetic and  enthusiastic  nature,  or  what  he  has  seen,  must 
recover  his  senses  ;  and  then  he  will  be  able  to  explain 
rationally  what  all  such  words  and  apparitions  mean, 
and  what  indications  they  afford,  to  this  man  or  that,  of 
past,  present,  or  future,  good  and  evil.  But,  while  he 
continues  demented,  he  cannot  judge  of  the  visions  which 
he  sees  or  the  words  which  he  utters  ;  the  ancient  saying 
is  very  true  that  'onlj'  a  man  in  his  senses  can  act  or 
judge  about  himself  and  his  own  affairs.'  And  for  this 
reason  it  is  customary  to  appoint  diviners  or  interpreters 
as  discerners  of  the  oracles  of  the  gods.  Some  persons 
call  them  prophets  ;  they  do  not  know  that  they  are  only 
repeaters  of  dark  sayings  and  visions,  and  are  not  to  be 
called  prophets  at  all.  but  only  interpreters  of  prophecy  " 
Gowetfs  "  Translation  "). 

t  "  Nik.,"  i.  91. 

S  "  Phaedrus,"  262  D. 


or  abstract  form.  He  brings  his  revelation  point 
by  point,  and  in  connection  with  some  occasion 
in  the  history  of  his  people,  or  some  phase  of 
their  character.  He  is  not  a  philosopher  nor  a 
theologian  with  a  system  of  doctrine  (at  least 
before  Ezekiel),  but  the  messenger  and  herald 
of  God  at  some  crisis  in  the  life  or  conduct 
of  His  people.  His  message  is  never  out  of 
touch  with  events.  These  form  either  the  sub- 
ject-matter or  the  proof  or  the  execution  of 
every  oracle  he  utters.  It  is,  therefore,  God 
not  merely  as  Truth,  but  far  more  as  Providence, 
whom  the  prophet  reveals.  And  although  that 
Providence  includes  the  full  destiny  of  Israel  and 
mankind,  the  prophet  brings  the  news  of  it,  for 
the  most  part,  piece  by  piece,  with  reference  to 
some  present  sin  or  duty,  or  some  impending 
crisis  or  calamity.  Yet  he  does  all  this,  not 
merely  because  the  word  needed  for  the  day 
has  been  committed  to  him  by  itself,  and  as  if 
he  were  only  its  mechanical  vehicle;  but  because 
he  has  come  under  the  overwhelming  conviction 
of  God's  presence  and  of  His  character,  a  con- 
viction often  so  strong  that  God's  word  breaks 
through  him  and  God  speaks  in  the  first  person 
to  the  people. 

I.  From  the  Earliest  Times  till  Samuel. 

There  was  no  ancient  people  but  believed  in 
the  power  of  certain  personages  to  consult  the 
Deity  and  to  reveal  His  will.  Every  man  could 
sacrifice;  but  not  every  man  could  render  in  re- 
turn the  oracle  of  God.  This  pertained  to  select 
individuals  or  orders.  So  the  prophet  seems 
to  have  been  an  older  specialist  than  the  priest, 
though  in  every  tribe  he  frequently  combined 
the  latter's  functions  with  his  own.* 

The  matters  on  which  ancient  man  consulted 
God  were  as  wide  as  life.  But  naturally  at  first, 
in  a  rude  state  of  society  and  at  a  low  stage 
of  mental  development,  it  was  in  regard  to  the 
material  defence  and  necessities  of  life,  the  bare 
law  and  order,  that  men  almost  exclusively 
sought  the  Divine  will.  And  the  whole  history 
of  prophecy  is  just  the  effort  to  substitute  for 
these  elementary  provisions  a  more  personal 
standard  of  the  moral  law,  and  more  spiritual 
ideals  of  the  Divine  grace. 

By  the  Semitic  race — to  which  we  may  now 
confine  ourselves,  since  Israel  belonged  to  it — 
Deity  was  worshipped,  in  the  main,  as  the  god 
of  a  tribe.  Every  Semitic  tribe  had  its  own 
god;  it  would  appear  that  there  was  no  god 
without  a  tribe:  t  the  traces  of  belief  in  a  su- 
preme and  abstract  Deity  are  few  and  ineffectual. 
The  tribe  was  the  medium  by  which  the  god 
made  himself  known,  and  became  an  effective 
power  on  earth:  the  god  was  the  patron  of  the 
tribe,  the  supreme  magistrate  and  the  leader  in 
war.  The  piety  he  demanded  was  little  more 
than  loyalty  to  ritual;  the  morality  he  enforced 
was  only  a  matter  of  police.  He  took  no  cogni- 
sance of  the  character  or  inner  thoughts  of  the 
individual.  But  the  tribe  believed  him  to  stand 
in  very  close  connection  with  all  the  practical 
interests  of  their  common  life.     They  asked  of 

*  It  is  still  a  controversy  whether  the  original  meaning 
of  the  Semitic  root  KHN  is  prophet,  as  in  the  Arabic 
KaHiN,  or  priest,  as  in  the  Hebrew  KoHeN. 

t  Cf.  Jer.  li  10 :  "  For  pass  over  to  the  isles  of  Chittim; 
and  see  ;  and  send  unto  Kedar,  and  consider  diligently, 
and  see  if  there  be  such  a  thing.  Hath  a  nation  changed 
their  gods?"  From  the  isles  of  Chittim  unto  Kedar— the 
limits  of  the  Semitic  world. 


446 


THE   BOOK  OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


him  the  detection  of  criminals,  tlie  discovery  of 
lost  property,  the  settlement  of  civil  suits,  some- 
times when  the  crops  should  be  sown,  and  al- 
ways when  war  should  be  waged  and  by  what 

The  means  by  which  the  prophet  consulted  the 
Deity  on  these  subjects  were  for  the  most  part 
primitive  and  rude.  They  may  be  summed  up 
under  two  kinds:  Visions  either  through  falling 
into  ecstasy  or  by  dreaming  in  sleep,  and  Signs 
or  Omens.  Both  kinds  are  instanced  in  Balaam.* 
Of  the  signs  some  were  natural,  like  the  whis- 
per of  trees,  the  flight  of  birds,  the  passage  of 
clouds,  the  movement  of  stars.  Others  were 
artificial,  like  the  casting  or  drawing  of  lots. 
Others  were  between  these,  like  the  shape  as- 
sumed by  the  entrails  of  the  sacrificed  animals 
when  thrown  on  the  ground.  Again,  the 
prophet  was  often  obliged  to  do  something  won- 
derful in  the  people's  sight  in  order  to  convince 
them  of  his  authority.  In  Biblical  language  he 
had  to  work  a  miracle  or  give  a  sign.  One  in- 
stance throws  a  flood  of  light  on  this  habitual  ex- 
pectancy of  the  Semitic  mind.  There  was  once 
an  Arab  chief  who  wished  to  consult  a  distant 
soothsayer  as  to  the  guilt  of  a  daughter.  But 
before  he  would  trust  the  seer  to  give  him  the 
right  answer  to  such  a  question  he  made  him 
discover  a  grain  of  corn  which  he  had  concealed 
about  his  horse. f  He  required  the  physical  sign 
before  he  would  accept  the  moral  judgment. 

Now,  to  us,  the  crudeness  of  the  means  em- 
ployed, the  opportunities  of  fraud,  the  inade- 
quacy of  the  tests  for  spiritual  ends,  are  very 
obvious.  But  do  not  let  us,  therefore,  miss  the 
numerous  moral  opportunities  which  lay  before 
the  prophet  even  at  that  early  stage  of  his  evo- 
lution. He  was  trusted  to  speak  in  the  name 
of  Deity.  Through  him  men  believed  in  God 
and  in  the  possibility  of  a  revelation.  They 
sought  from  him  the  discrimination  of  evil  from 
good.  The  highest  possibilities  of  social  min- 
istry lay  open  to  him:  the  tribal  existence  often 
hung  on  his  word  for  peace  or  war;  he  was  the 
mouth  of  justice,  the  rebuke  of  evil,  the  charn- 
pion  of  the  wronged.  Where  such  opportunities 
were  present,  can  we  imagine  the  Spirit  of  God 
to  have  been  absent — the  Spirit  Who  seeks  men 
more  than  they  seek  Him,  and,  as  He  conde- 
scends to  use  their  poor  language  for  religion, 
must  also  have  stooped  to  the  picture  language, 
to  the  rude  instruments,  symbols  and  sacraments, 
of  their  early  faith? 

In  an  office  of  such  mingled  possibilities  every- 
thing depended — as  we  shall  find  it  depend  to 
fhe  very  end  of  prophecy — on  the  moral  insight 
and  character  of  the  prophet  himself,  on  his 
conception  of  God  and  whether  he  was  so  true 
to  this  as  to  overcome  his  professional  tempta- 
tions to  fraud  and  avarice,  malice  towards  in- 
dividuals, subservience  to  the  powerful,  or,  worst 
snares  of  all,  the  slothfulness  and  insincerity  of 
routine.  We  see  this  moral  issue  put  very  clearly 
in  such  a  story  as  that  of  Balaam,  or  in  such  a 
career  as  that  of  Mohammed. 

So  much  for  the  Semitic  soothsayer  in  general. 
Now  let  us  turn  to  Israel. 

Among  the  Hebrews  the  "man  of  God, "J  to  use 
his  widest  designation,  is  at  first  called  "  Seer,"  § 

•  Numbers  xxiv.  4,  "  falling  but  having  his  eyes  open." 
Ver.  I,  enchantments  ought  to  be  omens. 
t  Instanced  by  Wellhauaen,  "  Skizzen  u.  Vorarb.,"  No.  v. 


or  "  Gazer,"  *  the  word  which  Balaam  uses  of 
himself.  In  consulting  the  Divine  will  he  em- 
ploys the  same  external  means,  he  ofTers  the  peo- 
ple for  their  evidence  the  same  signs,  as  do  the 
seers  or  soothsayers  of  other  Semitic  tribes.  He 
gains  influence  by  the  miracles,  "  the  wonderful 
things,"  which  he  does.f  Moses  himself  is  rep- 
resented after  this  fashion.  He  meets  the  magi- 
cians of  Egypt  on  their  own  level.  His  use 
of  "rods";  the  holding  up  of  his  hands  that 
Israel  may  prevail  against  Amaleq:  Joshua's 
casting  of  lots  to  discover  a  criminal;  Samuel's 
dream  in  the  sanctuary;  his  discovery  for  a  fee 
of  the  lost  asses  of  Saul;  David  and  the  images 
in  his  house,  the  ephod  he  consulted;  the  sign 
to  go  to  battle  "  what  time  thou  hearest  the 
sound  of  a  going  in  the  tops  of  the  mulberry 
trees";  Solomon's  inducement  of  dreams  by 
sleeping  in  the  sanctuary  at  Gibeah, — these  are 
a  few  of  the  many  proofs  that  early  prophecy 
in  Israel  employed  not  only  the  methods  but 
even  much  of  the  furniture  of  the  kindred  Sem- 
itic religions.  But  then  those  tools  and  methods 
were  at  the  same  time  accompanied  by  the  noble 
opportunities  of  the  prophetic  office  to  which 
I  have  just  alluded — opportunities  of  religious 
and  social  ministry — and  still  more,  these  op- 
portunities were  at  the  disposal  of  moral  in- 
fluences which,  it  is  a  matter  of  history,  were 
not  found  in  any  other  Semitic  religion  than 
Israel's.  However  you  will  explain  it,  that  Di- 
vine Spirit,  which  we  have  felt  unable  to  con- 
ceive as  absent  from  any  Semitic  prophet  who 
truly  sought  after  God,  that  Light  which  light- 
eth  every  man  who  cometh  into  the  world,  was 
present  to  an  unparalleled  degree  with  the  early 
prophets  of  Israel.  He  came  to  individuals,  and 
to  the  nation  as  a  whole,  in  events  and  in  in- 
fluences which  may  be  summed  up  as  the  im- 
pression of  the  character  of  their  national  God, 
Jehovah:  to  use  Biblical  language,  as  "Jehovah's 
spirit  "  and  "  power."  It  is  true  that  in  many 
ways  the  Jehovah  of  early  Israel  reminds  us 
of  other  Semitic  deities.  Like  some  of  them 
He  appears  with  thunder  and  lightning;  like  all 
of  them  He  is  the  God  of  one  tribe  who  are 
His  peculiar  people.  He  bears  the  same  titles 
— Melek,  Adon,  Baal  ("  King,"  "  Lord,"  "  Pos- 
sessor"). He  is  propitiated  by  the  same  offer- 
ings. To  choose  one  striking  instance,  captives 
and  spoil  of  war  are  sacrificed  to  Him  with 
the  same  relentlessness,  and  by  a  process  which 
has  even  the  same  names  given  to  it,  as  in  the 
votive  inscriptions  of  Israel's  heathen  neigh- 
bours.t  Yet,  notwithstanding  all  these  elements, 
the  religion  of  Jehovah  from  the  very  first 
evinced,  by  the  confession  of  all  critics,  an  eth- 
ical force  shared  by  no  other  Semitic  creed. 
From  the  first  there  was  m  it  the  promise  and 
the  potency  of  that  sublime  monotheism,  which 
in  the  period  of  our  "  Twelve "  it  afterwards 
reached.§  Its  earliest  effects  of  course  were 
chiefly  political:  it  welded  the  twelve  tribes  into 
the  unity  of  a  nation;  it  preserved  them  as  one 
amid  the  many  temptations  to  scatter  along 
those    divergent    lines    of    culture    and    of    faith 

*  ^.t" 

+  Deut.  xiii.  i  ff.  admits  that  heathen  seers  were  able  to 
work  miracles  and  give  signs,  as  well  as  the  prophets  of 
Jehovah. 

X  Cf.  Mesha's  account  of  himself  and  Chemosh  on  the 
Moabite  Stone,  with  the  narrative  of  the  taking  of  Ai  in 
the  Book  of  Joshua. 

%  Cf.  Kuenen  :  "  Gesammelte  Abhandlungen"  (trans,  by 
Budde),  p.  461. 


THE    PROPHET    IN    EARLY    ISRAEL. 


447 


which  the  geography  of  their  country  placed  so 
attractively  before  them.*  It  taught  them  to 
prefer  religious  loyalty  to  material  advantage, 
and  so  inspired  them  with  high  motives  for  self- 
sacrifice  and  every  other  duty  of  patriotism.  But 
it  did  even  better  than  thus  teach  them  to  bear 
one  another's  burdens.  It  inspired  them  to 
care  for  one  another's  sins.  The  last  chapters 
of  the  Book  of  Judges  prove  how  strong  a 
national  conscience  there  was  in  early  Israel. 
Even  then  Israel  was  a  moral,  as  well  as  a  politi- 
cal, unity.  Gradually  there  grew  up*  but  still 
unwritten,  a  body  of  Torah,  or  revealed  law, 
which,  though  its  framework  was  the  common 
custom  of  the  Semitic  race,  was  inspired  by  ideals 
of  humanity  and  justice  not  elsewhere  in  that 
race  discernible  by  us. 

When  we  analyse  this  ethical  distinction  of 
early  Israel,  this  indubitable  progress  which  the 
nation  were  making  while  the  rest  of  their  world 
was  morally  stagnant,  we  find  it  to  be  due  to 
their  impressions  of  the  character  of  their  God. 
This  character  did  not  affect  them  as  Righteous- 
ness only.  At  first  it  was  even  a  more  wonder- 
ful Grace.  Jehovah  had  chosen  them  when  they 
were  no  people,  had  redeemed  them  from  servi- 
tude, had  brought  them  to  their  land;  had  borne 
with  their  stublaornness,  and  had  forgiven  their 
infidelities.  Such  a  Character  was  partly  mani- 
fest in  the  great  events  of  their  history,  and 
partly  communicated  itself  to  their  finest  person- 
alities— as  the  Spirit  of  God  does  communicate 
with  the  spirit  of  man  made  in  His  image. 
Those  personalities  were  the  early  prophets  from 
Moses  to  Samuel.  They  inspired  the  nation  to 
believe  in  God's  purposes  for  itself;  they  rallied 
it  to  war  for  the  common  faith,  and  war  was 
then  the  pitch  of  self-sacrifice;  they  gave  justice 
to  it  in  God's  name,  and  rebuked  its  sinfulness 
without  sparing.  Criticism  has  proved  that  we 
do  not  know  nearly  so  much  about  those  first 
prophets  as  perhaps  we  thought  we  did.  But 
under  their  God  they  made  Israel.  Out  of  their 
work  grew  the  monotheism  of  their  successors, 
whom  we  are  now  to  study,  and  later  the  Chris- 
tianity of  the  New  Testament.  For  myself  I 
cannot  but  believe  that  in  the  influence  of  Jeho- 
vah which  Israel  owned  in  those  early  times 
there  was  the  authentic  revelation  of  a  real 
Being. 

2.  From  Samuel  to  Elisha. 

Of  the  oldest  order  of  Hebrew  prophecy,  Sam- 
uel was  the  last  representative.  Till  his  time, 
we  are  told,  the  prophet  in  Israel  was  known 
as  the  Seer,f  but  now,  with  other  tempers  and 
other  habits,  a  new  order  appears  whose  name 
— and  that  means  to  a  certain  extent  their  spirit 
— is  to  displace  the  'older  name  and  the  older 
spirit. 

When  Samuel  anointed  Saul  he  bade  him,  for 
a  tign  that  he  was  chosen  of  the  Lord,  go  forth 
to  meet  "  a  company  of  prophets  " — Nebi'im,  the 
singular  is  Nabi' — coming  down  from  the  high 
place  or  sanctuary  with  viols,  drums  and  pipes, 
and  prophesying.  "  There,"  he  added,  "  the 
spirit  of  Jehovah  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  thou 
shalt  prophesy  with  them,  and  shalt  be  turned 
into  another  man."  So  it  happened;  and  the 
people  "  said  one  to  another.  What  is  this  that  is 
come  to  the  son  of  Kish?     Is  Saul  also  among 


♦  So  in  Deborah's  Song. 


1 1  Sam.  ix.  9. 


the  prophets?"*  Another  story,  probably  from 
another  source,  tells  us  that  later,  when  Saul 
sent  troops  ot  messengers  to  the  sanctuary  at 
Ramah  to  take  David,  they  saw  "  the  company 
of  prophets  prophesying  and  Samuel  standing 
appointed  over  them,  and  the  spirit  of  God  fell  " 
upon  one  after  another  of  the  troops;  as  upon 
Saul  himself  when  he  followed  them  up.  "  And 
he  stripped  off  his  clothes  also,  and  prophesied 
before  Samuel  in  like  manner,  and  lay  down 
naked  all  that  day  and  all  that  night.  Wherefore 
they  say.  Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets?  "f 

All  this  is  very  different  from  the  habits  of 
the  Seer,  who  had  hitherto  represented  prophecy. 
He  was  solitary,  but  these  went  about  in  bands. 
They  were  filled  with  an  infectious  enthusiasm, 
by  which  they  excited  each  other  and  all  sensi- 
tive persons  whom  they  touched.  They  stirred 
up  this  enthusiasm  by  singing,  playing  upon  in- 
struments, and  dancing:  its  results  were  frensy, 
the  tearing  of  their  clothes,  and  prostration. 
The  same  phenomena  have  appeared  in  every  re- 
ligion— in  Paganism  often,  and  several  times 
within  Christianity.  They  may  be  watched  to- 
day among  the  dervishes  of  Islam,  who  by  sing- 
ing (as  one  has  seen  them  in  Cairo),  by  sway- 
ing of  their  bodies,  by  repeating  the  Divine 
Name,  and  dwelling  on  the  love  and  ineffable 
power  of  God,  work  themselves  into  an  excite- 
ment which  ends  in  prostration  and  often  in 
insensibility.:]:  The  whole  process  is  due  to  an 
overpowering  sense  of  the  Deity — crude  and  un- 
intelligent if  you  will,  but  sincere  and  authentic 
— which  seems  to  haunt  the  early  stages  of  all 
religions,  and  to  linger  to  the  end  with  the 
stagnant  and  unprogressive.  The  appearance  of 
this  prophecy  in  Israel  has  given  rise  to  a  con- 
troversy as  to  whether  it  was  purely  a  native 
product,  or  was  induced  by  infection  from  the 
Canaanite  tribes  around.  Such  questions  are  of 
little  interest  in  face  of  these  facts:  that  the  ec- 
stasy sprang  up  in  Israel  at  a  time  when  the 
spirit  of  the  people  was  stirred  against  the  Phil- 
istines, and  patriotism  and  religion  were  equally 
excited;  that  it  is  represented  as  due  to  the 
Spirit  of  Jehovah;  and  that  the  last  of  the  old 
order  of  Jehovah's  prophets  recognised  its  har- 
mony with  his  own  dispensation,  presided  over 
it,  and  gave  Israel's  first  king  as  one  of  his  signs, 
that  he  should  come  under  its  power.  These 
things  being  so,  it  is  surprising  that  a  recent 
critic  §  should  have  seen  in  the  dancing  prophets 
nothing  but  eccentrics  into  whose  company  it 
was  shame  for  so  good  a  man  as  Saul  to  fall.  He 
reaches  this  conclusion  only  by  supposing  that 
the  reflexive  verb  used  for  their  "  prophesying  " 
— hithmbbe' — had  at  this  time  that  equivalence  to 
mere  madness  to  which  it  was  reduced  by  the 
excesses  of  later  generations  of  prophets.  With 
Samuel  we  feel  that  the  word  had  no  reproach: 
the  Nebi'im  were  recognised  by  him  as  stand- 
ing in  the  prophetical  succession.  They  sprang 
up  in  sympathy  with  a  national /movement.  The 
king  who  joined  himself  to  them  was  the  same 
who  sternly  banished  from  Israel  all  the  baser 

*i  Sam.  X.  1-16,  xi.  i-ii,  15.  Chap.  x.  17-27,  xi.  12-14, 
belong  to  other  and  later  documents.  C/.  Robertson 
Smith,  "  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,"  135  ff. 

+  I  Sam.  six.  20-24. 

t  What  seemed  most  to  induce  the  frensy  of  the  der- 
vishes whom  I  watched  was  the  fixing  of  their  attention 
upon,  the  yearning  of  their  minds  after,  the  love  of  God. 
"  Ya  habeebi  !  " — "O  my  beloved  '."—they  cried. 

jiCornill,  in  the  first  of  his  lectures  on  "  Der  Israelitische 
Prophetismus,"  one  of  the  very  best  popular  studies  of 
prophecy,  by  a  master  on  the  subject.     See  p.  73  n. 


448 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


forms  of  soothsaying  and  traffic  with  the  dead. 
But,  indeed,  we  need  no  other  proof  than  this: 
the  name  Nebi'im  so  establishes  itself  in  the 
popular  regard  that  it  displaces  the  older  names 
of  Seer  and  Gazer,  and  becomes  the  classical 
term  for  the  whole  body  of  prophets  from  Moses 
to  Malachi. 

There  was  one  very  remarkable  change  ef- 
fected by  this  new  order  of  prophets,  probably 
the  very  greatest  relief  which  prophecy  expe- 
rienced in  the  course  of  its  evolution.  This  was 
separation  from  the  ritual  and  from  the  im- 
plements of  soothsaying.  Samuel  had  been  both 
priest  and  prophet.  But  after  him  the  names 
and  the  duties  were  specialised,  though  the  spe- 
cialising was  incomplete.  While  the  new 
Nebi'im  remained  in  connection  with  the  ancient 
centres  of  religion,  they  do  not  appear  to  have 
exercised  any  part  of  the  ritual.  The  priests,  on 
the  other  hand,  did  not  confine  themselves  to 
sacrifice,  and  other  forms  of  public  worship,  but 
exercised  many  of  the  so-called  prophetic  func- 
tions. They  also,  as  Rosea  tells  us,  were  ex- 
pected to  give  Toroth — revelations  of  the  Divine 
will  on  points  of  conduct  and  order.  There  re- 
mained with  them  the  ancient  forms  of  oracle 
— the  Ephod,  or  plated  image,  the  Teraphim, 
the  lot,  and  the  Urim  and  Thummim,*  all  of 
these  apparently  still  regarded  as  indispensable 
elements  of  religion. f  From  such  rude  forms  of 
ascertaining  the  Divine  Will,  prophecy  in  its 
new  order  was  absolutely  free.  And  it  was  free 
of  the  ritual  of.  the  sanctuaries.  As  has  been 
justly  remarked,  the  ritual  of  Israel  always  re- 
mained a  peril  to  the  people,  the  peril  of  relaps- 
ing into  Paganism.  Not  only  did  it  materialise 
faith  and  engross  affections  in  the  worshipper 
which  were  meant  for  moral  objects,  but  very 
many  of  its  forms  were  actually  the  same  as 
those  of  the  other  Semitic  religions,  and  it 
tempted  its  devotees  to  the  confusion  of  their 
God  with  the  gods  of  the  heathen.  Prophecy 
was  now  wholly  independent  of  it,  and  we  may 
see  in  such  independence  the  possibility  of  all 
the  subsequent  career  of  prophecv  along  moral 
and  spiritual  lines.  Amos  absolutely  condemns 
the  ritual,  and  Hosea  brings  the  message  from 
God,  "  I  will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice." 
This  is  the  distinctive  glory  of  prophecy  in  that 
era  ir»  which  we  are  to  study  it.  But  do  not 
let  us  forget  that  it  became  possible  through 
the  ecstatic  Nebi'im  of  Samuel's  time,  and 
through  their  separation  from  the  national  ritual 
and  the  material  forms  of  soothsaying.  It  is 
the  way  of  Providence  to  prepare  for  the  revela- 
tion of  great  moral  truths,  by  the  enfranchise- 
ment, sometimes  centuries  before,  of  an  order 
or  a  nation  of  men  from  political  or  professional 
interests  which  would  have  rendered  it  impos- 
sible for  their  descendants  to  appreciate  those 
truths  without  prejudice  or  compromise. 

We  may  conceive  then  of  these  Nebi'im,  these 
prophets,  as  enthusiasts  for  Jehovah  and  for 
Israel.  For  Jehovah — if  to-day  we  see  men  cast 
by  the  adoration  of  the  despot-deity  of  Islam 
into  transports  so  excessive  that  they  lose 
all  consciousness  of  earthly  things  and  fall  into 

♦It  is  now  past  doubt  that  the.se  were  two  sacred 
stones  used  for  decision  in  the  case  of  an  alternative 
issue.  This  is  plain  from  the  amended  reading  of  Saul's 
prayer  in  i  Sam  xiv.  41,  42  (after  the  LXX.)  :  "  O  Jehovah 
God  of  Israel,  wherefore  hast  Thou  not  answered  Thy 
servant  this  day  ?  If  the  iniquity  be  in  me  or  in  Jonathan 
my  son,  O  Jehovah  God  of  Israel,  give  Urim  :  and  if  it  be 
in  Thy  people  Israel,  give,  I  pray  Thee.  Thummim." 

+  Hosea  iii.  4.    See  next  chapter,  p.  451. 


a  trance,  can  we  not  imagine  a  like  effect  pro- 
duced on  the  same  sensitive  natures  of  the  East 
by  the  contemplation  of  such  a  God  as  Jehovah, 
so  mighty  in  earth  and  heaven,  so  faithful  to 
His  people,  so  full  of  grace?  Was  not  such  an 
ecstasy  of  worship  most  likely  to  be  born  of 
the  individual's  ardent  devotion  in  the  hour  of 
the  nation's  despair?  *  Of  course  there  would  be 
swept  up  by  such  a  movement  all  the  more 
volatile  and  unbalanced  minds  of  the  day — as 
these  always  have  been  swept  up  by  any  power- 
ful religious  excitement — but  that  is  not  to  dis- 
credit the  sincerity  of  the  main  volume  of  the 
feeling  nor  its  authenticity  as  a  work  of  the  Spirit 
of  God,  as  the  impression  of  the  character  and 
power  of  Jehovah. 

But  these  ecstatics  were  also  enthusiasts  for 
Israel;  and  this  saved  the  movement  from  mor- 
bidness. They  worshipped  God  neither  out  of 
sheer  physical  sympathy  with  nature,  like  the 
Phoenician  devotees  of  Adonis  or  the  Greek 
Bacchantes;  nor  out  of  terror  at  the  approach- 
ing end  of  all  things,  like  some  of  the  ecstatic 
sects  of  the  Middle  Ages;  nor  out  of  a  selfish 
passion  for  their  own  salvation,  like  so  many 
a  modern  Christian  fanatic;  but  in  sympathy 
with  their  nation's  aspirations  for  freedom  and 
her  whole  political  life.  They  were  enthusiasts 
for  their  people.  The  ecstatic  prophet  was  not 
confined  to  his  body  nor  to  nature  for  the  im- 
p  -Ises  of  Deity.  Israel  was  his  body,  his  atmos^ 
phere,  his  universe.  Through  it  all  he  felt  the 
thrill  of  Deity.  Confine  religion  to  the  personalj 
it  grows  rancid,  morbid.  Wed  it  to  patriotism, 
it  lives  in  the  open  air  and  its  blood  is  pure. 
So  in  days  of  national  danger  the  Nebi'im 
would  be  inspired  like  Saul  to  battle  for  their 
country's  freedom;  in  more  settled  times  they 
would  be  lifted  to  the  responsibilities  of  educat- 
ing the  people,  counselling  the  governors,  and 
preserving  the  national  traditions.  This  is  what 
actually  took  place.  After  the  critical  period  of 
Saul's  time  has  passed,  the  prophets  still  remain 
enthusiasts;  but  they  are  enthusiasts  for  affairs. 
They  counsel  and  they  rebuke  David. f  They 
warn  Rehoboam,  and  they  excite  Northern 
Israel  to  revolt. t  They  overthrow  and  they  set 
up  dynasties.^  They  offer  the  king  advice  on 
campaigns.!  Like  Elijah,  they  take  up  against 
the  throne  the  cause  of  the  oppressed;  II  like 
Elisha,  they  stand  by  the  throne  its  most  trusted 
counsellors  in  peace  and  war.**  That  all  this 
is  no  new  order  of  prophecy  in  Israel,  but  the 
developed  form  of  the  ecstacy  of  Samuel's  day, 
is  plain  from  the  continuance  of  the  name 
Nebi'im  and  from  these  two  facts  besides:  that 
the  ecstasy  survives  and  that  the  prophets  still 
live  in  communities.  The  greatest  figures  of  the 
period,  Elijah  and  Elisha,  have  upon  them  "  the 
hand  of  the  Lord,"  as  the  influence  is  now  called: 
Elijah  when  he  runs  before  Ahab's  chariot  across 
Esdraelon,  Elisha  when  by  music  he  induces 
upon  himself  the  prophetic  mood. ft  Another 
ecstatic  figure  is  the  prophet  who  was  sent  to 
anoint  Jehu;  he  swept  in  and  he  swept  out  again, 
and  the  soldiers  called  him  "  that  mad  fellow."  tt 

*  Cf.  Deut.  xxviil.  34. 
+  2  Sam.  xii.  i  ff. 

$  I  Kings  xi.  29  ;  xii.  22._  ,        v         •        a 

§  I  Kings  xiv.  2,  7-11 ;  xix.  15  f. ;  2  Kings  ix.  3  ff. 
II  I  Kings  xxii.  5  flf.  ;  2  Kings  111.  11  ff. 
i[  I  Kings  xxi.  i  ff. 
**  2  Kings  vi.-viii.,  etc. 
H     I  Kings  xviii.  46  ;  2  Kings  iii.  15. 

X%  2  Kings  ix.  11.    Mad  fellow,  not  necessarily  a  term  ot 
reproach. 


THE    PROPHET    IN    EARLY    ISRAEL. 


449 


But  the  roving  bands  had  settled  down  into 
more  or  less  stationary  communities,  who  partly 
lived  by  agriculture  and  partly  by  the  alms  of 
the  people  or  the  endowments  of  the  crown.* 
Their  centres  were  either  the  centres  of  national 
worship,  like  Bethel  and  Gilgal,  or  the  centres 
of  government,  like  Samaria,  where  the  dynasty 
of  Omri  supported  prophets  both  of  Baal  and 
of  Jehovah. f  They  were  called  prophets,  but 
also  "  sons  of  the  prophets,"  the  latter  name 
not  because  their  office  was  hereditary,  but  by 
the  Oriental  fashion  of  designating  every  mem- 
ber of  a  guild  as  the  son  of  the  guild.  In  many 
cases  the  son  may  have  succeeded  his  father;  but 
the  ranks  could  be  recruited  from  outside,  as 
we  see  in  the  case  of  the  young  farmer  Elisha, 
whom  Elijah  anointed  at  the  plough.  They 
probably  all  wore  the  mantle  which  is  distinctive 
of  some  of  them,  the  mantle  of  hair,  or  skin  of 
a   beast,  t 

The  risks  of  degeneration,  to  which  this  order 
of  prophecy  was  liable,  arose  both  from  its  ec- 
static temper  and  from  its  connection  with  public 
affairs. 

Religious  ecstasy  is  always  dangerous  to  the 
moral  and  intellectual  interests  of  religion.  The 
largest  prophetic  figures  of  the  period,  though 
they  feel  the  ecstasy,  attain  their  greatness  by  ris- 
ing superior  to  it.  Elijah's  raptures  are  impres- 
sive; but  nobler  are  his  defence  of  Naboth  and 
his  denunciation  of  Ahab.  And  so  Elisha's  in- 
ducement of  the  prophetic  mood  by  music  is  the 
least  attractive  element  in  his  career:  his  great- 
ness lies  in  his  combination  of  the  care  of  souls 
with  political  insight  and  vigilance  for  the  na- 
tional interests.  Doubtless  there  were  many  of 
the  sons  of  the  prophets  who  with  smaller  abili- 
ties cultivated  a  religion  as  rational  and  moral. 
But  for  the  herd  ecstasy  would  be  everything. 
It  was  so  easily  induced  or  imitated  that  much 
of  it  cannot  have  been  genuine.  Even  where 
the  feeling  was  at  first  sincere  we  can  under- 
stand how  readily  it  became  morbid;  how  fatally 
it  might  fall  into  sympathy  with  that  drunken- 
ness from  wine  and  that  sexual  passion  which 
Israel  saw  already  cultivated  as  worship  by  the 
surrounding  Canaanites.  We  must  feel  these 
dangers  of  ecstasy  if  we  would  understand  why 
Amos  cut  himself  off  from  the  Nebi'im,  and  why 
Hosea  laid  such  emphasis  on  the  moral  and 
intellectual  sides  of  religion:  "  My  people  per- 
ish for  lack  of  knowledge."  Hosea  indeed  con- 
sidered the  degeneracy  of  ecstasy  as  a  judgment: 
■■  the  prophet  is  a  fool,  the  man  of  the  spirit  is 
mad — for  the  multitude  of  thine  iniquity. "§  A 
later  age  derided  the  ecstatics,  and  took  one  of 
the  forms  of  the  verb  "  to  prophesy  "  as  equiva- 
lent to  the  verb  "  to  be  mad."  || 

But  temptations  as  gross  beset  the  prophet 
from  that  which  should  have  been  the  discipline 
of  his  ecstasy — his  connection  with  public  af- 
fairs. Only  some  prophets  were  brave  rebukers 
of  the  king  and  the  people.  The  herd  which 
fed  at  the  royal  table — four  hundred  under  Ahab 
— were  flatterers,  who  could  not  tell  the  truth, 
who  said  Peace,  peace,  when  there  was  no  peace. 
These  were  false  prophets.     Yet  it  is  curious  that 

*  I  Kings  xviii.  4,  cf.  19  ;  2  Kings  ii.  3,  5  ;  iv.  38-44  ;  v.  20  ff.  : 
vi.  I  ff.  ;  viii.  8  f.,  etc. 

1 1  Kings  xviii.  iq  ;  xxii.  6. 

X  So  Elijah,  2  Kings  i.  8  :  cf.  John  the  Baptist,  Matt.  iii.  4. 

§  Hosea  ix.  7. 

I  Jer.  xxix.  26 :  "  Every  man  that  is  mad,  and  worketh 
himself  into  prophecy  "  (XQJDD.  the  same  form  as  is  used 
without  moral  reproach  in  i  Sam.  x.  10  ff.). 
29— Vol.  ^V- 


the  very  early  narrative  which  describes  them  * 
does  not  impute  their  falsehood  to  any  base  mo- 
tives of  their  own,  but  to  the  direct  inspiration 
of  God,  who  sent  forth  a  lying  spirit  upon  them. 
So  great  was  the  reverence  still  for  the  "  man 
of  the  spirit"!  Rather  than  doubt  his  inspira- 
tion, they  held  his  very  lies  to  be  inspired.  One 
does  not  of  course  mean  that  these  consenting 
prophets  were  conscious  liars;  but  that  their  de- 
pendence on  the  king,  their  servile  habits  of 
speech,  disabled  them  from  seeing  the  truth. 
Subserviency  to  the  powerful  was  their  great 
temptation.  In  the  story  of  Balaam  we  see  con- 
fessed the  base  instinct  that  he  who  paid  the 
prophet  should  have  the  word  of  the  prophet  in 
his  favour.  In  Israel  prophecy  went  through 
exactly  the  same  struggle  between  the  claims  of 
its  God  and  the  claims  of  its  patrons.  Nor  were 
those  patrons  always  the  rich.  The  bulk  of  the 
prophets  were  dependent  on  the  charitable  gifts 
of  the  common  people,  and  in  this  we  may  find 
reason  for  that  subjection  of  so  many  of  them 
to  the  vulgar  ideals  of  the  national  destiny,  to 
signs  of  which  we  are  pointed  by  Amos.  The 
priest  at  Bethel  only  reflects  public  opinion  when 
he  takes  for  granted  that  the  prophet  is  a  thor- 
oughly mercenary  character:  "  Seer,  get  thee 
gone  to  the  land  of  Judah:  eat  there  thy  bread, 
and  play  the  prophet  there!  "f  No  wonder 
Amos  separates  'himself  from  such  hireling 
craftsmen! 

Such  was  the  course  of  prophecy  up  to  Elisha, 
and  the  borders  of  the  eighth  century.  We  have 
seen  how  even  for  the  ancient  prophet,  mere 
soothsayer  though  we  might  regard  him  in  re- 
spect of  the  rude  instruments  of  his  ofifice,  there 
were  present  moral  opportunities  of  the  highest 
kind,  from  which,  if  he  only  proved  true  to 
them,  we  cannot  conceive  the  Spirit  of  God  to 
have  been  absent.  In  early  Israel  we  are  sure 
that  the  Spirit  did  meet  such  strong  and  pure 
characters,  from  Moses  to  Samuel,  creating  by 
their  means  the  nation  of  Israel,  welding  it  to 
a  unity,  which  was  not  only  political  but  moral 
— and  moral  to  a  degree  not  elsewhere  realised 
in  the  Semitic  world.  We  saw  how  a  new  race 
of  prophets  arose  under  Samuel,  separate  from 
the  older  forms  of  prophecy  by  lot  and  oracle, 
separate,  too,  from  the  ritual  as  a  whole;  and 
therefore  free  for  a  moral  and  spiritual  advance 
of  which  the  priesthood,  still  bound  to  images 
and  the  ancient  rites,  proved  themselves  incapa- 
ble. But  this  new  order  of  prophecy,  besides  its 
moral  opportunities,  had  also  its  moral  perils: 
its  ecstasy  was  dangerous,  its  connection  with 
public  affairs  was  dangerous  too.  Again,  the  test 
was  the  personal  character  of  the  prophet  him- 
self. And  so  once  more  we  see  raised  above  the 
herd  great  personalities,  who  carry  forward  the 
work  of  their  predecessors.  The  results  are,  be- 
sides the  discipline  of  the  monarchy  and  the  de- 
fence of  justice  and  the  poor,  the  firm  establish- 
ment of  Jehovah  as  the  one  and  only  God  of 
Israel,  and  the  impression  on  Israel  both  of  His 
omnipotent  guidance  of  them  in  the  past  and  of 
a  worldwide  destiny,  still  vague  but  brilliant, 
which  He  had  prepared  for  them  in  the  future. 

This  brings  us  to  Elisha,  and  from  Elisha  there 
are  but  forty  years  to  Amos.  During  those  forty 
years,  however,  there  arose  within  Israel  a  new 
civilisation;  beyond  her  there  opened  up  a  new 
world;   and  with   Assyria  there   entered  the   re- 


♦  I  Kings  xxii. 


t  Amos  vii.  13. 


45° 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


sources  of  Providence,  a  new  power.  It  was 
these  three  facts — the  New  Civilisation,  the  New 
World,  and  the  New  Power — which  made  the 
difference  between  Elisha  and  Amos,  and  raised 
prophecy  from  a  national  to  a  universal  religion. 


CHAPTER  HI. 
THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY  IN  ISRAEL. 

The  long  life  of  Elisha  fell  to  its  rest  on  the 
margin  of  the  eighth  century.*  He  had  seen 
much  evil  upon  Israel.  The  people  were  smitten 
in  all  their  coasts.  None  of  their  territory  across 
Jordan  was  left  to  them;  and  not  only  Hazael 
and  his  Syrians,  but  bands  of  their  own  former 
subjects,  the  Moabites,  periodically  raided 
Western  Palestine,  up  to  the  very  gates  of  Sa- 
maria.f  Such  a  state  of  aflfairs  determined  the 
activity  of  the  last  of  the  older  prophets.  Elisha 
spent  his  life  in  the  duties  of  the  national  de- 
fence, and  in  keeping  alive  the  spirit  of  Israel 
against  her  foes.  When  he  died  they  called  him 
"  Israel's  chariot  and  the  horsemen  thereof,"  t 
so  incessant  had  been  both  his  military  vig- 
ilance §  and  his  political  insight. ||  But  Elisha 
was  able  to  leave  behind  him  the  promise  of  a 
new  day  of  victory.^  It  was  in  the  peace  and 
liberty  of  this  day  that  Israel  rose  a  step  in  civi- 
lisation; that  prophecy,  released  from  the  defence, 
became  the  criticism,  of  the  national  life;  and 
that  the  people,  no  longer  absorbed  in  their  own 
borders,  looked  out,  and  for  the  first  time  real- 
ised the  great  world,  of  which  they  were  only 
a  part. 

King  Joash,  whose  arms  the  dying  Elisha  had 
blessed,  won  back  in  the  sixteen  years  of  his 
reign  (798-783)  the  cities  which  the  Syrians  had 
taken  from  his  father.**  His  successor,  Jero- 
boam II.,  capie  in,  therefore,  with  a  flowing  tide. 
He  was  a  strong  man,  and  he  took  advantage  of 
it.  During  his  long  reign  of  about  forty  years 
(783-74.3)  he  restored  the  border  of  Israel  from 
the  Pass  of  Hamath  between  the  Lebanons  to 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  occupied  at  least  part  of  the 
territory  of  Damascus. ft  This  means  that  the 
constant  raids  to  which  Israel  had  been  sub- 
jected now  ceased,  and  that  by  the  time  of  Amos, 
about  755,  a  generation  was  grown  up  who  had 
not  known  defeat,  and  the  most  of  whom  had 
perhaps  no  experience  even  of  war. 

Along  the  same  length  of  years  Uzziah  (circa 
778-740)  had  dealt  similarly  with  Judah.$|  He 
had  pushed  south  to  the  Red  Sea,  while  Jero- 
boam pushed  north  to  Hamath:  and  while  Jero- 
boam had  taken  the  Syrian  towns  he  had  crushed 
the  Philistine.  He  had  reorganised  the  army, 
and  invented  new  engines  of  siege  for  casting 
stones.  On  such  of  his  frontiers  as  were  op- 
posed to  the  desert  he  had  built  towers:  there 
is  no  better  means  of  keeping  the  nomads  in 
subjection. 

All  this  meant  such  security  across  broad  Is- 
rael as  had  not  been  known  since  the  glorious 
days  of  Solomon.  Agriculture  must  everywhere 
have  revived:  Uzziah,  the  Chronicler  tells  us, 
"  loved  husbandry."  But  we  hear  most  of  Trade 
and  Building.     With  quarters  in  Damascus  and 

*  He  died  in  798  or  7Q7.  §  vi.  12  ff.,  etc. 

■fa  Kings  X.  32,  xiii.  20,  22.  II  viii.,  etc. 

t  2  Kings  xiii.  14.  fxiii.  17!!. 

**2  Kings  xiii.  23-25. 

tt  xiv.  28,  if  not  Damascus  itself. 

ti  2  Kings  XV.  :  c/.  2  Chron.  xxvi. 


a  port  on  the  Red  Sea,  with  allies  in  the 
Phoenician  towns  and  tributaries  in  the  Philis- 
tine, with  command  of  all  the  main  routes  be- 
tween Egypt  and  the  North  as  between  the 
Desert  and  the  Levant,  Israel,  during  those  forty 
years  of  Jeroboam  and  Uzziah,  must  have  be- 
come a  busy  and  a  wealthy  commercial  power. 
Hosea  calls  the  Northern  Kingdom  a  very  Ca- 
naan * — Canaanite  being  the  Hebrew  term  for 
trader — as  we  should  say  a  very  Jew;  and  Amos 
exposes  all  the  restlessness,  the  greed,  and  the 
indifiference  to  the  poor  of  a  community  making 
haste  to  be  rich.  The  first  effect  of  this  was  a 
large  increase  of  the  towns  and  of  town-life. 
Every  document  of  the  time — up  to  720 — speaks 
to  us  of  its  buildings. t  In  ordinary  building 
houses  of  ashlar  seem  to  be  novel  enough  to  be 
mentioned.  Vast  palaces — the  name  of  them 
first  heard  of  in  Israel  under  Omri  and  his 
Phoenician  alliance,  and  then  only  as  that  of  the 
king's  citadel  t — are  now  built  by  wealthy 
grandees  out  of  money  extorted  from  the  poor; 
they  can  have  risen  only  since  the  Syrian  wars. 
There  are  summer  houses  in  addition  to  winter 
houses;  and  it  is  not  only  the  king,  as  in  the 
days  of  Ahab,  who  furnishes  his  buildings  with 
ivory.  When  an  earthquake  comes  and  whole 
cities  are  overthrown,  the  vigour  and  wealth  of 
the  people  are  such  that  they  build  more  strongly 
and  lavishly  than  before. §  With  all  this  we 
have  the  characteristic  tempers  and  moods  of 
city-life:  the  fickleness  and  liability  to  panic 
which  are  possible  only  where  men  are  gathered 
in  crowds;  the  luxury  and  false  art  which  are 
engendered  only  by  artificial  conditions  of  life; 
the  deep  poverty  which  in  all  cities,  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  time,  lurks  by  the  side 
of  the  most  brilliant  wealth,  its  dark  and  inevita- 
ble shadow. 

In  short,  in  the  half-century  between  Elisha 
and  Amos,  Israel  rose  from  one  to  another  of  the 
great  stages  of  culture.  Till  the  eighth  century 
they  had  been  but  a  kingdom  of  fighting  hus- 
bandmen. Under  Jeroboam  and  Uzziah  city-life 
was  developed,  and  civilisation,  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word,  appeared.  Only  once  before 
had  Israel  taken  so  large  a  step:  when  they 
crossed  Jordan,  leaving  the  nomadic  life  for  the 
agricultural;  and  that  had  been  momentous  for 
their  religion.  They  came  among  new  tempta- 
tions: the  use  of  wine,  and  the  shrines  of  local 
gods  who  were  believed  to  have  more  influence 
on  the  fertility  of  the  land  than  Jehovah  who 
had  conquered  it  for  His  people.  But  now  this 
further  step,  from  the  agricultural  stage  to  the 
mercantile  and  civil,  was  equally  fraught  with 
danger.  There  was  the  closer  intercourse  with 
foreign  nations  and  their  cults.  There  were  all 
the  temptations  of  rapid  wealth,  all  the  dangers 
of  an  equally  increasing  poverty.  The  growth 
of  comfort  among  the  rulers  meant  the  growth 
of  thoughtlessness.  Cruelty  multiplied  with  re- 
finement. The  upper  classes  were  lifted  away 
from  feeling  the  real  woes  of  the  people.     There 

*xii.  7  (Heb.  ver.  8).  Trans.,  "As  for  Canaan,  the 
balances,"  etc. 

t  Amos,  passim.  Hosea  viii.  14,  etc. ;  Micah  111.  12  ;  Isa. 
ix.  10. 

tpDIX,  a  word  not  found  in  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua, 
Judges,  or  Samuel,  is  used  in  i  Kings  xvi.  18,  2  Kings  xv. 
25,  for  a  citadel  within  the  palace  of  the  kmg.  Similarly 
in  Isa.  XXV.  2  ;  Prov.  xviii.  iq.  But  in  Amos  generally  of 
any  large  or  grand  house.  That  the  name  first  appears  in 
the  time  of  Omri's  alliance  with  Tyre,  points  to  a  Phoeni- 
cian origin.    Probably  from  root  DIN.  "to  ^^  high." 

$  Isa.  ix.  10. 


THE    EIGHTH    CENTURY    IN    ISRAEL. 


45 » 


was  a  well-fed  and  sanguine  patriotism,  but  at 
the  expense  of  indifference  to  social  sin  and 
want.  Religious  zeal  and  liberality  increased, 
but  they  were  coupled  with  all  the  proud's  mis- 
understanding of  God:  an  optimist  faith  without 
moral  insight  or  sympathy. 

It  is  all  this  which  makes  the  prophets  of  the 
eighth  century  so  modern,  whUe  Elisha's  life  is 
still  so  ancient.  With  him  we  are  back  in  the 
times  of  our  own  border  wars — of  Wallace  and 
Bruce,  with  their  struggles  for  the  freedom  of 
the  soil.  With  Amos  we  stand  among  the  con- 
ditions of  our  own  day.  The  City  has  arisen. 
For  the  development  of  the  highest  form  of 
prophecy,  the  universal  and  permanent  form, 
there  was  needed  that  marvellously  unchanging 
mould  of  human  life,  whose  needs  and  sorrows, 
whose  sins  and  problems,  are  to-day  the  same 
as  they  were  all  those  thousands  of  years  ago. 

With  Civilisation  came  Literature.  The  long 
peace  gave  leisure  for  writing;  and  the  just  pride 
of  the  people  in  boundaries  broad  as  Solomon's 
own,  determined  that  this  writing  should  take  the 
form  of  heroic  history.  In  the  parallel  reigns 
of  Jeroboam  and  Uzziah  many  critics  have 
placed  the  great  epics  of  Israel:  the  earlier  docu- 
ments of  our  Pentateuch  which  trace  God's  pur- 
poses to  mankind  by  Israel,  from  the  creation  of 
the  world  to  the  settlement  of  the  Promised 
Land;  the  histories  which  make  up  our  Books 
of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings.  But  whether  all 
these  were  composed  now  or  at  an  earlier  date, 
it  is  certain  that  the  nation  lived  in  the  spirit 
of  them,  proud  of  its  past,  aware  of  its  vocation, 
and  confident  that  its  God,  who  had  created  the 
world  and  so  mightily  led  itself,  would  bring  it 
from  victory  by  victory  to  a  complete  triumph 
over  the  heathen.  Israel  of  the  eighth  century 
were  devoted  to  Jehovah;  and  although  passion 
or  self-interest  might  lead  individuals  or  even 
communities  to  worship  other  gods.  He  had  no 
possible  rival  upon  the  throne  of  the  nation. 

As  they  delighted  to  recount  His  deeds  by  their 
fathers,  so  they  thronged  the  scenes  of  these  with 
sacrifice  and  festival.  Bethel  and  Beersheba, 
Dan  and  Gilgal,  were  the  principal;*  but  Aliz- 
peh,  the  top  of  Tabor,f  and  Carmel.t  perhaps 
Penuel,^  were  also  conspicuous  among  the 
countless  "  high  places"!  of  the  land.  Of  those 
in  Northern  Israel  Bethel  was  the  chief.  It  en- 
joyed the  proper  site  for  an  ancient  shrine, 
which  was  nearly  always  a  market  as  well — near 
a  frontier  and  where  many  roads  converged; 
where  traders  from  the  East  could  meet  half- 
way with  traders  from  the  West,  the  wool- 
growers  of  Moab  and  the  Judaean  desert  with 
the  merchants  of  Phoenicia  and  the  Philistine 
coast.  Here,  on  the  spot  on  which  the  father 
of  the  nation  had  seen  heaven  open,*^  a  great 
temple  was  now  built,  with  a  priesthood  en- 
dowed and  directed  by  the  crown,**  but  lavishly 
supported  also  by  the  tithes  and  free-will  offer- 

*  I  Kings  xii.  25  ff.,  and  Amos  and  Hosea  passim. 

t  Hosea  v.  i. 

+  I  Kings  xviii.  30  ff. 

§1  Kings  xii.  25. 

P  Originally  so  called  from  their  elevation  (though 
Dftener  on  the  flank  than  on  the  summit  of  a  hill) ;  but 
like  the  name  High  Street  or  the  Scotti.sh  High  Kirk,  the 
term  came  to  be  dissociated  from  physical  height  and 
was  applied  to  anj'  sanctuary,  even  in  a  hollow,  like  so 
many  of  the  sacred  wells. 

1^  The  sanctuary  itself  was  probably  on  the  present  site 
if  the  Burj  Beitin  (with  the  ruins  of  an  early  Christian 
Church),  some  few  minutes  to  the  southeast  of  the  present 
village  of  Beitin,  which  probably  represents  the  city  of 
Bethel  that  was  called  Luz  at  the  first. 

**  I  Kings  xii.  25  fl.  ;  Amos  vii. 


ings  of  the  people.*  "  It  is  a  sanctuary  of  the 
king  and  a  house  of  the  kingdom."!  Jeroboam 
had  ordained  Dan,  at  the  other  end  of  the  king- 
dom, to  be  the  fellow  of  Bethel  ;t  but  Dan  was 
far  away  from  the  bulk  of  the  people,  and  in 
the  eighth  century  Bethel's  real  rival  was  Gil- 
gal.^ Whether  this  was  the  Gilgal  by  Jericho, 
or  the  other  Gilgal  on  the  Samarian  hills  near 
Shiloh,  is  uncertain.  The  latter  had  been  a 
sanctuary  in  Elijah's  day,  with  a  settlement  of 
the  prophets;  but  the  former  must  have  proved 
the  greater  attraction  to  a  people  so  devoted  to  I 
the  sacred  events  of  their  past.  Was  it  not  the 
first  resting-place  of  the  Ark  after  the  passage  of 
Jordan,  the  scene  of  the  reinstitution  of  circum- 
cision, of  the  anointing  of  the  first  king,  of 
Judah's  second  submission  to  David?||  As  there 
were  many  Gilgals  in  the  land — literally  "  crom- 
lechs," ancient  "  stone-circles "  sacred  to  the 
Canaanites  as  well  as  to  Israel — so  there  were 
many  Mizpehs,  "'  Watch-towers,"  "  Seers'  sta- 
tions": the  one  mentioned  by  Hosea  was  proba- 
bly in  Gilead.^  To  the  southern  Beersheba,  to 
which  Elijah  had  fled  from  Jezebel,  pilgrimages 
were  made  by  northern  Israelites  traversing 
Judah.  The  sanctuary  on  Carmel  was  the  an- 
cient altar  of  Jehovah  which  Elijah  had  rebuilt; 
but  Carmel  seems  at  this  time  to  have  lain,  as  it 
did  so  often,  in  the  power  of  the  Phoenicians, 
for  it  is  imagined  by  the  prophets  only  as  a 
hiding-place  from  the  face  of  Jehovah.** 

At  all  these  sanctuaries  it  was  Jehovah  and 
no  other  who  was  soOght:  "  thy  God,  O  Israel, 
which  brought  thee  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt."  ft  At  Bethel  and  at  Dan  He  was  adored 
in  the  form  of  a  calf;  probably  at  Gilgal  also,  ] 
for  there  is  a  strong  tradition  to  that  efifect;  tt 
and  elsewhere  men  still  consulted  the  other 
images  which  had  been  used  by  Saul  and  by 
David,  the  Ephod  and  the  Teraphim.§§  With 
these  there  was  the  old  Semitic  symbol  of  the 
Maggebah,  or  upright  stone  on  which  oil  was 
poured. nil  All  of  them  had  been  used  in  the  wor- 
ship of  Jehovah  by  the  great  examples  and  lead- 
ers of  the  past;  all  of  them  had  been  spared  by 
Elijah  and  Elisha:  it  was  no  wonder  that  the 
common  people  of  the  eighth  century  felt  them 
to  be  indispensable  elements  of  religion,  the  re- 
moval of  which,  like  the  removal  of  the  mon- 
archy or  of  sacrifice  itself,  would  mean  utter  di- 
vorce from  the  nation's  God.^^ 

*  Amos  iv.  4. 

t  Amos.  vii.  13. 

i  I  Kings  xii.  25  ff. 

§  Curiously  enough  conceived  by  many  of  the  early 
Christian  Fathers  as  containing  the  second  of  the  calves. 
Cj'ril,  "  Comm.  in  Hoseam,"  5  ;  Epiph.,  "  De  Vitis  Proph.," 
237  ;  "  Chron.  Pasc,"  161. 

II  Josh.  iv.  2off.,  v.  2  ff.  ;  I  Sam.  xi.  14,  is.  etc. ;  2  Sam.  xix. 
15,  40.  This  Gilgal  by  Jericho  fell  to  N.  Israel  after  the 
Disruption  ;  but  there  is  nothing  in  Amos  or  Hosea  to 
tell  us  whether  it  or  the  Gilgal  near  Shiloh,  which  seems 
to  have  absorbed  the  sanctity  of  the  latter,  is  the  shrine 
which  they  couple  with  Bethel— except  that  they  never 
talk  of  "going  up  "  to  it.  The  passage  from  Epiphanius 
in  previous  note  speaks  of  the  Gilgal  with  the  calf  as  the 
"  Gilgal  which  is  in  Shiloh." 

^  Site  uncertain.    See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  579,  586. 

**  Amos  ix.  3.     But  c/.  i.  2. 

++  2  Kings  xii.  28. 

tt  See  an  tea. 

§§  The  Ephod,  t/te  plated  thing ;  presumably  a  wooden 
image  covered  either  with  a  skin  of  metal  or  a  cloak  of 
metal.    The  Teraphim  were  images  in  human  shape. 

III  The  menhir  oi  modern  Palestine— not  a  hewn  pillar, 
but  oblong  natural  stone  narrowing  a  little  towards  the 
top  icf.  W.  R.  Smith,  "  Religion  of  the  Semites,"(i83-i88). 
From  Hosea  x.  i.  2,  it  would  appear  that  the  maggeboth  of 
the  eighth  century  were  artificial.  They  make  good  ma.<;(iQ- 
both  (A.  V.  wrongly  images). 

n  So  indeed  Hosea  iii.  4  implies.  The  Asherah,  the  pole 


452 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


One  great  exception  must  be  made.  Com- 
pared with  the  sanctuaries  we  have  mentioned, 
Zion  itself  was  very  modern.  But  it  contained 
the  main  repository  of  Israel's  religion,  the  Ark, 
and  in  connection  with  the  Ark  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  was  not  a  worship  of  images.  It  is  sig- 
nificant that  from  this,  the  original  sanctuary 
of  Israel,  with  the  pure  worship,  the  new 
prophecy  derived  its  first  inspiration.  But  to 
that  we  shall  return  later  with  Amos.*  Apart 
from  the  Ark,  Jerusalem  was  not  free  from  im- 
ages, nor  even  from  the  altars  of  foreign  deities. 

Where  the  externals  of  the  ritual  were  thus  so 
much  the  same  as  those  of  the  Canaanite  cults, 
which  were  still  practised  in  and  around  the  land, 
it  is  not  surprising  that  the  worship  of  Jehovah 
should  be  further  invaded  by  many  pagan  prac- 
tices, nor  that  Jehovah  Himself  should  be  re- 
garded with  imaginations  steeped  in  pagan  ideas 
of  the  Godhead.  That  even  the  foulest  tempers 
of  the  Canaanite  ritual,  those  inspired  by  wine 
and  the  sexual  passion,  were  licensed  in  the 
sanctuaries  of  Israel,  both  Amos  and  Hosea 
testify.  But  the  worst  of  the  evil  was  wrought 
in  the  popular  conception  of  God.  Let  us  re- 
member again  that  Jehovah  had  no  real  rival  at 
this  time  in  the  devotion  of  His  people,  and 
that  their  faith  was  expressed  both  by  the  legal 
forms  of  His  religion  and  by  a  liberality  which 
exceeded  these.  The  tithes  were  paid  to  Him, 
and  paid,  it  would  appear,  with  more  than  legal 
frequency. t  Sabbath  and  New  Moon,  as  days 
of  worship  and  rest  frorfi  business,  were  ob- 
served with  a  Pharisaic  scrupulousness  for  the 
letter  if  not  for  the  spirit.:}:  The  prescribed  festi- 
vals were  held,  and  thronged  by  zealous  dev- 
otees who  rivalled  each  other  in  the  amount  of 
their  free-will  offerings. §  Pilgrimages  were 
made  to  Bethel,  to  Gilgal,  to  far  Beersheba,  and 
the  very  way  to  the  latter  appeared  as  sacred  to 
the  Israelite  as  the  way  to  Mecca  does  to  a  pious 
Moslem  of  to-day. ||  Yet,  in  spite  of  all  this  de- 
votion to  their  God,  Israel  had  no  true  ideas  of 
Him.  To  quote  Amos,  they  sought  His  sanctu- 
aries, but  Him  they  did  not  seek;  in  the  words 
of  Hosea's  frequent  plaint,  they  "  did  not  know 
Him."  To  the  mass  of  the  people,  to  their  gov- 
ernors, their  priests,  and  the  most  of  their 
prophets,  Jehovah  was  but  the  characteristic 
Semitic  deity — patron  of  His  people,  and  caring 
for  them  alone — who  had  helped  them  in  the 
past,  and  was  bound  to  help  them  still — very 
jealous  as  to  the  correctness  of  His  ritual  and 
the  amount  of  His  sacrifices,  but  indifferent 
about  real  morality.  Nay,  there  were  still 
darker  streaks  in  their  views  of  Him.  A  god, 
figured  as  an  ox,  could  not  be  adored  by  a  cattle- 
breeding  people  without  starting  in  their  minds 
thoughts  too  much  akin  to  the  foul  tempers  of 
the  Canaanite  faiths.  These  things  it  is  almost 
a  shame  to  mention;  but  without  knowing  that 
they  fermented  in  the  life  of  that  generation,  we 
shall  not  appreciate  the  vehemence  of  Amos  or 
of  Hosea. 

Such  a  religion  had  no  discipline  for  the  busy, 
mercenary  life  of  the  day.  Injustice  and  fraud 
were  rife  in  the  very  precincts  of  the  sanctuary. 

or  symbolic  tree  of  Canaanite  worship,  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  used  as  a  part  of  the  ritual  of  Jehovah's  wor- 
ship. But,  that  there  was  constantly  a  temptation  so  to 
use  it  is  clear  from  Deut.  xvi.  21,  22.  See  Driver  on  that 
passage. 

*  See  below,  p  466. 
.    tAmqsiv.  4ff.  §  Amos  iv   4  f. 

t  Amos  vii.  4  :  c/.  2  Kings  v.  23.        ||  See  below,  p.  488. 


Magistrates  and  priests  alike  were  smitten  with 
their  generation's  love  of  money,  and  did  every- 
thing for  reward.  Again  and  again  do  the 
prophets  speak  of  bribery.  Judges  took  gifts 
and  perverted  the  cause  of  the  poor;  priests 
drank  the  mulcted  wine,  and  slept  on  the  pledged 
garments  of  religious  offenders.  There  was  no 
disinterested  service  of  God  or  of  the  common- 
weal. Mammon  was  supreme.  The  influence  of 
the  commercial  character  of  the  age  appears  in 
another  very  remarkable  result.  An  agricultural 
community  is  always  sensitive  to  the  religion  of 
nature.  They  are  awed  by  its  chastisements — 
droughts,  famines,  and  earthquakes.  They  feel 
its  majestic  order  in  the  course  of  the  seasons, 
the  procession  of  day  and  night,  the  march  of 
the  great  stars,  all  the  host  of  the  Lord  of  hosts. 
But  Amos  seems  to  have  had  to  break  into  pas- 
sionate reminders  of  Him  that  maketh  Orion 
and  the  Pleiades,  and  turneth  the  murk  into 
morning.*  Several  physical  calamities  visited 
the  land.  The  locusts  are  bad  in  Palestine  every 
sixth  or  seventh  year:  one  year  before  Amos 
began  they  had  been  very  bad.  There  was  a 
monstrous  drought,  followed  by  a  famine.  There 
was  a  long-remembered  earthquake — "  the 
earthquake  in  the  days  of  Uzziah."  With 
Egypt  so  near,  the  home  of  the  plague,  and  with 
so  much  war  afoot  in  Northern  Syria,  there 
were  probably  more  pestilences  in  Western  Asia 
than  those  recorded  in  803,  765,  and  759.  There 
was  a  total  eclipse  of  the  sun  in  763.  But  of  all 
these,  except  perhaps  ttie  pestilence,  a  commer- 
cial people  are  independent  as  an  agricultural  are 
not.  Israel  speedily  recovered  from  them,  with- 
out any  moral  improvement.  Even  when  the 
earthquake  came  "  they  said  in  pride  and  stout- 
ness of  heart,  The  bricks  are  fallen  down,  but  we 
will  build  with  hewn  stones;  the  sycamores  are 
cut  down,  but  we  will  change  to  cedars."  f  It 
was  a  marvellous  generation — so  joyous,  so 
energetic,  so  patriotic,  so  devout.  But  its 
strength  was  the  strength  of  cruel  wealth,  its 
peace  the  peace  of  an  immoral  religion. 

I  have  said  that  the  age  is  very  modern,  and 
we  shall  indeed  go  to  its  prophets  feeling  that 
they  speak  to  conditions  of  life  extremely  like 
our  own.  But  if  we  wish  a  still  closer  analogy 
from  our  history,  we  must  travel  back  to  the 
fourteenth  century  in  England — Langland's  and 
Wyclif's  century,  which,  like  this  one  in  Israel, 
saw  both  the  first  real  attempts  towards  a  na- 
tional literature,  and  the  first  real  attempts  to- 
wards a  moral  and  religious  reform.  Then  as  in 
Israel  a  long  and  victorious  reign  was  drawing 
to  a  close,  under  the  threat  of  disaster  when  it 
should  have  passed.  Then  as  in  Israel  there  had 
been  droughts,  earthquakes,  and  pestilences  with 
no  moral  results  upon  the  nation.  Then  also 
there  was  a  city  life  developing  at  the  expense 
of  country  life.  Then  also  the  wealthy  began  to 
draw  aloof  from  the  people.  Then  also  there 
was  a  national  religion,  zealously  cultivated  and 
endowed  by  the  liberality  of  the  people,  but  su~ 
perstitious,  mercenary,  and  corrupted  by  sexual 
disorder.  Then  too  there  were  many  pilgrim- 
ages to  popular  shrines,  and  the  land  was 
strewn  with  mendicant  priests  and  hireling 
preachers.  And  then  too  prophecy  raised  its 
voice,  for  '.'he  first  time  fearless  in  England.  As 
we  study  the  verses  of  Amos  we  shall  find  again 
and  ag:i'.in   the  most  exact  parallels  to  them  in 

*  f'ut  whether  these  be  by  Amos  see  Chap.  XI. 
t 'sa.  ix.  lo. 


THE    INFLUENCE    OF    ASSYRIA    UPON    PROPHECY. 


453 


the  verses  of  Langland's  "  Vision  of  Piers  the 
Plowman,"  which  denounce  the  same  vices  in 
Church  and  State,  and  enforce  the  same  princi- 
ples of  religion  and  morality. 

It  was  when  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  was  at  its 
height  of  assured  victory,  when  the  nation's 
prosperity  seemed  impregnable  after  the  survival 
of  those  physical  calamities,  when  the  worship 
and  the  commerce  were  in  full  course  throughout 
the  land,  that  the  first  of  the  new  prophets  broke 
out  against  Israel  in  the  name  of  Jehovah, 
threatening  judgment  alike  upon  the  new  civil- 
isation of  which  they  were  so  proud  and  the  old 
religion  in  which  they  were  so  confident.  These 
prophets  were  inspired  by  feelings  of  the  purest 
morality,  by  the  passionate  conviction  that  God 
could  no  longer  bear  such  impurity  and  dis- 
order. But,  as  we  have  seen,  no  prophet  in  Is- 
rael ever  worked  on  the  basis  of  principles  only. 
He  came  always  in  alliance  with  events.  These 
first  appeared  in  the  shape  of  the  great  physical 
disasters.  But  a  more  powerful  instrument  of 
Providence,  in  the  service  of  judgment,  was  ap- 
pearing on  the  horizon.  This  was  the  Assyrian 
Empire.  So  vast  was  its  influence  on  prophecy 
that  we  must  devote  to  it  a  separate  chapter. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  INFLUENCE  OF  ASSYRIA    UPON 
PROPHECY. 

By  far  the  greatest  event  in  the  eighth  cen- 
tury before  Christ  was  the  appearance  of  As- 
syria in  Palestine.  To  Israel  since  the  Exodus 
and  Conquest,  nothing  had  happened  capable  of 
so  enormous  an  influence  at  once  upon  their  na- 
tional fortunes  and  their  religious  development. 
But  while  the  Exodus  and  Conquest  had  ad- 
vanced the  political  and  spiritual  progress  of  Is- 
rael in  equal  proportion,  the  effect  of  the  As- 
syrian invasion  was  to  divorce  these  two  inter- 
ests, and  destroy  the  state  while  it  refined  and 
confirmed  the  religion.  After  permitting  the 
Northern  Kingdom  to  reach  an  extent  and  splen- 
dour unrivalled  since  the  days  of  Solomon,  As- 
syria overthrew  it  in  721,  and  left  all  Israel 
scarcely  a  third  of  their  former  magnitude.  But 
while  Assyria  proved  so  disastrous  to  the  state, 
her  influence  upon  the  prophecy  of  the  period 
was  little  short  of  creative.  Humanly  speaking, 
this  highest  stage  of  Israel's  religion  could  not 
have  been  achieved  by  the  prophets  except  in 
alliance  with  the  armies  of  that  heathen  empire. 
Before  then  we  turn  to  their  pages  it  may  be  well 
for  us  to  make  clear  in  what  directions  Assyria 
performed  this  spiritual  service  for  Israel.  While 
pursuing  this  inquiry  we  may  be  able  to  find  an- 
swers to  the  scarcely  less  important  questions: 
why  the  prophets  were  at  first  doubtful  of  the 
part  Assyria  was  destined  to  play  in  the  provi- 
dence of  the  Almighty;  and  why,  when  the 
prophets  were  at  last  convinced  of  the  certainty 
of  Israel's  overthrow,  the  statesmen  of  Israel  and 
the  bulk  of  the  people  still  remained  so  uncon- 
cerned about  her  coming,  or  so  sanguine  of  their 
power  to  resist  her.  This  requires,  to  begin 
with,  a  summary  of  the  details  of  the  Assyrian 
advance  upon  Palestine. 

In  the  far  past  Palestine  had  often  been  the 
hunting-ground  of  the  Assyrian  kings.  But  after 
iioo  B.   c,  and  for  nearly   two   centuries  and   a 


half,  her  states  were  left  to  tiiemselves.  Then 
Assyria  resumed  the  task  of  breaking  down  that 
disbelief  in  her  power  with  which  her  long  with- 
drawal seems  to  have  inspired  their  politics.  In 
870  Assurnasirpal  reachecl  the  Levant,  and  took 
tribute  from  Tyre  and  Sidon.  Omri  was  reign- 
ing in  Samaria,  and  must  have  come  into  close 
relations  with  the  Assyrians,  for  during  more 
than  a  century  and  a  half  after  his  death  they 
still  called  the  land  of  Israel  by  his  name.*  In 
854  Salmanassar  II.  defeated  at  Karkar  the  com- 
bined forces  of  Ahab  and  Benhadad.  In  850, 
849,  and  846  he  conducted  campaigns  against 
Damascus.  In  842  he  received  tribute  from 
Jehu,t  and  in  839  again  fought  Damascus  under 
Hazael.  After  this  there  passed  a  whole  gen- 
eration during  which  Assyria  came  no  farther 
south  than  Arpad,  some  sixty  miles  north  of 
Damascus;  and  Hazael  employed  the  respite  in 
those  campaigns  which  proved  so  disastrous  for 
Israel,  by  robbing  her  of  the  provinces  across 
Jordan,  and  ravaging  the  country  about  Sa- 
maria.t  In  803  Assyria  returned,  and  accom- 
plished the  siege  and  capture  of  Damascus.  The 
first  consequence  to  Israel  was  that  restoration 
of  her  hopes  under  Joash,  at  which  the  aged 
Elisha  was  still  spared  to  assist,§  and  which 
reached  its  fulfilment  in  the  recovery  of  all 
Eastern  Palestine  by  Jeroboam  II.  ||  Jeroboam's 
own  relations  to  Assyria  have  not  been  recorded 
either  by  the  Bible  or  by  the  Assyrian  monu- 
ments. It  is  hard  to  think  that  he  paid  no  trib- 
ute to  the  "  king  of  kings."  At  all  events  it  is 
certain  that,  while  Assyria  again  overthrew  the 
Arameans  of  Damascus  in  773  and  their  neigh- 
bours of  Hadrach  in  yy2  and  765,  Jeroboam  was 
himself  invading  Aramean  land,  and  the  Book 
of  Kings  even  attributes  to  him  an  extension 
of  territory,  or  at  least  of  political  influence,  up 
to  the  northern  mouth  of  the  great  pass  between 
the  Lebanons.Tf  For  the  next  twenty  years  As- 
syria only  once  came  as  far  as  Lebanon — to 
Hadrach  in  759 — and  it  may  have  been  this  long 
quiescence  which  enabled  the  rulers  and  people 
of  Israel  to  forget,  if  indeed  their  religion  and 
sanguine  patriotism  had  ever  allowed  them  to 
realise,  how  much  the  conquests  and  splendour 
of  Jeroboam's  reign  were  due,  not  to  themselves, 
but  to  the  heathen  power  which  had  maimed 
their  oppressors.  Their  dreams  were  brief.  Be- 
fore Jeroboam  himself  was  dead,  a  new  king  had 
usurped  the  Assyrian  throne  (745  b.  c.)  and  in- 
augurated a  more  vigorous  policy.  Borrowing 
the  name  of  the  ancient  Tiglath-Pileser,  he  fol- 
lowed that  conqueror's  path  across  the  Eu- 
phrates. At  first  it  seemed  as  if  he  was  to  suffer 
check.  His  forces  were  engrossed  by  the  siege 
of  Arpad  for  three  years  (c.  743),  and  this  delay, 
along  with  that  of  two  years  more,  during  which 
he  had  to  return  to  the  conquest  of  Babylon, 
may  well  have  given  cause  to  the  courts  of  Da- 
mascus and  Samaria  to  believe  that  the  Assyr- 
ian power  had  not  really  revived.  Combining, 
they  attacked  Judah  under  Ahaz.  But  Ahaz  ap- 
pealed   to    Tiglath-Pileser,    who    within    a    year 

*"The  house  of  Omri":  so  even  in  Sargon's  time, 
722-705. 

tThe  Black  Obelisk  of  Salmanassar  in  the  British 
Museum,  on  which  the  messengers  of  Jehu  are  portrayed. 

t  2  Kings  X.  32  f.;  xiii.  3. 

§  2  Kings  xiii.  14  ff. 

II  The  phrase  in  2  Kings  xiii.  5,  '/Jehovah  gave  Israel 
a  saviour,"  is  interpreted  by  certain  scholars  as  if  the 
saviour  were  Assyria.  In  xiv.  27  he  is  plainly  said  to  be 
Jeroboam. 

^The  entering  in  of  Hamath  (2  Kings  xiv.  25). 


454 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


(.73^-733)  had  overthrown  Damascus  and  carried 
captive  the  populations  of  Gilead  and  Galilee. 
There  could  now  be  no  doubt  as  to  what  the 
Assyrian  power  meant  for  the  political  fortunes 
of  Israel.  Before  this  resistless  and  inexorable 
empire  the  people  of  Jehovah  were  as  the  most 
frail  of  their  neighbours — sure  of  defeat,  and  sure, 
too,  of  that  terrible  captivity  in  exile  which 
formed  the  novel  policy  of  the  invaders  against 
the  tribes  who  withstood  them.  Israel  dared  to 
withstand.  The  vassal  Hoshea,  whom  the  As- 
syrians had  placed  on  the  throne  of  Samaria  in 
730,  kept  back  his  tribute.  The  people  rallied 
to  him;  and  for  more  than  three  years  this  little 
tribe  of  highlanders  resisted  in  their  capital  the 
Assyrian  siege.  Then  came  the  end.  Samaria 
fell  in  721,  and  Israel  went  into  captivity  beyond 
the  Euphrates. 

In  following  the  course  of  this  long  tragedy, 
a  man's  heart  cannot  but  feel  that  all  the  splen- 
dour and  the  glory  did  not  lie  with  the  prophets, 
in  spite  of  their  being  the  only  actors  in  the 
drama  who  perceived  its  moral  issues  and  pre- 
dicted its  actual  end.  For  who  can  withhold  ad- 
miration from  those  few  tribesmen,  who  accepted 
no  defeat  as  final,  but  so  long  as  they  were  left 
to  their  fatherland  rallied  their  ranks  to  its  liberty 
and  defied  the  huge  empire.  Nor  was  their 
courage  always  as  blind,  as  in  the  time  of  Isaiah 
Samaria's  so  fatally  became.  For  one  cannot 
have  failed  to  notice,  how  fitful  and  irregular  was 
Assyria's  advance,  at  least  up  to  the  reign  of 
Tiglath-Pileser;  nor  how  prolonged  and  doubt- 
ful were  her  sieges  of  some  of  the  towns.  The 
Assyrians  themselves  do  not  always  record  spoil 
or  tribute  after  what  they  are  pleased  to  call 
iheir  victories  over  the  cities  of  Palestine.  To 
the  same  campaign  they  had  often  to  return  for 
several  years  in  succession.*  It  took  Tiglath- 
Pileser  himself  three  years  to  reduce  Arpad;  Sal- 
manassar  IV.  besieged  Samaria  for  three  years, 
and  was  slain  before  it  yielded.  These  facts  en- 
able us  to  understand  that,  apart  from  the  moral 
reasons  which  the  prophets  urged  for  the  cer- 
tainty of  Israel's  overthrow  by  Assyria,  it  was 
always  within  the  range  of  political  possibility 
that  Assyria  would  not  come  back,  and  that  while 
she  was  engaged  with  revolts  of  other  portions 
of  her  huge  and  disorganised  empire,  a  com- 
bined revolution  on  the  part  of  her  Syrian  vas- 
sals would  be  successful.  The  prophets  them- 
selves felt  the  influence  of  these  chances.  They 
were  not  always  confident,  as  we  shall  see,  that 
Assyria  was  to  be  the  means  of  Israel's  over^ 
throw.  Amos,  and  in  his  earlier  years  Isaiah, 
describe  her  with  a  caution  and  a  vagueness  for 
which  there  is  no  other  explanation  than  the  po- 
litical uncertainty  that  again  and  again  hung  over 
the  future  of  her  advance  upon  Syria.  If,  then, 
even  in  those  high  minds,  to  whom  the  moral 
issue  was  so  clear,  the  political  form  that  issue 
should  assume  was  yet  temporarily  uncertain, 
what  good  reasons  must  the  mere  statesmen  of 
Syria  have  often  felt  for  the  proud  security 
which  filled  the  intervals  between  the  Assyrian 
invasions,  or  the  sanguine  hopes  which  inspired 
their  resistance  to  the  latter. 

We  must  not  cast  over  the  whole  Assyrian  ad- 
vance the  triumphant  air  of  the  annals  of  such 
kings  as  Tiglath-Pileser  or  Sennacherib.  Cam- 
paigning in  Palestine  was  a  dangerous  business 

*  Salmanassar  II.  in  850,  849,  846  to  war  against  Dad'idri 
of  Damascus,  and  in  842  and  839  against  Hazael,  his  suc- 
cessor. 


even  to  the  Romans;  and  for  the  Assyrian  armies 
there  was  always  possible  besides  some  sudden 
recall  by  the  rumour  of  a  revolt  in  a  distant 
province.  Their  own  annals  supply  us  with  good 
reasons  for  the  sanguine  resistance  offered  to 
them  by  the  tribes  of  Palestine.  No  defeat,  of 
course,  is  recorded;  but  the  annals  are  full  of 
delays  and  withdrawals.  Then  the  Plague  would 
break  out;  we  know  how  in  the  last  year  of  the 
century  it  turned  Sennacherib,  and  saved  Jeru- 
salem.* In  short,  up  almost  to  the  end  the 
Syrian  chiefs  had  some  fair  political  reasons  for 
resistance  to  a  power  which  had  so  often  de- 
feated them;  while  at  the  very  end,  when  no  such 
reason  remained  and  our  political  sympathy  is 
exhausted,  we  feel  it  replaced  by  an  even  warmer 
admiration  for  their  desperate  defence.  Mere 
mountain-cats  of  tribes  as  some  ot  them  were, 
they  held  their  poorly  furnished  rocks  against 
one,  two,  or   three  years  of  cruel  siege. 

In  Israel  these  political  reasons  for  courage 
against  Assyria  were  enforced  by  the  whole  in- 
stincts of  the  popular  religion.  The  century  had 
felt  a  new  outburst  of  enthusiasm  for  Jehovah. f 
This  was  consequent,  not  only  upon  the  victories 
He  had  granted  over  Aram,  but  upon  the  litera- 
ture of  the  peace  which  followed  those  victories: 
the  collection  of  the  stories  of  the  ancient  mira- 
cles of  Jehovah  in  the  beginning  of  His  people's 
history,  and  of  the  purpose  He  had  even  then  an- 
nounced of  bringing  Israel  to  supreme  rank  in 
the  world.  Such  a  God,  so  anciently  manifested, 
so  recently  proved,  could  never  surrender  His 
own  nation  to  a  mere  Goi  % — a  heathen  and  a 
barbarian  people.  Add  this  dogma  of  the  popu- 
lar religion  of  Israel  to  those  substantial  hopes 
of  Assyria's  withdrawal  from  Palestine,  and  you 
see  cause,  intelligible  and  adequate,  for  the  com- 
placency of  Jeroboam  and  his  people  to  the  fact 
that  Assyria  had  at  last,  by  the  fall  of  Damascus, 
reached  their  own  borders,  as  well  as  for  the 
courage  with  which  Hoshea  in  725  threw  ofif 
the  Assyrian  yoke,  and,  with  a  willing  people, 
for  three  years  defended  Samaria  against  the 
great  king.  Let  us  not  think  that  the  opponents 
of  the  prophets  were  utter  fools  or  mere  puppets 
of  fate.  They  had  reasons  for  their  optimism; 
they  fought  for  their  hearths  and  altars  with  a 
valour  and  a  patience  which  proves  that  the  na- 
tion as  a  whole  was  not  so  corrupt  as  we  are 
sometimes,  by  the  language  of  the  prophets, 
tempted  to  suppose. 

But  all  this — the  reasonableness  of  the  hope 
of  resisting  Assyria,  the  valour  which  so  stub- 
bornly fought  her,  the  religious  faith  which 
sanctioned  both  valour  and  hope — only  the  more 
vividly  illustrates  the  singular  independence  of 
the  prophets,  who  took  an  opposite  view,  who 
so  consistently  affirmed  that  Israel  must  fall,  and 
so  early  foretold  that  she  should  fall  to  Assyria. 
The  reason  of  this  conviction  of  the  prophets 
was,  of  course,  their  fundamental  faith  in  the 
righteousness  of  Jehovah.  That  was  a  belief 
quite  independent  of  the  course  of  events.  As 
a  matter  of  history  the  ethical  reasons  for  Is- 
rael's doom  were  manifest  to  the  prophets 
within  Israel's  own  life,  before  the  signs  grew 
clear  on  the  horizon  that  the  doomster  was  to 
be  Assyria.^    Nay,  we  may  go  further,  and  say 

*  See  in  this  series  "  Isaiah,"  Vol.  III.  pp.  706  ff. 

t  See  above,  pp.  451  flf. 

X  To  use  the  term  which  Amos  adopts  with  such  ironi- 
cal force  :  vi.  14. 

§  When  we  get  down  among  the  details  we  shall  see 
clear  evidence  for  this    fact,   for   instance,  that  Amos 


THE    INFLUENCE    OF   ASSYRIA    UPON    PROPHECY. 


455 


that  it  could  not  possibly  have  been  otherwise. 
For  except  the  prophets  had  been  previously 
furnished  with  the  ethical  reasons  for  Assyria's 
resistless  advance  on  Israel,  to  their  sensitive 
minds  that  advance  must  have  been  a  hopeless 
and  a  paralysing  problem.  But  they  nowhere 
treat  it  as  a  problem.  By  them  Assyria  is  al- 
ways cither  welcomed  as  a  proof  or  summoned 
as  a  means — the  proof  of  their  conviction  that 
Israel  requires  humbling,  the  means  of  carrying 
that  humbling  into  effect.  The  faith  of  the 
prophets  is  ready  for  Assyria  from  the  moment 
that  she  becomes  ominous  for  Israel,  and  every 
footfall  of  her  armies  on  Jehovah's  soil  becomes 
the  corroboration  of  the  purpose  He  has  already 
declared  to  His  servants  in  the  terms  of  their 
moral  consciousness.  The  spiritual  service 
which  Assyria  rendered  to  Israel  was  therefore 
secondary  to  the  prophets'  native  convictions  of 
the  righteousness  of  God,  and  could  not  have 
b;en  performed  without  these.  This  will  become 
even  more  clear  if  we  look  for  a  little  at  the 
e  tact  nature  of  that  service. 

In  its  broadest  effects,  the  Assyrian  invasion 
meant  for  Israel  a  very  considerable  change  in 
the  intellectual  outlook.  Hitherto  Israel's  world 
had  virtually  lain  between  the  borders  promised 
of  old  to  their  ambition — "  the  river  of  Egypt,* 
and  the  great  river,  the  River  Euphrates."  These 
had  marked  not  merely  the  sphere  of  Israel's 
politics,  but  the  horizon  within  which  Israel  had 
been  accustomed  to  observe  the  action  of  their 
God  and  to  prove  His  character,  to  feel  the 
problems  of  their  religion  rise  and  to  grapple 
with  them.  But  now  there  burst  from  the  out- 
side of  this  little  world  that  awful  power,  sov- 
ereign and  inexorable,  which  effaced  all  distinc- 
tions and  treated  Israel  in  the  same  manner  as 
her  heathen  neighbours.  This  was  more  than 
a  widening  of  the  world:  it  was  a  change  of  the 
very  poles.  At  first  sight  it  appeared  merely  to 
have  increased  the  scale  on  which  history  was 
conducted;  it  was  really  an  alteration  of  the 
whole  character  of  history.  Religion  itself  shriv- 
elled up,  before  a  force  so  much  vaster  than 
anything  it  had  yet  encountered,  and  so  con- 
temptuous of  its  claims.  "  What  is  Jehovah," 
said  the  Assyrian  in  his  laughter,  "  more  than 
the  gods  of  Damascus,  or  of  Hamath,  or  of  the 
Philistines?"  In  fact,  for  the  mind  of  Israel, 
the  crisis,  though  less  in  degree,  was  in  quality 
not  unlike  that  produced  in  the  religion  of 
Europe  by  the  revelation  of  the  Copernican  as- 
tronomy. As  the  earth,  previously  believed  to 
be  the  centre  of  the  universe,  the  stage  on  which 
th'i  Son  of  God  had  achieved  God's  eternal  pur- 
poses to  mankind,  was  discovered  to  be  but  a 
savellite  of  one  of  innumerable  suns,  a  mere  ball 
swung  beside  millions  of  others  by  a  force 
which  betrayed  no  sign  of  sympathy  with  the 
great  transactions  which  took  place  on  it,  and 
so  faith  in  the  Divine  worth  of  these  was  rudely 
shaken — so  Israel,  who  had  believed  themselves 
to  be  the  peculiar  people  of  the  Creator,  the 
s(  litary  agents  of  the  God  of  Righteousness  to 
ail    mankind.t    and    who    now    felt    themselves 

piophesied  against  Israel  at  a  time  when  he  thought  that 
tb;  Lord's  anger  was  to  be  exhausted  in  purely  natural 
chastisements  of  His  people,  and  before  it  was  revealed 
to  him  that  Assyria  was  required  to  follow  up  these 
chastisements  with  a  heavier  blow.  See  Chap.  VI.,  Sec- 
tion 2. 

*  That  is,  of  course,  not  the  Nile,  but  the  great  Wady,  at 
P'-esent  known  as  the  Wady  el  'Arish,  which  divides 
Palestine  from  Egypt. 

t  So  already  in  the  JE  narratives  of  the  Pentateuch. 


brought  to  an  equality  with  other  tribes  by  this 
sheer  force,  which,  brutally  indifferent  to  spirit- 
ual distinctions,  swayed  the  fortunes  of  all  alike, 
must  have  been  tempted  to  unbelief  in  the  spirit- 
ual facts  of  their  history,  in  the  power  of  their 
God  and  the  destiny  He  had  promised  them. 
Nothing  could  have  saved  Israel,  as  nothing 
could  have  saved  Europe,  but  a  conception  of 
God  which  rose  to  this  new  demand  upon  its 
powers — a  faith  which  said,  "  Our  God  is  suf- 
ficient for  this  greater  world  and  its  forces  that 
so  dwarf  our  own;  the  discovery  of  these  only 
excites  in  us  a  more  awful  wonder  of  His 
power."  The  prophets  had  such  a  conception 
of  God.  To  them  He  was  absolute  righteous- 
ness— righteousness  wide  as  the  widest  world, 
stronger  than  the  strongest  force.  To  the 
prophets,  therefore,  the  rise  of  Assyria  only  in- 
creased the  possibilities  of  Providence.  But  it 
could  not  have  done  this  had  Providence  not 
already  been  invested  in  a  God  capable  by  His 
character  of  rising  to  such  possibilities. 

Assyria,  however,  was  not  only  Force:  she  was 
also  the  symbol  of  a  great  Idea — the  Idea  of 
Unity.  We  have  just  ventured  on  one  histori- 
cal analogy.  We  may  try  another  and  a  more 
exact  one.  The  Empire  of  Rome,  grasping  the 
whole  world  in  its  power  and  reducing  all  races 
of  men  to  much  the  same  level  of  political  rights, 
powerfully  assisted  Christian  theology  in  the 
task  of  imposing  upon  the  human  mind  a  clearer 
imagination  of  unity  in  the  government  of  the 
world  and  of  spiritual  equality  among  men  of  all 
nations.  A  not  dissimilar  service  to  the  faith  of 
Israel  was  performed  by  the  Empire  of  Assyria. 
History,  that  hitherto  had  been  but  a  series  of 
angry  pools,  became  as  the  ocean  swaying  in 
tides  to  one  almighty  impulse.  It  was  far  easier 
to  imagine  a  sovereign  Providence  when  As- 
syria reduced  history  to  a  unity  by  overthrowing 
all  the  rulers  and  all  their  gods,  than  when  his- 
tory was  broken  up  into  the  independent  for- 
tunes of  many  states,  each  with  its  own  religion 
divinely  valid  in  its  own  territory.  By  shattering 
the  tribes  Assyria  shattered  the  tribal  theory  of 
religion,  which  we  have  seen  to  be  the  char- 
acteristic Semitic  theory — a  god  for  every  tribe, 
a  tribe  for  every  god.  The  field  was  cleared  of 
the  many:  there  was  room  for  the  One.  That 
He  appeared,  not  as  the  God  of  the  conquering 
race,  but  as  the  Deity  of  one  of  their  many  vic- 
tims, was  due  to  Jehovah's  righteousness.  At 
this  juncture,  when  the  world  was  suggested  to 
have  one  throne  and  that  throne  was  empty, 
there  was  a  great  chance,  if  we  may  so  put  it, 
for  a  god  with  a  character.  And  the  only  God 
in  all  the  Semitic  world  who  had  a  character 
was  Jehovah. 

It  is  true  that  the  Assyrian  Empire  was  not 
constructive,  like  the  Roman,  and,  therefore, 
could  not  assist  the  prophets  to  the  idea  of  a 
Catholic  Church.  But  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  it  did  assist  them  to  a  feeling  of  the  moral 
unity  of  mankind.  A  great  historian  has  made 
the  just  remark  that,  whatsoever  widens  the  im- 
agination, enabling  it  to  realise  the  actual  ex- 
perience of  other  men,  is  a  powerful  agent  of 
ethical  advance.*  Now  Assyria  widened  the  im- 
agination and  the  sympathy  of  Israel  in  precisely 
this  way.  Consider  the  universal  Pity  of  the  As- 
syrian conquest:  how  state  after  state  went  down 
before  it,  how  all  things  mortal  yielded  and  were 
swept  away.     The  mutual  hatreds  and  ferocities 

*  Lecky  ;  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  I. 


456 


THE"^^OOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


of  men  could  not  persist  before  a  common  Fate, 
so  sublime,  so  tragic.  And  thus  we  understand 
how  in  Israel  the  old  envies  and  rancours  of 
that  border  warfare  with  her  foes  which  had 
filled  the  last  four  centuries  of  her  history  is  re- 
placed by  a  new  tenderness  and  compassion  to- 
wards the  national  efforts,  the  achievements,  and 
all  the  busy  life  of  the  Gentile  peoples.  Isaiah 
is  especially  distinguished  by  this  in  his  treat- 
ment of  Egypt  and  of  Tyre;  and  even  where  he 
and  others  do  not,  as  in  these  cases,  appreciate 
the  sadness  of  the  destruction  of  so  much  brave 
beauty  and  serviceable  wealth,  their  tone  in 
speaking  of  the  fall  of  the  Assyrian  on  their 
neighbours  is  one  of  compassion  and  not  of  ex- 
ultation.* As  the  rivalries  and  hatreds  of  individ- 
ual lives  are  stilled  in  the  presence  of  a  common 
death,  so  even  that  factious,  ferocious  world  of 
the  Semites  ceased  to  "  fret  its  anger  and  watch 
it  for  ever "  (to  quote  Amos'  phrase)  in  face 
of  the  universal  Assyrian  Fate.  But  in  that  Fate 
there  was  more  than  Pity.  On  the  data  of  the 
prophets  Assyria  was  afflicting  Israel  for  moral 
reasons:  it  could  not  be  for  other  reasons  that 
she  was  afHicting  their  neighbours.  Israel  and 
the  heathen  were  suffering  for  the  same  right- 
eousness' sake.  What  could  have  better  illus- 
trated the  moral  equality  of  all  mankind!  No 
doubt  the  prophets  were  already  theoretically 
convincedf  of  this — for  the  righteousness  they 
believed  in  was  nothing  if  not  universal.  But  it 
is  one  thing  to  hold  a  belief  on  principle  and 
another  to  have  practical  experience  of  it  in 
history.  To  a  theory  of  the  moral  equality  of 
mankind  Assyria  enabled  the  prophets  to  add 
sympathy  and  conscience.  We  shall  see  all  this 
illustrated  in  the  opening  prophecies  of  Amos 
against  the  foreign  nations. 

But  Assyria  did  not  help  to  develop  monothe- 
ism in  Israel  only  by  contributing  to  the  doc- 
trines of  a  moral  Providence  and  of  the  equality 
of  all  men  beneath  it.  The  influence  must  have 
extended  to  Israel's  conception  of  God  in  Na- 
ture. Here,  of  course,  Israel  was  already  pos- 
sessed of  great  beliefs.  Jehovah  had  created 
man;  He  had  divided  the  Red  Sea  and  Jordan. 
The  desert,  the  storm,  and  the  seasons  were  all 
subject  to  Him.  But  at  a  time  when  the  super^ 
stitious  mind  of  the  people  was  still  feeling  after 
other  Divine  powers  in  the  earth,  the  waters  and 
the  air  of  Canaan,  it  was  a  very  valuable  antidote 
to  such  dissipation  of  their  faith  to  find  one  God 
swaying,  through  Assyria,  all  families  of  man- 
kind. The  Divine  unity  to  which  history  was 
reduced  must  have  reacted  on  Israel's  views  of 
Nature,  and  made  it  easier  to  feel  one  God  also 
there.  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  imagination 
of  the  unity  of  Nature,  the  belief  in  a  reason  and 
method  pervading  all  things,  was  very  power- 
fully advanced  in  Israel  throughout  the  Assyrian 
period. 

We  may  find  an  illustration  of  this  in  the 
greater,  deeper  meaning  in  which  the  prophets 
use  the  old  national  name  of  Israel's  God — Je- 
hovah §eba'oth,  "  Jehovah  of  Hosts."  This 
title,  which  came  into  frequent  use  under  the 
early  kings,  when  Israel's  vocation  was  to  win 

*  The  present  writer  has  already  pointed  out  this  with 
regard  to  Egypt  and  Phcenicia  in  "  Isaiah  "  (Expositor's 
Bible  Series),  Part  I.,  chaps,  xxii.  and  xxiii.,  and  with  re- 
gard to  Philistia  in  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  178. 

+  I  put  it  this  way  only  for  the  sake  of  making  the  logic 
clear  ;  for  it  is  a  mistake  to  say  that  the  prophets  at  any 
time  held  merely  theoretic  convictions.  All  their  convic- 
tion was  really  experimental  — never  held  apart  from 
some  illustration  or  proof  of  principle  in  actual  history. 


freedom  by  war,  meant  then  (as  far  as  we  can 
gather)  only  "  Jehovah  of  the  armies  of  Israel  " 
— the  God  of  battles,  the  people's  leader  in  war,* 
whose  home  was  Jerusalem,  the  people's  capital, 
and  His  sanctuary  their  battle  emblem,  the  Ark. 
Now  the  prophets  hear  Jehovah  go  forth  (as 
Amos  does)  from  the  same  place,  but  to  them 
the  Name  has  a  far  deeper  significance.  They 
never  define  it,  but  they  use  it  in  associations 
where  "  hosts  "  must  mean  something  different 
from  the  armies  of  Israel.  To  Amos  the  hosts 
of  Jehovah  are  not  the  armies  of  Israel,  but  those 
of  Assyria:  they  are  also  the  nations  whom  He 
marshals  and  marches  across  the  earth,  Philis- 
tines from  Caphtor,  Aram  from  Qir,  as  well  as 
Israel  from  Egypt.  Nay.  more;  according  to 
those  Doxologies  which  either  Amos  or  a  kin- 
dred spirit  has  added  to  his  lofty  argument,  +  Je- 
hovah sways  and  orders  the  powers  of  the  heav- 
ens: Orion  and  Pleiades,  the  clouds  from  the  sea 
to  the  mountain  peaks  where  they  break,  day 
and  night  in  constant  processsion.  It  is  in  as- 
sociations like  these  that  the  Name  is  used,  either 
in  its  old  form  or  slightly  changed  as  "  Jehovah 
God  of  hosts,"  or  "the  hosts":  and  we  cannot 
but  feel  that  the  hosts  of  Jehovah  are  now  looked 
upon  as  all  the  influences  of  earth  and  heaven — 
human  armies,  stars  and  powers  of  nature,  which 
obey  His  word  and  work  His  will. 


AMOS. 


"  Towers  in  the  distance,  like  an  earth-born  Atlas  .  .  . 
such  a  man  in  such  a  historical  position,  standing  on  the 
confines  of  light  and  darkness,  like  day  on  the  misty 
mountain-tops." 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  BOOK  OF  AMOS. 

The  genuineness  of  the  bulk  of  the  Book  of 
Amos  is  not  doubted  by  any  critic.  The  only 
passages  suspected  as  interpolations  are  the  three 
references  to  Judah,  the  three  famous  outbreaks 
in  praise  of  the  might  of  Jehovah  the  Creator, 
the  final  prospect  of  a  hope  that  does  not  gleam 
in  any  other  part  of  the  book,  with  a  few  clauses 
alleged  to  reflect  a  stage  of  history  later  than 

*  niN3V  niiTJ  I  Sam.  i.  3  ;  iv.  4  ;  xvii.  45,  where  it  is  ex- 
plained by  the  parallel  phrase  "God  of  the  armies  of 
Israel";  2  Sam.  vi.  2,  where  it  is  connected  with  Israel's 
battle  emblem,  the  Ark  (cf.  Jer.  xxii.  18)  ;  and  so  through- 
out Samuel  and  Kings,  and  also  Chronicles,  the  Psalms, 
and  most  prophets.  The  plural  niX3V  is  never  used  in 
the  Old  Testament  except  of  human  hosts,  and  generally 
of  the  armies  or  hosts  of  Israel.  The  theory  therefore 
which  sees  the  same  meaning  in  the  Divine  title  is  prob- 
ably the  correct  one.  It  was  first  put  forward  by  Herder 
("  Geist  der  Eb.  Poesie,"  ii.  84,  85),  and  after  some  neglect 
it  has  been  revived  by  Kautzsch  ("Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  vi.  ff.) 
and  Stade  ("  Gesch.,"  i.  437,  n.  3).  The  alternatives  are 
that  the  hosts  originally  meant  those  of  heaven,  either  the 
angels  (so,  among  others,  Ewald.  ''  Hist.,"  Eng.  Ed.,  iii. 
62)  or  the  stars  (so  Delitzsch,  Kuenen,  Baudlssin,  Cheyne, 
"  Prophecies  of  Isaiah,"  i.  11).  In  the  former  of  these  two 
there  is  some  force  ;  but  the  reason  given  for  the  latter, 
that  the  name  came  to  the  front  in  Israel  when  the  people 
were  being  drawn  into  connection  with  star-worshippmg 
nations,  especially  Aram,  seems  to  me  baseless.  Israel 
had  not  been  long  in  touch  with  Aram  in  Saul's  time,  yet 
even  then  the  name  is  accepted  as  if  one  of  much  earlier 
origin.  A  clear  account  of  the  argument  on  the  other 
side  to  that  taken  in  this  note  will  be  found  in  Smend 
"  Alttestamentliche  Religionsgeschichte,"  pp.  185  ff. 

t  See  below,  chap.  xi. 


THE    BOOK    OF    AMOS 


457 


that  in  which  Amos  worked.*  In  all,  these 
verses  amount  to  only  twenty-six  or  twenty- 
seven  out  of  one  hundred  and  forty-six.  Each 
of  them  can  be  discussed  separatelv  as  we  reach 
it,  and  we  may  now  pass  to  consider  the  general 
course  of  the  prophecy  which  is  independent  of 
them. 

The  Book  of  Amos  consists  of  Three  Groups 
of  Oracles,  under  one  title,  which  is  evidently 
meant  to  cover  them  all. 

The  title   runs   as   follows: — 

"  Words  of  'Amos — who  was  of  the  herdsmen 
of  Tekoa" — which  he  saw  concerning  Israel  in 
the  days  of  'Uzziah  king  of  Judah,  and  in  the 
days  of  Jarab'am  son  of  Joash.f  king  of  Israel: 
two  years  before  the  earthquake." 

The  Three  Sections,  with  their  contents,  are  as 
follows: — 

First  Section:  Chaps.  I.,  II.  The  Heathen's 
Crimes  and  Israel's. 

A  series  of  short  oracles  of  the  same  form, 
directed  impartially  against  the  political  crimes 
of  all  the  states  of  Palestine,  and  culminating  in 
a  more  detailed  denunciation  of  the  social  evils 
of  Israel,  whose  doom  is  foretold,  beneath  the 
same  flood  of  war  as  shall  overwhelm  all  her 
neighbours. 

Second  Section:  Chaps.  III. -VI.   Israel's 
Crimes  and  Doom. 

A  series  of  various  oracles  of  denunciation, 
which  have  no  further  logical  connection  than  is 
supplied  by  a  general  sameness  of  subject,  and  a 
perceptible  increase  of  detail  and  articulateness 
from  beginning  to  end  of  the  section.  They  are 
usually  grouped  according  to  the  recurrence  of 
the  formula  "  Hear  this  word,"  which  stands  at 
the  head  of  our  present  chaps,  iii.,  iv.,  and  v.; 
and  by  the  two  cries  of  "  Woe  "  at  v.  i8  and  vi.  i. 
But  even  more  obvious  than  these  commence- 
ments are  the  various  climaxes  to  which  they 
lead  up.  These  are  all  threats  of  judgment,  and 
each  is  more  strenuous  or  explicit  than  the  one 
that  has  preceded  it.  They  close  with  iii.  15. 
iv.  3,  iv.  12,  V.  17,  V.  2"],  and  vi.  14;  and  according 
to  them  the  oracles  may  be  conveniently  divided 
into  six  groups. 

1.  III.  1-15.  After  the  main  theme  of  judg- 
ment is  stated  in  i,  2,  we  have  in  3-8  a  parenthe- 
sis on  the  prophet's  right  to  threaten  doom;  after 
which  9-15,  following  directly  on  2,  emphasise 
the  social  disorder,  threaten  the  land  with  in- 
vasion, the  people  with  extinction  and  the  over- 
throw of  their  civilisation. 

2.  IV.  1-3,  beginning  with  the  formula  "  Hear 
this  word,"  is  directed  against  women  and  de- 
scribes the  siege  of  the  capital  and  their  cap- 
tivity. 

3.  IV.  4-12,  with  no  opening  formula,  contrasts 
the  people's  vain  propitiation  of  God  by  ritual 
with  His  treatment  of  them  by  various  physical 
chastisements — drought,  blight,  and  locusts,  pes- 
tilence, earthquake — and  summons  them  to  pre- 

*The  full  list  of  suspected  passages  is  this:  (t)  Refer- 
ences to  Judah— ii.  ^,  5;  vi.  i,  "in  Zion  "  ;  ix.  n,  12.  (2) 
The  three  Outbreaks  of  Praise— iv.  13  ;  v.  8,  q  ;  ix.  5,  6.  (3I 
The  Final  Hope— ix.  8-15,  including  vv.  11,  12,  already 
mentioned.  (4)  Clauses  alleged  to  reflect  a  later  stage  of 
history — i.  p-12  ;  v.  i,  2,  15  ;  vi.  2,  14.  (5)  Suspected  for  in- 
compatibility—viii.  11-13. 

+  So  designated  to  distinguish  him  from  the  first  Jero- 
boam, the  son  of  Nebat. 


pare   for  another,   unnamed,   visitation.     "  Jeho- 
vah God  of  Hosts  is  His  Name." 

4.  V.  1-17,  beginning  with  the  formula  "  Hear 
this  word,"  and  a  dirge  over  a  vision  of  the 
nation's  defeat,  attacks,  like  the  previous  group, 
the  lavish  ritual,  sets  in  contrast  to  it  Jehovah's 
demands  for  justice  and  civic  purity;  and,  offer- 
ing a  reprieve  if  Israel  will  rgpent,  closes  with 
the  prospect  of  an  universal  mourning  (vv.  16, 
17),  which,  though  introduced  by  a  "  therefore," 
has  no  logical  connection  with  what  precedes  it. 

5.  V.  18-26  is  the  first  of  the  two  groups  that 
open  with  "  Woe."  Affirming  that  the  eagerly 
expected  "  Day  of  Jehovah  "  will  be  darkness 
and  disaster  on  disaster  inevitable  (18-20),  it 
again  emphasises  Jehovah's  desire  for  righteous- 
ness rather  than  worship  (21-26),  and  closes  with 
the  threat  of  captivity  beyond  Damascus.  "  Je- 
hovah God  of  Hosts  is  His  Name,"  as  at  the 
close  of  3. 

6.  VI.  1-14.  The  second  "  Woe,"  on  them 
"that  are  at  ease  in  Zion"  (i,  2):  a  satire  on 
the  luxuries  of  the  rich  and  their  indifference  to 
the  national  suffering  (3-6) :  captivity  must  come, 
with  the  desolation  of  the  land  (9,  10) ;  and  in 
a  peroration  the  prophet  reiterates  a  general 
downfall  of  the  nation  because  of  its  perversity. 
"  A  Nation  " — needless  to  name  it! — will  oppress 
Israel  from  Hamath  to  the  River  of  the  Arabah. 

Third  Section:  Chaps.  VII. -IX.  Visions  with 
Interludes. 

The  Visions  betray  traces  of  development;  but 
they  are  interrupted  by  a  piece  of  narrative  and 
addresses  on  the  same  themes  as  chaps,  iii.-vi. 
The  First  Two  Visions  (vii.  1-6)  are  of  disasters 
— locusts  and  drought — in  the  realm  of  nature; 
they  are  averted  by  prayer  from  Amos.  The 
Third  (7-9)  is  in  the  sphere,  not  of  nature,  but 
history:  Jehovah  standing  with  a  plumbline,  as 
if  to  show  the  nation's  fabric  to  be  utterly 
twisted,  announces  that  it  shall  be  overthrown, 
and  that  the  dynasty  of  Jeroboam  must  be  put 
to  the  sword.  Upon  this  mention  of  the  king, 
the  first  in  the  book,  there  starts  the  narrative 
(10-17)  of  how  Amaziah,  priest  at  Bethel — obvi- 
ously upon  hearing  the  prophet's  threat — sent 
word  to  Jeroboam;  and  then  (whether  before  or 
after  getting  a  reply)  proceeded  to  silence  Amos, 
who,  however,  reiterates  his  prediction  of  doom, 
again  described  as  captivity  in  a  foreign  land, 
and  adds  a  Fourth  Vision  (viii.  1-3).  of  the 
Kaits  or  "  Summer  Fruit,"  which  suggests  Kets, 
or  "  End  "  of  the  Nation.  Here  it  would  seem 
Amos'  discourses  at  Bethel  take  end.  Then 
comes  viii.  4-6,  another  exposure  of  the  sins  of 
the  rich;  followed  by  a  triple  pronouncement  of 
doom  (7),  again  in  the  terms  of  physical  calami- 
ties— earthquake  (8),  eclipse  (9,  10),  and  famine 
(11-14),  in  the  last  of  which  the  public  worship 
is  again  attacked.  A  Fifth  Vision,  of  the  Lord 
by  the  Altar  commanding  to  smite  (ix.  i),  is 
followed  by  a  powerful  threat  of  the  hopelessness 
of  escape  from  God's  punishment  (ix.  it-4);  the 
third  of  the  great  apostrophes  to  the  might  of 
Jehovah  (5,  6) ;  another  statement  of  the  equality 
in  judgment  of  Israel  with  other  peoples,  and  of 
their  utter  destruction  (7-&J).  Then  (8t)  we 
meet  the  first  qualification  of  the  hitherto  unre- 
lieved sentence  of  death.  Captivity  is  described, 
not  as  doom,  but  as  discipline  (9) ;  the  sinners  of 
the  people,  scoffers  at  doom,  shall  die  (10).  And 
this  seems  to  leave  room  for  two  final  oracles 


4S8 


THE-^-BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


of  restoration  and  glory,  the  only  two  in  the 
book,  which  are  couched  in  the  exact  terms  of 
the  promises  of  later  prophecy  (ii-is)  and  are 
by  many  denied  to  Amos. 

Such  is  the  course  of  the  prophesying  of  Amos. 
To  have  traced  it  must  have  made  clear  to  us 
the  unity  of  his  book,*  as  well  as  the  character 
of  the  period  to  which  he  belonged.  But  it  also 
furnishes  us  with  a  good  deal  of  evidence  to- 
wards the  answer  of  such  necessary  questions  as 
these — whether  we  can  fix  an  exact  date  for  the 
whole  or  any  part,  and  whether  we  can  trace 
any  logical  or  historical  development  through 
the  chapters,  either  as  these  now  stand,  or  in 
some  such  re-arrangement  as  we  saw  to  be  neces- 
sary for  the  authentic  prophecies  of  Isaiah. 

Let  us  take  first  the  simplest  of  these  tasks— 
to  ascertain  the  general  period  of  the  book. 
Twice — by  the  title  and  by  the  portion  of  nar- 
rative t — we  are  pointed  to  the  reign  of  Jero- 
boam IL,  circa  783-743:  other  historical  allusions 
suit  the  same  years.  The  principalities  of  Pales- 
tine are  all  standing,  except  Gath:  $  but  the  great 
northern  cloud  which  carries  their  doom  has 
risen  and  is  ready  to  burst.  Now  Assyria,  we 
have  seen,  had  become  fatal  to  Palestine  as  early 
as  854.  Infrecjuent  invasions  of  Syria  had  fol- 
lowed, in  one  of  which,  in  803,  Rimmon  Ni- 
rari  IIL  had  subjected  Tyre  and  Sidon,  besieged 
Damascus,  and  received  tribute  from  Israel.  So 
far  then  as  the  Assyrian  data  are  concerned,  the 
Book  of  Amos  might  have  been  written  early  in 
the  reign  of  Jeroboam.  Even  then  was  the 
storm  lowering  as  he  describes  it.  Even  then 
had  the  lightning  broken  over  Damascus. 
There  are  other  symptoms,  however,  which  de- 
mand a  later  date.  They  seem  to  imply,  not  only 
Uzziah's  overthrow  of  Gath,^^  and  Jeroboam's 
conquest  of  Moab||  and  of  Aram,*]  but  that  es- 
tablishment of  Israel's  political  influence  from 
Lebanon  to  the  Dead  Sea,  which  must  have 
taken  Jeroboam  several  years  to  accomplish. 
With  this  agree  other  features  of  the  prophecy 
— the  sense  of  political  security  in  Israel,  the 
large  increase  of  wealth,  the  ample  and  luxuri- 
ous buildings,  the  gorgeous  ritual,  the  easy 
ability  to  recover  from  physical  calamities,  the 
consequent  carelessness  and  pride  of  the  upper 
classes.  All  these  things  imply  that  the  last 
Syrian  invasions  of  Israel  in  the  beginning  of 
the  century  were  at  least  a  generation  behind  the 
men  into  whose  careless  faces  the  prophet 
hurled  his  words  of  doom.  During  this  interval 
Assyria  had  again  advanced — in  775,  in  jj^y  and 
in  7/2.*''"  None  of  these  expeditions,  however, 
had  come  south  of  Damascus,  and  this,  their 
invariable  arrest  at  some  distance  from  the 
proper  territory  of  Israel,  may  have  further  flat- 
tered the  people's  sense  of  security,  though  prob- 

*  Apart  from  the  suspected  parentheses  already  men- 
tioned. 

tChap.  vii. 

t  And,  if  vi.  2  be  genuine,  Hamath. 

iaChron.  xxvi.  6.  In  the  list  of  the  Philistine  cities, 
Amos  i.  6-8,  Gath  does  not  occur,  and  in  harmony  with 
this  in  vi.  2  it  is  said  to  be  overthrown  ;  seep.  485. 

II  2  Kings.  In  Amos  li.  3  the  ruler  of  Moab  is  called  not 
king,  but  tOQIti*.  or  regent,  such  as  Jeroboam  substituted 
for  the  king  of  Moab. 

IT  According  to  Gratz's  emendation  of  vi.  13  :  "  we  have 
taken  Lo-Debar  and  Karnaim."  Perhaps  too  in  iii.  12, 
though  the  verse  is  very  obscure,  some  settlement  of 
Israelites  in  Damascus  is  implied.  For  Jeroboam's  con- 
quest of  Aram  (2  Kings  xiv,  28),  see  p.  486. 

**  In  775  to  Erini,  "  the  country  of  the  cedars  "—that  is. 
Mount  Amanus,  near  the  Gulf  of  Antioch  ;  in  773  to  Da- 
mascus ;  in  772  to  Hadrach. 


ably  the  truth  was  that  Jeroboam,  like  some  of 
his  predecessors,  bought  his  peace  by  tribute  to 
the  emperor.  In  765,  when  the  Assyrians  for 
the  second  time  invaded  Hadrach,  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Damascus,  their  records  mention 
a  pestilence,  which,  both  because  their  armies 
were  then  in  Syria,  and  because  the  plague 
generally  spreads  over  the  whole  of  Western 
Asia,  may  well  have  been  the  pestilence  men- 
tioned by  Amos.  In  763  a  total  eclipse  of  the 
sun  took  place,  and  is  perhaps  implied  by  the 
ninth  verse  of  his  eighth  chapter.  If  this  double 
allusion  to  pestilence  and  eclipse  be  correct,  it 
brings  the  book  down  to  the  middle  of  the  cen- 
tury and  the  latter  half  of  Jeroboam's  long  reign. 
In  755  the  Assyrians  came  back  to  Hadrach; 
in  754  to  Arpad:  with  these  exceptions  Syria 
was  untroubled  by  them  till  after  745.  It  was 
probably  these  quiet  years  in  which  Amos  found 
Israel  "  at  ease  in  Zion."  *  If  we  went  down 
further,  within  the  more  forward  policy  of  Tig- 
lath-Pileser,  who  ascended  the  throne  in  745 
and  besieged  Arpad  from  743  to  740,  we  should 
find  an  occasion  for  the  urgency  with  which 
Amos  warns  Israel  that  the  invasion  of  her  land 
and  the  overthrow  of  the  dynasty  of  Jeroboam 
will  be  immediate. t  But  Amos  might  have 
spoken  as  urgently  even  before  Tiglath-Pileser's 
accession;  and  the  probability  that  Hosea,  who 
prophesied  within  Jeroboam's  reign,  quotes  from 
Amos  seems  to  imply  that  the  prophecies  of  the 
latter  had  been  current  for  some  time. 

Towards  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century — 
is,  therefore,  the  most  definite  date  to  which 
we  are  able  to  assign  the  Book  of  Amos.  At 
»o  great  a  distance  the  difference  of  a  few  un- 
marked years  is  invisible.  It  is  enough  that  we 
know  the  moral  dates — the  state  of  national  feel- 
ing, the  personages  alive,  the  great  events  which 
are  behind  the  prophet,  and  the  still  greater 
which  are  imminent.  We  can  see  that  Amos 
wrote  in  the  political  pride  of  the  latter  years 
of  Jeroboam's  reign,  after  the  pestilence  and 
eclipse  of  the  sixties,  and  before  the  advance 
of  Tiglath-Pileser  in  the  last  forties  of  the  eighth 
century. 

A  particular  year  is  indeed  offered  by  the  title 
of  the  t)ook,  which,  if  not  by  Amos  himself, 
must  be  from  only  a  few  years  later :.t  "  Words 
of  Amos,  which  he  saw  in  the  days  of  Uzziah 
and  of  Jeroboam,  two  years  before  the  earth- 
quake." This  was  the  great  earthquake  of  which 
other  prophets  speak  as  having  happened  in  the 
days  of  Uzziah. §  But  we  do  not  know  where 
to  place  the  year  of  the  earthquake,  and  are  as 
far  as  ever  from  a  definite  date. 

The  mention  of  the  earthquake,  however,  in. 
troduces  us  to  the  answer  of  another  of  our  ques- 
tions— whether,  with  all  its  unity,  the  Book  of 
Amos  reveals  any  lines  of  progress,  either  of 
event  or  of  idea,  either  historical  or  logical. 

Granting  the  truth  of  the  title,  that  Amos  had 
his  prophetic  eyes  opened  two  years  before  the 
earthquake,  it  will  be  a  sign  of  historical  prog- 
ress if  we.  find  in  the  book  itself  any  allusions 
to  the  earthquake.  Now  these  are  present.  In 
the  first  division  we  find  none,  urless  the  threat 


*  VI.   I. 

tvii.  9. 

t  Even  Konig  denies  that  the  title  is  from  Amos  ("  Ein- 
leitung,"  307);  yet  the  ground  on  which  he  does  so,  the 
awkwardness  of  the  double  relative,  does  not  appear 
sufficient.  One  does  not  write  a  title  in  the  same  style  as 
an  ordinary  sentence. 

§Zech.  XIV.  Si  and  probably  Isa.  ix.  g,  10  (Eng.> 


THE    BOOK    OF    AMOS. 


459 


of  God's  visitation  in  the  form  of  a  shaking  of 
the  land  be  considered  as  a  tremor  communi- 
cated to  the  prophet's  mind  from  the  recent 
upheaval.  But  in  the  second  division  there  is 
an  obvious  reference:  the  last  of  the  unavailing 
chastisements  with  which  Jehovah  has  chastised 
His  people  is  described  as  a  "  great  overturn- 
ing." *  And  in  the  third  division,  in  two  pas- 
sages, the  judgment,  which  Amos  has  already- 
stated  will  fall  in  the  form  of  an  invasion,  is 
also  figured  in  the  terms  of  an  earthquake.  Nor 
does  this  exhaust  the  tremors  which  that  awful 
convulsion  had  started;  but  throughout  the  sec- 
ond and  third  divisions  there  is  a  constant  sense 
of  instability,  of  the  liftableness  and  breakable- 
ness  of  the  very  ground  of  life.  Of  course,  as 
we  shall  see,  this  was  due  to  the  prophet's 
knowledge  of  the  moral  explosiveness  of  society 
in  Israel;  but  he  could  hardly  have  described 
the  results  of  that  in  the  terms  he  has  used, 
unless  himself  and  his  hearers  had  recently  felt 
the  ground  quake  under  them,  and  seen  whole 
cities  topple  over.  If,  then,  Amos  began  to 
prophesy  two  years  before  the  earthquake,  the 
bulk  of  his  book  was  spoken,  or  at  least  written 
down,  after  the  earthquake  had  left  all  Israel 
trembling.f 

This  proof  of  progress  in  the  book  is  con- 
firmed by  another  feature.  In  the  abstract  given 
above  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  judgments  of 
the  Lord  upon  Israel  were  of  a  twofold  character. 
Some  were  physical — famine,  drought,  blight, 
locusts,  earthquake;  and  some  were  political — 
battle,  defeat,  invasion,  captivity.  Now  it  is 
significant — and  I  do  not  think  the  point  has 
been  previously  remarked — that  not  only  are  the 
physical  represented  as  happening  first,  but  that 
at  one  time  the  prophet  seems  to  have  under- 
stood that  no  others  would  be  needed,  that  in- 
deed God  did  not  reveal  to  him  the  imminence 
of  political  disaster  till  He  had  exhausted  the 
discipline  of  physical  calamities.  For  this  we 
have  double  evidence.  In  chapter  iv.  Amos  re- 
ports that  the  Lord  has  sought  to  rouse  Israel 
out  of  the  moral  lethargy  into  which  their  re- 
ligious servides  have  soothed  them,  by  withhold- 
ing bread  and  water;  by  blighting  their  orchards; 
by  a  pestilence,  a  thoroughly  Egyptian  one;  and 
by  an  earthquake.  But  these  having  failed  to  pro- 
duce repentance,  God  must  visit  the  people  once 
more:  how,  the  prophet  does  not  say,  leaving 
the  imminent  terror  unnamed,  but  we  know  that 
the  Assyrian  overthrow  is  meant.  Now  pre- 
cisely parallel  to  this  is  the  course  of  the  Visions 
in  chapter  vii.  The  Lord  caused  Amos  to  see 
(whether  in  fancy  or  in  fact  we  need  not  now  stop 
to  consider)  the  plague  of  locusts.  It  was  so 
bad  as  to  threaten  Israel  with  destruction.  But 
Amos  interceded,  and  God  answered,  "  It  shall 

*  iv.  II. 

tOf  course  it  is  always  possible  to  suspect— and  let  us 
b)-  all  means  exhaust  the  possibilities  of  suspicion— that 
the  title  has  been  added  by  a  scribe,  who  interpreted  the 
forebodings  of  judgment  which  Amos  expresses  in  the 
terms  of  earthquake  as  if  they  were  the  predictions  of  a 
real  earthquake,  and  was  anxious  to  show,  by  inserting 
the  title,  liow  they  were  fulfilled  in  the  great  convulsion 
of  Uzziah's  days.  But  to  such  a  suspicion  we  have  a 
complete  answer.  No  later  scribe,  who  understood  the 
bf^iok  he  was  dealing  with,  would  have  prefi.xed  to  it  a 
title,  with  the  motive  just  suspected,  when  in  chap.  iv.  he 
Ttad  that  an  earthquake  had  just  taken  place.  The  very 
fact  that  such  a  title  appears  over  a  book,  which  speaks 
of  the  earthquake  as  past,  surely  attests  the  bona  fides  of 
the  title.  With  that  mention  in  chap.  iv.  of  the  earth- 
quake as  past,  none  would  have  ventured  to  say  that  Amos 
began  to  prophesy  before  the  earthquake,  unless  they 
had  known  this  to  be  the  case. 


not  be."  Similarly  with  a  plague  of  drought. 
But  then  the  Vision  shifts  from  the  realm  of 
nature  to  that  of  politics.  The  Lord  sets  the 
plumbline  to  the  fabric  of  Israel's  life:  this  is 
found  hopelessly  bent  and  unstable.  It  must 
be  pulled  down,  and  the  pulling  down  shall  be 
political:  the  family  of  Jeroboam  is  to  be  slain, 
the  people  are  to  go  into  captivity.  The  next 
Vision,  therefore,  is  of  the  End— the  Final  Judg- 
ment of  war  and  defeat,  which  is  followed  only 
by  Silence. 

Thus,  by  a  double  proof,  we  see  not  only  that 
the  Divine  method  in  that  age  was  to  act  first 
by  physical  chastisement,  and  only  then  by  an 
inevitable,  ultimate  doom  of  war  and  captivity; 
but  that  the  experience  of  Amos  himself,  his 
own  intercourse  with  the  Lord,  passed  through 
these  two  stages.  The  significance  of  this  for 
the  picture  of  the  prophet's  life  we  shall  see 
in  our  next  chapter.  Here  we  are  concerned  to 
ask  whether  it  gives  us  any  clue  as  to  the  ex- 
tant arrangement  of  his  prophecies,  or  any  jus- 
tification for  rearranging  them,  as  the  prophecies 
of  Isaiah  have  to  be  re-arranged,  according  to 
the  various  stages  of  historical  development  at 
which  they  were  uttered. 

We  have  just  seen  that  the  progress  from  the 
physical  chastisements  to  the  political  doom  is 
reflected  in  both  the  last  two  sections  of  the 
book.  But  the  same  gradual,  cumulative  method 
is  attributed  to  the  Divine  Providence  by  the 
First  Section:  "  For  three  transgressions,  yea, 
for  four,  I  will  not  turn  it  back";  and  then 
follow  the  same  disasters  of  war  and  captivity 
as  are  threatened  in  Sections  II.  and  III.  But 
each  section  does  not  only  thus  end  similarly; 
each  also  begins  with  the  record  of  an  immediate 
impression  made  on  the  prophet  by  Jehovah 
(chaps,  i.  2;  iii.  3-8;  vii.  1-9). 

To  sum  up: — The  Book  of  Amos  consists  of 
three  sections,  which  seem  to  have  received  their 
present  form  *  towards  the  end  of  Jeroboam's 
reign;  and  which,  after  emphasising  their  origin 
as  due  to  the  immediate  influence  of  Jehovah 
Himself  on  the  prophet,  follow  pretty  much  the 
same  course  of  the  Divine  dealings  with  that 
generation  of  Israel — a  course  which  began  with 
physical  chastisements  that  failed  to  produce  re- 
pentance, and  ended  with  the  irrevocable  threat 
of  the  Assyrian  invasion.  Each  section,  that 
is  to  say,  starts  from  the  same  point,  follows 
much  the  same  direction,  and  arrives  at  exactly 
the  same  conclusion.  Chronologically  you  can- 
not put  one  of  them  before  the  other;  but  from 
each  it  is  possible  to  learn  the  stages  of  experi- 
ence through  which  Amos  himself  passed — to  dis- 
cover how  God  taught  the  prophet,  not  only  by 
the  original  intuitions  from  which  all  prophecy 
starts,  but  by  the  gradual  events  of  his  day  both 
at  home  and  abroad. 

This  decides  our  plan  for  us.  We  shall  first 
trace  the  life  and  experience  of  Amos,  as  his 
book  enables  us  to  do;  and  then  we  shall  ex- 
amine, in  the  order  in  which  they  lie,  the  three 
parallel  forms  in  which,  when  he  was  silenced 
at  Bethel,  he  collected  the  fruits  of  that  ex- 
perience, and  gave  them  their  final  expression. 

The  style  of  the  book  is  simple  and  terse.  The 
fixity  of  the  prophet's  aim — upon  a  few  moral 
principles  and  the  doom  they  demand — keeps 
his  sentences  firm  and  sharp,  and  sends  his  para- 

*  Except  for  the  later  additions,  not  by  Amos,  to  be 
afterwards  noted. 


460 


THE  1B00K    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


graphs  rapidly  to  their  climax.  That  he  sees 
nature  only  under  moral  light  renders  his  poetry 
austere  and  occasionally  savage.  His  language 
is  very  pure.  There  is  no  ground  for  Jerome's 
charge  that  he  was  "  imperitus  sermone":  we 
shall  have  to  notice  only  a  few  irregularities 
in  spelling,  due  perhaps  to  the  dialect  of  the 
deserts  in  which  he  passed  his  life.* 

The  text  of  the  book  is  for  the  most  part 
well  preserved;  but  there  are  a  number  of  evident 
corruptions.  Of  the  Greek  Version  the  same 
holds  good  as  we  have  said  in  more  detail  of 
the  Greek  of  Rosea. f  It  is  sometimes  correct 
where  the  Hebrew  text  is  not,  sometimes  sug- 
gestive of  the  emendations  required,  and  some- 
times hopelessly  astray. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  MAN  AND   THE  PROPHET. 

The  Book  of  Amos  opens  one  of  the  greatest 
stages  in  the  religious  development  of  mankind. 
Its  originality  is  due  to  a  few  simple  ideas,  which 
it  propels  into  religion  with  an  almost  unrelieved 
abruptness.  But,  like  all  ideas  which  ever  broke 
upon  the  world,  these  also  have  flesh  and  blood 
behind  them.  Like  every  other  Reformation  this 
one  in  Israel  began  with  the  conscience  and  the 
protest  of  an  individual.  Our  review  of  the  book 
has  made  this  plain.  We  have  found  in  it,  not 
only  a  personal  adventure  of  a  heroic  kind,  but 
a  progressive  series  of  visions,  with  some  other 
proofs  of  a  development  both  of  facts  and  ideas. 
In  short,  behind  the  book  there  beats  a  life, 
and  our  first  duty  is  to  attempt  to  trace  its 
spiritual  history.  The  attempt  is  worth  the 
greatest  care.  "  Amos,"  says  a  very  critical 
writer, r  "is  one  of  the  most  wonderful  appear- 
ances in  the  history  of  the  human  spirit." 

I.  The  Man  and  His  Discipline. 
Amos  i.  i;  iii.  3-8;  vii.  14,  15. 

When  charged  at  the  crisis  of  his  career  with 
being  but  a  hireling-prophet,  Amos  disclaimed 
the  official  name  and  took  his  stand  up*^::  Iiis 
work  as  a  man:  "  No  prophet  I,  nor  prophet's 
son,  but  a  herdsman  and  a  dresser  of  sycamores. 
Jehovah  took  me  from  behind  the  flock."  §  We 
shall  enhance  our  appreciation  of  this  manhood, 
and  of  the  new  order  of  prophecy  which  it  as- 
serted, if  we  look  for  a  little  at  the  soil  on  which 
it  was  so  bravely  nourished. 

Six  miles  south  from  Bethlehem,  as  Bethlehem 
is  six  from  Jerusalem,  there  rises  on  the  edge 
of  the  Judasan  platean,  towards  the  desert,  a 
commanding  hill,  the  ruins  on  which  are  still 
known  by  the  name  of  Tek6a*.|| 

*  Cf.  ii.  13  ;  V.  II.;  vi.  8,  lo  ;  vii.  9,  16  ;  viii.  8(?). 
t  See  below,  p.  497. 

ICornill:  "  Der  Israelitische  Prophetismus.    Five  Lec- 
tures for  the  Educated  Laity."    1894. 
§  Amos  vii.  14.     See  further  p.  461. 

II  Khurbet  Takfia',  Hebrew  Tekoa',  Vlp^,   from  sfpj-j, 

to  bloiv  a  trtimpet  (cf.  Jer.  vi.  i,  "Blow  the  trumpet  in 
Tekoa")  or  to  pitch  a  tent.  The  latter  seems  the  more 
probable  derivation  of  the  name,  and  suggests  a  nomadic 
origin,  which  agrees  with  the  position  of  Tekoa  on  the 
borders  of  the  desert.  Tekoa  does  not  occur  in  the  list  of 
the  towns  taken  by  Joshua.  There  are  really  no  reasons 
for  supposing  that  some  other  Tekoa  is  meant.  The  two 
that  have  been  alleged  are   (i)  that  Amos  exclusively 


In  the  time  of  Amos  Tekoa  was  a  place  with- 
out sanctity  and  almost  without  tradition.  The 
name  suggests  that  the  site  may  at  first  have 
been  that  of  a  camp.  Its  fortification  by  Reho- 
boam,  and  the  mission  of  its  wise  woman  to 
David,  are  its  only  previous  appearances  in  his- 
tory. Nor  had  nature  been  less  grudging  to 
it  than  fame.  The  men  of  Tekoa  looked  out 
upon  a  desolate  and  haggard  world.  South, 
west,  and  north  the  view  is  barred  by  a  range 
of  limestone  hills,  on  one  of  which  directly  north 
the  grey  towers  of  Jerusalem  are  hardlv  to  be 
discerned  from  the  grey  mountain  lines.  East- 
ward the  prospect  is  still  more  desolate,  but  it 
is  open;  the  land  slopes  away  for  nearly  eighteen 
miles  to  a  depth  of  four  thousand  feet.  Of  this 
long  descent  the  first  step,  lying  immediately 
below  the  hill  of  Tekoa,  is  a  shelf  of  stony  moor- 
land with  the  ruins  of  vineyards.  It  is  the  low- 
est ledge  of  the  settled  life  of  Judsea.  The  east- 
ern edge  drops  suddenly  by  broken  rocks  to 
slopes  spotted  with  bushes  of  "  retem,"  the 
broom  of  the  desert,  and  with  patches  of  poor 
wheat.  From  the  foot  of  the  slopes  the  land 
rolls  away  in  a  maze  of  low  hills  and  shallow 
dales  that  flush  green  in  spring,  but  for  the  rest 
of  the  year  are  brown  with  withered  grass  and 
scrub.  This  is  the  "  Wilderness  "  or  "  Pasture- 
land  of  Tekoa,"  *  across  which  by  night  the  wild 
beasts  howl,  and  by  dav  the  blackened  sites  of 
deserted  camps,  with  the  loose  cairns  that  mark 
the  nomads'  graves,  reveal  a  human  life  almost 
as  vagabond  and  nameless  as  that  of  the  beasts. 
Beyond  the  rolling  land  is  Jeshimon,  or  Devas- 
tation— a  chaos  of  hills,  none  of  whose  ragged 
crests  are  tossed  as  high  as  the  shelf  of  Tekoa, 
while  their  flanks  shudder  down  some  further 
thousands  of  feet,  by  crumbling  precipices  and 
corries  choked  with  debris,  t  the  coast  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  The  northern  half  of  this  is  visible, 
bright  blue  against  the  red  wall  of  Moab,  and 
the  level  top  of  the  wall,  broken  only  by  the 
valley  of  the  Arnon,  constitutes  the  horizon. 
Except  for  the  blue  water-  -which  shines  in  its 
gap  between  the  torn  hills  like  a  bit  of  sky 
through  rifted  clouds — it  is  a  very  dreary  world. 
Yet  the  sun  breaks  over  it,  perhaps  all  the  more 
gloriously;  mists,  rising  from  the  sea  simmering 
in  its  great  vat,  drape  the  nakedness  of  the  desert 
noon;  and  through  the  dry  desert  night  the 
planets  ride  with  a  majesty  they  cannot  assume 
in  our  more  troubled  atmospheres.  It  is  also 
a  very  empty  and  a  very  silent  world,  yet  every 
stir  of  life  upon  it  excites,  therefore,  the  greater 
vigilance,  and  man's  faculties,  relieved  from  the 
rush  and  confusion  of  events,  form  the  instinct 
of  marking,  and  reflecting  upon,  every  single 
phenomenon.  And  it  is  a  very  savage  world. 
Across  it  all  the  towers  of  Jerusalem  give  the 
only  signal  of  the  spirit,  the  one  token  that  man 
has  a  history. 

Upon  this  unmitigated  wilderness,  where  life 
is  reduced  to  poverty  and  danger;  where  nature 
starves  the  imagination,  but  excites  the  faculties 
of  perception  and  curiosity;  with  the  mountain 
tops  and  the  sunrise  in  his  face,  but  above  all 
with  Jerusalem  so  near, — Amos  did  the  work 
which  made  him  a  man,  heard  the  voice  of 
God  calling  him  to  be  a  prophet,  and  gathered 
those  symbols  and  figures  in  which  his  prophet's 

refers  to  the  Northern  Kingdom,  (2)  that  sycamores  do 
not  grow  at  such  levels  as  Tekoa.    These  are  dealt  with 
on  p.  461. 
*  2  Chron.  xx.  20. 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


461 


message  still  reaches  us  with  so  fresh  and  so 
austere  an  air. 

Amos  was  "  among  the  shepherds  of  Tekoa." 
The  word  for  "  shepherd  "  is  unusual,  and  means 
the  herdsman  of  a  peculiar  breed  of  desert  sheep, 
still  under  the  same  name  prized  in  yVrabia  for 
the  excellence  of  their  wool.*  And  he  was  "  a 
dresser  of  sycamores."  The  tree,  which  is  not 
our  sycamore,  is  very  easily  grown  in  sandy 
soil  with  a  little  water.  It  reaches  a  great 
height  and  mass  of  foliage.  The  fruit  is  like  a 
small  fig,  with  a  sweet  but  watery  taste,  and  is 
eaten  only  by  the  poor.  Born  not  of  the  fresh 
twigs,  but  of  the  trunk  and  older  branches,  the 
sluggish  lumps  are  provoked  to  ripen  by  phich- 
ing  or  bruising,  which  seems  to  be  the  literal 
meaning  of  the  term  that  Amos  uses  of  himself— 
"  a  pincher  of  sycamores."  f  The  sycamore  does 
not  grow  at  so  high  a  level  as  Tekoa;  if  and  this 
fact,  taken  along  with  the  limitation  of  the  min- 
istry of  Amos  to  the  Northern  Kingdom,  has 
been  held  to  prove  that  he  was  originally  an 
Ephraimite,  a  sycamore-dresser,  who  had  mi- 
grated and  settled  down,  as  the  peculiar  phrase 
of  the  title  says,  "  among  the  shepherds  of 
Tekoa. ">5  We  shall  presently  see,  however,  that 
his  familiarity  with  life  in  Northern  Israel  may 
easily  have  been  won  in  other  ways  than  through 
citizenship  in  that  kingdom;  while  the  very  gen- 
eral nature  of  the  definition,  "  among  the  shep- 
herds of  Tekoa,"  does  not  oblige  us  to  place 
either  him  or  his  sycamores  so  high  as  the  vil- 
lage itself.  The  most  easterly  township  of  Judaea, 
Tekoa  commanded  the  whole  of  the  wilderness 
beyond,  to  which  indeed  it  gave  its  name,  "  the 
wilderness  of  Tekoa."  The  shepherds  of  Tekoa 
were  therefore,  in  all  probability,  scattered  across 
the  whole  region  down  to  the  oases  on  the  coast 
of  tiie  Dead  Sea,  which  have  generally  been 
owned  by  one  or  other  of  the  settled  communi- 
ties in  the  hill-country  above,  and  may  at  that 
time  have  belonged  to  Tekoa,  just  as  in  Crusad- 

'1?.^'   noked,   is  doubtless   the    same  as  the    Arabic 

"  naV'jad,"  or  keeper  of  the  "  nakad,"  defined  by  Freytag 
as  a' short-legged  and  deformed  race  of  sheep  in  the 
Bahrein  province  of  Arabia,  from  which  Gomes' the 
proverb  "viler  than  a  nakad  "  ;  yet  the  wool  is  very  fine. 

The  king  of  Moab  is  called    'k)^  in  2  Kings  iii.  4  (A.  V. 

sheepmaster).  In  vii.  14  Amos  calls  himself  'P.'^'  cattle- 
man, which  there  is  no  reason  to  alter,  as  some  do,  to 


boles,  probably  from  a  root  (found  in  .lEthi- 


+  0^13. 

opic)  balas,  a  fi^ :  hence  one  who  had  to  do  with  figs, 
handled  them,  ripened  them. 

X  The  Egyptian  sycamore,  Ficus  sycomorus,  is  not  found 
in  Syria  above  one  thousand  feet  above  the  sea,  while 
Tekoa  is  more  than  twice  as  high  as  that.  Cf.  i  Kings  x. 
27.  "the  sycamores  that  are  in  the  vale  or  valley  land," 

r.^.  '  I  Chron.  xxvii.  28,  "the  sycamores  that  are  in  the 

low  plains."  "The  sycamore  grows  in  sand  on  the  edge 
of  the  desert  as  vigorously  as  in  the  midst  of  a  well- 
watered  country.  Its  roots  go  deep  in  search  of  water, 
which  infiltrates  as  far  as  the  gorges  of  the  hills,  and 
they  absorb  it  freely  even  where  drought  seems  to  reign 
supreme"  (Maspero  on  the  Egyptian  sycamore:  "The 
Dawn  of  Civilization,"  translated  by  McClure,  p.  26). 
"Everywhere  on  the  confines  of  cultivated  ground,  and 
even  at  some  distance  from  the  valley,  are  fine  single  syc- 
amores flourisliing  as  though  by  miracle  amid  the  sand. 
.  .  .  They  drink  from  water,  which  has  infiltrated  from 
the  Nile,  and  whose  existent-e  is  nowise  betrayed  upon 
the  surface  of  the  soil  "  (ifi.,  121).  Always  and  still  rever- 
enced by  Moslem  and  Christian. 

§  So  practically  Oort  ("Th.  Tjidsch.,"  i8qi,  121  ff.).  when 
compelled  to  abandon  his  previous  conclusion  (id  ,  1880, 
122  ft.)  that  the  Tekoa  of  Amos  lay  in  Northern  Israel. 


ing  times  they  belonged  to  the  monks  of  He- 
bron, or  are  to-day  cultivated  by  the  Rushaideh 
Arabs,  who  pitch  their  camps  not  far  from  Te- 
koa itself.  As  you  will  still  find  everywhere  on 
the  borders  of  the  Syrian  desert  shepherds  nour- 
ishing a  few  fruit-trees  round  the  chief  well  of 
their  pasture,  in  order  to  vary  their  milk  diet, 
so  in  some  low  oasis  in  the  wilderness  of  Judaea 
Amos  cultivated  the  poorest,  but  the  most  easily 
grown  of  fruits,  the  sycamore.*  All  this  pushes 
Amos  and  his  dwarf  sheep  deeper  into  the  desert, 
and  emphasises  what  has  been  said  above,  and 
still  remains  to  be  illustrated,  of  the  desert's  in- 
fluence on  his  discipline  as  a  mn  and  on  his 
speech  as  a  prophet.  We  ought  to  remember 
that  in  the  same  desert  another  prophet  was 
bred,  who  was  also  the  pioneer  of  a  new  dispen- 
sation, and  whose  ministry,  both  in  its  strength 
and  its  limitations,  is  much  recalled  by  the  min- 
istry of  Amos.  John  the  son  of  Zacharias  "  grew 
and  waxed  strong  in  spirit,  and  was  in  the  deserts 
till  the  day  of  his  showing  unto  Israel."  f  Here, 
too,  our  Lord  was  "  with  the  wild  beasts."  i 
How  much  Amos  had  been  with  them  may  be 
seen  from  many  of  his  metaphors.  "  The  lion 
roareth,  who  shall  not  fear?  ....  As  when  the 
shepherd  rescueth  from  the  mouth  of  the  lion 
two  shinbones  or  a  bit  of  an  ear.  ...  It  shall 
be  as  when  one  is  fleeing  from  a  lion  and  a  bear 
Cometh  upon  him;  and  he  entereth  a  house,  and 
leaneth  his  hand  on  the  wall,  and  a  serpent  biteth 
him." 

As  a  wool-grower,  however,  Amos  must  have 
had  his  yearly  journeys  among  the  markets  of 
the  land;  and  to  such  were  probably  due  his 
opportunities  of  familiarity  with  Northern  Is- 
rael, the  originals  of  his  vivid  pictures  of  her 
town-life,  her  commerce,  and  the  worship  at  her 
great  sanctuaries.  One  hour  westward  from  Te- 
koa would  bring  him  to  the  high-road  between 
Hebron  and  the  North,  with  its  troops  of  pil- 
grims passing  to  Beersheba.§  It  was  but  half-an- 
hour  more  to  the  watershed  and  an  open  view 
of  the  Philistine  plain.  Bethlehem  was  only 
six,  Jerusalem  twelve,  miles  from  Tekoa.  Ten 
miles  farther,  across  the  border  of  Israel,  lay 
Bethel  with  its  temple,  seven  miles  farther  Gil- 
gal,  and  twenty  miles  farther  still  Samaria  the 
capital,  in  all  but  two  days'  journey  from  Tekoa. 
These  had  markets  as  well  as  shrines  ;||  their  an- 
nual festivals  would  be  also  great  fairs.  It  is 
certain  that  Amos  visited  them;  it  is  even  pos- 
sible that  he  went  to  Damascus,  in  which  the 
Israelites  had  at  the  time  their  own  quarters  for 
trading.  By  road  and  market  he  would  meet 
with  men  of  other  lands.  Phoenician  pedlars, 
or  Canaanites  as  they  were  called,  came  up  to 
buy  the  homespun  for  which  the  housewives  of 
Israel  were  famed  TT — hard-faced  men  who  were 
also  willing  to  purchase  slaves,  and  haunted  even 
the  battle-fields  of  their  neighbours  for  this  sin- 
ister purpose.  Men  of  Moab,  at  the  time  sub- 
ject to  Israel;  Aramean  hostages;  Philistines  who 
held  the  export  trade  to  Egypt, — these  Amos 
must  have  met  and  may  have  talked  with;  their 
dialects  scarcely  dififered  from  his  own.  It  is  no 
distant,  desert  echo  of  life  which  we  hear  in  his 

*  In  i8qi  we  met  the  Rushaideh,  who  cultivate  Engedi, 
encamped  just  below  Tekoa.  But  at  other  parts  of  the 
borders  between  the  hill-country  of  Judaea  and  the 
desert,  and  between  Moab  and  the  desert,  we  found 
round  most  of  the  herdsmen's  central  wells  a  few  fig- 
trees  or  pomegranates,  or  even  apricots  occasionally. 

t  Luke  i.  80. 

J  Mark  i.  18.  ||  See  p.  451. 

§v.  5;  viii.  14.  irProv.  xxxi.  24. 


462 


THE -BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


pages,  but  the  thick  and  noisy  rumour  of  caravan 
and  market-place:  how  the  plague  was  marching 
up  from  Egypt;*  ugly  stories  of  the  Phoenician 
slave-trade;!  rumours  of  the  advance  of  the  aw- 
ful Power,  which  men  were  hardly  yet  accus- 
tomed to  name,  but  which  had  already  twice 
broken  from  the  North  upon  Damascus.  Or  it 
was  the  progress  of  some  national  mourning — 
how  lamentation  sprang  up  in  the  capital,  rolled 
along  the  highways,  and  was  re-echoed  from 
the  husbandmen  and  vinedressers  on  the  hill- 
sides.t  Or,  at  closer  quarters,  we  see  and  hear 
the  bustle  of  the  great  festivals  and  fairs— the 
"  solemn  assemblies,"  the  reeking  holocausts, 
the  "noise  of  songs  and  viols:  "§  the  brutish 
religious  zeal  kindling  into  drunkenness  and  lust 
on  the  very  steps  of  the  altar;  ||  the  embezzlement 
of  pledges  by  the  priests,  the  covetous  restless- 
ness of  the  traders,  their  false  measures,  their 
entanglement  of  the  poor  in  debt;  11  the  careless 
luxury  of  the  rich,  their  "  banquets,  buckets  of 
wine,  ivory  couches,"  pretentious,  preposterous 
music.**  These  things  are  described  as  by  an 
eyewitness.  Amos  was  not  a  citizen  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  to  which  he  almost  exclu- 
sively refers;  but  it  was  because  he  went  up 
and  down  in  it,  using  those  eyes  which  the  desert 
air  had  sharpened,  that  he  so  thoroughly  learned 
the  wickedness  of  its  people,  the  corruption  of 
Israel's  life  in  every  rank  and  class  of  society.ff 

But  the  convictions  which  he  applied  to  this 
life  Amos  learned  at  home.  They  came  to  him 
over  the  desert,  and  without  further  material 
signal  than  was  flashed  to  Tekoa  from  the  towers 
of  Jerusalem.  This  is  placed  beyond  doubt  by 
the  figures  in  which  he  describes  his  call  from 
Jehovah.  Contrast  his  story,  so  far  as  he  re- 
veals it,  with  that  of  another.  Some  twenty  years 
later,  Isaiah  of  Jerusalem  saw  the  Lord  in  the 
Temple,  high  and  lifted  up,  and  all  the  inaugural 
vision  of  this  greatest  of  the  prophets  was  con- 
ceived in  the  figures  of  the  Temple— the  altar, 
the  smoke,  the  burning  coals.  But  to  his  prede- 
cessor "  among  the  shepherds  of  Tekoa,"  al- 
though revelation  also  starts  from  Jerusalem,  it 
reaches  him,  not  in  the  sacraments  of  her  sanc- 
tuary, but  across  the  bare  pastures,  and  as  it  were 
in  the  roar  of  a  lion.  "  Jehovah  from  Zion  roar- 
eth,  and  uttereth  His  voice  from  Jerusalem."  tt 
We  read  of  no  formal  process  of  consecration 
for  this  first  of  the  prophets.  Through  his  clear 
desert  air  the  word  of  God  breaks  upon  him 
without  medium  or  sacrament.  And  the  native 
vigilance  of  the  man  is  startled,  is  convinced  by 
it,  beyond  all  argument  or  question.  "  The  lion 
hath  roared,  who  shall  not  fear?  Jehovah  hath 
spoken,  who  can  but  prophesy?  " 

These  words  are  taken  from  a  passage  in  which 
Amos  illustrates  prophecy  from  other  instances 
of  his  shepherd  life.  We  have  seen  what  a  school 
of  vigilance  the  desert  is.  Upon  the  bare  sur- 
face all  that  stirs  is  ominous.  Every  shadow, 
every  noise — the  shepherd  must  know  what  is 
behind  and  be  warned.  Such  a  vigilance  Amos 
would  have  Israel  apply  to  his  own  message, 
and  to  the  events  of  their  history.  Both  of 
these  he  compares  to  certain  facts  of  desert  life, 
behind  which  his  shepherdly  instincts  have 
taught  him  to  feel  an  ominous  cause.  "  Do 
two  men  walk  together  except  they  have 
trysted?  " — except  they  have  made  an  appoint- 


•  VI.  10. 

ti.  9. 
•tv.  16. 


§  V.  21  ff. 

II  ii-  7i  8. 
•f  viii.  4  ff. 


**  VI.  I,  4-7. 

tt  See  pp.  476.  f . 


ment.  Hardly  in  the  desert;  for  there  men  meet 
and  take  the  same  road  by  chance  as  seldom 
as  ships  at  sea.  "  Doth  a  lion  roar  in  the  jungle 
and  have  no  prey,  or  a  young  lion  let  out  his 
voice  in  his  den  except  he  be  taking  some- 
thing? "  The  hunting  lion  is  silent  till  his  quarry 
be  in  sight;  when  the  lonely  shepherd  hears 
the  roar  across  the  desert  he  knows  the  lion 
leaps  upon  his  prey,  and  he  shudders  as  Israel 
ought  to  do  when  they  hear  God's  voice  by  the 
prophet,  for  this  also  is  never  loosened  but  for 
some  grim  fact,  some  leap  of  doom.  Or  "  doth  a 
little  bird  fall  on  the  snare  earthwards  and  there 
be  no  noose  upon  her?  "  The  reading  may  be 
doubtful,  but  the  meaning  is  obvious:  no  one 
ever  saw  a  bird  pulled  roughly  down  to  earth 
when  it  tried  to  fly  away  without  knowing  there 
was  the  loop  of  a  snare  about  her.  Or  "  does  the 
snare  itself  rise  up  from  the  ground,  except  in- 
deed it  be  capturing  something?  " — except  there 
be  in  the  trap  or  net  something  to  flutter,  strug- 
gle, and  so  lift  it  up.  Traps  do  not  move  with- 
out life  in  them.  Or  "  is  the  alarum  trumpet  * 
blown  in  a  city  " — for  instance,  in  high  Tekoa 
up  there,  when  some  Arab  raid  sweeps  from  the 
desert  on  to  the  fields — "  and  do  the  people  not 
tremble?"  Or  "shall  calamity  happen  in  a  city 
and  Jehovah  not  have  done  it?  Yea,  the  Lord 
Jehovah  doeth  nothing  but  He  has  revealed 
His  purpose  to  His  servants  the  prophets.'' 
My  voice  of  warning  and  these  events  of  evil 
in  your  midst  have  the  same  cause — Jehovah — 
behind  thein.  "  The  lion  hath  roared,  who  shall 
not  fear?  Jehovah  hath  spoken,  who  can  but 
prophesy?  "f 

We  cannot  miss  the  personal  note  which  rings 
through  this  triumph  in  the  reality  of  things 
unseen.  Not  only  does  it  proclaim  a  man  of 
sincerity  and  conviction:  it  is  resonant  with  the 
discipline  by  which  that  conviction  was  won — 
were  won,  too,  the  freedom  from  illusion  and 
the  power  of  looking  at  facts  in  the  face,  which  j 
Amos  alone  of  his  contemporaries  possessed.  ' 

St.  Bernard  has  described  the  first  stage  of 
the  Vision  of  God  as  the  Vision  Distributive, 
in  which  the  eager  mind  distributes  her  atten- 
tion upon  common  things  and  common  duties 
in  themselves.  It  was  in  this  elementary  school 
that  the  earliest  of  the  new  prophets  passed  his 
apprenticeship  and  received  his  gifts.  Others 
excel  Amos  in  the  powers  of  the  imagination 
and  the  intellect.  But  by  the  incorrupt  habits 
of  his  shepherd's  life,  by  daily  wakefulness  to 
its  alarms  and  daily  faithfulness  to  its  oppor- 
tunities, he  was  trained  in  that  simple  power 
of  appreciating  facts  and  causes,  which,  applied 
to  the  great  phenomena  of  the  spirit  and  of  , 
history,  forms  his  distinction  among  his  peers.  | 
In  this  we  find  perhaps  the  reason  why  he  re-  1 
cords  of  himself  no  solemn  hour  of  cleansing 
and  initiation.  "  Jehovah  took  me  from  follow- 
ing the  flock,  and  Jehovah  said  unto  me.  Go, 
prophesy  unto  My  people  Israel."  Amos  was 
of  them  of  whom  it  is  written,  "  Blessed  are 
those  servants  whom  the  Lord  when  He  cometh 
shall  find  watching."  Through  all  his  hard  life 
this  shepherd  had  kept  his  mind  open  and  his 
conscience  quick,  so  that  when  the  word  of  God 
came  to  him  he  knew  it,  as  fast  as  he  knew  the 
roar  of  the  lion  across  the  moor.    Certainly  there 

*  IQIK*.  as  has  been  pointed  out,  means  in  early  Israel 
always  the  trumpet  blown  as  a  summons  to  war  ;  only  in 
later  Israel  was  the  name  given  to  the  temple  trumpet. 

t  See  further  on  this  important  passage,  p.  464. 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


403 


is  no  habit  which,  so  much  as  this  of  watching 
facts  with  a  single  eye  and  a  responsible  mind, 
is  indispensable  alike  in  the  humblest  duties  and 
in  the  highest  speculations  of  life.  When  Amos 
gives  those  naive  illustrations  of  how  real  the 
voice  of  God  is  to  him,  we  receive  them  as  the 
tokens  of  a  man,  honest  and  awake.  Little  won- 
der that  he  refuses  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
professional  prophets  of  his  day  who  found 
their  inspiration  in  excitement  and  trance.  Upon 
him  the  impulses  of  the  Deity  come  in  no  arti- 
ficial and  morbid  ecstasy,  removed  as  far  as 
possible  from  real  life.  They  come  upon  him, 
as  it  were,  in  the  open  air.  They  appeal  to 
the  senses  of  his  healthy  and  expert  manhood. 
They  convince  him  of  their  reality  with  the  same 
force  as  do  the  most  startling  events  of  his  lonely 
shepherd  watches.  "  The  lion  hath  roared,  who 
shall  not  fear?  Jehovah  hath  spoken,  who  can 
but  prophesy?  " 

The  influence  of  the  same  discipline  is  still  visi- 
ble when  Amos  passes  from  the  facts  of  his  own 
consciousness  to  the  facts  of  his  people's  life. 
His  day  in  Israel  sweltered  with  optimism.  The 
glare  of  wealth,  the  fulsome  love  of  country, 
the  rank  incense  of  a  religion  that  was  without 
morality — these  thickened  all  the  air,  and  neither 
the  people  nor  their  rulers  had  any  vision.  But 
Amos  carried  with  him  his  clear  desert  atmos- 
phere and  hjs  desert  eyes.  He  saw  the  raw  facts: 
the  poverty,  the  cruel  negligence  of  the  rich, 
the  injustice  of  the  rulers,  the  immorality  of  the 
priests.  The  meaning  of  these  things  he  ques- 
tioned with  as  much  persistence  as  he  ques- 
tioned every  suspicious  sound  or  sight  upon 
those  pastures  of  Tekoa.  He  had  no  illusions: 
he  knew  a  mirage  when  he  saw  one.  Neither 
the  military  pride  of  the  people,  fostered  by  re- 
cent successes  over  Syria,  nor  the  dogmas  of 
their  religion,  which  asserted  Jehovah's  swift 
triumph  upon  the  heathen,  could  prevent  him 
Jrom  knowing  that  the  immorality  of  Israel 
^Tieant  Israel's  political  downfall.  He  was  one 
of  those  recruits  from  common  life,  by  whom  re- 
ligion and  the  state  have  at  all  times  been  re- 
formed. Springing  from  the  laity  and  very  often 
from  among  the  working  classes,  their  freedom 
from  dogmas  and  routine,  as  well  as  from  the 
compromising  interests  of  wealth,  rank,  and 
party,  renders  them  experts  in  life  to  a  degree 
that  almost  no  professional  priest,  statesman,  or 
journalist,  however  honest  or  sympathetic,  can 
hope  to  rival.  Into  politics  they  bring  facts,  but 
into  religion  they  bring  vision. 

It  is  of  the  utmost  significance  that  this  re- 
former, this  founder  of  the  highest  order  of 
prophecy  in  Israel,  should  not  only  thus  begin 
with  facts,  but  to  the  very  end  be  occupied  with 
almost  nothing  else  than  the  vision  and  record 
of  them.  In  Amos  there  is  but  one  prospect 
of  the  Ideal.  It  does  not  break  till  the  close 
of  his  book,  and  then  in  such  contrast  to  the 
plain  and  final  indictments,  which  constitute 
nearly  all  the  rest  of  his  prophesying,  that  many 
have  not  unnaturally  denied  to  him  the  verses 
which  contain  it.  Throughout  the  other  chap- 
ters we  have  but  the  exposure  of  present  facts, 
material  and  moral,  nor  the  sight  of  any  future 
more  distant  than  to-morrow  and  the  immediate 
consequences  of  to-day's  deeds.  Let  us  mark 
this.  The  new  prophecy  which  Amos  started 
in  Israel  reached  Divine  heights  of  hope,  un- 
folded infinite  powers  of  moral  and  political 
regeneration — dared    to   blot   out   all     the   past, 


dared  to  believe  all  things  possible  in  the  future. 
But  it  started  from  the  truth  about  the  mora! 
situation  of  the  present.  Its  first  prophet  not 
only  denied  every  popular  dogma  and  ideal,  but 
appears  not  to  have  substituted  for  them  any 
others.  He  spent  his  gifts  of  vision  on  the 
discovery  and  appreciation  of  facts.  Now  this 
is  necessary,  not  only  in  great  reformations  of 
religion,  but  at  almost  every  stage  in  her  de- 
velopment. We  are  constantly  disposed  to 
abuse  even  the  most  just  and  necessary  of  reli- 
gious ideals  as  substitutes  for  experience  or  as 
escapes  from  duty,  and  to  boast  about  the  future 
before  we  have  understood  or  mastered  the  pres- 
ent. Hence  the  need  of  realists  like  Amos. 
Though  they  are  destitute  of  dogma,  of  comfort, 
of  hope,  of  the  ideal,  let  us  not  doubt  that  they 
also  stand  in  the  succession  of  the  prophets  of 
the  Lord. 

Nay,  this  is  a  stage  of  prophecy  on  which  may 
be  fulfilled  the  prayer  of  Moses:  "  Would  to 
God  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets!  " 
To  see  the  truth  and  tell  it,  to  be  accurate  and 
brave  about  the  moral  facts  of  our  day — to  this 
extent  the  Vision  and  the  Voice  are  possible  for 
every  one  of  us.  Never  for  us  may  the  doors 
of  heaven  open,  as  they  did  for  him  who  stood 
on  the  threshold  of  the  earthly  temple,  and  he 
saw  the  Lord  enthroned,  while  the  Seraphim  of 
the  Presence  sang  the  glory.  Never  for  us  may 
the  skies  fill  with  that  tempest  of  life  which 
Ezekiel  beheld  from  Shinar,  and  above  it  the 
sapphire  throne,  and  on  the  throne  the  likeness 
of  a  man,  the  likeness  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord. 
Yet  let  us  remember  that  to  see  facts  as 
they  are  and  to  tell  the  truth  about  them — this 
also  is  prophecy.  We  may  inhabit  a  sphere 
which  does  not  prompt  the  imagination,  but  is 
as  destitute  of  the  historic  and  traditional  as 
was  the  wilderness  of  Tekoa.  All  the  more  may 
our  unglamoured  eyes  be  true  to  the  facts  about 
us.  Every  common  day  leads  forth  her  duties 
as  shining  as  every  night  leads  forth  her  stars. 
The  deeds  and  the  fortunes  of  men  are  in  our 
sight,  and  spell,  to  all  who  will  honestly  read, 
the  very  Word  of  the  Lord.  If  only  we  be 
loyal,  then  by  him  vvho  made  the  rude  sounds 
and  sights  of  the  desert  his  sacraments,  and 
whose  vigilance  of  things  seen  and  temporal  be- 
came the  vision  of  things  unseen  and  eternal, 
we  also  shall  see  God,  and  be  sure  of  His  ways 
with  men. 

Before  we  pass  from  the  desert  discipline  of 
the  prophet  we  must  notice  one  of  its  effects, 
which,  while  it  greatly  enhanced  the  clearness 
of  his  vision,  undoubtedly  disabled  Amos  for  the 
highest  prophetic  rank.  He  who  lives  in  the 
desert  lives  without  patriotism — detached  and 
aloof.  He  may  see  the  throng  of  men  more 
clearly  than  those  who  move  among  it.  He 
cannot  possibly  so  much  feel  for  them.  Unlike 
Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah,  Amos  was  not  a 
citizen  of  the  kingdom  against  which  he  proph- 
esied, and  indeed  no  proper  citizen  of  any  king- 
dom, but  a  nomad  herdsman,  hovering  on  the 
desert  borders  of  Judaea.  He  saw  Israel  from 
the  outside.  His  message  to  her  is  achieved 
with  scarcely  one  sob  in  his  voice.  For  the 
sake  of  the  poor  and  the  oppressed  among  the 
people  he  is  indignant.  But  with  the  erring, 
staggering  nation  as  a  whole  he  has  no  real 
sympathy.  His  pity  for  her  is  exhausted  in  one 
elegy  and  two  brief  intercessions;  hardly  more 
than  once  does  he  even  call  her  to  repentance. 


464 


THE  -BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


His  sense  of  justice,  in  fact,  had  almost  never  to 
contend  with  his  love.  This  made  Amos  the  better 
witness,  but  the  worse  prophet.  He  did  not  rise 
so  high  as  his  great  successors,  because  he  did 
not  so  feel  himself  one  with  the  people  whom 
he  was  forced  to  condemn,  because  he  did  not 
bear  their  fate  as  his  own  nor  travail  for  their 
new  birth.  "  Ihm  fehlt  die  Liebe."  Love  is  the 
element  lacking  in  his  prophecy;  and  therefore 
the  words  are  true  of  him  which  were  uttered 
of  his  great  follower  across  this  same  wilderness 
of  Judica,  that  mighty  as  were  his  voice  and  his 
message  to  prepare  the  way  of  the  Lord,  yet 
"  the  least  in  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  is  greater 
than   he." 

2.  The  Word  and  its  Origins. 

Amos  i.  2;  iii.  3-8;  and  passim. 

We  have  seen  the  preparation  of  the  Man  for 
the  Word.  We  are  now  to  ask.  Whence  came 
the  Word  to  the  Man? — the  Word  that  made 
him  a  prophet.  What  were  its  sources  and  sanc- 
tions outside  himself?  These  involve  other 
questions.  How  much  of  his  message  did  Amos 
inherit  from  the  previous  religion  of  his  people? 
And  how  much  did  he  teach  for  the  first  time 
in  Israel?  And  again,  how  much  of  this  new 
element  did  he  owe  to  the  great  events  of  his 
day?  And  how  much  demands  some  other 
source  of  inspiration? 

To  all  these  inquiries,  outlines  of  the  answers 
ought  by  this  time  to  have  become  visible.  We 
have  seen  that  the  contents  of  the  Book  of  Amos 
consist  almost  entirely  of  two  kinds:  facts,  actual 
or  imminent,  in  the  history  of  his  people;  and 
certain  moral  principles  of  the  most  elementary 
order.  Amos  appeals  to  no  dogma  nor  form  of 
law,  nor  to  any  religious  or  national  institution. 
Still  more  remarkably,  he  does  not  rely  upon 
miracle  nor  any  so-called  "  supernatural  sign." 
To  employ  the  terms  of  Mazzini's  famous 
formula,  Amos  draws  his  materials  solely  from 
"  conscience  and  history."  Within  himself  he 
hears  certain  moral  principles  speak  in  the  voice 
of  God,  and  certain  events  of  his  day  he  recog- 
nises as  the  judicial  acts  of  God.  The  principles 
condemn  the  living  generation  of  Israel  as 
morally  corrupt;  the  events  threaten  the  people 
with  political  extinction.  From  this  agreement 
between  inward  conviction  and  outward  event 
Amos  draws  his  full  confidence  as  a  prophet,  and 
enforces  on  the  people  his  message  of  doom  as 
God's  own  word. 

The  passage  in  which  Amos  most  explicitly  il- 
lustrates this  harmonv  between  event  and  con- 
viction is  one  whose  metaphors  we  have  already 
quoted  in  proof  of  the  desert's  influence  upon 
the  prophet's  life.  When  Amos  asks,  "  Can  two 
walk  together  except  they  have  made  an  ap- 
pointment? "  his  figure  is  drawn,  as  we  have  seen, 
from  the  wilderness  in  which  two  men  will  hardly 
meet  except  they  have  arranged  to  do  so;  but 
the  truth  he  would  illustrate  by  the  figure  is 
that  two  sets  of  phenomena  which  coincide  must 
have  sprung  from  a  common  purpose.  Their 
conjunction  forbids  mere  chance.  What  kind  of 
phenomena  he  means,  he  lets  us  see  in  his  next 
instance:  "  Doth  a  lion  roar  in  the  jungle  and 
have  no  prey?  Doth  a  young  lion  let  forth  his 
voice  from  his  den  except  he  be  catching  some- 
thing? "  That  is,  those  ominous  sounds  never 
happen  without  some  fell  and  terrible  deed  hap- 


pening along  with  them.  Amos  thus  plainly 
hints  that  the  two  phenomena  on  whose  coinci- 
dence he  insists  are  an  utterance  on  one  side, 
and  on  the  other  side  a  deed  fraught  with  de- 
struction. The  reading  of  the  next  metaphor 
about  the  bird  and  the  snare  is  rncertain;  at 
most  what  it  means  is  that  you  ne-\  er  see  signs 
of  distress  or  a  vain  struggle  to  escape  without 
there  being,  though  out  of  sight,  some  real  cause 
for  them.*  But  from  so  general  a  principle  he 
returns  in  his  fourth  metaphor  to  the  special 
coincidence  between  utterance  and  deed.  "  Is 
the  alarum-trumpet  blown  in  a  city  and  do  the 
people  not  tremble?"  Of  course  they  do;  they 
know  such  sound  is  never  made  without  the  ap- 
proach of  calamity.  But  who  is  the  author  of 
every  calamity?  God  Himself:  "  Shall  there  be 
evil  in  a  city  and  Jehovah  not  have  done  it?  " 
Very  well  then;  we  have  seen  that  common  life 
has  many  instances  in  which,  when  an  ominous 
sound  is  heard,  it  is  because  it  is  closely  linked 
with  a  fatal  deed.  These  happen  together,  not 
by  mere  chance,  but  because  the  one  is  the  ex- 
pression, the  warning,  or  the  explanation  of  the 
other.  And  we  also  know  that  fatal  deeds  which 
happen  to  any  community  in  Israel  are  from 
Jehovah.  He  is  behind  them.  But  they,  too,  are 
accompanied  by  a  warning  voice  from  the  same 
source  as  themselves.  This  is  the  voice  which 
the  prophet  hears  in  his  heart — the  moral  con- 
viction which  he  feels  as  the  Word  of  God. 
"  The  Lord  Jehovah  doeth  nothing  but  He  hath 
revealed  His  counsel  to  His  servants  the 
prophets."  Mark  the  grammar:  the  revelation 
comes  first  to  the  prophet's  heart;  then  he  sees 
and  recognises  the  event,  and  is  confident  to  give 
his  message  about  it.  So  Amos,  repeating  his 
metaphor,  sums  up  his  argument.  "  The  Lion 
hath  roared,  who  shall  not  fear?  " — certain  that 
there  is  more  than  sound  to  happen.  "  The  Lord 
Jehovah  hath  spoken,  who  can  but  prophesy?" 
— certain  that  what  Jehovah  has  spoken  to  him 
inwardly  is  likewise  no  mere  sound,  but  that 
deeds  of  judgment  are  about  to  happen,  as  the 
ominous  voice  requires  they  should.f 

The  prophet  then  is  made  sure  of  his  message 
by  the  agreement  between  the  inward  convictions 
of  his  soul  and  the  outward  events  of  the  day. 
When  these  walk  together,  it  proves  that  they 
have  come  of  a  common  purpose.  He  who 
causes  the  events — it  is  Jehovah  Himself,  "  for 
shall  there  be  evil  in  a  city  and  Jehovah  not 
have  done  it?  " — must  be  author  also  of  the  inner 
voice  or  conviction  which  agrees  with  them. 
"  Who  "  then  "  can  but  prophesy?  "  O'bserve 
again  that  no  support  is  here  derived  from 
miracle;  nor  is  any  claim  made  for  the  prophet 
on  the  ground  of  his  ability  to  foretell  the  event. 
It  is  the  agreement  of  the  idea  with  the  fact, 
their  evident  common  origin  in  the  purpose  of 
Jehovah,  which  makes  a  man  sure  that  he  has  in 
him  the  Word  of  God.  Both  are  necessary,  and 
together  are  enough.  Are  we  then  to  leave  the 
origin  of  the  Word  in  this  coincidence  of  fact 
and  thought — as  it  were  an  electric  flash  pro- 
duced by  the  contact  of  conviction  with  event? 

*  "  Shall  a  little  bird  fall  on  the  snare  earthwards  and 
there  be  no  noose  about  her?  Shall  a  snare  rise  from  the 
ground  and  not  be  taking  something?"  On  this  see  p.  462. 
Its  meaning  seems  to  be  equivalent  to  the  Scottish 
proverb :  "  There's  aye  some  water  whan  the  stirkie 
droons." 

t  There  is  thus  no  reason  to  alter  the  words  "  who  shall 
not  prophesy"  to  "who  shall  not  tremble" — as  Well- 
hausen  does.  To  do  so  is  to  blunt  the  point  of  the  argfU- 
ment. 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


465 


Hardly:  there  are  questions  behind  this  coinci- 
dence. For  instance,  as  to  how  the  two  react 
on  each  other — the  event  provoking  the  con- 
viction, the  conviction  interpreting  the  event? 
The  argument  of  Amos  seems  to  imply  that  the 
ethical  principles  are  experienced  by  the  prophet 
prior  to  the  events  which  justify  them.  Is  this 
so,  or  was  the  shock  of  the  events  required  to 
awaken  the  principles?  And  if  the  principles 
were  prior,  whence  did  Amos  derive  them? 
These  are  some  questions  that  will  lead  us  to 
the  very  origins  of  revelation. 

The  greatest  of  the  events  with  which  Amos 
and  his  contemporaries  dealt  was  the  Assyrian 
invasion.  In  a  previous  chapter  we  have  tried 
to  estimate  the  intellectual  effects  of  Assyria  on 
prophecy.*  Assyria  widened  the  horizon  of  Is- 
rael, put  the  world  to  Hebrew  eyes  into  a  new 
perspective,  vastly  increased  the  possibilities  of 
history,  and  set  to  religion  a  novel  order  of 
problems.  We  can  trace  the  effects  upon  Is- 
rael's conceptions  of  God,  of  man,  and  even  of 
nature. t  Now  it  might  be  plausibly  argued  that 
the  new  prophecy  in  Israel  was  first  stirred  and 
quickened  by  all  this  mental  shock  and  strain, 
and  that  even  the  loftier  ethics  of  the  prophets 
were  thus -due  to  the  advance  of  Assyria.  For, 
as  the  most  vigilant  watchmen  of  their  day,  the 
prophets  observed  the  rise  of  that  empire,  and 
felt  its  fatality  for  Israel.  Turning  then  to  in- 
quire the  Divine  reasons  for  such  a  destruction, 
they  found  these  in  Israel's  sinfulness,  to  the  full 
extent  of  which  their  hearts  were  at  last  awak- 
ened. According  to  such  a  theory  the  prophets 
were  politicians  first  and  moralists  afterwards: 
alarmists  to  begin  with,  and  preachers  of  re- 
pentance only  second.  Or — to  recur  to  the  lan- 
guage employed  above — the  prophets'  experi- 
ence of  the  historical  event  preceded  their  con- 
viction  of  the  moral  principle  which  agreed 
with  it. 

In  support  of  such  a  theory  it  is  pointed  out 
that  after  all  the  most  original  element  in  the 
prophecy  of  the  eighth  century  was  the  an- 
nouncement of  Israel's  fall  and  exile.  The 
Righteousness  of  Jehovah  had  often  previously 
been  enforced  in  Israel,  but  never  had  any  voice 
drawn  from  it  this  awful  conclusion  that  the  na- 
tion must  perish.  The  first  in  Israel  to  dare  this 
was  Amos,  and  surely  what  enabled  him  to  do 
so  was  the  imminence  of  Assyria  upon  his  peo- 
ple. Again,  such  a  theory  might  plausibly  point 
to  the  opening  verse  of  the  Book  of  Amos,  with 
its  unprefaced,  unexplained  pronouncement  of 
doom  upon  Israel: — 

"  The  Lord  roareth  from  Zion, 
And  giveth  voice  from  Jerusalem  ; 
And  the  pastures  of  the  shepherds  mourn, 
And  the  summit  of  Carmel  is  withered  ! " 

Here,  it  might  be  averred,  is  the  earliest  proph- 
et's earliest  utterance.  Is  it  not  audibly  the  voice 
of  a  man  in  a  panic — such  a  panic  as,  ever  on  the 
eve  of  historic  convulsions,  seizes  the  more  sensi- 
tive minds  of  a  doomed  people?  The  distant 
Assyrian  thunder  has  reached  Amos,  on  his  pas- 
tures, unprepared — unable  to  articulate  its  exact 
meaning,  and  with  only  faith  enough  to  hear 
in  it  the  voice  of  his  God.  He  needs  reflection 
to  unfold  its  contents;  and  the  process  of  this 
reflection  we  find  through  the  rest  of  his  book. 
There  he  details  for  us,  with  increasing  clear- 
ness, both  the  ethical  reasons  and  the  political 
♦  See  chap.  iv.  t  See  pp.  455  S. 

30— Vol.  IV. 


results  of  that  Assyrian  terror,  by  which  he  was 
at  first  so  wildly  shocked  into  prophecy. 

But  the  panic-born  are  always  the  still-born; 
and  it  is  simply  impossible  that  prophecy,  in  all 
her  ethical  and  religious  vigour,  can  have  been 
the  daughter  of  so  fatal  a  birth.  If  we  look 
again  at  the  evidence  which  is  quoted  from  Amos 
in  favour  of  such  a  theory,  we  shall  see  how  fully 
it  is  contradicted  by  other  features  of  his  book. 

To  begin  with,  we  are  not  certain  that  the 
terror  of  the  opening  verse  of  Amos  is  the  As- 
syrian terror.  Even  if  it  were,  the  opening  of  a 
book  does  not  necessarily  represent  the  writer's 
earliest  feelings.  The  rest  of  the  chapters  con- 
tain visions  and  oracles  which  obviously  date 
from  a  time  when  Amos  was  not  yet  startled  by 
Assyria,  but  believed  that  the  punishment  which 
Israel  required  might  be  accomplished  through 
a  series  of  physical  calamities — locusts,  drought, 
and  pestilence.*  Nay,  it  was  not  even  these  ear- 
lier judgments,  preceding  the  Assyrian,  which 
stirred  the  word  of  God  in  the  prophet.  He  in- 
troduces them  with  a  "  now  "  and  a  "  therefore." 
That  is  to  say,  he  treats  them  only  as  the  con- 
sequence of  certain  facts,  the  conclusion  of  cer- 
tain premises.  These  facts  and  premises  are 
moral — they  are  exclusively  moral.  They  are 
the  sins  of  Israel's  life,  regarded  without  illusion 
and  without  pity.  They  are  certain  simple  con- 
victions, which  fill  the  prophet's  heart,  about  the 
impossibility  of  the  survival  of  any  state  which  is 
so  perverse  and  so  corrupt. 

This  origin  of  prophecy  in  moral  facts  and 
moral  intuitions,  which  are  in  their  beginning 
independent  of  political  events,  may  be  illustrated 
by  several  other  points.  For  instance,  the  sins 
which  Amos  marked  in  Israel  were  such  as  re- 
quired no  "  red  dawn  of  judgment  "  to  expose 
their  fiagrance  and  fatality.  The  abuse  of  jus- 
tice, the  cruelty  of  the  rich,  the  shameless  im- 
morality of  the  priests,  are  not  sins  which  we  feel 
only  in  the  cool  of  the  day,  when  God  Himself 
draws  near  to  judgment.  They  are  such  things 
as  make  men  shiver  in  the  sunshine.  And  so  the 
Book  of  Amos,  and  not  less  that  of  Hosea,  trem- 
ble with  the  feeling  that  Israel's  social  corrup- 
tion is  great  enough  of  itself,  without  the  aid 
of  natural  convulsions,  to  shake  the  very  basis 
of  national  life.  "  Shall  not  the  land  tremble 
for  this,"  Amos  says  after  reciting  some  sins, 
"and  every  one  that  dwelleth  therein?"!  Not 
drought  nor  pestilence  nor  invasion  is  needed  for 
Israel's  doom,  but  the  elemental  force  of  ruin 
which  lies  in  the  people's  own  wickedness.  This 
is  enough  to  create  gloom  long  before  the  po- 
litical skies  be  overcast — or,  as  Amos  himself 
puts  it,  this  is  enough 

"To  cause  the  sun  to  go  down  at  noon, 
And  to  darken  the  earth  in  the  clear  day."$ 

And  once  more — in  spite  of  Assyria  the  ruin 
may  be  averted,  if  only  the  people  will  repent: 
"  Seek  good  and  not  evil,  and  Jehovah  of  hosts 
will  be  with  you,  as  you  say."  J$  Assyria,  how- 
ever threatening,  becomes  irrelevant  to  Israel's 
future  from  the  moment  that  Israel  repents. 

Such  beliefs,  then,  are  obviously  not  the  re- 
sults of  experience,  nor  of  a  keen  observation 
of  history.  They  are  the  primal  convictions  of 
the  heart,  which  are  deeper  than  all  experience, 
and  themselves  contain  the  sources  of  historical 
foresight.     With  Amos  it  was  not  the  outward 


*Seep.  4sg. 
t  viii.  8. 


t  viii.  Q. 
§v.  14- 


466 


THE„  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


event  which  inspired  the  inward  conviction,  but 
the  conviction  which  anticipated  and  interpreted 
the  event,  though  when  the  event  came  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  it  confirmed,  deepened, 
and  articulated  the  conviction.* 

But  when  we  have  thus  tracked  the  stream  of 
prophecy  as  far  back  as  these  elementary  con- 
victions we  have  not  reached  the  fountain-head. 
Whence  did  Amos  derive  his  simple  and  absolute 
ethics?  Were  they  original  to  him?  Were  they 
new  in  Israel?  Such  questions  start  an  argu- 
ment which  touches  the  very  origins  of  revela- 
tion. 

It  is  obvious  that  Amos  not  only  takes  for 
granted  the  laws  of  righteousness  which  he  en- 
forces: he  takes  for  granted  also  the  people's  con- 
science of  them.  New,  indeed,  is  the  doom 
which  sinful  Israel  deserves,  and  original  to  him- 
self is  the  proclamation  of  it;  but  Amos  appeals 
to  the  moral  principles  which  justify  the  doom, 
as  if  they  were  not  new,  and  as  if  Israel  ought 
always  to  have  known  them.  This  attitude  of 
the  prophet  to  his  principles  has,  in  our  time, 
suffered  a  curious  judgment.  It  has  been  called 
an  anachronism.  So  absolute  a  morality,  some 
say,  had  never  before  been  taught  in  Israel;  nor 
had  righteousness  been  so  exclusively  empha- 
sised as  the  purpose  of  Jehovah.  Amos  and 
the  other  prophets  of  his  century  were  the  virtual 
"creators  of  ethical  monotheism":  it  could  only 
be  by  a  prophetic  license  or  prophetic  fiction 
that  he  appealed  to  his  people's  conscience  of 
the  standards  he  promulgated,  or  condemned  his 
generation  to  death  for  not  having  lived  up  to 
them. 

Let  us  see  how  far  this  criticism  is  supported 
by  the  facts. 

To  no  sane  observer  can  the  religious  history 
of  Israel  appear  as  anything  but  a  course  of 
gradual  development.  Even  in  the  moral  stand- 
ards, in  respect  to  which  it  is  confessedly  often 
most  difficult  to  prove  growth,  the  signs  of  the 
nation's  progress  are  very  manifest.  Practices 
come  to  be  forbidden  in  Israel  and  tempers  to 
be  mitigated,  which  in  earlier  ages  were  sanc- 
tioned to  their  extreme  by  the  explicit  decrees 
of  religion.  In  the  nation's  attitude  to  the  outer 
world  sympathies  arise,  along  with  ideals  of 
spiritual  service,  where  previously  only  war  and 
extermination  had  been  enforced  in  the  name 
of  the  Deity.  Now  in  such  an  evolution  it  is 
equally  indubitable  that  the  longest  and  most 
rapid  stage  was  the  prophecy  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury. The  prophets  of  that  time  condemn  acts 
which  had  been  inspired  by  their  immediate 
predecessors;!  they  abjure,  as  impeding  moral- 
ity, a  ceremonial  which  the  spiritual  leaders  of 
earlier  generations  had  felt  to  be  indispensable  to 
religion;  and  they  unfold  ideals  of  the  nation's 
moral  destiny,  of  which  older  writings  give  us 
only  the  faintest  hints.  Yet,  while  the  fact  of 
a  religious  evolution  in  Israel  is  thus  certain,  we 
must  not  fall  into  the  vulgar  error  which  inter- 
prets evolution  as  if  it  were  mere  addition,  nor 

*  How  far  Assyria  assisted  the  development  of  prophecy 
we  have  already  seen.  But  we  have  been  made  aware, 
at  the  same  time,  that  Assyria's  service  to  Israel  in  this 
respect  presupposed  the  possession  by  the  prophets  of 
certain  beliefs  in  the  character  and  wih  of  their  God, 
Jehovah.  The  prophets'  faith  could  never  have  risen  to 
the  magnitude  of  the  new  problems  set  to  it  by  Assyria 
if  there  had  not  been  already  inherent  in  it  that  belief  in 
the  sovereignty  of  a  Righteousness  of  which  all  things 
material  were  but  the  instruments. 

t  Compare,  for  instance,  Hosea's  condemnation  of  Jehu's 
murder  of  Joram,  with  Elisha's  command  to  do  it ;  also  2 
Kings  iii.  ig,  25,  with  Deut.  xx,  iq. 


forget  that  even  in  the  most  creative  periods  of 
religion  nothing  is  brought  forth  which  has  not 
already  been  promised,  and,  at  some  earlier  stage, 
placed,  so  to  speak,  within  reach  of  the  human 
mind.  After  all  it  is  the  mind  which  grows;  the 
moral  ideals  which  become  visible  to  its  more 
matured  vision  are  so  Divine  that,  when  they 
present  themselves,  the  mind  cannot  but  think 
they  were  always  real  and  always  imperative.  If 
we  remember  these  commonplaces  we  shall  do 
justice  both  to  Amos  and  to  his  critics. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  clear  that  most  of  the 
morality  which  Amos  enforced  is  of  that  funda- 
mental order  which  can  never  have  been  recog- 
nised as  the  discovery  or  invention  of  any 
prophet.  Whatever  be  their  origin,  the  con- 
science of  justice,  the  duty  of  kindness  to  the 
poor,  the  horror  of  wanton  cruelty  towards  one's 
enemies,  which  form  the  chief  principles  of 
Amos,  are  discernible  in  man  as  far  back  as  his- 
tory allows  us  to  search  for  them.  Should  a 
generation  have  lost  them,  they  can  be  brought 
back  to  it,  never  with  the  thrill  of  a  new  lesson, 
but  only  with  the  shame  of  an  old  and  an  abused 
memory.  To  neither  man  nor  people  can  the 
righteousness  which  Amos  preached  appear  as 
a  discovery,  but  always  as  a  recollection  and 
a  remorse.  And  this  is  most  emphatically  true 
of  the  people  of  Moses  and  of  Samuel,  of  Na- 
than, of  Elijah,  and  of  the  Book  of  the  Covenant. 
Ethical  elements  had  been  characteristic  of  Is- 
rael's religion  from  the  very  first.  They  were 
not  due  to  a  body  of  written  law.  but  rather  to 
the  character  of  Israel's  God,  appreciated  by  the 
nation  in  all  the  great  crises  of  their  history.* 
Jehovah  had  won  for  Israel  freedom  and  unity. 
He  had  been  a  spirit  of  justice  to  their  lawgivers 
and  magistrates. t  He  had  raised  up  a  succession 
of  consecrated  personalities,!:  who  by  life  and 
word  had  purified  the  ideals  of  the  whole  people. 
The  results  had  appeared  in  the  creation  of  a 
strong  national  conscience,  which  avenged  with 
horror,  as  "  folly  in  Israel,"  the  wanton  crimes 
of  any  person  or  section  of  the  commonwealth; 
in  the  gradual  formation  of  a  legal  code,  founded 
indeed  in  the  common  custom  of  the  Semites, 
but  greatly  more  moral  than  that;  and  even  in 
the  attainment  of  certain  profoundly  ethical  be- 
liefs about  God  and  His  relations,  beyond  Israel, 
to  all  mankind.  Now,  let  us  understand  once 
for  all,  that  in  the  ethics  of  Amos  there  is  noth- 
ing which  is  not  rooted  in  one  or  other  of  these 
achievements  of  the  previous  religion  of  his  peo- 
ple. To  this  religion  Amos  felt  himself  attached 
in  the  closest  possible  way.  The  word  of  God 
comes  to  him  across  the  desert,  as  we  have  seen, 
yet  not  out  of  the  air.  From  the  first  he  hears 
it  rise  from  that  one  monument  of  his  people's 
past  which  we  have  found  visible  on  his  physical 
horizon  § — "  from  Zion,  from  Jerusalem,"  ||  from 
the  city  of  David,  from  the  Ark,  whose  ministers 
were  Moses  and  Samuel,  from  the  repository  of 
the  main  tradition  of  Israel's  religion. Tf  Amos 
felt  himself  in  the  sacred  succession;  and  his  feel- 
ing is  confirmed  by  the  contents  of  his  book. 
The  details  of  that  civic  justice  which  he  demands 
from  his  generation  are  found  in  the  Book  of 

*  See  above,  p.  444. 

+  Isa.  xxviii.  %Ante  p.  460. 

X  Amos  ii.  i|  i.  2. 

t  Therefore  we  see  at  a  glance  how  utterly  inadequate 
is  Renan's  brilliant  comparison  of  Amos  to  a  modem 
revolutionary  journalist  ("Histoire  du  Peuple  Israel," 
II.;.  Journalist  indeed  !  How  all  this  would-be  cosmo- 
politan and  impartial  critic's  judgments  smack  of  the 
boulevards ! 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


467 


the  Covenant — the  only  one  of  Israel's  great 
codes  which  appears  by  this  time  to  have  been 
in  existence;  *  or  in  those  popular  proverbs 
wliich  almost  as  certainly  were  found  in  early 
Israel. t 

Nor  does  Amos  go  elsewhere  for  the  religious 
sanctions  of  his  ethics.  It  is  by  the  ancient  mer- 
cies of  God  towards  Israel  that  he  shames  and 
convicts  his  generation — by  the  deeds  of  grace 
which  made  them  a  nation,  by  the  organs  of 
doctrine  and  reproof  which  have  inspired  them, 
unfailing  from  age  to  age.  "  I  destroyed  the 
Amorite  before  them.  .  .  .  Yea,  I  brought  you 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  I  led  you 
forty  years  in  the  wilderness,  to  possess  the  land 
of  the  Amorites.  And  I  raised  up  of  your  sons 
for  prophets,  and  of  your  young  men  for  Naza- 
rites.  Was  it  not  even  thus,  O  ye  children  of 
Israel?  saith  Jehovah." ^:  We  cannot  even  say 
that  the  belief  which  Amos  expresses  in  Jeho- 
vah as  the  supreme  Providence  of  the  world  § 
was  a  new  thing  in  Israel,  for  a  belief  as  uni- 
versal inspires  those  portions  of  the  Book  of 
Genesis  which,  like  the  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
were  already  extant. 

We  see,  therefore,  what  right  Amos  had  to 
present  his  ethical  truths  to  Israel,  as  if  they  were 
not  new,  but  had  been  within  reach  of  his  people 
from  of  old. 

We  could  not,  however,  commit  a  greater  mis- 
take than  to  confine  the  inspiration  of  our 
prophet  to  the  past,  and  interpret  his  doctrines 
as  mere  inferences  from  the  earlier  religious  ideas 
of  Israel — inferences  forced  by  his  own  passion- 
ate logic,  or  more  naturally  ripened  for  him  by 
the  progress  of  events.  A  recent  writer  has  thus 
summarised  the  "work  of  the  prophets  of  the 
eighth  century:  "  In  fact  they  laid  hold  upon 
that  bias  towards  the  ethical  which  dwelt  in 
Jahwism  from  Moses  onwards,  and  they  allowed 
it  alone  to  have  value  as  corresponding  to  the 
true  religion  of  Jehovah."  ||  But  this  is  too  ab- 
stract to  be  an  adequate  statement  of  the  proph- 
ets' own  consciousness.  What  overcame  Amos 
was  a  Personal  Influence — the  Impression  of  a 
Character;  and  it  was  this  not  only  as  it  was 
revealed  in  the  past  of  his  people.  The  God 
who  stands  behind  Amos  is  indeed  the  ancient 
Deity  of  Israel,  and  the  facts  which  prove  Him 
God  are  those  which  made  the  nation — the  Ex- 
odus, the  guidance  through  the  wilderness,  the 
overthrow  of  the  Amorites,  the  gift  of  the  land. 
"  Was  it  not  even  thus,  O  ye  children  of  Israel?  " 
But  what  beats  and  burns  through  the  pages  of 
Amos  is  not  the  memory  of  those  wonderful 
works,  so  much  as  a  fresh  vision  and  understand- 
ing of  the  Living  God  who  worked  them.  Amos 
has  himself  met  with  Jehovah  on  the  conditions 
of  his  own  time — on  the  moral  situation  pro- 
vided by  the  living  generation  of  Israel.  By  an 
intercourse  conducted,  not  through  the  distant 
signals  of  the  past,  but  here  and  now,  through 
the  events  of  the  prophet's  own  day,  Amos  has 
received  an  original  and  overpowering  convic- 
tion of  his  people's  God  as  absolute  righteous- 

*  Exod.  XX. ;  incorporated  in  the  JE  book  of  history,  and, 
according  to  nearly  all  critics,  complete  by  750  ;  the  con- 
tents must  have  been  familiar  in  Israel  long  before  that. 
There  is  no  trace  in  Amos  of  any  influence  peculiar  to 
either  the  Deuteronomic  or  the  Levitical  legislation. 

tSee  especially  Schultz,  "  O.  T.  Theol.,"  Eng.  Trans, 
by  Paterson,  I.  214. 

{ii.  q-ii.    On  this  passage  see  further  p.  476. 

§  If  iv.  13,  V.  8  and  ix.  6  be  genuine,  this  remark  equally 
applies  to  belief  in  Jehovah  as  Creator. 

II  Kayser,  "  Old  Testament  Theology." 


ness.  What  prophecy  had  hitherto  felt  in  part, 
and  applied  to  one  or  other  of  the  departments 
of  Israel's  life,  Amos  is  the  first  to  feel  in  its 
fulness,  and  to  every  extreme  of  its  consequences 
upon  the  worship,  the  conduct,  and  the  fortunes 
of  the  nation.  To  him  Jehovah  not  only  com- 
mands this  and  that  righteous  law,  but  Jehovah 
and  righteousness  are  absolutely  identical. 
"  Seek  Jehovah  and  ye  shall  live  .  .  .  seek  good 
and  ye  shall  live."  *  The  absoluteness  with 
which  Amos  conceived  this  principle,  the  cour- 
age with  which  he  applied  it,  carry  him  along 
those  two  great  lines  upon  which  we  most  clearly 
trace  his  originality  as  a  prophet.  In  the 
strength  of  this  principle  he  does  what  is  really 
new  in  Israel;  he  discards  the  two  elements  which 
had  hitherto  existed  alongside  the  ethical,  and 
had  fettered  and  warped  it. 

Up  till  now  the  ethical  spirit  of  the  religion 
of  Jehovah  t  had  to  struggle  with  two  beliefs 
which  we  can  trace  back  to  the  Semitic  origins 
of  the  religion — the  belief,  namely,  that,  as  the 
national  God,  Jehovah  would  always  defend  their 
political  interests,  irrespective  of  morality;  and 
the  belief  that  a  ceremonial  of  rites  and  sacrifices 
was  indispensable  to  religion.  These  principles 
were  mutual:  as  the  deity  was  bound  to  succour 
the  people,  so  were  the  people  bound  to  supply 
the  deity  with  gifts,  and  the  more  of  these  they 
brought  the  more  they  made  sure  of  his  favours. 
Such  views  were  not  absolutely  devoid  of  moral 
benefit.  In  the  formative  period  of  the  nation 
they  had  contributed  both  discipline  and  hope. 
But  of  late  they  had  between  them  engrossed 
men's  hearts,  and  crushed  out  of  religion  both 
conscience  and  common-sense.  By  the  first  of 
them,  the  belief  in  Jehovah's  predestined  protec- 
tion of  Israel,  the  people's  eyes  were  so  holden 
they  could  not  see  how  threatening  were  the 
times;  by  the  other,  the  confidence  in  ceremonial, 
conscience  was  dulled,  and  that  immorality  per- 
mitted which  they  mingled  so  shamelessly  with 
their  religious  zeal.  Now  the  conscience  of 
Amos  did  not  merely  protest  against  the  prcr 
dominance  of  the  two,  but  was  so  exclusive,  so 
spiritual,  that  it  boldly  banished  both  from  re- 
ligion. Amos  denied  that  Jehovah  was  bound 
to  save  His  people;  he  affirmed  that  ritual  and 
sacrifice  were  no  part  of  the  service  He  de- 
mands from  men.  This  is  the  measure  of  orig- 
inality in  our  prophet.  The  two  religious  prin- 
ciples which  were  inherent  in  the  very  fibre  of 
Semitic  religion,  and  which  till  now  had  gone 
unchallenged  in  Israel,  Amos  cast  forth  frorn  re~ 
ligion  in  the  name  of  a  pure  and  absolute  right- 
eousness. On  the  one  hand,  Jehovah's  peculiar 
connection  with  Israel  meant  no  more  than  jeal- 
ousy for  their  holiness;  "  You  only  have  I  known 
of  all  the  families  of  the  earth,  therefore  will  I 
visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities."  if  And,  on 
the  other  hand,  all  their  ceremonial  was  abhor- 
rent to  Him;  "  I  hate,  I  despise  your  festivals. 
.  .  .  Though  ye  offer  Me  burnt  offerings  and 
your  meal  offerings,  I  will  not  accept  them.  .  .  . 
Take  thou  away  from  Me  the  noise  of  thy  songs; 
I  will  not  hear  the  music  of  thy  viols.  But  let 
justice  run  down  as  waters,  and  righteousness  as 
a  perennial  stream."  § 

It  has  just  been  said  that  emphasis  upon 
morality  as  the  sum  of  religion,  to  the  exclusion 
of  sacrifice,  is  the  most  original  element  in  the 
prophecies  of  Amos.     He  himself,  however,  does 


*  V.  6,  14. 

t  See  above,  p.  446. 


i  iii.  2. 
§v.  21  fiE 


468 


THE    HOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


not  regard  this  as  proclaimed  for  the  first  time 
in  Israel,  and  the  precedent  he  quotes  is  so  illus- 
trative of  the  sources  of  his  inspiration  that  we 
do  well  to  look  at  it  for  a  little.  In  the  verse 
next  to  the  one  last  quoted  he  reports  these 
words  of  God:  "  Did  ye  oflfer  unto  Me  sacrifices 
and  gifts  in  the  wilderness,  for  forty  years,  O 
house  of  Israel?"  An  extraordinary  challenge! 
From  the  present  blind  routine  of  sacrifice  Jeho- 
vah appeals  to  the  beginning  of  His  relations 
with  the  nation:  did  they  then  perform  such 
services  to  Him?  Of  course,  a  negative  answer 
is  expected.  No  other  agrees  with  the  main 
contention  of  the  passage.  In  the  wilderness  Is- 
rael had  not  offered  sacrifices  and  gifts  to  Je- 
hovah. Jeremiah  quotes  a  still  more  explicit 
word  of  Jehovah:  "  I  spake  not  unto  your  fathers 
in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  concerning  burnt  offerings  and  sacri- 
fices: but  this  thing  I  commanded  them,  saying, 
Obey  My  voice,  and  I  will  be  your  God,  and  ye 
shall  be  My  people."  * 

To  these  Divine  statements  we  shall  not  be 
able  to  do  justice  if  we  hold  by  the  traditional 
view  that  the  Levitical  legislation  was  proclaimed 
in  the  wilderness.  Discount  that  legislation,  and 
the  statements  become  clear.  It  is  true,  of 
course,  that  Israel  must  have  had  a  ritual  of  some 
kind  from  t'„i  first;  and  that  both  in  the  wilder- 
ness and  in  Canaan  their  spiritual  leaders  must 
have  performed  sacrifices  as  if  these  were  ac- 
ceptable to  Jehovah.  But  even  so  the  Divine 
words  which  Amos  and  Jeremiah  quote  are  his- 
torically correct;  for  while  the  ethical  contents 
of  the  religion  of  Jehovah  were  its  original  and 
essential  contents—"  I  commanded  them,  say- 
ing. Obey  My  voice  " — the  ritual  was  but  a  mod- 
ification of  the  ritual  common  to  all  Semites; 
and  ever  since  the  occupation  of  the  land,  it  had, 
through  the  infection  of  the  Canaanite  rites  on 
the  high  places,  grown  more  and  more  Pagan, 
both  i  1  its  functions  and  in  the  ideas  which  these 
were  supposed  to  express,  f  Amos  was  right. 
Sacrifice  had  i.aver  been  the  Divine,  the  revealed 
element  in  the  religion  of  Jehovah.  Neverthe- 
less, before  Amos  no  prophet  in  Israel  appears 
to  have  said  so.  And  what  enabled  this  man  in 
the  eighth  century  to  oflfer  testimony,  so  novel 
but  so  true,  about  the  far-away  beginnings  of 
his  people's  religion  in  the  fourteenth,  was 
plainly  neither  tradition  nor  historical  research, 
but  an  overwhelming  conviction  of  the  spiritual 
and  moral  character  of  God — of  Him  who  had 
been  Israel's  God  both  then  and  now,  and  whose 
righteousness  had  been,  just  as  much  then  as 
now,  exalted  above  all  purely  national  interests 
and  all  susceptibility  to  ritual.  When  we  thus 
see  the  prophet's  knowledge  of  the  Living  God 
enabling  him,  not  only  to  proclaim  an  ideal  of 
religion  more  spiritual  than  Israel  had  yet 
dreamed,  but  to  perceive  that  such  an  ideal  had 
been  the  essence  of  the  religion  of  Jehovah  from 
the  first,  we  understand  how  thoroughly  Amos 
was  mastered  by  that  knowledge.  If  we  need 
any  further  proof  of  his  "  possession  "  by  the 
character  of  God,  we  find  it  in  those  phrases  in 
which  his  own  consciousness  disappears,  and  we 
have  no  longer  the  herald's  report  of  the  Lord's 
words,  but  the  very  accents  of  the  Lord  Him- 
self, fraught  with  personal  feeling  of  the  most 
intense  quality.  "  I  "  Jehovah  "  hate,  I  despise 
your  feast  days.  .  .  .  Take  thou  away  from  Me 
the  noise  of  thy  songs;  I  will  not  hear  the  music 


of  thy  viols.*  ...  I  abhor  the  arrogance  of 
Jacob,  and  hate  his  palaces. f  .  .  .  The  eyes  of 
the  Lord  Jehovah  are  upon  the  sinful  kingdom,  t 
.  .  .  .  Jehovah  sweareth,  I  will  never  forget 
any  of  their  works."  $5  Such  sentences  reveal 
a  Deity  who  is  not  only  manifest  Character,  but 
surgent  and  importunate  Feeling.  We  have 
traced  the  prophet's  word  to  its  ultimate  source. 
It  springs  from  the  righteousness,  the  vigilance, 
the  urgency  of  the  Eternal.  The  intellect,  im- 
agination, and  heart  of  Amos — the  convictions 
he  has  inherited  from  his  people's  past,  his  con- 
science of  their  evil  life  to-day,  his  impressions 
of  current  and  coming  history — are  all  enforced 
and  illuminated,  all  made  impetuous  and  radi- 
ant, by  the  Spirit,  that  is  to  say  the  Purpose 
and  the  Energy,  of  the  Living  God.  Therefore, 
as  he  says  in  the  title  of  his  book,  or  as  some 
one  says  for  him,  Amos  saw  his  words.  They 
stood  out  objective  to  himself.  And  they  were 
not  mere  sound.  They  glowed  and  burned  with 
God. 

When  we  realise  this,  we  feel  how  inadequate 
it  is  to  express  prophecy  in  the  terms  of  evolu- 
tion. No  doubt,  as  we  have  seen,  the  ethics  and 
religion  of  Amos  represent  a  large  and  measura- 
ble advance  upon  those  of  earlier  Israel.  And 
yet  with  Amos  we  do  not  seem  so  much  to  have 
arrived  at  a  new  stage  in  a  Process,  as  to  have 
penetrated  to  the  Idea  which  has  been  behind 
the  Process  from  the  beginning.  The  change 
and  growth  of  Israel's  religion  are  realities — 
their  fruits  can  be  seen,  defined,  catalogued — 
but  a  greater  reality  is  the  unseen  Purpose  which 
impels  them.  They  have  been  expressed  only 
now.  He  has  been  unchanging  from  old  and 
for  ever — from  the  first  absolute  righteousness 
in  Himself,  and  absolute  righteousness  in  His 
demands  from  men. 


3.  The  Prophet  and  His  Ministry. 
Amos  vii.,  viii.  1-4. 

We  have  seen  the  preparation  of  the  Man 
for  the  Word;  we  have  sought  to  trace  to  its 
source  the  Word  which  came  to  the  Man.  It 
now  remains  for  us  to  follow  the  Prophet,  Man 
and  Word  combined,  upon  his  Ministry  to  the 
people. 

For  reasons  given  in  a  previous  chapter,  ||  there 
must  always  be  some  doubt  as  to  the  actual 
course  of  the  ministry  of  Amos  before  his  ap- 
pearance at  Bethel.  Most  authorities,  however, 
agree  that  the  visions  recounted  in  the  beginning 
of  the  seventh  chapter  form  the  substance  of  his 
address  at  Bethel,  which  was  interrupted  by  the 
priest  Amaziah.  These  visions  furnish  a  proba- 
ble summary  of  the  prophet's  experience  up  to 
that  point.  While  they  follow  the  same  course, 
which  we  trace  in  the  two  series  of  oracles  that 
now  precede  them  in  the  book,  the  ideas  in  them 
are  less  elaborate.  At  the  same  time  it  is  evi- 
dent that  Amos  must  have  already  spoken  upon 
other  points  than  those  which  he  puts  into  the 
first  three  visions.  For  instance,  Amaziah  re- 
ports to  the  king  that  Amos  had  explicitly  pre- 
dicted the  exile  of  the  whole  people  '  — a  convic- 
tion which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  prophet  reached 
only  after  some  length  of  experience.  It  is  equally 
certain  that  Amos  must  have  already  exposed  the 


*  Jer.  vii.  22  f. 


+  See  above,  p.  448. 


*  V.  21-23. 
t  vi.  8. 


Jix.  8. 
§  viii.  7, 


II  Chap.  V.  p.  459. 
I^vii.  II. 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


469 


sins  of  the  people  in  the  light  of  the  Divine 
righteousness.  Some  of  the  sections  of  the  book 
which  deal  with  this  subject  appear  to  have  been 
originally  spoken;  and  it  is  unnatural  to  suppose 
that  the  prophet  announced  the  chastisements 
of  God  without  having  previously  justified  these 
to  the  consciences  of  men. 

If  this  view  be  correct,  Amos,  having  preached 
for  some  time  to  Israel  concerning  the  evil  state 
of  society,  appeared  at  a  great  religious  festival 
in  Bethel,  determined  to  bring  matters  to  a  crisis, 
and  to  announce  the  doom  which  his  preaching 
threatened  and  the  people's  continued  impeni- 
tence made  inevitable.  Mark  his  choice  of  place 
and  of  audience.  It  was  no  mere  king  he  aimed 
at.  Nathan  had  dealt  with  David,  Gad  with  Sol- 
omon, Elijah  with  Ahab  and  Jezebel.  But  Amos 
sought  the  people,  them  with  whom  resided  the 
real  forces  and  responsibilities  of  life:  the  wealth, 
the  social  fashions,  the  treatment  of  the  poor, 
the  spirit  of  worship,  the  ideals  of  religion.* 
And  Amos  sought  the  people  upon  what  was  not 
only  a  great  popular  occasion,  but  one  on  which 
was  arrayed,  in  all  pomp  and  lavishness,  the 
very  system  he  essayed  to  overthrow.  The  re- 
ligion of  his  time — religion  as  mere  ritual  and 
sacrifice — was  what  God  had  sent  him  to  beat 
down,  and  he  faced  it  at  its  headquarters,  and 
upon  one  of  its  high  days,  in  the  royal  and 
popular  sanctuary  where  it  enjoyed  at  once  the 
patronage  of  the  crown,  the  lavish  gifts  of  the 
rich,  and  the  thronged  devotion  of  the  multitude. 
As  Savonarola  at  the  Duomo  in  Florence,  as 
Luther  at  the  Diet  of  Worms,  as  our  Lord, Him- 
self at  the  feast  in  Jerusalem,  so  was  Amos  at  the 
feast  in  Bethel.  Perhaps  he  was  still  more  lonely. 
He  speaks  nowhere  of  having  made  a  disciple, 
and  in  the  sea  of  faces  which  turned  on  him  when 
he  spoke,  it  is  probable  that  he  could  not  wel- 
come a  single  ally.  They  were  officials,  or  in- 
terested traders,  or  devotees;  he  was  a  foreigner 
and  a  wild  man,  with  a  word  that  spared  the 
popular  dogma  as  little  as  the  royal  prerogative. 
Well  for  him  was  it  that  over  all  those  serried 
ranks  of  authority,  those  fanatic  crowds,  that  lav- 
ish splendour,  another  vision  commanded  his 
eyes.  "  I  saw  the  Lord  standing  over  the  altar, 
and  He  said.  Smite." 

Amos  told  the  pilgrims  at  Bethel  that  the  first 
events  of  his  time  in  which  he  felt  a  purpose  of 
God  in  harmony  with  his  convictions  about  Is- 
rael's need  of  punishment  were  certain  calamities 
of  a  physical  kind.  Of  these,  which  in  chap.  iv. 
he  describes  as  successively  drought,  blasting, 
locusts,  pestilence,  and  earthquake,  he  selected 
at  Bethel  only  two — locusts  and  drought — and  he 
began  with  the  locusts.  It  may  have  been  either 
the  same  visitation  as  he  specifies  in  chap,  iv.,  or 
a  previous  one;  for  of  all  the  plagues  of  Palestine 
locusts  have  been  the  most  frequent,  occurring 
every  six  or  seven  years.  "  Thus  the  Lord  Je- 
hovah caused  me  to  see:  and,  behold,  a  brood  t 
of  locusts  at  the  beginning  of  the  coming  up  of 
the  spring  crops."  In  the  Syrian  year  there  are 
practically  two  tides  of  verdure:  one  which  starts 
after  the  early  rains  of  October  and  continues 
through  the  winter,  checked  by  the  cold;  and 
one  which  comes  away  with  greater  force  under 
the  influence  of  the  latter  rains  and  more  genial 

*  On  the  ministry  of  eighth-century  prophets  to  the 
people  see  the  author's  "Isaiah,"  I.  p.  119. 

t  So  LXX.,  followed  by  Hitzig  and  Wellhausen,  by 
-eading  "IV^  for  "lVi\ 


airs  of  spring.*  Of  these  it  was  the  later  and 
richer  which  the  locusts  had  attacked.  "  And, 
behold,  it  was  after  the  king's  mowings."  These 
seem  to  have  been  a  tribute  which  the  kings  of 
Israel  levied  on  the  spring  herbage,  and  which 
the  Roman  governors  of  Syria  used  annually  to 
impose  in  the  month  Nisan.-f  "  After  the  king's 
mowings  "  would  be  a  phrase  to  mark  the  time 
when  everybody  else  might  turn  to  reap  their 
green  stufif.  It  was  thus  the  very  crisis  of  the 
year  when  the  locusts  appeared;  the  April  crops 
devoured,  there  was  no  hope  of  further  fodder 
till  December.  Still,  the  calamity  had  happened 
before,  and  had  been  survived;  a  nation  so 
vigorous  and  wealthy  as  Israel  was  under  Jero- 
boam II.  need  not  have  been  frightened  to 
death.  But  Amos  felt  it  with  a  conscience.  To 
him  it  was  the  beginning  of  that  destruction  of 
his  people  which  the  spirit  within  him  knew  that 
their  sin  had  earned.  So  "  it  came  to  pass 
when "  the  locusts  "  had  made  an  end  of  de- 
vouring the  verdure  of  the  earth,  that  I  said, 
Remit,  I  pray  Thee,"  or  "  pardon  " — a  proof 
that  there  already  weighed  on  the  prophet's  spirit 
something  more  awful  than  loss  of  grass — "  how 
shall  Jacob  rise  again?  for  he  is  little." t  The 
prayer  was  heard.  "Jehovah  repented  for  this: 
It  shall  not  be,  said  Jehovah."  The  unnameable 
"  it  "  must  be  the  same  as  in  the  frequent  phrase 
of  the  first  chapter:  "  I  will  not  turn  It  back  " — 
namely,  the  final  execution  of  doom  on  the  peo- 
ple's sin.  The  reserve  with  which  this  is  men- 
tioned, both  while  there  is  still  chance  for  the 
people  to  repent  and  after  it  has  become  irrevoca- 
ble, is  very  impressive. 

The  next  example  which  Amos  gave  at  Bethel 
of  his  permitted  insight  into  God's  purpose  was 
a  great  drought.  "  Thus  the  Lord  Jehovah  made, 
me  to  see:  and,  behold,  the  Lord  Jehovah  was 
calling  fire  into  the  quarrel."  §  There  was,  then, 
already  a  quarrel  between  Jehovah  and  His  peo- 
ple— another  sign  that  the  prophet's  moral  con- 
viction of  Israel's  sin  preceded  the  rise  of  the 
events  in  which  he  recognised  its  punishment. 
"  And  "  the  fire  "  devoureth  the  Great  Deep,  yea, 
it  was  about  to  devour  the  land."  ||  Severe 
drought  in  Palestine  might  well  be  described  as 
fire,  even  when  it  was  not  accompanied  by  the 
flame  and  smoke  of  those  forest  and  prairie  fires 
which  Joel  describes  as  its  consequences."  But 
to  have  the  full  fear  of  such  a  drought,  we  should 
need  to  feel  beneath  us  the  curious  world  which 
the  men  of  those  days  felt.  To  them  the  earth 
rested  in  a  great  deep,  from  whose  stores  all  her 
springs  and  fountains  burst.  When  these  failed 
it  meant  that  the  unfathomed  floods  below  were 

*  Cf.  "  Hist.  Geography  of  the  Holy  Land,"  pp.  64  ff.  The 
word  translated  "  spring  crop  "above  is  {J'p^,  and  from 

the  same  root  as  the  name  of  the    latter  rain,  "^PPP' 

which  falls  in  the  end  of  March   or  beginning  of  April 

Cf.  Zeitschrift  des  deutschen  Palastina-Vereins,   IV.  83; 

VIII.  62. 
t  Cf.  I  Kings  xviii.  5  with  i  Sam.  vii.  15,  17  ;  i  Kings  iv. 

7  ff.    See  Robertson  Smith,  "  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  228. 
X  LXX. :  "  Who  shall  raise  up  Jacob  again    " 
§  So  Professor  A.  B.  Davidson.     But  the  grammar  might 

equally  well  afford  the  rendering  "  one  calling  that  the 

Lord  will  punish  with  the  fire,"  the  7  of  '^'w  marking 
the  introduction  of  indirect  speech  icf.  Ewald,  §  338^). 
But  Hitzig  for  K^i5  reads  TVi^  (Deut.  xxv.  i8),  "  to  occur," 
"happen."  So  similarly  Wellhausen,  "  es  nahte  sich  z« 
strafen  mit  Feuer  der  Herr  Jahve".  All  these  renderings 
yield  practically  the  same  meaning. 

II  A.  B.  Davidson,  "Syntax."  §  57,  Rem.  i. 

Ti.  19  f. 


470 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


burnt  up.  But  how  fierce  the  flame  that  could 
effect  this!  And  how  certainly  able  to  devour 
next  the  solid  land  which  rested  above  the  deep 
— the  very  "  Portion  "  *  assigned  by  God  to  His 
people.  Again  Amos  interceded:  "  Lord  Jehovah, 
I  pray  Thee  forbear:  how  shall  Jacob  rise?  for 
he  is  little."  And  for  the  second  time  Jacob  was 
reprieved.  "Jehovah  repented  for  this:  It  also 
shall  not  come  to  pass,  said  the  Lord  Jehovah." 

We  have  treated  these  visions,  not  as  the  im- 
agination or  prospect  of  possible  disasters,}  but 
as  insight  into  the  meaning  of  actual  plagues. 
Such  a  treatment  is  justified,  not  only  by  the 
invariable  habit  of  Amos  to  deal  with  real  facts, 
but  also  by  the  occurrence  of  these  same  plagues 
among  the  series  by  which,  as  we  are  told,  God 
had  already  sought  to  move  the  people  to  re- 
pentance.t  The  general  question  of  sympathy 
between  such  purely  physical  disasters  and  the 
moral  evil  of  a  people  we  may  postpone  to  an- 
other chapter,  confining  ourselves  here  to  the 
part  played  in  the  events  by  the  prophet  himself. 

Surely  there  is  something  wonderful  in  the 
attitude  of  this  shepherd  to  the  fires  and  plagues 
that  Nature  sweeps  upon  his  land.  He  is  ready 
for  them.  And  he  is  ready  not  only  by  the 
general  feeling  of  his  time  that  such  things  hap- 
pen of  the  wrath  of  God.  His  sovereign  and 
predictive  conscience  recognises  them  as  her 
ministers.  They  are  sent  to  punish  a  people 
whom  she  has  already  condemned.  Yet,  unlike 
Elijah,  Amos  does  not  summon  the  drought,  nor 
even  welcome  its  arrival.  How  far  has  prophecy 
travelled  since  the  violent  Tishbite!  With  all 
his  conscience  of  Israel's  sin,  Amos  yet  prays 
that  their  doom  may  be  turned.  We  have  here 
some  evidence  of  the  struggle  through  which 
these  later  prophets  passed,  before  they  accepted 
their  awful  messages  to  men.  Even  Amos, 
desert-bred  and  living  aloof  from  Israel,  shrank 
from  the  judgment  which  it  was  his  call  to  pub- 
lish. For  two  moments— they  would  appear  to 
be  the  only  two  in  his  ministry — his  heart  con- 
tended with  his  conscience,  and  twice  he  en- 
treated God  to  forgive.  At  Bethel  he  told  the 
people  all  this,  in  order  to  show  how  unwillingly 
he  took  up  his  duty  against  them,  and  how  inevi- 
table he  found  that  duty  to  be.  But  still  more 
shall  we  learn  from  his  tale,  if  we  feel  in  his 
words  about  the  smallness  of  Jacob,  not  pity 
only,  but  sympathy.  We  shall  learn  that  prophets 
are  never  made  solely  by  the  bare  word  of  God, 
but  that  even  the  most  objective  and  judicial  of 
them  has  to  earn  his  title  to  proclaim  judgment 
by  suffering  with  men  the  agony  of  the  judg- 
ment he  proclaims.  Never  to  a  people  came 
there  a  true  prophet  who  had  not  first  prayed  for 
them.  To  have  entreated  for  men,  to  have  rep- 
resented them  in  the  highest  courts  of  Being, 
is  to  have  deserved  also  supreme  judicial  rights 
Upon  them.     And  thus  it  is  that  our  Judge  at  the 


Cf.  Micah  ii   3. 


P^^Di 


s  the  word  used,  and  according 


to  the  motive  given  above  stands  well  for  the  climax  of 
the  fire's  destructive  work.    This  meets  the  objection  of 


Wellhausen,   who    proposes   to  om 


it  P.^n. 


because   the 


heat  does  not  dry  up  first  the  great  deep  and  then  the 
fields  (Ackerflur).  This  is  to  mistake  the  obvious  point 
of  the  sentence.  The  drought  was  so  great  that,  after  the 
fountains  were  exhausted,  it  seemed  as  if  the  solid  frame- 
work of  the  land,  described  with  very  apt  pathos  as  the 

Portion^  would  be  the  next  to  disappear.  Some  take  pPH 
as  d^/w'i^<'(A  therefore  cultivated,  ground. 

t  So  for  instance,  Von  Orelli. 

$Chap.  iv. 


Last  Day  shall  be  none  other  than  our  great 
Advocate  who  continually  maketh  intercession 
for  us.  It  is  prayer,  let  us  repeat,  which,  while 
it  gives  us  all  power  with  God,  endows  us  at  the 
same  time  with  moral  rights  over  men.  Upon 
his  mission  of  judgment  we  shall  follow  Amos 
with  the  greater  sympathy  that  he  thus  comes 
forth  to  it  from  the  mercy-seat  and  the  ministry 
of  intercession. 

The  first  two  visions  which  Amos  told  at 
Bethel  were  of  disasters  in  the  sphere  of  nature, 
but  his  third  lay  in  the  sphere  of  politics.  The 
two  former  were,  in  their  completeness  at  least, 
averted;  and  the  language  Amos  used  of  them 
seems  to  imply  that  he  had  not  even  then  faced 
the  possibility  of  a  final  overthrow.  He  took 
for  granted  Jacob  was  to  rise  again:  he  only 
feared  as  to  hotv  this  should  be.  But  the  third 
vision  is  so  final  that  the  prophet  does  not  even 
try  to  intercede.  Israel  is  measured,  found 
wanting,  and  doomed.  Assyria  is  not  named,  but 
is  obviously  intended;  and  the  fact  that  the 
prophet  arrives  at  certainty  with  regard  to  the 
doom  of  Israel,  just  when  he  thus  comes  within 
sight  of  Assyria,  is  instructive  as  to  the  influence 
exerted  on  prophecy  by  the  rise  of  that  empire.* 

"Thus  He  gave  me  to  see:  and,  behold,  the 
Lord  had  taken  His  station  " — 'tis  a  more  solemn 
word  than  the  "  stood  "  of  our  versions — "  upon 
a  city  wall  "  built  to  "  the  plummet.f  and  in  His 
hand  a  plummet.  And  Jehovah  said  unto  me, 
What  art  thou  seeing,  Amos? "  The  question 
surely  betrays  some  astonishment  shown  by  the 
prophet  at  the  vision  or  some  difficulty  he  felt 
in  making  it  out.  He  evidently  does  not  feel 
it  at  once,  as  the  natural  result  of  his  own  think- 
ing: it  is  objective  and  strange  to  him;  he  needs 
time  to  see  into  it.  "  And  I  said,  A  plummet. 
And  the  Lord  said.  Behold,  I  am  setting  a  plum- 
met in  the  midst  of  My  people  Israel.  I  will  not 
again  pass  them  over."  To  set  a  measuring  line 
or  a  line  with  weights  attached  to  any  building 
means  to  devote  it  to  destruction ;t  but  here  it 
is  uncertain  whether  the  plummet  threatens  de- 
struction, or  means  that  Jehovah  will  at  last 
clearly  prove  to  the  prophet  the  insufferable 
obliquity  of  the  fabric  of  the  nation's  life, 
originally  set  straight  by  Himself — originally 
"  a  wall  of  a  plummet."  For  God's  judgments 
are  never  arbitrary:  by  a  standard  we  men 
can  read  He  shows  us  their  necessity.  Con- 
science itself  is  no  mere  voice  of  authority:  it 
is  a  convincing  plummet,  and  plainly  lets  us  see 
why  we  should  be  punished.  But  whichever  in- 
terpretation we  choose,  the  result  is  the  same. 
"  The  high  places  of  Israel  shall  be  desolate,  and 
the  sanctuaries  of  Isaac  laid  waste;  and  I  will 
rise  against  the  house  of  Jeroboam  with  the 
sword."  A  declaration  of  war!  Israel  is  to  be 
invaded,  her  dynasty  overthrown.  Every  one 
who  heard  the  prophet  would  know,  though  he 
named  them  not,  that  the  Assyrians  were  meant. 

It  was  apparently  at  this  point  that  Amos  was 
interrupted  by  Amaziah.  The  priest,  who  was 
conscious  of  no  spiritual  power  with  which  to 
oppose  the  prophet,   gladly  grasped  the  oppor- 

*  See  chap  iv.  p.  454. 

t  Literally  "  of  the  plummet, "an  obscure  expression.    It 
cannot  mean  plumb-straight,  for  the  wall  is  condemned. 
X  2  Kings  xxi.  13 :  "I  will  stretch  over  Jerusalem  the 

line   of  Samaria    and  the  plummet   or  weight  ^ArPV^' 

of  the  house  of  Ahab."  Isa.  xxxiv.  11 :  "  He  shall  strefch 
over  it  the  cord  of  confusion,  and  the  weights  [literally 
stones]  of  emptiness." 


THE    MAN    AND    THE    PROPHET. 


471 


tunity  afforded  him  by  the  mention  of  the  king, 
and  fell  back  on  the  invariable  resource  of  a 
barren  and  envious  sacerdotalism:  "  He  speaketh 
against  Cjesar."  *  There  follows  one  of  the 
great  scenes  of  history — the  scene  which,  how- 
ever fast  the  ages  and  the  languages,  the  ideals 
and  the  deities  may  change,  repeats  itself  with 
the  same  two  actors.  Priest  and  Man  face  each 
other — Priest  with  King  behind,  Man  with  God 
— and  wage  that  debate  in  which  the  whole  war- 
fare and  progress  of  religion  consist.  But  the 
story  is  only  typical  by  being  real.  Many  subtle 
traits  of  human  nature  prove  that  we  have  here 
an  exact  narrative  of  fact.  Take  Amaziah's  re- 
port to  Jeroboam.  He  gives  to  the  words  of 
the  prophet  just  that  exaggeration  and  innuendo 
which  betray  the  wily  courtier,  who  knows  how 
to  accentuate  a  general  denunciation  till  it  feels 
like  a  personal  attack.  And  yet,  like  every 
Caiaphas  of  his  tribe,  the  priest  in  his  exaggera- 
tions expresses  a  deeper  meaning  than  he  is  con- 
scious of.  "  Amos  " — note  how  the  mere  men- 
tion of  the  name  without  description  proves  that 
the  prophet  was  already  known  in  Israel,  per- 
haps was  one  on  whom  the  authorities  had  long 
kept  their  eye — "  Amos  hath  conspired  against 
thee" — yet  God  was  his  only  fellow-conspirator! 
— "  in  the  midst  of  the  house  of  Israel  " — this 
royal  temple  at  Bethel.  "  The  land  is  not  able 
to  hold  his  words" — it  must  burst;  yes,  but  in 
another  sense  than  thou  meanest,  O  Caiaphas- 
Amaziah!  "  For  thus  hath  Amos  said.  By  the 
sword  shall  Jeroboam  die  " — Amos  had  spoken 
only  of  the  dynasty,  but  the  twist  which  Ama- 
ziah  lends  to  the  words  is  calculated — "  and  Is- 
rael going  shall  go  into  captivity  from  off  his 
own  land."  This  was  the  one  unvarnished  spot 
in   the  report. 

Having  fortified  himself,  as  little  men  will  do, 
by  his  duty  to  the  powers  that  be,  Amaziah  dares 
to  turn  upon  the  prophet;  and  he  does  so,  it  is 
amusing  to  observe,  with  that  tone  of  intellectual 
and  moral  superiority  which  it  is  extraordinary 
to  see  some  men  derive  from  a  merely  official 
station  or  touch  with  royalty.  "  Visionary,f  be- 
gone! Get  thee  ofT  to  the  land  of  Judah;  and 
earnj  thy  bread  there,  and  there  play  the 
prophet.  But  at  Bethel  " — mark  the  rising  ac- 
cent of  the  voice — "  thou  shalt  not  again 
prophesy.  The  King's  Sanctuary  it  is,  and  the 
House  of  the  Kingdom."  i^  With  the  official 
mind  this  is  more  conclusive  than  that  it  is  the 
House  of  God!  In  fact  the  speech  of  Amaziah 
justifies  the  hardest  terms  which  Amos  uses  of 
the  religion  of  his  day.  In  all  this  priest  says 
there  is  no  trace  of  the  spiritual — only  fear,  pride, 
and  privilege.  Divine  truth  is  challenged  by 
human  law,  and  the  Word  of  God  silenced  in  the 
name  of  the  king. 

We  have  here  a  conception  of  religion,  which 
is  not  merely  due  to  the  unspiritual  character  of 
the  priest  who  utters  it.  but  has  its  roots  in  the 
far  back  origins  of  Israel's  religion.  The  Pagan 
Semite  identified  absolutely  State  and  Church; 
and  on  that  identification  was  based  the  religious 

*  John  xix.  12. 

+  The  word  "  seer,"  is  here  used  in  a  contemptuous  sense 
*nd  has  therefore  to  be  translated  by  some  such  word  as 
"visionary." 

t  Literally  "  eat." 

§ '^"^Vy  ''  ^—thatis.a  "central"or  "capital  sanctuary." 

C/.  fip^ODn  Ty  (-J  Sam,  xxvii.  5),  "city  of  the  kingdom  " 
».  tf.,  chief  or  capital  town. 


practice  of  early  Israel.  It  had  many  healthy 
results:  it  kept  religion  in  touch  with  public  life; 
order,  justice,  patriotism,  self-sacrifice  for  the 
common  weal,  were  devoutly  held  to  be  matters 
of  religion.  So  long,  therefore,  as  the  system 
was  inspired  by  truly  spiritual  ideals,  nothing 
for  those  times  could  be  better.  But  we  see  in 
it  an  almost  inevitable  tendency  to  harden  to  the 
sheerest  officialism.  That  it  was  more  apt  to  do 
so  in  Israel  than  in  Judah,  is  intelligible  from 
the  origin  of  the  Northern  Schism,  and  the 
erection  of  the  national  sanctuaries  from  motives 
of  mere  statecraft.*  Erastianism  could  hardly 
be  more  flagrant  or  more  ludicrous  in  its  op- 
position to  true  religion  than  at  Bethel.  And 
yet  how  often  have  the  ludicrousness  and  the 
flagrancy  been  repeated,  with  far  less  tempta- 
tion! Ever  since  Christianity  became  a  state  re- 
ligion, she  that  needed  least  to  use  the  weapons 
of  this  world  has  done  so  again  and  again  in  a 
thoroughly  Pagan  fashion.  The  attempts  of 
Churches  by  law  established,  to  stamp  out  by  law 
all  religious  dissent;  or  where  such  attempts  were 
no  longer  possible,  the  charges  now  of  fanaticism 
and  now  of  sordidness  and  religious  shopkeep- 
ing,  which  have  been  so  frequently  made  against 
dissent  by  little  men  who  fancied  their  state  con- 
nection, or  their  higher  social  position  to  mean 
an  intellectual  and  moral  superiority;  the  absurd 
claims  which  many  a  minister  of  religion  makes 
upon  the  homes  and  the  souls  of  a  parish,  by 
virtue  not  of  his  calling  in  Christ,  but  of  his 
position  as  official  priest  of  the  parish, — all  these 
are  the  sins  of  Amaziah,  priest  of  Bethel.  But 
they  are  not  confined  to  an  established  Church. 
The  Amaziahs  of  dissent  are  also  very  many. 
Wherever  the  official  masters  the  spiritual; 
wherever  mere  dogma  or  tradition  is  made  the 
standard  of  preaching;  wherever  new  doctrine  is 
silenced,  or  programmes  of  reform  condemned, 
as  of  late  years  in  Free  Churches  they  have 
sometimes  been,  not  by  spiritual  argument,  but 
by  the  ipse  dixit  of  the  dogmatist,  or  by  ecclesi- 
astical rule  or  expediency, — there  you  have  the 
same  spirit.  The  dissenter  who  checks  the  Word 
of  God  in  the  name  of  some  denominational  law 
or  dogma  is  as  Erastian  as  the  churchman  who 
would  crush  it,  like  Amaziah,  by  invoking  the 
state.  These  things  in  all  the  Churches  are  the 
beggarly  rudiments  of  Paganism;  and  religious 
reform  is  achieved,  as  it  was  that  day  at  Bethel, 
by  the  adjuring  of  officialism. 

"  But  Amos  answered  and  said  unto  Amaziah, 
No  prophet  I,  nor  prophet's  son.  But  a  herds- 
man f  I,  and  a  dresser  of  sycamores;  and  Jeho- 
vah took  me  from  behind  the  fiock,  and  Jehovah 
said  unto  me,  Go,  prophesy  unto  My  people 
Israel." 

On  such  words  we  do  not  comment;  we  give 
them  homage.  The  answer  of  this  shepherd  to 
this  priest  is  no  mere  claim  of  personal  disinter- 
estedness. It  is  the  protest  of  a  new  order  of 
prophecy,^:  the  charter  of  a  spiritual  religion.  As 
we  have  seen,  the  "  sons  of  the  prophets''-'  were 
guilds  of  men  who  had  taken  to  prophesying  be- 
cause of  certain  gifts  of  temper  and  natural  dis- 
position, and  they  earned  their  bread  by  the  ex- 

*  I  Kings  xii.  26.  27. 

t  "  Prophet  "  and  "  prophet's  son  "  are  equivalent  terms, 
the  latter  meaning  one  of  the  professional  guilds  of 
prophets.  There  is  no  need  to  change  herdsman.  IpO. 
as  Wellhausen  does,  into  TplJ,  shepherd,  the  word  used 
in  i.  I. 

t  Cf.  Wellhausen,  "  Hist.,"  Eng.  Ed.,  §  6  :  "  Amos  was  the 
founder  and  the  purest  type  of  a  new  order  of  prophecy." 


472 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


ercise  of  these.  Among  such  abstract  craftsmen 
Amos  will  not  be  reckoned.  He  is  a  prophet, 
but  not  of  the  kind  with  which  his  generation 
was  familiar.  An  ordinary  member  of  society, 
he  has  been  suddenly  called  by  Jehovah  from 
his  civil  occupation  for  a  special  purpose  and 
by  a  call  which  has  not  necessarily  to  do  with 
either  gifts  or  a  profession.  This  was  something 
new,  not  only  in  itself,  but  in  its  consequences 
upon  the  general  relations  of  God  to  men. 
What  we  see  in  this  dialogue  at  Bethel  is,  there- 
fore, not  merely  the  triumph  of  a  character,  how- 
ever heroic,  but  rather  a  step  forward — and  that 
one  of  the  greatest  and  most  indispensable — in 
the  history  of  religion. 

There  follows  a  denunciation  of  the  man  who 
sought  to  silence  this  fresh  voice  of  God.  "  Now 
therefore  hearken  to  the  word  of  Jehovah  thou 
that  sayest,  Prophesy  not  against  Israel,  nor  let 
drop  thy  words  against  the  house  of  Israel; 
therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah.  .  .  ."  Thou  hast 
presumed  to  say;  "  Hear  what  God  will  say." 
Thou  hast  dared  to  set  thine  office  and  system 
against  His  word  and  purpose.  See  how  they 
must  be  swept  away.  In  defiance  of  its  own 
rules  the  grammar  flings  forward  to  the  begin- 
nings of  its  clauses,  each  detail  of  the  priest's 
estate  along  with  the  scene  of  its  desecration. 
"  Thy  wife  in  the  city — shall  play  the  harlot;  and 
thy  sons  and  thy  daughters  by  the  sword — shall 
fall;  and  thy  land  by  the  measuring  rope — shall 
be  divided;  and  thou  in  an  unclean  land — shalt 
die."  Do  not  let  us  blame  the  prophet  for  a 
coarse  cruelty  in  the  first  of  these  details.  He 
did  not  invent  it.  With  all  the  rest  it  formed 
an  ordinary  consequence  of  defeat  in  the  war- 
fare of  the  times — an  inevitable  item  of  that 
general  overthrow  which,  with  bitter  emphasis, 
the  prophet  describes  in  Amaziah's  own  words: 
"  Israel  going  shall  go  into  captivity  from  off 
his   own   land." 

There  is  added  a  vision  in  line  with  the  three 
which  preceded  the  priest's  interruption.  We  are 
therefore  justified  in  supposing  that  Amos  spoke 
it  also  on  this  occasion,  and  in  taking  it  as  the 
close  of  his  address  at  Bethel.  "  Then  the  Lord 
Jehovah  gave  me  to  see:  and,  behold,  a  basket  of 
Kaits,"  that  is,  "  summer  fruit.  And  He  said, 
What  art  thou  seeing,  Amos?  And  I  said,  A 
basket  of  Kaits.  And  Jehovah  said  unto  me, 
The  Kets — the  End — has  come  upon  My  people 
Israel.  I  will  not  again  pass  them  over."  This 
does  not  carry  the  prospect  beyond  the  third 
vision,  but  it  stamps  its  finality,  and  there  is 
therefore  added  a  vivid  realisation  of  the  result. 
By  four  disjointed  lamentations,  "  howls "  the 
prophet  calls  them,  we  are  made  to  feel  the  last 
shocks  of  the  final  collapse,  and  in  the  utter  end 
an  awful  silence.  "  And  the  songs  of  the  temple 
shall  be  changed  into  howls  in  that  day,  saith  the 
Lord  Jehovah.  Multitude  of  corpses!  In  every 
place!     He  hath  cast  out!     Hush!  " 

These  then  were  probably  the  last  words  which 
Amos  '^poke  to  Israel.  If  so,  they  form  a  curi- 
ous echo  of  what  was  enforced  upon  himself,  and 
he  may  have  meant  them  as  such.  He  was  "  cast 
out";  he  was  "silenced."  They  might  almost 
be  the  verbal  repetition  of  the  priest's  orders. 
In  any  case  the  silence  is  appropriate.  But 
Amaziah  little  knew  what  power  he  had  given 
to  prophecy  the  day  he  forbade  it  to  speak.  The 
gagged  prophet  began  to  write;  and  those  ac- 
cents which,  humanly  speaking,  might  have  died 
out  with  the  songs  of  the  temple  of  Bethel  were 


clothed  upon  with  the  immortality  of  literature. 
Amos  silenced  wrote  a  book — first  of  prophets 
to  do  so — and  this  is  the  book  we  have  now  to 
study. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ATROCITIES  AND  ATROCITIES. 

Amos  i.  3-ii. 

Like  all  the  prophets  of  Israel,  Amos  receives 
oracles  for  foreign  nations.  Unlike  them,  how- 
ever, he  arranges  these  oracles  not  after,  but 
before,  his  indictment  of  his  own  people,  and  so 
as  to  lead  up  to  this.  His  reason  is  obvious  and 
characteristic.  If  his  aim  be  to  enforce  a  re- 
ligion independent  of  his  people's  interests  and 
privileges,  how  can  he  better  do  so  than  by  ex- 
hibiting its  principles  at  work  outside  his  people, 
and  then,  with  the  impetus  drained  from  many 
areas,  sweep  in  upon  the  vested  iniquities  of  Is- 
rael herself?  This  is  the  course  of  the  first  sec- 
tion of  his  book — chaps,  i.  and  ii.  One  by  one 
the  neighbours  of  Israel  are  cited  and  condemned 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah;  one  by  one  they  are 
told  they  must  fall  before  the  still  unnamed  en- 
gine of  the  Divine  Justice.  But  when  Amos  has 
stirred  his  people's  conscience  and  imagination 
by  his  judgment  of  their  neighbours'  sins,  he 
turns  with  the  same  formula  on  themselves.  Are 
they  morally  better?  Are  they  more  likely  to 
resist  Assyria?  With  greater  detail  he  shows 
them  worse  and  their  doom  the  heavier  for  all 
their  privileges.  Thus  is  achieved  an  oratorical 
triumph,  by  tactics  in  harmonv  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  prophecy  and  remarkably  suited  to  the 
tempers  of  that  time. 

But  Amos  achieves  another  feat,  which  extends 
far  beyond  his  own  day.  The  sins  he  condemns 
in  the  heathen  are  at  first  sight  very  different 
from  those  which  he  exposes  within  Israel.  Not 
only  are  they  sins  of  foreign  relations,  of  treaty 
and  war,  while  Israel's  are  all  civic  and  domestic; 
but  they  are  what  we  call  the  atrocities  of  Bar- 
barism— wanton  war,  massacre,  and  sacrilege — 
while  Israel's  are  rather  the  sins  of  Civilisation 
— the  pressure  of  the  rich  upon  the  poor,  the 
bribery  of  justice,  the  seduction  of  the  innocent, 
personal  impurity,  and  other  evils  of  luxury.  So 
great  is  this  difference  that  a  critic  more  gifted 
with  ingenuity  than  with  insight  might  plausibly 
distinguish  in  the  section  before  us  two  prophets 
with  two  very  different  views  of  national  sin — a 
ruder  prophet,  and  of  course  an  earlier,  who 
judged  nations  only  by  the  flagrant  drunkenness 
of  their  war,  and  a  more  subtle  prophet,  and  of 
course  a  later,  who  exposed  the  masked  cor- 
ruptions of  their  religion  and  their  peace.  Such 
a  theory  would  be  as  false  as  it  would  be  plausi- 
ble. For  not  only  is  the  diversity  of  the  ob- 
jects of  the  prophet's  judgment  explained  by  this, 
that  Amos  had  no  familiarity  with  the  interior 
life  of  other  nations,  and  could  only  arraign  their 
conduct  at  those  points  where  it  broke  into  light 
in  their  foreign  relations,  while  Israel's  civic  life 
he  knew  to  the  very  core.  But  Amos  had  be- 
sides a  strong  and  a  deliberate  aim  in  placing 
the  sins  of  civilisation  as  the  climax  of  a  list 
of  the  atrocities  of  barbarism.  He  would  recall 
what  men  are  always  forgetting,  that  the  former 
are  really  more  cruel  and  criminal  than  the 
latter;  that  luxury,  bribery,  and  intolerance,  the 


Amos  i.  3-1  i  J 


AIROCITIES    AND    ATROCITIES. 


473 


oppression  of  the  poor,  the  corruption  of  the 
innocent  and  the  silencing  of  the  prophet — what 
Christ  calls  offences  against  His  little  ones — are 
even  more  awful  atrocities  than  the  wanton  hor- 
rors of  barbarian  warfare.  If  we  keep  in  mind 
this  moral  purpose,  we  shall  study  with  more  in- 
terest than  we  could  otherwise  do  the  somewhat 
foreign  details  of  this  section.  Horrible  as  the 
outrages  are  which  Amos  describes,  they  were 
repeated  only  yesterday  by  Turkey:  many  of  the 
crimes  with  which  he  charges  Israel  blacken  the 
life  of  Turkey's  chief  accuser.  Great  Britain. 

In  his  survey  Amos  includes  all. the  six  states 
of  Palestine  that  bordered  upon  Israel,  and  lay 
in  the  way  of  the  advance  of  Assyria — Aram  of 
Damascus,  Philistia,  Tyre  (or  Phoenicia), 
Edom,  Ammon,  and  Moab.  They  are  not  ar- 
ranged in  geographical  order.  The  prophet  be- 
gins with  Aram  in  the  northeast,  then  leaps  to 
Philistia  in  the  southwest,  comes  north  again  to 
Tyre,  crosses  to  the  southeast  and  Edom,  leaps 
Moab  to  Ammon,  and  then  comes  back  to  Moab. 
Nor  is  any  other  explanation  of  his  order  visible. 
Damascus  heads  the  list,  no  doubt,  because  her 
cruelties  had  been  most  felt  by  Israel,  and  per- 
haps too  because  she  lay  most  open  to  Assyria. 
It  was  also  natural  to  take  next  to  Aram  Philis- 
tia,* as  Israel's  other  greatest  foe;  and  nearest 
to  Philistia  lay  Tyre.  The  three  southeastern 
principalities  come  together.  But  there  may 
have  been  a  chronological  reason  now  unknown 
to  us. 

The  authenticity  of  the  oracles  on  Tyre,  Edom, 
and  Judah  has  been  questioned:  it  will  be  best 
to  discuss  each  case  as  we  come  to  it. 

Each  of  the  oracles  is  introduced  by  the 
formula:  "Thus  saith,"  or  "hath  said,  Jeho- 
vah: Because  of  three  crimes  of  .  .  .  yea,  be- 
cause of  four,  I  will  not  turn  It  back."  In  har- 
mony with  the  rest  of  the  book,t  Jehovah  is  rep- 
resented as  moving  to  punishment,  not  for  a 
single  sin,  but  for  repeated  and  cumulative  guilt. 
The  unnamed  "  It  "  which  God  will  not  recall  is 
not  the  word  of  judgment,  but  the  anger  and 
the  hand  stretched  forth  to  smite.:^  After  the 
formula,  an  instance  of  the  nation's  guilt  is 
given,  and  then  in  almost  identical  terms  he  de- 
crees the  destruction  of  all  by  war  and  captivity. 
Assyria  is  not  mentioned,  but  it  is  the  Assyrian 
fashion  of  dealing  with  conquered  states  which 
is  described.  Except  in  the  case  of  Tyre  and 
Edom,  the  oracles  conclude  as  they  have  begun, 
by  asserting  themselves  to  be  the  "  word  of  Je- 
hovah," or  of  "Jehovah  the  Lord."  It  is  no 
abstract  righteousness  which  condemns  these  for- 
eign peoples,  but  the  God  of  Israel,  and  their 
evil  deeds  are  described  by  the  characteristic 
Hebrew  word  for  sin — "  crimes,"  "  revolts,"  or 
"  treasons  "  against  Him. 8 

I.  Aram  of  Damascus. — "  Thus  hath  Jehovah 
said:  Because  of  three  crimes  of  Damascus,  yea, 
because  of  four,  I  will  not  turn  It  back;  for  that 
they  threshed  Gilead  with  iron  " — or  "  basalt 
threshing-sledges."  The  word  is  "  iron,"  but  the 
Arabs  of  to-day  call  basalt  iron;  and  the  thresh- 
ing-sledges, curved  slabs  H  drawn  rapidly  by 
horses  over  the  heaped  corn,  are  studded  with 

*  As  is  done  in  chap.  vi.  2,  i.\.  7. 
t  So  against  Israel  in  chap.  iv. 

t  So  Isa.  V.  25  :  H^IDJ  "[T  Hiyi  ISN  3tJ»  vh    Cf.  Ezek.  xx. 
^  Called  lah,  i.  e.,  slab. 


sharp  basalt  teeth  that  not  only  thresh  out  the 
grain,  but  chop  the  straw  into  little  pieces.  So 
cruelly  had  Gilead  been  chopped  by  Hazael  and 
his  son  Ben-Hadad  some  fifty  or  forty  years 
before  Amos  prophesied.*  Strongholds  were 
burned,  soldiers  slain  without  quarter,  children 
dashed  to  pieces,  and  women  with  child  put  to 
a  most  atrocious  end.f  But  "  I  shall  send  fire 
on  the  house  of  Hazael,  and  it  shall  devour  the 
palaces  of  Ben-Hadad  " — these  names  are  chosen, 
not  because  they  were  typical  of  the  Damascus 
dynasty,  but  because  they  were  the  very  names 
of  the  two  heaviest  oppressors  of  Israel.^  "  And 
I  will  break  the  boltS  of  Damascus,  and  cut  off 
the  inhabitant  from  Bik'ath-Aven  " — the  Valley 
of  Idolatry,  so.  called,  perhaps,  by  a  play  upon 
Bik'ath  On,||  presumably  the  valley  between  the 
Lebanons,  still  called  the  Bek'a,  in  which  lay 
Heliopolis  H — "  and  him  that  holdeth  the  sceptre 
from  Beth-Eden  " — some  royal  Paradise  in  that 
region  of  Damascus  which  is  still  the  Paradise  of 
the  Arab  world — "  and  the  people  of  Aram  shall 
go  captive  to  Kir  " — Kir  in  the  unknown  north, 
from  which  they  had  come:**  "Jehovah  hath 
said  "  it. 

2.  Philistia. — "  Thus  saith  Jehovah:  For  three 
crimes  of  Gaza  and  for  four  I  will  not  turn  It 
back,  because  they  led  captive  a  whole  captivity, 
in  order  to  deliver  them  up  to  Edom."  It  is 
difficult  to  see  what  this  means  if  not  the  whole- 
sale depopulation  of  a  district  in  contrast  to  the 
enslavement  of  a  few  captives  of  war.  By  all 
tribes  of  the  ancient  world,  the  captives  of  their 
bow  and  spear  were  regarded  as  legitimate  prop- 
erty: it  was  no  offence  to  the  public  conscience 
that  they  should  be  sold  into  slavery.  But  the 
Philistines  seem,  without  excuse  of  war,  to  have 
descended  upon  certain  districts  and  swept  the 
whole  of  the  population  before  them,  for  purely 
commercial  purposes.  It  was  professional  slave- 
catching.  The  Philistines  were  exactly  like  the 
Arabs  of  to-day  in  Africa — not  warriors  who  win 
their  captives  in  honourable  fight,  but  slave- 
traders,  pure  and  simple.  In  warfare  in  Arabia 
itself  it  is  still  a  matter  of  conscience  with  the 
wildest  nomads  not  to  extinguish  a  hostile  tribe, 
however  bitter  one  be  against  them.ft  Gaza  is 
chiefly  blamed  by  Amos,  for  she  was  the  em- 
porium of  the  trade  on  the  border  of  the  desert, 
with  roads  and  regular  caravans  to  Petra  and 
Elah  on  the  Gulf  of  Akaba,  both  of  them  places 
in  Edom  and  depots  for  the  traffic  with  Arabia. JJ 
"  But  I  will  cut  off  the  inhabitant  from  Ashdod, 
and  the  holder  of  the  sceptre  from  Askalon,  and 
I  will  turn  My  hand  upon  Ekron  " — four  of  the 
five  great  Philistine  towns,  Gath  being  already 
destroyed,  and  never  again  to  be  mentioned  with 
the  others  §§ — "  and  the  last  of  the  Philistines 
shall  perish:  Jehovah  hath  said  it." 

•These  Syrian  campaigns  in  Gilead  must  have  taken 
place  between  839  and  806,  the  long  interval  during  which 
Damascus  enjoyed  freedom  from  Assyrian  invasion. 

t  2  Kings  viii.  12  ;  xiii.  7  :  cf.  above,  p.  450. 

$"  He  delivered  them  into  the  hand  of  Hazael  king  of 
Aram,  and  into  the  hand  of  Ben-Hadad  the  son  of  Hazael, 
continually  "  (2  Kings  xiii.  3). 

§  No  need  here  to  render /r/'w^:^,  as  some  do. 

I!  So  the  LXX. 

IThe  present  Baalbek  (Baal  of  the  Bek'a  ?).  Well- 
hausen  throws  doubt  on  the  idea  that  Heliopolis  was  at 
this  time  an  Aramean  town. 

**  ix.  7. 

+t  Doughty  :  "  Arabia  Deserta,"  I.  335. 

%X  On  the  close  connection  of  Edom  and  Gaza  see  "  Hist. 
Geog.,"  pp.  182  ff. 

§§  See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  194  ff.  Wellhausen  think.-^ 
Gath  was  not  yet  destroyed,  and  quotes  vi.  2  ;  Micah  i.  10, 
14.  But  we  know  that  Hazael  destroyed  it,  and  that  fac'^, 
taken  in  conjunction  with  its  being  the  only  omission 


474 


THE    mOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


3.  Tyre. — "  Thus  saith  Jehovah :  Because  of 
three  crimes  of  Tyre  and  because  of  four  I  will 
not  turn  It  back;  for  that  they  gave  up  a  whole 
captivity  to  Edom  " — the  same  market  as  in  the 
previous  charge—"  and  did  not  remember  the 
covenant  of  brethren."  We  do  not  know  to 
what  this  refers.  The  alternatives  are  three:  that 
the  captives  were  Hebrews  and  the  alliance  one 
between  Israel  and  Edom;  that  the  captives  were 
Hebrews  and  the  alliance  one  between  Israel  and 
Tyre;  *  that  the  captives  were  Phoenicians  and 
the  alliance  the  natural  brotherhood  of  Tyre  and 
the  other  Phoenician  towns. f  But  of  these  three 
alternatives  the  first  is  scarcely  possible,  for  in 
such  a  case  the  blame  would  have  been  rather 
Edoni's  in  buying  than  Tyre's  in  selling.  The 
second  is  possible,  for  Israel  and  Tyre  had  lived 
in  close  alliance  for  more  than  two  centuries; 
but  the  phrase  "  covenant  of  brethren  "  is  not 
so  well  suited  to  a  league  between  two  tribes 
who  felt  themselves  to  belong  to  fundamentally 
different  races.t  as  to  the  close  kinship  of  the 
Phoenician  communities.  And  although,  in  the 
scrappy  records  of  Phoenician  history  before  this 
time,  we  find  no  instance  of  so  gross  an  outrage 
by  Tyre  on  other  Phoenicians,  it  is  quite  possible 
that  such  may  have  occurred.  During  next  cen- 
tury Tyre  twice  over  basely  took  sides  with  As- 
syria in  suppressing  the  revolts  of  her  sister 
cities.^  Besides,  the  other  Phoenician  towns  are 
not  included  in  the  charge.  We  have  every 
reason,  therefore,  to  believe  that  Amos  ex- 
presses here  not  resentment  against  a  betrayal  of 
Israel,  but  indignation  at  an  outrage  upon  natural 
rights  and  feelings  with  which  Israel's  own  inter- 
ests were  not  in  any  way  concerned.  And  this 
also  suits  the  lofty  spirit  of  the  whole  prophecy. 
"  But  I  will  send  fire  upon  the  wall  of  Tyre,  and 
it  shall  devour  her  palaces.    .    .    ." 

This  oracle  against  Tyre  has  been  suspected 
by  Wellhausen.ll  for  the  following  reasons:  that 
it  is  of  Tyre  alone,  and  silence  is  kept  regarding 
the  other  Phoenician  cities,  while  in  the  case 
of  Philistia  other  towns  than  Gaza  are  con- 
demned; that  the  charge  is  the  same  as  against 
Gaza;  and  that  the  usual  close  to  the  formula  is 
wanting.  But  it  would  have  been  strange  if  from 
a  list  of  states  threatened  by  the  Assyrian  doom 
we  had  missed  Tyre,  Tyre  which  lay  in  the 
avenger's  very  path.  Again,  that  so  acute  a 
critic  as  Wellhausen  should  cite  the  absence  of 
other  Phoenician  towns  from  the  charge  against 
Tyre  is  really  amazing,  when  he  has  just  allowed 
that  it  was  probably  against  some  or  all  of  these 
cities  that  Tyre's  crime  was  committed.  How 
could  they  be  included  in  the  blame  of  an  out- 
rage done  upon  themselves?  The  absence  of  the 
usual  formula  at  the  close  may  perhaps  be  ex- 
plained by  omission,  as  indicated  above. IT 

4.  Edom. — "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  Because  of 
three  crimes  of  Edom  and  because  of  four  I  will 
not  turn  It  back;  for  that  he  pursued  with  the 

here  from  the  five  Philistine  towns,  is  evidence  enough. 
In  the  passages  cjuoted  by  Wellhausen  there  is  nothing  to 
the  contrary:  vi.  2  implies  that  Gath  has  fallen  ;  Micah 
i.  10  is  the  repetition  of  an  old  proverb. 

*  Farrar,  53  ;  Pusey  on  ver.  9  ;  Pietschmann  "  Geschichte 
de  Phonizier,"  298. 

+  To  which  Wellhausen  inclines. 

t  Gen   X. 

§  Under  Asarhaddon,  678-676  B.  C,  and  later  under 
Assurbanipal  f Pietschmann.  "Gesch.,"  pp.  302  f.). 

J  And  he  omits  it  from  his  translation. 

i  So  far  from  such  an  omission  proving  that  the  oracle 
is  an  insertion,  is  it  not  more  probable  that  an  inserter 
would  have  taken  care  to  make  his  insertion  formally 
correct  ? 


sword  his  brother,"  who  cannot  be  any  other 
than  Israel,  "  corrupted  his  natural  feelings  " — 
literally  "  his  bowels  of  mercies  " — "  and  kept 
aye  fretting  *  his  anger,  and  his  passion  he 
watched  " — like  a  fire,  or  "  paid  heed  "  to  it — • 
"for  ever."-}-  "But  I  will  send  fire  upon  Te- 
man  " — the  "  South  "  Region  belonging  to  Edom 
— "  and  it  shall  devour  the  palaces  of  Bosrah  " 
— the  Edomite  Bosrah,  southeast  of  Petra. .  The 
Assyrians  had  already  compelled  Edom  to  pay 
tribute.?; 

The  objections  to  the  authenticity  of  this  oracle 
are  more  serious  than  those  in  the  case  of  the 
oracle  on  Tyre.  It  has  been  remarked  '  that  be- 
fore the  Jewish  Exile  so  severe  a  tone  could  not 
have  been  adopted  by  a  Jew  against  Edom,  who 
had  been  mostly  under  the  yoke  of  Judah,  and 
not  leniently  treated.  What  were  the  facts? 
Joab  subdued  Edom  for  David  with  great 
cruelty.H  Jewish  governors  were  set  over  the 
conquered  people,  and  this  state  of  affairs  seems 
to  have  lasted,  in  spite  of  an  Edomite  attempt 
against  Solomon,**  till  850.  In  Jehoshaphat's 
reign,  873-850,  "  there  was  no  king  of  Edom,  a 
deputy  was  king,"  who  towards  850  joined  the 
kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  in  an  invasion  of  Moab 
through  his  territory.ff  But,  soon  after  this  in- 
vasion and  perhaps  in  consequence  of  its  failure, 
Edom  revolted  from  Joram  of  Judah  (849-842), 
who  unsuccessfully  attempted  to  put  down  the 
revolt.tt  The  Edomites  appear  to  have  remained 
independent  for  fifty  years  at  least.  Amaziah  of 
Judah  (797-779)  smote  them,§§  but  not,  it  would 
seem,  into  subjection;  for,  according  to  the 
Chronicler,  Uzziaih  had  to  win  back  Elath  for 
the  Jews  after  Amaziah's  death. ||||  The  history, 
therefore,  of  the  relations  of  Judah  and  Edom 
before  the  time  of  Amos  was  of  such  a  kind  as  to 
make  credible  the  existence  in  Judah  at  that 
time  of  the  feeling  about  Edom  which  inspires 
this  oracle.  Edom  had  shown  just  the  vigilant, 
implacable  hatred  here  described.  But  was  the 
right  to  blame  them  for  it  Judah's,  who  herself 
had  so  persistently  waged  war,  with  confessed 
cruelty,  against  Edom?  Could  a  Judsean  prophet 
be  just  in  blaming  Edom  and  saying  nothing  of 
Judah?  It  is  true  that  in  the  fifty  years  of 
Edom's  independence — the  period,  we  must  re- 
member, from  which  Amos  seems  to  draw  the 
materials  of  all  his  other  charges — there  may 
have  been  events  to  justify  this  oracle  as  spoken 
by  him;  and  our  ignorance  of  that  period  is 
ample  reason  why  we  should  pause  before  re- 
jecting the  oracle  so  dogmatically  as  Wellhausen 
does.  But  we  have  at  least  serious  grounds  for 
suspecting  it.  To  charge  Edom,  whom  Judah 
has  conquered  and  treated  cruelly,  with  restless 
hate  towards  Judah  seems  to  fall  below  that 
high  impartial  tone  which  prevails  in  the  other 
oracles  of  this  section.     The  charge  was  much 

*  There  seems  no  occasion  to  amend  with  Olshausen  to 
the  "  kept  "  of  Psalm  ciii .  9. 

-t-  Read  with  LXX.  n)i:h  IDK'.  though  throughout  the 
verse  the  LXX.  translation  is  very  vile. 

i  In  other  two  passages,  Bosrah,  the  city,  is  placed  in 
parallel  not  to  another  city,  but  just  as  here  to  a  whole 
region  :  Isa.  xxxiv.  6,  where  the  parallel  is  the  "  land  of 
Edom,"  and  Ixiii.  i,  where  it  is  "  Edom."  There  is  there- 
fore no  need  to  take  Teman  in  our  passage  as  a  city,  as 
which  it  does  not  appear  before  Eusebius. 

§  Under  Rimman-nirari  III.  (812-783).  See  Buhl's 
"  Gesch.  der  Edomiter,"  65  :  this  against  Wellhausen. 

II  Wellhausen,  m  loco. 

t2  Sam.  viii.  13,  with  i  Kings  xi.  16. 

♦*  I  Kings  xj.  14-25. 

tt  2  Kings  iii.  §§2  Kings  xiv.  10. 

X%  2  Kings  viii.  20-22.  Illl  a  Chron.  xxvL  a. 


Amos  i.  3-ii.] 


ATROCITIES    AND    ATROCITIES. 


475 


more  justifiable  at  the  time  of  the  Exile,  when 
Edom  did  behave  shamefully  towards  Israel.* 
Wellhausen  points  out  that  Tcman  and  Bosrah 
are  names  which  do  not  occur  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment before  the  Exile,  but  this  is  uncertain  and 
inconclusive.  The  oracle  wants  the  concluding 
formula  of  the  rest.f 

5.  Ammon. — "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  Because  of 
three  crimes  of  Ammon  and  because  of  four  I 
will  not  turn  It  back;  for  that  they  ripped  up 
Gilead's  women  with  child — in  order  to  enlarge 
their  borders!"  For  such  an  end  they  com- 
mitted such  an  atrocity!  The  crime. is  one  that 
has  been  more  or  less  frequent  in  Semitic  war- 
fare. Wellhausen  cites  several  instances  in  the 
feuds  of  Arab  tribes  about  their  frontiers.  The 
Turks  have  been  guilty  of  it  in  our  own  day.  t 
It  is  the  same  charge  which  the  historian  of  Is- 
rael puts  into  the  mouth  of  Elisha  against 
Hazael  of  Aram,§  and.  probably  the  war  was  the 
same;  when  Gilead  was  simultaneously  attacked 
by  Arameans  from  the  north  and  Ammonites 
from  the  south.  "  But  I  will  set  fire  to  the  wall 
of  Rabbah  "— Rabbath-Ammon,  literally  "  chief  " 
or  "  capital  "  of  Ammon — "  and  it  shall  devour 
her  palaces,  with  clamour  in  the  day  of  battle, 
with  tempest  in  the  day  of  storm."  As  we  speak 
of  "storming  a  city,"  Amos  and  Isaiah  |  use 
the  tempest  to  describe  the  overwhelming  in- 
vasion of  Assyria.  There  follows  the  character- 
istic Assyrian  conclusion:  "  And  their  king  shall 
go  into  captivity,  he  and  his  princes  Tj  together, 
saith  Jehovah." 

6.  MoAB. — "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  Because  of 
three  crimes  of  Moab  and  because  of  four  I  will 
not  turn  It  back;  for  that  he  burned  the  bones 
of  the  king  of  Edom  to  lime."  **  In  the  great 
invasion  of  Moab,  about  850,  by  Israel,  Judah, 
and  Edom  conjointly,  the  rage  of  Moab  seems 
to  have  been  directed  chiefly  against  Edom.ff 
Whether  opportunity  to  appease  that  rage  oc- 
curred on  the  withdrawal  of  Israel  we  cannot  say. 
But  either  then  or  afterwards,  balked  of  their  at- 
tempt to  secure  the  king  of  Edom  alive,  Moab 
wreaked  their  vengeance  on  his  corpse,  and  bfirnt 
his  bones  to  lime.  It  was,  in  the  religious  be- 
lief of  all  antiquity,  a  sacrilege;  yet  it  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  the  desecration  of  the  tomb — 
or  he  would  have  mentioned  it — but  the  wanton 
meanness  of  the  deed,  which  Amos  felt.  "  And 
I  will  send  fire  on  Moab,  and  it  shall  devour  the 
palaces  of  The-Cities  " — Kerioth,+t  perhaps  the 
present  Kureiyat,§§  on  the  Moab  plateau  where 
Chemosh  had  his  shrine  ||!| — "  and  in  tumult  shall 
Moab  die  " — to  Jeremiah  1[1[  the  Moabites  were 
the  sons  of  tumult — "  with  clamour  and  with  the 
noise  of  the  war-trumpet.  And  I  will  cut  off 
the  ruler  " — literally  "  judge,"  probably  the  vas- 

*See,  however,  Buhl,  op.  cit.,  67. 

+  It  is,  however,  no  reason  against  the  authenticity  of 
the  oracle  to  say  that  Edom  lay  outside  the  path  of 
Assyria.  In  answer  to  that  see  the  Assyrian  inscriptions, 
e.  /^.,  Asarhaddon's  :  c/.  above,  p.  474,  «. 

i  Notably  in  the  recent  Armenian  massacres. 

§  2  Kings  viii.  12. 

ixxyiii.  2,  xxvii.  7,  8,  where  the  Assyrian  and  another 
invasion  are  both  described  in  terms  of  tempest. 

IT  The  LXX.  reading,  "their  priests  and  their  princes," 
must  be  due  to  taking  Malcam  :=  "  their  king"  as  Milcom 
=  the  Ammonite  god.     See  Jer.  xlix.  3. 

**  "Great  Caesar  dead  and  turned  to  clay 

Miglu  stop  a  hole  to  turn  the  wind  away." 

+t  2  Kings  iii.  26.     So  rightly  Pusey. 

tt  ler  xiviii.  24  without  article,  but  in  41  with. 

§§  Though  this  is  claimed  by  most  for  Kiriathaim. 

if II  Moabite  Stone,  1.  13. 

^^  xiviii.  4S. 


sal  king  placed  by  Jeroboam  II. — "  from  her  * 
midst,  and  all  hisf  princes  will  I  slay  with  him: 
Jehovah    hath    said  "    it. 

These,  then,  are  the  charges  which  Amos 
brings  against  the  heathen  neighbours  of  Israel. 

If  wc  look  as  a  whole  across  the  details 
through  which  we  have  been  working,  what  we 
see  is  a  picture  of  the  Semitic  world- so  summary 
and  so  vivid  that  we  get  the  like  of  it  nowhere 
else — the  Semitic  world  in  its  characteristic 
brokcnness  and  turbulence;  its  factions  and  fe- 
rocities, its  causeless  raids  and  quarrels,  tribal 
disputes  about  boundaries  flaring  up  into  the 
most  terrible  massacres,  vengeance  that  wreaks 
itself  alike  on  the  embryo  and  the  corpse — "  cut- 
ting up  women  with  child  in  Gilead,"  and  "  burn- 
ing to  lime  the  bones  of  the  king  of  Edom." 
And  the  one  commerce  which  binds  these  fero- 
cious tribes  together  is  the  slave-trade  in  its 
wholesale  and  most  odious  form. 

Amos  treats  none  of  the  atrocities  subjectively. 
It  is  not  because  they  have  been  inflicted  upon 
Israel  that  he  feels  or  condemns  them.  The  ap- 
peals of  Israel  against  the  tyrant  become  many 
as  the  centuries  go  on;  the  later  parts  of  the 
Old  Testament  are  full  of  the  complaints  of  God's 
chosen  people,  conscious  of  their  mission  to  the 
world  against  the  heathen,  who  prevented  them 
from  it.  Here  we  find  none  of  these  complaints, 
but  a  strictly  objective  and  judicial  indictment 
of  the  characteristic  crimes  of  heathen  men 
against  each  other;  and  though  this  is  made  in 
the  name  of  Jehovah,  it  is  not  in  the  interests 
of  His  people  or  of  any  of  His  purposes  through 
them,  but  solely  by  the  standard  of  an  impartial 
righteousness  which,  as  we  are  soon  to  hear, 
must  descend  in  equal  judgment  on  Israel. 

Again,  for  the  moral  principles  which  Amos 
enforces  no  originality  can  be  claimed.  He  con- 
demns neither  war  as  a  whole  nor  slavery  as  a 
whole,  but  limits  his  curse  to  wanton  and  delib- 
erate aggravations  of  them:  to  the  slave-trade  in 
cold  blood,  in  Violation  of  treaties,  and  for  purely 
commercial  ends;t  to  war  for  trifling  causes, 
and  that  wreaks  itself  on  pregnant  women  and 
dead  men;  to  national  hatreds,  that  never  will 
be  still.  Now  against  such  things  there  has  al- 
ways been  in  mankind  a  strong  conscience,  of 
which  the  word  "  humanity  "  is  in  itself  a  suffi- 
cient proof.  We  need  not  here  inquire  into  the 
origin  of  such  a  common  sense — whether  it  be 
some  native  impulse  of  tenderness  which  asserts 
itself  as  soon  as  the  duties  of  self-defence  are  ex- 
hausted, or  some  rational  notion  of  the  needless- 
ness  of  excesses,  or  whether,  in  committing  these, 
men  are  visited  by  fear  of  retaliation  from  the 
wrath  they  have  unnecessarily  exasperated.  Cer- 
tain it  is  that  warriors  of  all  races  have  hesitated 
to  be  wanton  in  their  war,  and  have  foreboded 
the  special  judgment  of  heaven  upon  every  blind 
extravagance  of  hate  or  cruelty.  It  is  well  known 
how  "  fey  "  the  Greeks  felt  the  insolence  of 
power  and  immoderate  anger;  they  are  the  fatal 
element  in  many  a  Greek  tragedy.^  But  the 
Semites  themselves,  whose  racial  ferocity  is  so 
notorious,  are  not  without  the  same  feeling. 
"  Even  the  Beduins'  old  cruel  rancours  are  often 
less  than  the  golden  piety  of  the  wilderness.  The 
danger  past,  they  can  think  of  the  defeated  foe- 
men    with    kindness,     .     .     .     putting   only   their 

*  The  land's.  t  The  king's.  t  See  above,  p.  473. 

§  6u<r(7e/3ias  uiv  ii/Spts  reKos  f.(Eschylus,  "Eumen.,"  534)-  c/. 
"Odyssey,"  xiv.  263  ;  xvii.  431. 


476 


THlT-BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


trust  in  Ullah  to  obtain  the  like  at  need  for 
themselves.  It  is  contrary  to  the  Arabian  con- 
science to  extinguish  a  Kabila."  *  Similarly  in 
Israel  some  of  the  earliest  ethical  movements 
were  revolts  of  the  public  conscience  against 
horrible  outrages,  like  that,  for  instance,  done  by 
the  Benjamites  of  Gibeah.f  Therefore  in  these 
oracles  on  his  Wild  Semitic  neighbours  Amos 
discloses  no  new  ideal  for  either  tribe  or  indi- 
vidual. Our  view  is  confirmed  that  he  was  in- 
tent only  upon  arousing  the  natural  conscience  of 
his  Hebrew  hearers  in  order  to  engage  this  upon 
other  vices  to  which  it  was  less  impressionable 
— that  he  was  describing  those  deeds  of  war  and 
slavery,  whose  atrocity  all  men  admitted,  only 
that  he  might  proceed  to  bring  under  the  same 
condemnation  the  civic  and  domestic  sins  of 
Israel. 

We  turn  with  him,  then,  to  Israel.  But  in  his 
book  as  it  now  stands  in  our  Bibles,  Israel  is  not 
immediately  reached.  Between  her  and  the  for- 
eign nations  two  verses  are  bestowed  upon 
Judah:  "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  Because  of  three 
crimes  of  Judah  and  because  of  four  I  will  not 
turn  It  back;  for  that  they  despised  the  Torah  of 
Jehovah,  and  His  statutes  they  did  not  observe, 
and  their  falsehoods  " — false  gods — "  led  them 
astray,  after  which  their  fathers  walked.  But  I 
will  send  fire  on  Judah,  and  it  shall  devour  the 
palaces  of  Jerusalem."  These  verses  have  been 
suspected  as  a  later  insertion,:]:  on  the  ground 
that  every  reference  to  Judah  in  the  Book  of 
Amos  must  be  late,  that  the  language  is  very 
formal,  and  that  the  phrases  in  which  the  sin  of 
Judah  is  described  sound  like  echoes  of  Deu- 
teronomy. The  first  of  these  reasons  may  be 
dismissed  as  absurd;  it  would  have  been  far  more 
strange  if  Amos  had  never  at  all  referred  to 
Judah.^  The  charges,  however,  are  not  like 
those  which  Amos  elsewhere  makes,  and  though 
the  phrases  may  be  quite  as  early  as  his  time,  || 
the  reader  of  the  original,  and  even  the  reader 
of  the  English  version,  is  aware  of  a  certain 
tameness  and  vagueness  of  statement,  which  con- 
trasts remarkably  with  the  usual  pungency  of  the 
prophet's  style.  We  are  forced  to  suspect  the 
authenticity  of  these  verses. 

We  ought  to  pass,  then,  straight  from  the 
third  to  the  sixth  verse  of  this  chapter,  from 
the  oracles  on  foreign  nations  to  that  on 
Northern  Israel.  It  is  introduced  with  the  same 
formula  as  they  are:  "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  Be- 
cause of  three  crimes  of  Israel  and  because  of 
four  I  will  not  turn  It  back."  But  there  follow 
a  great  number  of  details,  for  Amos  has  come 
among  his  own  people  whom  he  knows  to  the 
heart,  and  he  applies  to  them  a  standard  more 
exact  and  an  obligation  more  heavy  than  any  he 
could  lay  to  the  life  of  the  heathen.  Let  us  run 
quickly  through  the  items  of  his  charge.  "  For 
that  they  sell  an  honest  man"|  for  silver,  and  a 

*  /.  e.,  a  tribe  ;  Doughty.  "  Arabia  Deserta,"  I.  335. 

t  Judges  .xix.,  xx. 

X  Duhm  was  the  first  to  publish  reasons  for  rejecting 
the  passa^fe  ('•Theol.  der  Propheten,"  1875,  p.  iiq),  but 
Wellhauscn  had  already  reached  the  same  conclusion 
("  Kleine  Propheten,"  p.  71).  Oort  and  Stade  adhere. 
On  the  other  side  see  Robertson  Smith,  "  Prophets  of 
Israel,"  igS,  and  Kuenen,  who  adheres  to  Smith's  argu- 
ments ("  Onderzoek  "). 

§  "  It  is  plain  that  Amos  could  not  have  excepted  Judah 
from  the  universal  ruin  which  he  saw  to  threaten  the 
whole  land  ;  or  at  all  events  such  exception  would  have 
required  to  be  expressly  made  on  special  grounds." — 
Robertson  Smith,  ''^Prophets,"  398. 

II  Jbid. 

t  pnV,  righteous  :  hardly,  as  most  commentators  take 
it,  the  legally  (as  distinguished  from  the  morally)  right- 


needy  man  for  a  pair  of  shoes  " — proverbial,  as 
we  should  say  "  for  an  old  song " — "  who 
trample  to  the  dust  of  the  earth  the  head  of  the 
poor  " — the  least  improbable  rendering  of  a  cor- 
rupt passage  * — "  and  pervert  the  way  of  hum- 
ble men.  And  a  man  and  his  father  will  go  into 
the  maid,"  the  same  maid.f  "  to  desecrate  My 
Holy  Name  " — without  doubt  some  public  form 
of  unchastity  introduced  from  the  Canaanite  wor- 
ship into  the  very  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  the  holy 
place  where  He  reveals  His  Name — "  and  on 
garments  given  in  pledge  they  stretch  them- 
selves by  every  altar,  and  the  wine  of  those  who 
have  been  fined  they  drink  in  the  house  of  their 
God."  A  riot  of  sin:  the  material  of  their  revels 
is  the  miser'ies  of  the  poor,  its  stage  the  house 
of  God!  Such  is  religion  to  the  Israel  of  Amos' 
day — indoors,  feverish,  sensual.  By  one  of  the 
sudden  contrasts  he  loves,  Amos  sweeps  out  of 
it  into  God's  idea  of  religion — a  great  historical 
movement,  told  in  the  language  of  the  open 
air:  national  deliverance,  guidance  on  the  high- 
ways of  the  world,  the  inspiration  of  prophecy, 
and  the  pure,  ascetic  life.  "  But  I,  I  destroyed 
the  Amoritet  before  you,  whose  height  was  as 
the  cedars,  and  he  was  strong  as  oaks,  and  I 
destroyed  his  fruit  from  above  and  his  roots  from 
below."  What  a  contrast  to  the  previous  picture 
of  the  temple  filled  with  fumes  of  wine  and  hot 
with  lust!  We  are  out  on  open  history;  God's 
gales  blow  and  the  forests  crash  before  them. 
"  And  I  brought  you  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  led  you  through  the  wilderness  forty 
years,  to  inherit  the  land  of  the  Amorite."  Re- 
ligion is  not  chambering  and  wantonness;  it  is 
not  selfish  comfort  or  profiting  by  the  miser'ies 
of  the  poor  and  the  sins  of  the  fallen.  But  re- 
ligion is  history — the  freedom  of  the  people  and 
their  education,  the  winning  Of  the  land  and  the 
defeat  of  the  heathen  foe;  and  then,  when  the 
land  is  firm  and  the  home  secure,  it  is  the  rais- 
ing, upon  that  stage  and  shelter,  of  spiritual 
guides  and  examples.  "  And  I  raised  up  of  your 
son^  to  be  prophets,  and  of  your  young  men  to 
be  Nazarites " — consecrated  and  ascetic  lives. 
"  Is  it  not  so,  O  children  of  Israel?  (oracle  of 
Jehovah).  But  ye  made  the  Nazarites  drink 
wine,  and  the  prophets  ye  charged,  saying, 
Prophesy  not!  " 

Luxury,  then,  and  a  very  sensual  conception 
of  religion,  with  all  their  vicious  offspring  in 
the  abuse  of  justice,  the  oppression  of  the  poor, 
the  corrupting  of  the  innocent,  and  the  intoler- 
ance of  spiritual  forces — these  are  the  sins  of  an 
enlightened  and  civilised  people,  which  Amos 
describes  as  worse  than  all  the  atrocities  of  bar- 
barism, and  as  certain  of  Divine  vengeance. 
How  far  beyond  his  own  day  are  his  words  still 
warm!  Here  in  the  nineteenth  century  is  Great 
Britain,  destroyer  of  the  slave-traffic,  and  cham- 
pion of  oppressed  nationalities — yet  this  great 
and  Christian  people,  at  the  very  time  they  are 
abolishing  slavery,  suffer  their  own  children  to 
work  in  factories  and  clay-pits  for  sixteen  hours 

eous :  the  rich  cruelly  used  their  legal  rights  to  sell  re- 
spectable and  honest  members  of  society  into  slavery. 

*  By  adapting  the  LXX.  So  far  as  we  know,  Well- 
hausen  is  right  in  saying  that  the  Massoretic  text,  which 
our  English  version  follows,  gives  no  sense.  LXX.  reads, 
also  without  much  sense  as  a  whole,  ri  ■naTovvra.  k-a\  r'ov 
Xovv  T^5  7^5,  tai  e»co>'6i!Ai^oi'  eis  ice^oAas  irTia^iav , 

tSo  rightly  the  LXX.  Or  the  definite  article  may  be 
here  used  in  conformity  with  the  common  Hebrew  way 
of  employing  it  to  designate,  not  a  definite  individual, 
but  a  member  of  a  definite,  well-known  genus. 

}  On  the  use  of  Amorite  for  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Canaan  see  Driver's  "Deut.,"  pp.  11  f. 


Amos  iii.-iv.  3.] 


CIVILISATION    AND    JUDGMENT. 


477 


a  day,  and  in  mines  set  women  to  a  labour  for 
which  horses  are  deemed  too  valual)le.  Things 
improve  after  1848,  but  how  slowly,  and  against 
what  callousness  of  Christians,  Lord  Shaftes- 
bury's long  and  often  disappointed  labours  pain- 
fully testify.  Even  yet  our  religious  public,  that 
curses  the  Turk,  and  in  an  indignation,  which 
can  never  be  too  warm,  cries  out  against  the 
Armenian  atrocities,  is  callous,  nay,  by  the 
avarice  of  some,  the  haste  and  passion  for  en- 
joyment of  many  more,  and  the  thoughtlessness 
of  all,  itself  contributes,  to  conditions  of  life  and 
fashions  of  society,  which  bear  with  cruelty  upon 
our  poor,  taint  our  literature,  needlessly  increase 
the  temptations  of  our  large  towns,  and  render 
pure  child  life  impossible  among  masses  of  our 
population.  Along  some  of  the  highways  of 
our  Christian  civilisation  we  are  just  as  cruel 
and  just  as  lustful  as  Kurd  or  Turk. 

Amos  closes  this  prophecy  with  a  vision  of 
immediate  judgment.  "  Behold,  I  am  about  to 
crush  "  or  "  squeeze  down  upon  you,  as  a  wag- 
gon crushes*  that  is  full  of  sheaves." f  An  al- 
ternative reading  supplies  the  same  general  im- 
pression of  a  crushing  judgment:  "  I  will  make 
ihe  ground  quake  under  you,  as  a  waggon  makes 
it    quake,"    or    "  as    a    waggon  "    itself    "  quakes 


*  The  verb  piy  of  the  Massoretic  text  is  not  found  else- 
where, and  whether  we  retain  it,  or  take  it  as  a  variant 
of,  or  mistake  for,  py^,  or  adopt  some  other  reading,  the 
whole  phrase  is  more  or  less  uncertain,  and  the  e.Kact 
shade  of  meaning  has  to  be  guessed,  though  the  general 
sense  remains  pretty  much  the  same.  The  following  is  a 
complete  note  on  the  subject,  with  reasons  for  adopting 
the  above  conclusion. 

(i)  LXX.  :  "  Behold,  I  roll  (kvKCo})  under  you  as  a  waggon 
full  of  straw  is  rolled."  A.  V. :  "I  am  pressed  under  you 
as  a  cart  is  pressed."  Pusey  :  "I  straiten  myself  under 
you,"  etc.  These  versions  take  p^J?  in  the  sense  of  pIV, 
"  to  press,"  and  rinn  'n  its  usual  meaning  of  "  beneath  "  ; 
and  the  result  is  conformable  to  the  well-known  figure  of 
the  Old  Testament  by  which  God  is  said  to  be  laden  and 
weary  with  the  transgressions  of  His  people.  But  this 
does  not  mean  an  actual  descent  of  judgment,  and  yet  vv. 
14-16  imply  that  such  an  intimation  has  been  made  in  ver. 
13  ;  and  besides  p^y^  and  p'^yn  are  both  in  the  Hiphil,  the 
active,  "to  press,'  or  causative,  "  make  to  press."  (2) 
Accordingly  some,  adopting  this  sense  of  the  verb,  take 
nnn  in  an  unusual  sense  of  '"down  upon."  Ewald :  "I 
press  down  upon  you  as  a  cart  that  is  full  of  sheaves 
presseth."  Guthe  (in  Kautzsch's  "  Bibel ") :  "'Ich  will 
euch  quetschen."  Rev.  Eng.  Ver.  :  "I  will  pyess  you  in 
your  place." — But  piy  has  been  taken  in  other  senses.  (3) 
Hoffmann  ("  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  HI.  100)  renders  it  "groan" 
in  conformity  with  Arab  'ik.  (4)  Wetzstein  (idt'd.,  278  flf.) 
quotes  Arab  'ak,  to  "  stop,  hinder,"  and  suggests  "  I  will 
bring  to  a  stop."  (5)  Buhl  (12th  Ed.  of  Gesenius'  "  Hand- 
wort,"  sub  p!|y),  in  view  of  possibility  of  npJJ/  being 
threshing-roller,  recalls  Arab,  'akk,  "to  cut  in  pieces." 
(6)  Hitzig  ("  Exeg.  Handbuch  ")  proposed  to  read  p^QO 
and  p''Sn  ;  "  I  will  make  it  shake  under  you,  as  the  laden 
waggon  shakes"  (the  ground).  So  rather  differently 
Welihausen  :  "  I  will  make  the  ground  quake  under  you, 
as  a  waggon  quakes  under  its  load  of  sheaves." 

I  have  only  to  add  that,  in  the  Alex.  Cod.  of  LXX., 
which  reads  kuAuu  for  (cvAiu,  we  have  an  interesting 
analogy  to  Wetzstein's  proposal ;  and  that  in  support  of 
the  rendering  of  Ewald,  and  its  unusual  interpretation  of 
DD^nnn,  which  seems  to  me  on  the  whole  the  most  prob- 
able, we  may  compare  Job  xxxvi.  16,  HTirin  pVID  NP- 
This,  it  is  true,  suggests  rather  the  choking  of  a  passage 
than  the  crushing  of  tlie  ground  ;  but,  by  the  way,  that 
sense  is  even  more  applicable  to  a  harvest  waggon  laden 
with  sheaves. 

■  t  "  Waggon  full  of  sheaves." — Welihausen  goes  too  far 
when  he  suggests  that  Amos  would  have  to  go  outside 
Palestine  to  see  such  a  waggon.  That  a  people  who 
already  knew  the  nse  of  chariots  for  travelling  (cy".  Gen. 
xlvi.  5,  JE)  and  waggons  for  agricultural  purposes  (i  Sam. 
vi.  7  ff.)  did  not  use  them  at  least  in  the  lowlands  of  their 
country  is  extremelv  improbable.  C/.  "Hist.  Geog.," 
Appendix  on  Roads  and  Wheeled  Vehicles  in  Syria. 


under  its  load  of  sheaves."  This  shock  is  to  be 
War.  "  Flight  shall  perish  from  the  swift,  and 
the  strong  shall  not  prove  his  power,  nor  the 
mighty  man  escape  with  his  life.  And  he  that 
graspeth  the  bow  shall  not  stand,  nor  shall  the 
swift  of  foot  escape,  nor  the  horseman  escape 
with  his  life.  And  he  that  thinketh  himself 
strong  among  the  heroes  shall  flee  away  naked  in 
that  day — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah," 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

CIVILISATION  AND  JUDGMENT. 

Amos  iii.-iv.  3. 

We  now  enter  the  Second  Section  of  the  Book 
of  Amos:  chaps,  iii.-vi.  It  is  a  collection  of 
various  oracles  of  denunciation,  grouped  partly 
by  the  recurrence  of  the  formula  "  Hear  this 
word,"  which  stands  at  the  head  of  our  present 
chaps,  iii.,  iv.,  and  v.,  which  are  therefore  proba- 
bly due  to  it;  partly  by  two  cries  of  "  Woe  "  at 
V.  18  and  vi.  i;  and  also  by  the  fact  that  each  of 
the  groups  thus  started  leads  up  to  an  emphatic, 
though  not  at  first  detailed,  prediction  of  the 
nation's  doom  (iii.  13-15;  iv.  3;  iv.  12;  v.  16,  17; 
V.  26,  27;  vi.  14).  Within  these  divisions  lie  a 
number  of  short  indictments,  sentences  of  judg- 
ment, and  the  like,  which  have  no  further  logical 
connection  tlwn  is  supplied  by  their  general 
sameness  of  subject,  and  a  perceptible  increase 
of  articulateness  from  beginning  to  end  of  the 
Section.  The  sins  of  Israel  are  more  detailed, 
and  the  judgment  of  war,  coming  from  the 
North,  advances  gradually  till  we  discern  the  un- 
mistakable ranks  of  Assyria.  But  there  are  vari- 
ous parentheses  and  interruptions,  which  cause 
the  student  of  the  text  no  little  difificulty.  Some 
of  these,  however,  may  be  only  apparent:  it  will 
always  be  a  question  whether  their  want  of  im- 
mediate connection  with  what  precedes  them  is 
not  due  to  the  loss  of  several  words  from  the 
text  rather  than  to  their  own  intrusion  into  it. 
Of  others  it  is  true  that  they  are  obviously  out 
of  place  as  they  lie;  their  removal  brings  together 
verses  which  evidently  belong  to  each  other. 
Even  such  parentheses,  however,  may  be  from 
Amos  himself.  It  is  only  where  a  verse,  besides 
interrupting  the  argument,  seems  to  reflect  a  his- 
torical situation  later  than  the  prophet's  day. 
that  we  can  be  sure  it  is  not  his  own.  And  in 
all  this  textual  criticism  we  must  keep  in  mind 
that  the  obscurity  of  the  present  text  of  a  verse, 
so  far  from  being  an  adequate  proof  of  its  sub- 
sequent insertion,  may  be  the  very  token  of  its 
antiquity,  scribes  or  translators  of  later  date  hav- 
ing been  unable  to  understand  it.  To  reject  a 
verse,  only  because  we  do  not  see  the  connection, 
would  surely  be  as  arbitrary  as  the  opposite  habit 
of  those  who,  missing  a  connection,  invent  one, 
and  then  exhibit  their  artificial  joint  as  evidence 
of  the  integrity  of  the  whole  passage.  In  fact 
we  must  avoid  all  headstrong  surgery,  for  to  a 
great  extent  we  work  in  the  dark. 

The  general  subject  of  the  Section  may  be  in- 
dicated by  the  title:  Religion  and  Civilisation. 
A  vigorous  community,  wealthy,  cultured,  and 
honestly  religious,  are,  at  a  time  of  settled  peace 
and  growing  power,  threatened,  in  the  name  of 
the  God  of  justice,  with  their  complete  political 
overthrow.  Their  civilisation  is  counted  for 
nothing;  their  religion,  on  which  they  base  their 


478 


THE-.  BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


confidence,  is  denounced  as  false  and  unavail- 
ing. These  two  subjects  are  not,  and  could  not 
have  been,  separated  by  the  prophet  in  any  one 
of  his  oracles.  But  in  the  first,  the  briefest,  and 
most  summary  of  these,  chaps,  iii.-iv.  3,  it  is 
mainly  with  the  doom  of  the  civil  structure  of 
Israel's  life  that  Amos  deals;  and  it  will  be  more 
convenient  for  us  to  take  them  first,  with  all  due 
reference  to  the  echoes  of  them  in  later  parts  of 
the  Section.  From  iv.  4-^1.  it  h  the  Religion 
and  its  false  peace  which  he  assaults;  and  we 
shall  take  that  in  the  next  chapter.  First,  then, 
Civilisation  and  Judgment  (iii.-iv.  3);  second,  The 
False  Peace  of  Ritual  (iv.  4-vi.). 

These  few  brief  oracles  open  upon  the  same 
note  as  that  in  which  the  previous  Section  closed 
. — that  the  crimes  of  Israel  are  greater  than  those 
of  the  heathen;  and  that  the  people's  peculiar  re- 
lation to  God  means,  not  their  security,  but  their 
greater  judgment.  It  is  then  affirmed  that  Is- 
rael's wealth  and  social  I'ife  are  so  sapped  by 
luxury  and  injustice  that  the  nation  must  perish. 
And,  as  in  every  luxurious  community  the 
women  deserve  especial  blame,  the  last  of  the 
group  of  oracles  is  reserved  for  them  (iv.  1-3). 

"  Hear  th'is  word,  which  Jehovah  hath  spoken 
against  you,  O  children  of  Israel,  against  the 
whole  family  which  I  brought  up  from  the  land 
of  Egypt  " — Judah  as  well  as  North  Israel,  so 
that  we  see  the  vanity  of  a  criticism  which  would 
•cast  out  of  the  Book  of  Amos.^s  unauthentic 
every  reference  to  Judah.  "  Only  you  have  I 
known  of  all  the  families  of  the  ground  " — not 
world,  but  "  ground,"  purposely  chosen  to  stamp 
the  meanness  and  mortality  of  them  all — "  there- 
fore will  I  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities." 

This  famous  text  has  been  called  by  various 
writers  "  the  keynote,"  "  the  license,"  and  "  the 
charter  "  of  prophecy.  But  the  names  are  too 
petty  for  what  is  not  less  than  the  fulmination  of 
an  element.  It  is  a  peal  of  thunder  we  hear.  It 
is,  in  a  moment,  the  explosion  and  discharge  of 
the  full  storm  of  prophecy.  As  when  from  a 
burst  cloud  the  streams  immediately  below  rise 
suddenly  and  all  their  banks  are  overflowed,  so 
the  prophecies  that  follow  surge  and  rise  clear 
of  the  old  limits  of  Israel's  faith  by  the  uncon- 
fined,  unmeasured  flood  of  heaven's  justice  that 
breaks  forth  by  this  single  verse.  Now,  once 
for  all,  are  submerged  the  lines  of  custom  and 
tradition  within  which  the  course  of  religion  has 
hitherto  flowed;  and,  as  it  were,  the  surface  of 
the  world  is  altered.  It  is  a  crisis  which  has  hap- 
pened more  than  once  again  in  history:  when 
helpless  man  has  felt  the  absolute  relentlessness 
of  the  moral  issues  of  life;  their  renunciation  of 
the  past,  however  much  they  have  helped  to  form 
it;  their  sacrifice  of  every  development  however 
costly,  and  of  every  hope  however  pure;  their 
deafness  to  prayer,  their  indifference  to  peni- 
tence; when  no  faith  saves  a  Church,  no  courage 
a  people,  no  culture  or  prestige  even  the  most 
exalted  order  of  men;  but  at  the  bare  hands  of  a 
judgment,  uncouth  of  voice  and  often  uncon- 
scious of  a  D'ivine  mission,  the  results  of  a  great 
civilisation  are  for  its  sins  swept  remorselessly 
away. 

Before  the  storm  bursts,  we  learn  by  its  light- 
nings some  truths  from  the  old  life  that  is  to  be 
destroyed.  "  You  only  have  I  known  of  all  the 
families  of  the  ground:  therefore  w'ill  I  visit  your 
iniquities  upon  you."  Religion  is  no  insurance 
against  judgment,  no  mere  atonement  and  escape 


from  consequences.  Escape!  Religion  is  only 
opportunity — the  greatest  moral  opportunity 
which  men  have,  and  which  if  they  violate  noth- 
ing remains  for  them  but  a  certain  fearful  look- 
ing forward  unto  judgment.  You  only  have  I 
known;  and  because  you  did  not  take  the  moral 
advantage  of  My  intercourse,  because  you  felt 
it  only  as  privilege  and  pride,  pardon  for  the  past 
and  security  for  the  future,  therefore  doom  the 
more  inexorable  awaits  you. 

Then  as  if  the  people  had  interrupted  him  with 
the  question,  What  sign  do  you  give  us  that  this 
judgment  is  near? — Amos  goes  aside  into  that 
noble  digression  (vv.  3-8)  on  the  harmony  be- 
tween the  prophet's  word  and  the  imminent 
events  of  the  time,  which  we  have  already 
studied.*  From  this  apologia,  verse  9  returns 
to  the  note  of  verses  i  and  2  and  develops  it. 
Not  only  is  Israel's  responsibility  greater  than 
that  of  other  people's.  Her  crimes  themselves 
are  more  heinous.  "  Make  proclamation  over 
the  palaces  in  Ashdod  "—if  we  are  not  to  read 
Assyria  here.f  then  the  name  of  Ashdod  has  per- 
haps been  selected  from  all  other  heathen  names 
because  of  its  similarity  to  the  Hebrew  word  for 
that  "  violence  "  J  with  which  Amos  is  charging 
the  people — "  and  over  the  palaces  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  and  say.  Gather  upon  the  Mountls  of 
Samaria  and  see!  Confusions  manifold  in  the 
midst  of  her;  violence  to  her  very  core!  Yea, 
they  know  not  how  to  do  uprightness,  saith  Je- 
hovah, who  store  up  wrong  and  violence  in  their 
palaces." 

"  To  their  crimes,"  said  the  satirist  of  the  Ro- 
mans, "  they  owe  their  gardens,  palaces,  stables, 
and  fine  old  plate."  ||  And  William  Langland 
declared  of  the  rich  English  of  his  day: — 

"  For  toke  thei  on  trewly  •  they  tymbred  not  so  heigh, 
Ne  boughte  non  burgages  •  be  ye  full  certayne."  ^ 

"  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah: 
Siege  and  Blockade  of  the  Land.**  And  they 
shall  bring  down  from  ofif  thee  thy  fortresses, 
and  plundered  shall  be  thy  palaces."  Yet  this 
shall  be  no  ordinary  tide  of  Eastern  war,  to  ebb 
like  the  Syrian  as  it  flowed,  and  leave  the  na- 
tion to  relly  on  their  land  again.  For  Assyria 
devours  the  peoples.  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah:  As 
the  shepherd  saveth  from  the  mouth  of  the  lion 
a  pair  of  shin-bones  or  a  bit  of  an  ear,  so  shall 
the  children  of  Israel  be  saved— they  who  sit  in 
Samaria  in  the  corner  of  the  diwan  and  ...  on 
a  couch."  ft  The  description,  as  will  be  seen  from 

*  See  above,  pp.  462  ff.  and  pp.  464  fF. 

t  With  the  LXX.  11^^X3  for  nnjJ>K3. 

t"lt»>(ver.  10). 

§  Singular  as  in  LXX.,  and  not  plural  as  in  the  M.  T. 
and  English  versions. 

!l  Juvenal,  "  Satires,"  I. 

If  "  Vision  of  Piers  Plowman."    Burgages  =  tenements. 

**  Or  "  The  Enemy,  and  that  right  round  the  Land  !  " 

tt  "  In  Damascus  on  a  couch:  "  "  on  a  Damascus  couch  :  " 
"  on  a  Damascus-cloth  couch  :  "  or  "  Damascus-fashion  on 
a  couch  " — alternatives  all  equally  probable  and  equally 
beyond  proof.  The  te.xt  is  very  difficult,  nor  do  the  ver- 
sions give  help,  (i)  The  consonants  of  the  word  before 
"  a  couch  "  spell  "in  Damascus,"  and  so  the  LXX.  take 
it.  This  would  be  in  e.xact  parallel  to  the  "in  Samaria" 
of  the  previous  half  of  the  clause.  But  although  Jeroboam 
IL  is  said  to  have  recovered  Damascus  (2  Kings  ,\iv.  28) 
this  is  not  necessarily  the  town  itself,  of  whose  occupation 
by  Israel  we  have  no  evidence,  while  Amos  always 
assumes  it  to  be  Aramean,  and  here  he  is  addressing 
Israelites.  Still  retaining  the  name  of  the  city,  we  can 
take  it  with  "  couch  "  as  parallel,  not  to  "  in  Samaria,"  but 
to  "on  the  side  of  a  diwan  ;"  in  that  case  the  meaning 
may  have  been  "a  Damascus  couch  "  (though  as  the  two 
words  stand  it  is  impossible  to  parse  them,  and  Gen.  xv. 


Amos  iii.-iv.  3.] 


CIVILISATION    AND    JUDGMENT. 


479 


the  note  below,  is  obscure.  Some  think  it  is 
intended  to  satirise  a  novel  and  affected  fashion 
of  sitting  adopted  by  the  rich.  Much  more 
probably  it  means  that  carnal  security  in  the 
luxuries  of  civilisation  which  Amos  threatens 
more  than  once  in  similar  phrases.*  The  corner 
of  the  diwan  is  in  Eastern  houses  the  seat  of 
honour.f  To  this  desert  shepherd,  with  only  the 
hard  ground  to  rest  on,  the  couches  and  ivory- 
mounted  diwans  of  the  rich  must  have  seemed 
the  very  symbols  of  extravagance.  But  the 
pampered  bodies  that  loll  their  lazy  lengths  upon 
them  shall  be  left  like  the  crumbs  of  a  lion's 
meal — "  two  shin-bones  and  the  bit-  of  an  ear!  " 
Their  whole  civilisation  shall  perish  with  them. 
"  Hearken  and  testify  against  the  house  of  Is- 
rael— oracle  of  the  Lord  Jehovah,  God  of 
Hosts  "  + — those  addressed  are  still  the  heathen 
summoned  in  ver.  9.  "  For  on  the  day  when  I 
visit  the  crimes  of  Israel  upon  him,  I  shall  then 
make  visitation  upon  the  altars  of  Bethel,  and 
the  horns  of  the  altar,"  which  men  grasp  in  their 
last  despair,  "  shall  be  smitten  and  fall  to  the 
earth.  And  I  will  strike  the  winter-house  upon 
the  summer-house,  and  the  ivory  houses  shall 
perish,  yea,  swept  away  shall  be  houses  many 
— oracle  of  Jehovah." 

But  the  luxury  of  no  civilisation  can  be  meas- 
ured without  its  women,  and  to  the  women  of 
Samaria  Amos  now  turns  with  the  most  scornful 
of  all  his  words.  "  Hear  this  word  " — this  for 
you — "  kine  of  Bashan  that  are  in  the  mount  of 
Samaria,  that  oppress  the  poor,  that  crush  the 
needy,  that  say  to  their  lords.  Bring,  and  let  us 
drink.  Sworn  hath  the  Lord  Jehovah  by  His 
holiness,  lo,  days  are  coming  when  there  shall 
be  a  taking  away  of  you  with  hooks,  and  of 
the  last  of  you  with  fish-hooks."  They  put 
hooks§  in  the  nostrils  of  unruly  cattle,  and  the 
figure  is  often  applied  to  human  captives;!  but 
so  many  should  these  cattle  of  Samaria  be  that 
for  the  "  last  of  them  fish-hooks  "  must  be  used. 
"  Yea,  by  the  breaches "  in  the  wall  of  the 
stormed  city  "  shall  ye  go  out,  every  one  head- 

2  cannot  be  quoted  in  support  of  this,  for  it  is  too  uncer- 
tain itself,  being  possibly  a  gloss,  though  it  is  curious  that 
as  the  two  passages  ruri  the  name  Damascus  should  be  in 
the  same  strange  grammatical  conjunction  in  each),  or 
possibly  "Damascus-fashion  on  a  couch,"  which  (if  the 
first  half  of  the  clause,  as  some  maintain,  refers  to  some 
delicate  or  affected  posture  then  come  into  tashion)  is 
the  most  probable  rendering.  (2)  The  Massoretes  have 
pointed,  not  "  bedammeseq  "  =  "  in  Damascus,"  but 
"  bedemesheq,"  a  form  not  found  elsewhere,  which  some 
(Ges.,  Hitz.,  Ew.,  Rev.  Eng.  Ver. ,  etc.)  take  to  mean  some 
Damascene  stuff  (as  perhaps  our  Damask  and  the  Arabic 
"  dimshaq  "  originally  meant,  though  this  is  not  certain), 
<".  ^.,  "silk"  or  "velvet"  or  "cushions."  (3)  Others 
rearrange  the  text.  E.g.,  Hoffman  ("  Z.  A.  T.\V."  III. 
102)  takes  the  whole  clause  away  from  ver.  12  and  attaches 
it  to  ver.  13,  reading  "O  those  who  sit  in  Samaria  on 
the  edge  of  the  diwan,  and  in  Damascus  on  a  couch, 
hearken  and  testify  against  the  house  of  Jacob."  But,  as 
Wellhausen  points  out,  those  addressed  in  ver.  13  are  the 
same  as  those  addressed  in  ver  g.  Wellhausen  prefers  to 
believe  that  after  the  words  "  children  of  Israel,"  which 
end  a  sentence,  something  has  fallen  out.  The  LXX. 
translator,  who  makes  several  blunders  in  the  course  of 
this  chapter,  instead  of  translating  \iP\'^  couch,  the  last 
word  of  the  verse,  merely  transliterates  it  into  icpeis  !  ! 

*Cf.\'\.  4:  "  that  lie  on  ivory  diwans  and  sprawl  on  their 
couches." 

t  Van  Lennep,  "  Bible  Lands  and  Customs,"  p.  460. 

X  S.-e  p.  494.  n. 

§The  words  for  hook  in  Hebrew— the  two  used  above, 

'''^*  and  ''' '  P'  and  a  third,  Q^''  — all  mean  originally 

"  thorns,"  doubtless  the  first  hooks  of  primitive  man  ;  but 
by  this  time  they  would  signify  metal  hooks — a  change 
analogous  to  theEnglish  word  "pen." 

II  Cf.  fcia.  xx.Kvii.  29  ;  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  11.  On  the  use  of 
fish-hooks,  Job  xl.  26  (Heb.).  xli.  2  (Eng.) ;  Ezek.  xxix.  4. 


long,  and  ye  shall  be  cast  .  .*  oracle  of  Je- 
hovah." It  is  a  cowherd's  rough  picture  of 
women:  a  troop  of  kine — heavy,  heedless  animals, 
trampling  in  their  anxiety  for  food  upon  every 
frail  and  lowly  object  in  the  way.  But  there  is 
a  prophet's  insight  into  character.  Not  of  Jeze- 
bels, or  Messalinas,  or  Lady-Macbeths  is  it 
spoken,  but  of  the  ordinary  matrons  of  Samaria. 
Thoughtlessness  and  luxury  are  able  to  make 
brutes  out  of  women  of  gentle  "nurture,  with 
homes  and  a  religion.f 

Such  are  these  three  or  four  short  oracles  of 
Amos.  They  are  probably  among  his  earliest — 
the  first  peremptory  challenges  of  prophecy  to 
that  great  stronghold  which  before  forty  years 
she  is  to  see  thrown  down  in  obedience  to  her 
word.  As  yet,  however,  there  seems  to  be  noth- 
ing to  justify,  the  menaces  of  Amos.  Fair  and 
stable  rises  the  structure  of  Israel's  life.  A  na- 
tion, who  know  themselves  elect,  who  in  politics 
are  prosperous  and  in  religion  proof  to  every 
doubt,  build  high  their  palaces,  see  the  skies 
above  them  unclouded,  and  bask  in  their  pride, 
heaven's  favourites  without  a  fear.  This  man, 
solitary  and  sudden  from  his  desert,  springs 
upon  them  in  the  name  of  God  and  their  poor. 
Straighter  word  never  came  from  Deity:  "Jeho- 
vah hath  spoken,  who  can  but  prophesy?"  The 
insight  of  it,  the  justice  of  it,  are  alike  convinc- 
ing. Yet  at  first  it  appears  as  if  it  were  sped 
on  the  personal  and  very  human  passion  of  its 
herald.  For  Amos  not  only  uses  the  desert's 
cruelties — the  lion's  to  the  sheep — to  figure 
God's  impending  judgment  upon  His  people,  but 
he  enforces  the  latter  with  all  a  desert-bred  man's 
horror  of  cities  and  civilisation.  It  is  their 
costly  furniture,  their  lavish  and  complex  build- 
ing, on  which  he  sees  the  storm  break.  We 
seem  to  hear  again  that  frequent  phrase  of  the 
previous  section:  "the  fire  shall  devour  the  pal- 
aces thereof."  The  palaces,  he  says,  are  simply 
storehouses  of  oppression;  the  palaces  will  be 
plundered.  Here,  as  throughout  his  book,:}: 
couches  and  diwans  draw  forth  the  scorn  of  a 
man  accustomed  to  the  simple  furniture  of  the 
tent.  But  observe  his  especial  hatred  of  houses. 
Four  times  in  one  verse  he  smites  them:  "win- 
ter-house on  summer-house  and  the  ivory  houses 
shall  perish — yea,  houses  manifold,  saith  the 
Lord."  So  in  another  oracle  of  the  same  sec- 
tion: "  Houses  of  ashlar  ye  have  built,  and  ye 
shall  not  inhabit  them;  vineyards  of  delight  have 
ye  planted,  and  ye  shall  not  drink  of  their 
wine."§  And  in  another:  "  I  loathe  the  pride  of 
Jacob,  and  his  palaces  I  hate;  and  I  will  give  up 
a  city  and  all  that  is  in  it.  .  .  .  For,  lo,  the  Lord 
is  about  to  command,  and  He  will  smite  the 
great  house  into  ruins  and  the  small  house  into 

*  The  verb,  which  in  the  text  is  active,  must  be  taken  in 

the  passive.    The  word  not  translated  above  is  ' '^^^~U'J' 

"unto  the  Harmon,"  which  name  does  not  occur  else- 
where. LXX.  read  eis  rb  opo?  to  'Pofi/u.a;',  which  Ewald 
renders  "  ye  shall  cast  the  Rimmon  to  the  mountain  "  (cf. 
Isa.  ii.  20),  and  he  takes  Rimmon  to  be  the  Syrian  god- 
dess of  love.  Steiner  (quoted  by  Wellhausen)  renders 
"ye  shall  be  cast  out  to  Hadad  Rimmon,"  that  is,  "  vio- 
lated as"  niEjnp.  Hitzig  separates  "inn  from  nj1!D, 
which  he  takes  as  contracted  from  njyo,  and  renders 
"ye  shall  fling  yourselves  out  on  the  mountains  as  a 
refuge."    But  none  of  these  is  satisfactory. 

+  I  have  already  treated  this  passage  in  connection  with 
Isaiah's  prophecies  on  women  in  the  Prophecies  of  Isaiah 
i.— xxxix.  ("Expositor's  Bible"),  chap.  xvi. 

X  Cf.  chap.  vi.  4. 

§V.  II. 


48o 


THE  -BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


splinters."  *  No  wonder  that  such  a  prophet 
found  war  with  its  breached  walls  insufficient, 
and  welcomed,  as  the  full  ally  of  his  word,  the 
earthquake  itself,  f 

Yet  all  this  is  no  mere  desert  razzia  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  a  nomad's  hatred  of  cities 
and  the  culture  of  settled  men.  It  is  not  a  tem- 
per; it  is  a  vision  of  history.  In  the  only  argu- 
ment which  these  early  oracles  contain,  Amos 
claims  to  have  events  on  the  side  of  his  word. 
"  Shall  the  lion  roar  and  not  be  catching  "  some- 
thing? Neither  does  the  prophet  speak  till  he 
knows  that  God  is  ready  to  act.  History  ac- 
cepted this  claim.  Amos  spoke  about  755.  In 
734  Tiglath-Pileser  swept  Gilead  and  Galilee;  in 
724  Shalmaneser  overran  the  rest  of  Northern 
Israel:  "  siege  and  blockade  of  the  whole  land!  " 
For  three  years  the  Mount  of  Samaria  was  in- 
vested, and  then  taken;  the  houses  overthrown, 
the  rich  and  the  delicate  led  away  captive.  It 
happened  as  Amos  foretold;  for  it  was  not  the 
shepherd's  rage  within  him  that  spoke.  He 
had  "  seen  the  Lord  standing,  and  He  said, 
Smite." 

But  this  assault  of  a  desert  nomad  upon  the 
structure  of  a  nation's  life  raises  many  echoes 
in  history  and  some  questions  in  our  own  minds 
to-day.  Again  and  again  have  civilisations  far 
more  powerful  than  Israel's  been  threatened  by 
the  desert  in  the  name  of  God,  and  in  good  faith 
it  has  been  proclaimed  by  the  prophets  of  Chris- 
tianity and  other  religions  that  God's  kingdom 
cannot  come  on  earth  till  the  wealth,  the  culture, 
the  civil  order,  which  men  have  taken  centuries 
to  build,  have  been  swept  away  by  some  great  po- 
litical convulsion.  To-day  Christianity  herself 
suffers  the  same  assaults,  and  is  told  by  many, 
the  high  life  and  honest  intention  of  whom  can- 
not be  doubted,  that  till  the  civilisation  which 
she  has  so  much  helped  to  create  is  destroyed, 
there  is  no  hope  for  the  purity  or  the  progress 
of  the  race.  And  Christianity,  too,  has  doubts 
within  herself.  What  is  the  world  which  our 
Master  refused  in  the  Mount  of  Temptation,  and 
so  often  and  so  sternly  told  us  that  it  must  per- 
ish?— how  much  of  our  wealth,  of  our  culture, 
of  our  politics,  of  the  whole  fabric  of  our  so- 
ciety? No  thoughtful  and  religious  man,  when 
confronted  with  civilisation,  not  in  its  ideal,  but 
in  one  of  those  forms  which  give  it  its  very  name, 
the  life  of  a  large  city,  can  fail  to  ask,  How  much 
of  this  deserves  the  judgment  of  God?  How 
much  must  be  overthrown,  before  His  will  is 
done  on  earth?  All  these  questions  rise  in  the 
ears  and  the  heart  of  a  generation,  which  more 
than  any  other  has  been  brought  face  to  face 
with  the  ruins  of  empires  and  civilisations,  which 
have  endured  longer,  and  in  their  day  seemed 
more  stable,  than  her  own. 

In  face  of  the  confused  thinking  and  fanatic 
speech  which  have  risen  on  all  such  topics,  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  Hebrew  prophets  supply 
us  with  four  cardinal  rules. 

First,  of  course,  they  insist  that  it  is  the  moral 
question  upon  which  the  fate  of  a  civilisation  is 
decided.  By  what  means  has  the  system  grown? 
Is  justice  observed  in  essence  as  well  as  form? 
Is  there  freedom,  or  is  the  prophet  silenced? 
Does  luxury  or  self-denial  prevail?  Do  the  rich 
make  life  hard  for  the  poor?  Is  childhood 
sheltered  and  is  innocence  respected?  By  these, 
claim  the  prophets,  a  nation  stands  or  falls;  and 

*  vi.  8,  II. 

f  Cf.  what  was  said  on  building  above,  p.  450. 


history  has  proved  the  claim  on   wider  worlds 
than  they  dreamt  of. 

But  by  themselves  moral  reasons  are  never 
enough  to  justify  a  prediction  of  speedy  doom 
upon  any  system  or  society.  None  of  the. 
prophets  began  to  foretell  the  fall  of  Israel  till 
they  read,  with  keener  eyes  than  their  contem- 
poraries, the  signs  of  it  in  current  history.  And 
this,  I  take  it,  was  the  point  which  made  a  nota- 
ble difference  between  them,  and  one  who  like 
them  scourged  the  social  wrongs  of  his  civilisa- 
tion, yet  never  spoke  a  word  of  its  fall.  Juvenal 
nowhere  calls  down  judgments,  except  upon  in- 
dividuals. In  his  time  there  were  no  signs  of 
the  decline  of  the  empire,  even  though,  as  he 
marks,  there  was  a  flight  from  the  capital  of  the 
virtue  which  was  to  keep  the  empire  alive.  But 
the  prophets  had  political  proof  of  the  nearness 
of  God's  judgment,  and  they  spoke  in  the  power 
of  its  coincidence  with  the  moral  corruption  of 
their  people. 

Again,  if  conscience  and  history  (both  of 
them,  to  the  prophets,  being  witnesses  of  God) 
thus  combine  to  announce  the  early  doom  of  a 
civilisation,  neither  the  religion  that  may  have 
helped  to  build  it,  nor  any  remanent  virtue  in  it, 
nor  its  ancient  value  to  God,  can  avail  to  save. 
We  are  tempted  to  judge  that  the  long  and 
costly  development  of  ages  is  cruelly  thrown 
away  by  the  convulsion  and  collapse  of  an  em- 
pire; it  feels  impious  to  think  that  the  patience, 
the  providence,  the  millennial  discipline  of  the 
Almighty  are  to  be  in  a  moment  abandoned  to 
some  rude  and  savage  force.  But  we  are 
wrong.  "  You  only  have  I  known  of  all  the 
families  of  the  ground,"  yet  I  must  "  visit  upon 
you  your  iniquities."  Nothing  is  too  costly  for 
justice.  And  God  finds  some  other  way  of  con- 
serving the  real  results  of  the  past. 

Again,  it  is  a  corollary  of  all  this,  that  the 
sentence  upon  civilisation  must  often  seem  to 
come  by  voices  that  are  insane,  and  its  execu- 
tion by  means  that  are  criminal.  Of  course, 
when  civilisation  is  arraigned  as  a  whole,  and  its 
overthrow  demanded,  there  may  be  nothing  be- 
hind the  attack  but  jealousy  or  greed,  the  fanati- 
cism of  ignorant  men  or  the  madness  of  dis- 
ordered lives.  But  this  is  not  necessarily  the 
case.  For  God  has  often  in  history  chosen  the 
outsider  as  the  herald  of  doom,  and  sent  the  bar- 
barian as  its  mstrument.  By  the  statesmen  and 
patriots  of  Israel,  Amos  must  have  been  re- 
garded as  a  mere  savage,  with  a  savage's  hate 
of  civilisation.  But  we  know  what,  he  answered 
when  Amaziah  called  him  rebel.  And  it  was 
not  only  for  its  suddenness  that  the  apostles  said 
the  "  day  of  the  Lord  should  come  as  a  thief," 
but  also  because  of  its  methods.  For  over  and 
over  again  has  doom  been  pronounced,  and  pro- 
nounced truly,  by  men  who  in  the  eyes  of  civilisa- 
tion were  criminals  and  monsters. 

Now  apply  these  four  princioles  to  the  question 
of  ourselves.  It  will  scarcely  be  denied  that  our 
civilisation  tolerates,  and  in  part  lives  by,  the 
existence  of  vices  which,  as  we  all  admit,  ruined 
the  ancient  empires.  Are  the  political  possi- 
bilities of  overthrow  also  present?  That  there 
exist  among  us  means  of  new  historic  convul- 
sions is  a  thing  hard  for  us  to  admit.  But  the 
signs  cannot  be  hid.  When  we  see  the  jealousies 
of  the  Christian  peoples,  and  their  enormous 
preparations  for  battle;  the  arsenals  of  Europe 
which  a  few  sparks  may  blow  up;  the  millions 
of  soldiers  one  man's  word  may  mobilise;  when 


Amos  iv.  4-vi.] 


THE    FALSE    PEACE    OF    RITUAL. 


481 


we  imagine  the  opportunities  which  a  general 
war  would  furnish  to  the  discontented  masses  of 
tlie  European  proletariat — we  must  surely  ac- 
knowledge the  existence  of  forces  capable  of  in- 
flicting calamities,  so  severe  as  to  af?ect  not 
merely  this  nationality  or  that  type  of  culture, 
but  the  very  vigour  and  progress  of  civilisation 
herself;  and  all  this  without  our  looking  beyond 
Christendom,  or  taking  into  account  the  rise 
of  the  yellow  races  to  a  consciousness  of  their 
aproach  to  equality  with  ourselves.  If,  then,  in 
the  eyes  of  the  Divine  justice  Christendom  merits 
judgment, — if  life  continue  to  be  left  so  hard  to 
the  poor;  if  innocence  be  still  an  iinpossibility 
for  so  much  of  the  childhood  of  the  Christian 
nations;  if  with  so  many  of  the  leaders  of  civil- 
isation prurience  be  lifted  to  the  level  of  an  art, 
and  licentiousness  followed  as  a  cult;  if  we  con- 
tinue to  pour  the  evils  of  our  civilisation  upon 
the  barbarian,  and  "  the  vices  of  our  young 
nobles,"  to  paraphrase  Juvenal,  "  are  aped  in  " 
Hindustan, — then  let  us  know  that  the  means 
of  a  judgment  more  awful  than  any  which  has 
yet  scourged  a  delinquent  civilisation  are  extant 
and  actual  among  us.  And  if  one  should  reply, 
that  our  Christianity  makes  all  the  difference, 
that  God  cannot  undo  the  development  of  nine- 
teen centuries,  or  cannot  overthrow  the  peoples 
of  His  Son, — let  us  remember  that  God  does 
justice  at  whatever  cost;  that  as  He  did  not 
spare  Israel  at  the  hands  of  Assyria,  so  He  did 
not  spare  Christianity  in  the  East  when  the  bar- 
barians of  the  desert  found  her  careless  and  cor- 
rupt. "  You  only  have  I  known  of  all  the  fami- 
lies of  the  ground,  therefore  will  I  visit  upon 
you  all  your  iniquities." 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  FALSE  PEACE  OF  RITUAL 

Amos  iv.  4-vi. 

The  next  four  groups  of  oracles  * — iv.  4-13, 
V.  1-17,  V.  18-27,  and  vi. — treat  of  many  different 
details,  and  each  of  them  has  its  own  emphasis; 
but  all  are  alike  in  this,  that  they  vehemently 
attack  the  national  worship  and  the  sense  of  po- 
litical security  which  it  has  engendered.  Let  us 
at  once  make  clear  that  this  worship  is  the  wor- 
ship of  Jehovah.  It  is  true  that  it  is  mixed  with 
idolatry,  but,  except  possibly  in  one  obscure 
verse,t  Amos  does  not  concern  himself  with  the 
idols.  What  he  strikes  at,  what  he  would  sweep 
away,  is  his  people's  form  of  devotion  to  their 
own  God.  The  cult  of  the  national  God,  at  the 
national  sanctuaries,  in  the  national  interest  and 
by  the  whole  body  of  the  people,  who  practise  it 
with  a  zeal  unparalleled  by  their  forefathers — this 
is  what  Amos  condemns.  And  he  does  so  abso- 
lutely. He  nas  nothing  but  scorn  for  the  tem- 
ples and  the  feasts.  The  assiduity  of  attend- 
ance, the  liberality  of  gifts,  the  employment  of 
wealth  and  art  and  patriotism  in  worship — he 
tells  his  generation  that  God  loathes  it  all.  Like 
Jeremiah,  ne  even  seems  to  imply  that  God  never 
instituted  in  Israel  any  sacrifice  or  offering.^  It 
is  all  this  which  gives  these  oracles  their  inter- 
est for  us;  and  that  interest  is  not  merely  his- 
torical. 

It   is   indeed   historical   to   begin   with.     When 
we  find,  not  idolatry,  but  all  religious  ceremonial 
*  See  p.  477.  tv.  a6.  $v.  25. 

31— Vol.  IV. 


— temples,  public  worship,  tithes,  sacrifice,  the 
praise  of  God  by  music,  in  fact  every  material 
form  in  which  man  has  ever  been  wont  to  ex- 
press his  devotion  to  God — scorned  and  con- 
demned with  the  same  uncompromising  passion 
as  idolatry  itself,  we  receive  a  needed  lesson  in 
the  history  of  religion.  For  when  one  is  asked. 
What  is  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
heathenism?  one  is  always  ready  to  say.  Idolatry, 
which  is  not  true.  The  distinguishing  character- 
istic of  heathenism  is  the  stress  which  it  lays 
upon  ceremonial.  To  the  pagan  religions,  both 
of  the  ancient  and  of  the  modern  world,  rites 
were  the  indispensable  element  in  religion.  The 
gifts  of  the  gods,  the  abundance  of  fruits,  the  se- 
curity of  the  state,  depended  upon  the  full  and 
accurate  performance  of  ritual.  In  Greek  litera- 
ture we  have  innumerable  illustrations  of  this: 
the  "  Iliad "  itself  starts  from  a  god's  anger, 
roused  by  an  insult  to  his  priest,  whose  prayers 
for  vengeance  he  hears  because  sacrifices  have 
been  assiduously  offered  to  him.  And  so  too 
with  the  systems  of  paganism  from  which  the 
faith  of  Israel,  though  at  first  it  had  so  much 
in  common  with  them,  broke  away  to  its  su- 
preme religious  distinction.  The  Semites  laid 
the  stress  of  their  obedience  to  the  gods  upon 
traditional  ceremonies;  and  no  sin  was  held  so 
heinous  by  them  as  the  neglect  or  infringement 
of  a  religious  rite.  By  the  side  of  it  offences 
against  one's  fellowmen  or  one's  own  character 
were  deemed  mere  misdemeanours.  In  the  day 
of  Amos  this  pagan  superstition  thoroughly  pen- 
etrated the  religion  of  Jehovah,  and  so  absorbed 
the  attention  of  men,  that  without  the  indignant 
and  complete  repudiation  of  it  prophecy  could 
not  have  started  on  her  task  of  identifying  moral- 
ity with  religion,  and  of  teaching  men  more 
spiritual  views  of  God.  But  even  when  we  are 
thus  aware  of  ceremonialism  as  the  characteristic 
quality  of  the  pagan  religions,  we  have  not  meas- 
ured the  full  reason  of  that  uncompromising  at- 
tack on  it.  which  is  the  chief  feature  of  this  part 
of  the  permanent  canon  of  our  religion.  For 
idolatries  die  everywhere;  but  everywhere  a  su- 
perstitious ritualism  survives.  It  continues  with 
philosophies  that  have  ceased  to  believe  in  the 
gods  who  enforced  it.  Upon  ethical  movements 
which  have  gained  their  freedom  by  breaking 
away  from  it,  in  the  course  of  time  it  makes  up, 
and  lays  its  paralysing  weight.  With  offers  of 
help  it  flatters  religions  the  most  spiritual  in  - 
theory  and  intention.  The  Pharisees,  than  whom 
few  parties  had  at  first  purer  ideals  of  morality, 
tithed  mint,  anise,  and  cummin,  to  the  neglect 
of  the  essence  of  the  Law;  and  even  sound  Chris- 
tians, who  have  assimilated  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John,  find  it  hard  and  sometimes  impossible  to 
believe  in  salvation  apart  from  their  own  sacra- 
ments, or  outside  their  own  denominational 
forms.  Now  this  is  because  ritual  is  a  thing 
which  appeals  both  to  the  baser  and  to  the  nobler 
instincts  of  man.  To  the  baser  it  offers  itself 
as  a  mechanical  atonement  for  sin,  and  a  substi- 
tute for  all  moral  and  intellectual  effort  in  con- 
nection with  faith;  to  the  nobler  it  insists  on  a 
man's  need  in  religion  of  order  and  routine,  of 
sacrament  and  picture.  Plainly  then  the  words 
of  Amos  have  significance  for  more  than  the 
immediate  problems  of  his  day.  And  if  it  seem 
to  some  that  Amos  goes  too  far  with  his  cry 
to  sweep  away  all  ceremonial,  let  them  remem- 
ber, besides  the  crisis  of  his  times,  that  the  tem- 
per he  exposes  and  seeks  to  dissipate  is  a  rank 


482 


THE^OOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and  obdurate  error  of  the  human  heart.  Our 
Lord,  who  recognised  the  place  of  ritual  in  wor- 
ship, who  said,  "  Thus  it  behoveth  us  to  fulfil 
all  righteousness,"  which  righteousness  in  the 
dialect  of  His  day  was  not  the  moral  law,  but 
man's  due  of  rite,  sacrifice,  tithe,  and  alms,*  said 
also,  "  I  will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice." 
There  is  an  irreducible  minimum  of  rite  and 
routine  in  worship;  there  is  an  invaluable  loyalty 
to  traditional  habits;  there  are  holy  and  spiritual 
uses  in  symbol  and  sacrament.  But  these  are  all 
dispensable;  and  because  they  are  all  constantly 
abused,  the  voice  of  the  prophet  is  ever  needed 
which  tells  us  that  God  will  have  none  of  them; 
but  let  justice  roll  on  like  water,  and  righteous- 
ness like  an  unfailing  stream. 

For  the  superstition  that  ritual  is  the  indis- 
pensable bQ,nd  between  God  and  man,  Amos  sub- 
stitutes two  other  aspects  of  religion.  They  are 
history  as  God's  discipline  of  man:  and  civic  jus- 
tice as  man's  duty  to  God.  The  first  of  them 
he  contrasts  with  religious  ceremonialism  in 
chap.  iv.  4-13,  and  the  second  in  chap,  v.;  while 
in  chap.  vi.  he  assaults  once  more  the  false  po- 
litical peace  which  the  ceremonialism  engenders. 


I.  For  Worship,  Chastisement. 

Amos  iv.  4-13. 

In  chap.  ii.  Amos  contrasted  the  popular  con- 
ception of  religion  as  worship  with  God's  con- 
ception of  it  as  history.  He  placed  a  picture  of 
the  sanctuary,  hot  with  religious  zeal,  but  hot 
too  with  passion  and  the  fumes  of  wine,  side  by 
side  with  a  great  prospect  of  the  national  history: 
God's  guidance  of  Israel  from  Egypt  onwards. 
That  is,  as  we  said  at  the  time,  'he  placed  an  in- 
doors picture  of  religion  side  by  side  with  an 
open-air  one.  He  repeats  that  arrangement  here. 
The  religious  services  he  sketches  are  more  pure, 
and  the  history  he  takes  from  his  own  day;  but 
the  contrast  is  the  same.  Again  we  have  on  the 
one  side  the  temple  worship — artificial,  exag- 
gerated, indoors,  smoky;  but  on  the  other  a  few 
movements  of  God  in  Nature,  which,  though 
they  all  be  calamities,  have  a  great  moral  majesty 
upon  them.  The  first  opens  with  a  scornful  call 
to  worship,  which  the  prophet,  letting  out  his 
whole  heart  at  the  beginning,  s*hows  to  be  equiva- 
lent to  sin.  Note  next  the  impossible  caricature 
of  their  exaggerated  zeal:  sacrifices  every  morn- 
ing instead  of  once  a  year,  tithes  every  three  days 
instead  of  every  three  years. f  To  offer  leavened 
bread  was  a  departure  from  the  older  fashion  of 
unleavened. t  To  publish  their  liberality  was  like 
the  later  Pharisees,  who  were  not  dissimilarly 
mocked  by  our  Lord:  "  When  thovi  doest  alms, 
cause  not  a  trumpet  to  be  sounded  before  thee, 
^  as  the  hypocrites  do  in  the  synagogues  and  in 
(the  streets,  that  they  may  have  glory  of  men."  § 
/There  is  a  certain  rhythm  in  the  taunt;  but  the 
prose  style  seems  to  be  resumed  with  fitness 
when  the  prophet  describes  tlie  solemn  approach 
of  God  in  deeds  of  doom. 


*  Another  proof  of  how  the  spirit  of  ritualism  tends  to 
absorb  morality. 

+  Ver.  4  :  f/.  I  Sam.  i. ;  Deut.  xiv.  28.  Wellhausen  offers 
another  exegesis  :  Amos  is  describing  exactly  what  took 
place  at  Bethel— sacrifice  on  the  morning:,  '•  e.,  next  to  the 
day  of  their  arrival,  tithes  on  the  third  day  thereafter. 

1  See  Wellhausen's  note,  and  compare  Lev.  vii,  13. 

S  Matt.  vi.  a. 


Come  away  to  Bethel  and  tran.'igress. 

At  Gilgal  exaggerate  your  transgression  ! 

And  bring  every  morning  your  sacrifices. 

Every  three  days  your  tithes! 

And  send  up  the  savour  of  leavened  bread  as  a  tban1c< 

offering. 
And  call  out  your  liberalities  -make  them  to  be  heard! 
For  so  ye  love  io  do,  O  children  of  Israel : 

Oracle  of  Jehovah. 

"  But  I  on  My  side  have  given  you  cleanness  of 
teeth  in  all  your  cities,  and  want  of  bread  in  all 
your  places — yet  ye  did  not  return  to  Me:  oracle 
of  Jehovah. 

"  But  I  on  My  side  withheld  from  you  the 
winter  rain,*  while  it  was  still  three  months  to 
the  harvest:  and  I  let  it  rain  repeatedly  on  one 
city,  and  upon  one  city  I  did  not  let  it  rain:  one 
lot  was  rained  upon,  and  the  lot  that  was  not 
rained  upon  withered;  and  two  or  three  cities 
kept  straggling  to  one  city  to  drink  water,  and 
were  not  satisfied — yet  ye  did  not  return  to  Me: 
oracle  of  Jehovah. 

"  I  smote  you  with  blasting  and  with  mildew: 
many  of  your  gardens  and  your  vineyards  and 
your  figs  and  your  olives  the  locust  devoured — 
yet  ye  did  not  return  to  Me:  oracle  of  Jehovah. 

"  I  sent  among  you  a  pestilence  by  way  of 
Egypt:!  I  slew  with  the  sword  your  youths — be- 
sides the  capture  of  your  horses — and  I  brought 
up  the  stench  of  your  camps  to  your  nostrils — 
yet  ye  did  not  return  to  Me:  oracle  of  Jehovah. 

"  I  overturned  among  you,  like  God's  own 
overturning  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  till  ye  be- 
came as  a  brand  plucked  from  the  burning — yet 
ye  did  not  return  to  Me:  oracle  of  Jehovah." 

This  recalls  a  passage  in  that  English  poem 
of  which  we  are  again  and  again  reminded  by  the 
Book  of  Amos,  "  The  Vision  of  Piers  Plow- 
man." It  is  the  sermon  of  Reason  in  Passus  V. 
(Skeat's  edition): — 

"  He  preved  that  thise  pestilences  "  were  for  pure  synne. 
And  the  southwest  wynde  •  in  saterday  et  evene 
Was  pertliche  X  for  pure  pride  •  and  for  no  poynt  elles. 
Piries  and  plomtrees  •  were  puffed  to  the  erthe. 
In  ensample  ze  segges  §  •  ze  shulden  do  the  bettere. 
Beches  and  brode  okes  "  were  blowen  to  the  grounde. 
Torned  upward  her  failles  •  in  tokenynge  of  drede, 
That  dedly  synne  atdomesday  •  shal  fordon  ||  hem  alle." 

In  the  ancient  world  it  was  a  settled  belief  that 
natural  calamities  like  these  were  the  effects  of 
the  deity's  wrath.  When  Israel  suffers  from 
them  t'he  prophets  take  for  granted  that  they  are 
for  the  people's  punishment.  I  have  elsewhere 
shown  how  the  climate  of  Palestine  lent  itself 
to  these  convictions;  in  this  respect  the  Book  of 
Deuteronomy  contrasts  it  with  the  climate  of 
Egypt.TT  And  although  some,  perhaps  rightly, 
have  scoffed  at  the  exaggerated  form  of  the  be- 
lief, that  God  is  angry  with  the  sons  of  men 
every  time  drought  or  floods  happen,  yet  the 
instinct  is  sound  which  in  all  ages  has  led  re- 

*  ^^\  '  "Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  64.    It  is  interesting  that  this 

year  (1895)  the  same  thing  was  threatened,  according  to  a 
report  in  the  "  Mittheilungen  u.  Nachrichten  des  D.  P.  V.," 
p.  44  :  "  Nachdem  es  im  December  einigemal  recht  stark 
geregnet  hatte  besonders  an  der  Meereskiiste  ist  seit  kurz 
vor  Weihnachten  das  Wetter  immer  schon  u.  mild  geblie- 
ben,  u.  wenn  nicht  weiterer  Regen  fallt,  so  wird  grosser 
Wassermangel  entstehen  denn  bis  jetzt  (16  Febr.)  hat 
Niemand  Cisterne  voll."    The  harvest  is  in  April-May. 

+  Or  in  the  fashion  of  Egypt,  i.  e.,  a  thoroughly  Egyptian 
plague  ;  so  called,  not  with  reference  to  the  plagues  of 
Egypt,  but  because  that  covtntry  was  always  the  nursery 
of  the  pestilence.  See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  157  ff.  Note  how 
it  comes  with  war. 

t  Apertly,  openly. 

§Men. 

\  Undo. 

«[  "  Hist.  Geog."  chap.  iii.  pp.  73  £. 


Amos  iv.  4-vi.] 


THE    FALSE    PEACE    OF    RITUAL. 


483 


ligious  people  to  feel  that  such  things  are  in- 
flicted for  moral  purposes.  In  the  economy  of 
the  universe  there  may  be  ends  of  a  purely  physi- 
cal kind  served  by  sudh  disasters,  apart  alto- 
gether from  tlieir  meaning  to  man.  But  man  at 
least  learns  from  them  that  nature  does  not  exist 
solely  for  feeding,  clothing,  and  keeping  him 
wealthy;  nor  is  it  anything  else  than  his  mono- 
theism, his  faith  in  God  as  the  Lord  both  of  his 
moral  life  and  of  nature,  which  moves  him  to 
believe,  as  Hebrew  prophets  taught  and  as  our 
early  English  seer  heard  Reason  herself  preach. 
Amos  had  the  more  need  to  explain  those  dis- 
asters as  the  work  of  the  God  of  righteousness, 
because  his  contemporaries,  while  willing  to 
grant  Jehovah  leadership  in  war,  were  tempted  to 
attribute  to  the  Canaanite  gods  of  the  land  all 
power  over  the  seasons. 

What,  however,  more  immediately  concerns  us 
in  this  passage  is  its  very  effective  contrast  be- 
tween men's  treatment  of  God  and  God's  treat- 
ment of  men.  They  lavish  upon  Him  gifts  and 
sacrifices.  He — "  on  His  side  " — sends  them 
cleanness  of  teeth,  drought,  blasting  of  their 
fruits,  pestilence,  war,  and  earthquake.  That  is 
to  say,  they  regard  Him  as  a  being  only  to  be 
flattered  and  fed.  He  regards  them  as  creatures 
with  characters  to  discipline,  even  at  the  ex- 
pense of  their  material  welfare.  Their  views  of 
Him,  if  religious,  are  sensuous  and  gross;  His 
views  of  them,  if  austere,  are  moral  and  enno- 
bling. All  this  may  be  grim,  but  it  is  exceeding 
grand;  and  short  as  the  efforts  of  Amos  are,  we 
begin  to  perceive  in  him  something  already  of 
the  greatness  of  an  Isaiah. 

And  have  not  those  who  have  believed  as 
Amos  believed  ever  been  the  strong  spirits  of 
our  race,  making  the  very  disasters  which 
crushed  them  to  the  earth  the  tokens  that  God 
has  great  views  about  them?  Laugh  not  at  the 
simple  peoples,  who  have  their  days  of  humilia-. 
tion,  and  their  fast-days  after  floods  and  stunted 
harvests.  For  they  take  these,  not  like  other 
men,  as  the  signs  of  their  frailty  and  helpless- 
ness; but  as  measures  of  the  greatness  God  sees 
in  them.  His  provocation  of  their  souls  to  the 
infinite  possibilities  which  He  has  prepared  for 
them. 

Israel,  however,  did  not  turn  even  at  the  fifth 
call  to  penitence,  and  so  there  remained  nothing 
for  her  but  a  fearful  looking  forward  to  judg- 
ment, all  the  more  terrible  that  the  prophet  does 
not  define  what  the  judgment  shall  be. 

"Therefore  thus  shall  I  do  to  thee,  O  Israel: 
because  I  am  going  to  do  this  to  thee,  prepare 
to  meet  thy  God,  O  Israel.  For,  lo,  He  that 
formeth  the  mountains,  and  createth  the  wind, 
and  declareth  to  man  w'hat  His  thought  is,  that 
maketh  morning  darkness,  and  marcheth  on  the 
high  places  of  earth,  Jehovah,  God  of  Hosts,  is 
His  Name."  * 

2.  For  Worship,  Justice. 

Amos  v. 

In  the  next  of  these  groups  of  oracles  Amos 
continues  his  attack  on  the  national  ritual,  and 
now  contrasts  it  with  the  service  of  God  in  public 
life — the  relief  of  the  poor,  the  discharge  of  jus- 
tice. But  *he  does  not  begin  with  this.  The 
group  opens  with  an  elegy,   which  bewails  the 

*  This  and  similar  passages  are  dealt  with  by  themselves 
in  chap.  xi. 


nation  as  already  fallen.  It  is  always  difficult  to 
mark  where  the  style  of  a  prophet  passes  from 
rhythmical  prose  into  what  we  may  justly  call 
a  metrical  form.  But  in  this  short  wail,  we  catch 
the  well-known  measure  of  the  Hebrew  dirge; 
not  so  artistic  as  in  later  poems,  yet  with  at  least 
the  characteristic  couplet  of  a  long  and  a  short 
line. 

"  Hear  this  word  which  I  lift  up  against  you — 
a  Dirge,  O  house  of  Israel: — 

"  Fallen,  no  more  shall  she  rise, 
Virgin  of  Israel ! 
Flung  down  on  her  own  ground, 
No  one  to  raise  her  ! " 

The  "  Virgin,"  which  with  Isaiah  is  a  standing 
title  for  Jerusalem  and  occasionally  used  of  other 
cities,  is  here  probably  the  whole  nation  of 
Northern  Israel.  The  explanation  follows.  It  is 
War.  "  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah:  The 
city  that  goeth  forth  a  thousand  shall  have  an 
hundred  left;  and  she  that  goeth  forth  an  hun- 
dred shall  have  left  ten  for  the  house  of  Israel." 

But  judgment  is  not  yet  irrevocable.  There 
break  forthwith  the  only  two  promises  which 
lighten  the  lowering  darkness  of  the  book.  Let 
the  people  turn  to  Jehovah  Himself — and  that 
means  let  them  turn  from  the  ritual,  and  instead 
of  it  purge  their  civic  life,  restore  justice  in  their 
courts,  and  help  the  poor.  For  God  and  moral 
good  are  one.  It  is  "  seek  Me  and  ye  shall  live," 
and  "  seek  good  and  ye  shall  live."  Omitting  for 
the  present  all  argument  as  to  whether  the  in- 
terruption of  praise  to  the  power  of  Jehovah  be 
from  Amos  or  another,  we  read  the  whole  oracle 
as  follows. 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  to  the  house  of  Israel: 
Seek  Me  and  live.  But  seek  not  Bethel,  and 
come  not  to  Gilgal,  and  to  Beersheba  pass  not 
over  " — to  come  to  Beersheba  one  had  to  cross 
all  Judah.  "  For  Gilgal  shall  taste  the  gall  of 
exile  " — it  is  not  possible  except  in  this  clumsy 
way  to  echo  the  prophet's  play  upon  words, 
''  Ha-Gilgal  galoh  yigleli  " — "  and  Bethel,"  God's 
house,  "  shall  become  an  idolatry."  This  ren- 
dering, however,  scarcely  gives  the  rude  force 
of  the  original;  for  the  word  rendered  idolatry, 
Aven,  means  also  falsehood  and  perdition,  so 
that  we  should  not  exaggerate  the  antithesis  if 
we  employed  a  phrase  which  once  was  not 
vulgar:  "And  Bethel,  house  of  God,  shall  go  to 
the  devil!  "  *  The  epigram  was  the  more  natural 
that  near  Bethel,  on  a  site  now  uncertain,  but 
close  to  the  edge  of  the  desert  to  which  it  gave 
its  name,  there  lay  from  ancient  times  a  village 
actually  called  Beth-Aven,  however  the  form  may 
have  risen.  And  we  shall  find  Hosea  stereo- 
typing this  epigram  of  Amos,  and  calling  the 
sanctuary  Beth-Aven  oftener  than  he  calls  it 
Beth-el. t  "  Seek  ye  Jehovah  and  live,"  he  begins 
again,  "  lest  He  break  forth  like  fire,  O  house 
of  Joseph,  and  it  consume  and  there  be  none  to 
quench   at   Bethel,  t  .    •    •  §  He   that   made   the 

*  Cf.  LXX.  :  BoiflijA  icTai  ois  ovx  vndpxovara. 

t  The  name  Bethel  is  always  printed  as  one  word  in  our 
Hebrew  texts.     See  Baer  on  Gen.  xii.  8. 

X  Wellhausen  thinks  a(  Bethel  not  genuine.  But  Bethel 
has  been  singled  out  as  the  place  where  the  people  put 
their  false  confidence,  and  is  naturally  named  here. 
I^XX.  :  T<p  oiK<o  '\(r(ta.i\\. 

§Ver.  7'is  plainly  out  of  place  here,  as  the  LXX.  per- 
ceived, and  therefore  tried  to  give  it  another  rendering 
which  would  make  it  seem  in  place  :  6  ttoioiv  eis  vi|(os  /cpiVo. 
(cal  fiiKaioa-uVi)!'  cis  -fyv  eOriKev.  So  Ewald  removed  it  to  be- 
tween vv.  Q  and  10.  There  it  begins  well  another  oracle; 
and  it  may  b«  that  we  should  insert  before  it  ^in.  as  in  vv. 
18,  vi.  I. 


434 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Seven  Stars  and  Orion,*  that  turneth  the  murk.t 
into  morning,  and  day  He  darkeneth  to  night, 
that  calleth  for  the  waters  of  the  sea  and  poureth 
them  out  on  the  face  of  the  earth — Jehovah  His 
Name.  He  it  is  that  flasheth  out  ruin;  on 
strength,  and  bringeth  down  S  destruction  on  the 
fortified."  This  rendering  of  the  last  verse  is  un- 
certain, and  rightly  suspected,  but  there  is  no 
alternative  so  probable,  and  it  returns  to  the  key- 
note from  which  the  passage  started,  that  God 
should  break  forth  like  fire. 

Ah,  "  they  that  turn  justice  to  wormwood,  and 
abase  II  righteousness  to  the  earth!  They  hate 
him  that  reproveth  in  the  gate  " — in  an  Eastern 
city  both  the  law-court  and  place  of  the  popular 
council — "  and  him  tjiat  speaketh  sincere  y  they 
abhor."  So  in  the  English  mystic's  Vision 
Peace  complains  of  Wrong: — 

"  I  dar  noughte  for  fere  of  hym  •  fyghte  ne  chyde."  1 

"  Wherefore,  because  ye  trample  on  the  weak 
and  take  from  him  a  present  of  corn,**  ye  have 
built  houses  of  ashlar,tt  but  ye  shall  not  dwell  in 
them;  vineyards  for  pleasure  have  ye  planted,  but 
ye  shall  not  drink  of  their  wine.  For  I  know 
how  many  are  your  crimes,  and  how  forceful  $t 
your  sins — ye  that  browbeat  the  righteous,  take 
bribes,  and  bring  down  the  poor  in  the  gate! 
Therefore  the  prudent  in  such  a  time  is  dumb, 
for  an  evil  time  is  it  "  indeed. 

"  Seek  good  and  not  evil,  that  ye  may  live, 
and  Jehovah  God  of  Hosts  be  with  you,  as  ye 
say  "  He  is.  "  Hate  evil  and  love  good;  and  in 
the  gate  set  justice  on  her  feet  as^aiii — perad- 
venture  Jehovah  God  of  Hosts  may  have  pity  on 
the  remnant  of  Joseph."  If  in  the  Book  of  Amos 
there  be  any  passages,  which,  to  say  the  least, 
do  not  now  lie  in  their  proper  places,  this  is  one 
of  them.  For,  firstly,  while  it  regards  the  na- 
tion as  still  responsible  for  the  duties  of  govern- 
ment, it  recognises  them  as  reduced  to  a  rem- 
nant. To  find  such  a  state  of  afifairs  we  have  to 
come  down  to  the  years  subsequent  to  734,  when 
Tiglath-Pileser  swept  into  captivity  all  Gi'ead  and 
Galilee — that  is,  two-thirds,  in  bulk,  of  the  terri- 
tory of  Northern  Israel — but  left  Ephraim  un- 
touched. In  answer  to  this,  it  may.  of  course,  be 
pointed  out  that  in  thus  calling  the   people  to 

♦Literally  "the  Group."  and  "theGiant."  HO^U,  Kimah, 
signifies  group,  or  little  heap.  Here  it  is  rendeied  by  Aq. 
and  at  Job  i.x.  9  by  LXX.  'ApxToOpos  ;  and  here  by  Theod. 
and  in  Job  xxxviii.  31,  the  "chain."  or  "cluster,"  of  the 
group"  riAetaSes.  TheTanj.  and  Pesh.  always  give  it  as 
Kima,  i e.,  Pleiades.  And  this  is  the  rendering  of  most 
moderns.  But  Stern  takesit  for  Sirius  with  its  constellation 
of  the  Great  Dog,  for  the  reason  that  this  is  the  brightest  of 
all  stars.and  therefore  a  more  suitable  fellow  forOrion  than 

the  dimmer  Pleiades  can  be.  piQ^  the  Fool  or  Giant,  is 
the  Hebrew  nameof 'Opiui/,  by  which  the  LXX.  render  it. 
Targum  XPD'3.  T°  ^^^  ancient  world  the  constellation 
looked  like  the  figure  of  a  giant  fettered  in  heaven,  "a 
fool  so  far  as  he  trusted  in  his  bodily  strength  "  (Dill- 
mann).  In  later  times  he  was  called  Nimrod.  His  early 
setting  came  at  the  time  of  the  early  rains.  Cf.  with  the 
passage  Job  ix.  g  and  xxxviii.  31. 

+  The  abstract  noun  meaning  "deep  shadow,"  LXX.  o-icia, 
and  rendered  "  shadow  of  death  "  by  many  modern  ver- 
sions. 

tSoLXX.,rea4ing13*>)  forTJ>;  it  inp-^vesthe  rhythm, 
and  escaoes  the  awk  w  ird  repetition  of  *1{J> 

§So  LXX. 

II  Possible  alternative  :  "  make  stagnant  " 

i"  Vision  of  Piers  Plowman."  Passu.s  IV.  1.  52.  Cf.  the 
whole  passage. 

**  Uncertain  ;  Hitzig  takes  it  as  the  apodosis  of  the  pre 
vious  clause  :  "  Ye  shall  have  to  take  from  him  a  present 
of  corn."  i.  e.,  as  alms 

ttSee  above,  p.  ^50. 

it  Cf  "  Pecca  for  titer." 


repentance,  so  that  a  remnant  might  be  saved, 
Amos  may  have  been  contemplating  a  disaster 
still  future,  from  which,  though  it  was  inevitable, 
God  might  be  moved  to  Spare  a  remnant.*  That 
is  very  true.  But  it  does  not  meet  this  further 
dif^culty,  that  the  verses  (14,  15)  plainly  make 
interruption  between  the  end  of  ver.  13  and  the 
beginning  of  ver.  16;  and  that  the  initial  "  there- 
fore "  of  the  latter  verse,  while  it  has  no  meaning 
in  its  present  sequence,  becomes  natural  and  ap- 
propriate when  made  to  follow  immediately  on 
ver.  13.  For  all  these  reasons,  then,  I  take  vv. 
14  and  15  as  a  parenthesis,  whether  from  Amos 
himself  or  from  a  later  writer  who  can  tell?  But 
it  ought  to  be  kept  in  mind  that  in  other  pro- 
phetic writings  where  judgment  is  very  severe, 
we  have  some  proof  of  the  later  insertion  of  calls 
to  repentance,  by  way  of  mitigation. 

Ver.  13  had  said  the  time  was  so  evil  that  the 
prudent  man  kept  silence.  All  the  more  must 
the  Lord  Himself  speak,  as  ver.  16  now  pro- 
claims. "  Therefore  thus  sait'h  Jehovah,  God  of 
Hosts,t  Lord:  On  all  open  ways  lamentation, 
and  in  all  streets  they  shall  be  saying.  Ah  woe! 
Ah  woe!  And  in  all  vineyards  lamentation,  J 
and  they  shall  call  the  ploughman  to  wailing  and 
to  lamentation  them  that  are  skilful  in  dirges  " 
— town  and  country,  rustic  and  artist  alike — "  for 
I  shall  pass  through  thy  midst,  saith  Jehovah." 
It  is  the  solemn  formula  of  the  Great  Passover, 
when  Egypt  was  filled  with  wailing  and  there 
were  dead  in  every  house. 

The  next  verse  starts  another,  but  a  kindred, 
theme.  As  blind  as  was  Israel's  confidence  in 
ritual,  so  blind  was  their  confidence  in  dogma, 
and  the  popular  dogma  was  that  of  the  "  Day  of 
Jehovah." 

All  popular  hopes  expect  their  victory  to  come 
in  a  single  sharp  crisis — a  day.  And  again,  the 
day  of  any  one  means  either  the  day  he  has  ap- 
pointed, or  the  day  of  his  display  and  triumph. 
So  Jehovah's  day  meant  to  the  people  the  day  of 
His  judgment,  or  of  His  triumph:  His  triumph 
in  war  over  their  enemies,  His  judgment  upon 
the  heathen.  But  Amos,  whose  keynote  has 
been  that  judgment  begins  at  home,  cries  woe 
upon  such  hopes,  and  tells  his  people  that  for 
t!hem  the  day  of  Jehovah  is  not  victory,  but 
rather  insidious,  importunate,  inevitable  death. 
And  this  he  describes  as  a  man  who  has  lived, 
alone  with  wild  beasts,  from  the  jungles  of  the 
Jordan,  where  the  lions  lurk,  to  the  huts  of  the 
desert  infested  by  snakes. 

"  Woe  unto  them  that  long  for  the  day  of  Je- 
hovah! What  have  you  to  do  with  the  day  of 
Jehovah?  It  is  darkness,  and  not  light.  As 
when  a  man  fleeth  from  the  face  of  a  lion,  and 
a  bear  falls  upon  him;  and  he  comes  into  his 
home, ^  and,"  breathless,  "  leans  his  hand  upon 
the  wall,  and  a  serpent  bites  him."  And  then, 
as  if  appealing  to  Heaven  for  confirmation:  Is  it 
not  so?  "  Is  it  not  darkness,  the  day  of  Jeho- 
vah, and  not  light?  storm  darkness,  and  not  a 
ray  of  light  upon  it?" 

Then  Amos  returns  to  the  worship,  that  nurse 
of  their  vain  hopes,  that  false  prophet  of  peace, 
and  he  hears  God  speak  more  strongly  than  ever 
of  its  futility  and  hatefulness. 

*  As,   for  instance,  the  prophet  looks    forward    to  in 
iii.  12. 
+  "  God  of   Hosts,"   perhaps  an    intrusion  (?)    between 

tjiK  and  nin\ 

;  1  have  ventured  to  rearrange  the  order  of  the  clauses, 
which  in  the  original  is  evidently  dislocated. 
§  Lit.  "  the  house." 


Amos  iv.  4-vi.] 


THE    FALSE    PEACE    OF    RITUAL. 


485 


"  I  hate,  I  loathe  your  feasts,  and  I  will  not 
smell  the  savour  of  your  gatherings  to  sacrifice." 
For  with  pagan  folly  they  still  believed  that  the 
smoke  of  their  burnt-offerings  went  up  to 
heaven  and  flattered  the  nostrils  of  Deity.  How 
ingrained  was  this  belief  may  be  judged  by  us 
from  the  fact  that  the  terms  of  it  had  to  be 
adopted  by  the  apostles  of  a  spiritual  religion, 
if  they  would  make  themselves  understood,  and 
are  now  tlic  metaphors  of  the  sacrifices  of  the 
Christian  heart:*  "  Though  ye  bring  to  Me 
burnt-offerings  and  your  meal-ofTerings  I  will 
not  be  pleased,  or  your  thank-ofTerings  of  fatted 
calves,  I  will  not  look  at  them.  Let  cease  from 
Me  the  noise  of  thy  songs;  to  the  playing  of  thy 
viols  I  will  not  listen.  But  let  justice  roll  on 
like  water,  and  righteousness  like  an  unfailing 
stream." 

Then  follows  the  remarkable  appeal  from  the 
habits  of  this  age  to  those  of  the  times  of  Is- 
rael's simplicity.  "  Was  it  flesh-  or  meal-ofifer- 
ings  that  ye  brought  Me  in  the  wilderness,  forty 
years,  O  house  of  Israel?"!  That  is  to  say, 
at  the  very  time  when  God  made  Israel  His 
people,  and  led  them  safely  to  the  promised  land 
— the  time  w'hen  of  all  others  He  did  most  for 
them — He  was  not  moved  to  such  love  and  de- 
liverance by  the  propitiatory  bribes,  which  this 
generation  imagine  to  be  so  availing  and  indis- 
pensable. Nay,  those  still  shall  not  avail,  for 
exile  from  the  land  shall  now  as  surely  come  in 
spite  of  them,  as  the  possession  of  the  land  in 
old  times  came  without  them.  This  at  least 
seems  to  be  the  drift  of  the  very  obscure  verse 
which  follows,  and  is  the  unmistakable  state- 
ment of  the  close  of  the  oracle.  "  But  ye  shall 
lift  up  .  .  .  your  king  and  .  .  .  your  god,  im- 
ages which  you  have  made  for  yourselves;^    and 

•  Eph.  V.  2,  etc. 

+  No  one  doubts  that  this  verse  is  interrogative.  But 
the  Authorised  Eng.  Ver.  puts  it  in  a  form—"  Have  ye 
brought  unto  Me?"  etc.— which  implies  blame  that  they 
did  not  do  so.  Ewald  was  the  first  to  see  that,  as  rendered 
above,  an  appeal  to  the  forty  years  was  the  real  intention 
of  the  verse.  So  after  him  nearly  all  critics,  also  the 
Revised  Eng.  Ver.  :  "Do  ye  bring  unto  Me?"  On  the 
whole  question  of  the  possibility  of  such  an  appeal  see 
above,  pp.  467  S.,  and  c/.  Jer.  vii.  22,  which  distinctly 
declares  that  in  the  wilderness  God  prescribed  no  ritual 
to  Israel. 

t  Ver.  26  is  very  difficult,  for  both  the  text  and  the  ren- 
dering of  all  the  possible  alternatives  of  it  are  quite 
uncertain,  (i)  As  to  the  "  text,"  the  present  division  into 
words  must  be  correct ;  at  least  no  other  is  possible.  But 
the  present  order  of  the  words  is  obviously  wrong.  For 
"your  images"  is  evidently  described  by  the  relative 
clause  "  which  you  have  made,"  and  ought  to  stand  next 
it.  What  then  is  to  be  done  with  the  two  words  that  at 
present  come  between — "star  of  your  god"?  Are  they 
both  a  mere  gloss,  as  Robertson  Smith  holds,  and  tnere- 
fore  to  be  struck  out?  or  should  they  precede  the  pair  of 

words,  D3''D<'V  pO.  which  they  now  follow?    This  is  the 

order  of  the  text  which  the  LXX.  translator  had  before 

him,   only  for  P^  he  misread  1^  ?.  or  I;  1  •  icaX  aveKa^ere 

Tr)v  <TKr)vriv  Tow  Mu\o\  icoi  to  airrpov  tou  ©eoO  tifxu>i/  'Pok^oi/ 
['P€(J)ai',  Q],  Toil?  Tiiirous  avT<J>i>  [om.  AQ]  01)5  eiroirjaare  eavTois. 
This  arrangement  has  the  further  evidence  in  its  favour, 
that  it  brings  "  your  god  "  into  proper  parallel  with  "your 
king."    The  Hebrew  text  would  then  run  thus  : — 

(D3^n^N  nD"i3)  riNi  dds^d  didd  nx  onxE'Ji 

(2) The  translation  of  this  text  is  equally  difficult:  not  in 
the  verb  DnSK'JV  for  both  the  grammar  and  the  argu- 
ment oblige  us  to  take  it  as  future,  "  and  ye  shall  lift  up  ; " 
but  in  the  two  words  DIDD  and  P'3.  Are  these  common 
nouns,  or  proper  names  of  deities  in  apposition  to  "  your 
king  and  your  god"?  The  LXX.  takesHISD  as  =  "taber- 
nacle," and  p^3  as  a  proper  name  (Theodotion  takes  both 
as  proper  names).    The  Auth.  Eng.  Ver.  follows  the  LXX. 


I  will  carry  you  away  into  exile  far  beyond 
Damascus,  saith  Jehovah — God  of  Hosts  is  His 
Name!  "  *  So  this  chapter  closes  like  the  previ- 
ous, with  the  marshalling  of  God's  armies.  But 
as  there  His  hosts  were  the  movements  of  Na- 
ture and  the  Great  Stars,  so  here  they  are  the 
nations  of  the  world.  By  His  rule  of  both  He 
is  the  God  of  Hosts. 

3.  "  At  Ease  in  Zion." 
Amos  vi. 

The  evil  of  the  national  worship  was  the  false 
political  confidence  which  it  engendered.  Leav- 
ing the  ritual  alone,  Amos  now  proceeds  to  as- 
sault this  confidence.  We  are  taken  from  the 
public  worship  of  the  people  to  the  private  ban- 
quets of  the  rich,  but  again  only  in  order  to  have 
their  security  and  extravagance  contrasted  with 
the  pestilence,  the  war,  and  the  captivity  that  are 
rapidly  approaching. 

"  Woe  unto  them  that  are  at  ease  in  Zion  "  f — 
it  is  a  proud  and  overweening  ease  which  the 
word  expresses — "  and  that  trust  in  the  mount 
of  Samaria!  Men  of  mark  of  the  first  of  the 
peoples  " — ironically,  for  that  is  Israel's  opinion 
of  itself — "  and  to  them  do  the  house  of  Israel 
resort!    .    .    .^    Ye  that  put  off  the  day  of  calam- 

(except  that  it  takes  "king"  for  the  name  "Moloch"}. 
Schrader  ("Stud.  u.  Krit.."  1874,  324;  "K.  A.  T.,"442f.) 
takes  them  as  the  consonants  of  Sakkut,  a  name  of  the 
Assyrian  god  Adar,  and  of  Kewan,  the  Assyrian  name 
for  the  planet  Saturn  :  "Ye  shall  take  up  Sakkut  your 
king  and  Kewan  your  star-god,  your  images  which   .  .  ." 

Baethgen  goes  further  and  takes  both  the  "1/0  of  DS^D/D 

and  the  D7V  of  D3''0?!;f  as  Moloch  and  Selam,  proper 
names,  in  combinaiion  with  Sakkut  and  Kewan  ("  Beitr. 
z.  Sem.  Rel.,"  239).  Now  it  is  true  that  the  Second  Book 
of  Kings  implies  that  the  worship  of  the  host  of  heaven 
existed  in  Samaria  before  its  fall  (2  Kings  xvii.  16),  but  the 
introduction  into  Samaria  of  Assyrian  gods  (among  them 
Adar  is  placed  by  it  after  the  fall  (2  Kings  xvii.  31),  and 
besides,  Amos  does  not  elsewhere  speak  of  the  worship 
of  foreign  gods,  nor  is  the  mention  of  them  in  any  way 
necessary  to  the  argument  here.  On  the  contrary,  even 
if  Amos  were  to  mention  the  worship  of  idols  by  Israel, 
would  he  have  selected  at  this  point  the  Assyrian  ones  1 
(See,  however,  Tiele,  "  Revue  de  I'Histoire  des  Reli- 
gions," in.  p.  211,  who  makes  Koun  and  the  planet  Keiwan 
purely  Phoenician  deities.)  Some  critics  take  fllSD  and 
p^O  as  common  nouns  in  the  construct  state.  So  Ewald, 
and  so  most  recently  Robertson  Smith  ("  O.  T.  J.  C,"  2)  : 
"  the  shrine  of  your  king  and  the  stand  of  your  images." 
This  is  more  in  harrrony  with  the  absence  from  the  rest 
of  Amos  of  any  hint  as  to  the  worship  of  idols,  but  an  ob- 
jection to  it,  and  a  very  strong  one,  is  that  the  alleged 
common  nouns  are  not  found  elsewhere  in  Hebrew.  In 
view  of  this  conflicting  evidence  it  is  best  therefore  to 
leave  the  words  untranslated,  as  in  the  text  above.  It  is 
just  possible  that  they  may  themselves  be  later  insertions, 
for  the  verse  would  read  very  well  without  them  :  "  And 
ye  shall  lift  up  your  king  and  your  images  which  you 
have  made  to  yourselves." 

♦The  last  clause  is  peculiar.  Two  clauses  seem  to 
have  run  into  one — "saith  Jehovah,  God  of  Hosts,"  and 
"God  of  Hosts  is  His  Name."  The  word  yoi^  -  "His 
Name,"  may  have  been  added  to  give  the  oracle  the  same 
conclusion  as  the  oracle  at  the  end  of  the  preceding  chap- 
ter ;  and  it  is  not  to  be  overlooked  that  ^OtJ>  at  the  end  of 
a  clause  does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  book  outside  the 
three  questioned  Doxologies  iv.  13,  v.  8,  ix.  6.  Further 
see  below,  pp.  493  f. 

+  "  In  Zion  :  "very  suspicious."  Cornill.  But  see  pp. 
476  f. 

1 1  remove  ver.  2  to  a  note,  not  that  1  am  certain  that  it 
is  not  by  Amos— who  can  be  dogmatic  on  such  a  point? — 
but  because  the  text  of  it,  the  place  which  it  occupies,  and 
its  relation  to  the  facts  of  current  history,  all  raise  doubts. 
Moreover,  it  is  easily  detached  from  the  context,  without 
disturbing  the  flow  of  the  chapter,  which  indeed  runs 
more  equably  without  it.  The  Massoretic  text  gives: 
"  Pass  over  to  Calneh,  and  see  ;  and  go  thence  to  Hamafh 
Rabbah,  and  come  down  to  Gath  of  the  Philistines  :  are 
they  better  than  these  kingdoms,  or  is  their  territory 


486 


THE  T^OOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


ity  *  and  draw  near  the  sessions  of  injustice  "  f 
— an  epigram  and  proverb,  for  it  is  the  universal 
way  of  men  to  wish  and  fancy  far  away  the  very 
crisis  that  their  sins  are  hastening  on.  Isaiaii 
described  this  same  generation  as  drawing 
iniquity  with  cords  of  hypocrisy,  and  sin  as  it 
were  with  a  cart-rope!  "That  lie  on  ivory 
diwans  and  sprawl  on  their  couches  " — another 
luxurious  custom,  which  filled  this  rude  shepherd 
with  contempt — "  and  eat  lambs  from  the  flock 
and  calves  from  the  midst  of  the  stall  "  t — that  is. 
only  the  most  delicate  of  meats — "  who  prate  " 
or  "  purr  "  or  "  babble  to  the  sound  of  the  viol, 
and  as  if  they  were  David  "  himself  "  invent  for 
them  instruments  of  song;  §  who  drink  wine  by 
ewerfuls — waterpotfuls — and  anoint  with  the  fin- 
est of  oil — yet  never  do  they  grieve  at  the  havoc 
of  Joseph!  "  The  havoc  is  the  moral  havoc,  for 
the  social  structure  of  Israel  is  obviously  still 
secure. II  The  rich  are  indifferent  to  it;  they  have 
wealth,  art,  patriotism,  religion,  but  neither  heart 
for  the  poverty  nor  conscience  for  the  sin  of  their 
people.  We  know  their  kind!  They  are  always 
with  us,  who  live  well  and  imagine  they  are  pro- 
portionally clever  and  refined.  They  have  their 
political  zeal,  will  rally  to  an  election  when  the 
interests  of  their  class  or  their  trade  is  in  danger. 
They  have  a  robust  and  exuberant  patriotism, 
^talk  grandly  of  commerce,  empire,  and  the  na- 
tional destiny;  but  for  the  real  woes  and  sores  of 
the  people,  the  poverty,  the  overwork,  the  drunk- 
enness, fhe  dissoluteness,  which  more  affect  a 
nation's  life  than  anything  else,  they  have  no 
pity  and  no  care. 

"  Therefore  now  " — tlie  double  initial  of  judg- 
ment— "  shall  they  go  into  exile  at  the  head  of 
the  exiles,  and  stilled  shall  be  the  revelry  of  the 
-dissolute " — literally  "  the  sprawlers,"  as  in 
yer.  4,  but  used  here  rather  in  the  moral  than 
,in  the  physical  sense.  "  Sworn  hath  the  Lord 
Jehovah  by  Himself — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah 

Harper  than  yours?"  Presumably,  "these  kingdoms"  are 
Judah  and  Israel.  But  that  can  only  mean  that  Israel  is 
the  best  of  the  peoples,  a  statement  out  of  harmony  with 
"the  irony  of  ver.  i,  and  impossible  in  the  mouth  of  Amos. 
Geiger,  therefore,  proposes  to  read  :  "  Are  you  better  than 
•these  kingdoms— /.  e.,  Calneh,  Haniath.  Gath— or  is  your 
territory  larger  than  theirs?"  But  this  is  also  unlikely, 
"for  Israel's  territory  was  much  larger  than  Gath's.  Be- 
dsides, the  question  would  have  force  only  if  Calneh,  Ha- 
math,  and  Gath  had  already  fallen.  Gath  had.  but  it  is  at 
least  very  questionable  whether  Hamath  had.  Therefore 
Schrader  ("K.  A.  T  ,"  444)  rejects  the  whole  verse  ;  and 
Kuenen  agrees  that  if  we  are  to  understand  Assyrian  con- 
quests, it  is  hardly  piossible  to  retain  the  verses.  Bickell's 
^rst  argument  against  the  verse,  that  it  does  not  fit  into 
_the  metrical  system  of  Amos  vi.  1-7,  is  precarious  ;  his 
second,  that  it  disturbs  the  grammar,  which  it  makes  to 
jump  suddenly  from  the  third  person  in  ver.  1  to  the  sec- 
ond in  ver.  2,  and  back  to  the  third  in  yer.  3,  is  not  worth 
^anything,  for  such  a  jump  occurs  within  ver.  3  itself. 
,    *  Davidson,  "  Syntax,"  §  too,  R.  5. 

tDDH  DitJ'  ;  LXX.  o•a/3^aT^)^'  xj/evSSiv,  on  which  hint 
Hoffmann  renders  the  verse:  "you  that  daily  demanh 
*he  tribute  of  evil  (cf.  Ezek.  xvi.  33I,  and  every  Sabbatd 
.extort  by  violence."  But  this  is  both  unnecessary  and 
opposed  to  viii.  5,  which  tells  us  no  trade  was  done  on  the 
Sabbath.  r\2,'^  is  to  be  taken  in  the  common  sense  of 
.sitting  in  judgment  rather  than  (with  Wellhausen)  in  the 
sense  of  the  enthronement  of  wrong-doing. 

tTo  this  day,  in  some  parts  of  Palestine,  the  general 
told  into  which  the  cattle  are  shut  contains  a  portion 
railed  off  for  calves  and  lambs  Ccf.  Dr.  M.  Blanckenhorn 
of  Erlangen  in  the  "  Mittheilungcn  u.  Nachrichten  "  of 
the  D.  P.  v.,  1805,  P-  37.  with  a  sketch).  It  must  be  this  to 
'which  Amos  refers.  . 
,    §Or  perhaps  "melodies,  airs." 

.  B  Of  course,  it  is  possible  that  here  again,  as  in  v.  15  and 
16,  we  have  prophecy  later  than  the  disaster  of  734,  when 
Tiglath-Pileser  made  a  great  "breach"  or  "havoc"  in 
the  body  politic  of  Israel  by  taking  Gilead  and  Galilee 
.captive.  But  this  is  scarcely  probable,  for  Amos  almost 
everywhere  lays  stress  upon  the  moral  corruption  of 
Israel,  as  her  real  and  essential  danger. 


God  of  Hosts:  I  am  loathing*  the  pride  of 
Jacob,  and  his  palaces  do  I  hate,  and  I  will  pack 
up  a  city  and  its  fulness.f  .  .  .  For,  behold,  Je- 
hovah is  commanding,  and  He  will  smite  the 
great  house  into  ruins  and  the  small  house  into 
splinters.  '  The  collapse  must  come,  postpone  it 
as  their  fancy  will,  for  it  has  been  worked  for 
and  is  inevitable.  How  could  it  be  otherwise? 
"  Shall  horses  run  on  a  cliflf,  or  the  sea  be 
ploughed  by  oxen  X — that  ye  should  turn  justice 
to  poison  and  the  fruit  of  Righteousness  to 
wormwood!  Ye  that  exult  in  Lo-Debar  and  say, 
By  our  own  strength  have  we  taken  to  ourselves 
Karnaim."  So  Gratz  rig'htly  reads  the  verse. 
The  Hebrew  text  and  all  the  versions  take  these 
names  as  if  they  were  common  nouns — Lo- 
Debar,  "a  thing  of  naught";  Karnaim,  "a  pair 
of  horns  " — and  doubtless  it  was  just  because  of 
this  possible  play  upon  their  names,  that  Amos 
selected  these  two  out  of  all  the  recent  conquests 
of  Israel.  Karnaim,  in  full  Ashteroth  Karnaim, 
"  Astarte  of  Horns,"  was  that  immemorial  fort- 
ress and  sanctuary  which  lay  out  upon  the  great 
plateau  of  Bas'han  towards  Damascus;  so  obvi- 
ous and  cardinal  a  site  that  it  appears  in  the 
sacred  history  both  in  the  earliest  recorded  cam- 
paign in  Abraham's  time  and  in  one  of  the  latest 
under  the  Maccabees. j^  Lo-Debar  was  of  Gilead, 
and  probably  lay  on  that  last  rampart  of  the 
province  northward,  overlooking  the  Yarmuk, 
a  strategical  point  which  must  have  often  been 
contested  by  Israel  and  Aram,  and  with  which 
no  other  Old  Testament  name  has  been  identi- 
fied.jl  These  two  fortresses,  with  many  others, 
Israel  had  lately  taken  from  Aram;  but  not,  as 
they  boasted,  "  by  their  own  strength."  It  was 
only  Aram's  pre-occupation  with  Assyria,  now 
surgent  on  the  n-  hern  flank,  which  allowed 
Israel  these  easy  victories.  And  this  same 
northern  foe  would  soon  overwhelm  themselves. 
"  For,  behold,  I  am  to  raise  up  against  you,  O 
house  of  Israel — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah  God 
of  the  hosts  T[ — a  Nation,  and  they  shall  oppress 
you  from  the  Entrance  of  Hamath  to  the  Tor- 
rent of  the  'Arabah."  Every  one  knows  the 
former,  the  Pass  between  the  Lebanons,  at  whose 
mouth  stands  Dan,  northern  limit  of  Israel;  but 
it  is  hard  to  identify  t'he  latter.  If  Amos  means 
to  include  Judah,  we  should  have  expected  the 
Torrent  of  Egypt,  the  present  Wady  el  'Arish; 
but  the  Wady  of  the  'Arabah  may  be  a  cor- 
responding valley  in  the  eastern  watershed  issu- 
ing in  the  'Arabah.  If  Amos  threatens  only  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  he  intends  some  wady  run- 
ning down  to  that  Sea  of  the  'Arabah,  the  Dead 
Sea,  which  is  elsewhere  given  as  the  limit  of 
Israel.** 

*  3Nn»  for  3vnD. 

tSome  words  must  have  dropped  out  here.  For  these 
and  the  following  verses 9  and  10  on  the  pestilence  see  pp. 

4S7  ff. 

tSoMichaelis,  P^  "li^?^  for  ^'IP^^^' 

§Gen.  xiv.  5  ;  i  Mace.  v.  In  the  days  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (4th  century)  there  were  two  places  of  the  name  : 
one  of  them  doubtless  the  present  Tell  Ashtara  south  of 
El-Merkez,  the  other  distant  from  that  fourteen  Roman 
miles. 

|l  Along  this  ridge  ran,  and  still  runs,  one  of  the  most 
important  highwavs  to  the  East,  that  from  Beth-Shan 
by  Gadera  to  Edref.  About  seven  miles  east  from  Gadera 
lies  a  village,  Ibdar.  "with  a  good  spring  and  some 
ancient  rernains"  (Schumacher,  "  N.  Ajhm,"  101).  Lo- 
Debar  is  mentioned  in  2  Sam.  ix.  45;  xvii.  27  ;  and  doubt- 
less the  Lidebir  of  Josh.  xiii.  26  on  the  north  border  of 
Gilead  is  the  same. 

t  With  the  article,  an  unusual  form  of  the  title.  LXX. 
here  xupio?  Tuiv  6vydiJ.GU)v. 

**2  Kings  xiv.   25.    The  Torrent  of   the  'Arabah  can 


Amos  viii.  4-ix.] 


DOOM   OR    DISCIPLINE? 


487 


The  Assyrian  flood,  then,  was  about  to  break, 
and  the  oracles  close  with  the  hopeless  prospect 
of  the  whole  land  submerged  beneath  it. 


4.  A  Fragment  from  the  Plague. 

In  the  above  exposition  we  have  omitted  two 
very  curious  verses,  9  and  10,  which  are  held  by 
some  critics  to  interrupt  the  current  of  the  chap- 
ter, and  to  reflect  an  entirely  different  kind  of 
calamity  from  that  which  it  predicts.  I  do  not 
think  these  critics  right,  for  reasons  I  am  about 
to  give;  but  the  verses  are  so  remarkable  that 
it  is  most  convenient  to  treat  them  by  themselves 
apart  from  the  rest  of  the  chapter.  Here  they 
are,  with  the  verse  immediately  in  front  of  them. 

"  I  am  loathing  the  pride  of  Jacob,  and  his 
palaces  I  hate.  And  I  will  give  up  a  city  and  its 
fulness  "  to  .  .  .  (perhaps  "  siege  "  or  "  pesti- 
lence"?). "And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  there 
be  left  ten  men  in  one  house,  and  they  die,* 
.  .  .  that  his  cousin  t  and  the  man  to  burn  him 
shall  lift  him  to  bring  the  body]:  out  of  the 
house,  and  they  shall  say  to  one  who  is  in  the 
recesses  of  the  house,^  Are  there  any  more  with 
thee?  And  he  shall  say.  Not  one  .  .  .  and  they 
shall  say,  Hush!  (for  one  must  not  make  men- 
tion of  the  name  of  Jehovah)." 

This  grim  fragment  is  obscure  in  its  relation 
to  the  context.  But  the  death  of  even  so  large 
a  household  as  ten — the  funeral  left  to  a  distant 
relation — the  disposal  of  the  bodies  by  burning 
instead  of  the  burial  customary  among  the  He- 
brews II — sufficiently  reflect  the  kind  of  calamity. 
It  is  a  weird  little  bit  of  memory,  the  recollec- 
tion of  an  eye-witness,  from  one  of  those  great 
pestilences  which,  during  the  first  half  of  the 
eighth  century,  happened  not  seldom  in  Western 
Asia."!  But  what  does  it  do  here?  Wellhausen 
says  that  there  is  nothing  to  lead  up  to  the  inci- 
dent; that  before  it  the  chapter  speaks,  not  of 
pestilence,  but  only  of  political  destruction  by  an 
enemy.  This  is  not  accurate.  The  phrase  im- 
mediately preceding  may  mean  either  "  I  will 
shut  up  a  city  and  its  fulness,"  in  which  case 
a  siege  is  meant,  and  a  siege  was  the  possibility 
both  of  famine  and  pestilence;  or  "  I  will  give  up 
the  city  and  its  fulness  .  .  .,"  in  which  case  a 
word  or  two  may  have  been  dropped,  as  words 
have  undoubtedly  been  dropped  at  the  end  of 
the  next  verse,  and  one  ought  perhaps  to  add 
"  to  the  pestilence."  **  The  latter  alternative  is 
the  more  probable,  and  this  may  be  one  of  the 

scarcely  be  the  Torrent  of  the  'Arabim  of  Isa.  xv.  7,  for 
the  latter  was  outside  Israel's  territory,  and  the  border 
between  Moaband  Edora.  The  LXX.  render  "Torrent 
of  the  West,"  tCiv SvaiJt.iiii'. 

*  Here  there  is  evidently  a  gap  in  the  text.  The  LXX. 
insert  <ca't  vnoKeiijidricrovTai  oi  KOTdAotjrot ;  perhaps  therefore 
tlie  text  originally  ran  "  and  the  survivors  die." 

t  Or  "uncle" — that  is.  a  distant  relative,  presumably 
because  all  the  near  ones  are  dead. 

t  Literally  "  bones." 

§  LXX.  Tois  7rpoe(TT7)/cdo-i :  evidently  in  ignorance  of  the 
reading  or  the  meaning, 

II  The  burning  of  a  body  was  regarded,  as  we  have  seen 
(iimos  ii.  i),  as  a  great  sacrilege  ;  and  was  practised,  out- 
side times  of  pestilence,  only  in  cases  of  great  criminals  : 
Lsv.  XX.  14;  XXI.  q;  Josh.  vii.  25.  Doughty  ("Arabia 
Deserta,"  68)  mentions  a  case  in  which,  in  Medina,  a 
Persian  pilgrim  was  burned  o  death  by  an  angry  crowd 
for  defiling  Mohammed's  tomb. 

T^The  Assyrian  inscriptions  record  at  least  three— in 
8  '3.  765.  759- 

**As  in  Psalm  Ixxviii.  50.       '  rr'7' to  give  up,   is  so 

ssldoin  used  absolutely  (Deut.  xxxii.  30  is  poetry  and 
elliptic)  that  we  may  well  believe  it  was  followed  by 
vrords  signifying  to  what  the  city  was  to  be  given  up. 


passages,  already  alluded  to,*  in  which  the  want 
of  connection  with  the  preceding  verses  is  to  be 
explained,  not  upon  the  favourite  theory  that 
there  has  been  a  violent  intrusion  into  the  text, 
but  upon  the  too  much  neglected  hypothesis  that 
some  words  have  been  lost. 

The  uncertainty  of  the  text,  however,  does  not 
weaken  the  impression  of  its  ghastly  realism:  the 
unclean  and  haunted  hc^use;  the  kinSman  and  the 
body-burner  afraid  to  search  through  the  in- 
fected rooms,  arrd  calling  in  mufifled  voice  to  the 
single  survivor  crouching  in  some  far  corner  of 
them,  "  Are  there  any  more  with  thee? "  his 
reply,  "None" — himself  the  next!  Yet  these 
details  are  not  the  most  weird.  Over  all  hangs 
a  terror  darker  than  the  pestilence.  "  Shall 
there  be  evil  in  a  city  and  Jehovah  not  have 
done  it?  "  Such,  as  we  have  heard  from  Amos, 
was  the  settled  faith  of  the  age.  But  in  times 
of  woe  it  was  held  with  an  awful  and  a  craven 
superstition.  The  whole  of  life  was  believed  to 
be  overhung  with  loose  accumulations  of  Divine 
anger.  And  as  in  some  fatal  hollow  in  the  high 
Alps,  where  any  noise  may  bring  down  the  im- 
pending masses  of  snow,  and  the  fearful  trav- 
eller hurries  along  in  silence,  so  the  men  of  that 
superstitious  age  feared,  when  an  evil  like  the 
plague  was  imminent,  even  to  utter  the  Deity's 
name,  lest  it  should  loosen  some  avalanche  of 
His  wrath.  "  And  he  said,  Hush!  for."  adds  the 
comment,  one  "  must  not  make  mention  of  the 
name  of  Jehovah." 

This  reveals  another  side  of  the  popular  re- 
ligion which  Amos  has  been  attacking.  We  have 
seen  it  as  the  sheer  superstition  of  routine;  but 
we  now  know  that  it  was  a  routine  broken  by 
panic.  The  God  who  in  times  of  peace  was 
propitiated  by  regular  supplies  of  savoury  sacri- 
fice and  flattery,  is  conceived,  when  His  wrath 
is  roused  and  imminent,  as  kept  quiet  only  by 
the  silence  of  its  miserable  objects.  The  false 
peace  of  ritual  is  tempered  by  panic. 


CHAPTER  X. 

DOOM  OR  Discipline? 

Amos  viii.  4-ix. 

We  now  enter  the  Third  Section  of  the  Book 
of  Amos:  chaps,  vii.-ix.  As  we  have  already 
treated  the  first  part  of  it — the  group  of  four 
visions,  which  probably  formed  the  prophet's 
discourse  at  Bethel,  with  the  interlude  of  his  ad- 
venture there  (vii. -viii.  3)  f — we  may  pass  at  once 
to  what  remains:  from  viii.  4  to  the  end  of  the 
book.  This  portion  consists  of  groups  of  oracles 
more  obscure  in  their  relations  to  each  other 
than  any  we  have  yet  studied,  and  probably  con- 
taining a  number  of  verses  which  are  not  from 
Amos  himself.  They  open  in  a  denunciation  of 
the  rich,  which  echoes  previous  oracles,  and  soon 
pass  to  judgments  of  a  kind  already  threatened, 
but  now  with  greater  relentlessness.  Then,  just 
as  all  is  at  the  darkest,  lights  break;  exceptions 
are  made:  the  inevitable  captivity  is  described  no 
more  as  doom,  but  as  discipline;  and,  with  only 
this  preparation  for  a  change,  we  are  swept  out 
on  a  scene,  in  which,  although  the  land  is  strewn 
with  the  ruins  that  have  been  threatened,  the 
sunshine  of  a  new  day  floods  them;  the  promise 
of  restoration  is  given;  Nature  herself  will  be 
*  Pp.  477  f.  t  See  chapter  vi.,  section  3. 


488 


THE  "BOOK    OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


regenerated,  and  the  whole  life  of  Israel  planted 
on  its  own  ground  again. 

Whether  it  was  given  to  Amos  himself  to  be- 
hold this  day — whether  these  last  verses  of  the 
book  were  his  "  Nunc  Dimittis,"  or  the  hope 
of  a  later  generatfon,  which  found  his  book  in- 
tolerably severe,  and  mingled  with  its  judgments 
their  own  new  mercies — we  shall  try  to  discover 
further  on.  Meanwhile  there  is  no  doubt  that 
we  start  with  the  authentic  oracles  of  the  prophet. 
We  know  the  ring  of  his  voice.'  To  the  tyranny 
of  the  rich,  which  he  has  so  often  lashed,  he 
now  adds  the  greed  and  fraud  of  the  traders; 
and  he  paints  Israel's  doom  in  those  shapes  of 
earthquake,  eclipse,  and  famine  with  which  his 
own  generation  had  recently  become  familiar. 
Note  that  in  this  first  group  Amos  employs  only 
physical  calamities,  and  says  nothing  of  war  and 
captivity.  If  the  standard  which  we  have  al- 
ready applied  to  the  growth  of  his  doctrine  be 
correct,  these  ought  therefore  to  be  counted 
among  his  earlier  utterances.  War  and  captiv- 
ity follow  in  chap.  ix.  That  is  to  say,  this  Third 
Section  follows  the  same  line  of  development  as 
both  the  First  and  the  Second. 

I.  Earthquake,  Eclipse,  and  Famine. 

Amos  viii.  4-14. 

"  Hear  this,  ye  who  trample  the  needy,  and 
would  put  an  end  to  *  the  lowly  of  the  land, 
saying,  When  will  the  New-Moon  be  over,  that 
we  may  sell  grain,  and  the  Sabbath,  that  we 
may  open  corn  (by  making  small  the  measure, 
but  large  the  weight,  and  falsifying  the  fraudulent 
balances;  buying  the  wretched  for  silver,  and  the 
needy  for  a  pair  of  shoes!),  and  that  we  may  sell 
as  grain  the  refuse  of  the  corn!"  The  paren- 
thesis puzzles,  but  is  not  impossible:  in  the  speed 
of  his  scorn,  Amos  might  well  interrupt  the 
speech  of  the  merchants  by  these  details  of  their 
fraud,!  flinging  these  in  their  teeth  as  they  spoke. 
The  existence  at  this  date  of  the  New-Moon  and 
Sabbath  as  days  of  rest  from  business  is  inter- 
esting; but  even  more  interesting  is  the  peril  to 
which  they  lie  open.  As  in  the  case  of  the 
Nazarites  and  the  prophets,  we  see  how  the  re- 
ligious institutions  and  opportunities  of  the  peo- 
ple are  threatened  by  worldliness  and  greed. 
And,  as  in  every  other  relevant  passage  of  the 
Old  Testament,  we  have  the  interests  of  the  Sab- 
bath bound  up  in  the  same  cause  with  the  inter- 
ests of  the  poor.  The  Fourth  Commandment 
enforces  the  day  of  rest  on  behalf  of  the  serv- 
ants and  bondsmen.  When  a  later  prophet  sub- 
stitutes for  religious  fasts  the  ideals  of  social 
service,  he  weds  with  the  latter  the  security  of 
the  Sabbath  from  all  business.^  So  here  Amos 
emphasises  that  the  Sabbath  is  threatened  by  the 
same  worldliness  and  love  of  money  which  tram- 
ples on  the  helpless.  The  interests  of  the  Sab- 
bath are  the  interests  of  the  poor:  the  enemies 

♦  The  phrase  is  uncertain. 

+  Wellhausen  thinks  that  the  prophet  could  not  have 
put  the  parenthesis  in  the  mouth  of  the  traders,  and  there- 
fore regards  it  as  an  intrusion  or  gloss.  But  this  is  hyper- 
criticism.  The  last  clause,  however,  may  be  a  mere 
clerical  repetition  of  ii.  6. 

t  Isa.  Iviii.  See  the  exposition  of  the  passage  in  the 
writer's  "Isaiah"  xl.-lxvi.  (Expositor's  Bible  Series): 
"  Our  prophet,  while  exalting  the  practical  service  of  man 
at  the  expense  of  certain  religious  forms,  equally  exalts 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  ;  ...  he  places  the  keep- 
ing of  the  Sabbath  on  a  level  with  the  practice  of 
love." 


of  the  Sabbath  are  the  enemies  olf  the  poor.  And 
all  this  illustrates  our  Saviour's  sayihg,  that  "  the 
Sabbath  was  made  for  man." 

But,  as  in  the  rest  of  the  book,  judg'nent 
again  follows  hard  on  sin.  "  Sworn  hath  Je'ho- 
vah  by  the  pride  of  Jacob,  Never  shall  I  forget 
their  deeds."  It  is  as  before.  The  chief  spfing 
of  the  prophet's  inspiration  is  his  burning  sense 
of  the  personal  indignation  of  God  agains 
crimes  so  abominable.  God  is  the  God  of  the 
poor,  and  His  anger  rises,  as  we  see  the  anger 
of  Christ  arise,  heavy  against  their  tyrants  and 
oppressors.  Such  cins  are  intolerable  to  Him. 
But  the  feeling  of  their  intolerableness  is  shared 
by  the  land  itself,  the  very  fabric  of  nature;  the 
earthquake  is  the  proof  of  it.  "  For  all  this  shall 
not  the  land  tremble  and  her  every  inhabitant 
mourn?  and  she  shall  rise  like  t'he  Nile  in  mass, 
and  heave  and  sink  like  the  Nile  of  Egypt.  "* 

To  the  earthquake  is  added  the  eclipse:  one 
had  happened  in  803,  and  another  in  763,  the 
memory  of  which  probably  inspired  the  form  of 
this  passage.  "  And  it  shall  be  in  that  day — 'tis 
t'he  oracle  of  the  Lord  Jehovah — that  I  shall 
bring  down  the  sun  at  noon,  and  cast  darkness 
on  the  earth  in  broad  day.i  And  I  will  turn 
your  festivals  into  mourning,  and  all  your  songs 
to  a  dirge.  And  I  will  bring  up  upon  all  loins 
sackcloth  and  on  every  head  baldness,  and  I 
will  make  it  like  the  mourning  for  an  only  son, 
and  the  end  of  it  as  a  bitter  day." 

But  the  terrors  of  earthquake  and  eclipse  are 
not  sufBcient  for  doom,  and  famine  is  drawn 
upon. 

"  Lo,  days  are  coming — 'tis  the  oracle  of  the 
Lord  Jehovah — that  I  will  send  famine  on  the 
land,  not  a  famine  of  bread  nor  a  drouth  of  water, 
but  of  hearing  the  words  of  Jehovah.  And  they 
shall  wander  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the  dark 
North  to  the  Sunrise  shall  they  run  to  and  fro, 
to  seek  the  word  of  Jehovah,  and  they  shall  not 
find  it;  .  .  .  who  swear  by  Samaria's  Guilt" — 
the  golden  calf  in  the  house  of  the  kingdom  at 
Bethel  $ — "and  say.  As  liveth  thy  God,  O  Dan! 
and.  As  liveth  the  way  to  Beersheba!  and  they 
shall  fall  and  not  rise  any  more."  I  'have  omitted 
ver.  13:  "  in  that  day  shall  the  fair  maids  faint  and 
the  youths  for  thirst  "  ;  and  I  append  my  reasons 
in  a  note.  Some  part  of  the  received  text  must 
go,  for  while  vv.  11  and  12  speak  of  a  spiritual 
drought,  the  drought  of  13  is  physical.  And  ver. 
14  follows  12  better  than  it  follows  13.  The  oaths 
mentioned  by  Bethel,  Dan,  Beersheba,  are  not 
specially  those  of  young  men  and  maidens,  but 
of  the  whole  nation,  that  run  from  one  end  of 
the  land  to  the  other,  Dan  to  Beersheba,  seeking 
for  some  word  of  Jehova'h.^     One  of  the  oaths, 

*  "She  shall  rise,"  etc.— The  clause  is  almost  the  same 
as  in  ix.  5*.  and  the  text  differs  from  the  LXX.,  which 
omits  "  and  heave."    Is  it  an  insertion  ? 

t  Literally  "  in  the  day  of  light." 

JThat  is,  Samaria  is  used  in  the  wider  sense  of  the 
kingdom,  not  the  capital,  and  there  is  no  need  for  Well- 
hausen's  substitution  of  Bethel  for  it. 

§This  in  answer  to  Gunning  ("  De  Godspraken  van 
Amos,"  1885),  Wellh.  tn  loco,  and  Konig  ("  Einleitung,"  p. 
304,  d),  who  reckon  vv.  ii  and  12  to  be  the  insertion  :  the 
latter  on  the  additional  ground  that  the  formula  of  ver. 
13,  "in  that  day.'"  points  back  to  ver.  9;  but  not  to  the 
"  Lo,  days  are  commg"  of  ver.  11.  But  thus  to  miss  out 
vv.  II  and  12  leaves  us  with  greater  difficulties  than  before. 
For  without  them  how  are  we  to  explain  the  "  thirst  "  of 
ver.  13.  It  is  left  unintroduced  ;  there  is  no  hint  of  a 
drought  in  g  and  10.  It  seems  to  me  then  that,  since  we 
must  omit  some  verse,  it  ought  to  be  ver.  13 ;  and  this  the 
rather  that  if  omitted  it  is  not  missed.  It  is  just  the  kind 
of  general  statement  that  would  be  added  by  an  unthink- 
ing scribe  ;  and  it  does  not  readily  connect  with  ver.  14, 
while  ver.  12  does  do  so.    For  why  should  youths  and 


Amos  viii.  4-ix.] 


DOOM    OR    DISCIPLINE? 


489 


"  As  liveth  the  way  to  Beersheba,"  *  is  so  curious 
that  some  have  doubted  if  the  text  be  correct. 
But  strange  as  it  may  appear  to  us  to  speak  of 
the  life  of  the  lifeless,  this  often  happens  among 
the  Semites.  To-day  Arabs  "  swear  wa  hyat, 
'by  the  life  of,'  even  of  things  inanimate;  'By 
the  life  of  this  fire,  or  of  this  coffee.'  "  f  And 
as  Amos  here  tells  us  that  the  Israelite  pilgrims 
swore  by  the  way  to  Beersheba,  so  do  the  Mos- 
lems affirm  their  oaths  by  the  sacred  way  to 
Mecca. 

Thus  Amos  returns  to  the  c'hief  target  of  his 
shafts — the  senseless,  corrupt  worship  of  the  na- 
tional sanctuaries.  And  this  time — perhaps  in  re- 
membrance of  how  they  bad  silenced  the  word 
of  God  when  he  brought  it  home  to  them  at 
Bethel — he  tells  Israel  that,  with  all  t'heir  run- 
ning to  and  fro  across  the  land,  to  shrine  after 
shrine  in  search  of  the  word,  fchey  shall  suffer 
from  a  famine  and  drouth  of  it.  Perhaps  this 
is  the  most  effective  contrast  in  which  Amos  has 
yet  placed  the  stupid  ritualism  of  his  people. 
With  so  many  things  to  swear  by;  with  so  many 
holy  places  that  once  were  the  homes  of  Vision, 
Abraham's  Beersheba,  Jacob's  Bethel,  Joshua's 
Gilgal — nay,  a  whole  land  over  w<hich  God's 
voice  had  broken  in  past  ages,  lavish  as  the 
rain;  with,  too,  all  their  assiduity  of  sacrifice  and 
prayer,  they  should  nevertheless  starve  and  pant 
for  that  living  word  of  the  Lord,  which  they 
had  silenced  in  His  prophet. 

Thus,  men  may  be  devoted  to  religion,  may 
be  loyal  to  their  sacred  traditions  and  institu- 
tions, may  haunt  the  holy  associations  of  the 
past  and  be  very  assiduous  with  their  ritual — 
and  yet,  because  of  their  worldliness,  pride,  and 
disobedience,  never  feel  that  moral  inspiration, 
that  clear  call  to  duty,  that  comfort  in  pain,  that 
hope  in  adversity,  that  good  conscience  at  all 
times,  which  spring  up  in  the  heart  like  living 
water.  W'here  these  be  not  experienced,  ortho- 
doxy, zeal,  lavish  ritual,  are  all  in  vain. 

2.  Nemesis. 

Amos  ix.  1-6. 

There  follows  a  Vision  in  Bethel,  the  opening 
of  which,  "  I  saw  the  Lord,"  immediately  recalls 
the  great  inauguration  of  Isaiah.  He  also  "  saw 
the  Lord";  but  how  different  the  Attitude,  how 
other  the  Word!  To  the  statesman-prophet  the 
Lord  is  enthroned,  surrounded  bv  the  court  of 
heaven;  and  though  the  temple  rocks  to  the  in- 
tolerable thunder  of  their  praise,  they  bring  to 
the  contrite  man  beneath  the  consciousness  of  a 
life-long  mission.  But  to  Amos  t'he  Lord  is 
standing  and  alone — to  this  lonely  prophet  God 
is  always  alone — and  His  message  may  be 
summed  up  in  its  initial  word,  "  Smite."  There 
— Government:  hierarchies  of  service,  embassies, 
clemencies,  healings,  and  though  at  first  devas- 
tation, thereafter  the  indestructible  hope  of  a  fu- 
ture. Here — Judgment:  that  Figure  of  Fate 
which  terror's  fascinated  eye  ever  sees  alone;  one 
final  blow  and  irreparable  ruin.  And  so,  as  with 
Isaiah  we  saw  how  constructive  propihecy  may 
be,  with  Amos  we  be'hold  only  the  preparatory 

maids  be  specially  singled  out  as  swearing  by  Samaria, 
Dan,  and  Beersheba?  These  were  the  oaths  of  the  whole 
people,  to  whom  vv.  n  and  12  refer.  I  see  a  very  clear 
case,  therefore,  for  omitting  v.  13. 

*  LXX.  here  gives  a  mere  repetition  of  the  preceding 
oath. 

t  Doughty  :  "Arabia  Deserta  "  I.  269. 


havoc,  the  levelling  and  clearing  of  the  ground 
of  the  future. 

"  I  have  seen  the  Lord  standing  over  the  Altar, 
and  He  said,  Smite  the  capital  " — of  the  pillar — 
"  that  the  "  very  "  thresholds  *  quake,  and  break 
them  on  the  head  of  all  of  them!  "  It  is  a  shock 
that  makes  the  temple  reel  from  roof-tree  to 
basement.  The  vision  seems  subsequent  to  the 
prophet's  visit  to  Bethel;  and  it  gathers  his  whole 
attack  on  the  national  worsihip  into  one  decisive 
and  irreparable  blow.  "  The  last  of  them  will 
I  slay  with  the  sword:  there  shall  not  flee  away 
of  them  one  fugitive:  there  shall  not  escape  of 
them  a"  single  "survivor!"  Neither  hell  nor 
heaven,  mountain-top  nor  sea-bottom,  shall  har- 
bour one  of  them.  "  If  they  break  through  to 
Sheol,  thence  shall  My  hand  take  them;  and  if 
they  climb  to  heaven,  thence  shall  I  bring  them 
down.  If  they  hide  in  Carmel's  top,  thence  will 
I  find  them  out  and  fetch  them;  and  if  they  con- 
ceal themselves  from  before  Mine  eyes  in  the 
bottom  of  the  sea,  thence  shall  I  charge  the  Ser- 
pent and  he  shall  bite  them;  and  if  they  go  into 
captivity  before  their  foes  " — to  Israel  as  terrible 
a  distance  from  God's  face  as  Sheol  itself! — 
"  thence  will  I  charge  the  sword  and  it  shall  slay 
them;  and  I  will  set  Mine  eye  upon  them  for 
evil  and  not  for  good." 

It  is  a  ruder  draft  of  the  Hundred  and  Thirty- 
Ninth  Psalm;  but  the  Divine  Pursuer  is  Nemesis, 
and  not  Conscience. 

"And  the  Lord,  Jehovah  of  the  Hosts;  Who 
toucheth  the  earth  and  it  melteth,  and  all  its  in- 
habitants mourn,  and  it  rises  like  the  Nile,  all 
of  it  "  together,  "  and  sinks  like  the  Nile  of 
Egypt;  Who  buildeth  His  stories  in  the  heavens, 
and  His  vault  on  the  earth  He  foundeth;  W'ho 
calleth  to  the  waters  of  the  sea  and  poureth  them 
forth  on  the  face  of  the  earth — Jehovah "  of 
Hosts  "is  His  Name."t 

3.  The  Voices  of  Another  Dawn. 
Amos  ix.  7-15. 

And  now  we  are  come  to  the  part  where,  as 
it  seems,  voices  of  another  day  mingle  with  that 
of  Amos,  and  silence  his  judgments  in  the 
c'horus  of  their  unbroken  hope.  At  first,  'how- 
ever, it  is. himself  without  doubt  who  speaks. 
He  takes  up  the  now  familiar  truth,  that  when 
it  comes  to  judgment  for  sin,  Israel  is  no  dearer 
to  Jehovah  than  any  other  people  of  His  equal 
Providence. 

"Are  ye  not  unto  Me,  O  children  of  Israel — 
'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehova'h — just  like  the  children 
of  Kus'hites?"  mere  black  folk  and  far  away! 
"  Did  I  not  bring  up  Israel  from  Egypt,  and 
the  Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  Aram  from 
Kir? "  Mark  again  the  universal  Providence 
which  Amos  proclaims:  it  is  the  due  concomitant 
of  his  universal  morality.  Once  for  all  the  re- 
ligion of  Israel  breaks  from  the  characteristic 
Semitic  belief  that  gave  a  god  to  every  people, 
and  limited  both  his  power  and  'his  interests  to 
that  people's  territory  and  fortunes.  And  if  we 
remember  how  everything  spiritual  in  the  reli- 

*  Since  it  is  the  capital  that  has  been  struck,  and  the 
command  is  given  to  break  "the  thresholds  on  the  head 
of  all  of  them,"  many  translate  "lintels"  or  "archi- 
traves "  instead  of  "  thresholds  («?.  ^.,  Hitzig,  and  Guthe  in 

Kautzsch's"  Bibel  ").    But  the  word  ^''^P  always  means 

thresholds,  and  the  blow  here  is  fundamental. 

t  LXX.  adds  "of  Hosts":  on  the  whole  passage  see 
next  chapter. 


490 


THET  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


gion  of  Israel,  everything  in  its  significance  for 
mankind,  was  rendered  possible  only  because 
at  this  date  it  broke  from  and  abjured  the  par- 
ticularism in  which  it  had  been  born,  we  shall 
feel  some  of  the  Titanic  force  of  the  prophet,  in 
whom  that  break  was  achieved  with  an  absolute- 
ness which  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired.  But  let 
us  also  emphasise  that  it  was  by  no  mere  method 
of  the  intellect  or  observation  of  history  that 
Amos  was  led  to  assert  the  unity  of  the  Divine 
Providence.  The  inspiration  in  this  was  a  moral 
one:  Je'hovah  was  ruler  and  guide  of  all  the 
families  of  mankind,  because  He  was  exalted  in 
righteousness;  and  the  field  in  which  that  right- 
eousness was  proved  and  made  manifest  was  the 
life  and  the  fate  of  Israel.  Therefore  to  this 
Amos  now  turns.  "  Lo,  the  eyes  of  the  Lord 
Jehovah  are  on  the  sinful  kingdom,  and  I  will 
destroy  it  from  the  face  of  the  ground."  In 
other  words,  Jehovah's  sovereignty  over  the 
world  was  not  prq.ved  by  Israel's  conquest  of  the 
latter,  but  by  His  unflinching  application  of  the 
principles  of  righteousness,  at  whatever  cost,  to 
Israel  herself. 

Up  to  this  point,  then,  the  voice  of  Amos  is 
unmistakable,  uttering  the  doctrine,  so  original 
to  him,  that  in  the  judgment  of  God  Israel  shall 
not  be  specially  favoured,  and  the  sentence,  we 
have  heard  so  often  from  him,  of  her  removal 
from  her  land.  Remember,  Amos  has  not  yet 
said  a  word  in  mitigation  of  the  sentence:  up 
to  this  point  of  his  book  it  has  been  presented 
as  inexorable  and  final.  But  now  to  a  statement 
of  it  as  absolute  as  any  that  has  gone  before, 
there  is  suddenly  added  a  qualification:  "never- 
theless I  will  not  utterly  destroy  the  house  of 
Jacob — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah."  And  then 
there  is  added  a  new  picture  of  exile  changed 
from  doom  to  discipline,  a  process  of  sifting  by 
which  only  the  evil  in  Israel,  "  all  the  sinners  of 
My  people,"  shall  perish,  but  not  a  grain  of  the 
good.  "  For,  lo,  I  am  giving  command,  and  I 
will  toss  the  house  of  Israel  among  all  the  na- 
tions, like "  something  "  that  is  tossed  in  a 
sieve,  but  not  a  pebble  *  shall  fall  to  earth.  By 
the  sword  shall  die  all  the  sinners  of  My  people, 
they  w'ho  say,  The  calamity  shall  not  reach  nor 
anticipate  us."t 

Now  as  to  these  qualifications  of  the  hitherto 
unmitigated  judgments  of  the  book,  it  is  to  be 
noted  that  there  is  nothing  in  their  language  to 
lead  us  to  take  them  from  Amos  himself.  On 
the  contrary,  the  last  clause  describes  what  he 
has  always  called  a  characteristic  sin  of  his  day. 
Our  only  difficulties  are  that  hitherto  Amos  has 
never  qualified  his  sentences  of  doom,  and  that 
the  change  now  appears  so  suddenly  that  the 
two  halves  of  the  verse  in  which  it  does  so  abso- 
lutely contradict  each  other.  Read  them  again, 
ver.  8:  "  Lo,  the  eyes  of  the  Lord  Jehovah  are  on 

*  We  should  have  expected  "a  grain,"  but  the   word 

''  'f    only  means  small  stone  :  cf.  2  Sam.  xvii.  13.    The 

LXX.  has  here  o-ui'TptfA/aa,  fracture,  ruin.    Cf.  "  Z.  A.  T. 
W.,"  III.  125. 
t  The  te.Kt  has  been  disturbed  here ;  the  verbs  are  in 

forms  not  possible  to  the  sense.  For  ^  ^}2  read  either 
J^K'rj  with  Hitzig  or  tJ'ari  ^ith  Wellhausen.  ^'''^P?' 
Hiph.,  is  not  impossible  in  an  intransitive  sense,  but 
probably    Wellhausen    is    right    in    reading    Pi,    ^Tlii;  * 

The  reading  IjnV  which  the  Greek  suggests  and  Hoff- 
mann and  Wellhaii  -.'.n  adopt  is  not  so  appropriate  to  the 
preceding  verb  as  IJ^H^fi  of  the  text. 


the  sinful  nation,  and  I  will  destroy  it  from  off 
the  face  of  the  ground — nevertheless  destroying 
I  shall  not  destroy  the  house  of  Jacob:  'tis  the 
oracle  of  Jehovah."  Can  we  believe  the  same 
prophet  to  have  uttered  at  the  same  time  these 
two  statements?  And  is  it  possible  to  believe 
that  prophet  to  be  the  hitherto  imwavering,  un- 
qualifying Amos?  Noting  these  things,  let  us 
pass  to  the  rest  of  the  chapter.  We  break  from 
all  shadows;  the  verses  are  verses  of  pure  hope. 
The  judgment  on  Israel  is  not  averted;  but  hav- 
ing taken  place  her  ruin  is  regarded  as  not 
irreparable. 

"  In  that  day  " — the  day  Amos  has  threatened 
of  overthrow  and  ruin — "  I  will  raise  again  the 
fallen  hut  of  David  and  will  close  up  its  breaches, 
and  his  ruins  I  will  raise,  and  I  will  build  it  up 
as  in  the  days  of  old,*  that  they  may  possess  the 
remnant  of  Edom  and  all  the  nations  upon  whom 
My  Name  has  been  called  " — that  is,  as  once  their 
Possessor — "  'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovalh,  He  who 
is  about  to  do  this.' 

The  "  fallen  hut  of  David  "  undoubtedly  means 
the  fall  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  It  is  not 
language  Amos  uses,  or,  as  it  seems  to  me,  could 
have  used,  of  the  fall  of  the  Northern  Kingdom 
only.f  Again,  it  is  undoubted  that  Amos  con- 
templated the  fall  of  Judah:  this  is  implicit  in 
such  a  phrase  as  "  the  whole  family  that  I 
brought  up  from  Egypt."  %  He  saw  then  "  the 
day"  and  "the  ruins"  of  which  ver.  11  speaks. 
The  only  question  is,  can  we  attribute  to  him  the 
prediction  of  a  restoration  of  these  ruins?  And 
this  is  a  question  which  must  be  answered  in 
face  of  the  facts  that  the  rest  of  his  book  is 
unrelieved  by  a  single  gleam  of  hope,  and  that 
his  threat  of  the  nation's  destruction  is  absolute 
and  final.  Now  it  is  significant  that  in  face  of 
those  facts  Cornill  (though  he  has  changed  his 
opinion)  once  believed  it  was  "  surely  possible 
for  Amos  to  include  restoration  in  his  prospect 
of  ruin,"  as  (he  might  have  added)  other  proph- 
ets undoubtedly  do.  I  confess  I  cannot  so  read- 
ily get  over  the  rest  of  the  book  and  its  gloom; 
and  am  the  less  inclined  to  be  sure  about  these 
verses  being  Amos'  own  that  it  seems  to  ihave 
been  not  unusual  for  later  generations,  for  whom 
the  daystar  was  beginning  to  rise,  to  add  their 
own  inspired  hopes  to  the  unrelieved  threats  of 
their  predecessors  of  the  midnight.  The  mention 
of  Edom  does  not  help  us  much:  in  the  days 
of  Amos  after  the  partial  conquest  by  Uzziaih 
the  promise  of  "  the  rest  of  Edom  "  was  singu- 
larly appropriate.  On  the  other  hand,  what  in- 
terest had  so  purely  ethical  a  prophet  in  the 
mere  addition  of  territory?  To  this  point  we 
shall  'have  to  return  for  our  final  decision.  We 
have  still  the  closing  oracle — a  very  pleasant 
piece  of  music,  as  if  the  birds  had  come  out 
after  the  thunderstorm,  and  the  wet  hills  were 
glistening  in  the  sunshine. 

"  Lo,  days  are  coming — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jeho- 
vah— w'hen  the  ploughman  shall  catch  up  the 
reaper,  and  the  grape-treader  him  that  streweth 
the  seed."  The  seasons  shall  jostle  each  other, 
harvest  foll'owing  hard  upon  seed-time,  vintage 

*The  text  reads  "their  breaches,"  and  some  accord- 
ingly point    J^^D'  "  hut,"  as  if  it  were  the  plural  "  huts  " 

(Hoffmann,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1883,  125;  Schwally,  id.,  iBqo, 
226,  n.  I  ;  Guthe  in  Kautzsch's  "  Bibei  ").  The  LXX.  has 
the  sing.,  and  it  is  easy  to  see  how  the  plur.  fern,  suffix 
may  have  risen  from  confusion  with  the  following  con- 
junction. 

t  This  against  Cornill,  "  Einleitung,"  176. 

f  iii.  I. 


AriK^s  iii,-i.\. 


COMMON-SENSE    AND    THE    REIGN    OF    LAW. 


491 


upon  spring.  It  is  that  "  happy  contention  of 
seasons  "  w'hich  Josephus  describes  as  the  per- 
petual blessing  of  Galilee.*  "  And  the  moun- 
tains shall  drip  with  new  wine,  and  all  the  hills 
shall  flow  down.  And  I  will  bring  back  the  cap- 
tivity of  My  people  I.«rael,  and  they  shall  build  " 
the  "  waste  cities  and  dwell  "  in  t'hcm,  "  and  plant 
vineyards  and  drink  the  wine  thereof,  and  make 
gardens  and  eat  their  fruits.  And  I  will  plant 
them  on  their  own  ground;  and  they  shall  not 
be  uprooted  any  more  from  their  own  ground 
which  I  have  given  to  them,  saith  Jehovah  thy 
God."  t  Again  we  meet  the  difficulty:  does  the 
voice  that  speaks  'here  speak  with  captivity  al- 
ready realised?  or  is  it  the  voice  of  one  who 
projects  himself  forward  to  a  day,  which,  by  the 
oath  of  the  Lord  Himself,  is  certain  to  come? 

We  have  now  surveyed  the  whole  of  this 
much-doubted,  much-defended  passage.  I  have 
stated  fully  the  arguments  on  both  sides.  On  the 
one  hand,  we  have  the  fact  that  nothing  in  the 
language  of  the  verses,  and  nothing  in  their  his- 
torical allusions,  precludes  their  being  by  Amos; 
we  have  also  to  admit  that,  having  threatened 
a  day  of  ruin,  it  was  possible  for  Amos  to  real- 
ise by  his  mind's  eye  its  arrival,  and  standing 
at  that  point  to  see  the  sunshine  flooding  the 
ruins  and  to  prophesy  a  restoration.  In  all  this 
there  is  nothing  impossible  in  itself  or  incon- 
sistent with  the  rest  of  the  book.  On  t'he  other 
hand,  we  have  the  impressive  and  incommensura- 
ble facts:  first,  that  this  change  to  hope  conies 
suddenly,  without  preparation  and  without  state- 
ment of  reasons,  at  the  very  end  of  a  book  whose 
characteristics  are  not  only  a  final  and  absolute 
sentence  of  ruin  upon  the  people,  and  an  outlook 
of  unrelieved  darkness,  but  scornful  discourage- 
ment of  every  popular  vision  of  a  prosperous 
future:  and,  second,  that  the  prophetic  books  con- 
tain numerous  signs  that  later  generations  wove 
their  own  brighter  hopes  into  the  abrupt  and 
hopeless  conclusions  of  prophecies  of  judgment. 

To  this  balance  of  evidence  is  there  anything 
to  add?  I  think  there  is;  and  that  it  decides  the 
question.  All  these  prospects  of  the  future  res- 
toration of  Israel  are  absolutely  without  a  moral 
feature.  They  speak  of  return  from  captivity,  of 
political  restoration,  of  supremacy  over  the  Gen- 
tiles, and  of  a  revived  Nature,  hanging  with 
fruit,  dripping  with  must.  Such  hopes  are  natu- 
ral and  legitimate  to  a  people  who  were  long 
separated  from  their  devastated  and  neglected 
land,  and  whose  punishment  and  penitence  were 
accomplished.  But  they  are  not  natural  to  a 
prophet  like  Amos.  Imagine  him  predicting  a 
future  like  this!  Imagine  him  describing  the 
consummation  of  'his  people's  history,  without 
mentioning  one  of  those  moral  triumphs  to  rally 
his  people  to  which  his  whole  passion  and  energy 
had  been  devoted.  To  me  it  is  impossible  to 
hear  the  voice  that  cried,  "  Let  justice  roll  on 
like  waters  and  righteousness  like  a  perennial 
stream,"  in  a  peroration  which  is  content  to  tell 
of  mountains  dripping  with  must  and  of  a  people 
satisfied  with  vineyards  and  gardens.  These  are 
legitimate  hopes;  but  they  are  the  hopes  of  a 
generation  of  other  conditions  and  of  other 
deserts  than  the  generation  of  Amos. 

*III.  "  Wars,"  X.  8.  With  the  above  verses  of  the  Book 
of  Amos  Lev.  xxvi.  5  has  been  compared  :  "  your  thresh- 
ing shall  reach  to  the  vintage  and  the  vintage  to  the  sow- 
ing time."  But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  either 
of  two  so  natural  passages  depends  on  the  other. 

+  LXX.  "God  of  Hosts." 


If  then  the  gloom  uf  this  great  book  is  turned 
into  lig'ht,  such  a  change  is  not  due  to  Amos. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

COMMON-SENSE  AND  THE  REIGN  OF 
LAW. 

Amos  iii.  3-8;   iv.  6-13;   v.  8,  9;  vi.    12;  viii.  8; 
ix.  5,  6. 

Fools,  when  they  face  facts,  which  is  seldom, 
face  them  one  by  one,  and,  as  a  consequence, 
either  in  ignorant  contempt  or  in  panic.  With 
this  inordinate  folly  Amos  charged  the  religion 
of  his  day.  The  superstitious  people,  careful  of 
every  point  of  ritual  and  very  greedy  of  omens, 
would  not  ponder  real  facts  nor  set  cause  to 
effect.  Amos  recalled  them  to  common  life. 
"  Does  a  bird  fall  upon  a  snare,  except  there  be 
a  loop  on  her?  Does  the  trap  itself  rise  from 
the  ground,  except  it  be  catching  something  " — 
something  alive  in  it  that  struggles,  and  so  lifts 
the  trap?  "  Shall  the  alarum  be  blown  in  a  city, 
and  the  people  not  tremble?"  Daily  life  is  im- 
possible without  putting  two  and  two  together. 
But  this  is  just  what  Israel  will  not  do  with  the 
sacred  events  of  their  time.  To  religion  they 
will  not  add  common-sense. 

For  Amos  himself,  all  things  w'hich  happen  are 
in  sequence  and  in  sympathy.  He  has  seen  this 
in  the  simple  life  of  the  desert;  he  is  sure  of  it 
throughout  the  tangle  and  hubbub  of  history. 
One  thing  explains  another;  one  makes  another 
inevitable.  When  'he  has  illustrated  the  truth 
in  common  life,  Amos  claims  it  for  especially 
four  of  the  great  facts  of  the  time.  T'he  sins  of 
society,  of  which  society  is  careless;  the  physical 
calamities,  which  they  survive  and  forget;  the 
approach  of  Assyria,  which  they  ignore;  the  word 
of  the  prophet,  w'hich  they  silence, — all  these  be- 
long to  eac'h  other.  Drought,  Pestilence,  Earth- 
quake, Invasion  conspire — and  the  Prophet  holds 
their  secret. 

Now  it  is  true  that  for  the  most  part  Amos 
describes  this  sequence  of  events  as  the  personal 
action  of  Jehovah.  "  Shall  evil  befall,  and  Jeho- 
vah not  have  done  it?  ...  I  have  smitten  you. 
...  I  will  raise  up  against  you  a  Nation.  .  .  . 
Prepare  to  meet  thy  God,  O  Israel!  "  *  Yet  even 
where  the  personal  impulse  of  the  Deity  is  thus 
emphasised,  we  feel  equal  stress  laid  upon  the 
order  and  the  inevitable  certainty  of  the  process. 
Amos  nowhere  uses  Isaiah's  great  phrase:  "a 
God  of  Mishpat,"  a  "  God  of  Order  "  or  "  Law." 
But  he  means  almost  the  same  thing:  God  works 
by  methods  which  irresistibly  fulfil  themselves. 
Nay  more.  Sometimes  this  sequence  sweeps 
upon  the  prophet's  mind  with  such  force  as  to 
overwhelm  all  his  sense  of  the  Personal  within  it. 
The  Will  and  the  Word  of  the  God  who  causes 
the  thing  are  crushed  out  by  the  "  Must  Be  " 
of  the  thing  itself.  Take  even  the  descriptions 
of  those  historical  crises,  which  the  prophet  most 
explicitly  proclaims  as  the  visitations  of  the  Al- 
mighty. In  some  of  the  verses  all  thought  of 
God  Himself  is  lost  in  the  roar  and  foam  with 
which  that  tide  of  necessitj'  bursts  up  through 
them.  The  fountains  of  the  great  deep  break 
loose,  and  while  the  universe  trembles  to  the 
shock,  it  seems  that  even  the  voice  of  the  Deity 
is    overwhelmed.     In    one    passage,    immediately 

*  iii.  6  b\  iv.  9  ;  vi.  14  ;  iv.  12  b. 


492 


THE  "BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


after  describing  Israel's  ruin  as  due  to  Jehovah's 
word,  Amos  asks  how  could  it  have  happened 
otherwise: — 

"  Shall  horses  run  up  a  cliff,  or  oxen  plough 
the  sea?  that  ye  turn  justice  into  poison,  and  the 
fruit  of  righteousness  into  wormwood."  *  A 
moral  order  exists,  which  it  is  as  impossible  to 
break  without  disaster  as  it  would  be  to  break 
the  natural  order  by  driving  horses  upon  a  preci- 
pice. There  is  an  inherent  necessity  in  the  sin- 
ners' doom.  Again,  he  says  of  Israel's  sin: 
"  Shall  not  the  Land  tremble  for  this?  Yea,  it 
shall  rise  up  together  like  the  Nile,  and  heave 
and  sink  like  the  Nile  of  Egypt."  f  The  crimes 
of  Israel  are  so  intolerable,  that  in  its  own  might 
the  natural  frame  of  things  revolts  against  them. 
In  these  great  crises,  therefore,  as  in  the  simple 
instances  adduced  from  everyday  life,  Amos  had 
a  sense  of  what  we  call  law,  distinct  from,  and 
for  moments  even  overwhelming,  that  sense  of 
the  personal  purpose  of  God,  admission  to  the 
secrets  of  which  had  marked  his  call  to  be  a 
prophet.t 

These  instincts  we  must  not  exaggerate  into  a 
system.  There  is  no  philosophy  in  Amos,  nor 
need  we  wish  there  were.  Far  more  instructive 
is  what  we  do  find — a  virgin  sense  of  the  sympa- 
thy of  all  things,  the  thrill  rather  than  the  the- 
ory of  a  universe.  And  this  faith,  which  is  not 
a  philosophy,  is  especially  instructive  on  these 
two  points:  that  it  springs  from  the  moral  sense; 
and  that  it  embraces,  not  history  only,  but 
nature. 

It  springs  from  the  moral  sense.  Other  races 
have  arrived  at  a  conception  of  the  universe 
along  other  lines:  some  by  the  observation  of 
physical  laws  valid  to  the  recesses  of  space;  some 
by  logic  and  the  unity  of  Reason.  But  Israel 
found  the  universe  through  the  conscience.  It 
is  a  historical  fact  that  the  Unity  of  God,  the 
Unity  of  History,  and  the  Unity  of  the  World, 
did,  in  this  order,  break  upon  Israel,  through 
conviction  and  experience  of  the  universal  sov- 
ereignty of  righteousness.  We  see  the  begin- 
nings of  the  process  in  Amos.  To  him  the  se- 
quences which  work  themselves  out  through  his- 
tory and  across  nature  are  moral.  Righteous- 
ness is  the  hinge  on  which  the  world  hangs; 
loosen  it.  and  history  and  nature  feel  the  shock. 
History  punishes  the  sinful  nation.  But  nature, 
too,  groans  beneatih  the  guilt  of  man;  and  in  the 
Drought,  the  Pestilence,  and  the  Earthquake 
provides  his  scourges.  It  is  a  belief  which  has 
stamped  itself  upon  the  language  of  mankind. 
What  else  is  "  plague "  than  "  blow "  or 
"  scourge  "? 

This  brings  us  to  the  second  point — our  proph- 
et's treatment  of  Nature. 

Apart  from  the  disputed  passages  (which  we 
s'hall  take  afterwards  by  themselves)  we  have  in 
the  Book  of  Amos  few  glimpses  of  nature,  and 
these  always  under  a  moral  light.  There  is  not 
in  any  chapter  a  landscape  visible  in  its  own 
beauty.  Like  all  desert-dwellers,  who  when  they 
would  praise  the  works  of  God  lift  their  eyes  to 
the  heavens,  Amos  gives  us  but  the  outlines  of 
the  earth — a  mountain  range, ^  or  the  crest  of  a 
forest,!  or  the  bare  back  of  the  land,  bent  from 
sea  to  sea.U  Nearly  all  his  figures  are  drawn 
from  the  desert — the  torrent,  the  wild  beasts,  the 

*  Vi.   12. 

+  viii.  8. 

tiii.  7  :  "Jehovah  God  doeth  nothing,  but  He  hath  re- 
vealed His  secret  to  His  servants  the  prophets." 
S  i.  2  ;  iii.  9  ;  ix.  3.  1|  ii.  9.  \  viii.  12. 


wormwood.*  If  he  visits  the  meadows  of  the 
shephert's,  it  is  with  the  terror  of  the  people's 
doom;t  if  the  vineyards  or  orchards,  it  is  with 
the  mildew  and  the  locust ;t  if  the  towns,  it  is 
with  drought,  eclipse,  and  earthquake. >  To  him, 
unlike  his  fellows,  unlike  especially  Rosea,  the 
whole  land  is  one  theatre  of  judgment;  but  it  is 
a  theatre  trembling  to  its  foundations  with  the 
drama  enacted  upon  it.  Nay,  land  and  nature 
are  themselves  actors  in  the  drama.  Physical 
forces  are  inspired  with  moral  purpose,  and  be- 
come the  ministers  of  righteousness.  This  is 
the  converse  of  Elijah's  vision.  To  the  older 
prophet  the  message  came  that  God  was  not  in 
the  fire  nor  in  the  earthquake  nor  in  the  tem- 
pest, but  only  in  the  still  small  voice.  But  to 
Amos  the  fire,  the  earthquake,  and  the  tempest 
are  all  in  alliance  with  the  Voice,  and  execute  the 
doom  which  it  utters.  The  difference  will  be 
appreciated  by  us,  if  we  remember  the  respective 
problems  set  to  prophecy  in  tjhose  two  periods. 
To  Elijah,  prophet  of  the  elements,  wild  worker 
by  fire  and  water,  by  life  and  death,  the  spiritual 
had  to  be  asserted  and  enforced  by  itself.  Es- 
static  as  he  was,  Elijah  had  to  learn  that  the 
Word  is  more  Divine  than  all  physical  violence 
and  terror.  But  Amos  understood  that  for  his 
age  the  question  was  very  different.  Not  only 
was  the  God  of  Israel  dissociated  from  the  pow- 
ers of  nature,  which  were  assigned  by  the  popu- 
lar mind  to  the  various  Ba'alim  of  the  land,  so 
that  there  was  a  divorce  between  His  govern- 
ment of  the  people  and  the  influences  that  fed  the 
people's  life;  but  morality  itself  was  conceived 
as  provincial.  It  was  narrowed  to  the  national 
interests:  it  was  summed  up  in  mere  rules  of 
police,  and  these  were  looked  upon  as  not  so 
important  as  the  observances  of  the  ritual. 
Therefore  Amos  was  driven  to  show  tihat  nature 
and  morality  are  one.  Morality  is  not  a  set  of 
conventions.  "  Morality  is  the  order  of  things." 
Righteousness  is  on  the  scale  of  the  universe. 
All  things  tremble  to  the  shock  of  sin;  all  things 
work  together  for  good  to  them  that  fear  God. 

With  this  sense  of  law,  of  moral  necessity,  in 
Amos  we  must  not  fail  to  connect  that  absence 
of  all  appeal  to  miracle,  which  is  also  conspicu- 
ous in  his  book. 

We  come  now  to  the  three  disputed  pas- 
sages:— 

iv.  13: — "  For,  lo!  He  Who  formed  the  hills,|| 
and  createth  the  wind,1I  and  declareth  to  man 
what  His**  mind  is;  Who  maketh  the  dawn  into 
darkness,  and  marcheth  on  the  heights  of  the 
land — ^Jehovah,  God  of  Hosts,  is  His  Name." 

v.  8,  9: — "  Maker  of  the  Pleiades  and  Orion, ft 
turning  to  morning  the  murk,  and  day  into 
night  He  darkeneth;  Who  calleth  for  the  waters 
of  the  sea,  and  pouret'h  them  forth  on  the  face 
of  the  earth — Jehovah  His  Name;  Who  flasheth 
ruin  on  the  strong,  and  destruction  cometh  down 
on  the  fortress."  tt 

ix.  5,  6: — "  And  the  Lord  Jehovah  of  the 
Hosts,  Who  toucheth  the  earth  and  it  rocketh, 
and  all  mourn  that  dwell  on  it,  and  it  riseth  like 
the  Nile  together,  and  sinketh  like  the  Nile  of 
Egypt;  Who  hath  builded  in  the  heavens  His 
ascents,  and  founded  His  vault  upon  the  earth; 

♦v.  24  ;  19,  20,  etc.;  7  ;  vi.  12.      §iv.  6-ii;vi    n  ;  viii.  8  ff. 
fi.  2.  1  LXX.  "the  thunder." 

tiv.  9  ff.  1  Or  "spirit." 

**/.  f.,  "  God's  ;  "  a  more  natural  rendering  than  to  take 
"  his  "  (as  Hitzig  does)  as  meaning  "  man's.  '^ 
t+See  above,  pp.  484  f.  n. 
X%  Text  of  last  clause  uncertain  ;  see  above,  p.  484. 


Amos  iii  -ix.] 


COMMON-SENSE    AND    THE    REIGN    OF    LAW. 


493 


Who  calleth  to  the  waters  of  the  sea,  and  poureth 
them  on  the  face  of  the  earth — Jehovah  *  His 
Name." 

These  sublime  passages  it  is  natural  to  take 
as  the  triple  climax  of  the  doctrine  we  have 
traced  through  the  Book  of  Amos.  Are  they 
not  the  natural  leap  of  the  soul  to  the  stars? 
The  same  shepherd's  eye  which  has  marked  se- 
quence and  effect  unfailing  on  the  desert  soil, 
does  it  not  now  sweep  the  clear  heavens  above 
the  desert,  and  find  there  also  all  things  ordered 
and  arrayed?  The  same  mind  which  traced  the 
Divine  processes  down  history,  which  foresaw 
the  hosts  of  Assyria  marshalled  for  Israel's  pun- 
ishment, which  felt  the  overthrow  of  justice 
shock  the  nation  to  their  ruin,  and  read  the  dis- 
asters of  the  husbandman's  year  as  the  vindica- 
tion of  a  law  higher  than  the  physical — does  it 
not  now  naturally  rise  beyond  such  instances  of 
the  Divine  order,  round  which  the  dust  of  his- 
tory rolls,  to  the  lofty,  undimmed  outlines  of 
the  Universe  as  a  w'hole,  and,  in  consummation 
of  its  message,  declare  that  "  all  is  Law,"  and 
Law  intelligible  to  man? 

But  in  the  way  of  so  attractive  a  conclusion 
the  literary  criticism  of  the  book  has  interposed. 
It  is  maintained!  that,  while  none  of  these  sub- 
lime verses  are  indispensable  to  the  argument 
of  Amos,  some  of  them  actually  interrupt  it,  so 
that  when  they  are  removed  it  becomes  con- 
sistent; that  such  ejaculations  in  praise  of  Je- 
hovah's creative  power  are  not  elsewhere  met 
with  in  Hebrew  prophecy  before  the  time  of  the 
Exile;  that  they  sound  very  like  echoes  of  the 
Book  of  Job;  and  that  in  the  Seotuagint  version 
of  Hosea  we  actually  find  a  similar  doxology, 
wedged  into  the  middle  of  an  authentic  verse  of 
the  prophet.t  To  these  arguments  against  the 
genuineness  of  the  three  famous  passages,  other 
critics,  not  less  able  and  not  less  free,  like  Rob- 
ertson Smith  and  Kuenen,§  have  replied  that 
such  ejaculations  at  critical  points  of  the  proph- 
et's discourse  "  are  not  surprising  under  the  gen- 
eral conditions  of  prophetic  oratory";  and  that, 
while  one  of  the  doxologies  does  appear  to  break 
the  argument  ||  of  the  context,  they  are  all  of 
them  thoroughly  in  the  spirit  and  the  style  of 
Amos.  To  this  point  the  discussion  has  been 
carried;  it  seems  to  need  a  closer  examination. 

We  may  at  once  dismiss  the  argument  which 
has  been  drawn  from  that  obvious  intrusion  into 
the  Greek  of  Hosea  xiii.  4.  Not  only  is  this 
verse  not  so  suited  to  the  doctrine  of  Hosea 
as  the  doxologies  are  to  the  doctrine  of 
Amos;  but  while  they  are  definite  and  sub- 
lime, it  is  formal  and  flat — "  Who  made  firm 
the  heavens  and  founded  the  earth.  Whose 
hands  founded  all  the  host  of  heaven,  and  He 
did  not  display  them  that  thou  shouldest  walk 
after  them."  The  passages  in  Amos  are  vision; 
this  is  a  piece  of  catechism  crumbling  into 
homily. 

Again — an  argument  in  favour  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  these  passages  may  be  drawn  from  the 
character  of  their  subjects.  We  have  seen  the 
part  which  the  desert  played  in  shaping  the  tem- 
per and  the  style  of  Amos.     But  the  works  of  the 

♦  LXX.  "  Jehovah  of  Hosts." 

+  First  in  18715  by  Duhm,  "  Theol.  der  Proph.,"  p.  iig; 
and  after  him  by  Oort,  "Theol.  Tjidschrift.,"  1880.  pp. 
116  f.;  Wellhausen,  in  locis  :  Stade  "Gesch.,"  I.  571 ;  Cor- 
nill,  "  Einletung,"  176. 

t  Hosea  xiii.  4. 

S Smith,  "Prophets  of  Israel,"  p.  399;  Kuenen,  "Hist. 
Krit.  Einl."     (Germ.  Ed.),  II.  347. 

I  V.  8,  9. 


Creator,  to  which  these  passages  lift  their  praise, 
are  just  those  most  fondly  dwelt  upon  by  all  the 
poetry  of  the  desert.  The  Arabian  nomad,  when 
he  magnifies  the  power  of  God,  finds  his  subjects 
not  on  the  bare  earth  about  him,  but  in  the 
brilliant  heavens  and  the  heavenly  processes. 

Again,  the  critic  who  affirms  that  the  passages 
in  Amos  "  in  every  case  sensibly  disturb  the 
connection,"*  exaggerates.  In  the  case  of  the 
first  of  them,  chap.  iv.  13,  the  disturbance  is  not 
at  all  "sensible";  though  it  must  be  admitted 
that  the  oracle  closes  impressively  enough  with- 
out it.  The  last  of  them,  chap.  ix.  5,  6 — which 
repeats  a  clause  already  found  in  the  book  f — 
is  as  much  in  sympathy  with  its  context  as  most 
of  the  oracles  in  the  somewhat  scattered  dis- 
course of  that  last  section  of  the  book.  The  real 
difficulty  is  the  second  doxology,  chap.  v.  8,  9, 
which  does  break  the  connection,  and  in  a  sud- 
den and  violent  way.  Remove  it,  and  the  argu- 
ment is  consistent.  We  cannot  read  chap.  v. 
without  feeling  that,  whether  Amos  virrote  these 
verses  or  not,  they  did  not  originally  stand 
where  they  stand  at  present. 

Now,  taken  with  this  dispensableness  of  two 
of  the  passages  and  this  obvious  intrusion  of 
one  of  them,  the  following  additional  fact  be- 
comes ominous.  "  Jehovah  is  His  Name " 
(which  occurs  in  two  of  the  passages),t  or  "  Jt- 
hovah  of  Hosts  is  His  Name  "  (w^ich  occurs  at 
least  in  one),§  is  a  construction  which  does  not 
happen  elsewhere  in  the  book,  except  in  a  verse 
where  it  is  awkward  and  where  we  have  already 
seen  reason  to  doubt  its  genuineness.!  But  still 
more,  the  phrase  does  not  occur  in  any  other 
prophet,  till  we  come  down  to  the  oracles  which 
compose  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  Here  it  happens  thrice 
— twice  in  passages  dating  from  the  Exile.TI  and 
once  in  a  passage  suspected  by  some  to  be  of 
still  later  date.**  In  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  the 
phrase  is  found  eight  times;  but  either  in  pas- 
sages already  on  other  grounds  judged  by  many 
critics  to  be  later  than  Jeremiah, ft  or  where  by 
itself  it  is  probably  an  intrusion  into  the  text.Jt 
Now  is  it  a  mere  coincidence  that  a  phrase, 
which,  outside  the  Book  of  Amos,  occurs  only  in 
writing  of  the  time  of  the  Exile  and  in  passages 
considered  for  other  reasons  to  be  post-exilic 
insertions — is  it  a  mere  coincidence  that  within 
the  Book  of  Amos  it  should  again  be  found  only 
in  suspected  verses? 

There  appears  to  be  in  this  more  than  a  coin- 
cidence; and  the  present  writer  cannot  but  feel 
a  very  strong  case  against  the  traditional  belief 
that  these  doxologies  are  original  and  integral 
portions  of  the  Book  of  Amos.  At  the  same 
time  a  case  which  has  failed  to  convince  critics 
like  Robertson  Smith  and  Kuenen  cannot  be 
considered  conclusive,  and  we  are  so  ignorant  of 
many  of  the  conditions  of  prophetic  oratory  at 
this  period  that  dogmatism  is  impossible.  For 
instance,  the  use  by  Amos  of  the  Divine  titles 
is  a  matter  over  which  uncertainty  still  lingers; 

♦Cornill,  "Einl.,"  176. 

+  Cf.  viii.  8. 

$  V.  8  ;  ix.  6,  though  here  LXX.  rdad  "  Jehovah  of  Hosts 
is  His  Name." 

§iv.  13.     See  previous  note. 

II  V.  27.    See  above,  pp.  485  f.  n.:  cf.  Hosea  xii.  6. 

S  xlvii.  4  and  liv.  s. 

**  xlviii.  2  :  cf.  Duhm,  in  loco,  and  Cheyne,  "Introduc- 
tion to  the  Hook  of  Isaiah,"  301. 

+t  X  16;  xxxi.3!;;  xxxii.  18;  1.  •?4  (perhaps  a  quotation 
from  Isa.  xlvii    4)  ;  li    iq,  57. 

t?:xlvi.  18,  where  the  words  '\>yi;  niN3V  fail  in  LXX.; 
xlviii.  IS  b,  where  the  clause  in  which  it  occurs  is  wanting 
in  the  LXX. 


494 


THETBOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and  any  further  argument  on  the  subject  must 
include  a  fuller  discussion  than  space  here  al- 
lows of  the  remarkable  distribution  of  those 
titles  throughout  the  various  sections  of  the 
book.* 

But  if  it  be  not  given  to  us  to  prove  this  kind 
of  authenticity — a  question  whose  data  are  so 
obscure,  yet  whose  answer  frequently  is  of  so 
little  significance — let  us  gladly  welcome  that 
greater  Authenticity  whose  undeniable  proofs 
these  verses  so  splendidly  exhibit.  No  one 
questions  their  right  to  the  place  which  some 
great  spirit  gave  them  in  this  book — their  suita- 
bleness to  its  grand  and  ordered  theme,  their 
pure  vision  and  their  eternal  truth.  That  com- 
mon-sense, and  that  conscience,  which,  moving 
among  the  events  of  earth  and  all  the  tangled 
processes  of  history,  find  everywhere  reason  and 
righteousness  at  work,  in  these  verses  claim  the 
Universe  for  the  same  powers,  and  see  in  stars 
and  clouds  and  the  procession  of  day  and  nig'ht 
the  One  Eternal  God  Who  "  declareth  to  man 
what  His  mind  is." 


HOSEA. 

'  For  leal  love  have  I  desired  and  not  sacrifice 
And  the  knowledge  of  God  rather  than  burnt-offerings." 


posed,*  the  argument  is  continuous.  In  the 
Second  Section,  on  the  contrary,  we  have  a 
stream  of  addresses  and  reflections,  appeals,  up- 
braidings,  sarcasms,  recollections  of  earlier  his- 
tory, denunciations  and  promises,  which,  with 
little  logical  connection  and  almost  no  pauses  or 
periods,  start  impulsively  from  each  other,  and 
for  a  large  part  are  expressed  in  elliptic  and 
ejaculatory  phrases.  In  the  present  restlessness 
of  Biblical  Criticism  it  would  have  been  surprising 
if  this  difference  of  style  had  not  prompted  some 
minds  to  a  difference  of  authorship.  Gratzf  has 
distinguished  two  Hoseas,  separated  by  a  period 
of  fifty  years.  But  if,  as  we  shall  see,  the  First 
Section  reflects  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam 
II.,  who  died  about  743,  then  the  next  few  years, 
with  their  revolutionary  changes  in  Israel,  are 
sufficient  to  account  for  the  altered  outlook  of 
the  Second  Section;  while  the  altered  style  is 
fully  explained  by  difference  of  occasion  and 
motive.  In  both  sections  not  only  are  the  reli- 
gious principles  identical,  and  many  of  the 
characteristic  expressions,  i  but  there  breathes 
throughout  the  same  urgent  and  jealous  temper 
which  renders  Hosea's  personality  so  distinctive 
among  the  prophets.  Within  this  unity,  of 
course,  we  must  not  be  surprised  to  find,  as  in 
the  Book  of  Amos,  verses  which  cannot  well  be 
authentic. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE  BOOK  OF  HOSEA. 

The  Book  of  Hosea  consists  of  two  unequal 
sections,  chaps,  i.-iii.  and  chaps,  iv.-xiv.,  which 
differ  in  the  dates  of  their  standpoints,  to  a 
large  extent  also  in  the  details  of  their  common 
subjects,  but  still  more  largely  in  their  form  and 
style.  The  First  Section  is  the  main  narrative; 
though  the  style  rises  to  the  pitch  of  passionate 
pleading  and  promise,  it  is  fluent  and  equable. 
If  one  verse  be  omitted  and  three  others  trans- 


*  But  I  have  room  at  least  for  a  bare  statement  of  these 
remarkable  facts : 

The  titles  for  the  God  of  Israel  used  in  the  Book  of 
Amos  are  these  :  (i)  "Thy  God,  O  Israel,"  pXIK^'  TTl^K; 
(2)  "Jehovah,  nin^  (3)  "Lord  Jehovah,"  ni.T  ""inN;  (4) 
"  Lord  Jehovah  of  the  Hosts,"  niH'  ^JIN  niN2V  ;  (5) 
"  Jehovah  God  of  Hosts  "  or  "  of  the  Hosts,"  J^^^^V  TI^K 

nin"'orniKnvn. 

Now  in  the  First  Section,  chaps,  i.,  ii.,  it  is  interesting 
that  we  find  none  of  the  variations  which  are  com- 
pounded with  "  Hosts,"  niXS^.  By  itself  niH^  (espe- 
cially in  the  phrase  "Thus  saith  Jehovah,"  ")0X  HS  nin'') 
is  general ;  and  once  only  (i.  8)  is  "  Lord  Jehovah  "  em- 
ployed.     The  phrase,   "oracle  of  Jehovah,"  '''''    '^^?' 

is  also  rare  ;  it  occurs  only  twice  (ii.  11,  16),  and  then  only 
in  the  passage  dealing  with  Israel,  and  not  at  all  in  the 
oracles  against  foreign  nations. 

In  Sections  II.  and  III.  the  simple  niiT'  is  again  most 
frequently  used.  But <  we  find  also  "Lord  Jehovah," 
niiT  ^JIX  (iii-  7,  8 ;  iv.  2,  5 ;  v.  3,  with  mn'  alone  in  the 
parallel  ver  4 ;  vi.  8;  vii.  i,  2,  4  di's,  5,  6;  viii.  i,  3,  q,  11), 
used  either  indifferently  with  nin^  ;  or  in  verses  where  it 
seems  more  natural  to  emphasise  the  sovereignty  of  Je- 
hovah than  His  simple  Name  (as,  e.  g:,  where  "  He 
swears,"  iv.  2,  vi.  8,  yet  when  the  same  phrase  occurs  in 
viii.  7  mn''  alone  is  used)  ;  or  in  the  solemn  Visions  of  the 
Third  Section  (but  not  in  the  Narrative)  ;  and  sometimes 
we  find  in  the  Visions  "  Lord,"  ^JTK,  alone  without  niiT 
(vii.  7,  8 ;  ix.  i).    The  titles  containing  n"lN32f  or  DIK^X 


First  Section:  Hosea's  Prophetic  Life. 

With  the  removal  of  some  of  the  verses  the 
argument  becomes  clear  and  consecutive.  After 
the  story  of  the  wife  and  children  (i.  2-9),  who 
are  symbols  of  the  land  and  people  of  Israel  in 
their  apostasy  from  God  (2,  4,  6,  9),  the  Divine 
voice  calls  on  the  living  generation  to  plead  with 
their  mother  lest  destruction  come  (ii.  2-5,  Eng. ; 
ii.  4-7,  Heb.§),  but  then  passes  definite  sentence 
of  desolation  on  the  land  and  of  exile  on  the 
people  (6-13,  Eng.;  8-15,  Heb.),  which,  however, 
is  not  final  doom,  but  discipline,!  with  the  ulti- 
mate promise  of  the  return  of  the  nation's  youth, 
their  renewed  betrothal  to  Jehovah  and  the  res- 
toration of  nature  (14-23).  Then  follows  the 
story  of  the  prophet's  restoration  of  his  wife, 
also  with  discipline  (chap.  iii.). 

Notice  that,  although  the  story  of  the  wife's 
fall  has  preceded  the  declaration  of  Israel's 
apostasy,  it  is  Israel's  restoration  which  precedes 
the  wife's.  The  ethical  significance  of  this  order 
we  shall  illustrate  in  the  next  chapter. 

In  this  section  the  disturbing  verses  are  i.  7 

^n?N  occur  m'ne  times.  Of  these  _five  are  in  passages 
which  we  have  seen  other  reasons  to  suppose  are 
insertions :    two  of  the  Doxologies— iv.   13,  JT1X3V  ^tlhn 

ninv  and  ix.  5,  niNavn  nirr'  ""jin  on  addition  the  lxx. 

read  in  ix.  6  niN3X  niH^).  and  in  v.  14,  15  (see  p.  484)  and 
27  (see  p.  4B5),  in  all  three  mN3V  Tli'N  r['\n\  The  four 
genuine  passages  are  iii.  13,  where  we  find  JTiXiVH  TI^N 
nin^   preceded   by   ^JTK  I    v.  16,    where  we   have   niX3V 

''iiha  mn""  fonowed  by  >j^x  ;  v'-  s.  m^n  nin""  mxav, 

and  vi.  14,  mXiiV  ^H^N  HliT,    Throughout  the  last  two 

sections  of  the  book  ^^^  is  used  with  all  these  forms  of 

the  Divine  title. 

*  See  below,  pp.  491;  f. 

t  "Geschichte,"  pp.  93  ff.,  214  ff.,  439  f. 

t  A  list  of  the  more  obvious  is  given  by  Kuenen,  p.  334. 

I  The  first  chapter  in  the  Hebrew  closes  with  ver.  9. 

Ii  C/.  this  with  Amos  ;  above,  pp.  490  ff. 


THE    BOOK   OF    HOSEA. 


495 


and  the  group  of  three — i.  lo,  ii,  ii.  i  (Eng.; 
but  ii.  1-3  Heb.).  Chap.  i.  7  introduces  Judah  as 
excepted  from  the  curse  passed  upon  Israel;  it 
is  so  obviously  intrusive  in  a  prophecy  dealing 
only  with  Israel,  and  it  so  clearly  reflects  the 
deliverance  of  Judah  from  Sennacherib  in  701, 
that  we  cannot  hold  it  for  anything  but  an  inser- 
tion of  a  date  subsequent  to  that  deliverance,  and 
introduced  by  a  pious  Jew  to  signalise  Judah's 
fate  in  contrast  with  Israel's.* 

The  other  three  verses  (i.  10,  11,  ii.  i,  Eng.;  ii. 
1-3,  Heb.)  introduce  a  promise  of  restoration  be- 
fore the  sentence  of  judgment  is  detailed,  or  any 
ethical  conditions  of  restoration  are  stated.  That 
is,  they  break  and  tangle  an  argument  otherwise 
consistent  and  progressive  from  beginning  to 
end  of  the  Section.  Every  careful  reader  must 
feel  them  out  of  place  where  they  lie.  Their 
awkwardness  has  been  so  much  appreciated  that, 
while  in  the  Hebrew  text  they  have  been  sepa- 
rated from  chap,  i.,  in  the  Greek  they  have  been 
separated  from  chap.  ii.  That  is  to  say,  some 
have  felt  they  have  no  connection  with  what 
precedes  them,  others  none  with  what  follows 
them;  while  our  English  version,  by  distributing 
them  between  the  two  chapters,  only  makes  more 
sensible  their  superfluity.  If  they  really  belong  to 
the  prophecy,  their  proper  place  is  after  the  last 
verse  of  chap,  ii.f  This  is  actually  the  order  in 
which  part  of  it  and  part  of  them  are  quoted  by 
St.  Paul.  I  At  the  same  time,  when  so  arranged, 
they  repeat  somewhat  awkwardly  the  language 
of  ii.  23,  and  scarcely  form  a  climax  to  the  chap- 
ter. There  is  nothing  in  their  language  to  lead 
us  to  doubt  that  they  are  Hosea's  own;  and  ver. 
II  shows  that  they  must  have  been  written  at 
least  before  the  captivity  of  Northern  Israel.^ 

The  only  other  suspected  clause  in  this  sec- 
tion is  that  in  iii.  5,  "  and  David  their  king;"  || 
but  if  it  be  struck  out  the  verse  is  rendered  awk- 
ward, if  not  impossible,  by  the  immediate  repeti- 
tion of  the  Divine  name,  which  would  not  have 
been  required  in  the  absence  of  the  suspected 
clause.lF 

The  text  of  the  rest  of  the  section  is  remark- 
ably free  from  obscurities.  The  Greek  version 
offers  few  variants,  and  most  of  these  are  due 
to  mistranslation.**  In  iii.  i  for  "  loved  of  a 
husband  "  it  reads  "  loving  evil." 

Evidently  this  section  was  written  before  the 
death  of  Jeroboam  II.  The  house  of  Jehu  still 
reigns;  and  as  Hosea  predicts  its  fall  by  war  on 
the  classic  battle-ground  of  Jezreel,  the  prophecy 
must  have  been  written  before  the  actual  fall, 
which  took  the  form  of  an  internal  revolt  against 
Zechariah,    the    son    of    Jeroboam.     With    this 

*  Konig's  arguments  ("  Einleitung,"  309)  in  favour  of 
ihe  possibility  of  the  genuineness  of  the  verse  do  not 
peem  to  me  to  be  conclusive.  He  thinks  the  verse  ad- 
missible because  Judah  had  sinned  less  than  Israel  ; 
the  threat  in  vv.  4-6  is  limited  to  Israel  ;  the  phrase 
"Jehovah  their  God  "  is  so  peculiar  that  it  is  difficult  to 
assign  it  to  a  mere  expander  of  the  text ;  and  if  it  was  a 
later  hand  that  put  in  the  verse,  why  did  he  not  alter  the 
judgments  against  Judaea,  which  occur  further  on  in  the 
book  ? 

t  So  Cheyne  and  others,  Kuenen  adhering.  Konig 
agrees  that  they  have  been  removed  from  their  proper 
place  and  the  te.xt  corrupted. 

tRom.  ix.  25,  26,  which  first  give  the  end  of  Hosea  ii.  23 
(Heb.  25),  and  then  the  end  of  i.  10  (Heb.  ii.  2).    See  below, 
p.  504,  n. 
8721  B.  C. 

II  Stade,   "Gesch.,"  I.  577;  Cornill,  "  Einleitung,"  who 
I    also  would  exclude  "  no  king  and  no  prince,"  in  iii.  4. 
I        ^This  objection,  however,  does  not  hold  against  the 
j    removal  of  merely  ""and  David,"  leaving  "their  king." 
I        **  ii.  7,  II,  14,  17  (Heb.).     In  i.  4  B-text  reads  'louia  for 
I     KVl^  while  Qniq  have  'Itjov. 


agrees  the  tone  of  the  section.  There  are  the 
same  evils  in  Israel  which  Amos  exposed  in  the 
prosperous  years  of  the  same  reign;  but  Hosea 
appears  to  realise  the  threatened  exile  from  a 
nearer  standpoint.  It  is  probable  also  that  part 
of  the  reason  of  his  ability  to  see  his  way  through 
the  captivity  to  the  people's  restoration  is  due 
to  a  longer  familiarity  with  the  approach  of  cap- 
tivity than  Amos  experienced  before  he  wrote. 
But,  of  course,  for  Hosea's  promise  of  restora- 
tion there  were,  as  we  shall  see,  other  and  greater 
reasons  of  a  religious  kind.* 

Second    Section:    Chaps.    IV.-XIV. 

When  we  pass  into  these  chapters  we  feel  that 
the  times  are  changed.  The  dynasty  of  Jehu  has 
passed:  kings  are  falling  rapidly:  Israel  devours 
its  rulers:!  there  is  no  loyalty  to  the  king;  he  is 
suddenly  cut  ofF;t  all  the  princes  are  revolters.§ 
Round  so  despised  and  so  unstable  a  throne  the 
nation  tosses  in  disorder.  Conspiracies  are  rife. 
It  is  not  only,  as  in  Amos,  the  sins  of  the  lux- 
urious, of  them  that  are  at  ease  in  Zion,  which 
are  exposed;  but  also  literal  bloodshed:  highway 
robbery  with  murder,  abetted  by  the  priests;  || 
the  thief  breaketh  in  and  the  robber-troop 
maketh  a  raid. IT  Amos  looked  out  on  foreign 
nations  across  a  quiet  Israel;  his  views  of  the 
world  are  wide  and  clear;  but  in  the  Book  of 
Hosea  the  dust  is  up,  and  into  what  is  happen- 
ing beyond  the  frontier  we  get  only  glimpses. 
There  is  enough,  however,  to  make  visible  an- 
other great  change  since  the  days  of  Jeroboam. 
Israel's  self-reliance  is  gone.  She  is  as  fluttered 
as  a  startled  bird:  "  They  call  unto  Egypt,  they 
go  unto  Assyria.**  Their  wealth  is  carried  as  a 
gift  to  King  Jareb,tt  and  they  evidently  engage 
in  intrigues  with  Egypt.  But  everything  is 
hopeless:  kings  cannot  save,  for  Ephraim  is 
seized  by  the  pangs  of  a  fatal  crisis. J:t 

This  broken  description  reflects — and  all  the 
more  faithfully  because  of  its  brokenness — the 
ten  years  which  followed  on  the  death  of  Jero- 
boam II.  about  743. §§     His  son  Zechariah,  who 

*  In  determining  the  date  of  the  Book  of  Hosea  the  title 
in  chap.  i.  is  of  no  use  to  us:  "The  Word  of  Jehovah 
which  was  to  Hosea  ben  Be'eri  in  the  days  of  Uzziah, 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah,  and  in  the  days 
of  Jeroboam  ben  Joash,  king  of  Israel."  This  title  is 
trebly  suspicious.  First  :  the  given  reigns  of  Judah  and 
Israel  do  not  correspond  ;  Jeroboam  was  dead  before 
Uzziah.  Second  :  there  is  no  proof  either  in  the  First  or 
Second  Section  of  the  book  that  Hosea  prophesied  after 
the  reign  of  Jotham.  Third  :  it  is  curious  that  in  the  ca.se 
of  a  prophet  of  Northern  Israel  kings  of  Judah  should  be 
stated  first,  and  four  of  them  be  given  while  only  one 
king  of  his  own  country  is  placed  beside  them.  On  these 
grounds  critics  are  probably  correct  who  take  the  title  as 
it  stands  to  be  the  work  of  some  later  Judsean  scribe  who 
sought  to  make  it  correspond  to  the  titles  of  the  Books  of 
Isaiah  and  Micah.  He  may  have  been  the  same  who  added 
chap.  i.  7.  The  original  "form  of  the  title  probably  was 
"  The  Word  of  God  which  was  to  Hosea  son  of  Be'eri  in 
the  days  of  Jeroboam  ben  Joash,  king  of  Israel,"  and 
designed  only  for  the  First  bection  of  the  book,  chaps, 
i.-iii. 

+  vii.  7.  There  are  also  other  passages  which,  while 
they  may  be  referred,  as  they  stand,  to  the  whole  suc- 
cession of  illegitimate  dynasties  in  Northern  Israel  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  that  kingdom,  more  probably 
reflect  the  same  ten  years  of  special  anarchy  and  disorder 
after  the  death  of  Jeroboam  II.  See  vii.  3  ff.  ;  viii.  4, 
where  the  illegitimate  king-making  is  coupled  with  the 
idolatry  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  ;  xiii.  10,  11. 

%  X.  3,  7,  8,  15. 

§  ix.  15.  *♦  vii.  II. 

II  vi.  8,  9.  ttx.  6. 

^  vii.  I.  %%  xiii.  121. 

§§  The  chronology  of  these  years  is  exceedingly  uncer- 
tain. Jeroboam  was  dead  about  743  ;  in  738  Alenahem 
gave  tribute  to  Assyria  ;  in  734  Tiglath-Pileser  had  con- 
quered Aram,  Gilead,  and    Galilee  in  response  to  King 


496 


THE  TiOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


succeeded  him,  was  in  six  months  assassinated 
by  Shallum  ben  Jabesh,  who  within  a  month 
more  was  himself  cut  down  by  Menahem  ben 
Gadi.*  Menahem  held  the  throne  for  six  or 
seven  years,  but  only  by  sending  to  the  King  of 
Assyria  an  enormous  tribute  which  he  exacted 
from  the  wealthy  magnates  of  Israel. f  Discon- 
tent must  have  followed  these  measures,  such  dis- 
content with  their  rulers  as  Hosea  describes, 
Pekahiah  ben  Menahem  kept  the  throne  for  liitle 
over  a  year  after  his  father's  death,  and  was  as- 
sassinated by  his  captain, t  Pekah  ben  Remaliah, 
with  fifty  Gileadites,  and  Pekah  took  the  throne 
about  736.  This  second  and  bloody  usurpation 
may  be  one  of  those  on  which  Hosea  dwells;  but 
if  so  it  is  the  last  historical  allusion  in  his  book. 
There  is  no  reference  to  the  war  of  Pekah  and 
Rezin  against  Ahaz  of  Judah  which  Isaiah  de- 
scribes,S  and  to  which  Hosea  must  have  alluded 
had  he  been  still  prophesying.!  There  is  no  al- 
lusion to  its  consequence  in  Tiglath-Pileser's 
conquest  of  Gilead  and  Galilee  in  734-733.  On 
the  contrary,  these  provinces  are  still  regarded  as 
part  of  the  body  politic  of  Israelii  Nor  is  there 
any  sign  that  Israel  have  broken  with  Assyria; 
to  the  last  the  book  represents  them  as  fawning 
on  the  Northern  Power.** 

In  all  probability,  then,  the  Book  of  Hosea 
was  closed  before  734  b.  c.  The  Second  Sec- 
tion dates  from  the  years  behind  that  and  back 
to  the  death  of  Jeroboam  II.  about  743,  while  the 
First  Section,  as  we  saw,  reflects  the  period  im- 
mediately before  the  latter. 

We  come  now  to  the  general  style  of  chaps, 
iv.-xiv.  The  period,  as  we  have  seen,  was  one 
of  the  most  broken  of  all  the  history  of  Israel; 
the  political  outlook,  the  temper  of  the  people, 
were  constantly  changing.  Hosea,  who  watched 
these  kaleidoscopes,  had  himself  an  extraordi- 
narily mobile  and  vibrant  mind.  There  could  be 
no  greater  contrast  to  that  fixture  of  conscience 
which  renders  the  Book  of  Amos  so  simple  in 
argument,  so  firm  in  style. ft  It  was  a  leaden 
plummet  which  Amos  saw  Jehovah  setting  to  the 
structure  of  Israel's  life.Jt     But  Hosea  felt  his 

Ahaz,  who  had  a  year  or  two  before  been  attacked  by 
Rezin  of  Aram  and  Pekah  of  Israel. 

*  2  King's  XV.  8-16.  It  may  be  to  this  appearance  of  three 
kings  within  one  month  that  there  was  originally  an 
allusion  in  the  now  obscure  verse  of  Hosea,  v.  7. 

t2  Kings  XV.  17-22. 

t  Or  prince,  "1t}>  J  c/.  Hosea's  denunciation  of  the  D^"1K' 

as  rebels. 

§  Isa.  vii.  ;  2  Kings  xv.  37,  38. 

II  Some  have  found  a  later  allusion  in  chap,  x,  14  :  "  like 
unto  the  destruction"  of  (?)  "Shalman  (of?)  "Beth' 
Arbe'l."  Pusey,  p.  ■;  d,  and  others  take  this  to  allude  to  a 
destruction  of  the  Galilean  Arbela,  the  modern  Irbid,  by 
Salmanassar  IV.,  who  ascended  the  Assyrian  throne  in 
727  and  besieged  Samaria  in  724  ff.  But  since  the  con- 
struction of  the  phrase  leaves  it  doubtful  whether  the 
name  Shalman  is  that  of  the  agent  or  object  of  the  de- 
struction, and  whether,  if  the  agent,  he  be  one  of  the 
Assyrian  Salmanassars  or  a  Moabite  King  Salman  (^r.  730 
B.  c),  it  is  impossible  to  make  use  of  the  verse  in  fixing 
the  date  of  the  Book  of  Hosea.  See  further,  p.  514.  Well- 
hausen  omits. 

If  v.  I  ;  vi  8  ;  xii.  12  :  cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  "  Prophets,"  156. 

**  C/;  W.  R.  Smith,  /.  c. 

++  Cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  "Prophets,"  157:  Hosea's  "language 
and  the  movement  of  his  thoughts  are  far  removed  from 
the  simplicity  and  self-control  which  characterise  the 
prophecy  of  Amos.  Indignation  and  sorrow,  tenderness 
and  severity,  faith  in  the  sovereignty  of  Jehovah's  love, and 
a  despairing  sense  of  Israel  s  inhdelity  are  woven  together 
in  a  sequence  which  has  no  logical  plan,  but  is  determined 
by  the  battle  and  alternate  victory  of  contending  emo- 
tions ;  and  the  swift  transitions,  the  fragmentary  un- 
balanced utterance,  the  half-developed  allusions,  that 
make  his  prophecy  so  difficult  to  the  commentator,  express 
the  agony  of  this  inward  conflict." 

tt  See  above,  p.  470. 


own  heart  hanging  at  the  end  of  the  line;  and 
this  was  a  heart  that  could  never  be  still.  Amos 
is  the  prophet  of  law;  he  sees  the  Divine  proc- 
esses work  themselves  out,  irrespective  of  the 
moods  and  intrigues  of  the  people,  with  which, 
after  all,  he  was  little  familiar.  So  each  of  his 
paragraphs  moves  steadily  forward  to  a  climax, 
and  every  climax  is  Doom — the  captivity  of  the 
people  to  Assyria.  You  can  divide  his  book  by 
these  things;  it  has  its  periods,  strophes, 
and  refrains.  It  marches  like  the  hosts  of 
the  Lord  of  Hosts.  But  Hosea  had  no  such 
unhampered  vision  of  great  laws.  He  was 
too  familiar  with  the  rapid  changes  of  his 
fickle  people;  and  his  affection  for  them  was  too 
anxious.  His  style  has  all  the  restlessness  and 
irritableness  of  hunger  about  it — the  hunger  of 
love.  Hosea's  eyes  are  never  at  rest.  He  seeks, 
he  welcomes,  for  moments  of  extraordmary 
fondness  he  dwells  upon  every  sign  of  his  peo- 
ple's repentance.  But  a  Divine  jealousy  suc- 
ceeds, and  he  questions  the  motives  of  the 
change.  You  feel  that  his  love  has  been  over- 
taken and  surprised  by  his  knowledge;  and  in 
fact  his  whole  style  might  be  described  as  a  race 
between  the  two — a  race  varying  and  uncertain 
up  to  almost  the  end.  The  transitions  are  very 
swift.  You  come  upon  a  passage  of  exquisite 
tenderness:  the  prophet  puts  the  people's  peni- 
tence in  his  own  words  with  a  sympathy  and 
poetry  that  are  sublime  and  seem  final.  But 
suddenly  he  remembers  how  false  they  are,  and 
there  is  another  light  in  his  eyes.  The  lustre  of 
their  tears  dies  from  his  verses,  like  the  dews  of 
a  midsummer  morning  in  Ephraim;  and  ad  is  dry 
and  hard  again  beneath  the  brazen  sun  of  his 
amazement.  "  What  shall  I  do  unto  thee, 
Ephraim?  What  shall  I  do  unto  thee,  Judah?" 
Indeed,  this  figure  of  his  own  is  insufficient  to 
express  the  suddenness  with  which  Hosea  lights 
up  some  intrigue  of  the  statesmen  of  the  day,  or 
some  evil  habit  of  the  priests,  or  some  hidden 
orgy  of  the  common  people.  Rather  than  the 
sun  it  is  the  lightning — the  lightning  in  pursuit 
of  a  serpent. 

The  elusiveness  of  the  style  is  the  greater  that 
many  passages  do  not  seem  to  have  been  pre- 
pared for  public  delivery.  They  are  more  the 
play  of  the  prophet's  mind  than  his  set  speech. 
They  are  not  formally  addressed  to  an  audience, 
and  there  is  no  trace  in  them  of  oratorical  art. 

Hence  the  language  of  this  Second  Section  of 
the  Book  of  Hosea  is  impulsive  and  abrupt  be- 
yond all  comparison.  There  is  little  rhythm  in 
it,  and  almost  no  argument.  Few  metaphors 
are  elaborated.  Even  the  brief  parallelism  of 
Hebrew  poetry  seems  too  long  for  the  quick 
spasms  of  the  writer's  heart.  "  Osee,"  said  Je- 
rome,* "  commaticus  est,  et  quasi  per  sententias 
loquitur."  He  speaks  in  little  clauses,  olten 
broken  ofif;  he  is  impatient  even  of  copulas.  And 
withal  he  uses  a  vocabulary  full  of  strange  words, 
which  the  paucity  of  parallelism  makes  much  the 
more  difficult. 

To  this  original  brokenness  and  obscurity  of 
the  language  are  due,  first,  the  great  corruption 
of  the  text;  second,  the  difificulty  of  dividing  it; 
third,  the  uncertainty  of  deciding  its  genuineness 
or  authenticity. 

I.  The  Text  of  Hosea  is  one  of  the  most  di- 
lapidated in  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  parts  be- 
yond  possibility   of   repair.     It   is   probable   that 
glosses  were  found  necessary  at  an  earlier  period 
*  "  Praef.  in  Duod.  Prophetas." 


I 


THE    BOOK    OF    HOSEA. 


497 


and  to  a  larger  extent  than  in  most  other  books: 
there  are  evident  traces  of  some;  yet  it  is  not  al- 
ways possible  to  disentangle  them.*  The  value 
of  the  Greek  version  is  curiously  mixed.  The 
authors  had  before  them  much  the  same  dififi- 
culties  as  we  have,  and  they  made  many  more  for 
themselves.  Some  of  their  mistranslations  are 
outrageous:  they  occur  not  only  in  obscure  pas- 
sages, where  they  may  be  pardoned;!  but  even 
where  there  are  parallel  terms  with  which  the 
translators  show  themselves  familiar.^  Some- 
times they  have  translated  word  by  word,  without 
any  attempt  to  give  the  general  sense;  and  as  a 
whole  their  version  is  devoid  both  of  beauty  and 
compactness.  Yet  not  infrequently  they  supply 
us  with  a  better  reading  than  the  Massoretic  text. 
Occasionally  they  divide  words  properly  which 
the  latter  misdivides.§  They  often  give  more 
correctly  the  easily  confused  pronominal  suf- 
fixes ;||  and  the  copula.lf  And  they  help  us  to 
the  true  readings  of  many  other  words.**  Here 
and  there  an  additional  clause  in  the  Greek  is 
plethoric,  perhaps  copied  by  mistake  from  a 
similar  verse  in  the  context. ft  All  of  these  will 
be  noticed  separately  as  we  reach  them.  But, 
even  after  these  and  other  aids,  we  shall  find  that 
the  text  not  infrequently  remains  impracticable. 
2.  As  great  as  the  difficulty  of  reaching  a  true 
text  in  this  Second  Section  of  the  book  is  the 
difficulty  of  Dividing  it.  Here  and  there,  it  is 
true,  the  Greek  helps  us  to  improve  upon  the 
division  into  chapters  and  verses  of  the  Hebrew 
text,  which  is  that  of  our  own  English  version. 
Chap.  vi.  1-4  ought  to  follow  immediately  on 
to  the  end  of  chap,  v.,  with  the  connectmg  word 
"  saying."  The  last  few  words  of  chap.  vi.  go 
with  the  first  two  of  chap,  vii.,  but  perhaps  both 
are  gloss.  The  openings  of  chaps,  xi.  and  xi;.  are 
better  arranged  in  the  Hebrew  than  in  the  Greek. 
As  regards  verses  we  shall  have  to  make  several 
rearrangements. It  But  beyond  this  more  or  less 
conventional  division  into  chapters  and  verses 
our  confidence  ceases.  It  is  impossible  to  sepa- 
rate the  section,  long  as  it  is,  into  subsections, 
or  into  oracles,  strophes,  or  periods.  The  rea- 
son of  this  we  have  already  seen,  in  the  turbu- 
lence of  the  period  reflected,  in  the  divided  in- 
terest and  abrupt  and  emotional  style  of  the  au- 
thor, and  in  the  probability  that  part  at  least  of 
the  book  was  not  prepared  for  public  speaking. 
The  periods  and  climaxes,  the  refrains,  the  catch- 
words by  which  we  are  helped  to  divide  even  the 
confused  Second  Section  of  the  Book  of  Amos, 

*  Especially  in  chap.  vii. 

■'  As  in  xi.  2  b. 

X  This  is  especially  the  case  in  x.  11-13,  xi.  4  ;  xiv.  5. 

^E.g.  vi.5  b:  M.  T.  K^»  "I1N  1't3QE^.  which  is  non- 
sense ;  LXX.  11X3  "•DDK'D.  "  My  judgment  shall  go  forth 
like  light."    xi.  2  :  M.  T.    D'"!!'.^??  !  LXX.  ^D  '^?'?' 

I  iv.  4,  ^oy  for  -|Dy  ;  8,  DITSJ  for  SJ-perhaps ;  13,  "^pV 

for  '''?4  '•  V.  2  ;  vi.  2  (possibly) ;  viii.  4,  read  !|mD^  ;  ix-  2  ; 

xi.  2,  3 ;  xi.  s,  6,  where  for  X?  read  1?  ;   10,  read  '?]^     ;  xii. 

9 ;  xiv.  Q  a,  \?  for  ^p.    On  the  other  hand,  they  are  either 

improbable  or  quite  wrong,  as  in  v.  2  i^  ;  xi.  2  Cbut  the  LXX. 
may  be  right  here) ;  vii.  i^;  xi.  i,  4  ;  xii.  5  ;  xiii.  14,  15  (ter.). 

1[  V.  5  (so  as  to  change  the  tense  :  "  and  Judah  shall  stum- 
ble ")  ;  xii.  3,  etc. 

.?.*  '^'-  3  ;  viii.  10.  13  ;  ix.  2  ;  x.  4,  13  5,  15  (probably);  xii.  2  * 
xiii.  q  ;  xiv.  :;.     Wrong  tense,  xii.  u.     Cf.  also  vi.  3. 

++  E.  g.,  viii.  13. 

XX  Cf-  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  of  e.  g.,  iv.  10,  11,  12  ;  vi.  9, 
10;  viii.  5,  6  ;  ix.  S,  q. 

32-Voi.  rv. 


are  not  found  in  Hosea.  Only  twice  does  the 
exordium  of  a  spoken  address  occur:  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  section  (chap.  iv.  i),  and  at  what 
is  now  the  opening  of  the  next  chapter  (v.  i). 
The  phrase  "  'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah,"  which 
occurs  so  periodically  in  Amos,  and  thrice  in  the 
second  chapter  of  Hosea,  is  found  only  once  in 
chaps,  iv.-xiv.  Again,  the  obvious  climaxes  or 
perorations,  of  which  we  found  so  many  in 
Amos,  are  very  few,*  and  even  when  they  occur 
the  next  verses  start  impulsively  from  them, 
without  a  pause. 

In  spite  of  these  difficulties,  since  the  section 
is  so  long,  attempts  at  division  have  been  made. 
Ewald  distinguished  three  parts  in  three  different 
tempers:  First,  iv.-vi.  11  a,  God's  Plaint  against 
His  people;  Second,  vi.  11  b-\x.  9,  Their  Punish- 
ment; Third,  ix.  lo-xiv.  10,  Retrospect  of  the  ear- 
lier history — warning  and  consolation.  Driver 
also  divides  into  three  subsections,  but  differently: 
First,  iv.-viii.,  in  which  Israel's  Guilt  predomi- 
nates; Second,  ix.-xi.  11,  in  which  the  prevailing 
thought  is  their  Punishment;  Third,  xi.  12-xiv. 
10,  in  which  both  lines  of  thought  are  continued, 
but  followed  by  a  glance  at  the  brighter  future,  f 
What  is  common  to  both  these  arrangements  is 
the  recognition  of  a  certain  progress  from  fee.ings 
about  Israel's  guilt  which  prevail  in  the  earlier 
chapters,  to  a  clear  vision  of  the  political  de- 
struction awaiting  them;  and  finally  more  hope 
of  repentance  in  the  people,  with  a  vision  of  the 
blessed  future  that  must  follow  upon  it.  It  is, 
however,  more  accurate  to  say  that  the  emphasis 
of  Hosea's  prophesying,  instead  of  changing 
from  the  Guilt  to  the  Punishment  of  Israel, 
changes  about  the  middle  of  chap.  vii.  from  their 
Moral  Decay  to  their  Political  Decay,  and  that 
the  description  of  the  latter  is  modified  or  inter- 
rupted by  Two  Visions  of  better  things:  one  of 
Jehovah's  early  guidance  of  the  people,  with  a 
great  outbreak  of  His  Love  upon  them,  in  chap, 
xi.;  and  one  of  their  future  Return  to  Jehovah 
and  restoration  in  chap.  xiv.  It  is  on  these 
features  that  the  division  of  the  following  Ex- 
position is  arranged. 

3.  It  will  be  obvious  that  with  a  text  so  cor- 
rupt, with  a  style  so  broken  and  incapable  of 
logical  division,  questions  of  Authenticity  are 
raised  to  a  pitch  of  the  greatest  difficulty.  Allu- 
sion has  been  made  to  the  number  of  glosses 
which  must  have  been  found  necessary  from  even 
an  early  period,  and  of  some  of  which  we  can 
discern  the  proofs.^  We  will  deal  with  these 
as  they  occur.  But  we  may  here  discuss,  as  a 
whole,  another  class  of  suspected  passages — sus- 
pected for  the  same  reason  that  we  saw  a 
number  in  Amos  to  be,  because  of  their  reference 
to  Judah.  In  the  Book  of  Hosea  (chvips.  iv.- 
xiv.)  they  are  twelve  in  number.  Only  one  of 
them  is  favourable  (iv.  15) :  "  Though  Israel  play 
the  harlot,  let  not  Judah  sin."  Kuenen§  argues 
that  this  is  genuine,  on  the  ground  that  the  pecu- 
liar verb  "  to  sin  "  or  "  take  guilt  to  oneself  "  is 
used  several  other  times  in  the  book,|  and  that 
the  wish  expressed  is  in  consonance  with  what 
he  understands  to  be  Hosea's  favourable  feel- 
ing towards  Judah.  Yet  Hosea  nowhere  else 
makes  any  distinction  between  Ephraim  and 
Judah  in  the  matter  of  sin,  but  condemns  both 

*  viii.  13  (14  must  be  omitted) ;  ix.  17. 

+  "  Introd.."  284. 

X  E.  g..  iv.  IS  (?) ;  vi.  ii-vii.  (?) ;  vii.  4  ;  viii.  2  ;  xiL  6> 

§'-Kml.,"  323. 

II  DJJ'N.  v.  15  ;  s.  ?  ;  xiii.  r ;  xiv.  i. 


498 


THE'-BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


equally;  and  as  iv.  15  f.  are  to  be  suspected  on 
other  grounds  as  well,  I  cannot  hold  this  refer- 
ence to  Judah  to  be  beyond  doubt.  Nor  is  the 
reference  in  viii.  14  genuine:  "And  Israel  forgat 
her  Maker  and  built  temples,  and  Judah  multi- 
plied fenced  cities,  but  I  will  send  fire  on  his 
cities  and  it  shall  devour  her  palaces."  Kuenen  * 
refuses  to  reject  the  reference  to  Judah,  on  the 
ground  that  without  it  the  rhythm  of  the  verse 
is  spoiled;  but  the  fact  is  the  whole  verse  must 
go.  Chap.  V.  13  forms  a  climax,  which  v.  14  only 
weakens;  the  style  is  not  like  Hosea's  own,  and 
indeed  is  but  an  echo  of  verses  of  Amos.f  Nor 
can  we  be  quite  sure  about  v.  5:  "  Israel  and 
Ephraim  shall  stumble  by  their  iniquities,  and  " 
(LXX.)  "stumble  also  shall  Judah  with  them;" 
or  vi.  10,  11:  "In  Bethel  I  have  seen  horrors: 
there  playest  thou  the  harlot,  Ephraim;  there  Is- 
rael defiles  himself;  also  Judah  "...  (the  rest 
of  the  text  is  impracticable).  In  both  these 
passages  Judah  is  the  awkward  third  of  a  paral- 
lelism, and  is  introduced  by  an  "  also,"  as  if  an 
afterthought.  Yet  the  afterthought  may  be  the 
prophet's  own;  for  in  other  passages,  to  which 
no  doubt  attaches,  he  fullv  includes  Judah  in 
the  sinfulness  of  Israel.  Cornill  rejects  x.  11, 
"  Judah  must  plough,"  but  I  cannot  see  on  what 
grounds;  as  Kuenen  says,  it  has  no  appearance 
of  being  an  intrusion. J  In  xii.  3  Wellhausen 
reads  "  Israel  "  for  "  Judah,"  but  the  latter  is 
justified  if  not  rendered  necessary  by  the  refer- 
ence to  Judah  in  ver.  i,  which  Wellhausen  admits. 
Against  the  other  references — v.  10,  "The  princes 
of  Jndah  are  as  removers  of  boimdaries;  "  v.  12, 
"  I  shall  be  as  the  moth  to  Ephraim,  and  a  worm 
to  the  house  of  Judah;"  v.  13,  "And  Ephraim 
saw  his  disease,  and  Judah  his  sore;"  v.  14,  "  For 
I  am  as  a  roaring  lion  to  Ephraim,  and  as  a 
young  lion  to  the  house  of  Judah;  "  vi.  4,  "  What 
shall  I  do  to  thee,  Ephraim?  what  shall  I  do  to 
thee,  Judah?  " — there  are  no  apparent  objections 
and  they  are  generally  admitted  by  critics.  As 
Kuenen  says,  it  would  have  been  surprising  if 
Rosea  had  made  no  reference  to  the  sister  king- 
dom. His  judgment  of  her  is  amply  justified 
by  that  of  her  own  citizens,  Isaiah  and  Micah. 

Other  short  passages  of  doubtful  authenticity 
will  be  treated  as  we  come  to  them;  but  again  it 
may  be  emphasised  that,  in  a  book  of  such  a 
style  as  this,  certainty  on  the  subject  is  impos- 
sible. 

Finally,  there  may  be  given  here  the  only  nota- 
ble addition  which  the  Septuagint  makes  to  the 
Book  of  Hosea.  It  occurs  in  xiii.  4,  after  "  I 
am  Jehovah  thy  God:"  "That  made  fast  the 
heavens  and  founded  the  earth,  whose  hands 
founded  all  the  host  of  the  heaven,  and  I  did  not 
show  'lem  to  thee  that  thou  shouldest  follow 
after  them,  and  I  led  thee  up  " — "  from  the  land 
of  Egypt." 

At  first  this  recalls  those  apostrophes  to  Je- 
hovah's power  which  break  forth  in  the  Book 
of  Amos;  and  the  resemblance  has  been  taken  to 
prove  that  they  also  are  late  intrusions.  But  this 
both  obtrudes  itself  as  they  do  not,  and  is  mani- 
festly of  much  lower  poetical  value.  See 
page  493. 

We  have  now  our  material  clearly  before  us, 
and  may  proceed  to  the  more  welcome  task  of 
tracing  our  prophet's  life,  and  expounding  his 
teaching. 

*P.  313. 

t  viii.  14  is  also  rejected  by  Wellhausen  and  Cornill. 

i  Loc.  cit. 


CHAPTER   XIII. 
THE  PROBLEM  THAT  AMOS  LEFT. 

Amos  was  a  preacher  of  righteousness  almost 
wholly  in  its  judicial  and  punitive  offices.  Ex- 
posing the  moral  conditions  of  society  in  his 
day,  emphasising  on  the  one  hand  its  obduracy 
and  on  the  other  the  intolerableness  of  it,  he 
asserted  that  nothing  could  avert  the  inevitable 
doom — neither  Israel's  devotion  to  Jehovah  nor 
Jehovah's  interest  in  Israel.  "  You  alone  have 
I  known  of  all  the  families  of  the  ground:  there- 
fore will  I  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities." 
The  visitation  was  to  take  place  in  war  and  in  the 
captivity  of  the  people.  This  is  practically  the 
whole  message  of  the  prophet  Amos. 

That  he  added  to  it  the  promise  of  restoration 
which  now  closes  his  book,  we  have  seen  to  be 
extremely  improbable.*  Yet  even  if  that  prom- 
ise is  his  own,  Amos  does  not  tell  us  how  the 
restoration  is  to  be  brought  about.  With  won- 
derful insight  and  patience  he  has  traced  the 
captivity  of  Israel  to  moral  causes.  But  he  does 
not  show  what  moral  change  in  the  exiles  is  to 
justify  their  restoration,  or  by  what  means  such 
a  moral  change  is  to  be  effected.  We  are  left 
to  infer  the  conditions  and  the  means  of  redemp- 
tion from  the  principles  which  Amos  enforced 
while  there  yet  seemed  time  to  pray  for  the 
doomed  people:  "Seek  the  Lord  and  ye  shall 
live."t  According  to  this,  the  moral  renewal  of 
Israel  must  precede  their  restoration;  but  the 
prophet  seems  to  make  no  great  effort  to  effect 
the  renewal.  In  short  Amos  illustrates  the 
easily-forgotten  truth  that  a  preacher  to  the  con- 
science is  not  necessarily  a  preacher  of  repent- 
ance. 

Of  the  great  antitheses  between  which  religion 
moves.  Law  and  Love,  Amos  had  therefore  been 
the  prophet  of  Law.  But  we  must  not  imagine 
that  the  association  of  Love  with  the  Deity  was 
strange  to  him.  This  could  not  be  to  any  Is- 
raelite who  remembered  the  past  of  his  people — 
the  romance  of  their  origins  and  early  struggles 
for  freedom.  Israel  had  always  felt  the  grace 
of  their  God;  and  unless  we  be  wrong  about  the 
date  of  the  great  poem  in  the  end  of  Deuteron- 
omy, they  had  lately  celebrated  that  grace  in 
lines  of  exquisite  beauty  and  tenderness: — 

"  He  found  him  in  a  desert  land, 
In  a  waste  and  a  howling  wilderness.  _ 
He  compassed  him  about,  cared  for  him. 
Kept  him  as  the  apple  of  His  eye. 
As  an  eagle  stirreth  up  his  nest, 
Fluttereth  over  his  young, 
Spreadeth  his  wings,  taketh  them, 
Beareth  them  up  on  his  pinions — 
So  Jehovah  alone  led  him."  t 

The  patience  of  the  Lord  with  their  wayward- 
ness and  their  stubbornness  had  been  the  ethical 
influence  on  Israel's  life  at  a  time  when  they  had 
probably  neither  code  of  law  nor  system  of  doc- 
trine. "  Thy  gentleness,"  as  an  early  Psalmist 
says  for  his  people,  "  Thy  gentleness  hath  made 
me  great."§  Amos  is  not  unaware  of  this  an- 
cient grace  of  Jehovah.  But  he  speaks  of  it  in 
a  fashion  which  shows  that  he  feels  it  to  be  ex- 
hausted  and    without   hope    for    his    generation. 

*  See  above,  pp.  490  ff. 
+  v.  4. 

tDeut.   xxxii.  10-12:  a  song  probably  earlier  than  the 
eighth  century.    But  some  put  it  later. 
I  Psalm  xviii. 


Hosea  i.-iii.] 


THE    STORY   OF   THE    PRODIGAL   WIFE. 


499 


"  I  brought  you  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
led  you  forty  years  in  the  wilderness,  to  possejs 
the  land  of  the  Amorites.  And  I  raised  up  of 
your  sons-for  prophets  and  of  your  young  men 
for  Nazarites."  *  But  this  can  now  only  fill  the 
cup  of  the  nation's  sin.  "  You  alone  have  I 
known  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth:  therefore 
will  I  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities."!  Je- 
hovah's ancient  Love  but  strengthens  now  the 
justice  and  the  impetus  of  His  Law. 

We  perceive,  then,  the  problem  which  Amos 
left  to  prophecy.  It  was  not  to  discover  Love 
in  the  Deity  whom  he  had  so  absolutely  identi- 
fied with  Law.  The  Love  of  God  needed  no  dis- 
covery among  a  people  with  the  Deliverance,  the 
Exodus,  the  Wilderness,  and  the  Gift  of  the 
Land  in  their  memories.  But  the  problem  was 
to  prove  in  God  so  great  and  new  a  mercy  as 
was  capable  of  matching  that  Law,  which  the 
abuse  of  His  millennial  gentleness  now  only  the 
more  fully  justified.  There  was  needed  a 
prophet  to  arise  with  as  keen  a  conscience  of 
Law  as  Amos  himself,  and  yet  affirm  that  Love 
was  greater  still;  to  admit  that  Israel  were 
doomed,  and  yet  promise  their  redemption  by 
processes  as  reasonable  and  as  ethical  as  those 
by  which  the  doom  had  been  rendered  inevitable. 
The  prophet  of  Conscience  had  to  b^  followed 
by  the  prophet  of  Repentance. 

Such  an  one  was  found  in  Hosea,  the  son  of 
Be'eri,  a  citizen  and  probably  a  priest  of  North- 
ern Israel,  whose  very  name.  Salvation,  the 
synonym  of  Joshua  and  of  Jesus,  breathed  the 
larger  hope,  which  it  was  his  glory  to  bear  to  his 
people.  Before  we  see  how  for  this  task  Hosea 
was  equipped  with  the  love  and  sympathy  which 
Amos  lacked,  let  us  do  two  things.  Let  us  ap- 
preciate the  magnitude  of  the  task  itself,  set  to 
him  first  of  prophets;  and  let  us  remind  ourselves 
that,  greatly  as  he  achieved  it,  the  task  was  not 
one  which  could  be  achieved  even  by  him  once 
for  all,  but  that  it  presents  itself  to  religion  again 
and  again  in  the  course  of  her  development. 

For  the  first  of  these  duties,  it  is  enough  to 
recall  how  much  all  subsequent  prophecy  derives 
from  Hosea.  We  shall  not  exaggerate  if  we  say 
that  there  is  no  truth  uttered  by  later  prophets 
about  the  Divine  Grace,  which  we  do  not  find  in 
germ  in  him.  Isaiah  of  Jerusalem  was  a  greater 
statesman  and  a  more  powerful  writer,  but  he  had 
not  Hosea's  tenderness  and  insight  into  motive 
and  character.  Hosea's  marvellous  sympathy 
both  with  the  people  and  with  God  is  sufficient 
to  foreshadow  every  grief,  every  hope,  every  gos- 
pel, which  make  the  Books  of  Jeremiah  and  the 
great  Prophet  of  the  Exile  exhaustless  in  their 
spiritual  value  for  mankind.  These  others  ex- 
plored the  kingdom  of  God:  it  was  Hosea  who 
took  it  by  storm. J  He  is  the  first  prophet  of 
Grace,  Israel's  earliest  Evangelist;  yet  with  as 
keen  a  sense  of  law,  and  of  the  inevitableness  of 
ethical  discipline,  as  Amos  himself. 

But  the  task  which  Hosea  accomplished  was 
not  one  that  could  be  accomplished  once  for  all. 
The  interest  of  his  book  is  not  merely  historical. 
For  so  often  as  a  generation  is  shocked  out  of 
its  old  religious  ideals,  as  Amos  shocked  Israel, 
by  a  realism  and  a  discovery  of  law,  which  have 
no  respect  for  ideals,  however  ancient  and  how- 
ever dear  to  the  human  heart,  but  work  their 
own  pitiless  way  to  doom  inevitable;  so  often 
must  the  Book  of  Hosea  have  a  practical  value 
for  living  men.  At  such  a  crisis  we  stand  to- 
*ii.  lof.  +  iii.  2.  JMatt.  xi.  12. 


day.  The  older  Evangelical  assurance,  the  older 
Evangelical  ideals  have  to  some  extent  been 
rendered  impossible  by  the  realism  to  which  the 
sciences,  both  physical  and  historical,  have  most 
healthily  recalled  us,  and  by  their  wonderful  rev- 
elation of  Law  working  through  nature  and  so- 
ciety without  respect  to  our  creeds  and  pious 
hopes.  The  question  presses:  Is  it  still  possible 
to  believe  in  repentance  and  conversion,  still 
possible  to  preach  the  power  of  God  to  save, 
whether  the  individual  or  society,  from  the  forces 
of  heredity  and  of  habit?  We  can  at  least  learn 
how  Hosea  mastered  the  very  similar  problem 
which  Amos  left  to  him,  and  how,  with  a  moral 
realism  no  less  stern  than  his  predecessor  and  a 
moral  standard  every  whit  as  high,  he  proclaimed 
Love  to  be  the  ultimate  element  in  religion;  not 
only  because  it  moves  man  to  a  repentance  and 
God  to  a  redemption  more  sovereign  than  any 
law;  but  because  if  neglected  or  abused,  whether 
as  love  of  man  or  love  of  God,  it  enforces  a 
doom  still  more  inexorable  than  that  required 
by  violated  truth  or  by  outraged  justice.  Love 
our  Saviour,  Love  our  almighty  and  unfailing 
Father,  but,  just  because  of  this,  Love  our  most 
awful  Judge — we  turn  to  the  life  and  the  messa^6 
in  which  this  eternal  theme  was  first  unfolded. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  PRODIGAL  WIFE. 

Hosea  i.-iii. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that,  unlike  th^ 
first  Doomster  of  Israel,  Israel's  first  Evangelist 
was  one  of  themselves,  a  native  and  citizen,  per- 
haps even  a  priest,  of  the  land  to  which  he  was 
sent.  This  appears  even  in  his  treatment  of  the 
stage  and  soil  of  his  ministry.  Contrast  him  in 
this  respect  with  Amos.  ' 

In  the  Book  of  Amos  we  have  few  glimpses  of 
the  scenery  of  Israel,  and  these  always  by  flashes 
of  the  lightnings  of  judgment:  the  towns  in 
drought  or  earthquake  or  siege;  the  vineyards 
and  orchards  under  locusts  or  mildew;  Carmel  it- 
self desolate,  or  as  a  hiding-place  from  God's 
wrath. 

But  Hosea's  love  steals  across  his  whole  land 
like  the  dew,  provoking  every  separate  scent  and 
colour,  till  all  Galilee  Hes  before  us  lustrous  and 
fragrant  as  nowhere  else  outside  the  parables  of 
Jesus.  The  Book  of  Amos,  when  it  would  praise 
God's  works,  looks  to  the  stars.  But  the  poetry 
of  Hosea  clings  about  his  native  soil  like  its 
trailing  vines.  If  he  appeals  to  the  heavens,  it 
is  only  that  they  may  speak  to  the  earth,  and  the 
earth  to  the  corn  and  the  wine,  and  the  corn 
and  the  wine  to  Jezreel.*  Even  the  wild  beasts 
— and  Hosea  tells  us  of  their  cruelty  almost  as" 
much  as  Amos — he  cannot  shut  out  of  the  hope 
of  his  love:  "  I  will  make  a  covenant  for  them 
with  the  beasts  of  the  field,  and  with  the  fowls  of 
heaven,  and  with  the  creeping  things  of  the 
ground."!  God's  love-gifts  to  His  people  are 
corn  and  wool,  flax  and  oil;  while  spiritual  bless- 
ings are  figured  in  the  joys  of  them  who  sow 
and  reap.  With  Hosea  we  feel  all  the  seasons 
of  the  Syrian  year:  early  rain  and  latter  rain, 
the  first  flush  of  the  young  corn,  the  scent  of  the 
vine  blossom,  the  "  first  ripe  fig  of  the  fig:-tree  in 
her  first  season,"  the  bursting  of  the  lily;  the 
*ii.  23,  Heb.  tii.  20,  Heb. 


500 


THE"  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


wild  vine  trailing  on  the  hedge,  the  field  of  tares, 
the  beauty  of  the  full  olive  in  sunshine  and 
breeze;  the  mists  and  heavy  dews  of  a  summer 
morning  in  Ephraim,  the  night  winds  laden  with 
the  air  of  the  mountains,  "  the  scent  of  Leb- 
anon." *  Or  it  is  the  dearer  human  sights  in 
valley  and  field:  the  smoke  from  the  chimney, 
the  chaflf  from  the  threshing-floor,  the  doves 
startled  to  their  towers,  the  fowler  and  his  net; 
the  breaking  up  of  the  fallow  ground,  the  har- 
rowing of  the  clods,  the  reapers,  the  heifer  that 
treadeth  out  the  corn;  the  team  of  draught  oxen 
surmounting  the  steep  road,  and  at  the  top  the 
kindly  driver  setting  in  food  to  their  jaws.f 

Where,  I  say,  do  we  find  anything  like  this 
save  in  the  parables  of  Jesus?  For  the  love  of 
Hosea  was  as  the  love  of  that  greater  Galilean: 
however  high,  however  lonelj'  it  soared,  it  was 
yet  rooted  in  the  common  life  below,  and  fed 
with  the  unfailing  grace  of  a  thousand  homely 
sources. 

But  just  as  the  Love  which  first  showed  itself 
in  the  sunny  Parables  of  Galilee  passed  onward 
to  Gethsemane  and  the  Cross,  so  the  love  of 
Hosea,  that  had  wakened  with  the  spring  lilies 
and  dewy  summer  mornings  of  the  North,  had 
also,  ere  his  youth  was  spent,  to  meet  its  agony 
and  shame.  These  came  upon  the  prophet  in  his 
home,  and  in  her  in  whom  so  loyal  and  tender  a 
heart  had  hoped  to  find  his  chieftest  sanctuary 
next  to  God.  There  are,  it  is  true,  some  of  the 
ugliest  facts  of  human  life  about  this  prophet's 
experience;  but  the  message  is  one  very  suited 
to  our  own  hearts  and  times.  Let  us  read  this 
story  of  the  Prodigal  Wife  as  we  do  that  other 
Galilean  tale  of  the  Prodigal  Son.  There  as  well 
as  here  are  harlots;  but  here  as  well  as  there  is 
the  clear  mirror  of  the  Divine  Love.  For  the 
Bible  never  shuns  realism  when  it  would  expose 
the  exceeding  hatefulness  of  sin  or  magnify  the 
power  of  God's  love  to  redeem.  To  an  age 
which  is  always  treating  conjugal  infidelity  either 
as  a  matter  of  comedy  or  as  a  problem  of  despair, 
the  tale  of  Hosea  and  his  wife  may  still  become, 
what  it  proved  to  his  own  generation,  a  gospel 
full  of  love  and  hope. 

The  story,  and  how  it  led  Hosea  to  understand 
God's  relations  to  sinful  men,  is  told  in  the  first 
three  chapters  of  his  book.  It  opens  with  the 
very  startling  sentence:  "The  beginning  of  the 
word  of  Jehovah  to  Hosea: — And  Jehovah  said 
to  Hosea,  Go,  take  thee  a  wife  of  harlotry  and 
children  of  harlotry:  for  the  Land  hath  com- 
mitted great  harlotry  in  departing  from  Je- 
hovah." t 

The  command  was  obeyed.  "  And  he  went 
and  took  Gomer,  daughter  of  Diblaim;§  and  she 

*  vi.  3,  4  ;  vii.  8  ;  ix.   lo ;  xiv.  6,  7,  8. 
t  vii.  II,  12  ;  X.  u  ;  xi.  4,  etc. 

t  Pregnant  construction,  "hath  committed  great  har- 
lotry from  after  Jehovah." 

§  These  personal  names  do  not  elsewhere  occur.      'P^  ' 

Foixfp.  ^^.?^1  •  A6/3))\ai^i,  B  ;  Ae/STjAaei/ui,  AQ.  They  have, 
of  course,  been  interpreted  allegorically  in  the  interests 
of  the  theory  discussed  below.  "|Q3  has  been  taken  to 
mean  "  completion,"  and  interpreted  as  various  deriva- 
tives of  that  root:  Jerome,  "the  perfect  one";  Raschi, 
"that  fulfilled  all  evil  "  ;  Kimchi,  "fulfilment  of  punish- 
ment ";  Calvin,  "  consumptio,"  and  so  on.  D^PQT  has 
been  traced  to  nplT,  PI.  U'^hll^.  cakes  of  pressed  figs,  as 

if  a  name  had  been  sought  to  connect  the  woman  at  once 
with   the   idol-worship   and   a   rich   sweetness  ;  or   to  an 

Arabic  root,  p21,  to  press,  as  if  it  referred  either  to  the 


conceived,  and  bare  to  him  a  son.  And  Jehovah 
said  unto  him.  Call  his  name  Jezreel;  for  yet  a 
little  and  I  shall  visit  the  blood  of  Jezreel  upon 
the  house  of  Jehu,  and  will  bring  to  an  end 
the  kingdom  of  the  house  of  Israel;  and  it  shall 
be  on  that  day  that  I  shall  break  the  bow  of 
Israel  in  the  Vale  of  Jezreel  " — the  classic  battle- 
field of  Israel.*  "  And  she  conceived  again,  and 
bare  a  daughter;  and  He  said  to  him.  Call  her 
name  Un-Loved,"  or  "  That-never-knew-a- 
Father's-Pity;  t  for  I  will  not  again  have  pity" 
— such  pity  as  a  Father  hath — "  on  the  house  of 
Israel,  that  I  should  fully  forgive  them.:):  And  she 
weaned  Un-Pitied,  and  conceived,  and  bare  a 
son.  And  He  said,  Call  his  name  Not-My- 
People;  for  ye  are  not  My  people,  and  I — I  am 
not  yours."  § 

It  is  not  surprising  that  divers  interpretations 
have  been  put  upon  this  troubled  tale.  The 
words  which  introduce  it  are  so  startling  that 
very  many  have  held  it  to  be  an  allegory,  or 
parable,  invented  by  the  prophet  to  illustrate,  by 
familiar  human  figures,  what  was  at  that  period 
the  still  difficult  conception  of  the  Love  of  God 
for  sinful  men.  But  to  this  well-intended  argu- 
ment there  are  insuperable  objections.  It  im- 
plies that  Hosea  had  first  awakened  to  the  rela- 
tions of  Jehovah  and  Israel — He  faithful  and  full 
of  afifectibn,  she  unfaithful  and  thankless — and 
that  then,  in  order  to  illustrate  the  relations,  he 
had  invented  the  story.  To  that  we  have  an  ade- 
quate reply.  In  the  first  place,  though  it  were 
possible,  it  is  extremely  improbable,  that  such  a 
man  should  have  invented  such  a  tale  about  his 
wife,  or,  if  he  was  unmarried,  about  himself. 
But,  in  the  second  place,  he  says  expressly  that 
his  domestic  experience  was  the  "  beginning  of 
Jehovah's  word  to  him."  That  is,  he  passed 
through  it  first,  and  only  afterwards,  with  the 
sympathy  and  insight  thus  acquired,  he  came  to 
appreciate  Jehovah's  relation  to  Israel.  Finally, 
the  style  betrays  narrative  rather  than  parable. 
The  simple  facts  are  told;  there  is  an  absence  of 
elaboration;  there  is  no  effort  to  make  every 
detail  symbolic;  the  names  Gomer  and  Diblaim 
are  apparently  those  of  real  persons;  every  at- 
tempt to  attach  a  symbolic  value  to  them  has 
failed. 

She  was,  therefore,  no  dream,  this  woman,  but 
flesh  and  blood:  the  sorrow,  the  despair,  the 
sphinx  of  the  prophet's  life;  yet  a  sphinx  who 
in  the  end  yielded  her  riddle  to  love. 

Accordingly  a  large  number  of  other  inter- 
preters have  taken  the  story  throughout  as  the 
literal  account  of  actual  facts.     This  is  the  theory 

plumpness  of  the  body  (cf.  Ezek.  xvi.  7  ;  so  Hitzig)  or  to 
the  woman's  habits.  But  all  these  are  far-fetched  and 
vain.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  either  of  the 
two  names  is  symbolic.    The  alternative  (allowed  by  the 

language)  naturally  suggests  itself  that  D''?3T  is  the 
name  of  Gomer's  iDirthplace.  But  there  is  nothing  to 
prove  this.  No  such  place-name  occurs  elsewhere :  one 
cannot  adduce  the  Diblathaim  in  Moab  CNum.  xxxiii.  46  ff.  ; 
Jer.  xlviii.  2). 

*  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  chap,  xviii. 

t  ^7  T?  probably    3d    pers.    sing.    fem.    Pual    (in 

Pauses/'.  Prov.  xxviii.  13)  ;  literally,  "  She  is  not  loved  or 
pitied.  The  word  means  love  as  pity  :  "  such  pity  as  a 
father  hath  unto  his  children  dear  "(Psalm  ciii.),  or  God 
to  a  penitent  man  (Psalm  .xxviii.  13).  The  Greek  versions 
alternate  between  love  and  pity.  LXX.  ovk  ^Attj/nei'T)  6ioTt 
oil  firj  7rpocr8>)<rio  (tl  ijAe^yrai,  for  which  the  Complutensian 
has  ayairijcrai,  the  reading  followed  by  Paul  (Rora.  ix.  25  : 
cf.  I  Peter  ii.  10). 

t  Here  ver.  7  is  to  be  omitted,  as  explained  above,  p.  495. 

§  Do  not  belong  to  you  ;  but  the  "I  am,"  n^HS,  recalls 
the  "I  am  that  I  am"  of  Exodus.  " 


Hosea  i.-iii.] 


THE    STORY    OF    THE    PRODIGAL    WIFE. 


5^ 


of  many  of  the  Latin  and  Greek  Fathers,*  of 
many  of  the  Puritans  and  of  Dr.  Pusey — by  one 
of  those  agreements  into  which,  from  such  op- 
posite schools,  all  these  commentators  are  not 
infrequently  drawn  by  their  common  captivity 
to  the  letter  of  Scripture. f  When  you  ask  them, 
How  then  do  you  justify  that  first  strange  word 
of  God  to  Hosea.t  if  you  take  it  literally  and  be- 
lieve that  Hosea  was  charged  to  marry  a  woman 
of  public  shame?  they  answer  either  that  such  an 
evil  may  be  justified  by  the  bare  word  of  God,  or 
that  it  was  well  worth  the  end,  the  salvation  of 
a  lost  soul.§  And  indeed  this  tragedy  would  be 
invested  with  an  even  greater  pathos  if  it  were 
true  that  the  human  hero  had  passed  through  a 
self-sacrifice  so  unusual,  had  incurred  such  a 
shame  for  such  an  end.  The  interpretation,  how- 
ever, seems  forbidden  by  the  essence  of  the  story. 
Had  not  Hosea's  wife  been  pure  when  he  married 
her  she  could  not  have  served  as  a  type  of  the 
Israel  whose  earliest  relations  to  Jehovah  he 
describes  as  innocent.  And  this  is  confirmed  by 
other  features  of  the  book:  by  the  high  ideal 
which  Hosea  has  of  marriage,  and  by  that  sense 
of  early  goodness  and  early  beauty  passing  away 
like  morning  mist,  which  is  so  often  and  so  pa- 
thetically expressed  that  we  cannot  but  catch  in 
it  the  echo  of  his  own  experience.  As  one  has 
said  to  whom  we  owe,  rr»ore  than  to  any  other, 
the  exposition  of  the  gospel  in  Hosea, ||  "  The 
struggle  of  Hosea's  shame  and  grief  when  he 
found  his  wife  unfaithful  is  altogether  inconceiv- 
able unless  his  first  love  had  been  pure  and  full 
of  trust  in  the  purity  of  its  object." 

How  then  are  we  to  reconcile  with  this  the 
statement  of  that  command  to  take  a  wife  of  the 
character  so  frankly  described?  In  this  way — 
and  we  owe  the  interpretation  to  the  same  la- 
mented scholar. H  When,  some  years  after  his 
marriage,  Hosea  at  last  began  to  be  aware  of  the 
character  of  her  whom  he  had  taken  to  his  home, 
and  while  he  still  brooded  upon  it,  God  revealed 
to  him  why  He  who  knoweth  all  things  from  the 
beginning  had  suffered  His  servant  to  marry  such 
a  woman;  and  Hosea,  by  a  very  natural  antici- 
pation, in  which  he  is  imitated  by  other  proph- 
ets,** pushed  back  his  own  knowledge  of  God's 
purpose  to  the  date  when  that  purpose  began  ac- 
tually to  be  fulfilled,  the  day  of  his  betrothal. 
This,  though  he  was  all  unconscious  of  its  fatal 
future,  had  been  to  Hosea  the  beginning  of  the 
word  of  the  Lord.  On  that  uncertain  voyage  he 
had  sailed  with  sealed  orders. 

Now  this  is  true  to  nature,  and  may  be  matched 
from  our  own  experience.  "  The  beginning  of 
God's  word'"  to  any  of  us — where  does  it  lie? 
Does  it  lie  in  the  first  time  the  meaning  of  our 

♦Augustine,  Ambrose,  Theodoret,  Cyril  Alex.,  and 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia. 

+  It  is  interesting  to  read  in  parallel  the  interpretations 
of  Matthew  Henrj'  and  Dr.  Pusey.  They  are  very  alike, 
but  the  latter  has  the  more  delicate  taste  of  his  age. 

*  i.  2. 

§The  former  is  Matthew  Henry's;  the  latter  seems  to 
be  implied  by  Pusey. 

II  Robertson  Smith,  "  Prophets  of  Israel." 

i  Apparently  it  was  W.  R.  Smith's  interpretation  which 
caused  Kuenen  to  give  up  the  allegorical  theory. 

♦*  Two  instancesare  usually  quoted.  The  one  is  Isaiah 
vi.,  where  most  are  agreed  that  what  Isaiah  has  stated 
there  as  his  inaugural  vision  is  not  only  what  happened 
in  the  earliest  moments  of  his  prophetic  life,  but  this  spelt 
out  and  emphasised  by  his  experience  since.  See  "  Isaiah 
i.-.Kxxix."  ("Exp.  Bible"),  pp.  630  f.  The  other  instance 
is  Jeremiah  xxxii.  8.  where  the  prophet  tells  us  that  he 
became  convinced  that  the  Lord  spoke  to  him  on  a  certain 
occasion  only  after  a  subsequent  event  proved  this  to  be 
the  case. 


life  became  articulate,  and  we  are  able  to  utter 
it  to  others?  Ah,  no;  it  always  lies  far  behind 
that,  in  facts  and  in  relationships,  of  the  Divine 
meaning  of  which  we  are  at  the  time  unconscious, 
though  now  we  know.  How  familiar  this  is  in  re- 
spect to  the  sorrows  and  adversities  of  life:  dumb, 
deadening  things  that  fall  on  us  at  the  time  with 
no  more  voice  than  clods  falling  on  cofifins  of 
dead  men,  we  have  been  able  to  read  them  after- 
wards as  the  clear  call  of  God  to  our  souls.  But 
what  we  thus  so  readily  admit  about  the  sor- 
rows of  life  may  be  equally  true  of  any  of  those 
relations  which  we  enter  with  light  and  unawed 
hearts,  conscious  only  of  the  novelty  and  the  joy 
of  them.  It  is  most  true  of  the  love  which  meets 
a  man  as  it  met  Hosea  in  his  opening  manhood. 

How  long  Hosea  took  to  discover  his  shame 
he  indicates  by  a  few  hints  which  he  suffers  to 
break  from  the  -delicate  reserve  of  his  story. 
He  calls  the  first  child  his  own;  and  the  boy's 
name,  though  ominous  of  the  nation's  fate,  has 
no  trace  of  shame  upon  it.  Hosea's  Jezreel  was 
as  Isaiah's  Shear-Jashub  or  Maher-shalal-hash- 
baz.  But  Hosea  does  not  claim  the  second  child; 
and  in  the  name  of  this  little  lass,  Lo-Ruhamah, 
"  she-that-never-knew-a-father's-love,"  orphan 
not  by  death  but  by  her  mother's  sin,  we  find 
proof  of  the  prophet's  awakening  to  the  tragedy 
of  his  home.  Nor  does  he  own  the  third  child, 
named  "  Not-my-people,"  that  could  also  mean 
"  No-kin-of-mine."  The  three  births  must  have 
taken  at  least  six  years;  *  and  once  at  least,  but 
probably  oftener,  Hosea  had  forgiven  the  wo- 
man, and  till  the  sixth  year  she  stayed  in  his 
house.  Then  either  he  put  her  from  him,  or  she 
went  her  own  way.  She  sold  herself  for  money, 
and  finally  drifted,  like  all  of  her  class,  into 
slavery.! 

Such  were  the  facts  of  Hosea's  grief,  and  we 
have  now  to  attempt  to  understand  how  that  grief 
became  his  gospel.  We  may  regard  the  stages 
of  the  process  as  two:  first,  when  he  was  led  to 
feel  that  his  sorrow  was  the  sorrow  of  the  whole 
nation;  and,  second,  when  he  comprehended  that 
it  was  of  similar  kind  to  the  sorrow  of  God 
Himself. 

While  Hosea  brooded  upon  his  pain  one  of  the 
first  things  he  would  remember  would  be  the  fact, 
which  he  so  frequently  illustrates,  that  the  case 
of  his  home  was  not  singular,  but  common  and 
characteristic  of  his  day.  Take  the  evidence  of 
his  book,  and  there  must  have  been  in  Israel 
many  such  wives  as  his  own.  He  describes  their 
sin  as  the  besetting  sin  of  the  nation,  and  the 
plague  of  Israel's  life.  But  to  lose  your  own 
sorrow  in  the  vaster  sense  of  national  trouble — 
that  is  the  first  consciousness  of  a  duty  and  a  mis- 
sion. In  the  analogous  vice  of  intemperance 
among  ourselves  we  have  seen  the  same  experi- 
ence operate  again  and  again.  How  many  a 
man  has  joined  the  public  warfare  against  that 
sin,  because  he  was  aroused  to  its  national  conse- 
quences by  the  ruin  it  had  brought  to  his  own 
house!  And  one  remembers  from  recent  years 
a  more  illustrious  instance,  where  a  domestic 
grief — it  is  true  of  a  very  different  kind — became 
not  dissimilarly  the  opening  of  a  great  career  of 
service  to  the  people: — 

"  I  was  in  Leamington,  and  Mr.  Cobden  called 
on   me.     I   was  then   in   the  depths   of  grief — i 

*  An  Eastern  woman  seldoms  weans  her  child  before 
the  end  of  its  second  year, 
tiii.  2. 


5°^ 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


'may  almost  say  of  despair,  for  the  light  and  sun- 
shine of  my  house  had  been  extinguished.  All 
that  was  left  on  earth  of  my  young  wife,  except 
the  memory  of  a  sainted  life  and  a  too  brief  hap- 
piness, was  lying  still  and  cold  in  the  chamber 
above  us.  Mr.  Cobden  called  on  me  as  his 
friend,  and  addressed  me,  as  you  may  suppose, 
with  words  of  condolence.  After  a  time  he 
looked  up  and  said:  "There  are  thousands  and 
thousands  of  homes  in  England  at  this  moment 
where  wives  and  mothers  and  children  are  dying 
of  hunger.  Now,  when  the  first  paroxysm  of 
your  grief  is  passed,  I  would  advise  you  to  come 
with  me,  and  we  will  never  rest  until  the  Corn 
Laws  are  repealed.'  "  * 

,  Not  dissimilarly  was  Hosea's  pain  over- 
whelmed by  the  pain  of  his  people.  He  remem- 
bered that  there  were  in  Israel  thousands  of 
homes  like  his  own.  Anguish  gave  way  to  sym- 
pathy. The,  mystery  became  the  stimulus  to  a 
mission. 

But,  again,  Hosea  traces  this  sin  of  his  day  to 
the  worship  of  strange  gods.  He  tells  the 
fathers  of  Israel,  for  instance,  that  they  need  not 
be  surprised  at  the  corruption  of  their  wives  and 
daughters  when  they  themselves  bring  home 
from  the  heathen  rites  the  infection  of  light  views 
of  love.f  That  is  to  say,  the  many  sins  against 
human  love  in  Israel,  the  wrong  done  to  his 
own  heart  in  his  own  home,  Hosea  connects  with 
the  wrong  done  to  the  Love  of  God,  by  His  peo- 
ple's desertion  of  Him  for  foreign  and  impure 
rites.  Hosea's  own  sorrow  thus  became  a  key 
to  the  sorrow  of  God.  Had  he  loved  this  wo- 
man, cherished  and  honoured  her,  borne  with 
and  forgiven  her,  only  to  find  at  the  last  his  love 
spurned  and  hers  turned  to  sinful  men:  so  also 
had  the  Love  of  God  been  treated  by  His  chosen 
people,  and  they  had  fallen  to  the  loose  worship 
of  idols. 

Hosea  was  the  more  naturally  led  to  compare 
his  relations'  to  his  wife  with  Jehovah's  to  Is- 
rael, by  certain  religious  beliefs  current  among 
the  Semitic  peoples.  It  was  common  to  nearly 
all  Semitic  religions  to  express  the  union  of  a 
god  with  his, land  or  with  his  people  by  the  figure 
of  marriage.  The  title  which  Hosea  so  often 
applies  to  the  heathen  deities,  Ba'al,  meant  orig- 
inally not  "lord  "  of  his  worshippers,  but  "  pos- 
sessor "  and  endower  of  his  land,  its  husband  and 
fertiliser.  A  fertile. land  was  "a  land  of  Ba'al,"' 
or  "  Be'ulah,"  that  is,  "  possessed  "  or  "  blessed 
by  a  Ba'al."  :|:  Under  the  fertility  was  counted 
not  only  the  increase  of  field  and  flock,  but  the 
human  increase  as  well;  and  thus  a  nation  could 
speak  of  themselves  as  the  children  of  the  Land, 
their  mother,  and  of  her  Ba'al,  their  father.^ 
When  Hosea,  tl^en,  called  Jehovah  the  husband 
of  Israel,  it  was  not  an  entirely  new  symbol  which 
he  invented.  Up  to  -his  time,  however,  the  mar- 
riage of  Heaven  and;Earth,  of  a  god  and  his  peo- 
ple, seems  to  have  been  conceived  in  a  physical 
.form  which  ever  tended  to  become  more  gross; 
and    was    expressed,    as    Hosea    points    out,    by 

.rites  of  a  sensual  and. debasing  nature,  with  the 
most  disastrous  efifects  on  the  domestic  morals 
•of  the  people.     By  an  inspiration,  whose  ethical 

.character  is  , very  conspicuous,  Hosea  breaks  the 

*  From  a  speech'  bj'  John  Bright, 
t  iv.  13,  14.      ■ 

■t  Cf.  the  spiritual  use  of  the  term,  Isa  Ixii.  4. 
§  For  proof  and  exposition  of  all  this  see  Robertson 
Smith,  "'Religion  of  the  Semites,"  92  fl. 


physical  connection  altogether.  Jehovah's  Bride 
is  not  the  Land,  but  the  People,  and  His  mar- 
riage with  her  is  conceived  wholly  as  a  moral  re- 
lation. Not  that  He  has  no  connection  with  the 
physical  fruits  of  the  land:  corn,  wine,  oil,  wool, 
and  flax.  But  these  are  represented  only  as  the 
signs  and  ornaments  of  the  marriage,  love-gifts 
from  the  husband  to  the  wife.*  The  marriage 
itself  is  purely  moral:  "  I  will  betroth  her  to  Me 
in  righteousness  and  justice,  in  leal  love  and 
tender  mercies."  f  From  her  in  return  are  de- 
manded faithfulness  and  growing  knowledge  of 
her  Lord. 

It  is  the  re-creation  of  an  Idea.  Slain  and 
made  carrion  by  the  heathen  religions,  the  figure 
is  restored  to  life  by  Hosea.  And  this  is  a  life 
everlasting.  Prophet  and  apostle,  the  Israel  of 
Jehovah,  the  Church  of  Christ,  have  alike  found 
in  Hosea's  figure  an  unfailing  significance  and 
charm.  Here  we  cannot  trace  the  history  of  the 
figure;  but  at  least  we  ought  to  emphasise  the 
creative  power  which  its  recovery  to  life  proves 
jto  have  been  inherent  in  prophecy.  This  is  one 
of  those  triumphs  of  which  the  God  of  Israel 
said:  "Behold,  I  make  all  things  new."|: 

Having  dug  his  figure  from  the  mire  and  set 
it  upon  the  rock,  Hosea  sends  it  on  its  way  with 
all  boldness.  If  Jehovah  be  thus  the  husband  of 
Israel,  "  her  first  husUand,  the  husband  of  her 
youth,"  then  all  her  pursuit  of  the  Ba'alim  is  un- 
faithfulness to  her  marriage  vows.  But  she  is 
worse  than  an  adulteress;  she  is  a  harlot.  She 
has  fallen  for  gifts.  Here  the  historical  facts 
wonderfully  as.sisted  the  prophet's  metaphor.  It 
was  a  fact  that  Israel  and  Jehovah  were  first 
wedded  in  the  wilderness  upon  conditions,  which 
by  the  very  circumstances  of  desert  life  could 
have  little  or  no  reference  to  the  fertility  of  the 
earth,  but  were  purely  personal  and  moral.  And 
it  was  also  a  fact  that  Israel's  declension  from 
Jehovah  came  after  her  settlement  in  Canaan, 
and  was  due  to  her  discovery  of  other  deities,  in 
possession  of  the  soil,  and  adored  by  the  natives 
as  the  dispensers  of  its  fertility.  Israel  fell  under 
these  superstitions,  and,  although  she  still  form- 
ally acknowledged  her  bond  to  Jehovah,  yet  in 
order  to  get  her  fields  blessed  and  her  flocks 
made  fertile,  her  orchards  protected  from  blight 
and  her  fleeces  from  scab,  she  went  after  the  local 
Ba'alim. §  With  bitter  scorn  Hosea  points  out 
that  there  was  no  true  love  in  this:  it  was  the 
mercenariness  of  a  harlot,  selling  herself  for 
gifts.  II  And  it  had  the  usual  results.  The  chil- 
dren whom  Israel  bore  were  not  her  husband's.  IT 
The  new  generation  in  Israel  grew  up  in  igno- 
rance of  Jehovah,  with  characters  and  lives 
strange  to  His  Spirit.  They  were  Lo-Ruhamah: 
He  could  not  feel  towards  them  such  pity  as  a 
father  hath.**  They  were  Lo-Ammi:  not  at  all 
His  people.  All  was  in  exact  parallel  to  Hosea's 
own  experience  with  his  wife;  and  only  the  real 
pain  of  that  experience  could  have  made  the  man 
brave  enough  to  use  it  as  a  figure  of  his  God's 
treatment  by  Israel. 

Following  out  the  human  analogy,  the  next 
step  should  have  been  for  Jehovah  to  divorce  His 

*ii.  8. 

t  So  best  is  rendered  *lDn.  hesedh,  which  means  always 
notmerely  an  affection,  "■lovingkindness,"  asourversion 
puts  it,  but  a  relation  loyally  observed. 

X  An  expansion  of  this  will  be  found  in  the  present 
writer's  "Isaiah  xl.-lxvi."  (Expositor's  Bible),  pp. 
828  ff. 

§ii.  i^.  lii.  5. 

||ii.  5,  13.  **  See  above,  p.  500. 


( 


Hosea  i.-iii.] 


THE    STORY    OF    THE    PRODIGAL    WIFE. 


5°3 


erring  spouse.  But  Jehovah  reveals  to  the 
prophet  that  this  is  not  His  way.  For  He  is 
"  God  and  not  man,  the  Holy  One  in  the  midst 
of  thee.  How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim? 
How  shall  I  surrender  thee,  O  Israel?  My  heart 
is  turned  within  Me,  My  compassions  are  kindled 
together!  " 

Jehovah  will  seek,  find,  and  bring  back  the 
wanderer.  Yet  the  process  shall  not  be  easy. 
The  gospel  which  Hosea  here  preaches  is 
matched  in  its  great  tenderness  by  its  full  recog- 
nition of  the  ethical  requirements  of  the  case. 
Israel  may  not  be  restored  without  repentance, 
and  cannot  repent  without  disillusion  and  chas- 
tisement. God  will  therefore  show  her  that  her 
lovers,  the  Ba'alim,  are  unable  to  assure  to  her 
the  gifts  for  which  she  followed  them.  These  are 
His  corn.  His  wine.  His  wool,  and  His  flax,  and 
He  will  take  them  away  for  a  time.  Nay  more, 
as  if  mere  drought  and  blight  might  still  be  re- 
garded as  some  Ba'al's  work.  He  who  has  al- 
ways manifested  Himself  by  great  historic  deeds 
will  do  so  again.  He  will  remove  herself  from 
the  land,  and  leave  it  a  waste  and  a  desolation. 
The  whole  passage  runs  as  follows,  introduced 
by  the  initial  "  Therefore  "  of  judgment: — 

"  Therefore,  behold,  I  am  going  to  hedge  *  up 
herf  way  with  thorns,  and  build  her^:  a  wall,  so 
that  she  find  not  her  paths.  And  she  shall  pursue 
her  paramours  and  shall  not  come  upon  them, 
seek  them  and  shall  not  find  them;  and  she  shall 
say,  Let  me  go  and  return  to  my  first  husband, 
for  it  was  better  for  me  then  than  now.  She 
knew  not,  then,  that  it  was  I  who  gave  her 
the  corn  and  the  wine  and  the  oil;  yea,  silver  I 
heaped  upon  her  and  gold — they  worked  it  up  for 
the  Ba'al!  "^  Israel  had  deserted  the  religion 
that  was  historical  and  moral  for  the  religion  that 
was  physical.  But  the  historical  religion  was 
the  physical  one.  Jehovah  who  had  brought  Is- 
rael to  the  land  was  also  the  God  of  the  Land. 
He  would  prove  this  by  taking  away  its  blessings. 
"  Therefore  I  will  turn  and  take  away  My  corn 
in  its  time  and  My  wine  in  its  season,  and  I  will 
withdraw  My  wool  and  My  flax  that  should  have 
covered  her  nakedness.  And  now  " — the  other 
initial  of  judgment — "  I  will  lay  bare  her  shame 
to  the  eyes  of  her  lovers,  and  no  man  shall  res- 
cue her  from  My  hand.  And  I  will  make  an  end 
of  all  her  joyaunce,  her  pilgrimages,  her  New- 
Moons  and  her  Sabbaths,  with  every  festival;  and 
I  will  destroy  her  vines  and  her  figs  of  which  she 
said,  '  They  are  a  gift,  mine  own,  which  my 
lovers  gave  me,'  and  I  will  turn  them  to  jungle 
and  the  wild  beast  shall  devour  them.  So  shall 
I  visit  upon  her  the  days  of  the  Ba'alim,  when 
she  used  to  offer  incense  to  them,  and  decked 
herself  with  her  rings  and  her  jewels  and  went 
after  her  paramours,  but  Me  she  forgat — 'tis  the 
oracle  of  Jehovah."  All  this  implies  something 
more  than  such  natural  disasters  as  those  in 
which  Amos  saw  the  first  chastisements  of  the 
Lord.  Each  of  the  verses  suggests,  not  only  a 
devastation  of  the  land  by  war,||  but  the  removal 

♦The  participle  Qal,  used  by  God  of  Himself  in  His 
proclamations  of  grace  or  of  punishment,  has  in  this  pas- 
sage (cf.  ver.  i6)  and  elsewhere  (especially  in  Deuter- 
onomy) the  force  of  an  immediate  future. 

+  So  LXX.  ;  Mass.  Text.  t/ty. 

t  The  reading      t  "  :  '^  more  probable  than      ^  •• : 

§  Or  "  they  made  it  into  a  Ba'al  "  image.    So  Ew.,  Hitz., 
Nowack.     But  Wellhausen  omits  the  clause, 
t  Wellhausen  thinks  that  up  to   ver.  14  only  physical 

calamities  are  meant,  but  the  ^flpViT  oi  ver.  11,  as  well  as 
others  of  the  terms  used,  imply  not  the  blighting  of  crops 


of  the  people  into  captivity.  Evidently,  there- 
fore, Hosea,  writing  about  745,  had  in  view  a 
speedy  invasion  by  As.syria,  an  invasion  which 
was  always  followed  up  by  the  exile  of  the  people 
subdued. 

This  is  next  described,  with  all  plainness,  under 
the  figure  of  Israel's  early  wanderings  in  the  wil- 
derness, but  is  emphasised  as  happening  only  for 
the  end  of  the  people's  penitence  and  restoration. 
The  new  hope  is  so  melodious  that  it  carries  the 
language  into  metre. 

"Therefore,  lo  !  I  am  to  woo  her,  and  I  will  bring  her  to 

the  wilderness, 
And  I  will  speak  home  to  her  heart. 
And  from  there  I  will  give  to  her  her  vineyards, 
And  the  Valley  of  Achor  for  a  doorway  of  hope. 
And  there  she  shall  answer  Me  as  in   the  days  of  her 

youth, 
And  as  the  day   when  she  came  up  from  the  land  of 

Misraim." 

To  us  the  terms  of  this  passage  may  seem 
formal  and  theological.  But  to  every  Israelite 
some  of  these  terms  must  have  brought  back 
the  days  of  his  own  wooing.  "  I  will  speak  home 
to  her  heart  "  is  a  forcible  expression,  like  the 
German  "  an  das  Herz  "  or  the  sweet  Scottish 
"  it  cam'  up  roond  my  heart,"  and  was  used  in 
Israel  as  from  man  to  woman  when  he  won  her.* 
But  the  other  terms  have  an  equal  charm.  The 
prophet,  of  course,  does  not  mean  that  Israel 
shall  be  literally  taken  back  to  the  desert.  But 
he  describes  her  coming  Exile  under  that  ancient 
figure,  in  order  to  surround  her  penitence  with 
the  associations  of  her  innocency  and  her  youth. 
By  the  grace  of  God,  everything  shall  begin 
again  as  at  first.  The  old  terms  "  wilderness," 
"  the  giving  of  vineyards,"  "  Valley  of  Achor," 
are,  as  it  were,  the  wedding  ring  restored. 

As  a  result  of  all  this  (whether  the  words  be 
by  Hosea  or  another)  ,t 

"  It  shall  b  in  that  day— 'tis  Jehovah's  oracle— that  thou 
Shalt  call  Me,  My  husband,  1 

And  thou  shalt  not  again  call  Me,  My  Ba'al  : 

For  I  will  take  away  the  names  of  the  Ba'alim  from  her 
mouth. 

And  they  shall  no  more  be  remembered  by  their  names." 

There  follows  a  picture  of  the  ideal  future,  in 
which — how  unlike  the  vision  that  now  closes 
the  Book  of  Amos! — moral  and  spiritual  beauty, 
the  peace  of  the  land  and  the  redemption  of  the 
people,  are  wonderfully  mingled  together,  in  a 
style  so  characteristic  of  Hosea's  heart.  It  is 
hard  to  tell  where  the  rhythmical  prose  passes 
into   actual    metre. 

"  And  I  will  make  for  them  a  covenant  in  that 
day  with  the  wild  beasts,  and  with  the  birds  of  the 
heavens,  and  with  the  creeping  things  of  the 
ground;  and  the  bow  and  the  sword  and  battle 
will  I  break  from  the  land,  and  I  will  make  you 
to  dwell  in  safety.  And  I  will  betroth  thee  to 
Me  for  ever,  and  I  will  betroth  thee  to  Me  in 
righteousness  and  in  justice,  in  leal  love  and  in 
tender  mercies;  and  I  will  betroth  thee  to  Me  in 
faithfulness,  and  thou  shalt  know  Jehovah. 

"  And  it  shall  be  on  that  day  I  will  speak — 
'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah — I  will  speak  to  the 
heavens,  and  they  shall  speak  to  the  earth;  and 

before  their  season,  but  the  carrying  of  them  away  in 
their  season,  when  they  had  fully  ripened,  by  invaders. 
The  cessation  of  all  worship  points  to  the  removal  of  the 
people  from  their  land,  which  is  also  implied,  of  courset 
by  the  promise  that  they  shall  be  sown  again  in  ver.  23. 

*  Cf.  Isa.  xl.  I  :  which  to  the  same  exiled  Israel  is  the 
fulfilment  of  the  promise  made  by  Hosea.  See  "  Isaiah 
xl.-  Ixvi."  ("Expositor's  Bible  "),  pp.  749  S. 

t  Wellhausen  calls  ver.  18  a  gloss  to  ver  19. 


504 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  earth  shall  speak  to  the  corn  and  the  wine 
and  the  oil,  and  they  shall  speak  to  Jezreel,"  the 
"scattered  like  seed"  across  many  lands;  "but 
I  will  sow  him*  for  Myself  in  the  land:  and  I 
will  have  a  father's  pity  upon  Un-Pitied;  and  to 
Not-My-People  "  I  will  say,  "  My  people  thou 
art!  and  he  shall  say,  My  God!  "f 

The  circle  is  thus  completed  on  the  terms  from 
which  we  started.  The  three  names  which 
Hosea  gave  to  the  children,  evil  omens  of  Israel's 
fate,  are  reversed,  and  the  people  restored  to  the 
favour  and  love  of  their  God. 

We  might  expect  this  glory  to  form  the  cul- 
mination of  the  prophecy.  What  fuller  prospect 
could  be  imagined  than  that  we  see  in  the  close 
of  the  second  chapter?  With  a  wonderful  grace, 
however,  the  prophecy  turns  back  from  this  sure 
vision  of  the  restoration  of  the  people  as  a  whole, 
to  pick  up  again  the  individual  from  whom  it  had 
started,  and  whose  unclean  rag  of  a  life  had  flut- 
tered out  of  sight  before  the  national  fortunes 
sweeping  in  upon  the  scene.  This  was  needed  to 
crown  the  story — this  return  to  the  individual. 

"  And  Jehovah  said  unto  me,  Once  more  go, 
love  a  wife  that  is  loved  of  a  paramour  and  is 
an  adulteress,^  as  Jehovah  loveth  the  children  of 
Israel,"  the  "  while  they  are  turning  to  other 
gods,  and  love  raisin-cakes  " — probab  y  some  ele- 
ment in  the  feasts  of  the  gods  of  the  land,  the 
givers  of  the  grape.  "  Then  I  bought  her  to 
me  for  fifteen  "  pieces  "  of  silver  and  a  homer  of 
barley  and  a  lethech  of  wine.§  And  I  said  to 
her.  For  many  days  shalt  thou  abide  for  me 
alone;  thou  shalt  not  play  the  harlot,  thou  shalt 
not  be  for  any  husband;  and  I  for  my  part  also 
shall  be.so  towards  thee.  For  the  days  are  many 
that  the  children  of  Israel  shall  abide  without  a 
king  and  without  a  prince,  without  sacrifice  and 
without  maggebah,  and  without  ephod  and  tera- 
phim.ll  Afterwards  the  children  of  Israel  shall 
turn  and  seek  Jehovah  their  God  and  David  their 
king,  and  shall  be  in  awe  of  Jehovah  and  towards 
His  goodness  in  the  end  of  the  days."1[ 

Do  not  let  us  miss  the  fact  that  the  story  of 
the  wife's  restoration  follows  that  of  Israel's,  al- 
though the  story  of  the  wife's  unfaithfulness  had 
come  before  that  of  Israel's  apostasy.  For  this 
order  means  that,  while  the  prophet's  private 
pain  preceded  his  sympathy  with  God's  pain,  it 
was  not  he  who  set  God,  but  God  who  set  him, 
the  example  of  forgiveness.  The  man  learned 
the  God's  sorrow  out  of  his  own  sorrow;  but 
conversely  he  was  taught  to  forgive  and  redeem 
his  wife  only  by  seeing  God  forgive  and  redeem 
the  people.  In  other  words,  the  Divine  was  sug- 
gested by  the  human  pain;  yet  the  Divine  Grace 
was  not  started  by  any  previous  human  grace, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  was  itself  the  precedent  and 

♦Massoretic  Text,  "her." 

+  It  is  at  this  point,  if  at  any,  that  i.  lo,  ii,  ii.  i  (Eng.,  but 
ii.  1-3  Heb.)  ought  to  come  in.  It  will  be  observed,  how- 
ever;  that  even  here  they  are  superfluous  :  "  And  the 
number  of  the  children  of  Israel  shall  be  as  the  sand  of 
the  sea,  which  cannot  be  measured  nor  counted  ;  and  it 
,  shall  be  in  the  place  where  it  was  said  to  them.  No  People 
of  Mine  are  ye  !  it  shall  be  said  to  them,  Sons  of  the  Liv- 
ing God  !  And  the  children  of  Judah  and  the  children  of 
Israel  shall  be  gathered  together,  and  they  shall  appoint 
themselves  one  head,  and  shall  go  up  from  the  land  :  for 
great  is  the  day  of  Jezreel.  Say  unto  your  brothers,  My 
People,  and  to  your  sisters  (LXX.  sister),  She-is-Pitied." 
On  the  whole  passage  see  above,  p.  494  f. 

t  Or  "that  is  loved  of  her  husband  though  an  adul- 

§  So  LXX.    The  homer  was  eight  bushels.    The  lethech 
is  a  measure  not  elsewhere  mentioned. 
I  On  these  see  above,  Introduction,  chap,  iii.,  p.  451. 
^  On  the  text  see  above,  p.  495. 


origin  of  the  latter.  This  is  in  harmony  with  all 
Hosea's  teaching.  God  forgives  because  "  He  is 
God  and  not  man."  *  Our  pain  with  those  we 
love  helps  us  to  understand  God's  pain;  but  it  is 
not  our  love  that  leads  us  to  believe  in  His  love. 
On  the  contrary,  all  human  grace  is  but  the  re- 
flex of  the  Divine.  So  St.  Paul:  "  Even  as  Christ 
forgave  you,  so  also  do  ye."  So  St.  John:  "  We 
love  Him,"  and  one  another,  "  because  He  first 
loved  us." 

But  this  return  from  the  nation  to  the  individ- 
ual has  another  interest.  Gomer's  redemption 
is  not  the  mere  formal  completion  of  the  parallel 
between  her  and  her  people.  It  is,  as  the  story 
says,  an  impulse  of  the  Divine  Love,  recognised 
even  then  in  Israel  as  seeking  the  individual. 
He  who  followed  Hagar  into  the  wilderness, 
who  met  Jacob  at  Bethel  and  forgat  not  the  slave 
Joseph  in  prison, f  remembers  also  Hosea's  wife. 
His  love  is  not  satisfied  with  His  Nation-Bride: 
He  remembers  this  single  outcast.  It  is  the 
Shepherd  leaving  the  ninety-and-nine  in  the  fold 
to  seek  the  one  lost  sheep. 

For  Hosea  himself  his  home  could  never  be 
the  same  as  it  was  at  the  first.  "  And  I  said  to 
her,  For  many  days  shalt  thou  abide,  as  far  as  I 
am  concerned,  alone.  Thou  shalt  not  play 
the  harlot.  Thou  shalt  not  be  for  a  husband: 
and  I  on  my  side  also  shall  be  so  to- 
wards thee."  Discipline  was  needed  there;  and 
abroad  the  nation's  troubles  called  the  prophet  to 
an  anguish  and  a  toil  which  left  no  room  for  the 
sweet  love  or  hope  of  his  youth.  He  steps  at 
once  to  his  hard  warfare  for  his  people;  and 
through  the  rest  of  his  book  we  never  again  hear 
him  speak  of  home,  or  of  children,  or  of  wife. 
So  Arthur  passed  from  Guinevere  to  his  last  bat- 
tle for  his  land: — 

"  Lo  !  I  forgive  thee,  as  Eternal  God 
Forgives  :  do  thou  for  thine  own  soul  the  rest. 
But  how  to  take  last  leave  of  all  I  loved? 

I  cannot  touch  thy  lips,  they  are  not  mine  ;  .  .  . 

I  cannot  take  thy  hand  ;  that  too  is  flesh. 

And  in  the  flesh  thou  hast  sinned  ;  and  mine  own  flesh, 

Here  looking  down  on  thine  polluted,  cries 

'  I  loathe  thee  '  ;  yet  not  less,  O  Guinevere, 

For  I  was  ever  virgin  save  for  thee. 

My  love  thro'  flesh  hath  wrought  into  my  life 

So  far,  that  my  doom  is,  I  love  thee  still. 

Let  no  man  dream  but  that  I  love  thee  still. 

Perchance,  and  so  thou  purify  thy  soul, 

And"  so  thou  lean  on  our  fair  father  Christ, 

Hereafter  in  that  world  where  all  are  pure 

We  two  may  meet  before  high  God,  and  thou 

Wilt  spring  to  me,  and  claim  me  thine,  and  know 

I  am  thine  husband,  not  a  smaller  soul.  .  .  . 

Leave  me  that, 
I  charge  thee,  my  last  hope.    Now  must  I  hence. 
Thro'  the  thick  night  I  hear  the  trumpet  blow." 


CHAPTER  XV. 

THE  THICK  NIGHT  OF  ISRAEL. 

Hosea  iv.-xiv. 

It  was  indeed  a  "  thick  night "  into  which  this 
Arthur  of  Israel  stepped  from  his  shattered 
home.  The  mists  drive  across  Hosea's  long 
agony  with  his  people,  and  what  we  see,  we  see 
blurred  and  broken.  There  are  stumbling  and 
clashing;  crowds  in  drift;  confused  rallies;  gangs 

+  As  the  stories  all  written  down  before  this  had  made 
familiar  to  Israel. 


Hosea  iv.-vii.  7.] 


A    PEOPLE    IN    DECAY:    I.    MORALLY. 


505 


of  assassins  breaking  across  the  highways;  doors 
opening  upon  lurid  interiors  full  of  drunken  riot. 
Voices,  which  other  voices  mock,  cry  for  a  dawn 
that  never  comes.  God  Himself  is  Laughter, 
Lightning,  a  Lion,  a  Gnawing  Worm.  Only  one 
clear  note  breaks  over  the  confusion — the  trum- 
pet summoning  to  war. 

Take  courage,  O  great  heart!  .  Not  thus  shall 
it  always  be!  There  wait  thee,  before  the  end, 
of  open  Visions  at  least  two — one  of  Memory  and 
one  of  Hope,  one  of  Childhood  and  one  of 
Spring.  Past  this  night,  past  the  swamp  and 
jungle  of  these  fetid  years,  thou  shalt  see  thy 
land  in  her  beauty,  and  God  shall  look  on  the 
face  of  His  Bride. 

Chaps,  iv.-xiv.  are  almost  indivisible.  The  two 
Visions  just  mentioned,  chaps,  xi.  and  xiv.  3-9, 
may  be  detached  by  virtue  of  contributing  the 
only  strains  of  gospel  which  rise  victorious  above 
the  Lord's  controversy  with  His  people  and  the 
troubled  story  of  their  sins.  All  the  rest  is  the 
noise  of  a  nation  falling  to  pieces,  the  crumbling 
of  a  splendid  past.  And  as  decay  has  no  climax 
and  ruin  no  rhythm,  so  we  may  understand  why 
it  is  impossible  to  divide  with  any  certainty 
Hosea's  record  of  Israel's  fall.  Some  arrange- 
ment we  must  attempt,  but  it  is  more  or  less  arti- 
ficial, and  to  be  undertaken  for  the  sake  of  our 
own  minds,  that  cannot  grasp  so  great  a  collapse 
all  at  once.  Chap.  iv.  has  a  certain  unity,  and  is 
followed  by  a  new  exordium,  but  as  it  forms  only 
the  theme  of  which  the  subsequent  chapters  are 
variations,  we  may  take  it  with  them  as  far  as 
chap,  vii.,  ver.  7;  after  which  there  is  a  slight 
transition  from  the  moral  signs  of  Israel's  disso- 
lution to  the  political — although  Hosea  still  com- 
bines the  religious  offences  of  idolatry  with  the 
anarchy  of  the  land.  These  form  the  chief  in- 
terest to  the  end  of  chap.  x.  Then  breaks  the 
bright  Vision  of  the  Past,  chap,  xi.,  the  tempo- 
rary victory  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Prophet  over  his 
Curse.  In  chaps,  xii.-xiv.  2  we  are  plunged  into 
the  latter  once  more,  and  reach  in  xiv.  3  fif.  the 
second  bright  Vision,  the  Vision  of  the  Future 
To  each  of  these  phases  of  Israel's  Thick  Night 
— we  can  hardly  call  them  Sections — we  may  de- 
vote a  chapter  of  simple  exposition,  adding  three 
chapters  more  of  detailed  examination  of  the 
main  doctrines  we  shall  have  encountered  on  our 
way — the  Knowledge  of  God,  Repentance,  and 
the  Sin  against  Love. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 
A  PEOPLE  IN  DECAY:  I.  MORALLY. 


Hosea  iv. 


■vii.  7. 


Pursuing  the  plan  laid  down  in  the  last  chap- 
ter, we  now  take  the  section  of  Hosea's  discourse 
which  lies  between  chap.  iv.  i  and  chap.  vii.  7. 
Chap.  iv.  is  the  only  really  separable  bit  of  it; 
but  there  are  also  slight  breaks  at  v.  15  and  vii. 
2.  So  we  may  attempt  a  division  into  four  pe- 
riods: I.  Chap,  iv.,  which  states  God's  general 
charge  against  the  people;  2.  Chap.  v.  1-14,  which 
discusses  the  priests  and  princes;  3.  Chaps,  v.  15- 
vii.  2,  which  abjures  the  people's  attempts  at  re- 
pentance; and  4.  Chap.  vii.  3-7,  which  is  a  lurid 
spectacle  of  the  drunken  and  profligate  court. 
All  these  give  symptoms  of  the  moral  decay  of 
'.he   people, — the   family   destroyed   by   impurity. 


and  society  by  theft  and  murder;  the  corruption  of 
the  spiritual  guides  of  the  people;  the  debauch- 
ery of  the  nobles;  the  sympathy  of  the  throne 
with  evil, — with  the  despairing  judgment  that 
such  a  people  are  incapable  even  of  repentance. 
The  keynotes  are  these:  "  No  troth,  leal  love, 
nor  knowledge  of  God  in  the  land.  Priest  and 
Prophet  stumble.  Ephraim  and  Judah  stumble. 
I  am  as  the  moth  to  Ephraim.  What  can  I  make 
of  thee,  Ephraim?  When  I  would  heal  them, 
their  guilt  is  only  the  more  exposed."  Morally, 
Israel  is  rotten.  The  prophet,  of  course,  cannot 
help  adding  signs  of  their  political  incoherence. 
But  these  he  deals  with  more  especially  in  the 
part  of  his  discourse  which  follows  chap.  vii.  7. 

I.  The  Lord's  Quarrel  with  Israel. 
Hosea  iv. 

"  Hear  the  word  of  Jehovah,  sons  of  Israel!  * 
Jehovah  hath  a  quarrel  with  the  inhabitants  of 
the  land,  for  there  is  no  troth  nor  leal  love  nor 
knowledge  of  God  in  the  land.  Perjury f  and 
murder  and  theft  and  adultery  1^:  They  break 
out,  and  blood  strikes  upon  blood." 

That  stable  and  well-furnished  life,  across 
which,  while  it  was  still  noon,  Amos  hurled  his 
alarms — how  quickly  it  has  broken  up!  If  there 
be  still  "  ease  in  Zion,"  there  is  no  more  "  secu- 
rity in  Samaria."  §  The  great  Jeroboam  is  dead, 
and  society,  which  in  the  East  depends  so  much 
on  the  individual,  is  loose  and  falling  to  pieces. 
The  sins  which  are  exposed  by  Amos  were  those 
that  lurked  beneath  a  still  strong  government, 
but  Hosea  adds  outbreaks  which  set  all  order 
at  defiance.  Later  we  shall  find  him  describing 
housebreaking,  highway  robbery,  and  assassina- 
tion. "  Therefore  doth  the  land  wither,  and 
every  one  of  her  denizens  languisheth,  even  to 
the  beast  of  the  field  and  the  fowl  of  the 
heaven;  yea,  even  the  fish  of  the  sea  are  swept 
up "  in  the  universal  sickness  of  man  and  na- 
ture: for  Hosea  feels,  like  Amos,  the  liability 
of  nature   to   the   curse  upon   sin. 

Yet  the  guilt  is  not  that  of  the  whole  people, 
but  of  their  religious  guides.  "  Let  none  find 
fault  and  non^  upbraid,  for  My  people  are  but 
as  their  priestlings. ||  O  Priest,  thou  hast  stum- 
bled to-day:  and  stumble  to-night  shall  the 
prophet  with  thee."  One  order  of  the  nation's 
ministers  goes  staggering  after  the  other!  "  And 
I  will  destroy  thy  Mother,"  presumably  the  na- 
tion herself.  "  Perished  are  My  people  for  lack 
of  knowledge."  But  how?  By  the  sin  of  their 
teachers.  "  Because  thou,"  O  Priest,  "  hast  re- 
jected knowledge,  I  reject  thee  from  being  priest 

*  ^3  formally  introduces  the  charge. 

tLit.  "swearing  and  falsehood." 

t  Ninth,  si.xth,  eighth,  and  seventh  of  the  Decalogue. 

§  Amos  vi.  1. 

Jiv.  4.  According  to  the  e.xcellent  emendation  of  Beck 
(quoted  by  Wiinsche.  p.  142),  who  instead  of  2^1033)13^1 
proposes  1^1033  ^Oyi.  for  the  first  word  of  which  there 
is  support  in  the  LXX.  o  Aods  nov.  The  second  word, 
*1J33,  is  used  for  priest  only  in  a  bad  sense  by  Hosea  him- 
self, X.  5,  and  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  5  of  the  calf-worship  and  in 
Zech.  i.  4  of  the  Baal  priesthood.  As  Wellhausen  re- 
marks, this  emendation  restores  sense  to  a  passage  that 
had  none  before.  "  Ver.  4  cannot  be  directed  against  the 
people,  but  must  rather  furnish  the  connection  for  ver.  5, 
and  effect  the  transference  from  the  reproof  of  the 
people  (vv.  1-3)  to  the  reproof  of  the  priests  (5  ff.)."  The 
letters  |ri3'  which  are  left  over  in  ver.  4  by  the  emenda- 
tion are  then  justly  improved  by  Wellhausen  (following 
Zunz)  into  the  vocative  jHSri  and  taken  with  the  following 


5o6 


THE   FOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


to  Me;  and  as  thon  hast  forgotten  the  Torah 
of  thy  God,  I  forget  thy  children  * — I  on  My 
side.  As  many  as  they  be,  so  many  have  sinned 
against  Me."  Every  jack-priest  of  them  is  cul- 
pable. "They  have  turned f  their  glory  into 
shame.  They  feed  on  the  sin  of  My  people, 
and  to  the  guilt  of  these  lift  up  their  appetite!  " 
The  more  the  people  sin,  the  more  merrily  thrive 
the  priests  by  fines  and  sin-offerings.  They  live 
upon  the  vice  of  the  day,  and  have  a  vested  in- 
terest in  its  crimes.  English  Langland  said  the 
same  thing  of  the  friars  of  his  time.  The  con- 
tention is  obvious.  The  priests  have  given 
themselves  wholly  to  the  ritual;  they  have  for- 
gotten that  their  office  is  an  intellectual  and 
moral  one.  We  shall  return  to  this  when  treat- 
ing of  Hosea's  doctrine  of  knowledge  and  its 
responsibilities.  Priesthood,  let  us  only  remem- 
ber, priesthood  is  an  intellectual  trust. 

"  Thus  it  comes  to  be — like  people  like  priest:  " 
they  also  have  fallen  under  the  ritual,  doing 
from  lust  what  the  priests  do  from  greed.  "  But 
I  will  visit  upon  them  their  ways,  and  their  deeds 
will  I  requite  to  them.  For  they  "  (those)  ''  shall 
eat  and  not  be  satisfied,"  (these)  "  shall  play  the 
harlot  and  have  no  increase,  because  they  have 
left  ofif  heeding  Jehovah."  This  absorption  in 
ritual  at  the  expense  of  the  moral  and  intellect- 
ual elements  of  religion  has  insensibly  led  them 
over  into  idolatry,  with  all  its  unchaste  and 
drunken  services.  "  Harlotry,  wine,  and  new 
wine  take  away  the  brains!  "J  The  result  is 
seen  in  the  stupidity  v/ith  which  they  consult 
their  stocks  for  guidance.  "  My  people!  of  its 
bit  of  wood  it  asketh  counsel,  and  its  staff  tell- 
eth  to  it"  the  oracle!  "  For  a  spirit  of  harlotry 
hath  led  them  astray,  and  they  have  played  the 
harlot  from  their  God.  Upon  the  headlands  of 
the  hills  they  sacrifice,  and  on  the  heights  offer 
incense,  under  oak  or  poplar  or  terebinth,  for 
the  shade  of  them  is  pleasant."  On  "  headlands," 
not  summits,  for  here  no  trees  grow;  and  the 
altar  was  generally  built  under  a  tree  and  near 
water  on  some  promontory,  from  which  the 
flight  of  birds  or  of  clouds  might  be  watched. 
"  Wherefore  " — because  of  this  your  frequenting 
of  the  heathen  shxines — "your  daughters  play 
the  harlot  and  your  daughters-in-law  commit 
adultery.  I  will  not  come  with  punishment  upon 
your  daughters  because  they  play  the  harlot,  nor 
upon  your  daughters-in-law  because  they  commit 
adultery."  Why?  For  "  they  themselves,"  the 
fathers  of  Israel — or  does  he  still  mean  the 
priests? — "  go  aside  with  the  harlots  and  sacrifice 
with  the  common  women  of  the  shrines!  "  It 
is  vain  for  the  men  of  a  nation  to  practise  im- 
purity and  fancy  that  nevertheless  they  can  keep 
their  womankind  chaste.  "  So  the  stupid  people 
fall  to  ruin!  " 

("  Though  thou  play  the  harlot,  Israel,  let  not 
Judah  bring  guilt  on  herself.  And  come  not  to 
Gilgal,  and  go  not  up  to  Beth-Aven,  and  take 
not  vour  oath  "  at  the  Well-of-the-Oath,  Beer- 
Sheba,§  "  By  the  life  of  Jehovah!"     This  obvi- 

*  The  application  seems  to  swerve  here.  "Thy  chil- 
dren "  would  seem  to  imply  that,  for  this  clause  at  least, 
the  whole  people,  and  not  the  priests  only,  were  ad- 
dressed. But  Robertson  Smith  takes  "thy  mother"  as 
equivalent,  not  to  the  nation,  but  to  the  priesthood. 

+  A  reading  current  among  Jewish  writers  and  adopted 
by  Geiger,  "  Urschrif  t,"  316. 

t'Heb.  "the  heart,"  which  ancient  Israel  conceived  as 
the  seat  of  the  intellect. 

§  Wellhausen  thinks  this  third  place-name  icf.  Amos  v. 
S)  has  been  dropped.  It  certainly  seems  to  be  under- 
stood. 


ous  parenthesis  may  be  either  bv  Hosea  or  a 
later  writer;  the  latter  is  more  probable.*) 

"  Yea,  like  a  wild  heifer  Israel  has  gone  wild. 
How  now  can  Jehovah  feed  them  like  a  lamb 
in  a  broad  meadow?"  To  treat  this  clause  in- 
terrogatively is  the  only  way  to  get  sense  out 
of  it.f  "  Wedded  to  idols  is  Ephraim:  leave  him 
alone."  The  participle  means  "  mated  "  or 
"  leagued."  The  corresponding  noun  is  used  of 
a  wife  as  the  "mate"  of  her  husband  t  and  of 
an  idolater  as  the  "  mate  "  of  his  idols. ^;  The 
expression  is  doubly  appropriate  here,  since 
Hosea  used  marriage  as  the  figure  of  the  relation 
of  a  deity  to  his  worshippers.  "  Leave  him 
alone  " — he  must  go  from  bad  to  worse.  "  Their 
drunkenness  over,  they  take  to  harlotry:  her  rul- 
ers have  fallen  in  love  with  shame,"  or  "  they 
love  shame  more  than  their  pride."  |  But  in 
spite  of  all  their  servile  worship  the  Assyrian 
tempest  shall  sweep  them  away  in  its  trail.  "  A 
wind  hath  wrapt  them  up  in  her  skirts;  ana  they 
shall  be  put  to  shame  by  their  sacrifices." 

This  brings  the  passage  to  such  a  climax  as 
Amos  loved  to  crown  his  periods.  And  the 
opening  of  the  next  chapter  offers  a  new  ex- 
ordium. 

2.  Priests  and  Princes  Fail. 
Hosea  v.  1-14. 

The  line  followed  in  this  paragraph  is  almost 
parallel  to  that  of  chap,  iv.,  running  out  to  a 
prospect  of  invasion.  But  the  charge  is  directed 
solely  against  the  chiefs  of  the  people,  and  the 
strictures  of  chap.  vii.  7  ff.  upon  the  political 
folly  of  the  rulers  are  anticipated. 

"  Hear  this,  O  Priests,  and  hearken,  House 
of  Israel,  and  House  of  the  King,  give  ear.  For 
on  you  is  the  sentence!  "  You  who  have  hith- 
erto been  the  judges,  this  time  shall  be  judged. 

"  A  snare  have  ye  become  at  Mizpeh,  and  a 
net  spread  out  upon  Tabor,  and  a  pit  have  they 
made  deep  upon  Shittim;!!  but  I  shall  be  the 
scourge  of  them  all.  I  know  Ephraim,  and  Israel 
is  not  hid  from  me — for  now  hast  thou  played 
the  harlot,  Ephraim,  Israel  is  defiled."  The 
worship  on  the  high  places,  whether  nominally 
of  Jehovah  or  not,  was  sheer  service  of  Ba'alim. 
It  was  in  the  interest  both  of  the  priesthood 
and  of  the  rulers  to  multiply  these  sanctuaries, 
but  they  were  only  traps  for  the  people.  "  Their 
deeds  will  not  let  them  return  to  their  God;  for 
a  harlot  spirit  is  in  their  midst,  and  Jehovah," 
for  all  their  oaths  by  Him,  "  they  have  not 
known.  But  the  pride  of  Israel  shall  testify  to 
his  face;  and  Israel  and  Ephraim  shall  stumble 
by  their  guilt — stumble  also  shall  Judah  with 
them."  By  Israel's  pride  many  understand  God. 
But  the  term  is  used  too  opprobriously  by  Amos 
to  allow  us  to  agree  to  this.  The  phrase  must 
mean  that  Israel's  arrogance,  or  her  proud  pros- 
perity, by  the  wounds  which  it  feels  in  this  time 
of  national  decay,  shall  itself  testify  against  the 

*  But  see  above,  p.  497.  ^Mal.  ii.  4. 

t  So  all  critics  since  Hitzig.  S  Isa.  xliv.  11. 

\  The  verse  is  very  uncertain.  LXX.  read  a  different 
and  a  fuller  text  from  "  Ephraim  "  in  the  previous  verse 
to  "  harlotry  "  in  this  :  "  Ephraim  hath  set  up  for  himself 
stumbling-blocks  and  chosen  Canaanites."  In  the  first 
of  alternate  readings  of  the  latter  half  of  the  verse  omit 
13n  as  probably  a  repetition  of  the  end  of  the  preceding 
word  ;  the  second  alternative  is  adapted  from  LXX., 
which  for  n''J"'aO  must  have  read  HJIWO. 

1  So  by  slightly  altering  the  consonants.  But  the  text 
is  uncertain. 


Hosea  iv.-vii.  7.] 


A  PEOPLE  IN  DECAY:  I.  MORALLY. 


507 


people — a  profound  ethical  symptom  to  which 
we  shall  return  when  treating  of  Repentance.* 
Yet  the  verse  may  be  rendered  in  harmony  with 
the  context:  "the  pride  of  Lsrael  shall  be 
humbled  to  his  face.  With  their  sheep  and  their 
cattle  they  go  about  to  seek  Jehovah,  and  shall 
not  find  "  Him;  "  He  hath  drawn  off  from  them. 
They  have  been  unfaithful  to  Jehovah,  for  they 
have  begotten  strange  children."  A  generation 
has  grown  up  who  are  not  His.  "  Now  may  a 
month  devour  them  with  their,  portions!  "  Any 
month  may  bring  the  swift  invader.  Hark!  the 
alarum  of  war!  How  it  reaches  to-  the  back  of 
the  land! 

"  Blow  the  trumpet  in  Gibeah,  the  clarion  in  Ramah  ; 
Raise  the  slogan,  Beth-Aven:  '  After  thee  Benjamin! '  "  t 

"  Ephraim  shall  become  desolation  in  the  day 
of  rebuke!  Among  the  tribes  of  Israel  I  have 
made  known  what  is  certain!  " 

At  this  point  (ver.  10)  the  discourse  swerves 
from  the  religious  to  the  political  leaders  of 
Israel;  but  as  the  princes  were  included  with  the 
priests  in  the  exordium  (ver.  i),  we  can  hardly 
count  this  a  new  oracle. t 

"  The  princes  of  Judab  are  like  landmark-re- 
movers " — commonest  cheats  in  Israel — "  upon 
them  will  I  pour  out  My  wrath  like  water. 
Ephraim  is  oppressed,  crushed  is  "  his  "  right, 
for  he  wilfully  went  after  vanity.§  And  I  am 
as  the  moth  to  Ephraim,  and  as  rottenness  to 
the  house  of  Judah."  Both  kingdoms  have  be- 
gun to  fall  to  pieces,  for  by  this  time  Uzziah 
of  Judah  also  is  dead,  and  the  weak  politicians 
are  in  charge  whom  Isaiah  satirised.  "  And 
Ephraim  saw  his  sickness,  and  Judah  his  sore; 
and  Ephraim  went  to  Asshur  and||  sent  to  King 
Jareb — King  Combative,  King  Pick-Quarrel,"  "1 
a  nickname  for    the    Assyrian    monarch.      The 

*  Note  on  the  Pride  of  Israel. -V\'^'^  means  "  grandeur," 
and  is  (i)  so  used  of  Jehovah's  majesty  (Micah  v.  3  ;  Isa.  ii. 
10,  ig,  21  ;  xxi  V.  14),  and  (2)  of  the  greatness  of  human  pow- 
ers (Zech.  X.  II  ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  12).  In  Psalm  xlvii.  5  it  is 
parallel  to  the  land  of  Israel  Kef-  Nahum  ii.  3).  (3)  In  a 
grosser  sense  the  word  is  used  of  the  rank  vegetation  of 
Jordan  (Eng  wrongly  "  swelling  ")  ijer.  xii.  5  ;  Zech.  xi.  3  : 
cf.  Job  xxxviii.  11).  It  would  appear  to  be  this  grosser 
sense  of  "  rankness,  arrogance,"  in  which  Amos  vi.  8 
takes  it  as  parallel  to  "  the  palaces  of  Israel  "  which  "Je- 
hovah loathes  and  will  destroy."  In  Amos  viii.  7  the 
phrase  may  be  used  in  scorn  ;  yet  some  take  it  even  there 
of  God  Himself  (  Buhl,  last  ed.  of  Gesenius'  "  Lexicon  "). 

Now  in  Hosea  it  occurstwice  in  the  phrase  given  above 

— njyi  VJD3  ^XIK'"'  |1KJ  (V-  S.  vii.  lo).  LXX.,  Targum 
and  some  Jewish  exegetes  take  njj?  as  a  V?  verb,  "  to  be 
humbled,"  and  this  suits  both  contexts.  But  the  word 
VJ32.  "  to  his  face  "  almost  compels  us  to  take  Hjy  as  a 
^"p  verb,  "to  witness  against"  (,cf.  Job  -xvi.  8;  Jer.  xiv. 
7).  Hence  VVellhausen  renders  "With  his  arrogance 
Israel  witnesseth  against  himself."  and  confirms  the 
plaint  of  Jehovah— the  arrogance  being  the  trust  in  the 
ritual  and  the  feeling  of  no  need  to  turn  from  that  and 
repent  (c/i  vii.  10).  Orelli  quotes  Amos  vi.  8  and  Nahum 
ii.  3,  and  says  injustice  cleaves  to  all  Israel's  splendour, 
so  it  testifies  against  him. 

But  theconte,Kt,  which  in  both  cases  speaks  of  Israel's 
gradual  decay,  demands  rather  the  interpretation  that 
Israel's  material  grandeur  shows  unmistakable  signs  of 
breaking  down.  For  the  ethical  development  of  this  in- 
terpretation, see  below,  pp.  b4i  f. 

t  Probably  the  ancient  war-cry  of  the  clan.     Cf.  Judg. 

V.    14. 

X  Yet  ver.  g  goes  with  ver.  8  (so  Wellhausen),  and  not 
with  ver.  10  (so  Ewald) 

§  For  ^X  read  ^{1JJ>. 

II  Wellhausen  inserts  "Judah,"  with  that  desire  to  com- 
plete a  parallel  which  seems  to  me  to  be  overdone  by  so 
many  critics.  If  Judah  be  inserted  we  should  need  to 
bring  the  date  of  these  verses  down  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz 
in  731. 

^Guthe:    '  King  Fighting-Cock." 


verse  probably  refers  to  the  tribute  which  Mena- 
hem  sent  to  Assyria  in  738.  If  so,  then  Israel 
has  drifted  full  five  years  into  her  "  thick  night." 
■'  But  he  cannot  heal  you,  nor  dry  up  your  sore. 
For  I,"  Myself,  "  am  like  a  lion  to  Ephraim, 
and  like  a  young  lion  to  the  house  of  Judah. 
I,  I  rend  and  go  My  way;  I  carry  of¥  and  there 
is  none  to  deliver."  It  is  the  same  truth  which 
Isaiah  expressed  with  even  greater  grimness.* 
God^  Himself  is  His  people's  sore;  and  not  all 
their  statecraft  nor  alliances  may  heal  what  He 
inflicts.  Priests  and  Princes,  then,  have  alike 
failed.    A  greater  failure  is  to  follow. 


3.  Repentance  Fails. 
Hosea  v.  15-vii.  2. 

Seeing  that  their  leaders  are  so  helpless, 
and  feeling  their  wounds,  the  people  may  them- 
selves turn  to  God  for  healing,  but  that  will  be 
with  a  repentance  so  shallow  as  also  to  be  futile. 
They  have  no  conviction  of  sin,  nor  appreciation 
of  how  deeply  their  evils  have  eaten. 

This  too  facile  repentance  is  expressed  in  a 
prayer  which  the  Christian  Church  has  para- 
phrased into  one  of  its  most  beautiful  hymns 
of  conversion.  Yet  the  introduction  to  this 
prayer,  and  its  own  easy  assurance  of  how  soon 
God  will  heal  the  wounds  He  has  made,  as  well 
as  the  impatience  with  which  God  receives  it, 
oblige  us  to  take  the  prayer  in  another  sense 
than  the  hymn  which  has  been  derived  from  it.  \ 
It  offers  but  one  more  symptom  of  the  optimism 
of  this  light-hearted  people,  whom  no  discipline 
and  no  judgment  can  impress  with  the  reality 
of  their  incurable  decay.  They  said  of  them- 
selves, "  The  bricks  are  fallen,  let  us  build  with 
stones,":}:  and  now  they  say  just  as  easily  and 
airily  of  their  God,  "  He  hath  torn  "  only  "  that 
He  may  heal:  "  we  are  fallen,  but  "  He  will  raise 
us  up  again  in  a  day  or  two."  At  first  it  is  still 
God  who  speaks. 

"  I  am  going  My  way,  I  am  returning  to  My 
own  place, §  until  they  feel  their  guilt  and  seek 
My  face.  When  trouble  comes  upon  them,  they 
will  soon"  enough  "seek  Me,  saying:|| — 

"  Come  and  let  us  return  to  Jehovah  ; 
For  He  hath  rent,  that  He  may  heal  us. 
And  hath  wounded, 1  that  He  may  bind  us  up. 
He  will  bring  us  to  life  in  a  couple  of  days  ; 
On  the  third  day  He  will  raise  us  up  again, 
That  we  may  live  in  His  presence." 

"  Let  us  know,  let  us  follow  up  **  to  know,  Jehovah  : 
As  soon  as  we  seek  Him.  we  shall  find  Him  +t 
And  He  shall  come  to  us  like  the  winter-rain, 
Like  the  spring-rain,  pouring  on  the  land  !" 

But  how  is  this  fair  prayer  received  by  God? 
With  incredulity,  with  impatience.  "  What  can 
I    make    of   thee,    Ephraim?    what   can    I    make 

♦See  "Isaiah  i.-xxxix."  ("Expositor's  Bible"),  pp. 
677  flf. 

tCheyne  indeed  (Introduction  to  Robertson  Smith's 
"  Prophets  of  Israel  ")  takes  the  prayer  to  be  genuine,  but 
an  intrusion.  His  reasons  do  not  persuade  me.  But  at 
least  it  is  clear  that  there  is  a  want  of  connection  between 
the  prayer  and  what  follows  it,  unless  the  prayer  be 
under-stood  in  the  sense  explained  above. 

X  Isaiah  ix.  10. 

§  Cf.  Isaiah  xviii.  4. 

II  Saving :  so  the  LXX.  adds  and  thereby  connects  chap, 
v.  with  chap.  vi. 

11  Read  "H*^* 

**  Literally  "hunt,  pursue."  It  is  the  same  word  as  is 
used  of  the  unfaithful  Israel's  pursuit  of  the  Ba'alim, 
chap.  ii.  9. 

ttSo  by  a  rearrangement  of  consonants   (inXVDJ    p 


5o8 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


of  thee,  Judah?  since  your  love  is  like  the  morn- 
ing cloud  and  like  the  dew  so  early  gone."  Their 
shallow  hearts  need  deepening.  Have  they  not 
been  deepened  enough?  "  Wherefore  I  have 
hewn "  them  "  by  the  prophets,  I  have  slain 
them  by  the  words  of  My  mouth,  and  My  judg- 
ment goeth  forth  like  the  lightning.*  For  leal 
love  have  I  desired,  and  not  sacrifice;  and  the 
knowledge  of  God  more  than  burnt-offerings." 

That  the  discourse  comes  back  to  the  fitual 
is  very  intelligible.  For  what  could  make  re- 
pentance stem  so  easy  as  the  belief  that  forgive- 
ness can  be  won  by  simply  offering  sacrifices? 
Then  the  prophet  leaps  upon  what  each  new  year 
of  that  anarchy  revealed  afresh — the  profound 
sinfulness  of  the  people. 

"  But  they  in  human  fashion  f  have  trans- 
gressed the  covenant!  There" — he  will  now 
point  out  the  very  spots — "  have  they  betrayed  X 
Me!  Gilead  is  a  city  of  evil-doers:  stamped  with 
the  bloody  footprints;  assassins  §  in  troops;  a 
gang  of  priests  murder  on  the  way  to  Shechem. 
Yea,  crime!  have  they  done.  In  the  house  of 
Israel  I  have  seen  horrors:  there  Ephraim  hath 
played  the  harlot:  Israel  is  defiled — ^Judah  as 
well."  IT 

Truly  the  sinfulness  of  Israel  is  endless.  Every 
effort  to  redeem  them  only  discovers  more  of  it. 
"  When  I  would  turn,  when  I  would  heal  Israel, 
then  the  guilt  of  Ephraim  displays  itself  and  the 
evils  of  Samaria,"  these  namely:  "  that  they  work 
fraud  and  the  thief  cometh  in " — evidently  a 
technical  term  for  housebreaking  ** — "  while 
abroad  a  crew  "  of  highwaymen  "  foray.  And 
they  never  think  in  their  hearts  that  all  their 
evil  is  recorded  by  Me.  Now  have  their  deeds 
encompassed  them:  they  are  constantly  before 
Me." 

Evidently  real  repentance  on  the  part  of  such 
a  people  is  impossible.  As  Hosea  said  before, 
"  Their  deeds  will  not  let  them  return."  ff 

4.  Wickedness  in  High  Places. 
Hosea  vii.  3-7. 

There  follows  now  a  very  difficult  passage. 
The  text  is  corrupt,  and  we  have  no  means  of 
determining  what  precise  events  are  intended. 
The  drift  of  meaning,  however,  is  evident.  The 
disorder  and  licentiousness  of  the  people  are 
favoured  in  high  places;  the  throne  itself  is  guilty. 

"  With  their  evil  they  make  a  king  glad,  and 
princes  with  their  falsehoods:  all  of  them  are 
adulterers,  like  an  oven  heated  by  the  baker,  .  .  .|t 

UintJ'D)  and  the  help  of  the  LXX.  (eiiprja-oinv  ovrdi/)  Giese- 
brecht  ("  Beitrage,"  p.  208)  proposes  to  read  the  clause, 
which  in  the  traditional  text  runs,  "like  the  morn  His 
going  forth  shall  be  certain." 

*  Read  NV  "IIKD  "DQi^. 
....         Y     .  J  .  . 

t  Or  "  like  Adam,"  or  (Guthe)  "  like  the  heathen." 
iThe  verb  means  to  prove  false  to  any  contract,  but 
especially  marriage. 

§  Read  ^ano. 

jl  In  several  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  the  word 
means  unchastity. 

1  Here  the  LXX.  close  chap,  vi.,  taking  11  d  along  with 
chap,  vii .  Some  think  the  whole  of  ver.  11  to  be  a  Judaean 
gloss. 

**  Of-  Josl  "•  9<  *i^<i  the  New  Testament  phrase  "  to  come 
as  a  thief." 

t+  v.  4. 

tt  The  text  is  unsound.  Heb.:  "like an  oven  kindled  by 
the  baker,  the  stirrer  (stoker  or  kneader  ? )  resteth  from 
kneading  the  dough   until  it  be  leavened."     LXX.:   ii 

KAi'/SafOt  (cold^«^'os  eis  ne^iv  KaraKav/jiaTOi  airb  T^9  (frAoyos  airit 
<l>vpa<Tfu>i  <rT€'aTOS  iws  tou  (v^l.<a9f|va^  ovTO — t.  e.,  for  7135?''  they 


"  On  the  day  of  our  king " — some  corona- 
tion or  king's  birthday — "  the  princes  were  sick 
with  fever  from  wine.  He  stretched  forth  his 
hand  with  loose  fellows,"  *  presumably  made 
them  his  associates.  "  Like  an  oven  have  they 
madef  their  hearts  with  their  intriguing.:}:  All 
night  their  anger  sleepeth:§  in  the  morning  it 
blazes  like  a  flame  of  fire.  All  of  them  glow 
like  an  oven,  and  devour  their  rulers:  all  their 
kings  have  fallen,  without  one  of  them  calling  on 
Me." 

An  obscure  passage  upon  obscure  events;  yet 
so  lurid  with  the  passion  of  that  fevered  people 
in  the  flagrant  years  743-735  that  we  can  make 
out  the  kind  of  crimes  described.  A  king  sur- 
rounded by  loose  and  unscrupulous  nobles: 
adultery,  drunkenness,  conspiracies,  assassina- 
tion: every  man  striking  for  himself;  none  ap- 
pealing to  God. 

From  the  court,  then,  downwards,  by  princes, 
priests,  and  prophets,  to  the  common  fathers  of 
Israel  and  their  households,  immorality  prevails. 
There  is  no  redeeming  feature,  and  no  hope  of 
better  things.  For  repentance  itself  the  capacity 
is  gone. 

In  making  so  thorough  an  indictment  of  the 
moral  condition  of  Israel,  it  would  have  been 
impossible  for  Hosea  not  to  speak  also  of  the 
political  stupidity  and  restlessness  which  resulted 
from  it.  But  he  has  largely  reserved  these  for 
that  part  of  his  discourse  which  now  follows, 
and  which  we  will  take  in  the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

A  PEOPLE  IN  DECAY:  II.  POLITICALLY. 

Hosea  vii.  8-x. 

Moral  decay  means  political  decay.  Sins  like 
these  are  the  gangrene  of  nations.  It  is  part 
of  Hosea's  greatness  to  have  traced  this,  a  proof 
of  that  versatility  which  distinguishes  him  above 
other  prophets.  The  most  spiritual  of  them  alk, 
he  is  at  the  same  time  the  most  political.  We 
owe  him  an  analysis  of  repentance  to  which  the 
New  Testament  has  little  to  add;  ||  but  he  has 
also  left  us  a  criticism  of  society  and  of  politics 
in  Israel,  unrivalled  except  by  Isaiah.  We  owe 
him  an  intellectual  conception  of  God,^  which 
for  the  first  time  in  Israel  exploded  idolatry; 
yet  he  also  is  the  first  to  define  Israel's  position 
in  the  politics  of  Western  Asia.  With  the  single 
courage  of  conscience  Amos  had  said  to  the 
people:  You  are  bad,  therefore  you  must  per- 
ish. But  Hosea's  is  the  insight  to  follow  the 
processes  by  which  sin  brings  forth'  death — to 
trace,  for  instance,  the  effects  of  impurity  upon 
a  nation's  powers  of  reproduction,  as  well  as 
upon  its  intellectual  vigour. 

read  n3n^  K'N.  Oort  emends  Heb  to  iriDN  DH  IVia, 
which  gets  rid  of  the  difficulty  of  a  feminine  participle 
with  "TiJn.  Wellhausen  omits  whole  clause  as  a  gloss  on 
ver.  6.    But  if  there  be  a  gloss  it  properly  commences  with 

*  LXX.  /leTaTOi/aii'  ?  ? 

+  LXX.  "kindled," '•'1^3 •     So  Vollers,  "Z.  A.  T.  W.," 

III.   2SO. 

t  Lit.  "lurking." 

§  Massoretic  Text  with  different  vowels  reads  "  theii 
baker."    LXX.  E<frpai^ ! 
II  S^e  below,  chap.  xxii. 
^  See  chap.  xxi. 


Hosea  vii.  8-x.] 


A    PEOPLE    IN    DECAY:    II.    POLITICALLY. 


509 


So  intimate  are  these  two  faculties  of  Hosea 
that  in  chapters  devoted  chieHy  to  the  sins  of 
Israel  we  have  already  seen  him  expose  the  po- 
litical disasters  that  follow.  But  from  the  point 
we  have  now  reached — chap.  vii.  8 — the  propor- 
tion of  his  prophesying  is  reversed:  he  gives  us 
less  of  the  sin  and  more  of  the  social  decay  and 
political  folly  of  his  age. 


I.  The  Confusion  of  the  Nation. 


Hosea 


vii.  8-vni.  3. 


Hosea  begins  by  summing  up  the  public  as- 
pect of  Israel  in  two  epigrams,  short  but  of  mar- 
vellous >adequacy  (vii.  8) : — 

"  Ephraim— among  the  nations  he  mixeth  himself : 
Ephraim  has  become  a  cake  not  turned." 

It  is  a  great  crisis  for  any  nation  to  pass  from 
the  seclusion  of  its  youth  and  become  a  factor 
in  the  main  history  of  the  world.  But  for  Israel 
the  crisis  was  trebly  great.  Their  difference 
from  all  other  tribes  about  them  had  struck  the 
Canaanites  on  their  first  entry  to  the  land:*  their 
own  earliest  writers  had  emphasised  their  se- 
clusion as  their  strength;!  and  their  first  proph- 
ets consistently  deprecated  every  overture  made 
by  them  either  to  Egypt  or  to  Assyria.  We  feel 
the  force  of  the  prophets'  policy  when  we  re- 
member what  happened  to  the  Philistines.  These 
were  a  people  as  strong  and  as  distinctive  as 
Israel,  with  whom  at  one  time  they  disputed  pos- 
session of  the  whole  land.  But  their  position  as 
traders  in  the  main  line  of  trafific  between  Asia 
and  Africa  rendered  the  Philistines  peculiarly 
open  to  foreigi'  nf^uence.  They  were  now  Egyp- 
tian vassals,  now  Assyrian  victims;  and  after  the 
invasion  of  Alexander  the  Great  their  cities  be- 
came centres  of  Hellenism,  while  the  Jews  upon 
their  secluded  hills  still  stubbornly  held  unmixed 
their  race  and  their  religion.  This  contrast,  so 
remarkably  developed  in  later  centuries,  has  jus- 
tified the  prophets  of  the  eighth  in  their  anxiety 
that  Israel  should  not  annul  the  advantages  of 
her  geographical  seclusion  by  trade  or  treaties 
with  the  Gentiles.  But  it  was  easier  for  Judaea 
to  take  heed  to  the  warning  than  for  Ephraim. 
The  latter  lies  as  open  and  fertile  as  her  sister 
province  is  barren  and  aloof.  She  has  many 
gates  into  the  world,  and  they  open  upon  many 
markets.  Nobler  opportunities  there  could  not 
be  for  a  nation  in  the  maturity  of  its  genius  and 
loyal  to  its  vocation: — 

"  Rejoice,  O  Zebulun,  in  thine  outgoings  : 
They  shall  call  the  nations  to  the  mountain  ; 
They  shall  suck  of  the  abundance  of  the  seas, 
And  of  the  treasure  that  is  stored  in  the  sands."  t 

But  in  the  time  of  his  outgoings  Ephraim  was 
not  sure  of  himself  nor  true  to  his  God,  the  one 
secret  and  strength  of  the  national  distinctive- 
ness. So  he  met  the  world  weak  and  unformed, 
and,  instead  of  impressing  it,  was  by  it  dis- 
sipated and  confused.  The  tides  of  a  lavish  com- 
merce scattered  abroad  the  faculties  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  swept  back  upon  their  life  alien  fashions 
and  tempers,  to  subdue  which  there  was  neither 
native  strength  nor  definiteness  of  national  pur- 
pose. All  this  is  what  Hosea  means  by  the  first 
of  his  epigrams:  "  Ephraim — among  the  nations 

*  Numb,  xxiii.  g  ^  ,•  Josh.  ii.  8.  t  Deut.  xxxiii.  27. 

^Deut.  xxxiii.  18,  19. 


he  lets  himself  be  poured  out,"  or  "  mixed  up." 
The  form  of  the  verb  does  not  elsewhere  occur; 
but  it  is  reflexive,  and  the  meaning  of  the  root 
is  certain.  "  Balal  "  is  to  "  pour  out,"  or 
"  mingle,"  as  of  oil  in  the  sacrificial  fiour.  Yet 
it  is  sometimes  used  of  a  mixing  which  is  not 
sacred,  but  profane  and  hopeless.  It  is  applied 
to  the  first  great  confusion  of  mankind,  to  which 
a  popular  etymology  has  traced  the  name  Babel, 
as  if  for  Balbel.  Derivatives  of  the  stem  bear 
the  additional  ideas  of  staining  and  impurity. 
The  alternative  renderings  which  have  been  pro- 
posed, "  lets  himself  be  soaked  "  and  "  scatters 
himself "  abroad  like  wheat  among  tares,  are 
not  so  probable,  yet  hardly  change  the  mean- 
ing.* Ephraim  wastes  and  confuses  himself 
among  the  Gentiles.  The  nation's  character  is 
so  disguised  that  Hosea  afterwards  nicknames 
him  Canaan ;f  their  religion  so  filled  with  for- 
eign influences  that  he  calls  the  people  the  harlot 
of  the  Ba'alim. 

If  the  first  of  Hosea's  epigrams  satirises 
Israel's  foreign  relations,  the  second,  with  equal 
brevity  and  wit,  hits  ofif  the  temper  and  consti- 
tution of  society  at  home.  For  the  metaphor 
of  which  this  epigram  is  composed  Hosea  has 
gone  to  the  baker.  Among  all  classes  in  the 
East,  especially  under  conditions  requiring  haste, 
there  is  in  demand  a  round  flat  scone,  which 
is  baked  by  being  laid  on  hot  stones  or  attached 
to  the  wall  of  a  heated  oven.  The  whole  art 
of  baking  consists  in  turning  the  scone  over  at 
the  proper  moment.  If  this  be  mismanaged  it 
does  not  need  a  baker  to  tell  us  that  one  side 
may  be  burnt  to  a  cinder,  while  the  other  re- 
mains raw.  "  Ephraim,"  says  Hosea,  "  is  an  un- 
turned cake." 

By  this  he  may  mean  one  of  several  things, 
or  all  of  them  together,  for  they  are  infectious 
of  each  other.  There  was,  for  instance,  the  so- 
cial conditions  of  the  people.  What  can  better  be 
described  as  an  unturned  scone  than  a  community 
one  half  of  whose  number  are  too  rich,  and  the 
other  too  poor?  Or  Hosea  may  refer  to  that 
unequal  distribution  of  religion  through  life 
with  which  in  other  parts  of  his  prophecy  he 
reproaches  Israel.  They  keep  their  religion,  as 
Amos  more  fully  tells  us,  for  their  tempies,  and 
neglect  to  carry  its  spirit  into  their  daily  busi- 
ness. Or  he  may  refer  to  Israel's  politics,  which 
were  equally  in  want  of  thoroughness.  They 
rushed  hotly  at  an  enterprise,  but  having  ex- 
pended so  much  fire  in  the  beginning  of  it,  they 
let  the  end  drop  cold  and  dead.  Or  he  may  wish 
to  satirise,  like  Amos,  Israel's  imperfect  culture 
— the  pretentious  and  overdone  arts,  stuck  ex- 
crescence-wise upon  the  unrefined  bulk  of  the 
nation,  just  as  in  many  German  principalities  last 
century  society  took  on  a  few  French  lashions  in 
rough  and  exaggerated  forms,  while  at  heart  still 
brutal  and  coarse.     Hosea  may  mean  any  one  of 

*  ??3n^  from  7P2.     In  Phoen.  ??2  seems  to  have  been 

used  as  in  Israel  of  the  sacrificial  mingling  of  oil  and  flour 
(c/.  Robertson  Smith,  "Religion  of  Kemites,"  I.  203)  ;  in 
Arabic  "  ball  "  is  to  weaken  a  strong  liquid  with  water, 
while  "balbal"  is  to  be  confused,  disordered.  The 
Syriac   "  balal "   is  to   mix.     Some  have   taken   Hosea's 

hblD'^  as  if  from  7''7l  (Isa.  xxx.  24  ;  Job  vi.  5),  usually 
understood  as  a  mixed  crop  of  wheat  and  inferior  vege- 
tables  for  fodder  ;  but  there  is  reason  to  believe  7v3 

means  rather  fresh  corn.    The  derivation  from  11/3.  to 
grow  old,  does  not  seem  probable, 
txii.  8. 


5IO 


THE  BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


these  things,  for  the  figure  suits  all,  and  all  spring 
from  the  same  defect.  Want  of  thoroughness 
and  equable  efifort  was  Israel's  besetting  sin,  and 
it  told  on  all  sides  of  his  life.  How  better  de- 
scribe a  half-fed  people,  a  half-cultured  society, 
a  half-lived  religion,  a  half-hearted  policy,  than 
by  a  half-baked  scone? 

We  who  are  so  proud  of  our  political  bakers, 
we  who  scorn  the  rapid  revolutions  of  our  neigh- 
bours and  complacently  dwell  upon  our  equable 
ovens,  those  slow  and  cautious  centuries  of  po- 
litical   development    which    lie    behind    us — have 
we   anything   better   than   our   neighbours,    any- 
thing better  than  Israel,  to  show  in  our  civilisa- 
tion?  Hosea's  epigram  fits  us  to  the  letter.   After 
all  those  ages  of  baking,  society  is  still  with  us 
"  an  unturned  scone  "  :   one  end  of   the  nation 
with  the  strength  burnt  out  of  it  by  too  much 
enjoyment   of   life,    the   other   with   not   enough 
of   warmth   to   be   quickened   into   anything   like 
adequate  vitality.     No   man   can  deny   that  this 
is  so;  we  are  able  to  live  only  by  shutting  our 
hearts   to  the   fact.      Or  is   religion   equally   dis- 
tributed through  the  lives  of  the  religious  por- 
tion of  our  nation?     Of  late  years  religion  has 
spread,  and  spread  wonderfully,  but  of  how  many 
Christians  is  it  still  true  that  they  are  but  half- 
baked — living  a  life   one   side  of  which   is   reek- 
ing with  the  smoke  of  sacrifice,  while  the  other 
is  never  warmed  by  one  religious  thought.     We 
may   have   too    much    religion    if   we    confine    it 
to  one  day  or  one  department  of  life:  our  wor- 
ship overdone,   with  the   sap  and  the   freshness 
burnt   out   of    it,   cindry,    dusty,   unattractive,    fit 
only    for   crumbling;    our    conduct    cold,    damp, 
and  heavy,  like  dough  the  fire  has  never  reached. 
Upon  the   theme   of    these   two   epigrams   the 
other  verses  of  this  chapter  are  variations.     Has 
Ephraim    mixed    himself    among    the    peoples? 
"  Strangers  have  devoured  his  strength,   and  he 
knoweth  it  not,"  senselessly  congratulating  him- 
self upon  the  increase  of  his  trade  and  wealth, 
while  he  does  not  feel  that  these  have   sucked 
from  him  all  his  distinctive  virtue.     "  Yea,  grey 
hairs  are  sprinkled  upon  him,  and  he  knoweth 
it  not."     He  makes  his  energy  the  measure  of 
his   life,    as    Isaiah   also   marked,*   but   sees   not 
that  it  all  means  waste  and  decay.     "  The  pride 
of  Israel  testifieth  to  his  face,  yet  " — even  when 
the  pride  of  the  nation  is  touched  to  the  quick 
by  such  humiliating  overtures  as  they  make  to 
both  Assyria  and  Egypt  f — "they  do  not  return 
to  Jehovah  their  God,  nor  seek  Him  for  all  this." 
With  virtue  and  single-hearted  faith  have  dis- 
appeared  intellect   and   the    capacity    for   affairs. 
"  Ephraim  is   become   like  a  silly  dove — a  dove 
without  heart,"  to  the  Hebrews  the  organ  of  the 
wits   of   a   man — "  they    cry   to    Egypt,    they   go 
ofif  to  Assyria."     Poor  pigeon  of  a  people,  flut- 
tering from  one  refuge  to  another!    But  "  as  they 
go  I  will  throw  over  them  My  net,  like  a  bird 
of  the  air  I  will  bring  them  down.     I  will  punish 
them   as   their    congregation    have    heard " — this 
text  as  it  stands^:  can  only  mean  "  in  the  manner 
I  have  publicly  proclaimed  in  Israel."    "  Woe  to 
them  that  they  have  strayed  from  Me!     Damna- 
tion   to    them    that    they    have    rebelled    against 
Me!     While  I  would  have  redeemed  them  they 
spoke  lies  about  Me.     And  they  have  never  cried 
unto  Me  with  their  heart,  but  they  keep  howling 
from  their  beds   for   corn  and  new   wine."     No 
real  repentance  theirs,  but  some  fear  of  drought 

*  ix.  9  f.  t  See  above,  p  507,  and  below,  p.  641. 

t  But  the  reading  is  very  doubtful. 


and  miscarriage  of  the  harvests,  a  sensual  and 
servile  sorrow  in  which  they  wallow.  They  seek 
God  with  no  heart,  no  true  appreciation  of  what 
He  is,  but  use  the  senseless  means  by  which 
the  heathen  invoke  their  gods:  "they  cut  them- 
selves,* and  "  so  "  apostatise  from  Me!  And  yet 
it  was  I  who  disciplined  them,  I  strengthened 
their  arm,  but  with  regard  to  Me  they  kept  think- 
ing "  only  "evil!"  So  fickle  and  sensitive  to 
fear,  "  they  turn  "  indeed  "  but  not  upwards;  " 
no  Godward  conversion  theirs.  In  their  re- 
pentance "  they  are  like  a  bow  which  swerves  " — 
off  upon  some  impulse  of  their  ill-balanced  na- 
tures. "  Their  princes  must  fall  by  the  sword 
because  of  the  bitterness  " — we  should  have  ex- 
pected "falseness" — "of  their  tongue:  this  is 
their  scorn  in  the  land  of  Egypt!  "  To  the 
allusion  we  have  no  key. 

With  so  false  a  people  nothing  can  be  done. 
Their  doom  is  inevitable.     So 

"  Cry  havoc  and  let  slip  the  dogs  of  war." 

"  To  thy  mouth  with  the  trumpet!  The  Eagle 
is  down  upon  the  house  of  Jehovah!  "  f  Where 
the  carcase  is,  there  are  the  eagles  gathered  to- 
gether. "  For  " — to  sum  up  the  whole  crisis — 
"  they  have  transgressed  My  covenant,  and 
against  My  law  have  they  rebelled.  To  Me  they 
cry.  My  God,  we  know  Thee,  we  Israel!" 
What  does  it  matter?  "  Israel  hath  spurned  the 
good::t    the  Foe  must  pursue  him." 

It  is  the  same  climax  of  inevitable  war  to 
which  Amos  led  up  his  periods:  and  a  new  sub- 
ject is  now  introduced. 


2.  Artificial  Kings  and  Artificial  Gods. 

Hosea  viii.  4-13. 

The  curse  of  such  a  state  of  dissipation  as 
that  to  which  Israel  had  fallen  is  that  it  pro- 
duces no  men.  Had  the  people  had  in  them 
"  the  root  of  the  matter,"  had  there  been  the 
stalk  and  the  fibre  of  a  national  consciousness 
and  purpose,  it  would  have  blossomed  to  a  man. 
In  the  similar  time  of  her  outgoings  upon  the 
world  Prussia  had  her  Frederick  the  Great,  and 
Israel,  too,  would  have  produced  a  leader,  a 
heaven-sent  king,  if  the  national  spirit  had  not 
been  squandered  on  foreign  trade  and  fashions. 
But  after  the  death  of  Jeroboam  every  man  who 
rose  to  eminence  in  Israel,  rose,  not  on  the 
nation,  but  only  on  the  fevered  and  transient 
impulse  of  some  faction;  and  through  the  broken 
years  one  party  monarch  was  lifted  after  another 
to  the  brief  tenancy  of  a  blood-stained  throne. 
They  were  not  from  God,  these  inonarchs;  but 
man-made,  and  sooner  or  later  man-murdered. 
With  his  sharp  insight  Hosea  likens  these  arti- 
ficial kings  to  the  artificial  gods,  also  the  work 
of  men's   hands;  and  till  near  the  close   of  his 

*  Tor  r\-\iJV  read  mirW 

+  Wellhausen's  objection  to  the  first  clause,  that  one 

does  not  set  a  trumpet   to  one's    "gums,"   which     H*!! 

literally   means,  is  beside  the  mark.     mG  is  more  than 

once  used  of  the  mouth  as  a  whole  (Job  viii.  7  ;  Prov.  v. 
3).  The  second  clause  gives  the  reason  of  the  trumpet, 
the  alarum  trumpet,  in  the  first.  Read  "^^2  ^D  (so  als« 
Wellhausen).  ,,        ,   , 

t  Cf.  Amos  :  "  Seek  Me  =  Seek  the  good  ;  and  Jesus : 
"  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto  Me,  Lord,  Lord  ;  but  he 
that  doeth  the  will  of  My  Father  in  heaven." 


Hosea  vii.  8-x.] 


A    PEOPLE    IN    DECAY:    II.    POLITICALLY. 


5'^ 


book  the  idols  of  the  sanctuary  and  the  puppets 
of  the  throne  form  the  twin  targets  of  liis  scorn. 
"They  have  made  kings,  but  not  from  Me; 
they  have  made  princes,  but  I  knew  not.  With 
their  silver  and  their  gold  they  have  manufac- 
tured themselves  idols,  only  that  they  *  may  be 
cut  off  " — king  after  king,  idol  upon  idol.  "  He 
loathes  thy  Calf,  O  Samaria,"  the  thing  of  wood 
and  gold  which  thou  callest  Jehovah.  And  God 
confirms  this.  "  Kindled  is  Mine  anger  against 
them!  How" long  will  they  be  incapable  of  in- 
nocence? " — unable  to  clear  themselves  of  guilt! 
The  idol  is  still  in  his  mind.  "  For  from  Israel 
is  it  also" — as  much  as  the  puppet-kings;  "a 
workman  made  it,  and  no  god  is  it.  Yea,  splin- 
ters shall  the  Calf  of  Samaria  become."  f  Splin- 
ters shall  everything  in  Israel  become.  "  For 
they  sow  the  wind,  and  the  whirlwind  shall  they 
reap."  Indeed  like  a  storm  Hosea's  own  lan- 
guage now  sweeps  along;  and  his  metaphors  are 
torn  into  shreds  upon  it.  "  Stalk  it  hath  none: 
the  sprout  brings  forth  no  grain:  if  it  were  to 
bring  forth,  strangers  would  swallow  it."t  Nay, 
"  Israel  hath  let  herself  be  swallowed  up!  Al- 
ready are  they  becoming  among  the  nations  like 
a  vessel  there  is  no  more  use  for."  Heathen 
empires  have  sucked  them  dry.  "  They  have 
gone  up  to  Assyria  like  a  runaway  wild-ass. 
Ephraim  hath  hired  lovers."  t^  It  is  again  the 
note  of  their  mad  dissipation  among  the  foreign- 
ers. "  But  if  they  "  thus  "  give  themselves  away 
among  the  nations,  I  must  gather  them  in,  and  " 
then  "  shall  they  have  to  cease  a  little  from 
the  anointing  of  a  king  and  princes."  ||  This 
wilful  roaming  of  theirs  among  the  foreigners 
shall  be  followed  by  compulsory  exile,  and  all 
their  unholy  artificial  politics  shall  cease.  The 
discourse  turns  to  the  other  target.  For  Ephraim 
hath  multiplied  altars — to  sin;  altars  are  his  own 
— to  sin.  Were  I  to  write  for  him  by  myriads 
My  laws,"f  as  those  of  a  stranger  would  they  be 
accounted.  They  slay  burnt-offerings  for  Me 
and  eat  flesh.**  Jehovah  hath  no  delight  in  them. 
Now  must  He  remember  their  guilt  and  make 
visitation  upon  their  sin.  They — to  Egypt — shall 
return.  ..."  ft  Back  to  their  ancient  servi- 
tude must  they  go,  as  formerly  He  said  He 
would  withdraw  them  to  the  wilderness. $$ 


3.  The  Effects  of  Exile. 

Hosea  ix.    1-9. 

Hosea  now  turns  to  describe  the  effects  of 
exile  upon  the  social  and  religious  habits  of  the 
people.  It  must  break  up  at  once  the  joy  and 
the  sacredness  of  their  lives.     Every  pleasure  will 

*So  LXX.,but  Hebrew  it. 

t  Davidson's  "  Syntax,"  §  136,  Rom.  i,  and  §  71,  Rom.  4. 

tSo  by  the  accents  runs  the  verse,  but,  *s  Wellhausen 
has  pointed  out,  both  its  sense  and  its  assonance  are  better 
expressed  by  another    arrangement :    "  Hath   it  grown 
up?"  then  "  it  hath  no  shoot,  nor  bringeth  forth  fruit." 
en  lo  seniach, 
b'h'  ya'aseh  qemach. 
Yet  to  this  there  is  a  grammatical  obstacle. 

§  Wellhausen's  reading  "to  Egypt  with  love  gifts" 
scarcely  suits  the  verb  "go  up."  Notice  the  play  upon 
P(h)ere',  "  wild-ass"  and  Ephra'[im]. 

II  So  LXX.  reads.  Heb.:  "they  shall  involve  them- 
selves with  tribute  to  the  king  of  princes,"  presumably 
the  .A.ssyrian  monarch. 

T  So  LXX. 

**Text  obscure. 

tt  LXX.  addition  here  is  plainly  borrowed  from  ix.  3. 
For  the  reasons  for  omitting  ver.  14  see  aboye,  p.  497. 

XX'xx.  i6. 


be  removed,  every  taste  offended.  Indeed,  even 
now,  with  their  conscience  of  having  deserted 
Jehovah,  they  cannot  pretend  to  enjoy  the 
feasts  of  the  Ba'alim  in  the  same  hearty  way 
as  the  heathen  with  whom  they  mix.  But. 
whether  or  no,  the  time  is  near  when  nature- 
feasts  and  all  other  religious  ceremonies— all 
that  makes  life  glad  and  regular  and  solemn— 
shall  be  impossible. 

"  Rejoice  not,  O  Israel,  to  "  the  pitch  of  "  rap- 
ture like  the  heathen,  for  thou  hast  played  the 
harlot  from  thy  God;  a  harlot's  hire  hast  thou 
loved  on  all  threshing-floors.*  Threshing-floor 
and  wine-vat  shall  ignore  f  them,  and  the  new 
wine  shall  play  them  false.  They  shall  not  abide 
in  the  land  of  Jehovah,  but  Ephraim  shall  re- 
turn to  Egypt,  and  in  Assyria  they  shall  eat  what 
is  unclean.  They  shall  not  pour  libations  to 
Jehovah,  nor  prepare t  for  Him  their  sacrifices. 
Like  the  bread  of  sorrows  shall  their  bread  ^^ 
be;  all  that  eat  of  it  shall  be  defiled:"  yea*, 
"  their  bread  shall  be  "  only  "  for  their  appetite; 
they  shall  not  bring  "  it||  •"  to  the  temple  of  Je- 
hovah." He  cannot  be  worshipped  off  His  own 
land.  They  will  have  to  live  like  animals,  di- 
vorced from  religion,  unable  to  hold  communion 
with  their  God.  "  What  shall  ye  do  for  days^T 
of  festival,  or  for  a  day  of  pilgrimage  to  Je- 
hovah? For  lo,"  they  "  shall  be  gone  forth  from 
destruction,"  **  the  shock  and  invasion  of  their 
land,  only  ''  that  Egypt  may  gather  them  in, 
Memphis  give  them  sepulchre,  nettles  inherit 
their  jewels  of  silver,  thorns  "  come  up  "  in  their 
tents."  The  threat  of  exile  still  wavers  between 
Assyria  and  iigypt.  And  in  Egypt  Memphis  is 
chosen  as  the  destined  grave  of  Israel;  for  even 
then  her  Pyramids  and  mausoleums  were  an- 
cient and  renowned,  her  vaults  and  sepulchres 
were  countless  and  spacious. 

But  what  need  is  there  to  seek  the  future  for 
Israel's  doom,  when  already  this  is  being  fulfilled 
by  the  corruption  of  her  spiritual  leaders? 

"  The  days  of  visitation  have  come,  have  come 
the  days  of  requital.  Israel  "  already  "  experi- 
encesft  them!  A  fool  is  the  prophet,  raving  mad 
the  man  of  the  spirit."  The  old  ecstasy  of  Saul's 
day  has  become  delirium  and  fanaticism. JJ  Why? 
"  For  the  mass  of  thy  guilt  and  the  multiplied 
treachery!  Ephraim  acts  the  spy  with  My  God." 
There  is  probably  a  play  on  the  name,  for  with 
the  meaning  a  "  watchman  "  for  God  it  is  else- 
where used  as  an  honourable  title  of  the  proph- 
ets. "  The  prophet  is  a  fowler's  snare  upon  all 
his  ways.  Treachery — they  have  made  it  pro- 
found in  the  "  very  "  house  of  their  God.§§  They 
have  done  corruptly,  as  in  the  days  of  Gibeah. 
Their  iniquity  is  remembered;  visitation  is  madt 
on  their  sin." 

These,  then,  were  the  symptoms  of  the  pro- 
found political  decay  which  followed  on  Israel's 
immorality.  The  national  spirit  and  unity  of  the 
people  had  disappeared.     Society — half  of  it  was 

*  On  this  verse  see  more  particularly  below,  pp.  643  flf. 

tSo  LXX. 

\  Read  13")^^,     Cf.  with  the  whole  passage  iii.  4  f. 

§  DDni?  for  on^. 

If  Plural  :  so  LXX. 

**  Others  read  "  they  are  gone  to  Assyria." 
++ Literally  "knows.    See  below,  p.  522,  n. 
XX  See  above,  p.  44q. 

§§  So,  after  the  LXX,  by  taking  ip^^^VH  with  this  verse, 
8.  instead  of  with  ver.  0. 


512 


THE-  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


raw,  half  of  it  was  baked  to  a  cinder.  The  na- 
tion, broken  into  fractions,  produced  no  man  to 
lead,  no  king  with  the  stamp  of  God  upon  him. 
Anarchy  prevailed;  monarchs  were  made  and 
murdered.  There  was  no  prestige  abroad,  noth- 
ing but  contempt  among  the  Gentiles  for  a  peo- 
ple whom  they  had  exhausted.  Judgment  was 
inevitable  by  exile — nay,  it  had  come  already  in 
the  corruption  of  the  spiritual  leaders  of  the 
nation. 

Rosea  now  turns  to  probe  a  deeper  corruption 
still. 

4.  "  The  Corruption  that  is  Through  Lust." 
Rosea  ix.  10-17:  cf.  iv.  11-14. 

Those  who  at  the  present  time  are  enforcing 
among  us  the  revival  of  a  Paganism — without 
the  Pagan  conscience — and  exalting  licentious- 
ness to  the  level  of  an  art,  forget  how  frequently 
the  human  race  has  attempted  their  experiment, 
with  far  more  sincerity,  than  they  themselves  can 
put  into  it,  and  how  invariably  the  result  has 
been  recorded  by  history  to  be  weariness,  decay, 
and  death.  On  this  occasion  we  have  the  story 
told  to  us  by  one  who  to  the  experience  of  the 
statesman  adds  the  vision  of  the  poet. 

The  generation  to  which  Rosea  belonged  prac- 
tised a  periodical  unchastity  under  the  alleged 
sanctions  of  nature  and  religion.  And,  although 
their  prophet  told  them  that — like  our  own  apos- 
tates from  Christianity — they  could  never  do  so 
with  the  abandon  of  the  Pagans,  for  they  carried 
within  them  the  conscience  and  the  memory  of 
a  higher  faith,  it  appears  that  even  the  fathers  of 
Israel  resorted  openly  and  without  shame  to  the 
licentious  rites  of  the  sanctuaries.  In  an  earlier 
passage  of  his  book  Rosea  insists  that  all  this 
must  impair  the  people's  intellect.  "  Harlotry 
takes  away  the  brains."  *  Re  has  shown  also 
how  it  confuses  the  family,  and  has  exposed  the 
old  delusion  that  men  may  be  impure  and  keep 
their  womankind  chaste. f  But  now  he  diagnoses 
another  of  the  inevitable  results  of  this  sin. 
After  tracing  the  sin  and  the  theory  of  life  which 
permitted  it,  to  their  historical  beginnings  at  the 
entry  of  the  people  into  Canaan,  he  describes 
how  the  long  practice  of  it,  no  matter  how  pre- 
tentious its  sanctions,  inevitably  leads  not  only 
to  exterminating  strifes,  but  to  the  decay  of  the 
vigour  cf  the  nation,  to  barrenness  and  a  dimin- 
ishing population. 

"  Like  grapes  in  the  wilderness  I  found  Israel, 
like  the  first  fruit  on  a  fig-tree  in  her  first  season 
I  saw  your  fathers."  So  had  the  lusty  nation 
appeared  to  God  in  its  youth;  in  that  dry 
wilderness  all  the  sap  and  promise  of  spring 
were  in  its  eyes,  because  it  was  still  pure. 
But  "  they — they  came  to  Ba'al-Peor  " — the 
first  of  the  shrines  of  Canaan  which  they 
touched — "  and  dedicated  themselves  to  the 
Shame,  and  became  as  abominable  as  the  object 
of  their  love.  Ephraim  " — the  "  Fruitful  "  name 
is  emphasised — '"  their  glory  is  flown  away  like 
a  bird.  No  more  birth,  no  more  motherhood, 
no  more  conception!:]:  Blasted  is  Ephraim, 
withered  the  root  of  them,  fruit  they  produce 
not:  yea,  even  when  they  beget  children  I  slay 
the  darlings  of  their  womb.     Yea,  though  they 

*  iv.  12. 
+  iv.  13,  14. 

X  Here,  between  vv.  11  and  12,  Wellhausen  with  justice 
proposes  to  insert  ver.  16. 


bring  up  their  sons  I  bereave  them,"  till  they  are 
"  poor  in  men.  Yea,  woe  upon  themselves  also, 
when  I  look  away  from  them!  Ephraim" — 
again  the  '"  Fruitful "  name  is  dragged  to  the 
front — "  for  prey,  as  I  have  seen,  are  his  sons 
destined.*  Ephraim  " — he  "  must  lead  his  sons 
to  the  slaughter." 

And  the  prophet  interrupts  with  his  chorus: 
"  Give  them,  O  Lord — what  wilt  Thou  give 
them?  Give  them  a  miscarrying  womb  and 
breasts  that  are  dry!  " 

"  All  their  mischief  is  in  Gilgal  " — again  the 
Divine  voice  strikes  the  connection  between  the 
national  worship  and  the  national  sin — "  yea, 
there  do  I  hate  them:  for  the  evil  of  their  doings 
from  My  house  I  will  drive  them.  I  will  love 
them  no  more:  all  their  nobles  are  rebels."! 

And  again  the  prophet  responds:  "  My  God 
will  cast  them  away,  for  they  have  not  hearkened 
to  Rim,  and  they  shall  be  vagabonds  among  the 
nations." 

Some  of  the  warnings  which  Rosea  enforces 
with  regard  to  this  sin  have  been  instinctively 
felt  by  mankind  since  the  beginnings  of  civilisa- 
tion, and  are  found  expresed  among  the  prov- 
erbs of  nearly  all  the  languages.^  But  I  am  un- 
aware of  any  earlier  moralist  in  any  literature 
who  traced  the  effects  of  national  licentiousness 
in  a  diminishing  population,  or  who  exposed  the 
persistent  delusion  of  libertine  men  that  they 
themselves  may  resort  to  vice,  yet  keep  their  wo- 
mankind chaste.  Rosea,  so  far  as  we  know,  was 
the  first  to  do  this.  History  in  many  periods 
has  confirmed  the  justice  of  his  observations, 
and  by  one  strong  voice  after  another  enforced 
his  terrible  warnings.  The  experience  of  ancient 
Persia  and'  Egypt;  the  languor  of  the  Greek 
cities;  the  "  deep  weariness  and  sated  lust  "  which 
in  Imperial  Rome  "made  human  life  a  hell"; 
the  decay  which  overtook  Italy  after  the  renas- 
cence of  Paganism  without  the  Pagan  virtues; 
the  strife  and  anarchy  that  have  rent  every  court 
where,  as  in  the  case  of  Henri  Quatre,  the  king 
set  the  example  of  libertinage;  the  incompetence, 
the  poltroonery,  the  treachery,  that  have  cor- 
rupted every  camp  where,  as  in  French  Metz  in 
1870,  soldiers  and  officers  gave  way  so  openly 
to  vice;  the  checks  suffered  by  modern  civilisa- 
tion in  face  of  barbarism  because  its  pioneers 
mingled  in  vice  with  the  savage  races  they  were 
subduing;  the  number  of  great  statesmen  failing 
by  their  passions,  and  in  their  fall  frustrating  the 
hopes  of  nations;  the  great  families  worn  out  by 
indulgence;  the  homes  broken  up  by  infidelities; 
the  tainting  of  the  blood  of  a  new  generation  by 
the  poisonous  practices  of  the  old, — have  not 
all  these  things  been  in  every  age,  and  do  they 
not  still  happen  near  enough  to  ourselves  to  give 
us  a  great  fear  of  the  sin  which  causes  them  all? 
Alas!  how  slow  men  are  to  listen  and  to  lay  to 
heart!  Is  it  possible  that  we  can  gild  by  the 
names  of  frivolity  and  piquancy  habits  the  wages 
of  which  are  death?  Is  it  possible  that  we  can 
enjoy   comedies  which   make   such   things   their 

*  So  Wellhausen  after  LXX.,  ;  probably  correct. 

t  So  we  may  attempt  to  echo  the  play  on  the  words. 

X  Cf.,  e.  g.,  the  "Proverbs  of  Ptah-Hotep  "  the  Egyptian, 
circa  2soo  B.  C.  "  There  is  no  prudence  in  taking  part  in 
it,  and  thousands  of  men  destroy  themselves  in  order  to 
enjoy  a  moment,  brief  as  a  dream,  while  they  gain  death 
so  as  to  know  it.  It  is  a  villainous  .  .  .  that  of  a  man  vvho 
excites  himself  C?) ;  if  he  goes  on  to  carry  it  out.  his  mind 
abandons  him.  For  as  foK  him  who  is  without  repugnance 
for  such  an  [act],  there  is  no  good  sense  at  all  in  him."  — 
From  the  translation  in  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  Second 
Series,  Vol.  III.,  p.  24. 


Hosea  vii.  8-x.J 


A    PEOPLE    IN    DECAY:    II.    POLITICALLY. 


5^3 


jest?  We  have  among  us  many  who  find  their 
business  in  the  theatre,  or  in  some  of  the  peri- 
odical literature  of  our  time,  in  writing  and 
speaking  and  exhibiting  as  closely  as  they  dare 
to  limits  of  public  decency.  When  will  they 
learn  that  it  is  not  upon  the  easy  edge  of  mere 
conventions  that  they  are  capering,  but  upon  the 
brink  of  those  eternal  laws  whose  further  side 
is  death  and  hell — that  it  is  not  the  tolerance 
of  their  fellow-men  they  are  testing,  but  the  pa- 
tience of  God  Himself?  As  for  those  loud  few 
who  claim  license  in  the  name  of  art  and  litera- 
ture, let  us  not  shrink  from  them  as  if  they  were 
strong  or  their  high  words  true.  They  are  not 
strong,  they  are  only  reckless;  their  claims  are 
lies.  All  history,  the  poets  and  the  prophets, 
whether  Christian  or  Pagan,  are  against  them. 
They  are  traitors  alike  to  art,  to  love,  and  to 
every  other  high  interest  of  mankind. 

It  may  be  said  that  a  large  part  of  the  art  of  the 
day,  which  takes  great  license  in  dealing  with 
these  subjects,  is  exercised  only  by  the  ambition 
to  expose  that  ruin  and  decay  which  Hosea  him- 
self affirms.  This  is  true.  Some  of  the  ablest 
and  most  popular  writers  of  our  time  have  pict- 
ured the  facts,  which  Hosea  describes,  with  so 
vivid  a  realism  that  we  cannot  but  judge  them  to 
be  inspired  to  confirm  his  ancient  warnings,  and 
to  excite  a  disgust  of  vice  in  a  generation  which 
otherwise  treats  vice  so  lightly.  But  if  so,  their 
ministry  is  exceeding  narro\y,  and  it  is  by  their 
side  that  we  best  estimate  the  greatness  of  the 
ancient  prophet.  Their  transcript  of  human  life 
may  be  true  to  the  facts  it  selects,  but  we  find  in 
it  no  trace  of  facts  which  are  greater  and  more 
essential  to  humanity.  They  have  nothing  to 
tell  us  of  forgiveness  and  repentance,  and  yet 
these  are  as  real  as  the  things  they  describe. 
Their  pessimism  is  unrelieved.  They  see  the 
"corruption  that  is  in  the  world  through  lust;" 
they  forget  that  there  is  an  escape  from  it.*  It  is 
Hosea's  greatness  that,  while  he  felt  the  vices  of 
his  day  with  all  needed  thoroughness  and  real- 
ism, he  yet  never  allowed  them  to  be  inevitable 
or  ultimate,  but  preached  repentance  and  pardon, 
with  the  possibility  of  holiness  even  for  his  de- 
praved generation.  It  is  the  littleness  of  the  Art 
of  our  day  that  these  great  facts  are  forgotten  by 
her,  though  once  she  was  their  interpreter  to 
men.  When  she  remembers  them  the  greatness 
of  her  past  will  return. 

5.  Once    More:    Puppet-Kings   and 
Puppet-Gods. 

Hosea  x. 

For  another  section,  the  tenth  chapter,  the 
prophet  returns  to  the  twin  targets  of  his  scorn: 
the  idols  and  the  puppet-kings.  But  few  notes 
are  needed.  Observe  the  reiterated  connection 
between  the  fertility  of  the  land  and  the  idolatry 
of  the  people. 

"A  wanton  vine  is  Israel;  he  lavishes  his 
fruit ;+  the  more  his  fruit,  the  more  he  made  his 

*  2  Peter  i. 

t  Doubtful.  The  Heb.  text  gives  an  inappropriate  if 
not  impossible  clause,  even  if  TX\^'^  be  taken  from  a  root 
mK*.  to  "set  "  or  "produce"  (Barth,  "  Etyra.  Stud."  66). 
LXX.  :  6  icapirbs  eiiSriviav  airr^s  (A.  Q.  avTrjs  evOrjviav),  "her 
[the  vine's]  fruit  flourishing."  Some  parallel  is  required 
to  pp3  of  the  first  clause  ;  and  it  is  possible  that  it  may 
have   been   from  a  root   R^K'  or  ITtJ'-  corresponding  to 

Arabic    sah,   "to  wander"  in    the    sense    of   scattering 

or  being  scattered. 

33— Vol.  IV. 


altars;  the  goodlier  his  land,  the  more  goodly  he 
made  his  "  maggeboth,  or  "  sacred  pillars.  False 
is  the  heart  of  them:  now  must  they  atone  for  it. 
He  shall  break  the  neck  of  their  altars;  He  shall 
ruin  their  pillars.  For  already  they  are  saying, 
No  king  have  we,  for  we  have  not  feared  Jehovali, 
and  the  king — what  could  he  do  for  us?  Speak- 
ing *  of  words,  swearing  of  false  oaths,  making 
of  bargains — till  law  +  breaks  out  like  weeds  in 
the  furrows  of  the  field. 

"  For  the  Calf  of  Beth-Aven  the  inhabitants^  of 
Samaria  shall  be  anxious:  yea,  mourn  for  him 
shall  his  people,  and  his  priestlings  shall  writhe 
for  him — for  his  glory  that  it  is  banished  from 
him."  In  these  days  of  heavy  tribute  shall  the 
gold  of  the  golden  calf  be  safe?  "  Yea,  himself 
shall  they  pack§  to  Assyria;  he  shall  be  offered 
as  tribute  to  King  Pick-Quarrel. ||  Ephraim  shall 
take  disgrace,  and  Israel  be  ashamed  because  of 
his  counsel. 1[  Undone  Samaria!  Her  king  like 
chip  **  on  the  face  of  the  waters!  "  This  may  re- 
fer to  one  of  the  revolutions  in  which  the  king  was 
murdered.  But  it  seems  more  appropriate  to  the 
final  catastrophe  of  724-21:  the  fall  of  the  king- 
dom, and  the  king's  banishment  to  Assyria.  If 
the  latter,  the  verse  has  been  inserted;  but  the  fol- 
lowing verse  would  lead  us  to  take  these  disasters 
as  still  future.  "  And  the  high  places  of  idola- 
try shall  be  destroyed,  the  sin  of  Israel;  thorn 
and  thistle  shall  come  up  on  their  altars.  And 
they  shall  say  to  the  mountains,  Cover  us,  and  to 
the  hills,  Fall  on  us."  It  cannot  be  too  often  re- 
peated: these  handmade  gods,  these  chips  of 
kings,  shall  be  swept  away  together. 

Once  more  the  prophet  returns  to  the  ancient 
origins  of  Israel's  present  sins,  and  once  more 
to  their  shirking  of  the  discipline  necessary  for 
spiritual  results,  but  only  that  he  may  lead  up 
as  before  to  the  inevitable  doom.  "  From  ft  the 
days  of  Gibeah  thou  hast  sinned,  O  Israel. 
There  have  they  remained  " — never  progressed 
beyond  their  position  there — "  and  this  without 
war  overtaking  them  in  Gibeah  against  the  dast- 
ards.JI  As  soon  as  I  please,  I  can  chastise  them, 
and  peoples  shall  be  gathered  against  them  in 
chastisement  for  their  double  sin."  This  can 
scarcely  be,  as  some  suggest,  the  two  calves  at 
Bethel  and  Dan.  More  probably  it  is  still  the 
idols  and  the  man-made  kings.  Now  he  returns 
to  the  ambition  of  the  people  for  spiritual  results 
without  a  spiritual  disciphne. 

"  And  Ephraim  is  a  broken-in  heifer,  that  loveth 
to  thresh. §§  But  I  have  come  on  her  fair  neck. 
I  will  yoke  Ephraim;  Judah  must  plough;  Jacob 
must  harrow  for  himself."  It  is  all  very  well  for 
the  unmuzzled  beast  ||||  to  love  the  thresh. ng,  but 
harder  and  unrewarded  labours  of  ploughing  and 

♦After  LXX. 

+  Doubtful.    Lawsuits? 

t  Calf,"  "  inhabitants  "—so  LXX. 

§  LXX.  supplies. 

Il  See  above,  p.  507. 

^  Very  uncertain.    Wellhausen  reads  "  from  his  idol," 

**  f]Vp  '  compare  Arabic  qsf,  "to  break  ";  but  there  is 
also  the  assonant  Arabic qsb,  "reed."  The  Rabbis  trans- 
late "  foam  "  :  c/.  the  other  meaning  of  ClVP  =  outbreak 
of  anger,  which  suggests  "bubble." 

tt  Rosenmiiller  :  "  more  than  in  "  These  days  are  evi- 
dently not  the  beginning  of  the  kingship  under  Saul  (so 
Wellhausen).  for  with  that  Hosea  has  no  quarrel,  but 
either  the  idolatrj-  of  Micah  (Judg.  xvii.  3  ff.),  or  more 
probably  the  crime  of  Benjamin  (Judg.  xix.  22*. 

tt  Obscure  ;  text  corrupt,  and  in  next  verse  uncertain. 

§S  For  the  sense  of  the  verse  both  participles  are  surely 
needed.    Wellhausen  thinks  two  redundant. 

IIJ  Deut.  XXV.  4 ;  i  Cor.  ix.  9  ;  i  Tim.  v.  18. 


514 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


harrowing  have  to  eome  before  the  floor  be 
heaped  with  sheaves.  Israel  must  not  expect  re- 
ligious festival  without  religious  discipline.  '"'Sow 
for  yourselves  righteousness;  then  shall  ye  reap 
the  fruit  of  God's  leal  love.*  Break  up  your  fal- 
low ground,  for  it  is  time  to  seek  Jehovah,  till 
He  come  and  shower  salvation  t  upon  you.J  Ye 
have  ploughed  wickedness;  disaster  have  ye 
reaped:  ye  have  eaten  the  fruit  of  falsehood;  for 
thou  didst  trust  in  thy  chariots,^  in  the  multitude 
of  thy  warriors.  For  the  tumult  of  war  shall 
arise  among  thy  tribes, ||  and  all  thy  fenced  cities 
shall  be  ruined,  as  Salman  beat  to  ruin  Beth- 
ArbelH  in  the  day  of  war:  the  mother  shall  be 
broken  on  the  children  " — presumably  the  land 
shall  fall  with  the  falling  of  her  cities.  "  Thus 
shall  I  do  to  you,  O  house  of  Israel,**  because  of 
the  evil  of  your  evil:  soon  shall  the  king  of  Is- 
rael be  undone — undone." 

The  political  decay  of  Israel,  then,  so  deeply 
figured  in  all  these  chapters,  must  end  in  utter 
collapse.  Let  us  sum  up  the  gradual  features 
of  this  decay:  the  substance  of  the  people  scat- 
tered abroad;  the  national  spirit  dissipated;  the 
national  prestige  humbled;  the  kings  mere  pup- 
pets; the  prophets  corrupted;  the  national  vigour 
sapped  by  impurity;  the  idolatry  conscious  of  its 
impotence. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  FATHERHOOD  AND  HUMANITY 
OF  GOD. 

HosEA  xi. 

From  the  thick  jungle  of  Hosea's  travail,  the 
eleventh  chapter  breaks  like  a  high  and  open 
mound.  The  prophet  enjoys  the  first  of  his  two 
clear  visions — that  of  the  Past.ff  Judgment  con- 
tinues to  descend.  Israel's  Sun  is  near  his  set- 
ting, but  before  he  sinks — 

"  A  lingering  light  he  fondly  throws 
On  the  dear  hills,  whence  first  he  rose." 

Across  these  confused  and  vicious  years,  through 
which  he  has  painfully  made  his  way,  Hosea  sees 
the  tenderness  and  the  romance  of  the  early 
history  of  his  people.  And  although  he  must 
strike  the  old  despairing  note — that,  by  the  insin- 
cerity of  the  present  generation,  all  the  ancient 
guidance  of  their  God  must  end  in  this! — yet  for 
some  moments  the  blessed  memory  shines  by  it- 
self, and  God's  mercy  appears  to  triumph  over 
Israel's  ingratitude.  Surely  their  sun  will  not 
set;  Love  must  prevail.  To  which  assurance  a 
later  voice  from  the  Exile  has  added,  in  verses 
10  and  II,  a  confirmation  suitable  to  its  own  cir- 
cumstances. 

"  When  Israel  was  a  child,  then  I  loved  him. 
And  from  Egypt  I  called  him  to  be  My  son. 

*LXX.  :  "fruit  of  life." 

tpnV  surely  in  the  sense  in  which  we  find  it  in  Isa.  xl. 
ff.     LXX.  :  "  the  fruits  of  righteousness  shall  be  yours." 

X  We  shall  return  to  this  passage  in  dealing  with  Repent- 
ance ;  see  p.  643. 

§  So  LXX.  Wellhausen  suspects  authenticity  of  the 
whole  clause. 

I  Wellhausen  proposes  to  read  *7^^y3  for  *1^J0y3,  but 
there  is  no  need. 

^  See  above,  p.  495,  n, 

♦*SoLXX. 

++  See  above,  p.  505. 


The  early  history  was  a  romance.  Think  of  it 
historically.  Before  the  Most  High  there  spread 
an  array  of  kingdoms  and  peoples.  At  their 
head  were  three  strong  princes — sons  indeed  of 
God,  if  all  the  heritage  of  the  past,  the  power  of 
the  present,  and  the  promise  of  the  future  be 
tokens.  Egypt,  wrapt  in  the  rich  and  jewelled 
web  of  centuries,  basked  by  Nile  and  Pyramid, 
all  the  wonder  of  the  world's  art  in  his  dreamy 
eyes.  Opposite  him  Assyria,  with  barer  but 
more  massive  limbs,  stood  erect  upon  his  high- 
lands, grasping  in  his  sword  the  promise  of  the 
world's  power.  Between  the  two,  and  using 
both  of  them,  yet  with  his  eyes  westward  on  an 
empire  of  which  neither  dreamed,  the  Phoeni- 
cian on  his  sea-coast  built  his  storehouses  and 
sped  his  navies,  the  promise  of  the  world's 
wealth.  It  must  ever  remain  the  supreme  ro- 
mance of  history,  that  the  true  son  of  God,  bearef 
of  His  love  and  righteousness  to  all  mankind, 
should  be  found,  not  only  outside  this  powerful 
trinity,  but  in  the  puny  and  despised  captive  of 
one  of  them — in  a  people  that  was  not  a  state, 
that  had  not  a  country,  that  was  without  a  his- 
tory, and,  if  appearances  be  true,  was  as  yet  de- 
void of  even  the  rudiments  of  civilisation — a  child 
people  and  a  slave. 

That  was  the  Romance,  and  Hosea  gives  us  the 
Grace  which  made  it.  "  When  Israel  was  a  chil<J 
then  I  loved  him."  The  verb  is  a  distinct  im- 
pulse: "  I  began,  I  learned,  to  love  him."  God's 
eyes,  that  passed  unheeding  the  adult  princes  ol 
the  world,  fell  upon  this  little  slave  boy,  and  H< 
loved  him  and  gave  him  a  career:  "  from  Egypt 
I  called  "  him  "  to  be  My  son." 

Now,  historically,  it  was  the  persuasion  of  this 
which  made  Israel.  All  their  distinctiveness  and 
character,  their  progress  from  a  level  with  other 
nomadic  tribes  to  the  rank  of  the  greatest  reli- 
gious teachers  of  humanity,  started  from  the 
memory  of  these  two  facts — that  God  loved  them, 
and  that  God  called  them.  This  was  an  unfailing 
conscience — the  obligation  that  they  were  not 
their  own,  the  irresistible  motive  to  repentance 
even  in  their  utmost  backsliding,  the  unquench- 
able hope  of  a  destiny  in  their  direst  days  of  de- 
feat and  scattering. 

Some,  of  course,  may  cavil  at  the  narrow,  ny- 
tional  scale  on  which  such  a  belief  was  held,  but 
let  them  remember  that  it  was  held  in  trust  for 
all  mankind.  To  snarl  that  Israel  felt  this  son- 
ship  to  God  only  for  themselves,  is  to  forget  that 
it  is  they  who  have  persuaded  humanity  that  this 
is  the  only  kind  of  sonship  worth  claiming.  Al- 
most every  other  nation  of  antiquity  imagined  a 
filial  relation  to  the  deity,  but  it  was  either 
through  some  fabulous  physical  descent,  and 
then  often  confined  only  to  kings  and  heroes,  or 
by  some  mystical  mingling  of  the  Divine  with  the 
human,  which  was  just  as  gross  and  sensuous. 
Israel  alone  defined  the  connection  as  a  histori- 
cal and  a  moral  one.  "  The  sons  of  God  are 
begotten  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh, 
nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God."  *  Sonship 
to  God  is  something  not  physical,  but  moral  and 
historical,  into  which  men  are  carried  by  a  su- 
preme awakening  to  the  Divine  love  and  author- 
ity. Israel,  it  is  true,  felt  this  only  in  a  general 
way  for  the  nation  as  a  whole;  f  but  their  con- 
ception of  it  embraced  just  those  moral  contents 
which  form  the  glory  of  Christ's  doctrine  of  the 

*  St.  John's  Gospel,  i.  12,  13. 

t  Or  occasionally  for  the  king  as  the  nation's  represent 
ative. 


I 


Hosea  xi.] 


THE    FATHERHOOD    AND    HUMANITY    OF    GOD. 


515 


Divine  sonship  of  the  individual.  The  belief  that 
God  is  our  Father  does  not  come  to  us  with  our 
carnal  birth — except  in  possibility:  the  persua- 
sion of  it  is  not  conferred  by  our  baptism  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  that  is  Christ's  own  seal  to  the 
fact  that  God  Almighty  loves  us  and  has  marked 
us  for  His  own.  To  us  sonship  is  a  becoming, 
not  a  being — the  awakening  of  our  adult  minds 
into  the  surprise  of  a  Father's  undeserved  mercy, 
into  the  constraint  of  His  authority  and  the  assur- 
ance of  the  destiny  He  has  laid  up  for  us.  It  is 
conferred  by  love,  and  confirmed  by  duty. 
Neither  has  power  brought  it,  nor  wisdom,  nor 
wealth,  but  it  has  come  solely  with  the  wonder 
of  the  knowledge  that  God  loves  us,  and  has  al- 
ways loved  us,  as  well  as  in  the  sense,  imme- 
diately following,  of  a  true  vocation  to  serve 
Him.  Sonship  which  is  less  than  this  is  no  son- 
ship  at  all.  But  so  much  as  this  is  possible  to 
every  man  through  Jesus  Christ.  His  constant 
message  is  that  the  Father  loves  evej^y  one  of  us, 
and  that  if  we  know  *  that  love,  we  are  God's 
sons  indeed.  To  them  who  feel  it,  adoption  into 
the  number  and  privileges  of  the  sons  of  God 
comes  with  the  amazement  and  the  romance 
which  glorified  God's  choice  of  the  child-slave 
Israel.  "  Behold,"  they  cry,  "  what  manner  of 
love  the  Father  hath  bestowed  upon  us,  that  we 
should  be  called  the  sons  of  God."t 

But  we  cannot  be  loved  by  God  and  left  where 
we  are.  Beyond  the  grace  there  lie  the  long 
discipline  and  destiny.  We  are  called  from  servi- 
tude to  freedom,  from  the  world  of  God — each 
of  us  to  run  a  course,  and  do  a  work,  which 
can  be  done  by  no  one  else.  That  Israel  did 
not  perceive  this  was  God's  sore  sorrow  with 
them. 

"The  more  I|  called  to  them  the  farther  they 
went  from  Me.§  They  to  the  Ba'alim  kept  sacri- 
ficing, and  to  images  offering  incense."  But  God 
persevered  with  grace,  and  the  story  is  at  first 
continued  in  the  figure  of  Fatherhood  with  which 
it  commenced;  then  it  changes  to  the  metaphor 
of  a  humane  man's  goodness  to  his  beasts.  "  Yet 
I  taught  Ephraim  to  walk,  holding  them  on 
Mine  arms,||  but  they  knew  not  that  I  healed 
them " — presumably  when  they  fell  and  hurt 
themselves.  "  With  the  cords  of  a  man  I  would 
liraw  them,  with  bands  of  love;  and  I  was  to 
them  as  those  who  lift  up  the  yoke  on  their  jaws, 
and  gently  would  I  give  them  to  eat."1[  It  is 
the  picture  of  a  team  of  bullocks,  in  charge  of  a 
kind  driver.  Israel  are  no  longer  the  wanton 
young  cattle  of  the  previous  chapter,  which  need 
the  yoke  firmly  fastened  on  their  neck,**  but  a 
team  of  toiling  oxen  mounting  some  steep  road. 
There  is  no  use  now  for  the  rough  ropes,  by 
which  frisky  animals  are  kept  to  their  work;  but 
the  driver,  coming  to  his  beasts'  heads,  by  the 
gentle  touch  of  his  hand  at  their  mouths  and  by 
words  of  sympathy  draws  them  after  him. 
"  I  drew  them  with  cords  of  a  man,  and  with 
bands  of  love."  Yet  there  is  the  yoke,  and  it 
would    seem   that   certain    forms   of   this,    when 

*  See  below,  pp.  321-3. 

+  I  John  iii. 

t  So  rightly  the  LXX. 

8LXX.,  rightly  separating  DH^iSD  into  ^230  and  DH, 

which  latter  is  the  nominative  to  the  next  clause. 
II  So  again  rightly  the  LXX.  . 

1  The  reading  is  uncertain.    The  {<?  of  the  following 

verse  (6)  must  be  read  as  tbe  Greek  reads  it,  as  ^,  and 
taken  with  ver.  j. 
••x.  n. 


beasts  were  working  upwards,  as  we  should  say 
"  against  the  collar,"  pressed  and  rubbed  upon 
them,  so  that  the  humane  driver,  when  he  came 
to  their  heads,  eased  the  yoke  with  his  hands. 
"  I  was  as  they  that  take  the  yoke  ofT  their 
jaws;"  *  and  then,  when  they  got  to  the  top  of 
the  hill,  he  would  rest  and  feed  them.  That  is 
the  picture,  and  however  uncertain  we  may  feel 
as  to  some  of  its  details,  it  is  obviously  a  passage 
— Ewald  says  "  the  earliest  of  all  passages  " — in 
which  "  humane  means  precisely  the  same  as 
love."  It  ought  to  be  taken  along  with  that 
other  passage  in  the  great  Prophecy  of  the  Exile, 
where  God  is  described  as  He  that  led  them 
through  "  the  deep,  as  an  horse  in  the  wilder- 
ness, that  they  should  not  stumble:  as  a  beast 
goeth  down  into  the  valley,  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  gave  him  rest."f 

Thus  then  the  figure  of  the  fatherliness  of  God 
changes  into  that  of  His  gentleness  or  humanity. 
Do  not  let  us  think  that  there  is  here  either  any 
descent  of  the  poetry  or  want  of  connection  be- 
tween the  two  figures.  The  change  is  true,  not 
only  to  Israel's,  but  to  our  own  experience.  Men 
are  all  either  the  eager  children  of  happy,  irre- 
sponsible days,  or  the  bounden,  plodding 
draught-cattle  of  life's  serious  burdens  and 
charges.  Hosea's  double  figure  reflects  human 
life  in  its  whole  range.  Which  of  us  has  not 
known  this  fatherliness  of  the  Most  High,  ex- 
ercised upon  us,  as  upon  Israel,  throughout  our 
years  of  carelessness  and  disregard?  It  was  God 
Himself  who  taught  and  trained  us  then; — 

"  When  through  the  slippery  paths  of  youth 
With  heedless  steps  I  ran, 
Thine  arm  unseen  conveyed  me  safe. 
And  led  me  up  to  man." 

Those  speedy  recoveries  from  the  blunders  of 
early  wilfulness,  those  redemptions  from  the  sins 
of  youth — happy  were  we  if  we  knew  that  it 
was  "  He  who  healed  us."  But  there  comes  a 
time  when  men  pass  from  leading-strings  to  har- 
ness— when  we  feel  faith  less  and  duty  more — 
when  our  work  touches  us  more  closely  than  our 
God.  Death  must  be  a  strange  transformer  of 
the  spirit,  yet  surely  not  more  strange  than  life, 
which  out  of  the  eager  buoyant  child  makes  in 
time  the  slow  automaton  of  duty.  It  is  such 
a  stage  which  the  fourth  of  these  verses  suits, 
when  we  look  up,  not  so  much  for  the  father- 
liness as  for  the  gentleness  and  humanity  of  our 
God.  A  man  has  a  mystic  power  of  a  very  won- 
derful kind  upon  the  animals  over  whom  he  is 
placed.  On  any  of  these  wintry  roads  of  ours 
we  may  see  it,  when  a  kind  carter  gets  down 
at  a  hill,  and,  throwing  the  reins  on  his  beast's 
back,  will  come  to  its  head  and  touch  it  with 
his  bare  hands,  and  speak  to  it  as  if  it  were  his 
fellow;  till  the  deep  eyes  fill  with  light,  and  out 
of  these  things,  so  much  weaker  than  itself,  a 
touch,  a  glance,  a  word,  there  will  come  to  it 
new  strength  to  pull  the  stranded  wagon  onward. 
The  man  is  as  a  god  to  the  beast,  coming  down 
to  help  it,  and  it  almost  makes  the  beast  human 
that  he  does  so.  Not  otherwise  does  Hosea  feel 
the  help  which  God  gives  His  own  on  the  weary 
hills  of  life.  We  need  not  discipline,  for  our 
work  is  discipline  enough,  and  the  cares  we  carry 
of  themselves  keep  us  straight  and  steady.  But 
we  need  sympathy  and  gentleness — this  very  hu- 
manity which  the  prophet  attributes  to  our  God. 

*  Or  lifted  forward  from  the  neck  to  the  jaws, 
t  Isa.  Ixiii.  13,  14. 


5i6 


THE  rBOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


God  comes  and  takes  us  by  the  head;  through 
the  mystic  power  which  is  above  us,  but  which 
makes  us  like  itself,  we  are  lifted  to  our  task. 
Let  no  one  judge  this  incredible.  The  incredible 
would  be  that  our  God  should  prove  any  less  to 
us  than  the  merciful  man  to  his  beast.  But  we 
are  saved  from  argument  by  experience.  When 
we  remember  how,  as  life  has  become  steep  and 
our  strength  exhausted,  there  has  visited  us  a 
thought  which  has  sharpened  to  a  word,  a  word 
which  has  warmed  to  a  touch,  and  we  have  drawn 
ourselves  together  and  leapt  up  new  men,  can 
we  feel  that  God  was  any  less  in  these  things, 
than  in  the  voice  of  conscience  or  the  message 
of  forgiveness,  or  the  restraints  of  His  discipl.n^? 
Nay,  though  the  reins  be  no  longer  felt,  God  is 
at  our  head,  that  we  should  not  stumble  nor 
stand  still. 

Upon  this  gracious  passage  there  follows  one 
of  those  swift  revulsions  of  feeling,  which  we 
have  learned  almost  to  expect  in  Hosea.  His 
insight  again  overtakes  his  love.  The  people  will 
not  respond  to  the  goodness  of  their  God;  it 
is  impossible  to  work  upon  minds  so  fickle 
and  insincere.  Discipline  is  what  they  need. 
"  He  shall  return  to  the  land  of  Egypt,  or  Asshur 
shall  be  his  king "  (it  is  still  an  alternative), 
"  for  they  have  refused  to  return  "  to  Me.  .  .  .* 
'Tis  but  one  more  instance  of  the  age-long  apos- 
tasy of  the  people.  "  My  people  have  a  bias  f 
to  turn  from  Me;  and  though  they'"  (the  proph- 
ets) "  call  them  upwards,  none  of  them  can  lift 
them."  t 

Yet  God  is  God,  and  though  prophecy  fail 
He  will  attempt  His  love  once  more.  There 
follows  the  greatest  passage  in  Hosea — deepest 
if  not  highest  of  his  book — the  breaking  forth 
of  that  exhaustless  mercy  of  the  Most  High 
which  no  sin  of  man  can  bar  back  nor  wear 
out. 

"  How  am  I  to  give  thee  up,  O  Ephraim  ? 
How  am  I  to  let  thee  go,  O  Israel  ? 
How  am  I  to  give  thee  up? 
Am  I  to  make  an  Admah  of  thee— a  Seboim  ? 
My  heart  is  turned  upon  Me, 
My  compassions  begin  to  boil  : 
I  will  not  perform  the  fierceness  of  Mine  anger, 
I  will  not  turn  to  destroy  Ephraim  ; 
For  God  am  I  and  not  man, 

The  Holy  One  in  the  midst  of  thee,  yet  I  come 
not  to  consume  !  § 

Such  a  love  has  been  the  secret  of  Hosea's 
persistence  through  so  many  years  with  so  faith- 
less a  people,  and  now,  when  he  has  failed,  it 
takes  voice  to  itself  and  in  its  irresistible  fulness 
makes  this  last  appeal.  Once  more  before  the 
end  let  Israel  hear  God  in  the  utterness  of  His 
Love! 

The  verses  are  a  climax,  and  obviously  to  be 
succeeded  by  a  pause.  On  the  brink  of  his  doom, 
will  Israel  turn  to  such  a  God,  at  such  a  call? 
The  next  verse,  though  dependent  for  its  prom- 
ise on  this  same  exhaustless  Love,  is  from  an 
entirely  different  circumstance,  and  cannot  have 
been  put  by  Hosea  here.ll 

*  Ver.  6  has  an  obviously  corrupt  text,  and,  weakening 
as  it  does  the  clima.\  of  ver.  5,  may  be  an  insertion. 

+  "  Are  hung  or  swung  towards  turning  away  from  Me." 

t  This  verse  is  also  uncertain. 

§  For  Tyn,  which   makes    nonsense,   read  "Tiy37,  "to 

con-^nn  •,"    or    with    Wellhausen    amend    further    ~)J?37 

T]2Mi  K?    "  I  am  not  willing  to  consume." 

11"  r  ley  will  follow  fehovah  ;  like  a  lion  He  will  roar, 
and  they  shall  hurry  trembling  from  the  west  Like  birds 
shall  they  hurry  trembling  from  Egypt,  and  like  doves 
from  the  land  of  Assyria,  and  I  will  bring  them  to  their 
homes— 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah."    Not  only  does  this 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE  FINAL  ARGUMENT. 
Hosea  xii.-xiv.   i. 

The  impassioned  call  with  which  the  last  chap- 
ter closed  was  by  no  means  an  assurance  of 
salvation:  "  How  am  I  to  give  thee  up,  Ephraim? 
how  am  I  to  let  thee  go,  Israel?  "  On  the  con- 
trary, it  was  the  anguish  of  Love,  when  it  hovers 
over  its  own  on  the  brink  of  the  destruction 
to  which  their  wilfulness  has  led  them,  and  be- 
fore relinquishing  them  would  seek,  if  possible, 
some  last  way  to  redeem.  Surely  that  fatal  mor- 
row and  the  people's  mad  leap  into  it  are  not 
inevitable!  At  least,  before  they  take  the  leap, 
let  the  prophet  go  back  once  more  upon  the 
moral  situation  of  to-day,  go  back  once  more 
upon  the  past  of  the  people,  and  see  if  he  can  find 
anything  els?  to  explain  that  bias  to  apostasy  * 
which  has  brought  them  to  this  fatal  brink — any- 
thing else  which  may  move  them  to  repentance 
even  there.  So  in  chaps,  xii.  and  xiii.  Hosea 
turns  upon  the  now  familiar  trail  of  his  argu- 
ment, full  of  the  Divine  jealousy,  determmed 
to  give  the  people  one  other  chance  to  turn; 
but  if  they  will  not,  he  at  least  will  justify  God's 
relinquishment  of  them.  The  chapters  throw 
even  a  brighter  light  upon  the  temper  and  hab- 
its of  that  generation.  They  again  explore 
Israel's  ancient  history  for  causes  of  the  present 
decline;  and,  in  especial,  they  cite  the  spiritual 
experience  of  the  Father  of  the  Nation,  as  if 
to  show  that  what  of  repentance  was  possible 
for  him  is  possible  for  his  posterity  also.  But 
once  more  all  hope  is  seen  to  be  in  vain;  and 
Hosea's  last  travail  with  his  obstinate  people 
closes  in  a  doom  even  more  awful  than  its  pred- 
ecessors. 

The  division  into  chapters  is  probably  correct; 
but  while  chap.  xiii.  is  well  ordered  and  clear, 
the  arrangement,  and,  in  parts,  the  meaning  of 
chap.  xii.  are  very  obscure. 

I.  The  People  and  Their  Father  Jacob. 

Hosea  xii. 

In  no  part  even  of  the  difficult  Book  of  Hosea 
does  the  sacred  text  bristle  with  more  problems. 
It  may  well  be  doubted  whether  the  verses  lie 
in  their  proper  order,  or,  if  they  do,  whether 
we  have  them  entire  as  they  came  from  the 
prophet,  for  the  connection  is  not  always  per- 
ceptible.f  We  cannot  believe,  however,  that  the 
chapter  is  a  bundle  of  isolated  oracles,  for  the 
analogy  between  Jacob  and  his  living  posterity 
runs  through  the  whole  of  it,t  and  the  refrain 
that  God  must  requite  upon  the  nation  their  deeds 
is  found  both  near  the  beginning  and  at  the  end 

verse  contain  expressions  which  are  unusual  to  Hosea, 
and  a  very  strange  metaphor,  but  it  is  not  connected 
either  historically  or  logically  with  the  previous  verse. 
The  latter  deals  with  the  people  before  God  has  scattered 
them— offers  them  one  more  chance  before  exile  comes  on 
them.  But  in  this  verse  they  are  already  scattered,  and 
just  about  to  be  brought  back.  It  is  such  a  promise  as 
both  in  language  and  metaphor  was  common  among  the 
prophets  of  the  Exile.  In  the  LXX.  the  verse  is  taken 
from  chap.  xi.  and  put  with  chap.  xii. 

*xi   7. 

t  This  is  especially  true  of  vv.  11  and  12. 

i  R\'en  in  the  most  detachable  portion,  vv.  8-10,  where 
the  pS  of  ver.  g  seems  to  refer  to  the  ^J1K3  oi  ver.  4. 


Hosea  xii.-xiv.  i.] 


THE    FINAL    ARGUMENT. 


517 


of  the  chapter.*  One  is  tempted  to  take  the  two 
fragments  about  the  Patriarch  (vv.  4,  5,  and  13 
f.)  by  themselves,  and  the  more  so  that  ver.  8 
would  follow  so  suitably  on  either  ver.  2  or  ver. 
3.  But  this  clue  is  not  sufficient;  and  till  one 
more  evident  is  discovered,  it  is  perhaps  best 
to  keep  to  the  extant  arrangement.! 

As  before,  the  argument  starts  from  the  false- 
ness of  Israel,  which  is  illustrated  in  the  faith- 
lessness of  their  foreign  relations.  "  Ephraim 
hath  compassed  Me  with  lies,  and  the  house  of 
Israel  with  deceit,  and  Judah  .  .  ,t  Ephraim 
herds  the  wind,§  and  hunts  the  sirocco.  All 
day  long  they  heap  up  falsehopd  and  fraud:  || 
they  strike  a  bargain  with  Assyria,  and  carry 
oil  to  Egypt,"  as  Isaiah  also  complained.lF 

"  Jehovah  hath  a  quarrel  with  Israel**  and  is 
about  to  visit  upon  Jacob  his  ways;  according 
to  his  deeds  will  He  requite  them.  In  the  womb  he 
supplanted  his  brother,  and  in  his  man's  strength 
he  wrestled  with  God. ft  Yea,  he  wrestled  with 
the  Angel  and  prevailed;  he  wept  and  besought 
of  Him  mercy.  At  Bethel  he  met  with  Him, 
and  there  he  spake  with  Him,"  tt  (or  "with  us" 
— that  is,  in  the  person  of  our  fath^).  .  .  .  §§ 
"  So  that  thou  by  thy  God  " — by  His  help,||||  for 
no  other  way  is  possible  except,  like  thy  father, 
through  wrestling  with  Him — "  shouldest  return: 
keep  leal  love  and  justice,  and  wait  on  thy  God 
without  ceasing."Tli|  To  this  passage  we  shall 
leiurn  in  dealing  with  Hosea's  doctrme  of  Re- 
pentance. 

In  characteristic  fashion  the  discourse  now 
swerves  from  the  ideal  to  the  real  state  of  the 
people. 

♦Viz.  in.  vv.  3  and  15. 

+  Beer  indeed,  at  the  close  of  a  very  ingenious  analysis 
of  the  chapter  ("Z.  A.  T.  W.".  1893,  pp.  281  ff.),  claims  to 
have  proved  that  it  contains  "eine  wohlgegliederte  Rede 
des  Propheten  "  (p.  292).  But  he  reaches  this  conclusion 
only  by  several  forced  and  precarious  arguments.  Espe- 
cially unsound  do  his  pleas  appear  that  in  8b  p^\}p  is 
a  play  upon  the  root-meaning  of  |yj3,  "lowly";  that 
jyjD,  in  analogy  to  the  |t333  of  ver.  4,  is  the  crude  orig- 
inal, the  raw  material,  of  the  Ephraim  of  ver.  g  ;  and  that 
nyiO  ^J3^D  is  "the  determined  time"  of  the  coming  judg- 
ment on  Israel. 

i  Something  is  written  about  Judah  (remember  what 
was  said  above  about  Hosea's  treble  parallels),  but  the 
text  is  too  obscure  for  translation.  The  theory  that  it 
has  been  altered  by  a  later  Judaean  writer  in  favour  of 
his  own  people  is  probably  correct :  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion translates  in  favour  of  Judah  ;  so  too  Guthe  in 
Kautzsch's  "Bibel."  But  an  adverse  statement  is  re- 
quired by  the  parallel  clauses,  and  the  Hebrew  text 
allows  this  :  "  Judah  is  still  wayward  with  God,  and  with 
the  Holy  One  who  is  faithful."  So  virtually  Ewald,  Hitzig, 
Wtinsche,  Nowack,  and  Cheyne.  But  Cornill  and  Well- 
hausen  read  the  second  half  of  the  clause  as  HOVJ 
D^6jnp"Dy,  "  profanes  himself  with  Qedeshim  "  ("Z.  A., 
T.  W.",  1887,  pp.  286  ff.). 

§  Why  should  not  Hosea,  the  master  of  many  forced 
phrases,  have  also  uttered  this  one  ?  This  in  answer  to 
Wellhausen. 

I  To  LXX.,  reading  XIB'  for  '^^, 

1  Isa.  XXX.  6. 

**  Heb.  "Judah,"  but  surely  Israel  is  required  by  the 
next  verse,  which  is  a  play  upon  the  two  names  Israel 
and  Jacob. 

+t "  Supplanted  "  is  'aqab,  the  presumable  root  of 
Ja'aqab  (Jacob).  "Wrestled  with  God"  is  Sarah  eth 
Elohim,  the  presumable  origin  of  Yisra'el  (Israel). 

t$Heb.  "us."  LXX.  "them." 

§§  Ver.  6—"  And  Jehovah  God  of  Hosts.  Jehovah  is  His 
memorial,"  t.  e.,  name— is  probably  an  insertion  for  the 
reasons  mentioned  above,  pp.  493  f. 

nil  This,  the  most  natural  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  phrase, 
has.  been  curiously  omitted  by  Beer,  who  says  that 
*]^n7N3  can  only  mean  "to  thy  God."  Hitzig:  "durch 
deinen  Gott." 

^IfSome  take  these  words  as  addressed  by  Jehovah  at 
Bethel  to  the  Patriarch. 


"  Canaan!  "  So  the  prophet  nicknames  his 
rnercenary  generation.*  "  With  false  balances  in 
his  hand,  he  loves  to  defraud.  For  Ephraim 
said,"  Ah,  but  "  I  have  grown  rich,  I  have  won 
myself  wealth,  f  None  of  my  gains  can  touch 
me  with  guilt  which  is  sin. J  But  I,  Jehovah 
thy  God  from  the  land  of  Egypt — I  could  make 
thee  dwell  in  tents  again,  as  in  the  davs  of  the 
Assembly  "  in  Horeb — I  could  destroy  all  this 
commercial  civilisation  of  thine,  and  reduce  thee 
to  thine  ancient  level  of  nomadic  life — "  and  I 
spake  to  the  prophets:  it  was  I  who  multiplied 
vision,  and  by  the  hand  of  the  prophets  gave 
parables.  If  Gilead  "  be  for  "  idolatry,  then  shall 
it  become  vanity!  "  If  "  in  Gilgal  " — Stone- 
Circle — "  they  sacrifice  bullocks, §  stone  heaps 
shall  their  altars  become  among  the  furrows  of 
the  field."  One  does  not  see  the  connection  of 
these  verses  with  the  preceding.  But  now  the 
discourse  oscillates  once  more  to  the  national 
father,  and  the  parallel  between  his  own  and  his 
people's  experience. 

"And  Jacob  fied  to  the  land||  of  Aram,  and 
Israel  served  for  a  wife,  and  for  a  wife  he 
herded  sheep.  And  by  a  prophet  Jehovah 
brought  Israel  up  from  Egypt,  and  by  a  prophet 
he  was  shepherded.  And  Ephraim  hath  given 
bitter  provocation;  but  his  blood-guiltiness  shall 
be  upon  him,  and  his  Lord  shall  return  it  to 
him." 

I  cannot  trace  the  argument  here. 

2.  The   Last  Judgment. 
Hosea  xiii.-xiv.  i. 

The  crisis  draws  on.  On  the  one  hand 
Israel's  sin,  accumulating,  bulks  ripe  for  judg- 
ment. On  the  other  the  times  grow  more 
fatal,  or  the  prophet  more  than  ever  feels  them 
so.  He  will  gather  once  again  the  old  truths 
on  the  old  lines — the  great  past  when  Jehovah 
was  God  alone,  the  descent  to  the  idols  and  the 
mushroom  monarchs  of  to-day,  the  people,  who 
once  had  been  strong,  sapped  by  luxury,  forget- 
ful, stupid,  not  to  be  roused.  The  discourse  has 
every  mark  of  being  Hosea's  latest.  There  are 
clearness  and  definiteness  beyond  anything  since 
chap.  iv.  There  are  ease  and  lightness  of  treat- 
ment, a  playful  sarcasm,  as  if  the  themes  were 
now  familiar  both  to  the  prophet  and  his  audi- 
ence. But,  chiefly,  there  is  the  passion — so  suit- 
able to  last  words — of  how  different  it  all  might 
have  been,  if  to  this  crisis  Israel  had  come  with 
store  of  strength  instead  of  guilt.  How  these 
years,  with  their  opening  into  the  great  history 
of  the  world,  might  have  meant  a  birth  for  the 
nation,  which  instead  was  lying  upon  them  like 
a  miscarried  child  in  the  mouth  of  the  womb! 
It  was  a  fatality  God  Himself  could  not  help  in. 
Only  death  and  hell  remained.  Let  them,  then, 
have  their  way!  Samaria  must  expiate  her  guilt 
in  the  worst  horrors  of  war. 

Instead  of  with   one  definite  historical  event, 

*  So  nearly  all  interpreters.    Hitzig  aptly  quotes  Polyb- 

ius,  "  De  Virtute,"  L.  ix.:  8ia  ttji/  en<(>vrov  ^oivi^i  -nKeovf^iav, 

K.  T.  A.  One  might  also  refer  to  the  Romans'  idea  of  the 
"  Punica  fides." 

t  Or,  full  man's  strength  :  cf.  ver.  4. 

t  But  the  LXX.  reads:  "All  his  gains  shall  not  be 
found  of  him  because  of  the  iniquity  which  he  has 
sinned  ;  "  and  Wellhausen  emends  this  to  :  "All  his  gain 
sufficeth  not  for  the  guilt  which  it  has  incurred." 

§  Others  "  to  demons." 

II  Field,  but  here  in  sense  of  territory.  See  "Hist 
Geog.",  pp.  79  f. 


5^8 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


this  last  eflfort  of  Rosea  opens  more  naturally 
with  a  summary  of  all  Ephraim's  previous  his- 
tory. The  tribe  had  been  the  first  in  Israel  till 
they  took  to  idols. 

"Whenever  Ephraim  spake  there  was  trem- 
bling.* Prince t  was  he  in  Israel;  but  he  fell  into 
guilt  through  the  Ba'al,  and  so — died.  Even 
now  they  continue  to  sin  and  make  them  a  smelt- 
ing of  their  silver,  idols  after  their  own  model, $ 
smith's  work  all  of  it.  To  them  " — to  such  things 
— "they  speak!  Sacrificing  men  kiss  calves!" 
In  such  unreason  have  they  sunk.  They  cannot 
endure.  "  Therefore  shall  they  be  like  the  morn- 
ing cloud  and  like  the  dew  that  early  vanish- 
eth,  like  chaflf  which  whirleth  up  from  the  floor 
and  like  smoke  from  the  window.  And  I  was 
thy  God§  from  the  land  of  Egypt;  and  god  be- 
sides Me  thou  knowest  not,  nor  saviour  has 
there  been  any  but  Myself.  I  shepherded  ||  thee 
in  the  wilderness,  in  the  land  of  droughts  " — long 
before  they  came  among  the  gods  of  fertile 
Canaan.  But  once  they  came  hither,  "  the  more 
pasture  they  had,  the  more  they  ate  themselves 
full,  and  the  more  they  ate  themselves  full,  the 
more  was  their  heart  uplifted,  so  they  for- 
gat  Me.  So  that  I  must  be^J  to  them  like  a 
lion,  like  a  leopard  in  the  way  I  must  leap.** 
I  will  fall  on  them  like  a  bear  robbed  of  its 
young,  and  will  tear  the  caul  of  their  hearts, 
and  will  devour  them  like  a  lion — wild  beasts 
shall  rend  them."  ft 

When  "  He  hath  destroyed  thee,  O  Israel — 
who  then  may  help  thee?  ft  Where  is  thy  king 
now?  that  he  may  save  thee,  or  all  thy  princes? 
that  they  may  rule  thee;  §§  those  of  whom  thou 
hast  said.  Give  me  a  king  and  princes."  Aye, 
"  I  give  thee  a  king  in  Mine  anger,  and  I  take 
him  away  in  My  wrath!  "  Fit  summary  of  the 
short  and  bloody  reigns  of  these  last  years. 

"  Gathered  is  Ephraim's  guilt,  stored  up  is  his 
sin."  The  nation  is  pregnant — but  with  guilt! 
"  Birth  pangs  seize  him.  but " — the  figure 
changes,  with  Hosea's  own  swiftness,  from 
mother  to  child — "  he  is  an  impracticable  son;  \\\\ 
for  this  is  no  time  to  stand  in  the  mouth  of 
the  womb."  The  years  that  might  have  been  the 
nation's  birth  are  by  their  own  folly  to  prove 
their  death.  Israel  lies  in  the  way  of  its  own 
redemption — how  truly  this  has  been  forced 
home  upon  them  in  one  chapter  after  another! 
Shall  God  then  step  in  and  work  a  deliverance 
on  the  brink  of  death?  "  From  the  hand  of 
Sheol  shall  I  deliver  them?  from  death  shall  I 
redeem  them?  "  Nay,  let  death  and  Sheol  have 
their  way.  "Where 'are  thy  plagues,  O  death? 
where  thy  destruction,  Sheol?"  Here  with 
them.     "  Compassion  is  hid  from  Mine  eyes." 

•Uncertain. 
+  K"'CJ'Jfor{<K'J. 

t  Read  with  Ewald  003303.      LXX.  read  031003. 
§  Here  the  LXX.  makes  the  insertion  noted  on  pp.  493, 
498. 
II  So  LXX..       -['O"'!?!. 
IRead   •'nNI. 

**"I1K'X.  iisoally  taken  as  first  fut.  ofllt^t,  "to  lurk."  But 
there  is  a  root  of  common  use  in  Arabic,  sar,  "to  spring 
up  suddenly,"  of  wine  into  the  head  or  of  a  lion  on  its 
prey  ;  sawar,  "  the  spr.nger,"  is  one  of  the  Arabic  names 
for  lion. 

tt  We  shall  treat  this  passage  later  in  connection  with 
Hosea's  doctrine  of  the  knowledge  of  God  :  see  pp.  524  f. 

ti  After  the  LXX. 

^S  Read  with  Hoiitsmn  -]1t3Dt>^1  "^^IJ}'  731. 

in  i^iterally  a  "son  not  wise,"  perhaps  a  name  given  to 
"**'!dr*=  whose  birth  was  difficult. 


This  great  verse  has  been  variously  rendered. 
Some  have  taken  it  as  a  promise:  "  I  will  de- 
liver ...  I  will  redeem  .  .  ."So  the  Septuagint 
translated,  and  St.  Paul  borrowed,  not  the  whole 
Greek  verse,  but  its  spirit  and  one  or  two  of 
its  terms,  for  his  triumphant  challenge  to  death 
in  the  power  of  the  Resurrection  of  Christ.*  As 
it  stands  in  Hosea,  however,  the  verse  must  be 
a  threat.  The  last  clause  unambiguously  abjures 
mercy,  and  the  statement  that  His  people  will 
not  be  saved,  for  God  cannot  save  them,  is  one 
in  thorough  harmony  with  all  Hosea's  teaching,  f 

An  appendix  follows  with  the  illustration  of 
the  exact  form  which  doom  shall  take.  As  so 
frequently  with  Hosea,  it  opens  with  a  play  upon 
the  people's  name,  which  at  the  same  time  faintly 
echoes  the  opening  of  the  chapter. 

"  Although  he  among  his  brethren  |  is  the 
fruit-bearer  " — yaphri',  he  Ephraim — "  there 
shall  come  an  east  wind,  a  wind  of  Jehovah 
rising  from  the  wilderness,  so  that  his  fountain 
dry  up  and  his  spring  be  parched."  He — "  him- 
self," not  the  Assyrian,  but  Menahem,  who  had 
to  send  gold  to  the  Assyrian — "  shall  strip  the 
treasury  of  all  its  precious  jewels.  Samaria  must 
bear  her  guilt:  for  she  hath  rebelled  against  her 
God."  To  this  simple  issue  has  the  impenitence 
of  the  people  finally  reduced  the  many  possibil- 
ities of  those  momentous  years;  and  their  last 
prophet  leaves  them  looking  forward  to  the  crash 
which  came  some  dozen  years  later  in  the  inva- 
sion and  captivity  of  the  land.  "  They  shall 
fall  by  the  sword;  their  infants  shall  be  dashed 
in  pieces,  and-  their  women  with  child  ripped 
up."  Horrible  details,  but  at  that  period  certain 
to  follow  every  defeat  in  war. 


CHAPTER   XX. 

"  /  WILL  BE  AS  THE  DEW." 

Hosea  xiv.  2-10. 

Like  the  Book  of  Amos,  the  Book  of  Hosea, 
after  proclaiming  the  people's  inevitable  doom, 
turns  to  a  blessed  prospect  of  their  restoration  to 
favour  with  God.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
we  decided  against  the  authenticity  of  such  an 
epilogue  in  the  Book  of  Amos;  and  it  may  now 
be  asked,  how  can  we  come  to  any  other  conclu- 
sion with  regard  to  the  similar  peroration  in  the 
Book  of  Hosea?     For  the  following  reasons. 

*  The  LXX.  reads :  Hov  r)  SiKti  (Tov,  Bdvare  ;  Trov  to  Kevrpov 
(TOW,  o6t)  ;  But  Paul  says  :  Tlov  <rov,  Bdvare,  to  yiKos  ;  nov  <roi;, 
Odvare,  to  xevTpoy  ;  i  Cor.  XV.  55  (Westcott  and  Hort's  Ed.). 

t  The  following  is  a  list  of  the  interpretations  of  verse 
14. 

A.  Taken  as  a  threat,  i.  "It  is  I  who  redeemed  you 
from  the  grip  of  the  grave,  and  who  delivered  you  from 
death— but  now  1  will  call  up  the  words  (sic)  of  death 
against  you  ;  for  repentance  is  hid  from  My  eyes."  So 
Raschi.  2.  "  I  would  have  redeemed  them  from  the  grip 
of  Sheol,  etc.,  if  they  had  been  wise,  but  being  foolish  I 
will  bring  on  them  the  plagues  of  death."  So  Kimchi, 
Eichhorn,  Simson,  etc.  3.  "  Should  I  "  or  "shall  I  deliver 
them  from  the  hand  of  Sheol,  redeem  them  from  death  ?  " 
etc.,  as  in  the  text  above.  So  Wiinsche,  Wellhausen, 
Guthe  in  Kautzsch's  "  Bibel,"  etc. 

B.  Taken  as  a  promise.  "From  the  hand  of  Sheol  I 
will  deliver  them,  from  death  redeem  them,"  etc.  So 
Umbreit,  Ewald,  Hitzig,  and  Authorised  and  Revised 
English  Versions.  In  this  case  repentance  in  the  last 
clause  must  be  taken  as  "  resentment  "  (Ewald).  But.  as 
Ewald  sees,  the  whole  verse  must  then  be  put  in  a  paren- 
thesis, as  an  ejaculation  of  promise  in  the  midst  of  a  con- 
text that  only  threatens.  Some  without  change  of  word 
render:  "I  will  be  thy  plagues,  O  death!  I  will  be  thy 
sting,  O  hell."    So  the  Authorised  English  Version. 

t  Text  doubtful.  I 


Hosea  xiv.  2-10.] 


I    WILL    BE    AS    THE    DEW. 


519 


We  decided  against  the  genuineness  of  the  clos- 
ing verses  of  Amos,  because  their  sanguine  tem- 
per is  opposed  to  the  temper  of  the  whole  of  the 
rest  of  the  book,  and  because  they  neither  pro- 
pose any  ethical  conditions  for  the  attainment  of 
the  blessed  future,  nor  in  their  picture  of  the 
latter  do  they  emphasise  one  single  trace  of  the 
justice,  or  the  purity,  or  the  social  kindliness,  on 
■which  Amos  has  so  exclusively  insisted  as  the 
ideal  relations  of  Israel  to  Jehovah.  It  seemed 
impossible  to  us  that  Amos  could  imagine  the 
perfect  restoration  of  his  people  in  the  terms  only 
of  requickened  nature,  and  say  nothing  about 
righteousness,  truth,  and  mercy  towards  the  poor. 
The  prospect  which  now  closes  his  book  is  psy- 
chologically alien  to  him,  and,  being  painted  in 
the  terms  of  later  prophecy.,  may  be  judged  to 
have  been  added  by  some  prophet  of  the  Exile, 
speaking  from  the  standpoint,  and  with  the  legiti- 
mate desires,  of  his  own  day. 

But  the  case  is  very  different  for  this  epilogue 
in  Hosea.  In  the  first  place,  Hosea  has  not  only 
continually  preached  repentance,  and  been,  from 
his  whole  affectionate  temper  of  mind,  unable  to 
believe  repentance  impossible;  but  he  has  actu- 
ally predicted  the  restoration  of  his  people  upon 
certain  well-defined  and  ethical  conditions.  In 
chap.  ii.  he  has  drawn  for  us  in  detail  the  whole 
prospect  of  God's  successful  treatment  of  his 
erring  spouse.  Israel  should  be  weaned  from 
their  sensuousness  and  its  accompanying  trust 
in  idols  by  a  severe  discipline,  which  the  prophet 
describes  in  terms  of  their  ancient  wanderings  in 
the  wilderness.  Th«ey  should  be  reduced  as  at 
the  beginning  of  their  history,  to  moral  converse 
with  their  God;  and  abjuring  the  Ba'alim  (later 
chapters  imply  also  their  foreign  allies  and  fool- 
ish kings  and  princes)  should  return  to  Jehovah, 
when  He,  having  proved  that  these  could  not 
give  them  the  fruits  of  the  land  they  sought  after, 
should  Himself  quicken  the  whole  course  of  na- 
ture to  bless  them  with  the  fertility  of  the  soil 
and  the  friendliness  even  of  the  wild  beasts. 

Now  in  the  epilogue  and  its  prospect  of  Is- 
rael's repentance  we  find  no  feature,  physical  or 
moral,  which  has  not  already  been  furnished  by 
these  previous  promises  of  the  book.  All  their 
ethical  conditions  are  provided;  nothing  but  what 
they  have  conceived  of  blessing  is  again  con- 
ceived. Israel  is  to  abjure  senseless  sacrifice  and 
c  )me  to  Jehovah  with  rational  and  contrite  con- 
f<  ssion.*  She  is  to  abjure  her  foreign  alliances.  + 
She  is  to  trust  in  the  fatherly  love  of  her  God.  i 
He  is  to  heal  her,§  and  His  anger  is  to  turn 
away.  II  He  is  to  restore  nature,  just  as  described 
in  chap,  ii.,  and  the  scenery  of  the  restoration  is 
borrowed  from  Hosea's  own  Galilee.  There  is, 
in  short,  no  phrase  or  allusion  of  which  we  can 
say  that  it  is  alien  to  the  prophet's  style  or  en- 
vironment, while  the  very  keynotes  of  his  book 
— "  return,"  "  backsliding,"  "  idols  the  work  of 
our  hands,"  "  such  pity  as  a  father  hath,"  and 
pt  rhaps  even  the  "  answer  "  or  "  converse  "  of 
vcrs^e  9 — are  all  struck  once  more. 

The  epilogue  then  is  absolutely  different  from 
the  epilogue  to  the  Book  of  Amos,  nor  can  the 
present  expositor  conceive  of  the  possibility  of 
a  stronger  case  for  the  genuineness  of  any  pas- 
sage of  Scripture.  The  sole  difiiculty  seems  to 
b  '.  the  place  in  which  we  find  it — a  place  where 
it  >  contradiction  to  the  immediately  preceding 
S"  ntence  of  doom  is  brought  out  into  relief.     We 

»  Cf.  vi.  6,  etc.        +  Cf.  xii.  2,  etc.        %  Cf.  i.  7  ;  ii.  22,  25. 
§C/.  xi.4.  IC/.  xi.8,  9. 


need  not  suppose,  however,  that  it  was  uttered  by 
Hosea  in  immediate  proximity  to  the  latter,  nor 
even  that  it  formed  his  last  word  to  Israel.  But 
granting  only  (as  the  above  evidence  obliges  us  to 
do)  that  it  is  the  prophet's  own,  this  fourteenth 
chapter  may  have  been  a  discourse  addressed 
by  him  at  one  of  those  many  points  when,  as  we 
know,  he  had  some  hope  of  the  people's  return. 
Personally,  I  should  think  it  extremely  likely  that 
Hosea's  ministry  closed  with  that  final,  hopeless 
proclamation  in  chap,  xiii.:  no  other  conclusion 
was  possible  so  near  the  fall  of  Samaria  and  the 
absolute  destruction  of  the  Northern  Kingdom. 
But  Hosea  had  already  in  chap.  ii.  painted  the 
very  opposite  issue  as  a  possible  ideal  for  his 
people;  and  during  some  break  in  those  years 
when  their  insincerity  was  less  obtrusive,  and  the 
final  doom  still  uncertain,  the  prophet's  heart 
swung  to  its  natural  pole  in  the  exhaustless  and 
steadfast  love  of  God,  and  he  uttered  his  un- 
mingled  gospel.  That  either  himself  or  the  un^ 
known  editor  of  his  prophecies  should  have 
placed  it  at  the  very  end  of  his  book  is  not  less 
than  what  we  might  have  expected.  For  if  the 
book  were  to  have  validity  beyond  the  circum- 
stances of  its  origin,  beyond  the  judgment  which 
was  so  near  and  so  inevitable,  was  it  not  right  to 
let  something  else  than  the  proclamation  of  this 
latter  be  its  last  word  to  men?  was  it  not  right  to 
put  as  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  the 
ideal  eternity  valid  for  Israel — the  gospel  which 
is  ever  God's  last  word  to  His  people?  * 

At  some  point  or  other,  then,  in  the  course 
of  his  ministry,  there  was  granted  to  Hosea  an 
open  vision  like  to  the  vision  which  he  has  re- 
counted in  the  second  chapter.  He  called  on  the 
people  to  repent.  For  once,  and  in  the  power 
of  that  Love  to  which  he  had  already  said  all 
things  are  possible,  it  seemed  to  him  as  if  repent- 
ance came.  The  tangle  and  intrigue  of  his  gen- 
eration fell  away;  fell  away  the  reeking  sacrifices 
and  the  vain  show  of  worship.  The  people 
turned  from  their  idols  and  puppet-kings,  from 
Assyria  and  from  Egypt,  and  with  contrite  hearts 
came  to  God  Himself,  who,  healing  and  loving, 
opened  to  them  wide  the  gates  of  the  future.  It 
is  not  strange  that  down  this  spiritual  vista  the 
prophet  should  see  the  same  scenery  as  daily 
filled  his  bodily  vision.  Throughout  Galilee 
Lebanonf  dominates  the  landscape.    You  cannot 

*  Since  preparing  the  above  for  the  press  there  has  come 
into  my  hands  Professor  Cheyne's  "  Introduction  "  to  the 
new  edition  of  Robertson  Smith's  "The  Prophets  of 
Israel,"  in  which  (p.  xix.)  he  reaches  with  regard  to  Hosea 
xiv.  2-IO  conclusions  entirely  opposite  to  those  reached 
above.  Professor  Cheyne  denies  the  passage  to  Hosea  on 
the  grounds  that  it  is  akin  in  language  and  imagery  and 
ideas  to  writings  of  the  age  which  begins  with  Jeremiah, 
and  which  among  other  works  includes  the  Song  of 
Songs.  But,  as  has  been  shown  above,  the  "  language, 
imagery,  and  ideas  "  are  all  akin  to  what  Professor  Cheyne 
admits  to  be  genuine  prophecies  of  Hosea ;  and  the  like- 
ness to  them  of,  e.g.,  Jer.  xxxi.  10-20,  may  be  explained 
on  the  same  ground  as  so  much  else  in  Jeremiah  by  the 
influence  of  Hosea.  The  allusion  in  ver.  3  suits  Hosea's 
own  day  more  than  Jeremiah's.  Nor  can  I  understand 
what  Professor  Cheyne  means  by  this  :  "The  spirituality 
of  the  tone  of  vers.  1-3  is  indeed  surprising  (contrast  the 
picture  in  Hos.  v.  6)."  Spirituality  surprising  in  the  book 
that  contains  "  I  will  have  love  and  not  sacrifice,  and  the 
knowledge  of  God  rather  than  burnt-offerings"!  The 
verse,  v.  6,  he  would  contrast  with  xiv.  1-3  is  actually  one 
in  which  Hosea  says  that  when  they  go  "with  flocks  and 
herds  "  Israel  shall  not  find  God  !  He  saysthat  "  to  under- 
stand Hosea  aright  we  must  omit  it"  (/.  e.,  the  whole 
epilogue).  But  after  the  argument  I  have  given  above  it 
will  be  plain  that  if  we  "understand  Hosea  aright"  we 
have  every  reason  "not  "  "to  omit  it."  His  last  conten- 
tion, that  "to  have  added  anything  to  the  stern  warning 
in  xiii.  16  would  have  robbed  it  of  half  its  force,"  is  fully 
met  by  the  considerations  stated  above  on  this  page. 

t  By   Lebanon   in  the  fourteenth  chapter,  and  almost 


520 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


lift  your  eyes  from  any  spot  of  Northern  Israel 
without  resting  them  upon  the  vast  mountain. 
From  the  unhealthy  jungles  of  the  Upper  Jordan, 
the  pilgrim  lifts  his  heart  to  the  cool  hill  air 
above,  to  the  ever-green  cedars  and  firs,  to  the 
streams  and  waterfalls  that  drop  like  silver  chains 
off  the  great  breastplate  of  snow.  From  Esdrae- 
lon  and  every  plain  the  peasants  look  to  Lebanon 
to  store  the  clouds  and  scatter  the  rain;  it  is  not 
from  heaven  but  from  Hernion  that  they  expect 
the  dew,  their  only  hope  in  the  long  drought 
of  summer.  Across  Galilee  and  in  Northern 
Ephraim,  across  Bashan  and  in  Northern  Gilead, 
across  Hauran  and  on  the  borders  of  the  desert, 
the  mountain  casts  its  spell  of  power,  its  lavish 
promise  of  life.*  Lebanon  is  everywhere  the 
summit  of  the  land,  and  there  are  points  from 
which  it  is  as  dominant  as  heaven. 

No  wonder  then  that  our  northern  prophet 
painted  the  blessed  future  in  the  poetry  of  ihe 
Mountain — its  air,  its  dew,  and  its  trees.  Other 
seers  were  to  behold,  in  the  same  latter  days. 
the  mountain  of  the  Lord  above  the  tops  of  the 
mountains;  the  ordered  city^  her  steadfast  walls 
salvation,  and  her  open  gates  praise;  the  wealth 
of  the  Gentiles  flowing  into  her,  profusion  of 
flocks  for  sacrifice,  profusion  of  pilgrims;  the 
great  Temple  and  its  s'olemn  services;  and  "the 
glory  of  Lebanon  shall  come  unto  thee,  nr-tree 
and  pine  and  box-tree  together,  to  beautify  the 
place  of  My  Sanctuary."  f  But,  with  his  home 
in  the  north,  and  weary  of  sacrifice  and  ritual, 
weary  of  everything  artificial,  whether  it  were 
idols  or  puppet-kings.  Rosea  turns  to  the  "  glory 
of  Lebanon  "  as  it  lies,  untouched  by  human  tool 
or  art,  fresh  and  full  of  peace  from  God's  own 
hand.  Like  that  other  seer  of  Galilee,  Rosea 
in  his  vision  of  the  future  "  saw  no  temple 
therein."  I  Ris  sacraments  are  the  open  air,  the 
mountain  breeze,  the  dew,  the  vine,  the  lilies,  the 
pines;  and  what  God  asks  of  men  are  not  rites 
nor  sacrifices,  but  life  and  health,  fragrance  and 
fruitfulness,  beneath  the  shadow  and  the  Dew  of 
His  Presence. 

"  Return,  O  Israel,  to  Jehovah  thy  God,  for 
thou  hast  stumbled  by  thine  iniquity.  Take  with 
you  words§  and  return  unto  Jehovah.  Say  unto 
Rim,  Remove  iniquity  altogether,  and  take  good, 
so  will  we  render  the  calves||  of  our  lips;"  con- 
fessions, vows,  these  are  the  sacrificial  offerings 
God  delights  in.  Which  vows  are  now  regis- 
tered:— 

"  Asshur  shall  not  save  us ; 
We  shall  not  ride  upon  horses  (from  Egypt) ; 
And  we  will  say  no  more'  "  O  our  God,"  to  the  work  of 

our  hands : 
For  in  Thee  the  fatherless  findeth  a  father's  pity." 

Alien  help,  whether  in  the  protection  of  As- 
syria or  the  cavalry  which  Pharaoh  sends  in  re- 
turn for  Israel's  homage;  alien  gods,  whose  idols 
we  have  ourselves  made, — we  abjure  them  all, 
for  we  remember  how  Thou  didst  promise  to 
show  a  father's  love  to  the  people  whom  Thou 

always  in  the  Old  Testament,  we  must  understand  not  the 
western  range  now  called  Lebanon,  for  that  makes  no 
impression  on  the  Holy  Land,  its  bulk  lying  too  far  to  the 
north,  but  Hermon,  the  southmost  and  highest  summits 
of  Anti-Lebanon.     See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  417  f. 

•Full  sixty  miles  off ,  in  the  Jebel  Druze,  the  ancient 
Greek  amphitheatres  were  so  arranged  that  Hermon 
might  fill  the  horizon  of  the  spectators. 

t  Isa.  Ix.  13. 

i  Revelation  of  St.  John  xxi.  22. 

§On  all  this  exhortation  see  below,  p.  527. 

II LXX.  "  fruit,  ''"IQ  (or  D^S  ',  the  whole  verse  is 
obscure. 


didst  name,  for  their  mother's  sins,  Lo-Ruhamah, 
the  Unfathered.     Then  God  replies: — 

"I  will  heal  their  backsliding, 
I  will  love  them  freely  : 

For  Mine  anger  is  turned  away  from  them. 
I  will  be  as  tlie  dew  unto  Israel : 
He  shall  blossom  as  the  lily. 
And  strike  his  roots  deep  as  Lebanon  : 
His  branches  shall  spread. 
And  his  beauty  shall  be  as  the  olive-tree, 
And  his  smell  as  Lebanon— 

smell  of  clear  mountain  air  with  the  scent  of  th* 
pines  upon  it.  The  figure  in  the  end  of  ver.  6 
seems  forced  to  some  critics,  who  have  proposed 
various  emendations,  such  as  "  like  the  fast- 
rooted  trees  of  Lebanon,"  *  but  any  one  who  has 
seen  how  the  mountain  himself  rises  from  great 
roots,  cast  out  across  the  land  like  those  of  some 
giant  oak,  will  not  feel  it  necessary  to  mitigate 
the  metaphor. 
The  prophet  now  speaks: — 

"They  shall  return  and  dwell  in  His  shadow. 
They  shall  live  well-watered  as  a  garden, 
Till  they  flourish  like  the  vine. 
And  be  fragrant  like  the  wine  of  Lebanon." t 

God  speaks: — 

"  Ephraim,  what  has  he  t  to  do  any  more  with  idols ! 
I  have  spoken /or  Aim,  and  I  will  look  after  him. 
I  am  like  an  ever-green  fir ; 
From  Me  is  thy  fruit  found." 

This  version  is  not  without  its  difiiculties;  but 
the  alternative  that  God  is  addressed  and 
Ephraim  is  the  speaker — '"Ephraim"  says, "What 
have  I  to  do  any  more  with  idols?  I  answer  and 
look  to  Rim:  I  am  like  a  green  fir-tree;  from  me 
is  Thy  fruit  found  " — has  even  greater  difficul- 
ties,§  although  it  avoids  the  unusual  comparison 
of  the  Deity  with  a  tree.     The  difiiculties  of  both 

*  So  Guthe  ;  some  other  plant  Wellhausen,  who  for  ^i) 

reads  "j^p^l. 

t  Ver.  8  obviously  needsemendation.  The  Hebrew  text 
contains  at  least  one  questionable  construction,  and, 
gives  no  sense:  "They  that  dwell  in  his  shadow  shall* 
turn,  and  revive  corn  and  flourish  like  the  vine,  and  his 
fame,"  etc.  To  cultivate  corn  and  be  themselves  like  a 
vine  is  somewhat  mixed.  The  LXX.  reads  :  iTtiaTpi<itov(n.v 
jcal  KadioiivTai.  viro  Ti)v  <TK€-m)V  avToi,  ^ritrovTai  Koi  fie0vo'0^(7'oi'Tai 
airif  Kol  f^avBria^d  a/inr  .Ao?  ii.vi\ti.6avvr\v  avTov  <u9  oifot  Ai/9afov. 
It  removes  the   grammatical    difficulty  from  clause   i, 

which  then  reads  ^^V^  \t  •:  '  ^^^  supplied  vau 
may  easily  have  dropped  after  the  final  vau  of  the  previ- 
ous word.  In  the  second  clause  the  LXX.  takes  ViT  as  an 
intransitive,  which  is  better  suited  to  the  oth'er  verbs, 
and  adds  koI  fiedvadria-ovTai,  V")"11  (a  form  that  may  have 
easily  slipped  from  the  Hebrew  text,  through  its  likeness 
to  the  preceding  ViTI),  "And  they  shall  be  well- 
watered."    After  this  it  is  probable  that  jJT  should  read 

\r^'     In  the  third  clause  the  Hebrew  text  may  stand.     In 

the  fourth  "^^f  may  not,  as  many  propose,  be  taken  for 
m3T  and  translated  "their  perfume;"  but  the  parallel- 
ism makes  it  now  probable  that  we  have  a  verb  here  ; 
and  if  "131  in  the  Hiph.  has  the  sense  "to  make  a  per- 
fume" (c/.  Isa.  Ixvi.  3),  there  is  no  reason  against  the 
Kal  being  used  in  the  intransitive  sense  here.  In  the 
LXX.  for  fi€9u(r8^<ro«'Tat  Qa  reads  aTripix^rja-ovTai.. 

$LXX. 

§This  alternative,  which  Robertson  Smith  adopted, 
"though  not  without  some  hesitation  "("  Prophets,'  413) 
is  that  which  follows  the  Hebrew  text,  reading  in  the  first 

clause  ""r '  and  not,  like  LXX.,  V.  and  avoids  the  unusual 

figure  of  comparing  Jehovah  to  a  tree.  But  it  does  not 
account  for  the  singular  emphasis  laid  in  the  second 
clause  on  the  first  personal  pronoun,  and  implies  that 
God,  whose  name  has  not  for  several  verses  been  men- 
tioned, is  meant  by  the  mere  personal  suffix,  "I  will  look 
to  Him."  Wellhausen  suggests  changing  the  second 
clause  to  "  I  am  his  Anat  and  his  Aschera." 


THE    KNOWLEDGE    OF    GOD. 


521 


interpretations  may  be  overcome  by  dividing  the 
verse  between  God  and  the  people: — 

"  Ephraim  !  what  has  he  to  do  any  more  with  idols  : 
I  have  spoken/or  him,  and  will  look  after  him." 

In  this  case  the  speaking  would  be  intended  in 
the  same  sense  as  the  speaking  in  chap.  ii.  to  the 
heavens  and  earth,  that  they  might  speak  to  the 
corn  and  wine*    Then  Ephraim  replies: — 

"  I  am  like  an  ever-yreen  fir-tree  ; 
From  me  is  Thy  fruit  found." 

But  the  division  appears  artificial,  and  the  text 
does  not  suggest  that  the  two  I's  belong  to  differ- 
ent speakers.  The  first  version  therefore  is  the 
preferable. 

Some  one  has  added  a  summons  to  later  gen- 
erations to  lay  this  book  to  heart  in  face  of  their 
own  problems  and  sins.  May  we  do  so  for  our- 
selves! 

"  Who  is  wise,  that  he  understands  these  things  ? 
Intelligent,  that  he  knows  them  ? 
Yea   straight  are  the  ways  of  Jehovah, 
And  thi  righteous  shall  walk  therein,  but  sinners  shall 
stumble  upon  them." 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE  KNOWLEDGE  OF  GOD. 

Hose  A  passim. 

We  have  now  finished  the  translation  and  de- 
tailed exposition  of  Hosea's  prophecies.  We 
have  followed  his  minute  examination  of  his  peo- 
ple's character;  his  criticism  of  his  fickle  genera- 
tion's attempts  to  repent;  and  his  presentation 
of  true  religion  in  contrast  to  their  shallow  op- 
timism and  sensual  superstitions.  We  have  seen 
an  inwardness  and  spirituality  of  the  highest  kind 
— a  love  not  only  warm  and  mobile,  but  nobly 
jealous,  and  in  its  jealousy  assisted  by  an  extraor- 
dinary insight  and  expertness  in  character.  Why 
Hosea  should  be  distinguished  above  all  prophets 
for  inwardness  and  spirituality  must  by  this  time 
be  obvious  to  us.  From  his  remote  watchful- 
ness, Amos  had  seen  the  nations  move  across  the 
world  as  the  stars  across  heaven;  had  seen, 
within  Israel,  class  distinct  from  class,  and  given 
types  of  all:  rich  and  poor;  priest,  merchant,  and 
judge;  the  panic-stricken,  the  bully;  the  fraudu- 
lent and  the  unclean.  The  observatory  of  Amos 
was  the  woiid,  and  the  nation.  But  Hosea's 
was  the  home;  and  there  he  had  watched  a  hu- 
man soul  decay  through  every  stage  from  inno- 
cence to  corruption.  It  was  a  husband's  study 
of  a  wife  which  made  Hosea  the  most  inward  of 
all  the  prophets.  This  was  "  the  beginning  of 
God's  word  by  him."-f- 

Among  the  subjects  in  the  subtle  treatment  of 
which  Hosea's  service  to  religion  is  most  orig- 
inal and  conspicuous,  there  are  especially  three 
that  deserve  a  more  detailed  treatment  than  we 
have  been  able  to  give  them.  These  are  the 
Knowledge  of  God,  Repentance,  and  the  Sin 
against  Love.  We  may  devote  a  chapter  to  each 
of  them,  beginning  in  this  with  the  most  char- 
acteristic and  fundamental  truth  Hosea  gave  to 
religion — the   Knowledge  of   God. 

If  to  the  heart  there  be  one  pain  more  fatal 
than  another,  it  is  the  pain  of  not  being  under- 


■  r[:i]},  ii.  23, 


ti.  2. 


stood.  That  prevents  argument:  how  can  you 
reason  with  one  who  will  not  come  to  quarters 
with  your  real  self?  It  paralyses  influence:  how 
can  you  do  your  best  with  one  who  js  blind  to 
your  best?  It  stifles  Love;  for  how  dare  she 
continue  to  speak  when  she  is  mistaken  for  some- 
thing else?  Here  as  elsewhere  "  against  stupidity 
the  gods  themselves  fight  in  vain.'"- 

This  anguish  Hosea  had  suffered.  As  closely 
as  two  souls  may  live  on  earth,  he  had  lived  with 
Gomer.  Yet  she  had  never  wakened  ,to  his 
worth.  She  must  have  been  a  woman  with  a 
power  of  love,  or  such  a  heart  had  hardly  wooed 
her.  He  was  a  man  of  deep  tenderness  and  ex- 
quisite powers  of  expression.  His  tact,  his  deli- 
cacy, his  enthusiasm  are  sensible  in  every  chap- 
ter of  his  book.  Gomer  must  have  tasted  them 
all  before  Israel  did.  Yet  she  never  knew  him. 
It  was  her  curse  that,  being  married,  she  was 
not  awake  to  the  meaning  of  marriage,  and,  be- 
ing married  to  Hosea,  she  never  appreciated  the 
holy  tenderness  and  heroic  patience  which  were 
deemed  by  God  not  unworthy  of  becoming  a 
parable  of  His  own. 

Now  I  think  we  do  not  go  far  wrong  if  we 
conclude  that  it  was  partly  this  long  experience 
of  a  soul  that  loved,  but  had  neither  conscience 
nor  ideal  in  her  love,  which  made  Hosea  lay 
such  frequent  and  pathetic  emphasis  upon  Is- 
rael's ignorance  of  Jehovah.  To  have  his  char- 
acter ignored,  his  purposes  baffled,  his  gifts  un- 
appreciated, his  patience  mistaken — this  was 
what  drew  Hosea  into  that  wonderful  sympathy 
with  the  heart  of  God  towards  Israel  which 
comes  out  in  such  passionate  words  as  these: 
"  My  people  perish  for  lack  of  knowledge.* 
There  is  no  troth,  nor  leal  love,  nor  knowledge 
of  God  in  the  land.f  They  have  not  known  the 
Lord.t  She  did  not  know  that  I  gave  her  corn 
and  wine.§  They  knew  not  that  I  healed  them.  | 
For  now,  because  thou  hast  rejected  knowledge, 
I  will  reject  thee.^  I  will  have  leal  love  and  not 
sacrifice,  and  the  knowledge  of  God  rather  than 
burnt-offerings."**  Repentance  consists  in 
change  of  knowledge.  And  the  climax  of  the 
new  life  which  follows  is  again  knowledge:  "  I 
will  betroth  thee  to  Me,  and  thou  shalt  know  the 
Lord.ft  Israel  shall  cry.  My  God,  we  know 
Thee."  Jt 

To  understand  what  Hosea  meant  by  knowl- 
edge we  must  examine  the  singularly  supple 
word  which  his  language  lent  him  to  express  it. 
The  Hebrew  root  "  Yadh'a,"  §§  almost  exclu- 
sively rendered  in  the  Old  Testament  by  the  Eng- 
lish verb  to  know,  is  employed  of  the  many 
processes  of  knowledge,  for  which  richer  lan- 
guages have  separate  terms.  It  is  by  turns  to 
perceive,  be  aware  of,  recognise,  understand  or 
conceive,  experience,  and  be  expert  in.||j|  But 
there  is  besides  nearly  always  a  practical  effect- 
iveness, and  in  connection  with  religious  ob- 
jects  a   moral   consciousness. 

The  barest  meaning  is  to  be  aware  that  some- 
thing is  present  or  has  happened,  and  perhaps  the 
root  meant  simply  to  see.*i"|  But  it  was  the  fre- 
quent duty  of  the  prophets  to  mark  the  differ- 
ence between  perceiving  a  thing  and  laying  it  to 

*  iv.  6.  Tiv.  6. 

t  iv.  I.  **  vi.  6. 

t  V.  4.  ++ii,  22. 

§ii.  10.  tt  viii.  2. 

Jxi.  3.  §§yT. 

Ill  The  Latin  "  videre,  scire,  noscere,  cognoscere,  latel 
ligere,  sapere  "  and  "  peritus  esse." 
^^  Cf.  the  Greek  oifia  from  fxtf^v. 


522 


THE'BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


heart.  Isaiah  speaks  of  the  people  ''  seeing,"  but 
not  so  as  "to  know;"*  and  Deuteronomy  renders 
the  latter  sense  by  adding  "  with  the  heart," 
which  to  ihe  Hebrews  was  the  seat,  not  of  the 
feeling,  but  of  the  practical  intellect. f  "  And 
thou  knowest  with  thy  heart  that  as  a  man  chas- 
tiseth  his  son,  so  the  Lord  your  God  chastiseth 
you.":}:  Usually,  however,  the  word  "know" 
suffices  by  itself.  This  practical  vigour  naturally 
developed  in  such  directions  as  "  intimacy,  con- 
viction, experience,"  and  "  wisdom."  Job  calls 
his  familiars  "  my  knowers;"§  of  a  strong  con- 
viction he  says,  "  I  know  that  my  Redeemer 
liveth,"!  and  referring  to  wisdom,  "We  are  of 
yesterday  and  know  not;"1T  while  Ecclesiastes 
says,  "  Whoso  keepeth  the  commandment  shall 
know  " — that  is,  "  experience,"  or  "  suffer — no 
evil."**  But  the  verb  rises  into  a  practical  sense 
— to  the  knowledge  that  leads  a  man  to  regard  or 
care  for  its  object.  Job  uses  the  verb  "  know  " 
when  he  would  say,  "  I  do  not  care  for  my 
life;  "  tt  and  in  the  description  of  the  sons  of  Eli, 
that  "  they  were  sons  of  Belial,  and  did  not  know 
God,"  it  means  that  they  did  not  have  any  regard 
for  Him.Jt  Finally,  there  is  a  moral  use  of  the 
word  in  which  it  approaches  the  meaning  of  con- 
science: "  Their  eyes  were  opened,  and  they  knew 
that  they  were  naked."  §§  They  were  aware  of 
this  before,  but  they  felt  it  now  with  a  new 
sense.  Also  it  is  the  mark  of  the  awakened  and 
the  full-grown  to  know,  or  to  feel,  the  difference 
between   good  and  evil.|||| 

Here,  then,  we  have  a  word  for  knowing,  the 
utterance  of  which  almost  invariably  starts  a 
moral  echo,  whose  very  sound,  as  it  were,  is 
haunted  by  sympathy  and  by  duty.  It  is  knowl- 
edge, not  as  an  effort  of,  so  much  as  an  effect 
upon,  the  mind.  It  is  not  to  knozv  so  as  to  see 
the  fact  of,  but  to  know  so  as  to  feel  the  force  of; 
knowledge,  not  as  acquisition  and  mastery,  but 
as  impression,  passion.  To  quote  Paul's  distinc- 
tion, it  is  not  so  much  the  apprehending  as  the 
being  apprehended.  It  leads  to  a  vivid  result — 
either  warm  appreciation  or  change  of  mind  or 
practical  effort.  It  is  sometimes  the  talent  con- 
ceived as  the  trust,  sometimes  the  enlistment  of 
all  the  affections.  It  is  knowledge  that  is  fol- 
lowed by  shame,  or  by  love,  or  by  reverence,  or 
by  the  sense  of  a  duty.  One  sees  that  it  closely 
approaches  the  meaning  of  our  "  conscience," 
and  understands  how  easily  there  was  developed 
from  it  the  evangelical  name  for  repentance, 
Metanoia — that  is,  change  of  mind  under  a  new 
impression  of  facts. 

There  are  three  writers  who  thus  use  knowl- 
edge as  the  key  to  the  Divine  life — in  the  Old 
Testament  Hosea  and  the  author  of  Deuteron- 
omy, in  the  New  Testament  St.  John.  We  likened 
Amos  to  St.  John  the  Baptist:  it  is  not  only  upon 
his  similar  temperament,  but  far  more  upon  his 

*  vi.  g. 

t  See  above,  pp.  506,  510. 

t  viii.  5  :  cf.  x.\ix.  3  (Eng.  4),  "Jehovah  did  not  give  you 
a  heart  to  know." 

§Job.  xix.  13  :  still  more  close,  of  course,  the  intimacy 
between  the  sexes  for  which  the  verb  is  so  often  used  in 
the  Old  Testament. 

II  xix.  25  :  cf.  Gen.  xx.  6. 
1  viii.  9. 

**  viii.  s  :  cf.  Hosea  ix.  7. 

tt  ix.  21. 

XXi  Sam.  ii.  12.  A  similar  meaning  is  probably  to  be 
attaclied  to  the  word  in  Gen.  xxxix.  6  :  Potiphar  "had  no 
thoug-ht  or  care  for  anything  "  that  was  in  Joseph's  hand. 
Cf.  Prov.  ix.  13  ;  xxvii.  23 ;  Job  xxxv.  15. 

§§  Gen.  iii.  7. 

III  Gen.  iii.  5  ;  Isa.  vii.  15,  etc. 


use   of   the   word   knowledge    for   spiritual   pur- 
poses, that  we  may  compare  Hosea  to  St.  John 

the  Evangelist. 

Hosea's  chief  charge  against  the  people  is  one 
of  stupidity.  High  and  low  they  are  "  a  people 
without  intelligence."  *  Once  he  defines  this  as 
want  of  political  wisdom:  "  Ephraim  is  a  silly 
dove  without  heart,"  or,  as  we  should  say,  "  with- 
out brains ;"t  and  again,  as  insensibility  to  every 
ominous  fact:  "  Strangers  have  devoured  his 
strength,  and  he  knoweth  it  not;  yea,  grey  hairs 
are  scattered  upon  him,  and  he  knoweth  it  not,"  | 
or,  as  we  should  say,  "  lays  it  not  to  heart." 

But  Israel's  most  fatal  ignorance  is  of  God 
Himself.  This  is  the  sign  and  the  cause  of  every 
one  of  their  defects.  "  There  is  no  troth,  nor 
leal  love,  nor  knowledge  of  God  in  the  land.^ 
They  have  not  known  the  Lord.||  They  have 
not  known  Me." 

With  the  causes  of  this  ignorance  the  prophet 
has  dealt  most  explicitly  in  the  fourth  chapter.  1[ 
They  are  two:  the  people's  own  vice  and  the  neg- 
ligence of  their  priests.  Flabitual  vice  destroys 
a  people's  brains.  ''  Harlotry,  wine,  and  new 
wine  take  away  the  heart  of  My  people."**  Lust, 
for  instance,  blinds  them  to  the  domestic  conse- 
quences of  their  indulgence  in  the  heathen  wor- 
ship, "  and  so  the  stupid  people  come  to  their 
end."  ft  Again,  their  want  of  political  wisdom  is 
due  to  their  impurity,  drunkenness,  and  greed  to  be 
rich.Jt  Let  those  take  heed  who  among  ourselves 
insist  that  art  is  independent  of  moral  condi- 
tions— that  wit  and  fancy  reach  their  best  and 
bravest  when  breaking  from  any  law  of  decency. 
They  lie:  such  license  corriipts  the  natural  intel- 
ligence of  a  people,  and  robs  them  of  insight  and 
imagination. 

Yet  Hosea  sees  that  all  the  fault  does  not  lie 
with  the  common  people.  Their  teachers  are  to 
blame,  priest  and  prophet  alike,  for  both 
"  stumble,"  and  it  is  true  that  a  people  shall  be 
like  its  priests. §§  "  The  priests  have  rejected 
knowledge  and  forgotten  the  Torah "  of  their 
God;  they  think  only  of  the  ritual  of  sacrifice  and 
the  fines  by  which  they  fill  their  mouths.  It  was, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  sin  of  Israel's  religion  in  the 
eighth  century.  To  the  priests  religion  was  a 
mass  of  ceremonies  which  satisfied  the  people's 
superstitions  and  kept  themselves  in  bread.  To 
the  prophets  it  was  an  equally  sensuous,  an 
equally  mercenary  ecstasy.  But  to  Hosea  reli- 
gion is  above  all  a  thing  of  the  intellect  and  con- 
science: it  is  that  knowing  which  is  at  once  com- 
mon-sense, plain  morality,  and  the  recognition 
by  a  pure  heart  of  what  God  has  done  and  is  do- 
ing in  history.  Of  such  a  knowledge  the  priests 
and  prophets  are  the  stewards,  and  it  is  because 
they  have  ignored  their  trust  that  the  people  have 
been  provided  with  no  antidote  to  the  vices  that 
corrupt  their  natural  intelligence  and  make  them 
incapable  of  seeing  God. 

In  contrast  to  such  ignorance  Hosea  describes 

*  iv.  14,  |^2^"X?  DJ?  ;  if  the  original  meaning  of  p3  be  to 
"get  between,  see  through"  or  "into,"  so  "  discriminate, 
understand,"  then  intelligence  is  its  etymological  equiva- 
lent. 

t  vii.  II. 

t  vii.  q. 

§iv.  I. 

II  v.  4. 

1  For  exposition  of  this  chapter  see  above,  pp.  505  ff. 

**iv.  II,  12,  LXX. 

ttiv.  14  f.     See  above,  pp.  506  f. 

Jt  vii. /ajj/w. 

§§  iv.  4-9.    Above,  pp.  505  f. 


THE    KNOWLEDGE    OF   GOD. 


523 


the  essential  temper  and  contents  of  a  true  un- 
derstanding of  God.  u^sing  the  word  knozvledge, 
in  the  passive  sense  characteristic  of  his  lan- 
guage, not  so  much  the  acquisition  as  the  im- 
pression of  facts,  an  impression  which  masters 
not  only  a  man's  thoughts  but  his  heart  and  will, 
Hosea  describes  the  knozvledge  of  God  as  feeling, 
character,  and  conscience.  Again  and  again  he 
makes  it  parallel  to  loyalty,  repentance,  love,  and 
service.  Again  and  again  he  emphasises  that  it 
comes  from  God  Himself.  It  is  not  something 
which  men  can  reach  by  their  own  endeavours, 
or  by  the  mere  easy  turning  of  their  fickle  hearts. 
For  it  requires  God  Himself  to  speak,  and  disci- 
pline to  chasten.  The  only  passage  in  which  the 
knowledge  of  God  is  described  as  the  immediate 
prize  of  man's  own  pursuit  is  that  prayer  of  the 
people  on  whose  facile  religiousness  Hosea  pours 
his  scorn.*  "  Let  us  know,  let  us  follow  on  to 
know  the  Lord,"  he  heard  them  say,  and  promise 
themselves,  "  As  soon  as  we  seek  Him  we  shall 
find  Him."  But  God  replies  that  He  can  make 
nothing  of  such  ambitions;  they  will  pass  away 
like  the  morning  cloud  and  the  early  dew.f  This 
discarded  prayer,  then,  is  the  only  passage  in  the 
book  in  which  the  knowledge  of  God  is  described 
as  man's  acquisition.  Elsewhere,  in  strict  con- 
formity to  the  temper  of  the  Hebrew  word  to 
know,  Hosea  presents  the  knowledge  of  the 
Most  High,  not  as  something  man  finds  out  for 
himself,  but  something  which  comes  down  on 
him  from  above. 

The  means  which  God  took  to  impress  Himself 
upon  the  heart  of  His  people  were,  according  to 
Hosea,  the  events  of  their  history.  Hosea,  in- 
deed, also  points  to  another  means.  "  The 
Torah  of  thy  God,"  which  in  one  passage^  he 
makes  parallel  to  "  knowledge,"  is  evidently  the 
body  of  instruction,  judicial,  ceremonial,  and  so- 
cial, which  has  come  down  by  the  tradition  of  the 
priests.  This  was  not  all  oral;  part  of  it  at  least 
was  already  codified  in  the  form  we  now  know  as 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant. §  But  Hosea  treats  of 
the  Torah  only  in  connection  with  the  priests. 
And  the  far  more  frequent  and  direct  means  by 
which  God  has  sought  to  reveal  Himself  to  the 
people  are  the  great  events  of  their  past.  These 
Hosea  never  tires  of  recalling.  More  than  any 
other  prophet,  he  recites  the  deeds  done  by  God 
in  the  origins  and  making  of  Israel.  So  numer- 
ous are  his  references  that  from  them  alone  we 
could  almost  rebuild  the  early  history.  Let  us 
gather  them  together.  The  nation's  father  Jacob 
"  in  the  womb  overreached  his  brother,  and  in 
his  manhood  strove  with  God;  yea,  he  strove 
with  the  Angel  and  he  overcame, ||  he  wept  and 
supplicated  Him;  at  Bethel  he  found  Him,  and 
there  He  spake  with  us — Jehovah  God  of  Hosts, 
Jehovah  is   His   name.T[ .  .  .  And  Jacob  fled  to 

*vi.  I  ff.     See  above,  pp.  507  flf. 

t  vi.  4. 

X  iv.  6.    See  above,  p.  506. 

i  See  above,  pp.  466  f .  On  the  other  doubtful  phrase, 
viii.  12— literally  "I  write  multitudes  of  My  Torah,  as  a 
stranger  they  have  reckoned  it " — no  argument  can  be 
built  ;  for  even  if  we  take  the  first  clause  as  conditional 
and  render,  "  Though  I  wrote  multitudes  of  My  Toroth, 
yet  as  those  of  a  stranger  they  would  regard  them,"  that 
would  not  necessarilj'  mean  that  no  Toroth  of  Jehovah 
were  yet  written,  but,  on  the  contrary,  might  equally 
well  imply  that  some  at  least  had  been  written. 

,1  Or  "  was  overcome." 

txii.  4-6.  See  above,  p.  517.  LXX.  reads  "they  sup- 
plicated Me  .  .  they  found  Me  .  .  .  He  spoke  with 
them."  Many  propose  to  read  the  last  clause  "with 
him."  The  passage  is  obscure.  Note  the  order  of  the 
events— the  wrestling  at  Peniel,  the  revelation  at  Bethel, 
then  in  the  subsequent  passage  the  flight  to  Aram.    This, 


the  territory  *  of  Aram,  and  he  served  for  a  wife, 
and  for  a  wife  he  tended  sheep.  And  by  a 
prophet  Jehovah  brought  Israel  up  out  of  Egypt, 
and  by  a  prophet  he  was  tended.f  When  Is- 
rael was  young,:]:  then  I  came  to  love  him,  and 
out  of  Egypt  I  called  My  son.i^  As  often  as  I 
called  to  them,  so  often  did  they  go  from  me:  J 
they  to  the  Ba'alim  kept  sacrificing,  and  to  im- 
ages offering  incense.  But  I  taught  Ephraim 
to  walk,  taking  him  upon  Minelj  arms,  and  they 
did  not  know  that  I  nursed  them.**  .  .  .  Like 
grapes  in  the  wilderness  I  found  Israel,  like  the 
firstfruits  on  an  early  fig-tree  I  saw  your 
fathers;"  but  "  they  went  to  Ba'al-Peor,  and  con- 
secrated themselves  to  the  Shame.tt  •  •  •  But  I 
am  Jehovah  thy  God  from  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
gods  besides  Me  thou  knowest  not,  and  Saviour 
there  is  none  but  Me.  I  knew  thee  in  the  wilder- 
ness, in  the  land  of  burning  heats.  But  the  more 
pasture  they  had,  the  more  they  fed  themselves 
full;  as  they  fed  themselves  full  their  heart  was 
lifted  up:  therefore  they  forgat  Me.JI  ...  I  Je- 
hovah thy  God  from  the  land  of  Egypt."  §§  And 
all  this  revelation  of  God  was  not  only  in  that 
marvellous  history,  but  in  the  yearly  gifts  of  na- 
ture and  even  in  the  success  of  the  people's  com- 
merce: "  She  knew  not  that  it  was  I  who  have 
given  her  the  corn  and  the  wine  and  the  oil,  and 
silver  have  I  multiplied  to  her."  {|{| 

This,  then,  is  how  God  gave  Israel  knowledge 
of  Himself.  First  it  broke  upon  the  Individual, 
the  Nation's  Father.  And  to  him  it  had  not 
come  by  miracle,  but  just  in  the  same  fashion  as 
it  has  broken  upon  men  from  them  until  now. 
He  woke  to  find  God  no  tradition,  but  an  ex- 
perience. Amid  the  strife  with  others  of  which 
life  for  all  so  largely  consists,  Jacob  became 
aware  that  God  also  has  to  be  reckoned  with, 
and  that,  hard  as  is  the  struggle  for  bread  and 
love  and  justice  with  one's  brethren  and  fellow- 
men,  with  the  Esaus  and  with  the  Labans,  a  more 
inevitable  wrestle  awaits  the  soul  when  it  is  left 
alone  in  the  darkness  with  the  Unseen.  Oh,  this 
is  our  sympathy  with  those  early  patriarchs,  not 
that  they  saw  the  sea  dry  up  before  them  or  the 
bush  ablaze  with  God,  but  that  upon  some  lonely 
battle-field  of  the  heart  they  also  endured  those 
moments  of  agony,  which  imply  a  more  real  Foe 
than  we  ever  met  in  flesh  and  blood,  and  which 
leave  upon  us  marks  deeper  than  the  waste  of 
toil  or  the  rivalry  of  the  world  can  inflict.  So 
the  Father  of  the  Nation  came  to  "  find  "  God  at 
Bethel,  and  there,  adds  Hosea,  where  the  Nation 
still  worship  God  "  spake  with  us  "UU  in  the.  per- 
son of  our  Father. 

The  second  stage  of  the  knowledge  of  God  was 
when  the  Nation  awoke  to  His  leading,  and 
'■  through  a  prophet,"  Moses,  were  "  brought  up 

however,  does  not  prove  that  in  Hosea's  information  the 
last  happened  after  the  two  first. 

*  mtJ'."  field,"  here  used  in  its  political  sense:  t/.  "  Hist. 
Geog.,"  p.  79.  Our  word  "  country,"  now  meaning  terri- 
tory and  now  the  rural  as  opposed  to  the  urban  districts, 
is  strictly  analogous  to  the  Hebrew  "  field." 

t  xii.  13,  14. 

t  "  A  youth." 

§  LXX.,  followed  by  many  critics,  "his  sons."  But 
"  My  son  "  is  a  better  parallel  to  "young"  in  the  preced- 
ing clause.    Or  trans.:  "to  be  My  son." 

II  So  LXX.     See  p.  515. 

^  So  rightly  LXX. 

**  xi.  1-3. 
.    tt  i.x.  10. 

XX  xiii.  4-6. 

§§xii.  10.  Other  references  to  the  ancient  history  are 
the  story  of  Gibeah  and  the  Valley  of  Achor. 

nil  ii.  10. 

^^  See  above,  p.  517. 


524 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


out  of  Egypt.  Here  again  no  miracle  is  adduced 
by  Rosea,  but  with  full  heart  he  appeals  to  the 
grace  and  the  tenderness  of  the  whole  story.  To 
him  it  is  a  wonderful  romance.  Passing  by  all 
the  empires  of  earth,  the  Almighty  chose  for 
Himself  this  people  that  was  no  people,  this  tribe 
that  were  the  slaves  of  Egypt.  And  the  choice 
was  of  love  only:  "  When  Israel  was  young  I 
came  to  love  him,  and  out  of  Egypt  I  called  My 
son."  It  was  the  adoption  of  a  little  slave-boy, 
adoption  by  the  heart;  and  the  fatherly  figure 
continues,  "'  I  taught  Ephraim  to  walk,  taking 
him  upon  Mine  arms."  It  is  just  the  same 
charm,  seen  from  another  point  of  view,  when 
Hosea  hears  God  say  that  He  had  "  found  Israel 
like  grapes  in  the  wilderness,  'like  the  firstfruits 
on  an  early  fig-tree  I  saw  your  fathers." 

Now  these  may  seem  very  imperfect  figures 
of  the  relation  of  God  to  this  one  people,  and  the 
ideas  they  present  may  be  felt  to  start  more  diffi- 
culties than  ever  their  poetry  could  soothe  to 
rest:  as,  for  instance,  why  Israel  alone  was 
chosen — why  this  of  all  tribes  Was  given  such  an 
opportunity  to  know  the  Most  High.  With 
these  questions  prophecy  does  not  deal,  and  for 
Israel's  sake  had  no  need  to  deal.  What  alone 
Hosea  is  concerned  with  is  the  Character  dis- 
cernible in  the  origin  and  the  liberation  of  his 
people.  He  hears  that  Character  speak  for  itself; 
and  it  speaks  of  a  love  and  of  a  joj%  to  find 
figures  for  which  it  goes  to  childhood  and  to 
spring — to  the  love  a  man  feels  for  a  child,  to  the 
joy  a  man  feels  at  the  sight  of  the  firstfruits  of 
the  year.  As  the  human  heart  feels  in  those  two 
great  dawns,  when  nothing  is  yet  impossible,  but 
all  is  full  of  hope  and  promise,  so  humanly,  so 
tenderly,  so  joyfully  had  God  felt  towards  His 
people.  Never  again  say  that  the  gods  of  Greece 
were  painted  more  living  or  more  fair!  The  God 
of  Israel  is  Love  and  Sprinertime  to  His  people. 
Grace,  patience,  pure  joy  of  hope  and  possibility 
— these  are  the  Divine  elements  which  this 
spiritual  man,  Rosea,  sees  in  the  early  history  of 
his  people,  and  not  the  miraculous,  about  which, 
frpm  end  to  end  of  his  book,  he  is  utterly  silent. 

It  is  ignorance,  then,  of  such  a  Character,  so 
evident  in  these  facts  of  their  history,  with  which 
Hosea  charges  his  people — not  ignorance  of  the 
facts  themselves,  not  want  of  devotion  to  their 
memory,  for  they  are  a  people  who  crowd  the 
sacred  scenes  of  the  past,  at  Bethel,  at  Gilgal,  at 
Beersheba,  but  ignorance  of  the  Character  which 
shines  through  the  facts.  Rosea  also  calls  it 
forgetfulness,  for  the  people  once  had  knowl- 
edge.* The  cause  of  their  losing  it  has  been 
their  prosperity  in  Canaan:  "  As  their  pastures 
were  increased  they  grew  satisfied;  as  they  grew 
satisfied  their  heart  was  lifted  up,  and  therefore 
they  forgat  Me."  f 

Equally  instructive  is  the  method  by  which 
Hosea  seeks  to  move  Israel  from  this  oblivion 
and  bring  them  to  a  true  knowledge  of  God.  He 
insists  that  their  recovery  can  only  be  the  work 
of  God  Himself — the  living  God  working  in  their 
lives  to-day  as  He  did  in  the  past  of  the  nation. 
To  those  past  deeds  it  is  useless  for  this  genera- 
tion to  go  back,  and  seek  again  the  memory  of 
which  they  have  disinherited  themselves.  Let 
them  rather  realise  that  the  same  God  still  lives. 
The  knowledge  of  Him  may  be  recovered  by  ap- 
preciating His  deeds  in  the  life  of  to-day.  And 
these  deeds  must  first  of  all  be  violence  and  ter- 
ror, if  only  to  rouse  them  from  their  sensuous 
*  iv.  6.  t  xiii.  5. 


sloth.  The  last  verse  we  have  quoted,  about  Is- 
rael's  complacency  and  pride,  is  followed  by  this 
terrible  one:  "I  shall  be*  to  them  like  a  lion, 
like  a  leopard  I  shall  leapf  upon  the  way.  I  will 
meet  them  as  a  bear  bereft "  of  her  cubs,  "  that  I 
may  tear  the  caul  of  their  heart,  that  I  may  de- 
vour them  there  like  a  lion:  the  wild  beast  shall 
rend  them."t  This  means  that  into  Israel's  in- 
sensibility to  Himself  God  must  break  with  facts, 
with  wounds,  with  horrors  they  cannot  evade. 
Till  He  so  acts,  their  own  efforts,  "  then  shall  we 
know  if  we  hunt  up  to  know,"§  and  their  assur- 
ance, "  My  God,  we  do  know  Thee,"  ||  are  very 
vain.  Hosea  did  not  speak  for  nothing.  Events 
were  about  to  happen  more  momentous  than 
even  the  Exodus  and  the  Conquest  of  the  Land. 
By  734  the  Assyrians  had  depopulated  Gilead  and 
Galilee;  in  725  the  capital  itself  was  invested,  and 
by  721  the  whole  nation  carried  into  captivity. 
God  had  made  Himself  known. 

We  are  already  aware,  however,  that  Hosea 
did  not  count  this  as  God's  final  revelation  to 
His  people.  Doom  is  not  doom  to  him,  as  it 
was  to  Amos,  but  discipline;  and  God  withdraws 
His  people  from  their  fascinating  land  only  that 
Re  may  have  them  more  closely  to  Himself.  He 
will  bring  His  Bride  into  the  wilderness  again, 
the  wilderness  where  they  first  met,  and  there, 
when  her  soul  is  tender  and  her  stupid  heart 
broken.  Re  will  plant  in  her  again  the  seeds  of 
His  knowledge  and  His  love.  The  passages 
which  describe  this  are  among  the  most  beautiful 
of  the  book.  They  tell  us  of  no  arbitrary  con- 
quest of  Israel  by  Jehovah,  of  no  magic  and  sud- 
den transformation.  They  describe  a  process  as 
natural  and  gentle  as  a  human  wooing;  they  use, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  very  terms  of  this:  "  I  will 
woo  her,  bring  her  into  the  wilderness,  and  speak 
home  to  her  heart.  .  .  .  And  it  shall  be  in  that 
day  that  thou  shalt  call  Me,  My  husband,  .  .  . 
and  I  will  betroth  thee  to  Me  for  ever  in  right- 
eousness and  in  justice,  and  in  leal  love  and  in 
mercies  and  in  faithfulness;  and  thou  shalt  know 
Jehovah."  T[ 


CHAPTER  XXIL 

REPENTANCE. 
Rosea  passim. 

If  we  keep  in  mind  what  Hosea  meant  by 
knowledge — a  new  impression  of  facts  implying 
a  change  both  of  temper  and  of  conduct — we 
shall  feel  how  natural  it  is  to  pass  at  once  from 
his  doctrine  of  knowledge  to  his  doctrine  of  re- 
pentance. Hosea  may  be  accurately  styled  the 
first  preacher  of  repentance,  yet  so  thoroughly 
did  he  deal  with  this  subject  of  eternal  interest 
to  the  human  heart,  that  between  him  and  our- 
selves almost  no  teacher  has  increased  the  insight 
with  which  it  has  been  examined,  or  the  passion 
with  which  it  ought  to  be  enforced. 

One  thing  we  must  hold  clear  from  the  outset. 
To  us  repentance  is  intelligible  only  in  the  in- 
dividual. There  is  no  motion  of  the  heart  which 
more  clearly  derives  its  validity  from  its  personal 
character.     Repentance    is    the    conscience,    the 

*  With  Wellhausen  read    H^nX  for  \1N1, 


+  See  above,  p.  518,  n. 
X  xiii.  7  ff. 
§vi.  3- 


llvin.  2. 

i[i.  16,  18,  21,  2a< 


REPENTANCE. 


525 


feeling,  the  resolution  of  a  man  by  himself  and 
for  himself — "  /  will  arise  and  go  to  my  Father." 
Yet  it  is  not  to  the  individual  that  Hosea  directs 
his  passionate  appeals.  For  him  and  his  age 
the  religious  unit  was  not  the  Israelite  but  Israel. 
God  had  called  and  covenanted  with  the  nation 
as  a  whole;  He  had  revealed  I-Iimself  thr(fugh 
their  historical  fortunes  and  institutions.  His 
grace  was  shown  in  their  succour  and  guidance 
as  a  people;  His  last  judgment  was  threatened  in 
their  destruction  as  a  state.  So  similarly,  when 
by  Hosea  God  calls  to  repentance,  it  is  the  whole 
nation  whom  He  addresses. 

At  the  same  tiine  we  must  remember  those 
qualifications  which  we  adduce  with  regard  to 
Hosca's  doctrine  of  the  nation's  knowledge  of 
God.*  They  affect  also  his  doctrine  of  the  na- 
tional repentance.  Hosea's  experience  of  Israel 
had  been  preceded  by  his  experience  of  an  Is- 
raelite. For  years  the  prophet  had  carried  on 
his  anxious  heart  a  single  human  character — lived 
with  her,  travailed  for  her,  pardoned  and  re- 
deemed her.  As  we  felt  that  this  long  cure  of  a 
soul  must  have  helped  Hosea  to  his  very  spiritual 
sense  of  the  knowledge  of  God,  so  now  we  may 
justly  assume  that  the  same  cannot  have  been 
without  effect  upon  his  very  personal  teaching 
about  repentance.  But  with  his  experience  of 
Gomer,  there  conspired  also  his  intense  love  for 
Israel.  A  warm  patriotism  necessarily  personi- 
fies its  object.  To  the  passionate  lover  of  his 
people,  their  figure  rises  up  one  and  individual 
— his  mother,  his  lover,  his  wife.  Now  no  man 
ever  loved  his  people  more  intimately  or  more 
tenderly  than  Hosea  loved  Israel.  The  people 
were  not  only  dear  to  him,  because  he  was  their 
son,  but  dear  and  vivid  also  for  their  loneliness 
and  their  distinction  among  the  peoples  of  the 
earth,  and  for  their  long  experience  as  the  inti- 
mate of  the  God  of  grace  and  lovingkindness. 
God  had  chosen  this  Israel  as  His  Bride;  and 
the  remembrance  of  the  unique  endowment  and 
lonely  destiny  stimulated  Hosea's  imagination  in 
the  work  of  personifying  and  individualising  his 
people.  He  treats  Israel  with  the  tenderness  and 
particularity  with  which  the  Shepherd,  leaving 
the  ninety  and  nine  in  the  wilderness,  seeks  till 
He  find  it  the  one  lost  lamb.  His  analysis  of  his 
fickle  generation's  efi'orts  to  repent,  of  their  mo- 
tives in  turning  to  God,  and  of  their  failures,  is  as 
inward  and  definite  as  if  it  were  a  single  heart 
he  were  dissecting.  Centuries  have  passed;  the 
individual  has  displaced  the  nation;  the  experi- 
ence of  the  human  heart  has  been  infinitely  in- 
creased, and  prophecy  and  all  preaching  has 
grown  more  and  more  personal.  Yet  it  has 
scarcely  ever  been  found  either  necessary  to  add 
to  the  terms  which  Hosea  used  for  repentance, 
or  possible  to  go  deeper  in  analysing  the  proc- 
esses which  these  denote. 

Hosea's  most  simple  definition  of  repentance 
is  that  "  of  returning  unto  God."  For  "  turn- 
ing "  and  '■  re-turning "  the  Hebrew  language 
has  only  one  verb — shubh.  In  the  Book  of 
Hosea  there  are  instances  in  which  it  is  employed 
in  the  former  sense  ;t  but,  even  apart  from  its 
use  for  repentance,  the  verb  usually  means  to  re- 
turn. Thus  the  wandering  wife  in  the  second 
chapter  says,  "'  I  wiil  return  to  my  former  hus- 


*  Sf^e  above,  p.  521. 

tvi-  ••  Tliey  turn,  but  not  upwards;"  xiv.  5,  "Mine 

anjr  ncd  kwav  " 


band;"  *  and  in  the  threat  of  judgment  it  is  said, 
"  Ephraini  will  return  to  Egypt."  \  Similar  is 
the  sense  in  the  phrases  "  His  deeds  will  I  turn 
back  upon  him  "t  and  "  I  will  not  turn  back 
to  destroy  Ephraim."i:5  The  usual  meaning  of 
the  verb  is  therefore,  not  merely  to  turn  or 
change,  but  to  turn  right  round,  to  turn  back  and 
home. II  This  is  obviously  the  force  of  its  em- 
ployment to  express  repentance.  For  this  pur- 
pose Hosea  very  seldom  uses  it  alone. "T  He 
generally  adds  either  the  name  by  which  God  had 
always  been  known,  Jehovah,**  or  the  designa- 
tion of  Him,  as  "  their  own  God."  ff 

We  must  emphasise  this  point  if  we  would  ap- 
preciate the  thoroughness  of  our  prophet's  doc- 
trine, and  its  harmony  with  the  preaching  of  the 
New  Testament.  To  Hosea  repentance  is  no 
mere  change  in  the  direction  of  one's  life.  It  is 
a  turning  back  upon  one's  self,  a  retracing  of 
one's  footsteps,  a  confession  and  acknowledg- 
ment of  what  one  has  abandoned.  It  is  a  coming 
back  and  a  coming  home  to  God.  exactly  as 
Jesus  Himself  has  described  in  the  Parable  of  the 
Prodigal.  As  Hosea  again  and  again  affirms,  the 
Return  to  God,  like  the  New  Testament  Meta- 
noia,  is  the  effect  of  new  knowledge;  but  the  new 
knowledge  is  not  of  new  facts — it  is  of  facts 
which  have  been  present  for  a  long  time  and 
which  ought  to  have  been  appreciated  before. 

Of  these  facts  Hosea  describes  three  kinds:  the 
nation's  misery,  the  unspeakable  grace  of  their 
God,  and  their  great  guilt  in  turning  from  Him. 
Again  it  is  as  in  the  case  of  the  prodigal:  his 
hunger,  his  father,  and  his  cry,  "  I  have  sinned 
against  heaven  and   in  thy  sight." 

We  have  already  felt  the  pathos  of  those  pas- 
sages in  which  Hosea  describes  the  misery  and 
the  decay  of  Israel,  the  unprofitableness  and 
shame  of  all  their  restless  traffic  with  other  gods 
and  alien  empires.  The  state  is  rotten  ;tt  anarchy 
prevails. §§  The  national  vitality  is  lessened: 
"  Ephraim  hath  grey  hairs."  ||||  Power  of  birth 
and  begetting  has  gone;  the  universal  unchas- 
tity  causes  the  population  to  diminish:  "their 
glory  ffieth  away  like  a  bird."*t[1[  The  presents  to 
Egypt,***  the  tribute  to  Assyria,  drain  the  wealth 
of  the  people:  "strangers  devour  his  strength.''ttt 
The  prodigal  Israel  has  his  far-off  country  where 
he  spends  his  substance  among  strangers.  It  is 
in  this  connection  that  we  must  take  the  repeated 
verse:  "the  pride  of  Israel  testifieth  to  his 
iace."ttt  We  have  seen  §§§  the  impossibility  of 
the  usual  exegesis  of  these  words,  that  by  "  the 
Pride  of  Israel"  Hosea  means  Jehovah;  the  word 
"  pride  "  is  probably  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  in 

*  ii.  9. 

+  viii.  13  ;  ix.  3  ;  xi.  5. 

tiv.  q:  c/:  xii   3.  15. 
§  xi.  9  :  cf.  ii.  11. 

II  'l"his  may  be  further  seen  in  the  very  common  phrase 
ni3tJ*  QIEJ' ^OJ?.  "''^  ^">'"  again  the  captivity  of  My 
people  "  (see  Hosea  vi.  11);  or  in  the  use  of  ilSJ'  in  xiv.  8, 
where  it  has  the  force,  auxiliary  to  the  other  verb  in  the 
clause,  of  repeating  or  coming  back  to  do  a  thing.  But 
the  text  here  needs  emendation  :  cf.  above,  p.  520.  Cf. 
Amos'  use  of  the  Hiphil  form  to  "  draw  back,  withdraw." 
i.  ^,  6,  9,  II,  13  ;  ii.  I,  4,  6. 

^  Cf.  xi.  5,  "  they  refused  to  return." 

**  VI  I,  "  Come  and  let  us  return  to  Jehovah  ; "  vii.  10, 
"  They  did  not  return  to  Jehovah  ;  "  xiv.  2,  3,  "  Return,  O 
Israel,  to  Jehovah." 

tt  iii.  5,  "  They  shall  return  and  seek  Jehovah  their  God; 
V.  4,  "  Their  deeds  do  not  allow  them  to  return  to  their 
God." 

%X  V.  12.  etc.  ***xii.  2. 

§§iv.  2  ff.;  vi.  7  fif.,  etc.  t+t  vii.  7. 

III  vii.  7.  %*%  v.  5  ;  vii.  10. 

m  ix.  II  if.  §§§  See  above,  p.  506. 


526 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


which  Amos  employs  it  of  the  exuberance  and 
arrogance  of  Israel's  civilisation.  If  we  are  right 
then  Hosea  describes  a  very  subtle  symptom  of 
the  moral  awakening  whether  of  the  individual 
or  of  a  community.  The  conscience  of  many  a 
man,  of  many  a  kingdom,  has  been  reached  only 
through  their  pride.  Pride  is  the  last  nerve 
which  comfort  and  habit  leave  quick;  and  when 
summons  to  a  man's  better  nature  fail,  it  is  still 
possible  in  most  cases  to  touch  his  pride  with 
the  presentation  of  the  facts  of  his  decadence. 
This  is  probably  what  Hosea  means.  Israel's 
prestige  suffers.  The  civilisation  of  which  they 
are  proud  has  its  open  wounds.  Their  politi- 
cians are  the  sport  of  Egypt;  *  their  wealth,  the 
very  gold  of  their  Temple,  is  lifted  by  Assyria,  f 
The  nerve  of  pride  was  also  touched  in  the  prodi- 
gal: "  How  many  hired  servants  of  my  father 
have  enough  and  to  spare,  while  I  perish  with 
hunger."  Yet,  unlike  him,  this  prodigal  son  of 
God  will  not  therefore  return.  X  Though  there 
are  grey  hairs  upon  him,  though  strangers  de- 
vour his  strength,  "  he  knoweth  it  not;  "  of  him 
it  cannot  be  said  that  "  he  has  come  to  himself." 
And  that  is  why  the  prophet  threatens  the  further 
discipline  of  actual  exile  from  the  land  and  its 
fruits, §  of  bitter  bread  ||  and  poverty  1  on  an  un- 
clean soil.  Israel  must  also  eat  husks  and  feed 
with  swine  before  he  arises  and  "  returns  to  his 
God." 

But  misery  alone  never  led  either  man  or  na- 
tion to  repentance:  the  sorrow  of  this  world 
worketh  only  death.  Repentance  is  the  return  to 
God;  and  it  is  the  awakening  to  the  truth  about 
God,  to  the  facts  of  His  nature  and  His  grace, 
which  alone  makes  repentance  possible.  No 
'man's  doctrine  of  repentance  is  intelligible  with- 
out his  doctrine  of  God;  and  it  is  because 
Hosea's  doctrine  of  God  is  so  rich,  so  fair,  and  so 
tender,  that  his  doctrine  of  repentance  is  so  full 
and  gracious.  Here  we  see  the  difiference  be- 
tween him  and  Amos.  Amos  had  also  used  the 
phrase  with  frequency;  again  and  again  he  had 
appealed  to  the  people  to  seek  God  and  to  return 
to  God.**  But  from  Amos  it  went  forth  only  as 
a  pursuing  voice,  a  voice  crying  in  the  wilder- 
ness. Hosea  lets  loose  behind  it  a  heart,  plies  the 
people  with  gracious  thoughts  of  God,  and  brings 
about  them,  not  the  voices  only,  but  the  atmos- 
phere, of  love.  "  I  will  be  as  the  dew  unto  Is- 
rael," promises  the  Most  High;  but  He  is  before 
His  promise.  The  chapters  of  Hosea  are 
drenched  with  the  dew  of  God's  mercy,  of  which 
no  drop  falls  on  those  of  Amos,  but  there  God  is 
rather  the  roar  as  of  a  lion,  the  flash  as  of  light- 
ning. Both  prophets  bid  Israel  turn  to  God; 
but  Amos  means  by  that,  to  justice,  truth,  and 
purity,  while  Hosea  describes  a  husband,  a  father, 
long-suffering  and  full  of  mercy.  "  I  bid  you 
come  back,"  cries  Amos.  But  Hosea  pleads,  ''  If 
only  you  were  aware  of  what  God  is,  you  would 
,  come  back."  "  Come  back  to  God  and  live," 
'  cries  Amos;  but  Hosea,  "  Come  back  to  God,  for 
He  is  Love."  Amos  calls,  "  Come  back  at  once, 
for  there  is  but  little  time  left  till  God  must  visit 
you  in  judgment";  but  Hosea,  "Come  back  at 
once,  for  God  has  loved  you  so  long  and  so 
kindly."  Amos  cries,  "  Turn,  for  in  front  of  you 
is  destruction";  but  Hosea,  "Turn,  for  behind 
you    is    God."     And    that    is    why    all    Hosea's 


*  vii.  i6. 

§ii.  i6,  etc.; 

;  ix.  2  flf., 

,  etc. 

Jvii.  lO. 

II  ix.  4. 
'ixii.  10. 
♦*  iv.  6,  8,  g,  10,  II. 

preaching  of  repentance   is   so  evangelical.     "  I 
will  arise  and  go  to  my  Father." 

But  the  third  element  of  the  new  knowledge 
which  means  repentance  is  the  conscience  of 
guilt.  "  My  Father,  I  have  sinned."  On  this 
point  it  might  be  averred  that  the  teaching  of 
Hosea  is  less  spiritual  than  that  of  later  prophets 
in  Israel,  and  that  here  at  last  he  comes  short  of 
the  evangelical  inwardness  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. There  is  truth  in  the  charge;  and  here 
perhaps  we  feel  most  the  defects  of  his  standpoint 
as  one  who  appeals,  not  to  the  individual,  but  to 
the  nation  as  a  whole.  Hosea's  treatment  of  the 
sense  of  guilt  cannot  be  so  spiritual  as  that,  say, 
of  the  fifty-first  Psalm.  But,  at  least,  he  is  not 
satisfied  to  exhaust  it  by  the  very  thorough  ex- 
posure which  he  gives  us  of  the  social  sins  of  his 
day,  and  of  their  terrible  results.  He,  too,  under- 
stands what  is  meant  by  a  conscience  of  sin.  He 
has  called  Israel's  iniquity  harlotry,  unfaithful- 
ness to  God;  and  in  a  passage  of  equal  insight 
and  beauty  of  expression  he  points  out  that  in  the 
service  of  the  Ba'alim  Jehovah's  people  can  never 
feel  anything  but  a  harlot's  shame  and  bitter 
memories  of  the  better  past. 

"  Rejoice  not,  O  Israel,  to  the  pitch  of  rap- 
ture like  the  heathen:  for  thou  hast  played  the 
harlot  from  thine  own  God;  'tis  hire  thou  hast 
loved  on  all  threshing-floors.  Floor  and  vat 
shall  not  acknowledge  them;  the  new  wine  shall 
play  them  false."  *  Mere  children  of  nature  may 
abandon  themselves  to  the  riotous  joy  of  har- 
vest and  vintage  festivals,  for  they  have  never 
known  other  gods  than  are  suitably  worshipped 
by  these  orgies.  But  Israel  has  a  past — the 
memory  of  a  holier  God,  the  conscience  of  hav- 
ing deserted  Him  for  material  gifts.  With  such 
a  conscience  she  can  never  enjoy  the  latter;  as 
Hosea  puts  it,  they  will  not  "  acknowledge  " 
or  "take  to  "  f  her.  Here  there  is  an  instinct 
of  the  profound  truth,  that  even  in  the  fulness 
of  life  conscience  is  punishment;  by  itself  the 
sense  of  guilt  is  judgment. 

But  Hosea  does  not  attack  the  service  of 
strange  gods  only  because  it  is  unfaithfulness 
to  Jehovah,  but  also  because,  as  the  worship 
of  images,  it  is  a  senseless  stupidity  utterly  in- 
consistent with  that  spiritual  discernment  of 
which  repentance  so  largely  consists.  And  with 
the  worship  of  heathen  idols  Hosea  equally  con- 
demns the  worship  of  Jehovah  under  the  form 
of  images. 

Hosea  was  the  first  in  Israel  to  lead  the  at- 
tack upon  the  idols.  Elijah  had  assaulted  the 
worship  of  a  foreign  god,  but  neither  he  nor 
Elisha  nor  Amos  condemned  the  worship  of 
Israel's  own  God  under  the  form  of  a  calf. 
Indeed  Amos,  except  in  one  doubtful  passage,  | 
never  at  all  attacks  idols  or  false  gods.  The 
reason  is  very  obvious.  Amos  and  Elijah  were 
concerned  only  with  the  proclamation  of  God 
as  justice  and  purity;  and  to  the  moral  aspects 
of  religion  the  question  of  idolatry  is  not  rele- 
vant; the  two  things  do  not  come  directly  into 
collision.  But  Hosea  had  deeper  and  more  wide 
views  of  God,  with  which  idolatry  came  into 
conflict  at  a  hundred  points.  We  know  what 
Hosea's  "  knowledge  of  God  "  was — how  spirit- 
ual, how  extensive — and  we  can  appreciate  how 
incongruous  idolatry  must  have  appeared  against 
it.  We  are  prepared  to  find  him  treating  the 
images,  whether  of  the  Ba'alim  or  of  Jehovah, 

*  ix.  I.    See  above,  p.  511.  t  See  above,  p.  511,  n. 

i  V.  26. 


REPENTANCE. 


527 


with  that  fine  scorn  which  a  passionate  mon- 
otheism, justly  conscious  of  its  intellectual  su- 
periority, has  ever  passed  upon  the  idolatry  even 
of  civilisations  in  other  respects  higher  than  its 
own.  To  Hosea  the  idol  is  an  "  'eseb,  a  made 
thing."  *  It  is  made  of  the  very  silver  and  gold 
with  which  Jehovah  Himself  had  endowed  the 
people. t  It  is  made  only  "to  be  cut  ofi"t  by 
the  first  invader!  Chiefly,  however,  does  Ho- 
sea's  scorn  fall  upon  the  image  under  which  Je- 
hovah Himself  was  worshipped.  "  Thy  Calf.  O 
Samaria!  "^  he  contemptuously  calls  it.  "  From 
Israel  is  it  also,"  as  much  as  the  Ba'alim.  "  A 
workman  made  it,  and  no  god  is  it:  chips  shall 
the  Calf  of  Samaria  become!  "  In  another  place 
he  mimics  the  "  anxiety  of  Samaria  for  their 
Calf;  his  people  mourn  for  him,  and  his  priest- 
lings writhe  for  his  glory,"  why? — "  because  it 
is  going  into  exile  :"||  the  gold  that  covers  him 
shall  be  stripped  for  the  tribute  to  Assyria.  And 
once  more:  "They  continue  to  sin;  they  make 
them  a  smelting  of  their  silver,  idols  after  their 
own  modelling,  smith's  work  all  of  it.  To  these 
things  they  speak!  Sacrificing  men"  actually 
"kiss  calves!  "IT  All  this  in  the  same  vein  of 
satire  which  we  find  grown  to  such  brilliance 
in  the  great  Prophet  of  the  Exile.**  Hosea  was 
the  first  in  whom  it  sparkled;  and'  it  was  due 
to  his  conception  of  "  the  knowledge  of  God." 
Its  relevancy  to  his  doctrine  of  repentance  is 
this,  that  so  spiritual  an  apprehension  of  God 
as  repentance  implies,  so  complete  a  "metanoia" 
or  "  change  of  mind,"  is  intellectually  incom- 
patible with  idolatry.  You  cannot  speak  of  re- 
pentance to  men  who  "  kiss  calves  "  and  worship 
blocks  of  wood.  Hence  he  says:  "  Ephraim  is 
wedded  to  idols:  leave  him  alone." ff 

There  was  more  than  idolatry,  however,  in  the 
way  of  Israel's  repentance.  The  whole  of  the 
national  worship  was  an  obstacle.  Its  formalism 
and  its  easy  and  mechanical  methods  of  "  turn- 
ing to  God  "  disguised  the  need  of  that  moral 
discipline  and  change  of  heart,  without  which 
no  repentance  can  be  genuine.  Amos  had  con- 
trasted the  ritualism  of  the  time  with  the  duty 
of  civic  justice  and  the  service  of  the  poor:tt 
Hosea  opposes  to  it  leal  love  and  the  knowledge 
of  God.  "  I  will  have  leal  love  and  not  sac- 
rifice, and  the  knowledge  of  God  rather  than 
burnt-offerings."  §§  It  is  characteristic  of  Hosea 
to  class  sacrifices  with  idols.  Both  are  sense- 
less and  inarticulate,  incapable  of  expressing 
or  of  answering  the  deep  feelings  of  the  heart. 
True  repentance,  on  the  contrary,  is  rational, 
articulate,  definite.  "  Take  with  you  words," 
says  Hosea,  "and  so  return  to  Jehovah." |||| 

To  us  who,  after  twenty-five  more  centuries 
of  talk,  know  painfully  how  words  may  be 
abused,  it  is  strange  to  find  them  enforced  as 
the  tokens  of  sincerity.  But  let  us  consider 
against  what  the  prophet  enforces  them.  Against 
the  "  kissing  of  calves  "  and  such  mummery — 
worship  of  images  that  neither  hear  nor  speak. 
Let  us  remember  the  inarticulateness  of  ritual- 

^X"    from    2*Jf'    which   in  Job  x.   8  is  parallel   to 

t  ii.  8.  I X.  5.  .  tt  iv.  17. 

X  viii.  4.  1  xiii.  2.  $t  Amos  v. 

§viii.  5.  **  Isa.  xli.  ff.  §§vi.  6. 

III!  xiv.  2.  Perhaps  the  curious  expression  at  the  close  of 
the  verse,  "so  will  we  render  the  calves  of  our  lips,"  or 
(as  a  variant  reading  gives)  "  fruit  of  our  lips,"  has  the 
same  intention.  Articulate  confession  (or  vows),  these 
are  the  sacrifices,  "the  calves,"  which  are  acceptable  to 
God. 


ism,  how  it  stifles  rather  than  utters  the  feel- 
ings of  the  heart.  Let  us  imagine  the  dead 
routine  of  the  legal  sacrifices,  their  original  sym- 
bolism worn  bare,  bringing  forward  to  the 
young  hearts  of  new  generations  no  interpreta- 
tion of  their  ancient  and  distorted  details,  re- 
ducing those  who  perform  them  to  irrational 
machines  like  themselves.  Then  let  us  remem- 
ber how  our  own  Reformers  had  to  grapple  with 
the  same  hard  mechanism  in  the  worship  of  their 
time,  and  how  they  bade  the  heart  of  every 
worshipper  "  speak  " — speak  for  itself  to  God 
with  rational  and  sincere  words.  So  in  place 
of  the  frozen  ritualism  of  the  Church  there 
broke  forth  from  all  lands  of  the  Reformation, 
as  though  it  were  birds  in  springtime,  a  great 
burst  of  hymns  and  prayers,  with  the  clear  notes 
of  the  Gospel  in  the  common  tongue.  So  intol- 
erable was  the  memory  of  what  had  been,  that 
it  was  even  enacted  that  henceforth  no  sacra- 
ment should  be  dispensed  but  the  Word  should 
be  given  to  the  people  along  with  it.  If  we 
keep  all  these  things  in  mind,  we  shall  know 
what  Hosea  means  when  he  says  to  Israel  in 
their   penitence,    "  Take   with   you   words." 

No  one,  however,  was  more  conscious  of  the 
danger  of  words.  Upon  the  lips  of  the  people 
Hosea  has  placed  a  confession  of  repentance, 
which,  so  far  as  the  words  go,  could  not  be 
more  musical  or  pathetic*  In  every  Christian 
language  it  has  been  paraphrased  to  an  exquisite 
confessional  hymn.  But  Hosea  describes  it  as 
rejected.  Its  words  are  too  easy;  its  thoughts 
of  God  and  of  His  power  to  save  are  too  facile. 
Repentance,  it  is  true,  starts  from  faith  in  the 
mercy  of  God,  for  without  this  there  were  only 
despair.  Nevertheless  in  all  true  penitence  there 
is  despair.  Genuine  sorrow  for  sin  includes  a 
feeling  of  the  irreparableness  of  the  past,  and 
the  true  penitent,  as  he  casts  himself  upon  God, 
does  not  dare  to  feel  that  he  ever  can  be  the 
same  again.  "  I  am  no  more  worthy  to  be  called 
Thy  son:  make  me  as  one  of  Thy  hired  servants." 
Such  necessary  thoughts  as  these  Israel  does 
not  mingle  with  her  prayer.  "  Come  and  let  us 
return  to  Jehovah,  for  He  hath  torn  "  only  "  that 
He  may  heal,  and  smitten  "  only  "  that  He  may 
bind  up.  He  will  revive  us  again  in  a  couple 
of  days,  on  the  third  day  raise  us  up,  that  we 
may  live  before  Him.  Then  shall  we  know  if 
we  hunt  up  to  know  the  Lord.  As  soon  as 
we  seek  Him  we  shall  find  Him:  and  he  shall 
come  upon  us  like  winter-rain,  and  like  the 
spring-rain  pouring  on  the  land."  This  is  too 
facile,  too  shallow.  No  wonder  that  God  de- 
spairs of  such  a  people.  "  What  am  I  to  make 
of  thee,  Ephraim?  "t 

Another  familiar  passage,  the  Parable  of  the 
Heifer,  describes  the  same  ambition  to  reach 
spiritual  results  without  spiritual  processes. 
"  Ephraim  is  a  broken-in  heifer — one  that  lov- 
eth  to  tread  "  out  the  corn.  "  But  I  will  pass 
upon  her  goodly  neck.  I  will  give  Ephraim 
a  yoke.  Judah  must  plough.  Jacob  must  har- 
row for  himself."!  Cattle,  being  unmuzzled 
by  law§  at  threshing  time,  loved  this  best  of 
all  their  year's  work.  Yet  to  reach  it  they  must 
first  go  through  the  harder  and  unrewarded 
trials  of  ploughing  and  harrowing.  Like  a 
heifer,    then,    which   loved    harvest    only,    Israel 

*  vi.  1-4. 

t  For  the  reasons  for  this  interpretation  see  above,  pp. 
507  ff. 
+  x.  II.  jSee  above,  p.  513. 


528 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


would  spring  at  the  rewards  of  penitence,  the 
peaceable  fruits  of  righteousness,  without  going 
through  the  discipline  and  chastisement  which 
alone  yield  them.  Repentance  is  no  mere  turn- 
ing or  even  re-turning.  It  is  a  deep  and  an  ethi- 
cal process — the  breaking  up  of  fallow  ground, 
the  labour  and  long  expectation  of  the  sower,  the 
seeking  and  waiting  for  Jehovah  till  Himself 
send  the  rain.  "  Sow  to  yourselves  in  righteous- 
ness; reap  in  proportion  to  love"  (the  iove  you 
have  sown),  "break  up  your  fallow  ground:  for 
it"  is  time  to  seek  Jehovah,  until  He  come  and 
rain  righteousness  upon  us."  * 

A  repentance  so  thorough  as  this  cannot  but 
result  in  the  most  clear  and  steadfast  manner  of 
life.  Truly  it  is  a  returning  not  by  oneself,  but 
"  a  returning  by  God,"  and  it  leads  to  the 
"  keeping  of  leal  love  and  justice,  and  waiting 
upon  God  continually."  t 


CHAPTER  XXHI. 

THE  SIN  AGAINST  LOVE. 

HoSEA  i.-iii.;  iv.  ii  fT. ;  ix.  lo  flf. ;  xi.  8  f. 

The  Love  of  God  is  a  terrible  thing — that  is 
the  last  lesson  of  the  Book  of  Hosea.  "  My 
God  will  cast  them  away."  X 

"  My  God  " — let  us  remember  the  right  which 
Hosea  had  to  use  these  words.  Of  all  the 
prophets  he  was  the  first  to  break  into  the  full 
aspect  of  the  Divine  Mercy — to  learn  and  to 
proclaim  that  God  is  Love.  But  he  was  worthy 
to  do  so,  by  the  patient  love  of  his  own  heart 
towards  another  who  for  years  had  outraged 
all  his  trust  and  tenderness.  He  had  loved,  be- 
lieved and  been  betrayed;  pardoned  and  waited 
and  yearned,  and  sorrowed  and  pardoned  again. 
It  is  in  this  long-sufYering  that  his  breast  beats 
upon  the  breast  of  God  with  the  cry  "  My  God." 
As  He  had  loved  Gomer,  so  had  God  loved 
Israel,  past  hope,  against  hate,  through  ages  of 
ingratitude  and  apostasy.  Quivering  with  his 
own  pain,  Hosea  has  exhausted  all  human  care 
and  afifection  for  figures  to  express  the  Divine 
tenderness,  and  he  declares  God's  love  to  be 
deeper  than  all  the  passion  of  men,  and  broader 
than  all  their  patience:  "  How  can  I  give  thee 
up,  Ephraim?  How  can  I  let  thee  go,  Israel? 
I  will  not  execute  the  fierceness  of  Mine  anger. 
For  I  am  God,  and  not  man."  And  yet,  like 
poor  human  affection,  this  Love  of  God,  too, 
confesses  its  failure — "  My  God  shall  cast  them 
away."  It  is  God's  sentence  of  relinquish- 
ment upon  those  who  sin  against  His  Love,  but 
the  poor  human  lips  which  deliver  it  quiver  with 
an  agony  of  their  own,  and  here,  as  more  ex- 
plicitly in  twenty  other  passages  of  the  book, 
declare  it  to  be  equally  the  doom  of  those  who 
outrage  the  love  of  their  fellow  men  and  women. 

We  have  heard  it  said:  "The  lives  of  men 
are  never  the  same  after  they  have  loved;  if 
they  are  not  better,  they  must  be  worse."  "  Be 
afraid  of  the  love  that  loves  you:  it  is  either  your 
heaven  or  your  hell."  "  All  the  discipline  of 
men  springs  from  their  love — if  they  take  it  not 
so,  then  all  their  sorrow  must  spring  from  the 
same  source."  "  There  is  a  depth  of  sorrow, 
which  can  only  be  known  to  a  soul  that  has 
loved  the  most  perfect  thing  and  beholds  itself 


txii.  7. 


tx.  17. 


fallen."  These  things  are  true  of  the  Love, 
both  of  our  brother  and  of  our  God.  And  the 
eternal  interest  of  the  life  of  Hosea  is  that  he 
learned  how,  for  strength  and  weakness,  for 
better  or  for  worse,  our  human  and  our  Divine 
loves  are  inseparably  joined. 


Most  men  learn  that  love  is  inseparable  from 
pain  where  Hosea  learned  it — at  home.  There 
it  is  that  we  are  all  reminded  that  when  love  is 
strongest  she  feels  her  weakness  most.  For  the 
anguish  which  love  must  bear,  as  it  were  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  is  the  contradiction 
at  her  heart  between  the  largeness  of  her  wishes 
and  the  littleness  of  her  power  to  realise  them. 
A  mother  feels  it,  bending  over  the  bed  of  her 
child,  when  .its  body  is  racked  with  pain  or  its 
breath  spent  with  coughing.  So  great  is  the 
feeling  of  her  love  that  it  ought  to  do  some- 
thing, that  she  will  actually  feel  herself  cruel 
because  nothing  can  be  done.  Let  the  sick-bed 
become  the  beach  of  death,  and  she  must  feel 
the  helplessness  and  the  anguish  still  more  as 
the  dear  life  is  now  plucked  from  her  and  now 
tossed  back  by  the  mocking  waves,  and  then 
drawn  slowly  out  to  sea  upon  the  ebb  from 
which  there  is  no  returning. 

But  the  pain  which  disease  and  death  thus 
cause  to  love  is  nothing  to  the  agony  that  Sin 
inflicts  when  he  takes  the  game  into  his  un- 
clean hands.  We  know  what  pain  love  brings, 
if  our  love  be  a  fair  face  and  a  fresh  body  in 
which  Death  brands  his  sores  while  we  stand 
by,  as  if  with  arms  bound.  But  what  if  our  love 
be  a  childlike  heart,  and  a  frank  expression  and 
honest  eyes,  and  a  clean  and  clever  mind.  Our 
powerlessness  is  just  as  great  and  infinitely  more 
tormented  when  Sin  comes  by  and  casts  his 
shadow  over  these.  Ah,  that  is  Love's  greatest 
torment  when  her  children,  who  have  run  from 
her  to  the  bosom  of  sin,  look  back  and  their 
eyes  are  changed!  That  is  the  greatest  torment 
of  Love — to  pour  herself  without  avail  into  one 
of  those  careless  natures  which  seem  capacious 
and  receptive,  yet  never  fill  with  love,  for  there 
is  a  crack  and  a  leak  at  the  bottom  of  them. 
The  fields  where  Love  suffers  her  sorest  defeats 
are  not  the  sick-bed  and  not  death's  margin,  not 
the  cold  lips  and  sealed  eyes  kissed  without  re- 
sponse; but  the  changed  eyes  of  children,  and 
the  breaking  of  the  "  full-orbed  face,"  and  the 
darkening  look  of  growing  sons  and  daughters, 
and  the  home  the  first  time  the  unclean  laugh 
breaks  across  it.  To  watch,  though  unable  to 
soothe,  a  dear  body  racked  with  pajn,  is  peace 
beside  the  awful  vigil  of  watching  a  soul  shrink 
and  blacken  with  vice,  and  your  love  unable  to 
redeem  it. 

Such  a  clinical  study  Hosea  endured  for  years. 
The  prophet  of  God,  we  are  told,  brought  a 
dead  child  to  life  by  taking  him  in  his  arms  and 
kissing  him.  But  Hosea  with  all  his  love 
could  not  make  Gomer  a  true,  whole  wife  again. 
Love  had  no  power  on  this  woman — no  power 
even  at  the  merciful  call  to  make  all  things  new. 
Hosea,  who  had  once,  placed  all  hope  in  tender- 
ness, had  to  admit  that  Love's  moral  power  is 
not  absolute.  Love  may  retire  defeated  from 
the  highest  issues  of  life.  .  Sin  may  conquer 
Love. 

Yet  it  is  in  this  his  triumph  that  Sin  must 
feel   the   ultimate   revenge.      When   a   man   has 


Hosea  i.-xi.J 


THE    SIN    AGAINST    LOVE. 


529 


conquered  this  weak  thing,  and  beaten  her  down 
beneath  his  feet,  God  speaks  the  sentence  of 
abandonment. 

There  is  enough  of  the  whipped  dog  in  all 
of  us  to  make  us  dread  penalty  when  we  come 
into  conflict  with  the  strong  things  of  life.  But 
it  takes  us  all  our  days  to  learn  that  there  is 
far  more  condemnation  to  them  who  ofifend  the 
weak  thing:s  of  life,  and  particularly  the  weak- 
est of  all,  its  love.  It  was  on  sins  against  the 
weak  that  Christ  passed  His  sternest  judgments: 
"  Woe  unto  him  that  offends  one  of  these  little 
ones;  it  were  better  for  him  that  he  had  never 
been  born."  God's  little  ones  are  not  only  little 
children,  but  all  things  which,  like  little  children, 
have  only  love  for  their  strength.  They  are  pure 
and  loving  men  and  women — men  with  no 
weapon  but  their  love,  women  with  no  shield 
but  their  trust.  They  are  the  innocent  affec- 
tions of  our  own  hearts — the  memories  of  our 
childhood,  the  ideals  of  our  youth,  the  prayers 
of  our  parents,  the  faith  in  us  of  our  friends. 
These  are  the  little  ones  of  whom  Christ  spake, 
that  he  who  sins  against  them  had  better  never 
have  been  born.  Often  may  the  dear  solicitudes 
of  home,  a  father's  counsels,  a  mother's  prayers, 
seem  foolish  things  against  the  challenges  of  a 
world  calling  us  to  play  the  man  and  do  as 
it  does;  often  may  the  vows  and  enthusiasms 
of  boyhood  seem  impertinent  against  the  temp- 
tations which  are  so  necessary  to  manhood:  yet 
let  us  be  true  to  the  weak,  for  if  we  betray  them, 
we  betray  our  own  souls.  We  may  sin  against 
law  and  maim  or  mutilate  ourselves,  but  to  sin 
against  love  is  to  be  cast  out  of  life  altogether. 
He  who  violates  the  purity  of  the  love  with 
which  God  has  filled  his  heart,  he  who  abuses 
the  love  God  has  sent  to  meet  him  in  his  open- 
ing manhood,  he  who  slights  any  of  the  affec- 
tions, whether  they  be  of  man  or  woman,  of 
young  or  of  old,  which  God  lays  upon  us  as 
the  most  powerful  redemptive  forces  of  our 
life,  next  to  that  of  His  dear  Son— he  sinneth 
against  his  own  soul,  and  it  is  of  such  that  Hosea 
spake:  "  My  God  will  cast  them  away." 

We  talk  of  breaking  law:  we  can  only  break 
ourselves  against  it.  But  if  we  sin  against  Love, 
we  do  destroy  her:  we  take  from  her  the  power 
to  redeem  and  sanctify  us.  Though  in  their 
youth  men  think  Love  a  quick  and  careless 
thing — a  servant  always  at  their  side,  a  winged 
messenger  easy  of  despatch — let  them  know  that 
■every  time  they  send  her  on  an  evil  errand  she 
returns  with  heavier  feet  and  broken  wings. 
When  they  make  her  a  pander  they  kill  her 
outright.  When  she  is  no  more  they  waken  to 
that  which  Gomer  came  to  know,  that  love 
abused  is  love  lost,  and  love  lost  means  Hell. 

II. 

This,  however,  is  only  the  margin  from  which 
Hosea  beholds  an  abandonment  still  deeper. 
All  that  has  been  said  of  human  love  and  the 
penalty  of  outraging  it  is  equally  true  of  the 
Divine  love  and  the  sin  against  that. 

The  love  of  God  has  the  same  weakness  which 
we  have  seen  in  the  love  of  man.  It,  too, 
may  fail  to  redeem;  it,  too,  has  stood  defeated 
on  some  of  the  highest  moral  battle-fields  of 
life.  God  Himself  has  suffered  anguish  and  re- 
jection from  sinful  men.  "  Herein,"  says  a 
theologian,  "  is  the  mystery  of  this  love,  .  .  . 
that  God  can  never  by  His  Almighty  Power 
»*— Vol.  rv. 


compel  that  which  is  the  very  highest  eift  in 
the  life  of  His  creatures — love  to  Himself,  but 
that  He  receives  it  as  the  free  gift  of  His 
creatures,  and  that  He  is  only  able  to  allow  men 
to  give  it  to  Him  in  a  free  act  of  their  own 
will."  So  Hosea  also  has  told  us  how  God  does 
not  compel,  but  allure  or  "woo,"  the  sinful  back 
to  Himself.  And  it  is  the  deepest  anguish  of 
the  prophet's  heart,  that  this  free  grace  of  God 
may  fail  through  man's  apathy  or  insincerity. 
The  anguish  appears  in  those  frequent  antitheses 
in  which  his  torn  heart  reflects  herself  in  the 
style  of  his  discourse.  "  I  have  redeemed  them 
— yet  they  have  spoken  lies  against  Me.*  I 
found  Israel  like  grapes  in  the  wilderness — they 
went  to  Ba'al-Peor.f  When  Israel  was  a  child, 
then  I  loved  him  .  .  .  but  they  sacrificed  to 
Ba'alim.J:  I  taught  Ephraim  to  walk,  but  they 
knew  not  that  I  healed  them.g  How  can  I  give 
thee  up,  Ephraim?  how  can  I  let  thee  go,  O 
Israel?  .  .  .  Ephraim  compasseth  Me  with  lies, 
and  the  house  of  Israel  with  deceit."  || 

We  fear  to  apply  all  that  we  know  of  the 
weakness  of  human  love  to  the  love  of  God. 
Yet  though  He  be  God  and  not  man,  it  was 
as  man  He  commended  His  love  to  us.  He 
came  nearest  us,  not  in  the  thunders  of  Sinai, 
but  in  Him  Who  presented  Himself  to  the 
world  with  the  caresses  of  a  little  child;  who 
met  men  with  no  angelic  majesty  or  heavenly 
aureole,  but  whom  when  we  saw  we  found  noth- 
ing that  we  should  desire  Him,  His  visage  was 
so  marred  more  than  any  man,  and  his  form 
than  the  sons  of  men;  Who  came  to  His  own 
and  His  own  received  Him  not;  Who,  having 
loved  His  own  that  were  in  the  world,  loved 
them  up  to  the  end,  and  yet  at  the  end  was  by 
them  deserted  and  betrayed, — it  is  of  Him  that 
Hosea  prophetically  says:  "  I  drew  them  with 
cords  of  a  man  and  with  bands  of  love." 

We  are  not  bound  to  God  by  any  Unbreakable 
chain.  The  strands  which  draw  us  upwards  to 
God,  to  holiness  and  everlasting  life,  have  the 
weakness  of  those  which  bind  us  to  the  earthly 
souls  we  love.  It  is  possible  for  us  to  break 
them.  We  love  Christ,  not  because  He  has  com- 
pelled us  by  any  magic,  irresistible  influence  to 
do  so;  but,  as  John  in  his  great  simplicity  says, 
"  We  love  Him  because  He  first  loved  us." 

Now  this  is  surely  the  terror  of  God's  love 
— that  it  can  be  resisted;  that  even  as  it  is  mani- 
fest in  Jesus  Christ  we  men  have  the  power, 
not  only  to  remain  as  so  many  do,  outside  its 
scope,  feeling  it  to  be  far-off  and  vague,  but 
having  tasted  it  to  fall  away  from  it,  having 
realised  it  to  refuse  it,  having  allowed  it  to  begin 
its  moral  purposes  in  our  lives  to  baftie  and 
nullify  these;  to  make  the  glory  of  Heaven  ab- 
solutely ineffectual  in  our  own  characters;  and 
to  give  our  Saviour   the  anguish  of  rejection. 

Give  Him  the  anguish,  yet  pass  upon  our- 
selves the  doom!  For,  as  I  read  the  New  Tes- 
tament, the  one  unpardonable  sin  is  the  sin 
against  our  Blessed  Redeemer's  Love  as  it  is 
brought  home  to  the  heart  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Every  other  sin  is  forgiven  to 
men  but  to  crucify  afresh  Him  who  loved  us 
and  gave  Himself  for  us.  The  most  terrible  of 
His  judgments  is  "  the  wail  of  a  heart  wounded 
because  its  love  has  been  despised  "  :  "  Jerusa- 
lem, Jerusalem!  how  often  would  I  have  gath- 
ered thy  children  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chick- 

*vii.  13.  tix.  10.  ^xi.  I,  2. 

§xi.  4,  l  xi.  8  ;  xii.  i. 


53° 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


ens,  and  ye  would-  not.  Behold  your  house  is 
left  unto  you  desolate!  " 

Men  say  they  cannot  believe  in  hell,  because 
they  cannot  conceive  how  God  may  sentence 
men  to  niisery  for  the  breaking  of  laws  they 
were  born  without  power  to  keep.  And  one 
would  agree  with  the  inference  if  God  had  done 
any  such  thing.  But  for  them  which  are  under  the 
law  and  the  sentence  of  death,  Christ  died  once 
for  all,  that  He  might  redeem  them.  Yet  this 
does  not  make  a  hell  less  believable.  When  we 
see  how  Almighty  was  that  Love  of  God  in 
Christ  Jesus,  lifting  our  whole  race  and  send- 
ing them  forward  with  a  freedom  and  a  power 
of  growth  nothing  else  in  history  has  won  for 
them;  when  we  prove  again  how  weak  it  is,  so 
that  it  is  possible  for  millions  of  characters 
that  have  felt  it  to  refuse  its  eternal  influence  for 
the  sake  of  some  base  and  transient  passion; 
nay,  when  /  myself  know  this  power  and  this 
weakness  of  Christ's  love,  so  that  one  day  being 
loyal  I  am  raised  beyond  the  reach  of  fear  and 
of  doubt,  beyond  the  desire  of  sin  and  the  habit 
of  evil,  and  the  next  day  finds  me  capable  of 
putting  it  aside  in  preference  for  some  slight 
enjoyment  or  ambition — then  I  know  the  peril 
and  the  terror  of  this  love,  that  it  may  be  to  a 
man  either  Heaven  or  Hell. 

Believe  then  in  hell,  because  you  believe  in 
the  Love  of  God — not  in  a  hell  to  which  God 
condemns  men  of  His  will  and  pleasure,  but  a 
hell  into  which  men  cast  themselves  from  the 
very  face  of  His  love  in  Jesus  Christ.  The 
place  has  been  painted  as  a  place  of  fires.  But 
when  we  contemplate  that  men  come  to  it  with 
the  holiest  flames  in  their  nature  quenched,  we 
shall  justly  feel  that  it  is  rather  a  dreary  waste 
of  ash  and  cinder,  strewn  with  snqw — some 
ribbed  and  frosty  Arctic  zone,  silent  in  death, 
for  there  is  no  life  there,  and  there  is  no  life 
there  because  there  is  no  Love,  and  no  Love 
because  men,  in  rejecting  or  abusing  her,  have 
slain  their  own  power  ever  again  to  feel  her 
presence. 


MICAH. 

•But  I  am  full  of  power  by  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah 
To  declare  to  Jacob  his  transgressions,  and  to  Israel  his 
sin." 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 
THE  BOOK  OF  MICAH. 

The  Book  of  Micah  lies  sixth  of  the  Twelve 
Prophets  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  but  in  the  order 
of  the  Septuagint  third,  following  Amos  and 
Hosea.  The  latter  arrangement  was  doubtless 
directed  by  the  size  of  the  respective  books;  *  in 
the  case  of  Micah  it  has  coincided  with  the 
prophet's  proper  chronological  position.  Though 
his  exact  date  be  not  certain,  he  appears  to  have 
been  a  younger  contemporary  of  Hosea,  as 
Hosea  was  of  Amos. 

The  book  is  not  two-thirds  the  size  of  that  of 
Amos,  and  about  half  that  of  Hosea.  It  has 
been  arranged  in  seven  chapters,  which  follow, 
more    or    less,    a    natural    method    of    division.} 

*  See  above,  pp.  443  f. 

t  Note  that  the  Hebrew  and  English  divisions  do  not 
coincide  between  chaps,  iv.  and  v.    In  the  Hebrew  chap. 


They  are  usually  grouped  in  three  sections,  dis- 
tinguishable from  each  other  by  their  subject- 
matter,  by  t'heir  temper  and  standpoint,  and  to 
a  less  degree  by  their  literary  form.  They  are 
A.  Chaps,  i.-iii. ;  B.  Chaps,  iv.,  v.;  C.  Chaps,  vi., 
vii. 

There  is  no  book  of  the  Bible,  as  to  the  date 
of  whose  diflferent  parts  there  has  been  more 
discussion,  especially  within  recent  years.  The 
history  of  this  is  shortly  as  follows: — 

Tradition  and  the  criticism  of  the  early  years 
of  this  century  accepted  the  statement  of  the 
title,  that  the  book  was  composed  in  the  reigns 
of  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah — ^^that  is,  be- 
tween 740  and  700  B.  c.  It  was  generally  agreed 
that  there  were  in  it  only  traces  of  the  first  two 
reigns,  but  that  the  whole  was  put  together  be- 
fore the  fall  of  Samaria  in  721.*  Then  Hitzig 
and  Steiner  dated  chaps,  iii.-vi.  after  721;  and 
Ewald  denied  that  Micah  could  have  given  ns 
chaps,  vi.,  vii.,  and  placed  them  under  King  Ma- 
nasseh,  circa  690-640.  Next  Wellhausenf  sought 
to  prove  that  vii.  7-20  must  be  post-exilic. 
Stadet  took  a  further  step  and,  on  the  ground 
that  Micah  himself  could  not  have  blunted  or 
annulled  his  sharp  pronouncements  of  doom, 
by  the  promises  w'hich  chaps,  iv.  and  v.  contain, 
he  withdrew  these  from  the  prophet  and  assigned 
them  to  the  time  of  the  Exile. ^  But  the  suffi- 
ciency of  this  argument  was  denied  by  Vatke.  |i 
Also  in  opposition  to  Stade,  Kuenen^i  refused  to 
believe  that  Micah  could  have  been  content  with 
the  announcement  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  as  his 
last  word,  that  therefore  much  of  chaps,  iv.  and 
V.  is  probably  from  himself,  but  since  their  ar- 
gument is  obviously  broken  and  confused,  we 
must  look  in  them  for  interpolations,  and  he  de- 
cides that  such  are  iv.  6-8,  11-13,  and  the  working 
up  of  V.  9-14.  The  famous  passage  in  iv.  1-4 
may  have  been  Micah's,  but  was  probably  added 
by  another.  Chaps,  vi.  and  vii.  were  written  un- 
der Manasseh  by  some  of  the  persecuted  adher- 
ents of  Jehovah. 

We  may  next  notice  two  critics  who  adopt  an 
extremely  conservative  position.  Von  Ryssel,** 
as  the  result  of  a  very  thorough  examination, 
declared  that  all  the  chapters  were  Micah's,  even 
the  much  doubted  ii.  12,  13,  which  have  been 
placed  by  an  editor  of  the  book  in  the  wrong 
position,  and  chap.  vii.  7-20,  which,  he  agrees 
with  Ewald,  can  only  date  from  the  reign  of 
Manasseh,  Micah  himself  having  lived  long 
enough  into  that  reign  to  write  them  himself. 
Another  careful  analysis  by  Elhorst  ft  also 
reached  the  conclusion  that  the  bulk  of  the  book 
was  authentic,  but  for  his  proof  of  this  Elhorst 
requires  a  radical  rearrangement  of  the  verses, 
and    that    on    grounds    which    do    not    always 

iv.  includes  a  fourteenth  verse,  which  in  the  English 
stands  as  the  first  verse  of  chap.  v.  In  this  the  English 
agrees  with  the  Septuagint. 

*  Caspari. 

t  In  the  fourth  edition  of  Bleek's  "  Introduction." 

t  "Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  Vols.  I.,  III.,  IV. 

§  See  also  Cornill,  "  Einleitung,"  183  f.  Stade  takes  iv. 
1-4,  iv.  ii-v.  •^,  V.  6-14.  as  originally  one  prophecy  (dis- 
tinguished by  certain  catch-words  and  an  outlook  similar 
to  that  of  Ezekiel  and  the  great  Prophet  of  the  Exile),  in 
which  the  two  pieces  iv.  5-10  and  v.  4,  5,  were  afterwards 
inserted  by  the  author  of  ii.  12,  13. 

II  "  Einleitung  in  das  A.  T.,"  pp.  690  ff . 

1  "Einleitung." 

**  "Untersuchungen  iiber  die  Textgestalt  u.  die  Echtheit 
des  Buches  Micha,"  1887. 

+t  "  De  Profetie  van  Micha,"  iBgi,  which  I  have  not  seen. 
It  is  summarised  in  Wildeboer's  "  Litteratur  des  A.  T.," 
1895. 


THE    BOOK    OF    MICAH. 


53^ 


coimiiend  themselves.  He  holds  chap.  5v.  g-14 
and  V.  8  for  post-exilic  insertions.  Driver  *  con- 
tributes a  thorough  examination  of  the  book, 
and  reaches  the  conclusions  that  ii.  12,  13,  though 
obviously  in  their  wrong  place,  need  not  be  de- 
nied to  Micah;  that  the  difficulties  of  ascribing 
chaps,  iv.,  v.,  to  the  prophet  are  not  insuperable, 
nor  is  it  even  necessary  to  suppose  in  them  inter- 
polations. He  agrees  with  Ewald  as  to  the  date 
of  vi.-vii.  6,  and,  while  holding  that  it  is  quite 
possible  for  Micah  to  have  written  them,  thinks 
they  are  more  probably  due  to  another,  though 
a  confident  conclusion  is  not  to  be  achieved.  As 
to  vii.  7-20,  he  judges  Wellhausen's  inferences 
to  be  unnecessary.  A  prophet  in  Micah's  or 
Manasseh's  time  may  have  thought  destruction 
nearer  than  it  actually  proved  to  be,  and,  imag- 
ining it  as  already  arrived,  have  put  into  the 
mouth  of  the  people  a  confession  suited  to  its 
circumstance.  Wildeboerf  goes  further  than 
Driver.  He  replies  in  detail  to  the  arguments 
of  Stade  and  Cornill,  denies  that  the  reasons  for 
withdrawing  so  much  from  Micah  are  conclusive, 
and  assigns  to  the  prophet  the  whole  book,  with 
the  exception  of  several  interpolations. 

We  see,  then,  that  all  critics  are  practically 
agreed  as  to  the  presence  of  interpolations  in 
the  text,  as  well  as  to  the  occurrence  of  certain 
verses  of  the  prophet  out  of  their  proper  order. 
This  indeed  must  be  obvious  to  every  careful 
reader  as  he  notes  the  somewhat  frequent  breaks 
in  the  logical  sequence,  especially  of  chaps,  iv. 
and  V.  All  critics,  too,  admit  the  authenticity 
of  chaps,  i.-iii.,  with  the  possible  exception  of 
ii.  12,  13;  while  a  majority  hold  that  chaps,  vi. 
and  vii.,  whether  by  Micah  or  not,  must  be  as- 
signed to  the  reign  of  Manasseh.  On  the  au- 
thenticity of  chaps,  iv.  and  v. — minus  interpola- 
tions— and  of  chaps,  vi.  and  vii.,  opinion  is  di- 
vided; but  we  ought  not  to  overlook  the  re- 
markable fact  that  those  who  have  recently  writ- 
ten the  fullest  monographs  of  Micah  t  incline  to 
believe  in  the  genuineness  of  the  book  as  a 
whole.§  We  may  now  enter  for  ourselves  upon 
the  discussion  of  the  various  sections,  but  before 
we  do  so  let  us  note  how  much  of  the  controversy 
turns  upon  the  general  question,  whether  after 
decisively  predicting  the  overthrow  of  Jerusalem 
it  was  possible  for  Micah  to  add  prophecies  of 
her  restoration.  It  will  be  remembered  that  we 
have  had  to  discuss  this  same  point  with  regard 
both  to  Amos  and  Hosea.  In  the  case  of  the 
former  we  decided  against  the  authenticity  of 
visions  of  a  blessed  future  which  now  close  his 
book;  in  the  case  of  the  latter  we  decided  for 
the  authenticity.  What  were  our  reasons  for 
this  difference?  They  were,  that  the  closing 
visi'on  of  the  Book  of  Amos  is  not  at  all  in  har- 
mony with  the  exclusively  ethical  spirit  of  the 
authentic  prophecies;  while  the  closing  vision 
of  the  Book  of  Hosea  is  not  only  in  language 
and  in  ethical  temper  thoroughly  in  harmony 
with  the  chapters  which  precede  it,  but  in  certain 
details  has  been  actually  anticipated  by  these. 
Hosea,  therefore,  furnishes  us  with  the  case  of 

♦"Introduction,"  i8q2. 

t  "  Litteratur  des  A.  T.,"  pp.  148  ff. 

tWildeboer  ("De  Profet  Micha"),  Von  Ryssel  and 
Elhorst. 

§  Cheyne,  therefore,  is  not  correct  when  he  says  ("  In- 
troduction" to  second  edition  of  Robertson  Smith's 
"Prophets,"  p.  xxiii.)  that  it  is  "becoming  more  and 
more  doubtful  whether  more  than  two  or  three  fragments 
of  the  heterogeneous  collection  of  fragments  in  chaps, 
iv.-vii.  can  have  come  from  that  prophet." 


a  prophet  who,  though  he  predicted  the  ruin  of 
his  impenitent  people  (and  that  ruin  was  verified 
by  events),  also  spoke  of  the  possibility  of  their 
restoration  upon  conditions  in  harmony  with  his 
reasons  for  the  inevitableness  of  their  fall.  And 
we  saw,  too,  that  the  hopeful  visions  of  the  fu- 
ture, though  placed  last  in  the  collection  of  his 
prophecies,  need  not  necessarily  have  been  spo- 
ken last  by  the  prophet,  but  stand  where  they  do 
because  they  have  an  eternal  spiritual  validity 
for  the  remnant  of  Israel.*  What  was  possible 
for  Hosea  is  surely  possible  for  Micah.  That 
promises  come  in  his  book,  and  closely  after  the 
conclusive  threats  which  he  gave  of  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem,  does  not  imply  that  originally  he  ut- 
tered them  all  in  such  close  proximity.  That 
indeed  would  have  been  impossible.  But  consid- 
ering how  often  the  political  prospect  in  Israel 
changed  during  Micah's  time,  and  how  far  the 
city  was  in  his  day  from  her  actual  destruction — 
more  than  a  century  distant — it  seems  to  be  im- 
probable that  he  should  not  (in  whatever  order) 
have  uttered  both  threat  and  promise.  And  nat- 
urally, when  his  prophecies  were  arranged  in  per- 
manent order,  the  promises  would  be  placed 
after  the  threats.f 


First  Section:  Chaps.   I.-III. 

No  critic  doubts  the  authenticity  of  the  bulk 
of  these  chapters.  The  sole  question  at  issue  is 
the  date  or  (possibly)  the  dates  of  them.  Only 
chap.  ii.  12,  13,  are  generally  regarded  as  out  of 
place,  where  they  now  stand. 

Chap.  i.  trembles  with  the  destruction  of  both 
Northern  Israel  and  Judah — a  destruction  either 
very  imminent  or  actually  in  the  process  of  hap- 
pening. The  verses  which  deal  with  Samaria, 
6  fF.,  do  not  simply  announce  her  inevitable  ruin. 
They  throb  with  the  sense  either  that  this  is  im- 
mediate, or  that  it  is  going  on,  or  that  it  has  just 
been  accomplished.  The  verbs  suit  each  of  these 
alternatives:  "And  I  shall  set,"  or  "am  set- 
ting," or  "  have  set,  Samaria  for  a  ruin  of  the 
field,"  and  so  on.  We  may  assign  them  to  any 
time  between  725  B.  c,  the  beginning  of  the 
siege  of  Samaria  by  Shalmaneser,  and  a  year  or 
two  after  its  destruction  by  Sargon  in  721.  Their 
intense  feeling  seems  to  preclude  the  possibility 
of  their  having  been  written  in  the  years  to  which 
some  assign  them,  705-700,  or  twenty  years  after 
Samaria  was  actually  overthrown. 

In  the  next  verses  thd  prophet  goes  on  to 
mourn  the  fact  that  the  affliction  of  Samaria 
reaches  even  to  the  gate  of  Jerusalem,  and  he 
especially  singles  out  as  partakers  in  the  danger 
of  Jerusalem  a  number  of  towns,  most  of  which 
(so  far  as  we  can  discern)  lie  not  between  Jeru- 
salem and  Samaria,  but  at  the  other  corner  of 
Judah,  in  the  Shephelah  or  out  upon  the  Philis- 
tine plain.  I  This  was  the  region  which  Sen- 
cherib  invaded  in  701.  simultaneously  with  his 
detachment  of  a  corps  to  attack  the  capital;  and 
accordingly  we  might  be  shut  up  to  affirm  that 
this   end   of   chap.    i.    dates   from   that   invasion, 

♦  See  above,  p.  519. 

+  Wildeboer  seems  to  me  to  have  good  grounds  for  his 
reply  to  Stade's  assertion  that  the  occurrence  of  promises 
after  the  threats  only  blunts  and  nullifies  the  latter. 
"These  objections,"  says  Wildeboer,  "raise  themselves 
only  against  tAe  spoken,  but  not  against  the  written 
word,"  See,  too,  the  admirable  remarks  he  quotes  from 
De  Goeje. 

i  See  below,  pp.  536  fif. 


532 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


if  no  other  explanation  of  the  place-names  vvere 
possible.  But  another  is  possible.  Micah 
himself  belonged  to  one  of  these  Shephelah 
towns,  Moresheth-Gath,  and  it  is  natural 
that,  anticipating  the  invasion  of  all  Judah. 
after  the  fall  of  Samaria  (as  Isaiah  *  also  did), 
he  should  single  out  for  mourning  his  own  dis- 
trict of  the  country.  This  appears  to  be  the  most 
probable  solution  of  a  very  doubtful  problem, 
and  accordingly  we  may  date  the  whole  of  chap, 
i.  somewhere  between  725  and  720  or  718.  Let 
us  remember  that  in  719  Sargon  marched  past 
this  very  district  of  the  Shephelah  in  his  cam- 
paign   against     Egypt,     whom    he    defeated    at 

Raphia.f 

Our  conclusion  is  supported  by  chap.  ii.  Ju- 
dah, though  Jehovah  be  planning  evil  against 
her,  is  in  the  full  course  of  her  ordinary  social 
activities.  The  rich  are  absorbmg  the  lands  of 
the  poor  (vv.  i.  fif.):  note  the  phrase  tipon  their 
beds;  it  alone  signifies  a  time  of  security.  The 
enemies  of  Israel  are  internal  (8).  The  public 
peace  is  broken  by  the  lords  of  the  land,  and 
men  and  women,  disposed  to  live  quietly,  are 
robbed  (8  fif.).  The  false  prophets  have  sufH- 
cient  signs  of  the  times  in  their  tavour  to  regard 
Micah's  threats  of  destruction  as  calumnies  (6). 
And  ak'hough  he  regards  destruction  as  inevi- 
table, it  is  not  to  be  to-day;  but  in  that  day  (4), 
viz.,  some  still  indefinite'date  in  the  future,  the 
blow  will  fall  and  the  nation's  elegy  be  sung. 
On  this  chapter,  then,  there  is  no  shadow  of  a 
foreign  invader.  We  might  assign  it  to  the  years 
of  Jatham  and  Ahaz  (under  whose  reigns  the 
title  of  the  book  places  part  of  the  prophesying 
of  Micah),  but  since  there  is  no  sense  of  a  double 
kingdom,  no  distinction  between  Judah  and  Is- 
rael, it  belongs  more  probably  to  the  years  when 
all  immediate  danger  from  Assyria  had  passed 
away,  between  Sargon's  withdrawal  from  Ra- 
phia  in  719  and  his  invasion  of  Ashdod  in  710, 
or  between  the  latter  date  and  Sennacherib's  ac- 
cession in  705. 

Chap.  iii.  contains  three  separate  oracles,  which 
exhibit  a  similar  state  of  aflfairs:  the  abuse  of  the 
common  people  by  their  chiefs  and  rulers,  who 
are  implied  to  be  in  full  sense  of  power  and  se- 
curity. They  have  time  to  aggravate  their  do- 
ings (4);  their  doom  is  still  future — them  at  that 
time  {ib.y  The  bulk  of  the  prophets  determine 
their  oracles  by  the  amount  men  give  them  (5), 
another  sign  of  security.  Their  doom  is  also 
future  (6  f.).  In  the  third  of  the  oracles  the  au- 
thorities of  the  land  ^re  in  the  undisturbed  ex- 
ercise of  their  judicial  offices  (9  f.),  and  the 
priests  and  prophets  of  their  oracles  (10),  though 
all  these  professions  practise  only  for  bribe  and 
reward.  Jerusalem  is  still  being  built  and  embel- 
lished (9).  But  the  prophet  not  because  there 
are  political  omens  pointinjg  to  this,  but  simply 
in  the  force  of  his  indignation  at  the  sins  of  the 
upper  classes,  prophesies  the  destruction  of  the 
capital  (10).  It  is  possible  that  these  oracles  of 
chap.  iii.  may  be  later  than  those  of  the  previous 
chapters. 

*x.  18. 

t  Smend  assigns  the  prophecy  of  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  in  iii.  14,  along  with  Isaiah  xxviii.-xxxii.,  to  704- 
701,  and  suggests  that  the  end  of  chap.  i.  refers  to  Sen- 
nacherib's campaign  in  Philistia  in  701  ("  A.  T.  Religions- 
geschichte,"  p  225,  «.).  The  former  is  possible,  but  the 
latter  passage,  following  so  closely  on  i.  6,  which  im- 
plies the  fall  of  Samaria  to  be  still  recent,  if  not  in 
actual  course,  is  more  suitably  placed  in  the  time  of 
the  campaign  of  Sargon  over  pretty  much  the  same 
ground. 


Second  Section:  Chaps.  IV.,  V. 

This  section  of  the  book  opens  with  two  pas- 
sages, verses  1-5  and  verses  6,  7,  which  there  are 
serious  objections  against  assigning  to  Micah. 

I.  The  first  of  these,  1-5,  is  the  famous  proph- 
ecy of  the  Mountain  of  the  Lord's  House,  which 
is  repeated  in  Isaiah  ii.  2-5.  Probably  the  Book 
of  Micah  presents  this  to  us  in  the  more  original 
form.*  The  alternatives  therefore  are  four:  Mi- 
cah was  the  author,  and  Isaiah  borrowed  from 
him;  or  both  borrowed  from  an  earlier  source;  t 
or  the  oracle  is  authentic  in  Mica'h,  and  has  been 
inserted  by  a  later  editor  in  Isaiah;  or  it  has 
been  inserted  by  later  editors  in  both  Micah  and 
Isaiah. 

The  last  of  these  conclusions  is  required  by 
the  arguments  first  stated  by  Stade  and  Hack- 
mann,  and  then  elaborated,  in  a  very  strong 
piece  of  reasoning,  by  Cheyne.  Hackmann,  after 
marking  the  want  of  connection  with  the  previ- 
ous chapter,  alleges  the  keynotes  of  the  passage 
to  be  three:  that  it  is  not  the  arbitration  of  Je- 
hovah,:}: but  His  sovereignty  over  foreign  nations, 
and  their  adoption  of  His  law,  which  the  passage 
predicts;  that  it  is  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem 
whose  future  supremacy  is  affirmed;  and  that 
there  is  a  strong  feeling  against  war.  These, 
Cheyne  contends,  are  the  doctrines  of  a  much 
later  age  than  that  of  Mica'h;  he  holds  the  pas- 
sage to  be  the  work  of  a  post-exilic  imitator  of 
the  prophets,  which  was  first  intruded  into  the 
Book  of  Micah  and  afterwards  borrowed  from 
this  by  an  editor  of  Isaiah's  prophecies.  It  is 
just  here,  however,  tliat  the  theory  of  these  crit- 
ics loses  its  strength.  Agreeing  heartily  as  I  do 
with  recent  critics  that  the  genuine  writings  of 
the  early  prophets  have  received  some,  and  per- 
haps considerable,  additions  from  the  Exile  and 
later  periods,  it  seems  to  me  extremely  improb- 
able that  the  same  post-exilic  insertion  should 
find  its  way  into  tzvo  separate  books.  And  I 
think  that  the  undoubted  bias  towards  the  post- 
exilic  period  of  all  Canon  Cheyne's  recent  criti- 
cism, has  in  this  case  hurried  him  past  due  con- 
sideration of  the  possibility  of  a  pre-exilic  date. 
In  fact,  the  gentle  temper  shown  bv  the  passage 
towards  foreign  nations,  the  absence  of  hatred 
or  of  any  ambition  to  subject  the  Gentiles  to 
servitude  to  Israel,  contrasts  strongly  with  the 
temper  of  many  exilic  and  post-exilic  prophe- 
cies; §  w'hile  the  position  which  it  demands  for 
Jehovah  and  His  religion  is  quite  consistent  with 
the  fundamental  principles  of  earlier  prophecy. 
The  passage  really  claims  no  more  than  a  suze- 
rainty of  Jehovah  over  the  heathen  tribes,  with 
the  result  only  that  their  war  with  Israel  and 
with  one  another  shall  cease,  not  that  they  shall 
become,  as  the  great  prophecy  of  the  Exile  de- 
mands, tributaries  and  servitors.  Such  a  claim 
was  no  more  than  the  natural  deduction  from 
the  early  prophet's  belief  of  Jehovah's  suprem- 
acy in  righteousness.  And  although  Amos  had 
not  driven  the  principle  so  far  as  to  promise  the 
absolute  cessation  of  war,  he  also  had  recognised 
in  the  most  unmistakable  fashion  the  responsibil- 
ity of  the  Gentiles  to  Jehovah,  and  His  supreme 

*  So  Hitzig  ("  ohne  Zweifel  "),  and  Cheyne,  "  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Book  of  Isaiah";  Ryssel,  op.  cit.,  pp.  218  f. 
Hackmann  ("Die  Zukunftserwartung  des  Jesaia,"  127-8, 
«.)  prefers  the  Greek  of  Micah.  Ewald  is  doubtful. 
Duhm,  however,  inclines  to  authorship  by  Isaiah,  and 
would  assign  the  composition  to  Isaiah's  old  age. 

t  Hitzig;   Ewald. 

:;:  As  against  Duhm. 

§  So  rightly  Duhm  on  Isa.  ii.  2-4. 


THE    BOOK    OF    MICAH. 


533 


arbitrament  upon  them.*  And  Isaiah  himself, 
in  his  prophecy  on  Tyre,  promised  a  still  more 
complete  subjection  of  the  life  of  the  heathen 
to  the  service  of  Jehovah. f  Moreover  the  fifth 
verse  of  the  passage  in  Micah  (though  it  is  true 
its  connection  with  the  previous  four  is  not  ap- 
parent) is  much  more  in  harmony  with  pre- 
exilic  than  with  post-exilic  prophecy:  "  All  the 
nations  shall  walk  each  in  the  name  of  his  god, 
and  we  shall  walk  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  our 
God  for  ever  and  aye."  This  is  consistent  with 
more  than  one  prophetic  utterance,  before  the 
Exile,:}:  but  it  is  not  consistent  with  the  beliefs 
of  Judaism  after  the  Exile.  Finally,  the  great 
triumph  achieved  for  Jerusalem  in  701  is  quite 
sufficient  to  have  prompted  the  feelings  ex- 
pressed by  this  strange  passage  for  the  "  moun- 
tain of  the  house  of  the  Lord;  "  though  if  we  are 
to  bring  it  down  to  a  date  subseciuent  to  701, 
we  must  rearrange  our  views  with  regard  to  the 
date  and  meaning  of  the  second  chapter  of  Isaiah. 
In  Micah  the  passage  is  obviously  devoid  of  all 
connection,  not  only  with  the  previous  chapter, 
but  with  the  subsequent  verses  of  chap.  iv.  The 
possibility  of  a  date  in  the  eighth  or  beginning 
of  the  seventh  century  is  all  that  we  can  deter- 
mine with  regard  to  it:  the  other  questions  must 
remain   in   obscurity. 

2.  Verses  6,  7,  may  refer  to  the  Captivity  of 
Northern  Israel,  the  prophet  adding  that  when  it 
shall  be  restored  the  united  kingdom  shall  be 
governed  from  Mount  Zion;  but  a  date  during 
the  Exile  is,  of  course,  equally  probable. 

3.  Verses  8-13  contain  a  series  of  small  pictures 
of  Jerusalem  in  siege,  from  which,  however,  she 
issues  triumphant. ji  It  is  impossible  to  say 
whether  such  a  siege  is  actually  in  course  while 
the  prophet  writes,  or  is  pictured  by  him  as  inev- 
itable in  the  near  future.  The  words  "  thou 
shalt  go  to  Babylon  "  may  be,  but  are  not  nec- 
essarily,  a  gloss. 

4.  Chap.  iv.  14-v.  8  again  pictures  such  a  siege 
of  Jerusalem,  but  promises  a  deliverer  out  of 
Bethlehem,  the  city  of  David.  ||  Sufficient  heroes 
will  be  raised  up  along  with  him  to  drive  the 
Assyrians  from  the  land,  and  what  is  left  of  Is- 
rael after  all  these  disasters  shall  prove  a  pow- 
erful and  sovereign  influence  upon  the  peoples. 
These  verses  were  probably  not  all  uttered  at 
the  same  time. 

5.  Verses  9-14. — In  prospect  of  such  a  deliver- 
ance the  prophet  returns  to  what  chap.  i.  has  al- 
ready described  and  Isaiah  frequently  emphasises 
as  the  sin  of  Judah — 'her  armaments  and  for- 
tresses, her  magic  and  idolatries,  the  things  she 
trusted  in  ins'tead  of  Jehovah.  They  will  no 
more  be  necessary,  and  will  disappear.  The  na- 
tions that  serve  not  Jehovah  will  feel  His  wrath. 

In  all  these  oracles  there  is  nothing  inconsist- 
ent wit'h  the  authorship  in  the  eighth  century: 
there  is  much  that  witnesses  to  this  date.  Ev- 
erything that  they  threaten  or  promise  is  threat- 
ened or  promised  by  Hosea  and  by  Isaiah,  with 

•Amos  i.  and  ii.    See  above,  pp.  473,  475. 

+  Isa.  xxiii.  17  f. 

t  Jer.  xvii. 

§  Wellhausen  indeed  thinks  that  ver.  8  presupposes  that 
Jerusalem  is  already  devastated,  reduced  to  the  state  of  a 
shepherd's  tower  in  the  wilderness.  This,  however,  is 
incorrect.  The  verse  implies  only  that  the  whole  country 
is  overrun  by  the  foe,  Jerusalem  alone  standing  with  the 
flock  of  God  in  it,  like  a  fortified  fold  (cf.  Isaiah  i.). 

II  Roorda,  reasoning  from  the  Greek  text,  takes  "  House 
of  Ephratha"  as  the  original  reading,  with  Bethlehem 
added  later  ;  and  Hitzig  properly  reads  Ephrath,  giving 
its  final  letter  to  the  next  word,  which  improves  the 
grammar,  thus  :  l^yxn  niDN. 


the  exception  of  the  destruction  (in  ver,  12)  of 
the  Maggeboth,  or  sacred  pillars,  against  which 
we  find  no  sentence  going  forth  from  Jehovah 
before  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  while  Isaiah 
distinctly  promises  the  erection  of  a  Magqebah 
to  Jehovah  in  the  land  of  Egypt.*  But  waiving 
for  the  present  che  possibility  of  a  date  for  Deu- 
teronomy, or  for  part  of  it,  in  the  reign  of  Hez- 
ekiah,  we  must  remember  the  destruction,  which 
took  place  under  this  king,  of  idolatrous  sanctu- 
aries in  Judah,  and  feel  also  that,  in  spite  of  such 
a  reform,  it  was  quite  possible  for  Isaiah  to  in- 
troduce a  Maggebah  into  his  poetic  vision  of  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  in  Egypt.  For  has  he  not 
also  dared  to  say  that  the  "  harlot's  hire  "  of  the 
Phoenician  commerce  shall  one  day  be  conse- 
crated to  Jehovah? 

Third  Section:  Chaps.  VI.,  VII. 

The  style  now  changes.  We  have  had  hitherto 
a  series  of  short  oracles,  as  if  delivered  orally. 
These  are  succeeded  by  a  series  of  conferences 
or  arguments,  by  several  speakers.  Ewald  ac- 
counts for  the  change  by  supposing  that  the  lat- 
ter date  from  a  time  of  persecution,  when  the 
prophet,  unable  to  speak  in  public,  uttered  him- 
self in  literature.     But  chap.  i.  is  also  dramatic. 

1.  Chap.  vi.  1-8. — An  argument  in  which  the 
prophet  as  herald  calls  on  the  hills  to  listen  to 
Jehovah's  case  against  the  people  (i,  2),  Jeho- 
vah Himself  appeals  to  the  latter,  and  in  a  style 
similar  to  Hosea's  citet  His  deeds  in  their  his- 
tory, as  evidence  of  what  he  seeks  from  them 
(3-5).  The  people,  presumably  penitent,  ask  how 
they  shall  come  before  Jehovah  (6,  7).  And  the 
prophet  tells  them  what  Jehovah  has  declared 
in  the  matter  (8).  Opening  very  much  like 
Micah's  first  oracle  (chap.  i.  i),  this  argument 
contains  nothing  strange  either  to  Micah  or  the 
eig'hth  century.  Exception  has  been  taken  to  the 
reference  in  ver.  7  to  the  sacrifice  of  the  first- 
born, which  appears  to  have  been  more  common 
from  the  gloomy  age  of  Manasseh  onwards,  and 
which,  therefore,  led  Ewald  to  date  all  chaps, 
vi.  and  vii.  from  that  king's  reign.  But  child- 
sacrifice  is  stated  simply  as  a  possibility,  and— 
occurring  as  it  does  at  the-  climax  of  the  sen- 
tence— as  an  extreme  possibility.!  I  see  no  ne- 
cessity, therefore,  to  deny  the  piece  to  Micah  or 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Of  those  who  place  it 
under  Manasseh,  some,  like  Driver,  still  reserve 
it  to  Micah  himself,  whom  they  suppose  to  have 
survived  Hezekiah  and  seen  the  evil  days  which 
followed. 

2.  Verses  9-16. — Most  expositors  t  take  these 
verses  along  with  the  previous  eight,  as  well  as 
with  the  six  which  follow  in  chap.  vii.  But  there 
is  no  connection  between  verses  8  and  9;  and 
9-16  are  better  taken  by  themselves.  The  prophet 
heralds,  as  before,  the  speech  of  Jehovah  to  tribe 
a.d  city  (9).  Addressing  Jerusalem,  Jehovah 
asks  how  He  can  forgive  such  fraud  and  violence 
as  those  by  which  her  wealth  has  been  gath- 
ered (10-12).  Then  addressing  the  people  (note 
the  change  from  feminine  to  masculine  in  the 
second  personal  pronouns)  He  tells  them  He 
must  smite:  they  shall  not  enjoy  the  fruit  of 
their  labours  (14,  15).  They  have  sinned  the 
sins  of  Omri  and  the  house  of  Ahab  (query — 
should  it  not  be  of  Ahab  and  the  house  of 
Omri?),  so  that  they  must  be  put  to  shame  be- 

*  Isa.  xix.  19.  +  So  also  Wellhausen. 

X  E.  g.,  Ewald  and  Driver. 


534 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


fore  the  Gentiles  *  (i6).  In  this  section  three 
or  four  words  have  been  marked  as  of  late  He- 
brew.f  But  this  is  uncertain,  and  the  inference 
made  from  it  precarious.  The  deeds  of  Omri 
and  A'hab's  house  have  been  understood  as  the 
persecution  of  the  adherents  of  Jehovah,  and  the 
passage  has,  therefore,  been  assigned  by  Ewald 
and  others  to  the  reign  of  the  tyrant  Manasseh. 
But  such  habits  of  persecution  could  hardly  be 
imputed  to  the  City  or  People  as  a  whole;  and 
we  may  conclude  that  the  passage  means  some 
other  of  that  notorious  dynasty's  sins.  Among 
these,  as  is  well  known,  it  is  possible  to  make  a 
large  selection — the  favouring  of  idolatry,  or  the 
tyrannous  absorption  by  the  rich  of  the  land  of 
the  poor  (as  in  Naboth's  case),  a  sin  which 
Micah  has  already  marked  as  that  of  his  age. 
The  whole  treatment  of  the  subject,  too,  whether 
under  the  head  of  the  sin  or  its  punishment, 
strongly  resembles  the  style  and  temper  of 
Amos.  It  is,  therefore,  by  no  means  impossible 
for  this  passage  also  to  have  been  Micah's,  and 
we  must  accordingly  leave  the  question  of  its 
date  undecided  Certainly  we  are  not  shut  up, 
as  the  majority  of  modern  critics  suppose,  to  a 
date  under  Manasseh  or  Amon. 

3.  Chap.  vii.  1-6. — These  verses  are  spoken  by 
the  prophet  in  his  own  name  or  that  of  the 
people's.  The  land  is  devastated;  the  righteous 
have  disappeared;  everybody  is  in  ambush  to 
commit  deeds  of  violence  and  take  his  neighbour 
unawares.  There  is  no  justice:  the  great  ones 
of  the  land  are  free  to  do  what  they  like;  they 
have  intrigued  with  and  bribed  the  authorities. 
Informers  have  crept  in  everywhere.  Men  must 
be  silent,  for  the  members  of  their  own  families 
are  their  foes.  Some  of  these  sins  have  already 
been  marked  by  Micah  as  those  of  his  age  (chap, 
ii.),  but  the  others  point  rather  to  a  time  of  per- 
secution, such  as  that  under  Manasseh.  Well- 
hausen  remarks  the  similarity  of  the  state  of  af- 
fairs described  in  Mai.  iii.  24  and  in  some  Psalms. 
We  cannot  fix  the  date. 

4.  Verses  7-20. — This  passage  starts  from  a  to- 
tally different  temper  ot  prophecy,  and  presuma- 
bly, therefore,  from  very  different  circumstances. 
Israel,  as  a  whole,  speaks  in  penitence.  She  has 
sinned,  and  bows  herself  to  the  consequences, 
but  in  hope.  A  day  shall  come  when  her  exiles 
shall  return  and  the  heathen  acknowledge  her 
God.  The  passage,  and  with  it  the  Book  of 
Micah,  concludes  by  apostrophising  Jehovah  as 
the  God  of  forgiveness  and  grace  to  His  people. 
Ewald,  and  tollowing  him  Driver,  assign  the 
passage,  witlh  those  which  precede  it,  to  the 
times  of  Manasseh,  in  which  of  course  it  is  pos- 
sible that  Micah  was  still  active,  though  Ewald 
supposes  a  younger  and  anonymous  prophet  as 
the  author.  Wellhausen:^  goes  further,  and, 
while  recognising  that  the  situation  and  temper 
of  the  passage  resemble  those  of  Isaiah  xl.  ff., 
is  inclined  to  bring  it  even  further  down  to  post- 
exilic  times,  because  of  the  universal  character 
of  the  Diaspora.  Driver  objects  to  these  infer- 
ences, and  maintains  that  a  prophet  in  the  time 
of  Manasseh,  thinking  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 

*  For  ''rsy  read  Q^OV  with  the  LXX. 

t  Wellhausen  states  four.  But  n"'55'in  oi  ver.  9  is  an 
uncertain  reading.  rfD"!  is  found  in  Hosea  vii.  i6,  though 
the  text  of  this,  it  is  true,  is  corrupt.  n3T  ^^  another  ver- 
bal form  is  found  in  Isa.  i  16.  There  only  remains  HtilO. 
but  again  it  is  uncertain  whether  we  should  take  this  in 
its  late  sense  of  tribe. 

jf  And  also  Giesebrecht,  "Beitrage,"  p.  317. 


salem  to  be  nearer  than  it  actually  was,  may 
easily  have  pictured  it  as  having  taken  place,  and 
put  an  ideal  confession  in  the  moutth  of  the 
people.  It  seems  to  me  that  all  these  critics 
have  failed  to  appreciate  a  piece  of  evidence  even 
more  remarkable  than  any  they  have  insisted  on 
in  their  argument  for  a  late  date.  This  is,  that 
the  passage  speaks  of  a  restoration  of  the  people 
only  to  Bashan  and  Gilead,  the  provinces  over- 
run by  Tiglath-Pileser  III.  in  734.  It  is  not 
possible  to  explain  such  a  limitation  either  by  the 
circumstances  of  Manasseh's  time  or  by  those 
of  the  Exile.  In  the  former  surely  Samaria 
would  have  been  included;  in  the  latter  Zion  and 
Judah  would  have  been  emphasised  before  any 
other  region.  It  would  be  easy  for  the  defenders 
of  a  post-exilic  date,  and  especially  of  a  date 
much  subsequent  to  the  Exile,  to  account  for  a 
longing  after  Bashan  and  Gilead,  though  they 
also  would  have  to  meet  the  obiection  that  Sa- 
maria or  Ephraim  is  not  mentioned.  But  how 
natural  it  would  be  for  a  prophet  writing  soon 
after  the  captivity  of  Tiglath-Pileser  III.  to  make 
this  precise  selection!  And  although  there  re- 
main difficulties  (arising  from  the  temper 
and  language  of  the  passage)  in  the  way 
of  assigning  all  of  it  to  Micah  or  his  con- 
temporaries, I  feel  that  on  the  geograph- 
ical allusions  much  can  be  said  for  the  ori- 
gin of  this  part  of  the  passage  in  their  age, 
or  even  in  an  age  still  earlier:  that  of  the  Syrian 
wars  in  the  end  of  the  ninth  century,  with  which 
there  is  nothing  inconsistent  either  in  the  spirit 
or  the  language  of  vv.  14-17.  And  I  am  sure  that 
if  the  defenders  of  a  late  date  had  found  a  selec- 
tion of  districts  as  suitable  to  the  post-exilic 
circumstances  of  Israel  as  the  selection  of  Bashan 
and  Gilead  is  to  the  circumstances  of  the  eighth 
century,  they  would,  instead  of  ignoring  it,  have 
emphasised  it  as  a  conclusive  confirmation  of 
their  theory.  On  the  other  hand,  ver.  11  can 
date  only  from  the  Exile,  or  the  following  years, 
before  Jerusalem  was  rebuilt.  Again,  vv.  18-20 
appear  to  stand  by  themselves. 

It  seems  likely,  therefore,  that  chap.  vii.  7-20 
is  a  Psalm  composed  of  little  pieces  from  vari- 
ous dates,  which,  combined,  give  us  a  picture  of 
the  secular  sorrows  of  Israel,  and  of  the  con- 
science she  ultimately  felt  in  them,  and  con- 
clude by  a  doxology  to  the  everlasting  mercies 
of  her  God. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

MICAH  THE  MORASTHITE. 

Micah  i. 

Some'  time  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  w^hen  the 
kingdom  of  Judah  was  still  inviolate,  but  shiv- 
ering to  the  shock  of  the  fall  of  Samaria,  and 
probably  while  Sargon  the  destroyer  was  push- 
ing his  way  past  Judah  to  meet  Egypt  at  Raohia, 
a  Judean  prophet  of  the  name  of  Micah,  standing 
in  sight  of  the  Assyrian  march,  attacked  the  sins 
of  his  people  and  prophesied  their  speedy  over- 
throw beneath  the  same  flood  of  war.  If  we  be 
correct  in  our  surmise,  the  exact  year  was  720- 
719  B.  c.  Amos  had  been  silent  thirty  years, 
Hosea  hardly  fifteen;  Isaiah  was  in  the  midway 
of  his  career.  The  title  of  Micah's  book  asserts 
that  he  had  previously  prophesied  under  Jotham 


]\[icah  i.] 


MICAH    THE    MORASTHITE. 


535 


and  Ahaz,  and  though  we  have  seen  it  to  be 
possible,  it  is  by  no  means  proved,  that  certain 
passages  of  the  book  date  from  these  reigns. 

Micah  is  called  the  Morasthite.*  For  this  des- 
ignation there  appears  to  be  no  other  meaning 
than  that  of  a  native  of  Moreshefh-Gath,  a  vil- 
lage mentioned  by  himself.f  It  signifies  Prop- 
erty or  Territory  of  Gath,  and  after  the  fall  of 
the  latter,  which  from  this  time  no  more  appears 
in  history,  Moresheth  may  have  been  used  alone. 
Compare  the  analogous  cases  of  Helkath  (portion 
of — )  Galilee,  Ataroth,  Chesulloth,  and  lim.t 

In  our  ignorance  of  Gath's  position,  we  should 
be  equally  at  fault  about  Moresheth,  for  the 
name  has  vanished,  were  it  not  for  one  or  two 
plausible  pieces  of  evidence.  Belonging  to  Gath, 
Moresheth  must  have  lain  near  the  Philistine  bor- 
der: the  towns  among  which  Micalh  includes 
it  are  situate  in  that  region;  and  Jerome  de- 
clares that  the  name — though  the  form,  Moras- 
thi,  in  which  he  cites  it  is  suspicious — was  in  his 
time  still  extant  in  a  small  village  to  the  east 
of  Eleutheropolis  or  Beit-Jibrin.  Jerome  cites 
Morasthi  as  distinct  from  the  neighbouring 
Mareshah,  which  is  also  quoted  by  Micah  beside 
Moresheth-Gath.g 

Moresheth  was,  therefore,  a  place  in  the  Shep- 
helah,  or  range  of  low  hills  which  lie  between 
the  hill  country  of  Judah  and  the  Philistine  plain. 
It  is  the  opposite  exposure  from  the  wilderness 
of  Tekoa,!  some  seventeen  miles  away  across 
the  watershed.  As  the  home  of  Amos  is  bare  and 
desert,  so  the  "home  of  Micalh  is  fair  and  fertile. 
The  irregular  chalk  hills  are  separated  by  broad 
glens,  in  which  the  soil  is  alluvial  and  red,  with 
room  for  cornfields  on  either  side  of  the  peren- 
nial or  almost  perennial  streams.  The  olive 
groves  on  the  braes  are  finer  than  either  those 
of  the  plain  below  or  of  the  Judean  tableland 
above.  There  is  herbage  for  cattle.  Bees  mur- 
mur everywhere,  larks  are  singing,  and  although 
to-day  you  may  wander  in  the  maze  of  bills  for 
hours  without  meeting  a  man  or  seeing  a  house, 
you  are  never  out  of  sight  of  the  traces  of  ancient 
habitation,  and  seldom  beyond  sound  of  the  hu- 
nian  voice — shepherds  and  ploughmen  calling 
to  their  flocks  and  to  each  other  across  the  glens. 
Tiere  are  none  of  the  conditions  or  of  the  occa- 
si  )ns  of  a  large  town.  But,  like  the  south  of 
F/igland,  the  country  is  one  of  villages  and  home- 
steads, breeding  good  yeomen — men  satisfied 
ard  in  love  with  their  soil,  yet  borderers  with  a 
fa'  outlook  and  a  keen  vigilance  and  sensibility. 
Tiie  Shephelah  is  sufficiently  detached  from  the 
capital  and  body  of  the  land  to  beget  in  her  sons 
an  independence  of  mind  and  feeling,  but  so 
much  upon  the  edge  of  the  open  world  as  to  en- 
due them  at  the  same  time  with  that  sense  of 
the    responsibilities    of   warfare,    which    the    na- 

♦  Micah  i.;  Jer.  xxvi.  i8. 

+  i.  14. 

t  Ataroth  ("Numb,  xxxii.  3)  is  Atroth-Shophan  (tb.  35) ; 
Chesulloth  (Josh.  xix.  18)  is  Chisloth-Tabor  {id.  12) ;  lim 
(Numb,   xxxiii.   45)   is   lye-Abarim  (lb.  44). 

^"Michaeam  de  Morasthi  qui  usque  hodie  juxta  Eleu- 
theropolim,  baud  grandis  est  viculus."  — Jerome,  Preface 
to  Micha.  "  Morasthi,  unde  fuit  Micheas  propheta,  est 
autem  vicus  contra  orientem  Eleutheropoleos.'"— "  Ono- 
^iwasticon,"  which  also  gives  "  Maresa,  in  tribu  Juda  ; 
cuius  nunc  tantummodo  sunt  ruinae  in  secundo  lapide 
E'eutheropoleos."  See,  too,  the  "  Epitaphium  S.  Paulae  :  " 
"  Videam  Morasthim  sepulchrum  quondam  Michaeae,  nunc 
e>  clesiam,  et  ex  latere  derelinquam  Choraeos,  et  Gitthaeos 
e'  Maresam."  The  occurrence  of  a  place  bearing  the 
t  ime  Property-of-Gath  so  close  to  Beit-Jibrin  certainly 
9"  rengthens  the  claims  of  the  latter  to  be  Gath.  See 
'  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  196. 

II  See  above,  pp.  460  S, 


tional  statesmen,  aloof  and  at  ease  in  Zion,  could 
not  possibly  have   shared. 

Upon  one  of  the  westmost  terraces  of  this 
Shephelah,  nearly  a  thousand  feet  above  the  sea, 
lay  Moresheth  itself.  There  is  a  great  view 
across  the  undulating  plain  with  its  towns  and 
fortresses,  Lachish,  Eglon,  Shaphir,  and  others, 
beyond  which  runs  the  coast  road,  the  famous 
war-path  between  Asia  and  Africa.  Ashdod  and 
Gaza  are  hardly  discernible  against  the  glitter 
of  the  sea,  twenty-two  miles  away.  Behind  roll 
the  round  bush-covered  hills  of  the  Shephelah, 
with  David's  hold  at  Adullam,*  the  field  where 
he  fought  Goliath,  and  many  another  scene  of 
border  warfare;  while  over  them  rises  the  high 
wall  of  the  Judean  plateau,  with  the  defiles  break- 
ing through  it  to  Hebron  and  Bethlehem. 

The  valley-mouth  near  which  Moresheth 
stands  has  always  formed  the  southwestern 
gateway  of  Judea,  the  Philistine  or  Egyptian 
gate,  as  it  might  be  called,  with  its  outpost  at 
Lachish,  twelve  miles  across  the  plain.  Roads 
converge  upon  this  valley-mouth  from  all  points 
of  the  compass.  Beit-Jibrin,  which  lies  in  it, 
is  midway  between  Jerusalem  and  Gaza,  about 
twenty-five  miles  from  either,  nineteen  miles 
from  Bethlehem,  and  thirteen  from  Hebron. 
Visit  the  place  at  any  point  of  the  long 
history  of  Palestine,  and  you  find  it  either  full 
of  passengers  or  a  centre  of  campaign.  Asa  de- 
feated the  Ethiopians  here.  The  Maccabees  and 
John  Hyrcanus  contested  Mareshah,  two  miles 
off,  with  the  Idumeans.  Gabinius  fortified  Mare- 
shah. Vespasian  and  Saladin  both  deemed  the 
occupation  of  the  valley  necessary  before  they 
marched  upon  Jerusalem.  Septimius  Severus 
made  Be'it-Jibrin  the  capital  of  the  Shephelah, 
and  laid  out  military  roads,  whose  pavements  still 
radiate  from  it  in  all  directions.  The  Onomasticon 
measures  distances  in  the  Shephelah  from  Beit- 
Jibrin.  Most  of  the  early  pilgrims  from  Jerusa- 
lem by  Gaza  to  Sinai  or  Egypt  passed  through 
it,  and  it  was  a  centre  of  Crusading  operations, 
whether  against  Egypt  during  the  Latin  king- 
dom or  against  Jerusalem  during  the  Third  Cru- 
sade. Not  different  was  the  place  in  the  time  of 
Micah.  Micah  must  have  seen  pass  by  his  door 
the  frequent  embassies  which  Isaiah  tells  us 
went  down  to  Egypt  from  Hezekiah's  court,  and 
seen  return  those  Egyptian  subsidies  in  which  a 
foolish  people  put  their  trust  instead  of  in  their 
God. 

In  touch,  then,  with  the  capital,  feeling  every 
throb  of  its  folly  and  its  panic,  but  standing  on 
that  border  which  must,  as  he  believed,  bear  the 
brunt  of  the  invasion  that  its  crimes  were  attract- 
ing, Micah  lifted  up  his  voice.  They  were  days 
of  great  excitement.  The  words  of  Amos  and 
Hosea  had  been  fulfilled  upon  Northern  Israel. 
Should  Judah  escape,  whose  injustice  and  im- 
purity were  as  flagrant  as  her  sister's?  It  were 
vain  to  think  so.  The  Assyrians  had  come  up  to 
her  northern  border.  Isaiah  was  expecting  their 
assault  upon  Mount  Zion.f  The  Lord's  Contro- 
versy was  not  closed.  Micah  will  summon  the 
whole  earth  to  hear  the  old  indictment  and  the 
still   unexhausted   sentence. 

*  For  the  situation  of  Adullam  in  the  Shephelah  see 
"Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  22Q. 

t  Isa.  X.  28  ff.  This  makes  it  quite  conceivable  that  Micah 
i.  9,  "  it  hath  struck  right  up  to  the  gate  of  Jerusalem,"  was 
composed  immediately  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and 
not,  as  Smend  imagines,  during  the  campaign  of  Sennach- 
erib. Against  the  latter  date  there  is  the  objection  that 
by  then  the  fall  of  Samaria,  which  Micah  i.  6  describes  as 
present,  was  already  nearly  twenty  years  past. 


536 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Hear  ye.  peoples  *  all  ; 
Hearken,  O  Earth,  and  her  fulness! 
That  Jehovah  may  be  among  you  to  testify. 
The  Lord  from  His  holy  temple  ' 
For,  lo  !  Jehovah  goeth  forth  from  His  place; 
He  descendeth  and    marcheth   on  the  heights  of  the 

earth. t 
Molten  are  the  mountains  beneath  Him, 
And  the  valleys  gape  open, 
Like  wax  in  face  of  the  fire, 
Like  water  poured  over  a  falL 

God  speaks: — 

"For  the  transgression  of  Jacob  is  all  this, 
And  for  the  sins  of  the  house  of  Israel. 
What  is  the  transgression  of  Jacob  ?  is  it  not  Samaria  ? 
And  what  is  the  sin  of  the  housed  of  Judah?  is  it  not 

Jerusalem  ? 
Therefore  do  I  turn  Samaria  into  a  ruin  of  the  field, § 
And  into  vineyard  terraces  ; 
And  I  pour  down  her  stones  to  the  glen, 
And  lay  bare  her  foundations.il 
All  her  images  are  shattered, 
And  all  her  hires  are  being  burned  in  the  fire  ; 
And  all  her  idols  I  lay  desolate. 
For  from  the  hire  of  a  harlot  they  were  gathered, 1^ 
And  to  a  harlot's  hire  they  return.** 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  For  this  let  me  mourn,  let  me  wail. 
Let  me  go  barefoot  and  stripped  (of  my  robe). 
Let  me  make  lamentations  like  the  jackals, 
And  mourning  like  the  daughters  of  the  desert.+t 
For  her  stroke  tj  is  desperate  ; 
Yea,  it  hath  come  unto  Judah  ! 
It  hath  smitten  right  up  to  the  gate  of  my  people. 
Up  to  Jerusalem." 

Within  the  capital  itself  Isa'iah  was  also  record- 
ing the  extension  of  the  Assyrian  invasion  to 
its  walls,  bnt  in  a  different  temper. §§  He  was  full 
of  the  exulting  assurance  that,  although  at  the 
very  gate,  the  Assyrian  could  not  harm  the  city 
of  Jehovah,  but  must  fall  when  he  lifted  his  im- 
piotis  hand  against  it.  Micah  has  no  such  hope: 
he  is  overwhelmed  with  the  thought  of  Jerusa- 
lem's danger.  Provincial  though  he  be,  and  full 
of  wrath  at  the  danger  into  which  the  politicians 
of  Jerusalem  had  dragged  the  w'hole  country, 
he  profoundly  mourns  the  peril  of  the  capital, 
"  the  gate  of  my  people,"  as  he  fondly  calls  her. 
Therefore  we  must  not  exaggerate  the  frequently 
drawn  contrast  between  Isaiah  and  himself. ||||  To 
Micah  also  Jerusalem  was  dear,  and  his  subse- 

*  The  address  is  either  to  the  tribes,  in  which  case  we 
must  substitute  "  land  "  for  "  earth  "  in  the  next  line  ;  or 
much  more  probably  it  is  to  the  Gentile  "  nations,"  but  in 
this  case  we  cannot  translate  (as  all  do)  in  the  third  line 
that  the  Lord  will  be  a  witness  "against  "  them,  for  the 
charge  is  only  against  Israel.  They  are  summoned  in  the 
same  sense  as  Amos  summons  a  few  of  the  nations  in 
chap.  iii.  9  ff.— The  opening  words  of  Micah  are  original 
to  this  passage,  and  interpolated  in  the  exordium  of  the 
other  Micah,  i  Kings  xxii.  28. 

t  Jehovah's  "  Temple  "  or  "Place"  is  not,  as  in  earlier 

Eoems,  Sinai  or  Seir  {cf.  Deborah's  song  and  Deut.  xxxiii), 
ut  Heaven  {cf.  Isaiah  xix.  or  Psalm  xxix.). 

t  So  LXX.  and  other  versions. 

§  Wellhausen's  objections  to  this  phrase  are  arbitrary 
and  incorrect.  A  ruin  in  the  midst  of  soil  gone  out  of 
cultivation,  where  before  there  had  been  a  city  among 
vineyards,  is  a  striking  figure  of  desolation. 

II  Which  is  precisely  how  Herod's  Samaria  lies  at  the 
present  day. 

t  So  Ewald. 

**  It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  all  the  verbs  in  the 
above  passage  may  as  correctly  be  given  in  the  future 
tense  ;  in  that  case  the  passage  will  be  dated  just  before 
the  fall  of  Samaria,  in  722-1,  instead  of  just  after. 

++  njy  ni33,  that  is,  the  ostriches  :  cf.  Arab,  wa'ana, 
"white,  barren  ground."  The  Arabs  call  the  ostrich 
"  father  of  the  desert :  abu  saharS." 

XX  LXX. 

§§  Isa.  X.  28  fr. 

ilB  It  is  well  put  by  Robertson  Smith's  "  Prophets,"  pp. 
289  ff. 


quent  prediction  of  her  overthrow  *  ought  -to  be 
read  with  the  accent  of  this  previous  mourning 
for  her  peril.  Nevertheless  his  heart  clings  mftst 
to  his  own  home,  and  while  Isaiah  pictures  the 
Assyrian  entering  Judah  from  the  north  by  Mi- 
gron,  Michmash,  and  Nob,  Micah  anticipates  in- 
vasion by  the  opposite  gateway  of  the  land,  at 
the  door  of  his  own  village.  His  elegy  sweeps 
across  the  landscape  so  dear  to  him.  This  ob- 
scure province  was  even  more  than  Jerusalem 
his  world,  the  world  of  his  heart.  It  gives  us  a 
living  interest  in  the  man  that  the  fate  of  these 
small  villages,  many  of  them  vanished,  should 
excite  in  him  more  passion  than  the  fortunes 
of  Zion  herself.  In  such  passion  we  can  incar- 
nate his  spirit.  Micah  is  no  longer  a  book,  or 
an  oration,  but  flesh  and  blood  upon  a  home 
and  a  countryside  of  his  own.  We  see  him  on 
his  housetop  pouring  forth  his  words  before  the 
hills  and  the  far-stretching  heathen  land.  In  the 
name  of  every  village  within  sight  he  reads  a 
symbol  of  the  curse  that  is  coming  upon  his 
country,  and  of  the  sins  that  have  earned  the 
curse.  So  some  of  the  greatest  poets  have  caught 
their  music  from  the  nameless  brooklets  of  their 
boyhood's  fields;  and  many  a  prophet  has  learned 
to  read  the  tragedy  of  man  and  God's  verdict 
upon  sin  in  his  experience  of  village  life.  But 
there  was  more  than  feeling  in  Micah's  choice 
of  his  own  country  as  the  scene  of  the  Assyrian 
invasion.  He  had  better  reasons  for  his  fears 
than  Isaiah,  who  imagmed  the  approach  of  the 
Assyrian  from  the  north.  For  it  is  remarkable 
how  invaders  of  Judea,  from  Sennacherib  to 
Vespasian  and  from  Vespasian  to  Saladin  and 
Richard,  have  shunned  the  northern  access  to 
Jerusalem  and  endeavoured  to  reach  her  by  the 
very  gateway  at  which  Micah  stood  mourning. 
He  had,  too,  this  greater  motive  for  his  fear, 
that  Sargon,  as  we  have  seen,  was  actually  in 
the  neighbourhood,  marching  to  the  defeat  of 
Judah's  chosen  patron,  Egypt.  Was  it  not  prob- 
able that,  when  the  latter  was  overthrown,  Sar- 
gon would  turn  back  upon  Judah  by  Lachish 
and  Mareshah?  If  we  keep  this  in  mind  we  shall 
appreciate,  not  only  the  fond  anxiety,  but  the 
political  foresight  that  inspires  the  following  pas- 
saje,  which'is  to  our  Western  taste  so  strangely 
cast  in  a  series  of  plays  upon  place-names.  The 
disappearance  of  many  of  these  names,  and  our 
ignorance  of  the  transactions  to  which  the  verses 
allude,  often  render  both  the  text  and  the  mean- 
ing very  uncertain.  Micah  begins  with  the  well- 
known  play  upon  the  name  of  Gath;  the  Acco 
which  he  couples  with  it  is  either  the  Phoenician 
port  to  the  north  of  Carmel,  the  modern  Acre, 
or  some  Philistine  town,  unknown  to  us,  but  in 
any  case  the  line  forms  with  the  previous  one 
an  intelligible  couplet:  "Tell  it  not  in  Tell- 
town;  Weep  not  in  Weep-town."  The  following 
Beth-le-'Aphrah,  "  House  of  Dust,"  must  be 
taken  with  them,  for  in  the  phrase  "  roll  thyself" 
there  is  a  play  upon  the  name  Philistine.  So, 
too,  Shaphir,  or  Beauty,  the  modern  Suafir,  lay 
in  the  Philistine  Region.  Sa'anan  and  Beth-esel 
and  Maroth  are  unknown;  but  if  Micah,  as  is 
probable,  beg'ins  his  list  far  away  on  the  western  . 
horizon  and  comes  gradually  inland,  they  also  are 
to  be  sought  for  on  the  maritime  plain.  Then  he 
draws  nearer  by  Lachish,  on  the  first  hills,  and 
in  the  leading  pass  towards  Judah,  to  Moresheth- 
Gath,  Achzib,  Mareshah,  and  Adullam,  which 
all   lie   within    Israel's    territory   and    about    the 


Micah  ii.,  iii.] 


THE    PROPHET    OF    THE    POOR. 


537 


prophet's  own  home.  We  understand  the  allu- 
sion, at  least,  to  Lachish  in  ver.  13.  As  the  last 
Judean  outpost  towards  Egypt,  and  on  a  main 
road  thither,  Lachish  would  receive  the  Egyptian 
subsidies  of  horses  and  chariots,  in  which  the  pol- 
iticians put  their  trust  instead  of  in  Jehovah. 
Therefore  she  "  was  the  beginning  of  sin  to  the 
daughter  of  Zion."  And  if  we  can  trust  the  text 
of  ver.  14,  Lachish  would  pass  on  the  Egyptian 
ambassadors  to  Moresheth-Gath,  the  next  stage 
of  their  approach  to  Jerusalem.  But  this  is  un- 
certain. With  Moresheth-Gath  is  coupled  Ach- 
zib,  a  town  at  some  distance  from  Jerome's  site 
for  the  former,  to  the  neighbourhood  of  which, 
Mareshah,  we  are  brought  back  again  in  ver.  15. 
Adullam,  with  which  the  list  closes,  lies  some 
eight  or  ten  miles  to  the  northeast  of  Mareshah. 
The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Tell  it  not  in  Gath, 

Weep  not  in  Acco,* 

In  Beth-le-"Aphrah+  roll  thyself  in  dust. 

Pass  over,  inhabitress  of  Shaphir.J  thy  shame  un- 
covered ! 

The  inhabitress  of  Sa'anan  §  shall  not  march  forth  ; 

The  lamentation  of  Beth-esel  ||  taketh  from  you  its 
standing'. 

The  inhabitress  of  Marotht  trembleth  for  good, 

For  evil  hath  come  down  from  Jehovah  to  the  gate  of 
Jerusalem. 

Harness  the  horse  to  the  chariot,  inhabitress  of 
Lachish,** 

That  hast  been  the  beginning  of  sin  to  the  daughter  of 
Zion  ; 

Yea,  in  thee  are  found  the  transgressions  of  Israel. 

Therefore  thou  givest  ...  ft  to  Moresheth-Gath  :  it 

The  houses  of  Achzib  §§  j/z^z// deceive  the  kings  of  Israel. 

Again  shall  I  bring  the  Possessor  [conqueror]  to  thee, 
inhabitress  of  Mareshah  ;|!|| 

To  Adullam  n  shall  come  the  glory  of  Israel. 

Make  thee  bald,  and  shave  thee  for  thy  darlings  ; 

Make  broad  thy  baldness  like  the  vulture, 

For  they  go  into  banishment  from  thee. 

This  was  the  terrible  fate  which  the  Assyrian 
kept  before  the  peoples  with  whom  he  was  at 
war.  Other  foes  raided,  burned,  and  slew:  he 
carried  off  whole  populations  into  exile. 

Having  thus  pictured  the  doom  which  threat- 
ened his  people,  Micah  turns  to  declare  the  sins 
for  which  it  has  been  sent  upon  them. 

♦  LXX.  iv  "Aicetia  ;    Heb.  "  weep  not  at  all." 

+  mSy?  cannot  be  the  Ophrah,  iTlDy,  of  Benjamin. 
T : -:  T  :  T 

It  may  be  connected  with  "'??J^'  ^  gazelle  ;  and  it  is  to  be 

noted  that  S.  of  Beit-Jibrin  there  is  a  wady  now  called 
El-Ghufr,  the  corresponding  Arabic  word.  But,  as  stated 
in  the  text  above,  the  name  ought  to  be  one  of  a  Philistine 
town. 

X  Beauty  town.  This  is  usually  taken  to  be  the  modern 
Suafir  on  the  Philistine  plain,  4J  miles  S.  E.  of  Ashdod.  a 
site  not  unsuitable  for  identification  with  the  2a(^eip  of  the 
"  Onom.,"  "  between  Eleutheropolisand  Ascalon,"  except 
that  2a(^cip  is  also  described  as  "in  the  hill  country." 
Guerin  found  the  name  Safar  a  very  little  N.  of  Beit-' 
Jibrin  ("  Judee,"  II.  317). 

§  March-town  :  perhaps  the  same  as  Senan  (pV)  of  Josh. 

^v.  37  ;  given  along  with  Migdal-Gad  and  Hadashah  ;  not 
identified. 

II  Unknown. 

i  "  Bitternesses  "  :  unknown. 

**TelI-el-Hesy. 

tt "  Ambassadors  "  or  "  letters  of  dismissal." 

ttSee  above,  p.  535. 

§§  Josh.  XV.  44;  mentioned  with  Keilah  and  Mareshah; 
perhaps  the  present  Ain  Kezbeh,  8  miles  N.  N.  E.,  of  Beit- 
Jibrin. 

illl'"'?^?'  but  in  Josh,  xv.  44  ntJ'XIO,  which  is  identical 

*  Isa.  v.  8. 
with  spelling  of  the  present  name  of  a  ruin  i  mile  S.  of       tMr.   Congreve,  in  his  Essay  on   Slavery  appended  to 
Beit-Jibrin.     MapTjcra  is  placed  by  Eusebius  ("  Onom.")  2     his  edition  of  Aristotle's  "  Politics,"  p.  496,  points  out  that 
Roman  miles  S.  of  Eleutheropolis  (=•■  Beit-Jibrin).  all  the  servile  wars  from  which  Rome  suffered  arose,  not 

^^6  miles  N.  E.  of  Beit-Jibnn.  in  the  capital,  but  in  the  provinces,  notably  in  Sicily. 


CHAPTER  XXVL 

THE  PROPHET  OF  THE  POOR. 

Micah  ii.,  iii. 

We  have  proved  Micah's  love  for  his  country- 
side in  the  eflfusion  of  his  heart  upon  her  villages 
with  a  grief  for  their  danger  greater  than  his 
grief  for  Jerusalem.  Now  in  his  treatment  of  the 
sins  which  give  that  danger  its  fatal  significance, 
he  is  inspired  by  the  same  partiality  for  the 
fields  and  the  folk  about  him.  While  Isaiah 
chiefly  satirises  the  fashions  of  the  town  and 
the  intrigues  of  the  court,  Micah  scourges  the 
avarice  of  the  landowner  and  the  injustice  which 
oppresses  the  peasant.  He  could  not,  of  course, 
help  sharing  Isaiah's  indignation  for  the  fatal 
politics  of  the  capital,  any  more  than  Isaiah 
could  help  sharing  his  sense  of  the  economic 
dangers  of  the  provinces;*  but  it  is  the  latter 
with  which  Micah  is  most  familiar  and  on  which 
he  spends  his  wrath.  These  so  engross  him,  in- 
(deed,  that  he  says  almost  nothing  about  the 
idolatry,  or  the  luxury,  or  the  hideous  vice, 
which,  according  to  Amos  and  Hosea,  were  now 
corrupting  the  nation. 

Social  wrongs  are  always  felt  most  acutely,  not 
in  the  town,  but  in  the  country.  It  was  so  in 
the  days  of  Rome,  whose  earliest  social  revolts 
were  agrarian. f  It  was  so  in  the  Middle  Ages: 
the  fourteenth  century  saw  both  the  Jacquerie 
in  France  and  the  Peasants'  Rising  in  England; 
Langland,  who  was  equally  familiar  with  town 
and  country,  expends  nearly  all  his  sympathy 
upon  the  poverty  of  the  latter,  "  the  poure  folk 
in  cotes."  It  was  so  after  the  Reformation,  un- 
der the  new  spirit  of  which  the  first  social  revolt 
was  the  Peasants'  War  in  Germany.  It  was  so 
at  the  French  Revolution,  which  began  with 
the  tnarch  of  the  starving  peasants  into  Paris. 
And  it  is  so  still,  for  our  new  era  of  social  legis- 
lation has  been  forced  open,  not  by  the  poor  of 
London  and  the  large  cities,  but  by  the  peas- 
antry of  Ireland  and  the  crofters  of  the  Scottish 
Highlands.  Political  discontent  and  religious 
heresy  take  their  start  among  industrial  and 
manufacturing  centres,  but  the  first  springs  of 
the  social  revolt  are  nearly  always  found  among 
the   rural   populations. 

Why  the  country  should  begin  to  feel  the 
acuteness  of  social  wrong  before  the  town  is  suf- 
ficiently obvious.  In  the  town  there  are  mitiga- 
tions, and  there  are  escapes.  If  the  conditions  of 
one  trade  become  oppressive,  it  is  easier  to  pass 
to  another.  The  workers  are  better  educated 
and  better  organised:  there  is  a  middle  class,  and 
the  tyrant  dare  not  bring  matters  to  so  high  a 
crisis.  The  might  of  the  wealthy,  too,  is  di- 
vided; the  poor  man's  employer  is  seldom  at  the 
same  time  his  landlord.  But  in  the  country 
power  easily  gathers- into  the  hands  of  the  few. 
The  labourer's  opportunities  and  means  of  work, 
his  home,  his  very  standing-ground,  are  often  all 
of  them  the  property  of  one  man.  In  the  coun- 
try the  rich  have  a  real  power  of  life  and  death, 
and  are  less  hampered  by  competition  with  each 
other  and  by  the  force  of  public  opinion.  One 
man  cannot  hold  a  city  in  fee,  but  one  man  can 


538 


THE   BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


affect  for  evil  or  for  good  almost  as  large  a 
population  as  a  city's,  when  it  is  scattered  across 
a  countryside. 

This  is  precisely  the  state  of  wrong  which 
Micah  attacks.  The  social  changes  of  the 
eighth  century  in  Israel  were  peculiarly  favoura- 
ble to  its  growth.*  The  enormous  increase  of 
money  which  had  been  produced  by  the  trade  of 
Uzziah's  reign  threatened  to  overwhelm  the  sim- 
ple economy  under  which  every  family  had  its 
croft.  As  in  many  another  land  and  period,  the 
social  problem  was  the  descent  of  wealthy  men, 
land-hungry,  upon  the  rural  districts.  They 
made  the  poor  their  debtors,  and  bought  out  the 
peasant  proprietors.  They  absorbed  into  their 
power  numbers  of  homes,  and  had  at  their  in- 
dividual disposal  the  lives  and  the  happiness  of 
thousands  of  their  fellow-countrymen.  Isaiah 
had  cried.  "  Woe  upon  them  that  join  house  to 
house,  that  lay  field  to  field,  till  there  be  no 
room  "  for  the  common  people,  and  the  inhab- 
itants of  the  rural  districts  grow  fewer  and 
fewer.f  Micah  pictures  the  recklessness  of  those 
plutocrats — the  fatal  ease  with  which  their  wealth 
enabled  them  to  dispossess  the  yeomen  of 
Judah. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Woe  to  them  that  plan  mischief, 
And  on  their  beds  work  out  evil ! 

As  soon  as  morning  breaks  they  put  it  into  execution, 
For— it  lies  to  the  power  of  their  hands ! 

They  covet  fields  and — seize  them, 
Houses  and — lift  them  up. 
So  they  crush  a  good  man  and  his  home, 
A  man  and  his  heritage.'' 

This  is  the  evil — the  ease  with  which  wrong  is 
done  in  the  country!  "  It  lies  to  the  power  of 
their  hands:  they  covet  and  seize."  And  what 
is  it  that  they  get  so  easily — not  merely  field  and 
house,  so  much  land  and  stone  and  lime:  it  is 
human  life,  with  all  that  makes  up  personal  in- 
dependence, and  the  security  of  home  and  of  the 
family.  That  these  should  be  at  the  mercy  of 
the  passion  or  the  caprice  of  one  man — this  is 
what  stirs  the  prophet's  indignation.  We  shall 
presently  see  how  the  tyranny  of  wealth  was 
aided  by  the  bribed  and  unjust  judges  of  the 
country;  and  how,  growing  reckless,  the  rich  be- 
took themselves,  as  the  lords  of  the  feudal  sys- 
tem in  Europe  continually  did,  to  the  basest  of 
assaults  upon  the  persons  of  peaceful  men  and 
women.  But  meantime  Micah  feels  that  by 
themselves  the  economic  wrongs  explain  and 
justify  the  doom  impending  on  the  nation. 
When  this  doom  falls,  by  the  Divine  irony  of 
God  it  shall  take  the  form  of  a  conquest  of  the 
land  by  the  heathen,  and  the  disposal  of  these 
great  estates  to  the  toreigner. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah  : 
Behold,  I  am  planning  evil  against  this  race, 
From  which  ye  shall  not  withdraw  your  necks, 
Nor  walk  upright  : 
For  an  evil  time  it  is  !  t 


To  the  rebel  our  fields  are  allotted.' 

So  thou  Shalt  have  none  to  cast  the  line  by  lot 

In  the  congregation  of  Jehovah." 

No  restoration  at  time  of  Jubilee  for  lands 
taken  away  in  this  fashion!  There  will  be  no 
congregation  of  Jehovah  left! 

At  this  point  the  prophet's  pessimist  discourse, 
that  must  have  galled  the  rich,  is  interrupted  by 
their  clamour  to  him  to  stop. 

The  rich  speak: — 

"  Prate  not,  they  prate,  let  none  prate  of  such  things  ! 
Revilings  will  never  cease  ! 

0  thou  that  speakest  thus  to  the  house  of  Jacob,* 
Is  the  spirit  of  Jehovah  cut  short  ? 

Or  are  such  His  doings  ? 

Shall  not  His  words  mean  well  with  him  that  walketh 
uprightly  ? " 

So  the  rich,  in  their  immoral  confidence  that 
Jehovah  was  neither  weakened  nor  could  permit 
such  a  disaster  to  fall  on  His  own  people,  tell 
the  prophet  that  his  sentence  of  doom  on  the 
nation,  and  especially  on  themselves,  is  absurd, 
impossible.  They  cry  the  eternal  cry  of  Re- 
spectability: "  God  can  mean  no  harm  to  the 
like  of  us!  His  words  are  good  to  them  that 
walk  uprightly — and  we  are  conscious  of  being 
such.  What  you,  prophet,  have  charged  us  with 
are  nothing  but  natural  transactions."  The 
Lord  Himself  has  His  answer  ready.  Upright 
indeed!    They  have  been  unprovoked  plunderers! 

God  speaks: — 

"  But  ye  are  the  foes  of  My  people, 
Rising  against  those  that  are  peaceful  ; 
The  mantle  ye  strip  from  them  that  walk  quietly  by, 
Averse  to  war  !  t 

Women  of  My  people  ye  tear  from  their  happy  homes,^ 
From  their  children  ye  take  My  glory  for  ever. 
Rise  and  begone— for  this  is  no  resting-place  ! 
Because  of  the  uncleanness  that  bringeth  destruction, 
■     Destruction  incurable." 

Of  the  outrages  on  the  goods  of  honest  men, 
and  the  persons  of  women  and  children,  which 
are  possible  in  a  time  of  peace,  when  the  rich 
are  tyrannous  and  abetted  by  mercenary  judges 
and  prophets,  we  have  an  illustration  analogous 
to  Micah's  in  the  complaint  of  Peace  in  Lang- 
land's  vision  of  English  society  in  the  fourteenth 
century.  The  parallel  to  our  prophet's  words  is 
very  striking: — 

"  And  thanne  come  Pees  into  parlement  •  and  put  forth  a 

bille. 
How  Wrongeageines  his  wille  •  had  his  wyf  taken. 
'Both    my    gees    and     my    grys§    'his    gadelyngesj 

feccheth  ; 

1  dar  noughte  for  fere  of  hym  •  fyghte  ne  chyde. 

He  borwed  of  me   bayard^  "he  broughte   hym  home 

nevre, 
Ne  no  ferthynge  ther-fore  •  for  naughte  I  couthe  plede. 
He  meynteneth  his  men  •  to  marther  myne  hewen,** 
Forstalleth  my  feyrestt  "  and  fighteth  in  my  chepynge, 

*  Uncertain.  "Is  the  house  of  Jacob  .  .  .  ?"  "  Well- 
ftausen^.  "  What  a  saying,  O  house  of  Jacob  ?  "  (Ewald 
and  Guthe).  In  the  latter  case  the  interruption  of  the 
rich  ceases  with  the  previous  line,  and  this  one  is  the 
beginning  of  the  prophet's  answer  to  them. 

tSo  we  may  conjecture  the  very  obscure  details  of  a 
verse  whose  general  meaning,  however,  is  evident.    For 


In  that  day  shall  they  raise  a  taunt-song  against  you         /«'^«  ^^""^'=  s^uc-c.,  u.^^.^.u^,  .■.w.v...,  ..  .v,...,,..    x-w 
And  wail  out  the  wailing  ("  It  is  done  ") ;  §  and  say,  pllOnXI  read  p  DHNV    The  LXX.  takes  HOPK'  as  "  peace 


We  be  utterly  undone 
My  people's  estate  is  measured  off !  || 
How  they  take  it  away  from  me  !1f 

*  See  above,  pp.  450  ff. 

tisa.  V.  8. 

%  C).  Amosv.  13. 

§  "  Fuit."  But  whether  this  is  a  gloss,  as  of  the  name  of 
the  dirge  or  of  the  tune,  or  a  part  of  the  text,  is  uncer- 
tain.    Query:  "lONI  r\r\T  Hmi. 

II  So  LXX  ,  and  adds  :  "  with  the  measuring  rope." 

^  Or  (after  the  LXX.)  "there  is  none  to  give  it  back  to 
me." 


and  not  as  "  cloak,"  for  which  there  seems  to  be  no  place 
beside  "ITX  (or  rmX)-  Wellhausen  with  further  altera- 
tions renders :  "  But  ye  come  forward  as  enemies  against 
My  people  ;  from  good  friends  ye  rob  their  .  .  .  ,  from 
peaceful  wanderers  war-booty." 

t  Wellhausen  reads  ''JQ  for  n''3.  "tenderly  bred  chil- 
dren," another  of  the  many  emendations  which  he  pro- 
poses in  the  interests  of  complete  parallelism.  See  the 
Preface,  p.  435. 

§  Little  pigs. 

II  Fellows.  **  Servants. 

^  A  horse.  tt  Fairs,  markets. 


Micah  ii.,  iii.] 


THE    PROPHET    OF    THE    POOR. 


539 


And  breketh  up  my  bernes  dore  •  andbereth  aweye  my 

whete, 
And  taketh  me  but  a  taile  *  '  for  ten  quarters  of  otes. 
And  yet  he  bet  me  ther-to  ■  and  lyth  bi  my  mayde, 
I  nam  t  noughte  hardy  for  hym  •  uneth  t  to  loke.'  " 

They  pride  themselves  that  all  is  stable  and 
God  is  with  them.  How  can  such  a  state  of 
affairs  be  stable!  They  feel  at  ease,  yet  injus- 
tice can  never  mean  rest.  God  has  spoken  the 
final  sentence,  but  with  a  rare  sarcasm  the 
prophet  adds  his  comment  on  the  scene.  These 
rich  men  had  been  flattered  into  their  religious 
security  by  hireling  prophets,  who  had  opposed 
himself.  As  they  leave  the  presence  of  God, 
having  heard  their  sentence,  Micah  looks  after 
them  and  muses  in  quiet  prose. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Yea,  if  one  whose  walk  is  wind  and  falsehood 
were  to  try  to  cozen  "  thee,  saying,  "  I  will  bab- 
ble to  thee  of  wine  and  strong  drink,  then  he 
might  be  the  prophet  of  such  a  people." 

At  this  point  in  chap.  ii.  there  have  somehow 
slipped  into  the  text  two  verses  (12,  13),  which 
all  are  agreed  do  not  belong  to  it,  and  for  which 
we  must  find  another  place. §  They  speak  of  a 
return  from  the  Exile,  and  interrupt  the  con- 
nection between  ver.  11  and  the  first  verse  of 
chap.  iii.  With  the  latter  Micah  begins  a  series 
of  three  oracles,  which  give  the  substance  of  his 
own  prophesying  in  contrast  to  that  of  the  false 
prophets  whom  he  has  just  been  satirising.  He 
lias  told  us  what  they  say,  and  he  now  begins 
the  first  of  his  own  oracles  with  the  words,  "  But 
1  said."  It  is  an  attack  upon  the  authorities  of 
the  nation,  whom  the  false  prophets  flatter. 
Micah  speaks  very  plainly  to  them.  Their  busi- 
ness is  to  know  justice,  and  yet  they  love  wrong. 
They  flay  the  people  with  their  exactions;  they 
o  Jt  up  the  people  like  meat. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  But  I  said, 
Hear  now,  O  chiefs  of  Jacob, 
And  rulers  of  the  house  of  Israel : 
Is  it  not  yours  to  know  justice  ?— 
Haters  of  good  and  lovers  of  evil, 
Tearing  their  hide  from  upon  them 

^  le  points  to  the  people) 

And  their  flesh  from  the  bones  of  them  ; 

And  who  devour  the  flesh  of  my  people. 

And  their  hide  they  have  stripped  from  them 

And  their  bones  have  they  cleft, 

And  served  it  up  as  if  from  a  pot, 

Like  meat  from  the  thick  of  the  caldron  ! 

At  that  time  shall  they  cry  to  Jehovah, 

And  He  will  not  answer  them  ; 

But  hide  His  face  from  them  at  that  time, 

Because  they  have  aggravated  their  deeds." 

These  words  of  Micah  are  terribly  strong,  but 
there  have  been  many  other  ages  and  civilisations 
than  his  own  of  which  they  have  been  no  more 
than  true.  "  They  crop  us,"  said  a  French  peas- 
art  of  the  lords  of  the  great  Louis'  time,  "  as  the 
sheep  crops  grass."  "  They  treat  us  like  their 
food,"  said  another  on  the  eve  of  the  Revolution. 

Is  there  nothing  of  the  same  with  ourselves? 

'•A  tally. 
•Am  not. 
;:  Scarcely. 
Ii"  I  will  gather,  gather  thee,  O  Jacob,  in  mass, 

I  will  bring,  bring  together  the  Remnant  of  Israel ! 

I  will  set  them  like  sheep  in  a  fold, 

Like  a  flock  in  the  midst  of  the  pasture. 

They  shall  hum  with  men  ! 

The  breach-breaker  hath  gone  up  before  them  : 

They  have  broken  the  breach,  have  carried  the  gate, 

and  are  gone  out  by  it ; 
And   their  king  hath  passed   on  before  them,  and 
Jehovah  at  their  head." 


While  Micah  spoke  he  had  wasted  lives  and  bent 
backs  before  him.  His  speech  is  elliptic  till  you 
see  his  finger  pointing  at  them.  Pinched  peas- 
ant faces  peer  between  all  his  words  and  fill  the 
ellipses.  And  among  the  living  poor  to-day  are 
there  not  starved  and  bitten  faces — bodies  with 
the  blood  sucked  from  them,  with  the  Divine 
image  crushed  out  of  them?  Brothers,  we  can- 
not explain  all  of  these  by  vice.  Drunkenness 
and  unthrift  do  account  for  much;  but  how  much 
more  is  explicable  only  by  the  following  facts! 
Many  men  among  us  are  able  to  live  in  fashiona- 
ble streets  and  keep  their  families  comfortable 
only  by  paying  their  employes  a  wage  upon 
which  it  is  impossible  for  men  to  be  strong  or 
women  to  be  virtuous.  Are  those  not  using 
these  as  their  food?  They  tell  us  that  if  they 
are  to  give  higher  wages  they  must  close  their 
business,  and  cease  paying  wages  at  all;  and  they 
are  right  if  they  themselves  continue  to  live  on 
the  scale  they  do.  As  long  as  many  families 
are  maintained  in  comfort  by  the  profits  of  busi- 
nesses in  which  some  or  all  of  the  employes 
work  for  less  than  they  can  nourish  and  repair 
their  bodies  upon,  the  simple  fact  is  that  the 
one  set  are  feeding  upon  the  other  set.  It  may 
be  inevitable,  it  may  be  the  fault  of  the  system 
and  not  of  the  individual,  it  may  be  that  to  break 
up  the  system  would  mean  to  make  things  worse 
than  ever — but  all  the  same  the  truth  is  clear 
that  many  families  of  the  middle  class,  and  some 
of  the  very  wealthiest  of  the  land,  are  nourished 
by  the  waste  of  the  lives  of  the  poor.  Now  and 
again  the  fact  is  acknowledged  with  as  much 
shamelessness  as  was  shown  by  any  tyrant  in 
the  days  of  Micah.  To  a  large  employer  of 
labour  who  was  complaining  that  his  employes, 
by  Kefusing  to  live  at  the  low  scale  of  Belgian 
workmen,  were  driving  trade  from  this  country, 
the  present  writer  once  said:  "Would  it  not 
meet  your  wishes  if,  instead  of  your  workmen 
being  levelled  down,  the  Belgians  were  levelled 
up?  This  would  make  the  competition  fair  be- 
tween you  and  the  employers  in  Belgium."  His 
answer  was,  "  I  care  not  so  long  as  I  get  my 
profits."  He  was  a  religious  man,  a  liberal 
giver  to  his  Church,  and  he  died  leaving  more 
than  one  hundred  thousand  pounds. 

Micah's  tyrants,  too,  had  religion  to  support 
them.  A  number  of  the  hireling  prophets,  whom 
we  have  seen  both  Amos  and  Hosea  attack,  gave 
their  blessing  to  this  social  system,  which 
crushed  the  poor,  for  they  shared  its  profits. 
They  lived  upon  the  alms  of  the  rich,  and  flat- 
tered according  as  they  were  fed.  To  them 
Micah  devotes  the  second  oracle  of  chap,  iii., 
and  we  find  confirmed  by  his  words  the  prin- 
ciple we  laid  down  before,  that  in  that  age  the 
one  great  difference  between  the  false  and  the 
true  prophet  was  what  it  has  been  in  every  age 
since  then  till  now — an  ethical  difference;  and 
not  a  difference  of  dogma,  or  tradition,  or  ec- 
clesiastical note.  The  false  prophet  spoke,  con- 
sciously or  unconsciously,  for  himself  and  his 
living.  He  sided  with  the  rich;  he  shut  his 
eyes  to  the  social  condition  of  the  people;  he  did 
not  attack  the  sins  of  the  day.  This  made  him 
false — robbed  him  of  insight  and  the  power  of 
prediction.  But  the  true  prophet  exposed  the 
sins  of  his  people.  Ethical  insight  and  courage, 
burning  indignation  of  wrong,  clear  vision  of  the 
facts  of  the  day — this  was  what  Jehovah's  spirit 
put  into  him,  this  was  what  Micah  felt  to  be 
inspiration. 


540 


THE  "BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


The  prophet  speaks: — 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  against  the  prophets  who  lead  my 
people  astray. 

Who  while  they  have  aught  between  their  teeth  pro- 
claim peace, 

But  against  him  who  will  not  lay  to  their  mouths  they 
sanctify  war  ! 

Wherefore  night  shall  be  yours  without  vision, 

And  yours  shall  be  darkness  without  divination  ; 

And  the  sun  shall  go  down  on  the  prophets, 

And  the  day  shall  darken  about  them  ; 

And  the  seers  shall  be  put  to  the  blush, 

And  the  diviners  be  ashamed  : 

All  of  them  shall  cover  the  beard. 

For  there  shall  be  no  answer  from  God. 

But  I— I  am  full  of  power  by  the  spirit  of  Jehovah, 
and  justice  and  might, 

To  declare  to  Jacob  his  transgressions  and  to  Israel  his 
sin." 

In  the  third  oracle  of  this  chapter  rulers  and 
prophets  are  combined — how  close  the  con- 
spiracy between  them!  It  is  remarkable  that,  in 
harmony  with  Isaiah,  Micah  speaks  no  word 
against  the  king.  But  evidently  Hezekiah  had 
not  power  to  restrain  the  nobles  and  the  rich. 
When  this  oracle  was  uttered  it  was  a  time  of 
peace,  and  the  lavish  building,  which  we  have 
seen  to  be  so  marked  a  characteristic  of  Israel 
in  the  eighth  century,*  was  in  process.  Jeru- 
salem was  larger  and  finer  than  ever.  Ah,  it 
was  a  building  of  God's  own  city  in  blood! 
Judges,  priests,  and  prophets  were  all  alike  mer- 
cenary, and  the  poor  were  oppressed  for  a  re- 
ward. No  walls,  however  sacred,  could  stand 
on  such  foundations.  Did  they  say  that  they 
built  her  so  grandly,  for  Jehovah's  sake?  Did 
they  believe  her  to  be  inviolate  because  He  was 
in  her?  They  should  see.  Zion — yes,  Zion — 
should  be  ploughed  like  a  field,  and  the  Moun- 
tain of  the  Lord's  Temple  become  desolate. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Hear  now  this,  O  chiefs  of  the  house  of  Jacob, 
And  rulers  of  the  house  of  Israel, 
Who  spurn  justice  and  twist  all  that  is  straight, 
Building  Zion  in  blood,  and  Jerusalem  with  crime  ! 
Her  chiefs  give  judgment  for  a  bribe, 
And  her  priests  oracles  for  a  reward, 
And  her  prophets  divine  for  silver  ; 
And  on  Jehovah  they  lean,  saying  : 
'  Is  not  Jehovah  in  the  midst  of  us? 
Evil  cannot  come  at  us.' 
Therefore  for  your  sakes  shall  Zion  be  ploughed  like  a 

field. 
And  Jerusalem  become  heaps, 
And  the  Mount  of  the  House  mounds  in  a  jungle." 

It  is  extremely  difficult  for  us  to  place  our- 
selves in  a  state  of  society  in  which  bribery  is 
prevalent,  and  the  fingers  both  of  justice  and 
of  religion  are  gilded  by  their  suitors.  But  this 
corruption  has  always  been  common  in  the  East. 
"  An  Oriental  state  can  never  altogether  pre- 
vent the  abuse  by  which  officials,  small  and 
great,  enrich  themselves  in  illicit  ways."f  The 
strongest  government  takes  the  bribery  for 
granted,  and  periodically  prunes  the  rank  for- 
tunes of  its  great  officials.  A  weak  government 
lets  them  alone.  But  in  either  case  the  poor 
suffer  from  unjust  taxation  and  from  laggard  or 
perverted  justice.  Bribery  has  always  been 
found,  even  in  the  more  primitive  and  puritan 
forms  of  Semitic  life.  Mr.  Doughty  has  borne 
testimony  with  regard  to  this  among  the  austere 
Wahabees  of  Central  Arabia.  '"  When  I  asked 
if  there  were  no  handling  of  bribes  at  Hayil  by 
those  who  are  nigh  the  prince's  ear,  it  was  an- 
swered, '  Nay.'  The  Byzantine  corruption  can- 
not enter  into  the  eternal  and  noble  simplicity  of 
this  people's  (airy)  life,  in  the  poor  nomad  coun- 

*  See  above,  p.  450. 

tNoldeke,  "  Sketches  from  Eastern  History,"  translated 
by  Black,  pp.  134  f. 


try;  but  (we  have  seen)  the  art  is  not  unknown 
to  the  subtle-headed  Shammar  princes,  who 
thereby  help  themselves  with  the  neighbour  Tur- 
kish governments."  *  The  bribes  of  the  ruler 
of  Hayil  "  are,  according  to  the  shifting 
weather  of  the  world,  to  great  Ottoman  gov- 
ernment men;  and  now  on  account  of  Kheybar, 
he  was  gilding  some  of  their  crooked  fingers  in 
Medina."!  Nothing  marks  the  difference  of 
Western  government  more  than  the  absence  of 
all  this,  especially  from  our  courts  of  justice. 
Yet  the  improvement  has  only  come  about  within 
comparatively  recent  centuries.  What  a  large 
space,  for  instance,  does  Langland  give  to  the 
arraigning  of  "  Mede,"  the  corrupter  of  all  au- 
thorities and  influences  in  the  society  of  his  day! 
Let  us  quote  his  words,  for  again  they  provide  a 
most  exact  parallel  to  Micah's,  and  may  enable 
us  to  realise  a  state  of  life  so  contrary  to  our 
own.  It  is  Conscience  who  arraigns  Mede  be- 
fore the  King: — 

"By    ihesus    with    here     jeweles    "  youre   justices    she 

shendeth.t 
And  lith  §  agein  the  lawe  "  and  letteth  hym  the  gate. 
That  feith  may  noughte  have  his  forth  ||  •  here  floreines 

go  so  thikke, 
She  ledeth  the  lawe  as  hire  list  •  and  lovedays  maketh 
And  doth  men  lese  thorw  hire  love  '  that  law  myghte 

Wynne, 
The  mase  t  for  a  mene  man  ■  though  he  mote  **  hir  eure. 
Law  is  so  lordeliche  •  and  loth  to  make  ende, 
Without  presentz  or  pens  ft  "  she  pleseth  wel  fewe. 

For  pore  men   moweH  have  no  powere  "  to  pleyne  §§ 

hem  though  thei  smerte  ; 
Suche  a  maistre  is  Mede  ■  amonge  men  of  gode."  [|| 


CHAPTER  XXVIL 

ON  TIME'S  HORIZON. 

MiCAH  iv.  1-7. 

The  immediate  prospect  of  Zion's  desolation 
which  closes  chap.  iii.  is  followed  in  the  opening 
of  chap.  iv.  by  an  ideal  picture  of  her  exaltation 
and  supremacy  "  in  the  issue  of  the  days."  We 
can  hardly  doubt  that  this  arrangement  has  been, 
made  of  purpose,  nor  can  we  deny  that  it  is  natu- 
ral and  artistic.  Whether  it  be  due  to  Micah  him- 
self, or  whether  he  wrote  the  second  passage,  are 
questions  we  have  already  discussed. IfTf  Like 
so  many  others  of  their  kind,  they  cannot  be 
answered  with  certainty,  far  less  with  dogmatism. 
But  I  repeat,  I  see  no  conclusive  reason  for 
denying  either  to  the  circumstances  of  Micah's 
times  or  to  the  principles  of  their  prophecy  the 
possibility  of  such  a  hope  as  inspires  chap.  iv. 
1-4.  Remember  how  the  prophets  of  the  eighth 
century  identified  Jehovah  with  supreme  and  uni- 
versal righteousness;  remember  how  Amos  ex- 
plicitly condemned  the  aggravations  of  war  and 
slavery  among  the  heathen  as  sins  against  Him, 
and  how  Isaiah  claimed  the  future  gains  of 
Tyrian  commerce  as  gifts  for  His  sanctuary;  re- 
member how  Amos  heard  His  voice  come  forth 
from  Jerusalem,  and  Isaiah  counted  upon  the 
eternal  inviolateness  of  His  shrine  and  city, — and 
you  will  not  think  it  impossible  for  a  third 
Judean  prophet  of  that  age,  whether  he  was 
Micah  or  another,  to  have  drawn  the  prospect 
of  Jerusalem  which  now  opens  before  us. 

*  "  Arabia  Deserta,"  I.  607.     **  Summon. 

f/d.,  II.  eo.  tt  Pence. 

t  Ruins.  tt  May. 

SLieth.  S§  Complain. 

II  Course.  fill  Substance  or  property. 

*f  Confusion.  ^^  See  above,  pp.  532  fl. 


Micah  iv.  1-7.] 


ON    TIME'S    HORIZON. 


541 


It  is  the  far-ofif  horizon  of  time,  which,  like 
the  spatial  horizon,  always  seems  a  fixed  and 
eternal  line,  but  as  constantly  shifts  with  the 
shifting  of  our  standpoint  or  elevation.  Every 
prophet  has  his  own  vision  of  "  the  latter  days  "; 
seldom  is  that  prospect  the  same.  Determined 
by  the  circumstances  of  the  seer,  by  the  desires 
these  prompt  or  only  partially  fulfil,  it  changes 
from  age  to  age.  The  ideal  is  always  shaped  by 
the  real,  and  in  this  vision  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury there  is  no  exception.  This  is  not  any  of 
the  ideals  of  later  ages,  when  the  evil  was  the 
oppression  of  the  Lord's  people  by  foreign 
armies  or  their  scattering  in  exile;  it  is  not,  in 
contrast  to  these,  the  spectacle  of  the  armies  of 
the  Lord  of  Hosts  imbrued  in  the  blood  of  the 
heathen,  or  of  the  columns  of  returning  captives 
filling  all  the  narrow  roads  to  Jerusalem,  "  like 
streams  in  the  south":  nor,  again,  is  it  a  nation 
of  priests  gathering  about  a  rebuilt  temple  and 
a  restored  ritual.  But  because  the  pain  of  the 
greatest  minds  of  the  eighth  century  was  the 
contradiction  between  faith  in  the  God  of  Zion 
as  Universal  Righteousness  and  the  experience 
that,  nevertheless,  Zion  had  absolutely  no  influ- 
ence upon  surrounding  nations,  this  vision 
shows  a  day  when  Zion's  influence  will  be 
as  great  as  her  right,  and  from  far  and  wide 
the  nations  whom  Amos  has  condemned  for 
their  transgressions  against  Jehovah  will  ac- 
knowledge His  law,  and  be  drawn  ^to  Jeru- 
salem to  learn  of  Him.  Observe  that  noth- 
ing is  said  of  Israel  going  forth  to  teach  the 
nations  the  law  of  the  Lord.  That  is  the  ideal 
of  a  later  age,  when  Jews  were  scattered  across 
the  world.  Here,  in  conformity  with  the  experi- 
ence of  a  still  untravelled  people,  we  see  the 
Gentiles  drawing  in  upon  the  Mountain  of  the 
House  of  the  Lord.  With  the  same  lofty  im- 
partiality which  distinguishes  the  oracles  of 
Amos  on  the  heathen,  the  prophet  takes  no  ac- 
count of  their  enmity  to  Israel;  nor  is  there  any 
talk — such  as  later  generations  were  almost 
forced  by  the  hostility  of  neighbouring  tribes 
to  indulge  in — of  politically  subduing  them  to  the 
king  in  Zion.  Jehovah  will  arbitrate  between 
them,  and  the  result  shall  be  the  institution  of  a 
great  peace,  with  no  special  political  privilege 
to  Israel,  unless  this  be  understood  in  ver.  5, 
which  speaks  of  such  security  to  life  as  was  im- 
possible, at  that  time  at  least,  in  all  borderlands 
of  Israel.  But  among  the  heathen  themselves 
there  will  be  a  resting  from  war:  the  factions 
and  ferocities  of  that  wild  Semitic  world,  which 
Amos  so  vividly  characterised,*  shall  cease.  In 
all  this  there  is  nothing  beyond  the  possibility 
of  suggestion  by  the  circumstances  of  the  eighth 
century  or  by  the  spirit  of  its  prophecy. 

A  prophet  speaks: — 

"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  issue  of  the  days,t 
That  the   Mount  of  the   House  of  Jehovah  shall  be 

established  on  the  tops  J  of  the  mountains, 
And  lifted  shall  it  be  above  the  hills, 
And  peoples  shall  flow  to  it, 

*See  above,  chap.  vii. 

t  n^inX  is  the  hindmost,  furthest,  ultimate,  whether 
of  space  cPsalm  cx.\xix.  q  :  "  the  uttermost  part  of  the 
sea."),  or  of  time  (Deut.  xi.  12:  "the  end  of  the  year"). 
It  is  the  end  as  compared  with  the  beginning,  the  sequel 
■with  the  start,  the  future  with  the  present  (Job  xlii.  12). 
In  proverbs  it  is  chiefly  used  in  the  moral  sense  of  issue 
or  result.  Hut  it  chiefly  occurs  in  the  phrase  used  here, 
D"'iO''n  n^"int<.  not  "the  latter  days,"  as  A.  V.,  nor  ulti- 
mate days,  for  in  these  phrases  lurks  the  idea  of  time 
having  an  end,  but  the  "after-days"  (Cheyne),  or,  better 
still,  the  "the  issue  of  the  days." 

JLXX. 


And  many  nations  shall  go  and  say  : 
•  Come,  and  let  us  up  to  the  Mount  of  Jehovah, 
And  to  the  House  of  the  God  of  Jacob, 
That  He  may  teach  us  of  His  ways, 
And  we  will  walk  in  His  paths.' 
For  from  Zion  goeth  fortli  the  law. 
And  the  word  of  Jehovah  from  out  of  Jerusalem  i 
And  He  shall  judge  between  many  peoples. 
And  decide  *  for  strong  nations  far  and  wide  -.t 
And   they   shall   hammer  their  swords  into  plough- 
shares. 
And  their  spears  into  pruning-hooks  : 
They  shall  not  lift  up,  nation  against  nation,  a  sword, 
And  they  shall  not  any  more  learn  war. 
Every  man  shall  dwell  under  his  vine 
And  under  his  fig-tree, 
And  none  shall  make  afraid  ; 
For  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  has  spoken." 

What  connection  this  last  verse  is  intended  to 
have  with  the  preceding  is  not  quite  obvious. 
It  may  mean  that  every  family  among  the  Gen- 
tiles shall  dwell  in  peace;  or,  as  suggested  above, 
that  with  the  voluntary  disarming  of  the  sur- 
rounding heathendom,  Israel  herself  shall  dwell 
secure,  in  no  fear  of  border  raids  and  slave- 
hunting  expeditions,  with  which  especially 
Micah's  Shephelah  and  other  borderlands  were 
familiar.  The  verse  does  not  occur  in  Isaiah's 
quotation  of  the  three  which  precede  it.  We  can 
scarcely  suppose,  fain  though  we  may  be  to  do 
so,  that  Micah  added  the  verse  in  order  to  ex- 
hibit the  future  correction  of  the  evils  he  has 
been  deploring  in  chap,  iii.:  the  insecurity  of  the 
householder  in  Israel  before  the  unscrupulous 
land-grabbing  of  the  wealthy.  Such  are  not  the 
evils  from  which  this  passage  prophesies  re- 
demption. It  deals  only,  like  the  first  oracles 
of  Amos,  with  the  relentlessness  and  ferocity  of 
the  heathen:  under  Jehovah's  arbitrament  these 
shall  be  at  peace,  and  whether  among  themselves 
or  in  Israel,  hitherto  so  exposed  to  their  raids, 
men  shall  dwell  in  unalarmed  possession  of  their 
houses  and  fields.  Security  from  war,  not  from 
social  tyranny,  is  what  is  promised. 

The  following  verse  (5)  gives  in  a  curious  way 
the  contrast  of  the  present  to  that  future  in 
which  all  men  will  own  the  sway  of  one  God. 
"  For  "  at  the  present  time  "  all  the  nations  are 
walking  each  in  the  name  of  his  God,  but  we 
go  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  for  ever  and  aye." 

To  which  vision,  complete  in  itself,  there  has 
been  added  by  another  hand,  of  what  date  we 
cannot  tell,  a  further  effect  of  God's  blessed  in- 
fluence. To  peace  among  men  shall  be  added 
healing  and  redemption,  the  ingathering  of  the 
outcast  and  the  care  of  the  crippled. 

"  In  that  day — 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah — 
I  will  gather  the  halt, 
And  the  cast-off  I  will  bring  in,  and  all  that  I  have 

afflicted  ; 
And  I  will  make  the  halt  for  a  Remnant, t 
And  her  that  was  weakened  §  into  a  strong  people, 
And  Jehovah  shall  reign  over  them 
In  the  Mount  of  Zion  from  now  and  for  ever." 

Whatever  be  the  origin  of  the  separate  oracles 
which  compose  this  passage  (iv.  1-7),  they 
form  as  they  now  stand  a  beautiful  whole,  rising 
from  Peace  through  Freedom  to  Love.  They 
begin  with  obedience  to  God  and  they  culminate 
in  the  most  glorious  service  wliich  God  or  man 
may  undertake,  the  service  of  saving  the  lost. 
See  how  the  Divine  spiral  ascends.  We  have, 
first.  Religion  the  centre  and  origin  of  all,  com- 
pelling the  attention  of  men  by  its  historical  evi- 
dence of  justice  and  righteousness.     We  have  the 

*  Or  "arbitrate." 

t  Literally  :  "  up  to  far  away." 

X  That  which  shall  abide  and  be  the  stock  of  the  future. 

§LXX.  "cast  off." 


542 


THE  :book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


world's  willingness  to  learn  of  it.  We  have  the 
results  in  the  widening  brotherhood  of  nations, 
in  universal  Peace,  in  Labour  freed  from  War, 
and  with  none  of  her  resources  absorbed  by  the 
conscriptions  and  armaments  which  in  our  times 
are  deemed  necessary  for  enforcing  peace.  We 
have  the  universal  diffusion  and  security  of  Prop- 
erty, the  prosperity  and  safety  of  the  humblest 
home.  And,  finally,  we  have  this  free  strength 
and  wealth  inspired  by  the  example  of  God  Him- 
self to  nourish  the  broken  and  to  gather  in  the 
forwandered. 

Such  is  the  ideal  world,  seen  and  promised 
two  thousand  five  hundred  years  ago,  out  of  as 
real  an  experience  of  human  sin  and  failure  as 
ever  mankind  awoke  to.  Are  we  nearer  the 
Vision  to-day,  or  does  it  still  hang  upon  time's 
horizon,  that  line  which  seems  so  stable  from 
every  seer's  point  of  view,  but  which  moves  from 
the  generations  as  fast  as  they  travel  to  it? 

So  far  from  this  being  so,  there  is  much  in 
the  Vision  that  is  not  only  nearer  us  than  it  was 
to  the  Hebrew  prophets,  and  not  only  abreast 
of  us,  but  actually  achieved  and  behind  us,  as 
we  live  and  strive  still  onward.  Yes,  brothers, 
actually  behind  us!  History  has  in  part  ful- 
filled the  promised  influence  of  religion  upon  the 
nations.  The  Unity  of  God  has  been  owned,  and 
the  civilised  peoples  bow  to  the  standards  of 
justice  and  of  mercy  first  revealed  from  Mount 
Zion.  "  Many  nations  "  and  "  powerful  na- 
tions "  acknowledge  the  arbitrament  of  the  God 
of  the  Bible.  We  have  had  revealed  that  High 
Fatherhood  of  which  every  family  in  heaven  and 
earth  is  named;  and  wherever  that  is  believed  the 
brotherhood  of  men  is  confessed.  We  have  seen 
Sin,  that  profound  discord  in  man  and  estrange- 
ment from  God,  of  which  all  human  hatreds  and 
malices  are  the  fruit,  atoned  for  and  reconciled 
by  a  Sacrifice  in  face  of  which  human  pride  and 
passion  stand  abashed.  The  first  part  of  the 
Vision  is  fulfilled.  "  The  nations  stream  to  the 
God  of  Jerusalem  and  His  Christ."  And  though 
to-day  our  Peace  be  but  a  paradox,  and  the 
"  Christian  "  nations  stand  still  from  war  not  in 
love,  but  in  fear  of  one  another,  there  are  in 
every  nation  an  increasing  number  of  men  and 
women,  with  growing  influence,  who,  without 
being  fanatics  for  peace,  or  blind  to  the  fact  that 
war  may  be  a  people's  duty  in  fulfilment  of  its 
own  destiny  or  in  relief  of  the  enslaved,  do  yet 
keep  themselves  from  foolish  forms  of  patriotism, 
and  by  their  recognition  of  each  other  across 
all  national  differences  make  sudden  and  uncon- 
sidered war  more  and  more  of  an  impossibility. 
I  write  this  in  the  sound  of  that  call  to  stand 
upon  arms  which  broke  like  thunder  upon  our 
Christmas  peace;  but,  amid  all  the  ignoble  jeal- 
ousies and  hot  rashness  which  prevail,  how  the 
air,  burned  clean  by  that  first  electric  discharge, 
has  filled  with  the  determination  that  war  shall 
not  happen  in  the  interests  of  mere  wealth  or  at 
the  caprice  of  a  tyrant!  God  help  us  to  use 
this  peace  for  the  last,  ideals  of  His  prophet! 
May  we  see,  not  that  of  which  our  modern  peace 
has  been  far  too  full,  mere  freedom  for  the  wealth 
of  the  few  to  increase  at  the  expense  of  the  mass 
of  mankind.  May  our  Peace  mean  the  gradual 
disarmament  of  the  nations,  the  increase  of  la- 
bour, the  diffusion  of  property,  and,  above  all, 
the  redemption  of  the  waste  of  the  people  and  the 
recovery  of  our  outcasts.  Without  this,  peace 
is  no  peace;  and  better  were  war  to  burn  out  by 
its  fierce  fires  those  evil  humours  of  our  secure 


comfort,  which  render  us  insensible  to  the  neec^y 
and  the  fallen  at  our  side.  Without  the  re- 
demptive forces  at  work  which  Christ  brought  to 
earth,  peace  is  no  peace;  and  the  cruelties  of 
war,  that  slay  and  mutilate  so  many,  are  as 
nothing  to  the  cruelties  of  a  peace  which  leaves 
us  insensible  to  the  outcasts  and  the  perishing, 
of  whom  there  are  so  many  even  in  our  civilisa- 
tion. 

One  application  of  the  prophecy  may  be  made 
at  this  moment.  We  are  told  by  those  who 
know  best  and  have  most  responsibility  in  the 
matter  that  an  ancient  Church  and  people  of 
Christ  are  being  left  a  prey  to  the  wrath  of  an 
infidel  tyrant,  not  because  Christendom  is  with- 
out strength  to  compel  him  to  deliver,  but  be- 
cause to  use  the  strength,  would  be  to  imperil 
the  peace,  of  Christendom.  It  is  an  ignoble 
peace  which  cannot  use  the  forces  of  redemption, 
and  with  the  cry  of  Armenia  in  our  ears  the 
Unity  of  Europe  is  but  a  mockery. 


CHAPTER  XXVin. 

THE  KING  TO  COME. 

'MiCAH  iv.  8-v. 

When  a  people  has  to  be  purged  of  long  in- 
justice, .when  some  high  aim  of  liberty  or  of 
order  has  to  be  won,  it  is  remarkable  how  often 
the  drama  of  revolution  passes  through  three 
acts.  There  is  first  the  period  of  criticism  and  of 
vision,  in  which  men  feel  discontent,  dream  of 
new  things,  and  put  their  hopes  into  systems: 
it  seems  then  as  if  the  future  were  to  come  of 
itself.  But  often  a  catastrophe,  relevant  or  ir- 
relevant, ensues:  the  visions  pale  before  a  vast 
conflagration,  and  poet,  philosopher,  and  prophet 
disappear  under  the  feet  of  a  mad  mob  of 
wreckers.  Yet  this  is  often  the  greatest  period 
of  all,  for  somewhere  in  the  midst  of  it  a  strong 
character  is  forming,  and  men,  by  the  very 
anarchy,  are  being  taught,  in  preparation  for 
him,  the  indispensableness  of  obedience  and 
loyalty.  With  their  chastened  minds  he  achieves 
the  third  act,  and  fulfils  all  of  the  early  vision 
that  God's  ordeal  by  fire  has  proved  worthy  to 
survive.  Thus  history,  when  distraught,  rallies 
again  upon  the  Man. 

To  this  law  the  prophets  of  Israel  only  gradu- 
ally gave  expression.  We  find  no  trace  of  it 
among  the  earliest  of  them;  and  in  the  essential 
faith  of  all  there  was  much  which  predisposed 
them  against  the  conviction  of  its  necessity. 
For,  on  the  one  hand,  the  seers  were  so  filled 
with  the  inherent  truth  and  inevitableness  of  their 
visions,  that  they  described  these  as  if  already 
realised;  there  was  no  room  for  a  great  figure 
to  rise  before  the  future,  for  with  a  rush  the 
future  was  upon  them.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
was  ever  a  principle  of  prophecy  that  God  is  able 
to  dispense  with  human  aid.  "  In  presence  of 
the  Divine  omnipotence  all  secondary  causes,  all 
interposition  on  the  part  of  the  creature,  fall 
away."  *  The  more  striking  is  it  that  before, 
long  the  prophets  should  have  begun,  not  only 
to  look  for  a  Man,  but  to  paint  him  as  the  ce  i- 
tral  figure  of  their  hopes.  In  Hosea,  who  h,ts 
no  such  promise,  we  already  see  the  instinct  tt 
work.  The  age  of  revolution  which  he  describits 
is  cursed  by  its  want  of  men:  there  is  no  great 
*  Schultz,  "  A.  T.  Theol.,"  p.  722. 


J 


Micah  iv.  8-v.] 


THE    KING    TO    COME. 


543 


leader  of  the  people  sent  from  God;  those  who 
come  to  the  front  are  the  creatures  of  faction 
and  party;  there  is  no  king  from  God.*  How 
different  it  had  been  in  the  great  days  of  old, 
when  God  had  ever  worked  for  Israel  through 
some  man — a  Moses,  a  Gideon,  a  Samuel,  but 
especially  a  David.  Thus  memory,  equally  with 
the  present  dearth  of  personalities,  prompted  to 
a  great  desire,  and  with  passion  Israel  waited 
for  a  Man.  The  hope  of  the  mother  for  her 
firstborn,  the  pride  of  the  father  in  his  son,  the 
eagerness  of  the  woman  for  her  lover,  the  de- 
votion of  the  slave  to  his  liberator,  the  en- 
thusiasm of  soldiers  for  their  captain — unite  these 
noblest  affections  of  the  human  heart,  and  you 
shall  yet  fail  to  reach  the  passion  and  the  glory 
with  which  prophecy  looked  for  the  King  to 
Come.  Each  age,  of  course,  expected  him  in 
the  qualities  of  power  and  character  needed  for 
its  own  troubles,  and  the  ideal  changed  from 
glory  unto  glory.  From  valour  and  victory  in 
war,  it  became  peace  and  good  government,  care 
for  the  poor  and  the  oppressed,  sympathy  with 
the  sufferings  of  the  whole  people,  but  especially 
of  the  righteous  among  them,  with  fidelity  to  the 
truth  delivered  unto  the  fathers,  and,  finally,  a 
conscience  for  the  people's  sin,  a  bearing  of  their 
punishment  and  a  travail,  for  their  spiritual  re- 
demption. But  all  these  qualities  and  functions 
were  gathered  upon  an  individual — a  Victor,  a 
King,  a  Prophet,  a  Martyr,  a  Servant  of  the 
Lord. 

Micah  stands  among  the  first,  if  he  is  not  the 
very  first,  who  thus  focussed  the  hopes  of  Israel 
upon  a  great  Redeemer;  and  his  promise  of  Him 
shares  all  the  characteristics  just  described.  In 
his  book  it  lies  next  a  number  of  brief  oracles 
with  which  we  are  unable  to  trace  its  immedi- 
ate connection.  They  differ  from  it  in  style  and 
rhythm:  they  are  in  verse,  while  it  seems  to  be 
in  prose.  They  do  not  appear  to  have  been  ut- 
tered along  with  it.  But  they  reflect  the  troubles 
out  of  which  the  Hero  is  expected  to  emerge, 
and  the  deliverance  which  He  shall  accomplish, 
though  at  first  they  picture  the  latter  without  any 
hint  of  Himself.  They  apparently  describe  an  in- 
vasion which  is  actually  in  course,  rather  than 
one  which  is  near  and  inevitable;  and  if  so  they 
can  only  date  from  Sennacherib's  campaign 
against  Judah  in  701  b.  c.  Jerusalem  is  in  siege, 
standing  alone  in  the  land,t  like  o^ne  of  those 
solitary  towers  with  folds  round  them  which 
were  built  here  and  there  upon  the  border  pas- 
tures of  Israel  for  defence  of  the  flock  against 
the  raiders  of  the  desert. t  The  prophet  sees  the 
possibility  of  Zion's  capitulation,  but  the  people 
shall  leave  her  only  for  their  deliverance  else- 
where. Many  are  gathered  against  her,  but  he 
sees  them  as  sheaves  upon  the  floor  for  Zion  to 
thresh.  This  oracle  (vv.  11-13)  cannot,  of  course, 
have  been  uttered  at  the  same  time  as  the  pre- 
vious one,  but  there  is  no  reason  why  the  same 
prophet  should  not  have  uttered  both  at  dif- 
ferent periods.  Isaiah  had  prospects  of  the  fate 
of  Jerusalem  which  differ  quite  as  much.^    Once 

*  See  above,  pp.  510  ff. 

+  Wellliausen  declares  that  this  is  unsuitable  to  the 
position  of  Jerusalem  in  the  eighth  century,  and  virtually 
implies  her  ruin  and  desolation.  But,  on  the  contrary, 
it  is  not  so  ;  Jerusalem  is  still  standing,  though  alone  {cf. 
the  similar  figure  in  Isa.  i.l.  Consequently  the  contra- 
diction which  Wellhausen  sees  between  this  eighth  verse 
and  vv.  q,  10,  does  not  exist.  He  grants  that  the  latter 
may  belong  to  the  time  of  Sennacherib's' invasion — unless 
it 'be  a  vaticiniitm  post  eventutn  ! 

X  See  above,  p.  450. 

JThis  in  answer  to  Wellhausen,  who  thinks  the  two 


more  (ver.   14)  the  blockade  is  established.     Is- 
rael's ruler  is  helpless,  "  smitten  on  the  cheek  by 
the   foe."  *     It   is   to   this   last   picture   that  the 
promise  of  the  Deliverer  is  attached. 
The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  But  thou,  O  Tower  of  the  Flock, 

Hill  of  the  daughter  of  Zion, 

To  thee  shall  arrive  the  former  rule. 

And  the  kingdom  shall  come  to  the  daughter  of  Zion. 

Now  wherefore  criest  thou  so  loud  ? 

Is  there  no  king  in  thee.t  or  is  thy  counsellor  perished. 

That  throes  have  seized  thee  like  a  woman  in  child- 
birth ? 

Quiver  and  writhe,  daughter  of  Zion,  like  one  in  child- 
birth : 

For  now  must  thou  forth  from  the  city, 

And  encamp  on  the  field  (and  come  unto  Babel)  ;t 

There  shalt  thou  be  rescued, 

There  shall  Jehovah  redeem  thee  from  the  hand  of  thy 
foes ! 

"  And  now  gather  against  thee  many  nations,  that  say, 
'  Let  her  be  violate,  that  our  eyes  may  fasten  on  Zion  f' 
But  they  know  not  the  plans  of  Jehovah, 
Nor  understand  they  His  counsel. 

For  He  hath  gathered  them  in  like  sheaves  to  the  floor. 
Up  and  thresh,  O  daughter  of  Zion  ! 
For  thy  horns  will  I  turn  into  iron, 
And  thy  hoofs  will  I  turn  into  brass  ; 
And  thou  will  beat  down  many  nations, 
And  devote  to  Jehovah  their  spoil. 
And  their  wealth  to  the  Lord  of  all  earth. 

"  Now  press  thyself  together,  thou  daughter  of  pressure:  § 

The  joe  hath  set  a  wall  around  us. 

With  a  rod  they  smite  on  the  cheek  Israel's  regent ! 

But  thou,  Beth-Ephrath,i|  smallest  among  the  thou- 
sands! of  Judah, 

From  thee  unto  Me  shall  come  forth  the  Ruler  to  be  in 
Israel ! 

Yea,  of  old  are  His  goings  forth,  from  the  days  of  long 
ago! 

Therefore  shall  He  suffer  them  till  the  time  that  one 
bearing  shall  have  born.** 

(Then  the  rest  of  His  brethren  shall  return  with  the 
children  of  Israel.)  tt 

And  He  shall  stand  and  shepherd  His  flock  tJ  in  the 
strength  of  Jehovah, 

In  the  pride  of  the  name  of  His  God. 

And  they  shall  abide  ! 

For  now  is  He  great  to  the  ends  of  the  earth. 

And  Such  an  One  shall  be  our  Peace. §§ 

Bethlehem  was  the  birthplace  of  David,  but 
when  Micah  says  that  the  Deliverer  shall  emerge 
from  her  he  does  not  only  mean  what  Isaiah 
afiirms  by  his  promise  of  a  rod  from  the  stock 
of  Jesse,  that  the  King  to  Come  shall  spring 
from  the  one  great  dynasty  in  Judah.  Micah 
means  rather  to  emphasise  the  rustic  and  popular 
origin  of  the  Messiah,  "  too  small  to  be  among 
the  thousands  of  Judah."  David,  the  son  of 
Jesse  the  Bethlehemite,  was  a  dearer  figure  than 
Solomon  son  of  David  the  King.  He  impressed 
the  people's  imagination,  because  he  had  sprung 
from  themselves,  and  in  his  lifetime  had  been 
the  popular  rival  of  an  unlovable  despot.  Micah 
himself  was  the  prophet  of  the  country  as  distinct 
from  the  capital,  of  the  peasants  as  against  the 

oracles  incompatible,  and  that  the  second  one  is  similar 
to  the  eschatological  prediction  common  from  Ezekiel 
onwards.     Jerusalem,  however,  is  surely  still  standing. 

*  Even  Wellhausen  agrees  that  this  verse  is  most  suit- 
ably dated  from  the  time  of  Micah. 

t  Those  who  maintain  the  exilic  date  understand  by  this 
Jehovah  Himself.  In  any  case  it  may  be  He  who  is 
meant. 

X  The  words  in  parenthesis  are  perhaps  a  gloss. 

§  Uncertain. 

II  The  name  Bethlehem  is  probably  a  later  insertion. 
I  read  with   Hitzig  and  others  T'yvn  niQN.  and  omit 

nvnf>. 

!  Smallest  form  of  district :  cf.  English  "hundreds." 

**  Cf.  the  prophecy  of  Immanuel,  Isa.  vii. 

ttThis  seems  like  a  later  insertion:  it  disturbs  both 
sense  and  rhythm. 

ttSoLXX. 

§§Take  this  clause  from  ver.  4  and  the  following  oracle 
and  put  it  with  ver.  3. 


544 


THE' BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


rich  who  oppressed  them.  When,  therefore,  he 
fixed  upon  Bethlehem  as  the  Messiah's  birth- 
place, he  doubtless  desired,  without  departing 
from  the  orthodox  hope  in  the  Davidic  dynasty, 
to  throw  round  its  new  representative  those  as- 
sociations which  had  so  endeared  to  the  people 
their  father-monarch.  The  shepherds  of  Judah, 
that  strong  source  of  undefiled  life  from  which 
the  fortunes  of  the  state  and  prophecy  itself  had 
ever  been  recuperated,  should  again  send  forth 
salvation.  Had  not  Micah  already  declared  that, 
after  the  overthrow  of  the  capital  and  the  rulers, 
the  glory  of  Israel  should  come  to  Adullam, 
where  of  old  David  had  gathered  its  soiled  and 
scattered  fragments? 

We  may  conceive  how  such  a  promise  would 
affect  the  crushed  peasants  for  whom  Micah 
wrote.  A  Saviour,  who  was  one  of  themselves, 
not  bom  up  there  in  the  capital,  foster-brother 
of  the  very  nobles  who  oppressed  them,  but  born 
among  the  people,  sharer  of  their  toils  and  of 
their  wrongs!- — it  would  bring  hope  to  every  bro- 
ken heart  among  the  disinherited  poor  of  Israel. 
Yet  meantime,  be  it  observed,  this  was  a  prom- 
ise, not  for  the  peasants  only,  but  for  the  whole 
people.  In  the  present  danger  of  the  nation  the 
class  disputes  are  forgotten,  and  the  hopes  of  Is- 
rael gather  upon  their  Hero  for  a  common  de- 
liverance from  the  foreign  foe.  "  Such  an  One 
shall  be  our  peace."  But  in  the  peace  He  is  "  to 
stand  and  shepherd  His  fiock,"  conspicuous  and 
watchful.  The  country  folk  knew  what  such  a 
figure  meant  to  themselves  for  security  and 
weal  on  the  land  of  their  fathers.  Heretofore 
their  rulers  had  not  been  shepherds,  but  thieves 
and  robbers. 

We  can  imagine  the  contrast  which  such  a 
vision  must  have  offered  to  the  fancies  of  the 
false  prophets.  What  were  they  beside  this? 
Deity  descending  in  fire  and  thunder,  with  all 
the  other  features  oi  the  ancient  Theophanies 
that  had  now  become  <■  much  cant  in  the 
mouths  of  mercenary  traditionalists.  Besides 
those,  how  sane  was  this,  how  footed  upon  the 
earth,  how  practical,  how  popular  in  the  best 
sense! 

We  see,  then,  the  value  of  Micah's  prophecy 
for  his  own  day.  Has  it  also  any  value  for  ours 
— especially  in  that  aspect  of  it  which  must  have 
appealed  to  the  hearts  of  those  for  whom 
chiefly  Micah  arose?  "  Is  it  wise  to  paint  the 
Messiah,  to  paint  Christ,  so  much  a  working- 
man?  Is  it  not  much  more  to  our  purpose  to 
remember  the  general  fact  of  His  humanity,  by 
which  He  is  able  to  be  Priest  and  Brother  to  all 
classes,  high  and  low,  rich  and  poor,  the  noble 
and  the  peasant  alike?  Is  not  the  Man  of  Sor- 
rows a  much  wider  name  than  the  Man  of  La- 
bour? "     Let  us  answer  these  questions. 

The  value  of  such  a  prophecy  of  Christ  lies  in 
the  correctives  which  it  supplies  to  the  Christian 
apocalypse  and  theology.  Both  of  these  have 
raised  Christ  to  a  throne  too  far  above  the  ac- 
tual circumstance  of  His  earthly  ministry  and  the 
theatre  of  His  eternal  sympathies.  Whether  en- 
throned in  the  praises  of  Heaven,  or  by  scholas- 
ticism relegated  to  an  ideal  and  abstract  human- 
it)',  Christ  is  lifted  away  from  touch  with  the 
common  people.  But  His  lowly  origin  was  a 
fact.  He  sprang  from  the  most  democratic  of 
peoples.  His  ancestor  was  a  shepherd,  and  His 
mother  a  peasant  girl.  He  Himself  was  a  car- 
penter: at  home,  as  His  parables  show,  in  the 
fields  and  the  folds  and  the  barns  of  His  country; 


with  the  servants  of  the  great  houses,  with  the 
unemployed  in  the  market;  with  the  woman  in 
the  hovel  seeking  one  piece  of  silver,  with  the 
shepherd  on  the  moors  seeking  the  lost  sheep. 
"  The  poor  had  the  gospel  preached  to  them; 
and  the  common  people  heard  Him  gladly."  As 
the  peasants  of  Judea  must  have  listened  to 
Micah's  promise  of  His  origin  among  them- 
selves with  new  hope  and  patience,  so  in  the 
Roman  empire  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  was 
welcomed  chiefly,  as  the  Apostles  and  the 
Fathers  bear  witness,  by  the  lowly  and  the  la- 
bouring of  every  nation.  In  the  great  persecu- 
tion which  bears  His  name,  the  Emperor  Domi- 
tian  heard  that  there  were  two  relatives  alive  of 
this  Jesus  whom  so  many  acknowledged  as  their 
King,  and  he  sent  for  them  that  he  might  put 
them  to  death.  But  when  they  came,  he  asked 
them  to  hold  up  their  hands,  and  seeing  these 
brown  and  chapped  with  toil,  he  dismissed  the 
men,  saying,  "  From  such  slaves  we  have  noth- 
ing to  fear."  Ah  but.  Emperor!  it  is  just  the 
horny  hands  of  this  religion  that  thou  and  thy 
gods  have  to  fear!  Any  cynic  or  satirist  of  thy 
literature,  from  Celsus  onwards,  could  have  told 
thee  that  it  was  by  men  who  worked  with  their 
hands  for  their  daily  bread,  by  domestics,  arti- 
sans, and  all  manner  of  slaves,  that  the  power  of 
this  King  should  spread,  which  meant  destruc- 
tion to  thee  and  thine  empire!  "  From  little 
Bethlehem  came  forth  the  Ruler,"  and  "  now 
He  is  great  to  the  ends  of  the  earth." 

There  follows  upon  this  prophecy  of  the  Shep- 
herd a  curious  fragment  which  divides  His  of- 
fice among  a  number  of  His  order,  though  the 
grammar  returns  towards  the  end  to  One.  The 
mention  of  Assyria  stamps  this  oracle  also  as  of 
the  eighth  century.  Mark  the  refrain  which 
opens  and  closes  it.* 

"  When  Asshflr  cometh  into  our  land, 
And  when  he  marcheth  on  our  borders,t 
Then  shall  we  raise  against  him  seven  shepherds 
And  eight  princes  of  men. 

And  they  shall  shepherd  Asshflr  with  a  sword, 
And  Nimrod's  land  with  her  own  bare  blades. 
And  He  shall  deliver  from  Asshflr, 
When  he  cometh  into  our  land, 
And  marcheth  upon  our  borders." 

There  follows  an  oracle  in  which  there  is  no 
evidence  of  Micah's  hand  or  of  his  times;  but  if 
it  carries  ainy  proof  of  a  date,  it  seems  a*  late 
one. 

"  And  the  remnant  of  Jacob  shall  be  among  many  peoples 
Like  the  dew  from  Jehovah, 
Like  showers  upon  grass. 
Which  wait  not  for  a  man. 
Nor  tarry  for  the  children  of  men. 
And  the  remnant  of   Jacob    (among   nations,)  among 

many  peoples. 
Shall  be  like  the  lion  among  the  beasts  of  the  jungle, 
Like  a  young  lion  among  the  sheepfolds, 
Who,  when  he  cometh  by,  treadeth  and  teareth, 
And  none  may  deliver. 

Let  thine  hand  be  high  on  thine  adversaries, 
And  all  thine  enemies  be  cut  off  !  " 

Finally  in  this  section  we  have  an  oracle  full 
of  the  notes  we  had  from  Micah  in  the  first  two 
chapters.  It  explains  itself.  Compare  Micah  ii. 
and  Isaiah  ii. 

"  And  it  shall  be  in  that  day— 'tis  the  oracle  of  Jehovah— 
That  I  will  cut  off  thy  horses  from  the  midst  of  thee, 
And  I  will  destroy  thy  chariots ; 
That  I  will  cut  oft'  the  Cities  of  thy  land. 
And  tear  down  all  thy  fortresses, 

*  Wellhausen  alleges  in  the  numbers  another  trace  ct 
the  late  Apocalyptic  writings— but  this  is  not  conclusi'^e. 
t  So  LXX.     C/.  the  refrain  at  the  close. 


Micah  vi.  i-8.] 


REASONABLENESS    OF   TRUE   RELIGION. 


545 


And  I  will  cut  off  thine  enchantments  from  thy  hand. 

And  thou  shalt  have  no  more  soothsayers  ; 

And  I  will  cut  off  thine  images  and  thy  pillars  from  the 

midst  of  thee, 
And  thou  shalt  not  bow  down  any  more  to  the  work  of 

thy  hands ; 
And  I  will  uproot  thine  Asheras  from  the  midst  of  thee. 
And  will  destroy  thine  idols. 
So  shall  I  do,  in  My  wrath  and  Mine  anger. 
Vengeance  to  the  nations,  who  have  not  known  Me." 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

THE  REASONABLENESS  OF  TRUE  RE- 
LIGION. 

Micah  vi.  i-8. 

We  have  now  reached  a  passage  from  which 
all  obscurities  of  date  and  authorship  *  disappear 
before  the  transparence  and  splendour  of  its 
contents.  "  These  few  verses,"  says  a  great 
critic,  "  in  which  Micah  sets  forth  the  true  es- 
sence of  religion,  may  raise  a  well-founded  title 
to  be  counted  as  the  most  important  in  the 
prophetic  literature.  Like  almost  no  others,  they 
aflford  us  an  insight  into  the  innermost  nature 
of  the  religion  of  Israel,  as  delivered  by  the 
prophets." 

Usually  it  is  only  the  last  of  the  verses  upon 
which  the  admiration  of  the  reader  is  bestowed: 
"  What  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  O  man, 
but  to  do  justice  and  love  mercy  and  walk  hum- 
bly with  thy  God?"  But  in  truth  the  rest  of 
the  passage  dififereth  not  in  glory;  the  wonder 
of  it  lies  no  more  in  its  peroration  than  in  its 
argument  as  a  whole. 

The  passage  is  cast  in  the  same  form  as  the 
opening  chapter  of  the  book — that  of  the  Argu- 
ment or  Debate  between  the  God  of  Israel  and 
His  people,  upon  the  great  theatre  of  Nature. 
The  heart  must  be  dull  that  does  not  leap  to  the 
Presences  before  whidh  the  trial  is  enacted. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Hear  ye  now  that  which  Jehovah  is  saying ; 
Arise,  contend  before  the  mountains, 
And  let  the  hills  hear  thy  voice  ! 
Hear.  O  mountains,  the  Lord's  Argument, 
And  ye,  the  everlasting  foundations  of  earth  !  " 

This  is  not  mere  scenery.  In  all  the  moral  ques- 
tions between  God  and  man,  the  prophets  feel 
that  Nature  is  involved.  Either  she  is  called  as 
a  witness  to  the  long  history  of  their  relations 
to  each  other,  or  as  sharing  God's  feeling  of  the 
intolerableness  of  the  evil  which  men  have 
heaped  upon  her,  or  by  her  droughts  and  floods 
and  earthquakes  as  the  executioner  of  their 
doom.  It  is  in  the  first  of  these  capacities  that 
the  prophet  in  this  passage  appeals  to  the  moun- 
tains and  eternal  foundations  of  earth.  They  are 
called,  not  because  they  are  the  biggest  of  ex- 
istences, but  because  they  are  the  most  full  of 
memories  and  associations  with  both  parties  to 
the  Trial. 

The  main  idea  of  the  passage,  however,  is  the 
Trial  itself.  We  have  seen  more  than  once  that 
the  forms  of  religion  which  the  prophets  had  to 
combat  were  those  which  expressed  it  mechani- 
cally in  the  form  of  ritual  and  sacrifice,  and  those 
which  expressed  it  in  mere  enthusiasm  and  ec- 
stasy. Between  such  extremes  the  prophets  in- 
sisted that  religion  was  knowledge  and  that  it 
was  conduct — rational  intercourse  and  loving 
duty  between  God  and  man.     This  is  what  they 

•  See  above,  pp.  533  ff . 
35-Vol.  IV. 


figure  in  their  favourite  scene  of  a  Debate  which 
is  now  before  us. 

"Jehovah  hath  a  Quarrel  with  His  People, 
And  with  Israel  He  cometh  to  argue. 

To  us,  accustomed  to  communion  with  the  God- 
head, as  with  a  Father,  this  may  seem  formal 
and  legal.  But  if  we  so  regard  it  we  do  it  an 
injustice.  The  form  sprang  by  revolt  against 
mechanical  and  sensational  ideas  of  religion.  It 
emphasised  religion  as  rational  and  moral,  and  at 
once  preserved  the  reasonableness  of  God  and 
the  freedom  of  man.  God  spoke  with  the  people 
whom  He  had  educated:  He  plead  with  them, 
listened  to  their  statements  and  questions,  and 
produced  His  own  evidences  and  reasons.  Reli- 
gion— such  a  passage  as  this  asserts — religion  is 
not  a  thing  of  authority  nor  of  ceremonial  nor  of 
mere  feeling,  but  of  argument,  reasonable  pres- 
entation and  debate.  Reason  is  not  put  out  of 
court:  man's  freedom  is  respected;  and  he  is  not 
taken  by  surprise  through  his  fears  or  his  feel- 
ings. This  sublime  and  generous  conception  of 
religion,  which  we  owe  first  of  all  to  the  proph- 
ets in  their  contest  with  superstitious  and  sloth- 
ful theories  of  religion  that  unhappily  survive 
among  us,  was  carried  to  its  climax  in  the  Old 
Testament  by  another  class  of  writers.  We  find 
it  elaborated  with  great  power  and  beauty  in  the 
Books  of  Wisdom.  In  these  the  Divine  Reason 
has  emerged  from  the  legal  forms  now  before 
us,  and  has  become  the  Associate  and  Friend  oi 
Man.  The  Prologue  to  the  Book  of  Proverbs 
tells  how  Wisdom,  fellow  of  God  from  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world,  descends  to  dwell  among 
men.  She  comes  forth  into  their  streets  and 
markets,  she  argues  and  pleads  there  with  an 
urgency  which  is  equal  to  the  urgency  of  tempta- 
tion itself.  But  it  is  not  till  the  earthly  ministry 
of  the  Son  of  God,  His  arguments  with  the  doc- 
tors. His  parables  to  the  common  people,  His 
gentle  and  prolonged  education  of  His  disciples, 
that  we  see  the  reasonableness  of  religion  in  all 
its  s'trength  and  beauty. 

In  that  free  court  of  reason  in  which  the  proph- 
ets saw  God  and  man  plead  together,  the  sub- 
jects were  such  as  became  them  both.  For  God 
unfolds  no  mysteries,  and  pleads  no  power,  but 
the  debate  proceeds  upon  the  facts  and  evidences 
of  life:  the  appearance  of  Character  in  history; 
whether  the  past  be  not  full  of  the  efforts  of 
Love;  whether  God  had  not,  as  human  wilful- 
ness permitted  Him,  achieved  the  liberation  and 
progress  of  His  people. 

God  speaks: — 

"  My  people,  what  have  I  done  unto  thee  ? 

And  how  have  I  wearied  thee— answer  Me  ! 

For  I  brought  thee  up  from  the  land  of  Misraim, 

And  from  the  house  of  slavery  I  redeemed  thee. 

I  sent  before  thee  Moses,  Aharon  and  Miriam. 

My  people,  remember  now  what  Balak  king  of  Moab 
counselled. 

And  how  he  was  answered  by  Bala'am,  Be'or's  son— 

So  that  f/tou  mayest  know  the  righteous  deeds  of  Je- 
hovah." * 

Always  do  the  prophets  go  back  to  Egypt  or 
the  wilderness.  There  God  made  the  people,  there 
He  redeemed  them.  In  lawbook  as  in  prophecy, 
it  is  the  fact  of  redemption  which  forms  the 
main  ground  of  His  appeal.  Redeemed  by  Him, 
the  people  are  not  their  own,  but  His.  Treated 
with  that  wonderful  love  and  patience,  like  pa- 
tience and  love  they  are  called  to  bestow  upon 

*  Omitted  from  the  above  is  the  strange  clause  "from 
Shittim  to  Gilgal,"  which  appears  to  be  a  gloss. 


546 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE   PROPHETS. 


the  weak  and  miserable  beneath  tliem.*  One  of 
the  greatest  interpreters  of  the  prophets  to  our 
own  age,  Frederick  Denison  Maurice,  has  said 
upon  this  passage:  "  We  do  not  know  God  till 
we  recognise  Him  as  a  Deliverer;  we  do  not 
understand  our  own  work  in  the  world  till  we 
believe  we  are  sent  into  it  to  carry  out  His  de- 
signs for  the  deliverance  of  ourselves  and  the 
race.  The  bondage  I  groan  under  is  a  bondage 
of  the  will.  God  is  emphatically  the  Redeemer 
of  the  will.  It  is  in  that  character  He  reveals 
Himself  to  us.  We  could  not  tliink  of  God  at 
all  as  the  God,  the  living  God,  if  we  did  not  re- 
gard Him  as  such  a  Redeemer.  But  if  of  my 
will,  then  of  all  wills:  sooner  or  later  I  am  con- 
vinced He  will  be  manifested  as  the  Restorer, 
Regenerator — not  of  something  else,  but  ol  this 
— of  the  fallen  spirit  that  is  within  us." 

In  most  of  the  controversies  which  the  propli- 
ets  open  between  God  and  man,  the  subject  on 
the  side  of  the  latter  is  his  sin.  But  that  is  not 
so  here.  In  the  controversy  which  opens  the 
Book  of  Micah  the  argument  falls  upon  the  trans- 
gressions of  the  people,  but  here  upon  their  sin- 
cere though  mistaken  methods  of  approaching 
God.  There  God  deals  with  dull  consciences, 
but  here  with  darkened  and  imploring  hearts. 
In  that  case  we  had  rebels  forsaking  the  true 
God  for  idols,  but  here  are  earnest  seekers  after 
God,  wlio  have  lost  their  way  and  are  weary. 
Accordingly,  as  indignation  prevailed  there,  here 
prevails  pity;  and  though  formally  this  be  a  con- 
troversy under  the  same  legal  form  as  before, 
the  passage  breathes  tenderness  and  gentleness 
from  first  to  last.  By  this  as  well  as  by  the 
,  recollections  of  the  ancient  history  of  Israel  we 
)  are  reminded  of  the  style  of  Hosea.  But  there 
is  no  expostulation,  as  in  his  book,  with  the 
people's  continued  devotion  to  ritual.  All  that  is 
past,  and  a  new  temper  prevails.  Israel  have  at 
last  come  to  feel  the  vanity  of  the  exaggerated 
zeal  with  which  Amos  pictures  them  exceeding 
the  legal  requirements  of  sacrifice;  f  and  with  a 
despair,  sufficiently  evident  in  the  superlatives 
which  they  use,  they  confess  the  futility  and 
weariness  of  the  whole  system,  even  in  the  most 
lavish  and  impossible  forms  of  sacrifice.  What 
then  remains  for  them  to  do?  The  prophet  an- 
swers with  the  beautiful  words  that  express  an 
ideal  of  religion  to  whic'h  no  subsequent  century 
has  ever  been  able  to  add  either  grandeur  or 
tenderness. 

The  people  speak: — 

"  Wherewithal  shall  I  come  before  Jehovah, 
Shall  I  bow  myself  to  God  the  Most  High? 
Shall  I  come  before  Him  with  burnt-offerings, 
With  calves  of  one  year? 

Will  Jehovah  be  pleased  with  thousands  of  rams, 
With  myriads  of  rivers  of  oil  ? 
Shall  I  give  my  firstborn  for  a  guilt-offering,t 
The  fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ?  " 


The  prophet  answers: — 

"He  hath  shown  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good  ; 
And  what  is  the  Lord  seeking  from  thee, 
But  to  do  justice  and  love  mercy. 
And  humbly  §  to  walk  with  thy  God  ?  " 

•  See  the  passages  on  the  subject  in  Professor  Harper's 
work  on  Deuteronomy  in  this  series. 

+  See  above,  p.  482. 

$See  above,  p.  S34,  on  the  futility  of  the  argument  which 
because  of  this  line  would  put  the  whole  passage  in 
Manasseh's  reign. 

SThis  word  yjVH  is  only  once  used  again,  in  Prov.  xi. 
a,  in  another  grammatical  form,  where  also  it  might 
mean  "humbly."    But  the  root-meaning  is  evidently  "  in 


This  is  the  greatest  saying  of  the  Old  Tesbr 
ment;  and  there  is  only  one  other  in  the  Ne^r 
which  excels  it: — 

"Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  that  labour  and  aie 
heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest. 

"  Take  My  yoke  upon  you,  and  learn  of  Me; 
for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart:  and  ye  shall 
find  rest  unto  your  souls. 

"  For  My  yoke  is  easy,  and  My  burden  is 
light." 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

THE  SIN  OF  THE  SCANT  MEASURE. 

MiCAH  vi.  9-vii.  6. 

The  state  of  the  text  of  Micah  vi.  9-vii.  6  is 
as  confused  as  the  condition  of  society  wliich  it 
describes:  it  is  difficult  to  get  reason,  and  im- 
possible to  get  rhyme,  out  of  the  separate  clauses. 
We  had  best  give  it  as  it  stands,  and  afterwards 
state  the  substance  of  its  doctrine,  which,  in 
spite  of  the  obscurity  of  details,  is,  as  so  often 
happens  in  similar  cases,  perfectly  clear  and  forc- 
ible. The  passage  consists  of  two  portions,  which 
may  not  originally  have  belonged  to  each  other, 
but  which  seem  to  reflect  the  same  disorder  of 
civic  life,  with  the  judgment  that  impends  upon 
it.*  In  the  first  of  them,  vi.  9-16,  the  prophet 
calls  for  attention  to  the  voice  of  God,  which 
describes  the  fraudulent  life  of  Jerusalem,  and 
the  evils  He  is  bringing  on  her.  In  the  second, 
vii.  1-6,  Jerusalem  bemoans  her  corrupt  society; 
but  perhaps  we  hear  her  voice  only  in  ver.  i, 
and  thereafter  the  prophet's. 

The  prophet  speaks: — 

"  Hark  !  Jehovah  crieth  to  the  city ! 

('Tis  salvation  to  fear  Thy  name  !)  t 
"  Hear  ye,  O  tribe  and  council  of  the  city  !  "  (7)',% 

God  speaks: — 

"...    in  the  house  of  the  wicked  treasures 

of  wickedness. 
And  the  scant  measure  accursed? 
Can  she  be  pure  with  the  evil  balances, 
And  with  the  bag  of  false  weights, 
Whose  rich  men  are  full  of  violence, § 

secret,"  or  "secretly  "  (c/.  the  Aram.  yjV.  to  be  hidden; 
yjV.  one  who  lives  noiselessly,  humble,  pious;  in  the 
feminine  of  a  bride  who  is  modest) ;  and  it  is  uncertain 
whether  we  should  not  take  that  sense  here. 

*  See  above,  pp.  534  ff. 

t  Probably  a  later  parenthesis.  The  word  iTKhfl  is  one 
which,  unusual  in  the  prophets,  the  Wisdom  literature, 
has  made  its  own.  Prov.  ii.  7,  xviii.  i  ;  Tob  v.  12,  etc.  For 
TAy  LXX.  read  "His." 

t  Translation  of  LXX.  emended  by  Wellhausen  so  as  to 
read  l^yn  1]J)12,  the  Tiy  being  obtained  by  taking  and 
transferring  the  Tiy  of  the  next  verse,  and  relieving  that 
verse  of  an  unusual  formation,  viz.,  *Tiy  before  the  inter- 
rogative {J^XH.  But  for  an  instance  of  Tiy  preceding  an 
interrogative  see  Gen.  xix.  12. 

§  The  text  of  the  two  preceding  verses,  which  is  acknowl- 
edged to  be  corrupt,  must  be  corrected  by  the  undoubted 
3d  feminine  suffix  in  this  one— "/zifr  rich  men."  Through- 
out the  reference  must  be  to  the  city.  We  ought  there- 
fore to  change  riDTKH  of  ver.  n  into  nDTfin,  which  agrees 
■with  the  LXX.  6t(caiu)fl>)<7-<Tai.  Ver.  fb  is  more  uncertain, 
but  for  the  same  reason  that  "the  city"  is  referred  to 
throughout  vv.  9-12,  it  is  possible  that  it  is  the  nomin- 
ative to  DDiyT  ;  translate  "  cursed  with  the^short  meas- 
ure."   Again  for  ni"lVN  LXX.   read  HilSN  n"T|ViK.   to 

which  also  the  city  would  be  nominative.  And  this  sug- 
gests the  query  whether  in  the  letters  n''3  CNH,  that 
make  little  sense  as  they  stand  in  the  Massoretic  Text, 


Micah  vi.  9-vii.6.]  THE   SIN    OF   THE    SCANT    MEASURE. 


547 


And  her  citizens  speak  falsehood, 
And  their  tongue  is  deceit  in  their  mouth  ? 
But  I  on  my  part  have  begun  to  plague  thee. 
To  lay  thee'xn  ruin  because  of  thy  sins. 
Thou  eatest  and  art  not  filled, 
But  thy  famine  *  is  in  the  very  midst  of  thee  ! 
And  but  try  to  remove,t  thou  canst  not  bring  off  : 
And  what  thou  bringest  off,  I  give  to  the  sword. 
Thou  sowest,  but  never  reapest ; 
Treadest  olives,  but  never  anointest  with  oil, 
And  must,  but  not  to  drink  wine  ! 
So  thou  keepest  the  statutes  of  Omri,J 
And  the  habits  of  the  house  of  Ahab, 
And  walkest  in  their  principles. 
Only  that  I  may  give  thee  to  ruin, 
And  her  inhabitants  for  sport- 
Yea,  the  reproach  of  the  Gentiles  J  shall  ye  bear  ! " 

Jerusalem  speaks: — 

"  Woe,  woe  is  me,  for  I  am  become  like  sweepings  of 

harvest. 
Like  gleanings  of  the  vintage — 

Not  a  cluster  to  eat.  not  a  fig  that  ray  soul  lusteth  after. 
Perished  are  the  leal  from  the  land. 
Of  the  upright  among  men  there  is  none  : 
All  of  them  are  lurking  for  blood  ; 
Every  man  takes  his  brother  in  a  net. 
Their  hands  are  on  evil  to  do  it  thoroughly.! 
The  prince  makes  requisition. 
The  judge Jud^et/i  for  payment, 
And  the  great  man  he  speaketh  his  lust ; 
So  together  they  weave  it  out. 
The  best  of  them  is  but  a  thorn  thicket.lf 
The  most  upright  worse  than  a  prickly  hedge.** 
The  day  that  thy  sentinels  saw,  thy  visitation,  draweth 

on  ; 
Now  is  their  havoc  +t  come  ! 
Trust  not  any  friend  !    Rely  on  no  confidant ! 
From  her  that  lies  in  thy  bosom  guard  the  gates  of  thy 

mouth. 
For  son  insulteth  father,  daughter  is  risen  against  her 

mother,  daughter-in-law  against  her  mother-in-law  ; 
And  the  enemies  of  a  man  are  the  men  of  his  house. 

Micah,  though  the  prophet  of  the  country  and 
stern  critic  of  its  life,  characterised  Jerusalem 
herself  as  the  centre  of  the  nation's  sins.  He  did 
not  refer  to  idolatry  alone,  but  also  to  the  irre- 
ligion  of  the  politicians,  and  the  cruel  injustice 
of  the  rich  in  the  capital.  The  poison  which 
weakened  the  nation's  blood  had  found  its  en- 
trance to  their  veins  at  the  very  heart.  There 
had  the  evil  gathered  which  was  shaking  the 
state  to  a  rapid  dissolution. 

This  section  of  the  Book  of  Micah,  whether 
it  be  by  that  prophet  or  not,  describes  no  fea- 
tures of  Jerusalem's  life  which  were  not  present 
in  the  eighth  century;  and  it  may  be  considered 
as  the  more  detailed  picture  of  the  evils  he  sum- 
marily denounced.  It  is  one  of  the  most  poign- 
ant criticisms  of  a  commercial  community 
which  have  ever  appeared  in  literature.  In  equal 
relief  we  see  the  meanest  instruments  and  the 
most  prominent  agents  of  covetousness  and  cru- 
elty— the   scant   measure,   the   false   weights,   the 

there  was  not  originally  another  feminine  participle. 
The  recommendation  of  a  transformation  of  this  kind  is 
that  it  removes  the  abruptness  of  the  appearance  of  the 
3d  feminine  suffi-x  in  ver.  12. 

*  The  word  is  found  only  here.  The  stem  tJ>n^  is  no 
doubt  the  same  as  the  Arabic  verb  wahash,  which  in 
Form  V.  means  "  Inani  ventre  fuit  prae'fame;  vacuum 
reliquit  stomachum  "  (Freytag).  In  modern  colloquial 
Arabic  wahsha  means  a  "  longing  for  an  absent  friend." 

t  Jussive.'  The  objects  removed  can  hardly  be  goods, 
as  Hitzig  and  others  infer  ;  for  it  is  to  "  the  sword  "  they 
afterwards  fall.    They  must  be  persons. 

tLXX.  -Zimri." 

SSo  LXX.;  but  Heb.  "My  people." 

li  Uncertain. 

"T  Cf.  Prov.  XV.  ig. 

**  Roorda,  by  rearranging  letters  and  clauses  (some  of 
them  after  LXX),  and  by  changing  points,  gets  a  reading 
which  may  be  rendered  :  "  For  evil  are  their  hands  !  To 
do  good  the  prince  demandeth  a  bribe,  and  the  judge,  for 
the  reward  of  the  great,  speaketh  what  he  desireth.  And 
they  entangle  the  good  more  than  thorns,  and  the  right- 
eous more  than  a  thorn  hedge." 

tt  Cf.  Isa.  xxii.  5. 


unscrupulous  prince,  and  the  venal  judge.  And 
although  there  are  some  sins  denounced  which 
are  impossible  in  our  civilisation,  yet  falsehood, 
squalid  fraud,  pitilessness  of  the  everlasting 
struggle  for  life  are  exposed  exactly  as  we  see 
them  about  us  to-day.  Through  the  prophet's 
ancient  and  often  obscure  eloquence  we  feel  just 
those  shocks  and  sharp  edges  which  still  break 
everywhere  through  our  Christian  civilisation. 
Let  us  remember,  too,  that  the  community  ad- 
dressed by  the  prophet  was,  like  our  own,  pro- 
fessedly religious. 

The  most  widespread  sin  with  which  the 
prophet  charges  Jerusalem  in  these  days  of  her 
commercial  activity  is  falsehood:  "  Her  inhab- 
itants speak  lies,  and  their  tongue  is  deceit  in 
their  mouth."  In  Mr.  Lecky's  "  History  of  Eu- 
ropean Morals  "  we  find  the  opinion  that  "  the 
one  respect  in  which  the  growth  of  industrial 
life  has  exercised  a  favourable  influence  on 
morals  has  been  in  the  promotion  of  truth." 
The  tribute  is  just,  but  there  is  another  side  to 
it.  The  exigencies  of  commerce  and  industry 
are  fatal  to  most  of  the  conventional  pretences, 
insincerities,  and  flatteries  which  tend  to  grow 
up  in  all  kinds  of  society.  In  commercial  life, 
more  perhaps  than  in  any  other,  a  man  is  taken, 
and  has  to  be  taken,  in  his  inherent  worth.  Busi- 
ness, the  life  which  is  called  par  excellence  Busy- 
ness, wears  off  every  mask,  all  false  veneer  and 
unction,  and  leaves  no  time  for  the  cant  and 
parade  which  are  so  prone  to  increase  in  all  other 
professions.  Moreover  the  soul  of  commerce  is 
credit.  Men  have  to  show  that  they  can  be 
trusted  before  other  men  will  traffic  with  them, 
at  least  upon  that  large  and  lavish  scale  on 
which  alone  the  great  undertakings  of  comimerce 
can  be  conducted.  When  we  look  back  upon 
the  history  of  trade  and  industry,  and  see  how 
they  have  created  an  atmosphere  in  which  men 
must  ultimately  seem  what  they  really  are;  how 
they  have  of  their  needs  replaced  the  jealousies, 
subterfuges,  intrigues  which  were  once  deemed 
indispensable  to  the  relations  of  men  of  different 
peoples,  by  large  international  credit  and  trust; 
how  they  break  through  the  false  conventions 
that  divide  class  from  class,  we  must  do  homage 
to  them,  as  among  the  greatest  instruments  of 
the  truth  which  maketh  free. 

But  to  all  this  there  is  another  side.  If  com- 
merce has  exploded  so  much  conventional  insin- 
cerity, it  has  developed  a  species  of  the  genus 
which  is  quite  its  own.  In  our  days  nothing 
can  lie  like  an  advertisement.  The  saying,  "  the 
tricks  of  the  trade "  has  become  proverbial. 
Every  one  knows  that  the  awful  strain  and 
harassing  of  commercial  life  are  largely  due  to 
the  very  amount  of  falseness  that  exists.  The 
haste  to  be  rich,  the  pitiless  rivalry  and  com- 
petition, have  developed  a  carelessness  of  the 
rights  of  others  to  tlie  truth  from  ourselves,  with 
a  capacity  for  subterfuge  and  intrigue,  which  re- 
minds one  of  nothing  so  much  as  that  state  of 
barbarian  war  out  of  which  it  was  the  ancient 
glory  of  commerce  to  have  assisted  mankind  to 
rise.  Are  the  prophet's  words  about  Jerusalem 
too  strong  for  large  portions  of  our  own  com- 
mercial communities?  Men  who  know  these 
best  will  not  say  that  they  are.  But  let  us  cher- 
ish rather  the  powers  of  commerce  which  make 
for  truth.  Let  us  tell  men  who  engage  in  trade 
that  there  are  none  for  whom  it  is  more  easy 
to  be  clean  and  straight;  that  lies,  whether  of 
action   or  of  speech,    only   increase   the   mental 


54S 


THE-iOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


expense  and  the  moral  strain  of  life;  and  that 
the  health,  the  capacity,  the  foresight,  the  op- 
portunities of  a  great  merchant  depend  ultimately 
on  his  resolve  to  be  true  and  on  the  courage 
with  which  he  sticks  to  the  truth. 

One  habit  of  falseness  on  which  the  prophet 
dwells  is  the  use  of  unjust  scales  and  short  meas- 
ures. The  "  stores  "  or  fortunes  of  his  day  are 
"  stores  of  wickedness,"  because  they  have  been 
accumulated  by  the  use  of  the  "  lean  ephah,"  the 
"  balances  of  wrong,"  and  "  the  bag  of  false 
weights."  These  are  evils  more  common  in  the 
East  than  with  us:  modern  government  makes 
them  almost  impossible.  But,  all  the  same,  ours 
is  the  sin  of  the  scant  measure,  and  the  more 
so  in  proportion  to  the  greater  speed  and  rivalry 
of  our  commercial  life.  The  prophet's  name 
for  it,  "  measure  of  leanness,"  of  "  consumption  " 
or  "  shrinkage,"  is  a  proper  symbol  of  all  those 
duties  and  offices  of  man  to  man,  the  full  and 
generous  discharge  of  which  is  diminished  by  the 
baste  and  the  grudge  of  a  prevalent  selfishness. 
The  speed  of  modern  life  tends  to  shorten  the 
time  expended  on  every  piece  of  work,  and  to 
turn  it  out  untempered  and  incomplete.  The 
struggle  for  life  in  commerce,  the  organised 
rivalry  between  labour  and  capital,  not  only  puts 
every  man  on  his  guard  against  giving  any  other 
more  than  his  due,  but  tem'pts  him  to  use  every 
opportunity  to  scamp  and  curtail  his  own  service 
and  output.  You  will  hear  men  defend  this  par- 
simony as  if  it  were  a  law.  They  say  that  busi- 
ness is  impossible  without  the  temper  which  they 
call  "  sharpness  "  or  the  habit  which  they  call 
"  cutting  it  fine."  But  such  character  and  con- 
duct are  the  very  decay  of  society.  The  shrink- 
age of  the  units  must  always  and  everywhere 
mean  the  disintegration  of  the  mass.  A  society 
whose  members  strive  to  keep  within  their  duties 
is  a  society  which  cannot  continue  to  cohere. 
Selfishness  may  be  firmness,  bu't  it  is  the  firm- 
ness of  frost,  the  rigour  of  death.  Only  the  un- 
selfish excess  of  duty,  only  the  generous  loyalty 
to  others,  give  to  society  the  compactness  and 
indissolubleness  of  life.  Who  is  responsible  for 
the  enmity  of  classes,  and  the  distrust  which  ex- 
ists between  capital  and  labour?  It  is  the  work- 
man whose  one  aim  is  to  secure  the  largest 
amount  of  wages  for  the  smallest  amount  of 
work,  and  who  will,  in  his  blind  pursuit  of  that, 
wreck  the  whole  trade  of  a  town  or  a  district; 
it  is  the  employer  who  believes  he  has  no  duties 
to  his  men  beyond  paying  them  for  their  work 
the  least  that  he  can  induce  them  to  take;  it  is 
the  customer  who  only  and  ever  looks  to  the 
cheapness  of  an  article — procurer  in  that  prosti- 
tution of  talent  to  the  work  of  scamping  which 
is  fast  killing  art,  and  joy,  and  all  pity  for  the 
bodies  and  souls  of  our  brothers.  These  are 
the  true  anarchists  and  breakers-up  of  society. 
On  their  methods  social  coherence  and  harmony 
are  impossible.  Life  itself  is  impossible.  No 
organism  can  thrive  whose  various  limbs  are 
ever  shriking  in  upon  themselves.  There  is  no 
life  except  by  living  to  others. 

But  the  prophet  covers  the  whole  evil  when 
he  says  that  the  "  pious  are  perished  out  of  the 
land."  "  Pious "  is  a  translation  of  despair. 
The  original  means  the  man  distinguished  by 
"  hesedh,"  that  word  which  we  have  on  several 
occasions  translated  "  leal  love,"  because  it  im- 
plies not  only  an  afifection  but  loyalty  to  a  rela- 
tion. And,  as  the  use  of  the  word  frequently 
reminds  us,  "  hesedh  "  is  love  and  loyalty  both 


to  God  and  to  our  fellow-men.  We  need  not 
dissociate  these:  they  are  one.  But  here  it  is 
the  human  direction  in  which  the  word  looks. 
It  means  a  character  which  fulfils  all  the  relations 
of  society  with  the  fidelity,  generosity,  and  grace 
which  are  the  proper  aflfections  O'f  man  to  man. 
Such  a  character,  says  the  prophet,  is  perished 
from  the  land.  Every  man  now  lives  for  him- 
self, and  as  a  consequence  preys  upon  his 
brother.  "They  all  lie  in  wait  for  blood;  they 
hunt  every  man  his  brother  with  a  net."  This 
is  not  murder  which  the  prophet  describes:  it 
is  the  reckless,  pitiless  competition  of  the  new 
conditions  of  life  developed  in  Judah  by  the  long 
peace  and  commerce  of  the  eighth  century.  And 
he  carries  this  selfishness  into  a  very  striking 
figure  in  ver.  4:  "  The  best  of  them  is  as  a  thorn 
thicket,  the  most  upright "  worse  "  than  a 
prickly  hedge."  He  realises  exactly  what  we 
mean  by  sharpness  and  sharp-dealing:  bristling 
self-interest,  all  points;  splendid  in  its  own  de- 
fence, but  barren  of  fruit,  and  without  nest  or 
covert  for  any  life. 


CHAPTER  XXXL 

OUR  MOTHER  OF  SORROWS. 

MiCAH  vii.  7-20. 

After  so  stern  a  charge,  so  condign  a  sen- 
tence, confession  is  natural,  and,  with  prayer  for 
forgiveness  and  praise  to  the  mercy  of  God,  it 
fitly  closes  the  whole  book.  As  we  have  seen,* 
the  passage  is  a  cento  of  several  fragments,  from 
periods  far  apart  in  the  history  of  Israel.  One 
historical  allusion  suits  best  the  age  of  the 
Syrian  wars;  another  can  only  refer  to  the  day 
of  Jerusalem's  ruin.  In  spirit  and  language  the 
Confessions  resemble  the  prayers  of  the  Exile. 
The  Doxology  has  echoes  of  several  Scriptures,  t 

But  from  these  fragments,  it  may  be  of  many 
centuries,  there  rises  clear  the  One  Essential 
Figure:  Israel,  all  her  secular  woes  upon  her;  our 
Mother  of  Sorrows,  at  whose  knees  we  learned 
our  first  prayers  of  confession  and  penitence. 
Other  nations  have  been  our  teachers  in  art  and 
wisdom  and  government.  But  she  is  our  mis- 
tress in  pain  and  in  patience,  teaching  men  with 
what  conscience  they  should  bear  the  chastening 
of  the  Almighty,  with  what  hope  and  humility 
they  should  wait  for  their  God.  Surely  not  less 
lovable,  but  only  more  human,  that  her  pale 
cheeks  flush  for  a  moment  with  the  hate  of  the 
enemy  and  the  assurance  of  revenge.  Her  pas- 
sion is  soon  gone,  for  she  feels  her  guilt  to  be 
greater;  and,  seeking  forgiveness,  her  last  word 
is  what  man's  must  ever  be,  praise  to  the  grace 
and  mercy  of  God. 

Israel  speaks: — 

"  But  I  will  look  for  the  Lord, 
I  will  wait  for  the  God  of  my  salvation  i 
My  God  will  hear  me  ! 
Rejoice  not,  O  mine  enemy,  at  me  : 
If  I  be  fallen,  I  rise  ; 
If  I  sit  in  the  darkness,  the  Lord  is  a  light  to  me. 

"  The  anger  of  the  Lord  will  I  bear — 
For  I  have  sinned  against  Him — 
Until  that  He  take  up  my  quarrel. 
And  execute  my  right. 
He  will  carry  me  forth  to  the  light ; 

*  Above,  pp.  534  ff. 

+  Cf.  with  it  Exod.  xxxiv.  6.  7  (J);  Jer,  iii.  5,  1.  ao;  Isik 

Ivii.  16  ;  Psalms  ciii.  g,  cv.  0.  10. 


Micah  vii.  7-20. J 


OUR   MOTHER   OF   SORROWS. 


549 


I  will  look  on  His  righteousness  : 

So  shall  mine  enemy  see,  and  shame  cover  her, 

She  that  saith  unto  me,  Where  is  Jehovah  thy  God  ?— 

Mine  eyes  shall  see  hei', 

Now  is  she  for  trampling,  like  mire  in  the  streets  ! 

The  prophet*  responds: — 

"  A  day  for  the  building  of  thy  walls  shall  that  day  be  ! 
Broad  shall  thy  border  be  t  on  that  day  ! 

t  and  shall  come  to  thee 

From   Assyria  unto    Egypt,   and    from    Egypt  to  the 

River, 
And  to  Sea  from  Sea,  and  Mountain  from  Mountain  ;§ 
Though  II   the    land    be   waste  on  account  of    her  in- 
habitants. 
Because  of  the  fruit  of  their  doings." 

An  Ancient  Prayer: — 

*'  Shepherd  Thy  people  with  Thy  staff, 
The  sheep  of  Thy  heritage  dwelling  solitarily.  .   .  .^ 

♦  It  was  a  woman  who  spoke  before,  the  People  or  the 
City.  But  the  second  personal  pronouns  to  which  this 
reply  of  the  prophet  is  addressed  are  all  masculine. 
Notice  the  same  change  in  vi.  q-i6  (above,  p.  546). 

tprrpmV  Ewald:  "distant  the  date."  Notice  the 
assonance.  It  e.xplains  the  use  of  the  unusual  word  for 
"border."  LXX.  "thy  border."  The  LXX.  also  takes 
into  ver.  n  (as  above)  the  JiJin  DV  of  ver.  12. 

t  Something  has  probably  been  lost  here. 

§  For  inn  read  -)n». 

II  It  is  difficult  to  get  sense  when  translating  the  con- 
junction in  any  other  way.  But  these  two  lines  may  be- 
long to  the  following. 

^  The  words  omitted  above  are  literally  "  jungle  in  the 


May  they  pasture  in  Bashan  and  Gilead  as  in  days  of 

old! 
As  in  the  days  when  Thou  wentest  forth  from  the  land 

of  .\lisraim,  give  us  wonders  to  see  ! 
Nations  shall  see  and  despair  of  all  their  might ; 
Their  hands  to  their  mouths  shall  they  put. 
Their  ears  shall  be  deafened. 
They  shall  lick  the  dust  like  serpents  ; 
Like  worms  of  the  ground  from  their  fastnesses, 
To  Jehovah  our  God  they  shall  come  trembling, 
And  in  fear  before  Thee  !  " 

A  Doxology: — 

"  Who  is  a  God  like  to  Thee?    Forgiving  iniquity, 
And  passing  by  transgression,  to  the  remnant  of  His 

heritage  ; 
He  keepeth  not  hold  of  His  anger  for  ever. 
But  One  who  delighteth  in  mercy  is  He  ; 
He  will  come  back.  He  will  pity  us. 
He  will  tread  under  foot  our  iniquities — 
Yea,  Thou  wilt  cast  to  the  depths  of  the  sea  every  one 

of  our  sins. 
Thou   wilt    show  faithfulness  to   Jacob,  leal    love  to 

Abraham, 
As  Thou  hast  sworn  to  our  fathers  from  the  days  of 

yore." 

midst  of  gardenland"  or  "  Carmel."  Plausible  as  it 
would  be  to  take  the  proper  name  Carmel  here  along 
with  Bashan  and  Gilead  (.see  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  338),  the  con- 
nection prefers  the  common  noun  "  garden  "  or  "  garden- 
land  ":  translate  "dwelling  alone  like  a  bit  of  jungle  in 
the  midst  of  cultivated  land."     Perhaps  the  clause  needs 

rearrangement:  TOl^Siri^TyV  with  a  verb  to  intro- 
duce it.    Yet  compare   ""  j?  "^.i  2  Kings  xix.  33;  Isa. 


THE  BOOK  OF  THE 

TWELVE  PROPHETS, 

PART  II. 


PREFACE. 


The  first  Part  on  the  Twelve  Prophets  dealt  with  the  three  who  belonged  to 
the  Eighth  Century:  Amos,  Rosea,  and  Micah.  This  second  Part  includes  the 
other  nine  books  arranged  in  chronological  order:  Zephaniah,  Nahum,  and  Habak- 
kuk,  of  the  Seventh  Century  ;  Obadiah,  of  the  Exile  ;  Haggai,  Zechariah  i.-viii., 
••  Malachi,"  and  Joel,  of  the  Persian  Period,  538-331  ;  "  Zechariah  "  ix.-xiv.,  and  the 
Book  of  Jonah,  of  the  Greek  Period,  which  began  in  332,  the  date  of  Alexander's 
Syrian  campaign. 

The  same  plan  has  been  followed  as  in  Part  I.  A  historical  introduction  is 
offered  to  each  period.  To  each  prophet  are  given,  first  a  chapter  of  critical  intro- 
duction, and  then  one  or  more  chapters  of  exposition.  A  complete  translation  has 
been  furnished,  v/ith  critical  and  explanatory  notes.  All  questions  of  date  and  of 
text,  and  nearly  all  of  interpretation,  have  been  confined  to  the  introductions  and  the 
notes,  so  that  those  who  consult  the  book  only  for  expository  purposes  will  find 
the  exposition  unencumbered  by  the  discussion  of  technical  points. 

The  necessity  of  including  within  one  volume  so  many  prophets,  scattered  over 
more  than  three  centuries,  and  each  of  them  requiring  a  separate  introduction,  has 
reduced  the  space  available  for  the  practical  application  of  their  teaching  to  modern 
life.  But  this  is  the  less  to  be  regretted,  that  the  contents  of  the  nine  books  before 
us  are  not  so  applicable  to  our  own  day  as  we  have  found  their  greater  predeces- 
sors to  be.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  they  form  a  more  varied  introduction  to 
Old  Testament  Criticism,  while,  by  the  long  range  of  time  which  they  cover,  and  the 
many  stages  of  religion  to  which  they  belong,  they  afford  a  wider  view  of  the  devel- 
opment  of  prophecy.     Let  us  look  for  a  little  at  these  two  points. 

I.  To  Old  Testament  Criticism  these  books  furnish  valuable  introduction — some 
of  them,  like  Obadiah,  Joel,  and  "Zechariah  "  ix.-xiv.,  by  the  great  variety  of  opin- 
ion that  has  prevailed  as  to  their  dates  or  their  relation  to  other  prophets  with  whom 
they  have  passages  in  common  ;  some,  like  Zechariah  and  "  Malachi,"  by  their  rela- 
tion to  the  Law,  in  the  light  of  modern  theories  of  the  origin  of  the  latter;  and 
some,  like  Joel  and  Jonah,  by  the  question  whether  we  are  to  read  them  as  history, 
or  as  allegories  of  history,  or  as  apocalypse.  That  is  to  say,  these  nine  books  raise, 
besides  the  usual  questions  of  genuineness  and  integrity,  every  other  possible  prob- 
lem of  Old  Testament  Criticism.  It  has,  therefore,  been  necessary  to  make  the  crit- 
ical introductions  full  and  detailed.  The  enormous  differences  of  opinion  as  to  the 
dates  of  some  must  start  the  suspicion  of  arbitrariness,  unless  there  be  included  in 
each  case  a  history  of  the  development  of  criticism,  so  as  to  exhibit  to  the  English 
reader  the  principles  and  the  evidence  of  fact  upon  which  that  criticism  is  based.  I 
*am  convinced  that  what  is  chiefly  required  just  now  by  the  devout  student  of  the 
Bible  is  the  opportunity  to  judge  for  himself  how  far  Old  Testament  Criticism  is  an 
adult  science  ;  with  what  amount  of  reasonableness  it  has  been  prosecuted  ;  how 
gradually  its  conclusions  have  been  reached,  how  jealously  they  have  been  contested; 
and  how  far,  amid  the  many  varieties  of  opinion  which  must  always  exist  with  refer- 

553 


554  '  PREFACE. 

ence  to  facts  so  ancient  and  questions  so  obscure,  there  has^  been  progress  towards 
agreement  upon  the  leading  problems.  But,  besides  the  accounts  of  past  criticism 
given  in  this  book,  the  reader  will  find  in  each  case  an  independent  attempt  to 
arrive  at  a  conclusion.  This  has  not  always  been  successful.  A  number  of  points 
have  been  left  in  doubt ;  and  even  where  results  have  been  stated  with  some  degree 
of  positiveness,  the  reader  need  scarcely  be  warned  (after  what  was  said  in  the 
Preface  to  Part  I.)  that  many  of  these  must  necessarily  be  provisional.  But,  in  look- 
ing back  from  the  close  of  this  work  upon  the  discussions  which  it  contains,  I  am 
more  than  ever  convinced  of  the  extreme  probability  of  most  of  the  conclusions. 
Among  these  are  the  following:  that  the  correct  interpretation  of  Habakkuk  is  to  be 
found  in  the  direction  of  the  position  to  which  Budde's  ingenious  proposal  has  been 
carried  on  pages  590  ff.  with  reference  to  Egypt ;  that  the  most  of  Obadiah  is  to  be 
dated  from  the  sixth  century  ;  that  "  Malachi  "  is  an  anonymous  work  from  the  eve 
of  Ezra's  reforms  ;  that  Joel  follows  "  Malachi  "  ;  and  that  "  Zechariah  "  ix.-xiv.  has 
been  rightly  assigned  by  Stade  to  the  early  years  of  the  Greek  Period.  I  have  ven- 
tured to  contest  Kosters'  theory  that  there  was  no  return  of  Jewish  exiles  under 
Cyrus,  and  am  the  more  disposed  to  believe  his  strong  argument  inconclusive,  not 
only  upon  a  review  of  the  reasons  I  have  stated  in  chap,  xvi.,  but  on  this  ground 
also,  that  many  of  its  chief  adherents  in  this  country  and  Germany  have  so  modified 
it  as  virtually  to  give  up  its  main  contention.  I  think,  too,  there  can  be  little  doubt 
as  to  the  substantial  authenticity  of  Zephaniah  ii.  (except  the  verses  on  Moab  and 
Ammon)  and  iii.  1-13,  of  Habakkuk  ii.  5  ff.^  and  of  the  whole  of  Haggai ;  or  as  to  the 
ungenuine  character  of  the  lyric  piece  in  Zechariah  ii.  and  the  intrusion  of  "  Malachi  " 
ii.  11-13^.  On  these  and  smaller  points  the  reader  will  find  full  discussion  at  the 
proper  places. 

[I  may  here  add  a  word  or  two  upon  some  of  the  critical  conclusions  reached  in 
Part  I.,  which  have  been  recently  contested.  The  student  will  find  strong  grounds 
offered  by  Canon  Driver  in  his  "  Joel  and  Amos"*  for  the  authenticity  of  those  pas- 
sages in  Amos  which,  following  other  critics,  I  regarded  or  suspected  as  not  authen- 
tic. It  makes  one  diffident  in  one's  opinions  when  Canon  Driver  supports  Professors 
Kuenen  and  Robertson  Smith  on  the  other  side.  But  on  a  survey  of  the  case  I  am 
unable  to  feel  that  even  they  have  removed  what  they  admit  to  be  "  forcible  "  objec- 
tions to  the  authorship  by  Amos  of  the  passages  in  question.  They  seem  to  me  to 
have  established  not  more  than  a  possibility  that  the  passages  are  authentic;  and  on 
the  whole  I  still  feel  that  the  probability  is  in  the  other  direction.  If  I  am  right, 
then  I  think  that  the  date  of  the  apostrophes  to  Jehovah's  creative  power  which 
occur  in  the  Book  of  Amos,  and  the  reference  to  astral  deities  in  chap.  v.  27, 
may  be  that  which  I  have  suggested  on  page  562  of  this  Part,  Some  critics  have 
charged  me  with  inconsistency  in  denying  the  authenticity  of  the  epilogue  to  Amos 
while  defending  that  of  the  epilogue  to  Hosea.  The  two  cases,  as  my  arguments 
proved,  are  entirely  different.  Nor  do  I  see  any  reason  to  change  the  conclusions  of 
Part  I.  upon  the  questions  of  the  authenticity  of  various  parts  of  Micah.] 

The  text  of  the  nine  prophets  treated  in  this  book  has  presented  even  more» 
difificulties  than  that  of  the  three  treated  in  Part  I.     And  these  difficulties  must  be 
my  apology  for  the  delay  of  this  work. 

2.  But  the  critical  and  textual  value  of  our  nine  books  is  far  exceeded  by  the 
historical.  Each  exhibits  a  development  of  Hebrew  prophecy  of  the  greatest  inter- 
est.    From  this  point  of  view,  indeed,  the  book  might  be  entitled  "  The  Passing  of 

*  "  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools,"  1897, 


PREFACE. 


555 


the  Prophet."  For  throughout  our  nine  books  we  see  the  spirit  and  the  style  of  the 
classic  prophecy  of  Israel  gradually  dissolving  into  other  forms  of  religious  thought 
and  feeling.  The  clear  start  from  the  facts  of  the  prophet's  day,  the  ancient  truths 
about  Jehovah  and  Israel,  and  the  direct  appeal  to  the  conscience  of  the  prophet's 
contemporaries,  are  not  always  given,  or  when  given  are  mingled,  coloured,  and 
warped  by  other  religious  interests,  both  present  and  future,  which  are  even  power- 
ful enough  to*  shake  the  ethical  absolutism  of  the  older  prophets.  With  Nahum  and 
Obadiah  the  ethical  is  entirely  missed  in  the  presence  of  the  claims — and  we  cannot, 
deny  that  they  were  natural  claims — of  the  long-suffering  nation's  hour  of  revenge 
upon  her  heathen  tyrants.  With  Zephaniah  prophecy,  still  austerely  ethical,  passes 
under  the  shadow  of  apocalypse  ;  and  the  future  is  solved,  not  upon  purely  historical 
lines,  but  by  the  intervention  of  "  supernatural  "  elements.  With  Habakkuk  the 
ideals  of  the  older  prophets  encounter  the  shock  of  the  facts  of  experience :  we  have 
the  prophet  as  sceptic.  Upon  the  other  margin  of  the  Exile,  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
(i.-viii.),  although  they  are  as  practical  as  any  of  their  predecessors,  exhibit  the  influ- 
ence of  the  exilic  developments  of  ritual,  angelology,  and  apocalypse.  God  appears 
further  off  from  Zechariah  than  from  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century,  and  in  need 
of  mediators,  human  and  superhuman.  With  Zechariah  the  priest  has  displaced  the 
prophet,  and  it  is  very  remarkable  that  no  place  is  found  for  the  latter  beside  the  two 
sons  of  oil,  the  political  and  priestly  heads  of  the  community,  who,  according  to  the 
Fifth  Vision,  stand  in  the  presence  of  God  and  between  them  feed  the  religious  life 
of  Israel.  Nearly  sixty  years  later  "  Malachi "  exhibits  the  working  of  Prophecy 
within  the  Law,  and  begins  to  employ  the  didactic  style  of  the  later  Rabbinism. 
Joel  starts,  like  any  older  prophet,  from  the  facts  of  his  own  day,  but  these  hurry 
him  at  once  into  apocalypse;  he  calls,  as  thoroughly  as  any  of  his  predecessors,  to 
repentance,  but  under  the  imminence  of  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  with  its  "  supernat- 
ural"  terrors,  he  mentions  no  special  sin  and  enforces  no  single  virtue.  The  civic 
and  personal  ethics  of  the  earlier  prophets  are  absent.  In  the  Greek  Period,  the 
oracles  now  numbered  from  the  ninth  to  the  fourteenth  chapters  of  the  Book  of 
Zechariah  repeat  to  aggravation  the  exulting  revenge  of  Nahum  and  Obadiah,  with- 
out the  strong  style  or  the  hold  upon  history  which  the  former  exhibits,  and  show  us 
prophecy  still  further  enwrapped  in  apocalypse.  But  in  the  Book  of  Jonah,  though 
it  is  parable  and  not  history,  we  see  a  great  recovery  and  expansion  of  the  best  ele- 
ments of  prophecy.  God's  character  and  Israel's  true  mission  to  the  world  are 
revealed  in  the  spirit  of  Hosea  and  of  the  Seer  of  the  Exile,  with  much  of  the  tender- 
ness, the  insight,  the  analysis  of  character,  and  even  the  humour  of  classic  prophecy. 
These  qualities  raise  the  Book  of  Jonah,  though  it  is  probably  the  latest  of  our 
Twelve,  to  the  highest  rank  among  them.  No  book  is  more  worthy  to  stand  by  the 
side  of  Isaiah  xl.-lv. ;  none  is  nearer  in  spirit  to  the  New  Testament. 

All  this  gives  unity  to  the  study  of  prophets  so  far  separate  in  time,  and  so  very 
distinct  in  character,  from  each  other.  From  Zephaniah  to  Jonah,  or  over  a  period 
of  three  centuries,  they  illustrate  the  dissolution  of  Prophecy  and  its  passage  into 
other  forms  of  religion. 

The  scholars  to  whom  every  worker  in  this  field  is  indebted  are  named  through- 
out the  book.  I  regret  that  Nowack's  recent  commentary  on  the  Minor  Prophets 
(Gottingen :  Vandenhoeck  &  Ruprecht)  reached  me  too  late  for  use  (except  in  foot- 
notes) upon  the  earlier  of  the  nine  prophets. 

George  Adam  Smith 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION    TO    THE   PROPHETS   OF 
THE   SEVENTH   CENTURY. 

C-HAI'I'KK     I. 

PAGE 

The  Seventh  Century  before  Christ,  .        .     561 

ZEPHANIAH. 

Chapter  II. 

The   Book  of  Zephaniah,       ....    568 

Chapter   III. 
The  Prophet  and  the  Reformers,  .        .     571 

Chapter  IV. 
Ninive    Delenda, 575 

Chapter  V. 
So  as  by  Fire, 576 

NAHUM. 

Chapter  VI. 

The  Book  of  Nahum 579 

Chapter  VII. 
The  Vengeance  of  the  Lord,         .        ,        .    582 

Chapter  VIII. 
The  Siege  and  Fall  of  Nineveh,  .        ,        .    583 

HABAKKUK. 

Chapter  IX. 

The  Book  of  Habakkuk,       ....     587 

Chapter  X. 
The  Prophet  as  Sceptic,        ....     591 

Chapter  XI. 
Tyranny  is  Suicide 594 

Cm  \ptek   XII, 
"  In  the  Midst  of  the  Years."      .        .        .595 


OBADIAH. 
Chapter  XIII. 

PAGE 

The  Book  of  Obadiah, 598 

Chapter  XIV. 
Edom  and  Israel 602 

INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    PROPHETS    OF 
THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD. 

Chapter  XV. 

Israel  under  the  Persians,     ....    604 

Chapter  XVI. 

From    the    Return    from    Babylon    to    the 

Building  of  the  Temple  (536-516  b.  c.)  .     606 

HAGGAI. 

Chapter  XVII. 
The  Book  of  Haggai, 613 

Chapter  XVIII. 
Haggai  and  the  Building  of  the  Temple,    .    615 

ZECHARIAH. 

Chapter  XIX. 
The  Book  of  Zechariah  (i.-viii.),  .        .        .    620 

Chapter  XX. 
Zechariah  the  Prophet, 623 

Chapter  XXI. 

The  Visions  of  Zechariah 625 

Chapter  XXII. 
The  Angels  of  the  Visions,  ....    635 

Chapter  XXIII. 
"  The  Seed  of  Peace," 637 

"  MALACHI." 

Chapter  XXIV. 

The  Book  of  "  Malachi,"       ....    640 


558  "  CONTENTS. 

Chapter  XXV.  "  ZECHARIAH." 

PAGE 

From  Zechariah  to  "  Malachi,"  .        .        .642  Chapter  XXXII. 

PAGE 

Chapter  XXVI.  "  Zechariah  "    ix.-xiv., 668 

Prophecy  within  the  Law,     .        .        .        .644  Chapter  XXXIII. 

Tffpr  The  Contents  of  "  Zechariah "  ix.-xiv.,       .    671 

Chapter  XXVII.  JONAH. 

The  Book  of  Joel 651  Chapter  XXXIV. 

Chapter  XXVIII.  The  Book  of  Jonah, 679 

The  Locusts  and  the  Day  of  the  Lord,       .     657  Chapter  XXXV. 

Chapti-.r  XXIX.  The  Great  Refusal, 684 

Prosperity  and   the    Spirit,    .        .        .        .662  Chapter  XXXVI. 

Chapter  XXX.  The  Great  Fish  and  What  It  Means— The 

^,      ,    ,  r    ,      TT      ,  ^^  Psalm, 687 

The  Judgment  of  the   Heathen,  .        .        .    005 

Chapter  XXXVII. 

INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    PROPHETS    OF  ^,     ^         ,             ,  ,,      ^.,                                 ^aa 

THE  GRECIAN  PERIOD.  The  Repentance  of  the  City,          ...    688 

Chapter  XXXI.  Chapter  XXXVIII. 

Israel  and  the  Greeks,  ......    666  Israel's  Jealousy  of  Jehovah,       ,        .             690 


CHRONOLOGICAL   TABLE    No.    I. 

FROM   THE   FALL    OF  SAMARLA    TO    THE   FALL    OF  JERUSALEM. 

%*  c.=ctrca:  it  refers  chiefly  to  the  accession  of  the  kings  of  Judah  ;  the  years  are  exact  so  far  as 
they  concern  nearly  all  the  Assyrian  data.  A  date  opposite  the  mere  name  of  a  king  signifies  the 
year  of  his  accession. 


1^7  c. 

733  or  I 
7*0  or  ig 

7IS 


709 
70s 


«>4 
7PI 


692 
681 

•78 

676 

67S 
674 
671 

£68 

666 
664  «. 


663  f. 


663 

6'i3 

649 

647 
64s 

641  f. 
639^. 
630  f. 

627 
*abc. 

635 


620  f. 

610 

608 


607-6 

60s 

604 

oo3or6oo 


S99ors97 
597 


S94 
S93 


S89 
587-6 


TUuLrka. 
Defeat  of  Egypt 


Taharka    defeated 

at  Memphis 
Taharka    regains 

Egypt- 

Taharka  over- 
thrown, Memphis 
taken,  Dodek- 
arcby  established 

Urrtamman  over- 
thrown and 
Thebes  taken 

Fsamtlk  I. 

Psamtik  I..    . 


N«eho  XL 

Necbo  defeats  and 


Necbb  defeated 


Pumtikn. 


UtJi-ab-n ' 

(Hopbra,  Apries) 


HexekUh. 

(Siege  of  Samaria  begins.) 

(Fall  of  Samaria. ) 


(Samaria  peopled 


Events  in  Isaiah  zxxix.? 
Invasion  of  Judah     . 
Deliverance  of  Jertisalem. 


Manasseb  and  . 


Manasseb  and  . 


Amoa. 

JOBlOb. 


Jeremiah  appears. 


Book  of  the  Law  (Deut.  v.- 
xxvi.,  xxviii.)  discovered. 

Josiah's  reforms  begin. 
Passover  (a  Kings  xxii., 
xxiii.). 


ays  Josiah  at  Megiddo 
judah  Egyptian  vassal. 
Jehoahaz     reigns     three 
months:  taken  to  Egypt. 
Jehoialdm  succeeds. 


Judah  vassal     , 

but  is  subdued  (z  Kings 

xxiv.  aff.). 
Judah  withholds 
Judah  invaded  . 
Jeholachin  yields     . 
Temple  plundered. 
First  Great  Exile 
Zedeldali  vassal 


Jewish  revolt     . 

stayed  by  Jeremiah, 
offers  help  to  Zedekiab,  who 


Jerusalem  taken 
Second  Great  Exile 


Isaiah. 
Mlcah. 


Kepbanlah. 


7HabaK- 
knk. 


?Kahtun. 


PHILISTIA,     PUCENICIA, 
ARABIA,  CYPRUS,   ETC. 


Gaza  overthrown  by . 


Asbdod  taken  by 


and  all  Palestine 
Siege  of  Ekron. 
at  Battle  of  Eltekeb 


Sidan  subdued  and  Sidoniflnt 

deported         .        .        .        .by  Asarhaddon. 
21  Palestine  princes  pay  tribute  to  Assyria 

also  Greek  princes  of  Cyprus. 
Arabia  invad»l  ,        .        . 
Sinai  invaded     .        .        .        , 
Tyre  besieged    .... 


ShalmaneMT  IV. 

Bargon  takes  Samaria. 

Sargon  as  be  marches  past  Judah 

and  defeats  Egypt  at  Rapbia. 
by  subjugated  tnbes  deported  from 

Assyria.) 
Sargon. 
Sargon  takes  Babylon  from 

Herodach-Baladu. 
Death  of  SaTgen. 
Accession  of  Sennacherib. 
War  with  Merodach-Baladan. 
by  Sennacherib. 

by  Sennacherib, 

Sennacherib  destroys  Babylon^ 
Sennacherib  murdered. 
Asarliaddoa 


by  Asarhaddon. 
by  Asarhaddon. 
by  Asarhaddon. 

by  Asarhaddon. 
ABsorbanlpal. 


31  Palestine  princes  pay  tribnte  to  Assyria. 


(Palestine  t>rlnces  aiding)  . 


by  Assurbanipal. 
I  and  Egyptian  campaign  of 
I     Assurbanipal. 

by  Assurbanipal. 


Tyre  and  Arvad  taken 

Palestine  princes,  Arabia,  Lydia,  Elam  and  Babylon  revolt  from 

Assyria. 
Assurbanipal  reduces  Elam  and 

Babylon. 

{reduced  in  two  campaigns  by 
Assurbanipal. 
punished  by  Asstu-banipaL 
Assurbanipal. 


Havtran,  N.  Arabia  and  Edom  ) 
Ammon ,  Moab  and  Nabatea    J 
Usu  "  by  the  sea  "  and  Akko 
T^  assists,  against  Arvad, 


Western  Palestine     . 


by  Moab,  Ammon  and  Arameans 


Scythians  invade  Media  and 
Western  Asia. 

invaded  by  Scythians, 
Assur-itil-UanL 
Niniveh  attacked  by  Medes. 
Nabopolassar  independent  in 
Babylon. 


gin-tftr-Qikl2L 

and  Nebuchadreuar  on  Euphrates 


Fall   of  Niniveh  to   Medes  and 
Chaldeans  under  Nabopolassar. 
by  Nebuchadrezzar  at  Carchemish. 
Mebuchadrezsar. 
of  Babylon  (3  Kings  xxiv.  i); 

tribute  from  Babylon, 
in  alliance  with. Babylon, 
to  Nebuchadrezzar. 

to  Babylonia, 
of  Babylon. 

against  Babylon, 

revolts  from  Babylon. 

by  Nebuchadreuar. 
to  Babylonia. 


733  or  I 
730  or  19 


7" 
709 


704 
701 


69a 
681 


678 

67S 
674 
671 

670*. 

668 


664  <; 
663*. 

663 
652 

649 

647 
64s 

641 

630  c. 

636  r. 
6»s 


?6ao«. 
608 


6076 

60s 
604 
60a  or  600 


S99  0r  J97I 
597 


593 
5S9 
S«;-6 


THE    BOOK    OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


BY     GEORGE     ADAM     SMITH,     D.     D.,     LL.     D. 


PART    II.  ing  the   Decline  and   Fall   of  Nineveh,   and  the 

prophets  Nahum  and  Habakkuk,  with  an  addi- 
INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    PROPHETS    OF    tion  carrying  on  the  history  to  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY.  salem  in  587-586. 

I.  Reaction  under  Manasseh  and  Amon 

(695?-639)- 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  BEFORE 
CHRIST. 

The  three  prophets  who  were  treated  in  the 
first  volume  of  this  work  belonged  to  the  eighth 
century  before  Christ:  if  Micah  lived  into  the 
seventh  his  labours  were  over  by  675.  The  next 
group  of  our  twelve,  also  three  in  number, 
Zephaniah,  Nahum,  and  Habakkuk,  did  not  ap- 
pear till  after  630.  To  make  our  study  continu- 
ous *  we  must  now  sketch  the  course  of  Israel's 
history  between. 

In  another  volume  of  this  series,  f  some  ac- 
count was  given  of  the  religious  progress  of 
Israel  from  Isaiah  and  the  Deliverance  of  Jeru- 
salem in  701  to  Jeremiah  and  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
salem in  587.  Isaiah's  strength  was  bent  upon 
establishing  the  inviolableness  of  Zion.  Zion,  he 
said,  should  not  be  taken,  and  the  people,  though 
cut  to  their  roots,  should  remain  planted  in  their 
own  land,  the  stock  of  a  noble  nation  in  the 
latter  days.  But  Jeremiah  predicted  the  ruin 
both  of  City  and  Temple,  summoned  Jerusalem's 
enemies  against  her  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  and 
counselled  his  people  to  submit  to  them.  This 
reversal  of  the  prophetic  ideal  had  a  twofold 
reason.  In  the  first  place  the  moral  condition  of 
Israel  was  worse  in  600  b.  c.  than  it  had  been 
in  700;  another  century  had  shown  how  much 
the  nation  needed  the  penalty  and  purgation  of 
exile.  But  secondly,  however  the  inviolableness 
of  Jerusalem  had  been  required  in  the  interests 
of  pure  religion  in  701,  religion  had  now  to 
show  that  it  was  independent  even  of  Zion  and 
of  Israel's  political  survival.  Our  three  prophets 
of  the  eighth  century  (as  well  as  Isaiah  him- 
self) had  indeed  preached  a  gospel  which  implied 
this,  but  it  was  reserved  to  Jeremiah  to  prove 
that  the  existence  of  state  and  temple  was  not 
indispensable  to  faith  in  God,  and  to  explain  the 
ruin  of  Jerusalem,  not  merely  as  a  well-merited 
penance,  but  as  the  condition  of  a  more  spiritual 
intercourse  between  Jehovah  and  His  people. 

It  is  our  duty  to  trace  the  course  of  events 
through  the  seventh  century,  which  led  to  this 
change  of  the  standpoint  of  prophecy,  and  which 
moulded  the  messages  especially  of  Jeremiah's 
contemporaries,  Zephaniah,  Nahum,  and  Habak- 
kuk. We  may  divide  the  century  into  three 
periods:  First,  that  of  the  Reaction  and  Persecu- 
tion under  Manasseh  and  Anion,  from  695  or 
690  to  639,  during  which  prophecy  was  silent 
or  anonymous;  Second,  that  of  the  Early  Years 
of  Josiah,  639  to  625,  near  the  end  of  which  we 
meet  with  the  young  Jeremiah  and  Zephaniah; 
Third,  the  Rest  of  the  Century,  625  to  Ooo,  cover- 


*  See  p.  435. 

t" Expositor's  Bible,"  "Isaiah  xl.-lxvi."  chap.  ii. 


36— Vol.  IV. 


Jerusalem  was  delivered  in  701,  and  the  Assyr- 
ians kept  away  from  Palestine  for  twenty-three 
years.*  Judah  had  peace,  and  Hezekiah  was  free 
to  devote  'his  latter  days  to  the  work  of  purifying 
the  worship  of  his  people.  What  he  exactly 
achieved  is  uncertain.  The  historian  imputes  to 
him  the  removal  of  the  high  places,  the  destruc- 
tion of  all  Magqeboth  and  Asheras,  and  of  the 
brazen  serpent. f  That  his  measures  were  drastic 
is  probable  from  the  opinions  of  Isaiah,  who 
was  their  inspiration,  and  proved  by  the  reaction 
which  they  provoked  when  Hezekiah  died.  The 
removal  of  the  high  places  and  the  concentration 
of  the  national  worship  within  the  Temple  would 
be  the  more  easy  that  the  provincial  sanctuaries 
had  been  devastated  by  the  Assyrian  invasion, 
and  that  the  shrine  of  Jehovah  was  glorified  by 
the  raising  of  the  siege  of  701. 

While  the  first  of  Isaiah's  great  postulates  for 
the  future,  the  inviolableness  of  Zion,  had  been 
fulfilled,  the  second,  the  reign  of  a  righteous 
prince  in  Israel,  seemed  doomed  to  disappoint- 
ment. Hezekiah  died  early  in  the  seventh  cen- 
tury,:]: and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Manasseh, 
a  boy  of  twelve,  who  appears  to  have  been  cap- 
tured by  the  party  whom  his  father  had  opposed. 
The  few  years'  peace — peace  in  Israel  was  al- 
ways dangerous  to  the  health  of  the  higher  re- 
ligion— the  interests  of  those  who  had  suffered 
from  the  reforms,  the  inevitable  reaction  which 
a  rigorous  puritanism  provokes — these  swiftly 
reversed  the  religious  fortunes  of  Israel.  Isaiah's 
and  Micah's  predictions  of  the  final  overthrow 
of  Assyria  seemed  falsified,  when  in  681  the  more 
vigorous  Asarhaddon  succeeded  Sennacherib, 
and  in  678  swept  the  long  absent  armies  back 
upon  Syria.  Sidon  was  destroyed,  and  twenty- 
two  princes  of  Palestine  immediately  yielded 
their  tribute  to  the  conqueror.  Manasseh  was 
one  of  them,  and  his  political  homage  may  have 
brought  him,  as  it  brought  Ahaz,  within  the  in- 
fection of  foreign  idolatries. §  Everything,  in 
short,  worked  for  the  revival  of  that  eclectic 
paganism  which  Hezekiah  had  striven  to  stamp 
out.  The  high  places  were  rebuilt;  altars  were 
erected  to  Baal,  with  the  sacred  pole  of  Asherah, 
as  in  the  time  of  Ahab;||    shrines  to  the  "host 

*  It  is  uncertain  whether  Hezekiah  was  an  Assyrian 
vassal  during  these  years,  as  his  successor  Manasseh  is 
recorded  to  have  been  in  676. 

t  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 

t  The  exact  date  is  quite  uncertain  ;  695  is  suggested  on 
the  chronological  table  prefixed  to  this  volume,  but  it 
may  have  been  690  or  685. 

§  C/.  McCurdy,  "  History,  Prophecy  and  the  Monu- 
ments," §  79q. 

II  Stade  ("Gesch.  des  Vqlkes  Israel,"  I.  pp.  627  f.)  denies 
to  Manasseh  the  reconstruction  of  the  high  places,  the 
Baal  altars,  and  the  Asheras,  for  he  does  not  believe  that 
Hezekiah  had  succeeded  in  destroj'ing  these.  He  takes 
2  Kings  xxi.  3,  which  describes  these  reconstructions,  as 
a  late  interpolation  rendered  necessary  to  reconcile  the 
tradition  that  Hezekiah's  reforms  had  been  quite  in  the 


561 


S62 


THE"  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


of  heaven  "  defiled  the  courts  of  Jehovah's  house; 
there  was  recrudescence  of  sooth-saying,  divina- 
tion, and  traffic  with  the  dead. 

But  it  was  all  very  different  from  the  secure 
and  sunny  temper  which  Amos  had  encountered 
in  Northern  Israel.*  The  terrible  Assyrian  in- 
vasions had  come  between.  Life  could  never 
again  feel  so  stable.  Still  more  destructive  h.ad 
been  the  social  poisons  which  our  prophets  de- 
scribed as  sapping  the  constitution  of  Israel  for 
nearly  three  generations.  The  rural  simplicity 
was  corrupted  by  those  economic  changes  which 
Micah  bewails.  With  the  ousting  of  the  old 
families  from  the  soil,  a  thousand  traditions, 
memories,  and  habits  must  have  been  broken, 
which  had  preserved  the  people's  presence  of 
mind  in  days  of  sudden  disaster,  and  had  carried 
them,  for  instance,  through  so  long  a  trial  as 
the  Syrian  wars.  Nor  could  the  blood  of  Israel 
have  run  so  pure  after  the  luxury  and  licentious- 
ness described  by  Hosea  and  Isaiah.  The  novel 
obligations  of  commerce,  the  greed  to  be  rich, 
the  increasing  distress  among  the  poor,  had 
strained  the  joyous  temper  of  that  nation  of 
peasants'  sons,  whom  we  met  with  Amos,  and 
shattered  the  nerves  of  their  rulers.  There  is  no 
word  of  fighting  in  Manasseh's  days,  no  word 
of  revolt  against  the  tyrant.  Perhaps  also  the 
intervening  puritanism,  which  had  failed  to  give 
the  people  a  permanent  faith,  had  at  least  awak- 
ened within  them  a  new  conscience. 

At  all  events  there  is  now  no  more  "  ease  in 
Zion,"  but  a  restless  fear,  driving  the  people  to 
excesses  of  religious  zeal.  We  do  not  read  of 
the  happy  country  festivals  of  the  previous  cen- 
tury, nor  of  the  careless  pride  of  that  sudden 
wealth  which  built  vast  palaces  and  loaded  the 
altar  of  Jehovah  with  hecatombs.  The  full- 
blooded  patriotism,  which  at  least  kept  ritual  in 
touch  with  clean  national  issues,  has  vanished. 
The  popular  religion  is  sullen  and  exasperated. 
It  takes  the  form  of  sacrifices  of  frenzied  cruelty 
and  lust.  Children  are  passed  through  the  fire 
to  Moloch,  and  the  Temple  is  defiled  by  the 
orgies  of  those  who  abuse  their  bodies  to  pro- 
pitiate a  foreign  and  a  brutal  god.f 

But  the  most  certain  consequence  of  a  religion 
whose  nerves  are  on  edge  is  persecution,  and 
this  raged  all  the  earlier  years  of  Manasseh.  The 
adherents  of  the  purer  faith  were  slaughtered,  and 
Jerusalem  drenched^  vvith  innocent  blood.  Her 
"  own  sword,"  says  Jeremiah,  "  devoured  the 
prophets  like  a  destroying  lion."§ 

It  is  significant  that  all  that  has  come  down 
to  us  from  this  "killing  time"  is  anonymous;  || 
we  do  not  meet  with  our  next  group  of  public 
prophets  till  Manasseh  and  his  like-minded  son 
have  passed  away.  Yet  prophecy  was  not  wholly 
stified.  Voices  were  raised  to  predict  the  exile 
and  destruction  of  the  nation.     "  Jehovah  spake 

spirit  of  Deuteronomy,  with  the  fact  that  there  were  still 
high  places  in  the  land  when  Josiah  began  his  reforms. 
Further,  Stade  takes  the  rest  of  2  Kings  xxi.  2  b-j  as  also 
an  interpolation,  but  unlike  verse  3  an  accurate  account 
of  Manasseh's  idolatrous  institutions,  because  it  is  corrob- 
orated by  the  account  of  Josiah's  reforms,  2  Kings  Kxiii. 
Stade  also  discusses  this  passage  in  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1886, 
pp.  186  ff. 

*  See  p.  452.  In  addition  to  the  reasons  of  the  change 
given  above,  we  must  remember  that  we  are  now 
treating,  not  of  Northern  Israel,  but  of  the  more  stern 
and  sullen  Judeans. 

+  2  Kings  xxi.,  xxiii. 

I  "  Filled  from  mouth  to  mouth  "  (2  Kings  xxi.  16). 
Sjer.  ii.  30. 

II  We  have  already  seen  that  there  is  no  reason  for  that 
theory  of  so  many  critics  which  assigns  to  this  period 
Micali.    See  p.  533. 


by  His  servants";*  while  others  wove  into  the 
prophecies  of  an  Amos,  a  Hosea,  or  an  Isaiah 
some  application  of  the  old  principles  to  the  new 
circumstances.  It  is  probable,  for  instance,  that 
the  extremely  doubtful  passage  in  the  Book  of 
Amos,  V.  26  f.,  which  imputes  to  Israel  as  a  whole 
the  worship  of  astral  deities  from  Assyria,  is 
to  be  assigned  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh.  In  its 
present  position  it  looks  very  like  an  intrusion: 
nowhere  else  does  Amos  charge  his  generation 
with  serving  foreign  gods;  and  certainly  in  all 
the  history  of  Israel  we  could  not  find  a  more 
suitable  period  for  so  specific  a  charge  than  the 
days  when  into  the  central  sanctuary  of  the  na- 
tional worship  images  were  introduced  of  the 
host  of  heaven,  and  the  nation  was,  in  conse- 
quence, threatened  with  exile. f 

In  times  of  persecution  the  documents  of  the 
suffering  faith  have  ever  been  reverenced  and 
guarded  with  especial  zeal.  It  is  not  improbable 
that  the  prophets,  driven  from  public  life,  gave 
themselves  to  the  arrangement  of  the  national 
scriptures;  and  some  critics  date  from  Manas- 
seh's reign  the  weaving  of  the  two  earliest  docu- 
ments of  the  Pentateuch  into  one  continuous 
book  of  history.^  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy 
forms  a  problem  by  itself.  The  legislation  which 
composes  the  bulk  of  it§  appears  to  have  been 
found  among  the  Temple  archives  at  the  end  of 
our  period,  and  presented  to  Josiah  as  an  old 
and  forgotten  work.  ||  There  is  no  reason  to 
charge  with  fraud  those  who  made  the  presen- 
tation by  affirming  that  they  really  invented 
the  book.  They  were  priests  of  Jerusalem, 
but  the  book  is  written  by  members  of  the 
prophetic  party,  and  ostensibly  in  the  interests 
of  the  priests  of  the  country.  It  betrays  no 
tremor  of  the  awful  persecutions  of  Manasseh's 
reign:  it  does  not  hint  at  the  distinction,  then  for 
the  first  time  apparent,  between  a  false  and  a 
true  Israel.  But  it  does  draw  another  distinc- 
tion, familiar  to  the  eighth  century,  between  the 
true  and  the  false  prophets.     The  political  and 

*2  Kings  xxi.  10  if. 

+  Whether  the  parenthetical  apostrophes  to  Jehovah  as 
Maker  of  the  heavens,  their  hosts,  and  all  the  powers  of 
nature  (Amos  iv.  13,  v.  8,  9,  ix.  5,  6),  are  also  to  be  attribu- 
ted to  Manasseh's  reign  is  more  doubtful.  Yet  the  fol- 
lowing facts  are  to  be  observed  :  that  these  passages  are 
also  (though  to  a  less  degree  than  v.  26  f.)  parenthetic 
that  their  language  seems  of  a  later  cast  than  that  or 
the  time  of  Amos  (see  p.  493 :  though  here  evidence 
is  adduced  to  show  that  the  late  features  are  prob- 
ably post-exilic) ;  and  that  Jehovah  is  expressly  named 
as  the  "  Maker  "  of  certain  of  the  stars.  Similarly  when 
Mohammed  seeks  to  condemn  the  worship  of  the  heavenly 
bodies,  he  insists  that  God  is  their  Maker.  Koran,  Sur. 
41,  37  :  "To  the  signs  of  His  Omnipotence  belong  night 
and  day,  sun  and  moon  ;  but  do  not  pray  to  sun  or  moon, 
for  God  hath  created  them."  Sur.  53,50:  "Because  He 
is  the  Lord  of  Sirius."  On  the  other  side  see  Driver's 
"Joel  and  Amos "  Cambridge  Bible  for  School  Series), 
i8(}7,  pp.  118  f.,  189. 

How  deeply  Manasseh  had  planted  in  Israel  the  wor- 
ship of  the  heavenly  host  may  be  seen  from  the  survival 
of  the  latter  through  all  the  reforms  of  Josiah  and  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  vii.  18,  viii.,  xliv.;  Ezek.  viii., 
Cf.  Stade,  "Gesch.  des  V.  Israel,"  I.,  pp.  629  ff.). 

X  The  Jehovist  and  Elohist  into  the  closely  mortised 
JE.  Stade  indeed  assigns  to  the  period  of  Manasseh 
Israel's  first  acquaintance  with  the  Babylonian  cosmogo- 
nies and  myths  which  led  to  that  reconstruction  of  them 
in  the  spirit  of  her  own  religion  which  we  find  in  the  Je- 
hovistic  portions  of  the  beginning  of  Genesis  ("  Gesch.  des 
V.  Isr.,"  I.  pp.  630  ff.).  But  it  may  well  be  doubted  (i) 
whether  the  reign  of  Manasseh  affords  time  for  this 
assimilation,  and  (2)  whether  it  was  likely  that  Assyrian 
and  Babylonian  theology  could  make  so  deep  and  lasting 
impression  upon  the  purer  faith  of  Israel  at  a  time  when 
the  latter  stood  in  such  sharp  hostility  to  all  foreign  influ- 
ences and  was  so  bitterly  persecuted  by  the  parties  in 
Israel  who  had  succumbed  to  these  influences. 

S  Chaps,  v.-xxvi.,  xxviii. 

II 621  B.  C. 


THE    SEVENTH   CENTURY    BEFORE    CHRIST. 


563 


spiritual  premisses  of  the  doctrine  of  the  book 
were  all  present  by  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah,  and  it  is  extremely  improbable  that  his  re- 
forms, which  were  in  the  main  those  of 
Deuteronomy,  were  not  accompanied  by  some 
code,  or  by  some  appeal  to  the  fountain  of  all 
law  in  Israel. 

But  whether  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  now 
existed  or  not,  there  were  those  in  the  nation 
who  through  all  the  dark  days  between  Hezekiah 
and  Josiah  laid  up  its  truth  in  their  hearts  and 
were  ready  to  assist  the  latter  monarch  in  his 
public  enforcement  of  it. 

While  these  things  happened  within  Judah, 
very  great  events  were  taking  place  beyond  her 
borders.  Asarhaddon  of  Assyria  (681-668)  was 
a  monarch  of  long  purposes  and  thorough  plans. 
Before  he  invaded  Egypt,  he  spent  a  year  (675) 
in  subduing  the  restless  tribes  of  Northern 
Arabia,  and  another  (674)  in  conquering  the 
peninsula  of  Sinai,  an  an'cient  appanage  of 
Egypt.  Tyre  upon  her  island  baffled  his  as- 
saults, but  the  rest  of  Palestine  remained  sub- 
ject to  him.  He  received  his  reward  in  carrying 
the  Assyrian  arms  farther  into  Egypt  than  any 
of  his  predecessors,  and  about  670  took  Memphis 
from  the  Ethiopian  Pharaoh  Taharka.  Then  he 
died.  Assurbanipal,  who  succeeded,  lost  Egypt 
for  a  few  years,  but  about  665,  with  the  help  of 
his  tributaries  in  Palestine,  he  overthrew  Ta- 
harka, took  Thebes,  and  established  along  the 
Nile  a  series  of  vassal  states.  He  quelled  a  re- 
volt there  in  663  and  overthrew  Memphis  for 
a  second  time.  The  fall  of  the  Egyptian  capital 
resounds  through  the  rest  of  the  century;  we 
shall  hear  its  echoes  in  Nahum.  Tyre  fell  at 
last  with  Arvad  in  662.  But  the  Assyrian  em- 
pire ihad  grown  too  vast  for  human  hands  to 
grasp,  and  in  652  a  general  revolt  took  place 
in  Egypt,  Arabia,  Palestine,  Elam,  Babylon, 
and  Asia  Minor.  In  649  Assurbanipal  reduced 
Elam  and  Babylon;  and  by  two  further  cam- 
paigns (647  and  645)  Hauran,  Edom,  Ammon, 
Moab,  Nalsatea,  and  all  the  northern  Arabs.  On 
his  return  from  these  he  crossed  Western  Pales- 
tine to  the  sea  and  punished  Usu  and  Akko. 
It  is  very  remarkable  that,  while  Assurbanipal, 
who  thus  fought  the  neighbours  of  Judah,  makes 
no  mention  of  her,  nor  numbers  Manasseh 
among  the  rebels  whom  he  chastised,  the  Book 
of  Chronicles  should  contain  the  statement  that 
"  Jehovah  sent  upon  Manasseh  the  captains  of 
the  host  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  who  bound  him 
with  fetters  and  carried  him  to  Babylon."  * 
What  grounds  the  Chronicler  had  for  such  a 
statement  are  quite  unknown  to  us.  He  intro- 
duces Manasseh's  captivity  as  the  consequence 
of  idolatry,  and  asserts  that  on  his  restoration 
Manasseh  abolished  in  Judah  all  worship  save 
that  of  Jehovah,  but  if  this  happened  (and  the 
Book  of  Kings  has  no  trace  of  it)  it  was  with- 
out result.  Amon,  son  of  Manasseh,  continued 
to  sacrifice  to  all  the  images  which  his  father 
had  introduced. 

2.  The  Early  Years  of  Josiah  (639-625) : 
Jeremiah  and  Zephaniah. 

Amon  had  not  reigned  for  two  years  when 
"  his  servants  conspired  against  him,  and  he  was 
slain  in  his  own  house."!  But  the  "people  of 
the  land  "  rose  against  the  court,  slew  the  con- 
spirators,   and   secured    the    throne    for   Amon's 


*  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  n  S. 


t2  Kings  xxi.  23. 


son,  Josiah,  a  child  of  eight.  It  is  difiFicult  to 
know  what  we  ought  to  understand  by  these 
movements.  Amon,  who  was  slain,  was  an 
idolater;  the  popular  party,  who  slew  his  slayers, 
put  his  son  on  the  throne,  and  that  son,  unlike 
both  his  father  and  grandfather,  bore  a  name 
compounded  with  the  name  of  Jehovah.  Was 
Amon  then  slain  for  personal  reasons?  Did  the 
people,  in  their  rising,  have  a  zeal  for  Jeho- 
vah? Was  the  crisis  purely  political,  but 
usurped  by  some  school  or  party  of  Jehovah 
who  had  been  gathering  strength  through  the 
later  years  of  Manasseh,  and  waiting  for  some 
such  unsettlement  of  affairs  as  now  occurred? 
The  meagre  records  of  the  Bible  give  us  no 
help,  and  for  suggestions  towards  an  answer  we 
must  turn  to  the  wider  politics  of  the  time. 

Assurbanipal's  campaigns  of  647  and  645  were 
the  last  appearances  of  Assyria  in  Palestine.  He 
had  not  attempted  to  reconquer  Egypt,*  and  her 
king,  Psamtik  I.,  began  to  push  his  arms  north- 
ward. Progress  must  have  been  slow,  for  the 
siege  of  Ashdod,  which  Psamtik  probably  began 
after  645,  is  said  to  have  occupied  him  twenty- 
nine  years.  Still,  he  must  have  made  his  influ- 
ence to  be  felt  in  Palestine,  and  in  all  probability 
there  was  once  more,  as  in  the  days  of  Isaiah, 
an  Egyptian  party  in  Jerusalem.  As  the  power 
of  Assyria  receded  over  the  northern  horizon, 
the  fascination  of  her  idolatries  which  Manasseh 
had  established  in  Judah  must  have  waned.  The 
priests  of  Jehovah's  house,  jostled  by  their  pagan 
rivals,  would  be  inclined  to  make  common  cause 
with  the  prophets  under  a  persecution  which  both 
had  suffered.  With  the  loosening  of  the  As- 
syrian yoke  the  national  spirit  would  revive,  and 
it  is  easy  to  imagine  prophets,  priests,  and  peo- 
ple working  together  in  the  movement  which 
placed  the  child  Josiah  on  the  throne.  At  his 
tender  age,  he  must  have  been  wholly  in  the 
care  of  the  women  of  the  royal  house;  and 
among  these  the  influence  of  the  prophets  may 
have  found  adherents  more  readily  than  among 
the  counsellors  of  an  adult  prince.  Not  only  did 
the  new  monarch  carry  the  name  of  Jehovah  in 
his  own;  this  was  the  case  also  with  his  mother's 
father.!  In  the  revolt,  therefore,  which  raised 
this  unconscious  child  to  the  throne  and  in  the 
circumstances  which  moulded  his  character,  we 
may  infer  that  there  already  existed  the  germs 
of  the  great  work  of  reform  which  his  manhood 
achieved. 

For  some  time  little  change  would  be  possible, 
but  from  the  first  facts  were  working  for  great 
issues.  The  Book  of  Kings,  which  places  the 
destruction  of  the  idols  after  the  discovery  of 
the  law-book  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah's 
reign,  records  a  previous  cleansing  and  restora- 
tion of  the  house  of  Jehovah. :t  This  points  to 
the  growing  ascendency  of  the  prophetic  party 
during  the  first  fifteen  years  of  Josiah's  reign. 
Of  the  first  ten  years  we  know  nothing,  except 
that  the  prestige  of  Assyria  was  waning;  but  this 

♦But  in  his  conquests  of  Hauran,  Northern  Arabia,  and 
the  eastern  neighbours  of  Judah,  he  had  evidently  sought 
to  imitate  the  policy  of  Asarhaddon  in  675  f.,  and  secure 
firm  ground  in  Palestine  and  Arabia  for  a  subsequent 
attack  upon  Egypt.  That  this  never  came  shows  more 
than  anything  else  could  Assyria's  consciousness  of 
growing  weakness. 

t  The  name  of  Josiah's    Hil^K'Ss  )  niother  was  Jedidah 

(HT*!'),  daughter  of  Adaiah  ^^'!^}?)  of  Boskath  in  the 

Shephelah  of  Judah. 
t  2  Kings  xxii.,  xxiii. 


564 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


fact,  along  with  the  preaching  of  the  prophets, 
who  had  neither  a  native  tyrant  nor  the  exi- 
gencies of  a  foreign  alliance  to  silence  them, 
must  have  weaned  the  people  from  the  worship 
of  the  Assyrian  idols.  Unless  these  had  been 
discredited,  the  repair  of  Jehovah's  house  could 
hardly  have  been  attempted;  and  that  this  pro- 
gressed means  that  part  of  Josiah's  destruction 
of  the  heathen  images  took  place  before  the  dis- 
covery of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  which  happened 
in  consequence  of  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple. 

But  just  as  under  the  good  Hezekiah  the 
social  condition  of  the  people,  and  especially  the 
behaviour  of  the  upper  classes,  continued  to  be 
bad,  so  it  was  again  in  the  early  years  of  Josiah. 
There  was  a  "  remnant  of  Baal  "  *  in  the  land. 
The  shrines  of  "  the  host  of  heaven  "  might  have 
been  swept  from  the  Temple,  but  they  were  still 
worshipped  from  the  housetops. f  Men  swore 
by  the  Queen  of  Heaven,  and  by  Moloch,  the 
King.  Some  turned  back  from  Jehovah;  some, 
grown  up  in  idolatry,  had  not  yet  sought  Him. 
Idolatry  may  have  been  disestablished  from  the 
national  sanctuary:  its  practices  still  lingered 
(how  intelligibly  to  us!)  in  social  and  commer- 
cial life.  Foreign  fashions  were  afifected  by  the 
court  and  nobility;  trade,  as  always,  was  com- 
bined with  the  acknowledgment  of  foreign  gods,  t 
Moreover,  the  rich  were  fraudulent  and  cruel. 
The  ministers  of  justice,  and  the  great  in  the 
land,  ravened  among  the  poor.  Jerusalem  was 
full  of  oppression.  These  were  the  same  dis- 
orders as  Amos  and  Hosea  exposed  in  Northern 
Israel,  and  as  Micah  exposed  in  Jerusalem.  But 
one  new  trait  of  evil  was  added.  In  the  eighth 
century,  with  all  their  ignorance  of  Jehovah's 
true  character,  men  had  yet  believed  in  Him, 
gloried  in  His  energy,  and  expected  Him  to  act 
— were  it  only  in  accordance  with  their  low 
ideals.  They  had  been  alive  and  bubbling  with 
religion.  But  now  they  "  had  thickened  on  their 
lees."  They  had  grown  sceptical,  dull,  indiffer- 
ent; they  said  in  their  hearts,  "Jehovah  will  not 
do  good,  neither  will  He  do  evil!  " 

Now,  just  as  in  the  eighth  century  there  had 
risen,  contemporaneous  with  Israel's  social  cor- 
ruption, a  cloud  in  the  north,  black  and  pregnant 
with  destruction,  so  was  it  once  more.  But  the 
cloud  was  not  Assyria.  From  the  hidden  world 
beyond  her,  from  the  regions  over  Caucasus, 
vast,  nameless  hordes  of  men  arose,  and,  sweep- 
ing past  her  unchecked,  poured  upon  Palestine. 
This  was  the  great  Scythian  invasion  recorded  by 
Herodotus. §  We  have  almost  no  other  report 
than  his  few  paragraphs,  but  we  can  realise  the 
event  from  our  knowledge  of  the  Mongol  and 
Tartar  invasions  which  in  later  centuries  pur- 
sued the  same  path  southwards.  Living  in  the 
saddle,  and  (it  would  seem)  with  no  infantry  Bor 
chariots  to  delay  them,  these  Centaurs  swept  on 
with  a  speed  of  invasion  hitherto  unknown.  In 
630  they  had  crossed  the  Caucasus,  by  626  they 
were  on  the  borders  of  Egypt.  Psamtik  I.  suc- 
ceeded in  purchasing  their  retreat,||  and  they 
swept  back  again  as  swiftly  as  they  came.  They 
must  have  followed  the  old  Assyrian  war-paths 
of  the  eighth  century,  and,  without  foot-soldiers, 
had  probably  kept  even  more  closely  to  the 
plains.  In  Palestine  their  way  would  lie,  like 
Assyria's,  across  Hauran,  through  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon,  and  down  the  Philistine  coast,  and  in 

*  Zeph.  i.  4:  the  LXX.  reads  "names  of  Baal."    See 
below,  p.  570  n. 
t  Hid.,  5.  %  I.  102  ff. 

X  Ibid.,  8-12.  II  Herod.,  I.  105. 


fact  it  is  only  on  this  line  that  there  exists  any 
possible  trace  of  them.*  But  they  shook  the 
whole  of  Palestine  into  consternation.  Though 
Judah  among  her  hills  escaped  them,  as  she  es- 
caped the  earlier  campaigns  of  Assyria,  they 
showed  her  the  penal  resources  of  her  offended 
God.  Once  again  the  dark,  sacred  North  was 
seen  to  be  full  of  the  possibilities  of  doom. 

Behold,  therefore,  exactly  the  two  conditions, 
ethical  and  political,  which,  as  we  saw,  called 
forth  the  sudden  prophets  of  the  eighth  century, 
and  made  them  so  sure  of  their  message  of 
judgment:  on  the  one  side  Judah,  her  sins  call- 
ing aloud  for  punishment;  on  the  other  side, 
the  forces  of  punishment  swiftly  drawing  on. 
It  was  precisely  at  this  juncture  that  prophecy 
again  arose,  and  as  Amos,  Hosea,  Micah,  and 
Isaiah  appeared  in  the  end  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury, Zephaniah,  Habakkuk,  Nahum,  and  Jere- 
miah appeared  in  the  end  of  the  seventh.  The 
coincidence  is  exact,  and  a  remarkable  con- 
firmation of  the  truth  which  we  deduced  from 
the  experience  of  Amos,  that  the  assurance  of 
the  prophet  in  Israel  arose  from  the  coincidence 
of  his  conscience  with  his  political  observation. 
The  justice  of  Jehovah  demands  His  people's 
chastisement,  but  see — the  forces  of  chastisement 
are  already  upon  the  horizon.  Zephaniah  uses 
the  same  phrase  as  Amos:  "  the  Day  of  Jehovah," 
he  says,  "  is  drawing  near." 

We  are  now  in  touch  with  Zephaniah,  the  first 
of  our  prophets,  but,  before  listening  to  him, 
it  will  be  well  to  complete  our  survey  of  those 
remaining  years  of  the  century  in  which  he  and 
his  immediate  successors  laboured. 

3.  The  Rest  of  the  Century   (625-586):   the 
Fall  of  Nineveh;  Nahum  and  Habakkuk. 

Although  the  Scythians  had  vanished  from  the 
horizon  of  Palestine  and  the  Assyrians  came 
over  it  no  more,  the  fateful  North  still  lowered 
dark  and  turbulent.  Yet  the  keen  eyes  of  the 
watchman  in  Palestine  perceived  that,  for  a  time 
at  least,  the  storm  must  break  where  it  had  gath- 
ered. It  is  upon  Nineveh,  not  upon  Jerusalem, 
that  the  prophetic  passion  of  Nahum  and  Ha- 
bakkuk is  concentrated;  the  new  day  of  the 
Lord  is  filled  with  the  fate,  not  of  Israel,  but  of 
Assyria. 

For  nearly  two  centuries  Nineveh  had  been  the 
capital  and  cynosure  of  Western  Asia;  for  more 
than  one  she  had  set  the  fashions,  the  art,  and 
even,  to  some  extent,  the  religion  of  all  the 
Semitic  nations.  Of  late  years,  too,  she  had 
drawn  to  herself  the  world's  trade.  Great  roads 
from  Egypt,  from  Persia,  and  from  the  .^gean 
converged  upon  her,  till  like  Imperial  Rome  she 
was  filled  with  a  vast  motley  of  peoples,  and 
men  went  forth  from  her  to  the  ends  of  the 
earth.  Under  Assurbanipal  travel  and  research 
had  increased,  and  the  city  acquired  renown  as 
the  centre  of  the  world's  wisdom.  Thus  her 
size  and  glory,  with  all  her  details  of  rampart  and 
tower,  street,  palace,  and  temple,  grew  every- 
where familiar.  But  the  peoples  gazed  at  her 
as  those  who  had  been  bled  to  build  her.  The 
most  remote  of  them  had  seen  face  to  face  on 
their  own  fields,  trampling,  stripping,  burning, 
the  warriors  who  manned  her  walls.  She  had 
dashed  their  little  ones  against  the  rocks.     Their 

*  The  new  name  of  Bethshan  in  the  mouth  of  Esdraelon, 
viz.,  Scythopulis,  is  said  to  be  derived  from  them  (but  see 
"Hist.  Geog;.  of  the  Holy  Land,"  pp.  633  f.)  ;  they  con- 
quered Askalon  (Herod.,  I.  105). 


THE    SEVENTH    CENTURY    BEFORE   CHRIST. 


565 


kings  had  been  dragged  from  them  and  hung 
in  cages  about  her  gates.  Their  gods  had  lined 
the  temples  of  her  gods.  Year  by  year  they  sent 
her  their  heavy  tribute,  and  the  bearers  came 
back  with  fresh  tales  of  her  rapacious  insolence. 
So  she  stood,  bitterly  clear  to  all  men,  in  her 
glory  and  her  cruelty!  Their  hate  haunted  her 
every  pinnacle;  and  at  last,  when  about  625  the 
news  came  that  her  frontier  fortresses  had  fallen 
and  the  great  city  herself  was  being  besieged,  we 
can  understand  how  her  victims  gloated  on  each 
possible  stage  of  her  fall,  and  saw  her  yield  to 
one  after  another  of  the  cruelties  of  battle,  siege, 
and  storm,  which  for  two  hundred  years  she  had 
inflicted  on  themselves.  To  such  a  vision  the 
prophet  Nahuni  gives  voice,  not  on  behalf  of 
Israel  alone,  but  of  all  the  nations  whom  Nine- 
veh had  crushed. 

It  was  obvious  that  the  vengeance  which 
Western  Asia  thus  hailed  upon  Assyria  must 
come  from  one  or  other  of  two  groups  of  peo- 
ples, standing  respectively  to  the  north  and  to 
the  south  of  her. 

To  the  north,  or  northeast,  between  Mesopo- 
tamia and  the  Caspian,  there  were  gathered  a 
congeries  of  restless  tribes  known  to  the  As- 
syrians as  th'te  Madai  or  Matai,  the  Medes.  They 
are  mentioned  first  by  Shalmaneser  II.  in  840, 
and  few  of  his  successors  do  not  record  cam- 
paigns against  them.  The  earliest  notice  of  them 
in  the  Old  Testament  is  in  connection  with  the 
captives  of  Samaria,  some  of  whom  in  720  were 
settled  among  them.*  These  Medes  were  proba- 
bly of  Turanian  stock,  but  by  the  end  of  the 
eighth  century,  if  we  are  to  judge  from  the  names 
of  some  of  their  chiefs,t  their  most  easterly  tribes 
had  already  fallen  under  Aryan  influence,  spread- 
ing westward  from  Persia. t  So  led,  they  be- 
came united  and  formidable  to  Assyria.  Herod- 
otus relates  that  their  King  Phraortes,  or  Fra- 
vartis,  actually  attempted  the  siege  of  Nineveh, 
probably  on  the  death  of  Assurbanipal  in  625, 
but  was  slain.^  His  son  Kyaxares,  Kastarit,  or 
Uvakshathra,  was  forced  by  a  Scythian  invasion 
of  his  own  country  to  withdraw  his  troops  from 
Assyria;  but  having  either  bought  off  or  assimi- 
lated the  Scythian  invaders,  he  returned  in  608, 
with  forces  sufficient  to  overthrow  the  northern 
Assyrian  fortresses  and  to  invest  Nineveh  her- 
self. 

The  other  and  southern  group  of  peoples 
which  threatened  Assyria  were  Semitic.  At  their 
head  were  the  Kasdim  and  Chaldeans.!!  This 
name  appears  for  the  first  time  in  the  Assyrian 
annals  a  little  earlier  than  that  of  the  Medes, •! 
and  from  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  on- 
wards the  people  designated  by  it  frequently  en- 
gage the  Assyrian  arms.     They  were,  to  begin 

*  2  Kings  xvii.  6:  "and  in  the  cities"  (LXX.  "  moun- 
tains ")  of  the  Medes."  The  Heb.  is    ^^'  Madai. 

+  Mentioned  by  Sargon. 

tSayce,   "Empires  of  the  East,"  239:    cf.   McCurdj',  § 
823  f. 
§  Herod.,  I.  103. 

II  Heb.  Kasdim,  ^Ht^l  \  LXX.  XaASaZoi ;  Assyr.  Kaldda, 

Kaldu.  The  Hebrew  form  with  j  is  regarded  by  many 
authorities  as  the  original,  from  the  Assyrian  root 
"kashadu,"  to  conquer,  and  the  Assyrian  form  with  /to 
have  arisen  by  the  common  change  of  sh  through  r  into  I. 
The  form  with  s  does  not  occur,  however,  in  Assyrian, 
which  also  possesses  the  root  "  kaladu,"  with  the  same 
meaning  as  "kashadu."  See  Mr.  Pinches'  articles  on 
Chaldea  and  the  Chaldeans  in  the  new  edition  of  Vol.  I. 
of  Smith's  "  Bible  Dictionary." 

^  About  880  B.  c.  in  the  annals  of  Assurnatsirpal.  See 
Chronological  Table  p.  441. 


with,  a  few  half-savage  tribes  to  the  south  of 
Babylon,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Persian 
Gulf;  but  they  proved  their  vigour  by  the  re- 
peated lordship  of  all  Babylonia  and  by  invet- 
erate rebellion  against  the  monarchs  of  Nineveh. 
Before  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  we  find 
their  names  used  by  the  prophets  for  the  Baby- 
lonians as  a  whole.  Assurbanipal,'  who  was  a 
patron  of  Babylonian  culture,  kept  the  country 
quiet  during  the  last  years  of  his  reign,  but  his 
son  Asshur-itil-ilani,  upon  his  accession  in  625, 
had  to  grant  the  viceroyalty  to  Nabopolassar  the 
Chaldean  with  a  considerable  degree  of  inde- 
pendence. Asshur-itil-ilani  was  succeeded  in  a 
few  years  *  by  Sincuriskin,  the  Sarakos  of  the 
Greeks,  who  preserved  at  least  a  nominal  sov- 
ereignty over  Babylon, f  but  Nabopolassar  must 
already  have  cherished  ambitions  of  succeeding 
the  Assyrian  in  the  empire  of  the  world.  He 
enjoyed  sufficient  freedom  to  organise  his  forces 
to  that  end. 

These  were  the  two  powers  which  from  north 
and  south  watched  with  impatience  the  decay  of 
Assyria.  That  they  made  no  attempt  upon  her 
between  625  and  608  was  probably  due  to  sev- 
eral causes:  their  jealousy  of  each  other,  the 
Medes'  trouble  with  the  Scythians,  Nabopo- 
lassar's  genius  for  waiting  till  his  forces  were 
ready,  and  above  all  the  still  considerable  vigour 
of  the  Assyrian  himself.  The  Lion,  though  old,.' 
was  not  broken.  His  power  may  have  relaxed 
in  the  distant  provinces  of  his  empire,  though,  if 
Budde  be  right  about  the  date  of  Habakkuk.^i 
the  peoples  of  Syria  still  groaned  under  the 
thought  of  it;  but  his  own  land — his  "  lair,"  as 
the  prophets  call  it — was  still  terrible.  It  is  true 
that,  as  Nahimi  perceives,  the  capital  was  no 
longer  native  and  patriotic  as  it  had  been;  the 
trade  fostered  by  Assurbanipal  had  filled  Nine- 
veh with  a  vast  and  mercenary  population,  ready 
to  break  and  disperse  at  the  first  breach  in  her 
walls.  Yet  Assyria  proper  was  covered  with 
fortresses,  and  the  tradition  had  long  fastened 
upon  the  peoples  that  Nineveh  was  impregna- 
ble. Hence  the  tension  of  those  years.  The 
peoples  of  Western  Asia  looked  eagerly  for  their 
revenge;  but  the  two  powers  which  alone  could 
acco.mplish  this  stood  waiting — afraid  of  each 
other  perhaps,  but  more  afraid  of  the  object  of 
their  common  ambition. 

It  is  said  that  Kyaxares  and  Nabopolassar  at 
last  came  to  an  agreement; ||  but  more  probably 
the  crisis  was  hastened  by  the  appearance  of  an- 
other claimant  for  the  coveted  spoil.  In  608 
Pharaoh  Necho  "  went  up  against  the  king  of 
Assyria  towards  the  river  Euphrates.""!  This 
Egyptian  advance  may  have  forced  the  hand  of 
Kyaxares,  who  appears  to  have  begun  his  in- 
vestment of  Nineveh  a  little  after  Necho  defeated 
Josiah  at  Megiddo.**    The  siege  is  said  to  have 

*No  inscriptions  of  Asshur-itil-ilani  have  been  found 
later  than  the  first  two  years  of  his  reign. 

t  Billerbeck-Jeremias,  "  Der  Untergang  Niniveh's,"  in 
Delitzsch  and  Haupt's  "  Beitrage  zur  Assyriologie,"  HI., 
p.  113. 

I  Nahum  n. 

§  See  below,  p.  589. 

II  Abydenus  idpud  Euseb.,  "  Chron.,"  1.  g)  reports  a 
marriage  between  Nebuchadrezzar,  Nabopolassar's  son, 
and  the  daughter  of  the  Median  king. 

^2  Kings  xxiii.  2(j.  The  history  is  here  very  obscure. 
Necho,  met  at  Megiddo  by  Josiah,  and  having  slain  him, 
appears  to  have  spent  a  year  or  two  in  subjugating,  and 
arranging  for  the  government  of  Syria  (ibid.,  verses 
33-35),  and  only  reached  the  Euphrates  in  605,  when  Nebu- 
chadrezzar defeated  him. 

**The  reverse  view  is  taken  by  Wellhausen,  who  says 
("  Israel  u.  Jfld.  Gesch.,"  pp.  q^  f.) :  •'  Der  Pharaoh  scheint 


566 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


lasted  two  years.  Whether  this  included  the  de- 
lays necessary  for  the  reduction  of  fortresses 
upon  the  great  roads  of  approach  to  the  As- 
syrian capital  we  do  not  know;  but  Nineveh's 
own  position,  fortifications,  and  resources  may 
well  account  for  the  whole  of  the  time.  Colonel 
Billerbeck,  a  military  expert,  has  suggested  * 
that  the  Medes  found  it  possible  to  invest  the 
city  only  upon  the  northern  and  eastern  sides. 
Down  the  west  flows  the  Tigris,  a-nd  across  this 
the  besieged  may  have  been  able  to  bring  in  sup- 
plies and  reinforcements  from  the  fertile  country 
beyond.  Herodotus  affirms  that  the  Medes  ef- 
fected the  capture  of  Nineveh  by  themselves,  t 
and  for  this  some  recent  evidence  has  been 
found,t  so  that  another  tradition  that  the  Chal- 
deans were  also  actively  engaged,^  which  has 
nothing  to  support  it,  mav  be  regarded  as  false. 
Nabopolassar  may  still  have  been  in  name  an 
Assyrian  viceroy;  yet,  as  Colonel  Billerbeck 
points  out,  he  had  it  in  his  power  to  make 
Kyaxares'  victory  possible  by  holding  the 
southern  roads  to  Nineveh,  detaching  other 
viceroys  of  her  provinces  and  so  shutting  her  up 
to  her  own  resources.  But  among  other  reasons 
which  kept  him  away  from  the  siege  may  have 
been  the  necessity  of  guarding  against  Egyptian 
designs  on  the  moribund  empire.  Pharaoh 
Necho,  as  we  know,  was  making  for  the  Eu- 
phrates as  early  as  608.  Now  if  Nabopolassar 
and  Kyaxares  had  arranged  to  divide  Assyria  be- 
tween them,  then  it  is  likely  that  they  agreed 
also  to  share  the  work  of  making  their  inheri- 
tance sure,  so  that  while  Kyaxares  overthrew 
Nineveh,  Nabopolassar,  or  rather  his  son  Nebu- 
chadrezzar,! waited  for  and  overthrew  Pharaoh 
by  Carchemish  on  the  Euphrates.  Consequently 
Assyria  was  divided  between  the  Medes  and  the 
Chaldeans;  the  latter,  as  her  heirs  in  the  south, 
took  over  her  title  to  Syria  and  Palestine. 

The  two  prophets  with  whom  we  have  to  deal 
at  this  time  are  almost  entirely  engrossed  with 
the  fall  of  Assyria.  Nahum  exults  in  the  de- 
struction of  Nineveh;  Habakkuk  sees  in  the 
Chaldeans  nothing  but  the  avengers  of  the  peo- 
ples whom  Assyria*!    had  oppressed.    For  both 

ausgezogen  zu  sein  um  sich  seinen  Teil  an  der  Erbschaft 
Ninives  vorwegzunehmen,  wahrend  die  Meder  und 
Chaldaer  die  Stadt  belagerten." 

*  See  above,  p.  565,  n. 

+  I.  106.    ■ 

X  A  stele  of  Nabonidus  discovered  at  Hilleh  and  now  m 
the  museum  at  Constantinople  relates  that  in  his  third 
year,  553,  the  king  restored  at  Harran  the  temple  of  Sin, 
the  moon-god,  which  the  Medes  had  destroyed  fifty-four 
years  before,  i.  e.,  607.  Whether  the  Medes  did  this  before, 
during,  or  after  the  siege  of  Nineveh  is  uncertain,  but  the 
approximate  date  of  the  siege,  608-60&,  is  thus  marvel- 
lously confirmed.  The  stele  affirms  that  the  Medes  alone 
took  Nineveh,  but  that  they  were  called  in  by  Marduk, 
the  Babylonian  god,  to  assist  Nabopolassar  and  avenge 
the  deportation  of  his  image  by  Sennacherib  to  Nineveh. 
Messerschmidt  ("  Mittheilungen  der  Vorderasiatischen 
Gesellschaft,"  I.,  i8g6)  argues  that  the  Medes  were  sum 
luoned  by  the  Babylonians  while  the  latter  were  being 
sore  pressed  by  the  Assyrians.  Winckler  had  already 
("Untersuch,"  pp.  124  ff-,  1889)  urged  that  the  Baby- 
lonians would  retrain  from  taking  an  active  part  in  the 
ovferthrow  of  Nineveh,  in  fear  of  incurring  the  guilt  of 
sacrilege.  Neither  Messerschmidt's  paper,  nor  Scheil's 
<who  describes  the  stele  in  the  Rccucil  des  Travaux, 
XVIII.,  1896),  being  accessible  to  me,  I  have  written  this 
note  on  the  information  supplied  by  Rev.  C.  H.  W  Johns, 
of  Cambridge,  in  the  Expositorv  Times.  1896,  and  by  Prof. 
A.  B.  Davidson  in  App.  I.  to  "  Nah.,  Hab.  and  Zeph." 

§  Berosus  and  Abydenus  in  Eusebius. 

if  This  spelling  (Je'r.  .xlix.  28)  is  hearer  the  original  than 
the  alternative  Hebrew  Nebuchad/zezzar.  But  the  LXX. 
Na^ollxoSo^'oo■op,  and  the  ^a.^ovKohp6<iopo<i  of  Abydenus  and 
Megasthenes  and  Na^oKo8poo■opos  of  Strabo,  have  pre- 
served the  more  correct  vocalisation  ;  for  the  original  is 
Nabu-kiidurri-nsur  =  Nebo,  defend  the  crown  ! 

^  But  see  below,  p-.gqo.  ■  '■■ 


these  events  are  the  close  of  an  epoch:  neither 
prophet  looks  beyond  this.  Nahum  (not  on  Idc- 
half  of  Israel  alone)  gives  expression  to  the 
epoch's  long  thirst  for  vengeance  on  the  tyrant; 
Habakkuk  (if  Budde's  reading  of  him  be  right*) 
states  the  problems  with  which  its  victorious 
cruelties  had  filled  the  pious  mind — states  the 
problem  and  beholds  the  solution  in  the  Chal- 
deans. And,  surely,  the  vengeance  was  so  just 
and  so  ample,  the  solution  so  drastic  and  for 
the  time  complete,  that  we  can  well  understand 
how  two  prophets  should  exhaust  their  office  in 
describing  such  things,  and  feel  no  motive  to 
look  either  deep  into  the  moral  condition  of  Is- 
rael, or  far  out  into  the  future  which  God  was 
preparing  for  His  people.  It  might,  of  course, 
be  said  that  the  prophets'  silence  on  the  latter 
subjects  was  due  to  their  positions  immediately 
after  the  great  Reform  of  621,  when  the  nation, 
having  been  roused  to  an  honest  striving  after 
righteousness,  did  not  require  prophetic  rebuke, 
and  when  the  success  of  so  godly  a  prince  as 
Josiah  left  no  spiritual  ambitions  unsatisfied. 
But  this  (even  if  the  dates  of  the  two  prophets 
were  certain)  is  hardly  probable;  and  the  other 
explanation  is  sufficient.  Who  can  doubt  this 
who  has  realised  the  long  epoch  which  then 
reached  a  crisis,  or  has  been  thrilled  by  the 
crash  of  the  crisis  itself?  The  fall  of  Nineveh 
was  deafening  enough  to  drown  for  the  moment, 
as  it  does  in  Nahum,  even  a  Hebrew's  clamant 
conscience  of  his  country's  sin.  The  problems, 
which  the  long  success  of  Assyrian  cruelty  had 
started,  were  old  and  formidable  enough  to  de- 
mand statement  and  answer  before  either  the 
hopes  or  the  responsibilities  of  the  future  could 
find  voice.  The  past  also  requires  its  prophets. 
Feeling  has  to  be  satisfied,  and  experience  bal- 
anced, before  the  heart  is  willing  to  turn  the  leaf 
and  read  the  page  of  the  future. 

Yet,  through  all  this  time  of  Assyria's  decline, 
Israel  had  her  own  sins,  fears,  and  convictions 
of  judgment  to  come.  The  disappearance  of  the 
Scythians  did  not  leave  Zephaniah's  predictions 
of  doom  without  means  of  fulfilment;  nor  did  the 
great  Reform  of  621  remove  the  necessity  of 
that  doom.  In  the  deepest  hearts  the  assurance 
that  Israel  must  be  punished  was  by  these  things 
only  confirmed.  The  prophetess  Huldah,  the 
first  to  speak  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  after  the 
Book  of  the  Law  was  discovered,  emphasised 
not  the  reforms  which  it  enjoined  but  the  judg- 
ments which  it  predicted.  Josiah's  righteous- 
ness could  at  most  ensure  for  himself  a  peaceful 
death:  his  people  were  incorrigible  and  doomed. f 
The  reforms  indeed  proceeded,  there  was  public 
and  widespread  penitence,  idolatry  was  abol- 
ished. But  those  were  only  shallow  pedants  who 
put  their  trust  in  the  possession  of  a  revealed 
Law  and  purged  Temple, t  and  who  boasted  that 
therefore  Israel  was  secure.  Jeremiah  repeated 
the  gloomy  forecasts  of  Zephaniah  and  Huldah, 
and  even  before  the  wickedness  of  Jehoiakim's 
reign  proved  the  obduracy  of  Israel's  heart,  he 
affirmed  "  the  imminence  of  the  evil  out  of  the 
north  and  the  great  destruction." >i  Of  our 
three  prophets  in  this  period  Zephaniah,  though 

*  Below,  p. sag. 

t2Kingsxxii.  11-20.  The  genuineness  of  this  passage 
is  proved  (as  against  Stade.  "Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel," 
I.)  by  the  promise  which  it  gives  to  Josiah  of  a  peaceful 
death.  Had  it  been  written  after  the  battle  of  Megiddo, 
in  which  Josiah  was  slain,  it  could  not  have  contained 
such  a  promise. 

tjer.  vii.  4,  viii.  8. 

§vi.  I. 


THE    SEVENTH    CENTURY    BEFORE    CHRIST. 


567 


the  earliest,  had  therefore  the  last  word.  While 
Nahum  and  Habakkuk  were  almost  wholly  ab- 
sorbed with  the  epoch  that  is  closing,  he  had 
a  vision  of  the  future.  Is  this  why  this  book  has 
been  ranged  among  our  Twelve  after  those  of 
his  slightly  later  contemporaries? 

The  precise  course  of  events  in  Israel  was 
this — and  we  must  follow  them,  for  among  them 
we  have  to  seek  exact  dates  for  Nahum  and 
Habakkuk.  In  621  the  Book  of  the  Law  was 
discovered,  and  Josiah  applied  himself  with 
thoroughness  to  the  reforms  which,  he  had  al- 
ready begun.  For  thirteen  years  he  seems  to 
have  had  peace  to  carry  them  through.  The 
heathen  altars  were  thrown  down,  with  all  the 
high  places  in  Judah  and  even  some  in  Sa- 
maria. Images  were  abolished.  The  heathen 
priests  were  exterminated,  with  the  wizards  and 
soothsayers.  The  Levites,  except  the  sons  of 
Zadok,  who  alone  were  allowed  to  minister  in 
the  Temple,  henceforth  the  only  place  of  sacri- 
fice, were  debarred  from  priestly  duties.  A  great 
passover  was  celebrated.*  The  king  did  justice 
aad  was  the  friend  of  the  poor;f  it  went  well 
with  him  and  the  people. t  He  extended  his  in- 
fluence into  Samaria;  it  is  probable  that  he  ven- 
tured to  carry  out  the  injunctions  of  Deuteron- 
omy with  regard  to  the  neighbouring  heathen. § 
Literature  flourished:  though  critics  have  not 
combined  upon  the  works  to  be  assigned  to  this 
reign,  they  agree  that  a  great  many  were  pro- 
duced in  it.  Wealth  must  have  accumulated: 
certainly  the  nation  entered  the  troubles  of  the 
next  reign  with  an  arrogant  confidence  that  ar- 
gues under  Josiah  the  rapid  growth  of  prosperity 
in  every  direction.  Then  of  a  sudden  came  the 
fa'al  year  of  608.  Pharaoh  Necho  appeared  in 
Palestine  ||  with  an  army  destined  for  the  Eu- 
ph  rates,  and  Josiah  went  up  to  meet  him  at 
Megiddo.  His  tactics  are  plain — it  is  the  first 
St;  ait  on  the  land-road  from  Egypt  to  the  Eu- 
phrates— but  his  motives  are  obscure.  Assyria 
en  a  hardly  have  been  strong  enough  at  this 
ti'Jie  to  fling  him  as  her  vassal  across  the  path 
o)  her  ancient  foe.  He  must  have  gone  of  him- 
stlf.  "His  dream  was  probably  to  bring  back 
tl't  scattered  remains  of  the  northern  kingdom 
tc  a  pure  worship,  and  to  unite  the  whole  people 
o*  Israel  under  the  sceptre  of  the  house  of  Da- 
VI 1;  and  he  was  not  inclined  to  allow  Egypt  to 
CI  Dss  his  aspirations,  and  rob  him  of  the  in- 
hfritance  which  was  falling  to  him  from  the 
dead  hand  of  Assyria."  T[ 

Josiah  fell,  and  with  him  not  only  the  liberty 
of  his  people,  but  the  chief  support  of  their 
faith.  That  the  righteous  king  was  cut  down  in 
the  midst  of  his  days  and  in  defence  of  the  Holy 

*  All  these  reforms  in  2  Kings  xxiii. 

+  Jer.  xxii.  15  f. 

X  Jdi'd.,  ver.  16. 

§  We  have  no  record  of  this,  but  a  prince  who  so  rashly 
flung  himself  in  the  way  of  Egypt  would  not  hesitate  to 
claim  authority  over  Moab  and  Ammon. 

I  3  Kings  xxiii.  24.  The  question  whether  Necho  came 
by  land  from  Egypt  or  brought  his  troops  in  his  fleet  to 
Acre  is  hardly  answered  by  the  fact  that  Josiah  went  to 
Megiddo  to  meet  him.  But  Megiddo  on  the  whole  tells 
more  for  the  land  than  the  sea.  It  is  not  on  the  path  from 
Acre  to  the  Euphrates;  it  is  the  key  of  the  land-road 
from  Egypt  to  the  Euphrates.  Josiah  could  have  no 
hope  of  stopping  Pharaoh  on  the  broad  levels  of  Philistia  ; 
but  at  Megiddo  there  was  a  narrow  pass,  and  the  only 
chance  of  arresting  so  large  an  army  as  it  moved  in  de- 
tachments. Josiah's  tactics  were  therefore  analogous  to 
those  of  Saul,  who  also  left  his  own  territory  and  marched 
north  to  Esdraelon,  to  meet  his  foe — and  death. 

t  A.  B.  Davidson,  "The  Exile  and  the  Restoration."  p. 
8  (Bible  Class  Primers,  ed.  by  Salmond  ;  Edin.,T,  &  T. 
C  ark,  1897). 


Land — what  could  this  mean?  Was  it,  then,  vain 
to  serve  the  Lord?  Could  He  not  defend  His 
own?  With  some  the  disaster  was  a  cause  of 
sore  complaint,  and  with  others,  perhaps,  of 
open  desertion  from  Jehovah. 

But  the  extraordinary  thing  is,  how  little  eflfect 
Josiah's  death  seems  to  have  had  upon  the  peo- 
ple's self-confidence  at  large,  or  upon  their  ad- 
herence to  Jehovah.  They  immediately  placed 
Josiah's  second  son  on  the  throne;  but  Necho, 
having  got  him  by  some  means  to  his  camp 
at  Riblah  between  the  Lebanons,  sent  him  in 
fetters  to  Egypt,  where  he  died,  and  established 
in  his  place  Eliakim,  his  elder  brother.  On  his 
accession  Eliakim  changed  his  name  to  Jehoia- 
kim,  a  proof  that  Jehovah  was  still  regarded  as 
the  sufficient  patron  of  Israel;  and  the  same  blind 
belief  that,  for  the  sake  of  His  Temple  and  of 
His  Law,  Jehovah  would  keep  His  people  in  se- 
curity, continued  to  persevere  in  spite  of  Me- 
giddo. It  was  a  most  immoral  ease,  and  filled 
with  injustice.  Necho  subjected  the  land  to  a 
fine.  This  was  not  heavy,  but  Jehoiakim,  in- 
stead of  paying  it  out  of  the  royal  treasures,  ex- 
acted it  from  "  the  people  of  the  land,"  *  and 
then  employed  the  peace  which  it  purchased  in 
erecting  a  costly  palace  for  himself  by  the  forced 
labour  of  his  subjects. f  He  was  covetous,  un- 
just, and  violently  cruel.  Like  prince  like  peo- 
ple: social  oppression  prevailed,  and  there  was 
a  recrudescence  of  the  idolatries  of  Manasseh's 
time,t  especially  (it  may  be  inferred)  after 
Necho's  defeat  at  Carchemish  in  605.  That  all 
this  should  exist  along  with  a  fanatic  trust  in 
Jehovah  need  not  surprise  us  who  remember  the 
very  similar  state  of  the  public  mind  in  North 
Israel  under  Amos  and  Hosea.  Jeremiah  at- 
tacked it  as  they  had  done.  Though  Assyria 
was  fallen,  and  Egypt  was  promising  protection, 
Jeremiah  predicted  destruction  from  the  north 
on  Egypt  and  Israel  alike.  When  at  last  the 
Egyptian  defeat  at  Carchemish  stirred  some 
vague  fears  in  the  people's  hearts,  Jeremiah's 
conviction  broke  out  into  clear  flame.  For 
three-and-twenty  years  he  had  brought  God's 
word  in  vain  to  his  countrymen.  Now  God 
Himself  would  act:  Nebuchadrezzar  was  but  His 
servant  to  lead  Israel  into  captivity.^ 

The  same  year,  605  or  604,  Jeremiah  wrote  all 
these  things  in  a  volume  ;||  and  a  few  months 
later,  at  a  national  fast,  occasioned  perhaps  by 
the  fear  of  the  Chaldeans,  Baruch,  his  secretary, 
read  them  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  in  the  ears 
of  all  the  people.  The  king  was  informed,  the 
roll  was  brought  to  him,  and  as  it  was  read,  with 
his  own  hands  he  cut  it  up  and  burned  it,  three 
or  four  columns  at  a  time.  Jeremiah  answered 
by  calling  down  on  Jehoiakim  an  ignominious 
death,  and  repeated  the  doom  already  uttered  on 
the  land.  Another  prophet,  Urijah,  had  recently 
been  executed  for  the  same  truth;  but  Jeremiah 
and  Baruch  escaped  into  hiding. 

This  was  probably  in  603,  and  for  a  little  time 
Jehoiakim  and  the  populace  were  restored  to 
their  false  security  by  the  delay  of  the  Chaldeans 
to  come  south.  Nebuchadrezzar  was  occupied  in 
Babylon,  securing  his  succession  to  his  father. 
At  last,  either  in  602  or  more  probably  in  600, 
he  marched  into  Syria,  and  Jehoiakim  "  became 
his  servant  for  three  years."  T[    In  such  a  condi- 


*2  Kings  xxiii.  33-35. 
t  Jer.  xxii.  13-15. 
I  xxxvi. 


;  Jer.  xi. 

i  XXV.  I  ff. 


i  2  Kings,  xxiv.  i.    In  the  chronological  table  appended 
to  Kautzsch's  "  Bibel "  this  verse  and  Jehoiakim^s  sub- 


568 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


tion  the  Jewish  state  might  have  survived  for 
at  least  another  generation,*  but  in  599  or  597 
Jehoiakim,  with  the  madness  of  the  doomed,  held 
back  his  tribute.  The  revolt  was  probably  insti- 
gated by  Egypt,  which,  however,  did  not  dare 
to  support  it.  As  in  Isaiah's  time  against  As- 
syria, so  now  against  Babylon,  Egypt  was  a 
blusterer  "  who  blustered  and  sat  still."  She  still 
"  helped  in  vain  and  to  no  purpose."  f  Nor 
could  Judah  count  on  the  help  of  the  other  states 
of  Palestine.  They  had  joined  Hezekiah  against 
Sennacherib,  but  remembering  perhaps  how  Ma- 
nasseh  had  failed  to  help  them  against  Assur- 
banipal,  and  that  Josiah  had  carried  things  with 
a  high  hand  towards  them,t  they  obeyed  Nebu- 
chadrezzar's command  and  raided  Judah  till  he 
himself  should  have  time  to  arrive.^  Amid  these 
raids  the  senseless  Jehoiakim  seems  to  have  per- 
ished.jl  for  when  Nebuchadrezzar  appeared  be- 
fore Jerusalem  in  597.  his  son  Jehoiachin,  a  youth 
of  eighteen,  had  succeeded  to  the  throne.  The 
innocent  reaped  the  harvest  sown  by  the  guilty. 
In  the  attempt  (it  would  appear)  to  save  his  peo- 
ple from  destruction,  IT  Jehoiachm  capitulated. 
But  Nebuchadrezzar  was  not  content  with  the 
person  of  the  king:  he  deported  to  Babylon  the 
court,  a  large  number  of  influential  persons,  "  the 
mighty  men  of  the  land,"  or  what  must  have 
been  nearly  all  the  fighting  men.  with  the  neces- 
sary military  artificers  and  swordsmiths.  Priests 
also  went,  Ezekiel  among  them,  and  probably 
representatives  of  other  classes  not  mentioned  by 
the  annalist.  All  these  were  the  flower  of  the 
nation.  Over  what  was  left  Nebuchadrezzar 
placed  a  son  of  Josiah  on  the  throne  who  took 
the  name  of  Zedekiah.  Again  with  a  little  com- 
mon-sense, the  state  might  have  survived;  but 
it  was  a  short  respite.  The  new  court  began 
intrigues  with  Egypt,  and  Zedekiah,  with  the 
Ammonites  and  Tyre,  ventured  a  revolt  in  589. 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  knew  it  was  in  vain. 
Nebuchadrezzar  marched  on  Jerusalem,  and 
though  for  a  time  he  had  to  raise  the  siege  in 
order  to  defeat  a  force  sent  by  Pharaoh  Hophra, 
the  Chaldean  armies  closed  in  again  upon  the 
doomed  city.  Her  defence  was  stubborn;  but 
famine  and  pestilence  sapped  it,  and  numbers  fell 
away  to  the  enemy.  About  the  eighteenth 
month,  the  besiegers  took  the  northern  suburb 
and  stormed  the  middle  gate.  Zedekiah  and  the 
army  broke  their  lines,  only  to  be  captured  at 
Jericho.  In  a  few  weeks  more  the  city  was 
taken  and  given  over  to  fire.  Zedekiah  was 
blinded,  and  with  a  large  number  of  his  people 
carried  to  Babylon.  It  was  the  end,  for  al- 
though a  small  community  of  Jews  was  left  at 
Mizpeh  under  a  Jewish  viceroy  and  with  Jere- 
miah to  guide  them,  they  were  soon  broken  up 
and  fled  to  Egypt.  Judah  had  perished.  Her 
savage  neighbours,  who  had  gathered  with  glee 
to  the  day  of  Jerusalem's  calamity,  assisted  the 


mission  are  assigfned  to  602.  But  this  allows  too  little 
time  for  Nebuchadrezzar  to  confirm  his  throne  in  Babylon 
and  march  to  Palestine,  and  it  is  not  corroborated  by  the 
record  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  of  events  in  Judah  in 
604-602 . 

*  Nebuchadrezzar  did  not  die  till  562. 

+  See  "  Isaiah  i.-xxxix."  ("  Expositor's  Bible  "),  pp.  671  f. 

JSee  above,  p.  507,  n. 

§2  Kings  xxiy.  2. 

II  Jer.  xxxvii.  30,  but  see  2  Kings  xxiv.  6. 

^  So  Josephus  puts  it  ("  X.  Antiq.,"  vii.  i).  Jehoiachin 
■was  unusually  bewailed  (Lam.  iv.  20 ;  Ezek.  xvii.  22  ft.). 
He  survived  in  captivity  till  the  death  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, whose  successor  Evil-Merodach  in  561  took  him 
from  prison  and  gave  him  a  place  in  his  palace  (2  Kings 
XXV.  27  ff.). 


Chaldeans  in  capturing  the  fugitives,  and  Edom- 
ites  came  up  from  the  south  on  the  desolate  land. 

It  has  been  necessary  to  follow  so  far  the 
course  of  events,  because  of  our  prophets 
Zephaniah  is  placed  in  each  of  the  three  sections 
of  Josiah's  reign,  and  by  some  even  in  Jehoia- 
kim's;  Nahum  has  been  assigned  to  different 
points  between  the  eve  of  the  first  and  the  eve 
of  the  second  siege  of  Nineveh;  and  Habakkuk 
has  been  placed  hy  different  critics  in  almost 
every  year  from  621  to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim; 
while  Obadiah,  whom  we  shall  find  reasons  for 
dating  during  the  Exile,  describes  the  behaviour 
of  Edom  at  the  final  siege  of  Jerusalem.  The 
next  of  the  Twelve,  Haggai,  may  have  been  born 
before  the  Exile,  but  did  not  prophesy  till  520. 
Zechariah  appeared  the  same  year,  Malachi  not 
for  half  a  century  after.  These  three  are  proph- 
ets of  the  Persian  period.  With  the  approach 
of  the  Greeks  Joel  appears,  then  comes  the 
prophecy  which  we  find  in  the  end  of  Zecha- 
riah's  book,  and  last  of  all  the  Book  of  Jonah. 
To  all  these  post-exilic  prophets  we  shall  pro- 
vide, later  on,  the  necessary  historical  introduc- 
tions 


ZEPHANIAH. 


■  CHAPTER  II. 
THE  BOOK  OF  ZEPHANIAH. 

Dies  free,  Dies  Ilia  .'— Zeph.  i.  15. 

"  His  book  is  the  first  tinging  of  prophecy  with  apoca- 
lypse :  that  is  the  moment  which  it  supplies  in  the  history 
of  Israel's  religion." 

The  Book  of  Zephaniah  is  one  of  the  most 
difficult  in  the  prophetic  canon.  The  title  is 
very  generally  accepted;  the  period  from  which 
chap.  i.  dates  is  recognised  by  practically  all 
critics  to  be  the  reign  of  Josiah,  or  at  least  the 
last  third  of  the  seventh  century.  But  after  that 
doubts  start,  and  we  find  present  nearly  every 
other  problem  of  introduction. 

To  begin  with,  the  text  is  very  damaged.  In 
some  passages  we  may  be  quite  sure  that  we 
have  not  the  true  text;  *  in  others  we  cannot 
be  sure  that  we  have  it,f  and  there  are  several 
glosses. I  The  bulk  of  the  second  chapter  was 
written  in  the  Qinah,  or  elegiac  measure,  but  as 
it  now  stands  the  rhythm  is  very  much  broken. 
It  is  difBcult  to  say  whether  this  is  due  to  the 
dilapidation  of  the  original  text  or  to  wilful  in- 
sertion of  glosses  and  other  later  passages.  The 
Greek  version  of  Zephaniah  possesses  the  same 
general  features  as  that  of  other  difficult  proph- 
ets. Occasionally  it  enables  us  to  correct  the 
text;  but  by  the  time  it  was  made  the  text  must 
already  have  contained  the  same  corruptions 
which  we  encounter,  and  the  translators  were 
ignorant  besides  of  the  meaning  of  some  phrases 
which  to  us  are  plain. § 

The  difficulties  of  textual  criticism  as  well  as 
of  translation  are  aggravated  by  the  large  num- 
ber of  words,  grammatical  forms,  and  phrasea 

*  i.  3*,  s*  ;  ii.  2,  5,  6,  7,  8  last  word,  \^b  ;  iii.  18,  19a,  «o. 

ti.  14*  ;  ii.  I,  3 ;  iii-  i,  5.  f>^  7i  8,  10,  15,  17. 

X  i.  3*,  5*  ;  ii.  2,  6  •,  iii.  5  (?). 

S  For  details  see  translation  below. 


THE    BOOK   OF   ZEPHANIAH. 


569 


which  either  happen  very  seldom  in  the  Old 
Testament,*  or  nowhere  else  in  it  at  all.f  Of 
the  rare  words  and  phrases,  a  very  few  (as  will 
be  seen  from  the  appended  notes)  are  found  in 
earlier  writings.  Indeed  all  that  are  found  are 
from  the  authentic  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  with 
whose  style  and  doctrine  Zephaniah's  own  ex- 
hibit most  affinity.  All  the  other  rarities  of  vo- 
cabulary and  grammar  are  shared  only  by  later 
writers;  and  as  a  whole  the  language  of  Zeph- 
aniah  exhibits  symptoms  which  separate  it  by 
many  years  from  the  language  of  the  prophets 
of  the  eighth  century,  and  range  it  with  that  of 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  the  Second  Isaiah,  and  still 
later  literature.  It  may  be  useful  to  the  student 
to  collect  in  a  note  the  most  striking  of  these 
symptoms  of  the  comparative  lateness  of  Zeph- 
aniah's dialect. t 

We  now  come  to  the  question  of  date,  and  we 
take,  to  begin  with,  the  First  Chapter.  It  was 
said  above  that  critics  agree  as  to  the  general 
period — between  639,  when  Josiah  began  to 
reign,  and  600.  But  this  period  was  divided  into 
three  very  different  sections,  and  each  of  these 
has  received  considerable  support  from  modern 
criticism.  The  great  majority  of  critics  place  the 
chapter  in  the  early  years  of  Josiah,  before  the 
enforcement  of  Deuteronomy  and  the  great  Re- 
form in  621. §  Others  have  argued  for  the  later 
years  of  Josiah,  621-608,  on  the  ground  that  the 
chapter  implies  that  the  great  Reform  has  al- 
ready taken  place,  and  otherwise  shows  knowl- 

*  i.  3,  Jyhppp,  only  in  Isa.  iii.  6;  15,  ilNIK^,  only  in 

Job  xx.x.  3,  xxxviii.  27 — cf.  Psalms  Ixxiii.  18,  Ixxiv.  3;  ii, 
8,  D"'Q1J,  Isa.  xliii.  iZ-cf.  li.  7;  q,  yr\X\,  Prov.  xxiv.  31, 
Job  XXX.  7 ;  15,  nP^y,  Isa.  xxii.  2,  xxiii.  7,  xxxii.  13 — cf. 
xiii.  3,  xxiv.  8 ;  iii.  i,  TO  JJ.  see  next  note  but  one  ;  3,  3")y 
••aNr,  Hab.  i.  8  ;  n,  -|niKJ  T^y,  isa.  xiii.  3  ;  18,  tJIJ,  Lam. 

i.  4,  nuij. 

t  i.  n,  KTlSOn  as  the  name  of  a  part  of  Jerusalem,  other- 
wise only  Jer.  xv.  19  ;  PjDS  v'tOJ  ;  12.  KDp.in  pt.  Qal,  and 
otherwise  only  Exod.  xv.  8,  Zech.  xiv.  6,  Job  x.  10 ;  14, 
"inO  (adj.),  but  the  pointing  may  be  wrong— c/.  Maher- 

shalal-hash-baz,  Isa.  viii.  i,  3  ;  rilV  in  Qal,  elsewhere  only 
once  in  Hi.  Isa.  xiii.  13  ;  17,  Q^n?  in  sense  of  flesh,  cf. 
Job  XX.  23  ;  18,  n^naj  if  a  noun  (?);  ii.  i.  B>5>>p,  in  Qal 
and  Hithpo,  elsewhere  only  in  Polel ;  g,  '^'^i^'O,  iTlSD  ; 
II,  nn.  to  make  lean,  otherwise  only  in  Isa.  xvii.  4,  to  be 
lean  ;  14,  HHS  (?) ;  iii.  i,  HNIO,  pt.  of  m»  ;  HJV,  pt.  Qal, 
in  Jer.  xlvi.  16,  1.  16,  it  may  be  a  noun  ;  4,  rinJ3  ^K'JN  ; 

6,  nvj ;  9.  "ins  DDB* ;  1°,  'viD-na  •'-inj?  c?) ;  is-  njs  in 

sense  to  "  turn  away  "  ;  18,  VH  "]DD  (?). 

X'\.  8,  etc.,  7y  TpD,  followed  by  person,  but  not  by 
thing— c/.  Jer.  ix.  24,  xxiii.  34,  etc.,  Job  xxxvi.  23.  2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  23,  Ezek.  i.  2  ;  13,  nDt^>  only  in  Hab.  ii.  7,  Isa. 
I  xiii.,  Jer.  xxx.  16,  2  Kings  xxi.  14  ;  17,  "IVH,  Hi.  ofT^^f, 
only  in  i  Kings  viii.  37,  and  Deut.,  2  Chron.,  Jer.,  Neh., 
ii.  3.  mjy  :  8,  D^B"nJ.  isa.  xliii.  28,  li.  7  (fem.  pi.) ;  9,  ^Itn, 
Prov.  xxiv.  31,  Job  xxx.  7  ;  iii.  i,  ri/'NJJ.  Ni,  pt.  =  impure, 
Isa.  lix.  3,  Lam.  iv.  14  ;  HJV.  a  pt.  in  Jer.  xlvi.  16,  1.  16 ;  3, 
3"iy  ""3X1,  Hab.  i.  8-c/  Jer.  v.  6,  r\\1'\)i  1X7  I  Q,  llin, 
Isa.  xlix.  2,  "ni,  Ezek.  xx.  38,  i  Chron.  vii.  40.  i.x.  22,  xvi. 
41,  Neh.  v.  18,  Job  xxxiii.  3,  Eccles.  iii.  18,  ix.  i ;  n,  JTIXJ 
'TvV,  Isa.  xiii.  3  ;  18  ^}^'^-  Lam.  i.  4  has  nW3. 

§So  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Pusey,  Kuenen,  Robertson  Smith 
{"  Encyc.  Brit."),  Driver,  Wellhausen,  Kirkpatrick, 
Budde,  von  Orelli.  Cornill,  Schwallv.  Davidson. 


edge  of  Deuteronomy;  *  while  some  prefer  tlie 
days  of  reaction  under  Jehoiakim,  608  fF.,+  and 
assume  that  the  phrase  in  the  title,  "  in  the  days 
of  Josiah,"  is  a  late  and  erroneous  inference  from 
i.  4- 

The  evidence  for  the  argument  consists  of  the 
title  and  the  condition  of  Judah  reflected  in  the 
body  of  the  chapter.  The  latter  is  a  .definite  piece 
of  oratory.  Under  the  alarm  of  an  immediate 
and  general  war,  Zephaniah  proclaims  a  vast  de- 
struction upon  the  earth.  Judah  must  fall  be- 
neath it:  the  worshippers  of  Baal,  of  the  host 
of  heaven,  and  of  Milcom,  the  apostates  from  Je- 
hovah, the  princes  and  house  of  the  king,  the 
imitators  of  foreign  fashions,  and  the  forceful 
and  fraudulent,  shall  be  cut  off  in  a  great 
slaughter.  Those  who  have  grown  sceptical  and 
indifferent  to  Jehovah  shall  be  unsettled  by  in- 
vasion and  war.  This  shall  be  the  Day  of  Je- 
hovah, near  and  immediate,  a  day  of  battle  and 
disaster  on  the  whole  land. 

The  conditions  reflected  are  thus  twofold — the 
idolatrous  and  sceptical  state  of  the  people,  and 
an  impending  invasion.  But  these  suit,  more 
or  less  exactly,  each  of  the  three  sections  of  our 
period.  For  Jeremiah  distinctly  states  that  he 
had  to  attack  idolatry  in  Judah  for  twenty-three 
years,  627  to  604;:}:  he  inveighs  against  the  false- 
ness and  impurity  of  the  people  alike  before  the 
great  Reform,  and  after  it  while  Josiah  was  still 
alive,  and  still  more  fiercely  under  Jehoiakim. 
And,  while  before  621  the  great  Scythian  inva- 
sion was  sweeping  upon  Palestine  from  the 
north,  after  621,  and  especially  after  604,  the 
Babylonians  from  the,  same  quarter  were  visibly 
threatening  the  land.  But  when  looked  at  more 
closely,  the  chapter  shows  several  features  which 
suit  the  second  section  of  our  period  less  than 
they  do  the  other  two.  The  worship  of  the  host 
of  heaven,  probably  introduced  under  Manasseh, 
was  put  down  by  Josiah  in  621;  it  revived  under 
Jehoiakim,§  but  during  the  latter  years  of  Josiah 
it  cannot  possibly  have  been  so  public  as  Zeph- 
aniah describes.!  Other  reasons  which  have 
been  given  for  those  years  are  inconclusive  "l  — 
the  chapter,  for  instance,  makes  no  indubitable 
reference  to  Deuteronomy  or  the  Covenant  of 
621 — and  on  the  whole  we  may  leave  the  end  of 

*  So  Delitzsch,  Kleinert,  and  Schulz  ("Commentar  iiber 
den  Proph.  Zeph.,"  1892,  p.  7,  quoted  by  Konig). 

+  So  Konig. 

t  Jer.  XXV. 

§  Jer.  vii.  18. 

ill.  3- 

If  Kleinert  in  his  Commentary  in  Lange's  "  Bibelwerk," 
and  Delitzsch  in  his  article  in  Herzog's  "  Real-Encyclo- 
padie,"  both  offer  a  number  of  inconclusive  arguments. 
These  are  drawn  from  the  position  of  Zephaniah  after 
Habakkuk,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  the  order  of  the  Twelve 
is  not  always  chronological ;  from  the  supposition  that 
Zephaniah  i.  7,  "  Silence  before  the  Lord  Jehovah,"  quotes 
Habakkuk  ii.  20,  "Keep  silence  before  Him,  all  the 
earth,"  but  the  phrase  common  to  both  is  too  general  to 
be  decisive,  and  if  borrowed  by  one  or  other  may  just  as 
well  have  been  Zephaniah's  originally  as  Habakkuk's; 
from  the  phrase  "remnant  of  Baal"  (i.  4),  as  if  this  were 
appropriate  only  after  the  Reform  of  621,  but  it  was  quite 
as  appropriate  after  the  beginnings  of  reform  six  j'ears 
earlier  ;  from  the  condemnation  of  "the  sons  of  the  king " 
(i.  8),  whom  Delitzsch  takes  as  Josiah's  sons,  who  before 
the  great  Reform  were  too  young  to  be  condemned,  while 
later  their  characters  did  develop  badly  and  judgment 
fell  upon  all  of  them,  but  "  sons  of  the  king,"  even  if  that 
be  the  correct  reading  (LXX.  "  house  of  the  king  "),  does 
not  necessarily  mean  the  reigning  monarch's  children  ; 
and  from  the  assertion  that  Deuteronomy  is  quoted  in  the 
first  chapter  of  Zephaniah,  and  "  so  quoted  as  to  show 
that  the  prophet  needs  only  to  put  the  people  in  mind  of 
it  as  something  supposed  to  be  known,"  but  the  verses 
cited  in  support  of  this  fviz.  13,  15,  17  :  cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  30 
and  29)  are  too  general  in  their  character  to  prove  the 
assertion.    See  translation  below. 


S70 


THfi^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Josiah's  reign  out  of  account.  Turning  to  the 
third  section,  Jehoiakim's  reign,  we  find  one 
feature  of  the  prophecy  which  suits  it  admirably. 
The  temper  described  in  ver.  12 — "  men  who  are 
settled  on  their  lees,  who  say  in  their  heart,  Je- 
hovah doeth  neither  good  nor  evil  " — is  the  kind 
of  temper  likely  to  have  been  produced  among 
the  less  earnest  adherents  of  Jehovah  by  the  fail- 
ure of  the  great  Reform  in  621  to  effect  either 
the  purity  or  the  prosperity  of  the  nation.  But 
this  is  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  sig- 
nificant exception  of  the  king  from  the  condem- 
nation which  ver.  8  passes  on  the  "  princes  and 
the  sons  of  the  king."  Such  an  exception  could 
not  have  been  made  when  Jehoiakim  was  on  the 
throne;  it  points  almost  conclusively  to  the  reign 
of  the  good  Josiah.  And  with  this  agrees  the 
title  of  the  chapter — "  in  the  days  of  Josiah."  * 
We  are,  therefore,  driven  back  to  the  years  of 
Josiah  before  621.  In  these  we  find  no  discrep- 
ancy either  with  the  chapter  itself,  or  with  its 
title.  The  southward  march  of  the  Scythians,  f 
between  630  and  625,  accounts  for  Zephaniah's 
alarm  of  a  general  war,  including  the  invasion 
of  Judah;  the  idolatrous  practices  which  he  de- 
scribes may  well  have  been  those  surviving  from 
the  days  of  Manasseh,t:  and  not  yet  reached  by 
the  drastic  measures  of  621;  the  temper  of  scep- 
ticism and  hopelessness  condemned  by  ver.  12 
was  possible  among  those  adherents  of  Jehovah 
who  had  hoped  greater  things  from  the  over- 
throw of  Amon  than  the  slow  and  small  reforms 
of  the  first  fifteen  years  of  Josiah's  reign.  Nor 
is  a  date  before  621  made  at  all  difficult  by  the 
genealogy  of  Zephaniah  in  the  title.  If,  as  is 
probable,§  the  Hezekiah  given  as  his  great- 
great-grandfather  be  Hezekiah  the  king,  and  if 
he  died  about  695,  and  Manasseh,  his  successor, 
who  was  then  twelve,  was  his  eldest  son,  then  by 
630  Zephaniah  cannot  have  been  much  more 
than  twenty  years  of  age,  and  not  more  than 
twenty-five  by  the  time  the  Scythian  invasion 
had  passed  away.||  It  is  therefore  by  no  means 
impossible  to  suppose  that  he  prophesied  before 
625;  and  besides,  the  data  of  the  genealogy  in 
the  title  are  too  precrrious  to  make  them  valid, 
as  against  an  inference  from  the  contents  of  the 
chapter  itself. 

The  date,  therefore,  of  the  first  chapter  of 
Zephaniah  may  be  given  as  about  625  b.  c,  and 
probably  rather  before  than  after  that  year,  as  the 
tide  of  Scythian  invasion  has  apparently  not  yet 
ebbed. 

The  other  two  chapters  have  within  recent 
years  been  almost  wholly  denied  to  Zephaniah. 
Kuenen  doubted  chap.  ii.  9-20.  Stade  makes 
all  chap.  iii.  post-exilic,  and  suspects  ii.  1-3,  11. 
A  very  thorough  examination  of  them  has  led 
Schwallylf  to  asign  to  exilic  or  post-exilic  times 
the  whole  of  the  little  sections  comprising  them, 

*  Konigf  has  to  deny  the  authenticity  of  this  in  order  to 
make  his  case  for  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim.  But  nearly  all 
critics  take  the  phrase  as  genuine. 

t  See  above,  p.  564.  For  inconclusive  reasons  Schwally, 
"  Z.  A.  T.  VV.,"  i8go,  pp.  215-217.  prefers  the  Egyptians 
under  Psamtik.     See  in  answer  Davidson,  p   g8. 

t  Not  much  stress  can  be  laid  upon  the  phrase  "I  will 
cut  off  the  remnant  of  Baal,"  ver.  4,  for,  if  the  reading  be 
correct,  it  may  only  mean  the  destruction  of  Baal-wor- 
ship, and  not  the  uprooting  of  what  has  been  left  over. 

§  See  below,  p.  571,  n. 

II  If  6q5  be  the  date  of  the  accession  of  Manasseh,  being 
then  twelve,  Amariah,  Zephaniah's  great-grandfather, 
cannot  have  been  more  than  ten,  that  is,  born  in  705.  His 
son  Gedaliah  was  probably  not  born  before  68q,  his  son 
Kushi  probably  not  before  672,  and  his  son  Zephaniah 
probably  not  before  650. 

T  "Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1890,  Heft  I. 


with  the  possible  exceptions  of  chap.  iii.  1-7, 
which  "  may  be "  Zephaniah's.  His  essay  has 
been  subjected  to  a  searching  and  generally  hos- 
tile criticism  by  a  number  of  leading  scholars;  * 
and  he  has  admitted  the  inconclusiveness  of  some 
of   his   reasons. t 

Chap.  ii.  1-4  is  assigned  by  Schwally  to  a  date 
later  than  Zephaniah's,  principally  because  of  the 
term  meekness  (ver.  3),  which  is  a  favourite  one 
with  post-exilic  writers.  He  has  been  sufficiently 
answered;  t  and  the  close  connection  of  vv.  1-3 
with  chap.  i.  has  been  clearly  proved. ^  Chap.  ii. 
4-15  is  the  passage  in  elegiac  measure  but  bro- 
ken, an  argument  for  the  theory  that  insertions 
have  been  made  in  it.  The  subject  is  a  series 
of  foreign  nations — Philistia  (5-7),  Moab  and 
Ammon  (8-10),  Egypt  (11)  and  Assyria  (13-15). 
The  passage  has  given  rise  to  many  doubts;  every 
one  must  admit  the  difficulty  of  coming  to  a 
conclusion  as  to  its  authenticity.  On  the  one 
hand,  the  destruction  just  predicted  is  so  univer- 
sal that,  as  Professor  Davidson  says,  we  should 
expect  Zephaniah  to  mention  other  nations  than 
Judah. II  The  concluding  oracle  on  Nineveh 
must  have  been  published  before  608,  and  even 
Schwally  admits  that  it  may  be  Zephaniah's  own. 
But  if  this  be  so,  then  we  may  infer  that  the 
first  of  the  oracles  on  Philistia  is  also  Zepha- 
niah's, for  both  it  and  the  oracle  on  Assyria  are 
in  the  elegiac  measure,  a  fact  which  makes 
it  probable  that  the  whole  passage,  however  bro- 
ken and  intruded  upon,  was  originally  a  unity. 
Nor  is  there  anything  in  the  oracle  on  Philistia 
incompatible  with  Zephaniah's  date.  Philistia 
lay  on  the  path  of  the  Scythian  invasion;  the 
phrase  in  ver.  7,  "  shall  turn  their  captivity,"  is 
not  necessarily  exilic.  As  Cornill,  too,  points 
out,  the  expression  in  ver.  13,  "  He  will  stretch 
out  His  hand  to  the  north,"  implies  that  the 
prophecy  has  already  looked  in  other  directions. 
There  remains  the  passage  between  the  oracles 
on  Philistia  and  Assyria.  This  is  not  in  the  ele- 
giac measure.  Its  subject  is  Moab  and  Ammon, 
who  were  not  on  the  line  of  the  Scythian  in- 
vasion, and  Wellhausen  further  objects  to  it,  be- 
cause the  attitude  to  Israel  of  the  two  peoples 
whom  it  describes  is  that  which  is  attributed  to 
them  only  just  before  the  Exile  and  surprises 
us  in  Josiah's  reign.  Dr.  Davidson  meets  this 
objection  by  pointing  out  that,  just  as  in  Deu- 
teronomy, so  here,  Moab  and  Ammon  are  de- 
nounced, while  Edom,  which  in  Deuteronomy  is 
spoken  of  with  kindness,  is  here  not  denounced 
at  all.  A  stronger  objection  to  the  passage  is 
that  ver.  11  predicts  the  conversion  of  the  na- 
tions, while  ver.  12  makes  them  the  prey  of  Je- 
hovah's sword,  and  in  this  ver.  12  follows  on  nat- 
urally to  ver.  7.  On  this  ground,  as  well  as  on 
the  absence  of  the  elegiac  measure,  the  oracle  on 
Moab  and  Ammon  is  strongly  to  be  suspected. 

On  the  whole,  then,  the  most  probable  conclu- 
sion is  that  chap.  ii.  4-15  was  originally  an  au- 
thentic   oracle    of    Zephaniah's    in    the    elegiac 


*  Bacher,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1891,  186  ;  Cornill,  "  Einleitung," 
i8gi ;  Budde,  "Theol.  Stud.  u.  Krit.,"  1893,  393  ff.;  David- 
son, "Nah.,  Hab.  and  Zeph.,"  100  ff. 

+  "  Z.  A.  T.  W."  i8qi.  Heft  2. 

X  By  especially  Bacher,  Cornill  and  Budde  as  above. 

§  See  Budde  and  Davidson. 

(The  ideal  of  chap,  i-.ii.  3,  of  the  final  security  of  a 
poor  and  lowly  remnant  of  Israel,  "  necessarily  implies 
that  they  shall  no  longer  be  threatened  by  1  ostility  from 
without,  and  this  condition  is  satisfied  by  the  prophet's 
view  of  the  impending  judgment  on  the  ancient  enemies 
of  his  nation,"  i.e.,  those  mentioned  in  ii.  4-15  (Robertson 
Smith,  "  Encyc.  Brit.,"  art.  "Zephaniah"). 


Zephaniah  i.-ii.  3.]      THE    PROPHET    AND    THE    REFORMERS. 


57' 


metre,  uttered  at  the  same  date  as  chap,  i.-ii.  3, 
the  period  of  the  Scythian  invasion,  though  from 
a  different  standpoint;  and  that  it  has  suffered 
considerable  dilapidation  (witness  especially  vv. 
6  and  14),  and  probably  one  great  intrusion,  vv. 
8-10. 

»  There   remains   the   Third   Chapter.     The   au- 

thenticity has  been  denied  by  Schwally,  who 
transfers  the  whole  till  after  the  Exile.  But  the 
chapter  is  not  a  unity.*  In  the  first  place,  it 
falls  into  two  sections,  vv.  1-13  and  14-20.  There 
is  no  reason  to  take  away  the  bulk  of  the  first 
section   from    Zephaniah.     As   Schwally  admits, 

]f        the   argument   here   is   parallel   to   that   of  chap. 

'  i.-ii.  3.  It  could  hardly  have  been  applied  to 
Jerusalem  during  or  after  the  Exile,  but  suits 
her  conditions  before  her  fall.  Schwally's  linguis- 
tic objections  to  a  pre-exilic  date  have  been  an- 
swered by  Budde.f  He  holds  ver.  6  to  be  out 
of  place  and  puts  it  after  ver.  8,  and  this  may 

[  be.  But  as  it  stands  it  appeals  to  the  impenitent 
Jews  of  ver.  5  with  the  picture  of  the  judgment 
God  has  already  completed  upon  the  nations, 
and  contrasts  with  ver.  7,  in  which  God  says  that 
He  trusts  Israel  will  repent.  Vv.  9  and  10  are, 
we  shall  see,  obviously  an  intrusion,  as  Budde 
maintains  and  Davidson  admits  to  be  possi- 
ble.t- 

We  reach  more  certainty  when  we  come  to 
the  second  sect'on  of  the  chapter,  vv.  14-20. 
Since  Kuenen  it  has  been  recognised  by  the  ma- 
jority of  critics  that  we  have  here  a  prophecy 
from  the  end  of  the  Exile  or  after  the  Return. 
The  temper  has  changed.  Instead  of  the  austere 
and  sombre  outlook  of  chap,  i.-ii.  3  and  chap, 
iii.  1-13,  in  which  the  sinful  Israel  is  to  be  saved 
indeed,  but  only  as  by  fire,  we  have  a  trium- 
phant prophecy  of  her  recovery  from  all  afflic- 
tion (nothing  is  said  of  her  sin)  and  of  her  glory 
among  the  nations  of  the  world.  To  put  it  other- 
wise, while  the  genuine  prophecies  of  Zephaniah 
almost  grudgingly  allow  a  door  of  escape  to  a 
few  righteous  and  humble  Israelites  from  a  judg- 
ment which  is  to  fall  alike  on  Israel  and  the  Gen- 
tiles, chap.  iii.  14-20  predicts  Israel's  deliverance 
from  her  Gentile  oppressors,  her  return  from 
captivity,  and  the  establishment  of  her  renown 
over  the  earth.  The  language,  too,  has  many  re- 
semblances to  that  of  Second  Isaiah. ^  Obvi- 
ously therefore  we  have  here,  added  to  the  severe 
prophecies  of  Zephaniah,  such  a  more  hopeful, 
peaceful  epilogue  as  we  saw  was  added,  during 
the  Exile,  or  immediately  after  it,  to  the  despair- 
ing prophecies  of  Amos. 


♦See,  however,  Davidson  for  some  linguistic  reasons 
for  taking  the  two  sections  as  one.  Robertson  Smith, 
also  in  1888  ("  Encyc.  Brit.,"  art.  "Zephaniah  "),  assumed 
(though  not  witliout  pointing  out  the  possibility  of  the 
addition  of  other  pieces  to  the  genuine  prophecies  of 
Zephaniah)  that  "a  single  leading  motive  runs  through 
the  whole  "  book,  and  "the  first  two  chapters  would  be 
incomplete  without  the  third,  which  moreover  is  certainly 
pre-exilic  (vv.  1-4)  and  presents  specific  points  of  contact 
with  what  precedes,  as  well  as  a  general  agreement  in  style 
and  idea." 

t  Schwally  (234)  thinks  that  the  epithet  jTlV  fver.  5) 
was  first  applied  to  Jehovah  by  the  Second  Isaiah  (xlv. 
21,  Ixiv.  2,  xlii  2O,  and  became  frequent  from  his  time 
on.  In  disproof  Budde  (3398)  quotes  E.xod.  ix.  27,  Jer. 
xii.  I.  Lam.  i.  18  Schwallj-  also  points  to  "nVJ  as 
borrowed   from   Aramaic. 

t  Budde,  p.  395  ;  Davidson,  103.  Schwally  (230  ff.)  seeks 
to  prove  the  unity  of  g  and  10  with  the  context,  but  he 
has  apparently  mistaken  the  meaning  of  ver.  8  (231).  That 
surely  does  not  mean  that  the  nations  are  gathered  in 
order  to  punish  the  godlessness  of  the  Jews,  but  that 
they  may  themselves  be  punished. 

§  See  Davidson,  103. 


CHAPTER  III. 
THE    PROPHET    AND    THE    REFORMERS. 


Zephaniah 


i.-ii.  3. 


Towards  the  year  625,  when  King  Josiah  had 
passed  out  of  his  minority,*  and  was  making 
his  first  efforts  at  religious  reform,  prophecy, 
long  slumbering,  woke  again  in  Israel. 

Like  the  king  himself,  its  first  heralds  were 
men  in  their  early  youth.  In  627  Jeremiah  calls 
himself  but  a  boy,  and  Zephaniah  can  hardly 
have  been  out  of  his  teens. f  For  the  sudden 
outbreak  of  these  young  lives  there  must  have 
been  a  large  reservoir  of  patience  and  hope  gath- 
ered in  the  generation  behind  them.  So  Scrip- 
ture itself  testifies.  To  Jeremiah  it  was  said: 
"  Before  I  formed  thee  in  the  belly  I  knew  thee, 
and  before  thou  camest  forth  out  of  the  womb 
I  consecrated  thee."}:  In  an  age  when  names 
were  bestowed  only  because  of  their  significance,^ 
both  prophets  bore  that  of  Jehovah  in  their  own. 
So  did  Jeremiah's  father,  who  was  of  the  priests 
of  Anathoth.  Zephaniah's  ''  forbears  "  are  given 
for  four  generations,  and  with  one  exception 
they  also  are  called  after  Jehovah:  "  The  Word 
of  Jehovah  which  came  to  Sephanyah,  son  of 
Kushi,  son  of  Gedhalyah,  son  of  Amaryah,  son 
of  Hizkiyah,  in  the  days  of  Joshiyahu,||  Amon's 
son,  king  of  Judah."  Zephaniah's  great-great- 
grandfather Hezekiah  was  in  all  probability  the 
king.TI  His  father's  name  Kushi,  or  Ethiop,  is 
curious.  If  we  are  right,  that  Zephaniah  was  a 
young  man  towards  625,  then  Kushi  must  have 
been  born  towards  663,  about  the  time  of  the 
conflicts  between  Assyria  and  Egypt,  and  it  is 
possible  that,  as  Manasseh  and  the  predominant 
party  in  Judah  so  closely  hung  upon  and  imi- 
tated Assyria,  the  adherents  of  Jehovah  put  their 
hope  in  Egypt,  whereof,  it  may  be,  this  name 
Kushi  is  a  token.**  The  name  Zephaniah  itself, 
meaning  "Jehovah  hath  hidden,"  suggests  the 
prophet's  birth  in  the  "  killing-time "  of  Ma- 
nasseh. There  was  at  least  one  other  contempo- 
rary of  the  same  name — a  priest  executed  by 
Nebuchadrezzar,  tt 

Of  the  adherents  of  Jehovah,  then,  and  proba- 
bly of  royal  descent,  Zephaniah  lived  in  Jerusa- 
lem. We  descry  him  against  her,  almost  as 
clearly  as  we  descry  Isaiah.  In  the  glare  and 
smoke    of    the    conflagration    which    his    vision 

*  Josiah,  born  c.  648,  succeeded  c.  639,  was  about  eigh- 
teen in  630,  and  then  appears  to  have  begun  his  reforms. 

+  See  above,  p.  570,  n. 

tjer.  i.  s. 

§  See  G.  B.  Gray,  "  Hebrew  Proper  Names." 

II  Josiah. 

t  It  is  not  usual  in  the  O.  T.  to  carry  a  man's  geneal- 
ogy beyond  his  grandfather,  except  for  some  special  pur- 
pose, or  in  order  to  include  some  ancestor  of  note.  Also 
the  name  Hezekiah  is  very  rare  apart  from  the  king. 
The  number  of  names  compounded  with  Jah  or  Jehovah 
is  another  proof  that  the  line  is  a  royal  one.  The  omission 
of  the  phrase  "king  of  Judah"  after  Hezekiah's  name 
proves  nothing  ;  it  may  have  been  of  purpose  because 
the  phrase  has  to  occur  immediately  again. 

**  It  was  not  until  652  that  a  league  was  made  between 
the  Palestine  princes  and  Psamtik  I.  against  Assyria. 
This  certainly  would  have  been  the  most  natural  year 
for  a  child  to 'be  named  Kushi.  But  that  would  set  the 
birth  of  Zephaniah  as  late  as  632,  and  his  prophecy 
towards  the  end  of  Josiah's  reign,  which  we  have  seen  to 
be  improbable  on  other  grounds. 

+t  Jer.  xxi.  i,  xxix.  25,  29,  xxxvii.  3,  Hi.  24  flf. ;  2  Kings  xxv. 

18.  The  analogous  Phoenician  name  py^JQV,  Saphan- 
ba'al  =  "Baal  protects  or  hides,"  is  found  in  No.  207  of 
the  Phoenician  mscriptions  in  the  "  Corpus  Inscr.  Semiti- 
carum." 


572 


THB^  BOOK   OF 'THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


sweeps  across  the  world,  only  her  features  stand 
out  definite  and  particular:  the  flat  roofs  with 
men  and  women  bowing  in  the  twilight  to  the 
host  of  heaven,  the  crowds  of  priests,  the  nobles 
and  their  foreign  fashions:  the  Fishgate,  the  New 
or  Second  Town,  where  the  rich  lived,  the  Heights 
to  which  building  had  at  last  spread,  and  between 
them  the  hollow  Mortar,  with  its  markets,  Phoe- 
nician merchants,  and  money-dealers.  In  the  first 
few  verses  of  Zephaniah  we  see  almost  as  much 
of  Jerusalem  as  in  the  whole  book  either  of 
Isaiah  or  Jeremiah. 

For  so  young  a  man  the  vision  of  Zephaniah 
may  seem  strangely  dark  and  final.  Yet  not 
otherwise  was  Isaiah's  inaugural  vision,  and  as 
a  rule  it  is  the  young  and  not  the  old  whose  in- 
dignation is  ardent  and  unsparing.  Zephaniah 
carries  this  temper  to  the  extreme.  There  is  no 
great  hope  in  his  book,  hardly  any  tenderness, 
and  never  a  glimpse  of  beauty.  A  townsman, 
Zephaniah  has  no  eye  for  nature;  not  only  is  no 
fair  prospect  described  by  him,  he  has  not  even 
a  single  metaphor  drawn  from  nature's  love- 
liness or  peace.  He  is  pitilessly  true  to  his  great 
keynotes:  "  I  will  sweep,  sweep  from  the  face  of 
the  ground;  He  will  burn,"  burn  up  everything. 
No  hotter  book  lies  in  all  the  Old  Testament. 
Neither  dew  nor  grass  nor  tree  nor  any  blos- 
som, lives  in  it,  but  it  is  everywhere  fire,  smoke, 
and  darkness,  drifting  chafif.  ruins,  nettles,  salt- 
pits,  and  owls  and  ravens  looking  from  the  win- 
dows of  desolate  palaces.  Nor  does  Zephaniah 
foretell  the  restoration  of  nature  in  the  end  of 
the  days.  There  is  no  prospect  of  a  redeemed 
and  fruitful  land,  but  only  of  a  group  of  bat- 
tered and  hardly  saved  characters:  a  few  meek 
and  righteous  are  hidden  from  the  fire  and  creep 
forth  when  it  is  over.  Israel  is  left  "  a  poor  and 
humble  folk."  No  prophet  is  more  true  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  remnant,  or  more  resolutely  re- 
fuses to  modify  it.     Perhaps  he  died  young. 

The  full  truth,  however,  is  that  Zephaniah, 
though  he  found  his  material  in  the  events  of 
his  own  day,  tears  himselt  loose  from  history  al- 
together. To  the  earlier  prophets  the  Day  of 
the  Lord,  the  crisis  of  the  world,  is  a  definite 
point  in  history:  full  of  terrible.  Divine  events, 
yet  "  natural  "  ones — battle,  siege,  famine,  mas- 
sacre, and  captivitv.  After  it  history  is  still  to 
flow  on,  common  days  come  back  and  Israel 
pursue  their  way  as  a  nation.  But  to  Zephaniah 
the  Day  of  the  Lord  begins  to  assume  what  we 
call  the  "supernatural."  The  grim  colours  are 
still  woven  of  war  and  siege,  but  mixed  with 
vague  and  solemn  terrors  from  another  sphere, 
by  which  history  appears  to  be  swallowed  up, 
and  it  is  only  with  an  efifort  that  the  prophet 
thinks  of  a  rally  of  Israel  beyond.  In  short,  with 
Zephaniah  the  Day  of  the  Lord  tends  to  become 
the  Last  Day.  His  book  is  the  first  tinging  of 
prophecy  with  apocalypse:  that  is  the  moment 
which  it  supplies  in  the  history  of  Israel's  re- 
ligion. And,  therefore,  it  was  with  a  true  instinct 
that  the  great  Christian  singer  of  the  Last  Day 
took  from  Zephaniah  his  keynote.  The  "  Dies 
Irae,  Dies  Ilia  "  of  Thomas  of  Celano  is  but  the 
Vulgate  translation  of  Zephaniah's  "  A  day  of 
wrath  is  that  day."  * 

Nevertheless,  though  the  first  of  apocalyptic 
writers,  Zephaniah  does  not  allow  himself  the  li- 
cense of  apocalypse.  As  he  refuses  to  imagine 
great  glory   for  the   righteous,   so   he   does   not 

*  Chap.  i.  15.  With  the  above  paragraph  cf.  Robertson 
Smith,  "  Encyc.  Brit.,"  art,  "Zephaniah." 


dwell  on  the  terrors  of  the  wicked.  He  is  sober 
and  restrained,  a  matter-of-fact  man,'  yet  with 
power  of  imagination,  who,  amidst  the  vague 
horrors  he  summons,  delights  in  giving  a  sharp 
realistic  impression.  The  Day  of  the  Lord,  he 
says,  what  is  it?  "  A  strong  man — there! — cry- 
ing bitterly."  * 

It  is  to  the  fierce  ardour,  and  to  the  elemental 
interests  of  the  book,  that  we  owe  the  absence 
of  two  features  of  prophecy  which  are  so  con- 
stant in  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century. 
Firstly,  Zephaniah  betrays  no  interest  in  the 
practical  reforms  which  (if  we  are  right  about  the 
date)  the  young  king,  his  contemporary,  had 
already  started. f  There  was  a  party  of  reform, 
the  party  had  a  programme,  the  programme  was 
drawn  from  the  main  principles  of  prophecy  and 
was  designed  to  put  these  into  practice.  And 
Zephaniah  was  a  prophet  and  ignored  them. 
This  forms  the  dramatic  interest  of  his  book. 
Here  was  a  man  of  the  same  faith  which  kings, 
priests,  and  statesmen  were  trying  to  realise  in 
public  life,  in  the  assured  hope — as  is  plain  from 
the  temper  of  Deuteronomy — that  the  nation  as  a 
whole  would  be  reformed  and  become  a  very 
great  nation,  righteous  and  victorious.  All  this 
he  ignored,  and  gave  his  own  vision  of  the  fu- 
ture: Israel  is  a  brand  plucked  from  the  burn- 
ing; a  very  few  meek  and  righteous  are  saved 
from  the  conflagration  of  a  whole  world.  Why? 
Because  for  Zephaniah  the  elements  were  loose, 
and  when  the  elements  were  loose  what  was  the 
use  of  talking  about  reforms?  The  Scythians 
were  sweeping  down  upon  Palestine,  with 
enough  of  God's  wrath  in  them  to  destroy  a 
people  still  so  full  of  idolatry  as  Israel  was;  and 
if  not  the  Scythians,  then  some  other  power  in 
that  dark,  rumbling  North  which  had  ever  been 
so  full  of  doom.  Let  Josiah  try  to  reform  Is- 
rael, but  it  was  neither  Josiah's  nor  Israel's  day 
that  was  falling.  It  was  the  Day  of  the  Lord, 
and  when  He  came  it  was  neither  to  reform  nor 
to  build  up  Israel,  but  to  make  visitation  and 
to  punish  in  His  wrath  for  the  unbelief  and  wick- 
edness of  which  the  nation  was  still  full. 

An  analogy  to  this  dramatic  opposition  be- 
tween prophet  and  reformer  may  be  found  in  our 
own  century.  At  its  crisis,  in  1848,  there  were 
many  righteous  men  rich  in  hope  and  energy. 
The  political  institutions  of  Europe  were  being 
rebuilt.  In  our  own  land  there  were  great 
measures  for  the  relief  of  labouring  children 
and  women,  the  organisation  of  labour,  and  the 
just  distribution  of  wealth.  But  Carlyle  that  year 
held  apart  from  them  all,  and,  though  a  personal 
friend  of  many  of  the  reformers,  counted  their 
work  hopeless:  society  was  too  corrupt,  the  rud- 
est forces  were  loose,  "  Niagara  "  was  near.  Car- 
lyle was  proved  wrong  and  the  reformers  right, 
but  in  the  analogous  situation  of  Israel  the  re- 
formers were  wrong  and  the  prophet  right.  Jo- 
siah's hope  and  daring  were  overthrown  at  Me- 
giddo,  and,  though  the  Scythians  passed  away, 
Zephaniah's  conviction  of  the  sin  and  doom  of 
Israel  was  fulfilled,  not  forty  years  later,  in  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  great  Exile. 

Again,  to  the  same  elemental  interests,  as  we 

*  Chap.  i.  14  *. 

t  In  fact  this  forms  one  difficulty  about  the  conclusion 
which  we  have  reached  as  to  the  date.  We  saw  that  one 
reason  against  putting  the  Book  of  Zephaniah  after  the 
great  Reforms  of  621  was  that  it  betrayed  no  sign  of  their 
effects.  But  it  might  justly  be  answered  that,  if  Zeph- 
aniah prophesied  before  621,  his  book  ought  to  betray 
some  sign  of  the  approach  of  reform.  Still  the  explana- 
tion  given  above  is  satisfactory. 


Zephaniah  i.-ii,  3.J      THE    PROPHET    AND    THE    REFORMERS. 


573 


may  call  them,  is  due  the  absence  from  Zepha- 
niah's  pages  of  all  the  social  and  individual  stud- 
ies which  form  the  charm  of  other  prophets. 
With  one  exception,  there  is  no  analysis  of  char- 
acter, no  portrait,  no  satire.  But  the  exception 
is  worth  dwelling  upon:  it  describes  the  temper 
equally  abhorred  by  both  prophet  and  reformer 
— that  of  the  indifferent  and  stagnant  man.  Here 
we  have  a  subtle  and  memorable  picture  of  char- 
acter, which  is  not  without  its  warnings  for  our 
own   time. 

Zephaniah  heard  God  say:  "  And  it  shall  be  at 
that  time  that  I  will  search  out  Jerusalem  with 
lights,  and  I  will  make  visitation  upon  the  men 
who  are  become  stagnant  upon  their  lees,  who 
say  in  their  hearts,  Jehovah  doeth  no  good  and 
doeth  no  evil."  *  The  metaphor  is  clear.  New 
wine  was  left  upon  its  lees  only  long  enough  to 
fix  its  colour  and  body.f  If  not  then  drawn  ofif 
it  grew  thick  and  syrupy — sweeter  indeed  than 
the  strained  wine,  and  to  the  taste  of  some  more 
pleasant,  but  feeble  and  ready  to  decay.  "  To 
settle  upon  one's  lees  "  became  a  proverb  for 
sloth,  indifference,  and  the  muddy  mind.  "  Moab 
hath  been  at  ease  from  his  youth  and  hath  set- 
tled upon  his  lees,  and  hath  not  been  emptied 
from  vessel  to  vessel;  therefore  his  taste  stands 
in  him  and  his  scent  is  not  changed."  t  The 
characters  stigmatised  by  Zephaniah  are  also  ob- 
vious. They  were  a  precipitate  from  the  ferment 
of  fifteen  years  back.  Through  the  cruel  days 
of  Manasseh  and  Amon  hope  had  been  stirred 
and  strained,  emptied  from  vessel  to  vessel,  and 
so  had  sprung,  sparkling  and  keen,  into  the  new 
days  of  Josiah.  But  no  miracle  came,  only  ten 
years  of  waiting  for  the  king's  majority  and  five 
more  of  small,  tentative  reforms.  Nothing  Di- 
vine happened.  They  were  but  the  ambiguous 
successes  of  a  small  party  who  had  secured  the 
king  for  their  principles.  The  court  was  still 
full  of  foreign  fashions,  and  idolatry  was  rank 
upon  the  housetops.  Of  course  disappointment 
ensued — disappointment  and  listlessness.  The 
new  security  of  life  became  a  temptation;  perse- 
cution ceased,  and  religious  men  lived  again  at 
ease.  So  numbers  of  eager  and  sparkling  souls, 
who  had  been  in  the  front  of  the  movement,  fell 
away  into  a  selfish  and  idle  obscurity.  The 
prophet  hears  God  say,  "  I  must  search  Jerusa- 
lem with  lights  "  in  order  to  find  them.  They 
had  "  fallen  from  the  van  and  the  freemen "  ; 
they  had  "  sunk  to  the  rear  and  the  slaves," 
where  they  wallowed  in  the  excuse  that  "  Jeho- 
vah "  Himself  "  would  do  nothing — neither 
good,"  therefore  it  is  useless  to  attempt  reform 
like  Josiah  and  his  party.  "  nor  evil,"  therefore 
Zephaniah's  prophecy  of  destruction  is  also  vain. 
Exactly  the  same  temper  was  encountered  by 
Mazzini  in  the  second  stage  of  his  career.  Many 
of  those  who  with  him  had  eagerly  dreamt  of 
a  free  Italy  fell  away  when  the  first  revolt  failed 
— fell  away  not  merely  into  weariness  and  fear, 
but,  as  he  emphasises,  into  the  very  two  tempers 
which  are  described  by  Zephaniah,  scepticism 
and  self-indulgence. 

All  this  starts  questions  for  ourselves.  Here 
is  evidently  the  same  public  temper,  which  at  all 
periods  provokes  alike  the  desoair  of  the  re- 
former and  the  indignation  of  the  prophet:  the 
criminal  apathy  of  the  well-to-do  classes  sunk  in 

*  Chap.  i.  12. 

+  So  "  wine  upon  the  lees  "  is  a  generous  wine,  according 
to  Isa.  XXV.  6. 
t  Jer.  xlviii.  n. 


ease  and  religious  indifference.  We  have  to- 
day the  same  mass  of  obscure,  nameless  persons, 
who  oppose  their  almost  unconquerable  inertia 
to  every  movement  of  reform,  and  are  the  drag 
upon  all  vital  and  progressive  religion.  The 
great  causes  of  God  and  Humanity  are  not  de- 
feated by  the  hot  assaults  of  the  Devil,  but  by  the 
slow,  crushing,  glacier-like  masses  of  thousands 
and  thousands  of  indifferent  nobodies.  God's 
causes  are  never  destroyed  by  being  blown  up, 
but  by  being  sat  upon.  It  is  not  the  violent  and 
anarchical  whom  we  have  to  fear  in  the  war  for 
human  progress,  but  the  slow,  the  staid,  the  re- 
spectable. And  the  danger  of  these  does  not  lie 
in  their  stupidity.  Notwithstanding  all  their  re- 
ligious profession,  it  lies  in  their  real  scepticism. 
Respectability  may  be  the  precipitate  of  unbelief. 
Nay,  it  is  that,  however  religious  its  mask, 
wherever  it  is  mere  comfort,  decorousness,  and 
conventionality;  where,  though  it  would  abhor 
articulately  confessing  that  God  does  nothing, 
it  virtually  means  so — says  so  (as  Zephaniah  puts 
it)  in  its  heart,  by  refusing  to  share  manifest  op- 
portunities of  serving  Him,  and  covers  its  sloth 
and  its  fear  by  sneering  that  God  is  not  with  the 
great  crusades  of  freedom  and  purity  to  which 
it  is  summoned.  In  these  ways.  Respectability 
is  the  precipitate  which  unbelief  naturally  forms 
in  the  selfish  ease  and  stillness  of  so  much  of 
our  middle-class  life.  And  that  is  what  makes 
mere  respectability  so  dangerous.  Like  the  un- 
shaken, unstrained  wine  to  which  the  prophet 
compares  its  obscure  and  muddy  comfort,  it 
tends  to  decay.  To  some  extent  our  respectable 
classes  are  just  the  dregs  and  lees  of  our  national 
life;  like  all  dregs,  they  are  subject  to  corrup- 
tion. A  great  sermon  could  be  preached  on  the 
putrescence  of  respectability — how  the  ignoble 
comfort  of  our  respectable  classes  and  their  in- 
difference to  holy  causes  lead  to  sensuality,  and 
poison  the  very  institutions  of  the  Home  and  the 
Family,  on  which  they  pride  themselves.  A  large 
amount  of  the  licentiousness  of  the  present  day 
is  not  that  of  outlaw  and  disordered  lives,  but  is 
bred  from  the  settled  ease  and  indifference  of 
many  of  our  middle-class  families. 

It  is  perhaps  the  chief  part  of  the  sin  of  the 
obscure  units,  which  form  these  great  masses  of 
indifference,  that  they  think  they  escape  no- 
tice and  cover  their  individual  responsibility.  At 
all  times  many  have  sought  obscurity,  not  be- 
cause they  are  humble,  but  because  they  are 
slothful,  cowardly,  or  indifferent.  Obviously  it 
is  this  temper  which  is  met  by  the  words,  "  I  will 
search  out  Jerusalem  with  lights."  None  of  us 
shall  escape  because  we  have  said,  "  I  will  go 
with  the  crowd,"  or  "  I  am  a  common  man  and 
have  no  right  to  thrust  myself  forward."  We 
shall  be  followed  and  judged,  each  of  us  for  his 
or  her  personal  attitude  to  the  great  movements 
of  our  time.  These  things  are  not  too  high  for 
us:  they  are  our  duty;  and  we  cannot  escape  our 
duty  by  slinking  into  the  shadow. 

For  all  this  wickedness  and  indifference  Zeph- 
aniah sees  prepared  the  Day  of  the  Lord — near, 
hastening,  and  very  terrible.  It  sweeps  at  first  in 
vague  desolation  and  ruin  of  all  things,  but  then 
takes  the  outlines  of  a  solemn  slaughter-feast  for 
which  Jehovah  has  consecrated  the  guests,  the 
dim  unnamed  armies  from  the  north.  Judah 
shall  be  invaded,  and  they  that  are  at  ease,  who 
say  "  Jehovah  does  nothing  "  shall  be  unsettled 
and  routed.  One  vivid  trait  comes  in  like  a 
screech  upon   the   hearts   of  a  people   unaccus- 


574 


THB^BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


tomed  for  years  to  war.  "  Hark,  Jehovah's 
Day!"'  cries  the  prophet.  "A  strong  man — 
there! — crying  bitterly."  From  this  flash  upon 
the  concrete  he  returns  to  a  great  vague  terror, 
in  which  earthly  armies  merge  in  heavenly;  bat- 
tle, siege,  storm,  and  darkness  are  mingled,  and 
destruction  is  spread  abroad  upon  the  whole 
earth.  The  first  shades  of  Apocalypse  are  upon 
us. 

We  may  now  take  the  full  text  of  this  strong 
and  significant  prophecy.  We  have  already  given 
the  title.  Textual  emendations  and  other  points 
are  explained  in  footnotes. 

"  I  will  sweep,  sweep  away  everything  from  the 
face  of  the  ground — oracle  of  Jehovah — sweep 
man  and  beast,  sweep  the  fowl  of  the  heaven  and 
the  fish  of  the  sea,  and  I  will  bring  to  ruin  *  the 
wicked  and  cut  ofif  the  men  of  wickedness  from 
the  ground — oracle  of  Jehovah.  And  I  will 
stretch  forth  My  hand  upon  Judah,  and  upon  all 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem:  and  I  will  cut  ofif 
from  this  place  the  remnant  f  of  the  Baal, J  the 
names  §  of  the  priestlings  with  the  priests,  and 
them  who  upon  the  housetops  bow  themselves 
to  the  host  of  heaven,  and  them  who  .  .  .  .  || 
swear  by  their  Melech,"!  and  them  who  have 
turned  from  following  Jehovah,  and  who  do  not 
seek  Jehovah  nor  have  inquired  of  Him. 

"  Silence  for  the  Lord  Jehovah!  For  near  is 
Jehovah's  Day.  Jehovah  has  prepared  a  ** 
slaughter,    He   has   consecrated    His   guests. 

"  And  it  shall  be  in  Jehovah's  day  of  slaughter 
that  I  will  make  visitation  upon  the  princes  and 
the  house  ft  of  the  king,  and  upon  all  who  array 
themselves  in  foreign  raiment;  and  I  will  make 
visitation  upon  all  who  leap  over  the  threshold  tt 

*The  text  reads,  "the  ruins"  (i\>PY..-''   unless  we 

prefer  with  Wellhausen  "  '''^r?'  "the  stumbling- 
blocks."  t.  e.,  "idols")  "with  the  wicked,  and  I  will 
cut  off  man  "  (LXX.  "the  lawless")  "from  off  the  face 
of  the  ground."  Some  think  the  clause  partly  too 
redundant,    partly    too    specific,    to    be    original.      But 

suppose  we  read    ^C^^''!''.   (cf.  Mai.  ii.  8,  Lam.  i.  14  and 

passim:  this  is  more  probable  than  Schwally's   'I'fWr' 

op  ctt.,  p.  169),  and  for  mx  the  reading  which  probably 
the  LXX.  had  before  them,  yjj>"1  DTK  (Job  xx.  29,  xxvii. 

13,  Prov.  xi.  7 :  cf.  fjy^i?!  DIK.  Prov.  vi.  12)  or    ?'^V  t31X 

{cf.  iii.  5),  we  get  the  rendering  adopted  in  the  translation 
above.  Some  think  the  whole  passage  an  intrusion,  yet 
it  is  surely  probable  that  the  earnest  moral  spirit  of 
Zephaniah  would  aim  at  the  wicked  from  the  very  outset 
of  his  prophecy. 

t  LXX.  "  names,"  held  by  some  to  be  the  original  reading 
(Schwally,  etc.).  In  that  case  the  phrase  might  have 
some  allusion  to  the  well-known  promise  in  Deut.,  "the 
place  where  I  shall  set  My  name."  This  is  more  natural 
than  a  reference  to  Hosea  ii.  19,  which  is  quoted  by  some. 

X  Some  Greek  codd.  take  Baal  as  fem.,  others  as  plur. 

§  So  LXX. 

jIHeb.  reads  "and  them  who  bow  themselves,  who 
swear,  by  Jehovah."  So  LXX.  B  with  "and"  before 
"who  swear."  But  LXX.  A  omits  "  and."  LXX.  Q  omits 
"them  who  bow  themselves."  Wellhausen  keeps  the 
clause  with  the  exception  of  "who  swear,"  and  so  reads 
(to  the  end  of  verse)  "  them  who  bow  themselves  to  Je- 
hovah and  swear  by  Milcom." 

^  Or  Molech  =  king.  LXX.  "by  their  king."  Other 
Greek  versions:  Moloch  and  Melchom.    Vulg.  Melchom. 

♦*LXX.  "His." 

t+SoLXX.  Heb.  "sons." 

His  this  some  superstitious  rite  of  the  idol-worshippers 
as  described  in  the  case  of  Dagon,  i  Sam.  v.  5  ?  Or  is  it  a 
phrase  for  breaking  into  a  house,  and  so  parallel  to  the 
second  clause  of  the  verse  ?    Most  interpreters  prefer  the 


on  that  day,  who  fill  their  lord's  house  full  of 
violence  and  fraud. 

"  And  on  that  day — oracle  of  Jehovah — there 
shall  be  a  noise  of  crying  from  the  Fishgate, 
and  wailing  from  the  Mishneh,*  and  great  havoc 
on  the  Heights.  Howl,  O  dwellers  in  the  Mor- 
tar.f  for  undone  are  all  the  merchant  folk,t  cut 
ofT  are  all  the  money-dealers.^ 

"  And  in  that  time  it  shall  be,  that  I  will  search 
Jerusalem  with  lanterns,  and  make  visitation 
upon  the  men  who  are  become  stagnant  upon 
their  lees,  who  in  their  hearts  say,  Jehovah  doeth 
no  good  and  doeth  no  evil.||  Their  substance 
shall  be  for  spoil,  and  their  houses  for  wast- 
ing.   ...   IT 

"  Near  is  the  great  Day  of  Jehovah,  near  and 
very  speedy.**  Hark,  the  Day  of  Jehovah!  A 
strong  man — there! — crying  bitterly. 

"  A  Day  of  wrath  is  that  Day!  ft  Day  of  siege 
and  blockade,  day  of  stress  and  distress, $$  day 
of  darkness  and  murk,  day  of  cloud  and  heavy 
mist,  day  of  the  war-horn  and  battle-roar,  up 
against  the  fenced  cities  and  against  the  highest 
turrets!  And  I  will  beleaguer  men,  and  they 
shall  walk  like  the  blind,  for  they  have  sinned 
against  Jehovah;  and  poured  out  shall  their 
blood  be  like  dust,  and  the  flesh  of  them  like 
dung.  Even  their  silver,  even  their  gold  shall 
not  avail  to  save  them  in  the  day  of  Jehovah's 
wrath. §§  and  in  the  fire  of  His  zeal  shall  all  the 
earth  be  devoured,  for  destruction,  yea,||||  sud- 
den collapse  shall  He  make  of  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  earth." 

Upon  this  vision  of  absolute  doom  there  fol- 
lows Ulf  a  qualification  for  the  few  meek  and 
righteous.  They  may  be  hidden  on  the  day  of  the 
Lord's  anger;  but  e-<'en  for  them  escape  i.  only 
a  possibility.  Note  the  absence  of  all  mention 
of  the  Divine  mercy  as  the  cause  of  deliverance. 
Zephaniah  has  no  gospel  of  that  kind.  The  con- 
ditions of  escape  are  sternly  ethical — meekness, 
the  doing  of  justice  and  righteousness.  So  aus- 
tere is  our  prophet. 

latter.  The  idolatrous  rites  have  been  left  behind. 
Schwally  suggests  the  original  order  may  have  been  .; 
"  princes  and  sons  of  the  king,  who  fill  their  lord's  house 
full  of  violence  and  deceit;  and  I  will  visit  upon  every 
one  that  leapethover  the  threshold  on  that  rlay,  and  upon 
all  that  wear  foreign  raiment." 

*  The  Second  or  New  Town  :  cf.  2  Kings  xxii.  14,  2 
Chron.  xxxiv.  22,  which  state  that  the  prophetess  Huldah 
lived  there.     Cf.  Neh.  iii.  g,  12,  xi.  9. 

+  The  hollow  probably  between  the  western  and  eastern 
hills,  or  the  upper  part  of  the  Tyropcean  (Orelli). 

$  Heb.  "  people  of  Canaan." 

§  ?"'tDJ>  found  only  here  from  7tOJ,  to  lift  up.  and  in 
Isa.  xl.  15  to  weigh.  Still  it  may  have  a  wider  meaning, 
"all  they  that  carry  money  "  (Davidson). 

II  See  above,  p.  573. 

^The  Hebrew  text  and  versions  here  add  :  "And  they 
shall  build  hou.ses  and  not  inhabit "  (Greek  "in  them  "^ 
"and  plant  vineyards  and  not  drink  the  wine  thereof. 
But  the  phrase  is  a  common  one  (Deut.  xxviii.  30  ;  Amos 
V.  II  :  cf.  Micah  vi.  15),  and  while  likely  to  have  been 
inserted  by  a  later  hand,  is  here  superfluous,  and  mars 
the  firmness  and  edge  of  Zephaniah's  threat. 

**  For  "inO  Wellhausen  reads  "in)0K5,  pt-  Pi  ;  but  "yT]"):^ 
may  be  a  verbal  adj.;  compare  the  phrase  y^^  "IHO,  ^s^- 
viii.  I. 

+t  "Dieslrae,  Dies  Ilia!" 

ti  Heb.  "  sho'ah  u-mesho'ah."  Lit.  ruin  (or  devastation) 
and  destruction. 

§§Some  take  this  first  clause  of  ver.  18  as  a  gloss.  See 
Schwally  in  loco. 

llllRead  P|K  for  -)X.  So  LXX.,  Syr.,  Wellhausen, 
Schwally. 

m  In  vv.  1-3  of  chap,  ii.,  wrongly  separated  from  chap, 
i.:  see  Davidson. 


Zephaniah  ii.  4-15.] 


NINIVE    DELENDA. 


575 


.  .  .  .*  "  O  people  unabashed!t  before  that  ye 
become  as  the  drifting  chafT  before  the  anger  of 
Jehovah  come  upon  you4  before  there  come 
upon  you  the  day  of  Jehovah's  wrath; i^  seek  Je- 
hovah, all  ye  meek  of  the  land  who  do  His  ordi- 
nance,! seek  righteousness,  seek  meekness,  per- 
adventure  ye  may  hide  yourselves  in  the  day  of 
Jehovah's  wrath." 


CHAPTER  IV. 
NINIVE  DELENDA.    ■ 
Zephaniah  ii.  4-15. 

There  now  come  a  series  of  articles  on  for- 
eign nations,  connected  with  the  previous  proph- 
ecy by  the  conjunction  for,  and  detailing  the 
worldwide  judgment  which  it  had  proclaimed. 
But  though  dated  from  the  same  period  as  that 
prophecy,  circa  626,  these  oracles  are  best  treated 
by  themselves. II 

These  oracles  originally  formed  one  passage 
in  the  well-known  Qinah  or  elegiac  measure;  but 
this  has  suffered  sadly  both  by  dilapidation  and 
rebuilding.     How   mangled  the   text  is   may  be 

*Heb.     1E'p\^t;>K|l'pnn.     a.    v.   "Gather    yourselves 

together,    yea,  gather    together  ('^rr  V    is    "  to    gather 

straw  "  or  "  sticks  "—c/".  Arab,  "kash,"  to  sweep  up— and 
Nithp.  of  the  Aram,  is  to  assemble).  Orelli :  "Crowd 
and    crouch    down."    Ewald    compares  Aram,   "kash," 

late  Heb.  ^VV.  "to  grow  old,"  which  he  believes  origi- 
nally meant  "to  be  withered,  grey."  Budde  suggests 
IK'tJ'Srin  ^t^'3,  but,  as  Davidson  remarks,  it  is  not  easy  to 
see  how  this,  if  once  extant,  was  altered  to  the  present 
reading. 

T  *|Djj  is  usually  thought  to  have  as  its  root  meaning 
"to  be  pale"  or  "colourless,"  i.  e.,  either  white  or  black 
{Journal  of  Phil.,  14,  125),  whence  H^r'  "silver"  or  "the 

pale  metal  " :  hence  in  the  Qal  to  long  for,  Job  xiv.  15, 
Ps.  xvii.  12  ;  so  Ni.  Gen.  xx.xi.  30,  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  3  ;  and  here 
'to  be  ashamed."  But  the  derivation  of  the  name  for 
silver  is  quite  imaginary,  and  the  colour  of  shame  is  red 
rather  than  white  :  c/!  the  mod.  Arab,  saying,  "They  are 
a  people  that  cannot  blush  ;  they  have  no  blood  in  their 
faces,"  i.  e..  shameless.  Indeed  Schwally  saj's  (in  loco), 
"Die  Bedeutung  fahl,  blass  ist  unerweislich."  Hence 
(in  spite  of  the  meanings  of  the  Aram.  C|D3  both  to  lose 
colour  and  to  be  ashamed)  a  derivation  fur  the  Hebrew 
is  more  probably  to  be  found  in  the  root  "  kasaf,"  to  cut 
off.  The  Arabic  verb  which  in  the  classic  tongue  means 
to  cut  a  thread  or  eclip.se  the  sun,  is  in  colloquial  Arabic 
to  give  a  rebuff,  refuse  a  favour,  disappoint,  shame.  In 
the  forms  "  inkasaf  "  and  "  itkasaf  "  it  means  to  receive  a 
rebuff,  be  disappointed,  then  shy  or  timid,  and  "kasflf" 
means  shame,  shyness  (as  well  as  eclipse  of  the  sun). 
See  Spiro's  "  Arabic-English  Vocabulary."  In  Ps.  Ixxxiv. 
P)D3J  is  evidently  used  of  unsatisfied  longing  (but  see 
Cheyne),  which  is  also  the  proper  meaning  of  the  parallel 
n?3  ^'^f-  other  passages  where  ,-)^3  is  used  of  still  unful- 
filled or  rebuffed  hopes:  Job  xix.  27,  Ps.  Ixix.  4,  cxix.  81, 
cxliii.  7),  So  in  Ps.  xvii.  4  CjDD  is  used  of  a  lion  who  is 
longing  for,  i.  e.  still  disappointed  in,  his  prey,  and  so  in 
Job  xiv.  15. 

X  LXX.  TTpb  ToO  yeVecrflai  u/no?  <us  dvtJos  (here  in  error  read- 
ing V^  for  |*t3)  TrapaTTopeuo/ixei'OV,  irpb  toO  kitiKdiiv  €((>'  v/ua; 
opY'ji'  Kvpiov  (last  clause  omitted  by  KcD-  According  to 
this  the  Hebrew  text,  which  is  obviously  disarranged, 

may  be  restored   to   I?!'  H^?  1^""?"^^  D"]t23  niH'  |i-|n 


DD^^y  NT-Ni5  man. 


§This  clause  Wellhausen  deletes.  Cf.  Hexaplar  Syriac 
translation. 

IIT/XX.  take  this  also  as  imperative,  "do  judgment," 
and  so  co-ordinate  to  the  other  clauses. 

1  See  above,  pp.  570  ff. 


seen  especially  from  vv.  6  and  14,  where  the 
Greek  gives  us  some  help  in  restoring  it.  The 
verses  (8-1 1)  upon  Moab  and  Ammon  cannot 
be  reduced  to  the  metre  which  both  precedes  and 
lollows  them.  Probably,  therefore,  they  are  a 
later  addition:  nor  did  Moab  and  Ammon  lie 
upon  the  way  of  the  Scythians,  who  are  presuma- 
bly the  invaders  pictured  by  the  prophet.* 

The  poem  begins  with  Philistia  and  the  sea- 
coast,  the  very  path  of  the  Scythian  raid.f  Evi- 
dently the  latter  is  imminent,  the  Philistine  cities 
are  shortly  to  be  taken  and  the  whole  land  re- 
duced to  grass.  Across  the  emptied  strip  the 
long  hope  of  Israel  springs  seaward;  but — mark! 
— not  yet  with  a  vision  of  the  isles  beyond.  The 
prophet  is  satisfied  with  reaching  the  edge  of  the 
Promised  Land:  "by  the  sea  shall  they  feed"  t 
their  flocks. 

"  For  Gaza  forsaken  shall  be, 
Ashk'lon  a  desert. 
Ashdod — by  noon  shall  they  rout  her, 
And  Ekron  be  torn  up !  § 

"  Ah  !  woe,  dwellers  of  the  sea-shore, 
Folk  of  Kerethim. 
The  word  of  Jehovah  against  thee,  Kena'an,|| 
Land  of  the  Philistines  !  " 

"And  I  destroy  thee  to  the  last  inhabitant, 1 
And  Kereth  shall  become  shepherds'  cots,** 
And  folds  for  flocks. 

*  Some,  however,  think  the  prophet  is  speaking  in  pros- 
pect of  the  Chaldean  invasion  of  a  few  years  later.  This 
IS  not  so  likely,  because  he  pictures  the  overthrow  of 
Nineveh  as  subsequent  to  the  invasion  of  Philistia,  while 
the  Chaldeans  accomplished  the  latter  only  after  Nineveh 
had  fallen. 

+  According  to  Herodotus. 

t  Ver.  7,  LXX. 

§The  measure,  as  said  above,  is  elegiac:  alternate  lines 
long  with  a  rising,  and  short  with  a  falling,  cadence. 
There  is  a  play  upon  the  names,  at  least  on  the  first  and 
last—"  Gazzah  "or  "  'Azzah  '  Azubah  "—which  in  English 
we  might  reproduce  by  the  use  of  Spenser's  word  for 
"dreary":  "For  Gaza  ghastful  shall  be."  " 'Ekror 
te'aker."      LXX.  'AxKapuv  e/cpifiudijo-CTal  (B),  eKpi<j>ri<TfTai,'{A). 

In  the  second  line  we  have  a  slighter  assonance,  'Ash. 
kelon  lishemamah.    In  the  third  the    verb  is     ^'ri?^.' 

Bacher  ("Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1891,  185  ff.)  points  out  that  ^!!? 
is  not  used  of  cities,  but  of  their  populations  or  of  in- 
dividual men,  and  suggests  (from  Abulwalid)  rTlK*"!^', 
"shall    possess    her,"    as    "a    plausible    emendation." 

Schwally  (idi^.,  260)  prefers  to  alter  to  0''  i?*"":'  with  the 
remark  that  this  is  not  only  a  good  parallel  to  Tpyn.  but 
suits  the  LXX.  e/cpii|»)o-eTai.— On  the  expression  "  by  noon  " 
see  Davidson.  "  N.  H.  and  Z.,"  Appendix,  Note  2,  where 
he  quotes  a  parallel  expression,  in  the  Senjerli  inscrip- 
tion, of  Asarhaddon  :  that  he  took  Memphis  by  midday 
or  in  half  a  day  (Schrader).  This  suits  the  use  of  the 
phrase  in  Jer.  xv.  8,  where  it  is  parallel  to  "suddenly." 

(I  Canaan  omitted   by  Wellhausen,  who  reads  "]^7j;  for 

D3^py,  But  as  the  metre  requires  a  larger  number  cf 
syllables  in  the  first  line  of  each  couplet  than  in  the 
second,  Kena'an  should  probably  remain.  The  difficulty 
is  the  use  of  Canaan  as  synonymous  with  "  Land  of  the 
Philistines."  Nowhere  else  in  the  Old  Testament  is  it 
expressly  applied  to  the  coast  south  of  Carmel,  though  it 
is  so  used  in  the  Egyptian  inscriptions,  and  even  in  the 
Old  Testament  in  a  sense  which  covers  this  as  well  as 
other  lowlying  parts  of  Palestine. 

T  An  odd  long  line,  either  the  remains  of  two,  or  per- 
haps we  should  take  the  two  previous  lines  as  one,  omit- 
ting Canaan. 

**SoLXX.:  Hebrew  text  "and  the  sea-coast  shall  be- 
come dwellings,  cots  ^^^~'  of  shepherds."   But  the  point. 

ing  and  meaning  of  ri"l3  are  both  conjectural,  and  the 
"sea-coast"  has  probably  fallen  by  mistake  into  this 
verse  from  the  ne.xt.  On  Kereth  and  Kerethim  as  names 
for  Philistia  and  the  Philistines  see  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  171. 


576 


thE^  book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


And  the  coast  *  for  the  remnant  of  Judah's  house  ; 

By  the  seat  shall  they  feed. 
In  Ashkelon's  houses  at  even  shall  they  couch  ; 

■X 
For  Jehovah  their  God  shall  visit  them, 
And  turn  their  captivity. § 

There  comes  now  an  oracle  upon  Moab  and 
Ammon  (vv.  8-11).  As  already  said,  it  is  not 
in  the  elegiac  measure  which  precedes  and  fol- 
lows it,  while  other  features  cast  a  doubt  upon 
its  authenticity.  Like  other  oracles  on  the  same 
peoples,  this  denounces  the  loud-mouthed  arro- 
gance of  the  sons  of  Moab  and  Ammon. 

"  I  have  heardll  the  revihng  of  Moab  and  the 
insults  of  the  sons  of  Ammon,  who  have  reviled 
My  people  and  vaunted  themselves  upon  their  l| 
border.  Wherefore  as  I  live,  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  God  of  Israel,  Moab  shall  become  as 
Sodom,  and  Ammon's  sons  as  Gomorrah — the 
possession  **  of  nettles,  and  saltpits.ff  and  a 
desolation  forever;  the  remnant  of  My  people 
shall  spoil  them,  and  the  rest  of  My  nation  pos- 
sess them.  This  to  them  for  their  arrogance, 
because  they  reviled,  and  vaunted  themselves 
against,  the  people  of  ft  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  Je- 
hovah showeth  Himself  terrible  §§  against  them, 
for  He  hath  made  lean  ||||  all  gods  of  earth,  that 
all  the  coasts  of  the  nations  may  worship  Him, 
every  man  from  his  own  place."*!  ^[ 

The  next  oracle  is  a  very  short  one  (ver.  12) 
upon  Egypt,  which  after  its  long  subjection  to 
Ethiopic  dynasties  is  called,  not  Misraim,  but 
Kush,  or  Ethiopia.  The  verse  follows  on  natu- 
rally to  ver.  7,  but  is  not  reducible  to  the  elegiac 
measure. 

Also  ye,  O  Kushites,  are  the  slain  of  My  svrord.*** 

The  Elegiac  measure  is  now  renewed  ftt  in  an 
oracle  against  Assyria,  the  climax  and  front  of 
heathendom  (vv.  13-15).  It  must  have  been 
written  before  608;  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  it  is  Zephaniah's. 

"  And  may  He  stretch  out  His  hand  against  the  North, 
And  destroy  Asshur  ; 
And  may  He  turn  Nineveh  to  desolation, 
Dry  as  the  desert. 

*  LXX.  adds  "  of  the  sea."  'So  Wellhausen,  but  unneces- 
sarily and  improbably  for  phonetic  reasons,  as  "sea" 
has  to  be  read  in  the  next  line.  .  . 

t  So  Wellhausen,  reading  for    ^[}''^^.  '^^L''''^' 

t  Some  words  must  have  fallen  out,  ior  first  a  short 
line  is  required  here  by  the  metre,  and  second  the 
LXX.  have  some  additional  words,  which,  however,  give 
us  no  help  to  what  the  lost  line  was:  awb  npoauinov  vliav 

'loiiSa. 

§  As  stated  above,  there  is  no  conclusive  reason  against 
the  pre-exilic  date  of  this  expression. 

i|  Cf.  Isa.  xvi.  6. 

1  LXX.  "  My." 

**  Doubtful  word,  not  occurring  elsewhere. 

t+  Heb.  singular. 

tt  LXX.  omits  "  the  people  of." 

§i  LXX.  •'  maketh  Himself  manifest,"  HSIJ  for  NIIJ. 

Illlarraf  AeyoiJ-fvof.  The  passive  of  the  verb  means  "to 
grow  lean  "  (Isa.  xvii.  4). 

1^  DlpO  has  probably  here  the  sense  which  it  has  in  a 
few  other  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  Arabic, 
of  "  sacred  place." 

Many  will  share  Schwally's  doubts  (p.  192)  about  the 
authenticity  of  ver.  u  ;  nor,  as  Wellhausen  points  out, 
does  its  prediction  of  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  agree 
with  ver.  12,  which  devotes  them  to  destruction.  Ver.  12 
follows  naturally  on  to  ver.  7. 

***  Wellhausen  reads  "  His  sword,"  to  agree  with  the 
next   verse.    Perhaps  ""^in  >s  an  abbreviation  for  Hin^ 

Din. 

ttt  See  Budde,  "Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1882,  25. 


And  herds  shall  couch  in  her  midst. 

Every  beast  of   .   .    .    .* 
Yea,  pelican  and  bittern  t  shall  roost  on  the  capitals; 
The  owl  shall  hoot  in  the  window. 

The  raven  on  the  doorstep. 

"  Such  is  the  City,  the  Jubilant, 

She  that  sitteth  at  ease. 
She  that  saith  in  her  heart,  I  am 

And  there  is  none  else  ! 
How  hath  she  become  desolatioc  ! 

A  lair  ot  beasts. 
Everyone  passing  by  her  hisses, 

Shakes  his  hand. 

The  essence  of  these  oracles  is  their  clear  confi- 
dence in  the  fall  of  Nineveh.  From  652,  when 
Egypt  revolted  from  Assyria,  and,  Assurbanipal 
notwithstanding,  began  to  push  northward,  men 
must  have  felt,  throughout  all  Western  Asia, 
that  the  great  empire  upon  the  Tigris  was  be- 
ginning to  totter.  This  feeling  was  strength- 
ened by  the  Scythian  invasion,  and  after  625  it 
became  a  moral  certainty  that  Nineveh  would 
fall  § — which  happened  in  607-6.  These  are  the 
feelings,  625  to  608,  which  Zephaniah's  oracles 
reflect.  We  can  hardly  over-estimate  what  they 
meant.  Not  a  man  was  then  alive  who  had  ever 
known  anything  else  than  the  greatness  and  the 
glory  of  Assyria.  It  was  two  hundred  and  thirty 
years  since  Israel  first  felt  the  weight  of-  her 
arms. II  It  was  more  than  a  hundred  since  her 
hosts  had  swept  through  Palestine,?!  and  for  at 
least  fifty  her  supremacy  had  been  accepted  by 
Judah.  Now  the  colossus  began  to  totter.  As 
she  had  menaced,  so  she  was  menaced.  The 
ruins  with  which  for  nigh  three  centuries  she  had 
strewn  Western  Asia — to  these  were  to  be  re- 
duced her  own  impregnable  and  ancient  glory. 
It  was  the  close  of  an  epoch. 


CHAPTER  V. 

SO  AS  BY  FIRE. 

Zephaniah  iii. 

The  third  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Zephaniah 
consists  **  of  two  sections,  of  which  only  the 
first,  vv.  1-13,  is  a  genuine  work  of  the  prophet; 

*  Heb.  reads  "a  nation,"  and  Wellhausen  translates 
"ein  buntes  Gemisch  von  Volk."  LXX.  "beasts  of  the 
earth." 

+  nNp.  a  water-bird  according  to  Deut.  xiv.  17,  Lev.  xi. 
18,  mostly  taken  as  "pelican";  so  R.  V.,  A.  V.  "cor- 
morant."   '''^i?  has    usually   been  taken  from  *7Sp,    to 

draw  together,  therefore  "hedgehog"  or  "porcupine." 
But  the  other  animals  mentioned  here  are  birds,  and  it  is 
birds  which  would  naturally  roost  on  capitals.  Therefore 
"  bittern  "  is  the  better  rendering  (Hitzig,  Cheyne).  The 
name  is  onomatopoeic.  C/.  Eng.  butter-dump.  LXX. 
translates  "chameleons  and  hedgehogs." 

$Heb.:  "a  voice  shall  sing  in  the  window,  desolation 
on  the  threshold,  for  He  shall  uncover  the  cedar-work." 
LXX.  Kol  Sripia  (/)uji'^(ret  iv  tois  hiopvyiJiao'iv  auT^?,  KopaKC9  iv 
Tois  TruAoxrti'  aiir^?,  Slotl  KeSpoi  to  avdcTT)  <.a  a.VTrj';  :   Wild  beastS 

shall  sound  in  her  excavations,  ravens  in  her  porches, 
because  (the)  cedar  is  her  height.  For  pip,  "voice," 
Wellhausen  reads  D13,  "ovirl,"  and  with  the  LXX.  3iy, 
"raven,"  for  3"in,  "desolation."  The  last  two  words 
are  left  untranslated  above.  ^  ;  -  occurs  only  here  and 
is  usually  taken  to  mean  cedar-work ;  but  it  might  be 
pointed  "her  "  cedar.  7X1]},  "he,"  or  "one,  has  stripped 
the  cedar-work." 

§  See  above,  p.  564. 

II  At  the  battle  of  Karkar,  854. 

•f  Under  Tiglath-Pileser  in  734. 

**  See  above,  p.  571. 


Zephaniah  iii.J 


SO    AS    BY    FIRE. 


577 


while  the  second,  vv.  14-20,  is  a  later  epilogue 
such  as  we  found  added  to  the  genuine  prophe- 
cies of  Amos.  It  is  written  in  the  large  hope  and 
jjrilliant  temper  of  the  Second  Isaiah,  saying  no 
word  of  Judah's  sin  or  judgment,  but  predict- 
ing her  triumphant  deliverance  out  of  all  her 
afflictions. 

In  a  second  address  to  his  City  (vv.  1-13) 
Zephaniah  strikes  the  same  notes  as  he  did  in  his 
first.  He  spares  the  king,  but  denounces  the 
ruling  and  teaching  classes.  Jerusalem's  princes 
are  lions,  her  judges  wolves,  her  prophets  brag- 
garts, her  priests  pervert  the  law,  her  wicked 
have  no  shame.  He  repeats  the  proclamation 
of  a  universal  doom.  But  the  time  is  perhaps 
later.  Judah  has  disregarded  the  many  threats. 
She  will  not  accept  the  Lord's  discipline;  and 
while  in  chap,  i.-ii.  3  Zephaniah  had  said  that 
the  meek  and  righteous  might  escape  the  doom, 
he  now  emphatically  affirms  that  all  proud  and 
impenitent  men  shall  be  removed  from  Jerusa- 
lem, and  a  humble  people  be  left  to  her,  righteous 
and  secure.  There  is  the  same  moral  earnestness 
as  before,  the  same  absence  of  all  other  elements 
of  prophecy  than  the  ethical.  Before  we  ask  the 
reason  and  emphasise  the  beauty  of  this  austere 
gospel,  let  us  see  the  exact  words  of  the  address. 
There  are  the  usual  marks  of  poetic  diction  in  it 
— elliptic  phrases,  the  frequent  absence  of  the 
definite  article,  archaic  forms,  and  an  order  of 
the  syntax  different  from  that  which  obtains  in 
prose.  But  the  measure  is  difficult  to  deter- 
mine, and  must  be  printed  as  prose.  The 
echo  of  the  elegiac  rhythm  in  the  opening  is 
more  apparent  than  real:  it  is  not  sustained 
beyond  the  first  verse.  Verses  9  and  10  are 
relegated  to  a  footnote,  as  very  probably  an 
intrusion,    and    disturbance    of    the    argument. 

"  Woe,  rebel  and  unclean,  city  of  oppression!  * 
She  listens  to  no  voice,  she  accepts  no  discipline, 
in  Jehovah  she  trusts  not,  nor  has  drawn  near  to 
her  God. 

'■  Her  princes  in  her  midst  are  roaring  lions; 
her  judges  evening  wolves, f  they  ...  .J  not  till 
morning;  her  prophets  are  braggarts  and  trai- 
tors; her  priests  have  profaned  what  is  holy 
and  done  violence  to  the  Law.^  Jehovah  is 
righteous  in  the  midst  of  her,  He  does  no  wrong. 

*  Heb.  "the  city  the  oppressor."  The  two  participles 
in  the  first  clause  are  not  predicates  to  the  noun  and 
adjective  of  the  second  (Schwally),  but  vocatives,  though 
without  the  article,  after  ^ir|, 

t  LXX.  "  wolves  of  Arabia." 

t  The  verb  left  untranslated,  IClJ,  is  quite  uncertain  in 
meaning.  QIJ  is  a  root  common  to  the  Semitic  lan- 
guages and  seems  to  mean  originally  "to  cut  off,"  while 
the  noun  U'M  's  "a  bone."  In  Num.  xxiv.  8  the  Piel  of' 
the  verb  used  with  another  word  for  bone  means  "to 
gnaw,  munch."  (The  only  other  passage  where  it  is 
used,  Ezek.  xxiii.  34,  is  corrupt.)  So  some  take  it  here  : 
"they  do  not  gnaw  bones  till  morning,"  i.  e.,  devour  all 
at  once  ;  but  this  is  awkward,  and  Schwall}'  (iq8)  has  pro- 
posed to  omit  the  negative,  "they  do  gnaw  bones  till 
morninii,"  yet  in  that  case  surely  the  impf.  and  not  the 
perf.  tense  would  have  been  used.  The  LXX.  render 
"they  do  not  leave  over,"  and  it  has  been  attempted, 
though  inconclusively,  to  derive  this  meaning  from  that 
of  "cutting  off,"  /■.  e.,  "  laying  aside  "  (the  Arabic  Form 
H.  means,  however,  "  to  leave  behind  ").  Another  line  of 
meaning  perhaps  promises  more  In  Aram,  the  verb 
means  "  to  be  the  cause  of  anything,  to  bring  about."  and 
perhaps  contains  the  idea  of  "  deciding"  (Levy  sub  Z'oce 
compares  Kpi.vui  "  cerno) ;  in  Arab,  it  means,  among  other 
things,  'to  commit  a  crime,  be  guilty,"  but  in  mod. 
Arabic  "to  fine."  Now  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  here  the 
expression  is  used  of  "judges,"  and  it  may  be  there  is  an 
intentional  play  upon  the  double  possibility  of  meaning 
in  the  root. 

§  Ezek.  xxii.  26  :  "  Her  priests  have  done  violence  to  My 
Law  and  have  profaned  My  holy  things ;  they  have  put 

3T-Vol.  IV. 


Morning  by  morning  He  brings  His  judgment 
to  light:  He  does  not  let  Himself  fail* — but  the 
wicked  man  knows  no  shame.  I  have  cut  off 
nations,  their  turrets  are  ruined;  I  have  laid 
waste  their  broad  streets,  till  no  one  passes  upon 
them;  destroyed  are  their  cities,  without  a  man, 
without  a  dwcller.f  I  said,  Surely  she  will  fear 
Me,  she  will  accept  punishment,:];  and  all  that 
I  have  visited  upon  her?  shall  never  vanish 
from  her  eyes.||  But  only  the  more  zealously 
have  they  corrupted  all  their  doings.lT 

"  Wherefore  wait  ye  for  Me — oracle  of  Jeho- 
vah— wait  for  the  day  of  My  rising  to  testify, 
for  'tis  My  fixed  purpose  **  to  sweep  nations  to- 
gether, to  collect  kingdoms,  to  pour  upon  them 
.  .  .ft  all  the  heat  of  My  wrath — yea,  with  the 
fire  of  My  jealousy  shall  the  whole  earth  be 
consumed. tt 

"  In  that  day  thou  shalt  not  be  ashamed  §§  of 
all  thy  deeds,  by  which  thou  hast  rebelled  against 
Me:  for  then  will  I  turn  out  of  the  midst  of  thee 
all  who  exult  with  that  arrogance  of  thine, |1|| 
and  thou  wilt  not  again  vaunt  thyself  upon  the 
Mount  of  My  Holiness.  But  I  will  leave  in  thy 
midst  a  people  humble  and  poor,  and  they  shall 
trust  in  the  name  of  Jehovah.  The  Remnant  of 
Israel  shall  do  no  evil,  and  shall  not  speak  false- 
hood, and  no  fraud  shall  be  found  in  their 
mouth,  but  they  shall  pasture  and  they  shall 
couch,  with  none  to  make  them  afraid." 

Such  is  the  simple  and  austere  gospel  of 
Zephaniah.  It  is  not  to  be  overlooked  amid  the 
lavish  and  gorgeous  promises  which  other 
prophets  have  poured  around  it,  and  by  our- 
selves, too,  it  is  needed  in  our  often  unscrupulous 
enjoyment  of  the  riches  of  grace  that  are  in 
Christ  Jesus.  A  thorough  purgation,  the  re- 
no  difference  between  the  holy  and  profane,  between  the 
clean  and  the  unclean."     Cf.  Jer.  ii.  8. 

♦  Schwally  by  altering  the  accents :  "  morning  by  morn- 
ing He  giveth  forth  His  judgment :  no  day  does  He  fail. 

+  On  this  ver.  6  see  above,  p.  571.    It  is  doubtful. 

t  Or  "  discipline. 

§  Wellhausen  :  "that  which  I  have  commanded  her." 
Cf.  Job  xxxvi.  23  ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  23  ;  Ezra  i.  2. 

i  So  LXX.,  reading  Q\^^J^    for  the  Heb.  '"^^1^0.  "  her 

dwelling." 

1  A  frequent  phrase  of  Jeremiah's. 

**  't3DB^.  decree,  ordinance,  decision. 

+t  Heb.  "  My  anger."    LXX.  omits. 

tJThat  is  to  say,  the  prophet  returns  to  that  general 
judgment  of  the  whole  earth,  with  which  in  his  first  dis- 
course he  had  already  threatened  Judah.  He  threatens 
her  with  it  again  in  this  eighth  verse,  because,  as  he  has 
said  in  the  preceding  ones,  all  other  warnings  have  failed. 
The  eighth  verse  therefore  follows  naturally  upon  the 
seventh,  just  as  naturally  as  in  Amos  iv.  ver.  12,  intro- 
duced by  the  same  Ir^   as  here,  follows  its  predecessors. 

The  next  two  verses  of  the  text,  however,  describe  an 
opposite  result :  instead  of  the  destruction  of  the  heathen, 
they  picture  their  conversion,  and  it  is  only  in  the 
eleventh  verse  that  we  return  to  the  main  subject  of  the 
passage,  Judah  herself,  who  is  represented  (in  harmony 
with  the  close  of  Zephaniah's  first  discourse)  as  reduced 
to  a  righteous  and  pious  remnant.  Vv.  g  and  10  are  there- 
fore obviously  a  later  insertion,  and  we  pass  to  the 
eleventh  verse.  Vv.  g  and  10  :  "  For  then  "  (this  has  no 
meaning  after  ver.  8)  "  will  I  give  to  the  peoples  a  pure 
lip  "  (elliptic  phrase  :  "  turn  to  the  peoples  a  pure  lip  "— 
t.  e..  "turn  their"  evil  lip  into  "a  pure  lip":  pure  = 
"picked  out,  select,  excellent."  c/".  Isa.  xlix.  2),  "that  they 
may  all  of  them  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord,  that  they 
may  serve  Him  with  one  consent"  (Heb.  "shoulder," 
LXX.  "yoke").     From  beyond  the  rivers  of  Ethiopia" 

—there    follows  a  very  obscure  phrase,    r^"  ''t    -V^' 

"suppliants  (?)  of  the  daughter  of  My  dispersed,"  but 
Ewald  "of  the  daughter  of  Phut— they  shall  bring  Mine 
offering." 

§§  Wellhausen  "  despair." 

in  Heb.  "  the  iubilant  ones  of  thine  arroganca." 


I 


578 


THE^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


moval  of  the  wicked,  the  sparing  of  the  honest 
and  the  meek;  insistence  only  upon  the  rudi- 
ments of  morality  and  religion;  faith  in  its  sim- 
plest form  of  trust  in  a  righteous  God,  and  char- 
acter in  its  basal  elements  of  meekness  and 
truth, — these  and  these  alone  survive  the  judg- 
ment. Why  does  Zephaniah  never  talk  of  the 
Love  of  God,  of  the  Divine  Patience,  of  the 
Grace  that  has  spared  and  will  spare  wicked 
hearts  if  only  it  can  touch  them  to  penitence? 
Why  has  he  no  call  to  repent,  no  appeal  to  the 
wicked  to  turn  from  the  evil  of  their  ways?  We 
have  already  seen  part  of  the  answer.  Zephaniah 
stands  too  near  to  judgment  and  the  last  things. 
Character  is  fixed,  the  time  for  pleading  is  past; 
there  remains  only  the  separation  of  bad  men 
from  the  good.  It  is  the  same  standpoint  (at 
least  ethically)  as  that  of  Christ's  visions  of  the 
Judgment.  Perhaps  also  an  austere  gospel  was 
required  by  the  fashionable  temper  of  the  day. 
The  generation  was  loud  and  arrogant;  it  gilded 
the  future  to  excess,  and  knew  no  shame.*  The 
true  prophet  was  forced  to  reticence;  he  must 
make  his  age  feel  the  desperate  earnestness  of 
life,  and  that  salvation  is  by  fire.  For  the  gor- 
geous future  of  its  unsanctified  hopes  he  must 
give  it  this  severe,  almost  mean,  picture  of  a 
poor  and  humble  folk,  hardly  saved  but  at  last 
at  peace. 

The  permanent  value  of  such  a  message  is 
proved  by  the  thirst  which  we  feel  even  to-day 
for  the  clear,  cold  water  of  its  simple  promises. 
Where  a  glaring  optimism  prevails,  and  the  fu- 
ture is  preached  with  a  loud  assurance,  where 
many  find  their  onlv  religious  enthusiasm  in  the 
resurrection  of  mediaeval  ritual  or  the  singing  of 
stirring  and  gorgeous  hymns  of  second-hand  im- 
agery, how  needful  to  be  recalled  to  the  earnest- 
ness and  severity  of  life,  to  the  simplicity  of  the 
conditions  of  salvation,  and  to  their  ethical,  not 
emotional,  character!  Where  sensationalism  has 
so  invaded  religion,  how  good  to  hear  the  sober 
insistence  upon  God's  daily  commonplaces — • 
"  morning  by  morning  He  bringeth  forth  His 
judgment  to  light  " — and  to  know  that  the  ac- 
ceptance of  discipline  is  what  prevails  with  Him. 
Where  national  reform  is  vaunted  and  the 
progress  of  education,  how  well  to  go  back  to  a 
prophet  who  ignored  all  the  great  reforms  of 
his  day  that  he  might  impress  his  people  with 
the  indispensableness  of  humility  and  faith. 
Where  Churches  have  such  large  ambitions  for 
themselves,  how  necessary  to  hear  that  the  fu- 
ture is  destined  for  "  a  poor  folk,"  the  meek  and 
the  honest.  Where  men  boast  that  their  reli- 
gion— Bible,  Creed,  or  Church — has  undertaken 
to  save  them,  "  vaunting  themselves  on  the 
Mount  of  My  Holiness,"  how  needful  to  hear 
salvation  placed  upon  character  and  a  very  sim- 
ple trust  in  God. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  is  any  one  in  despair 
at  the  darkness  and  cruelty  of  this  life,  let  him 
hear  how  Zephaniah  proclaims  that,  though  all 
else  be  fraud,  "  the  Lord  is  righteous  in  the 
midst  "  of  us,  "  He  doth  not  let  Himself  fail," 
that  the  resigned  heart  and  the  humble,  the  just, 
and  the  pure  heart,  is  imperishable,  and  in  the 
end  there  is  at  least  peace. 


Epilogue. 
Verses  14-^,0. 

Zephaniah's  prophecy  was  fulfilled.     The  Day    we  might  read 
of   the    Lord   came,    and   the   people    met   their 
*  See  vv.  4,  s,  II. 


judgment.  The  Remnant  survived — "a  folk 
poor  and  humble."  To  them,  in  the  new  estate 
and  temper  of  their  life,  came  a  new  song  from 
God — perhaps  it  was  nearly  a  hundred  years 
after  Zephaniah  had  spoken — and  they  added  it 
to  his  prophecies.  It  came  in  with  wonderful 
fitness,  for  it  was  the  song  of  the  redeemed, 
whom  he  had  foreseen,  and  it  tuned  his  book, 
severe  and  simple,  to  the  full  harmony  of  proph- 
ecy, so  that  his  book  might  take  a  place  in  the 
great  choir  of  Israel — the  diapason  of  that  full 
salvation  which  no  one  man,  but  only  the  experi- 
ence of  centuries,  could  achieve. 

"Sing  out,  O  daughter  of  Zion!  shout  aloud, 
O  Israel!  Rejoice  and  be  jubilant  with  all  thy* 
heart,  daughter  of  Jerusalem!  Jehovah  hath  set 
aside  thy  judgments,!  He  hath  turned  thy  foes. 
King  of  Israel,  Jehovah  is  in  thy  midst;  thou 
shalt  not  sect   evil  any  more. 

"  In  that  day  it  shall  be  said  to  Jerusalem. 
Fear  not,  O  Zion,  let  not  thy  hands  droop! 
Jehovah,  thy  God,  in  the  midst  of  thee  is 
mighty;  §  He  will  save.  He  will  rejoice  over 
thee  with  joy,  He  will  make  new||  His  love, 
He  will  exult  over  thee  with  singing. 

"The  scattered  of  thy  congregation""  have  I 
gathered — thine  **  are  they,  .  .  .ft  reproach  upon 
her.  Behold,  I  am  about  to  do  all  for  thy  sake 
at  that  time,$t  and  I  will  rescue  the  lame  and  the 
outcast  will  I  bring  in,§§  and  I  will  make  them 
for   renown   and   fame    whose   shame   is   in    the 


*Heb.  "the." 

t-]:t2B^.     ^^^  Wellhausen  reads    ^^^f^^^'   th:ne 
adversaries  :  c/.  Job  ix.  15. 
t  Reading  ^^'l'?  (with  LXX.,  Wellhausen  and  Schwally) 

for    '?^  V  of  the  Hebrew  text,  "  fear." 

§Lit.  "hero,  mighty  man." 

II  Heb.  "will  be  silent  in,  "^  IC]-'  but  not  in  harmony 
with  the  next  clause.  LXX.  and  Syr.  render  "  will  make 
new,"  which  translates  ^  :-:-'  ^  form  that  does  not  else- 
where occur,  though  that  is  no  objection  to  finding  it  in 
Zephaniah,  or  ^\}".'  Hitzig  :  "He  makes  new  things 
in  His  love."  Buhl :  "  He  renews  His  love."  Schwaily 
suggests  nin^i  "  He  rejoices  in  His  love. 

t  LXX.  "In  the  days  of  thy  festival,"  which  it  takes 
with  the  previous  verse.  The  Heb.  construction  is  un- 
grammatical,  though  not  unprecedented— the  construct 
state  before  a  preposition.  Besides  ""JIJ  is  obscure  in 
meaning.  It  is  a  Ni.  pt.  for  HJIJ  from  n3\  "to  be  sad  ": 
cf.  the  Pi.  in  Lam.  iii.  33.  But  the  Hiphil  njlH  '"  2  Sam. 
XX.  13,  followed  (as  here)  by  |0,  means  "  to  thrust  away 

from,"  and  that  is  probably  the  sense  here. 

**  LXX.  "thine  oppressed"  in  ace.  governed  by  the 
preceding  verb,  which  in  LXX.  begins  the  verse. 

ttThe    Heb.,  ^^^^5'  "burden    of,"    is    unintelligible. 

Wellhausen  proposes    ^[}''2^.  ^^^^' 

tt  This  rendering  is  only  a  venture  in  the  almost  impos- 
sible task  of  restoring  the  text  of  the  clause.  As  it  stands 
the  Heb.  runs,  "  Behold,  I  am  about  to  do,"  or  "deal, 
with  thine  oppressors  "  (which  Hitzig  and  Ewald  accept). 

Schwally  points  ^I^VP     (active)  as  a  passive,   ^  iVP' 

"thine  oppressed."    LXX.  has  ISov  iyi>  noiu  ev  o-ol  tytKev 

(ToO,  2.  e.,  it  read   ^^^     ^r!?/??*     Following  its  suggestion 


ilpyo!?  ^3"nN, 


and   so    get   the  above 


translation. 
§S  Micah  iv.  6. 


THE    BOOK    OF    NAHUM. 


579 


whole  earth.*  In  that  time  I  will  bring  you  in.  f 
even  in  the  time  that  I  gather  you.t  For  I  will 
set  you  for  fame  and  renown  among  all  the  peo- 
ples of  the  earth,  when  I  turn  again  your  cap- 
tivity before  your  eyes,  saith  Jehovah. "§ 


NAHUM. 

"  Woe  to  the  City  of  Blood, 
All  of  her  guile,  robbery-full,  ceaseless  rapine  ! 

*'  Hark  the  whip. 
And  the  rumbling  of  wheels  ! 
Horses  at  the  gallop. 
And  the  rattling  dance  of  the  chariot ! 
Cavalry  at  the  charge. 
Flash  of  sabres,  and  lightning  of  lances!  " 


CHAPTER  VI. 
THE  BOOK  OF  NAHUM. 

The  Book  of  Nahum  consists  of  a  double  title 
and  three  odes.  The  title  runs  "  Oracle  of 
Nineveh:  Book  of  the  Vision  of  Nahum  the 
Elkoshite."  The  three  odes,  eager  and  passion- 
ate pieces,  are  all  of  them  apparently  vibrant  to 
the  impending  fall  of  Assyria.  The  first,  chap.  i. 
with  the  possible  inclusion  of  chap.  ii.  2,  ||  is 
general  and  theological,  affirming  God's  power 
of  vengeance  and  the  certainty  of  the  overthrow 
of  His  enemies.  The  second,  chap.  ii.  with  the 
omission  of  ver.  2,11  and  the  third,  chap,  iii.,  can 
hardly  be  disjoined;  they  both  present  a  vivid 
picture  of  the  siege,  the  storm,  and  the  spoiling 
of  Nineveh. 

The  introductory  questions,  which  title  and 
contents  start,  are  in  the  main  three:  i.  The  po- 
sition of  Elkosh,  to  which  the  title  assigns  the 
prophet;  2.  The  authenticity  of  chap.  i. ;  3.  The 
date  of  chaps,  ii.,  iii.:  to  which  siege  of  Nineveh 
do  they  refer? 

I.  The  Position  of  Elkosh. 

The  title  calls  Nahum  the  Elkoshite — that  is, 
native  or  citizen  of  Elkosh.**  Three  positions 
have  been  claimed  for  this  place,  which  is  not 
mentioned  elsewhere  in  the  Bible. 

The  first  we  take  is  the  modern  Al-Ktish,  a 
town  still  flourishing  about  twenty-four  miles  to 
the   north   of   the    site   of   Nineveh.ft   with   "  no 

*  This  rendering  (Ewald's)  is  doubtful.  The  verse  con- 
cludes with   "  in  the    whole  earth    their    shame."    But 

DnK'3     may  be  a  gloss.    LXX.  takes  it  as  a  verb  with 
T  :  T 

the  next  verse. 

f  LXX.  "  do  good  to  you  ";  perhaps  3'tON  for  N^3X. 

t  So  Heb.  literally,  but  the  construction  is  very  awk- 
ward. Perhaps  we  should  read  "  in  that  time  I  will 
gather  you." 

§'■  Before  your  eyes,"  i.  e.,  in  your  lifetime.  It  is 
doubtful  whether  ver.  20  is  original  to  the  passage. 
For  it  is  simply  a  variation  on  ver.  ig.  and  it  has  more 
than   one  impossible  reading:  see  previous  note,  and  for 

D3'nnty  for  Danntr. 

1 1n  the  English  version,  but  in  the  Hebrew  chap.  ii.  vv, 
I  and  3  ;  for  the  Hebrew  text  divides  chap.  i.  from  chap.  ii. 
differently  from  the  English,  which  follows  the  Greek. 
The  Hebrew  begins  chap.  ii.  with  what  in  the  English 
and  Greek  is  the  fifteenth  verse  of  chap,  i.:  "Behold, 
upon  the  mountains,"  etc. 

tin  the  English  text,  but  in  the  Hebrew  with  the  omis- 
sion of  vv.  I  and  3  :  see  previous  note. 

**  Other  meanings  have  been  suggested,  but  are  impos- 
sible. 

++  .So  it  lies  on  Billerbeck's  map  in  Delitzsch  and  Haupt's 
"  Beitrage  zur  Assyr.,"  Ill  Smith's  "  Bible  Dictionary  " 
puis  it  at  only  2  m.  N.  of  Mosul. 


fragments  of  antiquity  "  about  it,  but  possessing 
a  "  simple  plaster  box,"  which  Jews,  Christians, 
and  Mohammedans  alike  reverence  as  the  tomb 
of  Nahum.*  There  is  no  evidence  that  Al-^ush, 
a  name  of  Arabic  form,  is  older  than  the  Arab 
period,  while  the  tradition  which  locates  the 
tomb  there  is  not  found  before  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury of  our  era,  but  on  the  contrary  Nahum's 
grave  was  pointed  out  to  Benjamin  of  Tudela 
in  1 165  at  'Ain  Japhata,  on  the  south  of  Babylon,  f 
The  tradition  that  the  prophet  lived  and  died  at 
Al-Kvish  is  therefore  due  to  the  similarity  of  the 
nam'e  to  that  of  Nahum's  Elkosh,  as_  well  as  to 
the  fact  that  Nineveh  was  the  subject  of  his 
prophesying.^:  In  his  book  there  is  no  trace  of 
proof  for  the  assertion  that  Nahum  was  a  de- 
scendant of  the  ten  tribes  exiled  in  721  to  the 
region  to  the  north  of  Al-Kush.  He  prophesies 
for  Judah  alone.  Nor  does  he  show  any  more 
knowlege  of  Nineveh  than  her  ancient  fame  must 
have  scattered  to  the  limits  of  the  world. S  We 
might  as  well  argue  from  chap.  iii.  8-10  that 
Nahum  had  visited  Thebes  of  Egypt. 

The  second  tradition  of  the  position  of  El- 
kosh is  older.  In  his  commentary  on  Nahum 
Jerome  says  that  in  his  day  it  still  existed,  a 
petty  village  of  Galilee,  under  the  name  of 
Helkesei,||  or  Elkese,  and  apparently  with  an  es- 
tablished reputation  as  the  town  of  Nahum.lF 
But  the  book  itself  bears  no  symptom  of  its 
author's  connection  with  Galilee,  and  although 
it  was  quite  possible  for  a  prophet  of  that  period 
to  have  lived  there,  it  is  not  very  probable. ^"^ 

A  third  tradition  places  Elkosh  in  the  south 
of  Judah.  A  Syriac  version  of  the  accounts  of 
the  prophets,  which  are  ascribed  to  Epiphanius,tt 
describes  Nahum  as  "  of  Elkosh  beyond  Bet 
Gabre,  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  "  ;  JJ  and  it  may  be 

*  Layard,  "Nineveh  and  its  Remains,"  I.  233,  3d  ed., 
1840. 

t  Bohn's  "  Earlv  Travels  in  Palestine,"  p.  102. 

t  Just  as  they  show  Jonah's  tomb  at  Nineveh  itself. 

§  See  above,  p.  565. 

il  Just  as  in  Micah's  case  Jerome  calls  his  birthplace 
Moresheth  by  the  adjective  Morasthi,  so  with  equal  care- 
lessness he  calls  Elkosh  by  the  adjective  with  the  article 
Ha-elkoshi,  the  Elkoshite.  Jerome's  words  are  :  "  Quum 
Elcese  usque  hodie  in  Galilea  viculus  sit,  parvus  quidera 
et  vix  ruinis  veterum  ajdificiorum  indicans  vestigia,  sed 
tamen  notus  Judseis  et  mihi  quoqi-.e  a  circumducente 
monstratus"  (in  "Prol.  ad  Prophetiam  Nachumi  ").  In 
the  "Onomasticon  "  Jerome  gives  the  name  as  Elcese, 
Eusebius  as  'EAKto-e,  but  without  defining  the  position. 

t  This  Elkese  has  been  identified,  though  not  conclu- 
sively, with  the  modern  El  Kauze  near  Ramieh,  some 
seven  miles  W.  of  Tibnin. 

**  C/.  Kuenen,  §  75.  n.  5  ;  Davidson,  p.  12  (2). 

Capernaum,  which  the  Textus  Receptus  gives  as  Ka- 
TTipvaovii,  but  most  authorities  as  Kaf^opi-aov'n  and  the 
Peshitto  as  Kaphar  Nahum,  obviously  means  Village  of 
Nahum,  and  both  Hitzig  and  Knobel  looked  for  Elkosh  in 
it.     See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  456. 

Against  the  Galilean  origin  of  Nahum  it  is  visual  to 
appeal  to  John  vii.  52  :  "  Search  and  see  that  out  of  Galilee 
ariseth  no' prophet ;"  but  this  is  not  decisive,  for  Jonah 
came  out  of  Galilee. 

tt  Though  perhaps  falsely. 

tt  This  occurs  in  the  Syriac  translation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment by  Paul  of  Telia,  617  A.  D.,  in  which  the  notices  of 
Epiphanius  (Bishop  of  Constantia  in  Cyprus,  A.  D.  367)  or 
Pseudepiphanius  are  attached  to  their  respective  prophets. 
It  was  first  communicated  to  the  "  Z.  D.  P.  V.,"  I.  122  fF., 
by  Dr.  Nestle  :  c/.  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  231,  n.  i.  The  pre- 
viously known  readings  of  the  passage  were  either  geo- 
graphically impossible,  as  "  He  came  from  Elkesei  beyond 
Jordan,  towards  Begabar  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  "  (so  in 
Paris  edition,  1622,  of  the  works  of  St.  Epiphanius,  Vol. 
II.  p.  147:  cf.  Migne,  "  Patr.  Gr.,"  XLIII.  409);  or  based 
on  a  misreading  of  the  title  of  the  book  :  "  Nahum  son  of 
Elkesaios  was  of  Jesbo  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  "  ;  or  inde- 
finable :  "Nahum  was  of  Elkesem  beyond  Betabarem  of 
the  tribe  of  Simeon";  these  last  two  from  recensions  of 
Epiphanius  published  in  i8s5  t)y  Tischendorf  (quoted  b^ 
Davidson,  p.  13).  In  the  Srixipo"  twi/  IB'  npoiJ>rjTcoi'  xai 
'laaiov:  attributed  to  Hesychius,  Presbyter  of  Jerusalem, 
who   died  428  or  433  (Migne,   "  Patrologia  Gr.,"   XCIII. 


58o 


THE^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


noted  that  Cyril  of  Alexandria  says  *  that  El- 
kese  was  a  village  in  the  country  of  the  Jews. 
This  tradition  is  superior  to  the  first  in  that  there 
is  no  apparent  motive  for  its  fabrication,  and  to 
the  second  in  so  far  as  Judah  was  at  the  time 
of  Nahum  a  much  more  probable  home  for  a 
prophet  than  Galilee;  nor  does  the  book  give  any 
references  except  such  as  might  be  made  by  a 
judean.t  No  modern  place-name,  however,  can 
be  suggested  with  any  certainty  as  the  echo  of 
Elkosh.  Umm  Lakis,  which  has  been  proved 
not  to  be  Lachish,'  contains  the  same  radicals, 
and  some  six  and  a  quarter  miles  east  from  Beit- 
Jibrin,  at  the  upper  end  of  the  Wady  es  Sur, 
there  is  an  ancient  well  with  the  name  Bir  el 
Kus.1: 

2.  The  Authenticity  of  Chap.  I. 

Till  recently  no  one  doubted  that  the  three 
chapters  formed  a  unity.  "  Nahum's  prophecy," 
said  Kuenen  in  1889,  "  is  a  whole."  In  iSgi  ^ 
Cornill  affirmed  that  no  questions  of  authenticity 
arose  in  regard  to  the  book;  and  in  1892  Well- 
hausen  saw  in  chap.  i.  an  introduction  leadmg 
"  in  no  awkward  way  to  the  proper  subject  of 
the  prophecy."  „       ,. 

Meanwhile,  however,  Bickell,|l  discovermg 
what  he  thought  to  be  the  remains  of  an 
alphabetic  Psalm  in  chap.  i.  1-7.  attempted  to 
reconstruct  throughout  chaps,  i.-ii.  3  twenty-two 
verses,  each  beginning  with  a  successive  letter 
of  the  alphabet.  And,  following  this,  Gunkel  in 
1893  produced  a  more  full  and  plausible  recon- 
struction of  the  same  scheme.!  By  radical 
emendations  of  the  text,  by  excision  of  what  he 
believes  to  be  glosses,  and  by  altering  the  order 
of  many  of  the  verses,  Gunkel  seeks  to  produce 
twenty-three  distichs,  twenty  of  which  begin 
with  the  successive  letters  of  the  alphabet,  two 

1^57)  it  is  said  that  Nahum  was  anh  'EAicecre'n'  (Helcesin) 
nepav  ToO  T-nvfiapiLv  €(c  ^uA^j  'S.v^f'^v ;  to  which  has  been 
added  a  note  from  Theophylact,  "EA/cacrai  nepav  tow  lopSavov 

*  Ad  Nahum  i.  i  (Migne,  "Patr.  Gr.,"  LXXI.  780)  :  Kumt? 

Si  aiiTT)  ndvTiai  nov  T^s  'IbvSaiuiv  X"P«5-  /•      n    j 

t  The  selection  Bashan,  Carmel,  and  Lebanon  (1.  4),  does 
not  prove  northern  authorship. 

t  K'ip?'*   may  be  (i)  a   theophoric  name  =  Kosh  is 

God ;  and  Kosh  might  then  be  the  Edomite  deity  Dip 
whose  name  is  spelt  with  a  Shin  on  the  Assyrian  monu- 
ments (Baethgen,  "  Beitrage  z.  Semit.  Rehgionsge- 
schichte,"  p.  II ;  Schrader,  "  K.  A.  T."'  pp.  150,  613).  and 
who  is  probably  the  same  as  the  Arab  deity  Kais  (Baeth- 
gen, ic/.,  p.  108);  and  this  would  suit  a  position  m  ti^e 
south  of  Judah.  in  which  region  we  find  the  majority  of 
place-names  compounded  with  ^^,  Or  else  (2)  the  j,{  is 
prosthetic,  as  in  the  place-names  TDK  on  the  Phoenician 
coast,  C|{i'3N  in  Southern  Canaan,  HHti'S.  etc.    In  this 

case   we    might  find    its   equivalent  in  the  form   ^P? 

{c/.  3^T3K  TD)  ;  but  no  such  form  is  now  extant  or  re- 
corded at  any  previous  period.  The  form  Lakis  would 
not  suit.  On  Bir  el  Kfls  see  Robinson,  "  B.  R.,"  III.  p.  14, 
and  Guerin,  "  Judee,"  III.  p.  341.  Bir  el  Kfls  means  Well 
of  the  Bow,  or,  according  to  Guerin,  of  the  Arch,  from 
ruins  that  stand  by  it.  The  position,  easf  of  Beit- 
Jibrin,  is  unsuitable  ;  for  the  early  Christian  texts  quoted 
in  the  previous  note  fix  it  beyojidy  presumably  south 
or  southwest  of  Beit-Jibrin,  and  in  the  tribe  of  Simeon. 
The  error  ■•  tribe  of  Simeon"  does  not  matter,  for  the 
same  fathers  place  Bethzecharias.  the  alleged  birthplace 
of  Habakkuk.  there. 

§  "  Einleitung,"  ist  ed. 

II  Who  seems  to  have  owed  the  hint  to  a  quotation  by 
Delitzsch  on  Psalm  ix.  from  G.  Frohnmeyer  to  the  effect 
that  there  were  traces  of  "alphabetic"  verses  in  chap  i., 
at  least  in  vv.  ■\-t.  See  Bickell's  "  Beitrage  zur  Semit. 
Metrik,"  Separatabdruck,  Wien,  1894. 

1  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1893,  pp.  223  ff. 


are  wanting,  while  in  the  first  three  letters  of  the 
twenty-third,  ^2ti'.  he  finds  very  probably  the 
name  of  the  author,  Shobai  or  Shobi.*  He  takes 
this  ode,  therefore,  to  be  an  eschatological  Psalm 
of  the  later  Judaism,  which  from  its  theological 
bearing  has  been  thought  suitable  as  an  intro- 
duction to   Nahum's  genuine  prophecies. 

The  text  of  chaps,  i.-ii.  4  has  been  badly  mauled 
and  is  clamant  for  reconstruction  of  some  kind. 
As  it  lies,  there  are  traces  of  an  alphabetical  ar- 
rangement as  far  as  the  beginning  of  ver.  9,  f 
and  so  far  Gunkel's  changes  are  comparatively 
simple.  Many  of  his  emendations  are  in  them- 
selves, and  apart  trom  the  alphabetic  scheme,  de- 
sirable. They  get  rid  of  difficulties  and  improve 
the  poetry  of  the  passage. t  His  reconstruction 
is  always  clever  and  as  a  whole  forms  a  wonder- 
fully spirited  poem.  But  to  have  produced  good 
or  poetical  Hebrew  is  not  conclusive  proof  of 
having  recovered  the  original,  and  there  are  obvi- 
ous objections  to  the  process.  Several  of  the 
proposed  changes  are  unnatural  in  themselves 
and  unsupported  by  anything  except  the  exi- 
gencies of  the  scheme;  for  example,  ih  and  ZO' 
are  dismissed  as  a  gloss  only  because,  if 
they  be  retained,  the  "  Aleph "  verse  is  two 
bars  too  long.  The  gloss,  Gunkel  thinks,  was 
introduced  to  mitigate  the  absoluteness  of  the 
declaration  that  Jehovah  is  a  God  of  wrath  and 
vengeance;  but  this  is  not  obvious  and  would 
hardly  have  been  alleged  apart  from  the  needs 
of  the  alphabet  scheme.  In  order  to  find  a  "  Da- 
leth,"  it  is  quite  arbitrary  to  say  that  the  first 
fj^DK  '"  4^  ''^  redundant  in  face  of  the  second, 
and  that  a  word  beginning  with  "  Daleth  "  orig- 
inally filled  its  place,  but  was  removed  because  it 
was  a  rare  or  difficult  word!  The  re-arrange- 
ment of  7  and  80  is  very  clever,  and  reads  as  if 
it  were  right;  but  the  next  effort,  to  get  a  verse 
beginning  with  "  Lamed,"  is  of  the  kind  by 
which  anything  might  be  proved.  These,  how- 
ever, are  nothing  to  the  difficulties  which  vy. 
9-14  and  chap.  ii.  i,  3,  present  to  an  alphabetic 
scheme,  or  to  the  means  which  Gunkel  takes 
to  surmount  them.  He.  has  to  re-arrange  the 
order  of  the  verses,§  and  of  the  words  within 
the  verses.  The  distichs  beginning  with  "  Nun  " 
and  "  Koph "  are  wanting,  or  at  least  unde- 
cipherable. To  provide  one  with  initial  "  Resh  " 
the  interjection  has  to  be  removed  from  the 
opening  of  chap.  ii.  i,  and  the  verse  made  to 
begin  with  1^3-)  and  to  run  thus:  "the  feet  of 
him  that  bringeth  good  news  on  the  mountains; 
behold  him  that  publisheth  peace."  Other  un- 
likely changes  will  be  noticed  when  we  come  to 
the  translation.  Here  we  may  ask  the  question: 
if  the  passage  was  originally  alphabetic,  that  is, 
furnished  with  so  fixed  and  easily  recognised  a 

*  Cf.  Ezra  ii.  42  ;  Neh.  vii.  45  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  27. 

+  Ver.  7  is  title  ;  2  begins  with  K  ;  1  is  found  in  HBIDS, 
3*  ;  3  in  1j;i3  4  ;  T  is  wanting- Bickell  proposes  to  substi- 
tute a  New-Hebrew  word  p^^_  Gunkel  3XT,  ^o""  ^^ON. 

46:  n  in  D^in.  5«;  1  in  KJJ^nV  5*  ;  T  by  removing  sjQ^ 
of  ver.  6a  to  the  end  of  the  clause  (and  reading  it  there 
VJ3^)'  ^n'^  ^°  leaving  i^yj  as  the  first  word  ;  [-j  in  inon 
in  6/*;  12  in  310,  ^a\  '•by  eliding  1  from  y^^l,  7*^  i  3  in 
n^D.  8  ;  ^  is  wanting,  though  Gunkel  seeks  to  supply  it 
by  taking  9c,  beginning  x^,  with  96,  before  9a;  <q  begins 

ga. 

X  See  below  in  the  translation. 

§  As  thus  :9  a,  II  b,  12  (but  unintelligible),  10,  13,  14,  ii. 
I.  3- 


THE    BOOK    OF    NAHUM. 


5«i 


frame,  why  has  it  so  fallen  to  pieces?  And 
again,  if  it  has  so  fallen  to  pieces,  is  it  possible 
that  it  can  be  restored?  The  many  arbitrari- 
nesses of  Gunkel's  able  essay  would  seem  to  im- 
ply that  it  is  not.  Dr.  Davidson  says:  "  Even  if 
it  should  be  assumed  that  an  alphabetical  poem 
lurks  under  chap,  i.,  the  attempt  to  restore  it, 
just  a^  in  Psalm  x.,  can  never  be  more  than  an 
acad€(tnic  exercise." 

Little  is  to  be  learned  from  the  language. 
Wellhausen,  who  makes  no  objection  to  the 
genuineness  of  the  passage,  thinks  that  about 
ver.  7  we  begin  to  catch  the  familiar  dialect  of 
the  Psalms.  Gunkel  finds  a  want  of  originality 
in  the  language,  with  many  touches  that  betray 
connection  not  only  with  the  Psalms  but  with 
late  eschatological  literature.  But  when  we  take 
one  by  one  the  clauses  of  chap,  i.,  we  discover 
very  few  parallels  with  the  Psalms,  which  are 
not  at  the  same  time  parallels  with  Jeremiah's 
or  some  earlier  writings.  That  the  prophecy 
is  vague,  and  with  much  of  the  air  of  the  later 
eschatology  about  it,  is  no  reason  for  removing 
it  from  an  age  in  which  we  have  already  seen 
prophecy  beginning  to  show  the  same  apoca- 
lyptic temper.*  Gunkel  denies  any  reference  in 
ver.  gb  to  the  approaching  fall  of  Nineveh,  al- 
though that  is  seen  by  Kuenen,  Wellhausen, 
Konig,  and  others,  and  he  omits  ver.  iia,  in 
which  most  read  an  allusion  to  Sennacherib. 

Therefore,  while  it  is  possible  that  a  later  poem 
has  been  prefixed  to  the  genuine  prophecies  of 
Nahum,  and  the  first  chapter  supplies  many 
provocations  to  belief  in  such  a  theory,  this  has 
not  been  proved,  and  the  able  essays  of  proof 
have  much  against  them.  The  question  is 
open.f 

3.  The  Date  of  Chaps.  II.  and  III. 

We  turn  now  to  the  date  of  the  Book,  apart 
from  this  prologue.  It  was  written  after  a  great 
overthrow  of  the  Eg>-ptian  Thebes  X  and  when 
the  overthrow  of  Nineveh  was  imminent.  Now 
Thebes  had  been  devastated  by  Assurbanipal 
about  664  (we  know  of  no  later  overthrow),  and 
Nineveh  fell  finally  about  607.  Nahum  flour- 
ished, then,  somewhere  between  664  and  607.^ 
Some  critics,  feeling  in  his  description  of  the 
falh  of  Thebes  the  force  of  a  recent  impression, 
have  placed  his  prophesying  immediately  after 
that,  or  about  660.11  But  this  is  too  far  away  from 
the  fall  of  Nineveh.  In  660  the  power  of  Assyria 
was  unthreatened.  Nor  is  652,  the  year  of  the 
revolt  of  Babylon,  Egypt,  and  the  princes  of 
Palestine,  a  more  likely  date.H  For  although  in 
that  year  Assyrian  supremacy  ebbed  from  Egypt 
never  to  return,  Assurbanipal  quickly  reduced 
Elam,  Babylon,  and  all  Syria.  Nahum,  on  the 
other  hand,  represents  the  very  centre  of  the 
empire  as  threatened.  The  land  of  Assyria  is 
apparently  already  invaded  (iii.  13,  etc.).  Nine- 
veh, if  not  invested,  must  immediately  be  so,  and 
that    by    forces    too    great    for    resistance.     Her 

♦  See  above  on  Zephaniah,  pp.  572  ff. 

+  Cornill,  in  the  2d  ed.  of  his  "  Einleitung,"  has  accepted 
Gunkel's  and  Bickell's  main  contentions. 

t  iii.  8-10. 

§The  description  of  the  fall  of  No-Amon  Efecludes  the 
older  view  almost  universally  held  before  the  discovery 
of  Assurbanipal's destruction  of  Thebes,  viz..  that  Nahum 
prophesied  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  or  in  the  earlier 
years  of  Manasseh  (Lightfoot,  Pusey,  Nagelsbach,  etc.). 

11  So  Schrader,  Voick  in  Herz.  "  Real.  Enc,"  and  others. 

i  't  is  favoured  by  Winckler,  "A.  T.  Untersuch.,"  pp. 


mixed  populace  already  show  signs  of  breaking 
up.  Within,  as  without,  her  doom  is  sealed. 
All  this  implies  not  only  the  advance  of  an 
enormous  force  upon  Nineveh,  but  the  reduc- 
tion of  her  people  to  the  last  stage  of  hopeless- 
ness. Now,  as  we  have  seen,*  Assyria  proper 
was  thrice  overrun.  The  Scythians  poured 
across  her  about  626,  but  there  is  no  proof  that 
they  threatened  Nineveh. f  A  little  after  Assur- 
banipal's death  in  625,  the  Medes  under  King 
Phraortes  invaded  Assyria^  but  Phraortes  was 
slain  and  his  son  Kyaxares  called  away  by  an 
invasion  of  his  own  country.  Herodotus  says 
that  this  was  after  he  had  defeated  the  As- 
syrians in  a  battle  and  had  begun  the  siege  of 
Nineveh,:]:  but  before  he  had  succeeded  in  re- 
ducing the  city.  After  a  time  he  subdued  or  as- 
similated the  Scythians,  and  then  investing  Nine- 
veh once  more,  about  607,  in  two  years  he  took 
and   destroyed   her. 

To  which  of  these  two  sieges  by  Kyaxares  are 
we  to  assign  the  Book  of  Nahum?  Hitzig, 
Kuenen,  Cornill,  and  others  incline  to  the  first 
on  the  ground  that  Nahum  speaks  of  the  yoke 
of  Assyria  as  still  heavy  on  Judah,  though  about 
to  be  lifted.  They  argue  that  by  608,  when  King 
Josiah  had  already  felt  himself  free  enough  to 
extend  his  reforms  into  Northern  Israel,  and 
dared  to  dispute  Necho's  passage  across  Es- 
draelon,  the  Jews  must  have  been  conscious  that 
they  had  nothing  more  to  fear  from  Assyria, 
and  Nahum  could  hardly  have  written  as  he  does 
in  1.  13,  "  I  will  break  his  yoke  from  of?  thee 
and  burst  thy  bonds  in  sunder."J^  But  this  is 
not  conclusive,  for  first,  as  we  have  seen,  it  is 
not  certain  that  i.  13  is  from  Nahum  himself, 
and  second,  if  it  be  from  himself,  he  might  as 
well  have  written  it  about  608  as  about  625,  for 
he  speaks  not  from  the  feelings  of  any  single 
year,  but  with  the  impression  upon  him  of  the 
whole  epoch  of  Assyrian  servitude  then  drawing 
to  a  close.  The  eve  of  the  later  siege  as  a  date 
from  the  book  is,  as  Davidson  remarks,!  "  well 
within  the  verge  of  possibility,"  and  some  critics 
prefer  it  because  in  their  opinion  Nahum's  de- 
scriptions thereby  acquire  greater  reality  and 
naturalness.  But  this  is  not  convincing,  for  if 
Kyaxares  act'ually  began  the  siege  of  Nineveh 
about  625,  Nahum's  sense  of  the  imminence  of 
her  fall  is  perfectly  natural.  Wellhausen  indeed 
denies  that  earlier  siege.  "  Apart  from  Herod- 
otus," he  says,  "  it  would  never  have  occurred 
to  anybody  to  doubt  that  Nahum's  prophecy 
coincided  with  the  fall  of  Nineveh."  1i  This  is 
true,  for  it  is  to  Herodotus  alone  that  we  owe 
the  tradition  of  the  earlier  siege.  But  what  if 
we  believe  Herodotus?  In  that  case,  it  is  im- 
possible to  come  to  a  decision  as  between  the 
two  sieges.  With  our  present  scanty  knowledge 
of  both,  the  prophecy  of  Nahum  suits  either 
equally  well.** 

*  Above  p.  564  ff. 

tThis  in  answer  to  Jeremias  in  Delitzsch'sand  Haupt's 
"  Beitrage  zur  Assyriologie,"  III.  g6. 

tl.  103. 

§  Hitzig's  other  reason,  that  the  besiegers  of  Nineveh 
are  described  by  Nahum  in  ii.  3  ff.  as  single,  which  was 
true  of  the  siege  in  625  c,  but  not  of  that  of  607-6,  when 
the  Chaldeans  joined  the  Medes,  is  disposed  of  by  the 
proof  on  p.  566  above,  that  even  in  607-6  the  Medes  carried 
on  the  siege  alone. 

II  Page  564. 

^In  commenting  on  chap.  i.  9 ;  p.  156  of  "  Kleine 
Propheten." 

♦♦The  phrase  which  is  so  often  appealed  to  by  both 
sides,  i.  g,  "Jehovah  maketh  a  complete  end,  not  twice 
shall  trouble  arise,"  is  really  inconclusive.  Hitzig  main- 
ta»BS  that  if  Nahum  had  written  this  after  the  lii  st  and 


582 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE  TROPHETS. 


Fortunately  it  is  not  necessary  to  come  to  a 
decision.  Nahum,  we  cannot  too  often  insist, 
expresses  the  feelings  neither  of  this  nor  of  that 
decade  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  but  the  whole 
volume  of  hope,  wrath,  and  just  passion  of  ven- 
geance which  had  been  gathering  for  more  than 
a  century  and  which  at  last  broke  into  exultation 
when  it  became  certain  that  Nineveh  was  falling. 
That  suits  the  eve  of  either  siege  by  Kyaxares. 
Till  we  learn  a  little  more  about  the  first  siege 
and  how  far  it  proceeded  towards  a  successful 
result,  perhaps  we  ought  to  prefer  the  second. 
And  of  course  those  who  feel  that  Nahum  writes 
not  in  the  future  but  the  present  tense  of  the 
details  of  Nineveh's  overthrow,  must  prefer  the 
second. 

That  the  form  as  well  as  the  spirit  of  the  Book 
of  Nahum  is  poetical  is  proved  by  the  familiar 
marks  of  poetic  measure — the  unusual  syntax,  the 
frequent  absence  of  the  article  and  particles,  the 
presence  of  elliptic  forms  and  archaic  and 
sonorous  ones.  In  the  two  chapters  on  the 
siege  of  Nineveh  the  lines  are  short  and  quick,  in 
harmony  with  the  dashing  action  they  echo. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  text  of  chap.  i.  is  very 
uncertain.  The  subject  of  the  other  two  chapters 
involves  the  use  of  a  number  of  technical  and 
some  foreign  terms,  of  the  meaning  of  most  of 
which  we  are  ignorant.*  There  are  apparently 
some  glosses;  here  and  there  the  text  is  obvi- 
ously disordered.  We  get  the  usual  help,  and 
find  the  usual  faults,  in  the 'Septuagint;  they  will 
be  noticed  in  the  course  of  the  translation. 


CHAPTER  Vn. 

THE  VENGEANCE  OF  THE  LORD. 

Nahum  i. 

The  prophet  Nahum,  as  we  have  seen,f  arose 
probably  in  Judah,  if  not  about  the  same  time 
as  Zephaniah  and  Jeremiah,  then  a  few  years 
later.  Whether  he  prophesied  before  or  after  the 
great  Reform  of  621  we  have  no  means  of  de- 
ciding. His  book  does  not  reflect'  the  inner  his- 
tory, character,  or  merits  of  his  generation.  His 
sole  interest  is  the  fate  of  Nineveh.  Zephaniah 
had  also  doomed  the  Assyrian  capital,  yet  he  was 
much  more  concerned  with  Israel's  unworthiness 
of  the  opportunity  presented  to  them.  The  yoke 
of  Asshur,  he  saw,  was  to  be  broken,  but  the 
same  cloud  which  was  bursting  frorn  the  north 
upon  Nineveh  must  overwhelm  the  incorrigible 
people    of   Jehovah.     For    this    Nahum    has    no 

before  the  second  siege  of  Nineveh  he  would  have  had 
to  s^y,  "  not  thrice  s/ia/I  ti-ouhle  arise.'"  This  is  not  con- 
clusive :  the  prophet  is  looking  only  at  the  future  and 
thinking  of  it— "  not  twice  again  shall  trouble  rise  "  ; 
and  if  there  were  really  two  sieges  of  Nineveh,  would  the 
words  '•  not  twice  "  have  been  suffered  to  remain,  if  they 
had  been  a  confident  jjrediction  before  the  first  siege? 
Besides,  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  is  not  certain  ;  it  may 
be  only  a  general  statement  corresponding  to  what  seems 
a  general  statement  in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse. 
Kuenen  and  others  refer  the  "  trouble  "  not  to  that  which 
is  about  to  afflict  Assyria,  but  to  the  long  slavery  and 
slaughter  which  Judah  has  suffered  at  Assyria's  hands. 
Davidson  leaves  it  ambiguous.  . 

*  Technical  military  terms  :  ii.2,  HTlVOi  4>  m^S  (?) !  4i 
l^jnn  ;  6  -jDDn  ;  iii-  3.  n^jyO  (?)•  Probably  foreign 
terms:  ii.  8,  3Vn  ;   iii-  17.  "l^lTiO-      Certainly  foreign:  iii. 

17,  T"'DSt3. 
t  Above,  pp.  579  ff.,  581  ff- 


thought.  His  heart,  for  all  its  bigness,  holds 
room  only  for  the  bitter  memories,  the  bafHed 
hopes,  the  unappeased  hatreds  of  a  hundred 
years.  And  that  is  why  we  need  not  be  anxious 
to  fix  his  date  upon  one  or  other  of  the  shifting 
phases  of  Israel's  history  during  that  last  quar- 
ter of  the  seventh  century.  For  he  represents 
no  single  movement  of  his  fickle  people's  prog- 
ress, but  the  passion  of  the  whole  epoch  then 
drawing  to  a  close.  Nahum's  book  is  one  great 
At  Last! 

And,  therefore,  while  Nahum  is  a  worse 
prophet  than  Zephaniah,  with  less  conscience  and 
less  insight,  he  is  a  greater  poet,  pouring  forth 
the  exultation  of  a  people  long  enslaved,  who 
see  their  tyrant  ready  for  destruction.  His  lan- 
guage is  strong  and  brilliant;  his  rhythm  rum- 
bles and  rolls,  leaps  and  flashes,  like  the  horse- 
men and  chariots  he  describes.  It  is  a  great  pity 
the  text  is  so  corrupt.  If  the  original  lay  be- 
fore us,  and  that  full  knowledge  of  the  times 
which  the  excavation  of  ancient  Assyria  may 
still  yield  to  us,  we  might  judge  Nahum  to  be 
an  even  greater  poet  than  we  do. 

We  have  seen  that  there  are  some  reasons  for 
doubting  whether  he  wrote  the  first  chapter  of 
the  book,*  but  no  one  questions  its  fitness  as  an 
introduction  to  the  exultation  over  Nineveh's  fall 
in  chaps,  ii.  and  iii.  The  chapter  is  theological, 
affirming  those  general  principles  of  Divine 
Providence,  by  which  the  overthrow  of  the  tyrant 
is  certain  and  God's  own  people  are  assured  of 
deliverance.  Let  us  place  ourselves  among  the 
people,  who  for  so  long  a  time  had  been 
thwarted,  crushed,  and  demoralised  by  the  most 
brutal  empire  which  was  ever  suffered  to  roll  its 
force  across  the  world,  and  we  shall  sympathise 
with  the  author,  who  for  the  moment  will  feel 
nothing  about  his  God,  save  that  He  is  a  God 
of  vengeance.  Like  the  grief  of  a  bereaved  man, 
the  vengeance  of  an  enslaved  people  has  hours 
sacred  to  itself.  And  this  people  had  such  a 
God!  Jehovah  must  punish  the  tyrant,  else  were 
He  untrue.  He  had  been  patient,  and  patient,  as 
a  verse  seems  to  hint.f  just  because  He  was  om- 
nipotent, but  in  the  end  He  must  rise  to  judg- 
ment. He  was  God  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  it 
is  the  old  physical  proofs  of  His  power,  so  often 
appealed  to  by  the  peoples  of  the  East,  for  they 
feel  them  as  we  cannot,  which  this  hymn  calls 
up  as  Jehovah  sweeps  to  the  overthrow  of  the 
oppressor.  "  Before  such  power  of  wrath  who 
may  stand?  What  think  ye  of  Jehovah?"  The 
God  who  works  with  such  ruthless,  absolute 
force  in  nature  will  not  relax  in  the  fate  He  is 
preparing  for  Nineveh.  "  He  is  one  who  maketh 
utter  destruction,"  not  needing  to  raise  up  His 
forces  a  second  time,  and  as  stubble  before  fire 
so  His  foes  go  down  before  Him.  No  half- 
measures  are  His,  Whose  are  the  storm,  the 
drought,   and  the   earthquake. 

Such  is  the  sheer  religion  of  the  Proem  to 
the  Book  of  Nahum — thoroughly  Oriental  in  its 
sense  of  God's  method  and  resources  of  destruc- 
tion; very  Jewish,  and  very  natural  to  that  age 
of  Jewish  history,  in  the  bursting  of  its  long- 
pent  hopes  of  revenge.  We  of  the  West  might 
express  these  hopes  dififerently.  We  should  not 
attribute  so  much  personal  passion  to  the 
Avenger. "  With  our  keener  sense  of  law,  we 
should  emphasise  the  slowness  of  the  process, 
and  select  for  its  illustration  the  forces  of  decay 

*  See  above,  pp.  580  ff. 

t  Ver.  3,  if  the  reading  be  correct. 


Nahum  ii.,  iii.J 


THE    SIEGE    AND    FALL    NINEVEH. 


583 


rather  than  those  of  sudden  ruin.  But  we  must 
remember  the  crashing  times  in  which  the  Jews 
lived.  The  world  was  breaking  up.  The  ele- 
ments were  loose,  and  all  that  God's  own  people 
could  hope  for  was  the  bursting  of  their  yoke, 
with  a  little  shelter  in  the  day  of  trouble.  The 
elements  were  loose,  but  amidst  the  blind  crash 
the  little  people  knew  that  Jehovah  knew  them. 

"  A  God  jealous  and  avenging  is  Jehovah  ; 
Jehovah  is  avenger  and  lord  of  wrath  ; 
Vsngeful  is  Jehovah  towards  His  enemies, 
And  implacable  He  to  His  foes. 

'  Jehovah  is  long-suffering  and  great  in  might,* 
Yet  He  will  not  absolve. 

Jehovah  !    His  way  is  in  storm  and  in  hurricane. 
And  clouds  are  the  dust  of  His  feet.t 
He  curbeth  the  sea,  and  drieth  it  up  ; 
All  the  streams  hath  He  parched. 
Withered  t  be  Bashan  and  Carmel ; 
The  bloom  of  Lebanon  is  withered. 
Mountains  have  quaked  before  Him, 
And  the  hills  have  rolled  down. 
Earth  heaved  at  His  presence. 
The  world  and  all  its  inhabitants. 
Before  His  rage  who  may  stand. 
Or  who  abide  in  the  glow  of  His  anger? 
His  wrath  pours  forth  like  fire, 
And  rocks  are  rent  before  Him. 

"Good  is  Jehovah  to  them  that  wait  upon  Him  in  the  day 

of  trouble, S 
And  He  knoweth  them  that  trust  Him. 
With  an  overwhelming  flood  He  makes  an  end  of  His 

rebels. 
And  His  foes  He  comes  down  on  |1  with  darkness. 

"  What  think  ye  of  Jehovah? 
He  is  one  that  makes  utter  destruction  ; 
Not  twice  need  trouble  arise. 
For  though  they  be  like  plaited  thorns, 
And  sodden  as  .  .  .  ,  1 
They  shall  be  consumed  like  dry  stubble. 

*'  Came  there  not  **  out  of  thee  one  to  plan  evil  against 
Jehovah, 
A  counsellor  of  mischief?  "  tt 

"  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  .  .  .  many  waters,±t  yet 
shall  they  be  cut  ofif  and  pass  away,  and  I  will 
so  humble  thee  that  I  need  humble  thee  §§  no 
more;  ||{{  and  Jehovah  hath  ordered  concerning 
thee,  that  no  more  of  thy  seed  be  sown:  from  the 
house   of   thy    God,    I    will   cut   ofif   graven   and 

*  Gunkel  amends  to  "in  mercy"  to  make  the  parallel 
<!xact.     Hut  see  above,  p.  580. 

+  Gunkel's  emendation  is  quite  unnnecessary  here. 

t  See  above,  p.  580. 

§  So  LXX.  Heb.  =  "  for  a  stronghold  in  the  day  of 
1  rouble." 

!i  "  Thrusts  into,"  Wellhausen,  reading  C|nj>  or  n^^  for 
*nT.    LXX.  "darkness  shall  pursue." 

i  Heb.  and  R.  V.  "  drenched  as  with  their  drink."  LXX. 
"  like  a  tangled  yew."    The. text  is  corrupt. 

**  The  superfluous  word  XPD  at  the  end  of  ver.  10  Well- 
hausen reads  as  X?n  at  she  beginning  of  ver.  ii. 

tt  Usually  taken  as  Sennacherib. 

tt  The  Hebrew  is  given  by  the  R.  V.  "  though  they  be  in 
full  strength  and  likewise  many."  LXX.  "Thus  saith 
Jehovah   ruling  over  many  waters,"  reading  D''3"|   Q>Q 

7B^  and  omitting  the   first  pi.     Similarly  Syr.     "Thus 

saith  Jehovah  of  the  heads  of  many  waters,"  W21  D^D 


molten      images.       I      will      make      thy      sepul- 
chre,   .    .    ,"  * 

Disentangled  from  the  above  verses  are  three 
which  plainly  refer  not  to  Assyria  but  to  Judah. 
How  they  came  to  be  woven  among  the  others 
we  cannot  tell.  Some  of  them  appear  applicable 
to  the  days  of  Josiah  after  the  great.  Reform. 

"  And  now  will  I  break  his  yoke  from  upbn  tb««. 
And  burst  thy  bonds  asunder. 
Lo,  upon  the  mountains  the  feet  of  Him  that  bringeth 

good  tidings. 
That  publisheth  peace ! 
Keep  thy  feasts,  O  Judah, 
Fulfil  thy  vows: 
For  no  more  shall  the  wicked  attempt  to  pass  through 

thee  ; 
Cut  off  is  the  whole  of  him.t 
For  Jehovah  hath  turned  the  pride  of  Jacob, 
Like  to  the  pride  of  Israel :  t 
For  the  plunderers  plundered  them. 
And  destroyed  their  vinebranches." 


vB'O  ?y.  Wellhausen,  substituting  Q^Q  for  the  first  pV 
translates,  "  Let  the  great.waters  be  ever  so  full,  they  will 
yet  all"  .  .  .?  (misprint  here)  "and  vanish."  For -)3y 
read  "n^y  with  LXX.,  borrowing  1  from  next  word. 

§§  Lit.  "and  I  will  afflict  thee,  I  will  not  afflict  thee  again  " 
Ihis  rendering  implies  that  Nineveh  is  the  object  The 
A.  v..  'though  I  have  afflicted  thee  I  will  afflict  thee  no 
more,    refers  to  Israel. 

|li|  Omit  ver.  13  and  run  14  on  to  12.  For  the  curious 
alternation  now  occurs:  Assyria  in  one  verse,  Judah  in 
the  other.  Assyria  •  i.  12,  14.  ii.  2  (Heb.  ;  Eng.  li.  ,)  4  ff 
Judah:  1  13,  11,  I  (Heb.  ;  Eng.  i.  ,5,)  3  (Heb.  ;  Eng.  2). 
Kemove  these  latter,  as  Wellhausen  does,  and  the  verses 
<n  Assyria  remain  a  connected  and  orderly  whole  So  in 
tie  text  above. 


CHAPTER  VHL 

THE  SIEGE  AND  FALL  OF  NINEVEH. 

Nahum  ii.,  iii. 

The  scene  now  changes  from  the  presence  and 
awful  arsenal  of  the  Almighty  to  the  historical 
consummation  of  His  vengeance.  Nahum  fore- 
sees the  siege  of  Nineveh.  Probably  the  Medes 
have  already  overrun  Assyria.^  The  "  Old 
Lion  "  has  withdrawn  to  his  inner  den,  and  is 
making  his  last  stand.  The  suburbs  are  full  of 
the  enemy,  and  the  great  walls  which  made  the 
inner  city  one  vast  fortress  are  invested.  Na- 
hum describes  the  details  of  the  assault.  Let  us 
try,  before  we  follow  him  through  them,  to  form 
some  picture  of  Assyria  and  her  capital  at  this 
time.  I 

As  we  have  seen,  1  the  Assyrian  Empire  began 

*Syr.  "make  it  thy  sepulchre."  The  Hebrew  left  un- 
translated above  might  be  rendered  "  for  thou  art  vile." 
Bickell  amends  into  "dunghills."  Lightfoot,  "  Chron 
Temp,  et  Ord.  Text.  V.  T."  in  Collected  Works.  I.  109, 
takes  this  as  a  prediction  of  Sennacherib's  murder  in  the 
temple,  an  interpretation  which  demands  a  date  for 
Nahum  under  either  Hezekiah  or  Manasseh.  See  Pusey 
also,  p.  357. 

tLXX.  "destruction,"  TV^  for  n?3. 

T  T 

t  Davidson  :  "  restoreth  the  excellency  of  Jacob,  as  the 
excellency  of  Israel,"  but  when  was  the  latter  restored? 

§  See  above,  p.  566. 

II  The  authorities  are  very  full.  First  there  is  M.  Botta's 
huge  work  "Monument  de  Ninive,"  Paris,  5  vols.,  1845. 
Then  must  be  mentioned  the  work  of  which  we  availed 
ourselves  in  describing  Babylon  in  "Isaiah  xl.-lxvi." 
(Expositor's  Bible),  pp.  744  ff.  :  "Memoirs  by  Commander 
James  Felix  Jones,  I.  N. ,"  in  "Selections  from  the 
Records  of  the  Bombay  Government."  No.  XLIII.,  New 
Series,  1857.  It  is  good  to  find  that  the  careful  and  able 
observations  of  Commander  Jones,  too  much  neglected  in 
his  own  country,  have  had  justice  done  them  by  the 
German  Colonel  Billerbeck  in  the  work  about  to  be  cited. 
Then  there  is  the  invaluable  "Nineveh  and  its  Remains," 
by  Layard.  There  are  also  the  works  of  Rawlinson  and 
George  Smith.  And  recently  Colonel  Billerbeck,  found- 
ing on  these  and  other  works,  has  published  an  admirable 
monograph  (lavishly  illustrated  by  maps  and  pictures), 
not  only  upon  the  rriilitary  state  of  Assyria  proper  and  of 
Nineveh  at  this  period,  but  upon  the  whole  subject  of 
Assyrian  fortification  and  art  of  besieging,  as  well  as 
upon  the  course  of  the  Median  invasions.  It  forms  the 
larger  part  of  an  article  to  which  Dr.  Alfred  Jeremias 
contributes  an  introduction,  and  reconstruction  with 
notes  of  chaps,  ii.  and  iii.  of  the  Book  of  Nahum  :  "  Der 
Untergang  Niniveh's  und  die  Weissagungschrift  des 
Nahum  von  El^josh,"  in  Vol.  IIL  of  "  Beitrage  zur 
Assyriologie  und  Semitischen  Sprachwissenschaft." 
edited  by  Friedrich  Delitzsch  and  Paul  Haupt,  with  the 
support  of  Johns  Hopkins  University  of  Baltimore, 
U.  S.  A. :  Leipzig,  1895. 

1  Pages  56=.  f. 


584 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


about  625  to  shrink  to  the  limits  of  Assyria 
proper,  or  Upper  Mesopotamia,  within  the  Eu- 
phrates on  the  southwest,  the  mountain-range 
of  Kurdistan  on  the  northeast,  the  river  Chabor 
on  the  northwest,  and  the  Lesser  Zab  on  the 
southeast.*  This  is  a  territory  of  nearly  a  hun- 
dred and  fifty  miles  from  north  to  south,  and 
rather  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  from  east 
to  west.  To  the  south  of  it  the  Viceroy  of 
Babylon,  Nabopolassar,  held  practically  inde- 
pendent sway  over  Lower  Mesopotamia,  if  he 
did  not  command  as  well  a  large  part  of  the 
Upper  Euphrates  Valley.  On  the  north  the 
Medes  were  urgent,  holding  at  least  the  farther 
ends  of  the  passes  through  the  Kurdish  moun- 
tains, if  they  had  not  already  penetrated  these 
to  their  southern  issues. 

The  kernel  of  the  Assyrian  territory  was  the 
triangle,  two  of  whose  sides  are  represented  by 
the  Tigris  and  the  Greater  Zab,  the  third  by  the 
foot  of  the  Kurdistan  mountains.  It  is  a  fertile 
plain,  with  some  low  hills.  To-day  the  level 
parts  of  it  are  covered  by  a  large  number  of 
villages  and  well-cultivated  fields.  The  more 
frequent  mounds  of  ruin  attest  in  ancient  times 
a  still  greater  population.  At  the  period  of 
which  we  are  treating,  the  plains  must  have  been 
covered  by  an  almost  continuous  series  of 
towns.  At  either  end  lay  a  group  of  fortresses. 
The  southern  was  the  ancient  capital  of  Assyria, 
Kalchu,  now  Nimrud,  about  six  miles  to  the 
north  of  the  confluence  of  the  Greater  Zab  and 
the  Tigris.  The  northern,  close  by  the  present 
town  of  Khorsabad,  was  'the  great  fortress  and 
palace  of  Sargon,  Dur-Sargina:t  it  covered  the 
roads  upon  Nineveh  from  the  north,  and  stand- 
ing upon  the  upper  reaches  of  the  Choser  pro- 
tected Nineveh's  water  supply.  But  besides 
these  there  were  scattered  upon  all  the  main 
roads  and  round  the  frontiers  of  the  territory 
a  number  of  other  forts,  towers,  and  posts,  the 
ruins  of  many  of  which  are  still  considerable, 
but  others  have  perished  without  leaving  any 
visible  traces.  The  roads  thus  protected  drew 
in  upon  Nineveh  from  all  directions.  The  chief 
of  those,  along  which  the  Medes  and  their  allies 
would  advance  from  the  east  and  north,  crossed 
the  Greater  Zam,  or  came  down  through  the 
Kurdistan  mountains  upon  the  citadel  of  Sargon. 
Two  of  them  were  distant  enough  from  the  lat- 
ter to  relieve  the  invaders  from  the  necessity  of 
taking  it,  and  Kalchu  lay  far  to  the  south  of  all 
of  them.  The  brunt  of  the  first  defence  of  the 
land  would  therefore  fall  upon  the  smaller 
fortresses. 

Nineveh  itself  lay  upon  the  Tigris  between 
Kalchu  and  Sargon's  city,  just  where  the  Tigris 
is  met  by  the  Choser.  Low  hills  descend  from 
the  north  upon  the  very  site  of  the  fortress,  and 
then  curve  east  and  south,  bow-shaped,  to  draw 
west  again  upon  the  Tigris  at  the  south  end  of 
the  city.  To  the  east  of  the  latter  they  leave  a 
level  plain,  some  two  and  a  half  miles  by  one 
and  a  half.  These  hills  appear  to  have  been  cov- 
ered by  several  forts.  The  city  itself  was  four- 
sided,  lying  lengthwise  to  the  Tigris  and  cut 
across  its  breadth  by  the  Choser.  The  circum- 
ference was  about  seven  and  a  half  miles,  en- 
closing the  largest  fortified  space  in  Western 
Asia,   and   capable   of   holding  a   population    of 

*  Colonel  Billerbeck  (p.  115)  thinks  that  the  southeast 
frontier  at  this  time  lay  more  to  the  north,  near  the 
Greater  Zab. 

+  First  excavated  by  M.  Botta,  1842-1845.  See  also 
George  Smith   "  Assyr.  Disc,"  pp.  98  £. 


three  hundred  thousand.  The  western  wall, 
rather  over  two  and  a  half  miles  long,  touched 
the  Tigris  at  the  other  end,  but  between  there 
lay  a  broad,  bow-shaped  stretch  of  land,  probably 
in  ancient  times,  as  now,  free  of  buildings.  The 
northwestern  wall  ran  up  from  the  Tigris  for  a 
mile  and  a  quarter  to  the  low  ridge  which  en- 
tered the  city  at  its  northern  corner.  From  this 
the  eastern  wall,  with  a  curve  upon  it,  ran  down' 
in  face  of  the  eastern  plain  for  a  little  more 
than  three  miles,  and  was  joined  to  the  western 
by  the  short  southern  wall  of  not  quite  half  a 
mile.  The  ruins  of  the  western  wall  stand  from 
ten  to  twenty,  those  of  the  others  from  twenty- 
five  to  sixty,  feet  above  the  natural  surface,  with 
here  and  there  the  still  higher  remains  of  towers. 
There  were  several  gates,  of  which  the  chief 
were  one  in  the  northern  and  two  in  the  eastern 
wall.  Round  all  the  walls  except  the  western  ran 
moats  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  feet  broad — not 
close  up  to  the  foot  of  the  walls,  but  at  a  dis- 
tance of  some  sixty  feet.  Water  was  supplied  by 
the  Choser  to  all  the  moats  south  of  it;  those 
to  the  north  were  fed  from  a  canal  which  en- 
tered the  city  near  its  northern  corner.  At  these 
and  other  points  one  can  still  trace  the  remains 
of  huge  dams,  batardeaux,  and  sluices;  and  the 
moats  might  be  emptied  by  opening  at  either 
end  of  the  western  wall  other  dams,  which  kept 
back  the  waters  from  the  bed  of  the  Tigris.  Be- 
yond its  moat,  the  eastern  wall  was  protected 
north  of  the  Choser  by  a  large  outwork  cov- 
ering its  gate,  and  south  of  the  Choser  by  an- 
other outwo.rk,  in  shape  the  segment  of  a  circle, 
and  consisting  of  a  double  line  of  fortification 
more  than  five  hundred  yards  long,  of  which  the 
inner  wall  was  almost  as  high  as  the  great  wall 
itself,  but  the  outer  considerably  lower.  Again, 
in  front  of  this  and  in  face  of  the  eastern  plain 
was  a  third  line  of  fortification,  consisting  of  a 
low  inner  wall  and  a  colossal  outer  wall  still 
rising  to  a  height  of  fifty  feet,  with  a  moat  one 
hundred  and  fifty  feet  broad  between  them.  On 
the  south  this  third  line  was  closed  by  a  large 
fortress. 

Upon  the  trebly  fortified  city  the  Medes  drew 
in  from  east  and  north,  far  away  from  Kalchu 
and  able  to  avoid  even  Dur-Sargina.  The  other 
fortresses  on  the  frontier  and  the  approaches  fell 
into  their  hands,  says  Nahum,  like  "  ripe 
fruit."  *  He  cries  to  Nineveh  to  prepare  for  the 
siege.f  Military  authorities  J  suppose  that  the 
Medes  directed  their  main  attack  upon  the 
northern  corner  of  the  city.  Here  they  would 
be  upon  a  level  with  its  highest  point,  and  would 
command  the  waterworks  by  which  most  of  the 
moats  were  fed.  Their  flank,  too,  would  be  pro- 
tected by  the  ravines  of  the  Choser.  Nahum  de- 
scribes fighting  in  the  suburbs  before  the  assault 
of  the  walls,  and  it  was  just  here,  according  to 
some  authorities,§  that  the  famous  suburbs  of 
Nineveh  lay,  out  upon  the  canal  and  the  road 
to  Khorsabad.  All  the  open  fighting  which 
Nahum  foresees  would  talfe  place  in  these  "  out- 
places "  and  "  broad  streets  "  ||— the  mustering 
of  the  "  red  "  ranks.ll  the  "  prancing  horses  "  ** 

*iii.  12. 

+  iii.  14. 

t  See  Jones  and  Billerbeck. 

§Delitzsch  places  the  flUm  TV  of  Gen.  x.  11,  the 
"ribit  Nina"  of  the  inscriptions,  on  the  northeast  of 
Nineveh. 

Bii.  4  Eng.,  5  Heb. 

Iii.  3  Eng.,  4  Heb 

♦*  /6ia.  LXX. 


I 


NaKum  ii.,  iii.] 


THE    SIEGE    AND    FALL    OF    NINEVEH. 


585 


and  "  rattling  chariots  "  *  and  "  cavalry  at  the 
charge."  t  Beaten  there  the  Assyrians  would  re- 
tire to  the  great  walls,  and  the  waterworks  would 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  besiegers.  They  would 
npt  immediately  destroy  these,  but  in  order  to 
bring  their  engines  and  battering-rams  against 
the  walls  they  would  have  to  lay  strong  dams 
across  the  moats;  the  eastern  moat  has  actually 
been  found  filled  with  rubbish  in  face  of  a  great 
breach  at  the  north  end  of  its  wall.  This  breach 
may  have  been  elTected  not  only  by  the  rams  but 
by  directing  upon  the  wall  the  waters  of  the 
canal;  or  farther  south  the  Choser.  itself,  in  its 
spring  floods,  may  have  been  confined  by  the 
besiegers  and  swept  in  upon  the  sluices  which 
regulate  its  passage  through  the  eastern  wall  into 
the  city.  To  this  means  tradition  has  assigned 
the  capture  of  Nineveh,^:  and  Nahuni  perhaps 
foresees  the  possibility  of  it:  "  the  gates  of  the 
rivers  are  opened,  the  palace  is  dissolved." JJ 

Now  of  all  this  probable  progress  of  the  siege 
Nahum,  of  course,  does  not  give  us  a  narrative, 
for  he  is  writing  upon  the  eve  of  it,  and  probably, 
as  we  have  seen,  in  Judah,  with  only  such  knowl- 
edge of  the  position  and  strength  of  Nineveh  as 
her  fame  had  scattered  across  the  world.  The 
military  details,  the  muster,  the  fighting  in  the 
open,  the  investment,  the  assault,  he  did  not 
need  to  go  to  Assyria  or  to  wait  for  the  fall  of 
Nineveh  to  describe  as  he  has  done.  Assyria 
herself  (and  herein  lies  much  of  the  pathos  of  the 
poem)  had  made  all  Western  Asia  familiar  with 
their  horrors  for  the  last  two  centuries.  As  we 
iearn  from  the  prophets  and  now  still  more  from 
herself,  Assyria  was  the  great  Besieger  of  Men. 
It  is  siege,  siege,  siege,  which  Amos,  Hosea,  and 
Isaiah  tell  their  people  they  shall  feel:  "  siege 
and  blockade,  and  that  right  round  the  land!  " 
It  is  siege,  irresistible  and  full  of  cruelty,  which 
Assyria  records  as  her  own  glory.  Miles  of 
sculpture  are  covered  with  masses  of  troops 
marching  upon  some  Syrian  or  Median  fortress. 
Scaling  ladders  and  enormous  engines  are 
pushed  forward  to  the  walls  under  cover  of  a 
shower  of  arrows.  There  are  assaults  and 
breaches,  panic-stricken  and  suppliant  defenders. 
Streets  and  places  are  strewn  with  corpses,  men 
are  impaled,  women  led  away  weeping,  children 
dashed  against  the  stones.  The  Jews  had  seen, 
had  felt  these  horrors  for  a  hundred  years,  and 
it  is  out  of  their  experience  of  them  that  Nahum 
weaves  his  exultant  predictions.  The  Besieger 
of  the  world  is  at  last  besieged;  every  cruelty  he 
has  inflicted  upon  men  is  now  to  be  turnedupon 
himself.  Again  and  again  does  Nahum  return 
to  the  vivid  details, — he  hears  the  very  whips 
crack  beneath  the  walls,  and  the  rattle  of  the 
leaping  chariots;  the  end  is  slaughter,  dispersion, 
and  a  dead  waste. || 

*  iii.  2. 

+  iii-  3. 

t  It  is  the  waters  of  the  Tigris  that  the  tradition  avers 
to  have  broken  the  wall  ;  but  the  Tigris  itself  runs  in  a 
bed  too  low  for  this.  It  can  only  have  been  the  Choser. 
See  both  Jones  and  Billerbeck. 

§ii.  6. 

II  If  t  he  above  conception  of  chaps,  ii.  and  iii.  be  correct, 
then  there  is  no  need  for  such  a  re-arrangement  of  these 
verses  as  has  been  proposed  by  Jeremias  and  Billerbeck. 
In  order  to  produce  a  continuous  narrative  of  the  progress 
of  the  siege,  they  bring  forward  iii.  12-15  (describing  the 
fall  of  the  fortresses  and  gates  of  the  land  and  the  call  to 
the  defence  of  the  city),  and  place  it  immediately  after  ii. 
2,  4  (the  description  of  the  invader)  and  ii.  5-11  (the  appear- 
ance of  chariots  in  the  suburbs  of  the  city,  the  opening  of 
the  floodgates,  the  flight  and  the  spoilingof  the  city).  But 
if  they  believe  that  the  original  gave  an  orderly  account 
of  the  progress  of  the  siege,  why  do  they  not  bring  for- 
ward also  iii.  2  f.,  which  describe  the  arrival  of  the  foe 


Two  other  points  remain  to  be  emphasised. 

There  is  a  striking  absence  from  both  chapters 
of  any  reference  to  Israel.*  Jehovah  of  Hosts 
is  mentioned  twice  in  the  same  formula,!  but 
otherwise  the  author  does  not  obtrude  his  na- 
tionality. It  is  not  in  Judah's  name  he  exults, 
but  in  that  of  all  the  peoples  of  Western  Asia. 
Nineveh  has  sold  "  peoples  "  by  her  harlotries 
and  "  races  "  by  her  witchcraft;  it  is  "  peoples  " 
that  shall  gaze  upon  her  nakedness  and  "  king- 
doms "  upon  her  shame.  Nahum  gives  voice  to 
no  national  passions,  but  to  the  outraged  con- 
science of  mankind.  We  see  here  another  proof, 
not  only  of  the  large,  human  heart  of  prophecy, 
but  of  that  which  in  the  introduction  to  these 
Twelve  Prophets  we  ventured  to  assign  as  one 
of  its  causes.  By  crushing  all  peoples  to  a  com- 
mon level  of  despair,  by  the  universal  pity  which 
her  cruelties  excited,  Assyria  contributed  to  the 
development  in  Israel  of  the  idea  of  a  common 
humanity,  t 

The  other  thing  to  be  noticed  is  Nahum's  feel- 
ing of  the  incoherence  and  mercenariness  of  the 
vast  population  of  Nineveh.  Nineveh's  com- 
mand of  the  world  had  turned  her  into  a  great 
trading  power.  Under  Assurbanipal  the  lines  of 
ancient  commerce  had  been  diverted  so  as  to 
pass  through  her.  The  immediate  result  was  an 
enormous  increase  of  population,  such  as  the 
world  had  never  before  seen  within  the  limits 
of  one  city.  But  this  had  come  out  of  all  races 
and  was  held  together  only  by  the  greed  of  gain. 
What  had  once  been  a  firm  and  vigorous  nation 
of  warriors,  irresistible  in  their  united  impact 
upon  the  world,  was  now  a  loose  aggregate  of 
many  peoples,  without  patriotism,  discipline,  or 
sense  of  honour.  Nahum  likens  it  to  a  reser- 
voir of  waters, §  which  as  soon  as  it  is  breached 
must  scatter,  and  leave  the  city  bare.  The  Sec- 
ond Isaiah  said  the  same  of  Babylon,  to  which 
the  bulk  of  Nineveh's  mercenary  populace  must 
have  fled: — 

"Thus  are  they  grown  to  thee,  they  who  did  weary  thee, 
Traders  of  thine  from  thy  youth  up  ; 
Each  as  he  could  escape  have  they  fled  '. 
None  is  thy  helper.|| 

The  prophets  saw  the  truth  about  both  cities. 
Their  vastness  and  their  splendour  were  artificial. 
Neither  of  them,  and  Nineveh  still  less  than 
Babylon,  was  a  natural  centre  for  the  world's 
commerce.  When  their  political  power  fell,  the 
great  lines  of  trade,  which  had  been  twisted  to 
their  feet,  drew  back  to  more  natural  courses, 
and  Nineveh  in  especial  became  deserted.  This 
is  the  explanation  of  the  absolute  collapse  of  that 
mighty  city.  Nahum's  foresight,  and  the  very 
metaphor  in  which  he  expressed  it,  were  thor- 
oughly sound.  The  population  vanished  like 
water.  The  site  bears  little  trace  of  any  dis- 
turbance since  the  ruin  by  the  Medes,  except 
such  as  has  been  inflicted  by  the  weather  and 
the  wandering  tribes  around.     Mosul,  Nineveh's 

under  the  city  walls?  The  truth  appears  to  be  as  stated 
above.  We  have  really  two  poems  against  Nineveh,  chap, 
ii.  and  chap.  iii.  They  do  not  give  an  orderly  description 
of  the  siege,  but  exult  over  Nineveh's  imminent  downfall, 
with  gleams  scattered  here  and  there  of  how  this  is  to 
happen.  Of  these  "  impressions  "  of  the  coming  siege 
there  are  three,  and  in  the  order  in  which  we  now  have 
them  they  occur  very  naturally  »  ii.  5  ff.,  iii.  2  f.,  and 
iii.  12  ff. 
*ii.  2  goes  with  the  previous  chapter.    See  above,  pp. 

583  f- 
t  ii.  13,  111.  s- 
X  See  above,  chap,  iv.,  especially  pp.  455  ff. 

1  "  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi."  (Expositor's  Bible),  pp.  779  if. 


586 


THE  BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


representative  to-day,  is  not  built  upon  it,  and  is 
but  a  provincial  town.  The  district  was  never 
meant  for  anything  else. 

The  swift  decay  of  these  ancient  empires  from 
the  climax  of  their  commercial  glory  is  often  em- 
ployed as  a  warning  to  ourselves.  But  the 
parallel,  as  the  previous  paragraphs  suggest,  is 
very  far  from  exact.  If  we  can  lay  aside  for 
the  moment  the  greatest  difiference  of  all,  in  re- 
ligion and  morals,  there  remain  others  almost 
of  cardinal  importance.  Assyria  and  Babylonia 
were  not  filled,  like  Great  Britain,  with  repro- 
ductive races,  able  to  colonise  distant  lands,  and 
carry  everywhere  the  spirit  which  had  made 
them  strong  at  home.  Still  more,  they  did  not 
continue  at  home  to  be  homogeneous.  Their 
native  forces  were  exhausted  by  long  and  unceas- 
ing wars.  Their  populations,  especially  in  their 
capitals,  were  very  largely  alien  and  distraught, 
with  nothing  to  hold  them  together  save  then- 
commercial  interests.  They  were  bound  to  break 
up  at  the  first  disaster.  It  is  true  that  we  are  not 
without  some  risks  of  their  peril.  No  patriot 
among  us  can  observe  without  misgiving  the 
large  and  growing  proportion  of  foreigners  in 
that  department  of  our  life  from  which  the 
strength  of  our  defence  is  largely  drawn — our 
merchant  navy.  But  such  a  fact  is  very  far  from 
bringing  our  empire  and  its  chief  cities  into  the 
fatal  condition  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  Our 
capitals,  our  commerce,  our  life  as  a  whole  are 
still  British  to  the  core.  If  we  only  be  true  to 
our  ideals  of  righteousness  and  religion,  if  our 
patriotism  continue  moral  and  sincere,  we  shall 
have  the  power  to  absorb  the  foreign  elements 
that  throng  to  us  in  commerce,  and  stamp  them 
with  our  own  spirit. 

We  are  now  ready  to  follow  Nahum's  two 
great  poems  delivered  on  the  eve  of  the  Fall  of 
Nineveh.  Probably,  as  we  have  said,  the  first 
of  them  has  lost  its  original  opening.  It  wants 
some  notice  at  the  outset  of  the  object  to  which 
it  is  addressed:  this  is  indicated  only  by  the  sec- 
ond personal  pronoun.  Other  needful  com- 
ments will  be  given  in  footnotes. 


"  The  Hammer  *  is  come  up  to  thy  face  ! 
Hold  the  rampart !    t  Keep  watch  on  the  way  ! 
Brace  the  loins  !  t    Pull  thyself  firmly  together  !  § 
The  shields  ||  of  his  heroes  are  red, 
The  warriors  are  in  scarlet ;! 

Like  **  fire  are  the   .    .   .   +t  of  the  chariots  in  the  day 
of  his  muster, 

♦Read  K?'?  with  Wellhausen  (cf.  Siegfried-Stade's 
"  Worterbuch,"  sub  |*'lS)  for    ^""30  "  Breaker  in  pieces." 

In  Jer.  li.  20  Babylon  is  also  called  by  Jehovah  His  Tri'^' 

"  Hammer  "  or  "  Maul." 

t  "  Keep  watch,"  Wellhausen. 

iThis  may  be  a  military  call  to  attention,  the  converse 
of  "  Stand  at  ease  !  " 

§Heb.  literally  :  "  brace  up  thy  power  exceedingly." 

f  Heb.  singular. 

«f  Rev.  ix.  17.  Purple  or  red  was  the  favourite  colour  of 
the  Mede.s.     The  Assyrians  also  loved  red. 

**  Read  t^XD  f "r  C»'X3. 

+■'  rrni^D  the  word  omitted,  is  doubtful  ;  it  does  not 
occur  elsewhere.  LXX.  J/i-itti  ;  Vulg.  "habense."  Some 
have  thought  that  it  means  "  scythes  "—<:/.  the  Arabic 
"falad,"  "to  cut"— but  the  earliest  notice  of  chariots 
armed  with  scythes  is  at  the  battle  of  Cunaxa,  and  in 
Jewish  literature  they  do  not  appear  before  2  Mace.  xiii. 
2.  Cf.  jeremias,  op.  cit.  p.  97,  where  Billerbeck  suggests 
that  the  words  of  Nahum  are  applicable  to  the  covered 
siege-engines,    pictured    on    the    Assyrian    monuments. 


And  the  horsemen  ♦  are  prancing. 

Through  the  markets  rage  chariots, 

They  tear  across  the  squares  ;  + 

The  look  of  them  is  like  torches, 

Like  lightnings  they  dart  to  and  fro. 

He  musters  his  nobles.  ...  $ 

They  rush  to  the  wall  and  the  mantlet  $  is  fixed  !  * 

The  river-gates  II  burst  open,  the  palace  dissolves.^ 

And  Hu^fjab  **  is  stripped,  is  brought  forth, 

With  her  maids  sobbing  like  doves, 

Beating  their  breasts. 

And  Nineveh  !  she  was  like  a  reservoir  of  waters. 

Her  waters   .   .   .tt 

And    now  they   flee.     "  Stand,    stand  !  "    but  there  is 

none  to  rally. 
Plunder  silver,  plunder  gold  ! 
Infinite  treasures,  mass  of  all  precious  things ! 
Void  and  devoid  and  desolate  %%  is  she. 
Melting  hearts  and  shaking  knees, 
And  anguish  in  all  loins, 
And  nothing  but  faces  full  of  black  fear.gf 

from  which  the  besiegers  flung  torches  on  the  walls :  cj. 
ibid.,  p.  167,  n.  ***  But  from  the  parallelism  of  the 
verse  it  is  more  probable  that  ordinary  chariots  are 
meant.  The  leading  chariots  were  covered  with  plates 
of  metal  (Billerbeck,  p.  167). 

*So  LXX.,  reading  D''^D  for  D^K^I^  of  Heb.  text, 
that  means  "  fir-trees."  If  the  latter  be  correct,  then  we 
should  need  to  suppose  with  Billerbeck  that  either  the 
long  lances  of  the  Aryan  Medes  were  meant,  or  the  great, 
heavy  spears  which  were  thrust  against  the  walls  by 
engines.  We  are  not,  however,  among  these  yet ;  it 
appears  to  be  the  cavalry  and  chariots  in  the  open  that 
are  here  described. 

tOr  "broad  places,"  or  '"suburbs."  See  above,  pp. 
584  ff- 

iHeb.  "They  stumble  in  their  goings."  Davidson 
holds  this  is  more  probably  of  the  defenders.  Wellhausen 
takes  the  verse  as  of  the  besiegers.    See  next  note. 

5;  TjJBij.  Partic.  of  the  verb  "  to  cover,"  hence  cover- 
ing thing:  whether  "mantlet"  (on  the  side  of  the  be- 
siegers) or  "  bulwark  "  (on  the  side  of  the  besieged  :  c/. 

M'^7'  Isa.  xxii.  8)  is  uncertain.     Billerbeck  says,  if  it  be 

an  article  of  defence,  we  can  read  ver.  5  as  illustrating 
the  vanity  of  the  hurried  defence,  when  the  elements 
themselves  break  in  vv.  6  and  7  (p.  loi  :  cf.  p.  176,  «.  *). 

11  "Sluices"  (Jeremias;  or  "bridge-gates"  (Well- 
hausen) ? 

*i  Or  "  breaks  into  motion,"  i.  e.,  "  flight." 

**  "'"'  if  a  Hebrew  word,  might  be  Hophal  of  3VJ  and 

has  been  taken  to  mean  "  it  is  determined,  she  (Nineveh) 
is  taken  captive."  Volck  (in  Herzog),  Kleinert.  Orelli  : 
"it  is  settled."  LXX.  vwdtrTacris  =  3VD.  Vulg.  "miles" 
(as  if  some  form  of  X3V?)"    Hitzig  points  it   ^Jfil,  "the 

lizard,"  Wellhausen  "the  toad."  But  this  noun  is  mas- 
culine (Lev.  xi.   29)  and  the  verbs  feminine.    Davidson 

suggests  the  other  ~G'  fem.,  the  "litter"  or  "palan- 
quin" (Isa.  Ixvi.  20):  "in  lieu  of  anything  better  one 
might  be  tempted  to  think  that  the  litter  might  mean  the 
woman  or  lady,  just  as  in  Arab,  dha'inah  means  a  woman's 
litter  and  then  a  woman."    One  is  also  tempted  to  think 

of   ''3Sfn,  "the  beauty."    The  Targ.   has  ^03^10.   "the 

queen."  From  as  early  as  at  least  1527  ("  Latina  Inter- 
pretatio  "  Xantis  Pagnini  Lucensis  revised  and  edited  for 
the  Plantin  Bible,  1615)  the  word  has  been  taken  by  a 
series  of  scholars  as  a  proper  name,  Hussab.  So  Ewald" 
and  others.  It  may  be  an  Assyrian  word,  like  some 
others  in  Nahum.    Perhaps,  again,  the  text  is  corrupt. 

!Vlr.  Paul  Ruben  (Academy,  March  7,  1896)  has  pro- 
posed instead  of  T\rbv^'    "'^  brought  forth,"  to  read 

n^nyn.  and  to  translate  it  by  analogy  of  the  Assyrian 
"etellu,"  fem.  "etellitu"  =  great  or  exalted,  "The 
Lady."    The  line  would  then  run  "  Hussab,  the  lady,  is 

stripped."     (With    H^nyn    Cheyne,  Academy,   June    21, 
1896,  compares  H^Sny.  which,  he  suggests,  is  "  Yahwe  is 
great  "  or  "  is  lord." 
ttHeb.  N^'^  ''©■'O  for  X'n  "IB'K  "'0^0.  "from  days  she 

was."  A.  V.  "  is  of  old."  R.  V.  "  hath  been  of  old,"  and 
Marg.  "from  the  days  that  she  hath  been."     LXX.  "her 

waters,"  V'^P^^'     On  waters  fleeing,  cf.  Ps.  civ.  7. 

XX  Bukah,  umebukah,  umebullakah.  Ewald  :  "  desert 
and  desolation  and  devastation."    The  adj.  are  feminine. 

§§  Literally:  "and  the  faces  of  all  them  gather  livid- 
ness." 


IHh:    BOOK    OF    HABAKKUK. 


587 


Where  is  the  Lion's  den, 

And  the  young  lions'  feeding  ground  *? 

Whither  the  Lion  retreated, + 

The  whelps  of  the  Lion,  with  none  to  affray : 

The  Lion,  who  tore  enough  for  his  whelps, 

And  strangled  for  his  lionesses. 

And  he  filled  his  pits  with  prey. 

And  his  dens  with  rapine. 

'  Lo,  I  am  at  thee  (oracle  of  Jehovah  pf  Hosts)  : 
I  will  put  up  thy  ...Jin  flames. 
The  sword  shall  devour  thv  young  lions  : 
I  will  cut  off  from  the  earth  thy  rapine, 
And  the  noise  of  thine  envoys  shall  no  mo«'<«  h»  heard. 


'  Woe  to  the  City  of  Blood, 
All  of  her  guile,  robbery-full,  causeless  rapine  I 

'  Hark  the  whip. 
And  the  rumbling  of  the  wheei. 
And  horses  galloping, 
And  the  rattling  dance  of  the  chariot  !  § 
Cavalry  at  the  charge, ||  and  flash  of  sabres, 
And  lightning  of  lances, 
Mass  of  slain  and  weight  of  corpses. 
Endless  dead  bodies— 
They  stumble  on  their  dead  ! 
—For  the  manifold  harlotries  of  the  Harlott 
The  well-favoured,  mistress  of  charms. 
She  who  sold  nations  with  her  harlotries 
And  races  by  her  witchcrafts  ! 

'  Lo,  J  am  at  thee  (oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts)  : 
I  will  uncover  thy  skirts  to  thy  face  ;  ^ 
Give  nations  to  look  on  thy  nakedness, 
And  kingdoms  upon  thy  shame  ; 
Will  have  thee  pelted  with  filth,  and  disgrace  thee, 
And  set  thee  for  a  gazingstock  ; 

So  that  every  one  seeing  thee  shall  shrink  from  thee  and 
say, 

'Shattered  is  Nineveh— who  will  pity  her? 

Whence  shall  I  seek  for  comforters  to  thee  ?' 


•*  Shalt  thou  be  better  than  No-Amon,** 
Which  sat  upon  the  Nile  streams  tt— waters  were  round 

her— 
Whose  rampart  was  the  sea.tt  and  waters  her  wall  ?§§ 
Kush  was  her  strength  and  Misraim  without  end  ; 
Phut  and  the  Lybians  were  there  to  assist  her.|||| 
Even  she  was  for  e.xile.  she  went  to  captivity  : 
Even  her  children  were  dashed  on  every  street  corner  ; 
For  her  nobles  they  cast  lots. 
And  all  her  great  men  were  fastened  with  fetters. 

'  Thou  too  Shalt  stagger, l^t  shalt  grow  faint ; 
Thou  too  shalt  seek  help  from  ***  the  foe  ! 

All  thy  fortresses  are  fig-trees  with  figs  early-ripe  : 
Be  they  shaken  they  fall  on  the  mouth  of  the  eater. 


nyiD 


Wellhausen     reads 


myo. 


" cave ' 


*  For 
"hold.- 

tLXX.,  reading  K137  for  N'37. 

t  Heb.  "her  chariots."  LXX.  and  Syr.  suggest  "thy 
mass"  or  "multitude,"  n33T.  Davidson  suggests  "  thy 
lair,"  n3V3-|. 

§  Literally  "and  the  chariot  dancing,"  but  the  word, 
merakedah,  has  a  rattle  in  it. 


n  Doubtful, 


n^]m. 


LXX.  avapaivovTOi. 


^  Jeremias  (104)  shows  how  the  Assyrians  did  this  to 
female  captives. 

**  Jer.  xlvi.  25  :  "I  will  punish  Amon  at  No."  Ezek.  xxx. 
14-16:  "...  judgments  in  No  ....  I  will  cut  off  No- 
Amon  "  (Heb.  and  A.  V.  "  multitude  of  No,"  reading  JlOn  ; 
so  also  LXX.  TO  7rA)j9o?  for  JI^X)  ".  .  ■  and  No  shall  be 
broken  up."  It  is  Thebes,  the  Egyptian  name  of  which 
■was  Nu-Amen.  The  god  Amen  had  his  temple  there : 
Herod.  I.  182,  H.  42.  Nahum  refers  to  Assurbanipal's 
account  of  the  fall  of  Thebes.     See  above,  p.  563. 

*■+  D^IX'n.  PI-  of  the  word  for  Nile. 

tt  Arabs  still  call  the  Nile  the  sea. 

§§  So  LXX.,  reading  D'D   for  Heb-   D'D. 

mi  So  LXX.  ;  Heb.  "thee." 

^f  Heb.  "  be  drunken." 

***/.  e.,  "  against,  because  of." 


Lo,  thy  folk  are  but  women  in  thy  midst  :• 
To  thy  foes  the  gates  of  thy  land  fly  open  ; 
Fire  has  devoured  thy  bars.  » 

'Draw  thee  water  for  siege,  strengthen  thy  forts! 
Get  thee  down  to  the  mud,  and  tramp  in  the  clay! 
Grip  fast  the  brick-mould  ! 

There  fire  consumes  thee,  the  sword  cuts  thee  off.t 
Make  thyself  many  as  a  locust  swarm, 
Many  as  grasshoppers. 

Multiply  thy  traders  more  than  heaven's  stars, 
— The  locusts  break  off  t  and  fly  away,  . 
Thy  ...  §  are  as  locusts  and  thy  ...  as  grasshoppers, 
That  hive  in  the  hedges  in  the  cold  of  the  day  :| 
The  sun  is  risen,  they  are  fled. 
And  one  knows  not  the  place  where  they  be. 

'  Asleep  are  thy  shepherds,  O  king  of  Assyria, 
Thy  nobles  do  slumber  ;^ 
Thy  people  are  strewn  on  the  mountains, 
Without  any  to  gather. 
There  is  no  healing  of  thy  wreck, 
Fatal  thy  wound ! 
All  who  hear  the  bruit  of  thee  shall  clap  the  hand  at 

thee. 
For  upon  whom  hath  not  thy  cruelty  passed  without 

ceasing  ? " 


HABAKKUK. 

'  Upon  my  watch-tower  will  I  stand. 
And  take  up  my  post  on  the  rampart. 
I  will  watch  to  see  what  He  will  say  to  tne. 
And  what  answer  I  get  back  to  my  plea." 

The  righteous  shall  live  by  his  faithfulness. 


"  The  beginning  of  speculation  in  Israel. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  BOOK  OF  HABAKKUK. 

As  it  has  reached  us,  the  Book  of  Habakkuk 
under  the  title  "  The  Oracle  which  Habakkuk 
the  prophet  received  by  vision,"  consists  of  three 
chapters,  which  fall  into  three  sections.  First: 
chap.  i.  2-ii.  4  (or  8),  a  piece  in  dramatic  form; 
the  prophet  lifts  his  voice  to  God  against  the 
wrong  and  violence  of  which  his  whole  horizon 
is  full,  and  God  sends  him  answer.  Second: 
chap.  ii.  5  (or  9)-20,  a  taunt-song  in  a  series  of 
Woes  upon  the  wrong-doer.  Third:  chap,  iii., 
part  psalm,  part  prayer,  descriptive  of  a  The- 
ophany  and  expressive  of  Israel's  faith  in  their 

*  Jer.  1.  37,  li.  30. 

t  Heb.  and  LXX.  add  "devour  thee  like  the  locust," 
probably  a  gloss. 

t  Cf.  Jer.  ix.  33.  Some  take  it  of  the  locusts  stripping 
the  skin  which  confines  their  wings  :  Davidson. 

§n^-)|3Q.  A.  V.  "  thy  crowned  ones  "  ;  but  perhaps  like 
its  neighbour  an  Assyrian  word,  meaning  we  know  not 
what.  Wellhausen  reads  "^^ITQO.  LXX.  o  o-u^mikto?  aov 
(applied  in  Deut.  xxiii.  sand  Zech.  ix.  6  to  the  offspring 
of  a  mixed  marriage  between  an  Israelite  and  a  Gentile), 
deine  Mischlinge:  a  term  of  contempt  for  the  floating 
foreign  or  semi-foreign  population  which  filled  Nineveh 
and  was  ready  to  fly  at  sight  of  danger.  Similarly  Well- 
hausen takes  the  second  terra,  TDDD.  This,  which  occurs, 
also  in  Jer.  li.  27,  appears  to  be  some  kind  of  official.  In 
Assyrian  "dupsar  "  is  scribe,  which  may,  like  Heb.  "ItiK', 
have  been  applied  to  any  high  official.  See  Schrader, 
"K.  A.  T.,"  Eng.  Tr.,  1.  141,  II.  118.  See  also  Fried. 
Delitzsch,  "  Wo  lag  Parad,"  p.  142.  The  name  and  office 
were  ancient.  Such  Babylonian  officials  are  mentioned 
in  the  Tell  el  Amarna  letters  as  present  at  the  Egyptian 
court 

I  Heb.  "  dav  of  cold." 

^"IJDK",  "dwell,"  is  the  Heb.  reading.  But  LXX.  IJEjr^, 
iKoiiJMTev.  Sleep  must  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  death  :  c/. 
Jer.  li.  39,  57  :  Isa.  xiv.  18. 


588 


THE-   BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


God.  Of  these  three  sections  no  one  doubts  the 
authenticity  of  the  first;  opinion  is  divided 
about  the  second;  about  the  third  there  is  a  grow- 
ing agreement  that  it  is  not  a  genuine  work  of 
Habakkuk,  but  a  poem  from  a  period  after  the 
Exile. 

.     I.  Chap.  I.  2-II.  4  (or  8). 

Yet  it  is  the  first  piece  which  raises  the  most 
difficult  questions.  All  *  admit  that  it  is  to  be 
dated  somewhere  along  the  line  of  Jeremiah's 
long  career,  c.  627-586.  There  is  no  doubt  about 
the  general  trend  of  the  argument:  it  is  a  plaint 
to  God  on  the  sufferings  of  the  righteous  under 
tyranny,  with  God's  answer.  But  the  order  and 
connection  of  the  paragraphs  of  the  argument 
are  not  clear.  There  is  also  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  who  the  tyrant  is — native,  Assyrian,  or 
Chaldee;  and  this  leads  to  a  difference,  of  course, 
about  the  date,  which  ranges  from  the  early 
years  of  Josiah  to  the  end  of  Jehoiakim's  reign, 
or  from  about  630  to  597. 

As  the  verses  lie,  their  argument  is  this.  In 
chap.  i.  2-4  Habakkuk  asks  the  Lord  how  long 
the  wicked  are  to  oppress  the  righteous,  to  the 
paralysing  of  the  Torah,  or  Revelation  of  His 
Law,  and  the  making  futile  of  judgment.  For 
answer  the  Lord  tells  him.  vv.  5-11,  to  look 
round  among  the  heathen:  He  is  about  to  raise 
up  the  Chaldees  to  do  His  work,  a  people  swift, 
self-reliant,  irresistible.  Upon  which  Habakkuk 
resumes  his  question,  vv.  12-17,  how  long  will 
God  suffer  a  tyrant  who  sweeps  up  the  peoples 
into  his  net  like  fish?  Is  he  to  go  on  with  this 
for  ever?  In  ii.  i  Habakkuk  prepares  for  an 
answer,  which  comes  in  ii.  2,  3,  4:  let  the  prophet 
wait  for  the  vision  though  it  tarries;  the  proud 
oppressor  cannot  last,  but  the  righteous  shall 
live  by  his  constancy,  or  faithfulness. 

T'^p  difficulties  are  these.  Who  are  the  wicked 
oppressors  in  chap.  i.  2-4?  Are  they  Jews,  or 
some  heathen  nation?  And  what  is  the  connec- 
tion between  vv.  1-4  and  vv.  S-ii?  Are  the 
Chaldees,  who  are  described  in  the  latter,  raised 
up  to  punish  the  tyrant  complained  against  in 
the  former?  To  these  questions  three  different 
sets  of  answers  have  been  given. 

First:  the  great  majority  of  critics  take  the 
wrong  complained  of  in  vv.  2-4  to  be  wrong  done 
by  unjust  and  cruel  Jews  to  their  countryrnen, 
that  is,  civic  disorder  and  violence,  and  believe 
that  in  vv.  5-1 1  Jehovah  is  represented  as  raising 
up  the  Chaldees  to  punish  the  sin  of  Judah — a 
message  which  is  pretty  much  the  same  as  Jere- 
miah's. But  Habakkuk  goes  further:  the  Chal- 
dees themselves  with  their  cruelties  aggravate 
his  problem  how  God  can  suffer  wrong,  and  he 
appeals  again  to  God,  vv.  12-17.  Are  the  Chal- 
dees to  be  allowed  to  devastate  for  ever?  The 
answer  is  given,  as  above,  in  chap.  ii.  1-4.  Such 
is  practica'V  the  view  of  Pusey,  Delitzsch, 
Kleinert,  Kuenen,  Sinker.f  Driver,  Orelli,  Kirk- 
patrick,  Wildeboer,  and  Davidson,  a  formidable 
league,  and  Davidson  says  "  this  is  the  most 
natural  sense  of  the  verses  and  of  the  words  used 
in  them."  But  these  scholars  differ  as  to  the 
date.  Pusey,  Delitzsch,  and  Volck  take  the 
whole  passage  from  i.  5  as  prediction,  and  date 
it  from  before  the  rise  of  the  Chaldee  power  in 
625,  attributing  the  internal  wrongs  of  Judah  de- 

*  Except  one  or  two  critics  who  place  it  in  Manasseh's 
reign.    See  below, 
t  See  next  note. 


scribed  in  vv.  2-4  to  Manasseh's  reign  or  the 
early  years  of  Josiah.*  But  the  rest,  on  the 
grounds  that  the  prophet  shows  some  experi- 
ence of  the  Chaldean  methods  of  warfare,  and 
that  the  account  of  the  internal  disorder  in  Judah 
does  not  suit  Josiah's  reign,  bring  the  passage 
down  to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  608-598,  or  of 
Jehoiachin,  597.  Kleinert  and  Von  Orelli  date 
it  before  the  battle  of  Carchemish,  605,  in  which 
the  Chaldean  Nebuchadrezzar  wrested  from 
Egypt  the  Empire  of  the  Western  Asia,  on  the 
ground  that  after  that  Habakkuk  could  not  have 
called  a  Chaldean  invasion  of  Judah  incredible 
(i.  5).  But  Kuenen,  Driver,  Kirkpatrick,  Wilde- 
boer, and  Davidson  date  it  after  Carchemish. 
To  Driver  it  must  be  immediately  after,  and  be- 
fore Judah  became  alarmed  at  the  consequences 
to  herself.  To  Davidson  the  description  of  the 
Chaldeans  "  is  scarcely  conceivable  before  the 
battle,"  "  hardly  one  would  think  before  the  de- 
portation of  the  people  under  Jehoiachin."  f 
This  also  is  Kuenen's  view,  who  thinks  that 
Judah  must  have  suffered  at  least  the  first  ChaJ' 
dean  raids,  and  he  explains  the  use  of  an  un- 
doubted future  in  chap.  i.  5,  "  Lo,  I  am  about  tc 
raise  up  the  Chaldeans,"  as  due  to  the  prophet's 
predilection  for  a  dramatic  style.  "  He  sets  him- 
self in  the  past,  and  represents  the  already  expe- 
rienced chastisement  [of  Judah]  as  having  been 
then  announced  by  Jehovah.  His  contempora- 
ries could  not  have  mistaken  his  meaning." 

Second:  others,  however,  deny  that  chap.  i. 
2-4  refers  to  the  internal  disorder  of  Judah,  ex- 
cept as  the  effect  of  foreign  tyranny.  The 
"  righteous "  mentioned  there  are  Israel  as  a 
whole,  "  the  wicked  "  their  heathen  oppressors. 
So  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Konig,  and  practically 
Smend.  Ewald  is  so  clear  that  Habakkuk  as- 
cribes no  sin  to  Judah,  that  he  says  we  might 
be  led  by  this  to  assign  the  prophecy  to  the 
reign  of  the  righteous  Josiah;  but  he  prefers,  be- 
cause of  the  vivid  sense  which  the  prophet  be- 
trays of  actual  experience  of  the  Chaldees,  to 
date  the  passage  from  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim, 
and  to  explain  Habakkuk's  silence  about  his 
people's  sinfulness  as  due  to  his  overwhelming 
impression  of  Chaldean  cruelty..  Konig  t  takes 
vv.  2-4  as  a  general  complaint  of  the  violence 
that  fills  the  prophet's  day,  and  vv.  5-1 1  as  a 
detailed  description  of  the  Chaldeans,  the  instru- 
ments of  this  violence.  Vv.  5-11,  therefore,  give 
not  the  judgment  upon  the  wrongs  described  in 
vv.  2-4,  but  the  explanation  of  them.  Lebanon 
is  already  wasted  by  the  Chaldeans  (ii.  17); 
therefore  the  whole  prophecy  must  be  assigned 
to  the  days  of  Jehoiakim.  Giesebrec-ht^  and 
Wellhausen  adhere  to  the  view  that  no  sins  of 
Judah  are  mentioned,  but  that  the  "  righteous  " 
and  "  wicked  "  of  chap.  i.  4  are  the  same  as  in 

*  So  Pusey.  Delitzsch  in  his  commentary  on  Habakkuk, 
1843,  preferred  Josiah's  reign,  but  in  his  "  O.  T.  Hist  of 
Redemption,"  1881,  p.  226,  Manasseh's.  Volck  (in  Herzog, 
"Real  Encyc,"  art.  "Habakkuk,"  1879,)  assuming  that 
Habakkuk  is  quoted  both  by  Zephaniah  (see  above,  p.  56(3, 
n.)  and  Jeremiah,  places  him  before  these.  Sinker  ("The 
Psalm  of  Habakkuk:"  see  below,  p.  591.  «•)  deems  "the 
prophecy,  taken  as  a  whole,"  to  bring  "  before  us  the 
threat  of  the  Chaldean  invasion,  the  horrors  that  follow 
in  its  train,"  etc.,  with  a  vision  of  the  day  "  when  the 
Chaldean  host  itself,  its  work  done,  falls  beneath  a 
mightier  foe."  He  fixes  the  date  either  in  the  concluding 
years  of  Manasseh's  reign,  or  the  opening  years  of  that  of 
Josiah  (Preface,  1-4). 

t  Kirkpatrick  (Smith's  "Diet,  of  the  Bible,"  art. 
"  Habakkuk,"  1893)  puts  it  not  later  than  the  sixth  year 
of  Jehoiakim. 

t  "Einl.  in  das  A.  T." 

§  "  Beitrage  zur  Jesaiakritik,"  1890,  pp.  197  f. 


THE    BOOK    OF    HABAKKUK. 


vc".  13,  viz.,  Israel  and  a  heathen  tyrant.  But 
this  leads  them  to  dispute  that  the  present  order 
of  the  paragraphs  of  the -prophecy  is  the  right 
one.  In  chap.  i.  5  the  Chaldeans  are  represented 
as  about  to  be  raised  up  for  the  first  time,  al- 
though their  violence  has  already  been  described 
in  vv.  1-4,  and  in  vv.  12-17  these  are  already  in 
full  career.  Moreover  ver.  12  lollows  on  nat- 
urally to  ver.  4.  Accordingly  these  critics  would 
remove  the  section  vv.  5-1 1.  Giesebrecht  pre- 
fixes it  to  ver.  i,  and  dates  the  whole  passage 
from  the  Exile.  Wellhausen  calls  5-1 1  an  older 
passage  than  the  rest  of  the  prophecy,  and  re- 
moves it  altogether  as  not  Habakkuk's.  To  the 
latter  he  assigns  what  remains,  i.  1-4,  12-17,  ii. 
1-5,  and  dates  it  from  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim.* 

Third:  from  each  of  these  groups  of  critics 
Budde  of  Strasburg  borrows  something,  but  so 
as  to  construct  an  arrangement  of  the  verses, 
and  to  reach  a  date,  for  the  whole,  from  which 
both  difFer.t  With  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Konig, 
Smend,  Giesebrecht,  and  Wellhausen  he  agrees 
that  the  violence  complained  of  in  i.  2-4  is  that 
inflicted  by  a  heathen  oppressor,  "  the  wicked," 
on  the  Jewish  nation,  the  '"  righteous."  But  with 
Kuenen  and  others  he  holds  that  the  Chaldeans 
are  raised  up,  according  to  i.  5-1 1,  to  punish  the 
violence  complained  of  in  i.  2-4  and  again  in 
i.  12-17.  In  these  verses  it  is  the  ravages  of  an- 
other heathen  power  than  the  Chaldeans  which 
Budde  describes.  The  Chaldeans  are  still  to 
come,  and  cannot  be  the  same  as  the  devastator 
whose  long  continued  tyranny  is  described  in 
i.  12-17.  They  are  rather  the  power  which  is  to 
punish  him.  He  can  only  be  the  Assyrian.  But 
if  that  be  so,  the  proper  place  for  the  passage, 
i.  5-1 1,  which  describes  the  rise  of  the  Chaldeans 
must  be  after  the  description  of  the  Assyrian  rav- 
ages in  i.  12-17,  and  in  the  body  of  God's  answer 
to  the  prophet  which  we  find  in  ii.  2  fT.  Budde 
therefore  places  i.  5-1 1  after  ii.  2-4.  But  if  the 
Chaldeans  are  still  to  come,  and  Budde  thinks 
that  they  are  described  vaguely  and  with  a  good 
deal  of  imagination,  the  prophecy  thus  arranged 
must  fall  somewhere  between  625,  when  Nabopo- 
lassar  the  Chaldean  made  himself  independent  of 
Assyria  and  King  of  Babylon,  and  607,  when 
Assyria  fell.  That  the  prophet  calls  Judah 
"  righteous "  is  proof  that  he  wrote  after  the 
great  Reform  of  621 ;  hence,  too,  his  reference 
to  Torah  and  Mishpat  (i.  4),  and  his  complaint 
of  the  obstacles  which  Assyrian  supremacy  pre- 
sented to  their  free  course.  As  the  Assyrian 
yoke  appears  not  to  have  been  felt  anywhere  in 
Judah  by  608,  Budde  would  fix  the  exact  date  of 
Habakkuk's  prophecy  about  615.  To  these  con- 
clusions of  Budde  Cornill,  who  in  1891  had  very 
confidently  assigned  the  prophecy  of  Habakkuk 
to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  gave  his  adherence  in 
1896.^ 

Budde's  very  able  and  ingenious  argument  has 
been  subjected  to  a  searching  criticism  by  Pro- 
fessor Davidson,  who  emphasises  first  the  dif^- 
culty  of  accounting  for  the  transposition  of 
chap.  i.  5-1 1  from  what  Budde  alleges  to  have 
been  its  original  place  after  ii.  4  to  its  present 
position    in    chap.    i.§     He    points    out    that    if 

*  See  further  note  on  p.  5Q1. 

t  ■■  Studien  u.  Kritiken  "  for  18Q3. 

t  Cf.  the  opening  of  §  30  in  the  first  edition  of  his  "  Ein- 
leitung  "  with  that  of  §  34  in  the  third  and  fourth  editions. 

§  Budde's  explanation  of  this  is,  that  to  the  later  editors 
of  the  book,  long  after  the  Babylonian  destruction  of 
Jews,  it  was  incredible  that  the  Chaldean  should  be  rep- 
resented as  the  deliverer  of  Israel,  and  so  the  account 
of  him  was  placed  where,  while  his  call  to  punish  Israel 


chap.  i.  2-4  and  12-17  and  ii.  5  f{.  refer  to  the 
Assyrian,  it  is  strange  the  latter  is  not  once  men- 
tioned. Again,  by  615  we  may  infer  (though  we 
know  little  of  Assyrian  history  at  this  time) 
that  the  Assyrian's  hold  on  Judah  was  already 
too  relax^ed  for  the  prophet  to  impute  to  him 
power  to  hinder  the  Law,  especially  as  Josiah 
had  begun  to  carry  his  reforms  into  the  northern 
kingdom;  and  the  knowledge  of  the  Chaldeans 
displayed  in  i.  5-1 1  is  too  fresh  and  detailed*  to 
suit  so  early  a  date:  it  was  possible  only  after  the 
battle  of  Carchemish.  And  again,  it  is  improba- 
ble that  we  have  two  different  nations,  as  Budde 
thinks,  described  by  the  very  similar  phrases  in 
i.  II,  "  his  own  power  becomes  his  god,"  and  in 
i.  16,  "  he  sacrifices  to  his  net."  Again,  chap.  i. 
5-1 1  would  not  read  quite  naturally  after  chap.  ii. 
4.  And  in  the  woes  pronounced  on  the  op- 
pressor it  is  not  one  nation,  the  Chaldeans,  which 
are  to  spoil  him,  but  all  the  remnant  of  the  peo- 
ples (ii.  7,  8). 

These  objections  are  not  inconsiderable.  But 
are  they  conclusive?  And  if  not,  is  any  of  the 
other  theories  of  the  prophecy  less  beset  with 
difificulties? 

The  objections  are  scarcely  conclusive.  We 
have  no  proof  that  the  power  of  Assyria  was 
altogether  removed  from  Judah  by  615;  on  the 
contrary,  even  in  608  Assyria  was  still  the  power 
with  which  Egypt  went  forth  to  contend  for  the 
empire  of  the  world.  Seven  years  earlier  her 
hand  may  well  have  been  strong  upon  Pales- 
tine. Again,  by  615  the  Chaldeans,  a  people 
famous  in  Western  Asia  for  a  long  time,  had 
been  ten  years  independent:  men  in  Palestine 
may  have  been  familiar  with  their  methods  of 
warfare;  at  least  it  is  impossible  to  say  they 
were  not.f  There  is  more  weight  in  the  ob- 
jection drawn  from  the  absence  of  the  name  of 
Assyria  from  all  of  the  passages  which  Budde 
alleges  describe  it;  nor  do  we  get  over  all  diffi- 
culties of  text  by  inserting  i.  5-11  between  ii.  4 
and  5.  Besides,  how  does  Budde  explain  i.  126 
on  the  theory  that  it  means  Assyria?  Is  the 
clause  not  premature  at  that  point?  Does  he 
propose  to  elide  it,  like  Wellhausen?  And  in 
any  case  an  erroneous  transposition  of  the  orig- 
inal is  impossible  to  prove  and  difficult  to  ac- 
count for.l 

But  have  not  the  other  theories  of  the  Book 
of  Habakkuk  equally  great  difficulties?  Surely, 
we  cannot  say  that  the  '"  righteous "  and  the 
"  wicked  "  in  i.  4  mean  something  different  from 
what  they  do  in  i.  13?  But  if  this  is  impossible 
the  construction  of  the  book  supported  by  the 
great  majority  of  critics  S  falls  to  the  ground. 
Professor  Davidson  justly  says  that  it  has 
"  something  artificial  in  it  "  and  "  puts  a  strain 
on  the  natural  sense."  ||  How  can  the  Chal- 
deans be  described  in  i.  5  as  "  just  about  to  be 
raised  up,"  and  in  14-17  as  already  for  a  long 
time  the  devastators  of  earth?     Ewald' s,  Hitzig's, 

for  her  sins  was  not  emphasised,  he  should  be  pictured 
as  destined  to  doom  ;  and  so  the  prophecy  originally 
referring  to  the  Assyrian  was  read  of  him.  "This  is 
possible,"  says  Davidson.  "  If  it  be  true,  criticism  is  not 
without  its  romance." 

*  This  in  opposition  to  Budde's  statement  that  the 
description  of  the  Chaldeans  in  i.  5-11  "isteine  phantas- 
tische  Schilderung  "  (p.  387). 

t  It  is,  however,  a  serious  question  whether  it  would  be 
possible  in  615  to  describe  the  Chaldeans  as  "  a  nation  that 
traversed  the  breadth  of  the  earth  to  occupy  dwelling- 
places  that  were  not  his  own  "  (i,  6).  This  suits  better  after 
the  battle  of  Carchemish. 

t  See  above. 

§  See  above,  pp.  587  ff. 

1  Page  572. 


590 


THE^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and  Konig's  views  *  are  equally  beset  by  these 
difficulties;  Konig's  exposition  also  "strains  the 
natural  sense."  Everything,  in  fact,  points  to 
i.  5-1 1  being  out  of  its  proper  place;  it  is  no 
wonder  that  Giesebrecht,  Wellhausen,  and 
Budde  independently  arrived  at  this  co'nclusion.  f 
Whether  Budde  be  right  in  inserting  i.  5-1 1  after 
ii.  4,  there  can  be  little  doubt  of  the  correct- 
ness of  his  views  that  i.  12-17  describe  a  heathen 
oppressor  who  is  not  the  Chaldeans.  Budde 
says  this  oppressor  is  Assyria.  Can  he  be  any 
one  else?  From  608  to  605  Judah  was  sorely 
beset  by  Egypt,  who  had  overrun  all  Syria  up  to 
the  Euphrates.  The  Egyptians  killed  Josiah, 
deposed  his  successor,  and  put  their  own  vassal 
under  a  very  heavy  tribute;  "gold  and  silver 
were  exacted  of  the  people  of  the  land:  "  the 
picture  of  distress  in  i.  1-4  might  easily  be  that 
of  Judah  in  these  three  terrible  years.  And  if 
we  assigned  the  prophecy  to  them,  we  should 
certainly  give  it  a  date  at  which  the  knowledge 
of  the  Chaldeans  expressed  in  i.  5-1 1  was  more 
probable  than  at  Budde's  date  of  615.  But  then 
does  the  description  in  chap.  i.  14-17  suit  Egypt 
so  well  as  it  does  Assyria?  We  can  hardly  af- 
firm this,  until  we  know  more  of  what  Egypt  did 
in  those  days,  but  it  is  very  probable. 

Therefore,  the  theory  supported  by  the  ma- 
jority of  critics  being  unnatural,  we  are,  with 
our  present  meagre  knowledge  of  the  time, 
flung  back  upon  Budde's  interpretation  that  the 
prophet  in  i.  2-ii.  4  appeals  trom  oppression  by 
a  heathen  power,  which  is  not  the  Chaldean,  but 
upon  which  the  Chaldean  shall  bring  the  just 
vengeance  of  God.  The  tyrant  is  either  As- 
syria up  to  about  615  or  Eygpt  from  608  to  605, 
and  there  is  not  a  little  to  be  said  for  the  latter 
date. 

In  arriving  at  so  uncertain  a  conclusion  about 
i.-ii.  4,  we  have  but  these  consolations,  that  no 
other  is  possible  in  our  present  knowledge,  and 
that  the  uncertainty  will  not  hamper  us  much  in 
our  appreciation  of  Habakkuk's  spiritual  atti- 
tude and  poetic  gifts. t; 

2.  Chap.  II.  5-20. 

The  dramatic  piece  i.  2-ii.  4  is  succeeded  by  a 
series  of  fine  taunt-songs,  starting  after  an  in- 
troduction from  6b,  then  9,  11,  15,  and  (18)  19, 
and  each  opening  with  "Woe!"  Their  subject 
is,  if  we  take  Budde's  interpretation  of  the  dra- 
matic piece,  the  Assyrian  and  not  the  Chaldean  § 
tyrant.  The  text,  as  we  shall  see  when  we  come 
to  it,  is  corrupt.  Some  words  are  manifestly 
wrong,  and  the  rhythm  must  have  suffered  be- 
yond restoration.  In  all  probability  these  fine 
lyric  Woes,  or  at  least  as  many  of  them  as  are 
authentic — for  there  is  doubt  about  one  or  two 
--were  of  equal  length.  Whether  they  all  orig- 
inally had  the  refrain  now  attached  to  two  is 
more  doubtful. 

Hitzig  suspected  the  authenticity  of  some  parts 

♦  See  above,  pp.  588  f. 

+  Wellhausen  in  1873  (see  p.  661)  ;  Giesebrecht  in  1890  ; 
Budde  in  1892,  before  he  had  seen  the  opinions  of  either 
of  the  others  (see  "  Stud,  und  Krit.,"  1893,  P-  386,  «.  2). 

tCornill  quotes  a  rearrangement  of  chaps,  i.,  ii.,  by 
Rothstein,  who  takes  i.  2-4,  12  a,  13,  ii.  1-3,  4,  5  a,  i.  6-10,  14, 
IS  a,  ii.  6  d,  7,  g,  10  a  d  p,  n,  i.;,  16,  ig,  18,  as  an  oracle  against 
Jehoiakim  and  the  godless  in  Israel  about  605,  which 
during  the  Exile  was  worked  up  into  the  present  oracle 
against  Babylon.  Cornill  esteems  it  "too  complicated." 
Budde  ("  Expositor,"  1895,  pp.  372  fi.)  and  Nowack  hold  it 
untenable. 

_S  As  of  course  was  universally  supposed  according  to 
either  of  the  other  two  interpretations  given  above. 


of  this  series  of  songs.  Stade  *  and  Kuenen  have 
gone  further  and  denied  the  genuineness  of  v^-. 
9-20.  But  this  is  with  little  reason.  As  Budde 
says,  a  series  of  Woes  was  to  be  expected  here 
by  a  prophet  who  follows  so  much  the  exam- 
ple of  Isaiah. f  In  spite  of  Kuenen's  objection, 
vv.  9-1 1  would  not  be  strange  of  the  Chaldean, 
but  they  suit  the  Assyrian  better.  Vv.  12-14  are 
doubtful:  12  recalls  Micah  iii.  10;  13  is  a  repeti- 
tion of  Jer.  Ii.  58:  14  is  a  variant  of  Isa.  xi.  9. 
Very  likely  Jer.  Ii.  58,  a  late  passage,  is  bor- 
rowed from  this  passage;  yet  the  addition  used 
here,  "  Are  not  these  things  t  from  the  Lord  of 
Hosts?  "  looks  as  it  it  noted  a  citation.  Vv.  15- 
17  are  very  suitable  to  the  Assyrian;  there  is 
no  reason  to  take  them  from  Habakkuk.>i  The 
final  song,  vv.  18  and  19,  has  its  Woe  at  the  be- 
ginning of  its  second  verse,  and  closely  resem- 
bles the  language  of  later  prophets.!  Moreover 
the  refrain  forms  a  suitable  close  at  the  end  of 
ver.  17.  Ver.  20  is  a  quotation  from  Zephaniah,1[ 
perhaps  another  sign  of  the  composite  character 
of  the  end  of  this  chapter.  Some  take  it  to  have 
been  inserted  as  an  introduction  to  the  the- 
ophany  in  chap.  iii. 

Smend  has  drawn  up  a  defence  **  of  the  whole 
passage,  ii.  9-20,  which  he  deems  not  only  to 
stand  in  a  natural  relation  to  vv.  4-8,  but  to  be 
indispensable  to  them.  That  the  passage  quotes 
from  other  prophets,  he  holds  to  be  no  proof 
against  its  authenticity.  If  we  break  off  with 
ver.  8,  he  thinks  that  we  must  impute  to  Ha- 
bakkuk  the  opinion  that  the  wrongs  of  the  world 
are  chiefly  avenged  by  human  means — a  conclu- 
sion which  is  riot  to  be  expected  after  chap,  i.- 
ii.  I  ff. 

3.  Chap.  III. 

The  third  chapter,  an  Ode  or  Rhapsody,  is  as- 
cribed to  Habakkuk  by  its  title.     This,  however, 
does  not  prove  its  authenticity:   the  title  is  too 
like  those  assigned  to  the  Psalms  in  the  period 
of  the  Second  Temple. ft    On  the  contrary,  the 
title   itself,    the   occurrence   of   the   musical   sign 
Selah  in  the  contents,  and  the  colophon  suggest 
for  the  chapter  a  liturgical  origin  after  the  Ex-      « 
ile.JJ   That  this  is  more  probable  than  the  alter-     ^ 
native   opinion,   that,   being  a  genuine   work   of      -^ 
Habakkuk,  the  chapter  was  afterwards  arranged 
as  a  Psalm  for  public  worship,  is  confirmed  by 

*  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1884,  p.  154. 

+  Cf.  Isa.  V.  8  fif  (x.  1-4),  etc. 

t  So  LXX. 

§  Cf.  Davidson,  p.  56,  and  Budde,  p.  391,  who  allows  g-ii 
and  15-17. 

\\  £.'£'.,  Isa.  xl.  18  ff.,  xliv.  9  fif.,  xlvi.  5  ff..  etc.  On  this 
ground  it  is  condemned  by  Stade,  Kuenen,  and  Budde. 
Davidson  finds  this  not  a  serious  difficulty,  for,  he  points 
out,  Habakkuk  anticipates  several  later  lines  of  thought. 

^  See  above,  p.  569,  «. 

**  "A.  T.  Religionsgeschichte,"  p.  229,  ft.  2. 

tt  Cf.  the  ascription  by  the  LXX.  of  Psalms  cxlvi.— cl. 
to  the  prophets  Haggai  and  Zechariah. 

tt  Cf.  Kuenen,  who  conceives  it  to  have  been  taken  from 
a  post-exilic  collection  of  Psalms.  See  also  Cheyne, 
"  The  Origin  of  the  Psalter  :  "  exilic  or  more  probably 
post-exilic  "  (i5.  125).  "  The  most  natural  position  for  it  is 
in  the  Persian  period.  It  was  doubtless  appended  to 
Habakkuk,  for  the  same  reason  for  which  Isa.  Ixiii.  7- 
Ixiv.  was  attached  to  the  great  prophecy  of  Restoration, 
viz.,  that  the  earlier  national  troubles  seemed  to  the 
Jewish  Church  to  be  typical  of  its  own  sore  troubles  after 
the  Return.  .  .  .  The  lovely  closing  verses  of  Hab.  iii.  are 
also  in  a  tone  congenial  to  the  later  religion  "  (p.  156). 
Much  less  certain  is  the  assertion  that  the  language  is 
imitative  and  artificial  {ibid.')  ;  while  the  statement  that 
in  ver.  3 — cf.  with  Deut.  xxxiii.  2 — we  have  an  instance  of 
the  efifort  to  avoid  the  personal  name  of  the  Deity  (p.  287) 
is  disproved  by  the  use  of  the  latter  in  ver.  2  and  other 
verses. 


liabakkuk  i.-ii.  4  J 


THE    PROPHET    AS    SCEPTIC. 


591 


the  fact  that  no  other  work  of  the  prophets  has 
been  treated  in  the  same  way.  Nor  do  the  con- 
tents support  the  authorship  by  Habakkuk. 
They  reflect  no  definite  historical  situation  like 
the  preceding  chapters.  The  style  and  temper 
are  different.  While  in  them  the  prophet  speaks 
for  himself,  here  it  is  the  nation  or  congregation 
of  Israel  that  addresses  God.  The  language  is 
not,  as  some  have  maintained,  late;*  but  the 
designation  of  the  people  as  "  Thine  anointed," 
a  term  which  before  the  Exile  was  applied  to 
the  king,  undoubtedly  points  to  a  post-exilic 
date.  The  figures,  the  theophany  itself,  are  not 
necessarily  archaic,  but  are  more  probably 
moulded  on  archaic  models.  There  are  many 
affinities  with  Psalms  of  a  late  date. 
.  At  the  same  time  a  number  of  criticsf  main- 
tain the  genuineness  of  the  chapter,  and  they 
have  some  grounds  for  this.  Habakkuk  was,  as 
we  can  see  from  chaps,  i.  and  ii.,  a  real  poet. 
There  was  no  need  why  a  man  of  his  temper 
should  be  bound  down  to  reflecting  only  his  own 
day.  If  so  practical  a  prophet  as  Hosea,  and 
one  who  has  so  closely  identified  himself  with 
his  times,  was  wont  to  escape  from  them  to  a 
retrospect  of  the  dealings  of  God  with  Israel 
from  of  old,  why  should  not  the  same  be  natural 
for  a  prophet  who  was  much  less  practical  and 
more  literary  and  artistic?  There  are  also  many 
phrases  in  the  Psalm  which  may  be  interpreted 
as  reflecting  the  same  situation  as  chaps,  i.,  ii. 
All   this,   however,   only   proves   possibility. 

The  Psalm  has  been  adapted  in  Psalm  Ixxvii. 
17-20. 

Further  Note  on  Chap.  I.-II.  4. 

Since  this  chapter  was  in  print  Nowack's  "  Die  Kleinen 
Propheten  "  in  the  "  Handkommentar  z.  A.  T."  has  been 
published.  He  recognises  emphatically  that  the  disputed 
passage  about  the  Chaldeans,  chap.  i.  5-11,  is  out  of  place 
where  it  lies  (this  against  Kuenen  and  the  other  authori- 
ties cited  above,  p.  588),  and  admits  that  it  follows  on, 
with  a  natural  connection,  to  chap.  ii.  4,  to  which  Budde 
proposes  to  attach  it.  Nevertheless,  for  other  reasons, 
which  he  does  not  state,  he  regards  Budde's  proposal  as 
untenable  ;  and  reckons  the  disputed  passage  to  be  by 
another  hand  than  Habakkuk's,  and  intruded  into  the 
latter's  argument.  Habakkuk's  argument  he  assigns  to 
after  605  ;  perhaps  590.  The  tyrant  complained  against 
would  therefore  be  the  Chaldean.— Driver  in  the  6th  ed. 
of  his  "  Introduction  "  (1897)  deems  Budde's  argument 
"  too  ingenious,"  and  holds  by  the  older  and  most  numer- 
ously supported  argument '  (above,  pp.  588  ff.;.— On  a 
review  of  the  case  in  the  light  of  these  two  discussions, 
the  present  writer  holds  to  his  opinion  that  Budde's  re- 
arrangement, which  he  has  adopted,  offers  the  fewest 
difificulties. 


Tradition  says  that  Habakkuk  was  a  priest, 
the  son  of  Joshua,  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  but  this 
is  only  an  inference  from  the  late  liturgical  notes 
to  the  Psalm  which  has  been  appended  to  his 
prophecy.*  All  that  we  know  for  certain  is  that 
he  was  a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah,  with  a  sensi- 
tiveness under  wrong  and  impulses  to  question 
God  which  remind  us  of  Jeremiah;  but  with  a 
literary  power  which  is  quite  his  own.  We  may 
emphasise  the  latter,  even  though  we  recognise 
upon  his  writing  the  influence  of  Isaiah's. 

Habakkuk's  originality,  however,  is  deeper 
than  style.  He  is  the  earliest  who  is  known  to 
us  of  a  new  school  of  religion  in  Israel.  He  is 
called  "  prophet,"  but  at  first  he  does  not  adopt 
the  attitude  which  is  characteristic  of  the  proph- 
ets. His  face  is  set  in  an  opposite  direction  to 
theirs.  They  address  the  nation  Israel,  on  be- 
half of  God:  he  rather  speaks  to  God  on  behalf 
of  Israel.  Their  task  was  Israel's  sin,  the  proc- 
lamation of  God's  doom,  and  the  offer  of  His 
grace  to  their  penitence.  Habakkuk's  task  is 
God  Himself,  the  effort  to  find  out  what  He 
means  by  permitting  tyranny  and  wrong.  They 
attack  the  sins,  he  is  the  first  to  state  the  prob- 
lems, of  life.  To  him  the  prophetic  revelation, 
the  Torah,  is  complete:  it  has  been  codified  in 
Deuteronomy  and  enforced  by  Josiah.  Habak- 
kuk's business  is  not  to  add  to  it,  but  to  ask  why 
it  does  not  work.  Why  does  God  suffer  wrong 
to  triumph,  so  that  the  Torah  is  paralysed,  and 
Mishpat,  the  prophetic  "justice"  or  "judg- 
ment," comes  to  naught?  The  prophets  trav- 
ailed for  Israel's  character — to  get  the  people  to 
love  justice  till  justice  prevailed  among  them: 
Habakkuk  feels  justice  cannot  prevail  in  Israel, 
because  of  the  great  disorder  which  God  per- 
mits to  fill  the  world.  It  is  true  that  he  arrives 
at  a  prophetic  attitude,  and  before  the  end  au- 
thoritatively declares  God's  will;  but  he  begins 
by  searching  for  the  latter,  with  an  appreciation 
of  the  great  obscurity  cast  over  it  by  the  facts 
of  life.  He  complains  to  God,  asks  questions, 
and  expostulates.  This  is  the  beginning  of 
speculation  in  Israel.  It  does  not  go  far:  it  is 
satisfied  with  stating  questions  to  God;  it  does 
not,  directly  at  least,  state  questions  against 
Him.  But  Habakkuk  at  least  feels  that  revela- 
tion is  bafifled  by  experience,  that  the  facts  of 
life  bewilder  a  man  who  believes  in  the  God 
whom  the  prophets  have  declared  to  Israel.  As 
in  Zephaniah  prophecy  begins  to  exhibit  traces 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  PROPHET  AS  SCEPTIC. 

Habakkuk  i.-ii.  4. 

Of  the  prophet  Habakkuk  we  know  nothing 
that  is  personal  save  his  name — to  our  ears  his 
somewhat  odd  name.  It  is  the  intensive  form  of 
a  root  which  means  to  caress  or  embrace.  More 
probably  it  was  given  to  him  as  a  child,  than 
afterwards  assumed  as  a  symbol  of  his  clinging 
to  God.t 

*  DN  ySJ*^,  ver.  13,  cannot  be  taken  as  a  proof  of  late- 
ness;  read  probably  flK  VK^IH. 

tPusey,  Ewald,  Konig,  Sinker  ("The  Psalm  of  Habak- 
kuk," (Cambridge,  1890,)  Kirkpatrick  (Smith's  "  Bible 
Diet.,"  art.  "  Habakkuk  "),  Von  Orelli. 

t  P^i55n  (^^®  Greek  'Afj-fiaKovfi,  LXX.  version  of  the 
•  itle  of  this  book,  and  again  the  inscription  to  "  Bel  and 


the  Dragon,"  suggests  the  pointing  p1p3n  i  Epiph.,  "  De 

Vitis  Proph."— see  next  note— spells  it  'ApPaKov/x),  from 
p3n,  "to  embrace."  Jerome:  "He  is  called  'embrace' 
either  because  of  his  love  to  the  Lord,  or  because  he 
wrestles  with  God."  Luther:  "Habakkuk  means  one 
who  comforts  and  holds  up  his  people  as  one  embraces  a 
weeping  person." 

*  See  above,  pp.  590  fF.  The  title  to  the  Greek  version 
of  "  Bel  and  the  Dragon  "  bears  that  the  latter  was  taken 
from  the  prophecy  of  Hambakoum,  son  of  Jesus,  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi.  Further  details  are  offered  in  the  "  D« 
Vitis  Prophetarum "  of  (Pseud-)  Epiphanius,  "Epiph. 
Opera,"  ed.  Paris,  1622,  Vol.  II.  p.  147,  according  to  which 
Habakkuk  belonged  to  Bf0^oxr]p,  which  is  probably 
BeiJ^axopia?  of  i  Macc.  vi.  32,  the  modern  Beit-Zakaryeh,  a 
little  to  the  north  of  Hebron,  and  placed  by  this  notice,  as 
Nahum's  Elkosh  is  placed,  in  the  tribe  of  Simeon.  His 
grave  was  shown  in  the  neighbouring  Keilah.  The  notice 
further  alleges  that  when  Nebuchadrezzar  came  up  to 
Jerusalem  Habakkuk  fled  to  Ostracine,  where  he  travelled 
in  the  country  of  the  Ishmaelites ;  but  he  returned  after 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  died  in  538,  two  vears  before 
the  return  of  the  exiles.  "  Bel  and  the  Dragon  "tells  an 
extraordinary  story  of  his  miraculous  carriage  of  food 
to  Daniel  in  the  lions'  den  soon  after  Cyrus  had  taken 
Babylon. 


592 


THET-BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVi:    PROPHE  IS. 


of  apocalypse,   so   in   Habakkuk   we   find   it  de- 
veloping the  first  impulses  of  speculation. 

We  have  seen  that  the  course  of  events  which 
troubles  Habakkuk  and  renders  the  Torah  inef- 
fectual is  somewhat  obscure.  On  one  interpre- 
tation of  these  two  chapters,  that  which  takes  the 
present  order  of  their  verses  as  the  original, 
Habakkuk  asks  why  God  is  silent  in  face  of  the 
injustice  which  fills  the  whole  horizon  (chap.  i. 
1-4),  is  told  to  look  round  among  the  heathen 
and  see  how  God  is  raising  up  the  Chaldeans 
(i.  5-11),  presumably  to  punish  this  injustice  (if 
it  be  Israel's  own)  or  to  overthrow  it  (if  vv.  1-4 
mean  that  it  is  inflicted  on  Israel  by  a  foreign 
power).  But  the  Chaldeans  only  aggravate  the 
prophet's  problem;  they  themselves  are  a 
wicked  and  oppressive  people:  how  can  God 
suffer  them?  (i.  12-17).  Then  come  the  proph- 
et's waiting  for  an  answer  (ii.  i)  and  the  answer 
itself  (ii.  2  fif.).  Another  interpretation  takes  the 
passage  about  the  Chaldeans  (i.  S-ii)  to  be  out 
of  place  where  it  now  lies,  removes  it  to  after 
chap.  ii.  4  as  a  part  of  God's  answer  to  the 
prophet's  problem,  and  leaves  the  remainder  of 
chap.  i.  as  the  description  of  the  Assyrian  op- 
pression of  Israel,  baffling  the  Torah  and  perplex- 
ing the  prophet's  faith  in  a  Holy  and  Just  God.* 
Of  these  two  views  the  former  is,  we  have  seen, 
somewhat  artificial,  and  though  the  latter  is  by 
no  means  proved,  the  arguments  for  it  are  suffi- 
cient to  justify  us  in  re-arranging  the  verses 
chap,  i.-ii.  4  in  accordance  with  its  proposals. 

"The  Oracle  which  Habakkuk  the  Prophet 
Received  by  Vision. t 
How  long,  O  Jehovah,  have  I  called  and  Thou  hearest 

not  ? 
I  cry  to  Thee,  Wrong  !  and  Thou  sendest  no  help. 
Why  make  me  look  upon  sorrow, 
And  fill  mine  eyes  with  trouble  ? 
Violence  and  wrong  are  before  me, 
Strife  comes  and  quarrel  arises.^ 
So  the  Law  is  benumbed,  and  judgment  never  gets 

forth  :  § 
For  the  wicked  beleaguers  the  righteous, 
So  judgment  comes  forth  perverted. 

Art   not   Thou  of   old,  Jehovah,  my    God,  my  Holy 

One  ?  .  .  .  t 
Purer  of  eyes  than  to  behold  evil, 
And  that  canst  not  gaze  upon  trouble ! 
Why  gazest  Thou  upon  traitors,** 
Art  dumb  when  the  wicked  swallows  him  that  is  more 

righteous  than  he  ?  t+ 
Thou  hast  let  men  be  made  iX  like  fish  of  the  sea, 
Like  worms  that  have  no  ruler  !  §§ 
He  lifts  the  whole  of  it  with  his  angle  ; 
Draws  it  in  with  his  net,  sweeps  it  in  his  drag-net  : 
So  rejoices  and  exults. 
So  he  sacrifices  to  his  net,  and  offers  incense  to  his 

drag-net ;  .  .  •    i-     j    •  ,. 

For  by  them  is  his  portion  fat,  and  his  food  rich. 
Shall  he  for  ever  draw  his  sword,l!ll 
And  ceaselessly,  ruthlessly  massacre  nations  ?11' 


*  See  above,  pp.  589  ff. 
+  Heb.  "saw^' 


i  Text  uncertain.  Perhaps  we  should  read,  "  Why  make 
me  look  upon  sorrow  and  trouble?  why  fill  mine  eyes 
with  violence  and  wrong?  Strife  is  come  before  me,  and 
quarrel  arises."' 

§  "  Never  gets  away,"  to  use  a  colloquial  expression. 

11  Here  vv.  5-1 1  come  in  the  original. 

I  Ver.  Z2b  :  "  We  shall  not  die  "  (many  Jewish  authorities 
read  "  Thou  shalt  not  die  ").  "  O  Jehovah,  for  judgment 
hast  Thou  set  him,  and,  O  my  Rock,  for  punishment  hast 
Thou  appointed  him." 

**  Wellhausen  ;  "  on  the  robbery  of  robbers." 

ttLXX.  "devoureth  the  righteous." 

ti  Literally  "Thou  hast  made  men." 

§§  Wellhausen  :  cf.  Jer.  xviii.  i,  xix.  i. 

niSoGiesebrecht  (see  above,  p.  588,  w.),  reading  121 H 
p^-]'  n^iyn  for  imn  pn*'  p-hVi'^^  "  shall  he  therefore 
empty  his  net  ?"  . 

II  Wellhausen,  reading  Jin''  for  JIH?  I  "  should  he 
therefore  be  emptying  his  net  continually,  and  slaughter- 
ing the  nations  without  pity  ? " 


'  Upon  my  watch-tower  I  will  stand. 
And  take  my  pos-t  on  the  rampart.* 
I  will  watch  to  ste  what  He  will  say  to  me. 
And  what  answer  It  get  back  to  my  plea. 

'  And  Jehovah  ans-wered  me  and  said  : 
Write  the  vision,  and  make  it  plain  upon  tablets, 
That  he  may  run  who  reads  it. 

'  Fort  the  vision  is  for  a  time  yet  to  be  fixed. 
Yet  it  hurries  §  to  the  end,  and  shall  not  fail : 
Though  it  linger,  wait  thou  for  it ; 
Coming  it  shall  c(  me,  and  shall  not  be  behind! 
Lo  !  swollen, 1  not  level  is  his  **  soul  within  him  ; 
But  the  righteous  shall  live  by  his  faithfulness.tt 


Look  tt  round  an  ong  the  heathen,  and  look  well. 

Shudder  and  be  s-hocked  ;§§ 

For  I  am  {111  about  to  do  a  work  in  your  days. 

Ye  shall  not  believe  it  when  told. 

For,  lo,  I  am  about  to  raise  up  the  Kasdim,1^ 

A  people  the  most  bitter  and  the  most  hasty. 

That  traverse  the  breadths  of  the  earth. 

To  possess  dwelling-places  not  their  own. 

Awful  and  terrible  are  they  ; 

From  themselves***  start  their  purpose  and  rising^. 

"  Fleeter  than  leopards  their  steeds, 
Swifter  than  nigl.t-wolves. 
Their  horsemen  li  ap +tt  from  afar  ; 
They  swoop  like  the  eagle  a-haste  to  devoiir. 
All  for  wrong  do  they  tft  come  : 
The  set  of  their  f:  ces  is  forward, §§8 
And  they  sweep  up  captives  like  sand. 
They— at  kings  do  they  scoff. 
And  princes  are  t^port  to  them. 

*"nXD.  But  Wellhausen  takes  it  as  from"|^f3  and  = 
"  ward  "  or  "  watch-tower."    So  Nowack. 

t  So  Heb.  and  LXX.;  but  Syr.  "he":  so  Wellhausen, 
"what  answer  He  returns  to  my  plea." 

t  Bredenkamp  ("Stud.  u.  Krit.,"  i88g,  pp.  161  ff.)  sug- 
gests that  the  writing  on  the  tablets  begins  here  and 
goes  on  to  ver  ca  Budde  ("  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  i88g,  pp.  155  f.) 
takes  the  ^3  which  opens  it  as  simply  equivalent  to  the 
Greek  oti,  introducing,  like  our  marks  of  quotation,  th« 
writing  itself. 

''■?,.:  •    c/.   Psalm  xxvii.  12.    Bredenkamp  emends  to 

niB^i. 

0  "  Not  be  late,"  or  past  its  fixed  time. 

1  So  literally  the  Heb.   •"'^f?''  '•  ^-"arrogant,  false": 

c/.  the  colloquial  expression  "swollen-head  "  =  conceit, 
as   opposed    to   level-headed.    Bredenkamp.    "  Stud.    u. 

Krit.,"    1889,    121,    reads  ^^J?^."]    for    '^^^V  '"'?'!'•     Well- 

hausen  suggests  'vl''J  ...  •  "  Lo,  the  sinner,"  in  con- 
trast to  p^n^f  of  next  clause.    Nowack  prefers  this. 

**  LXX.  wrongly  "my." 

++  LXX.  jricTTts  "faith,*^"  and  so  in  N.  T. 

tt  Chap.  i.  s-ii- 

§§So   to    bring   out    the    assonance,    reading    ii'Dni 

Ill  So  LXX. 

11  Or  Chaldeans  ;  on  the  name  and  people  see  above,  p. 

S6s. 

♦  "♦Heb.  singular. 

ttt  Omit  VKHBI  (evidently  a  dittography)  and  the  lame 
"INT  which  is  omitted  by  LXX.  and  was  probably  in- 
serted to  afford  a  verb  for  the  second  VKHD, 

tit  Heb.  sing.,  and  so  in  all  the  clauses  here  except  the 
next. 

§§§  A  problematical  rendering.  nOJD  is  found  only  here, 
and  probably  means  "  direction."  Hitzig  translates  "  de- 
sire, effort,  striving."  niOHp.  "towards  the  front"  or 
"forward";  but  elsewhere  it  means  only  "eastward": 

D"i"7p.  "the  east  wind."  Cf.  Judg.  v.  21,  pE»>''p  ?n3 
D^Onp  ?ni,  "a  river  of  spates"  or  "rushes  is  the  river 
Kishon "  ("Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  395).  Perhaps  we  should 
change  D^rT'JQ  to  a  singular  suffix  as  in  the  clauses  be- 
fore and  after  and  this  would  leave  13  to  form  with 
nonp  a  participle  from  D^TpH  (.cf.  Amos  ix.  io.> 


Habakkuk  i.-ii.  4.] 


THE    PROPHET    AS    SCEPTIC. 


593 


They— they  laugh  at  each  fortress. 
Heap  dust  up  and  take  it  ! 
Then  the  wind  shifts  *  and  they  pass  ! 
But  doomed  are   those  whose  own    strength  is  their 
god!"t 

The  difficulty  of  deciding  between  the  various 
arrangements  of  the  two  chapters  of  Habakkuk 
does  not,  fortunately,  prevent  us.  from  appreci- 
ating his  argument.  What  he  feels  throughout 
(this  is  obvious,  however  you  arrange  his  verses) 
is  the  tyranny  of  a  great  heathen  power,]:  be  it 
Assyrian,  Egyptian,  or  Chaldean.  The  prophet's 
horizon  is  filled  with  wrong:  ^  Israel  thrown  into 
disorder,  revelation  paralysed,  justice  perverted.  || 
But,  like  Nahum,  Habakkuk  feels  not  for  Israel 
alone.  The  tyrant  has  outraged  humanity."  He 
"  sweeps  peoples  into  his  net,"  and  as  soon  as  he 
empties  this,  he  fills  it  again  "  ceaselessly,"  as  if 
there  were  no  just  God  above.  He  exults  in 
his  vast  cruelty,  and  has  success  so  unbroken 
that  he  worships  the  very  means  of  it.  In  itself 
such  impiety  is  gross  enough,  but  to  a  heart 
that  believes  in  God  it  is  a  problem  of  exquisite 
pain.  Habakkuk's  is  the  burden  of  the  finest 
faith.  He  illustrates  the  great  commonplace  of 
religious  doubt,  that  problems  arise  and  become 
rigorous  in  proportion  to  the  purity  and  tender- 
ness of  man's  conception  of  God.  It  is  not  the 
coarsest  but  the  finest  temperaments  which  are 
exposed  to  scepticism.  Every  advance  in  assur- 
ance of  God  or  in  appreciation  of  His  character 
develops  new  perplexities  in  face  of  the  facts  of 
experience,  and  faith  becomes  her  own  most  cruel 
troubler.  Habakkuk's  questions  are  not  due  to 
any  cooling  of  the  religious  temper  in  Israel, 
but  are  begotten  of  the  very  heat  and  ardour  of 
prophecy  in  its  encounter  with  experience.  His 
tremulousness,  for  instance,  is  impossible  with- 
out the  high  knowledge  of  God's  purity  and  faith- 
fulness, which  older  prophets  had  achieved  in 
Israel: — 

"  Art  not  Thou  of  old.  O  Lord,  my  God,  my  Holy  One, 
Purer  of  eyes  than  to  behold  evil, 
And  incapable  of  looking  upon  wrong?  " 

His  despair  is  that  which  comes  only  from  eager 
and  persevering  habits  of  prayer: — 

"  How  long,  O  Lord,  have  I    called  and    Thou  hearest 
not! 
I  cry  to  Thee  of  wrong  and  Thou  givest  no  help  !  " 

His  questions,  too,  are  bold  with  that  sense  of 
God's  absolute  power,  which  flashed  so  bright  in 
Israel  as  to  blind  men's  eyes  to  all  secondary 
and  intermediate  causes.     "  Thou,"  he  says, — 

"  Thou  hast  made  men  like  fishes  of  the  sea. 
Like  worms  that  have  no  ruler," 

boldly  charging  the  Almighty,  in  almost  the  tem- 
per of  Job  himself,  with  being  the  cause  of  the 
cruelty  inflicted  by  the  unchecked  tyrant  upon 
the  nations;  "  for  shall  evil  happen,  and  Jehovah' 
not  have  done  it?  "  **    Thus  all  through  we  per- 

*Or  "their  spirit  changes,"  or  "they  change  like  the 
•wind"    (Wellhausen    suggests  nnS).     Gratz    reads  fis 


and 


^'ST-'  " 


\ 


he  renews  his  strength." 

+  Von  Orelli  For  DK'N  Wellhausen  proposes  ^P^]' 
"  and  sets." 

X  "  The  wicked  "  of  chap.  i.  4  must,  as  we  have  seen,  be 
the  same  as  "the  wicked"  of  chap.  i.  13— a  heathen 
oppressor  of  "the  righteous,"  z.  e.,  the  people  of  God. 

§i-3- 

II  i.  4- 

^  i.  13-17- 

♦♦Amosiii.  6.     See  p.  464. 

38— Vol.  IV. 


ceive  that  Habakkuk's  trouble  springs  from  the 
central  founts  of  prophecy.  This  scepticism — 
if  we  may  venture  to  give  the  name  to  the  first 
motions  in  Israel's  mind  of  that  temper  which 
undoubtedly  became  scepticism — this  scepticism 
was  the  inevitable  heritage  of  prophecy:  the 
stress  and  pain  to  which  prophecy  was  forced 
by  its  own  strong  convictions  in  face  of  the  facts 
of  experience.  Habakkuk,  "  the  prophet,"  as  he 
is  called,  stood  in  the  direct  line  of  his  order, 
but  just  because  of  that  he  was  the  father  also  of 
Israel's   religious   doubt. 

But  a  discontent  springing  from  sources  so 
pure  was  surely  the  preparation  of  its  own  heal- 
ing. In  a  verse  of  exquisite  beauty  the  prophet 
describes  the  temper  in  which  he  trusted  for  an 
answer  to  all   his   doubts: — 

"  On  my  watch-tower  will  I  stand. 
And  take  up  my  post  on  the  rampart ; 
I  will  watch  to  see  what  He  says  to  me, 
And  what  answer  I  get  back  to  my  plea." 

This  verse  is  not  to  be  passed  over,  as  if  its  meta- 
phors were  merely  for  literary  effect.  They  ex- 
press rather  the  moral  temper  in  which  the 
prophet  carries  his  doubt,  or,  to  use  New  Testa- 
ment language,  "  the  good  conscience,  which 
some  having  put  away,  concerning  faith  have 
made  shipwreck."  Nor  is  this  temper  patience 
only  and  a  certain  elevation  of  mind,  nor  only  a 
fixed  attention  and  sincere  willingness  to  be  an- 
swered. Through  the  chosen  words  there 
breathes  a  noble  sense  of  responsibility.  The 
prophet  feels  he  has  a  post  to  hold,  a  rampart 
to  guard.  He  knows  the  heritage  of  truth, 
won  by  the  great  minds  of  the  past;  and  in  a 
\.orld  seething  with  disorder,  he  will  take  his 
stand  upon  that  and  see  what  more  his  God  will 
send  him.  At  the  very  least,  he  will  not  indo- 
lently drift,  but  feel  that  he  has  a  standpoint, 
however  narrow,  and  bravely  hold  it.  Such  has 
ever  been  the  attitude  of  the  greatest  sceptics 
— not  only,  let  us  repeat,  earnestness  and  sincer- 
ity, but  the  recognition  of  duty  towards  the 
truth:  the  conviction  that  even  the  most  tossed 
and  troubled  minds  have  somewhere  a  iroO  arCt 
appointed  of  God,  and  upon  it  interests  human 
and  Divine  to  defend.  Without  such  a  con- 
science, scepticism,  however  intellectually  gifted, 
will  avail  nothing.  Men  who  drift  never  discover, 
never  grasp  aught.  They  are  only  dazzled  by 
shifting  gleams  of  the  truth,  only  fretted  and 
broken  by  experience. 

Taking  then  his  stand  within  the  patient  tem- 
per, but  especially  upon  the  conscience  of  his 
great  order,  the  prophet  waits  for  his  answer  and 
the  healing  of  his  trouble.  The  answer  comes 
to  him  in  the  promise  of  "  a  Vision,"  which, 
though  it  seem  to  linger,  will  not  be  later  than 
the  time  fixed  by  God.  "  A  Vision  "  is  some- 
thing realised,  experienced — something  that  will 
be  as  actual  and  present  to  the  waiting  prophet 
as  the  cruelty  which  now  fills  his  sight.  Obvi- 
ously some  series  of  historical  events  is  meant, 
by  which,  in  the  course  of  time,  the  unjust  op- 
pressor of  the  nations  shall  be  overthrown  and 
the  righteous  vindicated.  Upon  the  re-arrange- 
ment of  the  text  proposed  by  Budde,*  this  se- 
ries of  events  is  the  rise  of  the  Chaldeans,  and 
it  is  an  argument  in  favour  of  his  proposal  that 
the  promise  of  "  a  Vision "  requires  some 
such  historical  picture  to  follow  it  as  we 
find     in     the     description     of     the     Chaldeans 

♦See  above,  pp.  589  ff. 


594 


THE^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


— chap.  i.  S-ii.  This,  too,  is  explicitly  in- 
troduced by  terms  of  vision:  "  See  among 
the  nations  and  look  round  ....  Yea, 
behold  I  am  about  to  raise  up  the  Kasdim."  But 
before  this  vision  is  given,*  and  for  the  uncer- 
tain interval  of  waiting  ere  the  facts  come  to 
pass,  the  Lord  enforces  upon  His  watching  ser- 
vant the  great  moral  principle  that  arrogance 
and  tyranny  cannot,  from  the  nature  of  them, 
last,  and  that  if  the  righteous  be  only  patient 
he   will    survive   them: — 

"  Lo,  swollen,  not  level,  is  his  soul  within  him  ; 
But  the  righteous  shall  live  by  his  faithfulness." 

We  have  already  seen  f  that  the  text  of  the 
first  line  of  this  couplet  is  uncertain.  Yet  the 
meaning  is  obvious,  partly  in  the  words  them- 
selves, and  partly  by  their  implied  contrast  with 
the  second  line.  The  soul  of  the  wicked  is  a 
radically  morbid  thing:  inflated,  swollen  (unless 
we  should  read  perverted,  which  more  plainly 
means  the  same  thing  %),  not  level,  not  natural 
and  normal.  In  the  nature  of  things  it  cannot 
endure.  "  But  the  righteous  shall  live  by  his 
faithfulness."  This  word,  wrongly  translated 
faith  by  the  Greek  and  other  versions,  is  concen- 
trated by  Paul  in  his  repeated  quotation  from  the 
Greek§  upon  that  single  act  of  faith  by  which 
the  sinner  secures  forgiveness  and  justification. 
With  Habakkuk  it  is  a  wider  term.  'Emunah,  \\ 
from  a  verb  meaning  originally  to  be  firm,  is 
used  in  the  Old  Testament  in  the  physical  sense 
of  steadfastness.  So  it  is  applied  to  the  arms  of 
Moses  held  up  by  Aaron  and  Hur  over  the  battle 
with  Amalek:  "they  were  steadiness  till  the  go- 
ing down  of  the  sun. "II  It  is  also  used  of  the 
faithful  discharge  of  public  office,**  and  of  fidel- 
ity as  between  man  and  wife. ft  It  is  also  faithful 
testimony, tt  equity  in  judgment,§§  truth  in 
speech,||||  and  sincerity  or  honest  dealing.  1[^  Of 
course  it  has  faith  in  God  as  its  secret — the  verb 
from  which  it  is  derived  is  the  regular  Hebrew 
term  to  believe — but  it  is  rather  the  temper  which 
faith  produces  of  endurance,  steadfastness,  integ- 
rity. Let  the  righteous,  however  baffled  his  faith 
be  by  experience,  hold  on  in  loyalty  to  God  and 
duty,  and  he  shall  live.  Though  St.  Paul,  as 
we  have  said,  used  the  Greek  rendering  of 
"  faith  "  for  the  enforcement  of  trust  in  God's 
mercy  through  Jesus  Christ  as  the  secret  of  for- 
giveness and  life,  it  is  rather  to  Habakkuk's 
wider  intention  of  patience  and  fidelity  that  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  returns 
in  his  fuller  quotation  of  the  verse:  "  For  yet 
a  little  while  and  He  that  shall  come  will  come 
and  will  not  tarry;  now  the  just  shall  live  by  faith, 
but  if  he  draw  back  My  soul  shall  have  no  pleas- 
ure  in   him."*** 

Such,  then,  is  the  tenor  of  the  passage.  In  face 
of  experience  that  baffles  faith,  the  duty  of  Israel 
is  patience  in  loyalty  to  God.  In  this  the  nascent 
scepticism  of  Israel  received  its  first  great  com- 
mandment, and  this  it  never  forsook.  Intellect- 
ual questions  arose,  of  which  Habakkuk's  were 

*  Its  proper  place  in  Budde's  re-arrangement  is  after 
chap.  ii.  4. 
+  Above,  p.  592,  n. 

t  rhviV  instead  of  ni)£3y. 

T  :  •.  T  :  \ 

SRom.  i.  17  ;  Gal.  iii.  n. 

I^Exod.  xvii.  12. 
*♦  2  Chron.  xix.  q. 
t+  Hosea  ii.  22  (Heb.). 
XX  Prov.  xiv.  5. 


S§  Isa.  xi.  s. 

ill  Prov.  xii.  17:  c/.Jer.  ix.  2. 
i^  Prov.  xii.  22,  xxviii.  30. 
***  Heb.  X.  37,  38. 


but  the  faintest  foreboding — questions  concern- 
ing not  only  the  mission  and  destiny  of  the  na- 
tion, but  the  very  foundation  of  justice  and  the 
character  of  God  Himself.  Yet  did  no  sceptic, 
however  bold  and  however  provoked,  forsake  his 
faithfulness.  Even  Job,  when  most  audaciously 
arraigning  the  God  of  his  experience,  turned 
from  Him  to  God  as  in  his  heart  of  hearts  he 
believed  He  must  be,  experience  notwithstand- 
ing. Even  the  Preacher,  amid  the  aimless  fiux 
and  drift  which  he  finds  in  the  universe,  holds 
to  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  in  a  com- 
mand, which  better  than  any  other  defines  the 
contents  of  the  faithfulness  enforced  by  Habak- 
kuk: "  Fear  God  and  keep  His  commandments, 
for  this  is  the  whole  of  man."  It  has  been  the 
same  with  the  great  mass  of  the  race.  Repeat- 
edly disappointed  of  their  hopes,  and  crushed  for 
ages  beneath  an  intolerable  tyranny,  have  they 
not  exhibited  the  same  heroic  temper  with  which 
their  first  great  questioner  was  endowed?  En- 
durance— this  above  all  others  has  been  the  qual- 
ity of  Israel:  "though  He  slay  me,  yet  will  I 
trust  Him."  And,  therefore,  as  Paul's  adapta- 
tion, "  The  just  shall  live  by  faith,"  has  become 
the  motto  of  evangelical  Christianity,  so  we  may 
say  that  Habakkuk's  original  of  it  has  been  the 
motto  and  the  fame  of  Judaism:  "  The  righteous 
shall  live  by  His  faithfulness." 


CHAPTER  XI.  ' 

TYRANNY  IS  SUICIDE. 

Habakkuk  ii.  5-20. 

In  the  style  of  his  master  Isaiah,  Habakkuk 
follows  up  his  "  Vision  "  with  a  series  of  lyrics 
on  the  same  subject:  chap.  ii.  5-20.  They  are 
taunt-songs,  the  most  of  them  beginning  with 
"  Woe  unto,"  addressed  to  the  heathen  oppres- 
sor. Perhaps  they  were  all  at  first  of  equal 
length,  and  it  has  been  suggested  that  the  strik- 
ing refrain  in  which  two   of  them  close: — 

"  For  men's  blood,  and  earth's  waste, 
Cities  and  their  inhabitants — " 

was  once  attached  to  each  of  the  others  as  well. 
But  the  text  has  been  too  much  altered,  besides 
suffering  several  interpolations,*  to  permit  of  its 
restoration,  and  we  can  only  reproduce  these 
taunts  as  they  now  run  in  the  Hebrew  text. 
There  are  several  quotations  (not  necessarily 
an  argument  against  Habakkuk's  authorship); 
but,  as  a  whole,  the  expression  is  original,  and 
there  are  some  lines  of  especial  force  and  fresh- 
ness. Verses  5-6a  are  properly  an  introduction, 
the  first  Woe  commencing  with  6b. 

The  belief  which  inspires  these  songs  is  very 
simple.  Tyranny  is  intolerable.  In  the  nature 
of  things  it  cannot  endure,  but  works  out  its  own 
penalties.  By  oppressing  so  many  nations,  the 
tyrant  is  preparing  the  instruments  of  his  own 
destruction.  As  he  treats  them,  so  in  time  shall 
they  treat  him.  He  is  like  a  debtor  who  increases 
the  number  of  his  creditors.  Some  day  they 
shall  rise  up  and  exact  from  him  the  last  penny. 
So  that  in  cutting  off  others  he  is  "  but  forfeiting 
his  own  life."  The  very  violence  done  to  na- 
ture, the  deforesting  of  Lebanon  for  instance, 
and  the  vast  hunting  of  wild  beasts,  shall  recoil 
on  him.  This  line  of  thought  is  exceedingly  in- 
*  See  above,  p.  590. 


Habakkuk  iii.] 


"IN    THE    MIDST   OF   THE   YEARS." 


595 


teresting.  We  have  already  seen  in  prophecy, 
and  especially  in  Isaiah,  the  beginnings  of  He- 
brew Wisdom — the  attempt  to  uncover  the  moral 
processes  of  life  and  express  a  philosophy  of  his- 
tory. But  hardly  anywhere  have  we  found  so 
complete  an  absence  of  all  reference  to  the  di- 
rect interference  of  God  Himself  in  the  punish- 
ment of  the  tyrant;  for  "  the  cup  of  Jehovah's 
right  hand  "  in  ver.  i6  is  simply  the  survival  of 
an  ancient  metaphor.  These  "  proverbs "  or 
"  taunt-songs,"  in  conformity  with  the  proverbs 
of  the  later  Wisdom,  dwell  only  upon  the  in- 
herent tendency  to  decay  of  all  injustice.  Tyr- 
anny, they  assert,  and  history  ever  since  has  af- 
firmed tlieir  truthfulness — tyranny  is  suicide. 

The  last  of  the  taunt-songs,  which  treats  of  the 
different  subject  of  idolatry,  is  probably,  as  we 
have  seen,  not  from  Habakkuk's  hand,  but  of  a 
later  date.* 

Introduction  to  the  Taunt-Songs  (ii.  s-6a). 

"  For  .  .  .  +  treacherous, 
An  arrogant  fellow,  and  is  not  .  .  .J 
Who  opens  his  desire  wide  as  Sheol ; 
He  is  like  death,  unsatisfied  ; 
And  hath  swept  to  himself  all  the  nations, 
And  gathe^-ed  to  him  all  peoples. 
Shall   not  these,  all  of  them,  take  up  a  proverb  upon 

him. 
And  a  taunt-song  against  him  ?  and  say  :— 

First  Taunt-Song  (ii.  6^-8). 

*■  Woe  -.into  him  who  multiplies  what  is  not  his  own,— 
How  long?— 

And  loads  him  with  debts  !  § 

Shall  not  thy  creditors  ji  rise  up, 

And  thy  troublers  awake. 

And  thou  be  for  spoil  ^  to  them  ? 

Because  thou  hast  spoiled  many  nations. 

All  the  rest  of  the  peoples  shall  spoil  thee. 
For  men's  blood,  and  earth's  waste, 
Cities  and  all  their  inhabitants."  ** 

Second  Taunt-Song  (ii.  9-11). 

"  Woe  unto  him  that  gains  evil  gain  for  his  house.+t 
To  set  high  his  nest,  to  save  him   from  the  grasp  of 
calamity  ! 

*  See  above,  p,  590.  Nowack  (1897)  agrees  that  Cor- 
nill's  and  others'  conclusion  that  vv.  9-20  are  not 
Habakkuk's  is  too  sweeping.  He  takes  the  first,  second, 
and  fourth  of  the  taunt-songs  as  authentic,  but  assigns 
the  third  (vv.  12-14;  and  the  fifth  (18-20)  to  another  hand. 
He  deems  the  refrain,  8d  and  lyiJ,  to  be  a  gloss,  and  puts 
19  before  i3.  Driver,  "Introd.,"  6th  ed.,  holds  to  the 
authenticity  of  all  the  verses. 

t  The  text  reads,  "  For  also  wine  is  treacherous,"  under 
which  we  might  be  tempted  to  suspect  some  such  original 
as,  '"As  wine  is  treacherous,  so"  (next  line)  "the  proud 
fellow,"  etc.  Cor,  as  Davidson  suggests,  "  Like  wine  is  the 
treacherous  dealer"),  were  it  not  that  the  word  "wine" 
appears  neither  in  the  Greek  nor  in  the  Syrian  version. 
Wellhausen  suggests  that  T^n,  "wine,"  is  a  corruption 
of  >^n,  with  which  the  verse,  like  vv.  6*,  9,  12,  15,  ig,  may 
have  originally  begun,  but  according  to  6a  the  taunt- 
songs,  opening  with  'IH,  start  first  in  6d.  .Bredenkamp 

proposes  T^S  DDK1. 

tThe  text  is  n"l3^.  a  verb  not  elsewhere  found  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  conjectured  by  our  translators  to 
mean  "  keepeth  at  home,"  because  the  noun  allied  to  it 
means  "homestead"  or  "resting-place."  The  Syriac 
gives  "  is  not  satisfied,"  and  Wellhausen  proposes  to 
read  nW  with  that  sense.  See  Davidson's  note  on  the 
verse. 

§  A.  V.  "thick  clay,"  which  is  reached  by  breaking  up 
the  word  O'tODV.  "pledge"  or  "debt,"  into  3y,  "thick 
cloud."  and  t3"'0i  "clay." 

II  Literally  "thy  biters,"  1^3B>J,  but  "^^i.  "biting."  is 
"  interest"  or  "usury,"  and  the  Hiphil  of  "IJJ'J  is  "to 
exact  interest." 

1LXX.  sing.,  Heb.  pi. 

**  These  words  occur  again  in  ver  17.  Wellhausen 
thinks  they  suit  neither  here  nor  there.  But  they  suit  all 
the  taunt-songs,  and  some  suppose  that  they  formed  the 
refrain  to  each  of  these. 

t+  Dynasty  or  people  ? 


Thou  hast  planned  shame  for  thy  honse  ; 
Thou  hast  cut  off*  many  people, 
While  forfeiting  thine  own  life.t 
For  the  stone  shall  cry  out  from  the  wall, 
And  the  lath  J  from  the  timber  answer  it. 

Third  Taunt-Song  (ii.  12-14). 

'  Woe  unto  him  that  builds  a  city  in  blood,| 
And  stablishes  a  town  in  iniquity  !  || 
Lo,  is  it  not  from  Jehovah  of  hosts. 
That  the  nations  shall  toil  for  smoke,  1 
And  the  peoples  wear  themselves  out  for  nought  ? 
But  earth   shall  be   filled   with  the  knowledge  of   the 

glory  of  Jehovah,  ** 
Like  the  waters  that  cover  the  sea. 

Fourth  Taunt-Song  (ii.  15-17). 

'  Woe  unto  him  that  gives  his  neighbour  to  drink. 

From  the  cup  of  his  wrath  +t  till  he  be  drunken. 

That  he  may  gloat  on  his  ifj  nakedness ! 

Thou  art  sated  with  shame— not  with  glory  ; 

Drink  also  thou,  and  stagger. §§ 

Comes  round  to  thee  the  cup  of  Jehovah's  right  hand. 

And  foul  shame  ||||  on  thy  glory. 

For  the  violence  to  Lebanon  shall  cover  thee, 

The  destruction  of  the  beasts  shall  affray  thee.  ^5 
For  men's  blood,  and  earth's  waste. 
Cities  and  all  their  inhabitants.*** 

Fifth  Taunt-Song  (ii.  18-20). 

'  What  boots  an  image,  when  its  artist  has  graven  it, 
A  cast-image    and    lie-oracle,   that    its    moulder    has 

trusted  upon  it. 
Making  dumb  idols? 

Woe  to  him  that  saith  to  a  block,  Awake  ! 
To  a  dumb  stone,  Arise  ! 
Can  it  teach  ? 

Lo,  it  .  .  .ttt  with  gold  and  silver  ; 
There  is  no  breath  at  all  in  the  heart  of  it. 
But  Jehovah  is  in  His  Holy  Temple  : 
Silence  before  Him,  all  the  earth  !  " 


CHAPTER  XII. 

"IN  THE  MIDST  OF  THE  YEARS." 

Habakkuk  iii. 

We  have  seen  the  impossibility  of  deciding 
the  age  of  the  ode  which  is  attributed  to  Habak- 
kuk in  the  third  chapter  of  his  book.Jtl  But  this 
is  only  one  of  the  many  problems  raised  by  that 

*  So  LXX. ;  Heb.  "  cutting  ofif." 

tThe  grammatical  construction  is  obscure,  if  the  text 
be  correct.    There  is  no  mistaking  the  meaning. 

t  D'D3.  not  elsewhere  found  in  the  O.  T.,  is  in  Rab- 
binic Hebrew  both  "cross-beam  "  and  "  lath." 

§  Micah  iii.  10. 

Ii  Jer.  xxii.  13. 

^  Literally  "fire." 

**Jer.  Ii.  58:  which  original? 

tt  After  Wellhausen's  suggestion  to  read  inDfl  6]DD 
instead  of  the  text  nnDH  HSDO.  "adding,"  or  "mixing, 
thy  wrath." 

tt  So  LXX.  Q. ;  Heb.  "  their." 

§§Read^y^,>^  (c/.  Nahum  ii.  4;  Zech.  xii.  2).    The  text 

is  7^yn.  "°t  found  elsewhere,  which  has  been  conject- 
ured to  mean  "uncover  the  foreskin."  And  there  is 
some  ground  for  this,  as  parallel  to  "his  nakedness"  in 
the  previous  clause.  Wellhausen  also  removes  the  first 
clause  to  the  end  of  the  verse:  "Drink  also  thou  and 
re^l ;  there  comes  to  thee  the  cup  in  Jehovah's  right 
hand,  and  thou  wilt  glut  thyself  with  shame  instead  of 
honour." 

SI!  So  R.  V.  for  )pp*5,  which  A.  V.  has  taken  as  two 
words— ^p,  for  which  c/.  Jer.  xxv.  27,  where,  however,  the 
text  is  probably  corrupt,  and  M^p,  With  this  confusion 
c/.  above,  ver.  6,  t3^t33y. 

^1  Read  with  LXX.  -)nn'  for  JTl^n^  of  the  text. 

***  .See  above,  ver.  8. 

T 

ttt  Above,  pp.  590  ff. 


596 


THE^-^BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE   PROPHETS. 


brilliant  poem.  Much  of  its  text  is  corrupt,  and 
the  meaning  of  many  single  words  is  uncertain. 
As  in  most  Hebrew  poems  of  description,  the 
tenses  of  the  verbs  puzzle  us;  we  cannot  always 
determine  whether  the  poet  is  singing  of  that 
which  is  past  or  present  or  future,  and  this  dif- 
ficulty is  increased  by  his  subject,  a  revelation 
of  God  in  nature  for  the  deliverance  of  Israel. 
Is  this  the  deliverance  from  Egypt,  with  the 
terrible  tempests  which  accompanied  it?  Or 
have  the  features  of  the  Exodus  been  borrowed 
to  describe  some  other  deliverance,  or  to  sum 
up  the  .;onstant  manifestation  of  Jehovah  for 
His  people's  help? 

The  introduction,  in  ver.  2,  is  clear.  The 
singer  has  heard  what  is  to  be  heard  of  Jehovah, 
and  His  great  deeds  in  the  past.  He  prays  for 
a  revival  of  these  "  in  the  midst  of  the  years." 
The  times  are  full  of  trouble  and  turmoil. 
Would  that  God,  in  the  present  confusion  of  baf- 
fled hopes  and  broken  issues,  made  Himself  man- 
ifest by  power  and  brilliance,  as  of  old!  "  In 
turmoil  remember  mercy!"  To  render  "tur- 
moil "  by  "  wrath,"  as  if  it  were  God's  anger 
against  which  the  singer's  heart  appealed,  is  not 
true  to  the  original  word  itself,*  affords  no  par- 
allel to  "  the  midst  of  the  years,"  and  misses  the 
situation.  Israel  cries  from  a  state  of  life  in 
which  the  obscure  years  are  huddled  together 
and  full  of  turmoil.  We  need  not  wish  to  fix 
the  date  more  precisely  than  the  writer  himself 
does,  but  may  leave  it  with  him  "  in  the  midst  of 
the  vears." 

There  follows  the  description  of  the  Great 
Theophany,  of  which,  in  his  own  poor  times, 
the  singer  has  heard.  It  is  probable  that  he  has 
in  his  memory  the  events  of  the  Exodus  and 
Sinai.  On  this  point  his  few  geographical  al- 
lusions agree  with  his  descriptions  of  nature. 
He  draws  all  the  latter  from  the  desert,  or  Ara- 
bian, side  of  Israel's  history.  He  introduces 
none  of  the  sea-monsters,  or  imputations  of  ar- 
rogance and  rebellion  to  the  sea  itself,  which  the 
influence  of  Babylonian  mythology  so  thickly 
scattered  through  the  later  sea-poetry  of  the  He- 
brews. The  Theophany  takes  place  in  a  violent 
tempest  of  thunder  and  rain,  the  only  process  of 
nature  upon  which  the  desert  poets  of  Arabia 
dwell  with  any  detail.  In  harmony  with  this, 
God  appears  from  the  southern  desert,  from  Te- 
man  and  Paran,  as  in  the  theophanies  in  Deu- 
teronomy xxxiii.  and  in  the  Song  of  Deborah;  f 
a  few  lines  recall  the  Song  of  the  Exodus,]:  and 
there  are  many  resemblances  to  the  phraseol- 
ogy of  the  Sixty-eighth  Psalm.  The  poet  sees 
under  trouble  the  tents  of  Kushan  and  of  Mid- 

*  TJ"1  nowhere  in  the  Old  Testament  means  "  wrath," 
but  either  roar  and  noise  of  thunder  (Job  xxxvii.  2)  and 
of  horsehoofs  (xxxix.  24),  or  the  raging  of  the  wicked  (iii. 
17)  or  the  commotion  of  fear  (iii.  26  ;  Isa.  xiv.  3). 
t  "  Jehovah  from  Sinai  hath  come, 
And  risen  from  Se'ir  upon  them  ; 
He  shone  from  Mount  Paran, 
And  broke  from  Meribah  of  Kadesh  : 
From  the  South  fire  ...  to  them." 
Deut.  xxxiii.  2,  slightly  altered  after  the  LXX.     "South:" 
some  form  of  ^12"*   must  be  read  to  bring  the  line  into 
parallel  with  the  others;  pTl,  Teman,  is  from  the  same 
root. 

"  Jehovah,  in  Thy  going  forth  from  Se'ir, 
In  Tl'y  marching  from  Edom's  field. 
Earth  shook,  yea,  heaven  dropped, 
Yea,  the  clouds  dropped  water. 
Mountains  flowed  down  before  Jehovah, 
Yon  Sinai  at  the  face  of  the  God  of  Israel." 

—Judges  V.  4,  5. 
X  Exoa.  x\ 


ian,  tribes  of  Sinai.  And  though  the  Theophany 
is  with  floods  of  rain  and  lightning,  and  foam- 
ing of  great  waters,  it  is  not  with  hills,  rivers, 
or  sea  that  God  is  angry,  but  with  the  nations, 
the  oppressors  of  His  poor  people,  and  in  order 
that  He  may  deliver  the  latter.  All  this,  taken 
with  the  fact  that  no  mention  is  made  of  Egypt, 
proves  that,  while  the  singer  draws  chiefly  upon 
the  marvellous  events  of  the  Exodus  and  Sinai 
for  his  description,  he  celebrates  not  them  alone 
but  all  the  ancient  triumphs  of  God  over  the 
heathen  oppressors  of  Israel.  Compare  the  ob- 
scure line — these  be  "  His  goings  of  old." 

The  report  of  it  all  fills  the  prophet  with  trem- 
bling (ver.  16  returns  upon  ver.  26),  and  al- 
though his  language  is  too  obscure  to  permit  us 
to  follow  with  certainty  the  course  of  his  feeling, 
he  appears  to  await  in  confidence  the  issue  of  Is- 
rael's present  troubles.  His  argument  seems  to 
be,  that  such  a  God  may  be  trusted  still,  in  face 
of  approaching  invasion  (ver.  16).  The  next 
verse,  however,  does  not  express  the  experience 
of  trouble  from  human  foes;  but  figuring  the 
extreme  affliction  of  drought,  barrenness,  and 
poverty,  the  poet  speaking  in  the  name  of  Is- 
rael declares  that,  in  spite  of  them,  he  will  still 
rejoice  in  the  God  of  their  salvation  (ver.  17). 
So  sudden  is  this  change  from  human  foes  to 
natural  plagues  that  some  scholars  have  here 
felt  a  passage  to  another  poem  describing  a  dif- 
ferent situation.  But  the  last  lines  with  their 
confidence  in  the  "  God  of  salvation,"  a  term  al- 
ways used  of  deliverance  from  enemies,  and  the 
boast,  borrowed  from  the  Eighteenth  Psalm, 
"He  makethmy  feet  like  to  hinds'  feet,  and 
gives  me  to  march  on  my  heights,"  reflect  the 
same  circumstances  as  the  bulk  of  the  Psalm, 
and  offer  no  grounds  to  doubt  the  unity  of  the 
whole.* 

Psalm  +  of  Habakkuk  the  Prophet. 

"  Lord,  I  have  heard  the  report  of  Thee  ; 
I  stand  in  awe  !  t 

Lord,  revive  Thy  work  in  the  midst  of  the  years, 
In  the  midst  of  the  years  make  Thee  known  ;§ 
In  turmoil  |l  remember  mercy  ! 
God  comes  from  Teman, t 
The  Holy  from  Mount  Paran.** 
He  covers  the  heavens  with  His  glory. 
And  filled  with  His  praise  is  the  earth. 
The  flash  is  like  lightning  ; 
He  has  rays  from  each  hand  of  Him, 
Therein  +t  is  the  ambush  of  His  might. 

Pestilence  travels  before  Him, 

The  plague-fire  breaks  forth  at  His  feet. 

He  stands  and  earth  shakes,  tt 

*  In  this  case  ver.  17  would  be  the  only  one  that  offered 
any  reason  for  suspicion  that  it  was  an  intrusion. 

f  nijSn.  l'*«  Prayer,  but  used  for  Psalm  :  c/.  Psalm  cii.  i. 
t  Sinker  takes  with  this  the  first   two  words  of  next 
line  :  "  I  have  trembled,  O  Lord,  at  Thy  work." 

§  ynin.  imp.  Niph.,  after  LXX.  yy<o<T0v<Tr).    The  Hebrew 

has  V"''?'!^'  Hi.,  "  make  known."  The  LXX.  had  a  text  of 
these  verses  which  reduplicated  them,  and  it  has  trans- 
lated them  very  badly. 

II  ^•1.'''   "turmoil,  noise,"  as  in    Job:  a  meaning    that 

offers  a  better  parallel  to  "in  the  midst  of  the  years" 
than  "  wrath."  which  the  word  also  means.  Davidson, 
however,  thinks  it  more  natural  to  understand  the 
"wrath"  manifest  at  the  coming  of  Jehovah  to  judg- 
ment.    So  Sinker. 

t  Vulg.  ab.  Austro,  "  from  the  South. 

**  LXX.  adds  KaTacr/ct'oi' 6a<reos,  which  Seems  the  transla- 
tion of  a  clause,  perhaps  a  gloss,  containing  the  name  of 
Mount  Se'ir,  as  in  the  parallel  d.'scriptions  of  a  theophany, 
Deut.  xxiii.  2,  Judg.  v.  4.     S  e  Sinker,  p.  45. 

+t  Wellhausen,  reading  DK'  for  DtJ'.  translates  "He 
made  them,"  etc. 

XX  So  LXX.  Heb.  "  and  measures  the  earth. 


Habakkuk  iii.J 


IN    THE    MIDST    OF    THE    YEARS. 


597 


He  looks  and  drives  nations  asunder  ; 
And  the  ancient  mountains  are  cloven, 
The  hills  everlasting  sink  down. 
These  be  His  ways  from   of  old.* 

"  Under  trouble  I  see  the  tents  of  Kflshan.t, 
The  curtains  of  Midian's  land  are  quivering. 
Is  it  with  hilst  Jehovah  is  wroth  ? 
Is  Thine  anger  with  rivers } 
Or  against  the  sea  is  Thy  wrath, 
That  Thou  ridest  it  with  horses. 
Thy  chariots  of  victory  ? 
Thy  bow  is  stripped  bare  ;  § 
Thou  gluttest  (0  Thy  shafts.il 
Into  rivers  Thou  cleavest  the  earth  ;  5 
Mountains  see  Thee  and  writhe  ; 
The  rainstorm  sweeps  on  :  ** 
The  Deep  utters  his  voice. 
He  lifts  up  his  roar  upon  high.tt 
Sun  and  moon  stand  still  in  their  dwelling, 
At  the  Hash  of  Thy  shafts  as  they  speed, 
At  the  sheen  of  the  lightning.  Thy  lance. 
In  wrath  Thou  stridest  the  earth. 
In  anger  Thou  threshest  the  nations  ! 
Thou  art  forth  to  the  help  of  Thy  people, 
To  save  Thine  anointed. ^§ 

♦  This  is  the  only  way  of  rendering  the  verse  so  as  not 
to  make  it  seem  superfluous  :  so  rendered  it  sums  up  and 
clencht  s  the  theophany  from  ver.  3  onwards  ;  and  a  new 
strophe  now  begins,  i'iiere  is,  ilierelure,  no  need  to  omit 
the  verse  as  W  eilliausen  does. 

tLXX.  "Aiflton-e?  ;  but  these  are  Kush,  and  the  parallel- 
ism requires  a  tribe  in  Arabia.  Calvin  rejects  the  mean- 
ing "Ethiopian"  on  the  same  ground,  but  takes  the 
reference  as  to  King  Kushan  in  Judg.  iii.  8,  10,  on  account 
of  the  parallelism  with  Midian.  The  Midianite  wife 
whom  Moses  married  is  called  the  Kushite  (Num.  xii/ 1). 
Hommel  ("  Anc.  Hebrew  Tradition  as  illustrated  by  the 
Monuments,"  p.  315  and  11.  1)  appears  to  take  Zerah  the 
Kushite  of  2  Chron.  xiv.  9  flf.  as  a  prince  of  Kush  in  Cen- 
tral Arabia.  But  the  narrative  which  makes  him  deliver 
his  invasion  of  Judah  at  Mareshah  surely  confirms  the 
usual  opinion  that  he  and  his  host  were  Ethiopians  com- 
ing up  from  Egypt. 

JFor  p'~inJ3n.  "is  it  with  streams,"  read  D''"in3n, 
"  is  it  with  hills  :  "  because  hills  have  already  been  men- 
tioned, and  rivers  occur  in  the  next  clause,  and  are  sepa- 
rated   by  the    same    disjunctive    particle,    ^^'     which 

separates  "  the  sea  "  in  the  third  clause  from  them.  The 
whole  phrase  might  be  rendered,  "  Is  it  with  hills  "  Thou 
art  "  angry,  O  Jehovah  ?  " 

§  Questionable  :  the  verb  "'''I''!!'  Ni.  of  a  supposed  "1!|y, 
does  not  elsewhere  occur,  and  is  only  conjectured  from 
the  noun  ''J'."'  "nakedness,"  and  '"'^"!i''  "stripping." 
LXX.  has  kvT^iviov  evfTeiya:;,  and  Wellhausen  reads,  after 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  18,  "^D^^  "'l^J''  "  Thou  bringest  into  action 
Thy  bow." 

II  nok  niDO  niym  uterally  "swom  are  staves"  or 
"rods  of  speech."  A.  V.:  according  "to  the  oaths  of  the 
tribes,"   even    Thy    "word."    LXX.    (omitting    01^3^' 

and  adding  niil')  «"■"'  <ric^n-Tpa,  Xeyei  (cupto?.    These  words 
"form  a  riddle  which  all  the  ingenuity  of  scholars  has 
not  been  able  to  solve.    Delitzsch  calculates  that  a  hun- 
dred translations  of  them  have  been  offered  "  (Davidson). 
In  parallel  to  previous  clause  about  a  "  bow,"  we  ought 
to  expect  n"106,  "  staves,"  though  it  is  not  elsewhere  used 
for    "shafts"    or   "arrows."    rW]}!^    may    have    been 
Vr--'  "Thou  safest."    The  Cod.  Barb,  reads:  ixopratrai 
^oAi6as  T^5  ^aperprj?  aiiToO,  "Thou  hast  satiated  the  shafts 
of  his  quiver."    Sinker:  "sworn  are  the  punishments  of 
the  solemn  decree,"  and  relevantly  compares  Isa.  xi.  4, 
"the  rod   of  His    mouth;"    xxx.    32,   "rod  of    doom^' 
Ewald:  "sevenfold  shafts  of  war."   Bit  r/.  Psalm  c.xviii.  12.    ..  ,      -n  <.  1  <:     .  ..    c-   ,        .,       ...... 

1  Uncertain,  but  a  more  natural  result  of  cleaving  than        ^  '^'''  *^^^  comfort.       Sinker  takes  "|J}>X  as  the  simple 
"the  rivers  Thou  cleavest  into  dry  land  "  (Davidson  and    relative:    "I  who    will  wait    patiently   for    the    day  of 

**  But  Ewald  takes  this  as  of  the  Red  Sea  floods  sweep- 
ing on  the  Egyptians. 

■^■•■NK'J  inn''  Dl"!  =  "he  lifts  up  his  hands  on  high." 
But  the  LXX.  read  liT'lD,  <f>a.vTa<riai  aiirri^,  and  took  KK'J 
with  the  next  verse.  The  reading  1,T"I)D  (for  IH^XID) 
is  indeed  nonsense,  but  suggests  an  emendation  to 
iniTD,  "  his  shout  "  or  "wail  :  "  cf.  Amos  vi.  7,  Jer.  xvi.  5. 

§§ReadingforyB;'  y^K^H.  required  by  the  ace.  follow- 
ing. "Thine  anointed,"  lit.  "  Thy  Messiah,"  according 
to  Isa.  xl.  ff.  the  whole  people. 


Thou   hast  shattered  the  head  from  the  house  of  the 

wicked, 
Laying  bare  from  ...  *  to  the  neck. 
Thou   hast   pierced    with   Thy   spears  the  head  of  his 

prill, -i-^.i 
They  stormed  forth  to  crush  me  ; 
Their  triumph  was  as  to  devour  the  poor  in  secret4 
Thou  hast  marched  on  the  sea  with  Thy  horses; 
Foamed  §  the  great  waters. 

I  have  heard,  and  my  heart  |  shakes ; 
At  the  sound  my  lips  tremble, 1 
Rottenness  enters  my  bones,** 
My  steps  shake  under  me. ++ 
I  will  .  .  .  tt  for  the  day  of  trouble 
That  pours  in  on  the  people. §§ 

Though  the  fig-tree  do  not  blossom, ||| 

And  no  fruit  be  on  the  vines. 

Fail  the  produce  of  the  olive. 

And  the  fields  yield  no  meat. 

Cut  off  m  be  the  flock  from  the  fold, 

And  no  cattle  in  the  stalls. 

Yet  in  the  Lord  will  I  exult, 

I  will  rejoice  in  the  God  of  my  .salvation. 

Jehovah,  the  Lord,  is.my  might  ; 

He  hath  made  my  feet  like  the  hinds', 

And  on  my  heights  He  gives  me  to  march." 

This  Psalm,  whose  musical  signs  prove  it  to 
have  been  employed  in  the  liturgy  of  the  Jewish 
Temple,  has  also  largely  entered  into  the  use  of 
the  Christian  Church.  The  vivid  style,  the  sweep 
of  vision,  the  exultation  in  the  extreme  of  adver- 
sity with  which  it  closes,  have  made  it  a  frequent 
theme  of  preachers  and  of  poets.  St.  Augustine's 
exposition  of  the  Septuagint  version  spiritualises 
almost  every  clause  into  a  description  of  the 
first  and  second  advents  of  Christ.***  Calvin's 
more  sober  and  accurate  learning  interpreted  it 
of  God's  guidance  of  Israel  from  the  time  of  the 
Egyptian  plagues  to  the  days  of  Joshua  and  Gid- 
eon, and  made  it  enforce  the  lesson  that  He  who 
so  wonderfully  delivered  His  people  in  their 
youth  will  not  forsake  them  in  the  midway  of 

*Heb.  TlDV  "foundation."  LXX.  "bonds."  Some 
suggest  laying  bare  from  the  foundation  to  the  neck,  but 
this  is  mixed  unless  "neck  "  happened  to  be  a  technical 
name  for  a  part  of  a  building :  cf.  Isa.  viii.  8,  xxx.  28. 

t  Heb.  "his  spears  "  or  "  staves  ;  his  own  "  (Von  Orelli). 

LXX.  eV  e/caTao-et ;  see  Sinker,  pp.  i;6  ff.     "Princes:"  ""TS 

only  here.  Hitzig:  "his  brave  ones."  Ewald,  Well- 
hausen, Davidson :  ''his  princes."  Delitzsch  :  "hishost5." 
LXX.  K€(pa\a^  6vva<TTu}V, 

t  So  Heb.  literally.  A  very  difficult  line.  On  LXX.  see 
Sinker,  pp.  60  f. 

§For  '?•'•  "heap"  (so  A.  V.),  read  some  part  of  lOH, 
"  to  foam."     LXX.  Tapaatrovra^  :  cf.  Psalm  xlvi.  4, 

II  So  LXX.  K  (some  codd.),  .softening  the  original 
"belly." 

lOr  "my  lips  quiver  aloud"  pipS,  "vocally"  (Von 
Orelli).  ' 

**  By  the  Hebrew  the  bones  were  felt,  as  a  modern  man 
feels  his  nerves  :  Psalms  xxxii.,  li.;  Job. 

ttFor1{>;X.  for  which  LXX.  gives  r)  if  is  /uou,  read  "i"1{»/t<, 
"  my  steps  ";  and  for  M"IX.  LXX.  eTopax^l,  1*JT, 

niJK.  LXX.  ai/oTrauao/aat,  "I  will  rest."  A.  v.: 
"that  I  might  rest  in  the  day  of  trouble."  Others:  "I 
will  wait  for."    Wellhausen   suggests  ^U^^  (Isa.  1.  24), 


doom."    Von  Orelli    takes    it    as  the  conjunction 
cause." 


'be- 


§§  *"^  ;■   "  it  invades,  brings  up  troops  on  them,"  only 

in  Gen.  xlix.  19  and  here.  Wellhausen  :  "which  invades 
us."  Sinker  ;  "for  the  coming  up  against  the  people  of 
him  who  shall  assail  it." 

Ill  mSn  ;  but  LXX.  mSn  <>"  K«pwo0opi7<rei,  "  bear  no 

fruit." 

HForltJ  Wellhausen  reads  ^TJJ.     LXX.  i^ikimv. 
***  "  De  Civitate  Dei,"  XVIIL  32. 


198 


the'-'book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


their  career.*  The  closing  verses  have  been  torn 
from  the  rest  to  form  the  essence  of  a  large  num- 
ber of  hymns  in  many  languages. 

For  ourselves,  it  is  perhaps  most  useful  to 
fasten  upon  the  poet's  description  of  his  own 
position  in  the  midst  of  the  years,  and  like  him 
to  take  heart,  amid  our  very  similar  circum- 
stances, from  the  glorious  story  of  God's  ancient 
revelation,  in  the  faith  that  He  is  still  the  same 
in  might  and  in  purpose  of  g  ace  to  His  people. 
We,  too,  live  among  the  nameless  years.  We  feel 
them  about  us,  undistinguished  by  the  manifest 
workings  of  God,  slow  and  petty,  or,  at  the  most, 
full  of  inarticulate  turmoil.  At  this  very  moment 
we  suffer  from  the  frustration  of  a  great  cause, 
on  which  believing  men  had  set  their  hearts 
as  God's  cause;  Christendom  has  received  from 
the  infidel  no  greater  reverse  since  the  days  of 
the  Crusades.  Or,  lifting  our  eyes  to  a  larger 
horizon,  we  are  tempted  to  see  about  us  a  wide, 
fiat  waste  of  years.  It  is  nearly  nineteen  centu- 
ries since  the  great  revelation  of  God  in  Christ, 
the  redemption  of  mankind,  and  all  the  wonders 
of  the  Early  Church.  We  are  far,  far  away  from 
that,  and  unstirred  by  the  expectation  of  any 
crisis  in  the  near  future.  We  stand  "  in  the  midst 
of  the  years,"  equally  distant  from  beginning 
and  from  end.  It  is  the  situation  which  Jesus 
Himself  likened  to  the  long  double  watch  in  the 
middle  of  the  night — "  if  he  come  in  the  second 
watch  or  in  the  third  watch  " — against  whose 
dulness  He  warned  His  disciples.  How  much 
need  is  there  at  such  a  time  to  recall,  like  this 
poet,  what  God  has  done — how  often  He  has 
shaken  the  world  and  overturned  the  nations, 
for  the  sake  of  His  people  and  the  Divine  causes 
they  represent.  "  His  ways  are  everlasting."  As 
He  then~  worked,  so  He  will  work  now  for  the 
same  ends  of  redemption.  Our  prayer  for  "  a  re- 
vival of  His  work  "  will  be  answered  before  it 
is  spoken. 

It  is  probable  that  much  of  our  sense  of  the 
staleness  of  the  years  comes  from  their  prosper- 
ity. The  dull  feeling  that  time  is  mere  routine 
is  fastened  upon  our  hearts  by  nothing  rnore 
firmly  than  by  the  constant  round  of  fruitful 
seasons — that  fortification  of  comfort,  that  regu- 
larity of  material  supplies,  which  modern  life 
assures  to  so  many.  Adversity  would  brace  us 
to  a  new  expectation  of  the  near  and  strong 
action  of  our  God.  This  is  perhaps  the  meaning 
of  the  sudden  mention  of  natural  plagues  in  the 
seventeenth  verse  of  our  Psalm.  Not  in  spite  of 
the  extremes  of  misfortune,  but  just  because  of 
them,  should  we  exult  in  "  the  God  of  our  sal- 
vation;" and  realise  that  it  is  by  discipline  He 
makes  His  Church  to  feel  that  she  is  not  march- 
ing over  the  dreary  levels  of  nameless  years,  but 
"  on  our  high  places  He  makes  us  to  march." 

"  Grant,  Almighty  God,  as  the  dulness  and 
hardness  of  our  flesh  is  so  great  that  it  is  needful 
for  us  to  be  in  various  ways  afflicted — oh,  grant 
that  we  patiently  bear  Thy  chastisement  and  un- 
der ?.  deep  feeling  of  sorrow  flee  to  Thy  mercy 
■displayed  to  us  in  Christ,  so  that  we  depend  not 
•on  the  earthly  blessings  of  this  perishable  life, 
but  relying  on  Thy  word  go  forward  in  the 
•course  of  our  calling,  until  at  length  we  be  gath- 
ered to  that  blessed  rest  which  is  laid  up  for  us 
in  h-eaven,  through  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen."  f 

*  So  he  paraphrases  "  in  the  midst  of  the  years." 
+  From   the  pirayer  with  which   Calvin  concludes  his 
exposition  of  Habakkuk. 


OBADIAH. 

"  And  Saviours  shall  come  up  on  Mount  Zion  to  judge 
Mount  Esau,  and  the  kingdom  shall  be  Jehovah's." 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  BOOK  OF  OBADIAH. 

The  Book  of  Obadiah  is  the  smallest  among 
the  prophets,  and  the  smallest  in  all  the  Old 
Testament.  Yet  there  is  none  which  better  il- 
lustrates many  of  the  main  problems  of  Old  Tes- 
tament criticism.  It  raises,  indeed,  no  doctrinal 
issue  nor  any  question  of  historical  accuracy. 
All  that  it  claims  to  be  is  "  The  Vision  of 
Obadiah  "  ;  *  and  this  vague  name,  with  no  date 
or  dwelling-place  to  challenge  comparison  with 
the  contents  of  the  book,  introduces  us  without 
prejudice  to  the  criticism  of  the  latter.  Nor  is 
the  book  involved  in  the  central  controversy  of 
Old  Testament  scholarship,  the  date  of  the  Law. 
It  has  no  reference  to  the  Law.  Nor  is  it  made 
use  of  in  the  New  Testament.  The  more 
freely,  therefore,  may  we  study  the  literary 
and  historical  questions  started  by  the  twenty 
one  verses  which  compose  the  book.  Their 
brief  course  is  broken  by  differences  of  style, 
and  by  sudden  changes  of  outlook  from  the  past 
to  the  future.  Some  of  them  present  a  close 
parallel  to  another  passage  of  prophecy,  a  feature 
which  when  present  offers  a  difficult  problem 
to  the  critic.  Hardly  any  of  the  historical  allu- 
sions are  free  from  ambiguity,  for  although  the 
book  refers  throughout  to  a  single  nation — and 
so  vividly  that  even  if  Edom  were  not  named 
we  might  still  discern  the  character  and  crimes 
of  that  bitter  brother  of  Israel — yet  the  conflict 
of  Israel  and  Edom  was  so  prolonged  and  so 
monotonous  in  its  cruelties,  that  there  are  few 
of  its  many  centuries  to  which  some  scholar  has 
not  felt  himself  able  to  assign,  in  part  or  whole, 
Obadiah's  indignant  oration.  The  little  book 
has  been  tossed  out  of  one  century  into  another 
by  successive  critics,  till  there  exists  in  their  es- 

*  n^iaV.    'Obadyah,  the  later  form  of  inH^y.   'Oba- 

dyahu  (a  name  occurring  thrice  before  the  Exile  :  Ahab's 
steward  who  hid  the  prophets  of  the  Lord,  i  Kings  xviii. 
3-7,  16,  of  a  man  in  David  house,  i  Chron.  xxvii.  19  ;  a 
Levite  in  Josiah's  reign,  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  12I,  is  the  name 
of  several  of  the  Tews  who  returned  from  exile  ;  Ezra  viii. 
q,  the  son  of  Jehi  el  (in  i  Esdras  viii.  'A^aSias) ;  Neh.  x.  6, 
a  priest,  probably  the  same  as  the  Obadiah  in  xii.  25,  a 
porter,  and  the   t^^QU,   the  singer,  in  xi.  17,  who  is  called 

nnSy  in  i  Chron.  ix.  16.     Another  'Obadyah  is  given  in 

the  eleventh  generation  from  Saul,  i  Chron.  viii.  38,  ix. 
44  ;  another  in  the  royal  line  in  the  time  of  the  Exile,  iii. 
21 :  a  man  of  Issachar,  vii.  3  ;  a  Gadite  under  David,  xii. 
g;  a  "prince"  under  Jehoshaphat  sent  "to  teach  in  the 
cities  of  Judah,"  2  Chron.  xvii.  7.  With  the  Massoretic 
points  nn^y  means  worshipper  of  Jehovah  :  cf.   Obed- 

Edom,  and  so  in  the  Greek  form,  'O^Seiov,  of  Cod.  B.  But 
other  Codd.,  A.  0  and  X  g'^'e  "AjSSiou  or  "A/SSeiou,  and  this, 
with  the  alternative  Hebrew  form  ^^"^^N  of  Neh.  xi.  17, 

suggests  rather   rT"    IJIJ?)    "  servant    of  Jehovah."    The 

name  as  given  in  the  title  is  probably  intended  to  be  that 
of  an  historical  individual,  as  in  the  titles  of  all  the  other 
books  ;  but  which,  or  if' any,  of  the  above  mentioned  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  Note,  however,  that  it  is  the  later 
post-exilic  form  of  the  name  that  is  used,  in  spite  of  the 
book  occurring  among  the  pre-exilic  prophets.  Some, 
less  probably,  take  the  name  Obadyah  to  be  symbolic  of 
the  prophetic  character  of  the  writer. 


I 


THE    BOOK    OF    OBADIAH. 


599 


timates  of  its  date  a  difference  of  nearly  six 
hundred  years.*  Such  a  fact  seems,  at  first  sight, 
to  convict  criticism  either  of  arbitrariness  or 
helplessness;  t  yet  a  little  consideration  of  de- 
tails is  enough  to  lead  us  to  an  appreciation  of 
the  reasonable  methods  of  Old  Testament  criti- 
cism, and  of  its  indubitable  progress  towards 
certainty,  in  spite  of  our  ignorance  of  large 
stretches  of  the  history  of  Israel.  To  the  stu- 
dent of  the  Old  Testament  nothing  could  be 
mere  profitable  than  to  master  the  historical 
and  literary  questions  raised  by  the  Book  of 
Obadiah,  before  following  them  out  among  the 
more  complicated  problems  which  are  started 
,  by  other  prophetical  books  in  their  relation  to 
the  Law  of  Israel,  or  to  their  own  titles,  or  to 
claims  made  for  them  in  the  New  Testament. 

The  Book  of  Obadiah  contains  a  number  of 
verbal  parallels  to  another  prophecy  against 
Edom  which  appears  in  Jeremiah  xlix.  7-22. 
Most  critics  have  regarded  this  prophecy  of 
Jeremiah  as  genuine,  and  have  assigned  it  to  the 
year  604  b.  c.  The  question  is  whether  Obadiah 
or  Jeremiah  is  the  earlier.  Hitzig  and  Vatke  X 
answered  in  favour  of  Jeremiah;  and  as  the  Book 
of  Obadiah  also  contains  a  description  of 
Edom's  conduct  in  the  day  of  Jerusalem's  over- 
throw by  Nebuchadrezzar,  in  586,  they  brought 
the  whole  book  down  to  post-exilic  times.  Very 
forcible  arguments,  however,  have  been  offered 
for  Obadiah's  priority.^  Upon  this  priority,  as 
well  as  on  the  facts  that  Joel,  whom  they  take 
to  be  early,  quotes  from  Obadiah,  and  that 
Obadiah's  book  occurs  among  the  first  six — pre- 
sumably the  pre-exilic  members — of  the  Twelve, 
a  number  of  scholars  have  assigned  all  of  it  to 
an  early  period  in  Israel's  history.  Some  fix 
upon  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  when  Judah  was 
invaded  by  Edom  and  his  allies  Moab  and  Am- 
mon,  but  saved  from  disaster  through  Moab  and 
Amnion  turning  upon  the  Edomites  and  slaugh- 
tering them. II  To  this  they  refer  the  phrase  in 
Obadiah  9,  "  the  men  of  thy  covenant  have  be- 
trayed thee."  Others  place  the  whole  book  in 
the  reign  of  Joram  of  Judah  (849-842  b.  c), 
when,  according  to  the  Chronicles,^  Judah  was 
invaded  and  Jerusalem  partly  sacked  by  Philis- 
tines and  Arabs.**    But  in  the  story  of  this  inva- 

♦889  B.  c.  Hofmann,  Keil,  etc.:  and  soon  after  312, 
Hitzig. 

t  C/.  the  extraordinary  tirade  of  Pusey  in  his  Introd.  to 
Obadiah. 

t  The  first  in  his  Commentary  on  "Die  Zwolf  Kleine 
Propheten  "  ;  the  other  in  his  '•  Einleitung." 

§  Caspari  ("Der.  Proph.  Ob.  ausgelegt,"  18421,  Ewald 
Graf.  Pusey,  Driver,  Giesebrecht,  Wildeboer,  and  Konig. 
C/.  Jer.  xlix.  q  with  Ob.  5  ;  Jer.  xlix.  14  S  with  Ob.  1-4. 
The  opening  of  Ob.  i  ff.  is  held  to  be  more  in  its  place 
than  where  it  occurs  in  the  middle  of  Jeremiah's  passage. 
The  language  of  Obadiah  is  "terser  and  more  forcible. 
Jeremiah  seems  to  expand  Obadiah,  and  parts  of  Jeremiah 
which  have  no  parallel  in  Obadiah  are  like  Obadiah's  own 
style"  (Driver).  This  strong  argument  is  enforced  in 
detail  by  Pusey  :  "Out  of  the  si.xteen  verses  of  which  the 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah  against  Edom  consists,  four  are 
identical  with"  those  of  Obadiah  ;  a  fifth  embodies  a  verse 
of  Obadiah's  ;  of  the  eleven  which  remain  ten  have  some 
turns  of  expression  or  idioms,  more  or  fewer,  which  occur 
i)i  Jeremiah,  either  in  these  prophecies  against  foreign 
nations,  or  in  his  prophecies  generally.  Now  it  would  be 
v'holly  improbable  that  a  prophet,  selecting  verses  out  of 
the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  should  have  selected  precisely 
tnose  which  contain  nona  of  Jeremiah's  characteristic 
expressions;  whereas  it  perfectly  fits  in  with  the  supposi- 
tion that  Jeremiah  interwove  verses  of  Obadiah  with  his 
own  prophecy,  that  in  verses  so  interwoven  there  is  not 
one  expression  which  occurs  elsewhere  in  Jeremiah." 
Similarly  Nowack,  "  Comm.,"  1897. 

11  2  Chron.  xx. 

12  Chron.  xxi.  14-1;;. 

**  So  Delitzsch,  Keil.  Volck  in  Herzog's  "  Real.  Ency." 


sion  there  is  no  mention  of  Edomites,  and  the 
argument  which  is  drawn  from  Joel's  quotation 
of  Obadiah  fails  if  Joel,  as  we  shall  see,  be  of  late 
date.  With  greater  prudence  Pusey  declines  to 
fix  a  period. 

The  supporters  of  a  pre-exilic  origin  for  the 
whole  book  of  Obadiah  have  to  explain  vv.  11-14, 
which  appear  to  reflect  Edom's  conduct  at  the 
sack  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadrezzar  in  586,  and 
they  do  so  in  two  ways.  Pusey  takes  the  verses 
as  predictive  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  siege.  Orelli 
and  others  believe  that  they  suit  better  the  con- 
quest and  plunder  of  the  city  in  the  time  of 
Jehoram.  But,  as  Calvin  has  said,  "  they  seem 
to  be  mistaken  who  think  that  Obadiah  lived 
before  the  time  of  Isaiah." 

The  question,  however,  very  early  arose, 
whether  it  was  possible  to  take  Obadiah  as  a 
unity.  Vv.  1-9  are  more  vigorous  and  firm  than 
vv.  10-21.  In  vv.  1-9  Edom  is  destroyed  by 
nations  who  are  its  allies;  in  vv.  10-21  it  is  still 
to  fall,  along  with  other  Gentiles  in  the  general 
judgment  of  the  Lord.*  Vv.  10-21  admittedly 
describe  the  conduct  of  the  Edomites  at  the 
overthrow  of  Jerusalem  in  586;  but  vv.  1-9  prob- 
ably reflect  earlier  events;  and  it  is  significant 
that  in  them  alone  occur  the  parallels  to  Jere- 
miah's prophecy  against  Edom  in  604.  On 
some  of  these  grounds  Ewald  regarded  the  little 
book  as  consisting  of  two  pieces,  both  of  which 
refer  to  Edom,  but  the  first  of  which  was  writ- 
ten before  Jeremiah,  and  the  second  is  post- 
exilic.  As  Jeremiah's  prophecy  has  some  fea- 
tures more  original  than  Obadiah's.f  he  traced 
both  prophecies  to  an  original  oracle  against 
Edom,  of  which  Obadiah  on  the  whole  renders 
an  exact  version.  He  fixed  the  date  of  this 
oracle  in  the  earlier  days  of  Isaiah,  when  Rezin 
of  Syria  enabled  Edom  to  assert  again  its  inde- 
pendence of  Judah,  and  Edom  won  back  Elath, 
which  Uzziah  had  taken. ^  Driver,  Wildeboer 
and  Cornill§  adopt  this  theory,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  period  to  which  Ewald  refers  the 
original  oracle.  According  to  them,  the  Book 
of  Obadiah  consists  of  two  pieces,  vv.  1-9  pre- 
exilic,  and  vv.  10-21  post-exilic  and  descriptive 
in  11-14  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  sack  of  Jerusalem. 

This  latter  point  need  not  be  contested. ||  But 
is  it  clear  that  1-9  are  so  different  from  10-21  that 
they  must  be  assigned  to  another  period?  Are 
they  necessarily  pre-exilic?  Wellhausen  thinks 
not,  and  has  constructed  still  another  theory 
of  the  origin  of  the  book,  which,  like  Vatke's 
brings  it  all  down  to  the  period  after  the  Exile. 

There  is  no  mention  in  the  book  either  of 
Assyria  or  of  Babylonia. If    The  allies  who  have 

II..  Orelli,  and  Kirkpatrick.  Delitzsch  indeed  suggests 
that  the  prophet  may  have  been  "Obadiah  the  prince  " 
appointed  by  Jehoshaphat  "to  teach  in  the  cities  of 
Judah."     See  above,  p.  598,  n. 

*  Driver,  "  Introd." 

tjer.  xlix.  9  and  16  appear  to  be  more  original  than 
Ob.  ^  and  26.     Notice    the    presence    in    Jer.  xlix.   16  of 

"inV?2n.  which  Obadiah  omits. 

J  2  Kings  xiv.  22  ;  .xvi.  6,  Revised  Version  margin. 

§"Einl."  pp.  185  f.  :  "In  any  case  Obadiah  i-g  are  older 
than  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim." 

!1  "That  the  verses  Obadiah  10  ff.  refer  to  this  event 
[the  sack  of  Jerusalem]  will  always  remain  the  most 
natural  supposition,  for  the  description  which  they  give 
so  completely  suits  that  time  that  it  is  not  possible  to 
take  any  other  explanation  into  consideration." 

1  Edom  paid  tribute  to  Sennacherib  in  701,  and  to  Asar- 
haddon  (68i-66q).  According  to  2  Kings  xxiv.  2  Nebuchad- 
rezzar sent  Ammonites,  Moabites  and  Edomites  [for  QIX 
read  DTK]  against  Jehoiakim,  who  had  broken  his  oath 
to  Babylonia. 


6oo 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


betrayed  Edom  (ver.  7)  are  therefore  probably 
those  Arabian  tribes  who  surrounded  it  and  were 
its  frequent  confederates.*  They  are  described 
as  "sending"  Edom  "to  the  border"  (ib.). 
Wellhausen  thinks  that  this  can  only  refer  to 
the  great  northward  movement  of  Arabs  which 
began  to  press  upon  the  fertile  lands  to  the 
southeast  of  Israel  during  the  time  of  the  Cap- 
tivity. Ezekielf  prophesies  that  Ammon  and 
Moab  will  disappear  before  the  Arabs,  and  we 
know  that  by  the  year  312  the  latter  were  firmly 
settled  in  the  territories  of  Edom.|  Shortly  be- 
fore this  the  Hagarenes  appear  in  Chronicles, 
and  Se'ir  is  called  by  the  Arabic  name  Gebal,§ 
while  as  early  as  the  fifth  century  Malachi  || 
records  the  desolation  of  Edom's  territory  by  the 
"jackals  of  the  wilderness,"  and  the  expulsion 
of  the  Edomites,  who  will  not  return.  The 
Edomites  were  pushed  up  into  the  Negeb  of  Is- 
rael, and  occupied  the  territory  round,  and  to 
the  south  of,  Hebron  till  their  conquest  by  John 
Hyrcanus  about  130;  even  after  that  it  was  called 
Idumcea.ir  Wellhausen  would  assign  Obadiah  1-7 
to  the  same  stage  of  this  movement  as  is  re- 
flected in  Malachi  i.  1-5;  and,  apart  from  cer- 
tain parentheses,  would  therefore  take  the  whole 
of  (Dbadiah  as  a  unity  from  the  end  of  the 
fifth  century  before  Christ.  In  that  case  Giese- 
brecht  argues  that  the  parallel  prophecy,  Jere- 
miah xlix.  7-22,  must  be  reckoned  as  one  of  the 
passages  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  in  which  post- 
exilic  additions  have  been  inserted.** 

Our  criticism  of  this  theory  may  start  from  the 
seventh  verse  of  Obadiah:  "To  the  border  they 
have  sent  thee,  all  the  men  of  thy  covenant  have 
betrayed  thee,  they  have  overpowered  thee,  the 
men  of  thy  peace."  On  our  present  knowledge 
of  the  history  of  Edom  it  is  impossible  to  assign 
the  first  of  these  clauses  to  any  period  before  the 
Exile.  No  doubt  in  earlier  days  Edom  was  more 
than  once  subjected  to  Arab  razzias.  But  up 
to  the  Jewish  Exile  the  Edomites  were  still  in 
possession  of  their  own  land.  So  the  Deuter- 
onomist  ft  implies,  and  so  Ezekiel  $$  and  perhaps 
the  author  of  Lamentations.  §§  Wellhausen's 
claim,  therefore,  that  the  seventh  verse  of  Oba- 
diah refers  to  the  expulsion  of  Edomites  by 
Arabs  in  the  sixth  or  fifth  century  b.  c.  may  be 
granted.  ||{{  But  does  this  mean  that  verses  1-6 
belong,  as  he  maintains,  to  the  same  period?  A 
negative  answer  seems  required  by  the  following 
facts.  To  begin  with,  the  seventh  verse  is  not 
found  in  the  parallel  prophecy  in  Jeremiah. 
There  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  have  been 
used  there,  if  that  prophecy  had  been  compiled 
at  a  time  when  the  expulsion  of  the   Edomites 

*For  Edom's  alliances  with  Arab  tribes  c/.  Gen.  xxv.  13 
with  xxxvi.  3,  12,  etc. 

t  Ezek,  xxv.  4,  5,  10. 

X  Diod.  Sic.  XIX.  94.  A  little  earlier  they  are  described 
as  in  possession  of  Iturea,  on  the  southeast  slopes  of 
Anti-Lebanon  (Arrian  II.  20,  4). 

§  Psalm  Ixxxiii.  8. 

II  i.  1-5. 

If  E.  g.  in  the  New  Testament:  Mark  iii.  8. 

**  So  too  Nowack,  1897. 

+t  Deut.  ii.  5,  8,  12. 

%%  Ezek.  XXXV.,  esp.  2  and  15. 

§S  iv.  21:  yet  "  Uz  "  fails  in  LXX.,  and  some  take  V"1X  to 

refer  to  the  Holy  Land  itself.  Buhl,  "  Gesch.  der  Edo- 
miter,"  73. 

nil  It  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  Edom's  treacherous 
allies  were  Assyrians  or  Babylonians,  for  even  if  the  phrase 
"  men  of  thy  covenant  "  could  be  applied  to  those  to 
whom  Edom  was  tributary,  the  Assyrian  or  Babylonian 
method  of  dealing  with  conquered  peoples  is  described 
by  saying  that  they  took  them  oft  into  captivity,  not  that 
they  "  sent  them  to  the  border." 


was  already  an  accomplished  fact.  But  both  \  y 
this  omission  and  by  all  its  other  features,  thit 
prophecy  suits  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  and  we 
may  leave  it,  therefore,  where  it  was  left  till  the 
appearance  of  Wellhausen's  theory — namely, 
with  Jeremiah  himself.*  Moreover  Jeremiah 
xlix.  9  seems  to  have  been  adapted  in  Obadiah 
5  in  order  to  suit  verse  6.  But  again,  Obadiah 
1-6,  which  contains  so  many  parallels  to  Jere- 
miah's prophecy,  also  seems  to  imply  that  the 
Edomites  are  still  in  possession  of  their  land. 
"  The  nations  "  (we  may  understand  by  this  the 
Arab  tribes)  are  risen  against  Edom,  and  Edom 
is  already  despicable  in  face  of  them  (vv.  i-2">; 
but  he  has  not  yet  fallen,  any  more  than,  to  the 
writer  of  Isaiah  xlv.-xlvii.,  who  uses  analogous 
language,  Babylon  is  already  fallen.  Edom  is 
weak  and  cannot  resist  the  Arab  razzias.  But 
he  still  makes  his  eyrie  on  high  and  says:  "  Who 
will  bring  me  down?  "  To  which  challenge  Je- 
hovah replies,  not  "  I  have  brought  thee  down," 
but  "  I  will  bring  thee  down."  The  post-exilic 
portion  of  Obadiah,  then,  I  take  to  begin  with 
verse  7;  and  the  author  of  this  prophecy  has 
begun  by  incorporating  in  vv.  1-6  a  pre-exilic 
prophecy  against  Edom,  which  had  been  already, 
and  with  more  freedom,  used  by  Jeremiah. 
Verses  8-9  form  a  difficulty.  They  return  to  the 
future  tense,  as  if  the  Edomites  were  still  to  be 
cut  ofif  from  Mount  Esau.  But  verse  10,  as 
Wellhausen  points  out,  follows  on  naturally  to 
verse  7,  and,  with  its  successors,  clearly  points  to 
a  period  subsequent  to  Nebuchadrezzar's  over- 
throw of  Jerusalem.  The  change  from  the  past 
tense  in  vv.  lo-ii  to  the  imperatives  of  12-14 
need  cause,  in  spite  of  what  Pusey  says,  no  diffi- 
culty, but  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  excited 
feelings  of  the  prophet.  The  suggestion  has 
been  made,  and  it  is  plausible,  that  Obadiah 
speaks  as  an  eye-witness  of  that  awful  time. 
Certainly  there  is  nothing  in  the  rest  of  the 
prophecy  (vv.  15-21)  to  lead  us  to  bring  it  further 
down  than  the  years  following  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem.  Everything  points  to  the  Jews 
being  still  in  exile.  The  verbs  which  describe 
the  inviolateness  of  Jerusalem  (17),  and  the  re- 
instatement of  Israel  in  their  heritage  (17,  19), 
and  their  conquest  of  Edom  (18),  are  all  in  the 
future.  The  prophet  himself  appears  to  write 
in  exile  (20).  The  captivity  of  Jerusalem  is  in 
Sepharad  (ib.)  and  the  "  saviours "  have  to 
"  come  up"  to  Mount  Zion;  that  is  to  say,  they 
are  still  beyond  the  Holy  Land  (21). f 

The  one  difficulty  in  assigning  this  date  to  the; 
prophecy  is  that  nothing  is  said  in  the  Hebrew 
of  ver.  19  about  the  re-occupation  of  the  hill- 
country  of  Judsea  itself,  but  here  the  Greek  may 
help  us.  t  Certainly  every  other  feature  suits  the 
early  days  of  the  Exile. 

The  result  of  our  inquiry  is  that  the  Book 
of  Obadiah  was  written  at  that  time  by  a  prophet 
in  exile,  who  was  filled  by  the  same  hatred  of 
Edom  as  filled  another  exile,  who  in  Babylon 
wrote  Psalm  cxxxvii. ;  and  that,  like  so  many  of 
the  exilic  writers,  he  started  from  an  earlier 
prophecy  against  Edom,  already  used  by  Jere- 
miah.§    [Nowack  ("Comm.,"  1897)  takes  vv.  1-14 

*  So  even  Cornill,  "  Einl."     * 

tThis  in  answer  to  Wellhausen  on  the  verse. 

i  See  below,  p.  175,  «. 

§  Calvin,  while  refusing  in  his  introduction  to  Obadiah 
to  fix  a  date  (except  in  so  far  as  he  thinks  it  impossible 
for  the  book  to  be  earlier  than  Isaiah),  implies  throughout 
his  commentary  on  the  book  that  it  was  addressed  tff 
Edom  while  the  Jews  were  in  exile.  See  his  remarks  on 
vv.  18-20. 


THE    BOOK   OF   OBADIAH. 


Coi 


(with  additions  in  vv.  i,  s,  6,  8  f.  and  12)  to  be 
from  a  date  not  long  after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem, 
alluded  to  in  vv.  11-14;  and  vv.  15-21  to  belong  to 
a  later  period,  which  it  is  impossible  to  fix  ex- 
actly.] 

There  is  nothing  in  the  language  of  the  book 
to  disturb  this  conclusion.  The  Hebrew  of 
Obadiah  is  pure;  unlike  its  neighbour,  the  Book 
of  Jonah,  it  contains  neither  Aramaisms  nor 
other  symptoms  of  decadence.  The  text  is  very 
sound.  The  Septuagint  Version  enables  us  to 
correct  vv.  7  and  17,  offers  the  true  division  be- 
tween vv.  9  and  10,  but  makes  an  omission  which 
leaves  no  sense  in  ver.  17.*  It  will  be  best  to 
give  all  the  twenty-one  verses  together  before 
commenting  on  their  spirit. 

The  Vision  of  Obadiah. 

Thus  hath  the  Lord  Jehovah  spoken  con- 
cerning Edom.  t 

"  A  report  have  we  heard  from  Jehovah,  and  a 
messenger  has  been  sent  through  the  nations, 
'  Up  and  let  us  rise  against  her  to  battle.'  Lo, 
I  have  made  thee  small  among  the  nations,  thou 
art  very  despised!  The  arrogance  of  thy  heart 
hath  misled  thee,  dweller  in  clefts  of  the  Rock;  X 
the  height  is  his  dwelling,  that  saith  in  his  heart 
'  Who  shall  bring  me  down  to  earth!  '  Though 
thou  build  high  as  the  eagle,  though  between  the 
stars  thou  set  thy  nest,  thence  will  I  bring  thee 
down — oracle  of  Jehovah.  If  thieves  had  come 
into  thee  by  night  (how  art  thou  humbled !),§ 
would  they  not  steal  just  what  they  wanted?  If 
vine-croppers  had  come  into  thee,  would  they 
not  leave  some  gleanings?  (How  searched  out  is 
Esau,  how  rifled  his  treasures!)"  But  now  to 
thy  very  border  have  they  sent  thee,  all  the  men 
of  thy  covenant  II  have  betrayed  thee,  the  men  of 
thy  peace  have  overpowered  theeT[;  they  kept 
setting  traps  for  thee — there  is  no  understanding 
in  him!  "**  Shall  it  not  be  in  that  day — oracle 
of  Jehovah — that  I  will  cause  the  wise  men  to 
perish  from  Edom,  and  understanding  from 
Mount  Esau?  And  thy  heroes,  O  Teman,  shall 
be  dismayed,  till  ft  every  man  be  cut  off  from 
Mount  Esau."  For  the  slaughter,  ||  for  the  out- 
raging of  thy  brother  Jacob,  shame  doth  cover 
thee,  and  thou  art  cut  off  for  ever.  In  the  day 
ofthystanding  aloof, §§ in  the  day  when  strangers 
took  captive  his  substance,  and  aliens  came  into 
his  gates,  ||||  and  they  cast  lots  on  Jerusalem,  even 

♦There  is  a  mistranslation  in  ver.  18  :  Tilb*  is  rendered 
by  Trupo(J>opos. 

t  This  is  no  doubt  from  the  later  writer,  who  before  he 
gives  the  new  word  of  Jehovah  with  regard  to  Edom, 
quotes  the  earlier  prophecy,  marked  above  by  quotation 
marks.  In  no  other  way  can  we  explain  the  immediate 
following  of  the  words  "Thus  hath  the  Lord  spoken" 
with  "   Pye  have  heard  a  report,"  etc. 

t"  Sela,"  the  name  of  the  Edomite  capital,  Petra. 

§  The  parenthesis  is  not  in  Jer.  xlix.  q  ;  Nowack  omits  it. 
"  If  spoilers  "  occur  in  Heb.  before  "  by  night  "  :  delete. 

II  Antithetic  to  "  thieves  "  and  "  spoilers  by  night,"  as  the 
sending  of  the  people  to  their  border  is  antithetic  to  the 
thieves  taking  only  what  they  wanted. 

l^lOn?!  "  thy  bread,"  which  here  follows,  is  not  found 
in  the  LXX.,  and  is  probably  an  error  due  to  a  mechani- 
cal repetition  of  the  letters  of  the  previous  word. 
/  *♦  Again  perhaps  a  quotation  from  an  earlier  prophecy  : 
Nowack  counts  it  from  another  hand.  Mark  the  sudden 
change  to  the  future. 

t+Heb.  "so  that." 

XX  With  LXX.  transfer  this  expression  from  the  end  of 
the  ninth  to  the  beginning  of  the  tenth  verse. 

§§"When  thou  didst  stand  on  the  opposite  side."— 
Calvin. 

m  Plural ;  LXX.  and  Qeri. 


thou  wert  as  one  of  them!  Ah,  gloat  not  *  upon 
the  day  of  thy  brother,!  the  day  of  his  misfor- 
tune t ',  exult  not  over  the  sons  of  Judah  in  the 
day  of  their  destruction,  and  make  not  thy  mouth 
large§  in  the  day  of  distress.  Come  not  up  into 
the  gate  of  My  people  in  the  day  of  their  disas- 
ter. Gloat  not  thou,  yea  thou,  upon  his  ills,  in 
the  day  of  his  disaster,  nor  put  forth  thy  hand 
to  his  substance  in  the  day  of  his  .disaster,  nor 
stand  at  the  parting ||  of  the  ways  (?)  to  cut  off 
his  fugitives;  not  arrest  his  escaped  ones  in  the 
day  of  distress. 

For  near  is  the  day  of  Jehovah,  upon  all  the 
nations — as  thou  hast  done,  so  shall  it  be  done 
to  thee:  thy  deed  shall  come  back  on  thine  own 
head.lT 

For  as  ye  **  have  drunk  on  my  holy  mount,  all 
the  nations  shall  drink  continuously,  drink  and 
reel,  and  be  as  though  they  had  not  been,  ft  But 
on  Mount  Zion  shall  be  refuge,  and  it  shall  be 
inviolate,  and  the  house  of  Jacob  shall  inherit 
those  who  have  disinherited  them.  JJ  For  the 
house  of  Jacob  shall  be  fire,  and  the  house  of 
Joseph  a -flame,  but  the  house  of  Esau  shall  be- 
come stubble,  and  they  shall  kindle  upon  them 
and  devour  them,  and  there  shall  not  one  escape 
of  the  house  of  Esau — for  Jehovah  hath  spoken. 

And  the  Negeb  shall  possess  Mount  Esau, 
and  the  Shephelah  the  Philistines,  §§  and  the 
Mountain  ||||  shall  possess  Ephraim  and  the  field 
of  Samaria,  1[T[  and  Benjamin  shall  possess  Gilead. 
And  the  exiles  of  this  host  ***  of  the  children  of 
Israel  shall  possess  (?)  the  land  ftfoftheCanaan- 
ites  unto  Sarephath,  and  the  exiles  of  Jerusalem 
who  are  in  Sepharad  til  shall  inherit  the  cities  of 

*  Sudden  change  to  imperative.    The  English  versions 
render,  "  Thou  shouldest  not  have  looked  on,"  etc. 
+  Cf.  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7,  "  the  day  of  Jerusalem." 
t  The  day  of  his  strangeness  —  "  aliena  fortuna." 
§  With  laughter.    Wellhausen  and  Nowack  suspect  ver. 
13  as  an  intrvision. 

I'    P.P.  does  not  elsewhere  occur.    It  means  cleaving, 

and  the  LXX.  render  it  bj'  SickjSoAij,  z.  e.,  pass  between 
mountains.  The  Arabic  forms  from  the  same  root  sug- 
gest the  sense  of  a  band  of  men  standing  apart  from  the 
main  body,  on  the  watch  for  stragglers  c/.  1JJ,  in  ver.  n). 
Calvin,  "the  going  forth  ";  Gratz,  VIS,  "  breach,"  but 
see  Nowack. 

^  Wellhausen  proposes  to  put  the  last  two  clauses 
immediately  after  ver.  14. 

**  The  prophet  seems  here  to  turn  to  address  his  own 
countrymen  :  the  drinking  will  therefore  take  the  mean- 
ing of  suffering  God's  chastising  wrath.  Others,  like 
Calvin,  take  it  in  the  opposite  sense,  and  apply  it  to  Edom  : 
"  as  ye  have  exulted,"  etc. 

tt"  Reel"— for  ^yp  we  ought  (with  Wellhausen)  probably 
to  read  !|yj  ;  c/.  Lam.  iv.  2.  Some  codd.  of  LXX.  omit 
"all  the  nations  .  .  .  continuously,  drink  and  reel."  But 
{<  c.  a  A  and  Q  have  "  all  the  nations  shall  drink  wine." 

U  So  LXX.     Heb.  "  their  heritages." 

§§  That  is  the  reverse  of  the  conditions  after  the  Jews 
went  into  exile,  for  then  the  Edomites  came  up  on  the 
Negeb  and  the  Philistines  on  the  Shephelah. 

III!  /.  e.,  of  Judah,  the  rest  of  the  country  outside  the 
Negeb  and  Shephelah.    The  reading  is  after  the  LXX. 

^t  Whereas  the  pagan  inhabitants  of  these  places  came 
upon  the  hill-country  of  Judea  during  the  Exile. 

***  An  unusual  form  of  the  word.  Ewald  would  read 
"coast."    The  verse  is  obscure. 

tttSoLXX. 

tttThe  Jews  themselves  thought  this  to  be  Spain:  so 
Onkelos,  who  translates  1"1DD  by  N'JDQDX  =  Hispania. 

Hence  the  origin  of  the  name  Sephardim  Jews.  The  sup- 
position that  it  is  Sparta  need  hardly  be  noticed.  Our 
decision  must  lie  between  two  other  regions — the  one  in 
Asia  Minor,  the  other  in  S.  W.  Media.  First  in  the 
ancient  Persian  inscriptions  there  thrice  occurs  (great 
Behistun  inscription,  I.  15  ;  inscription  of  Darius,  II.  12,  13  ; 
and  inscription  of  Darius  from  Naksh-i-Rustam)  (Jparda. 
It  is  connected  with  Janua  or  Ionia  and  Katapatuka  or 
Cappadocia  (Schrader,  "  Cun.  Inscr.  and  O.  T.,"  Germ,  ed., 


6o2 


TH^:'  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  Negeb.  And  saviours  shall  come  up  on 
Mount  Zion  to  judge  Mount  Esau,  and  the  king- 
dom shall  be  Jehovah's. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
EDOM  AND  ISRAEL. 

ObADIAH    1-21. 

If  the  Book  of  Obadiah  presents  us  with  some 
of  the  most  difficult  questions  of  criticism,  it 
raises  besides  one  of  the  hardest  ethical  prob- 
lems in  all  the  vexed  history  of  Israel. 

Israel's  fate  has  been  to  work  out  their  call- 
ing in  the  world  through  antipathies  rather  than 
by  sympathies,  but  of  all  the  antipathies  which 
the  nation  experienced  none  was  more  bitter  and 
more  constant  than  that  towards  Edom.  The 
rest  of  Israel's  enemies  rose  and  fell  like  waves: 
Canaanites  were  succeeded  by  Philistines,  Phil- 
istines by  Syrians,  Syrians  by  Greeks.  Tyrant 
relinquished  his  grasp  of  God's  people  to  tyrant: 
Egyptian,  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  Persian;  the 
Seieucids,  the  Ptolemies.  But  Edom  was  always 
there,  "  and  fretted  his  anger  for  ever."  *  From 
that  far  back  day  when  their  ancestors  wrestled 
in  the  womb  of  Rebekah  to  the  very  eve  of  the 
Christian  era,  when  a  Jewish  kingf  dragged  the 
Idumeans  beneath  the  yoke  of  the  Law,  the  two 
peoples  scorned,  hated,  and  scourged  each  other, 
with  a  relentlessness  that  finds  no  analogy,  be- 
tween kindred  and  neighbour  nations,  anywhere 
else  in  history.  About  1030  David,  about  130 
the  Hasmoneans,  were  equally  at  war  with 
Edom;  and  few  are  the  prophets  between  those 
distant  dates  who  do  not  cry  for  vengeance 
against  him  or  exult  in  his  overthrow.  The 
Book  of  Obadiah  is  singular  in  this,  that  it  con- 
tains nothing  else  than  such  feelings  and  such 
cries.  It  brings  no  spiritual  message.  It  speaks 
no  word  of  sin,  or  of  righteousness,  or  of  mercy, 
but  only  doom  upon  Edom  in  bitter  resentment 
at  his  cruelties,  and  in  exultation  that,  as  he 
has  helped  to  disinherit  Israel,  Israel  shall  dis- 
inherit him.  Such  a  book  among  the  prophets 
surprises  us.  It  seems  but  a  dark  surge  staining 
the  stream  of  revelation,  as  if  to  exhibit  through 
what  a  muddy  channel  these  sacred  waters  have 
been  poured  upon  the  world.     Is  ,the  book  only 

p.  446  :  Eng.,  Vol.  II.,  p.  145) ;  and  Sayce  shows  that,  called 
Shaparda  on  a  late  cuneiform  inscription  of  275  B.  C,  it 
must  have  lain  in  Bithynia  or  Galatia  ("  Higher  Criticism 
and  Monuments,"  p.  483).  Darius  made  it  a  satrapy.  It 
is  clear,  as  Cheyne  says  ("  Founders  of  O.  T.  Criticism," 
p.  312;,  that  those  who  on  other  grounds  are  convinced 
of  the  post-exilic  origin  of  this  part  of  Obadiah,  of  its 
origin  in  the  Persian  period,  will  identify  Sepharad  with 
this  Qparda.  which  both  he  and  Sayce  do.  Hut  to  those  of 
VIS  who  hold  that  this  part  of  Obadiah  is  from  the  time  of 
the  Babylonian  exile,  as  we  have  sought  to  prove  above 
on  pp.  600  f.,  then  Sepharad  cannot  be  Qparda,  for 
Nebuchadrezzar  did  not  subdue  Asia  Minor  and  cannot 
have  transported  Jews  there.  Are  we  then  forced  to  give 
up  our  theory  of  the  date  of  Obadiah  10-21  in  the  Baby- 
lonian exile?  By  no  means  For,  second,  the  inscrip- 
tions of  Sargon,  king  of  Assyria,  (721-705  B.  C),  mention  a 
Shaparda,  in  S.  W.  Media  towards  Babylonia,  a  name 
phonetically  correspondent  to  "Tl3D  (Schrader,  /.  c),  and 
the  identification  of  the  two  is  regarded  as  "  exceedingly 
probable"  by  Fried.  Delitzsch  "  Wo  lag  das  Paradies?" 
p.  249).  But  even  if  this  should  be  shown  to  be  impossi- 
ble, and  if  the  identification  Sepharad  —  Qparda  be 
proved,  that  would  not  oblige  us  to  alter  our  opinion  as 
to  the  date  of  the  whole  of  Obfdiah  10-21,  for  it  is  possible 
that  later  additions,  including  Sepharad,  have  been  made 
to  the  passage. 

*Amosi.  II.     See  p.  474. 

t  John  Hyrcanus,  about  130  B.  C. 


an  outbreak  of  Israel's  selfish  patriotism?  This 
is  the  question  we  have  to  discuss  in  the  present 
chapter. 

Reasons  for  the  hostility  of  Edom  and  Is- 
rael are  not  far  to  seek.  The  two  nations  were 
neighbours  with  bitter  memories  and  rival  inter- 
ests. Each  of  them  was  possessed  by  a  strong 
sense  of  distinction  from  the  rest  of  mankind, 
which  goes  far  to  justify  the  story  of  their  com- 
mon descent.  But  while  in  Israel  this  pride  was 
chiefly  due  to  the  consciousness  of  a  peculiar 
destiny  not  yet  realised — a  pride  painful  and 
hungry — in  Edom  it  took  the  complacent  form 
of  satisfaction  in  a  territory  of  remarkable  iso- 
lation and  self-sufficiency,  in  large  stores  of 
wealth,  and  in  a  reputation  for  worldly  wisdom — 
a  fulness  that  recked  little  of  the  future,  and  felt 
no  need  of  the  Divine. 

The  purple  mountains,  into  which  the  wild 
sons  of  Esau  clambered,  run  out  from  Syria 
upon  the  desert,  some  hundred  miles  by  twenty 
of  porphyry  and  red  sandstone.  They  are  said 
to  be  the  finest  rock  scenery  in  the  world. 
"  Salvator  Rosa  never  conceived  so  savage  and 
so  suitable  a  haunt  for  banditti."  *  From  Mount 
Hor,  which  is  their  summit,  you  look  down  upon 
a  maze  of  mountains,  cliffs,  chasms,  rocky 
shelves  and  strips  of  valley.  On  the  east  the 
range  is  but  the  crested  edge  of  a  high,  cold 
plateau,  covered  for  the  most  part  by  stones, 
but  with  stretches  of  corn  land  and  scattered 
woods.  The  western  walls,  on  the  contrary, 
spring  steep  and  bare,  black  and  red,  from  the 
yellow  of  the  desert  'Arabah.  The  interior  is 
reached  by  defiles,  so  narrow  that  two  horsemen 
may  scarcely  ride  abreast,  and  the  sun  is  shut  out 
by  the  overhanging  rocks.  Eagles,  hawks,  and 
other  mountain  birds  fly  screaming  round  the 
traveller.  Little  else  than  wild-fowls'  nests  are 
the  villages;  human  eyries  perched  on  high 
shelves  or  hidden  away  in  caves  at  the  ends  of 
the  deep  gorges.  There  is  abundance  of  water. 
The  gorges  are  filled  with  tamarisks,  oleanders, 
and  wild  figs.  Besides  the  wheat  lands  on  the 
eastern  plateau,  the  wider  defiles  hold  fertile 
fields  and  terraces  for  the  vine.  Mount  Esau 
is,  therefore,  no  mere  citadel  with  supplies  for  a 
limited  siege,  but  a  well-stocked,  well-watered 
country,  full  of  food  and  lusty  men,  yet  lifted  so 
high,  and  locked  so  fast  by  precipice  and  slip- 
pery mountain,  that  it  calls  for  little  trouble  of 
defence.  "  Dweller  in  the  clefts  of  the  rock,  the 
height  is  his  habitation,  that  saith  in  his  heart: 
Who  shall  bring  me  down  to  earth?  "  \ 

On  this  rich  fortress-land  the  Edomites  en- 
joyed a  civilisation  far  above  that  of  the  tribes 
who  swarmed  upon  the  surrounding  deserts;  and 
at  the  same  time  they  were  cut  ofif  from  the  lands 
of  those  Syrian  nations  who  were  their  equals 
in  culture  and  descent.  When  Edom  looked  out 
of  himself,  he  looked  "  down  "  and  '"  across  " — 
down  upon  the  Arabs,  whom  his  position  en- 
abled him  to  rule  with  a  loose,  rough  hand,  and 
across  at  his  brothers  in  Palestine,  forced  by 
their  more  open  territories  to  make  alliances 
with  and  against  each  other,  from  all  of  which 
he  could  afford  to  hold  himself  free.  That  alone 
was  bound  to  exasperate  them.  In  Edom  him-  ^ 
self  it  appears  to  have  bred  a  want  of  sympathy, 
a  habit  of  keeping  to  himself  and  ignoring  the 
claims  both  of  pity  and  of  kinship — with  which 

*  Irby     and     Mangles'     "  Travels "  :    cf.    Burckhardt. 
"  Travels  in  Syria,"  and  Doughty,  "  Arabia  Deserta,"  I 
t  Obadiah  3. 


Obadiah  1-21.  J 


EDOM    AND    ISRAEL. 


603 


he  is  charged  by  all  the  prophets.  "  He  cor- 
rupted his  natural  feelings,  and  watched  his  pas- 
sion for  ever.*     Thou  stoodest  aloof!  "f 

This  self-sufficiency  was  aggravated  by  the 
position  of  the  country  among  several  of  the 
main  routes  of  ancient  trade.  The  masters  of 
Mount  Se'ir  held  the  harbours  of  'Akaba,  into 
which  the  gold  ships  came  frorii  Ophir.  They 
intercepted  the  Arabian  caravans  and  cut  the 
roads  to  Gaza  and  Damascus.  Petra,  in  the  very 
heart  of  Edom,  was  in  later  times  the  capital 
of  the  Nabatcan  kingdom,  whose  commerce 
rivalled  that  of  Phcenicia,  scattering  its  inscrip- 
tions from  Teyma  in  Central  Arabia  up  to  the 
very  gates  of  Rome.^  The  earlier  Edomites 
were  also  traders,  middlemen  between  Arabia 
and  the  Phcenicians;  and  they  filled  their  caverns 
with  the  wealth  both  of  East  and  West. J?  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  it  was  this  which  first 
drew  the  envious  hand  of  Israel  upon  a  land  so 
cut  ofif  from  their  own  and  so  difficult  of  inva- 
sion. Hear  the  exultation  of  the  ancient  prophet 
whose  words  Obadiah  has  borrowed:  "  flow 
searched  out  is  Esau,  and  his  hidden  treasures 
rifled!"!  But  the  same  is  clear  from  the  his- 
tory. Solomon,  Jehoshaphat,  Amaziah,  Uzziah, 
and  other  Jewish  invaders  of  Edom  were  all  am- 
bitious to  command  the  Eastern  trade  through 
Elath  and  Ezion-geber.  For  this  it  was  neces- 
sary to  subdue  Edom;  and  the  frequent  reduc- 
tion of  the  country  to  a  vassal  state,  with  the  re- 
volts in  which  it  broke  free,  were  accompanied 
by  terrible  cruelties  upon  both  sides. *|y  Every 
century  increased  the  tale  of  bitter  memories  be- 
tween the  brothers,  and  added  the  horrors  of  a 
war  of  revenge  to  those  of  a  war  for  gold. 

The  deepest  springs  of  their  hate,  however, 
bubbled  in  their  blood.  In  genius,  temper,  and 
ambition,  the  two  peoples  were  of  opposite  ex- 
tremes. It  is  very  singular  that  we  never  hear 
in  the  Old  Testament  of  the  Edomite  gods.  Is- 
rael fell  under  the  fascination  of  every  neigh- 
bouring idolatry,  but  does  not  even  mention  that 
Edom  had  a  religion.  Such  a  silence  cannot  be 
accidental,  and  the  inference  which  it  suggests  is 
confirmed  by  the  picture  drawn  of  Esau  himself. 
Esau  is  a  "profane  person"**;  with  no  con- 
science of  a  birthright,  no  faith  in  the  future,  no 
capacity  for  visions;  dead  to  the  unseen,  and 
clamouring  only  for  the  satisfaction  of  his  appe- 
tites. The  same  was  probably  the  character  of 
his  descendants;  who  had,  of  course,  their  own 
gods,  like  every  other  people  in  that  Semitic 
world,  tt  but  were  essentially  irreligious,  living 
for  food,  spoil,  and  vengeance,  with  no  national 
conscience  or  ideals — a  kind  of  people  who  de- 
serve even  more  than  the  Philistines  to  have 
their  name  descend  to  our  times  as  a  symbol  of 
hardness  and  obscurantism.  It  is  no  contradic- 
tion to  all  this  that  the  one  intellectual  quality 
imputed  to  the  Edomites  should  be  that  of 
shrewdness  and  a  wisdom  which  was  obviously 

♦  Amos  i.  :  cf.  Ezek.  xxxv.  5. 

+  Obadiah  10. 

t"C.  I.  S.,"  II.  i.  183  ff. 

§  Obadiah  6. 

II  Verse  6. 

i  See  the  details  in  pp.  591  f. 

♦♦  Heb.  xii.  16. 

tt  We  even  know  the  names  of  some  of  these  deities 
from  the  theophorous  names  of  Edomites:  e  g.,  Baal- 
chanan  (Gen.  x.xxvi.  38),  Hadad  (ib.  35  ;  i  Kings  xi.  14  ff.) ; 
Malikram,  Kausmalaka,  Kausgabri  (on  Assyrian  inscrip- 
tions :    Schrader,    "  K.    A.    T."     150,   613);    Ko<ra5apo;,  Koo-- 


Pivog,      Koo-7T)p09,      Koava.To.vo';    {ReV.     archdoL,     1870,      I.    pp. 

109  fL,    170  ff.).   Ko<rTo/3apos  (Jos.  XV.  "Ant."  .'ii.  g).    See 
Baethgen,  "  Beitrage  zur  Semit.  ReL  Gesch.,"  pp.  10  ff. 


worldly.  "  The  wise  men  of  Edom,  the  clever- 
ness of  Mount  Esau "  *  were  notorious.  It  is 
the  race  which  has  given  to  history  only  the 
Herods — clever,  scheming,  ruthless  statesmen,  as 
able  as  they  were  false  and  bitter,  as  shrewd  in 
policy  as  they  were  destitute  of  ideals.  "  That 
fox,"  cried  Christ,  and,  crying,  stamped  the  race. 

But  of  such  a  national  character  Israel  was  in 
all  points,  save  that  of  cunning,  essentially  the 
reverse.  Who  had  such  a  passion  for  the  ideal? 
Who  such  a  hunger  for  the  future,  such  hopes  or 
such  visions?  Never  more  than  in  the  day  of 
their  prostration,  when  Jerusalem  and  the  sanc- 
tuary fell  in  ruins,  did  they  feel  and  hate  the 
hardness  of  the  brother,  who  "  stood  aloof " 
and  "  made  large  his  mouth."  f 

It  is,  therefore,  no  mere  passion  for  revenge, 
which  inspires  these  few,  hot  verses  of  Obadiah. 
No  doubt,  bitter  memories  rankle  in  his  heart. 
He  eagerly  repeats:^  the  voices  of  a  day  when 
Israel  matched  Edom  in  cruelty  and  was  cruel 
for  the  sake  of  gold,  when  Judah's  kings  coveted 
Esau's  treasures  and  were  foiled.  No  doubt 
there  is  exultation  in  the  news  he  hears,  that 
these  treasures  have  been  rifled  by  others;  that 
all  the  cleverness  of  this  proud  people  has  not 
availed  against  its  treacherous  allies;  and  that 
it  has  been  sent  packing  to  its  borders.§  But 
beneath  such  savage  tempers,  there  beats  the 
heart  which  has  fought  and  suffered  for  the 
highest  things,  and  now  in  its  martyrdom  sees 
them  baffled  and  mocked  by  a  people  without 
vision  and  without  feeling.  Justice,  mercy,  and 
truth;  the  education  of  humanity  in  the  law  of 
God,  the  establishment  of  His  will  upon  earth — 
these  things,  it  is  true,  are  not  mentioned  in  the 
Book  of  Obadiah,  but  it  is  for  the  sake  of  some 
dim  instinct  of  them  that  its  wrath  is  poured 
upon  foes  whose  treachery  and  malice  seek  to 
make  them  impossible  by  destroying  the  one 
people  on  earth  who  then  believed  and  lived  for 
them.  Consider  the  situation.  It  was  the  dark- 
est hour  of  Israel's  history.  City  and  Temple 
had  fallen,  the  people  had  been  carried  away.  Up 
over  the  empty  land  the  waves  of  mocking 
heathen  had  flowed,  there  was  none  to  beat  them 
back.  A  Jew  who  had  lived  through  these 
things,  who  had  seen  ||  the  day  of  Jerusalem's 
fall  and  passed  from  her  ruins  under  the  mocking 
of  her  foes,  dared  to  cry  back  into  the  large 
mouths  they  made:  Our  day  is  not  spent;  we 
shall  return  with  the  things  we  live  for;  the  land 
shall  yet  be  ours,  and  the  kingdom  our  God's. 

Brave,  hot  heart!  It  shall  be  as  thou  sayest; 
it  shall  be  for  a  brief  season.  But  in  exile  thy 
people  and  thou  have  first  to  learn  many  more 
things  about  the  heathen  than  you  can  now  feel. 
Mix  with  them  on  that  far-off  coast,  from  which 
thou  criest.  Learn  what  the  world  is,  and  that 
more  beautiful  and  more  possible  than  the  nar- 
row rule  which  thou  hast  promised  to  Israel  over 
her  neighbours  shall  be  that  worldwide  service 
of  man,  of  which,  in  fifty  years,  all  the  best  of 
thy  people  shall  be  dreaming. 

The  Book  of  Obadiah  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Exile,  and  the  great  prophecy  of  the  Servant  at 
the  end  of  it — how  true  was  his  word  who  said: 
"He  that  goeth  forth  and  weepeth,  bearing  pre- 
cious seed,  shall  doubtless  come  again  with  re- 
joicing, bringing  his  sheaves  with  him." 
*  Obabiah  8  :  cf.  Jer.  xlix.  7. 
t  Obadiah  11,  12  :  cf.  Ezek.  xxxv.  12  f. 
X  1-5  or  6.     See  above,  pp.  599,  600  f. 
§  Verse  7. 
II  See  above,  p.  600. 


6o4 


th£-  book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


The  subsequent  history  of  Israel  and  Edom 
may  be  quickly  traced.  When  the  Jews  returned 
from  exile  they  found  the  Edomites  in  posses- 
sion of  all  the  Negeb.  and  of  the  Mountain  of 
Judah  far  north  of  Hebron.  The  old  warfare 
was  resumed,  and  not  till  130  b.  c.  (as  has  been 
already  said)  did  a  Jewish  king  bring  the  old 
enemies  of  his  people  beneath  the  Law  of  Je- 
hovah. The  Jewish  scribes  transferred  the  name 
of  Edom  to  Rome,  as  if  it  were  the  perpetual 
symbol  of  that  hostility  of  the  heathen  world, 
against  which  Israel  had  to  work  out  her  calling 
as  the  peculiar  people  of  God.  Yet  Israel  had 
not  done  with  the  Edomites  themselves.  Never 
did  she  encounter  foes  more  dangerous  to  her 
higher  interests  than  in  her  Idumean  dynasty 
of  the  Herods;  while  the  savage  relentlessness  of 
certain  Edomites  in  the  last  struggles  against 
Rome  proved  that  the  fire  which  had  scorched 
her  borders  for  a  thousand  years,  now  burned 
a  still  more  fatal  flame  , within  her.  More  than 
anything  else,  this  Edomite  fanaticism  provoked 
the  splendid  suicide  of  Israel,  which,  beginning 
in  Galilee,  was  consummated  upon  the  rocks  of 
Masada,  half-way  between  Jerusalem  and  Mount 
Esau.         / 


INTRODUCTION    TO    THE   PROPHETS   OF 
THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD. 

(539-331  B.  c.) 

"The  exiles  returned    from    Babylon  to  found  not  a 
kingdom,  but  a  church."— KiRKPATRiCK. 

"Israel  is  no  longer  a  kingdom,  but  a  colony." 


CHAPTER  XV. 
ISRAEL  UNDER  THE  PERSIANS. 

The  next  group  of  the  Twelve  Prophets — 
Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi,  and  perhaps  Joel 
— fall  withixi  the  period  of  the  Persian  Empire. 
The  Persian  Empire  was  founded  on  the  con- 
quest of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  in  539  b.  c,  and  it 
fell  in  the  defeat  of  Darius  III.  by  Alexander 
the  Great  at  the  battle  of  Gaugamela,  or  Arbela, 
in  331.  The  period  is  thus  one  of  a  little  more 
than  two  centuries. 

During  all  this  time  Israel  were  the  subjects 
of  the  Persian  monarchs,  and  bound  to  them  and 
their  civilisation  by  the  closest  of  ties.  They 
owed  them  their  liberty  and  revival  as  a  sepa- 
rate community  upon  its  own  land.  The  Jewish 
State — if  we  may  give  that  title  to  what  is  per- 
haps more  truly  described  as  a  Congregation  or 
Commune — was  part  of  an  empire  which 
stretched  from  the  ^gean  to  the  Indus,  and  the 
provinces  of  which  were  held  in  close  inter- 
course by  the  first  system  of  roads  and  posts  that 
ever  brought  different  races  together.  Jews 
were  scattered  almost  everywhere  across  this  em- 
pire. A  vast  number  still  remained  in  Babylon, 
and  there  were  many  at  Susa  and  Ecbatana,  two 
of  the  royal  capitals.  Most  of  these  were  sub- 
ject to  the  full  influence  of  Aryan  manners  and 
religion;  some  were  even  members  of  the  Per- 
sian Court  and  had  access  to  the  Royal  Presence. 
In  the  Delta  of  Egypt  there  were  Jewish  settle- 
ments,   and   Jews   were    found   also    throughout 


Syria  and  along  the  coast,  at  least,  of  Asia 
Minor.  Here  they  touched  another  civilisation, 
destined  to  impress  them  in  the  future  even  more 
deeply  than  the  Persian.  It  is  the  period  of  the 
struggle  between  Asia  and  Europe,  between  Per- 
sia and  Greece:  the  period  of  Marathon  and 
Thermopylae,  of  Salamis  and  Plataea,  of  Xeno- 
phon  and  the  Ten  Thousand.  Greek  fleets  oc- 
cupied Cyprus  and  visited  the  Delta.  Greek 
armies — in  the  pay  of  Persia — trod  for  the  first 
time  the  soil  of  Syria.* 

In  such  a  world,  dominated  for  the  first  time 
by  the  Aryan,  Jews  returned  from  exile,  rebuilt 
their  Temple  and  resumed  its  ritual,  revived 
Prophecy  and  codified  the  Law:  in  short,  re- 
stored and  organised  Israel  as  the  people  of  God, 
and  developed  their  religion  to  those  ultimate 
forms  in  which  it  has  accomplished  its  supreme 
service  to  the  world. 

In  this  period  Prophecy  does  not  maintain  that 
lofty  position  which  it  has  hitherto  held  in  the  life 
of  Israel,  and  the  reasons  for  its  decline  are  ob- 
vious. To  begin  with,  the  national  life,  from 
which  it  springs,  is  of  a  far  poorer  quality.  Is- 
rael is  no  longer  a  kingdom,  but  a  colony.  The 
state  is  not  independent:  there  is  virtually  no 
state.  The  community  is  poor  and  feeble,  cut 
off  from  all  the  habit  and  prestige  of  their  past, 
and  beginning  the  rudiments  of  life  again  in 
hard  struggle  with  nature  and  hostile  tribes.  To 
this  level  Prophecy  has  to  descend,  and  occupy 
itself  with  these  rudiments.  We  miss  the  civic 
atmosphere,  the  great  spaces  of  public  life,  the 
large  ethical  issues.  Instead  we  have  tearful 
questions,  raised  by  a  grudging  soil  and  bad 
seasons,  with  all  the  petty  selfishness  of  hunger- 
bitten  peasants.  The  religious  duties  of  the 
colony  are  mainly  ecclesiastical:  the  building  of 
a  temple,  the  arrangement  of  ritual,  and  the  cere- 
monial discipline  of  the  people  in  separation 
from  their  heathen  neighbours.  We  miss,  too, 
the  clear  outlook  of  the  earlier  prophets  upon 
the  history  of  the  world,  and  their  calm,  rational 
grasp  of  its  forces.  The  world  is  still  seen,  and 
even  to  further  distances  than  before.  The  peo- 
ple abate  no  whit  of  their  ideal  to  be  the  teachers 
of  mankind.  But  it  is  all  through  another  me- 
dium. The  lurid  air  of  Apocalypse  envelops  the 
future,  and  in  their  weakness  to  grapple  either 
politically  or  philosophically  with  the  problems 
which  history  offers,  the  prophets  resort  to  the 
expectation  of  physical  catastrophes  and  of  the 
intervention  of  supernatural  armies.  Such  an 
atmosphere  is  not  the  native  air  of  Prophecy, 
and  Prophecy  yields  its  supreme  office  in  Israel 
to  other  forms  of  religious  development.  On 
one  side  the  ecclesiastic  comes  to  the  front — the 
legalist,   the   organiser  of  ritual,   the  priest;    on 

♦  The  chief  authorities  for  this  period  are  as  follows  : 
A.  Ancient :  the  inscriptions  of  Nabonidus,  last  native 
King  of  Babylon,  Cyrus,  and  Darius  I.;  the  Hebrew 
writings  which  were  composed  in,  or  record  the  history 
of,  the  period  ;  the  Greek  historians  Herodotus,  frag- 
ments of  Ctesias  in  Diodorus  Sic,  etc.;  of  Abydenus  in 
Eusebius,  Berosus.  B.  Modern  :  Meyer's  and  Duncker's 
Histories  of  Antiquity  ;  art.  "  Ancient  Persia  "  in  "  Encycl. 
Brit."  by  Noldeke  and  Gutschmid  ;  Sayce,  "  Anc.  Em- 
pires " ;  the  works  of  Kuenen,  Van  Hoonacker,  and 
Kosters  given  on  p.  192 ;  recent  histories  of  Israel,  e.  g., 
Stade's,  Wellhausen's,  and  Klostermann's ;  P.  Hay 
Hunter,  "After  the  Exile,  a  Hundred  Years  of  Jewish 
History  and  Literature,"  2  Vols.,  Edin.,  1890  ;  W.  Fair- 
weather,  "  From  the  Exile  to  the  Advent,"  Edin.,  1895.  On 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  see  especially  Ryle's  "  Commentary  " 
in  the  "Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools,"  and  Bertheau- 
Ryssel'sin  "  Kurzgefasstes  Exegetisches  Handbuch  "  :  cf. 
also  Charles  C.  Torrey,  "The  Composition  and  Historical 
Value  of  Ezra-Nehemiah,"  in  the  "  Beihefte  zur  Z.  A.  T- 
W.,"  II.,  1896. 


ISRAEL    UNDER    THE    PERSIANS. 


605 


another,  the  teacher,  the  moralist,  the  thinker, 
and  the  speculator.  At  the  same  time  personal 
religion  is  perhaps  more  deeply  cultivated  than 
at  any  other  stage  of  the  people's  history.  A 
large  number  of  lyrical  pieces  bear  proof  to  the 
existence  of  a  very  genuine  and  beautiful  piety 
throughout  the  period. 

Unfortunately  the  Jewish  records  for  this  time 
are  both  fragmentary  and  confused;  they  touch 
the  general  history  of  the  world  only  at  inter- 
vals, and  give  rise  to  a  number  of  difficult  ques- 
tions, some  of  which  are  insoluble.  The  clearest 
and  only  consecutive  line  of  data  through  the 
period  is  the  list  of  the  Persian  monarchs.  The 
Persian  Empire.  5,39-331,  was  sustained  through 
eleven  reigns  and  two  usurpations,  of  which  the 
following  is  a  chronological  table: — 


Cyrus  (Kurush)   the  Great 
Cambyses     (Kambujiya) 

Pseudo-Smerdis,  or  Baradis 
Darius  (Darayahush)   I.,  Hystaspis 
Xerxes     (Kshayarsha)     I. 
Artaxerxes    (Artakshathra)  I.,    Lon- 

gimanus 

Xerxes    II. 

Sogdianus  .... 

Darius    II.,     Nothus 
Artaxerxes   II.,   Mnemon 
Artaxerxes  III.,  Ochus     . 

Arses  

Darius    III.,    Codomannus 


B.  c. 
539-529 
529-522 
522 

521-485 
485-464 

464-424 
424-423 

423 

423-404 

404-358 

358-338 

338-335 

335-331 


I 


Of  these  royal  names,  Cyrus,  Darius,  Xerxes 
(Ahasuerus),  and  Artaxerxes  are  given  among 
the  Biblical  data;  but  the  fact  that  there  are  three 
I)arius',  two  Xerxes'  and  three  Artaxerxes' 
makes  possible  more  than  one  set  of  identifica- 
tions, and  has  suggested  different  chronological 
schemes  of  Jewish  history  during  this  period. 
The  simplest  and  most  generally  accepted  identi- 
ivjation  of  the  Darius,  Xerxes  (Ahasuerus),  and 
Artaxerxes  of  the  Biblical  history,*  is  that  they 
were  the  first  Persian  monarchs  of  these  names; 
and  after  needful  rearrangement  of  the  somewhat 
confused  order  of  events  in  the  narrative  of  the 
Book  of  Ezra,  it  was  held  as  settled  that,  while 
the  ej  lies  returned  under  Cyrus  about  537,  Hag- 
gai  a.">d  Zechariah  prophesied  and  the  Temple 
was  tnilt  under  Darius  I.  between  the  second 
and  th-;  sixth  year  of  his  reign,  or  from  520  to 
516;  that  attempts  were  made  to  build  the  walls 
of  Jeru-alem  under  Xerxes  I.  (485-464),  but  espe- 
cially u  ider  Artaxerxes  I.  (464-424),  under  whom 
first  E;  ,a  in  458  and  then  Nehemiah  in  445  ar- 
rived at  Jerusalem,  promulgated  the  Law,  and  re- 
organised Israel. 

But  this  has  by  no  means  satisfied  all  modern 
critics.  Some  in  the  interest  of  the  authenticity 
a\id  correct  order  of  the  Book  of  Ezra,  and  some 
for  other  reasons,  argue  that  the  Darius  under 
whom  the  Temple  was  built  was  Darius  II.,  or 
Nothus,  423-404,  and  thus  bring  down  the  build- 
ing of  the  Temple  and  the  prophets  Haggai  and 
Zechariah  a  whole  century  later  than  the  ac- 
cepted   theory; f    and    that    therefore    the    Arta- 

*  Ezra  iv.  5-7,  etc.;  vi.  1-14,  etc. 

+  Havet,  Revue  des  Deux  Mondes  XCIV.  790  ff.  (art. 
"  La  Modernite  des  Prophetes");  Imbert  (in  defence  of 
tl  e  historical  character  of  the  Book  of  Ezra),  "  Le  Temple 
F  sconstruit  par  Zorobabel,"  extrait  du  Museon,  i888-g 
(t  lis  I  have  not  seen);  Sir  Henry  Howorth  in  X.h.Q  Acad- 
e*^y  for  18^— see  especially  pp.  326  ft. 


xerxes  under  whom  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
laboured  was  not  the  first  Artaxerxes,  or 
Longimanus  (464-424),  but  the  second,  or 
Mnemon  (404-358).*  This  arrangement  of  the 
history  finds  some  support  in  the  data,  and 
especially  in  the  order  of  the  data,  furnished  by 
the  Book  of  Ezra,  which  describes  the  building 
of  the  Temple  under  Darius  aUer  its  record  of 
events  under  Xerxes  I.  (Ahasuerus)  and  Arta- 
xerxes I.f  But,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chap- 
ter, the  Compiler  of  the  Book  of  Ezra  has  seen 
fit,  for  some  reason,  to  violate  the  chronological 
order  of  the  data  at  his  disposal,  and  nothing  re- 
liable can  be  built  upon  his  arrangement.  Un- 
ravel his  somewhat  confused  history,  take  the 
contemporary  data  supplied  in  Haggai  and  Zech- 
ariah, add  to  them  the  historical  probabilities  of 
the  time,  and  you  will  find,  as  the  three  Dutch 
scholars  Kuenen,  Van  Hoonacker  and  Kosters 
have  done,t  that  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple 
cannot  possibly  be  dated  so  late  as  the  reign  of 
the  second  Darius  (423-404),  but  must  be  left,  ac- 
cording to  the  usual  acceptation,  under  Darius  I. 
(521-485).  Haggai,  for  instance,  plainly  implies 
that  among  those  who  saw  the  Temple  rising 
were  men  who  had  seen  its  predecessor  de- 
stroyed in  586,§  and  Zechariah  declares  that 
God's  wrath  on  Jerusalem  has  just  lasted  seventy 
years. II  Nor  (however  much  his  confusion  may 
give  grounds  to  the  contrary)  can  the  Compiler 
of  the  Book  of  Ezra  have  meant  any  other  reign 
for  the  building  of  the  Temple  than  that  of 
Darius  I.  He  mentions  that  nothing  was  done 
to  the  Temple  "  all  the  days  of  Cyrus  and  up  to 
the  reign  of  Darius:  "  T[  by  this  he  cannot  intend 
to  pass  over  the  first  Darius  and  leap  on  three 
more  reigns,  or  a  century,  to  Darius  II.  He 
mentions  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  both  as  at  the 
head  of  the  exiles  who  returned  under  Cyrus, 
and  as  presiding  at  the  building  of  the  Temple 
under  Darius.  **  If  alive  in  536,  they  may  well 
have  been  alive  in  521,  but  cannot  have  survived 
till  423.  ft  These  data  are  fully  supported  by  the 
historical  probabilities.  It  is  inconceivable  that 
the  Jews  should  have  delayed  the  building  of  the 
Temple  for  more  than  a  century  from  the  time 
of  Cyrus.  That  the  Temple  was  built  by  Zerub- 
babel and  Jeshua  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  Darius  I.  may  be  considered  as  one  of  the 
unquestionable  data  of  our  period. 

But  if  this  be  so,  then  there  falls  away  a  great 
part  of  the  argument  for  placing  the  building  of 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  and  the  labours  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  under  Artaxerxes  II.  (404-358) 
instead  of  Artaxerxes  I.  It  is  true  that  some 
who  accept  the  building  of  the  Temple  under 
Darius  I.  nevertheless  put  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
under  Artaxerxes  II.  The  weakness  of  their 
case,    however,    has    been    clearly    exposed    by 


*  Another  French  writer,  Bellange,  in  the  Museon  for 
i8qo,  quoted  by  Kuenen  ("Ges.  Abhandl.,"  p.  213),  goes 
further,  and  places  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  under  the  third 
Artaxerxes,  Ochus  (358-338). 

t  Ezra  iv.  6-v. 

t  Kuenen,  "  De  Chronologie  van  het  Perzische  Tijdvak 
der  Joodsche  Geschiedems,"  iSqo,  translated  by  Budde  in 
Kuenen's  "Gesammelte  Abhandlungen,"  pp.  212  ff.;  Van 
Hoonacker,  "Zorobabel  et  le  Second  Temple"  (i8g2); 
Kosters,  "Het  Herstel  van  Israel,"  in  "Het  Perzische 
Tijdvak,"  1894,  translated  by  Basedow,  "Die  Wieder- 
herstellung  Israels  im  Persischen  Zeitalter,"  1896. 

§  Hag.  ii.  3. 

li  Zech.  i.  12. 

if  Ezra  iv.  5. 

**  Ezra  ii.  2,  iv.  i  fT.,  v.  2. 

tt  As  Kuenen  shows,  p.  226,  nothing  can  be  deduced  from 
Ezra  vi.  14. 


6o6 


THE   BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Kuenen,*  who  proves  that  Nehemiah's  mission 
to  Jerusalem  must  have  fallen  in  the  twentieth 
year  of  Artaxerxes  I.,  or  445. f  "  On  this  fact 
there  can  be  no  further  difference  of  opinion."  X 

These  two  dates  then  are  fixed:  the  beginning 
of  the  Temple  in  520  by  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua, 
and  the  arrival  of  Nehemiah  at  Jerusalem  in  445. 
Other  points  are  more  difficult  to  establish,  and 
in  particular  there  rests  a  great  obscurity  on  the 
date  of  the  two  visits  of  Ezra  to  Jerusalem.  Ac- 
cording to  the  Book  of  Ezra^  he  went  there  first 
in  the  seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  I.,  or  458  b.  c, 
thirteen  years  before  the  arrival  of  Nehemiah. 
He  found  many  Jews  married  to  heathen  wives, 
laid  it  to  heart,  and  called  a  general  assembly  of 
the  people  to  drive  the  latter  out  of  the  com- 
munity. Then  we  hear  no  more  of  him:  neither 
in  the  negotiations  with  Artaxerxes  about  the 
building  of  the  walls,  nor  upon  the  arrival  of 
Nehemiah,  nor  in  Nehemiah's  treatment  of  the 
mixed  marriages.  He  is  absent  from  everything, 
till  suddenly  he  appears  again  at  the  dedication 
of  the  walls  by  Nehemiah  and  at  the  reading  of 
the  Law. II  This  "  eclipse  of  Ezra,"  as  Kuenen 
well  calls  it,  taken  with  the  mixed  character  of 
all  the  records  Jeft  of  him,  has  moved  some  to 
deny  to  him  and  his  reforms  and  his  promulga- 
tion of  the  Law  any  historical  reality  whatever;^ 
while  others,  with  a  more  sober  and  rational  crit- 
icism, have  sought  to  solve  the  difficulties  by  an- 
other arrangement  of  the  events  than  that  usu- 
ally accepted.  Van  Hoonacker  makes  Ezra's 
first  appearance  in  Jerusalem  to  be  at  the  dedi- 
cation of  the  walls  and  promulgation  of  the  Law 
in  445,  and  refers  his  arrival  described  in  Ezra 
vii.  and  his  attempts  to  abolish  the  mixed  mar- 
riages to  a  second  visit  to  Jerusalem  in  the  twen- 
tieth year,  not  of  Artaxerxes  L,  but  of  Arta- 
xerxes n.,  or  398  B.  c.  Kuenen  has  exposed 
the  extreme  unlikelihood,  if  not  impossibility, 
of  so  late  a  date  for  Ezra,  and  in  this  Kosters 
holds  with  him.  **  But  Kosters  agrees  with  Van 
Hoonacker  in  placing  Ezra's  activity  subse- 
quent to  Nehemiah"s  and  to  the  dedication  of 
the  walls. 

These  questions  about  Ezra  have  little  bearing 
on  our  present  study  of  the  prophets,  and  it  is 
not  our  duty  to  discuss  them.  But  Kuenen,  in 
answer  to  Van  Hoonacker,  has  shown  very  strong 
reasons  ft  for  holding  in  the  main  to  the  gener- 
ally accepted  theory  of  Ezra's  arrival  in  Jerusa- 
lem in  458,  the  seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  L; 
and  though  there  are  great  difficulties  about  the 
narrative    which    follows,    and    especially    about 

*  P.  227  ;  in  answer  to  De  Saulcy,  "  Etude  Chronologique 
des  Livres  d'Esdras  et  de  Nehemie  "  (1868),  "  Sept  Siecles 
de  I'Histoire  Judaique  "  (1874)-  De  Saulcy's  case  rests  on 
the  account  of  Josephus  (XI.  "Ant."  vii.  2-8:  c/.  ix.  i), 
the  untrustworthy  character  of  which  and  its  confusion 
of  two  distant  eras  Kuenen  has  no  difKculty  in  showing. 

t  When  Nehemiah  came  to  Jerusalem  Eliyashib  was 
high  priest,  and  he  was  a  grandson  of  Jeshua,  who  was 
high  priest  in  520,  or  seventy-five  years  before  ;  but  be- 
tween 520  and  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes  II.  lie 
one  hundred  and  thirty-six  years.  And  again,  the  Arta- 
xerxes of  Ezra  iv.  8-23,  under  whom  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem were  begun,  was  the  immediate  follower  of  Xerxes 
(Ahasuerus),  and  therefore  Artaxerxes  I.,  and  Van 
Hoonacker  has  shown  that  he  must  be  the  same  as  the 
Artaxerxes  of  Nehemiah. 

t  Kosters,  p.  43. 

S  vii.  1-8. 

II  Neh.  xii.  36,  viii.,  x. 

^Vernes,  "Precis  d'Histoire  Juive  depuis  les  Origines 
jusqu'^  I'Epoque  Persane"  (1889),  pp.  57Q  flf.  (not  seen); 
more  recently  also  Charles  C.  Torrey  of  Andover,  "The 
Composition  and  Historical  Value  of  Ezra-Nehemiah," 
in  the  "  Beihefte  zur  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  II.,  1896. 

**  Pages  113  flf. 

+t  Page  237. 


Ezra's  sudden  disappearance  from  the  scene  till 
after  Nehemiah's  arrival,  reasons  may  be  found 
for  this.* 

We  are  therefore  justified  in  holding,  in  the 
meantime,  to  the  traditional  arrangement  of  the 
great  events  in  Israel  in  the  fifth  century  before 
Christ.  We  may  divide  the  whole  Persian  period 
by  the  two  points  we  have  found  to  be  certain, 
the  beginning  of  the  Temple  under  Darius  L  in 
520  and  the  mission  of  Nehemiah  to  Jerusalem 
in  445,  and  by  the  other  that  we  have  found  to  be 
probable,    Ezra's   arrival   in   458. 

On  these  data  the  Persian  period  may  be  ar- 
ranged under  the  following  four  sections,  among 
which  we  place  those  prophets  who  respectively 
belong   to   them: — 

1.  From  the  Taking  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  to 
the  Completion  of  the  Temple  in  the  sixth  year 
of  Darius  L,  538-516:  Haggai  and  Zechariah  in 
520  fif. 

2.  From  the  Completion  of  the  Temple  under 
Darius  L  to  the  arrival  of  Ezra  in  the  seventh 
year  of  Artaxerxes  L,  516-458:  sometimes  called 
the  period  of  si'lence,  but  probably  yielding  the 
Book  of  Malachi. 

3.  The  Work  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  under 
Artaxerxes  L,   Longimanus,  458-425. 

4.  The  Rest  of  the  Period,  Xerxes  H.  to 
Darius  HL,  425-331:  the  prophet  Joel  and  per- 
haps several  other  anonymous  fragments  of 
prophecy. 

Of  these  four  sections  we  must  now  examine 
the  .first,  for  it  forms  the  necessary  introduction 
to  our  study  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  and  above 
all  it  raises  a  question  almost  greater  than  any 
of  those  we  have  just  been  djscussing.  The 
fact  recorded  by  the  Book  of  Ezra,  and  till  a  few 
years  ago  accepted  without  doubt  by  tradition 
and  modern  criticism,  the  first  Return  of  Exiles 
from  Babylon  under  Cyrus,  has  lately  been  alto- 
gether denied;  and  the  builders  of  the  Temple 
in  520  have  been  asserted  to  be,  not  returned 
exiles,  but  the  remnant  of  Jews  left  in  Judah  by 
Nebuchadrezzar  in  586.  The  importance  of  this 
for  our  interpretation  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah, 
who  instigated  the  building  of  the  Temple,  is 
obvious:  we  must  discuss  tne  question  in  detail. 


CHAPTER   XVL 

FROM  THE  RETURN  FROM  BABYLON  TO 
THE  BUILDING  OF   THE  TEMPLE. 

(536-516  B.  c). 

Cyrus  the  Great  took  Babylon  and  the  Baby- 
lonian Empire  in  539.  Upon  the  eve  of  his  con- 
quest the  Second  Isaiah  had  hailed  him  as  the 
Liberator  of  the  people  of  God  and  the  builder 
of  their  Temple.  The  Return  of  the  Exiles  and 
the  Restoration  both  of  Temple  and  City  were 
predicted  by  the  Second  Isaiah  for  the  immediate 
future;  and  a  Jewish  historian,  the  Compiler  of 
the  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  who  lived 
about  300  B.  c,  has  taken  up  the  story  of  how 
these  events  came  to  pass  from  the  very  first 
year  of  Cyrus  onward.  Before  discussing  the 
dates  and  proper  order  of  these  events,   it  will 

*The  failure  of  his  too  hasty  and  impetuous  attempts 
at  so  wholesale  a  measure  as  the  banishment  of  the 
heathen  wives;  or  his  return  to  Babylon,  having  accom- 
plished his  end.  See  Ryle,  "  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,"  in  the 
"  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools,"  Introd.,  pp.  xl.  f. 


FROM    RETURN    TO    BUILDING    OF    TEMPLE. 


607 


be  well  to  have  this  Chronicler's  narrative  be- 
fore us.  It  lies  in  the  first  and  following  chap- 
ters of  our  Book  of  Ezra. 

According  to  this,  Cyrus,  soon  after  his  con- 
quest of  Babylon,  gave  permission  to  the  Jewish 
exiles  to  return  to  Palestine,  and  between  forty 
and  fifty  thousand  *  did  so  return,  bearing  the 
vessels  of  Jehovah's  house  which  the  Chaldeans 
had  taken  away  in  586.  These  Cyrus  delivered 
"to  Sheshbazzar,  prince  of  Judah"f  (who  is 
further  described  in  an  Aramaic  document  in- 
corporated by  the  Compiler  of  the  Book  of  Ezra 
as  "  Pehah,"  or  "provincial  governor,":!:  and  as 
laying  the  foundation  of  the  Temple  i^),  and  there 
is  also  mentioned  in  command  of  the  people  a 
Tirshatha,  probably  the  Persian  Tarsata,||  which 
also  means  "  provincial  governor."  Upon  their 
arrival  at  Jerusalem,  the  date  of  which  will  be 
immediately  discussed,  the  people  are  said  to  be 
under  Jeshu'a  ben  JosadakTT  and  Zerubbabel  ben 
Shc'alti'el  **  who  had  already  been  mentioned  as 
the  head  of  the  returning  exiles,  ft  and  who  is 
called  by  his  contemporary  Haggai  Pehah,  or 
"  governor,  of  Judah."  Xt  Are  we  to  understand 
by  Sheshbazzar  and  Zerubbabel  one  and  the  same 
person?  Most  critics  have  answered  in  the  af- 
firmative, believing  that  Sheshbazzar  is  but  the 
Babylonian  or  Persian  name  by  which  the  Jew 
Zerubbabel  was  known  at  court;  §§  and  this  view 
is  supported  by  the  facts  that  Zerubbabel  was 
of  the  house  of  David  and  is  called  Pehah  by 
Haggai,  and  by  the  argument  that  the  command 
given  by  the  Tirshatha  to  the  Jews  to  abstain 
from  "eating  the  most  holy  things"  ||!|  could  only 
have  been  given  by  a  native  Jew.  "f^  But  others, 
arguing  that  Ezra  v.  i,  compared  with  vv.  14 
and  16,  implies  that  Zerubbabel  and  Sheshbazzar 
were  two  different  persons,  take  the  former  to 
have  been  the  most  prominent  of  the  Jews 
themselves,  but  the  latter  an  ofificial,  Persian  or 
Babylonian,  appointed  by  Cyrus  to  carry  out 
such  business  in  connection  with  the  Return  as 
couldonlybedischargedby  an  imperial  otTicer.*** 
This  is,  on  the  whole,  the  more  probable  theory. 

If  it  is  right,  Sheshbazzar,  who  superintended 
the  Return,  had  disappeared  from  Jerusalem  by 
521,  when  Haggai  commenced  to  prophesy,  and 
had  been  succeeded  as  Pehah,  or  governor,  by 
Zerubbabel.  But  in  that  case  the  Compiler  has 
been  in  error  in  calling  Sheshbazzar  "  a  prince 
of  Judah."  ttt 

The  next  point  to  fix  is  what  the  Compiler 
considers  to  have  been  the  date  of  the  Return. 
He    names    no   year,    but   he    recounts    that   the 

♦42,360,  "  besides  their  servants,"  is  the  total  sum  given 
in  Ezra  ii.  64  ;  but  the  detailed  figures  in  Ezra  amount 
only  to  2Q,8i8,  those  in  Nehemiah  to  31,089,  and  those  in 
I  Esdras  to  30,143  (other  MSS.  30,678).  See  Ryle  on  Ezra 
ii.  64. 

t  Ezra  i.  8. 

X  Ezra  V.  14. 

i,/d.  16. 

II  Ezra  ii.  63. 

^  P"^?^'"!^  J?'"^."'.  *  Ezra  iii.  2,  like  Ezra  i.  1-8,  from  the 
Compiler  of  Ezra-Nehemiah. 

+t  Ezra  ii.  2. 

ttHag.  i.  14,  ii.  2,  21,  and  perhaps  by  Nehemiah  (vii.  65- 
70).  Nehemiah  himself  is  styled  both  Pehah  (xiv.  20)  and 
Tirshatha  (viii.  g,  X.  i). 

§§  As  Daniel  and  his  three  friends  had  also  Babylonian 
names. 

BH  Ezra  ii.  63. 

il^  Cf.  Ryle,  xxxi.  ff.;  and  on  Ezra  i.  8,  ii.  63. 

•♦*  Stade,  "  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,"  II.  98  fi.:c/.  Kue- 
nen  "Gessammelte  Abhandl.,"  220. 

tttEzrai.  8. 


same  people,  whom  he  has  just  described  as 
receiving  the  command  of  Cyrus  to  return,  did 
immediately  leave  Babylon,*  and  he  says  that 
they  arrived  at  Jerusalem  in  "  the  seventh 
month,"  but  again  without  stating  a  year.f  In 
any  case,  he  obviously  intends  to  imply  that  the 
Return  followed  immediately  on  reception  of 
the  permission  to  return,  and  that  this  was  given 
by  Cyrus  very  soon  after  his  occupation  of 
Babylon  in  539-8.  We  may  take  it  that  the 
Compiler  understood  the  year  to  be  that  we 
know  as  537  b.  c.  He  adds  that,  on  the  arrival 
of  the  caravans  from  Babylon,  the  Jews  set  up 
the  altar  on  its  old  site  and  restored  the  morn- 
ing and  evening  sacrifices;  that  they  kept  also 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  and  thereafter  all  the 
rest  of  the  feasts  of  Jehovah;  and  further, 
that  they  engaged  masons  and  carpenters  for 
building  the  Temple,  and  Phoenicians  to  bring 
them  cedar-wood  from  Lebanon. :t 

Another  section  from  the  Compiler's  hand 
states  that  the  returned  Jews  set  to  work  upon 
the  Temple  "  in  the  second  month  of  the  sec- 
ond year  "  of  their  Return,  presumably  536  b.  c, 
laying  the  foundation-stone  with  due  pomp,  and 
amid  the  excitement  of  the  whole  people.^ 
Whereupon  certain  "  adversaries,"  by  whom  the 
Compiler  means  Samaritans,  demanded  a  share 
in  the  building  of  the  Temple,  and  when  Joshua 
and  Zerubbabel  refused  this,  "  the  people  of  the 
land  "  frustrated  the  building  of  the  Temple 
even  until  the  reign  of  Darius,  521  ff. 

This — the  second  year  of  Darius — is  the  point 
to  which  contemporary  documents,  the  proph- 
ecies of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  assign  the  be- 
ginning of  new  measures  to  build  the  Temple. 
Of  these  the  Compiler  of  the  Book  of  Ezra 
says  in  the  meantime  nothing,  but  after  barely 
mentioning  the  reign  of  Darius  leaps  at  once  || 
to  further  Samaritan  obstructions — though  not 
of  the  building  of  the  Temple  (be  it  noted), 
but  of  the  building  of  the  city  walls — in  the 
reigns  of  Ahasuerus,  that  is  Xerxes,  presumably 
Xerxes  I.,  the  successor  of  Darius,  485-464,  and 
of  his  successor  Artaxerxes  I.,  464-424  ;•]  the 
account  of  the  latter  of  which  he  gives  not  in 
his  own  language,  but  in  that  of  an  Aramaic  doc- 
ument, Ezra  iv.  8  ff.  And  this  document,  after 
recounting  how  Artaxerxes  empowered  the  Sa- 
maritans to  stop  the  building  of  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem,  records  **  that  the  building  ceased 
"  till  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Darius," 
when  the  prophets  Haggai  and  Zechariah  stirred 
up  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  to  rebuild,  not  the 
city  walls,  be  it  observed,  but  the  Temple,  and 
with  the  permission  of  Darius  this  building  was 
at  last  completed  in  his  sixth  year,  ft  That  is 
to  say,  this  Aramaic  document  brings  us  back, 
with  the  frustrated  building  of  the  walls 
under  Xerxes  I.  and  Artaxerxes  I.  (485-424), 
to  the  same  date  under  their  predecessor  Darius 
I.,  viz.  520,  to  which  the  Compiler  had  brought 

*  Ezra  i.  compared  with  ii.  i. 

t  Some  think  to  find  this  in  i  Esdras  v.  i-6,  where  it  is 
said  that  Darius,  a  name  they  take  to  be  an  error  for  that 
of  Cyrus,  brought  up  the  exiles  with  an  escort  of  a  thou- 
sand" cavalry,  starting  in  the  first  month  of  the  second 
year  of  the  king's  reign.  This  passage,  however,  is  not 
beyond  suspicion  as  a  gloss  (see  Ryle  on  Ezra  i.  u),  and 
even  if  genuine  may  be  intended  to  describe  a  second 
contingent  of  exiles  despatched  by  Darius  I.  in  his  second 
year,  520.  The  names  given  include  that  of  Jesua,  son  of 
Josedec,  and  instead  of  Zerubbabel,  that  of  his  sou 
Joacim. 

t  Ezra  iii.  3-7.  ^  See  above,  p.  605. 

§//^.  8-13.  •*iv.  24. 

II  Ezra  iv.  7.  +t  Ezra  iv.  24-vi.  15. 


6oS 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


down  the  frustrated  building  of  the  Temple! 
The  most  reasonable  explanation  of  this  confu- 
sion, not  only  of  chronology,  but  of  two 
distinct  processes — the  erection  of  the  Temple 
and  the  fortification  of  the  city — is  that  the  Com- 
piler was  misled  by  his  desire  to  give  as  strong 
an  impression  as  possible  of  the  Samaritan  ob- 
structions by  placing  them  all  together.  At- 
tempts to  harmonise  the  order  of  his  narrative 
with  the  ascertained  sequence  of  the  Persian 
reigns  have  failed.* 

Such  then  is  the  character  of  the  compilation 
known  to  us  as  the  Book  of  Ezra.  If  we  add 
that  in  its  present  form  it  cannot  be  of  earlier 
date  than  300  b.  c,  or  two  hundred  and  thirty- 
six  years  after  the  Return,  and  that  the  Aramaic 
document  which  it  incorporates  is  probably  not 
earlier  than  430,  or  one  hundred  years  after  the 
Return,  while  the  List  of  Exiles  which  it  gives 
(in  chap,  ii.)  also  contains  elements  that  can- 
not be  earlier  than  430,  we  shall  not  wonder 
that  grave  doubts  should  have  been  raised  con- 
ce-rning  its  trustworthiness  as  a  narrative. 

These  doubts  af¥ect,  with  one  exception,  all 
the  great  facts  which  it  professes  to  record. 
The  exception  is  the  building  of  the  Temple  be- 
tween the  second  and  sixth  years  of  Darius  L, 
520-516,  which  we  have  already  seen  to  be  past 
doubt.f  But  all  that  the  Book  of  Ezra  relates 
before  this  has  been  called  in  question,  and  it 
has  been  successively  alleged:  (i)  that  there  was 
no  such  attempt  as  the  book  describes  to  build 
the  Temple  before  520,  (2)  that  there  was  no 
Return  of  Exiles  at  all  under  Cyrus,  and  that 
the  Temple  was  not  built  by  Jews  who  had  come 
from  Babylon,  but  by  Jews  who  had  never  left 
Judah. 

These  conclusions,  if  justified,  would  have  the 
most  important  bearing  upon  our  interpretation 
of  Haggai  and  Zechariah.  It  is  therefore  neces- 
sary to  examine  them  with  care.  They  were 
reached  by  critics  in  the  order  just  stated,  but 
as  the  second  is  the  more  sweeping  and  to  some 
extent  involves  the  other,  we  may  take  it  first. 

I.  Is  the  Book  of  Ezra,  then,  right  or  wrong 
in  asserting  that  there  was  a  great  return  of 
Jews,  headed  by  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua,  about 
the  year  536,  and  that  it  was  they  who  in  520-516 
rebuilt  the  Temple? 

The  argument  that  in  recounting  these  events 
the  Book  of  Ezra  is  unhistorical  has  been  fully 
stated  by  Professor  Kosters  of  Leiden.:]:  He 
reaches  his  conclusion  along  three  lines  of  evi- 
dence: the  Books  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  the 
sources  from  which  he  believes  the  Aramaic  nar- 
rative Ezra  V.    i-vi.    18  to  have  been  compiled, 

*  There  are  in  the  main  two  classes  of  such  attempts. 
(a)  Some  have  suggested  that  the  Ahasuerus  (Xerxes) 
and  Arta.xerxes  mentioned  in  Ezra  iv.  6  and  7  fif.  are  not 
the  successors  of  Darius  I.  who  bore  these  names,  but 
titles  of  his  predecessors  Cambyses  and  the  Pseudo- 
Smerdis  (see  above,  p.  605).  This  view  has  been  disposed 
of  by  Kuenen,  "  Ges.  Abhandl.,"  pp.  224  ff..  and  by  Ryle, 
pp.  65  If.  (6)  The  attempt  to  prove  that  the  Darius  under 
whom  the  Temple  was  built  was  not  Darius  I.  (521-485), 
the  predecessor  of  Xerxes  I.  and  Artaxerxes  I.  (485-424), 
but  their  successor  once  removed,  Darius  II.,  Nothus 
(423-404).  So.  in  defence  of  the  Book  of  Ezra,  Imbert. 
For  his  theory  and  the  answer  to  it  see  above   pp.  605  f. 

tSee  above,  pp.  605  ff. 

t  For  his  work  see  above,  p.  605,  n.  I  regret  that 
neither  Wellhausen's  answer  to  it,  nor  Kosters'  reply  to 
Wellhausen,  was  accessible  to  me  in  preparing  this 
chapter.  Nor  did  I  read  Mr.  Torry's  rt^suwe  of  Well- 
hausen's answer,  or  Wellhausen's  notes  to  the  second 
edition  of  his  "  Isr.  u.  Jud.  Geschichte,"  till  the  chapter 
was  written.  Previous  to  Kosters,  the  Return  under 
Cyrus  had  been  called  in  question  only  by  the  very 
arbitrary  French  scholar,  M.  Vernes,  in  1889-90. 


and  the  list  of  names  in  Eera  ii.  In  the 
Books  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  he  points  out 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  whom  the 
prophets  summon  to  build  the  Temple  are  not 
called  by  any  name  which  implies  that  they  are 
returned  exiles;  that  nothing  in  the  description 
of  them  would  lead  us  to  suppose  this;  that 
God's  anger  against  Israel  is  represented  as  still 
unbroken;  that  neither  prophet  speaks  of  a  Re- 
turn as  past,  but  that  Zechariah  seems  to.  look 
for  it  as  still  to  come.*  The  second  line  of  evi- 
dence is  an  analysis  of  the  Aramaic  document, 
Ezra  v.  6  ff.,  into  two  sources,  neither  of  which 
implies  a  Return  under  Cyrus.  But  these  two 
lines  of  proof  cannot  avail  against  the  List  of 
Returned  Exiles  offered  us  in  Ezra  ii.  and  Nehe- 
miah  vii.,  if  the  latter  be  genuine.  On  his  third 
line  of  evidence.  Dr.  Kosters,  therefore,  disputes 
the  genuineness  of  this  List,  and  further  denies 
that  it  even  gives  itself  out  as  a  List  of  Exiles 
returned  under  Cyrus.  So  he  arrives  at  the  con- 
clusion that  there  was  no  Return  from  Babylon 
under  Cyrus,  nor  any  before  the  Temple  was 
built  in  520  ff.,  but  that  the  builders  were  "  peo- 
ple of  the  land,"  Jews  who  had  never  gone  into 
exile. 

The  evidence  which  Dr.  Kosters  draws  from 
the  Book  of  Ezra  least  concerns  us.  Both  be- 
cause of  this  and  because  it  is  the  weakest  part 
of  his  case,  we  may  take  it  first. 

Dr.  Kosters  analyses  the  bulk  of  the  Aramaic 
document,  Ezra  v.-vi.  18,  into  two  constituents. 
His  arguments  for  this  are  very  precarious,  f 
The  first  document,  which  he  takes  to  consist 
of  chap.  V.  1-5  and  10,  with  perhaps  vi.  6-15 
(except  a  few  phrases),  relates  that  Thathnai, 
Satrap  of  the  West  of  the  Euphrates,  asked 
Darius  whether  he  might  allow  the  Jews  to  pro- 
ceed with  the  building  of  the  Temple,  and  re- 
ceived command  not  only  to  allow,  but  to  help 
them,  on  the  ground  that  Cyrus  had  already 
given  them  permission.  The  second,  chap.  v. 
11-17,  vi.  1-3,  affirms  that  the  building  had  ac- 
tually begun  under  Cyrus,  who  had  sent  Shesh- 
bazzar,  the  Satrap,  to  see  it  carried  out.  Neither 
of  these  documents  says  a  word  about  any  order 
from  Cyrus  to  the  Jews  to  return-  and  the  im- 
plication of  the  second,  that  the  building  had 
gone  on  uninterruptedly  from  the  time  of  Cyrus' 
order  to  the  second  year  of  Darius, J  is  not  in 
harmony  with  the  evidence  of  the  Compiler  of 
the  Book  of  Ezra,  who,  as  we  have  seen,^  states 
that  Samaritan  obstruction  stayed  the  building 
till  the  second  year  of  Darius. 

But  suppose  we  accept  Koster's  premisses  and 
agree  that  these  two  documents  really  exist 
within  Ezra  v.-vi.  18.  Their  evidence  is  not  ir- 
reconcilable. Both  imply  that  Cyrus  gave  com- 
mand to  rebuild  the  Temple;  if  they  were  orig- 
inally   independent    that    would    but    strengthen 

*  ii.  6.  ff.  Eng..  10  ff.  Heb. 

t  His  chief  grounds  for  this  analysis  are  (i)  that  in  v. 
1-5  the  Jews  are  said  to  have  begun  to  build  the  Temple 
in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  while  in  v.  16  the  foundation- 
stone  is  said  to  have  been  laid  under  Cyrus;  (2)  the  fre- 
quent want  of  connection  throughout  the  passage  ;  (3) 
an  alleged  doublet :  in  v.  17-vi.  i  search  is  said  to  have 
been  made  for  the  edict  of  Cyrus  "  in  Babylon,"  while  in 
vi.  2  the  edict  is  said  to  have  been  found  "in  Ecbatana." 
But  (i)  and  (3)  are  capable  of  very  obvious  explanations, 
and  (2)  is  far  from  conclusive.— The  remainder  of  the 
Aramaic  text,  iv.  8-24,  Kosters  seeks  to  prove  is  by  the 
Chronicler  or  Compiler  himself.  As  Torrey  (op.  at.,  p. 
11)  has  shown,  this  "is  as  unlikely  as  possible."  At  the 
most  he  may  have  made  additions  to  the  Aramaic  docu- 
ment. 

t  Ezra  V.  16. 

§  Above,  pp.  607  f. 


FROM    RETURN    TO    BUILDING    OF    TEMPLE. 


609 


the  tradition  of  such  a  command,  and  render  a 
little  weaker  Dr.  Kosters'  contention  that  the 
tradition  arose  merely  from  a  desire  to  find  a 
fulfilment  of  the  Second  Isaiah's  predictions  * 
that  Cyrus  would  be  the  Temple's  builder.  That 
neither  of  the  supposed  documents  mentions  the 
Return  itself  is  very  natural,  because  both  are 
concerned  with  the  building  of  the  Temple.  For 
the  Compiler  of  the  Book  of  Ezra,  who  on 
Kosters'  argument  put  them  together,  the  in- 
terest of  the  Return  is  over;  he  has  already 
sufficiently  dealt  with  it.  But  more — Kosters' 
second  document,  which  ascribes  the  building 
of  the  Temple  to  Cyrus,  surely  by  that  very 
statement  implies  a  Return  of  Exiles  during  his 
reign.  For  is  it  at  all  probable  that  Cyrus 
would  have  committed  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Temple  to  a  Persian  magnate  like  Sheshbazzar, 
without  sending  with  him  a  large  number  of 
those  Babylonian  Jews  who  must  have  instigated 
the  king  to  give  his  order  for  rebuilding?  We 
may  conclude  then  that  Ezra  v.-vi.  18,  whatever 
be  its  value  and  its  date,  contains  no  evidence, 
positive  or  negative,  against  a  Return  of  the 
Jews  under  Cyrus,  but,  on  the  contrary,  takes  this 
for  granted. 

We  turn  now  to  Dr.  Kosters'  treatment  of 
the  so-called  List  of  the  Returned  Exiles.  He 
holds  this  List  to  have  been,  not  only  borrowed 
for  its  place  in  Ezra  ii.  from  Nehemiah  vii.,f 
but  even  interpolated  in  the  latter.  His  reasons 
for  this  latter  conclusion  are  very  improbable, 
as  will  be  seen  from  the  appended  note,  and 
really  weaken  his  otherwise  strong  case.^:  As 
to  the  contents  of  the  List,  there  are,  it  is  true, 
many  elements  which  date  from  Nehemiah's  own 
time  and  even  later.  But  these  are  not  sufficient 
to  prove  that  the  List  was  not  originally  a  List 
of  Exiles  returned  under  Cyrus.  The  verses  in 
which  this  is  asserted — Ezra  ii.  i,  2;  Nehemiah 
vii.  6,  7 — ^plainly  intimate  that  those  Jews  who 
came  up  out  of  the  Exile  were  the  same  who 
built  the  Temple  under  Darius.  Dr.  Kosters 
endeavours  to  destroy  the  force  of  this  state- 
ment (if  true  so  destructive  of  his  theory)  by 
pointing  to  the  number  of  the  leaders  which  the 
List  assigns  to  the  returning  exiles.     In  fixing 

*  Isa.  xliv.  28,  xlv.  I.  According  to  Kosters,  the  state- 
ment of  the  Aramaic  document  about  the  rebuilding  of 
the  Temple  is  therefore  a  pious  invention  of  a  literal  ful- 
filment of  prophecy.  To  this  opinion  Cheyne  adheres 
("  Introd.  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah,"  1895,  xxxviii.),  and  adds 
the  further  assumption  that  the  Chronicler,  being 
"shocked  at  the  ascription  to  Cyrus  (for  the  Judaean 
builders  have  no  credit  given  them)  of  what  must,  he 
thought,  have  been  at  least  equally  due  to  the  zeal  of  the 
exiles,"  invented  his  story  in  the  earlier  chapters  of  Ezra 
as  to  the  part  the  exiles  themselves  took  in  the  rebuild- 
ing. It  will  be  noticed  that  these  assumptions  have  pre- 
cisely the  value  of  such.  They  are  merely  the  imputation 
of  motives,  more  or  less  probable  to  the  vvriters  of  certain 
statements,  and  may  therefore  be  fairly  met  by  prob- 
abilities from  the  other  side.     But  of  this  more  later  on. 

tThis  is  the  usual  opinion  of  critics,  who  yet  hold  it  to 
be  genuine — e.  <f.,  Ryle. 

X  He  seeks  to  argue  that  a  List  of  Exiles  returned  under 
Cyrus  in  536  could  be  of  no  use  for  Nehemiah's  purpose 
to  obtain  in  445  a  census  of  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  ; 
but  surely,  if  in  his  efforts  to  make  a  census  Nehemiah 
discovered  the  existence  of  such  a  List,  it  was  natural  for 
him  to  give  it  as  the  basis  of  his  inquiry,  or  (because  the 
List — see  above,  p.  608— contains  elements  from  Nehe- 
miah's own  time)  to  enlarge  it  and  bring  it  down  to  date. 
But  Dr.  Kosters  thinks  also  that  as  Nehemiah  would  never 
have  broken  the  connection  of  his  memoirs  with  such  a 
List,  the  latter  must  have  been  inserted  by  the  Compiler, 
who  at  this  point  grew  weary  of  the  discursiveness  of 
the  memoirs,  broke  from  them,  and  then — inserted  this 
lengthy  List !  This  is  simply  incredible — that  he  should 
seek  to  atone  for  the  diffuseness  of  Nehemiah's  memoirs 
by  the  intrusion  of  a  very  long  catalogue  which  had  no 
relevance  to  the  point  at  which  he  broke  them  off. 
39— Vol.  IV. 


this  number  as  twelve,  the  author,  Kosters  main- 
tains, intended  to  make  the  leaders  representa- 
tive of  the  twelve  tribes  and  the  body  of  returned 
exiles  as  equivalent  to  All-Israel.  But,  he  ar- 
gues, neither  Haggai  nor  Zechariah  considers 
the  builders  of  the  Temple  to  be  equivalent  to 
All-Israel,  nor  was  this  conception  realised  in 
Judah  till  after  the  arrival  of  Ezra  with  his 
bands.  The  force  of  this  argument  is  greatly 
weakened  by  remembering  how  natural  it  would 
have  been  for  men,  who  felt  the  Return  under 
Cyrus,  however  small,  to  be  the  fulfilment  of  the 
Second  Isaiah's  glorious  predictions  of  the  res- 
toration of  All-Israel,  to  appoint  twelve  leaders, 
and  to  make  them  representative  of  the  nation 
as  a  whole.  Kosters'  argument  against  the  nat- 
uralness of  such  an  appointment  in  537,  and 
therefore  against  the  truth  of  the  statement  of 
the  List  about  it,  falls  to  the  ground. 

But  in  the  Books  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
Dr.  Kosters  finds  much  more  formidable  wit- 
nesses for  his  thesis  that  there  was  no  Return 
of  Exiles  from  Babylon  before  the  building  of 
the  Temple  under  Darius.  These  books  nowhere 
speak  of  a  Return  under  Cyrus,  nor  do  they  call 
the  community  who  built  the  Temple  by  the 
names  of  Golah  or  B'ne  ha-G61ah,  "  Captivity  " 
or  "  Sons  of  the  Captivity,"  which  are  given  after 
the  Return  of  Ezra's  bands;  but  they  simply 
name  them  "  this  people  "  *  or  "  remnant  of  the 
people," f  "people  of  the  land,"t  "Judah"  or 
"  House  of  Judah,"  §  names  perfectly  suitable  to 
Jews  who  had  never  left  the  neighbourhood  of 
Jerusalem.  Even  if  we  except  from  this  list 
the  phrase  "  the  remnant  of  the  people,"  as  in- 
tended by  Haggai  and  Zechariah  in  the  numeri- 
cal sense  of  "  the  rest "  or  "  all  the  others,"  || 
we  have  still  to  deal  with  the  other  titles,  with 
the  absence  from  them  of  any  symptom  descrip- 
tive of  return  from  exile,  and  with  the  whole 
silence  of  our  two  prophets  concerning  such  a 
return.  These  are  very  striking  phenomena,  and 
they  undoubtedly  afiford  considerable  evidence 
for  Dr.  Kosters'  thesis.*|[  But  it  cannot  escape 
notice  that  the  evidence  they  afTord  is  mainly 
negative,  and  this  raises  two  questions:  (i)  Can 
the  phenomena  in  Haggai  and  Zechariah  be  ac- 
counted for?  and  (2)  whether  accounted  for  or 
not,  can  they  be  held  to  prevail  against  the  mass 
of  positive  evidence  in  favour  of  a  Return  under 
Cyrus? 

An  explanation  of  the  absence  of  all  allusion 
in  Haggai  and  Zechariah  to  the  Return  is  cer- 
tainly possible. 

No  one  can  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  spiritual- 
ity of  the  teaching  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah. 
Their  one  ambition  is  to  put  courage  from  God 

*  Hag.  i.  2,  12;  ii.  14. 

+  Hag.  i.  12,  14  ;  ii.  2  ;  Zech.  viii.  6,  11,  12, 

X  Hag.  ii.  4  ;  Zech.  vii.  5. 

§  Zech.  ii.  16  ;  viii.  ij,  15. 

II  It  is  used  in  Hag.  1.  12,  14,  ii.  2,  only  after  the  mention 
of  the  leaders  ;  see,  however,  Pusey's  note  9  to  Hag.  i.  12  ; 
wliile  in  Zech.  viii.  6,  11,  18,  it  might  be  argued  that  it  was 
employed  in  such  a  way  as  to  cover  not  only  Jews  who 
had  never  left  their  land,  but  all  Jews  as  well  who  were 
left  of  ancient  Israel. 

1^ Compare  Cheyne,  "Introduction  to  the  Book  of 
Isaiah,"  1805,  xxxv.  ff.,  who  says  that  in  the  main  points 
Kosters'  conclusions  "appear  so  inevitable  "  that  he  has 
"constantly  presupposed  them  "  in  dealing  with  chaps. 
Ivi -Ixvi.  of  Isaiah;  and  Torrey,  op.  ctt.,  i8g6,  p.  53; 
"  Kosters  has  demonstrated,  from  the  testimony  of  Haggai 
and  Zechariah,  that  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  were  not 
returned  exiles;  and  furthermore  that  the  prophets 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  knew  nothing  of  an  important 
return  of  exiles  from  Babylonia."  Cf.  also  WildeBoer, 
"  Litteratur  des  A.  T.,"  pp.  291  ff. 


6io 


THE'BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


into  the  poor  hearts  before  them,  that  these  out 
of  their  own  resources  may  rebuild  their  Temple. 
As  Zechariah  puts  it,  "  Not  by  might,  nor  by 
power,  but  by  My  Spirit,  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts."  *  It  is  obvious  why  men  of  this  temper 
should  refrain  from  appealing  to  the  Return, 
or  to  the  royal  power  of  Persia  by  which  it 
had  been  achieved.  We  can  understand  why, 
while  the  annals  employed  in  the  Book  of  Ezra 
record  the  appeal  of  the  political  leaders  of  the 
Jews  to  Darius  upon  the  strength  of  the  edict 
of  Cyrus,  the  prophets,  in  their  efifort  to  en- 
courage the  people  to  make  the  most  of  what 
they  themselves  were  and  to  enforce  the  om- 
nipotence of  God's  Spirit  apart  from  all  human 
aids,  should  be  silent  about  the  latter.  We  must 
also  remember  that  Haggai  and  Zechariah  were 
addressing  a  people  to  whom  (whatever  view  we 
take  of  the  transactions  under  Cyrus)  the  favour 
of  Cyrus  had  been  one  vast  disillusion  in  the 
light  of  the  predictions  of  Second  Isaiah. f  The 
Persian  magnate  Sheshbazzar  himself,  invested 
with  full  power,  had  been  unable  to  build  the 
Temple  for  them,  and  had  apparently  disap- 
peared from  Judah,  leaving  his  powers  as  Pehah, 
or  governor,  to  Zerubbabel.  Was  it  not,  th'en, 
as  suitable  to  these  circumstances,  as  it  was  es- 
sential to  the  prophets'  own  religious  temper, 
that  Haggai  and  Zechariah  should  refrain  from 
alluding  to  any  of  the  political  advantages  to 
which'their  countrymen  had  hitherto  trusted  in 
vain?:}: 

Another  fact  should  be  marked.  If  Haggai 
is  silent  about  any  return  from  exile  in  the  past, 
he  is  equally  silent  about  any  in  the  future.  If 
for  him  no  return  had  yet  taken  place,  would 
he  not  have  been  likely  to  predict  it  as  certain 
to  happen?§  At  least  his  silence  on  the  subject 
proves  how  absolutely  he  confined  his  thoughts 
to  the  circumstances  before  him,  and  to  the 
needs  of  his  people  at  the  moment  he  addressed 
them.  Kosters,  indeed,  alleges  that  Zechariah 
describes  the  Return  from  Exile  as  still  future 
— viz.,  in  the  lyric  piece  appended  to  his  Third 
Vision.il  But,  as  we  shall  see  when  we  come  to 
it,  this  lyric  piece  is  most  probably  an  intrusion 
among  the  Visions,  and  is  not  to  be  assigned 
to  Zechariah  himself.  Even,  however,  if  it  were 
from  the  same  date  and  author  as  the  Visions, 
it  would  not  prove  that  no  return  from  Baby- 
lon had  taken  place,  but  only  that  numbers  of 
Jews  still  remained  in  Babylon. 

But  we  may  now  take  a  further  step.  If  there 
were  these  natural  reasons  for  the  silence  of 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  about  a  return  of  exiles 
under  Cyrus,  can  that  silence  be  allowed  to  pre- 
vail against  the  mass  of  testimony  which  we 
have  that  such  a  return  took  place?  It  is  true 
that,  while  the  Books  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah 


t  Of  course  it  is  always  possible  that,  if  there  had  been 
ino  great  Return  from  Babj'lon  under  Cyrus,  the  com- 
munity at  Jerusalem  in  520  had  not  heard  of  the  Prophe- 
cies of  the  Second  Isaiah. 

i  This  argument,  it  is  true,  does  not  fully  account  for  the 
curious  fact  that  Haggai  and  Zechariah  never  call  the 
Jewish  community  at  Jerusalem  by  a  name  significant  of 
their  return  from  exile.  But  in  reference  to  this  it  ought 
to  be  noted  that  even  the  Aramaic  document  in  the  Book 
of  Ezra  which  records  the  Return  under  Cyrus  does  not 
call  the  builders  of  the  Temple  by  any  name  which 
implies  that  they  have  come  up  from  exile,  but  styles 
them  simply  "  the  Jews  who  were  in  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem "  (Ezra  V.  i),  in  contrast  to  the  Jews  who  were  in 
foreign  lands. 

§  Indeed,  why  does  he  ignore  the  whole  Exile  if  no  return 
from  it  has  taken  place  ? 

1  Zech.  ii.  10-17  Heb.,  6-13  Eng. 


are  contemporary  with  the  period  in  question, 
some  of  the  evidence  for  the  Return,  Ezra  i. 
and  iii.-iv.  7,  is  at  least  two  centuries  later,  and 
upon  the  date  of  the  rest,  the  List  in  Ezra  ii. 
and  the  Aramaic  document  in  Ezra  iv.  8  ff., 
we  have  no  certain  information.  But  that  the 
List  is  from  a  date  very  soon  after  Cyrus  is 
allowed  by  a  large  number  of  the  most  advanced 
critics,*  and  even  if  we  ignore  it,  we  still  have 
the  Aramaic  document,  which  agrees  with  Hag- 
gai and  Zechariah  in  assigning  the  real,  effectual 
beginning  of  the  Temple-building  to  the  second 
year  of  Darius  and  to  the  leadership  of  Zerub- 
babel and  Jeshua  at  the  instigation  of  the  two 
prophets.  May  we  not  trust  the  same  document 
in  its  relation  of  the  main  facts  concerning 
Cyrus?  Again,  in  his  memoirs  Ezra  f  speaks 
of  the  transgressions  of  the  Golah  or  B'ne  ha- 
Golah  in  effecting  marriages  with  the  mixed  peo- 
ple of  the  land,  in  a  way  which  shows  that  he 
means  by  the  name,  not  the  Jews  who  had  juet 
come  up  with  himself  from  Babylon,  but  the 
older  community  whom  he  found  in  Judah,  and 
who  had  had  time,  as  his  own  bands  had  nor, 
to  scatter  over  the  land  and  enter  into  social  re- 
lations with  the  heathen. 

But,  as  Kuenen  points  out,t  we  have  yet 
further  evidence  for  the  probability  of  a  Return 
under  Cyrus  in  the  explicit  predictions  of  the 
Second  Isaiah  that  Cyrus  would  be  the  builder 
of  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple.  "  If  they  express 
the  expectation,  nourished  by  the  prophet  and 
his  contemporaries,  then  it  is  clear  from  their 
preservation  for  future  generations  that  Cyrus 
did  not  disappoint  the  hope  of  the  exiles,  from 
whose  midst  this  voice  pealed  forth  to  him." 
And  this  leads  to  other  considerations.  Whether 
was  it  more  probable  for  the  poverty-stricken 
"  people  of  the  land,"  the  dregs  which  Nebuchad- 
rezzar had  left  behind,  or  for  the  body  and  flower 
of  Israel  in  Babylon  to  rebuild  the  Temple? 
Surely  for  the  latter.  §  Among  them  had  risen, 
as  Cyrus  drew  near  to  Babylon,  the  hopes  and 
the  motives,  nay,  the  glorious  assurance  of  the 
Return  and  the  Rebuilding;  and  with  them  was 
all  the  material  for  the  latter.  Is  it  credible 
that  they  took  no  advantage  of  their  opportunity 
under  Cyrus?  Is  it  credible  that  they  waited 
nearly  a  century  before  seeking  to  return  to  Je- 
rusalem, and  that  the  building  of  the  Temple 
was  left  to  people  who  were  half-heathen,  and, 
in  the  eyes  of  the  exiles,  despicable  and  unholy? 
This  would  be  credible  only  upon  one  condition, 
that  Cyrus  and  his  immediate  successors  disap- 
pointed the  predictions  of  the  Second  Isaiah  and 
refused  to  allow  the  exiles  to  leave  Babylon. 
But  the  little  we  know  of  these  Persian  mon- 
archs  points  all  the  other  way:  nothing  is  more 
probable,  for  nothing  is  more  in  harmony  with 

*.£".  ^.,  Stade,  Kuenen  iop.  cit.y  p.  216).  So,  too,  Klos- 
termann,  "  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,"  Miinchen,  i8q6. 
Wellhausen,  in  the  second  edition  of  his  "Gesch.,"  does 
not  admit  that  the  List  is  one  of  exiles  returned  under 
Cyrus  (p.  155,  n.). 

t  ix.  4  ;  X.  6.  7. 

X  op.  cit.^  p.  2ifi,  where  he  also  quotes  the  testimon>' 
of  the  Book  of  Daniel  (ix.  25). 

§  Since  writing  the  above  I  have  seen  the  relevant  notes 
to  the  second  edition  of  Wellhausen's  "Gesch.,"  pp.  iss 
and  160.  "  The  refounding  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple 
cannot  have  started  from  the  Jews  left  behind  in  Pales- 
tine." "  The  remnant  left  in  the  land  would  have  restored 
the  old  popular  cultus  of  the  high  places.  Instead  of  that 
we  find  even  before  Ezra  the  legitimate  cultus  and  the 
hierocracy  in  Jerusalem  :  in  the  Temple-service  proper 
Ezra  discovers  nothing  to  reform.  Without  the  leaven 
of  the  G61ah  the  Judaism  of  Palestine  is  in  its  origin 
incomprehensible. 


FROM    RETURN    TO    BUILDING    OF    TEMPLE. 


6ii 


Persian  policy,  than  that  Cyrus  should  permit 
the  captives  of  the  Babylon  which  he  conquered 
to  return  to  their  own  lands.* 

Moreover,  we  have  another,  and  to  the  mind 
of  the  present  writer  an  almost  conclusive  ar- 
gument, that  the  Jews  addressed  by  Haggai  and 
Zechariah  were  Jews  returned  from  Babylon. 
Neither  prophet  ever  charges  his  people  with 
idolatry;  neither  prophet  so  much  as  mentions 
idols.  This  is  natural  if  the  congregation  ad- 
dressed was  composed  of  such  pioiis  and  ardent 
adherents  of  Jehovah  as  His  word  had  brought 
back  to  Judah.  when  His  servant  Cyrus  opened 
the  way.  But  had  Haggai  and  Zechariah  been 
addressing  "  the  people  of  the  land,"  who  had 
never  left  the  land,  they  could  not  have  helped 
speaking  of  idolatry. 

Such  considerations  may  very  justly  be  used 
against  an  argument  which  seeks  to  prove  that 
the  narratives  of  a  Return  under  Cyrus  were 
due  to  the  pious  invention  of  a  Jewish  writer 
who  wished  to  record  that  the  predictions  of  the 
Second  Isaiah  were  fulfilled  by  Cyrus,  their  des- 
ignated trustee. t  They  certainly  possess  a  far 
•  higher  degree  of  probability  than  that  argument 
does. 

Finally  there  is  this  consideration.  If  there 
was  no  return  from  Babylon  under  Cyrus,  and 
the  Temple,  as  Dr.  Kosters  alleges,  was  built 
by  the  poor  people  of  the  land,  is  it  likely  that 
the  latter  should  have  been  regarded  with  such 
contempt  as  they  were  by  the  exiles  who  re- 
turned under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah?  Theirs  would 
have  been  the  glory  of  reconstituting  Israel,  and 
their  position  very  different  from  what  we  find 
it. 

On  all  these  grounds,  therefore,  we  must  hold 
tha't  the  attempt  to  discredit  the  tradition  of 
an  important  return  of  exiles  under  Cyrus  has 
not  been  successful;  that  such  a  return  remains 
the  more  probable  solution  of  an  obscure  and 
difficult  problem;  and  that  therefore  the  Jews 
who  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  are  represented 
in  Haggai  and  Zechariah  as  building  the  Temple 
in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  520,  had  come  up 
from  Babylon  about  537.^  Such  a  conclusion, 
of  course,  need  not  commit  us  to  the  various 
data  offered  by  the  Chronicler  in  his  story  of 
the  Return,  such  as  the  Edict  of  Cyrus,  nor  to 
all   of  his   details. 

2.  Many,  however,  who  grant  the  correctness 
•  of  the  tradition  that  a  large  number  of  Jewish 
exiles  returned  under  Cyrus  to  Jerusalem,  deny 
the  statement  of  the  Compiler  of  the  Book  of 
Ezra  that  the  returned  exiles  immediately  pre- 
pared to  build  the  Temple  and  laid  the  founda- 
tion-stone with  solemn  festival,  but  were  hin- 
dered from  proceeding  with  the  building  till  the 
second  year  of  Darius.^  They  maintain  that 
this  late  narrative  is  contradicted  by  the  contem- 
porary statements    of    Haggai    and    Zechariah, 

*  The  inscription  of  Cyrus  is  sometimes  quoted  to  this 
effect:  cf.  P.  Hay  Hunter,  op.  a'f.,  I.  35.  But  it  would 
seem  that  the  statement  of  Cyrus  is  limited  to  the  restora- 
tion of  Assyrian  idols  and  their  worshippers  to  Assur  and 
Akkad.  Still,  what  he  did  in  this  case  furnishes  a  strong 
argument  for  the  probability  of  his  having  done  the  same 
in  the  case  of  the  Jews. 

tSee  above,  p.  6og,  and  especially  «. 

J  Even  Cheyne,  after  accepting  Kosters'  conclusions  as 
in  the  main  points  inevitable  (pp.  cit.,  p.  xxxv.),  considers 
(p.  xxxviii.)  that  "  the  earnestness  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
(who  cannot  have  stood  alone)  implies  the  existence  of  a 
higher  religious  element  at  Jerusalem  long  before  432  B.  C. 
vVhence  came  this  higher  element  but  from  its  natural 
home  among  the  more  cultured  Jews  in  Babylonia  ? " 

§Ezra  iii.  8-13. 


who,  according  to  them,  imply  that  no  fopnda- 
tion-stone  was  laid  till  520  b.  c*  For  the  in- 
terpretation of  our  prophets  this  is  not  a  ques- 
tion of  cardinal  importance.  But  for  clearness' 
sake  we  do  well  to  lay  it  open. 

We  may  at  once  concede  that  in  Haggai  and 
Zechariah  there  is  nothing  which  necessarily  im- 
plies that  the  Jews  had  made  any  beginning  to 
build  the  Temple  before  the  start  .recorded  by 
Haggai  in  the  year  520.  The  one  passage,  Hag- 
gai ii.  18,  which  is  cited  to  prove  this f  is  at 
the  best  ambiguous,  and  many  scholars  claim  it 
as  a  fixture  of  that  date  for  the  twenty-fourth 
day  of  the  ninth  month  of  520.:}:  At  the  same 
time,  and  even  granting  that  the  latter  interpre- 
tation of  Haggai  ii.  18  is  correct,  there  is  noth- 
ing in  either  Haggai  or  Zechariah  to  make  it 
impossible  that  a  foundation-stone  had  been  laid 
some  years  before,  but  abandoned  in  consequence 
of  the  Samaritan  obstruction,  as  alleged  in  Ezra 
iii.  8-11.  If  we  keep  in  mind  Haggai's  and 
Zechariah's  silence  about  the  Return  from  Baby- 
lon, and  their  very  natural  concentration  upon 
their  own  circumstances,§  we  shall  not  be  able 
to  reckon  their  silence  about  previous  attempts 
to  build  the  Temple  as  a  conclusive  proof  that 
these  attempts  never  took  place.  Moreover,  the 
Aramaic  document,  which  agrees  with  our  two 
prophets  in  assigning  the  only  effective  start  of 
the  work  on  the  Temple  to  520II  does  not  deem  it 
inconsistent  with  this  to  record  that  the  Persian 
Satrap  of  the  West  of  the  Euphrates  T[  reported 
to  Darius  that,  when  he  asked  the  Jews  why  they 
were  rebuilding  the  Temple,  they  replied  not 
only  that  a  decree  of  Cyrus  had  granted  them 
permission,**  but  that  his  legate  Sheshbazzar  had 
actually  laid  the  foundation-stone  upon  his  ar- 
rival at  Jerusalem,  and  that  the  building  had 
gone  on  without  interruption  from  that  time  to 
520. tt  This  last  assertion,  which  of  course  was 
false,  may  have  been  due  either  to  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  Jewish  elders  by  the  reporting 
Satrap,  or  else  to  the  Jews  themselves,  anxious 
to  make  their  case  as  strong  as  possible.  The 
latter  is  the  more  probable  alternative.  As  even 
Stade  admits,  it  was  a  very  natural  assertion  for 
the  Jews  to  make,  and  so  conceal  that  their 
effort  of  520  was  due  to  the  instigation  of  their 
own  prophets.  But  in  any  case  the  Aramaic 
document  corroborates  the  statement  of  the 
Compiler  that  there  was  a  foundation-stone  laid 
in  the  early  years  of  Cyrus,  and  does  not  con- 
ceive this  to  be  inconsistent  with  its  own  nar- 
rative of  a  stone  being  laid  in  520,  and  an  effect- 
ive start  at  last  made  upon  the  Temple  works. 
So  much  does  Stade  feel  the  force  of  this  that 
he  concedes  not  only  that  Sheshbazzar  may  have 
started  some  preparation  for  building  the 
Temple,  but  that  he  may  even  have  laid  the 
stone  with  ceremony.t|: 

*  Schrader,  "Ueber  die  Dauer  des  Tempelbaues,"  in 
"Stud.  u.  Krit.,"  1879,  460  ff.  ;  Stade  "Gesch.  des  Volkes 
Israel,"  II.  115  ff.  ;  Kuenen,  op.  cit..,  p.  222;  Kosters,  £7/.  «'/., 
chap.  i.  §  I.  To  this  opinion  others  have  adhered  :  Konig 
("Einleit.  in  das  A.  T."),  Ryssel  (op.  cit.),  and  Marti  (2d 
edition  of  Kaysers'"Theol.  des  A.  T.")  p.  200.  Schrader  (p. 
563)  argues  that  Ezra  iii.  8-13  was  not  founded  on  a  histori- 
cal document,  but  is  an  imitation  of  Neh.  vii.  73-viii.;  and 
Stade  that  the  Aramaic  document  in  Ezra  which  ascribes 
the  laying  of  the  foundation-stone  to  Sheshbazzar,  the 
legate'of  Cyrus,  was  not  eai(ier  than  430. 

t  Ryle,  op.  cit.,  p.  xxx. 

X  Stade,  Wellhausen,  etc.  See  below,  chap,  xviii.  on 
Hag.  ii.  18. 

§  See  above,  pp.  610  f .  **  Jb.  13. 

II  Ezra  iv.  24,  v.  1.  tt  Jb.  16. 

iEzrav.  6.  $$  "Gesch.,"  II.  p.  113. 


6l2 


THE^-BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


And  indeed,  is  it  not  in  itself  very  probable 
that  some  early  attempt  was  made  by  the  exiles 
returned  under  Cyrus  to  rebuild  the  house  of 
Jehovah?  Cyrus  had  been  predicted  by  the  Sec- 
ond Isaiah  not  only  as  the  redeemer  of  God's 
people,  but  with  equal  explicitness  as  the  builder 
of  the  Temple;  and  all  the  argument  which 
Kuenen  draws  from  the  Second  Isaiah  for  the 
fact  of  the  Return  from  Babylon  *  tells  with  al- 
most equal  force  for  the  fact  of  some  efforts 
to  raise  the  fallen  sanctuary  of  Israel  immediately 
after  the  Return.  Among  the  returned  were 
many  priests,  and  many  no  doubt  of  the  most 
sanguine  spirits  in  Israel.  They  came  straight 
from  the  heart  of  Jewry,  though  that  heart  was 
in  Babylon;  they  came  with  the  impetus  and 
obligation  of  the  great  Deliverance  upon  them; 
they  were  the  representatives  of  a  community 
which  we  know  to  have  been  comparatively 
wealthy.  Is  it  credible  that  they  should  not  have 
begun  the  Temple  at  the  earliest  possible  mo- 
ment? 

Nor  is  the  story  of  their  frustration  by  the  Sa- 
maritans any  less  natural. f  It  is  true  that  there 
were  not  any  adversaries  likely  to  dispute  with 
the  colonists  the  land  in  the  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood of  Jerusalem.  The  Edomites  had 
overrun  the  fruitful  country  about  Hebron,  and 
part  of  the  Shephelah.  The  Samaritans  held  the 
rich  valleys  of  Ephraim,  and  probably  the  plain 
of  Ajalon.  But  if  any  peasants  struggled  with 
the  stony  plateaus  of  Benjamin  and  Northern 
Judah,  such  must  have  been  of  the  remnants  of 
the  Jewish  population  who  were  left  behind  by 
Nebuchadrezzar,  and  who  clung  to  the  sacred 
soil  from  habit  or  from  motives  of  religion. 
Jerusalem  was  never  a  site  to  attract  m.en,  either 
for  agriculture,  or,  now  that  its  shrine  was  deso- 
late and  its  population  scattered,  for  the  com- 
mand of  trade.J  The  returned  exiles  must  have 
been  at  first  undisturbed  by  the  envy  of  their 
neighbours.  The  tale  is,  therefore,  probable 
which  attributes  the  hostility  of  the  Ic^tter  to 
purely  religious  causes — the  refusal  of  the  Jews 
to  allow  the  half-heathen  Samaritans  to  share 
in  the  construction  of  the  Temple.j^  Now  the 
Samaritans  could  prevent  the  building.  While 
stones  were  to  be  had  by  the  builders  in  profu- 
sion from  the  ruins  of  the  city  and  the  great 
quarry  to  the  north  of  it,  ordinary  timber  did 
not  grow  in  their  neighbourhood,  and  though 
the  story  be  true  that  a  contract  was  already 
made  with  Phoenicians  to  bring  cedar  to  Joppa, 
it  had  to  be  carried  thence  for  thirty-six  miles. 
Here,  then,  was  the  opportunity  of  the  Samari- 
tans. They  could  obstruct  the  carriage  both  of 
the  ordinary  timber  and  of  the  cedar.  To  this 
state  of  affairs  the  present  writer  found  an  anal- 
ogy in  1891  among  the  Circassian  colonies  set- 
tled by  the  Turkish  Government  a  few  years 
earlier  in  the  vicinity  of  Gerasa  and  Rabbath- 
Ammon.  The  colonists  had  built  their  houses 
from  the  numerous  ruins  of  these  cities,  but  at 
Rabbath-Ammon  they  said  their  great  difficulty 
had  been  about  timber.  And  we  could  well  un- 
derstand how  the  Beduin,  who  resented  the  set- 

*  See  above,  p.  610. 

t  Ezra  iv.  1-4.  "  That  the  relation  of  Ezra  iv.  1-4  is  his- 
torical seems  to  be  established  against  objections  which 
have  been  taken  to  it  by  th$  reference  to  Esarhaddon, 
which  A  V.  Gutschmidt  has  vindicated  by  an  ingenious 
historical  combination  with  the  aid  of  the  Assyrian  monu- 
ments "  (' Neue  iieitrage,'  p.  145)." — Robertson  Smith, 
art.  "  Haggai,"  "  Encyc.  Brit." 

i  Cf.  "  Hist.  Geog.,''  pp.  317  ff. 

§  Ezra  iv. 


tlement  of  Circassians  on  lands  they  had  used 
for  ages,  and  with  whom  the  Circassians  were 
nearly  always  at  variance,*  did  what  they  could 
to  make  the  carriage  of  timber  impossible.  Sim- 
ilarly with  the  Jews  and  their  Samaritan  adver- 
saries. The  site  might  be  cleared  and  the  stone 
of  the  Temple  laid,  but  if  the  timber  was  stopped 
there  was  little  use  in  raising  the  walls,  and  the 
Jews,  further  discouraged  by  the  failure  of  their 
impetuous  hopes  of  what  the  Return  would  bring 
them,  found  cause  for  desisting  from  their  ef- 
forts. Bad  seasons  followed,  the  labours  for 
their  own  sustenance  exhausted  their  strength, 
and  in  the  sordid  toil  their  hearts  grew  hard 
to  higher  interests.  Cyrus  died  in  529,  and  his 
legate  Sheshbazzar,  having  done  nothmg  but  lay 
the  stone,  appears  to  have  left  Judea.  f  Cam- 
byses  marched  more  than  once  through  Pales- 
tine, and  his  army  garrisoned  Gaza,  but  he  was 
not  a  monarch  to  have  any  consideration  for 
Jewish  ambitions.  Therefore — although  Samari- 
tan opposition  ceased  on  the  stoppage  of  the 
Temple  works  and  the  Jews  procured  timber 
enough  for  their  private  dwellings  % — is  it  won- 
derful that  the  site  of  the  Temple  should  be  neg-  • 
lected  and  the  stone  laid  by  Sheshbazzar  for- 
gotten, or  that  the  disappointed  Jews  should  seek 
to  explain  the  disillusions  of  the  Return  by  argu- 
ing that  God's  time  for  the  restoration  of  His 
house  had  not  yet  come? 

The  death  of  a  cruel  monarch  is  always  in 
the  East  an  occasion  for  the  revival  of  shattered 
hopes,  and  the  events  which  accompanied  the 
suicide  of  Cambyses  in  522  were  particularly 
fraught  with  the  possibilities  of  political  change. 
Cambyses'  throne  had  been  usurped  by  one 
Gaumata,  who  pretended  to  be  Smerdis  or 
Barada,  a  son  of  Cyrus.  In  a  few  months 
Gaumata  was  slain  by  a  conspiracy  of  seven 
Persian  nobles,  of  whom  Darius,  the  son  of 
Hystaspes  both  by  virtue  of  his  royal  descent 
and  his  own  great  ability,  was  raised  to  the 
throne  in  521.  The  empire  had  been  too  pro- 
foundly shocked  by  the  revolt  of  Gaumata  to 
settle  at  once  under  the  new  king,  and  Darius 
found  himself  engaged  by  insurrections  in  all 
his  provinces  except  Syria  and  Asia  Minor. § 
The  colonists  in  Jerusalem,  like  all  their  Syrian 
neighbours,  remained  loyal  to  the  new  king;  so 
loyal  that  their  Pehah  or  Satrap  was  allowed 
to  be  one  of  themselves — Zerubbabel,  son  of 
She'alti'el,!  a  son  of  their  royal  house.  Yet  > 
though  they  were  quiet,  the  nations  were  rising 
against  each  other  and  the  world  was  shaken. 
It  was  just  such  a  crisis  as  had  often  before 
in  Israel  reawakened  prophecy.  Nor  did  it  fail 
now;  and  when  prophecy  was  roused  what  duty 
lay  more  clamant  for  its  inspiration  than  the 
duty  of  building  the  Temple? 

We  are  in  touch  with  the  first  of  our  post- 
exilic  prophets,   Haggai  and  Zechariah. 

*  There  was  a  sharp  skirmish  at  Rabbath-Ammon  the 
night  we  spent  there,  and  at  least  one  Circassian  was 
shot. 

t  "  Sheshbazzar  presumably  having  taken  up  his  task 
with  the  u.sual  conscientiousness  of  an  Oriental  governor, 
that  is,  having  done  nothing,  though  the  work  was  nomi, 
nally  in  hand  all  along  (Ezra  v.  i6>."— Robertson  Smith, 
art.  "Haggai,"  "Encyc.  Brit." 

X  See  below,  chap,  xviii. 

§  Herod  ,  I.  1:50,  HI.  127. 

II  I  Chron.  iii.  :g  makes  him  a  son  of  Pedaiah,  brother  of 
She'alti'el,  son  of  Jehoiachin,  the  king  who  was  carried 
away  by  Nebuchadrezzar  in  597  and  remained  captive  till 
561,  when  King  Evil-Merodach  set  him  in  honour.  It  has 
been  supposed  that,  She'alti'el  dying  childish,  Pedaiah  by 
levirate  marriage  with  his  widow  became  father  of 
Zerubbabel. 


THE    BOOK   OF    HAGGAI. 


613 


HAGGAI. 


"Go  up  into  the  mountain,  and  fetch  wood,  and  build 
the  House." 


CHAPTER  XVII. 
THE  BOOK  OF  HAGGAI. 

The  Book  of  Haggai  contains  thirty-eight 
verses,  which  have  been  divided  between  two 
chapters.*  The  text  is,  for  the  prophets,  a  com- 
paratively sound  one.  The  Greek  version  aflfords 
a  number  of  corrections,  but  has  also  the  usual 
amount  of  misunderstandings,  and,  as  in  the  case 
of  other  prophets,  a  few  additions  to  the  He- 
brew text.f  These  and  the  variations  in  the 
other  ancient  versions  will  be  noted  in  the  trans- 
lation below.:]: 

The  book  consists  of  four  sections,  each  re- 
counting a  message  from  Jehovah  to  the  Jews 
in  Jerusalem  in  520  B.  c,  "  the  second  year  of 
Darius"  (Hystaspis),  "by  the  hand  of  the 
prophet  Haggai." 

The  first,  chap,  i.,  dated  the  first  day  of  the 
sixth  month,  during  our  September,  reproves 
the  Jews  for  building  their  own  "  ceiled  houses," 
while  they  say  that  "  the  time  for  building  Je- 
hovah's house  has  not  yet  come";  affirms  that 
this  is  the  reason  of  their  poverty  and  of  a  great 
drought  which  has  afflicted  them.  A  piece  of 
narrative  is  added  recounting  how  Zerubbabel 
and  Jeshua.  the  heads  of  the  community,  were 
stirred  by  this  word  to  lead  the  people  to  begin 
work  on  the  Temple,  on  the  twenty-fourth  day 
of  the  same  month. 

The  second  section,  chap.  ii.  1-9,  contains  a 
message,  dated  the  twenty-first  day  of  the 
seventh  month,  during  our  October,  in  which 
the  builders  are  encouraged  for  their  work.  Je- 
hovah is  about  to  shake  all  nations,  these  shall 
contribute  of  their  wealth,  and  the  latter  glory 
of  the  Temple  be  greater  than  the  former. 

The  third  section,  chap.  ii.  10-19,  contains  a 
word  of  Jehovah  which  came  to  Haggai  on  the 
twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth  month,  during 
our  December.  It  is  in  the  form  of  a  parable 
based  on  certain  ceremonial  laws,  according  to 
which  the  touch  of  a  holy  thing  does  not  sanctify 
so  much  as  the  touch  of  an  unholy  pollutes. 
Thus  is  the  people  polluted,  and  thus  every  work 
of  their  hands.  Their  sacrifices  avail  nought, 
and  adversity  has  persisted:  small  increase  of 
fruits,  blasting,  mildew  and  hail.  But  from  this 
day  God  will  bless. 

The  fourth  section,  chap.  ii.  20-23,  is  a  second 
word  from  the  Lord  to  Haggai  on  the  twenty- 
fourth  day  of  the  ninth  month.  It  is  for  Zerub- 
babel, and  declares  that  God  will  overthrow  the 
thrones  of  kingdoms  and  destroy  the  forces  of 
many  of  the  Gentiles  by  war.  In  that  day  Zerub- 
babel, the  Lord's  elect  servant,  shall  be  as  a  sig- 
net to  the  Lord. 

*  In  the  English  Bible  the  division  corresponds  to  that 
of  the  Hebrew,  which  gives  fifteen  verses  to  chap  i. 
The  LXX.  lakes  the  fifteenth  verse  along  with  ver.  i  of 
chap.  ii. 

t  li.  g,  14  :  see  on  these  passages,  pp.  617,  w.  618,  «. 

t  Resides  the  general  works  on  the  te.xt  of  the  Twelve 
Prophets,  already  cited,  M.  Tony  Andree  has  published 
*'  Etat  Critique  du  Te.xte  d'Aggee  :  Quatre  Tableaux 
Coniparatifs,^'  (Paris,  1803),  which  is  also  included  in  his 
general  introduction  and  commentary  on  the  prophet, 
quoted  below. 


The  authenticity  of  all  these  four  sections  was 
doubted  by  no  one,*  till  ten  years  ago  W. 
Bohme,  besides  pointing  out  some  useless  repe- 
titions of  single  words  and  phrases  cast  suspi- 
cion on  chap.  i.  13,  and  questioned  the  whole  of 
the  fourth  section,  chap.  ii.  20-23.t  With  regard 
to  chap.  i.  13,  it  is  indeed  curious  that  Haggai 
should  be  described  as  "  the  messenger  of  Je- 
hovah"; while  the  message  itself,  "I  am  with 
you,"  seems  superfluous  here,  and  if  the  verse 
be  omitted,  ver.  14  runs  on  naturally  to  ver.  12.  | 
Bohme's  reasons  for  disputing  the  authenticity 
of  chap.  ii.  20-23  are  much  less  sufiicient.  He 
thinks  he  sees  the  hand  of  an  editor  in  the  phrase 
"  for  a  second  time  "  in  ver.  20;  notes  the  omis- 
sion of  the  title  "  prophet  "§  after  Haggai's 
name,  and  the  difference  of  the  formula  "  the 
word  came  to  Haggai  "  from  that  employed  in 
the  previous  sections,  "  by  the  hand  of  Haggai," 
and  the  repetition  of  ver.  6b  in  ver.  21;  and  other- 
wise concludes  that  the  section  is  an  insertion 
from  a  later  hand.  But  the  formula  "  the  word 
came  to  Haggai "  occurs  also  in  ii.  10:  i  the 
other  points  are  trivial,  and  while  it  was  most 
natural  for  H^aggai  the  contemporary  of  Zerub- 
babel to  entertain  of  the  latter  such  hopes  as  the 
passage  expresses,  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  later 
writer,  who  knew  how  they  had  not  been  ful- 
filled in  Zerubbabel,  should  have  invented  them.^ 

Recently  M.  Tony  Andree,  privat-docent  in  the 
University  of  Geneva,  has  issued  a  large  work 
on  Haggai,**  in  which  he  has  sought  to  prove 
that  the  third  section  of  the  book,  chap.  ii.  (10) 
11-19,  is  from  the  hand  of  another  writer  than 
the  rest.  He  admits  ft  that  in  neither  form,  nor 
style,  nor  language  is  there  anything  to  prove 
this  distinction,  and  that  the  ideas  of  all  the  sec- 
tions suit  perfectly  the  condition  of  the  Jews  in 
the  time  soon  after  the  Return.  But  he  con- 
siders that  chap.  ii.  (10)  11-19  interrupts  the  con- 
nection between  the  sections  upon  either  side  of 
it;  that  the  author  is  a  legalist  or  casuist,  while 
the  author  of  the  other  sections  is  a  man  whose 
only  ecclesiastical  interest  is  the  rebuilding  of 
the  Temple;  that  there  are  obvious  contradic- 
tions between  chap.  ii.  (10)  11-19  and  the  rest 
of  the  book;  and  that  there  is  a  difference  of  vo- 
cabulary. Let  us  consider  each  of  these  rea- 
sons. 

The  first,  that  chap.  ii.  (10)  11-19  interrupts 
the  connection  between  the  sections  on  either 
side  of  it,  is  true  only  in  so  far  as  it  has  a  differ- 
ent subject  from  that  which  the  latter  have  more 
or  less  in  common.  But  the  second  of  the  lat- 
ter, chap.  ii.  20-23,  treats  only  of  a  corollary  of 
the  first,  chap.  ii.  1-9,  and  that  corollary  may 
well  have  formed  the  subject  of  a  separate  or- 
acle. Besides,  as  we  shall  see,  chap.  ii.  10-19  is 
a  natural  development  of  chap.  i.XX  The  contra- 
dictions alleged  by  M.  Andree  are  two.  He 
points  out  that  while  chap.  i.  speaks  only  of  a 

*  Robertson  Smith  ("  Encyc.  Brit.,"  art.  "  Haggai,"  1880I 
does  not  even  mention  authenticity.  "Without  doubt 
from  Haggai  himself  "  (Kuenen).  "The  Book  of  Haggai 
is  without  doubt  to  be  dated,  according  to  its  whole  extant 
contents,  from  the  prophet  Haggai,  whose  work  fell  in 
the  year  520"  (Konig).    So  Driver,  Kirkpatrick,  Cornill, 

t"Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1887,  215  f. 
X  So  also  Wellhausen. 
%  Which  occurs  only  in  the  LXX. 
II  See  note  on  that  verse. 
^  Cf.  Wildeboer,  "  Litter,  des  A.  T.,"  294. 
**  "Le  Prophete  Aggee,  Introduction  Critique  et  Com 
mentaire."    Paris,  Fischbacher,  1893. 
tt  Page  151. 
XX  Below,  p  619. 


6i4 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


"drought,"*  chap.  ii.  (lo)  11-19  mentionsf  as 
the  plagues  on  the  crops  shiddaphon  and  yerakon, 
generally  rendered  blasting  and  mildew  in  our 
English  Bible,  and  barad,  or  hail;  and  these  he 
reckons  to  be  plagues  due  not  to  drought  but 
to  excessive  moisture.  But  shiddaphon  and 
yerakon,  which  are  always  connected  in  the  Old 
Testament  and  are  words  of  doubtful  meaning, 
are  not  referred  to  damp  in  any  of  the  passages 
in  which  they  occur,  but,  on  the  contrary,  appear 
to  be  the  consequences  of  drought.^  The  other 
contradiction  alleged  refers  to  the  ambiguous 
verse  ii.  18,  on  which  we  have  already  seen  it  diffi- 
cult to  base  any  conclusion,  and  which  will  be 
treated  when  we  come  to  it  in  the  course  of 
translation. §  Finally,  the  differences  in  language 
which  M.  Andree  cites  are  largely  imaginary, 
and  it  is  hard  to  understand  how  a  responsible 
critic  has  come  to  cite,  far  more  to  emphasise 
them,  as  he  has  done.  We  may  relegate  the  dis- 
cussion of  them  to  a  note,||  and  need  here  only 
remark  that  there  is  among  them  but  one  of 
any  significance:  while  the  rest  of  the  book  calls 
the  Temple  "  the  House "  or  "  the  House  of 
Jehovah"  (or  "of  Jehovah  of  Hosts"),  chap, 
ii.  (10)  11-19  styles  it  "  palace,"  or  temple,  of  Je- 
hovah.Tf  On  such  a  difiference  between  two  com- 
paratively brief  passages  it  would  be  unreason- 
able to  decide  for  a  distinction  of  authorship. 


*  1.  10,  II. 

+  ii.  17. 

JThey  follow  drought  in  Amos  iv.  q  ;  and  in  the  other 
passages  where  they  occur — Deut.  xxviii.  22  ;  i  Kings  viii. 
37  ,  2  Chron.  vi.  28— they  are  mentioned  in  a  list  of  pos- 
sible plagues  after  famine,  or  pestilence,  or  fevers,  all  of 
which  with  the  doubtful  exception  of  fevers,  followed 
drought. 

§  Above,  p.  611  ;  below,  p.  619  n. 

II  Some  of  M.  Andree's  alleged  differences  need  not  be 

discussed  at  all,  ^.  ^.,  that  between  ^JQ)^  ^^'^  ''iuP,  ^^'- 
here  are  the  others.  He  asserts  that  while  chap.  i.  calls 
"oil  and  wine"  "  yishar  and  tirosh,"  chap.  ii.  (10)  11-19 
call  them  ''yayin  and  shemen."  But  he  overlooks  the 
fact  that  the  former  pair  of  names,  meaning  the  ne\Vly 

Firessed  oil  and  wine,  suit  their  connection,  in  w^hich  the 
ruits  of  the  earth  are  being  catalogued,  i.  11,  while  the 
latter  pair,  meaning  the  finished  wine  and  oil,  equally 
suit  their  connection,  in  which  articles  of  food  are  being 
catalogued,  ii.  12.  Equally  futile  is  the  distinction  drawn 
between  i.  g,  which  speaks  of  bringing  the  crops  "  to  the 
house,"  or  as  we  should  say  "  home,"  and  ii.  ig,  which 
speaks  of  seed  being  "  in  the  barn."  Again,  what  is  to  be 
said  of  a  critic  who  adduces  in  evidence  of  distinction  of 
authorship. the  fact  that  i.  6  employs  the  verb  labhash, 
"to  clothe,"  while  ii.  12  uses  beged  for  "garment,"  and 
who  actually  puts  in  brackets  the  root  bagad,  as  if  it  any- 
where in  the  Old  Testament  meant  "to  clothe  "  !  Again, 
Andree  remarks  that  while  ii.  (lo)  11-19  does  not  employ 
the  epithet  "Jehovah  of  Hosts,"  but  only  "Jehovah," 
the  rest  of  the  book  frequently  uses  the  former ;  but  he 
omits  to  observe  that  the  rest  of  the  book,  besides  using 
"Jehovah  of  Hosts,"  often  uses  the  name  Jehovah  alone 
[the  phrase  in  ii.  (10)  11-19  is  niiT'  Dfr^J>  a^nd  occurs  twice, 
ii.  14,  17  ;  but  the  rest  of  the  book  has  also  nUl"'  DXJ.  i'- 
4  ;  and  besides  niiT  121,  i-  i.  ii-  i.  ii-  20  ;  niH^  "lOK.  i-  8  ; 
and  Q\-I^J^  ^-Wri"^  and  j-\)j-[i  IJQJ^,  i.  12].  Again,  Andree 
observes  that  while  the  rest  of  the  book  designates  Israel 
always  by  DJ?  and  the  heathen  by  ""IJ,  chap.  ii.  (lol  ii-ig, 
in  ver.  14,  uses  both  terms  of  Israel.  Yet  in  this  latter 
case  ^1J  is  used  only  in  parallel  to  QJ?,  as  frequently  in 
other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament.  Again,  that  while  in  the 
rest  of  the  book  Haggai  is  called  the  prophet  (the  doubt- 
ful i.  13  may  be  omitted),  he  is  simply  named  in  ii.  (10) 
»i-ig,  means  nothing,  for  the  name  here  occurs  only  in 
introducing  his  contribution  to  a  conversation,  in  record- 
ing which  it  was  natural  to  omit  titles.  Similarly  insig- 
nificant is  the  fact  that  while  the  rest  of  the  book  men- 
tions only  "the  High  Priest,"  chap.  ii.  (10)  ii-ig  talks  only 
of  "the  priests"  :  because  here  again  each  is  suitable  to 
the  connection. — Two  or  three  of  Andree's  alleged 
grounds  (such  as  that  from  the  names  for  wine  and  oil 
and  that  from  labhash  and  beged)  are  enough  to  discredit 
his  whole  case. 
lii.  15,  18. 


There  is,  therefore,  no  reason  to  disagree  with 
the  consensus  of  all  other  critics  in  the  integrity 
of  the  Book  of  Haggai.  The  four  sections  are 
either  from  himself  or  from  a  contemporary  of 
his.  They  probably  represent,*  not  the  full  ad- 
dresses given  by  him  on  the  occasions  stated, 
but  abstracts  or  summaries  of  these.  "  It  is 
never  an  easy  task  to  persuade  a  whole  popula- 
tion to  make  pecuniary  sacrifices,  or  to  post- 
pone private  to  public  interest;  and  the  proba- 
bility is,  that  in  these  brief  remains  of  the 
prophet  Haggai  we  have  but  one  or  two  speci- 
mens of  a  ceaseless  diligence  and  persistent  de- 
termination, which  upheld  and  animated  the 
whole  people  till  the  work  was  accomplished."  f 
At  the  same  time  it  must  be  noticed  that  the 
style  of  the  book  is  not  wholly  of  the  bare, 
jejune  prose  which  it  is  sometimes  described  to 
be.  The  passages  of  Haggai's  own  exhortation 
are  in  the  well-known  parallel  rhythm  of  pro- 
phetic discourse:  see  especially  chap,   i.,  ver.  6. 

The  only  other  matter  of  Introduction  to  the 
prophet  Haggai  is  his  name.  The  precise  form  X 
is  not  elsewhere  found  in  the  Old  Testament; 
but  one  of  the  clans  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  is  called 
Haggai, §  and  the  letters  H  G  I  occur  as  the  con- 
sonants of  a  name  on  a  Phoenician  inscription,  jj 
Someiy  have  taken  Haggai  to  be  a  contraction 
of  Haggiyah,  the  name  of  a  Levitical  family,  ** 
but  although  the  final  yod  of  some  proper  names 
stands  for  Jehovah,  we  cannot  certainly  conclude 
that  it  is  so  in  this  case.  Others  ft  see  in  Haggai 
a  probable  contraction  of  Hagariah,$t  as  Zaccai, 
the  original  of  Zacchaeus,  is  a  contraction  of 
Zechariah.§§  A  more  general  opinion||l|  takes  the 
termination  as  adjectival,  1"^  and  the  root  to  be 
"  hag,"  feast  or  festival.***  In  that  case  Haggai 
would  mean  festal,  and  it  has  been  supposed  that 
the  name  would  be  given  to  him  from  his  birth 
on  the  day  of  some  feast.  It  is  impossible  to  de- 
cide with  certainty  among  these  alternatives. 
M.  Andree,ttt  who  accepts  the  meaning  festal, 
ventures  the  hypothesis  that,  like  "  Malachi," 
Haggai  is  a  symbolic  title  given  by  a  later  hand 
to  the  anonymous  writer  of  the  book,  because 
of  the  coincidence  of  his  various  prophecies  with 
solemn  fertivals.J:|:t  But  the  name  is  too  often 
and  too  naturally  introduced  into  the  book  to 
present  any  analogy  to  that  of  "  Malachi  "  ;  and 

*In  this  opinion,  stated  first  by  Eichhorn,  most  critics 
agree. 

t  Marcus  Dods,  "  Haggai,  Zechariah  and  Malachi,"  iSyc 
in  Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes  :  Edin.,  T.  &  T.  Clark. 

■•'     zD'   Greek  "Ayyatos. 

S  "'2n,  Gen.    xlvi.    16.    Num.  xxvi.    15;   Greek    'Ayyet, 

'Ayyeis.    The  feminine  ^^^G'   Haggith,  was  the  name  cf 

one  of  David's  wives  :  2  Sam.  iii.  4. 

II  No.  67  of  the  Phoenician  inscriptions  in  "  C.  I.  S." 
tHiiler,  "  Onom.    Sacrum,"     Tub.,    1706    (quoted    by 

Andree),  and  Pusey. 

iT3n,  I  Chron.  vi.  15;  Greek  'Ayyi-a,  Lu.  'Avaia. 

ttKohler,  "  Nachexil.    Proph.,"    I.    2;    Wellhausen    in 
fourth    edition    of    Bleek's    "  Einleitung ;"     Robertson    , 
Smith,  "Encyc.  Brit.,"  art.  "Haggai." 
Xt  iT'ljn  =  "Jehovah  hath  girded." 
§§  Derenbourg,  "  Hist,  de  la  Palestine,"  pp.  95,  150. 

III  Jerome,  Gesenius,  and  most  moderns. 

l«f  As  in  the  names  ^i:?"]?'  ^5''''?'  ''i'i'etc. 

***The  radical  double  ^  of  which  appears  in  composi- 
tion. 

ttt  Op  cit.,  p.  8. 

jni-  I.  the  new  moon;  ii.  i,  the  seventh  day  of  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  ;  ii.  18,  the  foundation  of  the  Temple  (?). 


J 


Haggai  i.,  ii.] 


HAGGAI   AND   THE   TEMPLE-BUILDING. 


615 


the  hypothesis  may  be  dismissed  as  improbable 
and  unnatural. 

Nothing  more  is  known  of  Haggai  than  his 
name  and  the  facts  given  in  his  book.  But  as 
with  the  other  prophets  whom  we  have  treated, 
so  with  this  one,  Jewish  and  Christian  legends 
have  been  very  busy.  Other  functions  have 
been  ascribed  to  him;  a  sketch  of  his  biography 
has  been  invented.  According  to  the  Rabbis  he 
was  one  of  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  and 
with  Zechariah  and  "  Malachi  "  transmitted  to 
that  mythical  body  the  tradition  of  the  older 
prophets.*  He  was  the  author  of  several  cere- 
monial regulations,  and  with  Zechariah  and 
"  Malachi  "  introduced  into  the  alphabet  the  ter- 
minal forms  of  the  five  elongated  letters.!  The 
Christian  Fathers  narrate  that  he  was  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi,:]:  that  with  Zachariah  he  prophesied 
in  exile  of  the  Return, j?  and  was  still  young  when 
he  arrived  in  Jerusalem, ||  where  he  died  and  was 
buried.  A  strange  legend,  founded  on  the 
doubtful  verse  which  styles  him  "  the  messenger 
of  Jehovah,"  gave  out  that  Haggai,  as  well  as 
for  similar  reasons  "  Malachi  "  and  John  the 
Baptist,  were  not  men,  but  angels  in  human 
shape.TT  With  Zechariah  Haggai  appears  on  the 
titles  of  Psalms  cxxxvii.,  cxlv.-cxlviii.  in  the 
Septuagint;  cxi.,  cxlv.,  cxlvi.  in  the  Vulgate;  and 
cxxv.,  cxxvi.,  and  cxlv.-cxlviii.  in  the  Peshitto.** 
"  In  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  he  was  the  first 
who  chanted  the  Hallelujah,  .  .  .  wherefore  we 
say:  Hallelujah,  which  is  the  hymn  of  Haggai 
and  Zechariah."  ff  All  these  testimonies  are,  of 
course,  devoid  of  value. 

Finally,  the  modern  inference  from  chap.  ii.  3, 
that  Haggai  in  his  youth  had  seen  the  former 
Temple,  had  gone  into  exile,  and  was  now  re- 
turned a  very  old  man,H  may  be  probable,  but  is 
not  certain.  We  are  quite  ignorant  of  his  age 
at  the  time  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  to  him. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

HAGGAI  AND    THE  BUILDING   OF    THE 
TEMPLE. 

Haggai  i.,  ii. 

We  have  seen  that  the  most  probable  solution 
of  the  problems  presented  to  us  by  the  inade- 
quate and  confused  records  of  the  time  is  that  a 
considerable  number  of  Jewish  exiles  returned 
from  Jerusalem  to  Babylon  about  537,  upon  the 
permission  of  Cyrus,  and  that  the  Satrap  whom 
he  sent  with  them  not  only  allowed  them  to  raise 
the  altar  on  its  ancient  site,  but  himself  laid  for 
them  the  foundation-stone  of  the  Temple. §§ 

We  have   seen,   too,   why  this  attempt  led  to 

*  Baba-bathra,  15a,  etc. 

t  Megilla,  2d. 

t  Hesychius;  see  above,  p.  579,  «. 

§  Augustine,  "  Enarratio  in  Psalm  cxlvii." 

f  Pseud-Epiphanius,  "De  Vitis  Prophetarum." 

^Jerome  on  Hag.  i.  13. 

**  Eusebius  did  not  find  these  titles  in  the  Hexaplar 
Septuagint.  See  Field's  "Hexaplar"  on  Psalm  cxlv.  i. 
The  titles  are  of  course  wholl}'  without  authoritj-. 

+t  Pseud-Epiphanius,  as  above. 

+t  So  Ewald,  Wildeboer  (p.  2q5),  and  others. 

§§  See  above,  pp  610-612,  and  emphasise  specially  the 
facts  that  the  most  pronounced  adherents  of  Kosters' 
theory  seek  to  qv.ah'fy  his  absolute  negation  of  a  Return 
vnder  Cyrus,  Dy  the  admission  that  some  Jews  did  re- 
turn ;  and  that  even  Stade,  who  agrees  in  the  main  with 
Schrader  that  no  attempt  was  made  by  the  Jews  to  begin 
building  the  Temple  till  520,  admits  the  probability  of  a 
ftone  being  laid  by  Sheshbazzar  about  536. 


nothing,  and  we  have  followed  the  Samaritan 
obstructions,  the  failure  of  the  Persian  patronage, 
the  drought  and  bad  harvests,  and  all  the  dis- 
illusion of  the  fifteen  years  which  succeeded  the 
Return.*  The  hostility  of  the  Samaritans  was 
entirely  due  to  the  refusal  of  the  Jews  to  give 
them  a  share  in  the  construction  of  the  Temple, 
and  its  virulence,  probably  shown  by  preventing 
the  Jews  from  procuring  timber,  seems  to  have 
ceased  when  the  Temple  works  were  stopped. 
At  least  we  find  no  mention  of  it  in  our  prophets; 
and  the  Jews  are  furnished  with  enough  of  tim- 
ber to  panel  and  ceil  their  own  houses. f  But  the 
Jews  must  have  feared  a  renewal  of  Samaritan 
attacks  if  they  resumed  work  on  the  Temple,  and 
for  the  rest  they  were  too  sodden  with  adversity, 
and  too  weighted  with  the  care  of  their  own  sus- 
tenance, to  spring  at  higher  interests.  What  im- 
mediately precedes  our  prophets  is  a  miserable 
story  of  barren  seasons  and  little  income,  money 
leaking  fast  away,  and  every  man's  sordid  heart 
engrossed  with  his  own  household.  Little  won- 
der that  critics  have  been  led  to  deny  the  great 
Return  of  sixteen  years  back,  with  its  grand  am- 
bitions for  the  Temple  and  glorious  future  of  Is- 
rael. But  the  like  collapse  has  often  been  ex- 
perienced in  history  when  bands  of  religious 
men,  going  forth,  as  they  thought,  to  freedom 
and  the  immediate  erection  of  a  holy  common- 
wealth, have  found  their  unity  wrecked  and  their 
enthusiasm  dissipated  by  a  few  inclement  seasons 
on  a  barren  and  a  hostile  shore.  Nature  and 
their  barbarous  fellow-men  have  frustrated  what 
God  had  promised.  Themselves,  accustomed 
from  a  high  stage  of  civilisation  to  plan  still 
higher  social  structures,  are  suddenly  reduced  to 
the  primitive  necessities  of  tillage  and  defence 
against  a  savage  foe.  Statesmen,  poets,  and 
idealists  of  sorts  have  to  hoe  the  ground,  quarry 
stones,  and  stay  up  of  nights  to  watch  as  senti- 
nels. Destitute  of  the  comforts  and  resources 
with  which  they  have  grown  up,  they  live  in  con- 
stant battle  with  their  bare  and  unsympathetic 
environs.  It  is  a  familiar  tale  in  history,  and 
we  read  it  with  ease  in  the  case  of  Israel.  The 
Jews  enjoyed  this  advantage,  that  they  came  not 
to  a  strange  land,  but  to  one  crowded  with  in- 
spiring memories,  and  they  had  behind  them  the 
most  glorious  impetus  of  prophecy  which  ever 
sent  a  people  forward  to  the  future.  Yet  the 
very  ardours  of  this  hurried  them  past  a  due 
appreciation  of  the  difficulties  they  would  have 
to  encounter,  and  when  they  found  themselves 
on  the  stony  soil  of  Judah,  which  they  had  been 
idealising  for  fifty  years,  and  were  further  af- 
flicted by  barren  seasons,  their  hearts  must  have 
suffered  an  even  more  bitter  disillusion  than  has 
so  frequently  fallen  to  the  lot  of  religious  emi- 
grants to  an  absolutely  new  coast. 

I.  The  Call  to  Build  (Chap.  i). 

It  was  to  this  situation,  upon  an  autumn  day, 
when  the  colonists  felt  another  year  of  beggarly 
effort  behind  them  and  their  wretched  harvest 
had  been  brought  home,  that  the  prophet  Haggai 
addressed  himself.  With  rare  sense  he  confined 
his  efforts  to  the  practical  needs  of  the  moment. 
The  sneers  of  modern  writers  have  not  been 
spared  upon  a  style  that  is  crabbed  and  jejune, 
and  they  have  esteemed  this  to  be  a  collapse  of 
the  prophetic  spirit,  in  which  Haggai  ignored 
all  the  achievements  of  prophecy  and  interpreted 
*  See  above,  pp.  612  ff.  t  Hag.  i.  4. 


6i6 


THET  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


4 


the  word  of  God  as  only  a  call  to  hew  wood  and 
lay  stone  upon  stone.  But  the  man  felt  what 
the  moment  needed,  and  that  is  the  supreme 
mark  of  the  prophet.  Set  a  prophet  there,  and 
what  else  could  a  prophet  have  done?  It  would 
have  been  futile  to  rewaken  those  most  splendid 
voices  of  the  past,  which  had  in  part  been  the 
reason  of  the  people's  disappointment,  and 
equally  futile  to  interpret  the  mission  of  the 
great  world  powers  towards  God's  people. 
What  God's  people  themselves  could  do  for 
themselves — that  was  what  needed  telling  at  the 
moment;  and  if  Haggai  told  it  with  a  meagre 
and  starved  style,  this  also  was  in  harmony  with 
the  occasion.  One  does  not  expect  it  otherwise 
when  hungry  men  speak  to  each  other  of  their 
duty. 

Nor  does  Haggai  deserve  blame  that  he  in- 
terpreted the  duty  as  the  material  building  of  the 
Temple.  This  was  no  mere  ecclesiastical  func- 
tion. Without  the  Temple  the  continuity  of  Is- 
rael's religion  could  not  be  maintained.  An  in- 
dependent state,  with  the  full  courses  of  civic 
life,  was  then  impossible.  The  ethical  spirit,  the 
regard  for  each  other  and  God,  could  prevail 
over  their  material  interests  in  no  other  way 
than  by  common  devotion  to  the  worship  of  the 
God  of  their  fathers.  In  urging  them  to  build 
the  Temple  from  their  own  unaided  resources,  in 
abstaining  from  all  hopes  of  imperial  patronage, 
in  making  the  business  one,  not  of  sentiment  nor 
of  comfortable  assurance  derived  from  the  past 
promises  of  God,  but  of  plain  and  hard  duty — 
Haggai  illustrated  at  once  the  sanity  and  the 
spiritual  essence  of  prophecy  in  Israel. 

Professor  Robertson  Smith  has  contrasted  the 
central  importance  which  Haggai  attached  to  the 
Temple  with  the  attitude  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah, 
to  whom  "the  religion  of  Israel  and  the  holi- 
ness of  Jerusalem  have  little  to  do  with  the 
edifice  of  the  Temple.  The  city  is  holy  because 
it  is  the  seat  of  Jehovah's  sovereignty  on  earth, 
exerted  in  His  dealings  with  and  for  the  state 
of  Judah  and  the  kingdom  of  David."  *  At  the 
same  time  it  ought  to  be  pointed  out  that  even  to 
Isaiah  the  Temple  was  the  dwelling-place  of  Je- 
hovah, and  if  it  had  been  lying  in  ruins  at  his 
feet,  as  it  was  at  Haggai's.  there  is  little  doubt 
he  would  have  been  as  earnest  as  Haggai  in  urg- 
ing its  reconstruction.  Nor  did  the  Second 
Isaiah,  who  has  as  lofty  an  idea  of  the  spiritual 
destiny  of  the  people  as  any  other  prophet,  lay 
less  emphasis  upon  the  cardinal  importance  of 
the  Temple  to  their  life,  and  upon  the  certainty 
of  its  future  glory. 

"  In  the  second  year  of  Darius f  the  king,  in 
the  sixth  month  and  the  first  day  of  the  month  " 
— that  is,  on  the  feast  of  the  new  moon — "  the 
word  of  Jehovah  came  byt  Haggai  the  prophet 
to  Zerubbabel,  son  of  She'alti'el,  §  Satrap  of 
Judah,  and  to  Jehoshua',  son  of  Jehosadak,||  the 
high  priest " — the  civil  and  religious  heads  of 
the  community — "  as  follows  H  : — 

"  Thus  hath  Jehovah  of  Hosts  spoken,  saying: 
This  people  have  said,   Not  yet  **  is  come  the 
♦Art.  "  Haggai,"  "  Encyc.  Brit."  +  Heb.  Daryavesh. 

t  Heb.  "  by  the  hand  of." 
S  See  pp.  607  f.  and  612. 
y  See  below,  pp.  621,  626,  630  ff.  1  Heb.  "  saying." 

•*  For  ^^"^^^^  NP  _  "  noj  (.^5  time  of  coming  "  read  with 
Hitzig  and  Wellhausen  ^^  ^J?  ^^'  "not  now  is  come;" 
for  ^^  cf.  Ezek.  xxiii.  4,  Psalm  Ixxiv.  6. 


time  for  the  building  of  Jehovah's  House. 
Therefore  Jehovah's  word  is  come  by  Haggai 
the  prophet,  saying:  Is  it  a  time  for  you — you* 
— to  be  dwelling  in  houses  ceiled  with  planks,! 
while  this  House  is  waste?  And  now  thus  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Lay  to  heart  how  things  have 
gone  with  you.^  Ye  sowed  much  but  had  little 
income,  ate  and  were  not  satisfied,  drank  and 
were  not  full,  put  on  clothing  and  there  was  no 
warmth,  while  he  that  earned  wages  has  earned 
them  into  a  bag  with  holes. 

"Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts :§  Go  up  into 
the  mountain  " — the  hill-country  of  Judah — "  and 
bring  in  timber,  and  build  the  House,  that  I  may 
take  pleasure  in  it,  and  show  My  glory,  saith  Je- 
hovah. Ye  looked  for  much  and  it  has  turned 
out  little, II  and  what  ye  brought  home  I  puf?ed 
at.  On  account  of  what? — oracle  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts — on  account  of  My  House  which  is  waste, 
while  ye  are  hurrying  every  man  after  his  own 
house.  Therefore  IT  hath  heaven  shut  off  the 
dew,**  and  earth  shut  ofif  her  increase.  And  I 
have  called  drought  upon  the  earth,  both  upon 
the  mountains, tt  and  upon  the  corn,  and  upon  the 
wine,  and  upon  the  oil,  and  upon  what  the 
ground  brings  forth,  and  upon  man,  and  upon 
beast,  and  upon  all  the  labour  of  the  hands." 

For  ourselves,  Haggai's  appeal  to  the  barren 
seasons  and  poverty  of  the  people  as  proof  of 
God's  anger  with  their  selfishness  must  raise 
questions.  But  we  have  already  seen,  not  only 
that  natural  calamities  were  by  the  ancient  world 
interpreted  as  the  penal  instruments  of  the  Deity, 
but  that  all  through  history  they  have  had  a 
wonderful  influence  on  the  spirits  of  men,  forc- 
ing them  to  search  their  own  hearts  and  to  be- 
lieve that  Providence  is  conducted  for  other  ends 
than  those  of  our  physical  prosperity.  "Have 
not  those  who  have  believed  as  Amos  believed 
ever  been  the  strong  spirits  of  our  race,  making 
the  very  disasters  which  crushed  them  to  the 
earth  the  tokens  that  God  has  great  views  about 
them?  "  XX  Haggai,  therefore,  takes  no  sordid 
view  of  Providence  when  he  interprets  the  sea- 
sons, from  which  his  countrymen  had  suffered, 
as  God's  anger  upon  their  selfishness  and  delay 
in  building  His  House. 

The  straight  appeal  to  the  conscience  of  the 
Jews  had  an  immediate  effect.  Within  three 
weeks  they  began  work  on  the  Temple. 

"  And  Zerubbabel,  son  of  She'alti'el,  and  Je- 
hoshua', son  of  Jehosadak,  the  high  priest,  and 
all  the  rest  of  the  peojjle,  hearkened  to  the  voice 

*  The  emphasis  may  be  due  only  to  the  awkward  gram- 
matical construction. 

+  D''J1SD.  from  jQD.  "  to  cover  "  with  planks  of  cedar,  2 
Kings  vi.  9  :  cf.  iii.  7. 

i  Heb.  "set  your  hearts"  (see  pp.  506,  510,  522)  "upon 
your  ways;"  but  "your  ways"  cannot  mean  here,  as 
elsewhere,  "your  conduct,"  but  obviously  from  what 
follows  "  the  ways  "  you  have  been  led,  "  the  way  " 
things  have  gone  with  you — the  barren  seasons  and  little 
income. 

§The  Hebrew  and  Versions  here  insert  "set  your 
hearts  upon  your  ways,"  obviously  a  mere  clerical  repeti- 
tition  from  ver.  5. 


For  nyoi?  njni  read  with  the  LXX.   toyoi?  n\ni   or 

tThe  DSvV  here  inserted  in  the  Hebrew  text  is  un- 
parsable,  not  found  in  the  LXX.  and  probably  a  clerical 
error  by  dittography  from  the  preceding  p"?^. 

**  Heb.  "  heavens  ate  shut  from  dew."    But  perhaps  the 

JDof  ^3130  should  be  deleted.    So  Wellhausen.    There  is 
no  instance  of  an  intransitive  Qal  of  K73, 

tt  Query? 

XX  Pages  482  ff. 


Haggai  i.,  ii.J 


HAGGAI    AND    THE    TEMPLE-BUILDING. 


617 


of  Jehovah  their  God,  and  to  the  words  of  Hag- 
gai the  prophet,  as  Jehovah  their  God  had  sent 
him;  and  the  people  feared  before  the  face  of  Je- 
hovah. (And  Haggai,  the  messenger  of  Je- 
hovah, in  Jehovah's  mission  to  the  people,  spake, 
saying,  I  am  with  you — oracle  of  Jehovah.)  * 
And  Jehovah  stirred  the  spirit  of  Zerubbabel,  son 
of  She'aiti'el,  Satrap  of  Judah,  and  the  spirit  of 
Jehoshua',  son  of  Jehosadak:,  the  high  priest,  and 
the  spirit  of  all  the  rest  of  the  people;  and  they 
went  and  did  work  in  the  House  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  their  God,  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of 
the  sixth  month,  in  the  second  year  of  Darius 
the  king."f 

Note  how  the  narrative  emphasises  that  the 
new  energy  was,  as  it  could  not  but  be  from 
Haggai's  unflattering  words,  a  purely  spiritual 
result.  It  was  the  spirit  of  Zerubbabel,  and  the 
spirit  of  Jehoshua,  and  the  spirit  of  all  the  rest 
of  the  people,  which  was  stirred — their  con- 
science and  radical  force  of  character.  Not  in 
vain  had  the  people  suffered  their  great  disillu- 
sion under  Cyrus,  if  now  their  history  was  to 
start  again  from  sources  so  inward  and  so  pure. 

2.  Courage,  Zerubbabel!  Courage,  Jehoshua 
AND  ALL  the  People!  (Chap.  ii.  1-9). 

The  second  occasion  on  which  Haggai  spoke 
to  the  people  was  another  feast  the  same  autumn, 
the  seventh  day  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  X 
the  twenty-first  of  the  seventh  month.  For 
nearly  four  weeks  the  work  on  the  Temple  had 
proceeded.  Some  progress  must  have  been 
made,  for  comparisons  became  possible  between 
the  old  Temple  and  the  state  of  this  one.  Prob- 
ably the  outline  and  size  of  the  building  were 
visible.  In  any  case  it  was  enough  to  discour- 
age the  builders  with  their  efforts  and  the  means 
at  their  disposal.  Haggai's  new  word  is  a  very 
simple  one  of  encouragement.  The  people's 
conscience  had  been  stirred  bj'  his  first;  they 
need  now  some  hope.  Consequently  he  appeals 
to  what  he  had  ignored  before,  the  political 
possibilities  which  the  present  state  of  the  world 
afforded — always  a  source  of  prophetic  promise. 
But  again  he  makes  his  former  call  upon  their 
own  courage  and  resources.  The  Hebrew  text 
contains  a  reference  to  the  Exodus  which  would 
be  appropriate  to  a  discourse  delivered  during 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  but  it  is  not  found  in 
the  Septuagint,  and  is  so  impossible  to  construe 
that  it  has  been  justly  suspected  as  a  gloss,  in- 
serted by  some  later  hand,  only  because  the  pas- 
sage had  to  do  with  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

"  In  the  seventh  "  month.  "  on  the  twenty-first 
day  of  the  month,  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  by§ 
Haggai  the  prophet,  saying: — 

"  Speak  now  to  Zerubbabel,  son  of  She'aiti'el, 
Satrap  of  Judah,  and  to  Johoshua',  son  of  Jelio- 
sadak,  the  high  priest,  and  to  the  rest  of  the  peo- 
ple, "saying:  Who  among  you  is  left  that  saw 
this  House  in  its  former  glory,  and  how  do  ye 
see  it  now?     Is  it  not  as  nothing  in  your  eyes?  | 

*  See  above,  p.  613. 

t  The  LXX.  wrongly  takes  this  last  verse  of  chap.  i.  as 
the  first  half  of  the  first  verse  of  chap.  ii. 
+  Lev.  xxiii.  ^4,  :i6,  -10-42. 
^  "  I5v  tlie  hand  of." 

I  ^^'?y}  r«3  ^riOD  Nt5n.     Literally,  "is  not  the  like 

of  it  as  nothing  in  your  eyes?"  But  that  can  hardly  be 
the  meaning.  It  might  be  equivalent  to  "  is  it  not,  as  it 
stands,  as  nothing  in  your  eyes?"  But  the  fact  is  that  in 
Hebrew  construction  of  a  simple,  unemphasised  com- 
parison,  the    comparing   particle   3   stands    before  bot/i 


And  now  courage,*  O  Zerubbabel — oracle  of  Je- 
hovah— and  courage,  Jehoshua',  son  of  Jehosa- 
dak,  O  high  priest;!  and  courage,  all  people *of 
the  land! — oracle  of  Jehovah;  and  get  to  work, 
for  I  am  with  you — oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  X 
— and  My  Spirit  is  standing  in  your  midst.  Fear 
not!  For  thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  It  is 
but  a  little  while,  and  I  will  shake  the  heavens, 
and  the  earth  and  the  sea  and  the  dry  land; 
and  I  will  shake  all  nations,  and  the  costly 
things§  of  all  nations  shall  come  in,  and  I  will 
fill  this  House  with  glory,  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts.  Mine  is  the  silver  and  Mine  the  gold — 
oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  Greater  shall  the 
latter  glory  of  this  House  be  than  the  former, 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  and  in  this  place  will 
I  give  peace  || — oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts." 

t>om  the  earliest  times  this  passage,  by  the 
majority  of  the  Christian  Church,  has  been  in- 
terpreted of  the  coming  of  Christ.  The  Vulgate 
renders  ver.  7b,  "  Et  veniet  Desideratus  cunctis 
gentibus,"  and  so  a  large  number  of  the  Latin 
Fathers,  who  are  followed  by  Luther,  "  Der 
Trost  aller  Heiden,"  and  by  our  own  Author- 
ised Version,  "  And  the  Desire  of  all  nations 
shall  come."  This  was  not  contrary  to  Jewish 
'tradition,  for  Rabbi  Akiba  had  defined  the  clause 
of  the  Messiah,  and  Jerome  received  the  inter- 
pretation from  his  Jewish  instructors.  In  itself 
the  noun,  as  pointed  in  the  Massoretic  text, 
means  "longing"  or  "object  of  longing."iT 
But  the  verb  which  goes  with  it  is  in  the  plural, 
and  by  a  change  of  points  the  noun  itself  may  be 
read  as  a  plural.*"*-  That  this  was  the  original 
reading  is  made  extremely  probable  by  the  fact 
that  it  lay  before  the  translators  of  the  Septua- 
gint, who  render:  "  the  picked,"  or  "  chosen, 
things  of  the  nations."  ft  So  the  old  Italic  ver- 
sion: "  Et  venient  omnia  electa  gentium." +$ 
Moreover  this  meaning  suits  the  context,  as  the 
other  does  not.  The  next  verse  mentions  silver 
objects  compared:  as,  for  instance,  in  the  phrase  (Gen. 
xliv.  18)    '^J'"!?!'  ^""^^  ^?,   •>  thou  art  as  Pharaoh." 

♦Literally:  "be  strong." 

+  It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  "  high  priest  "  belongs  to 
the  text  or  not. 

J  Here  occurs  the  anacolouthic  clause,  introduced  by  an 
ace.  without  a  verb,  which  is  not  found  in  the  LXX.  and 
is  probably  a  gloss:  "The  promise  which  I  made  with 
you  in  your  going  forth  from  Egypt." 

§  Hebrew  has  singular,  "costly  thing"  or  "desirable- 
ness," ^  J?!?  (fem.  for  neut.),  but  the  verb  "  shall  come  " 

is  in  the  plural,  and  the  LXX.  has  to  ExAeKTa,  "the  choice 
things." 
II  The  LXX.  add  a  parallel  clause,  icoi  eip^vTjv  t/'vx^s  eis 

iT€pnroi-q(7iv    TrarTi    Tw    kti'^oi'ti    tov    ai'aaTTjaai    Toi'    vaov   toOtoi/, 

which  would  read  in  Hebrew  njlH  ^^'^HH  Dpipi?  *lDin"^3 

ni'np  K'Di  rilpK'l.     On  nVn  Wellhausen   cites  i  Chron. 

xi.  8,  =  "  restore  "  or  "  revive." 

^rnun  —  "longing,"  2  Chron.  xxi.  2,  and  "object  of 

longing,"  Dan.  xi.  37.  It  is  the  feminine  or  neuter,  and 
might  be  rendered  as  a  collective,  "desirable  things." 
Pusey  cites  Cicero's  address  to  his  wife  :  "  Valete,  mea 
desideria,  valete  "  ("  Ep.  ad  Famil.,"  xiv.  2  fin.). 

"'P":  plural  feminine  of  pass,  part.,  as  in  Gen.  xxvii. 

15,  where  it  is  an  adjective,  but  used  as  a  noun  =  "pre- 
cious things,"  Dan.  xi.  38,  43,  which  use  meets  the  objection 
of  Pusey,  tn  loco,  where  he  wrongly  maintains  that 
"  precious  things,"  if  intended,  must  have  been  expressed 
by  "'ll^nO. 

ttfjfei    Ta    exXeiCTa    navTiov    tmv    iBvoiv.      Theodore  of    Mop- 

suestia  takes  it  as  "elect  persons  of  all  nations,"  to  which 
a  few  moderns  adhere. 

tX  Augustini  "  Contra  Donatistas  post  Collationem," 
cap.  XX.  3o(,Migne,  "Latin  Patrology,"  XLIIL,  p.  671). 


6i8 


THE-  BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and  gold.  "  We  may  understand  what  he  says," 
writes  Calvin,  "  of  Christ;  we  indeed  know  that 
Christ  was  the  expectation  of  the  whole  world; 
.  .  .  but  as  it  immediately  follows,  '  Mine  is  the 
silver  and  Mine  is  the  gold,'  the  more  simple 
meaning  is  that  which  I  first  stated:  that  the 
nations  would  come,  bringing  with  them  all 
their  riches,  that  they  might  offer  themselves  and 
all  their  possessions  a  sacrifice  to  God."  * 

3.  The    Power    of    the    Unclean    (Chap.    ii. 
10-19). 

Haggai's  third  address  to  the  people  is  based 
on  a  deliverance  which  he  seeks  from  the  priests. 
The  Book  of  Deuteronomy  had  provided  that, 
in  all  difificult  cases  not  settled  by  its  own  code, 
the  people  shall  seek  a  "  deliverance "  or 
"  Torah  "  from  the  priests,  "  and  shall  observe 
to  do  according  to  the  deliverance  which  the 
priests  deliver  to  thee."t  Both  noun  and  verb, 
which  may  be  thus  literally  translated,  are  also 
used  for  the  completed  and  canonical  Law  in  Is- 
rael, and  they  signify  that  in  the  time  of  the  com- 
position of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  that  Law 
was  still  regarded  as  in  process  of  growth.  So 
it  is  also  in  the  time  of  Haggai:  he  does  not  con* 
suit  a  code  of  laws,  nor  asks  the  priests  what  the 
canon  says,  as,  for  instance,  our  Lord  does  with 
the  question,  "  how  readest  thou?  "  But  he  begs 
them  to  give  him  a  Torah  or  deliverance,  | 
based  of  course  upon  existing  custom,  but  not  yet 
committed  to  writing.§  For  the  history  of  the 
Law  in  Israel  this  is,  therefore,  a  passage  of 
great  interest. 

"  On  the  twenty-fourth  of  the  ninth  month,  in 
the  second  year  of  Darius,  the  word  of  Jehovah 
came  to  ||  Haggai  the  prophet,  saying:  Thus 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  Ask,  I  pray,  of  the 
priests  a  deliverance, H  saying: — 

"  If  a  man  be  carrying  flesh  that  is  holy  in  the 
skirt  of  his  robe,  and  with  his  skirt  touch  bread 
or  pottage  or  wine  or  oil  or  any  food,  shall 
the  latter  become  holy?  And  the  priests  gave 
answer  and  said.  No!  And  Haggai  said.  If  one 
unclean  by  a  corpse  **  touch  any  of  these,  shall 
the  latter  become  unclean?  And  the  priests 
gave  answer  and  said.  It  shall."  That  is  to  say, 
holiness  which  passed  from  the  source  to  an  ob- 
ject immediately  in  touch  with  the  latter  did  not 

*  Calvin,  "Comm.  in  Hag-g-ai,"  ii.  6-q. 

tDeut.   xii.    8ff.:   ^nV  le^Ninninn  ^S-by.      compare 

the  expression  ''T!'"  \\r^'  2  Chron.  xv.  3,  and  the  duties 

of  the  teaching  priests  assigned  by  the  Chronicler  (2 
Chron.  xvii.  7-9)  to  the  days  of  Jehoshaphat. 

I  Note  that  it  is  not  "  the  Torah,"  but  "  a  Torah." 
§The    nearest  passage    to  the   "deliverance"  of   the 

priests  to  Haggai  is  Lev.  vi.  20,21  (Heb.),  27,  28  (Eng.). 
This  is  part  of  the  Priestly  Code  not  promulgated  till  445 
B.  c,  but  based,  of  course,  on  long  extant  custom,  some 
of  it  very  ancient.  "  Everything  that  touches  the  flesh" 
(of  the   sin-offering,   which  is   holy)   "  shall   be   holy  "— 

"^l?.'  the  verb  used  by  the  priests  in  their  answer  to 

Haggai— "and  when  any  of  its  blood  has  been  sprinkled 
on  a  garment,  that  whereon  it  was  sprinkled  shall  be 
washed  in  a  holy  place.  Tlie  earthen  vessel  wherein  it 
has  been  boiled  shall  be  broken,  and  if  it  has  been  boiled 
in  a  brazen  vessel,  this  shall  be  scoured  and  rinsed  with 
water." 

II  So  several  old  edd.  and  many  codd.,  and  adopted  by 
Baer  (see  his  note /«  loco)in  his  text.  But  most  of  the  edd. 
of  the  Massoretic  text  read  T13  after  Cod.  Hill.  For  the 
importance  of  the  question  see  above,  p.  613. 

If  Torah. 


spread  further;  but  pollution  infected  not  only 
the  person  who  came  into  contact  with  it,  but 
whatever  he  touched.*  "  The  flesh  of  the  sacri- 
fice hallowed  whatever  it  should  touch,  but  not 
further;  but  the  human  being  who  was  defiled 
by  touching  a  dead  body,  defiled  all  he  might 
touch."  t  "And  Haggai  answered  and  said:  So 
is  this  people,  and  so  is  this  nation  before  Me — 
oracle  of  Jehovah — and  so  is  all  the  work  of  their 
hands,  and  what  they  offer  there  " — at  the  altar 
erected  on  its  old. site — "is  unclean."  J  That  is 
to  say,  while  the  Jews  had  expected  their  re- 
stored ritual  to  make  them  holy  to  the  Lord, 
this  had  not  been  effective,  while,  on  the  con- 
trary, their  contact  with  sources  of  pollution  had 
thoroughly  polluted  both  themselves  and  their 
labour  and  their  sacrifices.  What  these  sources 
of  pollution  are  is  not  explicitly  stated,  but 
Haggai,  from  his  other  messages,  can  only  mean, 
either  the  people's  want  of  energy  in  building 
the  Temple,  or  the  unbuilt  Temple  itself. 
Andree  goes  so  far  as  to  compare  the  latter  with 
the  corpse,  whose  touch,  according  to  the  priests, 
spreads  infection  through  more  than  one  degree. 
In  any  case  Haggai  means  to  illustrate  and  en- 
force the  building  of  the  Temple  without  delay; 
and  meantime  he  takes  one  instance  of  the  effect 
he  has  already  spoken  of,  "  the  work  of  their 
hands,"  and  shows  how  it  has  been  spoilt  by 
their  neglect  and  delay.  "  And  now,  I  pray,  set 
your  hearts  backward  from  to-day,§  before  stone 
was  laid  upon  stone  in  the  Temple  of  Jehovah: 
.  .  .||  when  one  came  to  a  heap  of  grain  of  twenty 
measures,  and  it  had  become  ten,  or  went  to  the 
winevat  to  draw  fifty  measures,  ^[  and  it  had  be- 
come twenty.  I  smote  you  with  blasting  and 
with  withering,**  and  with  hail  all  the  work  of 


♦There  does  not  appear  to  be  the  contrast  between 
indirect  contact  with  a  holy  thing  and  direct  contact  with 
a  polluted  which  Wellhausen  says  there  is.  In  either 
case  the  articles  whose  character  is  in  question  stand  sec- 
ond from  the  source  of  holiness  and  pollution— the  holy 
flesh  and  the  corpse. 

t  Pusey,  in  loco. 

tThe    L/XX.   have    here    found  _  inserted    three    other 

clauses  :  evexev  Tuiv  Ajj/ut/iiaTioc  avTUiv  tCiv  bp6piv<j>v,  oSwrjOriijOfTai. 
anb   irpocrioirov    itoviav   avriyv,   Kal  ffiKreln   iv  TruAat?   eAey;^ovTas. 

The  first  clause  is  a  misreading  (Wellhausen),'!]?:  ^^"P? 

]V1  for  "Tl^  ^^rip?  ]V1'  "because  ye  take  a  bribe,"  and 
goes  well  with  the  third  clause,  modified  from  Amos  v. 
10  :  D  r^'^    'V.W^       :  T  '  "  they  hate  him  who  reproves  in 

the  gate."  These  may  have  been  inserted  into  the 
Hebrew  text  by  some  one  puzzled  to  know  what  the 
source  of  the  people's  pollution  was.  and  who  absurdly 
found  it  in  sins  which  in  Haggai's  time  it  was  impossi- 
ble to  impute  to  them.    The  middle  clause,    ■p.r'P    '*>" 


DH-'avy, 


"they  vex  themselves  with  their  labours,"  is 


suitable  to  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  verse,  as 
Wellhausen  points  out,  but  besides  gives  a  connection 
with  what  follows. 

§  From  this  day  and  onward. 

II  Heb.  literally  "since  they  were."  A.  V.  "since  those 
days  were." 

1  Winevat,  Jp..;  is  distinguished    from  winepress,  DJ, 

in  Josh.  ix.  13,  and  is  translated  by  the  Greek  vnoKrivi.ov 
(Mark  xii.  i),  Krivov,  (Matt.  xxi.  33),  "  dug  a  pit  for  the  wine- 
press ";  but  the  name  is  applied  sometimes  to  the  whole 
winepress — Hosea  ix.  2  etc.,  Job  xxiv.  11,  "to  tread  the 
winepress."    The  word    translated    "measures,"  as   in 

LXX.   fA€TpT)Tas.   is  ''^^'*'  and  that  is  properly  the  vat  in 

which  the  grapes  were  trodden  (Isa.  Ixiii.  3),  but  here  it 
can   scarcely   mean   fifty   "vatfuls,"  but   must    refer  to 
some  smaller  measure — cask? 
**  See  above,  pp.  613  f.,  n. 


1 


riaggai  i.,  ii.] 


HAGGAI    AND    THE    TEMPLE-BUILDING. 


619 


your  hands,  and  .  .  .  * — oracle  of  Jehovah.  Lay 
now  your  hearts  "  on  the  time  "  before  to-day  f 
(the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth  month  $), 
before  the  day  of  the  foundation  of  the  Temple 
of  Jehovah  § — lay  your  hearts"  to  that  time! 
"  Is    there    yet    any    seed    in    the    barn?  ||      And 

*  The  words  omitted  cannot  be  construed  in  the  Hebrew, 
y.^  ^?^?T^V    literally  "and  not  you   (ace.)  to  Me." 

Hitzig,  etc,  propose  to  read  Qj'i'f*  and  render  ''there 
was  none  with  you"  who  turned  "  to  Me."  Others  pro- 
pose ^r!^  ^'  "asif  none  of  you  "turned  "to'Me."    Others 

retain  ^?^^  ^^^^  render  "as  for  you."  The  versions 
LYY.  Syr.,  V'ulg.  "  ye  will  not  return  "  or  "  did  not  return 

to    Me,"    reading    perhaps    for     ^?.^^  V^.'  ^^^^  ^^' 

which  is  found  in  Amos  iv.  q,  of  which  the  rest  of  the 
verse  is  an  echo.  VVellhausen  deletes  the  whole  verse  as 
a  gloss.  It  is  certainly  suspicious,  and  remarkable  in 
that  the  LXX.  text  has  already  introduced  two  citations 
from  Amos.     See  above  on  ver.  14. 

t  Heb.  "  from  this  day  backwards." 

JThe  date  Wellhausen  thinks  was  added  by  a  latter 
hand. 

§This  is  the  ambiguous  clause  on  different  interpreta- 
tions of  which  so  much  has  been  founded:  ^  ■  -  " 
HB'J-nB'N    Di'Q'IDp.      Does     this     clause,     in      simple 

parallel  to  the  previous  one,  describe  the  day  on  which 
the  prophet  was  speaking,  i/ie  twenty-fourth  of  the 
ninth  tnonth,  the  terminus  a  quo  of  the  people's  retro- 
spect ?  In  that  case  Haggai  regards  the  foundation-stone 
of  the  Temple  as  laid  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the 
ninth  month  520  B.  C,  and  does  not  know,  or  at  least 
ignores,  any  previous  laying  of  the   foundation   stone. 

So  Kuenen,  Kosters,  Andnee,  etc.    Or  does  JO7    signify 

up  to  the  time  the  foundation-stone  was  laid  and  state 
a  terininus  ad  quet?i  for  the  people's  retrospect?  So 
Ewald  and  others,  who  therefore  find  in  the  verse  a 
proof    that    Haggai   knew   of  an   earlier    laj'ing   of    the 

foundation-stone.  But  that  JQp  is  ever  used  for  "lyi  can- 
not be  proved,  and  indeed  is  disproved  by  Jer.  vii.  7, 
where  it  occurs  in  contrast  to  Hyi.    Van  Hoonacker  finds 

the  same,  but  in  a  more  subtle  translation  of  JO?,  TO, 
he  says,  is  never  used  except  of  a  date  distant  from 
the  speaker  or  writer  of  it;  Jt2?  (if  I  understand  him 
aright)  refers  therefore  to  a  date  previous  to  Haggai  to 

which  the  people's  thoughts  are  directed  by  the  7  and 
then  brought  back  from  it  to  the  date  at  which  he  was 

speaking  by  means  of  the  W  ;  "la  preposition  p  signifie 
la  direction  de  I'esprit  vers  une  epoque  du  passe  d'ou  il 
est  ramene  par  la  preposition  JD.  "     But  surely  VQ  can  be 

used  (as  indeed  Haggai  has  just  used  it)  to  signify  exten- 
sion backwards  from  the  standpoint  of  the  speaker  ;  and 
although  in  the  passages  cited  by  Van  Hoonacker  of  the 

use  of  Viyp  it  always  refers  to  a  past  date— Deut.  ix.  7, 
Judg.  xix.  30,  2  Sam.  vi.  11,  Jer.  vii.  7  and  25— still,  as  it  is 
there  nothing  but  a  pleonastic  form   for   VQ,    it  surely 

might  be  employed  as  JO  is  sometimes  employed  for  de- 
parture from  the  present  backwards.  Nor  in  any  case  is 
it  used  to  express  what  Van  Hoonacker  seeks  to  draw 
from  it  here,  the  idea  of  direction  of  the  mind  to  a  past 
event  and  then  an  immediate  return  from  that.  Had 
Haggai    wished    to    express    that    idea    he   would   have 

phrased  it  thus :  HTH  OVH  1^1  Htn^  ^^'H  ID^  "Iti'K  DV.T 
JJ07  (as  Kosters  remarks).  Besides,  as  Kosters  has 
pointed  out  (pp.  7  ff.  of  the  Germ,  trans,  of  "  Het  Herstel," 

eic),  even  if  Van  Hoonacker's  translation  of  JO7  were 
correct,  the  context  would  show  that  it  might  refer  only 
to  a  laying  of  the  foundation-stone  since  Haggai's  first 
address  to  the  people,  and  therefore  the  question  of  an 
earlier  foundation-stone  under  Cyrus  would  remain  un- 
solved. Consequently  Haggai  ii.  18  cannot  be  quoted  as 
»  proof  of  the  latter.  See  above,  p.  611. 
i  Meaning  "  there  is  none  " 


as  yet  *  the  vine,  the  fig-tree,  the  pomegranate 
and  the  olive  have  not  borne  fruit.  From  this 
day  I  will  bless  thee." 

This  then  is  the  substance  of  the  whole  mes- 
sage. On  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth 
month,  somewhere  in  our  December,  the  Jews 
had  been  discouraged  that  their  attempts  to  build 
the  Temple,  begun  three  months  before,f  had 
not  turned  the  tide  of  their  misfortunes  and  pro- 
duced prosperity  in  their  agriculture.  Haggai 
tells  them,  there  is  not  yet  time  for  the  change 
to  work.  If  contact  with  a  holy  thing  has  only 
a  slight  effect,  but  contact  with  an  unclean  thing 
has  a  much  greater  effect  (verses  11-13),  then 
their  attempts  to  build  the  Temple  must  have  less 
good  influence  upon  their  condition  than  the 
bad  influence  of  all  their  past  devotion  to  them- 
selves and  their  secular  labours.  That  is  why 
adversity  still  continues,  but  courage!  from  this 
day  on  God  will  bless.  The  whole  message  is, 
therefore,  opportune  to  the  date  at  which  it  was 
delivered,  and  comes  naturally  on  the  back  of 
Haggai's  previous  oracles.  Andree's  reason  for 
assigning  it  to  another  writer,  on  the  ground  of 
its  breaking  the  connection,  does  not  exist.t 

These  poor  colonists,  in  their  hope  deferred, 
were  learning  the  old  lesson,  which  humanity 
finds  so  hard  to  understand,  that  repentance  and 
new-born  zeal  do  not  immediately  work  a  change 
upon  our  material  condition;  but  the  natural 
consequences  of  sin  often  outweigh  the  influence 
of  conversion,  and  though  devoted  to  God  and 
very  industrious  we  may  still  be  punished  for  a 
sinful  past.  Evil  has  an  infectious  power  greater 
than  that  of  holiness.  Its  efifects  are  more  ex- 
tensive and  lasting.^  It  was  no  bit  of  casuistry 
which  Haggai  sought  to  illustrate  by  his  ap- 
peal to  the  priests  on  the  ceremonial  law,  but  an 
ethical  truth  deeply  embedded  in  human  ex- 
perience. 

4.  The    Reinvestment   of  Israel's    Hope 
(Chap.  ii.  20-23). 

On  the  same  day  Haggai  published  another 
oracle,  in  which  he  put  the  climax  to  his  own 
message  by  reinvesting  in  Zerubbabel  the  an- 
cient hopes  of  his  people.  When  the  monarchy 
fell  the  Messianic  hopes  were  naturally  no  longer 
concentrated  in  the  person  of  a  king;  and  the 
great  evangelist  of  the  Exile  found  the  elect  and 
anointed  Servant  of  Jehovah  in  the  people  as  a 
whole,  or  in  at  least  the  pious  part  of  them,  with 
functions  not  of  political  government  but  of 
moral  influence  and  instruction  to\yards  all  the 
peoples  of  the  earth.  Yet  in  the  Exile  Ezekiel 
still  predicted  an  individual  Messiah,  a  son  of 
the  house  of  David;  only  it  is  significant  that, 
in  his  latest  prophecies  delivered  after  the  over- 
throw of  Jerusalem,  Ezekiel  calls  him  not 
king\  any  more,  but  prince.^ 

*11j;i  or  "iyi  for   *1^'  after  LXX.  Ka\  ei  «Tt. 

t  The  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  sixth  month,  according 
to  chap.  i.  15. 
t  See  above,  p.  613. 

§  "  For  I  believe  the  devil's  voice 
Sinks  deeper  in  our  ear. 
Than  any  whisper  sent  from  heaven. 
However  sweet  and  clear." 
II  Onlj'  in  xxxiv.  24,  xxxvii.  22,  24. 

^KtJ'JI  C'-  Skinner,  "Ezekiel"  pp.  336  ff.,  antea,  who, 
however,  attributes  the  diminution  of  the  importance 
of  the  civil  head  in  Israel,  not  to  the  feeling  that  he 
would  henceforth  always  be  subject  to  a  foreign 
emperor,  but  to  the  conviction  that  in  the  future  he  will 
be  "  overshadowed  by  the  personal  presence  of  Jehovah 
in  the  midst  of  His  people." 


620 


THK  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


After  the  return  of  Sheshbazzar  to  Babylon 
this  position  was  -virtually  filled  by  Zerubbabel, 
a  grandson  of  Jehoiakin,  the  second  last  king  of 
Judah,  and  appointed  by  the  Persian  king  Pehah 
or  Satrap  of  Judah.  Him  Haggai  now  formally 
names  the  elect  servant  of  Jehovah.  In  that 
overturning  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  which 
Haggai  had  predicted  two  months  before,  and 
which  he  now  explains  as  their  mutual  destruc- 
tion by  war,  Jehovah  of  Hosts  will  make  Zerub- 
babel His  signet-ring,  inseparable  from  Himself 
and  the  symbol  of  His  authority. 

"  And  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  a  second 
time  to  *  Haggai  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of 
the  ninth  month,  saying:  Speak  to  Zerubba- 
bel, Satrap  of  Judah,  saying:  I  am  about  to  shake 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,f  and  I  will  overturn 
the  thrones^  of  kingdoms,  and  will  shatter  the 
power  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  Gentiles,  and  will 
overturn  chariots^  and  their  riders,  and  horses 
and  their  riders  will  come  down,  every  man  by 
the  sword  of  his  brother.  In  that  day— oracle  of 
Jehovah  of  Hosts — I  will  take  Zerubbabel,  son 
of  She'alti'el,  My  servant — oracle  of  Jeho- 
vah— and  will  make  him  like  a  signet-ring; 
for  thee  have  I  chosen — oracle  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts." 

The  wars  and  mutual  destruction  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, of  which  Haggai  speaks,  are  doubtless  those 
revolts  of  races  and  provinces  which  threatened 
to  disrupt  the  Persian  Empire  upon  the  acces- 
sion of  Darius  in  521.  Persians,  Babylonians, 
Medes,  Armenians,  the  Sacse  and  others  rose  to- 
gether or  in  succession.  In  four  years  Darius 
quelled  them  all,  and  reorganised  his  empire  be- 
fore the  Jews  finished  their  Temple.  Like  all 
the  Syrian  governors,  Zerubbabel  remained  his 
poor  lieutenant  and  submissive  tributary.  His- 
tory rolled  westward  into  Europe.  Greek  and 
Persian  began  their  struggle  for  the  control  of 
its  future,  and  the  Jews  fell  into  an  obscurity 
and  oblivion  unbroken  for  centuries.  The 
"  signet-ring  of  Jehovah  "  was  not  acknowledged 
by  the  world — does  not  seem  even  to  have  chal- 
lenged its  briefest  attention.  But  Haggai  had 
at  least  succeeded  in  asserting  the  Messianic 
hope  of  Israel,  always  baffled,  never  quenched, 
in  this  re-opening  of  her  life.  He  had  delivered 
the  ancient  heritage  of  Israel  to  the  care  of  the 
new  Judaism. 

Haggai's  place  in  the  succession  of  prophecy 
ought  now  to  be  clear  to  us.  The  meagreness  of 
his  words  and  their  crabbed  style,  his  occupation 
with  the  construction  of  the  Temple,  his  unful- 
filled hope  in  Zerubbabel,  his  silence  on  the  great 
inheritance  of  truth  delivered  lay  his  predeces- 
sors, and  the  absence  from  his  prophesying  of  all 
visions  of  God's  character  and  all  emphasis  upon 
the  ethical  elements  of  religion-^— these  have 
moved  some  to  depress  his  value  as  a  prophet 
almost  to  the  vanishing  point.  Nothing  could 
be  more  unjust.  In  his  opening  message  Hag- 
gai evinced  the  first  indispensable  power  of  the 
prophet:  to  speak  to  the  situation  of  the  moment, 
and  to  succeed  in  getting  men  to  take  up  the 
duty  at  their  feet;  in  another  message  he  an- 
nounced a  great  ethical  principle;  in  his  last  he 
conserved  the  Messianic  traditions  of  his  reli- 
gion,   and    though    not    less    disappointed    than 

*  See  above,  p.  613. 

t  LXX.  enlarges  :  "  and  the  sea  and  the  dry  land." 

t  Heb.  sing,  collect.     LXX.  plural. 

§  Again  a  sing.  coll. 


Isaiah  in  the  personality  to  whom  he  looked  iar 
their  fulfilment,  he  succeeded  in  passing  on  their 
hope  undiminished  to  future  ages. 


ZECHARIAH. 

(i-viii.) 


"Not  by  might,  and  not  by  force,  but  by  My  Spirit, 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 

"Be  not  afraid,  strengthen  your  hands!  Speak  truth 
every  man  to  his  neighbour  ;  truth  and  wholesome  judg- 
ment judge  ye  in  your  gates,  and  in  your  hearts  plan  no 
evil  for  each  other,  nor  take  pleasure  in  false  swearing, 
for  all  these  things  do  I  hate— oracle  of  Jehovah." 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
THE  BOOK  OF  ZECHARIAH  (I.—VHI.). 

The  Book  of  Zechariah,  consisting  of  fourteen 
chapters,  falls  clearly  into  two  divisions:  First, 
chaps,  i.-viii.,  ascribed  to  Zechariah  himself  and 
full  of  evidence  for  their  authenticity;  Second, 
chaps,  ix.-xiv.,  which  are  not  ascribed  to  Zech- 
ariah, and  deal  with  conditions  different  from 
those  upon  which  he  worked.  The  full  discus- 
sion of  the  date  and  character  of  this  second 
section  we  shall  reserve  till  we  reach  the  period 
at  which  we  believe  it  to  have  been  written. 
Here  an  introduction  is  necessary  only  to 
chaps,  i.-viii.    ■ 

These  chapters  may  be  divided  into  five  sec- 
tions. 

I.  Chap.  i.  1-6. — A  Word  of  Jehovah  which 
came  to  Zechariah  in  the  eighth  month  of  the 
second  year  of  Darius,  that  is  in  November,  520 
B.  c,  or  between  the  second  and  the  third  oracles 
of  Haggai.*  In  this  the  prophet's  place  is  af- 
firmed in  the  succession  of  the  prophets  of  Is- 
rael. The  ancient  prophets  are  gone,  but  their 
predictions  have  been  fulfilled  in  the  calamities 
of  the  Exile,  and  God's  Word  abides  for  ever. 

II.  Chap.  i.  7-vi.  9. — A  Word  of  Jehovah 
which  came  to  Zechariah  on  the  twenty-fourth 
of  the  eleventh  month  of  the  same  year,  that 
is  January  or  February,  519,  and  which  he  re- 
produces in  the  form  of  eight  Visions  by  night, 
(i)  The  Vision  of  the  Four  Horsemen:  God's 
new  mercies  to  Jerusalem  (chap.  i.  7-17).  (2) 
The  Vision  of  the  Four  Horns,  or  Powers  of  the 
World,  and  the  Four  Smiths,  who  smite  them 
down  (ii.  1-4  Heb.,  but  in  the  Septi.agint  and  in 
the  English  Version  i.  18-21).  (3)  The  Vision  of 
the  Man  with  the  Measuring  Rope:  Jerusalem 
shall  be  rebuilt,  no  longer  as  a  narrow  fortress, 
but  sprear"  abroad  for  the  multitude  of  her 
population  (chap.  ii.  5-9  Heb.,  ii.  i-S  LXX. 
and  Eng.).  To  this  Vision  is  appended  a 
lyric  piece  of  probably  older  date  calling 
upon  the  Jews  in  Babylon  to  return,  and 
celebrating  the  joining  of  many  peoples  to  Je- 
hovah, now  that  He  takes  up  again  His  habita- 
tion in  Jerusalem  (chap.  ii.  10-17  Heb.,  ii.  6-13 
LXX.  and  Eng.).  (4)  The  Vision  of  Joshua, 
the  High  Priest,  and  the  Satan  or  Accuser:  the 
Satan  is  rebuked,  arid  Joshua  is  cleansed  Jrom 
his  foul  garments  and  clothed  with  a  new  turban 
and  festal  apparel;  the  land  is  purged  and  secure 

*  See  above,  pp.  613  ff. 


THE    BOOK    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


621 


(chap,  iii.)-  (S)  The  Vision  of  the  Seven- 
Branched  Lamp  and  the  Two  Olive-Trees 
(chap.  iv.  i-6a,  iofe-14):  into  the  centre  of  this 
has  been  inserted  a  Word  of  Jehovah  to  Zerub- 
babel  (vv.  6b-ioa),  which  interrupts  the  Vision 
and  ought  probably  to  come  at  the  close  of  it. 
(6)  The  Vision  of  the  Flying  Book:  it  is  the 
curse  of  the  land,  which  is  being  removed,  but 
after  destroying  the  houses  of  the  wicked  (chap. 
V.  1-4).  (7)  The  Vision  of  the  Bushel  and  the 
Woman:  that  is  the  guilt  of  the  land  and  its  wick- 
edness; they  are  carried  of?  and  planted  in  the 
land  of  Shinar  (v.  5-1 1).  (8)  The  Virion  of  the 
Four  Chariots:  they  go  forth  from  the  Lord  of 
all  the  earth,  to  traverse  the  earth  and  bring 
His  Spirit,  or  anger,  to  bear  on  the  North  coun- 
try (chap.  vi.  1-8)). 

in.  Chap.  vi.  9-15. — A  W^ord  of  Jehovah,  un- 
dated (unless  it  is  to  be  taken  as  of  the  same 
date  as  the  Visions  to  which  it  is  attached),  giv- 
ing directions  as  to  the  gifts  sent  to  the  com- 
munity at  Jerusalem  from  the  Babylonian  Jews. 
A  crown  is  to  be  made  from  the  silver  and  gold, 
and,  according  to  the  text,  placed  upon  the  head 
of  Joshua.  But,  as  we  shall  see,*  the  text  gives 
evident  signs  of  having  been  altered  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  High  Priest;  and  probably  the 
crown  was  meant  for  Zerubbabel,  at  whose  right 
hand  the  priest  is  to  stand,  and  there  shall  be  a 
counsel  of  peace  between  the  two  of  them.  The 
far-away  shall  come  and  assist  at  the  building  of 
the  Temple.  This  section  breaks  ofif  in  the  mid- 
dle of  a  sentence. 

IV.  Chap.  vii. — The  Word  of  Jehovah  which 
came  to  Zechariah  on  the  fourth  of  the  ninth 
month  of  the  fourth  year  of  Darius,  that  is  nearly 
two  years  after  the  date  of  the  Visions.  The 
Temple  was  approaching  completion;  and  an  in- 
quiry was  addressed  to  the  priests  who  were 
in  it  and  to  the  prophets  concerning  the  Fasts, 
which  had  been  maintained  during  the  Exile, 
while  the  Temple  lay  desolate  (chap.  vii.  1-3). 
This  inquiry  drew  from  Zechariah  a  historical 
explanation  of  how  the  Fasts  arose  (chap.  vii. 
4-14)- 

V.  Chap.  viii. — Ten  short  undated  oracles,  each 
introduced  by  the  same  formula,  "  Thus  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts,"  and  summarising  all  Zecha- 
riah's  teaching  since  before  the  Temple  began 
up  to  the  question  of  the  cessation  of  the  Fasts 
upon  its  completion — with  promises  for  the 
future,  (i)  A  Word  affirming  Jehovah's  new 
zeal  for  Jerusalem  and  His  Return  to  her  (vv. 
I,  2).  (2)  Another  of  the  same  (ver.  3).  (3) 
A  Word  promising  fulness  of  old  folk  and  chil- 
dren in  her  streets  (vv.  4,  5).  (4)  A  Word 
affirming  that  nothing  is  too  wonderful  for  Je- 
hovah (ver.  6).  (5)  A  Word  promising  the  re- 
turn of  the  people  from  east  and  west  (vv.  7,  8). 
(6  and  7)  Two  Words  contrasting,  in  terms  sim- 
ilar to  Haggai  i.,  the  poverty  of  the  people  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  Temple  with  their 
new  prosperity:  from  a  curse  Israel  shall  be- 
come a  blessing.  This  is  due  to  God's  anger 
having  changed  into  a  purpose  of  grace  to  Jeru- 
salem. But  the  people  themselves  must  do  truth 
and  justice,  ceasing  from  perjury  and  thoughts 
of  evil  against  each  other  (vv.  9-17).  (8)  A 
Word  which  recurs  to  the  question  of  Fasting, 
and  commands  that  the  four  great  Fasts,  insti- 
tuted to  commemorate  the  siege  and  overthrow 
of  Jerusalem,  and  the  murder  of  Gedaliah,  be 
changed   to  joy  and   gladness    (vv.    18,    19).     (9) 

*  I'elow,  p.  634. 


A  Word  predicting  the  coming  of  the  Gentiles  to 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  at  Jerusalem  (vv.  20-22). 
(10)  Another  of  the  same  (ver.  23). 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that,  apart  from  the 
few  interpolations  noted,  these  eight  chapters 
are  genuine  prophecies  of  Zechariah,  who  is 
mentioned  in  the  Book  of  Ezra  as  the  colleague 
of  Haggai,  and  contemporary  of  Zerubbabel  and 
Joshua  at  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  Tem- 
ple.* Like  the  oracles  of  Haggai,  these  proph- 
ecies are  dated  according  to  the  years  of  Darius 
the  king,  from  his  second  year  to  his  fourth.  Al- 
though they  may  contain  some  of  the  exhorta- 
tions to  build  the  Temple,  which  the  Book  of 
Ezra  informs  us  that  Zechariah  made  along  with 
Haggai,  the  most  of  them  presuppose  progress 
in  the  work,  and  seek  to  assist  it  by  historical 
retrospect  and  by  glowing  hopes  of  the  Mes- 
sianic effects  of  its  completion.  Their  allusions 
suit  exactly  the  years  to  which  they  are  as- 
signed. Darius  is  king.  Tlie  Exile  has  lasted 
about  seventy  years. f  Numbers  of  Jews  remain 
in  Babylon.^  and  are  scattered  over  the  rest  of 
the  world.§  The  community  at  Jerusalem  is 
small  and  weak:  it  is  the  mere  colony  of  young 
men  and  men  in  middle  life  who  came  to  it 
from  Babylon;  there  are  few  children  and  old 
folk. II  Joshua  and  Zerubbabel  are  the  heads  of 
the  community,  and  the  pledges  for  its  future.  H 
The  exact  conditions  are  recalled  as  recent  which 
Haggai  spoke  of  a  few  years  before.  **  More- 
over, there  is  a  steady  and  orderly  progress 
throughout  the  prophecies,  in  harmony  with  the 
successive  dates  at  which  they  were  delivered. 
In  November,  520,  they  begin  with  a  cry  to  re- 
pentance and  lessons  drawn  from  the  past  of 
prophecy.ft  In  January,  519,  Temple  and  city  are 
still  to  be  built.  $$  Zerubbabel  has  laid  the  foun- 
dation; the  completion  is  yet  future.  §§  The 
prophet's  duty  is  to  quiet  the  people's  appre- 
hensions about  the  state  of  the  world,  ||||  to  pro- 
voke their  zeal,  ^^  give  them  confidence  in  their 
great  men,***  and,  above  all,  assure  them  that  God 
is  returned  to  themfft  and  their  sin  pardoned. $tt 
But  in  December,  518,  the  Temple  is  so  far  built 
that  the  priests  are  said  to  belong  to  it;§§§  there 
is  no  occasion  for  continuing  the  fasts  of  the 
Exile,  null  the  future  has  opened  and  the  horizon 
is  bright  with  the  Messianic  hopes.^lj  Most  of 
all,  it  is  felt  that  the  hard  struggle  with  the  forces 
of  nature  is  over,  and  the  people  are  exhorted 
to  the  virtues  of  the  civic  life.  ****  They  have 
time  to,  lift  their  eyes  from  their  work  and  see 
the  nations  coming  from  afar  to  Jerusalem. ffff 

These  features  leave  no  room  for  doubt  that 
the  great  bulk  of  the  first  eight  chapters  of  the 
Book  of  Zechariah  are  by  the  prophet  himself, 
and  from  the  years  to  which  he  assigns  them, 
November,  520,  to  December,  518.  The  point  re- 
quires no  argument. 

*  Ezra  V.  i,  vi.  14. 

+  i.  12,  vii.  5  :  reckoning  in  round  numbers  from  sqo,  mid- 
way between  the  two  Exiles  of  507  and  586,  that  brings  us 
to  about  520,  the  second  year  of  Darius. 

t  ii.  6(Eng.,  Heb.  10).  On  the  question  whether  the  Book 
of  Zechariah  gives  no  evidence  of  a  previous  Return  from 
Babylon  see  above,  pp.  609  flf. 

g  viii.  7,  etc. 

II  viii.  4,  5.  ***  iii.,  iv. 

*f  iii.  i-io,  iv.  6-10,  vi.  11  flf.       ttt  i.  16. 

**  viii.  9,  10.  ttt  V. 

tti.  1-6.  §S§vii.  3. 

tti.  7-17-  mill  vii.  1-7,  viii.  18,  19. 

§§  iv.  6-10.  ^^^  viii.  20-23. 

nil  i   7-2i(Eng.,Heb.i.7— ii.4).     ****  viii.  16,  17. 

T^l  iv.  6  ff.  ++tt  viii.  20-23. 


622 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


There  are,  however,  three  passages  which  pro- 
voke further  examination — two  of  them  because 
of  the  signs  they  bear  of  an  earlier  date,  and 
one  because  of  the  alteration  it  has  suffered  in 
the  interests  of  a  later  day  in  Israel's  history. 

The  lyric  passage  which  is  appended  to  the 
Second  V^ision  (chap.  ii.  10-17  Heb.,  6-13  LXX. 
and  Eng.)  suggests  questions  by  its  singularity: 
there  is  no  other  such  among  the  Visions.  But 
in  addition  to  this  it  speaks  not  only  of  the  Re- 
turn from  Babylon  as  still  future  * — this  might 
still  be  said  after  the  First  Return  of  the  exiles 
in  536  t — but  it  differs  from  the  language  of  all 
the  Visions  proper  in  describing  the  return  of 
Jehovah  Himself  to  Zion  as  still  future.  The 
whole,  too,  has  the  ring  of  the  great  odes  in 
Isaiah  xl.-lv.,  and  seems  to  reflect  the  same  sit- 
uation, upon  the  eve  of  Cyrus'  conquest  of  Baby- 
lon. There  can  be  little  doubt  that  we  have  here 
inserted  in  Zechariah's  Visions  a  song  of  twenty 
years  earlier,  but  we  inust  confess  inability  to 
decide  whether  it  was  adopted  by  Zechariah  him- 
self or  added  by  a  later  hand.t 

Again,  there  are  the  two  passages  called  the 
Word  of  Jehovah  to  Zerubbabel,  chap.  iv.  6b- 
loa;  and  the  Word  of  Jehovah  concerning  the 
gifts  which  came  to  Jerusalem  from  the  Jews 
in  Babylon,  chap.  vi.  9-15.  The  first,  as  Well- 
hausen  has  shown, §  is  clearly  out  of  place;  it 
disturbs  the  narrative  of  the  Vision,  and  is  to 
be  put  at  the  end  of  the  latter.  The  second  is 
undated,  and  separate  from  the  Visions.  The 
second  plainly  affirms  that  the  building  of  the 
Temple  is  still  future.  The  man  whose  name  is 
Branch  or  Shoot  is  designated:  "and  he  shall 
build  the  Temple  of  Jehovah."  The  first  is  in 
the  same  temper  as  the  first  two  oracles  of  Hag- 
gai.  It  is  possible  then  that  these  two  passages 
are  not,  like  the  Visions  with  which  they  are 
taken,  to  be  dated  from  519,  but  represent  that 
still  earlier  prophesying  of  Zechariah  with  which 
wo  are  told  he  assisted  Haggai  in  instigating  the 
people  to  begin  to  build  the  Temple. 

The  style  of  the  prophet  Zechariah  betrays 
spe:;ial  features  almost  only  in  the  narrative  of 
the  Visions.  Outside  these  his  language  is 
simple,  direct,  and  pure,  as  it  could  not  but  be, 
considering  how  much  of  it  is  drawn  from,  or 
modeled  upon,  the  older  prophets,  ||  and  chiefly 
Rosea  and  Jeremiah.  Only  one  or  two  lapses 
into  a  careless  and  degenerate  dialect  show  us 
how  the  prophet  might  have  written  had  he  not 
been  sustained  by  the  music  of  the  classical 
periods  of  the  language. ^f 


*ii.  10  f.  Heb.,  6  f.,  LXX.,  and  Eng. 

t  Though  the  expression  "  I  have  scattered  you  to  the 
four  winds  o£  heaven"  seems  to  imply  the  Exile  before 
any  return. 

t  For  the  bearing  of  this  on  Kosters'  theory  of  the 
Return  see  pp.  610  f. 

§See  below,  p.  632. 

II  Outside  the  Visions  the  prophecies  contain  these 
echoes  or  repetitions  of  earlier  writers  :  chap.  i.  1-6  quotes 
the  constant  refrain  of  prophetic  preaching  before  the 
Exile,  and  in  chap.  vii.  7-14  (ver.  8  must  be  deleted)  is 
given  a  summary  of  that  preaching  ;  in  chap.  viii.  ver.  3 
echoes  Isa.  ■;.  21,  26,  "city  of  troth,"  and  Jer.  xxxi.  23, 
"  mountain  of  holiness  "  (there  is  really  no  connection,  as 
Kueneu  holds,  between  ver.  4  and  Isa.  Ixv.  20;  it  would 
create  mors  interesting  questions  as  to  the  date  of  the 
latter  if  there  were) ;  ver.  8  is  based  on  Hosea  ii.  15  Heb., 
ig  Eng.,  an>i  )?!•  xxxi.  33;  ver.  12  is  based  on  Hosea  ii. 
21  f.  (Heb.  i3  f.);  with  ver.  13  compare  Jer.  xlii.  18,  "a 
curse  ";  vv.  a?  ftr.  with  Isa.  ii.  3  and  Micah  iv.  2. 

^E.^.,  vii.    5,  "^^  '^^P'i  ioT  -f'  DnOV:     c/.    EwaW. 


This  directness  and  pith  is  not  shared  by  the 
language  in  which  the  Visions  are  narrated  * 
Here  the  style  is  involved  and  redundant.  The 
syntax  is  loose;  there  is  a  frequent  omission 
of  the  copula,  and  of  other  means  by  which, 
in  better  Hebrew,  connection  and  conciseness 
are  sustained.  The  formulas,  "  thus  saith  "  and 
"  saying,"  are  repeated  to  weariness.  At  the 
same  time  it  is  fair  to  ask  how  much  of  this 
redundancy  was  due  to  Zechariah  himself?  Take 
the  Septuagint  version.  The  Hebrew  text,  which 
it  followed,  not  only  included  a  number  of  re- 
petitions of  the  formulas,  and  of  the  designa- 
tions of  the  personages  introduced  into  the  Vi- 
sions, which  do  not  occur  in  the  Massoretic 
text,f  but  omitted  some  which  are  found  in  the 
Massoretic  text.J  These  two  sets  of  phenomena 
prove  that  from  an  early  date  the  copiers  of 
the  original  text  of  Zechariah  must  have  been 
busy  in  increasing  its  redundancies.  Further, 
there  are  still  earlier  intrusions  and  expansions, 
for  these  are  shared  by  both  the  Hebrew  and 
the  Greek  texts:  some  of  them  very  natural  ef- 
forts to  clear  up  the  personages  and  conver- 
sations recorded  in  the  dreams, §  some  of  them 
stupid  mistakes  in  understanding  the  drift  of 
the  argument.il  There  must  of  course  have  been 
a  certain  amount  of  redundancy  in  the  original 
to  provoke  such  aggravations  of  it,  and  of  ob- 
scurity or  tortuousness  of  style  to  cause  them 
to  be  deemed  necessary.  But  it  would  be  very 
unjust  to  charge  all  the  faults  of  our  present 
text  to  Zechariah  himself,  especially  when  we 
find  such  force  and  simplicity  in  the  passages 
outside  the  Visions.  Of  course  the  involved  and 
misty  subjects  of  the  latter  naturally  forced 
upon  the  description  of  them  a  laboriousness  of 
art,  to  which  there  was  no  provocation  in  di- 
rectly exhorting  the  people  to  a  pure  life,  or  in 
straightforward  predictions  of  the  Messianic 
era. 

Beyond  the  corruptions  due  to  these  causes, 
the  text  of  Zechariah  i.-viii.  has  not  suffered 
more  than  that  of  our  other  prophets.  There 
are  one  or  two  clerical  errors  ;1^  an  occasional 
preposition  or  person  of  a  verb  needs  to  be 
amended.  Here  and  there  the  text  has  been  dis- 
arranged;** and  as  already  noticed,  there  has 
been  one  serious  alteration  of  the  original. -ff 

From  the  foregoing  paragraphs  it  must  be  ap- 
parent what  help  and  hindrance  in  the  recon- 
struction of  the  text  is  furnished  by  the  Sep- 
tuagint. A  list  of  its  variant  readings  and  of  its 
mistranslations   is   appended. tt 


"Syntax,"  §  315^.  The  curious  use  of  the  ace.  in  the  fol- 
lowing verse  is  perhaps  only  apparent ;  part  of  the  text 
may  have  fallen  out. 

*  Though  there  are  not  wanting,  of  course,  echoes  here 
as  in  the  other  prophecies  of  older  writings,  e.  £".,  i.  12,  17. 

t"lOX?,  "  saying,"  ii.  8  (Gr.  ii.  4) ;  iv.  5,  "  And  the  angel 
who  spoke  with  me  said  ; "  i.  17,  cf.  vi.  5.  "  All  "  is  inserted 
in  i.  II,  iii.  q  ;  "  lord"  in  ii.  2  ;  "of  hosts"  (after  "Jehovah  ") 
viii.  17  ;  and  there  are  other  instances  of  palpable  ex- 
pansion, e.  g.,  i.  6,  8,  ii.  4  bis,  6,  viii.  ig. 

XB.g..  ii.  2,  iv.  2,  13,  V.  q,  vi.  12  bis,  vii.  8:  cf.  also  vi.  13. 

^  i.  8  ff..  iii.  4  ff .  :  cf.  also  vi.  3  with  vv.  6  f. 

\E.g.  (but  this  is  outside  the  Visions),  the  very  flagrant 
misunderstanding  to  which  the  insertion  of  vii.  8  is  due. 

t  V.  6,  DJ^y  for  DJiy  as  in  LXX.,  and  the  last  words  of 
V.  II ;  perhaps  vi.  10;  and  almost  certainly  vii.  la. 

**  Chap.  iv.  On  6a,  10^-14  should  immediately  follow,  and 
tb-ioa  come  after  14. 

tt  vi.  II  ff.     See  below,  pp.  634  f. 

XX  Chief  variants :  i.  8,  10 :  ii.  15;  '»■  4;  iv.  71  12 ;  v.  i,  3,  4, 
Q  ;  vi.  10,  13  ;  vii.  3  ;  viii.  8,  9.  12,  20.  Obvious  mistransla- 
tions or  misreadings :  ii.  9,  10,  15,  17  ;  iii.  4  ;  iv.  7,  10  ;  v.  ).. 
4,  9 ;  vi.  xo  cf.  ^^\  vii.  3. 


Zechariah  i.  i-6.] 


ZECHARIAH   THE    PROPHET. 


623 


CHAPTER    XX. 

ZECHARIAH  THE  PROPHET. 

Zechariah  i.  1-6,  etc.;  Ezra  v.  i,  vi.  14. 

Zechariah  is  one  of  the  prophets  whose  per- 
sonality as  distinguished  from  their  message  ex- 
erts some  degree  of  fascination  on  the  student. 
This  is  not  due,  however,  as  in  the  case  of 
Hosea  or  Jeremiah,  to  the  facts  of  his  life, 
for  of  these  we  know  extremely  little;  but  to 
certain  conflicting  symptoms  of  character  which 
appear  through  his  prophecies. 

His  name  was  a  very  common  one  in  Israel, 
Zekher-Yah,  "  Jehovah  remembers."  *  In  his 
own  book  he  is  described  as  "  the  son  of  Berekh- 
Yah,  the  son  of  Iddo,"  f  and  in  the  Aramaic 
document  of  the  Book  of  Ezra  as  "  the  son  of 
Iddo."  :j:  Some  have  explained  this  difference 
by  supposing  that  Berekhyah  was  the  actual 
father  of  the  prophet,  but  that  either  he  died 
early,  leaving  Zechariah  to  the  care  of  the  grand- 
father, or  else  that  he  was  a  man  of  no  note, 
and  Iddo  was  more  naturally  mentioned  as  the 
head  of  the  family.  There  are  several  instances 
in  the  Old  Testament  of  men  being  called  the 
sons  of  their  grandfathers  :§  as  in  these  cases  the 
grandfather  was  the  reputed  founder  of  the 
house,  so  in  that  of  Zechariah  Iddo  was  the 
head  of  his  family  when  it  came  out  of  Baby- 
lon and  was  anew  planted  in  Jerusalem.  Others, 
however,  have  contested  the  genuineness  of  the 
words  "  son  of  Berekh-Yah,"  and  have  traced 
their  insertion  to  a  confusion  of  the  prophet  with 
Zechariah  son  of  Yebherekh-Yahu,  the  contem- 
porary of  Isaiah. II  This  is  precarious,  while  the 
other  hypothesis  is  a  very  natural  one.TJ  Which- 
ever be  correct,  the  prophet  Zechariah  was  a 
member  of  the  priestly  family  of  Iddo,  that  came 
up  to  Jerusalem  from  Babylon  under  Cyrus.** 
The  Book  of  Nehemiah  adds  that  in  the  high- 
priesthood  of  Yoyakim,  the  son  of  Joshua,  the 
head  of  the  house  of  Iddo  was  a  Zechariah. ft 
If  this  be  our  prophet,  then  he  was  probably 
a  young  man  in  520,$:}:  and  had  come  up  as  a 
child  in  the  caravans  from  Babylon.  The  Ara- 
maic document  of  the  Book  of  Ezra  §§  assigns 
to  Zechariah  a  share  with  Haggai  in  the  work 
of  instigating  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  to  begin 
the  Temple.  None  of  his  oracles  is  dated  pre- 
vious to  the  beginning  of  the  work  in  August, 


*  nnat  ;    LXX.   Zaxapias. 

+  i.  1 :  nri3  nOn2-f3.       in  i.  7:  Nny-|3  1iT3^3. 
i  Ezra  V.  i,  vi.  14  :  Ni"ny"^3. 

§  Gen.  xxiv.  47,  c/.  xxix.  5  ;  i  Kings  xix.  16,  c/.  1  Kings  ix. 
14,  20. 
II  Isa.  viii.  2  :  ^n^^^lT'lIl.    This  confusion,  which  existed 

in  early  Jewish  and  Christian  times,  Knobel,  Von  Orten- 
berg,  Bleek,  Wellhausen.  and  others  take  to  be  due  to  the 
effort  to  find  a  second  Zechariah  for  the  authorship  of 
chaps,  ix.  ff. 

t  So  Vatke,  Konig,  and  many  others.    Marti  prefers  it 
("Der  Prophet  Sacharja,"  p.  58).     See  also  Ryle  on  Ezra 

V.    T. 

**  Neh.  xii.  4. 
tt  lb.  16. 

ttThis  is  not  proved,  as  Pusey,  Konig  ("Einl.,"  p.  364) 
and  others  think,  by  lyj.  or  young  man,  of  the  Third 

yision   (ii.   8.  Heb.,   ii.  4   LXX.   and  Eng.).     Cf.    Wright, 
"Zechariah  and  his  Prophecies,"  p.  xvi. 
§§  V.  I,  vi.  14. 


520,  but  we  have  seen  *  that  among  those  un- 
dated there  are  one  or  two  which  by  referring 
to  the  building  of  the  Temple  as  still  future  may 
contain  some  relics  of  that  first  stage  of  his 
ministry.  From  November,  520,  we  have  the  first 
of  his  dated  oracles;  his  Visions  followed  in 
January,  519,  and  his  last  recorded  prophesying 
in   December,  5i8.f 

These  are  all  the  certain  events  of.  Zechariah's 
history.  But  in  the  well-attested  prophecies  he 
has  left  we  discover,  besides  some  obvious  traits 
of  character,  certain  problems  of  style  and  ex- 
pression which  suggest  a  personality  of  more 
than  usual  interest.  Loyalty  to  the  great  voices 
of  old,  the  temper  which  appeals  to  the  expe- 
rience, rather  than  to  the  dogmas,  of  the  past, 
the  gift  of  plain  speech  to  his  own  times,  a 
wistful  anxietv  about  his  reception  as  a  prophet,  t 
combined  with  the  absence  of  all  ambition  to  be 
original  or  anything  but  the  clear  voice  of  the 
lessons  of  the  past  and  of  the  conscience  of  to- 
day— these  are  the  qualities  which  characterise 
Zechariah's  orations  to  the  people.  But  how  to 
reconcile  them  with  the  strained  art  and  obscure 
truths  of  the  Visions — it  is  this  which  invests 
with  interest  the  study  of  his  personality.  We 
have  proved  that  the  obscurity  and  redundancy 
of  the  Visions  cannot  all  have  been  due  to  him- 
self. Later  hands  have  exaggerated  the  repeti- 
tions and  ravelled  the  processes  of  the  original. 
But  these  gradual  blemishes  have  not  grown 
from  nothing:  the  original  style  must  have  been 
sufHciently  involved  to  provoke  the  interpola- 
tions of  the  scribes,  and  it  certainly  contained 
all  the  weird  and  shifting  apparitions  which  we 
find  so  hard  to  make  clear  to  ourselves.  The 
problem,  therefore,  remains — how  one  who  had 
gift  of  speech,  so  straight  and  clear,  came  to 
torture  and  tangle  his  style;  how  one  who  pre- 
sented with  all  plainness  the  main  issues  of  his 
people's  history  found  it  laid  upon  him  to  invent, 
for  the  further  expression  of  these,  symbols  so 
laboured  and  intricate. 

We  begin  with  the  oracle  which  opens  his 
book  and  illustrates  those  simple  characteristics 
of  the  man  that  contrast  so  sharply  with  the 
temper  of  his  Visions. 

"  In  the  eighth  month,  in  the  second  year  of 

*  Above,  p.  622. 

t  More  than  this  we  do  not  know  of  Zechariah.  The 
Jewish  and  Christian  traditions  of  him  are  as  unfounded 
as  those  of  other  prophets.  According  to  the  Jews  he  was, 
of  course,  a  member  of  the  mythical  Great  Synagogue. 
See  above  on  Haggai,  pp.  615  f.  As  in  the  case  of  the 
prophets  we  have  already  treated,  the  Christian  traditions 
of  Zechariah  are  found  in  (Pseud-)  Epiphanius,  "  De  Vitis 
Prophetarum,"  Dorotheus,  and  Hesychius,  as  quoted 
above,  p.  580.  They  amount  to  this,  that  Zechariah,  after 
predicting  in  Babylon  the  birth  of  Zerubbabel,  and  to 
Cyrus  his  victory  over  Croesus  and  his  treatment  of  the 
Jews,  came  in  his  old  age  to  Jerusalem,  prophesied,  died, 
and  was  buried  near  Beit-Jibrin— another  instance  of  the 
curious  relegation  by  Christian  tradition  of  the  birth  and 
burial  places  of  so  many  of  the  prophets  to  that  neigh- 
bourhood. Compare  Beit-Zakharya,  12  miles  from  beit- 
Jibrin.  Hesychiussayshe  wasborn  in  Gilead.  Dorotheue 
"confuses  him,  as  the  Jews  did,  with  Zechariah  of  Isa. 
viii  I. 

Zechariah  was  certainlj'  not  the  Zechariah  whom  our 
Lord  describes  as  slain  between  the  Temple  and  the  Altar 
(Matt,  xxiii.  35  ;  Luke  xi.  51).  In  the  former  passage  alone 
is  this  Zechariah  called  the  son  of  Barachiah.  In  the 
"  Evang.  Nazar."  Jerome  read  "the  son  of  Yehoyada." 
Both  readings  maybe  insertions.  According  to  2  Chron., 
xxiv.  21,  in  the  reign  of  Joash,  Zechariah,  the  son  of 
Yehoyada  the  priest,  was  stoned  in  the  court  of  the 
Temple,  and  according  to  JosephusdV.  "Wars,"  v.  4),  in 
the  year  68  A.  D.  Zechariah  son  of  Baruch  was  assassinated 
in  the  Temple  bj'  two  zealots.  The  latter  murder  may, 
as  Marti  remarks  (pp.  58  f.),  have  led  to  the  insertion  of 
Barachiah  into  Matt,  xxiii.  35. 
X'\\.  13,  15;  iv.  9;  vi.  IS. 


624 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Darius,  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  to  the 
prophet  Zechariah,  son  of  Berekhyah,  son  of 
Iddo,*  saying:  Jehovah  was  very  wroth  +  with 
your  fathers.  And  thou  sh..lt  say  unto  them: 
Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Turn  ye  to  Me 
—oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts— that  I  may  turn 
to  you,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts!  Be  not  like 
your  fathers,  to  whom  the  former  prophets 
preached,  saying:  'Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts, 
Turn  now  from  your  evil  ways  and  from  if  your 
evil  deeds,'  but  they  hearkened  not,  and  paid 
no  attention  to  Me — oracle  of  Jehovah.  Your 
fathers,  where  are  they?  And  the  prophets,  do 
they  live  for  ever?  But§  My  words  and  My 
statutes,  with  which  I  charged  My  servants  the 
prophets,  did  they  not  overtake  your  fathers? 
till  these  turned  and  said.  As  Jehovah  of  Hosts 
did  purpose  to  do  unto  us,  according  to  our 
deeds  and  according  to  our  ways,  so  hath  He 
dealt  with  us." 

It  is  a  sign  of  the  new  age  which  we  have 
reached,  that  its  prophet  should  appeal  to  the 
older  prophets  with  as  much  solemnity  as  they 
did  to  Moses  himself.  The  history  which  led 
to  the  Exile  has  become  to  Israel  as  classic 
and  sacred  as  her  great  days  of  deliverance  from 
Egypt  and  of  conquest  in  Canaan.  But  still 
more  significant  is  what  Zechariah  seeks  from 
that  past;  this  we  must  carefully  discover,  if 
we  would  appreciate  with  exactness  his  rank  as 
a   prophet. 

The  development  of  religion  may  be  said  to 
consist  of  a  struggle  between  two  tempers,  both 
of  which  indeed  appeal  to  the  past,  bijt  from 
very  opposite  motives.  The  one  proves  its  de- 
votion to  the  older  prophets  by  adopting  the 
exact  formulas  of  their  doctrine,  counts  these 
sacred  to  the  letter,  and  would  enforce  them  in 
detail  upon  the  minds  and  circumstances  of  the 
new  generation.  It  conceives  that  truth  has 
been  promulgated  once  for  all  in  forms  as  endur- 
ing as  the  principles  they  contain.  It  fences  an- 
cient rites,  cherishes  old  customs  and  institu- 
tions, and  when  these  are  questioned  it  becomes 
alarmed  and  even  savage.  The  other  temper  is 
no  whit  behind  this  one  in  its  devotion  to  the 
past,  but  it  seeks  the  ancient  prophets  not  so 
much  for  what  they  have  said  as  for  what  they 
have  been,  not  for  what  they  enforced  but  for 
what  they  encountered,  suffered,  and  confessed. 
It  asks  not  for  dogmas,  but  for  experience  and 
testimony.  He  who  can  thus  read  the  past  and 
interpret  it  to  his  own  day — he  is  the  prophet. 
In  his  reading  he  finds  nothing  so  clear,  noth- 
ing so  tragic,  nothing  so  convincing  as  the  work- 
ing of  the  Word  of  God.  He  beholds  how  this 
came  to  men,  haunted  them,  and  was  entreated 
by  them.  He  sees  that  it  was  their  great  op- 
portunity, which  being  rejected  became  their 
judgment.  He  finds  abused  justice  vindicated, 
proud  wrong  punished,  and  all  God's  neglected 
commonplaces  achieving  in  time  their  triumph. 
He  reads  how  men  came  to  see  this,  and  to 
confess  their  guilt.  He  is  haunted  by  the  re- 
morse of  generations  who  know  how  they  might 
have  obeyed  the  Divine  call,  but  wilfully  did  not. 
And  though  they  have  perished,  and  the  proph- 
ets have  died  and  their  formulas  are  no  more 
applicable,  the  victorious  Word  itself  still  lives 
and  cries  to  men  with  the  terrible  emphasis  of 


their  fathers'  experience.  All  this  is  the  vision 
of  the  true  prophet,  and  it  was  the  vision  of 
Zechariah. 

His  generation  was  one  whose  chief  tempta- 
tion was  to  adopt  towards  the  past  the  other  at- 
titude we  have  described.  In  their  feebleness 
what  could  the  poor  remnant  of  Israel  do  but 
cling  servilely  to  the  former  greatness?  The 
vindication  of  the  Exile  had  stamped  the  Divine 
authority  of  the  earlier  prophets.  The  habits, 
which  the  life  in  Babylon  had  perfected,  of  ar- 
ranging and  codifying  the  literature  of  the  past, 
and  of  employing  it,  in  place  of  a'tar  and 
ritual,  in  the  stated  service  of  God,  had  canonised 
Scripture  and  provoked  men  to  the  worship  of 
its  very  letter.  Had  the  real  prophet  not  again 
been  raised,  these  habits  might  have  too  early 
produced  the  belief  that  the  Word  of  God  was 
exhausted,  and  must  have  fastened  upon  the 
feeble  life  of  Israel  that  mass  of  stiff  and  stark 
dogmas,  the  literal  application  of  which  Christ 
afterwards  found  crushing  the  liberty  and  the 
force  of  religion.  Zechariah  prevented  this — for 
a  time.  He  himself  was  mighty  in  the  Scriptures 
of  the  past:  no  man  in  Israel  makes  larger  use 
of  them.  But  he  employs  them  as  witnesses, 
not  as  dogmas;  he  finds  in  them  not  authority, 
but  experience.*  He  reads  their  testimony  to 
the  ever-living  presence  of  God's  Word  with 
men.  And  seeing  that,  though  the  old  forms 
and  figures  have  perished  with  the  hearts  which 
shaped  them,  the  Word  itself  in  its  bare  truth 
has  vindicated  its  life  by  fulfilment  in  history, 
he  knows  that  it  lives  still,  and  hurls  it  upon 
his  people,  not  in  the  forms  published  by  this 
or  that  prophet  of  long  ag;o,  but  in  its  essence 
and  direct  from  God  Himself,  as  His  Word  for 
to-day  and  now.  "  The  fathers,  where  are  they? 
And  the  prophets,  do  they  live  for  ever?  But 
My  words  and  My  statutes,  with  which  I  charged 
My  servants  the  prophets,  have  they  not  over- 
taken your  fathers?  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  Be  ye  not  like  your  fathers,  but  turn  ye 
to  Me  that  I  may  turn  to  you." 

The  argument  of  this  oracle  might  very  nat- 
urally have  been  narrowed  into  a  credential  for 
the  prophet  himself  as  sent  from  God.  About 
his  reception  as  Jehovah's  messenger  Zechariah 
shows  a  repeated  anxiety.  Four  times  he  con- 
cludes a  prediction  with  the  wordc.  "  And  ye  shall 
know  that  Jehovah  hath  sent  me,"  f  as  if  after 
his  first  utterances  he  had  encountered  that  sus- 
picion and  unbelief  which  a  prophet  never  failed 
to  suffer  from  his  contemporaries.  But  in  this 
oracle  there  is  no  trace  of  such  personal  anxiety. 
The  oracle  is  pervaded  only  with  the  desire  to 
prove  the  ancient  Word  of  God  as  still  alive, 
and  to  drive  it  home  in  its  own  sheer  force. 
Like  the  greatest  of  his  order  Zechariah  appears 
with  the  call  to  repent:  "Turn  ye  to  Me — 
oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts — that  I  may  turn 
to  you."  This  is  the  pivot  on  which  history 
has  turned,  the  one  condition  on  which  God  has 
been  able  to  help  men.  Wherever  it  is  read 
as  the  conclusion  of  all  the  past,  wherever  it 
is  proclaimed  as  the  conscience  of  the  present, 
there  the  true  prophet  is  fou^.d  and  the  Word  of 
God   has  been  spoken. 

This  same  possession  by  the  ethical  spirit  re- 
appears, as  we  shall,  see,  in  Zechariah's  orations 


*  LXX.  'A-SSia.    See  above,  p.  264.  *  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  Zechariah  appeals  to  the  Torah 

+  Heb    "  ang-eiifed  with  anger  ;"  Gr.  "  with  great  anger."  of  the  prophets,  and  does  not  mention  any  Torah  of  the 

t  As  in  T-XX.  priests      Cf.  Smend,  "  A.  T.  Rel.  Gesch.,"  pp.  176  f. 

i  LXX.  has  misunderstood  and  expanded  this  verse.  +  Page  623  n. 


Zechariah  i.  7-vi.] 


THE    VISIONS    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


625 


to  the  people  after  the  anxieties  of  building 
arc  over  and  the  completion  of  the  Temple  is 
in  sight.  In  these  he  affirms  again  that  the 
whole  essence  of  God's  Word  by  the  older 
prophets  has  been  moral — to  judge  true  judg- 
ment, to  practise  mercy,  to  defend  the  widow 
and  orphan,  the  stranger  and  poor,  and  to  think 
no  evil  of  one  another.  For  the  sad  fasts  of 
the  Exile  Zechariah  enjoins  gladness,  with  the 
duty  of  truth  and  the  hope  of  peace.  Again 
and  again  he  enforces  sincerity  and  the  love 
without  dissimulation.  His  ideals  for  Jerusalem 
are  very  high,  including  the  conversion  of  the 
nations  to  her  God.  But  warlike  ambitions  have 
vanished  from  them,  and  his  pictures  of  her 
future  condition  are  homely  and  practical.  Je- 
rusalem shall  be  no  more  a  fortress,  but  spread 
village-wise  without  walls.*  Full  families,  unlike 
the  present  colony  with  its  few  children  and  its 
men  worn  out  in  middle  life  by  harassing  war- 
fare with  enemies  and  a  sullen  nature;  streets 
rife  with  children  playing  and  old  folk  sitting 
in  the  sun;  the  return  of  the  exiles;  happy  har- 
vests and  springtimes  of  peace;  solid  gain  of 
labour  for  everj'  man,  with  no  raiding  neigh- 
bours to  harass,  nor  the  mufial  envies  of  peas- 
ants in  their  selfish  struggle  with   famine. 

It  is  a  simple,  hearty,  practical  man  whom 
such  prophesying  reveals,  the  spirit  of  him  bent 
on  justice  and  love,  and  yearning  for  the  un- 
harassed  labour  of  the  field  and  for  happy  homes. 
No  prophet  has  more  beautiful  sympathies,  a 
more  direct  word  of  righteousness,  or  a  braver 
heart.  "  Fast  not,  but  love  truth  and  peace. 
Truth  and  wholesome  justice  set  ye  up  in  your 
gates.  Be  not  afraid;  strengthen  your  hands! 
Old  men  and  women  shall  yet  sit  in  the  streets 
of  Jerusalem,  each  with  staff  in  hand  for  the 
fulness  of  their  years;  the  city's  streets  shall  be 
rife  with  boys  and  girls  at  play." 


CHAPTER   XXI. 

THE   VISIONS   OF  ZECHARIAH. 

Zechariah  i.  7-vi. 

The  Visions  of  Zechariah  do  not  lack  those 
large  and  simple  views  of  religion  which  we 
have  just  seen  to  be  the  charm  of  his  other 
prophecies.  Indeed  it  is  among  the  Visions  that 
wj  find  the  most  spiritual  of  all  his  utterances:  f 
"  Not  by  might,  and  not  by  force,  but  by  My 
Spirit,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts."  The  Visions 
express  the  need  of  the  Divine  forgiveness,  em- 
plasise  the  reality  of  sin,  as  a  principle  deeper 
than  the  civic  crimes  in  which  it  is  manifested, 
ar  d  declare  the  power  of  God  to  banish  it  from 
H's  people.  The  Visions  also  contain  the  re- 
markable prospect  of  Jerusalem  as  the  City  of 
Pi  ace,  her  only  wall  the  Lord  Himself.^  The 
01  erthrow  of  the  heathen  empires  is  predicted 
b]  the  Lord's  own  hand,  and 'from  all  the  Visions 
th  ;re  are  absent  both  the  turmoil  and  the  glory 
o'   war. 

We  must  also  be  struck  by  the  absence  of  an- 
01  ler  element,  which  is  a  cause  of  complexity 
it  the  writings  of  many  prophets — the  polemic 
z%  ainst   idolatry.     Zechariah   nowhere   mentions 

This  picture  is  given  in  one  of  the  Visions  :  the  Third. 
'   iv.  6.    Unless  this  be  taken  as  an  earlier  prophecy. 
Ii«    above,  p.  622. 
•   ii.  9,  10  Heb.,  5,  6  LXX.  and  Eng. 
40— Vol.  IV. 


the  idols.  We  have  already  seen  what  proof 
this  silence  bears  for  the  fact  that  the  commu- 
nity to  which  he  spoke  was  not  that  half-heathen 
remnant  of  Israel  which  had  remained  in  the 
land,  but  was  composed  of  worshippers  of  Je- 
hovah who  at  His  word  had  returned  from  Baby- 
lon.* Here  we  have  only  to  do  with  the  bear- 
ing of  the  fact  upon  Zechariah's  style.  That  be- 
wildering confusion  of  the  heathen  pantheon 
and  its  rites,  which  forms  so  much  of  our  dif- 
ficulty in  interpreting  some  of  the  prophecies  of 
Ezekiel  and  the  closing  chapters  of  the  Book 
of  Isaiah,  is  not  to  blame  for  any  of  the  com- 
plexity of  Zechariah's  Visions. 

Nor  can  we  attribute  the  latter  to  the  fact 
that  the  Visions  are  dreams,  and  therefore  bound 
to  be  more  involved  and  obscure  than  the  words 
of  Jehovah  which  came  to  Zechariah  in  the  open 
daylight  of  his  people's  public  life.  In  chaps, 
i.  7-vi.  we  have  not  the  narrative  of  actual 
dreams,  but  a  series  of  conscious  and  artistic 
allegories — the  deliberate  translation  into  a  care- 
fully constructed  symbolism  of  the  Divine  truths 
with  which  the  prophet  was  entrusted  by  his 
God.  Yet  this  only  increases  our  problem — why 
a  man  with  such  gifts  of  direct  speech,  and 
such  clear  views  of  his  people's  character  and 
history,  should  choose  to  express  the  latter  by 
an  imagery  so  artificial  and  involved?  In  his 
orations  Zechariah  is  very  like  the  prophets 
whom  we  have  known  before  the  Exile,  thor- 
oughly ethical  and  intent  upon  the  public  con- 
science of  his  time.  He  appreciates  what  they 
were,  feels  himself  standing  in  their  succession, 
and  is  endowed  both  with  their  spirij;  and  their 
style.  But  none  of  them  constructs  the  elaborate 
allegories  which  he  does,  or  insists  upon  the 
religious  symbolism  which  he  enforces  as  indis- 
pensable to  the  standing  of  Israel  with  God. 
Not  only  are  their  visions  few  and  simple,  but 
they  look  down  upon  the  visionary  temper  as 
a  rude  stage  of  prophecy  and  inferior  to  their 
own,  in  which  the  Word  of  God  is  received  by 
personal  communion  with  Himself,  and  conveyed 
to  His  people  by  straight  and  plain  words. 
Some  of  the  earlier  prophets  even  condemn  all 
priesthood  and  ritual;  none  of  them  regards 
these  as  indispensable  to  Israel's  right  relations 
with  Jehovah;  and  none  employs  those  super- 
human mediators  of  the  Divine  truth  by  whom 
Zechariah  is  instructed  in  his  Visions. 

I.  The  Influences  which  Moulded  the 
Visions. 

The  explanation  of  this  change  that  has  come 
over  prophecy  must  be  sought  for  in  certain 
habits  which  the  people  formed  in  exile.  Dur- 
ing the  Exile  several  causes  conspired  to  de- 
velop among  Hebrew  writers  the  tempers  both 
of  symbolism  and  apocalypse.  The  chief  of 
these  was  their  separation  from  the  realities  of 
civic  life,  with  the  opportunity  their  political 
leisure  afforded  them  of  brooding  and  dreaming. 
Facts  and  Divine  promises,  which  had  previously 
to  be  dealt  with  by  the  conscience  of  the  mo- 
ment, were  left  to  be  worked  out  by  the  imagina- 
tion. The  exiles  were  not  responsible  citizens 
or  statesmen,  but  dreamers.  They  were  inspired 
by  mighty  hopes  for  the  future,  and  not  fettered 
by  the  practical  necessities  of  a  definite  historical 

*See  above,  pp.  610  ff.,  where  this  is  stated  as  an 
argumet  against  Kosters'  theory  that  there  was  no  Re- 
turn from  Babylon  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus. 


626 


THE    BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


situation  upon  which  these  hopes  had  to  be  im- 
mediately realised.  They  had  a  far-off  horizon 
to  build  upon,  and  they  occupied  the  whole 
breadth  of  it.  They  had  a  long  time  to  build, 
and  they  elaborated  the  minutest  details  of  their 
architecture.  Consequently  their  construction  of 
the  future  of  Israel,  and  their  description  of  the 
processes  by  which  it  was  to  be  reached,  became 
colossal,  ornate,  and  lavishly  symbolic.  Nor 
could  the  exiles  fail  to  receive  stimulus  for  all 

'  this   from   the   rich   imagery    of    Babylonian   art 
by  which  they  were  surrounded. 

Under  these  influences  there  were  three  strong 
developments  in  Israel.  One  was  that  develop- 
ment of  Apocalypse  the  first  beginnings  of  which 
we  traced  in  Zephaniah — the  representation  of 
God's  providence  of  the  world  and  of  His  peo- 
ple, not  by  the  ordinary  political  and  military 
processes  of  history,  but  by  awful  convulsions 
and  catastrophes,  both  in  nature  and  in  politics, 
in  which  God  Himself  appeared,  either  alone  in 
sudden  glory  or  by  the  mediation  of  heavenly 
armies.  The  second — and  it  was  but  a  part  of 
the  first — was  the  development  of  a  belief  in 
Angels:  superhuman  beings  who  had  not  only 
a  part  to  play  in  the  apocalyptic  wars  and  revo- 
lutions; but,  in  the  growing  sense,  which  char- 
acterises the  period,  of  God's  distance  and  awful- 
ness,  were  believed  to  act  as  His  agents  in  the 
communication  of  His  Word  to  men.  And, 
thirdly,  there  was  the  development  of  the  Ritual. 
To  some  minds  this  may  appear  the  strangest 
of  all  the  effects  of  the  Exile.  The  fall  of  the 
Temple,  its  hierarchy  and  sacrifices,  might  be 
supposed  to   enforce   more   spiritual   conceptions 

)of  God  and  of  His  communion  with  His  people. 
And  no  doubt  it  did.  The  impossibility  of  the 
legal  sacrifices  in  exile  opened  the  mind  of  Israel 
to  the  belief  that  God  was  satisfied  with  the 
sacrifices  of  the  broken  heart,  and  drew  near, 
without  mediation,  to  all  who  were  humble  and 
pure  of  heart.  But  no  one  in  Israel  therefore 
understood  that  these  sacrifices  were  for  ever 
abolished.  Their  interruption  was  regarded  as 
merely  temporary  even  by  the  most  spiritual 
of  Jewish  writers.  The  Fifty-first  Psalm,  for  in- 
stance, which  declares  that  "  the  sacrifices  of 
God  are  a  broken  spirit;  a  broken  and  a  con- 
trite heart,  O  Lord,  Thou  wilt  not  despise,"  im- 
mediately follows  this  declaration  by  the  assur- 
ance that  "  when  God  builds  again  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem,"  He  will  once  more  take  delight  in 
"the  legal  sacrifices:  burnt  offering  and  whole 
burnt  offering,  the  oblation  of  bullocks  upon 
Thine  altar."  *  For  men  of  such  views  the  ruin 
of  the  Temple  was  not  its  abolition  with  the 
whole  dispensation  which  it  represented,  but 
rather  the  occasion  for  its  reconstruction  upon 
wider  lines  and  a  more  detailed  system,  for  the 
planning  of  which  the  nation's  exile  afforded 
the  leisure  and  the  carefulness  of  art  described 
above.  The  ancient  liturgy,  too,  was  insufificient 
for  the  stronger  convictions  of  guilt  and  need 
of  purgation,  which  sore  punishment  had  im- 
pressed upon  the  people.  Then,  scattered  among 
the  heathen  as  they  were,  they  learned  to  require 
stricter  laws  and  more  drastic  ceremonies  to  re- 
store and  preserve  their  holiness.  Their  ritual, 
therefore,  had  to  be  expanded  and  detailed  to 
a  degree  far  beyond  what  we  find  in  Israel's 
earlier  systems  of  worship.  With  the  fall  of  the 
monarchy  and  the  absence  of  civic  life  the  im- 
portance of  the  priesthood  was  proportionately 
*  Vv.  17  and  19, 


enhanced;  and  the  growing  sense  of  God's  aloof- 
ness from  the  world,  already  alluded  to,  made 
the  more  indispensable  human,  as  well  as  super- 
human, mediators  between  Himself  and  His  peo- 
ple. Consider  these  things,  and  it  will  be  clear 
why  prophecy,  which  with  Amos  had  begun  a 
war  against  all  ritual,  and  with  Jeremiah  had 
achieved  a  religion  absolutely  independent  of 
priesthood  and  Temple,  should  reappear  after 
the  Exile,  insistent  upon  the  building  of  the 
Temple,  enforcing  the  need  both  of  the  priest- 
hood and  sacrifice,  and  while  it  proclaimed  the 
Messianic  King  and  the  High  Priest  as  the  great 
feeders  of  the  national  life  and  worship,  finding 
no  place  beside  them  for  the  Prophet  himself.* 
The  force  of  these  developments  of  Apoca- 
lypse, Angelology,  and  the  Ritual  appears  both 
in  Ezekiel  and  in  the  exilic  codification  of  the 
ritual  which  forms  so  large  a  part  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. Ezekiel  carries  Apocalypse  far  beyond 
the  beginnings  started  by  Zephaniah.  He  intro- 
duces, though  not  under  the  name  of  angels, 
superhuman  mediators  between  himself  and 
God.  The  Priestly  Code  does  not  mention  an- 
gels,  and  has  no  Apocalypse;  but  like  Ezekiel 
it  develops,  to  an  extraordinary  degree,  the  ritual 
of  Israel.  Both  its  author  and  Ezekiel  base  on 
the  older  forms,  but  build  as  men  who  are  not 
confined  by  the  lines  of  an  actually  existing  sys- 
tem. The  changes  they  make,  the  innovations 
they  introduce,  are  too  numerous  to  mention 
here.  To  illustrate  their  influence  upon  Zech- 
ariah,  it  is  enough  to  emphasise  the  large  place 
they  give  in  the  ritual  to  the  processes  of  pro- 
pitiation and-  cleansing  from  sin,  and  the  in- 
creased authority  with  which  they  invest  the 
priesthood.  In  Ezekiel  Israel  has  still  a  Prince, 
though  he  is  not  called  King.  He  arranges  the 
cultus,f  and  sacrifices  are  offered  for  him  and 
the  peopled  but  the  priests  teach  and  judge  the 
people. §  In  the  Priestly  Code||  the  priesthood 
is  more  rigorously  fenced  than  by  Ezekiel  from 
the  laity,  and  more  regularly  graded.  At  its 
head  appears  a  High  Priest  (as  he  does  not  in 
Ezekiel),  and  by  his  side  the  civil  rulers  are  por- 
trayed in  lesser  dignity  and  power.  Sacrifices 
are  made,  no  longer  as  with  Ezekiel  for  Prince 
and  People,  but  for  Aaron  and  the  congrega- 
tion; and  throughout  the  narrative  of  ancient 
history,  into  the  form  of  which  this  Code  pro- 
jects its  legislation,  the  High  Priest  stands 
above  the  captain  of  the  host,  even  when  the 
latter  is  Joshua  himself.  God's  enemies  are  de- 
feated not  so  much  by  the  wisdom  and  valour 
of  the  secular  powers,  as  by  the  miracles  of  Je- 
hovah Himself,  mediated  through  the  priest- 
hood. Ezekiel  and  the  Priestly  Code  both  elab- 
orate the  sacrifices  of  atonement  and  sanctifica- 
tion  beyond  all  the  earlier  uses. 

2.  General  Features  of  the  Visions. 

It  was  beneath  these  influences  that  Zechariah 
grew  up,  and  to  them  we  may  trace,  not  only 
numerous  details  of  his  Visions,  but  the  whole 
of  their  involved  symbolism.  He  was  himself 
a  priest  and  the  son  of  a  priest,  born  afid  bred 
in  the  very  order  to  which  we  owe  the  codifi- 

*  See  Zechariah's  Fifth  Vision, 
txliv.  I  ff. 
t  xlv.  22. 
§  xliv.  23,  24. 

II  Its  origin  was  the  Exile,  whether  its  date  be  before  or 
arter  the  First  Return  under  Cyrus  in  537  B.  C. 


Zechariah  i.  7-vi'.] 


THE    VISIONS    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


627 


cation  of  the  ritual,  and  the  development  of 
those  ideas  of  guilt  and  uncleanness  that  led  to 
its  expansion  and  specialisation.  The  Visions  in 
which  he  deals  with  these  are  the  Third  to  the 
Seventh.  As  with  Haggai  there  is  a  High 
Priest,  in  advance  upon  Ezekiel  and  in  agree- 
ment with  the  Priestly  Code.  As  in  the  latter 
the  High  Priest  represents  the  people  and  car- 
ries their  guilt  before  God.*  He  and  his  col- 
leagues are  pledges  and  portents  of  the  coming 
Messiah.  But  the  civil  power  is  not  yet  dimin- 
ished before  the  sacerdotal,  as  in  the  Priestly 
Code.  We  shall  find  indeed  that  a  remarkable 
attempt  has  been  made  to  alter  the  original  text 
of  a  prophecy  appended  to  the  Visions,f  in  order 
to  divert  to  the  High  Priest  the  coronation  and 
Messianic  rank  there  described.  But  any  one 
who  reads  the  passage  carefully  can  see  for  him- 
self that  the  crown  (a  single  crown,  as  the  verb 
which  it  governs  proves  t)  which  Zechariah  was 
ordered  to  make  was  designed  for  Another  than 
the  priest,  that  the  priest  was  but  to  stand  at  this 
Other's  right  hand,  and  that  there  was  to  be 
concord  between  the  two  of  them.  This  Other 
can  only  have  been  the  Messianic  King,  Zerub- 
babel,  as  was  already  proclaimed  by  Haggai. § 
The  altered  text  is  due  to  a  later  period,  when 
the  High  Priest  became  the  civil  as  well  as  the 
religious  head  of  the  community.  To  Zech- 
ariah he  was  still  only  the  right  hand  of  the 
monarch  in  government;  but,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  religious  life  of  the  people  was  already  gath- 
ered up  and  concentrated  in  him.  It  is  the 
priests,  too,  who  by  their  perpetual  service  and 
holy  life  bring  on  the  Messianic  era.||  Men 
come  to  the  Temple  to  propitiate  Jehovah,  for 
which  Zechariah  uses  the  anthropomorphic  ex- 
pression "  to  make  smooth  "  or  "  placid  His 
face."1[  No  more  than  this  is  made  of  the 
sacrificial  system,  which  was  not  in  full  course 
when  the  Visions  were  announced.  But  the 
symbolism  of  the  Fourth  Vision  is  drawn  from 
the  furniture  of  the  Temple.  It  is  interesting 
that  the  great  candelabrum  seen  by  the  prophet 
should  be  like,  not  the  ten  lights  of  the  old 
Temple  of  Solomon,  but  the  seven-branched 
candlestick  described  in  the  Priestly  Code.  In 
the  Sixth  and  Seventh  Visions  the  strong  con- 
victions of  guilt  and  uncleanness,  which  were 
engendered  in  Israel  by  the  Exile,  are  not  re- 
moved by  the  sacrificial  means  enforced  in  the 
Priestly  Code,  but  by  symbolic  processes  in  the 
style  of  the  Visions  of  Ezekiel. 

The  Visions  in  which  Zechariah  treats  of  the 
outer  history  of  the  world  are  the  first  two  and 
the  last,  and  in  these  we  notice  the  influence 
of  the  Apocalypse  developed  during  the  Exile. 
In  Zechariah's  day  Israel  had  no  stage  for  their 
history  save  the  site  of  Jerusalem  and  its  im- 
mediate neighbourhood.  So  long  as  he  keeps 
to  this  Zechariah  is  as  practical  and  matter-of- 
fact  as  any  of  the  prophets,  but  when  he  has 
to  go  beyond  it  to  describe  the  general  over- 
throw of  the  heathen,  he  is  unable  to  project 
that,  as  Amos  or  Isaiah  did,  in  terms  of  his- 
toric battle,  and  has  to  call  in  the  apocalyptic. 
A   people   such   as   that   poor  colony   of   exiles, 

*  Fourth  Vision,  chap.  iii.  t  See  ver.  11. 

t  vi.  g-15.  §ii.  2o-.i3. 

II  iii.  8. 

1  nin''  '3B"DK  n?n.        The  verb  (Piel)  originally  means 

■'  to  make  weak  or  flaccid  "  (the  Kal  means  "  to  be  sick,") 
and  so  "  to  soften  "  or  "  weaken  by  flattery."  i  Sam.  xiii, 
12  :  I  Kings  xiii.  6,  etc. 


with  no  issue  upon  history,  is  forced  to  take 
refuge  in  Apocalypse,  and  carries  with  it  even 
those  of  its  prophets  whose  conscience,  like 
Zechariah's,  is  most  strongly  bent  upon  the  prac- 
tical present.  Consequently  these  three  histor- 
ical Visions  are  the  most  vague  of  the  eight. 
They  reveal  the  whole  earth  under  the  care  of 
Jehovah  and  the  patrol  of  His  angels.  They 
definitely  predict  the  overthrow  of  the  heathen 
empires.  But,  unlike  Amos  or  Isaiah,  the 
prophet  does  not  see  by  what  political  move- 
ments this  is  to  be  effected.  The  world  "  is 
still  quiet  and  at  peace."  *  The  time  is  hidden 
in  the  Divine  counsels;  the  means,  though 
clearly  symbolised  in  "  four  smiths  "  who  come 
forward  to  smite  the  horns  of  the  heathen,f  and 
in  a  chariot  which  carries  God's  wrath  to  the 
North, t  are  obscure.  The  prophet  appears  to 
have  intended,  not  any  definite  individuals  or 
political  movements  of  the  immediate  future,  but 
God's  own  supernatural  forces.  In  other  words, 
the  Smiths  and  Chariots  are  not  an  allegory 
of  history,  but  powers  apocalyptic.  The  forms 
of  the  symbols  were  derived  by  Zechariah  from 
different  sources.  Perhaps  that  of  the  "  smiths  " 
who  destroy  the  horns  in  the  Second  Vision 
was  suggested  by  "  the  smiths  of  destruction  " 
threatened  upon  Amnion  by  Ezekiel.^  In  the 
horsemen  of  the  First  Vision  and  the  chariots 
of  the  Eighth,  Ewald  sees  a  reflection  of  the 
couriers  and  posts  which  Darius  organised 
throughout  the  empire;  they  are  more  probably, 
as  we  shall  see,  a  reflection  of  the  military  bands 
and  patrols  of  the  Persians.  But  from  what- 
ever quarter  Zechariah  derived  the  exact  aspect 
of  these  Divine  messengers,  he  found  many  prec- 
edents for  them  in  the  native  beliefs  of  Israel. 
They  are,  in  short,  angels  incarnate  as  Hebrew 
angels  always  were,  and  in  fashion  like  men. 
But  this  brings  up  the  whole  subject  of  the 
angels,  whom  he  also  sees  employed  as  the  me- 
diators of  God's  Word  to  him;  and  that  is  large 
enough  to  be  left  to  a  chapter  by  itself. || 

We  have  now  before  us  all  the  influences  which 
led  Zechariah  to  the  main  form  and  chief  fea- 
tures of  his  Visions. 

3.  Exposition  of  the  Several  Visions. 

For  all  the  Visions  there  is  one  date,  "  in  the 
twenty-fourth  day  of  the  eleventh  month,  the 
month  Shebat,  in  the  second  year  of  Darius." 
that  is,  January  or  February,  519;  and  one  Di- 
vine impulse,  "  the  Word  of  Jehovah  came  to 
the  prophet  Zekharyah,  son  of  Berekhyahu,  son 
of  Iddo,  as  follows."' 

The   First  Vision:   The  Angel-Horsemen. 

(i-  7-U)- 

The  seventy  years  which  Jeremiah  had  fixed 
for  the  duration  of  the  Babylonian  servitude 
were  drawing  to  a  close.  Four  months  had 
elapsed  since  Haggai  promised  that  in  a  little 
while  God  would  shake  all  nations.^!  But  the 
world  was  not  shaken:  there  was  no  political 
movement  which  promised  to  restore  her  glory 
to   Jerusalem.      A   very   natural    disappointment 

*  First  Vision,  chap.  i.  11. 

t  Second  Vision,  ii.  1-4  Heb.,  i.  18-21  LXX.  and  Eng. 

i  Eighth  Vision,  chap.  vi.  i-8. 

§  xxi.  36  Heb.,  31  Eng.  :  "  skilful  to  destroy." 

I  See  next  chapter. 

^  Jer.  XXV.  12;  Hag.  ii.  7. 


628 


THE-  BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


must  have  been  the  result  among  the  Jews.  In 
this  situation  of  affairs  the  Word  came  to  Zech- 
ariah,  and  both  situation  and  Word  he  expressed 
by  his  First  Vision. 

It  was  one  of  the  myrtle-covered  glens  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem:*  Zechariah  calls 
it  the  Glen  or  Valley-Bottom,  either  because 
it  was  known  under  that  name  to  the  Jews,  or 
because  he  was  himself  wont  to  frequent  it  for 
prayer.  He  discovers  in  it  what  seems  to  be 
a  rendezvous  of  Persian  cavalry-scouts, f  the 
leader  of  the  troop  in  front,  and  the  rest  behind 
him,  having  just  come  in  with  their  reports. 
Soon,  however,  he  is  made  aware  that  they  are 
angels,  and  with  that  quick,  dissolving  change 
both  of  function  and  figure,  which  marks  all 
angelic  apparitions,:]:  they  explain  to  him  their 
mission.  Now  it  is  an  angel-interpreter  at  his 
side  who  speaks,  and  now  the  angel  on  the  front 
horse.  They  are  scouts  of  God  come  in  from 
their  survey  of  the  whole  earth.  The  world  lies 
quiet.  Whereupon  "  the  angel  of  Jehovah  "  asks 
Him  how  long  His  anger  must  rest  on  Jerusa- 
lem and  nothing  be  done  to  restore  her;  and 
the  prophet  hears  a  kind  and  comforting  answer. 
The  nations  have  done  more  evil  to  Israel  than 
God  empowered  them  to  do.  Their  aggrava- 
tions have  changed  His  wrath  against  her  to 
pity,  and  in  pity  He  is  come  back  to  her.  She 
shall  soon  be  rebuilt  and  overflow  with  pros- 
perity. 

The  only  perplexity  in  all  this  is  the  angels' 
report  that  the  whole  earth  lies  quiet.  How  this 
could  have  been  in  519  is  difScult  to  understand. 
The  great  revolts  against  Darius  were  then  in 
active  progress,  the  result  was  uncertain,  and  he 
took  at  least  three  more  years  to  put  them  all 
down.  They  were  confined,  it  is  true,  to  the 
east  and  northeast  of  the  empire,  but  some  of 
them  threatened  Babylon,  and  we  can  hardly 
ascribe  the  report  of  the  angels  to  such  a  limita- 
tion of  the  Jews'  horizon  at  this  time  as  shut  out 
Mesopotamia  or  the  lands  to  the  north  of  her. 
There  remain  two  alternatives.  Either  these 
far-away  revolts  made  only  more  impressive  the 
stagnancy  of  the  tribes  of  the  rest  of  the  em- 
pire, and  the  helplessness  of  the  Jews  and  their 
Syrian  neighbours  was  convincingly  shown  by 
their  inability  to  take  advantage  even  of  the  des- 
perate straits  to  which  Darius  was  reduced;  or 
else  in  that  month  of  vision  Darius  had  quelled 
one  of  the  rebellions  against  him,  and  for  the 
moment  there  was  quiet  in  the  world. 

"  By  night  I  had  a  vision^  and  behold!  a  man 
riding  a  brown  horse, §  and  he  was  standing 
between  the  myrtles  that  are  in  the  Glen;||    and 

*  Myrtles  were  once  common  in  the  Holy  Land,  and 
have  been  recently  found  (Hasselquist,  "  Travels  ")•  For 
their  prevalence  near  Jerusalem  see  Neh.  viii.  15.  They 
do  not  appear  to  have  any  symbolic  value  in  the  Vision. 

tFor  a  less  probable  explanation  see  above,  p.  627. 

t  See  p.  635. 

§  Ewald  omits  "riding  a  brown  horse,"  as  "marring 
the  lucidity  of  the  description,  and  added  from  a  miscon- 
ception by  an  early  hand."  But  we  must  not  expect 
lucidity  in  a  phantasmagoria  like  this. 

Il  ''?;:'  Mesullah,  either  "  shadow  "  from  ppV,  or  for 
n^isu.  "ravine,"   or  else  a  proper  name.    The   LXX., 

which    uniformly  for    ^  ?i!J.'   "myrtles,"    reads  ClH, 
"  mountains,"    renders  n^Dl    IB'K  ^^    ■^"''    "aTaorKiuv. 


behind  him  horses  brown,  bay  *  and  white.  And 
I  said,  What  are  these,  my  lord?  And  the  angel 
who  talked  with  me  said,  I  will  show  you 
what  these  are.  And  the  man  who  was  standing 
among  the  myrtles  answered  and  said.  These  are 
they  whom  Jehovah  hath  sent  to  go  to  and  fro 
through  the  earth.  And  they  answered  the  angel 
of  Jehovah  who  stood  among  the  myrtles,t  and 
said.  We  have  gone  up  and  down  through  the 
earth,  and  lo!  the  whole  earth  is  still  and  at 
peace. t  And  the  angel  of  Jehovah  answered  and 
said,  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  how  long  hast  Thou  no 
pity  for  Jerusalem  and  the  cities  of  Judah,  with 
which  §  Thou  hast  been  wroth  these  seventy 
years?  And  Jehovah  answered  the  angel  who 
talked  with  me,||  kind  words  and  comforting. 
And  the  angel  who  talked  with  me  said  to  me, 
Proclaim  now  as  follows:  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  I  am  zealous  for  Jerusalem  and  for  Zion, 
with  a  great  zeal;  but  with  great  wrath  am  I 
wroth  against  the  arrogant  Gentiles.  For  I  was 
but  a  little  angry  with  Israel,  but  they  aggra- 
vated the  evil. IF  Therefore  thus  saith  Jehovah, 
I  am  returned  to  Jerusalem  with  mercies.  My 
house  shall  be  built  in  her — oracle  of  Jehovah 
of  Hosts — and  the  measuring  line  shall  be  drawn 
over  Jerusalem.  Proclaim  yet  again,  saying: 
Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  My  cities  shall  yet 
overflow  with  prosperity,  and  Jehovah  shall 
again  comfort  Zion,  and  again  make  choice  of 
Jerusalem." 

Two  things  are  to  be  noted  in  this  oracle. 
No  political  movement  is  indicated  as  the  means 
of  Jerusalem's  restoration:  this  is  to  be  the  effect 
of  God's  free  grace  in  returning  to  dwell  in  Je- 
rusalem, which  is  the  reward  of  the  building  of 
the  Temple.  And  there  is  an  interesting  expla- 
nation of  the  motive  for  God's  new  grace:  in 
executing  His  sentence  upon  Israel,  the  heathen 
had  far  exceeded  their  commission,  and  now 
themselves  deserved  punishment.  ■  That  is  to 
say,  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem  and  the  resump- 
tion of  the  worship  are  not  enough  for  the  future 
of  Israel.  The  heathen  must  be  chastised.  But 
Zechariah  does  not  predict  any  overthrow  of  the 
world's  power,  either  by  earthly  or  by  heavenly 
forces.  This  is  entirely  in  harmony  with  the  in- 
sistence upon  peace  which  distinguishes  him 
from  other  prophets. 


Ewald  and  Hitzig  read 
ing  "  or  "  tent." 


Arab,  mizhallah,  "  shadow- 


The  Second  Vision:  The  Four  Horns  and 
THE  Four  Smiths  (ii.  1-4  Heb.,  i.  18-21 
Eng.). 

The  Second  Vision  supplies  what  is  lacking 
in  the  First,  the  destruction  of  the  tyrants  who 
have  oppressed  Israel.  The  prophet  sees  four 
horns,  which,  he  is  toW  by  his  interpreting  an- 
gel, are  the  powers  that  have  scattered  Ju- 
dah. The  many  attempts  to  identify  these  with 
four  heathen  nations  are  ingenious  but  futile. 
"  Four  horns  were  seen  as  representing  the  to- 
tality of  Israel's  enemies — her  enemies  from  all 

*  Heb.  D''p1tJ'.  only  here.  For  this  LXX.  gives  two 
kinds,  Kal  i|/apoi  Kal  TToiKiAoi,  "and  dappled  and  piebald.' 
Wright  gives  a  full  treatment  of  the  question,  pp.  531  ff. 
He  points  out  that  the  cognate  word  in  Arabic  means 
sorrel,  or  yellowish  red. 

t  "  Who  stood  among  the  myrtles  "  omitted  by  Nowack. 

tlsa.  xxxvii.  29;  Jer.  xlviii.  11;  Psalm  cxxiii.  4  ;  Zeph. 
i.  12. 

§Or  "for." 

II  "  Who  talked  with  me"  omitted  by  Nowack. 

ir  Heb.  "  helped  for  evil,"  or  "  till  it  became  a  calamity." 


Zcfhariah  i.  7-vi.] 


THE    VISIONS    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


629 


quarters."  *  And  to  destroy  these  horns  four 
smiths  appear.  Because  in  the  Vision  the  horns 
are  of  iron,  in  Israel  an  old  symbol  of  power, 
the  first  verb  used  of  the  action  can  hardly  be, 
as  in  the  Hebrew  text,  to  terrify.  The  Greek 
reads  "  sharpen,"  and  proliably  some  verb  mean- 
ing "  to  cut  "  or  "  chisel  "  stood  in  the  original,  t 
"  And  I  lifted  mine  eyes  and  looked,  and  lo! 
four  horns.  And  I  said  to  the  angel  who  spoke 
with  me.  What  are  these?  And  he  said  to  me, 
These  are  the  horns  which  scattered  Judah, 
Israel  and  Jerusalem. ^  And  Jehovah  showed 
me  four  smiths.  And  I  said.  What  are  these 
coming  to  do?  And  he  spake,  saying.  These 
are  the  horns  which  scattered  Judah,  so  that 
none  lifted  up  his  head;§  and  these  are  come 
to  .  .  .||  them,  to  strike  down  the  horns  of 
the  nations,  that  lifted  the  horn  against  the  land 
of  Judah  to  scatter  it." 

The  Third  Vision:  The  City  of  Peace. 
(ii.  S-9  Heb.,  ii.  1-5  Eng.). 

Like  the  Second  Vision,  the  Third  follows 
from  the  First,  another,  but  a  still  more  sig- 
nificant, supplement.  The  First  had  promised 
the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem,  and  now  the  prophet 
beholds  "  a  young  man  " — by  this  term  he  prob- 
ably means  "  a  servant  "  or  "  apprentice  " — who 
is  attempting  to  define  the  limits  of  the  new 
city.  In  the  light  of  what  this  attempt  encoun- 
ters, there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  prophet 
means  to  symbolise  by  it  the  intention  of  build- 
ing the  walls  upon  the  old  lines,  so  as  to  make 
Jerusalem  again  the  mountain  fortress  she  had 
previously  been.  Some  have  considered  that  the 
young  man  goes  forth  only  to  see,  or  to  show, 
the  extent  of  the  city  in  the  approaching  future. 
But  if  this  had  been  his  motive  there  would 
have  been  no  reason  in  interrupting  him  with 
other  orders.  The  point  is  that  he  has  narrow 
ideas  of  what  the  city  should  be,  and  is  prepared 
to  define  it  upon  its  old  lines  of  a  fortress.  For 
the  interpreting  angel  who  "comes  forward  "IT 
is  told  by  another  angel  to  run  and  tell  the 
young  man  that  in  the  future  Jerusalem  shall 
be  a  large  unwalled  town,  and  this,  not  only 
because  of  the  multitude  of  its  population,  for 
even  then  it  might  still  have  been  fortified  like 
Nineveh,  but  because  Jehovah  Himself  shall  be 
its  wall.  The  young  man  is  prevented,  not 
merely  from  making  it  small,  but  from  making 
it  a  citadel.  And  this  is  in  conformity  with  all 
the  singular  absence  of  war  from  Zechariah's 
Visions,  both  of  the  future  deliverance  of  Je- 
hovah's people  and  of  their  future  duties  before 
Him.  It  is  indeed  remarkable  how  Zechariah 
not  only  develops  none  of  the  warlike  elements 

*  Marcus  Dods,  "  Hag-.,  Zech.  and  Mai.,"  p.  71.  Orelli  : 
"In  distinction  from  Daniel,  Zechariah  is  fond  of  a  simul- 
taneous survey,  not  the  presenting  of  a  succession." 

t  For  the  symbolism  of  iron  horns  see  Micah  iv.  13,  and 
compare  Orelli's  note,  in  which  it  is  pointed  out  that  the 
destroyers  must  be  smiths  as  in  Isa.  xliv.  12,  "workmen 
of  iron,"  and  not  as  in  LXX.  "carpenters  " 

t  Wellhausen  and  Nowack  delete  "Israel  and  Jeru- 
salem;"  the  latter  does  not  occur  in  Codd.  A.  Q,  of  Sep- 
tuagint. 

§  Wellhausen  reads,  after  Mai.  ii.  9,  "IK'K  ^33,  "so  that 
it  lifted  not  itshead  "  ;  but  in  that  case  we  should  not  find 

iK>J<-|,  but   '"^^^"•• 

innnn.  but  LXX.  read  nnnn.  and  either  that  or 
some  verb  of  cutting  must  be  read. 

1  The  Hebrew,  literallv  "  comes  forth,"  is  the  technical 
term  throughout  the  Visions  for  the  entrance  of  the 
figures  upon  the  stage  of  vision.  " 


of  earlier  Messianic  prophecies,  but  tells  us  here 
of  how  God  Himself  actually  prevented  their 
repetition,  and  insists  again  and  again  only  on 
those  elements  of  ancient  prediction  which  had 
filled  the  future  of  Israel  with  peace. 

"  And  I  lifted  mine  eyes  and  looked,  and  lo! 
a  man  with  a  measuring  rope  in  his  hand.  So 
I  said.  Whither  art  thou  going?  And  he  said  to 
me.  To  measure  Jerusalem:  to  see"  how  much 
its  breadth  and  how  much  its  length  should  be. 
And  lo!  the  angel  who  talked  with  me  came 
forward,*  and  another  angel  came  forward  to 
meet  him.  And  he  said  to  him.  Run  and  speak 
to  yonder  young  man  thus:  Like  a  number 
of  open  villages  shall  Jerusalem  remain,  because 
of  the  multitude  of  men  and  cattle  in  the  midst 
of  her.  And  I  Myself  will  be  to  her — oracle 
of  Jehovah — a  wall  of  fire  round  about,  and  for 
glory  will  I  be  in  her  midst." 

In  this  Vision  Zechariah  gives  us,  with  his 
prophecy,  a  lesson  in  the  interpretation  of 
prophecy.  His  contemporaries  believed  God's 
promise  to  rebuild  Jerusalem,  but  they  defined 
its  li.iiits  by  the  conditions  of  an  older  and 
a  narrower  day.  They  brought  forth  their 
measuring  rods  to  measure  the  future  by  the 
sacred  attainments  of  the  past.  Such  literal  ful- 
filment of  His  Word  God  prevented  by  that 
ministry  of  angels  which  Zechariah  beheld.  He 
would  not  be  bound  by  those  forms  which  His 
Word  had  assumed  in  suitableness  to  the  needs 
of  ruder  generations.  The  ideal  of  many  of  the 
returned  exiles  must  have  been  that  frowning 
citadel,  those  gates  of  everlastingness,f  which 
some  of  them  celebrated  in  Psalms,  and  from 
which  the  hosts  of  Sennacherib  had  been  broken 
and  swept  back  as  the  angry  sea  is  swept  from 
the  fixed  line  of  Canaan's  coast.t  What  had 
been  enough  for  David  and  Isaiah  was  enough 
for  them,  especially  as  so  many  prophets  of  the 
Lord  had  foretold  a  Messianic  Jerusalem  that 
should  be  a  counterpart  of  the  historical.  But 
God  breaks  the  letter  of  His  Word  to  give  its 
spirit  a  more  glorious  fulfilment.  Jerusalem  shall 
not  "  be  builded  as  a  city  that  is  compact  to- 
gether," §  but  open  and  spread  abroad  village- 
wise  upon  her  high  mountains,  and  God  Him- 
self her  only  wall. 

The  interest  of  this  Vision  is  therefore  not 
onljr  historical.  For  ourselves  it  has  an  abiding 
doctrinal  value.  It  is  a  lesson  in  the  method  of 
applying  prophecy  to  the  future.  How  much 
it  is  needed  we  must  feel  as  we  remember  the 
readiness  of  men  among  ourselves  to  construct 
the  Church  of  God  upon  the  lines  His  own  hand 
drew  for  our  fathers,  and  to  raise  again  the  bul- 
warks behind  which  they  sufficiently  sheltered 
His  shrine.  Whether  these  ancient  and  sacred 
defences  be  dogmas  or  institutions  we  have  no 
right,  God  tells  us,  to  cramp  behind  them  His 
powers  for  the  future.  And  the  great  men  whom 
He  raises  to  remind  us  of  this,  and  to  prevent 
by  their  ministry  the  timid  measurements  of  the 
zealous  but  servile  spirits  who  would  confine 
every  thing  to  the  exact  letter  of  ancient  Scrip- 
ture— are  they  any  less  His  angels  to  us  than 
those  ministering  spirits  whom  Zechariah  beheld 
preventing  the  narrow  measures  of  the  poor  ap- 
prentice  of  his   dream? 

To  the  Third  Vision  there  has  been  appended 

*  LXX.  iVrijicfi,  "  stood  up  :  "  adopted  by  Nowack. 
+  Psalm  xxiv. 
t  Isa.  xvii.  12-14. 
%  Psalm  cxxii.  3. 


630 


THE   BOOK   OF   THE   TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  only  lyrical  piece  which  breaks  the  prose 
narrative  of  the  Visions.  We  have  already  seen 
that  it  is  a  piece  of  earlier  date.  Israel  is  ad- 
dressed as  still  scattered  to  the  four  winds  of 
heaven,  and  still  inhabiting  Babylon.  While  in 
Zechariah's  own  oracles  and  visions  Jehovah  has 
returned  to  Jerusalem,  His  return  according  to 
this  piece  is  still  future.  There  is  iiothing  about 
the  Temple:  God's  holy  dwelling  from  which 
He  has  roused  Himself  is  Heaven.  The  piece 
was  probably  inserted  by  Zechariah  himself:  its 
lines  are  broken  by  what  seem  to  be  a  piece 
of  prose,  in  which  the  prophet  asserts  his  mis- 
sion in  words  he  twice  uses  elsewhere.  But  this 
is  uncertain. 

"Ho,  ho!     Flee  from  the  Land  of  the  North  (oracle  of 
Jehovah; ; 
For  as  the   four   winds    have  I   spread  you  abroad  * 

(oracle  of  Jehovah). 
Ho  !  to  Zion  escape,  cUou  inhabitress  of  Babel. + 
For  thus  saith  Jenovah  of  Hosts  J  to  the  nations  that 
plunder  you  (for  he  that  toucheth  you  toucheth  the  apple 
of  His  eye),  that,  lo  !  I  am  about  to  wave  My  hand  over 
them,  and  they  shall  be  plunder  to  their  own  servants, 
and  ye  shall  know  that  Jehovah  of  Hosts  hath  sent  me. 
Sing  out  and  rejoice,  O  aaughter  of  Zion  ; 
For,  lo  !  I  come,  and  will  dwell  in  thy  midst  (oracle  of 

Jehovah; 
And  many  nations  shall  join  themselves  to  Jehovah  in 

that  day. 
And  shall  be  to  Him  §  a  people. 
And  I  will  dwell  in  thy  midst 
(And  thou  shalt  know  that  Jehovah  of  Hosts  hath  sent 

me  to  thee). 
And  Jehovah  will  make  Judah  His  heritage. 
His  portion  shall  be  upon  holy  soil. 
And  make  choice  once  more  of  Jerusalem. 
Silence,  all  flesh,  before  Jehovah  ;  !| 

For  He  hath  roused  Himself  up  from  His  holy  dwell- 
ing." 

The  Fourth  Vision:  The  High  Priest  and 
THE  Satan  (Chap.  iii.). 

The  next  Visions  deal  with  the  moral  condi- 
tion of  Israel  and  their  standing  before  God. 
The  Fourth  is  a  judgment  scene.  The  Angel  of 
Jehovah,  who  is  not  to  be  distinguished  from 
Jehovah  Himself,1I  stands  for  judgment,  and 
there  appear  before  him  Joshua  the  High  Priest 
and  the  Satan  or  Adversary  who  has  come  to 
accuse  him.  Now  those  who  are  accused  by 
the  Satan— see  next  chapter  of  this  volume  upon 
the  Angels  of  the  Visions — are,  according  to 
Jewish  belief,  those  who  have  been  overtaken  by 
misfortune.  The  people  who  are  standing  at 
God's  bar  in  the  person  of  their  High  Priest 
still  sufifer  from  the  adversity  in  which  Haggai 
found  them,  and  the  continuance  of  which  so 
disheartened  them  after  the  Temple  had  begun. 
The  evil  seasons  and  poor  harvests  tormented 
their  hearts  with  the  thought  that  the  Satan  still 

*  Some  codd.  read  "  with  the  four  winds."  LXX.  "  from 
the  four  winds  will  I  gather  you"  (o-ui/afw  U|aos),  and  this 
is  adopted  by  Wellhausen  and  Nowack.  But  it  is  prob- 
ably a  later  change  intended  to  adapt  the  poem  to  its  new 
■context. 

t"  Dweller  of  the  daughter  of  Babel."  But  r\2. 
"  daughter,"  is  mere  dittography  of  the  termination  of 
i:he  preceding  word. 

t  A  curious  phrase  here  occurs  in  the  Heb.  and  ver- 
sions, "After  glory  hath  He  sent  me,"  which  we  are 
probably  right  in  omitting.  In  any  case  it  is  a  parenthe- 
sis, and  ought  to  go  not  with  "  sent  me  "  but  with  "saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts." 

§  So  LXX.    Heb.  "to  me." 

H  Cy.  Zeph.  i.  7;  Hab.  ii.  20.  "Among  the  Arabians, 
■after  the  slaughter  of  the  sacrificial  victim,  the  partici- 
pants stood  for  some  time  in  silence  about  the  altar. 
That  was  the  moment  in  which  the  Deity  approached  in 
order  to  take  His  share  in  the  sacrifice"  (Smend,  "A.  T. 
Rel.  Gesch.,"  p.  124). 

*i  Cf.  vv.  I  and  2. 


slandered  them  in  the  court  of  God.  But  Zech- 
ariah comforts  them  with  the  vision  of  the  Satan 
rebuked.  Israel  has  indeed  been  sorely  beset 
by  calamity,  a  brand  much  burned,  but  now  of 
God's  grace  plucked  from  the  fire.  The  Satan's 
role  is  closed,  and  he  disappears  from  the  Vi- 
sion.* Yet  something  remains:  Israel  is  rescued, 
but  not  sanctified.  The  nation's  troubles  are 
over:  their  uncleanness  has  still  to  be  removed. 
Zechariah  sees  that  the  High  Priest  is  clothed 
in  filthy  garments  while  he  stands  before  the  An- 
gel of  Judgment.  The  Angel  orders  his  servants, 
those  "  that  stand  before  him,"  \  to  give  him 
clean  festal  robes.  And  the  prophet,  breaking 
out  in  sympathy  with  what  he  sees,  for  the 
first  time  takes  part  in  the  Visions.  "  Then  I 
said.  Let  them  also  put  a  clean  turban  on  his 
head " — the  turban  being  the  headdress,  in 
Ezekiel  of  the  Prince  of  Israel,  and  in  the 
Priestly  Code  of  the  High  Priest.J  This  is  done, 
and  the  national  efifect  of  his  cleansing  is  ex- 
plained to  the  High  Priest.  If  he  remains  loyal 
to  the  law  of  Jehovah,  he,  the  representative  of 
Israel,  shall  have  right  of  entry  to  Jehovah's 
presence  among  the  angels  who  stand  there. 
But  more,  he  and  his  colleagues  the  priests  are 
a  portent  of  the  coming  of  the  Messiah — "  the 
Servant  of  Jehovah,  the  Branch,"  as  he  has  been 
called  by  many  prophets.  §  A  stone  has  already 
been  set  before  Joshua,  with  seven  eyes  upon 
it.  God  will  engrave  it  with  inscriptions,  and 
on  the  same  day  take  away  the  guilt  of  the  land. 
Then  shall  be  the  peace  upon  which  Zechariah 
loves  to  dwell. 

"  And  he  showed  me  Joshua,  the  high  priest, 
standing  before  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  and  the 
Satan  II  standing  at  his  right  hand  to  accuse 
him.Tf  And  Jehovah**  said  to  the  Satan:  Jeho- 
vah rebuke  thee,  O  Satan!  Jehovah  who  makes 
choice  of  Jerusalem  rebuke  thee!  Is  not  this 
a  brand  saved  from  the  fire?  But  Joshua  was 
clothed  in  foul  garments  while  he  stood  before 
the  Angel.  And  he  " — the  Angel — "  answered 
and  said  to  those  who  stood  in  his  presence, 
Take  the  foul  garments  from  off  him  (and  he 
said  to  him.  See,  I  have  made  thy  guilt  to  pass 
away  from  thee), ft  and  clothe  him  %%  in  fresh 
clothing.     And  I  said,§§   Let  them  put  a  clean 

♦  See  below,  p.  637. 

tin  this  Vision  the  verb  "to  stand  before  "  is  used  in 
two  technical  senses:  (a)  of  the  appearance  of  plaintiff 
and  defendant  before  their  judge  (vv.  i  and  3)  ;  (Jb)  of 
servants  before  their  masters  (vv.  4  and  7). 

X  See  below,  p.  631,  tt. 

%  Isa.  iv.  2,  xi.  I  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  5,  xxxiii.  15  ;  Isa.  liii.  2. 
Stade  ("  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Isr.,"  II.  125),  followed  by 
Marti  ("Der  Proph.  Zach.,"  85  n.),  suspects  the  clause  "I 
will  bring  in  My  Servant  the  Branch  as  a  later  interpo- 
lation, entangling  the  construction  and  finding  in  this 
section  no  further  justification. 

II  Or  ■'  Adversary  ;  "  see  p.  637. 

t  "  To  Satan  him  "  :  "  slander,"  or  "  accuse,  him." 

**That  is  "the  Angel  of  Jehovah,"  which  Wellhausen 
and  Nowack  read  ;  but  see  below,  p.  636. 

tt  This  clause  interrupts  the  Angel's  speech  to  the  ser- 
vants. Wellh.  and  Nowack  omit  it.  T'Syn  \  cf.  2  Sam. 
xii.  13  ;  Job  vii.  21. 

XX  So  LXX.  Heb.  has  a  degraded  grammatical  form, 
"  clothe  thyself  "  which  has  obviously  been  made  to  suit 
the  intrusion  of  the  previous  clause,  and  is  therefore  an 
argument  against  the  authenticity  of  the  latter. 

§§  LXX.  omits  "  I  said  "  and  reads  "  Let  them  put  "  as 
another  imperative,  "  Do  ye  put,"  following  on  the  two 
of  the  previous  verse.  Wellhausen  adopts  this  (reading 
"1)0^JJ>  for  "ItO^E*'"').  Though  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  "10X1 
dropped  out  of  the  text  if  once  there,  it  is  equally  so  to 
understand  why,  if  not  original,  it  was  inserted.  The 
whole  passage  has  been  tampered  with.  If  we  accept  the 
Massoretic  text,  then  we  have  a  sympathetic  interference 
in  the    vision  of    the    dreamer    himseif    which  is  very 


Zechariah  i.  7-vi.] 


THE    VISIONS    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


631 


turban  *  on  his  head.  And  they  put  the  clean 
turban  upon  his  head,  and  clothed  him  with  gar- 
ments, the  Angel  of  Jehovah  standing  up  "  the 
while. f  "  And  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  certified 
unto  Joshua,  saying:  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  If  in  My  ways  thou  walkest,  and  if  My 
charges  thou  keepest  in  charge,  then  thou 
also  shalt  judge  my  house,  and  have  charge 
of  My  courts,  and  I  will  give  thee  entryj  among 
these  who  stand  in  My  presence.     Hearken  now, 

0  Joshua,  high  priest,  thou  and  thy  fellows  who 
sit  before  thee  are  men  of  omen,  that,  lo!  I 
am  about  to  bring  My  servant,  Branch.  For 
see  the  stone  which  I  have  set  before  Joshua, 
one  stone  with  seven  eyes.§  Lo,  I  will  etch 
the  engraving  upon  it  (oracle  of  Jehovah),  and 

1  will  wash  away  the  guilt  of  that  land  in  one 
day.  In  that  day  (oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts) 
ye  will  invite  one  another  in  under  vine  and 
under  fig-tree." 

The  theological  significance  of  the  Vision  is 
as  clear  as  its  consequences  in  the  subsequent 
theology  and  symbolism  of  Judaism.  The  un- 
deanness  of  Israel  which  infests  their  represen- 
tative before  God  is  not  defined.  Some||  hold 
that  it  includes  the  guilt  of  Israel's  idolatry.  But 
they  have  to  go  back  to  Ezekiel  for  this,  and 
we  have  seen  that  Zechariah  nowhere  mentions 
or  feels  the  presence  of  idols  among  his  people. 
The  Vision  itself  supplies  a  better  explanation. 
Joshua's  filthy  garments  are  replaced  by  festal 
and  official  robes.  He  is  warned  to  walk  in 
the  whole  law  of  the  Lord,  ruling  the  Temple 
and  guarding  Jehovah's  court.  The  uncleanness 
was  the  opposite  of  all  this.  It  was  not  ethical 
failure:  covetousness,  greed,  immorality.  It  was, 
as  Haggai  protested,  the  neglect  of  the  Temple, 
and  of  the  whole  worship  of  Jehovah.  If  this 
be  now  removed,  in  all  fidelity  to  the  law,  the 
High  Priest  shall  have  access  to  God,  and  the 
Messiah  will  come.  The  High  Priest  himself 
shall  not  be  the  Messiah — this  dogma  is  left  to 
a  later  age  to  frame.  But  before  God  he  will 
Le  as  one  of  the  angels,  and  himself  and  his 
faithful  priesthood  omens  of  the  Messiah.  We 
need  not  linger  on  the  significance  of  this  for 
the  place  of  the  priesthood  in  later  Judaism. 
Note  how  the  High  Priest  is  already  the  reli- 
gious representative  of  his  people;  their  unclean- 
ness is  his;  when  he  is  pardoned  and  cleansed, 

/ 

natural  ;  and  he  speaks,  as  is  proper,  not  in  the  direct, 
but  indirect,  imperative,  "Let  them  put." 

M  ?^'  the  headdress  of  rich  women  (Isa.  iii.  23),  as  of 

eminent  men  (Job  xxix.  14),  means  something  wound 
round  and  round  the  head— c/.  the  use  of  njV(toform  like 
a  ball)  in  Isa.  xxii.  18,  and  the  use  of  t»'2n  (to  wind)  to  ex- 
press the  putting  on  of  the  headdress  (Ezek.  xvi.  lo,  etc.). 
Hence  '"  turban  "  seems  to  be  the  proper  rendering. 
Another  form  from  the  same  root,  riQJVC  is  the  name  of 
the  headdress  of  the  Prince  of  Israel  lEzek.  xxi.  31) ;  and 
in  the  Priestly  Codex  of  the  Pentateuch  the  headdress  of 
the  high  priest  (Exod.  xxviii.  37,  etc.). 
t  Wellhausen  takes  the  last  words  of  ver.  5  with  ver.  6, 

reads      ''?^   and  renders   "  And  the   Angel  of  Jehovah 

stood    up"  or  "stepped    forward."    But    even   if  "^^V 

be  read,  the  order  of  the  words  would  require  transla- 
tion in  the  pluperfect,  which  would  come  to  the  sarme  as 
the  original  text.  And  if  Wellhausen's  proposal  were 
correct  the  words  "  Angel  of  Jehovah  "  in  ver.  6  would  be 
superfluous. 


t  Read 


(Smend,   "A.   T.   Rel.   Gesch.,"  p.  324, 


u.  2). 
§  Or  "  facets." 
Il  £.  £■.,  Marti,  "  Der  Prophet  Sacharja,"  p.  83. 


"  the  uncleanness  of  the  land  "  is  purged  away. 
In  such  a  High  Priest  Christian  theology  has 
seen  the  prototype  of  Christ. 

The  stone  is  very  difficult  to  explain.  Some 
have  thought  of  it  as  the  foundation-stone  of. 
the  Temple,  which  had  already  been  employed 
as  a  symbol  of  the  Messiah  and  which  played 
so  important  a  part  in  later  Jewish  symbolism.* 
Others  prefer  the  top-stone  of  the  Temple,  men-' 
tioned  in  chap.  iv.  7,f  and  others  an  altar  or 
substitute  for  the  ark.j  Again,  some  take  it  to 
be  a  jewel,  either  on  the  breastplate  of  the  High 
Priest, §  or  upon  the  crown  afterwards  prepared 
for  Zerubbabel.il  To  all  of  these  there  are  ob- 
jections. It  is  difficult  to  connect  with  the 
foundation-stone  an  engraving  still  to  be  made; 
neither  the  top-stone  of  the  Temple,  nor  a  jewel 
on  the  breastplate  of  the  priest,  nor  a  jewel 
on  the  king's  crown,  could  properly  be  said  to 
be  set  before  the  High  Priest.  We  must 
rather  suppose  that  the  stone  is  symbolic  of  the 
finished  Temple. 1[  The  Temple  is  the  full  ex- 
pression of  God's  providence  and  care — His 
"  seven  eyes."  Upon  it  shall  His  will  be  en- 
graved, and  by  its  sacrifices  the  uncleanness  of 
the  land  shall  be  taken  away. 


The  Fifth  Vision:  The  Temple  Candlestick 
AND  THE  Two  Olive  Trees  (Chap.  iv.). 

As  the  Fourth  Vision  unfolded  the  dignity  and 
significance  of  the  High  Priest,  so  in  the  Fifth 
we  find  discovered  the  joint  glory  of  himself 
and  Zerubbabel,  the  civil  head  of  Israel.  And 
to  this  is  appended  a  Word  for  Zerubbabel  him- 
self. In  our  present  text  this  Word  has  become 
inserted  in  the  middle  of  the  Vision,  vv.  6b-ioa; 
in  the  translation  which  follows  it  has  been  re- 
moved to  the  end  of  the  Vision,  and  the  reasons 
for  this  will  be  found  in  the  notes. 

The  Vision  is  of  the  great  golden  lamp  which 
stood  in  the  Temple.  In  the  former  Temple 
light  was  supplied  by  ten  several  candlesticks.** 
But  the  Levitical  Code  ordained  one  seven- 
branched  lamp,  and  such  appears  to  have  stood 
in  the  Temple  built  while  Zechariah  was  prophe- 
sying, ft  The  lamp  Zechariah  sees  has  also  seven 
branches,  but  differs  in  other  respects,  and  es- 
pecially in  some  curious  fantastic  details  only 
possible  in  dream  and  symbol.  Its  seven  lights 
were  fed  by  seven  pipes  from  a  bowl  or  reser- 
voir of  oil  which  stood  higher  than  themselves, 
and  this  was  fed,  either  directly  from  two  olive- 
trees  which  stood  to  the  right  and  left  of  it,  or,  if 
ver.  12  be  genuine,  by  two  tubes  which  brought 
the  oil  from  the  trees.  The  seven  lights  are  the 
seven  eyes  of  Jehovah — if,  as  we  ought,  we  run 
the  second  half  of  ver.  10  on  to  the  first  half  of 
ver.  6.  The  pipes  and  reservoir  are  given  no 
symbolic  force;  but  the  olive-trees  which  feed 
them  are  called  "  the  two  sons  of  oil  which 
stand  before  the  Lord  of  all  the  earth."  These 
can  only  be  the  two  anointed  heads  of  the  com- 
munity— Zerubbabel,  the  civil  head,  and  Joshua, 
the   religious   head.      Theirs   was   the   equal    and 

*  Hitzig,  Wright,  and  many  others.  On  the  place  of  this 
stone  in  the  legends  of  Judaism  see  Wright,  pp.  75  f. 

t  Ewald,  Marcus  Dods. 

t  Von  Orelli,  Volck. 

§  Rredenkamp. 

Il  Wellhausen,  in  loco,  and  Smend,  "  A.  T.  Rel.  Gesch," 
345- 

1  So  Marti,  p.  88. 

**  I  Kings  vii.  49. 

tt  I  Mace.  i.  21  ;  iv.  49,  50.    Josephus,  XIV.  Ant.  iv.  4. 


632 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


co-ordinate  duty  of  sustaining  the  Temple,  fig- 
ured by  the  whole  candelabrum,  and  ensuring  the 
brightness  of  the  sevenfold  revelation.  The 
Temple,  that  is  to  say,  is  nothing  without  the 
jnonarchy  and  the  priesthood  behind  it;  and 
these  stand  in  the  immediate  presence  of  God. 
Therefore  this  Vision,  which  to  the  superficial 
eye  might  seem  to  be  a  glorification  of  the  mere 
machinery  of  the  Tem.ple  and  its  ritual,  is  rather 
to  prove  that  the  latter  derive  all  their  power 
from  the  national  institutions  which  are  behind 
them,  from  the  two  representatives  of  the  peo- 
ple who  in  their  turn  stand  before  God  Himself. 
The  Temple  so  near  completion  will  not  of 
itself  reveal  God:  let  not  the  Jews  put  their 
trust  in  it,  but  in  the  life  behind  it.  And  for 
ourselves  the  lesson  of  the  Vision  is  that  which 
Christian  theology  has  been  so  slow  to  learn,  that 
God's  revelation  under  the  old  covenant  shone 
not  directly  through  the  material  framework, 
but  was  mediated  by  the  national  life,  whose 
chief  men  stood  and  grew  fruitful  in  His 
presence. 

One  thing  is  very  remarkable.  The  two 
sources  of  revelation  are  the  King  and  the 
Priest.  The  Prophet  is  not  mentioned  beside 
them.  Nothing  could  prove  more  emphatically 
the  sense  in  Israel  that  prophecy  was  exhausted. 

The  appointment  of  so  responsible  a  position 
for  Zerubbabel  demanded  for  him  a  special 
promise  of  grace.  And  therefore,  as  Joshua 
had  his  promise  in  the  Fourth  Vision,  we  find 
Zerubbabel's  appended  to  the  Fifth.  It  is  one 
of  the  great  sayings  of  the  Old  Testament:  there 
is  none  more  spiritual  and  more  comforting. 
Zerubbabel  shall  complete  the  Temple,  and  those 
who  scoffed  at  its  small  beginnings  in  the  day 
of  small  things  shall  frankly  rejoice  when  they 
see  him  set  the  top-stone  by  plummet  in  its 
place.  As  the  moral  obstacles  to  the  future  were 
removed  in  the  Fourth  Vision  by  the  vindication 
of  Joshua  and  by  his  cleansing,  so  the  political 
obstacles,  all  the  hindrances  described  by  the 
Book  of  Ezra  in  the  building  of  the  Temple, 
shall  disappear.  "  Before  Zerubbabel  the  great 
mountain  shall  become  a  plain."  And  this, 
because  he  shall  not  work  by  his  own  strength, 
but  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  shall  do 
everything.  Again  we  find  that  absence  of  ex- 
pectation in  human  means,  and  that  full  trust  in 
God's  own  direct  action,  which  characterise  all 
the  prophesying  of  Zechariah. 

"  Then  the  angel  who  talked  with  me  returned 
and  roused  me  like  a  man  roused  out  of  his 
sleep.  And  he  said  to  me.  What  seest  thou? 
And  I  said,  I  see,  and  lo!  a  candlestick  all  of 
gold,  and  its  bowl  upon  the  top  of  it,  and  its 
seven  lamps  on  it,  and  seven  *  pipes  to  the 
lamps  which  are  upon  it.  And  two  olive-trees 
stood  over  against  it,  one  on  the  right  of  the 
bowl,t  and  one  on  the  left.  And  I  began:^  and 
said  to  the  angel  who  talked  with  me,§  What  be 
these,  my  lord?  And  the  angel  who  talked  with 
me  answered  and  said,  Knowest  thou  not  what 
these  be?  And  I  said.  No,  my  lord!  And  he 
answered  and  said  to  me,||   These  seven  are  the 

*  LXX.    Heb.  has  "  seven  sevens  "  of  pipes. 
t  Wellhausen  reads  "its  right  "  and  deletes  " the  bowl." 
t  IVKI.      njy  is  not  only  "  to  answer,"  but  to  take  part 
in  a  conversation,  whether  by  starting  or  continuing  it. 

LXX.  rightly  eTrrjpaJTTjo-a. 

§Heb.  ■'  saying." 

I  In  the  Hebrew  text,  followed  by  the  ancient  and 
modern  versions,  including  the  English  Bible,  there  here 
follows  6b-toa,  the  Word  to  Zerubbabel.    They  obviously 


eyes  of  Jehovah  which  sweep  through  the  whole 
earth.  And  I  asked  and  said  to  him.  What  are 
these  two  olive-trees  on  the  right  of  the  candle- 
stick and  on  its  left?  And  again  I  asked  and 
said  to  him.  What  are  the  two  olive-branches 
which  are  beside  the  two  golden  tubes  that  pour 
forth  the  oil*  from  them?f  And  he  said  to 
me,  Knowest  thou  not  what  these  be?  And  I 
said,  No,  my  lord!  And  he  said,  These  are  the 
two  sons  of  oil  which  stand  before  the  Lord  of 
all  the  earth. 

"  This  is  Jehovah's  Word  to  Zerubbabel,  and 
it  says:$  Not  by  might,  and  not  by  force,  but 
by  My  Spirit,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  What 
art  thou,  O  great  mountain?  Before  Zerub- 
babel be  thou  level!  And  he§  shall  bring  forth 
the  top-stone  with  shoutings,  Grace,  grace  to 
it!  II  And  the  Word  of  Jehovah  came  to  me, 
saying.  The  hands  of  Zerubbabel  have  founded 
this  house,  and  his  hands  shall  complete  it,  and 
thou  shalt  know  that  Jehovah  of  Hosts  hath 
sent  me  to  you.  For  whoever  hath  despised  the 
day  of  small  things,  they  shall  rejoice  when  they 
see  the  plummet T[  in  the  hand  of  Zerubbabel." 

The  Sixth  Vision:  The  Winged  Volume 
(Chap.  V.   1-4). 

The  'religious  and  political  obstacles  being  now 
removed  from  the  future  of  Israel,  Zechariah  -n 
the  next  two  Visions  beholds  the  land  purged 
of  its  crime  and  wickedness.  These  Visions  are 
very  simple,  if  somewhat  after  the  ponderous 
fashion    of    Ezekiel. 

The  first  of  them  is  the  Vision  of  the  removal 
of  the  curse  brought  upon  the  land  by  its  civic 
criminals,  especially  thieves  and  perjurers — the 
two  forms  which  crime  takes  in  a  poor  and 
rude  community  like  the  colony  of  the  returned 
exiles.  The  prophet  tells  us  he  beheld  a  roll 
flying.  He  uses  the  ordinary  Hebrew  name  for 
the  rolls  of  skin  or  parchment  upon  which  writ- 
ing was  set  down.  But  the  proportions  of  its 
colossal  size — twenty  cubits  by  ten — prove  that 
it  was  not  a  cylindrical  but  an  oblong  shape 
which  he  saw.  It  consisted,  therefore,  of  sheets 
laid  on  each  other  like  our  books,  and  as  our 
word  "  volume,"  which  originally  meant,  like 
his  own  term,  a  roll,  means  now  an  oblong 
article,  we  may  use  this  in  our  translation.  The 
volume  is  the  record  of  the  crime  of  the  land, 
and  Zechariah  sees  it  flying  from  the  land.  But 
it  is  also  the  curse  upon  this  crime,  and  so 
again  he  beholds  it  entering  every  thief's  and 
perjurer's  house  and  destroying  it.  Smend  gives 
a  possible  explanation  of  this:  "  It  appears  that 
in  ancient  times  curses  were  written  on  pieces  of 
paper  and  sent  down  the  wind  into  the  houses"** 

disturb  the  narrative  of  the  Vision,  and  Wellhausen  has 
rightly  transierred  them  to  the  end  of  it,  where  they  come 
in  as  naturally  as  the  word  of  hope  to  Joshua  comes  in  at 
the  end  of  the  preceding  Vision.  Take  them  away,  and, 
as  can  be  seen  above,  ver.  lod  follows  quite  naturally 
upon  6a. 

*  Heb.  "gold."    So  LXX. 

t  Wellhausen  omits  the  whole  of  this  second  question 
(ver.  12)  as  intruded  and  unnecessary.  So  also  Smend  as 
a  doublet  on  ver.  n  ("A.  T.  Rel.  Gesch.,"  343  n.).  So 
also  Nowack. 


t  Heb.  "  saying." 
8LXX.  "I.'' 


„  Or  "  Fair,  fair  is  it !"    Nowack. 

t  "The  stone,  the  leaden."  Marti,  "  St.  u.  Kr.,"  1892,  p. 
213  n.,  takes  "  the  leaden  "  for  a  gloss,  and  reads  simply 
"the  stone,"  i.  e.,  the  top-stone  ;  but  the  plummet  is  the 
last  thing  laid  to  the  building  to  test  the  straightness  of 
the  top-stone. 

**  "  A.  T.  Rel.  Gesch.,"  312  n. 


Zechariah  i.  7-vi.] 


THE    VISIONS    OF    ZECHARIAH. 


^33 


of  those  against  whom  they  were  directed.  But 
the  figure  seems  rather  to  be  of  birds  of  prey. 

"  And  I  turned  and  lifted  my  eyes  and  looked, 
and  lo!  a  volume*  flying.  And  he  said  unto 
me,  What  dost  thou  see?  And  I  said,  I  see 
a  volume  flying,  its  length  twenty  cubits  and 
its  breadth  ten.  And  he  said  unto  me,  This  is 
the  curse  that  is  going  out  upon  the  face  of 
all  the  land.  For  every  thief  is  hereby  purged 
away  from  hence, f  and  every  perjurer  is  hereby 
purged  away  from  hence.  1  have  sent  it  forth 
— oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts — and  it  shall  enter 
the  thief's  house,  and  the  house  of.  him  that 
hath  sworn  falsely  by  My  name,  and  it  shall 
roost  :f  in  the  midst  of  his  house  and  consume  it, 
with  its  beams  and  its  stones."  § 

The  Seventh  Vision:  The  Woman  in  the 
Barrel  (Chap.  v.  S-ii). 

It  is  not  enough  that  the  curse  fly  from  the 
land  after  destroying  every  criminal.  The  living 
principle  of  sin,  the  power  of  temptation,  must 
be  covered  up  and  removed.  This  is  the  subject 
of  the  Seventh  Vision. 

The  prophet  sees  an  ephah,  the  largest  vessel 
in  use  among  the  Jews,  of  more  than  seven 
gallons  capacity,  and  round  |  like  a  barrel. 
Presently  the  leaden  top  is  lifted,  and  the  prophet 
sees  a  woman  inside.  This  is  Wickedness,  fem- 
inine because  she  figures  the  power  of  tempta- 
tion. She  is  thrust  back  into  the  barrel,  the 
leaden  lid  is  pushed  down,  and  the  whole  car- 
ried ofif  by  two  other  female  figures,  winged  like 
the  strong,  far-flying  stork,  into  the  land  of 
Shin'ar,  "  which  at  that  time  had  the  general 
significance  of  the  counterpart  of  the  Holy 
Land,"  IT  and  was  the  proper  home  of  all  that 
was  evil. 

"  And  the  angel  of  Jehovah  who  spake  with 
me  came  forward  **  and  said  to  me,   Lift  now 

*  tOnpJD,  "roll  "  or  "  volume."    LXX.  Spenavov, "  sickle," 

T  — 

t  A  group  of  difficult  expressions.    The  verb  ''i^A  is  Ni. 

of  a  root  which  originally  had  the  physical  meaning  to 
"  clean  out  of  a  place,"  and  this  Ni.  is  so  used  of  a  plun- 
dered town  in  Isa.  iii.  26.  But  its  more  usual  meaning  is 
to  be  spoken  free  from  guilt  (Psalm  xix.  14,  etc.).  Most 
commentators  take  it  here  in  the  physical  sense,  Hitzig 

quoting  the  use  of  (codopi^co  in  Mark  vii.  ig.       niUJ  nTp 

are  variously  rendered.  HTD  's  mostly  understood  as 
locative,  "  hence,"  /.  e.,  from  the  land  just  mentioned,  but 
some  take  it  with  "steal  "  (Hitzig),  some  with  "cleaned 

out"  (Ewald,  Orelli,  etc.).     ^      ^   is  rendered  "like  it" 

—the  flying  roll  (Ewald,  Orelli),  which  cannot  be,  since 
the  roll  flies  upon  the  face  of  the  land,  and  the  sinner  is 
to  be  purged  out  of  it  ;  or  in  accordance  with  the  roll  or 

its  curse  (Jerome,   Kohler).    But  Wellhausen  reads  '""?? 

'l.'P'  and  takes  ''1^^  in  its  usual  meaning  and  in  the  past 

tense,  and  renders  "  Every  thief  has  for  long  remained 
unpunished  ";  and  so  in  the  next  clause.  So,  too,  Nowack, 
LxX.  "Every  thief  shall  be  condemned  to  death,"  £<o9 
i^afiiTov  €»(5ii:H)0'€Tai. 

tHeb.  "  lodge,  pass  the  night  "  :  cf.  Zeph.  ii.  14  (above, 
p.  65),  "pelican  and  bittern  shall  roost  upon  the  capitals." 

§  Smend  sees  a  continuation  of  Ezekiel's  idea  of  the 
guilt  of  man  overtaking  him  (iii.  20,  xxxiv,).  Here  God's 
curse  does  all. 

II  This  follows  from  the  shape  of  the  disc  that  fits  into 
it.  Seven  gallons  are  seven-eighths  of  the  English 
bushel  :  that  in  use  in  Canada  and  the  United  States  is 
somewhat  smaller. 

^  Ewald. 

**  Upon  the  stage  of  vision. 


thine  eyes  and  see  what  this  is  that  comes  forth. 
And  I  said,  What  is  it?  And  he  said,  This  is 
a  bushel  coming  forth.  And  he  said.  This  is 
their  transgression*  in  all  the  land.f  And  be- 
hold! the  round  leaden  top  was  lifted  up. 
and  lo!t  a  woman  sitting  inside  the  bushel.  And 
he  said.  This  is  the  Wickedness,  and  he  thrust 
her  back  into  the  bushel,  and  thrust  the  leaden 
disc  upon  the  mouth  of  it.  And  I  -lifted  mine 
eyes  and  looked,  and  lo!  two  women  came  forth 
with  the  wind  in  their  wings,  for  they  had  wings 
like  storks'  wings,  and  they  bore  the  bushel  be- 
twixt earth  and  heaven.  And  I  said  to  the  angel 
that  talked  with  me.  Whither  do  they  carry  the 
bushel?  And  he  said^to  me.  To  build  it  a  house 
in  the  land  of  Shin'ar,  that  it  may  be  fixed  and 
brought  to  rest  there  on  a  place  of  its  own."^^ 

We  must  not  allow  this  curious  imagery  to 
hide  from  us  its  very  spiritual  teaching.  If 
Zechariah  is  weighted  in  these  Visions  by  the 
ponderous  fashion  of  Ezekiel,  he  has  also  that 
prophet's  truly  moral  spirit.  He  is  not  con- 
tented with  the  ritual  atonement  for  sin,  nor 
with  the  legal  punishment  of  crime.  The  living 
power  of  sin  must  be  banished  from  Israel;  and 
this  cannot  be  done  by  any  efiforts  of  men  them- 
selves, but  by  God's  action  only,  which  is  thor- 
ough and  efifectual.  If  the  figures  by  which  this 
is  illustrated  appear  to  us  grotesque  and  heavy, 
let  us  remember  how  they  would  suit  the  imag- 
ination of  the  prophet's  own  day.  Let  us  lay 
to  heart  their  eternally  valid  doctrine,  that  sin 
is  not  a  formal  curse,  nor  only  expressed  in 
certain  social  crimes,  nor  exhausted  by  the  pun- 
ishment of  these,  but,  as  a  power  of  attraction 
and  temptation  to  all  men,  it  must  be  banished 
from  the  heart,  and  can  be  banished  only  by 
God. 

The  Eighth  Vision:  The  Ch.\riots  of   the 
Four  Winds  (Chap.  vi.  1-8). 

As  the  series  of  Visions  opened  with  one  of 
the  universal  providences  of  God,  so  they  close 
with  another  of  the  same.  The  First  Vision 
had  postponed  God's  overthrow  of  the  nations 
till  His  own  time,  and  this  the  Last  Vi- 
sion now  describes  as  begun,  the  religious  and 
moral  needs  of  Israel  having  meanwhile  been 
met  by  the  Visions  which  come  between,  and 
every  obstacle  to  God's  action  for  the  deliverance 
of   His  people   being  removed. 

The  prophet  sees  four  chariots,  with  horses  of 
different  colour  in  each,  coming  out  from  be- 
tween two  mountains  of  brass.    The  horsemen  of 


*  For  Heb.    ^^''V  read    DJIJ?  with  LXX. 


tBy  inserting  nC^X  after  HO  in  ver.  5,  and  deleting 
nS^Vn  ,  ,  .  10X''1  in  verse  6,  Wellhausen  secures  the 
more  concise  text  :  "And  see  what  this  bushel  is  that 
comes  forth.  And  I  said.  What  is  it?  And  he  said.  That 
is  the  evil  of  the  people  in  the  whole  land."  But  to  reduce 
the  redundancies  of  the  Visions  is  to  delete  the  most 
characteristic  feature  of  their  style.  Besides,  Well- 
hausen's  result  gives  no  sense.  The  prophet  would  not 
be  asked  to  see  what  a  bushel  is  :  the  angel  is  there  to 
tell  him  this.  So  Wellhausen  in  his  translation  has  to 
omit  the  HO  of  ver.  5,  while  telling  us  in  his  note  to 
replace  nQ^NH  after  it.  His  emendation  is,  therefore,  to 
be  rejected.    Nowack,  however,  accepts  it. 

tLXX.    Heb.  "this." 

§  In  the  last  clause  the  verbal  forms  are  obscure  if  not 

corrupt.     LXX.  koI  eTotfia<rai   koI  &i^(TOv<riv  avro  ixel  —    ^Y 
V'f^^ill  r?0:  '  t>ut  see  Ewald,  "Syntax,"  131  d. 


634 


THK   BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  First  Vision  were  bringing  in  reports:  these 
chariots  are  coming  forth  with  their  commissions 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  of  all  the  earth. 
They  are  the  four  winds  of  heaven,  servants  of 
Him  who  maketh  the  winds  His  angels.  They 
are  destined  for  different  quarters  of  the  world. 
The  prophet  has  not  been  admitted  to  the  Pres- 
ence, and  does  not  know  what  exactly  they  have 
been  commissioned  to  do;  that  is  to  say,  Zech- 
ariah  is  ignorant  of  the  actual  political  processes 
by  which  the  nations  are  to  be  overthrown  and 
Israel  glorified  before  them.  But  his  Angel-in- 
terpreter tells  him  that  the  black  horses  go  north, 
the  white  west,  and  the  dappled  south,  while  the 
horses  of  the  fourth  chariot,  impatient  because 
no  direction  is  assigned  to  them,  are  ordered  to 
roam  up  and  down  through  the  earth.  It  is 
striking  that  none  are  sent  eastward.*  This  ap- 
pears to  mean  that,  in  Zechariah's  day,  no  power 
oppressed  or  threatened  Israel  from  that  direc- 
tion; but  in  the  north  there  was  the  centre  of 
the  Persian  empire,  to  the  south  Egypt,  still  a 
possible  master  of  the  world,  and  to  the  west 
the  new  forces  of  Europe  that  in  less  than  a 
generation  were  to  prove  themselves  a  match 
for  Persia.  The  horses  of  the  fourth  chariot  are 
therefore  given  the  charge  to  exercise  super- 
vision upon  the  whole  earth — unless  in  ver.  7 
we  should  translate,  not  "  earth,"  but  "  land," 
and  understand  a  commission  to  patrol  the  land 
of  Israel.  The  centre  of  the  world's  power  is 
in  the  north,  and  therefore  the  black  horses, 
which  are  despatched  in  that  direction,  are  ex- 
plicitly described  as  charged  to  bring  God's 
spirit,  that  is  His  anger  or  His  power,  to  bear 
on  that  quarter  of  the  world. 

'■  And  once  moref  I  lifted  mine  eyes  and 
looked,  and  lo!  four  chariots  coming  forward 
from  between  two  mountains,  and  the  moun- 
tains were  mountains  of  brass.  In  the  first 
chariot  were  brown  horses,  and  in  the  second 
chariot  black  horses,  and  in  the  third  chariot 
white  horses,  and  in  the  fourth  chariot  dappled 
.  .  .  t  horses.  And  I  broke  in  and  said  to  the 
angel  who  talked  with  me,  What  are  these,  my 
lord?  And  the  angel  answered  and  said  to  me, 
These  be  the  four  winds  of  heaven  that  come 
forth  from  presenting  themselves  before  the 
Lord  of  all  the  earth. §  Tluxt  with  the  black 
horses  goes  forth  to  the  land  of  the  north,  while 
the  white  go  out  west||  (?),  and  the  dappled 
go  to  the  land  of  the  south.  And  the  .  .  .IT 
go  forth  and  seek  to  go,  to  march  up  and  down 
on  the  earth.  And  he  said.  Go,  march  up  and 
down  on  the  earth;  and  they  marched  up  and 
down  on  the  earth.    And  he  called  me  and  spake 

*  Wellhausen  suggests  that  in  the  direction  assigned  to 
the  white  horses,  D^mPIK  fver.  6),  which  we  have  ren- 
dered "westward,"  we  might  read  DTpH  J?"1N.  "land  of 
the  east ; "  and  that  from  ver.  7  "  the  west  "  has  probably 
fallen  out  after  "  they  go  forth." 

t  Heb.  "I  turned  again  and." 

$  Hebrew  reads  ^■•P^-  "  strong  ;"  LXX.  tjjapoC,  "dap- 
pled," and  for  the  previous  ^  ^?  ;  "  spotted  "  or  "  dap- 
pled," it  reads  ttoikiAoi,  "piebald."  Perhaps  we  should 
read  D''VDn  (c/.  Isa.  Ixiii.  i),  "  dark  red  "  or  "  sorrel,"  with 
"grey  spots."  So  Ewald  and  Orelli.  Wright  keeps 
"strong."  , 

§  Wellhausen,  supplying  ^  before  y3"|X.  renders  "  These 
go  forth  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven  after  they  have  pre- 
sented themselves,"  etc. 

11  Heb.  "  behind  them." 

1  D''VON.  tlie  second  epithet  of  the  horses  of  the  fourth 
'>h^riot,  ver.  3.     See  note  there. 


to  me,  saying.  See  they  that  go  forth  to  the 
land  of  the  north  have  brought  my  spirit  to 
bear  *  on  the  land  of  the  north." 


The  Result  of  the  Visions:  The  Crowning 
OF  the  King  of  Israel  (Chap.  vi.  9-15). 

The  heathen  being  overthrown,  Israel  is  free, 
and  may  have  her  king  again.  Therefore  Zech- 
ariah  is  ordered — it  would  appear  on  the  same 
day  as  that  on  which  he  received  the  Visions 
— to  visit  a  certain  deputation  from  the  captivity 
in  Babylon,  Heldai,  Tobiyah  and  Yedayah,  at 
the  house  of  Josiah  the  son  of  Zephaniah,  where 
they  have  just  arrived;  and  to  select  from  the 
gifts  they  have  brought  enough  silver  and  gold 
to  make  circlets  for  a  crown.  The  present  text 
assigns  this  crown  to  Joshua,  the  high  priest, 
but  as  we  have  already  remarked,  and  will  pres- 
ently prove  in  the  notes  to  the  translation,  the 
original  text  assigned  it  to  Zerubbabel,  the  civil 
head  of  the  community,  and  gave  Joshua,  the 
priest,  a  place  at  his  right  hand — the  two  to  act 
in  perfect  concord  with  each  other.  The  text 
has  suffered  some  other  injuries,  which  it  is  easy 
to  amend;  and  the  end  of  it  has  been  broken  off 
in  the  middle  of  a  sentence. 

"  And  the  Word  of  Jehovah  came  to  me,  say- 
ing: Take  from  the  Golah.f  from  Heldai  I  and 
from  Tobiyah  and  from  Yeda'yah;  and  do  thou 
go  on  the  same  day,  yea,  go  thou  to  the  house 
of  Yosiyahu,  son  of  Sephanyah,  whither  they 
have  arrived  from  BalJylon.§  And  thou  shalt 
take  silver  and  gold,  and  make  a  crown,  and  set 
it  on  the  head  of  .  .  .|  And  say  to  him:  Thus 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  Lo!  a  man  called 
Branch;  from  his  roots  shall  a  branch  come, 
and  he  shall  build  the  Temple  of  Jehovah.  Yea, 
he  shall  build  Jehovah's  Temple,  T[  and  he  shall 
wear  the  royal  majesty  and  sit  and  rule  upon 
his  throne,  and  Joshua  shall  be  priest  on 
his  right  hand,tt  and  there  will  be  a  counsel  of 
peace  between  the  two  of  them.JJ     And  the  crown 

*Or  "anger  to  bear,"  Heb.  "rest." 

+  The  collective  name  for  the  Jews  in  exile. 

fLXX.  napa.  Tojv  apxovTmv,  ^  ~''P  •  but  since  an  accusa- 
tive is  wanted  to  express  the  articles  taken,  Hitzig  pro- 
poses to  read  jyly*  "  My  precious  things."  The  LXX. 
reads  the  other  two  names  (coi  napa  tuv  xP')<'''V">'  a-vrfii  Kal 

Trapa  tmv  iireyvioKOTiav  avrriv, 

§The  construction  of  ver.  lois  very  clumsy  ;  above  it  is 
rendered  literally.  Wellhausen  proposes  to  delete  "and 
do  thou  go  ...  to  the  house  of,"  and  take  Yosiyahu's 
name  as  simply  a  fourth  with  the  others,  reading  the 
last  clause  "who  have  come  from  Babylon."  This  is  to 
cut,  not  disentangle,  the  knot. 

II  The  Hebrew  text  here  has  "  Joshua  son  of  Jehosadak, 
the  high  priest,"  but  there  is  good  reason  to  suppose  that 
the  crown  was  meant  for  Zerubbabel,  but  that  the  name 
of  Joshua  was  inserted  instead  in  a  later  age,  when  the 
high  priest  was  also  the  king— see  below,  note.  For  these 
reasons  Ewald  had  previously  supposed  that  the  whole 
verse  was  genuine,  but  that  there  had  fallen  out  of  it  the 
words  "and  on  the  head  of  Zerubbabel."  Ewald  found 
a  proof  of  this  in  the  plural  form  mitoy.  which  he  ren- 
dered "  crowns."  (So  also  Wildeboer,  "  A.  T.  Litteratur," 
p.  2Q7.)  But  ril'lt^y  is  to  be  rendered  "  crown  "  ;  see  ver. 
II,  where  it  is  followed  by  a  singular  verb.  The  plural 
form  refers  to  the  several  circlets  of  which  it  was  woven. 

If  Some  critics  omit  the  repetition. 

**  So  Wellhausen  proposes  to  insert.  The  name  was  at 
least  understood  in  the  original  text. 

t+SoLXX.     Heb.  "on  his  throne." 

tt  With  this  phrase,  vouched  for  by  both  the  Heb.  and 
the  Sept.,  the  rest  of  the  received  text  cannot  be  harmo- 
nised. There  were  two  :  one  is  the  priest  just  mentioned 
who  is  to  be  at  the  right  hand  of  the  crowned.  The  re- 
ceived text  makes  this  crowned  one  to  be  the  high  priest 
Joshua.    But  if  there  are  two  and  the  priest  is  only  sec- 


Zechariah  i.  7-vi.  8.] 


THE    ANGELS    OF    THE    VISIONS. 


635 


shall  be  for  Heldai  *  and  Tobiyah  and  Yeda'yah, 
and  for  the  courtesy  f  of  the  son  of  Sephanyah, 
for  a  memorial  in  the  Temple  of  Jehovah.  And 
the  far-away  shall  come  and  build  at  the  Temple 
of  Jehovah,  and  ye  shall  know  that  Jehovah  of 
Hosts  hath  sent  me  to  you;  and  it  shall  be  if 
ye  hearken  to  the  voice  of  Jehovah  your 
God  .   .   ."t 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

THE  ANGELS  OF  THE  VISIONS. 

Zechariah  i.  7-vi.  8. 

Among  the  influences  of  the  Exile  which  con- 
tributed the  material  of  Zechariah's  Visions  we 
included  a  considerable  development  of  Israel's 
belief  in  Angels.  The  general  subject  is  in  itself 
so  large,  and  the  Angels  play  so  many  parts  in 
the  Visions,  that  it  is  necessary  to  devote  to 
them  a  separate  chapter. 

From  the  earliest  times  the  Hebrews  had  con- 
ceived their  Divine  King  to  be  surrounded  by 
a  court  of  ministers,  who  besides  celebrating 
His  glory  went  forth  from  His  presence  to  exe- 
cute His  will  upon  earth.  In  this  latter  capacity 
they  were  called  Messengers,  Male'akim,  which 
the  Greeks  translated  Angeloi,  and  so  gave  us 
our  Angels.  The  origin  of  this  conception  is 
wrapped  in  obscurity.  It  may  have  been  partly 
due  to  a  belief,  shared  by  all  early  peoples,  in  the 
existence  of  superhuman  beings  inferior  to  the 
gods,§  but  even  without  this  it  must  have  sprung 
up  in  the  natural  tendency  to  provide  the  royal 
deity  of  a  people  with  a  court,  an  army  and 
servants.  In  the  pious  minds  of  early  Israel 
there  must  have  been  a  kind  of  necessity  to  be- 
lieve and  develop  this — a  necessity  imposed 
firstly  by  the  belief  in  Jehovah's  residence  as 
confined  to  one  spot,  Sinai  or  Jerusalem,  from 
which  He  Himself  went  forth  only  upon  great 
occasions  to  the  deliverance  of  His  people  as 
a  whole;  and  secondly  by  the  unwillingness  to 
conceive  of  His  personal  appearance  in  missions 
of  a  menial  nature,  or  to  represent  Him  in 
the  human  form  in  which,  according  to  primi- 
tive ideas.  He  could  alone  hold  converse  with 
men. 

It  can  easily  be  understood  how  a  religion, 
which  was  above  all  a  religion  of  revelation, 
should  accept  such  popular  conceptions  in  its 
constant  record  of  the  appearance  of  God  and 
His  Word  in  human  life.     Accordingly,   in  the 

ondary,  the  crowned  one  must  be  Zerubbabel,  whom 
Hasgai  has  already  designated  as  Messiah.  Nor  is  it 
difficult  to  see  why,  in  a  later  age,  when  the  high  priest 
was  sovereign  in  Israel,  Joshua's  name  should  have  been 
inserted  in  place  of  Zerubbabel's,  and  at  the  same  time  the 
phrase  "  priest  at  his  right  hand,"  to  which  the  LXX. 
testifies  in  harmony  with  "the  two  of  them,"  should 
have  t>een  altered  to  the  reading  of  the  received  text, 
"  priest  upon  his  throne."  With  the  above  agree  Smend, 
"A.  T.  Rel.  Gesh.,"  343  n.,  and  Nowack. 


*Heb. 


D^n, 


Hglem,  but   the    reading  Heldai,  s^^pj, 


is  proved  by  the  previous  occurrence  of  the  name  and  by 
the   LXX.  reading  here,  roi?  vnoiiivovaiv,  i.  e.,  from  root 

•^^pi.  "to  last." 

f  "jn,  but  Wellhausen  and  others  take  it  as  abbrevia- 
tion or  misreading  for  the  name  of  Yosiyahu  Csee  ver.  10). 

t  Here  the  verse  and  paragraph  break  suddenly  off  in 
the  middle  of  a  sentence  On  the  passage  see  Smend, 
343  and  345. 

§  So  Robertson  Smith,  art.  "  Angels  "  in  the  "  Encyc. 
Brit.,"  qtb  ed. 


earliest  documents  of  the  Hebrews,  we  find  an- 
gels who  bring  to  Israel  the  blessings,  curses, 
and  commands  of  Jehovah.*  Apart  from  this 
duty  and  their  human  appearance,  these  beings 
arc  not  conceived  to  be  endowed  either  with 
character  or,  if  we  may  judge  by  their  namc- 
lessnessf  with  individuality.  They  are  the  Word 
of  God  personified.  Acting  as  God's  mouth- 
piece, they  are  merged  in  Him,  and  so  com- 
pletely that  they  often  speak  of  themselves  by 
the  Divine  I.X  "  The  function  of  an  Angel  so 
overshadows  his  personality  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment does  not  ask  who  or  what  this  Angel  is, 
but  what  he  does.  And  the  answer  to  the  last 
question  is  that  he  represents  God  to  man  so 
directly  and  fully  that  when  he  speaks  or  acts 
God  Himself  is  felt  to  speak  or  act."  §  Besides 
the  carriage  of  the  Divine  Word,  angels  bring 
back  to  their  Lord  report  of  all  that  happens: 
kings  are  said,  in  popular  language,  to  be  "  as 
wise  as  the  wisdom  of  an  angel  of  God,  to  know 
all  the  things  that  are  in  the  earth."  ||  They  are 
also  employed  in  the  deliverance  and  discipline 
of  His  people.^  By  them  come  the  pestilence,** 
and  the  restraint  of  those  who  set  themselves 
against  God's  will. ft 

Now  the  prophets  before  the  Exile  had  so 
spiritual  a  conception  of  God,  worked  so  im- 
mediately from  His  presence,  and  above  all  were 
so  convinced  of  His  personal  and  practical  inter- 
est in  the  affairs  of  His  people,  that  they  felt 
no  room  for  Angels  between  Him  and  their 
hearts,  and  they  do  not  employ  Angels,  except 
when  Isaiah  in  his  inaugural  vision  penetrates 
to  the  heavenly  palace  and  court  of  the  Most 
High.tt  Even  when  Amos  sees  a  plummet  laid 
to  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  it  is  by  the  hands  of 
Jehovah  himself,§§  and  we  have  not  encountered 
an  Angel  in  the  mediation  of  the  Word  to  any 
of  the  prophets  whom  we  have  already  studied. 
But  Angels  reappear,  though  not  under  the 
name,  in  the  visions  of  Ezekiel,  the  first  prophet 
of  the  Exile.  They  are  in  human  form,  and  he 
calls  them  "  Men."  Some  execute  God's  wrath 
upon  Jerusalem, nil  and  one,  whose  appearance  is 
as  the  appearance  of  brass,  acts  as  the  interpreter 
of  God's  will  to  the  prophet,  and  instructs  him 
in  the  details  of  the  building  of  City  and 
Temple. IIT  When  the  glory  of  Jehovah  appears 
and  Jehovah  Himself  speaks  to  the  prophet  out  of 
the  Temple,  this  "Man"  stands  by  the  prophet,*** 
distinct  from  the  Deity,  and  afterwards  con- 
tinues his  work  of  explanation.  "  Therefore," 
as  Dr.  Davidson  remarks,  "  it  is  not  the 
sense  of  distance  to  which  God  is  removed  that 
causes  Ezekiel  to  create  these  intermediaries." 
The  necessity  for  them  rather  arises  from  the 
same  natural  feeling  which  we  have  suggested 
as  giving  rise  to  the  earliest  conceptions  of 
Angels:  the  unwillingness,  namely,  to  engage  the 
Person  of  God  Himself  in  the  subordinate  task 
of  explaining  the  details  of  the  Temple.     Note, 

*  So  already  in  Deborah's  Song,  Judg.  v.  23,  and 
throughout  both  J  and  E. 

t  QCespecially  Gen.  xxxii.  29. 

$  Judg.  vi.  12  ff. 

§  Robertson  Smith,  as  above. 

jl  2  Sam.  xiv.  20. 

1  Exod.  xiv.  ig  C?),  xxiii.  20,  etc.;  Josh.  v.  13. 

**  2  Sam.  xxiv  16,  17 ;  2  Kings  xix.  35  ;  Exod.  xii.  23.  In 
Eccles.  v.  6  this  destroying  angel  is  the  minister  of  God  : 
c/.  Psalm  Ixx viii.  49*,  "  hurtful  angels  "— Cheyne,  "  Origin 
of  Psalter,"  p.  157. 

tt  Balaam:  Num.  xxii.  23,  31. 

tX  vi.  2-6. 

§§  Page  470.  ITxl.  3ff. 

mix.  ***xliii.  6. 


6^.6 


tim:  book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


too,  how  the  Divine  Voice,  which  speaks  to 
Ezekiel  out  of  the  Temple,  blends  and  becomes 
one  with  the  "  Man "  standing  at  his  side. 
Ezekiel's  Angel-interpreter  is  simply  one  func- 
tion of  the  Word  of  God. 

Many  of  the  features  of  Ezekiel's  Angels  ap- 
pear in  those  of  Zechariah.  "  The  four  smiths  " 
or  smiters  of  the  four  horns  recall  the  six  execu- 
tioners of  the  wicked  in  Jerusalem.*  Like 
Ezekiel's  Interpreter,  they  are  called  "  Men,"  | 
and  like  him  one  appears  as  Zechariah's  in- 
structor and  guide:  "he  who  talked  with  me."  X 
But  while  Zechariah  calls  these  beings  "  Men," 
he  also  gives  them  the  ancient  name,  which  Eze- 
kiel had  not  used,  of  Male'akim,  "  messengers, 
angels."  The  Instructor  is  "  the  Angel  who 
talked  with  me."  In  the  First  Vision,  "  the  Man 
riding  the  brown  horse,  the  Man  that  stood 
among  the  myrtles,  is  the  Angel  of  Jehovah 
that  stood  among  the  myrtles."  §  The  Inter- 
preter is  also  called  "  the  Angel  of  Jehovah," 
and  if  our  text  of  the  First  Vision  be  correct,  the 
two  of  them  are  curiously  mingled,  as  if  both 
were  functions  of  the  same  Word  of  God,  and  in 
personality  not  to  be  distinguished  from  each 
other.  The  Reporting  Angel  among  the  myrtles 
takes  up  the  duty  of  the  Interpreting  Angel  and 
explains  the  Vision  to  the  prophet.  In  the 
Fourth  Vision  this  dissolving  view  is  carried 
further,  and  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  is  inter- 
changeable with  Jehovah  Himself;'||  just  as  in  the 
Vision  of  Ezekiel  the  Divine  Voice  from  the 
Glory  and  the  Man  standing  beside  the  prophet 
are  curiously  mingled.  Again  in  the  Fourth  Vis- 
ion we  hear  of  those  "  who  stand  in  the  presence 
of  Jehovah,"  IT  and  in  the  Eighth  of  executant 
angels  coming  out  from  His  presence  with  com- 
missions upon  the  whole  earth.** 

In  the  Visions  of  Zechariah,  then,  as  in  the 
earlier  books,  we  see  the  Lord  of  all  the  earth, 
surrounded  by  a  court  of  angels,  whom  He  sends 
forth  in  human  form  to  interpret  His  Word  and 
execute  His  will,  and  in  their  doing  of  this 
there  is  the  same  indistinctness  of  individuality, 
the  same  predominance  of  function  over  person- 
ality. As  with  Ezekiel,  one  stands  out  more 
clearly  than  the  rest,  to  be  the  prophet's  inter- 
preter, whom,  as  in  the  earlier  visions  of  angels, 
Zechariah  calls  "  my  lord,"  tt  but  even  he  melts 
into  the  figures  of  the  rest.  These  are  the  old 
and  borrowed  elements  in  Zechariah's  doctrine 
of  Angels.  But  he  has  added  to  them  in  several 
important  particulars,  which  make  his  Visions 
an  intermediate  stage  between  the  Book  of 
Ezekiel  and  the  very  intricate  angelology  of  later 
Judaism. 

In  the  first  place  Zechariah  is  the  earliest 
prophet  who  introduces  orders  and  ranks 
among  the  angels.  In  his  Fourth  Vision  the 
Angel  of  Jehovah  is  the  Divine  Judge  "  before 
whom  "  H  Joshua  appears  with  the  Adversary. 
He  also  has  others  standing  "  before  him  "  §§  to 

*  Zech.  i.  18  ff.;  Ezek.  ix.  i  flf. 

+  Zech.  i.  8  :  so  even  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  we  have  "  the 
man  "  Gabriel— ix.  21. 

t  i.  9,  ig  ;  ii.  3 ;  iv.  i,  4,  s  ;  v.  5,  10 ;  vi.  4.  But  see  above, 
pp.  622  f. 

§i.  8,  10,  II. 

I  iii.  1  compared  with  2. 

iiii.  6,  7. 

*•  vi.  s- 

tti.  9,  etc. 

Xi  iii.  I.  "  Stand  before  "  is  here  used  forensically  :  c/. 
the  N.  T.  phrases  to  "stand  before  God,"  Rev.  xx.  12; 
"before the  judgment-seat  of  Christ,"  Rom.  xiv.  10;  and 
"  be  acquitted,"  Luke  xxi.  36. 

§8111.4.     Here  the  phrase  is  used  domestically  of  ser- 


execute  his  sentences.  In  the  Third  Visicti, 
again,  the  Interpreting  Angel  does  not  commu- 
nicate directly  with  Jehovah,  but  receives  his 
words  from  another  Angel  who  has  come  forth.* 
All  these  are  symptoms,  that  even  with  a 
prophet,  who  so  keenly  felt  as  Zechariah  did  the 
ethical  directness  of  God's  word  and  its  per- 
vasiveness through  public  life,  there  had  yet  be- 
gun to  increase  those  feelings  of  God's  sublimity 
and  awfulness,  which  in  the  later  thought  of  Is- 
rael lifted  Him  to  so  far  a  distance  from  men, 
and  created  so  complex  a  host  of  intermediaries, 
human  and  superhuman,  between  the  worship- 
ping heart  and  the  Throne  of  Grace.  We  can 
best  estimate  the  difference  in  this  respect  be- 
tween Zechariah  and  the  earlier  prophets  whom 
we  have  studied  by  remarking  that  his  character- 
istic phrase  "  talked  with  me,"  literally  "  spake 
in  "  or  "  by  me,"  which  he  uses  of  the  Inter- 
preting Angel,  is  used  by  Habakkuk  of  God 
Himself.f  To  the  same  awful  impressions  of  the 
Godhead  is  perhaps  due  the  first  appearance  of 
the  Angel  as  intercessor.  Amos,  Isaiah,  and 
Jeremiah  themselves  directly  interceded  with 
God  for  the  people;  but  with  Zechariah  it  is  the 
Interpreting  Angel  who  intercedes,  and  who  in 
return  receives  the  Divine  comfort. $  In  this  an- 
gelic function,  the  first  of  its  kind  in  Scripture, 
we  see  the  small  and  explicable  beginnings  of  a 
belief  destined  to  assume  enormous  dimensions 
in  the  development  of  the  Church's  worship. 
The  supplication  of  Angels,  the  faith  in  their 
intercession  and  in  the  prevailing  prayers  of  the 
righteous  dead,  which  has  been  so  egregiously 
multiplied  in'  certain  sections  of  Christendom, 
may  be  traced  to  the  same  increasing  sense  of 
the  distance  and  awfulness  of  God,  but  is  to  be 
corrected  by  the  faith  Christ  has  taught  us  of 
the  nearness  of  our  Father  in  Heaven,  and  of 
His  immediate  care  of  His  every  human  child. 

The  intercession  of  the  Angel  in  the  First 
Vision  is  also  a  step  towards  that  identification 
of  special  Angels  with  different  peoples  which  we 
find  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  This  tells  us  of 
heavenly  princes  not  only  for  Israel — "  Michael, 
your  prince,  the  great  prince  which  standeth  up 
for  the  children  of  thy  people  "  § — but  for  the 
heathen  nations,  a  conception  the  first  begin- 
nings of  which  we  see  in  a  prophecy  that  was 
perhaps  not  far  from  being  contemporaneous 
with  Zechariah. II  Zechariah's  Vision  of  a  hier- 
archy among  the  angels  was  also  destined  to 
further  development.  The  head  of  the  patrol 
among  the  myrtles,  and  the  Judge-Angel  before 
whom  Joshua  appears,  are  the  first  Archangels. 
We  know  how  these  were  further  specialised,  and 
had  even  personalities  and  names  given  them  by 
both  Jewish  and  Christian  writers.*! 

Among  the  Angels  described  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, we  have  seen  some  charged  with  powers 
of  hindrance  and  destruction — "  a  troop  of  angels 
of  evil."  **  They  too  are  the  servants  of  .God, 
who  is  the  author  of  all  evil  as  well  as  good,  ff 
and  the  instruments  of  His  wrath.  But  the 
temptation  of  men   is   also  part   of   His    Provi- 

vants  in  the  presence  of  their  master.  See  above,  p. 
630,  n. 

*ii-  3.  4- 

tHab.  ii.  i  :  c/.  also  Num.  xii.  6-g. 

t  First  Vision,  i.  12. 

§x.  21,  xii.  I. 

II  Isa.  xxiv.  21. 

i  Book  of  Daniel  x.,  xii.;  Tobit  xii.  15;  Book  of  Enoch 
passim  ,•  Jude  9  ;  Rev.  viii.  2,  etc. 

**  Psalm  Ixxviii.  49.    See  above,  p.  635,  «. 

++ Amos  iii.  6. 


Zechariah  vii.,  viii.] 


THE    SEED    OF    PEACE. 


637 


dence.  Where  wilful  souls  have  to  be  misled, 
the  spirit  who  does  so,  as  in  Ahab's  case,  comes 
from  Jehovah's  presence.  *  All  these  spirits  are 
just  as  devoid  of  character  and  personality  as  the 
rest  of  the  angelic  host.  They  work  evil  as  mere 
instruments:  neither  malice  nor  falseness  is  at- 
tributed to  themselves.  They  are  not  rebel  nor 
fallen  angels,  but  obedient  to  Jehovah.  Nay, 
like  Ezekiel's  and  Zechariah's  Angels  of  the 
Word,  the  Angel  who  tempts  David  to  number 
the  people  is  interchangeable  with  God  Himself,  f 
Kindred  to  the  duty  of  tempting  men  is  that  of 
discipline,  in  its  forms  both  of  restraining  or 
accusing  the  guilty,  and  of  vexing  the  righteous 
in  order  to  test  them.  For  both  of  these  the 
same  verb  is  used,  "to  satan,"t  in  the  general 
sense  of  "  withstanding,"  or  antagonising.  The 
Angel  of  Jehovah  stood  in  Balaam's  way  "  to 
satan  hini."§  The  noun,  "the  Satan,"  is  used 
repeatedly  of  a  human  foe.||  But  in  two  pas- 
sages, of  which  Zechariah's  Fourth  Vision  is 
one,  and  the  other  the  Prologue  to  Job,1[  the 
name  is  given  to  an  Angel,  one  of  "  the  sons  of 
Elohim,"  or  Divine  powers  who  receive  their 
commission  from  Jehovah.  The  noun  is  not  yet, 
what  it  afterwards  became,**  a  proper  name;  but 
has  the  definite  article,  "  the  Adversary  "  or  "Ac- 
cuser " — that  is,  the  Angel  to  whom  that  function 
was  assigned.  With  Zechariah  his  business  is 
the  official  one  of  prosecutor  in  the  supreme 
court  of  Jehovah,  and  when  his  work  is  done  he 
disappears.  Yet,  before  he  does  so,  we  see  for 
the  first  time  in  connection  with  any  angel  a 
gleam  of  character.  This  is  revealed  by  the 
Lord's  rebuke  of  him.  There  is  something 
blameworthy  in  thv°  accusation  of  Joshua:  not 
indeed  false  witness,  for  Israel's  guilt  is  patent 
in  the  foul  garments  of  their  High  Priest,  but 
hardness  or  malice,  that  would  seek  to  prevent 
the  Divine  grace.  In  the  Book  of  Job  "  the 
Satan  "  is  also  a  function,  even  here  not  a  fallen 
or  rebel  angel,  but  one  of  God's  court,  ft  the  in- 
strument of  discipline  or  chastisement.  Yet, 
in  that  he  himself  suggests  his  cruelties  and  is 
represented  as  forward  and  officious  in  their  in- 
fliction, a  character  is  imputed  to  him  even  more 
clearly  than  in  Zechariah's  Vision.  But  the 
Satan  still  shares  that  identification  with  his 
function  which  we  have  seen  to  characterise  all 
the  angels  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  therefore 
he  disappears  from  the  drama  so  soon  as  his 
place  in  its  high  argument  is  over.:};t 

In  this  description  of  the  development  of  Is- 
rael's doctrine  of  Angels,  and  of  Zechariah's 
contributions  to  it,  we  have  not  touched  upon  the 
question  whether  the  development  was  assisted 
by  Israel's  contact  with  the  Persian  religion  and 

*  I  Kings  xxii.  20  ff. 

+  2  Sam.  xxiv.  i ;  i  Chron.  xxi.  i.  Though  here  differ- 
ence of  age  between  the  two  documents  may  have  caused 
the  difference  of  view. 

t  There  are  two  forms  of  the  verb,  |C3b',  satan,  and  DtOK', 
satam,  the  latter  apparently  the  older. 

§Num.  xxii.  22,  32. 

II  I  Sam.  xxix.  4  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  23  Heb.,22Eng.  ;  i  Kings  v. 
18,  xi.  14,  etc. 

IZech.  iii.  i  ff.  ;  Job  i.  6  ff. 

**  I  Chron.  xxi.  i. 

tti.  6iJ. 

t  J  See  Davidson  in  "Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  "  on 
Job  i.  fi-i2,  especially  on  ver.  9  :  "  The  Satan  of  this  book 
may  show  the  beginnings  of  a  personal  malevolence 
against  man,  but  he  is  still  rigidly  subordinated  to 
Heaven,  and  in  all  he  does  subserves  its  interests.  His 
function  is  as  the  minister  of  God  to  try  the  sincerit}'  of 
man  ;  hence  when  his  work  of  trial  is  over  he  is  no  more 
found,  and  no  place  is  given  him  among  the  drajnatis 
persotice  of  the  poem." 


with  the  system  of  Angels  which  the  latter  con- 
tains. For  several  reasons  the  question  is  a  diffi- 
cult one.  But  so  far  as  present  evidence  goes, 
it  makes  for  a  negative  answer.  Scholars  who 
are  in  no  way  prejudiced  against  the  theory  of 
a  large  Persian  influence  upon  Israel  declare 
that  the  religion  of  Persia  affected  the  Jewish 
doctrine  of  Angels  "  only  in.  secondary  points," 
such  as  their  "  number  and  personality,  and  the 
existence  of  demons  and  evil  spirits."*  Our 
own  discussion  has  shown  us  that  Zechariah's 
Angels,  in  spite  of  the  new  features  they  intro- 
duce, are  in  substance  one  with  the  Angels  of 
pre-exilic  Israel.  Even  the  Satan  is  primarily 
a  function,  and  one  of  the  servants  of  God.  If 
he  has  developed  an  immoral  character,  this  ca_n- 
not  be  attributed  to  the  influence  of  Persian  be- 
lief in  a  Spirit  of  evil  opposed  to  the  Spirit  of 
good  in  the  universe,  but  may  be  explained  by 
the  native,  or  selfish,  resentment  of  Israel  against 
their  prosecutor  before  the  bar  of  Jehovah.  Nor 
can  we  fail  to  remark  that  this  character  of  evil 
appears  in  the  Satan,  not,  as  in  the  Persian  re- 
ligion, in  general  opposition  to  goodness,  but 
as  thwarting  that  saving  grace  which  was  so 
peculiarly  Jehovah's  own.  And  Jehovah  said  to 
the  Satan,  "  Jehovah  rebuke  thee,  O  Satan,  yea, 
Jehovah  who  hath  chosen  Jerusalem  rebuke  thee! 
Is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  from  the  burning?  " 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

"r//£  SEED  OF  PEACE." 

Zechariah  vii.,  viii. 

The  Visions  have  revealed  the  removal  of  the 
guilt  of  the  land,  the  restoration  of  Israel  to 
their  standing  before  God.  the  revival  of  the 
great  national  institutions,  and  God's  will  to  de- 
stroy the  heathen  forces  of  the  world.  With 
the  Temple  built,  Israel  should  be  again  in  the 
position  which  she  enjoyed  before  the  Exile. 
Zechariah,  therefore,  proceeds  to  exhort  his  peo- 
ple to  put  away  the  fasts  which  the  Exile  had 
made  necessary,  and  address  themselves,  as  of 
old,  to  the  virtues  and  duties  of  the  civic  life. 
And  he  introduces  his  orations  to  this  end  by 
a  natural  appeal  to  the  experience  of  the  former 
days. 

The  occasion  came  to  him  when  the  Temple 
had  been  building  for  two  years,  and  when  some 
of  its  services  were  probably  resumed. f  A  depu- 
tation of  Jews  appeared  in  Jerusalem  and  raised 
the  question  of  the  continuance  of  the  greal 
Fasts  of  the  Exile.  Who  the  deputation  were 
is  not  certain:  probably  we  ought  to  delete 
"  Bethel  "  from  the  second  verse,  and  read 
either  "  El-sar'eser  sent  Regem-Melekh  and  his 
men  to  the  house  of  Jehovah  to  propitiate  Je- 
hovah," or  else  "  the  house  of  El-sar'eser  sent 
Regem-Melekh  and  his  men  to  propitiate  Je- 
hovah." It  has  been  thought  that  they  came 
from  the  Jews  in  Babylon:  this  would  agree 
with  their  arrival  in  the  ninth  month  to  inquire 
about  a  fast  in  the  fifth  month.  But  Zecha- 
riah's answer  is  addressed  to  Jews  in  Judea. 
The  deputation  limited  their  inquiry  to  the  fast 
of    the    fifth    month,    which    commemorated    the 

*  Cheyne,  "  The  Origin  of  the  Psalter,"  p.  272.  Read 
carefully  on  this  point  the  very  important  remarks  on  pp. 
270  ff.  and  281  f . 

t  C/.  chap.  vii.  3  :  "the  priests  which  were  of  the  house 
of  Jehovah." 


638 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


burning  of  the  Temple  and  the  City,  now  prac- 
tically restored.  But  with  a  breadth  of  view 
which  reveals  the  prophet  rather  than  the  priest, 
Zechariah  replies,  in  the  following  chapter,  upon 
all  the  fasts  by  which  Israel  for  seventy  years  had 
bewailed  her  ruin  and  exile.  He  instances  two. 
that  of  the  fifth  month,  and  that  of  the  seventh 
month,  the  date  of  the  murder  of  Gedaliah, 
when  the  last  poor  remnant  of  a  Jewish  state  was 
swept  away.*  With  a  boldness  which  recalls 
Amos  to  the  very  letter,  Zechariah  asks  his  peo- 
ple whether  in  those  fasts  they  fasted  at  all  to 
their  God.  Jehovah  had  not  charged  them,  and 
in  fasting  they  had  fasted  for  themselves,  just 
as  in  eating  and  drinking  they  had  eaten  and 
drunken  to  themselves.  They  should  rather 
hearken  to  the  words  He  really  sent  them.  In  a 
passage,  the  meaning  of  which  has  been  per- 
verted by  the  intrusion  of  the  eighth  verse,  that 
therefore  ought  to  be  deleted,  Zechariah  recalls 
what  those  words  of  Jehovah  had  been  in  the 
former  times  when  the  land  was  inhabited  and 
the  national  life  in  full  course.  They  were  not 
ceremonial;  they  were  ethical:  they  commanded 
justice,  kindness,  and  the  care  of  the  helpless 
and  the  poor.  And  it  was  in  consequence  of  the 
people's  disobedience  to  those  words  that  all 
the  ruin  came  upon  them  for  which  they  now  an- 
nually mourned.  The  moral  is  obvious  if  un- 
expressed. Let  them  drop  their  fasts,  and  prac- 
tise the  virtues  the  neglect  of  which  had  made 
their  fasts  a  necessity.  It  is  a  sane  and  practical 
word,  and  makes  us  feel  how  much  Zechariah 
has  inherited  of  the  temper  of  Amos  and  Isaiah. 
He  rests,  as  before,  upon  the  letter  of  the  an- 
cient oracles,  but  only  so  as  to  bring  out  their 
spirit.  With  such  an  example  of  the  use  of  an- 
cient Scripture,  it  is  deplorable  that  so  many 
men,  both  among  the  Jews  and  the  Christians, 
should  have  devoted  themselves  to  the  letter  at 
the  expense  of  the  spirit. 

"  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Darius  the  king,  that  the  Word  of  Jehovah  came 
to  Zechariah  on  the  fourth  of  the  ninth  month, 
Kislev.  For  there  sent  to  the  house  of  Jeho- 
vah, El-sar'eser  and  Regem-Melekh  and  his 
men,f  to  propitiate  t  Jehovah,  to  ask  of  the 
priests  which  were  in  the  house  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts  and  of  the  prophets  as  follows:  Shall  I 
weep  in  the  fifth  month  with  fasting  as  I  have 
now  done  so  many  years?  And  the  Word  of  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts  came  to  me:  Speak  now  to  all 
the  people  of  the  land,  and  to  the  priests,  say- 
ing: When  ye  fasted  and  mourned  in  the  fifth 
and  in  the  seventh  month, §  and  this  for  seventy 
years,  did  ye  fast  at  all  to  Me?  And  when  ye  eat 
and  when  ye  drink,  are  not  ye  the  eaters  and  ye 
the  drinkers?  Are  not  these ||  the  words  which 
Jehovah  proclaimed  by  the  hand  of  the  former 
prophets,  when  Jerusalem  was  inhabited  and  at 

*  Jer.  xli.  2  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  25. 

tThe  Hebrew  text  is  difficult  if  not  impossible  to  con- 
strue :  "  For  Bethel  sent  Sar'eser  "  (without  sign  of  accusa- 
tive) "and  Regem-Melekh  and  his  men."  Wellhausen 
points  out  that  Sar'eser  is  a  defective  name,  requiring  the 
name  or  title  of  deity  in  front  of  it.  and  Marti  proposes  to 
find  this  in  the  last  syllable  of  Bethel,  and  to  read  'El- 
sar'eser.  It  is  tempting  to  find  in  the  first  syllable  of 
Bethel  the  remnant  of  the  phrase  "  to  the  house  of 
Jehovah." 

X  To  stroke  the  face  of. 

JThe  fifth  month  Jerusalem  fell,  the  seventh  month 
Gedaliah  was  murdered  :  Jer.  Hi.  12  f. ;  2  Kings  xxv.  8  f., 

25- 

I  So  LXX.  Heb.  has  ace.  sign  before  "words,"  perhaps 
implying  "  Is  it  not  rather  necessary  to  do  the  words?" 
etc. 


peace,  with  her  cities  round  about  her,  and  the 
Negeb  and  the  Shephelah  were  inhabited? 

*  "  Thus  spake  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Judge  true 
judgment,  and  practise  towards  each  other  kind- 
ness and  mercy;  oppress  neither  widow  nor 
orphan,  stranger  nor  poor,  and  think  not  evil 
in  your  hearts  towards  one  another.  But  they 
refused  to  hearken,  and  turned  a  rebellious  shoul- 
der,f  and  their  ears  they  dulled  from  listening. 
And  their  heart  they  made  adamant,  so  as  not 
to  hear  the  Torah  and  the  words  which  Jehovah 
of  Hosts  sent  through  His  Spirit  by  the  hand  of 
the  former  prophets;  and  there  was  great  wrath 
from  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  And  it  came  to  pass 
that,  as  He  had  called  and  they  heard  not,  so 
they  shall  call  and  I  will  not  hear,  said  Jehovah 
of  Hosts,  but  I  will  whirl  it  them  away  among 
nations  whom  they  know  not.  And  the  land  was 
laid  waste  behind  them,  without  any  to  pass  to 
and  fro,  and  they  made  the  pleasant  land  deso- 
late." 

There  follow  upon  this  deliverance  ten  other 
short  oracles:  chap.  viii.  Whether  all  of  this 
decalogue  are  to  be  dated  from  the  same  time 
as  the  answer  to  the  deputation  about  the  fasts 
is  uncertain.  Some  of  them  appear  rather  to  be- 
long to  an  earlier  date,  for  they  reflect  the  situa- 
tion, and  even  the  words,  of  Haggai's  oracles, 
and  represent  the  advent  of  Jehovah  to  Jerusalem 
as  still  future.  But  they  return  to  the  question 
of  the  fasts,  treating  it  still  more  comprehen- 
sively than  before,  and  they  close  with  a  promise, 
fitly  spoken  as  the  Temple  grew  to  completion, 
of  the  coming  of  the  heathen  to  worship  at 
Jerusalem. 

We  have  already  noticed  the  tender  charm  and 
strong  simplicity  of  these  prophecies,^  and  there 
is  little  now  to  add  except  the  translation  of 
them.  As  with  the  older  prophets,  and  especially 
the  great  Evangelist  of  the  Exile,  they  start  from 
the  glowing  love  of  Jehovah  for  His  people,  to 
which  nothing  is  impossible;!  they  promise  a 
complete  return  of  the  scattered  Jews  to  their 
land,  and  are  not  content  except  with  the  assur- 
ance of  a  world  converted  to  the  faith  of  their 
God.  With  Haggai  Zechariah  promises  the 
speedy  end  of  the  poverty  of  the  little  colony; 
and  he  adds  his  own  characteristic  notes  of  a 
reign  of  peace  to  be  used  for  hearty  labour, 
bringing  forth  a  great  prosperity.  Only  let  men 
be  true  and  just  and  kind,  thinking  no  evil  of 
each  other,  as  in  those  hard  days  when  hunger 
and  the  fierce  rivalry  for  sustenance  made  every 
one's  neighbour  his  enemy,  and  the  petty  life, 
devoid  of  large  interests  for  the  commonweal, 
filled  their  hearts  with  envy  and  malice.  For 
ourselves  the  chief  profit  of  these  beautiful  ora- 
cles is  their  lesson  that  the  remedy  for  the  sordid 
tempers  and  cruel  hatreds,  engendered  by  the 
fierce  struggle  for  existence,  is  found  in  civic 
and  religious  hopes,  in  a  noble  ideal  for  the 
national  life,  and  in  the  assurance  that  God's 
Love  is  at  the  back  of  all,  with  nothing  impos- 
sible to  it.  Amid  these  glories,  however,  the 
heart  will  probably  thank  Zechariah  most  for  his 
immortal  picture  of  the  streets  of  the  new  Je- 

*  Omit  here  ver.  8,  "  And  the  Word  of  Jehovah  came  to 
Zechariah,  saying."  It  is  obviously  a  gloss  by  a  scribe 
who  did  not  notice  that  the  "lOX  HS  of  ver.  9  is  God's 
statement  by  the  former  prophets. 

t  Cf.  the  phrase  "  with  one  shoulder,"  t.  e.,  unanimously. 

X  So  Heb.  and  LXX.  ;  but  perhaps  we  ought  to  point 
"  and  I  whirled  them  away,"  taking  the  clause  with  the 
next. 

§  See  above,  pp.  625  ff. 

II  Cf.  especially  Isa.  xl.  ff. 


Zechariah  vii.,  viii.] 


"THE    SEED    OF    PEACE.' 


639 


rusalem:  old  men  and  women  sitting  in  the  sun, 
boys  and  girls  playing  in  all  the  open  places. 
The  motive  of  it,  as  we  have  seen,  was  found 
in  the  circumstances  of  his  own  day.  Like 
many  another  emigration  for  religion's  sake, 
from  the  heart  of  civilisation  to  a  barren  coast, 
the  poor  colony  of  Jerusalem  consisted  chiefly 
of  men,  young  and  in  middle  life.  The  barren 
years  gave  no  encouragement  to  marriage.  The 
constant  warfare  with  neighbouring  tribes 
allowed  few  to  reach  grey  hairs.  It  was  a  rough 
and  a  hard  society,  unblessed  by  the  two  great 
benedictions  of  life,  childhood  and  old  age.  But 
this  should  all  be  changed,  and  Jerusalem  filled 
with  placid  old  men  and  women,  and  with  joy- 
ous boys  and  girls.  The  oracle,  we  say,  had  its 
motive  in  Zechariah's  day.  But  what  an  oracle 
for  these  times  of  ours!  Whether  in  the  large 
cities  of  the  old  world,  where  so  few  of  the  work- 
ers may  hope  for  a  quiet  old  age  sitting  in  the 
sun,  and  the  children's  days  of  play  are  short- 
ened by  premature  toil  and  knowledge  of  evil; 
or  in  the  newest  fringes  of  the  new  world, 
where  men's  hardness  and  coarseness  are, 
in  the  struggle  for  gold,  unawed  by  rever- 
ence for  age  and  unsoftened  by  the  fellow- 
ship of  childhood, — Zechariah's  great  promise 
is  equally  needed.  Even  there  shall  it  be  ful- 
filled if  men  will  remember  his  conditions — that 
the  first  regard  of  a  community,  however  strait- 
ened in  means,  be  the  provision  of  religion,  that 
truth  and  whole-hearted  justice  abound  in  the 
gates,  with  love  atnd  loyalty  in  every  heart  to- 
wards every  other. 

"  And  the  Word  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  came, 
saymg: — 

1.  '■  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  I  am  jealous 
for  Zion  with  a  great  jealousy,  and  with  great 
anger  am  I  jealous  for  her. 

2.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah:  I  am  returned  to 
Zion,  and  I  dwell  in  the  midst  of  Jerusalem,  and 
Jerusalem  shall  be  called  the  City  of  Troth,*  and 
the  mountain  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  the  Holy 
Mountain. 

3.  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Old  men  and 
old  v/omen  shall  yet  sit  in  the  streets  of  Jerusa- 
lem, each  with  staff  in  hand,  for  fulness  of  days; 
and  the  streets  of  the  city  shall  be  full  of  boys 
and   girls   playing   in   her   streets. 

4.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Because  it 
seems  too  wonderful  to  the  remnant  of  this  peo- 
ple in  those  days,  shall  it  also  seem  too  wonder- 
ful to  Me? — oracle  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 

5.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Lo!  I  am 
about  to  save  My  people  out  of  the  land  of  the 
rising  and  out  of  the  land  of  the  setting  of  the 
sun;  and  I  will  bring  them  home,  and  they  shall 
dwell  in  the  midst  of  Jerusalem,  and  they  shall 
be  to  Me  for  a  people,!  and  I  will  be  to  them  for 
God,  in  troth  and  in  righteousness. 

6.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Strengthen 
your  hands,  O  ye  who  have  heard  in  such  days 
such    words    from    the    mouth   of   the    prophets, 

♦  Isa.  i.  26. 

t  Not  merely  "  My  people  "  (Wellhausen),  but  their 
return  shall  constitute  them  a  people  once  more.  The 
quot£.tion  is  from  Hosea  ii.  25. 


since*  the  day  when  the  House  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts  was  founded:  the  sanctuary  was  to  be 
built!  For  before  those  days  there  was  no  gain 
for  man,  f  and  none  to  be  made  by  cattle;  and 
neither  for  him  that  went  out  nor  for  him  that 
came  in  was  there  any  peace  from  the  adversary, 
and  I  set  every  man's  hand  against  his  neigh- 
bour. But  not  now  as  in  the  past  days  am  I 
towards  the  remnant  of  this  people^oracle  of 
Jehovah  of  Hosts.  For  I  am  sowing  the  seed  of 
peace.l  The  vine  shall  yield  her  fruit,  and  the 
land  yield  her  increase,  and  the  heavens  yield 
their  dew,  and  I  will  give  them  all  for  a  heri- 
tage to  the  remnant  of  this  people.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  that  as  ye  have  been  a  curse  among 
the  nations,  O  house  of  Judah  and  house  of  Is- 
rael, so  will  I  save  you  and  ye  shall  be  a  bless- 
ing!    Be    not   afraid,    strengthen   your   hands! 

7.  "  For  thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  As  I 
have  planned  to  do  evil  to  you,  for  the  provoca- 
tion your  fathers  gave  Me,  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts,  and  did  not  relent,  so  have  I  turned  and 
planned  in  these  days  to  do  good  to  Jerusalem 
and  the  house  of  Judah.  Be  not  afraid!  These 
are  the  things  which  ye  shall  do:  Speak  truth  to 
one  another;  truth  and  wholesome  judgment  de- 
cree ye  in  your  gates;  and  plan  no  evil  to  each 
other  in  your  hearts,  nor  take  pleasure  in  false 
swearing:  for  it  is  all  these  that  I  hate — oracle 
of  Jehovah. 

"  And  the  Word  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts  came 
to  me,  saying: — 

8.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  The  fast  of 
the  fourth  month,  and  the  fast  of  the  fifth,  and 
the  fast  of  the  seventh,  and  the  fast  of  the  tenth, 
shall  become  to  the  house  of  Judah  joy  and  glad- 
ness and  happy  feasts. §  But  love  ye  truth  and 
peace. 

9.  "Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  There  shall 
yet  come  peoples  and  citizens  of  great  cities;  and 
the  citizens  of  one  city||  will  go  to  another  city, 
saying:  '  Let  us  go  to  propitiate  Jehovah,  and 
to  seek  Jehovah  of  Hosts!  '  '  I  will  go  too!  ' 
And  many  peoples  and  strong  nations  shall  come 
to  seek  Jehovah  of  Hosts  in  Jerusalem  and  to 
propitiate   Jehovah; 

10.  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  In  those 
days  ten  men,  of  all  lang:uages  of  the  nations, 
shall  take  hold  of  the  skirt  of  a  Jew  and  say. 
We  will  go  with  you,  for  we  have  heard  that 
God  is  with  you." 

*So  LXX. 

t  '■  But  he  that  made  wages  made  them  to  put  them  into 
a  bag  with  holes,"  Haggai  i.  6. 

t  Read  m^tj'n  nviTx  '•3  for  Di^j^n  yir  '^  of  the 

text,  "  for  the  seed  of  peace."  The  LXX.  makes  J?"lt  a 
verb.  C/.  Hosea  ii.  23  ft'.,  which  the  next  clauses  show  to 
be  in  the  mind  of  our  prophet.    Klostermann  and  Nowack 

prefer  DIPK'  riyiT,  "  her  "  (the  remnant's)  "  seed  shall  be 

T         T    :- 

peace." 

§In  the  tenth  month  the  siege  oi:  Jerusalem  had  began 
(2  Kings  XXV.  i) ;  on  the  ninth  of  the  fourth  month  Jeru- 
salem was  taken  Qer.  xxxix.  2)  ;  on  the  seventh  of  the 
fifth  City  and  Temple  were  burnt  down  12  Kings  xxv.  8) ; 
in  the  seventh  month  Gedaliah  was  assassinated  and  the 
poor  relics  of  a  Jewish  state  swept  from  the  land  (Jer. 
xli.).    See  above,  pp.  568  fif. 

I  LXX.  "the  citizens  of  five  cities  will  go  to  one." 


640 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


"  MALACHI." 


"Have  we  not  all  One  Father?  Why  then  are  we  un- 
faithful to  each  other  ? " 

"The  lips  of  a  Priest  guard  knowledge,  and  men  seek 
instruction  from  his  mouth,  for  he  is  the  Angel  of  Jeho- 
vah of  Hosts." 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 
THE  BOOK  OF  "MALACHI." 

This  book,  the  last  in  the  arrangement  of  the 
prophetic  canon,  bears  the  title:  "Burden"  or 
"  Oracle  of  the  Word  of  Jehovah  to  Israel  by  the 
hand  of  male'akhi."  Since  at  least  the  second 
century  of  our  era  the  word  has  been  understood 
as  a  proper  name,  Malachi,  or  Malachias.  But 
there  are  strong  objections  to  this,  as  well  as  to 
the  genuineness  of  the  whole  title,  and  critics 
now  almost  universally  agree  that  the  book  was 
originally  anonymous. 

It  is  true  that  neither  in  form  nor  in  meaning 
is  there  any  insuperable  obstacle  to  our  under- 
standing "  male'akhi  "  as  the  name  of  a  person. 
If  so,  however,  it  cannot  have  been,  as  some  have 
suggested,  an  abbreviation  of  Male'akhiyah,  for, 
according  to  the  analogy  of  other  names  of  such 
formation,  this  could  only  express  the  impossible 
meaning  "  Jehovah  is  Angel."  *  But,  as  it 
stands,  it  might  have  meant  "  My  Angel  "  or 
"  Messenger,"  or  it  may  be  taken  as  an  adjective, 
"  Angelicus."t  Either  of  these  meanings  wouJd 
form  a  natural  name  for  a  Jewish  child,  and  a 
very  suitable  one  for  a  prophet.  There  is  evi- 
dence, however,  that  some  of  the  earliest  Jew- 
ish interpreters  did  not  think  of  the  title  as  con- 
taining the  name  of  a  person.  The  Septuagint 
read  "  by  the  hand  of  His  messenger,"  J  "  male'- 
akho";  and  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  while  re- 
taining "  male'akhi,"  rendered  it  "  My  messen- 
ger," adding  that  it  was  Ezra  the  Scribe  who  was 
thus  designated. §  This  opinion  was  adopted  by 
Calvin. 

Recent  criticism  has  shown  that,  whether  the 
word  was  originally  intended  as  a  personal 
name  or  not,  it  was  a  purely  artificial  one  bor- 
rowed from  chap.  iii.  i,  "  Behold,  I  send  My  mes- 
senger," "  male'akhi,"  for  the  title,  which  itself 
has  been  added  by  the  editor  of  the  Twelve 
Prophets  in  the  form  in  which  we  now  have 
them.    The  peculiar  words  of  the  title,  "Burden" 

*n^3N^D  or  in^3K^)0,  To  judge  from  the  analogy 
of  other  cases  of  the  same  formation  (e.  g:,  Abiyah  = 
Jehovah  is  Father,  and  not  Father  of  Jehovah),  this  name, 
if  ever  extant,  could  not  have  borne  the  meaning,  which 
Robertson  Smith,  Cornill,  Kirkpatrick,  etc.,  suppose  it 
must  have  done,  of  "  Angel  of  Jehovah,"  These  scholars, 
it  should  be  added,  oppose,  for  various  reasons,  the  theory 
that  it  is  a  proper  name, 

t  C/.  the  suggested  meaning  of  Haggai,  Festus,  Above, 
p.  614.  ^ 

t  And  added  the  words,  "  lay  z/  to  your  hearts     :  tv  x^'pi 

ayyeKov  aviTO?'  fletrfle  5r)  67rt  ra?  KapSios  VfUMV.      Bachmann  ("  A, 

T.  Untersuch,,"  Berlin,  1894,  pp.  109  flf.)  takes  this  added 
clause  as  a  translation  of  3?3  ^D^b*"l,  and  suggests  that 
it  may  be  a  corruption  of  an  original  3?3  IDE^,  "and 
his  name  was  Kaleb,"  But  the  reading  3?3  ID^B^I 
is  not  the  exact  equivalent  of  the  Greek  phrase. 

§  xisD  Niry  n"'o^>  '^.ipnn  •'sx^o. 


or  "  Oracle  of  the  Word  of  Jehovah,"  occur  no- 
where else  than  in  the  titles  of  the  two  prophe- 
cies which  have  been  appended  to  the  Book  oi 
Zechariah,  chap,  ix,  i  and  chap,  xii,  i,  and  im- 
mediately precede  this  book  of  "  Malachi."  In 
chap,  ix,  I  "the  Word  of  Jehovah"  belongs  to  the 
text;  "  Burden"  or  "  Oracle"  has  been  inserted 
before  it  as  a  title;  then  the  whole  phrase  has 
been  inserted  as  a  title  in  chap,  xii,  i.  These 
two  pieces  are  anonymous,  and  nothing  is  more 
likely  than  that  another  anonymous  prophecy 
should  have  received,  when  attached  to  them, 
the  same  heading.*  The  argument  is  not  final, 
but  it  is  the  most  probable  explanation  of  the 
data,  and  agrees  with  the  other  facts.  The  cumu- 
lative force  of  all  that  we  have  stated — the  im- 
probability of  mal?'akhi  being  a  personal  name, 
the  fact  that  the  earliest  versions  do  not  treat  it 
as  such,  the  obvious  suggestion  for  its  invention 
in  the  malS'akhi  of  chap.  iii.  i,  the  absence  of  a 
father's  name  and  place  of  residence,  and  the 
character  of  the  whole  title — is  enough  for  the 
opinion  rapidly  spreading  among  critics  that  our 
book  was,  like  so  much  more  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, originally  anonymous, f  The  author  at- 
tacks the  religious  authorities  of  his  day;  he 
belongs  to  a  pious  remnant  of  his  people,  who 
are  overborne  and  perhaps  oppressed  by  the  ma- 
jority,:^  I"  these  facts,  which  are  all  we  know 
of  his  personality,  he  found  sufficient  reason  for 
not  attaching  his  name  to  his  prophecy. 

The  book  is  also  undated, ,  but  it  reflects  its 
period  almost  as  clearly  as  do  the  dated  Books 
of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  The  conquest  of 
Edom  by  the' Nabateans,  which  took  place  dur- 
ing the  Exile,§  is  already  past,||  The  Jews  are 
under  a  Persian  viceroy. H  They  are  in  touch 
with  a  heathen  power,  which  does  not  tyrannise 
over  them,  for  this  book  is  the  first  to  predict 
no  judgment  upon  the  heathen,  and  the  first, 
moreover,  to  acknowledge  that  among  the 
heathen  the  true  God  is  worshipped  "  from  the 
rising  to  the  setting  of  the  sun."  **  The  only 
judgment  predicted  is  one  upon  the  false  and 
disobedient  portion  of  Israel,  whose  arrogance 
and    success    have   cast   true    Israelites    into    de- 

*  See  Stade,  "  Z,  A,  T.  W.,"  1881,  p,  14;  1882,  p,  308; 
Cornill,  "  Einleitung,"  4th  ed.,  pp,  207  f, 

t  So  (besides  Calvin,  who  takes  it  as  a  title)  even  Heng- 
stenberg  in  his  "Christology  of  the  O.  T.,"  Ewald, 
Kuenen,  Reuss,  Stade,  Rob.  Smith,  Cornill,  Wellhausen, 
Kirkpatrick  (probably),  Wildeboer,  Nowack,  On  the 
other  side  Hitzig,  Vatke,  Nagelsbach  and  Volck  (in  Her- 
zog)  Von  Orelli,  Pusey,  and  Robertson  hold  it  to  be  a  per- 
sonal name — Pusey  with  this  qualification,  "that  the 
prophet  may  have  framed  it  for  himself,"  similarly 
Orelli.  They  support  their  opinion  by  the  fact  that  even 
the  LXX.  entitle  the  book  MaAaxias  ;  that  the  word  was 
regarded  as  a  proper  name  in  the  early  Church,  and  that 
it  is  a  possible  name  for  a  Hebrew.  In  opposition  to  the 
hypothesis  that  it  was  borrowed  from  chap,  iii,  t,  Hitzig 
suggests  the  converse  that  in  the  latter  the  prophet  plays 
upon  his  own  name.  None  of  these  critics,  however, 
meets  the  objections  to  the  name  drawn  from  the  peculiar 
character  of  the  title  and  its  relations  to  Zech.  ix.  i,  xii.  i. 
The  supposed  name  of  the  prophet  gave  rise  to  the  legend 
supported  by  manv  of  the  Fathers  that  Malachi,  like 
Haggai  and  John  the  Baptist,  was  an  incarnate  angel. 
This  is  stated  and  condemned  by  Jerome,  "  Comm,  ad 
Hag,"  i.  13,  but  held  by  Origen,  Tertullian,  and  others. 
The  existence  of  such  an  opinion  is  itself  proof  for  the 
impersonal  character  of  the  name.  As  in  the  case  of  the 
rest  of  the  prophets.  Christian  tradition  furnishes  the 
prophet  with  the  outline  of  a  biography.  See  (Pseud-) 
Epiphanius  and  other  writers  quoted  above,  p.  615, 

t  iii.  16  fT. 

§See  above  on  Obadiah,  p.  600,  and  below  on  the  pas- 
sage itself, 

I  i-  2-5. 

1i.  8. 

**  i  1 1 :  the  verbs  here  are  to  be  taken  in  the  present,  not 
as  in  A,  V,  in  the  future,  tense. 


THE    BOOK    OF    "MALACHI." 


641 


npair.*  All  this  reveals  a  time  when  the  Jews 
were  favourably  treated  by  their  Persian  lords. 
The  reign  must  be  that  of  Artaxerxes  Longhand, 
464-424. 

The  Temple  has  been  finished,!  and  years 
enough  have  elapsed  to  disappoint  those  fervid 
hopes  with  which  about  518  Zechariah  expected 
its  completion.  The  congregation  has  grown 
worldly  and  careless.  In  particular  the  priests 
are  corrupt  and  partial  in  the  administration  of 
the  Law.J  There  have  been  many  marriages 
with  the  heathen  women  of  the  land;i5  and  the 
laity  have  failed  to  pay  the  tithes  and  other  dues 
to  the  Temple. II  These  are  the  evils  against 
which  we  find  strenuous  measures  directed  by 
Ezra,  who  returned  from  Babylon  in  458,^1  and  by 
Nehemiah,  who  visited  Jerusalem  as  its  governor 
for  the  first  time  in  445  and  for  the  second  time 
in  433.  Besides,  "  the  religious  spirit  of  the 
book  is  that  of  the  prayers  of  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah. A  strong  sense  of  the  unique  privileges  of 
the  children  of  Jacob,  the  objects  of  electing 
love,**  the  children  of  the  Divine  Father,  ft  is 
combined  with  an  equally  strong  assurance  of 
Jehovah's  righteousness  amidst  the  many  mis- 
eries that  pressed  on  the  unhappy  inhabitants  of 
■Judea.  .  .  .  Obedience  to  the  law  is  the  sure 
path  to  blessedness."  J:}:  But  the  question  still 
remains  whether  the  Book  of  "  Malachi  "  pre- 
pared for,  assisted,  or  followed  up  the  reforms 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  An  ancient  tradition  al- 
ready alluded  to  §§  assigned  the  authorship  to 
Ezra  himself. 

Recent  criticism  has  been  divided  among  the 
years  immediately  before  Ezra's  arrival  in  458, 
those  immediately  before  Nehemiah's  first  visit 
in  445,  those  between  his  first  government  and 
his  second,  and  those  after  Nehemiah's  disap- 
pearance from  Jerusalem.  But  the;  years  in 
which  Nehemiah  held  office  may  be  excluded, 
because  the  Jews  are  represented  as  bringing 
gifts  to  the  governor,  which  Nehemiah  tells  us 
he  did  not  allow  to  be  brought  to  him.||||  The 
whole  question  depends  upon  what  Law  was  in 
practice  in  Israel  when  the  book  was  written. 
In  445  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  by  solemn  covenant 
between  the  people  and  Jehovah,  instituted  the 
code  which  we  now  know  as  the  Priestly  Code 
of  the  Pentateuch.  Before  that  year  the  ritual 
and  social  life  of  the  Jews  appear  to  have  been 
directed  by  the  Deuteronomic  Code.  Now  the 
Book  of  "  Malachi  "  enforces  a  practice  with  re- 
gard to  the  tithes,  which  agrees  more  closely 
with  the  Priestly  Code  than  it  does  with  Deuter- 
onomy. Deuteronomy  commands  that  every 
third  year  the  whole  tithe  is  to  be  given  to  the 
Levites  and  the  poor  who  reside  "  within  the 
gates  "  of  the  giver,  and  is  there  to  be  eaten  by 
them.  "  Malachi  "  commands  that  the  whole 
tithe  be  brought  into  the  storehouse  of  the  Tem- 
ple for  the  Levites  in  service  there;  and  so  does 
the  Priestly  Code. HI  On  this  ground  many  date 
the    Book    of    "  Malachi  "    after    445.***      But 

*  Passim  :  especially  iii.  13  ff.,  24. 

+  i.  10;  iii.  I,  10.  II  iii.  7-12. 

X  ii.  1-9.  1  See  above,  pp.  606  f. 

§  ii.  10-16.  **  i.  2. 

+t  ii.  10. 

ttii.  17-iii.  12;  iii.  22  f.,  Eng.  iv.  The  above  sentences 
are  from  Robertson  Smith,  art.  "Malachi,"  "Encyc. 
Prit,"  Qth  ed. 

§§  Above,  p.  640,  n. 

||||"Mal."i.  8;  Neb.  v. 

^I'Deut.  xii.  II,  xxvi.  12;  "  Mai."  iii.  8,  10  ;  Num.  xviii.  21 
fi.(P). 

♦**  Vatke  (contemporaneous  with  Nehemiah),  Schrader, 

41— Vol.  IV. 


"  Malachi's  "  divergence  from  Deuteronomy  on 
this  point  may  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  in 
his  time  there  were  practically  no  Levites  out- 
side Jerusalem;  and  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  he 
joins  the  tithe  with  the  teriimah  or  heave-ofifer- 
ing  exactly  as  Deuteronomy  does.*  On  other 
points  of  the  Law  he  agrees  rather  with  Deuter- 
onomy than  with  the  Priestly  Code.  He  fol- 
lows Deuteronomy  in  calling  the  priests  "  sons 
of  Levi,"  t  while  the  Priestly  Code  limits  the 
priesthood  to  the  sons  of  Aaron.  He  seems  to 
quote  Deuteronomy  when  forbidding  the  obla- 
tion of  blind,  lame,  and  sick  beasts;  |  appears  to 
dififer  from  the  Priestly  Code  which  allows  the 
sacrificial  beast  to  be  male  or  female,  when  he 
assumes  that  it  is  a  male;§  follows  the  expres- 
sions of  Deuteronmy  and  not  those  of  the 
Priestly  Code  in  detailing  the  sins  of  the  peo- 
ple;! and  uses  the  Deuteronomic  phrases  "the 
Law  of  Moses,"  "  My  servant  Moses,"  "  statutes 
and  judgments,"  and  "  Horeb  "  for  the  Mount  of 
the  Law.TI  For  the  rest,  he  echoes  or  implies 
only  Ezekiel  and  that  part  of  the  Priestly  Code  ** 
which  is  regarded  as  earlier  than  the  rest,  and 
probably  from  the  first  years  of  exile.  More- 
over he  describes  the  Torah  as  not  yet  fully  codi- 
fied, ft  The  priests  still  deliver  it  in  a  way 
improbable  after  445.  The  trouble  of  the 
heathen  marriages  with  which  he  deals  (if  indeed 
the  verses  on  this  subject  be  authentic  and  not  a 
later  intrusion  JJ)  was  that  which  engaged  Ezra's 
attention  on  his  arrival  in  458,  but  Ezra  found 
that  it  had  already  for  some  time  been  vexing 
the  heads  of  the  community.  While,  therefore, 
we  are  obliged  to  date  the  Book  of  "  Malachi  " 
before  445  b.  c,  it  is  uncertain  whether  it  pre- 
ceded or  followed  Ezra's  attempts  at  reform  in 
458.  "  Most  critics  now  think  that  it  preceded 
them.  §§ 

The  Book  of  "  Malachi  "  is  an  argument  with 
the  prophet's  contemporaries,  not  only  with  the 
wicked  among  them,  who,  in  forgetfulness  of 
what  Jehovah  is,  corrupt  the  ritual,  fail  to  give 
the  Temple  its  dues,  abuse  justice,  marry  foreign 
wives,  Ijll  divorce  their  own,  and  commit  various 
other  sins;  but  also  with  the  pious,  who,  equally 

Keil,  Kuenen  (perhaps  in  second  governorship  of  Nehe- 
miah, but  see  above  for  a  decisive  reason  against  this), 
Kohler,  Driver,  Von  Orelli  (between  Nehemiah's  first 
and  second  visit),  Kirkpatrick,  Robertson. 

*  Deut.  xii.  u.  In  P  terflmah  is  a  due  paid  to  priests  as 
distinct  from  Levites. 

t  ii.  4-8  :  cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  8. 

$  i.  8  ;  Deut.  xv.  21. 

§i.  14  ;  Lev.  iii.  1,  6. 

II  iii.  5;  Deut.  v.  n  ff.,  xviii.  10,  xxiv.  T7  ff.;  Lev.  xix.  31, 
33  f.,  XX.  6. 

^  iii.  22  Heb.,  iv.  4  Eng.  "  Law  of  Moses  "  and  "  Moses 
My  servant "  are  found  only  in  the  Deuteronomistic 
portions  of  the  Hexateuch  and  historical  books  and  here. 
In  P  Sinai  is  the  Mount  of  the  Law.  To  the  above  may 
be  added  "segullah,"  iii.  17,  which  is  found  in  the  Penta- 
teuch only  outside  P  and  in  Psalm  cxxxv.  4.  All  these 
resemblances  between  "  Malachi  "  and  Deuteronomy  and 
"  Malachi's  "  divergences  from  P  are  given  in  Roljertson 
Smith's  "Old  Test,  in  the  Jewish  Church,"  2d  ed.,  425  ff.: 

cf.  444  ff. 

**  Lev.  xvii.-xxvi.  From  this  and  Ezekiel  he  received 
the  conception  of  the  profanation  of  the  sanctuary  by  the 
sins  of  the  people— ii.  11 :  c/.  also  ii.  2,  iii.  3,  4,  for  traces  of 
Ezekiel's  influence. 

+tii.  6ff. 

%X  See  below,  pp.  642.  64S.  640. 

§§  Herzfeld,  Bleek.  Stade,  Kautzsch  (probably),  Well- 
hausen  (•' Gesch."  p.  125),  Nowack  before  the  arrival  of 
Ezra,  Cornill  either  soon  Ijefore  or  soon  after  4^8,  Robert- 
son Smith  either  before  or  soon  after  445.  Hitzig  at  first 
put  it  before  458,  but  was  afterwards  moved  to  date  it 
after  3i;8,  as  he  took  the  overthrow  of  the  Edomites  de- 
scribed in  chap.  i.  2-5  to  be  due  to  a  campaign  in  that 
year  by  Artaxerxes  Ochus  icf.  Euseb.,  "Chron."  II.  221). 

UU  But  see  below,  pp.  642,  649. 


642 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


forgetful  of  God's  character,  are  driven  by  the 
arrogance  of  the  wicked  to  ask,  whether  He 
loves  Israel,  whether  He  is  a  God  of  justice,  and 
to  murmur  that  it  is  vain  to  serve  Him.  To 
these  two  classes  of  his  contemporaries  the 
prophet  has  the  following  answers.  God  does 
love  Israel.  He  is  worshipped  everywhere 
among  the  heathen.  He  is  the  Father  of  all 
Israel.  He  will  bless  His  people  when  they  put 
away  all  abuses  from  their  midst  and  pay  their 
religious  dues;  and  His  Day  of  Judgment  is  com- 
ing, when  the  good  shall  be  separated  from  the 
wicked.  But  before  it  come,  Elijah  the  prophet 
will  be  sent  to  attempt  the  conversion  of  the 
wicked,  or  at  least  to  call  the  nation  to  decide 
for  Jehovah.  This  argument  is  pursued  in  seven 
or  perhaps  eight  paragraphs,  which  do  not  show 
much  consecutiveness,  but  are  addressed,  some 
to  the  wicked,  and  some  to  the  despairing  adher- 
ents of  Jehovah. 

1.  Chap.  i.  2-5. — To  those  who  ask  how  God 
loves  Israel,  the  proof  of  Jehovah's  election  of 
Israel  is  shown  in  the  fall  of  the  Edomites. 

2.  Chap.  i.  6-14. — Charge  against  the  people  of 
dishonouring  their  God,  whom  even  the  heathen 
reverence. 

3.  Chap.  ii.  1-9. — Charge  against  the  priests, 
who  have  broken  the  covenant  God  made  of  old 
with  Levi,  and  debased  their  high  office  by  not 
reverencing  Jehovah,  by  misleading  the  people, 
and  by  perverting  justice.  A  curse  is  therefore 
fallen  on  them — they  are  contemptible  in  the 
people's  eyes. 

4.  Chap.  ii.  10-16. — A  charge  against  the  peo- 
ple for  their  treachery  to  each  other;  instanced 
in  the  heathen  marriages,  if  the  two  verses,  11 
and  12,  upon  this  be  authentic,  and  in  their  di- 
vorce of  their  wives. 

5.  Chap.  ii.  17-iii.  5  or  6. — Against  those  who 
in  the  midst  of  such  evils  grow  sceptical  about 
Jehovah.  His  Angel,  or  Himself,  will  come  first 
to  purge  the  priesthood  and  ritual  that  there  may 
be  pure  sacrifices,  and  second  to  rid  the  land  of 
its  criminals   and   sinners. 

6.  Chap.  iii.  6  or  7-12. — A  charge  against  the 
people  of  neglecting  tithes.  Let  these  be  pa.d, 
disasters  shall  cease  and  the  land  be  blessed. 

7.  Chap.  iii.  13-21  Heb.,  Chap.  iii.  13-iv.  2 
LXX.  and  Eng. — Another  charge  against  the 
pious  for  saying  it  is  vain  to  serve  God.  God 
will  rise  to  action  and  separate  between  the  good 
and  bad  in  the  terrible  Day  of  His  coming. 

8.  To  this.  Chap.  iii.  22-24  Heb.,  Chap.  iv.  3-5 
Eng.,  adds  a  call  to  keep  the  Law,  and  a  promise 
that  Elijah  will  be  sent  to  see  whether  he  may 
not  convert  the  people  before  the  Day  of  the 
Lord  comes  upon  them  with  its  curse. 

The  authenticity  of  no  part  of  the  book  has 
been  till  now  in  serious  question.  Bohme,*  in- 
deed, took  the  last  three  verses  for  a  later  addi- 
tion, on  account  of  their  Deuteronomic  char- 
acter, but,  as  Kuenen  points  out,  this  is  in  agree- 
ment with  other  parts  of  the  book.  Sufficient 
attention  has  not  yet  been  j)aid  to  the  question 
of  the  mtegrity  of  the  text.  The  Septuagint 
offers  a  few  emendations.f  There  are  other  pas- 
sages obviously  or  probably  corrupt,  t  The  text 
of  the  title,  as  we  have  seen,  is  uncertain,  and 

♦"Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1887,  210  ff. 

+  i.  II,  for  ^'(^i,  SeS6^a(TTai.  ;  perhaps  ii.  12,  "^y  for  iy  ; 
perhaps  iii.  8  fif.,  for  ]}2\>  2p])  ;   16,  for  tK,  toOto. 

ii.  II  ff.;  ii.  3,  and  perhaps  12,  ij- 


probably  a  later  addition.  Professor  Robertson 
Smith  has  called  attention  to  chap.  ii.  16,  where 
the  Massoretic  punctuation  seems  to  have  been 
determined  with  the  desire  to  support  the  render- 
ing of  the  Targum  "  if  thou  hatest  her  put  her 
away,"  and  so  pervert  into  a  permission  to  di- 
vorce a  passage  which  forbids  divorce  almost 
as  clearly  as  Christ  Himself  did.  But  in  truth 
the  whole  of  this  passage,  chap.  ii.  10-16,  is  in 
such  a  curious  state  that  we  can  hardly  believe 
in  its  integrity.  It  opens  with  the  statement  that 
God  is  the  Father  of  all  us  Israelites,  and  with 
the  challenge,  why  then  are  we  faithless  to  each 
other? — ver.  10.  But  vv.  11  and  12  do  not  give 
an  instance  of  this:  they  describe  the  marriages 
with  the  heathen  women  of  the  land,  which  is 
not  a  proof  of  faithlessness  between  Israelites. 
Such  a  proof  is  furnished  only  by  vv.  13-16,  with 
their  condemnation  of  those  who  divorce  the 
wives  of  their  youth.  The  verses,  therefore,  can- 
not lie  in  their  proper  order,  and  vv.  13-16  ought 
to  follow  immediately  upon  ver.  10.  This  raises 
the  question  of  the  authenticity  of  vv.  11  and  12, 
against  the  heathen  marriages.  If  they  bear  such 
plain  marks  of  having  been  intruded  into  their 
position,  we  can  understand  the  possibility  of_ 
such  an  intrusion  in  subsequent  days,  when  the' 
question  of  the  heathe/i  marriages  came  to  the 
front  with  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Besides,  these 
verses  1 1  and  12  lack  the  characteristic  mark  of  all 
the  other  oracles  of  the  book:  they  do  not  state  a 
general  charge  against  the  people,  and  then  in- 
troduce the  people's  question  as  to  the  particu- 
lars of  the  charge.  On  the  whole,  therefore, 
these  verses  are  suspicious.  If  not  a  later  in- 
trusion, they  are  at  least  out  of  place  where  they 
now  lie.  The  peculiar  remark  in  ver.  13,  "  and 
this  secondly  ye  do,"  must  have  been  added  by 
the  editor  to  whom  we  owe  the  present  arrange- 
ment. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

FROM   ZECHARIAH    TO  "  MALACHI." 

Between  the  completion  of  the  Temple  in  516 
and  the  arrival  of  Ezra  in  458,  we  have  almost 
no  record  of  the  little  colony  round  Mount  Zion. 
The  Jewish  chronicles  devote  to  the  period  but 
a  few  verses  of  unsupported  tradition.*  After 
517  we  have  nothing  from  Zechariah  himself; 
and  if  any  other  prophet  appeared  during  the 
next  half-century,  his  words  have  not  survived. 
We  are  left  to  infer  what  was  the  true  condition 
of  affairs,  not  less  from  this  ominous  silence 
than  from  the  hints  which  are  given  to  us  in  the 
writings  of  "Malachi,"  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  after 
the  period  was  over.  Beyond  a  partial  attempt 
to  rebuild  the  walls  of  the  city  in  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  I.,t  there  seems  to  have  been  nothing 

*  Ezra  iv.  6-23. 

+  This  is  recorded  in  the  Aramean  document  which  has 
been  incorporated  in  our  Book  of  Ezra,  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  its  reality.  In  that  document  we  have 
already  found,  in  spite  of  its  comparatively  late  date, 
much  that  is  accurate  history.  See  above,  p.  610.  And 
it  is  clear  that,  the  Temple  being  finished,  the  Jews  must 
have  drawn  upon  themselves  the  same  religious  envy  of 
the  Samaritans  which  had  previously  delayed  the  con- 
struction of  the  Temple.  To  meet  it,  what  more  natural 
than  that  the  Jews  should  have  attempted  to  raise  the 
walls  of  their  city?  It  is  almost  impossible  to  believe 
that  they  who  had  achieved  the  construction  of  the 
Temple  in  516  should  not,  in  the  next  fifty  years,  make 
some  effort  to  raise  their  fallen  walls.  And  indeed  Nehe- 
miah's  account  of  his  own  work  almost  necessarily  im- 


FROM    ZECHARIAH    TO    "  MALACHI." 


643 


to  record.  It  was  a  period  of  disillusion,  dis- 
heartening, and  decay.  The  completion  of  the 
Temple  did  not  bring  in  the  Messianic  era. 
Zerubbabel,  whom  Haggai  and  Zechariah  had 
crowned  as  the  promised  King  of  Israel,  died 
without  reaching  higher  rank  than  a  minor 
satrapy  in  the  Persian  Empire,  and  even  in  that 
he  appears  to  have  been  succeeded  by  a  Persian 
official.*  The  re-migrations  from  Babylon  and 
elsewhere,  which  Zechariah  predicted,  did  not 
take  place.  The  small  population  of  Jerusalem 
were  still  harassed  by  the  hostility,  and  their 
morale  sapped  by  the  insidiousness,  of  their 
Samaritan  neighbours:  they  were  denied  the 
stimulus,  the  purgation,  the  glory  of  a  great 
persecution.  Their  Persian  tyrants  for  the  most 
part  left  them  alone.  The  world  left  them  alone. 
Nothing  stirred  in  Palestine  except  the  Samar- 
itan intrigues.  History  rolled  away  westward, 
and  destiny  seemed  to  be  settling  on  the  Greeks. 
In  490  Miltiades  defeated  the  Persians  at  Mara- 
thon. In  480  Thermopylae  was  fought  and  the 
Persian  fleet  broken  at  Salamis.  In  479  a  Per- 
sian army  was  destroyed  at  Platoea,  and  Xerxes 
lost  Europe  and  most  of  the  Ionian  coast.  In 
460  Athens  sent  an  expedition  to  Egypt  to  assist 
the  Egyptian  revolt  against  Persia,  and  in  457 
"  her  slain  fell  in  Cyprus,  in  Egypt,  in  Phccnicia, 
at  Halite,  in  yEgina,  and  in  Megara  in  the  same 
year." 

Thus  severely  left  to  themselves  and  to  the 
petty  hostilities  of  their  neighbours,  the  Jews 
appear  to  have  sunk  into  a  careless  and  sordid 
manner  of  life.  They  entered  the  period,  it  is 
true,  with  some  sense  of  their  distinction.!  In 
exile  they  had  suffered  God's  anger,!:  and  had 
been  purged  by  it.  But  out  of  discipline  often 
springs  pride,  and  there  is  no  subtler  temptation 
of  the  human  heart.  The  returned  Israel  felt 
this  to  the  quick,  and  it  sorely  unfitted  them  for 
encountering  the  disappointment  and  hardship 
which  followed  upon  the  completion  of  the  Tem- 
ple. The  tide  of  hope,  which  rose  to  flood  with 
that  consummation,  ebbed  rapidly  away,  and  left 
God's  people  struggling,  like  any  ordinary  tribe 
of  peasants,  with  bad  seasons  and  the  cruelty  of 
their  envious  neighbours.  Their  pride  was  set 
on  edge,  and  they  fell,  not  as  at  other  periods 
of  disappointment  into  despair,  but  into  a  bitter 
carelessness  and  a  contempt  of  their  duty  to 
God.  This  was  a  curious  temper,  and,  so  far 
as  we  know,  new  in  Israel.  It  led  them  to  de- 
spise both  His  love  and  His  holiness. §  They 
neglected  their  Temple  dues,  and  impudently  pre- 
sented to  their  God  polluted  bread  and  blem- 
ished beasts  which  they  would  not  have  dared 
to  offer  to  their  Tersian  governor.!  Like  people 
like  priest:  the  priesthood  lost  not  reverence 
only,  but  decency  and  all  conscience  of  their 
office. T[  They  "  despised  the  Table  of  the  Lord," 
ceased  to  instruct  the  people,  and  grew  partial 
in  judgment.  As  a  consequence  they  became 
contemptible  in  the  eyes  of  the  community.  Im- 
morality prevailed  among  all  classes:  "every 
man    dealt    treacherously    with    his    brother."  ** 


plies  fhat  they  had  done  so,  for  what  he  did  after  445  was 
not  to  build  new  walls,  but  rather  to  repair  shattered 
ones. 

♦See  ahove,  p.  641,  «.,  and  below,  p.  646,  on  "Mai." 
i.  8. 

+  Cf.  Stade,  "  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,"  II.,  pp.  128-138, 
the  best  accour*  of  this  period. 

i  "  Mai."  iii.  14. 

§  "  Mai. "  i.  2,  6  ;  ii-   -  '  ^  Id.  i.  6f .,  ii. 

II  Id.  i.  7  f.,  i?-»~  **  Jd.  ii.  10. 


Adultery,  perjury,  fraud,  and  the  oppression  of 
the  poor  were  very  rife. 

One  particular  fashion,  in  which  the  people's 
wounded  pride  spited  itself,  was  the  custom  of 
marriage  which  even  the  best  families  contracted 
with  the  half-heathen  "  people  of  the  land." 
Across  Judah  there  were  scattered  the  descend- 
ants of  those  Jews  whom  Nebuchadrezzar  had 
not  deemed  worth  removing  to  Babylon. 
Whether  regarded  from  a  social  or  a  religious 
point  of  view,  their  fathers  had  been  the  dregs 
of  the  old  community.  Their  own  religion,  cut 
off  as  they  were  from  the  main  body  of  Israel 
and  scattered  among  the  old  heathen  shrines,  of 
the  land,  must  have  deteriorated  still  further; 
but  in  all  probability  they  had  secured  for  them- 
selves the  best  portions  of  the  vacant  soil,  and 
now  enjoyed  a  comfort  and  a  stability  of  wel- 
fare far  beyond  that  which  was  yet  attainable 
by  the  majority  of  the  returned  exiles.  More 
numerous  than  these  dregs  of  ancient  Jewry  were 
the  very  mixed  race  of  the  Samaritans.  They 
possessed  a  rich  land,  which  they  had  cultivated 
long  enough  for  many  of  their  families  to  be 
settled  in  comparative  wealth.  With  all  these 
half-pagan  Jews  and  Samaritans,  the  families  of 
the  true  Israel,  as  they  regarded  themselves,  did 
not  hesitate  to  form  alliances,  for  in  the  pre- 
carious position  of  the  colony,  such  alliances 
were  the  surest  way  both  to  wealth  and  to  po- 
litical influence.  How  much  the  Jews  were  mas- 
tered by  their  desire  for  them  is  seen  from  the 
fact  that,  when  the  relatives  of  their  half- 
heathen  brides  made  it  a  condition  of  the  mar- 
riages that  they  should  first  put  away  their  old 
wives,  they  readily  did  so.  Divorce  became  very 
frequent,  and  great  suffering  was  inflicted  on  the 
native  Jewish  women.* 

So  the  religious  condition  of  Israel  declined 
for  nearly  two  generations,  and  then  about  460 
the  Word  of  God,  after  long  silence,  broke  once 
more  through  a  prophet's  lips. 

We  call  this  prophet  "  Malachi,"  following  the 
error  of  an  editor  of  his  book,  who,  finding 
it  nameless,  inferred  or  invented  that  name  from 
its  description  of  the  priest  as  the  "  Male'ach," 
or  "messenger,  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts." f  But 
the  prophet  gave  himself  no  name.  Writing 
from  the  midst  of  a  poor  and  persecuted  group 
of  the  people,  and  attacking  the  authorities  both 
of  church  and  state,  he  preferred  to  publish  his 
charge  anonymously.  His  name  was  in  "  the 
Lord's  own  book  of  remembrance." t 

The  unknown  prophet  addressed  himself  both 
to  the  sinners  of  his  people  and  to  those  quer- 
ulous adherents  of  Jehovah  whom  the  success 
of  the  sinners  had  tempted  to  despair  in  their 
service  of  God.  His  style  shares  the  practical 
directness  of  his  predecessors  among  the  re- 
turned exiles.  He  takes  up  one  point  after  an- 
other, and  drives  them  home  in  a  series  of 
strong,  plain  paragraphs  of  prose.  But  it  is 
sixty  years  since  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  and  in 
the  circumstances  we  have  described,  a  prophet 
could  no  longer  come  forward  as  a  public  in- 
spirer  of  his  nation.  Prophecy  seems  to  have 
been  driven  from  public  life,  from  the  sudden 
enforcement  of  truth  in  the  face  of  the  people 
to  the  more  deliberate  and  ordered  argument 
which  marks  the  teacher  who  works  in  private. 
In  the  Book  of  "  Malachi  "  there  are  many  of 

*  "Mai."  ii.  10-16. 

+  For  proof  of  this  see  above,  pp.  640  f. 

i  "  Mai."  iii.  16. 


644 


THE   BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  principles  and  much  of  the  enthusiasm  of 
the  ancient  Hebrew  seer.  But  the  discourse  is 
broken  up  into  formal  paragi.iphs,  each  upon 
the  same  academic  model.  First  a  truth  is  pro- 
nounced, or  a  charge  made  against  the  people; 
then  with  the  words  "  but  ye  will  say "  the 
prophet  states  some  possible  objection  of  his 
hearers,  proceeds  to  answer  it  by  detailed  evi- 
dence, and  only  then  drives  home  his  truth,  or 
his  charge,  in  genuine  prophetic  fashion.  To 
the  student  of  prophecy  this  peculiarity  of  the 
book  is  of  the  greatest  interest,  for  it  is  no 
merely  personal  idiosyncrasy.  We  rather  feel 
that  prophecy  is  now  assuming  the  temper  of 
the  teacher.  The  method  is  the  commencement 
of  that  which  later  on  becomes  the  prevailing 
habit  in  Jewish  literature.  Just  as  with  Zeph- 
aniah  we  saw  prophecy  passing  into  Apocalypse, 
and  with  Habakkuk  into  the  speculation  of  the 
schools  of  Wisdom,  so  now  in  "  Malachi  "  we 
perceive  its  transformation  into  the  scholasti- 
cism of  the  Rabbis. 

But  the  interest  of  this  change  of  style  must 
not  prevent  us  from  appreciating  the  genuine 
prophetic  spirit  of  our  book.  Far  more  fully 
than,  for  instance,  that  of  Flaggai,  to  the  style 
of  which  its  practical  sympathy  is  so  akin,  it  enu- 
merates the  prophetic  principles:  the  everlasting 
Love  of  Jehovah  for  Israel,  the  Fatherhood  of 
Jehovah  and  His  Holiness,  His  ancient  Ideals 
for  Priesthood  and  People,  the  need  of  a  Re- 
pentance proved  by  deeds,  the  consequent  Prom- 
ise of  Prosperity,  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  and 
Judgment  between  the  evil  and  the  richteous. 
Upon  the  last  of  these  the  book  affords  a  strik- 
ing proof  of  the  delinquency  of  the  people  dur- 
ing the  last  haif-century,  and  in  connection  with 
it  the  prophet  introduces  certain  novel  features. 
To  Haggai  and  Zechariah  the  great  Tribulation 
had  closed  with  the  Exile  and  the  rebuilding  of 
the  Temple:  Israel  stood  on  the  margin  of  the 
Messianic  age.  But  the  Book  of  "  Malachi  " 
proclaims  the  need  of  another  judgment  as  em- 
phatically as  the  older  prophets  had  predicted 
the  Babylonian  doom.  "  Malachi  "  repeats  their 
name  for  it,  "  the  great  and  terrible  Day  of 
Jehovah."  But  he  does  not  foresee  it,  as  they 
did,  in  the  shape  of  a  historical  process.  His 
description  of  it  is  pure  Aoocalypse — "  the  fire 
of  the  smelter  and  the  fuller's  acid:  the  day 
that  burns  like  a  furnace,"  when  all  wickedness 
is  as  stubble,  and  all  evil  men  are  devoured, 
but  to  the  righteous  "  the  Sun  of  Righteous- 
ness shall  arise  with  healing  in  His  wings,"  and 
they  shall  tread  the  wicked  under  foot.*  To 
this  the  prophet  adds  a  novel  promise.  God 
is  so  much  the  God  of  Love,f  that  before  the 
Day  comes  He  will  give  Flis  people  an  oppor- 
tunity of  conversion.  He  will  send  them  Elijah 
the  prophet  to  change  their  hearts,  that  He  may 
be  prevented  from  striking  the  land  with  His 
Ban. 

In  one  other  point  the  book  is  original,  and 
that  is  in  its  attitude  towards  the  heathen. 
Among  the  heathen,  it  boldly  says,  Jehovah  is 
held  in  higher  reverence  than  among  His  own 
people. i:  In  such  a  statement  we  can  hardly 
fail  to  feel  the  influence  uoon  Israel  of  their 
contact,  often  close  and  personal,  with  their  wise 
and  mild  tyrants  the  Persians.  We  may  em- 
phasise the  verse  as  the  first  note  of  that  recog- 
nition of  the  real   religiousness   of  the  heathen, 


iii.  2, 19  ff.  Heb.,  iv.  i  ff.  Eng. 


Ji.  II. 


which  we  shall  find  swelling  to  such  fulness  and 
tenderness  in  the  Book  of  Jonah. 

Such  are  in  brief  the  style  and  the  principles 
of  the  Book  of  "  Malachi,"  whose  separate 
prophecies  we  may  now  proceed  to  take  up  in 
detail. 


CHAPTER  XXVL 

PROPHECY  WITHIN  THE  LAW. 

"  Malachi  "   i.-iv. 

Beneath  this  title  we  may  gather  all  the 
eight  sections  of  the  Book  of  "  Malachi."  They 
contain  many  things  of  perennial  interest  and 
validity:  their  truth  is  applicable,  their  music 
is  still  musical,  to  ourselves.  But  their  chief 
significance  is  historical.  They  illustrate  the  de- 
velopment of  prophecy  within  the  Law.  Not 
under  the  Law,  be  it  observed.  For  if  one  thing 
be  more  clear  than  another  about  "  Malachi's  " 
teaching,  it  is  that  the  spirit  of  prophecy  is  not 
yet  crushed  by  the  legalism  which  finally  killed 
it  within  Israel.  "  Malachi  "  observes  and  en- 
forces the  demands  of  the  Deuteronomic  law 
under  which  his  people  had  lived  since  the  Re- 
turn from  Exile.  But  he  traces  each  of  these 
to  some  spiritual  principle,  to  some  essential  of 
religion  in  the  character  of  Israel's  God,  which 
is  either  doubted  or  neglected  by  his  contem- 
poraries in  their  lax  performance  of  the  Law. 
That  is  why  we  may  entitle  his  book  Prophecy 
within  the  Law. 

The  essential  principles  of  the  religion  of 
Israel  which  had  been  shaken  or  obscured  by 
the  delinquency  of  the  people  during  the  half- 
century  after  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple  were 
three — the  distinctive  Love  of  Jehovah  for  His 
people.  His  Floliness,  and  His  Righteousness. 
The  Book  of  "  Malachi  "  takes  up  each  of  these 
in  turn,  and  proves  or  enforces  it  according  as 
the  people  have  formally  doubted  it  or  in  their 
carelessness  done  it  de^ite. 

I.  God's  Love  for  Israel  and  Hatred  of 

Edo.m  (Chap.  i.  2-5). 

He  begins  with  God's  Love,  and  in  answer 
to  the  disappointed  *  people's  cry,  "  Wherein 
hast  Thou  loved  us?"  he  does  not,  as  the  older 
prophets  did,  sweep  the  whole  history  of  Israel, 
and  gather  proofs  of  Jehovah's  grace  and  unfail- 
ing guidance  in  all  the  great  eVents  from  the 
deliverance  from  Egypt  to  the  deliverance  from 
Babylon.  But  he  confines  himself  to  a  com- 
parison of  Israel  with  the  Gentile  nation  which 
was  most  akin  to  Israel  according  to  the  flesh, 
their  own  brother  Edom.  It  is  possible,  of 
course,  to  see  in  this  a  proof  of  our  prophet's 
narrowness,  as  contrasted  with  Amos  or  Hosea 
or  the  great  Evangelist  of  the  Exiie.  But  we 
must  remember  that  out  of  ail  the  history  of 
Israel  "  Malachi  "  could  not  have  chosen  an  in- 
stance which  would  more  strong. y  appeal  to  the 
heart  of  his  contemporaries.  We  have  seen  from 
the  Book  of  Obadiah  how  ever  since  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Exile  Edom  had  come  to  be 
regarded  by  Israel  as  their  great  antithesis.!     If 

*  See  above,  p.  043. 

+  See  above,  chapter  xiv.  on  "  Edom  and  Israel." 


Malachi  i.-iv.] 


PROPHECY    WITHIN    THE    LAW. 


645 


we  needed  further  proof  of  this  we  should  find 
it  in  many  Psalms  of  the  Exile,  which  like  the 
Book  of  Obadiah  remember  with  bitterness  the 
hostile  part  that  Edom  played  in  the  day  of 
Israel's  calamity.  The  two  nations  were  utterly 
opposed  in  genius  and  character.  Edom  was 
a  people  of  as  unspiritual  and  self-sufficient  a 
temper  as  ever  cursed  any  of  God's  human 
creatures.  Like  their  ancestor  they  were  "  pro- 
fane," *  without  repentance,  humility,  or  ideals, 
and  almost  without  religion.  Apart,  therefore, 
from  the  long  history  of  war  between  the  two 
peoples,  it  was  a  true  instinct  which  led  Israel 
to  regard  their  brother  as  representative  of  that 
heathendom  against  which  they  had  to  realise 
their  destiny  in  the  world  as  God's  own  nation. 
In  choosing  the  contrast  of  Edom's  fate  to  illus- 
trate Jehovah's  love  for  Israel,  "  Malachi  "  was 
not  only  choosing  what  would  appeal  to  the  pas- 
sions of  his  contemporaries,  but  what  is  the 
most  striking  and  constant  antithesis  in  the  whole 
history  of  Israel:  the  absolutely  diverse  genius 
and  destiny  of  these  two  Semitic  nations  who 
were  nearest  neighbours  and,  according  to  their 
traditions,  twin-brethren  after  the  flesh.  If  we 
keep  this  in  mind  we  shall  understand  Paul's 
use  of  the  antithesis  in  the  passage  in  which 
he  clenches  it  by  a  quotation  from  "  Malachi  "  : 
"  as  it  is  written,  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau 
have  I  hated."  f  In  thes^  words  the  doctrine 
of  the  Divine  election  of  individuals  appears  to 
be  expressed  as  absolutely  as  possible.  But  it 
would  be  unfair  to  read  the  passage  except  in 
the  light  of  Israel's  history.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment it  is  a  matter  of  fact  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  Divine  preference  of  Israel  to  Esau  ap- 
peared only  after  the  respective  characters  of  the 
nations  were  manifested  in  history,  and  that  it 
grew  more  defined  and  absolute  only  as  history 
discovered  more  of  the  fundamental  contrast 
between  the  two  in  genius  and  destiny.:^  In  the 
Old  Testament,  therefore,  the  doctrine  is  the 
result,  not  of  an  arbitrary  belief  in  God's  bare 
fiat,  but  of  historical  experience;  although,  of 
course,  the  distinction  which  experience  proves 
is  traced  back,  with  everything  else  of  good  or 
evil  that  happens,  to  the  sovereign  will  and  pur- 
pose of  God.  Nor  let  us  forget  that  the  Old 
Testament  doctrine  of  election  is  of  election  to 
service  only.  That  is  to  say,  the  Divine  intention 
in  electing  covers  not  the  elect  individual  or 
nation  only,  but  the  whole  world  and  its  needs 
of  God  and  His  truth. 

The  event  to  which  "  Malachi  "  appeals  as  evi- 
dence for  God's  rejection  of  Edom  is  "  the  deso- 
lation of  "  the  latter's  ancient  "  heritage,  and  " 
the  abandonment  of  it  to  the  "  jackals  of  the 
desert."  Scholars  used  to  think  that  these  vague 
phrases  referred  to  some  act  of  the  Persian 
kings:  some  removal  of  the  Edomit«s  from  the 
lands  of  the  Jews  in  order  to  make  room  for 
the  returned  exiles. §  But  "  Malachi  "  says  ex- 
pressly that  it  was  Edom's  own  "  heritage  " 
which  was  laid  desolate.  This  can  only  be  Mount 
Esau  or  Se'ir,  and  the  statement  that  it  was 
delivered  "  to  the  jackals  of  the  desert  "  proves 
that  the  reference  is  to  that  same  expulsion  of 

*  Heb.  xii.  16. 

t  Romans  ix.   13.    The  citation  is  from  the  LXX.:  tov 

'laKilifi  >jyaffi)<Ta,  Tov  6e  'HcraC  e/xio-Tjera. 

tThis  was  mainly  "after"  the  beginning  of  exile. 
Shortly  before  that  Dent,  xxiii.  7  says:  "Thou  shalt  not 
abhor  an  Edomite,  for  he  is  thy  brother." 

§So  even  so  recently  as  1888,  Stade,  "Gesch.  des  Volkes 
Israel,"  II.  p.  112. 


Edom  from  their  territory  by  the  Nabatean 
Arabs  which  we  have  already  seen  the  Book 
of  Obadiah  relate  about  the  beginning  of  the 
Exile.* 

But  it  is  now  time  to  give  in  full  the  opening 
passage  of  "  Malachi,"  in  which  he  appeals  to 
this  important  event  as  proof  of  God's  distinctive 
love  for  Israel,  and,  "  Malachi  "•  adds,  of  His 
power  beyond  Israel's  border  ("  Mai."  chap. 
i-  2-5). 

"  I  have  loved  you,  saith  Jehovah.  But  ye 
say,  '  Wherein  hast  Thou  loved  us?  '  Is  not 
Esau  brother  to  Jacob? — oracle  of  Jehovah — 
and  I  have  loved  Jacob  and  Esau  have  I  hated. 
I  have  made  his  mountains  desolate,  and  given 
his  heritage  to  the  jackals  of  the  desert.  Should 
the  people  of  Edom  say,  f  '  We  are  destroyed, 
but  we  will  rebuild  the  waste  places.'  thus  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts,  They  may  build,  but  I  will 
pull  down:  men  shall  call  them  'The  Border  of 
Wickedness  '  and  '  The  People  with  whom  Je- 
hovah is  wroth  for  ever.'  And  your  eyes  shall 
see  it,  and  yourselves  shall  say,  '  Great  is  Je- 
hovah beyond  Israel's  border.'  " 

2.  "Honour  Thy  Father"  (Chap.  i.  6-14). 

From  God's  Love,  which  Israel  have  doubted, 
the  prophet  passes  to  His  Majesty  or  Holiness, 
which  they  have  wronged.  Now  it  is  very  re- 
markable that  the  relation  of  God  to  the  Jews 
in  which  the  prophet  should  see  His  Majesty 
illustrated  is  not  only  His  lordship  over  them 
but  His  Fatherhood:  "A  son  honours  a  father, 
and  a  servant  his  lord;  but  if  I  be  Father, 
where  is  My  honour?  and  if  I  be  Lord,  where 
is  there  reverence  for  Me?  saith  Jehovah  of 
Hosts."  ^:  We  are  so  accustomed  to  associate 
with  the  Divine  Fatherhood  only  ideas  of  love 
and  pity  that  the  use  of  the  relation  to  illus- 
trate not  love  but  Majesty,  and  the  setting  of 
it  in  parallel  to  the  Divine  Kingship,  may  seem 
to  us  strange.  Yet  this  was  very  natural  to 
Israel.  In  the  old  Semitic  world,  even  to  the 
human  parent,  honour  was  due  before  love. 
"  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother,"  said  the 
Fifth  Commandment;  and  when,  after  long  shy- 
ness to  do  so,  Israel  at  last  ventured  to  claim 
Jehovah  as  the  Father  of  His  people,  it  was 
at  first  rather  with  the  view  of  increasing  their 
sense  of  His  authority  and  their  duty  of  rever- 
encing Him,  than  with  the  view  of  bringing  Him 
near  to  their  hearts  and  assuring  them  of  His 
tenderness.  The  latter  elements,  it  is  true,  were 
not  absent  from  the  conception.  But  even  in 
the  Psalter,  in  which  we  find  the  most  inti- 
mate and  tender  fellowship  of  the  believer  with 
God,  there  is  only  one  passage  in  which  His 
love  for  His  own  is  compared  to  the  love  of 
a  human  father.§  And  in  the  other  very  few 
passages  of  the  Old  Testament  where  He  is  re- 
vealed or  appealed  to  as  the  Father  of  the  na- 

*  See  above,  p.  600.  This  interpretation  is  there  said  to 
be  Wellhausen's  ;  but  Cheyne,  inanote  contributed  to  the 
"  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1894,  p.  142,  points  out  that  Gratz,  in  an 
article  "  Die  Anfange  der  Nabataer-Herrschaft "  in  the 
"  Monatschrift  fur  Wissenschaft  u.  Geschichte  des  Juden- 
thums,"  187.S,  pp.  60-66,  had  already  explained  "Mal."i.  1-5 
as  describing  the  conquest  of  Edom  by  the  Nabateans. 
This  is  adopted  by  Buhl  in  his  "  Gesch.  der  Edomiter,"  p. 
79- 

+  The  verb  in  the  feminine  indicates  that  the  population 
of  Edom  is  meant. 

Ji.  6. 

§  Psalm  ciii.  o.  In  Psalm  Ixxiii.  15  believers  are  called 
"His  children  ;  but  elsewhere  sonship  is  claimed  only 
for  the  king— ii.  7,  Ixxxix.  27  f . 


646 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


tion,  it  is,  with  two  exceptions,*  in  order  either 
to  emphasise  His  creation  of  Israel  or  His  dis- 
cipline. So  in  Jeremiah,!  and  in  an  anonymous 
prophet  of  the  same  period  perhaps  as  "  Mala- 
chi."t  This  hesitation  to  ascribe  to  God  the 
name  of  Father,  and  this  severe  conception  of 
what  Fatherhood  meant,  was  perhaps  needful 
for  Israel  in  face  of  the  sensuous  ideas  of 
the  Divine  Fatherhood  cherished  by  their 
heathen  neighbours.^  But,  however  this  may 
be,  the  infrequency  and  austerity  of  Israel's  con- 
ception of  God's  Fatherhood,  in  contrast  with 
that  of  Christianity,  enables  us  to  understand 
why  "  Malachi  "  should  employ  the  relation  as 
proof,  not  of  the  Love,  but  of  the  Majesty  and 
Holiness   of  Jehovah. 

This  Majesty  and  this  Holiness  have  been 
wronged,  he  says,  by  low  thoughts  of  God's 
altar,  and  by  offering  upon  it,  with  untroubled 
conscience,  cheap  and  blemished  sacrifices.  The 
people  would  have  been  ashamed  to  present  such 
to  their  Persian  governor:  how  can  God  be 
pleased  with  them?  Better  that  sacrifice  should 
cease  than  that  such  offerings  should  be  pre- 
sented in  such'a  spirit!  "  Is  there  no  one,"  cries 
the  prophet,  "  to  close  the  doors  "  of  the  Temple 
altogether,  so  that  "  the  altar  "  smoke  not  "  in 
vain?  " 

The  passage  shows  us  what  a  change  has 
passed  over  the  spirit  of  Israel  since  prophecy 
first  attacked  the  sacrificial  ritual.  We  remem- 
ber how  Amos  would  have  swept  it  all  away 
as  an  abomination  to  God.||  So,  too,  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah.  But  their  reason  for  this  was  very 
different  from  "  Malachi's."  Their  contempo- 
raries were  assiduous  and  lavish  in  sacrificing, 
and  were  devoted  to  the  Temple  and  the  ritual 
with  a  fanaticism  which  made  them  forget  that 
Jehovah's  demands  upon  His  people  were  right- 
eousness and  the  service  of  the  weak.  But 
"  Malachi  "  condemns  his  generation  for  depre- 
ciating the  Temple,  and  for  being  stingy  and 
fraudulent  in  their  offerings.  Certainly  the  post- 
exilic  prophet  assumes  a  different  attitude  to 
the  ritual  from  that  of  his  predecessors  in  an- 
cient Israel.  They  wished  it  all  abolished,  and 
placed  the  chief  duties  of  Israel  towards  God 
in  civic  justice  and  mercy.  But  he  emphasises 
it  as  the  first  duty  of  the  people  towards  God, 
and  sees  in  their  neglect  the  reason  of  their  mis- 
fortunes and  the  cause  of  their  coming  doom. 
In  this  change  which  has  come  over  prophecy 
we  must  admit  the  growing  influence  of  the  Law. 
From  Ezekiel  onwards  the  prophets  become 
more  ecclesiastical  and  legal.  And  though  at 
first  they  do  not  become  less  ethical,  yet  the 
influence  which  was  at  work  upon  them  was  of 
such  a  character  as  was  bound  in  time  to  en- 
gross their  interest,  and  lead  them  to  remit  the 
ethical  elements  of  their  religion  to  a  place  sec- 
ondary to  the  ceremonial.  We  see  symptoms  of 
this  even  in  "  Malachi,"  we  shall  find  more  in 
Joel,  and  we  know  how  aggravated  these  symp- 
toms afterwards  became  in  all  the  leaders  of 
Jewish  religion.  At  the  same  time  we  ought 
to  remember  that  this  change  of  emphasis,  which 

*  Hosea  xi.  i  ff.  (though  even  here  the  idea  of  discipline 
is  present)  and  Isa.  Ixiii.  16. 

t  iii.  4. 

t  Isa.  Ixiv.  8,  cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  ir  where  the  discipline  of 
Israel  by  Jehovah,  shaking  them  out  of  their  desert  cir- 
cumstance and  tempting  them  to  their  great  career  in 
Palestine,  is  likened  to  the  father-eagle's  training  of  his 
new-Hedged  brood  to  fly  :  A.  V.  mother-eagle. 

$  Cf.  Cheyne,  "  Origin  of  the  Psalter,"  p.  305,  n.  O. 

I  Page  481  ff . 


many  will  think  to  be  for  the  worse,  was  largely 
rendered  necessary  by  the  change  of  temper  in 
the  people  to  whom  the  prophets  ministered. 
"  Malachi  "  found  among  his  contemporaries  a 
habit  of  religious  performance  which  was  not 
only  slovenly  and  indecent,  but  mean  and  fraud- 
ulent, and  it  became  his  first  practical  duty  to 
attack  this.  Moreover  the  neglect  of  the  Temple 
was  not  due  to  those  spiritual  conceptions  of 
Jehovah  and  those  moral  duties  He  demanded, 
in  the  interests  of  which  the  older  prophets  had 
condemned  the  ritual.  At  bottom  the  neglect 
of  the  Temple  was  due  to  the  very  same  reasons 
as  the  superstitious  zeal  and  fanaticism  in  .sac- 
rificing which  the  older  prophets  had  attacked 
— false  ideas,  namely,  of  God  Himself,  and  of 
what  was  due  to  Him  from  His  people.  And 
on  these  grounds,  therefore,  we  may  say  that 
"  Malachi  "  was  performing  for  his  generation 
as  needful  and  as  Divine  a  work  as  Amos  and 
Isaiah  had  performed  for  theirs.  Only,  be  it 
admitted,  the  direction  of  "  Malachi's "  em- 
phasis was  more  dangerous  for  religion  than 
that  of  the  emphasis  of  Amos  or  Isaiah.  How 
liable  the  practice  he  inculcated  was  to  exag- 
geration and  abuse  is  sadly  proved  in  the  later 
history  of  his  people:  it  was  against  that  exag- 
geration, grown  great  and  obdurate  through 
three  centuries,  that  Jesus  delivered  His  most 
unsparing  words. 

"  A  son  honours  a  father,  and  a  servant  his 
lord.  But  if  I  am  Father,  where  is  My  honour? 
and  if  I  am  Lord,  where  is  reverence  for  Me? 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts  to  you,  O  priests,  who 
despise  My  Name.  Ye  say,  '  How '  then 
'have  we  despised  Thy  Name?'  Ye  are  bring- 
ing polluted  food  to  Mine  Altar.  Ye  say,  '  How 
have  we  polluted  Thee?  '  *  By  saying,t  '  The 
Table  of  Jehovah  may  be  despised  '  ;  and  when 
ye  bring  a  blind  heast  to  sacrifice,  '  No 
harml't  Pray,  take  it  to  thy  Satrap:  will  h«. 
be  pleased  with  thee,  or  accept  thy  person?  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts.  But  now,  propitiate^  God, 
that  He  may  be  gracious  to  us.  When  things 
lik£  this  come  from  your  hands  can  He  ac- 
cept your  persons?  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 
Who  is  there  among  you  to  close  the  doors  " 
of  the  Temple  altogether,  "  that  ye  kindle  not 
Mine  Altar  in  vain?  I  have  no  pleasure  in  you, 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  and  I  will  not  accept  an 
offering  from  your  hands.  For  from  the  rising 
of  the  sun  and  to  its  setting  My  Name  is  glori- 
fied |  among  the  nations;  and  in  every  sacred 
place  ^  incense  is  offered  to  My  Name,  and  a 
pure  offering:  **  for  great  is  My  Name  among 
the   nations,    saith  Jehovah   of   Hosts.      But   ye 


*Or  used  polluted  things  with  respect  to  Thee.  For 
similar  construction  see  Zech.  vii.  5 :  'JIDOX.  This  in 
answer  to    Wellhausen,   who,   on    the  ground    that  the 

phrase  gives  pKJ  a  wrong  object  and  destroys  the  connec- 
tion, deletes  it.  Further  he  takes  7X30,  not  in  the  sense 
of  pollution,  but  as  equivalent  to  riDJ.   "  despised." 

+  Obviously  "  in  their  hearts  -  thinking." 

i  LXX.  "  is  there  no  harm  ? " 

i  "  Pacify  the  face  of,"  as  in  Zechariah. 

II  So  LXX.  Heb.  "  is  great,"  but  the  phrase  is  probably 
written  by  mistake  from  the  instance  further  on:  "is 
glorified"  could  scarcely  have  been  used  in  the  very 
literal  version  of  the  LXX.  unless  it  had  been  found  in  the 
original. 

^  DIpO.  here  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  it  bears  in  Arabic 
of  "  sacred  place."     See  on  Zeph.  ii.  11  :  above,  576,  «. 

**  Wellhausen  deletes  tJ>JO  as  a  gloss  on  lOpD.  and  th» 
vau  before  nnjlO. 


Malachi  i.-iv.] 


PROPHECY   WITHIN    THE    LAW. 


647 


are  profaning  it,  in  that  ye  think  *  that  the  Table 
of  the  Lord  is  polluted,  andf  its  food  contempt- 
ible. And  ye  say.  What  a  weariness!  and  ye 
sniff  at  it, I  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  When  ye 
bring  what  has  been  plundered,^  and  the  lame 
and  the  diseased,  yea,  when  ye  so  bring 
an  offering,  can  I  accept  it  with  grace  from 
your  hands?  saith  Jehovah.  Cursed  be  the  cheat 
in  whose  fiock  is  a  male  beast  and  he  vows 
it,|  and  slays  for  the  Lord  a  miserable  beast. ■[ 
For  a  great  King  am  I,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts, 
and  My  Name  is  reverenced  among  the  na- 
tions." 

Before  we  pass  from  this  passage  we  must 
notice  in  it  one  very  remarkable  feature — per- 
haps the  most  original  contribution  which  the 
Book  of  "  Malachi  "  makes  to  the  development 
of  prophecy.  In  contrast  to  the  irreverence  of 
Israel  and  the  wrong  they  do  to  Jehovah's  Holi- 
ness, He  Himself  asserts  that  not  only  is  "  His 
Name  great  and  glorified  among  the  heathen, 
from  the  rising  to  the  setting  of  the  sun,"  but 
that  "  in  every  sacred  place  incense  and  a  pure 
offering  are  offered  to  His  Name."  This  is 
po  novel  a  statement,  and,  we  may  truly  say, 
so  startling,  that  it  is  not  wonderful  that  the 
attempt  should  have  been  made  to  interpret  it, 
not  of  the  prophet's  own  day,  but  of  the  Mes- 
sianic age  and  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  So,  many 
of  the  Christian  Fathers,  from  Justin  and  Ire- 
naeus  to  Theodoret  and  Augustine;**  so, our  own 
Authorised  Version,  which  boldly  throws  the 
verbs  into  the  future;  and  so,  many  modern  in- 
terpreters like  Pusey,  who  declares  that  the  style 
is  "  a  vivid  present  such  as  is  often  used  to 
describe  the  future;  but  the  things  spoken  of 
^ow  it  to  be  future."  All  these  take  the  pas- 
sage to  be  an  anticipation  of  Christ's  parables 
declaring  the  rejection  of  the  Jews  and  ingather- 
ing of  the  Gentiles  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
and  of  the  argument  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, that  the  bleeding  and  defective  offerings 
of  the  Jews  were  abrogated  by  the  sacrifice  of 
the  Cross.  But  such  an  exegesis  is  only  possible 
by  perverting  the  text  and  misreading  the  whole 
argument  of  the  prophet.  Not  only  are  the 
verbs  of  the  original  in  the  present  tense — so 
also  in  the  early  versions — but  the  prophet  is 
obviously  contrasting  the  contempt  of  God's  own 
people  for  Himself  and  His  institutions  with  the 
rtiverence  paid  to  His  Name  among  the  heathen. 
It  is  not  the  mere  question  of  there  being  right- 
eous people  in  every  nation,  well-pleasing  to  Je- 
hovah because  of  their  lives.  The  very  sacri- 
fices of  the  heathen  are  pure  and  acceptable  to 
Him.  Never  have  we  had  in  prophecy,  even 
the  most  far-seeing  and  evangelical,  a  statement 
so  generous  and  so  catholic  as  this.  Why  it 
should  appear  only  now  in  the  history  of  proph- 
ecy is  a  question  we  are  unable  to  answer  with 
certainty.     Many   have  seen  in   it  the   result  of 

*  Heb.  "  say." 

+  Heb.  also  has  1TJ,  found  besides  only  in  Keri  of  Isa. 
Ivii.  19.  But  Robertson  Smith  (•'  O.  T.  J.  C,"  2,  p.  444I  is 
probably  right  in  considering  this  an  error  for  HT^J. 
which  has  kept  its  place  after  the  correction  was  inserted. 

t  This  clause  is  obscure,  and  comes  in  awkwardly 
before  that  which  follows  it.     Wellhausen  omits. 


8  b^n 


§  •'lis.     Wellhausen  emends   iW'^  "v.'    borrowing  the 
ferst  three  letters  from  the  previous  word.    LXX.  apjraY- 

ftATa. 
II  LXX. 

^  Cf.  Lev.  iii.  i,  6. 
•*  Quoted  by  Pusey,  in  loco. 


Israel's  intercourse  with  their  tolerant  and  re- 
ligious masters  the  Persians.  None  of  the  Per- 
sian kings  had  up  to  this  time  persecuted  the 
Jews,  and  numbers  of  pious  and  large-minded 
Israelites  must  have  had  opportunity  of  acquaint- 
ance with  the  very  pure  doctrines  of  the  Persian 
religion,  among  which  it  is  said  that  there  was 
already  numbered  the  recognition  of  true  piety 
in  men  of  all  religions.*  If  Paul  derived  from 
his  Hellenic  culture  the  knowledge  which  made 
it  possible  for  him  to  speak  as  he  did  in  Athens 
of  the  religiousness  of  the  Gentiles,  it  was  ju.st 
as  probable  that  Jews  who  had  come  within 
the  experience  of  a  still  purer  Aryan  faith  should 
utter  an  even  more  emphatic  acknowledgment 
that  the  One  True  God  had  those  who  served 
Him  in  spirit  and  in  truth  all  over  the  world. 
But,  whatever  foreign  influences  may  have  rip- 
ened such  a  faith  in  Israel,  we  must  not  forget 
that  its  roots  were  struck  deep  in  the  native 
soil  of  their  religion.  From  the  first  they  had 
known  their  God  as  a  God  of  grace  so  infinite 
that  it  was  impossible  it  should  be  exhausted 
on  themselves.  If  His  righteousness,  as  Amos 
showed,  was  over  all  the  Syrian  states,  and  His 
pity  and  His  power  to  convert,  as  Isaiah  showed, 
covered  even  the  cities  of  Phoenicia,  the  great 
Evangelist  of  the  Exile  could  declare  that  He 
quenched  not  the  smoking  wicks  of  the  dim 
heathen  faiths. 

As  interesting,  however,  as  the  origin  of 
"  Malachi's  "  attitude  to  the  heathen,  are  two 
other  points  about  it.  In  the  first  place,  it  is 
remarkable  that  it  should  occur,  especially  in 
the  form  of  emphasising  the  purity  of  heathen 
sacrifices,  in  a  book  which  lays  such  heavy  stress 
upon  the  Jewish  Temple  and  ritual.  This  is 
a  warning  to  us  not  to  judge  harshly  the  so- 
called  legal  age  of  Jewish  religion,  nor  to  de- 
spise the  prophets  who  have  come  under  the 
influence  of  the  Law.  And  in  the  second  place, 
we  perceive  in  this  statement  a  step  towards  the 
fuller  acknowledgment  of  Gentile  religiousness 
which  we  find  in  the  Book  of  Jonah.  It  is 
strange  that  none  of  the  post-exilic  Psalms  strike 
the  same  note.  They  often  predict  the  conver- 
sion of  the  heathen;  but  they  do  not  recognise 
their  native  reverence  and  piety.  Perhaps  the 
reason  is  that  in  a  body  of  song,  collected  for 
the  national  service,  such  a  feature  would  be  out 
of  place. 

3.  The  Priesthood  of  Knowledge 
(Chap.  ii.   1-9). 

In  the  third  section  of  his  book  "  Malachi  " 
addresses  himself  to  the  priests.  He  charges 
them  not  only  with  irreverence  and  slovenliness 
in  their  discharge  of  the  Temple  service — for 
this  he  appears  to  intend  by  the  phrase  "  filth 
of  your  feasts  " — but  with  the  neglect  of  their 
intellectual  duties  to  the  people.  "  The  lips  of 
a  priest  guard  knowledge,  and  men  seek  instruc- 
tion from  his  mouth,  for  he  is  the  Angel  " — 
the  revealing  Angel — "  of  Jehovah  of  Hosts." 
Once  more,  what  a  remarkable  saying  to  come 
from  the  legal  age  of  Israel's  religion,  and  from 
a  writer  who  so  emphasises  the  ceremonial  law! 
In  all  the  range  of  prophecy  there  is  not  any 
more  in  harmony  with  the  prophetic  ideal.  How 
needed  it  is  in  our  own  age! — needed  against 
those  two  extremes  of  religion  from  which  we 
suffer,   the   limitation  of  the   ideal   of  priesthood 

*  See  Cheyne,  "  Origin  of  the  Psalter,"  29a  and  y>s  £. 


648 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


to  the  communication  of  a  magic  grace,  and 
its  evaporation  in  a  vague  religiosity  from  which 
the  intellect  is  excluded  as  if  it  were  perilous, 
worldly,  and  devilish.*  "  Surrender  of  the  in- 
tellect "  indeed!  This  is  the  burial  of  the  talent 
in  the  napkin,  and,  as  in  the  parable  of  Christ, 
it  is  still  in  our  day  preached  and  practised  by 
the  men  of  one  talent.  Religion  needs  all  the 
brains  we  poor  mortals  can  put  into  it.  There 
is  a  priesthood  of  knowledge,  a  priesthood  of 
the  intellect,  says  "  Malachi,"  and  he  makes  this 
a  large  part  of  God's  covenant  with  Levi. 
Every  priest  of  God  is  a  priest  of  truth;  and 
it  is  very  largely  by  the  Christian  ministry's 
neglect  of  their  intellectual  duties  that  so  much 
irreligion  prevails.  As  in  "  Malachi's  "  day,  so 
now,  "  the  laity  take  hurt  and  hindrance  by  our 
negligence."  t  And  just  as  he  points  out,  so 
with  ourselves,  the  consequence  is  the  growing 
indifYerence  with  which  large  bodies  of  the 
Christian  ministry  are  regarded  by  the  thought- 
ful portions  both  of  our  labouring  and  profes- 
sional classes.  Were  the  ministers  of  all  the 
Churches  to  awake  to  their  ideal  in  this  inatter, 
there  would  surely  come  a  very  great  revival  of 
religion  among  us. 

"And  now  this  Charge  for  you,  O  priests: 
If  ye  hear  not,  and  lay  not  to  heart  to  give  glory 
to  My  Name,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  I  will 
send  upon  you  the  curse,  and  will  curse  your 
blessings — yea,  I  have  cursed  them  t — for  none 
of  you  layeth  it  to  heart.  Behold,  I  .  .  .  you 
.  .  .§  and  I  will  scatter  filth  in  your  faces,  the 
filth  of  your  feasts.  .  .  .||  And  ye  shall  know 
that  I  have  sent  to  you  this  Charge,  to  be  My 
covenant  with  Levi,*]!  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 
My  covenant  was  with  him  life  and  peace**  and 
I  gave  them  to  him,  fear  and  he  feared  Me, 
and  humbled  himself  before  My  Name. ft  The 
revelation  of  truth  was  in  his  mouth,  and  wicked- 
ness was  not  found  upon  his  lips.  In  whole- 
heartedness  tt  and  integrity  he  walked  with  Me, 
and  turned  many  from  iniquity.     For  the  lips  of 

*  "  Isaiah  i.-xxxix."  (Expositor's  Bible):  p.  664. 

+  See  most  admirable  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Arch- 
deacon Wilson's  "  Essays  and  Addresses,"  No.  III.  "The 
Need  of  giving  Higher  Biblical  Teaching:,  and  Instruction 
on  the  Fundamental  Questions  of  Religion  and  Chris- 
tianity."    London  :  Macmillan,  1887. 

X  Doubtful.  LXX.  adds  Kal  6t6<TK66a<rw  rriv  eiiKoyiav  ii/auic 
(cal  ovK  eo-rat  ev  ii/aii' :  obvious  redundancy,  if  not  mere 
dittography. 

§  An  obscure  phrase,  V'^TH'^^*  D^t  ""^^  ^^^''^'  "  Behold, 
I  rebuke  you  the  seed."  LXX.  "Behold.  I  separate  from 
you  the  arm"  or  "shoulder,"  reading  >;"'.   for  Vj.'  and 

perhaps  ilr    for    'W'    both    of  which    readings    Well- 

hausen  adopts,  and  Ewald  the  former.  The  reference 
may  be  to  the  arm  of  the  priest  raised  in  blessing.  Orelli 
reads  "seed"  =  "posterity."  It  may  mean  the  whole 
"seed"  or  "class"  or  "kind  "of  the  priests.  The  next 
clause  tempts  one  to  suppose  that  y"ltn"riK  contains  the 
verb  of  this  one,  as  if  scattering  something. 

I  Heb.  ■>  Y^  '^5'??  ^^t\  "and  one  shall  bear  you  to 

it  "  Hitzig  ■  filth  shall  be  cast  on  them,  and  they  on  the 
filth. 

H  Others  would  render  "My  covenant  being  with  Levi." 
Wellhausen  :  "  for  My  covenant  was  with  Levi."  But 
this  new  Charge  or  covenant  seems  contrasted  with  a 
former  covenant  in  the  next  verse. 

**  Num.  XXV.  12. 

t+  This  sentence  is  a  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew. 
With  other  punctuation  Wellhausen  renders  "My  cove- 
nant was  with  him,  life  and  peace  I  gave  them  to  him, 
fear  ..."  ,    _ 

Jt  Or  peace'  DW* 


a  priest  guard  knowledge,  and  men  seek  in- 
struction *  from  his  mouth,  for  he  is  the  Angel 
of  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  But  ye  have  turned  from 
the  way,  ye  have  tripped  up  many  by  the  Torah, 
ye  have  spoiled  the  covenant  of  Levi,  saith  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts.  And  I  on  My  partf  have 
made  you  contemptible  to  all  the  people,  and 
abased  in  proportion  as  ye  kept  not  My  ways 
and  had  respect  of  persons  in  delivering  your 
Torah." 

4.  The  Cruelty  of  Divorce  (Chap.  ii.  10-17). 

In  his  fourth  section,  upon  his  countrymen's 
frequent  divorce  of  their  native  wives  in  order  to 
marry  into  the  influential  families  of  their  half- 
heathen  neighbours, t  "  Malachi  "  makes  another 
of  those  wide  and  spiritual  utterances  which  so 
distinguish  his  prophecy  and  redeem  his  age 
from  the  charge  of  legalism  that  is  so  often 
brought  against  it.  To  him  the  Fatherhood  of 
God  is  not  merely  a  relation  of  power  and 
authority,  requiring  reverence  from  the  nation. 
It  constitutes  the  members  of  the  nation  one 
close  brotherhood,  and  against  this  divorce  is. 
a  crime  and  unnatural  cruelty.  Jehovah  makes 
the  "  wife  of  a  man's  youth  his  mate  "  for  life 
"  and  his  wife  by  covenant."  He  "  hates  di- 
vorce," and  His  altar  is  so  wetted  by  the  tears 
of  the  wronged  women  of  Israel  that  the  gifts 
upon  it  are  no  more  acceptable  in  His  sight. 
No  higher  word  on  marriage  was  spoken  except 
by  Christ  Himself.  It  breathes  the  spirit  of  our 
Lord's  utterance:  if  we  were  sure  of  the  text 
of  ver.  15,  we  might  almost  say  that  it  antici- 
pated the  letter.  Certain  verses,  11-130,  which 
disturb  the  argument  by  bringing  in  the  mar- 
riages with  heathen  wives,  are  omitted  in  the 
following  translation,  and  will  be  given  sep- 
arately. 

"  Have  we  not  all  One  Father?  Hath  not 
One  God  created  us?  Why  then  are  we  unfaith- 
ful to  one  another,  profaning  the  covenant  of 
our  fathers?  .  .  .§  Ye  cover  with  tears  the 
altar  of  Jehovah,  with  weeping  and  with  groan- 
ing, because  respect  is  no  longer  had  to  the 
offering,  and  acceptable  gifts  are  not  taken  from 
your  hands.  And  ye  say,  '  Why?  '  Because  Je- 
hovah has  been  witness  between  thee  and  the 
wife  of  thy  youth,  with  whom  thou  hast  broken 
faith,  though  she  is  thy  mate||  and  thy  wife 
by  covenant.     And  .    .    .11   And  what  is  the  one 

■''  Or  "  revelation,"  Torah. 
f  VX'DJI  :  c/.  Amos  iv. 

tSee  above,  p.  643. 

§Here  occur  the  two  verses  and  a  clause,  ii-isa,  upon 
the  foreign  marriages,  which  seem  to  be  an  intrusion. 

i  See  p.  506. 

if  Heb.  literally  :  "  And  not  one  did,  and  a  remnant  of 
spirit  was  his"  ;  which  (i)  A.  V.  renders:  "And  did  not 
he  make  one  ?  Yet  he  had  the  residue  of  the  spirit." 
which  Pusey  accepts  and  applies  to  Adam  and  Eve,  inter- 
preting the  second  clause  as  "the  breath  of  life,"  by 
which  Adam  "  became  aliving  soul  "  (Gen.  ii.  7).  In  Gen. 
i.  27  Adam  and  Eve  are  called  one.  In  that  case  the 
meaning  would  be  that  the  law  of  marriage  was  prior  to 
that  of  divorce,  as  in  the  words  of  our  Lord,  Matt.  xix. 
4-6.  (2)  The  Hebrew  might  be  rendered,  "  Not  one  has 
done  this  who  had  any  spirit  left  in  him."  So  Hitzig  and 
Orelli.  In  that  case  the  following  clauses  of  the  verse 
are  referred  to  Abraham.  "But  what  about  the  One"? 
(LXX.  insert  "ye  say"  after  "But")— the  one  who  did 
put  away  his  wife.  Answer  :  "  He  was  seeking  a  Divine 
seed."  The  objection  to  this  interpretation  is  that  Abra- 
ham did  not  cast  off  the  wife  of  his  youth,  Sarah,  but  the 
foreigner  Hagar.  (3)  Ewald  made  a  very  different  pro- 
posal :  "  And  has  not  One  created  them,  and  all  the 
Spirit"  (cf.  Zeph.  i.  4)  "is  His?  And  what  doth  the  One 
seek?    A     Divine    seed."     So    Reinke.     Similarly    Kirk- 


Malachi  i.-iv.] 


PROPHECY   WITHIN    THE    LAW. 


649 


seeking?  A  Divine  Seed.  Take  heed,  then,  to 
your  spirit,  and  be  not  unfaithful  to  the  wife  of 
thy  youth.*  For  I  hate  divorce,  saith  Jehovah, 
God  of  Israel,  and  that  a  man  cover  his  cloth- 
ing f  with  cruelty,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  So 
take  heed  to  your  spirit,  and  deal  not  faith- 
lessly." 

The  verses  omitted  in  the  above  translation 
treat  of  the  foreign  marriages,  which  led  to  this 
frequent  divorce  by  the  Jews  of  their  native 
wives.  So  far,  of  course,  they  are  relevant  to 
the  subject  of  the  passage.  But  they  obviously 
disturb  its  argument,  as  already  pointed  out.| 
They  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  principle 
from  which  it  starts  that  Jehovah  is  the  Father 
of  the  whole  of  Israel.  Remove  them  and  the 
awkward  clause  in  ver.  13a,  by  which  some 
editor  has  tried  to  connect  them  with  the  rest 
of  the  paragraph,  and  the  latter  runs  smoothly. 
The  motive  of  their  later  addition  is  apparent, 
if  not  justifiable.  Here  they  are  by  them- 
selves:— 

"  Judah  was  fruitless,  and  abomination  was 
practised  in  Israel  §  and  in  Jerusalem,  for  Judah 
hath  defiled  the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  which  was 
dear  to  Him,  and  hath  married  the  daughter 
of  a  strange  god.  May  Jehovah  cut  oflf  from 
the  man  who  doeth  this  witness  and  champion  || 
from  the  tents  of  Jacob,  and  offerer  of  sacrifices 
to  Jehovah  of  Hosts."T[ 

5.  "  Where  is  the  God  of  Judgment?  " 
(Chap.  ii.   17-iii.  5). 

In  this  section  "  Malachi  "  turns  from  the  sin- 
ners of  his  people  to  those  who  weary  Jehovah 
with  the  complaint  that  sin  is  successful,  or, 
as  they  put  it,  "  Every  one  that  does  evil  is 
good  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah,  and  He  delighteth 
in  them  "  ;  and  again,  "  Where  is  the  God  of 
Judgment?  "  The  answer  is.  The  Lord  Him- 
self shall  come.  His  Angel  shall  prepare  His 
way  before  Him,  and  suddenly  shall  the  Lord 
come  to  His  Temple.  His  coming  shall  be  for 
judgment,  terrible  and  searching.  Its  first  ob- 
ject (note  the  order)  shall  be  the  cleansing  of 
the  priesthood,  that  proper  sacrifices  may  be 
established,  and  its  second  the  purging  of  the 
immorality  of  the  people.  Mark  that  although 
the  coming  of  the  Angel  is  said  to  precede 
that  of  Jehovah  Himself,  there  is  the  same  blend- 
ing of  the  two  as  we  have  seen  in  previous 
accounts  of  angels.**  It  is  uncertain  whether 
this  section  closes  w\th  ver.   5   or  6:   the  latter 

Patrick  ("  Doct.  of  the  Proph.,"  p.  502):  "And  did  not 
One  make"  [you  both]?  'And  why"  [did]  "the  One" 
[do  so]  ?    "  Seeking  a  goodly  seed."    (4)  Wellhausen  goes 

further  along  the  same  lin?.     Reading  j^^,-)  for  ^^^^  and 

1NJi'"l  f"''  "IXK^I.  ^"'^  1J^  ^^^  1^,  ^^  translates:  "Hath 
not  the  same  God  created  and  sustained  your  "  (?  "  our  ") 
"breath?     And  what  does  He  desire  ?    A  seed  of  God." 

♦Literally:  "let  none  be  unfaithful  to  the  wife  of  thy 
youth,"  a  curious  instance  of  the  Hebrew  habit  of  mixing 
the  pronominal  reference,?.  Wellhausen's  emendation  is 
unnecessary. 

t  See  Gesenius  and  Ewald  £  >r  Arabic  analogies  for  the 
use  of  clothing  =  wife. 

t  See  above,  p.  642. 

§  Wellhausen  omits. 

1  Heb     •"•.^yi.  IJ?'     "  caller    and  answerer."    But  LXX. 

read  ^y,  "  witness"  (see  iii.  5),  though  it  pointed  it  differ- 
ently. 

1 13a,  "  But  secondly  ye  do  this,"  is  the  obvious  addition 
of  the  editor  in  order  to  connect  his  ■n'-'^sion  with  what 
follows. 

**  See  above,  pp.  63f   65"'  f. 


goes  equally  well  with  it  and  with  the  following 
section. 

"  Ye  have  wearied  Jehovah  with  your  words; 
and  ye  say,  '  In  what  have  we  wearied  Him? ' 
In  that  ye  say,  '  Every  one  that  does  evil  is 
good  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah,  and  He  delighteth 
in  them  '  ;  or  else,  '  Where  is  the  God  of  Judg- 
ment? '  Behold,  I  will  send  My  Angel,  to  pre- 
pare the  way  before  Me,  and  suddenly  shall  come 
to  His  Temple  the  Lord  whom  ye  seek  and 
the  Angel  of  the  Covenant  whom  ye  desire. 
Behold,  He  comes!  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 
But  who  may  bear  the  day  of  His  coming,  and 
who  stand  when  He  appears?  For  He  is  like 
the  fire  of  the  smelter  r.nd  the  acid  of  the  ful- 
lers. He  takes  His  seat  to  smelt  and  to  purge;  * 
and  He  will  purge  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  wash 
them  out  like  gold  or  silver,  and  they  shall  be 
to  Jehovah  bringers  of  an  offering  in  righteous- 
ness. And  the  offering  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem 
shall  be  pleasing  to  Jehovah,  as  in  the  days 
of  old  and  as  in  long  past  years.  And  I  will 
come  near  you  to  judgment,'  and  I  will  be  a 
swift  witness  against  the  sorcerers  and  the  adul- 
terers and  the  perjurers,  and  against  those  who 
wrong  the  hireling  in  his  wage,  and  the  widow 
and  the  orphan,  and  oppress  the  stranger,  and 
fear  not  Me,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts." 


6.  Repentance  by  Tithes  (Chap.  iii.  6-12). 

This  section  ought  perhaps  to  follow  on  to 
the  preceding.  Those  whom  it  blames  for  not 
paying  the  Temple  tithes  may  be  the  sceptics 
addressed  in  the  previous  section,  who  have 
stopped  their  dues  to  Jehovah  out  of  sheer  dis- 
appointment that  He  does  nothing.  And  ver. 
6,  which  goes  well  with  either  section,  may  be 
the  joint  between  the  two.  However  this  be, 
the  new  section  enforces  the  need  of  the  people's 
repentance  and  return  to  God,  if  He  is  to  return 
to  them.  And  when  they  ask,  how  are  they 
to  return,  "  Malachi  "  plainly  answers.  By  the 
payment  of  the  tithes  they  have  not  paid.  In 
withholding  these  they  robbed  God,  and  to  this, 
their  crime,  are  due  the  locusts  and  bad  seasons 
which  have  afflicted  them.  In  our  temptation 
to  see  in  this  a  purely  legal  spirit,  let  us  re- 
member that  the  neglect  to  pay  the  tithes  was 
due  to  a  religious  cause,  unbelief  in  Jehovah, 
and  that  the  return  to  belief  in  Him  could  not 
therefore  be  shown  in  a  more  practical  way 
than  by  the  payment  of  tithes.  This  is  not 
prophecy  subject  to  the  Law,  but  prophecy  em- 
ploying the  means  and  vehicles  of  grace  with 
which  the  Law  at  that  time  provided  the  people. 

"  For  I  Jehovah  have  not  changed,  but  ye 
sons  of  Jacob  have  not  done  with(?).f  In  the 
days  of  your  fathers  ye  turned  from  My  statutes 
and  did  not  keep  them.  Return  to  Me,  and 
I  will  return  to  you,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts. 
But  you  say,  '  How  then  shall  we  return?  '  (Jan 
a  man  rob|  God?  yet  ye  are  robbing  Me.  But 
ye   say,   '  In  what  have   we   robbed  Thee?  '     In 

♦Delete  "silver":  the  longer  LXX.  text  shows  how 
easily  it  was  added. 

t  "  Made  an  end  of,"  reading  the  verb  as  Piel  (Orelli). 
LXX.  '•  refrain  from."  "  Your  sins  "  are  understood,  the 
sins  which  have  always  characterised  the  people.  LXX. 
connects  the  opening  of  the  next  verse  with  this,  and 
with  a  different  reading  of  the  first  word  translates 
"from  the  sins  of  your  fathers." 

t  Heb.  JJ2p,  only  here  and  Prov.  xxii.  32.  LXX.  read 
3pV.  "supplant,  cheat,"  which  Wellhausen  adopts. 


650 


THE   BOOK   OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  tithe  and  the  tribute.*  With  the  curse  are 
ye  cursed,  and  yet  Me  ye  are  robbing,  the  whole 
people  of  you.  Bring  in  the  whole  tithe  to  the 
storehouse,  that  there  may  be  provisionf  in  My 
House,  and  pray,  prove  Me  in  this,  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts — whether  I  will  not  open  to 
you  the  windows  of  heaven,  and  pour  blessing 
upon  you  till  there  is  no  more  need.  And  I 
will  check  for  you  the  devourcr,^  and  he  shall 
not  destroy  for  you  the  fruit  of  the  ground, 
nor  the  vine  in  the  field  miscarry,  saith  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts.  And  all  nations  shall  call  you 
happy,  for  ye  shall  be  a  land  of  delight,  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts." 

7.  The  Judgment  to  Come 
(Chap.  iii.  13-21  Heb.,  iii.  13-iv.  2  Eng.). 

This  is  another  charge  to  the  doubters  among 
the  pious  remnant  of  Israel,  who,  seeing  the 
success  of  the  wicked,  said  it  is  vain  to 
serve  God.  Deuteronomy  was  their  Canon,  and 
Deuteronomy  said  that  if  men  sinned  they  de- 
cayed, if  they  were  righteous  they  prospered. 
How  different  were  the  facts  of  experience! 
The  evil  men  succeeded:  the  good  won  no  gain 
by  their  goodness,  nor  did  their  mourning  for 
the  sins  of  their  people  work  any  effect.  Bit- 
terest of  all,  they  had  to  congratulate  wicked- 
ness in  high  places,  and  Jehovah  Himself  suf- 
fered it  to  go  unpunished.  "  Such  things,"  says 
"  Malachi,"  "  spake  they  that  feared  God  to  each 
other  " — tempted  thereto  by  the  dogmatic  form 
of  their  religion,  and  forgetful  of  all  that  Jere- 
miah and  the  Evangelist  of  the  Exile  had  taught 
them  of  the  value  of  righteous  sufferings.  Nor 
does  "  Malachi  "  remind  them  of  this.  His  mes- 
sage is  that  the  Lord  remembers  them,  has  their 
names  written  before  Him,  and  when  the  day 
of  His  action  comes  they  shall  be  separated 
from  the  wicked  and  spared.  This  is  simply  to 
transfer  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  of  Deuter- 
onomy to  the  future  and  to  another  dispensation. 
Prophecy  still  works  within  the  Law. 

The  Apocalypse  of  this  last  judgment  is  one 
of  the  grandest  in  all  Scripture.  To  the  wicked 
it  shall  be  a  terrible  fire,  root  and  branch  shall 
they  be  burned  out,  but  to  the  righteous  a  fair 
morning  of  God,  as  when  dawn  comes  to  those 
who  have  been  sick  and  sleepless  through  the 
black  night,  and  its  beams  bring  healing,  even 
as  to  the  popular  belief  of  Israel  it  was  the 
rays  of  the  morning  sun  which  distilled  the  dew.§ 
They  break  into  life  and  energy,  like  young 
calves  leaping  from  the  dark  pen  into  the  early 
sunshine.  To  this  morning  landscape  a  grim 
figure  is  added.  They  shall  tread  down  the 
wicked  and  the  arrogant  like  ashes  beneath  their 
feet. 

"  Your  words  are  hard  upon  Me,  saith  Jeho- 

np"ri,  "the  heave  offering,"  the  tax  or  tribute  given 

to  the  sanctuary  or  priests  and  associates  with  the  tithes, 
as  here  in  Deut.  xii.  ii,  to  be  eaten  by  the  offerer  (id.  17) 
but  in  Ezekiel  by  the  priests  (xliv.  30)  ;  taken  by  the 
people  and  tlie  Levites  to  the  Temple  treasury  for  the 
priests  (Neh.  x.  3S,  xii.  44)  :  corn,  wine,  and  oil.  In  the 
Priestly  Writing  it  signifies  the  part  of  each  sacrifice 
which  was  the  priest's  due.  Ezekiel  also  uses  it  of 
the  part  of  the  Holy  Land  that  fell  to  the  prince  and 
priests. 

I  ^T!P     in  its  later  meaning  :  c/.  Job  xxiv.  5  ;  Prov. 

xxxi.  15. 

$/.  e.,  locust. 

S"  A  dew  of  lights." 


vah.  Ye  say,  '  What  have  we  said  against 
Thee?  '  Ye  have  said,  '  It  is  vain  to  serve  God,' 
and  '  What  gain  is  it  to  us  to  have  kept  His 
charge,  or  to  have  walked  in  funeral  garb  before 
Jehovah  of  Hosts?  Even  now  we  have  got  to 
congratulate  the  arrogant;  yea,  the  workers  of 
wickedness  are  fortified;  yea,  they  tempt  God 
and  escape!  '  Such  things*  spake  they  that  fear 
Jehovah  to  each  other.  But  Jehovah  gave  ear 
and  heard,  and  a  book  of  remembrance  f  was 
written  before  Him  about  those  who  fear  Je- 
hovah, and  those  who  keep  in  mind  X  His  Name. 
And  they  shall  be  Mine  own  property,  saith  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts,  in  the  day  when  I  rise  to 
action, §  and  I  will  spare  them  even  as  a  man 
spares  his  son  that  serves  him.  And  ye  shall 
once  more  see  the  difference  between  right- 
eous and  wicked,  between  him  that  serves  God 
and  him  that  does  not  serve  Him. 

"  For,  lo!  the  day  is  coming  that  shall  burn 
like  a  furnace,  and  all  the  overweening  and  every 
one  that  works  wickedness  shall  be  as  stubble, 
and  the  day  that  is  coming  shall  devour  them, 
saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  so  that  there  be  left 
them  neither  root  nor  branch.  But  to  you  that 
fear  My  Name  the  Sun  of  Righteousness  shall 
rise  with  healing  in  His  wings,  and  ye  shall 
go  forth  and  leap  ||  like  calves  of  the  stall. T^ 
And  ye  shall  tread  down  the  wicked,  for  they 
shall  be  as  ashes**  beneath  the  soles  of  your 
feet,  in  the  day  that  I  begin  to  do,  saith  Jehovah 
of   Hosts. 

8.  The  Return  of  Elijah 
(Chap.  iii.  22-24  Heb.,  iv.  3-5  Eng.). 

With  his  last  word  the  prophet  significantly 
calls  upon  the  people  to  remember  the  Law. 
This  is  their  one  hope  before  the  coming  of 
the  great  and  terrible  day  of  the  Lord.  But, 
in  order  that  the  Law  may  have  full  effect. 
Prophecy  will  be  sent  to  bring  it  home  to  the 
hearts  of  the  people — Prophecy  in  the  person 
of  her  founder  and  most  drastic  representative. 
Nothing  could  better  gather  up  than  this  con- 
junction does  that  mingling  of  Law  and  of 
Prophecy  which  we  have  seen  to  be  so  charac- 
teristic of  the  work  of  "  Malachi."  Only  we 
must  not  overlook  the  fact  that  "  Malachi  "  ex- 
pects this  prophecy,  which  with  the  Law  is  to 
work  the  conversion  of  the  people,  not  in  the 
continuance  of  the  prophetic  succession  by  the 
appearance  of  original  personalities,  developing 
further  the  great  principles  of  their  order,  but 
in  the  return  of  the  first  prophet  Elijah.  This 
is  surely  the  confession  of  Prophecy  that  the 
number  of  her  servants  is  exhausted  and  her 
message  to  Israel  fulfilled.  She  can  now  do 
no  more  for  the  people  than  she  has  done.  But 
she  will  summon  up  her  old  energy  and  fire  in 
the  return  of  her  most  powerful  personality,  and 
make  one  grand  effort  to  convert  the  nation  be- 
fore the  Lord  come  and  strike  it  with  judg- 
ment. 

"  Remember  the  Torah  of  Moses,  My  servant, 
with    which    I    charged    him    in    Horeb    for    all 

*So  LXX.;  Heb.  "then." 

t  Ezek.  xiii.  g. 

t  ^KTI.  "to  think,  plan,"  has  much  the  same  meaning 
as  here  in  Isa.  xiii.  17,  xxxiii.  8,  liii.  3. 

§  Heb.  "  when  I  am  doing  ; "  but  in  the  sense  in  which 
the  word  is  used  of  Jehovah's  decisive  and  final  doing, 
Psalms  XX.,  xxxii.,  etc. 

II  Hab.  i.  8. 

i  See  note  to  Amos  vi.  4  :  p.  486,  «. 

**Or  "dust." 


riiE    BOOK   OF   JOEL. 


651 


Israel:  statutes  and  judgments.  Lo!  I  am  send- 
ing to  you  Elijah  the  prophet,  before  the  com- 
ing of  the  great  and  terrible  day  of  Jehovah. 
And  he  shall  turn  the  heart  of  the  fathers  to 
the  sons,  and  the  heart  of  the  sons  to  their 
fathers,  ere  I  come  and  strike  the  land  with  the 
Ban." 

"  Malachi  "  makes  this  promise  of  the  Law 
in  the  dialect  of  Deuteronomy:  "  statutes  and 
judgments  with  which  Jehovah  charged  Moses 
for  Israel."  But  the  Law  he  enforces  is  not 
that  which  God  delivered  to  Moses  on  the  plains 
of  Shittim,  but  that  which  He  gave  him  in 
Mount  Horeb.  And  so  it  came  to  pass.  In  a 
very  few  years  after  "  Malachi  "  prophesied  Ezra 
the  Scribe  brought  from  Babylon  the  great  Le- 
vitical  Code,  which  appears  to  have  been  ar- 
ranged there,  while  the  colony  in  Jerusalem  were 
still  organising  their  life  under  Deuteronomic 
legislation.  In  444  B.  c.  this  Levitical  Code, 
along  with  Deuteronomy,  became  by  covenant 
between  the  people  and  their  God  their  Canon 
and  Law.  And  in  the  next  of  our  prophets, 
Joel,  we  shall  find  its  full  influence  at  work. 


JOEL. 

"The  Day  of  Jehovah  is  great  and  very  awful,  and  who 
may  abide  it  ? 

"  But  now  the  oracle  of  Jehovah — Turn  ye  to  Me  with  all 
your  heart,  and  with  fasting  and  with  weeping  and  with 
mourning.  And  rend  your  hearts  and  not  your  garments, 
and  turn  to  Jehovah  your  God,  for  gracious  and  merciful 
is  He,  long-suffering  and  abounding  in  love." 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

THE  BOOK  OF  JOEL. 

In  the  criticism  of  the  Book  of  Joel  there  ex- 
ist differences  of  opinion — upon  its  date,  the  ex- 
act reference  of  its  statements  and  its  relation  to 
parallel  passages  in  other  prophets — as  wide  as 
even  those  by  which  the  Book  of  Obadiah  has 
been  assigned  to  every  century  between  the  tenth 
and  the  fourth  before  Christ.*  As  in  the  case  of 
Obadiah.  the  problem  is  not  entangled  with  any 
doctrinal  issue  or  question  of  accuracy;  but  while 
we  saw  that  Obadiah  was  not  involved  in  the 
central  controversy  of  the  Old  Testament,  the 
date  of  the  Law,  not  a  little  in  Joel  turns  upon 
the  latter.  And  besides,  certain  descriptions  raise 
the  large  question  between  a  literal  and  an  alle- 
gorical interpretation.  Thus  the  Book  of  Joel 
carries  the  student  further  into  the  problems 
of  Old  Testament  Criticism,  and  forms  an  even 
more  excellent  introduction  to  the  latter,  than 
does  the   Book   of  Obadiah. 


I.  The  Date  of  the  Book. 

In  the  history  of  prophecy  the  Book  of  Joel 
must  be  either  very  early  or  very  late,  and  with 
few  exceptions  the  leading  critics  place  it  either 
before  800  b.  c.  or  after  500.  So  great  a  dif- 
ference is  due  to  most  substantial  reasons.  Un- 
like every  other  prophet,  except  Haggai,  "  Mal- 
achi "  and  "  Zechariah  "  ix.-xiv.,  Joel  mentions 
neither  Assyria,   which  emerged  upon   the  pro- 

♦  See  above,  chap.  xiii. 


phetic  horizon  about  760,*  nor  the  Babylonian 
Empire,  which  had  fallen  by  537.  The  presump- 
tion is  that  he  wrote  before  760  or  after  537.  Un- 
like all  the  prophets,  too,t  Joel  does  not  charge 
his  people  with  civic  or  national  sins;  nor  does 
his  book  bear  any  trace  of  the  struggle  between 
the  righteous  and  unrighteous  in  Israel  nor  of 
that  between  the  spiritual  worshippers  of  Jeho- 
vah and  the  idolaters.  The  book  addresses  an 
undivided  nation,  who  know  no  God  but  Jeho- 
vah; and  again  the  presumption  is  that  Joel  wrote 
before  Amos  and  his  successors  had  started  the 
spiritual  antagonisms  which  rent  Israel  in  twain, 
or  after  the  Law  had  been  accepted  by  the  whole 
people  under  Nehemiah.t  The  same  wide  alter- 
native is  suggested  by  the  style  and  phraseology. 
Joel's  Hebrew  is  simple  and  direct.  Either  he  is 
an  early  writer,  or  imitates  early  writers.  His 
book  contains  a  number  of  phrases  and  verses 
identical,  or  nearly  identical,  with  those  of  proph- 
ets from  Amos  to  "  Malachi."  Either  they  all 
borrowed  from  Joel,  or  he  borrowed  from  them.^^ 
Of  this  alternative  modern  criticism  at  first 
preferred  the  earlier  solution,  and  dated  Joel  be- 
fore Amos.  So  Credner  in  his  Commentary  in 
1831,  and  following  him  Hitzig,  Bleek,  Ewald, 
Delitzsch,  Keil,  Kuenen  (up  to  1864), ||  Pusey 
and  others.  So,  too,  at  first  some  living  critics 
of  the  first  rank,  who.  like  Kuenen,  have  since 
changed  their  opinion.  And  so,  even  still,  Kirk- 
Patrick  (on  the  whole),  Von  Orelli,  Robertson,1I 
Stanley  Leathes  and  Sinker. $$  The  reasons  which 
these  scholars  have  given  for  the  early  date  of 
Joel  are  roughly  as  follows. ft  His  book  occurs 
among  the  earliest  of  the  Twelve:  while  it  is 
recognised  that  the  order  of  these  is  not  strictly 
chronological,  it  is  alleged  that  there  is  a  division 
between  the  pre-exilic  and  post-exilic  prophets, 
and  that  Joel  is  found  among  the  former.  The 
vagueness  of  his  representations  in  general,  and 
of  his  pictures  of  the  Day  of  Jehovah  in  particu- 
lar, is  attributed  to  the  simplicity  of  the  earlier 
religion  of  Israel,  and  to  the  want  of  that  analy- 
sis of  its  leading  conceptions  which  was  the  work 
of  later  prophets. $t  His  horror  of  the  interrup- 
tion of  the  daily  offerings  in  the  Temple,  caused 
by  the  plague  of  locusts, §§  is  ascribed  to  a  fear 
which  pervaded  the  primitive  ages  of  all  peo- 
ples.||||  In  Joel's  attitude  towards  other  nations, 
whom  he  condemns  to  judgment,  Ewald  saw  "the 
old  unsubdued  warlike  spirit  of  the  times  of  De- 
borah and  David."  The  prophet's  absorption  in 
the  ravages  of  the  locusts  is  held  to  reflect  the 
feeling  of  a  purely  agricultural  community,  such 
as  Israel  was  before  the  eighth  century.  The 
absence  of  the  name  of  Assyria  from  the  book 
is   assigned  to   the   same   unwillingness   to   give 


♦The  Assyria  of    "Zech."x.  11  is  Syria.    See  below. 

t  The  two  exceptions,  Nahum  and  Habakkuk,  are  not 
relevant  to  this  question.  Their  dates  are  fixed  bj-  their 
references  to  Assyria  and  Babylon. 

$  See  Rob.  Smith,  art.  "Joel,"  "  Encyc.  Brit." 

§  So  obvious  is  tliis  alternative  that  all  critics  may  be 
said  to  grant  it,  except  Konig  ("Einl."),  on  whose  reasons 
for  placing  Joel  in  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  see 
below,  p.  654,  n.  Kessner  ("  Das  Zeitalter  der  Proph. 
Joel  "  (1888)  deems  the  date  unprovable. 

!l  See  "  The  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  pp.  86  £. 

*i  The  "  O.  T.  and  its  Contents."  p.  105. 

**  "  Lex  Mosaica,"  pp.  422,  450. 

tt  See  especially  Ewald  on  Joel  in  his  "  Prophets  of  the 
O.  T.,"  and  Kirkpatrick's  verv  fair  argument  in  "Doc- 
trine of  the  Prophets,"  pp.  57  ff. 

J  J  On  Joel's  picture  of  the  Day  of  Jehovah  Ewald  says: 
"We  have  it  here  in  its  first  simple  and  clear  form,  nor 
has  it  become  a  subject  of  ridicule  as  in  Amos." 

S§i.  9,  13,  16,  ii.  14. 

Ill  So  Ewald. 


6^2 


THEt-BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  name  as  we  see  in  Amos  and  the  earlier 
prophecies  of  Isaiah,  and  it  is  thought  by  some 
that,  though  not  named,  the  Assyrians  are  sym- 
bolised by  the  locusts.  The  absence  of  all  men- 
tion of  the  Law  is  also  held  by  some  to  prove 
an  early  date:  though  other  critics,  who  believe 
that  the  Levitical  legislation  was  extant  in  Is- 
rael from  the  earliest  times,  find  proof  of  this  in 
Joel's  insistence  upon  the  daily  offering.  The 
absence  of  all  mention  of  a  king  and  the  promi- 
nence given  to  the  priests  are  explained  by  as- 
signing the  prophecy  to  the  minority  of  King 
Joash  of  Judah,  when  Jehoyada  the  priest  was 
regent;  *  the  charge  against  Egypt  and  Edom 
of  spilling  innocent  blood  by  Shishak's  invasion 
of  Judah, f  and  by  the  revolt  of  the  Edomites 
under  Jehoram;:^  the  charge  against  the  Philis- 
tines and  Phoenicians  by  the  Chronicler's  ac- 
count of  Philistine  raids>j  in  the  reign  of  Jeho- 
ram  of  Judah,  and  by  the  oracles  of  Amos  against 
both  nations;!  and  the  mention  of  the  Vale  of 
Jehoshaphat  by  that  king's  defeat  of  Moab,  Am- 
mon,  and  Edom  in  the  Vale  of  Berakhah.^j 
These  allusions  being  recognised,  it  was  de- 
duced from  them  that  the  parallels  between  Joel 
and  Amos  were  due  to  Amos  having  quoted 
from  Joel.** 

These  reasons  are  not  all  equally  cogent.ff  and 
even  the  strongest  of  them  do  not  prove  more 
than  the  possibility  of  an  early  date  for  Joel.H 
Nor  do  they  meet  every  historical  difficulty. 
The  minority  of  Joash,  upon  .which  they  con- 
verge, fell  at  a  time  when  Aram  was  not  only 
prominent  to  the  thoughts  of  Israel,  but  had  al- 
ready been  felt  to  be  an  enemy  as  powerful  as 
the  Philistines  or  Edomites.  But  the  Book  of 
Joel  does  not  mention  Aram.  It  mentions  the 
Greeks, §§  and,  although  we  have  no  right  to  say 
that  such  a  notice  was  impossible  in  Israel  in 
the  ninth  century,  it  was  not  only  improbable, 
but  no  other  Hebrew  document  from  before  the 
Exile  speaks  of  Greece,  and  in  particular  Amos 
does  not  when  describing  the  Phoenicians  as 
slave-traders. Ill  The  argument  that  the  Book  of 
Joel  must  be  early  because  it  was  placed  among 
the  first  six  of  the  Twelve  Prophets  by  the  ar- 
rangers of  the  Prophetic  Canon,  who  could  not 
have  forgotten  Joel's  date  had  he  lived  after 
450,  loses  all  force  from  the  fact  that  in  the 
same  group  of  pre-exilic  prophets  we  find  the 
exilic  Obadiah  and  the  post-exilic  Jonah,  both 
of  them   in   precedence  to   Micah. 

The  argument  for  the  early  date  of  Joel  is, 
therefore,  not  conclusive.  But  there  are  besides 
serious  objections  to  it,  which  make  for  the  other 
solution  of  the  alternative  we  started  from,  and 
lead  us  to  place  Joel  after  the  establishment  of 
the  Law  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  in  444  b.   c. 

A  post-exilic  date  was  first  proposed  by 
Vatke,1[1|  and  then   defended  by    Hilgenfeld,*** 

*  2  Kings  xi.  4-21. 

1 1  Kings  xiv.  25,  f.:  cf.  Joel  iii.  \ib,  iq. 

Xz  Kings  viii.  20-22  :  cf.  Joel  iii.  ig. 

§2  Chron.  xxi.  16,  17,  xxii.  i  :  cf.  Joel  iii.  4-6. 

11  Amos  i.:  cf.  Joel  iii.  4-6. 

1 2  Chron.  xx  ,  especially  26  :    cf.  Joel  iii.  2. 

**Joel  iii.  (Eng.;  iv.  Heb.)  16;  Amos  i.  2.  For  a  list  of 
the  various  periods  to  which  Joel  has  been  assigned  by 
supporters  of  this  early  date  see  Kuenen,  §  68. 

tt  The  reference  of  Egypt  in  iii.  ig  to  Shishak's  invasion 
appears  particularly  weak. 

XX  Cf.  Robertson,  "  O.  T.  and  its  Contents,"  105,  and 
Kirkpatrick's  cautious,  though  convinced,  statement  of 
the  reasons  for  an  early  date. 

§§iii.  6  (Heb.  iv.  6). 

(I  Amos  i.  0. 

It  "  Bibl.  Theol.,"  I.  p.  462  ;  "  Einl.,"  pp.  675  ff. 

♦•*  "Zeitschr.  f.  wissensch.  Theol.,"  X.,  Heft  4. 


and  by  Duhm  in  1875.*  From  this  time  the  the- 
ory made  rapid  way,  winning  over  manv  who  had 
previously  held  the  early  date  of  Joel,  like  Oort,t 
Kuenen,:):  A.  B.  Davidson,^  Driver  and  Cheyne,|| 
perhaps  also  Wellhausen,1i  and  finding  accept- 
ance and  new  proofs  from  a  gradually  increasing 
majority  of  younger  critics,  Merx,**  Robertson 
Smith,tt  Stadctt  Matthes  and  Scholz,§S  Hol- 
zinger,||||  Farrar,jI1|  Kautzsch,***  Cornill.ftt 
VVildeboer,tt$  G.  B.  Gray  §§§  and  Nowack.|||||| 
The  reasons  which  have  led  to  this  formidable 
change  of  opinion  in  favour  of  the  late  date  of 
the    Book   of  Joel   are   as   follows. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Exile  of  Judah  appears 
in  it  as  already  past.  This  is  proved,  not  by 
the  ambiguous  phrase,  "  when  I  shall  bring 
again  the  captivity  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,"  \^\ 
but  by  the  plain  statement  that  "  the  heathen 
have  scattered  Israel  among  the  nations  and  di- 
vided their  land.  ****  The  plunder  of  the  Tem- 
ple seems  also  to  be  implied,  ftff  Moreover,  no 
great  world-power  is  pictured  as  either  threat- 
ening or  actually  persecuting  God's  people;  but 
Israel's  active  enemies  and  enslavers  are  repre- 
sented as  her  own  neighbours,  Edomites,  Phil- 
istines and  Phoenicians,  and  the  last  are  repre- 
sented as  selling  Jewish  captives  to  the  Greeks. 
All  this  suits,  if  it  does  not  absolutely  prove,  the 
Persian  age,  before  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes 
Ochus,  who  was  the  first  Persian  king  to  treat 
the  Jews  with  cruelty.ttU  The  Greeks,  Javan, 
do  not  appear  in  any  Hebrew  writer  before  the 
Exile  ;8j5^g  the  form  in  which  their  name  is  given 
by  Joel,  B'ne  ha-Jevanim,  has  admittedly  a  late 
sound  about  it,  |||||||  and  we  know  from  other 
sources  that  it  was  in  the  fifth  and  fourth  cen- 
turies that  Syrian  slaves  were  in  demand  in 
Greece.  HIITni  Similarly  with  the  internal 
condition  of  the  Jews  as  reflected  in  Joel.     No 

*  "  Theol.  der  Proph.,"  pp.  275  ff. 

t  "  Theol.  Tijd.,"  1876,  pp.  362  ff.  (not  seen). 

J"Onderz.,"  §68. 

§  Expositor,  1888,  Jan. -June,  pp.  igS  ff. 

il  See  Cheyne,  "Origin  of  Psalter,"  xx.;  Driver, 
"  Introd.,"  in  the  sixth  edition  of  which,  iSg?,  he  supports 
the  late  date  of  Joel  more  strongly  than  in  the  first  edi- 
tion, i8g2. 

^Wellhausen  allowed  the  theory  of  the  early  date  of 
Joel  to  stand  in  his  edition  of  Bleek's  "  Einleitung,"  but 
adfipts  the  late  date  in  his  own  "  Kleine  Propheten." 

**  "  Die  Projphetie  des  Joels  u.  ihre  Ausleger,"  i87g. 

tt  "Encyc.  Brit.,"  art.  "Joel,"  1881. 

XX  "Gesch.,  "  II.  207. 

§§"  Theol.  Tijdschr.,"  1885,  p.  151;  "Comm.,"  1885 
(neither  seen). 

IHI  "  Sprachcharakter  u.  Abfassungszeit  des  B.  Joels"  in 
"Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  i88q.  pp.  8g  ff. 

m  "  Minor  Prophets." 

***  "  Bibel." 

ttt  "Einleit." 

XXX  "  Litteratur  des  A.  T." 

§§^  Expositor,  September,  1893. 

tilii  "  Comm.,"  1807. 

Ilttiv.  (Heb.;  iii.  Eng.)  i.  For  this  may  only  mean 
"  turn  again  the  fortunes  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem." 

****iv.  (Heb.;  iii.  Eng.)  2.  The  supporters  of  a  pre-exilic 
date  either  passed  this  over  or  understood  it  of  incursions 
by  the  heathen  into  Israel's  territories  in  the  ninth  cen- 
tury.    It  is,  however,  too  universal  to  suit  these. 

ttttiv.  (Heb.;  iii.  Eng.)  5. 

XXXX  Kaut/.sch  dates  after  Artaxerxes  Ochus,  and  c.  350. 

§§§§  Ezekiel  ixxvii.  13,  ig)  is  the  first  to  give  the  name 
Javan,  i.  e.,  \a\uiv,or  Ionian  (earlier  writers  name  Egypt, 
Edom,  Arabia,  and  Phoenicia  as  the  great  slave-markets: 
Amos  i.;  Isa.  xi.  n;  Deut.  xxviii.  68)  ;  and  Greeks  ai  e  also 
mentioned  in  Isa.  Ixvi.  ig  (a  post-exilic  passage);  Zech.  ix. 
13  ;  Dan.  viii.  21,  x.  20,  xi.  2  ;  i  Chron.  i.  5,  7,  and  Gen.  x.  2, 
See  below,  chap.  xxxi. 

IIIHIII  D''JVn  ^J3  instead  of  JV  ^J3,  just  as  the  Chronicler 
gives  Cmpn  ^Vl  for  il'lp  '33  '.  see  Wildeboer,  p.  348. 
and  Matthes,  quoted  by  Holzinger,  p.  g4. 

nilT  Movers,  "  Phon.  Alterthum.,"  II.  i,  pp.  yo  sgg.; 
which  reference  I  owe  to  R.  Smith's  art.  in  the  "Encyc. 
Brit." 


THE    BOOK    OF    JOEL. 


653 


king  is  mentioned;  but  the  priests  are  promi- 
nent, and  the  elders  are  introduced  at  least  once.* 
It  is  an  agricultural  calamity,  and  that  alone, 
unmixed  with  any  political  alarm,  which  is  the 
omen  of  the  coming  Day  of  the  Lord.  All  this 
suits  the  state  of  Jerusalem  under  the  Persians. 
Take  again  the  religious  temper  and  emphasis 
of  the  book.  The  latter  is  laid,  as  we  have  seen, 
very  remarkably  upon  the  horror  of  the  inter- 
ruption by  the  plague  of  locusts  of  the  daily 
meal  and  drink  offerings,  and  in  the  later  history 
of  Israel  the  proofs  are  many  of  the  exceeding 
importance  with  which  the  regularity  of  this  was 
regarded.!  This,  says  Professor  A.  B.  Davidson, 
"  is  very  unlike  the  way  in  which  all  other 
prophets  down  to  Jeremiah  speak  of  the  sacri- 
ficial service."  The  priests,  too,  are  called  to 
take  the  initiative;  and  the  summons  to  a 
solemn  and  formal  fast,  without  any  notice  of  the 
particular  sins  of  the  people  or  exhortations  to 
distinct  virtues,  contrasts  with  the  attitude  to 
fasts  of  the  earlier  prophets,  and  with  their  in- 
sistence upon  a  change  of  life  as  the  only  ac- 
ceptable form  of  penitence. t  And  another  con- 
trast with  the  earliest  prophets  is  seen  in  the 
general  apocalyptic  atmosphere  and  colouring  of 
the  Book  of  Joel,  as  well  as  in  some  of  the  partic- 
ular figures  in  which  this  is  expressed,  and  which 
are  derived  from  later  prophets  like  Zephaniah 
and   Ezekiel.S 

These  evidences  for  a  late  date  are  supported, 
on  the  whole,  by  the  language  of  the  book.  Of 
this  Merx  furnishes  many  details,  and  by  a  care- 
ful examination,  which  makes  due  allowance  for 
the  poetic  form  of  the  book  and  for  possible 
glosses,  Holzinger  has  shown  that  there  are 
symptoms  in  vocabulary,  grammar,  and  syntax 
which  at  least  are  more  reconcilable  with  a 
late  than  with  an  early  date.||  There  are  a  num- 
ber of  Aramaic  words,  of  Hebrew  words  used  in 
the  sense  in  which  they  are  used  by  Aramaic, 
but  by  no  other  Hebrew,  writers,  and  several 
terms  and  constructions  which  appear  only  in 
the  later  books  of  the  Old  Testament  or  very 
seldom  in  the  early  ones.H    It  is  true  that  these 

*  With  these  might  be  taken  the  use  of  pPIp  (ii-  16J  in 
its  sense  of  a  gathering  for  public  worship.  The  word  it- 
s;lf  was  old  in  Hebrew,  but  as  time  went  on  it  came  more 
and  more  to  mean  the  convocation  of  the  nation  for  wor- 
saip  or  deliberation.     Holzinger,  pp.  105  f. 

■\  Cf.  Neh.  X.  33  ;  Dan.  viii.  n,  xi.  31,  xii.  11.    Also  Acts 

XXVI.  7:  TO  iiiiihiKa^vKov   T\}i.iav   iv    tKreveia  I'liiCTa  xai  jjjiiepai' Aa- 

rpevov.  Also  the  passages  in  Jos.,  XIV.  "  Ant."  iv.  3,  xvi.  2, 
in  which  Josephus  mentions  the  horror  caused  by  the 
interruption  of  the  daily  sacrifice  by  famine  in  the  last 
siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  adds  that  it  had  happened  in  no 
previous  siege  of  the  city. 

t  Cf.  Jer.  xiv.  12  ;  Isa.  Iviii.  6;  Zech.  vii.  5,  vi.  11,  ig,  with 
Neh.  i.  4,  ix.  I ;  Ezra  viii.  21 ;  Jonah  iii.  5,  7  ;  Esther  iv.  3, 
16,  ix.  31  ;  Dan.  ix.  3. 

§The  gathering  of  the  Gentiles  to  judgment,  Zeph.  iii. 
8  (see  above,  p.  577)  and  Ezek.  xxxviii.  22  ;  the  steam  issu- 
ing from  the  Temple  to  fill  the  Wady  ha-Shittim,  Ezek. 
xlvii.  I  ff.,  c/.  Zech.  xiv.  8;  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit, 
Ezek.  xxxix.  2g. 

1"Z  A.  T.  W.,"  i88g,  pp.  8g-i36.  Holzinger's  own  con- 
clusion is  stated  more  emphatically  than  above. 

1  For  an  exhaustive  list  the  reader  must  be  referred  to 
Holzinger's  article  {c/.  Driver,  "Introd.,"  sixth  edition  ; 
"  Joel  and  Amos,"  p.  24 ;  G.  B.  Gray,  Expository  Sep- 
tember, i8g^,  p.  212).  But  the  following  (a  few  of  which 
are  not  given  by  Holzinger)  are  sufficient  to  prove  the 

conclusion  come  to  above :  i.  2,  iv.  4,  ^^l   •   •   *  i! — this 

is  the  form  of  the  disjunctive  interrogative  in  later  O.  T. 

writings,  replacing   the    earlier  Di^   .   .   .   H;     i.  3,    ^7X 

only  here  in  O.  T.,  but  frequent  in  Aram.;  13,  yjJOJ  in  Ni. 
only  from  Jeremiah  onwards,  Qal  only  in  two  passages 
b  ifore  Jeremiah  and  in  a  number  after  him  ;  18,  nnJKi. 
i'   the  correct  reading  occurs  only  in  the  latest  O.  T. 


do  not  stand  in  a  large  proportion  to  the  rest  of 
Joel's  vocabulary  and  grammar,  which  is  classic 
and  suitable  to  an  early  period  of  the  literature; 
but  this  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  large  use 
which  the  prophet  makes  of  the  very  words  of 
earlier  writers.  Take  this  large  use  into  account, 
and  the  unmistakable  Aramaisms  of  the  book 
become  even  more  emphatic  in  th^ir  proof  of  a 
late  date. 

The  literary  parallels  between  Joel  and  other 
writers  are  unusually  many  for  so  small  a  book. 
They  number  at  least  twenty  in  seventy-two 
verses.  The  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  which  they  occur  are  about  twelve.  Where 
one  writer  has  parallels  with  many,  we  do  not 
necessarily  conclude  that  he  is  the  borrower,  un- 
less we  find  that  some  ot  the  phrases  common  to 
both  are  characteristic  of  the  other  writers,  or 
that,  in  his  text  of  them,  there  are  differences 
from  theirs  which  may  reasonably  be  reckoned 
to  be  of  a  later  origin.  But  that  both  of  these 
conditions  are  found  in  the  parallels  between 
Joel  and  other  prophets  has  been  shown  by  Prof. 
Driver  and  Mr.  G.  B.  Gray.  "  Several  of  the 
parallels — either  in  their  entirety  or  by  virtue  of 
certain  words  which  they  contain — have  their 
affinities  solely  or  chiefly  in  the  later  writings. 
But  the  significance  [of  this]  is' increased  when 
the  very  difference  between  a  passage  in  Joel 
and  its  parallel  in  another  book  consists  in  a 
word  or  phrase  characteristic  of  the  later  centu- 
ries. That  a  passage  in  a  writer  of  the  ninth 
century  should  differ  from  its  parallel  in  a  sub- 
sequent writer  by  the  presence  of  a  word  else- 
where confined  to  the  later  literature  would  be 
strange;  a  single  instance  would  not,  indeed,  be 
inexplicable  in  view  of  the  scantiness  of  extant 
writings;  but  every  additional  instance — though 
itself  not  very  convincing — renders  the  strange- 
ness greater."  And  again,  "  the  variations  in 
some  of  the  parallels  as  found  in  Joel  have  other 
common  peculiarities.  This  also  finds  its  nat- 
ural explanation  in  the  fact  that  Joel  quotes: 
for  that  the  same  author  even  when  quoting  from 
different  sources  should  quote  with  variations  of 
the  same  character  is  natural,  but  that  different 
authors  quoting  from  a  common  source  should 
follow  the  same  method  of  quotation  is  improb- 
able." *  "  While  in  some  of  the  parallels  a  com- 
parison discloses  indications  that  the  phrase  in 
Joel  is  probably  the  later,  in  other  cases,  even 
though  the  expression  may  in  itself  be  met  with 
earlier,  it  becomes  frequent  only  in  a  later  age, 
and  the  use  of  it  by  Joel  increases  the  presump- 


writings,  the  Qal  only  in  the.se  and  Aram.;  ii.  2.  iv.  (Heb.} 
iii.  Eng.)  20,  ini  *11T  first  in  Deut.  xxxii.   7,   and  then 

exilic  and  post-exilic  frequently  ;  8,  HPB'i  a  late  word, 
only  in  Job  xxxiii.  18,  xxxvi.  12,  2  Chron.  xxiii.  10,  xxxii. 
5,  Neh.  iii.  15,  iv.  u,  17  ;  20,  P)iD>  "end,"  only  in  2  Chron. 
XX.  16  and  Eccles.,  Aram,  of  Daniel,  and  post  Bibl.  Aram, 
and  Heb.;  iv.  (Heb.;  iii.  Eng.)  4,  py  pDJ,  cf.  2  Chron.  xx. 
II ;  10,  HDI,  see  below  on  this  verse  ;  11,  nrUH.  Aram.;  t.% 
p{>>2,  in  Hebrew  to  cook  (c/.  Ezek.  xxiv.  5),  and  in  other 
forms  always  with  that  meaning  down  to  the  Priestly 
Writing  and  "Zech."  ix.-xiv.,  is  used  here  in  the  sense 
of  "ripen,"  which  is  frequent  in  Aram.,  but  does  not 
occur  elsewhere  in  O  T.  Besides,  Joel  uses  for  the  first 
personal  pronoun  ''JK — ii.  27  {bis),  iv.  10,  17— which  is  by 
far  the  most  usual  form  with  later  writers,  and  not  '3JKi 
preferred  by  pre-exilic  writers.  (See  below  on  the  lan- 
guage of  Jonah.) 

*  G.  B.  Gray,  Expositor,  September.  i8g3,  pp.  21;?  f. 
For  the  above  conclusions  ample  proof  is  given  in  Mr. 
Gray's  detailed  examination  of  the  parallels :  pp.  214  fE. 


654 


the:  book  of  the  twelve  prophets. 


tion  that  he  stands  by  the  side  of  the  later 
writers."  * 

In  face  of  so  many  converging  lines  of  evi- 
dence, we  shall  not  wonder  that  there  should 
have  come  about  so  great  a  change  in  the 
opinion  of  the  majority  of  critics  on  the  date  of 
Joel,  and  that  it  should  now  be  assigned  by  them 
to  a  post-exilic  date.  Some  place  it  in  the  sixth 
century  before  Christ, f  some  in  the  first  half  of 
the  fifth  before  "  Malachi  "  and  Nehemiah,t  but 
the  most  after  the  full  establishment  of  the  Law 
by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  in  444  b.  c.^  It  is  diffi- 
cult, perhaps  impossible,  to  decide.  Nothing  cer- 
tain can  be  deduced  from  the  mention  of  the 
"  city  wall  "  in  chap.  ii.  9,  from  which  Robert- 
son Smith  and  Cornill  infer  that  Nehemiah's 
walls  were  already  built.  Nor  can  we  be  sure 
that  Joel  quotes  the  phrase,  "before  the  great 
and  terrible  day  of  Jehovah  come,"  from  "  Mal- 
achi,"||  although  this  is  rendered  probable  by 
the  character  of  Joel's  other  parallels.  But  the 
absence  of  all  reference  to  the  prophets  as  a 
class,  the  promise  of  the  rigorous  exclusion  of 
foreigners  from  Jerusalem,?!  the  condemnation 
to  judgment  of  all  the  heathen,  and  the  strong 
apocalyptic  character  of  the  book,  would  incline 
us  to  place  it  after  Ezra  rather  than  before.  How 
far  after,  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  the  absence 
of  feeling  against  Persia  requires  a  date  before 
the  cruelties  inflicted  by  Artaxerxes  about  360.** 

One  solution,  which  has  lately  been  offered 
for  the  problems  of  date  presented  by  the  Book 
of  Joel,  deserves  some  notice.  In  his  German 
translation  of  Driver's  "  Introduction  to  the 
Old  Testament,"  ft  Rothstein  questions  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  prophecy,  and  alleges  reasons  for 
dividing  it  into  two  sections.  Chaps,  i.  and  ii. 
(Heb. ;  i.-ii.  27  Eng.)  he  assigns  to  an  early  au- 
thor, writing  in  the  minority  of  King  Joash,  but 
chaps,   iii.   and  iv.    (Heb.;   ii.   28-iii.    Eng.)   to  a 

*  Driver,  "  Joel  and  Amos,"  p.  27. 

tScholz  and  Rosenzweig  (not  seen). 

JHilgenfeld,  Duhm,  Oort.  Driver  puts  it  "most  safely 
shortly  after  Haggai  and  Zechariah  i.-viii.,  c.  500  B.  C." 

§  Vernes,  Robertson  Smith,  Kuenen,  Matthes,  Cornill, 
Novvack,  etc. 

II  Joel  iii.  4  (Heb.;  Eng.  ii.  31);  "  Mai."  iv.  5. 

i  iii.  (Eng.;  iv.  Heb.)  17. 

**  Perhaps  this  is  the  most  convenient  place  to  refer  to 
Konig's  proposal  to  place  Joel  in  the  last  years  of  Josiah. 
Some  of  his  arguments  (e.  g.,  that  Joel  is  placed  among 
the  first  of  the  Twelve)  we  have  already  answered.  He 
thinks  that  i.  17-20  suit  the  great  drought  in  Josiah's  reign 
(Jer.  xiv.  2-6),  that  the  name  given  to  the  locusts,  ''J'lQVri, 
ii.  20,  is  due  to  Jeremiah's  enemy  "  from  the  north,"  and 
that  the  phrases  "  return  with  all  your  heart,"  ii.  12,  and 
"return  to  Jehovah  your  God,"  13,  imply  a  period  of 
apostasy.  None  of  these  conclusions  is  necessary.  The 
absence  of  reference  to  the  "high  places"  finds  an 
analogy  in  Isa.  i.  13  ;  the  nPIjO  is  mentioned  in  Isa.  i.  13  : 
if  Amos  viii.  5  testifies  to  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  and 
Nahum  ii.  i  to  other  festivals,  who  can  say  a  pre-exilic 
prophet  would  not  be  interested  in  the  meal  and  drink 
offerings?  But  surely  no  pre-exilic  prophet  would  have 
so  emphasised  these  as  Joel  has  done.  Nor  is  Konig's 
explanation  of  iv.  2  as  of  the  Assyrian  and  Egyptian  in- 
vasion of  Judah  so  probable  as  that  which  refers  the 
verse  to  the  Babylonian  exile.  Nor  are  Konig's  objec- 
tions to  a  date  after  "Malachi"  convincing.  They  are 
that  a  prophet  near  "  Malachi's  "  time  must  have  speci- 
fied as  "  Malachi  "  did  the  reasons  for  the  repentance  to 
which  he  summoned  the  people,  while  Joel  gives  none, 
but  is  quite  general  (ii.  13a).  But  the  change  of  attitude 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  covenant  and  Law  of  444. 
"Malachi"  i.  n  speaks  of  the  Gentiles  worshipping 
Jehovah,  but  not  even  in  Jonah  iii.  5  is  any  relation  of 
the  Gentiles  to  Jehovah  predicated.  Again,  the  greater 
exclusiveness  of  Ezra  and  his  Law  may  be  the  cause. 
Joel,  it  is  true,  as  Konig  says,  does  not  mention  the  Law, 
while  "  Malachi  "  does  (ii.  8,  etc.);  but  this  was  not  neces- 
sary if  the  people  had  accepted  it  in  444.  Professor  Ryle 
(Canon  of  O.  T.,  106  n.)  leaves  the  question  of  Joel's  date 
open. 

tt  Pages  640  f.  n. 


date  after  the  Exile,  while  ii.  20,  which,  it  will 
be  remembered,  Robertson  Smith  takes  as  a 
gloss,  he  attributes  to  the  editor  who  has  joined 
the  two  sections  together.  His  reasons  are  that 
chaps,  i.  and  ii.  are  entirely  taken  up  with  the 
physical  plague  of  locusts,  and  no  troubles  from 
heathen  are  mentioned;  while  chaps,  iii.  and  iv. 
say  nothing  of  a  physical  plague,  but  the  evils 
they  deplore  for  Israel  are  entirely  political,  the 
assaults  of  enemies.  Now  it  is  quite  within 
the  bounds  of  possibility  that  chaps,  iii.  and 
iv.  are  from  another  hand  than  chaps,  i.  and 
ii.:  we  have  nothing  to  disprove  that.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  there  is  nothing  to  prove 
it.  On  the  contrary,  the  possibility  of  all 
four  chapters  being  from  the  same  hand  is  very 
obvious.  Joel  mentions  no  heathen  in  the  first 
chapter,  because  he  is  engrossed  with  the 
plague  of  locusts.  But  when  this  has  passed, 
it  is  quite  natural  that  he  should  take  up  the 
standing  problem  of  Israel's  history — thfir  rela- 
tion to  heathen  peoples.  There  is  no  discrepancy 
between  the  two  different  subjects,  nor  between 
the  styles  in  which  they  are  respectively  treated. 
Rothstein's  arguments  for  an  early  date  for 
chaps,  i.  and  ii.  have  been  already  answered,  and 
when  we  come  to  the  exposition  of  them  we 
shall  find  still  stronger  reasons  for  assigning 
them  to  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  befCTe  Christ. 
The  assault  on  the  integrity  of  the  prophecy 
may  therefore  be  said  to  have  failed,  though  no 
one  who  remembers  the  composite  character  of 
the  prophetical  books  can  deny  that  the  question 
is  still  open.*   . 


2.   The   Interpretation  of  the   Bock:   Is   it 
Description,  Allegory,  or  Apocalypse? 

Another  question  to  which  we  must  address 
ourselves  before  we  can  pass  to  the  exposition 
of  Joel's  prophecies  is  of  the  attitude  and  inten- 
tion of  the  prophet.  Does  he  describe  or  pre- 
dict?   Does  he  give  history  or  allegory? 

Joel  starts  from  a  great  plague  of  locusts, 
which  he  describes  not  only  in  the  ravages  they 
commit  upon  the  land,  but  in  their  ominous 
foreshadowing  of  the  Day  of  the  Lord.  They 
are  the  heralds  of  God's  near  judgment  upon  the 
nation.  Let  the  latter  repent  instantly  with  a 
day  of  fasting  and  prayer.  Peradventure  Jeho- 
vah will  relent,  and  spare  His  people.  So  far 
chap.  i.  2-ii.  17.  Then  comes  a  break.  An  un- 
certain interval  appears  to  elapse;  and  in  chap, 
ii.  18  we  are  told  that  Jehovah's  zeal  for  Israel 
has  been  stirred,  and  He  has  had  pity  on  His 
folk.  Promises  follow,  first,  of  deliverance  from 
the  plague  and  of  restoration  of  the  harvests  it 
has  consumed,  and  second,  of  the  outpouring  of 
the  Spirit  on  all  classes  of  the  community: 
chap.  ii.  17-32  (Eng.;  ii.  17-iii.  Heb.).  Chap.  iii. 
(Eng.;  iv.  Heb.)  gives  another  picture  of  the 
Day  of  Jehovah,  this  time  described  as  a  judg- 
ment upon  the  heathen  enemies  of  Israel.  They 
shall  be  brought  together,  condemned  judicially 
by  Him,  and  slain  by  His  hosts,  His  "  super- 
natural "   hosts.     Jerusalem  shall  be   freed  from 

*  "Vernes,  "  Histoire  des  Idees  Messianiques  depuis 
Alexandre,"  pp.  13  ff.,  had  already  asserted  that  chaps,  i. 
and  ii.  must  be  by  a  different  author  from  chaps,  iii  and 
iv.,  because  the  former  has  to  do  wholly  with  the  writer's 
present,  with  which  the  latter  has  no  connection  what- 
ever, but  it  is  entirely  eschatological.  But  in  his 
"  Melanges  de  Crit.  Relig.,  pp.  218  ff.,  Vernes  allows  that 
his  arguments  are  not  conclusive,  and  that  all  four  chap- 
ters may  have  come  from  the  same  hand. 


THE    BOOK    OF    JOEL. 


655 


the  feet  of  strangers,  and  the  fertility  of  the  land 
restored. 

These  are  the  contents  of  the  book.  Do  they 
describe  an  actual  plague  of  locusts,  already  ex- 
perienced by  the  people?  Or  do  they  predict 
this  as  still  to  come?  And  again,  are  the  locusts 
which  they  describe  real  locusts,  or  a  symbol  and 
allegory  of  the  human  foes  of  Israel?  To  these 
two  questions,  which  in  a  measure  cross  and  in- 
volve each  other,  three  kinds  of  answer  have 
been  given. 

A  large  and  growing  majority  of  critics  of  all 
schools  *  hold  that  Joel  starts,  like  other  proph- 
ets, from  the  facts  of  experience.  His  locusts, 
though  described  with  poetic  hyperbole — for  are 
they  not  the  vanguard  of  the  awful  Day  of  God's 
judgment? — are  real  locusts;  their  plague  has 
just  been  felt  by  his  contemporaries,  whom  he 
summons  to  repent,  and  to  whom,  when  they 
have  repented,  he  brings  promises  of  the  res- 
toration of  their  ruined  harvests,  the  outpouring 
of  the  Spirit,  and  judgment  upon  their  foes.  Pre- 
diction is  therefore  found  only  in  the  second 
half  of  the  book  (ii.  18  onwards) :  it  rests  upon 
a  basis  of  narrative  and  exhortation  which  fills 
the  first  half. 

But  a  number  of  other  critics  have  argued  (and 
with  great  force)  that  the  prophet's  language 
about  the  locusts  is  too  aggravated  and  too 
ominous  to  be  limited  to  the  natural  plague 
which  these  insects  periodically  inflicted  upon 
Palestine.  Joel  (they  reason)  would  hardly  have 
connected  so  common  an  adversity  with  so  sin- 
gular and  ultimate  a  crisis  as  the  Day  of  the 
Lord.  Under  the  figure  of  locusts  he  must  be 
describing  some  more  fateful  agency  of  God's 
wrath  upon  Israel.  More  than  one  trait  of  his 
description  appears  to  imply  a  human  army.  It 
can  only  be  one  or  other,  or  all,  of  those  heathen 
powers  whom  at  different  periods  God  raised 
up  to  chastise  His  delinquent  people;  and  this 
opinion  is  held  to  be  supported  by  the  facts  that 
chap.  ii.  20  speaks  of  them  as  the  Northern  and 
chap.  iii.  (Eng. ;  iv.  Heb.)  deals  with  the  heathen. 
The  locusts  of  chaps,  i.  and  ii.  are  the  same  as 
the  heathen  of  chap.  iii.  In  chaps,  i.  and  ii.  they 
are  described  as  threatening  Israel,  but  on  con- 
dition of  Israel  repenting  (chap.  ii.  18  fif.)  the 
Day  of  the  Lord  which  they  herald  shall  be  their 
destruction  and  not  Israel's  (chap.  iii.).t 

The  supporters  of  this  allegorical  interpretation 
of  Joel  are,  however,  divided  among  themselves 
as  to  whether  the  heathen  powers  symbolised 
by  the  locusts  are  described  as  having  already 
afflicted  Israel  or  are  predicted  as  still  to  come. 
Hilgenfeld,t  for  instance,  says  that  the  prophet 
in  chaps,  i.  and  ii.  speaks  of  their  ravages  as  al- 
ready past.  To  him  their  fourfold  plague  de- 
scribed in  chap.  i.  4  symbolises  four  Persian  as- 
saults upon  Palestine,  after  the  last  of  which  in 
358  the  prophecy  must  therefore  have  been 
written. §  Others  read  them  as  still  to  come.  In 
our  own  country  Pusey  has  been  the  strongest 
supporter   of   this   theory.||     To   him   the   whole 

*/.  e.,  Hitzig,  Vatke,  Ewald,  Robertson  Smith,  Kuenen, 
Kirkpatrick,  Driver,  Davidson,  Nowack,  etc. 

t  This  allegorical  interpretation  was  a  favourite  one  with 
the  early  Christian  Fathers  :  c/.  Jerome. 

t  "  Zeitschr.  ftir  wissensch.  Theologie,"  i860,  pp.  412  ff. 

§Cambyses  525,  Xerxes  484,  Artaxerxes  Ochus  460  and 
458. 

II  In  Germany,  among  other  representatives  of  this 
opinion,  are  Bertholdt  ("Einl.")  and  Hengstenberg 
C'Christol."  111.352  flf.)  the  latter  of  whom  saw  in  the 
four  kinds  of  locusts  the  Assyrian-Babylonian,  the  Per- 
sian, the  Greek,  and  the  Roman  tyrants  of  Israel. 


book,  written  before  Amos,  is  prediction.  "  It 
extends  from  the  prophet's  own  day  to  the  end 
of  time."  Joel  calls  the  scourge  the  Northern: 
he  directs  the  priests  to  pray  for  its  removal, 
that  "  the  heathen  may  not  rule  over "  God's 
heritage;  *  he  describes  the  agent  as  a  responsi- 
ble one;f  his  imagery  goes  far  beyond  the  ef- 
fects of  locusts,  and  threatens  drought,  fire,  and 
plague,:}:  the  assault  of  cities  and  the  terrifying 
of  peoples. §  The  scourge  is  to  be  destroyed 
in  a  way  physically  inapplicable  to  locusts;  |  and 
the  promises  of  its  removal  include  the  remedy 
of  ravages  which  mere  locusts  could  not  inflict: 
the  captivity  of  Judah  is  to  be  turned,  and  the 
land  recovered  from  foreigners  who  are  to  be 
banished  from  it.l  Pusey  thus  reckons  as  future 
the  relenting  of  God,  consequent  upon  the  peo- 
ple's penitence:  chap.  ii.  18  fT.  The  past  tenses 
in  which  it  is  related,  he  takes  as  instances  of 
the  well-known  prophetic  -perfect,  according  to 
which  the  prophets  express  their  assurance  of 
things  to  come  by  describing  them  as  if  they 
had  already  happened. 

This  is  undoubtedly  a  strong  case  for  the  pre- 
dictive and  allegorical  character  of  the  Book  of 
Joel;  but  a  little  consideration  will  show  us  that 
the  facts  on  which  it  is  grounded  are  capable  of 
a  dififerent  explanation  than  that  which  it  as- 
sumes, and  that  Pusey  has  overlooked  a  number 
of  other  facts  which  force  us  to  a  literal  inter- 
pretation of  the  locusts  as  a  plague  already  past, 
even  though  we  feel  they  are  described  in  the 
language  of  poetical  hyperbole. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  Pusey's  theory  implies 
that  the  prophecy  is  addressed  to  a  future  gen- 
eration, who  shall  be  alive  when  the  predicted 
invasions  of  heathen  come  upon  the  land. 
Whereas  Joel  obviously  addresses  his  own  con- 
temporaries. The  prophet  and  his  hearers  are 
one.  "  Before  our  eyes,"  he  says,  "  the  food  has 
been  cut  off."  **  As  obviously,  he  speaks  of  the 
plague  of  locusts  as  of  something  that  has  just 
happened.  His  hearers  can  compare  its  effects 
with  past  disasters,  which  it  has  far  exceeded  ;tt 
and  it  is  their  duty  to  hand  down  the  story  of  it 
to  future  generations. tt  Again,  his  description 
is  that  of  a  physical,  not  of  a  political,  plague. 
Fields  and  gardens,  vines  and  figs,  are  devastated 
by  being  stripped  and  gnawed.  Drought  ac- 
companies the  locusts,  the  seed  shrivels  beneath 
the  clods,  the  trees  languish,  the  cattle  pant  for 
want  of  water. §§  These  are  not  the  trail  which 
an  invading  army  leave  behind  them.  In  support 
of  his  theory  that  human  hosts  are  meant,  Pusey 
points  to  the  verses  which  bid  the  people  pray 
"  that  the  heathen  rule  not  over  them,"  and 
which  describe  the  invaders  as  attacking  cities. |||| 
But  the  former  phrase  may  be  rendered  with 
equal  propriety,  "  that  the  heathen  make  not 
satirical  songs  about  them";  ^^  and  as  to  the 
latter,  not  only  do  locusts  invade  towns  exactly 
as  Joel  describes,  but  his  words  that  the  invader 
steals  into  houses  like  "  a  thief "  are  far  more 
applicable  to  the  insidious  entrance  of  locusts 
than  to  the  bold  and  noisy  assault  of  a  storming 
party.  Moreover  Pusey  and  the  other  allegori- 
cal interpreters  of  the  book  overlook  the  fact 
that  Joel  never  so  much  as  hints  at  the  invariable 


•11. 17. 

t  ii .  20. 

t  i-  iQt  20. 

jPlur.  ii.  6. 

11  ii-  20. 

iiii.  (Heb.  iv.)  i  f.,  17. 


**i.  16. 
+t  i.  2  f. 
«i.  3- 
8§i-  17- 

nil  11. 17, 11. 9  ff. 
^^  on  h^. 


656 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


effects  of  a  human  invasion,  massacre,  and  plun- 
der. He  describes  no  slaying  and  no  looting; 
but  when  he  comes  to  the  promise  that  Jeho- 
vah will  restore  the  losses  which  have  been  sus- 
tained by  His  people,  he  defines  them  as  the 
years  which  His  army  has  eaten*  But  all  this 
proof  is  clenched  by  the  fact  that  Joel  compares 
the  locoasts  to  actual  soldiers.!  They  are  like 
horsemen,  the  sound  of  them  is  like  chariots, 
they  run  like  horses,  and  like  men  of  war  thry 
leap  upon  the  wall.  Joel  could  never  have  com- 
pared a  real  army  to  itself! 

The -allegorical  interoretation  is  therefore  un- 
tenable. But  some  critics,  while  admitting  this, 
are  yet  not  disposed  to  take  the  first  part  of  the 
book  for  narrative.  They  admit  that  the  prophet 
means  a  plague  of  locusts,  but  they  deny  that  he 
is  speaking  of  a  plague  already  past,  and  hold 
that  his  locusts  are  still  to  come,  that  they  are 
as  much  a  part  of  the'  future  as  the  pouring  out 
of  the  Spirit  t  and  the  judgment  of  the  heathen 
in  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat.J^  All  alike,  they 
are  signs  or  accompaniments  of  the  Day  of  Je- 
hovah, and  that  Day  has  still  to  break.  The 
prophet's  scenery  is  apocalyptic;  the  locusts  are 
"  eschatological  locusts,"  not  historical  ones. 
This  interpretation  of  Joel  has  been  elaborated 
by  Dr.  Adalbert  Merx,  and  the  following  is  a 
summary  of  his  opinions.! 

After  examining  the  book  along  all  the  lines 
of  exposition  which  have  been  proposed,  Merx 
finds  himself  unabJe  to  trace  any  plan  or  even 
sign  of  a  plan;  and  his  only  escape  from  per- 
plexity is  the  belief  that  no  plan  can  ever  have 
been  meant  by  the  author.  Joel  weaves  in  one 
past,  present,  and  future,  paints  situations  only 
to  blot  them  out  and  put  others  in  their  place, 
starts  many  processes  but  develops  none.  His 
book  shows  no  insight  into  God's  plan  with  Is- 
rael, but  is  purely  external;  the  bearing  and  the 
end  of  it  is  the  material  prosperity  of  the  little 
land  of  Judah.  From  this  Merx  concludes  that 
the  book  is  not  an  original  work,  but  a  mere 
summary  of  passages  from  previous  prophets, 
that  with  a  few  reflections  of  the  life  of  the  Jews 
after  the  Return  lead  us  to  assign  it  to  that 
period  of  literary  culture  which  Nehemiah  in- 
augurated by  the  collection  of  national  writings 
and  which  was  favoured  by  the  cessation  of  all 
political  disturbance.  Joel  gathered  up  the  pic- 
tures of  the  Messianic  age  in  the  older  prophets, 
and  welded  them  together  in  one  long  prayer  by 
the  fervid  belief  that  that  age  was  near.  But 
while  the  older  prophets  spoke  upon  the  ground 
of  actual  fact  and  rose  from  this  to  a  majestic 
picture  of  the  last  punishment,  the  still  life  of 
Joel's  time  had  nothing  such  to  ofifer  him  and 
he  had  to  seek  another  basis  for  his  prophetic 
flight.  It  is  probable  that  he  sought  this  in  the 
relation  of  Type  and  Antitype.  The  Antitype  he 
found  in  the  liberation  from  Egypt,  the  darkness 
and  the  locusts  of  which  he  transferred  to  his 
canvas  from  Exod.  x.  4-6.  The  locusts,  there- 
fore, are  ncitlicr  real  nor  symbolic,  but  ideal. 
This  is  the  method  of  the  Midrash  and  Haggada 
in  Jewish  literature,  which  constantly  placed  over 
against  each   other  the   deliverance   from   Egypt 

*  A.  U.  Davidson,  Expos.,  18S8,  pp.  200  f. 

+  ii.  4IT. 

X  Hug  ii.  28  ff.,  Heb.  iii. 

§  iCuy;.  iii.  Heb  iv. 

H"Oi.'  Prophetic  dea  Joel  11  ihre  Ausleger,"  i87q.  The 
following  sninmai  y  and  criticism  of  Merx's  views  I  take 
from  an  umpublishf  J;  review  of  his  work  which  I  wrote 
in  1881. 


and  the  last  judgment.  It  is  a  method  that  is  al- 
ready found  in  such  portions  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  Ezek.  xxxvii.  and  Psalm  Ixxviii.  Joel's 
locusts  are  borrowed  from  the  Egyptian  plagues, 
but  are  presented  as  the  signs  of  the  Last  Day. 
They  will  bring  it  near  to  Israel  by  famine, 
drought,  and  the  interruption  of  worship  de- 
scribed in  chap.  i.  Chap,  ii.,  which  Merx  keeps 
distinct  from  chap,  i.,  is  based  on  a  study  of 
Ezekiel,  from  whom  Joel  has  borrowed,  among 
other  things,  the  expressions  "  the  garden  of 
Eden  "  and  "  the  Northerner."  The  two  verses 
generally  held  to  be  historic,  18  and  19,  Merx 
takes  to  be  the  continuation  of  the  prayer  of  the 
priests,  pointing  the  verbs  so  as  to  turn  them 
from  perfects  into  futures.*  The  rest  of  the 
book,  Merx  strives  to  show,  is  pieced  together 
from  many  prophets,  chiefly  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel, 
but  without  the  tender  spiritual  feeling  of  the 
one,  or  the  colossal  magnificence  of  the  other. 
Special  nations  are  mentioned,  but  in  this  por- 
tion of  the  work  we  have  to  do  not  with  events 
already  past,  but  with  general  views,  and  these 
not  original,  but  conditioned  by  the  expressions 
of  earlier  writers.  There  is  no  history  in  the 
book:  it  is  all  ideal,  mystical,  apocalyptic.  That 
is  to  say,  according  to  Merx,  there  is  no  real 
prophet  or  prophetic  fire,  only  an  old  man  warm- 
ing his  feeble  hands  over  a  few  embers  that  he 
has  scraped  together  from  the  ashes  of  ancient 
fires,  now  nearly  wholly  dead. 

Merx  has  traced  Joel's  relations  to  other 
prophets,  and  reflection  of  a  late  date  in  Israel's 
history,  with  .care  and  ingenuity;  but  his  treat- 
ment of  the  text  and  exegesis  of  the  prophet's 
meaning  are  alike  forced  and  fanciful.  In  face 
of  the  support  which  the  Massoretic  reading  of 
the  hinge  of  the  book,  chap.  ii.  18  ff.,  receives 
from  the  ancient  versions,  and  of  its  inherent 
probability  and  harmony  with  the  context, 
Merx's  textual  emendation  is  unnecessary,  be- 
sides being  in  itself  unnatural. f  While  the  very 
same  objections  which  we  have  already  found 
valid  against  the  allegorical  interpretation 
equally  dispose  of  this  mystical  one.  Merx  out- 
rages the  evident  features  of  the  book  almost  as 
much  as  Hengstenberg  and  Pusey  have  done. 
He  has  lifted  out  of  time  altogether  that  which 
plainly  purports  to  be  historical.  His  literary 
criticism  is  as  unsound  as  his  textual.  It  is  only 
by  ignoring  the  beautiful  poetry  of  chap.  i.  that 
he  transplants  it  to  the  future.  Joel's  figures  are 
too  vivid,  too  actual,  to  be  predictive  or  mysti- 
cal. And  the  whole  interpretation  wrecks  itself 
in  the  same  verse  as  the  allegorical,  the  verse, 
viz.,  in  which  Joel  plainly  speaks  of  himself  as 
having  suffered  with  his  hearers  the  plague  he 
describes. t 

We  may,  therefore,  with  confidence  conclude 
that  the  allegorical  and  mystical  interpretations 
of  Joel  are  impossible;  and  that  the  only  rea- 
sonable view  of  our  prophet  is  that  which  re- 
gards him  as  calling,  in  chap.  i.  2-ii.  17,  upon  his 
contemporaries  to  repent  in  face  of  a  plague  of 
locusts,  so  unusually  severe  that  he  has  felt  it 
to  be  ominous  of  even  the  Day  of  the  Lord;  and 
in  the  rest  of  his  book,  as  promising  material, 

*For  ^.?i?P_'  etc.,  he  reads  ^.?5^1'  etc. 

+  "  The  proposal  of  Merx,  to  change  the  pointing  so  as  to 
transform  the  perfects  into  futures,  ...  is  an  exegetical 
mon.strosity."— Robertson  Smith,  art.  "Joel,"  "  Encyc. 
Brit." 

X  i.  16. 


Joel  i.-ii.  17.1       THE    LOCUSTS    AND    THE    DAY    OF    THE    LORD. 


t'S/ 


political  and  spiritual  triumphs  to  Israel  in  con- 
sequence of  their  repentance,  either  already  con- 
summated, or  anticipated  by  the  prophet  as 
certain. 

It  is  true  that  the  account  of  the  locusts  ap- 
pears to  bear  features  which  conflict  with  the 
literal  interpretation.  Some  of  these,  however, 
vanish  upon  a  fuller  knowlege  of  the  awful  de- 
gree which  such  a  plague  has  been  testified  to 
reach  by  competent  observers  within  our  own 
era.*  Those  that  remain  may  be  attributed 
partly  to  the  poetic  hyperbole  of  Joel's  style,  and 
partly  to  the  fact  that  he  sees  in  the  plague  far 
more  than  itself.  The  locusts  are  signs  of  the 
Day  of  Jehovah.  Joel  treats  them  as  we  found 
Zephaniah  treating  the  Scythian  hordes  of  his 
day.  They  are  as  real  as  the  latter,  but  on  them 
as  on  the  latter  the  lurid  glare  of  Apocalypse 
ha?  fallen,  magnifying  them  and  investing  them 
with  that  air  of  ominousness  which  is  the  sole 
justification  of  the  allegorical  and  mystic  inter- 
pretation of  their  appearance. 

To  the  same  sense  of  their  office  as  heralds  of 
the  last  day,  we  owe  the  description  of  the  lo- 
custs as  "the  Northerner."!  The  North  is  not 
the  quarter  from  which  locusts  usually  reach 
Palestine,  nor  is  there  any  reason  to  suppose 
that  by  naming  the  North  Joel  meant  only  to 
emphasise  the  unusual  character  of  these  swarms. 
Rather  he  takes  a  name  employed  in  Israel  since 
Jeremiah's  time  to  express  the  instruments  of  Je- 
hovah's wrath  in  the  day  of  His  judgment  of 
Israel.  The  name  is  typical  of  Doom,  and  there- 
fore Joel  applies  it  to  his  fateful  locusts. 

3.  State  of  the  Text  and  the   Style  of  the 
Book. 

Joel's  style  is  fluent  and  clear,  both  when  he  is 
describing  the  locusts,  in  which  part  of  his  book 
he  is  most  original,  and  when  he  is  predicting, 
in  apocalyptic  language  largely  borrowed  from 
earlier  prophets,  the  Day  of  Jehovah.  To  the 
■ease  of  understandng  him  we  may  attribute  the 
sound  state  of  the  text  and  its  freedom  from 
glosses.  In  this,  like  most  of  the  books  of  the 
post-exilic  prophets,  especially  the  Books  of 
Haggai,  "  Malachi  "  and  Jonah,  Joel's  book  con- 
trasts very  favourably  with  those  of  the  older 
prophets;  and  that  also,  to  some  degree,  is 
proof  of  the  lateness  of  his  date.  The  Greek 
translators  have,  on  the  whole,  understood  Joel 
•easily  and  with  little  error.  In  their  version 
there  are  the  usual  differences  of  grammatical 
construction,  especially  in  the  pronominal  suf- 
fixes and  verbs,  and  of  punctuation;  but  very  few 
bits  of  expansion  and  no  real  additions.  These 
are  all  noted  in  the  translation  below. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

THE  LOCUSTS   AND    THE   DAY   OF   THE 
LORD. 

Joel  i.-ii.  17. 

Joel,  as  we  have  seen,  found  the  motive  of  his 
p/ophecy  in  a  recent  plague  of  locusts,  the  ap- 

*  Even  the  comparison  of  the  ravages  of  the  locusts  to 
t  irning  by  fire.  But  probably  also  Joel  means  that  they 
vere  accompanied  by  drought  and  fprest  fires.  See 
t  slow. 

t  ii.  20. 

42— Vol.  rv. 


pearancc  of  which  and  the  havoc  they  worked 
are  described  by  him  in  full  detail.  Writing  not 
only  as  a  poet  but  as  a  seer,  who  reads  in  the 
locusts  signs  of  the  great  Day  of  the  Lord,  Joel 
has  necessarily  put  into  his  picture  several  fea- 
tures which  carry  the  imagination  beyond  the 
limits  of  experience.  And  yet,  if  we  ourselves 
had  lived  through  such  a  plague,  we  should  be 
able  to  recognise  how  little  license  the  poet 
has  taken,  and  that  the  seer,  so  far  from  unduly 
mixing  with  his  facts  the  colours  of  Apocalypse, 
must  have  experienced  in  the  terrible  plague  it- 
self enough  to  provoke  all  the  religious  and 
monitory  use  which  he  makes  of  it. 

The  present  writer  has  seen  but  one  swarm 
of  locusts,  in  which,  though  it  was  small  and 
soon  swept  away  by  the  wind,  he  felt  not  only 
many  of  the  features  that  Joel  describes,  but  even 
some  degree  of  that  singular  helplessness  before 
a  calamity  of  portent  far  beyond  itself,  some- 
thing of  that  supernatural  edge  and  accent, 
which,  by  ''he  confession  of  so  many  observers, 
characterise  the  locust-plague  and  the  earth- 
quake above  all  other  physical  disasters.  One 
summer  afternoon,  upon  the  plain  of  Hauran, 
a  long  bank  of  mist  grew  rapidly  from  the 
western  horizon.  The  day  was  dull,  and  as  the 
mist  rose  athwart  the  sunbeams,  struggling 
through  clouds,  it  gleamed  cold  and  white,  like 
the  front  of  a  distant  snow-storm.  When  it 
came  near,  it  seemed  to  be  more  than  a  mile 
broad,  and  was  dense  enough  to  turn  the  atmos- 
phere raw  and  dirty,  with  a  chill  as  of  a  summer 
sea-fog,  only  that  this  was  not  due  to  any  fall 
in  the  temperature.  Nor  was  there  the  silence 
of  a  mist.  We  were  enveloped  by  a  noise,  less 
like  the  whirring  of  wings  than  the  rattle  of 
hail  or  the  crackling  of  bush  on  fire.  Myriads 
upon  myriads  of  locusts  were  about  us,  cover- 
ing the  ground,  and  shutting  out  the  view  in  all 
directions.  Though  they  drifted  before  the 
wind,  there  was  no  confusion  in  their  ranks. 
They  sailed  in  unbroken  lines,  sometimes 
straight,  sometimes  wavy;  and  when  they  passed 
pushing  through  our  caravan,  they  left  almost 
no  stragglers,  except  from  the  last  battalion,  and 
only  the  few  dead  which  we  had  caught  in  our 
hands.  After  several  minutes  they  were  again 
but  a  lustre  on  the  air,  and  so  melted  away  into 
some  heavy  clouds  in  the  east. 

Modern  travellers  furnish  us  with  terrible  im- 
pressions of  the  innumerable  multitudes  of  a  lo- 
cust-plague, the  succession  of  their  swarms 
through  days  and  weeks,  and  the  utter  desola- 
tion they  leave  behind  them.  Mr.  Doughty 
writes:  *  "  There  hopped  before  our  feet  a  minute 
brood  of  second  locusts,  of  a  leaden  colour,  with 
budding  wings  like  the  spring  leaves,  and  born 
of  those  gay  swarms  which  a  few  weeks  before 
had  passed  over  and  despoiled  the  desert.  After 
forty  days  these  also  would  fly  as  a  pestilence, 
yet  more  hungry  than  the  former,  and  fill  the 
atmosphere."  And  later:  "The  clouds  of  the 
second  locust  brood  which  the  Aarab  call 
'Am'dan,  '  pillars,'  flew  over  us  for  some  days, 
invaded  the  booths  and  for  blind  hunger  even 
bit  our  shins."  f  It  was  "  a  storm  of  rustling 
wings."  t  "  This  year  was  remembered  for  the 
locust  swarms  and  great  summer  heat."§  A 
traveller  in  South  Africa ||  says:  "  For  the  space 
of  ten  miles  on  each  side  of  the  Sea-Cow  river 

*  "  Arabia  Deserta,"  p.  307.  t  ^d.,  396. 

\''  Id."  p.  355.  §/^.,  .335- 

II  Barrow,  "  South  Africa,"  p.  257,  quoted  by  Pusey. 


658 


THE"BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


and  eighty  or  ninety  miles  in  length,  an  area  of 
sixteen  or  eighteen  hundred  square  miles,  the 
whole  surface  might  literally  be  said  to  be  cov- 
ered with  them."  In  his  recently  published  book 
on  South  Africa,  Mr.  Bryce  writes: — * 

■'  It  is  a  strange  sight,  beautiful  if  you  can 
forget  the  destruction  it  brings  with  it.  The 
whole  air,  to  twelve  or  even  eighteen  feet  above 
the  ground,  is  filled  with  the  insects,  reddish 
,  brown  in  body,  with  bright  gauzy  wings.  When 
i  the  sun's  rays  catch  them  it  is  like  the  sea 
'  sparkling  with  light.  When  you  see  them 
against  a  cloud  they  are  like  the  dense  flakes  of 
a  driving  snow-storm.  You  feel  as  if  you  had 
never  before  realised  immensity  in  number. 
Vast  crowds  of  men  gathered  at  a  festival,  count- 
less tree-tops  rising  along  the  slope  of  a  forest 
ridge,  the  chimneys  of  London  houses  from  the 
top  of  St.  Paul's — all  are  as  nothing  to  the  myri- 
ads of  insects  that  blot  out  the  sun  above  and 
cover  the  ground  beneath  and  fill  the  air  which- 
ever way  one  looks.  The  breeze  carries  them 
swiftly  past,  but  they  come  on  in  fresh  clouds, 
a  host  of  which  there  is  no  end,  each  of  them  a 
harmless  creature  which  you  can  catch  and 
crush  in  your  hand,  but  appalling  in  their  power 
of  collective  devastation." 

And  take  three  testimonies  from  Syria:  "The 
quantity  of  these  insects  is  a  thing  incredible  to 
any  one  who  has  not  seen  it  himself;  the  ground 
is  covered  by  them  for  several  leagues."  f  "  The 
whole  face  of  the  mountain  t  was  black  with 
them.  On  they  came  like  a  living  deluge.  We 
dug  trenches  and  kindled  fires,  and  beat  and 
burnt  to  death  heaps  upon  heaps,  but  the  effort 
•  was  utterly  useless.  They  rolled  up  the  moun- 
'  tain-side,  and  poured  over  rocks,  walls,  ditches, 
and  hedges,  those  behind  covering  up  and  pass- 
ing over  the  masses  already  killed.  For  some 
days  they  continued  to  pass.  The  noise  made  by 
them  in  marching  and  foraging  was  like  that  of 
a  heavy  shower  falling  upon  a  distant  forest."  J^ 
"  The  roads  were  covered  with  them,  all  march- 
ing and  in  regular  lines,  like  armies  of  soldiers, 
with  their  leaders  in  front;  and  all  the  opposi- 
tion of  man  to  resist  their  progress  was  in  vain." 
Having  consumed  the  plantations  in  the  country, 
they  entered  the  towns  and  villages.  "  When 
they  approached  our  garden  all  the  farm  servants 
were  employed  to  keep  them  ofif,  but  to  no 
avail;  though  our  men  broke  their  ranks  for  a 
moment,  no  sooner  had  they  passed  the  men 
than  they  closed  again,  and  marched  forward 
through  hedges  and  ditches  as  before.  Our  gar- 
den finished,  they  continued  their  march  toward 
the  town,  devastating  one  garden  after  another. 
They  have  also  penetrated  into  most  of  our 
rooms:  whatever  one  is  doing  one  hears  their 
noise  from  without,  like  the  noise  of  armed 
hosts,  or  the  running  of  many  waters.  When 
in  an  erect  position  their  appearance  at  a  little 
,  distance  is  like  that  of  a  well-armed  horse- 
man." II 

Locusts  are  notoriously  adapted  for  a  plague, 
"  since  to  strength  incredible  for  so  small  a  crea- 
ture, they  add  saw-like  teeth,  admirably  calcu- 

♦  "  Impressions  of  South  Africa,"  by  James  Hryce:  Mac- 
tnillans,  1897. 

t  Volney,  "  Voyage  en  Syrie,"  I.  277,  quoted  by  Pusey, 

t Lebanon. 

S  Abridged  from  Thomson'.s  "  The  Land  and  the  Book," 
ed.  1877,  Northern  Palestine,  pp.  416  ff. 

II  From  Driver's  abridgment  ("Joel  and  Amos,'' p.  90)  of 
an  account  in  the  Journ.  0/  Sac.  Lit.,  October,  1865,  pp. 


lated  to  eat  up  all  the  herbs  in  the  land."  *  They 
are  the  incarnation  of  hunger.  No  voracity  is 
like  theirs,  the  voracity  of  little  creatures,  whose 
million  separate  appetites  nothing  is  too  minute 
to  escape.  They  devour  first  grass  and  leaves, 
fruit  and  foliage,  everything  that  is  green  and 
juicy.  Then  they  attack  the  young  branches  of 
trees,  and  then  the  hard  bark  of  the  trunks.! 
"  After  eating  up  the  corn,  they  fell  upon  the 
vines,  the  pulse,  the  willows,  and  even  the  hemp, 
notwithstanding  its  great  bitterness."  %  "  The 
bark  of  figs,  pomegranates,  and  oranges,  bitter, 
hard,  and  corrosive,  escaped  not  their  vorac- 
ity." §  "They  are  particularly  injurious  to  the 
palm-trees;  these  they  strip  of  every  leaf  and 
green  particle,  the  trees  remaining  like  skeletons 
with  bare  branches."  ||  "  For  eighty  or  ninety 
miles  they  devoured  every  green  herb  and  every 
blade  of  grass."  1[  "  The  gardens  outside  Jaflfa 
are  now  completely  stripped,  even  the  bark  of 
the  young  trees  having  been  devoured,  and  look 
like  a  birch-tree  forest  in  winter."  **  "  The 
bushes  were  eaten  quite  bare,  though  the  ani- 
mals could  not  have  been  long  on  the  spot. 
They  sat  by  hundreds  on  a  bush  gnawing  the 
rind  and  the  woody  fibres."  ff  "  Bamboo  groves 
have  been  stripped  of  their  leaves  and  left  stand- 
ing like  saplings  after  a  rapid  bush  fire,  and 
grass  has  been  devoured  so  that  the  bare  ground 
appeared  as  if  burned."  H  "  The  country  did  not 
seem  to  be  burnt,  but  to  be  much  covered  with 
snow  through  the  whiteness  of  the  trees  and  the 
dryness  of  the  herbs."  §§  The  fields  finished, 
they  invade  towns  and  houses,  in  search  of 
stores.  Victual  of  all  kinds,  hay,  straw,  and 
even  linen  and  woollen  clothes  and  leather  bot- 
tles, they  consume  or  tear  in  pieces. ||||  They 
flood  through  the  open,  unglazed  windows  and 
lattices:  nothing  can  keep  them  out. 

These  extracts  prove  to  us  what  little  need 
Joel  had  of  hyperbole  in  order  to  read  his  lo- 
custs as  signs  of  the  Day  of  Jehovah;  especially 
if  we  keep  in  mind  that  locusts  are  worst  in  very 
hot  summers,  and  often  accompany  an  absolute 
drought  along  with  its  consequence  of  prairie 
and  forest  fires.  Some  have  thought  that,  in  in- 
troducing the  eflfects  of  fire,  Joel  only  means 
to  paint  the  burnt  look  of  a  land  after  locusts 
have  ravaged  it.  But  locusts  do  not  drink  up 
the  streams,  nor  cause  the  seed  to  shrivel  in  the 
earth. ITU  By  these  the  prophet  must  mean 
drought,  and  by  "  the  flame  that  has  burned  all 
the  trees  of  the  field,"  ***  the  forest  fire,  finding 
an  easy  prey  in  the  trees  which  have  been  re- 
duced to  firewood  by  the  locusts'  teeth. 

Even  in  the  great  passage  in  which  he  passes 
from  history  to  Apocalypse,  from  the  gloom  and 
terror  of  the  locusts  to  the  lurid  dawn   of  Je- 


*  Morier,  "  A  Second  Journey  through  Persia."  p.  ciq, 
quoted  by  Pusey,  from  whose  notesand  Driver's  excursus 
upon  locusts  in  "Joel  and  Amos  "the  following  quota- 
tions have  been  borrowed. 

+  Shaw's  "Travels  in  Barbary,"  1738,  pp.  236-8 ;  Jack- 
son's "  Travels  to  Morocco." 

t Adansson,  "Voyage  au  Senegal,"  p.  88. 

§Chenier,  "Recherches  Historiques  sur  les  Maures," 

III.  p.  4q6. 

II  Burckhardt,  "Notes,"  II.  90. 

i  Barrow,  "  South  Africa,"  p.  257. 

**  Journ.  of  Sac.  Lit.,  October,  1865. 

t+Lichtenstein,  "Travels  in  South  Africa.'' 

XX  Standard,  December  .25,  1896. 

§§  Fr.  Alvarez. 

IJIJ  Barheb.,  "  Chron.  Syr.,"  p.  784 ;  Burckhardt,  "  Notes," 
II.  90. 

IFIf  i.  20,  17. 

•*♦  i.  xg. 


Joel  i.-ii.  17]       THE    LOCUSTS    AND    THE    DAY    OF    THE    LORD. 


659 


hovah's  Day,  Joel  keeps  within  the  actual  facts 
of  experience: — 

■'  Day  of  darkness  and  murk. 
Day  of  cloud  and  heavy  mist, 
Like  dawn  scattered  on  the  mountains, 
A  people  many  and  powerful." 

No  one  who  has  seen  a  cloud  of  locusts  can  ques- 
tion the  realism  even  of  this  picture:  the  heavy 
gloom  of  the  immeasurable  mass  of  them,  shot 
by  gleams  of  light  where  a  few  of  the  sun's  im- 
prisoned beams  have  broken  through  or  across 
the  storm  of  lustrous  wings.  This  is  like  dawn 
beater*  down  upon  the  hilltops,  and  crushed  by 
rolling  masses  of  cloud,  in  conspiracy  to  pro- 
long the  night.  No:  the  only  point  at  which 
Joel  leaves  absolute  fact  for  the  wilder  combina- 
tions of  Apocalypse  is  at  the  very  close  of  his 
description,  chap.  ii.  10  and  11,  and  just  before 
his  call  to  repentance.  Here  we  find,  mixed  with 
the  locusts,  earthquake  and  thunderstorm;  and 
Joel  has  borrowed  these  from  the  classic  pictures 
of  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  using  some  of  the  very 
phrases  of  the  latter: — 

"  Earth  trembles  before  them, 
Heaven  quakes. 
Sun  and  moon  become  black, 
The  stars  withdraw  their  shining, 
And  Jehovah  utters  His  voice  before  His  army." 

Joel,  then,  describes,  and  does  not  unduly  en- 
hance, the  terrors  of  an  actual  plague.  At  first 
his  whole  strength  is  so  bent  to  make  his  people 
feel  these,  that,  though  about  to  call  to  re- 
pentance, he  does  not  detail  the  national  sins 
which  require  it.  In  his  opening  verses  he  sum- 
mons the  drunkards,*  but  that  is  merely  to  lend 
vividness  to  his  picture  of  facts,  because  men 
of  such  habits  will  be  the  first  to  feel  a  plague 
of  this  kind.  Nor  does  Joel  yet  ask  his  hearers 
what  the  calamity  portends.  At  first  he  only 
demands  that  they  shall  feel  it,  in  its  uniqueness 
and  its  own  sheer  force. 

Hence  the  peculiar  style  of  the  passage.  Let- 
ter for  letter,  this  is  one  of  the  heaviest  passages 
in  prophecy.  The  proportion  in  Hebrew  of 
liquids  to  the  other  letters  is  not  large;  but  here 
it  is  smaller  than  ever.  The  explosives  and  den- 
tals are  very  numerous.  There  are  several  key- 
words, with  hard  consonants  and  long  vowels, 
used  again  and  again:  Shuddadh,  'abhlah, 
'umlal,  hobhish.  The  longer  lines  into  which 
Hebrew  parallelism  tends  to  run  are  replaced  by 
a  rapid  series  of  short,  heavy  phrases,  falling  like 
blows.  Critics  have  called  it  rhetoric.  But  it  is 
rhetoric  of  a  very  high  order  and  perfectly  suited 
to  the  prophet's  purpose.  Look  at  chap.  i.  10: 
Shuddadh  sadheh,  'Sbhlah  'adhamah,  shuddadh 
daghan,  hobhish  tirosh,  'umlal  yi|har.t  Joel 
loads  his  clauses  with  the  most  leaden  letters  he 
can  find,  and  drops  them  in  quick  succession, 
repeating  the  same  heavy  word  again  and  again, 
as  if  he  would  stun  the  careless  people  into  some 
sense  of  the  bare,  brutal  weight  of  the  calamity 
which  has  befallen  them. 

Now  Joel  does  this  because  he  believes  that, 
if  his  people  feel  the  plague  in  its  proper  violence, 
they  must  be  convinced  that  it  comes  from  Je- 
hovah. The  keynote  of  this  part  of  the  prophecy 
is  found  in  chap.  i.  15:  "  Keshodh  mishshaddhai," 
■'  like  violence  from  the  All-violent  doth  it 
come."  "  If  you  feel  this  as  it  is,  you  will  feel 
Jehovah  Himself  in  it.  By  these  very  blows.  He 
and  His  Day  are  near.     We  had  been  forgetting 

*i.  5.  tC/;  i.  12,  13,  and  many  verses  in  chap.  ii. 


how  near."  Joel  mentions  no  crime,  nor  en- 
forces any  virtue:  how  could  he  have  done  so 
in  so  strong  a  sense  that  "  the  Judge  was  at  the 
door"?  To  make  men  feel  that  they  had  for- 
gotten they  were  in  reach  of  that  Almighty 
Hand,  which  could  strike  so  suddenly  and  so 
hard — Joel  had  time  only  to  make  men  feel  that, 
and  to  call  them  to  repentance.  In  this  we 
probably  see  some  reflection  of  the  age:  an  age 
when  men's  thoughts  were  thrusting  the  Deity 
further  and  further  from  their  life;  when  they 
put  His  Law  and  Temple  between  Him  and 
themselves;  and  when  their  religion,  devoid  of 
the  sense  of  His  Presence,  had  become  a  set  of 
formal  observances,  the  rending  of  garments 
and  not  of  hearts.  But  He,  whom  His  own  ordi- 
nances had  hidden  from  His  people,  has  burst 
forth  through  nature  and  in  sheer  force  of  calam- 
ity. He  has  revealed  Himself,  El-Shaddhai, 
"  God  All-violent,"  as  He  was  known  to  their 
fathers,  who  had  no  elaborate  law  or  ritual  to 
put  between  their  fearful  hearts  and  His  terrible 
strength,  but  cowered  before  Him,  helpless  on 
the  stripped  soil,  and  naked  beneath  His  thun- 
der. By  just  these  means  did  Elijah  and  Amos 
bring  God  home  to  the  hearts  of  ancient  Israel. 
In  Joel  we  see  the  revival  of  the  old  nature- 
religion,  and  the  revenge  that  it  was  bound  to 
take  upon  the  elaborate  systems  which  had  dis- 
placed it,  but  which  by  their  formalism  and  their 
artificial  completeness  had  made  men  forget 
that  near  presence  and  direct  action  of  the  Al- 
mighty which  it  is  nature's  own  office  to  enforce 
upon  the  heart. 

The  thing  is  true,  and  permanently  valid. 
Only  the  great  natural  processes  can  break  up 
the  systems  of  dogma  and  ritual  in  which  we 
make  ourselves  comfortable  and  formal,  and 
drive  us  out  into  God's  open  air  of  reality.  In 
the  crash  of  nature's  forces  even  our  particular 
sins  are  forgotten,  and  we  feel,  as  in  the  imme- 
diate presence  of  God,  our  whole,  deep  need  of 
repentance.  So  far  from  blaming  the  absence  of 
special  ethics  in  Joel's  sermon,  we  accept  it  as 
natural  and  proper  to  the  occasion. 

Such,  then,  appears  to  be  the  explanation  of 
the  first  part  of  the  prophecy,  and  its  develop- 
ment towards  the  call  to  repentance,  which  fol- 
lows it.  If  we  are  correct,  the  assertion  *  is 
false  that  no  plan  was  meant  by  the  prophet. 
For  not  only  is  there  a  plan,  but  the  plan  is  most 
suitable  to  the  requirements  of  Israel,  after  their 
adoption  of  the  whole  Law  in  445,  and  forms  one 
of  the  most  necessary  and  interesting  develop- 
ments of  all  religion:  the  revival,  in  an  artificial 
period,  of  those  primitive  forces  of  religion 
which  nature  alone  supplies,  and  which  are 
needed  to  correct  formalism  and  the  forgetful- 
ness  of  the  near  presence  of  the  Almighty.  We 
see  in  this,  too,  the  reason  of  Joel's  archaic  style, 
both  of  conception  and  expression:  that  likeness 
of  his  to  early  prophets  which  has  led  so  many 
to  place  him  between  Elijah  and  Amos.f  They 
are  wrong.  Joel's  simplicity  is  that  not  of  early 
prophecy,  but  of  the  austere  forces  of  this  re- 
vived and  applied  to  the  artificiality  of  a  later 
age. 

One  other  proof  of  Joel's  conviction  of  the 
religious  meaning  of  the  plague  might  also  have 
been  pled  by  the  earlier  prophets,  but  certainly 
not  in  the  terms  in  which  Joel  expresses  it. 
Amos   and    Hosea   had   both   described  the   de- 

*  On  Merx  and  others  :  see  above,  p.  656. 
tSee  above,  p.  651. 


66o 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


struction  of  the  country's  fertility  in  their  day 
as  God's  displeasure  on  His  people  and  (as 
Hosea  puts  it)  His  divorce  of  His  Bride  from 
Himself.*  But  by  them  the  physical  calamities 
were  not  threatened  alone:  banishment  from  the 
land  and  from  enjoyment  of  its  fruits  was  to 
follow  upon  drought,  locusts,  and  famine.  In 
threatening  no  captivity  Joel  dififers  entirely  from 
the  early  prophets.  It  is  a  mark  of  his  late  date. 
And  he  also  describes  the  divorce  between  Je- 
hovah and  Israel,  through  the  interruption  of 
the  ritual  by  the  plague,  in  terms  and  with  an 
accent  which  could  hardly  have  been  employed 
in  Israel  before  the  Exile.  After  the  rebuilding 
of  the  Temple  and  restoration  of  the  daily  sacri- 
fices morning  and  evening,  the  regular  perform- 
ance of  the  latter  was  regarded  by  the  Jews  with 
a  most  superstitious  sense  of  its  indispensable- 
ness  to  the  national  life.  Before  the  Exile,  Jere- 
miah, for  instance,  attaches  no  importance  to 
it,  in  circumstances  in  which  it  would  have  been 
not  unnatural  for  him.  priest  as  he  was,  to  do 
so.f  But  after  the  Exile,  the  greater  scrupulous- 
ness of  the  religious  life,  and  its  absorption  in 
ritual,  laid  extraordinary  emphasis  upon  the 
daily  offering,  which  increased  to  a  most  painful 
degree  of  anxiety  a„  the  centuries  went  on.^ 
The  New  Testament  speaks  of  "  the  Twelve 
Tribes  constantly  serving  God  day  and  night  ";  § 
and  Josephus,  while  declaring  that  in  no  siege 
of  Jerusalem  before  the  last  did  the  interruption 
ever  take  place  in  spite  of  the  stress  of  famine 
and  war  combined,  records  the  awful  impression 
made  alike  on  Jew  and  heathen  by  the  giving  up 
of  the  daily  sacrifice  on  the  17th  of  July,  a.  d.  70, 
during  the  investment  of  the  city  by  Titus.  ||  This 
disaster,  which  Judaism  so  painfully  feared  at 
every  crisis  in  its  history,  actually  happened,  Joel 
tells  us,  during  the  famine  caused  by  the  locusts. 
"  Cut  off  are  the  meal  and  the  drink  offerings 
from  the  house  of  Jehovah.^  Is  not  food  cut  ofT 
from  our  eves,  joy  and  gladness  from  the  house 
of  our  God?  **  Perhaps  He  will  turn  and  relent, 
and  leave  a  blessing  behind  Him,  meal  and  drink 
offering  for  Jehovah  our  God."  ft  The  break  "  of 
the  coniinual  symbol  of  gracious  intercourse  be- 
tween Jehovah  and  His  people,  and  the  main 
office  of  religion,"  means  divorce  between  Je- 
hovah and  Israel.  "  Wail  like  a  bride  girt  in 
sackcloth  for  the  husband  of  her  youth!  Wail, 
O  ministers  of  the  altar,  O  ministers  of  God!"tt 
This  then  was  another  reason  for  reading  in  the 
plague  of  locusts  more  than  a  physical  mean- 
ing. This  was  another  proof,  only  too  intelligi- 
ble to  scrupulous  Jews,  that  the  great  and  terri- 
ble Day  of  the  Lord  was  at  hand. 

Thus  Joel  reaches  the  climax  of  his  argument. 
Jehovah  is  near.  His  Day  is  about  to  break. 
From  this  it  is  impossible  to  escape  on  the  nar- 
row path  of  disaster  by  which  the  prophet  has 
led  up  to  it.  But  beneath  that  path  the  prophet 
passes  the  ground  of  a  broad  truth,  and  on  that 
truth,  while  judgment  remains  still  as  real,  there 
is  room  for  the  people  to  turn  from  it.  If  ex- 
perience has  shown  that  God  is  in  the  present, 
near  and  inevitable,  faith  remembers  that  He  is 
there  not  willingly  for  judgment,  but  with  all  His 
ancient  feeling  for  Israel  and  His  zeal  to  save 
*  See  pp.  S02,  50J  f. 
+  Jer.  xiv. 

i  Cf.  Ezek.  xlvi.  15  on  the  Thamid,  and  Neh.  x.  «  ;  Dan. 
viii.  II,  xi.  31,  xii.  11  :  cf.  p.  653. 
§  Acts  xxvi.  7. 

il  XIV.  "  Antt."  iv.  J,  xvi.  2  ;  VI.  "  Wars  "  ii.  i. 
*f  i-  9,  13.  ttii.  14. 

**i.  16.  tii.8,  13. 


her.  If  the  people  choose  to  turn,  Jehovah,  as 
their  God  and  as  one  who  works  for  their  sake, 
will  save  them.  Of  this  God  assures  them  by 
His  own  word.  For  the  first  time  in  the 
prophecy  He  speaks  for  Himself.  Hitherto  the 
prophet  has  been  describing  the  plague  and  sum» 
nioning  to  penitence.  "  But  now  oracle  of  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts."  *  The  great  covenant  name, 
"  Jehovah  your  God,"  is  solemnly  repeated  as  if 
symbolic  of  the  historic  origin  and  age-long  en- 
durance of  Jehovah's  relation  to  Israel;  and  the 
very  words  of  blessing  are  repeated  which  were 
given  when  Israel  was  called  at  Sinai  and  the 
covenant  ratified: —  • 

"  For  He  is  gracious  and  merciful, 
Long-suffering  and  plenteous  in  leal  love. 
And  relents  Him  of  the  evil " 

He  has  threatened  upon  you.  Once  more  the 
nation  is  summoned  to  try  Him  by  prayer:  the 
solemn  prayer  of  all  Israel,  pleading  that  He 
should  not  give  His  people  to  reproach. 

"  The  Word  of  Jehovah 
which  came  to  Jo'el  the  son  of  Pethfl'el.t 

Hear  this,  ye  old  men, 

And  give  ear,  all  inhabitants  of  the  land  ! 

Has  the  like  been  in  your  days. 

Or  in  the  days  of  your  fathers.' 

Tell  it  to  your  children, 

And  your  children  to  their  children. 

And  their  children  to  the  generation  that  follows. 
That  which  the  Shearer  left  the  Swarmer  hath  eaten, 
And  that  which  the  Swarmer  left  the  Lapper  hath  eaten, 
And  that  which  the  Lapper  left  the  Devourer  hath  eaten." 

These  are  four  dififerent  names  for  locusts, 
which  it  is  best  to  translate  by  their  literal  mean- 
ing. Some  think  that  they  represent  one  swarm 
of  locusts  in  four  stages  of  development,  but  this 
cannot  be,  because  the  same  swarm  never  returns 
upon  its  path,  to  complete  the  work  of  destruc- 
tion which  it  had  begun  in  an  earlier  stage  of 
its  growth.  Nor  can  the  first-named  be  the 
adult  brood  from  whose  eggs  the  others  spring, 
as  Doughty  has  described,^  for  that  would  ac- 
count only  for  two  of  the  four  names.  Joel 
rather  describes  successive  swarms  of  the  insect, 
without  reference  to  the  stages  of  its  growth,  and 
he  does  so  as  a  poet,  using,  in  order  to  bring 
out  the  full  force  of  its  devastation,  several  of 
the  Hebrew  names  that  were  given  to  the  lo- 
cust as  epithets  of  various  aspects  of  its  de- 
structive power.  The  names,  it  is  true,  cannot 
be  said  to  rise  in  climax,  but  at  least  the  most 
sinister  is  reserved  to  the  last.§ 

"  Rouse  ye,  drunkards,  and  weep. 
And  wail,  all  ye  bibbers  of  wine  ! 
The  new  wine  is  cut  off  from  your  month  I 
For  a  nation  is  con^e  up  on  My  land, 
Powerful  and  numberless; 
His  teeth  are  the  teeth  of  the  lion, 
And  the  fangs  \  of  the  lioness  his. 
Mj'  vine  he  has  turned  to  waste, 
And  My  fig-tree  to  splinters  ; 
He  hath  peeled  it  and  strawed  it, 
Bleached  are  its  branches! 

*  ii.  12. 

+  LXX.    Ba,Jov>)A. 

X  See  above,  pp.  657  f. 

§  ?''Dn  from  7Dn.  used  in  the  O.  T.  only  in  Deut.  xxvilL 

38,  "to  devour";  but  in  post-biblical  Hebrew  ''to  utterly 
destroy,  bring  to  an  end."     "' Talmud  Jerus.":  TaanithllL 

66rf,  "  Why  is  the  locust  called  p^DH  ?    Because  it  brings 
everything  to  an  end." 

11  A.  V.  "cheek-teeth,"  R.  V.  "jaw-teeth,"  or  "eye- 
teeth."  "Possibly  (from  the  Arabic)  'projectors'"' 
Driver. 


Joel  i.-ii.  17.]       THE   LOCUSTS   AND   THE    DAY    OF    THE    LORD. 


66 1 


•'  Wail  as  a  bride  girt  in  sackcloth  for  the  spouse  of 

her  youth. 
Cut  oflf  are  the  meal  and  drink  offerings  from  the 

house  of  Jehovah ! 
In  grief  are  the  priests,  the  ministers  of  Jehovah. 
The  fields  are  blasted,  the  ground  is  in  grief, 
Blasted  is  the  corn,  abashed  is  the  new  wine,  the  oil 

pines  away. 
Be  ye  abashed.  O  ploughmen! 
Wail,  O  vine-dressers. 
For  the  wheat  and  the  barley  ; 
The  harvest  is  lo.st  from  the  field  ! 
The  vine  is  abashed,  and  the  fig-tree  is  drooping; 
Pomegranate,  palm  too  and  apple, 
All  trees  of  the  field  are  dried  up  : 
Yea,  joy  is  aba.shed  and  a.\\a.y  from  the  children  of 

men.  " 

In  this  passage  the  same  feeling  is  attributed 
to  men  and  to  the  fruits  of  the  land:  "  In  grief 
are  the  priests,  the  ground  is  in  grief."  And  it 
is  repeatedly  said  that  all  alike  are  "  abashed." 
By  this  heavy  word  we  have  sought  to  render 
the  effect  of  the  similarly  sounding  "  hobhisha," 
that  our  English  version  renders  "  ashamed." 
It  signifies  to  be  frustrated,  and  so  "  disheart- 
ened," "put  out":  "soured"  would  be  an 
equivalent,  applicable  to  the  vine  and  to  joy  and 
to  men's  hearts. 

"  Put  on  mourning;  O  priests,  beat  the  breast ; 
Wail,  ye  ministers  of  the  altar  ; 

Come,  lie  down  in  sackcloth,  O  ministers  of  my  God  : 
For  meal-offering  and  drink-offering  are  cut  off  from 
the  house  of  your  God. 

"  Hallow  a  fast,  summon  an  assembly. 
Gather  *  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  to  the  house  of 

your  God  ; 
And  cry  to  Jehovah  : 

'  Alas  for  the  Day  !    At  hand  is  the  Day  of  Jehovah  ! 
And  as  vehemence  from  the  Vehement  t  doth  it  come.' 
Is  not  food  cut  off  from  before  us, 
Gladness  and  joy  from  the  house  of  our  God  ? 
The  grains  shrivel  under  their  hoes,$ 
The  garners  are  desolate,  the  barns  broken  down, 
For    the    corn    is    withered— what     shall     we    put    in 

them?§ 
The  herds  of  cattle  huddle  together, ||  for  they  have  no 

pasture  ; 
Yea,  the  flocks  of  sheep  are  forlorn. T 
To  Thee,  Jehovah,  do  I  cry  : 

For  fire  has  devoured  the  pastures  of  the  steppes,** 
Tnd  the  flame  hath  scorched  all  the  trees  of  the  field. 
Ahe  wild  beasts  pant  up  to  Thee  : 
For  the  watercourses  are  dry. 
And  fire  has  devoured  the  pastures  of  the  steppes." 

Here,  with  the  close  of  chap,  i.,  Joel's  dis- 
course takes  pause,  and  in  chap.  ii.  he  begins 
a  second  with  another  call  to  repentance  in  face 
of  the  same  plague.  But  the  plague  has  pro- 
gressed. The  locusts  are  described  now  in  their 
invasion  not  of  the  country  but  of  the  towns, 
to  which  they  pass  after  the  country  is  stripped. 
For  illustration  of  the  latter  see  above,  p.  658. 

*  Heb.  text  inserts  "elders,"  which  may  be  taken  as 
vocative,  or  with  the  LXX.  as  accusative,  but  after  the 
latter  we  should  expect  "and."  Wellhausen  suggests  its 
deletion,  and  Nowack  regards  it  as  an  intrusion.  For 
1DDS  Wellhausen  readslQDXn."  be  j'e  gathered." 

t  Keshodh  mishshaddhai  (Isa.  xiii.  6);  Driver,  "as 
overpowering  from  the  Overpowerer." 

X  A.  V.  "clods."  Dn^niSIJO  \  the  meaning  is  doubtful, 
but  the  corresponding  Arabic  word  means  "  besom  "  or 
"  shovel  "  or  ("  P.  E.  F.  Q.,"  1891,  p.  iii,  with  plate) 
"  hoe,"  and  the  Aram.  "  shovel."    See  Driver's  note. 

§  Reading,  after  the  LXX.  xi  aTroiJ^tro/neveauTois  (probably 
an  error  for  iv  avrois)  Dn3  Hn'JJ  HO  for  the  Massoretic 
nOn2  nnJKJ  no  "  how  the  beasts  sob !  "  to  which  A.  V. 
and  Driver  adhere. 

II  Lit.  "press  themselves"  in  perplexity. 

1^  Reading  with  Wellhausen  and  Nowack  ("perhaps 
rightly,"  Driver)  IDtJ'3  for  lOK'KJ  "are  guilty"  or 
"  punished." 

**"l2nO'  usually  rendered  "  wilderness"  or  desert,'' 
bu*  literally  "place  where  the  sheep  are  driven,"  land 
n«>T  cultivated.    See  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  656. 


The  "  horn  "  which  is  to  be  blown,  ver.  i,  is  an 
"  alarm  horn,"  *  to  warn  the  people  of  the  ap- 
proach of  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  and  not  the 
Shophar  which  called  the  people  to  a  general 
assembly,  as  in  ver.   15. 

"  Blow  a  horn  in  Zion, 
Sound  the  alarm  in  My  holy  mountain  ! 
Let  all  inhabitants  of  the  land  tremble, 
For  the  Day  of  Jehovah  comes— it  is  near  ! 
Day   of  darkness  and  murk,  day  of  cloud  and  heavj* 

mist.t 
Like  dawn  scattered  %  on  the  mountains, 
A  people  many  and  powerful  ; 
Its  like  has  not  been  from  of  old. 
And  shall  not  again  be  for  years  of  generation  upon 

generation. 
Before  it  the  fire  devours,§ 
And  behind  the  flame  consumes. 
Like  the  garden  of  Eden  ||  is  the  land  in  front, 
And  behind  it  a  desolate  desert ; 
Yea,  it  lets  nothing  escape. 
Their  visage  is  the  visage  of  horses, 
And  like  horsemen  they  run. 

They  rattle  like  chariots  over  the  tops  of  the  hills, 
Like  the  crackle  of  flames  devouring  stubble. 
Like  a  powerful  people  prepared  for  battle. 
Peoples  are  writhing  before  them, 
Every  face  gathers  blackness. 


"  Like  warriors  they  run, 
Like  fighting  men  they  come  up  the  wall; 
They  march  every  man  by  himself,^ 
And  they  ravel  **"not  their  paths. 
None  jostles  his  comrade, 
They  march  every  man  on  his  track, +t 
And  plunge  through  the  missiles  unbroken. JJ 
They  scour  the  city,  run  upon  the  walls. 
Climb  into  the  houses,  and  enter  the  windows  like  a 

thief. 
Earth  trembles  before  them. 
Heaven  quakes. 
Sun  and  moon  become  black. 
The  stars  withdraw  their  shining. 
And  Jehovah  utters  His  voice  before  His  army  : 
For  very  great  is  His  host  ; 

Yea,  powerful  is  He  that  performetti  His  word, 
Great  is  the  Day  of  Jehovah,  and  very  awful : 
Who  may  abide  it  ?  §§ 

"  But  now  hear  the  oracle  of  Jehovah  : 
Turn  ye  to  Me  with  all  your  heart. 
And  with  fasting  and  weepmg  and  mourning. 
Rend  ye  your  hearts  and  not  your  garments, 
And  turn  to  Jehovah  your  God  : 
For  He  is  gracious  and  merciful. 
Long-suffering  and  plenteous  in  love, 
And  relents  of  the  evil. 
Who  knows  but  He  will  turn  and  relent, 
And  leave  behind  Him  a  blessing, 
Meal-offering  and  drink-offering  to  Jehovah  your  God? 

"  Blow  a  horn  in  Zion, 
Hallow  a  fast,  summon  the  assembly  ! 
Gather  the  people,  hallow  the  congregation. 
Assemble    the    old    men, 111   gather    the    children,    and 

infants  at  the  breast  ; 
Let  the  bridegroom  come  forth  from  his  chamber, 
And  the  bride  from  her  bower. ^^ 

*  See  on  Amos  iii.  6  ;  p.  462. 

tZeph.  i.  !■;.    See  above,  p.  574. 

X  KHD  in  Qal  to  spread  abroad,  but  the  passive  is  here 
to  be  taken  in  the  same  sense  as  the  Ni.  in  Ezek.  xvii.  21, 
"dispersed."  The  figure  is  of  dawn  crushed  by  and 
struggling  with  a  mass  of  cloud  and  mist,  and  expresses 
the  gleams  of  white  which  so  often  break  through  a 
locust  cloud.    See  above,  p.  659. 

§  So  travellers  have  described  the  effect  of  locusts.  See 
above,  p.  658. 

11  Ezek.  xxxvi.  35. 

i  Heb.  "  in  his  own  ways." 

**pt33y<,an  impossible  metaphor,  so  that  most  read 
nnSy.  a  root  found  only  in  Micah  vii.  3  (see  p.  547),  "to 
twist "    or    "  tangle  ; "    but    Wellhausen    reads     "";=. ' 

"twist,"  Eccles.  vii.  13. 

t+  Heb.  "highroad,"  as  if  defined  and  heaped  up  for  him 
alone. 

tt  See  above,  p.  658. 

§§  Zeph.  i.  14  ;  "  Mai."  iii.  2. 

mi  So  (and  not  "elders")  in  contrast  to  children. 

•f^  "(Canopy"  or  "pavilion,"  bridal  tent. 


662 


THE   BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Let  the  priests,  the  ministers  of  Jehovah,  weep  between 

porch  and  altar  ; 
Let  them  say,  Spare,  O  Jehovah,  Thy  people. 
And    give  not  Thine  heritage    to    dishonour,  for   the 

heathen  to  mock  them  :  * 
Why  should  it  be  said  among  the  nations,  Where  is 

their  God?" 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

PROSPERITY  AND   THE  SPIRIT. 

Joel  ii.  18-32  (Eng.;  ii.  i8-iii.  Heb.). 

"  Then  did  Jehovah  become  jealous  for  His 
land,  and  took  pity  upon  His  people  "  — with 
these  words  Joel  opens  the  second  half  of  his 
book.  Our  Authorised  Version  renders  them  in 
the  future  tense,  as  the  continuation  of  the 
prophet's  discourse,  which  had  threatened  the 
Day  of  the  Lord,  urged  the  people  to  penitence, 
and  now  promises  that  their  penitence  shall  be 
followed  by  the  Lord's  mercy.  But  such  a  ren- 
dering forces  the  grammar;!  and  the  Revised 
English  Version  is  right  in  taking  the  verbs,  as 
the  vast  majority  of  critics  do,  in  the  past.  Joel's 
call  to  repentance  has  closed,  and  has  been  suc- 
cessful. The  fast  has  been  hallowed,  the  prayers 
are  heard.  Probably  an  interval  has  elapsed  be- 
tween vv.  17  and  18,  but,  in  any  case,  the  people 
having  repented,  nothing  more  is  said  of  their 
need  of  doing  so,  and  instead  we  have  from  God 
Himself  a  series  of  promises,  vv.  19-27,  in  answer 
to  their  cry  for  mercy.  These  promises  relate 
to  the  physical  calamity  which  has  been  suf- 
fered. God  will  destroy  the  locusts,  still  im- 
pending on  the  land,  and  restore  the  years  which 
His  great  army  has  eaten.  There  follows  in 
vv.  28-32  (Eng.;  Heb.,  chap,  iii.)  the  promise  of 
a  great  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  on  all  Israel, 
amid  terrible  manifestations  in  heaven  and 
earth. 


I.  The  Return  of  Prosperity  (ii.  19-27). 

"  And  Jehovah  answered  and  said  to  His  people  : 
Lo,  I  will  send  you  corn  and  wine  and  oil. 
And  your  fill  shall  ye  have  of  them  ; 
And  I  will  not  agam  make  you  a  reproach  among  the 

heathen. 
And  the  Northern  Foet  will  I  remove  far  from  you  ; 
And  I  will  push  him  into  a  land  barren  and  waste, 

*  02  pCJ^D?,  which  may  mean  either  "  rule  over  them  " 
or  "  mock  them,"  but  the  parallelism  decides  for  the 
latter. 

tA.  v.,  adhering  to  the  Massoretic  text,  in  which  the 
verbs  are  pointed  for  the  past,  has  evidently  understood 
them  as  instances  of  the  prophetic  perfect.  But  "this  is 
grammatically  indefensible":  Driver,  zn  loco:  see  his 
"  Heb.  Tenses,"  §  82,  Obs.  Calvin  and  others,  who  take 
the  verbs  of  ver.  18  as  future,  accept  those  of  the  next 
verse  as  past  and  with  it  begin  the  narrative.  But  if 
'God's  answer  to  His  people's  prayer  be  in  the  past,  so 
must  His  jealousy  and  pity.  All  these  verbs  are  in  the 
same  sequence  of  time.  Merx  proposes  to  change  the 
vowel-points  of  the  verbs  and  turn  them  into  futures. 
But  see  above,  p.  656.  Ver.  21  shows  that  Jehovah's 
action  is  past,  and  Nowack  points  out  the  very  unusual 
character  of  the  construction  that  would  follow  from 
Merx's  emendation.  Ewald,  Hitzig.  Kuenen.  Robertson 
:Smith,  Davidson..  Robertson,  Steiner,  Wellhausen,  Driver, 
Nowack,  etc  ,  all  take  the  verbs  in  the  past. 

tThis  is  scarcely  a  name  for  the  locusts,  who,  though 
'they  might  reach  Palestine  from  the  N.  E.  under  certain 
circumstances,  came  generally  from  E.  and  S.  E.  But 
see  above,  p.  657  ■  so  Kuenen,  Wellhausen,  Nowack. 
W.  R.  Smith  suggests  the  whole  verse  as  an  allegorising 
gloss.  Hitzig  thought  of  the  locusts  only,  and  rendered 
'JIQVn,  '°  rv<j>u>vt.K6i,  Acts  xxvi.  14  ;  but  this  is  not  proved. 


His  van  to  the  eastern  sea  and  his  rear  to  the  western,* 
Till  the  stench  of  him  rises,+ 
Because  he  hath  done  greatly." 

Locusts  disappear  with  the  same  suddenness  as 
they  arrive.  A  wind  springs  up  and  they  are 
gone.t  Dead  Sea  and  Mediterranean  are  at  the 
extremes  of  the  compass,  but  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  the  prophet  has  abandoned  the 
realism  which  has  hitherto  distinguished  his 
treatment  of  the  locusts.  The  plague  covered 
the  whole  land,  on  whose  high  watershed  the 
winds  suddenly  veer  and  change.  The  dis- 
persion of  the  locusts  upon  the  deserts  and  the 
opposite  seas  was  therefore  possible  at  one  and 
the  same  time.  Jerome  vouches  for  an  instance 
in  his  own  day.  The  other  detail  is  also  true  to 
life.  Jerome  says  that  the  beaches  of  the  two 
seas  were  strewn  with  putrefying  locusts,  and 
Augustine  §  quotes  heathen  writers  in  evidence 
of  large  masses  of  locusts,  driven  from  Africa 
uoon  the  sea,  and  then  cast  up  on  the  shore, 
which  gave  rise  to  a  pestilence.  "  The  south  and 
east  winds,"  says  Volney  of  Syria,  "  drive  the 
clouds  of  locusts  with  violence  into  the  Mediter- 
ranean, and  drown  them  in  such  quantities  that 
when  their  dead  are  cast  on  the  shore  they  in- 
fect the  air  to  a  great  distance."  ||  The  prophet 
continues,  celebrating  this  destruction  of  the  lo- 
custs as  if  it  were  already  realised — "  the  Lord 
hath  done  greatly,"  ver.  21.  That  among  the 
blessings  he  mentions  a  full  supply  of  rain  proves 
that  we  were  right  in  interpreting  him  to  have 
spoken  of  drought  as  accompanying  the  locusts.lf 

"  Fear  not,  O  Land  !    Rejoice  and  be  glad, 
For  Jehovah  hath  done  greatly.** 
Fear  not,  O  beasts  of  the  field  ! 
For  the  pastures  of  the  steppes  are  springing  with  new 

grass. 
The  trees  bear  their  fruit. 
Fig-tree  and  vine  yield  their  substance. 
O  sons  of  Zion,  be  glad. 
And  rejoice  in  Jehovah  your  God  : 

For   He    hath    given    you    the    early    rain    in    normal 
measure,tt 

*/.  e.,  the  Dead  Sea  (Ezek.  xlvii.  18;  Zech.  xiv.  8)  and 
the  Mediterranean. 
t  The  construction  shows  that  the  clause  preceding  this, 

Iti'Ni!!!  n?]}).  is  a  gloss.  So  Driver.  But  Nowack  gives 
the  other  clause  as  the  gloss. 

$Nah.  iii.  17;  Exod.  x.  19. 

§  "  De  Civitate  Dei,"  HI.  31. 

II  I.  278,  quoted  by  Pusey. 

'[  i.  17-20  :  see  above,  p.  658. 

**  Prophetic  past :  Driver. 

t+ Opinion  is  divided  as  to  the  meaning  of  this  phrase : 

np*lV?  =  "for  righteousness."  A.  There  are  those 
who  take  it  as  having  a  moral  reference  ;  and  (1)  this  is 
so  emphatic  to  some  that  they  render  the  word  for  "  early 
rain,"  miO,  which  also  means  "  teacher  "  or  "  revealer," 
in  the  latter  significance.  So  (some  of  them  applying  it 
to  the  Messiah)  Targum,  Symmachus,  the  Vulgate,  doc- 
torem  justitia,  some  Jews,  e.  ff.,  Rashi  and  Abarbanel, 
and  some  moderns,  e.  g.  (at  opposite  extremes),  Pusey  and 
Merx.  But,  as  Calvin  points  out  (this  is  another  instance 
of  his  sanity  as  an  exegete,  and  refusal  to  be  led  by  theo- 
logical presuppositions  :  he  says,  "  I  do  not  love  strained 
expositions  "),  this  does  not  agree  with  the  context,  which 
speaks  not  of  spiritual,  but  wholly  of  physical  blessings. 

(2)  Some,  who  take  ntlO  as  "  early  rain,"  give  HpHV? 
the  meaning  "for  righteousness,"  ad justitiam,  either  in 
the  sense  that  God  will  give  the  rain  as  a  token  of  His 
own  righteousness,  or  in  order  to  restore  or  vindicate 
the  people's  righteousness  (so  Davidson,  Expositor,  1888. 
I.  p.  2o:i  n.).  in  the  frequent  sense  in  which  T\\>1)i  is  em- 
ployed in  Isa.  xl.  fE.  (see  "Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.,"  Expositor's 
Bible,  pp.  785  ff.).  Cf.  Hosea  x.  13,  piV  ;  above,  p.  514.  »• 
This  of  course  is  possible,  especially  in  view  of  Israel 
having  been  made  by  their  plagues  a  reproach  among 
the  heathen.  Still,  if  Joel  had  intended  this  meaning, 
he  would  have  applied  the  phrase,  not  to  the  "early 
rain  "  only,  but  to  the  whole  series  of  blessings  by  which 
the  people  were  restored  to  their  standing  before  God. 


Joel  ii.  18-32.] 


PROSPERITY   AND   THE    SPIRIT. 


663 


And  poured  •  on  you  winter  rain  t  and  latter  rain  as 

before. t 
And  the  threshing-floors  shall  be  full  of  wheat, 
And  the  vats  stream  over  with  new  wine  and  oil. 
And  I  will  restore  to  you  the  years  which  the  Swarmer 

has  eaten, 
The  Lapper,  the  Devourer  and  the  Shearer, 
My  great  army  whom  I  sent  among  you. 
And  ye  shall  eat  your  food  and  be  full. 
And  praise  the  Name  of  Jehovah  your  God, 
Who  hath  dealt  so  wondrously  with  you  ; 
And  My  people  shall  be  abashed  nevermore. 
Ye  shall  know  I  am  in  the  midst  of  Israel, 
That  I  am  Jehovah  your  God  and  none  else  ; 
And  nevermore  shall  My  people  be  abashed." 


2.  The  Outpouring  of  the  Spirit 

(ii.  28-32  Eng. ;  iii.  Heb.). 

Upon  these  promises  of  physical  blessing  there 
follows  another  of  the  pouring  forth  of  the 
Spirit:  the  prophecy  by  which  Joel  became  the 
Prophet  of  Pentecost,  and  through  which  his 
book  is  best  known  among  Christians. 

When  fertility  has  been  restored  to  the  land, 
the  seasons  again  run  their  normal  courses, 
and  the  people  eat  their  food  and  be  full — "  It 
shall  come  to  pass  after  these  things,  I  will  pour 
out  My  Spirit  upon  all  flesh."  The  order  of 
events  makes  us  pause  to  question:  does  Joel 
mean  to  imply  that  physical  prosperity  must 
precede  spiritual  fulness?  It  would  be  unfair  to 
a.=sert  that  he  does,  without  remembering  what 
he  understands  by  the  physical  blessings.  To 
Joel  these  are  the. token  that  God  has  returned  to 
His  people.  The  drought  and  the  famine  pro- 
duced by  the  locusts  were  signs  of  His  anger  and 
o'  His  divorce  of  the  land.  The  proofs  that  He 
has  relented,  and  taken  Israel  back  into  a  spirit- 
u  il  relation  to  Himself,  can,  therefore,  from 
Joel's  point  of  view,  only  be  given  by  the  heal- 
iijg  of  the  people's  wounds.  In  plenteous  rains 
aid  full  harvests  God  sets  His  seal  to  man's 
penitence.  Rain  and  harvest  are  not  merely 
physical  benefits,  but  religious  sacraments:  signs 
tliat  God  has  returned  to  His  people,  and  that 
His  zeal  is  again  stirred  on  their  behalf.^  This 
his  to  be  made  clear  before  there  can  be  talk  of 
any  higher  blessing.  God  has  to  return  to  His 
people  and  to  show  His  love  for  them  before 
He  pours  forth  His  Spirit  upon  them.  That  is 
what  Joel  intends  by  the  order  he  pursues,  and 
not  that  a  certain  stage  of  physical  comfort  is 
indispensable  to  a  high  degree  of  spiritual  feel- 
ing and  experience.  The  early  and  latter  rains, 
the  fulness  of  corn,  wine,  and  oil,  are  as  purely 
religious  to  Joel,  though  not  so  highly  religious, 
as  the  phenomena  of  the  Spirit  in  men. 

But  though  that  be  an  adequate  answer  to  our 
question  so  far  as  Joel  himself  is  concerned,  it 

B.  It  seems,  therefore,  right  to  take  HpHV?  i^  ^  purely 
physical  sense,  of  the  measure  or  quality  of  the  "  earlj' 
rain."  So  even  Calvin,  "rain  according  to  what  is  just 
or  fit";  A.  V.  "moderately"  (inexact);  R.  V.  "in  just 
treasure";  Siegfried-Stade  "sufficient."  The  root- 
meaning  of  p^^f  is  probably  "according  to  norm,"  cf. 
"  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.,"  p.  784),  and  in  that  case  the  meaning 
would  be  "  rain  of  normal  quantity."  This  too  suits  the 
parallel  in  the  next  clause  :  "as  formerly."  In  Himyaritic 
the  word   is  applied  to  good  harvests.     A  man  prays  to 

God  for-io'nNI  ^pSK  DplSf,  "full"  or  "good  harvests 
and  fruits  "  :  "  Corp.  Inscr.  Sem.,"  Pars  Quarta,  Tomus  I., 
No.  2,  lin.  1-5  ;  cf.  the  note. 

*  Driver  in  loco. 

t  Heb.  also  repeats  here  "early  rain,"  but  redundantly. 

tpCJ'Xia,  "in  the  first."  A.  V.  adds  "month."  But 
LXX.  and  Syr.  read  njjySID,  which  is  probably  the  cor- 
rect reading,  "as  before  "  or  "  formerly." 

\  i.  18. 


does  not  exhaust  the  question  with  regard  to 
history  in  general.  From  Joel's  own  standpoint 
physical  blessings  may  have  been  as  religious  as 
spiritual;  but  we  must  go  further,  and  assert  that 
for  Joel's  anticipation  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit 
by  a  return  of  prosperity  there  is  an  ethical  rea- 
son and  one  which  is  permanently  valid  in  his- 
tory. A  certain  degree  of  prosperity,  and  even  of 
comfort,  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  that 
universal  and  lavish  exercise  of  the  religious 
faculties  which  Joel  pictures  under  the  pouring 
forth  of  God's  Spirit. 

The  history  of  prophecy  itself  furnishes  us  with 
proofs  of  this.  When  did  prophecy  most  flourish 
in  Israel?  When  had  the  Spirit  of  God  most 
freedom  in  developing  the  intellectual  and  moral 
nature  of  Israel?  Not  when  the  nation  was 
struggling  with  the  conquest  and  settlement  of 
the  land,  not  when  it  was  engaged  with  the  em- 
barrassments and  privations  of  the  Syrian  wars; 
but  an  Amos,  a  Hosea,  an  Isaiah  came  forth  at 
the  end  of  the  long,  peaceful,  and  prosperous 
reigns  of  Jeroboam  II.  and  Uzziah.  The  intel- 
lectual strength  and  liberty  of  the  great  Prophet 
of  the  Exile,  his  deep  insight  into  God's  pur- 
poses and  his  large  view  of  the  future,  had  not 
been  possible  without  the  security  and  com- 
parative prosperity  of  the  Jews  in  Babylon,  from 
among  whom  he  wrote.  In  Haggai  and  Zecha- 
riah,  on  the  other  hand,  who  worked  in  the 
hunger-bitten  colony  of  returned  exiles,  there 
was  no  such  fulness  of  the  Spirit.  Prophecy,  we 
saw,*  was  then  starved  by  the  poverty  and  mean- 
ness of  the  national  life  from  which  it  rose.  All 
this  is  very  explicable.  When  men  are  stunned 
by  such  a  calamity  as  Joel  describes,  or  when 
they  are  engrossed  by  the  daily  struggle  with 
bitter  enemies  and  a  succession  of  bad  seasons, 
they  may  feel  the  need  of  penitence  and  be  able 
to  speak  with  decision  upon  the  practical  duty 
of  the  moment,  to  a  degree  not  attainable  in 
better  days,  but  they  lack  the  leisure,  the  free- 
dom, and  the  resources  amid  which  their  various 
faculties  of  mind  and  soul  can  alone  respond 
to  the  Spirit';;  influence. 

Has  it  been  otherwise  in  the  history  of  Chris- 
tianity? Our  Lord  Himself  found  His  first  dis- 
ciples, not  in  a  hungry  and  ragged  community, 
but  amid  the  prosperity  and  opulence  of  Galilee. 
They  left  all  to  follow  Him  and  achieved  their 
ministry  in  poverty  and  persecution,  but  they 
brought  to  that  ministry  the  force  of  minds  and 
bodies  trained  in  a  very  fertile  land  and  by  a 
prosperous  commerce. f  Paul,  in  his  apostolate, 
sustained  himself  by  the  labour  of  his  hands,  but 
he  was  the  child  of  a  rich  civilisation  and  the 
citizen  of  a  great  empire.  The  Reformation  was 
preceded  by  the  Renaissance,  and  on  the  Conti- 
nent of  Europe  drew  its  forces,  not  from  the  en- 
slaved and  impoverished  populations  of  Italy  and 
Southern  Austria,  but  from  the  large  civic  and 
commercial  centres  of  Germany.  An  acute  his- 
torian, in  his  recent  lectures  on  the  "  Economic 
Interpretation  of  History,":):  observes  that  every 
rdligious  revival  in  England  has  happened  upon 
a  basis  of  comparative  prosperity.  He  has 
proved  "  the  opulence  of  Norfolk  during  the 
epoch  of  Lollardy,"  and  pointed  out  that  "  the 
Puritan  movement  was  essentially  and  originally 
one  of  the  middle  classes,  of  the  traders  in 
towns  and  of  the  farmers  in  the  country";  that 
the  religious  state  of  the  Church  of  England  was 

*  Above,  p.  604. 

t  Cf.  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  chap,  xxi.,  especially  p.  463. 

X  By  Thorold  Rogers,  pp.  80  fif. 


664 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


never  so  low  as  among  the  servile  and  beg- 
garly clergy  of  the  seventeenth  and  part  of 
the  eighteenth  centuries;  that  the  Noncon- 
formist bodies  who  kept  religion  alive  during 
this  period  were  closely  identified  with  the 
leading  movements  of  trade  and  finance;*  and 
that  even  Wesley's  great  revival  of  religion 
among  the  labouring  classes  of  England  took 
place  at  a  time  when  prices  were  far  lower  than 
in  the  previous  century,  wages  had  slightly  risen 
and  "  most  labourers  were  small  occupiers;  there 
was  therefore  in  the  comparative  plenty  of  the 
time  an  opening  for  a  religious  movement  among 
the  poor,  and  Wesley  was  equal  to  the  occasion." 
He  might  have  added  that  the  great  missionary 
movement  of  the  nineteenth  century  is  contem- 
poraneous with  the  enormous  advance  of  our 
commerce  and  our  empire. 

On  the  whole,  then,  the  witness  of  history  is 
uniform.  Poverty  and  persecution,  "  famine, 
nakedness,  peril,  and  sword,"  put  a  keenness 
upon  the  spirit  of  religion,  while  luxury  rots  its 
very  fibres;  but  a  stable  basis  of  prosperity  is 
indispensable  to  every  social  and  religious  re- 
form, and  God's  Spirit  finds  fullest  course  in 
communities  of  a  certain  degree  of  civilisation 
and  of  freedom  from  sordidness. 

We  may  draw  from  this  an  impressive  lesson 
for  our  own  day.  Joel  predicts  that,  upon  the 
new  prosperity  of  his  land,  the  lowest  classes  of 
society  shall  be  permeated  by  the  spirit  of 
prophecy.  Is  it  not  part  of  the  secret  of  the 
failure  of  Christianity  to  enlist  large  portions  of 
our  population,  that  the  basis  of  their  life  is  so 
sordid  and  insecure?  Have  we  not  yet  to  learn 
from  the  Hebrew  prophets  that  some  amount 
of  freedom  in  a  people  and  some  amount  of 
health  are  indispensable  to  a  revival  of  religion? 
Lives  which  are  strained  and  starved,  lives  which 
are  passed  in  rank  discomfort  and  under  grind- 
ing poverty,  without  the  possibility  of  the  in- 
dependence of  the  individual  or  of  the  sacredness 
of  the  home,  cannot  be  religious  except  in  the 
most  rudimentary  sense  of  the  word.  For  the 
revival  of  energetic  religion  among  such  lives 
we  must  wait  for  a  better  distribution,  not  of 
wealth,  but  of  the  bare  means  of  comfort,  leisure, 
and  security.  When,  to  our  penitence  and  our 
striving,  God  restores  the  years  which  the  locust 
has  eaten,  when  the  social  plagues  of  rich  men's 
selfishness  and  the  poverty  of  the  very  poor  are 
lifted  from  us,  then  may  we  look  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  Joel's  prediction — "  even  upon  all  the 
slaves  and  upon  the  handmaidens  will  I  pour  out 
My  Spirit  in  those  days." 

The  economic  problem,  therefore,  has  also  its 
place  in  the  warfare  for  the  kingdom  of  God. 

*'  And  it  .shall  be  that  after  such  things,  I  will  pour  out 

My  Spirit  on  all  flesh  ; 
And  your  sons  and  your  daughters  shall  prophesy, 
Your  old  men  shall  dream  dreams, 
Your  young  men  shall  see  visions  : 
And  even  upon  all  the  slaves  and  the  handmaidens  in 

those  days  will  I  pour  out  My  Spirit. 
And  I  will  set  signs  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  ^ 

Blood  and  fire  and  pillars  of  smoke. 
The  sun  shall  be  turned  to  darkness, 
And  the  moon  to  blood. 
Before  the  coming  of  the  Day  of  Jehovah,  the  great  and 

the  awful. 
And  it  shall  be  that  every  one  who  calls  on  the  name  of 

Jehovah  shall  be  saved  : 
For  in  Mount  Zion  and  in  Jerusalem  shall  be  a  remnant, 

as  Jehovah  hath  spoken. 
And  among  the  fugitives  those  whom  Jehovah  calleth." 


This  prophecy  divides  into  two  parts — the  out- 
pouring of  the  Spirit,  and  the  appearance  of  the 
terrible  Day  of  the  Lord. 

The  Spirit  of  God  is  to  be  poured  "  on  all 
flesh,"  says  the  prophet.  By  this  term,  which  is 
sometimes  applied  to  all  things  that  breathe,  and 
sometimes  to  mankind  as  a  whole,*  Joel  means 
Israel  only:  the  heathen  are  to  be  destroyed.! 
Nor  did  Peter,  when  he  quoted  the  passage  at 
the  Day  of  Pentecost,  mean  anything  more.  He 
spoke  to  Jews  and  proselytes:  "for  the  promise 
is  to  you  and  your  children,  and  to  them  that 
are  afar  ofif":  it  was  not  till  afterwards  that  he 
discovered  that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  granted  to 
the  Gentiles,  and  then  he  was  unready  for  the 
revelation  and  surprised  by  it.:};  But  within 
Joel's  Israel  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  was  to 
be  at  once  thorough  and  universal.  All  classes 
would  be  afifected,  and  affected  so  that  the  sim- 
plest and  rudest  would  become  prophets. 

The  limitation  was  therefore  not  without  its 
advantages.  In  the  earlier  stages  of  all  religions 
it  is  impossible  to  be  both  extensive  and  in- 
tensive. With  a  few  exceptions,  the  Israel  of 
Joel's  time  was  a  narrow  and  exclusive  body, 
hating  and  hated  by  other  peoples.  Behind  the 
Law  it  kept  itself  strictly  aloof.  But  without 
doing  so,  Israel  could  hardly  have  survived  or 
prepared  itself  at  that  time  for  its  influence  on 
the  world.  Heathenism  threatened  it  from  all 
sides  with  the  most  insidious  of  infections;  and 
there  awaited  it  in  the  near  future  a  still  more 
subtle  and  powerful  means  of  disintegration.  In 
the  wake  of  Alexander's  expeditions,  Hellenism 
poured  across  all  the  East.  There  was  not  a 
community  nor  a  religion,  save  Israel's,  which 
was  not  Hellenised.  That  Israel  remained  Is- 
rael, in  spite  of  Greek  arms  and  the  Greek  mind, 
was  due  to  the  legalism  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
and  to  what  we  call  the  narrow  enthusiasm  of 
Joel.  The  hearts  which  kept  their  passion  so 
confined  felt  all  the  deeper  for  its  limits.  They 
would  be  satisfied  with  nothing  less  than  the 
inspiration  of  every  Israelite,  the  fulfilment  ot 
the  prayer  of  Moses:  "  Would  to  God  that  all 
Jehovah's  people  were  prophets!  "  And  of  itself 
this  carries  Joel's  prediction  to  a  wider  fulfilment. 
A  nation  of  prophets  is  meant  for  the  world.  But 
even  the  best  of  men  do  not  see  the  full  force  of 
the  truth  God  gives  to  them,  nor  follow  it  even 
to  its  immediate  consequences.  Few  of  the 
prophets  did  so,  and  at  first  none  of  the  apostles. 
Joel  does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  the  heathen 
shall  be  destroyed.  He  does  not  think  of  Is- 
rael's mission  as  foretold  by  the  Second  Isaiah; 
nor  of  "  Malachi's  "  vision  of  the  heathen  wait- 
ing upon  Jehovah.  But  in  the  near  future  of 
Israel  there  was  waiting  another  prophet  to  carry 
Joel's  doctrine  to  its  full  effect  upon  the  world, 
to  rescue  the  gospel  of  God's  grace  from  the 
narrowness  of  legalism  and  the  awful  pressure 
of  Apocalypse,  and  by  the  parable  of  Jonah,  the 
type  of  the  prophet  nation,  to  show  to  Israel  that 
God  had  granted  to  the  Gentiles  also  repentance 
unto   life. 

That  it  was  the  lurid  clouds  of  Apocalypse 
which  thus  hemmed  in  our  prophet's  view,  is 
clear  from  the  next  verses.  They  bring  the  ter- 
rible manifestations  of  God's  wrath  in  nature 
very  closely  upon  the  lavish  outpouring  of  the 
Spirit:    "the    sun    turned    to    darkness    and    the 


*  E.  g.,  the  Quakers  and  the  Independents.    The  Inde-        *  All  living  things.  Gen.  vi.  17,  i9i  etc.  ;  mankind,  Isa.  xL 
pendents  of  the  seventeenth  century  "  were  the  founders    5,  xlix.  26.    See  Driver's  note, 
of  the  Bank  of  England."  t  Next  chapter.  JActs.  x.  45. 


Joel  iii.] 


THE    JUDGMENT    OF    THE    HEATHEN. 


665 


moon  to  blood,  the  great  and  terrible  Day  of 
the  Lord."  Apocalypse  must  always  paralyse 
the  missionary  energies  01  religion.  Who  can 
think  of  converting  the  world  when  the  world  is 
about  to  be  convulsed?  There  is  only  time  for  a 
remnant  to  be  saved. 

But  when  we  get  rid  of  Apocalypse,  as  the 
Book  of  Jonah  does,  then  we  have  time  and  space 
opened  up  again,  and  the  essential  forces  of  such 
a  prophecy  of  the  Spirit  as  Joel  has  given  us 
burst  their  national  and  temporary  confines,  and 
are  seen  to  be  applicable  to  all  mankind. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

THE  JUDGMENT  OF   THE  HEATHEN. 

Joel  iii.  (Eng. ;  iv.  Heb.). 

Hitherto  Joel  has  spoken  no  syllable  of  the 
heathen,  except  to  pray  that  God  by  His  plagues 
will  not  give  Israel  to  be  mocked  by  them.  But 
in  the  last  chapter  of  the  Book  we  have  Israel's 
captivity  to  the  heathen  taken  for  granted,  a 
promise  made  that  it  will  be  removed  and  their 
land  set  free  from  the  foreigner.  Certair^^  na- 
tions are  singled  out  for  judgment,  which  is  de- 
scribed in  the  terms  of  Apocalypse;  and  the 
Book  closes  with  the  vision,  already  familiar 
in  prophecy,  of  a  supernatural  fertility  for  the 
land. 

It  is  quite  another  horizon  and  far  different 
interests  from  those  of  the  preceding  chapter. 
Here  for  the  first  time  we  may  suspect  the  unity 
of  the  Book,  and  listen  to  suggestions  of  another 
authorship  than  Joel's.  But  these  can  scarcely  be 
regarded  as  conclusive.  Every  prophet,  however 
national  his  interests,  feels  it  his  duty  to  express 
himself  upon  the  subject  of  foreign  peoples,  and 
Joel  may  well  have  done  so.  Only,  in  that  case, 
his  last  chapter  was  delivered  by  him  at  another 
time  and  in  different  circumstances  from  the 
rest  of  his  prophecies.  Chaps,  i.-ii.  (Eng.;  i.- 
iii.  Heb.)  are  complete  in  themselves.  Chap, 
iii.  (Eng.;  iv.  Heb.)  opens  without  any  connec- 
tion of  time  or  subject  with  those  that  precede 
it.* 

The  time  of  the  prophecy  is  a  time  when  Is- 
rael's fortunes  are  at  low  ebb,f  her  sons  scat- 
tered among  the  heathen,  her  land,  in  part  at 
least,  held  by  foreigners.  But  it  would  appear 
(though  this  is  not  expressly  said,  and  must 
rather  be  inferred  from  the  general  proofs  of 
a  post-exilic  date)  that  Jerusalem  is  inhabited. 
Nothing  is  said  to  imply  that  the  city  needs  to  be 
restored. :f 

All  the  heathen  nations  are  to  be  brought  to- 
gether for  judgment  into  a  certain  valley,  which 
the  prophet  calls  first  the  Vale  of  Jehoshaphat 
and  then  the  Vale  of  Decision.  The  second 
name  leads  us  to  infer  that  the  first,  which  means 
"Jehovah-judges,"  is  also  •symbolic.  That  is  to 
say,  the  prophet  does  not  single  out  a  definite 
valley  already  called  Jehoshaphat.  In  all  proba- 
bility, however,  he  has  in  his  mind's  eye  some 

*  I  am  unable  to  feel  Driver's  and  Nowack's  arguments 
for  a  connection  conclusive.  The  only  reason  Davidson 
gives  is  (p.  204)  that  the  judgment  of  the  heathen  is  an 
essential  element  in  the  Day  of  Jehovah,  a  reason  which 
does  not  make  Joel's  authorship  of  the  last  chapter  certain, 
but  only  possible. 

+  The  phrase  of  ver.  i,  "  when  I  turn  again  the  captivity 
of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,"  may  be  rendered  "  when  I 
restore  the  fortunes  of  Israel." 

J  See  above,  p.  654,  especially  «. 


vale  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  for  since 
Ezekiel  *  the  judgment  of  the  heathen  in  face  of 
Jerusalem  has  been  a  standing  feature  in  Israel's 
vision  of  the  last  things;  and  as  no  valley  about 
that  city  lends  itself  to  the  picture  of  judgment 
so  well  as  the  valley  of  the  Kedron  with  the 
slopes  of  Olivet,  the  name  Jehoshaphat  has  nat- 
urally been  applied  to  it.f  Certain  nations  are 
singled  out  by  name.  These  are  not  Assyria  and 
Babylon,  which  had  long  ago  perished,  nor  the 
Samaritans,  Moab  and  Ammon,  which  harassed 
the  Jews  in  the  early  days  of  the  Return  from 
Babylon,  but  Tyre,  Sidon,  Philistia,  Edom,  and 
Egypt.  The  crime  of  the  first  three  is  the  rob- 
bery of  Jewish  treasures,  not  necessarily  those 
of  the  Temple,  and  the  selling  into  slavery  of 
many  Jews.  The  crime  of  Edom  and  Egypt  is 
that  they  have  shed  the  innocent  blood  of  Jews. 
To  what  precise  events  these  charges  refer  we 
have  no  means  of  knowing  in  our  present  igno- 
rance of  Syrian  history  after 'Nehemiah.  That 
the  chapter  has  no  explicit  reference  to  the  cru- 
elties of  Artaxerxes  Ochus  in  360  would  seem 
to  imply  for  it  a  date  earlier  than  that  year.  But 
it  is  possible  that  ver.  17  refers  to  that,  the 
prophet  refraining  from  accusing  the  Persians 
for  the  very  good  reason  that  Israel  was  still 
under  their  rule. 

Another  feature  worthy  of  notice  is  that  the 
Phoenicians  are  accused  of  selling  Jews  to  the 
sons  of  the  Jevanim,  lonians  or  Greeks.^  The 
latter  lie  on  the  far  horizon  of  the  prophet,  S 
and  we  know  from  classical  writers  that  from 
the  fifth  century  onward  numbers  of  Syrian 
slaves  were  brought  to  Greece.  The  other  fea- 
tures of  the  chapter  are  borrowed  from  earlier 
prophets. 


"  For,  behold,  in  those  days  and  in  that  time, 
When    I    bring    again    the    captivity  ||    of   Judah    and 

Jerusalem, 
I  will  also  gather  all  the  nations, 

And  bring  them  down  to  the  Vale  of  Jehoshaphat ;  ^ 
And  I  will  enter  into  judgment  with  them  there, 
For  My  people  and  for  My  heritage  Israel, 
Whom  they  have  scattered  among  the  heathen, 
And  My  land  have  they  divided. 
And  they  have  cast  lots  for  My  people  :  ** 
They  have  given  a  boy  for  a  harlot, tt 
And  a  girl  have  they  sold  for  wine  and  drunk  it. 
And  again,  what  are  ye  to  Me,  Tyre  and  Sidon  and  all 

circuits  of  Philistia  ?  Xt 
Is  it  any  deed  of  Mine  ye  are  repaying? 
Or  are  ye  doing  anj^thing  to  Me  ?  §§ 

Swiftly,  speedily  will  I  return  your  deed  on  your  head, 
Who  have  taken  My  silver  and  My  gold, 
And   My   goodly  jewels  ye    have  brought  into    your 

palaces. 
The  sons  of  Judah  and  the  sons  of  Jerusalem  have  ye 

sold  to  the  sons  of  the  Greeks, 
In  order  that  ye  might  set  them  as  far  as  possible  from 

their  own  border. 
Lo  1  I  will  stir  them  up  from  the  place  to  which  ye  have 

sold  them, 
And  I  wiii  return  your  deed  upon  your  head. 
I  will  sell  your  sons  and  your  daughters  into  the  hands 

of  the  sons  of  Judah, 
And  rhey  shall  sell  them  to  the  Shebans,||l| 
To  a  nation  far  off  ;  for  Jehovah  hath  spoken. 


*  xxxviii. 

t  Some  have  unnecessarily  thought  of  the  Vale  of 
Berakhah,  in  wMch  Jehoshaphat  defeated  Moab,  Ammon, 
and  Edom  (2  Chron.  xx.). 

X  See  above,  p.  652,  nn. 

§  Ver.  (,b. 

II  Or  "turn  again  the  fortunes." 

^  "Jehovah-judges."    See  above,  p.  665. 

**  See  above,  Obadiah  u  and  Nahum  iii.  lo. 

tt  TX'SWl.    Oort  suggests  pr03,  "  for  food." 

XX  Geliloth,  the  plural  feminine  of  Galilee— the  "  circuit ' 
(of  the  Gentiles).     "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  413. 

§§Scil.  "  that  I  must  repay." 

mi  LXX.  "they  shall  give  them  into  captivity." 


666 


TPffi    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


Proclaim  this  among  the  heathen,  hallow  a  war, 

Wake  up  the  warriors,  let  all  the  fighting-men  muster 

and  go  up.*' 
Beat  your  ploughshares  into  swords. 
And  your  pruning-hooks  into  lances. 
Let  the  weakling  say,  I  am  strong. 
.  .  .  tand  come,  all  ye  nations  round  about. 
And  gather  yourselves  together. 
Thither  bring  dpwn  Thy  warriors,  Jehovah, 
Let  the  heathen  be  roused. 
And  come  up  to  the  Vale  of  Jehoshaphat, 
For  there  will  I    sit  to  jucfge    all  the  nations  round 

about. 
Put  in  the  sickle, J  for  ripe  is  the  harvest. 
Come,  get  you  down  ;  for  the  press  is  full, 
The  vats  overflow,  great  is  their  wickedness. 
Multitudes,  multitudes  in  the  Vale  of  Decision  ! 
For  near  is  Jehovah's  day  in  the  Vale  of  Decision. 
Sun  and  moon  have  turned  black, 
And  the  stars  withdrawn  their  shining. 
Jehovah  thunders  from  Zion, 
And  from  Jerusalem  gives  §  forth  His  voice 
Heaven  and  earth  do  quake. 
But  Jehovah  is  a  refuge  to  His  people, 
And  for  a  fortress  to  the  sons  of  Israel. 
And  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah  your  God, 
Who  dwell  in  Zion,  the  mount  of  My  holiness; 
And  Jerusalem  shall  be  holy, 
Strangers  shall  not  pass  through  her  again. 
And  it  shall  be  on  that  day 
The  mountains  shall  drop  sweet  wine, 
And  the  hills  be  liquid  with  inilk. 
And  all  the  channels  of  Judah  flow  with  water  ; 
A  fountain  shall  spring  from  the  house  of  Jehovah, 
And  shall  water  the  Wady  of  Shittim.H 
Egypt  shall  be  desolation, 
And  Edom  desert-land, 

For  the  outrage  done  to  the  children  of  Judah, 
Because  they  shed  innocent  blood  in  their  land. 
Judah  shall  &h\Ae:  peopled  for  ever. 
And  Jerusalem  for  generation  upon  generation. 
And  I  will  declare  innocent  their  blood, T^  which  I  have 

not  declared  innocent, 
By  **  Jehovah  who  dwelleth  in  Zion." 


INTRODUCTION    TO    THE   PROPHETS 
THE  GRECIAN  PERIOD. 

331  B.  c. 


OF 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

ISRAEL  AND  THE  GREEKS. 

Apart  from  the  author  of  the  tenth  chapter 
of  Genesis,  who  defines  Javan  or  Greece  as  the 
father  of  Elishah  and  Tarshish,  of  Kittim  or  Cy- 
prus and  Rodanim  or   Rhodes.ff  the  first  He- 

*  Technical  use  of  t\?^.  to  go  up  to  war. 

t'lCJ'iy,  not  found  elsewhere,  but  supposed  to  mean 
"gather."  Cf.  Zeph.  ii.  i.  Others  read  "ij^in.  "hasten  " 
(Driver) ;  Wellhausen  ITlj;. 

tpSO,  only  here  and  in  Jer.  1.  16:  other  Heb.  word  for 
sickle  hermesh  (Deut.  xvi.  9,  xxiii.  26). 

§  Driver,  future. 

II  Not  the  well-known  scene  of  early  Israel's  camp  across 
Jordan,  but  it  must  be  some  dry  and  desert  valley  near 
Jerusalem  (so  most  comm.)  Nowack  thinks  of  the  Wadi 
el  Sant  on  the  way  to  Askalon,  but  this  did  not  need  water- 
ing and  is  called  tlie  Vale  of  Elah. 

i  Merx  applies  this  to  the  Jews  of  the  Messianic  era. 
LXX.  read  ex^Vio-'o  =  ^DOpJI.    So  Syr.    Cf.  2  Kings  ix.  7. 

.Steiner  :  "  Shall  I  leave  iheir  blood  unpunished  ?  I  will 
not  leave  it  unpunished."  Nowack  deems  this  to  be 
unlikely,  and  suggests,  "  I  will  avenge  their  blood  ;  I  will 
not  leave  unpunished  "  the  shedders  of  it. 

**  Heb.  construction  is  found  also  in  Hosea  xii.  5. 

ttGen.  X.  2,  4.  |V,  Javan,  is  laFwf  or  lawi/,  the  older 
form  of  the  name  of  the  lonians,  the  first  of  the  Greek 
race  with  whom  Eastern  peoples  came  into  contact.  They 
are  perhaps  named  on  the  TcU-el-Amarna  tablets  as 
"Yivana,"  serving  "in  the  country  of  Tyre"  {c.  1400  B. 
C);  and  on  an  inscription  of  Sargon  (c.  709)  Cyprus  is 
called  Yavanu. 


brew  writer  who  mentions  the  Greeks  is  Eze- 
kiel,*  c.  580  E.  r.  He  describes  them  as  en- 
gaged in  commerce  with  the  Phoenicians,  who 
bought  slaves  from  them.  Even  while  Ezekiel 
wrote  in  Babylonia,  the  Babylonians  were  in 
touch  with  the  Ionian  Greeks  through  the  Lyd- 
ians.f  The  latter  were  overthrown  by  Cyrus 
about  545,  and  by  the  beginning  of  the  next  cen- 
tury the  Persian  lords  of  Israel  were  in  close 
struggle  with  the  Greeks  for  the  supremacy  of 
the  world,  and  had  virtually  been  defeated  so  far 
as  concerned  Europe,  the  west  of  Asia  Minor, 
and  the  sovereignty  of  the  Mediterranean  and 
Black  Seas.  In  460  Athens  sent  an  expedition 
to  Egypt  to  assist  a  revolt  against  Persia,  and 
even  before  that  Greek  fleets  had  scoured  the 
Levant  and  Greek  soldiers,  though  in  the  pay 
of  Persia,  had  trodden  the  soil  of  Syria.  Still 
Joel,  writing  towards  400  b.  c,  mentions  Greece  % 
only  as  a  market  to  which  the  Phoenicians  car- 
ried Jewish  slaves;  and  in  a  prophecy  which 
some  take  to  be  contemporary  with  Joel,  Isaiah 
Ixvi.,  the  coasts  of  Greece  are  among  the  most 
distant  of  Gentile  lands. ^5  In  401  the  younger 
Cyrus  brought  to  the  Euphrates  to  fight  against 
Artaxerxes  Mnemon  the  ten  thousand  Greeks 
whom,  after  the  battle  of  Cunaxa,  Xenophon 
led  north  to  the  Black  Sea.  For  nearly  seventy 
years  thereafter  Athenian  trade  slowly  spread 
eastward,  but  nothing  was  yet  done  by  Greece 
to  advertise  her  to  the  peoples  of  Asia  as  a  claim- 
ant for  the  world's  throne.  Then  suddenly  in 
334  Alexander  of  Macedon  crossed  the  Helles- 
pont, spent  a  year  in  the  conquest  of  Asia  Mi- 
nor, defeated'  Darius  at  Issus  in  332,  took  Da- 
mascus, Tyre,  and  Gaza,  overran  the  Delta  and 
fgunded  Alexandria.  In  331  he  marched  back 
over  Syria,  crossed  the  Euphrates,  overthrew 
the  Persian  Empire  on  the  field  of  Arbela,  and 
for  the  next  seven  years  till  his  death  in  324 
extended  his  conquests  to  the  Oxus  and  the  In- 
dus. The  story  that  on  his  second  passage  of 
Syria  Alexander  visited  Jerusalem  ||  is  probably 
false.  Btit  he  must  have  encamped  repeatedly 
■within  forty  mile?  of  it,  and  he  visited  Samaria.  1[ 
It  is  impossible  that  he  received  no  embassy 
from  a  people  who  had  not  known  political  inde- 
pendence for  centuries  and  must  have  been  only 
too  ready  to  come  to  terms  with  the  new  lord  of 
the  world.  Alexander  left  behind  him  colonies 
of  his  veterans,  both  to  the  east  and  west  of  the 
Jordan,  and  in  his  wake  there  poured  into  all  the 
cities  of  the  Syrian  seaboard  a  considerable  vol- 
ume of  Greek  immigration.**    It  is  from  this  time 

*xxvii.  13. 

+  "  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi."  (Expositor's  Bible),  757  f. 

fiii.  6  (Eng.;  iv.  6  Heb.). 

§The  sense  of  distance  between  the  two  peoples  was 
mutual.  Writing  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  B.  C, 
Herodotus  has  heard  of  the  Jews  only  as  a  people  that 
practise  circumcision  and  were  defeated  by  Pharaoh 
Nechn  at  Megiddo  (II.  104,  isq;  on  the  latter  passage  see 
"  Hist.  GeogV'  p.  40s,  n.).  He  does  not  even  know  them 
by  name.  The  fragment  of  Choerilos  of  Sanios,  from  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century,  .which  Jose'phus  cites  ("  Contra 
Apionem,"  I.  22)  as  a  reference  to  the  Jews,  is  probably  of 
a  people  in  Asia  Minor.  Even  in  tne  last  half  of  the 
fourth  century  and  before  Alexander's  campaigns,  Aris- 
totle knows  of  the  Dead  Sea  only  by  a  vague  report 
("  Meteor.,"  II.  iii.  39).  His  pupil  Theophrastus  (d.  287) 
namesand  describes  the  Jews  (Porphyr.  "de  Abstinentia," 
II.  26:  Eusebius,  "  Prepar.  Evang.,"  IX.  2:  cf.  Jose- 
phus,  "  C.  Apion.,"  I.  22)  ;  and  another  pupil,  Clearchus  of 
Soli,  records  the  mention  by  Aristotle  of  a  travelled 
Jew  of  Coela-Syria,  but  "Greek  in  soul  as  in  tongue," 
whom  the  great  philosopher  had  met,  and  learned  from 
him  that  the  Jews  were  descended  from  the  philosophers 
of  India  (quoted  by  Josephus,  "  C.  Apion.,"  I.  22). 

II  Jos.,  XI.  "  Antt."  iv.  5. 

^1'"  Hist.  Geog.,"  p.  347. 

**  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  593  f. 


ISRAEL   AND   THE    GREEKS. 


667 


onward  tliat  we  find  in  Greek  writers  the  earli- 
est mention  of  the  Jews  by  name.  Theophrastus 
and  Clearchus  of  Soli,  disciples  of  Aristotle,  both 
speak  of  them;  but  while  the  former  gives  evi- 
dence of  some  knowledge  of  their  habits,  the  lat- 
ter reports  that  in  the  perspective  of  his  great 
master  they  had  been  so  distant  and  vague  as  to 
be  confounded  with  the  Brahmins  of  India,  a 
confusion  which  long  survived  among  the 
Greeks.* 

Alexander's  death  delivered  his  empire  to  the 
ambitions  of  his  generals,  of  whom  four  con- 
tested for  the  mastery  of  Asia  and  Egypt — An- 
tigonus,  Ptolemy,  Lysimachus,  and  Seleucus. 
Of  these  Ptolemy  and  Seleucus  emerged  victori- 
ous, the  one  in  possession  of  Egypt,  the  other 
of  Northern  Syria  and  the  rest  of  Asia.  Palestine 
lay  between  t'hem,  and  both  in  the  wars  which 
led  to  the  establishment  of  the  two  kingdoms 
and  in  thd^e  which  for  centuries  followed  Pal- 
estine became  the  battle-field  of  the  Greeks. 

Ptolemy  gained  Egypt  within  two  years  of 
Alexander's  death,  and  from  its  definite  and 
strongly  entrenched  territory  he  had  by  320  con- 
quered Syria  and  Cyprus.  In  315  or  314  Syria 
was  taken  from  him  by  Antigonus,  who  also  ex- 
pelled Seleucus  from  Babylon.  Seleucus  fled  to 
Egypt  and  stirred  up  Ptolemy  to  the  reconquest 
of  Syria.  In  312  Ptolemy  defeated  Demetrius, 
the  general  of  Antigonus,  at  Gaza,  but  the  next 
year  was  driven  back  into  Egypt  by  Antigonus 
himself.  Meanwhile  Seleucus  regained  Baby- 
lon, f  In  311  the  three  made  peace  with  each 
other,  but  Antigonus  retained  Syria.  In  306 
they  assumed  the  title  of  kings,  and  in  the  same 
year  renewed  their  quarrel.  After  a  naval  battle 
Antigonus  wrested  Cyprus  from  Ptolemy,  but  in 
301  he  was  defeated  and  slain  by  Seleucus  and 
Lysimachus  at  the  battle  of  Ipsus  in  Phrygia. 
His  son  Demetrius  retained  Cyprus  and  part  of 
the  Phoenician  coast  till  287,  when  he  was  forced 
to  yield  them  to  Seleucus,  who  had  moved  the 
centre  of  his  power  from  Babylon  to  the  new 
Antioch  on  the  Orontes,  with  a  seaport  at  Se- 
leucia.  Meanwhile  in  301  Ptolemy  had  regained 
what  the  Greeks  then  knew  as  Coele-Syria,  that 
is  all  Syria  to  the  south  of  Lebanon  except  the 
Phoenician  coast. t  Damascus  belonged  to  Se- 
leucus. But  Ptolemy  was  not  allowed  to  retain 
Palestine  in  peace,  for  in  297  Demetrius  appears 
to  have  invaded  it,  and  Seleucus,  especially  af- 
ter his  marriage  with  Stratonike,  the  daughter 
of  Demetrius,  never  wholly  resigned  his  claims 
to  it.§  Ptolemy,  however,  established  a  hold 
upon  the  land  which  continued  practically  un- 
broken for  a  century,  and  yet  during  all  that 
time  had  to  be  maintained  by  frequent  wars,  in 
the  course  of  which  the  land  itself  must  have 
severely  sufifered  (264-248). 

Therefore,  as  in  the  days  of  their  earliest 
prophets,  the  people  of  Israel  once  more  lay  be- 
tween two  rival  empires.  And  as  Hosea  and 
Isaiah  pictured  them  in  the  eighth  century,  the 
possible  prey  either  of  Egypt  or  Assyria,  so  now 
in  these  last  years  of  the  fourth  they  were  tossed 
between  Ptolemy  and  Antigonus,  and  in  the 
opening  years  of  the  third  were  equally  wooed 
by  Ptolemy  and  Seleucus.  Upon  this  new  al- 
ternative of  tyranny  the  Jews  appear  to  have  be- 
stowed the  actual  names  of  their  old  oppressors. 
Ptolemy  was  Egypt  to  them;  Seleucus,  with  one 

*  See  above,  p.  666,  n. 

t  Hence  the  Seleucid  era  dates  from  312. 

t  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  538. 

iC/.  Ewald,  "Hist."  (Eng.  Ed.),  V.  226! 


of  his  capitals  at  Babylon,  was  still  Assyria,  from 
which  came  in  time  the  abbreviated  Greek  form 
of  Syria.*  But,  unlike  the  ancient  empires,  these 
new  rival  lords  were  of  one  race.  Whether  the 
tyranny  came  from  Asia  or  Africa,  its  quality 
was  Greek;  and  in  the  sons  of  Javan  the  Jews 
saw  the  successors  of  those  world-powers  of 
Egpyt,  Assyria,  and  Babylonia,  in  which  had  been 
concentrated  against  themselves  the  whole  force 
of  the  heathen  world.  Our  records  of  the  times 
are  fragmentary,  but  though  Alexander  spared 
the  Jews  it  appears  that  they  had  not  long  to 
wait  before  feeling  the  force  of  Greek  arms.  Jo- 
sephus  quotes  t  from  Agatharchides  of  Cnidos 
(180-145  B.  c.)  to  the  effect  that  Ptolemy  I.  sur- 
prised Jerusalem  on  a  Sabbath  day  and  easily 
took  it;  and  he  adds  that  at  the  same  time  he 
took  a  great  many  captives  from  the  hill-country 
of  Judea,  from  Jerusalem  and  from  Samaria,  and 
led  them  into  Egypt.  Whether  this  was  in  320 
or  312  or  301 1  we  cannot  tell.  It  is  possible 
that  the  Jews  suffered  in  each  of  these  Egyptian 
invasions  of  Syria,  as  well  as  during  the  south- 
ward marches  of  Demetrius  and  Antigonus.  The 
later  policy,  both  of  the  Ptolemies,  who  were 
their  lords,  and  of  the  Seleucids,  was  for  a  long 
time  exceedingly  friendly  to  Israel.  Their  suf- 
ferings from  the  Greeks  were  therefore  proba- 
bly over  by  280,  although  they  cannot  have  re- 
mained unscathed  by  the  wars  between  264  and 
248. 

The  Greek  invasion,  however,  was  not  like  the 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian,  of  arms  alone;  but  of 
a  force  of  intellect  and  culture  far  surpassing 
even  the  influences  which  the  Persians  had  im- 
pressed upon  the  religion  and  mental  attitude 
of  Israel.  The  ancient  empires  had  transplanted 
the  nations  of  Palestine  to  Assyria  and  Baby- 
lonia. The  Greeks  did  not  need  to  remove  them 
to  Greece;  for  they  brought  Greece  to  Palestine. 
"  The  Orient,"  says  Wellhausen,  "  became  their 
America."  They  poured  into  Syria,  infecting, 
exploiting,  assimilating  its  peoples.  With  dis- 
may the  Jews  must  have  seen  themselves  sur- 
rounded by  new  Greek  colonies,  and  still  more 
by  the  old  Palestinian  cities  Hellenised  in  polity 
and  religion.  The  Greek  translator  of  Isaiah 
ix.  12  renders  Philistines  by  Hellenes.  Israel 
were  compassed  and  penetrated  by  influences  as 
subtle  as  the  atmosphere:  not  as  of  old  uprooted 
from  their  fatherland,  but  with  their  fatherland 
itself  infected  and  altered  beyond  all  powers  of 
resistance.  The  full  alarm  of  this,  however,  was 
not  felt  for  many  years  to  come.  It  was  at  first 
the  policy  both  of  the  Seleucids  and  the  Ptole- 
mies to  flatter  and  foster  the  Jews.     They  en- 

*  Asshur  or  Assyria  fell  in  607  (as  we  have  seen),  but  her 
name  was  transferred  to  her  successor  Babylon  (2  Kings 
xxiii.  2g  ;  Jer.  ii.  18  ;  Lam.  v.  6),  and  even  to  Babylon's  suc- 
cessor Persia  (Ezra  vi.  22).  When  Seleucus  secured  what 
was  virtually  the  old  Assyrian  Empire  with  large  exten- 
sions to  Phrygia  on  the  west  and  the  Punjaub  on  the  east, 
the  name  would  naturally  be  continued  to  his  dominion, 
especially  as  his  first  capital  was  Babylon,  from  his 
capture  of  which  in  312  the  Seleucid  era  took  its  start. 
There  is  actual  record  of  this.  Brugsch  ("  Gesch.  Aeg.," 
p.  218)  states  that  in  the  hieroglyphic  inscriptions  of  the 
Ptolemaean  period  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleucids  is  called 
Asharu  Cc/.  Stade,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1S82,  p.  292,  and  Cheyne. 
"Book  of  Psalms,"  p.  253,  and  "  Introd.  to  Book  of 
Isaiah  "  p.  107,  n.  3).  As  the  Seleucid  kingdom  shrank  to 
this  side  of  the  Euphrates,  it  drew  the  name  Assyria 
with  it.  But  in  Greek  mouths  this  had  long  ago  (cf. 
Herod.)  been  shortened  to  Syria  :  Herodotus  also  appears 
to  have  applied  it  only  to  the  west  of  the  Euphrates.  C/. 
"  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  3  f. 

t  Xn.  "  Antt."  I.:  c/.  "  Con.  Apion.,"  I.  22. 

t  See  above,  Eusebius,  "  Chron.  Arm.,"  II.  225,  assigns 
it  to  320. 


668 


THE^OOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


couraged  them  to  feel  that  their  religion  had  its 
own  place  beside  the  forces  of  Greece,  and  was 
worth  interpreting  to  the  world.  Seleucus  I. 
gave  to  Jews  the  rights  of  citizenship  in  Asia 
Minor  and  Northern  Syria;  and  Ptolemy  I. 
atoned  for  his  previous  violence  by  granting 
them  the  same  in  Alexandria.  In  the  matter  of 
the  consequent  tribute  Seleucus  respected  their 
religious  scruples:  and  it  was  under  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  (283-247),  if  not  at  his  instigation, 
that  the  Law  was  first  translated  into  Greek. 

To  prophecy,  before  it  finally  expired,  there 
was  granted  the  opportunity  to  assert  itself,  upon 
at  least  the  threshold  of  this  new  era  of  Israel's 
history. 

We  have  from  the  first  half-century  of  the  era 
perhaps  three  or  four,  but  certainly  two,  pro- 
phetic pieces.  By  many  critics  Isaiah  xxiv.-xxvii. 
are  assigned  to  the  years  immediately  follow- 
ing Alexander's  campaigns.  Others  assign  Isa- 
iah xix.  16-25  to  the  last  years  of  Ptolemy  I.* 
And  of  our  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,  the 
chapters  attached  to  the  genuine  prophecies  of 
Zechariah,  or  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  of  his  book,  most 
probably  fall  to  be  dated  from  the  contests  of 
Syria  and  Egypt  for  the  possession  of  Palestine; 
while  somewhere  about  300  is  the  most  likely 
date  for  the  Book  of  Jonah. 

In  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  we  see  prophecy  perhaps 
at  its  lowest  ebb.  The  clas'h  with  the  new  foes 
produces  a  really  terrible  thirst  for  the  blood  of 
the  heathen:  there  are  schisms  and  intrigues 
within  Israel  which  in  our  ignorance  of  her  his- 
tory during  this  time  it  is  not  possible  for  us  to 
to  follow:  the  brighter  gleams,  which  contrast 
so  forcibly  with  the  rest,  may  be  more  ancient 
oracles  that  the  writer  has  incorporated  with  his 
own  stern  and  dark  Apocalypse. 

In  the  Book  of  Jonah,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
find  a  spirit  and  a  style  in  which  prophecy  may 
not  unjustly  be  said  to  have  given  its  highest 
utterance.  And  this  alone  suffices,  in  our  un- 
certainty as  to  the  exact  date  of  the  book,  to 
take  it  last  of  all  our  Twelve.  For  "  in  this 
book,"  as  Cornill  has  finely  said,  "  the  prophecy 
of  Israel  quits  the  scene  of  battle  as  victor,  and 
as  victor  in  its  severest  struggle — that  against 
self." 


"  ZECHARIAH." 
(ix.-xiv.) 

"  Lo,  thy  King  cometh  to  thee,  vindicated  and  victori- 
ous, meek  and  riding  on  an  ass,  and  on  a  colt,  the  foal 
of  an  ass. 

"Up,  Sword,  against  My  Shepherd!  .  .  .  Smite  the 
Shepherd,  that  the  sheep  may  be  scattered  ! 

"  And  I  will  pour  upon  the  house  of  David  and  upon  all 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  the  spirit  of  grace  and  of 
supplication,  and  they  shall  look  to  Him  whom  they  have 
pierced  ;  and  they  shall  lament  for  Him,  as  with  lamenta- 
tion for  an  only  son,  and  bitterly  grieve  for  Him,  as  with 
grief  for  a  first-born." 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 

CHAPTERS  IX.-XIV.  OF  "  ZECHARIAH." 

We  saw  that  the  first  eight  chapters  of  the 
Book  of  Zechariah  were,  with  the  exception  of 
a  few  verses,  from  the  prophet  himself.     No  one 

*Cheyne,  "  Introd.  to  Book  of  Isaiah,"  p.  105. 


has  ever  doubted  this.  No  one  could  doubt  it : 
they  are  obviously  from  the  years  of  the  builc- 
ing  of  the  Temple,  520-516  b.  c.  They  hang  to- 
gether with  a  consistency  exhibited  by  few  other 
groups  of  chapters  in  the  Old  Testament. 

But  when  we  pass  into  chap.  ix.  we  find  our- 
selves in  circumstances  and  an  atmosphere  alto- 
gether different.  Israel  is  upon  a  new  situation 
of  history,  and  the  words  addressed  to  her 
breathe  another  spirit.  There  is  not  the  faint- 
est allusion  to  the  building  of  the  Temple — the 
subject  from  which  all  the  first  eight  chapters 
depend.  There  is  not  a  single  certain  reflection 
of  the  Persian  period,  under  the  shadow  of  which 
the  first  eight  chapter  were  all  evidently  writ- 
ten. We  have  names  of  heathen  powers  men- 
tioned which  not  only  do  not  occur  in  the  first 
eight  chapters,  but  of  which  it  is  not  possible  to 
think  that  they  had  any  interest  whatever  for 
Israel  between  520  and  516:  Damascus,  Hadrach, 
Hamath,  Assyria,  Egypt,  and  Greece.  The  peace, 
and  the  love  of  peace,  in  which  Zechariah  wrote, 
has  disappeared.*  Nearly  everything  breathes  of 
war  actual  or  imminent.  The  heathen  are  spoken 
of  with  a  ferocity  which  finds  few  parallels  in  the 
Old  Testament.  There  is  a  revelling  in  their 
blood  of  which  the  student  of  the  authentic 
prophecies  of  Zechariah  will  at  once  perceive 
that  gentle  lover  of  peace  could  not  have  been 
capable.  And  one  passage  figures  the  immi  ■ 
nence  of  a  thorough  judgment  upon  Jerusalem, 
very  dififerent  from  Zechariah's  outlook  upon 
his  people's  future  from  the  eve  of  the  comple  ■ 
tion  of  the  Temple.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore, 
that  one  of  the  earliest  efforts  of  Old  Testament 
criticism  should  have  been  to  prove  another  au- 
thor than  Zechariah  for  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  of  the 
book  called  by  his  name. 

The  very  first  attempt  of  this  kind  was  made 
so  far  back  as  1632  by  the  Cambridge  theologian 
Joseph  Mede,t  w'ho  was  moved  thereto  by  the 
desire  to  vindicate  the  correctness  of  St. 
Matthew's  ascription^  of  "  Zech."  xi.  13  to  the 
prophet  Jeremiah.  Mede's  effort  was  developed 
by  other  English  exegetes.  Hammond  assigned 
chaps,  x.-xii.,  Bishop  Kidder  J^  and  William 
Whiston,  the  translator  of  Josephus,  chaps,  ix.- 
xiv.,  to  Jeremiah.  Archbishop  Newcomeij  di- 
vided them,  and  sought  to  prove  that  while 
chaps,  ix.-xi.  must  have  been  written  before  721, 
or  a  century  earlier  than  Jeremiah,  because  of 
the  heathen  powers  they  name,  and  the  divisions 
between  Judah  and  Israel,  chaps,  xii.-xiv.  reflect 
the  imminence  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.  In  1784 
FliiggelT  offered  independent  proof  that  chaps, 
ix.-xiv.  were  by  Jeremiah;  and  in  1814  Ber- 
tholdt  **  suggested  that  chaps,  ix.-xi.  might  be 
by  Zechariah  the  contemporary  of  Isaiah,  ft  and 
on  that  account  attached  to  the  prophecies  of  his 
younger  namesake.  These  opinions  gave  the 
trend  to  the  main  volume  of  criticism,  which, 
till  fifteen  years  ago,  deemed  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv. 
to  be  pre-exilic.    So  Hitzig,  who  at  first  took  the 

*  Except  in  the  passage  ix.  10-12,  which  seems  strangely 
out  of  place  in  the  rest  of  ix.-xiv. 

t"  Works,"  4th  ed.  1677,  pp.  786  fif.  (1632),  834.  Mede  died 
1638. 

5  Matt,  xxvii.  g. 

§  "  Demonstration  of  the  Messias,"  1700. 

I!  "An  Attempt  towards  an  Improved  Version  of  the 
Twelve  Minor  Prophets,"  1785  (not  seen).  See  also 
Wright  on  Archbishop  Seeker. 

l'"Die  Weissagungen,  welche  bei  den  Schriften  des 
Proph.  Sacharja  beygebogen  sind,  tibersetzt,"  etc.,  Ham- 
burg (not  seen). 

**  "  Einleitung  in  A.  u.  N.  T."  (not  seen). 

t't  Isa.  viii.  2.     See  above,  p.  62^. 


CHAPTERS    IX.-XIV.    OF    "ZECHARIAH." 


669 


whole  to  be  from  one  hand,  but  afterwards 
placed  xii.-xiv.  by  a  different  author  under  Man- 
asseh.  So  Ewald,  Bleek,  Kuenen  (at  first),  Sam- 
uel Davidson,  Schrader,  Duhm  (in  1875),  and 
more  recently  Konig  and  Orclli,  who  assign 
chaps,  ix.-xi.  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  but  xii.-xiv. 
to  the  eve  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  or  even  a 
little  later. 

Some  critics,  however,  remained  unmoved  by 
the  evidence  offered  for  a  pre-exilic  date.  They 
pointed  out  in  particular  that  the  geographical 
references  were  equally  suitable  to  the  centuries 
after  the  Exile.  Damascus,  Hadrach,  and  Ha- 
math,*  though  politically  obsolete  by  720,  entered 
history  again  with  the  campaigns  of  Alexander 
the  Great  in  332-;i^\,  and  the  establishment  of 
the  Seleucid  kingdom  in  Northern  Syria. |  Egypt 
and  Assyria  t  were  names  used  after  the  Exile 
for  the  kingdom  of  the  Ptolemies,  and  for  those 
powers  which  still  threatened  Israel  from  the 
north  or  Assyrian  quarter  Judah  and  Joseph 
or  Ephraim  ^  were  names  still  used  after  the  Ex~ 
ile  to  express  the  whole  of  God's  Israel;  and  in 
chaps.  ix.-xiv.  they  are  presented,  not  divided 
as  before  721,  but  united.  None  of  the  chapters 
give  a  hint  of  any  king  in  Jerusalem;  and  all  of 
them,  while  representing  the  great  Exile  of  Ju~ 
dah  as  already  begun,  show  a  certain  depend- 
ence in  style  and  even  in  language  upon  Jere- 
miah, Ezekiel,  and  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  Moreover, 
the  language  is  post-exilic,  sprinkled  with  Ara- 
maisms  and  with  other  words  and  phrases  used 
only,  or  mainly,  by  Hebrew  writers  from  Jere- 
miah onwards. 

But  though  many  critics  judged  these  grounds 
to  be  sufficient  to  prove  the  post-exilic  origin 
of  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv.,  they  differed  as  to  the  au- 
thor and  exact  date  of  these  chapters.  Conserva- 
tives like  Hengstenberg,||  Delitzsch,  Keil,  Koh- 
ler,  and  Pusey  used  the  evidence  to  prove  the  au- 
thorship of  Zechariah  himself  after  516,  and  in- 
terpreted the  references  to  the  Greek  period  as 
pure  prediction.  Pusey  saysIT  that  chaps,  ix.-xi. 
extend  from  the  completion  of  the  Temple  and 
its  deliverance  during  the  invasion  of  Alexander, 
and  from  the  victories  of  the  Maccabees,  to  the 
rejection  of  the  true  shepherd  and  the  curse  upon 
the  false;  and  chaps,  xi.-xii.  "  from  a  future  re- 
pentance for  the  death  of  Christ  to  the  final  con- 
version of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles.""* 

But  on  the  same  grounds  Eichhorn  ft  saw  in 
the  chapters,  not  a  prediction,  but  a  reflection  of 
the  Greek  period.  He  assigned  chaps,  ix.  and  x. 
to  an  author  in  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great; 
xi.-xiii.  6  he  placed  a  little  later,  and  brought 
down  xiii.  7-xiv.  to  the  Maccabean  period. 
Bottcher  tt  placed  the  whole  in  the  wars  of 
Ptolemy  and  Seleucus  after  Alexander's  death; 
and  Vatke,  who  had  at  first  selected  a  date  in  the 
reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longhand,  464-425,  finally 
decided  for  the  Maccabean  period,  170  ff.§§ 

In  recent  times  the  most  thorough  examina- 
tion of  the  chapters  has  been  that  by  Stade,|||| 
and  the  conclusion  he  comes  to  is  that  chaps, 
ix.-xiv.  are  all  from  one  author,  who  must  have 
written  during  the  early  wars  between  the  Ptole- 

*  ix.  I.  §i.K.  10,  13,  etc. 

tSee  above,  chap.  xxxi.  ||  "  Dan.  u.  Sacharja." 

t  X.  10.  t  Page  503. 

**See  Addenda,  p.  671. 

tt "  Einl."  in  the  beginning  of  the  century. 

tt "  Nene  Exeg.  krit.  Aehrenlese  z.  A.  T.,''  1864. 

§§"Einl.."  i8£2,  p.  709. 

Ill  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,'^  i83r  1882.  See  further  proof  of  the  late 
character  of  language  and  style,  and  of  the  unity,  by 
Fckardt,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  18^3,  pp.  76  ff 


mies  and  Seleucids  about  280  b.  c,  but  employed, 
especially  in  chaps,  ix.,  x.,  an  earlier  prophecy. 
A  criticism  and  modification  of  Stade's  theory 
is  given  by  Kuenen.  He  allows  that  the  present 
form  of  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  must  be  of  post-exilic 
origin:  this  is  obvious  from  the  mention  of  the 
Greeks  as  a  world-power;  the  description  of  a 
siege  of  Jerusalem  by  all  tlie  heathen;  the  way  in 
which  (chaps,  ix.  11  f.,  but  especially  x.  6-9)  the 
captivity  is  presupposed,  if  not  of  all  Israel,  yet  of 
Ephraim;  the  fact  that  the  House  of  David  are 
not  represented  as  governing;  and  the  thor- 
oughly priestly  character  of  all  the  chapters.  But 
Kuenen  holds  that  an  ancient  prophecy  of  the 
eighth  century  underlies  chaps,  ix.-xi.,  xiii.  7-9, 
in  which  the  several  actual  phrases  of  it  sur- 
vive;* and  that  in  their  present  form  xii.-xiv.  are 
older  than  ix.-xi.,  and  probably  by  a  contem- 
porary of  Joel,  about  400  b.  c. 

In  the  main  Cheyne,t  Cornill,$  Wildeboer,§ 
and  Staerk  ||  adhere  to  Stade's  conclusions. 
Cheyne  proves  the  unity  of  the  six  chapters  and 
their  date  before  the  Maccabean  period.  Staerk 
brings  down  xi.  4-17  and  xiii.  7-9  to  171  B.  c. 
Wellhausen  argues  for  the  unity,  and  assigns  it 
to  the  Maccabean  times.  Driver  judges  ix.-xi., 
with  its  natural  continuation,  xiii.  7-9,  as  not 
earlier  than  333;  and  the  rest  of  xii.-xiv.  as  cer- 
tainly post-exilic,  and  probably  from  432-300. 
RubinkamTT  places  ix.  i-io  in  Alexander's  time, 
the  rest  in  that  of  the  Maccabees,  but  Zeydner** 
all  of  it  to  the  latter.  Kirkpatrick,tt  after  show- 
ing the  post-exilic  character  of  all  the  chapters, 
favours  assigning  ix.-xi.  to  a  dififerent  author 
from  xii.-xiv.  Asserting  that  to  the  question  of 
the  exact  date  it  is  impossible  to  give  a  definite 
answer,  he  thinks  that  the  whole  may  be  with 
considerable  probability  assigned  to  the  first 
sixty  or  seventy  years  of  the  Exile,  and  is  there- 
fore in  its  proper  place  between  Zechariah  and 
"  Malachi."  The  reference  to  the  sons  of  Javan 
he  takes  to  be  a  gloss,  probably  added  in  Mac- 
cabean times. $$ 

It  will  be  seen  from  this  catalogue  of  conclu- 
sions that  the  prevailing  trend  of  recent  criti- 
cism has  been  to  assign  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  to  post- 
exilic  times,  and  to  a  dififerent  author  from  chaps, 
i.-viii. ;  and  that  while  a  few  critics  maintain  a 
date  soon  after  the  Return,  the  bulk  are  divided 
between  the  years  following  Alexander's  cam- 
paigns and  the  time  of  the  Maccabean  strug- 
gles.§§ 

There  are,  in  fact,  in  recent  years  only  two  at- 
tempts to  support  the  conservative  position  of 
Pusey  and  Hengstenberg  that  the  whole  book  is 
a  genuine  work  of  Zechariah  the  son  of  Iddo. 
One  of  these  is  by  C.  H.  H.  Wright  in  his 
Bampton  Lectures.  The  other  is  by  George  L. 
Robinson,  now  Professor  at  loronto,  in  a  re- 
print (1896)  from  the  American  Journal  of  Se- 
mitic Languages  and  Literatures,  which  offers 
a  valuable  history  of  the  discussion  of  the  whole 
question  from  the  days  of  Mede,  with  a  careful 
argument  of  all  the  evidence  on  both  sides.    The 

*§8i,  n,  3.  10. 

ijeunsh  Quart.  Review,  i88q. 

f'Einl." 

§"A.  T.  Litt." 

il  "Untersuchung  iiber  die  Komposition  u.  Abfassungs- 
zeit  von  Zach.  9-14,"  etc.     Halle,  1891  (not  seen). 

If  1892  :  quoted  by  Wildeboer. 

**  i8q3  :  quoted  by  Wildeboer. 

tt  "  Doctrine  of  the  Prophets,"  438  ff.,  in  which  the  Eng- 
lish reader  will  find  a  singularly  lucid  and  fair  treatment 
of  the  question.     See,  too,  Wright. 

XX  Page  472,  Note  A. 

§§  Kautzsch— the  Greek  period. 


670 


THE^-BOOK    OF    THE   TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


very  original  conclusion  is  reached  that  the  chap- 
ters reflect  the  history  of  the  years  518-516  b.  c. 

In  discussing  the  question,  for  which  our  treat- 
ment of  other  prophets  has  left  us  too  little  space, 
we  need  not  open  that  part  of  it  which  lies  be- 
tween a  pre-exilic  and  a  post-exilic  date.  Re- 
cent criticism  of  all  schools  and  at  both  extremes 
has  tended  to  establish  the  latter  upon  reasons 
which  we  have  already  stated,*  and  for  further 
details  of  which  the  student  may  be  referred  to 
Stade's  and  Eckhardt's  investigations  in  the 
Zeitschrift  fiir  A.  T.  IVissenschaft  and  to 
Kirkpatrick's  impartial  summary.  There  remain 
the  questions  of  the  unity  of  chaps,  ix.-xiv. ;  their 
exact  date  or  dates  after  the  Exile,  and  as  a  con- 
sequence of  this  their  relation  to  the  authentic 
prophecies  of  Zechariah  in  chaps,  i.-viii. 

On  the  question  of  unity  we  take  first  chaps, 
ix.-xi.,  to  which  must  be  added  Cas  by  most  crit- 
ics since  Ewald)  xiii.  7-9,  which  has  got  out  of 
its  place  as  the  natural  continuation  and  conclu- 
sion of  chap.  xi. 

Chap.  ix.  1-8  predicts  the  overthrow  of  heathen 
neighbours  of  Israel,  their  possession  by  Jehovah 
and  His  safeguard  of  Jerusalem.  Vv.  9-12  follow 
with  a  prediction  of  the  Messianic  King  as  the 
Prince  of  Peace;  but  then  come  vv.  13-17,  with 
no  mention  of  the  King,  but  Jehovah  appears 
alone  as  the  hero  of  His  people  against  the 
Greeks,  and  there  is  indeed  sufficiency  of  war 
and  blood.  Chap.  x.  makes  a  new  start:  the 
people  are  warned  to  seek  their  blessings  from 
Jehovah,  and  not  from  Teraphim  and  diviners, 
whom  their  false  shepherds  follow.  Jehovah, 
visiting  His  flock,  shall  punish  these,  give  proper 
rulers,  make  the  people  strong  and  gather  in 
their  exiles  to  fill  Gilead  and  Lebanon.  Chap, 
xi.  opens  with  a  burst  of  war  on  Lebanon  and 
Bashan  and  the  overthrow  of  the  heathen  (vv. 
1-3),  and  follows  with  an  allegory,  in  which  the 
prophet  first  takes  charge  from  Jehovah  of  the 
people  as  their  shepherd,  but  is  contemptuously 
treated  by  them  (4-14),  and  then  taking  the  guise 
of  an  evil  shepherd  represents  what  they  must 
suffer  from  their  next  ruler  (15-17).  This  tyrant, 
however,  shall  receive  punishment,  two-thirds 
of  the  nation  shall'  be  scattered,  but  the  rest, 
further  purified,  shall  be  God's  own  people 
(xiii.  7-9). 

In  the  course  of  this  prophesying  there  is  no 
conclusive  proof  of  a  double  authorship.  The 
only  passage  which  offers  strong  evidence  for 
this  is  chap.  ix.  The  verses  predicting  the  peace- 
ful coming  of  Messiah  (9-12)  do  not  accord  in 
spirit  with  those  which  follow  predicting  the  ap- 
pearance of  Jehovah  with  war  and  great  shed- 
ding of  blood.  Nor  is  the  difference  altogether 
explained,  as  Stade  thinks,  by  the  similar  order 
of  events  in  chap,  x.,  where  Judah  and  Joseph 
are  first  represented  as  saved  and  brought  back 
in  ver.  6,  and  then  we  have  the  process  of  their 
redemption  and  return  described  in  vv.  7  ff.  Why 
did  the  same  writer  give  statements  of  sucli  very 
different  temper  as  chap.  ix.  9-12  and  13-17?  Or, 
if  these  be  from  different  hands,  why  were  they 
ever  put  together?  Otherwise  there  is  no  reason 
for  breaking  up  chaps,  ix.-xi.,  xiii.  7-9.  Rubin- 
kam,  who  separates  ix.  i-io  bv  a  hundred  and 
fifty  years  from  the  rest;  Bleek,  who  divides  ix. 
from  x. ;  and  Staerk,  who  separates  ix.-xi.  3  from 
the  rest,  have  been  answered  by  Robinson  and 
others. t  On  the  ground  of  language,  grammar, 
and  syntax,  Eckardt  has  fully  proved  that  ix.-xi 
♦  Above,  pp.  669,  f.  t  Robinson,  pp.  76  ff. 


are  from  the  same  author  of  a  late  date,  who, 
however,  may  have  occasionally  followed  earlier 
models  and  even  introduced  their  very  phrases.* 

More  supporters  have  been  found  for  a  division 
of  authorship  between  chaps,  ix.-xi.,  xiii.  7-9,  and 
chaps,  xii.-xiv.  (less  xiii.  7-9).  Chap.  xii.  opens 
with  a  title  of  its  own.  A  strange  element  is  in- 
troduced into  the  historical  relation.  Jerusalem 
is  assaulted,  not  by  the  heathen  only,  but  by  Ju- 
dah, who,  however,  turns  on  finding  that  Jeho- 
vah fights  for  Jerusalem,  and  is  saved  by  Jehovah 
before  Jerusalem  in  order  that  the  latter  may 
not  boast  over  it  (xii.  1-9).  A  spirit  of  grace 
and  supplication  is  poured  upon  the  guilty  city, 
a  fountain  opened  for  uncleanness,  idols  abol- 
ished, and  the  prophets,  who  are  put  on  a  level 
with  them,  abolished  too,  where  they  do  not 
disown  their  profession  (xii.  lo-xiii.  6).  An- 
other assault  of  the  heathen  on  Jerusalem  is  de- 
scribed, half  of  the  people  being  taken  captive. 
Jehovah  appears,  and  by  a  great  earthquake  saves 
the  rest.  The  land  is  transformed.  And  then 
the  prophet  goes  back  to  the  defeat  of  the 
heathen  assault  on  the  city,  in  which  Judah  is 
again  described  as  taking  part;  and  the  surviving 
heathen  are  converted,  or,  if  they  refuse  to  be, 
punished  by  the  withholding  of  rain.  Jerusalem 
is  holy  to  the  Lord  (xiv.).  In  all  this  there  is 
more  that  differs  from  chaps,  ix.-xi.,  xiii.  7-9, 
than  the  strange  opposition  of  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem. Ephraim,  or  Joseph,  is  not  mentioned, 
nor  any  return  of  exiles,  nor  punishment  of  the 
shepherds,  nor  coming  of  the  Messiah,!  the  lat- 
ter's  place  being  taken  by  Jehovah.  But  in  an- 
swer to  this  we  may  remember  that  the  Messiah, 
after  being  described  in  ix.  9-12,  is  immediately 
lost  behind  the  warlike  coming  of  Jehovah.  Both 
sections  speak  of  idolatry,  and  of  the  heathen, 
their  punishment  and  conversion,  and  do  so  in 
the  same  apocalyptic  style.  Nor  does  the  lan- 
guage of  the  two  differ  in  any  decisive  fashion. 
On  the  contrary,  as  Eckardt  t  and  Kuiper  have 
shown,  the  language  is  on  the  whole  an  argu- 
ment for  unity  of  authorship. §  There  is,  then, 
nothing  conclusive  against  the  position,  which 
Stade  so  clearly  laid  down  and  strongly  forti- 
fied, that  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  are  from  the  same  hand, 
although,  as  he  admits,  this  cannot  be  proved 
with  absolute  certainty.  So  also  Cheyne:  "  With 
perhaps  one  or  two  exceptions,  chaps,  ix.-xi. 
and  xii.-xiv.  are  so  closely  welded  together  that 
even  analysis  is  impossible."! 

The  next  questions  we  have  to  decide  are 
whether  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  offer  any  evidence  of  be- 
ing by  Zechariah,  the  author  of  chaps,  i.-viii., 
and  if  not  to  what  other  post-exilic  date  they  may 
be  assigned. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  in  language  and  in 
style  the  two  parts  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah 
have  features  in  common.  But  that  these  have 
been  exaggerated  by  defenders  of  the  unity  there 
can  be  no  doubt.  We  cannot  infer  anything 
from  the  fact  ^  that  both  parts  contain  specimens 
of  clumsy  diction,  of  the  repetition  of  the  same 
word,  of  phrases  (not  the  same  phrases)  unused 
by  other  writers;  **  or  that  each  is  lavish  in  voc- 

*  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  1893,  76  ff.  See  also  the  summaries  of 
linguistic  evidence  given  by  Robinson.  Kuenen  finds  in 
ix.-xi.  the  following  pre-exilic  elements:  ix.  1-5,  8-10, 
i^a  (?) ;  X.  I  f.,  10  f.;  xi.  4-14  or  17. 

t  Kuenen. 

t  See  above,  p.  66g,  n. 

§  See  also  Robinson. 

\Jeu<isli  Quarterly  Review,  1889,  p.  81. 

•[As  Robinson,  e.  g.,  does. 

**  E.g.,  "holy  land,"  ii.  16,  and  "Mount  of  Olives,"  xiv.  4. 


THE  CONTENTS  OF  "  ZECHARIAH  "  IX.-XIV. 


671 


atives;  or  that  each  is  variable  in  his  spelling. 
Resemblances  of  that  kind  they  share  with  other 
books:  some  of  them  are  due  to  the  fact  that 
both  sections  are  post-exilic.  On  the  other  hand, 
as  Eckardt  has  clearly  shown,  there  exists  a  still 
greater  number  of  differences  between  the  two 
sections,  both  in  language  and  in  style.*  Not 
only  do  characteristic  words  occur  in  each  which 
are  not  found  in  the  other,  not  only  do  chaps, 
ix.-xiv.  contain  many  more  Aramaisms  than 
chaps,  i.-viii.,  and  therefore  symptoms  of  a  later 
date;  but  both  parts  use  the  same  words  with 
more  or  less  different  meanings,  and  apply  dif- 
ferent terms  to  the  same  objects.  There  are  also 
differences  of  grammar,  of  favourite  formulas, 
and  of  other  features  of  the  phraseology,  which, 
if  there  be  any  need,  complete  the  proof  of  a 
distinction  of  dialect  so  great  as  to  require  to 
account   for   it  distinction   of  authorship. 

The  same  impression  is  sustained  by  the  con- 
trast of  the  historical  circumstances  reflected  in 
each  of  the  two  sections.  Zech.  i.-viii.  were  writ- 
ten during  the  building  of  the  Temple.  There  is 
no  echo  of  the  latter  in  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  Zech. 
i.-viii.  picture  the  whole  earth  as  at  peace,  which 
was  true  at  least  of  all  Syria;  they  portend  no 
danger  to  Jerusalem  from  the  heathen,  but  de- 
scribe her  peace  and  fruitful  expansion  in  terms 
most  suitable  to  the  circumstances  imposed  upon 
her  by  the  solid  and  clement  policy  of  the  earlier 
Persian  kings.  This  is  all  changed  in  "  Zech." 
ix.-xiv.  The  nations  are  restless;  a  siege  of  Je- 
rusalem is  imminent,  and  her  salvation  is  to  be 
assured  only  by  much  war  and  a  terrible  shedding 
of  blood.  We  know  exactly  how  Israel  fared 
and  felt  in  the  early  sections  of  the  Persian  pe- 
riod: her  interests  in  the  politics  of  the  world, 
her  feelings  towards  her  governors  and  her 
whole  attitude  to  the  heathen  were  not  at  that 
time  those  which  are  reflected  in  "  Zech."  ix.- 
xiv. 

Nor  is  there  any  such  resemblance  between 
the  religious  principles  of  the  two  sections  of 
the  Book  of  Zechariah  as  could  prove  identity  of 
origin.  That  both  are  spiritual,  or  that  they  have 
a  similar  expectation  of  the  ultimate  position  of 
Israel  in  the  history  of  the  world,  proves  only 
that  both  were  late  offshoots  from  the  same  re- 
ligious development,  and  worked  upon  the  same 
ancient  models.  Within  these  outlines  there  are 
not  a  few  divergences.  Zech.  r.-viii.  were  written 
before  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  had  imposed  the 
Levitical  legislation  upon  Israel;  but ,  Eckardt 
has  shown  the  dependence  on  the  latter  of 
"  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  /  i      .  : 

We  may,  therefore,  adhere  to  Canon  Driver's 
assertion,  that  Zechariah  in  chaps,  i.-viii.  ^':uses 
a  different  phraseology,  evinces  different  inter- 
ests, and  moves  in  a  different  circle  of  ideas  from 
those  which  prevail  in  chaps,  ix.-xiv." f  Criti- 
cism has  indeed  been  justified  in  separating,  by 
the  vast  and  growing  majority  of  its  opinions, 
the  two  sections  from  each  other.  This  was 
one  of  the  earliest  results  which  modern  criti- 
cism achieved,  and  the  latest  researches  have  but 
established  it  on  a  firmer  basis. 

If,  then,  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  be  not  Zechariah's,  to 
what  date  may  we  assign  them?  We  have  al- 
ready seen  that  they  bear  evidence  of  being  upon 
the  whole  later  than  Zechariah,  though  they  ap- 
pear to  contain  fragments  from  an  earlier  period. 
Perhaps  this  is  all  we  can  with  certainty  affirm. 

♦  Oy>.  ci(.,  io^-ioq:  c/.  Driver,  "  Introd.,"  354. 
+  "Introd.,"p.  354. 


Yet  something  more  definite  is  at  least  proba- 
ble. The  mention  of  the  Greeks,  not  as  Joel 
mentions  them  about  400,  the  most  distant  na- 
tion to  which  Jewish  slaves  could  be  carried,  but 
as  the  chief  of  the  heathen  powers,  and  a  foe 
with  whom  the  Jews  are  in  touch  and  must  soon 
cross  swords,*  appears  to  imply  that  the  Syrian 
campaign  of  Alexander  is  happening  or  has  hap- 
pened, or  even  that  the  Greek  kingdoms  of 
Syria  and  Egypt  are  already  contending  for  the 
possession  of  Palestine.  With  this  agrees  the 
mention  of  Damascus,  Hadrach,  and  Hamath, 
the  localities  where  the  Seleucids  had  their  chief 
seats. f  In  that  case  Asshur  would  signify  the 
Seleucids  and  Egypt  the  Ptolemies::^  it  is  these, 
and  not  Greece  itself,  from  whom  the  Jewish 
exiles  have  still  to  be  redeemed.  All  this  makes 
probable  the  date  which  Stade  has  proposed  for 
the  chapters,  between  300  and  280  b.  c.  To 
bring  them  further  down,  to  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees,  as  some  have  tried  to  do,  would  not 
be  impossible  so  far  as  the  historical  allusions 
are  concerned;  but  had  they  been  of  so  late  a 
date  as  that,  viz.,  170  or  160,  we  may  assert  that 
they  could  not  have  found  a  place  in  the  pro- 
phetic canon,  which  was  closed  by  200,  but  must 
have  fallen  along  with  Daniel  into  the  Ha- 
giographa. 

The  appearance  of  these  prophecies  at  the  close 
of  the  Book  of  Zechariah  has  been  explained,  not 
quite  satisfactorily,  as  follows.  With  the  Book  of 
"  Malachi  "  they  formed  originally  three  anony- 
mous pieces, §  which  because  of  their  anonym- 
ity were  set  at  the  end  of  the  Book  of  the 
Twelve.  The  first  of  them  begins  with  the  very 
peculiar  construction  "  Massa'  Debar  Jehovah," 
"  oracle  of  the  word  of  Jehovah,"  which,  though 
partly  belonging  to  the  text,  the  editor  read  as 
a  title,  and  attached  as  a  title  to  each  of  the 
others.  It  occurs  nowhere  else.  The  Book  of 
"  Malachi  "  was  too  distinct  in  character  to  be 
attached  to  another  book,  and  soon  came  to 
have  the  supposed  name  of  its  author  added  to 
its  title. II  But  the  other  two  pieces  fell,  like  all 
anonymous  works,  to  the  nearest  writing  with 
an  author's  name.  Perhaps  the  attachment  was 
hastened  by  the  desire  to  make  the  round  num- 
ber of  Twelve  Prophets. 

Addenda. 

Whiston's  work  (p.  450)  is  "An  Essay  towards  restor- 
ing the  True  Text  of  the  O.  T.  and  for  vindicating-  the 
Citations  made  thence  in  the  N.  T.,"  1722,  pp.  93  ff.  (not 
seen).  Besides  those  mentioned  on  p.  66q  (see  «.)  as  sup- 
porting the  unity  of  Zechariah  there  ought  to  be_^iiamed 
De  Wette,  Umbreit,  von  Hoffmann,  Ebrard,  etc.  Kuiper's 
work  (p.  671;  is  '■  Zacliaria  q-14,"  Utrecht,  1894  (not  seen). 
Nowack's  conclusions  are:  ix.-xi.  3  date  from  theCireek 
period  (we  cannot  date  them  more  exactly,  unless  ix.  8 
refers  to  Ptolemy's  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  320)  ;  xi.,  xiii. 
7-q,  are  post-exilic  ;  xii.-xiii.  6  long  after  Exile  ;  xiv.  long 
after  Exile,  later  than  "Malachi." 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

THE  CONTENTS  OF  "ZECHARIAH" 
IX.-XIV. 

From  the  number  of  conflicting  opinions 
which  prevail  upon  the  subject,  we  have  seen 
how  impossible  it  is  to  decide  upon  a  scheme  of 

*  ix.  13. 
+  ix.  1 1. 

t  X.  II.     See  above,  p.  66<). 

§  See  above,  pp.  3^1  ft.,  for  proof  of  the  original  anon> 
ymity  of  the  Book  of  "  Malachi." 
11  Above,  p.  640. 


67-2 


TiTfi    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


division  For  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  These  chapters 
consist  of  a  number  of  separate  oracles,  which 
their  language  and  general  conceptions  lead  us 
on  the  whole  to  believe  were  put  together  by  one 
hand,  and  which,  with  the  possible  exception  of 
some  older  fragments,  reflect  the  troubled  times 
in  Palestine  that  followed  on  the  invasion  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  But  though  the  most  of 
them  are  probably  due  to  one  date  and  possibly 
come  from  the  same  author,  these  oracles  do  not 
always  exhibit  a  connection,  and  indeed  some- 
times show  no  relevance  to  each  other.  It  will 
therefore  be  simplest  to  take  them  piece  by 
piece,  and,  before  giving  the  translation  of  each, 
to  explain  the  difficulties  in  it  and  indicate 
the  ruling  'deas. 

I.  The  Coming  of  the  Greeks  (ix.  1-8). 

This  passage  runs  exactly  in  the  style  of  the 
early  prophets.  It  figures  the  progress  of  war 
from  the  north  of  Syria  southwards  by  the  valley 
of  the  Orontes  to  Damascus,  and  then  along  the 
coasts  of  Phoenicia  and  the  Philistines.  All  these 
shall  be  devastated,  but  Jehovah  will  camp  about 
His  own  House  and  it  shall  be  inviolate.  This 
is  exactly  how  Amos  or  Isaiah  might  have  pic- 
tured an  Assyrian  campaign,  or  Zephaniah  a 
Scythian.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that 
even  some  of  those  who  take  the  bulk  of 
"  Zech."  ix.-xiv.  as  post-exilic  should  regard  ix. 
1-5  as  earlier  even  than  Amos,  with  post-exilic 
additions  only  in  vv.  6-8.*  This  is  possible. 
Vv.  6-8  are  certainly  post-exilic,  bacause  of  their 
mention  of  the  half-breeds,  and  their  intimation 
that  Jehovah  will  take  unclean  food  out  of  the 
mouth  of  the  heathen;  but  the  allusions  in  vv.  1-5 
suit  an  early  date.  They  equally  suit,  however, 
a  date  in  the  Greek  period.  The  progress  of 
war  from  the  Orontes  valley  by  Damascus  and 
thence  down  the  coast  of  Palestine  follows  the 
line  of  Alexander's  campaign  in  332,  which  must 
also  have  been  the  line  of  Demetrius  in  315  and 
of  Antigonus  in  311.  The  evidence  of  language 
is  mostly  in  favour  of  a  late  date.f  If  Ptolemy  I. 
took  Jerusalem  in  320,t  then  the  promise,  no  as- 
sailant shall  return  (ver.  8),  is  probably  later 
than  that. 

In  face,  then,  of  Alexander's  invasion  of  Pales- 
tine, or  of  another  campaign  on  the  same  line, 
this  oracle  repeats  the  ancient  confidence  of 
Isaiah.  God  rules:  His  providence  is  awake  alike 
for  the  heathen  and  for  Israel.  "  Jehovah  hath 
an  eye  for  mankind,  and  all  the  tribes  of  Is- 
rael." §  The  heathen  shall  be  destroyed,  but  Je- 
rusalem rest  secure;  and  the  remnant  of  the 
heathen  be  converted,  according  to  the  Levitical 
notion,  by  having  unclean  foods  taken  out  of 
their  mouths. 

Oracle. 

"  The  Word  of  Jehovah  is  on  the  land  of 
Hadrach,  and  Damascus  is  its  goal  || — for  Jeho- 

*  So  Staerk,  who  thinks  Amos  I.  made  use  of  vv.  1-5. 

t  ix.  1,  DTX.  "mankind,"  in  contrast  to  the  tribes  of 
Israel;  3,  VTHPI.  '"gold";  5,  3tJ'''  as  passive,  c/.  xii.  6; 
{J>^3in,  Hi.  of  tJ'IH,  in  passive  sense  only  after  Jeremiah 
(c/.  above,  p.  661,  on  Joel) ;  in  2  Sam.  xix.  6,  Hosea  ii.  7,  it 
is  active. 

tSee  p.  667. 

§ix.  I. 

B  Heb.  "  restinpr-place  : "  cf.  Zech.  vi.  8,  "bring  Mine 
anger  to  rest."  This  meets  the  objection  of  Bredenkamp 
and  others,  that  nniJD  is  otherwise  used  of  Jehovah 
alone,  in  consequence  of  which  they  refer  the  suffix  to 
Him. 


vah  hath  an  eye  upon  the  heathen,*  and  all  the 
tribes  of  Israel — and  on+  Hamath.  zvhich  borders 
upon  it,  Tyre  and  Sidon,  for  they  were  very 
wise.t  And  Tyre  built  her  a  fortress,  and 
heaped  up  silver  like  dust,  and  gold  like  the  dirt 
of  the  streets.  Lo,  the  Lord  will  dispossess 
her,  and  strike  her  rampart^  into  the  sea,  and 
she  shall  be  consumed  in  fire.  Ashklon  shall 
see  and  shall  fear,  and  Gaza  writhe  in  anguish, 
and  Ekron,  for  her  confidence!!  is  abashed. 
and  the  king  shall  perish  from  Gaza,  and 
Ashklon  lie  uninhabited.  Half-breeds"!  shall 
dwell  in  Ashdod,  and  I  will  cut  down  the  pride 
of  the  Philistines.  Ana  I  will  take  their  blood 
from  their  mouth  and  their  abominations  from 
between  their  teeth,**  and  even  they  shall  be  left 
for  our  God,  and  shall  become  like  a  clan  in 
Judah,  and  Ekron  shall  be  as  the  Jebusite.  And 
I  shall  encamp  for  a  guard  ft  to  My  House,  so 
that  none  pass  by  or  return,  and  no  assailant 
again  pass  upon  them,  for  now  do  I  regard  it 
with  Mine  eyes." 

2.  The  Prince  of  Peace  (ix.  9-12). 

This  beautiful  picture,  applied  by  the  Evangel- 
ist with  such  fitness  to  our  Lord  upon  His  entry 
to  Jerusalem,  must  also  be  of  post-exilic  date. 
It  contrasts  with  the  warlike  portraits  of  the 
Messiah  drawn  in  pre-exilic  times,  for  it  clothes 
Him  with  humility  and  with  peace.  The  coming 
King  of  Israel  has  the  attributes  already  imputed 
to  the  Servant  of  Jehovah  by  the  prophet  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity.  The  next  verses  also  im- 
ply the  Exile  as  already  a  fact.  On  the  whole, 
too,  the  language  is  of  a  late  rather  than  of  an 
early  date.Jt  Nothing  in  the  passage  betrays  the 
exact  point  of  its  origin  after  the  Exile. 

The  epithets  applied  to  the  Messiah  are  of 
very  great  interest.  He  does  not  bring 'victory 
or  salvation,  but  is  the  passive  recipient  of  it.§§ 
This  determines  the  meaning  of  the  preceding 
adjective,  "  righteous,"  which  has  not  the  moral 
sense  of  "  justice,"  but  rather  that  of  "  vindica- 
tion," in  which  "  righteousness  "  and  "  right- 
eous "  are  so  frequently  used  in  Isa.  xl.-lv.||||  He 
is  "lowly,"  like  the  Servant  of  Jehovah;  and 
comes  riding  not  the  horse,  an  animal  for  war, 

*  The  expression  "hath  an  eye"  is  so  unusual  that 
Klostermann,  T/ieo.  Litt.  Zeit-^  1879,  566  (quoted  by 
Nowack),  proposes  to  read  for  ry  ''ly,  "Jehovah's  are 
the  cities  of  the  heathen."  For  DIN.  "  mankind,"  as  = 
"  heathen  "  cf.  Jer.  xxxii.  20. 

tSo  LXX.:  Heb    "also." 

X  So  LXX.:  Heb.  has  verb  in  sing. 

§  Cf.  Nahuni  iii.  8  ;  Isa.  xxvi.  i. 

II  Read    ™PP' 

IDeut.  xxiii.  3  (Heb.,  2  Eng.). 

**  The  prepositions  refer  to  the  half-breeds.  Ezekiel 
uses  the  term  "to  eat  upon  the  blood,"  i.  e.,  meat  eaten 
without  being  ritually  slain  and  consecrated,  for  illegal 
sacrifices  (xxxiii.  35:  cf.  1  Sam.  xiv,  32  f.;  Lev.  xix.  26, 
xvii.  11-14). 

tt  n^JfO  for  ^*^^'1P  ;  but  to  be  amended  to  '"l^^- 
I  Sam.  xiv.  12,  "a  military  post."  Ewald  reads  ''~P' 
"rampart."    LXX.  ovdo-Tr/no  =  ''^•iy* 

ttixio,  ''?'^'  cf.  Dan.  xi.  4;  px  ^DDN  o"ly  i"  l^te 
writings  (unless  Deut.  xxxiii.  17  be  early)— see  Eckardt, 
p.  80;  12,  }n5f3  is  a.T!o.^' Ki-^diL^vov ;  the  last  clause  of  12  's 
based  on  Isa.  Ixi.  7.  If  our  interpretation  of  p^X  and 
ySJ'IJ  be  right,  they  are  also  symptoms  of  a  late  date. 

§(;  yt^^ij  (ver.  ij)  :  the  passive  participle. 

mi  Cy.  "  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi."  ("  Expositor's  Bible  "),  p.  783. 


THE    CONTENTS    OF    "ZECHARIAH"    IX. -XIV. 


67. 


Ijecause  the  next  verse  says  that  horses  and 
chariots  are  to  be  removed  from  Israel,*  but  the 
ass,  the  animal  not  of  lowliness,  as  some  have 
interpreted,  but  of  peace.  To  this  day  in  the 
East  asses  are  used,  as  they  are  represented  in 
the  Song  of  Deborah,  by  great  officials,  but  only 
when  these  are  upon  civil,  and  not  upon  military, 
duty. 

It  is  possible  that  this  oracles  closes  with  ver. 
10,  and  that  we  should  take  vv.  11  and  12,  on  the 
deliverance  from  exile,  with  the  next. 

"  Rejoice  mightily,  daughter  of  Zion!  shout 
aloud,  daughter  of  Jerusalem!  Lo,  thy  King 
cometh  to  thee,  vindicated  and  victorious,t  meek 
and  riding  on  an  ass.t  and  on  a  colt  the  she-ass' 
foal.§  And  I  ||  will  cut  off  the  chariot  from 
Ephraim  and  the  horse  from  Jerusalem,  and  the 
war-bow  shall  be  cut  off,  and  He  shall  speak 
peace  to  the  nations,  and  His  rule  shall  be  from 
sea  to  sea  and  from  the  river  even  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth.  Thou,  too, — by  thy  covenant- 
blood, T  I  have  set  free  thy  prisoners  from  the 
pit.**  Return  to  the  fortress,  ye  prisoners  of 
hope;  even  to-day  do  I  proclaim:  Double  will 
I  return  to  thee."  ft 

3.  The  Slaughter  of  the  Greeks  (ix.  13-17). 

The  next  oracle  seems  singularly  out  of  keep- 
ing with  the  spirit  of  the  last,  which  declared 
the  arrival  of  the  Messianic  peace,  while  this  rep- 
resents Jehovah  as  using  Israel  for  His  weapons 
in  the  slaughter  of  the  Greeks  and  heathens,  in 
whose  blood  they  shall  revel.  But  Stade  has 
pointed  out  how  often  in  chaps,  ix.-xiv.  a  result 
is  first  stated  and  then  the  oracle  goes  on  to 
describe  the  process  by  which  it  is  achieved.  Ac- 
cordingly we  have  no  ground  for  affirming  ix. 
13-17  to  be  by  another  hand  than  ix.  9-12.  The 
apocalyptic  character  of  the  means  by  which  the 
heathen  are  to  be  overthrown,  and  the  exulta- 
tion displayed  in  their  slaughter,  as  in  a  great 
sacrifice  (ver.  15),  betray  Israel  in  a  state  of  abso- 
lute political  weakness,  and  therefore  suit  a  date 
after  Alexander's  campaigns,  which  is  also  made 
sure  by  the  reference  to  the  "  sons  of  Javan," 
as  if  Israel  were  now  in  immediate  contact  with 
them.  Kirkpatrick's  note  should  be  read,  in 
which  he  seeks  to  prove  "  the  sons  of  Javan  " 
a  late  gloss;  J4:  but  his  reasons  do  not  appear 
conclusive.  The  language  bears  several  traces 
of  lateness. §§ 

"  For  I  have  drawn  Judah  for  My  bow,  I  have 
charged  it  with  Ephraim;  and  I  will  urge  thy 
sons,  O  Zion,  against  the  sons  of  W\\  Javan,  and 
make  thee  like  the  sword  of  a  hero.  Then  will 
Jehovah  appear  above  them,  and  His  shaft  shall 
go  forth  like  lightning;  and  the  Lord  Jehovah 

*  Why  "  chariot  from  Ephraim"  and  "horse  from  Je- 
rusalem "  is  explained  in  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  329-331. 

+  See  above. 

t  Symbol  of  peace  as  the  horse  was  of  war. 

§  Son  of  she-asses. 

If  Mass.:  LXX.  "He." 

i  Heb.  "  blood  of  thy  covenant,"  but  the  suflBx  refers  to 
the  whole  phrase  (Duhm,  "Theol.  der  Proph.,"  p.  143). 
The  covenant  is  Jehovah's;  the  blood,  that  which  the 
people  shed  in  sacrifice  to  ratify  the  covenant. 

**  Heb.  adds  "  there  is  no  water  in  it,"  but  this  is  either  a 
gloss,  or  perhaps  an  attempt  to  make  sense  out  of  a  dit- 
t)graphy  of  TI3J3,  or  a  corruption  of  "none  shall  be 
a  shamed." 

+  Hsa.  Ixi.  7. 

Xt  "  Doctrine  of  the  Prophets,"  Note  A.  p.  472. 

§§14.  onp^n  see  Eckardt ;  15,  DV^T.  Aramaism  ;  {^33 
iilate  ;  17.  DDUDri,  only  here  and  Psalm  Ix.  6  ;  31Ji  prob- 
»  bly  late. 

5!!  So  LXX.:  Heb.  reads,  "thy  sons,  O  Javan." 
43— Vol.  IV. 


shall  blow  a  blast  on  the  trumpet,  and  travel  in 
the  storms  of  the  south.*  Jehovah  will  protect 
them,  and  they  shall  devour  (?)f  and  trample 
.  .  .  -,1;.  and  they  shall  drink  their  blood?  like 
wine,  and  be  drenched  with  it,  like  a  bowl  and 
like  the  corners  of  the  altar.  And  Jehovah  their 
God  will  give  them  victory  in  that  day.  ...  'I 
How  good  it1[  is,  and  how  beautiful!  Corn  shall 
make  the  young  men  flourish  and  hew  wine  the 
maidens." 


4.  Against  the  Teraphim  and  Sorcerers 
(x.  I,  2). 

This  little  piece  is  connected  with  the  previous 
one  only  through  the  latter's  conclusion  upon 
the  fertility  of  the  land,  while  this  opens  with 
rain,  the  requisite  of  fertility.  It  is  connected  with 
the  piece  that  follows  only  by  its  mention  of  the 
shepherdless  state  of  the  people,  the  piece  that 
follows  being  against  the  false  shepherds.  These 
connections  are  extremely  slight.  Perhaps  the 
piece  is  an  independent  one.  The  subject  of  it 
gives  no  clue  to  the  date.  Sorcerers  are  con- 
demned both  by  the  earlier  prophets,  and  by  the 
later.**  Stade  points  out  that  this  is  the  only 
passage  of  the  Old  Testament  in  which  the 
Teraphim  are  said  to  speak.ff  The  language  has 
one  symptom  of  a  late  period,  tt 

After  emphasising  the  futility  of  images,  en- 
chantments, and  dreams,  this  little  oracle  says, 
therefore  the  people  wander  like  sheep:  they 
have  no  shepherd.  Shepherd  in  this  connection 
cannot  mean  civil  ruler,  but  must  be  religious 
director. 

"  Ask  from  Jehova'h  rain  in  the  time  of  the 
latter  rain.s§  Jehovah  is  the  maker  of  the 
lightning-flashes,  and  the  winter  rain  He  gives  to 
them — ^to  every  man  herbage  in  the  field.  But 
the  Teraphim  speak  nothingness,  and  the  sor^ 
cerers  see  lies,  and  dreams  discourse  vanity,  and 
they  comfort  in  vain.  Wherefore  they  wan- 
der (?)  nil  like  a  flock  of  sheep,  and  flee  about,  IT 
for  there  is  no  shepherd." 

*  LXX.  ev  ffaAw  T^s  anei\rii  avTov,  "in  the  tossing  of  His 
threat,"  nyj  IVK'a  (?)  or  nyn  nyK'a.  it  is  natural  to 
see  here  a  reference  to  the  Theophanies  of  Hab.  iii.  3, 
Deut.  xxxiii.  (see  above,  pp.  596  f.). 


t  Perhaps 


'overcome    them."     LXX.    Karava- 


\it)<TOv<n.v.  . 

t  Heb.  "  stones  of  a  sling,"  y^p  ^J3K,    Wellhausen  and 

Nowack  read  "  sons,"  ''33,  but  what  then  is  J?7p? 

§  Reading  DOT  for  Heb.  IDHI,  "  and  roar." 

II  Heb.  "  like  a  flock  of  sheep  His  people,"  (but  how  is 
one  to  construe  this  with  the  context  ?)  "  for  (?  like) 
stones  of  a  diadem  lifting  themselves  up  (?  shimmering) 
over  His  land."  Wellhausen  and  Nowack  delete  "for 
stones  .  .  .  shim'mering  "  as  a  gloss.  This  would  leave 
"like  a  flock  of  sheep  His  people  in  His  land,"  to 
which  it  is  proposed  to  add  "  He  will  feed."  This  gives 
good  sense. 

T  Wellhausen,  reading  n31t3,  fem.  suffix  for  neuter. 
Ewald  and  others  "  He."  Hitzig  and  others  "they,"  the 
people. 

**Of  these  Cf.  "  Mai."  iii.  5  ;  the  late  Jer.  xliv.  8  fit.  ;  Isa. 
Ixv.  3-5  ;  and,  in  the  Priestly  Law,  Lev.  xix.  31.  xx.  6. 

t+ "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  I.  60.  He  compares  this  verse  with  i 
Sam.  XV.  23.     In  Ezek.  xxi.  26  they  give  oracles. 

ti  T'THi  "  lightning-flash,"  only  here  and  in  Job  xxviii.  26, 
xxxviii.  25. 

§§  LXX.  read  :  "in  season  early  rain  and  latter  rain." 

lllliyDJ,  used  of  a  nomadic  life  in  Jer.  xxxi.  24  (23),  and 
so  it  is  possible  that  in  a  later  stage  of  the  language  it 
had  come  to  mean  to  wander  or  stray.  But  this  is  doubt- 
ful, and  there  may  be  a  false  reading,  as  appears  from 
LXX.   €^T)pdv&ri<rav. 

11  For  ljy>  read  lyj^l.   The  LXX.  iK<iKu&r,<rav  read  IJTl^V 


674 


THE    BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


5.  Against  Evil  Shepherds  (x.  3-12). 

The  unity  of  this  section  is  more  apparent  than 
its  connection  with  the  preceding,  which  had 
spoken  of  the  want  of  a  shepherd,  or  religious 
director,  of  Israel,  while  this  is  directed  against 
their  shepherds  and  leaders,  meaning  their  for- 
eign tyrants.* 

The  figure  is  taken  from  Jeremiah  xxiii.  i  ff., 
where,  besides,  "  to  visit  upon "  f  is  used  in 
a  sense  of  punishment,  but  the  simple  "  visit "  t 
in  the  sense  of  to  look  after,  just  as  within 
ver.  3  of  this  tenth  chapter.  Who  these  for- 
eign tyrants  are  is  not  explicitly  stated,  but 
the  reference  to  Egypt  and  Assyria  as  lands 
whence  the  Jewish  captives  shall  be  brought 
home,  while  at  the  same  time  there  is  a  Jewish 
nation  in  Judah,  suits  only  the  Greek  period, 
after  Ptolemy  had  taken  so  many  Jews  to  Egypt,^ 
and  there  were  numbers  still  scattered  through- 
out the  other  great  empire  in  the  north,  to 
which,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  Jews  applied 
the  name  of  Assyria.  The  reference  can  hardly 
suit  the  years  after  Seleucus  and  Ptolemy  granted 
to  the  Jews  in  their  territories  the  rights  of 
citizens.  The  captive  Jews  are  to  be  brought 
back  to  Gilead  and  Lebanon.  Why  exactly  these 
are  mentioned,  and  neither  Samaria  nor  Galilee, 
forms  a  difficulty,  to  whatever  age  we  assign  the 
chapter. 

The  language  of  x.  3-12  has  several  late 
features.il  Joseph  or  Ephraim,  here  and  else- 
where in  these  chapters,  is  used  of  the  portion 
of  Israel  still  in  captivity,  in  contrast  to  Judah, 
the  returned  community. 

The  passage  predicts  that  Jehovah  will  change 
His  poor  leaderless  sheep,  the  Jews,  into  war- 
horses,  and  give  them  strong  chiefs  and  weapons 
of  war.  They  shall  overthrow  the  heathen,  and 
Jehovah  will  bring  back  His  exiles.  The  pas- 
sage is  therefore  one  with  chap.  ix. 

"  My  wrath  is  hot  against  the  shepherds,  and 
I  will  make  visitation  on  the  he-goats: If  yea,  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts  will  **  visit  His  flock,  the  house 
of  Judah,  and  will  make  them  like  His  splendid 
war-horses.  From  Him  the  corner-stone,  from 
Him  the  stay,tt  from  Him  the  war-bow,  from 
Him  the  oppressor — shall  go  forth  together. 
And  in  battle  shall  they  trample  on  heroes  as  on 
the  dirt  of  the  streets, tt  and  fight,  for  Jehovah 
is  with  them,  and  the  riders  on  horses  shall  be 
abas^hed.  And  the  house  of  Judah  will  I  make 
strong  and  work  salvation  for  the  house  of 
Joseph,  and  bring  them  back,§§  for  I  have  pity 

♦There  can  therefore  be  none  of  that  connection 
between  the  two  pieces  which  Kirkpatrick  assumes  (p. 
66q  and  note). 

+  by  ipsi. 

§  See  above,  p.  667. 

I  X.  5,    D13,  Eckardt,  p.  82 ;  6,  12,  "133.  Pi.,  c/.  Eccles.    x. 

10,  where  it  alone  occurs  besides  here  ;  5,  11,  15J'''3n  in  pas- 
sive sense. 

1  As  we  should  say,  "  bell-wethers  ":  cf.  Isa.  xiv.  g,  also 
a  late  meaning-. 

•*  So  LXX.,  reading  TpD'->3  for  *1pQ-">3. 

tt  •'  Cornei-stoae  "  as  name  for  a  chief:  cf.  Judg.  xx.  2  :  i 
Sam.  xiv.  38  ;  Isa.  xix,  13.  "  Stay  "  or  "  tent-pin,"  Isa.  xxii. 
23.     "  From  Hjm,"  others  "  from  them." 

ii  Read  D^iiaa  and  t3"'lp3  (.Wellhausen). 

S8 Read  D^ni3B'ni for  th«  Mass.  D^nUtjHnV  "and  I 
will  make  them  to  dwell." 


for  them,*  and  they  shall  be  as  though  I  had 
not  piit  them  away,*  for  I  am  Jehovah  their 
God  *  and  I  will  hold  converse  with  them.*  And 
Ephraim  shall  be  as  heroes,!  and  their  heart  shall 
be  glad  as  with  wine,  and  their  children  shall 
behold  and  be  glad:  their  heart  shall  rejoice  in 
Jehovah.  I  will  whistle  for  them  and  gather 
them  in,  for  I  have  redeemed  them,  and  they 
shall  be  as  many  as  they  once  were.  I  scattered 
them  t  among  the  nations,  but  among  the  far- 
away they  think  of  Me,  and  they  will  bring  up  ^ 
their  children,  and  come  back.  And  I  will  fetch 
them  home  from  the  land  of  Misraim,  and  from 
Asshur  II  will  I  gather  them,  and  to  the  land 
of  Gilead  and  Lebanon  will  I  bring  them  in, 
though  these  be  not  found  sufficient  for  them.  And 
they  IT  shall  pass  through  the  sea  of  Egypt,** 
and  He  shall  smite  the  sea  of  breakers,  and  all 
the  deeps  of  the  Nile  shall  be  dried,  and  the 
pride  of  Assyria  brought  down,  and  the  sceptre 
of  Egypt  swept  aside.  And  their  strength  ft 
shall  be  in  Jehovah,  and  in  His  Name  shall  they 
boast  themselves  $$ — oracle  of  Jehovah." 

6.  War  upon  the  Syrian  Tyrants  (xi.  1-3). 

This  is  taken  by  some  with  the  previous  chap- 
ter, by  others  with  the  passage  following.  Either 
connection  seems  precarious.  No  conclusion  as 
to  date  can  be  drawn  from  the  language.  But 
the  localities  threatened  were  on  the  southward 
front  of  the  Seleucid  kingdom.  "  Open,  Leba- 
non, thy  doors  "  suits  the  Egyptian  invasions  of 
that  kingdom.  .  To  which  of  these  the  passage 
refers  cannot  of  course  be  determined.  The 
shepherds  are  the  rulers. 

"  Open,  Lebanon,  thy  doors,  that  the  fire  may 
devour  in  thy  cedars.  Wail,  O  pine-tree,  for  the 
cedar  is  fallen;  §§  wail,  O  oaks  of  Bashan,  for 
fallen  is  the  impenetrable  l|||  wood.  Hark  to  the 
wailing  of  the  shepherds!  for  their  glory  is  de- 
stroyed. Hark  how  the  lions  roar!  for  blasted 
is  the  pride  Tflf  of  Jordan." 

7.  The  Rejection  and  Murder  of  the  Good 
Shepherd  (xi.  4-17;  xiii.  7-9). 

There  follows  now,  in  the  rest  of  chap,  xi.,  a 
longer  oracle,  to  which  Ewald  and  most  critics 
after  him  have  suitably  attached  chap.  xiii.  7-9. 

This  passage  appears  to  rise  from  circum- 
stances similar  to  those  of  the  preceding  and 
from  the  same  circle  of  ideas.  Jehovah's  people 
are  His  flock  and  have  suffered.  Their  rulers 
are  their  shepherds;  and  the  rulers  of  other  peo- 
ples are  their  shepherds.  A  true  shepherd  is 
sought  for  Israel  in  place  of  the  evil  ones  which 
have     distressed     them.     The     language     shows 

*  DTlOm  and  D^nmr,  nn'^nba  and  DJJ?X,  key-words 
01  Hosea  i.-iii. 

tLXX.  ;  sing.  Heb. 

t  Changing  the  Heb.  points  which  make  the  verb  future. 
See  Nowack's  note. 

§  With  LXX.  read  ^*^]  for  Mass.  ''^Q). 

II  See  above,  p.  66q. 
i  So  LXX.  ;  Mass.  sing. 

**Heb.  mV,  "narrow  sea":  so  LXX.,  but  Wellhausen 
suggests  D''"iyC  which  Nowack  adopts. 

ft  Dm3j;  for  D^mnj. 

JtForia^nn'  read  l^isHnV  with  LXX.  and  Syr. 

S§Heb.  adds  here  a  difficult  clause,  "for  nobles  are 
wasted."    Probably  a  gloss. 

Bll  After  the  Keri. 

'jl /.  e.,  "rahkness";  applied  to  the  thick  vegetation  In 
the  larger  bed  of  the  stream  :  see  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  p,  484. 


THE    CONTENTS   OF    "  ZECHARIAH "    IX.-XIV. 


675 


traces  of  a  late  date.*  No  historical  allusion  is 
obvious  in  the  passage.  The  "  buyers "  and 
"  sellers  "  of  God's  sheep  might  reflect  the  Se- 
leucids  and  Ptolemies  between  whom  Israel  were 
exchanged  for  many  years,  but  probably  mean 
their  native  leaders.  The  "  three  shepherds  cut 
off  in  a  month  "  were  interpreted  by  the  sup- 
porters of  the  pre-exilic  date  of  the  chapters  as 
Zechariah  and  Shallum  (2  Kings  xv.  8-13),  and 
another  whom  these  critics  assume  to  have  fol- 
lowed them  to  death,  but  of  him  t'he  history  has 
no  trace.  The  supporters  of  a  Maccabean  date 
for  the  prophecy  recall  the  quick  succession  of 
high  priests  before  the  Maccabean  rising.  The 
"  one  month "  probably  means  nothing  more 
than  a  very  short  time. 

The  allegory  which  our  passage  unfolds  is 
given,  like  so  many  more  in  Hebrew  prophecy, 
to  the  prophet  himself  to  enact.  It  recalls  the 
pictures  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  of  the  over- 
throw of  the  false  shepherds  of  Israel,  and  the 
appointment  of  a  true  shepherd. f  Jehovah  com- 
missions the  prophet  to  become  s'hepherd  to  His 
sheep  that  have  been  so  cruelly  abused  by  their 
guides  and  rulers.  Like  the  shepherds  of  Pales- 
tine, the  prophet  took  two  staves  to  herd  his 
flock.  He  called  one  "  Grace,"  the  other 
"  Union."  In  a  month  he  cut  off  three  shep- 
herds— both  "  month  "  and  "  three  "  are  proba- 
bly formal  terms.  But  he  did  not  get  on  well 
with  his  charge.  They  were  wilful  and  quarrel- 
sorne.  So  he  broke  his  stafif  Grace,  in  token 
that  his  engagement  was  dissolved.  The  dealers 
of  the  sheep  saw  that  he  acted  for  God.  He 
asked  for  his  wage,  if  they  cared  to  give  it.  They 
gave  him  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  the  price  of  an 
injured  slave,t  which  by  God's  command  he  cast 
into  the  treasury  of  the  Temple,  as  if  in  token 
that  it  was  God  Himself  whom  they  paid  with 
so  wretched  a  sum.  And  then  'he  broke  his  other 
staflf,  to  signify  that  the  brotherhood  between 
Judah  and  Israel  was  broken.  Then,  to  show 
the  people  that  by  their  rejection  of  the  good 
shepherd  they  must  fall  a  prey  to  an  evil  one, 
the  prophet  assumed  the  character  of  the  latter. 
But  another  judgment  follows.  In  chap.  xiii. 
7-9  the  good  shepherd  is  smitten  and  the  flock 
dispersed. 

The  spiritual  principles  which  underlie  this  al- 
legory are  obvious.  God's  own  sheep,  perse- 
cuted and  helpless  though  they  be,  are  yet  ob- 
stinate, and  their  obstinacy  not  only  renders 
God's  good-will  to  them  futile,  but  causes  the 
death  of  the  one  man  who  could  have  done  them 
good.  The  guilty  sacrifice  the  innocent,  but  in 
this  execute  their  own  doom.  That  is  a  sum- 
mary of  the  history  of  Israel.  But  had  the 
writer  of  this  allegory  any  special  part  of  that 
history  in  view?  Who  were  the  "  dealers  of  the 
flock"? 

"  Thus  saith  Jehovah  my  God:^  Shepherd  the 

*  x.i.  5,  TK'yNI.  Hiph.,  but  intransitive,  "  grow  rich  ;  "  6, 

«'V»D  ;   7,  'o.    Dyj  (?)  ;  S,   ^na,  Aram.  ;  13,  -ip-i,  Aram., 

t: 
Jer.  XX.  5,  Ezek.  xxii.  25,  Job  xxviii.  10;  in  Esther  ten,  in 
Daniel  four  times  (Eckardt) ;  xiii.  7,  JT'Oy,  one  of  the 
marks  of  the  affinity  of  the  language  of  "  Zech."  ix.-xiv. 
to  that  of  the  Priestly  Code  (c/.  Lev.  v.  21,  xviii.  20,  etc.), 
but  in  P  it  is  concrete,  here  abstract ;  i^VV  ;  8,  ]})},  see 
Eckardt,  p.  85. 

tjer.   xxiii.  1-8;  Ezek.   xxxiv.,  xxxvii.   24  ff. :  t/i   Kirk 
Patrick,  p.  461. 

X  Exod.  xxi.  32. 

§LXX.  "God  of  Hosts." 


flock  of  slaughter,  whose  purchasers  slaughter 
them  impenitently,  and  whose  sellers  say,* 
Blessed  be  Jehovah,  for  I  am  rich! — and  their 
shepherds  do  not  spare  them.  [For  I  will  no 
more  spare  the  inhabitants  of  the  land — oracle  of 
Jehovah;  but  lo!  I  am  about  to  give  mankind  f 
over,  each  into  the  hand  of  his  shepherd, J  and 
into  the  hand  of  his  king;  and  they  shall  destroy 
the  land,  and  I  will  not  secure  it  from  their 
hands. §]  And  I  shepherded  the  flock  of  slaugh- 
ter for  the  sheep  merchants, ||  and  I  took  to  me 
two  staves — the  one  I  called  Grace,  and  the 
other  I  called  Union  1[ — and  so  I  shepherded  the 
sheep.  And  I  desftroyed  the  three  shepherds  in 
one  month.  Then  was  my  soul  vexed  with  them, 
and  they  on  their  part  were  displeased  with  me. 
And  I  said:  I  will  not  shepherd  you:  what  is 
dead,  let  it  die;  and  what  is  destroyed,  let  it 
be  destroyed;  and  those  that  survive,  let  them 
devour  one  another's  flesh!  And  I  took  my 
staff  Grace,  and  I  brake  it  so  as  to  annul  my 
covenant  which  I  made  with  all  the  peoples.** 
And  in  that  day  it  was  annulled,  and  the  dealers 
of  the  sheep,tt  who  watched  me,  knew  that  it 
was  Jehovah's  word.  And  I  said  to  them.  If  it  be 
good  in  your  sight,  give  me  my  wage,  and  if  it 
be  not  good,  let  it  go!  And  they  weighed  out 
my  wage,  thirty  pieces  of  silver.  Then  said  Je- 
hovah to  me,  Throw  it  into  the  treasury  tt  (the 
precious  wage  at  which  I  §§  had  been  valued  of 
them).  So  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and 
cast  them  to  t'he  House  of  Jehovah,  to  the  treas- 
ury.||||  And  I  brake  my  second  stafif.  Union,  so 
as  to  dissolve  the  brotherhood  between  Judah 
and  Israel. T[Tf  And  Jehovah  said  to  me:  Take 
again  to  thee  the  implements  of  a  worthless 
shepherd:  for  lo!  I  am  about  to  appoint  a  shep- 
herd over  the  land;  the  destroyed  he  will  not 
visit,  the  .  .  .***  he  will  not  seek  out,  the 
wounded  he  will  not  heal,  the    .    .    .fft  he  will  not 

*  Read  plural  with  LXX. 

tThat  is  the  late  Hebrew  name  for  the  heathen  :  c/. 
ix.  I. 
tHeb.    '^i^Vl^^y  "neighbour  ";  read  ^nj^, 

§  Many  take  this  verse  as  an  intrusion.  It  certainly 
seems  to  add  nothing  to  the  sense  and  to  interrupt  the 
connection,  which  is  clear  ■when  it  is  removed. 

II  Heb.    INSfn  7jy  |37,  "  wherefore  the  miserable  of  the 

flock,"    which   makes   no  sense.    But  LXX.  read  eU  rriv 

XavadviTTiv,  and  this  suggests  the  Heb.  ^jyj37,  "  to  the 

Canaanites,"  2'.  ^.,  "merchants,  of  the  sheep"  :  so  in  ver.  u. 

t  Lit.  "Bands." 

**  The  sense  is  here  obscure.  Is  the  text  sound?  In 
harmony  with  the  context  D^Oy  ought  to  mean  "  tribes  of 
Israel."  But  every  passage  in  the  O.  T.  in  which  D^DJ? 
might  mean  "  tribes"  has  been  shown  to  have  a  doubtful 
text :  Deut.  xxxii.  8,  xxxiii.  3  ;  Hosea  x.  14  ;  Micah  i.  2. 

+t  See  above,  note  II  on  the  same  mis-read  phrase  in 
ver.  7. 

*t  Heb.  IVI^n,  "  the  potter."  LXX.  xw^'«»'■'■^p^o^',  "smelt- 
ing furnace."'    Read  IVINn  by  change  of  N   for    '  J   the 

T  T 

two  are  often  confounded. 

§§  Wellhausen  and  Nowack  read  "thou  hast  been  valued 
of  them."  But  there  is  no  need  of  this.  The  clause  is  a 
sarcastic  parenthesis  spoken  by  the  prophet  himself. 

nil  Again  Heb.  "the  potter,"  LXX.  "the  smelting 
furnace,"  as  above  in  ver.  13.  The  additional  clause 
"House  of  God"  proves  how  right  it  is  to  read  "the 
treasury,"  and  disposes  of  the  idea  that  "  to  throw  to  the 
potter     w^a.s  a  proverb  for  throwing  away. 

^^  Two  codd.  read  "  Jerusalem,"  which  Wellhausen  and 
Now^ack  adopt. 

***  Heb.  lySn,  "the  scattered."  LXX.rhv  iaKopnitrnevov. 
+■*"'■  nSJfSn,  obscure  :    some  translate  "the  sound"  or 

T  T*  — 

"  Stable." 


676 


THE^-BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


cherish,  but  he  will  devour  the  flesh  of  the  fat 
and   .    .    .* 

"  Woe  to  My  worthless!  shepherd,  that  deserts 
the  flock!  The  sword  be  upon  his  arm  and  his 
right  eye!  May  his  arm  wither,  and  his  right 
eye  be  blinded." 

Upon  this  follows  the  section  xiii.  7-9,  which 
develops  the  tragedy  of  the  nation  to  its  climax 
in  the  murder  of  the  good  shepherd. 

"  Up,  Sword,  against  My  shepherd  and  the 
man  My  compatriot  t — oracle  of  Jehovah  of 
Hosts.  Smite  §  the  shepherd,  that  the  sheep 
may  be  scattered;  and  I  will  turn  My  hand 
against  the  little  ones.||  And  it  shall  come 
to  pass  in  all  the  land — oracle  of  Jehovah — that 
two-thirds  shall  be>cut  off  in  it,  and  perish,  but 
a  third  shall  be  left  in  it.  And  I  shall  bring  the 
third  into  the  fire,  and  smelt  it  as  men  smelt 
silver  and  try  it  as  men  try  gold.  It  shall  call 
upon  My  Name,  and  I  will  answer  it.  And  1 
willTf  say.  It  is  My  people,  and  it  will  say,  Je- 
hovah my  God!  " 

8.  JuDAH  versus  Jerusalem  (xii.  1-7). 

A  title,  though  probably  of  later  date  than  the 
text,**  introduces  with  the  beginning  of  chap, 
xii.  an  oracle  plainly  from  circumstances  differ- 
ent from  those  of  the  preceding  chapters.  The 
nations,  not  particularised  as  they  have  been, 
gather  to  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and,  very  sin- 
gularly, Judah  is  gathered  with  them  against  her 
own  capital.  But  God  makes  the  city  like  one  of 
those  great  boulders,  deeply  embedded,  which 
husbandmen  try  to  pull  up  from  their  fields,  but 
it  tears  and  wounds  the  hands  of  those  who 
would  remove  it.  Moreover  God  strikes  with 
panic  all  the  besiegers,  save  only  Judah,  who, 
her  eyes  being  opened,  perceives  that  God  is 
with  Jerusalem  and  turns  to  her  help.  Jerusa- 
lem remains  in  her  place;  but  the  glory  of  the 
victory  is  first  Judah's,  so  that  the  house  of 
David  may  not  have  too  much  fame  nor  boast 
over  the  country  districts.  The  writer  doubt- 
less alludes  to  some  temporary  schism  between 
the  capital  and  country  caused  by  the  arrogance 
of  the  former.  But  we  have  no  means  of  know- 
ing when  this  took  place.  It  must  often  have 
been  imminent  in  the  days  both  before  and  es- 
pecially after  the  Exile,  when  Jerusalem  had  ab- 
sorbed all  the  religious  privilege  and  influence 
of  the  nation.  The  language  is  undoubtedly 
late.ft 

*  Heb.  "  and  their  hbofs  he  will  tear  "  (?). 

t  For  Heb.  ^^^JJ^H  read  as  in  ver.  15  ^P^INH. 

t  JT'DV  I  only  in  Lev.  and  here. 

§n,-|.     Perhaps  we  should  read  HSNi   "I  smite,"  with 

Matt.  xxvi.  31. 

II  Some  take  this  as  a  promise  ?  "  turn  My  hand  towards 
the  little  ones." 

1  LXX.  Heb.  ^rnDN,  t>ut  the  1  has  fallen  from  the 
front  of  it. 

**  See  above,  p.  671. 

tt  xii.  2,?V'\,  a  noun  not  found  elsewhere  in  O.  T.  We 
found  the  verb  in  Nahum  ii.  4  (see  above,  p.  586),  and 
probably  in  Hab.  ii.  16  for  7iyn"l  (see  above,  p.  595,  «.) : 
it  is  common  in  Aramean  ;  other  forms  belong  to  later 
Hebrew  (c/.  Eckardt,  p.  85).  3,  t3"|E}>  is  used  in  classic 
Heb.  only  of  intentional  cutting  and  tattooing  of  oneself  ; 
in  the  sense  ot  "  wounding"  which  it  has  here  it  is  frequent 
in  Aramean.  3  has  besides  HDOyD  13K.  riot  found  else- 
where. 4  has  three  nouns  terminating  in  tt",  two  of 
them— jinOn.  "panic,"  and  JIIIJ?,  judicial  "blindness" — 
in  O.  T.  only  found  here  and  in  Deut.  xxviii.  28,  the  former 


The  figure  of  Jerusalem  as  a  boulder,  deeply 
bedded  in  the  soil,  which  tears  the  hands  that 
seek  to  remove  it,  is  a  most  true  and  expressive 
summary  of  the  history  of  heathen  assaults  upon 
her.  Till  she  herself  was  rent  by  internal  dis- 
sensions, and  the  Romans  at  last  succeeded  in 
tearing  her  loose,  she  remained  planted  on  her 
own  site.*  This  was  very  true  of  all  the  Greek 
period.  Seleucids  and  Ptolemies  alike  wounded 
themselves  upon  her.  But  at  what  period  did 
either  of  them  induce  Judah  to  take  part  against 
her?    Not  in  the  Maccabean. 


Oracle  of  the  Word  of  Jehovah  upon  Israel. 

"  Oracle  of  Jehovah,  who  stretched  out  the 
heavens  and  founded  the  earth,  and  formed  the 
spirit  of  man  within  him:  Lo,  I  am  about  to 
make  Jerusalem  a  cup  of  reeling  for  all  the  sur- 
rounding peoples,  and  even  Judah  f  shall  be  at 
the  siege  of  Jerusalem.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass  in  that  day  that  I  will  make  Jerusalem  a 
stone  to  be  lifted t  by  all  the  peoples — all  who 
lift  it  do  indeed  wound  §  themselves — and  there 
are  gathered  against  it  all  nations  of  the  earth. 
In  that  day — oracle  of  Jehovah — I  will  smite 
every  horse  with  panic,  and  their  riders  with 
madness;  but  as  for  the  house  of  Judah,  I  will 
open  its!  eyes,  though  every  horse  of  the  peo- 
ples I  smite  with  blindness.  Then  shall  the 
chiefs  ^  of  Judah  say  in  their  hearts,  .  .  .**  the 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  through  Jehovah  of 
Hosts  their  God.  In  that  day  will  I  make  the 
districts  of  Juddh  like  a  pan  of  fire  among  tim- 
ber and  like  a  torch  among  sheaves,  so  that  they 
devour  right  and  left  all  the  peoples  round  about, 
but  Jerusalem  shall  still  abide  on  its  own  site.ft 
And  Jehovah  shall  first  give  victory  to  the 
tents  tt  of  Judah,  so  that  the  fame  of  the  house 
of  David  and  the  fame  of  the  inhabitants  of  Je- 
rusalem be  not  too  great  in  contrast  to  Judah." 

also  in  Aramean .  7,  K7  ItJJjy?  is  also  cited  by  Eckardt  as 
used  only  in  Ezek.  xix.  6,  xxvi.  20,  and  four  times  in 
Psalms. 

*xii.6.  iTnnn. 

+  The  text  reads  "  against  "  Judah,  as  if  it  with  Jerusalem 
suffered  the  siege  of  the  heathen.  But  (i)  this  makes  an 
unconstruable  clause,  and  (2)  the  context  shows  that 
Judah    was    "against"    Jerusalem.      Therefore    Geiger 

("  Urschrift,"  p.  58)  is  right  in  deleting  py,  and  restoring 
to  the  clause  both  sense  in  itself  and  harmony  with  the 

context.  It  is  easy  to  see  why  py  was  afterwards  intro- 
duced.    LXX,  Ka'i  iv  T]7  'lovSaia. 

i  Since  Jerome,  commentators  have  thought  of  a  stone 
by  throwmg  or  lifting  which  men  try  their  strength,  what 
we  call  a  "putting  stone."  But  is  not  the  idea  rather  of 
one  of  the  large  stones  half-buried  in  the  earth  which  it  is 
the  effort  of  the  husbandman  to  tear  from  its  bed  and 
carry  out  of  his  field  before  he  ploughs  it?  Keil  and 
Wright  think  of  a  heavy  stone  for  building.  This  is  not 
so  likely. 

§t315J*.  elsewhere  only  in  Lev.  xxi.  5,  is  there  used  of 
intentional  cutting  of  oneself  as  a  sign  of  mourning. 
Nowack  takes  the  clause  as  a  later  intrusion  ;  but  there  is 
no  real  reason  for  this. 

II  Heb.  "  upon  Judah  will  I  keep  My  eyes  open  "  to  pro- 
tect him,  and  this  has  analogies,  Job  xiv.  3,  Jer.  xxxii.  iq. 
But  the  reading  "  its  eyes,"  which  is  made  by  inserting  a 
^  that  might  easily  have  dropped  out  through  confusion 
with  the  initial  ^  of  the  next  word,  has  also  analogies 
(Isa.  xlii.  7,  etc.),  and  stands  in  better  parallel  to  the  next 
clause,  as  well  as  to  the  clauses  describing  the  panic  of 
the  heathen.  . 

l^Othersread  ''S?^5'  "thousands,"/.  «.,"  districts  " 

**  Heb.  "  I  will  find  me  "  ;  LXX.  eupTjo-ojiev  eavrois. 
+t  Hebrew  adds  a  gloss  :  "  in  Jerusalem." 
tt  The  population  m  time  of  war. 


THE  CONTENTS  OF  '  ZECHARIAH "  IX.-XIV. 


67-7 


9.  Four  Results  of  Jerusalem's  Deliver- 
ance (xii.  8-xiii.  6). 

Upon  the  deliverance  of  Jerusalem,  by  the  help 
of  the  converted  Judah,  there  follow  four  results, 
each  introduced  by  the  words  that  it  happened 
"  in  that  day  "  (xii.  8,  9,  xiii.  i,  2).  First,  the 
people  of  Jerusalem  shall  themselves  be 
strengthened.  Second,  the  hostile  heathen  shall 
be  destroyed,  but  on  the  house  of  David  and  all 
Jerusalem  the  spirit  of  penitence  shall  be  poured, 
and  they  will  lament  for  the  good  shepherd 
whom  they  slew.  Third,  a  fountain  of  sin  and 
uncleanness  shall  be  opened.  Fourth,  the  idols, 
the  unclean  spirit,  and  prophecy,  now  so  de- 
graded, shall  all  be  abolished.  The  connection 
of  these  oracles  with  the  preceding  is  obvious, 
as  well  as  with  the  oracle  describing  the  mur- 
der of  the  good  shepherd  (xiii.  7-9).  When  we 
see  how  this  is  presupposed  by  xii.  9  fif.,  we  feel 
more  than  ever  that  its  right  place  is  between 
chaps,  xi.  and  xii.  There  are  no  historical  al- 
lusions. But  again  the  language  gives  evidence 
of  a  late  date.*  And  throughout  the  passage 
there  is  a  repetition  of  formal  phrases  which  re- 
calls the  Priestly  Code  and  the  general  style  of 
the  post-exilic  age.f  Notice  that  no  king  is 
mentioned,  although  there  are  several  points  at 
which,  had  he  existed,  he  must  have  been  intro- 
duced. 

1.  The  first  of  the  four  effects  of  Jerusalem's 
deliverance  from  the  heathen  is  the  promotion 
of  her  weaklings  to  the  strength  of  her  heroes, 
and  of  her  heroes  to  divine  rank  (xii.  8).  "  In 
that  day  Jehovah  will  protect  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem,  and  the  lame  among  them  shall  in 
that  day  be  like  David  himself,  and  the  house  of 
David  like  God,  like  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  before 
them." 

2.  The  second  paragraph  of  this  series  very  re- 
markably emphasises  that  upon  her  deliverance 
Jerusalem  shall  not  give  way  to  rejoicing,  but 
to  penitent  lamentation  for  the  murder  of  him 
whom  she  has  pierced — the  good  shepherd  whom 
her  people  have  rejected  and  slain.  This  is  one 
of  the  few  ethical  strains  which  run  through  these 
apocalyptic  chapters.  It  forms  their  highest  in- 
terest for  us.  Jerusalem's  mourning  is  compared 
to  that  for  "  Hadad-Rimmon  in  the  valley  "  or 
"  plain  of  Megiddo."  This  is  the  classic  battle- 
field of  the  land,  and  the  theatre  upon  which 
Apocalypse  has  placed  the  last  contest  between 
the  hosts  of  God  and  the  hosts  of  evil.t  In 
Israel's  history  it  had  been  the  ground  not  only 
of  triumph  but  of  tears.  The  greatest  tragedy 
of  that  history,  the  defeat  and  death  of  the 
righteous  Josiah,  took  place  there ;§  and  since 
the  earliest  Jewish  interpreters  the  "  mourning 
of  Hadad-Rimmon  in  the  valley  of  Megiddo  " 


*  xii.  10,  nn  'IDtJ'.  not  earlier  than  Ezek.  xxxix.  29,  Joel 
iii.  1,2  (Heb.) ;  D^JUHri-  oJ^ly  in  Job,  Proverbs,  Psalms, 
and  Daniel  ;  IDH,  an  intrans.  Hiph.  ;  xiii.  i,  "lIpD, 
"fountain,"  before  Jeremiah  only  in  Hoseaxiii.  15  (perhaps 
a  late  intrusion),  but  several  times  in  post-exilic  writings 
instead  of  pre-exilic  TN3  (Eckardt) ;     mj,   only   after 

Ezekiel ;  3,  cf.  xii.  10,  "IpT,  chiefly,  but  not  only,  in  post- 
exilic  writings. 

t  See  especially  xii.  12  fif.,  which  is  very  suggestive  of 
the  Priestly  Code. 

t  "  Hist.  Geog.,"  chap.  xix.  On  the  name  "plain  of 
Megiddo  "  see  especially  notes,  p.  386. 

§z  Chron.  xxxv.  22  fif. 


has  been  referred  to  the  mourning  for  Josiah."* 
Jerome  identifies  Hadail-Rimmon  with  Rum- 
mani,f  a  village  on  the  plain  still  extant,  close 
to  Megiddo.  But  the  lamentation  for  Josiah 
was  at  Jerusalem;  and  it  cannot  be  proved  that 
Hadad-Rimmon  is  a  place-name.  It  may  rather 
be  the  name  of  the  object  of  the  mourning,  and 
as  Hadad  was  a  divine  name  among  Phoenicians 
and  Arameans,  and  Rimmon  the  pomegranate 
was  a  sacred  tree,  a  number  of  critics  have  sup- 
posed this  to  be  a  title  of  Adonis,  and  the  mourn- 
ing like  that  excessive  grief  which  Ezekiel  tells 
us  was  yearly  celebrated  for  Tammuz.t  This, 
however,  is  not  fully  proved.§  Observe,  fur- 
ther, that  while  the  reading  Hadad-Rimmon  is 
by  no  means  past  doubt,  the  sanguine  blossoms 
and  fruit  of  the  pomegranate,  "  red-ripe  at  the 
heart,"  would  naturally  lead  to  its  association 
with  the  slaughtered  Adonis. 

"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day  that  I 
will  seek  to  destroy  all  the  nations  who  have 
come  in  upon  Jerusalem.  And  I  will  pour  upon 
the  house  of  David  and  upon  all  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  the  spirit  of  grace  and  of  supplica- 
tion, and  they  shall  look  to  him||  whorn  they 
have  pierced;  and  they  shall  lament  for  him,  as 
with  lamentation  for  an  only  son,  and  bitterly 
grieve  for  him,  as  with  grief  for  a  first-born.  In 
that  day  lamentation  shall  be  as  great  in  Jerusa- 
lem as  the  lamentation  for  Hadad-Rimmon*  in 
the  valley  of  Megiddo.  And  the  land  shall 
mourn,  every  family  by  itself:  the  family  of  the 
house  of  David  by  itself,  and  their  wives  by 
themselves;  the  family  of  the  house  of  Nathan 
by  itself,  and  their  wives  by  themselves;  the  fam- 
ily of  the  house  of  Levi  by  itself,  and  their  wives 
by  themselves;  the  family  of  Shime'i  **  by  itself, 
and  their  wives  by  themselves;  all  the  families 
who  are  left,  every  family  by  itself,  and  their 
wives  by  themselves." 

3.  The  third  result  of  Jerusalem's  deliverance 
from  the  heathen  shall  be  the  opening  of  a 
fountain  of  cleansing.  This  purging  of  her  sin 
follows  fitly  upon  her  penitence  just  described. 
"  In  that  day  a  fountain  shall  be  opened  for  the 
house  of  David,  and  for  the  inhabitants  of  Je- 
rusalem, for  sin  and  for  uncleanness."  ft 

4.  The  fourth  consequence  is  the  removal  of 
idolatry,  of  the  unclean  spirit,  and  of  the  de- 
graded prophets  from  her  midst.  The  last  is 
especially  remarkable:  for  it  is  not  merely  false 
prophets,  as  distinguished  from  true,  who  shall 
be  removed;  but  prophecy  in  general.  It  is  sin- 
gular that  in  almost  its  latest  passage  the 
prophecy  of  Israel  should  return  to  the  line  of 
its  earliest  representative,  Amos,  who  refused  to 
call  himself  prophet.  As  in  his  day,  the  prophets 
had  become  mere  professional  and  mercenary 
oracle-mongers,  abjured  to  the  point  of  death 
by  their  own  ashamed  and  wearied  relatives. 

"  And  it  shall  be  in  that  day — oracle  of  Je- 
hovah of  Hosts — I  will  cut  off  the  names  of  the 

*  Another  explanation  offered  by  the  Targum  is  the 
mourning  for  "  Ahab  son  of  Omri,  slain  by  Hadad-Rim- 
mon son  of  Tab-Rimmon." 

tLXX.  gives  for  Hadad-Rimmon  only  the  second  part, 
poi>v. 

t  Ezek.  viii.  14. 

§  Haudissin,  "  Studien  z.  Sem.  Rel.  Gesch.,"  I.  295  ff.  , 

II  Heb.  "Me";  several  codd.  "him":  some  read  ^pN> 

"to  [him]  whom  they  have  pierced;"  but  this  would 
require  the  elision  of  the  sign  of  the  ace.  before  "  who." 
Wellhausen  and  others  think  something  has  fallen  from 
the  text. 

H  See  above. 

**  LXX.  2u/i«iii'. 

tt  Cf.  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25,  xlvii.  i. 


678 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


idols  from  the  land,  and  they  shall  not  be  re- 
membered any  more.  And  also  the  prophets 
and  the  unclean  spirit  will  I  expel  from  the  land. 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  any  man  prophesy 
again,  then  shall  his  father  and  mother  \yho  be- 
gat him  say  to  him,  Thou  shalt  not  live,  for 
thou  speakest  falsehood  in  the  name  of  Jeho- 
vah; and  his  father  and  mother  who  begat  him 
shall  stab  him  for  his  prophesying.  And  it  shall 
be  in  that  day  that  the  prophets  shall  be  ashamed 
of  their  visions  when  they  prophesy,  and  shall 
not  wear  the  leather  cloak  in  order  to  lie.  And 
he  will  say.  No  prophet  am  I!  A  tiller  of  the 
ground  I  am,  for  the  ground  is  my  possession  * 
from  my  youth  up.  And  they  shall  say  to  him. 
What  are  these  wounds  inf  thy  hands?  and  he 
shall  say,  What  I  was  wounded  with  in  the 
house  of  my  lovers!  " 

10.  Judgment  of  the  Heathen  and  Sanctifi- 
CATioN  OF  Jerusalem  (xiv.). 

In  another  apocalyptic  vision  the  prophet  be- 
holds Jerusalem  again  beset  by  the  heathen.  But 
Jehovah  Himself  intervenes,  appearing  in  per- 
son, and  an  earthquake  breaks  out  at  His  feet. 
The  heathen  are  smitten,  as  they  stand,  into 
mouldering  corpses.  The  remnant  of  them  shall 
be  converted  to  Jehovah  and  take  part  in  the 
annual  Feast  of  Booths.  If  any  refuse  they  shall 
be  punished  with  drought.  But  Jerusalem  shall 
abide  in  security  and  holiness:  every  detail  of 
her  equipment  shall  be  consecrate.  The  passage 
has  many  resemblances  to  the  preceding  oracles.:]; 
The  language  is  undoubtedly  late,  and  the  figures 
are  borrowed  from  other  prophets,  chiefly  Eze- 
kiel.  It  is  a  characteristic  specimen  of  the  Jew- 
ish Apocalypse.  The  destruction  of  the  heathen 
is  described  in  verses  of  terrible  grimness:  there 
is  no  tenderness  nor  hope  exhibited  for  them. 
And  even  in  the  picture  of  Jerusalem's  holiness 
we  have  no  really  ethical  elements,  but  the  de- 
tails are  purely  ceremonial. 

"  Lo!  a  day  is  coming  for  Jehovah,§  when  thy 
spoil  will  be  divided  in  thy  midst.  And  I  will 
gather  all  the  nations  to  besiege  Jerusalem,  and 
the  city  will  be  taken  and  the  houses  plundered 
and  the  women  ravished,  and  the  half  of  the  city 
shall  go  into  captivity,  but  the  rest  of  the  people 
shall  not  be  cut  off  from  the  city.  And  Jehovah 
shall  go  forth  and  do  battle  with  those  nations, 
as  in  the  day  when  He  fought  in  the  day  of 
contest.  And  His  feet  shall  stand  in  that  day 
on  the  Mount  of  Olives  which  is  over  against 
Jerusalem  on  the  east,  and  the  Mount  of  Olives 
shall  be  split  into  halves  from  east  to  west 
by  a  very  great  ravine,  and  half  of  the 
Mount  will  slide  northwards  and  half  south- 
wards   ...    ,1   for  the   ravine   of  mountains "[ 

*  Read    'J^^.i?  '"'97^.    for  the  Mass.    ^JJpH    DIN :    so 

Wellhausen. 
+  Hed.  "  between." 
}  But  see  below,  p.  679. 

§  niiT'P  *  o^  "belonging  to  Jehovah;"  or  like  the 
'  Lamed  auctoris  "  or  Lamed  when  construed  with  passive 
verbs  (see  Oxford  "  Heb.-Eng.  Dictionary,"  pp.  513  and 
514,  col.  i),  "  from,  by  means  of,  Jehovah." 

(  Heb.:  "  and  ye  shall  flee,  the  ravine  of  My  mountains." 
The  te.xt  is  obviously  corrupt,  but  it  is  difficult  to  see 
how  it  should  be  repaired.  LXX.,  Targ.  Symmachus  and 

the  Babylonian  codd.  fBaer,p.  84)  read  ^^Pr'V  "  ye  shall 

be  closed,"   for     '^^i'yd;'     "ye   shall    flee,"  and    this    is 

adopted    by  a    number  of   critics    (Bredenkamp,   Well- 
hausen, Nowack).     But  it  is  hardly   possible    before   the 
next  clause,  which  says  the  valley  extends  t-o  'A§al. 
^Wellhausen  suggests  the  ravine  (K'J)  of  Hinnom. 


shall  extend  to  'Ajal,*  and  ye  shall  flee  as 
ye  fled  from  before  the  earthquake  in  the  days 
of  Uzziah  king  of  Judah,f  and  Jehovah  my  God 
will  come  and  J  all  the  holy  ones  with  Him.§  And 
in  that  day  there  shall  not  be  light,  .  .  .  congeal. || 
And  it  shall  be  one  ^  day — it  is  known  to  Jeho- 
vah ** — neither  day  nor  night;  and  it  shall  come 
to  pass  that  at  evening  time  there  shall  be  light. 

"  And  it  shall  be  in  that  day  that  living  waters 
shall  flow  forth  from  Jerusalem,  half  of  them  to 
the  eastern  sea  and  half  of  them  to  the  western 
sea:  both  in  summer  and  in  winter  shall  it  be. 
And  Jehovah  shall  be  King  over  all  the  earth: 
in  that  day  Jehovah  will  be  One  and  His  Name 
One.  All  the  land  shall  be  changed  to  plain, ft 
from  Geba  to  Rimmon,^  south  of  Jerusalem; 
but  she  shall  be  high  and  abide  in  her  place  §§ 
from  the  Gate  of  Benjamin  up  to  the  place  of  the 
First  Gate,  up  to  the  Corner  Gate,  and  from  the 
Tower  of  Hanan'el  as  far  as  the  King's  Wine- 
presses. And  they  shall  dwell  in  it,  and  there 
shall  be  no  more  Ban,||||  and  Jerusalem  shall 
abide  in  security.  And  this  shall  be  the  stroke 
with  which  Jehovah  will  smite  all  the  peoples 
who  have  warred  against  Jerusalem:  He  will 
make  their  flesh  moulder  while  they  still  stand 
upon  their  feet,  and  their  eyes  shall  moulder  in 
their  sockets,  and  their  tongue  shall  moulder 
in  their  mouth. 

["  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day,  there 
shall  be  a  great  confusion  from  Jehovah  among 
them,  and  they  shall  grasp  every  man  the  hand 
of  his  neighbour,  and  his  hand  shall  be  lifted 
against  the  hand  of  his  neighbour. T[T[  And  even 
Judah  shall  fight  against  Jerusalem,  and  the 
wealth  of  all  the  nations  round  about  shall  be 
swept  up,  gold  and  silver  and  garments,  in  a 
very  great  mass."  These  two  verses,  13  and  14, 
obviously  disturb  the  connection,  which  ver.  15 
as  obviously  resumes  with  ver.  12.  They  are, 
therefore,  generally  regarded  as  an  intrusion.*** 
But  why  they  have  been  inserted  is  not  clear. 
Ver.  14  is  a  curious  echo  of  the  strife  between 
Judah    and    Jerusalem    described    in    chap.    xii. 


''*»*•    place-name:   cf.    ^rV'     name  of  a  family  of 

Micah  i. 


Benjamin,  viii.  37  f.,  ix.  43  f.;  and    '^  v -t        -' 


II.    Some  would  read 


the  adverb  "near  by." 


t  Amos.  i.  I. 

J  LXX. 

§LXX.;  Heb.  "thee." 

II  Heb.     Kethibh,   pKSp'.  mij^V    "jewels'*    (?   hardly 

stars  as  some  have  sought  to  prove  from  Job  xxxi.  26) 
"  grow  dead  "  or  "  congealed."    Heb.  If  ere,  "  jewels  and 

frost,"   P^Si?)'      LXX.    Kal    ^vxv  «al  Trayos,    ji^^fi?"!  nn|71, 

"and  cold  and  frost."  Founding  on  this  Wellhausen 
proposes  to  read  Q'jn  for  IIK,  and  renders,  "there  shall 
be  neither  heat  nor  cold_  nor  frost."  So  Nowack.  But  it 
is  not  easy  to  see  how  Qin  ever  got  changed  to  "liX. 

H  "  Unique  "  or  "  the  same  "  ? 

**  Taken  as  a  gloss  by  Wellhausen  and  Nowack. 

tt   i^^'^V'    the  name  for  the  Jordan  Valley,  the  Ghor 

("  Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  482-484).  It  is  employed,  not  becau.se 
of  its  fertility,  but  because  of  its  level  character.  Cf. 
Josephus'  name  for  it,  "the  Great  Plain"  (IV.  "Wars" 
viii.  2 ;   IV.  "  Antt."  vi.  i) .  also  i  Mace.  v.  52,  xvi.  11. 

tt  Geba  "long  the  limit  of  Judah  to  the  north,  2  Kings 
xxiii.  8"  ("Hist.  Geog.,"  pp.  252,  2gi).  Rimmon  was  on 
the  southern  border  of  Palestine  (Josh,  xv.  32,  xix.  7),  the 
present  Umm  er  Rummamin  N.  of  Beersheba  (Rob., 
^'B.  R."). 

§§  Or  "  be  inhabited  as  it  stands." 

311  Cf.  "  Mai."  iii.  24  (Heb.). 

11^  Ezek.  xxxviii.  21. 

***  So  Wellhausen  and  Nowack. 


THE    BOOK   OF   JONAH. 


679 


They  may  be  not  a  mere  intrusion,  but  simply 
out  of  their  proper  place;  yet,  if  so,  where  this 
proper  place  lies  in  these  oracles  is  impossible 
to  determine.] 

"  And  even  so  shall  be  the  plague  upon  the 
horses,  mules,  camels,  and  asses,  and  all  the 
beasts  which  are  in  those  camps — just  like  this 
plague.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  all  that 
survive  of  all  the  nations  who  have  come  up 
against  Jerusalem,  shall  come  up  from  year  to 
year  to  do  obeisance  to  King  Jehovah  of  Hosts, 
and  to  keep  the  Feast  of  Booths.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass  that  whosoever  of  all  the  races 
of  the  earth  will  not  come  up  to  Jerusalem  to 
do  obeisance  to  King  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  upon 
them  there  shall  be  no  rain.  And  if  the  race  of 
Egypt  go  not  up  nor  come  in,  upon  them  also 
shall  *  come  the  plague,  with  which  Jehovah 
shall  strike  the  nations  that  go  not  up  to  keep 
the  Feast  of  Booths.  Such  shall  be  the  punish- 
ment f  of  Egypt,  and  the  punishment  t  of  all 
nations  who  do  not  come  up  to  keep  the  Feast  of 
Booths." 

The  Feast  of  Booths  was  specially  one  of 
thanksgiving  for  the  harvest;  that  is  why  the 
neglect  of  it  is  punished  by  the  withholding  of 
the  rain  which  brings  the  harvest.  But  such 
a  punishment  for  such  a  neglect  shows  how  com- 
pletely prophecy  has  become  subject  to  the  Law. 
One  is  tempted  to  think  what  Amos  or  Jere- 
miah or  even  "  Malachi  "  would  have  thought  of 
this.  Verily  all  the  writers  of  the  prophetical 
books  do  not  stand  upon  the  same  level  of  re- 
ligion. The  writer  remembers  that  the  curse  of 
no  rain  cannot  aflfect  the  Egyptians,  the  fertility 
of  whose  rainless  land  is  secured  by  the  annual 
floods  of  her  river.  So  he  has  to  insert  a  special 
verse  for  Egypt.  She  also  will  be  plagued  by 
Jehovah,  yet  he  does  not  tell  us  in  what  fashion 
her  plague  will  come. 

The  book  closes  with  a  little  oracle  of  the 
most  ceremonial  description,  connected  not  only 
in  temper  but  even  by  subject  with  what  has 
gone  before.  The  very  horses,  which  hitherto 
have  been  regarded  as  too  foreign, t  or — as  even 
in  this  group  of  oracles  § — as  too  warlike,  to 
exist  in  Jerusalem,  shall  be  consecrated  to  Je- 
hovah. And  so  vast  shall  be  the  multitudes  who 
throng  from  all  the  earth  to  the  annual  feasts 
and  sacrifices  at  the  Temple,  that  the  pots  of  the 
latter  shall  be  as  large  as  the  great  altar-bowls,  || 
and  every  pot  in  Jerusalem  and  Judah  shall  be 
consecrated  for  use  in  the  ritual.  This  hallow- 
ing of  the  horses  raises  the  question,  whether 
the  passage  can  be  from  the  same  hand  as  wrote 
the  prediction  of  the  disappearance  of  all  horses 
from  Jerusalem.*^ 

"  In  that  day  there  shall  be  upon  the  bells  of 
the  horses.  Holiness  unto  Jehovah.  And  the 
very  pots  in  the  House  of  Jehovah  shall  be  as 
the  bowls  before  the  altar.  Yea,  every  pot  in 
Jerusalem  and  in  Judah  shall  be  holy  to  Jehovah 
of  Hosts,  and  all  who  sacrifice  shall  come  and 
take  of  them  and  cook  in  them.  And  there  shall 
be  no  more  any  pedlar**  in  the  House  of  Jeho- 
vah of  Hosts  in  that  day." 


♦  So  LXX.  and  Syr.    The  Heb.  text  inserts  a  "  not." 

"''  nXlOn,  in  classic  Heb.  "sin  "  ;  but  as  in  Num.  xxxii. 
3  I  and  Isa.  v.  18,  "  the  punishment  that  sin  brings  down." 

t  Hosea  xiv.  3. 

§ix.  10. 

I  So  Wellhausen. 

H  ix.  10. 

**  Heb.  "Canaanite."  Cf.  Christ's  action  in  cleansing 
tie  Temple  of  all  dealers  (Matt.  xxi.  12-14). 


JONAH. 

"And  this  is  the  tragedy  of  the  Book  of  Jonah,  that  a 
Book  which  is  made  the  means  of  one  of  the  most  sub- 
lime revelations  of  truth  in  the  Old  Testament  should  be 
known  to  most  only  for  its  connection  with  a  whale." 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 
THE  BOOK  OF  JONAH. 

The  Book  of  Jonah  is  cast  throughout  in  the 
form  of  narrative — the  only  one  of  our  Twelve 
which  is  so.  This  fact,  combined  with  the  ex- 
traordinary events  which  the  narrative  relates, 
starts  questions  not  raised  by  any  of  the  rest. 
Besides  treating,  therefore,  of  the  book's  origin, 
unity,  division,  and  other  commonplaces  of  in- 
troduction, we  must  further  seek  in  this  chapter 
reasons  for  the  appearance  of  such  a  narrative 
among  a  collection  of  prophetic  discourses.  We 
have  to  ask  whether  the  narrative  be  intended  as 
one  of  fact;  and  if  not,  why  the  author  was 
directed  to  the  choice  of  such  a  form  to  enforce 
the  truth  committed  to  him. 

The  appearance  of  a  narrative  among  the 
Twelve  Prophets  is  not,  in  itself,  so  exceptional 
as  it  seems  to  be.  Parts  of  the  Books  of  Amos 
and  Hosea  treat  of  the  personal  experience  of 
their  authors.  The  same  is  true  of  the  Books  of 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  in  which  the 
prophet's  call  and  his  attitude  to  it  are  regarded 
as  elements  of  his  message  to  men.  No:  the 
peculiarity  of  the  Book  of  Jonah  is  not  the  pres- 
ence of  narrative,  but  the  apparent  absence  of  all 
prophetic  discourse.* 

Yet  even  this  might  be  explained  by  reference 
to  the  first  part  of  the  prophetic  canon — ^Joshua 
to  Second  Kings. f  These  Former  Prophets,  as 
they  are  called,  are  wholly  narrative — narrative 
in  the  prophetic  spirit  and  written  to  enforce  a 
moral.  Many  of  them  begin  as  the  Book  of 
Jonah  does:t  they  contain  stories,  for  instance, 
of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  who  flourished  immediately 
before  Jonah  and  like  him  were  sent  with  com- 
missions to  foreign  lands.  It  might  therefore  be 
argued  that  the  Book  of  Jonah,  though  narrative, 
is  as  much  a  prophetic  book  as  they  are,  and 
that  the  only  reason  why  it  has  found  a  place, 
not  with  these  histories,  but  among  the  Later 
Prophets,  is  the  exceedingly  late  date  of  its  com- 
position.§ 

This  is  a  plausible,  but  not  the  real,  answer  to 
our  question.  Suppose  we  were  to  find  the  latter 
by  discovering  that  the  Book  of  Jonah,  though 
in  narrative  form,  is  not  real  history  at  all,  nor 
pretends  to  be,  but,  from  beginning  to  end,  is  as 
much  a  prophetic  sermon  as  any  of  the  other 
Twelve  Books,  yet  cast  in  the  form  of  parable 
or  allegory?  This  would  certainly  explain  the 
adoption  of  the  book  among  the  Twelve;  nor 
would  its  allegorical  character  appear  without 
precedent  to  those  (and  they  are  among  the 
most  conservative  of  critics)   who  maintain    (as 


♦Unless the  Psalm  were  counted  as  such.    See  below, 
p.  684. 
+  Minus  Ruth,  of  course. 

X  Cf.  with  Jonah  i.  i,     '7.1'   Josh.  i.  i,  i  Sam.  i.  i,  a  Sam. 

i.  I.    The  corrupt  state  of  the  text  of  Ezek.  i.  i  does  not 
permit  us  to  adduce  it  also  as  a  parallel. 
§  See  below,  p.  680. 


68o 


THE   BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


the  present  writer  does  not)  the  allegorical  char- 
acter of  the  story  of  Hosea's  wife.* 

It  is,  however,  when  we  pass  from  the  form 
to  the  substance  of  the  book  that  we  perceive  the 
full  justification  of  its  reception  among  the 
prophets.  The  truth  which  we  find  in  the  Book 
of  Jonah  is  as  full  and  fresh  a  revelation  of  God's 
will  as  prophecy  anywhere  achieves.  That  God 
has  "  granted  to  the  Gentiles  also  repentance 
unto  life  "t  is  nowhere  else  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment so  vividly  illustrated.  It  lifts  the  teaching 
of  the  Book  of  Jonah  to  equal  rank  with  the 
second  part  of  Isaiah,  and  nearest  of  all  our 
Twelve  to  the  New  Testament.  The  very  form 
in  which  this  truth  is  insinuated  into  the  proph- 
et's reluctant  mind,  by  contrasting  God's  pity 
for  the  dim  population  of  Nineveh  with  Jonah's 
own  pity  for  his  perished  gourd,  suggests  the 
methods  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  and  invests  the 
book  with  the  morning  air  of  that  high  day 
which  shines  upon  the  most  evangelic  of  His 
parables. 

One  other  remark  is  necessary.  In  our  efTort 
to  appreciate  this  lofty  gospel  we  labour  under 
a  disadvantage.  That  is  our  sense  of  humour — 
our  modern  sense  of  humour.  Some  of  the 
figures  in  which  our  author  conveys  his  truth 
cannot  but  appear  to  us  grotesque.  How  many 
have  missed  the  sublime  spirit  of  the  book  in 
amusement  or  offence  at  its  curious  details! 
Even  in  circles  in  which  the  acceptance  of  its 
literal  interpretation  has  been  demanded  as  a 
condition  of  belief  in  its  inspiration,  the  story  has 
too  often  served  as  a  subject  for  humorous  re- 
marks. This  is  almost  inevitable  if  we  take  it  as 
history.  But  we  shall  find  that  one  advantage 
of  the  theory,  which  treats  the  book  as  parable, 
is  that  the  features,  which  appear  so  grotesque 
to  many,  are  traced  to  the  popular  poetry  of 
the  writer's  own  time  and  shown  to  be  natural. 
When  we  prove  this,  we  shall  be  able  to  treat 
the  scenery  of  the  book  as  we  do  that  of  some 
early  Christian  fresco,  in  which,  however  rude 
it  be  or  untrue  to  nature,  we  discover  an  ear- 
nestness and  a  success  in  expressing  the  moral 
essence  of  a  situation  that  are  not  always  present 
in  works  of  art  more  skilful  or  more  correct. 

I.  The  Date  of  the  Book. 

Jonah  ben-Amittai,  from  Gath-hepher:t  in 
Galilee,  came  forward  in  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  to  announce  that  the  king 
would  regain  the  lost  territories  of  Israel  from 
the  Pass  of  Hamath  to  the  Dead  Sea.^  He 
flourished,  therefore,  about  780,  and  had  this 
book  been  by  himself  we  should  have  had  to 
place  it  first  of  all  the  Twelve,  and  nearly  a 
generation  before  that  of  Amos.  But  the  book 
neither  claims  to  be  by  Jonah,  nor  gives  any 
proof  of  coming  from  an  eye-witness  of  the  ad- 
ventures which  it  describes,||  nor  even  from  a 
contemporary  of  the  prophet.  On  the  contrary, 
one  verse  implies  that  when  it  was  written  Nine- 
veh had  ceased  to  be  a  great  city."[  Now 
Nineveh  fell,  and  was  practically  destroyed,  in 
606  B.  c.**     In  all  ancient  history  there  was  no 

*  See  above,  p.  560. 

+  Acts  xi.  8. 

i  Cf.  Gittah-hepher,  Josh.  xix.  13,  by  some  held  to  be  El 
Meshhed,  three  miles  northeast  of  Nazareth.  The  tomb 
of  Jonah  is  pointed  out  there. 

§2  Kings  xiv.  25. 

\Cf.  Kuenen,  "  Einl.,"  II.  417,  418. 

iiii.  3:  ^n^^, "  was." 

•♦  See  above,  pp.  565  ff.,  58^  ff. 


collapse  of  an  imperial  city  more  sudden  or  so 
complete.*  We  must  therefore  date  the  Book 
of  Jonah  some  time  after  606,  when  Nineveh's 
greatness  had  become  what  it  was  to  the  Greek 
writers,  a  matter  of  tradition. 

A  late  date  is  also  proved  by  the  language  of 
the  book.  This  not  only  contains  Aramaic  ele- 
ments which  have  been  cited  to  support  the  argu- 
rnent  for  a  northern  origin  in  the  time  of  Jonah 
himself,f  but  a  number  of  words  and  grammati- 
cal constructions  which  we  find  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, some  of  them  in  the  later  and  some  only 
in  the  very  latest  writings.];  Scarcely  less  de- 
cisive are  a  number  of  apparent  quotations  and 
echoes  of  passages  in  the  Old  Testament,  mostly 
later  than  the  date  of  the  historical  Jonah,  and 
some  of  them  even  later  than  the  Exile.S  If  it 
could  be  proved  that  the  Book  of  Jonah  quotes 
from  Joel,  that  would  indeed  set  it  down  to  a 
very  late  date — probably  about  300  b.  c,  the 
period  of  the  composition  of  Ezra-Nehemiah, 
with  the  language  of  which  its  own  shows  most 
afifinity.il     This  would  leave  time  for  its  reception 


*  Cf.  George  Smith,  "Assyrian  Discoveries,''  p.  94; 
Sayce,  "  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East,"  p.  141.  Cf.  previ- 
ous note. 

t  As,  e.  g.,  by  Volck,  article  "Jona"  in  Herzog's  "Real, 

Encycl."  :  the  use  of  ^^  for  "^^^i    as,  e.  g.,  in  the  very 

early  Song  of  Deborah.  But  the  same  occurs  in  many 
late  passages  :  Eccles.  i.  j,  11,  ii.  21,22,  etc. ;  Psalms  cxxii.. 
cxxiv.,  cxxxv.  2,  8,  cxxxvii.  8,  cxlvi.  3.  . 

JA.  Grammatical  constructions  :—i.  7,  Pc'rir  '  la, 
Y^?  •  that  -jjj^'l  has  not  altogether  displaced  f)"1tJ>N;j 
Konig  ("  Einl.,"  378)  thinks  a  proof  of  the  date  of  Jonah 

in  the  early  Aramaic  period,  iv.  6,  the  use  of  \p  for  the 
accusative,  cf.  Jar.  xl.  2,  Ezra  viii.  24 :  seldom  in  earlier 
Hebrew,  i  Sam.  xxiii.  10,  2  Sam.  iii.  30,  especially  when 
the  object  stands  before  the  verb,  Isa.  xi.  q  (this  may  be 
late),  I  Sam.  xxii.  7,  Job  v.  2  ;  but  continually  in  Aramaic, 
Dan.  ii.  10,  12,  14,  24,  etc.  The  first  personal  pronoun  ^JX 
(five  times)  occurs  oftener  than  ^3JK  (twice),  just  as  in 
all  exilic  and  post-exilic  writings.  The  numerals  ii.  i,  fli. 
3,  precede  the  noun,  as  in  earlier  Hebrew. 

B.  Words :— njD  in  Pi.  is  a  favourite  term  of  our 
author,  ii.  i,  iv.  6,  8 ;  is  elsewhere  in  O.  T.  Hebrew  found 
only  in  Dan.  i.  5,  10,  18,  i  Chron.  ix.  2g,  Psalm  Ixi.  8 ;  but  in 
O.  T.  Aramaic  i<JJO  Pi.  ""DD  occurs  in  Ezra  vii.  25,  Dan.  ii. 
24,  49,  iii.  12,  etc.  nj^DD.  i-  5.  is  not  elsewhere  found  -(n 
O.  T.,  but  is  common  iu  later  Hebrew  and  in  Aramaic, 
nt^ynn.  i.  6,  "to  think,"  for  the  Heb.  SBTl.  cf.  Psalm 
cxlvi.  4,  but  Aram.  cf.  Dan.  vi.  4  and  Targums.  Dyt3  te 
the  sense  "  to  order  "  or  "  command,"  iii.  7,  is  found  else- 
where in  the  O.  T.  only  in  the  Aramaic  passages  Dan.  iii. 
10,  Ezra  vi.  1,  etc.  13"!,  iv.  11,  for  the  earlier  n3m 
occurs  only  in  later  Hebrew,  Ezra  ii.  64,  Neh.  vii.  66,  72, 
I  Chron.  xxix.  7  (Hosea  viii.  12,  Kethibh  is  suspected). 
pDJJ*,  i.  "i  i2i  occurs  only  in  Psalm  cvii.  30,  Prov.  xxiv.  20. 

?0y.  iv.  10,  instead  of  the  usual  )}y.  The  expression 
"God  of  Heaven,"  i.  q,  occurs  only  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  23, 
Psalm  cxxxvi.  26,  Dan.  ii.  18,  19,  44,  and  frequently  in  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah. 

§In  chap.  iv.  there  are  undoubted  echoes  of  the  story  of 
Elijah's  depression  in  i  Kings  xix.,  though  the  alleged 
parallel  between  Jonah's  tree  (iv.  8)  and  Elijah's  broom- 
bush  seems  to  me  forced,  iv.  g  has  been  thought,  though 
not  conclusively,  to  depend  on  Gen.  iv.  6,  and  the  appear- 
ance of  D^^?X  nin''  has  been  referred  to  its  frequent 
use  in  Gen.  ii.  f.  More  important  are  the  parallels  with 
Joel :  iii.  g  with  Joel  ii.  14a,  and  the  attributes  of  God  in 
IV.  2  with  Joel  ii.  13.    But  which  of  the  two  is  the  original  ? 

II  Kleinert  assigns  the  book  to  the  Exile  ;  Ewald  to  the 
fifth  or  sixth  century;  Driver  to  the  fifth  century 
("Introd.,"  301);  Orelli  to  the  last  Chaldean  or  first 
Persian  age  ;  Vatke  to  the  third  century.  These  assign 
generally  to  after  the  Exile  :  Cheyne  (Theol.  Rev.,  XIV., 
p.  218:  cf.  art.  "Jonah"  in  the  "Encycl.  Brit."),  Konig 
C'Einl.'*),  Rob.  Smith,  Kuenen,  Wildeboer.  Budde, 
Cornill,  Farrar,  etc.  Hitzig  brings  it  down  as  far  as  the 
Maccabea.n  age,   which    is  impossible  if   the  prophetic 


THE    BOOK    OF    JONAH. 


681 


into  the  Canon  of  the  Prophets,  which  was  closed 
by  200  B.  c*  Had  the  book  been  later  it  would 
undoubtedly  have  fallen,  like  Daniel,  within  the 
Hagiographa. 

2.   Tlll<:    ClIAKArTKR   OF   THE   BoOK. 

Nor  does  this  book,  written  so  many  centuries 
after  Jonah  had  passed  away,  claim  to  be  real 
history.  On  the  contrary,  it  offers  to  us  all  the 
marks  of  the  parable  or  allegory.  We  have,  first 
of  all,  the  residence  of  Jonah  for  the  conven- 
tional period  of  three  days  and  three  nights  in 
the  belly  of  the  great  fish,  a  story  not  only  very 
extraordinary  in  itself  and  sufficient  to  provoke 
the  suspicion  of  allegory  (we  need  not  stop  to 
argue  this),  but  apparently  woven,  as  we  shall 
see.t  from  the  materials  of  a  myth  well  known 
to  the  Hebrews.  We  have  also  the  very  general 
account  of  Nineveh's  conversion,  in  which  there 
is  not  even  the  attempt  to  describe  any  precise 
event.  The  absence  of  precise  data  is  indeed 
conspicuous  throughout  the  book.  "  The  author 
neglects  a  multitude  of  things  which  he  would 
have  been  obliged  to  mention  had  history  been 
his  principal  aim.  He  says  nothing  of  the  sins 
of  which  Nineveh  v/as  guilty,|.  nor  of  the  journey 
of  the  prophet  to  Nineveh,  nor  does  he  mention 
the  place  where  he  was  cast  out  upon  the  land, 
nor  the  name  of  the  Assyrian  king.  In  any 
case,  if  the  narrative  were  intended  to  be  histori- 
cal, it  would  be  incomplete  by  the  frequent  fact, 
that  circumstances  which  are  necessary  for  the 
connection  of  events  are  mentioned  later  than 
they  happened,  and  only  where  attention  has  to 
be  directed  to  them  as  having  already  hap- 
pened." §  We  find,  too,  a  number  of  trifling  dis- 
crepancies, from  which  some  critics  ||  have  at- 
tempted to  prove  the  presence  of  more  than  one 
story  in  the  composition  of  the  book,  but  which 
are  simply  due  to  the  license  a  writer  allows  him- 
self when  he  is  telling  a  tale  and  not  writing 
a  history.  Above  all,  there  is  the  abrupt  close 
to  the  story  at  the  very  moment  at  which  its 
moral  is  obvious. 1[  All  these  things  are  symp- 
toms of  the  parable — so  obvious  and  so  natural, 
that  we  really  sin  against  the  intention  of  the 
author,  and  the  purpose  of  the  Spirit  which  in- 
spired him,  when  we  wilfully  interpret  the  book 
as  real  history.** 

3.  The  Purpose  of  the  Book. 

The  general  purpose  of  this  parable  is  very 
clear.     It  is  not,  as  some  have  maintained,!!  to 

canon  closed  in  200  B.  C,  and  seeks  for  its  origin  in  Egypt, 
"that  land  of  wonders,"  on  account  of  its  fabulous 
character,  and  because  of  the  description  of  the  east  wind 

as  ^'t^'''■^^  (iv.  si,  and  the  name  of  the  gourd,  tVp^p, 
Egyptian  "kiki."  But  such  a  wind  and  such  a  plant 
were  found  outside  Egpyt  as  well.  Nowack  dates  the 
book  after  Joel. 

*  See  above,  p.  443. 

+  Below,  pp.  687  ff. 

};  Contrast  the  treatment  of  foreign  states  by  Elisha, 
Amos,  and  Isaiah,  etc. 

§  .Abridged  from  pp.  3  and  4  of  Kleinert's  Introduction 
to  the  Rook  of  Jonah  in  Lange's  Series  of  Commentaries 
Eng.  ed..  Vol.  XVI. 

II  Kohler,  Theol.  Rev.,  Vol.  XVI. ;  Bohme,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.," 
1887,  pp.  224  ff. 

H  Indeed  throughout  the  book  the  truths  it  enforces  are 
always  more  pushed  to  the  front  than  the  facts. 

**Xearly  all  the  critics  who  accept  the  late  date  of  the 
book  interpret  it  as  parabolic.  See  also  a  powerful 
article  bv  the  late  Dr.  Dale  in  the  Expositor,  Fourth 
Serie-;.  Vol.  VI.,  July,  1892,  pp.  i  ff.  C/\,  too,  C.  H.  H. 
Wright,  "Biblical  Essays"  (1886),  pp.  34-g8. 

t1  Marck  (quoted   by    Kleinert)    said:    "  Scriptum    est 


explain  why  the  judgments  of  God  and  the  pre- 
dictions of  his  prophets  were  not  always  ful- 
filled— though  this  also  becomes  clear  by  the  way. 
The/purpose  of  the  parable,  and  it  is  patent  from 
first  to  last,  is  to  illustrate  the  mission  of  proph- 
ecy to  the  Gentiles,  God's  care  for  them,  and 
their  susceptibility  to  His  word.  More  correctly, 
it  is  to  enforce  all  this  truth  upon  a  prejudiced 
and  thrice-reluctant  mind.* 

Whose  was  this  reluctant  mind?  In  Israel 
after  the  Exile  there  were  many  different  feelings 
with  regard  to  the  future  and  the  great  obstacle 
which  heathendom  interposed  between  Israel  and 
tb.e  future.  There  was  the  feeling  of  outraged 
justice,  with  the  intense  conviction  that  Jeho- 
vah's kingdom  could  not  be  established  save  by 
the  overthrow  of  the  cruel  kingdoms  of  this 
world.  We  have  seen  that  conviction  expressed 
in  the  Book  of  Obadiah.  But  the  nation,  which 
read  and  cherished  the  visions  of  the  Great  Seer 
of  the  Exile, t  could  not  help  producing  among 
her  sons  men  with  hopes  about  the  heathen  of 
a  very  different  kind — men  who  felt  that  Israel's 
mission  to  the  world  was  not  one  of  war,  but 
of  service  in  those  high  truths  of  God  and  of  His 
Grace  which  had  been  committed  to  herself. 
Between  the  two  parties  it  is  certain  there  was 
much  polemic,  and  we  find  this  still  bitter  in  the 
time  of  our  Lord.  And  some  critics  think  that 
while  Esther,  Obadiah,  and  other  writings  of 
the  centuries  after  the  Return  represent  the  one 
side  of  this  polemic,  which  demanded  the  over- 
throw of  the  heathen,  the  Book  of  Jonah  repre- 
sents the  other  side,  and  in  the  vexed  and  reluc- 
tant prophet  pictures  such  Jews  as  were  willing 
to  proclaim  the  destruction  of  the  enemies  of 
Israel,  and  yet  like  Jonah  were  not  without  the 
lurking  fear  that  God  would  disappoint  their 
predictions  and  in  His  patience  leave  the  heathen 

magna  parte  historicum  sed  ita  ut  in  historia  ipsa  lateat 
nia.Kimi  vaticinii  mysterium,  atque  ipse  fatis  suis,  non 
minus  quam  effatis  vatem  se  verum  demonstret."  Hitzig 
curiously  thinks  that  this  is  the  reason  why  it  has  been 
placed  in  the  Canon  of  the  Prophets  next  to  the  unful- 
filled prophecy  of  God  against  Edom.  But  by  the  date 
which  Hitzig  assigns  to  the  book  the  prophecy  against 
Edom  was  at  least  in  a  fair  way  to  fulfilment.  Riehm 
("  Theol.  Stud.  u.  Krit.,"  1862,  pp.  413  f.)  :  "  The  practical 
intention  of  the  book  is  to  afford  instruction  concerning 
the  proper  attitude  to  prophetic  warnings";  these, 
though  genuine  words  of  God,  may  be  averted  by  repent- 
ance. Volck  (art.  "Jona"  in  Herzog's  "Real.  Encycl.") 
gives  the  following.  Jonah's  experience  is  characteristic 
of  the  whole  prophetic  profession.  "  We  learn  from  it 
(i)that  the  prophet  must  perform  what  God  eommands 
iiim,  however  unusual  it  appears  ;  (2)  that  even  death 
cannot  nullify  his  calling  ;  (3)  that  the  prophet  has  no 
right  to  the  fulfilment  of  his  prediction,  but  must  place  it 
in  God's  hand."  Vatke  ("  Einl.,"  688)  maintains  that  the 
book  was  written  in  an  apologetic  interest,  when  Jews 
expounded  the  prophets  and  found  this  difficult)-,  that  all 
their  predictions  had  not  been  fulfilled.  "The  author 
obviously  teaches  :  (i)  since  the  prophet  cannot  withdraw 
from  the  Divine  commission,  he  is  also  not  responsible 
for  the  contents  of  his  predictions;  (2)  the  prophet  often 
announces  Divine  purposes,  which  are  not  fulfilled, 
because  God  in  His  mercy  takes  back  the  threat,  when 
repentance  follows;  (3)  the  honour  of  a  prophet  is  not 
hurt  when  a  threat  is  not  fulfilled,  and  the  inspiration 
remains  unquestioned,  although  many  predictions  are 
not  carried  out." 

To  all  of  which  there  is  a  conclusive  answer,  in  the  fact 
that,  had  the  book  been  meant  to  explain  or  justify  unful- 
filled prophecy,  the  author  would  certainly  not  have 
chosen  as  an  instance  a  judgment  against  Nineveh, 
because,  bj-  the  time  he  wrote,  all  the  early  predictions  of 
Nineveh's  fall  had  been  fulfilled,  we  might  say,  to  the 
verv  letter. 

*  So  even  Kimchi  ;  and  in  modern  times  De  Wette, 
Delitzsch,  Bleek,  Reuss,  Cheyne,  Wright,  Konig,  Farrar, 
Orelli,  etc.  So  virtually  also  Nowack.  Ewald's  view  is  a 
little  different.  He  thinks  that  the  fundamental  truth  of 
the  book  is  that  "true  fear  and  repentance  bring  salva- 
tion from  Jehovah." 

t  Isa.  xl  ff. 


682 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


room  for  repentance.*  Their  dogmatism  could 
not  resist  the  impression  of  how  long  God  had 
actually  spared  the  oppressors  of  His  people,  and 
the  author  of  the  Book  of  Jonah  cunningly 
sought  these  joints  in  their  armour  to  insinuate 
the  points  of  his  doctrine  of  God's  real  will  for 
nations  beyond  the  covenant.  This  is  ingenious 
and  plausible.  But  in  spite  of  the  cleverness 
with  which  it  has  been  argued  that  the  details  of 
the  story  of  Jonah  are  adapted  to  the  temper  of 
the  Jewish  party  who  desired  only  vengeance 
on  the  heathen,  it  is  not  at  all  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  the  book  was  the  produce  of  mere 
polemic.  The  book  is  too  simple  and  too  grand 
for  that.  And  therefore  those  appear  more 
right  who  conceive  that  the  writer  had  in  view, 
not  a  Jewish  party,  but  Israel  as  a  whole  in  their 
national  reluctance  to  fulfil  their  Divine  mission 
to  the  world.f  Of  them  God  had  already  said: 
"  Who  is  blind  but  My  servant,  or  deaf  as  My 
messenger  whom  I  have  sent?  .  .  .  Who  gave 
Jacob  for  a  spoil  and  Israel  to  the  robbers?  Did 
not  Jehovah,  He  against  whom  we  have  sinned? 
— for  they  would  not  walk  in  His  ways,  neither 
were  they  obedient  to  His  law."  J  Of  such  a 
people  Jonah  is  the  type.  Like  them  he  flees 
from  the  duty  God  has  laid  upon  him.  Like 
them  he  is,  beyond  his  own  land,  cast  for  a  set 
period  into  a  living  death,  and  like  them  rescued 
again  only  to  exhibit  once  more  upon  his  re- 
turn an  ill-will  to  believe  that  God  had  any  fate 
for  the  heathen  except  destruction.  According 
to  this  theory,  then,  Jonah's  disappearance  in 
the  sea  and  the  great  fish,  and  his  subsequent 
ejection  upon  dry  land,  symbolise  the  Exile  of 
Israel  and  their  restoration  to  Palestine. 

In  proof  of  this  view  it  has  been  pointed  out 
that,  while  the  prophets  frequently  represent  the 
heathen  tyrants  of  Israel  as  the  sea  or  the  sea- 
monster,  one  of  them  has  actually  described  the 
nation's  exile  as  its  swallowing  by  a  monster, 
whom  God  forces  at  last  to  disgorge  his  living 
prey.^  The  full  illustration  of  this  will  be  given 
in  chap,  xxxvi.  en  "  The  Great  Fish  and 
What  it  Means."  Here  it  is  only  necessary  to 
mention  that  the  metaphor  was  borrowed,  not, 
as  has  been  alleged  by  many,  from  some  Greek, 
or  other  foreign,  myth,  which,  like  that  of  Per- 
seus and  Andromeda,  had  its  scene  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Joppa,  but  from  a  Semitic  mythol- 
ogy which  was  well  known  to  the  Hebrews,  and 
the  materials  of  which  were  employed  very  fre- 
quently by  other  prophets  and  poets  of  the  Old 
Testament.il 

*  So  virtually  Kuenen,  "  Einl.,"  II.  p.  423 ;  Smend, 
"  Lehrbuch  der  A.  T.  Religionsgeschichte,"  pp.  408  f.,  and 
Nowack. 

tThat  the  book  is  a  historical  allegory  is  a  very  old 
theory.  Hermann  v.  d.  Hardt  ("  ..Enigniata  Prisci 
Orbis,"  1723  :  cf.  "Jonas  in  Carcharia,  Israel  in  Carcathio," 
1718,  quoted  by  Vatke,  "  Einl.,"  p.  686)  found  in  the  book 
apolitical  allegory  of  the  history  of  Manasseh  led  into 
exile,  and  converted,  while  the  last  two  chapters  repre- 
sent the  history  of  Josiah.  That  the  book  was  symbolic 
in  some  way  of  the  conduct  and  fortunes  of  Israel  was  a 
view  familiar  in  Great  Britain  during  the  first  half  of  this 
century  :  see  the  Preface  to  the  English  translation  of 
Calvin  on  Jonah  (1847).  Kleinert  (in  his  commentary  on 
Jonah  in  Lange's  Series,  Vol.  XVI.  English  translation, 
1874)  was  one  of  the  fir.st  to  expound  with  details  the 
symbolising  of  Israel  in  the  prophet  Jonah.  Then  came 
the  article  in  the  'J heol.  Review  (XIV.,  1877,  pp.  214  ff.)  by 
Cheyne,  following  Bloch's  "  Studien  z.  Gesch.  der  Samm- 
lunij  der  althebraischen  I^itteratur  "  (Breslau,  1876) ;  bvit 
adding  the  explanation  of  "  the  great  fish,"  from  Hebrew 
mythology  (see  below).  Von  Orelli  quotes  Kleinert  with 
approval  in  the  main. 

%  Isa.  xlii.  iQ-24. 

§Jer.  li.  34,  44  f- 

II  That  the  Book  of  Jonah  employs  mythical  elements  is 
an  opinion  that  has  prevailed  since  the  beginning  of  this 


Why,  of  all  prophets,  Jonah  should  have  been 
selected  as  the  type  of  Israel,  is  a  question  hard 
but  perhaps  not  impossible  to  answer.  In  his- 
tory Jonah  appears  only  as  concerned  with  Is- 
rael's reconquest  of  her  lands  from  the  heathen. 
Did  the  author  of  the  book  say:  I  will  take  such 
a  man,  one  to  whom  tradition  attributes  no  out- 
look beyond  Israel's  own  territories,  for  none 
could  be  so  typical  of  Israel,  narrow,  selfish,  and 
with  no  love  for  the  world  beyond  herself?  Or 
did  the  author  know  some  story  about  a  journey 
of  Jonah  to  Nineveh,  or  at  least  some  discourse 
by  Jonah  against  the  great  city?  Elijah  went 
to  Sarepta,  Elisha  took  God's  word  to  Damas- 
cus: may  there  not  have  been,  though  we  are 
ignorant  of  it,  some  connection  between  Nin- 
eveh and  the  labours  of  Elisha's  successor? 
Thirty  years  after  Jonah  appeared,  Amos  pro- 
claimed the  judgment  of  Jehovah  upon  foreign 
nations,  with  the  destruction  of  their  capitals; 
about  the  year  755  he  clearly  enforced,  as  equal 
with  Israel's  own,  the  moral  responsibility  of  the 
heathen  to  the  God  of  righteousness.  May  not 
Jonah,  almost  the  contemporary  of  Amos,  have 
denounced  Nineveh  in  the  same  way?  Would 
not  some  tradition  of  his  serve  as  the  nucleus 
of  history  round  which  our  author  built  his  al- 
legory? It  is  possible  that  Jonah  proclaimed 
doom  upon  Nineveh;  yet  those  who  are  familiar 
with  the  prophesying  of  Amos,  Hosea,  and,  in 
his  younger  days,  Isaiah,  will  deem  it  hardly 
probable.  For  why  do  all  these  prophets  exhibit 
such  reserve  in  even  naming  Assyria,  if  Israel 
had  already  through  Jonah  entered  into  such 
articulate  relations  with  Nineveh?  We  must, 
therefore,  .admit  our  ignorance  of  the  reasons 
which  led  our  author  to  choose  Jonah  as  a  type 
of  Israel.  We  can  only  conjecture  that  it  may 
have  been  because  Jonah  was  a  prophet,  whom 
history  identified  only  with  Israel's  narrower  in- 
terests. If,  during  subsequent  centuries,  a  tradi- 
tion had  risen  of  Jonah's  journey  to  Nineveh  or 
of  his  discourse  against  her,  such  a  tradition  has 
probability  against   it. 

A  more  definite  origin  for  the  book  than  any 
yet  given  has  been  suggested  by  Professor 
Budde.*  The  Second  Book  of  Chronicles  refers 
to  a  "  Midrash  of  the  Book  of  the  Kings  "t  for 
further  particulars  concerning  King  Joash.  A 
"  Midrash  "t  was  the  expansion,  for  doctrinal 
or  homiletic  purposes,  of  a  passage  of  Scripture, 
and  very  frequently  took  the  form,  so  dear  to 
Orientals,  of  parable  or  invented  story  about  the 
subject  of  the  text.  We  have  examples  of  Mid- 
rashim  among  the  Apocrypha,  in  the  Books  of 
Tobit  and  Susannah  and  in  the  prayer  of  Ma- 
nasseh, the  same  as  is  probably  referred  to  by  the 

century.  But  before  Semitic  mythology  was  so  well 
known  as  it  is  now,  these  mythical  elements  were  thought 
to  have  been  derived  from  the  Greek  mythology.  So 
Gesenius,  De  Wette,  and  even  Knobel,  but  see  especially 
F.  C.  Baur  in  Ilgen's  Zeitschrift  for  1837,  p.  201. 
Kuenen  ("Einl.,"  424)  and  Cheyne  (Theol.  Rev.,  XIV.) 
rightly  deny  traces  or  any  Greek  influence  on  Jonah,  and 
their  denial  is  generally  agreed  in. 

Kleinert  {op.cif.,  p.  10)  points  to  the  proper  source  in  the 
native  mythology  of  the  Hebrews:  "The  sea-monster  is 
by  no  means  an  unusual  phenomenon  in  prophetic 
typology.  It  is  the  secular  power  appointed  by  God  for 
the  scourge  of  Israel  and  of  the  earth  (Isa.  xxvii.  i)  ";  and 
Cheyne  (Theol.  Rev.,  XIV.,  "Jonah:  a  Study  in  Jewish 
Folk-lore  and  Religion  ")  points  out  how  Jer.  li.  34,  44  f., 
forms  the  connecting  link  between  the  story  of  Jonah  and 
the  popular  mythology. 

*  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  189?,  pp.  40  flf. 

t  2  Chron.  xxiv.  27. 

X  Cf.  Driver,  "  Introduction,"  I.  p.  497, 


THE    BOOK    OF    JONAH. 


683 


Chronicler*  That  the  Chronicler  himself  used 
the  "  Midrash  of  the  Book  of  the  Kings  "  as  ma- 
terial for  his  own  book  is  obvious  from  the  form 
of  the  latter  and  its  adaptation  of  the  historical 
narratives  of  the  Book  of  Kings. t  The  Book 
of  Daniel  may  also  be  reckoned  among  the  Mid- 
rashim,  and  Budde  now  proposes  to  add  to  their 
number  the  Book  of  Jonah.  It  may  be  doubted 
whether  this  distinguished  critic  is  right  in  sup- 
posing that  the  book  formed  the  Midrash  to  2 
Kings  xiv.  25  fif.  (the  author  being  desirous  to 
add  to  the  expression  there  of  Jehovah's  pity 
upon  Israel  some  expression  of  His  pity  upon 
the  heathen),  or  that  it  was  extracted  just  as  it 
stands,  in  proof  of  which  Budde  points  to  its 
abrupt  beginning  and  end.  We  have  seen  an- 
other reason  for  the  latter ;t  and  it  is  very  irn- 
probable  that  the  Midrashim,  so  largely  the  basis 
of  the  Book  of  Chronicles,  shared  that  spirit 
of  universalism  which  inspires  the  Book  of  Jo- 
nah.§  But  we  may  well  believe  that  it  was  in 
some  Midrash  of  the  Book  of  Kings  that  the  au- 
thor of  the  Book  of  Jonah  found  the  basis  of 
the  latter  part  of  his  immortal  work,  which  too 
clearly  reflects  the  fortunes  and  conduct  of  all 
Israel  to  have  been  wholly  drawn  from  a  Mid- 
rash upon  the  story  of  the  individual  prophet 
Jonah. 

4.  Our  Lord's  Use  of  the  Book. 

We  have  seen,  then,  that  the  Book  of  Jonah 
is  not  actual  history,  but  the  enforcement  of  a 
profound  religious  truth  nearer  to  the  level  of  the 
New  Testament  than  anything  else  in  the  Old, 
and  cast  in  the  form  of  Christ's  own  parables. 
The  full  proof  of  this  can  be  made  clear  only  by 
the  detailed  exposition  of  the  book.  There  is, 
however,  one  other  question,  which  is  relevant  to 
the  argument.  Christ  Himself  has  employed  the 
story  of  Jonah.  Does  His  use  of  it  involve  His 
authority  for  the  opinion  that  it  is  a  story  of 
real  facts? 

Two  passages  of  the  Gospels  contain  the  words 
of  our  Lord  upon  Jonah:  Matt.  xii.  39,  41,  and 
Luke  xi.  29,  30.II  "  A  generation,  wicked  and 
adulterous,  seeketh  a  sign,  and  sign  shall  not  be 
given  it,  save  the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonah. 
.  .  .  The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  stand  up  in  the 
Judgment  with  this  generation,  and  condemn  it, 
for  they  repented  at  the  preaching  of  Jonah, 
and  behold,  a  greater  than  Jonah  is  here.  This 
generation  is  an  evil  generation:  it  seeketh  a 
sign;  and  sign  shall  not  be  given  it,  except  the 
sign  of  Jonah.     For  as  Jonah  was  a  sign  to  the 

*  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  18. 

+  See  Robertson  Smith,  "Old  Test,  in  the  Jewish 
Church,"  pp.  140,  154. 

t  See  above,  pp.  681  f. 

§  Cf.  Smend,  "A.  T.  Religionsgeschichte,"  p.  409,  n.  i. 

II  Matt.  xii.  ^o.— "  For  as  Jonah  was  in  the  belly  of  the 
whale  ihree  days  and  three  nights,  so  shaft  the  Son  of 
Man  be  in  the  heart  of  the  earth  three  days  and  three 
nights" — is  not  repeated  in  Luke  xi.  2q,  30,  which  confines 
the  sign  to  the  preaching  of  repentance,  and  is  suspected 
as  an  intrusion  both  for  this  and  other  reasons,  e.  £:,  that 
ver.  40  is  superfluous  and  does  not  fit  in  with  ver.  41,  which 
gives  the  proper  explanation  of  the  sign  ;  that  Jonah,  who 
came  by  his  burial  in  the  fish  through  neglect  of  his  duty 
and  not  by  martyrdom,  could  not  therefore  in  this  respect 
be  a  type  of  our' Lord.  On  the  other  hand,  ver.  40  is  not 
unlike  another  reference  of  our  Lord  to  His  resurrection, 
John  ii.  19  ff.  Yet,  even  if  ver.  40  be  genuine,  the  vague- 
ness of  the  parallel  drawn  in  it  between  Jonah  and  our 
I  ord  surely  makes  for  the  opinion  that  in  quoting  Jonah 
our  Lord  was  not  concerned  about  quoting  facts,  but 
simply  gave  an  illustration  from  a  well-known  tale. 
Matt.  xvi.  4,  where  the  sign  of  Jonah  is  again  mentioned, 
d'jes  not  explain  the  sign. 


Ninevites,  so  also  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  to 
this  generation." 

These  words,  of  course,  are  compatible  with 
the  opinion  that  the  Book  of  Jonah  is  a  record 
of  real  fact.  The  onlv  question  is,  are  they  also 
compatible  with  the  opinion  that  the  Book  of 
Jonah  is  a  parable?  Many  sav  No;  and  they  al- 
lege that  those  of  us  who  hold  this  opinion  are 
denying,  or  at  least  ignoring,  the  testimony  of 
our  Lord;  or  that  we  are  taking  away  the  whole 
force  of  the  parallel  which  He  drew.  This  is 
a  question  of  interpretation,  not  of  faith.  We  do 
not  believe  that  our  Lord  had  any  thought  of 
confirming  or  not  confirming  the  historic  char- 
acter of  the  story.  His  purpose  was  purely  one 
of  exhortation,  and  we  feel  the  grounds  of  that 
exhortation  to  be  just  as  strong  when  we  have 
proven  the  Book  of  Jonah  to  be  a  parable. 
Christ  is  using  an  illustration:  it  surely  matters 
not  whether  that  illustration  be  drawn  frorn  the 
realms  of  fact  or  of  poetry.  Again  and  again  in 
their  discourses  to  the  people  do  men  use  illus- 
trations and  enforcements  drawn  from  traditions 
of  the  past.  Do  we,  even  when  the  historical 
value  of  these  traditions  is  very  ambiguous,  give 
a  single  thought  to  the  question  of  their  histori- 
cal character?  We  never  think  of  it.  It  is 
enough  for  us  that  the  tradition  is  popularly  ac- 
cepted and  familiar.  And  we  cannot  deny  to  our 
Lord  that  which  we  claim  for  ourselves.*  Even 
conservative  writers  admit  this.  In  his  recent  In- 
troduction to  Jonah,  Orelli  says  expressly:  "It 
is  not,  indeed,  proved  with  conclusive  necessity 
that,  if  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  a  physical 
fact,  Jonah's  abode  in  the  fish's  belly  must  also 
be  just  as  historical."  f 

Upon  the  general  question  of  our  Lord's  au- 
thority in  matters  of  criticism.  His  own  words 
with  regard  to  personal  questions  may  be  appo- 
sitely quoted:  "  Man,  who  made  Me  a  judge 
or  divider  over  you?  I  am  come  not  to  judge 
.  .  .  but  to  save."  Such  matters  our  Lord  surely 
leaves  to  ourselves,  and  we  have  to  decide  them 
by  our  reason,  our  common-sense,  and  our  loy- 
alty to  truth — of  all  of  which  He  Himself  is  the 
creator,  and  of  which  we  shall  have  to  render  to 
Him  an  account  at  the  last.  Let  us  remember 
this,  and  we  shall  use  them  with  equal  liberty 
and  reverence.  "  Bringing  every  thought  into 
subjection  to  Christ "  is  surely  just  using  our 
knowledge,  our  reason,  and  every  other  intel- 
lectual gift  which  He  has  given  us,  with  the  ac- 
curacy and  the  courage  of  His  own  Spirit. 

5.  The  Unity  of  the  Book. 

The  next  question  is  that  of  the  Unity  of  the 
Book.  Several  attempts  have  been  made  to  prove 
from  discrepancies,  some  real  and  some  alleged, 
that  the  book  is  a  compilation  of  stories  from 
several  different  hands.  But  these  essays  are  too 
artificial  to  have  obtained  any  adherence  from 
critics;  and  the  few  real  discrepancies  of  narra- 
tive from  which  they  start  are  due,  as  we  have 

♦Take  a  case.  Suppose  we  tell  slothful  people  that 
theirs  will  be  the  fate  of  the  man  who  buried  his  talent ;  is 
this  to  commit  us  to  the  belief  that  the  personages  of 
Christ's  parables  actually  existed  ?  Or  take  the  homiletic 
use  of  Shakespeare's  dramas — "as  Macbeth  did,"  or  "as 
Hamlet  said."  Does  it  commit  us  to  the  historical  reality 
of  Macbeth  or  Hamlet?  Any  preacher  among  us  would 
resent  being  bound  by  such  an  inference.  And  if  we 
resent  this  for  ourselves,  how  chary  we  should  be  about 
•eeking  to  bind  our  Lord  by  it. 

t  Eng.  trans,  of  "The  Twelve  Minor  Prophets,"  p.  172. 
Consult  also  Farrar's  judicious  paragraphs  on  the  subject: 
"  Minor  Prophets,"  234  f. 


684 


THB^BOOK    OF   THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


seen,  rather  to  the  license  of  a  writer  of  parable 
than  to  any  difference  of  authorship.* 

In  the  question  of  the  Unity  of  the  Book,  the 
Prayer  or  Psalm  in  chap.  ii.  offers  a  problem  of 
its  own,  consisting  as  it  does  almost  entirely  of 
passages  parallel  to  others  in  the  Psalter.  Be- 
si<des  a  number  of  religious  phrases,  which  are 
too  general  for  us  to  say  that  one  prayer  has 
borrowed  them  from  another.!  there  are  several 
unmistakable  repetitions  of  the   Psalms.]: 

And  yet  the  Psalm  of  Jonah  has  strong  fea- 
tures, which,  so  far  as  we  know,  are  original  to 
it.  The  horror  of  the  great  deep  has  nowhere 
in  the  Old  Testament  been  described  with  such 
power  or  with  such  conciseness.  So  far,  then, 
the  Psalm  is  not  a  mere  string  of  quotations, 
but  a  living  unity.  Did  the  author  of  the  book 
himself  insert  it  where  it  stands?  Against  this 
it  has  been  urged  that  the  Psalm  is  not  the 
prayer  of  a  man  inside  a  fish,  but  of  one  who 
on  dry  land  celebrates  a  deliverance  from  drown- 
ing, and  that  if  the  author  of  the  narrative  him- 
self had  inserted  it,  he  would  rather  have  done 
so  after  ver.  ii,  which  records  the  prophet's  es- 
cape from  the  fish.§  And  a  usual  theory  of  the 
origin  of  the  Psalm  is  that  a  later  editor,  having 
found  the  Psalm  ready-made  and  in  a  collection 
where  it  was  perhaps  attributed  to  Jonah,!!  in- 
serted it  after  ver.  2,  which  records  that  Jonah 
did  pray  from  the  belly  of  the  fish,  and  inserted 
it  there  the  more  readily,  because  it  seemed  right 
for  a  book  which  had  found  its  place  among  the 
Twelve  Prophets  to  contribute,  as  all  the  others 
did,  some  actual  discourse  of  the  prophet  whose 

*  The  two  attempts  which  have  been  made  to  divide  the 
Book  of  Jonah  are  those  by  Kohler  in  the  Theoi.  Rev.. 
XVI.  139  ff.,  and  by  Bohme  in  the  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  VII.  224 
ff.  Kohler  first  insists  on  traits  of  an  earlier  age  (rude 
conception  of  God,  no  sharp  boundary  drawn  iaetween 
heathens  and  the  Hebrews,  etc.),  and  then  finds  traces  of 
a  late  revision  :  lacuna  in  i.  2  ;  hesitation  in  iii.  i,  in  the 
giving  of  the  prophet's  commission,  which  is  not  pure 
Hebrew  :  change  of  three  days  to  forty  icf.  LXX.);  men- 
tion of  unnamed  king  and  his  edict,  which  is  superfluous 
after  the  popular  movement ;  beasts  sharing  in  mourn- 
ing;  also  in  i.  5,  8,  g,  14,  ii.  2,  ''^_'  iii.  9,  iv.  1-4,  as  disturb- 
ing context ;  also  the  building  of  a  booth  is  superfluous, 
and  only  invented  to  account  for  Jonah  remaining  forty 
days  instead  of  the  original  three ;  iv.  6,  1K>X"1  ^J?  ^V 
nVn^  for  an  original  i?  /'^fH/  =  to  offer  him  shade  ;  7, 

"the  worm,"  nypiH.  due  to  a  copyist's  change  of  the  fol- 
lowing n"l?J?2-  Withdrawing  these,  Kohler  gets  an 
account  of  the  sparing  of  Nineveh  on  repentance  follow- 
ing a  sentence  of  doom,  which,  he  says,  reflects  the  posi- 
tion of  the  city  of  God  in  Jeremiah's  time,  and  was  due  to 
Jeremiah's  opponents,  who  said  in  answer  to  his  sentence 
of  doom  :  If  Nineveh  could  avert  her  fate,  why  not  Jerusa- 
lem? Bohme's  conclusion,  starting  from  the  alleged  con- 
tradictions in  the  story,  is  that  no  fewer  than  four  hands 
have  had  to  deal  with  it.  A  sufficient  answer  is  given  by 
Kuenen  ("Einl.,"426  ff.),  who,  after  analysing  the  dissec- 
tion, says  that  its  "improbability  is  immediately  evi- 
dent." 'With  regard  to  the  inconsistencies  which  Bohme 
alleges  to  exist  in  chap.  iii.  between  ver.  5  and  vv.  6-q, 
Kuenen  remarks  that  "all  that  is  needed  for  their 
explanation  is  a  little  good-will  "—a  phrase  applicable  to 
many  other  difficulties  raised  with  regard  to  other  Old 
Testament  books  by  critical  attempts  even  more  rational 
than  those  of  Bohme.  Cornill  characterises  Bohme's 
hypothesis  as  absurd. 

t"To  Thy  holy  temple,"  vv.  5  and  8  :  cf.  Psalm  v.  8.  etc. 
"The  waters  have  come  round  me  to"  my  very  "soul,"  ver. 
6 :  cf.  Psalm  Ixix.  2.  "  And  Thou  broughtest  up  my  life," 
ver.  7  :  cf.  Psalm  xxx.  4.  "When  my  soul  fainted  upon 
me,"  ver.  8  :  cf.  Psalm  cxlii.  4,  etc.  "  With  the  voice  of 
thanksgiving,"  ver.  10 :  cf.  Psalm  xlii.  5.  The  reff.  are  to 
the  Heb.  text. 

X  Cf.  ver.  3  with  Psalm  xvii.  7  ;  ver.  4  with  Psalm  xlii.  8  ; 
ver.  5  with  Psalm  xxxi.  23  ;  ver.  9  with  Psalm  xxxi.  7,  and 
ver.  10  with  Psalm  1.  14. 

§  Budde,  as  above,  p.  570. 

II  De  Wette,  Knobel,  Kuenen. 


name  it  Dore.*  This,  however,  is  not  probable. 
Whether  the  original  author  found  the  Psalm 
ready  to  his  hand  or  made  it,  there  is  a  great 
deal  to  be  said  for  the  opinion  of  the  earlier 
critics,!  that  he  himself  inserted  it,  and  just  where 
it  now  stands.  For,  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
writer,  Jonah  was  already  saved,  when  he  was 
taken  up  by  the  fish — saved  from  the  deep  into 
which  he  had  been  cast  by  the  sailors,  and  the 
dangers  of  which  the  Psalm  so  vividly  describes. 
However  impossible  it  be  for  us  to  conceive  of 
the  compilation  of  a  Psalm  (even  though  full  of 
quotations)  by  a  man  in  Jonah's  position,]:  it  was 
consistent  with  the  standpoint  of  a  writer  who 
had  just  affirmed  that  the  fish  was  expressly  "  ap- 
pointed by  Jehovah,"  in  order  to  save  his  peni- 
tent servant  from  the  sea.  To  argue  that  the 
Psalm  is  an  intrusion  is  therefore  not  only  un- 
necessary, but  it  betrays  failure  to  appreciate 
the  standpoint  of  the  writer.  Given  the  fish 
and  the  Divine  purpose  of  the  fish,  the  Psalm  is 
intelligible  and  appears  at  its  proper  place.  It 
were  more  reasonable  indeed  to  argue  that  the 
fish  itself  is  an  insertion.  Besides,  as  we  shall 
see,  the  spirit  of  the  Psalm  is  national;  in  con- 
formity with  the  truth  underlying  the  book,  it 
is  a  Psalm  of  Israel  as  a  whole. 

If  this  be  correct,  we  have  the  Book  of  Jonah 
as  it  came  from  the  hands  of  its  author.  The  text 
is  in  wonderfully  good  condition,  due  to  the 
ease  of  the  narrative  and  its  late  date.  The  Greek 
version  exhibits  the  usual  proportion  of  clerical 
errors  and  mis-translations,^  omissions!!  and 
amplifications,  II  with  some  variant  readings  ** 
and  other  changes  that  will  be  noted  in  the  verses 
themselves. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 

THE  GREAT  REFUSAL. 

Jonah  i. 

We  have  now  laid  clear  the  lines  upon  which 
the  Book  of  Jonah  was  composed.  Its  purpose 
is  to  illustrate  God's  grace  to  the  heathen  in 
face  of  His  people's  refusal  to  fulfil  their  mission 
to  them.  The  author  was  led  to  achieve  this  pur- 
pose by  a  parable,  through  which  the  prophet  Jo- 
nah moves  as  the  symbol  of  his  recusant,  exiled, 

*  Budde. 

t  E.g:,  Hitzig. 

t  Luther  says  of  Jonah's  prayer,  that  "  he  did  not  speak 
with  these  exact  words  in  the  belly  of  the  fish,  nor  placed 
them  so  orderly,  but  he  shows  how  he  took  courage,  and 
what  sort  of  thoughts  his  heart  had,  when  he  stood  in  such 
a  battle  with  death."  We  recognise  in  this  Psalm  "the 
recollection  of  the  confidence  with  which  Jonah  hoped 
towards  God,  that  since  he  had  been  rescued  in  so  won- 
derful a  way  from  death  in  the  waves.  He  would  also 
bring  him  out  of  the  night  of  his  grave  into  the  light  of 
day." 

§ii.  5,  B  has  \a6v  for  vaov ;  i.  9.  for  ^"l3y  it  reads  ^SJ?, 
and  takes  the  ^  to  be  abbreviation  for  nin^  ;  "•  7.  for 
i^y3  it  reads  ""^y^,  and  translates  (caroxoi ;  iv.  11,  for 
nD"t^'  it  reads,  ^2^^,  and  translates  KaroiKova-i. 

I!  i-  4,  nSnJ.  perhaps  rightly  omitted  before  following 
^nj  ;  i-  8,  B  omits  the  clause  IK^Kl  to  Ijp,  probably 
rightly,  for  it  is  needless,  though  supplied  by  Codd.  A. 
Q  ;  iii.  g,  one  verb,  /iteraxo^aei,  for^DnJI  ^'IB'^  probably  cor- 
rectly, see  below. 

1  i.  2,  ^  Kpauvn  T^9  (caicias  for  Dnj?")  I  »•  3.  ^o"  ^^ov  ixov  after 
nirT"  ;  ii-  lo.  in  obedience  to  another  reading;  iii.  i,  i* 

innpoa^iv  after  n^KIp  I  i'i-  8,  "IDN?. 
**iii.  4,  8. 


J.-IUUl    l.J 


THE    GREAT    REFUSAL. 


685 


redeemed,  and  still  hardened  people.  It  is  the 
Drama  of  Israel's  career,  as  the  Servant  of  God, 
in  the  most  pathetic  moments  of  that  career.  A 
nation  is  stumbling  on  the  highest  road  nation 
was  ever  called  to  tread. 

"  Who  is  blind  but  My  servant. 
Or  deaf  as  My  messenger  whom  I  have  sent  ?  " 

He  that  would  read  this  Drama  aright  must 
remember  what  lies  behind  the  Great  Refusal 
which  forms  its  tragedy.  The  cause  of  Israel's 
recusancy  was  not  only  wilfulness  or  cowardly 
sloth,  but  the  horror  of  a  whole  world  given 
over  to  idolatry,  the  paralysing  sense  of  its  irre- 
sistible force,  of  its  cruel  persecutions  endured 
for  centuries,  and  of  the  long  famine  of  Heav- 
en's justice.  These  it  was  which  had  filled  Is- 
rael's eyes  too  full  of  fever  to  see  her  duty.  Only 
when  we  feel,  as  the  writer  himself  felt,  all  this 
tiagic  background  to  his  story,  are  we  able  to 
appreciate  the  exquisite  gleams  which  he  flashes 
across  it:  the  generous  magnanimity  of  the 
heathen  sailors,  the  repentance  of  the  heathen 
city,  and,  lighting  from  above,  God's  pity  upon 
the  dumb  heathen  multitudes. 

The  parable  or  drama  divides  itself  into  three 
parts:  The  Prophet's  Flight  and  Turning  (chap, 
i.);  The  Great  Fish  and  What  it  Means  (chap, 
ii.);  and  The  Repentance  of  the  City  (chaps,  iii. 
and  iv.). 

The  chief  figure  of  the  story  is  Jonah,  son 
of  Amittai,  from  Gath-hepher  in  Galilee,  a 
prophet  identified  with  that  turn  in  Israel's  for- 
tunes by  which  she  began  to  defeat  her  Syrian 
oppressors,  and  win  back  from  them  her  own 
territories — a  prophet,  therefore,  of  revenge,  and 
from  the  most  bitter  of  the  heathen  wars.  "  And 
the  word  of  Jehovah  came  to  Jonah,  the  son  of 
Amittai,  saying.  Up,  go  to  Nineveh,  the  Great 
City,  and  cry  out  against  her,  for  her  evil  is 
come  up  before  Me."  But  "  he  arose  to  flee." 
It  was  not  the  length  of  the  road,  nor  the  danger 
of  declaring  Nineveh's  sin  to  her  face,  which 
turned  him,  but  the  instinct  that  God  intended 
by  him  something  else  than  Nineveh's  destruc- 
tion; and  this  instinct  sprang  from  his  knowl- 
edge of  God  Himself.  "  Ah  now,  Jehovah,  was 
not  my  word,  while  I  was  yet  upon  mine  own 
soil,  at  the  time  I  made  ready  to  flee  to  Tar- 
shish,  this — that  I  knew  that  Thou  art  a  God 
gracious  and  tender  and  long-suffering,  plen- 
teous in  love  and  relenting  of  evil?"*  Jonah 
interpreted  the  Word  which  came  to  him  by  the 
Character  which  he  knew  to  be  behind  the  Word. 
This  is  a  significant  hint  upon  the  method  of 
revelation. 

It  would  be  rash  to  say  that,  in  imputing  even 
to  the  historical  Jonah  the  fear  of  God's  grace 
upon  the  heathen,  our  author  were  guilty  of  an 
anachronism. t  We  have  to  do,  however,  with 
a  greater  than  Jonah — the  nation  herself. 
Though   perhaps   Israel   little   reflected   upon   it. 


t  For  the  grace  of  God  had  been  the  most  formative 
influence  in  the  early  religion  of  Israel  (see  p.  447), 
and  Amos,  only  thirty  years  after  Jonah,  emphasised  the 
moral  equality  of  Israel  and  the  Gentiles  before  the  one 
God  of  righteousness.  Given  these  two  premisses  of 
God's  essential  grace  and  the  moral  responsibility  of  the 
heathen  to  Him,  and  the  conclusion  could  never  have 
been  far  away  that  in  the  end  His  essential  grace  must 
reach  the  heathen  too.  Indeed  in  sayings  not  later  than 
the  eighth  century  it  is  foretold  that  Israel  shall  become 
H  blessing  to  the  whole  world.  Our  author,  then,  may 
have  been  guilty  of  no  anachronism  in  imputing  such  a 
foreboding  to  Jonah. 


the  instinct  can  never  have  been  far  away  that 
some  day  the  grace  of  Jehovah  might  reach  the 
heathen  too.  Such  an  instinct,  of  course,  must 
have  been  almost  stifled  by  hatred  born  of 
heathen  oppression,  as  well  as  by  the  intellectual 
scorn  which  Israel  came  to  feel  for  heathen  idol- 
atries. But  we  may  believe  that  it  haunted  even 
those  dark  periods  in  which  revenge  upon  the 
Gentiles  seemed  most  just,  and  their  destruction 
the  only  means  of  establishing  God's  kingdom 
in  the  world.  We  know  that  it  moved  uneasily 
even  beneath  the  rigour  of  Jewish  legalism.  For 
its  secret  was  that  faith  in  the  essential  grace 
of  God,  which  Israel  gained  very  early  and  never 
lost,  and  which  was  the  spring  of  every  new 
conviction  and  every  reform  in  her  wonderful 
development.  With  a  subtle  appreciation  of  all 
this,  our  author  imputes  the  instinct  to  Jonah 
from  the  outset.  Jonah's  fear,  that  after  all  the 
heathen  may  be  spared,  reflects  the  restless  ap- 
prehension even  of  the  most  exclusive  of  his 
people — an  apprehension  which  by  the  time  our 
book  was  written  seemed  to  be  still  more  justified 
by  God's  long  delay  of  doom  upon  the  tyrants 
whom  He  had  promised  to  overthrow. 

But  to  the  natural  man  in  Israel  the  possi- 
bility of  the  heathen's  repentance  was  still  so  ab- 
horrent that  he  turned  his  back  upon  it.  "  Jonah 
rose  to  flee  to  Tarshish  from  the  face  of  Je- 
hovah." In  spite  of  recent  arguments  to  the 
contrary,  the  most  probable  location  of  Tarshish 
is  the  generally  accepted  one,  that  it  was  a  Phoe- 
nician colony  at  the  other  end  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean. In  any  case  it  was  far  from  the  Holy 
Land;  and  by  going  there  the  prophet  would 
put  the  sea  between  himself  and  his  God.  To 
the  Hebrew  imagination  there  could  not  be  a 
flight  more  remote.  Israel  was  essentially  an  in- 
land people.  They  had  come  up  out  of  the  des- 
ert, and  they  had  practically  never  yet  touched 
the  Mediterranean.  They  lived  within  sight  of 
it,  but  from  ten  to  twenty  miles  of  foreign  soil 
intervened  between  their  mountains  and  its 
stormy  coast.  The  Jews  had  no  traffic  upon  the 
sea,  nor  (but  for  one  sublime  instance  *  to  the 
contrary)  had  their  poets  ever  employed  it  ex- 
cept as  a  symbol  of  arrogance  and  restless  rebel- 
lion against  the  will  of  God.f  It  was  all  this 
popular  feeling  of  the  distance  and  strangeness 
of  the  sea  which  made  our  author  choose  it  as 
the  scene  of  the  prophet's  flight  from  the  face 
of  Israel's  God.  Jonah  had  to  pass,  too,  through 
a  foreign  land  to  get  to  the  coast:  upon  the  sea 
he  would  only  be  among  heathen.  This  was  to 
be  part  of  his  conversion.  "  He  went  down  to 
Yapho,  and  found  a  ship  going  to  Tarshish,  and 
paid  tJie  fare  thereof,  and  embarked  on  her  to 
get  away  with"  her  crew^  "to  Tarshish — away 
from  the  face  of  Jehovah." 

The  scenes  which  follow  are  very  vivid:  the 
sudden  wind  sweeping  down  from  the  very  hills 
on  which  Jonah  believed  he  had  left  his  God; 
the  tempest;  the  behaviour  of  the  ship,  so  alive 
with  effort  that  the  story  attributes  to  her  the 
feelings  of  a  living  thing — "  she  thought  she 
must  be  broken  "  :  the  despair  of  the  mariners, 
driven  from  the  unity  of  their  common  task  to 
the  hopeless  diversity  of  their  idolatry — "  they 
cried  every  man  unto  his  own  god  "  ;  the  jetti- 
soning of  the  tackle  of  the  ship  to  lighten  her 
(as  we  should  say,  they  let  the  masts  go  by  the 

*  Second  Isaiah.    See  chap.  Ix. 

t  See  the  author's  "Hist.  Geog.  of  the  Holy  Land,"  pp 
131-134. 
X  Heb.  "them.  ' 


686 


THE"  BOOK   OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


board) ;  the  worn-out  prophet  in  the  hull  of  the 
ship,  sleeping  like  a  stowaway;  the  group  gath- 
ered on  the  heaving  deck  to  cast  the  lot;  the 
passenger's  confession,  and  the  new  fear  which 
fell  upon  the  sailors  from  it;  the  reverence  with 
which  these  rude  men  ask  the  advice  of  him, 
in  whose  guilt  they  feel  not  the  offence  to  them- 
selves, but  the  sacredness  to  God;  the  awakening 
of  the  prophet's  better  self  by  their  generous 
deference  to  him;  how  he  counsels  to  them  his 
own  sacrifice;  their  reluctance  to  yield  to  this, 
and  their  return  to  the  oars  with  increased  per- 
severance for  his  sake.  But  neither  their  gen- 
erosity nor  their  efforts  avail.  The  prophet 
again  offers  himself,  and  as  their  sacrifice  he  is 
thrown   into   the   sea. 

"  And  Jehovah  cast  a  wind  *  on  the  sea,  and 
there  was  a  great  tempest,t  and  the  ship  threat- 
ened t  to  break  up.  And  the  sailors  were  afraid, 
and  cried  every  man  unto  his  own  god;  and  they 
cast  the  tackle  of  the  ship  into  the  sea,  to  lighten 
it  from  upon  them.  But  Jonah  had  gone  down 
to  the  bottom  of  the  ship  and  lay  fast  asleep. 
And  the  captain  of  the  ship§  came  to  him,  and 
said  to  him,  What  art  thou  doing  asleep?  Up, 
call  on  thy  God;  peradventure  the  God  will  be 
gracious  to  us,  that  we  perish  not.  And  they 
said  every  man  to  his  neighbour.  Come,  and  let 
us  cast  lots,  that  we  may  know  for  whose  sake 
is  this  evil  come  upon  us.  So  they  cast  lots, 
and  the  lot  fell  on  Jonah.  And  they  said  to  him, 
Tell  us  now,||  what  is  thy  business,  and  whence 
comest  thou?  what  is  thy  land,  and  from  what 
people  art  thou?  And  he  said  to  them,  A  He- 
brew am  I,  and  a  worshipper  of  the  God  of 
Heaven, Tf  who  made  the  sea  and  the  dry  land. 
And  the  men  feared  greatly,  and  said  to  him. 
What  is  this  thou  hast  done?  (for  thev  knew  he 
was  fleeing  from  the  face  of  Jehovah,  because 
he  had  told  them).  And  they  said  to  him,  What 
are  we  to  do  to  thee  that  the  sea  cease  raging 
against  us?  For  the  sea  was  surging  higher 
and  higher.  And  he  said,  Take  me  and  throw 
me  into  the  sea;  so  shall  the  sea  cease  raging 
against  you:  for  I  am  sure  that  it  is  on  my 
account  that  this  great  tempest  is  risen 
upon  you.  And  the  men  laboured  **  with  the 
oars  to  bring  the  ship  to  land,  and  they  could 
not,  for  the  sea  grew  more  and  more  stormy 
against  them.  So  they  called  on  Jehovah  and 
said,  Jehovah,  let  us  not  perish,  we  pray  Thee, 
for  the  life  of  this  man,  neither  bring  innocent 
blood  upon  us:  for  Thou  art  Jehovah,  Thou 
doest  as  Thou  pleasest.  Then  they  took  up  Jo- 
nah and  cast  him  into  the  sea,  and  the  sea  stilled 
from  its  raging.  But  the  men  were  in  great 
awe  of  Jehovah,  and  sacrificed  to  Him  and  vowed 
vows." 

How  very  real  it  is  and  how  very  noble!  We 
see  the  storm,  and  then  we  forget  the  storm  in 
the  joy  of  that  generous  contrast  between 
heathen  and  Hebrew.  But  the  glory  of  the  pas- 
sage is  the  change  in  Jonah  himself.  It  has  been 
called  his  punishment  and  the  conversion  of  the 
heathen.  Rather  it  is  his  own  conversion.  He 
meets  again  not  only  God,  but  the  truth  from 
which  he  fled.  He  not  only  meets  that  truth, 
but  he  offers  his  life  for  it. 

*  So  LXX.:  Heb.  "  a  great  wind." 
+  Heb.  "  on  the  sea. 
t  Lit.  "reckoned"  or  "thought." 
§  Heb.  "  ropes." 

II  The  words  "  for  whose  sake  is  this  evil  come  upon  us" 
do  not  occur  in  LXX.  and  are  unnecessary. 
*i  Wellhausen  suspects  this  form  of  the  Divine  title. 
**  Heb.  "aug." 


The  art  is  consummate.  The  writer  will  first 
reduce  the  prophet  and  the  heathen  whom  he  ab- 
hors to  the  elements  of  their  common  humanity. 
As  men  have  sometimes  seen  upon  a  mass  of 
wreckage  or  on  an  ice-floe  a  number  of  wild 
animals,  by  nature  foes  to  each  other,  reduced  to 
peace  through  their  common  danger,  so  we  des- 
cry the  prophet  and  his  natural  enemies  upon 
the  strained  and  breaking  ship.  In  the  midst  of 
the  storm  they  are  equally  helpless,  and  they 
cast  for  all  the  lot  which  has  no  respect  of  per- 
sons. But  from  this  the  story  passes  quickly, 
to  show  how  Jonah  feels  not  only  the  human 
kinship  of  these  heathen  with  himself,  but  their 
susceptibility  to  the  knowledge  of  his  God.  They 
pray  to  Jehovah  as  the  God  of  the  sea  and  the 
dry  land;  while  we  may  be  sure  that  the  proph- 
et's confession,  and  the  story  of  his  own  relation 
to  that  God,  forms  as  powerful  an  exhortation 
to  repentance  as  any  he  could  have  preached  in 
Nineveh.  At  least  it  produces  the  effects  which 
he  has  dreaded.  In  these  sailors  he  sees  heathen 
turned  to  the  fear  of  the  Lord.  All  that  he  has 
fled  to  avoid  happens  there  before  his  eyes  and 
through  his  own  mediation. 

The  climax  is  reached,  however,  neither  when 
Jonah  feels  his  common  humanity  with  the 
heathen  nor  when  he  discovers  their  awe  of  his 
God,  but  when  in  order  to  secure  for  them  God's 
sparing  mercies  he  offers  his  own  life  instead. 
"  Take  me  up  and  cast  me  into  the  sea;  so  shall 
the  sea  cease  from  raging  against  you."  Af- 
ter their  pity  for  him  has  wrestled  for  a  time 
with  his  honest  entreaties,  he  becomes  their  sac- 
rifice. 

In  all  this  story  perhaps  the  most  instruct- 
ive passages  are  those  which  lay  bare  to  us  the 
method  of  God's  revelation.  When  we  were  chil- 
dren this  was  shown  to  us  in  pictures  of  angels 
bending  from  heaven  to  guide  Isaiah's  pen,  or  to 
cry  Jonah's  commission  to  him  through  a  trum- 
pet. And  when  we  grew  older,  although  we 
learned  to  dispense  with  that  machinery,  yet  its 
infection  remained,  and  our  conception  of  the 
whole  process  was  mechanical  still.  We  thought 
of  the  prophets  as  of  another  order  of  things; 
we  released  them  from  our  own  laws  of  life  and 
thought,  and  we  paid  the  penalty  by  losing  all  in- 
terest in  them.  But  the  prophets  were  human, 
and  their  inspiration  came  through  experience. 
The  source  of  it,  as  this  story  shows,  was  God. 
Partly  from  His  guidance  of  their  nation,  partly 
through  close  communion  with  Himself,  they  re- 
ceived new  convictions  of  His  character.  Yet 
they  did  not  receive  these  mechanically.  They 
spake  neither  at  the  bidding  of  angels,  nor  like 
heathen  prophets  in  trance  or  ecstasy,  but  as 
"  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  And  the 
Spirit  worked  upon  them  first  as  the  influence 
of  God's  character,*  and  second  through  the  ex- 
perience of  life.  God  and  life — these  are  all  the 
postulates   for   revelation. 

At  first  Jonah  fled  from  the  truth,  at  last  he 
laid  down  his  life  for  it.  So  God  still  forces  us 
to  the  acceptance  of  new  light  and  the  perform- 
ance of  strange  duties.  Men  turn  from  these, 
because  of  sloth  or  prejudice,  but  in  the  end  they 
have  to  face  them,  and  then  at  what  a  cost!  In 
youth  they  shirk  a  self-denial  to  which  in  some 
storm  of  later  life  they  have  to  bend  with  heav- 
ier, and  often  hopeless  hearts.  For  their  narrow 
prejudices  and  refusals,  God  punishes  them  by 
•  "  I  knew  how  Thou  art  a  God  gracious." 


Jonah  ii."l 


THE    GREAT    FISH    AND    WHAT    IT    MEANS. 


687 


bringing  them  into  pain  that  stings,  or  into  re- 
sponsibility for  others  that  shames,  these  out  of 
them.  The  drama  of  life  is  thus  intensified  in 
interest  and  beauty;  characters  emerge  heroic 
and  sublime. 

"  But,  oh  the  labour, 
O  prince,  the  pain  !  " 

Sometimes  the  neglected  duty  is  at  last 
achieved  only  at  the  cost  of  a  man's  breath;  and 
the  truth,  which  might  have  been  the  bride  of 
his  youth  and  his  comrade  through  a  long  life, 
is  recognised  by  him  only  in  the  features  of 
Death. 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

THE  GREAT  FISH  AND  WHAT  IT  MEANS 
—THE  PSALM. 

Jonah  ii. 

At  this  point  in  the  tale  appears  the  Great 
Fish.  "  And  Jehovah  prepared  a  great  fish  to 
swallow  Jonah,  and  Jonah  was  in  the  belly  of 
the  fish  three  days  and  three  nights." 

After  the  very  natural  story  which  we  have  fol- 
lowed, this  verse  obtrudes  itself  with  a  shock 
of  unreality  and  grotesqueness.  What  an  anti- 
climax! say  some;  what  a  clumsy  intrusion!  So 
it  is  if  Jonah  be  taken  as  an  individual.  But  if 
we  keep  in  mind  that  he  stands  here,  not  for 
himself,  but  for  his  nation,  the  difficulty  and  the 
grotesqueness  disappear.  It  is  Israel's  ill-will  to 
the  heathen,  Israel's  refusal  of  her  mission,  Is- 
rael's embarkation  on  the  stormy  sea  of  the 
world's  politics,  which  we  have  had  described  as 
Jonah's.  Upon  her  flight  from  God's  will  there 
followed  her  Exile,  and  from  her  Exile,  which 
was  for  a  set  period,  she  came  back  to  her  own 
land,  a  people  still,  and  still  God's  servant  to  the 
heathen.  How  was  the  author  to  express  this 
national  death  and  resurrection?  In  conformity 
with  the  popular  language  of  his  time,  he  had 
described  Israel's  turning  from  God's  will  by 
her  embarkation  on  a  stormy  sea,  always  the 
symbol  of  the  prophets  fqr  the  tossing  heathen 
world  that  was  ready  to  engulf  her;  and  now  to 
express  her  exile  and  return  he  sought  meta- 
phors in  the  same  rich  poetry  of  the  popular 
imagination. 

To  the  Israelite  who  watched  from  his  hills  that 
stormy  coast  on  which  the  waves  hardly  ever 
cease  to  break  in  their  impotent  restlessness, 
the  sea  was  a  symbol  of  arrogance  and  futile 
defiance  to  the  will  of  God.  The  popular  myth- 
ology of  the  Semites  had  filled  it  with  turbulent 
monsters,  snakes,  and  dragons  who  wallowed  like 
Its  own  waves,  helpless  against  the  bounds  set 
to  them,  or  rose  to  wage  war  against  the  gods 
m  heaven  and  the  great  lights  which  they  had 
created;  but  a  god  slays  them  and  casts  their 
carcases  for  meat  and  drink  to  the  thirsty  people 
of  the  desert.*  It  is  a  symbol  of  the  perpetual 
war  between  light  and  darkness;  the  dragons 
are  the  clouds,  the  slayer  the  sun.  A  variant 
form,  which  approaches  closely  to  that  of  Jo- 
nah's great  fish,  is  still  found  in  Palestine.  In 
May,  1891,  I  witnessed  at  Hasbeya,  on  the  west- 
ern skirts  of  Hermon,   an  eclipse  of  the  moon. 

♦For  the  Babylonian  myths  see  Sayce's  Hibbert 
Lectures;  George  Smith's  "  Assyrian  Discoveries";  and 
Gunkel,  "  Schopfung  u.  Chaos." 


When  the  shadow  began  to  creep  across  her 
disc  there  rose  from  the  village  a  hideous  din 
of  drums,  metal  pots,  and  planks  of  wood  beaten 
together;  guns  were  fired,  and  there  was  much 
shouting.  I  was  told  that  this  was  done  to  ter- 
rify the  great  fish  which  was  swallowing  the 
moon,  and  to  make  him  disgorge  her. 

Now  these  purely  natural  myths  were  applied 
by  the  prophets  and  poets  of  the  Old  Testament 
to  the  illustration,  not  only  of  Jehovah's  sover- 
eignty over  the  storm  and  the  night,  but  of  Hi* 
conquest  of  the  heathen  powers  who  had  en- 
slaved His  people.*  Isaiah  had  heard  in  the  sea 
the  confusion  and  rage  of  the  peoples  against 
the  bulwark  which  Jehovah  set  around  Israel;  f 
but  it  is  chiefly  from  the  time  of  the  Exile  on- 
ward that  the  myths  themselves,  with  their  cruel 
monsters  and  the  prey  of  these,  are  applied  to 
the  great  heathen  powers  and  their  captive,  Is- 
rael. One  prophet  explicitly  describes  the  Exile 
of  Israel  as  the  swallowing  of  the  nation  by  the 
monster,  the  Babylonian  tyrant,  whom  God 
forces  at  last  to  disgorge  his  prey.  Israel  says:  | 
"  Nebuchadrezzar  the  king  of  Babylon  hath  de- 
voured me§  and  crushed  me,§  ...  he  hath 
swallowed  me  up  like  the  Dragon,  filling  his 
belly,  from  my  delights  he  hath  cast  me  out." 
But  Jehovah  replies: |  "I  will  punish  Bel  in 
Babylon,  and  I  will  bring  out  of  his  mouth  that 
which  he  hath  swallowed.  .  .  .  My  people,  go 
ye  out  of  the  midst  of  her." 

It  has  been  justly  remarked  by  Canon  Cheyne 
that  this  passage  may  be  considered  as  the  inter- 
vening link  between  the  original  form  of  the 
myth  and  the  application  of  it  made  in  the  story 
of  Jonah.T[  To  this  the  objection  might  be  of- 
fered that  in  the  story  of  Jonah  the  "  great 
fish "  is  not  actually  represented  as  the  means 
of  the  prophet's  temporary  destruction,  like  the 
monster  in  Jeremiah  li.,  but  rather  as  the  vessel 
of  his  deliverance.**  This  is  true,  yet  it  only 
means  that  our  author  has  still  further  adapted 
the  very  plastic  material  offered  him  by  this 
much-transformed  myth.  But  we  do  not  de- 
pend for  our  proof  upon  the  comparison  of  a 
single  passage.  Let  the  student  of  the  Book  of 
Jonah  read  carefully  the  many  passages  of  the 
Old  Testament,  in  which  the  sea  or  its  monsters 
rage  in  vain  against  Jehovah,  or  are  harnessed 
and  led  about  by  Him;  or  still  more  those  pas- 
sages in  which  His  conquest  of  these  monsters 
is  made  to  figure  His  conquest  of  the  heathen 
powers,tt — and  the  conclusion  will  appear  irre- 
sistible that  the  story  of  the  "  great  fish  "  and 
of  Jonah  the  type  of  Israel  is  drawn  from  the 
same  source.  Such  a  solution  of  the  problem 
has  one  great  advantage.  It  relieves  us  of  the 
grotesqueness  which  attaches  to  the  literal  con- 
ception of  the  story,  and  of  the  necessity  of  those 
painful  efforts  for  accounting  for  a  miracle 
which  have  distorted  the  common-sense  and  even 
the  orthodoxy  of  so  many  commentators  of  the 
book.tt     We  are  dealing,  let  us  remember,  with 

*  Passages  in  which  this  class  of  myths  are  taken  in  a 
physical  sense  are  Job  iii.  8,  vii.  12,  xxvi.  12,  13,  etc.,  etc.; 
and  passages  in  which  it  is  applied  politically  are  Isa. 
xxvii.  I,  li.  9  ;  Jer.  li.  34,  44  ;  Psalm  Ixxiv.,  etc.  See  Gunkel, 
"  Schopfung  u.  Chaos." 

t  Chap.  xvii.  12-14. 

t  Jer.  li.  34. 

§  Heb.  margin,  LXX.  and  Syr.;  Heb.  text  "us." 

Iljer.  li.  44,  45. 

^  Cheyne,  Theol.  Rev.  XIV.     See  above,  p.  682. 

**  See  above,  p.  684,  on  the  Psalm  of  Jonah. 

+t  Above,  p.  687,  n. 

XX\\.  is  very  interesting  to  notice  how  many  commenta- 
tors (e.  g.y  Pusey,  and  the  English  edition  of  Lange)  who 
take  the  story  in  its  individual  meaning,  and  therefore 


688 


THE^BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


poetry — a  poetry  inspired  by  one  of  the  most 
sublime  truths  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  whose 
figures  are  drawn  from  the  leeends  and  myths 
of  the  people  to  whom  it  is  addressed.  To  treat 
this  as  prose  is  not  only  to  sin  against  the  com- 
mon-sense which  God  has  given  us,  but  against 
the  simple  and  obvious  intention  of  the  author. 
It  is  blindness  both  to  reason  and  to  Scripture. 

These  views  are  confirmed  by  an  examination 
of  the  Psalm  or  Prayer  which  is  put  into  Jonah's 
mouth  while  he  is  yet  in  the  fish.  We  have  al- 
ready seen  what  grounds  there  are  for  believing 
that  the  Psalm  belongs  to  the  author's  own  plan, 
and  from  the  beginning  appeared  just  where  it 
does  now.*  But  we  may  also  point  out  how, 
in  consistence  with  its  context,  this  is  a  Psalm, 
not  of  an  individual  Israelite,  but  of  the  nation 
as  a  whole.  It  is  largely  drawn  from  the  na- 
tio'nal  Hturgy.f  It  is  full  of  cries  which  we  know, 
though  they  are  expressed  in  the  singular  num- 
ber, to  have  been  used  of  the  whole  people,  or 
at  least  of  that  pious  portion  of  them,  who  were 
Israel  indeed.  True  that  in  the  original  portion 
of  the  Psalm,  and  by  far  its  most  beautiful  verses, 
we  seem  to  have  the  description  of  a  drowning 
man  swept  to  the  bottom  of  the  sea.  But  even 
here,  the  colossal  scenery  and  the  magnificent 
hyperbole  of  the  language  suit  not  the  experience 
of  an  individual,  but  the  extremities  of  that  vast 
gulf  of  exile  into  which  a  whole  nation  was 
plunged.  It  is  a  nation's  carcase  which  rolls 
upon  those  infernal  tides  that  swirl  among  the 
roots  of  mountains  and  behind  the  barred  gates 
of  earth.  Finally,  vv.  9  and  10  are  obviously  a 
contrast,  not  between  the  individual  prophet  and 
the  heathen,  but  between  the  true  Israel,  who  in 
exile  preserve  their  loyalty  to  Jehovah,  and  those 
Jews  who,  forsaking  their  "  covenant-love," 
lapse  to  idolatry.  We  find  many  parallels  to  this 
in  exilic  and  post-exilic  literature. 

"  And  Jonah  prayed  to  Jehovah  his  God  from 
the  belly  of  the  fish,  and  said: — 

"  I    cried    out   of    my    anguish   to   Jehovah,    and    He 

answered  nie  ; 
From  the  belly  of  Inferno  I  sought  help — Thou  heardest 

my  voice. 
For  Thou  hadst  X  cast  me  into  the  depth,  to  the  heart  of 

the  seas,  and  the  flood  rolled  around  me  ; 
All  Thy  breakers  and  billows  went  over  me. 
Then  I  said,  I  am  hurled  from  Thy  sight : 
How  §  shall  I  ever  again  look  towards  Thy  holy  temple? 
Waters  enwrapped   me  to  the  soul;  the   Deep  rolled 

around  me  ; 
The  tangle  was  bound  about  my  head. 
I  was  gone  down  to  the  roots  ot  the  hills  ; 
Earth  and  her  bars  were  behind  me  for  ever. 
But    Thou    broughtest    my  life  up   from  destruction, 

Jehovah  my  God  ! 
When  my  soul  fainted  upon  me,  I  remembered  Jehovah, 
And    my    prayer    came    in   unto    Thee,    to    Thy    holy 

temple. 
They  that  observe  the  idols  of  vanity, 
They  forsake  their  covenant-love. 
But  to  the  sound  of  praise  I  will  sacrifice  to  Thee  ; 
What  I  have  vowed  I  will  perform. 
Salvation  is  Jehovah's. 

"  And  Jehovah  spake  to  the  fish,  and  it  threw 
up  Jonah  on  the  dry  land." 

as  miraculous,  immediately  try  to  minimise  the  miracle 
by  quoting  stories  of  great  fishes  who  have  swallowed 
men,  and  even  men  in  armour,  whole,  and  in  one  case  at 
least  have  vomited  them  up  alive  ! 

*  See  above,  pp.  684  f. 

+  See  above,  p.  684,  nn. 

i  The  grammar,  which  usually  expresses  result,  more 
literally  runs,  "And  Thou  didst  cast  me  ;"  but  after  the 
preceding  verse  it  must  be  taken  not  as  expressing  conse- 
quence but  cause. 

§  Read  V^.  for  ^*?'  and  with  the  LXX,  take  the  sen- 
tence interrogatively. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

THE  REPENTANCE  OF  THE  CITY. 

Jonah  iii. 

Having  learned,  through  suffering,  his  moral 
kinship  with  the  heathen,  and  having  offered 
his  life  for  some  of  them,  Jonah  receives  a  sec- 
ond command  to  go  to  Nineveh.  He  obeys,  but 
with  his  prejudice  as  strong  as  though  it  had 
never  been  humbled,  nor  met  by  Gentile  noble- 
ness. The  first  part  of  his  story  appears  to  have 
no  consequences  in  the  second.*  But  this  is 
consistent  with  the  writer's  purpose  to  treat  Jo- 
nah as  if  he  were  Israel.  For,  upon  their  return 
from  Exile,  and  in  spite  of  all  their  new  knowU 
edge  of  themselves  and  the  world,  Israel  con- 
tinued to  cherish  their  old  grudge  against  the 
Gentiles. 

"  And  the  word  of  Jehovah  came  to  Jonah 
the  second  time,  saying,  Up,  go  to  Nineveh, 
the  great  city,  and  call  unto  her  with  the  call 
which  I  shall  tell  thee.  And  Jonah  arose  and 
went  to  Nineveh,  as  Jehovah  said.  Now  Nineveh 
was  a  city  great  before  God,  three  days'  jour- 
ney "  through  and  through. f  "  And  Jonah  be- 
gan by  going  through  the  city  one  day's  jour- 
ney, and  he  cried  and  said.  Forty  %  days  more 
and  Nineveh  shall  be  overturned." 

Opposite  to  Mosul,  the  well-known  emporium 
of  trade  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Upper  Tigris, 
two  high  artificial  mounds  now  lift  themselves 
from  the  otherwise  level  plain.  The  more  north- 
erly takes  the  name  of  Kujundschik,  or  "  little 
lamb,"  after  the  Turkish  village  which  couches 
pleasantly  upon  its  northeastern  slope.  The 
other  is  called  in  the  popular  dialect  Nebi  Yu- 
nus,  "  Prophet  Jonah,"  after  a  mosque  dedicated 
to  him,  which  used  to  be  a  Christian  church; 
but  the  official  name  is  Nineveh.  These  two 
mounds  are  bound  to  each  other  on  the  west  by 
a  broad  brick  wall,  which  extends  beyond  them 
both,  and  is  connected  north  and  south  by  other 
walls,  with  a  circumference  in  all  of  about  nine 
English  miles.  The  interval,  including  the 
mounds,  was  covered  with  buildings,  whose  ruins 
still  enable  us  to  forrri  some  idea  of  what  was 
for  centuries  the  wonder  of  the  world.  Upon 
terraces  and  substructions  of  enormous  breadth 
rose  storied  palaces,  arsenals,  barracks,  libraries, 
and  temples.  A  lavish  water  system  spread  in  all 
directions  from  canals  with  massive  embank- 
ments and  sluices.  Gardens  were  lifted  into  mid- 
air, filled  with  rich  plants  and  rare  and  beautiful 
animals.  Alabaster,  silver,  gold,  and  precious 
stones  relieved  the  dull  masses  of  brick  and 
flashed  sunlight  from  every  frieze  and  battle- 
ment. The  surrounding  walls  were  so  broad 
that  chariots  could  roll  abreast  on  them.  The 
gates,  and  especially  the  river  gates,  were  very 
massive. § 

All  this  was  Nineveh  proper,  whose  glory  the 
Hebrews  envied  and  over  whose  fall  more  than 

*  Only  in  iii.  i,  "  second  time,"  and  in  iv.  2  are  there  any 
references  from  the  second  to  the  first  part  of  the  book. 

+  The  diameter  rather  than  the  circumference  seems 
intended  by  the  writer,  if  we  can  judge  by  his  sending 
the  prophet  "  one  day's  journey  through  the  city."  Some, 
however,  take  the  circumference  as  meant,  and  this 
agrees  with  the  computation  of  sixty  English  miles  as  the 
girth  of  the  greater  Nineveh  described  below. 

tLXX.  Codd.  B,  etc.,  read  "three  days";  other  Codd. 
have  the  "  forty  "  of  the  Heb.  text. 

§  For  a  more  detailed  description  of  Nineveh  see  aboi". 
on  the  Book  of  Nahum,  op.  e.8j  flE. 


Jonah  iii.J 


THE    REPENTANCE    OF    THE    CITY. 


689 


one  of  their  prophets  exult.  But  this  was  not 
the  Nineveh  to  which  our  author  saw  Jonah 
come.  Beyond  the  walls  were  great  suburbs,* 
and  beyond  the  suburbs  other  towns,  league  upon 
league  of  dwellings,  so  closely  set  upon  the  plain 
as  to  form  one  vast  complex  of  population,  which 
is  known  to  Scripture  as  "  The  Great  City."  f 
To  judge  from  the  ruins  which  still  cover  the 
ground,:}:  the  circumference  must  have  been 
about  sixty  miles,  or  three  days'  journey.  It  is 
these  nameless  leagues  of  common  dwellings 
which  roll  before  us  in  the  story.  None  of  those 
glories  of  Nineveh  are  mentioned  of  which  other 
prophets  speak,  but  the  only  proofs  offered  to 
us  of  the  city's  greatness  are  its  extent  and  its 
population. §  Jonah  is  sent  to  three  days,  not 
of  mighty  buildings,  but  of  homes  and  families, 
to  the  Nineveh,  not  of  kings  and  their  glories, 
but  of  men,  women,  and  children,  "  besides  much 
cattle."  The  palaces  and  temples  he  may  pass 
in  an  hour  or  two,  but  from  sunrise  to  sunset 
he  treads  the  dim  drab  mazes  where  the  people 
dwell. 

When  we  open  our  hearts  for  heroic  witness 
to  the  truth  there  rush  upon  them  glowing  mem- 
ories of  Moses  before  Pharaoh,  of  Elijah  before 
A'hab,  of  Stephen  before  the  Sanhedrim,  of  Paul 
upon  Areopagus,  of  Galileo  before  the  Inquisi- 
tion, of  Luther  at  the  Diet.  But  it  takes  a 
greater  heroism  to  face  the  people  than  a  king, 
to  convert  a  nation  than  to  persuade  a  senate. 
Princes  and  assemblies  of  the  wise  stimulate  the 
imagination;  they  drive  to  bay  all  the  nobler 
passions  of  a  solitary  man.  But  there  is  noth- 
ing to  help  the  heart,  and  therefore  its  courage 
is  all  the  greater,  which  bears  witness  before 
those  endless  masses,  in  monotone  of  life  and 
colour,  that  now  paralyse  the  imagination  like 
long  stretches  of  sand  when  the  sea  is  out,  and 
again  terrify  it  like  the  resistless  rush  of  the 
flood  beneath  a  hopeless  evening  sky. 

It  is,  then,  with  an  art  most  fitted  to  his  high 
purpose  that  our  author — unlike  all  other 
prophets,  whose  aim  was  different — presents  to 
us,  not  the  description  of  a  great  military  power: 
king,  nobles,  and  armed  battalions:  but  the 
vision  of  those  monotonous  millions.  He  strips 
his  country's  foes  of  everything  foreign,  every- 
thing provocative  of  envy  and  hatred,  and  un- 
folds them  to  Israel  only  in  their  teeming  hu- 
manity. II  I 

His  next  step  is  still  more  grand.  For  this 
teeming  humanity  he  claims  the  universal  human 
possibility  of  repentance — that  and  nothing  more. 

Under  every  form  and  character  of  human  life, 
beneath  all  needs  and  all  habits,  deeper  than 
despair  and  more  native  to  man  than  sin  itself, 
lies  the  power  of  the  heart  to  turn.  It  was  this 
and  not  hope  that  remained  at  the  bottom  of 
Pandora's  Box  when  every  other  gift  had  fled. 
For  this  is  the  indispensable  secret  of  hope.  It 
lies  in  every  heart,  needing  indeed  some  dream 
of  Divine  mercy,  however  far  and  vague,  to 
rouse  it;  but  when  roused,  neither  ignorance  of 
God,  nor  pride,  nor  long  obduracy  of  evil  may 
withstand  it.  It  takes  command  of  the  whole 
rature  of  a  man,  and  speeds  from  heart  to  heart 

*T'ynnn"i,Gen.  X.  n. 

+  Gen.  X.  12,  according- to  which  the  Great  City  included, 
tesides  Nineveh,  at  least  Resen  and  Kelach. 

t  And  taking  the  present  Kujundschik,  Nimrud,  Khor- 
sibad,  and  Balawat  as  the  four  corners  of  the  district. 

§  iii.  2,  iv.  II. 

il  Compare  the  Book  of  Jonah,  for  instance,  with  the 
look  of  Nahum. 

44— Vol.  IV. 


with  a  violence,  that  like  pain  and  death  spares 
neither  age  nor  rank  nor  degree  of  culture.  This 
primal  human  right  is  all  our  author  claims  for 
the  men  of  Nineveh.  He  has  been  blamed  for 
telling  us  an  impossible  thing,  that  a  whole  city 
should  be  converted  at  the  call  of  a  single 
stranger;  and  others  have  started  up  in  his  de- 
fence and  quoted  cases  in  which  large  Oriental 
populations  have  actually  been  stirred  by  the 
preaching  of  an  alien  in  race  and  religion;  and 
then  it  has  been  replied,  "  Granted  the  possi- 
bility, granted  the  fact  in  other  cases,  yet  where 
in  history  have  we  any  trace  of  this  alleged  con- 
version of  all  Nineveh?"  and  some  scoflf,  "  How 
could  a  Hebrew  have  made  himself  articulate  in 
one  day  to  those  Assyrian  multitudes?  " 

How  long,  O  Lord,  must  Thy  poetry  suffer 
from  those  who  can  only  treat  it  as  prose?  On 
whatever  side  they  stand,  sceptical  or  orthodox, 
they  are  equally  pedants,  quenchers  of  the  spirit- 
ual, creators  of  unbelief. 

Our  author,  let  us  once  for  all  understand, 
makes  no  attempt  to  record  an  historical  con- 
version of  this  vast  heathen  city.  For  its  men 
he  claims  only  the  primary  human  possibility  of 
repentance;  expressing  himself  not  in  this  gen- 
eral abstract  way,  but  as  Orientals,  to  whom  an 
illustration  is  ever  a  proof,  love  to  have  it  done 
— by  story  or  parable.  With  magnificent  re- 
serve he  has  not  gone  further;  but  only  told  into 
the  prejudiced  faces  of  his  people,  that  out  there, 
beyond  the  Covenant,  in  the  great  world  lying 
in  darkness,  there  live,  not  beings  created  for 
ignorance  and  hostility  to  God,  elect  for  de- 
struction, but  men  with  consciences  and  hearts, 
able  to  turn  at  His  Word  and  to  hope  in  His 
Mercy — that  to  the  farthest  ends  of  the  world, 
and  even  on  the  high  places  of  unrighteousness, 
Word  and  Mercy  work  just  as  they  do  within  the 
Covenant. 

The  fashion  in  which  the  repentance  of  Nine- 
veh is  described  is  natural  to  the  time  of  the 
writer.  It  is  a  national  repentance,  of  course, 
and  though  swelling  upwards  from  the  people, 
it  is  confirmed  and  organised  by  the  authorities: 
for  we  are  still  in  the  Old  Dispensation,  when 
the  picture  of  a  complete  and  thorough  repent- 
ance could  hardly  be  otherwise  conceived.  And 
the  beasts  are  made  to  share  its  observance,  as  in 
the  Orient  they  always  shared  and  still  share 
in  funeral  pomp  and  trappings.*  It  may  have 
been,  in  addition,  a  personal  pleasure  to  our 
writer  to  record  the  part  of  the  animals  in  the 
movement.  See  how,  later  on,  he  tells  us  that 
for  their  sake  also  God  had  pity  upon  Nineveh. 

"  And  the  men  of  Nineveh  believed  upon  God, 
and  cried  a  fast,  and  from  the  greatest  of  them 
to  the  least  of  them  they  put  on  sackcloth.  And 
word  came  to  the  king  of  Nineveh,  and  he  rose 
off  his  throne,  and  cast  his  mantle  from  upon 
him,  and  dressed  in  sackcloth  and  sat  in  the 
dust.     And  he  sent  criers  to  say  in  Nineveh: — 

"  By  Order  of  the  King  and  his  Nobles,  thus: 
— Man  and  Beast,  Oxen  and  Sheep,  shall  not 
taste  anything,  neither  eat  nor  drink  water.  But 
let  them  clothe  themselves  f  in  sackcloth,  both 
man  and  beast,  and  call  upon  God  with  power, 
and  turn  every  man  from  his  evil  way  and  from 
every  wrong  which  they  have  in  hand.  Who 
knoweth  but   that   God   may  t   relent   and   turn 

*C/.  Herod.  IX.  24;  Joel  i.  18;  Virgil,  "Eclogue"  V., 
"  ^neid  "  XI.  80  ff.;  Plutarch,  "  Alex."  72. 

tLXX.:  "and  they  did  clothe  themselves  in  sackcloth," 
and  so  on. 

i  So  LXX.    Heb.  text :  "  may  turn  and  relent,  and  turn." 


690 


THE    BOOK    OF    THE    TWELVE    PROPHETS. 


from  the  fierceness  of  His  wrath,  that  we  perish 
not?* 

"  And  God  saw  their  doings,  how  they  turned 
from  their  evil  way;  and  God  relented  of  the 
evil  which  He  said  He  would  do  to  them,  and 
did  it  not." 


CHAPTER  XXXVni. 

ISRAEL'S  JEALOUSY  OF  JEHOVAH. 

Jonah  iv. 

Having  illustrated  the  truth,  that  the  Gentiles 
are  capable  of  repentance  unto  life,  the  Book 
now  describes  the  effect  of  their  escape  upon 
Jonah,  and  closes  by  revealing  God's  full  heart 
upon  the  matter. 

Jonah  is  very  angry  that  Nineveh  has  been 
spared.  Is  this  (as  some  say)  because  his  own 
word  has  not  been  fulfilled?  In  Israel  there  was 
an  accepted  rule  that  a  prophet  should  be  judged 
by  the  issue  of  his  predictions:  "  If  thou  say  in 
thine  heart,  How  shall  we  know  the  word  which 
Jehovah  hath  not  spoken? — when  a  prophet 
speaketh  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  if  the  thing 
follow  not  nor  come  to  pass,  that  is  the  thing 
which  Jehovah  hath  not  spoken,  but  the  prophet 
hath  spoken  presumptuously,  thou  shalt  have  no 
reverence  for  him."  f  Was  it  this  that  stung 
Jonah?  Did  he  ask  for  death  because  men  would 
say  of  him  that  when  he  predicted  Nineveh's 
overthrow  he  was  false  and  had  not  God's  word? 
Of  such  fears  there  is  no  trace  in  the  story. 
Jonah  never  doubts  that  his  word  came  from 
Jehovah,  nor  dreads  that  other  men  will  doubt. 
There  is  absolutely  no  hint  of  anxiety  as  to  his 
professional  reputation.  But,  on  the  contrary, 
Jonah  says  that  from  the  first  he  had  the  fore- 
boding, grounded  upon  his  knowledge  of  God's 
character,  that  Nineveh  would  be  spared,  and 
that  it  was  from  this  issue  he  shrank  and  fled 
to  go  to  Tarshish.  In  short  he  could  not,  either 
then  or  now,  master  his  conviction  that  the 
heathen  should  be  destroyed.  His  grief,  though 
foolish,  is  not  selfish.  He  is  angry,  not  at  the 
baffling  of  his  word,  but  at  God's  forbearance 
with  the  foes  and  tyrants  of  Israel. 

Now,  as  in  all  else,  so  in  this,  Jonah  is  the 
type  of  his  people.  If  we  can  judge  from  their 
literature  after  the  Exile,  they  were  not  troubled 
by  the  non-fulfilment  of  prophecy,  except  as  one 
item  of  what  was  the  problem  of  their  faith— 
the  continued  prosperity  of  the  Gentiles.  And 
this  was  not,  what  it  appears  to  be  in  some 
Psalms,  only  an  intellectual  problem  or  an  of- 
fence to  their  sense  of  justice.  Nor  could  they 
meet  it  always,  as  some  of  their  prophets  did, 
with  a  supreme  intellectual  scorn  of  the  heathen, 
and  in  the  proud  confidence  that  they  them- 
selves   were    the    favourites    of    God.     For    the 

♦The  alleged  discrepancies  in  this  account  have 
been  already  noticed.  As  the  text  stands  the  fast  and 
mourning  are  proclaimed  and  actually  begun  before  word 
reaches  the  king  and  his  proclamation  of  fast  and  mourn- 
ing goes  forth.  The  discrepancies  might  be  removed  by 
transferring  the  words  in  ver.  6,  "and  they  cried  a  fast, 
and  from  the  greatest  of  them  to  the  least  they  clothed 
themselves  in   sackcloth,"  to  the  end  of  ver.  8,  with  a 


-10X^5 


'  or  ^"10X^1  to  introduce  ver.  9.  But,  as  said  above 
(pp.  681,  684,  «.),  it  is  more  probable  that  the  text  as  it 
Btands  was  original,  and  that  the  inconsistencies  in  the 
order  of  the  narrative  are  due  to  its  being  a  tale  or 
parable. 
tDeut.  xviii.  21,  22. 


knowledge  that  God  was  infinitely  gracious 
haunted  their  pride;  and  from  the  very  heart  o\ 
their  faith  arose  a  jealous  fear  that  He  would 
show  His  grace  to  others  than  themselves.  To 
us  it  may  be  difficult  to  understand  this  temper. 
We  have  not  been  trained  to  believe  ourselves 
an  elect  people;  nor  have  we  suffered  at  the 
hands  of  the  heathen.  Yet,  at  least,  we  have 
contemporaries  and  fellow-Christians  among 
whom  we  may  find  still  alive  many  of  the  feel- 
ings against  which  the  Book  of  Jonah  was 
written.  Take  the  Oriental  Churches  of  to-day. 
Centuries  of  oppression  have  created  in  them  an 
awful  hatred  of  the  infidel,  beneath  whose  power 
they  are  hardly  suffered  to  live.  The  barest  jus- 
tice calls  for  the  overthrow  of  their  oppressors. 
That  these  share  a  common  humanity  with  them- 
selves is  a  sense  they  have  nearly  lost.  For  cen- 
turies they  have  had  no  spiritual  intercourse  with 
them;  to  try  to  convert  a  Mohammedan  has 
been  for  fwelve  hundred  years  a  capital  crime. 
It  is  not  wonderful  that  Eastern  Christians 
should  have  long  lost  power  to  believe  in  the 
conversion  of  infidels,  and  to  feel  that  anything 
is  due  but  their  destruction.  The  present  writer 
once  asked  a  cultured  and  devout  layman  of  the 
Greek  Church,  Why  then  did  God  create  so 
many  Mohammedans?  The  answer  came  hot 
and  fast:  To  fill  up  Hell!  Analogous  to  this 
were  the  feelings  of  the  Jews  towards  the  peo- 
ples who  had  conquered  and  oppressed  them. 
But  the  jealousy  already  alluded  to  aggravated 
these  feelings  to  a  rigour  no  Christian  can  ever 
share.  What  right  had  God  to  extend  to  their 
oppressors  His  love  for  a  people  who  alone  had 
witnessed  and  suffered  for  Him,  to  whom  He  had 
bound  Himself  by  so  many  exclusive  promises, 
whom  He  had  called  His  Bride,  His  Darling, 
His  Only  One?  And  yet  the  more  Israel  dwelt 
upon  that  Love  the  more  they  were  afraid  of  it. 
God  had  been  so  gracious  and  so  long-suffering 
to  themselves  that  they  could  not  trust  Him  not 
to  show  these  mercies  to  others.  In  which  case, 
what  was  the  use  of  their  uniqueness  and  privi- 
lege? What  worth  was  their  living  any  more? 
Israel  might  as  well  perish. 

It  is  this  subtle  story  of  Israel's  jealousy  of 
Jehovah,  and  Jehovah's  gentle  treatment  of  it, 
which  we  follow  in  the  last  chapter  of  the  book. 
The  chapter  starts  from  Jonah's  confession  of  a 
fear  of  the  results  of  God's  lovingkindness  and 
from  his  persuasion  that,  as  this  spread  of  the 
heathen,  the  life  of  His  servant  spent  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  heathen  was  a  worthless  life;  and 
the  chapter  closes  with  God's  own  vindication 
of  His  Love  to  His  jealous  prophet. 

"  It  was  a  great  grief  to  Jonah,  and  he  was  an- 
gered; and  he  prayed  to  Jehovah  and  said:  Ah 
now,  Jehovah,  while  I  was  still  upon  mine  own 
ground,  at  the  time  that  I  prepared  to  flee  to 
Tarshish,  was  not  this  my  word,  that  I  knew 
Thee  to  be  a  God  gracious  and  tender,  long- 
suffering  and  plenteous  in  love,  relenting  of  evil? 
And  now,  Jehovah,  take,  I  pray  Thee,  my  life 
from  me,  for  for  me  death  is  better  than  life." 

In  this  impatience  of  life  as  well  as  in  some 
subsequent  traits,  the  story  of  Jonah  reflects  that 
of  Elijah.  But  the  difference  between  the  two 
prophets  was  this,  that  while  Elijah  was  very 
jealous  for  Jehovah,  Jonah  was  very  jealous  of 
Him.  Jonah  could  not  bear  to  see  the  love 
promised  to  Israel  alone,  and  cherished  by  her, 
bestowed  equally  upon  her  heathen  oppressors. 
And  he  behaved  after  the  manner  of  jealousy  and 


I 


Jonah  iv.] 


ISRAEL'S    JEALOUSY    OF   JEHOVAH. 


691 


of  the  heart  that  thinks  itself  insulted.  He  with- 
drew, and  sulked  in  solitude,  and  would  take  no 
responsibility  nor  further  interest  in  his  work. 
Such  men  are  best  treated  by  a  caustic  gentle- 
ness, a  little  humour,  a  little  rallying,  a  leaving 
to  nature,  and  a  taking  unawares  in  their  own 
confessed  prejudices.  All  these — I  dare  to 
think  even  the  humour — are  present  in  God's 
treatment  of  Jonah.  This  is  very  natural  and 
very  beautiful.  Twice  the  Divine  Voice  speaks 
with  a  soft  sarcasm:  "Art  thou  very  angry?"* 
Then  Jonah's  affections,  turned  from  man  to 
God,  are  allowed  their  course  with  a  bit  of  nature, 
the  fresh  and  green  companion  of  his  solitude; 
and  then  when  all  his  pity  for  this  has  been 
roused  by  its  destruction,  that  very  pity  is  em- 
ployed to  awaken  his  sympathy  with  God's  com- 
passion for  the  great  city,  and  he  is  shown  how 
he  has  denied  to  God  the  same  natural  affection 
which  he  confesses  to  be  so  strong  in  himself. 
But  why  try  further  to  expound  so  clear  and 
obvious  an  argument? 

3ut  Jehovah  said.  Art  thou  so  very  angry?" 
Jonah  would  not  answer — how  lifelike  is  his 
silence  at  this  point! — "  but  went  out  from  the 
city  and  sat  down  before  it,t  and  made  him  there 
a  booth  and  dwelt  beneath  it  in  the  shade,  till  he 
should  see  what  happened  in  the  city.  And  Je- 
hovah God  prepared  a  gourd,|  and  it  grew  up 
above  Jonah  to  be  a  shadow  over  his  head. 
.    .    .§    And  Jonah  rejoiced  in  the  gourd  with 

♦The  Hebrew  maybe  translated  either,  first  "  Doest 
thou  well  lo  be  angry?"  or  second,  "Art  thou  very 
angry  ?  "  Our  versions  both  prefer  the^rst,  though  they 
put  the  second  in  the  margin.  LXX.  take  the  second. 
That  the  second  is  the  right  one  is  not  only  proved  by 
its  greater  suitableness,  but  by  Jonah's  answer  to  the 
question,  "  I  am  very  angry,  ^iifa,  even  unto  death." 

tHeb.  "the  city." 

P  1^  R'  the    Egyptian    kiki,    the    Ricinus    or    Palma 

Christi.    See  above,  p.  680,  n. 
S  Heb.  adds'*  to  save  him  from  bis  evil,"  perhaps  a  gloss. 


a  great  joy.  But  as  dawn  came  up  the  next  day 
God  prepared  a  worm,  and  this  *  wounded  the 
gourd,  that  it  perished.  And  it  came  to  pass, 
when  the  sun  rose,  that  God  prepared  a  dry 
east-wind, t  and  the  sun  smote  on  Jonah's  head, 
so  that  he  was  faint,  and  begged  for  himself  that 
he  might  die, J  saying.  Better  my  dying  than  my 
living!  And  God  said  unto  Jonah,  Art  thou  so 
very  angry  about  the  gourd?  And  he  said,  I  am 
very  angry — even  unto  death!  And  Jehovah 
said:  Thou  carest  for  a  gourd  for  which  thou 
hast  not  travailed,  nor  hast  thou  brought  it  up, 
a  thing  that  came  in  a  night  and  in  a  night  has 
perished. §  And  shall  I  not  care  for  Nineveh, 
the  Great  City,||  in  which  there  are  more  than 
twelve  times  ten  thousand  human  beings  who 
know  not  their  right  hand  from  their  left,  besides 
much  cattle?  " 

God  had  vindicated  His  love  to  the  jealousy 
of  those  who  thought  that  it  was  theirs  alone. 
And  we  are  left  with  this  grand  vague  vision 
of  the  immeasurable  city,  with  its  multitude  of 
innocent  children  and  cattle,  and  God's  com- 
passion brooding  over  all. 

*Heb.  "it." 

^  T  ID'      The   Targum    implies    a    "  quiet,"   /.  e., 

"sweltering,  east  wind."  Hitzig  thinks  that  the  name  is 
derived  from  the  season  of  ploughing,  and  some  mod- 
ern proverbs  appear  to  bear  this  out:  "an  autumn  east 
wind."  LXX.  ovyKaiiav.  Siegfried-Stade :  "a  cutting 
east  wind,"  as  if  from  t^fl.-     Steiner  emends  to  n^D^TH. 

as  if  from  ^7-v  —  "the  piercing,"  a  poetic  name  of  the 
sun  ;  and  Bohme,  "  Z.  A.  T.  W.,"  VI.  256,  to  n'T"in,  from 
*1*in,  "  to  glow."  Kohler  {Theol.  Rev.,  XVI.,  p.  143)  com- 
pares '^'J'    "dried  clay." 

X  Heb. :  "begged  his  life,  that  he  might  die." 
§  Heb.:  "  which  was  the  son  of  a  night,  and  son  of  a  night 
has  perished." 
I  Gen.  X.  12. 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  ST.  MATTHEW 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  I.  Chapter  XII. 

PAGE  PAGE 

The  Coming  of  the  Christ,  .        .       .        .697      The  Crisis  in  GalNee, 743 

Chapter  II.                                                                     Chapter  XIII.    * 
His   Reception 700      The  New  Departure, 751 

Chapter  III. 

Chapter  XIV. 

His   Herald, 702      ,         „,     , 

Last  Words  at  Capernaum,  ....    759 

Chapter  IV. 

^^.     „  Chapter  XV. 

His  Baptism, 704 

Last  Days  in  Peraea,     .        .        ,        .        ,    764 

Chapter  V. 

His  Temptation, 706  Chapter  XVL 

To  Jerusalem,         ...,,.    768 
Chapter  VI. 

Beginning  of  His  Galilean  Ministry,  .        .    708  Chapter  XVII. 

Conflict  in  the  Temple, 773 

Chapter  VII.  ^  "^ 

The  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom,      .        .        .710  Chapter  XVIII. 

Chapter  VIII.  The  Prophecy  on  the  Mount,      ...    782 

The  Signs  of  the  Kingdom,  ....    723  Chapter  XIX. 

Chapter  IX.  The  Great  Atonement  Day,  .        .        .        .791 

The  King's  Ambassadors,     ....     TVi 

'"*  Chapter  XX. 

Chapter  X.  The  Third  Day, 805 

The  Shadow  of  the  Cross,  ....    732 

Chapter  XXI. 
Chapter  XI. 

The   Gospel  for  All  the   Nations  through 
The  Parables  of  the  Kingdom,  .        .        .    740  "  All  the  Days," 807 


695 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


BY  THE  REV.   JOHN   MONRO  GIBSON,  M,  A.,  D.  D. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  COMING  OF   THE  CHRIST. 

Matthew  i. 

The  New  Testament  opens  appropriately  with 
the  four  Gospels;  for,  though  in  their  present 
form  they  are  all  later  in  date  than  some  of 
the  Epistles,  their  substance  was  the  basis  of  all 
apostolic  preaching  and  writing.  As  the  Pen- 
tateuch to  the  Old  Testament,  so  is  the  fourfold 
Evangel  to  the   New. 

That  there  should  be  a  manifold  presentation 
of  the  great  facts  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of 
our  faith  and  hope,  was  both  to  be  expected 
and  desired.  The  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  pro- 
claimed by  the  first  preachers  of  it,  while  in 
substance  always  the  same,  would  be  varied  in 
form,  and  in  number  and  in  variety  of  details, 
according  to  the  individuality  of  the  speaker,  the 
kind  of  audience  before  him,  and  the  special  ob- 
ject he  might  have  in  view  at  the  time.  Before 
any  form  of  presentation  had  been  crystallised, 
there  would  therefore  be  an  indefinite  number  of 
Gospels,  each  "  according  to  "  the  individual 
preacher  of  "  Christ  and  Him  crucified."  It  is, 
therefore  a  marvellous  proof  of  the  guidance 
and  control  of  the  Divine  Spirit  that  out  of  these 
numerous  oral  Gospels  there  should  emerge  four, 
each  perfect  in  itself,  and  together  affording,  as 
with  the  all-round  completeness  of  sculpture, 
a  life-like  representation  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  It  is  manifestly  of  great  advantage  to 
have  these  several  portraits  of  our  Lord,  per- 
mitting us  to  see  Him  from  different  points  of 
view,  and  with  varying  arrangements  of  light 
and  shade;  all  the  more  that,  while  three  of  them 
set  forth  in  abundant  variety  of  detail  that  which 
is  more  external, — the  face,  the  features,  the 
form,  all  the  expression  of  that  wondrous 
Life, — the  fourth,  appropriately  called  on  that 
account  "  the  Gospel  of  the  heart  of  Jesus,"  un- 
veils more  especially  the  hidden  riches  of  His 
inner  Life.  But,  besides  this,  a  manifold  Gos- 
pel was  needed,  in  order  to  meet  the  wants  of 
man  in  the  many-sidedness  of  his  development. 
As  the  heavenly  "  city  lieth  four  square,"  with 
gates  on  the  east,  and  the  west,  and  the  north, 
and  the  south,  to  admit  strangers  coming  from 
all  points  of  the  compass;  so  must  there  be  in 
the  presentation  of  the  Gospel  an  open  door  for 
all  mankind.  How  this  great  purpose  is  at- 
tained by  the  fourfold  Gospel  with  which  the 
New  Testament  opens  can  be  readily  shown; 
and  even  a  brief  statement  of  it  may  serve  a  use- 
ful purpose  as  introductory  to  our  study  of  that 
which  is  known  as  the  First  Gospel. 

The  inscription  over  the  cross  was  in  three 
languages:  Hebrew,  Latin,  and  Greek.  These 
languages  represented  the  three  great  civilisa- 
tions which  were  the  final  outcome  of  ancient 
history— the  Jewish,  the  Roman,  the  Greek. 
These  three  were  not  like  so  many  nations 
selected  at  random,  but  stood  for  three  leading 
types  of  humanity.  The  Jew  was  the  man  of  the 
past.     He  could  claim  Moses  and  the  prophets; 


he  had  Abraham  for  his  father;  his  records 
went  back  to  the  Genesis  of  all  things.  He 
represented  ancient  prerogative  and  privilege, 
the  conservatism  of  the  East.  The  Roman  was 
the  man  of  the  present.  He  was  master  of  the 
world.  He  represented  power,  prowess,  and 
victory;  and  while  serving  himself  heir  to  the 
culture  which  came  from  the  shores  of  the 
jCgean  Sea,  he  had  combined  with  it  the  rude 
strength  and  restless  activity  of  the  barbarian 
and  Scythian  of  the  North.  The  Greek  was  the 
man  of  the  future.  He  had  lost  his  political 
empire,  but  still  retained  an  empire  in  the 
world  of  thought.  He  represented  humanity, 
and  the  ideal,  and  all  the  promise  which  was 
afterwards  to  be  realised  in  the  culture  of  the 
nations  of  the  West.  The  Jew  was  the  man  of 
tradition,  the  Roman  the  man  of  energy,  the 
Greek  the  man  of  thought.  Turning  now  to  the 
Gospels,  we  find  the  wants  of  each  of  these 
three  types  provided  for  in  a  wondrous  way.  St. 
Matthew  addresses  himself  especially  to  the  Jew 
with  his  Gospel  of  fulfilment,  St.  Mark  to  the 
Roman  with  "  his  brief  and  terse  narrative  of  a 
three  years'  campaign,"  St.  Luke  to  the  Greek 
with  that  all-pervading  spirit  of  humanity  and 
catholicity  which  is  so  characteristic  of  his 
Evangel;  while  for  those  who  have  been  gathered 
from  among  the  Jews  and  Romans  and  Greeks — 
a  people  who  are  now  no  longer  Jews  or  Greeks, 
but  are  "  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus,"  prepared  to 
receive  and  appreciate  the  deeper  things  of 
Christ — there  is  a  fourth  Gospel,  issued  at  a  later 
date,  with  characteristics  specially  adapted  to 
them  :  the  mature  work  of  the  then  venerable 
John,  the  apostle  of  the  Christian. 

It  is  manifest  that  for  every  reason  the  Gos- 
pel of  St.  Matthew  should  occupy  the  foremost 
place.  "  To  the  Jew  first  "  is  the  natural  order, 
whether  we  consider  the  'claims  of  "  the  fathers," 
or  the  necessity  of  making  it  clear  that  the  new 
covenant  was  closely  linked  to  the  old.  '  Salva- 
tion is  of  the  Jews;  "  the  Christ  of  God,  though 
the  Saviour  of  the  world,  had  been  in  a  very 
special  sense  "  the  Hope  of  Israel,"  and  there- 
fore it  is  appropriate  that  He  should  be  repre- 
sented first  from  the  standpoint  of  that  nation. 
We  have,  accordingly,  in  this  Gospel,  a  faithful 
setting  forth  of  Christ  as  He  presented  Himself 
to  the  mind  and  heart  of  a  devout  Jew,  "  an  Is- 
raelite indeed,  in  whom  was  no  guile,"  rejoicing 
to  find  in  Him  One  who  fulfilled  ancient  proph- 
ecy and  promise,  realised  the  true  ideal  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  and  substantiated  His  claim  to 
be  Himself  the  divine  Saviour-King  for  whom 
the  nation  and  the  world  had  waited  long. 

The  opening  words  of  this  Gospel  suggest  that 
we  are  at  the  genesis  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
genesis  not  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  but  of 
Him  who  was  to  make  for  us  "  new  heavens  and 
a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness." 
The  Old  Testament  opens  with  the  thought, 
"  Behold  I  make  all  things;"  the  New  Testament 
with  that  which  amounts  to  the  promise,  "  Be- 
hold I  make  all  things  new."  It  begins  with  the 
advent    of    "  the    Second    Man,    the    Lord    from 


697 


698 


THE    GOSPEL    OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


Heaven."  That  He  was  indeed  a  "  Second 
Man,"  and  not  merely  one  of  the  many  that  have 
sprung  from  the  first  man,  will  presently  appear; 
but  first  it  must  be  made  clear  that  He  is  man 
indeed,  "bone  of  our  bone,  flesh  of  our  flesh;" 
and  therefore  the  inspired  historian  begins  with 
His  historic  genealogy.  True  to  his  object, 
however,  he  does  not  trace  back  our  Lord's 
descent,  as  does  St.  Luke,  to  the  first  man,  but 
contents  himself  with  that  which  is  especially  in- 
teresting to  the  Jew,  setting  Him  forth  as  "  the 
son  of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham."  There  is 
another  difference  between  the  genealogies,  of  a 
more  serious  kind,  which  has  been  the  occasion 
of  much  difficulty;  but  which  also  seems  to  find 
readiest  explanation  in  the  different  object  each 
Evangelist  had  in  view.  St.  Luke,  writing  for 
the  Gentile,  is  careful  to  give  the  natural  de- 
scent, while  St.  Matthew,  writing  for  the  Jew, 
sets  forth  that  line  of  descent — diverging  from 
the  other  after  the  time  of  David — which  made  it 
clear  to  the  Jew  that  He  was  the  rightful  heir  to 
the  kingdom.  The  object  of  the  one  is  to  set 
Him  forth  as  the  Son  of  Man;  of  the  other  to 
proclaim  Him  King  of  Israel. 

St.  Matthew  gives  the  genealogy  in  three 
great  epochs  or  stages,  which,  veiled  in  the  Au- 
thorised Version  by  the  verse  division,  are 
clearly  exhibited  to  the  eye  in  the  paragraphs 
of  the  Revised  Version,  and  which  are  summed 
up  and  made  emphatic  at  the  close  of  the  genea- 
logical tree  (ver.  17).  The  first  is  from  Abra- 
ham to  David;  the  second  from  David  to  the 
captivity  in  Babylon;  the  third  from  the  captiv- 
ity to  Christ.  If  we  glance  at  these,  we  shall 
find  that  they  represent  three  great  stages  in  the 
development  of  the  Old  Testament  promises 
which  find  their  fulfilment  in  the  Messiah. 

"  To  Abraham  and  to  his  seed  were  the  prom- 
ises made."  As  given  to  Abraham  himself,  the 
promise  ran  thus:  "  In  thy  seed  shall  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  As  made  to 
David,  it  indicated  that  the  blessing  to  the 
nations  should  come  through  a  king  of  his  line. 
These  were  the  two  great  promises  to  Israel. 
There  were  many  others;  but  these  stand  out 
from  the  rest  as  constituting  the  mission  and  the 
hope  of  Israel.  Now,  after  long  waiting,  both 
are  to  be  fulfilled  in  Christ.  He  is  the  chosen 
Seed  in  Whom  all  nations  shall  be  blessed.  He 
is  the  Son  of  David,  who  is  to  sit  upon  His 
throne  for  ever,  and  reign,  not  over  Israel  alone, 
but  over  men,  as  "  Prince  of  Peace  "  and  "  King 
of  Glory."  But  what  has  the  captivity  in  Baby- 
lon to  do  with  it?  Very  much;  as  a  little  reflec- 
tion will  show. 

The  captivity  in  Babylon,  as  is  well  known,  was 
followed  by  two  great  results:  (i)  it  cured  the 
people  of  idolatry  for  ever,  so  that,  while  politi- 
cally the  kingdom  had  passed  away,  in  reality, 
and  according  to  the  spirit,  it  was  then  for  the 
first  time  constituted  as  a  kingdom  of  God.  Till 
then,  though  politically  separate  from  the  Gen- 
tile nations,  spiritually  Israel  had  become  as  one 
of  them;  for  what  else  than  a  heathen  nation  was 
the  northern  kingdom  in  the  days  of  Ahab  or 
the  southern  kingdom  in  the  time  of  Ahaz?  But 
after  the  captivity,  though  as  a  nation  shattered 
into  fragments,  spiritually  Israel  became  and 
continued  to  be  one.  (2)  The  other  great  result 
of  the  captivity  was  the  Dispersion.  Only  a 
small  remnant  of  the  people  came  back  to  Pales- 
tine. Ten  of  the  tribes  passed  out  of  sight,  and 
but  a  fraction  of  the  other  two  returned.     The 


rest  remained  in  Babylon,  or  were  scattered 
abroad  among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  Thus 
the  Jews  in  their  dispersion  formed,  as  it  were,  a 
Church  throughout  the  ancient  world, — their 
eyes  ever  turned  in  love  and  longing  to  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem,  while  their  homes  and  their 
business  were  among  the  Gentiles — in  the  world, 
but  not  of  it;  the  prototype  of  the  future  Church 
of  Christ,  and  the  soil  out  of  which  it  should 
afterwards  spring.  Thus  out  of  the  captivity  in 
Babylon  sprang,  first,  the  spiritual  as  distin- 
guished from  the  political  kingdom,  and,  next, 
the  world-wide  as  distinguished  from  the  merely 
national  Church.  Clearly,  then,  the  Babylonish 
captivity  was  not  only  a  most  important  histori- 
cal event,  but  also  a  stage  in  the  grand  prepara- 
tion for  the  Advent  of  the  Messiah.  The 
original  promise  made  to  Abraham,  that  in  his 
seed  should  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be 
blessed,  was  shown  m  the  time  of  David  to  be  a 
promise  which  should  find  its  fulfilment  in  the 
coming  of  a  king;  and  as  the  king  after  God's 
heart  was  foreshadowed  in  David,  so  the  king- 
dom after  the  Divine  purpose  was  foreshadowed 
in  the  condition  of  the  people  of  God  after  the 
captivity  in  Babylon,  purified  from  idolatry, 
scattered  abroad  among  the  nations,  with  their 
innumerable  synagogues  (prototypes  of  our 
churches)  and  their  peculiarities  of  faith  and  life 
and  worship.  Abraham  was  called  out  of  Baby- 
lon to  be  a  witness  for  God  and  the  coming 
Christ;  and,  after  the  long  training  of  centuries, 
his  descendants  were  taken  back  to  Babylon,  to 
scatter  from  that  world-centre  the  seed  of  the 
coming  kingdom  of  God.  Thus  it  comes  to  pass 
that  in  Christ  and  His  kingdom  we  see  the  cul- 
mination of  that  wonderful  history  which  has  for 
its  great  stages  of  progress  Abraham,  David,* 
the  Captivity,  Christ. 

So  much  for  the  earthly  origin  of  the  Man 
Christ  Jesus;  but  His  heavenly  descent  must  also 
be  told;  and  with  what  exquisite  simplicity  and 
delicacy  is  this  done.  There  is  no  attempt  to 
make  the  words  correspond  with  the  greatness  of 
the  facts.  As  simple  and  transparent  as  clear 
glass,  they  allow  the  facts  to  speak  for  themselves. 
So  it  is  all  the  way  through  this  Evangel.  What  a 
contrast  here  to  the  spurious  Gospels  afterwards 
produced,  when  men  had  nothing  to  tell,  and  so 
must  put  in  their  own  poor  fictions,  piously  in- 
tending sometimes  to  add  lustre  to  the  too  sim- 
ple story  of  the  Infancy,  but  only  with  the  effect 
of  degrading  it  in  the  eyes  of  all  men  of  taste 
and  judgment.  But  here  there  is  no  need  of  fic- 
tion, 'no  need  even  of  rhetoric  or  sentiment.  The 
fact  itself  is  so  great  that  the  more  simply  it  is 
told  the  better.  The  Holy  One  of  Israel  came 
into  the  world  with  no  tinsel  of  earthly  pomp; 
and  in  strict  harmony  with  His  mode  of 
entrance,  the  story  of  His  birth  is  told  with  like 
simplicity.  The  Sun  of  Righteousness  rises  like 
the  natural  sun,  in  silence;  and  in  this  Gospel, 
as   in   all    the   others,    passes    on   to    its    setting 


♦To  some  minds  it  may  present  itself  as  a  difficulty 
that  the  great  name  of  Moses  should  not  find  a  place  in 
the  series ;  was  not  he  as  much  of  an  epoch-maker  as 
David?  The  answer  is  that,  from  the  point  of  view  of 
prophecy  and  promise,  he  was  not.  This,  which  lies 
implicitly  in  St.  Matthew's  summary,  is  set  forth  explicitly 
by  St.  Paul  in  his  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  where  he  shows 
that  the  Law,  as  a  stage  in  the  dealings  of  God  with  the 
nation,  did  not  belong  to  the  main  course  of  development, 
bvit  came  in  as  an  episode,  was  "  added  because  of  trans- 
gressions" (Gal.  iii.  16-19). 


Matthew  i.] 


THE   COMING    OF   THE    CHRIST. 


699 


through  the  heaven  of  the  Evangelist's  thought, 
which  stands,  hke  that  other  heaven,  "  majestic 
in  its  own  simplicity." 

The  story  of  the  Incarnation  is  often  repre- 
sented as  incredible;  but  if  those  who  so  regard 
it  would  only  reflect  on  that  doctrine  of  heredity 
which  the  science  of  recent  years  has  brought 
into  such  prominence,  if  they  would  only  con- 
sider what  is  involved  in  the  obvious  truth  that, 
"  that  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,"  they 
would  see  that  it  was  not  only  natural  but  neces- 
sary that  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ  should  be  "  on 
this  wise."  Inasmuch  as  "  the  first  man  is  of  the 
earth,  earthy,"  "  the  Second  Man  "  must  be  "  of 
heaven,"  or  He  will  be  no  Second  Man  at  all; 
He  will  be  sinful  and  earthy  like  all  the  others. 
But  all  that  is  needful  is  met  in  the  manner  so 
chastely  and  beautifully  set  forth  by  our  Evan- 
gelist, in  words  which,  angelic  in  their  tone  and 
like  the  blue  of  heaven  in  their  purity,  so  well 
become  the  angel  of  the  Lord. 

Some  wonder  that  nothing  is  said  here  of 
Nazareth  and  what  took  place  there,  and  of  the 
journey  to  Bethlehem;  and  there  are  those  who 
are  fain  even  to  find  some  inconsistency  with  the 
third  Gospel  in  this  omission,  as  if  there  were 
any  need  to  wonder  at  omissions  in  a  story  which 
tells  of  the  first  year  on  one  page  and  the 
thirtieth  on  the  next!  These  Gospels  are  not 
biographies.  They  are  memorials,  put  together 
for  a  special  purpose,  to  set  forth  this  Jesus  as 
the  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  the  world.  And 
the  special  object,  as  we  have  seen,  of  St.  Mat- 
thew is  to  set  Him  forth  as  the  Messiah  of  Israel. 
In  accordance  with  this  object, we  have  His  birth 
told  in  such  a  way  as  to  bring  into  prominence 
those  facts  only  in  which  the  Evangelist  specially 
recognised  a  fulfilment  of  Old  Testament  proph- 
ecy. Here  again  the  names  give  us  the  main 
thoughts.  Just  as  Abraham,  David,  Babylon, 
suggest  the  main  object  of  the  genealogy,  so  the 
names  Emmanuel,  Jesus,  suggest  the  main  object 
of  the  record  of  His  birth.  "  All  this  was  done 
that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the 
prophet." 

The  first  name  mentioned  is  "  Jesus."  To 
understand  it  as  St.  Matthew  did,  we  must  bear 
in  mind  that  it  is  the  old  historic  name  Joshua, 
and  that  the  first  thought  of  the  Hebrew  mind 
would  be.  Here  is  One  who  shall  fulfil  all  that 
was  typified  in  the  life  and  work  of  the  two  Old 
Testament  heroes  who  bore  that  name,  so  full  of 
hopeful  significance.*  The  first  Joshua  was 
Israel's  captain  on  the  occasion  of  their  first 
settlement  in  the  Land  of  Promise  after  the  bond- 
age in  Egypt;  the  second  Joshua  was  Israel's 
high  priest  at  their  second  settlement  in  the  land 
after  the  bondage  in  Babylon.  Both  were  thus 
associated  with  great  deliverances;  but  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other  had  given  the  rest  of  full 
salvation  to  the  people  of  God  (see  Heb.  iv.  8) ; 
what  they  had  done  had  only  been  to  procure  for 
them  political  freedom  and  a  land  they  could 
call  their  own, — a  picture  in  the  earthly  sphere  of 
what  the  Coming  One  was  to  accomplish  in  the 
spiritual  sphere.  The  salvation  from  Egypt  and 
from  Babylon  were  both  but  types  of  the  great 
salvation  from  sin  which  was  to  come  through  the 
Christ  of  God.  These  or  such  as  these  must  have 
been  the  thoughts  in  the  mind  of  Joseph  when  he 
heard  the  angel's  words:  "Thou  shalt  call  His 

•The  Hebrew  name  Joshua,  of  which  Jesus  is  simply 
the  Greek  transliteration,  combines  the  two  words  Jeho- 
vah and  Salvation  (jcf.  Num.  xiii.  i6.) 


name  Joshua;  for  it  is  He  that  shall  save  His 
people  from  their  sins." 

Joseph,  though  a  poor  carpenter  of  Nazareth, 
was  a  true  son  of  David,  one  of  those  who 
waited  for  the  salvation  of  Israel,  who  had  wel- 
comed the  truth  set  forth  by  Daniel,  that  the 
coming  kingdom  was  to  be  a  kingdom  of  the 
saints  of  the  Most  High, — not  of  political  adven- 
turers, as  was  the  idea  of  the  corrupt  Judaism  of 
the  time;  so  he  was  prepared  to  welcome  the 
truth  that  the  coming  Saviour  was  One  who 
should  deliver,  not  from  the  rule  of  Rome,  but 
from  the  guilt  and  power  and  death  of  Sin. 

As  the  name  Joshua,  or  Jesus,  came  from  the 
earliest  times  of  Israel's  national  history,  the 
name  Emmanuel  came  from  its  latest,  even  out 
of  the  dark  days  of  King  Ahaz,  when  the  hope  of 
the  people  was  directed  to  the  birth  of  a  Child 
who  should  bear  this  name.  Some  have  thought 
it  enough  to  show  that  there  was  a  fulfilment  of 
this  hope  in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  to  make  it  evi- 
dent that  St.  Matthew  was  mistaken  in  finding 
its  fulfilment  in  Christ;  but  this  idea,  like  so 
many  others  of  the  same  kind,  is  founded  on 
ignorance  of  the  relation  of  the  Old  Testament 
history  to  the  New  Testament  times.  We  have 
seen  that  though  Joshua  of  the  early  times  and 
his  successor  of  the  same  name  did  each  a  work 
of  his  own,  yet  both  of  them  were  in  relation  to 
the  future  but  prototypes  of  the  Great  Joshua 
who  was  to  come.  In  the  same  way  exactly, 
if  there  was,  as  we  believe,  a  deliverance  in  the 
time  of  Ahaz,  to  which  the  prophet  primarily 
referred,  it  was,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  but  a 
picture  of  the  greater  one  in  which  the  gracious 
purpose  of  God,  manifested  in  all  these  partial 
deliverances,  was  to  be  "  fulfilled,"  i.  e.,  filled  to 
the  full.  The  idea  in  the  name  "  Emmanuel  " 
was  not  a  new  one  even  in  the  time  of  King 
Ahaz.  "  I  will  be  with  you;  "  "  Certainly  I  will 
be  with  you;  "  "  Fear  not,  for  I  am  with  you," 
— such  words  of  gracious  promise  had  been 
echoed  and  re-echoed  all  down  the  course  of  the 
history  of  the  people  of  God,  before  they  were 
enshrined  in  the  name  prophetically  used  by 
Isaiah  in  the  days  of  King  Ahaz;  and  they  were 
finally  embodied,  incarnated,  in  the  Child  born 
at  Bethlehem  in  the  fulness  of  the  time,  to  Whom 
especially  belongs  that  name  of  highest  hope, 
"  Emmanuel,"  "  God  with  us." 

If,  now,  we  look  at  these  two  names,  we  shall 
see  that  they  not  only  point  to  a  fulfilment,  in 
the  largest  sense,  of  Old  Testament  prophecy, 
but  to  the  fulfilment  of  that  which  we  all  need 
most — the  satisfaction  of  our  deepest  wants  and 
longings.  "  God  is  light;  "  sin  is  darkness. 
With  God  is  the  fountain  of  life;  "sin  when  it 
is  finished  bringeth  forth  death."  Here  shines 
the  star  of  hope;  there  lies  the  abyss  of  despair. 
Now,  without  Christ  we  are  tied  to  sin,  separated 
from  God.  Sin  is  near;  God  is  far.  That  is  our 
curse.  Therefore  what  we  need  is  God  brought 
near  and  sin  taken  away — the  very  blessings 
guaranteed  in  these  two  precious  names  of  our 
Lord.  As  Emmanuel,  He  brings  God  near  to 
us,  near  in  His  own  incarnate  person,  near  in 
His  loving  life,  near  in  His  perfect  syrnpathy, 
near  in  His  perpetual  presence,  according  to 
the  promise,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world."  As  Jesus,  He  saves 
us  from  our  sins.  How  he  does  it  is  set  forth 
in  the  sequel  of  the  Gospel,  culminating  in  the 
sacrifice  of  the  cross,  "  to  finish  the  transgres- 
sion, and  to  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make 


700 


-THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  to  bring  in  ever- 
lasting righteousness."  For  He  has  not  only 
to  bring  God  down  to  us,  but  also  to  lift  us  up 
to  God;  and  while  the  incarnation  effects  the  one, 
the  atonement,  followed  by  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  is  necessary  to  secure  the  other. 
He  touches  man,  the  creature,  at  his  cradle;  He 
reaches  down  to  man,  the  sinner,  at  His  cross — 
the  end  of  His  descent  to  us,  the  beginning  of 
our  ascent  with  Him  to  God.  There  we  meet 
Him  and,  saved  from  sin,  we  know  Him  as 
our  Jesus;  and  reconciled  to  God,  we  have 
Him  with  us  as  Emmanuel,  God  with  us, 
always  with  us,  with  us  throughout  all  life's 
changes,  with  us  in  death's  agony,  with  us  in  the 
life  to  come,  to  guide  us  into  all  its  wisdom  and 
honour  and  riches  and  glory  and  blessing. 


CHAPTER  n. 

HIS  RECEPTION. 

Matthew  ii. 

This  one  chapter  contains  all  that  St.  Matthew 
records  of  the  Infancy.  St.  Mark  and  St.  John 
tell  us  nothing,  and  St.  Luke  very  little.  This 
singular  reticence  has  often  been  remarked  upon, 
and  it  certainly  is  moi>t  noteworthy,  and  a  mani- 
fest sign  of  genuineness  and  truthfulness:  a  token 
that  what  these  men  wrote  was  in  the  deepest 
sense  not  their  own.  For  if  they  had  been  left 
to  themselves  in  the  performance  of  the  task 
assigned  them,  they  could  not  have  restrained 
themselves  as  they  have  done.  The  Jews  of  the 
time  attached  the  greatest  importance  to  child- 
life,  as  is  evident  from  the  single  fact  that  they 
had  no  less  than  eight  different  words  to  mark 
the  successive  stages  of  development  from  the 
new-born  babe  up  to  the  young  man;  and  to 
omit  all  reference  to  these  stages,  except  the 
slight  notice  of  the  Infancy  in  this  chapter,  was 
certainly  not  "  according  to  Matthew  "  the  Jew, 
— not  what  would  have  been  expected  of  him  had 
he  been  left  to  himself.  It  can  only  be  explained 
by  the  fact  that  he  spoke  or  was  silent  according 
as  he  was  moved  or  restrained  by  the  Holy 
Ghost.  This  view  is  strikingly  confirmed  by 
comparison  with  the  spurious  Gospels  afterwards 
published,  by  men  who  thought  they  could  im- 
prove on  the  original  records  with  their  childish 
stories  as  to  what  the  boy  Jesus  said  and  did. 
These  awkward  fictions  reflect  the  spirit  of  the 
age;  the  simple  records  of  the  four  Evangelists 
mirror  for  us  the  Spirit  of  Truth.  To  the  vulgar 
mind  they  may  seem  bare  and  defective,  but  all 
men  of  culture  and  mature  judgment  recognise 
in  their  simplicity  and  naturalness  a  note  of 
manifest  superiority. 

Much  space  might  be  occupied  in  setting  forth 
the  advantages  of  this  reticence,  but  a  single 
illustration  may  suggest  the  main  thought.  Re- 
call for  a  moment  the  well-known  picture  en- 
titled, "  The  Shadow  of  the  Cross,"  designed  and 
executed  by  a  master,  one  who  might  surely  be 
considered  qualified  to  illustrate  in  detail  the 
life  at  Nazareth.  We  have  nothing  to  say  as  to 
the  merit  of  the  picture  as  a  work  of  art:  let 
those  specially  qualified  to  judge  speak  of  this; 
but  is  it  not  generally  felt  that  the  realism  of  the 
carpenter's  shop  is  most  painful?  The  eye  is  in- 
stinctively averted  from  the  too  obtrusive  de- 
tails;   while  the   mind   gladly   returns    from  the 


startling  vividness  of  the  picture  to  the  vague 
impressions  made  on  us  by  the  mere  hints  in  the 
sacred  Scriptures.  Was  it  not  well  that  our 
blessed  Saviour  should  grow  in  retirement  and 
seclusion;  and  if  so,  why  should  that  seclusion 
be  invaded?  If  His  family  life  was  withdrawn 
from  the  eyes  of  the  men  of  that  time,  there  re- 
mains the  same  reason  why  it  should  be  with- 
drawn from  the  eyes  of  the  men  of  all  time;  and 
the  more  we  think  of  it,  the  more  we  realise  that 
it  is  better  in  every  way  that  the  veil  should  have 
been  dropped  just  where  it  has  been,  and  that  all 
should  remain  just  as  it  was,  when  with  uncon- 
scious skill  the  sacred  artists  finished  their  per- 
fect sketches  of  the  child  Jesus. 

Perhaps,  however,  the  question  may  be  asked: 
If  St.  Matthew  would  tell  us  so  little,  why  say 
anything  at  all?  What  was  his  object  in  relating 
just  what  he  has  set  down  in  this  chapter?  We 
believe  it  must  have  been  to  show  how  Christ 
was  received.  It  seems,  in  fact,  to  correspond 
to  that  single  sentence  in  the  fourth  Gospel, 
"  He  came  unto  His  own,  and  His  own  re- 
ceived Him  not;  "  only  St.  Matthew  gives  us 
a  wider  and  brighter  view;  he  shows  us  not  only 
how  Jerusalem  rejected  Him,  but  how  the  East 
welcomed  Him  and  Egypt  sheltered  Him. 
Throughout  the  entire  Old  Testament  our  atten- 
tion is  called,  not  merely  to  Jerusalem,  which  oc- 
cupied the  centre  of  the  ancient  world,  but  to 
the  kingdoms  round  about,  especially  to  the  great 
empires  of  the  East  and  South — the  empire  of 
the  East  represented  in  succession  by  Ancient 
Chaldea,  Assyria,  Babylonia,  Media,  and  Persia; 
and  that  of  the  Syouth — the  mighty  monarchy  of 
Egypt,  which  under  its  thirty  dynasties  held  on 
its  steady  course  alongside  these.  How  natural, 
then,  for  the  Evangelist  whose  special  mission 
it  was  to  connect  the  old  with  the  new,  to  take 
the  opportunity  of  showing  that,  while  His  own 
Jerusalem  rejected  her  Messiah,  her  old  rivals  of 
the  East  and  of  the  South  gave  Him  a  welcome. 
In  the  first  chapter  the  Child  Jesus  was  set 
forth  as  the  Heir  of  the  promise  made  to  Abra- 
ham and  his  seed,  and  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  given  to  the  chosen  people;  now  He 
is  further  set  forth  as  the  One  who  satisfies  the 
longings  of  those  whom  they  had  been  taught 
to  regard  as  their  natural  enemies,  but  who  now 
must  be  looked  upon  as  "  fellow-heirs "  with 
them  of  God's  heritage,  and  "  partakers  of  His 
promise  in  Christ  by  the  Gospel."  It  will  be 
seen,  then,  how  the  second  chapter  was  needed 
to  complete  the  first,  and  how  the  two  together 
give  us  just  such  a  view  of  the  Advent  as  was 
most  needed  by  the  Jews  of  the  period,  while 
it  is  most  instructive  and  suggestive  to  men  of 
all  countries  and  of  all  time.  As,  then,  the  last 
paragraph  began  with,  "  Now  the  birth  of  Jesus 
Christ  was  on  this  wise,"  we  may  regard  this  as 
beginning  with,  "  Now  the  reception  of  Jesus 
Christ   was   on   this   wise." 

According  to  the  plan  of  these  expositions,  we 
must  disregard  details,  and  many  interesting 
questions,  for  the  consideration  of  which  it  is 
surely  enough  to  refer  to  the  many  well-known 
and  widely-read  books  on  the  Life  of  Christ;  and 
confine  ourselves  to  those  general  thoughts  and 
suggestions  which  seem  best  fitted  to  bring  out 
the  spirit  of  the  passage  as  a  whole. 

Let  us,  then,  look  first  at  the  manner  of  His 
reception  by  Jerusalem,  the  city  which  as  Son 
of  David  He  could  claim  as  peculiarly  His  own. 
It  was  the  very  centre  of  the  circle  of  Old  Testa- 


Matthew  ii.] 


HIS   RECEPTION. 


701 


ment  illumination.  It  had  all  possible  aclvan» 
tages,  over  every  other  place  in  the  world,  for 
knowing  when  and  how  the  Christ  should  come. 
Yet,  when  He  did  come,  the  people  of  Jerusa- 
lem know  nothing  about  it,  but  had  their  first 
intimation  of  the  fact  from  strangers  who  had 
come  from  the  far  East  to  seek  Him.  And  not 
only  did  they  know  nothing  about  it  till  they 
were  told,  but,  when  told,  they  were  troubled 
(ver.  3).  Indifference  where  we  should  have  ex- 
pected eagerness,  trouble  where  we  should  have 
looked  for  joy! 

We  have  only  to  examine  the  contemporary 
accounts  of  the  state  of  society  in  Jerusalem  to 
understand  it  thoroughly,  and  to  see  how  ex- 
ceedingly natural  it  was.  Those  unacquainted 
with  these  records  can  have  no  idea  of  the  gaiety 
and  frivolity  of  the  Jewish  capital  at  the  time. 
Every  one,  of  course,  knows  something  of  the 
style  and  magnificence  in  which  Herod  the  Great 
lived;  but  one  is  not  apt  to  suppose  that  luxuri- 
ous living  was  the  rule  among  the  people  of  the 
town.  Yet  so  it  seems  to  have  been.  Dr. 
Edersheim,  who  has  made  a  special  study  of  this 
subject,  and  who  quotes  his  authorities  for  each 
separate  statement,  thus  describes  *  the  state  of 
things:  "These  Jerusalemites — townspeople  as 
they  called  themselves — were  so  polished,  so 
witty,  so  pleasant.  .  .  .  And  how  much  there 
was  to  be  seen  and  heard  in  those  luxuriously 
furnished  houses,  and  at  these  sumptuous  enter- 
tainments! In  the  women's  apartments  friends 
from  the  country  would  see  every  novelty  in 
dress,  adornments,  and  jewellery,  and  have  the 
benefit  of  examining  themselves  in  looking- 
glasses.  .  .  .  And  then  the  lady-visitors  might 
get  anything  in  Jerusalem,  from  a  false  tooth  to 
an  Arabian  veil,  a  Persian  shawl,  or  an  Indian 
dress!"  Then,  after  furnishing  what  he  calls 
"  too  painful  evidence  of  the  luxuriousness  at 
Jerusalem  at  that  time,  and  of  the  moral  cor- 
ruption to  which  it  led,"  he  concludes  by  giving 
an  account  of  what  one  of  the  sacred  books  of 
the  time  describes  as  "  the  dignity  of  the  Jerusa- 
lemites," mentioning  particulars  like  these:  "the 
wealth  which  they  lavished  on  their  marriages; 
the  ceremony  which  insisted  on  repeated  invita- 
tions to  the  guests  to  a  banquet,  and  that  men 
inferior  should  not  be  bidden  to  it;  the  dress  in 
which  they  appeared;  the  manner  in  which  the 
dishes  were  served,  the  wine  in  white  crystal 
vases;  the  punishment  of  the  cook  who  failed 
in  his  duty,"  and  so  on. 

If  things  of  that  kind  represented  the  dignity 
of  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  we  need  not  ask 
why  they  were  troubled  when  they  heard  that  to 
them  had  been  born  in  Bethlehem  a  Saviour  who 
was  Christ  the  Lord.  A  Saviour  who  would  save 
them  from  their  sins  was  the  very  last  thing  peo- 
ple of  that  kind  wanted.  A  Herod  suited  them 
better,  for  it  was  he  and  his  court  that  set  the 
example  of  the  luxury  and  profligacy  which 
characterised  the  capital.  Do  not  all  these  reve- 
lations as  to  the  state  of  things  in  the  capital  of 
Israel  set  ofT  more  vividly  than  ever  the  pure 
lustre  of  the  quiet,  simple,  humble,  peaceful  sur- 
roundings of  the  Babe  of  Bethlehem  and  Boy  of 
Nazareth?  Put  the  "dignity"  and  trouble  of 
Jerusalem  over  against  the  humility  and  peace 
of  Bethlehem,  and  say  which  is  the  more  truly 
dignified  and  desirable.  When  we  look  at  the 
contrast  we  cease  to  wonder  that,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  very  few  devout  Simeons  and  An- 
*  "  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,"  vol.  i.  p.  130. 


nas,  waiting  for  the  consolation  of  Israel,  Je- 
rusalem, as  a  whole,  was  troubled  to  hear  the 
rumour  of  the  advent  of  her  Saviour-King. 

Herod's  trouble  we  can  so  readily  understand 
that  we  need  not  spend  time  over  it,  or  over  what 
he  did  to  get  rid  of  it,  so  thoroughly  in  keeping 
as  it  was  with  all  that  history  tells  us  of  his 
character  and  conduct.  No  wonder  that  the  one 
thought  in  his  mind  was  "  Away  wi-th  Him!  "    . 

But  who  are  these  truly  dignified  men,  who 
are  now  turing  their  backs  on  rich  and  gay 
Jerusalem,  and  setting  their  faces  to  the  obscurity 
and  poverty  of  the  village  of  Bethlehem?  They 
are  men  of  rank  and  wealth  and  learning  from 
the  far  East — representatives  of  all  that  is  best 
in  the  old  civilisations  of  the  world.  They  had 
only  the  scantiest  opportunities  of  learning  what 
was  the  Hope  of  Israel,  and  how  it  should  be 
realised;  but  they  were  earnest  men;  their  minds 
were  not  taken  up  with  gaiety  and  frivolity;  they 
had  studied  the  works  of  nature  till  their  souh 
were  full  of  the  thought  of  God  in  His  glory 
and  majesty;  but  their  hearts  still  yearned  to 
know  if  He,  Whose  glory  was  in  the  heavens, 
could  stoop  to  cure  the  ills  that  flesh  is  heir  to. 
They  had  heard  of  Israel's  hope,  the  hope  of 
a  child  to  be  born  of  David's  race,  who  should 
bring  divine  mercy  near  to  human  need;  they 
had  a  vague  idea  that  the  time  for  the  fulfilment 
of  that  hope  was  drawing  near;  and,  as  they 
mused,  behold  a  marvellous  appearance  in  the 
heavens,  which  seemed  to  call  them  away  to  seek 
Him  whom  their  souls  desired!  Hence  their 
long  journey  to  Jerusalem  and  their  eager  en- 
trance into  Bethlehem.  Had  their  dignity  been 
the  kind  of  dignity  which  was  boasted  of  in 
Jerusalem,  they  would  no  doubt  have  been  of- 
fended by  the  poverty  of  the  surroundings,  the 
poor  house  with  its  scanty  furniture  and  its  hum- 
ble inmates.  But  theirs  was  the  dignity  of  mind 
and  soul,  so  they  were  not  ofTended  by  the  poor 
surroundings;  they  recognised  in  the  humble 
Child  the  object  of  their  search;  they  bowed  be- 
fore Him,  doing  Him  homage,  and  presented 
to  Him  gifts  as  a  tribute  from  the  East  to  the 
coming  King  of  righteousness  and  love. 

What  a  beautiful  picture;  how  striking  the 
contrast  to  the  magnificence  of  Herod  the  Great 
in  Jerusalem,  surrounded  by  his  wealthy  and 
luxurious  court.  Verily,  these  were  wise  men 
from  the  East,  wise  with  a  wisdom  not  of  this 
world — wise  to  recognise  the  hope  of  the  future, 
not  in  a  monarch  called  "  the  Great,"  surrounded 
by  the  world's  pomp  and  luxury,  but  in  the 
fresh  young  life  of  the  holy  heaven-born  Child. 
Learned  as  they  were,  they  had  simple  hearts — 
they  had  had  some  glimpse  of  the  great  truth  that 
it  is  not  learning  the  world  needs  so  much  as 
life,  new  life.  Would  that  all  the  wise  men  of 
the  present  day  were  equally  wise  in  heart!  We 
rejoice  that  so  many  of  them  are;  and  if  only 
all  of  them  had  true  wisdom,  they  would  con- 
sider that  even  those  who  stand  as  high  in  the 
learning  of  the  new  West  as  these  men  did  in 
the  learning  of  the  old  East,  would  do  themselves 
honour  in  bowing  low  in  presence  of  the  Holy 
Child,  and  acknowledge  that  by  no  effort  of  the 
greatest  intellect  is  it  possible  to  reach  that  truth 
which  can  alone  meet  the  deepest  wants  of  men — 
that  there  is  no  other  hope  for  man  than  the 
new  birth,  the  fresh,  pure,  holy  life  which  came 
into  the  world  when  the  Christ  was  born,  and 
which  comes  into  every  heart  that  in  simple 
trustfulness  gives  Him  a  welcome  as  did  these 


702 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


wise  men  of  old.  There,  at  the  threshold  of  the 
Gospel,  we  see  the  true  relation  of  science  and 
religion. 

"  Let  knowledge  grow  from  more  to  more, 
But  more  of  reverence  in  us  dwell ; 
That  mind  and  soul,  according  well, 
May  make  one  music  as  before." 

AJl  honour  to  these  wise  men  for  bending  low 
in  presence  of  the  Holy  Child;  and  thanks  be 
to  God  for  allowing  His  servant  Matthew  to  give 
us  a  glimpse  of  a  scene  so  beautiful,  so  touching, 
so  suggestive  of  pure  and  high  and  holy  thought 
and  feeling. 

The  gifts  of  the  East  no  doubt  provided  the 
means  of  securing  a  refuge  in  the  South  and 
West.  That  Egypt  gave  the  fugitives  a  friendly 
welcome,  and  a  safe  retreat  so  long  as  the  dan- 
ger remained,  is  obvious;  but  here  again  we  are 
left  without  detail.  The  one  thing  which  the 
Evangelist  wishes  to  impress  upon  us  is  the 
parallel  between  the  experience  of  Israel  and  Is- 
rael's Holy  One.  Israel  of  the  Old  Testament, 
born  in  Palestine,  had  to  flee  into  Egypt.  When 
the  time  was  ripe  for  return,  the  way  was  opened 
for  it;  and  thus  the  prophet  speaks  of  it  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord:  "  When  Israel  was  a  child, 
then  I  loved  him,  and  called  My  son  out  of 
Egypt."  Now  that  the  Holy  One  of  Israel  has 
come  to  fulfil  old  Israel's  destiny,  the  prophetic 
word,  which  had  been  only  partially  realised  in 
the  history  of  the  nation,  is  fulfilled  in  the  his- 
tory of  tbe  Anointed  One.  Hence,  just  as  it 
happened  with  the  nation,  so  did  it  happen  with 
the  nation's  representative  and  King;  born  in 
His  own  land.  He  had  to  flee  into  Egypt,  and 
remain  there  till  God  brought  Him  out,  and 
set  Him  in  His  land  again. 

Other  points  of  agreement  with  the  prophetic 
word  are  mentioned.  It  is  worthy  of  note  that 
they  are  all  connected  with  the  dark  side  of 
prophecy  concerning  the  Messiah.  The  reason 
for  this  will  readily  appear  on  reflection.  The 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  were  insistent  enough  on 
the  bright  side,  the  side  that  favoured  their  ideas 
of  a  great  king,  who  should  rescue  the  people 
from  the  Roman  yoke,  and  found  a  great  world- 
kingdom,  after  the  manner  of  Herod  the  Great 
or  of  Caesar  the  mighty.  So  there  was  no  need 
to  bring  strongly  out  that  side  of  prophecy  which 
foretold  of  the  glories  of  the  coming  King.  But 
the  sad  side  had  been  entirely  neglected.  It 
is  this,  accordingly,  which  the  Evangelist  is 
prompted  to  illustrate. 

It  was,  indeed,  in  itself  an  occasion  of  stum- 
bling that  the  King  of  Israel  should  have  to  flee 
to  Egypt.  But  why  should  one  stumble  at  it, 
who  looked  at  the  course  of  Israel's  history  as 
a  nation,  in  the  light  the  prophets  threw  upon 
it?  It  was  an  occasion  of  stumbling  that  His 
birth  in  Bethlehem  should  bring  with  it  such 
sorrow  and  anguish;  but  why  wonder  at  it  when 
so  great  a  prophet  as  Jeremiah  so  toucbingly 
speaks  of  the  voice  heard  in  Ramah,  "  Rachel 
weeping  for  her  children  and  would  not  be  com- 
forted,"— a  thought  of  exquisite  beauty  and 
pathos  as  Jeremiah  used  it  in  reference  to  the 
banished  ones  of  his  day,  but  of  still  deeper 
pathos  as  now  fulfilled  in  the  sorrow  at  Ramah, 
over  the  massacre  of  her  innocents,  when  not 
Israel  but  Israel's  Holy  One  is  banished  from 
the  land  of  His  birth.  Again,  it  was  an  occasion 
of  stumbling  that  the  King  of  Israel,  instead  of 
growing  up  in  majesty  in  the  midst  of  the  Court 


and  the  capital,  should  retire  into  obscurity  in  the 
little  village  of  Nazareth,  and  for  many  years  be 
unheard  of  by  the  great  ones  of  the  land;  but 
why  wonder  at  it  when  the  prophets  again  and 
again  represent  Him  as  growing  up  in  this  very 
way,  as  "  a  root  out  of  a  dry  ground,"  as  a  twig 
or  "  shoot  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,"  growing 
up  "  out  of  His  place,"  and  attracting  no  atten- 
tion while  He  grew.  Such  is  the  meaning  of  the 
words  translated,  "  He  shall  be  called  a  Naz« 
arene."  This  does  not  appear  in  our  language; 
hence  the  difficulty  which  many  have  found  in 
this  reference,  there  being  no  passage  in  any  of 
the  prophets  where  the  Christ  is  spoken  of  as 
a  Nazarene;  but  the  word  to  Hebrew  ears  at 
once  suggests  the  Hebrew  for  "  Branch,"  con- 
tinually applied  to  Him  in  the  prophets,  and 
especially  connected  with  the  idea  of  His  quiet 
and  silent  growth,  aloof  from  the  throng  and  un- 
noticed by  the  great. 

This  completes,  appropriately,  the  sketch  of 
His  reception.  Unthought  of  by  His  own,'  till 
strangers  sought  Him;  a  source  of  trouble  to 
them  when  they  heard  of  Him;  His  life  threat- 
ened by  the  occupant,  for  the  time,  of  David's 
throne.  He  is  saved  only  by  exile,  and  on  re- 
turning to  His  people  passes  out  of  notice:  and 
the  great  world  moves  on,  all  unconscious  and 
unconcerned,  whilst  its  Saviour-King  is  prepar- 
ing, in  the  obscurity  of  His  village  home,  for  the 
great  work  of  winning  a  lost  world  back  to  God. 

CHAPTER  III. 

HIS  HERALD. 

Matthew  iii.  1-12. 

Thirty  years  have  gone  since  all  Jerusalem 
was  in  trouble  at  the  rumour  of  Messiah's  birth. 
But  as  nothing  has  been  heard  of  Him  since, 
the  excitement  has  passed  away.  Those  who  were 
troubled  about  it  are  aging  or  old  or  dead;  so 
no  one  thinks  or  speaks  of  it  now.  There  have 
been  several  political  changes  since,  mostly  for 
the  worse.  Judea  is  now  a  province  of  Rome, 
governed  by  procurators,  of  whom  the  sixth, 
called  Pontius  Pilate,  has  just  entered  on  his 
office.  Society  is  much  the  same  as  before — the 
same  worldliness  and  luxurious  living  after  the 
rnanner  of  the  Greek,  the  same  formalism  and 
bigotry  after  the  manner  of  the  Scribe.  There  is 
no  sign,  in  Jerusalem  at  least,  of  any  change  for 
the  better. 

The  only  new  thing  stirring  is  a  rumour  in 
the  street.  People  are  telling  one  another  that 
a  new  prophet  has  arisen.  "In  the  Palace?" 
— "  No."  "  In  the  Temple?  " — "  No."  "  Surely 
somewhere  in  the  city?" — "No."  He  is  in 
the  wilderness,  clad  in  roughest  garb,  subsist- 
ing on  poorest  fare — a  living  protest  against 
the  luxury  of  the  time.  He  makes  no  pre- 
tence to  learning,  draws  no  fine  distinctions, 
gives  no  curious  interpretations,  and  yet,  with 
only  a  simple  message, — which,  however,  he  de- 
livers as  coming  straight  from  God  Himself, — 
is  drawing  crowds  to  hear  him  from  all  the 
country  side.  So  the  rumour  spreads  through- 
out the  town,  and  great  numbers  go  out  to  see 
what  it  is  all  about;  some  perhaps  from  curi- 
osity, some  in  hope  that  it  may  be  the  dawn 
of  a  brighter  day  for  Israel,  all  of  them  no  doubt 
more  or  less  stirred  with  the  excitement  of  the 
thought  that,   after  so  many  silent  centuries,  a 


Matthew  iii.  1-12.] 


HIS    HERALD. 


703 


veritable  prophet  has  come,  like  those  of  old. 
For  it  must  be  remembered  that  even  in  gay 
Jerusalem  the  deep-rooted  feelings  of  national 
pride  and  patriotism  had  been  only  overlaid,  not 
superseded,  by  the  veneer  of  Greek  and  Roman 
civilisation,  which  only  seemed  for  the  moment 
to  satisfy  the  people. 

So  they  go  out  in  multitudes  to  the  wilder- 
ness; and  what  do  they  see?  "  A  man  clothed  in 
fine  raiment,"  like  the  Roman  officials  in  the 
palace,  which  in  those  degenerate  days  were  Je- 
rusalem's pride?  "  A  reed  shaken  by  the  wind," 
like  the  time-serving  politicians  of  the  hour? 
Nay,  verily;  but  a  true  prophet  of  the  Lord,  one 
reminding  them  of  what  they  have  read  in  the 
Scriptures  of  the  great  Elijah,  who  suddenly  ap- 
peared in  the  wild  mountain  region  of  Gilead,  at 
a  time  when  Phoenician  manners  were  making; 
the  same  havoc  in  Israel  that  Greek  manners  are 
now  making  in  Jerusalem.  Who  can  he  be? 
He  seems  to  be  more  than  a  prophet.  Can  he 
be  the  Christ?  But  this  he  entirely  disclaims. 
Is  he  Elijah  then?  John  probably  knew  that 
he  was  sent  "  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah," 
for  so  his  father  had  learned  from  the  angel 
on  the  occasion  of  the  announcement  of  his 
birth;  but  that  was  not  the  point  of  their  ques- 
tion. When  they  asked,  "  Art  thou  Elijah? " 
they  meant  "  Art  thou  Elijah  risen  from  the 
dead?"  To  this  he  must,  of  course,  answer, 
"  No."  In  the  same  way  he  must  disclaim  iden- 
tity with  any  of  the  prophets.  He  will  not  trade 
upon  the  name  of  any  of  these  holy  men  of 
old.  Enough  that  he  comes,  a  nameless  one,  be- 
fore them,  with  a  message  from  the  Lord.  So, 
keeping  himself  in  the  background,  he  puts  his 
message  before  them,  content  that  they  should 
recognise  in  it  the  fufilment  of  the  well-known 
word  of  prophecy:  "  A  voice  crying  in  the  wil- 
derness, Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make 
His  paths  straight." 

John  wishes  it  to  be  distinctly  understood  that 
he  is  not  that  Light  which  the  prophets  of  old 
have  told  them  should  arise,  but  is  sent  to  bear 
witness  to  that  Light.  He  has  come  as  a  herald 
to  announce  the  approach  of  the  King,  and  to 
call  upon  the  people  to  prepare  for  His  coming. 
Think  not  of  me,  he  cries,  ask  not  who  I  am; 
think  of  the  coming  King,  and  make  ready  for 
Him, — "  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make 
His  paths  straight." 

How  is  the  way  of  the  Lord  to  be  prepared? 
Is  ft  by  summoning  the  people  to  arms  all  over 
the  land,  that  they  may  repel  the  Roman  invader 
and  restore  the  ancient  kingdom?  Such  a 
proclamation  would  no  doubt  have  struck  a 
chord  that  would  have  vibrated  through  all  the 
land.  That  would  have  been  after  the  manner 
of  men;  it  was  not  the  way  of  the  Lord.  The 
summons  must  be,  not  to  arms,  but  to  repentance: 
"  Wash  you,  make  you  clean:  put  away  the  evil 
of  your  doings."  So,  instead  of  marching  up, 
a  host  of  warriors,  to  the  Roman  citadel,  the 
people  troop  down,  band  after  band  of  peni- 
tents, to  the  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins.  After 
all  it  is  the  old,  old  prophetic  message  over 
again, — the  same  which  had  been  sent  generation 
after  generation  to  a  back-sliding  people,  its  bur- 
den always  this:  "Turn  ye  unto  Me,  saith  the 
Lord  of  Hosts,  and  I  will  turn  unto  you,  saith 
the  Lord  of  Hosts." 

Like  many  of  the  old  prophets,  John  taught 
by  symbol  as  well  as  by  word.  The  preparation 
needed  was  an  inward  cleansing,  and  what  more 


fitting  symbol  of  it  than  the  water  baptism  to 
which  he  called  the  nation?  "  In  that  day,"  it 
was  written  in  the  prophets,  "  there  shall  be  a 
fountain  opened  to  the  house  of  David  and  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  for  sin  and  for  un- 
cleanncss."  The  prophecy  was  about  to  be  ful- 
filled, and  the  baptism  of  John  was  the  appro- 
priate sign  of  it.  Again,  in  another  of  the 
prophets  the  promise  ran,  "  Then  will  I  sprinkle 
clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  b^  clean;  from 
all  your  filthiness  and  from  all  your  idols  will 
I  cleanse  you  .  .  .  and  I  will  put  my  spirit 
within  you."  John  knew  well  that  it  was  not 
given  to  him  to  fulfil  this  promise.  He  could 
not  grant  the  real  baptism,  the  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Ghost;  but  he  could  baptise  with  water; 
he  could  give  the  sign  and  assurance  to  the  truly 
penitent  heart  that  there  was  forgiveness  and 
cleansing  in  the  coming  One;  and  thus,  by  his 
baptism  with  water,  as  well  as  by  the  message 
he  delivered,  he  was  preparing  the  way  of  the 
Lord.  All  this,  we  cannot  but  observe,  was  in 
perfect  accord  with  the  wonderful  prophetic  ut- 
terance of  his  father  Zacharias,  as  recorded  by 
St.  Luke:  "Thou,  child,  shalt  be  called  the 
prophet  of  the  Highest:  for  thou  shalt  go  before 
the  face  of  the  Lord  to  prepare  His  ways;  to 
give  knowledge  of  salvation  unto  His  people  by 
the  remission  of  their  sins," — not  to  give  salva- 
tion, which  only  Christ  can  give,  but  the  knowl- 
edge of  it.  This  he  did  not  only  by  telling  of 
the  coming  Saviour,  and,  when  He  came,  point- 
ing to  Him  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world:  "  but  also  by  the  ap- 
propriate sign  of  baptism,  which  gave  the  same 
knowledge  in  the  language  of  symbol  addressed 
to  the  eye. 

The  summons  of  the  prophet  of  the  wilderness 
is  not  in  vain.  The  people  come.  The  throngs 
increase.  The  nation  is  moved.  Even  the  great 
ones  of  the  nation  condescend  to  follow  the  mul- 
titude. Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  the  leaders  of 
the  two  great  parties  in  Church  and  State,  are 
coming;  many  of  them  are  coming.  What  a 
comfort  this  must  be  to  the  prophet's  soul.  How 
gladly  he  will  welcome  them,  and  let  it  be  known 
that  he  has  among  his  converts  many  of  the  great 
ones  of  the  land!  But  the  stern  Baptist  is  a  man 
of  no  such  mould.  What  cares  he  for  rank  or 
position  or  worldly  influence?  What  he  wants 
is  reality,  simplicity,  godly  sincerity;  and  he 
knows  that,  scarce  as  these  virtues  are  in  the 
community  at  large,  they  are  scarcest  of  all 
among  these  dignitaries.  He  will  not  allow  the 
smallest  admixture  of  insincerity  or  hypocrisy 
in  what  is,  so  far,  a  manifest  work  of  God.  He 
must  test  these  new-comers  to  the  uttermost,  for 
the  sin  of  which  they  need  most  to  repent  is  the 
very  sin  which  they  are  in  danger  of  committing 
afresh  in  its  most  aggravated  form  in  oflfering 
themselves  for  baptism.  He  must  therefore  test 
their  motives:  he  must  at  all  risks  ensure  that, 
unless  their  repentance  is  genuine,  they  shall  not 
be  baptised.  For  their  own  sakes,  as  well  as  for 
the  work's  sake,  this  is  necessary.  Hence  the 
strong,  even  harsh  language  he  uses  in  putting 
the  question  why  they  had  come.  Yet  he  would 
not  repel  or  discourage  them.  He  does  not  send 
them  away  as  if  past  redemption,  but  only  de- 
mands that  they  bring  forth  fruit  worthy  of  the 
repentance  they  profess.  And  lest  they  should 
think  that  there  was  an  easier  way  of  entrance 
for  them  than  for  others,  lest  they  should  think 
that  they  had  claims  sufficient  because  of  their 


704 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


descent,  he  reminds  them  that  God  can  have  his 
kingdom  upon  earth,  even  though  every  son  of 
Abraham  in  the  world  should  reject  Him: 
"  Think  not  to  say  within  yourselves.  We  have 
Abraham  to  our  father:  for  I  say  unto  you,  that 
God  is  able  of  these  stones  to  raise  up  children 
unto  Abraham." 

It  is  as  if  he  said.  The  coming  kingdom  of 
righteousness  and  truth  will  not  fail,  even  if 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees  and  all  the  natural  chil- 
dren of  Abraham  refuse  to  enter  its  only  gate  of 
repentance;  if  there  is  no  response  to  the  Divine 
summons  where  it  is  most  to  be  expected,  then  it 
can  be  secured  where  it  is  least  to  be  expected; 
if  flesh  become  stone,  then  stone  can  be  made 
flesh,  according  to  the  word  of  promise.  So 
there  will  be  no  gathering  in  of  mere  formalists 
to  make  up  numbers,  no  including  of  those  who 
are  only  "  Jews  outwardly."  And  there  will  be 
no  half  measures,  no  compromise  with  evil,  no 
parleying  with  those  who  are  unwilling  or  only 
half  willing  to  repent.  A  time  of  crisis  has 
come, — "  now  also  the  axe  is  laid  unto  the  root 
of  the  trees."  It  is  not  lifted  yet.  But  it  is 
there  lying  ready,  ready  for  the  Lord  of  the 
vineyard,  when  He  shall  come  (and  He  is  close 
at  hand) ;  then,  "  every  'tree  which  bringeth  not 
forth  good  fruit  is  hewn  down  and  cast  into  the 
fire." 

Yet  not  for  judgment  is  He  coming, — John 
goes  on  to  say, — but  to  fulfil  the  promise  of  the 
Father.  He  is  coming  to  baptise  you  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire — to  purify  you  through 
and  through  and  to  animate  you  with  a  new  life, 
glowing,  upward-striving,  heaven-aspiring;  and 
it  is  to  prepare  you  for  this  unspeakable  blessing 
that  I  ask  you  to  come  and  put  away  those  sins 
which  must  be  a  barrier  in  the  way  of  His  com- 
ing, those  sins  which  dim  your  eyes  so  that  you 
cannot  see  Him,  which  stop  your  ears  so  that 
you  cannot  recognise  your  Shepherd's  voice,  that 
clog  your  hearts  so  that  the  Holy  Spirit  cannot 
reach  them, — repent,  repent,  and  be  baptised  all 
of  you;  for  there  cometh  One  after  me,  mightier 
than  I,  whose  meanest  servant  I  am  not  worthy 
to  be, — He  shall  baptise  you  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  with  fire,  if  you  are  ready  to  receive 
Him;  but  if  you  are  not,  still  you  cannot  escape 
Him,  "  Whose  fan  is  in  His  hand,  and  He  will 
throughly  cleanse  His  threshing-floor;  and  He 
will  gather  His  wheat  into  the  garner,  but  the 
chaflf  He  will  burn  up  with  unquenchable 
fire"  (R.  v.). 

The  work  of  John  must  still  be  done.  It  spe- 
cially devolves  upon  the  ministers  of  Christ; 
would  they  were  all  as  anxious  as  he  was  to  keep 
in  the  background,  as  little  concerned  about  po- 
sition, title,  official  rank,  or  personal  considera- 
tion. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

HIS  BAPTISM. 

Matthew  iii.  13-17. 

"The  baptism  of  John,  was  it  from  Heaven 
or  of  men?"  This  question  must  have  been 
asked  throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the 
land  in  the  days  of  his  mission.  We  know  how 
it  was  answered;  for  even  after  the  excitement 
had  died  awav,  we  are  told  that  "  all  men  counted 


John  for  a  prophet."  This  conviction  would  of 
course  prevail  in  Nazareth  as  well  as  everywhere 
else.  When,  therefore,  the  Baptist  removed  from 
the  wilderness  of  Judea  and  the  lower  reaches  of 
the  Jordan  to  the  ford  of  Bethany,  or  Bethabara, 
— now  identified  with  a  point  much  farther  north, 
within  a  single  day's  journey  of  Nazareth, — the 
people  of  Galilee  would  flock  to  him,  as  before 
the  people  of  Judea  ahd  Jerusalem  had  done. 
Among  the  rest,  as  might  naturally  be  expected, 
Jesus  came.  It  was  enough  for  Him  to  know 
that  the  baptism  of  John  was  of  Divine  appoint- 
ment. He  was  in  all  things  guided  by  His 
Father's  will,  to  whom  He  would  day  by  day 
commit  His  way.  Accordingly,  just  as  day  by 
day  He  had  been  subject  to  His  parents,  and 
just  as  He  had  seen  it  to  be  right  to  go  up  to 
the  Temple  in  accordance  with  the  Law,  so  He 
recognised  it  to  be  His  duty  to  present  Himself, 
as  His  countrymen  in  such  large  numbers  were 
doing,  to  receive  baptism  from  John.  The 
manner  of  the  narrative  implies  that  He  came, 
not  as  if  He  were  some  great  person  demanding 
special  recognition,  but  as  simply  and  naturally 
as  any  of  the  rest:  "Then  cometh  Jesus  from 
Galilee  to  the  Jordan  unto  John,  to  be  baptised 
of  him." 

John  looks  at  Him.  Does  he  know  Him  at 
all?  Perhaps  not;  for  though  they  are  cousins, 
their  lives  have  been  lived  quite  apart.  Before 
their  birth  their  mothers  met;  but  it  is  doubtful 
if  they  themselves  have  seen  each  other  before, 
and  even  if  they  have,  in  earlier  years,  they  may 
both  be  so  changed  that  recognition  is  uncertain. 
The  one  has  had  his  home  in  the  South;  the 
other  in  the  North.  Besides,  the  elder  of  the  two 
has  spent  his  life  mostly  in  the  desert,  so  that 
probably  he  is  a  stranger  now  even  to  his  own 
townspeople,  and  his  father  and  mother,  both 
very  old  when  he  was  born,  must  be  dead  and 
gone  long  ago.  Perhaps,  then,  John  did  not 
know  Jesus  at  all;  certainly  he  did  not  yet  know 
Him  as  the  Messiah.  But  he  sees  something  in 
Him  that  draws  forth  the  homage  of  his  soul. 
Or  possibly  he  gathers  his  impressions  rather 
from  what  Jesus  says.  All  the  rest  have  con- 
fessed sin;  He  has  no  sin  of  His  own  to  confess. 
But  words  would  no  doubt  be  spoken  that  would 
convey  to  the  Baptist  how  this  disciple  looked  on 
sin,  how  the  very  thought  of  it  filled  Him  with 
horror,  how  His  whole  soul  longed  for  the 
righteousness  of  God,  how  it  was  a  sacred  pas- 
sion with  Him  that  sin  should  perish  from  the 
hearts  of  men,  and  righteousness  reign  in  its 
place.  Whether  then,  it  was  by  His  appearance, 
the  clear  eye,  the  calm  face, — an  open  window 
for  the  prophet  to  look  through  into  His  soul, 
— or  whether  it  was  by  the  words  He  spoke  as 
He  claimed  a  share  in  the  baptism,  or  both  com- 
bined, John  was  taken  aback — surprised  a  second 
time,  though  in  just  the  opposite  way  to  that  in 
which  he  had  been  surprised  before.  The  same 
eagle  eye  that  saw  through  the  mask  of  Pharisee 
and  Sadducee  could  penetrate  the  veil  of  hu- 
mility and  obscurity;  so  he  said:  "  I  have  need  to 
be  baptised  of  Thee,  and  comest  Thou  to  me?  " 

Think  of  the  majesty  of  this  John.  Remem- 
ber how  he  bore  himself  in  presence  of  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees;  and  how  he  faced 
Herod,  telling  him  plainly,  at  the  risk  of  his 
life,  as  it  afterwards  proved,  "  It  is  not  lawful  for 
thee  to  have  thy  brother's  wife."  Remember  that 
all  Judea,  and  Jerusalem,  and  Galilee  had  been 
bowing  down  in  his  presence;   and  now,   when 


Matthew  iii.  13-17.] 


HIS    BAPTISM. 


705 


i  II  obscure  nameless  One  of  Nazareth  conies  to 
liim,  only  as  yet  distinguished  from  others  by 
the  holiness  of  His  life  and  the  purity  of  His 
soul,  John  would  not  have  Him  bow  in  his 
presence,  but  would  himself  bend  low  before 
Him:  "  I  have  need  to  be  baptised  of  Thee,  and 
comest  Thou  to  me? "  Oh,  for  more  of  that 
grand  combination  of  lofty  courage  and  lowly 
reverence!  Verily,  "among  them  that  are  born 
of  women  there  hath  not  risen  a  greater  than 
John  the  Baptist." 

But  Jesus  answering  said  unto  him,  "  Suffer  it 
now;  for  thus  it  becometti  us  to  fulfil  all  right- 
eousness "  (R.  v.).  Though  about  to  enter  on 
His  Messianic  work,  He  has  not  yet  taken  its 
burden  on  Him;  accordingly  He  comes,  not  as 
Messiah,  but  in  the  simplest  and  most  unassum- 
ing way;  content  still,  as  He  has  been  all  along 
till  now,  to  be  reckoned  simply  as  of  Israel. 
This  is  what  we  take  to  be  the  force  of  the  plural 
pronoun  "  us." 

On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  remembered 
that  Jesus  must  have  recognised  in  the  summons 
to  the  Jordan  a  call  to  commence  His  work  as 
Messiah.  He  would  certainly  have  heard  from 
His  mother  of  the  prophetic  words  which  had 
been  spoken  concerning  His  cousin  and  Himself; 
and  would,  therefore,  as  soon  as  He  heard  of  the 
mission  of  John,  know  well  what  it  meant — He 
could  not  but  know  that  John  was  preparing  the 
way  before  Him,  and  therefore  that  His  time 
was  close  at  hand.  Of  this,  too,  we  have  an 
indication  in  His  answer  to  the  expostulation  of 
John.  "  Suffer  it  now,"  He  says;  as  if  to  say,  I 
am  as  yet  only  one  of  Israel;  My  time  is  at  hand, 
when  I  must  take  the  position  to  which  I  am 
called,  but  meantime  I  come  as  the  rest  come: 
"  Suffer  it  nozv;  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil 
all  righteousness." 

While  then  Jesus  came  simply  in  obedience  to 
the  will  of  God,  He  must  have  come  with  a  very 
heavy  burden.  His  study  of  the  Scriptures  must 
have  made  Him  painfully  familiar  with  the  dark 
prospects  before  Him.  Well  did  He  know  that 
the  path  of  the  Messiah  must  be  one  of  suffer- 
ing, that  He  must  be  despised  and  rejected,  that 
He  must  be  wounded  for  the  people's  transgres- 
sions and  bruised  for  their  iniquity;  that,  in  a 
word.  He  must  be  the  suffering  Priest  before  He 
can  be  the  reigning  King.  This  thought  of  His 
priesthood  must  have  been  especially  borne  in 
upon  Him  now  that  He  had  just  reached  the 
priestly  age.  In  His  thirteenth  year — the  Tem- 
ple age — He  had  gone  to  the  Temple,  and  now  at 
the  age  when  the  priest  is  consecrated  to  his 
office.  He  is  summoned  to  the  Jordan,  to  be 
baptised  by  one  whom  He  knows  to  be  sent  of 
God  to  prepare  the  way  before  Him.  Those 
Scriptures,  then,  which  speak  of  the  priestly 
office  the  Messiah  must  fill,  must  have  been  very 
much  in  His  mind  as  He  came  to  John  and 
ofered  Himself  to  be  baptised.  And  of  all  these 
Scriptures  none  would  seem  more  appropriate  at 
t'le  moment  than  those  words  of  the  fortieth 
Psalm:  "  Lo,  I  come:  in  the  volume  of  the  book 
it  is  written  of  Me,  I  delight  to  do  Thy  will, 
C   My  God." 

At  this  point  we  can  readily  see  the  appro- 
priateness of  His  baptism,  and  also  an  element 
in  common  between  it  and  that  of  the  people. 
They  had  come  professing  to  be  willing  to  do 
t  le  will  of  God  by  turning  from  sin  to  righteous- 
r  ess.  He  had  no  need  to  turn  from  sin  to  do 
1  he  will  of  God;  but  He  had  to  turn  from  the 
45— Vol.  ^X 


quiet  and  peaceful  home  life  at  Nazareth,  that 
He  might  take  up  the  burden  laid  upon  Him  ai 
Messiah.  So  He  as  well  as  they  had  to  leave 
the  old  life  and  begin  a  new  one;  and  in  this  we 
can  see  how  fitting  it  was  that  He  as  well  as  they 
should  be  baptised.  Then,  just  as  by  baptism — ■ 
the  symbol,  in  their  case,  of  separation  from  sin 
and  consecration  to  God — John  made  "  ready  a 
people  prepared  for  the  Lord;  "  so  by  baptism 
— the  symbol,  in  His  case,  of  separation  from 
private  life  and  consecration  to  God  in  the  office 
of  Messiah, — the  Lord  was  made  ready  for  the 
people.  By  baptism  John  opened  the  door  of 
the  new  Kingdom.  From  the  wilderness  of  sin 
the  people  entered  it  as  subjects;  from  the  se- 
clusion of  private  life  Jesus  entered  it  as  King 
and  Priest.  They  came  under  a  vow  of  obedi- 
ence unto  Him;  He  came  under  a  vow  of  obedi- 
ence unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  Cross. 

This,  then,  is  the  moment  of  His  taking  up 
the  Cross.  It  is  indeed  the  assumption  of  His 
royalty  as  Messiah-King;  but  then  He  knew  that 
He  must  suffer  and  die  before  He  could  enter 
on  His  glory;  therefore,  as  the  first  great  duty 
before  Him,  He  takes  up  the  Cross.  In  this  we 
can  see  a  still  further  appropriateness  in  the 
words  already  quoted,  as  is  suggested  in  the  well- 
known  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews: 
"  Sacrifice  and  offering  thou  wouldest  not,  but  a 
body  hast  thou  prepared  me:  in  burnt  offerings 
and  sacrifices  for  sin  thou  hast  had  no  pleasure. 
Then  said  I,  Lo,  I  come  (in  the  volume  of  the 
book  it  is  written  of  me)  to  do  thy  will,  O 
God."  Ah,  who  can  understand  the  love  in  the 
heart  of  Jesus,  who  can  measure  the  sacrifice  He 
makes,  as  He  bends  before  John,  and  is  baptised 
into  the  name  of  "  the  Christ,"  the  Saviour  of 
mankind! 

The  act  of  solemn  consecration  is  over.  He 
comes  up  out  of  the  water.  And  lo,  the  heavens 
are  opened,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  descends  upon 
Him,  and  a  voice  from  heaven  calls,  "  This  is 
My  beloved  Son,  in  Whom  I  am  well  pleased." 

"  The  heavens  were  opened."  What  was  the 
precise  natural  phenomenon  witnessed  we  can 
only  conjecture,  but  whatever  it  was,  it  was  but 
a  symbol  of  the  spiritual  opening  of  the  heavens. 
The  heaven  of  God's  love  and  of  all  holy  Angela, 
shut  from  man  by  sin,  was  opened  again  by  the 
Christ  of  God.  Nothing  could  be  more  appro- 
priate, therefore,  than  that  just  at  the  moment 
when  the  Holy  One  of  Israel  had  bowed  Him- 
self to  take  up  His  heavy  burden,  when  for  the 
first  time  it  was  possible  to  say,  "  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world!  "  the  heavens  should  open  to  welcome 
Him,  and  in  welcoming  Him,  the  Sin-bearer,  to 
welcome  all  \^hose  sins  He  came  to  take  away. 

"  And  He  saw  the  Spirit  of  God  descending 
like  a  dove,  and  lighting  upon  Him."  This  was 
His  anointing  for  the  work  He  had  come  to  do. 
The  priests  of  the  line  of  Aaron  had  been 
anointed  with  oil;  He  was  anointed  with  that 
of  which  the  oil  was  but  a  symbol, — the  Holy 
Spirit  descending  from  the  open  heaven.  From 
His  birth,  indeed.  He  had  been  guided  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  But  up  to  this  time  He  had, 
as  we  have  seen,  nothing  more  than  was  needed 
to  minister  to  that  growth  in  wisdom  which 
had  been  going  on  in  private  life  these  thirty 
years,  nothing  more  than  was  necessary  to  guide 
Him  day  by  day  in  His  quiet,  unexacting  duties 
at  home.  Now  He  needs  far  more.  Now  He 
must  receive  the  Spirit  without  measure,  in  the 


7o6 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


fulness  of  His  grace  and  power;  hence  the  or- 
ganic form  of  the  symbol.  The  emblem  used 
when  the  apostles  were  baptised  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  tongues  of  fire,  indicating  the  partial 
nature  of  the  endowment;  here  it  is  the  dove, 
suggesting  the  idea  of  completeness  and,  at  the 
same  time,  as  every  one  sees,  of  beauty,  gentle- 
ness, peace,  and  love.  Again  let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  it  is  on  Him  as  our  representative  that 
the  Spirit  descends,  that  His  baptism  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  in  order  that  He  may  be  ready 
to  fulfil  the  word  of  John,  "  He  shall  baptise  you 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  Heaven 
opened  above  Him  means  all  heavenly  blessings 
prepared  for  those  who  follow  Him  into  the  new 
Kingdom.  The  descent  of  the  Spirit  means  the 
bestowment  on  Him  and  His  of  heaven's  best 
gift  as  an  earnest  of  all  the  rest. 

Last  of  all  there  is  the  voice,  "  This  is  My 
beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased," 
spoken  not  merely  to  Himself  individually, — all 
along,  in  the  personal  sense,  He  was  God's  be- 
loved Son,  in  whom  He  was  well  pleased, — but 
to  the  Messiah,  as  the  Representative  and  Head 
of  a  new  redeemed  humanity,  as  the  First-born 
among  many  brethren,  as  One  who  at  the  very 
moment  was  undertaking  suretyship  on  behalf 
of  all  who  had  already  received  Him  or  should 
in  the  ages  to  come  receive  Him  as  their  Priest 
and  King — "  This  is  My  beloved  Son,  in  whom 
I  am  well  pleased." 

Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  hath  blessed  us  with  all  spirit- 
ual and  heavenly  blessings  in  Him:  with  an  open 
heaven,  a  present  Spirit,  a  reconciled  Father's 
voice.  Blessed  be  our  loving  Lord  and  Saviour 
that  He  came  so  humbly  to  the  Jordan,  stooped 
so  bravely  to  the  yoke,  took  up  our  heavy  Cross, 
and  carried  it  through  these  sorrowful  years  to 
the  bitter,  bitter  end.  And  blessed  be  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  all  grace,  that  He  abode  on  Him,  and 
abides  with  us.  May  the  grace  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  love  of  God,  and  the  com- 
munion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  be  with  us  all! 


CHAPTER  V. 

HIS  TEMPTATION. 

Matthew  iv.  i-ii. 

Much  has  been  written  on  the  possibility  of 
temptation  in  the  experience  of  a  sinless  Being. 
The  difficulties  which  have  been  raised  in  this 
region  are  chiefly  of  a  metaphysical  kind,  such 
as  it  is  possible — for  some  minds,  we  might  say 
inevitable — to  raise  at  every  point  •in  that  mys- 
terious complexity  which  we  call  life.  Without 
attempting  to  enter  profoundly  into  the  ques- 
tion, may  not  an  appeal  be  made  to  our  own 
experience?  Do  we  not  all  know  what  it  is  to 
be  "  tempted  without  sin," — without  sin,  that  is, 
in  reference  to  the  particular  thing  to  which  we 
are  tempted?  Are  there  not  desires  in  our  na- 
ture, not  only  thoroughly  innocent,  but  a  neces- 
sary part  of  our  humanity,  which,  nevertheless, 
give  occasion  to  temptation?  But  on  its  being 
recognised  that  to  follow  the  impulse,  however 
natural,  would  lead  to  wrong-doing,  the  tempta- 
tion is  instantly  repelled  and  integrity  perfectly 
preserved.  In  such  a  case  there  is  temptation, 
conflict,  victory — all  without  sin.  Surely  then 
what  is  possible  to  us  on  occasion,  was  also  pos- 


sible to  our  Lord  on  all  occasions,  all  througti 
His  pure  and  spotless  life.  His  taking  our  na- 
ture indeed  involved  not  only  the  possibility,  but 
the  necessity,  of  temptation. 

The  passage  before  us  records  what  is  known 
as  the  Temptation,  by  which  it  is  not,  of  course, 
meant  that  it  was  the  only  one.  Our  Lord  was 
all  His  life  exposed  to  the  assaults  of  the 
Tempter,  which  seem  indeed  to  have  increased 
in  violence  as  He  approached  the  end  of  His  life. 
Why,  then,  is  this  attack  singled  out  for  special 
record?  The  reason  seems  obvious.  It  marks 
the  beginning  of  the  life-work  of  the  Messiah. 
In  His  quiet  home  at  Nazareth  Jesus  must, have 
had  the  ordinary  temptations  to  which  childhood 
and  youth  are  subject.  That  was  the  time  of 
quiet  preparation  for  the  great  campaign.  Now 
the  war  must  begin.  He  must  address  Himself 
to  the  mighty  undertaking  of  destroying  the 
works  of  the  devil.  The  great  adversary,  there- 
fore, wisely  endeavours  to  mar  it  at  the  outset, 
by  a  deliberately  planned  series  of  assaults,  di- 
rected against  all  the  vulnerable  points  of  that 
human  nature  his  great  antagonism  must  wear. 
From  this  time  onward  our  Lord's  whole  life 
was  to  be  a  warfare,  not  against  the  rage  of 
wicked  men  only,  but  against  the  wiles  of  the 
unseen  adversary,  whose  opposition  must  have 
been  as  bitter  and  relentless  as  that  of  his  repre- 
s  ntatives  in  flesh  and  blood.  From  the  nature 
of  the  case,  the  conflict  waged  in  the  spiritual 
sphere  could  not  appear  in  the  history.  It  be- 
longed to  that  hidden  life,  of  which  even  the 
closest  disciples ,  could  see  but  very  little.  We 
get  a  hint  of  it  occasionally  in  certain  looks  and 
words  betokening  inward  conflict,  and  in  those 
frequent  retirings  to  solitary  places  to  pray;  but 
of  the  actual  soul  experience  we  have  no  record, 
except  in  the  case  of  this  first  pitched  battle, 
so  to  call  it,  of  the  lifelong  conflict.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  our  Lord  Himself  must  have  given 
His  disciples  the  information  on  this  deeply  in- 
teresting subject  which  enabled  them  to  put  it 
on  record,  for  the  encouragement  and  comfort  of 
His  people  in  all  time  to  come.  Blessed  be  H-'s 
Holy  Name,  for  this  unveiling  of  His  hidden  life. 

The  greater  portion,  indeed,  is  still  veiled.  A 
dark  cloud  of  mystery  hangs  over  the  forty  days. 
Nothing  else  is  told  of  them  in  this  Gospel  than 
that  Jesus  fasted  for  that  time— an  indication  of 
sustained  intensity  in  the  life  of  His  spirit.  From 
St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  we  learn  that  the  temp- 
tation lasted  throughout  the  entire  period — a  fact 
not  at  all  inconsistent  with  sustained  spiritual 
elevation,  for  it  is  just  at  such  periods  that  man 
is  most  exposed  to  the  assaults  of  the  enemy. 
We  may  not  penetrate  the  darkness  of  these  forty 
days.  Like  the  darkness  in  Gethsemane,  and 
again,  from  the  sixth  to  the  ninth  hour  on  Cal- 
vary, it  forbids  entrance.  These  were  times 
when  even  "  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved " 
could  not  be  with  Him.  These  are  solitudes  that 
can  never  be  disturbed.  Only  this  we  know: 
that  it  was  necessary  that  our  Saviour  should 
pass  through  these  dark  "  cloud-gates  "  as  He 
entered  on  and  as  He  finished  His  priestly  work 
on   earth. 

But  though  we  cannot  comprehend  what  our 
Lord  did  for  us  during  these  forty  days,  when 
He  "  recovered  Paradise  to  all  mankind."  we 
may,  remembering  that  He  was  tempted,  not 
only  as  our  Representative,  but  as  our  Exemplar, 
endeavour  with  all  humility  and  reverence  to 
enter  into  this  soul-experience  of  our  Lord,  so 


Wiittliew  iv.  i-ii.] 


HIS    TEMPTATION. 


707 


far  as  the  vivid  representation  of  its  main  fea- 
tures in  the  inspired  record  warrants. 

It  is  always  difficult  to  tell  the  story  of  soul- 
experience  in  such  a  way  as  to  come  home  to 
the  common  mind  and  heart  of  humanity.  It 
will  not  do  to  tell  it  in  the  language  of  philos- 
ophy or  psychology,  which  none  but  those  fa- 
miliar with  such  discussions  could  understand. 
It  must  be  addressed  to  the  imagination  as  well 
as  to  the  pure  reason.  If  this  had  been  suffi- 
ciently kept  in  view,  it  might  have  saved  many 
a  difficulty  on  the  part  of  those  who  have  set 
themselves  to  discover  exactly  what  were  the 
outward  circumstances  of  the  temptation,  for- 
getting that  here  especially  it  is  the  inward  and 
spiritual  with  which  we  have  to  do,  not  the  out- 
ward and  physical.  It  is  not  what  happened  to 
the  body  of  Jesus, — whether  it  was  actually  car- 
ried to  a  pinnacle  of  the  Temple  or  not, — with 
which  we  have  any  concern  in  connection  with 
the  subject  of  temptation;  but  what  happened 
to  His  soul:  for  it  is  the  soul  of  man,  not  his 
body,   which  is  tempted. 

It  is  above  all  things  necessary  to  hold  firmly 
to  the  reality  of  the  temptation.  It  was  no  mere 
sham  fight:  it  was  just  as  real  as  any  we  have 
ever  had  when  most  fiercely  assailed  by  the 
tempter.  This  will,  of  course,  dispose  of  the  vul- 
gar idea  that  the  devil  appeared  in  recognisable 
shape,  like  one  of  Dore's  fiends.  Some  people 
cannot  rise  above  the  folly  of  imagining  that 
there  is  nothing  real  that  is  not  material,  and 
therefore  that  our  Saviour  could  have  had  no 
conflict  with  Satan,  if  Satan  had  not  assumed 
some  material  shape.  The  power  of  temptation 
consists  of  its  appearance  of  being  suggested 
without  sinister  intent.  Our  Lord  was  tempted 
"  like  as  we  are,"  and  therefore  had  not  the  ad- 
vantage of  seeing  the  tempter  in  his  proper  per- 
son. He  may  have  appeared  "  as  an  angel  of 
light,"  or  it  may  have  been  only  as  an  invisible 
spirit  that  he  came.  However  that  may  be,  it 
was  unquestionably  a  spiritual  experience;  and 
in  that  consists  its  reality  and  value. 

In  order  firmly  to  grasp  the  reality  of  the  con- 
flict, we  must  not  only  bear  in  mind  that  our 
Lord  had  to  contend  with  the  same  invisible  ad- 
versary whom  we  must  encounter,  but  that  He 
had  to  meet  him  just  as  we  have  to  meet  him — 
not  as  God,  but  as  man.  The  man  Christ  Jesus 
was  tempted,  and  in  His  human  nature  He  tri- 
umphed. He  had  "  emptied  Himself "  of  His 
Divine  attributes;  and  to  have  had  recourse  to 
them  when  the  battle  raged  too  fiercely  for  His 
resources  as  a  man,  would  have  been  to  have 
acknowledged  defeat.  What  need  was  there  to 
show  that  God  could  triumph  over  Satan? 
There  needed  no  Incarnation  and  no  wilderness 
contest  for  that.  Had  it  not  been  as  a  man  that 
He  triumphed  there  had  been  no  victory  at  all. 
It  is  true  that  He  went  into  the  wilderness  in 
the  power  of  the  Spirit;  but  so  may  we  go  into 
any  wilderness  or  anywhere.  It  was  through 
Divine  strength  He  triumphed,  but  only  in  that 
strength  made  perfect  in  human  weakness  ac- 
cording to  the  promise  which  is  valid  for  us  all. 
Here  too  "  He  was  tempted  like  as  we  are," 
with  the  same  ways  and  means  of  resisting  the 
temptation  and  overcoming  it  as  are  available  to 
us.  It  follows  from  all  this  that  we  should  not 
look  at  this  temptation  scene  as  something  quite 
foreign  to  ourselves,  but  should  endeavour  to 
enter  into  it,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  to  realise  it. 

Observe   first   the   close   connection    with   the 


baptism.  This  is  made  prominent  and  emphatic 
in  all  the  three  accounts.  Evidently,  then,  it 
supplies  the  key  to  it.  The  baptism  of  Christ 
was  His  consecration  to  the  work  of  His  Messi- 
ahship.  And  let  us  not  imagine  that  He  had 
any  ready-made  plan  for  the  accomplishment  of 
it.  His  was  no  stereotyped  life-work,  such 
as  that  which  most  of  us  take  up,  in  which  we 
can  learn  from  those  who  have  gone  before  how 
they  set  about  it  and  proceed  accordingly.  Even 
with  all  that  advantage  most  of  us  have  to  do 
not  a  little  hard  thinking,  before  we  can  lay 
our  plans.  Could  it  be,  then,  that  He  who  had 
such  a  work  before  Him  had  no  need  to  think 
over  it,  and  plan  it,  and  weigh  different  methods 
of  procedure,  and  face  the  difficulties  which 
every  one  who  enters  on  a  new  enterprise  has  to 
meet?  Do  not  let  us  forget  for  a  moment  that 
He  was  a  real  man,  and  that  in  planning  the' 
course  He  would  pursue,  as  in  all  other  points,' 
He  was  tried  like  as  we  are. 

Accordingly,  no  sooner  is  He  baptised,  than" 
He  withdraws  by  Himself  alone,  as  Moses  and 
others  had  done  when  about  to  enter  on  their 
work,  to  commune  with  God  and  to  take  counsel" 
with  His  own  thoughts.  Was  He  free  from  all 
misgiving?  Let  us  not  imagine  that  it  was  im-' 
possible  for  Him  to  doubt.  Tempted  in  all' 
points  like  as  we  are.  He  must  have  known  this 
sore  temptation.  One  may  well  suppose,  then, 
that  He  was  visited  again  and  again  with  mis- 
givings during  these  forty  days,  so  that  it  was 
not  at  all  unnatural  that  temptation  should  take 
the  form:     "  If  Thou  be  the  Son  of  God " 

Look  now  at  the  first  temptation,  and  mark 
the  double  human  weakness  to  which  it  was 
addressed.  On  the  one  hand  doubt — "  If  Thou 
art  the  Son  of  God;  "  on  the  other,  hunger — for 
He  had  fasted  long  and  had  as  strong  a  craving 
for  bread  as  any  of  us  would  have  had  in  the 
circumstances.  See  now  the  force  of  the  temp- 
tation. He  is  suffering  from  hunger;  He  is 
tempted  to  doubt.  How  can  He  have  relief? 
"  If  Thou  be  the  Son  of  God,  command  that  these 
stones  be  made  bread."  Special  powers  are  in- 
trusted to  Him  for  His  work  as  Messiah.  Should 
He  not  use  them  now?  Why  not?  So  in  his 
subtlety  suggests  the  tempter.  In  vain.  He  had 
taken  His  place  among  His  brother-men,  and 
would  not  separate  Himself  from  them.  They 
could  not  command  stones  to  be  made  bread; 
and  would  He  cease  to  be  their  brother?  What 
saith  the  Law?  A  well-known  passage  leaps 
into  His  memory:  "  Man  shall  not  live  by  bread 
alone,  but  by  every  word  that  proceedeth  out 
of  the  mouth  of  God."  Man  must  trust  in  God, 
and  when  he  is  hungry  in  the  wilderness,  as  Is- 
rael was  of  old,  must  look  upwards  for  his  help. 
So  must  I;  so  will  I.  And  He  bears  the  hunger, 
repels  the  doubt,  and  conquers  His  subtle  foe. 

The  thought  of  the  doubt  that  must  exist  in 
other  minds  if  not  in  His  own,  gives  occasion 
for  a  second  assault.  To  have  proved  His  power 
by  commanding  the  stones  to  be  made  bread 
would  only  have  gratified  a  personal  craving. 
But  would  it  not  advance  His  work  to  make 
some  signal  display  of  the  powers  by  which  He 
shall  be  accredited — do  something  that  would 
attract  universal  attention;  not  in  the  desert,  but 
in  Jerusalem; — why  not  show  to  all  the  people 
that  God  is  with  Him  by  casting  Himself  from 
the  pinnacle  of  the  Temple?  "  If  Thou  be  the 
Son  of  God,  cast  Thyself  down;  for  it  is  writ- 
ten. He  shall  give  His  angels  charge  concerning 


7p8 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


Thee;  and  in  their  hands  they  shall  bear  Thee 
up,  lest  at  any  time  Thou  dash  Thy  foot  against 
a  stone."  One  sees  at  once  the  added  force  of 
this  temptation.  The  hunger  remains,  together 
with  the  weakness  of  body  and  faintness  of 
spirit  which  always  accompany  it.  And  the  very 
weapon  He  used  to  repel  the  first  assault  is 
turned  against  Him  now,  for  His  adversary  has 
found  a  passage  of  Scripture,  which  he  uses  with 
great  effect.  Moreover,  the  appeal  seems  to  be 
to  that  very  spirit  of  trustfulness  which  stood 
Him  in  such  stead  in  His  first  encounter.  Is 
He  not  hard  beset?  What  then?  Does  He 
in  this  emergency  summon  to  His  aid  any  ally 
denied  to  us  in  similar  stress  of  trial?  No:  He 
does  exactly  what  we  have  to  do  in  the  same 
case:  meets  Scripture  quoted  with  a  bias  by  other 
Scripture  thought  of  without  prejudice.  He  rec- 
ognises that  the  Scripture  first  presented  to  His 
mind  is  only  a  part  of  the  truth  which  bears 
on  the  case.  Something  more  must  be  had  in 
view,  before  the  path  of  duty  is  clear.  To  meet 
the  distracting  thought,  this  word  occurs,  "  Thou 
shalt  not  tempt  the  Lord  thy  God."  It  is  one 
thing  to  trust,  another  to  tempt.  I  was  trust- 
ing when  I  refused  to  command  the  stones  to 
be  made  bread.  But  I  should  be  tempting  God 
were  I  to  cast  myself  down  from  a  pinnacle  of 
the  Temple.  I  should  be  experimenting  upon 
Him,  as  did  the  children  of  Israel  at  Meribah 
and  at  Massah  (for  that  is  the  connection  of 
the  words  He  quotes)  when  they  said,  "  Is  the 
Lord  among  us  or  not?  "  I  must  not  experi- 
ment, must  not  tempt,  I  must  simply  trust.  Thus 
victory    is    gained   a    second   time. 

If  it  is  not  right  to  begin  His  work  by  any 
such  display  as  that  which  the  Tempter  has  just 
suggested,  how  shall  it  be  begun?  A  question 
surely  of  unexampled  difficulty.  The  air  was 
full  of  expectancy  in  regard  to  the  coming  of 
King  Messiah.  The  whole  nation  was  ready  to 
hail  him.  Not  only  so,  but  even  the  heathen 
nations  were  more  or  less  prepared  for  His  com- 
ing. Why  not  take  advantage  of  this  favourable 
state  of  things  at  home  and  abroad?  Why  not 
proclaim  a  kingdom  that  will  satisfy  these  wide- 
spread expectations,  and  gather  round  itself  all 
those  enthusiasms;  and,  after  having  thus  won 
the  people,  then  proceed  to  lead  them  on  to 
higher  and  better  things?  Why  not?  It  would 
be  bowing  down  to  the  prince  of  this  world.  It 
is  clearly  a  temptation  of  the  Evil  One.  To 
yield  to  it  would  be  to  fall  down  before  him  and 
worship  him  in  exchange  for  the  kingdoms  of 
this  world  and  the  glory  of  them.  It  would  be 
gaining  the  allegiance  of  men  by  methods  which 
are  not  of  God,  but  of  the  great  adversary.  He 
recognises  the  device  of  Satan  to  lure  Him  from 
the  path  of  self-denial  which  He  sees  to  be  the 
path  of  duty;  accordingly,  with  energy  He  says, 
"  Get  thee  hence,  Satan;  for  it  is  written,  Thou 
shale  worship  the  Lord  thv  God,  and  Him  only 
shalt  thou  serve."  In  establishing  My  kingdom 
I  must  show  Myself  to  be  a  servant  and  wor- 
shipper of  God  and  of  Him  only;  accordingly, 
no  worldly  methods  must  be  used,  however 
promising  they  may  seem  to  be;  the  battle  must 
be  fought  with  spiritual  weapons,  the  kingdom 
must  be  established  by  spiritual  forces  alone,  and 
on  truth  and  love  alone  must  I  depend:  I  choose 
the  path  of  the  Cross.  "  Get  thee  hence,  Sa- 
tan." 

The  crisis  is  passed.  The  path  of  duty  and  of 
sorrow  lies  plain  and  clear  before  Him.     He  has 


refused  to  turn  aside  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the 
left.  The  Tempter  has  been  foiled  at  every  ^yoint, 
and  so  must  withdraw,  for  the  time,  at  least, 
"  Then  the  devil  leaveth  Him;  and,  behold, 
angels  came  and  ministered  unto  Him." 


CHAPTER  VI. 

BEGINNING  OF  HIS  GALILEAN  MINISTRY. 

Matthew  iv.  12-25. 

Did  our  Lord's  ministry  begin  in  Galilee?  If 
so,  why  did  He  not  Himself  set  the  example 
of  "  beginning  at  Jerusalem  "  ?  As  a  matter  of 
fact  we  learn  from  the  fourth  Gospel  that  He  did 
begin  at  Jerusalem;  c-nd  that  it  was  only  after  He 
was  rejected  there  that  He  changed  the  scene 
of  His  labours  to  the  North.  Why  then  do  the 
three  Evangelists  not  mention  this  earlier  minis- 
try in  the  South?  The  answer  to  this  question 
seems  suggested  by  the  stress  laid  by  each  of  the 
three  on  the  fact  of  John's  imprisonment,  as 
giving  the  date  after  which  Christ  commenced 
His  work  in  the  North.  Here,  for  example  (ver. 
12),  it  is  put  thus:  "  Now  when  He  heard  that 
John  was  delivered  up,  He  withdrew  into  Gali- 
lee." Their  idea,  then,  seems  to  be  that  the  Ju- 
dean  ministry  of  Christ  belonged  rather  to  the 
closing  months  of  John's  career;  and  that  only 
after  John's  mission,  the  sphere  of  which  had 
been  mainly  in  the  South,  had  closed,  could  the 
special  work  qf  Christ  be  regarded  as  having 
begun. 

If  we  review  the  facts  we  shall  see  how  natural 
and  accurate  was  this  view  of  the  case.  John 
was  sent  to  prepare  the  way  of  the  Lord,  to  open 
the  door  of  Jerusalem  and  Judea  for  His  com- 
ing. At  first  the  herald  meets  with  great  suc- 
cess. Jerusalem  and  Judea  flock  out  to  him  for 
his  baptism.  The  way  seems  ready.  The  door 
is  opened.  The  Messiah  has  come;  and  John 
has  pointed  Him  out  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God  that 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  Now  the 
Passover  is  at  hand.  People  will  be  gathered 
together  from  all  parts  of  the  land.  What  better 
time  for  the  Lord  to  come  to  His  temple?  And, 
as  we  are  told  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  Jesus  takes 
the  opportunity,  goes  up  to  Jerusalem,  enters 
into  the  Temple,  and  at  once  begins  to  cleanse 
it.  How  is  He  received?  As  one  whose  way 
has  been  prepared,  whose  claims  have  been  duly 
authenticated  by  a  prophet  of  the  Lord,  as  all 
acknowledge  John  to  be?  Not  at  all.  Forth  step 
the  Temple  officials  and  ask  Him  by  what  au- 
thority He  does  these  things.  He  has  come  unto 
His  own;  His  own  receive  Him  not.  He  does 
not,  however,  too  hastily  accept  their  suicidal  re- 
fusal to  receive  Him.  He  gives  them  time  to 
think  of  it.  He  tarries  in  the  neighbourhood. 
He  and  John  baptising  in  the  same  region;  pa- 
tiently waiting,  as  it  would  seem,  for  signs  of 
relenting  on  the  part  of  the  rulers  and  Phari- 
sees,— one  of  whom,  indeed,  has  come  by  night 
and  made  inquiries;  and  who  can  tell  what  the 
result  will  be — whether  this  Nicodemus  may  not 
be  able  to  win  the  others  over,  so  that  atter  all 
there  will  be  waiting  for  the  King  the  welcome 
He  ought  to  have,  and  which  Me  is  well  entitled 
to  expect  after  the  reception  given  to  His  herald? 
But  no:  the  impression  of  John's  preaching  and 
baptism  is  wearing  off;  the  hardness  of  heart 
returns,  and  passes  into  positive  bitterness,  which 


Matthew  iv.  12-25.]    BEGINNING    OF    HIS    GALILEAN    MINISTRY 


709 


reaches  such  a  height  that  at  last  Herod  finds 
the  tide  so  turned  that  he  can  hazard  what  a  few 
months  before  would  have  been  the  foolhardy 
policy  of  seizing  John  and  shutting  him  in  prison. 
So  ends  the  mission  of  John — beginning  with 
largest  hope,  ending  in  cruellest  disappointment. 

The  early  Judean  ministry  of  Christ,  then,  as 
related  by  St.  John,  may  be  regarded  as  the  op- 
portunity which  Christ  gave  to  the  nation,  as 
represented  by  the  capital  and  the  Temple,  to 
follow  out  the  mission  of  John  to  its  intended 
issue — an  opportunity  which  the  leaders  of  the 
nation  wasted  and  threw  away,  and  which  there- 
fore came  to  nothing.  Hence  it  is  that  the  three 
Evangelists,  without  giving  any  of  the  details 
which  were  afterwards  supplied  by  St.  John,  sum 
up  the  closing  months  of  the  forerunner's  min- 
istry in  the  one  fact  which  suggests  all,  that  John 
was  silenced,  and  shut  up  in  prison.  We  see, 
then,  that  though  Jesus  did  in  a  sense  commence 
His  work  in  Galilee,  He  did  not  do  so  until  He 
had  first  given  the  authorities  of  the  city  and 
the  Temple  the  opportunity  of  having  it  begin, 
as  it  would  seem  most  natural  that  it  should 
have  begun,  in  the  centre  of  the  old  kingdom. 

But  though  it  was  His  treatment  in  the  South 
which  was  the  immediate  cause  of  this  with- 
drawal to  the  North  and  the  beginning  of  the 
establishment  of  the  new  kingdom  there,  yet 
this  was  no  unforeseen  contingency — this  too  was 
anticipated  in  the  prophetic  page,  for  herein  was 
fulfilled  the  word  of  Isaiah  the  prophet,  spoken 
long  ago  of  this  same  northern  land:  "  The  land 
of  Zabulon  and  the  land  of  Nepthalim,  by  the 
way  of  the  sea,  beyond  Jordan,  Galilee  of  the 
Gentiles;  the  people  which  sat  in  darkness  saw 
great  light;  and  to  them  which  sat  in  the  region 
and  shadow  of  death  light  is  sprung  up." 

It  is  the  old  story  over  again.  No  room  in 
the  inn,  so  He  must  be  born  in  a  manger;  no 
safety  in  Judea,  so  He  must  be  carried  to  Egypt; 
no  room  for  Him  in  His  own  capital  and  His 
Father's  house,  so  He  must  away  to  the  coun- 
try, the  uttermost  part  of  the  land,  which  men 
despised,  the  very  speech  of  which  was  reck- 
oned barbarous  in  the  polite  ears  of  the  metro- 
politans, a  region  which  was  scarce  counted  of 
the  land  at  all,  being  known  as  "  Galilee  of 
the  Gentiles,"  a  portion  of  the  country  which 
had  been  overrun  more  than  any  other  by  the 
foreign  invader,  and  therefore  known  as  "  the 
region  and  shadow  of  death;"  here  it  is  that 
the  new  light  will  arise,  the  new  power  be  first 
acknowledged,  and  the  new  blessing  first  en- 
joyed— one  of  the  many  illustrations  of  the 
Lord's  own  saying,  "  Many  of  the  last  shall  be 
first,  and  the  first  last." 

Here,  then,  our  Lord  begins  the  work  of  set- 
ting up  His  kingdom.  He  takes  up  the  same 
message  which  had  seemed  to  return  void  to 
its  preacher  in  the  South.  John  had  come  say- 
ing, "  Repent  ye;  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is 
at  hand."  The  people  of  the  South  had  seemed 
to  repent;  and  the  kingdom  seemed  about  to 
come  in  the  ancient  capital.  But  the  repentance 
was  only  superficial;  and  though  it  still  remained 
true  that  the  kingdom  was  at  hand,  it  was  not  to 
begin  in  Jerusalem. 

So.  in  the  new.  and,  to  human  appearance, 
far  less  promising  field  in  the  North,  the  work 
must  be  begun  afresh;  and  now  the  same  stirring 
words  are  ringing  in  Galilee,  as  rang  a  few 
months  before  in  Judea:  "  Repent;  for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  at  hand." 


It  is  now  in  fact  close  at  hand.  It  is  interesting 
to  note  its  first  beginnings.  "  And  Jesus  walking 
by  the  sea  of  Galilee,*  saw  two  brethren,  Simon 
called  Peter,  and  Andrew  his  brother,  casting  a 
net  into  the  sea;  for  they  were  fishers.  And  He 
saith  unto  them,  Follow  Me,  and  I  will  make  you 
fishers  of  men.  And  they  straightway  left  their 
nets,  and  followed  Him.  And  going  on  from 
thence  He  saw  other  two  brethren,  James  the 
son  of  Zebedee,  and  John  his  brother,  in  a  ship 
with  Zebedee  their  father,  mending  their  nets; 
and  He  called  them  and  they  immediately  left 
the  ship  and  their  father,  and  followed  Him." 

Observe  in  the  first  place  that,  though  John 
is  in  prison,  and  to  all  human  appearance  failure 
has  been  written  on  the  work  of  his  life,  the 
failure  is  only  seeming.  The  multitudes  that  had 
been  stirred  by  his  preaching  have  relapsed  into 
their  old  indifference,  but  there  are  a  few  whose 
souls  have  been  permanently  touched  to  finer 
issues.  They  are  not  of  the  lordly  Pharisees  or 
of  the  brilliant  Sadducees;  they  cannot  even 
claim  to  be  metropolitans;  they  are  poor  Gali- 
lean fishermen:  but  they  gave  heed  when  the 
prophet  pointed  them  to  the  Lamb  of  God,  the 
Messiah  that  was  to  come;  and  though  they  had 
only  spent  a  short  time  in  His  company,  yet 
golden  links  had  been  forged  between  them; 
they  had  heard  the  Shepherd's  voice;  had  fully 
recognised  His  Kingly  claims;  and  so  were 
ready,  waiting  for  the  word  of  command.  Now 
it  comes.  The  same  Holy  One  of  Nazareth  is 
walking  by  the  shores  of  their  lake.  He  has 
been  proclaiming  His  kingdom,  as  now  at  last 
beginning;  and,  though  the  manner  of  its  estab- 
lishment is  so  entirely  different  from  anything 
to  which  their  thoughts  have  been  accustomed 
in  the  past,  their  confidence  in  Him  is  such  that 
they  raise  no  doubt  or  question.  Accordingly, 
when  they  see  Him  coming  alone  and  unat- 
tended, without  any  of  the  trappings  or  the  suits 
of  royalty,  without  any  badge  or  sign  of  office, 
with  a  simple  word  of  command, — a  word  of 
command,  moreover,  which  demanded  of  them 
the  sacrifice  of  all  for  His  sake,  the  absolute 
trusting  of  themselves  and  all  their  future  to  His 
guidance  and  care, — they  do  not  hesitate  for  a 
single  moment;  but  first  Andrew  and  Simon  his 
brother,  and  a  little  further  on  James  and  John 
his  brother,  straightway  leave  nets,  father, 
friends,  home,  everything,  and  follow  Him. 

Suc'h  was  the  first  exercise  of  the  royal  au- 
thority of  the  new  King.  Such  was  the  constitu- 
tion of  His — Cabinet  shall  we  call  it? — or  of  His 
Kingdom  itself,  shall  we  not  rather  say?  for,  so 
far  as  we  can  see.  His  cabinet  at  this  moment 
was  all  the  kingdom  that  he  had.  Let  us  here 
pause  a  moment  and  try  to  realise  the  picture 
painted  for  us  in  that  grey  morning  time  of  what 
we  now  call  the  Christian  Era.  Suppose  some  of 
our  artists  could  reproduce  the  scene  for  us:  in 
the  background  the  lake  with  the  deserted  boats 
upon  the  shore,  old  Zebedee  with  a  half  sad,  half 
bewildered  look  upon  his  face,  wondering  what 
was  happening,  trying  to  imagine  what  he  would 
do  without  his  sons,  and  what  his  sons  would  do 
without  him  and  the  boat  and  the  nets;  and,  in 
*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  He  has  had  the  same  experi- 
ence even  in  Galilee  as  before,  for  He  is  cast  out  of  His 
own  place  Nazareth,  so  that  He  cannot  really  begin  there. 
He  gave  them  the  first  opportunity  in  Galilee  as  He  had 
given  Jerusalem  first  of  all,  but  they  too  had  rejected  it, 
had  driven  Him  out,  and  hence  it  is  that  the  beginning 
was  not  in  the  village  up  in  the  hills,  but  down  by  the 
lakeside  in  the  midst  of  the  busy  life  that  thronged  its 
shores. 


710 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


the  foreground,  the  five  men  walking  along,  four 
of  them  without  the  least  idea  of  where  they  were 
going  or  of  what  they  had  to  do.  Or  suppose 
that,  instead  of  having  a  picture  of  it  now,  with 
all  the  light  that  eighteen  centuries  have  shed 
upon  it,  we  could  transport  ourselves  back  to  the 
very  time  and  stand  there  on  the  very  spot  and 
see  the  scene  with  our  own  eyes;  and  suppose 
that  we  were  told  by  some  bystander,  That  man 
of  the  five  that  looks  like  the  leader  of  the 
rest  thinks  himself  a  king:  he  imagines  he 
has  been  sent  to  set  up  a  kingdom  of  Heaven 
upon  the  earth;  and  he  has  just  asked  these 
other  four  to  join  him,  and  there  they  are, 
setting  out  upon  their  task.  What  should 
we  have  thought?  If  we  had  had  only  flesh 
and  blood  to  consult  with,  we  should  have 
thought  the  whole  thing  supremely  ridiculous; 
we  should  have  expected  to  see  the  four 
men  back  to  their  boats  and  nets  again  in  a 
few  days,  sadder  but  wiser  men.  How  far  Zebe- 
dee  had  a  spiritually  enlightened  mind  we  dare 
not  say;  perhaps  he  was  as  willing  that  his  sons 
should  go,  as  they  were  to  go;  but  if  he  was, 
it  could  not  have  been  flesh  and  blood  that  re- 
vealed it  to  him;  he  as  well  as  his  sons  must 
have  felt  the  power  of  the  Spirit  that  was  in 
Christ.  But  if  he  did  not  at  all  understand  it  or 
believe  in  it,  we  can  fancy  him  saying  to  the  two 
young  men  when  they  left:  "  Go  ofif  now,  if  you 
like;  you  will  be  back  again  in  a  few  days,  and 
foolish  as  you  Tiave  been,  your  old  father  will  be 
glad  to  take  you  into  his  boat  again." 

It  is  worth  while  for  us  to  try  to  realise  what 
happened  in  its  veriest  simplicity;  for  we  have 
read  the  story  so  often,  and  are  so  thoroughly 
familiar  with  it,  that  we  are  apt  to  miss  its  mar- 
vel, to  fail  to  recognise  that  it  is  perhaps  the 
most  striking  illustration  in  all  history  of  the 
apostle's  statement,  "  God  hath  chosen  the  fool- 
ish things  of  the  world  to  confound  the  wise, 
and  God  hath  chosen  the  weak  things  of  the 
world  to  confound  the  things  which  are  mighty, 
.  .  .  that  no  flesh  s'hould  glory  in  His  pres- 
ence." 

Where  was  ever  a  weaker  thing  in  this  world 
than  the  beginning  of  this  kingdom?  It  would 
be  difficult  to  imagine  any  commencement  that 
would  have  seemed  weaker  in  worldly  eyes. 
Stand  by  once  again  and  look  at  it  with  only 
human  eyes;  say,  is  it  not  all  weakness  together? 
—weakness  in  the  leader  to  imagine  He  can  set 
up  a  kingdom  after  such  a  fashion,  weakness 
in  the  followers  to  leave  a  paying  business  on 
such  a  fool's  errand.  But  "  the  foolishness  of 
God  is  wiser  than  men:  and  the  weakness  of 
God  is  stronger  than  men."  And  now  that  we 
look  back  upon  that  scene,  we  recognise  it  as 
one  of  the  grandest  this  earth  has  ever  witnessed. 
If  it  were  painted  now,  what  light  must  there  be 
in  the  Leader's  eye,  what  majesty  in  His  step, 
what  glory  of  dawning  faith  and  love  and  hope 
in  the  faces  of  the  rest — it  must  needs  be  a  picture 
of  Sunrise,  or  it  would  be  utterly  unworthy  of 
the   theme! 

Now  follow  them:  where  will  they  go,  and 
what  will  they  do?  "Will  they  take  arms  and 
call  to  arms  the  countryside?  Then  march  on 
Jerusalem  and  take  the  throne  of  David,  and 
thence  to  Rome  and  snatch  from  Csesar  the 
sceptre  of  the  world?  "  And  Jesus  went  about 
all  Galilee,  teaching  in  their  synagogues,  and 
preaching  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom,  and  heal- 
ing  all    manner   of   sickness   and   all   manner   of 


disease  among  the  people."  Teaching — preach- 
ing— healing:  these  were  the  methods  for  set- 
ting up  the  kingdom.  "  Teaching  " — this  was  the 
new  light;  "preaching  the  Gospel  of  the  King- 
dom " — this  was  the  new  power,  power  not  of  the 
sword  but  of  the  Word,  the  power  of  persuasion, 
so  that  the  people  will  yield  themselves  willingly 
or  not  at  all,  for  there  is  to  be  not  a  shadow  ol 
constraint,  not  the  smallest  use  of  force  or  com- 
pulsion, not  the  slightest  interference  with  hu- 
man freedom  in  this  new  kingdom;  and  "heal- 
ing,"— this  is  to  be  the  great  thing;  this  is  what 
a  sick  world  wants,  this  is  what  souls  and  bodies 
of  men  alike  are  crying  out  for — "  healing  al! 
manner  of  sickness  and  all  manner  of  disease 
among  the  people."  Heavenly  light,  heavenly 
power,  heavenly  healing — these  are  the  weapons 
of  the  new  warfare;  these  the  regalia  of  the  new 
kingdom.  "  And  the  report  of  Him  went  forth 
into  all  Syria;  and  they  brought  unto  Him  all 
that  were  sick,  holden  with  divers  diseases  and 
torments,  possessed  with  devils,  and  epileptic, 
and  palsied;  and  He  healed  them  "  (R.  V.).  Call 
to  mind,  for  a  moment,  how  in  the  extremity  of 
hunger  He  would  not  use  one  fraction  of  the 
entrusted  power  for  His  own  behoof.  "  Himself 
He  cannot  save."  But  see  how  He  saves  others. 
No  stinting  now  of  the  heavenly  power;  it  flows 
in  streams  of  blessing:  "  They  brought  unto 
Him  all  that  were  sick,  .  .  .  and  He  healed 
them." 

It  is  daybreak  on  the  shores  of  Galilee.  The 
Sun  of  Righteousness  has  risen  with  healing  in 
His  wings. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  GOSPEL  OF  THE  KINGDOM. 

("  Sermon  on  the  Mount.") 

Matthew  v.,   vi.,   vii. 

It  may  seem  almost  heresy  to  object  to  tha 
time-honoured  title  "  Sermon  on  the  Mount;  " 
yet,  so  small  has  the  word  "  sermon  "  become, 
on  account  of  its  application  to  those  produc- 
tions of  which  there  is  material  for  a  dozen  in 
single  sentences  of  this  great  discourse,  that  there 
is  danger  of  belittling  it  by  the  use  of  a  title 
which  suggests  even  the  remotest  relationship 
to  these  ephemeral  efforts.  No  mere  sermon  is 
this,  only  distinguished  from  others  of  its  class 
by  its  reach  and  sweep  and  power:  it  stands 
alone  as  the  grand  charter  of  the  commonwealth 
of  heaven;  or,  to  keep  the  simple  title  the  evan- 
gelist himself  suggests  (iv.  23),  it  is  "  The  Gos- 
pel (or  good  news)  of  the  Kingdom."  To  un- 
derstand it  aright  we  must  keep  this  in  mind, 
avoiding  the  easy  method  of  treating  it  as  a  mere 
series  of  lessons  on  dififerent  subjects,  and  en- 
deavouring to  grasp  the  unity  of  thought  and 
purpose  which  binds  its  dififerent  parts  into  one 
grand  whole. 

It  may  help  us  to  do  this  if  we  first  ask  our- 
selves what  questions  would  naturally  arise  in  the 
minds  of  the  more  thoughtful  of  the  people, 
when  they  heard  the  announcement,  "  The  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  at  hand."  It  was  evidently  to 
such  persons  the  Lord  addressed  Himself.  "  See- 
ing the  multitudes,"  we  read,  "  He  went  up  into 
the  mountain,"  perhaps  for  the  purpose  of  se- 
lecting His  audience.     The  idle  and  indifferent 


Matthew  v.,  vi.,  vii.] 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


711 


would  stay  down  on  the  plain;  only  those  who 
were  in  some  measure  stirred  in  spirit  would 
follow  Him  as  He  climbed  the  steep  ascent  from 
the  shore  of  the  lake  to  the  plateau  above;  and 
in  their  minds  they  would  in  all  probability  be 
revolving  such  questions  as  these:  (i)  "  What 
is  this  kingdom,  what  advantages  does  it  offer, 
and  who  are  the  people  that  belong  to  it?" 
(2)  "  What  is  required  of  those  that  belong  to 
it?  what  are  its  laws  and  obligations?"  And  if 
these  two  questions  were  answered  satisfacto- 
rily, a  third  would  naturally  follow — (3)  "How 
may  those  who  desire  to  share  its  privileges 
and  assume  its  obligations  become  citizens  of 
it?"  These,  accordingly,  are  the  three  great 
questions  dealt  with  in  succession. 


I.  The  Nature  and  Constitution  of  the 
Kingdom  (vv.  2-16:  first  in  itself,  and  then  in 
relation  to  the  world). 

I.  In  Itself  ("  The  Beatitudes"),  vv.  2-12. 

The  answer  to  the  questions  in  the  people's 
hearts  is  given  in  no  cold  didactic  way.  The 
truth  about  the  heavenly  kingdom  comes  warm 
from  a  loving  heart  yearning  over  the  woes  of 
a  weary  and  heavy-laden  humanity.  Its  first 
word  is  "  Blessed  "  ;  its  first  paragraph,  Beati- 
tudes. Plainly  the  King  of  Heaven  has  come  to 
bless.  There  is  no  thunder  nor  lightning  nor 
tempest  on  this  mount;  all  is  calm  and  peaceful 
as  a  summer's  day. 

How  high  the  key-note  struck  in  this  first 
word  of  the  King!  The  advantages  usually  asso- 
ciated with  the  best  earthly  government  are  very 
moderate  indeed.  We  speak  of  the  common- 
wealth, a  word  which  is  supposed  to  mean  the 
common  welfare;  but  the  common  welfare  is  quite 
beVond  the  power  of  any  earthly  government, 
which  at  most  can  only  give  protection  against 
those  enemies  that  would  hinder  the  people  from 
doing  what  they  can  to  secure  their  own  wel- 
fare. Biit  here  is. a  kingdom  which  is  to  secure 
the  well-being  of  all  who  belong  to  it;  and  not 
well-being  only,  but  something  far  beyond  and 
above  it:  for  "  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard, 
neither  have  entered  into  the  heart  of  man,  the 
things  which  God  hath  prepared  for  them  that 
Jove  Him,"  and  which  His  ambassador  wrapped 
up  in  that  great  word  "  Blessed,"  the  key-note 
of  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom. 

As  he  proceeds  to  show  wherein  this  blessed- 
ness is  to  be  found,  we  are  struck  by  the  original- 
ity of  the  conception,  and  its  opposition  to  vul- 
gar ideas.  What  the  ordinary  way  of  thinking 
on  the  subject  is  to  this  day  can  be  readily  seen 
in  that  very  word  "  wealth,"  which  in  its  original 
significance  means  welfare,  but  from  the  mistaken 
idea  that  a  man's  life  consists  in  the  abundance 
of  the  things  which  he  possesses  has  come  to 
mean  what  it  means  now.  Who  can  tell  the 
woes  that  result  from  the  prevalence  of  this  grand 
rnistake — how  men  are  led  off  in  pursuit  of  hap- 
piness in  a  wrong  direction  altogether,  away 
from  its  true  source,  and  set  to  contending  and 
competing  with  one  another,  so  that  there  is  con- 
stant danger — a  danger  averted  only  by  the  de- 
gree in  which  the  truth  enshrined  in  the  Beati- 
tudes prevails — that  "  the  common  wealth  "  will 
become  the  common  woe?  What  a  different 
world  this  would  be  if  only  the  teaching  of  Christ 
(n  this  one  subject  were  heartily  accepted — not 
Yy  a  few  here  and  there,  but  by  society  at  large! 


Then  should  we  see  indeed  a  kingdom  of  heaven 
upon  earth. 

For  observe  wherein  our  new  King  finds  the 
universal  weal.  We  cannot  follow  the  beatitudes 
one  by  one;  but  glancing  over  them  we  see,  run- 
ning through  them  all,  this  great  truth — that 
blessedness  is  essentially  spiritual,  that  it  depends" 
not  so  much  on  a  man's  condition. as  on  his  char- 
acter, not  so  much  on  what  he  has  as  on  what 
he  is.  It  needs  no  great  effort  of  imagination  to 
see  that  if  men  in  general  were  to  make  it  their 
main  object  and  endeavour  in  life  to  be  what 
they  ought  to  be,  rather  than  to  scramble  for 
what  they  can  get,  this  earth  would  speedily  be- 
come a  moral  paradise. 

In  expounding  the  blessedness  of  the  king- 
dom the  Master  has  unfolded  the  character  of 
its  members,  thus  not  only  explaining  the 
nature  of  the  kingdom  and  the  advantages 
to  be  enjoyed  under  it,  but  also  showing 
who  those  are  that  belong  to  it.  That 
this  was  intended  seems  evident  from  the 
first  and  the  last  of  the  beatitudes,  both  end- 
ing with  the  emphatic  words  "  theirs  is  the  king- 
dom of  heaven."  It  is  as  if  on  the  two  gates  at 
the  hither  and  farther  end  of  this  beautiful  garden 
were  inscribed  the  words,  "  The  truly  blessed 
ones,  the  citizens  of  the  commonwealth  of 
heaven,  are  those  who  are  at  home  here."  Orig- 
inality of  conception  is  again  apparent.  A  king- 
dom so  constituted  was  an  entirely  new  thing 
in  the  world.  Previously  it  had  been  a  matter 
of  race  or  of  place  or  of  forced  subjection.  The 
forefathers  of  these  people  had  belonged  to  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  because  they  belonged  to 
Israel's  race;  themselves  belonged  to  the  empire 
of  Rome,  because  their  country  had  been  con- 
quered and  they  were  obliged  to  acknowledge 
Rome's  sway;  moreover,  they  were  subjects  of 
Herod  Antipas,  simply  because  they  lived  in  Gal- 
ilee. Here  was  a  kingdom  in  which  race  distinc- 
tions had  no  place,  which  took  no  account  of 
territorial  limits,  which  made  no  appeal  to  force 
of  arms  or  rights  of  conquest — a  kingdom 
founded  on  character. 

Yet  it  is  no  mere  aristocracy  of  natural  virtue. 
It  is  not  a  Royal  Academy  of  the  spiritually 
noble  and  great.  Its  line  seems  rather  to  stretch 
down  to  the  lowest,  for  who  else  are  the  poor 
in  spirit?  And  the  mourners  and  the  meek  are 
no  elect  classes  of  nature's  nobility.  On  the 
other  hand,  liowever,  it  runs  up  to  heights  even 
quite  out  of  sight  of  the  easy-going  virtue  of  the 
day;  for  those  who  belong  to  this  kingdom  are 
men  full  of  eager  aspirations,  bent  on  heart 
purity,  given  to  efforts  for  the  good  of  others, 
ready  even  to  suffer  the  loss  of  all  things  for 
truth  and  righteousness'  sake.  The  line  is 
stretched  so  far  down  that  even  the  lowest  may 
enter;  yet  it  runs  up  so  high  that  those  have 
no  place  in  it  who  are  satisfied  with  mere  average 
morality,  who  count  it  enough  to  be  free  from 
vices  that  degrade  the  man,  and  innocent  of 
crimes  that  offend  the  state.  Most  respectable 
citizens  of  an  earthly  commonwealth  such  hon- 
est men  may  be;  but  no  kingdom  of  heaven  is 
open  to  such  as  they.  The  foundations  of  com- 
mon morality  are  of  course  assumed,  as  is 
made  specially  evident  in  the  next  division  of 
the  great  discourse;  but  it  would  have  been  quite 
misleading  had  the  Herald  of  heaven's  kingdom 
said  "  Blessed  are  the  honest,"  or  "  Blessed  is 
the  man  who  tells  no  lies."  The  common  virtues 
are  quite  indispensable;  but  there  must  be  some- 


712 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


thing  beyond  these — first  a  sense  of  need  of 
something  far  higher  and  better,  then  a  hunger- 
ing and  thirsting  after  it,  and  as  a  necessary 
consequence  some  attainment  of  it,  in  order  to 
citizenship  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  and  enjoy- 
ment of  its  blessedness. 

The  last  beatitude  breaks  forth  into  a  song  of 
joy.  No  light-hearted  joy,  as  of  those  who  shut 
their  eyes  to  the  dark  things  in  life,  but  joy  in 
facing  the  very  worst  the  world  can  do : 
"  Blessed  are  ye  when  men  shall  revile  you,  and 
persecute  you,  and  shall  say  all  manner  of  evil 
against  you  falsely,  for  My  sake.  Rejoice,  and 
be  exceeding  glad."  O  wonderful  alchemy  of 
heaven,  which  can  change  earth's  dust  and  ashes 
into  purest  gold!  Think,  too,  what  riches  and 
royalty  of  spirit  in  place  of  the  poverty  with 
which  the  series  began. 

These  eight  beatitudes  are  the  diatonic  scale  of 
heaven's  music.  Its  keynote  is  blessing;  its  up- 
per octave,  joy.  Those  who  heard  it  first  with 
quickened  souls  cotdd  no  longer  doubt  that  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  was  at  hand;  indeed,  was 
there  on  the  mountain  that  day  ! 

2.  In  relation  to  the  World  (w.  13-16). 

The  original  promise  to  Abraham  was  two- 
fold: "I  will  bless  thee,"  "Thou  shalt  be  a 
blessing"  (Gen.  xii.  2).  The  beatitudes  corres- 
pond to  the  former,  the  passage  before  us  to  the 
latter.  The  beatitudes  are,  so  to  speak,  the  home 
affairs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  the  passage 
which  follows  is  occupied  with  foreign  relations. 
Those  spoke  of  blessedness  within,  this  speaks 
of  usefulness  without;  for  the  disciples  of  Christ 
are  known  not  only  by  their  personal  character 
and  disposition,  but  also  by  their  influence  on 
others. 

The  relations  of  the  members  of  the  kingdom 
to  "  those  that  are  without "  is  a  complex  and 
difificult  subject;  but  the  essence  of  it  is  set  forth 
with  surpassing  clearness,  comprehensiveness, 
and  simplicity  by  the  use  of  two  unpretentious 
but  most  expressive  figures,  almost  infinite  in 
their  suggestiveness — salt  and  light.  This  is  our 
first  experience  of  a  well-known  characteristic 
of  the  teaching  of  Christ — viz.,  His  use  of  the 
simplest  and  most  familiar  objects  of  nature  and 
circumstances  of  daily  life,  to  convey  highest 
and  most  important  truth;  and  at  once  we  recog- 
nise the  touch  of  the  Master.  We  cannot  fail 
to  see  that  out  of  all  nature's  infinity  He  has 
selected  the  two  illustrations, — the  only  two, 
which  exactly  fit  and  fill  the  purpose  for  which 
He  employs  them.  To  the  thoughtful  mind  there 
is  something  here  which  prepares  for  such  tokens 
of  mastery  over  nature  as  are  found  lat;er  on  in 
the  hushing  of  the  storm  and  the  stilling  of  the 
sea. 

"  Salt  "  suggests  the  conservative,  "  light  "  the 
liberal,  side  of  the  politics  of  the  kingdom;  but 
the  two  are  not  in  opposition,  they  are  in  fullest 
harmony,  the  one  being  the  complement  of  the 
other.  Christian  people,  if  they  are  what  they 
profess  to  be,  are  all  conservatives  and  all  lib- 
erals: conservators  of  all  that  is  good,  and  dif- 
fusers  of  all  that  is  of  the  nature  of  light.  Each 
of  these  sides  of  Christian  influence  is  presented 
in  succession. 

''  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth."  The  metaphor 
suggests  the  sad  fact  that,  whatever  tendency 
to  upward  development  there  may  be  in  the 
world  of  nature,  there  is  a  contrary  tendency  in 
the  world  of  men,  so  far  as  character  is  con- 
cerned.    The   world   has   often    made   great   ad- 


vances in  civiUsation;  but  these,  unless  counter- 
acted by  forces  from  above,  have  always  been 
accompanied  by  a  degeneracy  in  morals,  which 
in  course  of  time  has  brought  about  the  ruin 
of  mighty  states.  All  that  is  best  and  most  hope- 
ful in  mere  worldly  civilisation  has  in  it  the 
canker  of  moral  evil, 

"  That  rotting  inward  slowly  moulders  all." 

The  only  possible  counteractive  is  the  introduc- 
tion of  an  element  into  society  which  will  hold 
in  check  the  forces  that  make  for  unrighteous- 
ness, and  be  itself  an  elevating  and  purifjdng 
influence.  Such  an  element  Christians  were  to 
be  in  the  world. 

Such,  to  a  large  extent,  they  have  been.  That 
they  were  the  salt  of  the  Roman  empire  during 
the  evil  days  of  its  decline,  no  student  of  history 
can  fail  to  see.  Again,  in  the  Dark  Ages  that 
followed,  we  can  still  trace  the  sweetening  in- 
fluence of  those  holy  lives  which  were  scattered 
Uke  shining  grains  of  salt  through  the  ferment 
and  seething  of  the  times.  So  it  has  been 
throughout,  and  is  still.  It  is  true  that  there  is 
no  longer  the  sharp  distinction  between  Chris- 
tians and  the  world  which  there  was  in  days 
when  it  cost  something  to  confess  Christ.  There 
are  now  so  many  Christians  in  name  who  are  not 
so  in  reality,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  so  many  in 
reality  who  are  not  so  in  name,  and  moreover 
so  many  who  are  Christians  neither  in  name  nor 
in  reality,  but  who  are  nevertheless  unconsciously 
gfuided  by  Christian  principles  as  the  result  of 
the  wide  diffusion  of  Christian  thought  and  sen- 
timent— that  the  conservative  influence  of  dis- 
tinctive Christianity  is  very  difficult  to  estimate 
and  is  far  less  appreciated  than  it  should  be. 
But  it  is  as  real  and  efficient  as  ever.  If  Chris- 
tianity, as  a  conservative  force  in  society,  were 
to  be  suddenly  eliminated,  the  social  fabric  v/ould 
fall  in  ruins;  but  if  only  the  salt  were  all  genuine, 
if  Christian  people  everywhere  had  the  savour  of 
the  eight  beatitudes  about  them,  their  conserva- 
tive power  as  to  all  that  is  good,  and  restraining 
influence  as  to  all  that  is  evil,  would  be  so  mani- 
fest and  mighty  that  none  could  question  it. 

If  the  salt  would  only  keep  its  savour — there  is 
the  weak  point.  We  know  and  feel  it  after  the 
experience  of  all  these  centuries.  And  did  n  )t 
our  omniscient  Lord  lay  His  finger  on  it  at 
the  very  outset?  He  needed  not  that  any  one 
should  tell  Him  what  was  in  man.  He  knew 
that  there  was  that  in  His  truth  which  would 
be  genuinely  and  ef^ciently  conservative;  but  He 
knew  equally  well  that  there  was  that  in  man 
which  would  to  a  large  extent  neutralise  that 
conservative  power,  that  the  salt  would  be  in  con- 
stant danger  of  losing  its  savour.  Hence,  after 
the  encouraging  words  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the 
earth,"  He  gives  an  earnest  warning  which  nec- 
essarily moderates  the  too  sanguine  anticipations 
that  would  otherwise  have  been  excited. 

Alas!  with  what  sad  certainty  has  history 
proved  the  need  of  this  warning!  The  salt  lost 
its  savour  in  the  churches  of  the  East,  or  it 
would  never  have  been  cast  out  and  trodden 
under  foot  of  the  Mohammedan  invaders.  It  lost 
its  savour  in  the  West,  or  there  would  have  been 
no  papal  corruption,  growing  worse  and  worse 
till  it  seemed  as  if  Western  Christendom  must 
in  turn  be  dissolved — a  fate  which  was  only 
averted  by  the  fresh  salt  of  the  Reformation 
revival.  In  modern  times  there  is  ever  the  same 
danger,  sometimes  affecting  all  the  churches,  as 


i 


Matthewv.,  vi.,  vii.]          THE    GOSPEL    OF   THE    KINGDOM. 


713 


in  the  dark  days  preceding  the  revival  under 
Whitefield  and  Wesley,  always  affecting  some  of 
them  or  some  portions  of  them,  as  is  too  appar- 
ent on  every  hand  in  these  days  in  which  we  live. 
There  is  as  much  need  as  ever  to  lav  to  heart 
the  solemn  warning  of  the  King.  It  is  as  pun- 
gent as  salt  itself.  "  Of  what  use,"  He  asks,  "  is 
tasteless  salt?  It  is  fit  only  to  be  cast  out  and 
trodden  under  foot  of  men."  Equally  useless 
is  the  so-called  Christian,  who  has  nothing  in 
character  or  life  to  distinguish  him  from  the 
world;  who,  though  he  may  be  honest  and  truth- 
ful and  sober,  a  very  respectable  citizen  of  an 
earthly  kingdom,  has  none  of  the  characteristic 
marks  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  none  of  the 
savour  of  the  beatitudes  about  him.  It  is  only 
because  there  are  still  so  many  savourless  Chris- 
tians that  the  value  of  the  Church  as  a  conserva- 
tive influence  on  society  is  so  little  recognised; 
and  that  there  are  so  many  critics,  not  all  un- 
intelligent or  wilfully  unfair,  who  begin  to  think 
it  is  time  that  it  were  cast  out  and  trodden  under 
foot  of  men. 

"  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world."  We  need  not 
stay  to  show  the  liberality  of  light.  Its  peculiar 
characteristic  is  giving,  spending;  for  this  pur- 
pose wholly  it  exists,  losing  its  own  life  in  order 
to  find  it  again  in  brightness  diffused  on  all 
,  around. 

I      Observe,  it  is  not  "  Ye  carry  the  light,"  but 
\ "  Ye  are  the  light."   We  are  apt  to  think  of  light  in 
the  abstract — as  truth,  as  doctrine,  as  something 
to   be   believed   and   held  and   expounded.     We 
quote  the  familiar  words,  "  Great  is  the  Truth, 
and  it  shall  prevail,"  and  we  imagine  they  are 
true.     They  are   true   indeed,   in   the   long   run, 
but  not  as  often  understood,  certainly  not  in  the 
region   of  the   moral   and   spiritual.     Of   course 
truth  in  the  abstract,  especially  moral  and  spir- 
itual truth,  ought  to  prevail;  but  it  never  does 
when  men's  interests  lie,  or  seem  to  lie,  in  the 
contrary   direction.      Such   truth,    to   be   mighty, 
must  be  vitalised;  it  must  glow  in  human  hearts, 
burn  on  human  tongues,  shine  in  human  lives, 
p.  The  King  of  truth  knew  this  well;  and  hence  He 
'   placed  the  hope  of  the  future,  the  hope  of  dis- 
pelling   the    world's    darkness,    not     in     abstract 
truth,  but  in  truth  incarnate  in  the  true  disciple: 
'    "  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world." 

In  the  strictest  and  highest  sense,  of  course, 
Christ  Himself  is  the  Light  of  the  world.  This 
is  beautifully  set  forth  in  discourses  reported  by 
another  Evangelist  (John  viii.  12,  ix.  5);  and, 
indeed,  it  has  been  already  taught  by  implication 
in  the  Evangel  before  us,  where,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  opening  of  Christ's  ministry  is  likened 
to  sunrise  in  the  land  of  Zebulon  and  Naph- 
tali  (chap.  iv.  16).  But  the  personal  Christ  can- 
not remain  upon  the  earth.  Only  for  a  few  years 
can  He  be  in  this  way  the  Light  of  the  world, 
as  He  expressly  says  in  one  of  the  passages  above 
referred  to  (John  ix.  5);  and  He  is  speaking  now 
not  for  the  next  few  years,  but  for  the  coming 
centuries,  during  which  He  must  be  represented 
by  His  faithful  disciples,  appointed  to  be  His 
witnesses  (Acts  i.  8)  to  the  ends  of  the  earth; 
so  at  once  He  puts  the  responsibility  on  them, 
and  says,   "  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world." 

This  responsibility  it  was  impossible  to  avoid. 
As  a  matter  of  course,  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
must  be  a  prominent  object  in  the  sight  of  men. 
The  mountain  of  the  Lord's  house  must  be  es- 
tablished on   the   top   of  the   mountains   (Isa.   ii. 


2),  and  therefore  may  not  be  inconspicuous: 
"  A  city  set  on  a  hill  cannot  be  hid."  It  has 
been  often  said,  but  it  will  bear  repeating,  that 
Christians  are  the  world's  Bible.  People  who 
never  read  a  word  of  either  Old  or  New  Testa- 
ment will  read  the  lives  of  those  who  profess  to 
draw  their  inspiration  thence,  and  will  judge  ac- 
cordingly. They  will  form  their  opinions  of 
Christ  and  of  His  kingdom  by  those  who  call 
themselves  or  are  called  by  others  Christians. 
"  A  city  set  on  a  hill  cannot  be  hid."  Here  we 
have  a  truth  complementary  to  that  other  con- 
veyed in  the  symbol  of  salt.  It  taught  that  true 
Christians  exert  a  great  deal  of  silent,  unobserved 
influence,  as  of  salt  hidden  in  a  mass;  but,  be- 
sides this,  there  is  their  position  as  connected 
with  the  kingdom  of  heaven  which  forbids  their 
being  wholly  hid. 

Indeed,  it  is  their  duty  to  see  to  it  that  they 
are  not  artificially  hid:  "  Neither  do  men  light 
a  lamp,  and  put  it  under  the  bushel,  but  on  the 
stand;  and  it  shineth  unto  all  that  are  in  the 
house  "(R.  v.).  How  beautifully  does  the  illus- 
tration lend  itself  to  the  needed  caution  against 
timidity,  without  giving  the  least  encouragement 
to  the  opposite  vice  of  ostentation!  Why  does 
light  shine?  Simply  because  it  cannot  help  it; 
it  is  its  nature;  without  effort  or  even  conscious- 
ness, and  making  no  noise,  it  quietly  does  its 
duty;  and  in  the  doing  of  it  does  not  encourage 
but  even  forbids  any  looking  at  itself — and  the 
brighter  it  is,  the  more  severely  does  it  forbid 
it.  But  while  there  is  no  ostentatious  obtru- 
siveness  on  the  one  hand,  there  is  no  ignoble 
shirking  on  the  other.  Who  would  ever  think 
of  kindling  a  light  and  then  putting  it  under  a 
bed?  Yet  how  many  Christians  do  that  very 
thing  when  they  are  called  to  work  for  Christ, 
to  let  the  light  He  has  given  them  shine  in  some 
of  the  dark  places  where  it  is  most  needed! 

Here,  again,  our  Lord  lays  His  finger  on  a 
weak  spot.  The  Church  suffers  sorely,  not  only 
from  quantities  of  savourless  salt, — people  call- 
ing themselves  Christians  who  have  little  or 
nothing  distinctively  Christian  about  them, — but 
also  from  bushel-covered  lights,  those  who  are 
genuinely  Christian,  but  who  do  all  they  can  to 
hide  it,  refusing  to  speak  on  the  subject,  afraid 
to  show  earnestness  even  when  they  feel  it  most, 
carefully  repressing  every  impulse  to  let  their 
light  shine  before  men,  doing  everything,  in  fact, 
which  is  possible  to  render  their  testimony  to 
Christ  as  feeble,  and  their  influence  as  Christians 
as  small,  as  it  can  be.  How  many  in  all  our 
Christian  communities  are  constantly  haunted  by 
a  nervous  fear  lest  people  should  think  them 
forward!  For  one  person  who  makes  a  parade 
of  his  Christianity  there  are  a  hundred  or  a 
thousand  who  want  always  to  shrink  into  a 
corner.  This  is  not  modesty;  it  is  the  sign  of 
an  unnatural  self-consciousness.  The  disciples 
of  Christ  should  act  simply,  naturally,  uncon- 
sciously, neither  making  a  display  on  the  one 
hand  nor  hiding  their  light  on  the  other.  So 
the  Master  puts  it  most  beautifully  and  sug- 
gestively: "  Let  your  light  so  shine  before  men, 
that  they  may  see  your  good  works  "  (not  the 
worker — that  is  of  no  consequences — but  the 
works),  "  and  glorify  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven." 

So  closes  the  first  great  division  of  the  Mani- 
festo of  the  King.  It  had  begun  with  "  goodwill 
to  men  ";  it  has  shown  the  way  of  ^'  peace  on 
earth  ";  it  closes  with  "  glory  to  God  in  the  high- 


714 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


est."  It  is  a  prolonged  echo  of  the  angels'  song. 
The  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom,  not  only  as  set 
forth  here  in  these  beautiful  paragraphs,  but  in 
all  its  length  and  breadth  and  depth  and  height, 
in  all  its  range  and  scope  and  application,  is 
but  an  expansion  of  its  very  first  proclamation: 
"  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  on  earth  peace, 
goodwill  to  men." 

II.  The  Law  of  the  Kingdom  (v.  17-vii.  12). 

I.  General  Principles  (vv.  17-20). 

After  blessing  comes  obligation — after  beati- 
tude, law.  It  is  the  same  order  as  of  old.  The 
old  covenant  was  in  its  origin  and  essence  a  cove- 
nant of  promise,  of  blessing.  Mercy,  not  duty, 
was  its  key-note.  When  God  called  Abraham 
to  the  land  of  promise,  His  first  word  was:  "  I 
will  bless  thee,  and  make  thy  name  great;  and 
thou  shalt  be  a  blessing"  (Gen.  xii.  2).  Later 
on  came  the  obligation  resulting,  as  in  Genesis 
xvii.  i:  "Walk  before  me,  and  be  thou  per- 
fect." So  in  the  history  of  the  Nation,  the  prom- 
ise came  first  and  the  law  followed  it  after  an 
interval  of  four  hundred  years — a  fact  of  which 
special  use  is  made  by  the  Apostle  Paul  (Gal. 
iii.  17,  18).  The  Mosaic  dispensation  itself  be- 
gan by  an  acknowledgment  of  the  ancient 
promise  ("  I  am  the  God  of  your  fathers  " — Ex. 
iii.  6),  and  a  fresh  declaration  of  Divine  mercy 
C'  I  know  their  sorrows,  and  am  come  to  de- 
liver them  " — Ex.  iii.  7,  8).  When  Mount  Sinai 
was  reached,  the  entire  covenant  was  summarised 
in  two  sentences,  the  first  reciting  the  blessing, 
the  second  setting  forth  the  resulting  obligation: 
"  Thus  shalt  thou  say  to  the  house  of  Jacob, 
and  tell  the  children  of  Israel;  Ye  have  seen 
what  I  did  unto  the  Egyptians,  and  how  I  bare 
you  on  eagles'  wings,  and  brought  you  unto 
Myself.  Now,  therefore,  if  ye  will  obey  My 
voice  indeed,  and  keep  My  covenant,  then  ye 
shall  be  a  peculiar  treasure  unto  Me  above  all 
people"  (Ex.  xix.  3-5).  The  very  Decalogue 
itself  is  constructed  on  the  same  principle;  for 
before  a  single  commandment  is  given,  atten- 
tion is  called  to  the  great  salvation  which  has 
been  wrought  on  their  behalf:  "I  am  the  Lord 
thy  God,  which  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  out  of  the  house  of  bondage."  Thus 
closely  does  the  proclamation  of  the  new  king- 
dom follow  the  lines  of  the  old;  far  above  and 
beyond  it  in  respect  of  development,  in  essence 
it  is  the  same. 

It  was  therefore  most  appropriate  that,  in  en- 
tering on  the  subject  of  the  law  of  His  kingdom, 
Christ  should  begin  with  the  caution,  "  Think 
not  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law  or  the 
prophets."  On  this  point  there  would  neces- 
sarily be  the  greatest  sensitiveness  on  the  part 
of  the  people.  The  law  was  their  glory — all  their 
history  had  gathered  round  it,  the  prophets  had 
enforced  and  applied  it;  their  sacred  Scriptures, 
known  broadly  as  "  The  Law  and  the  Prophets," 
had  enshrined  it.  Was  it,  then,  to  be  set  aside 
for  new  legislation?  The  feeling  was  quite  nat- 
ural and  proper.  It  was  necessary,  therefore, 
that  the  new  King  should  set  Himself  right  on  a 
matter  so  important.  He  has  not  come  to  over- 
turn everything.  He  accepts  the  old  covenant 
more  cordially  and  thoroughly  than  they  do,  as 
will  presently  appear;  He  will  build  on  it  as  a 
sure  foundation;  and  whatever  in  His  legislation 
may  be  new  grows  naturally  out  of  the  old.  It 
is,   moreover,    worthy   of  notice   that  while   the 


Mosaic  economy  is  specially  in  His  mind,  He 
does  not  entirely  leave  out  of  consideration  the 
elements  of  truth  in  other  religious  systems;  and 
therefore  defines  the  attitude  He  assumes  as  a 
Legislator  and  Prophet,  in  terms  of  the  widest 
generality:  "  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but  to 
fulfil." 

While  in  the  widest  sense  He  came  not  to  de- 
stroy, but  to  fulfil,  so  that  He  could  with  fullest 
liberality  acknowledge  what  was  good  and  true 
in  the  work  of  all  former  teachers,  whoever  and 
wherever  they  had  been,  thus  accepting  and  in- 
corporating their  "  broken  lights "  as  part  of 
His  "  Light  of  the  world  "  (compare  John  i.  9), 
He  can  speak  of  the  old  covenant  in  a  way  in 
which  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  speak  oi 
the  work  of  earth's  greatest  and  best.  He  can 
accept  it  as  a  whole  without  any  reservation  or 
deduction:  "  For  verily  I  say  unto  you.  Till 
heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall 
in  no  wise  pass  from  the  law,  till  all  be  ful- 
filled." Observe,  however,  that  this  statement 
is  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  what  He  teaches 
concerning  the  temporary  character  of  much  of 
the  Mosaic  legislation;  it  simply  makes  it  clear 
that  whatever  passes  away,  does  not  pass  by 
destruction,  but  by  fulfilment — i.  e.,  the  evolution 
of  its  hidden  life — as  the  bud  passes  into  the 
rose.  The  bud  is  there  no  longer;  but  it  is  not 
destroyed,  it  is  fulfilled  in  the  rose.  So  with 
the  law  as  infolded  in  the  Old  Testament,  un- 
folded in  the  New.  How  well  fitted  to  inspire  all 
thoughtful  minds  with  confidence  must  have  been 
the  discovery  that  the  policy  of  the  new  king- 
dom was  to  be  on  the  lines,  not  of  brand-new 
experimental  legislation,  but  of  Divine  evolution! 

Not  only  does  He  Himself  do  homage  to  the 
law,  but  takes  order  that  His  followers  shall 
do  the  same.  It  is  no  parting  compliment  that 
He  pays  the  old  covenant.  It  is  to  be  kept  up 
both  in  the  doing  and  in  the  teaching,  from 
generation  to  generation,  even  in  its  least  com» 
mandments.  Not  that  there  is  to  be  such  in- 
sistence on  very  small  matters  as  to  exclude 
altogether  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven  those 
who  do  not  press  every  jot  and  tittle;  but  that 
these  will  be  reckoned  of  such  importance,  that 
those  who  are  lax  in  doctrine  and  practice  in 
regard  to  them  must  be  counted  among  the  least 
in  the  kingdom;  while  those  who  destroy  noth- 
ing, but  seek  to  fulfil  everything,  will  be  the 
great  ones.  What  a  foundation  is  laid  here  for 
reverence  of  all  that  is  contained  in  the  law  and 
the  prophets!  And  has  it  not  been  found  that 
even  in  the  very  smallest  features  of  the  old  cov- 
enant, even  in  the  details  of  the  tabernacle  wor- 
ship, for  example,  there  is  for  the  devout  and  in- 
telligent Christian  a  treasury  of  valuable  sugges- 
tion? Only  we  must  beware  of  putting  jots  and 
tittles  in  the  place  that  belongs  to  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law,  of  which  we  have  warnings 
sufficient  in  the  conduct  of  the  scribes  and  Phari- 
sees. Their  righteousness  had  the  appearance  of 
extending  to  the  minutest  matters;  but,  large  as 
it  seemed  in  popular  eyes,  it  was  not  nearly  large 
enough;  and  accordingly,  in  closing  this  general 
definition  of  His  relation  to  the  old  covenant, 
our  Lord  had  to  interpose  this  solemn  warning: 
"  I  say  unto  you,  that  except  your  righteousness 
shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  case  enter  the  king- 
dom of  heaven."  Theirs  was  a  righteousness  as 
Ft  were  of  the  tips  of  the  fingers,  whereas  He 
must  have  "  the  whole  body  full  of  light  ";  theirs 


l^atthew  v..  vi.,  vii.]  THE    GOSPEL    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


7«5 


■was  a  righteousness  that  tithed  mint  and  anise 
and  cummin,  and  neglected  judgment,  mercy, 
and  faith;  theirs  was  in  the  narrow  sphere  of  the 
letter,  that  which  He  demanded  must  be  in  the 
large  and  lofty  region  of  the  Spirit. 

2.  Illustrations  front  tlie  Moral  Law  (vv.  21-48). 

The  selection  of  illustrative  instances  is  made 
with  consummate  skill.  Our  Lord,  avoiding  that 
which  is  specially  Jewish  in  its  interest,  treats 
of  matters  that  are  of  worldwide  importance. 
He  deals  with  the  broadest  principles  of  right- 
eousness as  adapted  to  the  universal  conscience  of 
mankind,  starting  at  the  lowest  point  of  mere 
earthly  morality  and  rising  to  the  very  highest 
development  of  Christian  character,  thus  leading 
up  to  the  magnificent  conclusion:  "  Be  ye  there- 
fore perfect,  even  as  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven  is  perfect." 

He  begins  with  the  crime  which  the  natural 
conscience  most  strongly  and  instinctively  con- 
demns, the  crime  of  murder;  and  shows  that  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees,  and  those  who  had  been 
like  them  in  bygone  days,  really  destroyed  the 
si.icth  commandment  by  limiting  its  range  to  the 
muscles,  so  that,  if  there  were  no  actual  killing, 
the  commandment  was  not  broken;  whereas  its 
true  sphere  was  the  heart,  the  essence  of  the  for- 
bidden crime  being  found  in  unjustifiable  anger, 
even  though  no  word  is  uttered  or  muscle  moved, 
— a  view  of  the  case  which  ought  to  have  been 
suggested  to  the  intelligent  student  of  the  law 
by  such  words  as  these:  "Thou  shalt  not  hate 
thy  brother  in  thine  heart"  (Lev.  xix.  17);  or 
again:  "Whoso  killeth  his  neighbour  ignorantly, 
w'lom  he  hated  not  in  time  past,  ...  is  not 
worthy  of  death,  inasmuch  as  he  hated  him  not 
in  time  past"  (Deut.  xix.  4).  Hatred  in  the 
heart,  then,  is  murder.  How  searching!  And 
how  terribly  severe  the  sentence!  Even  in  its 
least  aggravated  form  it  is  the  same  as  that  de- 
creed against  the  actual  shedding  of  blood.  All 
the  three  sentences  are  death-penalties,  only  there 
are  aggravations  in  the  penalty  where  there  are 
aggravations  in  the  offence.  Such  is  the  Sa- 
viour's teaching  on  the  great  subject  of  sin.  Yet 
tl  ere  are  those  who  imagine  that  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  is  all  the  gospel  they  need! 

The  two  practical  applications  which  follow 
press- the  searching  subject  home.  The  one  has 
reference  to  the  Throne  of  Grace,  and  teaches 
that  all  offences  against  a  brother  must  be  put 
away  before  approaching  it.  The  other  has  ref- 
eience  to  the  Throne  of  Judgment,  and  teaches 
by  a  familiar  illustration  drawn  from  common  ex- 
perience in  the  courts  of  Palestine  that  it  is  an 
awful  thing  to  think  of  standing  there  with  the 
memory  of  a  single  angry  feeling  that  had  not 
been  forgiven  and  utterly  removed  (v.  26). 

The  crime  of  adultery  furnishes  the  next  illus- 
tration; and  He  deals  with  it  on  the  same  lofty 
principles  and  with  the  same  terrible  severity. 
He  shows  that  this  crime,  too,  is  of  the  hearts 
that  even  a  wanton  look  is  a  commission  of  it; 
and  again  follows  up  His  searching  exposition 
by  a  twofold  practical  application,  first  showing 
that  personal  purity  must  be  maintained  at  any 
cc  St  (vv.  29,  30),  and  then  guarding  the  sacred- 
ness  of  home,  by  that  exaltation  of  the  marriage 
bund  which  has  secured  the  emancipation  of 
woman  and  her  elevation  to  her  proper  sphere, 
and  kept  in  check  those  frightful  evils  which  are 
ever  threatening  t(>  defile  the  pure  and  sacred 
spring  from  which  society  derives  its  life  and 
s»astenance  (vv.  31-32). 


Next  comes  the  crime  of  perjury — a  com- 
pound sin,  which  breaks  at  the  same  -time  two 
commandments  of  the  Decalogue,  the  third  and 
the  ninth.  Here,  again,  our  Lord  shows  that, 
if  only  due  homage  is  paid  in  the  heart  to  rever- 
ence and  to  truth,  all  swearing  is  superseded. 
Let  a  man  habitually  live  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord 
all  the  day  long,  and  "  his  word  is  as  good  as 
his  oath  " — he  will  always  speak'  the  truth,  and 
will  be  incapable  of  taking  the  name  of  the  Lord 
in  vain.  It  is  of  course  to  be  remembered  that 
these  are  the  laws  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ;  not 
laws  meant  for  the  kingdoms  of  this  world, 
which  have  to  do  with  men  of  all  sorts,  but  for 
a  kingdom  made  up  of  those  who  hunger  and 
thirst  after  righteousness,  who  seek  and  find 
purity  of  heart.  This  passage  accordingly  has 
no  bearing  on  the  procedure  of  secular  courts 
of  justice.  But,  though  the  use  of  oaths  may 
still  be  a  necessity  in  the  world,  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  they  have  no  place.  The  simple 
"  Yea,  yea,"  "  Nay,  nay,"  is  quite  enough  where 
there  is  truth  in  the  inward  parts  and  the  fear  of 
God  before  the  eyes;  and  the  feeling  of  reverence, 
not  only  for  God  Himself,  but  for  all  the  works 
of  His  hands,  will  efTectually  prevent  the  most 
distant  approach  to  profanity. 

The  sin  of  revenge  furnishes  the  next  illustra- 
tion. The  Pharisaic  perversion  of  the  old  law 
actually  sanctioned  private  revenge,  on  the 
ground  of  a  statute  intended  for  the  guidance  of 
the  courts  of  justice,  and  given  for  the  sake  of 
curbing  the  revengeful  spirit  which  without  it 
would  lead  a  prosecutor  to  demand  that  his 
enemy  should  suffer  more  than  he  had  inflicted. 
In  this  way  they  really  destroyed  that  part  of 
the  Mosaid  legislation,  whereas  He  fulfilled  it  by 
developing  still  further, — bringing,  in  fact,  to 
perfection, — that  spirit  of  humanity  which  had 
dictated  the  law  at  the  first.  The  true  spirit  of 
the  Mosaic  legislation  was  to  discourage  private 
revenge  by  assigning  such  cases  to  the  courts, 
and  curbing  it  still  further  by  the  limitation  of 
the  penalty  imposed.  Was  not  this  spirit  most 
nobly  fulfilled,  carried  to  its  highest  develop- 
ment, when  the  Saviour  laid  it  down  as  die  law 
of  His  kingdom  that  our  revenge  is  to  be  the 
returning  of  good  for  evil? 

The  four  practical  illustrations  (vv.  39-42)  have 
been  a  source  of  difficulty,  but  only  to  those 
who  forget  that  our  Saviour  is  all  the  while 
warning  against  "  the  letter  that  killeth,"  and 
showing  the  need  of  catching  "  the  spirit  "  of  a 
commandment  which  "  giveth  life  "  to  it.  To 
deal  with  these  illustrations  according  to  the 
letter,  as  telling  us  exactly  what  to  do  in  par- 
ticular cases,  is  not  to  fulfil,  but  to  destroy  the 
Saviour's  words.  The  great  thing,  therefore,  is 
to  catch  their  spirit;  then  they  will  be  found 
of  use,  not  for  so  many  specified  cases,  but  for 
all  cases  whatever.  As  an  illustration  of  the  diffi- 
culties to  which  we  refer,  mention  may  be  made 
of  the  prejudice  against  the  passage  which  sug- 
gests the  turning  of  the  other  cheek,  on  the 
ground  that  it  encourages  a  craven  spirit.  Take 
it  as  a  definite  command,  and  this  would  be  in 
many  cases  the  result.  It  would  be  the  result 
wherever  fear  or  pusillanimity  was  the  motive. 
But  where  is  there  in  all  this  passage  the  least 
trace  of  fear  or  pusillanimity?  It  is  all  love  and 
magnanimity.  It  is  the  very  antipodes  of  the 
craven  spirit.  It  is  the  heroism  of  self-denying 
love ! 

The  last  illustration  cuts  at  the  root  of  all  sin 


7i6 


THE   GOSPEL    OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


and  crime,  the  tap-root  of  selfishness.  The 
scribes  and  Pharisees  had  made  use  of  those 
regulations,  most  needful  at  the  time,  which  sep- 
arated Israel  from  other  nations,  as  an  excuse 
for  restricting  the  range  of  love  to  those  prepared 
to  render  an  equivalent.  Thus  that  wonderful 
statute  of  the  old  legislation,  "  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself,"  was  actually  made  a 
minister  to  selfishness;  so  that,  instead  of  lead- 
ing them  to  a  life  above  the  world,  it  left  them 
not  a  whit  better  than  the  lowest  and  most  self- 
ish of  the  people.  "  If  ye  love  them  which  love 
you,  what  reward  have  ye?  Do  not  even  the 
publicans  the  same?"  Thus  was  the  noble 
"  royal  law  according  to  the  Scripture "  de- 
stroyed by  the  petty  quibbling  use  of  the  word 
"  neighbour."  Our  Lord  fulfilled  it  by  giving 
to  the  word  neighbour  its  proper  meaning,  its 
widest  extent,  including  even  those  who  have 
wronged  us  in  thought  or  word  or  deed,  "  I  say 
unto  you,  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them  that 
curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that  hate  you,  and 
pray  for  them  which  despitefuUy  use  you,  and 
persecute  you." 

How  lofty,  how  far  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
natural  man! — but  not  impossible,  or  it  would 
not  have  been  demanded.  It  is  one  of  the 
things  of  the  kingdom  concerning  which  the  as- 
surance is  given  later  on:  "Ask,  and  ye  shall 
receive;  seek,  and  ye  shall  find."  Still,  the  Mas- 
ter knows  full  well  that  it  is  no  small  demand 
He  is  making  of  poor  human  nature.  So  at  this 
point  He  leads  our  thoughts  upward  to  our 
Father  in  heaven,  suggesting  in  that  relation- 
ship the  possibility  of  its  attainment  (for  why 
should  not  a  child  be  like  its  father?)  and  the 
only  example  possible,  for  this  was  a  range  of 
righteousness  beyond  the  reach  of  all  that  had 
gone  before — He  Himself  as  the  Son  of  the 
Father  would  later  set  it  forth  before  the  eyes 
of  men  in  all  its  lustre.  But  that  time  is  yet  to 
come,  and  meantime  He  can  only  point  upward 
to  the  Highest,  and  urge  them  to  this  loftiest 
height  of  righteousness  by  the  tender  plea, 
"  That  ye  may  be  the  children  of  your  Father 
which  is  in  heaven:  for  He  maketh  His  sun  to 
rise  on  the  evil  and  on  the  good,  and  sendeth 
rain  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust." 

How  beautiful  and  expressive  are  these  sym- 
bols from  nature,  and  how  encouraging  the  in- 
terpretation of  nature  His  use  of  them  suggests! 
And  what  shall  we  say  of  their  suggestiveness  in 
the  higher  sphere  of  the  spirit?  Already  the 
Sun  of  Righteousness  is  rising  with  healing  in 
His  wings;  and  in  due  time  the  rain  of  the  Spirit 
will  fall  in  fulness  of  blessing;  so  shall  His  dis- 
ciples receive  all  that  is  needful  to  raise  them  to 
the  very  highest  in  character  and  conduct,  in 
beatitude  and  righteousness;  and  accordingly 
their  Master  may  well  finish  His  whole  exposi- 
tion of  the  morals  of  the  kingdom  with  the  stir- 
ring, stimulating  call,  "  Be  ye  therefore  perfect, 
even  as  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  is  per- 
fect." 

3.  Illustrations  from  Religious  Duty  (vi.  1-18). 

The  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  is  still  the 
great  subject;  for  the  reading  of  the  Revised 
Version  in  the  first  verse  of  the  chapter  is  evi- 
dently the  correct  one.  The  illustrations  of  the 
preceding  passage  have  all  come  under  the  head 
of  what  we  call  morality  as  distinguished  from 
religion,  but  it  is  important  to  observe  that  our 
Lord  gives  no  sanction  to  the  separation  of  the 
two. 


Morality  divorced  from  religion  is  a  flower 
without  root,  which  may  bloom  for  a  while,  but 
in  the  end  must  wither  away;  religion  without 
morality  is — nothing  at  all;  worse  than  nothing, 
for  it  is  a  sham.  It  is  evident,  of  course,  that 
this  great  word  "  righteousness,"  as  used  by  our 
Lord,  has  a  far  wider  scope  than  is  given  to  it 
by  those  who  take  it  merely  as  the  equivalent  of 
truth  and  honesty,  as  if  a  man  could  in  any 
proper  sense  of  the  word  be  righteous,  who  was 
ungenerous  to  his  neighbours,  unfilial  to  God, 
or  not  master  of  himself. 

Again,  we  have  a  principle  laid  down;  "Take 
heed  that  ye  do  not  your  righteousness  before 
men,  to  be  seen  of  them  "  (R.  V.).  It  is  the 
same  great  principle  as  before,  though  the  cau- 
tion in  which  it  is  embodied  is  different.  For  if 
we  compare  ver.  20  of  the  preceding  chapter,  and 
remember  its  subsequent  development  in  the 
verses  which  follow,  we  find  that  it  agrees  with 
the  warning  before  us  in  insisting  on  righteous- 
ness of  the  heart  as  distinguished  from  that  which 
is  merely  outward.  The  difference  lies  in  this, 
that  whereas,  in  the  cases  already  dealt  with, 
external  conformity  with  the  law  is  good  so  far 
as  it  goes,  but  does  not  go  nearly  far  enough 
("  except  your  righteousness  shall  exceed,"  ex- 
ceed, i.  e.,  by  reaching  back  and  down  to  the 
deepest  recesses  of  the  heart),  in  the  cases  now 
to  be  taken  up  external  conformity  is  not  good 
in  itself,  but  really  evil,  inasmuch  as  it  is  mere 
pretence.  Accordingly  the  caution  now  must 
needs  be  much  stronger:  "Be  ye  not  as  the 
hypocrites." 

It  is  not,  however,  the  beii^g,  seen  which  is 
condemned,  otherwise  the  caution  would  be  at 
variance  with  the  earnest  counsel  in  chap.  v.  16, 
and  would,  in  fact,  amount  to  a  total  prohibition 
of  public  worship.  As  before,  it  is  a  matter  of 
the  heart.  It  is  the  hidden  motive  which  is  con- 
demned: "  Take  heed  that  ye  do  not  your  right- 
eousness before  men,  to  be  seen  of  them." 

The  principle  is  applied  in  succession  to  Alms- 
giving, to  Prayer,  to  Fasting. 

Almsgiving  is  no  longer  regarded  as  distinc- 
tively a  religious  duty.  Nor  can  it  be  put  under 
the  head  of  morality  according  to  the  common 
idea  attached  to  that  word.  It  rather  occupies  a 
kind  of  borderland  between  them,  coming 'under 
the  head  of  philanthropy.  But  whence  came  the 
spirit  of  philanthropy?  Its  foundation  is  in  the 
holy  mountains.  Modern  philanthropy  is  like  a 
great  fresh-water  lake,  on  the  shores  of  which 
one  may  wander  with  admiration  and  delight  for 
great  distances  without  discovering  any  con- 
nection with  the  heaven-piercing  mountains. 
But  such  connection  it  has.  The  explorer  is  sure 
to  find  somewhere  an  inlet  showing  whence  its 
waters  come,  a  bright  sparkling  stream  which  has 
filled  it  and  keeps  it  full;  or  springs  below  ii, 
which,  though  they  may  flow  far  underground, 
bring  the  precious  supplies  from  the  higher 
regions,  perhaps  quite  out  of  sight.  If  thest 
connections  with  the  upper  springs  were  to  be 
cut  off,  the  beautiful  lake  would  speedily  dry  up 
and  disappear.  Almsgiving,  therefore,  is  in  its 
right  place  here:  its  source  is  in  the  higher 
regions  of  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom. 
And  in  these  early  days  the  lakes  had  not  been 
formed,  for  the  springs,  were  only  beginning  10 
flow  from  the  great  Fountain-head. 

The  general  object  our  Lord  has  in  view, 
moreover,  leads  Him  to  treat  the  subject,  not  in 
relation  to  those  who  receive,  but  to  those  who 


Matthew  v.,  vi.vii.]  THE    GOSPEL    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


71,7 


give.  There  may  he  good  done  through  the 
gifts  of  men  who  have  no  higher  object  in  view 
than  the  sounding  of  their  own  trumpet;  but,  so 
far  as  they  themselves  are  concerned,  their  giv- 
ing has  no  vaUic  in  the  sight  of  God.  Every- 
thing depends  on  the  motive:  hence  the  injunc- 
tion of  secrecy.  There  may  indeed  be  circum 
stances  which  suggest  or  even  require  a  certain 
measure  of  publicity,  for  the  sake  of  the  object 
or  cause  to  which  gifts  are  devoted;  but  so  far 
as  the  giver  is  concerned,  the  more  absolute  the 
secrecy  the  better.  For  though  it  is  possible  to 
give  in  the  most  open  and  public  way  without 
at  all  indulging  the  petty  motive  of  ostentation, 
yet  so  weak  is  human  nature  on  that  side  of  it, 
that  our  Lord  puts  His  caution  in  the  very 
strongest  terms,  counselling  us  not  only  to 
avoid  courting  the  attention  of  others,  but  to 
refrain  from  even  thinking  of  what  we  have  done; 
for  that  seems  to  be  the  point  of  the  striking  and 
memorable  words  "  Let  not  thy  left  hand  know 
what  thy  right  hand  doeth." 

The  trumpet-blowing  may  be  a  great  success. 
What  the  Master  thinks  of  that  success  is  seen 
in  the  caustic  irony  of  the  words  "  Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  they  have  their  reward."  There  it  is 
— and  you  can  see  just  how  paltry  and  pitiful  it 
is;  for  there  is  nothing  a  man  is  more  ashamed  of 
than  to  be  caught  in  even  the  slightest  attempt 
to  parade  himself.  But  if  the  praise  of  men  is 
never  thought  of,  it  cannot  be  said  "  they  have 
their  reward."  Their  reward  is  to  come;  and 
though  it  doth  not  yet  appear,  it  will  certainly 
be  worthy  of  our  Father  Who  seeth  in  secret. 

Under  the  head  of  Prayer  two  cautions  are 
given.  The  one  may  be  dismissed  in  a  few 
words,  not  only  because  it  exactly  corresponds 
with  the  preceding  case,  but  because  among  us 
there  is  scarcely  any  temptation  to  that  against 
which  it  is  directed.  The  danger  now  is  all  the 
other  way.  The  temptation  for  true  children  of 
the  kingdom  is  not  to  parade  their  devotion  for 
show,  but  to  conceal  it  for  shame.  Still  there 
are  some  directions  in  which  even  yet  the  cau- 
tion against  ostentation  in  prayer  is  needed — as, 
for  instance,  by  those  who  in  public  or  social 
prayer  assume  affected  tones,  or  try  in  any  way 
to  give  an  impression  of  earnestness  beyond  what 
is  really  felt.  Of  the  sanctimonious  tone  we  may 
say  that  it  has  its  reward  in  the  almost  universal 
contempt  it  provokes. 

The  other  caution  is  directed,  not  against  pre- 
tence, but  against  superstition.  It  will  be  seen, 
however,  that  the  two  belong  to  the  same  cate- 
gory, and  therefore  are  most  appropriately  dealt 
with  together.  What  is  the  sin  of  the  formalist? 
It  is  that  his  heart  is  not  in  his  worship.  What 
is  the  folly  of  the  vain  repetitionist?  It  is  the 
same — that  his  heart  is  not  in  his  words.  For 
there  is  no  discouragement  of  repetition,  if  it  be 
prompted  by  genuine  earnestness.  Our  Lord 
again  and  again  encouraged  even  importunate 
prayer,  and  Himself  in  the  Garden  offered  the 
same  petition  three  times  in  close  succession.  It 
is  not,  then,  repetition,  but  "  vain  repetition," — 
empty  of  heart,  of  desire,  of  hope — that  is  here 
rebuked;  not  much  prayer,  but  "  much  speak- 
ing," the  folly  of  supposing  that  the  mere  "  say- 
ing "  of  prayers  is  of  any  use  apart  from  the 
emotions  of  the  heart  in  which  true  prayer  es- 
sentially consists. 

To  guide  us  in  a  matter  so  important,  our 
Lord  net  only  cautions  against  what  prayer 
ought  not  to  be,  but  shows  what  it  ought  to  be. 


Thus,  incidentally  as  it  were.  He  hands  to  us  this 
pearl  of  great  price,  this  purest  crystal  of  devo- 
tion, to  be  a  possession  of  His  people  for  ever, 
never  to  lose  its  lustre  through  millenniums  of 
daily  use,  its  beauty  and  preciousness  becoming 
rather  more  and  more  manifest  to  each  succes- 
sive generation. 

It  is  given  especially  as  a  model  of  form,  to 
show  that,  instead  of  the  vain  repetitions  con- 
demned, there  should  be  simplicity,  directness, 
brevity,  order — above  all,  the  plain,  unadorned 
expression  of  the  heart's  desire.  This  main  ob- 
pect  is  accomplished  perfectly;  a  whole  volume 
on  the  form  of  prayer  could  not  have  done  it 
better,  or  so  well.  But,  besides  this,  there  is  in- 
struction as  to  the  substance  of  prayer.  We  are 
taught  to  rise  high  above  all  selfish  considera- 
tions in  our  desires,  seeking  the  things  of  God 
first;  and  when  we  come  to  our  own  wants,  ask- 
ing nothing  more  than  our  Father  in  heaven 
judges  to  be  sufficient  for  the  day,  while  all  the 
stress  of  earnestness  is  laid  on  deliverance  from 
the  guilt  and  power  of  sin.  Then  as  to  the  spirit 
of  prayer,  mark  the  filial  reverence  implied  in  the 
invocation, — the  fraternal  spirit  called  for  by  the 
very  first  word  of  it,  and  the  spirit  of  forgive- 
ness we  are  taught  to  cherish  by  the  very  terms 
in  which  we  ask  it  for  ourselves.  All  this  and 
more  is  superadded  to  the  lesson  for  the  sake  of 
which  the  model  prayer  has  been  given. 

The  third  application  is  to  Fasting.  In  another 
place  (ix.  14)  will  be  found  the  principle  to  be 
followed  in  regard  to  times  of  fasting.  Here  it 
is  taken  for  granted  that  there  will  be  such  times, 
and  the  principle  announced  at  the  beginning  of 
the  chapter  is  applied  to  the  exercise.  Let  it  be 
done  in  secret,  before  no  other  eye  than  His 
Who  seeth  in  secret;  thus  only  can  we  have  the 
blessed  recompense  which  comes  to  the  heart 
that  is  truly  humbled  in  the  sight  of  God. 

This  principle  plainly  condemns  that  kind  of 
fasting  which  is  done  only  before  men,  as  when 
in  the  name  of  religion  people  will  abstain  from 
certain  kinds  of  food  and  recreation  on  particu- 
lar days  or  at  appointed  times,  without  any  cor- 
responding humbling  of  the  heart.  The  fasting 
must  be  before  God,  or  it  is  a  piece  of  acting, 
"  as  the  hypocrites,"  who  play  a  part  before  men, 
and  when  they  go  home  put  off  the  mask  and 
resume  their  proper  life.  "  Be  ye  not  as  the 
hypocrites;  "  therefore  see  that  your  fasting  is 
before  God;  and  then,  if  the  inward  feeling  nat- 
urally leads  to  restriction  of  the  pleasures  of  the 
table  or  of  society,  or  to  any  other  temporary 
self-denial,  let  it  by  all  means  be  followed  out, 
but  so  as  to  attract  just  as  little  attention  as  pos- 
sible; and  not  only  so,  but  if  any  traces  of  the 
secret  exercise  still  remain  when  the  penitential 
hour  with  God  alone  is  over,  these  are  to  be 
carefully  removed  before  returning  to  the  ordi- 
nary intercourse  of  life.  Our  "  penitence  and 
prayer "  are  for  ourselves  only,  and  for  God. 
Before  men  our  light  should  shine. 

The  three  illustrations  cover  by  suggestion  the 
whole  ground;  for  prayer  may  well  be  under- 
stood in  that  large  scriptural  sense  in  which 
praise  is  included,  and  fasting  is  suggestive  of  all 
mortification  of  the  flesh  and  humbling  of  the 
spirit.  The  first  shows  true  religion  in  its  out- 
going, the  second  in  its  upgoing.  while  the  third 
abases  self;  and  all  three  are  mutually  helpful, 
for  the  higher  we  soar  God-ward  in  praise  and 
prayer,  the  loww  shall  we  bend  in  reverent  hu- 


7i8 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


inility,  and  the  further  will  our  hearts  go  out  in 
world-wide  charity. 

All  depends  on  truth  in  the  inward  parts,  on 
the  secret  life  of  the  soul  with  God.  How  im- 
pressively is  this  stated  throughout  the  whole 
passage!  Observe  the  almost  rhythmical  repeti- 
tions: "  Be  ye  not  as  the  hypocrites,"  three 
times  repeated  :  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  they 
have  their  reward,"  the  very  words  three  times 
repeated;  "  Let  thme  alms  be  in  secret,"  "  Pray 
to  thy  Father  which  is  in  secret,"  "  That 
thou  appear  not  unto  men  to  fast,  but  unto  thy 
Father  which  is  in  secret  "  ;  and  once  more,  three 
times  repeated,  "  Thy  Father  which  seeth  in  se- 
cret Himself  shall  reward  thee."  No  vain  repeti- 
tions these.  They  press  the  great  lesson  home 
with  a  threefold  force. 

4.  Duty  in  relation  to  the  World  and  the  things  of 
it  (vi.  19-vii.  12). 

From  this  point  onwards  the  plan  of  the  dis- 
course is  not  so  apparent,  and  some  have  given 
up  the  idea  of  finding  orderly  sequence  in  it;  yet 
there  seems  to  be  no  insuperable  difBculty,  when 
the  right  point  of  view  is  taken.  The  perplexity 
seems  to  have  arisen  from  supposing  that  at  this 
point  an  entirely  new  subject  begins,  whereas 
all  that  follows  on  to  chapter  vii.  12,  arranges 
itself  easily  under  the  same  general  head — the 
Righteousness  of  the  Kingdom.  According  to 
this  arrangement  of  the  discourse  there  is  an  in- 
troduction of  fourteen  verses  (v.  3-16),  and  a  con- 
cluding passage  of  almost  exactly  the  same 
length  (vii.  13-27);  while  the  main  discussion 
occupies  nearly  three  chapters,  the  subject 
throughout  being  the  Righteousness  of  the  King- 
dom, dealt  with,  first  as  morality  (v.  17-48),  sec- 
ond as  religion  (vi.  1-18),  and  finally  as  spirit- 
uality (vi.  19-vii.  12),  beginning  and  ending  with 
a  general  reference  to  the  law  and  the  prophets 
(v.  17,  vii.  12).  The  first  of  these  divisions  had 
to  do  with  righteousness  as  between  man  and 
man;  *  the  second  with  righteousness  before  God 
alone;  while  the  third,  on  the  consideration  of 
which  we  now  enter,  deals  with  righteousness 
as  between  the  children  of  the  kingdom  and 
the  world  in  the  midst  of  which  it  is  set  up. 
And  just  as  in  the  paragraphs  already  considered 
we  have  been  shown  that  our  Lord  came  not  to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfil  the  code  of  ethics,  and  the 
rules  for  Divine  service  in  the  law  and  the  proph- 
ets, so  in  this  it  will  be  made  equally  apparent 
that  He  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil  the 
principles  involved  in  the  political  code  by  which 
Israel  was  separated  from  the  nations  of  the 
world  to  be  the  Lord's  peculiar  people. 

The  subject  before  us  now,  therefore,  is  the 
relations  of  the  children  of  the  kingdom  to  the 
world,  and  it  is  dealt  with — 

(i)  As  regards  the  good  things  of  the  world. 
From  the  Beatitudes  we  have  already  learned 
that  the  blessedness  of  the  children  of  the  king- 
dom is  to  consist  not  in  the  abundance  of  the 
things  they  possess,  but  in  qualities  of  soul,  pos- 
sessions in  the  realm  of  the  unseen.  Yet  the 
children  of  the  kingdom  cannot  do  without  the 
good  things  of  this  world;  what,  then,  has  the 
law  of  the  kingdom  to  s'ay  in  regard  to  their 
acquisition  and  use?  The  subject  is  large  and 
difficult;  but  with  amazing  clearness  and  force, 

*  It  is  true  that  under  the  head  of  oaths  comes  the  duty 
of  reverence,  which  scarcely  seems  to  fall  under  this 
head  :  but  it  will  be  remembered  that  this  point  comes  in 
by  way  of  a  very  natural  suggestion  in  dealing  with  false- 
hood and  the  regulation  of  conversation,  which  evidently 
belongs  to  righteousness  as  between  man  and  man. 


comprehensiveness  and  simple  practical  utilitj, 
it  is  set  forth  in  a  single  paragraph,  which  is 
also  characterised  by  a  surpassing  beauty  of  lan- 
guage. As  before,  the  strait  and  narrow  path 
is  marked  off  by  cautions  on  the  right  and  on  the 
left.  On  the  one  side  must  be  shunned  the 
Scylla  of  greed,  on  the  other  the  Charybdis  of 
care.  The  one  is  the  real  danger  of  seeking  too 
much,  the  other  the  supposed  danger  of  having 
too  little,  of  "  the  good  things  of  life." 

It  is  not,  however,  a  question  of  quantity.  As 
before,  it  is  a  question  of  the  heart.  On  the  one 
hand,  it  is  not  the  danger  of  having  too  much, 
but  of  seeking  too  much;  on  the  other,  it  is  not 
the  danger  of  having  too  little,  but  of  fearing  that 
there  will  not  be  enough.  It  is  a  mistake,  there- 
fore, to  say  that  the  one  caution  is  for  the  rich 
and  the  other  for  the  poor.  True,  indeed,  the 
rich  are  in  greater  danger  of  Scylla  than  of 
Charybdis,  and  the  poor  in  more  peril  from  the 
pool  than  from  the  rock;  still  a  rich  man  may 
be,  often  is,  a  victim  of  care,  while  a  poor  man 
may  readily  have  his  heart  far  too  much  set  on 
the  yearly  or  weekly  increase  of  his  little  store. 
It  seems  better,  then,  to  make  no  distinction  of 
classes,  but  to  look  at  each  caution  as  needed 
by  all. 

(a)  Against  seeking  the  good  things  of  the 
world  too  earnestly  (vv.  19-24).  It  is  important 
to  notice  the  strong  emphasis  on  the  word 
"  treasure."  This  is  evident  not  only  from  the 
reduplication  of  it — for  the  literal  translation 
would  be,  "  Treasure  not  for  yourselves  treas- 
ures upon  the  earth  " — but  also  from  the  reason 
against  it  assigned  in  ver.  21:  "Where  thy 
treasure  is,  there  will  thy  heart  be  also."  It  is 
clear,  then,  that  there  is  no  prohibition  of  wealth, 
but  only  of  making  it  "  thy  treasure."  But 
against  this  the  law  of  the  kingdom  is  in  the 
highest  degree  decided  and  uncompromising. 
The  language  is  exceedingly  forcible,  and  the 
reasons  marshalled  are  terribly  strong.  With  all 
faithfulness,  and  with  growing  earnestness,  the 
Master  shows  that  to  disobey  this  law  is  foolish, 
pernicious,  fatal.  It  is  foolish;  for  all  earthly 
treasures  are  perishable,  eaten  by  moth,  con- 
sumed by  rust,  stolen  by  thieves,  while  the  heav- 
enly treasures  of  the  spiritually-minded  are  in- 
corruptible and  safe  for  evermore.  It  is  not  only 
foolish,  but  most  pernicious,— in)unous  to  that 
which  is  most  sensitive  and  most  precious  in  the 
life,  that  which  is  to  the  soul  what  the  eye  is 
to  the  body,  the  darkening  of  which  means  the 
darkening  of  the  whole  body,  not  the  mere 
clouding  of  the  vision,  but  the  condition  sug- 
gested by  the  awful  words  "  full  of  darkness  "  ; 
whilethecorresponding  deterioration  in  the  lower 
ranges  of  the  life  is  indicated  by  what  follows: 
"  If  therefore  the  light  that  is  in  thee  be  dark- 
ness, how  great  is  that  darkness!  "  It  is  not 
only  foolish  and  most  pernicious,  but  fatal,  for 
"  No  man  can  serve  two  masters  "  ;  so  that  to  set 
the  heart  on  the  world  means  to  give  up  the 
kingdom.  It  is  vain  to  try  to  satisfy  two  claim- 
ants of  the  heart.  One  or  other  must  be  chosen: 
"  Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon." 

(b)  Against  anxiety  about  the  things  of  the 
world.  The  Revised  Version  has,  by  its  correct 
translation,  now  removed  the  difificulty  which 
seemed  to  lie  in  the  words  "  Take  no  thought." 
To  modern  ears  these  words  seemed  to  encour- 
age thoughtlessness  and  to  bless  improvidence. 
Our  translators  of  the  seventeenth  century,  how- 
ever,  had   no   such   idea.     It  is  the   result   of  a 


Matthew  v.,  vi.,  vii.]         THE    GOSPEL    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


719 


change  of  meaning  in  a  current  phrase.  At  the 
time  the  translation  was  made,  "  to  take 
thought  "  meant  to  be  anxious,  as  will  appear 
from  such  a  passage  as  that  in  the  first  book  of 
Samuel  Cix.  5),  where  Saul  says  to  his  servant, 
"Come  and  let  us  return;  lest  my  father  leave 
caring  for  the  asses,  and  take  thought  for  us," 
evidently  in  the  sense  of  "  be  anxious  about 
us."  *  It  is  then,  manifestly,  not  against  thought- 
fulness  and  providence,  but  against  anxious  care 
that  the  caution  is  directed. 

Although  this  evil  seems  to  lie  in  the  opposite 
direction  from  that  of  avarice,  it  is  really  the 
same  both  in  its  root  and  its  fruit,  for  it  is  due  to 
the  estrangement  of  the  heart  from  our  Father 
in  heaven,  and  amounts,  in  so  far  as  it  prevails, 
to  enslavement  to  the  world.  The  covetous  man 
is  enslaved  in  one  way,  the  anxious  man  in  an- 
other; for  does  not  our  common  language  betray 
it  every  time  we  think  or  speak  of  "  freedom 
from  care  "  ?  We  need  not  wonder,  then,  that 
our  Lord  should  connect  what  He  is  about  to 
say  on  this  evil  so  closely  with  what  He  has  said 
on  the  other,  as  He  does  by  the  use  of  the  word 
therefore:  "  Therefore  I  say  unto  you.  Be  not 
anxious  for  your  life." 

But  though,  like  the  other,  it  is  slavery,  the 
sin  of  it  is  not  nearly  so  great,  and  hence  the 
difference  of  tone,  which  cannot  but  be  observed 
as  this  new  caution  is  given.  It  is  no  longer 
strong  condemnation,  but  gentle  expostulation; 
not  dark  threatening  now,  but  tender  pleading. 
As  before,  reason  after  reason  is  given  against 
yielding  to  the  all  too  natural  weakness  of  the 
human  heart.  We  are  encouraged  to  remember 
what  God  has  given  already:  the  life,  with  such 
amazing  powers  and  capabilities;  the  body,  with 
all  its  marvellous  intricacy  and  adaptation:  and 
can  it  be  supposed  that  He  is  likely  to  withhold 
the  food  to  maintain  the  life,  the  raiment  to 
clothe  the  body? — to  remember  how  the  little 
birds  of  the  air  and  the  modesty  lilies  of  the  field 
are  not  forgotten:  how  then  can  we  think  that 
our  Father  would  forget  us,  who  are  of  so  much 
more  value  than  they? — to  remember  that  the 
very  fact  that  we  know  Him  as  our  Father 
should  be  guarantee  enough,  preventing  us  from 
an  anxious  solicitude  pardonable  in  the  heathen, 
who  have  no  such  knowledge  of  a  Father  in 
heaven  Who  knoweth  what  His  children  need; 
— to  remember  also  how  vain  and  fruitless  is  our 
care,  seeing  we  cannot  in  the  very  smallest 
lengthen  the  life  for  which  we  fret,  while  our 
times  are  wholly  in  the  hand  of  Him  Who  gave 
it  at  first  and  daily  satisfies  its  wants.  Such  is 
a  bare  outline  of  the  thought  in  this  passage,  to 
attempt  to  expound  or  illustrate  which  would 
be  to  spoil  it.  The  best  way  to  deal  with  such 
a  passage  is  first  to  study  it  carefully  to  see  that 
its  meaning  and  the  point  of  all  its  parts  are 
clearly  apprehended,  and  then  quietly,  slowly, 
lovingly  to  read  it  over  and  let  its  heavenly  music 
enter  into  the  soul.  Then,  when  the  reading  is 
finished  and  the  great  lesson  has  filled  the  heart 
with  trustful  love,  we  may  look  back  upon  it 
and  observe  that  not  only  is  a  great  spiritual 
lesson  taught,  but  incidentally  we  are  encour- 
aged and  directed  to  interrogate  Nature  and  learn 
what  she  has  to   teach,   to  gaze   on   her  beauty 

*  This  complete  change  of  meaning,  amounting  in  fact, 
to  the  destruction  and  almost  to  the  inversion  of  the  sense, 
is  one  of  many  illustrations  of  the  absolute  need  of  revision 
from  time  to  time  of  translations,  not  only  to  make  them 
more  correct,  but  even  to  keep  them  as  correct  as  they 
were  at  first. 


and  lovingly  look  at  what  she  has  to  show.  Thus 
wc  find,  as  it  were  by  the  way,  in  the  simple 
words  of  our  King,  the  germ  principles  of  science 
and  of  art. 

But  these  are  wayside  pearls;  no  special  at- 
tention is  called  to  them.  These  glimpses  of  na- 
ture come  so  naturally  from  the  Lord  of  nature 
that  nothing  is  made  of  them — they  "  flash  along 
the  chords  and  go  "  ;  and  we  return  to  the  great 
lesson  which,  now  that  the  cautions  have  been 
given,  can  be  put  in  its  positive  form:  "  Seek  ye 
first  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  His  righteousness; 
and  all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you  " 
(vi.  33).  Seek  ye  first  His  kingdom,  and  His 
righteousness.  Already  as  we  have  seen,  this 
lesson  has  been  implied  in  the  Lord's  Prayer; 
but  it  is  well  that  it  should  be  expressly  set  down 
— this  will  insure  that  the  treasure  is  above,  that 
the  eye  is  clear,  that  the  life  is  one:  "and  all 
these  things  shall  be  added,"  so  that  to-morrow 
need  not  trouble  you.  Trouble  there  must  be 
in  the  world,  but  no  one  need  have  more  than 
each  day  brings:  "  Sufficient  unto  the  day  is  the 
evil  thereof." 

(2)  As  regards  the  evil  in  the  world.  The  tran- 
sition from  the  good  things  of  the  world  to  the 
evil  that  is  in  it  comes  quite  naturally  from  the 
turn  the  Master's  thought  has  taken  in  the  close 
of  the  preceding  paragraph.  It  is  important  to 
observe,  however,  that  the  whole  subject  of  the 
evil  in  the  world  is  not  in  view  at  this  point. 
Has  not  the  evil  in  the  world  in  the  large  sense 
been  in  view  from  the  beginning  throughout; 
and  has  not  the  great  subject  of  righteousness 
had  all  along  as  its  background  the  dark  subject 
of  sin?  The  one  point  here  is  this:  the  attitude 
of  the  children  of  the  kingdom  to  the  evil  which 
they  cannot  btit  see  in  the  people  of  the  world 
by  whom  they  are  surrounded. 

Here,  as  before,  there  are  two  warnings,  each 
against  a  danger  lying  in  opposite  directions: 
the  one,  the  danger  of  making  too  much  of  the 
evil  we  see,  or  think  we  see,  in  dthers;  the  other, 
that  of  making  too  little  of  it. 

(a)  As  against  making  too  much  of  it — the 
danger  of  censoriousness  (vii.  1-5).  Here,  again, 
the  language  is  very  strong,  and  the  warning 
given  is  solemn  and  earnest — a  sure  sign  that 
the  danger  is  real  and  great.  Again,  too,  consid- 
erations are  urged,  one  after  another,  why  we 
should  beware.  First,  there  is  so  much  evil  in 
ourselves,  that  we  should  be  most  careful  how 
we  condemn  it  in  others,  for  "  with  what  judg- 
ment ye  judge  ye  shall  be  judged;  and  with  what 
measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured  to  you 
again."  Moreover,  severity  is  a  sign  not  of 
purity,  but  of  the  reverse:  "  Why  beholdest  thou 
the  mote  that  is  in  thy  brother's  eye,  but  con- 
siderest  not  the  beam  that  is  in  thine  own  eye?  " 
Our  severity  should  be  applied  to  ourselves,  our 
charity  to  others:  especially  if  we  would'  have 
any  success  in  the  correcting  of  our  neighbour's 
faults:  "  How  wilt  thou  say  to  thy  brother.  Let 
me  cast  out  the  mote  out  of  thine  eye;  and  lo, 
the  beam  is  in  thine  own  eye?"  (R.  V.)  Other- 
wise we  are  hypocrites,  and  we  must  thoroughly 
reform  ourselves  before  we  have  any  idea  even 
how  to  begin  to  improve  others:  "Thou  hypo- 
crite, first  cast  out  the  beam  out  of  thine  own 
eye;  and  then  shalt  thou  see  clearly  to  cast  out 
the  mote  out  of  thy  brother's  eye."  Of  what  ex- 
ceeding value  is  this  teaching  just  where  it 
stands!  The  Saviour  has  been  summoning  His 
people  not  only  to  pure  morality  and  true  god- 


720 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


liness,  but  to  lofty  spirituality  of  mind  and  heart; 
and  knowing  what  was  in  man — knowing  that 
dangers  lurked  on  his  path  at  every  turn,  and 
that  even  the  highest  spirituality  has  its  special 
danger,  its  besetting  sin — He  points  it  out, 
paints  it  in  all  its  blackness,  spares  not  the  sin 
of  the  saint  any  more  than  the  sin  of  the  sinner, 
calls  the  man  that  gathers  his  skirts  about  him 
with  the  word  or  the  thought  "  I  am  holier  than 
thou  "  by  the  same  ugly  name  with  which  He 
brands  the  poor  fools  who  disfigure  their  faces 
that  they  may  be  seen  of  men  to  fast.  Yet,  se- 
vere as  it  is,  is  it  not  needed?  does  not  our  best 
judgment  approve  and  applaud?  and  are  we  not 
glad  and  grateful  that  our  Lord  has  warned  us 
so  earnestly  and  impressively  against  a  danger 
it  might  never  have  occurred  to  us  to  fear? 

But  there  is  another  side  to  the  subject;  so 
we  have  another  warning,  in  relation  to  the  evil 
we  see  in  the  men  of  the  world.     It  is — 

(b)  Against  making  too  little  of  it  (ver.  6). 
Though  we  may  not  judge,  we  must  discriminate. 
It  may  be  wrong  to  condemn:  but  it  may  be 
necessary  to  withdraw,  otherwise  sacred  things 
may  be  profaned  and  angry  passions  stirred, 
and  thus  much  harm  may  be  done  though  only 
good  was  intended.  Such  is  the  manifest  purport 
of  the  striking  caution:  "  Give  not  that  which 
is  holy  unto  the  dogs,  neither  cast  ye  your  pearls 
before  swine,  lest  they  trample  them  under  their 
feet,  and  turn  again  and  rend  you." 

The  Saviour  is  now  about  to  close  what  He 
has  to  say  on  the  Righteousness  of  the  King- 
dom in  its  relation  to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets; 
and  He  does  it  by  setting  forth  in  most  memo- 
rable words  a  great  privilege  and  a  compact, 
comprehensive,  portable  rule — a  privilege  which 
will  keep  the  heart  right  with  God,  a  rule  which 
will  keep  the  heart  rig'ht  with  man  (vv.  7-12). 
The  former  is  of  course  the  more  important  of 
the  two,  so  it  cornes  first  and  has  much  the  larger 
space.  It  is  the  mighty  privilege  of  prayer. 
When  we  think  of  the  height  and  the  depth,  the 
length  and  breadth,  of  the  Righteousness  of 
the  Kingdom — when  we  think  of  the  dangers 
which  lurk  on  every  hand  and  at  every  stage  in 
our  life-journey — we  may  well  cry,  "  Who  is 
sufficient  for  these  things?"  To  that  cry  of  the 
heart  this  is  the  answer:  "  Ask,  and  it  shall  be 
given  you."  We  have  had  prayer  before;  but  it 
was  prayer  as  a  part  of  righteousness,  prayer  as 
a  religious  duty.  Now  it  is  prayer  as  a  power, 
as  the  one  sure  and  only  means  of  avoiding  the 
terrible  evils  on  every  side,  and  obtaining  the  un- 
speakable blessings,  the  "  good  things "  (ver. 
11)  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  This  being  so, 
it  was  of  the  greatest  importance  that  we  should 
have  faith  to  use  it.  Hence  the  repeated  assur- 
ance, and  the  plain  strong  language  in  which  it 
is  conveyed;  hence,  too,  the  simple,  strong,  and 
touching  arguments  to  dispel  our  doubts  and  en- 
-;ourage  our  trust   (vv.  9-11). 

Here,  again,  of  what  priceless  value  are  these 
few  words  of  our  blessed  Lord!  Just  where  they 
are  needed  most  they  come,  bringing  "  strength 
to  the  fainting  heart  "  in  view  of  the  seemingly 
inaccessible  heights  of  God's  holy  hill,  on  which 
the  city  of  His  kingdom  is  set.  Why  need  we 
faint  or  fear,  now  that  we  can  ask  and  be  sure 
of  receiving,  can  seek  and  be  sure  of  finding,  can 
knock  at  door  after  door  of  these  halls  of  Sion, 
and  have  them,  one  after  another,  opened  at 
our   touch? 


Again  as  before,  prayer  to  God  is  closely  con- 
nected with  our  behaviour  to  men.  In  the  model 
prayer  we  were  taught  to  say  "  Forgive  us  our 
debts,  as  we  forgive  our  debtors  "  :  and  not  only 
so,  but  a  special  warning  was  added,  that  if  we 
do  not  forgive  others,  we  cannot  be  forgiven. 
So  here  too  we  are  reminded  that  if  we  are  to 
expect  our  Father  to  act  in  a  fatherly  way  to 
us  by  giving  us  good  things,  we  must  act  in  a 
brotherly  way  to  our  neighlsours.  Hence  the 
golden  rule  which  follows,  and  hence  its  con- 
nection with  the  prayer-charter  by  the  word 
"  therefore."  And  now  that  our  relations  to  God 
and  man  have  been  summed  up  in  the  filial  rela- 
tion embodied  in  prayer,  and  in  the  fraternal 
relation  embodied  in  the  Golden  Rule,  all  is  com- 
plete, and  the  proof  of  this  is  furnished  in  the 
appropriate  concluding  words:  "  This  is  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets." 

III.  Invitation  to   Enter  the   Kingdom. 
(vii.  13-29). 

The  Master  has  now  said  everything  necessary 
in  order  to  clear  away  popular  misapprehensions, 
and  place  the  truth  about  His  kingdom  fairly 
before  the  minds  of  His  hearers.  He  has  ex- 
plained its  nature  as  inward  and  spiritual,  setting 
forth  the  character  of  those  who  belong  to  it, 
the  blessedness  they  will  enjoy,  and  the  influence 
they  will  exert  on  the  world  around  them.  He 
has  set  forth  clearly  and  fully  the  obligations 
that  will  rest  upon  them,  as  summed  up  in  the 
comprehensive  requirement  of  righteousness  un- 
understood  in  a  larger  and  deeper  sense  than  ever 
before — obligations  of  such  stringency  as  to 
make  it  apparent  that  to  seek  the  kingdom  of 
God  and  His  righteousness  is  no  holiday  under- 
taking, that  it  is  no  easy  thing  to  be  a  Christian, 
but  that  it  requires  self-restraint,  self-humbling, 
self-denial;  and  that  therefore  His  kingdom  can- 
not be  attractive  to  the  many,  but  must  appeal  to 
those  who  are  earnest-spirited  enough  to  ask 
and  seek  and  knock  for  admittance. 

Now  that  all  has  been  fully  and  faithfully  set 
forth — now  that  there  is  no  danger  of  obtaining 
disciples  under  misapprehension — the  great  invi- 
tation is  issued:  Enter  ye  in.  It  is  the  free  uni- 
versal invitation  of  the  Gospel,  as  large  and  lib- 
eral as  that  later  one,  "  Whosoever  will,  let  him 
come,"  though  given  in  such  a  way  as  to  keep 
still  prominently  before  the  minds  of  all  comers 
what  they  may  expect,  and  what  is  expected  of 
them:  "  Enter  ye  in  by  the  narrow  gate:  for 
wide  is  the  gate,  and  broad  is  the  way,  that  lead- 
eth  to  destruction,  and  many  be  they  that  enter 
in  thereby.  For  narrow  is  the  gate,  and  strait- 
ened the  way,  that  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  be 
they  that  find  it  "  (R.  V.). 

The  terms  of  this  first  invitation  are  very  sig- 
nificant. The  motives  of  fear  and  hope  are  ap- 
pealed to;  but  not  directly  or  specially.  In  the 
background  lies,  on  the  one  hand,  the  dark 
doom  of  "  destruction,"  and  on  the  other  the 
glorious  hope  of  "  life  "  ;  but  neither  the  one 
nor  the  other  is  made  emphatic.  The  demand 
for  "  righteousness  "  has  been  elaborated  in  full, 
and  warnings  against  sin  have  been  multiplied 
and  pressed  with  intensest  earnestness;  but  Christ 
does  not  now,  as  on  account  of  the  hardness 
of  men's  hearts  He  felt  it  needful  later  on  to  do, 
set  forth  in  language  that  appeals  vividly  to  the 
imagination  the  fate  of  those  who  take  the  broad 
way   of  easy  self-indulgence;   nor   does   He  en- 


Matthewv.,  vi..  vii.]  THE    GOSPEL    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


721 


deavour  to  picture  the  things  which  eye  hath  not 
seen,  nor  ear  heard,  nor  heart  conceived,  which 
God  hath  prepared  for  them  that  love  Him;  He 
simply  suggests  in  the  briefest  manner,  by  the 
use  of  a  single  word  in  each  case — and  that  word 
characterised  not  so  much  by  strength  as  by  sug- 
gestiveness — what  will  be  the  fate  of  one,  tlie 
goal  of  the  other.  Suggestive  as  both  words  are 
in  the  highest  degree,  they  are  not  emphatic,  but 
lie  as  it  were  in  the  background,  while  the  atten- 
tion is  kept  on  the  present  alternative:  on  the 
cne  hand  the  wide  gate,  the  broad  way,  the 
many  thronging  it;  on  the  other,  ■  the  narrow 
gate,  the  straitened  way,  the  few  finding  it.  Our 
J^ord  summons  not  so  much  to  a  choice  that  will 
pay,  as  to  a  choice  that  will  cost;  and  in  so 
doing  makes  His  appeal  to  all  that  is  noblest  and 
highest  and  best  in  human  nature. 

Throughout  the  whole  discourse  He  has  been 
leading  up  to  this  point.  He  has  been  setting 
ftrth  no  prospect  of  happiness  "  to  draw  the 
carnal  eye,"  but  an  ideal  of  blessedness  to  win 
t>ie  spiritual  heart.  He  has  been  unfolding  a 
righteousness,  which,  while  it  cannot  but  be  re- 
pulsive to  man's  natural  selfishness,  profoundly 
s.irs  and  satisfies  his  conscience;  and  now,  in 
strict  keeping  with  all  that  has  gone  before,  the 
appeal  is  made  in  such  a  way  as  shall  commend 
it.  not  to  the  thoughtless,  selfish  crowd,  but  to 
those  whose  hearts  have  been  drawn  and  whose 
consciences  have  been  touched  by  His  presenta- 
tion of  the  blessedness  they  may  expect  and  the 
righteousness  expected  of  them.  From  all  this 
there  is  surely  to  be  learned  a  most  important 
lesson,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Gospel 
should  usually  be  presented — not  by  sensational 
descriptions  of  the  glories  of  heaven  or  the  hor- 
rors of  hell,  nor  by  the  mere  reiteration  of  ex- 
hortations to  ■'  come  to  Jesus,"  but  by  such  in- 
formation of  the  mind,  awakening  of  the  heart, 
and  stirring  of  the  conscience  as  are  found  in 
perfection  in  this  great  discourse  of  the  Master. 

It  is  characteristic  of  the  large  view  our  Lord 
tikes  of  human  life  that  He  speaks  of  only  two 
I  aths.  There  seem  so  many,  leading  off  in  all 
(  ifferent  directions;  and  so  there  are  on  a  lim- 
i.td  view  of  life's  horizon;  but  when  eternal  is- 
sues are  in  sight,  there  are  but  two:  the  easy 
path  of  self-indulgence  leading  down  to  death, 
and  the  difficult  path  of  duty*  leading  up  to 
lie. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  there  is  not  a  trace 
of  asceticism  in  our  Lord's  representation.  The 
straitness  referred  to  is  not  outward,  any  more 
than  the  righteousness  is;  so  that  there  is  no 
encouragement  given  to  self-imposed  restrictions 
and  limitations,  as  in  the  monastic  vows  of 
"  poverty,  chastity,  and  obedience."  The  way  is 
strait  enough  in  itself  without  any  effort  of  ours 
to  make  it  straiter.  It  is  enough  that  we  set 
ourselves  to  keep  all  the  commandments;  so  shall 
we  have  a  sufficiency  of  exercise  to  toughen  our 
spiritual  fibre,  to  strengthen  our  moral  energies, 
to  make  us  men  and  women  instead  of  slaves 
of  lust  or  tools  of  mammon.  For,  be  it  ever 
remembered,  the  way  we  take  leads  on  naturally 
and  unavoidably  to  its  end.  Destruction  is  no 
arbitrary  punishment  for  self-indulgence;  nor  is 
life  an  arbitrary  reward  for  self-discipline  and 
surrender  to  the  will  of  God.  The  path  of  self- 
indulgence   "  leadeth  to   destruction,"   by  a  law 

*  Duty  of  course  in  its  largest  sense — to  God  and  man 
aid  self— including  all  "  righteousness  "  in  the  Master's 
S'.nse  of  the  word. 

46— Vol.  IV. 


which  cannot  be  annulled  or  set  aside.  But  the 
path  of  self-restraint  and  self-surrender  (for  these 
are  what  make  of  us  men,  and  not  "  blind 
mouths,"  as  Milton  expressively  puts  it),  the 
path  which  is  entered  by  the  strait  gate,  and  is 
continued  along  the  narrow  way,  is  one  which 
in  the  course  of  natural  development  "  leadeth 
unto  life." 

The  call  to  enter  is  followed  by  words  of 
solemn  warning  against  certain  dangers  which 
might  beset  even  those  who  wish  to  enter.  First, 
the  danger  of  false  guidance:  "  Beware  of  false 
prophets."  The  danger  lies  in  the  future.  Hith- 
erto, while  speaking  throughout  of  present  duty, 
there  have  been  backward  glances  over  the  past, 
as  our  Lord  has  made  it  evident,  point  after 
point,  that  the  righteousness  of  His  kingdom  was 
not  the  destruction,  but  the  fulfilment  of  the  law 
and  the  prophets.  Now,  however.  He  antici- 
pates the  time  when  there  will  be  those  claiming 
to  speak  in  the  name  of  God,  or  in  His  own 
name,  whose  doctrines  will  not  be  a  fulfilment, 
but  a  destruction  of  the  Truth,  and  a  constant 
danger  to  those  who  may  be  exposed  to  their 
wolf-like  ravages.  There  is  manifestly  no  refer- 
ence to  such  differences  of  opinion  as  divide  real 
Christians  from  each  other  in  these  days.  The 
doctrine  throughout  this  manifesto  is  not  specu- 
lative, but  practical;  it  nowhere  brings  into 
prominence  matters  of  opinion,  or  what  are  called 
theological  tenets,  but  everywhere  lays  stress  on 
that  which  immediately  and  powerfully  affects  the 
life.  So  it  is  here  also,  as  is  evident  from  the 
criterion  suggested  for  the  detection  of  false 
teachers:  "  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them." 
Besides,  the  connection  in  which  the  caution  oc- 
curs makes  it  evident  that  our  Lord  had  spe- 
cially in  view  those  teachers  who  would  lead 
their  disciples  astray  as  to  the  way  of  life,  es- 
pecially those  who  would  dare  to  make  that  easy 
which  he  had  sh'own  to  be  "  strait,"  who  would 
set  before  their  hearers  or  readers  a  broad  path 
instead  of  the  narrow  one  which  alone  leadeth 
unto  life.  This  is  a  danger  which  besets  us  in 
these  days.  There  is  so  strong  a  sentiment 
abroad  in  favour  of  liberalitv — and  liberality 
properly  so  called  is  so  admirable,  and  has  been 
so  much  a  stranger  in  times  past — that  we  are 
in  danger  of  accepting  in  its  name  easy-going 
representations  of  the  Christian  life  which 
amount  to  a  total  abolition  of  the  strait  gate  and 
the  narrow  way.  Let  us  by  all  means  be  liberal 
enough  to  acknowledge  all  who  have  entered  by 
the  strait  gate  of  genuine  repentance,  and  are 
walking  in  the  narrow  way  of  faith  and  obedi- 
ence, however  much  they  may  differ  from  us  in 
matters  of  opinion,  forms  of  worship,  or  modes 
of  work;  but  let  us  beware  how  we  give  even  the 
smallest  encouragement  to  any  on  the  broad 
road  to  imagine  that  they  can  continue  as  they 
are,  and  find  it  all  right  in  the  end.  So  to  tam- 
per with  truth  in  the  guise  of  liberality  is  to 
play  the  wolf  in  sheep's  clothing. 

The  test  our  Lord  gives  for  "  discerning  the 
spirits  "  is  one  which  requires  time  for  its  ap- 
plication, but  it  is  the  only  sure  one;  and  when 
we  remember  that  the  Master  is  now  looking 
forward  into  the  future  history  of  His  kingdom, 
we  can  see  why  He  should  lay  stress  on  a  test 
whose  operation,  though  slow,  was  sure.  It  is 
of  course  assumed  that  the  first  criterion  is  the 
Word  of  the  Lord  Himself.  This  is  the  law 
of  the  kingdom;  but,  knowing  well  what  was 
in    man,    the    Lord   could   not   but   foresee    that 


722 


■^'HE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


there  would  be  those  who  could  so  twist  any 
words  that  might  be  spoken  on  those  great  sub- 
jects as  to  lay  snares  for  the  unwary;  and  there- 
fore, besides  the  obvious  appeal  "  to  the  law 
and  to  the  testimony,"  He  supplied  a  practical 
test  which,  though  less  speedy  in  its  application, 
was  perfectly  sure  in   its  results. 

The  announcement  of  so  important  a  test  leads 
to  the  development  of  the  general  principle  on 
which  its  validity  depends — viz.,  the  vital  con- 
nection between  essential  doctrine  and  life.  In 
the  long  run  the  one  is  always  the  outcome  of 
the  other.  In  the  spiritual  as  in  the  natural 
world  every  species  brings  forth  fruit  "  after  its 
kind."  "  Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or 
figs  of  thistles?  Even  so  every  good  tree  bring- 
eth  forth  good  fruit;  but  a  corrupt  tree  bringeth 
forth  evil  fruit.  A  good  tree  cannot  bring  forth 
evil  fruit,  neither  can  a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth 
good  fruit."  The  law  being  so  absolute,  making 
it  certain,  on  the  one  hand,  that  where  there  is 
truth  in  the  inward  parts  there  will  be  good  fruit 
in  the  outward  life,  and  on  the  other,  that  where 
there  is  corrupt  fruit  in  the  outward  life  there 
must  be  that  which  is  corrupt  in  the  hidden  man 
of  the  heart,  it  follows  that  the  criterion  is  so 
sure  as  to  be  without  appeal:  "  Every  tree  that 
bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit  is  hewn  down,  and 
cast  into  the  fire  "  (ver.  19),  and  therefore  may 
well  determine  the  question  as  to  who  are  trust- 
worthy teachers  in  the  Church:  "  Wherefore  by 
their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them." 

In  the  development  of  the  principle  the  Mas- 
ter's thought  has  been  enlarged  so  as  to  include 
not  teachers  only,  but  all  His  disciples;  and  His 
range  of  view  has  been  extended  so  as  to  em- 
brace the  last  things.  The  great  day  of  Judg- 
ment is  before  him.  He  sees  the  multitudes 
gathered  around  the  throne.  He  foresees  that 
there  will  be  many  on  that  great  day  who  will 
discover,  when  it  is  too  late,  that  they  have  al- 
lowed themselves  to  be  deceived,  that  they  have 
not  been  careful  enough  to  test  their  spiritual 
guides,  that  they  have  not  been  careful  enough 
to  try  themselves  and  make  sure  that  their  fruits 
were  such  that  the  Lord  of  the  vineyard  could 
recognise  them  as  His  own.  He  is  filled  with 
sympathy  and  sorrow  at  the  prospect;  so  He 
lifts  up  His  voice  in  earnest  warning,  that,  if 
possible,  none  of  those  to  whom  the  words  will 
ever  come  may  allow  themselves  to  fall  into  so 
fatal  an  error:  "  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto 
me,  Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven;  but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  My  Father 
which  is  in  heaven." 

How  naturally,  and  as  it  were  unconsciously 
and  inevitably,  He  has  passed  from  the  Teacher 
to  the  Judge!  Not  as  a  personal  claim.  In  His 
earliest  teaching  He  kept  personal  claims  as 
much  in  the  background  as  possible.  But  now 
it  is  impossible  to  avoid  some  disclosure  of  His 
divine  authority.  He  must  speak  of  the  Judg- 
ment; and  He  cannot  speak  of  it  without  mak- 
ing it  appear  that  He  is  Judge.  The  force  of 
this  is  all  the  greater  that  He  is,  as  it  were,  sur- 
prised into  it;  for  He  is  evidently  not  thinking 
of  Himself  at  all,  but  only  of  those  who  then 
were  or  would  afterwards  be  in  danger  of  making 
a  most  fatal  mistake,  leading  to  consequences 
awful  and  irreparable.  We  can  well  imagine  that 
from  this  point  on  to  the  end  there  must  have 
been  a  light  on  His  face,  a  fire  in  His  eye,  a 
solemnity  in  His  tone,  a  grandeur  in  His  very 
attitude,  which  struck  the  multitude  with  amaze- 


ment, especially  at  the  authority  (ver.  29)  with 
which  He  spoke:  "  Many  will  say  to  Me  in  that 
day,  Lord,  Lord,  did  we  not  prophesy  by  Thy 
name,  and  by  Thy  name  cast  out  devils,  and  by 
Thy  name  do  many  mighty  works?  And  then 
will  I  profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you: 
depart  from  me,  ye  that  work  iniquity"  (R.  V.). 

Again,  observe  the  form  the  warning  takes, 
revealing  the  consciousness  that  to  depart  from 
Him  was  doom — one  of  the  many  tokens  through- 
out this  discourse  that  none  else  than  the  Lord 
of  life  and  glory  could  possibly  have  spoken  it. 
Yet  how  many  vainly  think  that  they  can  accept 
it  without  acknowledging  Him! 

The  same  solemn  and  regal  tone  is  kept  up 
throughout  the  impressive  passage  which  closes 
all,  and  presses  home  the  great  warning  against 
trusting  to  any  experience  short  of  the  surrender 
of  the  life  to  do  the  will  of  God  as  set  forth  in 
the  words  of  Christ  His  Son.  The  two  classes 
He  has  now  in  view  are  not  the  two  great 
classes  who  walk,  the  one  in  the  broad  and  the 
other  in  the  narrow  way.  They  are  two  classes 
of  hearers.  Most  of  those  that  throng  the  broad 
way  are  not  hearers  at  all;  they  have  no  desi-e 
or  intention  of  seeking  any  other  than  the  broad 
way — they  would  as  little  think  of  going  up  into 
a  mountain  and  listening  to  a  discourse  on 
righteousness,  as  they  would  of  wearing  a  hair 
shirt  or  doing  any  other  kind  of  penance;  but 
those  our  Lord  has  now  in  view  all  have  the 
idea  of  seeking  the  right  way:  their  very  attitude 
as  hearers  shows  it — they  are  all  of  the  church- 
going  class,  to  translate  into  modern  phrase;  and 
what  He  fears' is  that  some  of  them  may  deceive 
themselves  by  imagining  that  because  they  hear 
with  interest  and  attention,  perhaps  admiration, 
therefore  they  are  in  the  narrow  way.  Accord- 
ingly He  solemnly  warns  them  that  all  this  may 
amount  to  nothing:  there  may  be  attention,  in- 
terest, admiration,  full  assent  to  all;  but  if  the 
hearing  is  not  followed  by  doing,  all  is  in  vain. 

It  may  almost  go  without  saying  that,  after 
what  our  Lord  has  just  been  teaching  as  to  the 
vital  connection  between  the  faith  of  the  heart 
and  the  "  fruits  "  of  the  life  (vv.  15-23),  there  is 
no  "  legalism  "  here.  In  fact,  the  doing  is  not  out- 
ward; it  is  a  doing  of  the  heart.  The  righteous- 
ness He  has  been  expounding  has,  as  we  have 
seen,  been  a  righteousness  of  the  heart,  and  the 
doing  of  it,  as  a  matter  of  course,  is  a  heart- 
work,  having  its  root  in  faith,  which  is  the  be- 
ginning of  the  doing  in  every  case,  according  to 
His  own  word  in  another  place:  "This  is  the 
work  of  God,  that  ye  believe  on  Him  Whom 
He  hath  sent." 

The  illustration  with  which  He  presses  home 
the  warning  is  in  the  highest  degree  appropriate 
and  forcible.  The  man  who  not  only  hears,  but 
does,  makes  thorough  work,  digs  deep  (as  St. 
Luke  puts  it  in  his  record),  and  founds  the  house 
he  is  building  for  time  and  eternity  upon  solid 
rock;  while  the  man  who  hears  but  does  not,  is 
one  who  takes  no  care  as  to  his  foundation,  but 
erects  his  house  just  where  he  happens  to  be, 
on  loose  sand  or  earth,  which  the  first  storm 
will  dislodge  and  sweep  away.  Meanwhile  test- 
ing times  are  coming — rains,  floods,  winds — the 
searching  trials  of  life  culminating  in  the  final 
judgment  in  the  life  to  come.  These  all  test  the 
work  of  the  builder,  and  render  apparent  the 
wisdom  of  the  man  who  provided  against  the 
coming  storm  by  choosing  the  rock  foundation, 
for  his  house  abides  through  all;  and  the  folly  of 


Matthew  viii.-ix.  35.] 


THE    SIGNS   OF   THE    KINGDOM. 


723 


the  other,  who  without  a  foundation  carelessly 
risked  all,  for  his  house  gives  way  before  the 
storm,  and  great  is  the  fall  of  it. 

Alas  for  many  hearers  of  the  Word!  Alas  for 
many  admirers  of  the  "  Sermon  on  the  Mount"! 
Where  will  they  be  when  everything  turns  on 
the  question  "  Wert  thou  a  doer  of  it?  " 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  SIGNS  OF  THE  KINGDOM. 

Matthew  viii.-ix.  35. 

Referring  to  chap.  iv.  23,  we  find  the  work 
of  Christ  at  the  beginning  of  His  ministry  sum- 
marised as  teaching  and  preaching  and  healing 
all  manner  of  diseases.  Of  the  teaching  and 
preaching  we  have  had  a  signal  illustration  in 
what  is  called  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount;  now 
the  other  great  branch  of  the  work  is  set  before 
us  in  a  group  of  miracles,  filling  up  almost  the 
whole  of  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters. 

The  naturalness  of  the  sequence  will  be  at  once 
apparent.  If  men  had  needed  nothing  more 
than  counsel,  guidance,  rules  of  life,  then  might 
the  Gospel  have  ended  when  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  was  concluded.  There  are  those  who 
think  they  need  nothing  more;  but  if  they  knew 
themselves  they  would  feel  their  need  not  only 
of  the  Teacher's  word,  but  of  the  Healer's  touch, 
and  would  hail  with  gladness  the  chapters  which 
tell  how  the  Saviour  dealt  with  the  poor  leper, 
the  man  with  the  palsy,  the  woman  with  the 
fever,  those  poor  creatures  that  were  vexed  with 
evil  spirits,  that  dead  damsel  in  the  ruler's  house. 
We  may  well  rejoice  that  the  great  Teacher  came 
down  from  the  mountain,  and  made  Himself 
known  on  the  plain  and  among  the  city  crowds 
as  the  mighty  Healer;  that  His  stern  demand  for 
perfect  righteousness  was  so  soon  followed  by 
that  encouraging  word,  so  full  of  comfort,  for 
such  as  we:  "  I  came  not  to  call  the  righteous, 
but  sinners "  (ix.  13).  The  healing,  then,  is 
quite  as  essential  as  the  teaching.  The  Sermon 
points  out  the  way,  unfolds  the  truth;  but  in  the 
touch  and  word  of  the  King  Himself  is  found  the 
life.  The  Christ  of  God  had  come,  not  as  a  mere 
Ambassador  from  the  court  of  heaven  to  demand 
submission  to  its  laws,  but  as  a  mighty  Saviour, 
Friend,  and  Comforter.  Hence  it  was  necessary 
that  He  should  make  full  proof  of  His  mission 
in  this  respect  as  well  as  in  the  other;  and  ac- 
cordingly the  noble  ethics  taught  on  the  mount 
are  followed  by  a  series  of  heavenly  deeds  of 
power  and  lovingkindness  done  in  the  plain. 

The  group  in  chaps,  viii.  and  ix.  is  well  fitted 
to  give  a  comprehensive  view  of  Christ's  power 
and  willingness  to  save.  If  only  they  were 
looked  at  in  this  intelligent  way,  how  the  paltry 
prejudices  against  "  miracles  "  (a  word,  let  it  be 
observed,  not  once  to  be  found  in  this  Gospel) 
would  vanish.  Miracles,  wonders,  prodigies — how 
incredible  in  an  age  of  enlightenment!  Yes;  if 
they  were  introduced  as  miracles,  wonders,  prod- 
igies; but  they  are  not.  They  are  signs  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven — just  such  signs  of  it  as  the 
intelligent  reason  demands;  for  how  otherwise 
is  it  possible  for  One  Who  comes  to  save  to 
show  that  He  is  able  to  do  it?  How  could  the 
people  have  been  expected  to  welcome  Him  as 
a  Saviour,  unless  He  had  taken  some  means  to 
make  it  evident  that  He  had  the  power  as  well 


as  the  will  to  save?  Accordingly,  in  consonance 
with  what  enlightened  reason  imperatively  de- 
mands of  such  an  One  as  He  claims  to  be,  we 
have  a  series  of  "  mighty  deeds  "  of  love,  show- 
ing forth,  not  only  His  grace,  but  His  power^ 
power  to  heal  the  diseases  of  the  body,  power 
over  the  realm  of  nature,  power  over  the  unseen 
world  of  spirit,  power  to  forgive  and  save  from 
sin,  power  to  restore  lost  faculties  and  conquer 
death  itself.  Such  are  the  appropriate  signs  of 
the  kingdom  spread  before  us  here. 

Let  us  look  first  at  that  which  occupies  the 
foremost  place, — power  to  heal  disease.  The 
diseases  of  the  body  are  the  outward  symptoms 
of  the  deep-seated  malady  of  the  spirit;  hence  it 
is  fitting  that  He  should  begin  by  showing  in 
this  region  His  will  and  power  to  save.  Yet  it 
is  not  a  formal  showing  of  it.  It  is  no  mere 
demonstration.  He  does  not  seek  out  the  leper, 
set  him  up  before  them,  and  say,  "  Now  you  will 
see  what  I  can  do."  All  comes  about  in  a  most 
simple  and  natural  way,  as  became  Him  Who 
was  no  wonder-worker,  no  worker  of  miracles  in 
the  vulgar  use  of  that  word,  but  a  mighty 
Saviour  from  heaven  with  a  heart  of  love  and 
a  hand  of  power. 

The  Leper  (viii.  1-4). 

"  And  when  He  was  come  down  from  the 
mountain,  great  multitudes  followed  Him.  And 
behold,  there  came  to  Him  a  leper."  What  will 
He  do  with  him?  Should  He  say  to  him,  "  Poor 
man,  you  are  too  late — the  sermon  is  done"? 
or  should  He  give  him  some  of  the  best  bits 
over  again?  No,  there  is  not  a  sentence  in  the 
whole  of  it  that  would  be  any  answer  to  that 
cry,  "  Lord,  if  Thou  wilt.  Thou  canst  make  me 
clean."  What  does  He  do,  then?  "Jesus  put 
forth  His  hand,  and  touched  him,  saying,  I  will: 
be  thou  clean.  And  immediately  his  leprosy  was 
cleansed." 

Is  it,  then,  a  great  stumbling-block  in  your 
way,  O  nineteenth-century  critic,  that  you  are  ex- 
pected to  believe  that  the  Lord  Jesus  actually  did 
heal  this  leper?  Would  it  take  the  stumbling- 
block  away  to  have  it  altered?  Suppose  we  try 
it,  amended  to  suit  the  "  anti-supernaturalism  " 
of  the  age.  "  And  behold,  there  came  a  leper 
to  Him,  saying,  Lord,  if  Thou  wilt,  Thou  canst 
make  me  clean.  And  Jesus  put  out  His  hand, 
and  motioned  him  away,  saying,  Poor  man,  you 
are  quite  mistaken,  I  cannot  help  you.  I  came 
to  teach  wise  people,  not  to  help  poor  wretches 
like  you.  There  are  great  laws  of  health  and 
disease;  I  advise  you  to  find  them  out,  and  obey 
them:  consult  your  doctor,  and  do  the  best  you 
can.  Farewell."  Oh,  what  nonsense  many  wise 
people  talk  about  the  difficulty  of  believing  in 
Divine  power  to  heal!  The  fact  is,  that  if  Christ 
had  not  proved  Himself  a  healer,  men  could  not 
have  believed  in  Him  at  all. 

There  could  have  been  no  better  introduction 
to  the  saving  work  of  the  Christ  of  God.  Lep- 
rosy was  of  all  diseases  the  most  striking  symbol 
of  sin.  This  is  so  familiar  a  thought  that  it  need 
not  be  set  forth  in  detail.  One  point,  however, 
must  be  mentioned,  as  it  opens  up  a  vein  of 
tender  beauty  in  the  exquisite  simplicity  of  the 
story — the  rigorous  separation  of  the  leprous 
from  the  healthy,  enforced  by  the  ceremonial 
law,  which  made  it  defilement  to  touch  a  leper. 
Yet  ■'  Jesus  stretched  forth  His  hand,  and 
touched  him."     "  He   was   holy,   harmless,   unde- 


724 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


filed,  separate  from  sinners;  "  therefore  He  could 
mingle  with  them,  contracting  no  stain  Himself, 
but  diffusing  health  around  Him.  He  could  take 
no  defilement  from  the  leper's  touch;  the  cur- 
rent was  all  the  other  way:  "  virtue  "  went  out  of 
Him,  and  flowed  in  healing  streams  through  the 
poor  leper's  veins.  O  lovely  symbol  of  the 
Saviour's  relation  to  us  sinners!  He  has  in  His 
holy  Incarnation  touched  our  leprous  humanity; 
and  remaining  stainless  Himself,  has  set  flowing 
a  fountain  of  healing  for  all  who  will  open  to 
Him  hearts  of  faith  and  let  Him  touch  them  with 
His  pure  heart  of  love.  Those  were  most  won- 
derful words  spoken  on  the  mount:  they  touch 
the  conscience  to  the  quick  and  fire  the  soul  with 
heavenly  aspiration;  but  this  touch  of  the  let>er 
goes  to  our  hearts,  for  it  proves  to  us  that, 
though  the  time  is  coming  when  He  shall  sit  as 
Judge  and  say  to  all  the  sinful,  "  Depart  from 
Me,"  as  yet  He  is  the  loving  Saviour,  saying, 
"  Come  unto  Me,  ye  weary,"  and  touching  the 
leprous  into  health. 

That  our  Saviour  was  totally  averse  to  any- 
thing at  all  sensational,  and  determined  rather 
to  repress  than  encourage  the  mere  thirst  for 
marvels,  is  evident  from  the  directions  given  to 
the  leper  to  say  nothing  about  what  had  hap- 
pened to  him,  but  to  take  the  appointed  method 
of  giving  thanks  to  God  for  his  recovery,  at  the 
same  time  registering  the  fact,  so  that  while  his 
cure  should  not  be  used  to  gather  a  crowd,  it 
might  be  on  record  with  the  proper  authorities 
as  a  witness  to  the  truth  of  which  it  was  a  sign. 

The  Centurion's  Servant  (5-13). 

This  case,  while  affording  another  valuable  il- 
lustration of  the  Master's  willingness  and  power 
to  save,  differs  in  several  important  points  from 
the  first,  so  that  the  lesson  is  widened.  First 
and  chiefly,  the  application  was  from  a  Gentile; 
next,  it  was  not  on  his  own  behalf  that  the  cen- 
turion made  it,  but  on  behalf  of  another,  and  that 
other  his  servant;  and,  further,  it  was  a  request 
to  heal  a  patient  out  of  sight,  out  of  knowledge 
even,  as  it  would  seem.  Each  of  these  particulars 
might  suggest  a  doubt.  He  has  healed  this  Jew; 
but  will  He  listen  to  that  Gentile?  He  has  re- 
sponded to  this  man's  own  cry;  but  will  He  re- 
spond when  there  is  no  direct  application  from 
the  patient?  He  has  cured  this  man  with  a 
touch;  but  can  he  cure  a  patient  miles  away? 
The  Saviour  knew  well  the  difficulties  which 
must  have  lain  in  the  way  of  this  man's  faith. 
He  has  evidence,  moreover,  that  his  is  genuine 
faith,  and  not  the  credulity  of  superstition.  One 
could  readily  imagine  an  ignorant  person  think- 
ing that  it  made  no  difference  whether  the  patient 
were  present,  or  a  thousand  miles  away:  what 
difference  does  distance  make  to  the  mere  ma- 
gician? But  this  man  is  no  ignorant  believer 
in  charms  and  incantations.  He  is  an  intelligent 
man,  and  has  thought  it  all  out.  He  has  heard 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  knows  that  this 
is  the  King.  Reasoning  from  what  he  knows  of 
the  Roman  kingdom,  how  orders  given  from  a 
central  authority  can  be  despatched  to  the  out- 
skirts, and  be  executed  there  with  as  great  cer- 
tainty as  if  the  Emperor  himself  had  gone  to  do 
it,  he  concludes  that  the  King  of  the  spiritual 
world  must  in  like  manner  have  means  of  com- 
munication with  every  part  of  His  dominion;  and 
just  as  it  was  not  necessary,  even  for  a  mere 
centurion,  to  do  personally  everything  he  wanted 


done,  having  it  in  his  power  to  employ  some 
servant  to  do  it,  so  it  was  unreasonable  to  expect 
the  King  of  heaven  Himself  to  come  in  person 
and  heal  his  servant:  it  was  only  necessary, 
therefore,  that  He  should  speak  the  word,  and 
by  some  unseen  agency  the  thing  would  be 
done.  At  once  the  Saviour  recognises  the  man's 
thoughtful  intelligence  on  the  subject,  and,  con- 
trasting with  it  the  slowness  of  mind  and  heart 
of  those  of  whom  so  much  more  might  have  been 
expected,  "  He  marvelled,  and  said  to  them  that 
followed.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  have  not 
found  so  great  faith,  no,  not  in  Israel." 

The  thought  of  this  immediately  suggests  to 
Him  the  multitudes  that  shall  exercise  a  similar 
faith  in  ages  to  come,  and  in  lands  far  off;  and, 
as  on  the  mount,  when  He  looked  forward  to  the 
great  future.  His  heart  yearned  over  the  mere 
hearers  of  the  word  shut  out  at  last;  so  here  He 
yearns  with  a  great  yearning  over  His  unbeliev- 
ing countrymen,  whose  exclusion  at  last  from  the 
heavenly  kingdom  would  be  felt  with  all  the 
sharper  pain  that  such  multitudes  from  far  less 
favoured  lands  were  safe  within — at  home,  with 
the  patriarchs  of  the  chosen  nation — while  they, 
the  natural  heirs  of  the  kingdom,  were  exiles  from 
it  for  evermore.  Hence  the  wail  and  warning 
which  follow  His  hearty  appreciation  of  the  cen- 
turion's faith:  "  And  I  say  unto  you,  that  many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  the  west,  and  shall 
sit  down  with  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob, 
in  the  kingdom  of  heaven:  but  the  sons  of  the 
kingdom  shall  be  cast  forth  into  the  outer  dark- 
ness: there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth." 

How  fared  it  with  the  centurion's  appeal?  Was 
it  any  hindrance  that  he  was  a  foreigner,  that  he 
made  it  not  for  himself  but  for  a  servant,  and 
that  the  patient  was  so  far  away?  None  what- 
ever. As  he  rightly  judged,  the  King  of  heaven 
had  resources  in  abundance  to  meet  the  case. 
Without  the  least  hesitation,  Jesus  said  to  the 
centurion,  '"  Go  thy  way:  and  as  thou  hast  be- 
lieved, so  be  it  done  unto  thee.  And  his  servant 
was  healed  in  the  selfsame  hour." 

The  Fever  Patient  (14,  15). 

The  leprosy  and  palsy  were  symbols  of  sin 
wholly  possessing  its  victims:  the  one  suggestive 
of  the  state  of  those  who  are  positively  defiled 
by  sin,  the  other  of  the  condition  of  those  who, 
though  sound  to  all  outward  appearance,  are  sim- 
ply wanting  in  inward  life,  paralysed  in  that  part 
of  their  being  which  constitutes  life.  These  two 
cases,  then,  were  most  suitable  for  setting  forth 
the  saving  power  of  the  Christ  of  God  as  regards 
the  unconverted,  be  they  Jew  or  Gentile.  This 
third  cure  is  within  the  circle  of  the  disciples. 
It  is  a  case  of  fever  in  the  home  of  Peter.  It 
therefore  fitly  suggests  the  diseases  to  which 
those  are  still  liable  who  have  come  to  Christ 
and  been  healed  of  their  leprosy  or  palsy,  the 
chronic  disease  which  defiled  or  paralysed  them 
in  time  past;  but  who  are  still  liable  to  con-, 
tagion,  still  exposed  to  attacks  of  fever,  acute 
diseases  which,  though  temporary,  are  most  dan- 
gerous, and,  just  as  certainly  as  the  others,  need 
the  touch  of  the  Great  Physician  for  their  heal- 
ing. These  fevers  separate  us  from  Christ  and 
unfit  us  for  His  service;  but  they  need  not  con- 
tinue to  do  this,  for  if  only  we  allow  Him  to 
enter  the  house  and  touch  us,  the  fever  will 
cease;    and,    like    this    patient    in    the    home    of 


Matthew  viii.-ix.  35.] 


THE    SIGNS    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


725 


Peter,   wc  may  at  once  arise  and  minister  unto 
Him. 

The  three  specific  cases  which  have  been  so 
appropriately  selected  and  given  in  detail  are 
followed  by  a  general  enumeration  of  a  number 
of  similar  ones  dealt  with  in  like  manner,  "  when 
the  even  was  come  " — the  whole  experience  of 
that  eventful  day  leading  to  the  joyful  recogni- 
tion of  the  fulfilment  of  a  grand  prophetic  word 
spoken  long  ago  of  the  Messiah  that  was  to 
come:  "  Himself  took  our  infirmities,  and  bare 
our  sicknesses." 

The  quotation  is  most  suggestive.  It  raises  the 
question  of  our  Lord's  personal  relation  to  dis- 
ease. We  have  seen  reason  to  believe  that  dis- 
ease could  not  contaminate  His  holy  fiesh;  and 
certainly  we  never  read  of  His  suffering  from 
any  sickness  of  His  own.  Did  He  then  know 
nothing  personally  of  disease  and  fleshly  infirm- 
ity? If  not,  how  could  He  be  tempted  in  all 
points  like  as  we  are?  The  solution  seems  to 
lie  in  this  most  interesting  quotation.  It  is  not 
a  literal  citation  from  the  Septuagint,  but  it  is 
a  thoroughly  fair  and  true  reproduction  of  the 
idea  of  the  prophet;  and  it  clearly  suggests  to  the 
mind  that  the  Christ's  relation  to  human  sickness 
was  of  the  same  kind  as  His  relation  to  human 
sin.  Though  personally  He  had- no  sin,  yet  "  He 
was  made  sin  for  us,"  so  that  He  felt  the  intolera- 
ble weight  pressing  Him  down  as  in  the  garden, 
and  the  awful  darkness  wrapping  Him  round  as 
on  the  cross.  In  the  same  way,  even  though 
His  flesh  may  never  actually  have  been  subjected 
to  physical  disease.  He  nevertheless  could  not 
remove  diseases  from  others  without  bearing 
them  Himself.  Ah!  it  cost  Him  far  more  than 
we  are  apt  to  think,  to  say,  "  I  will,  be  thou 
clean."  It  was  only  by  the  sacrifice  of  His  life 
that  He  could  take  away  the  sin  of  the  world; 
and  we  believe  that  it  was  only  by  the  sacrifice 
of  a  part  of  His  life  that  He  could  take  away  the 
disease  of  a  sufferer.  When  He  said,  "  Some- 
body hath  touched  Me,  for  virtue  has  gone  out 
of  Me,"  we  may  be  sure  it  was  no  mere  jostling 
of  the  crowd;  it  was  an  outflow  of  His  life,  a 
partial  shedding,  so  to  speak,  of  His  precious 
blood.  Just  as  later,  in  the  words  of  St.  Peter, 
"  He  bare  our  sins  in  His  own  body  on  the 
tree,"  so  already  "  Himself  took  our  infirmities 
and  bare  our  sicknesses." 

The  Impulsive  Scribe  (18-20). 

The  two  incidents  which  follow,  though  at  first 
sight  apparently  different  in  character  from  the 
great  majority  of  the  group,  are  quite  in  place 
among  the  mighty  deeds  of  the  Master,  manifest- 
ing, as  they  do.  His  penetrating  insight  into 
character.  To  all  appearance  there  could  have 
been  no  better  offer  than  that  of  the  impulsive 
scribe — "  Master,  I  will  follow  Thee  whitherso- 
ever Thou  goest";  and.  had  it  been  made  with 
a  full  understanding  of  all  it  meant,  it  would 
beyond  all  question  have  been  at  once  accepted; 
but  He  Who  "  knew  what  was  in  man  "  saw  at 
once  what  manner  of  man  this  was — how  he  was 
quite  unprepared  for  the  hardships  he  would  have 
to  undergo;  and  therefore,  while  by  no  means 
declining  the  offer.  He  gives  him  fair  warning 
of  what  he  might  expect,  in  these  memorable 
words:  "The  foxes  have  holes,  and  the  birds  of 
the  air  have  nests;  but  the  Son  of  man  hath  not 
where  to  lay  His  head."     There  is  infinite  pathos 


in  the  words.  Moreover,  the  form  in  which  the 
truth  is  put,  while  fitted  effectually  to  deter  the 
selfish  and  faint-hearted,  would  be  no  discour- 
agement to  a  truly  devoted  and  courageous  soul, 
but  would  rather  fire  it  with  a  holier  ardour  to 
follow  the  Son  of  man  anywhere,  at  whatever 
cost,  rejoicing  to  be  "counted  worthy  to  suffer 
shame  "  and  loss  "  for  His  name." 

The  Hesitating  Disciple  (21,  22). 

This  case  is  one  of  the  opposite  description. 
Judging  from  the  way  in  which  the  scribe  had 
been  dealt  with,  it  might  have  been  expected  that 
when  this  disciple  asked  to  be  excused  for  a 
time,  in  order  to  discharge  a  duty  which  seemed 
so  urgent,  the  answer  would  have  been  one  not 
only  allowing  but  even  enforcing  the  delay.  But 
no.  Why  the  difference?  Again,  because  the 
Master  saw  "  what  was  in  man."  This  was  no 
impulsive,  impetuous  nature  which  needed  a 
word  of  caution,  but  one  of  those  hesitating  na- 
tures which  need  to  be  summoned  to  immediate 
decision.  It  would  seem  also,  from  the  peculiar 
expression,  "  Leave  the  dead  to  bury  their  own 
dead  "  (R.  V.),  that  he  belonged  to  an  ungodly 
family,  to  associate  again  with  whom  at  such  a 
critical  time  in  his  history  would  be  most  preju- 
dicial; and  it  must  be  remembered  that  it  would 
not  have  been  the  mere  attending  of  the  funeral; 
there  were  the  laws  of  uncleanness,  which  would 
oblige  him,  if  he  went,  to  stay  many  days;  and 
meantime  the  golden  opportunity  might  be 
gone. 

Thus  are  we  guarded  against  the  two  opposite 
dangers — the  one  besetting  the  eager  and  im- 
pulsive, the  other  the  halting  and  irresolute.  In 
neither  case  are  we  told  what  the  result  was. 
We  may  surmise  that  the  scribe  disappeared  from 
view,  and  that  the  other  joined  the  party  in  the 
boat;  but  "  something  sealed  the  lips  of  that 
Evangelist";  from  which  we  may  perhaps  infer 
that  his  main  object  in  relating  the  two  incidents 
was,  not  to  give  information  of  them,  but  to 
show  forth  the  glory  of  the  Master  as  the 
Searcher  of  hearts;  to  signalise  the  fact  that  He 
was  no  less  Master  of  the  minds  than  of  the 
bodies  of  men. 

The  Storm  Stilled  (23-27). 

It  was  not  enough  that  the  Saviour  of  man- 
kind should  have  power  to  grapple  with  disease 
and  skill  to  search  the  hearts  of  men:  He  must 
be  Master  not  only  of  life,  but  of  its  environment 
too.  That  He  is  becomes  apparent  before  the 
boat  which  carries  the  little  company  reaches  the 
other  side  of  the  lake.  One  of  those  tempests 
which  often  lash  the  Sea  of  Galilee  into  sudden 
fury  has  burst  upon  them,  and  the  little  boat 
is  almost  covered  with  the  waves.  Here  is  a 
situation  beyond  the  reach  even  of  the  Great 
Physician,  unless  indeed  He  be  something  more. 
He  is  something  more.  He  is  Lord  of  nature, 
Master  of  all  its  forces! 

Must  He  not  be?  He  has  come  to  reveal  the 
unseen  God  of  nature;  must  He  not  then  make 
it  manifest,  now  that  the  occasion  calls  for  it, 
that  winds  and  waves  are  "  ministers  of  His, 
that  do  His  pleasure"?  Again,  it  is  no  mere 
"  miracle,"  no  mere  marvel  which  He  works  in 
the  salvation  of  His  terrified  disciples — it  is  a 
sign,  an  indispensable  sign  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 


726 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


The  story  is  told  with  exquisite  simplicity,  and 
with  all  the  reality  of  manifest  and  trans- 
parent truthfulness.  "  He  was  asleep  " — naturally 
enough  after  the  fatigues  of  the  day,  notwith- 
standing the  howling  of  the  storm;  for  why 
should  He  fear  wind  or  wave?  Is  there  not  a 
promise  here  for  all  His  followers  when  tempest- 
tossed:  "So  He  giveth  His  beloved  sleep"? 

His  disciples  let  Him  sleep  as  long  as  they 
dare;  but  the  peril  is  too  imminent  now.  So 
they  come  to  Him  and  awake  Him,  saying, 
"  Save,  Lord;  we  perish!  "  Though  no  concern 
for  Himself  would  ever  have  disturbed  His  slum- 
ber, the  first  cry  of  His  disciples  rouses  Him 
at  once  to  action.  The  resources  of  His  human 
nature,  beyond  which  He  never  went  for  the  pur- 
pose of  meeting  His  own  personal  needs,  had 
been  completely  exhausted;  but  there  is  no 
diminution  of  His  power  to  save  those  who  call 
upon  Him.  Without  any  trace  remaining  of 
weariness  or  weakness,  He  hastens  to  relieve 
them.  First,*  He  quiets  the  tempest  in  the  dis- 
ciples' hearts,  rebuking  their  unbelief  and  calm- 
ing their  fears;  then  He  stills  the  storm  without, 
rebuking  the  winds  and  the  sea;  "  and  there  was 
a  great  calm."  It  reads  like  the  story  of  crea- 
tion. No  wonder  the  astonished  disciples  ex- 
claimed: "What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that 
even  the  winds  and  the  sea  obey  Him?  " 

Demons  Cast  Out  (28-34). 

Visible  nature  is  not  man's  sole  environment. 
There  is  an  unseen  universe  besides;  and  He 
Who  would  be  Saviour  of  mankind  must  be 
Master  there  as  well.  That  this  also  is  sure  is 
now  proved  beyond  a  doubt.  For  it  is  important 
to  observe  that  this  is  not  an  ordinary  case  of 
healing,  otherwise  its  true  place  would  have  been 
with  the  group  of  bodily  diseases  at  the  begin- 
ning of  this  series.  When  we  consider  its  salient 
features,  we  see  that  it  is  just  in  its  right  place, 
closely  following,  as  it  does,  the  stilling  of  the 
storm.  There  are  storms  in  the  spiritual  world, 
more  terrible  by  far  than  any  in  the  realm  of 
nature;  and  it  is  necessary  that  these  darker 
storms  be  also  subject  to  the  control  of  the 
Saviour  of  mankind.  "  The  prince  of  the  power 
of  the  air  "  and  all  his  legions  must  be  subject 
to  the  "  Son  of  man."  And  this  subjection, 
rather  than  the  cure  of  the  individual  sufferers, 
is  the  salient  feature  of  the  passage.  It  is  not 
the  men,  but  the  demons  possessing  them;  who 
cry  out,  "  What  have  we  to  do  with  Thee,  Jesus, 
Thou  Son  of  God?  art  Thou  come  hither  to 
torment  us  before  the  time?"  Well  did  these 
evil  spirits  know  who  He  was;  and  well,  also, 
did  they  know  that  He  was  mightier  than  they, 
and  that  the  time  was  coming  when  they  would 
be  put  entirely  under  His  feet:  "  Art  Thou  come 
to  torment  us  before  the  time?" 

The  sequel  has  been  the  occasion  of  much 
cavil.  It  has  been  represented  as  entirely  be- 
yond the  bounds  of  rational  belief;  but  why? 
The  whole  subject  of  demoniacal  possession  is  a 
most  difficult  one;  but  many  of  the  calmest  and 
deepest  thinkers,  quite  apart  from  the  testimony 
of  the  Gospel,  have  found  themselves  unable  to 
explain  a  multitude  of  dark  facts  in  history  and 
experience  apart  from  the  reality  of  demoniacal 

*  The  order  is  different  in  the  second  and  third  Gospels  ; 
but  here  only  is  the  order  of  events  noted :  "  And  He 
saith  unto  them,  Why  are  ye  fearful,  O  ye  of  little  faith? 
T/ien  He  arose." 


influence.  If  a  spirit  can  exercise  a  malign 
influence  on  a  man,  why  not  on  an  animal? 
Moreover,  seeing  that  the  keeping  of  these  swine 
was  an  open  breach  of  the  law,  what  difficulty 
is  there  in  supposing  that  Christ  should  allow 
their  destruction,  especially  when  we  consider 
that  this  transference  of  the  malign  influence  not 
only  made  more  apparent  His  absolute  control 
over  the  spirits  of  evil,  but  taught  a  most  strik- 
ing and  instructive  lesson  as  to  their  affinities? 
For  certain  persons  there  is  no  more  instructive 
and  no  more  needful  passage  in  Scripture  than 
this.  The  difficulty  is,  that  those  who  prefer  to 
keep  their  swine  will  not  welcome  the  mighty 
Exorcist,  but,  li^e  these  people  of  old,  beseech 
Him  to  "  depart  out  of  their  coasts." 

Sins  Forgiven  (ix.  1-13). 

Master  of  disease — Searcher  of  hearts — Master 
of  the  forces  of  nature — Master  of  the  powers  of 
the  Unseen:  is  not  this  enough?  Not  yet;  He 
must  make  it  evident  that  "  the  Son  of  man  hath 
power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins."  To  heal  the 
diseases  of  the  body  was  a  great  and  blessed  thing 
to  do,  but  it  was  not  thorough  work;  for  what 
are  all  these  varied  diseases — leprosy,  fever,  palsy 
— but  symptoms  of  one  great  disorder  which  has 
its  roots,  not  in, the  flesh,  but  in  the  soul,  a  dis- 
ease'belonging  to  that  region  of  the  unseen,  in 
which  He  has  now  made  manifest  His  power — 
the  dark  disease  of  sin.  The  time  has  now  come 
to  show  that  He  can  deal  effectually  with  it; 
and  immediately  on  His  return  to  His  own  side 
of  the  lake,  the  opportunity  presents  itself. 
"  They  brought  to  Him  a  man  sick  of  the  palsy, 
lying  on  a  bed." 

As  a  case  of  palsy,  it  is  not  new.  The  cen- 
turion's servant  was  a  palsy  case;  and  though 
from  His  treatment  of  it,  as  of  the  leprosy  and 
fever,  it  might  fairly  have  been  inferred  that 
He  could  deal  also  with  that  which  was  deeper, 
it  was  not  enough  to  leave  it  to  inference — it 
must  be  made  manifest.  It  may  have  been  that 
the  disease  of  this  man  had  been  in  some  special 
manner  connected  with  previous  sins,  so  that 
his  conscience  may  have  been  the  more  exercised 
as  he  looked  back  over  his  past  life;  but  whether 
this  was  so  or  not,  it  is  obvious  that  his  con- 
science was  at  work, — that  much  as  his  palsy 
may  have  troubled  him,  his  guilt  troubled  him 
much  more.  Why,  otherwise,  should  the  Saviour 
have  addressed  him  as  He  did,  making  no  refer- 
ence to  the  disease,  but  dealing  directly  with  his 
spiritual  condition?  Moreover,  the  special  af- 
fection shown  in  the  Saviour's  mode  of  address 
seems  to  indicate  His  recognition  of  that  broken 
and  contrite  spirit  with  which  the  Lord  is  well 
pleased.  It  would  scarcely  be  too  strong  to 
translate  it  thus:  "  My  dear  child,  be  of  good 
cheer;  thy  sins  are  forgiven." 

The  Saviour  is  coming  closer  and  closer  to 
human  need,  dealing  more  and  more  thoroughly 
with  the  world's  want  and  woe.  If  we  look  at 
it  aright,  we  cannot  but  recognise  it  as  really  a 
greater  thing  to  heal  the  deep  disease  of  the  soul, 
than  to  heal  any  or  all  of  the  diseases  of  the 
body,  greater  even  than  to  still  the  storm  or  rule 
by  superior  power  the  spirits  of  evil.  For  here 
there  is  something  more  needed  than  power  or 
skill,  even  though  both  be  infinite.  We  have  al- 
ready had  a  glimpse  of  the  need  there  was,  even 
in  taking  away  human  sickness,  that  the  Healer 
Himself   should   suffer.     But   deeper   far   is   this 


Matthew  viii.-ix.  35.] 


THE    SIGNS    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


727 


necessity  if  the  disease  of  the  soul  is  to  be 
reached.  It  is  only  the  Lamb  of  God  that  can 
take  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  These  scribes 
were  right  for  once  when  they  made  more  of 
this  claim  than  of  any  that  had  gone  before,  say- 
ing within  themselves,  "  This  man  blasphem- 
eth;  "  .  .  .  "Who  can  forgive  sins  but  God 
only?  " 

How  could  He  prove  to  them  His  power  actu- 
ally to  forgive  the  man's  sins?  A  demonstration 
of  this  is  quite  impossible;  but  He  will  come 
as  near  to  it  as  may  be.  He  has  already  recog- 
nised the  faith  of  the  bearers,  and  the  penitence 
of  the  man  himself;  just  as  quickly  He  discerns 
the  thoughts  of  the  scribes,  and  gives  them  proof 
that  He  does  so  by  asking  them,  "  Wherefore 
think  ye  evil  in  your  hearts?  "  Then,  answering 
their  thought  (which  was,  "  He  is  only  saying 
it  "),  He  replies  in  effect,  "  It  is  indeed  as  easy 
to  say  one  thing  as  another,  if  saying  is  all;  but 
that  you  may  be  sure  that  the  saying  of  it  is 
not  all,  I  shall  not  repeat  what  I  said  before, 
the  result  of  which  from  the  nature  of  the  case 
you  cannot  see,  but  something  else,  the  result 
of  which  you  shall  see  presently";  where- 
upon, turning  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy.  He  said: 
"  Arise,  take  up  thy  bed,  and  go  unto  thine 
house.  And  he  arose,  and  departed  to  his 
house."  With  characteristic  reticence,  the  sacred 
historian  says  nothing  of  the  feelings  of  the 
happy  man  as  he  hied  him  home  with  a  double 
blessing  beyond  the  power  of  words  to  tell. 

Is  it  possible  to  imagine  any  better  proof  that 
could  have  been  given  of  Christ's  authority  to 
forgive  sins?  Let  those  who  have  a  horror  of 
anything  extraordinary  suggest  some  way  in 
which  this  assurance  could  have  been  given  with- 
out any  manifestation  of  superhuman  power.  If 
they  cannot,  why  continue  those  unreasoning 
objections  to  the  kind  of  proof  He  did  give,  when 
no  other  proof  can  be  even  suggested  that  would 
have  at  all  suited  the  purpose? 

The  purpose  was  accomplished,  so  far  at  least 
as  the  people  were  concerned.  Whether  the 
scribes  found  some  way  of  evading  the  conclu- 
sion, the  Evangelist  does  not  say;  but  he  does 
say  that  "  when  the  multitudes  saw  it,  they  mar- 
velled," or,  as  the  probably  more  correct  version 
of  the  Revisers  gives  it,  "  they  were  afraid." 
This  is  true  to  nature,  for  now  they  knew  that 
they  stood  in  the  presence  of  One  Who  could 
look  them  through  and  through,  and  touch  them 
in  their  sorest  spot;  so  it  was  natural  that  their 
first  feeling  should  be  one  of  awe.  Still,  they 
could  not  but  be  thankful  at  the  same  time  that 
there  was  forgiveness  within  their  reach;  so 
quite  consistently  the  narrative  proceeds — And 
they  "  glorified  God,  which  had  given  such 
power  unto  men." 

Now  that  His  power  to  deal  with  sin  is  made 
so  apparent,  it  is  time  to  let  it  be  known  that  all 
sinners  are  welcome.  Hence  most  appropriately 
there  follows  the  call  of  one  from  among  the 
most  despised  class  to  take  a  place  among  His 
closest  followers.  We  can  well  understand  how 
the  modest  Matthew,  who  never  mentions  any- 
thing else  about  himself,  was  glad  to  signalise 
the  grace  of  the  Master  in  seeking  out  the  hated 
and  despised  publican.  Not  only  does  Christ 
welcome  him,  but  consents  to  sit  at  meat  with 
his  former  associates  (ver.  10);  and  when  the 
self-righteous  Pharisee  complains.  He  takes  oc- 
casion to  speak  those  memorable  words,  so  full 


of  warning  to  those  who  think  themselves  right- 
eous, so  full  of  comfort  to  those  who  know  them- 
selves sinners:  "They  that  be  whole  need  not  a 
physician,  but  they  that  are  sick.  ...  I  am  not 
come  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  re- 
pentance." 

Death  Vanquished  (14-26). 

The  focal  point  of  the  passage  is  the  chamber 
of  death  in  the  house  of  Jairus.  There  we  ^arn 
that  He  Who  had  shown  Himself  to  be  Lord 
of  nature  and  of  human  nature,  Master  of  the 
spirits  of  evil,  and  Saviour  from  sin,  is  also 
Conqueror  of  Death.  He  needs  no  preparation 
for  the  encounter.  The  summons  comes  to  Him 
in  the  midst  of  a  discourse,  yet  He  asks  not  a 
moment's  delay,  but  sets  out  at  once;  on  the 
other  hand,  He  is  in  no  haste,  for  He  has  time 
to  attend  to  another  sufferer  by  the  way;  and 
there  is  no  exhaustion  afterwards,  for  He  deals 
with  another  case,  and  still  another,  on  His  way 
back. 

The  question  with  which  He  was  engaged 
when  the  summons  came  was  one  raised  by  the 
disciples  of  John,  who,  as  we  learn  from  the 
other  accounts,  were  prompted  by  the  Pharisees 
in  the  hope  of  exciting  antagonism  between  the 
followers  of  John  and  of  Jesus.  Perhaps  also 
they  had  the  hope  of  setting  Him  at  variance 
with  Himself,  for  had  He  not  declared  that  one 
jot  or  one  tittle  should  not  pass  from  the  law 
till  all  was  fulfilled?  Why,  then,  did  not  His 
disciples  fast?  To  this  it  might  have  been  an- 
swered that  the  frequent  fasts  observed  by 
Pharisees,  and  also  by  the  disciples  of  John,  were 
not  really  appointed  by  the  law,  which  prescribed 
only  one  day  of  fasting  in  the  year — the  great 
atonement  day.  But  the  Saviour  gives  an  an- 
swer of  much  wider  scope  and  farther-reaching 
significance.  There  was  involved,  not  the  ques- 
tion of  fasting  only,  but  of  the  entire  ceremonial 
law;  and  He  disposes  of  it  all  by  a  series  of  char- 
acteristic illustrations,  each  of  them  as  good  as 
a  volume  on  the  subject  could  have  been.  The 
first  of  these  illustrations  sets  the  true  principle 
of  fasting  in  full,  clear  light  by  a  simple  question 
— "  Can  the  children  of  the  bridechamber  mourn, 
as  long  as  the  bridegroom  is  with  them?  but  the 
days  will  come,  when  the  bridegroom  shall  be 
taken  away  from  them,  and  then  shall  they  fast." 
There  is  here  much  more  to  think  of  besides  the 
answering  of  the  question.  There  is  a  treasury 
of  valuable  suggestion  in  His  calling  Himself 
the  Bridegroom,  thus  applying  to  Himself  the 
rich  imagery  of  the  Old  Testament  on  this 
theme;  while  at  the  same  time  He  adopts  the 
very  figure  which  John  himself  had  used  in 
order  to  mark  his  relation  to  Jesus  as  the  Bride- 
groom's friend  (cf.  John  iii.  29);  and  it  is  espe- 
cially worthy  of  note  how  this  keeps  up  the 
Gospel  idea, — the  great  joy,  as  of  a  marriage,  in 
the  yielding  of  the  heart  to  Christ.  No  less  strik- 
ing is  His  touching  reference  to  the  dark  days 
coming,  the  first  distinct  foreshadowing  of  the 
Cross.  It  has  been  well  said  by  a  German  writer, 
"  What  man  has  ever  looked  so  calmly,  so  lov- 
ingly (lieblich),  from  such  a  height  into  such  an 
abyss!  "  from  the  position  of  the  Bridegroom 
of  humanity  to  that  of  the  outcast  on  the  Cross. 
Ah!  the  shadow  of  that  Cross  is  never  of?  Him; 
not  even  when  He  is  exulting  in  His  bridegroom 
joy.     But  these  are  only  incidental  suggestions; 


728 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


the  main  idea  is  the  true  principle  of  fasting, 
which,  Hke  all  the  observances  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, must  be  the  expression  of  that  which  is 
in  the  heart.  Let  the  heart  only  be  true,  and 
when  the  Bridegroom  of  the  heart  is  present, 
fasting  will  be  entirely  out  of  the  question;  but 
when  He  is  absent  no  rule  will  be  needed — they 
will  fast  as  the  natural  expression  of  their  sorrow. 

The  two  companion  illustrations  which  follow 
set  in  the  clearest  light  the  large  subject  of  the 
relation  of  the  new  dispensation  to  the  old  in 
respect  of  forms.  As  to  substance.  He  had  al- 
ready made  it  plain  that  the  old  was  not  to  be 
destroyed,  nor  even  superseded,  but  fulfilled,  to 
its  last  jot  and  tittle,  as  harvest  fulfils  seed-time. 
But  as  to  form,  the  case  was  entirely  different. 
The  new  life,  while  losing  nothing  which  was 
in  the  old,  was  to  be  larger  and  freer,  and  there- 
fore must  have  new  garments  to  match.  To  try 
to  piece  out  and  patch  the  old  would  be  no  im- 
provement, but  much  the  reverse,  for  a  worse 
rent  would  be  the  only  result.  The  second  il- 
lustration, suggested  like  the  first  by  the  associa- 
tions of  the  marriage  feast  (the  Saviour's  illus- 
trations are  never  far-fetched — He  always  finds 
exactly  what  He  needs  close  at  hand,  thus  prov- 
ing Himself  Master  of  the  imagination  as  of  all 
else),  is  to  the  same  purpose.  The  new  wine  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  though  it  retains  all  the 
the  excellence  of  the  old  vintage,  yet  having  fresh 
properties  of  its  own,  must  have  fresh  skins  to 
hold  it,  that  its  natural  expansion  be  not  hin- 
dered; for  to  attempt  to  confine  it  in  the  old 
vessels  would  be  to  expose  them  to  destruction 
and  to  lose  the  wine. 

What  a  striking  illustration  of  these  suggestive 
words  of  warning  has  been  the  history  of  doc- 
trine and  of  form  in  those  churches  which  cling 
to  the  worn-out  ritualism  of  the  Old  Testament! 
Old  Testament  forms  were  good  in  their  time; 
but  they  are  not  good  to  hold  the  new  wine  of 
spiritual  life;  and  to  attempt  to  combine  them, 
as  modern  ritualists  do,  is  to  injure  both,  to  do 
violence  to  the  forms  by  subjecting  them  to  a 
strain  for  which  they  were  never  intended,  and 
to  lose  the  greater  part  of  the  life  by  trying  to 
put  it  in  moulds  which  were  never  intended  for 
it.  There  is  now  no  longer  the  excuse  which 
our  Lord  was  so  ready  to  make,  at  that  time 
of  transition,  for  those  who  were  slow  to  recog- 
nise the  superiority  of  the  new — a  point  which 
is  brought  out  in  the  pendant  to  this  illustration 
which  the  Evangelist  Luke  records:  "  No  man 
also  having  drunk  old  wine  straightway  desireth 
new:  for  he  saith.  The  old  is  better;  "  or  rather, 
according  to  the  more  correct  reading,  "  the  old 
is  good."  Thus,  while  the  true  principle  was 
laid  down  for  all  time,  excuse  was  made  on  be- 
half of  John  and  his  disciples,  for  clinging  with 
a  natural  fondness  to  that  which  had  done  good 
service  in  the  past.  A  very  needful  lesson  this 
for  too  ardent  reformers,  not  considerate  enough 
of  what  is  in  many  respects  wholesome  and 
praiseworthy  conservatism. 

It  was  in  the  midst  of  these  important  teach- 
ings that  the  message  came  from  the  chamber 
of  death,  to  which  we  must  now  again  direct 
our  thoughts:  "While  He  spake  these  things 
unto  them,  behold,  there  came  a  ruler,  and  wor- 
shipped Him,  saying,  My  daughter  is  even  now 
dead:  but  come  and  lay  Thy  hand  upon  her,  and 
she  shall  live.  And  Jesus  arose,  and  followed 
him,  and  so  did  His  disciples."     This  promptness 


is  a  most  precious  revelation  of  the  Divine  readi- 
ness to  help  at  any  moment.  No  need  of  waiting 
for  a  convenient  time.  Any  moment  is  con- 
venient for  Him,  to  Whom  the  affairs  even  of 
the  infinite  universe  are  no  burden. 

The  same  lesson  is  still  more  strikingly  taught 
by  His  manner  of  dealing  with  the  case  which 
met  Him  on  the  way  to  the  ruler's  house.  So 
hastily  had  He  set  out,  in  response  to  the  ruler's 
appeal,  that  one  would  have  thought  this  of  all 
times  the  most  inconvenient — especially  for  a 
chronic  invalid — to  gain  a  hearing.  Here  is  a 
woman  who  has  had  a  disease  for  twelve  years, 
and  who  therefore  might  surely  be  asked  to  wait 
a  few  hours  at  least,  till  the  Physician  should  be 
at  leisure!  And  the  case  is  not  at  all  forced  on 
His  attention;  ^she  does  not  stand  in  front  of 
Him,  so  that  He  cannot  pass  without  noticing 
her, — she  only  "came  behind  Him";  nor  does 
she  take  any  means  that  seem  likely  to  arrest 
His  attention, — she  only  "  touched  the  hem  of 
His  garment."  But  it  is  enough.  Slight  as  the 
indication  is  that  some  one  needs  His  help,  He 
at  once  observes  it;  nor  does  He  exhibit  the 
least  sign  of  impatience  or  of  haste;  He  turns 
round,  and  speaks  in  the  kindest  manner,  assur- 
ing her,  as  it  were,  of  her  right  to  enjoy  the  great 
blessing  of  health,  which  had  just  come  to  her, 
for  as  soon  as  she  had  touched  Him  He  had 
cured  her  of  her  long  and  weary  ailment.  What 
encouragement  to  the  most  timid  soul!  And 
what  a  revelation  of  the  large  sympathy  and 
ever-ready  helpfulness  of  our  Saviour  Christ,  and 
of  our  heavenly  Father  Whom  He  so  gloriously 
reveals! 

The  scene  is  now  changed  to  the  chamber  of 
death.  There  are  most  interesting  details  given 
in  the  fuller  account  by  the  Evangelist  Mark, 
but  our  scope  is  large  enough  here  without  en- 
deavouring to  bring  them  all  in.  The  maid  had 
been  at  the  point  of  death  when  the  father  left 
the  house;  now  it  is  all  over,  and  the  room  is 
full  of  noisy  mourners.  These  clamorous  dem- 
onstrations were  evidently  very  painful  to  the 
sensitive  heart  of  Christ,  not  only,  perhaps,  on 
account  of  their  unreality,  but  also  because  of 
their  inappropriateness  in  view  of  the  better  hope 
which  He  was  bringing  into  light.  For  we  take 
it  that  in  these  words  "  Give  place:  for  the  maid 
is  not  dead,  but  sleepeth,"  there  was  not  only  a 
reference  to  His  intention  at  once  to  bring  the 
dead  one  back  to  life,  but  to  the  true  nature  of 
death  in  His  kingdom.  In  it  death  was  to  be 
death  no  longer — only  a  sleep,  with  the  prospect 
of  a  speedy  and  blessed  awaking.  Therefore 
such  heathenish  lamentations  were  to  be  hence- 
forward out  of  place.  Perhaps,  too,  He  wished 
to  set  these  people  thinking  on  the  great  subject 
of  death — what  it  is,  what  it  means,  and  whether 
after  all  it  need  be  death  in  the  sense  in  which 
alone  the  noisy  mourners  thought  of  it.  But 
"  they  laughed  Him  to  scorn,"  so  they  must  be 
"  put  forth."  The  Lord  of  life  cannot  reveal 
Himself  to  such  as  these.  Only  the  faithful  dis- 
ciples, and  the  parents  whose  hearts  have  been 
prepared  for  such  a  revelation  by  the  discipline 
of  genuine  grief,  are  permitted  to  be  present.  It 
is  probable  that  both  parents  had  their  hearts 
fully  opened  to  the  Lord;  for  though  the  mother 
had  waited  by  the  daughter's  bedside,  she  had 
no  doubt  gone  with  her  husband  in  spirit  on  his 
hopeful  errand;  and  the  father's  faith  must  have 
been  greatly  confirmed  by  what  had  happened 
on  the  way  back — there  was  nothing  lost  by  that 


Matthew  viii.-ix.  35.] 


THE    SIGNS    OF    THE    KINGDOM. 


729 


delay,  even  though  in  the  meantime  the  message 
had  come  from  the  house  that  it  was  too  late. 
It  was  not  too  late:  it  was  well  that  the  damsel 
had  died;  for  now  the  Saviour  has  the  oppor- 
tunity to  show  that  He  is  no  less  Master  of  the 
last  great  enemy  than  of  all  the  other  enemies 
of  man.  "  He  took  her  by  the  hand,  and  the 
maid  arose." 

Lost  Faculties  Restored  (27-34). 

The  raising  of  the  dead  may  be  regarded  as 
the  culminating  point  of  the  series;  yet  there 
is  a  special  value  in  the  two  that  follow  in  close 
succession  before  the  series  is  complete.  We 
have  seen  already  that,  occurring,  as  they  do 
Tmmediately  after,  they  show  that  His  power  is 
not  at  all  exhausted — a  token  this  of  the  ex- 
haustlessness  of  the  Divine  love  and  helpfulness. 
But,  besides  this,  are  they  not  resurrections  too 
— the  raising  again  of  faculties  that  had  long 
been  dead?  Vision  is  a  large  part  of  our  natural 
life;  and  to  lose  it  is  to  descend,  so  far,  into  the 
darkness  of  death.  And  as  the  eye  is  to  impres- 
sion, so  is  the  tongue  to  expression.  The  one  is 
the  crown  of  life  on  its  receptive  side,  the  other 
on  its  communicative  side  {cf.  Psalm  Ivii.  8; 
cviii.  I,  2).  The  eye,  then,  may  well  represent 
life  on  the  one  side  of  it  and  the  tongue  on 
the  other;  while  the  two  together  represent  it  as 
completely  as  it  is  possible  to  do.  Thus  these 
two  cases  really  come  nearer  to  the  idea  of  spirit- 
ual resurrection  than  even  the  raising  of  the  dead 
damsel.  In  the  case  of  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
there  was  no  part  left  alive  to  make  its  appeal 
to  the  Lifegiver  on  behalf  of  the  rest;  but  with 
the  others  it  was  different:  the  blind  men,  for 
example,  were  able  to  cry  for  mercy  (ver.  27) ; 
and  it  was  possible  for  the  Saviour  to  say  to 
them,  as  He  touched  their  eyes,  "  According  to 
your  faith  be  it  unto  you  "  (ver.  29),  which  He 
could  not  have  said  to  the  damsel. 

Had  the  series  ended  with  the  raising  of  the 
daughter  of  Jairus,  it  had  been  made  sufificiently 
apparent  that  Christ  was  able  and  willing  to  raise 
the  dead;  but  it  had  still  remained  unrevealed  by 
what  means  a  man  spiritually  dead  could  secure 
for  himself  the  resurrection  of  his  lost  spiritual 
powers.  Now  it  is  clear.  The  death  of  the  spirit 
is  parallel,  not  to  the  total  death  of  the  damsel, 
but  to  the  partial  death  of  the  blind;  for  though 
the  spirit  of  a  man  be  dead,  his  mind  remains 
alive,  his  heart  too,  his  conscience  even,  and  his 
body  of  course;  there  remains  enough  of  him, 
so  to  speak,  to  imitate  the  example  of  these  two 
blind  men,  to  ask  the  Son  of  David  for  mercy, 
to  follow  Him  till  he  finds  it,  to  allow  Him  first 
to  draw  out  the  dormant  faculty  of  faith,  and 
then,  having  prepared  him  for  the  mighty  Isoon, 
to  pour  celestial  light  upon  his  soul,  bestowing 
on  him  a  life  so  new  and  fresh  and  blessed,  that 
it  will  seem  to  him  as  if  it  were,  and  it  will  in 
point  of  spiritual  fact  really  be,  life  from  the 
dead. 

It  seems  more  than  likely  that  it  was  because 
He  wished  to  subordinate  the  physical  to  the 
spiritual  that  He  strictly  charged  them,  saying, 
"  See  that  no  man  know  it."  If  the  main  thing 
had  been  the  restoration  of  bodily  sight,  the 
more  who  heard  of  it  the  better.  But  His  great 
purpose  was  far  higher, — even  to  put  an  end  to 
spiritual  blindness  and  death;  therefore  He  must 
limit  His  dealings  with  natural  blindness  to  those 


who  were  prepared  to  receive  the  lower  blessing 
without  injuring  them  in  their  higher  nature;  and 
to  make  known  such  a  case  in  the  way  of  adver- 
tisement through  the  country-side  would  have 
been  to  descend  from  His  lofty  position  as 
Saviour  of  men  and  Herald  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  to  that  of  oculist  for  the  neighbourhood. 
But,  though  we  can  readily  see  why  the  Saviour 
should  forbid  the  publication  of  the  cure,  it  was 
natural  enough  that  the  men  should  disobey  the 
order.  They  probably  attributed  His  injtnction 
to  modesty,  and  thought  they  Vere  showing  a 
proper  appreciation  of  what  had  been  done  for 
them  by  publishing  it  abroad.  Blameworthy 
they  certainly  were;  but  not  inexcusable. 

The  other  case — the  cure  of  the  dumb  de- 
moniac— comes,  if  possible,  still  closer  to  the 
spiritual  condition  with  which  it  was  the  work 
of  the  Saviour  especially  to  deal.  Like  the 
former,  it  was  the  loss  of  a  faculty;  but,  unlike 
it,  it  was  not  the  natural  loss  of  it,  but  the 
eclipsing  of  it  by  the  malign  presence  of  a  spirit 
of  evil.  How  closely  parallel  is  this  to  the  case 
of  the  spiritually  dead.  What  is  it  that  has  de- 
stroyed the  great  faculty  by  which  God  is  known 
and  worshipped?  Is  it  not  sin?  Let  that  demon 
be  cast  out,  and  not  only  will  the  eye  see,  but  the 
tongue  will  speak;  there  will  be  a  new  song  in 
the  mouth,  even  praise  to  the  Most  High. 

Furthermore,  as  the  cure  of  the  blind  men 
brought  into  prominence  the  power  of  faith,  this 
brings  into  prominence  the  power  of  Christ  to 
save  to  the  uttermost.  For  what  more  helpless 
case  could  there  be?  He  could  not  cry,  for  he 
was  dumb.  He  could  not  follow  Christ  as  the 
blind  men  had  done,  for  he  had  not  control  of 
himself;  so  he  must  be  brought  by  others.  Yet  for 
him,  as  well  as  for  them,  there  is  full  salvation, 
as  soon  as  he  comes  into  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  of  life.  No  wonder  the  multitudes  mar- 
velled, and  said,  "  It  was  never  so  seen  in  Is- 
rael "  !  and  no  wonder  that  the  Pharisees,  unable 
in  any  other  way  to  evade  the  force  of  such  a 
succession  of  manifest  signs  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  should  be  driven  to  the  contradictory 
and  blasphemous  suggestion,  "  He  casteth  out 
devils  through  the  prince  of  the  devils  "  (ver.  34). 

The  series  is  now  complete;  and,  long  as  it 
has  been,  we  could  not  dispense  with  a  single 
case.  There  has  been  no  repetition.  Each  case 
reported  in  detail  has  had  its  own  special  and 
peculiar  value:  the  leper,  the  centurion's  servant, 
the  mother-in-law  of  Peter,  the  dealings  with  the 
impulsive  scribe  and  the  hesitating  disciple,  the 
stilling  of  the  storm  and  mastery  of  the  unseen 
legions  of  evil,  the  forgiving  of  sin,  and  wel- 
coming of  repentant  sinners,  the  healing  of  the 
chronic  invalid  by  the  way,  the  raising  of  the 
dead  damsel,  and  the  restoring  of  sight  to  the 
blind  and  speech  to  the  dumb, — all  different,  all 
most  precious,  all  needed  to  bring  out  some  as- 
pect of  the  truth  concerning  Jesus  as  the  Saviour 
of  mankind,  all  together  giving  us  a  most  com- 
prehensive presentation  of  the  signs  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  And  now  that  the  nature  of 
His  work  has  been  so  fully  set  forth  in  its  two 
great  departments  of  teaching  and  of  healing, 
the  rest  is  left  unrecorded,  except  in  the  general 
statement  that  "  Jesus  went  about  all  the  cities 
and  villages,  teaching  in  their  synagogues,  and 
preaching  the  gospel  of  the  kingdom,  and  heal- 
ing every  sickness  and  every  disease  among  the 
people  "  (ver.  35). 


73© 


r-HE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
THE  KING'S  AMBASSADORS. 

Matthew  ix.  36-x.  42. 
I. — The  Mission  (ix.  36-x.  5). 

So  far  the  King  Himself  has  done  all  the 
work  of  the  kingdom.  But  it  has  grown  upon 
Him,  so  that  He  can  no  longer  do  it  without  as- 
sistance; He  must,  therefore  provide  Himself  with 
deputies.  His  doing  so  will  be  the  first  step  in 
the  organisation  of  His  world-wide  kingdom.  He 
reveals,  however,  no  plan  laid  down  to  meet  all 
possible  emergencies.  It  is  enough  to  provide 
for  necessities  as  they  develop  themselves.  He 
constructs  no  mechanism  beforehand  into  the 
different  parts  of  which  life  may  be  afterwards 
guided  or  forced;  His  only  care  is  about  the  life, 
knowing  well  that  if  only  this  be  full  and  strong, 
the  appropriate  organisation  will  be  ready  when 
it  is  needed. 

In  conformity  with  this  principle  He  does  not 
make  His  arrangements,  necessary  as  they  mani- 
festly are,  without  first  providing  that  they  shall 
not  be  mechanical,  but  vital,  that  they  shall  orig- 
inate, not  as  a  contrivance  of  mind,  but  as  an 
outflow  of  soul.  First,  we  are  informed  by  the 
Evangelist  that  the  soul  of  the  Master  Him- 
self was  stirred  with  compassion  as  He  looked 
upon  the  multitude,  and  thought  how  much  they 
needed  in  the  way  of  shepherding,  and  how  little 
it  was  possible  for  them  to  have.  It  was  no  mat- 
ter of  planning  for  the  extension  of  His  king- 
dom; it  was  a  great  yearning  over  the  sheep 
that  were  scattered,  and  torn  (ver.  36,  Gk.  of 
oldest  MSS.),  and  lost  (x.  6).  But  it  is  not 
enough  that  the  Master's  heart  should  be 
touched:  the  disciples  also  must  be  moved.  So 
He  turns  their  thoughts  in  the  same  direction, 
urging  them  to  observe  how  plenteous  the  har- 
vest, how  few  the  labourers;  and  therefore  to 
pray  that  the  lack  may  be  speedily  supplied.  He 
sets  them  thinking  and  praying  about  it— the 
only  way  to  lay  foundations  for  that  which  shall 
be  true  and  lasting.  Let  it  be  observed  further, 
that  the  two  emblems  He  uses  present  most 
strikingly  the  great  motives  to  missionary  work: 
compassion  for  the  lost,  and  zeal  for  the  Divine 
glory.  "  Sheep  having  no  shepherd,"- — this  ap- 
peals to  our  human  sympathies;  the  Lord  of  the 
harvest  deprived  of  His  harvest  for  want  of  la- 
bourers to  gather  it  in, — this  appeals  to  our  love 
and  loyalty  to   God. 

The  result  of  their  thought  and  prayer  pres- 
ently appears;  for  we  read  in  the  next  sentence 
of  the  setting  apart  of  the  twelve  disciples  to  the 
work.  It  does  not  follow,  because  the  narra- 
tive is  continuous,  that  the  events  recorded  were; 
it  is  probable  that  an  interval  elapsed  which 
would  be  largely  spent  in  prayer,  according  to 
the  word  of  the  Master. 

This  is  the  first  mention  of  the  Twelve  in  this 
Gospel;  but  it  is  evident  that  the  number  had 
been  already  made  up,  for  they  are  spoken  of 
as  "  His  twelve  disciples."  It  would  appear  from 
the  second  and  third  gospels  that,  immediately 
before  the  delivery  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
the  Twelve  were  chosen  from  the  whole  number 
of  disciples  to  be  constantly  with  Him,  as  wit- 
nesses of  His  works  and  learners  of  His  doctrine. 
By   this    time    they   had   been    so    far   instructed 


and  trained  by  their  companionship  with  Christ, 
that  they  could  be  safely  intrusted  with  a  mis- 
sion by  themselves;  accordingly.  He  for  the  first 
time  gives  them  power  to  do  deeds  of  mercy 
of  the  same  sort  as  those  which  He  Himself 
had  been  doing,  as  signs  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

As  the  apostles  have  not  been  mentioned  be- 
fore, their  names  are  appropriately  given  here. 
The  number  "  twelve  "  was  no  doubt  significant, 
as  suggestive  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel;  but 
there  was  plainly  no  attempt  to  have  the  tribes 
represented  separately.  It  would  seem  as  if  all 
were  Galileans,  except  one,  and  that  one  was 
Judas  Iscariot  (i.  e.,  the  man  of  Kerioth,  sup- 
posed to  be  a  town  in  Judea).  The  reason  of 
this  almost  exclusive  choice  of  Galileans  is  in 
all  probability  to  be  found  in  the  simple  fact  that 
there  were  none  other  available.  There  had  been 
those,  in  the  course  of  His  Judean  ministry,  who 
had  after  a  certain  fashion  believed  on  Him; 
but  there  was  not  one  of  them  whom  He  could 
trust  with  such  work  as  this  (John  ii.  23-5).  It 
may  be  thought,  indeed,  that  surely  there  might 
have  been  some  better  representative — at  least, 
than  Judas  proved  himself  to  be — of  the  southern 
tribes;  but  why  should  we  think  so?  We  have 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  Judas  was  a  traitor 
at  heart  when  he  was  chosen.  Perhaps  there 
was  in  him  at  that  time  the  making  of  as  grand 
an  apostle  as  the  best  of  them.  It  was  not  long, 
indeed,  before  the  demon  in  him  began  to  betray 
itself  to  the  searching  glance  of  the  Master  (John 
vi.  70)  but  had  he  only  in  the  power  of  the 
Master  he  followed,  cast  that  demon  out  of  his 
own  heart,  as  possibly  enough  he  may  have 
helped  in  this  very  mission  to  cast  demons  out 
of  others,  all  would  have  been  well.  The  sub- 
sequent fall  of  the  traitor  does  not  by  any  means 
show  that  Christ  now  made  a  mistaken  choice; 
it  only  shows  that  the  highest  privileges  and  op- 
portunities may,  by  the  tolerance  of  sin  in  the 
heart,  be  not  only  all  in  vain,  but  may  lead  to  a 
condemnation  and  ruin  more  terrible  by  far  than 
would  have  been  possible  without  them. 

Not  only  was  the  apostolate  Galilean, — it  was 
plebeian,  and  that  without  a  solitary  exception. 
It  seems  to  include  not  a  single  person  of  rec- 
ognised rank  or  position.  Again,  we  believe 
that  this  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  simple 
fact  that  there  were  none  of  these  available.  We 
cannot  suppose  that  if  there  had  been  a  disciple 
like  Paul  in  the  ranks,  the  Master  would  have 
hesitated  to  give  him  a  place  in  the  sacred  col- 
lege; but,  seeing  there  was  none,  He  would  not 
go  out  of  His  way  to  secure  a  representative  of 
the  learned  or  the  great.  Had  Nicodemus  been 
bold  enough  to  come  out  decidedly  on  the  Lord's 
side,  or  had  Joseph  of  Arimathea  developed 
earlier  that  splendid  courage  which  he  showed 
when  the  Master's  work  on  earth  was  done,  we 
can  scarcely  doubt  that  their  names  might  have 
been  included  in  the  roll.  But  there  is  no  such 
name;  and  now,  as  we  look  back,  was  it  not 
better  so?  Otherwise  there  could  not  have  been 
such  a  wonderful  illustration  of  the  great  fact 
that  "  God  hath  chosen  the  weak  things  of  the 
world  to  confound  the  things  which  are 
mighty  "  ;  there  could  not  otherwise  have  been 
the  same  invincible  evidence  that  the  work  these 
men  did  was  not  the  work  of  men,  but  was  in- 
deed and  in  truth  the  doing  of  God. 

Though  they  were  all  from  the  lower  ranks  of 
life,  they  were  characterised  by  great  varieties  of 


Matthew  ix.  36-x.  42.] 


THE    KING'S    AMBASSADORS. 


731 


gifts  and  dispositions.  Some  of  them,  indeed, 
are  scarcely  known  to  us  at  all.  It  may  be  that 
they  were  more  or  less  ordinary  men,  who  made 
no  special  mark;  but  it  would  be  rash  to  set  this 
down  as  certain,  or  even  as  probable,  seeing  that 
our  records  of  the  time  are  so  scanty,  and  are 
manifestly  constructed  with  the  idea,  not  of  giv- 
ing to  every  man  his  due — as  would  be  the  poor 
ideal  of  a  mere  writer  of  history — but  of  making 
nothing  of  the  men,  and  everything  of  the  cause 
and  of  the  Master  in  Whose  great  Personality 
theirs  was  merged.  But  those  of  them  who  do 
appear  in  the  records  are  men  of.  such  varied 
dispositions  and  powers  that  the  Twelve  might 
after  all  have  been  a  fair  miniature  of  the  Church 
at  large.  Some  of  the  selections  seem  very 
strange.  We  have  already  referred  to  Judas  the 
traitor.  But  there  were  those  among  them  who 
must  have  been  far  less  likely  men  than  he. 
There  were  two  in  particular,  the  choice  of  whom 
seemed  to  violate  all  dictates  of  wisdom  and  pru- 
dence. These  were  Matthew  the  publican  and 
Simon  the  Cananean  or  Zealot.  To  have  a  pub- 
lican, hated  as  the  whole  class  was,  among  the 
apostles,  was  apparently  to  invite  the  hostility 
and  contempt  of  the  great  majority  of  the  nation, 
and  especially  of  those  who  were  strongly  na- 
tional in  feeling.  On  the  other  hand,  to  invite 
one  who  was  known  as  a  Zealot,  a  radical  and 
revolutionist  in  politics,  a  man  who  had  identi- 
fied himself  with  the  wildest  schemes  for  the 
overthrow  of  the  Government,  was  to  provoke 
the  opposition  of  all  the  law-abiding  and  peace- 
loving  people  of  the  time.  Yet  how  could  the 
heavenly  King  have  more  efifectually  shown  that 
His  kingdom  was  not  of  this  world,  that  the 
petty  party  spirit  of  the  day  had  no  place  in  it 
whatever,  that  it  mattered  not  what  a  man  had 
been,  if  now  he  was  renewed  in  the  spirit  of 
his  mind,  and  consecrated  in  heart  and  soul  and 
life  to  do  the  will  of  God  and  serve  his  Master 
Christ?* 

So  it  has  come  to  pass  that,  though  these 
twelve  men  had  nothing  at  all  to  recommend 
them  to  the  favour  of  the  world,  and  though 
there  was  very  much  from  every  worldly  point 
of  view  to  create  the  strongest  prejudices  against 
them  and  to  militate  against  their  influence,  yet 
they  have,  by  the  grace  of  their  Divine  Master, 
so  triumphed  over  all,  that  when  we  think  of 
them  now,  it  is  not  as  fishermen,  nor  as  publi- 
can or  Zealot — even  the  traitor  has  simply 
dropped  out  of  sight — we  see  before  us  only  "  the 
glorious  company  of  the  apostles  "  ! 

II. — The  Commission  (x.  5-42). 

"  These  twelve  Jesus  sent  forth  "  (in  pairs,  as 
we  learn  elsewhere,  and  as  is  indicated  here,  per- 
haps, by  the  grouping  in  the  list),  "  and  charged 
them."  This  leads  us  to  look  at  their  commis- 
sion. It  begins  with  a  limitation,  which,  how- 
ever, was  only  to  be  temporary.  The  time  had 
not  yet  come  for  the  opening  of  the  door  to  the 
Gentiles.  Besides  this,  we  must  remember  that 
the  Saviour's  heart  was  yearning  over  His  own 
p  iople.  This  appears  in  the  tender  way  He 
speaks  of  them  as  "  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
ot  Israel."  Moreover,  the  apostles  were  by  no 
means  ready,  with  all  their  national  prejudices 

*  It  is  interesting  to  notice,  that,  though  Matthew  here 
cf  lis  himself  Matthew  the  publican,  no  one  else  does. 
T  )  others  the  publican  is  lost  in  the  apostle— it  is  only 
hi  -nself  who  will  not  forget  the  hole  of  the  pit  whence  he 
■w  IS  digged. 


still  rank  in  them,  to  be  intrusted  with  so  deli- 
cate and  difficult  a  duty  as  getting  into  com- 
munication with  an  alien  race.  Accordingly  their 
field  is  strictly  limited  to  their  own  countrymen. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  limitation  also  ^n 
their  message.  They  had  themselves  been  to 
some  extent  instructed  in  regard  to  the  nature 
of  the  kingdom,  its  blessedness,  its  righteous- 
ness, its  leading  principles  and  .features;  but, 
though  they  may  have  begun  to  get  some 
glimpse  of  the  truth  in  regard  to  these  great 
matters,  they  certainly  had  not  yet  made  it  their 
own;  accordingly  they  are  given,  as  the  sub- 
stance of  their  preaching,  only  the  simple  an- 
nouncement, with  which  the  Baptist  had  begun 
his  ministry,  and  with  which  Christ  also  com- 
menced His:  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at 
hand."  Though  there  seems  to  have  been  a  lim- 
itation on  the  teaching  side,  there  was  none  on 
the  side  of  healing,  for  their  Lord  empowers 
them  to  do  the  very  same  things  for  the  relief 
of  their  suffering  fellow-countrymen  as  they  had 
seen  Himself  doing.  We  have  already  seen  how 
much  teaching  there  was  in  these  signs  of  the 
kingdom;  and  we  can  well  believe  that  it  was 
far  better,  considering  the  stage  of  advancement 
the  apostles  had  reached,  that  reliance  should  be 
placed  on  the  light  such  deeds  of  mercy  would 
necessarily  throw  on  the  nature  of  the  kingdom, 
than  on  any  exposition  which,  apart  from  their 
Master,  they  could  at  that  time  have  been  able  to 
give.  Above  all  it  is  to  be  clear  that  the  privi- 
leges of  the  kingdom  are  free  to  all;  its  blessings 
are  to  be  dispensed  without  money  and  without 
price:     "  Freely  ye  have  received,  freely  give." 

How,  then,  were  they  to  be  supported?  About 
this  they  were  to  give  themselves  no  concern. 
They  were  now  to  put  in  practice  the  great  com- 
mand, '■  Seek  ye  first  the  kingdom  of  God,  and 
His  righteousness,"  relying  on  the  promise,  "  all 
these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you."  But  in  no 
miraculous  way  are  they  to  look  for  the  pro- 
vision of  their  wants.  They  are  to  be  maintained 
by  those  among  whom  and  for  whom  they  la- 
bour. This  was  to  be  no  burden,  but  a  privi- 
lege, reserved  for  those  who  were  found 
"worthy"  (ver.  11).  Nor  was  it  to  be  divided 
among  as  many  as  possible.  They  were  to  stay 
on  with  the  same  person  who  first  received  them, 
as  the  one  whom  the  Master  had  chosen  for  the 
honour;  while,  if  any  refused  to  recognise  it  as 
a  privilege,  there  was  to  be  no  weak  solicitation, 
but  a  dignified  withdrawal.  The  regulations 
throughout  are  manifestly  intended  to  keep  most 
vividly  before  their  minds  that  they  went  not  in 
their  own  names,  nor  in  their  own  strength,  nor 
at  their  own  charges, — that  they  were  ambassa- 
dors of  a  King,  clothed  with  His  authority, 
armed  with  His  power,  vested  with  His  rights; 
so  that  there  is  a  manifest  appropriateness  in  the 
solemn  words  with  which  this  part  of  the  com- 
mission closes:  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  It  shall 
be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrha  in  the  day  of  judgment,  than  for  that 
city  "  which  rejects  you  (ver.  15). 

The  part  of  the  charge  which  follows,  and 
which  the  limitation  of  our  plan  will  not  allow 
us  to  illustrate  point  by  point,  bears  not  so  much 
on  the  work  more  immediately  before  them  as 
on  the  whole  work  of  their  apostolate.  It  may 
have  been  spoken,  as  some  suppose,  later  on, 
and  only  put  here  as  germane  to  the  occasion; 
for,  as  we  have  seen,  the  arrangement  of  this 
gospel  is  not  chronological,  but  is  largely  top- 


732 


^HE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


ical.  Still  there  seems  no  very  strong  reason 
for  supposing  that  the  entire  discourse  was  not 
spoken  at  this  very  time;  for  why  should  not  the 
apostles  in  the  very  beginning  of  their  way  have 
some  idea  of  what  it  would  cost  them  to  accept 
the  work  to  which  they  were  now  called? 

The  leading  thoughts  are  these:  They  must 
expect  to  be  exposed  to  trial  and  suffering  in 
the  prosecution  of  their  mission.  The  Master 
Himself  was  sorely  tried,  and  the  servant  must 
not  expect  exemption.  He  is  not  indeed  to 
court  trials,  or  to  submit  to  persecutions  which 
are  not  inevitable:  "When  they  persecute  you 
in  this  city,  flee  ye  into  another."  On  the  other 
hand,  when  the  path  of  duty  lies  evidently 
through  trial  or  danger,  he  must  not  shirk  it, 
but  face  it  boldly;  and  in  all  emergencies  he  is 
to  place  implicit  confidence  in  Him  Whose  ser- 
vant he  is:  "  When  they  deliver  you  up,  be  not 
anxious  how  or  what  ye  shall  speak:  for  it  shall 
b ;  given  you  in  that  hour  what  ye  shall  speak  " 
(R.  v.).  "  The  very  hairs  of  your  head  are  all 
numbered.  Fear  ye  not,  therefore."  There  is 
no  way  of  avoiding  the  cross;  and  they  would  be 
quite  unworthy  of  their  Master  should  they  seek 
to  avoid  it.  Yet  there  is  a  great  reward  for  those 
who  bravely  take  it  up  and  patiently  bear  it  to 
the  end.  It  is  the  way  to  higher  honour  (ver. 
32),  and  to  the  only  life  that  is  worthy  of  the 
name  (ver.  39) ;  while  to  turn  away  from  it  is 
to  choose  a  path  which  leads  to  shame  (ver.  33) 
and  death  (ver.  39). 

The  passage,  taken  up,  as  so  much  of  it  has 
been,  with  the  anticipations  of  ill-treatment  which 
the  apostles  will  receive  in  setting  out  as  sheep 
in  the  midst  of  wolves,  closes  most  appropriately 
and  beautifully  with  a  series  of  blessings  on  those 
who  will  treat  them  well,  ending  with  the  encour- 
aging assurance  that  even  a  cup  of  cold  water 
given  to  a  thirsty  disciple  will  not  be  forgotten 
of  God. 

The  lessons  on  Christian  work  with  which  this 
passage  abounds  are  so  numerous  that  it  would 
be  vain  to  attempt  to  unfold  them.  It  is  not 
merely  a  record  of  facts;  it  is  an  embodiment 
of  great  principles  which  are  to  govern  the  dis- 
ciples of  Christ  in  their  service  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  If  only  the  Church  as  a  whole  were  to 
think  and  pray  as  Christ  taught  His  disciples  to 
think  and  pray  before  this  great  event;  and  then 
if  the  labourers  whom  God  has  sent,  or  would, 
in  answer  to  the  prayers  of  the  Church,  immedi- 
ately send,  into  His  harvest  were  to  act — not 
necessarily  according  to  the  letter,  but  in  every 
part  according  to  the  spirit  of  these  instructions, 
— using  their  own  faculties  with  all  the  wisdom 
of  the  serpent,  and  trusting  to  Divine  grace  and 
power  with  all  the  simplicity  of  the  dove — it 
would  not  be  long  before  all  the  scattered  sheep 
were  gathered  into  the  fold,  all  the  ripe  sheaves 
garnered  for  the   Lord  of  the  harvest! 


CHAPTER  X. 
THE  SHADOW  OF  THE  CROSS. 

Matthew  xi.,  xii. 

I. — Discouragements  (xi). 

Hitherto  almost  everything  has  been  hopeful 
and  encouraging  in  our  Evangelist's  record  of 
the  Saviour's  ministry,     it  began  like  daybreak 


on  the  shores  of  the  sea  of  Galilee.  Great  multt- 
tudes  followed  Him  wherever  He  went;  and 
those  whom  He  called  to  be  with  Him  cheer- 
fully responded  to  the  summons.  When  He 
preached  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom,  the  people 
were  astonished  at  His  doctrine,  and  recognised 
that  He  "  taught  them  as  one  having  authority, 
and  not  as  the  scribes."  His  works  of  healing 
were  warmly  welcomed,  and  to  a  large  extent 
appreciated  by  the  people  generally,  though  al- 
ready it  was  apparent  that  those  whose  selfish 
interests  were  touched  by  the  progress  of  the 
truth  were  ready  to  cavil  and  complain.  Not- 
withstanding this,  the  work  has  grown  upon  Him 
so  that  He  has  found  it  necessary  to  arm  His 
twelve  disciples  with  powers  like  His  own,  and 
send  them  forth  as  heralds  of  His  kingdom 
through   the  land. 

But  the  path  of  the  King  is  not  to  be  a  trium- 
phal progress.  It  is  to  be  a  via  dolorosa,  leading 
to  a  cross  and  a  grave.  Many  prophecies  had 
been  already  fulfilled,  as  our  Evangelist  has 
shown  again  and  again;  but  there  are  others  of 
a  different  sort  which  can  as  little  fail  of  their 
fulfilment, — like  that  which  speaks  of  the  Mes- 
siah as  "  despised  and  rejected  of  men,  a  man 
of  sorrows,  and  acquainted  with  grief."  It  is 
not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at,  then,  that  the  Evan- 
gelist should  now  give  his  readers  some  idea  of 
the  discouragements  which  met  the  King  in  the 
setting  up  of  His  kingdom  on  the  earth.  The 
first  of  these  which  he  mentions  comes  from  a 
quarter  from  which  least  of  all  it  might  have 
been  expected. 

I.  John  in  doubt  (vv.   I -15). 

It  was,  indeed,  not  at  all  unnatural  that  John 
should  be  in  doubt.  Think  of  his  character: 
stern,  uncompromising,  severe,  and  bold  to  rash- 
ness. Think  of  his  circumstances:  languishing  in 
prison  for  the  truth's  sake,  without  any  prospect 
of  rescue; — after  all,  was  Jesus  King,  or  Herod? 
Remember,  too,  in  what  terms  he  had  predicted 
the  coming  One:  "  Now  also  the  axe  is  laid  unto 
the  roo'ts  of  the  trees;  "  .  .  .  "  He  that  cometh 
after  me  is  mightier  than  I;  "  .  .  .  "  Whose  fan 
is  in  His  hand,  and  He  will  throughly  purge 
His  floor,  and  gather  His  wheat  into  the  garner; 
but  He  will  burn  up  the  chafif  with  unquenchable 
fire."  Did  not  this  betoken  a  work  which  would 
be  swift,  severe,  thorough, — very  different  from 
anything  of  which  he  could  hear  in  his  prison 
cell?  The  coming  of  the  kingdom  was  too  gentle 
and  too  slow  for  the  stern,  impatient  Baptist. 
Accordingly,  "offended"  (see  ver.  6,  R.  V. : 
"  finding  occasion  of  stumbling  ")  in  his  Master, 
he  sends  this  message,  in  the  hope  possibly  that 
it  may  constrain  Him  to  avow  Himself  and  to 
bring  matters  to  a  crisis:  "  Art  thou  He  that 
should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  another?  " 

Though  it  was  natural  enough  that  John 
should  doubt,  it  was  none  the  less  trying  to  Je- 
sus. The  disciples  were  only  children  yet.  Not 
one  of  them  could  enter  into  full  sympathy  with 
Him.  John,  the  forerunner,  was  the  one  strong' 
man,  on  whom  He  had  reason  thoroughly  to 
rely,  who  had  been  tried  again  and  again,  and 
always  found  brave  and  true.  Yet  it  is  he  who 
sends  the  doubting  message.  What  a  shock  it 
must  have  been  to  the  sensitive  heart,  what  a 
trial  to  the  faith,  of  the  Man  Christ  Jesus! 

The  message  must  have  been  a  very  disturbing 
and  disconcerting  one,  and  fitted,  if  widely 
known,  to  neutralise  to  a  large  degree  in  the 
minds  of  the  people  the  witness  John  had  borne 


Matthew  xi.,  xii.j 


THE    SHAIJOW    OF    THE    CROSS. 


733 


to  Jesus.  It  is  the  last  thin^  the  Evangelist 
would  have  thought  of  mentioning,  if  he  had 
been  actuated  in  the  selection  of  his  material  by 
motives  of  policy;  and  the  fact  that  this  inci- 
dent is  published  in  two  of  the  Gospels  is  a  strik- 
ing illustration  of  what  is  manifest  throughout — 
the  perfect  simplicity  and  candour  of  the  sacred 
historians. 

Have  we  not  reason  to  be  most  thankful  that 
they  did  record  it?  To  the  truly  thoughtful  mind 
it  is  no  weakening  of  the  testimony  of  John; 
while  it  is  full  of  comfort  for  the  honest  doubter, 
giving  him  the  assurance  that  even  when  the 
most  serious  questions  trouble  him — even  though 
the  very  foundations  of  his  faith  seem  to  be 
shaken — "  there  hath  no  temptation  taken  "  him 
"  but  such  as  is  common  to  man,"  such  as  even 
a  brave  and  true  soul  like  John  had  to  face;  full 
of  encouragement  also  to  do  just  as  he  did, — go 
straight  to  the  Master  Himself  with  the  doubts, 
and  let  Him  deal  with  them — wisely,  faithfully, 
tenderly — as   He   does   here. 

How,  then,  does  He  deal  with  them?  By  a 
miracle,  opening  the  prison  doors,  and  so  mak- 
ing it  perfectly  plain  to  him  that  not  Herod, 
but  Jesus,  is  King?  By  a  sudden  outburst  of 
vengeance,  destroying  hosts  of  unrepentant  sin- 
ners and  alarming  all  the  country  side,  and  so 
satisfying  the  sternest  thoughts  of  the  Baptist  in 
his  cell?  Not  at  all.  He  deals  with  them  as  He 
intends  to  deal  with  doubters  always:  points  him 
quietly  to  the  many  tokens  of  His  Divine  mission 
— not  in  the  way  of  judgment  wrought  on  sin- 
ners nor  of  any  grand  demonstration  which  will 
astonish  the  nation,  but  in  the  quiet  progress  of 
His  helpful,  healing,  comforting  work:  "  Go, 
and  show  John  again  those  things  which  ye  do 
hear  and  see:  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the 
deaf  hear,  the  dead  are  raised  up,  and  the  poor 
have  the  gospel  preached  to  them."  Then  He 
encourages  him  to  hold  fast  the  beginning  of 
his  confidence  firm  unto  the  end,  by  adding  the 
significant  words,  "'  Blessed  is  he,  whosoever 
shall  find  none  occasion  of  stumbling  in  Me  " 
(R.  v.).  It  was  far  bet,ter  for  John  himself  that 
he  should  be  allowed  to  rally,  than  that  any- 
thing special  should  be  done  to  meet  his  doubts. 
He  did  rally;  he  did  secure  the  blessing  his  Mas- 
ter set  before  him;  he  was  satished  without  any 
open  demonstration,  satisfied  to  wait  on  and 
suffer  in  faith  and  patience,  till  at  last  he  sealed 
the  testimony  of  his  magnificent  life  by  a  mar- 
tyr's death. 

Those  are  in  some  respects  to  be  envied  who 
in  childlike  simplicity  believe  without  doubt  or 
question;  but  there  is  a  special  blessing  for  those 
who  by  the  very  force  of  their  nature  must 
wrestle  with  doubt,  yet  in  the  trying  hour  find 
no  occasion  of  stumbling  in  Him.  They  come 
out  of  the  conflict  more  than  conquerors  through 
Him  that  loved  them. 

The  answer  sent  to  John  was  kind;  but  there 
was  no  flattery  in  it — not  even  a  word  of  com- 
mendation of  his  heroic  endurance.  The  Master 
knew  the  strength  of  His  disciple,  and  He  dealt 
with  him  accordingly.  But  as  soon  as  the  mes- 
sengers are  gone  He  tells  the  people  what  He 
thinks  of  him.  He  in  effect  deprecates  the 
thought  of  judging  John  by  a  message  sent  in 
an  hour  of  weakness  and  despondency.  "  Do 
not  imagine  for  a  moment,"  He  seems  to  say, 
"  that  the  man  you  went  out  into  the  wilderness 


to  see  is  feeble  as  a  reed,  or  soft  as  a  courtier. 
He  is  all,  and  more  than  all,  you  took  him  to 
be.  He  is  a  prophet  indeed;  and  much  more, 
for  He  is  a  herald  of  the  heavenly  King.  Among 
them  that  are  born  of  woman  there  hath  not 
risen  a  greater  than  John  the  Baptist;  and  though 
he  has  not  the  advantages  of  even  the  little 
ones  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  inasmuch  as  he 
belongs  to  the  old  dispensation,  yet,  as  herald 
of  the  new,  he  occupies  a  peculiarly  honoured 
place — he  stands  between  the  old  and  the  new; 
for  all  the  prophets  and  the  law  prophesied  until 
John;  while  from  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist 
until  now  the  kingdom  of  hei."'en  is  preached, 
and  men  are  pressing  into  it.  He  is,  in  fact,  if 
only  you  had  ears  to  hear,  if  only  your  minds 
were  open  to  read  the  Scriptures  according  to 
the  spirit  of  them,  that  very  Elijah  whose  com- 
ing your  prophet  has  taught  you  to  expect " 
(vv.  7-14). 

So  far  we  have  followed  what  seems  to  be  the 
drift  of  our  Saviours  words  in  regard  to  John; 
but  there  is  more  than  this  in  them.  He  is 
contrasting  the  feebleness  and  fickleness  of  the 
multitude  with  the  strength  and  stability  of  John. 
There  is  before  His  mind,  throughout,  the 
thought  of  the  transcendent  importance  of  the 
events  of  the  time  as  compared  with  the  thought- 
lessness of  the  people  of  the  time.  The  ques- 
tion "What  went  ye  out  for  to  see?"  was  in- 
tended not  merely  to  bring  into  relief  the  great- 
ness of  John,  but  to  search  their  hearts.  The 
important  events  of  the  time  had  circled  first 
around  John  the  Baptist,  then  around  Himself. 
The  people  had  not  the  least  idea  of  the  trans- 
cendent greatness  of  John  and  still  less  of  the  in- 
finite greatness  of  Him  to  Whom  he  had  borne 
witness.  Jesus  did  not  wish  as  yet  fully  to  assert 
His  own  claims,  y..  He  desired  to  bring  the 
inconsiderate  multitudes  to  some  conception  of 
the  things  which  their  eyes  saw,  to  rebuke  and, 
if  possible,  to  correct  their  thoughtlessness  and 
indifference. 

It  is  to  the  presence  of  this  underlying  thought 
that  some  forms  of  expression  are  due  which 
otherwise  are  difficult  to  understand.  This  ap- 
plies in  particular  to  ver.  12,  which  has  been  a 
terrible  stumbling-block  to  expositors.  So  far 
as  the  position  of  John  was  concerned,  it  was 
enough  to  say  that  from  his  time  the  kingdom 
of  God  was  preached  (the  form  found  in  St. 
Luke);  but  in  view  of  the  levity  and  thought- 
lessness of  the  multitudes  it  is  put  in  such  a  way 
as  to  suggest  that  it  is  not  your  thoughtless, 
fickle,  reed-hunting,  sight-seeing  people,  that  get 
the  kingdom,  but  eager,  earnest,  "  violent  "  men. 
The  same  thought  accounts  for  the  manner  in 
which  the  paragraph  closes,  indicating  that  that 
which  had  been  spoken  ought  to  lead  to  more 
serious  thought,  more  intelligent  appreciation 
both  of  the  herald  and  of  the  kingdom  which 
in  the  spirit  and  power  of  the  Great  Elijah  he 
has  heralded:  "  He  that  hath  ears  to  hear,  let 
him  hear." 

But  would  they  hear?  Alas,  no!  and  this  ac- 
cordingly must  be  put  down  as  a  second  and 
most   serious  discouragement. 

2.   The  Unreasonableness  of  the  People  (vv.  16-19). 

Unable  to  recognise  the  true  significance  of 
the  events  of  the  time,  with  deaf  ears  to  the  heav- 
enly message  which  first  the  herald  and  then  the 
King  had  brought  them,  they  fastened  their  at- 
tention on  that  which  was  merely  incidental:  the 
asceticism  of  John,  the  social  friendliness  of  Je- 


734 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


sus.  Of  the  first  they  complained,  because  it  was 
not  like  the  second;  of  the  second  they  com- 
plained, because  it  was  not  like  the  first.  Any 
excuse  for  a  complaint;  no  ear  to  hear  nor  soul 
to  appreciate  the  message  of  either.  To  what  can 
He  liken  them?  To  a  set  of  children,  sitting  in 
the  market-place  indeed,  but  with  no  thought  of 
business  in  their  heads:  they  are  there  only  to 
amuse  themselves;  and  even  in  their  games  they 
are  as  unreasonable  as  they  can  be.  One  set 
proposes  to  play  a  wedding,  and  the  rest  say, 
"  No,  we  want  a  funeral  "  ;  then,  when  the  others 
take  it  up  and  start  the  game  of  funeral,  they 
change  their  tune,  and  say,  "  No,  we  prefer  a 
wedding."  Nothing  will  please  those  who  have 
no  intention  to  be  satisfied.  Caring  nothing  for 
the  kingdom  which  John  heralded,  the  multitude 
only  noticed  the  peculiarity  of  his  garb,  and  the 
stern  solitariness  of  his  life,  and  said  he  must  be 
a  lunatic.  When  the  King  Himself  comes  with 
no  such  peculiarity,  but  mingling  on  familiar  and 
friendly  terms  with  the  people,  still  caring  noth- 
ing for  the  kingdom  which  He  preached,  they 
find  tault  with  Him  for  the  very  qualities  tiie 
absence  of  which  they  deprecated  in  John.  If 
they  had  acted,  not  as  foolish  children,  but  as 
wise  men,  they  would  have  recognised  that  both 
were  right,  inasmuch  as  each  was  true  to  him- 
self and  to  the  position  he  filled.  It  was  right 
and  fitting  that  the  last  of  the  old  prophets 
should  be  rugged  and  stern  and  solitary,  even  as 
the  great  Elijah,  in  whose  spirit  and  power  he 
came.  It  was  no  less  right  and  fit  that  the 
Saviour-King  of  men  should  set  out  on  new 
lines  and  introduce  the  new  dispensation  in  a 
manner  suited  to  its  distinctive  features  of  free- 
dom and  familiar  friendliness.  Thus,  in  the  one 
case,  and  in  the  other,  "  wisdom  is  justified  of 
her   children." 

3.  The  Unbelief  of  the  Cities  (vv.  20-24). 

Though  the  multitudes  which  had  flocked  to 
hear  John  might  be  fickle  and  thoughtless,  surely 
better  things  might  be  expected  of  those  fa- 
voured towns  by  the  lake  of  Galilee,  where  the 
signs  of  the  kingdom  had  been  so  abundantly 
exhibited  and  the  truth  of  the  kingdom  so  ear- 
nestly and  frequently  preached.  But  no:  even 
they  "  repented  not."  They  would  bring  their 
sick  in  crowds  to  get  them  healed;  'but  they  hid 
as  it  were  their  faces  from  Him.  They  had  not 
indeed  treated  Him  as  the  people  of  Nazareth 
had  done;  for  Nazareth  had  cast  Him  out,  and 
Capernaum  had  taken  Him  in.  Yet  His.  lamen- 
tation is  not  over  Nazareth,  but  over  Capernaum. 
We  can  readily  see  why.  What  He  suffered  at 
Nazareth  was  a  personal  indignity.  He  was  so 
summarily  ejected  that  He  had  not  time  or  op- 
portunity to  set  before  them  the  signs  of  the 
kingdom.  But  in  Capernaum  the  time  and  op- 
portunity had  been  ample.  The  truth  had  been 
fully  told;  the  signs  had  been  fully  wrought. 
The  people  had  seemed  to  listen;  and  all  beto- 
kened a  happy  issue.  We  can  imagine  the  Sa- 
viour waiting  and  hoping  and  longing  (for 
again,  let  it  be  remembered  that  He  was  very 
man,  and  that  this  experience  discouraged  Him 
as  it  would  discourage  any  of  us),  and  then  tast- 
ing all  the  bitterness  of  hope  deferred,  ending  in 
crushing  disappointment. 

For  a  long  time  He  continues  silent,  bearing 
the  heavy  burden  in  His  heart,  till  the  fountain 
of  grief!  could  be  pent  up  no  longer:  "  Then 
began  He  to  upbraid  the  cities  wherein  most  of 
His  mighty  works  were  done,  because  they  re- 


pented not."  The  words  He  speaks  are  very 
awful;  but  it  is  in  the  last  resort.  Love  and 
mercy  have  been  His  theme  from  day  to  day; 
and  it  is  only  because  these  are  obstinately  re- 
jected that  wrath  and  judgment  must  now  find 
a  voice.  It  is  not  a  wrathful  voice:  there  are 
tears  in  it.  What  must  it  have  cost  Him  to  speak 
these  awful  words  about  Capernaum's  impending 
doom!  To  think  that  those  who  were  nearest 
His  heart  of  all,  to  whom  He  devoted  the  fresh- 
ness of  His  first  days  of  service,  the  dew  of  His 
youth,  so  to  speak — that  they  would  have  none 
of  Him,  but  preferred  to  remain  in  sin  with  all 
the  woe  it  necessarily  entailed, — oh!  it  must  have 
been  torture  to  that  loving  heart.  And  we  may 
be  sure  there  was  no  less  pathos  in  this  last  ap- 
peal to  Bethsaida,  Chorazin,  and  Capernaum, 
than  there  was  in  the  later  lamentation  over  the 
city  of  the  South. 

How  does  the  Saviour  bear  Himself  under 
these  repeated  discouragements?  The  passage 
which  follows  will  show  (vv.  25-30).  Some  have 
found  a  dilticulty  in  the  word  "'  answered,"  be- 
cause there  appears  no  question  with  which  it  is 
connected.  But  did  not  these  discouragements 
require  an  answer?  As  we  read,  first  of  the 
doubts  of  John,  then  of  the  thoughtlessness  of 
the  multitudes,  and  then  of  the  impenitence  of 
the  favoured  cities  by  the  lake,  is  there  not  a 
question  in  our  hearts,  becoming  more  and  more 
urgent  as  each  new  discouragement  appears, 
What  will  He  say  to  this?  What  can  He  an- 
swer? Thus  our  minis  are  well  prepared  for 
that  which  immediately  follows:  "At  that  time 
Jesus  answered  and  said,  I  thank  Thee,  O 
Father."  Is  it  to  be  a  thanksgiving,  then,  after 
such  a  series  of  disappointments  and  vexations? 
Even  so.  As  He  has  looked  to  the  cities  of  the 
plain.  His  voice  has  been  a  wail;  now  that  He 
looks  up  to  His  Father,  wailing  ceases,  and 
thanksgiving  takes  its  place.  So  will  it  always 
be  to  faith  which  is  genuine  and  deep  enough. 
It  is  only  when  we  look  below  and  around  that 
we  are  depressed.  When  we  look  up  we  are 
strong.  "  I  will  lift  up  mine  eyes  unto  the  hills, 
from  whence  cometh  my  help.  My  help  cometh 
from  the  Lord  Who  made  heaven  and  earth." 
Was  it  the  remembrance  of  this  passage  at  the 
time  of  need  which  suggested  the  form  of  His 
thanksgiving:  "  I  thank  Thee,  Father,  Lord  of 
heaven  and  earth  "  ? 

Surely  we  have  here  the  living  original  of  that 
grand  apostolic  word.  "  In  everything  give 
thanks  "  ;  for  if  "  at  that  season  "  (R.  V.)  the 
Saviour  of  men  found  occasion  for  thanksgiving, 
we  may  well  believe  that  at  any  season,  how- 
ever dark,  we  may  find  something  to  stir  our 
hearts  to  gratitude;  and  the  very  exercise  of 
thanksgiving  will  bring  a  deep  spiritual  joy  to 
set  against  the  bitterest  sorrow,  even  as  it  was 
with  our  Lord,  Who,  as  St.  Luke  informs  us, 
"  rejoiced  in  spirit  "  as  He  lifted  up  His  soul  in 
thanks  to   God  that  day. 

What,  then,  does  He  find  to  be  thankful  for? 
First,  He  discovers  a  cause  for  gratitude  in  the 
very  limitation  which  occasions  His  sorest  dis- 
appointments: "  I  thank  Thee,  .  .  .  because 
Thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and 
prudent,  and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes." 
There  is  of  course  the  cheering  thought  that 
amid  the  general  unbelief  and  rejection  there 
are  some  childlike  souls  who  have  welcomed 
the  truth..     Some  are  fain  to  make  this  the  sole 


'citthew  xi.,  xii,] 


THE   SHADOW   OF   THE   CROSS. 


735 


cause  of  thankfulness,  as  if  He  meant  to  say, 
"  I  thank  Thee,  that  though  Thou  hast  hid  these 
things  from  the  wise  and  prudent,  Thou  hast 
revealed  them  unto  babes."  But  there  is  no  au- 
thority for  introducing  this  little  word.  The 
Saviour  gives  thanks,  not  merely  in  spite  of  this 
hiding,  but  because  of  it.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that 
He  uses  the  language  of  resigna:tion,  "  Even  so, 
Father:  for  so  it  seemed  good  in  Thy  sight," 
which  makes  it  evident  that  the  fact  that  so  many 
of  the  wise  and  intelligent  rejected  His  gospel 
presented  a  real  difficulty  to  His  mind,  as  it  has 
done  to  earnest  souls  in  all  ages.  .But  while  it 
was  no  doubt  enough  for  Him  to  feel  sure  that 
it  was  right  in  tlie  sight  of  God,  we  are  not  with- 
out indication  in  what  follows,  that  His  faith 
not  only  led  to  resignation,  but  enabled  Him  to 
see  for  Himself  that  it  was  wisely  ordered.  For 
what  is  the  great  object  of  the  Gospel?  Is  it 
not  to  dethrone  itself  and  enthrone  God  in  the 
hearts  of  men?  It  is  clear,  then,  that,  if  it  had 
in  any  way  appealed  to  pride  and  self-sufficiency, 
it  would  have  defeated  its  own  end.  Suppose  the 
revealing  of  things  had  been  to  the  wise  and  pru- 
dent as  such,  what  would  have  been  the  result? 
The  kingdom  of  heaven  would  have  become  a 
mere  scholarship  prize.  And  however  good  a 
thing  scholarship  may  be,  and  however  impor- 
tant that  it  be  encouraged,  this  is  not  the  work 
of  the  Christ  of  God.  His  Gospel  is  for  all; 
so  it  is  addressed  not  to  the  great  in  intellect, 
which  would  confine  it  to  the  few,  but  to  the 
lowly  in  heart,  which  brings  it  within  reach  of 
all, — for  the  very  wisest  and  greatest  in  intellect 
may  be,  and  ought  to  be,  meek  and  lowly  in 
heart. 

Indeed,  is  it  not  to  the  meek  and  lowly  heart 
that  even  the  truths  of  science  are  disclosed?  A 
man  who  approaches  nature  with  a  preconceived 
theory,  about  which  his  mind  is  already  made  up, 
is  sure  to  miss  the  mark.  To  enter  into  its  se- 
crets, prejudices  and  prepossessions  must  be  laid 
aside,  and  things  observed  with  open  mind  and 
simple  receptiveness.  In  this  conection  one 
sees  the  special  appropriateness  of  the  reference 
to  "  the  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth."  The  prin- 
ciple is  one  which  is  not  restricted  in  its  range: 
it  runs  all  through  nature.  Still  more  appropri- 
ate is  the  appeal  to  the  fatherhood  of  God.  It  is 
not  for  the  Father  to  be  partial  to  his  clever 
children,  and  leave  the  less  favoured  ones  to 
shift  for  themselves.  To  Him  they  are  all 
"  babes  "  ;  and  to  them  He  must  be  not  exam- 
iner, nor  prize-giver,  but  above  all  Father,  if  they 
would  understand  and  feel  His  love.  So  the 
more  one  thinks  of  it,  the  more  in  every  point 
of  view  does  it  seem  good  and  necessary  that 
these  things  should  not  be  made  known  to  the 
"wise  and  understanding"  (R.  V.)  as  such,  but 
should  be  revealed  to  "  babes,"  and  to  those  of 
childlike  spirit.  It  is  well.  The  wisest  and  most 
learned  may  join  in  the  thanksgiving,  for  it  is  far 
better  for  them  to  take  their  places  with  the  rest, 
as  many  happily  do,  and  receive  the  same  loving 
welcome;  and  those  of  us  who  cannot  call  our- 
selves wise  and  learned  should  surely  be  most 
devoutly  thankful  that,  however  impossible  it 
may  be  to  compete  with  these  highly  favoured 
ones  in  o^btaining  the  prizes  of  earth,  we  are 
at  no  disadvantage  in  striving  for  "  the  prize  of 
the  high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus." 

The  next  great  thought  which  comes  to  the  re- 
lief of  the  Saviour  in  His  discouragement  is  that, 
while  there  are  barriers  in  the  heart  of  man,  there 


is  no  barrier  in  the  heart  of  God,  no  limit  what- 
ever to  the  outpouring  of  Divine  love  and  grace: 
"  All  things  are  delivered  unto  Me  of  My 
Father."  Even  at  the  time  when  it  is  borne  in 
upon  Him  that  men  will  have  none  of  Him,  He 
exults  in  the  thought  that  He  has  everything 
for  them.  If  only  they  could  see  it!  If  only  they 
knew  the  boundless  treasure  there  was  for  them 
in  God!  If  only  they  knew  that  God  had  put 
all  within  their  reach  by  sending  them  His 
Son!  But  the  Son  is  unknown  except  to 
the  Father,  who  sent  Him;  and  the  Father 
is  unknown  except  to  the  Son,  Who  has 
come  to  reveal  Him.  But  He  has  come  to  reveal 
Him;  and  with  the  revealing  the  way  will  be 
opened  for  all  good  things  to  follow.  As  He 
thinks  of  it  His  heart  yearns  over  the  orphaned 
children  of  men,  and  He  exults  in  the  thought 
that  He  has  for  them  the  revelation  of  the 
Father's  heart  and  home,  with  enough  and  to 
spare  for  all  His  children  (ver.  27). 

Then  follows  such  an  outpouring  of  heart  as 
there  never  has  been  before.  He  knows  that 
only  in  the  Father  can  the  children  of  men  hnd 
rest,  and  so  He  says  "  Come  unto  Me,"  and  I 
will  lead  you  to  the  Father,  Who  alone  knows 
Me,  as  I  alone  know  Him;  and  you,  finding  Him 
in  Me,  shall  know  Him  too,  and  your  hearts 
shall  be  at  rest. 

It  is  beautiful  and  most  touching  to  observe 
how  our  Lord  is,  as  it  were,  compelled  to  make 
His  appeal  more  personal  than  He  has  ever  done 
before.  We  look  in  vain  through  His  previous 
utterances  as  reported  in  this  Gospel  for  such  re- 
duplication of  the  personal  pronouns  as  there  is 
here.  What  is  the  reason  of  it?  We  can  see  it 
when  we  read  between  the  lines.  Hitherto  His 
great  subject  has  been  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
This  kingdom  He  has  been  preaching  through 
all  the  country-side,  setting  forth  its  purity  and 
blessedness,  unfolding  its  unspeakable  riches,  and 
entreating  all  to  enter  in  by  the  strait  gate, 
which  He  has  thrown  open  to  receive  them. 
But  they  will  not  enter.  These  things,  in  spite 
of  all  He  can  say,  are  hid  from  them.  Well  He 
knows  what  is  the  difficulty:  it  is  the  hardness 
of  their  hearts.  If  He  could  only  get  at  these 
hearts!  How  can  He  do  it?  It  can  only  be  by 
the  opening  out  of  all  His  heart  to  them;  so  He 
will  make  His  pleading  a  personal  entreaty  now. 
Hence  the  peculiarly  winning  form  His  invitation 
now  assumes.  It  is  no  longer  "  Enter  ye  in  at 
the  strait  gate  "  ;  it  is  not  even,  "  I  have  come 
to  call  sinners  to  repentance  "  ;  it  is  the  cry  of  a 
loving,  yearning  heart,  "  Come  unto  Me."  And 
how  tenderly  He  thinks  of  them! — no  more  up- 
braiding now,  no  more  reproof.  He  will  try  to 
reach  the  conscience  through  the  heart,  and  so 
He  does  not  even  think  of  them  as  sinners  now — 
He  forgets  everything  but  their  weariness  and 
woe:  "  Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  that  labour  and  are 
heavy   laden,   and   I   will   rest  you."  * 

We  shall  not,  however,  dwell  on  the  precious 
words  with  which  this  chapter  ends.  They  are 
as  rich  and  suggestive  as  they  are  simple  and 
heart-thrilling;  but  for  this  very  reason  we  must 
not  attempt  to  do  more  than  place  them  in  their 
setting,    which    is   often    missed,    for   the    words 

*  This  is  the  literal  translation,  which  means  more  than 
"give  you  rest."  It  is  not  as  if  rest  were  a  blessing  He 
could  bestow,  as  a  friend  would  make  a  present  which 
might  be  retained  after  the  giver  had  gone.  Rest  is  not  so 
much  what  He  gives  to  us  as  what  He  is  to  us  ;  and  so  He 
says,  not  "I  will  give  you  rest,"  but  "  I  will  rest  you" 
ti.  e.,  I  will  be  your  rest*. 


T36 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


themselves  have  attracted  so  much  attention,  and 
so  filled  the  minds  and  hearts  of  those  who  have 
looked  at  them  that  too  little  has  been  made 
of  their  surroundings.  Observe  only  how  nobly 
the  Son  of  Man  comes  out  of  this  ordeal  of 
disappointment  and  discouragement.  See  the 
grandeur  of  His  faith.  "  At  that  season,"  when 
we  should  expect  to  see  Him  in  the  depths.  He 
rises  to  the  very  height  of  His  dignity  and  maj- 
esty. This  passage  above  all  others  has  been 
cited  as  an  example  of  the  self-assertion  of  Je- 
sus— saj  rather  His  sublime  consciousness  of  Di- 
vine dignity,  prerogative,  and  power;  yet  so  en- 
tirely natural  and  unassuming  is  it  all,  that  in  the 
very  same  breath  He  can  say,  without  conveying 
t*  the  most  thoughtful  mind  the  least  feeling 
of  incongruity:  "  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in 
heart."  Then  behold  what  manner  of  love!  These 
chilling  blasts  of  doubt,  indifference,  and  unbelief 
only  fan  it  into  a  warmer,  steadier  flame.  The 
sweetest  of  all  His  invitations,  the  most  touching 
of  all  His  appeals,  comes  from  a  heart  which  has 
just  been  wounded  in  its  tenderest  place,  and 
has  tasted  the  bitterness  of  cruel  disappoint- 
ment. Who  can  measure  the  patient  love  which 
'■  at  that  season  "  finds  such  utterance? 

II. — The  Contradiction  of  Sinners  (xii.). 

The  darkness  deepens  on  the  Saviour's  path. 
He  has  now  to  encounter  direct  antagonism. 
There  have  been,  indeed,  signs  of  opposition  be- 
fore. When  the  man  sick  of  the  palsy  was  for- 
given, "  certain  of  the  scribes  said  within  them- 
selves, This  man  blasphemeth  "  (ix.  3);  but  it 
was  only  "  within  themselves,"  they  did  not  ven- 
ture to  speak  out.  Again,  after  the  feast  in  the 
house  of  Levi,  the  Pharisees  complained,  but 
not  to  Christ  Himself;  "  they  said  unto  His  dis- 
ciples. Why  eateth  your  Master  with  publicans 
and  sinners?"  (ix.  11).  And  when  the  dumb 
demoniac  was  cured,  the  Pharisees  muttered, 
"  He  casteth  out  devils  through  the  prince  of 
ifhe  devils"  (ix.  34),  but  did  not  yet  say  it  to 
His  face.  But  now  they  are  emboldened  to  at- 
tack Him  directly.  Possibly  they  saw  as  clearly 
as  any  the  discouraging  aspect  of  affairs  for  the 
new  kingdom.  They  had,  in  all  probability, 
heard  of  the  doubts  of  John,  had  taken  note  of 
the  fault-findings  of  the  people  (if,  indeed,  these 
had  not  been  first  suggested  by  themselves),  had 
observed  that  even  "  the  cities  where  most  of 
His  mighty  works  were  done  repented  not  "  (xi. 
20);  and  having  therefore  less  occasion  to  fear 
consequences,  they  might  think  it  safe  to  attack 
one  who  stood  for  a  rapidly  failing  cause. 

I.  Observe,  first,  the  spirit  in  which  our  Lord 
meets  the  repeated  attacks  of  which  the  record 
is  given  in  this  chapter.  There  are  four  in  close 
succession.  The  first  is  the  charge  of  Sabbath- 
breaking  made  against  the  disciples,  because 
they  rubbed  a  few  ears  of  corn  in  their  hands 
as  they  passed  through  the  fields  on  the  Sabbath 
day;  and  following  it,  the  entangling  question 
put  to  the  Master  in  the  synagogue.  Then  there 
is  the  accusation  founded  on  the  healing  of  the 
blind  and  dumb  demoniac:  "This  man  doth  not 
cast  out  devils,  but  by  Beelzebub  the  prince  of 
the  devils"  (ver.  24).  The  third  attack  is  the 
hypocritical  application,  "  Master,  we  would  see 
a  sign  from  Thee  "  (ver.  38),  the  word  "  Master  " 
being  evidently  used  in  mockery,  and  the  request 
for  "  a  sign  "  a  scornful  way  of  suggesting  that 


all  the  signs  He  was  giving  were  worth  nothing. 
These  three  attacks  were  made  by  the  Pharisees, 
and  were  most  irritating  and  vexatious,  each  in 
its  own  way.  The  first  was  annoying  on  ac- 
count of  its  pettiness,  the  second  because  of  its 
bitter  malice,  while  the  third  was  a  studied  insult; 
and  yet,  galling  as  these  repeated  attacks  must 
iiave  been,  we  may  well  suppose  that  the  keen- 
est wound  of  all  to  the  gentle  spirit  of  the  Son 
of  man  would  be  the  last,  inflicted  by  the  mem- 
bers of  His  own  family,  who  seemed  at  this 
time  as  unsympathetic  and  unbelieving  as  the 
Pharisees  themselves;  for  the  untimely  inter- 
ruption lecorded  at  the  close  of  the  chapter  was 
intended,  as  we  learn  from  the  account  in  the 
second  gospel,  to  put  Him  under  restraint  as  a 
madman.  This  last  interruption,  in  which  even 
His  mother  joined,  must  have  been  gall  and 
wormword  to  that  tender  heart. 

Now  "  consider  Him  that  endured  such  contra- 
diction of  sinners  against  Himself"  (Heb.  xii. -3). 
How  does  He  bear  Himself  through  these 
storms  of  calumny  and  insult?  He  bears  Him- 
self so  that  out  of  this  dark  chapter  of  His  his- 
tory there  comes  to  us  one  of  the  loveliest  por- 
traits of  Him  to  be  found  anywhere.  It  had 
been  sketched  by  one  of  the  old  masters  as  an 
ide^l  portrait,  and  is  now  at  last  matched  in  real 
life:  "  Behold  My  Servant,  Whom  I  have  chosen; 
My  Beloved,  in  Whom  My  soul  is  well  pleased: 
I  will  put  My  spirit  upon  Him,  and  He  shall 
show  judgment  to  the  Gentiles.  He  shall  not 
strive,  nor  cry;  neither  shall  any  man  hear  His 
voice  in  the  streets.  A  bruised  reed  shall  He 
not  break,  and  smoking  flax  shall  He  not 
quench,  till  He  send  forth  judgment  unto  vic- 
tory. And  in  His  name  shall  the  Gentiles  trust  " 
(vv.  18-21).  What  gentleness  and  tenderness,  yet 
what  strength  and  majesty! — for,  though  "  He 
strives  not,"  nor  lifts  up  His  voice  in  angry 
altercation,  while  He  will  not  break  the  bruised 
reed,  nor  quench  the  smoking  flax.  He  will  nev- 
ertheless declare  judgment,  and  secure  victory, 
and  make  His  name  such  a  power  in  the  earth, 
that  the  Gentiles  shall  hope  in  Him  and  the 
world  go  after  Him.  We  can  fancy  the  glow  on 
the  Evangelist's  face  as  he  pauses  in  the  midst 
of  the  sad  record  of  these  cruel  assaults,  to  look 
at,  and  show  to  us,  that  lovely  portrait  of  the 
Son  of  man.  And  is  it  not  all  the  lovelier  that 
it  shines  out  from  such  a  background?  Does  it 
not  give  new  significance  to  the  tender  words 
which  linger  in  our  ears  from  the  chapter  of  dis- 
couragement before:  "  Learn  of  Me;  for  I  am 
meek  and  lowly  in  heart:  and  ye  shall  find  rest 
unto  your  souls  "? 

2.  It  would  have  been  a  great  thing  if  our 
Lord  had  only  borne  in  dignified  silence  these 
repeated  provocations;  but  He  is  too  good  and 
kind  to  leave  these  misguided  people  to  their 
own  devices  withoirt  an  effort  to  enlighten  their 
dark  minds  and  arouse  their  sleeping  con- 
sciences. How  patiently  He  reasons  with  them! 
We  may  glance  at  each  attack  in  succession  as 
an  illustration  of  this. 

On  the  charge  of  Sabbath-breaking  He  en- 
deavours to  set  them  right  by  citing  appropriate 
scriptures  (vv.  3,  4);  appealing  to  the  law  itself 
(ver.  5);  furnishing  them  with  a  great  principle 
laid  down  by  one  of  the  prophets,  the  key  of  the 
whole  position  (ver.  7) ;  and  concludes  by  an 
illustrative  act,  accompanied  by  a  simple  and  tell- 
ing  argument,    which    appeals    to    the    universal 


Matthew  xi.,  xii.] 


THE  SHADOW  OF  THE  CROSS. 


737 


conscience  and  heart  (vv.  9-13)-  Again,  how 
patiently  He  answers  the  malicious  charge  of 
collusion  with  Satan,  showing  them  in  the  clear- 
est manner,  and  with  amazing  power,  how  far 
they  are  astray,  and  what  a  dangerous  path  they 
are  treading  (vv.  25-37).  So,  too,  in  meeting  the 
third  attack:  though  He  cannot  but  sternly  re- 
buke the  hypocritical  application  for  "  a  sign," 
He  yet  does  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  prepare  for 
them  in  due  time,  when  perhaps  they  may  be 
ready  to  appreciate  it,  a  new  sign — His  death  and 
resurrection — overcoming  the  difficulty  arising 
from  the  fact  that  He  could  not  yet  speak  of  it 
i.i  plain  terms  (for  it  was  at  a  later  period  than 
tiis  that  He  began  to  speak  plainly  of  it  even 
t3  His  disciples)  by  veiling  it  under  the  figure 
C'f  "the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas":  a  way  of 
putting  it  which  had  the  advantage  of  being 
memorable,  and  at  the  same  time  enigmatical 
enough  to  veil  its  meaning  till  the  event  should 
lighten  it  all  up,  and  bring  out  its  deep  sug- 
gestiveness:  and  while  thus  preparing  them  for 
the  new  sign  when  it  should  come.  He  warns 
them  against  that  evil  state  of  mind  and  heart 
which  threatened  to  render  even  it  of  no  avail 
(vv.  38-45).  And  then,  with  what  marvellous 
readiness  does  He  use  the  painful  interruption 
with  which  the  chapter  ends  for  the  teaching  of 
truth  of  the  highest  and  purest  and  tenderest 
quality!  What  patience,  what  long-sufYering, 
what  meekness  of  wisdom,  what  faithfulness, 
what  strength  and  tenderness!  Every  line  of  the 
likeness  drawn  by  the  inspired  hand  of  the  old 
master  is  more  than  justified  (vv.  46-50). 

3.  Observe,  further,  that  in  all  His  dealings 
with  His  bitterest  foes  He  never  in  the  least 
degree  lowers  His  dignity,  but  rather  asserts  it 
in  the  boldest  and  strongest  terms.  It  may  be 
questioned,  indeed,  if  there  is  any  chapter  in  all 
the  history  in  which  this  is  more  marked.  This, 
again,  may  be  illustrated  from  all  the  four 
occasions. 

In  the  argument  on  the  Sabbath  question  hear 
Him  as  He  draws  Himself  up,  in  presence  of  His 
accusers,  and  says:  "  In  this  place  is  One  greater 
than  the  temple"  (ver.  6);  and  again:  "The 
Son  of  man  is  Lord  even  of  the  Sabbath  day  " 
(ver.  8).  Must  there  not  have  been  something 
heavenly-majestic  in  His  look  and  bearing  when 
ivords  like  these  were  allowed  to  pass  unchal- 
1  ;nged  by  such  men?  This  consciousness  of 
Gignity  appears  no  less  in  the  argument  by  which 
tlie  second  charge  is  met.  In  proof  of  this  we 
may  point  to  verses  28  and  30;  and  the  same 
impression  is  produced  by  the  solemnly  repeated 
"  I  say  unto  you  "  (vv.  31,  36),  in  each  case  in- 
troducing one  of  those  declarations  of  judgment 
to  which  reference  is  made  in  the  passage  quoted 
from  the  prophet  (vv.  18-20).  Quite  as  con- 
spicuous is  the  same  feature  in  the  third  re- 
monstrance, in  which  He  asserts  His  superiority 
to  the  great  ones  of  the  old  covenant  in  language 
which  acquires,  from  the  connection  in  which 
it  occurs,  a  strength  far  beyond  the  mere  terms 
employed:  "  Behold,  a  greater  than  Jonas,  .  .  . 
behold,  a  greater  than  Solomon,  is  here  "  (vv.  41, 
42).  And  in  the  last  of  the  four  sad  encounters 
the  same  lofty  consciousness  of  peerless  dignity 
i?  manifest.  Son  of  Mary  is  He?  brother  of 
James  and  Joses?  See  Him  lift  His  eyes  to 
heaven,  and  speak  of  "  My  Father,"  and  look 
down  the  ages,  and  out  to  the  uttermost  bounds 
of  earth,  and  say,  "  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will 
47— Vol.  rv. 


of  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is 
My  brother,  and  sister,  and  mother"   (ver.  50). 

4.  We  have  seen  how  kindly  and  patiently  the 
Saviour  deals  with  these  cavillers,  so  as  to  give 
them  every  opportunity  of  seeing  their  folly  and 
wickedness,  and  the  beauty  and  excellence  of  the 
truth  they  are  resisting.  But  He  does  much 
more  than  this.  He  speaks  not  only  so  as  to 
meet  their  objections,  and  give  them  the  oppor- 
tunity of  being  set  right,  but  so  as  to  provide 
instruction,  warning,  and  encouragement  for  all 
succeeding  ages.  To  show  in  any  satisfactory 
way  how  this  is  done  would  require  separate 
treatment  for  each  of  the  four  instances;  but  it 
may  be  possible  in  a  very  brief  way  to  suggest  it. 

The  first  attack  gave  Him  the  opportunity  of 
speaking  on  the  Sabbath  law.  As  we  have  seen, 
He  began  to  treat  the  subject  from  the  strictly 
Jewish  standpoint,  using  the  example  of  David 
and  tlie  ritual  of  the  Temple  to  correct  the  mis- 
apprehensions and  misrepresentations  of  those 
with  whom  in  the  first  instance  He  had  to  do. 
But  He  does  not  leave  it  as  a  mere  Jewish  ques- 
tion; He  broadens  His  view,  and  shows  that 
the  day  of  rest  is  for  humanity  at  large — not, 
however,  as  a  burden,  but  as  a  blessing,  the  prin- 
ciple which  underlies  it  being  "  mercy,  and  not 
sacrifice."  Thus,  out  of  this  conflict  there  has 
come  to  us  the  Magna  Charta  of  the  people's 
Sabbath,  the  full  text  of  which  is  given  in  the 
corresponding  passage  of  the  second  gospel: 
"  The  Sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not  man 
for  the  Sabbath:  therefore  the  Son  of  man  is 
Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath."  Here  we  have,  on 
the  one  hand,  the  vindication  of  our  rights 
against  those  who  would  deprive  us  of  the  day 
of  rest,  as  if  the  privilege  had  been  intended 
only  for  the  Jews,  and  was  abolished  when  the 
dispensation  closed;  and,  on  the  other,  the  as- 
sertion of  our  liberty  against  those  who,  by  their 
petty  regulations  and  restrictions,  would  make 
God's  precious  gift  a  burden  instead  of  a  bless- 
ing. And  how  wisely  and  beautifully  does  He 
confirm  to  us  our  privileges  by  following  the 
charter  with  an  argument  which,  though  coming 
still  under  the  head  of  the  great  principle 
("  Mercy,  and  not  sacrifice  "),  is  no  mere  repe- 
tition, but  illustrates  the  wider  aspect  just  un- 
folded, by  its  freedom  from  Jewish  colour,  and 
its  appeal  to  the  conscience  and  heart  of  man- 
kind at  large:  "  What  man  shall  there  be  among 
you,  that  shall  have  one  sheep,  and  if  it  fall  into 
a  pit  on  the  Sabbath  day,  will  he  not  lay  hold 
on  it,  and  lift  it  out?  How  much,  then,  is  a 
man  better  than  a  sheep?"  (vv.  11,  12). 

The  second  attack  gave  Him  the  opportunity 
of  bringing  out  with  great  distinctness  and  vivid- 
ness the  witness  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  His  work 
as  Saviour  of  mankind.  These  Pharisees  re- 
garded His  miracles  as  mere  displays  of  power, 
apart  altogether  from  the  spirit  of  purity,  mercy, 
and  grace  so  manifest  in  them  all.  It  was  only 
this  narrowness  of  view  that  made  it  possible 
for  them  to  imagine  that  the  Spirit  of  evil,  to 
whom  of  course  no  one  could  deny  a  certain 
measure  of  mere  power,  was  behind  them.  How 
completely  He  answers  their  blasphemous  sug- 
gestion by  showing  that  the  works  He  did, 
judged,  not  by  the  mere  power  they  displayed, 
but  by  their  whole  spirit  and  tendency,  were 
at   the   very   opposite   pole    from   the   works   of 


738 


THE   GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


Satan,  we  plainly  see;  but  the  point  now  is  the 
permanent  value  of  His  reasoning.  At  first  sight 
it  may  seem  to  be  quite  out  of  date.  Whoever 
dreams  now  of  disposing  of  the  works  of  Christ 
by  attributing  them  to  Satan?  Let  us  not  be 
over-hasty,  however,  in  concluding  that  old  ob- 
jections are  out  of  date.  If  we  look  closely  at 
those  regarded  as  the  newest,  we  may  find  that 
they  are  but  old  ones  in  a  new  dress.  What  of 
the  position  taken  by  some  intelligent  men  in  our 
day,  who  candidly  admit  the  power  of  Chris- 
tianity to  elevate  and  sanctify  men,  and  yet  set 
it  down  as  false? 

As  an  illustration  of  this,  we  cannot  do 
better  than  refer  to  a  recent  production  * 
of  the  Agnostic  School,  in  which  there  is 
the  most  emphatic  testimony  to  the  blessed 
power  of  Christianity  in  particular  instances, 
followed  by  these  most  candid  and  generous 
words:  "What  needs  admitting,  or  rather  pro- 
claiming, by  agnostics  who  would  be  just,  is 
that  the  Christian  doctrine  has  the  power  of 
elevating  and  developing  saintliness,  which  has 
had  no  equal  in  any  other  creed  or  philosophy." 
Yet  the  book  in  which  that  sentence  occurs  as- 
sumes throughout  that  this  doctrine,  which  has 
had  no  equal  in  producing  saintliness — a  quality 
which  in  another  place  is  described  as  "  so  lofty, 
so  pure,  so  attractive,  that  it  ravishes  men's 
souls  " — is  untrue!  Is,  then,  the  argument  of  our 
Lord  out  of  date?  and  is  it  too  late  to  ask  the 
old  question,  "  Can  Satan  cast  out  Satan?  " 

It  does  not  always  follow,  of  course,  that  that 
which  is  good  in  its  efifects  in  particular  cases, 
is  thereby  proved  to  be  true.  Truth  and  false- 
hood are  to  be  determined  fundamentally  on 
other  grounds  than  those  of  proved  utility — this 
applies  alike  to  truth  and  duty;  there  is  an  abso- 
lute truth  and  falsehood  quite  irrespective  of 
Utility,  and  there  is  an  absolute  right  and  wrong 
quite  irrespective  of  utility, — but  though  we  can- 
not in  particular  cases  prove  that  to  be  true 
which  appears  to  be  beneficial,  yet  we  cannot 
but  believe  that  in  the  end,  the  true,  the  good, 
and  the  beautiful  will  be  found  to  coincide;  and 
we  maintain  that,  seeing  the  efifects  of  genuine 
Christianity  on  human  character  have  been 
tested  for  nearly  two  thousand  years,  and  have 
been  found  to  "  make  for  righteousness,"  no- 
bility, purity,  all  that  is  good  and  gracious,  high 
and  holy,  it  is  too  late  in  the  day  to  set  it  down 
to  the  father  of  lies.  We  may  be  mistaken  in  our 
passing  judgments,  may  be  misled  into  accept- 
ing as  eternally  true  and  right  some  measure  or 
doctrine  which  has  not  yet  had  time  to  develop 
its  real  nature  and  character,  which  may  produce 
good  results  at  first,  and  then  by  degrees  develop 
other  results  of  quite  a  contrary' kind — take  the 
history  of  Monasticism  as  a  case  in  point;  but 
when  there  have  been  ample  time  and  oppor- 
tunity for  testing  the  fruits  of  a  system,  as  there 
has  been  in  the  case  of  Christianity;  when  we 
observe  that  the  gospel  of  Christ  has  had  these 
wonderful  efifects  through  eighteen  successive 
centuries  among  all  ranks  and  classes,  nations 
and  races  of  men — it  ought  surely  to  require 
something  stronger  than  Agnosticism  (which  at 
the  worst  can  only  say,  "  I  do  not  know  ")  to 
make  us  believe  the  outrageously  improbable 
supposition  that  it  is  false,  and  therefore  pre- 
sumably of  the  kingdom  of  lies  and  of  unclean 
things.  There  have  been  too  many  devils  cast 
out  of  human  hearts  to  make  it  at  all  doubtful 
*  "The  Service  of  Man,"  by  J.  Cotter  Morrison. 


that  in  very  deed  "  the  kingdom  of  God  has 
come  "  among  us  (ver.  28).  There  has  been  too 
much  spoiling  of  "  the  strong  man's  goods  "  to 
make  it  at  all  doubtful  that  "  a  stronger  than 
lie  "  has  mastered  him  and  is  spoiling  his  house. 
"  The  Son  of  God  was  manifested,  that  He  might 
destroy  the  works  of  the  devil"  (i  John  iii.  8); 
and  wherever  He  has  been  admitted  into  human 
hearts  He  has  done  it,  setting  up  His  kingdom 
of  "  righteousness  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy 
Ghost."  The  argument  is  as  fresh  to-day  as  the 
day  it  was  propounded;  and  it  has  now  all  the 
added  strength  of  centuries  of  confirmation. 

The  third  attack  gave  our  Lord  the  oppor- 
tunity of  laying  bare  the  root  of  unbelief,  and 
setting  forth  the  important  truth  that,  when  the 
heart  is  estranged  from  God,  mere  signs  are  un- 
availing. The  signs  He  had  given  in  abundance 
should  have  been  enough,  especially  when  the 
only  way  of  evading  their  force  the  ingenuity  of 
scepticism  could  devise  had  been  closed  by  the 
powerful  argument  just  delivered.  Besides  thiis 
there  was  the  crowning  sign  of  the  resurrection 
still  to  come;  yet  He  knew  that  even  that  would 
fail  to  satisfy — not  for  reasons  intellectual,  but 
because  of  the  spirit  of  the  age-,  as  He  points 
out  in  that  striking  and  powerful  parable  (vv. 
43-45).  and  hints  in  the  suggestive  term,  "  an 
evil  and  adulterous  generation  "  (ver.  39),  the 
word  "  adulterous  "  referring  to  the  well-known, 
and  at  that  time  thoroughly  understood,  Ian  - 
guage  of  the  Old  Testament,  according  to  which 
estrangement  of  heart  from  God  is  branded  as 
spiritual  adultery.  (See  Jeremiah  iii.,  Hosea  i,, 
ii.,   and  many  other  passages.) 

Herein  we  see  a  sufificient  explanation  of  the 
widespread  unbelief  of  the  age  in  which  we  live. 
It  is  because  the  heart  of  this  generation  is  so 
far  estranged  from  God,  so  wedded  to  the  earthly 
and  material,  so  taken  up  with  selfish  aggrandise- 
ment and  the  multiplication  of  the  luxuries  of 
life.  In  many  cases  of  unbelief  the  individual 
is  not  so  much  to  blame  as  the  spirit  of  the 
age  of  which  he  is  the  representative.  Observe 
that  the  Lord  does  not  say,  "  Ye  evil  Pharisees," 
but,  "An  evil  and  adulterous  generation";  thus 
making  it  evident  that  the  spirit  of  scepticism  was 
not  peculiar  to  themselves,  but  a  something  dit- 
fused  throughout  society.  Hence  it  comes  that 
many  men,  of  blameless  lives — of  whom  it  would 
be  a  breach  of  charity  to  say  that  they  loved 
darkness  rather  than  light,  because  their  deeds 
were  evil — nevertheless  declare  themselves  un- 
satisfied with  the  signs  of  the  divine  mission  of 
Christ  our  Lord.  Why  is  this?  It  is  because 
they  are  infected  with  the  spirit  of  the  age,  en- 
grossed with  the  material,  the  sensible,  the 
secular;  while  their  hearts,  "  swept  and  gar- 
nished"  though  they  be,  are  "empty"  of  God: 
"  The  god  of  this  world  hath  blinded  the  minds 
of  the  unbelieving,  that  the  light  of  the  gospel 
of  the  glory  of  Christ,  Who  is  the  image  of 
God,  should  not  dawn  upon  them  "  (2  Cor.  iv.  4, 
R.  v.). 

Such  persons  not  only  cannot  recognise  the 
signs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  but  are  in  a 
state  of  heart  and  mind  to  which  no  sign  can 
possibly  be  given.  We  are  indebted  to  the  fine 
candour  of  the  late  Mr.  Darwin  for  a  striking 
illustration  of  this.  In. his  Life  there  is  an  inter- 
esting correspondence  with  Professor  Asa  Gray, 
the  great  botanist,  who,  wondering  how  Darwin 
could  remain  unconvinced  by  the  innumerable 
evidences  of  design  in  nature,  took  the  liberty 


Matthew  xi.,  xii.] 


THE  SHADOW  OF  THE  CROSS. 


739 


of  asking  him  if  he  could  think  of  any  possible 
proof  which  he  would  consider  sufficient.  To 
this  Mr.  Darwin  replied:  "  Your  question, 
'  What  would  convince  me?  '  is  a  poser.  If  I 
saw  an  angel  come  down  to  teach  us  so,  and 
I  was  convinced,  from  others  seeing  him,  that 
I  was  not  mad,  I  should  believe."  If  he  had 
left  it  there,  it  might  have  been  pertinent  to 
ask  him  whether  Christ  is  not  just  such  an  angel 
come  down  from  heaven  to  teach  us,  and  whether 
a  sufficient  number  of  persons  did  not  see  Him 
in  the  flesh,  to  say  nothing  of  the  multitudes  who 
know  Him  in  the  spirit,  to  convince  us  that  we 
are  not  mad  in  believing  it.  He  did  not,  how- 
ever, leave  it  there,  but  went  on  to  say:  "  If 
man  was  made  of  brass  and  iron,  and  in  no  way 
connected  with  any  other  organism  which  had 
ever  lived,  I  should  perhaps  be  convinced." 
Nothing  could  be  more  candid,  or  more  in  keep- 
ing with  the  transparent  honesty  of  this  great 
man.  But  what  an  acknowledgment!  Man 
must  cease  to  be  man,  and  become  a  metal  ma- 
chine, and  the  universe  must  cease  to  be  a  har- 
monious whole,  before  there  can  be  evidence 
enough  for  so  simple  and  elementary  a  principle 
as  design  in  the  universe:  and  then  only  a  "  per- 
haps "!  If  all  this  were  done  for  me,  "  I  should 
perhaps  be  convinced."  Is  our  Lord's  answer  to 
the  seekers  after  a  sign  out  of  date?  "  Verily 
I  say  unto  you.  There  shall  no  sign  be  given 
unto  this  generation  "  (Mark  viii.  12).  How 
could  there  be? 

What  will  He  make  of  the  distressing  inter- 
ruption caused  by  the  interference  of  His  mother 
and  brethren?  Knowing  their  motives  and  in- 
tentions as  He  did,  He  could  not  for  a  moment 
yield;  and  how  was  it  possible  to  deal  with  them 
without  a  public  rebuke,  from  which,  seeing  that 
His  mother  was  involved  in  it.  His  heart  would 
instinctively  shrink?  It  was  a  most  painful  posi- 
tion; and  the  more  we  think  of  it,  and  try  to 
imagine  possible  ways  of  extrication,  the  more 
we  must  admire  the  wisdom  and  kindness  shown 
in  the  way  in  which  He  confronted  the  difficulty. 
He  makes  use  of  the  opportunity  for  giving  a 
new  and  most  winning  view  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  as  a  happy  family,  united  each  to  Him- 
self, and  all  to  the  Father  by  the  holiest  bonds; 
thus  opening  out  the  paradise  of  a  perfect  home 
to  a'l  who  choose  to  enter  it,  taking  the  sacred 
ties  involved  in  the  sweet  words  "  brother  "  and 
"  sister "  and  "  mother,"  and  giving  them  a 
range,  a  dignity,  and  a  permanence  they  never 
had  before. 

In  all  this  there  was  no  word  of  direct  censure; 
yet  the  sadly  mistaken  conduct  of  His  kindred 
did  not  pass  without  implied  rebuke:  for  the 
effect  of  His  words  was  to  make  it  clear  that, 
sacred  as  were,  in  His  eyes,  the  ties  of  earth,  their 
only  hope  of  permanence  was  in  alliance  with 
(■he  higher  ties  of  heaven.  He  has  come  in  the 
loving  Father's  name  to  gather  in  His  wan- 
dering children:  and  if  His  mother  and  brethren 
according  to  the  flesh  attempt  to  hinder  Him, 
He  cannot  listen  to  them  for  a  moment,  but 
must  steel  His  heart  against  their  blind  appeals, 
and  that,  not  only  for  His  works'  sake,  but  for 
Hieirs  also.  They  are  slow  to  believe:  but  t'ne 
least  likely  way  to  bring  them  to  faith  would 
he  to  yield  to  their  unbelief.  He  will  prosecute 
the  path  of  duty,  though  it  involve  the  sacrifice 
of  all  that  cheers  and  comforts  His  heart;  He 
must  set  His  face  as  a  flint  to  finish  the  work 


His  Father  has  given  Him  to  do,  and  they  will 
understand  Him  by-and-by.  There  is  no  doubt 
they  would  go  home  with  sore  hearts  that  day; 
but  no  very  long  time  would  elapse  till  they 
would  all  be  most  grateful  that  their  foolish, 
however  well-meant,  interference  had  failed  of 
its  intent. 

The  course  of  events  in  later  times  has  proved 
that  the  gentle  rebuke  involved  in  our  Lord's 
reception  of  the  message  from  His  mother  was 
not  only  necessary  at  the  time  and  for  her,  but 
for  the  ages  to  come  as  well.  We  have  seen 
that,  in  each  of  the  attacks  recorded  before,  our 
Saviour  replies  in  such  a  way  that  His  words  not 
only  meet  the  objection  of  the  moment,  but  con- 
tinue of  permanent  value  to  meet  similar  objec- 
tions and  gainsayings  in  ages  to  come.  So  is  it 
here.  It  certainly  is  no  fault  of  Mary  herself, 
whose  name  should  ever  be  held  in  the  highest 
respect  by  all  who  love  the  Lord,  that  a  corrupt 
Church,  reversing  all  the  teaching  of  the 
Church's  Head,  not  only  elevated  the  earthly  re- 
lationship far  above  the  spiritual,  but  in  virtue 
of  this  relationship  put  the  mother  in  the  place 
of  the  Son,  and  taught  an  ignorant  people  to 
worship  her  and  trust  in  her  as  a  mediator.  But 
the  fact  that  this  was  done,  and  is  persisted  in  to 
this  day,  shows  that  when  our  Lord  set  aside  the 
mere  earthly  relationship  as  one  that  must  be 
merged  in  the  spiritual,  He  was  correcting  not 
only  a  pardonable  error  of  Mary,  but  a  most 
unpardonable  error  that  afterwards,  without  any 
encouragement  whatever  from  her,  should  be 
committed  in  her  name. 

After  all,  however,  it  is  not  the  setting  aside 
of  the  claims  of  Mary  and  the  lowering  of  the 
earthly  relationship  in  comparison  with  the 
heavenly,  which  is  the  great  thing  in  the  passage; 
but  the  Gospel  of  the  Family  of  God.  We  have 
had  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  and 
glad  tidings  it  has  been  indeed;  but  have  we  not 
here  something  even  better?  It  is  much  to  be 
permitted  to  hail  the  Son  of  God  as  our  King; 
is  it  not  better  still  to  be  encouraged  to  hail 
Him  as  a  Brother,  to  know  that  all  that  is 
sweetest  and  tenderest  in  the  dear  words 
"  brother,"  "  sister,"  "  mother/'  can  be  imported 
into  our  relation  to  Him?  How  it  endears  the 
heavenly  relationship,  and  hallows  the  earthly! 

Again,  how  it  rebukes  all  sectarianism!  He 
"  stretches  out  His  hand  towards  His  disciples," 
and  then  to  all  the  world  by  that  v/ord  "  whoso- 
ever." And  it  is  not  the  mere  promise  of  salva- 
tion with  which  this  "  whosoever  "  is  connected. 
There  are  Christians  in  the  present  da}'  who  can 
scarcely  allow  themselves  to  be  sectarian  enough 
to  deny  that  there  is  salvation  out  of  the  Church 
to  which  they  happen  to  belong:  they  are  good 
enough  to  think  that  these  people  who  do  not 
follow  with  them  may  somehow  or  other  be 
saved:  but  the  idea  of  fraternising  with  them! 
that  is  quite  another  thing.  Now  listen  to  the 
Saviour  Himself:  "  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will 
of  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven  "  (no  question 
of  what  Church  he  belongs  to,  or  anything  of 
that  sort),  "  the  same  is  My  brother,  and  sister, 
and  mother."  No  arm's-length  recognition 
there:  He  takes  all  true  disciples  to  His  heart. 

Observe,  moreover,  the  emphasis  on  doing, 
with  which  we  are  already  familiar.  In  setting 
forth  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom,  our  Lord  was 
careful  to  warn  His  hearers:  "  Not  every  one 
that  saith  unto  Me,  Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven;   but  he  that  doeth  the 


740 


■THE    GOSPEL    OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


will  of  My  Father"  (vii.  21);  and  now  that  He 
is  setting  forth  the  Gospel  of  the  Family  the 
emphasis  is  still  in  the  same  place.  It  is  not 
"  Whosoever  shall  connect  himself  with  this 
church  or  that  church;"  it  is  not  "Whosoever 
shall  be  baptised,  and  take  the  sacrament;  "  it  is 
"  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  My  Father  in 
heaven."  This  emphasis  on  doing,  in  connection 
with  these  endearing  relations,  is  most  signifi- 
cant. There  must  be  love  among  the  members 
of  the  family:  and  what  else  than  love  is  the  char- 
acteristic  of  the  family  ties?  But  how  is  love  to 
be  shown?  How  are  we  to  distinguish  it  from 
mere  sentiment?  Our  Saviour  is  careful  to 
teach  us;  and  never  is  He  more  careful  than  in 
those  passages  where  tender  feeling  is  most 
prominent — as,  for  example,  in  His  parting 
words  in  the  upper  room,  where  again  and  again 
He  reminds  His  disciples  that  obedience  is  the 
only  sure  test  of  love:  "  If  ye  love  Me,  keep 
My  commandments;  "  "  He  that  hath  My  com- 
mandments, and  keepeth  them,  he  it  is  that  lov- 
eth  Me  "  (John  xiv.  15,  21).  For  the  same  rea- 
son obedience  is  here  set  forth  as  the  only  cer- 
tain mark  of  the  true  disciple:  "  Whosoever  shall 
do  the  will  of  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven,  the 
same  is  My  brother,  and  sister,  and  mother." 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  PARABLES  OF  THE  KINGDOM. 

Matthew  xiii. 

"  The  same  day  went  Jesus  out  of  the  house, 
and  sat  by  the  sea  side."  We  can  well  imagine 
that,  after  such  a  series  of  discouragements  and 
mortifications,  the  weary  and  heavy-laden  Sav- 
iour would  long  to  be  alone,  to  get  away  from 
the  abodes  of  men,  to  some  lonely  place  where 
silent  nature  around  Him  would  calm  His  spirit 
and  furnish  a  temple  in  which  He  might  lift  up 
His  soul  to  God.  How  long  He  was  allowed  to 
be  alone  we  cannot  tell;  but  possibly  He  may 
have  contrived  for  a  time  to  remain  unobserved. 
How  burdened  His  spirit  must  have  been!  What 
strength  of  faith  it  must  have  needed  to  look 
forward  with  any  hope  to  the  future  of  His  work 
at  such  a  time  of  crushing  disappointment!  We 
must  remember  that  He  was  true  man,  and 
therefore  His  heart  must  have  been  very  sore  as 
He  dwelt  on  the  painful  experiences  through 
which  He  had  just  been  passing.  The  obstacles 
which  lay  right  in  His  path  must  have  seemed 
well-nigh  insuperable;  and  it  would  have  been 
no  wonder  if  at  such  a  time  He  had  despaired  of 
the  prospects  of  the  kingdom  of  righteousness 
and  peace  and  joy  He  had  come  to  set  up  on 
the  earth.  He  did  not  despair;  but  He  did  most 
deeply  ponder;  and  the  result  of  His  thinking 
appears  in  the  series  of  parables  recorded  in  this 
chapter,  which  set  forth,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
nature  of  the  obstacles  the  kingdom  must  meet, 
and  the  reason  why  it  must  meet  them,  and  on 
the  other,  its  certain  prospect,  notwithstanding 
these,  of  growth  and  development  onward  to  its 
final  consummation. 

If  He  was  permitted  to  enjoy  His  seclusion,  it 
was  only  for  a^  short  time.  "He  could  not  be 
hid,"  His  quiet  retreat  was  discovered;  and  pres- 
ently there  came  to  Him  great  multitudes,  so 
many  that  the'  only  convenient  way  to  address 
them  all  was  to  get  into  a  boat,  and  speak  to  the 


people  gathered  on  the  shore.  It  is  a  lovely 
picture:  the  multitudes  on  the  shore  with  the 
green  fields  around  and  the  hills  behind,  and 
the  Master  speaking  from  the  little  boat. 
Viewed  apart  from  the  sorrowful  experience  of 
the  past,  it  would  have  been  full  of  cheer  and 
hope.  What  more  encouraging  sight  than  such 
a  throng  gathered  to  hear  the  words  of  light  and 
hope  He  had  for  them?  But  how  can  He  view 
it  apart  from  the  sorrowful  experience  of  the 
past?  Have  not  these  crowds  been  around  Him 
day  after  day,  week  after  week;  and  what  has 
come  of  it  all? 

It  is  one  thing  to  sow  the  seed  of  the  king- 
dom; it  is  quite  another  to  gather  the  harvest. 
The  result  depends  on  the  soil.  Some  of  it  may 
be  hard,  so  that  the  seed  cannot  enter;  some  of 
it,  though  receptive  on  the  surface,  yet  so  rocky 
underneath,  that  the  fairest  shoots  will  wither 
in  a  day;  some  of  it  so  filled  with  seeds  of  thorns 
and  weeds  that  plants  of  grace  are  choked  as  they 
attempt  to  grow;  while  only  a  portion,  and  it 
may  be  a  small  proportion  of  the  whole,  can 
yield  a  fair  or  full  return.  Such  were  His 
thoughts  as  He  looked  on  the  field  of  men  before 
Him,  and  glanced  from  it  to  the  fields  of  the 
plain  of  Gennesaret  around,  in  the  foreground  of 
which  as  in  a  picture  the  multitudes  were  set. 
As  He  thought,  so  He  spoke,  using  the  one 
field  as  a  parable  of  the  other,  thus  veiling,  and 
at  the  same  time  beautifully  revealing.  His 
thought  in  a  figure,  which,  simple  as  it  was,  de- 
manded some  degree  of  spiritual  understanding 
for  its  appreciation;  and  accordingly  after  speak- 
ing the  parable  He  adds  the  suggestive  word, 
"  Who  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear." 

There  is  something  very  touching  in  that  word. 
It  thrills  with  the  pathos  of  these  preceding 
chapters  of  disappointment.  He  had  such  a  mes- 
sage for  them — good  tidings  of  great  joy,  rest 
for  the  weary  and  heavy  laden,  words  of  life  and 
light  and  hope  eternal — if  only  there  were  ears 
10  hear.  But  that  sad  passage  of  Isaiah  is  run- 
ning in  His  mind:  "  By  hearing  ye  shall  hear, 
and  shall  not  understand;  and  seeing  ye  shall  see, 
and  shall  not  perceive:  for  this  people's  heart  is 
waxed  gross,  and  their  ears  are  dull  of  hearing, 
and  their  eyes  they  have  closed;  lest  at  any  time 
they  should  see  with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with 
their  ears,  and  should  understand  with  their 
heart,  and  should  be  converted,  and  I  should  heal 
them."  That  is  the  great  obstacle,  the  one  hin- 
drance. Oh!  if  only  men  would  hear;  if  only 
they  would  not  close  the  ears  of  their  souls! 
"  Who  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear." 

I.  The  Principle  of  Parabolic  Instruction. 

The  parable  is  a  new  style  of  teaching  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  which  the  "  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  "  was  so  notable  an  example.  That  dis- 
course was  not  by  ^ny  means  lacking  in  illus- 
tration; still  its  main  lines  of  thought  were  of  the 
nature  of  direct  spiritual  instruction.  'But  here 
there  is  no  direct  spiritual  teaching.  It  is  all 
indirect;  it  is  parabolic  through  and  through. 
No  wonder  the  disciples  noticed  the  difference, 
and  came  to  the  Master  with  the  question, 
"  Why  speakest  Thou  unto  them  in  parables?  " 
The  answer  He  gives  is  a  revelation  of  the 
thoughts  which  have  been  passing  in  His  mind. 
Of  this  disclosure  we  have  already  availed  our- 
selves in  our  attempt  to  picture  the  scene;  but 
it  remains  to   look  at  this   weighty  passage  as 


Matthew  xiii.] 


THE    PARABLES    OF   THE    KINGDOM. 


741 


answering  the  disciples'  question,  and  so  explain- 
ing the  rise  of  that  form  of  instruction  in  which, 
as  in  all  that  He  did,  He  showed  himself  a  per- 
fect Master. 

The  whole  thing  turns  on  the  distinction  be- 
tween earnest  inquirers  and  careless  hearers. 
There  must  have  been  many  of  the  latter  in  His 
audience,  for  this  was  no  selected  company,  like 
that  which  listened  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
The  earnest  inquirer  has  ears  to  hear;  the  other 
has  not.  The  difference  this  makes  is  most 
strikingly  set  forth  in  the  strong  declaration: 
"  Whosoever  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given,  and  he 
shall  have  more  abundance:  but  whosoever  hath 
not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  he 
hath," — that  is,  instead  of  being  the  better  for 
what  he  has  heard,  he  is  the  worse;  not  appre- 
hending the  truth,  he  is  only  perplexed  and  con- 
fused by  it,  and  instead  of  going  away  enriched, 
he  is  poorer  than  ever. 

What,  then,  is  to  be  done?  If,  instead  of  do- 
ing the  people  good,  it  only  does  them  harm, 
why  try  to  teach  them  at  all?  Why  not  let  them 
alone,  till  they  come  with  ears  to  hear,  ready 
to  receive?  Happily  this  sad  alternative  is  not 
the  only  resource.  The  truth  may  be  put  in 
such  a  way  that  it  has  both  a  shell  and  kernel 
of  meaning;  and  the  kernel  may  be  so  inclosed  in 
the  shell  that  it  can  be  kept  safely  there,  ready 
for  the  time  when  the  inner  fruit,  which  is  the 
true  food  of  the  soul,  can  be  used.  For  this 
purpose  the  parable  is  pre-eminently  serviceable. 
The  shell  of  meaning  is  so  simple  and  familiar, 
that  even  a  child  can  understand  it;  being  of  the 
nature  of  a  story,  it  is  very  easily  remembered; 
and  connected  as  it  is  with  that  which  is  fre- 
quently observed,  it  will  come  up  again  and 
again  to  the  minds  of  those  in  whom  the  thought 
has  been  lodged;  so  that,  even  if,  on  first  hear- 
ing it,  there  is  no  possibility  of  understanding 
its  deep  spiritual  significance,  the  time  may  come 
when  it  will  flash  upon  the  spirit  the  light  which 
has  been  concealed  within  and  so  preserved  from 
waste. 

Take  this  parable  of  "  The  Sower  "  as  an  illus- 
tration. The  disciples,  having  ears  to  hear,  were 
ready  to  get  the  good  of  it  at  once,  so  to  them 
He  expounds  it  (vv.  18-23)  on  the  spot.  The 
rest  were  not  ready  to  receive  and  apply  it. 
Having  ears  (but  not  ears  to  hear),  they  heard 
not;  but  did  it  follow  from  this  that  it  was  use- 
less, even  worse  than  useless,  to  give  it  them? 
Had  the  teaching  been  direct,  it  would  have  been 
so;  for  they  would  have  heard  and  rejected,  and 
that  would  have  been  the  last  of  it.  But  put 
as  it  was  in  parabolic  form,  while  they  were 
not  prepared  to  understand  and  apply  it  then, 
they  could  not  but  carry  it  away  with  them;  and, 
as  they  walked  the  fields,  and  observed  the  birds 
picking  the  seeds  from  the  trodden  field-paths, 
or  the  tiny  plants  withering  on  the  rocky  ledges, 
or  the  springing  wheat  strangled  with  rank 
growths  of  thorns,  or  the  healthy  growing  wheat 
plant,  or  later  in  the  season  the  rich  golden  grain 
on  the  good  soil,  they  would  have  opportunity 
after  opportunity  of  getting  a  glimpse  of  the 
truth,  and  finding  that  which  at  the  first  they 
were  so  unprepared  to  receive. 

In  this  we  can  see  the  harmony  of  the  passage 
before  us,  with  its  parallels  in  the  second  and 
third  Gospels,  where  the  object  of  speaking  in 
parables  is  represented  as  being  "  that  seeing, 
they  might  not  see,  and  hearing  they  might  not 
undersfand  "  (see  Mark  iv.  12,  and  Luke  viii.  10). 


It  is  true  that  the  object  of  the  parable  was  to 
veil  as  well  as  to  reveal;  and  the  effect,  which 
was  also  an  intended  eflfect,  was  to  veil  it  from 
the  unprepared  heart  and  reveal  it  to  the  heart 
prepared;  but  inasmuch  as  the  heart  which  is  un- 
prepared to-day  may  be  prepared  to-morrow,  or 
next  month,  or  next  year,  the  parable  may  serve, 
and  was  intended  to  serve,  the  double  purpose  of 
veiling  it  and  revealing  it  to  the  same  person — 
veiling  it  from  him  as  long  as  his  heart  was 
gross,  but  revealing  it  to  him  as  soon  as  he 
should  turn  to  the  Lord  and  be  willing  to  use 
his  spiritual  powers  of  apprehension  for  the  pur- 
pose for  which  they  had  been  given  him.  Thus, 
while  this  method  of  instruction  was  of  the  na- 
ture of  judgment  on  the  hardhearted  for  the  mo- 
ment, it  was  really  in  the  deepest  sense  a  device 
of  love,  to  prolong  the  time  of  their  opportunity, 
to  give  them  repeated  chances  instead  of  only 
one.  It  was  judgment  for  the  moment,  with  a 
view  to  mercy  in  the  time  to  come.  So  we  find, 
as  always,  that  even  when  our  Saviour  seems  to 
deal  harshly  with  men.  His  deepest  thoughts  are 
thoughts  of  love;  and  in  His  recourse  to  the 
parabolic  veil.  He  is  once  more  illustrating  the 
truth  of  the  prophet's  description  of  Him  cited 
in  the  foregoing  chapter:  "  A  bruised  reed  shall 
He  not  break,  and  smoking  flax  shall  He  not 
quench,  till  He  send  forth  judgment  unto  vic- 
tory." 

How  many  difificulties  might  have  been  avoided 
if  expositors  had  used  less  of  the  mere  "  dry 
light  "  of  the  understanding,  and  tried  more  to 
lay  their  hearts  alongside  the  beating  heart  of 
Christ!  "  Is  not  my  word  like  as  a  fire?  saith 
the.  Lord."  Had  this  been  remembered,  and  the 
fire  of  love  in  such  a  passage  as  this  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  heart,  before  it  was  used  "  like 
a  hammer  that  breaketh  the  rock  in  pieces,"  how 
different  in  many  cases  would  have  been  the  re- 
sult! It  is  sad  to  think  that  this  very  passage 
as  to  the  object  of  the  parables  has  been  used  as 
if  it  simply  taught  predestination  in  its  hardest 
sense,  dooming  the  poor  misguided  soul  to  hope- 
lessness for  ever;  whereas,  if  we  enter  at  all  into 
sympathy  with  the  Saviour's  heart  in  the  sad  and 
trying  circumstances  in  which  the  words  were 
spoken,  we  find  in  it  no  harshness  at  all,  but  the 
yearning  of  a  patient  love,  seeking  if  by  any 
means  He  may  reach  and  gain  the  lost. 

We  have,  indeed,  the  evidence  on  every  side 
that  the  Saviour's  heart  was  greatly  moved  at  this 
time.  We  have  already  recognised  the  pathos  of 
the  cry,  "  Who  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear." 
We  have  seen  the  sorrow  of  His  heart  in  the 
sad  quotation  from  the  prophet  Isaiah.  On  the 
ether  hand,  what  joy  He  has  in  those  who  do 
see  and  hear! — "  But  blessed  are  your  eyes,  for 
they  see;  and  your  ears,  for  they  hear.  For 
verily  I  say  unto  you.  That  many  prophets  and 
righteous  men  have  desired  to  see  those  things 
which  ye  see,  and  have  not  seen  them;  and  to 
hear  those  things  which  ye  hear,  and  have  not 
heard  them."  The  same  satisfaction  appears 
later  (ver.  51),  when,  after  finishing  the  series. 
He  asks  His  disciples,  "  Have  ye  understood  all 
these  things?"  and  they  say  unto  Him,  "Yea, 
Lord."  He  adds,  "  Therefore  every  scribe  which 
is  instructed  unto  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like 
unto  a  man  that  is  an  householder,  which  bring- 
eth  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old." 
The  Saviour  evidently  rejoices  in  the  thought 
that  these  disciples,  having  ears  to  hear,  are  mak- 
ing real  progress, — so  much  so  that  in  due  time 


74« 


THE   GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


they  will  be  ready  to  be  teachers  of  others,  each 
having  a  treasury  of  his  own;  and  not  only  will 
they  be  in  possession  of  the  old,  but  will  have 
power  to  strike  out  new  views  of  sacred  truth, 
and  so  be  prepared  with  freshness  and  variety 
to  set  forth  the  glad  tidings  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  How  fully  these  hopes  were  realised 
we  have  only  to  look  forward  to  the  epistles  to 
see.  There  we  have  things  old,  the  very  truths  the 
Master  taught  in  the  days  of  His  flesh;  and  not 
the  old  alone,  for  there  are  things  new  as  well, 
fresh  settings  of  the  old,  new  aspects,  varied 
applications  of  the  truth — a  treasury  indeed  for 
the  ages  to  come.  The  Saviour,  then,  had  good 
reason  to  take  comfort  that  some  of  the  seed 
He  was  sowing  in  tears  was  falling  on  good  soil, 
and  promising  a  rich  and  blessed  harvest. 

But  the  dark  and  discouraging  side  is  never 
long  out  of  sight.  Returning  to  His  own  coun- 
try, and  teaching  in  their  synagogue,  He  so  im- 
pressed the  people  that  they  could  not  but  ask 
certain  questions,  which,  if  they  had  only  pon- 
dered them,  would  have  led  them  to  the  truth: 
"  Whence  hath  this  man  this  wisdom,  and  these 
mighty  works?"  But  the  mere  outside  things 
that  met  their  eyes  so  engrossed  their  attention, 
that  their  heads  and  hearts  remained  as  empty 
as  ever.  Instead  of  pressing  the  question 
Whence f  which  would  have  led  them  up  to 
heaven  and  to  God,  they  dwelt  upon  "  this 
man,"  this  common  man,  this  carpenter's  son, 
with  a  mother  called  Mary,  and  brothers  with 
the  common  names,  James  and  Joseph,  Simon 
and  Judas;  so,  proving  themselves  to  be  of  the 
earth  earthy,  they  closed  their  ears  and  were 
"  offended  in  Him."  It  was  very  evident  that 
the  only  hope  of  reaching  people  of  that  kind  was 
to  speak  in  parables,  which  they  could  remember 
without  understanding  in  the  meantime,  with  the 
hope  that  by-and-by  as  they  thought  of  the  sub- 
ject without  such  prejudices  as  these  which  now 
cause  them  to  stumble,  they  may  at  last  under- 
stand, and  receive  the  truth  and  inherit  eternal 
life. 

II.  The  Group  of  Seven. 

So  far  we  have  dealt  with  the  parabolic 
method  of  teaching,  and  in  doing  so  have  glanced 
at  only  one  of  the  seven  parables  the  chapter 
contains,  every  one  of  which  invites  special  study; 
but  inasmuch  as  our  plan  will  not  admit  of  this, 
we  shall  attempt  nothing  more  than  a  general 
view  of  the  entire  group;  and  to  this  we  restrict 
ourselves  the  more  willingly  that  there  is  a  unity 
in  the  cluster  which  is  apt  to  escape  notice  when 
they  are  considered  apart,  and  because  by  letting 
go  the  details  we  get  the  prominent  features 
more  vividly  before  our  minds. 

The  arrangement  seems  to  be  in  three  pairs, 
with  a  single  concluding  parable.  The  first  pair 
— "  The  Sower  "  and  "  The  Tares  " — set  forth  the 
manner  of  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  and  the  obstacles  it  must  encounter. 
The  sphere  from  which  both  parables  are  taken  is 
admirably  suited  to  bring  out  the  radical  dis- 
tinction in  regard  to  the  manner  of  its  establish- 
ment between  the  new  kingdom  and  those  with 
which  the  people  were  already  familiar.  They 
were  founded  by  the  sword;  this  kingdom  by 
the  Word.  Net  force,  but  persuasion,  is  to  be 
the  weapon;  and  accordingly  there  is  placed  be- 
fore the  mind,  not  a  warrior  hasting  to  battle, 
but   a   sower    sowing   seed.     "  The    field    is    the 


world,"  we  are  told — the  world  of  men,  of  human 
hearts;  and  the  seed  is  "  the  word  of  the  king- 
dom." It  is  "  good  seed,"  and  therefore  it  ought 
to  be  welcome;  but  there  are  serious  obstacles 
in  the  way. 

The  first  parable  sets  forth  the  obstacles  en- 
countered in  the  soil  itself.  Sometimes  the  seed 
falls  on  hard  soil,  where  it  cannot  penetrate  the 
surface,  and  presently  birds  come  and  carry  it 
away — representing  those  hearers  of  the  word 
who,  though  they  remember  it  for  a  short  time, 
have  their  hearts  hardened  against  it,  so  that  it 
does  not  enter,  but  is  presently  snatched  away 
by  trifling  worldly  thoughts  which  come  flut- 
tering into  the  mind.  Then  there  is  the  shallow 
soil,  a  little  loose  earth  on  the  surface,  and  close 
under  it  the  hard  rock,  harder  even  than  the 
trodden  wayside — a  kind  of  soil  in  which  the 
seed  will  rapidly  take  root  and  spring  up,  and 
as  rapidly  wither  away  in  the  noonday  heat,  and 
which  therefore  fitly  represents  those  who  are 
easily  impressed,  but  whose  impressions  do  nol 
last;  who  make  many  resolutions  indeed,  but  in 
so  half-hearted  and  impulsive  a  way  that  they  are 
destined  to  be  blighted  by  the  first  blast  of 
temptation.  Finally,  there  is  the  preoccupied  soil, 
where  thorns  and  thistles  hold  the  ground  and 
choke  the  springing  plants  of  grace,  representing 
those  who  "  are  choked  with  cares,  and  riches 
and  pleasures  of  this  life,  and  bring  no  fruit  to 
maturity." 

The  good  soil  is  marked  by  characteristics 
which  are  simply  the  negatives  of  these:  it  is  not 
hard,  so  the  seed  enters;  not  shallow,  so  it  takes 
root;  not  preoccupied,  so  it  holds  the  ground, 
and  springs  up  and  brings  forth  fruit,  "  in  some 
thirty,  in  some  sixty,  in  some  a  hundred-fold." 

There  are,  however,  other  obstacles  than  those 
found  in  the  nature  of  the  soil.  There  is  the 
diligence  of  the  enemy,  and  the  impossibility  ol 
getting  rid  of  those  who  have  come  under  his 
influence,  as  set  forth  in  the  second  parable,  that 
of  "  The  Tares  of  the  Field."  In  this  parable 
the  good  seed  is  no  longer  the  word,  but  "  the 
children  of  the  kingdom";  as  if  to  suggest  that 
Christians  themselves  are  to  be  to  the  world 
what  the  word  has  been  to  them;  while  the  bad 
seed — sown  when  men  sleep,  sown  when  Chris* 
tians  are  asleep — does  not  remain  as  mere  seed, 
but  embodies  itself  in  "  children  of  the  v/icked 
one,"  who  take  their  places  side  by  side  with 
the  true  children  of  the  kingdom,  and  whom 
it  is  so  difficult  to  distinguish  from  them,  that 
the  separation  may  not  be  attempted  till  the  time 
of  the  harvest,  when  it  shall  be  complete  and 
final,  and  "  the  righteous  shall  shine  forth  as 
the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their  Father." 

The  second  pair—"  The  Mustard  Seed "  and 
"  The  Leaven  " — set  forth  the  growth  of  the 
kingdom  notwithstanding  the  many  obstacles  it 
must  encounter,  the  one  indicating  its  growth 
as  recognisable  to  the  observant  eye,  the  other 
its  pervasive  power  as  permeating  society.  This 
twofold  view  of  the  development  of  the  kingdom 
is  in  the  same  line  of  thought  as  the  illustrations 
of  the  light  and  the  salt  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  The  prophecy  these  parables  infold  is 
most  marvellous,  spoken  as  it  was  in  a  time  of 
so  deep  discouragement.  There  is  true  pathos 
in  the  thought  of  the  grain  of  mustard  seed, 
"  the  least  of  all  seeds,"  and  in  the  little  word 
''  hid,"  which  comes  in  so  significantly  in  the 
parable  of  the  Leaven;  and  there  is  great 
strength    of   faith    in    the    readiness    of   mind   to 


Matthew  xiv.-xvi.  12.] 


THE    CRISIS    IN    GALILEE. 


743 


recognise  the  hopeful  thought  of  the  inherent 
life  and  energy  hidden  in  the  tiny  germ,  and 
working  all  unseen  in  the  little  leaven  which 
literally  disappeared  in  the  at  first  unaltered 
mass. 

The  parables  of  "  The  Hid  Treasure "  and 
"  The  Pearl  "  form  a  third  pair,  shadowing  forth 
the  unsearchable  riches  of  Christ.  The  redupli- 
cation of  the  thought  adds  greatly  to  its  impres- 
siveness,  and  moreover  aflfords  the  opportunity 
of  suggested  variation  in  the  experience  of  those 
who  find  the  treasure.  The  merchantman  we 
naturally  think  of  as  representing  the  rich,  and 
the  man  finding  the  treasure  in  the  field  as  one 
of  the  poor  in  this  world's  goods.  Both  alike, 
however,  "  buy  "  their  prize  at  the  price  of  all 
that  they  possess,  on  the  principle  which  under- 
lies all  our  Lord's  teaching  as  to  the  way  of 
life:  "  Whosoever  he  be  of  you  that  forsaketh 
not  all  that  he  hath  cannot  be  My  disciple."  The 
one  comes  upon  his  treasure  unexpectedly;  the 
other  finds  it  in  the  course  of  diligent  search. 
Both  alike,  however,  recognise  its  exceeding 
value  as  soon  as  it  is  seen;  and  it  is  under  no 
Lonstraint,  but  willingly  and  gladly — "  for  joy 
*hereof,"  as  it  is  put  in  the  case  of  the  man  who 
from  his  not  seeking  it  might  have  been  thought 
indifferent  to  it — that  each  one  sells  all  that  he 
has  and  buys  it. 

The  last  parable,  according  to  the  arrangement 
we  have  suggested,  stands  alone.  It  is  the  para- 
ble of  "  The  Net,"  and  its  subject  is  the  con- 
summation of  the  Kingdom.  Its  teaching  is  in- 
deed to  a  great  extent  anticipated  in  the  parable 
of  the  tares  of  the  field;  but  in  that  parable, 
though  "  the  end  of  the  world  "  is  pictured  in 
the  most  impressive  imagery,  it  is  not  the  main 
thought,  as  it  is  here,  where  the  one  lesson  is, 
that  the  present  mixed  state  of  things  cannot 
continue  for  ever,  that  there  must  come  a  time 
of  separation,  when  those  in  whose  hearts  God 
reigns  shall  be  gathered  to  a  place  by  themselves, 
where  they  shall  be  satisfied  for  ever,  with  their 
treasure  no  longer  hid,  but  open  in  all  its  im- 
measurable fulness;  while  those  who  refused  to 
allow  God  to  reign  in  their  hearts,  and  preferred 
their  own  selfishness  and  sin,  shall  be  cast  away 
and  consumed,  with  "  wailing  and  gnashing  of 
teeth." 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE  CRISIS  IN  GALILEE. 

Matthew  xiv.-xvi.   12. 

The  lives  of  John  and  of  Jesus,  lived  so  far 
apart,  and  with  so  little  intercommunication, 
have  yet  been  interwoven  in  a  remarkable  way, 
the  connection  only  appearing  at  the  most  criti- 
cal times  in  the  life  of  our  Lord.  This  inter- 
weaving, strikingly  anticipated  in  the  incidents 
of  the  nativity  as  recorded  by  St.  Luke,  appears, 
not  only  at  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  baptism 
and  first  introduction  to  His  Messianic  work, 
but  again  at  the  beginning  of  His  Galilean  min- 
istry, which  dates  from  the  time  when  John  was 
cast  into  prison,  and  once  again  as  the  stern 
prophet  of  the  desert  finishes  his  course;  for  his 
martyrdom  precipitates  a  crisis,  to  which  events 
for  some  time  have  been  tending. 

The  period  of  crisis,  embracing  the  facts  re- 
'".orded  in  the  two  chapters  following  and  in  part 


of  the  sixteenth,  is  marked  by  events  of  thrilling 
interest.  The  shadow  of  the  cross  falls  so  very 
darkly  now  upon  the  Saviour's  path,  that  we  may 
look  for  some  more  striking  effects  of  light  and 
shade, — Rembrandt-like  touches,  if  with  rever- 
ence we  may  so  put  it, — in  the  Evangelist's  pic- 
ture. Many  impressive  contrasts  will  arrest  our 
attention  as  we  proceed  to  touch  briefly  on  the 
story  of  the  time. 

I. — The  Banquet  of  Herod  and  the  Feast  of 
Christ  (xiv.  1-21). 

"  Among  them  that  are  born  of  woman  there 
hath  not  risen  a  greater  than  John  the  Baptist." 
Such  was  the  Saviour's  testimony  to  His  fore- 
runner in  the  hour  of  his  weakness;  and  the 
sequel  fully  justified  it.  The  answer  which  came 
to  John's  inquiry  brought  him  no  outward  re- 
lief. His  prison  bolts  were  as  firmly  fastened  as 
before,  Herod  was  as  inexorable,  the  prospect 
before  Him  as  dark  as  ever;  but  he  had  the  as- 
surance that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  and  that  His 
blessed  work  of  healing  the  sick  and  preaching 
the  gospel  to  the  poor  was  going  on;  and  that 
was  enough  for  him.  So  he  was  quite  content  to 
languish  on,  resting  in  the  Lord  and  waiting  pa- 
tiently for  Him.  We  learn  from  St.  Mark  that 
Herod  was  in  the  habit  of  sending  for  him  at 
times,  evidently  interested  in  the  strange  man, 
probably  to  some  extent  fascinated  by  him,  and 
possibly  not  without  some  lingering  hope  that 
there  might  be  some  way  of  reconciling  the 
preacher  of  righteousness  and  securing  the  bless- 
ing of  so  well-accredited  a  messenger  of  Heaven. 
There  is  little  doubt  that  at  these  times  the  way 
was  open  for  John  to  be  restored  to  liberty,  if 
only  he  had  been  willing  to  lower  his  testimony 
against  Herod's  sin,  or  consent  to  say  no  more 
about  it;  but  no  such  thought  ever  crossed  his 
noble  soul.  He  had  said,  "  It  is  not  lawful  for 
thee  to  have  her;"  and  not  even  in  the  hour  of 
deepest  depression  and  darkest  doubt  did  he  for 
a  moment  relax  the  rigour  of  his  requirements 
as  a  preacher  of  righteousness. 

As  he  had  lived,  so  he  died.  We  shall  not 
dwell  on  the  details  of  the  revolting  story.  It  is 
quite  realistic  enough  in  the  simple  recital  of  the 
Evangelist.  One  cannot  help  recalling  in  this 
connection  four  hideous  pictures  of  Salome  with 
the  head  of  John  the  Baptist  recently  displayed, 
all  on  the  line,  in  the  Salon  at  Paris.  Of  what 
possible  use  are  such  representations?  To  what 
sort  of  taste  do  they  minister?  There  was  no 
picture  of  John  looking  with  flashing  eyes  at  the 
guilty  monarch  as  he  said,  "  It  is  not  lawful  for 
thee  to  have  her."  That  is  the  scene  which  is 
worthy  of  remembrance:  let  it  abide  in  the 
memory  and  heart;  let  the  tragic  end  serve  only 
as  a  dark  background  to  make  the  central  figure 
luminous,  "  a  burning  and  a  shining  light." 

The  time  of  Herod's  merciful  visitation  is  over. 
So  long  as  he  kept  the  Baptist  safe  (Mark  vi.  19, 
20)  from  the  machinations  of  Herodias,  he  re- 
tained one  link  with  better  things.  The  stern 
prisoner  was  to  him  like  a  second  conscience; 
and  so  long  as  he  was  there  within  easy  reach, 
and  Herod  continued  from  time  to  time  to  see 
him  and  hear  what  he  had  to  say,  there  remained 
some  hope  of  repentance  and  reformation.  Had 
he  only  yielded  to  the  promptings  of  his  better 
nature,  and  obeyed  the  prophet,  the  way  of  the 
Lord  would  have  been  prepared,  the  preacher  of 
righteousness  would  have  been  followed  by  the 


744 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


Prince  of  Peace;  and  the  gospel  of  Jesus,  with 
all  its  unspeakable  blessing,  would  have  had  free 
course  in  his  court  and  throughout  his  realm. 
But  the  sacrifice  of  the  prophet  to  the  cruelty  of 
Herodias  and  the  folly  and  wickedness  of  his 
vow  put  an  end  to  such  prospects;  and  the  fame 
of  Christ's  deeds  of  mercy,  when  at  last  it 
reached  his  ears,  instead  of  stirring  in  him  a  liv- 
ing hope,  aroused  the  demon  of  guilty  con- 
science, which  could  not  rid  itself  of  the  super- 
stitious fear  that  it  was  John  the  Baptist  risen 
from  the  dead.  Thus  passed  away  for  ever  the 
great  opportunity  of  Herod  Antipas. 

The  disciples  of  John  withdrew  in  sorrow,  but 
not  in  despair.  They  had  evidently  caught  the 
spirit  of  their  master;  for  as  soon  as  they  had 
reverently  and  lovingly  taken  up  the  mortal  re- 
mains and  buried  them,  they  came  and  told  Jesus. 

It  must  have  been  a  terrible  blow  to  Him, — 
perhaps  even  more  than  it  was  to  them,  for  they 
had  Him  to  go  to,  while  He  had  none  on  earth 
to  take  counsel  with:  He  must  carry  the  heavy 
burden  of  responsibility  all  alone;  for  even  the 
most  advanced  of  the  Twelve  could  not  enter 
into  any  of  His  thoughts  and  purposes;  and  cer- 
tainly not  one  of  them,  we  might  indeed  say  not 
all  of  them  together,  had  at  this  time  anything 
like  the  strength  and  steadfastness  of  the  great 
man  who  had  just  been  taken  away.  We  learn 
from  the  other  accounts  that  at  the  same  time 
the  Twelve  returned  from  their  first  missionary 
journey;  so  that  the  question  would  immediately 
come  up,  What  was  to  be  done?  It  was  a  criti- 
cal time.  Should  they  stir  up  the  people  to 
avenge  the  death  of  their  prophet?  This  would 
have  been  after  the  manner  of  men,  but  not  ac- 
cording to  the  counsel  of  God.  Long  ago  the 
Saviour  had  set  aside,  as  quite  apart  from  His 
way  of  working,  all  appeals  to  force;  His  king- 
dom must  be  a  kingdom  of  the  truth,  and  on 
the  truth  He  will  rely,  with  nothing  else  to  trust 
to  than  the  power  of  patient  love.  So  He  takes 
His  disciples  away  to  the  other  side  of  the  lake, 
outside  the  jurisdiction  of  Herod,  with  the 
thoughtful  invitation:  "  Come  ye  yourselves 
apart  into  a  desert  place,  and  rest  awhile." 

What  are  the  prospects  of  the  kingdom  now? 
Sin  and  righteousness  have  long  been  at  strife 
in  the  court  of  Galilee;  now  sin  has  conquered 
and  has  the  field.  The  great  preacher  of  right- 
eousness is  dead;  and  the  Christ,  to  Whom  he 
bore  such  faithful  witness,  has  gone  to  the 
desert.  Again  the  sad  prophecy  is  fulfilled: 
"  He  is  despised  and  rejected  of  men;  a  man  of 
sorrows,  and  acquainted  with  grief."  That  little 
boat  crossing  from  the  populous  shores  of  Gen- 
nesaret  to  the  desert  land  on  the  other  side — 
what  does  it  mean?  Defeat?  A  lost  cause?  Is 
this  the  end  of  the  mission  in  Galilee,  begun  to 
the  music  of  that  majestic  prophecy  which  spoke 
of  it  as  daybreak  on  the  hills  and  shores  of 
Naphtali  and  Zebulun,  Gennesaret  and  Jordan? 
Is  this  the  outcome  of  two  mighty  movements 
so  full  of  promise  and  hope?  Did  not  all  Jeru- 
salem and  Judea  go  after  John,  confessing  their 
sins  and  accepting  his  baptism?  And  has  not 
all  Galilee  thronged  after  Jesus,  bringing  their 
sick  to  be  healed,  and  listening,  at  least  with  out- 
ward respect  and  often  expressed  astonishment, 
to  His  words  of  truth  and  hope?  Now  John  is 
dead,  and  Jesus  is  crossing  with  His  own  dis- 
ciples and  those  of  John  in  a  boat — one  boat 
enough  to  hold  them  all — to  mourn  together  in 
a  desert  place  apart.     Suppose  we  had  been  sit- 


ting on  the  shore  that  day,  and  had  watched  it 
getting  ever  smaller  as  it  crossed  the  sea,  what 
should  we  have  thought  of  the  prospects? 
Should  we  have  found  it  easy  to  believe  in  Christ 
that  day?  Verily  "  the  kingdom  of  God  cometh 
not  with  observation." 

The  multitudes  will  not  believe  on  Him;  yet 
they  will  not  let  Him  rest.  They  have  rejected 
the  kingdom;  but  they  would  fain  get  as  much 
as  they  can  of  those  earthly  blessings  which  have 
been  scattered  so  freely  as  its  signs.  So  the  peo- 
ple, noticing  the  direction  the  boat  has  taken, 
throng  after  Him,  running  on  foot  round  the 
northern  shore.  When  Jesus  sees  them,  sad  and 
weary  as  He  is,  He  cannot  turn  away.  He 
knows  too  well  that  it  is  with  no  pure  and  lofty 
devotion  that  they  follow  Him;  but  He  cannot 
see  a  multitude  of  people  without  having  His 
heart  moved  with  a  great  longing  to  bless  them. 
So  He  "  went  forth,  and  healed  their  sick." 

He  continued  His  loving  work,  lavishing  His 
sympathy  on  those  who  had  no  sympathy  with 
Him,  till  evening  fell,  and  the  disciples  suggested 
that  it  was  time  to  send  the  people  away,  espe- 
cially as  they  were  beginning  to  suffer  from  want 
of  food.  "  But  Jesus  said  unto  them,  They  need 
not  depart:  give  ye  them  to  eat.  And  they  say 
unto  Him,  We  have  here  but  five  loaves,  and 
two  fishes.  He  said.  Bring  them  hither  to 
Me." 

The  miracle  which  follows  is  of  very  special 
significance.  Many  things  point  to  this,  (i)  It 
is  the  one  miracle  which  all  the  four  Evangelists 
record.  (2)  It  occurs  at  a  critical  time  in  our 
Lord's  history.  There  has  been  discouragement 
after  discouragement,  repulse  after  repulse,  de- 
spite and  rejection  by  the  leaders,  obstinate  un- 
belief and  impenitence  on  the  part  of  the  people, 
the  good  seed  finding  almost  everywhere  hard  or 
shallow  or  thorny  soil,  with  little  or  no  promise 
of  the  longed-for  harvest.  And  now  a  crown- 
ing disaster  has  come  in  the  death  of  John.  Can 
we  wonder  that  Christ  received  the  tidings  of  it 
as  a  premonition  of  His  own?  Can  we  wonder 
that  henceforth  He  should  give  less  attention  to 
public  preaching,  and  more  to  the  training  of  the 
little  band  of  faithful  disciples  who  must  be  pre- 
pared for  days  of  darkness  coming  on  apace — 
prepared  for  the  cross,  manifestly  now  the  only 
way  to  the  crown?  (3)  There  is  the  significant 
remark  (J'ohn  vi.  4)  that  "  the  Passover  was 
nigh."  This  was  the  last  Passover  but  one  of 
our  Saviour's  life.  The  next  was  to  be  marked 
by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God 
that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  Another 
year,  and  He  will  have  fulfilled  His  course,  as 
John  has  fulfilled  His.  Was  it  not,  then,  most 
natural  that  His  mind  should  be  full,  not  only 
of  thoughts  of  the  approaching  Passover,  but 
also  of  what  the  next  one  must  bring.  This  is 
no  mere  conjecture;  for  it  plainly  appears  in  the 
long  and  most  suggestive  discourse  St.  John  re- 
ports as  following  immediately  upon  the  miracle 
and  designed  for  its  application. 

The  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  is  indeed  a 
sign  of  the  kingdom,  like  those  grouped  together 
in  the  earlier  part  of  the  Gospel  (viii.,  ix).  It 
showed  the  compassion  of  the  Lord  upon  the 
hungry  multitude,  and  His  readiness  to  supply 
their  wants.  It  showed  the  Lordship  of  Christ 
over  nature,  and  served  as  a  representation  in 
miniature  of  what  the  God  of  nature  is  doing 
every  year,  when,  by  agencies  as  far  beyond  our 


Matthew  xiv.-xvi.  12.] 


THE    CRISIS    IN    GALILEE. 


745 


ken  as  those  by  which  His  Son  mviltiplied  the 
loaves  that  day,  He  transmutes  the  handful  of 
seed-corn  into  the  rich  harvests  of  grain  which 
feed  the  multitudes  of  men.  It  taught  also,  by 
implication,  that  the  same  God  Who  feeds  the 
bodies  of  men  with  the  rich  abundance  of  the 
year  is  able  and  willing  to  satisfy  all  their  spirit- 
ual wants.  But  there  is  something  more  than  all 
this,  as  we  might  gather  from  the  very  way  it  is 
told:  "And  He  commanded  the  multitude  to 
sit  down  on  the  grass,  and  took  the  five  loaves, 
.  .  .  and  looking  up  to  heaven.  He  blessed,  and 
brake,  and  gave  the  loaves  to  the  disciples,  and 
the  disciples  to  the  multitude."  Can  we  read 
these  words  without  thinking  of  what  our  Sav- 
iour did  just  a  year  later,  when  He  took  bread 
and  blessed  it,  and  brake  it,  and  gave  it  to  the 
disciples  and  said,  "'  Take,  eat,  this  is  My  body  " 
(xxvi.  26)?  He  is  not,  indeed,  instituting  the 
Supper  now;  but  it  is  very  plain  that  the  same 
thoughts  are  in  His  mind  as  when,  a  year  later, 
He  did  so.  And  what  might  be  inferred  from 
the  recital  of  what  He  did  becomes  still  more 
evident  when  we  are  told  what  afterwards  He 
said — especially  such  utterances  as  these:  "  I  am 
the  bread  of  life;"  "  The  bread  which  I  will  give 
you  is  My  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of 
the  world;"  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Except  ye 
eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink  His 
blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you." 

We  have,  then,  here,  not  a  sign  of  the  kingdom 
only,  but  a  parable  of  life  eternal,  life  to  be  be- 
stowed in  no  other  way  than  by  the  death  to  be 
accomplished  at  Jerusalem  at  the  next  passover, 
life  for  thousands,  life  ministered  through  the 
disciples  to  the  multitudes,  and  not  diminished  in 
the  ministering,  but  growing  and  multiplying  in 
their  hands,  so  that  after  all  are  fed  there  remain 
"  twelve  baskets  full," — far  more  than  at  the  first: 
a  beautiful  hint  of  the  abundance  that  will  re- 
main for  the  Gentile  nations  of  the  earth.  That 
passover  parable  comes  out  of  the  anguish  of  the 
great  Redeemer's  heart.  Already,  as  He  breaks 
that  bread  and  gives  it  to  the  people.  He  is  en- 
during the  cross  and  despising  the  shame  of  it, 
for  the  joy  set  before  Him  of  giving  the  bread 
of  life  to  a  hungry  world. 

One  can  scarcely  fail  at  this  point  to  contrast 
the  feast  in  honour  of  Herod's  birthday  with  the 
feast  which  symbolised  the  Saviour's  death. 
"  When  a  convenient  day  was  come,  Herod  on 
his  birthday  made  a  supper  to   his  lords,   high 

captains,  and  chief  estates  of  Galilee;   and " 

the  rest  is  well  known, — the  feasting,  mirth,  and 
revelry,  ending  in  the  dark  tragedy,  followed  by 
the  remorse  of  a  guilty  conscience,  the  gnawing 
of  the  worm  that  dieth  not,  the  burning  of  the 
fire  that  is  not  quenched.  Then  think  of  that 
other  feast  on  the  green  grass  in  the  pure  air  of 
the  fresh  and  breezy  hillside — the  hungry  multi- 
tudes, the  homely  fare,  the  few  barley  loaves  and 
the  two  small  fishes;  yet  by  the  blessing  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  there  was  provided  a  repast  far  more 
enjoyable  to  these  keen  appetites  than  all  the 
delicacies  of  the  banquet  to  the  lords  of  Galilee — 
a  feast  pointing  indeed  to  a  death,  but  a  death 
which  was  to  bring  life  and  peace  and  joy  to 
thousands,  with  abundance  over  for  all  who  will 
receive  it.  The  one  is  the  feast  to  which  the 
world  invites;  the  other  is  the  feast  which  Christ 
provides  for  all  who  are  willing  to  "  labour  not 
for  the  meat  that  perisheth,  but  for  that  which 
endureth  unto  eternal  life." 


n. — Calm  on  the  Mountain  and  Trouble  on 
THE  Sea. 

We  learn  from  the  fourth  Gospel  that  the  im- 
mediate result  of  the  impression  made  by  our 
Lord's  miraculous  feeding  of  the  five  thousand 
was  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  take 
Him  by  force  and  make  Him  a  king.  Thus,  as 
always,  their  minds  would  run  on  political 
change,  and  the  hope  of  bettering  their  circum- 
stances thereby;  while  they  refuse  to  allow  them- 
selves to  think  of  that  spiritual  change  which 
must  begin  with  themselves,  and  show  itself  in 
that  repentance  and  hunger  and  thirst  after  right- 
eousness, which  He  so  longed  to  see  in  them. 
Even  His  disciples,  as  we  know,  were  not  now, 
nor  for  a  long  time  subsequent  to  this,  alto- 
gether free  from  the  same  spirit  of  earthliness; 
and  it  is  quite  likely  that  the  general  enthusiasm 
would  excite  them  not  a  little,  and  perhaps  lead 
them  to  raise  the  question,  as  they  were  often 
fain  to  do,  whether  the  time  had  not  at  last  come 
for  their  Master  to  declare  Himself  openly,  put 
Himself  at  the  head  of  these  thousands,  take  ad- 
vantage of  the  widespread  feeling  of  irritation 
and  discontent  awakened  by  the  murder  of  John 
the  Baptist,  whom  all  men  counted  for  a  prophet 
(Mark  xi.  32),  hurl  Herod  Antipas  from  the  high 
position  he  disgraced,  and,  with  all  Galilee  under  . 
His  control  and  full  of  enthusiasm  for  His  cause, 
march  southward  on  Jerusalem.  This  was  no 
doubt  the  course  of  action  they  for  the  most  part 
expected  and  wished;  and,  with  One  at  their 
head  Who  could  do  such  wonders,  what  was 
there  to  hinder  complete   success? 

May  we  not  also  with  reverence  suppose  that 
this  was  one  of  the  occasions  on  which  Satan 
renewed  those  assaults  which  he  began  in  the 
wilderness  of  Judea?  A  little  later,  when  Peter 
was  trying  to  turn  Him  aside  from  the  path  of 
the  Cross,  Jesus  recognised  it,  not  merely  as  a 
suggestion  of  the  disciple,  but  as  a  renewed 
temptation  of  the  great  adversary.  We  may  well 
suppose,  then,  that  at  this  crisis  the  old  tempta- 
tion to  bestow  on  Him  the  kingdoms  of  the 
world  and  the  glory  of  them — not  for  their  own 
sake,  of  course  (there  could  have  been  no  temp- 
tation in  that  direction),  but  for  the  sake  of  the 
advancement  of  the  interests  of  the  heavenly 
kingdom  by  the  use  of  worldly  methods  of  policy 
and  force— was  presented  to  Him  with  peculiar 
strength. 

However  this  may  have  been,  the  circum- 
stances required  prompt  action  of  some  kind.  It 
was  necessary  that  the  disciples  should  be  got 
out  of  reach  of  temptation  as  soon  as  possible; 
so  He  constrained  them  to  enter  into  a  boat,  and 
go  before  Him  to  the  other  side,  while  He  dis- 
persed the  multitude.  And  need  we  wonder  that 
in  the  circumstances  He  should  wish  to  be  en- 
tirely alone?  He  could  not  consult  with  those 
He  trusted  most,  for  they  were  quite  in  the  dark, 
and  anything  they  were  at  all  likely  to  say  would 
only  increase  the  pressure  put  upon  Him  by  the 
people.  He  had  only  One  for  His  Counsellor 
and  Comforter,  His  Father  in  heaven.  Whose 
will  He  had  come  to  do;  so  He  must  be  alone 
with  Him.  He  must  have  been  in  a  state  of 
great  physical  exhaustion  after  all  the  fatigue  of 
the  day,  for  though  He  had  come  for  rest  He 
had  found  none;  but  the  brave,  strong  spirit 
conquers  the  weary  flesh,  and  instead  of  going 
to  sleep  He  ascends  the  neighbouring  height  to 
spend  the  night  in  prayer. 


746 


•^HE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


It  is  interestiHg  to  remember  that  it  was  after 
this  night  spent  in  prayer  that  He  delivered  the 
remarkable  discourse  recorded  in  the  sixth  chap- 
ter of  St.  John,  in  which  He  speaks  so  plainly 
about  giving  His  fiesh  for  the  life  of  the  world. 
It  is  evident,  then,  that,  if  any  question  had  arisen 
in  His  mind  as  to  the  path  of  duty,  when  He  was 
suddenly  confronted  with  the  enthusiastic  desire 
of  the  multitudes  to  crown  Him  at  once,  it  was 
speedily  set  at  rest:  He  now  plainly  saw  that  it 
was  not  the  will  of  His  Father  in  heaven  that 
He  should  take  advantage  of  any  such  stirring  of 
worldly  desire,  that  He  must  give  no  encourage- 
ment to  any,  except  those  who  were  hungering 
and  thirsting  after  righteousness,  to  range  them- 
selves upon  His  side.  Hence,  no  doubt,  the  sift- 
ing nature  of  the  discourse  He  delivered  the 
following  day.  He  is  eager  to  gather  the  multi- 
tudes to  Himself;  but  He  cannot  allow  them  to 
come  under  any  false  assumption; — He  must 
have  spiritually-minded  disciples,  or  none  at  all: 
accordingly  He  makes  His  discourse  so  strongly 
spiritual,  directs  their  attention  so  far  away  from 
earthly  issues  to  the  issues  of  eternity  ("  I  will 
raise  him  up  at  the  last  day  "  is  the  promise  He 
gives  over  and  over  again,  whereas  they  wanted 
to  be  raised  up  then  and  there  to  high  places  in 
the  world),  that  not  only  did  the  multitude  lose 
all  their  enthusiasm,  but  "  from  that  time  many 
of  His  disciples  went  back,  and  walked  no  more 
with  Him,"  while  even  the  Twelve  themselves 
were  shaken  in  their  allegiance,  as  seems  evident 
from  the  sorrowful  question  with  which  He 
turned  to  them:  ''Will  ye  also  go  away?"  We 
may  reverently  suppose,  then,  that  our  Lord  was 
occupied,  during  the  early  part  of  the  night,  with 
thoughts  like  these — in  preparation,  as  it  were, 
for  the  faithful  words  He  will  speak  and  the  sad 
duty  He  will  discharge  on  the  morrow. 

Meantime  a  storm  has  arisen  on  the  lake — one 
of  those  sudden  and  often  terrible  squalls  to 
which  inland  waters  everywhere  are  subject,  but 
which  are  greatly  aggravated  here  by  the  con- 
trast between  the  tropical  climate  of  the  lake, 
620  feet  below  the  level  of  the  Mediterranean, 
and  the  cool  air  on  the  heights  which  surround 
it.  The  storm  becomes  fiercer  as  the  night  ad- 
vances. The  Saviour  has  been  much  absorbed, 
but  He  cannot  fail  to  notice  how  angry  the  lake 
is  becoming,  and  to  what  peril  His  loved  dis- 
ciples are  exposed.  As  the  Passover  was  nigh, 
the  moon  would  be  nearly  full,  and  there  would 
be  frequent  opportunities,  between  the  passing 
of  the  clouds,  to  watch  the  little  boat.  As  long 
as  there  seems  any  prospect  of  their  weathering 
the  storm  by  their  own  exertions  He  leaves  them 
to  themselves;  but  when  it  appears  that  they  are 
making  no  progress,  though  it  is  evident  that 
they  are  "  toiling  in  rowing,"  He  sets  out  at 
once  to  their  relief. 

The  rescue  which  follows  recalls  a  former  in- 
cident on  the  same  lake  (viii.  23-27).  But  the 
points  of  difference  are  both  important  and  in- 
structive. Then  He  was  with  His  disciples  in 
the  ship,  though  asleep;  in  their  extremity  they 
had  only  to  rouse  Him  with  the  cry,  "  Save, 
Lord,  or  we  perish!"  to  secure  immediate  calm 
and  safety.  Now  He  was  not  with  them;  He 
was  out  of  sight,  and  beyond  the  reach  even  of 
the  most  piercing  cries.  It  was  therefore  a  much 
severer  trial  than  the  last,  and  remembering  the 
special  significance  of  the  miracle  of  the  loaves, 
we  can  scarcely  fail  to  notice  a  corresponding 
suggestiveness  in  this  one.     That  one  had  dimly 


foreshadowed  His  death;  did  not  this,  in  the  same 
way,  foreshadow  the  relations  He  would  sustain 
to  His  disciples  after  His  death?  May  we  not 
look  upon  His  ascent  of  this  mountain  as  a  pic- 
ture of  His  ascension  into  heaven — His  betak- 
ing Himself  to  His  Father  now  as  a  shadow  of 
His  going  to  the  Father  then — His  prayer  on 
the  mount  as  a  shadow  of  His  heavenly  interces- 
sion? It  was  to  pray  that  He  ascended;  and 
though  He,  no  doubt,  needed,  at  that  trying 
time,  to  pray  for  Himself,  His  heart  would  be 
poured  out  in  pleading  for  His  disciples  too, 
especially  when  the  storm  came  on.  And  these 
disciples  constrained  to  go  ofif  in  a  boat  by  them- 
selves,— are  they  not  a  picture  of  the  Church 
after  Christ  had  gone  to  His  Father,  launched 
on  the  stormy  sea  of  the  world?  What  will  they 
do  without  Him?  What  will  they  do  when  the 
winds  rise  and  the  waves  roar  in  the  dark  night? 
Oh!  if  only  He  were  here.  Who  was  sleeping 
in  the  boat  that  day,  and  only  needed  to  be 
roused  to  sympathise  and  save!  Where  is  He 
now?  There  on  the  hilltop,  interceding,  looking 
down  with  tenderest  compassion,  watching  every 
effort  of  the  toiling  rowers.  Nay,  He  is  nearer 
still!  See  that  Form  upon  the  waves!  "  It  is  a 
spirit,"  they  cry;  and  are  afraid,  very  much  as, 
a  little  more  than  a  year  afterward,  when  He 
came  suddenly  into  the  midst  of  them  with  His 
"  Peace  be  unto  you,"  they  were  terrified  and 
affrighted,  and  supposed  that  they  had  seen  a 
spirit  (Luke  xxiv.  2,7).  But  presently  they  hear 
the  familiar  voice:  "  Be  of  good  cheer:  it  is  I; 
be  not  afraid."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
remembrance  of  that  night  on  the  lake  of  Gal- 
ilee would  be  a  wondrous  consolation  to  these 
disciples  during  the  storms  of  persecution 
through  which  they  had  to  pass  after  their  Mas- 
ter had  ascended  up  to  heaven;  and  their  faith 
in  the  presence  of  His  Spirit,  and  His  constant 
readiness  to  help  and  save,  would  be  greatly 
strengthened  by  the  memory  of  that  apparently 
spectral  Form  they  had  seen  coming  across  the 
troubled  sea  to  their  relief.  Have  we  not  some 
reason,  then,  for  saying  that  here,  too,  we  have 
not  only  another  of  the  many  signs  of  the  king- 
dom showing  our  Lord's  power  over  nature  and 
constant  readiness  to  help  His  people  in  time  of 
need,  but  a  parable  of  the  future,  most  appro- 
priately following  that  parable  of  life  through 
death  set  forth  in  the  feeding  of  the  thousands 
on  the  day  before? 

There  seems,  in  fact,  a  strange  prophetic  ele- 
ment running  all  through  the  scenes  of  that  won- 
drous time.  We  have  already  referred  to  the 
disposition  on  the  part  even  of  the  Twelve,  as 
manifested  next  day  at  the  close  of  the  discourse 
on  the  "  bread  of  life,"  to  desert  Him — to  show 
the  same  spirit  which  afterward,  when  the  crisis 
reached  its  height,  so  demoralised  them  that  "they 
all  forsook  Him,  and  fled  "  ;  and  have  we  not, 
in  the  closing  incident,  in  which  Peter  figures 
so  conspicuously,  a  mild  foreshadowing  of  his 
terrible  fall,  when  the  storm  of  human  passion 
was  raging  as  fiercely  in  Jerusalem  as  did  the 
winds  and  waves  on  the  lake  of  Galilee  that 
night?  There  is  the  same  self-confidence: 
"  Lord,  if  it  be  Thou,  bid  me  come  unto  Thee 
on  the  water;  "  the  same  alarm  when  he  was 
brought  face  to  face  with  the  danger  the  thought 
of  which  he  had  braved;  then  the  sinking,  sink- 
ing as  if  about  to  perish,  yet  not  hopelessly  (for 
the  Master  had  prayed  for  him  that  his  faith 
should  not  fail) ;  then  the  humble  prayer,  "  Lord., 


i-altliew  xiv.-xvi.  12.] 


THE    CRISIS    IN    GALILEE. 


74  7 


save  me  "  ;  and  the  gracious  hand  immediately 
stretched  out  to  save.  Had  the  adventurous 
disciple  learnt  his  lesson  well  that  day,  what  it 
would  have  saved  him!  May  we  not  say  that 
there  is  never  a  great  and  terrible  fall,  however 
sudden  it  seems,  which  has  not  been  _  preceded 
by  warnings,  even  long  before,  which,  if  heeded, 
would  have  certainly  averted  it?  How  much 
need  have  the  disciples  of  Christ  to  learn  thor- 
oughly the  lessons  their  Lord  teaches  them  in 
His  gentler  dealings,  so  that  when  darker  days 
and  heavier  trials  come  they  may  be  ready,  hav- 
ing taken  unto  themselves  the  whole  armour 
of  God  to  withstand  in  the  evil  day,  and  having 
done  all,  to  stand. 

There  are  many  other  important  lessons  which 
might  be  learnt  from  this  incident,  but  we  may 
not  dwell  on  them;  a  mere  enumeration  of  some 
of  them  may,  however,  be  attempted.  It  was 
faith,  in  part  at  least,  which  led  the  apostle  to 
make  this  venture;  and  this  is,  no  doubt,  the 
reason  why  the  Lord  did  not  forbid  it.  Faith 
is  too  precious  to  be  repressed;  but  the  faith  of 
Feter  on  this  occasion  is  anything  but  simple, 
clear,  and  strong:  there  is  a  large  measure  of 
self-will  in  it,  of  impulsiveness,  of  self-confidence, 
perhaps  of  love  of  display.  A  confused  and  en- 
cumbered faith  of  this  kind  is  sure  to  lead  into 
mischief, — to  set  on  foot  rash  enterprises,  which 
show  great  enthusiasm,  and  perhaps  seem  to  re- 
buke the  caution  of  the  less  confident  for  the 
time,  but  which  come  to  grief,  and  in  the  end 
bring  no  credit  to  the  cause  of  Christ.  The 
rash  disciple's  enterprise  is  not,  however,  an  en- 
tire failure:  he  does  succeed  so  far;  but  pres- 
ently the  weakness  of  his  faith  betrays  itself. 
As  long  as  the  impulse  lasted,  and  his  eye  was 
fixed  on  his  Master,  all  went  well;  but  when 
the  first  burst  of  enthusiasm  was  spent,  and  he 
had  time  to  look  round  upon  the  waves,  he  began 
to  sink.  But  how  encouraging  it  is  to  observe 
that,  when  put  to  extremity,  that  which  is  gen- 
uine in  the  man  carries  it  over  all  the  rest! — the 
faith  which  had  been  encumbered  extricates  it- 
self, and  becomes  simple,  clear,  and  strong;  the 
last  atom  of  self-confidence  is  gone,  and  with 
it  all  thought  of  display;  nothing  but  simple 
faith  is  left  in  that  strong  cry  of  his,  "  Lord, 
save  me!  " 

Nothing  could  be  imagined  better  suited  than 
this  incident  to  discriminate  between  self-confi- 
dence and  faith.  Peter  enters  on  this  experience 
with  the  two  well  mixed  together, — so  well 
mixed  that  neither  he  himself  nor  his  fellow- 
disciples  could  distinguish  them;  but  the  test- 
ing process  precipitates  one  and  clarifies  the 
other, — lets  the  self-confidence  all  go  and  brings 
out  the  faith  pure  and  strong.  Immediately, 
therefore,  his  Lord  is  at  his  side,  and  he  is 
safe; — a  great  lesson  this  on  faith,  especially  in 
revealing  its  simplicity.  Peter  tried  to  make  a 
grand  thing  of  it:  he  had  to  come  back  to  the 
simple,  humble  cry,  and  the  grasping  of  his 
Saviour's   outstretched   hand. 

The  same  lesson  is  taught  on  a  larger  scale 
in  the  brief  account  of  the  cures  the  Master 
wrought  when  they  reached  the  other  side,  where 
all  that  was  asked  was  the  privilege  of  touching 
His  garment's  hem.  "  and  as  many  as  touched 
were  made  perfectly  whole;  "  not  the  great  ones, 
not  the  strong  ones,  but  "  as  many  as  touched." 
C'nly  let  us  keep  in  touch  with  Him,  and  all 
will  assuredly  be  well  with  us  both  in  time  and 
iiA  eternity. 


III. — Israel  after  the  Flesh  and   Israel 

AFTER    THE    SpIRIT    (xV.). 

Issue  is  now  joined  with  the  ecclesiastical  lead- 
ers at  Jerusalem,  who  send  a  deputation  to  make 
a  formal  complaint.  When  Jerusalem  was  last 
mentioned  in  our  Gospel  it  was  in  connection 
with  a  movement  of  quite  a  different  character. 
The  fame  of  the  Saviour's  deeds  of  mercy  in 
Galilee  had  then  just  reached  the  capital,  the 
result  being  that  many  set  out  at  once  to  find 
out  what  new  thing  this  might  be:  "There  fol- 
lowed hmi  great  multitudes  of  people  from 
Galilee,  and  from  Decapolis,  and  from  Jerusa- 
lem, and  from  Judea,  and  from  beyond  Jordan  " 
(iv.  25).  That  wave  of  interest  in  the  south 
had  now  died  down;  and  instead  of  eager  mul- 
titudes there  is  a  small  sinister  band  of  cold,  keen- 
witted, hard-hearted  critics.  It  was  a  sad  change, 
and  must  have  brought  new  distress  to  the 
Saviour's  troubled  heart;  but  He  is  none  the 
less  ready  to  face  the  trial  with  His  wonted 
courage  and  unfailing  readiness  of  resource. 

Their  complaint  is  trivial  enough.  It  is  to 
be  remembered,  of  course,  that  it  was  not  a 
question  of  cleanliness,  but  of  ritual;  not  even 
of  ritual  appointed  by  Moses,  but  only  of  that 
prescribed  by  certain  traditions  of  their  fathers 
which  they  held  in  superstitious  veneration. 
These  traditions,  by  a  multitude  of  minute  regu- 
lations and  restrictions,  imposed  an  intolerable 
burden  on  those  who  thought  it  their  duty  to 
observe  them;  while  the  magnifying  of  trifles 
had  the  natural  effect  of  keeping  out  of  sight 
the  weightier  matters  of  the  law.  Not  only  so, 
but  the  most  trivial  regulations  were  sometimes 
so  managed  as  to  furnish  an  excuse  for  neglect 
of  the  plainest  duties.  Our  Lord  could  not 
therefore  miss  the  opportunity  of  denouncing 
this  evil,  and  accordingly  He  exposes  it  in  the 
plainest   and   strongest   language. 

The  question  with  which  He  opens  His  at- 
tack is  most  incisive.  It  is  as  if  He  said,  "  I 
am  accused  of  transgressing  your  tradition. 
What  is  your  tradition?  It  is  itself  transgres- 
sion of  the  law  of  God."  Then  follows  the 
striking  illustration,  showing  how  by  their  rules 
of  tradition  they  put  it  within  the  power  of  any 
heartless  son  to  escape  entirely  the  obligation 
of  providing  even  for  his  aged  father  or  mother 
— an  illustration,  be  it  remembered,  which 
brought  out  more  than  a  breach  of  the  fifth 
commandment;  for  by  what  means  was  it  that 
the  ungrateful  son  escaped  his  obligation?  By 
taking  the  name  of  the  Lord  in  vain;  for  surely 
there  could  be  no  greater  dishonour  to  the  name 
of  God  than  meanly  to  mark  as  dedicated  to 
Him  ("  Corban  ")  what  ought  to  have  been  de- 
voted to  the  discharge  of  an  imperative  filial 
duty.  Besides,  it  was  not  at  all  necessary  that 
the  money  or  property  should  be  actually  dedi- 
cated to  sacred  uses;  it  was  only  necessary  to 
say  that  it  was,  only  necessary  to  pronounce 
over  it  that  magic  word  Corban,  and  then  the 
mean  hypocrite  could  use  it  for  the  most  self- 
ish purposes — for  any  purpose,  in  fact,  he  chose, 
except  that  purpose  for  which  it  was  his  duty 
to  use  it.  It  is  really  difficult  to  conceive  such 
iniquity  wrapped  up  in  a  cloak  of  so-called  re- 
ligion. No  wonder  our  Lord  was  moved  to 
indignation,  and  applied  to  His  critics  the  strong 
language  of  the  prophet:  "  Ye  hypocrites,  well 
did  Isaiah  prophesy  of  you,  saying,  This  people 
honoureth   Me  with   their  lips;   but  their   heart 


748 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


is  far  from  Me,  .  .  .  teaching  as  their  doc- 
trines the  precepts  of  men  "  (R.  V.)-  No  won- 
der that  He  turned  away  from  men  who  were 
so  deeply  committed  to  a  system  so  vile,  and 
that  He  explained,  not  to  His  questioners,  but 
to  the  multitude  who  had  gathered  round,  the 
principle  on  which  He  acted. 

There  seems,  however,  to  have  been  more  of 
sorrow  than  of  anger  in  His  tone  and  manner. 
How  else  could  the  disciples  have  asked  Him 
such  a  question  as  that  which  follows:  "  Know- 
est  Thou  that  the  Pharisees  were  offended,  after 
they  heard  this  saying?  "  Of  course  the  Phari- 
sees were  offended.  They  had  most  excellent 
reason.  And  the  disciples  would  have  known 
that  He  had  no  intention  of  sparing  them  in 
the  least,  and  no  concern  whether  they  took 
offence  or  not,  if  His  tone  had  been  such  as 
an  ordinary  person  would  naturally  have  put 
into  such  an  invective.  It  is  probable  that  He 
said  it  all  calmly,  earnestly,  tenderly,  without 
the  slightest  trace  of  passion;  from  which  it 
would  not  be  at  all  unnatural  for  the  disciples 
to  infer  that  He  had  not  fully  realised  how 
strong  His  language  had  been,  and  into  what 
serious  collision  He  had  brought  Himself  with 
the  leaders  in  Jerusalem.  Hence  their  gentle 
remonstrance,  the  expression  of  those  feelings 
of  dismay  with  which  they  saw  their  Master 
break  with  one  party  after  another,  as  if  de- 
termined to  wreck  His  mission  altogether.  Was 
it  not  bad  policy  to  give  serious  offence  to  per- 
sons of  such  importance  at  so  critical  a  time? 

The  Saviour's  answer  is  just  what  was  to  be 
expected.  Policy  had  no  place  in  His  plan.  His 
kingdom  was  of  the  truth;  and  whatever  was 
not  of  truth  must  go,  be  the  consequences  what 
they  might.  That  system  of  traditionalism  had 
its  roots  deeply  and  firmly  fastened  in  the  Jew- 
ish soil;  its  fibres  were  through  it  all;  and  to 
disturb  it  was  to  go  against  a  feeling  that  was 
nothing  less  than  national  in  its  extent.  But  no 
matter:  firmly,  deeply,  widely  rooted  though  it 
was,  it  was  not  of  God's  planting,  and  there- 
fore it  cannot  be  let  alone:  "  Every  plant,  which 
My  heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted,  shall  be 
rooted  up."  It  is  for  all  ritualists,  ancient  and 
modern,  all  who  teach  for  doctrines  what  are 
only  commandments  of  men,  seriously  to  ponder 
this  most  radical  utterance  by  One  Whose  right 
it  is  to  speak  with  an  authority  from  which  there 
is  no  appeal. 

Having  thus  condemned  the  ritualistic  teach- 
ing of  the  day,  He  disposes  next  of  the  false 
teachers.  This  He  does  in  a  way  which  ought 
to  have  been  a  warning  to  those  persecutors 
and  heresy-hunters  who,  by  their  unwise  use  of 
force  and  law,  have  given  only  larger  currency 
to  the  evil  doctrines  they  have  tried  to  suppress. 
He  simply  says  "  Let  them  alone:  they  be  blind 
leaders  of  the  blind.  And  if  the  blind  lead  the 
blind,  both  shall  fall  into  the  ditch."  Expose 
their  error  by  all  means;  root  it  out  if  possible; 
but  as  for  the  men  themselves,  "  let  them  alone." 

The  principle  He  sets  forth  as  underlying  the 
whole  subject  is  the  same  as  that  which  underlies 
His  teaching  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount — 
viz.,  that  "  out  of  the  heart  are  the  issues  of 
life."  The  ritualist  lays  stress  on  that  which 
enters  into  the  man — the  kind  of  food  which 
enters  his  mouth,  the  objects  which  meet  his 
eye,  the  incense  which  enters  his  nostril;  Christ 
sets  all  this  aside  as  of  no  consequence  in  com- 
parison with  the  state  of  the  heart  (vv.   16-20). 


Such  teaching  as  this  was  not  only  irreconcilable 
with  that  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  from  Je- 
rusalem, but  it  lay  at  the  very  opposite  pole. 

Was  it  on  this  account  that  after  this  in- 
terview Jesus  withdrew  as  far  as  possible  from 
Jerusalem?  He  is  limited,  indeed,  in  His  range 
to  the  Holy  Land,  as  He  indicates  in  His  con- 
versation with  the  woman  of  Canaan;  but  just  as 
after  the  death  of  John  He  had  withdrawn  out 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  Herod  to  the  east,  so 
now,  after  this  collision  with  the  deputation 
from  Jerusalem,  He  withdraws  to  the  far  north, 
to  the  borders  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  And  was 
it  only  a  coincidence  that,  just  as  Jerusalem  had 
furnished  such  sorry  specimens  of  dead  formal- 
ism, the  distant  borders  of  heathen  Tyre  and 
Sidon  should  immediately  thereafter  furnish  one 
of  the  very  noblest  examples  of  living  faith?  The 
coincidence  is  certainly  very  striking  and  most 
instructive.  The  leaders  from  Jerusalem  had  been 
dismissed  with  the  condemnation  of  their  own 
prophet:  "This  people  honoureth  Me  with  their 
lips,  but  their  heart  is  far  from  Me;"  while  out 
of  far-away  heathendom  there  comes  one  whose 
whole  heart  is  poured  out  to  Him  in  earnest, 
persevering,  prevailing  prayer.  It  is  one  of  those 
contrasts  with  which  this  portion  of  our  Lord's 
history  abounds,  the  force  of  which  will  appear 
more  clearly  as  we  proceed. 

The  suppliant  was  "  a  woman  of  Canaan,"  or, 
as  she  is  described  more  definitely  elsewhere,  a 
Syro-Phoenician  woman.  Yet  she  has  learned  of 
Jesus — knows  Him  as  the  Christ,  for  she  calls 
Him  "  Son  of  David  " — knows  Him  as  a  Saviour, 
for  she  comes  to  ask  that  her  daughter  may  be 
healed.  Her  application  must  have  been  a  great 
solace  to  His  wounded  heart.  He  always  loved 
to  be  asked  for  such  blessings;  and,  rejected  as 
He  had  been  by  His  countrymen,  it  must  have 
been  a  special  encouragement  to  be  approached 
in  this  way  by  a  stranger.  That  it  was  so  may 
be  inferred  from  what  He  said  on  similar  oc- 
casions. When  the  Roman  centurion  came  to 
have  his  servant  healed,  Jesus  commended  his 
wonderful  faith,  and  then  added:  "  I  say  unto 
you,  That  many  shall  come  from  the  east  and 
west,  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham,  and 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
So,  too,  when  it  was  announced  to  Him  that 
some  Greeks  desired  to  see  Him,  the  first  effect 
was  to  sharpen  the  agony  of  His  rejection  by  His 
own  countrymen;  but  immediately  He  recovers 
Himself,  looks  beyond  the  cross  and  the  shame 
to  the  glory  that  shall  follow,  and  exclaims,  "  I, 
if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all  men 
unto  Me."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  at  this 
time  of  rejection  in  Galilee  it  must  have  been  a 
similar  consolation  to  receive  this  visit  from  the 
woman   of   Canaan. 

How,  then,  can  we  explain  His  treatment  of 
her?  First,  He  answered  her  not  a  word.  Then 
He  reminded  her  that  she  did  not  belong  to 
Israel,  as  if  she  therefore  could  have  no  claim  on 
Him.  And  when  she  still  urged  her  suit,  in  a 
manner  that  might  have  apoealed  to  the  hardest 
heart.  He  gave  her  an  answer  which  seems  so 
incredibly  harsh,  that  it  is  with  a  feeling  of  pain 
one  hears  it  repeated  after  eighteen  hundred 
years.  What  does  all  this  mean?  It  means 
"  praise  and  honour  and  glory  "  for  the  poor  wo- 
man; for  thi  disciples,  and  for  all  disciples,  a 
lesson  never  to  be  forgotten.  He  Who  knew 
what  was  in  man,  knew  what  was  in  this  noble 


Matthew  xiv.-xvi.  12.] 


THE    CRISIS    IN    GALILEE. 


749 


woman's  heart,  and  He  wished  to  bring  it  out 
— to  bring  it  out  so  that  the  disciples  should  see 
it,  so  that  other  disciples  should  see  it,  so  that 
generation  after  generation  and  century  after 
century  should  see  it,  and  admire  it,  and  learn  its 
lesson.  It  cost  her  some  minutes'  pain:  Him 
also, — how  it  must  have  wrung  His  heart  to  treat 
her  in  a  way  so  foreign  to  every  fibre  of  His 
soul!  But  had  He  not  so  dealt  with  her,  what  a 
loss  to  her,  to  the  disciples,  to  countless  multi- 
tudes! He  very  much  needs  a  shining  example 
of  living  faith  to  set  over  against  the  dead  form- 
alism of  these  traditionalists;  and  here  it  is:  He 
must  bring  it  out  of  its  obscurity,  and  set  it  as  a 
star  in  the  firmament  of  His  gospel,  to  shine  for 
ever  and  ever.  He  tested  her  to  the  uttermost, 
because  He  knew  that  at  the  end  of  all  He  could 
say:  "O  woman,  great  is  thy  faith:  be  it  unto 
thee  even  as  thou  wilt."  The  heart  of  the  Sav- 
iour was  never  filled  with  a  deeper  tenderness 
or  a  wiser  and  more  far-seeing  love  than  when 
He  repulsed  this  woman  again  and  again,  and 
treated  her  with  what  seemed  at  the  moment 
most  inexcusable  and  unaccountable   harshness. 

The  lessons  which  shine  out  in  the  simple  story 
of  this  woman  can  only  be  touched  in  the  slight- 
est manner.  We  have  already  referred  to  the 
contrast  between  the  great  men  of  Jerusalem  and 
this  poor  woman  of  Canaan;  observe  now  how 
strikingly  is  suggested  the  distinction  between 
Israel  according  to  the  flesh  and  Israel  according 
to  the  spirit.  The  current  idea  of  the  time  was 
that  lineal  descent  from  Abraham  determined 
who  belonged  to  the  house  of  Israel  and  who 
did  not.  The  Saviour  strikes  at  the  root  of  this 
error.  He  does  not  indeed  attack  it  directly. 
For  this  the  time  has  not  yet  come:  the  veil  of 
the  Temple  has  not  yet  been  rent  in  twain.  But 
He  draws  aside  the  veil  a  little,  so  as  to  give  a 
glimpse  of  the  truth  and  prepare  the  way  for  its 
full  revealing  when  the  time  shall  come.  He 
does  not  broadly  say,  "  This  woman  of  Canaan  is 
as  good  an  Israelite  as  any  of  you;"  but  He  says, 
"  I  am  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the 
house  of  Israel  "—and  heals  her  daughter  not- 
withstanding. Was  it  not,  then,  evident  that  this 
poor  woman  after  all  did  in  some  sense  belong 
to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  whom 
Jesus  came  to  save? 

The  house  of  Israel? — what  does  Israel  mean? 
Learn  at  Peniel.  See  Jacob  in  sore  distress  at 
the  brook  Jabbok.  A  man  is  wrest' 'ng  with  him, 
— wrestling  with  him  all  the  night,  until  the 
break  of  day.  It  is  no  mere  man,  for  Jacob  finds 
before  all  is  over  that  he  has  been  face  to  face 
with  God.  The  man  who  wrestled  with  him  in- 
deed was  the  same  as  He  Who  wrestled  with  this 
woman  of  Canaan.  The  Divine  Man  struggles 
to  get  away  without  blessing  the  patriarch. 
Jacob  cries,  in  the  very  desperation  of  his  faith, 
"  I  will  not  let  Thee  go,  except  Thou  bless  me!  " 
The  victory  is  won.  The  blessing  is  granted, 
and  these  words  are  added:  "What  is  thy 
name?"  "Jacob."  "Thy  name  shall  be  called 
no  more  Jacob,  but  Israel  "  {i.  e.,  prince  with 
God):  "for  as  a  prince  hast  thou  power  with 
God  and  with  men,  and  hast  prevailed." 

Was  this  woman,  then,  or  was  she  not,  "  a 
prince"  with  God?  Did  she.  or  did  she  not,  be- 
long to  the  true  house  of  Israel?  Let  us  now 
look  back  to  vv.  8  and  9:  "  This  people  "  (i.  e., 
the  children  of  Lsrael  acrord-ng  to  the  flesh  .  .  . 
"  honoiirr^h  Mc  with  th°ir  Hps:  but  th^ir  heart  is 
far  from  Me.     But  in  vain  do  they  worship  Me." 


In  vain  do  they  worship:  are  they,  then,  princes 
with  God?  Nay,  verily;  they  are  only  actors  be- 
fore Him,  as  the  Saviour  plainly  says.  Truly 
they  are  not  all  Israel  who  are  of  Israel;  and 
just  as  truly  they  are  not  the  only  Israel  who  are 
of  Israel,  for  here  is  this  woman  of  Canaan  who 
earns  the  name  of  Israel  by  as  hard  a  contest  and 
as  great  a  victory  as  that  of  Jacob  at  the  brook 
Jabbok,  when  first  the  name  was  given. 

Another  instructive  contrast  is  inevitably 
suggested  between  the  foremost  of  the  apostles 
and  this  nameless  woman  of  Canaan.  The  last 
illustration  of  faith  was  Peter's  venture  on  the 
water.  What  a  difiference  between  the  strong 
man  and  the  weak  woman!  To  the  strong,  brave 
man  the  Master  had  to  say  "  O  thou  of  little 
faith!  wherefore  didst  thou  doubt?"  To  the 
weak  woman,  "  O  woman,  great  is  thy  faith." 
What  an  encouragement  here  to  the  little  ones, 
the  obscure,  unnoticed  disciples!  "  Many  that 
are  first  shall  be  last,  and  the  last  first." 

The  encouragement  to  persevering  prayer,  es- 
pecially to  parents  anxious  for  their  children,  is 
so  obvious  that  it  need  only  be  named.  That 
silence  first,  and  then  these  apparent  refusals, 
are  trials  of  faith,  to  which  many  earnest  hearts 
have  not  been  strangers.  To  all  such  the  ex- 
ample of  this  woman  of  Canaan  is  of  great  value. 
Her  earnestness  in  making  the  case  of  her 
daughter  her  own  (she  does  not  say,  "  Have 
mercy  on  my  daughter;"  but,  "  Have  mercy  on 
vie;"  and  again,  "  Lord,  help  me"),  and  her  un- 
conquerable perseverance  till  the  answer  came, 
have  been  an  inspiration  ever  since,  and  will  be 
to  the  end  of  the  world. 

The  lesson  taught  by  our  Lord's  dealing  with 
the  woman  of  Canaan  is  conveyed  again  on  a 
larger  scale  by  what  happened  in  the  region  of 
Decapolis,  east  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee;  for  it  was 
in  that  region,  as  we  learn  from  the  more  de- 
tailed account  in  the  second  Gospel,  that  the 
events  which  follow  came  to  pass. 

The  distance  from  the  one  place  to  the  other 
is  considerable,  and  the  route  our  Lord  took 
was  by  no  means  direct.  His  object  at  this 
time  seems  to  have  been  to  court  retirement  as 
much  as  possible,  that  He  might  give  Himself 
to  the  preparation  of  His  disciples — and  we  may 
with  reverence  add,  His  own  preparation  also — 
for  the  sad  journey  southward  to  Jerusalem  and 
Calvary.  Besides,  His  work  in  the  north  is 
done:  no  more  circuits  in  Galilee  now;  so  He 
keeps  on  the  far  outskirts  of  the  land,  passing 
through  Sidon,  across  the  southern  ridge  of 
Lebanon,  past  the  base  of  mighty  Hermon,  then 
southward  to  Decapolis — all  the  way  on  border 
territory,  where  the  people  were  more  heathen 
than  Jewish  in  race  and  religion.  We  can  im- 
agine Him  on  this  long  and  toilsome  journey, 
looking  in  both  directions  with  strange  emotion 
— away  out  to  the  Gentile  nations  with  love  and 
longing;  and  (with  what  mingled  feelings  of  pain 
and  eagerness  who  can  tell?)  to  that  Jerusalem, 
where  soon  He  must  oflFer  up  the  awful  sacrifice. 
When,  after  the  long  journey.  He  came  nigh  to 
the  Sea  of  Galilee,  He  sought  seclusion  by  going 
up  into  a  mountain.  But  even  in  this  borderland 
He  cannot  be  hid;  and  when  the  sick  and  needy 
throng  around  Him,  He  cannot  turn  away  from 
them.  He  still  keeps  within  the  limits  of  His 
commission,  as  set  forth  in  His  reply  to  tJie  wo- 
man of  Canaan;  but,  though  He  does  not  go  to 
seek  out  those  beyond  the  pale,  when  they  seek 


750 


•PHE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


Him,  He  cannot  send  them  away;  accordingly, 
in  these  heathen  or  semi-heathen  regions,  we 
have  another  set  of  cures  and  another  needing 
of  the  hungry  multitude. 

We  need  not  dwell  on  these  incidents,  as  they 
are  a  repetition,  with  variations,  of  what  He  had 
done  at  the  conclusion  of  His  work  in  Galilee. 
As  to  the  repetition, — strange  to  say,  there  are 
those  who  cavil,  whenever  similar  events  appear 
successively  in  the  story  of  the  life  and  work  of 
Christ.  As  if  it  were  possible  that  a  work  like 
His  could  be  free  from  repetition!  How  often 
does  a  physician  repeat  himself  in  the  course  of 
his  practice?  Christ  is  always  repeating  Himself. 
Every  time  a  sinner  comes  to  Him  for  salvation. 
He  repeats  Himself,  with  variations;  and  when 
need  arose  in  Decapolis — like  that  which  had 
previously  arisen  at  Bethsaida,  only  more  urgent, 
for  the  multitude  in  the  present  case  had  been 
three  days  from  home,  and  were  ready  to  faint 
with  hunger — must  their  wants  go  unrelieved 
merely  to  avoid  repetition?  As  to  the  telling  of 
it — for  this  of  course  might  have  been  avoided, 
on  the  ground  that  a  similar  event  had  been 
related  before — was  there  not  most  excellent 
reason  for  it,  in  the  fact  that  these  people  were 
not  of  the  house  of  Israel  in  the  literal  sense? 
To  have  omitted  the  record  of  these  deeds  of 
mercy  would  have  been  to  leave  out  the  evidence 
they  afforded  that  the  love  of  Christ  went  out 
not  to  Jews  only,  but  to  all  sick  and  hungry 
ones. 

Sick  and  hungry — these  words  suggest  the  two 
great  needs  of  humanity.  Christ  comes  to  heal 
disease,  to  satisfy  hunger;  in  particular,  to  heal 
the  root  disease  of  sin,  and  satisfy  the  deep 
hunger  of  the  soul  for  God  and  life  in  Him. 
And  when  we  read  how  He  healed  all  manner 
of  disease  among  the  multitudes  in  Decapolis, 
ana  thereafter  fed  them  abundantly  when  they 
were  ready  to  faint  with  hunger,  we  see  how 
He  is  set  forth  as  a  Saviour  from  sin  and  Re- 
vealer  of  God  beyond  the  borders  of  the  land  of 
Israel. 

It  is  worth  noticing  how  well  this  general 
record  follows  the  story  of  the  woman  of  Ca- 
naan. Just  as  she — though  not  of  Israel  after 
the  flesh — proved  herself  to  be  of  Israel  after 
the  spirit,  so  these  heathen  or  semi-heathen  peo- 
ple of  Decapolis  forsake  their  paganism  when 
they  see  the  Christ;  for  of  no  heathen  deity  do 
they  speak:  they  "glorified  the  God  of  Israel" 
(ver.  ,31).  Thus  we  have  a  contrast  similar  to 
that  which  we  recognised  in  the  case  of  the  wo- 
man of  Canaan,  between  those  scribes  and  Phari- 
sees of  Jerusalem — who  drew  near,  to  the  God 
of  Israel  with  their  lips  while  the  heart  was  far 
away — and  these  people  of  Decapolis,  who, 
though  "  afar  ofif "  in  the  estimation  of  these 
dignitaries  of  Jerusalem,  are  in  truth  "  nigh  " 
to  the  God  of  Israel.  Is  there  not  in  the  events 
of  the  chapter  a  wondrous  light  cast  on  the  true 
meaning  of  the  name  Israel,  as  not  according  to 
the  flesh,  but  according  to  the  spirit? 

IV. — The  Culmination  of  the  Crisis 
(xvi.  1-12). 

All  this  time  Jesus  has  been  keeping  as  much 
out  of  the  way  of  His  ungrateful  countrymen  as 
the  limits  of  His  commission  would  permit, 
hovering,  as  it  were,  around  the  northern  out- 
skirts of  the  land.  But  when  in  the  course  of 
this  largest  circuit  of  all  His  northern  journeys, 


He  reaches  Decapolis,  He  is  so  near  home  thnt  I 
He  cannot  but  cross  the  lake  and  revisit  the  fu-  ^ 
miliar  scenes.  How  is  He  received?  Do  the 
people  flock  around  Him  as  they  did  before? 
If  it  had  been  so,  we  should  no  doubt  have  been 
told.  There  seems  to  have  been  not  a  single 
word  of  welcome.  Of  all  the  multitudes  He  had 
healed  and  blessed,  there  is  no  one  to  cry,  "  Ho- 
sanna  to  the  Son  of  David!  " 

His  friends,  if  He  has  any,  have  gone  back, 
and  walk  no  more  with  Him;  but  His  old  ene- 
mies the  Pharisees  do  not  fail  Him;  and  they  are 
not  alone  now,  nor,  as  before,  in  alliance  only 
with  those  naturally  in  sympathy  with  them,  but 
have  actually  made  a  league  with  their  great  op- 
ponents, the  two  rival  parties  of  Pharisee  and 
Sadducee  finding  in  their  common  hatred  of  the 
Christ  of  God  a  sinister  bond  of  union. 

This  is  the  first  time  the  Sadducees  are  men- 
tioned in  this  Gospel  as  coming  in  contact  with 
Jesus.  Some  of  them  had  come  to  the  baptism 
of  John,  to  his  great  astonishment;  but,  beyond 
this,  they  have  as  yet  put  in  no  appearance. 
They  were  the  aristocracy  of  the  land,  and  held 
the  most  important  offices  of  Church  and  State 
in  the  capital.  It  is  therefore  the  less  to  be 
wondered  at  that  up  to  this  time  the  Carpenter 
of  Nazareth  should  have  been  beneath  their  no- 
tice. Now,  however,  the  news  of  His  great  do- 
ings in  the  north  has  at  last  compelled  attention; 
the  result  is  this  combination  with  the  Pharisees, 
who  have  already  been  for  some  time  engaged  in 
the  attempt  to  put  Him  down.  There  is  indica- 
tion elsewhere  (Mark  viii.  15)  that  the  Herodians 
had  also  united  with  them;  so  we  may  look  upon 
this  as  the  culmination  of  the  crisis  in  Galilee, 
when  all  the  forces  of  the  country  have  been 
roused  to  active  and  bitter  hostility. 

The  Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  as  is  well  known, 
were  at  opposite  poles  of  thought;  the  one  being 
the  traditionalists,  the  other  the  sceptics,  of  the 
time,  so  that  it  was  quite  remarkable  that  they 
should  unite  in  anything.  They  did,  however, 
unite  in  this  demand  for  a  sign  from  heaven. 
Neither  of  them  could  deny  that  signs  had  been 
given, — that  the  blind  had  received  sight,  lepers 
had  been  cleansed,  the  lame  healed,  and  deeds  of 
mercy  done  on  every  side.  But  neither  party  was 
satisfied  with  this.  Each  was  wedded  to  a  system 
of  thought  according  to  which  signs  on  earth 
were  of  no  evidential  value.  A  sign  from  heaven 
was  what  they  needed  to  convince  them.  The  de- 
mand was  practically  the  same  as  that  which  the 
Pharisees  and  scribes  had  made  before  (xii.  38), 
though  it  is  put  more  specifically  here  as  a  sign 
from  heaven.  The  reason  why  the  Pharisees 
adopted  the  same  method  of  attack  as  before  is 
not  far  to  seek.  Their  object  was  not  to  ob- 
tain satisfaction  as  to  His  claims,  but  to  find  the 
easiest  way  of  discrediting  them;  and,  knowing 
as  they  did  from  their  past  experience  that  the  de- 
mand of  a  special  sign  would  be  refused,  they 
counted  on  the  refusal  beforehand,  to  be  used  by 
their  new  allies  as  well  as  themselves  as  a  weapon 
against  Him.  They  were  not  disappointed,  for 
our  Lord  was  no  respecter  of  persons;  there- 
fore He  spoke  just  as  plainly  and  sternly  when 
the  haughty  Sadducees  were  present  as  He  had 
done  before  they  made  their  appearance. 

The  words  are  stern  and  strong;  but  here  again 
it  is  "  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger  "  that  He 
speaks.  We  learn  from  St.  Mark  that,  as  He 
gave  His  answers,  "  He  sighed  deeply  in  His 
spirit."     There  had  been  so  many  signs,  and  they 


Alatthew  xvi.  i3-xvii.  21.] 


THE    NEW    DEPARTURE. 


751 


were  so  plain  and  clear — signs  which  spoke  for 
themselves,  signs  which  so  plainly  spelt  out  the 
words,  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  among  you  " 
— that  it  was  unspeakably  sad  to  think  that  they 
should  be  blind  to  them  all,  and  find  it  in  their 
heart  to  ask  for  something  else,  which  in  its 
nature  would  be  no  sign  at  all,  but  only  a  por- 
tent, a  barren   miracle. 

We  can  see  in  this  how  determined  our  Lord 
was  not  to  minister  to  the  craving  for  the  merely 
miraculous.  He  would  work  no  miracle  for  the 
mere  purpose  of  exciting  astonishment  or  even 
of  producing  conviction,  when  there  was  quite 
enough  for  all  who  were  at  all  willing  to  receive 
it,  in  the  regular,  natural,  and  necessary  develop- 
ment of  His  work  as  the  Healer  of  the  sick, 
the  Shepherd  of  the  people,  the  Refuge  of  the 
troubled  and  distressed.  Had  there  been  no 
signs  of  the  times,  there  might  have  been  some 
reason  for  signs  in  the  heavens;  but  when  there 
were  signs  in  abundance  of  the  kind  to  appeal 
to  all  that  was  best  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of 
men,  why  should  these  be  discredited  by  resort- 
ing to  another  kind  of  sign  much  inferior  and  far 
less  adapted  to  the  securing  of  the  special  object 
for  which  the  King  of  heaven  had  come  into  the 
world?  The  signs  of  the  times  were  after  all  far 
more  easily  discerned  than  those  signs  in  the 
heavens  by  which  they  were  accustomed  to  an- 
ticipate both  fine  and  stormy  weather.  There 
were  signs  of  blessing  enough  to  convince  any 
doubter  that  the  summer  of  heaven  was  easily 
within  His  reach;  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  state 
of  the  nation,  and  the  rapidly  developing  cir- 
cumstances which  were  hastening  on  the  ful- 
filment of  the  most  terrible  of  the  prophecies 
concerning  it,  there  were  signs  enough  to  give 
far  more  certain  indication  of  approaching  judg- 
ment, than  when  the  red  and  lowering  morning 
gave  token  of  the  coming  thunderstorm  (vy.  2, 
3).  So  He  tells  them,  convicting  them  of  wilful 
blindness;  and  then  repeats  in  almost  identical 
terms  the  refusal  He  had  given  to  the  scribes 
and  Pharisees  before:  "  A  wicked  and  adulterous 
generation  seeketh  after  a  sign;  and  there  shall 
no  sign  be  given  unto  it,  but  the  sign  of  the 
prophet  Jonas  "  (see  xii.  39,  and  remarks  on  it 
on  pp.  738-9)- 

"  And  He  left  them,  and  departed."  How  sad 
for  Him;  how  awful  for  them!  Had  there  been 
in  their  hearts  one  single  aspiration  for  the  true 
and  good.  He  would  not  have  left  them  so. 
Where  are  these  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  now? 
What  do  they  now  think  of  the  work  of  that 
day? 

"  He  left  them,  and  again  entering  into  the 
boat  departed  to  the  other  side "  (Mark  viii. 
13).  Did  He  ever  cross  the  lake  again?  If  He 
did,  there  is  no  record  of  it.  He  passed  in  sight 
of  it  in  that  sorrowful  southward  journey  to  Je- 
rusalem which  He  must  presently  commence; 
and  He  will  visit  the  same  shore  again  after  His 
resurrection  to  cheer  the  apostles  at  their  toil; 
but  this  seems  to  have  been  the  last  crossing. 
What  a  sad  one  it  must  have  been! — after  a  be- 
ginning so  bright  that  it  was  heralded  as  daybreak 
on  Gennesaret's  shore,  after  all  His  self-denying 
toil,  after  all  the  words  of  wisdom  He  has  spoken 
and  the  deeds  of  mercy  He  has  done  upon  these 
shoves,  to  leave  them,  as  He  does  now,  rejected 
and  despised,  an  outcast,  to  all  outward  appear- 
ance a  failure.  No  wonder  He  is  silent  in  that 
crossing  of  the  lake;  no  wonder  He  is  lost  in 
saddest  thought,  turning  over  and  over  in  His 


mind  the  signs  of  the  times  forced  so  painfully 
on  His  attention! 

The  disciples  with  Him  in  the  boat  had  no 
share  in  these  sad  thoughts.  Their  minds,  as  it 
would  seem,  were  occupied  for  the  most  part 
with  the  mistake  they  had  made  in  provisioning 
the  boat.  Accordingly,  when  at  last  He  broke 
silence.  He  found  them  quite  out  of  touch  with 
Him.  He  had  been  thinking  of  the  sad  un- 
belief of  these  Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  and  of 
the  awful  danger  of  allowing  the  spirit  which 
was  in  them  to  dominate  the  life;  hence  the  sol- 
emn caution:  "Take  heed,  and  beware  of  the 
leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees." 
The  disciples  meantime  had  been  counting  their 
loaves,  or  rather,  looking  sadly  on  the  one  loaf 
which,  on  searching  their  baskets,  they  found  to 
be  all  they  had;  and  when  the  word  leaven  caught 
their  ear,  coupled  with  a  caution  as  to  a  particu- 
lar kind  of  it,  they  said  one  to  another,  "  It  is  be- 
cause we  have  taken  no  bread!  "  Another  cause 
of  sadness  to  the  Master.  He  had  been  mourn- 
ing over  the  blindness  of  Pharisees  and  Sad- 
ducees; He  must  now  mourn  over  the  blindness 
of  His  own  disciples;  and  not  blindness  only, 
but  also  forgetfulness  of  a  thrice-taught  lesson: 
for  why  should  the  mere  supply  of  bread  be  any 
cause  of  anxiety  to  them,  after  what  they  had 
seen  once  and  again  in  these  very  regions  to 
which  they  were  going? 

But  these  hearts  were  not  shut  against  Him; 
theirs  was  not  the  blindness  of  those  that  will 
not  see;  accordingly,  the  result  is  very  different. 
He  did  not  leave  them  and  depart;  nor,  on  the 
other  hand,  did  He  explain  in  so  many  words 
what  He  meant.  It  was  far  better  that  they 
should  find  out  for  themselves.  The  riddles  of 
nature  and  of  life  are  not  furnished  with  keys. 
They  must  be  discerned  by  thoughtful  attention; 
so,  instead  of  providing  them  a  key  to  His 
little  parable.  He  puts  them  in  the  way  of  find- 
ing it  for  themselves  by  asking  them  a  series 
of  questions  which  convinced  them  of  their 
thoughtlessness  and  faithlessness,  and  led  them 
to  recognise  His  true  meaning  (vv.  8-12). 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  NEW  DEPARTURE. 

(Founding    of    the    Church.) 

Matthew  xvi.    13-xvii.  21. 

This  conversation  at  C?esarea  Philippi  is  uni- 
versally regarded  as  marking  a  new  era  in  the 
life  of  Christ.  His  rejection  by  "  His  own  "  is 
now  complete.  Jerusalem,  troubled  at  His  birth, 
had  been  troubled  once  again  when  He  suddenly 
came  to  His  Temple,  and  began  to  cleanse  it  in 
His  Father's  name;  and  though  many  at  the  feast 
were  attracted  by  His  deeds  of  mercy.  He  could 
not  commit  Himself  to  any  of  them  (John  ii. 
24) :  there  was  no  rock  there  on  which  to  build 
His  Church.  He  had  passed  through  Samaria, 
and  found  there  fields  white  unto  the  harvest, 
but  the  time  of  reaping  was  not  yet.  Galilee  had 
given  better  promise:  again  and  again  it  had  ap- 
peared as  if  the  foundation  of  the  new  kingdom 
would  be  firmly  laid  in  the  land  of  "  Zebulun  and 
Naphtali";  but  there  had  been  bitter  and  crush- 
ing disappointment, — even  the  cities  where  most 
of  His  mighty  works  were  done  repented  not. 


752 


THE    GOSPEL    OF^ST.    MATTHEW. 


The  people  had  eagerly  welcomed  His  earthly 
things;  but  when  He  began  to  speak  to  them 
of  heavenly  things  they  "  went  back,  and  walked 
no  more  with  Him."  And  though  opportunity 
after  opportunity  was  given  them  while  He 
hovered  on  the  outskirts,  ever  and  anon  return- 
ing *  to  the  familiar  scenes,  they  would  not  re- 
pent; they  would  not  welcome  or  even  receive 
the  kingdom  of  God  which  Christ  came  to  found. 
The  country  has  been  traversed  from  the  wi  der- 
ness  of  Judea,  in  the  far  south,  even  unto  Dan; 
and  as  there  had  been  no  room  for  the  Infant 
King  in  the  inn,  so  there  was  none  in  all  the  land 
for  the  infant  kingdom. 

Thus  it  comes  to  pass  that,  with  the  very 
small  band  He  has  gathered  around  Him — called 
in  the  land  indeed,  but  now  of  necessity  called 
to  come  out  of  it — He  withdraws  to  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Gentile  town  of  Csesarea 
Philippi;  not  for  seclusion  only,  but,  as  the 
event  shows,  to  found  an  Ecclesia — His  Church. 
The  scenery  in  this  region  is  exceptionally  beau- 
tiful, and  the  place  was  in  every  way  suited  for  a 
season  of  quiet  communion  with  nature  and  with 
nature's  God.  It  was,  moreover,  just  outside  the 
land;  and  in  the  place  and  surroundings  there 
was  much  that  must  have  been  suggestive  and 
inspiring.  Is  not  this  great  mountain,  on  one 
of  the  southern  flanks  of  which  they  are  now 
resting,  the  mighty  Hermon,  the  great  landmark 
of  the  north,  rearing  its  snowy  head  on  high  to 
catch  the  precious  clouds  of  heaven,  and  enrich 
with  them  the  winds  that  shall  blow  southward 
over  Palestine?  And  are  not  these  springs 
which  issue  from  the  rock  beside  them  the 
sources  of  the  Jordan,  the  sacred  river?  As  the 
dew  of  Hermon,  and  as  the  flowing  of  the  water- 
springs,  shall  be  that  Church  of  the  living  God, 
which,  as  the  sequel  will  unfold,  had  its  first 
foundation  on  this  rocky  hillside  and  by  these 
river  sources. 

Into  this  remote  and  rocky  region,  then,  the 
Master  has  retired  with  the  small  band  of  faith- 
ful disciples,  on  whom  alone  He  can  depend  for 
the  future.  But  can  He  depend  even  on  them? 
Have  they  not  been  tainted  with  the  general 
apostasy?  Does  He  not  already  know  one  of 
them  to  be  in  heart  a  traitor?  (cf.  John  vi. 
70).  And  have  not  all  of  them  just  needed  the 
caution  themselves  to  beware  of  the  leaven  of 
the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees?  Are  they  really 
strong  men  of  faith,  like  "  faithful  Abraham," 
or  are  they  to  be  like  reeds  shaken  by  the  wind? 
The  time  has  come  to  test  it.  ^  This  He  does, 
first  by  asking  them  what  they  think  of  Him- 
self, and  then  by  showing  them  what  they  must 
expect  if  they  still  will  follow  Him.  First  there 
must  be  the  test  of  faith,  to  ascertain  what  they 
have  learned  from  their  intercourse  with  Him 
in  the  past;  then  the  test  of  hope,  lest  their 
attachment  to  Him  should  be  based  on  expec- 
tations doomed  to  disappointment. 

I. — The  Christ  (xvi.   13-20). 

The  faith  test  is  a  strictly  personal  one.  We 
have  seen  how  the  Master  has,  so  to  speak, 
focussed  His  gospel  in  Himself.  He  had  begun 
by  preaching  the   Gospel  of  the   Kingdom,  and 

*  A  touching  fulfilment  of  the  Messianic  spirit  of  these 
prophetic  words:  "How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim? 
how  shall  I  deliver  thee,  Israel  ?  how  shall  I  make  thee  as 
Admah?  how  shall  I  set  thee  as  Zeboim  ?  mine  heart  is 
turned  within  me,  my  repentings  are  kindled  together." 
Compare  chap,  xi.  21-24. 


calling  men  to  repentance;  but  as  time  passed 
on  He  found  it  necessary  to  make  a  more  per- 
sonal appeal,  pressing  His  invitations  in  the 
winning  form,  "  Come  unto  Me."  When  things 
came  to  a  crisis  in  Galilee  He  first  in  symbol 
and  then  in  word  set  Himself  before  the  people 
as  the  bread  of  life,  which  each  one  must  re- 
ceive and  eat  if  he  would  live.  Thus  He  has 
been  making  it  more  and  more  evident  that  the 
only  way  to  receive  the  Kingdom  of  God .  is 
to  welcome  Himself  as  the  Son  of  the  living 
God  come  to  claim  the  hearts  of  men  for  His 
Father  in  heaven.  How  is  it  with  the  little 
band?  Is  theirs  the  popular  notion,  which 
classes  the  Son  of  God  as  only  one  among 
other  gifted  sons  of  men,  or  do  they  welcome 
Him  in  the  plenitude  of  His  divine  prerogative 
and  power?  Hence  the  first  inquiry,  which 
brings  out  the  answer:  "  Some  say  that  Thou 
art  John  the  Baptist:  some,  Elias;  and  others, 
Jeremias,  or  one  of  the  prophets."  This  is  man- 
ifestly the  popular  idea  at  its  highest  and  best. 
There  were,  no  doubt,  among  the  people  those 
whose  thought  already  was  "  Away  with  Him! 
away  with  Him!  "  But  it  might  well  go  without 
saying  that  the  disciples  had  no  sympathy  with 
these.  It  did,  however,  remain  to  be  seen 
whether  they  were  not  content,  like  the  rest  of 
the  people,  to  accept  Him  as  a  teacher  sent 
from  God,  a  great  prophet  of  Israel,  or  at  most 
a  John  the  Baptist,  the  mere  herald  of  the  com- 
ing King.  We  can  imagine,  then,  with  what 
intensity  of  feeling  the  Master  would  look  into 
the  disciples'  eyes  as  He  put  the  testing  ques- 
tion, "  But  whom  say  ye  that  I  am?"  and  with 
what  joy  He  would  hail  the  ready  response  of 
their  spokesman  Peter,  when,  with  eyes  full  of 
heavenly  light  and  heart  glowing  with  sacred 
fire,  he  exclaimed,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God!" 

It  would  be  beyond  belief,  were  it  not  so 
sadly  familiar  a  fact,  that  some,  professing  hon- 
estly to  interpret  this  passage,  resolve  the  an- 
swer of  the  apostle  into  little  or  nothing  more 
than  the  popular  idea,  as  if  the  Sonship  here 
referred  to.  were  only  what  any  prophet  or  right- 
eous man  might  claim.  He  surely  must  be 
wilfully  t)lind  who  does  not  see  that  the  apos- 
tolic answer  which  the  Lord  accepts  is  wide 
as  the  poles  from  the  popular  notions  He 
so  decisively  rejects;  and  this  is  made  pe- 
culiarly emphatic  by  the  striking  words  with 
which  the  true  answer  is  welcomed — the  Sav- 
iour's first  personal  beatitude  (as  if  to  suggest, 
His  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven — cf.  Matt.  v.  3, 
10):  "Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona:  for 
fiesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee, 
but  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven."  It  will 
be  remembered  that,  in  asserting  His  own  per- 
sonal relation  to  the  Father,  Christ  had  said: 
"  No  man  knoweth  the  Son,  but  the  Father; 
neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father,  save  the 
Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal 
Him  "  (xi.  27) ;  and  now  that  to  one  at  least  the 
Father  has  been  revealed  in  the  Son,  He  recog- 
nises the  fact  with  joy.  These  notions  of  the 
people  about  Him  were  but  earth-born  notions, 
the  surmisings  of  "  flesh  and  blood  "  :  this  faith 
of  the  true  apostle  was  born  from  above;  it  could 
have   come  only  from, heaven. 

Now  at  last,  therefore,  the  foundation  is  laid, 
and  the  building  of  the  spiritual  temple  is  be- 
gun. The  words  which  follow  (ver.  18)  are 
quite  natural  and  free  from  most,   if  not  from 


1 


[atthevv  xvi.  13-xvii.  21.] 


THE    NEW    DEPARTURE. 


753 


all,  the  difficulties  in  which  perverse  human  in- 
genuity has  entangled  them,  if  only  we  bear  in 
mind  the  circumstances  and  surroundings.  The 
little  group  is  standing  on  one  of  the  huge  rocky 
flanks  of  mighty  Hcrmon,  great  boulders  here 
and  there  around  them;  and  in  all  probability, 
well  in  sight,  some  great  stones  cut  out  of  the 
rock  and  made  ready  for  use  in  building,  like 
those  still  to  be  seen  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Baalbec,  to  the  north  of  Hermon;  for  this  region 
was  famous  for  its  great  temples.  Now,  when 
we  remember  that  the  two  words  our  Lord  uses 
{v^rpos  and  irirpa)  for  "  rock  "  in  our  version 
have  not  precisely  the  same  meaning — the  one 
(Petros,  Peter)  signifying  a  piece  of  rock,  a 
stone,  the  other  (Petra)  suggesting  rather  the 
great  bed-rock  out  of  which  these  stones  are 
cut  and  on  which  they  are  lying — we  can  under- 
stand that,  while  the  reference  is  certainly  in 
the  first  place  to  Peter  himself,  the  main  thing 
is  the  great  fact  just  brought  out  that  he  is 
resting,  in  the  strength  of  faith,  on  God  as  re- 
vealed in  His  Son.  Thus,  while  Peter  is  cer- 
tainly the  piece  of  rock,  the  first  stone  which 
is  laid  upon  the  great  underlying  foundation  on 
which  all  the  faithful  build,  and  therefore  is 
in  a  sense — the  common  popular  sense,  in  fact 
— the  foundation  stone,  yet  the  foundation  of  all 
is  the  Bed-Rock,  on  which  the  first  stone  and 
all  other  stones  are  laid.  Bearing  this  well 
in  mind,  we  further  see  that  there  is  no  incon- 
sistency between  this  and  those  other  scriptures 
in  which  God  is  represented  as  alone  the  Rock  of 
our  salvation.  The  Bed-Rock,  "  the  Rock  of 
Ages,"  is  here,  as  elsewhere,  God  as  revealed  in 
His  Son,  and  Peter  is  the  first  stone  "  well  and 
truly  laid  "  upon  it. 

If  the  surroundings  suggest  the  use  of  the 
words  "  Petros  "  and  "  Petra,"  stone  and  rock, 
the  circumstances  suggest  the  use  of  the  word 
Ecclesia,  or  Church,  which  is  here  employed  by 
our  Lord  for  the  first  time.  Up  to  this  time 
He  has  spoken  always  of  the  kingdom,  never 
of  the  church.  How  is  this  to  be  explained? 
Of  course  the  kingdom  is  the  larger  term;  and 
row  it  is  necessary  that  that  portion  of  the  king- 
com  which  is  to  be  organised  on  earth  should 
le  distinguished  by  a  specific  designation;  and 
tie  use  of  the  word  "church"  in  preference  to 
t  le  more  familiar  "  synagogue  "  may  be  ac- 
c  3unted  for  by  the  desire  to  avoid  confusion. 
I  esides  this,  however,  the  word  itself  is  specially 
s  gnificant.  It  means  an  assembly  "  called  out," 
and  suggests  the  idea  of  separateness,  so  appro- 
priate to  the  circumstances  of  the  little  band  of 
outcasts. 

To  see  into  this  more  fully  let  us  recall  the 
recent  teaching  as  to  the  true  Israel  (chap,  xv.), 
no  longer  to  be  found  in  the  old  land  of  Israel. 
]f  there  is  to  be  an  Israel  at  all,  it  must  be 
reconstituted  "  outside  the  camp."  In  view  of 
(his,  how  strikingly  significant  is  it  that  just 
^s  Abraham  had  to  leave  his  country  and  go 
■'  o  a  strange  land  to  found  the  old  theocracy, 
;  o  Christ  has  to  leave  His  country  and  go  with 
llis  followers  to  those  remote  northern  regions 
\o  constitute  "the  Israel  of  God,"  to  inaugurate 
j-lis  Church,  the  company  of  those  who,  like 
I  hese  faithful  ones,  come  out  and  are  separate 
>o  be  united  by  faith  to  Him!     Christ  with  the 

Twelve  around  Him  is  the  Israel  of  the  New 
Testament;  and  we  can  imagine  that  it  was  on 
:  his  occasion  especially  that  in  the  prayers  which 

ve   know   from    St.    Luke's    Gospel    He    offered 
48— Vol.  IV. 


in  connection  with  this  very  conversation.  He 
would  find  these  words  of  devotion  especially  ap- 
propriate: "  Behold,  I  and  the  children  which 
God  hath  given  Me  "  (Heb.  ii.  13).  The  family 
of  God  (see  chap.  xii.  49)  are  by  themselves 
apart,  disowned  by  those  who  still  bear  un- 
worthily the  name  of  Israel;  and  most  appro- 
priate it  is  that  on  this  occasion  our  Lord  should 
begin  to  use  that  great  word,  which  means  first 
"  called  out  "  and  then  "  gathered  in  "  :  "  on  this 
rock  I  will  build  My  Church." 

When  we  think  of  the  place  and  the  scene 
and  the  circumstances,  the  sad  memories  of  the 
past  and  the  gloomy  forebodings  for  the  future, 
what  sublimity  of  faith  must  we  recognise  in 
the  words  which  immediately  follow:  "  The 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it"  !  Oh! 
shame  on  us  who  grow  faint-hearted  with  each 
discouragement,  when  the  Master,  with  rejection 
behind  Him  and  death  before  Him,  found  it 
encouragement  enough  after  so  much  toil  to 
make  a  bare  beginning  of  the  new  temple  of 
the  Lord;  and  even  in  that  day  of  smallest 
things  was  able  to  look  calmly  forward  across 
the  troubled  sea  of  the  dark  future  and  already 
raise  the  shout  of  final  victory! 

But  that  day  of  victory  is  still  far  of?;  and 
before  it  can  even  begin  to  come,  there  must 
be  a  descent  into  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of 
death.  He  is  about  to  tell  His  disciples  that 
He  must  go  up  to  Jerusalem  and  die,  and  leave 
them  to  be  the  builders  of  the  Church.  He  can- 
not continue  long  to  be  the  Keeper  of  the  keys; 
so  He  must  prepare  them  for  taking  them  from 
His  hand  when  the  time  shall  come  for  Him 
to  go.  Hence  the  words  which  follow,  appro- 
priately addressed  in  the  first  place  to  the  disciple 
who  had  first  confessed  Him:  "  I  will  give  unto 
thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
"  Honour  to  whom  honour  is  due:  "  the  first 
member  of  the  Church  is  to  be  its  prime  minis- 
ter as  well.  When  the  Master's  voice  shall  be 
silent,  the  voice  of  the  rock-disciple  (and  of  the 
other  disciples  as  well,  for  the  same  commission 
was  afterwards  extended  to  them  all)  shall  have 
the  same  authority  to  bind,  to  loose,  to  regulate 
theadministration  of  Church  afifairs  as  if  He  Him- 
self were  with  them.  It  is  not  yet  time  to  tell 
them  how  it  would  be — viz.,  by  the  coming  ajid 
indwelling  of  His  Spirit;  it  is  enough  now  to 
give  them  the  assurance  that  the  infant  Church 
shall  not  be  left  without  authority  from  above, 
without  power  from  on   high. 

The  Church  is  founded;  but  for  a  time  it  must 
remain  in  obscurity.  The  people  are  not  ready; 
and  the  gospeL  which  is  to  be  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation,  is  not  yet  complete,  until  He 
shall  go  up  to  Jerusalem  and  suffer  many  things 
and  die.  Till  then  all  that  has  passed  in  this 
sacred  northern  retreat  must  remain  a  secret: 
"  He  charged  His  disciples  that  they  should  tell 
no  man  that  He  was  the  Christ  "  (R.  V.). 

II. — The   Cross    (xvi.   21-28). 

A  still  more  searching  test  must  now  be  ap- 
plied. It  is  not  enough  to  discover  what  they 
have  learned  from  their  intercourse  with  Him 
in  the  past;  He  must  find  out  whether  they 
have  courage  enough  to  face  what  is  now  im- 
pending in  the  future.  Their  faith  in  God  as 
revealed  in  Christ  His  Son  has  been  well  ap- 
proved. It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  it  is 
strong  enough  to  bear  the  ordeal  of  the  cross. 


754 


THE    GOSPEL   OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


to  which  it  must  soon  be  subjected:  "  From  that 
time  forth  began  Jesus  to  show  unto  His  dis- 
ciples how  that  He  must  go  unto  Jerusalem  and 
suffer  many  things  of  the  elders  and  chief  priests 
and  scribes,  and  be  killed." 

Already  from  time  to  time  He  had  darkly 
hinted  what  manner  of  death  He  should  die; 
but  it  was  only  from  this  time  that  He  began 
to  show  it  unto  them,  to  put  it  before  them 
so  that  they  could  not  fail  to  see  it.  Herein  see 
the  wisdom  and  tender  considerateness  of  "  the 
Son  of  man."  So  dark  and  difficult  a  lesson 
would  have  been  too  much  for  them  before. 
The  ordeal  would  have  been  too  severe.  Not 
until  their  faith  has  begun  with  some  firmness 
to  grasp  His  true  and  proper  divinity,  can  their 
hope  live  with  such  a  prospect.  There  must 
be  some  basis  for  a  faith  in  His  rising  again, 
before  He  can  ask  them  even  to  look  into  the 
dark  abyss  of  death  into  which  He  must  de- 
scend. That  basis  is  found  in  the  confession 
of  the  rock-apostle;  and  relying  on  it  He  can 
trust  them  by-and-by,  if  not  at  once,  to  look 
through  the  darkness  of  the  suffering  and  death 
to  the  rising  again,  the  prospect  of  which  He 
sets  before  them  at  the  very  same  time:  "and 
be  raised  again  the  third  day."  Besides,  there 
was  no  possibility  of  their  ever  beginning  to 
understand  the  atonement  till  they  had  grasped 
the  truth  of  the  incarnation.  To  this  day  the 
one  is  intelligible  only  in  the  light  of  the  other. 
Those  to  whom  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  only  "  one 
of  the  prophets  "  cannot  begin  to  see  how  He 
must  suffer  and  die.  Only  those  who  with  the 
apostles  rise  to  the  realisation  of  His  divine 
glory  are  prepared  to  understand  anything  of 
the  mystery  of  His  Cross  and  Passion. 

As  yet,  however,  the  mystery  is  too  deep  and 
the  prospect  too  dark  even  for  them,  as  be- 
comes painfully  evident  from  the  conduct  of  the 
bravest  of  them  all,  who  "  took  Him,  and  be- 
gan to  rebuke  Him,  saying.  Be  it  far  from  Thee, 
Lord:  this  shall  not  be  unto  Thee." 

We  naturally  and  properly  blame  the  presump- 
tion of  the  apostle,  who,  when  he  did  not  under- 
stand, might  at  least  have  been  silent,  or  have 
contented  himself  with  some  modest  question, 
instead  of  this  unbecoming  remonstrance  with 
One  Whose  Messiahship  and  Divine  Sonship  he 
had  just  confessed.  But,  though  we  may  blame 
him  for  what  he  said,  we  cannot  wonder  at 
what  he  thought  and  felt.  The  lesson  of  the 
cross  is  just  beginning.  The  disciples  are  just 
entering  a  higher  form  in  the  Master's  school; 
and  it  does  not  follow,  because  they  have  un- 
dergone so  well  their  examination  on  the  great 
lesson  of  the  past,  that  they  are  prepared  all 
at  once  to  take  in  what  must  be  the  great  les- 
son of  the  future.  They  have  had  time  for  the 
first:  may  they  not  be  allowed  time  for  the 
second?  Why,  then,  is  Peter  reproved  so  very 
severely? 

We  may  say,  indeed,  that  faithfulness  to  Peter 
himself  required  it.  The  strong  commendation 
with  which  his  noble  confession  has  been 
greeted,  instead  of  making  him  humble,  as  it 
ought  to  have  done,  inasmuch  as  it  reminded 
him  that  it  was  not  of  himself  but  from  above 
he  had  the  power  to  make  it,  seems  to  have 
made  him  over-confident,  trustful  to  that  very 
flesh  and  blood  to  which  he  had  been  assured 
he  was,  in  regard  to  that  confession,  in  no  wise 
indebted.  It  was  therefore  necessary  that  the 
warm   commendation  accorded  to   the   strength 


of  his  faith  should  be  balanced  by  an  equally 
strong  condemnation  of  his  unbelief.  But  there 
is  more  than  this  to  be  said.  Christ  is  look- 
ing at  Peter,  and  speaking  to  Peter;  but  he 
recognises  another,  whom  He  names  and  whom 
in  the  first  place  he  addresses:  "  Get  thee  be- 
hind Me,  Satan."  He  recognises  the  same  old 
enemy,  with  the  same  old  weapon  of  assault; 
for  it  is  the  same  temptation  as  that  which 
formed  the  climax  of  the  conflict  in  the  wil- 
derness, a  temptation  to  prosecute  His  work  by 
methods  which  would  spare  Him  the  awful 
agony  of  the  cross.  The  devil  had  departed 
from  Him  then;  but  only,  as  we  were  informed, 
"  for  a  season  "  ;  and  there  are  frequent  indica- 
tions in  the  subsequent  history  that  at  critical 
times  the  great  adversary  took  opportunities  of 
renewing  the  old  temptation.  This  is  one  of 
these  occasions.  Let  us  by  all  means  bear  in 
mind  that  our  Lord  was  true  man — that  He  was 
'■  compassed  with  infirmity,"  that  He  was 
"  tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we  are,"  though 
ever  without  sin;  let  us  not  imagine,  then,  that 
His  human  soul  was  always  on  so  serene  a 
height  that  the  words  of  one  who  loved  Him 
and  whom  He  loved  so  much  would  have  no 
effect  on  Him.  It  was  hard  enough  for  Him 
to  face  the  awful  darkness,  without  having  this 
new  stumbling-block  set  in  His  path.  It  is  a 
real  temptation,  and  a  most  dangerous  one;  He 
may  not  therefore  tamper  with  it  for  a  moment: 
He  may  not  allow  His  affection  for  His  true 
disciple  to  blind  Him  to  the  real  source  of  it; 
He  must  realise  with  whom  He  has  to  deal; 
He  must  behind  the  love  of  the  apostle  recog- 
nise the  malice  of  the  evil  one,  who  is  using 
him  as  his  instrument;  accordingly,  with  His 
face  set  as  a  flint,  with  His  whole  being  braced 
for  resistance,  so  that  not  a  hair's-breadth  shall 
be  yielded.  He  says:  "  Get  thee  behind  Me, 
Satan:  thou  art  a  stumbling-block  unto  Me" 
(R.  V.) — words  which  clearly  indicate  that  He 
had  recognised  the  danger,  and  summoned  the 
resources  of  His  faith  and  obedience  to  put  the 
stumbling-block  away. 

"  Resist  the  devil,  and  he  will  flee  from  you." 
We  may  be  sure,  therefore,  that  so  soon  as  the 
energetic  words  were  spoken  he  was  gone:  the 
stumbling-block  was  out  of  the  way.  The  words 
which  follow  may  therefore  be  regarded  as 
spoken  to  Peter  himself,  to  bring  to  his  own. 
consciousness  the  difference  between  the  heav- 
enly faith  which  had  come  by  revelation  from 
above,  and  the  earthly  doubt  and  denial,  which 
was  evidently  not  of  God,  though  so  natural 
to  flesh  and  blood:  "Thou  mindest  not  the 
things  of  God,  but  the  things  of  men  "  (R.  V.). 

Thus  once  more  the  Christ  of  God  takes  up 
the  cross  of  man.  In  doing  so  He  not  only  sets 
aside  the  protest,  uttered  or  unexpressed,  of  His 
disciples'  hearts;  but  He  tells  them  plainly  that 
they  too  must  take  the  same  dark  path  if  they 
would  follow  Him:  "Then  said  Jesus  unto  His 
disciples,  If  any  man  will  come  after  Me,  let 
him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross,  and 
follow  Me."  So  He  tests  them  to  the  utter- 
most. He  withdraws  nothing  He  has  said  about 
the  blessedness  of  those  who  welcome  the  king- 
dom of  heaven;  but  the  time  has  come  to  put 
the  necessary  condition  in  its  strongest  light,  so 
that,  if  they  still  follow,  it  will  be  not  blindly, 
but  with  eyes  fully  open  to  all  that  it  involves. 
He  has  given  hints  before  of  the  stringency  of 
the  Divine  requirement;  He  has  spoken  of  the 


Matthew  xvi.  13-xvii.  21.] 


THE    NEW    DEPARTURE. 


755 


strait  gate  and  the  narrow  way;  now  He  goes 
to  the  very  heart  of  that  hard  matter,  and  un- 
folds the  innermost  secret  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  "  Let  him  deny  himself:  "  here  is  the 
pivot   of  all — the  crux. 

Be  it  observed  that  this  is  not  "  self-denial  " 
as  currently  understood,  a  term  applied  to  the 
denial  to  self  of  something  or  other  which  per- 
haps self  cares  very  little  about,  but  something 
much  more  radical.  It  is  the  denial  of  ,  self 
involving  as  its  correlative  the  giving  of  the 
life  to  God.  It  is  the  death  of  self-will,  and 
the  birth  of  God-will,*  as  the  central  force  of 
the   life. 

"  Let  him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross." 
Each  one  has  "  his  "  cross,  some  point  in  which 
the  will  of  God  and  self-will  come  in  direct 
opposition.  To  the  Captain  of  our  salvation  the 
conflict  came  in  its  very  darkest  and  most  dread- 
ful form.  Its  climax  was  in  the  Garden,  when 
after  the  great  agony  He  cried:  "Not  My  will,  but 
Thine  be  done."  Our  conflict  will  not  be  nearly 
so  severe:  it  may  even  be  on  a  point  that  may 
seem  small, — whether  or  not  we  will  give  up 
some  besetting  sin,  whether  or  not  we  will  do 
some  disagreeable  duty,  whether  or  not  we  will 
surrender  something  which  stands  between  us 
and  Christ, — but  whatever  that  be  in  which  the 
will  of  God  and  our  own  will  are  set  in  oppo- 
sition, there  is  our  cross,  and  it  must  be  taken 
up,  and  self  must  be  denied  that  we  may  follow 
Christ.  "  They  that  are  Christ's  have  crucified 
the  flesh." 

Is  this,  then,  the  great  salvation?  Does  it  re- 
solve itself  into  a  species  of  suicide?  Do  we 
enter  the  kingdom  of  life  by  death?  It  is  even 
so;  and  the  words  which  follow  resolve  the 
paradox:  "  For  whosoever  will  save  his  life  shall 
lose  it:  and  whosoever  will  lose  his  life  for  My 
sake  shall  find  it."  It  is  a  surrender  of  life, 
certainly,  for  the  giving  up  of  self  means  the 
giving  up  of  all;  but  these  words  "for  My 
sake  "  make  all  the  difference.  It  is  a  sur- 
render which,  in  dethroning  self,  enthrones 
Christ  in  the  life.  It  is  dying  indeed;  but  it 
is  dying  into  life:  it  is  an  act  of  faith  which 
puts  an  end  to  the  old  life  of  the  flesh,  and 
opens  the  gate  for  the  new  life  of  the  spirit. 

We  have  seen  that  all  may  hinge  on  some 
point  that  may  seem  quite  small,  in  which  case 
the  sacrifice  is  plainly  not  to  be  compared  with 
the  compensation;  but  even  when  the  very  great- 
est sacrifice  is  demanded,  it  is  folly  not  to  make 
it:  "  For  what  shall  a  man  be  profited,  if  he 
shall  gain  the  whole  world,  and  forfeit  his  life?  " 
(R.  v.).  And,  if  life  is  forfeited,  how  can  it 
be  bought  back  again:  "  What  shall  a  man  give 
in  exchange  for  his  life"  (R.  V.)?  "In  Him 
was  life,"  and  in  Him  is  life  still;  therefore  He 
is  more  to  us  than  all  the  world.  It  is  better 
to  suffer  the  loss  of  all  things  for  Christ  than  to 
have  all  that  flesh  and  blood  could  desire  with- 
out Him. 

The  world  is  very  large;  and  the  Son  of  man 
must  have  seemed  very  small  and  weak  that  day, 
as  He  told  them  of  the  coming  days  when  He 
should  suffer  so  many  things  at  His  enemies' 
hands,  and  die;  but  this  is  only  while  the  time 
of  testing  lasts:  things  will  be  seen  in  their  true 
proportion  by-and-by,  when  "  the  Son  of  man 
shall  come  "  (what  a  golden  background  this  to 
the  dark  prospect  immediately  before  them!    He 

*  "  Our  Virills  are  ours,  we  know  not  how  : 
Our  wills  are  ours,  io  make  them  Thine." 


must  go;  yes;  but  He  shall  come)  "  in  the  glory 
of  His  Father  with  His  angels;  then  He  shall 
reward  every  man  according  to  his  works." 
Thus,  with  the  searching  test  the  Saviour  gives 
the  reassuring  prospect;  and  lest  by  reason  of 
its  indefinite  distance  they  may  fail  to  find  in 
it  all  the  encouragement  they  need  for  the  pres- 
ent distress.  He  gives  them  the  further  assurance 
that,  before  very  long,  there  shall  be  manifest 
tokens  of  the  coming  glory  of  their  now  de- 
spised and  slighted  King:  "  Verily  I  say  unto 
you,  There  be  some  standing  here,  which  shall 
not  taste  of  death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man 
coming  in  His  kingdom." 


III. — The  Glory   (xvii.   1-8). 

"  After  six  days  " — the  interval  is  manifestly 
of  importance,  for  the  three  Evangelists  who 
record  the  event  all  lay  stress  on  it.  St.  Luke 
says  "  about  an  eight  days,"  which  indicates  that 
the  six  days  referred  to  by  the  others  were  days 
of  interval  between  that  on  which  the  conver- 
sation at  Csesarea  Philippi  took  place  and  the 
morning  of  the  transfiguration.  It  follows  that 
we  may  regard  this  important  epoch  in  the  life 
of  our  Lord  as  covering  a  week;  and  may  we 
not  speak  of  it  as  His  passion  week  in  the  north? 
The  shadow  of  the  cross  was  on  Him  all  His 
life  through;  but  it  must  have  been  much  darker 
during  this  week  than  ever  before.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  it  He  had  been  obliged  for  the  first 
time  to  let  that  shadow  fall  upon  His  loved 
disciples,  and  the  days  which  followed  seem  to 
have  been  given  to  thought  and  prayer,  and 
quiet,  unrecorded  conversation.  Beyond  all 
question  their  thought  would  be  fixed  on  the 
new  subject  of  contemplation  which  had  just 
been  brought  before  them,  and  whatever  conver- 
sation they  had  with  one  another  and  with  the 
Master  would  have  this  for  its  centre.  It  cannot 
but  have  been  a  very  sad  and  trying  week.  The 
first  tidings  of  the  approach  of  some  impending 
disaster  is  often  harder  to  bear  than  is  the  stroke 
itself  when  afterwards  it  falls.  To  the  disciples 
the  whole  horizon  of  the  future  would  be  filled 
with  darkest  clouds  of  mystery;  for  though  they 
had  been  told  also  of  the  rising  again  and  the 
glory  that  should  follow,  they  could  as  yet  get 
little  cheer  from  what  lay  so  far  in  the  dim 
distance,  and  was,  moreover,  so  little  under- 
stood that  even  after  the  vision  on  the  mount, 
the  favoured  three  questioned  with  each  other 
what  the  rising  from  the  dead  might  mean 
(Mark  ix.  10).  To  the  Master  the  awful  pros- 
pect must  have  been  much  more  definite  and 
real;  yet  even  to  His  human  soul  it  could  not 
have  been  free  from  that  namelessness  of  mys- 
tery that  must  have  made  the  anticipation  in 
some  respects  as  bad  as  the  reality,  rendering  the 
week  to  Him  a  passion  week  indeed. 

No  wonder  that  at  the  end  of  it  He  has  a 
great  longing  heavenward,  and  that  He  should 
ask  the  three  most  advanced  of  His  disciples, 
who  had  been  with  Him  in  the  chamber  of  death 
and  were  afterwards  to  be  witnesses  of  His  agony 
in  the  Garden,  to  go  with  Him  to  a  high  moun- 
tain apart.  The  wisdom  of  His  taking  only  these 
three  was  afterwards  fully  apparent,  when  it 
proved  that  the  experience  awaiting  them  on  the 
mountain-top  was  almost  too  much  for  even 
them  to  bear.  It  is  of  no  importance  to  identify 
the  mountain;  probably  it  was  one  of  the  spurs 


75f> 


'^HE    GOSPEL   OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


of  the  Hernion  range,  at  the  base  of  which  they 
had  spent  the  intervening  week.  We  can  per- 
fectly understand  the  sacred  instinct  which  led 
the  Saviour  to  seek  the  highest  point  which 
could  be  readily  reached,  so  as  to  feel  Himself 
for  the  time  as  far  away  from  earth  and  as  near 
to  heaven  as  possible.  When  we  think  of  this, 
what  pathos  is  there  in  the  reference  to  the 
height  of  the  mountain  and  the  loneliness  of  the 
spot:  He  "  bringeth  them  up  into  a  high  moun- 
tain apart  "  ! 

We  are  told  by  St.  Luke  that  they  went  up 
"  to  pray."  It  seems  most  natural  to  accept  this 
statement  as  not  only  correct,  but  as  a  suffi- 
cient statement  of  the  object  our  Saviour  had  in 
view.  The  thought  of  transfiguration  may  not 
have  been  in  His  mind  at  all.  Here,  as  always, 
He  was  guided  by  the  will  of  His  Father  in 
heaven;  and  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that 
to  His  human  mind  that  will  was  made  known 
earlier  than  the  occasion  required.  We  are  not 
told  that  He  went  up  to  be  transfigured;  we  are 
told  that  He  went  up  to  pray. 

It  seems  probable  that  the  idea  was  to  spend 
the  night  in  prayer.  We  know  that  this  was  a  not 
infrequent  custom  with  Him;  and  if  ever  there 
seemed  a  call  for  it,  it  must  have  been  now, 
when  about  to  begin  that  sorrowful  journey 
which  led  to  Calvary.  With  this  thought  agree 
all  the  indications  which  suggest  that  it  was 
evening  when  they  ascended,  night  while  they  re- 
mained on  the  top,  and  morning  when  they  came 
down.  This,  too,  will  account  in  the  most 
natural  manner  for  the  drowsiness  of  the  apos- 
tles; and  the  fact  that  their  Lord  felt  none  of  it 
only  proved  how  much  more  vivid  was  his  real- 
isation of  the  awfulness  of  the  crisis  than  theirs 
was.  We  are  to  think  of  the  four,  then,  as  slowly 
and  thoughtfully  climbing  the  hill  at  eventide, 
carrying  their  abbas,  or  rugs,  on  which  they 
would  kneel  for  prayer,  and  which,  if  they 
needed  rest,  they  would  wrap  around  them, 
as  is  the  Oriental  custom.  By  the  time  they 
reached  the  top,  night  would  have  cast  its  veil 
of  mystery  on  the  grandeur  of  the  mountains 
round  about  them:  while  snowy  Hermon  in  the 
gloom  would  rise  like  a  mighty  giant  -to  heaven, 
its  summit  "  visited  all  night  by  troops  of  stars." 
Never  before  nor  since  has  there  been  such  a 
prayer  meeting  on  this  earth  of  ours. 

A  careful  reading  of  all  the  records  leads  us 
to  think  of  the  following  as  the  order  of  events. 
Having  gone  up  to  pray,  they  would  doubtless 
all  kneel  down  together.  As  the  night  wore  on, 
the  three  disciples,  being  exhausted,  would  wrap 
themselves  in  their  cloaks  and  go  to  sleep;  while 
the  Master,  to  whom  sleep  at  such  a  time  was 
unnatural,  if  not  impossible,  would  continue  in 
prayer.  Can  we  suppose  that  that  time  of  plead- 
ing was  free  from  agony?  His  soul  had  been 
stirred  within  Him  when  Peter  had  tempted  Him 
to  turn  aside  from  the  path  of  the  Cross;  and 
may  we  not  with  reverence  suppose  that  on  that 
lonely  hilltop,  as  later  in  the  Garden,  there  might 
be  in  His  heart  the  cry,  "  Father,  if  it  be  pos- 
sible "  ?  If  only  the  way  upward  were  open 
now!  Has  not  the  kingdom  of  God  been 
preached  in  Judea,  in  Samaria,  in  Galilee,  away 
to  the  very  borderlands?  and  has  not  the  Church 
been  founded?  and  has  not  authority  been  given 
to  the  apostles?  Is  it,  then,  absolutely  necessary 
to  go  back,  back  to  Jerusalem,  not  to  gain  a 
triumph,  but  to  accept  the  last  humiliation  and 
defeat?    There  cannot  but  have  been  a  great  con- 


flict of  feeling;  and  with  all  the  determination 
to  be  obedient  even  unto  death,  there  must  have 
been  a  shrinking  from  the  way  of  the  cross,  and 
a  great  longing  for  heaven  and  home  and  the 
Father's  welcome.  The  longing  cannot  be  grati- 
fied: it  is  not  possible  for  the  cup  to  pass  from 
Him;  but  just  as  later  in  Gethsemane  there  came 
an  angel  from  heaven  strengthening  him,  so  now 
His  longing  for  heaven  and  home  and  the  smile 
of  His  Father  is  gratified  in  the  gladdening  and 
strengthening  experience  which  followed  His 
prayer — a  foretaste  of  the  heavenly  glory,  so 
vivid,  so  satisfying,  that  He  will  thenceforth  be 
strong,  for  the  joy  that  is  set  before  Him,  to 
endure  the  Cross,  despising  the  shame.  For  be- 
hold, as  He  prays.  His  face  becomes  radiant,  the 
glory  within  shining  through  the  veil  of  His 
mortal  flesh.  We  all  know  that  this  flesh  of  ours 
is  more  or  less  transparent,  and  that  in  moments 
of  exaltation  the  faces  of  even  ordinary  men 
will  shine  as  with  a  heavenly  lustre.  We  need  not 
wonder,  then,  that  it  should  have  been  so  with 
our  Lord,  only  in  an  immeasurably  higher  de- 
gree; that  His  face  should  have  shone  even  "  as 
the  sun  "  ;  and  that,  though  He  could  not  yet 
ascend  to  heaven,  heaven's  brightness  should 
have  descended  on  Him  and  wrapped  Him 
round,  so  that  even  "  His  raiment  was  white  as 
the  light."  And  not  only  heavenly  light  is 
round,  but  heavenly  company;  for  "  behold,  there 
appeared  unto  them  Moses  and  Elias  talking 
with  Him." 

The  disciples  could  not  sleep  through  all  this. 
"  When  thej'^  were  fully  awake,  they  saw  His 
glory,  and  the  two  men  that  stood  with  Him  " 
(Luke  ix.  32,  R.  V.).  How  they  recognised 
them  we  are  not  told.  It  may  have  been  through 
their  conversation,  which  in  part  at  least  they 
understood;  for  the  substance  of  it  has  been  pre- 
served in  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  where  we  read  that 
they  "  spake  of  His  decease  (literally,  exodus) 
which  He  should  accomplish  at  Jerusalem." 
The  human  soul  of  Jesus  no  doubt  longed  for  an 
exodus  here  and  now,  from  this  very  height  of 
Hermon  in  the  presence  of  God;  but  He  knows 
this  cannot  be:  His  exodus  must  be  accomplished 
in  a  very  different  way,  and  at  Jerusalem.  This 
Moses  and  Elijah  knew;  and  their  words  must 
have  brought  Him  encouragement  and  strength, 
and  given  steadiness  and  assurance  to  the  waver- 
ing hearts  of  Peter,  James,  and  John. 

That  the  conversation  was  intended  for  theii 
benefit  as  well,  seems  indicated  by  the  way  in 
which  Peter's  intervention  is  recorjied:  "Then 
answered  Peter,  and  said  unto  Jesus."  What  he 
said  is  quite  characteristic  of  the  impulsive  dis- 
cipline, so  ready  to  speak  without  thinking.  On 
this  occasion  he  blunders  in  a  very  natural  and 
pardonable  way.  He  feels  as  if  he  ought  to  say 
something;  and,  as  nothing  more  to  the  purpose 
occurs  to  him,  he  blurts  out  his  thoughtless  pro- 
posal to  make  three  tabernacles  for  their  abode. 
Besides  the  thoughtlessness  of  this  speech,  which 
is  manifest  enough,  there  seems  to  lurk  in  it  a 
sign  of  his  falling  back  into  the  very  error  which 
a  week  ago  he  had  renounced — the  error  of  put- 
ting his  Master  in  the  same  class  as  Moses  and 
Elias,  reckoning  Him  thus,  as  the  people  of 
Galilee  had  done,  simply  as  "  one  of  the  proph- 
ets." If  so,  his  mistake  is  at  once  corrected;  for 
behold  a  bright  luminous  cloud— fit  symbol  of 
the  Divine  presence:  the  cloud  suggesting  mys- 
tery, and  the  brightness,  glory— wraps  all  from 
sight,  and  out  of  the  cloud  there  comes  a  voice: 


Matthew  xvi.  13-xvii.  21.] 


THE    NEW    DEPARTURE. 


757 


"  This  is  My  beloved  Son,  in  Whom  I  am  well 
pleased;  hear  ye  Him." 

We  now  see  how  appropriate  it  was  that  just 
these  two  should  be  the  heavenly  messengers  to 
wait  upon  the  Son  of  man  on  this  occasion.  The 
one  represented  the  law,  the  other  the  prophets. 
"The  law  and  the  prophets  were  until  John;" 
but  both  are  now  merged  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus, 
Who  is  all  and  in  all.  Moses  and  Elijah  have 
long  had  audience  of  the  people  of  God;  but  be- 
hold a  greater  than  Moses  or  Elijah  is  here,  and 
they  must  withdraw;  and  accordingly,  when  the 
Voice  is  silent  and  the  cloud  has  cleared  away, 
Jesus  is  left  alone.  No  one  remains  to  divide 
His  authority  and  none  to  share  His  sorrow. 
He  must  tread  the  winepress  alone.  Moses  and 
Elijah  return  to  the  world  of  spirits — Jesus, 
God's  beloved  Son,  to  the  world  of  men.  And 
all  His  human  sympathies  were  fresh  and  quick 
as  ever;  for,  finding  His  three  disciples  fallen  on 
their  faces  for  fear.  He  came  and  touched  them, 
saying,  "  Arise,  and  be  not  afraid."  They  no 
doubt  thought  their  Lord  had  laid  aside  His 
human  body,  and  left  them  all  alone  upon  the 
mountain;  but  with  His  human  hand  He  touched 
them,  and  with  His  human  voice  He  called  them 
as  of  old,  and  with  His  human  heart  He  wel- 
comed them  again.  Reassured,  they  lifted  up 
their  eyes,  and  saw  their  Lord — the  man  Christ 
Jesus  as  before — and  no  one  else.  All  is  over; 
and  as  the  world  is  unprepared  for  it,  the  vision 
is  sealed  until  the  Son  of  man  be  risen  from  the 
dead. 

Why  were  their  lips  sealed?  The  more  we 
think  of  it,  the  more  we  shall  see  the  wisdom  of 
this  seal  of  secrecy,  even  from  the  other  nine; 
for  had  they  been  prepared  to  receive  the  revela- 
tion, they  would  have  been  privileged  to  witness 
it.  The  transfiguration  was  no  mere  wonder;  it 
was  no  sign  granted  to  incredulity:  it  was  one  of 
those  sacred  experiences  for  rare  spirits  in  rare 
hours,  which  nature  itself  forbids  men  to  parade, 
or  even  so  much  as  mention,  unless  constrained 
to  it  by  duty. 

It  is  one  of  the  innumerable  notes  of  truth 
found,  wherever  aught  that  is  marvellous  is  re- 
corded in  these  Gospels,  that  the  glory  on  the 
mount  is  not  appealed  to,  to  confirm  the  faith  of 
any  but  the  three  who  witnessed  it.  Upon  them 
it  did  produce  a  deep  and  abiding  impression. 
One  of  them,  indeed,  died  a  martyr's  death  so 
very  early  that  we  have  nothing  from  his  pen 
(.A.cts  xii.  2);  but  both  the  others  have  left  us 
words  written  late  in  their  after  life,  which  show 
now  ineffaceable  was  the  impression  produced 
upon  them  by  what  they  saw  that  memorable 
night.  John  evidently  has  it  in  mind,  both  in 
the  beginning  of  his  Epistle  and  of  his  Gospel, 
as  where  he  says:  "  We  beheld  His  glory,  the 
glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father;" 
and  Peter  thus  conveys  the  assurance  which  the 
experience' of  that  night  left  with  him  to  the 
end:  "We  have  not  followed  cunningly  devised 
tables,  when  we  made  known  unto  you  the  power 
and  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  were 
eyewitnesses  of  His  majesty.  For  He  received 
from  God  the  Father  honour  and  glory,  when 
there  came  such  a  voice  to  Him  from  the  ex- 
cellent glory.  This  is  My  beloved  Son.  in  Whom 
I  am  well  pleased.  And  this  voice  which  came 
from  heaven  we  heard,  when  we  were  with  Him 
in  the  holy  mount."  But  while  the  impression 
made  upon  the  three  who  witnessed  it  was  so 
deep  and  abiding,  it  could  not  be  expected  to 


have  any  direct  evidential  value  to  others;  ac- 
cordingly it  remained  unused  in  their  dealings 
with  others  until  their  Master's  work  had  been 
crowned  by  His  resurrection  from  the  dead, 
which  was  to  be  the  sign,  as  He  had  again  and 
again  said  to  those  who  kept  asking  Him  for  a 
sign  from  heaven.  The  transfiguration  was  in- 
deed a  sign  from  heaven;  but  it  was  no  sign  for 
a  faithless  generation:  it  was  only  for  those  who 
by  the  strength  of  their  faith  and  the  purity  of 
their  devotion  were  prepared  to  receive  it. 
Signs  fitted  to  satisfy  the  doubting  heart  had 
been  wrought  in  great  abundance  (xi.  4,  5) ;  and 
the  crowning  sign  was  to  be  certified  by  many 
infallible  proofs,  after  which  it  would  be  time  to 
speak  of  the  experience  of  that  sacred  night  upon 
the  holy  mount. 

How  fitly  the  transfiguration  closes  this  mem- 
orable week!  As  we  linger  with  the  Lord  and 
His  disciples  at  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  we 
realise  that  we  have  reached  what  we  may  call 
the  water-shed  of  doctrine  in  His  training  of  the 
Twelve.  Slowly  have  they  been  rising  in  their 
thoughts  of  Christ,  until  at  last  they  recognise 
His  true  divinity,  and  make  a  clear  and  full  con- 
fession of  it.  But  no  sooner  have  they  reached 
that  height  of  truth  than  they  are  constrained 
to  look  down  into  the  dark  valley  before  them, 
at  the  bottom  of  which  they  dimly  see  the  dread- 
ful cross;  and  then,  to  comfort  and  reassure, 
there  is  this  vision  of  the  glory  that  shall  follow. 
Thus  we  have,  in  succession,  the  three  great  doc- 
trines of  the  faith:  Incarnation,  Atonement,  Res- 
urrection. There  is  first  the  glory  of  Christ  as 
the  Son  of  God;  then  His  shame  as  Bearer  of  our 
sin;  then  the  vision  of  the  glory  that  shall  follow, 
the  glory  given  to  Him  as  His  reward.  For 
may  we  not  regard  that  company  upon  the  mount 
as  a  miniature  of  the  Church  in  heaven  and  on 
earth?  There  was  the  great  and  glorified  Head 
of  the  Church,  and  round  Him  five  representa- 
tive members:  two  from  the  family  in  heaven, 
three  from  the  family  on  earth — those  from  the 
Church  triumphant,  these  from  the  Church  still 
militant — those  from  among  the  saints  of  the 
old  covenant,  these  the  firstfruits  of  the  new. 
Could  there  have  been  a  better  representation  of 
"  the  whole  family  in  heaven  and  on  earth  "  ? 
How  appropriate  that  the  passion  week  of  the 
north,  which  began  with  the  founding  of  the 
Church  in  the  laying  of  its  first  stone,  should  end 
with  a  vision  of  it  as  completed,  which  must  to 
some  extent  have  been  a  fulfilment  of  the  prom- 
ise, "  He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  His  soul,  and 
shall   be   satisfied  "  ! 

Observe,  too,  in  quick  succession,  the  great 
key-words  c^  the  new  age:  The  Christ  (xvi.  16), 
The  Church  (ver.  18),  The  Cross  (ver.  24),  The 
Glory  (ver.  27)  :  the  latter,  as  still  in  the  future, 
made  real  by  the  glory  on  the  holy  mount.  The 
mediaeval  interpreters,  always  on  the  watch  for 
the  symbolism  of  numbers,  especially  the  num- 
ber three,  regarded  Peter  as  the  apostle  of  faith, 
James  of  hope,  and  John  of  love.  And  though 
we  may  set  this  aside  as  a  touch  of  fancy,  we 
cannot  fail  to  observe  that  just  as  the  mind,  in 
its  grasp  of  truth,  is  led  from  the  incarnation  to 
the  atonement,  and  thence  to  the  resurrection 
and  the  glory  that  shall  follow;  so  the  cardinal 
graces  of  the  Christian  life  are  called  out  in  quick 
succession:  first  faith  with  its  rock-foundation; 
then  love  with  its  self-sacrificing  devotion;  and 
finally  hope  with  its  vision  of  heavenly  glory. 
The  whole  gospel  of  Christ,  the  whole  life  of  the 


758 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


Christian,  is  found  in  this  brief  passage  of  the 
first  Evangelist,  ending  with  the  suggestive 
words,  "  Jesus  only." 


IV. — The  Descent  (xvii.  9-21). 

Who  can  tell  what  each  step  downward  cost 
the  Son  of  man?  If  it  seemed  good  to  the  dis- 
ciples to  be  on  the  mountain-top,  what  must  it 
have  been  to  the  Master!  and  what  utter  denial 
of  self  and  conscious  taking  up  of  the  cross  it 
must  have  been  to  leave  that  hallowed  spot!  Vfe 
have  already  seen  a  reason,  as  regards  the  dis- 
ciples, why  the  vision  should  be  sealed  till  the 
time  of  the  end:  but  was  there  not  also  a  reason 
which  touched  the  Master  Himself?  It  was  well 
that  He  had  enjoyed  such  a  time  of  refreshing — 
it  would  be  something  to  look  back  to  in  darkest 
hours;  but  it  must  be  a  memory  only:  it  may  not 
therefore  be  a  subject  of  conversation — not  the 
glory,  but  the  cross,  must  now,  both  for  Him- 
self and  for  His  di.sciples,  fill  all  the  near 
horizon. 

This  view  of  the  case  is  confirmed  by  the  man- 
ner in  which  He  deals  with  their  question  re- 
specting Elijah.  It  was  a  very  natural  question. 
It  was  no  doubt  perplexing  in  many  ways  to  be 
absolutely  forbidden  to  tell  what  they  had  seen; 
but  it  seemed  especially  mysterious  in  view  of 
Elijah's  appearance,  which  they  not  unnaturally 
regarded  as  a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  for 
which  the  scribes  were  waiting.  Hence  their 
question,  "  Why,  then,  say  the  Scribes  that  Elias 
must  first  come?"  Our  Lord's  answer  turned 
their  thoughts  to  the  true  fulfilment  of  the  proph- 
ecy, which  was  no  shadowy  appearance  on  a 
lonely  hill,  but  the  real  presence  among  the  men 
of  the  time  of  a  genuine  reformer  who  had  come 
in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah,  and  who  would 
certainly  have  restored  all  things,  had  not  these 
very  scribes  and  Pharisees,  failing  to  recognise 
him,  left  him  to  the  will  of  the  tyrant  who  had 
done  away  with  him.  Then  most  significant. y  He 
adds,  that  as  it  had  been  with  the  Elijah,  so 
would  it  be  with  the  Messiah  of  the  time:  "  Like- 
wise shall  also  the  Son  of  man  sufifer  of  them." 
Thus,  in  showing  them  where  to  look  for  the  true 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy.  He  turns  their  at- 
tention as  well  as  His  own  away  from  the  glory 
on  the  mount,  which  must  now  be  a  thing  ot  the 
past,  to  that  dark  scene  in  the  prison  cell,  which 
was  so  painfully  impressed  upon  their  minds,  and 
those  still  darker  scenes  in  the  near  future  of 
which  it  was  the  presage. 

At  the  foot  of  the  mountain  there  is  presented 
one  of  those  striking  contrasts  with  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  this  Gospel  abounds.  It  is  very  fa- 
miliar to  us  through  Raphael's  great  painting; 
and  we  shall  certainly  not  make  the  rtiistake  of 
attempting  to  translate  into  our  feeble  words 
what  is  there  seen,  and  may  now  be  regarded  as 
"  known  and  read  of  all  men."  Leaving,  there- 
fore, to  the  imagination  the  contrast  between  the 
glory  on  the  mount  and  the  misery  on  the  plain, 
let  us  briefly  look  at  the  scene  itself.  Briefly;  for 
though  it  well  deserves  detailed  treatment,  the 
proper  place  for  this  would  be  the  full  record  of 
it  in  the  second  Gospel;  while  the  more  general 
way  in  which  it  is  presented  here  suggests  the 
propriety  of  dealing  with  it  in  outline  only. 
Without,  then,  attempting  to  enter  on  the  strik- 
ing and  most  instructive  details  to  be  found  in 
St.    Mark's    Gospel,    and    without    even    dealing 


with  it  as  we  have  endeavoured  to  deal  with 
similar  cures  under  the  head  of  the  Signs  of 
the  Kingdom,  it  may  be  well  to  glance  at  it  in 
the  light  of  the  words  used  by  our  Lord  when 
He  was  confronted  with  the  sorrowful  scene: 
"  O  faithless  and  perverse  generation,  how  long 
shall  I  be  with  you?  how  long  shall  I  suffer 
you?  " 

It  seems  evident  from  these  words  that  He 
is  looking  at  the  scene,  not  so  much  as  present- 
ing a  case  of  individual  suffering,  appealing  to 
His  compassion,  as  a  representation  in  miniature 
of  the  helplessness  and  perverseness  of  the  race 
of  men  He  has  come  to  save.  Remember  how 
well  He  knew  what  was  in  man,  and  therefore 
what  it  must  have  been  to  Him,  immediately  after 
such  a  season  of  pure  and  peaceful  communion 
on  the  holy  mount,  to  have  to  enter  into  sym- 
pathy with  all  the  variety  of  helplessness  and 
confusion  He  saw  around  Him.  There  is  the 
poor  plague-stricken  boy  in  the  centre;  beside 
him  his  agonised  father;  there,  the  feeble  and 
blundering  disciples,  and  the  scribes  (Mark  ix. 
14)  questioning  with  them;  and  all  around  the 
excited,  sympathetic,  and  utterly  perplexed  multi- 
tude. Yet  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  so  near 
them,  and  has  been  so  long  proclaimed,  among 
them  !  Alas!  alas  for  the  perversity  of  men,  that 
blinds  them  to  the  Sun  of  Righteousness,  al- 
ready arisen  with  healing  in  His  wings,  and  for 
the  unbelief  even  of  the  disciples  themselves, 
which  renders  them,  identified  though  they  are 
with  the  kingdom,  as  helpless  as  all  the  rest! 
When  we  think  of  all  this,  need  we  wonder  at  the 
wail  which  breaks  from  the  Saviour's  sorrowful 
heart,  need  we  wonder  that  He  cries  "  How 
long?  how  long?  " 

"  Bring  him  hither  to  Me."  Here  is  the  solv- 
ent of  all.  "  From  that  very  hour  "  the  boy  is 
cured,  the  father's  heart  is  calmed  and  filled  with 
gladness,  the  cavillers  are  silenced,  the  multitudes 
are  satisfied,  and  the  worn-out  faith  of  the  dis- 
ciples is  renewed.  Out  of  chaos,  order,  out  of 
tumult,  peace,  by  a  word  from  Christ.  It  was  a 
wilder  sea  than  Galilee  at  its  stormiest;  but  at 
His  rebuke  the  winds  and  waves  were  stilled,  and 
there  was  a  great  calm. 

So  would  it  be  still,  if  this  generation  were  not 
perverse  and  faithless  in  its  turn — the  world  per- 
verse, the  Church  faithless.  Above  the  stormy 
sea  of  human  sin  and  woe  and  helplessness,  there 
still  is  hea^d  the  lamentation  "  How  long  shall 
I  be  with  you?  how  long  shall  I  sufifer  you?" 
Here  are  we  groaning  and  travailing  in  this  late 
age  of  the  world  and  of  the  Church,  the  worst 
kind  of  demons  still  working  their  will  in  their 
poor  victims,  the  cry  of  anxious  parents  going 
up  for  lost  children,  disciples  blundering  and 
failing  in  well-meant  efforts  to  cast  the  demons 
out,  wise  and  learned  scribes  pointing  at  them 
the  finger  of  scorn,  excited  and  angry  multitudes 
demanding  satisfaction  which  they  fail  to  get — 
Oh,  if  only  all  could  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son 
of  man  as  the  multitude  heard  it  that  day;  and  if 
we  would  only  with  one  consent  recognise  the 
majesty  of  His  face  and  mien  as  they  did  (see 
Mark  ix.  15),  bring  to  Him  our  plague-stricken 
ones,  our  devil-possessed,  bring  to  Him  our 
difficulties  and  perplexities,  our  vexed  questions 
and  our  hard  problems,  would  He  not  as  of  old 
bring  order  out  of  our  chaos,  and  out  of  weak- 
ness make  us  strong?  Oh,  for  more  faith,  faith 
to  take  hold  of  the  Christ  of  God,  come  down 
from  His  holy  habitation,  and  with  us  even  to 


Matthew  xvii.  22-xviii.  35-1     LAST    WORDS    AT    CAPERNAUM. 


759 


(he  end  of  the  world,  to  bear  the  infirmities  and 
carry  the  sorrows  and  take  away  the  sins  of 
men  ! — then  should  wc  be  able  to  say  to  this 
mountain  of  evil  under  which  our  cities  groan, 
"  Be  thou  removed,  and  be  thou  cast  into  the 
sea,"  and  it  would  be  done.  If  only  the 'Church 
of  Christ  in  the  world  to-day  had  through  all  its 
membership  that  faith  which  is  the  only  avenue 
by  which  the  power  of  God  can  reach  the  need 
of  man,  our  social  problems  would  not  long  defy 
solution — "nothing  would  be  impossible";  for 
over  the  millions  of  London,  and  the  masses 
everywhere,  there  broods  the  same  great  heart 
of  love  and  longing  which  prompted  the  gra- 
cious words,  "  Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  that  labour 
and  are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest;  " 
and  there  is  not  a  wretched  one  in  all  the  world 
for  whom  there  is  not  a  blessed  ray  of  hope  in 
this  pathetic  wail  which  still  proceeds  from  the 
loving  heart  of  Him  Who  is  the  same  yesterday 
and  to-day  and  for  ever.  "  O  faithless  and  per- 
verse generation,  how  long  shall  I  be  with  you? 
how  long  shall  I  suffer  you?  bring  him  hither  to 
Me." 

"  Bring  him  hither  " — this  is  a  work  of  faith 
as  well  as  a  labour  of  love.  The  Church  on 
earth  is  in  the  same  position  now  as  were  the 
nine  when  the  Master  was  absent  from  them  on 
the  mountain-top.  He  has  ascended  up  on  high, 
and"  the  work  must  be  carried  on  by  the  mem- 
bers of  His  body  on  the  earth;  and  it  is  only  in 
proportion  to  their  faith  that  any  success  can 
attend  them  in  their  work. 

Is  faith,  then,  all  that  is  necessary?  It  is:  pro- 
vided it  be  genuine  living  faith.  This  seems  to 
be  the  point  of  the  reference  to  the  grain  of 
mustard  seed.  The  little  seed,  small  as  it  is,  is 
set  in  true  relation  to  the  great  life-force  of 
Mother  Nature,  and  therefore  out  of  it  by-and-by 
there  comes  a  mighty  tree;  and  in  the  same  way 
even  feeble  faith,  if  it  be  genuine,  and  there- 
tore  set  in  true  relation  to  the  power  of  the 
Father  of  our  spirits,  becomes  receptive  of  a 
force  which  in  the  end  nothing  can  resist.  But 
pienuine  living  faith  it  must  be:  there  must  be  the 
real  opening  up  of  the  soul  to  the  Spirit  of  the 
living  God,  so  that  the  man's  nature  becomes 
a  channel  through  which  unobstructed  the  grace 
and  power  of  God  shall  flow.  It  need  scarcely 
be  remarked  that  the  notion  which  mistakes  faith 
Tor  mere  belief  of  certain  doctrines  is  utterly 
misleading.  In  nothing  is  the  perversity  of  a 
faithless  generation  more  conspicuous  than  in 
the  persistency  with  which  this  absurd  and  un- 
scriptural  notion  of  faith  holds  its  ground,  even 
with  those  who  are  supposed  to  be  leaders  of 
thought  in  certain  directions.  If  only  that 
mountain  of  folly  could  be  cleared  away,  there 
would  be  a  decided  brightening  of  the  spiritual 
outlook;  for  then  men  everywhere  would  see 
that  the  faith  which  Christ  expects  of  them,  and 
without  which  nothing  can  be  accomplished,  is 
no  mere  intellectual  belief,  but  the  laying  open 
and  leaving  open  of  the  entire  nature  to  the 
Spirit  of  Christ.  Thus  spurious  dead  faith  would 
be  utterly  discredited,  and  genuine  living  faith 
would  alone  be  recognised;  and  while  the  first 
effect  would  be  to  disclose  the  exceeding  scanti- 
ness of  the  Church's  faith,  the  result  would  be 
that  even  though  what  stood  the  test  should  be 
small  as  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,  it  would  have 
in  it  such  vitality  and  power  that  by-and-by  it 
would  become  mighty  and  all-pervading,  so  that 
before  it  mountains  would  disappear  (ver.  20). 


The  last  words  of  the  paragraph  *  carry  us 
back  to  the  ultimate  necessity  for  prayer.  It  is 
plain  that  our  Lord  refers  to  habitual  prayer. 
We  cannot  suppose  that  these  nine  disciples  had 
utterly  neglected  this  duty;  but  they  had  failed 
to  live  in  an  atmosphere  of  prayer,  as  was  their 
Master's  rule.  We  may  be  sure  that  they  had 
not  prayed  at  the  base  of  the  mountain  as  their 
Lord  had  prayed  on  the  sumtriit,  or  they  would 
certainly  not  have  failed  in  their  attempt  to  cure 
the  lunatic  child.  This  demand  for  prayer  is  not 
really  anything  additional  to  the  faith  set  forth 
as  the  one  thing  needful.  There  has  been  a  good 
deal  of  discussion  lately  as  to  whether  we  can 
think  without  words.  We  shall  not  presume  to 
decide  the  question;  but  it  may  safely  be  affirmed 
that  without  words  we  could  not  think  to  any 
purpose.  And  just  as  the  continuance  and  de- 
velopment of  our  thinking  are  dependent  on 
words,  so  the  continuance  and  development  of 
our  faith  are  dependent  on  prayer.  Is  not  the 
weak  spot  of  our  modern  Christianity  just  here? 
In  this  age  of  tear  and  wear,  bustle  and  excite- 
ment, what  becomes  of  prayer?  If  the  amount 
of  true  wrestling  with  God  in  the  daily  life  of 
the  average  Christian  could  be  disclosed,  the 
wonder  might  be,  not  that  he  accomplishes  so 
little,  but  that  God  is  willing  to  use  him  at  all. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

LAST    WORDS    AT    CAPERNAUM. 

Matthew  xvii.  22-xviii.  35. 

The  Temple  Tribute  (xvii.  22-27.) 

The  way  southward  lies  through  Galilee;  but 
the  time  of  Galilee's  visitation  is  now  over,  so 
Jesus  avoids  public  attention  as  much  as  pos- 
sible, and  gives  Himself  up  to  the  instruction  of 
His  disciples,  especially  to  impressing  upon  their 
minds  the  new  lesson  of  the  Cross,  which  they 
find  it  so  very  hard  to  realise,  or  even  to  under- 
stand. A  brief  stay  in  Capernaum  was  to  be 
expected;  and  there  above  all  places  He  could 
not  hope  to  escape  notice;  but  the  manner  of  it 
is  sadly  significant — no  friendly  greeting,  no 
loving  welcome,  not  even  any  personal  recogni- 
tion, only  a  more  or  less  entangling  question  as 
to  the  Temple  tax,  addressed,  not  to  Christ  Him- 
self, but  to  Peter:  "  Doth  not  your  Master  pay 
the  half-shekel?"  (R.  V.).  The  impulsive  dis- 
ciple showed  his  usual  readiness  by  answering  at 
once  in  the  affirmative.  He  perhaps  thought  it 
was  becoming  his  Master's  dignity  to  show  not 
a  moment's  hesitation  in  such  a  matter;  but  if 
so,  he  must  have  seen  his  mistake  when  he 
heard  what  his  Lord  had  to  say  on  the  subject, 
reminding  him  as  it  did  that,  as  Son  of  God, 
He  was  Lord  of  the  Temple,  and  not  tributary 
to  it. 

Some  have  felt  a  difficulty  in  reconciling  the 
position  taken  on  this  occasion  with  His  pre- 
vious attitude  towards  the  law,  notably  on  the 
occasion  of  His  baptism,  when  in  answer  to 
John's  remonstrance,  He  said,  "  It  becometh  us 
to  fulfil  all  righteousness";  but  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  He  has  entered  on  a  new  stage 
of  His  career.     He  has  been  rejected  by  those 

*  They  are  relegated  to  the  margin  in  R.  V.;  but  the  par- 
allel passage  in  St.  Mark's  Gospel  is  acknowledged  to  be 
genuine. 


760 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


who  acknowledged  allegiance  to  the  Temple,  vir- 
tually excommunicated,  so  that  He  has  been  con- 
strained to  found  His  Church  outside  the  com- 
monwealth of  Israel;  He  must  therefore  assert 
His  own  rights  and  theirs  in  spiritual  things 
(for  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  "  half- 
shekel  "  was  not  the  tribute  to  Caesar,  but  the 
impost  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Temple  wor- 
ship). But  while  asserting  His  right  He  would 
not  insist  on  it:  He  would  stand  by  His  disciple's 
word,  and  so  avoid  putting  a  stumbling-block  in 
the  way  of  those  that  were  without,  and  who 
therefore  could  not  be  expected  to  understand 
the  position  He  took.  While  consenting  to  pay 
the  tax.  He  would  provide  it  in  such  a  way  as  not 
to  lower  His  lofty  claims  in  the  view  of  His 
disciples,  but  rather  to  illustrate  them,  bringing 
home,  as  it  must  have  done,  to  them  all,  and 
especially  to  the  "  pilot  of  the  Galilean  lake," 
that  all  things  were  under  His  feet,  down  to  the 
very  "  fish  of  the  sea,  and  whatsoever  passeth 
through  the  paths  of  the  seas  "  (Psalm  viii.  8, 
1.  10-12).  The  difficulty  which  some  feel  in  re- 
gard to  this  miracle,  as  dififering  so  much  in  its 
character  from  those  wrought  in  presence  of  the 
people  as  signs  of  the  kingdom  and  credentials 
of  the  King,  is  greatly  relieved,  if  not  altogether 
removed,  by  remembering  what  was  the  special 
object  in  view — the  instruction  of  Peter  and  the 
other  disciples — and  observing  how  manifestly 
and  peculiarly  appropriate  it  was  for  this  particu- 
lar purpose. 

The  Little  Ones  (xviii.  1-14). 

The  brief  stay  at  Capernaum  was  signalised  by 
some  other  lessons  of  the  greatest  importance. 
First,  as  to  the  great  and  the  small  in  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  We  learn  from  the  other 
Evangelists  that  by  the  way  the  disciples  had  dis- 
puted with  one  another  who  should  be  the  great- 
est. Alas  for  human  frailty,  even  in  the  true 
disciple  !  It  is  most  humiliating  to  think  that, 
after  that  week,  with  its  high  and  holy  lessons, 
the  first  thing  we  hear  of  the  disciples  should  be 
their  failure  in  the  very  particulars  which  had 
been  special  features  of  the  week's  instruction. 
Recall  the  two  points:  the  first  was  faith  in  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  and  over 
against  it  we  have  from  lack  of  faith  the  signal 
failure  with  the  lunatic  child;  the  second  was 
self-denial,  and  over  against  it  we  have  this  un- 
seemly strife  as  to  who  should  be  greatest  in  the 
kingdom. 

It  is  startling  and  most  sad;  but  is  it  not  true 
to  nature?  Is  it  not  after  the  most  solemn  im- 
pressions that  we  need  to  be  most  watchful? 
And  how  natural  it  is,  out  of  what  is  taught  us. 
to  choose  and  appropriate  what  is  welcome,  and, 
without  expressly  rejecting,  simply  to  leave  un- 
assimilated  and  unapplied  what  is  unwelcome. 
The  great  burden  of  the  instruction  for  the  last 
eight  or  ten  days  had  been  the  Cross.  There  had 
been  reference  to  the  rising  again,  and  the  com- 
ing in  the  glory  of  the  kingdom;  but  these  had 
been  kept  strictly  in  the  background,  mentioned 
chiefly  to  save  the  disciples  from  undue  dis- 
couragement, and  even  the  three  who  had  the 
vision  of  glory  on  the  mount  were  forbidden  to 
mention  the  subject  in  the  meantime.  Yet  they 
let  it  fill  the  whole  field  of  view;  and  though 
when  the  Master  is  with  them  He  still  speaks 
to  them  of  the  Cross,  when  they  are  by  them- 
selves they  dismiss  the  subject,  and  fall  to  disput- 


ing as  to  who  shall  be  the  greatest  in  the  king- 
dom! 

How  patiently  and  tenderly  their  Master  deals 
with  them!  No  doubt  the  same  thought  was  in 
His  he^rt  again:  "  O  faithless  and  perverse  gen- 
eration, how  long  shall  I  be  with  you?  how  long 
shall  I  sufTer  you?  "  But  He  does  not  even  ex- 
press it  now.  He  takes  an  opportunity,  when  they 
are  quietly  together  in  the  house,  of  teachingthem 
the  lesson  they  most  need  in  a  manner  so  simple 
and  beautiful,  so  touching  and  impressive,  as  to 
commend  it  to  all  true-hearted  ones  to  the  end 
of  time.  Jesus  called  a  little  child  to  Him,  "  and 
set  him  in  the  midst  of  them."  Can  we  doubt 
that  they  felt  the  force  of  that  striking  object- 
lesson  before  He  said  a  word?  Then,  as  we 
learn  from  St.  Mark,  to  whom  we  always  look 
for  minute  details,  after  having  set  him  in  the 
midst  of  them  for  them  to  look  at  and  think 
about  for  a  while.  He  took  him  in  His  arms,  as 
if  to  show  them  where  to  look  for  those  who 
were  nearest  to  the  heart  of  the  King  of  heaveu. 

Nothing  could  have  been  more  suggestive.  It 
perfectly  suited  the  purpose  He  had  in  view;  b;'t 
the  meaning  and  the  value  of  that  simple  act 
were  by  no  means  limited  to  that  purpose.  1 1 
most  efifectually  rebuked  their  pride  and  seii- 
ish  ambition;  but  it  was  far  more  than  a  rebuKe 
— it  was  a  revelation  which  taught  men  to  ap- 
preciate child-nature  as  they  had  never  done  be- 
fore. It  was  a  new  thought  the  Lord  Jesus  so 
quietly  introduced  into  the  minds  of  men  that 
day,  a  seed-thought  which  had  in  it  the  promise, 
not  only  of  all,  that  appreciation  of  child-life 
which  is  characteristic  of  Christendom  to-day, 
and  which  has  rendered  possible  such  poems  as 
Vaughan's  "  Retreat,"  and  Wordsworth's  grand 
ode  on  "  Immortality,"  but  also  of  that  appre- 
ciation of  the  broadly  human  as  distinguished 
from  the  mere  accidents  of  birth  or  rank  or 
wealth  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  Chris- 
tian civilisation.  The  enthusiasm  of  humanity  is 
all  in  that  little  act  done  so  unassumingly  in 
heedless  Capernaum. 

The  words  spoken  are  in  the  highest  degree 
worthy  of  the  act  they  illustrate.  The  first  les- 
son is,  "  None  but  the  lowly  are  in  the  king- 
dom: "  "  Except  ye  be  converted  (from  the  self- 
ish pride  of  your  hearts),  and  become  (lowly  and 
self-forgetful)  as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  en- 
ter into  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  A  most  heart- 
searching  lesson!  What  grave  doubts  and  ques- 
tions it  must  have  suggested  to  the  disciple;:! 
They  had  faith  to  follow  Christ  in  an  external 
way;  but  were  they  really  following  Him?  Had 
He  not  said,  "  If  any  man  will  come  after  Me, 
let  him  deny  himself "  ?  Were  they  denying 
self?  On  the  other  hand,  however,  we  need  not 
suppose  that  this  selfish  rivalry  was  habitual  with 
them.  It  was  probably  one  of  those  surprises 
which  overtake  the  best  of  Christians;  so  that  it 
was  not  really  a  proof  that  they  did  not  belong 
to  the  kingdom,  but  only  that  for  the  time  they 
were  acting  inconsistently  with  it;  and  therefore, 
before  they  could  think  of  occupying  any  place, 
even  the  very  lowest  in  the  kingdom,  they  must 
repent,  and  become  as  little  children. 

The  next  lesson  is.  The  lowliest  in  the  king- 
dom are  the  greatest:  "  Whosoever  therefore 
shall  humble  himself  as  this  little  child,  the  sarne 
is  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Again 
a  most  wonderful  utterance,  now  so  familiar  to 
us,  that  we  are  apt  to  regard  it  as  a  thing  of 
course;    but   what   a    startling   paradox    it    must 


Matthew  xvii.  22-xviii.  35]  LAST    WORDS    AT    CAPERNAUM. 


7O1 


have  been  to  the  astonished  disciples  that  day! 
Yet,  as  they  looked  at  the  bright,  innocent,  clear- 
eyed,  self-unconscious  little  child,  so  simple,  so 
trustful,  there  must  have  come  a  response  from 
that  which  was  deepest  and  best  within  them  to 
their  Master's  words.  And  though  the  thought 
was  new  to  them  at  the  time,  it  did  come  home 
to  them:  it  passed  into  their  nature,  and  showed 
itself  afterwards  in  precious  fruit,  at  which  the 
world  still  wonders.  They  did  not  indeed  get 
over  their  selfishness  all  at  once;  but  how 
grandly  were  they  cured  of  it  when  their  train- 
ing was  finished!  If  there  is  one  thing  more 
characteristic  of  the  apostles  in  their  after  life 
than  any  other,  it  is  their  self-forgetfulness,  their 
self-effacement,  we  may  say.  Where  does  Mat- 
thew ever  say  a  word  about  the  sayings  or  doings 
of  Matthew?  Even  John,  who  was  nearest  of  all 
to  the  heart  of  the  Saviour,  and  with  Him  in  all 
His  most  trying  hours,  can  write  a  whole  gospel 
without  ever  mentioning  his  own  name;  and 
when  he  has  occasion  to  speak  of  John  the  Bap- 
tist does  it  as  if  there  were  no  other  John  in  ex- 
istence. So  was  it  with  them  all.  We  must  not 
forget  that,  so  far  as  this  lesson  of  self-denial  is 
concerned,  they  were  only  beginners  now  (see  xvi. 
21);  but  after  they  had  completed  their  course 
and  received  the  Pentecostal  seal,  they  did  not 
disgrace  their  Teacher  any  more:  they  did  then 
really  and  nobly  deny  self;  and  thus  did  they  at 
last  attain  true  greatness  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

So  far  we  have  what  may  be  called  the  Sav- 
iour's direct  answer  to  the  question  as  to  the 
greatest;  but  He  cannot  leave  the  subject  with- 
out also  setting  before  them  the  claims  of  the 
least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  He  has  shown 
them  how  to  be  great:  He  now  teaches  them  how 
to  treat  the  small.  The  two  things  lie  very  close 
together.  The  man  who  makes  much  of  him- 
self is  sure  to  make  light  of  others;  and  he  who 
is  ambitious  for  worldly  greatness  will  have  little 
regard  for  those  who  in  his  eyes  are  small.  The 
lesson,  then,  would  have  been  incomplete  had 
He  not  vindicated  the  claims  of  the  little  ones. 

It  is  manifest,  from  the  whole  strain  of  the 
passage  which  follows,  that  the  reference  is  not 
exclusively  to  children  in  years,  but  quite  as 
much  to  children  in  spiritual  stature,  or  in  posi- 
tion and  influence  in  the  Church.  The  little 
ones  are  those  who  are  Small  in  the  sense  cor- 
responding to  that  of  the  word  "  great  "  in  the 
disciples'  question.  They  are  those,  therefore, 
that  are  small  and  weak,  and  (as  it  is  sometimes 
expressed)  of  no  account  in  the  Church,  whether 
this  be  due  to  tender  years  or  to  slender  abilities 
or  to  scanty  means  or  to  little  faith. 

What  our  Lord  says  on  this  subject  comes 
evidently  from  the  very  depths  of  His  heart.  He 
is  not  content  with  making  sure  that  the  little 
ones  shall  receive  as  good  a  welcome  as  the 
greatest:  they  must  have  a  special  welcome,  just 
because  they  are  small.  He  identifies  Himself 
with  them — with  each  separate  little  one: 
"  Whoso  shall  receive  one  such  little  child  in  My 
name  receiveth  Me."  What  a  grand  security  for 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  small!  what  a 
word  for  parents  and  teachers,  for  men  of  in- 
fluence and  wealth  in  the  Church  in  their  re- 
lations to  the  weak  and  poor! 

Then  follow  two  solemn  warnings,  wrought 
out  with  great  fulness  and  energy.  The  first  is 
against  putting  a  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of 


even  one  of  these  little  ones — an  offence  which 
may  be  committed  without  any  thought  of  the 
consequences.  Perhaps  this  is  the  very  reason 
why  the  Master  feels  it  necessary  to  use  language 
so  terribly  strong,  that  He  may,  if  possible, 
arouse  His  disciples  to  some  sense  of  their  re- 
sponsibility: "Whoso  shall  ofifcnd  one  of  these 
little  ones  which  believe  in  Me,  it  were  better  for 
him  that  a  millstone  were  hanged  about  his  neck, 
and  that  he  were  drowned  in  the  depth  of  the 
sea."  How  jealously  He  guards  the  little  ones! 
Verily  he  that  toucheth  them  "  toucheth  the  ap- 
ple of  His  eye." 

From  the  corresponding  passage  in  St.  Mark, 
it  would  appear  that  Christ  had  in  view,  not  only 
such  differences  of  age  and  ability  and  social 
position  as  are  found  in  every  community  of  dis- 
ciples, but  also  such  differences  as  are  found  be- 
tween one  .company  and  another  of  professing 
Christians  (see  Mark  ix.  38-42).  This  infuses  a 
new  pathos  into  the  sad  lament  with  which  He 
forecasts  the  future:  "  Woe  unto  the  world  be- 
cause of  ofifences!  for  it  must  needs  be  that 
ofifences  come;  but  woe  to  that  man  by  whom 
the  ofifence  cometh!"  The  solemn  warnings 
which  follow,  not  given  now  for  the  first  time 
(see  chap.  v.  29,  30),  coming  in  this  connection, 
convey  the  important  lesson  that  the  only  effect- 
ual safeguard  against  causing  others  to  stumble 
is  to  take  heed  to  our  own  ways,  and  be  ready 
to  make  any  sacrifice  in  order  to  maintain  our 
personal  purity,  simplicity,  and  uprightness  (vv. 
8,  9).  How  often  alas!  in  the  history  of  the 
Church  has  the  cutting  oS  been  applied  in  the 
wrong  direction;  when  the  strong,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  an  authority  which  the  Master  would 
never  have  sanctioned,  have  passed  sentence  of 
excommunication  against  some  defenceless  little 
one;  whereas  if  they  had  laid  to  heart  these 
solemn  warnings,  they  would  have  cut  off,  not 
one  of  Christ's  members,  but  one  of  their  own 
— the  harsh  hand,  the  hasty  foot,  the  jealous  eye, 
which  caused  them  to  stumble! 

The  other  warning  is:  "  Take  heed  that  ye  de- 
spise not  one  of  these  little  ones."  To  treat 
them  so  is  to  do  the  reverse  of  what  is  done  in 
heaven.  Be  their  guardian  angels  rather,  if  you 
would  have  the  approval  of  Him  Who  reigns 
above;  for  their  angels  are  those  who  always 
have  the  place  of  honour  there.  Is  there  not 
something  very  touching  in  this  home  reference, 
"  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven  "  ? — especially 
when  He  is  about  to  refer  to  the  mission  of 
mercy  which  made  Him  an  exile  from  His  home. 
And  this  reference  gives  Him  an  additional  plea 
against  despising  one  of  these  little  ones;  for  not 
only  are  the  highest  angels  their  honoured 
guardians,  but  they  are  those  whom  the  Son  of 
man  has  come  to  seek  and  to  save.  The  little 
lamb  which  you  despise  is  one  for  whom  the 
heavenly  Shepherd  has  thought  it  worth  His 
while  to  leave  all  the  rest  of  His  flock  that  He 
may  go  after  it,  and  seek  it  on  the  lonely  moun- 
tains, whither  it  has  strayed,  and  over  whose  re- 
covery He  has  greater  joy  than  even  in  the 
safety  of  all  the  rest.  The  climax  is  reached 
when  He  carries  thoughts  above  the  angels, 
above  even  the  son  of  man,  to  the  will  of 
the  Father  (now  it  is  your  Father;  for  He 
desires  to  bring  to  bear  upon  them  the  full 
force  of  that  tender  relationship  which  it  is 
now  their  privilege  to  claim)  :  "  Even  so  it  is  not 
the  will  of  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven,  that 
one  of  these  little  ones  should  perish." 


762 


^THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


Trespasses  (xviii.  i5-35)- 

The  transition  is  natural  from  those  solemn 
words  in  which  our  Lord  has  warned  His  dis- 
ciples against  offending  "  one  of  these  little 
ones,"  to  the  instructions  which  follow  as  to  how 
they  should  treat  those  of  their  brethren  who 
might  trespass  against  them.  These  instruc- 
tions, occupying  the  rest  of  this  chapter,  are  of 
perennial  interest  and  value,  so  long  as  it  must 
needs  be  that  offences  come. 

The  trespasses  referred  to  are  of  course  real. 
Much  heartburning  and  much  needless  trouble 
often  come  of  "  offences  "  which  exist  only  in 
imagination.  A  "  sensitive  "  disposition  (often 
only  another  name  for  one  that  is  uncharitable 
and  suspicious)  leads  to  the  imputing  of  bad 
motives  where  none  exist,  and  the  finding  of 
sinister  meanings  in  the  most  innocent  acts. 
Such  offences  are  not  worthy  of  consideration  at 
all.  It  is  further  to  be  observed  that  our  Lord 
is  not  dealing  with  ordinary  quarrels,  where  there 
are  faults  on  both  sides,  in  which  case  the  first 
step  would  be  not  to  tell  the  brother  his  fault, 
but  to  acknowledge  our  own.  The  trespass, 
then,  being  real,  and  the  fault  all  on  the  other 
side,  how  is  the  disciple  of  Christ  to  act?  The 
paragraphs  which  follow  make  it  clear. 

"  The  wisdom  that  is  from  above  is  first  pure, 
then  peaceable;"  accordingly  we  are  first  shown 
how  to  proceed  in  order  to  preserve  the  purity 
of  the  Church.  Then  instructions  are  given  with 
a  view  to  preserve  the  peace  of  the  Church.  The 
first  paragraph  shows  how  to  exercise  discipline; 
the  second  lays  down  the  Christian  rule  of  for- 
giveness. 

"  If  thy  brother  shall  trespass  against  thee," 
— what?  Pay  no  heed  to  it?  Since  it  takes  two 
to  make  a  quarrel,  is  it  best  simply  to  let  him 
alone?  That  might  be  the  best  way  to  deal  with 
offences  on  the  part  of  those  that  are  without; 
but  it  would  be  a  sad  want  of  true  brotherly 
love  to  take  this  easy  way  with  a  fellow-disciple. 
It  is  certainly  better  to  overlook  an  injury  than 
to  resent  it;  yet  our  Lord  shows  a  more 
excellent  way.  His  is  not  the  way  of  selfish 
resentment,  nor  of  haughty  indifference;  but 
of  thoughtful  concern  for  the  welfare  of 
him  who  has  done  the  injury.  That  this  is 
the  motive  in  the  entire  proceeding  is  evident 
from  the  whole  tone  of  the  paragraph,  in  illus- 
tration of  which  reference  may  be  made  to  the 
way  in  which  success  is  regarded:  "  If  he  shall 
hear  thee,  thou  hast  gained  thy  brother."  If  a 
man  sets  out  with  the  object  of  gaining  his  cause 
or  getting  satisfaction,  he  had  better  let  it  alone; 
but  if  he  wishes  not  to  gain  a  barren  triumph 
for  himself,  but  to  gain  his  brother,  let  him  pro- 
ceed according  to  the  wise  instructions  of  our 
Lord  and  Master. 

There  are  four  steps:  (i)  "  Go  and  tell  him  his 
fault  between  thee  and  him  alone."  Do  not  wait 
till  he  comes  to  apologise,  as  is  the  rule  laid 
down  by  the  rabbis,  but  go  to  him  at  once.  Do 
not  think  of  your  own  dignity.  Think  only  of 
your  Master's  honour  and  your  brother's  wel- 
fare. How  many  troubles,  how  many  scandals 
might  be  prevented  in  the  Christian  Church,  if 
this  simple  direction  were  faithfully  and  lOvingly 
carried  out!  In  some  cases,  however,  this  may 
fail;  and  then  the  next  step  is:  (2)  "Take  with 
thee  one  or  two  more,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or 
three  witnesses  every  word  may  be  established." 


The  process  here  passes  from  private  dealing; 
still  there  must  be  no  undue  publicity.  If  the 
reference  to  two  or  at  most  three  (see  R.  V.) 
fail,  it  becomes  a  duty  to  (3)  "  tell  it  unto  the 
church,"  in  the  hope  that  he  may  submit  to  its 
decision.  If  he  decline,  there  is  nothing  left  but 
(4)  excommunication:  "  Let  him  be  unto  thee  as 
an  heathen  man  and  a  publican." 

The  mention  of  church  censure  naturally  leads 
to  a  declaration  of  the  power  vested  in  the 
church  in  the  matter  of  discipline.  Our  Lord 
had  already  given  such  a  declaration  to  Peter 
alone;  now  it  is  given  to  the  church  as  a  whole 
in  its  collective  capacity:  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you. 
Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven:  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  But  the  question 
comes:  What  is  the  church  in  its  collective  ca- 
pacity? If  it  is  to  have  this  power  of  disci- 
pline, of  the  admission  and  rejection  of  members 
— a  power  which,  rightly  exercised  on  earth,  is 
ratified  in  heaven — it  is  important  to  know  some- 
thing as  to  its  constitution.  This  much,  indeed, 
we  know:  that  it  is  an  assembly  of  believers. 
But  how  large  must  the  assembly  be?  What  are 
the  marks  of  the  true  church? 

These  questions  are  answered  in  vv.  19  and 
20.  It  is  made  very  plain  that  it  is  no  ques- 
tion of  numbers,  but  of  union  with  one  another 
and  the  Lord.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  the 
whole  discourse  has  grown  out  of  the  strife  with 
one  another  which  should  be  the  greatest.  Our 
Lord  has  already  shown  that,  instead  of  ambi- 
tion to  be  the  greatest,  there  must  be  readiness 
to  be  the  least.  He  now  makes  it  plain  that 
instead  of  strife  and  division  there  must  be  agree- 
ment, unity  in  heart  and  desire.  But  if  only 
there  be  this  unity,  this  blending  of  hearts  in 
prayer,  there  is  found  the  true  idea  of  the 
Church.  Two  disciples  in  full  spiritual  agree- 
ment, with  hearts  uplifted  to  the  Father  in 
heaven,  and  Christ  present  with  them, — there  is 
what  may  be  called  the  primitive  cell  of  the 
Church,  the  body  of  Christ  complete  in  itself, 
but  in  its  rudimentary  or  germinal  form.  It 
comes  to  this,  that  the  presence  of  Christ  with 
His  people  and  of  His  spirit  in  them,  uniting 
them  with  one  another  and  with  Him,  is  that 
which  constitutes  the  true  and  living  church;  and 
it  is  only  when  thus  met  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
and  acting  in  the  spirit  of  Christ,  that  assemblies 
of  believers,  whether  large  or  small,  have  any 
guarantee  that  their  decrees  on  earth  are  regis- 
tered in  heaven,  or  that  the  promise  shall  be  ful- 
filled to  them,  that  what  they  ask  "shall  be  done 
for  them  of  My  Father  which  is  in  heaven." 

These  words  were  spoken  in  the  day  of  small 
things,  when  the  members  of  the  Church  were 
reckoned  by  units;  therefore  it  is  a  mistake  to 
use  them  as  if  very  small  gatherings  for  prayer 
were  especially  pleasing  to  the  great  Head  of  the 
Church.  It  does  indeed  remain  true,  for  the  en- 
couragement of  the  faithful  few,  that  wherever 
two  or  three  are  met  in  the  name  of  Jesus  He 
is  there;  but  that  makes  it  no  less  disappointing 
when  the  numbers  might  be  reasonably  ex- 
pected to  be  very  much  larger.  Because  our 
Lord  said,  "  Better  two  of  you  agreed  than  the 
whole  twelve  at  strife,"  does  it  follow  that  two 
or  three  will  have  the  power  in  their  united 
prayers  which  two  or  three  hundred  would 
have?  The  stress  is  not  on  the  figure,  but  on 
the  agreement. 

The  words  "  There  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them  " 


Matthew  xvii.  22-xviii.  35]    l.AST    WORDS    AT    CAPERNAUM. 


763 


are  very  striking  as  a  manifestation  of  that 
strange  consciousness  of  freedom  from  limita- 
tions of  time  and  place,  which  the  Lord  Jesus 
felt  and  often  expressed  even  in  the  days  of 
His  flesh.  It  is  the  same  consciousness  which 
appears  in  the  answer  to  the  cavil  of  the  Jews 
as  to  the  intimacy  with  Abraham  He  seemed  to 
them  to  claim, — "  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am." 
As  a  practical  matter  also  it  suggests  that  we 
do  not  need  to  ask  and  wait  for  the  presence 
of  the  Master  when  we  are  truly  met  in  His 
nanre.  It  is  not  He  that  needs  to  be  entreated 
to  draw  near  to  us:  "  There  am  /." 

So  far  the  directions  given  have  been  with 
a  view  to  the  good  of  the  offending  brother 
and  the  honour  of  Christ  and  His  cause.  It 
remains  to  show  how  the  offended  person  is  to 
act  on  his  part.  Here  the  rule  is  very  simple: 
"  forgive  him."  What  satisfaction,  then,  is  the 
offended  party  to  get?  The  satisfaction  of  for- 
giving.    That  is  all;  and  it  is  enough. 

It  will  be  observed,  indeed,  that  our  Lord, 
in  His  discourse  up  to  the  point  we  have 
reached,  has  said  nothing  directly  about  forgive- 
ness. It  is  fairly  implied,  however,  in  the  man- 
ner of  process,  in  the  very  first  act  of  it  indeed; 
for  no  one  will  go  to  an  offending  brother  with 
the  object  of  gaining  him,  unless  he  have  first 
forgiven  him  in  his  heart.  Peter  appears  to 
have  been  revolving  this  in  his  mind,  and  in 
doing  so  he  cannot  get  over  a  difficulty  as  to 
the  limit  of  forgiveness.  He  was  familiar,  of 
course,  with  the  rabbinical  limit  of  the  third  of- 
fence, after  which  the  obligation  to  forgiveness 
ceased;  and,  impressed  with  the  spirit  of  his 
Master's  teaching,  he  no  doubt  thouglit  he  was 
showing  great  liberality  in  more  than  doubling 
the  number  of  times  the  offence  might  be  re- 
peated and  still  be  considered  pardonable: 
"  Lord,  how  oft  shall  my  brother  sin  against  me, 
and  I  forgive  him?  till  seven  times?"  It  has 
been  thought  that  some  of  his  brethren  had 
been  treating  Peter  badly,  so  that  his  patience 
was  sorely  tried.  Be  that  as  it  may,  the  ques- 
tion was  not  at  all  unnatural.  But  it  was 
founded  on  a  fallacy,  which  our  Lord  cleared 
away  by  His  answer,  and  thoroughly  exposed 
by  means  of  the  striking  parable  which  follows. 
The  fallacy  was  this:  that  we  have  a  right  to 
resent  an  injury,  that  in  refraining  from  this  we 
are  forbearing  to  exercise  our  right,  and  conse- 
quently that  there  is  a  limit  beyond  which  we 
have  no  call  to  exercise  such  forbearance.  Our 
Lord  by  His  answer  clears  away  the  limit,  and 
makes  the  obligation  unconditional  and  universal 
(ver.  22). 

The  parable  shows  the  reason  why  there 
should  be  no  limit — viz.,  that  all  believers,  or 
members  of  the  Church,  by  accepting  from  God 
the  unlimited  forgiveness  He  has  extended  to 
them,  are  thereby  implicitly  pledged  to  extend 
a  like  unlimited  forgiveness  to  others.  There 
is  no  duty  on  which  our  Lord  insists  more 
strenuously  than  this  duty  of  forgiving  those 
who  trespass  against  us,  always  connecting 
closely  together  our  forgiving  and  our  being  for- 
given; and  in  this  parable  it  is  set  in  the  strong- 
est light. 

The  greatest  offence  of  which  our  fellow-man 
can  be  guilty  is  as  nothing  to  the  sins  we  have 
committed  against  God.  The  proportion  sug- 
gested is  very  startling.  The  larger  sum  is  more 
than  two  millions  sterling  on  the  lowest  com- 


putation; the  sn.ialler  is  not  much  more  than 
four  guineas.  This  is  no  exaggeration.  Seven 
times  altogether  for  a  brother's  offences  seems 
almost  unpardonable:  do  we  never  offend  against 
God  as  many  times  in  a  single  hour?  Then  think 
of  the  days,  and  the  years!  This  is  a  startling 
thought  on  the  one  side;  but  how  cheering  on 
the  other!  For  the  immensity  of  the  debt  does 
not  interfere  in  the  slightest  with  the  freeness 
and  fulness  and  absoluteness  of  the  forgiveness. 
Verily  there  is  no  more  satisfying  or  reassuring 
presentation  of  the  gospel  than  this  parable,  es- 
pecially these  very  words,  which  rang  like  a 
knell  of  doom  in  the  unmerciful  servant's  ear: 
"  I  forgave  thee  all  that  debt."  But  just  in  pro- 
portion to  the  grandeur  of  the  gospel  here  un- 
folded is  the  rigour  of  the  requirement,  that 
as  we  have  been  forgiven  so  must  we  forgive. 
While  we  gladly  take  the  abounding  comfort, 
let  us  not  miss  the  stern  lesson,  evidently  given 
with  the  very  strongest  feeling.  Our  Lord  paints 
the  picture  of  this  man  in  the  most  hideous 
colours,  so  as  to  fill  our  minds  and  hearts  with 
a  proper  loathing  of  the  conduct  of  those  he 
represents.  The  same  intention  is  apparent  in 
the  very  severe  terms  in  which  the  punishment 
is  denounced:  "  His  lord  was  wroth,  and  de- 
livered him  to  the  tormentors."  After  this  how 
awful  is  the  closing  sentence:  "  So  likewise  shall 
My  heavenly  Father  do  also  unto  you,  if  ye 
from  your  hearts  forgive  not  every  one  his 
brother  their  trespasses." 

Is  that  tender  name  of  Father  out  of  place? 
By  no  means;  for  is  it  not  the  outraged  love 
of  God  that  cries  out  against  the  unforgiving 
soul?  And  the  words  "  from  your  hearts," — 
are  they  not  too  hard  on  poor  frail  human 
nature?  It  is  easy  enough  to  grant  forgiveness 
with  the  lips, — but  from  the  heart?  Yet  so  it 
stands  written;  and  it  only  shows  the  need  we 
have,  not  only  of  unmeasured  mercy,  but  of 
unmeasured  grace.  Nothing  but  the  love  of 
Christ  can  constrain  to  such  forgiveness.  The 
warning  was  a  solemn  one,  but  it  need  have  no 
terror  for  those  who  have  truly  learned  the  les- 
son of  the  Cross,  and  welcomed  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  to  reign  in  their  hearts.  "  I  can  do  all 
things  through  Christ  Who  strengtheneth  me." 

There  is  an  admirable  fulness  and  harmony 
in  Christ's  teaching  on  this  subject,  as  on  every 
other.  The  duty  of  unlimited  forgiveness  is  most 
plainly  enjoined;  but  not  that  weak  forgiveness 
which  consists  simply  in  permitting  a  man  .to 
trespass  as  he  chooses.  Forgiveness  and  faith- 
fulness go  hand  in  hand.  The  forgiveness  of 
the  Christian  is  in  no  case  to  be  the  offspring 
of  a  weak  unmanly  indifference  to  wrong.  It 
is  to  spring  from  gratitude  and  love:  gratitude 
to  God,  Who  has  forgiven  his  enormous  debt, 
and  love  to  the  enemy  who  has  wronged  him. 
It  must  be  combined  with  that  faithfulness  and 
fortitude  which  constrains  him  to  go  to  the  of- 
fending party  and  frankly,  though  kindly,  tell 
him  his  fault.  Christ's  doctrine  of  forgiveness 
has  not  an  atom  of  meanness  in  it,  and  His 
doctrine  of  faithfulness  has  not  a  spark  of 
malice.  "  The  wisdom  that  is  from  above  is  first 
pure,  then  peaceable,  gentle,  and  easy  to  be  en- 
treated, full  of  mercy  and  good  fruits,  without 
partiality  and  without  hypocrisy.  And  the  fruit 
of  righteousness  is  sown  in  peace  of  them  that 
make  peace." 


764 


TKE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

LAST  DAYS  IN  PER^A. 

Matthew  xix.  i-xx.  16. 

There  were  two  main  roads  from  Galilee  to 
Jerusalem.  One  passed  through  Samaria,  on  the 
west  of  the  Jordan,  the  other  through  Peraea, 
east  of  it.  It  was  by  the  former  that  our  Lord 
went  northward  from  Judea  to  begin  His  work 
in  Galilee;  it  is  by  the  other  that  He  now  goes 
southward  to  complete  His  sacrifice  in  Jerusa- 
lem. As  "  He  must  needs  go  through  Samaria  " 
then,  so  He  must  needs  go  through  Peraea  now. 
The  main  thought  in  His  mind  is  the  journey: 
but  He  cannot  pass  through  the  large  and  im- 
portant district  beyond  the  Jordan  without 
bringing  the  kingdom  of  heaven  near  to  the 
people,  and  accordingly  we  read  that  "  great  mul- 
titudes followed  Him,  and  He  healed  them 
there."  We  learn  from  St.  Luke's  Gospel  that 
"  He  went  through  the  cities  and  villages  teach- 
ing, and  journeying  towards  Jerusalem  "  ;  and 
from  the  details  there  recorded,  especially  the 
mission  of  the  seventy  which  belongs  to  that 
period,  it  is  evident  that  these  circuits  in  Peraea 
must  have  occupied  several  months.  Concern- 
ing the  work  of  these  months  our  Evangelist 
is  silent,  just  as  he  was  silent  concerning  the 
earlier  work  in  Judea  and  Samaria,  as  recorded 
by  St.  John.  We  are  reminded  by  this  of  the 
fragmentariness  of  these  memorials  of  our  Lord; 
and  when  we  consider  how  much  is  omitted  in 
all  the  narratives  (see  John  xxi.  25)  we  can  un- 
derstand how  difficult  it  is  to  form  a  closely 
connected  history  without  any  gaps  between, 
and  with  accurately  fitted  joinings  at  the  inter- 
sections of  the  different  accounts. 

There  is,  however,  no  difficulty  here;  for  by 
comparison  with  the  third  Gospel  we  find  that 
our  Evangelist  omits  all  the  circuits  in  Peraea, 
and  takes  up  the  story  again  when  our  Lord 
is  just  about  to  leave  that  region  for  Jerusalem. 
When  we  take  his  point  of  view  we  can  see 
how  natural  this  was.  It  was  his  special  calling 
to  give  a  full  account  of  the  work  in  Galilee. 
Hence  the  haste  with  which  he  passes  from 
what  it  was  necessary  for  him  to  tell  of  the 
early  years  in  the  south  till  the  work  in  Galilee 
began;  and  in  the  same  way,  now  that  the  work 
in  Galilee  is  done,  he  hastens  to  the  great  crisis 
in  Jerusalem.  In  following  the  journey  south- 
ward he  lingers  only  in  two  places,  each  of  them 
associated  with  special  memories.  The  one  is 
Capernaum,  where  Jesus,  as  we  have  seen,  tar- 
ried for  a  few  days  before  taking  final  leave 
of  Galilee;  the  other  is  the  place  beyond  Jordan, 
in  the  region  where  in  baptism  'He  had  solemnly 
entered  on  His  work  {cf.  John  x.  40),  where 
again  He  remains  for  a  brief  period  before  going 
up  to  Jerusalem  for  the  last  time. 

Marriage  and  Divorce  (vv.  3-12). 

There  it  was,  and  then,  that  the  Pharisees 
came  to  Him  with  their  entangling  question 
concerning  divorce.  To  know  how  entangling 
it  was  it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  there 
was  a  dispute  at  the  time  between  two  rival 
schools  of  Jewish  theology — the  school  of  Hillel 
and  that  of  Shammai — in  regard  to  the  interpre- 
tation of  Deut.  xxiv.  i.  The  one  school  held 
that  divorce  could  be  had  on  the  most  trivial 
grounds;  the  other  restricted  it  to  cases  of  griev- 


ous sin.  Hence  the  question:  "Is  it  lawful  fcr 
a  man  to  put  away  his  wife  for  every  cause?*' 
The  answer  Jesus  gives  is  remarkable,  not  only 
for  the  wisdom  and  courage  with  which  He  m'^t 
their  attack,  but  for  the  manner  in  which  He 
availed  Himself  of  the  opportunity  to  set  the  in- 
stitution of  marriage  on  its  true  foundation,  and 
give  perpetual  security  to  His  followers  for  the 
sanctity  of  home,  by  laying  down  in  the  clearest 
and  strongest  manner  the  position  that  marriage 
is  indissoluble  from  its  very  nature  and  from 
its  divine  appointment  (vv  4-6).  As  we  read 
these  clear  and  strong  utterances  let  us  bear  in 
mind,  not  only  that  the  laxity  which  unhappily 
prevailed  in  Rome  had  extended  to  Palestine, 
but  that  the  monarch  of  the  country  through 
which  our  Lord  was  passing  was  himself  one 
of  the  most  flagrant  offenders.  How  inspiring 
it  is  to  think  that  then  and  there  should  have 
been  erected  that  grand  bulwark  of  a  virtuous 
home:  "  What  God  hath  joined  together,  let  not 
man   put   asunder." 

The  Pharisees  must  have  felt  that  He  spoke 
with  authority;  but  they  are  anxious  not  to  lose 
their  opportunity  of  getting  Him  into  a  diffi- 
culty, so  they  press  Him  with  the  disputed  pas- 
sage in  Deuteronomy:  "  Why  did  Moses,  then, 
command  to  give  a  writing  of  divorcement,  and 
to  put  her  away?"  Our  Lord's  answer  exposes 
the  double  fallacy  lurking  in  the  question.  "  Why 
did  Moses  command?  "  He  did  not  command; 
he  only  suffered  it — it  was  not  to  further  di- 
vorce, but  to  check  it,  that  he  made  the  regula- 
tion about  the  "  writing  of  divorcement."  And 
then,  not  only  was  it  a  mere  matter  of  suf- 
france, — it  was  a  suffrance  granted  "  because 
of  the  hardness  of  your  hearts."  Since  things 
were  so  bad  among  your  fathers  in  the  mat- 
ter of  marriage,  it  was  better  that  there  should 
be  a  legal  process  than  that  the  poor  wives 
should  be  dismissed  without  it;  but  from  the 
beginning  it  was  not  so — it  was  not  intended 
that  wives  should  be  dismissed  at  all.  Mar- 
riage is  in  itself  indissoluble,  except  by  death 
or  by  that  which  in  its  very  nature  is  the  rupture 
of  marriage  (ver.  9). 

The  wide  prevalence  of  lax  views  on  this  suD- 
ject  is  made  evident  by  the  perplexity  of  the 
disciples.  They  were  not  at  all  prepared  for 
such  stringency,  so  they  venture  to  suggest  that 
if  that  is  to  be  the  law,  better  not  marry  at  all. 
The  answer  our  Lord  gives,  while  it  does  admit 
that  there  are  circumstances  in  which  celibacy 
is  preferable,  plainly  intimates  that  it  is  only  in 
quite  exceptional  cases.  Only  one  of  the  three 
cases  He  mentions  is  voluntary;  and  while  it 
is  certainly  granted  that  circumstances  might 
arise  in  which  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake 
celibacy  might  be  chosen  {cf.  i  Cor.  vii.  26),  even 
then  it  must  be  only  in  cases  where  there  is 
special  grace,  and  such  full  preoccupation  with 
the  things  of  the  kingdom  as  to  render  it  nat- 
ural; for  such  seems  to  be  the  import  of  the 
cautionary  words  with  which  the  paragraph 
eloses:  "  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  him 
receive  it."  How  completely  at  variance  with 
this  wise  caution  have  been  the  Romish  decrees 
in  regard  to  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy  may  go 
without   saying. 

The   Children   (vv.    13-15). 

"  Then  were  there  brought  unto  Him  little 
children" — a   happy   interruption!     The   Master 


i'atthew  xix.  i-xx.  i6.] 


LAST    DAYS    IN    PER^A. 


765 


has  just  been  laying  the  solid  foundations  of 
the  Christian  home;  and  now  the  group  of  men 
by  whom  He  is  surrounded  is  joined  by  a  troop 
of  mothers,  some  carrying  infants  in  their  arms 
(for  the  passage  in  St.  Luke  expressly  mentions 
infants),  and  some  leading  their  little  ones  by 
the  hand,  to  receive  His  blessing.  The  time- 
ousness  of  this  arrival  does  not  seem  to  have 
struck  the  disciples.  Their  hearts  had  not  yet 
been  opened  to  the  lambs  of  the  fold,  notwith- 
standing the  great  lesson  at  Capernaum.  With 
as  little  regard  for  the  feelings  of  the  mothers 
as  for  the  rights  of  the  children,  they  "  rebuked 
those  that  brought  them  "  (Mark  x.  13),  and 
motioned  them  away.  That  this  wounded  the 
heart  of  the  Saviour  appears  in  His  answer, 
which  is  stronger,  as  indicating  displeasure,  than 
is  shown  in  our  translation;  while  in  the  second 
Gospel  it  is  expressly  mentioned  that  Jesus 
"  was  much  displeased."  How  can  we  thank  the 
Lord  enough. for  that  sore  displeasure?  A  dis- 
tinguished opponent  of  Christianity  has  lately 
b.een  asking  whether  he  is  expected  to  accept 
the  kind  and  peaceful  Jesus,  Who  smiles  in  one 
place,  or  the  stern  Judge  Who  frowns  in  an- 
other— with  the  evident  implication  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  accept  both.  How  any  person  of 
intelligence  can  find  difficulty  in  supposing  that 
Christ  could  without  inconsistency  be  either 
gentle  or  stern,  as  the  occasion  required,  is  very 
marvellous;  but  here  is  a  case  in  which  the 
sternness  and  gentleness  are  blended  together  in 
one  act;  and  who  will  say  that  there  is  the  least 
incompatibility  between  them?  He  was  much 
displeased  with  the  disciples;  His  heart  was 
overflowing  with  tenderness  to  the  children:  and 
in  that  moment  of  conflicting  feeling  He  utters 
that  immortal  sentence,  these  noblest  and  now 
most  familiar  of  household  words,  "  Suffer  little 
children,  and  forbid  them  not,  to  come  unto 
Me:  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 

The  rights  of  woman  had  been  implicitly 
taught  in  the  law  of  marriage  carried  back  to 
the  original  creation  of  male  and  female;  the 
treatment  of  woman  had  been  vindicated  from 
the  rudeness  of  the  disciples  which  would  have 
d' iven  the  mothers  away;  and  this  reception  of 
the  children,  and  these  words  of  welcome  into 
the  kingdom  for  all  such  little  ones,  are  the 
charter  of  the  children's  rights  and  privileges. 
It  is  very  plain  that  Christ  has  opened  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  not  only  to  all  believers,  but 
to  their  children  as  well.  That  "  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  "  is  here  used  in  its  ordinary  sense 
throughout  this  Gospel,  as  referring  to  the 
heavenly  kingdom  which  Christ  had  come  to  es- 
tablish upon  earth,  cannot  'be  denied;  but  it 
is  a  very  fair  inference  from  the  Saviour's  words 
that,  seeing  the  children  are  acknowledged  as 
having  their  place  in  the  kingdom  on  earth, 
those  of  them  who  pass  away  from  earth  in 
childhood  certainly  find  as  sure  and  cordial  a 
welcome  in  the  kingdom  above. 

"  The  holy  to  the  holiest  leads, 
The  kingdoms  are  but  one." 

The  porch  is  on  earth,  the  palace  is  in  heaven; 
and  we  may  be  very  sure  that  all  whom  the 
King  acknowledges  in  the  porch  shall  be  wel- 
come in  the  palace. 

What  a  rebuke  in  these  words  of  our  Lord 
ti'  those  who  deal  with  children  indiscriminately 
a^  if  they  were  all  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins. 
Kow   it  must  grieve   the   Saviour's   heart  when 


lambs  of  his  own  fold  who  may  have  been  His 
from  their  earliest  infancy  are  taught  that  they 
are  utterly  lost,  and  must  be  lost  for  ever,  unless 
they  pass  through  some  extraordinary  change,' 
which  is  to  them  only  a  nameless  mystery.  It 
is  a  mistake  to  think  that  children  as  a  rule 
need  to  be  dragged  to  the  Saviour,  or  frightened 
into  trusting  Him:  what  they  need  is  to  be 
suffered  to  come.  It  is  so  natural  for  them 
to  come  that  all  they  need  is  very  gentle  leading, 
and  above  all  nothing  done  to  hinder  or  dis- 
courage them:  "Suffer  little  children,  and  for- 
bid them  not,  to  come  unto  Me:  for  of  such  is 
the  kingdom  of  heaven." 

The  Rich  Young  Man  (vv.  16-22). 

Another  inference  from  these  precious  words 
of  Christ  is  the  importance  of  seeking  to  win 
the  children  for  Christ  while  yet  they  are  chil- 
dren, ere  the  evil  days  come,  or  the  years  draw 
nigh,  when  they  will  be  apt  to  say  they  have 
no  pleasure  in  Him.  It  is  a  sad  thing  to  think 
how  soon  the  susceptibility  of  the  child-nature 
may  harden  into  the  impenetrability  which  is 
sometimes  found  even  in  youth.  Is  there  not 
a  suggestion  of  this  in  the  story  of  the  young 
man   which   immediately   follows? 

There  was  everything  that  seemed  hopeful 
about  him.  He  was  young,  so  his  heart  could 
not  be  very  hard;  of  good  moral  character, 
amiable  in  disposition,  and  stirred  with  noble 
aspirations;  moreover,  he  did  the  very  best  thing 
in  coming  to  Christ  for  guidance.  Yet  nothing 
came  of  it,  because  of  one  obstacle,  which  would 
have  been  no  hindrance  in  his  childhood,  but 
which  proved  insurmountable  now.  Young  as 
he  was,  his  affections  had  had  time  to  get  so 
intertwined  with  his  worldly  possessions  that 
he  could  not  disengage  them,  so  that  instead  of 
following  Christ  "  he  went  away  sorrowful." 

The  manner  of  our  Lord's  dealing  with  this 
young  man  is  exceedingly  instructive.  Some 
have  found  a  difficulty  in  what  seems  to  them 
the  strange  answer  to  the  apparently  straight- 
forward and  admirable  question,  "  What  good 
thing  shall  I  do,  that  I  maj  have  eternal  life?" 
Why  did  He  not  give  the*  same  answer  which 
St.  ^  Paul  afterwards  gave  to  the  Philippian 
jailer?  Why  did  He  not  only  fail  to  bring  him- 
self forward  as  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life, 
but  even  disclaim  the  goodness  which  the  young 
man  had  imputed  to  Him?  And  why  did  He 
point  him  to  the  law  instead  of  showing  him  the 
Gospel?  Everything  becomes  quite  clear  when 
we  remember  that  Christ  dealt  with  people  not 
according  to  the  words  they  spoke,  but  accord- 
ing to  what  He  saw  to  be  in  their  hearts.  Had 
this  young  man  been  in  a  state  of  mind  at  all 
like  that  of  the  Philippian  jailer  when  he  came 
trembling  and  fell  down  before  Paul  and  Silas, 
he  would  no  doubt  have  had  a  similar  answer. 
But  he  was  in  the  very  opposite  condition.  He 
was  quite  satisfied  with  his  own  goodness;  it 
was  not  salvation  he  was  seeking,  but  some  new 
merit  to  add  to  the  large  stock  he  already  had: 
"  what  good  thing  shall  I  do  "  in  addition  to  all 
the  well-known  goodness  of  my  character  and 
daily  life?  what  extra  claim  can  I  establish  upon 
the  favour  of  God?  Manifestly  his  idea  of  good- 
ness was  only  conventional;  it  was  the  good- 
ness which  passes  muster  among  men,  not  that 
which  justifies  itself  before  the  all-searching  eye 
of   God;    and   having  no   higher  idea   of   good- 


766 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


ness  than  that,  he  of  course  used  it  in  no  higher 
sense  when  he  addressed  Christ  as  "  good  Mas- 
ter." There  could,  then,  be  no  more  appro- 
priate or  more  heart-searching  question  than 
this, — "  IVhy  callest  thou  Me  good?  "  (it  is  only 
in  the  conventional  sense  you  use  the  term,  and 
conventional  goodness  is  no  goodness  at  all); 
"  there  is  none  good  but  One,  that  is  God." 
Having  thus  stimulated  his  easy  conscience,  He 
sends  him  to  the  law  that  he  may  have  knowl- 
edge of  his  sin,  and  so  may  take  the  first  step 
towards  eternal  life.  The  young  man's  reply 
to  this  reveals  the  secret  of  his  heart,  and  shows 
that  Christ  had  made  no  mistake  in  dealing  with 
him  as  He  did.  "  Which?  "  he  asks,  evidently 
expecting  that,  the  Ten  Commandments  being 
taken  for  granted,  there  will  be  something  higher 
and  more  exacting,  the  keeping  of  which  will 
bring  him  the  extra  credit  he  hopes  to  gain. 

The  Lord's  answer  to  his  question  was  well 
fitted  to  take  down  his  spiritual  pride,  pointing 
him  as  it  did  to  the  commonplace  Decalogue, 
and  to  that  part  of  it  which  seemed  the  easiest; 
for  the  first  table  of  the  law  is  passed  over,  and 
only  those  commandments  mentioned  which 
bear  upon  duty  to  man.  And  is  there  not  special 
skill  shown  in  the  way  in  which  they  are  mar- 
shalled, so  as  to  lead  up  to  the  one  which  cov- 
ered his  weak  point?  The  sixth,  the  seventh, 
the  eighth,  the  ninth,  the  fifth  are  rapidly  passed 
in  review;  then  the  mind  is  allowed  to  rest  on 
the  tenth,  not,  however,  in  its  mere  negative 
form,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet,"  but  as  involved 
in  that  positive  requirement  which  sums  up  the 
whole  of  the  second  table  of  the  Law,  "  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself."  We  can 
imagine  how  the  Saviour  would  mark  the  young 
man's  countenance,  as  one  after  another  the 
commandments  were  pressed  upon  his  con- 
science, ending  with  that  one  which  should  have 
pierced  him  as  with  a  two-edged  sword.  But 
he  is  too  strongly  encased  in  his  mail  of  self- 
righteousness;  and  he  only  replies,  "All  these 
things  have  I  kept  from  my  youth  up:  what  lack 
I  yet?"  Clearly  it  is  a  surgical  case;  the  medi- 
cine of  the  Commandments  will  not  do;  there 
must  be  the  insertion  of  the  knife:  "  Go,  and  sell 
that  thou  hast,  and  give  to  the  poor." 

Let  us  not,  however,  mistake  the  tone.  "  Jejus 
beholding  him  loved  him"  (Mark  x.  21);  and 
the  love  was  never  warmer  than  at  the  moment 
when  He  made  this  stern  demand.  There  was 
sorrow  on  His  face  and  in  His  tone  when  He 
told  him  of  the  hard  necessity;  and  there  was 
a  heart  full  of  love  in  the  gracious  invitation 
which  rounded  off  the  sharp  saying  at  the  end: 
"  Come,  and  follow  Me."  Let  us  hope  that  the 
Saviour's  compassionate  love  was  not  finally  lost 
on  him;  that,  though  he  no  doubt  did  lose  the 
great  opportunity  of  taking  a  high  place  in  the 
kingdom,  he  nevertheless,  before  all  was  done, 
bethought  him  of  the  Master's  faithful  and  lov- 
ing words,  repented  of  his  covetousness,  and 
so  found  an  open  door  and  a  forgiving  welcome. 

Danger  of  Riches  (vv.  23-26). 

So  striking  an  incident  must  not  be  allowed 
to  pass  without  seizing  and  pressing  the  great 
lesson  it  teaches.  No  lesson  was  more  needful 
at  the  time.  Covetousness  was  in  the  air;  it 
was  already  setting  its  mark  on  the  Hebrew 
people,  who,  as  they  ceased  to  serve  God  in 
spirit  and  in  truth,  were  giving  themselves  over 


more  and  more  to  the  worship  of  mammon; 
and,  as  the  Master  well  knew,  there  was  one 
of  the  twelve  in  whom  the  fatal  poison  was  even 
then  at  work.  We  can  understand,  therefore, 
the  deep  fee'ing  which  Christ  throws  into  His 
warnmg  agamst  this  danger,  and  His  special 
anxiety  to  guard  all  His  disciples  against  an 
over-estimate  of  this  world's  riches. 

We  shall  not,  however,  fully  enter  into  the 
mind  of  our  Lord,  if  we  fail  to  notice  the  tone 
of  compassion  and  charity  which  marks  His  first 
utterance.  He  is  still  thinking  kindly  of  the 
poor  rich  young  man,  and  is  anxious  to  make 
all  allowance  for  him.  It  is  as  if  He  said,  "  See 
that  you  do  not  judge  him  too  harshly;  think 
how  hard  it  is  for  such  as  he  to  enter  the  king- 
dom." This  will  explain  how  it  is  that  in  re- 
peating the  statement  He  found  it  desirable,  as 
recorded  by  St.  Mark,  to  introduce  a  qualifi- 
cation in  order  to  render  it  applicable  to  all 
cases:  "  How  hard  is  it  for  them  .that  trust  in 
riches  to  enter  into  the  kingdom!  "  But  while 
softening  it  in  one  direction,  He  puts  it  stiU 
more  strongly  in  another:  "Again  I  say  unto 
you,  it  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through  the 
eye  of  a  needle  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God."  We  shall  not  enter 
into  the  trivial  discussion  as  to  the  needle's  eye; 
it  is  enough  to  know  that  it  was  a  proverbial 
phrase,  probably  in  common  use,  expressing  in 
the  strongest  way  the  insurmountable  obstacle 
which  the  possession  of  riches,  when  these  are 
trusted  in  and  so  put  in  place  of  God,  must 
prove  to  their  unfortunate  owner. 

The  disciples'  alarm  expressed  in  the  question 
"  Who,  then,  can  be  saved?  "  does  them  much 
credit.  It  shows  that  they  had  penetration 
enough  to  see  that  the  danger  against  which 
their  Master  was  guarding  them  did  not  beset 
the  rich  alone;  that  they  had  sufficient  knowledge 
of  themselves  to  perceive  that  even  such  as  they, 
who  had  always  been  poor,  and  who  had  given 
up  what  little  they  had  for  their  Master's  sake, 
might  nevertheless  not  be  free  enough  from  the 
well-nigh  universal  sin  to  be  themselves  quite 
safe.  One  cannot  help  thinking  that  the  search- 
ing look,  which  St.  Mark  tells  us  their  Lord  bent 
on  them  as  He  spoke,  had  something  to  do 
with  this  unusual  quickness  of  conscience.  It 
reminds  us  of  that  later  scene,  when  each  one 
asked,  "Lord,  is  it  I?"  Is  there  any  one  of 
us,  who,  when  that  all-seeing  Eye  is  fixed  upon 
us,  with  its  pure  and  holy  gaze  into  the  depths 
of  our  being,  can  fail  to  ask,  with  the  conscience- 
stricken  disciples,  "  Who,  then,  can  be  saved?" 

The  answer  He  gives  does  not  at  all  lighten 
the  pressure  on  the  conscience.  There  is  no 
recalling  of  the  strong  words  which  suggest  the 
idea  of  utter  impossibility.  He  does  not  say, 
"  You  are  judging  yourselves  too  strictly  "  ;  on 
the  contrary.  He  confirms  their  judgment,  and 
tells  them  that  there  they  are  right:  "  With 
men  this  is  impossible  "  ;  but  is  there  not  an- 
other alternative?  "Who  art  thou,  O  great 
mountain?  before  Zerubbabel  thou  shalt  become 
a  plain;  "  "  With  God  all  things  are  possible." 
A  most  significant  utterance  this  for  those  to 
ponder  who,  instead  of  following  our  Lord's 
dealing  with  this  case  to  its  close,  treat  it  as 
if  the  final  word  had  been  "  If  thou  will  enter 
into  life,  keep  the  commandments."  This  fav- 
ourite passage  of  the  legalists  is  the  one  of  all 
others  which  most  completely  overthrows  his 
hopes,    and    shows    that    so    deep   are    the    roots 


Matthew  xix.  i-xx.  16.] 


LAST    DAYS    IN    PER^A. 


767 


of  sin  in  the  heart  of  man,  even  of  the  most 
amiable  and  most  exemplary,  that  none  can  be 
saved  except  by  the  power  of  divine  grace  over- 
coming that  which  is  to  men  an  impossibility. 
"  Behold,  God  is  my  salvation." 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  it  is  as  a  hindrance 
to  entering  the  kingdom  that  riches  are  here 
stigmatised, — which  suggests  the  thought  that 
the  danger  is  not  nearly  so  great  when  riches 
increase  to  those  who  have  already  entered.  Not 
that  there  is  even  for  them  no  serious  danger, 
nor  need  of  watching  and  of  prayer  that  as  they 
increase,  the  heart  be  not  set  upon  them;  but 
where  there  is  true  consecration  of  heart  the 
consecration  of  wealth  follows  as  a  natural  and 
easy  consequence.  Riches  are  a  responsibility 
to  those  that  are  in  the  kingdom;  they  are  a 
misfortune  only  to  those  who  have  not  entered 
it. 

As  on  the  question  of  marriage  or  celibacy, 
so  on  that  of  property  or  poverty,  the  Romanist 
has  pushed  our  Lord's  words  to  an  extreme 
which  is  evidently  not  intended.  It  was  plain 
even  to  the  disciples  that  it  was  not  the  mere 
possession  of  riches,  but  the  setting  the  heart 
on  them,  which  He  condemned.  If  our  Lord 
had  intended  to  set  forth  the  absolute  renuncia- 
tion of  property  as  a  counsel  of  perfection 
to  His  disciples,  this  would  have  been  the  time 
to  do  it;  but  we  look  in  vain  for  any  such 
counsel.  He  saw  it  to  be  necessary  for  that 
young  man;  but  when  He  applies  the  case  to 
disciples  in  general.  He  does  not  say  "  If  any 
man  will  come  after  Me,  let  him  sell  all  that 
he  has,  and  give  to  the  poor,"  but  contents 
Himself  with  giving  a  very  strong  warning 
against  the  danger  of  riches  coming  between  man 
and  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  while  the  ascetic 
interpretation  of  our  Lord's  words  is  manifestly 
wrong,  the  other  extreme  of  reducing  them  to 
nothing  is  far  worse,  which  is  the  danger  now. 

Rewards  (xix.  27-xx.   16*). 

The  thought  of  sacrifice  very  naturally  sug- 
gests as  its  correlative  that  of  compensation; 
so  it  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at  that,  be- 
fore this  conversation  ended,  the  impulsive 
disciple,  so  much  given  to  think  aloud,  should 
blurt  out  the  honest  question:  "  Behold,  we 
have  forsaken  all  and  followed  Thee;  what  shall 
we  have  therefore?  "  He  could  not  but  remem- 
ber that  while  the  Master  had  insisted  on  His 
disciples  denying  self  to  follow  Him,  He  had 
spoken  no  less  clearly  of  their  finding  life 
through  losing  it,  and  of  their  being  rewarded 
according  to  their  deeds  (see  xvi.  24-27).  A 
more  cautious  man  would  have  hesitated  before 
he  spoke;  but  it  was  no  worse  to  speak  it  than 
to  think  it:  and  then,  it  was  an  honest  and  fair 
question;  accordingly  our  Lord  gives  it  a  frank 
and  generous  answer,  taking  care,  however,  be- 
fore leaving  the  subject,  to  add  a  supplementary 
caution,  fitted  to  correct  what  was  doubtful  or 
wrong  in  the  spirit  it  showed. 

Here,  again,  we  see  how  thoroughly  natural 
is  our  Saviour's  teaching.  "  Not  to  destroy,  but 
to  fulfil,"'  was  His  motto.  This  is  as  true  of 
His  relation  to  man's  nature  as  of  His  relation 
to  the  law  and  the  prophets.     "  What  shall  we 

*The  latter  part  of  ver.  16— "Many  be  called,  but  few 
chosen  "—does  not  properly  belong  to  this  passage  (see 
R.  V. )  ;  its  consideration  will  therefore  be  postponed  till 
'ts  proper  olacp  is  reached  (see  chap.  xxii.  14). 


have?"  is  a  question  not  to  be  set  aside  as 
wholly  unworthy.  The  desire  for  property  is  an 
original  element  in  human  nature.  It  was  of 
God  at  the  first;  and  though  it  has  swelled  out 
into  most  unseemly  proportions,  and  has  usurped 
a  place  which  does  by  no  means  belong  to  it, 
that  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be  dealt  with 
as  if  it  had  no  right  to  exist.  It  is  vain  to 
attempt  to  root  it  out;  what  it  needs  is  moder- 
ating, regulating,  subordinating.  The  tendency 
of  perverted  human  nature  is  to  make  "  What 
shall  we  have?  "  the  first  question.  The  way 
to  meet  that  is  not  to  abolish  the  question  al- 
together, but  to  put  it  last,  where  it  ought  to 
be.  To  be,  to  do,  to  suffer,  to  enjoy — that  is 
the  order  our  Lord  marks  out  for  His  disciples. 
If  only  they  have  it  as  their  first  anxiety  to 
be  what  they  ought  to  be,  and  to  do  what  they 
are  called  to  do,  and  are  willing,  in  order  to 
this,  to  take  up  the  cross,  to  suffer  whatever 
may  be  theirs  to  suffer,  then  they  may  allow 
as  large  scope  as*  they  please  to  the  desire  for 
possession  and  enjoyment. 

Observe  the  difference  between  the  young 
man  and  the  disciples.  He  was  coming  to  Christ 
for  the  first  time;  and  if  our  Lord  had  set  be- 
fore him  what  he  would  gain  by  following  Him, 
He  would  have  directly  encouraged  a  mercenary 
spirit.  He  therefore  says  not  a  word  to  him 
about  prospects  of  reward  either  here  or  here- 
after. Those  who  choose  Christ  must  choose 
Him  for  His  own  sake.  Our  Saviour  deak  in  no 
other  way  with  Peter,  James,  and  John.  When 
first  He  called  them  to  follow  Him.  He  said  not 
a  word  about  thrones  or  rewards;  He  spoke  of 
work:  "  Follow  Me,  and  I  will  make  you  fishers 
of  men  ";  and  it  was  not  till  they  had  fully  com- 
mitted themselves  to  Him  that  He  went  so  far 
as  to  suggest  even  in  the  most  general  way  the 
thought  of  compensation.  It  would  have  spoiled 
them  to  have  put  such  motives  prominently  be- 
fore them  at  an  earlier  stage.  But  it  is  different 
now.  They  have  followed  Him  for  months,  even 
years.  They  have  been  tested  in  innumerable 
ways.  They  are  not  certainly  out  of  danger  from 
the  old  selfishness;  but  with  the  exception  of  one 
of  them,  who  is  fast  developing  into  a  hypocrite, 
all  they  need  is  a  solemn  word  of  caution  now 
and  then.  The  time  had  come  when  their  Master 
might  safely  give  them  some  idea  of  the  pros- 
pects which  lay  before  them,  when  their  cross- 
bearing  days  should  be  over. 

The  promise  looks  forward  to  an  entirely  al- 
tered state  of  things  spoken  of  as  "  the  regenera- 
tion " — ^a  remarkable  term,  reminding  us  of  the 
vast  scope  of  our  Saviour's  m.ission  as  ever  pres- 
ent to  His  consciousness  even  in  these  days  of 
smallest  things.  The  word  recalls  what  is  said 
in  the  book  of  Genesis  as  to  "  the  generation  ^ 
of  the  heaven  and  of  the  earth,"  and  suggests 
by  anticipation  the  words  of  the  Apocalypse 
concerning  the  regeneration,  "  Behold,  I  make 
all  things  new,"  and  "  I  saw  a  new  heaven 
and  a  new  earth."  That  the  reference  is  to 
that  final  restitution  of  all  things,  and  not 
merely  to  the  new  dispensation,  seems  evident 
from  the  words  which  immediately  follow: 
"  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  sit  on  the  throne 
of  His  glory."  Why,  then,  was  the  promise 
given  in  words  so  suggestive  of  those  crude  no- 
tions of  an  earthly  kingdom,  -above  which  it  was 
so  difficult  and  so  important  for  the  disclptes  to 
rise?  The  answer  is  to  be  found  in  the  limitation 
of  human  language:  "  Eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear 


768 


"^THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


heard,  neither  have  entered  into  the  heart  of  man, 
the  things  which  God  hath  prepared  for  them 
that  love  Him  ";  accordingly,  if  the  promise  was 
to  be  of  any  use  to  them  in  the  way  of  comfort 
and  encouragement,  it  must  be  expressed  in  terms 
which  were  familiar  to  them  then.  To  their 
minds  the  kingdom  was  as  yet  bound  up  with 
Israel;  "the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel"  was  as 
large  a  conception  of  it  as  their  thoughts  could 
then  grasp;  and  it  would  certainly  be  no  disap- 
pointment to  them  when  they  afterwards  dis- 
covered that  their  relation  as  apostles  of  the 
Lord  was  to  a  much  larger  "  Israel,"  embracing 
every  kindred  and  nation  and  people  and  tribe; 
and  though  their  idea  of  the  thrones  on  which 
they  would  sit  was  then  and  for  some  time  after- 
wards quite  inadequate,  it  was  only  by  starting 
with  what  ideas  of  regal  power  they  had,  that 
they  could  rise  to  those  spiritual  conceptions 
which,  as  they  matured  in  spiritual  understand- 
ing, took  full  possession  of  their  minds. 

The  Lord  is  speaking,  however,  not  for  the 
apostles  alone,  but  for  all  His  disciples  to  the 
end  of  time:  so  He  must  give  a  word  of  cheer, 
in  which  even  the  weakest  and  most  obscure  shall 
have  a  part  (ver.  29).  Observe  that  here  also 
the  promise  is  only  for  those  who  have  left  what 
they  had  for  the  sake  of  Christ.  We  are  not  au- 
thorised to  go  with  a  message  after  this  form: 
"  If  you  leave,  you  will  get."  The  reward  is  of 
such  a  nature  that  it  cannot  be  seen  until  the  sac- 
rifice is  made.  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again, 
he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God;"  until  a  man 
loses  his  life  for  Christ's  sake,  he  cannot  find  it. 
But  when  the  sacrifice  has  been  made,  then  ap- 
pears the  compensation,  and  it  is  seen  that  even 
these  strong  words  are  not  too  strong:  "  Every 
one  that  hath  forsaken  houses,  or  brethren,  or 
sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or  children, 
or  lands,  for  My  name's  sake,  shall  receive  an 
hundred-fold,  and  shall  inherit  everlasting  life." 
The  full  consideration  of  this  promise  belongs 
rather  to  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  in  which  it  is  pre- 
sented without  abridgment. 

The  supplementary  caution — "  But  many  that 
are  first  shall  be  last;  and  the  last  shall  be  first" 
— is  administered  in  apparent  reference  to  the 
spirit  of  the  apostle's  question,  which  exhibits 
still  some  trace  of  mercenary  motive,  with  some- 
thing also  of  a  disposition  to  self-congratulation. 
This  general  statement  is  illustrated  by  the  par- 
able immediately  following  it,  a  connection 
which  the  unfortunate  division  into  chapters 
here  obscures;  and  not  only  is  an  important 
saying  of  our  Lord  deprived  in  this  way  of  its 
illustration,  but  the  parable  is  deprived  of  its  key, 
the  result  of  which  has  been  that  many  have 
been  led  astray  in  its  interpretation.  We  can- 
not attempt  to  enter  fully  into  the  parable,  but 
shall  only  make  such  reference  to  it  as  is  nec- 
essary to  bring  out  its  appropriateness  for  the 
purpose  our  Lord  had  in  view.  Its  main  pur- 
port may  be  stated  thus:  many  that  are  first  in 
amount  of  work  shall  be  last  in  point  of  reward; 
and  many  that  are  last  in  amount  of  work  shall 
be  first  in  point  of  reward.  The  principle  on 
which  this  is  based  is  plain  enough:  that  in 
estimating  the  reward  it  is  not  the  quantity  of 
work  done  or  the  amount  of  sacrifice  made  that 
is  the  measure  of  value,  but  the  spirit  in  which 
the  work  is  done  or  the  sacrifice  made.  The 
labourers  who  made  no  bargain  at  all,  but  went 
to  work  on  the  faith  of  their  Master's  honour 
and    liberality,    were    the    best    ofi    in    the    end. 


Those  who  made  a  bargain  received,  indeed,  all 
they  bargained  for;  but  the  others  were  rewarded 
on  a  far  more  liberal  scale,  they  obtaining  much 
more  than  they  had  any  reason  to  expect.  Thus 
we  are  taught  that  those  will  be  first  who  think 
least  of  wages  as  wages,  and  are  the  least  dis- 
posed to  put  such  a  question  as,  "  What  shall 
we  then  have?  "  This  was  the  main  lesson  for 
the  apostles,  as  it  is  for  all  who  occupy  places 
of  prominence  in  the  kingdom.  It  is  thus  put  in 
later  years  by  one  of  those  who  now  for  the  first 
time  learned  it:  "  Look  to  yourselves,  that  we 
lose  not  those  things  which  we  have  wrought, 
but  that  we  receive  a  full  reward  "  (2  John  8). 
"  Look  to  yourselves,"  see  that  your  spirit  be 
right,  that  there  be  nothing  selfish,  nothing 
mercenary,  nothing  vainglorious;  else  much 
good  labour  and  real  self-denial  may  miss  its 
compensation. 

Besides  the  lesson  of  caution  to  the  great  ones, 
there  is  a  lesson  of  encouragement  to  the  little 
ones  in  the  kingdom — those  who  can  do  little 
and  seem  to  themselves  to  sacrifice  little  for 
Christ.  Let  such  remember  that  their  labour 
and  self-denial  are  measured  not  by  quantity  but 
by  quality,  by  the  spirit  in  which  the  service, 
however  small  it  be,  is  rendered,  and  the  sacri- 
fice, trifling  as  it  seems,  is  made.  Not  only  is  it 
true  that  many  that  are  first  shall  be  last;  but  also 
that  many  of  the  last  shall  be  first.  "  If  there  be 
first  a  willing  mind,  it  is  accepted  according  to 
that  a  man  hath,  and  not  according  to  that  he 
hath  not." 

Neither  in  the  general  statement  of  our  Lord, 
nor  in  the  parable  which  illustrates  it,  is  there 
the  slightest  encouragement  to  idlers  in  the  vine- 
yard— to  those  who  do  nothing  and  sacrifice 
nothing  for  Christ,  but  who  think  that,  when  the 
eleventh  hour  comes,  they  will  turn  in  with  the 
rest,  and  perhaps  come  off  best  after  all.  When 
the  Master  of  the  vineyard  asks  of  those  who 
are  standing  in  the  market-place  at  the  eleventh 
hour,  "  Why  stand  ye  here  all  the  day  idle?  " 
their  answer  is  ready,  "  Because  no  man  hath 
hired  us."  The  invitation  came  to  them,  then, 
for  the  first  time,  and  they  accepted  it  as  soon 
as  it  was  given  them.  Suppose  the  Master  of  the 
vineyard  had  asked  them  in  the  morning,  and  at 
the  first  hour  and  the  second  and  the  third,  and 
so  on  all  the  day,  and  only  at  the  eleventh  hour 
did  they  deign  to  notice  His  invitation,  how 
would  they  have  fared? 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

TO  JERUSALEM. 

Matthew  xx.  17-xxi.  17. 

I. — The  Going  Up  (xx.  17-34)- 

We  have  now  reached  the  last  stage  of  the 
long  and  sorrowful  journey  to  Jerusalem.  From 
the  corresponding  passage  in  the  second  Gospel 
we  learn  that  the  disciples  were  greatly  moved 
by  something  in  their  Master's  manner:  "  they 
were  amazed;  and  as  they  followed,  they  were 
afraid."  It  would  appear,  indeed,  that  they 
had  considerable  hesitation  in  following  at  all, 
for  it  is  pointedly  mentioned  that  "  Jesus  went 
before  them,"  a  hesitation  which  was  no  doubt 
due  to  the  same  feeling  which  prompted  Peter, 
on    the    first    announcement    of    the   journey    to 


Matthew  XX.  17-xxi    17. J 


TO    JERUSALEM. 


769 


Jerusalem  and  what  it  would  involve,  to  say  "  Be 
it  far  from  Thee,  Lord";  and  as  then,  so  now, 
the  Saviour  felt  it  as  an  obstacle  in  His  onward 
path  which  He  must  resolutely  put  out  of  the 
way;  and  it  was  doubtless  the  new  and  severe 
effort  required  of  that  heroic  will  to  set  it  aside, 
and  in  doing  so  to  face  the  gathering  storm 
alone,  which  explained  His  unwonted  agitation 
as  He  addressed  Him.self  to  the  last  stage  of  the 
fatal  journey. 

Still,  He  longs  to  have  His  disciples  in  sym- 
pathy with  Him.  He  knows  well  that  not  yet 
1  have  they  fully  appreciated  what  He  has  said  to 
I  them;  accordingly,  at  some  convenient  point  on 
the  way,  He  takes  them  by  themselves  and  tells 
them  once  again,  n  ore  distinctly  and  definitely 
than  ever,  what  must  be  the  issue  of  the  step 
He  is  now  taking  (vv.  17-19)-  St.  Luke  tells 
us  that  even  yet  "  they  understood  none  of  these 
things."  Their  minds  must  have  been  in  a  state 
of  great  bewilderment;  and  when  we  think  of 
this,  we  may  well  admire  that  strong  personal 
devotion  to  their  Master  which  made  them  will- 
ing, however  reluctantly  and  hesitatingly,  still 
to  follow  Him  into  the  dark  unknown.  With 
the  one  sad  exception,  they  were  thoroughly 
loyal  to  their  King;  they  trusted  Him  absolutely; 
and  though  they  could  not  understand  why  He 
should  be  mocked  and  scourged  and  crucified  in 
His  own  capital,  they  were  willing  to  go  with 
Him  there,  in  the  full  expectation  that,  in  some 
way  they  then  could  not  imagine.  He  should 
triumph  over  his  enemies  and  erect  those  thrones 
and  bring  in  that  glory  of  the  kingdom  of  which 
He  had  spoken. 

This  failure  of  theirs  to  comprehend  the  real 
situation,  which  one  Evangelist  mentions,  is  well 
illustrated  by  an  incident  which  happened  on  the 
road  as  recorded  by  the  others — one  of  those 
evidently  undesigned  coincidences  which  con- 
tinually meet  us,  and  which,  in  a  higher  degree 
than  mere  circumstantial  agreements,  confirm 
our  faith  in  the  accuracy  of  the  sacred  writers. 
"  Then  came  to  Him  the  mother  of  Zebedee's 
children  with  her  sons,  worshipping  Him,  and 
desiring  a  certain  thing  of  Him," — the  "  certain 
thing,"  as  it  turned  out,  being  that  the  two  sons 
should  have  the  chief  places  of  honour  in  the 
kingdom.  From  the  form  in  which  the  request 
was  presented  it  would  seem  as  if  it  had  been 
founded  on  a  misapprehension  of  one  of  His  own 
sayings.  In  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  where  the  part 
which  the  two  sons  themselves  had  in  it  is  re- 
lated, the  very  words  of  the  application  are  given 
thus:  "  Master,  we  would  that  Thou  shouldest 
do  for  us  whatsoever  we  shall  desire,"  as  if  to 
remind  Him  of  His  promise  to  any  two  of  them 
who  should  agree  as  touching  anything  they 
should  ask  (xviii.  19),  and  to  claim  the  fulfilment 
of  it.  It  need  not  be  assumed  that  the  request 
was  a  purely  selfish  one.  However  vague  their 
ideas  may  have  been  as  to  the  days  of  darkness 
that  awaited  them  in  Jerusalem,  we  cannot  sup- 
pose that  they  left  them  wholly  out  of  view;  and 
if  not,  they  must  have  been  prepared,  or  have 
thought  themselves  prepared,  to  take  foremost 
places  in  the  battlefield  as  well  as  in  the  triumph 
that  would  surely  follow.  There  may  well  have 
been,  then,  a  touch  of  chivalry  along  with  the 
grosser  motive  which,  it  is  to  be  feared,  was 
their  main  inspiration. 

This  makes  it  easier  for  Yis  to  understand  the 
possibility  of  their  coming  with  such  a  request  at 
such  a  time.     We  all  know  how  easy  it  is  to 
49— Vol.  IV. 


justify  a  selfish  proceeding  when  there  is  some- 
thing to  offset  it.  We  ourselves  know  how  nat- 
ural it  is  to  think  of  those  scriptures  which  suit 
our  purpose,  while  we  conveniently  forget  for  the 
moment  those  that  do  not.  Was  it,  then,  un- 
natural that  James  and  John,  forgetting  for  the 
moment  what  their  Lord  had  taught  them  as 
to  the  way  to  true  greatness  in  His  kingdom, 
should  satisfy  themselves  with  the  thought  that 
they  were  at  all  events  taking  up  their  cross  in 
the  first  place,  and  as  to  the  ulterior  object  were 
certainly  acting  up  to  the  very  plain  and  em- 
phatic word  of  the  Master  Himself:  ''  I  say  unto 
you,  that  if  two  of  you  shall  agree  on  earth  as 
touching  anything  that  they  shall  ask,  it  shall 
be  done  for  them." 

This  view  of  their  state  of  mind  is  confirmed 
by  our  Lord's  way  of  dealing  with  them.  He 
first  asks  them  what  it  is  they  have  agreed  upon; 
and,  when  the  mother  tells  Him,  He  quietly 
shows  them  that,  so  far  from  agreeing  together, 
none  of  them  know  what  they  are  asking.  They 
are  all  using  the  same  words,  but  the  words 
might  as  well  be  in  an  unknown  tongue, — better 
perhaps,  inasmuch  as  to  misunderstand  is  a  de- 
gree worse  than  not  to  understand  at  all.  He 
then  proceeds  to  show  them  that  the  fulfilment 
of  their  request  would  involve  issues  for  which 
as  yet  they  were  by  no  means  prepared:  "Jesus 
answered  and  said.  Ye  know  not  what  ye  ask. 
Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  shall  drink 
of?  "  Their  answer  confirms  the  view  suggested, 
that  they  did  not  leave  out  altogether  the 
thought  of  cross-bearing;  but  we  have  only  to 
remember  what  took  place  in  the  course  of  a 
week  to  see  that  in  saying  "  We  are  able,"  they 
knew  as  little  of  what  they  were  promising  as 
they  had  known  of  what  they  were  asking.  He 
will  not,  however,  break  the  bruised  reed  of  their 
devotion,  nor  quench  the  feeblest  spark  of  self- 
denying  courage;  accordingly  He  does  not  slight 
their  offer,  but,  in  accepting  it.  He  reminds  them 
that  the  honours  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  are 
not  for  favourites,  or  for  those  who  may  first 
apply,  but  only  for  those  who  approve  them- 
selves worthy  in  the  sight  of  Him  Who  seeth 
all,  and  who  rewards  every  man  according  to  his 
deeds  (ver.  23). 

The  ten  were  not  much  better  than  the  two.  It 
was  natural,  indeed,  that,  when  they  heard  it, 
they  should  be  "moved  with  indignation";  but, 
though  natural,  it  was  not  Christian.  Had  they 
remembered  the  lesson  of  the  little  child,  or 
even  thought  deeply  enough  of  that  very  recent 
one  about  the  last  and  the  first,  they  would  have 
been  moved  with  something  else  than  indigna- 
tion. But  need  any  one  wonder  that  selfishness 
should  be  so  very  hard  to  kill?  Is  it  not  true 
to  nature?  Besides,  the  Spirit  had  not  yet  been 
given,  and  therefore  we  need  not  wonder  that 
even  the  plainest  teaching  of  the  Lord  Himself 
failed  to  cast  the  selfish  spirit  out  of  His  dis- 
ciples then.  "  Knowledge  comes,  but  wisdom 
lingers."  On  the  other  hand,  think  of  the  mar- 
vellous patience  of  the  Master.  How  disappoint- 
ing it  must  have  been  at  such  a  time  to  see  in  all 
of  them  a  spirit  so  wholly  at  variance  with  all 
that  by  precept  and  example  He  had  been  labour- 
ing to  instil  into  them!  Yet  without  one  word 
of  reproach  He  teaches  them  the  old  lesson  once 
again,  gives  them  liberally  the  wisdom  which 
they  lack,  and  upbraids  them  not. 

The  words  of  Christ  not  only  meet  the  case 
most  fully,  but  reach  far  beyond  the  immediate 


770 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


occasion  of  their  utterance.  Thus  He  brings 
good  out  of  evil,  and  secures  that  even  the  strife 
of  His  disciples  shall  make  for  "  peace  on  earth." 
He  begins  by  showing  how  absolutely  in  con- 
trast to  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  is  the  king- 
dom He  has  come  to  establish.  In  them  the 
great  ones  "lord  it  over"  (R.  V.)  others;  in  it 
the  great  ones  are  those  who  serve.  What  a 
revolution  of  thought  is  involved  in  this  simple 
contrast!  of  how  much  that  is  great  and  noble 
has  it  been  the  seed!  The  dignity  of  labour,  the 
royalty  of  service,  the  pettiness  of  selfish  ambi- 
tion, the  majesty  of  self-sacrificing  love;  the  utter 
condemnation  of  the  miserable  maxim  "  Every 
man  for  himself";  the  world's  first  question 
"  What  shall  we  have?  "  made  the  last,  and  its 
last  question  "  What  shall  we  give?  "  made  the 
very  first — such  are  some  of  the  fruits  which  have 
grown  from  the  seed  our  Lord  planted  in  so 
ungenial  soil  that  day.  We  are,  alas!  still  very 
far  from  realising  that  great  ideal;  but  ever 
since  that  day,  as  an  ideal,  it  has  never  been  quite 
out  of  sight.  Early  Christianity  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  apostles  strove,  though  with  all  too 
little  success,  to  realise  it;  the  chivalry  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  with  its  glorification  of  knight- 
hood,* was  an  attempt  to  embody  it;  and  what 
is  the  constitutionalism  of  modern  times  but  the 
development  of  the  principle  in  political  life,  the 
real  power  being  vested  not  in  the  titular  mon- 
arch, who  represents  ideally  the  general  weal, 
but  in  a  ministry,  so  designated  to  mark  the  fact 
that  their  special  function  is  to  minister  or  serve; 
the  highest  position  in  the  realm  bearing  the 
humble  title  of  Prime  Minister,  or  first  servant  of 
the  state.  It  is  of  value  to  have  the  principle  be- 
fore us  as  an  ideal,  even  though  it  be  buried 
under  the  tombstone  of  a  name,  the  significance 
of  which  is  forgotten;  but  when  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  shall  be  fully  established  on  the  earth,  the 
ideal  will  be  realised,  not  in  political  life  only, 
but  all  through  society.  If  only  the  ambition  to 
serve  our  generation  according  to  the  will  of 
God  were  to  become  universal,  then  would  God's 
kingdom  come  and  His  will  be  done  on  earth 
even  as  it  is  in  heaven. 

Of  this  great  principle  of  the  heavenly  king- 
dom the  King  Himself  is  the  highest  illustration: 
"  even  as  the  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  min- 
istered unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His  life 
a  ransom  for  many."  There  are  those  who  write 
about  "  the  service  of  man  "  as  if  the  thought  of 
it  were  a  development  of  nineteenth-century  en- 
lightenment; but  there  it  is  in  all  its  truth  and 
grandeur  in  the  life,  and  above  all  in  the  death 
of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ!  His  en- 
tire life  was  devoted  to  the  service  of  man;  and 
His  death  was  but  the  giving  up  in  one  final  act 
of  surrender  what  had  all  along  been  consecrated 
to  the  same  high  and  holy  ministry. 

These  closing  words  of  the  great  lesson  are 
memorable,  not  only  as  setting  before  us  the 
highest  exemplification  of  the  law  of  service, 
which  as  "  Son  of  Man "  Christ  gave  to  the 
world;  but  as  presenting  the  first  intimation  of 
the  purpose  of  the  great  sacrifice  He  was  about 
to  oflfer  at  Jerusalem.  Again  and  again  He  had 
told  the  disciples  that  it  was  necessar>';  but  now 
for  the  first  time  does  He  give  them  an  idea  why 
it  was  necessary.  It  is  too  soon,  indeed,  to  give 
a  full  explanation;  it  will  be  time  enough  to  un- 
fold the  doctrine  of  atonement  after  the  atone- 

♦The  knight  was  originally  a  Knecht=a.  servant  or 
slave. 


ment  has  been  actually  made.  Meantime  He 
makes  it  plain  that,  while  His  whole  life  was  a 
life  of  ministering  as  distinguished  from  being 
ministered  unto,  the  supreme  service  He  had 
come  to  render  was  the  giving  of  His  life  as  a 
ransom,  something  to  be  rendered  up  as  a  price 
which  must  be  paid  to  redeem  His  people.  It 
is  plain  from  this  way  of  putting  it,  that  He 
viewed  the  giving  up  of  His  life  as  the  means  by 
which  alone  He  could  save  the  "  many "  who 
should,  as  His  redeemed  or  ransomed  ones,  con- 
stitute   His  kingdom. 

On  the  way  to  Jerusalem  lay  the  beautiful  city 
of  Jericho.  The  place  now  called  by  that  name 
is  such  a  wretched  assemblage  of  miserable 
hovels  that  it  is  difificult  for  the  traveller  to 
realise  that  the  Jericho  of  the  days  of  our  Lord 
was  not  only  the  most  luxurious  place  of  resort 
in  Palestine,  but  one  that  might  vie  with  its 
fashionable  rivals  throughout  the  Roman  Em- 
pire. Since  the  days  of  Herod  the  Great  it  had 
been  the  winter  residence  of  the  Court.  Jeru- 
salem being  on  the  cold  hill-top,  it  was  conven- 
ient to  have  within  easy  reach  a  warm  and  shel- 
tered spot  in  the  deep  valley  of  the  Jordan;  and 
with  a  delightful  winter  climate  and  a  rich  ard 
fertile  soil,  Jericho  needed  only  the  lavish  ex- 
penditure of  money  to  make  it  into  "  a  little 
Paradise,"  as  Josephus  calls  it.  With  its  gardens 
of  roses  and  groves  of  palm,  it  was,  even  before 
the  time  of  Herod,  so  beautiful  a  place,  that,  as 
a  gem  of  the  East,  Antony  bestowed  it  on  Cleo- 
patra as  an  expression  of  his  devotion;  after  it 
passed  into  the  hands  of  Herod,  a  theatre  was 
erected  and  an  amphitheatre,  and  many  other 
noble  and  costly  buildings;  and  during  the  season 
it  was  thronged  by  the  rich  and  the  great  o-f  the 
land,  among  whom  would  be  distinguished  vis- 
itors from  foreign  parts.  What  effect  would  all 
this  grandeur  have  on  Christ  and  His  discipLs 
as  they  passed  through  it  on  their  way  to  Jeru- 
salem? We  are  not  told.  Two  things  only  are 
noted  as  worthy  of  record:  the  salvation  of  a  rich 
publican  (Luke  xix.  i-io),  and  the  healing  of  two 
poor  blind  men.  Not  the  gardens  and  palaces  of 
the  city,  but  its  sins  and  sorrows,  engage  the 
Saviour's  thoughts  and  occupy  His  time. 

As  a  rule,  we  regard  it  as  waste  of  time  to  deal 
with  the  "  discrepancies  "  between  the  different 
Evangelists;  but  as  one  of  the  most  serious  of 
them  all  has  been  found  here  it  may  be  well 
to  look  at  it  to  see  how  much  or  how  little  it 
amounts  to.  First,  the  other  Gospels  speak  of 
the  cure  of  a  blind  man,  and  tell  his  name,  Bar- 
timseus;  this  one  says  that  two  blind  men  were 
cured,  and  does  not  mention  any  name.  If  the 
other  Evangelists  had  said  that  only  one  was 
healed,  there  would  have  been  a  real  discrep- 
ancy; but  they  do  not.  Another  "discrepancy" 
which  has  been  noticed  is  that  St.  Matthew  says 
Christ  "  touched  their  eyes,"  while  the  others  do 
not  mention  the  touch,  but  only  tell  us  what  He 
said;  but  surely  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing 
that  Christ  both  touched  the  eyes  and  spoke  the 
words  at  the  same  time.  It  is  true  that  the 
words  as  recorded  by  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  are 
not  identical,  but  they  are  precisely  to  the  same 
effect;  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  every  word 
which  both  of  them  report  was  actually  said  and 
that  other  words  besides  were  spoken  which  have 
not   been   preserved.    ■ 

These  differences  are  not  discrepancies  at  all; 
but  there  remains  one  which  may  fairly  enough 


Matthew  xx,  17-xxi.  17.] 


TO   JERUSALEM. 


be  so  characterised.  The  first  and  second  Gos- 
pel represent  the  cure  as  taking  place  on  the 
way  into  Jericho;  the  third  puts  it  on  the  way 
out. 

Various  suppositions,  more  or  less  plausible, 
especially  less,  have  been  made  to  "  reconcile  " 
these  two  representations:  such  as  the  fact  that 
there  were  really  two  Jerichos,  the  old  and  the 
new,  the  cure  being  wrought  as  the  Saviour 
passed  from  the  one  to  the  other,  so  that  both 
accounts  would  be  strictly  accurate;  or  again, 
that  cures  may  have  been  wrought  both  in  enter- 
ing and  in  leaving  Jericho.  But  why  should  we 
trouble  ourselves  to  reconcile  so  small  a  differ- 
ence? It  is  not  of  the  slightest  consequence 
whether  the  cure  took  place  on  the  way  in  or  on 
the  way  out.  If  it  had  been  a  point  on  which  strict 
accuracy  was  essential,  care  would  doubtless  have 
been  taken  to  note  the  very  moment  and  the 
very  spot  where  it  took  place — as,  for  example,  in 
the  case  of  the  cure  of  the  nobleman's  son  at 
Capernaum  (John  iv.  52);  but  it  was  not;  and 
therefore  we  have  no  more  reason  to  wonder  at 
the  variation  in  so  unimportant  a  detail  than 
at  those  variations  from  the  accurate  text  which 
we  continually  find  in  the  quotations  from  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures.  The  discrepancy 
does  not  in  the  slightest  degree  afifect  the  credi- 
bility of  any  of  the  witnesses;  it  only  serves,  to- 
gether with  the  other  variations,  to  show  the  in- 
dependence of  the  different  accounts.  How 
small  must  be  the  minds,  or  how  strong  the  prej- 
udices, of  those  who  find  support  for  their  un- 
belief in  discrepancies  of  which  this  is  acknowl- 
edged to  be  one  of  the  gravest  examples! 

It  so  happens,  too,  that  there  is  no  story  in 
ill  the  Gospels  which  shines  more  lustrously  in 
its  own  light.  It  is  full  of  beauty  and  pathos  in 
all  the  versions  of  it  which  have  come  down  to 
us;  but  most  of  all  in  the  graphic  story  of  St. 
Mark,  to  whose  Gospel  therefore  its  illustration 
may  be  regarded  as  belonging  by  special  right. 

II. — The  Royal  Entry  (xxi.  1-17). 

Travelling  from  Jericho,  it  is  probable  that  our 
Lord  reached  Bethany  on  the  evening  of  Friday, 
a  week  before  His  crucifixion.  The  next  day, 
being  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  He  would  spend  in 
retirement,  probably  in  the  house  of  Lazarus, 
whom  a  short  time  before  He  had  raised  from 
the  dead.  The  following  day,  the  first  day  of  the 
week,  would  therefore  be  the  date  of  His  entry 
into  Jerusalem  as  the  Royal  Son  of  David,  come 
to  claim   His  kingdom. 

That  this  entrance  into  the  capital  is  a  most 
important  event  in  the  history  of  Jesus  is  evi- 
dent not  only  from  its  nature  and  consequences, 
but  also  from  the  fact  that  it  is  one  which  all 
the  four  Evangelists  record.  Indeed,  it  is  just  at 
this  point  that  the  four  narratives  converge.  The 
river  of  the  water  of  life,  which  "  was  parted  and 
became  four  heads  "  diverging  at  times  in  their 
course,  now  unites  its  waters  in  one  channel 
broad  and  deep;  and  all  the  four  Evangelists, 
though  in  different  accents  still,  and  with  varia- 
tion in  the  selection  of  details,  combine  to  tell 
the  same  wondrous  story  of  our  Saviour's  pas- 
sion, the  story  of  "  the  decease  which  He  should 
accomplish  at  Jerusalem." 

This  was  the  first  occasion  on  which  our  Lord 
distinctly  put  forth  His  claim  to  royalty.  From 
the  beginning  of  His  ministry  He  had  shown 
Himself  to  be  a  "  prophet  mighty  in  word  and  in 


deed,"  and  to  those  who  followed  Him  it  be- 
came manifest  that  He  was  the  Prophet  foretold 
by  Moses,  for  whose  coming  they  had  been 
taught  to  look  with  eager  eyes  (see  Deut.  xviii. 
15-19).  From  the  beginning  of  His  ministry, 
too,  the  Saviour  had  been  proclaiming  "  the  gos- 
pel of  the  kingdom";  but  when  we  examine 
carefully  all  He  says  about  it,  we  find  that  He 
never  expressly  asserts  that  He  Himself  is 
King.  Not  that  He  conceals  the  all-important 
truth:  He  speaks  of  the  kingdom  in  such  a  way 
that  those  who  have  ears  to  hear  may  learn  that 
He  is  King  Himself — as,  for  instance,  when  He 
says,  "  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto 
Me,  and  forbid  them  not:  for  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  heaven."  One  might  quite  readily 
infer  from  these  words  that  Jesus  Himself  was 
King;  but  the  claim  is  not  thereby  formally 
made.  Besides,  not  only  is  it  true  that  up  to 
this  time  He  did  not  formally  assume  the  royal 
title,  but  He  even  resisted  attempts  made  to 
thrust  it  upon  Him  (e.  g.,  John  vi.  15).  For  this 
refusal  to  be  crowned  by  the  multitude  there  was 
only  too  good  reason.  Their  ideas  of  royalty 
were  entirely  different  from  His.  Had  He  al- 
lowed Himself  to  be  borne  on  the  tide  of  popu- 
lar favour  to  royal  honours.  His  kingdom  would 
have  been  thereby  marked  as  "  of  this  world," 
it  would  have  been  stamped  as  something  very 
different  from  the  kingdom  of  "  righteousness 
and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost  "  He  had 
come  to  establish.  Had  He  been  a  mere  enthu- 
siast, He  would  undoubtedly  have  yielded  to  such 
a  tidal  wave  of  public  excitement;  but  His  unerr- 
ing wisdom  taught  Him  that  He  must  reach  His 
throne  by  another  path  than  that  of  popular 
favour.  Rather  must  it  be  through  popular  re- 
jection— through  the  dark  portals  of  despite  and 
death;  and  for  that.  His  hour  had  not  then  come. 

Now  it  has  come.  He  has  been  steadily  ad- 
vancing to  Jerusalem  for  the  very  purpose  of 
accomplishing  that  decease  which  is  to  be  the 
portal  of  His  royalty.  Already  fully  revealed 
as  Prophet,  He  is  about  to  be  made  "  perfect 
through  suffering"  as  our  great  High  Priest. 
It  is  time,  therefore,  that  He  reveal  Himself  as 
King,  so  that  no  one  may  have  it  afterwards  to 
say  that  He  never  really  claimed  the  throne  of 
His   father   David. 

How,  then,  shall  He  assert  His  right?  Shall 
a  herald  be  sent  to  proclaim  with  the  sound  of 
a  trumpet  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  King  over 
Israel  in  Jerusalem?  To  take  such  a  course 
would  be  to  court  misunderstanding.  It  would 
be  to  raise  the  standard  of  revolt  against  the 
Romans.  It  would  stir  the  city  in  a  very  differ- 
ent fashion  from  that  in  which  the  Prince  of 
Peace  would  have  it  stirred.  It  would  be  the 
signal  for  tumult,  bloodshed,  and  disastrous  war. 
The  ordinary  method  is  evidently  not  to  be 
thought  of.     How,  then,  shall  it  be  done? 

Our  Lord  is  never  at  a  loss  for  means  to  ac- 
complish His  designs  in  His  own  way,  which  is 
always  the  best.  He  sends  to  a  neighbouring 
village  for  a  young  ass,  mounts  it,  and  rides  into 
the  city.  That  is  all  He  does.  Not  a  word  said 
about  royalty,  no  herald,  no  trumpeter,  no  proc- 
lamation, no  royal  pomp,  nothing  whatever  to 
rouse  the  Roman  jealousy  or  ire — nothing  but 
the  very  ordinary  circumstance  of  a  man  riding 
into  the  city  on  an  ass's  colt,  a  mode  of  convey- 
ance not  in  itself  calculated  to  attract  any  special 
notice.  What  was  there,  then,  in  such  an  act 
to  secure  the  end?     Nothing  in  itself;  but  a  great 


772 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


deal  when  taken  in  connection  with  a  remark- 
able prophecy  in  the  Book  of  Zechariah  well 
known  to  every  Jew,  and  much  in  the  thoughts 
of  all  who  were  looking  for  the  promised  Mes- 
siah. It  is  true,  indeed,  that  an  ordinary  man 
might  have  done  the  same  thing  and  the  people 
have  taken  no  notice  of  him.  But  Jesus  had  be- 
come the  object  of  very  great  interest  and  at- 
tention to  large  numbers  of  the  people  on  ac- 
count of  the  miracles  He  had  been  working — 
notably  that  great  miracle  which  still  stirred  the 
minds  of  the  whole  community,  the  raising  of 
Lazarus  from  the  dead.  The  chief  priests  and 
scribes,  indeed,  and  the  men  of  influence  in  Je- 
rusalem, regarded  Him  with  all  the  greater 
rancour  on  account  of  His  miracles  of  mercy, 
and  they  had  been  specially  embittered  against 
Him  since  the  raising  of  Lazarus;  but  it  was 
different  with  the  body  of  the  people,  especially 
those  who  had  come  or  were  coming  from  Ga  ilce 
and  other  distant  parts  of  the  land  to  be  present 
at  the  great  Paschal  feast.  We  are  told  by  St. 
John  that  a  large  number  of  these  had  gone  out 
the  day  before  to  Bethany,  both  to  see  Lazarus, 
who  was  naturally  an  object  of  curiosity,  and 
also  to  see  Jesus  Himself;  these  accordingly  were 
precisely  in  the  state  of  mind  in  wh.ch  they 
would  most  readily  catch  up  the  idea  so  nat- 
urally suggested  by  the  significant  act  of  our 
Saviour's  riding  into  the  city  of  David  on  a  colt 
the  foal  of  an  ass.  The  resu.t.  accordingly,  was 
as  had  been  intended,  and  is  thus  described  by 
our  Evangelist:  "  The  most  part  of  the  multitude 
spread  Uitir  garnn^ms  in  uie  way;  and  odieis 
cut  branches  irom  the  trees  and  spread  them 
in  the  way.  And  the  multitudes  that  went  before 
Him,  and  that  followed,  cried,  saymg,  Hosanna 
to  the  Son  of  David;  Blessed  is  He  that  cometh 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord;  Hosanna  in  the  high- 
est "   (R.  v.). 

The  excellence  of  the  method  adopted  by  our 
Saviour  to  set  forth  His  royal  claims  will  still 
further  appear  when  we  consider  that  it  arose 
quite  naturally  out  of  the  circumstances  in  which 
He  was  placed.  So  much  was  this  the  case  that 
some  have  thought  He  was  taken  by  surprise,  that 
He  had  no  intention  oi  caiiing  forth  the  testi- 
mony of  the  people  to  His  royal  claims,  that  in 
fact  He  was  oniy  giving  way  to  a  movement  He 
could  not  well  resist;  but  this  shallow  view  is 
plainly  set  aside,  not  only  by  what  has  been  al- 
ready advanced,  but  also  by  the  answer  He  gives 
to  the  Pharisees  who  ask  Him  to  rebuke  and 
silence  His  disciples:  "  I  tell  you  that  if  these 
should  hold  their  peace,  the  stones  would  imme- 
diately cry  out  "   (Luke  xix.  39,  40). 

Not  oniy  did  the  means  adopted  by  our  Lord 
rise  naturally  out  of  the  circumstances  in  which 
He  and  His  followers  were  placed,  but  they 
were  specially  suited  to  suggest  important  tru.hs 
concerning  the  kingdom  He  claimed  as  His  own. 
We  have  already  seen  that,  if  He  had  entered  the 
city  m  regal  pomp  and  splendour,  it  would  have 
conveyed  an  entirely  false  idea  of  the  kingdom. 
The  method  He  did  adopt  was  such  as  to  give 
a  true  idea  of  it. 

First,  it  strikingly  suggested  the  kingliness  of 
lowliness,  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  one  of 
its  great  distinctive  principles.  As  we  look  back 
over  His  recent  instructions  to  His  disciples,  we 
see  how  very  much  this  thought  was  in  His  heart 
and  how  great  was  the  importance  He  attached 
to  it.  He  had  just  taught  them  that  the  Son 
of  man  had  come,  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but 


to  minister  and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for 
many;  and  His  manner  of  entering  into  His 
capital  must  be  in  harmony  with  the  lowly,  self- 
renouncing  work  He  has  come  to  do.  Thus  He 
shows  in  the  most  impressive  way  that  His  king- 
dom is  not  of  this  world.  There  is  no  sugges- 
tion of  rivalry  with  Caesar;  yet  to  those  who 
look  beneath  the  surface  He  is  manifestly  more 
of  a  king  than  any  Caesar.  He  has  knowledge 
of  everything  without  a  spy  (ver.  2);  He  has 
power  over  men  without  a  soldier  (ver.  3) ;  He 
has  simply  to  say  "  The  Lord  hath  need,"  and 
immediately  His  royal  will  is  loyally  fulfilled. 
Evidently  He  has  the  mind  of  a  King  and  the 
will  of  a  King:  has  He  not  also  the  heart  of  a 
King,  of  a  true  Shepherd  of  the  people?  See 
how  He  bears  the  burden  of  their  future  on  His 
heart,  a  burden  which  weighs  so  heavily  upon 
Him  that  He  cannot  restrain  His  tears  (Luke 
xix.  41-44).  There  is  no  kingly  state;  but  was 
not  His  a  kingly  soul,  Who  in  such  humble  guise 
rode  into  Jerusalem  that  day? 

Not  less  than  lowliness  is  peace  suggested  as 
characteristic  of  His  kingdom.  First  by  the 
manner  of  His  entrance;  for  while  the  horse  and 
the  chariot  were  suggestive  of  war,  the  ass  was 
the  symbol  of  peace.  And  then,  the  prophecy 
is  one  of  peace.  Immediately  after  the  words 
quoted  by  the  Evangelist  there  follows  this  re- 
markable promise:  "  I  will  cut  oflf  the  chariot 
from  Ephraim,  and  the  horse  from  Jerusalem, 
and  the  battle  bow  shall  be  cut  ofif;  and  He  shall 
speak  peace  unto  the  heathen;  and  His  dominion 
shall  be  from  sea  even  to  sea,  and  from  the  river 
even  to  the  ends  of  the  earth."  It  would  seem, 
indeed,  that  some  at  least  in  the  multitude  real- 
ised that  through  the  Messiah  was  to  be  expected 
a  deeper  peace  than  that  between  man  and  man. 
This  deeper  peace  may  have  been  suggested  to 
their  minds  by  the  words  following  next  in  the 
prophecy,  which  goes  on  to  speak  of  prisoners 
of  hope  rescued  from  the  pit,  and  turning  tP  the 
stronghold;  or  by"  the  Psalm  from  which  their 
cry  "Hosanna  in  the  highest"  was  taken  (Ps. 
cxviii.);  certain  it  is  that  their  minds  did  rise 
to  a  higher  conception  of  the  work  of  the  Mes- 
siah than  they  had  given  token  of  before;  for 
the  cry  of  some  of  them  at  least  was  "  Peace  in 
heaven,  and  glory  in  the  highest"  (Luke  xix. 
38).  A  striking  proof  this,  of  the  fitness  of  His 
manner  of  entering  into  His  capital  to  suggest 
the  purest,  highest,  and  best  thoughts  concerning 
the  kingdom  which  He  claimed  as  His  own. 

As  Jerusalem  was  the  city  of  the  great  King, 
the  Temple  was  His  house,  His  royal  palace,  and 
accordingly  He  enters  it  and  takes  possession  in 
His  Father's  name.  We  are  told  by  St.  Mark 
that  ■'  when  He  had  looked  round  about  upon  all 
things,  it  being  now  eventide.  He  went  out  unto 
Bethany  with  the  twelve."  But  St.  Matthew, 
who  is  accustomed  to  pay  more  attention  to  the 
logical  than  to  the  exact  chronological  sequence 
of  events,  proceeds  at  once  to  relate  the  purging 
of  the  Temple,  which  really  took  place  the  fol- 
lowing day,  but  which  was  so  plainly  the  natural 
sequel  of  His  royal  entrance  that  he  very  prop- 
erly gives  it  in  close  connection  therewith.  Be- 
sides, what  the  King  did  on  entering  the  Temple 
the  next  day  admirably  illustrates  the  prophecy. 
For  what  saith  the  prophet?  "  Behold  thy  King 
cometh  unto  thee:  He  is  just,  and  having  salva- 
tion." '■  He  is  just," — therefore  He  will  not  tol- 
erate the  unholy  traffic  in  the  Temple,  but  "  cast 
out  all  them  that  sold  and  bought  in  the  Temple, 


Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii.] 


CONFLICT    IN    THE    TEMPLE. 


773 


and  overthrew  the  tables  of  the  money-changers 
and  the  seats  of  them  that  sold  the  doves;  and 
He  saith  unto  them,  My  house  shall  be  called  a 
house  of  prayer;  but  ye  make  it  a  den  of  rob- 
bers "  (R.  v.):  "and  having  salvation" — accord- 
ingly, when  He  sees  the  blind  and  the  lame  in 
the  Temple  He  does  not  turn  them  out.  He  does 
not  turn  away  from  them,  "  He  healed  them." 
The  casting  out  of  the  traders  illustrated  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom,  the  healing  of  the 
blind  and  lame,  its  peace,  and  the  shouts  of  the 
children  which  followed,  its  joy. 

This  coming  of  the  King  to  His  capital  has 
been  familiarly  spoken  of  as  "  the  triumphal 
entry."  The  term  seems  unfortunate  and  mis- 
leading. The  waving  of  palms,  the  strewing  of 
branches  and  leaves,  the  spreading  of  garments 
on  the  way — all  this  gave  it  something  of  the 
aspect  of  a  triumph;  but  that  it  was  no  triumph 
none  knew  better  than  the  man  of  Sorrows,  Who 
was  the  centre  of  it  all.  There  was  certainly  no 
triumph  in  His  heart  that  day.  If  you  wish  to 
look  into  His  heart,  watch  Him  as  He  comes  to 
the  turn  of  the  road  where  first  the  great  city 
bursts  upon  His  sight.  How  it  glitters  in  the 
sun,  its  palaces  and  towers  gleaming  in  the 
splendour  of  the  day,  its  magnificent  Temple,, 
which  had  taken  nearly  half  a  century  to  build, 
rearing  its  stately  head  high  above  all,  into  the 
glorious  heaven — a  city  and  a  temple  for  a  king 
to  be  proud  of,  especially  when  seen  through 
waving  palm  branches  held  in  the  hands  of  a  re- 
joicing throng  who  shout  "  Hosanna  to  the  Son 
of  David,  Hosanna  in  the  highest!  "  Surely  His 
soul  must  be  thrilled  with  jubilant  emotion! 

Ah!  but  look  at  Him:  look  at  Him  closely. 
Go  up  to  Him,  near  enough  to  see  His  face  and 
hear  what  He  is  saying.  Is  He  jubilant?  His 
eyes  are  wet  with  tears;  and  with  tears  in  His 
voice  He  is  speaking  "  the  saddest  words  of 
tongue  or  pen":  O  Jerusalem,  "if  thou  hadst 
known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the 
things  which  belong  unto  thy  peace!  but  now 
they  are  hid  from  thine  eyes.  For  the  days  shall 
come  upon  thee,  that  thine  enemies  shall  cast  a 
trench  about  thee,  and  compass  thee  round,  and 
keep  thee  in  on  every  side,  and  shall  lay  thee 
even  with  the  ground,  and  thy  children  within 
thee;  and  they  shall  not  leave  in  thee  one  stone 
upon  another;  because  thou  knewest  not  the  time 
of  thy  visitation."  Ah!  well  the  Man  of  Sorrows 
knew  what  all  that  shouting  and  rejoicing  were 
worth;  not  even  for  a  moment  was  He  misled 
by  it;  no  less  certainly  now  when  the  plaudits 
of  the  multitudes  were  ringing  around  Him, 
than  when  He  had  been  on  the  way  going  up 
to  Jerusalem,  did  He  know  that,  though  He  was 
the  rightful  King,  He  should  receive  no  king's 
welcome,  but  should  suflfer  many  things  and  die. 
He  knew  that  it  was  to  no  royal  palace,  but  to 
the  bitter  cross.  He  was  advancing,  as  He  rode 
down  Olivet,  across  the  Kedron,  and  up  to  the 
city  of  David.  Yet  it  is  not  the  thought  of  His 
own  cross  that  draws  the  tears  from  His  eyes; 
it  is  the  thought  of  the  woes  impending  over 
those  whom  He  has  come  to  save,  but  who  will 
have  none  of  Him.  O  the  depth  of  divine  love 
in  these  self-forgetful  tears! 

One  thrill  of  joy  the  day  had  for  the  King  of 
sorrows.  It  was  His  welcome  from  the  children. 
The  plaudits  of  the  multitude  He  seems  to  have 
received  in  silence.  Why  should  He  be  moved 
by  hosannas  from  the  lips  of  those  who,  as  soon 
as  they  shall  find  out  what  manner  of  King  He  is, 


will  cry  "  Away  with  Him  "?  But  the  hosannas 
of  the  children  are  genuine  music  to  His  soul. 
The  little  ones  at  least  are  true.  There  is  no 
guile  in  their  spirits.  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom 
of  heaven."  It  is  most  touching  to  observe  how 
lovingly  the  heart  of  the  Saviour  goes  out  to  the 
little  ones  at  this  most  trying  time.  The  climax 
of  pathos  in  His  lament  over  Jerusalem  is 
reached  when,  after  speaking  of  the  fate  of  the 
city.  He  adds,  "and  thy  children  within  thee"; 
and  the  same  deep  sympathy  with  the  little  ones 
is  shown  in  the  answer  He  gives  to  the  mean- 
spirited  priests  and  scribes  who  were  moved 
with  indignation  and  tried  to  silence  their  sweet 
voices:  "  Have  ye  never  read,  Out  of  the  mouth 
of  babes  and  sucklings  Thou  hast  perfected 
praise?  " 

"  And  He  left  them,  and  went  out  of  the  city 
into  Bethany,  and  He  lodged  there," — not  in  the 
house  of  Lazarus,  we  may  be  sure,  or  He  would 
not  have  "  hungered  "  when  in  the  morning  He 
returned  to  the  city  (ver.  i8) ;  no  doubt  under  the 
open  canopy  of  heaven  or  at  best  under  some 
booth  erected  as  a  temporary  shelter.  What  were 
His  thoughts,  what  His  feelings,  as  He  looked 
back  on  the  day  and  forward  to  the  week? 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

CONFLICT  IN  THE  TEMPLE. 

Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii. 

It  had  been  written  that  the  Lord  should  sud- 
denly come  to  His  Temple  (Mai.  iii.  i);  but  He 
would  not  too  hastily  assert  His  rights.  The 
first  day  He  simply  "  looked  round  about  upon 
all  things"  (Mark  xi.  ii),  and  then  withdrew  to 
Bethany.  The  second  day — without,  however, 
even  yet  assailing  the  authority  of  those  in  power 
— He  assumed  His  prerogative  as  Lord  of  the 
Temple  by  casting  out  the  traffickers,  healing  the 
blind  and  the  lame,  and  accepting  the  hosannas 
of  the  children.  The  scribes  and  Pharisees 
showed  some  displeasure  at  all  this,  and  raised 
objections;  but  the  answer  they  received  silenced, 
if  it  did  not  satisfy  them.  Thus  two  days  passed 
without  any  serious  attempt  to  dispute  His  au- 
thority; but  on  the  third  day  the  conflict  began. 
It  was  a  dark  and  terrible  day,  and  of  its  fatefuJ 
history  we  have  a  full  account  in  this  Gospel. 

The  day  opens  with  the  sight  on  the  way  to 
the  city  of  the  withered  fig  tree,  a  sad  symbol  of 
the  impending  fate  of  Israel,  to  be  decided  ere 
the  day  closed  by  their  final  rejection  of  their 
Saviour-King.  This  was  our  Lord's  single 
miracle  of  judgment;  many  a  stern  word  of  warn- 
ing did  He  speak,  but  there  is  no  severity  in  His 
deeds:  they  are  all  mercy  and  love.  The  single 
exception,  if  exception  it  may  be  called,  makes 
this  great  fact  stand  out  only  the  more  impres- 
sively. It  was  necessary  for  love's  sake  to  show 
that  in  that  arm,  which  was  always  strong  to 
save,  there  was  also  strength  to  smite  if  the  sad 
necessity  should  come;  but  so  tender-hearted  is 
He  that  He  cannot  bear  to  strike  where  the 
stroke  can  be  felt,  so  He  lets  it  fall  on  an  un- 
conscious tree.  Thus  to  the  end  He  justifies 
His  name  of  Jesus,  Saviour,  and  illustrates  the 
blessed  truth  of  which  His  whole  life  is  the  ex- 
pression, that  "  God  is  love."  "  The  Son  of  man 
is  not  come  to  destroy  men's  lives  but  to  save 
them."    Judgment   is    His    strange    work;    from 


774 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


the  very  thought  pf  it  He  shrinks,  as  seems  sug- 
gested to  us  here  by  the  fact  that,  in  the  use  He 
makes  of  the  circumstance  in  His  conversation 
with  the  disciples.  He  refrains  from  speaking  of 
its  dark  significance,  but  rather  takes  the  op- 
portunity of  teaching  from  it  an  incidental  lesson 
full  of  hope  and  comfort  regarding  the  power  of 
faith  and  the  value  of  prayer  (vv.  21,  22). 

As  soon  as  on  the  third  day  He  enters  the 
Temple  the  conrlict  begins.  It  would  seem  that 
the  interval  our  Lord  had  in  mercy  allowed  for 
calm  reflection  had  been  used  for  no  other  purpose 
than  to  organise  a  conspiracy  for  the  purpose  of 
entangling  Him  in  His  words  and  so  discrediting 
His  authority.  We  gather  this  from  the  care- 
fully framed  questions  with  which  He  is  plied  by 
one  party  after  another.  Four  successive  attacks 
are  recorded  in  the  passage  before  us:  the  first 
by  the  chief  priests  and  elders  of  the  people  de- 
manding His  authority;  the  next  by  the  Phari- 
sees, assisted  by  the  Herodians,  who  endeav- 
oured by  means  of  the  difficulty  of  the  tribute 
money  to  embroil  Him  with  the  Roman  power; 
this  was  again  immediately  followed  by  a  third, 
in  which  the  prime  movers  were  the  Sadducees, 
armed  with  what  they  considered  an  unanswer- 
able question  regarding  the  life  to  come;  and 
when  that  also  broke  down  there  was  a  renewed 
attack  of  the  Pharisees,  who  thought  to  discon- 
cert Him  by  a  perplexing  question  about  the 
law. 

We  may  not  discuss  the  long  sad  history  of 
these  successive  attacks  with  any  fulness,  but 
only  glance  first  at  the  challenge  of  our  Lord's 
authority  and  how  He  meets  it,  and  next  at  the 
ordeal  of  questions  with  which  it  was  followed. 

L. — The  Challenge  (xxi.  23-xxii.   14). 

"  By  what  authority  doest  Thou  these  things? 
And  who  gave  Thee  this  authority?  "  The  ques- 
tion was  fair  enough;  and  if  it  had  been  asked  in 
an  earnest  spirit  Jesus  would  have  given  them, 
as  always  to  the  honest  inquirer,  a  kind  and  satis- 
fying answer.  It  is  not,  however,  as  inquirers, 
but  as  cavillers,  they  approach  Him.  Again  and 
again,  at  times  and  in  ways  innumerable,  by  ful- 
filment of  prophecy,  by  His  mighty  deeds  and  by 
His  wondrous  words,  He  had  given  proof  of 
His  Divine  authority  and  established  His  claim 
to  be  the  true  Messiah.  It  was  not  therefore  be- 
cause they  lacked  evidence  of  His  authority,  but 
because  they  hated  it,  because  they  would  not 
have  this  man  to  reign  over  them,  that  now  they 
question  Him.  It  was  obvious  that  their  only 
object  was  to  entangle  Him;  accordingly  our 
Lord  showed  how  in  the  net  they  were  spreading 
for  Him  their  own  feet  were  caught. 

He  meets  their  question  with  a  counter-ques- 
tion, "  The  baptism  of  John,  whence  was  it? 
from  heaven,  or  of  men?  "  The  more  we  ex- 
amine this  question,  the  more  must  we  admire 
the  consummate  wisdom  it  displays.  We  see  at 
once  how  it  turns  the  tables  on  His  critics;  but 
it  is  far  more  important  to  notice  how  admirably 
adapted  it  was  to  lead  them  to  the  answer  of 
their  own  question,  if  only  they  would  follow  it 
out.  They  dared  not  repudiate  the  baptism  of 
John;  and  had  not  John  baptised  Jesus,  and 
solemnly  borne  repeated  testimony  to  His  Mes- 
siahship?  Had  he  not  most  emphatically  borne 
that  very  testimony  to  a  formal  deputation  sent 
by  themselves?  (John  i.  19-27).  Finally,  were 
not  the  ministry  and  testimony  of  John  closely 


associated  in  prophecy  with  that  very  coming 
of  the  Lord  to  His  Temple  which  gave  them  so 
deep  ofifence:  "  Behold,  I  will  send  My  mes- 
senger, and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before  Me: 
and  the  Lord,  whom  ye  seek,  shall  suddenly  come 
to  His  temple:  .  .  .  behold,  He  shall  come,  saith 
the  Lord  of  hosts."  Our  Lord's  counter-ques- 
tion, then,  was  framed  with  such  exquisite  skill 
as  to  disappoint  their  malice,  while  at  the  same 
time  it  was  suited  to  guide  the  earnest  inquirer 
to  the  truth. 

The  propounders  of  the  question  were  not  true 
men,  but  hypocrites.  A  negative  answer  they 
could  not  give.  An  afifirmative  they  would  not 
give.  So  when  they  refused  to  answer,  our  Lord 
replied,  "  Neither  tell  I  you  by  what  authority 
I  do  these  things." 

The  Lord  of  the  Temple  now  assumes  the  of- 
fensive, and'  directs  against  His  opponents  a 
series  of  parables  which  He  holds  up  to  them  as 
a  triple  mirror  in  which  from  different  points  of 
view  they  may  see  themselves  in  their  true  char- 
acter, and  as  a  set  of  danger  signals  to  warn  them 
of  their  impending  doom.  He  presents  them 
with  such  marvellous  skill  that  He  makes  the 
Pharisees  their  own  judges,  and  constrains  them 
to  pass  sentence  on  themselves.  In  the  first 
parable  He  constrains  them  to  declare  their  own 
guilt;  in  the  second,  He  makes  them  decree 
their  own  punishment;  in  the  third.  He  warns 
them  of  the  impending  fate  of  the  people  they 
were  leading  to  destruction. 

We  have  said  that  in  these  parables  Christ  as- 
sumes the  offensive;  but  this  is  true  only  in  a 
very  superficial  sense.  In  the  deepest  sense  He 
spoke  them  not  against  the  Pharisees,  but  for 
them.  His  object  was  to  carry  home  to  their 
hearts  the  conviction  of  sin,  and  to  impress  them 
with  a  sense  of  their  danger  before  it  was  too 
late.  This  was  what  above  all  they  needed.  It 
was  their  only  hope  of  salvation.  And  how  ad- 
mirably suited  for  His  purpose  were  these  three 
parables!  Their  application  to  themselves  was 
plain  enough  after  it  was  stated,  but  not  be- 
forehand; the  effect  of  which  was  that  they  were 
put  in  a  position  to  give  an  impartial  verdict  on 
their  own  conduct.  It  was  the  same  method  so 
efifectively  employed  by  Nathan  in  bringing  con- 
viction to  the  conscience  of  David.  Had  Christ 
charged  the  sin  of  the  Pharisees  directly  home 
upon  them  they  would  have  been  at  once  thrown 
on  the  defensive,  and  it  would  have  been  impos- 
sible to  reach  their  conscience  through  the  en- 
tanglements of  prejudice  and  personal  interest. 
Christ  wishes  to  disentangle  them  from  all  that 
was  darkening  their  moral  vision,  and  He  uses 
the  parable  as  the  most  effective  means.  It  is  a 
great  mistake,  then,  to  suppose  that  Jesus  con- 
tented Himself  with  turning  the  tables  on  them, 
and  carrying  the  war,  so  to  speak,  into  the  enemy's 
country.  It  was  with  them  a  war  of  words,  but 
not  with  Him.  He  was  seeking  to  save  these 
poor  lost  ones.  He  wished  to  give  them  His 
best  for  their  worst.  They  had  come  to  entangle 
Him  in  His  talk.  He  does  His  best  to  disentan- 
gle them  from  the  meshes  of  self-deception. 
The  tone  of  all  three  parables  is  exceptionally 
severe;  but  the  spirit  of  them  is  love. 

The  Two  Sons  (vv.  28-32). 

The  parable  of  the  two  song  is  exceedingly 
simple;  and  the  question  founded  upon  it, 
"  Whether   of   them    twain    did   the   will   of   his 


Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii.] 


CONFLICT    IN    THE    TEMPLE. 


775 


father?  "  admitted  of  but  one  answer — an  answer 
which  seemed,  as  it  was  spoken,  to  involve  only 
the  simplest  of  all  moral  judgments;  yet  how 
keen  the  edge  of  it  when  once  it  was  disclosed! 
Observe  the  emphatic  word  did,  suggesting  with- 
out saying  it,  that  it  made  comparatively  little 
difference  what  they  said  (see  xxiii.  3).  So  far 
as  profession  went,  the  Pharisees  were  all  that 
could  be  desired.  They  were  the  representatives 
of  religion  in  the  land;  their  whole  attitude  cor- 
responded to  the  answer  of  the  second  son:  "I 
go,  sir."  Yet  when  John — whom  they  them- 
selves admitted  to  be  a  prophet  of  the  Lord — 
came  to  them  in  the  way  of  righteousness,  they 
set  his  word  aside  and  refused  to  obey  him.  On 
the  other  hand,  many  of  those  whose  lives 
seemed  to  say  "  I  will  not,"  when  they  heard  the 
word  of  John,  repented  and  began  to  work  the 
works  of  God.  Thus  it  came  to  pass  that  many 
of  these  had  entered  the  kingdom,  while  the  self- 
complacent  Pharisee  still  remained  without. 

The  words  with  which  the  parable  is  pressed 
home  are  severe  and  trenchant;  but  they  are 
rievertheless  full  of  gospel  grace.  They  set  in 
the  strongest  light  the  welcome  fact  that  the  sal- 
vation of  God  is  for  the  chief  of  sinners,  for  those 
who  have  been  rudestand  most  rebellious  in  their 
first  answers  to  the  divine  appeal;  and  then, 
while  they  condemn  so  very  strongly  the  self- 
deceiver,  it  is  not  for  the  purpose  of  covering 
him  with  confusion,  but  in  order  to  open  his 
eyes  and  save  him  from  the  net  in  which  he  has 
set  his  feet.  Even  in  that  terrible  sentence  which 
puts  him  lower  down  than  open  and  disgraceful 
sinners,  there  is  a  door  left  still  imlatched  for 
him  to  enter.  "  The  publicans  and  harlots  go 
into  the  kingdom  of  God  before  you";  but  you 
may  enter  after  them.  If  only  you,  like  them, 
would  "  afterward  "  repent — if  you  would  repent 
ol  your  hypocrisy  and  insincerity,  as  they  have 
repented  of  their  rudeness  and  rebellion — you 
would  be  as  gladly  welcomed  as  they  into  the 
k/ngdom  of  God. 

The  Husbandmen  (vv.  33-46). 

The  second  parable  follows  hard  on  the  first, 
and  presses  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  so 
closely  that  they  cannot  fail  to  see  in  the  end  that 
it  is  themselves  they  have  been  constrained  to 
judge  and  condemn  (ver.  45).  It  is  indeed  diffi- 
cult to  suppose  that  they  had  not  even  from  the 
beginning  some  glimpse  of  the  intended  appli- 
cation of  this  parable.  The  vineyard  was  a  fa- 
miliar symbol  with  a  definite  and  well-understood 
meaning,  from  which  our  Lord  in  His  use  of  it 
does  not  depart.  The  vineyard  being  the  na- 
tion, the  owner  is  evidently  God;  the  fruit  ex- 
pected, righteousness;  the  particulars  mentioned 
(the  fence,  the  press,  the  tower)  implying  the 
completeness  of  the  arrangements  made  by  the 
owner  for  securing  the  expected  fruit.  The 
husbandmen  are  the  leaders  of  the  people,  those 
who  are  responsible  for  their  direction  and  con- 
trol. The  going  to  a  far  country  represents  the 
removal  of  God  from  their  sight;  so  that  they 
are,  as  it  were,  put  upon  their  honour,  left  to  act 
ill  the  matter  of  the  vineyard  according  to  the 
prompting  of  their  own  hearts.  All  this  is  con- 
tained in  the  few  lines  which  make  up  verse  33, 
a  id  forms  the  groundwork  of  this  great  parable. 
1  hus  are  set  forth  in  a  very  striking  manner  the 
high  privileges  and  grave  responsibilities  of  the 
loaders  of  the  Jewish  people,  represented  at  the 


time  by  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  He  war 
then  addressing.     How  are  they  meeting  this  re 
sponsibility?     Let  the  parable  tell. 

It  is  a  terrible  indictment,  showing  in  the 
strongest  light  the  guilt  of  their  fathers,  and 
pointing  out  to  them  that  they  are  on  the  verge 
of  a  crime  far  greater  still.  Again  and  again 
have  prophets  of  righteousness  come  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  and  demanded  the  fruits  of 
righteousness  which  were  due.  How  have  they 
been  received?  "The  husbandmen  took  his 
servants,  and  beat  one,  and  killed  another,  and 
stoned  another."  So  have  their  fathers  acted 
time  after  time  and  still  the  patience  of  the  owner 
is  not  exhausted,  nor  does  He  even  yet  give  up 
all  hope  of  fruit  from  His  favoured  vineyard:  so, 
as  a  last  resort.  He  sends  His  son,  saying,  "  They 
will  reverence  my  son." 

We  can  imagine  the  tone  in  which  the  Son 
of  God  wouJd  speak  these  words.  What  a  sub- 
lime consciousness  is  implied  in  His  use  of 
them!  and  how  touchingly  does  He  in  this  in- 
cidental way  give  the  best  of  all  answers  to  the 
question  with  which  His  enemies  began!  Surely 
the  son,  the  only  and  well-beloved  son,*  had 
the  best  of  all  authority  to  act  for  the  father! 
In  the  former  parable  He  had  appealed  to  the 
recognised  authority  of  John;  now  He  indicates 
that  the  highest  authority  of  all  is  in  Himself. 
If  only  their  hearts  had  not  been  wholly  shut 
against  the  light,  how  it  would  have  flashed  upon 
them  now!  They  would  have  taken  up  the  cry 
of  the  children,  and  said,  "  Hosanna!  blessed  is 
He  that  conieth  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  "  ; 
and  the  parable  would  have  served  its  purpose 
before  it  had  reached  its  close.  But  they  are 
deaf  and  blind  to  the  things  of  God;  so  the  awful 
indictment  must  proceed  to  the  bitter  end. 

If  there  was  in  the  heart  of  Christ  an  exalted 
consciousness  of  His  filial  relation  to  God  as 
He  spoke  of  the  sending  of  the  Son,  what  a 
pang  must  have  shot  through  it  as  He  pro- 
ceeded to  depict  in  such  vivid  colours  the  crime 
they  are  now  all  ready  to  commit,  referring  suc- 
cessively as  He  does  to  the  arrest,  the  handing 
over  to  Pilate,  and  the  crucifixion  without  the 
gate:  "They  caught  him,  and  cast  him  out  of 
the  vineyard,  and  slew  him."  How  apalling  it 
must  have  been  to  Him  to  speak  these  words! 
how  appalling  it  ought  to  have  been  to  them 
to  hear  them!  That  they  did  feel  the  force  of 
the  parable  is  evident  from  the  answer  they  gave 
to  the  question,  "  What  will  he  do  to  those 
husbandmen?  "  and,  as  we  have  said,  they  must 
surely  have  had  some  glimpses  of  its  applica- 
tion to  themselves;  but  it  did  not  disturb  their 
self-complacency,  until  our  Lord  spoke  the  plain 
words  with  which  He  followed  up  the  parable, 
referring  to  that  very  Psalm  from  which  the 
children's  cry  of  "  Hosanna  "  was  taken.  From 
it  He  selects  the  symbol  of  the  stone  rejected 
by  the  builders,  but  by  God  made  the  head  of 
the  corner,  applying  it  to  Himself  (the  rejected 
stone)  and  them  (the  builders).  The  reference 
was  most  appropriate  in  itself;  and  it  had  the 
further  advantage  of  being  followed  by  the  very 
word  which  it  would  be  their  salvation  now  to 
speak.  "  Hosanna  "  is  the  word  which  imme- 
diately follows  the  quotation  He  makes,  and  it 
introduces  a  prayer  which,  if  only  they  will  make 
their  own,  all  will  yet  be  well  with  them.  The 
prayer  is,  "  Save  now,  I  beseech  Thee,  O 
Lord "  ;    followed   by   the   words,    "  Blessed   be 

*  See  the  accounts  in  the  second  and  third  Gospels. 


776 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  May 
we  not  assume  that  our  Lord  paused  after  mak- 
ing His  quotation  to  give  them  the  opportunity 
of  adopting  it  as  their  own  prayer?  His  whole 
heart  was  longing  to  hear  these  very  words  from 
them.  Have  we  not  the  proof  of  it  further  on, 
in  the  sad  words  with  which  He  at  last  aban- 
doned the  hope:  "  I  say  unto  you,  ye  shall  not 
see  Me  henceforth  till  ye  shall  say.  Blessed  is  He 
that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the   Lord  "    (xxiii. 

39)? 

Seeing  they  will  not  take  the  warning  of  the 
parable,  and  that  they  refuse  the  opportunity 
given  them  while  yet  under  its  awe-inspiring  in- 
fluence, to  repent  and  return,  He  must  give 
sentence  against  them:  "Therefore  say  I  unto 
you.  The  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  away 
from  you,  and  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth 
the  fruits  thereof."  This  sentence  He  follows 
up  by  setting  before  them  the  dark  side  of  the 
other  symbol:  "Whosoever  shall  fall  on  this 
stone,  shall  be  broken:  but  on  whomsoever  it 
shall  fall,  it  will  grind  him  to  powder."  They 
were  stumbling  on  the  stone  now,  and  about  to 
be  broken  upon  it;  but  the  danger  that  lay  be- 
fore them  if  they  persisted  in  their  present  un- 
belief and  sin,  would  be  far  greater  still,  when 
He  Whom  they  now  despised  and  rejected  should 
be  at  the  head  of  all  authority  and  power. 

But  all  is  vain.  Steeling  their  hearts  against 
His  faithful  words,  they  are  only  the  more  mad- 
dened against  Him,  and  fear  alone  restrains 
them  from  beginning  now  the  very  crime  against 
which  they  have  just  had  so  terrible  a  warnings 
"  When  they  sought  to  lay  hands  on  Him,  they 
feared  the  multitudes,  because  they  took  Him 
for  a  prophet." 

The  Marriage  Feast  (xxii.  1-14)- 

The  manner  in  which  this  third  parable  is  in- 
troduced leaves  room  for  doubt  whether  it  was 
spoken  in  immediate  connection  with  the  two 
preceding.  The  use  of  the  word  "  answered  " 
(ver.  i)  would  rather  suggest  the  idea  that  some 
conversation  not  reported  had  intervened.  But 
though  it  does  not  form  part  of  a  continuous 
discourse  with  the  others,  it  is  so  closely  con- 
nected with  them  in  scope  and  bearing  that  it 
may  appropriately  be  dealt  with,  as  concluding 
the  warning  called  forth  by  the  first  attack  of 
the  chief  priests  and  elders.  The  relation  be- 
tween the  three  parables  will  be  best  seen  by  ob- 
serving that  the  first  has  to  do  with  their  treat- 
ment of  John;  the  second  and  third  with  their 
treatment  of  Himself  and  His  apostles.  The  sec- 
ond and  third  differ  from  each  other  in  this: 
that  while  the  King's  Son,  Who  is  prominent 
in  both,  is  regarded  in  the  former  as  the  last 
and  greatest  of  a  long  series  of  heavenly  mes- 
sengers sent  to  demand  of  the  chosen  people 
the  fruits  of  righteousness,  in  the  latter  He  is 
presented,  not  as  demanding  righteousness,  but 
as  bringing  joy.  Duty  is  the  leading  thought 
of  the  second  parable,  privilege  of  the  third; 
in  the  one  sin  is  brought  home  to  Israel's  lead- 
ers by  setting  before  them  their  treatment  of 
the  messengers  of  righteousness,  in  the  other  the 
sin  lies  in  their  rejection  of  the  message  of  grace. 
Out  of  this  distinction  rises  another — viz.,  that 
while  the  second  parable  runs  back  into  the  past, 
upwards  along  the  line  of  the  Old  Testament 
prophets,  the  third  runs  down  into  the  future, 
into  the  history  of  the  apostolic  times.    The  two 


together  make  up  a  terrible  indictment,  which 
might  well  have  roused  these  slumbering  con- 
sciences, and  led  even  scribes  and  Pharisees  to 
shrink  from  filling  up  the  measure  of  their 
iniquities. 

A  word  may  be  necessary  as  to  the  relation  of 
this  parable  to  the  similar  one  recorded  in  the 
fourteenth  chapter  of  St.  Luke,  known  as  "  The 
parable  of  the  Great  Supper."  The  two  have 
many  features  in  common,  but  the  differences 
are  so  great  that  it  is  plainly  wrong  to  suppose 
them  to  be  different  versions  of  the  same.  It 
is  astonishing  to  see  what  needless  difficulties 
some  people  make  for  themselves  by  the  utterly 
groundless  assumption  that  our  Lord  would 
never  use  the  same  illustration  a  second  time. 
Why  should  He  not  have  spoken  of  the  gospel 
as  a  feast,  not  twice  merely,  but  fifty  times? 
There  would,  no  doubt,  be  many  variations  in 
His  manner  of  unfolding  the  thought,  according 
to  the  circumstances,  the  audience,  the  particular 
object  in  view  at  the  time;  but  to  suppose  that 
because  He  had  used  that  illustration  in  Galilee 
He  must  be  forbidden  from  reverting  to  it  in 
Judea  is  a  specimen  of  what  we  may  call  the 
insanity  of  those  who  are  ever  on  the  watch 
for  their  favourite  "  discrepancies."  In  this  case 
there  is  not  only  much  variation  in  detail,  but 
the  scope  of  the  two  parables  is  quite  different, 
the  former  having  more  the  character  of  a  press- 
ing invitation,  with  only  a  suggestion  of  warn- 
ing at  the  close;  whereas  the  one  before  us, 
while  preserving  all  the  grace  of  the  gospel  as 
suggested  by  the  figure  of  a  feast  to  which  men 
are  freely  invited,  and  even  heightening  its  at- 
tractiveness inasmuch  as  it  is  a  wedding  feast 
— the  most  joyful  of  all  festivities — and  a  royal 
one  too,  yet  has  throughout  the  same  sad  tone 
of  judgment  which  has  been  characteristic  of  all 
these  three  parables,  and  is  at  once  seen  to  be 
specially  appropriate  to  the  fateful  occasion  on 
which  they  were  spoken. 

As  essentially  a  New  Testament  parable,  it 
begins  with  the  familiar  formula  "  The  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  like."  The  two  previous  par- 
ables had  led  up  to  the  new  dispensation;  but 
this  one  begins  with  it,  and  is  wholly  concerned 
with  it.  The  King's  Son  appears  now,  not  as 
a  messenger,  but  as  a  bridegroom.  It  was  not 
the  first  time  that  Jesus  had  spoken  of  Himself 
as  a  bridegroom,  or  rather  as  the  Bridegroom.* 
The  thought  was  a  familiar  one  in  the  prophets 
of  the  Old  Testament,  the  Bridegroom,  be  it 
remembered,  being  none  other  than  Jehovah 
Himself.  Consider,  then,  what  it  meant  that 
Jesus  should  without  hesitation  or  explanation 
speak  of  Himself  as  the  Bridegroom.  And  let 
us  not  imagine  that  He  simply  took  the  figure, 
and  applied  it  to  Himself  as  fulfilling  prophecy; 
let  us  not  fail  to  realise  that  He  entered  fully 
into  its  tender  meaning.  When  we  think  of  the 
circumstances  in  which  this  parable  was  spoken 
we  have  here  a  most  pathetic  glimpse  into  the 
sanctuary  of  our  Saviour's  loving  heart.  Let  us 
try  with  reverent  sympathy  to  enter  into  the 
feeling  of  the  King's  Son,  come  from  heaven 
to  seek  humanity  for  His  bride,  to  woo  and 
to  win  her  from  the  cruel  bondage  of  sin  and 
death,  to  take  her  into  union  with  Himself,  so 
that  she  may  share  with  Him  the  liberty  and 
wealth,  the  purity  and  joy,  the  glory  and  the  hope 
of   the    heavenly   kingdom!     The    King   "made 

*  Another  example  of  the  use  of  the  same  'ihistration 
more  than  once.    See  ix.  is- 


Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii.] 


CONFLICT    IN    THE    TEMPLE. 


777 


a  marriage  for  His  Son  " — where  is  the  bride? 
what  response  is  she  making  to  the  Bridegroom's 
suit?    A  marriage  for  His  Son!    On  Calvary? 

It  must  have  been  very  hard  for  Him  to  go 
on;  but  He  will  keep  down  the  rising  tide  of 
emotion,  that  He  may  set  before  this  people  and 
before  all  people  another  attractive  picture  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  He  will  give  even  these 
despisers  of  the  heavenly  grace  another  oppor- 
tunity to  reconsider  their  position.  So  He  tells 
of  the  invitations  sent  out  first  to  "  them  that 
were  bidden" — i.  e.,  to  the  chosen  people  who 
had  been  especially  invited  from  the  earliest 
times,  and  to  whom,  when  the  fulness  of  the 
time  had  come,  the  call  was  first  addressed. 
"  And  they  would  not  come."  There  is  no  ref- 
erence to  the  aggravations  which  had  found 
place  in  the  former  parable  (xxi.  39).  These 
were  connected  not  so  much  with  the  ofifer  of 
grace,  which  is  the  main  purport  of  this  parable, 
as  with  the  demand  for  fruit,  which  was  the 
leading  thought  of  the  one  before.  It  was 
enough,  then,  in  describing  how  they  dealt  with 
the  invitation,  to  say,  "  They  would  not  come  "  ; 
and,  indeed,  this  refusal  hurt  Him  far  more 
than  their  buffets  and  their  blows.  When  He 
is  buffeted  He  is  silent,  sheds  no  tears,  utters 
no  wail;  His  tears  and  lamentation  are  reserved 
for  them:  "  How  often  would  I  have  gathered 
thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth 
her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would 
not!  "     "  They  would  not  come." 

But  the  love  of  the  King  and  of  His  Son  is 
not  yet  exhausted.  A  second  invitation  is  sent, 
with  greater  urgency  than  before,  and  with 
fuller  representations  of  the  great  preparations 
which  had  been  made  for  the  entertainment  of 
the  guests:  "  Again,  he  sent  forth  other  servants, 
saying,  Tell  them  which  are  bidden.  Behold,  I 
have  prepared  my  dinner:  my  oxen  and  my  fat- 
lings  are  killed,  and  all  things  are  ready:  come 
unto  the  marriage."  As  the  first  invitation  was 
that  which  had  been  already  given  and  which 
they  were  now  rejecting,  the  second  refers  to 
that  fuller  proclamation  of  the  gospel  which  was 
yet  to  be  made  after  the  work  of  the  Bride- 
groom-Redeemer should  be  finished  when  it 
could  be  said,  as  not  before:  "All  things  are 
ready." 

In  the  account  which  follows,  therefore,  there 
is  a  foreshadowing  of  the  treatment  the  apostles 
would  afterwards  receive.  Many,  indeed,  were 
converted  by  their  word,  and  took  their  places 
at  the  feast;  but  the  people  as  a  whole  "  made 
light  of  it,  and  went  their  ways,  one  to  his 
farm,  another  to  his  merchandise:  and  the  rem- 
nant took  his  servants,  and  entreated  them  spite- 
fully, and  slew  them."  What  was  the  conse- 
quence? Jerusalem,  rejecting  the  gospel  of  the 
kingdom,  even  when  it  was  "  preached  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  sent  down  from  heaven,"  must  be 
destroyed;  and  new  guests  must  be  sought 
among  the  nations  that  up  till  now  had  no  es- 
pecial invitation  to  the  feast.  This  prophetic 
warning  was  conveyed  in  terms  of  the  parable; 
yet  there  is  a  touch  in  it  which  shows  how 
strongly  the  Saviour's  mind  was  running  on  the 
sad  future  of  which  the  parable  was  but  a  pic- 
ture: "  When  the  king  heard  thereof,  he  was 
wroth:  and  he  sent  forth  his  armies,  and  de- 
stroyed those  murderers,  and  burned  up  their 
city."  Why  "  city  "  ?  There  had  been  no  men- 
tion of  a  city  in  the  parable.  True;  but  Je- 
rusalem was  in  the  Saviour's  heart,  and  all  the 


pathos  of  His  lament  over  it  is  in  that  little 
word.  "  Their  city  "  too,  observe, — reminding 
us  of  "  your  house  "  at  the  close  of  this  sad  day 
(xxiii.  38).  In  the  same  way  the  calling  of  the 
Gentiles  is  most  skilfully  brought  within  the 
scope  of  the  parable,  by  the  use  of  the  peculiar 
word  translated  in  the  Revised  Version — "  the 
partings  of  the  highways,"  which  seems  to  sug- 
gest the  thought  of  the  servants  leaving  the  city 
precincts  and  going  out  in  all  directions  along 
the  main  trunk  roads  to  "  the  partings  of  the 
highways,"  to  carry  the  gospel  to  all  without 
distinction,  wherever  could  be  found  an  ear  of 
man  to  listen,  or  a  human  heart  to  welcome 
the  King's  grace  and  the  Bridegroom's  love. 
Thus,  after  all,  the  wedding  was  to  be  furnished 
with    guests. 

The  parable,  as  we  have  seen,  is  one  of  grace; 
but  righteousness  too  must  find  a  place  in  it. 
The  demand  for  fruits  of  righteousness  is  no 
less  rigid  in  the  new  dispensation  than  it  had 
been  in  the  old.  To  make  this  clear  and  strong 
the  parable  of  the  Feast  is  followed  by  the  pend- 
ant of  the  Wedding  Garment. 

There  are  two  ways  in  which  the  heavenly 
marriage  feast  may  be  despised:  first,  by  those 
who  will  not  come  at  all;  next,  and  no  less, 
by  those  who  try  to  snatch  the  wedding  joy 
without  the  bridal  purity.  The  same  leading 
thought  or  motive  is  recognisable  here  as  in 
the  parable  of  the  two  sons.  The  man  without 
the  wedding  garment  corresponds  to  the  son  who 
said  "  I  go,  sir,"  and  went  not,  while  those  who 
refuse  altogether  correspond  to  the  son  who 
answered  "  I  will  not."  By  bearing  this  in  mind 
we  can  understand,  what  to  many  has  been  a 
serious  difficulty — how  it  is  that  the  punishment 
meted  out  to  the  offender  in  this  second  parable 
is  so  terribly  severe.  If  we  simply  think  of  the 
parable  itself,  it  does  seem  an  extraordinary 
thing  that  so  slight  an  ofifence  as  coming  to  a 
wedding  feast  without  the  regulation  dress 
should  meet  with  such  an  awful  doom;  but  when 
we  consider  whom  this  man  represents  we  can 
see  the  very  best  of  reasons  for  it.  Hypocrisy 
was  his  crime,  than  which  there  is  nothing  more 
utterly  hateful  in  the  sight  of  Him  Who  desireth 
truth  in  the  inward  parts.  It  is  true  that  the 
representation  does  not  at  first  seem  to  set  the 
sin  in  so  very  strong  a  light;  but  when  we 
think  of  it,  we  see  that  there  was  no  other  way 
in  which  it  could  be  brought  within  the  scope 
of  this  parable.  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  more- 
over, that  the  distinction  between  the  intruder 
and  the  others  is  not  observed  till  the  king 
himself  enters,  which  indicates  that  the  differ- 
ence between  him  and  the  others  was  no  out- 
ward distinction,  that  the  garment  referred  to 
is  the  invisible  garment  of  righteousness.  To 
the  common  eye  he  looked  like  all  the  rest; 
but  when  the  all-searching  Eye  is  on  the  com- 
pany he  is  at  once  detected  and  exposed.  He 
is  really  worse  than  those  who  would  not  come 
at  all.  They  were  honest  sinners;  he  was  a 
hypocrite — at  the  feast  with  mouth  and  hand  and 
eye,  but  not  of  it,  for  his  spirit  is  not  robed 
in  white:  he  is  the  black  sheep  in  the  fold;  a 
despiser  within,  he  is  worse  than  the  despisers 
without. 

Even  to  him,  indeed,  the  king  has  a  kindly 
feeling.  He  calls  him  "  Friend,"  and  gives  him 
yet  the  opportunity  to  repent  and  cry  for  mercy. 
But  he  is  speechless.     False  to  the  core,  he  has 


778 


^THE   GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


no  rallying  point  within  to  fall  back  upon.  All 
is  confusion  and  despair.  He  cannot  even  pray. 
Nothing  remains  but  to  pronounce  his  final 
doom    (ver.    13). 

The  words  with  which  the  parable  closes  (ver. 
14)  are  sad  and  solemn.  They  have  occasioned 
difficulty  to  some,  who  have  supposed  they  were 
meant  to  teach  that  the  number  of  the  saved 
will  be  small.  Their  difficulty,  like  so  many  oth- 
ers, has  been  due  to  forgetfulness  of  the  cir- 
cumstances under  which  the  words  were  spoken, 
and  the  strong  emotion  of  which  they  were  the 
expression.  Jesus  is  looking  back  over  the  time 
since  He  began  to  spread  the  gospel  feast,  and 
thinking  how  many  have  been  invited,  and  how 
few  have  come!  And  even  among  those  who 
have  seemed  to  come  there  are  hypocrites!  One 
He  specially  would  have  in  mind  as  He  spoke 
of  the  man  without  the  wedding  garment;  for 
though  we  take  him  to  be  the  type  of  a  class, 
we  can  scarcely  think  that  our  Lord  could  fail 
to  let  His  sad  thoughts  rest  on  Judas  as  He  de- 
scribed that  man.  Taking  all  this  into  consider- 
ation we  can  well  understand  how  at  that  time 
He  should  conclude  His  parable  with  the  lamen- 
tation: "  Many  are  called,  but  few  chosen."  It 
did  not  follow  that  it  was  a  truth  for  all  time  and 
for  eternity.  It  was  true  for  the  time  included 
in  the  scope  of  the  parable.  It  was  most  sadly 
true  of  the  Jewish  nation  then,  and  in  the  times 
which  followed  on  immediately;  but  the  day  was 
coming,  before  all  was  done,  when  the  heavenly 
Bridegroom,  according  to  the  sure  word  of 
prophecy,  should  "  see  of  the  travail  of  His  soul, 
and  be  satisfied."  No  creed  article,  therefore, 
have  we  here,  but  a  cry  from  the  sore  heart 
of  the  heavenly  Bridegroom,  in  the  day  of  His 
sorrows,  in  the  pain  of  unrequited  love. 


II. — The  Ordeal  of  Questions   (xxii.   15-46). 

The  open  challenge  has  failed;  but  more  subtle 
weapons  may  succeed.  The  Pharisees  have 
found  it  of  no  avail  to  confront  their  enemy; 
but  they  may  still  be  able  to  entangle  Him. 
They  will  at  all  events  try.  They  will  spring 
upon  Him  some  hard  questions,  of  such  a  kind 
that,  answering  on  the  spur  of  the  moment.  He 
will  be  sure  to  compromise  Himself. 

I.  The  first  shall  be  one  of  those  semi-po- 
litical semi-religious  questions  on  which  feeling 
is  running  high — the  lawfulness  or  unlawfulness 
of  paying  tribute  to  Csesar.  The  old  Pharisees 
who  had  challenged  His  authority  keep  in  the 
background,  that  the  sinister  purpose  of  the 
question  may  not  appear;  but  they  are  repre- 
sented by  some  of  their  disciples  who,  coming 
fresh  upon  the  scene  and  addressing  Jesus  in 
terms  of  respect  and  appreciation,  may  readily 
pass  for  guileless  inquirers.  They  were  accom- 
panied by  some  Herodians,  whose  divergence 
of  view  on  the  point  made  it  all  the  more  natural 
that  they  shovild  join  with  Pharisees  in  asking 
the  question;  for  it  might  fairly  be  considered 
that  they  had  been  disputing  with  one  another 
in  regard  to  it,  and  had  concluded  to  submit 
the  question  to  His  decision  as  to  one  who 
would  be  sure  to  know  the  truth  and  fearless 
to  tell  it.  So  together  they  come  with  the  re- 
quest: "  Master,  we  know  that  Thou  art  true, 
and  teachest  the  way  of  God  in  truth,  neither 
carest  Thou  for  any  man:  for  Thou  regardest  not 
the   person   of   men.      Tell   us   therefore.    What 


thinkest  Thou?    Is  it  lawful  to  give  tribute  unto 
Caesar,  or  not?  " 

But  they  cannot  impose  upon  Him:  "Jesus 
perceived  their  wickedness,  and  said,  Why  tempt 
ye  Me,  ye  hypocrites?"  Having  thus  unmasked 
them,  without  a  moment's  hesitation  He  answers 
them.  They  had  expected  a  "  yes  "  or  a  "  no  " 
— a  "  yes  "  which  would  have  set  the  people 
against  Him,  or  better  still  a  "  no  "  which  would 
have  put  Him  at  the  mercy  of  the  government. 
But,  avoiding  Scylla  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Charybdis  on  the  other.  He  makes  straight  for 
His  goal  by  asking  for  a  piece  of  coin  and  call- 
ing attention  to  Caesar's  stamp  upon  it.  Those 
who  use  Caesar's  coin  should  not  refuse  to  pay 
Caesar's  tribute;  but,  while  the  relation  which 
with  their  own  acquiescence  they  sustain  to  the 
Roman  emperor  implied  corresponding  obliga- 
tions in  the  sphere  it  covered,  this  did  not  at 
all  interfere  with  what  is  due  to  the  King  of 
kings  and  Lord  of  lords,  in  Whose  image  we 
all  are  made,  and  Whose  superscription  every 
one  of  us  bears:  "  Render  therefore  unto  Caesar 
the  things  which  are  Caesar's;  and  unto  God 
the  things  that  are  God's."  Thus  He  not  only 
avoids  the  net  they  had  spread  for  Him,  and 
gives  them  the  very  best  answer  to  their  ques- 
tion, but,  in  doing  so,  He  lays  down  a  great 
principle  of  far-reaching  application  and  perma- 
nent value  respecting  the  difficult  and  much-to- 
be-vexed  question  as  to  the  relations  between 
Church  and  State.  "  O  answer  full  of  miracle!  " 
as  one  had  said.  No  wonder  that  "  when  they 
had  heard  these  words  they  marvelled,  and  left 
Him,  and  went  their  way." 

2.  Next  come  forward  certain  Sadducees. 
That  the  Pharisees  had  an  understanding  with 
them  also  seems  likely  from  what  is  said  both 
in  ver.  15,  which  seems  a  general  introduction 
to  the  series  of  questions,  and  in  ver.  34,  from 
which  it  would  appear  that  they  were  some- 
where out  of  sight,  waiting  to  hear  the  result  of 
this  new  attack.  Though  the  alliance  seems  a 
strange  one,  it  is  not  the  first  time  that  com- 
mon hostility  to  the  Christ  of  God  has  drawn 
together  the  two  great  rival  parties  (see  chap, 
xvi.  i).  If  we  are  right  in  supposing  them  to 
be  in  combination  now,  it  is  a  remarkable  illus- 
tration of  the  deep  hostility  of  the  Pharisees 
that  they  should  not  only  combine  with  the 
Sadducees  against  Him,  as  they  had  done  be- 
fore, but  that  they  should  look  with  complacency 
on  their  using  against  Him  a  weapon  which 
threatened  one  of  their  own  doctrines.  For  the 
object  of  the  attack  was  to  cast  ridicule  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  which  assuredly  the 
Pharisees  did  not  deny. 

The  difficulty  they  raise  is  of  the  same  kind 
as  those  which  are  painfully  familiar  in  these 
days,  when  men  of  coarse  minds  and  fleshly 
imaginations  show  by  their  crude  objections 
their  incapacity  even  to  think  on  spiritual  themes. 
The  case  they  supposed  was  one  they  knew  He 
could  not  find  fault  with  so  far  as  this  world 
was  concerned,  for  everything  was  done  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  letter  of  the  law  of  Moses, 
the  inference  being  that  whatever»confusion  there 
was  in  it  must  belong  to  what  they  would  caU 
His  figment  of  the  resurrection:  "  In  the  resur- 
rection whose  wife  shall  she  be  of  the  seven? 
for  they  all  had  her." 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  our  Lord's  answer 
is  much  less  stern  than  in  the  former  case. 
These    men    were    not    hypocrites.      They    were 


Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii.] 


CONFLICT    IN    THE   TEMPLE. 


779 


scornful,  perhaps  flippant;  but  they  were  not  in- 
tentionally dishonest.  The  difficulty  they  felt 
was  due  to  the  coarseness  of  their  minds,  but 
it  was  a  real  difficulty  to  them.  Our  Lord 
accordingly  gives  them  a  kindly  answer,  not  de- 
nouncing them,  but  calmly  showing  them  where 
they  are  wrong:  "  Ye  do  err,  not  knowing  the 
Scriptures,  nor  the  power  of  God." 

Ye  know  not  the  power  of  God,  or  ye  would 
not  suppose  that  the  life  to  come  would  be  a 
mere  repetition  of  the  life  .that  now  is,  with 
all  its  fleshly  conditions  the  same  as  now.  That 
there  is  continuity  of  life  is  of. course  implied 
in  the  very  idea  of  resurrection;  but  true  life 
resides  not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  spirit,  and 
therefore  the  continuity  will  be  a  spiritual  con- 
tinuity; and  the  power  of  God  will  cfTect  such 
changes  on  the  body  itself  that  it  will  rise  out 
of  its  fleshly  condition  into  a  state  of  being 
like  that  of  the  angels  of  God.  The  thought 
is  the  same  as  that  which  was  afterwards  ex- 
panded by  the  apostle  Paul  in  such  passages  as 
Rom.  viii.  5-1 1,  i  Cor.  xv.  35-54. 

Ye  know  not  the  Scriptures,  or  you  would 
find  in  the  writings  of  Moses  from  which  you 
quote,  and  to  which  you  attach  supreme  impor- 
tance, evidence  enough  of  the  great  doctrine  you 
deny.  "  Have  ye  not  read  that  which  was 
spoken  unto  you  by  God,  saying,  I  am  the  God 
of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God 
of  Jacob? "  Here,  again,  Jesus  not  only  an- 
swers the  Sadducees,  but  puts  the  great  and  all- 
important  doctrine  of  the  life  to  come  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  body  on  its  deepest  founda- 
tion. There  are  those  who  have  expressed  as- 
tonishment that  He  did  not  quote  from  some 
of  the  later  prophets,  where  He  could  have 
found  passages  much  clearer  and  more  to  the 
point:  but  not  only  was  it  desirable  that,  as 
they  had  based  their  question  on  Moses,  He 
should  give  His  answer  from  the  same  source; 
but  in  doing  so  He  has  put  the  great  truth  on 
a  permanent  and  universal  basis;  for  the  argu- 
ment rests  not  on  the  authority  of  Moses,  nor, 
as  some  have  supposed,  upon  the  present  tense 
"  I  am,"  but  on  the  relation  between  God  and 
His  people.  The  thought  is  that  such  a  relation 
between  mortal  man  and  the  eternal  God  as  is 
implied  in  the  declaration  "  I  am  the  God  of 
Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob  "  is  itself  a  guarantee  of  immortality.  Not 
for  the  spirit  only,  for  it  is  not  as  spirits  merely, 
but  as  men  that  we  are  taken  into  relation  to 
the  living  God;  and  that  relation,  being  of  God, 
must  share  His  immortality:  "  God  is  not  the 
God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living."  The 
thought  *  is  put  in  a  very  striking  way  in  a 
well-known  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews: "  But  now  they  [the  patriarchs]  desire 
a  better  country,  that  is,  an  heavenly:  wherefore 
God  is  not  ashamed  to  be  called  their  God:  for  He 
hath  prepared  for  them  a  city." 

Our  Lord's  answer  suggests  the  best  way  of 
assuring  ourselves  of  this  glorious  hope.  Let 
God  be  real  to  us,  and  life  and  immortality  will 
be  real  too.  If  we  would  escape  the  doubts  of 
old  Sadducee  and  new  Agnostic,  we  must  be 
much  with  God,  and  strengthen  more  and  more 
the  ties  which  bind  us  to  Him. 

3.   The   next   attempt    of   the    Pharisees    is    on 

an  entirely  new  line.    They  have  found  that  they 

cannot  impose  upon  Him  by  sending  pretended 

inquirers  to  question  Him.     But  they  have  man- 

♦  Compare  the  same  thought  in  Ps.  xvi.  8-11. 


aged  to  lay  their  hands  on  a  real  inquirer  now 
— one  of  themselves,  a  student  of  the  law,  who 
is  exercised  on  a  question  much  discussed,  and 
to  which  very  different  answers  are  given;  they 
will  suggest  to  him  to  carry  his  question  to 
Jesus  and  see  what  He  will  say  to  it.  That 
this  was  the  real  state  of  the  case  appears  from 
the  fuller  account  in  St.  Mark's  Gospel.  When, 
then,  St.  Matthew  speaks  of  him  as  asking  Jesus 
a  question,  "  tempting  Him,"  we  are  not  to  im- 
pute the  same  sinister  motives  as  actuated  those 
who  sent  him.  He  also  was  in  a  certain  sense  / 
tempting  Jesus — i.  e.,  putting  Him  to  the  test, 
but  with  no  sinister  motive,  with  a  real  desire 
to  find  out  the  truth,  and  probably  also 
to  find  out  if  this  Jesus  was  one  who  could 
really  help  an  inquirer  after  truth.  In  this  spirit, 
then,  he  asks  the  question,  "  Which  is  the  great 
commandment  in  the  law?  " 

The  answer  our  Lord  immediately  gives  is 
now  so  familiar  that  it  is  difficult  to  realise 
how  great  a  thing  it  was  to  give  it  for  the  first 
time.  True.  He  takes  it  from  the  Scriptures; 
but  think  what  command  of  the  Scriptures  is 
involved  in  this  prompt  reply.  The  passages 
quoted  lie  far  apart — the  one  in  the  sixth  chap- 
ter of  Deuteronomy,  the  other  in  the  nineteenth 
of  Leviticus  in  quite  an  obscure  corner;  and 
nowhere  are  tljey  spoken  of  as  the  first  and  sec- 
ond commandments,  nor  indeed  were  they  re- 
garded as  commandments  in  the  usually  under- 
stood sense  of  the  word.  When  we  consider 
all  this  we  recognise  what  from  one  point  of 
view  might  be  called  a  miracle  of  genius,  and 
from  another  a  flash  of  inspiration,  in  the  in- 
stantaneous selection  of  these  two  passages,  and 
bringing  them  together  so  as  to  furnish  a  sum- 
mary of  the  law  and  the  prophets  beyond  all 
praise  which  the  veriest  unbeliever,  if  only  he 
have  a  mind  to  appreciate  that  which  is  ex- 
cellent, must  recognise  as  worthy  of  being  writ- 
ten in  letters  of  light.  That  one  short  answer 
to  a  sudden  question — asked  indeed  by  a  true 
man,  but  really  sprung  upon  Him  by  His  ene- 
mies who  were  watching  for  His  halting — is  of 
more  value  in  morals  than  all  the  writings  of 
all  the  ethical  philosophers,  from  Socrates  to 
Herbert  Spencer. 

It  is  now  time  to  question  the  questioners. 
The  opportunity  is  most  favourable.  They  are 
gathered  together  to  hear  what  He  will  say  to 
their  last  attempt  to  entangle  Him.  Once  more 
He  has  not  only  met  the  difficulty,  but  has 
done  so  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  truth 
on  the  subject  in  dispute  shine  with  the  very 
light  of  heaven.  There  could  not,  then,  be  a 
better  opportunity  of  turning  their  thoughts  in 
a  direction  which  might  lead  them,  if  possible 
in  spite  of  themselves,  into  the  light  of  God. 

The  question  Jesus  asks  (vv.  41-45)  is  un- 
doubtedly a  puzzling  one  for  them;  but  it  is 
no  mere  Scripture  conundrum.  The  difficulty 
in  which  it  lands  them  is  one  which,  if  only 
they  would  honestly  face  it,  would  be  the  means 
of  removing  the  veil  from  their  eyes,  and  lead- 
ing them,  ere  it  is  too  late,  to  welcome  the  Son 
of  David  come  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  to  save 
them.  They  fully  accepted  the  psalm  to  which 
He  referred  as  a  psalm  of  David  concerning  the 
Messiah.  If,  then,  they  would  honestly  read  that 
psalm  they  would  see  that  the  Messiah  when 
He  comes  must  be,  not  a  mere  earthly  mon- 
arch,  as   David   was,    but   a   heavenly   monarch, 


78o 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


one  who  should  sit  on  the  throne  of  God  and 
bring  into  subjection  the  enemies  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  If  only  they  would  take  their 
ideas  of  the  Christ  from  the  Scriptures  which 
were  their  boast,  they  could  not  fail  to  see  Him 
standing  now  before  them.  For  we  must  re- 
member that  they  had  not  only  the  words  He 
spoke  to  guide  them.  They  had  before  them 
the  Messiah  Himself,  with  the  light  of  heaven  in 
His  eye,  with  the  love  of  God  in  His  face;  and 
had  they  had  any  love  for  the  light,  they  would 
have  recognised  Him  then — they  would  have 
seen  in  Him,  whom  they  had  often  heard  of 
as  David's  Son,  the  Lord  of  David,  and  there- 
fore the  Lord  of  the  Temple,  and  the  heavenly 
King  of  Israel.  But  they  love  the  darkness 
rather  than  the  light,  because  their  deeds  are 
evil:  therefore  their  hearts  remain  unchanged, 
the  eyes  of  their  spirit  unopened;  they  are  only 
abashed  and  silenced:  "  No  man  was  able  to 
answer  Him  a  word,  neither  durst  any  man 
from  that  day  forth  ask  Him  any  more  ques- 
tions." 

III. — The  House  Left  Desolate  (xxiii.). 

The  day  of  grace  is  over  for  the  leaders  of 
the  people;  but  for  the  people  themselves  there 
may  still  be  hope;  so  the  Lord, of  the  Temple 
turns  to  "  the  multitude,"  the  general  throng  of 
worshippers,  mingled  with  whom  were  several 
of  His  own  disciples,  and  solemnly  warns  them 
against  their  spiritual  guides.  There  is  every 
reason  to  suppose  that  many  of  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees  were  within  hearing;  for  when  He  has 
finished  what  He  has  to  say  to  the  people,  He 
turns  round  and  addresses  them  directly  in  that 
series  of  terrible  denunciations  which  follow 
(ver.  13,  seq.). 

His  warning  is  couched  in  such  a  way  as  not 
in  the  least  degree  to  weaken  their  respect  for 
Moses,  or  for  the  sacred  Scriptures,  the  expo- 
sition of  which  was  the  duty  of  their  spiritual 
guides.  He  separates  sharply  between  the  office 
and  the  men  who  hold  it.  Had  they  been  true 
to  the  position  they  occupied  and  the  high  duties 
they  had  been  called  to  discharge,  they  would 
have  been  worthy  of  all  honour;  but  they  are 
false  men:  "they  say,  and  dp  not."  Not  only 
so,  but  they  do  positive  evil,  making  that  griev- 
ous for  the  people  which  ought  to  be  a  de- 
light; and  when  they  do  or  seem  to  do  the 
right  thing,  it  is  some  petty  observance,  which 
they  exaggerate  for  the  sake  of  vain  display, 
while  their  hearts  are  set  on  personal  pre-emi- 
nence. Such  are  the  leading  thoughts  set  forth 
with  great  vigour  of  language  and  force  of  illus- 
tration, and  not  without  a  touch  of  keen  and 
delicate  irony  in  our  Lord's  remarkable  indict- 
ment of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  recorded  by 
our  Evangelist  (vv.  2-7). 

Then  follows  one  of  those  passages  of  pro- 
found significance  and  far-reaching  application 
which,  while  admirably  suiting  the  immediate 
occasions  on  which  they  were  spoken,  prove  to 
be  a  treasury  of  truth  for  the  ages  to  come. 
At  first  sight  it  strikes  us  as  simply  an  exhorta- 
tion to  cultivate  a  disposition  the  reverse  of  that 
of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees.  He  has  been  draw- 
ing their  portrait;  now  He  says.  Be  ye  not 
like  unto  them,  but  unlike  in  every  respect.  But 
in  saying  this  He  succeeds  in  laying  down  great 
principles  for  the  future  guidance  of  His  Church, 


the  remembrance  of  which  would  have  averted 
most  of  the  evils  which  in  the  course  of  its 
history  have  weakened  its  power,  hindered  its 
progress,  and  marred  its  witness  to  the  truth. 
With  one  stroke  He  abcJlishes  all  claims  of  men 
to  intervene  between  the  soul  and  God.  "  One 
is  your  Teacher "  (R.  V.),  "  One  is  your 
Father,"  "  One  is  your  Master."  Who  is  that 
One?  He  does  not  in  so  many  words  claim 
the  position  for  Himself;  but  it  is  throughout 
implied,  and  at  the  end  almost  expressed;  for, 
while  in  speaking  of  the  Teacher  and  the  Father 
He  says  nothing  to  indicate  who  the  One  is, 
when  He  comes  to  the  Master  He  adds  "  even 
the  Christ"  (R.  V.).  Standing  thus  at  the  end 
of  all,  these  words  suggest  that  the  office  of 
the  Christ  was  to  bring  God  within  reach  of 
every  soul,  so  that  without  any  intervention  of 
scribe  or  Pharisee,  priest  or  pope,  each  one  could 
go  direct  to  Him  for  instruction  (Teacher),  for 
loving  recognition  (Father),  for  authoritative 
guidance  and  control   (Master). 

We  must  remember,  too,  that  He  was  speak- 
ing to  His  disciples  as  well  as  to  the  multitude, 
and  to  them  these  words  would  be  fulJ  of  mean- 
ing. When  He  said,  "  One  is  your  Teacher," 
of  whom  could  they  possibly  think  but  of  Him- 
self? When  He  said,  "  One  is  your  Father," 
they  would  recall  such  utterances  as  "  I  and  My 
Father  are  One,"  and  have  suggested  to  them 
the  truth  which  was  so  very  soon  to  be  plainly 
stated:  "  He  that  hath  seen  Me,  hath  seen  the 
Father."  It  is  probable,  then,  that  even  before 
He  reached  the  end,  and  added  the  words  "  even 
the  Christ,"  the  minds  of  His  disciples  at  least 
had  anticipated  Him.  Thus  we  find  in  these  re- 
markable words  an  implicit  claim  on  the  part  of 
Christ  to  be  the  sole  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King 
of  His  people:  their  sole  Prophet,  to  teach  them 
by  the  enlightening  and  sanctifying  grace  of  the 
Holy  Spirit;  their  sole  Priest,  to  open  up  the 
way  of  access  to  a  reconciled  Father  in  heaven; 
their  sole  King,  alone  entitled  to  be  the  Lord  of 
their  conscience  and  their  heart. 

If  only  the  Christian  Church  had  been  true 
to  all  this,  how  different  would  her  history  have 
been!  Then  the  Word  of  God  would  have  been, 
throughout,  the  only  and  sufficient  rule  of  faith, 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  dealing  directly  with  the 
spirits  of  men  its  sole  authoritative  interpreter. 
Then  would  there  have  been  no  usurping  priest- 
hood to  stand  between  the  soul  of  men  and  their 
Father  in  heaven,  to  bind  heavy  burdens  and 
grievous  to  be  borne  and  lay  them  upon  men's 
shoulders,  to  multiply  forms  and  observances 
and  complicate  what  should  have  been  simplest 
of  all — the  direct  way  to  the  Father  in  heaven, 
through  Christ  the  great  Priest  of  humanity. 
Then  would  there  have  been  no  lordship  over 
men's  consciences,  no  ecclesiastical  usurpation, 
no  spiritual  tyranny,  no  inquisition,  no  perse- 
cution for  conscience'  sake.  How  inexcusable 
has  it  all  been!  It  would  seem  as  if  pains  had 
been  taken  deliberately  to  violate  not  only  the 
spirit,  but  the  very  letter  of  the  Saviour's  words, 
as,  e.  g.,  in  the  one  fact  that,  while  it  is  expressly 
written  "  Call  no  man  your  father  upon  the 
earth,"  the  Church  of  Rome  has  actually  suc- 
ceeded age  after  age  in  getting  the  millions 
under  its  usurped  spiritual  control,  to  give  a  man 
that  very  title;  for  the  word  "  pope  "  is  the  very 
word  *    which    our    Lord    so    expressly    forbids. 

*  "  Papa"  pope,  is  the  Latin  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
word  for  Father. 


Matthew  xxi.  i8-xxiii.] 


CONFLICT    IN    THE    TEMPLE. 


781 


But  all  clerical  assumption  of  priestly  power  is 
just  as  certainly  and  as  clearly  in  violation  of 
this  great  charter  of  our  spiritual  liberties. 

"  And  all  ye  are  brethren."  This  is  the  second 
comniandment  of  the  true  canon  law,  like  unto 
the  first  and  springing  naturally  out  of  it,  as 
naturally  as  the  love  of  neighbour  springs  out  of 
love  to  God.  As  soon  as  the  time  shall  come 
when  ail  Christians  shall  own  allegiance  alike, 
full  and  undivided,  to  the  one  Lord  of  mind  and 
heart  and  conscience,  then  will  there  he  an  end  to 
all  ecclesiastical  exclusiveness;  then  shall  we  see 
realised  and  manifested  to  the  world  the 
brotherhood  in  Christ  of  all  believers. 

Turning  once  again  to  the  scribes  and  Phari- 
sees, the  Lord  of  the  Temple  denounces  them  in 
words  perhaps  the  most  terrible  in  the  whole 
Bible.  It  is  a  very  thunderstorm  of  indignation, 
with  flash  after  flash  of  scorn,  peal  after  peal  of 
woe.  It  is  "  the  burden  of  the  Lord,"  "  the  wrath 
of  the  Lamb."  Ls  this  at  all  inconsistent  with 
the  meekness  and  lowliness  of  His  heart,  the  love 
and  tenderness  of  His  character?  Certainly  not! 
Love  is  no  love  at  all,  unless  it  be  capable  of  in- 
dignation against  wrong.  Besides,  it  is  no  per- 
sonal wrongs  which  stir  the  heart  of  Jesus, 
"  Who  when  He  was  reviled,  reviled  not  again, 
when  He  suffered.  He  threatened  not";  but  the 
wrong  these  hypocrites  are  doing  to  the  poor 
sheep  they  are  leading  all  astray.  The  occasion 
absolutely  demanded  a  tempest  of  indignation. 
There  is  this  further  to  be  considered,  that  the 
Lord  Jesus,  as  Revealer  of  God,  must  display 
His  justice  as  well  as  His  mercy,  His  wrath  as 
well  as  His  love. 

This  passage,  terrible  as  it  is,  commends  itself 
to  all  that  is  noblest  and  best  in  us.  Who  is 
there  who  does  not  thank  God  for  this  scathing 
denunciation  of  that  most  hateful  of  all  abomi- 
nations— hypocrisy?  See  how  He  brands  it  in 
every  sentence — "  Woe  unto  you,  scribes  and 
Pharisees,  hypocrites!  " — how  piece  by  piece  He 
shows  their  miserable  life  to  be  a  lie.  Hypocrites! 
because  you  profess  to  sit  in  Moses'  seat,  to 
have  the  key  of  knowledge,  to  know  the  way  of 
life  yourselves,  and  show  it  to  others;  and  all 
this  profession  is  a  lie  (ver.  13).  Hypocrites! 
because  your  pretended  charity  is  a  lie,  aggra- 
vated by  the  forms  of  devotion  with  which  it  is 
masked,  while  the  essence  of  it  is  most  sordid 
avarice  (ver.  14).  Hypocrites!  because  your  zeal 
for  God  is  a  lie,  being  really  a  zeal  for  the  devil, 
your  converts  being  perverts  worse  than  your- 
selves (ver.  15).  Hypocrites!  because  your  mo- 
rality is  a  lie,  making  the  law  of  God  of  none 
effect  by  your  miserable  casuistry  (vv.  16-22). 
Hypocrites!  because  your  devotion  is  a  lie,  con- 
sisting merely  in  punctilious  attention  to  the 
minutest  forms,  while  the  weighty  matters  of 
the  law  you  set  aside,  like  those  who  '"  strain  out 
the  gnat  and  swallow  the  camel  "  (vv.  23,  24, 
R.  v.).  Hypocrites!  because  your  whole  de- 
meanour is  a  lie,  all  fair  without  like  a  whited 
sepulchre,  while  within  ye  are  "  full  of  dead 
men's  bones,  and  of  all  uncleanness  "  (vv.  25-28). 
Hypocrites!  because  your  pretended  reverence 
for  the  prophets  is  a  lie,  for  had  you  lived  in  the 
days  of  your  fathers  you  would  have  done  as 
they  did,  as  is  plain  from  the  way  in  which  you 
are  acting  now;  for  you  build  the  tombs  of  the 
dead  prophets  and  put  to  death  the  living  ones 
(vv.  29-31). 

The  sin  branded,  sentence  follows:  "Fill  ye  up 


then  the  measure  of  your  fathers."  Since  you 
will  not  be  saved,  there  is  nothing  for  it  but  that 
you  go  on  in  sin  to  the  bitter  end:  serpents,  "  for 
ever  hissing  at  the  heels  of  the  holy,"  a  brood  of 
vipers,  with  no  hope  now  of  escaping  the  judg- 
ment  of   Gehenna! 

As  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (see  page  722) 
so  'lere,  when  He  speaks  as  Judge  He  cannot 
conceal  His  personal  majesty.  All  throughout 
He  has  been  speaking  with  authority,  but  has, 
as  usual,  avoided  the  obtrusion  of  His  personal 
prerogative.  Even  in  saying  "  One  is  your  Mas- 
ter, even  the  Christ,"  it  is  not  at  all  the  same  as 
if  He  had  said,  even  Myself.  All  it  necessarily 
conveyed  was,  "  One  is  your  master,  even  the 
Messiah,"  whoever  he  may  be.  But  now  He 
speaks  as  from  His  judgment  throne.  He  is  no 
longer  thinking  of  Himself  as  one  of  the  proph- 
ets, or  even  as  the  King's  Son,  but  as  Lord  of 
all;  so  He  says:  "  Wherefore,  behold,  /  send  unto 
you  prophets,  and  wise  men,  and  scribes:  and 
some  of  them  ye  shall  kill  and  crucify;  and  some 
of  them  shall  ye  scourge  in  your  synagogues, 
and  persecute  them  from  city  to  city:  that  upon 
you  may  come  all  the  righteous  blood  shed  on 
the  earth,"  from  Abel  to  Zacharias.*  And, 
again,  "  Verily  /  say  unto  you.  All  these  t^hings 
shall  come  upon  this  generation." 

But  judgment  is  His  strange  work.  He  has 
been  compelled  by  the  fire  of  His  holiness  to 
break  forth  into  this  tempest  of  indignation 
against  the  hypocrites,  and  to  pronounce  upon 
them  the  long-deferred  sentence  of  condemna- 
tion and  wrath.  But  there  has  been  a  wail  in 
all  His  woes.  His  nature  and  His  name  is  love, 
and  it  must  have  been  a  terrible  strain  on  Him 
to  keep  up  the  foreign  tone  so  long.  "  The 
zvrath  of  the  Lamb "  is  a  necessary  but  not  a 
natural  combination.  We  may  not  wonder, 
then,  though  well  we  may  adore,  when  after  the 
tension  of  these  woes,  His  heart  is  melted  into 
tenderness  as  He  mourns  over  the  fate  which  all 
His  love  may  not  avert:  "  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusa- 
lem, thou  that  killest  the  prophets  and  stonest 
them  which  are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would 
I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even  as  a 
hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings, 
and  ye  would  not!  "  Again,  observe  the  lofty 
consciousness  shining  out  in  the  little  pronoun 
"/."  He  is  a  young  man  of  little  more  than 
thirty;  but  His  personal  consciousness  runs  back 
through  all  the  ages  of  the  past,  through  all  the 
times  of  the  killing  of  the  prophets  and  stoning 
of  the  messengers  of  God,  from  Abel  on  to  Zach- 
ariah:  and  not  only  so,  but  this  Son  of  Israel 
speaks  in  the  most  natural  way  as  the  brooding 
mother  of  them  all  through  all  their  generations 
— what  wonders,  not  of  beauty  alone,  and  of  ex- 
quisite pathos,  but  of  conscious  majesty  in  that 
immortal   lamentation! 

Our  Saviour's  public  ministry  is  closed.  He 
has  yet  many  things  to  say  to  His  disciples — a 
private  ministry  of  love  to  fulfil  ere  He  leave  the 
world  and  go  to  the  Father;  but  His  public  min- 
istry is  ended  now.  Commenced  with  beatitudes, 
it  ends  with  woes,  because  the  blessings  offered  in 
♦The  reason  why  these  two  are  named  is  sufficiently- 
obvious,  when  we  remember  that  the  second  Book  of 
Chronicles,  in  which  the  martyrdom  of  Zachariah  is  re- 
corded, was  the  last  book  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  just 
as  we  might  say.  A/I  the  promises  from  Genesis  to  Reve- 
lation. The  difficulty  which  has  been  made  so  much  of 
(Barachias  v.  Jehoiada)  is  of  no  importance  except  to  those 
who  will  not  remember  that  the  letter  killeth  and  the 
spirit  giveth  life. 


782 


THE    GOSPEL   OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


the  beatitudes  have  been  rudely  rejected  and 
trampled  underfoot.  And  now  the  Lord  of  the 
Temple  is  about  to  leave  it — to  leave  it  to  its  fate, 
to  leave  it  as  He  counselled  His  disciples  to  leave 
any  city  or  house  that  refused  to  receive  them: 
shaking  the  dust  off  His  feet;  and  in  doing  so, 
as  He  turns  from  the  astonished  hierarchs.  He 
utters  these  solemn  words,  which  close  the  time 
of  their  merciful  visitation  and  leave  them  to 
"  eat  of  the  fruit  of  their  own  way,  and  be  filled 
with  their  own  devices";  "Behold,  your  house 
is  left  unto  you  desolate."  Your  house.  It  was 
Mine.  I  was  its  glory,  and  would  have  been  its 
defence;  but  when  I  came  unto  My  own.  Mine 
own  received  Me  not;  and  now  it  is  no  longer 
Mine  but  yours,  and  therefore  desolate.  Deso- 
late; and  therefore  defenceless,  a  ready  prey  for 
the  Roman  eagles  when  they  swoop  on  the  de- 
fenceless brood.  "  For  I  say  unto  you.  Ye  shall 
not  see  Me  henceforth  till  " — till  when?  Is  there 
still  a  door  of  hope?  There  is,  even  for  scribes 
and  Pharisees — hypocrites;  the  door  ever  open 
here  on  earth:  "  Him  that  cometh  unto  Me,  I 
will  in  nowise  cast  out."  The  door  is  closed 
upon  them  for  ever  as  leaders  of  the  people;  as 
temple  authorities  they  can  never  be  recognised 
again,i-their  house  is  left  to  them  desolate,  but 
for  themselves  there  is  still  this  door  of  hope; 
these  awful  woes  therefore  are  not  a  final  sen- 
tence, but  a  long,  loud,  last  call  to  enter  ere  it 
be  too  late.  And  as  if  to  show,  after  all  the 
wrath  of  His  terrible  denunciation,  that  judgment 
is  "  His  strange  work  "  and  that  He  "  delighteth 
in  mercy,"  He  points  in  closing  to  that  still  open 
door,  and  says,  "  Ye  shall  not  see  Me  hence- 
forth, till  ye  shall  say,  '  Blessed  is  He  that  cometh 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord.'  " 

Why  did  they  not  say  it  then?  Why  did  they 
not  entreat  Him  to  remain?  But  they  did  not. 
So  "  Jesus  went  out,  and  departed  from  the  Tem- 
ple "  (xxiv.  i);  and  though  eighteen  hundred 
years  have  rolled  away  since  then,  the  time  has 
not  yet  come  when  as  a  people  they  have  said, 
"  Blessed  is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord";  accordingly  their  house  is  still  desolate, 
and  they  are  "  scattered  and  peeled  " — chickens 
that  will  not  nestle  under  the  mother's  wing. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  PROPHECY  ON  THE  MOUNT. 

Matthew  xxiv.,  xxv. 

We  have  seen  that  though  the  Saviour's  public 
ministry  is  now  closed.  He  still  has  a  private 
ministry  to  discharge — a  ministry  of  counsel  and 
comfort  to  His  beloved  disciples,  whom  He  soon 
must  leave  in  a  world  where  tribulation  awaits 
them  on  every  side.  Of  this  private  ministry  the 
chief  remains  are  the  beautiful  words  of  conso- 
lation left  on  record  by  St.  John  (xiii.-xvii.),  and 
the  valuable  words  of  prophetic  warning  re- 
corded by  the  other  Evangelists,  occupying  in 
this  Gospel  two  long  chapters   (xxiv.,  xxv.). 

This  remarkable  discourse,  nearly  equal  in 
length  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  may  be 
called  the  Prophecy  on  the  Mount;  for  it  is 
prophetic  throughout,  and  it  was  delivered  on  the 
Mount  of  Olives.  From  the  way  in  which  it  is 
introduced  (vv.  1-3)  we  see  that  it  is  closely  con- 
nected with  the  abandonment  of  the  Temple,  and 
that  it  was  suggested  by  the  disciples  calling  His 


attention  to  the  buildings  of  the  Temple,  which 
were  in  full  view  of  the  little  group  as  they  sat 
on  the  Mount  of  Olives  that  memorable  day — 
buildings  which  seemed  stately  and  stable  enough 
in  their  eyes,  but  which  were  already  tottering 
to  their  fall  before 

"...  that  eye  which  watches  guilt 

And  goodness  ;  and  hath  power  to  see 
Within  the  green  the  mouldered  tree. 
And  towers  fallen  as  soon  as  built." 

Thus  everything  leads  us  to  expect  a  discourse 
about  the  fate  of  the  Temple.  The  minds  of  the 
whole  group  are  full  of  the  subject;  and  out  of 
the  fulness  of  their  hearts  the  question  comes, 
"  Tell  us,  when  shall  these  things  be?  And  what 
shall  be  the  sign  of  Thy  coming,  and  of  the  end 
of  the  world?"  From  the  latter  part  of  the 
question  it  is  evident  that  the  coming  of  Christ 
and  the  end  of  the  world  were  closely  connected 
in  the  disciples'  minds  with  the  judgment  that 
was  about  to  come  upon  the  Temple  and  the 
chosen  people — a  connection  which  was  right 
in  point  of  fact,  though  wrong  in  point  of  time. 
We  shall  not  be  surprised,  therefore,  to  discover 
that  the  burden  of  the  first  part  of  the  prophecy 
is  that  great  event  to  which  the  attention  of  all 
was  at  that  moment  so  pointedly  directed.  But 
since  the  near  as  well  as  the  distant  event  is 
viewed  as  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man,  we  may 
give  to  what  may  be  called  the  prophecy  proper 
as  distinguished  from  the  pictures  of  judgment 
that  follow,  a  title  which  embodies  this  unifying 
thought. 

I.  The  Coming  of  the  Son  of  Man 
(vv.  3-44). 

In  secular  history  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
is  nothing  more  than  the  destruction  of  any  other 
city  of  equal  size  and  importance.  It  is  indeed 
marked  out  from  sim.ilar  events  in  history  by  the 
peculiarly  terrible  sufferings  to  which  the  inhabi- 
tants were  subjected  before  the  final  overthrow. 
But  apart  from  this,  it  is  to  the  general  historian 
an  event  precisely  similar  to  the  destruction  of 
Babylon,  of  Tyre,  of  Carthage,  or  of  any  other 
ancient  city  once  the  seat  of  a  dominion  which 
now  has  passed  away.  In  sacred  history  it  stands 
alone.  It  was  not  merely  the  destruction  of  a 
city,  but  the  close  of  a  dispensation — the  end 
of  that  great  age  which  began  with  the  call  of 
Abraham  to  come  out  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees, 
and  be  the  father  of  a  people  chosen  of  the  Lord. 
It  was  "  the  end  of  the  world  "  (comp.  R.  V., 
ver.  3,  margin)  to  the  Jews,  the  end  of  the  world 
which  then  was,  the  passing  away  of  the  old  to 
give  place  to  the  new.  It  was  the  event  which 
bore  the  same  relation  to  the  Jews  as  the  Flood 
did  to  the  antediluvians,  which  was  emphatically 
the  end  of  the  world  to  them.  If  we  bear  this 
in  mmd  it  will  enable  us  to  appreciate  the  tre- 
mendous importance  assigned  to  this  event 
wherever  it  is  referred  to  in  the  sacred  Scriptures, 
and  especially  in  this  momentous  chapter. 

But  though  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is 
the  primary  subject  of  the  prophecy,  in  its  full 
sweep  it  takes  a  far  wider  range.  The  Saviour 
sees  before  Him  with  prophetic  eye,  not  only 
that  great  event  which  was  to  be  the  end  of  the 
world  which  then  was — the  close  of  the  dispensa- 
tion of  grace  which  had  lasted  two  thousand 
years;  but  also  the  end  of  all  things,  when  the 
last  dispensation  of  grace — not  for  Israel  alone, 
but  for  the  whole  world — shall  have  come  to  a 


I 


Matthew  xxiv.,  XXV.]       THE    PROPHECY    ON    THE    MOUNT. 


783 


close.  Though  these  two  events  were  to  be  sep- 
arated from  each  other  by  a  long  interval  of 
time,  yet  were  they  so  closely  related  in  their 
nature  and  issues  that  our  Lord,  having  in  view 
the  needs  of  those  who  were  to  live  in  the  new 
dispensation,  could  not  speak  of  the  one  without 
also  speaking  of  the  other.  What  He  was  then 
saying  was  intended  for  the  guidance,  not  only 
of  the  disciples  then  around  Him,  and  of  any 
other  Jews  who  might  from  them  receive  the 
message,  but  also  for  the  guidance  of  the  whole 
Christian  Church  throughout  the  world  Jo  the 
end  of  time, — another  marvellous  illustration  of 
that  sublime  consciousness  of  life  and  power, 
infinitely  beyond  the  limits  of  His  mere  man- 
hood, which  is  ever  betraying  itself  throughout 
this  wondrous  history.  Had  He  confined  Him- 
self to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  His  words 
would  have  had  no  special  interest  for  us,  any 
more,  for  example,  than  the  burden  of  Babylon 
or  of  Tyre  or  of  Dumah  in  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures;  but  when  He  carries  us  on  to  that 
Last  Great  Day,  of  which  the  day  of  Jerusa- 
lem's destruction  (as  closing  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation)  was  a  type,  we  recognise  at  once 
our  own  personal  interest  in  the  prophecy;  for 
we  ourselves  are  individually  concerned  with  that 
Day — we  shall  then  either  be  overwhelmed  in 
the  ruins  of  the  old,  or  shall  rejoice  in  the  glories 
of  the  new;  therefore  we  should  feel  that  this 
prophecy  has  an  interest  for  us  as  personal  as 
it  had  for  those  who  first  heard  it  on  the  Mount 
of  Olives. 

As  might  be  expected  from  the  nature  of  its 
subject,  the  interpretation  of  the  prophecy  in 
matters  of  detail  is  beset  with  difficulties.  The 
sources  of  difficulty  are  sufficiently  obvious. 
One  is  in  the  elimination  of  time.  The  time  of 
both  events  is  studiously  concealed,  according  to 
the  principle  distinctly  announced  by  our  Saviour 
just  before  His  ascension:  "  It  is  not  for  you  to 
know  the  times  or  the  seasons,  which  the  Father 
hath  put  in  His  own  power."  There  are  in  each 
case  signs  given,  by  which  the  approach  of  the 
event  may  be  recognised  by  those  who  will  give 
heed  to  them;  but  anything  in  the  shape  of  a 
date  is  studiously  avoided.  It  is  perhaps  not 
too  much  to  say  that  nine-tenths  of  the  difficul- 
ties which  have  been  encountered  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  this  passage  have  arisen  from  the 
unwarrantable  attempts  to  introduce  dates  into 
it. 

Another  difficulty  arises  from  the  similarity  of 
the  two  events  referred  to,  and  the  consequent 
applicability  of  the  same  language  to  both  of 
them.  This  leads  to  different  opinions  as  to 
which  of  the  two  is  referred  to  in  certain  places. 
To  show  the  source  of  these  difficulties  is  to 
suggest  their  solution;  for  when  we  consider  that 
one  event  is  the  type  of  the  other,  that  one  is  as 
it  were  the  miniature  of  the  other,  the  same  on 
a  much  smaller  scale,  we  need  not  hesitate  to 
apply  the  same  language  to  both, — it  may  be 
literally  in  the  one  case  and  figuratively  in  the 
other;  or  it  may  be  in  a  subordinate  sense  in  the 
one  case,  and  in  the  fullest  sense  in  the  other; 
or  it  may  be  in  precisely  the  same  sense  in  both 
cases.  In  general,  however,  it  will  be  observed 
that  the  lesser  event — the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem— stands  out  in  full  prominence  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  prophecy,  and  the  greater  event 
— the  Great  Day  of  our  Saviour's  appearing — in 
the  latter  part  of  it. 

Still  another  source  of  difficulty  is  that,  while 


our  Saviour's  object  in  giving  the  prophecy  was 
practical,  the  object  of  many  who  study  the 
prophecy  is  merely  speculative.  They  come  to 
it  to  satisfy  curiosity,  and  as  a  matter  of  course 
they  are  disappointed,  for  our  Lord  did  not  in- 
tend when  He  spoke  these  words  to  satisfy  so 
unworthy  a  desire;  and,  though  His  word  never 
returns  to  Him  void,  it  accomplishes  that  which 
He  pleases,  and  nothing  else;  it  prospers  in  the 
Ithing  to  which  He  has  sent  it,  but  not  in  the 
thing  to  which  He  has  not  sent  it.  He  has  sent 
us  this,  not  to  satisfy  our  curiosity,  but  to  influ- 
ence our  conduct;  and  if  We  use  it  not  for 
speculative  but  for  practical  purposes — not  to  find 
support  for  any  favourite  theory,  which  parcels 
out  the  future,  giving  days  and  hours,  which 
neither  the  angels  in  heaven  nor  the  Son  of  man 
Himself  could  tell  (Mark  xiii.  32) — but  to  find 
food  for  our  souls,  then  we  shall  not  be  troubled 
with  so  many  difficulties,  and  we  shall  certainly 
not  be  disappointed. 

Before  we  pass  from  the  difficulties  of  this 
prophecy,  observe  how  strong  an  argument  they 
furnish  for  its  genuineness.  Those  who  deny  the 
divinity  of  Christ  are  greatly  troubled  with  this 
prophecy,  so  mUch  so  that  the  only  way  in  which 
they  can  get  rid  of  its  witness  to  Him  is  by 
suggesting  that  it  was  really  composed  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  therefore  never 
spoken  by  Christ  at  all.  There  are  difficulties 
enough  of  other  kinds  in  the  way  of  such  a  dis- 
posal of  the  prophecy;  but  there  is  one  consid- 
eration which  absolutely  forbids  it — viz.,  that 
any  one  writing  after  the  event  would  have 
avoided  all  that  vagueness  of  language  which 
gives  trouble  to  expositors.  To  those  who  can 
judge  of  internal  evidence,  its  obscurity  is  clear 
proof  that  this  discourse  could  not  have  been 
produced  in  the  full  light  of  the  subsequent  his- 
tory, but  must  have  been  what  it  professes  to  be, 
a  foreshadowing  of  coming  events. 

We  may  not,  with  the  limits  imposed  by  the 
plan  of  these  expositions,  attempt  a  detailed  ex- 
planation of  this  difficult  prophecy,  but  must  con- 
tent  ourselves  with  giving  only  a  general  view. 
Our  Lord  first  warns  His  disciples  against  ex- 
pecting the  crisis  too  early  (vv.  4-14).  In  this 
passage  He  prepares  the  minds  of  His  disciples 
for  the  times  of  trouble  and  trial  through  which 
they  must  pass  before  the  coming  of  "  the  great 
and  notable  day  of  the  Lord "  which  was  at 
hand:  there  shall  be  false  Christs  and  false 
prophets — there  shall  be  wars  and  rumours  of 
wars,  and  shaking  of  the  nations,  and  famines, 
and  pestilences,  and  earthquakes  in  divers  places; 
yet  will  all  these  be  only  "  the  beginning  of 
sorrows."  He  also  prepares  their  minds  for  the 
gigantic  work  which  must  be  done  by  them  and 
by  their  brother-disciples  before  that  great  day: 
"  This  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached 
in  all  the  world  for  a  witness  unto  all  nations; 
and  then  shall  the  end  come."  Thus  are  the 
disciples  taught  the  very  important  and  thor- 
oughly practical  truth,  that  they  must  pass 
through  a  great  trial  and  do  a  great  work  before 
the  Day  shall  come. 

He  then  gives  them  a  certain  sign  by  wnich 
they  shall  know  that  the  event  is  imminent,  when 
it  does  approach.  This  is  not  equivalent  to  fix- 
ing a  date.  He  gives  them  no  idea  how  long  the 
period  of  trial  shall  last,  no  idea  how  long  time 
they  shall  have  for  the  great  work  before  them — 
He  simply  gives  them  a  sign,  by  observing  which 
they  shall  not  be  taken  completely  by  surprise. 


784 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


but  have  at  least  a  brief  space  to  make  their 
escape  from  the  condemned  city.  And  so  very 
little  time  will  elapse  between  the  sign  and  the 
event  to  which  it  points,  that  He  warns  them 
against  any  delay,  and  tells  them,  as  soon  as  it 
shall  appear,  to  flee  at  once  to  the  mountains  and 
escape  for  their  lives.  It  is  sufficiently  evident, 
by  comparing  this  passage  with  the  correspond- 
ing place  in  Luke,  where  our  Lord  speaks  of 
Jerusalem  being  compassed  with  armies,  that  the 
"  abomination  of  desolation  standing  in  the  holy 
place "  refers  to  some  particular  act  of  sacri- 
legious impiety  committed  in  the  Temple  just 
at  the  time  the  Romans  were  beginning  to  in- 
vest the  city.  Attempts  have  been  made  his- 
torically to  identify  this  profanation,  but  it  is 
doubtful  if  these  have  been  successful.  It  is  suf- 
ficient to  know  that  whether  or  not  the  fact  has 
found  a  place  in  history,  it  served  its  purpose  as 
a  sign  to  the  Christians  in  the  city  who  had 
treasured  up  in  their  hearts  their  Saviour's  warn- 
ing words. 

Having  told  them  what  the  sign  would  be,  and 
counselled  His  disciples  to  lose  no  time  in  mak- 
ing their  escape  as  soon  as  they  should  see  it, 
He  further  warns  them,  in  a  few  impressive 
words,  of  the  terrors  of  those  days  of  tribulation 
(vv.  19-22),  and  then  concludes  this  portion  of 
the  prophecy  by  warning  them  against  the  sup- 
position— a  very  natural  one  in  the  circumstances 
— that  even  then  the  Son  of  man  should  come. 

So  far  we  have  found  the  leading  ideas  to  be 
simple  and  practical,  and  all  connected  with  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  (i)  Do  not  expect  that 
event  too  early;  for  you  must  pass  through  many 
trials  and  do  much  work  before  it.  (2)  As  soon 
as  you  shall  see  the  sign  I  give  you,  expect  it 
immediately,  and  lose  no  time  in  making  your 
escape  from  the  horrors  of  these  awful  days. 
(3)  Even  then,  however,  do  not  expect  the  per- 
sonal advent  of  the  Son  of  man;  for  though  it  is 
a  day  of  judgment,  it  is  only  one  of  those  partial 
judgments  which  are  necessary  on  the  principle 
that  "  wheresoever  the  carcase  is,  there  will  the 
eagles  be  gathered  together."  The  personal  ad- 
vent of  Christ  and  the  day  of  final  judgment 
are  only  foreshadowed  by,  not  realised  in,  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  close  of  the  old 
dispensation. 

The  three  closing  verses  of  this  portion  of  the 
prophecy  refer  pre-eminently  to  the  great  Day 
of  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  (vv.  29-31). 
The  word  "  immediately  "  has  given  rise  to  much 
difficulty,  on  account  of  the  hasty  conclusion  to 
which  some  have  come  that  "  immediately  after 
the  tribulation  of  those  days  "  must  mean  imme- 
diately after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem;  ac- 
cording to  which  all  this  must  have  taken  place 
long  ago.  It  is,  indeed,  sufficiently  obvious  that 
the  tribulation  of  those  days  began  with  the 
destruction,  or  rather  with  the  besieging,  of  Je- 
rusalem. But  when  did  it  end?  As  soon  as  the 
city  was  destroyed?  Nay.  If  we  wish  to  get 
some  idea  of  the  duration  of  those  days  of  tribu- 
lation, let  us  turn  to  the  same  place  in  the  same 
prophecy  as  given  by  St.  Luke  (xxi.  23,  24), 
where  it  clearly  appears  that  it  embraces  the 
whole  period  of  the  Jewish  dispersion  and  of 
the  standing  of  the  Gentile  Church.  "  The 
tribulation  of  those  days  "  is  going  on  still,  and 
therefore  the  events  of  these  verses  are  still  fu- 
ture. We  look  forward  to  the  Day  of  the  Lord 
of  which  that  terrible  day  of  judgment,  to  which 


their  thoughts  were  first  turned,  was  only  a  dim 
foreshadowing — a  Day  far  more  august  in  its  na-     h 
ture,  far  more  awful  in  its  accompaniments,  far    | 
more  terrible  in  its  aspect  to  those  who  are  un- 
prepared for  it,  yet  full  of  glory  and  of  joy  to 
those  who  "  love  His  appearing." 

Appended  to  the  main  prophecy  are  some  ad- 
ditional warnings  as  to  time  (vv.  32-44)  setting 
forth  in  the  most  impressive  manner  the  cer- 
tainty, the  suddenness,  and,  to  those  who  are  not 
looking  for  it,  the  unexpectedness  of  the  coming 
of  the  Day  of  the  Lord.  Here  again,  in  the 
first  portion  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  in 
the  latter  portion  the  Day  of  the  Son  of  man, 
is  prominent.  If  we  bear  this  in  mind  it  will 
remove  a  difficulty  many  have  found  in  ver.  34, 
which  seems  to  say  that  the  events  specially  re- 
ferred to  in  vv.  29-31  would  be  fulfilled  before 
that  generation  passed  away.  But  when  we  re- 
member that  the  prophecy  proper  closes  with  the 
thirty-first  verse,  and  that  the  warning  as  to  the 
imminency  of  the  events  referred  to  commences 
with  ver.  32,  the  difficulty  vanishes;  for  it  is 
most  natural  that  the  practical  warning  should 
follow  the  course  of  the  prophecy  itself,  referring 
first  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  pass- 
ing from  it  to  that  grand  event  of  which  it  was 
the  precursor.  On  this  principle  vv.  32-35  are 
quite  simple  and  natural,  as  well  as  most  impres- 
sive, and  the  statement  of  ver.  34  is  seen  to  be 
literally  accurate. 

The  passage  from  ver.  36  onwards  is  still  quite 
applicable  to  the  near  event,  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem;  but  the  language  used  is  evidently 
such  as  to  carry  the  mind  onward  to  the  more 
distant  event  which  had  been  brought  promi- 
nently forward  in  the  latter  part  of  the  prophecy 
(vv.  36-44).  In  these  verses,  again,  not  only  is 
no  date  given,  but  we  are  expressly  told  that  it 
is  deliberately  withheld.  What  then?  Are  we 
to  dismiss  the  subject  from  our  minds?  Quite 
the  reverse;  for  though  the  time  is  uncertain, 
the  event  itself  is  most  certain,  and  it  will  come 
suddenly  and  unexpectedly.  No  time  will  be 
given  for  preparation  to  those  who  are  not  al- 
ready prepared.  True,  there  will  be  the  sign  of 
the  Son  of  man  in  heaven,  whatever  that  may 
be;  but,  like  the  other  sign  which  was  the  pre- 
cursor of  Jerusalem's  destruction,  it  will  appear 
immediately  before  the  event,  barely  giving  time 
for  those  who  have  their  lamps  trimmed  and  oil 
in  their  vessels  with  their  lamps  to  arise  and 
meet  the  Bridegroom;  but  for  those  who  are 
not  watching,  it  will  be  too  late — it  will  be  with 
them  as  with  those  who  lived  at  the  close  of  the 
very  first  dispensation,  who  were  "  eating  and 
drinking,  marrying  and  giving  in  marriage,  until 
the  day  that  Noah  entered  into  the  ark,  and 
knew  not  until  the  flood  came,  and  took  them 
all  away.  .  .  .  Watch  therefore:  for  ye  know 
not  what  hour  your  Lord  doth  come.  But  know 
this,  that  if  the  goodman  of  the  house  had  known 
in  what  watch  the  thief  would  come,  he  would 
have  watched,  and  would  not  have  suffered  his 
house  to  be  broken  up.  Therefore  be  ye  also 
ready:  for  in  such  an  hour  as  ye  think  not  the 
Son  of  man  cometh." 

II.   Parables  and  Pictures  of  Judgment 
(xxiv.  45-xxv.). 

The  remainder  of  this  great  prophecy  is  taken 
up  with  four  pictures  of  judgment,  very  striking 


Matthew  xxiv..  XXV.]       THE    PROPHECY    ON    THE    MOUNT. 


785 


and  impressive,  having  for  their  special  object 
the  enforcement  of  the  great  practical  lesson  with 
which  the  first  part  has  closed:  "  Watch  there- 
fore "  (vv.  42,  43) ;  "  Be  ye  also  ready  "  (ver.  44). 
In  the  former  portion  of  the  prophecy  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  was  in  the  foreground, 
and  in  the  background  the  coming  of  the  Son 
of  man  to  judgment  in  the  end  of  the  world.  In 
this  portion  the  Great  Day  of  the  Son  of  man 
is  prominent  throughout. 

The  four  pictures,  though  similar  in  their 
scope  and  object,  are  different  in  their  subjects. 
The  first  represents  those  who  occupy  positions 
of  trust  in  the  kingdom;  the  second  and  third, 
all  professing  Christians, — the  one  setting  forth 
inward  grace,  the  other  outward  activity;  the 
fourth  is  a  picture  of  judgment  on  the  whole 
world. 

I.  The  Servant  Set  over  the  Household 
(xxiv.  45-50- 

As  in  the  case  of  the  man  without  the  wedding 
garment,  a  single  servant  is  taken  as  representing 
a  class;  and  who  constitute  this  class  is  made 
quite  clear,  not  only  by  the  fact  that  the  servant 
is  set  over  the  household,  but  also  by  the  nature 
of  the  service:  "to  give  them  their  food  in  due 
season  "  (R.  V.).  The  application  was  evidently 
first  to  the  apostles  themselves,  and  then  to  all 
who  in  the  future  should  be  engaged  in  the 
same  work  of  providing  spiritual  nourishment 
for  those  under  their  charge.  The  very  pointed 
way  in  which  the  parable  is  introduced,  together 
with  the  fact  that  only  one  servant  is  spoken  of, 
suggests  to  each  one  engaged  in  the  work  the 
most  careful  self-examination.  "  Who,  then,  is 
a  faithful  and  wise  servant? "  The  underlying 
thought  seems  to  be  that  such  an  one  is  not 
very  easily  to  be  found;  and  that  therefore  there 
is  a  special  benediction  for  those  who  through 
the  trying  years  are  found  both  "  faithful  an(x 
wise,"  faithful  to  their  high  trust,  wise  ii>  rela- 
tion to  the  momentous  issues  depending  on  the 
manner  in  which  they  fulfil  it.  The  benediction 
on  the  wise  and  faithful  servant  is  evidently  easy 
to  miss  and  a  great  thing  to  ?,ain. 

But  there  is  more  to  be  thought  of  than  the 
missing  of  the  blessing.  There  is  a  fearful  doom 
awaiting  the  unfaithful  servant,  of  which  the  pic- 
ture following  gi-.'-^s  a  terrible  presentation. 
Both  ofitence  and  punishment  are  painted  in  the 
very  darkest  colours.  As  to  the  former,  the 
servant  not  only  neglects  his  duty,  but  beats  his 
fellow-servants,  and  eats  and  drinks  with  the 
drunken.  Here  a  question  arises.  What  was 
there  to  suggest  such  a  representation  to  the 
Saviour's  mind?  Surely  it  could  not  be  intended 
specially  for  those  who  were  sitting  with  Him 
on  the  mount  that  day.  If  Judas  was  among  the 
rest,  his  sin  was  not  of  the  nature  that  would 
have  suggested  the  parable  in  this  particular 
fo 'm,  and  certainly  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
t  lat  any  of  the  rest  were  in  the  slightest  danger 
ol  being  guilty  of  such  cruelties  and  excesses 
is  are  here  spoken  of.  Is  it  not  plain  then,  that 
trie  Judge  of  all  had  in  His  view  the  dark  days 
t )  come,  when  the  clergy  of  a  degenerate  Church 
v'ould  be  actually  guilty  of  cruelties  and  excesses 
4  ach  as  could  not  be  more  fitly  set  forth  in  para- 
\  e  than  by  the  disgraceful  conduct  of  "  that 
v'icked  servant  "? 

This  is  still  further  confirmed  by  the  reason 
f  iven  for  such  recklessness, — the  evil  servant  say- 
50— Vol.  IV. 


ing  in  his  heart,  "  My  Lord  delayeth  His  com- 
ing." There  is  reason  to  suppose  that  the  early 
Christians  expected  the  return  of  the  Lord  al- 
most immediately.  In  so  far  as  they  made  this 
mistake,  it  cannot  be  charged  against  their  Mas- 
ter; for,  as  we  have  seen.  He  warns  them  against 
this  error  throughout  the  whole  of  the  prophecy. 
It  is  plain,  however,  that  those  who  made  this 
mistake  were  in  no  danger  of  saying  in  their 
hearts,  "  My  Lord  delayeth  His  coming."  But 
as  time  passed  on,  and  the  expectation  of  the 
Lord's  speedy  return  grew  fainter,  then  there 
would  come  in  all  its  force  the  temptation  to 
those  who  did  not  watch  against  it  of  counting 
on  the  Lord's  delay.  When  we  think  of  this,  we 
see  how  necessary  it  was  that  the  danger  should 
be  set  forth  in  language  which  may  have  seemed 
unnecessarily  strong  at  the  time,  but  which  the 
future  history  of  the  Church  only  too  sadly 
justified. 

The  punishment  is  correspondingly  severe. 
The  word  used  to  picture  it  ("  shall  cut  him 
asunder")  is  one  to  make  us  shudder;  and  some 
have  felt  surprised  that  our  Lord  did  not  shrink 
from  the  horror  of  the  word.  Ah!  but  it  was 
the  horror  of  the  thing  which  He  dreaded,  and 
wished  to  avert.  It  was  the  infinite  pity  of  His 
heart  that  led  Him  to  use  a  word  which  might 
prove  the  very  strongest  deterrent.  Besides, 
how  significant  it  is!  Think,  again,  of  whom  He 
is  speaking, — servants  set  over  His  household 
to  give  food  in  due  season,  who  instead  of  doing 
this  maltreat  their  fellow-servants  and  ruin  them- 
selves with  excess.  Think  of  the  duplicity  of 
such  conduct.  By  oflfice  in  the  church  "  ex- 
alted unto  heaven,"  by  practice  "  brought  down 
to  hell"!  That  unnatural  combination  cannot 
last.  These  monsters  with  two  faces  and  one 
black  heart  cpnuv^i;  be  tolerated  in  the  universe 
of  God,  Tney  shall  be  cut  asunder;  and  then  it 
w.W  appear  which  of  the  two  faces  really  belongs 
to  the  man:  cut  asunder,  his  place  shall  be  ap- 
pointed with  the  hypocrites,  where  shall  be  weep- 
ing and  gnashing  of  teeth  (ver.  51). 

2  and  3.  The  Virgins;  The  Talents  (xxv.  1-30). 

The  second  and  third  pictures  presented  in  the 
form  of  two  parables  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
set  before  us  the  judgment  of  Christ  at  His  com- 
ing on  His  professed  disciples,  distinguishing 
between  real  and  merely  nominal  Christians, 
between  the  pretended  and  the  true  members  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  In  the  former  parable 
this  distinction  is  set  before  us  in  the  contrast 
between  the  wise  and  the  foolish  virgins;  in  the 
latter  it  appears  in  the  form  of  the  one  faithful 
and  the  two  unfaithful  servants.  No  special  sig- 
nificance need  be  attached  to  the  respective  num~ 
bers,  which  are  evidently  chosen  with  a  view  to 
the  consistency  of  the  parables,  not  to  set  forth 
anything  in  regard  to  the  actual  proportion  be- 
tween hypocrites  and  true  disciples  in  the  visible 
Church. 

The  relation  between  the  two  parables  has  been 
already  indicated.  The  first  represents  the 
Church  as  waiting,  the  second  as  working,  for 
her  Lord;  the  first  shows  the  necessity  of  a  con- 
stant supply  of  inward  grace,  the  second  the  need 
of  unremitting  outward  activity;  the  teaching  of 
the  first  is,  "  Keep  thy  heart  with  all  diligence, 
for  out  of  it  are  the  issues  of  life  ";  of  the  second, 
"  Do  good  as  ye  have  opportunity,"  '"  Be  faith- 
ful unto  death,  and  I  will  give  thee  a  crown  of 


786 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


life."  The  parable  of  the  Virgins  comes  appro* 
priately  before  that  of  the  Talents,  inasmuch  as 
a  Christian's  inner  life  should  be  his  first  care, 
the  outer  life  being  wholly  dependent  on  it. 
"  Keep  thy  heart  with  all  diligence,"  is  the  first 
command;  "  Do  thy  work  with  all  diligence," 
the  second.  The  first  parable  calls  aloud  to  every 
member  of  the  Church,  "Be  wise";  the  second 
follows  it  with  another  call,  as  urgent  as  the 
first,  "  Be  faithful." 

The  Parable  of  the  Virgins  (vv.  1-13),  with  its 
marriage  feast,  recalls  the  parable  of  the  mar- 
riage of  the  King's  Son,  so  recently  spoken  in 
the  Temple.  The  difference  between  the  two  is 
very  clearly  indicated  by  the  way  in  which  each 
parable  is  introduced:  there,  "the  kingdorn  of 
heaven  is  likened";  here,  "thai  shall  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  be  likened."  The  gospel  feast 
which  was  the  subject  of  the  parable  spoken  in 
the  Temple  was  already  spread;  it  was  a  thing 
of  the  present;  its  word  was,  "  All  things  are 
ready:  come  to  the  marriage";  its  preparation 
had  been  the  object  of  the  heavenly  Bride- 
groom's  first  coming.  The  wedding  feast  of  this 
parable  is  yet  to  be  prepared;  it  is  "  the  mar- 
riage supper  of  the  Lamb  "  to  which  the  Lord 
will  call  His  people  at  His  second  coming. 

An  interval,  therefore,  of  unknown  length  must 
pass  meantime;  and  herein,  as  the  sequel  will 
unfold,  lies  the  test  which  distinguishes  the  wise 
from  the  foolish  virgins.  This  interval  is  repre- 
sented by  a  night,  with  great  appropriateness, 
seeing  that  the  heavenly  Bridegroorn  is  the 
Sun  of  the  soul.  It  being  night,  all  alike  grow 
drowsy  and  fall  asleep.  To  make  this  a  fault, 
as  some  do,  is  to  spoil  the  parable.  Had  it  been 
wrong  to  sleep,  the  wise  virgins  would  certainly 
have  been  represented  as  keeping  awake.  If, 
then,  we  give  a  meaning  to  the  sleep,  it  is  not 
that  of  spiritual  torpor,  but  rather  such  occupa- 
tion with  the  concerns  of  the  present  life  as  is 
natural  and  necessary.  As  the  whole  of  "  the 
life  that  now  is,"  up  till  the  coming  of  the  Lord, 
is  represented  in  the  parable  by  the  night,  and 
as  sleep  is  the  business  of  night,  we  may  fairly 
consider  that  the  sleep  of  the  parable  represents 
the  business  of  the  life  that  now  is,  in  which 
Christians,  however  anxious  to  be  ready  for  the 
coming  of  the  Lord,  must  engage,  and  not  only 
so,  but  must  give  themselves  to  it  with  an  en- 
grossment which  for  the  time  may  amount  to  as 
entire  abstraction  from  distinctively  spiritual  du- 
ties as  sleep  is  an  abstraction  from  the  duties 
of  the  day.  In  this  point  of  view  we  see  how 
reasonable  is  our  Lord's  requirement.  He  does 
not  expect  us  to  be  always  equally  wide  awake 
to  spiritual  and  eternal  things.  The  wise  as  well 
as  the  foolish  slumber  and  sleep. 

It  is  not,  then,  by  the  temptation  to  sleep  that 
the  interval  tests  the  virgins,  but  by  bringing  out 
a  difference  which  has  existed  all  the  while, 
though  at  the  first  it  did  not  appear.  All 
seemed  alike  at  the  beginning  of  the  night. 
Had  not  every  one  of  them  a  lamp,  with 
oil  in  it,  and  were  not  the  lights  of  all 
the  ten  brightly  burning?  Yes;  and  if  the 
Bridegroom  had  come  at  that  hour,  all 
would  have  seemed  equally  ready.  But  the 
Bridegroom  tarries,  and  while  He  tarries  the 
business  of  the  night  must  go  on.  In  this  way 
time  passes,  till  at  an  unexpected  moment  in  the 
very  middle  of  the  night  as  it  were,  the  cry  is 
heard  "  Behold  the  Bridegroom  cometh;  go  y& 


out  to  meet  Him.  Then  all  those  virgins  arose, 
and  trimmed  their  lamps."  Still  no  difiference:  Jj 
each  of  the  ten  lamps  is  trimmed  and  lighted.  ^ 
But  see,  five  of  them  are  going  out  almost  as 
soon  as  they  are  kindled!  What  is  the  reason? 
There  is  no  store  of  oil.  Here,  then,  is  the  dif- 
ference between  the  wise  and  the  foolish,  and 
here  lies,  therefore,  the  main  point  of  the  par- 
able. 

What,  then,  are  we  to  understand  in  the  spir- 
itual sphere  by  this  distinction?  That  the  wise 
and  the  foolish  represent  the  watchful  and  the 
unwatchful  is  plain  enough;  but  is  there  not 
something  here  to  let  us  deeper  into  the  secret 
of  the  great  difference  between  the  one  and  the 
other?  In  order  to  get  this,  it  is  not  at  all  nec- 
essary to  ask  for  the  significance  of  each  sepa- 
rate detail — the  lamp,  the  wick,  the  oil,  the  oil 
vessel.  The  details  belong  to  the  drapery  of  the 
parable;  the  essentials  are  manifestly  the  light 
and  the  source  whence  it  comes.  The  light  is 
the  very  familiar  symbol  of  the  Christian  life; 
the  source  whence  it  comes  is  Divine  grace,  abid- 
ing unseen  in  the  heart.  Now,  there  is  a  certain 
superficial  goodness  which  shines  for  the  mo- 
ment much  as  the  true  light  of  grace  shines,  but 
is  connected  with  no  perennial  supply;  there  is 
no  oil  vessel  from  which  the  lamp  can  be  con- 
stantly replenished.  There  may  be  a  flaring  up 
for  a  moment;  but  there  is  no  steady  enduring 
light. 

All  which  points  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
foolish  virgins  represent  those  professing  Chris- 
tians who  have  religious  emotion  enough  to 
kindle  their  lamp  of  life  and  make  it  glow  with 
a  flame  which  looks  marvellously  like  true  de- 
votion, but  which  is  little  else  than  the  blazing 
up  of  natural  feeling;  while  the  wise  virgins  rep- 
resent those  whose  constant  habit  is  devotion, 
whose  grace  is  something  they  carry  with  them 
always,  so  that  at  any  moment  the  light  of  it  may 
shine,  the  flame  glow,  pure,  bright,  steady,  inex- 
tinguishable. They  may  be  as  much  engaged  in 
the  business  of  life  as  the  others,  so  that  no  flame 
of  devotion  may  be  seen;  but  deep  down,  hidden 
out  of  sight,  like  the  oil  in  the  vessel,  there  is 
abiding  grace,  which  is  only  waiting  the  occasion 
to  'burst  into  a  flame,  of  prayer  or  praise  or  joy- 
ful welcome  of  the  Bridegroom  at  whatever  mo- 
ment He  may  come.  The  distinction,  therefore, 
is  between  those  worldly  Christians,  whose  devo- 
tion is  a  thing  of  now  and  then,  and  those  thor- 
ough Christians  whose  devotion  is  habitual,  not 
always  to  be  recognised  on  the  surface  of  their 
life,  not  always  to  be  seen  of  men,  not  so  a» 
to  hinder  their  engrossment  in  business  hours 
with  the  ordinary  duties  of  life,  but  so  as  to  be 
always  there,  the  deep  abiding  habit  of  their  souls. 
There  is  the  secret  of  watchfulness;  there  the  se- 
cret of  readiness  for  the  coming  of  the  Lord. 

This  explains  why  the  wise  virgins  cannot  help 
the  foolish.  It  is  not  that  they  are  selfish,  and 
will  not  do  it;  but  that  it  cannot  be  done.  Some 
commentators,  men  of  the  letter,  have  puzzled 
themselves  as  to  the  advice  to  go  to  them  that 
sell  and  buy.  That,  again,  belongs  to  the  frame- 
work of  the  parable.  The  thought  conveyed  is 
plain  enough  to  those  who  think  not  of  the  letter 
but  of  the  spirit.  It  is  simply  this,  that  grace  is 
not  transferable.  A  man  may  belong  to  the 
warmest,  devoutest,  most  gracious  community 
of  disciples  in  all  Christendom;  but  if  he  himself 
has  been  foolish,  if  he  has  not  lived  in  com- 
munion with  Christ,  if  he  has  not  kept  himself  in 


Matthew  xxiv.,  XXV.]       THE    PROPHECY    ON    THE    MOUNT. 


787 


communication  with  the  Fountain  of  grace,  not 
all  the  saints  in  whose  company  he  has  passed  the 
night  of  the   Lord's  personal  absence,   however 

(willing  they  may  be,  will  be  able  to  lend  him  as 
much  as  one  drop  of  the  sacred  oil. 
1  The    same    principles    are    applicable    to    the 

'i  solemn  close  of  the  parable.  The  question  has 
been  asked,  Why  did  not  the  Bridegroom  open 
the  door?  Late  though  the  foolish  virgins  were, 
they  wished  to  enter,  and  why  should  they  not  be 
■allowed?  Again  let  us  look  beyond  the  letter  of 
the  parable  to  the  spirit  of  it — to  the  great  spir- 
itual facts  it  pictures  for  us.  If  it  were  the  mere 
opening  of  a  door  that  would  remedy  the  late- 
ness, assuredly  it  would  be  done;  but  the  real  fact 
is,  that  the  lateness  is  now  beyond  remedy.  The 
door  cannot  be  opened.  Ponder  the  solemn  words: 
"  I  know  you  not."  It  is  a  question  of  the  union 
of  the  life  with  Christ.  The  wise  virgins  had 
lived  a  life  that  was  always,  even  in  sleep,  hid 
with  Christ  in  God;  the  foolish  virgins  had  not: 
they  had  lived  a  life  which  had  transient  shows 
of  devotion  in  it,  but  no  reality — a  mistake  too 
fatal  to  be  in  any  wise  remedied  by  the  spasms 
of  a  few  minutes  at  the  close.  It  is  the  old  fa- 
miliar lesson,  that  cannot  be  taught  too  often 
or  taken  to  heart  too  earnestly:  that  the  only 
way  to  die  the  death  of  the  righteous  is  to  live 
the  life  of  the  righteous. 

The  Parable  of  the  Talents  deals  with  the  same 
subjects — viz.,  the  professed  disciples  of  Christ; 
only  instead  of  searching  the  reality  of  their  in- 
ner life,  it  tests  the  faithfulness  of  their  service. 
As  in  the  former  parable  so  in  this,  stress  is  laid 
on  the  time  that  must  elapse  before  the  Lord's 
return.  The  employer  of  the  servants  travels 
"  into  a  far  country  "  ;  and  it  is  "  after  a  long 
time  "  (ver.  19)  that  "  He  cometh,  and  reckoneth 
with  them."  Similarly,  in  the  cognate  parable  of 
"  the  pounds,"  reported  by  St.  Luke,  we  are  told 
that  it  was  spoken,  "  because  they  thought  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  should  immediately  appear  " 
(Luke  xix.  11).  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that 
both  these  parables  were  intended  to  guard 
against  the  temptation  to  make  the  anticipation 
of  the  Lord's  return  an  excuse  for  neglect  of 
present  duty. 

There  is  evidence  that  within  a  short  time 
some  Christians  in  Thessalonica  fell  into  this 
very  temptation, — so  much  so  as  to  render  it 
necessary  that  the  apostle  Paul  should  write  them 
a  letter,  liis  second  epistle,  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  reproving  them  and  setting  them  right. 
His  first  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  had  laid 
stress  on  the  suddenness  of  the  Lord's  coming, 
as  Christ  Himself  does  again  and  again  through- 
out this  discourse;  but  the  result  was  that  some 
of  them,  confounding  suddenness  with  immi- 
nence, gave  themselves  up  to  idle  waiting  or 
feverish  expectancy,  to  the  neglect  even  of  the 
most  ordinary  duties.  To  meet  this  he  had  to 
call  attention  to  the  Divine  ordinance,  that  "  if 
any  would  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat,"  and 
to  enforce  it  with  all  the  authority  of  Christ  Him- 
self: "  Now  them  that  are  such  "  (Viz.,  those  ex- 
cited "  busybodies  "  "  working  not  at  all  ")  "  we 
command  and  exhort  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
that  with  quietness  they  work,  and  eat  their  own 
bread"  (2  Thess.  iii.  10-12);  following  it  up  with 
a  caution,  on  the  other  hand,  against  allowing 
the  Lord's  delay  to  discourage  them  in  their 
activity  in  His  service:  "  But  ye,  brethren,  be  not 
weary  in  well  doing." 


All  this  helps  us  to  see  how  necessary  it  was 
that  the  parable  of  waiting  should  be  fol- 
lowed by  a  summons  to  work,  and  to  admire  the 
marvellous  insight  of  our  Lord  into  human  na- 
ture in  recognising  beforehand  where  hidden 
dangers  would  lurk  in  His  people's  path.  Un- 
happily, it  is  not  necessary  to  go  back  to  the 
case  of  the  Thessalonians  to  see  how  needful  k 
is  that  the  parable  of  work  should  go  along  with 
the  parable  of  waiting;  we  have  painful  illustra- 
tion of  it  in  our  own  day.  Thanks  to  the  clear- 
ness and  strength  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  the 
great  majority  of  those  who  in  our  day  look  for 
His  almost  immediate  return  are  not  only  dil- 
igent in  work,  but  an  example  and  a  rebuke  to 
many  who  do  not  share  their  expectations;  but 
on  the  other  hand,  there  are  not  a  few  who  have 
been  so  far  led  astray  as  to  give  up  positions 
of  great  usefulness,  and  discontinue  work  in 
which  they  had  been  signally  blessed,  with  the 
idea  that  the  great  event  being  now  so  near,  the 
sole  duty  of  the  believer  is  to  wait  for  it. 

The  parable  assumes  that  all  disciples  are  ser- 
vants of  Christ,  and  that  all  of  them  have  work 
for  Christ  to  do.  There  is  no  reason,  however, 
for  narrowing  the  field  of  service  to  what  is  in 
current  phrase  distinctively  spoken  of  as  "  Chris- 
tian work."  All  the  work  of  Christian  people 
should  be  Christian  work,  and  is  Christian  work, 
if  it  be  done  as  it  ought  to  be  done,  "  as  to  the 
Lord."  There  must  evidently,  however,  be  the 
desire  and  purpose  to  "  serve  the  Lord  Christ," 
whatever  the  nature  of  the  service  be. 

The  talents  signify  ability  and  opportunity. 
We  must  beware  of  using  the  word  in  any  lim- 
ited or  conventional  sense.  In  ordinary  conver- 
sation the  word  is  generally  applied  to  abilities 
above  the  average,  as,  for  example,  when  a  man 
of  more  than  ordinary  ability  is  spoken  of  as  "  a 
man  of  talent,"  or  "  a  talented  man."  The  word 
ability,  indeed,  is  used  in  the  same  way.  "  A 
man  of  ability,"  "  an  able  man,"  means  a  man 
able  to  do  more  than  most  people  can;  whereas, 
properly  speaking,  and  in  the  sense  of  the  par- 
able, a  man  who  is  able  to  do  anything — to  break 
stones,  to  write  his  name,  to  speak  a  sentence 
of  sense — is  an  able  man.  He  is  not  generally 
so  called,  but  he  really  is  a  talented  man,  for 
God  has  given  him,  as  He  has  given  to  every  one, 
certain  ability,  and  according  to  that  ability  is 
the  talent  for  service  with  which  Christ  entrusts 
him.  At  first  sight  this  phrase  "  according  to 
his  several  ability  "  seems  invidious,  as  if  sug- 
gesting that  Christ  was  a  respecter  of  persons, 
and  dealt  more  liberally  with  the  strong  than 
with  the  weak.  But  the  talents  are  not  merely 
gifts, — they  are  trusts  involving  responsibility; 
and  therefore  it  is  simple  justice  to  graduate 
them  according  to  ability.  As  we  shall  see,  there 
is  no  respect  of  persons  in  appointing  the  awards. 
But  as  respects  the  talents,  involving  as  they 
do  the  burden  of  responsibility,  it  is  very  evi- 
dent that  it  would  be  no  kindness  to  the  man  of 
less  ability  that  he  should  be  made  responsible 
for  more  than  he  can  easily  undertake. 

The  gradations  of  five,  two,  one,  appropriately 
correspond  to  what  we  speak  of  as  superior,  or- 
dinary, and  inferior  ability.  At  this  point  occurs 
the  main  distinction  between  this  parable  and  the 
similar  one  of  the  pounds,  spoken  at  a  different 
time  and  with  a  different  purpose.  Here  the  ser- 
vants all  dififer  at  first,  but  the  faithful  ones  are 
alike  in  the  end,  inasmuch  as  they  have  done 
equally  well  in  proportion  to  their  ability.    There 


788 


THE    GOSPEL   OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


the  servants  are  all  alike  at  the  beginning,  but 
the  faithful  ones  receive  different  awards,  inas- 
much as  they  have  differed  in  the  degree  of  their 
diligence  and  faithfulness.  The  two  together 
bring  out  with  striking  clearness  and  force  the 
great  thought  that  not  success,  but  faithfulness 
is  what  the  Lord  insists  on.  The  weakest  is  at 
no  disadvantage;  he  may  not  only  do  as  well  as 
the  strongest,  but  if  the  measure  of  his  diligence 
and  faithfulness  is  higher,  he  may  even  excel 
him. 

It  is  in  keeping  with  the  diflference  in  the  scope 
of  the  two  parables  that  in  the  one  the  sums 
entrusted  should  be  large  (talents),  in  the  other, 
small  (pounds).  Li  the  parable  which  has  for  its 
main  lesson,  "  Make  the  most  of  the  little  you 
have,"  the  amounts  entrusted  are  small;  while  the 
large  sums  are  fitly  found  in  the  parable  which 
emphasises  what  may  be  called  the  other  side 
of  the  great  lesson,  "  To  whom  much  is  given, 
of  them   much   shall  be   required." 

Confining  our  attention  now  to  the  parable  be- 
fore us,  we  have  first  the  encouraging  side  in 
the  cases  of  two  of  the  servants.  The  number 
is  evidently  chosen  as  the  very  smallest  that 
would  bring  out  the  truth  that  where  abilities 
differ  the  reward  will  be  the  same,  if  only  the 
diligence  and  faithfulness  be  equal.  It  is  quite 
probable,  indeed,  that  the  number  of  servants 
thought  of  was  more  than  three,  perhaps  ten,* 
to  correspond  with  the  number  of  the  virgins, 
and  that  only  as  many  cases  are  taken  as  were 
necessary  to  bring  out  the  truth  to  be  taught. 

These  two  faithful  servants  lost  no  time  in 
setting  to  work.  This  appears  in  the  Revised 
Version,  where  the  word  "  straightway "  is  re- 
stored to  its  right  place,  indicating  that  imme- 
diately on  receiving  the  five  talents  the  servant 
began  diligently  to  use  them  (ver.  i6,  R.  V.). 
The  servant  with  the  two  talents  acted  "  in  like 
manner"  (ver.  17).  The  result  was  that  each 
doubled  his  capital,  and  each  received  the  same 
gracious  welcome  and  high  promotion  when 
their  lord  returned  (vv.  20-23).  They  had  been 
unequally  successful;  but  inasmuch  as  this  was 
not  due  to  any  difference  in  diligence,  but  only 
to  difference  in  ability,  they  were  equal  in  wel- 
come and  reward.  It  is,  however,  worthy  of  re- 
mark that  while  the  language  is  precisely  the 
•same  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other,  it  is  not 
such  as  to  determine  that  their  position  would 
be  precisely  equal  in  the  life  to  come.  There 
will  be  differences  of  ability  and  of  range  of  serv- 
ice there  as  well  as  here.  In  both  cases  the  ver- 
dict on  the  past  was  "  faithful  over  a  few  things," 
though  the  few  things  of  the  one  were  more 
than  double  the  few  things  of  the  other;  and  in 
the  same  way,  thougli  the  promise  for  the  future 
was  for  the  one  as  well  as  for  the  other,  "  I  will 
set  thee  over  many  things,"  it  might  well  be  that 
the  many  things  of  the  future  might  vary  as  the 
few  things  of  the  past  had  done.  But  all  will 
be  alike  satisfied,  a  thought  which  is  beautifully 
put  by  Dante  in  the  third  canto  of  his  "  Para- 
dise," where  the  sainted  Piccarda,  in  answer  to 
the  question  whether  those  who,  like  her,  have 
the  lower  places  have  no  envy  of  those  above 
them,  gives  an  explanation  of  which  this  is  the 
concluding  passage: 

"  So  that  as  we,  from  step  to  step, 
Are  placed  throughout  this  kingdom,  pleases  all, 
Even  as  our  King,  Who  in  us  plants  His  will  ; 

*  In  the  parable  of  the  pounds  the  number  of  servants  is 
ten,  and  there,  too,  only  three  are  selected  as  examples. 


And  in  His  will  is  our  tranquillity  ; 
It  is  the  mighty  ocean,  whither  tends 
Whatever  it  creates  and  nature  makes." 

Whereupon  Dante  himself  says: 

"  Then  saw  I  clearly  how  each  spot  in  heaven 
Is  Paradise,  though  with  like  gracious  dew 
The  supreme  virtue  shower  not  ovc-  all." 

—Canto  III.  82-90  (Carey). 

It  is  not  suggested,  however,  in  the  parable 
that  there  is  not  the  same  gracious  dew  show- 
ering over  all.  "  The  joy  of  the  Lord  "  would 
appear  to  be  the  same  for  all;  but  it  is  signifi- 
cant that  the  leading  thought  of  heavenly  re- 
ward is  not  joy,  but  rather  promotion,  promotion 
in  service,  a  higher  sphere  and  a  wider  range  of 
work,  the  "  few  things  "  which  have  been  our 
glad  service  here  exchanged  for  "  many  things," 
of  which  we  shall  be  masters  there — no  more  fail- 
ures, no  more  bungling,  no  more  mortifications 
as  we  look  back  upon  work  half  done  or  ill  done 
or  much  of  it  undone:  "  I  will  set  thee  over 
many  things  (R.  V.)."  That  is  the  great  re- 
ward; the  other  follows  as  of  course:  "  Enter 
thou  into  the  joy  of  thy  Lord." 

As  in  the  parable  of  the  virgins,  so  here,  the 
force  increases  as  we  pass  from  encouragement 
to  warning.  The  closing  scene  is  solemn  and 
fearful.  That  the  man  with  one  talent  should  be 
selected  as  an  illustration  of  unfaithfulness  is 
very  significant — not  certainly  in  the  way  of  sug- 
gesting that  unfaithfulness  is  more  likely  to  be 
found  among  those  whose  abilities  are  slender 
and  opportunities  small;  but  so  as  to  make  it 
plain  that,  though  all  due  allowance  is  made  for 
this,  it  can  in  no  case  be  accepted  as  an  excuse 
for  want  of  faithfulness.  It  is  just  as  imperative 
on  the  man  with  one  talent,  as  on  him  with  five, 
to  do  what  he  can.  Had  the  illustration  been 
taken  from  one  with  higher  endowments,  it 
might  have  been  thought  that  the  greatness  of 
the  loss  had  something  to  do  with  the  severity 
of  the  sentence;  but,  as  the  parable  is  constructed, 
no  such  thought  is  admissible:  it  is  perfectly 
clear  that  it  is  no  question  of  gain  or  loss,  but 
simply  of  faithfulness  or  unfaithfulness:  "  Hast 
thou  done  what  thou  couldst?" 

The  offence  here  is  not,  as  in  the  first  of  the 
four  pictures  of  judgment,  painted  in  dark  col- 
ours. There  was  no  beating  of  fellow-servants 
or  drinking  with  the  drunken,  no  conduct  like 
that  of  the  unjust  steward  or  the  unmerciful 
creditor  who  took  his  fellow-servant  by  the 
throat — it  was  simple  neglect:  "  I  was  afraid, 
and  went  and  hid  thy  talent  in  the  earth."  The 
servant  had  such  a  modest  estimate  of  his  own 
abilities  that  he  was  even  afraid  he  might  do 
mischief  in  trying  to  use  the  talent  he  had,  so  he 
laid  it  away  and  let  it  alone.  The  excuse  he 
makes  (vv.  24,  25)  is  very  true  to  nature.  It 
is  not  modesty  after  all  that  is  at  the  root  of  the 
idleness  of  those  who  hide  their  talent  in  the 
earth;  it  is  unbelief.  They  do  not  believe  in  God 
as  revealed  in  the  Son  of  His  love;  they  think  of 
Him  as  a  hard  Master;  they  shrink  from  having 
anything  to  do  with  religion,  rather  wonder  at 
those  who  have  the  assurance  to  think  of  their 
serving  God,  or  doing  anything  for  the  advance- 
ment of  His  kingdom.  They  know  not  the  grace 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  therefore  it  is  that 
they  hold  aloof  from  Him,  refusing  to  confess 
Him,  declining  to  employ  m  His  service  the  tal- 
ents entrusted  to  their  care. 

At  this  point  there  is  an   instructive  contrast 


I 


Matthe^^xxiv.,xxv.]       THE    PROPHECY    ON    THE    MOUNT. 


789 


between  the  parable  of  the  virgins  and  the  one 
before  us.  There  the  foolish  virgins  failed  be- 
cause tiiey  took  their  duties  too  easily;  here  the 
servant  fails  because  he  thinks  his  duties  too 
hard.  Rearing  this  in  mind,  we  recognise  the 
appropriateness  of  the  Lord's  answer.  He  might 
have  found  fault  with  his  excuse,  showing  him 
how  easily  he  might  have  known  that  his  ideas 
of  his  Master  were  entirely  wrong,  and  how  if 
he  had  only  addressed  himself  to  the  work  to 
which  he  was  called,  his  difficulties  would  have 
disappeared  and  he  would  have  found  the  service 
easily  within  his  powers;  but  the  Master  waives 
all  this,  accepts  the  hard  verdict  on  Himself,  ad- 
mits the  difficulties  in  the  way,  and  then  points 
out  that  even  at  the  worst,  even  though  he  "  was 
afraid,"  even  though  he  had  not  courage  enough, 
like  the  other  servants,  to  go  straightway  to  the 
work  to  which  he  was  first  called,  he  might  have 
found  some  other  and  less  trying  form  of  serv- 
ice, something  that  would  have  avoided  the  risks 
he  had  not  courage  to  face,  and  yet  at  the  same 
time  have  secured  some  return  for  his  Lord  (vv. 
26,  2']').  The  Master  is  ready  to  make  all  allow- 
ance for  the  weakness  of  His  servants,  so  long  as 
it  does  not  amount  to  absolute  unfaithfulness; 
so  long  as  by  any  stretch  of  charity  it  is  possible 
to  call  the  servant  "  good  and  faithful."  In  this 
case  it  was  not  possible.  Not  faithful,  but  sloth- 
ful, was  the  word;  therefore  good  it  cannot  be, 
but — the  only  other  alternative — wicked:  "  thou 
Wicked  and  slothful  servant." 

Then  follows  doom.  Instead  of  promotion, 
degradation:  "take  the  talent  from  him."  And 
in  this  there  is  no  arbitrary  punishment,  no  pen- 
alty needing  to  be  inflicted — it  comes  as  the  re- 
sult of  a  great  law  of  the  universe,  according 
to  which  unused  powers  fall  into  atrophy,  pa- 
ralysis, and  death;  while  on  the  other  hand,  faith- 
ful and  diligent  use  of  power  enlarges  it  more 
and  more:  "  Take  therefore  the  talent  from 
him,  and  give  it  unto  him  which  hath  ter^  tal- 
ents. For  unto  every  one  that  hath  shall  be 
given,  and  he  shall  have  abundance:  but  from 
him  that  hath  not  shall  be  taken  away  even  that 
which  he  hath."  As  the  necessary  and  natural 
sequel  to  promotion  in  service  was  the  joy 
of  the  Lord,  so  the  natural  and  necessary  sequel 
of  degradation  is  the  "  outer  darkness,''  where 
"  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth." 

4.  The  Final  Separation  (xxv.  31-46). 

As  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  again 
in  the  last  discourse  in  the  Temple,  so  here,  the 
language  rises  into  a  strain  of  great  majesty  and 
sublimity  as  the  prophecy  draws  to  a  close.  No 
one  can  fail  to  recognise  it.  This  vision  of  judg- 
ment is  the  climax  of  the  teaching  of  the  Lord 
Christ.  Alike  for  magnificence  and  for  pathos 
it  is  unsurpassed  in  literature.  There  is  no  de- 
parture from  His  wonted  simplicity  of  style.  As 
little  here  as  everywhere  else  do  we  recognise 
even  a  trace  of  effort  or  of  elaboration;  yet  as 
we  read  there  is  not  a  word  that  could  be 
changed,  not  a  clause  that  could  be  spared,  not 
a  thought  that  could  be  added  with  advantage. 
It  bears  the  mark  of  perfection,  whether  we  look 
at  it  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Speaker's  di- 
vinity or  from  the  point  of  view  of  His  humanity. 
Divine  in  its  sublimity,  it  is  most  human  in  its 
tenderness.  "  Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God." 
Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  man. 

The  grandeur  of  the  passage  is  all  the  more 


impressive  by  contrast  with  what  immediately 
follows:  "And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Jesus  had 
finished  all  these  sayings,  He  said  unto  His  dis- 
ciples, Ye  know  that  after  two  days  is  the  feast 
of  the  passover,  and  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed 
to  be  crucified."  Into  such  an  abyss  was  the 
Son  of  man  looking  when  in  language  so  calm, 
so  confident,  so  majestic,  so  sublime.  He  spoke 
of  sitting  on  the  throne  of  His  glory  as  the  Judge 
of  all  mankind.  Did  ever  man  speak  like  this 
Man? 

It  is  significant  that  even  when  speaking  of 
the  coming  glory  He  still  retains  His  favourite 
designation,  "  the  Son  of  man."  In  this  we  see 
one  of  the  many  minute  coincidences  which  show 
the  inner  harmony  of  the  discourses  recorded  in 
this  Gospel  with  those  of  a  different  style  of 
thought  preserved  by  St.  John;  for  it  is  in  one  of 
these  we  read  that  "  He  [the  Father]  hath  given 
Him  authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  He 
is  the  Son  of  man."  Thus  the  judgment  of  hu- 
manity proceeds  out  of  humanity  itself,  and  con- 
stitutes as  it  were  the  final  offering  up  of  man 
to  God.  This  on  the  God-ward  side;  and,  on  the 
other  side,  there  is  for  those  who  stand  before 
the  Judge,  the  certainty  that  as  Son  of  man  He 
knows  by  experience  all  the  weaknesses  of  those 
He  judges  and  the  force  of  the  temptations  by 
which  they  have  been  beset. 

Nothing  could  be  more  impressive  than  the 
picture  set  before  us  of  the  throne  of  glory,  on 
which  is  seated  the  Son  of  man  with  all  the 
angels  around  Him  and  all  nations  gathered  be- 
fore Him.  It  is  undoubtedly  the  great  assize, 
the  general  judgment  of  mankind.  No  partial 
judgment  can  it  be,  nothing  less  than  the  great 
event  referred  to  in  that  passage  already  quoted 
from  St.  John's  Gospel,  where  after  speaking  of 
judgment  being  committed  to  the  Son  of  Man, 
it  is  added:  "  Marvel  not  at  this:  for  the  hour 
Cometh,  in  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall 
hear  His  voice,  and  shall  come  forth:  they  that 
have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life; 
and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrec- 
tion of  damnation."  This  view  of  the  passage  is 
supported  not  only  by  the  universality  implied 
throughout  and  expressed  in  the  term  "  all  the 
nations  "  ;  *  but  by  every  reference  to  the  same 
subject  throughout  this  Gospel,  notably  the  par- 
ables of  the  Tares  and  the  Net  (see  Matt.  xiii. 
.39-43.  47-50),  the  general  declaration  at  Caesarea 
Philippi,  "  The  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the 
glory  of  His  Father,  with  His  angels;  and  then 
shall  He  reward  every  man  according  to  his 
works  "  (Matt.  xvi.  27);  and  especially  the  earlier 
reference  to  the  same  event  in  this  discourse,  in 
that  portion  of  it  whic'h  we  have  spoken  oT  as 
the  prophecy  proper,  where  the  mourning  of 
all  the  tribes  of  earth,  and  the  gathering  to- 
gether of  the  elect  from  the  one  end  of  heaven 
to  the  other,  are  connected  with  one  another 
and  witih  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  (Matt, 
xxiv.  30,  31). 

It  seems  quite  certain,  then,  that  whatever  sub- 
sequent unfoldings  there  rnay  be  in  the  later 
books  of  the  New  Testament  as  to  the  order 
in  which  judgment  shall  proceed,  there  is  no  in- 
tention here  of  anticipating  them.  It  is  true  that 
the  preceding  parables  have. each  given  a  partial 

♦  It  is  not  forgotten  that  the  word  translated  "  nations  " 
is  coTOmonly  applied  to  the  Gentiles  as  distinguished 
from  the  Jews  ;  but  clearly  there  is  no  such  litnitation 
here.  No  commentator,  at  least  of  any  note,  suggests 
that  the  Jews  as  a  nation  are  not  among  the  nations  gatb> 
ered  around  the  throne. 


790 


"THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


view  of  the  judgment, — the  first  as  affecting  those 
in  office  in  the  Church,  the  second  and  third  as 
applied  to  the  members  of  the  Church;  but  just 
as  those  specially  contemplated  in  the  first  par- 
able are  included  in  the  wider  scope  of  the  sec- 
ond and  third,  so  these  contemplated  in  the  sec- 
ond and  third  are  included  in  the  universal  scope 
of  the  great  judgment  scene  with  which  the 
whole  discourse  is  fitly  and  grandly  concluded. 

In  this  great  picture  of  the  final  judgment  the 
prominent  thought  is  separation:  "  He  shall  sep- 
arate them  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  di- 
videth  his  sheep  from  the  goats:  and  He  shall 
set  the  sheep  on  His  right  hand,  but  the  goats 
on  the  left."  How  easily  and  with  what  unerr- 
ing certainty  the  separation  is  made — as  easily 
and  as  surely  as  the  shepherd  divideth  the  sheep 
from  the  goats!  Nothing  eludes  the  glance  of 
that  all-searching  Eye.  No  need  of  pleading  or 
counter-pleading,  of  prosecutor  or  prisoner's 
counsel,  no  hope  from  legal  quibble  or  insuffi- 
cient proof.  All,  all  is  "  naked  and  opened  unto 
the  eyes  of  Him  with  Whom  we  have  to  do." 
He  sees  all  at  a  glance;  and  as  He  sees.  He  di- 
vides by  a  single  dividing  line.  There  is  no 
middle  position:  each  one  is  either  on  the  right 
or  on  the  left. 

The  dividing  line  is  one  entirely  new.  All  na- 
tions are  there;  but  not  as  nations  are  they  di- 
vided now.  This  is  strikingly  suggested  in  the 
original  by  the  change  from  the  neuter  (nations, 
iOvi))  to  the  masculine  (them,  avroiis),  indicat- 
ing as  by  a  sudden  flash  of  unexpected  light 
that  not  as  nations,  but  as  individuals,  must  all 
be  judged.  The  line  is  one  which  crosses  all 
other  lines  that  have  divided  men  from  one  an- 
other, so  that  of  all  ranks  and  conditions  of  men 
there  will  be  some  on  the  right  and  some  on 
the  left.  Even  the  family  line  will  be  crossed, 
so  that  husband  and  wife,  parents  and  children, 
brothers  and  sisters,  may  be  found  on  opposite 
sides  of  it.  What,  then,  is  this  new  and  final 
line  of  separation?  The  sentence  of  the  King 
will  mark  it  out  for  us. 

It  is  the  first  and  only  time  that  Jesus  calls 
Himself  the  King.  He  has  displayed  His  roy- 
alty in  His  acts;  He  has  suggested  it  in  His  dis- 
courses and  His  parables;  He  has  claimed  it  by 
the  manner  of  His  entry  into  His  capital  and 
His  Temple;  He  will  afterwards  assent  when  Pi- 
late shall  ask  Him  the  plain  question;  but  this  is 
the  only  place  where  He  uses  the  title  in  speaking 
of  Himself.  How  significant  and  impressive  is 
this!  It  is  as  if  He  would  once  for  all  before 
He  suffered  disclose  the  fulness  of  His  majesty. 
His  royalty,  indeed,  was  suggested  at  the  very 
beginning  by  the  reference  to  the  throne  of  His 
glory;  but  inasmuch  as  judgment  was  the  work 
which  lay  immediately  before  Him,  He  still 
spoke  of  Himself  as  the  Son  of  man;  but  now 
that  the  separation  is  made,  now  that  the  books 
have  been  opened  and  closed,  He  rises  above  the 
Judge  and  styles  Himself  the  King. 

We  must  think  of  Him  now  as  all  radiant  with 
His  royal  glory — that  visage  which  was  "  so 
marred  more  than  any  man  "  now  shining  with 
•celestial  light — that  Form  which  was  distorted 
"  more  than  the  sons  of  men,"  now  seen  to  be 
the  very  "form  of  God,"  "the  chiefest  among 
ten  thousand  "  of  the  highest  angels  round 
Him,  "  altogether  lovely,"  the  personal  embodi- 
ment of  that  glorious  kingdom  He  has  been  pre- 
paring through  all  the  centuries  from  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world — disclosed  at  last  as  the  an- 


swer to  every  longing  soul,  the  satisfaction  of 
every  pure  desire, — the  King. 

All  this  we  must  realise  before  we  can  imag- 
ine the  awful  gulf  which  lies  between  these  simple 
words,  "  Depart "  and  "  Come."  That  sweet 
word  "  Come  " — how  He  has  repeated  and  re- 
peated it  through  all  these  ages,  in  every  pos- 
sible way,  with  endless  variations!  Spoken  so 
tenderly  with  His  own  human  lips,  it  has  been 
taken  up  and  given  forth  by  those  whom  He  has 
sent  in  His  name:  the  Spirit  has  said  "Come"; 
the  Bride  has  said  "  Come "  ;  the  hearers 
have  said  "  Come  "  ;  whosoever  would,  has 
been  invited  to  come.  The  music  of  the 
word  has  never  died  away.  But  now  its 
course  is  nearly  run.  Once  more  it  will  ring 
out;  but  with'  a  difference.  No  longer  now  to 
all.  The  line  of  separation  has  been  drawn,  and 
across  "  the  great  gulf  fixed  "  the  old  sweet  word 
of  grace  can  reach  no  longer.  It  is  to  those  on 
the  right,  and  these  alone,  that  now  the  King 
says  "  Come."  To  those  on  the  left  there  re- 
mains the  word,  a  stranger  to  His  lips  before, 
the  awful  word,   "  Depart  from  Me." 

In  the  contrast  between  these  two  words,  there 
already  is  involved  all  that  follows:  all  the  joy 
of  the  welcome — "  Come,  ye  blessed  of  My 
Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world  "  ;  all  the  hor- 
ror of  the  doom — "  Depart  from  Me,  ye  cursed, 
into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and 
his  angels." 

Still  the  great  question  remains  unanswered, 
What  is  the  dividing  line?  Inasmuch  as  this  be- 
longs to  the  hidden  man  of  the  heart,  to  the  se- 
crecy of  consciousness  and  conscience,  the  only 
way  i'.i  which  it  could  be  made  to  appear  in  a 
picture  parable  of  judgment  such  as  this,  is  by 
the  introduction  of  such  a  conversation  as  that 
which  follows  the  sentence  in  each  case.  The 
general  distinction  between  the  two  classes  had 
beer^  suggested  by  the  simile  of  the  sheep  and 
the  goats — the  one  white,  the  other  black,  the 
one  obedient,  the  other  unruly;  but  it  is  made 
much  more  definite  by  this  dramatic  conversa- 
tion. We  call  it  dramatic,  because  we  regard  it 
as  extreme  bondage  to  the  letter  to  suppose  this 
to  be  a  prediction  of  the  words  that  will  actually 
be  used,  and  therefore  look  upon  it  simply  as 
intended  to  represent,  as  nothing  else  could,  the 
new  light  which  both  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked  will  then  see  suddenly  flashed  upon  their 
life  on  earth,  a  light  so  full  and  clear  and  self- 
interpreting  that  there  cannot  but  be  unques- 
tioning acquiescence  in  the  justice  of  the  final 
award. 

There  are  those  who,  looking  at  this  con- 
versation in  the  most  superficial  way,  find  in  it 
the  doctrine  of  salvation  by  works,  and  imagine 
that  they  are  warranted  on  the  strength  of  this 
passage  to  set  aside  all  that  is  written  in  other 
parts  of  Scripture  as  to  the  necessity  of  change 
of  heart,  to  dismiss  from  their  minds  all  con- 
cern about  creed  or  worship,  about  doctrine  or 
sacraments  or  church  membership.  Be  kind  to 
the  poor — that  will  do  instead  of  everything  else. 

In  answer  to  such  a  perversion  of  our  Lord's 
language  it  should  surely  be  enough  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  fact  that  all  is  made  to  turn  upon 
the  treatment  of  Christ  by  the  one  class  and  by 
the  other.  Kindness  to  the  poor  comes  in,  not 
as  in  itself  the  ground  of  the  division,  but  as 
furnishing  the  evidence  or  manifestation  of  that 
devotion   to    God   as   revealed   in    Christ,    which 


Matthewxxvi.i-xxvii.  56.]     THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    DAY. 


791 


forms  the  real  ground  of  acceptance,  and  the 
want  of  which  is  the  sole  ground  of  condemna- 
tion. True  it  is  that  Christ  identifies  Himself 
with  His  people,  and  accepts  the  kindness  done 
to  the  poorest  of  them  as  done  to  Himself;  but 
there  is  obviously  implied,  what  is  elsewhere  in 
a  similar  connection  clearly  expressed,  that  the 
kindness  must  be  done  "  in  the  name  of  a  dis- 
ciple." In  other  words,  love  to  Christ  must  be 
the  motive  of  the  deed  of  charity,  else  it  is  worth- 
less as  a  test  of  true  discipleship.  The  more 
carefully  the  w'hole  passage  is  read,  the  more 
manifest  will  it  be  that  the  great  question  which 
determines  the  separation  is  this:  "  How  have 
you  treated  Christ?*"  It  is  only  to  bring  out 
more  clearly  the  real  answer  to  this  question 
that  the  other  is  added:  How  have  you  treated 
Christ's  poor?  For  according  to  each  man's 
treatment  of  these  will  have  been  his  treatment 
of  Christ  Himself.  It  is  the  same  principle  ap- 
plied to  the  unseen  Christ  as  the  apostle  applies 
to  the  invisible  God:  "  He  that  loveth  not  his 
brother  whom  he  hath  seen,  how  can  he  love 
God  Whom  he  hath  not  seen?" 

While  there  is  no  encouragement  here  for 
those  who  hope  to  make  up  for  the  rejection  of 
Christ  by  deeds  of  kindness  to  poor  people,  there 
is  abundant  room  left  for  the  acceptance  at  the 
last  of  those  who  had  no  means  of  knowing 
Christ,  but  who  showed  by  their  treatment  of 
their  fellow-men  in  distress  that  the  spirit  of 
Christ  was  in  them.  To  such  the  King  will  be 
no  stranger  when  they  shall  see  Him  on  the 
throne;  nor  will  they  be  strangers  to  Him.  He 
will  recognise  them  as  His  own;  and  they  will 
recognise  Him  as  the  very  King  of  Love  for 
Whom  their  souls  were  longing,  but  Who  not 
till  now  has  been  revealed  to  their  delighted 
gaze.  To  all  such  will  the  gracious  words  be 
spoken  "  Come,  ye  blessed  of  My  Father  "  ;  but 
they  too,  as  well  as  all  the  rest,  will  be  received 
not  on  the  ground  of  works  as  distinguished 
from  faith,  but  on  the  ground  of  a  real  though 
implicit  faith  which  worked  by  love  and  which 
was  only  waiting  for  the  revelation  of  their  King 
and  Lord  to  make  it  explicit,  to  bring  it  out  to 
light. 

Philanthropy  can  never  take  the  place  of  faith; 
and  yet  no  words  ever  spoken  or  written  on 
this  earth  have  done  so  much  for  philanthropy 
as  these.  It  were  vain  to  attempt,  in  so  brief  a 
sketch,  to  bring  out  even  in  the  way  of  sug- 
gestion the  mingled  majesty  and  pathos  of  the 
words  of  the  King  to  the  righteous,  culminating 
in  that  great  utterance  which  touches  the  very 
deepest  springs  of  feeling  and  thrills  every  fibre 
of  the  pure  and  loving  heart:  "  Inasmuch  as  ye 
have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these  My 
brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  Me."  Besides 
the  pathos  of  the  words,  what  depth  of  sugges- 
tion is  there  in  the  thought,  as  shedding  light 
upon  His  claim  to  be  the  Son  of  man!  As  Son 
of  God  He  is  the  King,  seated  on  the  throne 
of  His  glory;  as  Son  of  man  He  is  identified  with 
a.l  His  brethren,  even  with  the  least  of  them, 
and  with  each  one  of  them  all  over  all  the 
world  and  through  all  the  ages:  "  Inasmuch  as 
ye  have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these 
My  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  Me."  How 
the  divinity  shines,  how  the  humanity  thrills, 
through  these  great  words  of  the  King! 

The  scroll  of  this  grand  prophecy  is  finished 
\\  ith  the  awful  words:  "  These  shall  go  away  into 
e'.ernal     punishment;     but     the     righteous     into 


eternal  life "  (R.  V.).  Eternal  punishment, 
eternal  life — such  are  the  issues  which  hang  upon 
the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  to  judgment; 
such  are  the  issues  which  hang  upon  the  treat- 
ment of  the  Son  of  man  in  these  years  of  our 
mortal  life  that  are  passing  over  us  now.  There 
are  those  who  flatter  themselves  with  the  idea 
that,  because  the  question  has  been  raised  by 
honest  and  candid  interpreters  of  Scripture 
whether  absolute  endlessness  is  necessarily  in- 
volved in  the  word  eternal,  therefore  these  words 
of  doom  are  shorn  of  much  of  their  terror;  but 
surely  this  is  a  pitiful  delusion.  There  is  no 
possible  way  of  reducing  the  force  of  the  word 
"  eternal  "  which  will  bring  the  awfulness  of  the 
doom  within  the  bounds  of  any  finite  imagina- 
tion; and  whatever  may  be  said  as  to  what  the 
word  necessarily  implies,  whatever  vague  sur- 
mise there  may  be  that  absolute  endlessness  is 
not  in  it,  this  much  is  perfectly  certain:  that 
there  is  not  the  slightest  suggestion  of  hope  in 
the  words;  no  straining  of  the  eyes  can  discern 
even  the  straitest  gate  out  of  that  eternal  punish- 
ment into  eternal  life.  Between  the  one  and  the 
other  there  is  "  a  great  gulf  fixed."  It  is  the 
final  judgment;  it  is  the  final  separation;  and 
scarcely  with  more  distinctness  could  the  awful 
letters  have  been  traced,  "  Leave  every  hope 
behind,  all  ye  who  enter  here."  "  These  shall 
go  away  into  eternal  punishment;  'but  the  right- 
eous " — none  but  the  righteous — "  into  eternal 
life." 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE  GREAT  ATONEMENT  DAY. 

Matthew  xxvi.  i-xxvii.  56. 

We  enter  now  on  the  story  of  the  last  day 
of  the  mortal  life  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour.  We 
have  already  noticed  the  large  proportionate 
space  given  to  the  Passion  Week;  but  still  more 
remarkable  is  the  concentration  of  interest  on 
the  Passion  Day.  The  record  of  that  single  day 
is  very  nearly  one-ninth  of  the  whole  book;  and 
a  similar  proportion  is  observed  by  all  the  four 
Evangelists.  This  proportion  of  space  is  very 
striking  even  when  we  bear  in  mind  that,  prop- 
erly speaking,  the  Gospels  are  not  the  record  of 
thirty-three  or  thirty-four  years,  but  only  of  three 
or  four.  Of  the  story  of  the  years  of  the  public 
ministry  one-seventh  part  is  given  to  the  last 
day;  and  this,  too,  without  the  introduction  of 
any  lengthened  discourse.  If  the  discourse  in 
the  upper  room  and  the  intercessory  prayer  as 
recorded  by  St.  John  were  added,  it  would  be, 
not  one-seventh,  but  almost  one-fourth  of  the 
whole.  Truly  this  must  be  the  Day  of  days! 
Unspeakably  sacred  and  precious  as  is  the  entire 
life  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  sacred  above  all 
and  precious  above  all  is  His  death  of  shame 
and  agony.  The  same  pre-eminence  was  evi- 
dently given  to  the  dying  of  the  Lord  Jesus  in 
the  special  revelation  granted  to  St.  Paul,  as  is 
evident  from  the  fact  that,  in  setting  forth  the 
gospel  he  had  been  commissioned  to  preach,  he 
spoke  of  it  as  the  gospel  of  "  Jesus  Christ  and 
Him  crucified,"  and  put  in  the  foreground,  not 
the  incarnate  life,  great  as  he  recognised  it  to 
be  (i  Tim.  iii.  16),  but  the  atonmg  death  of 
Christ:  "  I  delivered  unto  you  iirst  of  all  that 
which  I  also  received,  how  that  Christ  died  for. 


792 


tHE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures."  Here, 
then,  we  have  the  very  gospel  of  the  grace  of 
God.  Here  we  enter  the  inner  shrine  of  the 
Word,  the  Holy  of  Holies  of  the  new  covenant. 
Let  us  draw  near  with  holy  reverence  and  deep 
humility,  yet  with  the  eye  of  faith  directed  ever 
upwards  in  reliance  on  the  grace  of  Him  Who 
searcheth  all  things,  even  the  deep  things  of 
God,  and  Whose  work  and  joy  it  is  to  take  of  the 
things  of  Christ,  even  those  that  are  among  the 
deepest  things  of  God,  and  show  them  unto  us, 

"  After  Two  Days  "  (xxvi.  1-19). 

This  passage  does  not  strictly  belong  to  the 
history  of  the  one  great  day,  but  it  is  the  ap- 
proach to  it.  It  opens  with  the  solemn  an- 
nouncement "  After  two  days  is  the  feast  of  the 
Passover,  and  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  to  be 
crucified";  and  without  any  record  of  the 
Saviour's  doings  in  the  interval,*  it  closes  with 
the  preparation  for  the  keeping  of  the  feast  with 
His  disciples,  the  directions  for  which  are  in- 
troduced by  the  pathetic  words,  "  My  time  is  at 
hand." 

The  incident  at  Bethany  (vv.  6-13)  seems  to  be 
introduced  here  in  connection  with  the  develop- 
ment of  treason  in  the  soul  of  Judas.  This  con- 
nection would  not  be  so  apparent  were  it  not  for 
the  information  given  in  St.  John's  account  of 
the  feast,  that  it  was  Judas  especially  who  ob- 
jected to  what  he  called  "  this  waste "  of  the 
ointment,  and  that  the  reason  why  he  was  dis- 
pleased at  it  was  because  "  he  had  the  bag,  and 
bare  what  was  put  therein."  With  this  in  mind 
we  can  see  how  natural  it  was  that,  having  had 
no  occasion  before  to  tell  the  story  of  the  feast 
at  Bethany,  the  Evangelist  should  be  disposed 
to  tell  it  now,  as  connected  in  his  mind  with 
the  traitor's  selling  of  his  Lord  for  thirty  pieces 
of  silver. 

The  two  days  of  interval  would  extend  from 
the  evening  following  the  abandonment  of  the 
Temple  to  the  evening  of  the  Passover  feast.  It 
is  important  always,  and  especially  in  studying 
the  days  of  the  Passion  week,  to  bear  in  mind 
that,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  reckon- 
ing, each  new  day  began,  not  with  the  morning 
as  with  us,  but  with  the  evening.  In  this  they 
followed  a  very  ancient  precedent:  "The  even- 
ing and  the  morning  were  the  first  day."  The 
two  days,  then,  would  be  from  Tuesday  evening 
till  Thursday  evening;  so  that  with  Thursday 
evening  began  the  last  day  of  our  Lord's  Pas- 
sion. There  is  no  record  at  all  of  how  He 
spent  the  Wednesday;  in  all  probability  it  was 
in  seclusion  at  Bethany.  Nor  have  we  any  ac- 
count of  the  doings  of  the  Thursday  save  the 
directions  given  to  prepare  the  Passover,  the 
keeping  of  which  was  to  be  the  first  act  of  the 
last  day. 

We  may  think  of  these  two  days,  then,  as  days 
of  rest  for  our  Lord,  of  holy  calm  and  quietude 
— a  sacred  lull  before  the  awful  storm.  What 
were  His  thoughts?  what  His  feelings?  What 
passages  of  Scripture  were  His  solace?  Would 
not  the  ninety-fourth  psalm  be  one  of  them? 
If  so,  how  fondly  would  He  dwell  upon  that 
sentence  of  it,  "  In  the  multitude  of  my  thoughts 
within  me  Thy  comforts  delight  my  soul."  If 
we  only  had  a  record  of  His  prayers,  how  rich 
*  The  feast  in  Bethany  did  not  take  place  during  this 
interval,  but  some  days  before  (see  Jonn  xii.  i) ;  in  all 
probability  the  very  day  before  Christ's  entry  into  Jeru- 
salem. 


it  would  be!  If  we  had  the  spiritual  history  of 
these  two  days  it  would  no  doubt  be  full  of 
pleading  as  rich  and  precious  as  the  prayer  of 
intercession  His  disciple  heard  and  one  of  them 
recorded  for  our  sakes,  and  of  yearning  as  tender 
and  touching  as  His  wail  over  Jerusalem.  But 
the  Spirit,  Who  takes  of  the  things  of  Christ 
and  shows  them  unto  us,  does  not  invade  the 
privacy  of  the  Saviour's  hours  of  retirement.  No 
diary  is  published;  and  beyond  doubt  it  is  better 
so.  It  may  be  that  in  the  lives  of  the  saints 
there  has  been  too  much  of  this — not  too  much 
of  spiritual  communing,  but  too  much  unveil- 
ing of  it.  It  may  be  that  there  is  a  danger  of  "  : 
leading  us  to  seek  after  such  "  exercises "  as 
an  end  in  themselves,  instead  of  as  mere  means  to 
the  end  of  holy  and  unselfish  living.  What  the 
world  should  see  is  the  life  that  is  the  outcome 
of  those  secret  communings  with  God — it  should 
see  the  life  which  was  with  the  Father  manifested 
in  glowing  word  and  self-forgetting  deed.  Why 
have  we  no  need  to  see  into  that  holy,  loving 
heart  during  these  two  sacred  days  in  Bethany? 
Because  it  is  sufficiently  revealed  in  the  story  of 
the  day  that  followed  it.  Ah!  the  words,  the 
deeds  of  that  day — what  revealings  of  heart,  what 
manifestations  of  the  life  within  are  there! 

The  very  silence  of  these  two  days  is  strik- 
ingly suggestive  of  repose.  We  are  presently 
to  hear  of  the  awful  agony  in  the  Garden;  but 
from  the  very  way  in  which  we  shall  hear  of  it 
we  shall  be  strengthened  in  the  impression,  which 
no  doubt  is  the  true  one,  that  the  two  days  of 
interval  were  not  days  of  agony,  but  days  of 
soul  rest;  and  in  this  we  recognise  a  striking 
contrast  to  the  restlessness  of  those  who  spent 
the  time  in  plotting  His  destruction.  Contrast, 
for  example,  the  calm  of  our  Lord's  announce- 
ment in  the  second  verse,  with  the  uneasy  plot- 
ting in  the  palace  of  the  high  priest.  Without 
agitation  He  faces  the  horror  of  great  darkness 
before  Him;  without  flinching  He  anticipates  the 
very  darkest  of  it  all:  "  betrayed  " — "  crucified  "; 
without  a  tremor  on  His  lips  He  even  specifies 
the  time:  "after  two  days."  Now  look  at  that 
company  in  the  palace  of  the  high  priest,  as 
with  dark  brows  and  troubled  looks  they  con- 
sult how  they  may  take  Jesus  by  subtlety.  Ob- 
serve how  in  fear  they  put  it  ofif, — as  not  safe 
yet,  not  for  nine  days  at  least,  till  the  crowds 
at  the  feast,  so  many  of  whom  had  so  recently 
been  shouting  "  Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David!  " 
shall  have  gone  home.  "  Not  for  nine  days," 
so  they  resolve.  "  After  two  days,"  so  He  has 
said. 

"  Oh,  but  the  counsel  of  the  Lord 
Doth  stand,  for  ever  sure." 

Christ  knew  far  more  about  it  than  if  there  had 
been  a  spy  in  the  palace  of  the  high  priest,  re- 
porting to  Him.  He  was  in  communication  with 
One  Who  doeth  according  to  His  will  in  the 
armies  of  heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants  of 
the  earth.  Caiaphas  and  his  fellow-conspirators 
may  plot  what  they  please,  it  shall  be  done  ac- 
cording to  the  counsel  of  the  Lord;  it  shall  be 
so  done  that  an  apostle  shall  be  able  afterwards 
with  confidence  to  say:  "  Him,  being  delivered  by 
the  determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God, 
ye  have  taken." 

The  means  by  which  their  counsels  were  over- 
ruled was  the  treason  of  Judas,  into  whose  dark 
heart  the  Bethany  incident  will  afford  us  a 
glimpse.      Its   interest  turns   upon   the   different 


Matthewxxvi.  i-xxvii.  56]    THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    DAY. 


793 


values  attached  to  a  deed  of  love,  by  Judas  on 
the  one  hand,  and  by  Jesus  on  the  other. 

To  Judas  it  meant  waste.  And  such  a  waste! 
— three  hundred  pence  thrown  away  on  the  fool- 
ish luxury  of  a  moment!  "  This  ointment  might 
have  been  sold  for  much,  and  given  to  the  poor." 
Be  it  remembered  that  there  was  a  good  deal  to 
be  said  for  this  argument.  It  is  very  easy  for 
us,  who  have  the  limelight  of  our  Lord's  words 
on  the  whole  scene,  to  see  how  paltry  the  ob- 
jection was;  but  even  yet,  with  this  story  now 
published,  as  our  Lord  said  it  would  be,  all 
over  Christendom,  how  many  arguments  are 
heard  of  the  very  same  description!  It  is  not 
so  much  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  objection  of 
Judah  found  a  good  deal  of  favour  with  some 
of  the  disciples.  They  could  not  see  the  black- 
ness of  the  heart  out  of  which  the  suggestion 
came,  nor  could  they  see  the  beauty  of  the  love 
which  shed  from  Mary's  heart  a  perfume  far 
more  precious  than  the  odour  of  the  ointment. 
Probably  even  Mary  was  startled;  and,  if  her 
Lord  had  not  at  once  taken  her  part,  might  not 
have  had  a  word  to  say  for  herself. 

"  But  Jesus,  perceiving  it,  said  unto  them, 
Why  trouble  ye  the  woman?  for  she  hath 
wrought  a  good  work  on  Me."  He  understood 
her — understood  her  perfectly,  read  at  once  the 
whole  secret  of  her  loving  heart,  explained  her 
conduct  better  even  than  she  understood  it  her- 
self, as  we  shall  presently  see.  He  deals  very 
tenderly  with  the  disciples;  for  He  understood 
them  too,  saw  at  once  that  there  was  no  treason 
in  their  hearts,  that  though  they  took  up  the 
suggestion  of  the  traitor  it  was  in  no  sympathy 
with  his  spirit,  but  simply  because  of  their  want 
of  insight  and  appreciation.  He,  however,  does 
rebuke  them — gently;  and  then  He  quietly  opens 
their  eyes  to  the  surpassing  beauty  of  the  deed 
they  had  ventured  to  condemn.  "  She  hath 
wrought  a  good  work  upon  Me."  The  word 
translated  "  good "  has  prominent  in  it  the 
thought  of  beauty.  And  since  our  Lord  has  set 
that  deed  of  Mary  in  its  true  light,  there  is  no 
one  with  any  sense  of  beauty  who  fails  to  see 
how  beautiful  it  is.  The  very  impulsiveness  of 
the  act,  the  absence  of  all  calculation,  the  sim- 
plicity and  naturalness  of  it,  the  womanliness  of 
it — all  these  add  to  its  beauty  as  an  outburst  of 
love.  We  can  well  imagine  that  these  words  of 
Jesus  may  have  furnished  much  of  the  inspiration 
which  thrilled  the  soul  of  the  apostle  as  he  wrote 
to  the  Corinthians  his  noble  eulogy  of  love. 
Certainly  its  pricelessness  could  not  have  been 
more  notably  or  memorably  taught.  Three 
hundred  pence  to  be  weighed  against  a  true 
woman's  love!  "  If  a  man  would  give  all  the 
substance  of  his  house  for  love,  it  would  utterly 
be  contemned." 

We  are  led  into  still  more  sacred  ground  as 
we  observe  how  highly  the  Saviour  values  Mary's 
aflfection  for  Himself.  "  She  hath  wrought  a 
good  work  upon  Me " — "  Me  ye  have  not  al- 
ways " — "  she  did  it  for  My  burial."  Who  can 
reach  the  pathos  of  these  sacred  words?  There 
is  no  doubt  that  amid  the  hate  by  which  Jesus 
was  surrounded,  with  His  knowledge  of  the 
treason  in  the  dark  soul  of  Judas,  and  His  keen 
sense  of  the  want  of  sympathy  on  the  part  of 
the  other  disciplejS,  His  human  heart  was  yearn- 
ing for  love,  for  sympathetic  love.  Oh.  how  He 
loved!  and  how  that  love  of  His  was  going  out 
to  all  around  Him  throughout  the  Passion  week 
— without  return!     Wt   may   well   believe,   then, 


that  this  outburst  of  love  from  the  heart  of 
Mary  must  have  greatly  cheered  Him. 

"  She  hath  wrought  a  good  work  upon  Me." 
With  the  ointment  on  His  head,  there  had  come 
a  far  sweeter  balm  to  His  wounded  heart;  for 
He  saw  that  she  was  not  wanting  in  sympathy 
— that  she  had  some  idea,  however  vague  it  might 
be,  of  the  pathos  of  the  time.  She  felt,  if  she 
did  not  quite  see,  the  shadow  of  the  grave.  And 
this  presentiment  (shall  we  call  it?)  not  as  the 
result  of  any  special  thought  about  it,  but  in 
some  dim  way,  had  prompted  her  to  choose  this 
touching  manner  of  showing  her  love:  "  In  that 
she  hath  poured  this  ointment  on  My  body,  she 
did  it  for  My  burial."  Verily,  a  true  human 
heart  beats  here,  welcoming,  oh!  so  gladly,  this 
woman's  loving  sympathy. 

But  the  Divine  Spirit  is  here  too,  looking  far 
beyond  the  needs  of  the  moment  or  the  burdens 
of  the  day.  No  orfe  could  more  tenderly  con- 
sider the  poor;  nothing  was  nearer  to  His  heart 
than  their  necessities, — witness  that  wonderful 
parable  of  judgment  with  which  He  finished  His 
public  ministry;  but  He  knew  well  that  in  that 
personal  devotion  which  was  shown  in  Mary's 
loving  act  was  to  be  found  the  mainspring  of 
all  benevolence,  and  not  only  so  but  of  all  that 
was  good  and  gracious;  therefore  to  discourage 
such  personal  aflfection  would  be  to  seal  up  the 
fount  of  generosity  and  goodness;  and  accord- 
ingly He  not  only  commends  it,  but  he  lifts  it 
up  to  its  proper  dignity,  He  gives  it  com- 
mendation beyond  all  other  words  of  praise 
He  ever  spoke;  looking  away  down  the  ages, 
and  out  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  recog- 
nising that  this  love  to  Himself,  this  per- 
sonal devotion  to  a  dying  Saviour,  was  to  be 
the  very  central  force  of  the  gospel,  and  thus 
the  hope  of  the  world,  He  adds  these  memorable 
words:  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Wheresoever 
this  gospel  shall  be  preached  in  the  whole  world, 
there  shall  also  this,  that  this  woman  hath  done, 
be  told  for  a  memorial  of  her." 

From  "  this  that  this  woman  hath  done  "  the 
record  passes  at  once  to  that  which  was  done 
by  the  man  who  had  dared  to  find  fault  with  it. 
It  also  is  told  wherever  the  gospel  is  preached 
as  a  memorial  of  him.  Behold,  then,  the  two 
memorials  side  by  side.  Has  not  the  Evangelist 
shown  himself  the  true  historian  in  bringing 
them  together?  The  contrast  intensifies  the 
light  that  shines  from  the  love  of  Mary,  and 
deepens  the  darkness  of  the  traitor's  sin.  Be- 
sides, the  story  of  the  three  hundred  pence  is  a 
most  fitting  prelude  to  that  of  the  thirty  pieces 
of  silver.  At  the  same  time,  by  suggesting  the 
steps  which  led  down  to  such  an  abyss  of 
iniquity,  it  saves  us  from  the  error  of  supposing 
that  the  sin  of  Judas  was  so  peculiar  that  no  one 
now  need  be  afraid  of  falling  into  it;  for  we 
are  reminded  in  this  way  that  it  was  at  bottom 
the  very  sin  which  is  the  commonest  of  all,  the 
very  sin  into  which  Christians  of  the  present  day 
are  in  greatest  danger  of  falling. 

What  was  it  that  made  so  great  a  gulf  between 
Judas  and  all  the  rest?  Not  natural  depravity; 
in  this  respect  they  were  no  doubt  much  alike. 
When  the  Twelve  were  chosen  there  was  in  all 
probability  as  good  material,  so  to  speak,  in  the 
man  of  Kerioth  as  in  any  of  the  men  of  Galilee. 
What,  then,  made  the  difference?  Simply  this, 
that  his  heart  was  never  truly  given  to  his  Lord. 
He   tried   throughout  to   serve   God   and   mam- 


70  <- 


-THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


mon;  and  if  he  had  been  able  to  combine  the 
two  services,  if  there  had  been  any  fair  prospect 
of  these  thrones  on  which  the  Twelve  were  to 
sit,  and  the  honours  and  emoluments  of  the 
kingdom  with  which  his  fancy  had  been  dazzled, 
treason  would  never  have  entered  his  mind;  but 
when  not  a  throne  but  a  cross  began  to  loom 
before  him,  he  found,  as  every  one  finds  some 
time,  that  he  must  make  his  choice,  and  that 
choice  was  what  it  invariably  is  with  those  who 
try  to  serve  the  two  masters.  The  god  of  this 
world  had  blinded  him.  He  not  only  failed  to 
see  the  beauty  of  Mary's  loving  deed,  as  some  of 
the  other  disciples  did  just  at  the  first,  but  he 
had  become  quite  incapable  of  any  spiritual  in- 
sight, quite  incapable  of  seeing  his  Master's 
glory,  or  recognising  His  claims.  In  a  certain 
sense,  then,  even  Judas  himself  was  like  the 
other  murderers  of  Christ  in  not  knowing  what 
he  did.  Only  he  might  have'  known,  would  have 
known,  had  not  that  accursed  lust  of  gold  been 
always  in  the  way.  And  we  may  say  of  any 
ordinary  worshipper  of  mammon  of  the  present 
day,  that  if  he  had  been  in  Judas'  place,  with 
the  prospects  as  dark  as  they  were  to  him,  with 
only  the  one  course  left,  as  it  would  seem  to 
him,  of  extricating  himself  from  a  losing  con- 
cern, he  would  be  in  the  highest  degree  likely 
to  do  the  very  same  thing. 

As  the  two  days  draw  to  a  close  we  see  Judas 
seeking  opportunity  to  betray  his  Master,  and 
Jesus  seeking  opportunity  to  keep  His  last  Pass- 
over  with  His  disciples.  Again,  what  a  contrast! 
The  traitor  must  lurk  and  lie  in  wait;  the  Master 
does  not  even  remain  in  Bethany  or  seek  some 
lonely  house  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  but  sends 
His  disciples  right  over  into  the  city,  and  with 
the  same  readiness  with  which  He  had  found 
the  ass's  colt  on  which  He  rode  into  Jerusalem 
He  finds  a  house  in  which  to  keep  the  feast. 

I.  The  Evening  (xxvi.  20-30). 

The  last  day  of  our  Lord's  Passion  begins  at 
eventide  on  Thursday  with  the  Passover  feast, 
at  which  "  He  sat  down  with  the  Twelve." 

The  entire  feast  would  be  closely  associated  in 
His  mind  with  the  dark  event  with  which  the 
day  must  close;  for  of  all  the  types  of  the  great 
sacrifice  He  was  about  to  offer,  the  most  sig- 
nificant was  the  paschal  lamb.  Most  fitting, 
therefore,  was  it  that  towards  the  close  of  this 
feast,  when  its  sacred  importance  was  deepest  in 
the  disciples'  minds,  their  Master  should  insti- 
tute the  holy  ordinance  which  was  to  be  a  lasting 
memorial  of  "  Christ  our  Passover  sacrificed  for 
us."  Of  this  feast,  then,  with  its  solemn  and 
affecting  close,  the  passage  before  us  is  the 
record. 

It  falls  naturally  into  two  parts,  correspond- 
ing to  the  two  great  burdens  on  the  Saviour's 
heart  as  He  looked  forward  to  this  feast — the 
Betrayal  and  the  Crucifixion  (see  ver.  2).  The 
former  is  the  burden  of  vv.  21-25;  the  latter  of 
vv.  26-30.  There  was  indeed  very  much  besides 
to  tell — the  strife  which  grieved  the  Master's 
heart  as  they  took  their  places  at  the  table,  and 
His  wise  and  kindly  dealing  with  it  (Luke  xxii. 
24,  seq.);  the  washing  of  the  disciples'  feet;  the 
farewell  words  of  consolation;  the  prayer  of  in- 
tercession (John  xiii.-xvii.), — but  these  are  all 
omitted  here,  that  thought  may  be  concentrated 
on  the  two  outstanding  facts:  the  unmasking  and 
dismissal  of  the  traitor,  and  the  committing  to 


the  faithful  ones  of  the  sacred  charge,  "  This  do 
in  remembrance  of  Me." 

I.  It  must  have  been  sorrowful  enough  for 
the  Master  as  He  sat  down  with  the  Twelve  to 
mark  their  unseemly  strife,  and  sadder  still  to 
think  that,  though  for  the  hour  so  closely  gath- 
ered round  Him,  they  would  soon  be  scattered 
every  man  to  his  own  and  would  leave  Him 
alone;  but  He  had  the  comfort  of  knowing  that 
eleven  were  true  at  heart  and  foreseeing  that 
after  all  wanderings  and  falls  they  would  come 
back  again.  "  He  knoweth  our  frame,  and  re- 
membereth  that  we  are  dust  ";  and  therefore  with 
the  eye  of  divine  compassion  He  could  look  be- 
yond the  temporary  desertion,  and  find  satisfac- 
tion in  the  fidelity  that  would  triumph  in  the 
end  over  the  weakness  of  the  flesh.  But  there 
was  one  of  them,  for  whom  His  heart  was  fail- 
ing Him,  in  whose  future  He  could  see  no 
gleam  of  light.  All  the  guiding  and  counsel  with 
which  he  had  been  favoured  in  common  with 
the  rest  had  been  lost  on  him, — even  the  early 
word  of  special  personal  warning  (John  vi.  70), 
spoken  that  he  might  bethink  himself  ere  it 
were  too  late,  had  failed  to  touch  him.  There 
is  now  only  one  opportunity  left.  It  is  the  last 
night;  and  the  last  word  must  now  be  spoken. 
How  tenderly  and  thoughtfully  the  difficult  duty 
is  done!  "As  they  did  eat,  He  said,  Verily  I 
say  unto  you,  that  one  of  you  shall  betray  Me." 
Imagine  in  what  tones  these  words  were  spoken, 
what  love  and  sorrow  must  have  thrilled  in 
them!  ' 

The  kind  intention  evidently  was  to  reach  the 
heart  of  the  one  without  attracting  the  attention 
of  the  rest.  For  there  must  have  been  a  studied 
avoidance  of  any  look  or  gesture  that  would 
have  marked  the  traitor.  This  is  manifest  from 
the  way  in  which  the  sad  announcement  is  re- 
ceived. It  comes,  in  fact,  to  all  the  eleven  as  a 
summons  to  great  searchings  of  heart,  a  fitting 
preparation  (i  Cor.  xi.  28)  for  the  new  and 
sacred  service  to  which  they  are  soon  to  be  in- 
vited; and  truly  there  could  have  been  no  better 
sign  than  the  passing  from  lip  to  lip,  from  heart 
to  heart,  of  the  anxious  question,  "  Lord,  is  it 
I?"  The  remembrance  of  the  strife  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  feast  was  too  recent,  the  tone 
of  the  Master's  voice  too  penetrating,  the  glance 
of  His  eye  too  searching,  to  make  self-confi- 
dence possible  to  them  at  that  particular  mo- 
ment. Even  the  heart  of  the  confident  Peter 
seems  to  have  been  searched  and  humbled  under 
that  scrutinising  look.  If  only  he  had  retained 
the  same  spirit,  what  humiliation  would  have 
been  spared  him! 

There  was  one  who  did  not  take  up  the  ques- 
tion; but  the  others  were  all  so  occupied  with 
self-scrutiny  that  no  one  seems  to  have  observed 
his  silence,  and  Jesus  forbears  to  call  attention 
to  it.  He  will  give  him  another  opportunity  to 
confess  and  repent,  for  so  we  understand  the 
pathetic  words  which  follow:  "  He  that  dippeth 
his  hand  with  Me  in  the  dish,  the  same  shall 
betray  Me."  This  was  no  mere  outward  sign  for 
the  purpose  of  denoting  the  traitor.  It  was  a 
wail  of  sorrow,  an  echo  of  the  old  lament  of 
the  Psalmist:  "  Yea,  mine  own  familiar  friend,  in 
whom  I  trusted,  which  did  eat  of  my  bread, 
hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against  me."  How  could 
the  heart  even  of  Judas  resist  so  tender  an 
appeal? 

We   shall    understand   the   situation   better   if 


Matthew xxvi.  i-xxvii.  56.]    THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    DAY. 


795 


we  suppose  what  is  more  than  probable,*  that 
he  was  sitting  very  near  to  Jesus,  perhaps  next 
to  Him  on  the  one  side,  as  John  certainly  was 
on  the  other.  We  cannot  suppose,  from  what 
we  know  of  the  customs  of  the  East,  that  Judas 
was  the  only  one  dipping  with  Him  in  the  dish; 
nor  would  he  be  the  only  one  to  whom  "  the 
sop  "  was  given.  But  if  his  position  was  as  we 
have  supposed,  there  was  something  in  the 
vague  words  our  Saviour  used  which  tended  to 
the  singling  of  him  out,  and,  though  not  the 
only  one,  he  would  naturally  be  the  first  to  whom 
the  sop  was  given,  which  would,  be  a  sufScient 
sign  to  John,  who  alone  was  taken  into  con- 
fidence at  the  time  (see  John  xiii.  25,  26),  with- 
out attracting  in  any  special  way  the  attention 
of  the  rest.  Both  in  the  words  and  in  the  action, 
then,  we  recognise  the  Saviour's  yearning  over 
His  lost  disciple,  as  He  makes  a  last  attempt  to 
melt  his  obdurate  heart. 

The  same  spirit  is  manifest  in  the  words  which 
follow.  The  thought  of  consequences  to  Him- 
self gives  Him  no  concern;  "the  Son  of  man 
goeth,  even  as  it  is  written  of  Him;"  it  is  the 
awful  abyss  into  which  His  disciple  is  plunging 
that  fills  His  soul  with  horror:  "  but  woe  unto 
that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed! 
it  had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not 
been  born."  O  Judas!  Thy  treachery  is  indeed 
a  link  in  the  chain  of  events  by  which  the  divine 
purpose  is  fulfilled;  but  it  was  not  necessary  that 
so  it  should  be.  In  some  other  way  the  counsel 
of  the  Lord  would  have  been  accomplished,  if 
thou  hadst  yielded  to  that  last  appeal.  It  was 
necessary  tliiBt  the  Son  of  man  should  sufifer  and 
die  for  the  world's  sin,  but  there  was  nothing  to 
compel  thee  to  have  thy  hand  in  it. 

At  last  Judas  speaks;  but  in  no  spirit  of  re- 
pentance. He  takes  up,  it  is  true,  the  question 
of  the  rest,  but  not  in  sincerity — only  driven  to 
it  as  the  last  refuge  of  hypocrisy.  Moreover, 
he  asks  it  in  so  low  a  tone,  that  neither  it  nor 
the  answer  to  it  appears  to  have  been  noticed  by 
the  general  company  (see  John  xiii.  29).  And 
that  there  is  no  inclining  of  the  heart  to  his 
Lord  appears  perhaps  in  the  use  of  the  formal 
title  Rabbi,  retained  in  the  Revised  Version: 
"  Is  it  I,  Rabbi?  "  Had  he  repented  even  at  this 
late  hour — had  he  thrown  himself,  humbled  and 
contrite,  at  the  Saviour's  feet,  with  the  question 
"Lord,  is  it  I?"  struggling  to  find  utterance, 
or  better  still,  the  heart-broken  confession, 
"  Lord,  it  is  I  " — it  would  not  yet  have  been  too 
late.  He  Who  never  turned  a  penitent  away 
would  have  received  even  Judas  back  again  and 
forgiven  all  his  sin;  and  in  lowliness  of  heart 
the  repentant  disciple  might  have  received  at 
his  Master's  hands  the  symbols  of  that  infinite 
sacrifice  which  was  sufficient  even  for  such  as 
he.  But  his  conscience  is  seared  as  with  a  hot 
iron,  his  heart  is  hard  as  the  nether  millstone, 
and  accordingly  without  a  word  of  confession, 
actually  taking  "  the  sop  "  without  a  sign  even 
of  shame,  he  gave  himself  up  finally  to  the  spirit 
of  evil,  and  went  immediately  out — "  and  it  was 
night"  (see  John  xiii.  30).  There  remain  now 
around  the  Master  none  but  true  disciples. 

2.  The  Passover  meal  is  drawing  to  a  close; 
but  ere  it  is  ended  the  Head  of  the  little  family 
has  quite  transfigured  it.     When  the  traitor  left 

♦See  the  interesting  discussion  on  the  arrangement  of 
the  table  in  Edersheim,  "  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the 
Messiah,"  vol.  ii.  p.  494. 


the  company  we  may  suppose  that  the  look  of 
unutterable  sadness  would  gradually  pass  from 
the  Saviour's  countenance.  Up  to  this  time  the 
darkness  had  been  unrelieved.  As  he  thought 
of  the  lost  disciple's  fate,  there  was  nothing  but 
woe  in  the  prospect;  but  when  from  that  dark 
future  he  turned  to  His  own,  He  saw,  not  the 
horror  of  the  Cross  alone,  but  "  the  joy  set  be- 
fore Him  ";  and  in  view  of  it  He  was  able  with 
a  heart  full  of  thanks  and  praise  to  appoint  for 
remembrance  of  the  awful  day  a  feast,  to  be  kept 
like  the  Paschal  feast  by  an  ordinance  for  ever 
(see  Ex.  xii.  14). 

The  connection  of  the  new  feast  with  the  old 
is  closely  maintained.  It  was  "  as  they  were 
eating  "  that  the  Saviour  took  bread,  and  from 
the  way  in  which  He  is  said  to  have  taken  "  a 
cup  "  (R  .V.)  it  is  plain  that  it  was  one  of  the 
cups  it  was  customary  to  take  at  the  Paschal 
feast.  With  this  in  mind  we  can  more  readily 
see  the  naturalness  of  the  words  of  institution. 
They  had  been  feasting  on  the  body  of  the  lamb; 
It  Is  time  that  they  should  look  directly  at  the 
Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sin  of 
the  world;  so,  taking  the  new  symbol  and  hand- 
ing it  to  them,  He  says,  "Take,  eat;  this  is  My 
body." 

How  strange  that  into  words  so  simple  there 
should  have  been  imported  anything  so  mysteri- 
ous and  unnatural  as  some  of  the  doctrines 
around  which  controversy  in  the  Church  has 
raged  for  weary  centuries — doctrines  sadly  at 
variance  with  "  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ."  * 
At  the  first  institution  of  the  Passover  the  direc- 
tions for  eating  it  close  with  these  words,  "  It 
is  the  Lord's  Passover."  Does  any  one  for  a 
single  moment  suppose  that  in  so  putting  it 
Moses  meant  to  assert  any  mysterious  identity 
of  two  things  so  diverse  in  their  nature  as  the 
literal  flesh  of  the  lamb  and  the  historical  event 
known  as  the  Lord's  Passover?  Why,  then, 
should  any  one  for  a  moment  suppose  that  when 
Jesus  says,  "  This  is  My  body,"  He  had  any 
thought  of  mysterious  transference  or  confusion 
of  identity?  Moses  meant  that  the  one  was  the 
symbol  of  the  other;  and  in  the  same  way  our 
Saviour  meant  that  the  bread  was  henceforth  to 
be  the  symbol  of  His  body.  The  same  appro- 
priateness, naturalness,  and  simplicity,  are  ap- 
parent in  the  words  with  which  He  hands  the 
cup:  "This  is  My  blood  of  the  covenant" 
(R.  V.  omits  new,  which  throws  the  emphasis 
more  distinctly  on  My)  "  which  is  shed  " — not, 
like  the  blood  of  the  lamb,  for  a  little  family 
group,  but — "  for  many,"  not  as  a  mere  sign  (see 
Heb.  X.),  but  "  unto  remission  of  sins." 

The  new  symbols  were  evidently  much  more 
suitable  to  the  ordinance  which  was  to  be  of 
world-wide  application.  Besides,  it  was  no 
longer  necessary  that  there  should  be  further 
sacrifice  of  life.     Christ  our  Passover  was  sacri- 

*  The  high  Sacramentarian  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is 
not  only  at  variance  with  the  simple  and  obvious  mean- 
ing of  the  central  words  of  institution,  but  seems  to  dis- 
regard in  the  most  wanton  manner  the  plainest  statements 
of  the  very  authority  on  which  the  ordinance  is  based. 
According  to  the  Gospel  it  was  "  as  they  were  eating" 
that  Jesus  took  the  bread  and  gave  it  to  the  disciples; 
according  to  the  Ritualist  it  ought  to  be  before  anything 
else  has  touched  the  lips.  For  their  mystical  act  of  conse- 
cration on  the  part  of  the  priest,  all  they  can  find  either  in 
gospel  or  epistle  is  the  simple  giving  of  thanks  (that 
"blessed  "  of  ver.  26  is  the  same  act  precisely  is  obvious 
by  comparing  the  corresponding  passages  in  the  other 
Gospels  and  in  the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians— xi.  24) ; 
while  in  opposition  to  the  emphatic  '"  Drink  ye  all  of  it,' 
the  cup  has  been  refused  by  the  Church  of  Rome  to  the 
great  majority  of  her  communicants  ! 


ygi 


I^HE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


ficed  once  for  all;  and  therefore  there  rnust  be 
no  thought  of  repetition  of  the  sacrifice;  it  must 
be  represented  only;  and  this  is  done  both  sim- 
ply and  impressively  in  the  breaking  of  the 
bread  and  the  pouring  of  the  wine.  Nothing 
could  be  more  natural  than  the  transition  from 
the  old  to  the  new  Passover  feast. 

Rising  now  above  all  matters  of  detail  and 
questions  of  interpretation,  let  us  try  humbly  and 
reverently  to  enter  into  the  mind  of  Christ  as 
He  breaks  the  bread  and  pours  the  wine  and 
institutes  the  feast  of  love.  As  in  the  earlier  part 
of  the  evening  we  had  in  His  dealings  with  the 
traitor  a  touching  unveiling  of  His  human  heart, 
so  now,  while  there  is  the  same  human  tender- 
ness, there  is  with  it  a  reach  of  thought  and 
range  of  vision  which  manifestly  transcend  all 
mortal  powers. 

Consider  first  how  extraordinary  it  was  that  at 
such  a  time  He  should  take  pains  to  concen- 
trate the  thoughts  of  His  disciples  in  all  time 
to  come  upon  His  death.  Even  the  bravest  of 
those  who  had  been  with  Him  in  all  His  tempta- 
tions could  not  look  at  it  now;  and  to  His  own 
human  soul  it  must  have  seemed  in  the  very  last 
degree  repulsive.  To  the  disciples,  to  the  world, 
it  must  have  seemed  defeat;  yet  He  calmly  pro- 
vides for  its  perpetual  celebration  as  a  victory! 

Think  of  the  form  the  celebration  takes.  It 
is  no  mournful  solemnity,  with  dirges  and  elegies 
for  one  about  to  die;  but  a  Feast— a.  strange  way 
of  celebrating  a  death.  It  may  be  said  that  the 
Passover  feast  itself  was  a  precedent;  but  in  this 
respect  there  is  no  parallel.  The  Passover  feast 
was  no  memorial  of  a  death.  If  Moses  had  died 
that  night,  would  it  ever  have  occurred  to  the 
children  of  Israel  to  institute  a  feast  for  the  pur- 
pose of  keeping  in  memory  so  unutterable  a 
calamity?  But  a  greater  than  Moses  is  here,  and 
is  soon  to  die  a  cruel  and  shameful  death.  Is 
not  that  a  calamity  as  much  more  dreadful  than 
the  other  as  Christ  was  greater  than  Moses? 
Why,  then,  celebrate  it  by  a  feast?  Because  this 
death  is  no  calamity.  It  is  the  means  of  life  to 
a  great  multitude  that  no  man  can  number,  out 
of  every  kindred  and  tongue  and  people  and 
nation.  Therefore  it  is  most  fitly  celebrated  by 
a  feast.  It  is  a  memorial;  but  it  is  far  more. 
It  is  a  feast,  provided  for  the  spiritual  nourish- 
ment of  the  people  of  God  through  all  their 
generations.  Think  what  must  have  been  in  the 
Saviour's  mind  when  He  said,  "Take,  eat";  how 
His  soul  must  have  been  enlarged  as  He  uttered 
the  words  "  shed  for  many."  Simple  words, 
easily  spoken;  but  before  they  came  from  these 
sacred  lips  there  must  have  risen  before  His 
mind  the  vision  of  multitudes  all  through  the 
ages,  fed  on  the  strangest  food,  refreshed  by  the 
strangest  wine,  that  mortal  man  had  ever  heard 
of. 

How  marvellously  the  horizon  widens  round 
Him  as  the  feast  proceeds!  At  first  He  is  wholly 
engaged  with  the  little  circle  round  the  table. 
When  He  says,  "  One  of  you  shall  betray  Me," 
when  He  takes  the  sop  and  hands  it,  when  He 
pours  out  His  last  lament  over  the  false  disciple, 
He  is  the  Man  of  Sorrows  in  the  little  upper 
chamber;  but  when  He  takes  the  bread  and  again 
the  cup,  the  horizon  widens,  beyond  the  cross 
He  sees  the  glory  that  shall  follow,  sees  men  of 
all  nations  and  climes  coming  to  the  feast  He  is 
preparing  for  them,  and  before  He  closes  He  has 
reached  the  consummation  in  the  heavenly  king- 
dom: "  I  say  unto  you,  I  will  not  drink  hence- 


forth of  this  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day 
when  I  drink  it  new  with  you  in  My  Father's 
kingdom."  "  Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God." 
Then  hear  Him  singing  at  the  close.  How 
bewildered  the  disciples,  how  rapt  the  Master, 
must  have  been!  What  a  scene  for  the  painter, 
what  a  study  of  divine  calm  and  human  agita- 
tion! The  "  hymn  "  they  sang  was  in  all  proba- 
bility the  latter  part  of  the  Great  Hallel,  which 
closes  with  Psalm  cxviii.  It  is  most  interesting 
as  we  read  the  psalm  to  think  what  depths  of 
meaning,  into  which  none  of  His  disciples  as 
yet  could  enter,  there  must  have  been  to  Hin» 
in  almost  every  line. 

II.  The  Night  (xxvi.  31-75). 

As  the  little  company  have  lingered  in  the 
upper  room  evening  has  passed  into  night.  The 
city  is  asleep,  as  Jesus  leads  the  way  along  the 
silent  streets,  down  the  steep  slope  of  Moriah, 
and  across  the  Kedron,  to  the  familiar  place  of 
resort  on  the  mount  of  Olives.  As  they  pro- 
ceed in  silence,  a  word  of  ancient  prophecy  lies 
heavy  on  His  heart.  It  was  from  Zechariah, 
whose  prophecy  was  often  *  in  his  thoughts  in 
the  Passion  week.  "  Awake,  O  sword,  against 
My  shepherd,  and  against  the  man  that  is  My 
fellow,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts:  smite  the  shep- 
herd, and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered."  It  is  the 
last  part  of  it  that  troubles  Him.  For  the  smit- 
ing of  the  Shepherd  He  is  well  prepared;  it  is 
the  scattering  of  the  sheep  that  makes  His  heart 
so  sore,  and  forces  Him  to  break  the  silence 
with  the  sorrowful  words,  "  All  ye  shall  be  of- 
fended because  of  Me  this  night."  What  pathos 
in  these  words  "because  of  Me":  how  it  pained 
Him  to  think  that  what  must  come  to  Him 
should  be  so  terrible  to  them!  And  is  there 
not  a  touch  of  kind  allowance  in  the  words 
"this  night"?  "He  that  walketh  in  the  night 
stumbleth,"  and  how  could  they  but  stumble  in 
such  a  night?  Then  the  thought  of  the  shep- 
herd and  the  sheep  which  fills  His  mind  and 
suggests  the  passage  He  quotes  is  full  of  tender- 
ness without  even  a  hint  of  reproach.  Who  will 
blame  the  sheep  for  scattering  when  the  Shep- 
herd is  smitten?  And  how  trustfully  and  withal 
how  wistfully  does  He  look  forward  to  the  re- 
assembling of  the  flock  in  the  old  home,  the 
sacred  region  where  they  gathered  first  round 
the  Shepherd:  "  After  I  am  risen  again,  I  will  go 
before  you  [as  the  shepherd  goes  before  the 
flock]  into  Galilee."  Thus  after  all  would  be 
fulfilled  His  prayer  of  intercession,  so  recent^ 
offered  on  their  behalf:  "  Holy  Father,  kerp 
through  Thine  own  name  those  whom  Thou  hast 
given  Me,  that  they  may  be  one." 

The  silly  sheep  were  not  at  all  alarmed.  This 
was  altogether  natural;  for  the  danger  was  not 
yet  within  their  sight.  Nor  was  it  really  at  all 
unnatural  that  the  impulsive  Peter  should  be  new 
at  the  very  opposite  pole  of  feeling  from  where 
he  stood  an  hour  or  two  before.  Then,  sharing 
the  general  depression,  he  joined  the  rest  in  the 
anxious  question,  "  Lord,  is  it  I?"  now,  having 
been  relieved  from  the  anxiety  which  for  the  mo- 
ment pressed  upon  him,  and  having  been  more- 
over raised  into  a  glow  of  feeling  and  an  assur- 
ance of  faith  by  his  Master's  tender  and  stirring 
words,  and  the  prayer  of  intercession  which  so 
fitly  closed  them,  he  has  passed  from  the  depths 
of  self-distrust  to  the  heights  of  self-confidence, 
*  See  Zech.  ix.  9,  xi.  12,  xiii.  7. 


Matthew  xxvi.  i-xxvii.  56.]    THE    GREAT   ATONEMENT    DAY, 


797 


so  that  he  even  dares  to  say,  "  Though  all  men 
shall  be  offended  because  of  Thee,  yet  will  / 
never  be  offended." 

Ah!  Peter,  you  were  safe  when  you  were  cry- 
ing "  Lord,  is  it  I  ?  " — you  are  very  far  from 
safe  now,  when  you  speak  of  yourself  in  so  dif- 
ferent a  tone.  Jesus  sees  it  all,  and  gives  him 
warning  in  the  very  plainest  words.  But  Peter 
persists.  He  vainly  imagines  that  his  Master 
cannot  know  how  strong  he  is,  how  burning  his 
zeal,  how  warm  his  love,  how  steadfast  his  devo- 
tion. Of  all  this  he  is  himself  distinctly  con- 
scious. There  is  no  mistake  about  it.  Devotion 
thrills  in  every  fibre  of  his  being;  and  he  knows, 
he  feels  it  in  his  soul,  that  no  torture,  not  death 
itself,  could  move  him  from  his  steadfastness: 
"  Though  I  should  die  with  Thee,  yet  will  I  not 
deny  Thee."  "  Likewise  also  said  all  the  dis- 
ciples." Quite  natural  too.  For  the  moment 
Peter  was  the  leader  of  the  sheep.  They  all 
caught  his  enthusiasm,  and  were  conscious  of 
the  same  devotion:  why,  then,  should  they  not 
acknowledge  it  as  he  had  done?  They  had  yet 
to  learn  the  difference  between  a  transient  glow 
of  feeling  and  abiding  inward  strength.  Only 
by  sad  experience  can  they  learn  it  now;  so  Jesus 
lets  them  have  the  last  word. 

And  now  Gethsemane  is  reached.  The  olive 
trees  which  in  the  daytime  give  a  shadow  from 
the  heat  will  now  afford  seclusion,  though  the 
moon  is  at  the  full.  Here,  then,  the  Son  of  man 
will  spend  some  time  with  God,  alone,  before 
He  is  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  sinners;  and 
yet,  true  Son  of  man  as  He  is,  He  shrinks  from 
being  left  alone  in  that  dread  hour,  and  clings  to 
the  love  and  sympathy  of  those  who  have  been 
with  Him  in  His  temptations  hitherto.  So  He 
leaves  eight  of  the  disciples  at  the  entering  in 
of  the  olive  grove,  and  takes  with  Him  into  the 
darkness  the  three  most  in  sympathy  with  Him 
— the  same  three  who  had  been  the  sole  witnesses 
of  His  power  in  raising  from  the  dead  the 
daughter  of  Jairus,  and  had  alone  seen  His  glory 
on  the  holy  mount.  But  even  these  three  cannot 
go  with  Him  all  the  way.  He  will  have  them 
as  near  as  possible;  and  yet  He  must  be  alone. 
Did  He  think  of  the  passage,  "  I  have  trodden 
the  winepress  *  alone,  and  of  the  people  there 
was  none  with  me"? 

That  solitude  may  not  be  invaded.  We  can 
only,  like  the  disciples  of  old,  look  reverently  at 
it  from  afar.  There  are  probably  many  true  dis- 
ciples who  can  get  no  nearer  than  the  edge  of 
the  darkness;  those  who  are  closest  in  sympathy 
may  be  able  to  obtain  a  nearer  view,  but  even 
those  who  like  John  have  leant  on  His  breast 
can  know  it  only  in  part — in  its  depth  it  pass- 
eth  knowledge.  Jesus  is  alone  in  Gethsemane 
yet,  and  of  the  people  there  is  none  with  Him. 

"  Ah  !  never,  never  can  we  know 
The  depth  of  that  mysterious  woe." 

While  it  is  not  possible  for  any  of  us  to  pene- 
trate the  deep  recesses  of  Gethsemane,  we  have 
a  key  to  let  us  in.  and  open  to  us  something  of 
its  meaning.  This  help  is  found  in  that  striking 
passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  where 
the  experience  of  the  Lord  Jesus  in  the  Garden 
is  closely  connected  with  His  being  "  called  of 
God  an  High  Priest  after  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedec."  It  is  true  that  at  His  baptism  Jesus 
entered  on  His  ministry  in  its  largest  sense,  the 
*  Gethsemane  means  "  oil-press." 


Prophet,  Priest,  and  King  of  men.  But  there 
is  a  sense  in  which  later  on,  at  successive  stages. 
He  was  "  called  of  God  "  to  each  of  these  of^ces 
in  succession.  At  His  baptism  the  voice  from 
heaven  was,  "  This  is  My  Beloved  Son,  in  Whom 
I  am  well  pleased."  On  the  mount  of  Trans- 
figuration there  was  this  added,  "  Hear  ye  Him," 
and  the  withdrawal  of  Moses  and  Elias,  leaving 
Jesus  alone,  indicated  that  henceforth  Me  was 
called  of  God  to  be  the  one  prophet  of  human- 
ity. Similarly,  though  from  the  beginning  He 
was  King,  it  was  not  till  after  He  had  overcome 
the  sharpness  of  death  that  He  was  "  called  o! 
God  "  to  be  King,  to  take  His  seat  on  the  right 
hand  of  majesty  in  the  heavens.  At  what  period, 
then,  in  His  ministry  was  it  that  He  was  called  of 
God  to  be  an  high  priest?  To  this  natural  ques- 
tion the  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
supplies  the  answer;  and  when  we  take  the 
thought  with  us  we  see  that  it  is  indeed  a  torch 
to  lighten  for  us  just  a  little  the  darkness  of  the 
Garden's  gloom. 

Is  there  not  something  in  the  very  arrange- 
ment of  the  group  which  harmonises  with  the 
thought?  Three  days  ago  the  Temple  had  been 
closed  for  ever  to  its  Lord.  Its  shrine  was 
empty  now  for  evermore:  "  Behold,  your  house 
is  left  unto  you  desolate."  But  still  there  is  to 
be  a  temple,  in  which  shall  minister  a  priest,  not 
of  the  line  of  Aaron,  rather  after  the  older  order 
of  Melchisedec — a  temple,  not  of  stone,  but  of 
men — of  believers,  according  to  the  later  apos- 
tolic word:  "  Ye  are  the  temple  of  the  living 
God."  Of  that  new  and  living  temple  we  have 
a  representation  in  Gethsemane.  The  eight  dis- 
ciples are  its  court;  the  three  are  in  the  holy 
place;  into  the  holiest  of  all  our  great  High 
Priest  has  gone — alone:  for  the  veil  is  not  yet 
rent  in  twain. 

But  why  the  agony?  The  difficulty  has  always 
been  to  account  for  the  sudden  change  from 
the  calmness  of  the  Paschal  feast  to  the  awful 
struggle  of  Gethsemane.  What  had  happened 
meanwhile  to  bring  about  so  great  a  change? 
There  was  light  in  the  upper  chamber — it  was 
dark  in  the  Garden;  but  suiely  the  darkness  and 
the  light  were  both  alike  to  Him;  or  if  to  His 
human  heart  there  was  the  difference  we  all  are 
conscious  of,  it  could  not  be  that  the  mere  with- 
drawal of  the  light  destroyed  His  peace.  It  is 
altogether  probable  that  both  the  previous 
nights  had  been  spent  on  this  same  mount  of 
Olives,  and  there  is  no  hint  of  agony  then.  It 
is  true  that  the  prospect  before  Him  was  full  of 
unutterable  horror;  but  from  the  time  He  had 
set  His  face  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  it  had  been 
always  in  His  view,  and  though  at  times  the 
thought  of  it  would  come  over  Him  as  a  cold 
wave  that  made  Him  shudder  for  the  moment, 
there  had  been  up  to  this  hour  no  agony  like 
this,  and  not  a  trace  of  pleading  that  the  cup 
might  pass. 

What,  then,  was  the  new  element  of  woe  that 
came  upon  Him  in  that  hour?  What  was  the 
cup  now  put  for  the  first  time  to  His  sacred 
lips,  from  which  He  shrank  as  from  nothing  in 
all  His  sad  experience  before?  Is  not  the  an- 
swer to  be  found  in  the  region  of  thought  into 
which  we  are  led  in  that  great  passage  already 
referred  to,  which  speaks  of  Him  as  then  for 
the  first  time  "  called  of  God  an  High  Priest," 
which  represents  Him,  though  He  was  a  Son, 
learning  His  obedience  (as  a  Priest)  by  the 
things  which  He  suffered? 


798 


THE   GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


May  we  not,  then,  reverently  conceive  of  Him 
as  in  that  hour  taking  on  Him  the  sin  of  the 
world,  in  a  more  intimate  sense  than  He  had 
ever  done  before?  "  He  bare  our  sins  in  His 
own  body  on  the  tree."  In  a  certain  sense  He 
had  borne  the  burden  all  His  life,  for  He  had 
throughout  endured  the  contradiction  of  sinners 
against  Himself;  but  in  some  special  sense 
manifestly  He  bore  it  on  the  tree.  When  did 
He  in  that  special  sense  take  the  awful  burden 
on  Him?  Was  it  not  in  the  Garden  of  Geth- 
semane?  If  so,  can  we  wonder  that  the  Holy 
One  shrank  from  it,  as  He  never  shrank  from 
simple  suffering?  To  be  identified  with  sin — to 
be  "  made  sin,"  as  the  apostle  puts  it — how  His 
soul  revolted  from  it!  The  cup  of  sorrow  He 
could  take  without  a  murmur;  but  to  take  on 
Him  the  intolerable  load  of  the  world's  sin — 
from  this  He  shrank  with  all  the  recoil  of  stain- 
less purity,  with  all  the  horror  of  a  heart  that 
could  not  bear  the  very  thought.  It  was  not 
the  weakness  of  His  flesh,  but  the  purity  of  His 
spirit,  that  made  Him  shrink,  that  wrung  from 
Him  once  and  again,  and  yet  again,  the  cry, 
'■  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  pass  from 
Me."  It  was  a  new  temptation,  three  times  re- 
peated, like  that  old  one  in  the  wilderness. 
That  assault,  as  we  found,  was  in  close  relation  to 
His  assumption  at  His  baptism  of  His  work  of 
ministry;  this  conflict  in  the  Garden  was,  we  be- 
lieve, as  closely  connected  with  His  assuming 
His  priestly  work,  undertaking  to  make  atone- 
ment for  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself.  As 
that  followed  His  baptism,  this  followed  His  in- 
stitution of  the  holy  supper.  In  that  ordinance 
He  had  prepared  the  minds  of  His  disciples  to 
turn  from  the  Paschal  lamb  of  the  old  covenant, 
to  behold  henceforth  the  Lamb  of  God  which 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  From  the 
feast  He  goes  straightway  to  this  lonely  garden, 
and  there  begins  *  His  dread  atoning  work. 

It  must  have  been  a  great  aggravation  of  His 
agony  that  even  the  three  disciples  could  not 
enter  into  sympathy  with  Him,  even  so  much  as 
to  hold  their  eyes  waking.  True,  they  were  very 
weary,  and  it  was  most  natural  that  they  should 
be  heavy  with  sleep;  but  had  they  had  even  a 
famt  conception  of  what  that  agony  of  their 
Master  meant  they  could  not  possibly  have 
slept;  and  we  can  well  fancy  that  in  that  hour  of 
anguish  the  Saviour  must  have  called  to  mind 
from  the  Book  of  Psalms,  with  which  He  was 
so  perfectly  familiar,  the  sad  lament:  "  Reproach 
hath  broken  my  heart;  and  I  am  full  of  heavi- 
ness: and  I  looked  for  some  to  take  pity,  but 
there  was  none;  and  for  comforters,  but  I  found 
none." 

But  though  He  keenly  feels  His  loneliness,  His 
thoughts  are  far  less  of  Himself  than  of  them. 
Realising  so  vividly  the  horrors  now  so  close  at 
hand.  He  sees,  from  the  very  possibility  of  their 
sleeping,  how  utterly  unprepared  they  are  for 
what  awaits  them,  so  He  summons  them  to 
"  watch  and  pray,"  to  be  on  the  alert  against 
sudden  surprise,  and  to  keep  in  constant  touch 
with  God,  so  that  they  may  not  find  themselves 
confronted  with  temptation  which,  whatever  the 
devotion  of  the  spirit,  may  prove  too  much  for 
the  weakness  of  the  flesh.  Think  of  the  tender 
consideration  of  this  second  warning,  when  the 
first  had  been  so  little  heeded. 

And  we  cannot  but  agree  with  those  who  see 

*  Observe  the  emphatic  word,  "  began  to  be  sorrowful  " 
(ver.  37) 


in  what  He  said  when  He  returned  for  the  last 
time  to  the  three,  not  irony,  no  touch  of  sar- 
casm, but  the  same  tender  consideration  He  has 
shown  throughout.  From  the  Garden  they 
could  easily  see  the  city  in  the  moonlight  across 
the  ravine.  As  yet  there  was  no  sign  of  life 
about  it:  all  was  quiet;  there  was  therefore  no 
reason  why  they  should  not  for  the  few  moments 
that  might  remain  to  them  sleep  on  now  and 
take  their  rest.  But  it  can  only  be  for  a  short 
time,  for  "  the  hour  is  at  hand."  We  may,  then, 
think  of  the  three  lying  down  to  sleep,  as  the 
eight  had  probably  been  doing  throughout, 
while  Jesus,  from  whose  mortal  eyes  sleep  was 
banished  now  for  ever,  would  watch  until  He 
saw  the  gleam  of  lanterns  and  torches  as  of  men 
from  the  city  coming  down  the  hill,  and  then 
He  would  wake  them  and  say,  "  Rise,  let  us  be 
going:  behold,  he  is  at  hand  that  doth  betray 
Me." 

The  arrest  immediately  follows  the  agony;  ai>d 
with  it  begin  the  outward  shame  and  tortui  e 
of  the  Passion.  The  time  has  now  come  when 
all  the  indignities  and  cruelties  of  which  Jesrs 
had  spoken  to  His  disciples  "  apart  in  the  way  " 
(see  XX.  17-19)  shall  be  heaped  upon  Him.  But 
none  of  these  things  move  Him.  The  inward 
shame  and  torture  had  almost  been  too  much 
for  Him.  His  soul  had  been  "  exceeding  sor- 
rowful, even  unto  death";  so  that  He  was  in 
danger  of  passing  away  from  the  scene  of  con- 
flict ere  yet  it  would  be  possible  to  say  "  It  is 
finished."  Only  , by  "strong  crying  and  tears 
unto  Him  that  was  able  to  save  Him  from  death  " 
had  He  obtained  the  needful  strength  (Luke 
xxii.  43)  to  pass  the  awful  ordeal,  and  come  out 
of  it  ready  to  yield  Himself  up  into  the  "  wicked 
hands "  by  which  He  must  be  "  crucified  and 
slain."  But  now  He  is  strong.  St.  Matthew  does 
not  tell  us  that  the  prayer  in  the  Garden  was 
answered;  but  we  see  it  as  we  follow  the  Son 
of  man  along  the  dolorous  way.  If  He  shrank 
from  taking  up  the  load  of  human  sin.  He  does 
not  flinch  in  carrying  it;  and  amid  all  He  has  to 
bear  at  the  hands  of  sinners.  He  maintains  His 
dignity  and  self-possession. 

When  the  armed  men  approach.  He  goes 
calmly  out  to  meet  them.  Even  the  traitor's 
kiss  He  does  not  resent;  but  only  takes  occasion 
to  make  one  more  appeal  to  that  stony  heart, 
"  Comrade,"  *  He  says,  "  (do)  that  for  which 
thou  art  come  "  (see  R.  V.).  There  is  a  bro- 
kenness  in  the  utterance  which  makes  it  difficult 
to  translate,  but  which  is  touchingly  natural. 
It  would  seem  as  if  our  Lord,  when  Judas  first 
appeared,  though  He  knew  well  for  what  purpose 
He  had  come,  and  wished  to  show  him  that  He 
did,  yet  shrank  from  putting  it  into  words.  When 
the  traitor  had  actually  done  that  for  which  he 
had  come,  when  he  had  not  only  given  the  trai- 
tor's kiss,  and  that  in  a  shamelessly  effusive  way, 
as  appears  from  the  strong  word  used  in  the  ac- 
count both  here  and  elsewhere,  then  would  come 
that  other  appeal  which  most  impressed  the  eye- 
witness from  whom  St.  Luke  had  his  informa- 

*  The  word  "  friend  "  is  too  strong.  It  is  not  the  same 
word  our  Lord  uses  when  He  says:  "I  have  not  called 
you  servants,  I  have  called  you  friends  "  ;  it  is  a  word 
which  indicates  not  heart-friendship,  but  that  familiar 
intercourse  which  is  supposed  to  take  place  only  between, 
friends.  The  selection  of  the  word  is  a  striking  illustra- 
tion of  our  Lord's  carefulness  of  the  claims  of  sincerity 
and  truth,  while  He  is  anxious,  if  possible,  to  use  a  word 
that  will  touch  the  traitor's  heart. 


Matthew  xxvi.i-xxvii.  56.]    THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    ^AY. 


799 


tion:  "Judas,  betrayest  thou  the  Son  of  man 
with  a  kiss?  " 

At  this  point  probably  occurred  an  incident  of 
the  arrest  recorded  only  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  the 
recoil  of  the  mob  when  Jesus  confronted  them 
and  acknowledged  Himself  to  be  the  man  whom 
they  were  seeking.  Though  this  is  not  men- 
tioned here,  we  recognise  the  effect  of  it  upon  the 
disciples.  It  would  naturally  embolden  them 
when,  on  the  second  advance,  they  saw  their 
Master  in  the  hands  of  these  men,  to-  jk,  "Lord, 
shall  we  smite  with  the  sword?"  And  it  was 
most  characteristic  that  "  one  of  them  "  (whom 
we  should  have  recognised,  even  though  St. 
John  had  not  mentioned  his  name)  should  not 
wait  for  the  answer,  bu*   jhould  smite  at  once. 

All  is  excitement  aiT-**'  jmmotion.  Jesus  alone 
is  calm.  In  such  a  ^ea  of  trouble,  behold  the 
Man!  See  the  heart  at  leisure  from  itself  to 
care  for  and  to  cure  the  wounded  servant  of  the 
high  priest  (Luke  xxii.  51).  Think  of  the  mind 
so  free  at  such  a  time  to  look  out  far  into  the 
future,  using  the  occasion  to  lay  down  the  great 
principle  that  force,  as  a  weapon  which  will  recoil 
on  those  who  use  it,  must  not  be  employed  in  the 
cause  of  truth  and  righteousness.  Look  at  that 
spirit,  so  serenely  confident  of  power  with  God 
at  the  very  moment  that  the  frail  body  is  help- 
less in  the  hands  of  men:  "  Thinkest  thou  that 
I-  cannot  now  pray  to  My  Father,  and  He  shall 
presently  give  Me  more  than  twelve  legions  of 
angels?  "  How  it  enlarges  our  souls  even  to 
try  to  enter  into  that  great  mind  and  heart  at 
such  a  moment.  What  an  outlook  of  thought! 
What  an  up-look  of  faith!  And  again,  what 
mastery!  What  self-annihilation!  We  have  seen 
His  self-repression  in  the  prayer  He  oflfered  in 
the  Garden:  but  think  of  the  prayers  He  did  not 
offer:  think  what  effort,  what  sacrifice,  what  self- 
abnegation  it  must  have  been  to  Him  to  suppress 
that  prayer  for  help  from  the  legions  of  heaven 
against  these  bands  of  the  ungodly.  But  it  was 
enough  for  Him  to  remember,  "  How  then  shall 
the  Scriptures  be  fulfilled,  that  thus  it  must  be?" 
It  was  necessary  that  He  should  suffer  at  the 
hands  of  men:  therefore  He  allows  them  to  lead 
Him  away,  only  reminding  them  that  the  force 
which  would  have  been  needful  for  the  arrest 
of  some  robber  desperado  was  surely  quite  un- 
necessary in  dealing  with  One  Whose  daily  prac- 
tice it  had  been  to  sit  quietly  teaching  in  the 
Temple. 

The  reference  to  the  Scriptures  was  probably 
intended  not  only  to  explain  His  non-resistance, 
but  also  to  support  the  faith  of  His  disciples 
when  they  saw  Him  bound  and  carried  off.  Had 
they  known  the  Scriptures  as  under  His  teach- 
ing they  might  well  have  known  them,  not  only 
would  they  have  seen  that  "  thus  it  must  be," 
but  they  would  have  had  before  them  the  sure 
prospect  of  His  rising  from  the  dead  on  the  third 
day.  But  in  their  case  the  Scriptures  were  ap- 
pealed to  in  vain;  they  had  not  the  faith  of  their 
Master  to  venture  on  the  sure  Word  of  God; 
and  so,  hope  failing,  "  all  the  disciples  forsook 
Him  and  fled."  Not  all  finally,  however,  even 
for  that  dark  night;  for  though  faith  and  hope 
failed,  there  remained  love  enough  in  the  hearts 
of  two  to  make  them  presently  stop  and  think, 
and  then  turn  slowly  and  follow  from  afar.  Only 
Peter  is  mentioned  here  as  boing  this,  because 
the  sequel  concerns  him;  but  that  John  also 
went  to  the  palace  of  the  high  priest  we  know 
from  his  own  account  (John  xviii.   15). 


The  night  is  not  yet  over,  and  therefore  there 
can  be  no  formal  meeting  of  the  Jewish  council, 
according  to  an  excellent  law  which  enacted  that 
all  cases  involving  the  death  penalty  should  be 
*ried  in  the  daytime.  This  law  was,  quite  char- 
acteristically, observed  in  the  letter,  transgressed 
in  the  spirit;  for  though  the  formal  sentence  was 
deferred  till  morning  (xxvii.  i),  the  real  trial 
was  begun  and  ended  before  the  dawn.  The  ref- 
erence by  St.  Matthew  to  both  sessions  of  the 
council  enables  us  clearly  to  understand  what 
would  otherwise  have  appeared  a  "  manifest 
discrepancy "  between  his  account  and  that 
of  St.  Luke,  the  former  speaking  of  the  trial 
as  having  taken  place  in  the  night,  while  the 
latter  tells  us  it  only  began  "  as  soon  as  it 
was  day." 

Our  Evangelist  shows  himself  to  be  a  true 
historian  in  that,  while  disposing  of  the  formal 
morning  session  in  half  a  sentence,  he  gives  a 
full  account  of  the  night  conclave  which  really 
settled  all.  They  proceed  in  a  thoroughly  char- 
acteristic manner.  Having  secured  their  pris- 
oner, they  must  first  agree  upon  the  charge: 
what  shall  it  be?  It  was  no  easy  matter;  for 
not  only  had  His  life  been  stainless,  but  He 
had  shown  consummate  skill  in  avoiding  all  the 
entanglements  which  had  been  set  for  Him;  and 
besides,  it  so  happened  that  nothing  they  could 
prove  conclusively  against  Him,  such  as  His 
breaking  the  letter  of  the  Sabbath  law,  or  rather 
of  their  traditions,  would  suit  their  purpose,  for 
they  would  run  the  risk  on  the  one  hand  of  call- 
ing fresh  attention  to  the  works  of  healing  which 
had  made  so  deep  an  impression  on  the  popular 
mind,  and  on  the  other  of  stirring  up  strife  be- 
tween the  opposing  factions  which  had  entered 
into  a  precarious  union  based  solely  on  their 
common  desire  to  do  away  with  Him.  Hence 
the  great  difficulty  of  securing  testimony  against 
Him,  and  the  necessity  of  having  recourse  to 
that  which  was  false. 

We  may  wonder  perhaps  that  a  court  so  un- 
scrupulous should  have  made  so  much  of  the 
difficulty  of  getting  witnesses  to  agree.  Could 
they  not,  for  other  "  thirty  pieces  of  silver," 
have  purchased  two  that  would  have  served  their 
purpose?  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  men 
in  their  position  had  to  pay  some  respect  to 
decency;  and  from  their  point  of  view  to  pay  a 
man  for  helping  to  arrest  a  criminal  was  an  en- 
tirely different  transaction  from  giving  money  to 
procure  false  witness.  Besides,  there  were  men 
of  the  council  who  did  not  "  consent  to  the 
counsel  and  deed  of  them  "  (see  Luke  xxiii.  51, 
and  John  vii.  50,  51),  and  they  must  be  careful. 
It  is  not  probable  of  course  that  Joseph  of  Ari- 
mathea  and  Nicodemus  would  be  present  at  the 
secret  session  in  the  night;  but  they  would  of 
course  be  present,  or  have  the  opportunity  of 
being  present,  at  the  regular  meeting  in  the 
morning. 

When,  therefore,  the  attempt  to  found  a  charge 
on  the  testimony  of  witnesses  against  Him  failed, 
the  only  hope  was  to  force  Him,  if  possible, 
to  incriminate  Himself.  The  high  priest  accord- 
ingly addresses  himself  to  the  prisoner,  and  at- 
tempts to  induce  Him  to  say  something  which 
might  tend  to  clear  up  the  confusion  of  the  wit- 
nesses' testimony.  It  was  evident  that  some- 
thing had  been  said  about  destroying  the  Temple 
and  building  it  in  three  days — would  He  not 
state  exactly  what  it  was?  "  But  Jesus  held  His 
peace."     He  would  not  plead  before  such  a  tri- 


8oo 


THE    GOSPEL    OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


bunal,  or  acknowledge  the  irregular  appeal  by  so 
much  as  a  single  word. 

Caiaphas  is  baffled;  but  there  is  one  course  left 
to  him,  a  course  which  for  many  reasons  he 
would  have  preferred  not  to  take,  but  he  sees 
now  no  other  way  of  setting  up  a  charge  that 
will  bear  examination  in  the  morning.  He  there- 
fore appeals  to  Jesus  in  the  most  solemn  man- 
ner to  assert  or  deny  His  Messiahship. 

Silence  is  now  impossible.  The  high  priest  has 
given  Him  the  opportunity  of  proclaiming  His 
gospel  in  presence  of  the  council,  and  He  will 
not  lose  it,  though  it  seal  His  condemnation. 
"  He  cannot  deny  Himself."  In  the  most  em- 
phatic manner  He  proclaims  Himself  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God,  and  tells  them  that  the  time 
is  coming  when  their  positions  shall  be  reversed 
— He  their  Judge,  they  summoned  to  His  bar: 
"  Henceforth  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting 
at  the  right  hand  of  power,  and  coming  on  the 
clouds  of  heaven  "  (R.  V.).  What  light  must 
have  been  in  His  eye,  what  majesty  in  His  mien, 
as  He  spoke  those  thrilling  words!  And  who 
shall  limit  their  power?  Who  of  us  shall  be  sur- 
prised to  find  members  of  that  very  conclave 
among  the  ransomed  of  the  Lord  in  the  New 
Jerusalem?  They  might  not  heed  His  words 
that  night,  but  three  days  after  would  they  not 
recall  them?  And  fifty  days  after  that  again — 
who  can  tell? 

Meantime  the  only  result  is  to  produce  real  or 
affected  horror.  "  The  high  priest  rent  his 
clothes,"  thereby  expressing  in  a  tragic  manner 
how  it  tore  his  heart  to  hear  such  "  blasphemy  "  ; 
and  with  one  consent,  or  at  least  with  no  voice 
raised  against  it.   He  is  condemned  to  death. 

The  council  have  now  done  with  Him  for  the 
night,  and  He  is  handed  over  to  the  custody  of 
the  guard  and  the  servants  of  the  high  priest. 
Then  follows  that  awful  scene,  which  cannot  be 
recalled  without  a  shudder.  To  think  that  the 
Holy  One  of  God  should  suffer  these  personal 
indignities — oh,  degradation!  It  is  more  dread- 
ful to  think  of  than  even  the  nails  and  the  spear. 
Alas,  even  the  dregs  of  the  bitter  cup  of  sorrow 
were  wrung  out  to  Him!  "  Is  it  nothing  to 
you,  all  ye  that  pass  by?  Behold  and  see  if 
there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  My  sorrow!  " 

Where  is  Peter  now?  We  left  Him  following 
afar  off.  He  has  summoned  up  courage  enough 
to  follow  on  into  the  court  of  the  high  priest's 
palace,  and  to  mingle  among  the  people  there. 
If  he  had  been  let  alone,  he  would  with  John 
have  in  some  measure  retrieved  the  disgrace  of 
all  the  disciples  forsaking  their  Master  in  "  that 
night  on  which  He  was  betrayed  "  ;  but  it  has 
been  necessary  to  rally  all  the  remnants  of  his 
bravery  to  come  so  far,  and  now  he  has  none 
of  it  to  spare.  Besides,  he  is  very  tired,  and 
shivering  with  cold — in  no  condition,  verily,  for 
anything  heroic.  Who  is  there  of  us  will  cast  the 
first  stone  at  him?  There  are  those  that  speak 
of  him  in  a  tone  of  contempt  as  "  quailing  be- 
fore a  servant  maid,"  as  if  the  meanness  of  the 
occasion  were  not  the  very  thing  which  made  it 
so  hard  for  him.  Had  he  been  summoned  to 
the  presence  of  the  high  priest,  with  all  the  eyes 
of  the  council  fastened  on  him,  his  tired  feeling 
would  have  left  him  all  at  once,  his  pulse  would 
have  beat  fast,  the  excitement  would  have  stirred 
him  so  that  no  fire  of  coals  would  have  been 
needed  to  warm  him,  and  he  might  then  have 
acauitted    himself   in   a   manner   worthy    of   the 


rock-apostle;  but  to  be  suddenly  met  with  a 
woman's  question  sprung  upon  him  unawares, 
with  nobody  he  cared  for  looking  on,  with  noth- 
ing to  rouse  his  soul  from  the  prostration  into 
which  it  had  been  cast  by  the  suddenness  of 
what  looked  like  overwhelming  defeat — that  was 
more  than  even  Peter  could  bear;  and  accord- 
ingly he  fell — fell  terribly.  Not  to  the  bottom 
all  at  once.  He  tries  first  to  pass  the  question 
off  with  a  show  of  ignorance  or  indifference: 
"  I  know  not  what  thou  sayest."  But  when  the 
first  downward  step  is  taken,  all  the  rest  follow 
with  terrible  rapidity.  As  we  look  down  into 
the  abyss  into  which  plunged  headlong  the  fore- 
most of  the  Twelve,  and  hear  these  oaths  and 
curses,  what  force  it  lends  to  the  warning  in 
Gethsemane:  "Watch  and  pray,  that  ye  enter 
not  into  temptation  "  ! 

What  a  lesson  of  charity  is  here!  Suppose  for 
a  moment  that  one  of  the  Marys  had  been  stand- 
ing near,  and  heard  Peter  denying  his  Master 
with  oaths  and  curses,  what  would  her  thought 
of  him  have  been?  What  else  could  it  have 
been  than  a  thought  of  sorrowful  despair?  She 
would  have  felt  constrained,  however  reluctantly, 
to  place  him,  not  with  the  timid  ten,  but  along- 
side of  "  Judas  who  betrayed  Him."  Yet  she 
would  have  been  wrong;  and  many  good  people 
are  quite  wrong  when  they  judge  disciples  of 
Christ  by  what  they  see  of  them  when  at  their 
worst.  After  all  Peter  was  true  at  heart;  and 
though  from  such  an  abyss  he  could  never  have 
recovered  himself,  he  v/as  so  linked  to  his  Mas- 
ter by  the  true  devotion  of  the  days  of  old  that 
he  could  not  fall  utterly  away.  It  was  quite 
otherwise  with  Judas.  His  heart  had  been  set  on 
his  covetousness  throughout,  while  Peter  in  his 
inmost  soul  was  loyal  and  true.  His  Master  has 
prayed  for  him  that  his  faith  fail  not.  His  cour- 
age has  failed;  and  if  that  faith  which  is  the  only 
sure  foundation  for  enduring  courage  had  utterly 
failed  too,  his  case  would  have  been  hopeless  in- 
deed. But  it  has  not;  there  is  still  a  link  to  bind 
him  to  the  Lord,  Whom  in  word  he  is  denying 
for  the  moment;  and  first  the  crowing  of  the  cock 
which  reminds  him  of  his  Master's  warning,  and 
then  immediately  after,  that  look  which  was 
turned  full  on  Peter  as  Jesus  passed  him,  led 
across  the  court,  perhaps  with  jeerings  and  buf- 
fetings  at  the  very  moment — that  solemn  mem- 
ory and  that  sad  and  loving  look  recall  him  to 
himself  again,  '  e  old  true  life  wells  up  from 
the  depths  of  the  genuine  and  noble  heart  of 
him,  and  overflows  in  tears.  So  ends  the  story 
of  that  awful  night. 

III.  The  Morning  (xxvii.  1-26). 

The  formal  meeting  of  the  council  in  the 
morning  would  not  occupy  many  minutes.  The 
death  sentence  had  been  already  agreed  upon, 
and  it  only  remained  to  take  the  necessary  steps 
to  carry  it  into  effect.  Hence  the  form  in  which 
the  Evangelist  records  the  morning  session: 
"  All  the  chief  priests  and  elders  of  the  people 
took  counsel  against  Jesus  to  put  Him  to  death." 
This  could  not  have  passed  as  a  minute  of  the 
meeting;  but  it  was  none  the  less  a  true  account 
of  it.  As,  however,  the  law  forbade  their  in- 
fiicting  the  death  penalty,  "  when  they  had  bound 
Him,  they  led  Him  away,  and  delivered  Him  to 
Pontius  Pilate  the  governor." 

This  delivering  up  of  Jesus  is  a  fact  of  the 
Passion  on  which  special  stress  is  laid  in  the  sa- 


Matthewxxvi.  i.-xxvii.  56.]    THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    DAY. 


So  I 


cred  records.  It  seems,  indeed,  to  have  weighed 
on  the  mind  of  Jesus  Himself  as  much  as  the 
betrayal,  as  would  appear  from  the  manner  in 
which,  as  He  was  nearing  Jerusalem,  He  told 
His  disciples  what  He  should  suffer  there:  "  Be- 
hold, we  go  up  to  Jerusalem;  and  the  Son  of 
man  shall  be  delivered  unto  the  chief  priests 
and  scribes,  and  they  shall  condemn  Him  to 
death,  and  ■slwll  deliver  Him  unto  the  Gentiles  to 
mock,  and  to  scourge,  and  to  crucify"  (Matt. 
XX.  i8,  19;  see  also  Mark  x.  2>i'  and  Luke  xviii. 
32).  Long  before  this,  indeed,  "  He  came  unto 
His  own,  and  His  own  received  Him  not."  With 
the  sorrow  of  that  rejection  He  was  only  too  fa- 
miliar; but  it  was  a  new  heartbreak  to  be  deliv- 
ered up  to  the  Gentiles.  It  was  a  second  be- 
trayal on  a  much  larger  scale.  So  Stephen  puts 
it  in  the  impassioned  close  of  his  defence,  where 
he  charges  the  council  with  being  "  the  betrayers 
and  murderers "  of  "  the  Just  One  "  ;  and  in- 
deed the  thought  is  suggested  here,  not  only  by 
the  association  with  what  follows  in  regard  to 
the  traitor's  end,  but  by  the  use  of  the  very  same 
word  as  applied  to  the  traitor's  act;  for  the  word 
translated  "  betrayed "  in  verse  3  is  the  very 
s.)me  in  the  original  as  that  translated  "  delivered 
up  "  in  verse  2.  Judas  is  about  to  drop  out  of 
sight  into  the  abyss;  but  the  nation  is  one  Judas 
now. 

It  may  be,  indeed,  that  it  was  the  seeing  of 
his  own  sin  as  mirrored  in  the  conduct  of  the 
council  which  roused  at  last  the  traitor's  sleeping 
conscience.  As  he  saw  his  late  Master  led  away 
bound  "  as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,"  these  very 
words  may  have  come  back  to  his  memory: 
"  They  shall  deliver  the  Son  of  man  to  the  Gen- 
tiles to  mock,  and  to  scourge,  and  to  crucify." 
It  is  quite  possi'ble,  indeed,  that  the  man  of  Keri- 
oth  was  too  good  a  Jew  to  have  been  willing 
to  sell  his  Master  to  Pilate  directly.  But  now 
he  sees  that  that  is  just  what  he  has  done.  We 
have  no  sympathy  with  those  who  imagine  that 
Judas  only  intended  to  give  his  Master  an  op- 
portunity of  displaying  His  power  and  asserting 
His  rights  in  a  manner  that  would  secure  at 
once  the  allegiance  of  the  people;  but  though 
we  see  no  evidence  of  any  good  intentions,  we 
can  readily  believe  that  in  the  act  of  betrayal 
his  mind  did  not  go  beyond  the  immediate  con- 
sequences of  his  action — on  the  one  hand  the 
money;  and  on  the  other  what  was  it  but  the 
handing  of  his  Master  to  the  chief  priests  and 
elders,  who  were  after  all  His  ecclesiastical  su- 
periors; and  had  they  not  the  right  to  put  Him 
on  His  trial?  But  now  that  he  sees  Jesus,  Whom 
by  long  acquaintance  he  knows  to  be  without 
spot  or  stain,  bound  as  a  common  criminal  and 
led  away  to  execution,  his  act  appears  in  a  new 
and  awful  light,  he  is  smitten  with  a  measureless 
fear,  and  can  no  longer  bear  to  think  of  what 
he   has    done. 

"  He  repented  himself,"  so  we  read  in  our 
version;  but  that  it  is  no  true  repentance  the 
more  expressive  Greek  makes  plain,  for  the  word 
is  quite  distinct  from  that  which  indicates  "  re- 
pentance after  a  godly  sort."  Had  there  been  in 
his  heart  any  spring  of  true  repentance  its 
waters  would  have  been  unsealed  long  ere  this — 
at  the  Table,  or  when  in  the  Garden  he  heard 
his  Master's  last  appeal  of  love.  Not  love,  but 
fear,  not  godly  sorrow,  but  very  human  terror. 
is  what  moves  him  now;  and  therefore  it  is  not 
to  Jesus  that  he  flies, — had  he  even  now  gone  up 
51— Vol.  IV. 


to  Him,  and  fallen  at  His  feet  and  confessed 
his  sins,  he  would  have  been  forgiven, — but  to  his 
accomplices  in  crime.  Fain  would  he  undo  what 
he  has  done;  but  it  is  impossible!  What  he  can 
do,  however,  he  will;  so  he  tries  to  get  the 
chief  priests  to  take  back  the  silver  pieces.  But 
they  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  them  or 
with  him.  To  his  piteous  confession  they  pay  no 
heed;  let  him  settle  his  own  accounts  with  his 
own  conscience:  "  What  is  that  to  us?  see  thou 
to  that." 

He  is  now  alone;  shut  up  to  himself;  alone 
with  his  sin.  Even  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver, 
which  had  such  a  friendly  sound  as  he  first 
dropped  them  in  his  purse,  have  turned  against 
him;  now  he  hates  the  very  sight  of  them,  and 
must  be  rid  of  them.  As  the  priests  will  not  take 
them  back,  he  will  cast  them  "  into  the  sanc- 
tuary "  (R.  v.),  and  so  perhaps  find  some  relief. 
But  oh,  Judas!  it  is  one  thing  to  get  the  silver 
out  of  your  hands,  and  quite  another  to  get  the 
stain  out  of  your  soul.  The  only  effect  of  it  is 
to  make  the  solitude  complete.  He  has  at  last 
come  to  himself;  and  what  a  self  it  is  to  come 
to!  No  wonder  that  he  "  went  and  hanged  him- 
self." 

The  chief  priests  have  not  yet  come  to  them- 
selves. They  will  by-and-by,  whether  after  the 
manner  of  the  prodigal  or  after  the  manner  of 
the  traitor  time  will  show;  but  meanwhile  they 
are  in  the  full  career  of  their  sin,  and  can  there- 
fore as  yet  consult  to  very  good  purpose.  It  was 
not  at  all  a  bad  way  of  getting  out  of  their  dif- 
ficulty with  the  money  found  in  the  sanctuary, 
to  buy  with  it  a  place  to  bury  strangers  in;  but 
little  did  they  dream  that  when  the  story  of  it 
should  be  told  thereafter  to  the  world  they  would 
be  discovered  to  have  unconsciously  fulfilled  a 
prophecy  (Zech.  xi.  12,  13),  which  on  the  one 
hand  gibbeted  their  crime  as  a  valuing  of  the 
Shepherd  of  Israel  at  the  magnificent  price  of 
thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and  on  the  other  carried 
with  it  the  suggestion  of  those  awful  woes  which 
Jeremiah  had  pronounced  at  the  very  spot  they 
had  purchased  with  the  price  of  blood  (Jer.  xix.). 

From  the  end  of  the  traitor  Judas  we  return 
to  the  issue  of  the  nation's  treason.  "  Now  Je- 
sus stood  before  the  governor;."  The  full  study 
of  Jesus  before  Pilate  belongs  rather  to  the 
fourth  Gospel,  which  supplies  many  most  inter- 
esting details  not  furnished  here.  We  must  there- 
fore deal  with  it  quite  briefly,  confining  our  at- 
tention as  much  as  possible  to  the  points  touched 
in   the  record  before  us.* 

*  It  is  most  instructive  at  this  point  to  note  the  extreme 
condensation  of  this  report  of  the  trial  before  Pilate. 
This  is  especially  noticeable  at  the  first  stage  of  the  trial. 
In  the  fuller  reports  by  St.  John  (xviii.  29-38)  we  find  in- 
deed the  qiiestion,  "Art  thou  king  of  the  Jews .' "  (v.  33), 
and  the  answer  "  Thou  sayest  "  (v.  37) ;  but  how  much 
more  besides  !  So  is  it  beyond  question  in  many  other 
places  where  there  is  not  the  same  opportunity  of  sup- 
plying what  has  been  omitted.  If  this  were  always  borne 
in  mind  in  reading  the  Gospels,  we  should  avoid  many  dif- 
ficulties, which  have  often  needlessly  perplexed  the  best 
of  people.  There  is  often  much  to  read  between  the  lines, 
and  not  only  so,  but  much  between  the  lines  we  cannot 
read,  the  knowledge  of  which  would  make  crooked  things 
straight  and  rough  places  plain.  The  difficulty  of  accu- 
rately realising  a  complex  scene  from  a  report  of  it  which, 
however  accurate,  is  highly  condensed,  ought  to  be  always 
present  to  the  minds  of  readers  of  the  Gospels,  and 
ought  to  be  a  check  on  those  who  attribute  to  the  "mis- 
takes" of  the  writers  what  in  all  probability  is  due  to  the 
ignorance  of  the  readers— ignorance,  it  may  be,  of  some 
little  matter  of  detail,  or  some  comparatively  unimportant 
saying,  the  knowledge  of  which  would  at  once  clear  up  a 
difficulty  which  to  the  unaided  imagination  may  appear 
insoluble. 


802 


THE    GOSPEL    OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


As  before  the  council,  so  before  Pilate,  our 
Lord  speaks,  or  is  silent,  according  as  the  ques- 
tion affects  His  mission  or  Himself.  When 
asked  of  His  Kingdom,  He  answers  in  the  most 
decided  manner  {"  Thou  sayest "  was  a  strong 
affirmation,  as  if  to  say  "Certainly  I  am");  for 
on  this  depends  the  only  hope  of  salvation  for 
Pilate— for  His  accusers — for  all.  He  will  by  no 
means  disown  or  shrink  from  acknowledging  the 
mission  of  salvation  on  which  His  Father  has 
sent  Him,  though  it  may  raise  against  Him  the 
cry  of  blasphemy  in  the  council,  and  of  treason 
in  the  court;  but  when  He  is  asked  what  He  has 
to  say  for  Himself,  in  the  way  of  answer  to  the 
charges  made  against  Him,  He  is  silent:  even 
when  Pilate  himself  appeals  to  Him  in  the 
strongest  manner  to  say  something  in  His  own 
defence,  "  He  gave  him  no  answer,  not  even  to 
one  word"  (R.  V.).  "Insomuch  that  the  gov- 
ernor marvelled  greatly;"  for  how  could  he  un- 
derstand? How  can  a  cautious,  cunning,  time- 
serving man  of  the  world  understand  the  self- 
lessness of  the  Son  of  God? 

Pilate  had  no  personal  grudge  against  Jesus, 
and  had  sense  enough  to  recognise  at  once  that 
the  claims  of  Kinghood  advanced  by  his  prisoner 
did  not  touch  the  prerogatives  of  Csesar — had 
penetration  also  to  see  through  the  motives  of 
the  chief  priests  and  elders  (ver.  i8),  and  there- 
fore was  not  at  all  disposed  to  acquiesce  in  the 
demand  made  on  him  for  a  summary  condemna- 
tion. Besides,  he  was  not  without  fears,  which 
inclined  him  to  the  side  of  justice.  He  was  evi- 
dently impressed  with  the  demeanour  of  his 
prisoner.  This  appears  even  in  the  brief  narra- 
tive of  our  Evangelist;  but  it  comes  out  very 
strikingly  in  the  fuller  record  of  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel. His  wife's  influence,  too,  was  used  in  the 
same  direction.  She  evidently  had  heard  some- 
thing about  Jesus,  and  had  taken  some  interest 
in  Him,  enough  to  reach  the  conviction  that  He 
was  a  "  righteous  man."  It  was  as  yet  quite  early 
in  the  morning,  and  she  may  not  have  known 
till  after  her  husband  had  gone  out  that  it  was 
for  the  trial  of  Jesus  he  was  summoned.  Hav- 
ing had  uneasy  dreams,  in  which  the  Man  Who 
had  impressed  her  so  much  was  a  leading  figure, 
it  was  natural  that  she  should  send  him  a  hasty 
message,  so  as  to  reach  him  "  while  he  was  sit- 
ting on  the  judgment  seat"  (R.  V.).  This  mes- 
sage would  reinforce  his  fears,  and  increase  his 
desire  to  deal  justly  with  his  extraordinary  pris- 
oner. 

On  the  other  hand,  Pilate  could  not  afford  to 
refuse  point-blank  the  demand  of  the  Jewish 
leaders.  He  was  by  no  means  secure  in  his  seat. 
There  had  been  so  many  disturbances  under  his 
administration,  as  we  learn  from  contemporary 
history,  that  his  recall,  perhaps  something  more 
serious  than  recall,  might  be  expected  from 
Rome,  if  he  should  again  get  into  trouble  with 
these  turbulent  Jews;  so  he  did  not  dare  to  run 
the  risk  of  simply  doing  what  he  knew  was 
right.  Accordingly  he  tried  several  expedients, 
as  we  learn  from  the  other  accounts,  to  avoid  the 
necessity  of  pronouncing  sentence,  one  of  which 
is  here  set  forth  at  length  (ver.  15,  seq.),  probably 
because  it  brings  into  strong  relief  the  absolute 
rejection  of  their  Messiah  alike  by  the  rulers 
and  by  the  people. 

It  was  a  most  ingenious  device,  and  affords  a 
striking  example  of  the  astuteness  of  the  procu- 
rator. Barabbas  may  have  had  some  following 
in  his  "  sedition  "  ;  but  evidently  he  was  no  pop- 


ular hero,  but  a  vulgar  robber  or  bandit,  whose 
release  was  not  at  all  likely  to  be  clamoured  for 
by  the  multitude;  and  it  was  moreover  reasonably 
to  be  expected  that  the  chief  priests,  much  as 
they  hated  Jesus,  would  be  ashamed  to  even  hint 
that  He  was  worse  than  this  wretched  crim- 
inal. But  he  did  not  know  how  deep  the 
hatred  was  with  which  he  had  to  deal.  "  He 
knew  that  for  envy  they  had  delivered  Him;" 
but  he  did  not  know  that  at  the  root  of 
that  envy  lay  the  conviction  that  either  Jesus 
must  perish  or  they  must.  They  felt  that  He 
was  "  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  evil,  and 
could  not  look  upon  iniquity "  ;  and  inas- 
much as  they  had  made  up  their  minds  to  keep 
their  iniquity,  they  must  get  rid  of  Him;  they 
must  seal  up  these  eyes  which  searched  them 
through  and  through,  they  must  silence  these 
tones  which,  silvery  as  they  were,  were  to  them 
as  the  knell  of  judgment.  They  had  no  liking 
for  Barabbas,  and,  to  do  them  justice,  no  sym- 
pathy whatever  with  his  crimes;  but  they  had  no 
reason  to  be  afraid  of  him:  they  could  live, 
though  he  was  free.  It  must  have  been  a  hard 
alternative  even  for  them;  but  there  is  no  hesi- 
tation about  it.  Themselves  and  their  emissa- 
ries are  busy  among  the  mob,  persuading  them 
"  that  they  should  ask  Barabbas,  and  destroy 
Jesus." 

The  multitudes  are  only  too  easily  persuaded. 
Not  that  they  had  the  dark  envy,  or  anything 
like  the  rooted  hatred,  of  their  leaders;  but  what 
will  a  careless  mob  not  be  prepared  to  do  when 
excitement  prevails  and  passions  are  inflamed? 
It  is  not  at  all  unlikely  that  some  of  the  same 
people  who  followed  the  multitude  in  shouting 
"  Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David!  "  only  five  days 
before,  would  join  in  the  cry  which  some  of  the 
baser  sort  would  be  the  first  to  raise,  "  Crucify 
Him!  crucify  Him!"  Those  who  know  human 
nature  best — at  its  basest,  as  in  the  hatred  of  the 
chief  priests  and  elders;  at  its  shallowest,  as  in 
the  passions  of  the  fickle  crowd — will  marvel 
least  at  the  way  in  which  the  alternative  of  Pi- 
late was  received.  There  is  no  touchstone  of 
human  nature  like  the  cross  of  Christ;  and  in 
the  presence  of  the  Holy  One  of  God,  sin  is 
forced,  as  it  were,  to  show  itself  in  all  its  na- 
tive blackness  and  enormity;  and  what  sin  is 
there,  however  small  it  seem  to  be,  which  if  al- 
lowed to  develop  its  latent  possibility  of  vile- 
ness,  would  not  lead  on  to  this  very  choice — 
"  Not  Jesus,  but  Barabbas  "  ? 

And  Pilate,  you  may  wash  your  hands  before 
the  multitude,  and  say,  "  I  am  innocent  of  the 
blood  of  this  just  Person";  but  it  is  all  in  vain. 
There  is  a  Searcher  of  hearts  Who  knows  you 
through  and  through.  "  See  ye  to  it,"  you  say; 
and  so  said  to  Judas  the  chief  priests  and  elders, 
using  the  very  same  words.  But  both  they  and 
you  must  see  to  that  which  each  fain  would  put 
aside  for  ever.  Aye,  and  it  will  be  less  tolerable 
for  you  and  for  them  than  even  for  the  thought- 
less crowd  who  cry,  "  His  blood  be  upon  us  and 
on  our  children."  It  was  in  vain  to  ask  of  people 
like  these,  "  What  shall  I  do,  then,  with  Jesus 
which  is  called  Christ?"  There  was  only  one 
thing  to  do:  the  thing  which  was  right.  Failing 
to  do  this,  you  had  no  alternative  but  to  share 
in  the  sin  of  all  the  rest..  Even  Pilate  must  take 
a  side,  as  all  must  do.  Neutrality  here  is  im- 
possible. Those  who  persist  in  making  the  vain 
attempt  will  find  themselves  at  last  on  the  same 
side  as  Pilate  took  when  he  "  released  unto  them 


Matthewxxvi.  i-xxvii.  56.]    THE    GREAT    ATONEMENT    DAY. 


803 


Barabbas;  but  Jesus  he  scourged  and  delivered 
to  be  crucified." 

IV.  From   the   Third   to   the   Ninth    Hour 
(xviii.  27-56). 

The  cool  of  the  morning  was  passing  into  the 
heat  of  the  day,  as  the  soldiers  took  Jesus  and 
led  Him  away  to  be  crucified;  and  the  sun  was  at 
the  same  angle  in  the  western  sky  when  He 
bowed  His  head  and  gave  up  the  ghost.  In  the 
six  hours  between  lay  the  crisis  of  the  world  (see 
John  xii.  31,  Greek;:  its  judgment,  its  salvation. 
The  great  conflict  of  the  ages  is  concentrated  in 
these  hours  of  agony.  In  the  brief  record  of  them 
we  have  the  very  core  and  kernel  of  the  gospel  of 
"  Jesus  Christ  and  Him  crucified." 

All  we  can  hope  to  do  is  to  find  some  point 
of  view  which  may  afiford  a  general  survey  of 
the  awful  scene;  and  such  point  of  observation 
we  may  perhaps  discover  in  the  thought  of  the 
marvellous  significance  of  each  detail  when  set 
in  the  after  light  of  faith.  Most  of  the  incidents 
are  quite  simple  and  natural — what  might  in 
every  way  be  expected  as  concomitants  of  the 
deed  of  blood  which  darkened  the  day — and  yet 
the  simplest  of  them  is  charged  with  unexpected 
meaning.  The  actors  in  this  dark  scene  are 
moved  by  the  basest  of  passions,  are  destitute 
of  the  smallest  gleam  of  insight  into  what  is  pass- 
ing; and  yet,  in  saying  what  they  say  and  doing 
what  they  do,  they  declare  the  glory  of  the 
Christ  of  God  as  signally  as  if  they  were  saying 
and  doing  all  by  Divine  direction.  In  more 
senses  than  one  "  they  know  not  what  they 
do." 

From  this  point  of  view  we  might  survey  all 
the  four  records  of  the  Crucifixion,  and  find 
striking  illustrations  of  our  thought  in  each  of 
them.  As  a  specimen  of  this  we  may  refer  in 
passing  to  the  words  of  Pilate  recorded  by  St. 
John  alone:  "  Behold  the  Man!  "  and  again, 
"  Behold  your  King!  "  In  these  remarkable  ut- 
terances the  procurato-  quite  unconsciously  fur- 
nishes the  answer  to  his  own  as  yet  unanswered 
questions  (John  xviii.  38:  Matt,  xxvii.  22),  and, 
Balaam-like,  becomes  a  preacher  of  the  gospel, 
summoning  the  whole  world  to  admiration  and 
homage,  to  faith  and  obedience.  But  we  may 
not  extend  our  view  over  the  other  Gospels;  it 
will  be  enough  to  glance  at  the  particulars  found 
in  that  which  lies  before  us. 

The  first  is  the  mockery  of  the  soldiers.  A 
brutal  set  they  must  have  been;  and  their  treat- 
ment of  their  victim,  as  they  intended  it,  is  too 
revolting  even  to  think  of  in  detail.  Yet,  had 
they  been  inspired  by  the  loftiest  purpose,  and 
been  able  to  look  into  the  meaning  of  what  they 
did  with  the  most  penetrating  insight,  they  could 
not  have  in  a  more  striking  manner  illustrated 
the  true  glory  of  His  royalty.  Ah,  soldiers!  you 
may  well  plait  that  crown  of  thorns,  and  put  it 
on  His  head;  for  He  is  the  Prince  of  Sufferers, 
the  King  of  Sorrow!  On  that  head  are  many 
crowns — the  crown  of  righteousness,  the  crown 
of  heroism,  the  crown  of  life;  but  of  them  all 
the  very  best  is  the  crown  of  thorns,  for  it  is 
the  crown  of  Love. 

The  next  incident  is  the  impressing  of  Simon 
of  Cyrene  to  bear  His  cross.  It  was  intended 
as  an  insult.  The  service  was  too  degrading 
even  for  any  of  the  rabble  of  Jerusalem,  so  they 
imposed  it  on  this  poor  foreigner,  coming  out 
of  the  country.     Little  did  they  think  that  this 


same  man  of  Cyrene,  who  probably  had  pro- 
voked them  by  showing  some  sympathy  with 
the  Sufferer,  and  might  by  no  means  grudge  the 
toil,  unjustly  forced  upon  him  though  it  was, 
should  with  his  two  sons  Alexander  and  Rufus 
(see  Mark  xv.  21)  be  a  kind  of  firstfruits  of  a 
great  multitude  of  foreigners  coming  out  of  all 
countries,  who  should  consider  it  the  highest 
honour  of  their  lives  to  take  up  and  bear  after 
Jesus  the  cross  which  Simon  had  borne  for  Him. 
The  very  name  Golgotha,  though  derived  in  all 
probability  from  the  natural  appearance  of  the 
eminence  on  which  the  crosses  were  erected,  has 
a  certain  dreary  appropriateness,  not  only  be- 
cause of  the  horror  of  the  deed,  but  because  the 
thought  is  suggested  that  death's  Destroyer 
gained  His  victory  on  death's  own  ground;  and 
the  offering  of  the  potion  usually  given  to 
deaden  pain  gave  the  pale  sufferer  an  oppor- 
tunity of  showing  by  His  refusal  of  it  that  not 
only  was  the  death  which  ended  all  a  voluntary 
act,  but  that  each  pang  of  the  passion  was  borne 
in  the  resoluteness  of  a  love-constrained  will: 

"Thou  wilt  feel  all,  that  Thou  may'stpity  all ; 
And  rather  would st  Thou  wrestle  with  strong  pain  , 
Than  overcloud  Thy  soul 
So  clear  in  agony. 

O  most  entire  and  perfect  Sacrifice, 
Renewed  in  every  pulse. 

That  on  the  tedious  Cross 

Told  the  long  hours  of  death." 

The  dividing  of  the  garments  among  the 
soldiers  was  a  most  natural  and  ordinary  inci- 
dent; it  would  seem,  indeed,  to  have  been  the 
common  practice  at  crucifixions;  and  the  fulfil- 
ment of  prophecy  would  be  the  very  last  thing 
that  would  enter  the  men's  minds  as  they  did 
it:  even  St.  Matthew  himself,  in  recording  it, 
does  not  view  it  in  this  light;  for,  though  he 
evidently  made  a  point  of  calling  attention  to 
all  fulfilments  of  prophecy  that  struck  him,  he 
seems  to  have  omitted  this;*  yet  here  again, 
even  in  a  small  but  most  significant  matter  of 
detail,  as  recorded  by  St.  John  (xix.  23,  24),  the 
Scriptures  are  fulfilled. 

The  writing  on  the  cross  is  called  "  His  ac- 
cusation." So  indeed  it  was;  for  it  was  for  this 
he  was  condemned:  no  other  charge  could  be 
made  good  against  Him.  But  it  was  not  His 
accusation  only, — it  was  His  coronation.  In 
vain  the  chief  priests  tried  to  induce  the  gov- 
ernor to  change  it.  "  What  I  have  written,  I 
have  written,"  was  his  answer;  and  there  it 
stood,  and  a  better  inscription  for  the  cross  the 
apostles  themselves  could  not  have  devised. 
"  This  is  Jesus,"  the  Saviour — the  name  above 
every  name.  How  it  must  have  cheered  the 
Saviour's  heart  to  know  that  it  was  there! 
"  This  is  Jesus,  the  King,"  never  more  truly  King 
than  when  this  writing  was  His  only  crown. 
"  This  is  Jesus,  the  King  of  the  Jews,"  despised 
and  rejected  of  them  now,  but  Son  of  David 
none  the  less,  and  yet  to  be  claimed  and 
crowned,  and  rejoiced  in  when  at  last  "  all  Is- 
rael shall  be  saved."  Elsewhere  we  learn  that 
the  inscription  was  in  Hebrew  and  Greek  and 
Latin, — the  first  the  tongue  of  the  people  to 
whose  keeping  had  been  committed  the  oracles 
of  God,  the  other  two  the  languages  in  which 
God's  good  tidings  of  Life  through  a  Crucified 
Saviour  could  be  best  and  most  quickly  carried 

*  The  reference  is  inserted  in  our  Authorised  Version. 
but  without  sufficient  authority.  The  Revised  Version 
properly  omits  it. 


8o4 


THE   GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


"  to   every  creature," — as   if  to   make   the   proc- 
lamation worldwide.. 

His  position  between  the  two  thieves  is  told 
as  simply  as  all  the  rest;  yet  how  full  of  mean^ 
ing,  not  only  as  fulfilling  the  Scripture  which 
spoke  of  Him  as  "  numbered  with  the  trans- 
gressors," but  as  furnishing  a  most  impressive 
picture  of  the  Friend  of  Sinners,  enduring  their 
revilings,  and  yet  as  soon  as  one  of  them  shows 
the  first  signs  of  coming  to  a  better  mind, 
eagerly  granting  him  forgiveness  and  eternal  life, 
and  receiving  him  into  His  kingdom  as  the  first- 
fruits  of  His  redeemed  ones. 

Again,  the  mocking  cries  of  the  passers-by  are 
exactly  what  was  to  be  expected  from  the  coarse 
natures  of  the  men;  yet  each  one  of  them,  when 
seen  in  the  after  light  of  faith,  becomes  a  tribute 
to  His  praise.  As  an  illustration  of  this,  listen 
to  the  cry  which  comes  out  of  the  deepest  abyss 
of  hatred.  Hear  these  chief  priests  mocking 
Him,  with  the  scribes  and  elders.  With  bitter 
taunt  they  say,  in  scorn,  "  He  saved  others; 
Himself  He  cannot  save."  With  bitter  taunt? 
In  scorn?  Ah,  "  fools  and  blind,"  you  little 
know  that  you  are  making  a  garland  of  imper- 
ishable beauty  to  wreathe  around  His  brow!  It 
was  indeed  most  true.  It  was  because  He  saved 
others  that  He  could  not  save  Himself.  Were 
He  willing  to  let  others  perish,  were  He 
willing  to  let  you  perish — He  would  this  very 
moment  save  Himself.  But  He  will  bear,  not 
only  the  cruel  nails  and  spear,  but  your  more 
cruel  mockeries,  rather  than  give  up  His  self- 
imposed  task  of  saving  others  by  His  perfect 
sacrifice! 

It  is  high  noon;  but  there,  at  that  place  of 
a  skull,  a  deed  is  being  done  from  which  the 
sun  must  hide  his  face  for  shame.  ^  From  the 
sixth  hour  there  was  darkness  over  all  the  land 
until  the  ninth  hour."  The  simple-hearted 
Evangelist  has  no  reflections  of  his  own  to  offer; 
he  sirnply  records  the  well-remembered  fact, 
with  his  usual  reticence  of  feeling,  which  makes 
the  deep,  dread  meaning  of  it  only  more  im- 
pressive. For  there  is  not  only  darkness  over 
all  the  land;  there  is  darkness  in  the  Sufferer's 
soul.  The  agony  of  the  Garden  is  on  Him  once 
again.  He  sees  no  longer  the  faces  of  the  crowd, 
and  the  mocking  voices  are  now  silent,  for  the 
people  cannot  but  feel  the  solemnising  effect 
of  the  midday  gloom.  The  presence  of  man  is 
forgotten,  and  with  it  the  shame,  even  the  pain: 
the  Redeemer  of  the  world  is  again  alone  with 
God. 

Alone  with  God,  and  the  sin  of  the  world  is 
on  Him.  "  He  bare  our  sins  in  His  own  body 
on  the  tree,"  therefore  is  it  that  He  must  enter 
even  into  the  very  deepest  darkness  of  the  soul, 
the  feeling  of  separation  from  God.  the  sense  of 
forsakenness,  which  is  so  appalling  to  the  awak- 
ened sinner,  and  which  even  the  sinless  One 
must  taste,  because  of  the  burden  laid  upon  Him. 
To  Him  it  was  a  pang  beyond  all  others,  forcing 
from  these  silent  lips  the  lamentable  cry,  "  My 
God,  My  God,  why  hast  Thou  forsaken  Me?" 
There  is  no  reason  indeed  to  suppose  that  the 
Sufferer  was  really  forsaken  by  God,  even  for  a 
moment.  Never  was  the  love  of  the  Father 
deeper  and  stronger  than  when  His  Son  was 
offering  up  the  all-atoning  sacrifice.  Never  was 
the  repeated  testimony  more  sure  than  now— 
"  This  is  My  Beloved  Son,  in  Whom  I  am  well 
pleased."  But  none  the  less  was  there  the  sense 
of  forsakenness. 


This  sense  of  forsakenness  seems  to  have  had 
some  mysterious  connection  with  the  pains  of 
death.  In  the  Garden,  where  the  experience  was 
similar.  He  said,  "  My  soul  is  exceeding  sorrow- 
ful, even  unto  death,"  and  now  that  death  is  on 
Him,  now  that  His  human  spirit  is  about  to 
sink  into  the  unknown  abyss,  now  that  darkness 
is  closing  over  Him  on  every  side.  He  feels  as 
if  He  were  forsaken  utterly:  yet  His  faith  fails 
not;  perhaps  He  thinks  of  the  words,  "  Yea  the 
darkness  hideth  not  from  Thee;  but  the  night 
shineth  as  the  day:  the  darkness  and  the  light 
are  both  alike  to  Thee,"  and  though  He  cannot 
now  say  "  Father  "  even.  He  can  at  least  cry  as 
from  the  depths.  His  spirit  overwhelmed  within 
Him,  "My  God,  My  God."  That  22d  Psalm 
which  was  certainly  in  His  mind  must  have  sug- 
gested thoughts  of  hope  and  strength,  and  ere 
His  spirit  leaves  the  tortured  body  He  has 
reached  the  triumphant  close  of  it;  for  as  its 
opening  utterance  became  His  cry  of  agony,  its 
closing  word  suggests  His  shout  of  victory.  The 
shout  is  mentioned  by  St.  Matthew;  the  words  we 
learn  from  St.  John:  "  It  is  finished." 

From  the  sixth  hour  to  the  ninth  the  dark- 
ness lasted,  and  at  the  ninth  hour  Jesus  yielded 
up  the  ghost.  The  agony  is  over.  The  feeling 
of  separation,  of  utter  loneliness,  is  gone,  for 
the  last  word  has  been,  "  Father,  into  Thy  hands 
I  commend  My  Spirit  "  ;  and  as  the  spirit  of 
the  Son  of  man  returns  to  the  Father's  bosom, 
the  gloom  is  gone,  and  the  sun  shines  out  again 
upon  the  earth. 

How  appropriate  the  rending  of  the  veil,*  the 
quaking  of  the  earth,  the  shuddering  of  the 
graves,  and  the  visitants  from  the  realm  of  the 
unseen  greeting  the  eyes  of  those  for  whom 
heaven  was  opened  now,  is  all  so  plain  in  the 
light  of  faith  on  the  Son  of  God  that  it  needs 
no  pointing  out.  It  was  no  wonder  that  even 
the  Roman  centurion,  unaccustomed  as  he  was 
to  think  of  such  things,  could  not  refrain  from 
exclaiming,  "  Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God." 
Much  more  may  we  echo  his  exclamation  when 
in  the  light  of  the  glory  that  has  followed  we 
look  back  on  "  the  things  that  were  done." 
Recall  them, — the  crown  of  thorns,  the  cross- 
bearing  of  Simon,  the  place  of  a  skull,  the  part- 
ing of  the  garments,  the  writing  on  the  cross, 
the  company  of  the  thieves,  the  mockeries  of 
the  peopk,  the  darkness  of  the  heavens,  the 
shaking  of  the  earth,  the  rending  of  the  veil, — 
is  there  not  profound  meaning  in  it  all? 

The  portents  at  the  close,  as  was  natural,  im- 
pressed the  centurion  most;  but  these  are  just 
what  make  the  least  impression  now,  because  we 
do  not  see  them,  and  those  for  whom  no  veil  has 
been  rent  by  the  Saviour's  sacrifice  cannot  be 
expected  to  recognise  them.  But  think  of  the 
other  incidents — incidents  to  which  not  even  the 
most  sceptical  can  attach  a  shadow  of  doubt:  ob- 
serve how  utterly  unconscious  the  actors  were 
—the  soldiers  in  plaiting  the  crown  of  thorns, 
Pilate  in  writing  His  title,  the  chief  priests  in 
shouting  "  He  saved  others;  Himself  He  cannot 
save  " — and  yet  how  these  all,  viewed  in  a  light 
that  did  not  shine  for  them,  are  seen  to  have  vied 
with  each  other  in  setting  forth  His  glory  as 
the  Saviour-King;  and  then  say  whether  it  could 
all  have  been  the  merest  chance,  whether  there 
be  not  in  it  manifestly  "  the  determinate  counsel 
and  foreknowledge  of  God,"  whether  it  is  pos- 

*  "  From  the  top  to  the  bottom,"  rent,  therefore,  by  no 
human  hand. 


Matthew  xxviii.  57-xxviii.  15.] 


THE    THIRD   DAY. 


805 


sible   to   escape   the   conviction   of   the   Roman 
centurion,  "  Truly  this  is  the  Son  of  God!  " 

The  reference  to  the  "  many  women,"  "  be- 
holding afar  off,"  forms  a  pathetic  close  to  the 
story  of  the  Great  Atonement  Day. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

THE  THIRD  DAY. 

Matthew  xxvii.  57-xxviii.   15. 

Now  that  the  atoning  work  of  Christ  is  fin- 
ished, the  story  proceeds  with  rapidity  to  its 
close.  It  was  the  work  of  the  Evangelist  to  give 
the  history  of  the  incarnate  Son  of  God;  and 
now  that  the  flesh  is  laid  aside,  it  is  necessary 
only  to  give  such  notes  of  subsequent  events  as 
shall  preserve  the  continuity  between  the  pro- 
phetic and  priestly  work  of  Christ  on  earth  which 
it  had  been  His  vocation  to  describe,  and  the 
royal  work  which,  as  exalted  Prince  and 
Saviour,  it  still  remained  for  Him  to  do.  We 
need  not  wonder,  then,  that  the  record  of  the 
three  days  should  be  quite  brief,  and  of  the  forty 
days  briefer  still. 

This  brevity  is  a  note  of  truthfulness.  The 
old  idea  of  deliberate  falsehood  having  been 
quite  given  up,  reliance  is  placed,  by  those  who 
wish  to  discredit  the  gospel  witnesses,  on  the 
suggestion  that  the  records  of  the  resurrection 
are  the  result  of  fancy  crystallising  into  so-called 
fact.  But  not  only  was  there  no  time,  between 
the  death  of  Christ  and  the  latest  date  which 
can  be  assigned  for  the  writing  of  the  first  Gos- 
pel, for  the  process  of  crystallisation,  but  had 
there  been  such  a  process,  the  result  would  have 
been  very  different.  Had  fancy,  and  not  ob- 
servation, been  the  source,  how  comes  it  that 
nothing  is  told  but  what  came  within  the  range 
of  actual  vision?  Why  is  there  not  a  word  about 
Christ's  entry  into  Paradise,  or  descent  into 
Hades?  What  a  fruitful  field  for  fancy  here!— 
yet  there  is  not  even  a  hint;  for  it  is  not  from 
anything  in  the  Gospels,  but  solely  from  a  pas- 
sage in  one  of  the  Epistles,  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  descent  into  Hades  has  been  derived.  There 
is  not  a  word  or  a  hint  of  anything  that  passed 
in  the  unseen;  a  plain  statement  of  what  was 
done  with  the  body  of  Jesus  is  absolutely  all. 
Clearly  it  is  not  myth,  but  history,  with  which 
here  we  have  to  do. 

The  Evening  of  the  First  Day  (vv.  57-61). 

Day  was  passing  into  evening  when  Jesus 
"yielded  up  His  spirit";  for  the  early  evening, 
according  to  the  Jewish  reckoning,  began  at  the 
ninth  hour.  It  was  probably  some  time  after 
this — perhaps  towards  the  later  evening,  which 
began  about  the  twelfth  hour  (six  o'clock) — that 
Joseph  of  Arimathea  thought  of  claiming  the 
body  to  give  it  honourable  burial.  Why  should 
such  a  duty  have  fallen  to  a  stranger?  Where 
were  the  eleven?  Had  none  of  them  so  far  re- 
covered from  their  fear?  Where  was  Peter? 
might  not  his  penitence  for  the  past  have  im- 
pelled him  to  come  forward  now?  Where  was 
John?  He  had  taken  the  mother  of  Jesus  to  his 
own  home;  but  why  did  he  not  come  back  to 
see  what  he  could  do  for  the  sacred  body?  How 
can  they  all  leave  this  tender  office  to  a  stranger? 


It  may  be  thought  by  some  sufficient  answer 
simply  to  say.  So  the  Lord  willed  it,  and  so  the 
Scripture  was  fulfilled  which  intimated  that  He 
Who  had  died  with  the  wicked  should  be  "  with 
the  rich  in  His  death";  but  is  there  not  more 
than  this  to  be  said?  Is  not  the  disappearance  of 
the  eleven  and  the  coming  forward  of  the  two 
secret  disciples  (for  as  we  learn  from  the  fourth 
Gospel,  Nicodemus — another  secret  disciple-— 
appears  a  little  later  on  the  scene)  true  to  human 
nature?  Let  us  remember  that  the  faith  of  the 
eleven,  while  much  superior  to  that  of  the  two, 
was  from  the  nature  of  the  case  exposed  to  a 
counter-current  of  feeling,  of  which  neither 
Joseph  nor  Nicodemus  could  know  anything. 
They  had  committed  themselves  and  their  all  to 
Jesus,  as  Joseph  and  Nicodemus  had  never 
done.  The  consequence  was  that  when  the  ter- 
rible tempest  broke  on  Him,  it  came  with  all  its 
force  on  them  too.  But  Joseph  and  Nicodemus 
had  not  as  yet  ventured  their  all — had  not,  it 
would  appear,  as  yet  ventured  anything  for 
Christ.  They  were  looking  on  at  the  storm,  as 
it  were,  from  the  shore;  so  they  could  stand  it, 
as  those  who  were  in  the  very  midst  of  it  could 
not.  They  could  stand  beholding.  Not  having 
made  themselves  known,  they  were  not  exposed 
to  personal  danger,  hence  were  in  a  position 
calmly  and  thoughtfully  to  watch  the  progress 
of  events.  We  can  imagine  them  first  looking 
towards  Calvary  from  afar,  and  then,  as  the 
darkness  favoured  a  timid  approach,  drawing 
nearer  and  nearer,  and  at  last  coming  within  the 
spell  of  the  Divine  Sufferer.  As  they  witnessed 
His  patient  endurance,  they  would  become  more 
and  more  ashamed  of  their  half-hearted  sym- 
pathy, ashamed  to  think  that  though  they  had 
not  consented  to  the  counsel  and  deed  of  the 
rest  (Luke  xxiii.  51;  John  vii.  50,  51),  they  had 
not  had  courage  to  offer  any  serious  opposition. 
They  would  feel,  as  they  thought  of  this,  as  if 
they  shared  the  responsibility  of  what  must  now 
appear  to  them  an  awful  crime;  and  so,  looking 
to  Him  whom  they  had  pierced,  they  would 
mourn;  and,  brought  at  last  to  decision  by  His 
death  (John  xii.  32),  first  Joseph,  and  after  him 
Nicodemus,  came  out  boldly,  the  one  asking  for 
the  body  of  Jesus,  the  other  joining  him  in  those 
tender  and  reverent  ministrations  which  all  that 
was  best  in  them  now  constrained  them  to 
render. 

The  sad  duty  hastily,  but  tenderly  and  fitly, 
done,  a  great  stone  is  rolled  to  the  door  of  the 
sepulchre,  and  they  depart.  But  the  sepulchre  is 
not  deserted  yet.  What  are  these  figures  in  the 
dusk,  these  women  that  advance  as  the  others 
retire?  While  the  two  men  were  busy  they  have 
been  keeping  at  a  discreet  and  respectful  dis- 
tance; but  now  that  all  is  silent  at  the  tomb,  they 
draw  nearer,  and  though  night  is  coming  on 
apace,  they  cannot  leave  it,  and  the  story  of  the 
long  day  ends  with  this  pathetic  touch:  "  And 
Mary  Magdalene  was  there,  and  the  other  Mary, 
sitting  over  against  the  sepulchre." 

The  Second  Day  (vv.  62-66). 

It  was  the  Jewish  Sabbath.  The  Evangelist 
for  some  reason  avoids  the  common  designation, 
preferring  to  speak  of  it  as  "  the  day  after  the 
preparation  " — whether  it  was  that  he  shrank 
from  mentioning  the  Sabbath  in  such  a  connec- 
tion, or  whether  it  was  that  the  great  event  of 
the  preparation  day  had  such  complete  posses- 


8o6 


THE    GOSPEL   OF    ST.    MATTHEW. 


sion  of  his  mind  that  he  must  date  from  it,  we 
shall  not  attempt  to  decide. 
'  This  is  the  only  record  we  have  of  that  Sab- 
bath day  except  that  St.  Luke  tells  us  that  on 
it  the  women  "  rested  according  to  the  command- 
ment." But  the  enemies  of  Jesus  could  not  rest. 
They  were  uneasy  and  troubled  now  that  the 
deed  was  done.  They  could  not  but  have  been 
impressed  with  the  bearing  of  their  Victim,  and 
with  all  the  portents  which  accompanied  His 
end.  It  was  natural,  therefore,  that  words  of 
His,  which  when  reported  to  them  before  had 
not  seemed  worth  noticing,  should  come  back  to 
them  now  with  fateful  force.  "After  three  days 
I  will  rise  again  "  was  what  He  had  often  said. 
"  What  if  He  should  rise?  we  must  see  that  He 
does  not."  It  would  never  do,  however,  to  con- 
fess to  such  a  fear;  but  they  may  get  all  need- 
ful precautions  taken  by  suggesting  that  there 
was  danger  of  the  disciples  stealing  the  body, 
and  then  saying  that  He  had  risen.  On  this 
pretext  they  get  a  guard  from  Pilate,  and  author- 
ity to  seal  the  sepulchre.  Having  thus  made 
all  secure,  they  can  sleep  in  peace. 

The  Morning  of  the  Third  Day  (xxviii.  1-15). 

The  women,  having  rested  on  the  Sabbath  ac- 
cording to  the  commandment,  knew  nothing  of 
what  had  been  done  at  the  tomb  that  day,  so, 
as  they  set  out  before  daybreak  on  the  third 
morning,  they  only  thought  of  the  great  stone, 
and  wondered  how  it  could  be  rolled  away;  but 
when  they  came,  the  sun  just  rising  as  they 
reached  the  spot,  they  found  the  stone  already 
rolled  away,  and  an  angel  of  the  Lord  at  the 
tomb,  so  lustrous  in  the  livery  of  heaven  that 
tbe  keepers  had  quailed  in  his  presence  and  were 
powerless  to  interfere.  The  awe  with  which  the 
sight  would  naturally  inspire  the  women  also 
was  mingled  with  joy  as  they  heard  his  kindly 
.  greeting  and  sympathetic  words.  Altogether 
worthy  of  an  angel  from  heaven  are  the  words 
he  is  reported  to  have  spoken.  There  is  first 
the  tender  response  to  their  looks  of  dread — 
"  Fear  not  ye,"  as  if  to  say,  These  others  well 
•  may  fear,  for  there  is  nothing  in  common  be- 
tween them  and  me;  but  with  you  it  is  different; 
"I  know  that  ye  seek  Jesus,  Which  was  cruci- 
fied." Then  there  is  the  joyful  news:  "  He  is 
not  here;  for  He  is  risen,  as  He  said:"  and  as 
he  observes  their  look  of  half-incredulous  won- 
der he  kindly  adds;  to  let  their  sight  be  helper 
to  their  faith,  "  Come,  see  the  place  where  the 
Lord  lay."  Then  he  gives  them  the  honour  of 
carrying  the  glad  tidings  to  the  other  disciples, 
and  assuring  them  that  the  Divine  Shepherd  will 
meet  them  all  in  Galilee,  according  to  His  word. 
>,  At  this  point  we  encounter  one  of  the  chief 
difficulties  to  be  found  in  St.  Matthew's  record  of 
the  resurrection.  There  are  indeed  several  par- 
ticulars in  this  Gospel,  as  well  as  in  the  others, 
.which  it  is  difficult  to  fit  into  a  connected  ac- 
count embracing  all  the  facts;  but  as  every  per- 
son of  even  moderate  intelligence  knows  that 
the  same  difficulty  is  met  in  comparing  various 
truthful  accounts  of  any  great  event  in  which 
details  are  many  and  complex,  it  is  only  the 
•most  unreasoning  prejudice  that  can  find  in  this 
an  excuse  for  doubting  the  credibility  of  the 
•writers.  Rather  is  this  feature  of  the  records 
a  distinct  note  of  truthfulness;  for,  had  it  been 
easy  to  fit  each  fact  into  its  exact  place  in  all  the 
other  accounts,  we  should  have  heard  from  the 


very  same  doubters,  and  with  far  better  reason, 
that  there  was  every  sign  of  its  being  a  made-up 
story.  All  the  four  accounts  are  brief  and  frag- 
mentary; there  is  evidently  no  attempt  whatever 
to  relate  all  that  took  place,  and  we  should  need 
to  know  all  in  order  to  form  a  complete  picture 
of  the  entire  series  of  events  which  glorified  the 
first  Easter  Day.  We  must  therefore  be  content 
with  the  four  vivid  pictures  given  us,  without 
insisting  on  what  with  our  imperfect  knowledge 
is  perhaps  the  impossible  task  of  so  combining 
them  as  to  have  one  great  canvas  embracing  all 
the  details  in  each  of  the  four. 

The  account  before  us  is  the  briefest  of  all, 
and  therefore  it  would  be  especially  out  of  place 
in  dealing  with  this  Gospel  to  attempt  to  fill 
up  the  blanks  and  construct  a  consecutive  his- 
tory of  all  that  took  place  on  that  eventful  day. 
But  there  is  one  point  with  which  it  is  especially 
necessary  to  deal  in  considering  St.  Matthew's 
account  of  the  resurrection — viz.,  the  prominence 
given  to  the  appearance  of  the  Lord  to  His  dis- 
ciples in  Galilee — whereas  in  the  fuller  records 
of  the  third  and  fourth  Gospels,  not  Galilee,  but 
Jerusalem  and  its  vicinity,  is  the  region  where 
He  makes  Himself  known. 

Those  who  are  anxious  to  make  the  most  of 
this  difficulty  are  much  disappointed  to  find  the 
ninth  verse  in  their  way.  Wishing  to  prove  a 
sharp  contradiction,  as  if  the  one  said  the  Lord 
appeared  only  in  Galilee,  and  the  other  that  He 
appeared  only  in  Jerusalem  and  its  neighbour- 
hood, they  are  naturally  vexed  to  find  one  of  the 
Jerusalem  appearances  actually  mentioned  here. 
The  attempt  has  accordingly  been  made  to  dis- 
credit it;  but  in  vain.  It  stands  there  an  un- 
questionable part  of  the  original  text.  So  we 
must  bear  in  mind  that  St.  Matthew  not  only 
does  not  assert  that  it  was  only  in  Galilee  that 
our  Lord  appeared,  but  he  expressly  mentions 
one  appearance  in  Jerusalem.  On  the  other 
hand,  while  St.  Mark  mentions  no  appearance 
in  Galilee,  he  does  mention  the  Lord's  promise 
to  meet  His  disciples  there,  and  leaves  it  dis- 
tinctly to  be  inferred  that  it  was  fulfilled.  St. 
Luke,  indeed,  makes  no  mention  of  Galilee  at 
all;  but  there  is  abundance  of  room  for  it:  for 
while  he  occupies  almost  all  his  space  with  the 
record  of  one  day,  he  tells  us  in  the  beginning  of 
his  second  volume  (Acts  i.  3)  that  Christ 
"  showed  Himself  alive  after  His  passion  by 
many  infallible  proofs,  being  seen  of  them  forty 
days,  and  speaking  of  the  things  pertaining  to 
the  kingdom  of  God."  St.  John  also  confines 
himself  to  what  took  place  at  Jerusalem;  but  in 
the  interesting  appendix  to  that  Gospel  there  is 
a  striking  account  of  a  meeting  with  the  eleven 
in  Galilee — evidently  not  the  same  one  which  is 
recorded  here,  but  another  of  the  same,  afford- 
ing one  more  specimen  of  meetings  which  were 
no  doubt  frequently  repeated  during  the  forty 
days.  It  is  abundantly  evident,  therefore,  that 
there  is  no  contradiction  whatever. 

Still  the  question  remains.  Why  does  St. 
Matthew  make  so  little  of  what  the  others  make 
so  much  of,  and  so  much  of  what  the  others 
make  so  little  of?  In  answer  we  might  first  ask 
whether  this  was  not  in  every  way  to  be  expected 
and  desired.  If,  as  evidently  was  the  case,  there 
were  manifestations  of  the  risen  Lord  both  in  the 
south  and  in  the  north,  and  if  we  were  to  have 
several  accounts,  was  it  not  desirable  that  one 
at  least  should  make  it  his  specialty  to  bring  into 
prominence  the  appearances  in  the  north?     And 


Matthew  xxviii.  16-20.] 


"ALL   THE    DAYS. 


807 


if  so,  who  could  do  it  more  appropriately  than 
Matthew  the  publican  of  Galilee?  The  favour 
shown  his  own  northern  land  had  most  deeply 
impressed  his  mind.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
he  passed  over  entirely  the  early  Judean  ministry 
recorded  by  St.  John,  and  rejoiced  in  the  Gali- 
lean ministry  as  the  dawning  of  the  new  Day 
according  to  the  words  of  ancient  prophecy 
(Matt.  iv.   14-16). 

Furthermore,  there  is  every  reason  to  suppose 
that  it  was  not  till  they  met  in  Galilee  that  the 
scattered  flock  of  the  disciples  was  gathered  all 
together.  The  appearances  in  Jerusalem  were  to 
individuals  and  to  little  companies;  whereas  in 
Galilee  it  would  seem  that  He  appeared  to  as 
many  as  five  hundred  at  once  (i  Cor.  xv.  6);  and 
though  the  Lord  appeared  to  the  ten  (Thomas 
being  absent),  and  again  to  the  eleven,  before 
they  left  Jerusalem,  it  is  not  to  these  occasions, 
but  rather  to  the  meeting  on  the  shore  of  the 
lake,  that  we  look  for  their  fresh  commission  to 
address  themselves  again  to  their  work  as  fishers 
of  men.  This  will  appear  more  clearly  if  we 
bear  in  mind  our  Lord's  sad  reference,  as  the 
crisis  approached,  to  the  scattering  of  the  flock, 
and  His  promise  that  after  He  had  risen  again 
He  would  go  before  them  into  Galilee  (Matt, 
xxvi.  31,  32).  We  have  here,  then  (ver.  7),  a 
repetition  of  the  same  promise,  "  He  goeth  be- 
fore you "  (as  the  shepherd  goes  before  his 
flock)  "  into  Galilee,"  where  all  the  scattered 
ones  shall  be  gathered  round  the  Shepherd  once 
again,  and  thence  sent  out  as  under-shepherds 
(see  John  xxi.  15-17),  to  gather  in  the  rest  of 
the  flock  that  are  scattered  abroad. 

The  conduct  of  the  chief  priests  and  scribes 
(vv.  11-15)  is  the  natural  sequel  of  their  futile 
attempt  to  seal  the  sepulchre.  It  is  in  vain  to 
raise  the  objection,  as  some  do,  that  it  was  too 
clumsy  a  device  for  men  so  astute;  for  what  else 
could  they  do?  It  was  indeed  a  poor  evasion; 
but,  baffled  as  they  were,  no  better  was  possible 
for  them.  Let  the  critic  say  what  better  expedi- 
ent they  could  have  thought  of,  before  he  as- 
signs its  poverty  as  a  reason  for  discrediting  the 
story.  That  St.  Matthew,  and  he  alone,  records 
it,  is  sufficiently  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that, 
his  being  the  first  written  Gospel,  and  moreover 
the  Gospel  for  the  Jew,  it  behoved  him  to  deal 
with  a  saying  "  commonly  reported  among  the 
Jews  until  this  day";  while  its  being  recorded 
by  him  was  a  sufficient  reason  why  no  further 
notice  should  be  taken  of  it,  when  there  was  so 
much  of  greater  importance  to  tell. 

Looking  back  on  this  very  brief  record  of  the 
great  events  of  Easter  Day,  nothing  is  more 
striking  than  the  prominence  of  the  women 
throughout.  It  is  a  note  of  the  new  dispensation. 
It  must  have  been  very  strange  to  all  the  dis- 
ciples, and  not  least  to  the  author  of  this  Gos- 
pel, that  woman,  who  had  been  kept  so  far  in 
the  background,  treated  almost  as  if  her  pres- 
ence would  pollute  the  sacred  places,  should, 
now  that  the  veil  was  rent  in  twain  from  the  top 
to  the  bottom,  not  only  enter  into  the  sacred 
presence  of  the  risen  Lord  as  the  equal  of  her 
brother  man,  but  should  be  there  before  him, — 
that  a  woman's  eyes  should  be  the  first  to  see 
Hiifi,  a  group  of  women  the  first  to  receive  His 
loving  welcome  and  to  fall  in  adoration  at  His 
sacred  feet.  Yet  so  it  was.  Not  that  there  was 
any  partiality.  "  In  Christ  Jesus  there  is  neither 
male  nor  female."  It  is  not  a  question  of  sex; 
it  is  a  question  of  love  and  faith;  and  it  was 


because  the  love  of  these  women  was  deeper, 
and  their  fidelity  greater,  than  that  of  any  of  the 
men,  that  they  had  this  honour.  Had  the  love 
of  John  been  as  all-engrossing  as  that  of  Mary 
of  Magdala,  he  would  not  have  had  to  wait  for 
the  Easter  tidings  till  she  had  come  to  tell  him. 
It  is  not  a  question  of  faith  alone,  but  of  faith 
and  love.  The  women's  faith  had  failed  them 
too.  It  was  with  no  hope  of  seeing  a  risen  Lord 
that  they  had  gone  to  the  tomb — it  was  with 
spices  to  finish  the  embalming  of  His  dead  body; 
but  their  love,  love  stronger  than  death,  even  in 
the  wreck  of  faith,  kept  them  near,  and  so  it  was 
that,  when  light  first  broke  from  out  the  dark- 
ness, they  were  there  to  see. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE  GOSPEL  FOR  ALL  THE  NATIONS 
THROUGH  "ALL  THE  DAYS." 

Matthew  xxviii.  16-20. 

This  brief  concluding  passage  is  all  St. 
Matthew  gives  us  of  the  thirty-nine  days  which 
followed  the  Resurrection  arid  preceded  the  As- 
cension. It  would  seem  as  if  he  fully  realised 
that  the  manifestations  of  these  days  belonged 
rather  to  the  heavenly  than  to  the  earthly  work 
of  Jesus,  and  that  therefore,  properly  speaking, 
they  did  not  fall  within  his  province.  It  was 
necessary  that  he  should  bear  witness  to  the 
fact  of  the  Resurrection,  and  that  he  should 
clearly  set  forth  the  authority  under  which  the 
first  preachers  of  the  gospel  acted.  Having  ac- 
complished both,  he  rests  from  his  long  labour 
of  love. 

That  the  commission  of  the  eleven  was  not  re- 
stricted to  this  particular  time  and  place  is  evi- 
dent from  notices  in  the  other  Gospels  (Mark 
xvi.  15;  Luke  xxiv.  48;  John  xx.  21-23,  xxi.  15- 
17);  but  we  can  see  many  reasons  why  this  oc- 
casion was  preferred  to  all  others.  We  have  al- 
ready seen  how  natural  it  was  that  St.  Matthew 
should  call  the  attention  of  his  readers  to  the 
appearances  of  the  risen  Lord  in  Galilee  rather 
than  to  those  in  Jerusalem  and  its  vicinity;  and 
the  more  we  think  of  it,  the  more  do  we  see  the 
appropriateness  of  his  singling  out  this  one  in 
particular.  It  was  the  only  formally  appointed 
meeting  of  the  Lord  with  His  disciples.  In 
every  other  case  He  came  unannounced  and  un- 
expected; but  for  this  meeting  there  had  been 
a  distinct  and  definite  appointment. 

This  consideration  is  one  of  many  which  ren- 
der it  probable  that  this  was  the  occasion  referred 
to  by  St.  Paul  when  our  Lord  was  seen  by  above 
five  hundred  brethren  at  once;  for  on  the  one 
hand  there  was  nothing  but  a  definite  appoint- 
ment that  would  bring  so  large  a  company  to- 
gether at  any  one  point,  and  on  the  other  hand, 
when  such  an  appointment  was  made,  it  is  al- 
together natural  to  suppose  that  the  news  of  it 
would  spread  far  and  wide,  and  bring  together, 
not  the  eleven  only,  but  disciples  from  all  parts 
of  the  land,  and  especially  from  Galilee,  where 
the  greater  number  of  them  would  no  doubt  re- 
side. That  St.  Matthew  mentions  only  the 
eleven  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  object  he 
has  in  view — viz.,  to  exhibit  their  apostolic  cre- 
dentials; but  even  in  his  brief  narrative  there  is 
one  statement  which  is  most  easily  understood 
on  the  supposition  that  a  considerable  number 


•8o8 


THE    GOSPEL   OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


were  present.  "  Some  doubted,"  he  says.  This 
would  seem  altogether  natural  on  the  part  of 
those  to  whom  this  was  the  only  appearance; 
whereas  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  any  of  the 
eleven  could  doubt  after  what  they  had  seen 
and  heard  at  Jerusalem. 

In  any  case,  the  doubts  were  only  temporary, 
and  were  in  all  probability  connected  with  the 
mode  of  His  manifestation.  As  on  other  occa- 
sions, of  which  particulars  are  given  in  other 
Gospels,  the  Lord  would  suddenly  appear  to  the 
assembled  company;  and  we  can  well  understand 
how,  when  first  His  form  was  seen.  He  should 
not  be  recognised  by  all;  so  that,  while  all  would 
be  solemnised,  and  bow  in  adoration,  some 
might  not  be  altogether  free  from  doubt.  But 
the  doubts  would  disappear  as  soon  as  "  He 
opened  His  mouth  and  taught  them,"  as  of  old. 
To  make  these  doubts,  as  some  do,  a  reason  for 
discrediting  the  testimony  of  all  is  surely  the 
very  height  of  perversity.  All  the  disciples  were 
doubters  at  the  first.  But  they  were  all  con- 
vinced in  the  end.  And  the  very  fact  that  it  was 
so  hard  to  convince  them,  when  they  were  first 
confronted  with  so  unexpected  an  event  as  the 
Lord's  appearing  to  them  after  His  death,  gives 
largely  increased  value  to  their  unfaltering  cer- 
tainty ever  afterwards,  through  all  the  persecu- 
tion and  sufferings,  even  unto  death,  to  which 
their  preaching  the  fact  of  the  Resurrection  ex- 
posed them. 

As  Galilee  was  the  most  convenient  place  *  for 
a  large  public  gathering  of  disciples,  so  a  moun- 
tain was  the  most  convenient  spot,  not  only 
because  of  its  seclusion,  but  because  it  would 
give  the  best  opportunity  for  all  to  see  and  hear. 
What  mountain  it  was  we  can  only  conjecture. 
Perhaps  it  was  the  mount  on  which  the  great 
Sermon  was  delivered  which  gave  the  first  out- 
line sketch  of  the  kingdom  now  to  be  formally 
established;  perhaps  it  was  the  mount  which  had 
already  been  honoured  as  the  scene  of  the  Trans- 
figuration; but  wherever  it  was,  the  associations 
with  the  former  mountain  scenes  in  Galilee  would 
be  fresh  and  strong  in  the  disciples'  minds. 

The  choice  of  a  mountain  in  the  north  was 
moreover  suitable  as  signalising  the  setting  aside 
of  Mount  Zion  and  Jerusalem  as  the  seat  of 
empire.  From  this  point  of  view  we  can  see  still 
another  reason  why  St.  Matthew,  the  Evangelist 
for  the  Jew,  should  mention  the  formal  inaugura- 
tion of  the  new  kingdom  in  the  north.  The 
rejection  of  the  Messiah  by  His  own  people  had 
gone  very  deeply  to  the  heart  of  the  author  of 
this  Gospel.  He  certainly  never  obtrudes  his 
feelings,  even  when  they  are  strongest,  as  is 
most  strikingly  apparent  in  his  calm  record  of  the 
Passion  itself;  but  there  are  many  things  which 
show  how  keenly  he  felt  on  this  point.  Recall 
how  he  tells  us  on  the  one  hand  that  "  Herod 
the  king  was  troubled,  and  all  Jerusalem  with 
him,"  when  the  report  was  spread  abroad  that 
the  Christ  was  born  in  Bethlehem,  and  on  the 
other  that  the  wise  men  from  the  East  "  rejoiced 
with  exceeding  great  joy."  Remember  how  he 
speaks  of  "  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles  "  as  rejoicing 
in  the  great  light  which  had  been  unnoticed  or 
unwelcome  in  Jerusalem,  and  how  he  calls  special 
attention  to  "  the  coasts  of  Caesarea  Philippi," 
the  utmost  corner  of  the  land,  as  the  place  where 
the  Church  was  founded.  And  now,  having  re- 
corded the  Lord's  final  and  formal  entry  into  the 

♦The  number  at  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  Ascension 
•w»8  only  a  hundred  and  twenty  (Acts  i.  15). 


ancient  capital  to  claim  the  throne  of  David,  only 
to  be  despised  and  rejected,  mocked  and 
scourged  and  crucified,  it  is  natural  that,  as  the 
Evangelist  for  the  Jew,  he  should  pass  away  from 
what  he  often  fondly  calls  "  the  holy  City,"  * 
but  which  is  now  to  him  an  accursed  place,  to 
those  calm  regions  of  the  north  which  were  as- 
sociated in  his  mind  with  the  first  shining  of 
the  light,  with  so  many  words  of  wisdom  spoken 
by  the  Lord,  with  the  doing  of  most  of  His 
mighty  deeds,  with  the  founding  of  the  Church, 
and  with  the  glory  of  the  Transfiguration. 

The  words  of  the  Lord  on  this  last  occasion 
are  worthy  of  all  that  has  gone  before.  Let  all 
doubters  ponder  well  the  significance  of  this. 
Suppose  for  a  moment  that  the  story  of  the 
Resurrection  had  been  only  "  the  passion  of  a 
hallucinated  woman,"  as  Renan  puts  it,  and  then 
consider  the  position.  No  one  of  course  denies 
that  up  to  the  moment  of  death  there  was  a 
veritable  Jesus,  whose  sayings  and  doings  sup- 
plied the  material  for  the  history;  but  now  that 
the  hero  is  dead  and  gone,  where  are  the  ma- 
terials? The  fishermen  and  publicans  are  c-n 
their  own  resources  now.  They  have  to  make 
everything  out  of  nothing.  Surely,  therefore, 
there  must  be  now  a  swift  descent;  no  more  of 
those  noble  utterances  to  which  we  have  been 
accustomed  hitherto — only  inventions  of  the 
poor  publican  now.  No  more  breadth  of  view — 
only  Jewish  narrowness  now.  It  was  about  this 
very  time  that  the  disciples  asked,  "  Lord,  wilt 
Thou  at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Is- 
rael?" Suppose,  then,  these  men  obliged  them- 
selves to  invent  a  Great  Commission,  how  nar- 
row and  provincial  will  it  be! 

Is  there,  then,  such  a  swift  descent?  Are  not 
the  reported  words  of  the  risen  Lord — not  in 
this  Gospel  merely,  but  in  all  the  Gospels — as 
noble,  as  impressive,  as  divine  as  any  that  have 
been  preserved  to  us,  from  the  years  of  His  life 
in  the  flesh?  Search  through  this  Gospel,  and 
say  if  there  can  be  found  anywhere  an  utterance 
that  has  more  of  the  King  in  it,  that  is  more 
absolutely  free  from  all  Jewish  narrowness  and 
from  all  human  feebleness,  than  this  Great  Com- 
mission which  forms  its  magnificent  close.  It 
is  very  plain  that  these  simple  artists  have  thejr 
subject  still  before  them.  Manifestly  they  are 
not  drawing  from  imagination,  but  telling  what 
they  heard  and  saw. 

There  is  an  unapproachable  majesty  in  the 
words  which  makes  one  shrink  from  touching 
them.  They  seem  to  rise  before  us  like  a  great 
mountain  which  it  would  be  presumption  to  at- 
tempt to  scale.  What  a  mighty  range  they  take, 
up  to  heaven,  out  to  all  the  earth,  down  to  the 
end  of  time! — and  all  so  calm,  so  simple,  so 
strong,  so  sure.  If,  as  He  finished  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  the  multitude  were  astonished, 
much  more  must  these  have  been  astonished  who 
first  listened  to  this  amazing  proclamation. 

"  All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  Me  in 
heaven  and  on  earth  "  (R.  V.).  What  words  are 
these  to  come  from  One  Who  has  just  been  put 
to  death  for  claiming  to  be  the  king  of  the  Jews! 
King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords  is  the  title, now 
He  claims.  And  yet  it  is  as  Son  of  man  He 
speaks.  He  does  not  speak  as  God,  and  say, 
"  All  authority  is  Mine "  :  He  speaks  as  the 
man   Christ  Jesus,    saying,    "  All   authority   has 

*  St.  Matthew  alone  of  the  Evangelists  uses  this  desig* 
nation. 


Matthew  zxviii.  i6>20.] 


"ALL   THE    DAYS." 


809 


been  given  unto  Me  " — given  as  the  purchase 
of  His  pain:  authority  in  heaven,  as  Priest  with 
God — authority  on  earth,  as  King  of  men. 

Having  thus  laid  broad  and  deep  and  strong 
the  foundations  of  the  new  kingdom,  He  sends 
the  heralds  forth:  "  Go  ye  therefore,  and  make 
disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptising  them  into 
the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost:  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  commanded  you  "  (R.  V.).  These 
are  simple  words  and  very  familiar  now,  and  a 
distinct  effort  is  needed  to  realise  how  extraor- 
dinary they  are,  as  spoken  then  and  there  to 
that  little  company.  "  All  nations "  are  to  be 
discipled  and  brought  under  His  sway, — such  is 
the  commission;  and  to  whom  is  it  given?  Not 
to  Imperial  Caesar,  with  his  legions  at  command 
and  the  civilised  world  at  his  feet;  not  to  a  com- 
pany of  intellectual  giants,  who  by  the  sheer 
force  of  genius  might  turn  the  world  upside 
down;  but  to  these  obscure  Galileans  of  whom 
Caesar  has  never  heard,  not  one  of  whose  names 
has  ever  been  pronounced  in  the  Roman  Senate, 
who  have  excited  no  wonder  either  for  intellect 
or  learning  even  in  the  villages  and  country- 
sides from  which  they  come, — it  is  to  these  that 
the  great  commission  is  given  to  bring  the  world 
to  the  feet  of  the  crucified  Nazarene.  Imagine 
a  nineteenth-century  critic  there,  and  listening. 
He  would  not  have  said  a  word.  It  would  have 
been  beneath  his  notice.  A  curl  of  the  lip  would 
have  been  all  the  recognition  he  would  have 
deigned  to  give.  Yes,  how  ludicrous  it  seems 
in  the  light  of  reason!  But  in  the  light  of  history 
is  it  not  sublime? 

The  hidden  power  lay  in  the  conjunction:  "  Go 
ye  therefore."  It  would  have  been  the  height  of 
folly  to  have  gone  on  such  an  errand  in  their 
own  strength;  but  why  should  they  hesitate  to 
go  in  the  name  and  at  the  bidding  of  One  to 
Whom  all  authority  had  been  given  in  heaven 
and  on  earth?  Yet  the  power  is  not  delegated 
to  them.  It  remains,  and  must  remain  with  Him. 
It  is  not,  "  All  authority  is  given  unto  yon." 
They  must  keep  in  closest  touch  with  Him, 
wherever  they  may  go  on  this  extraordinary 
mission.  How  this  may  be  will  presently  ap- 
pear. 

The  two  branches  into  which  the  commission 
divides — "  Baptising  them  into  the  name  of 
.the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  "  Teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  commanded  you  " — correspond  to 
the  twofold  authority  on  which  it  is  based.  By 
virtue  of  His  authority  in  heaven,  He  author- 
ises His  ambassadors  to  baptise  people  of  all 
nations  who  shall  become  His  disciples  "  into 
the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Thus  would  they  be  acknowl- 
edged as  children  of  the  great  family  of  God, 
accepted  by  the  Father  as  washed  from  sin 
through  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  His  Son,  and 
sanctified  by  the  grace  of  His  Holy  Spirit — the 
sum  of  saving  truth  suggested  in  a  single  line. 
In  the  same  way  by  virtue  of  His  authority  on 
earth,  He  authorises  His  disciples  to  publish  His 
commands  so  as  to  secure  the  obedience  of  al^ 
the  nations,  and  yet  not  of  constraint,  but  will- 
ingly, "  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  what- 
soever I  have  commanded  you." 

Easily  said;  but  how  shall  it  be  done?  We 
can  imagine  tne  feeling  of  bewilderment  and 
helplessness  with  which  the  disciples  would  lis- 
ten   to    their    marching    orders,    until    all    was 


changed  by  the  simple  and  sublime  assurance  at 
the  close:  "And  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world."  This  assurance  is 
perhaps  the  strangest  part  of  all,  as  given  to  a 
company,  however  small,  who  were  to  be  scat- 
tered abroad  in  different  directions,  and  who 
were  commissioned  to  go  to  the  very  ends  of 
the  earth.  How  could  it  be  fulfilled?  There 
is  nothing  in  St.  Matthew's  narrative  to  ex- 
plain the  difficulty.  We  know,  indeed,  from 
other  sources  what  explains  it.  It  is  the  Ascen- 
sion— the  return  of  the  King  to  the  heaven 
whence  He  came,  to  resume  His  omnipresent 
glory,  by  virtue  of  which  alone  He  can  fulfil  the 
promise  He  has  made. 

This  brings  us  to  a  question  of  considerable 
importance:  Why  is  it  that  St.  Matthew  gives 
no  record  of  the  Ascension,  and  does  not  even 
hint  what  became  of  the  risen  Christ  after  this 
last  recorded  interview  with  His  disciples?  It 
seems  to  us  that  a  sufficient  reason  is  found  in 
the  object  which  St.  Matthew  had  in  view, 
which  was  to  set  forth  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  upon  earth  as  foretold  by 
the  prophets  and  expected  by  the  saints  of  old; 
and  inasmuch  as  it  is  Christ's  kingdom  on  earth 
which  he  has  mainly  in  view,  he  does  not  call 
special  attention  to  His  return  to  heaven,  but 
rather  to  that  earthly  fact  which  was  the  glo- 
rious result  of  it — viz..  His  abiding  presence 
with  His  people  on  the  earth.  Had  he  finished 
his  Gospel  with  the  Ascension,  the  last  impres- 
sion left  on  the  reader's  mind  would  have  been 
of  Christ  in  heaven  at  the  right  hand  of  God — 
a  glorious  thought  indeed,  but  not  the  one  it 
was  his  special  aim  and  object  to  convey.  But, 
concluding  as  he  does,  the  last  impression  on  the 
reader's  mind  is  of  Christ  abiding  on  the  earth, 
and  with  all  His  people  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world — a  most  cheering,  comforting,  and  stimu- 
lating thought.  To  the  devout  reader  of  this 
Gospel  it  is  as  if  his  Lord  had  never  left  the 
earth  at  all,  but  had  suddenly  clothed  Himself 
with  omnipresence,  so  that,  however  far  apart 
His  disciples  might  be  scattered  in  His  service, 
each  one  of  them  might  at  any  moment  see 
His  face,  and  hear  His  voice  of  cheer,  and  feel 
His  touch  of  sympathy,  and  draw  on  His  reserve 
of  power.  Thus  was  it  made  quite  plain,  how 
they  could  keep  in  closest  touch  with  Him  to 
Whom  was  given  ^  all  authority  in  heaven  and 
on  earth. 

After  all,  is  it  quite  correct  to  say  that  St. 
Matthew  omits  the  Ascension?  What  was  the 
Ascension?  We  think  of  it  as  a  going  up;  but 
that  is  to  speak  of  i*  after  the  manner  of  men. 
In  the  kingdom  of  heaven  there  is  no  geograph- 
ical "  up  "  or  "  down."  The  Ascension  really 
meant  the  laying  aside  of  earthly  limitations  and 
the  resumption  of  Divine  glory  with  its  omni- 
presence and  eternity;  and  is  not  this  included 
in  these  closing  words?  May  we  not  fancy  one 
of  these  doubting  ones  (ver.  17),  who  trembled 
in  the  presence  of  that  Form  in  which  the  Lord 
appeared  to  them  upon  the  mount,  recalling  after- 
wards the  supreme  moment  when  the  words 
"  Lo,  I  am  with  you,"  entered  into  his  soul,  in 
language  such  as  this: 

"Then  did  the  Form  expand,  expand — 
I  knew  Him  through  the  dread  disguise, 
As  the  whole  God  within  His  eyes 
Embraced  me  " — 

an  embrace  in  which  he  remained,  when  the 
Form  had  vanished. 


8io 


W.JHE    GOSPEL    OF   ST.    MATTHEW. 


The  Ascension  is  all  in  that  wonderful  "  I  am." 
It  is  not  the  first  time  we  have  heard  it.  Among 
His  last  words  in  Capernaum,  when  the  Saviour 
was  thinking  of  His  Church  in  the  ages  to  come, 
gathered  together  in  companies  in  all  the  lands 
where  disciples  should  meet  in  His  name,  the 
great  thought  takes  Him  for  the  moment  out 
of  the  limitations  of  His  earthly  life;  it  carries 
Him  back,  or  rather  lifts  Him  up,  to  the  eternal 
sphere  from  which  He  has  come  to  earth,  so  that 
He  uses  not  the  future  of  time,  but  the  present 
of  eternity:  "  There  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them  " 
(xviii.  20).  A  still  more  striking  example  has 
been  preserved  by  St.  John.  When  on  one  occa- 
sion He  spoke  of  Abraham  as  seeing  His  day, 
the  Jews  interrupted  Him  with  the  question, 
"  Thou  art  not  yet  fifty  years  old,  and  hast  Thou 
seen  Abraham?"  Recognising  in  this  a  chal- 
lenge of  His  relation  to  that  timeless,  dateless 
sphere  from  which  He  has  come,  He  promptly 
replies,  "  Before  Abraham  was,*  /  am."  It  is  as 
if  a  foreigner,  speaking  perfectly  the  language  of 
the  country  of  his  adoption,  were  suddenly  be- 
trayed into  a  form  of  expression  which  marked 
his  origin. 

That  was  a  momentary  relapse,  as  it  were,  into 
the  language  of  eternity;  but  this  last  "I  am" 
marks  a  change  in  His  relations  to  His  disciples: 
it  is  the  note  of  the  new  dispensation  of  the 
Spirit.  These  forty  days  were  a  transition  time 
marked  by  special  manifestations — not  wholly 
material  as  in  the  days  of  the  Incarnation,  nor 
wholly  spiritual  as  in  the  days  after  Pentecost; 
but  on  the  borderland  between  the  two,  so  as  to 
prepare  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  disciples 
for  the  purely  spiritual  relation  which  was  thence- 
forward to  be  the  rule.  Whichever  appearance 
was  the  last  to  any  disciple  would  be  the  Ascen- 
sion to  him.  To  very  many  in  that  large  gath- 
ering this  would  be  the  Saviour's  last  appearance. 
It  was  in  all  probability  the  time  when  the  great 
majority  of  the  disciples  bade  farewell  to  the 
Form  of  their  risen  Lord.     May  we  not,  then, 

♦The  full  significance  of  the  original  can  scarcely  be 
given  in  English.  The  Greek  language,  rich  in  the  vocab- 
ulary of  philosophy,  has  two  verbs  corresponding  to  our 
"to  be,"  one  indicating  phenomenal,  the  other  absolute 
being.  It  is  the  former  which  is  used  of  Abraham  ;  the 
latter  is  used  by  our  Lord  in  speaking  of  Himself.  There 
is,  therefore,  more  than  a  difference  of  tense. 


call  this  the  Ascension  in  Galilee?  And  just  as 
the  parting  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  left  as  its 
deepest  impression  the  withdrawal  of  the  man 
Christ  Jesus,  with  the  promise  of  His  return  in 
like  manner,  so  the  parting  on  the  mount  in 
Galilee  left  as  its  deepest  impression  not  the  with' 
drawal  of  the  human  form,  but  the  permanent 
abiding  of  the  Divine  Spirit — a  portion  of  the 
truth  of  the  Ascension  quite  as  important  as  the 
other,  and  even  more  inspiring.  No  wonder  that 
the  great  announcement  which  is  to  be  the  Chris- 
tian's title-deed,  for  all  ages  to  come,  of  God's 
unspeakable  gift,  should  be  introduced  with  a 
summons  to  adoring  wonder:  "  Lo,  I  am  with 
you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world." 

The  Gospel  ends  by  removing  from  itself  all 
limitations  of  time  and  space,  extending  the  day 
of  the  Incarnation  to  "  all  the  days,"  enlarging 
the  Holy  Land  to  embrace  all  lands.  The  times 
of  the  Son  of  man  are  widened  so  as  to  embrace 
all  times.  The  great  name  Immanuel  (i.  23)  is 
now  fulfilled  for  all  the  nations  and  for  all  the 
ages.  For  what  is  this  finished  Gospel  but  the" 
interpretation,  full  and  clear  at  last,  of  that  great 
Name  of  the  old  covenant,  the  name  Jehovah: 
"  I  am,"  "  I  am  that  I  am  "  (Exod.  iii.  14)?  All 
of  the  Old  Testament  revelation  is  gathered  up 
in  this  final  utterance,  "  I  am — with  you  "  ;  and  it 
has  in  it  by  anticipation  all  that  will  be  included 
in  that  last  word  of  the  risen  Saviour:  "  I  am  Al- 
pha and  Omega,  the  Beginning  and  the  End, 
the  First  and  the  Last"  (Rev.  xxii.  13). 

This  last  sentence  of  the  Gospel  distinguishes 
the  life  of  Jesus  from  all  other  histories,  biog- 
raphies or  "  remains."  It  is  the  one  "  Life  "  in 
all  literature.  These  years  were  not  spent  "  as  a 
tale  that  is  told."  The  Lord  Jesus  lives  in  His 
gospel,  so  that  all  who  receive  His  final  promise 
may  catch  the  light  of  His  eye,  feel  the  touch  of 
His  hand,  hear  the  tones  of  His  voice,  see  for 
themselves,  and  become  acquainted  with  Him 
Whom  to  know  is  Life  Eternal.  Fresh  and  new, 
and  rich  and  strong,  for  "  all  the  days,"  this 
Gospel  is  not  the  record  of  a  past,  but  the  rev- 
elation of  a  present  Saviour,  of  One  Whose 
voice  sounds  deep  and  clear  across  all  storms 
of  life:  "  Fear  not:  I  am  the  First  and  the  Last: 
I  am  He  that  liveth  and  was  dead;  and  behold  I 

AM  ALIVE  FOR  EVERMORE." 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING 

TO  ST.  MARK 


CONTENTS. 


Chapter  I. 

The  Beginning  of  the  Gospel — /^t  the 
Jordan — The  Temptation — The  Early 
Preaching  and  the  First  Disciples — 
Teaching  with  Authority — Miracles — 
The  Demoniac — A  Group  of  Miracles 
— ^Jesus  in  Solitude — The  Lepers, 

Chapter  II. 


815 


The  Sick  of  the  Palsy — The  Son  of  Man — 
The  Call  and  Feast  of  Levi — The  Con- 
troversy concerning  Fasting  —  The 
Sabbath 826 

Chapter  III.  , 

The  Withered  Hand — The  Choice  of  the 
Twelve — Characteristics  of  the  Twelve 
— The  Apostle  Judas — Christ  and  Beel- 
zebub— "  Eternal  Sin  " — The  Friends 
of  Jesus, 832 

Chapter  IV. 

The  Parables — The  Sower — Lamp  and 
Stand — The  Seed  Growing  Secretly — 
The  Mustard  Seed — Four  Miracles — 
The  Two  Storms, 840 

'  Chapter  V. 

The    Demoniac    of    Gadara — The    Men    of 

Gadara — With  Jairus,      ....    849 

Chapter  VI. 

Rejected  in  His  Own  Country — The  Mis- 
sion of  the  Twelve — Herod — Bread  in 
the  Desert — Unwashen  Hands,      .        .     853 

Chapter  VII. 

Things    which    Defile — The    Children    and 

the   Dogs — The   Deaf-and-Dumb   Man,     860 

Chapter  VIII. 

The  Four  Thousand — The  Leaven  of  the 
Pharisees — >trn  a<;  Trees — The  Con- 
fession and  the  Warning — The  Rebuke 
of    Peter,    .  ...     863 


Chapter  IX. 

PAGE 

The  Transfiguration — The  Descent  from 
the  Mount  —  The  Demoniac  Boy  — 
Jesus  and  the  Disciples — Offences,       .    869 

Chapter  X. 

Divorce — Christ  and  Little  Children — The 
Rich  Inquirer — Who  then  can  be 
Saved? — Christ's  Cup  and  Baptism 
— The  Law  of  Greatness — Barti- 
maeus, 877 

Chapter  XI. 

The  Triumphant  Entry — The  Barren  Fig- 
tree — The  Second  Cleansing  of  the 
Temple — The  Baptism  of  John,  Whence 
Was  It? 886 

Chapter  XII. 

The  Husbandmen — The  Tribute  Money — 
Christ  and  the  Sadducees — The  Dis- 
cerning Scribe — David's  Lord — The 
Widow's   Mite 891 


Chapter  XIII. 

Things  Perishing  and  Things  Stable- 
Impending  Judgment,     . 

Chapter  XIV. 


-The 


Pilate— Christ 
Jesus, 


Chapter  XV. 
Crucified — The 


Death     of 


Chapter  XVI. 
Christ  Risen — The  Ascension, 


898 


The  Cruse  of  Ointment — The  Traitor — 
The  Sop — Bread  and  Wine — The  Warn- 
ing— In  the  Garden — The  Agony — The 
Arrest — Before  Caiaphas — The  Fall  of 
Peter, 901 


91S 


920 


813 


THE    GOSPEL    ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


BY  THE  VERY  REV.  G.  A.  CHADWICK,  D.  D. 


CHAPTER  I. 
THE   BEGINNING   OF    THE   GOSPEL. 

Mark  i.  i-6  (R.  V.). 

The  opening  »f  St.  Mark's  Gospel  is  energetic 
and  full  of  character.  St.  Matthew  traces  for 
Jews  the  pedigree  of  their  Messiah;  St.  Luke's 
worldwide  sympathies  linger  with  the  maiden 
who  bore  Jesus,  and  the  village  of  His  boyhood; 
and  St.  John's  theology  proclaims  the  Divine 
origin  of  the  Eternal  Lord.  But  St.  Mark  trusts 
the  public  acts  of  the  Mighty  Worker  to  do  for 
the  reader  what  they  did  for  those  who  first 
"  beheld  His  glory."  How  He  came  to  earth 
can  safely  be  left  untold:  what  He  was  will  appear 
by  what  He  wrought.  It  is  enough  to  record, 
with  matchless  vividness,  the  toils,  the  energy, 
the  love  and  wrath,  the  defeat  and  triumph  of 
the  brief  career  which  changed  the  world.  It 
will  prove  itself  to  be  the  career  of  "  the  Son 
of  God." 

In  so  deciding,  he  followed  the  example  of  the 
Apostolic  teaching.  The  first  vacant  place 
among  the  Twelve  was  filled  by  an  eye-witness, 
competent  to  tell  what  Jesus  did  "  from  the  bap- 
tism of  John  to  the  day  when  He  was  received 
up,"  the  very  space  covered  by  this  Gospel. 
That  "  Gospel  of  peace,"  which  Cornelius  heard 
from  St.  Peter  (and  hearing,  received  the  Holy 
Ghost)  was  the  same  story  of  Jesus  "  after  the 
baptism  which  John  preached."  And  this  is 
throughout  the  substance  of  the  primitive  teach- 
ing. The  Apostles  act  as  men  who  believe  that 
everything  necessary  to  salvation  is  (implicit  or 
explicit)  in  the  history  of  those  few  crowded 
years.     Therefore  this  is  "  the  gospel." 

Men  there  are  who  judge  otherwise,  and  whose 
gospel  is  not  the  story  of  salvation  wrought, 
but  the  plan  of  salvation  applied,  how  the  Atone- 
ment avails  for  us,  how  men  are  converted,  and 
what  privileges  they  then  receive.  But  in  truth 
men  are  not  converted  by  preaching  conversion, 
any  more  than  citizens  are  made  loyal  by  de- 
manding loyalty.  Show  men  their  prince,  and 
convince  them  that  he  is  gracious  and  truly 
royal,  and  they  will  die  for  him.  Show  them 
the  Prince  of  Life,  and  He,  being  lifted  up,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  Him;  and  thus  the  truest  gos- 
pel is  that  which  declares  Christ,  and  Him  cruci- 
fied. As  all  science  springs  from  the  phenomena 
of  the  external  world,  so  do  theology  and  reli- 
gion spring  from  the  life  of  Him  who  was  too 
adorable  to  be  mortal,  and  too  loving  to  be 
disobeyed. 

Therefore  St.  Paul  declares  that  the  gospel 
which  he  preached  to  the  Corinthians  and  by 
which  they  were  saved,  was,  that  Christ  died  for 
our  sins  and  was  buried  and  rose  again,  and  was 
seen  of  sufficient  witnesses  (i  Cor.  xv.  i-8). 

And  therefore  St.  Mark  is  contented  with  a 
very  brief  record  of  those  wondrous  years;  a  few 
facts,  chosen  with  a  keen  sense  of  the  intense 
energy  and  burning  force  which  they  reveal,  are 
what  he  is  inspired  to  call  the  gospel. 

He   presently   uses   the   word   in   a   somewhat 


larger  sense,  telling  how  Jesus  Himself,  before 
the  story  of  His  life  could  possibly  be  unfolded, 
preached  as  "  the  gospel  of  God  "  that  "  the  time 
is  fulfilled,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand," 
and  added  (what  St.  Mark  only  has  preserved 
for  us),  "  Repent,  and  believe  in  the  gospel  " 
(i.  14-15).  So  too  it  is  part  of  St.  Paul's  "  gos- 
pel "  that  "  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men 
by  Jesus  Christ  "  (Rom.  ii.  16).  For  this  also 
is  good  news  of  God,  "  the  gospel  of  the  king- 
dom." And  like  "  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ," 
it  treats  of  His  attitude  toward  us,  more  than 
ours  toward  Him,  which  latter  is  the  result 
rather  than  the  substance  of  it.  That  He  rules, 
and  not  the  devil;  that  we  shall  answer  at  last 
to  Him  and  to  none  lower;  that  Satan  lied  when 
he  claimed  to  possess  all  the  kingdoms  of  the 
earth,  and  to  dispose  of  them;  that  Christ  has 
now  received  from  far  different  hands  "  all 
power  on  earth";  this  is  a  gospel  which  the 
world  has  not  yet  learned  to  welcome,  nor  the 
Church  fully  to  proclaim. 

Now  the  scriptural  use  of  this  term  is  quite  as 
important  to  religious  emotion  as  to  accuracy 
of  thought.  All  true  emotions  hide  their'  foun- 
tain too  deep  for  self-consciousness  to  find. 
We  feel  best  when  our  feeling  is  forgotten.  Not 
while  we  think  about  finding  peace,  but  while  we 
approach  God  as  a  Father,  and  are  anxious  for 
nothing,  but  in  everything  by  prayer  and  sup- 
plication with  thanksgiving  make  known  our  re- 
quests, is  it  promised  that  the  peace  of  God 
which  passeth  all  understanding  shall  guard  our 
hearts  and  our  thoughts  (Phil.  iv.  7).  And  many 
a  soul  of  the  righteous,  whom  faith  in  the  true 
gospel  fills  with  trembling  adoration,  is  made 
sad  by  the  inflexible  demand  for  certain  realised 
personal  experiences  as  the  title  to  recognition 
as  a  Christian.  That  great  title  belonged  at  the 
first  to  all  who  would  learn  of  Jesus:  the  disciples 
were  called  Christians.  To  acquaint  ourselves 
with  Him,  that  is  to  be  at  peace. 
■  Meantime,  we  observe  that  the  new  movement 
which  now  begins  is  not,  like  Judaism,  a  law 
which  brings  death;  nor  like  Buddhism,  a  path 
in  which  one  must  walk  as  best  he  may:  it  differs 
from  all  other  systems  in  being  essentially  the 
announcement  of  good  tidings  from  above. 

Yet  "  the  beginning  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus 
Christ  "  is  a  profound  agitation  and  widespread 
alarm.  Lest  the  soothing  words  of  Jesus  should 
blend  like  music  with  the  slumber  of  sinners  at 
ease  in  Zion,  John  came  preaching  repentance,  and 
what  is  more,  a  baptism  of  repentance;  not  such 
a  lustration  as  was  most  familiar  to  the  Mosaic 
law,  administered  by  the  worshipper  to  himself, 
but  an  ablution  at  other  hands,  a  confession 
that  one  is  not  only  soiled,  but  soiled  beyond 
all  cleansing  of  his  own.  Formal  Judaism  was 
one  long  struggle  for  self-purification.  The 
dawn  of  a  new  system  is  visible  in  the  move- 
ment of  all  Judaea  towards  one  who  bids  them 
throw  every  such  hope  away,  and  come  to  him 
for  the  baptism  of  repentance,  and  expect  a 
Greater  One,  who  shall  baptise  them  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire.  And  the  true  function 
of  the  predicted  herald,  the  best  levelling  of  the 


S15 


8i6 


THE    GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


rugged  ways  of  humanity  for  the  Promised  One 
to  traverse,  was  in  this  universal  diffusion  of  the 
sense  of  sin.  For  Christ  was  not  come  to  call 
the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance. 

In  truth,  the  movement  of  the  Baptist,  with  its 
double  aspect,  gathers  up  all  the  teaching  of  the 
past.  He  produced  conviction,  and  he  promised 
help.  One  lesson  of  all  sacred  history  is  univer- 
sal failure.  The  innocence  of  Eden  cannot  last. 
The  law  with  its  promise  of  life  to  the  man  who 
doeth  these  things,  issued  practically  in  the 
knowledge  of  sin;  it  entered  that  sin  might 
abound;  it  made  a  formal  confession  of  universal 
sin,  year  by  year,  continually.  And  therefore  its 
fitting  close  was  a  baptism  of  repentance  univer- 
sally accepted.  Alas!  not  universally.  For 
while  we  read  of  all  the  nation  swayed  by  one 
impulse,  and  rushing  to  the  stern  teacher  who 
had  no  share  in  its  pleasures  or  its  luxuries, 
whose  life  was  separated  from  its  concerns,  and 
whose  food  was  the  simplest  that  could  sustain 
existence,  yet  we  know  that  when  they  heard 
how  deep  his  censures  pierced,  and  how  unspar- 
ingly he  scourged  their  best-loved  sins,  the 
loudest  professors  of  religion  rejected  the 
counsel  of  God  against  themselves,  being  not 
baptised  ,of  Him.  Nevertheless,  by  coming  to 
Him,  they  also  had  pleaded  guilty.  Something 
they  needed;  they  were  sore  at  heart,  and  would 
have  welcomed  any  soothing  balm,  although 
they  refused  the  surgeon's  knife. 

The  law  did  more  than  convict  men;  it  inspired 
hope.  The  promise  of  a  Redeemer  shone  like 
a  rainbow  across  the  dark  story  of  the  past.  He 
was  the  end  of  all  the  types,  at  once  the  Victim 
and  the  Priest.  To  Him  gave  all  the  prophets 
witness,  and  the  Baptist  brought  all  past  attain- 
ment to  its  full  height,  and  was  "  more  than 
a  prophet  "  when  he  announced  the  actual  pres- 
ence of  the  Christ,  when  he  pointed  out  to  the 
first  two  Apostles,  the  Lamb  of  God. 


AT  THE  JORDAN. 
Mark  i.  7-11  (R.  V.). 

It  was  when  all  men  mused  in  their  hearts 
whether  John  was  the  Christ  or  no,  that  he 
announced  the  coming  of  a  Stronger  One.  By 
thus  promptly  silencing  a  whisper,  so  honour- 
able to  himself,  he  showed  how  strong  he  really 
was  and  how  unselfish  "  a  friend  of  the  Bride- 
groom." Nor  was  this  the  vague  humility  of 
phrase  which  is  content  to  be  lowly  in  general, 
so  long  as  no  specified  individual  stands  higher. 
His  word  is  definite,  and  accepts  much  for  him- 
self. "The  Stronger  One  than  I  cometh,"  and 
it  is  in  presence  of  the  might  of  Jesus  (whom 
yet  this  fiery  reformer  called  a  Lamb),  that  he 
feels  himself  unworthy  to  bend  to  the  dust  and 
unbind  the  latchets  or  laces  of  his  shoe. 

So  then,  though  asceticism  be  sometimes  good, 
it  is  consciously  not  the  highest  nor  the  most 
effective  goodness.  Perhaps  it  is  the  most  im- 
pressive. Without  a  miracle,  the  preaching  of 
John  shook  the  nation  as  widely  as  that  of  Jesus 
melted  it,  and  prepared  men's  hearts  for  His. 
A  king  consulted  and  feared  him.  And  when 
the  Pharisees  were  at  open  feud  with  Jesus,  they 
feared  to  be  stoned  if  they  should  pronounce 
John's  baptism  to  be  of  men. 

Yet  is  there  weakness  lurking  even  in  the  very 
quality  which  gives  asceticism   its  power.     That 


stern  seclusion  from  an  evil  world,  that  peremp- 
tory denial  of  its  charms,  why  are  they  so  impres- 
sive? Because  they  set  an  example  to  those  who 
are  hard  beset,  of  the  one  way  of  escape,  the 
cutting  off  of  the  hand  and  foot,  the  plucking  out 
of  the  eye.  And  our  Lord  enjoins  such  mutila- 
tion of  the  life  upon  those  whom  its  gifts  betray. 
Yet  is  it  as  the  halt  and  maimed  that  such  men 
enter  into  life.  The  ascetic  is  a  man  who  needs 
to  sternly  repress  and  deny  his  impulses,  who 
is  conscious  of  traitors  within  his  breast  that 
may  revolt  if  the  enemy  be  sufT&ped  to  approach 
too  near. 

It  is  harder  to  be  a  holy  friend  of  publicans 
and  sinners,  a  witness  for  God  while  eating  and 
drinking  with  these,  than  to  remain  in  the  desert 
undefiled.  It  is  greater  to  convert  a  sinful  wo- 
man in  familiar  converse  by  the  well,  than  to 
shake  trembling  multitudes  by  threats  of  the 
fire  for  the  chaff  and  the  axe  for  the  barren  tree.- 
And  John  confessed  this.  In  the  supreme  mo- 
ment of  his  life,  he  added  his  own  confession  to 
that  of  all  his  nation.  This  rugged  ascetic  had 
need  to  be  baptised  of  Him  who  came  eating  and 
drinking. 

Nay,  he  taught  that  all  his  work  was  but  super- 
ficial, a  baptism  with  water  to  reach  the  surlace 
of  men's  life,  to  check,  at  the  most,  exaction  and 
violence  and  neglect  of  the  wants  of  others,  while 
the  Greater  One  should  baptise  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,  should  pierce  the  depths  of  human  nature, 
and  thoroughly  purge  His  floor. 

Nothing  could  refute  more  clearly  than  our 
three  simple  narratives,  the  sceptical  notion  that 
Jesus  yielded  for  awhile  to  the  dominating  in- 
fluence of  the  Baptist.  Only  from  the  Gospels 
can  we  at  all  connect  the  two.  And  what  we 
read  here  is,  that  before  Jesus  came,  John  ex- 
pected his  Superior;  that  when  they  met,  John 
declared  his  own  need  to  be  baptised  of  Him, 
that  he,  nevertheless,  submitted  to  the  will  of 
Jesus,  and  thereupon  heard  a  voice  from  the 
heavens  which  must  for  ever  have  destroyed  all 
notion  of  equality;  that  afterwards  he  only  saw 
Jesus  at  a  distance,  and  made  a  confession  which 
transferred  two  of  his  disciples  to  our  Lord. 

The  criticism  which  transforms  our  Lord's 
part  in  these  events  to  that  of  a  pupil  is  far  more 
wilful  than  would  be  tolerated  in  dealing  with 
any  other  record.  And  it  too  palpably  springs 
from  the  need  to  find  some  human  inspiration 
for  the  Word  of  God,  some  candle  from  which 
the  Sun  of  Righteousness  took  fire,  if  one  would 
escape  the  confession  that  He  is  not  of  this 
world. 

But  here  we  meet  a  deeper  question:  Not  why 
Jesus  accepted  baptism  from  an  inferior,  but 
why,  being  sinless.  He  sought  for  a  baptism  of 
repentance.  How  is  this  act  consistent  with  ab- 
solute and  stainless  purity? 

Now  it  sometimes  lightens  a  difficulty  to  find 
that  it  is  not  occasional  nor  accidental,  but 
wrought  deep  into  the  plan  of  a  consistent  work. 
And  the  Gospels  are  consistent  in  representing 
the  innocence  of  Jesus  as  refusing  immunity  from 
the  consequences  of  guilt.  He  was  circumcised, 
and  His  mother  then  paid  the  offering  com- 
manded by  the  law,  although  both  these  actions 
spoke  of  defilement.  In  submitting  to  the  like- 
ness of  sinful  fiesh  He  submitted  to  its  condi- 
tions. He  was  present  at  feasts  in  which  na- 
tional confessions  led  up  to  sacrifice,  and  the 
sacrificial  blood  was  sprinkled  to  make  atone- 
ment for  the  children  of  Israel,  because  of  all 


Mark  i.  7-1 1.] 


AT   THE    JORDAN. 


&fi 


their  sins.  When  He  tasted  death  itself,  which 
passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have  sinned, 
He  carried  out  to  the  utmost  the  same  stern  rule 
to  which  at  His  baptism  He  consciously  sub- 
mitted. Nor  will  any  theory  of  His  atonement 
suffice,  which  is  content  with  believing  that  His 
humiliations  and  sufferings,  though  inevitable, 
were  only  collateral  results  of  contact  with  our 
fallen  race.  Baptism  was  avoidable,  and  that 
without  any  compromise  of  His  influence,  since 
the  Pharisees  refused  it  with  impunity,  and  John 
would  fain  have  exempted  Him.  Here  at  least 
He  was  not  "  entangled  in  the  machinery,"  but 
deliberately  turned  the  wheels  upon  Himself. 
And  this  is  the  more  impressive  because,  in  an- 
other aspect  of  afifairs,  He  claimed  to  be  out  of 
the  reach  of  ceremonial  defilenient,  and  touched 
w'thout  reluctance  disease,  leprosy,  and  the  dead. 
Humiliating  and  penal  consequences  of  sin,  to 
these  He  bowed  His  head.  Yet  to  a  confession 
ol  personal  taint,  never.  And  all  the  accounts 
apree  that  He  never  was  less  conscience-stricken 
than  when  He  shared  the  baptism  of  repentance. 
St.  Matthew  implies,  what  St.  Luke  plainly  de- 
clares, that  He  did  not  come  to  baptism  along 
with  the  crowds  of  penitents,  but  separately. 
And  at  the  point  where  all  others  made  confes- 
sion, in  the  hour  when  even  the  Baptist,  although 
filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  his  mother's 
womb,  had  need  to  be  baptised,  He  only  felt  the 
propriety,  the  fitness  of  fulfilling  all  righteous- 
ness. That  mighty  task  was  not  even  a  yoke  to 
Him,  it  was  an  instinct  like  that  of  beauty  to  an 
artist;  it  was  what  became  Him. 

St.  Mark  omits  even  this  evidence  of  sinless- 
ncss.  His  energetic  method  is  like  that  of  a 
great  commander,  who  seizes  at  all  costs  the  vital 
point  upon  the  battle  field.  He  constantly  omits 
what  is  subordinate  (although  very  conscious  of 
the  power  of  graphic  details),  when  by  so  doing 
he  can  force  the  central  thought  upon  the  mind. 
Here  he  concentrates  our  attention  upon  the  wit- 
ness from  above,  upon  the  rending  asunder  of 
the  heavens  which  unfold  all  their  heights  over 
a  bended  head,  upon  the  visible  descent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  His  fulness,  upon  the  voice  from 
the  heavens  which  pealed  through  the  souls  of 
these  two  peerless  worshippers,  and  proclaimed 
that  He  who  had  gone  down  to  the  baptismal 
fiood  was  no  sinner  to  be  forgiven,  but  the  be,- 
loved  Son  of  God,  in  whom  He  is  well  pleased. 

That  is  our  Evangelist's  answer  to  all  mis- 
understanding of  the  rite,  and  it  is  enough. 

How  do  men  think  of  heaven?  Perhaps  only 
as  a  remote  point  in  space,  where  flames  a  ma- 
terial and  solid  structure  into  which  it  is  the 
highest  bliss  to  enter.  A  place  there  must  be  to 
which  the  Body  of  our  Lord  ascended  and 
whither  He  shall  yet  lead  home  His  followers  in 
spiritual  bodies  to  be  with  Him  where  He  is. 
If,  however,  only  this  be  heaven,  we  should  hold 
that  in  the  revolutions  of  the  solar  system  it 
hung  just  then  vertically  above  the  Jordan,  a  few 
fathoms  or  miles  aloft.  But  we  al<o  believe  in 
a  spiritual  city,  in  which  the  pillars  are  living 
saints,  an  all-embracing  blessedness  and  rapture 
and  depth  of  revelation,  whereinto  holy  mortals 
in  their  highest  moments  have  been  "  caught 
up,"  a  heaven  whose  angels  ascend  and  descend 
upon  the  Son  of  man.  In  this  hour  of  highest 
consecration,  these  heavens  were  thrown  open — 
rent  asunder — for  the  gaze  of  our  Lord  and  of 
the  Baptist.  They  were  opened  again  when  the 
first  martyr  died.  And  we  read  that  what  eye 
52-Vol.  rv. 


hath  not  seen  nor  ear  heard  nor  heart  conceived 
of  the  preparation  of  God  for  them  that  love 
Him,  He  hath  already  revealed  to  them  by  His 
Spirit.  To  others  there  is  only  cloud  or  "  the 
infinite  azure,"  as  to  the  crowd  by  the  Jordan 
and  the  murderers  of  Stephen. 

Now  it  is  to  be  observed  that  we  never  read 
of  Jesus  being  caught  up  into  heaven  for  a 
space,  like  St.  Paul  or  St.  John.  "What  we  read 
is,  that  while  on  earth  the  Son  of  man  is  in 
Heaven  (John  iii.  13),*  for  heaven  is  the  mani- 
festation of  God,  whose  truest  glory  was  revealed 
in  the  grace  and  truth  of  Jesus. 

Along  with  this  revelation,  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
manifested  wondrously.  His  appearance,  indeed, 
is  quite  unlike  what  it  was  to  others.  At  Pente- 
cost He  became  visible,  but  since  each  disciple 
received  only  a  portion,  "  according  to  his  sev- 
eral ability,"  his  fitting  symbol  was  "tongues 
parting  asunder  like  as  of  fire."  He  came  as  an 
element  powerful  and  pervasive,  not  as  a  Per- 
sonality bestowed  in  all  His  vital  force  on  any 
one. 

So,  too,  the  phrase  which  John  used,  when 
predicting  that  Jesus  should  baptise  with  the 
Holy  Ghost,  slightly  though  it  differs  from  what 
is  here,  impliesf  that  only  a  portion  is  to  be 
given,  not  the  fulness.  And  the  angel  who  fore- 
told to  Zacharias  that  John  himself  should  be 
filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  conveyed  the  same 
limitation  in  his  words.  John  received  all  that 
he  was  able  to  receive:  he  was  filled.  But  how 
should  mortal  capacity  exhaust  the  fulness  of 
Deity?  And  Who  is  this,  upon  Whom,  while 
John  is  but  an  awe-stricken  beholder,  the  Spirit 
of  God  descends  in  all  completeness,  a  living 
organic  unity,  like  a  dove?  Only  the  Infinite  is 
capable  of  receiving  such  a  gift,  and  this  is  He 
in  Whom  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  God- 
head bodily.  No  wonder  then  that  "  in  bodily 
form  "  as  a  dove,  the  Spirit  of  God  descended 
upon  Him  alone.  Henceforward  He  became  the 
great  Dispenser,  and  "  the  Spirit  emanated  from 
Him  as  perfume  from  the  rose  when  it  has 
opened." 

At  the  same  time  was  heard  a  Voice  from 
heaven.  And  the  bearing  of  this  passage  upon 
the  Trinity  becomes  clear  when  we  combine  the 
manifestation  of  the  Spirit  in  living  Personality, 
and  the  Divine  Voice,  not  from  the  Dove,  but 
from  the  heavens,  with  the  announcement  that 
Jesus  is  not  merely  beloved  and  well-pleasing, 
but  a  Son,  and  in  this  high  sense  the  only 
Son,  since  the  words  are  literally  "  Thou  art 
the  Son  of  Me,  the  beloved."  '  And  yet  He  is 
to  bring  many  sons  unto  glory. 

Is  it  consistent  with  due  reverence  to  believe 
that  this  voice  conveyed  a  message  to  our  Lord 
Himself?  Even  so  liberal  a  critic  as  Neander 
has  denied  this.  But  if  we  grasp  the  meaning 
of  what  we  believe,  that  He  upon  taking  flesh 
"  emptied  Himself,"  that  He  increased  in  wis- 
dom during  His  youth,  and  that  there  was  a 
day  and  hour  which  to  the  end  of  life  He  knew 
not,  we  need  not  suppose  that  His  infancy  was 
so  unchildlike  as  the  realisation  of  His  myste- 
rious and  awful  Personality  would  make  it. 
There  must  then  have  been  a  period  when  His 
perfect  human  development  rose  up  into  what 
Renan  calls  (more  accurately  than  he  knows) 
identification  of  Himself  with  the  object  of  His 

*  Cf.  the  admirable  note  in  Archdeacon  Watkins'  "  Com- 
mentary on  John." 
t  By  the  absence  of  the  article  in  the  Greek. 


8i8 


THE^-GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


devotion,  carried  to  the  utmost  limit.  Nor  is  this 
period  quite  undiscoverable,  for  when  it  arrived 
It  would  seem  highly  unnatural  to  postpone  His 
public  ministry  further.  Now  this  reasonable  in- 
ference is  entirely  supported  by  the  narrative. 
St.  Matthew  indeed  regards  the  event  from  the 
Baptist's  point  of  vision.  But  St.  Mark  and  St. 
Luke  are  agreed  that  to  Jesus  Himself  it  was 
also  said,  "  Thou  art  My  beloved  Son."  Now 
this  is  not  the  way  to  teach  us  that  the  testi- 
mony came  only  to  John.  And  how  solemn  a 
thought  is  this,  that  the  full  certitude  of  His 
destiny  expanded  before  the  eyes  of  Jesus,  just 
when  He  lifted  them  from  those  baptismal  waters 
in  which  He  stooped  so  low. 

THE  TEMPTATION. 
Mark  i.  12,  13  (R,  V.). 

St.  Mark  has  not  recorded  the  details  of  our 
Lord's  temptations,  and  lay_s  more  stress  upon 
the  duration  of  the  struggle  than  the  nature  of 
the  last  and  crowning  assaults.  But  he  is  care- 
ful, like  the  others,  to  connect  it  closely  with 
the  baptism  of  Jesus,  and  the  miraculous  testi- 
mony then  borne  to  Him. 

It  is  indeed  instructive  that  He  should  have 
suffered  this  affront  immediately  upon  being  rec- 
ognised as  the  Messiah.  But  the  explanation 
will  not  be  found  in  the  notion,  which  Milton 
has  popularised,  that  only  now  Satan  was  as- 
sured of  the  urgent  necessity  for  attacking 
Him: 

"  That  heard  the  adversary  .  .  .  and  with  the  voice  Di- 
vine 
Nigh  thunderstruck,  the  exalted  Man,  to  whom 
Such  high  attest  was  given,  awhile  surveyed 
With  wonder." 

As  if  Satan  forgot  the  marvels  of  the  sacred  in- 
fancy. As  if  the  spirits  who  attack  all  could 
have  failed  to  identify,  after  thirty  years  of  de- 
feat, the  Greater  One  whom  the  Baptist  had 
everywhere  proclaimed.  No.  But  Satan  ad- 
mirably chose  the  time  for  a  supreme  effort. 
High  places  are  dizzy,  and  especially  when  one 
has  just  attained  them;  and  therefore  it  was 
when  the  voice  of  the  herald  and  the  Voice 
from  the  heavens  were  blended  in  acclaim,  that 
the  Evil  One  tried  all  his  arts.  He  had  for- 
merly plunged  Elijah  into  despair  and  a  desire 
to  die  immediately  after  the  fire  from  heaven 
responded  to  the  prophet's  prayer.  Soon  after 
this  he  would  degrade  Peter  to  be  his  mouth- 
piece just  when  his  noblest  testimony  was  borne 
and  the  highest  approval  of  his  Lord  was  won. 
In  the  flush  of  their  triumphs  he  found  his  best 
opportunity;  but  Jesus  remained  unflushed  and 
met  the  first  recorded  temptation,  in  the  full 
consciousness  of  Messiahship,  by  quoting  the 
words  which  spoke  to  every  man  alike,  and  as 
man. 

It  is  a  lesson  which  the  weakest  needs  to  learn, 
for  little  victories  can  intoxicate  little  men. 

It  is  easy  then  to  see  why  the  recorded  temp- 
tations insist  upon  the  exceptional  dignity  of 
Jnrist  and  urge  Him  to  seize  its  advantages, 
while  He  insists  upon  bearing  the  common  bur- 
den and  proves  Himself  greatest  by  becoming 
least  of  all.  The  sharp  contrast  between  His 
circumstances  and  His  rank  drove  the  tempta- 
tions deep  into  His  consciousness  and  wounded 
His  sensibilities,  though  they  failed  to  shake  His 
will. 


How  unnatural  that  the  Son  of  God  should 
lack  and  suffer  hunger,  how  right  that  He  should 
challenge  recognition,  how  needful  (though  now 
His  sacred  Personality  is  cunningly  allowed  to 
fall  somewhat  into  the  background)  that  He 
should  obtain  armies  and  splendour. 

This  explains  the  possibility  of  temptation  in 
a  sinless  nature,  which  indeed  can  only  be  de- 
nied by  assuming  that  sin  is  part  of  the  original 
creation.  Not  because  we  are  sinful,  but  because 
we  are  flesh  and  blood  (of  which  He  became 
partaker),  when  we  feel  the  pains  of  hunger  we 
are  attracted  by  food,  at  whatever  price  it  is 
offered.  In  truth,  no  man  is  allured  by  sin, 
but  only  by  the  bait  and  bribe  of  sin,  except 
perhaps  in  the  last  stages  of  spiritual  decompo- 
sition. 

Now,  just  as  the  bait  allures,  and  not  the  jaws 
of  the  trap,  so  the  power  of  a  temptation  is 
not  its  wickedness,  not  the  guilty  service,  but 
the  proffered  recompense;  and  this  appeals  to 
the  most  upright  man,  equally  with  the  most 
corrupt.  Thus  the  stress  of  a  temptation  is  to 
be  measured  by  our  gravitation,  not  towards  the 
sin,  but  towards  the  pleasure  or  advantage  which 
is  entangled  with  that.  And  this  may  be  realised 
even  more  powerfully  by  a  man  of  keen  feeling 
and  vivid  imagination  who  does  not  falter,  than 
by  a  grosser  nature  which  succumbs. 

Now  Jesus  was  a  perfect  man.  To  His  ex- 
quisite sensibilities,  which  had  neither  inherited 
nor  contracted  any  blemish,  the  pain  of  hunger 
at  the  opening  of  His  ministry,  and  the  horror 
of  the  cross  at  its  close,  were  not  less  intense, 
but  sharper  than  to  ours.  And  this  pain  and  hor- 
ror measured  the  temptation  to  evade  them.  The 
issue  never  hung  in  the  scales;  even  to  hesitate 
would  have  been  to  forfeit  the  delicate  bloom 
of  absolute  sinlessness;  but,  none  the  less,  the 
decision  was  costly,  the  temptation  poignant. 

St.  Mark  has  given  us  no  details;  but  there 
is  immense  and  compressed  power  in  the  as- 
sertion, only  his,  that  the  temptation  lasted  all 
through  the  forty  days.  We  know  the  power 
of  an  unremitting  pressure,  an  incessant  impor- 
tunity, a  haunting  thought.  A  very  trifling  an- 
noyance, long  protracted,  drives  men  to  strange 
remedies.  And  the  remorseless  urgency  of  Satan 
may  be  measured  by  what  St.  Matthew  tells  us, 
that  only  after  the  forty  days  Jesus  became  aware 
of  the  pains  of  hunger.  Perhaps  the  assertion 
that  He  was  with  the  wild  beasts  may  throw 
some  ray  of  light  upon  the  nature  of  the  temp- 
tation. There  is  no  intimation  of  bodily  peril. 
On  the  other  hand  it  seems  incredible  that  what 
is  hinted  is  His  own  consciousness  of  the  super- 
natural dignity  from  which 

"The  fiery  serpent  fled,  and  noxious  worm  ; 
The  lion  and  fierce  tiger  glared  aloof." 

Such  a  consciousness  would  have  relieved  the 
strain  of  which  their  pressure  is  evidently  a  part. 
Nay,  but  the  oppressive  solitude,  the  waste  re- 
gion so  unlike  His  blooming  Nazareth,  and  the 
ferocity  of  the  brute  creation,  all  would  conspire 
to  suggest  those  dread  misgivings  and  question- 
ings which  are  provoked  by  "  the  something  that 
infects  the  world." 

Surely  we  may  believe  that  He  Who  was 
tempted  at  all  points  like  as  we  are,  felt  now 
the  deadly  chill  which  falls  upon  the  soul  from 
the  shadow  of  our  ruined  earth.  In  our  nature 
He  bore  the  assault  and  overcame.  And  then 
His  human  nature  condescended  to  accept  help. 


Mark  i.  21-22.] 


TEACHING   WITH   AUTHORITY. 


819 


such  as  ours  receives,  from  the  ministering  spir- 
its which  are  sent  forth  to  minister  to  them  that 
shall  be  heirs  of  salvation.  So  perfectly  was  He 
made  like  unto  His  brethren. 

THE  EARLY  PREACHING  AND  THE  FIRST 
DISCIPLES. 

Mark  i.  14-20  (R.  V.). 

St.  Mark  has  shown  us  the  Baptist  proclaim- 
ing Christ.  He  now  tells  us  that  when  John 
was  imprisoned,  Jesus,  turning  from  that  Ju- 
daean  ministry  which  stirred  the  jealousy  of 
John's  disciples  (John  iii.  26),  "  came  into  Gal- 
ilee, preaching."  And  one  looks  twice  before 
observing  that  His  teaching  is  a  distinct  advance 
upon  the  herald's.  Men  are  still  to  repent;  for 
however  slightly  modern  preachers  may  heal  the 
hurt  of  souls,  real  contrition  is  here  taken  over 
into  the  gospel  scheme.  But  the  time  which 
was  hitherto  said  to  be  at  hand  is  now  ful- 
filled. And  they  are  not  only  to  believe  the 
gospel,  but  to  "  believe  in  it."  Reliance,  the 
efifort  of  the  soul  by  which  it  ceases  equally  to 
be  self-confident  and  to  despair,  confiding  itself 
to  some  word  which  is  a  gospel,  or  some  being 
who  has  salvation  to  bestow,  that  is  belief  in 
its  object.  And  it  is  highly  important  to  ob- 
serve that  faith  is  thus  made  prominent  so  early 
in  our  Lord's  teaching.  The  vitalising  power 
of  faith  was  no  discovery  of  St.  Paul;  it  was 
not  evolved  by  devout  meditation  after  Jesus 
had  passed  from  view,  nor  introduced  into  His 
system  when  opposition  forced  Him  to  bind  men 
to  Him  in  a  stronger  allegiance.  The  power 
of  faith  is  implied  in  His  earliest  preaching,  and 
it  is  connected  with  His  earliest  miracles.  But 
no  such  phrase  as  the  power  of  faith  is  ever 
used.  Faith  is  precious  only  as  it  leans  on  what 
is  trustworthy.  And  it  is  produced,  not  by  think- 
ing of  faith  itself,  but  of  its  proper  object. 
Therefore  Christ  did  not  come  preaching  faith, 
but  preaching  the  gospel  of  God,  and  bidding 
men  believe  in  that. 

Shall  we  not  follow  His  example?  It  is  mor- 
ally certain  that  Abraham  never  heard  of  sal- 
vation by  faith,  yet  he  was  justified  by  faith 
when  he  believed  in  Him  Who  justifieth  the  un- 
godly. To  preach  Him  and  His  gospel  is  the 
way  to  lead  men  to  be  saved  by  faith. 

Few  things  are  more  instructive  to  consider 
than  the  slow,  deliberate,  yet  firm  steps  by  which 
Christ  advanced  to  the  revelation  of  God  in 
flesh.  Thirty  years  of  silence,  forty  days  of  se- 
clusion after  heaven  had  proclaimed  Him,  lei- 
surely intercourse  with  Andrew  and  John,  Peter 
and  Nathanael,  and  then  a  brief  ministry  in  a 
subject  nation,  and  chiefly  in  a  despised  prov- 
ince. It  is  not  the  action  of  a  fanatic.  It  ex- 
actly fulfils  His  own  description  of  the  kingdom 
which  He  proclaimed,  which  was  to  exhibit  first 
the  blade,  then  the  ear.  then  the  full  corn  in 
the  ear.  And  it  is  a  lesson  to  all  time  that 
the  boldest  expectations  possible  to  faith  do  not 
justify  feverish  haste  and  excited  longings  for 
immediate  prominence  or  immediate  success. 
The  husbandman  who  has  long  patience  with 
the  seed  is  not  therefore  hopeless  of  the  harvest. 

Passing  by  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  Jesus  finds  two 
fishermen  at  their  toil,  and  bids  them  follow 
Him.  Both  are  men  of  decided  and  earnest 
character;  one  is  to  become  the  spokesman  and 
'leader  of  the  Apostolic  band,  and  the  little  which 


is  recorded  of  the  other  indicates  the  same  ten»- 
perament,  somewhat  less  developed.  Our  Lord 
now  calls  upon  them  to  take  a  decided  step. 
But  here  again  we  find  traces  of  the  same  de- 
liberate progression,  the  same  absence  of  haste, 
as  in  His  early  preaching.  He  does  not,  as 
unthinking  readers  fancy,  come  upon  two  utter 
strangers,  fascinate  and  arrest  them  in  a  mo- 
ment, and  sweep  their  lives  into  the  vortex  of 
His  own.  Andrew  had  already  heard  the  Baptist 
proclaim  the  Lamb  of  God,  had  followed  Jesus 
home,  and  had  introduced  his  brother,  to  whom 
Jesus  then  gave  the  new  name  Cephas.  Their 
faith  had  since  been  confirmed  by  miracles.  The 
demands  of  our  Lord  may  be  trying,  but  they 
are  never  unreasonable,  and  the  faith  He  claims 
is  not  a  blind  credulity. 

Nor  does  He,  even  now,  finally  and  entirely 
call  them  away  from  their  occupation.  Some 
time  is  still  to  elapse,  and  a  sign,  especially 
impressive  to  fishermen,  the  miraculous  draught 
of  fishes,  is  to  burn  into  their  minds  a  pro- 
found sense  of  their  unworthiness,  before  the 
vocation  now  promised  shall  arrive.  Then  He 
will  say,  From  henceforth  ye  shall  catch  men: 
now  He  says,  I  will  prepare  you  for  that  future, 
I  will  make  you  to  become  fishers  of  men.  So 
ungrounded  is  the  suspicion  of  any  confusion  be- 
tween the  stories  of  the  three  steps  by  which 
they  rose  to  their  Apostleship. 

A  little  further  on,  He  finds  the  two  sons  of 
Zebedee,  and  calls  them  also.  John  had  almost 
certainly  been  the  companion  of  Andrew  when 
he  followed  Jesus  home,  and  his  brother  had 
become  the  sharer  of  his  hopes.  And  if  there 
were  any  hesitation  the  example  of  their  com- 
rades helped  them  to  decide — so  soon,  so  inev- 
itably does  each  disciple  begin  to  be  a  fisher  of 
other  men — and  leaving  their  father,  as  we  are 
gracefully  told,  not  desolate,  but  with  servants, 
they  also  follow  Jesus. 

Thus  He  asks,  from  each  group,  the  sacrifice 
involved  in  following  Him  at  an  inconvenient 
time.  The  first  are  casting  their  nets  and  eager 
in  their  quest.  The  others  are  mending  their 
nets,  perhaps  after  some  large  draught  had 
broken  them.  So  Levi  was  sitting  at  the  re- 
ceipt of  toll.  Not  one  of  the  Twelve  was 
chosen  to  that  high  rank  when  idle. 

Very  charming,  very  powerful  still  is  the  spell 
by  which  Christ  drew  His  first  apostles  to  His 
side.  Not  yet  are  they  told  anything  of  thrones 
on  which  they  are  to  sit  and  judge  the  tribes 
of  Israel,  or  that  their  names  shall  be  engraven 
on  the  foundations  of  the  heavenly  city  besides 
being  great  on  earth  while  the  world  stands. 
For  them  the  capture  of  men  was  less  lucrative 
than  that  of  fish,  and  less  honourable,  for  they 
suffered  the  loss  of  all  things  and  were  made 
as  the  filth  of  the  earth.  To  learn  Christ's  art, 
be  made  helpful  in  drawing  souls  to  Him,  fol- 
lowing Jesus  and  catching  men,  this  was  enough 
to  attract  His  first  ministers;  God  grant  that  a 
time  may  never  come  when  ministers  for  whom 
this  is  enough,  shall  fail.  Where  the  spirit  of 
self-devotion  is  absent  how  can  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  exist? 

TEACHING  WITH  AUTHORITY. 

Mark  i.  21,  22_(R.  V.). 

The  worship  of  the  synagogues,  not  having 
been  instituted  by  Moses,  but  gradually  devel- 


820 


THE    GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


oped  by  the  public  need,  was  comparatively  free 
and  unconventional.  Sometimes  it  happened 
that  remarkable  and  serious-looking  strangers 
were  invited,  if  they  had  any  word  of  exhorta- 
tion, to  say  on  (Acts  xiii.  15).  Sometimes  one 
presented  himself,  as  the  custom  of  our  Lord 
was  (Luke  iv.  16).  Amid  the  dull  mechanical 
tendencies  which  were  then  turning  the  heart 
of  Judaism  to  stone,  the  synagogue  may  often 
have  been  a  centre  of  life  and  rallying-place  of 
freedom.  In  Galilee,  where  such  worship  pre- 
dominated over  that  of  the  remote  Temple  and 
its  hierarchy,  Jesus  found  His  trusted  followers 
and  the  nucleus  of  the  Church.  In  foreign  lands 
St.  Paul  bore  first  to  his  brethren  in  their  syna- 
gogues the  strange  tidings  that  their  Messiah 
had  expired  upon  a  cross.  And  before  his  rup- 
ture with  the  chiefs  of  Judaism  the  synagogues 
were  fitting  places  for  our  Lord's  early  teach- 
ing. He  made  use  of  the  existing  system,  and 
applied  it,  just  as  we  have  seen  Him  use  the 
teaching  of  the  Baptist  as  a  starting-point  for 
His  own.  And  this  ought  to  be  observed:  that 
Jesus  revolutionised  the  world  by  methods  the 
furthest  from  being  revolutionary.  The  institu- 
tions of  His  age  and  land  were  corrupt  well- 
nigh  to  the  core,  but  He  did  not  therefore  make 
a  clean  sweep,  and  begin  again.  He  did  not 
turn  His  back  on  the  Temple  and  synagogues, 
nor  outrage  Sabbaths,  nor  come  to  destroy  the 
law  and  the  prophets.  He  bade  His  followers 
reverence  the  seat  where  the  scribes  and  the 
Pharisees  sat,  and  dr-^w  the  line  at  their  false 
lives  and  perilous  examples.  Amid  that  evil  gen- 
eration He  found  soil  wherein  His  seed  might 
germinate,  and  was  content  to  hide  His  leaven 
in  the  lump  where  it  should  gradually  work  out 
its  destiny.  In  so  doing  He  was  at  one  with 
Providence,  which  had  slowly  evolved  the  con- 
victions of  the  Old  Testament,  spending  cen- 
turies upon  the  process.  Now  the  power  which 
belongs  to  such  moderation  has  scarcely  been 
recognised  until  these  latter  days.  The  political 
sagacity  of  Somers  and  Burke,  and  the  eccle- 
siastical wisdom  of  our  own  reformers,  had  their 
occult  and  unsuspected  fountains  in  the  method 
by  which  Jesus  planted  the  kingdom  which  came 
not  with  observation.  But  who  taught  the  Car- 
penter? It  is  therefore  significant  that  all  the 
Gospels  of  the  Galilean  ministry  connect  our 
Lord's  early  teaching  with  the  synagogue. 

St.  Mark  is  by  no  means  the  evangelist  of 
the  discourses.  And  this  adds  to  the  interest 
with  which  we  find  him  indicate,  with  precise 
exactitude,  the  first  great  difference  that  would 
strike  the  hearers  of  Christ  between  His  teach- 
ing and  that  of  others.  He  taught  with  author- 
ity, and  not  as  the  scribes.  Their  doctrine  was 
built,  with  dreary  and  irrational  ingenuity,  upon 
perverted  views  of  the  old  law.  The  shape  of 
a  Hebrew  letter,  words  whereof  the  initials  would 
spell  some  important  name,  wire-drawn  infer- 
ences, astounding  allusions,  ingenuity  such  as 
men  waste  now  upon  the  number  of  a  beast 
and  the  measurement  of  a  pvramid,  these  were 
the  doctrine  of  the  scribes. 

And  an  acute  observer  would  remark  that  the 
authority  of  Christ's  teaching  was  peculiar  in  a 
farther-reaching  sense.  If,  as  seems  clear,  Jesus 
said,  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been  said " 
(not  "  by,"  but)  "  to  them  of  olo  time,  but  I 
say  unto  you,"  He  then  claimed  the  place,  not 
of  Moses  who  heard  the  Divine  Voice,  but  of 
Him  Who  spoke.    Even  if  this  could  be  doubted. 


the  same  spirit  is  elsewhere  unmistakable.  The 
tables  which  Moses  brought  were  inscribed  by 
the  finger  of  Another:  none  could  make  him  the 
Supreme  arbitrator  while  overhead  the  trumpet 
waxed  louder  and  louder,  while  the  fiery  pillar 
marshalled  their  journeying,  while  the  myste- 
rious Presence  consecrated  the  mysterious 
shrine.  Prophet  after  prophet  opened  and  closed 
his  message  with  the  words,  "  Thus  saith  the 
Lord."  ..."  P'or  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath 
spoken  it."  Jesus  was  content  with  the  attesta- 
tion, "  Verily,  I  say  unto  you."  Blessed  as  a 
wise  builder  was  the  hearer  and  doer  of  "  these 
words  of  Mine."  Everywhere  in  His  teaching 
the  centre  of  authority  is  personal.  He  distinctly 
recognises  the  fact  that  He  is  adding  to  the 
range  of  the  ancient  law  of  respect  for  human 
life,  and  for  purity,  veracity,  and  kindness.  But 
He  assigns  no  authority  for  these  additions  be- 
yond His  own.  Persecution  by  all  men  is  a 
blessed  thing  to  endure,  if  it  be  for  His  sake 
and  the  gospel's.  Now  this  is  unique.  Moses 
or  Isaiah  never  dreamed  that  devotion  to  him- 
self took  rank  with  devotion  to  his  message. 
Nor  did  St.  Paul.  But  Christ  opens  His  min- 
istry with  the  same  pretensions  as  at  the  close, 
when  others  may  not  be  called  Rabbi,  nor  Mas- 
ter, because  these  titles  belong  to  Him. 

And  the  lapse  of  ages  renders  this  "author- 
ity "  of  Christ  more  wonderful  than  at  first.  The 
world  bows  down  before  something  other  than 
His  clearness  of  logic  or  subtlety  of  inference. 
He  still  announces  where  others  argue,  He  re- 
veals, imposes  on  us  His  supremacy,  bids  us 
take  His  yoke  and  learn.  And  we  still  discover 
in  His  teaching  a  freshness  and  ^rotundity,  a 
universal  reach  of  application  and  yet  an  un- 
earthliness  of  aspect,  which  suit  so  unparalleled 
a  claim.  Others  have  constructed  cisterns  in 
which  to  store  truth,  or  aqueducts  to  convey  it 
from  higher  levels.  Christ  is  Himself  a  fountain; 
and  not  only  so,  but  the  water  which  He  gives, 
when  received  aright,  becomes  in  the  faithful 
heart  a  well  of  water  springing  up  in  new,  inex- 
haustible developments. 


MIRACLES. 
Mark  i.  23  (R.  V.). 

We  have  just  read  that  Christ's  teaching  as- 
tonished the  hearers.  He  was  about  to  aston- 
ish them  yet  more,  for  we  have  now  reached 
the  first  miracle  which  St.  Mark  records.  With 
what  sentiments  should  such  a  narrative  be  ap- 
proached? The 'evangelist  connects  it  emphat- 
ically with  Christ's  assertion  of  authority.  Im- 
mediately upon  the  impression  which  His  man- 
ner of  teaching  produced,  straightway,  there  was 
in  the  synagogue  a  man  with  an  unclean  spirit. 
And  upon  its  expulsion,  what  most  impressed 
the  people  was  that  as  He  taught  with  authority, 
so  "  with  authority  He  commandeth  even  the 
unclean  spirits,  and  they  obey  Him." 

Let  us  try  whether  this  may  not  be  a  provi- 
dential clue  to  guide  us  amid  the  embarrass- 
ments which  beset,  in.  our  day,  the  whole  sub- 
ject   of    miracles. 

A  miracle,  we  are  told,  is  an  interference  with 
the  laws  of  nature;  and  it  is  impossible,  because 
they  are  fixed  and  their  operation  is  uniform. 
But  these  bold  words  need  not  disconcert  any 


Mark  i.  23  j 


MIRACLES. 


821 


one  who  has  learned  to  ask,  In  what  sense  are 
the  operations  of  nature  uniform?  Is  the  opera- 
tion of  the  laws  which  govern  the  wind  uni- 
form, whether  my  helm  is  to  port  or  starboard? 
Can  I  not  modify  the  operation  of  sanitary  laws 
by  deodorisation,  by  drainage,  by  a  thousand 
resources  of  civilisation?  The  truth  is,  that 
while  natural  laws  remain  fixed,  human  intelli- 
gence profoundly  modifies  their  operation.  How 
then  will  the  objector  prove  that  no  higher  Be- 
ing can  as  naturally  do  the  same?  He  answers, 
Because  the  sum  total  of  the  forces  of  nature 
is  a  fixed  quantity:  nothing  can  be  added  to 
that  sum,  nothing  taken  from  it:  the  energy 
of  all  our  machinery  existed  ages  ago  in  the 
heat  of  tropical  suns,  then  in  vegetation,  and 
ever  since,  though  latent,  in  our  coal  beds; 
and  the  claim  to  add  anything  to  that  total  is 
subversive  of  modern  science.  But  again  we  ask, 
If  the  physician  adds  nothing  to  the  sum  of 
forces  when  he  banishes  one  disease  by  inocu- 
lation, and  another  by  draining  a  marsh,  why 
must  Jesus  have  added  to  the  sum  of  forces 
in  order  to  expel  a  demon  or  to  cool  a  fever? 
It  will  not  sufifice  to  answer,  because  His  meth- 
ods are  contrary  to  experience.  Beyond  ex- 
perience they  are.  But  io  were  the  marvels  of 
electricity  to  our  parents  and  of  steam  to  theirs. 
The  chemistry  which  analyses  the  stars  is  not 
incredible,  although  thirty  years  ago  its  meth- 
ods were  "  contrary  "  to  the  universal  experience 
of  humanity.  Man  is  now  doing  what  he  never 
did  before,  because  he  is  a  more  skilful  and 
better  informed  agent  than  he  ever  was.  Per- 
haps at  this  moment,  in  the  laboratory  of  some 
unknown  student,  some  new  force  is  preparing 
to  amaze  the  world.  But  the  sum  of  the  forces 
of  nature  will  remain  unchanged.  Why  is  it 
assumed  that  a  miracle  must  change  them? 
Simply  because  men  have  already  denied  God, 
or  at  least  denied  that  He  is  present  within  His 
world,  as  truly  as  the  chemist  is  within  it.  If 
we  think  of  Him  as  interrupting  its  processes 
from  without,  laying  upon  the  vast  machine  so 
powerful  a  grasp  as  to  arrest  its  working,  then 
indeed  the  sum  of  forces  is  disturbed,  and  the 
complaints  of  science  are  justified.  This  may. 
or  it  may  not,  have  been  the  case  in  creative 
epochs,  of  which  science  knows  no  more  than 
of  the  beginning  of  life  and  of  consciousness. 
But  it  has  nothing  to  say  against  the  doctrine 
of  the  miracles  of  Jesus.  For  this  doctrine  as- 
sumes that  God  is  ever  present  in  His  universe; 
that  by  Him  all  things  consist;  that  He  is  not 
far  from  any  one  of  us,  for  in  Him  we  live 
and  move  and  have  our  being,  although  men 
may  be  as  unconscious  of  Him  as  of  gravitation 
and  electricity.  When  these  became  known  to 
man,  the  stability  of  law  was  unaffected.  And 
it  is  a  wild  assumption  that  if  a  supreme  and 
vital  force  exist,  a  living  God,  He  cannot  make 
His  energies  visible  without  affecting  the  stabil- 
ity of  law. 

Now  Christ  Flimself  appeals  expressly  and  re- 
peatedly to  this  immanent  presence  of  God  as 
the  explanation  of  His  "  works." 

"  My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work." 
"  The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  showeth  Him 
all  things  that  Himself  doeth."  "  I,  by  the  finger 
of  God,  cast  out  devils." 

Thus  a  miracle,  even  in  the  Old  Testament, 
is  not  an  interruption  of  law  by  God,  but  a 
manifestation  of  God  who  is  within  nature  al- 
ways; to  common  events  it  is  as  the  lightning 


to  the  cloud,, a  revelation  of  the  electricity  which 
was  already  there.  God  was  made  known,  when 
invoked  by  His  agents,  in  signs  from  heaven, 
in  fire  and  tempest,  in  drought  and  pestilence, 
a  God  who  judgeth.  These  are  the  miracles  of 
God  interposing  for  His  people  against  their 
foes.  But  the  miracles  of  Christ  are  those  of 
God  carrying  forward  to  the  uttermost  His  pres- 
ence in  the  world,  God  manifest  in  the  flesh. 
They  are  the  works  of  Him  in  Whom  dwelleth 
all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily. 

And  this  explains  what  would  otherwise  be 
so  perplexing,  the  essentially  different  nature  of 
His  miracles  from  those  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Infidelity  pretends  that  those  are  the  models  on 
which  myth  or  legend  formed  the  miracles  of 
Jesus,  but  the  plain  answer  is  that  they  are 
built  on  no  model  of  the  kind.  The  difference 
is  so  great  as  to  be  startling. 

Tremendous  convulsions  and  visitations  of 
wrath  are  now  unknown,  because  God  is  now 
reconciling  the  world  unto  Himself,  and  exhib- 
iting in  miracles  the  presence  of  Him  Who  is 
not  far  from  every  one  of  us,  His  presence  in 
love  to  redeem  the  common  life  of  man,  and 
to  bless,  by  sharing  it.  Therefore  His  gifts  are 
homely,  they  deal  with  average  life  and  its  ne- 
cessities; bread  and  wine  and  fish  are  more  to 
the  purpose  than  that  man  should  eat  angels' 
food,  the  rescue  of  storm-tossed  fishermen  than 
the  engulfment  of  pursuing  armies,  the  healing 
of  prevalent  disease  than  the  plaguing  of  Egypt 
or  the  destruction  of  Sennacherib. 

Such  a  Presence  thus  manifested  is  the  con- 
sistent doctrine  of  the  Church.  It  is  a  theory 
which  men  may  reject  at  their  own  peril,  if  they 
please.  But  they  must  not  pretend  to  refute  it 
by  any  appeal  to  either  the  uniformity  of  law  or 
the   stability   of   force. 

Men  tell  us  that  the  divinity  of  Jesus  was  an 
after-thought;  what  shall  we  say  then  to  this 
fact,  that  men  observed  from  the  very  first  a 
difference  between  the  manner  of  His  miracles 
and  all  that  was  recorded  in  their  Scriptures, 
or  that  they  could  have  deemed  fit?  It  is  ex- 
actly the  same  peculiarity,  carried  to  the  highest 
pitch,  as  they  already  felt  in  His  discourses. 
They  are  wrought  without  any  reference  what- 
ever to  a  superior  will.  Moses  cried  unto  the 
Lord,  saying,  What  shall  I  do?  Elijah  said. 
Hear  me,  O  Lord,  hear  me.  But  Jesus  said 
I  will  ...  I  charge  thee  come  out  .  .  . 
I  am  able  to  do  this.  And  so  marked  is  the 
change,  that  even  His  followers  cast  out  devils 
in  His  name,  and  say  not,  Where  is  the  Lord  God 
of  Israel?  but.  In  the  Name  of  Jesus  Christ  of 
Nazareth.  His  power  is  inherent,  it  is  self-pos- 
sessed, and  His  acts  in  the  synoptics  are  only 
explamed  by  His  words  in  St.  John,  "  What 
things  soever  the  Father  doeth,  these  the  Son 
also  doeth  in  like  manner."  No  wonder  that 
St.  Mark  adds  to  his  very  first  record  of  a 
miracle,  that  the  people  were  amazed,  and  asked, 
What  is  this?  a  new  teaching!  with  authority 
He  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits  and 
they  do  obey  Him!  It  was  divinity  which,  with- 
out recognising,  they  felt,  implicit  in  His  bear- 
ing. No  wonder  also  that  His  enemies  strove 
hard  to  make  Him  say,  Who  gave  Thee  this 
authority?  Nor  could  they  succeed  in  drawing 
from  Him  any  sign  from  heaven.  The  centre 
and  source  of  the  supernatural,  for  human  ap- 
prehension, has  shifted  itself,  and  the  vision  o£ 
Jesus  is  the  vision  of  the  Father  also. 


822 


THET-OOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


THE  DEMONIAC. 
Mark  i.  23-28  (R.  V.). 

We  have  seen  that  belief  in  the  stability  of 
natural  law  does  not  forbid  ,us  to  believe  in 
miracles. 

Special  objections  are  urgfed,  however,  against 
the  belief  in  demoniacal  possession.  The  very 
existence  of  demons  is  declared  to  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  omnipotence  of  God,  or  else 
with  His  goodness. 

And  it  may  be  granted  that  abstract  reasoning 
in  an  ideal  world,  though  moving  in  a  vacuum, 
would  scarcely  evolve  a  state  of  things  so  far 
removed  from  the  ideal.  This,  however,  is  an 
argument  against  the  existence,  not  of  demons, 
but  of  evil  in  any  shape.  It  is  the  familiar  in- 
soluble problem  of  all  religions.  How  can  evil 
exist  in  the  universe  of  God?  And  it  is  bal- 
anced by  the  insoluble  problem  of  all  irreligious 
systems:  In  a  universe  without  God,  how  can 
either  good  or  evil  exist,  as  distinguished  from 
the  advantageous  and  the  unprofitable?  Whence 
comes  the  unquestionable  difiference  between  a 
lie  and  a  bad  bargain? 

But  the  argument  against  evil  spirits  professes 
to  be  something  more  than  a  disguised  repro- 
duction of  this  abstract  problem.  What  more 
is  it?  What  is  gained  by  denying  the  fiends, 
as  long  as  we  cannot  deny  the  fiends  incarnate 
— the  men  who  take  pleasure  in  unrighteousness, 
in  the  seduction  and  ruin  of  their  fellows,  in 
the  infliction  of  torture  and  outrage,  in  the  rav- 
age and  desolation  of  nations?  Such  freedom 
has  been  granted  to  the  human  wul,  for  even 
these  ghastly  issues  have  not  been  judged  so 
deadly  as  coercion  and  moral  fatalism.  What 
presumption  can  possibly  remain  against  the  ex- 
istence of  other  beings  than  men,  who  have 
fallen  yet  farther?  If,  mdeed,  it  be  certainly  so 
much  farther.  For  we  know  that  men  have 
lived,  not  outcasts  from  society,  but  boastful 
sons  of  Abraham,  who  willed  to  perform  the 
lusts  (rdx  iniOvfjilas)  of  their  father  the  devil. 
Now  since  we  are  not  told  that  the  wickedness 
of  demons  is  infinite,*  but  only  that  it  is  abysmal, 
and  since  we  know  that  abysses  of  wickedness 
do  actually  exist,  what  sort  of  vindication  of 
Deity  is  this  which  will  believe  that  such  gulfs 
are  yawning  only  in  the  bosoms  of  men? 

It  alarms  and  shocks  us  to  think  that  evil 
spirits  have  power  over  the  human  mind,  and 
still  more  that  such  power  should  extend,  as 
in  cases  of  possession,  even  to  the  body.  Evil 
men,  however,  manifestly  wield  such  power. 
■"  They  got  rid  of  the  wicked  one,"  says  Goethe, 
'"  but  they  could  not  get  rid  of  the  wicked  ones." 
Social  and  intellectual  charm,  high  rank,  the 
mysterious  attraction  of  strong  individuality,  all 
.are  employed  at  times  to  mislead  and  debase  the 
:shuddering,  reluctant,  mesmerised  wil.s  of  weaker 
men  and  women.  And  then  the  mind  acts  upon 
the  body,  as  perhaps  it  always  does.  Drunken- 
:ness  and  debauchery  shake  the  nerves.  Paralysis 
and  lunacy  tread  hard  on  the  footsteps  of  ex- 
cess. Experience  knows  no  reason  for  denying 
that  when  wickedness  conquers  the  soul  it  will 
also  deal  hardly  with  the  body. 

But  we  must  not  stop  here.  For  the  Gospels 
do  not  countenance  the  popular  notion  that 
:special  wickedness  was  the  cause  of  the   fearful 

♦The  opposite  is  asserted  by  the  fact  that  one  demon 
•mav  ally  h'mself  with  seven  others  worse. 


wretchedness  of  the  possessed.  Young  children 
suffered.  Jesus  often  cautioned  a  sufferer  to  sin 
no  more  lest  worse  results  should  follow  than  • 
those  He  had  removed;  but  He  is  never  known 
to  have  addressed  this  warning  to  demoniacs. 
They  suffered  from  the  tyranny  of  Satan  rather 
than  from  his  seduction;  and  the  analogies  which 
make  credible  so  frightful  an  outrage  upon  hu- 
man nature,  are  the  wrongs  done  by  despots 
and  mobs,  by  invading  armies  and  persecuting 
religionists.  Yet  people  who  cannot  believe  that 
a  demon  could  throw  a  child  upon  the  fire  are 
not  incredulous  of  Attila,  Napoleon,  and  the  In- 
quisition. 

Thus  it  appears  that  such  a  narrative  need 
startle  no  believer  in  God,  and  in  moral  good 
and  evil,  who  considers  the  unquestionable  facts 
of  life.  And  how  often  will  the  observant  Chris- 
tian be  startled  at  the  wild  insurrection  and  surg- 
ing up  of  evil  thought  and  dark  suggestions, 
which  he  cannot  believe  to  be  his  own,  which 
will  not  be  gainsaid  nor  repulsed.  How  easily 
do  such  experiences  fall  in  with  the  plain  words 
of  Scripture,  by  which  the  veil  is  drawn  aside, 
and  the  mystery  of  the  spiritual  world  laid  bare. 
Then  we  learn  that  man  is  not  only  fallen  but 
assaulted,  not  only  feeble  but  enslaved,  not  only 
a  wandering  sheep  but  led  captive  by  the  devil 
at  his  will. 

We  turn  to  the  narrative  before  us.  They 
are  still  wondering  at  our  Lord's  authoritative 
manner,  when  "  straightway,"  for  opportunities 
were  countless  until  unbelief  arose,  a  man  with 
an  unclean  spirit  attracts  attention.  We  can  only 
conjecture  the  special  meaning  of  this  descrip- 
tion. A  recent  commentator  assumes  that  "  like 
the  rest,  he  had  his  dwelling  among  the  tombs: 
an  overpowering  influence  had  driven  him  away 
from  the  haunts  of  men  "  (Canon  Luckock,  in 
loco).  To  others  this  feature  in  the  wretched- 
ness of  the  Gadarene  may  perhaps  seem  rather 
to  be  exceptional,  the  last  touch  in  the  apall- 
ing  picture  of  his  misery.  It  may  be  that  noth- 
ing more  outrageous  than  morbid  gloom  or 
sullen  mutterings  had  hitherto  made  it  neces- 
sary to  exclude  this  sufferer  from  the  synagogue. 
Or  the  language  may  suggest  that  he  rushed  ab- 
ruptly in,  driven  by  the  frantic  hostility  of  the 
fiend,  or  impelled  by  some  mysterious  and  lin- 
gering hope,  as  the  demoniac  of  Gadara  ran  to 
Christ. 

What  we  know  is  that  the  sacred  Presence  pro- 
voked a  crisis.  There  is  an  unbelief  which  never 
can  be  silent,  never  wearies  railing  at  the  faith, 
and  there  is  a  corruption  which  resents  good- 
ness and  hates  it  as  a  personal  wrong.  So  the 
demons  who  possessed  men  were  never  able  to 
confront  Jesus  calmly.  They  resent  His  interfer- 
ence; they  cry  out;  they  disclaim  having  any- 
thing to  do  with  Him;  they  seem  indignant  that 
He  should  come  to  destroy  them  who  have  de- 
stroyed so  many.  There  is  something  weird  and 
unearthly  in  the  complaint.  But  men  are  also 
wont  to  forget  their  wrong  doing  when  they 
come  to  suffer,  and  it  is  recorded  that  even  Nero 
had  abundance  of  compassion  for  himself. 
Weird  also  and  terrible  is  it,  that  this  unclean 
spirit  should  choose  for  his  confession  that  pure 
and  exquisite  epithet,  the  Holy  One  of  God. 
The  phrase  only  recurs  in  the  words  of  St 
Peter,  "  We  have  believed  and  know  that  Thou 
art  the  Holy  One  of  God  "  (John  vi.  69,  R.  V.). 
Was  it  not  a  mournful  association  of  ideas  which 
then  led  Jesus  to  reply,  "  Have  I  not  chosen  you 


Mark  i.  29-34.] 


A    GROUP    OF    MIRACLES. 


823 


the  Twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil?*"  But 
although  the  phrase  is  beautiful,  and  possibly 
"  wild  with  all  regret,"  there  is  no  relenting, 
no  better  desire  than  to  be  "  let  alone."  And 
so  Jesus,  so  gentle  with  sinful  men,  yet  some- 
time to  be  their  judge  also,  is  stern  and  cold. 
"  Hold  thy  peace — be  muzzled,"  He  answers,  as 
to  a  wild  beast,  "  and  come  out  of  him."  Where- 
upon the  evil  spirit  exhibits  at  once  his  ferocity 
and  his  defeat.  Tearing  and  screaming,  he  came 
out,  but  we  read  in  St.  Luke  that  he  did  the  man 
no  harm. 

And  the  spectators  drew  the  proper  inference. 
A  new  power  implied  a  new  revelation.  Some- 
thing far-reaching  and  profound  might  be  ex- 
pected from  Him  who  commanded  even  the  un- 
clean spirits  with  authority,  and  was  obeyed. 

It  is  the  custom  of  unbelievers  to  speak  as 
if  the  air  of  Palestine  were  then  surcharged  with 
belief  in  the  supernatural.  Miracles  were  every- 
where. Thus  they  would  explain  away  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  popular  belief  that  our  Lord 
wrought  signs  and  wonders.  But  in  so  doing  they 
set  themselves  a  worse  problem  than  they  evade. 
If  miracles  were  so  very  common,  it  would  be  as 
easy  to  believe  that  Jesus  wrought  them  as  that 
He  worked  at  His  father's  bench.  But  also  it 
would  be  as  inconclusive.  And  how  then  are 
we  to  explain  the  astonishment  which  all  the 
evangelists  so  constantly  record?  On  any  con- 
ceivable theory  these  writers  shared  the  beliefs 
of  that  age.  And  so  did  the  readers  who  ac- 
cepted their  assurance  that  all  were  amazed,  and 
that  His  report  "  went  out  straightway  every- 
where into  all  the  region  of  Gal'lee."  These 
are  emphatic  words,  and  both  the  author  and 
his  readers  must  have  considered  a  miracle  to 
be  more  surprising  than  modern  critics  believe 
they  did. 

Yet  we  do  not  read  that  any  one  was  con- 
verted by  this  miracle.  All  were  amazed,  but 
wonder  is  not  self-surrender.  They  were  con- 
tent to  let  their  excitement  die  out,  as  every 
violent  emotion  must,  without  any  change  of 
life,  any  permanent  devotion  to  the  new  Teacher 
and  His  doctrine. 


A  GROUP  OF  MIRACLES. 
Mark  i.  29-34  (R-  V.). 

St.  Matthew  tells  us  that  on  leaving  the  syna- 
gogue they  entered  into  Peter's  house.  St. 
Mark,  with  his  peculiar  sources  of  information, 
is  aware  that  Andrew  shared  the  house  with  his 
brother. 

Especial  interest  attaches  to  the  mention  of 
the  mother-in-law  of  Peter,  as  proving  that  Jesus 
chose  a  married  man  to  be  an  apostle,  the  very 
apostle  from  whom  the  celibate  ministry  of 
Rome  professes  to  have  received  the  keys.  The 
evidence  does  not  stand  alone.  When  St.  Paul's 
apostolic  authority  was  impugned,  he  insisted 
that  he  had  the  same  right  to  bring  with  him 
in  his  travels  a  believing  wife  which  Peter  ex- 
ercised. And  Clement  of  Alexandria  tells  us 
that  Peter's  wife  acted  as  his  coadjutor,  minis- 
it  ring  to  women  in  their  own  homes,  by  which 
n.eans  the  gospel  of  Christ  penetrated  without 
s:andal    the    privacy    of    women's    apartments. 

♦The  connection  would  be  almost  certain  if  the  word 
"  devil "  were  alike  in  both.  But  in  all  these  narratives  it 
is  '  ■  dnmon  "  there  being  in  Scripture  but  one  devil. 


Thus  the  notion  of  a  Zenana  mission  is  by  no 
means  modern. 

The  mother  of  such  a  wife  is  afflicted  by  fever 
of  a  kind  which  still  haunts  that  district.  "  And 
they  tell  Him  of  her."  Doubtless  there  were  so- 
licitude and  hope  in  their  voices,  even  if  desire 
did  not  take  the  shape  of  formal  prayer.  We  are 
just  emerging  from  that  early  period  when  belief 
in  His  power  to  heal  might  still  be  united  with 
some  doubt  whether  free  application  might  be 
made  to  Him.  His  disciples  might  still  be  as 
unwise  as  those  modern  theologians  who  are  so 
busy  studying  the  miracles  as  a  sign  that  they 
forget  to  think  of  them  as  works  of  love.  Any 
such  hesitation  was  now  to  be  dispelled  for  ever. 
It  is  possible  that  such  is  the  meaning  of  the 
expression,  and  if  so,  it  has  a  useful  lesson. 
Sometimes  there  are  temporal  gifts  which  we 
scarce  know  whether  we  should  pray  for,  so 
complex  are  our  feelings,  so  entangled  our  inter- 
ests with  those  of  others,  so  obscure  and  dubi- 
ous the  springs  which  move  our  desire.  Is  it 
presumptuous  to  ask?  Yet  can  it  be  right  to 
keep  anything  back,  in  our  communion  with  our 
Father? 

Now  there  is  a  curious  similarity  between  the 
expression  "  they  tell  Jesus  of  her "  and  that 
phrase  which  is  only  applied  to  prayer  when  St. 
Paul  bids  us  pray  for  all  that  is  in  our  hearts. 
"  In  nothing  be  anxious,  but  in  everything  by 
prayer  and  supplication  with  thanksgiving  let 
your  requests  be  made  known  unto  God."  So 
shall  the  great  benediction  be  fulfilled:  "The 
peace  of  God  which  passeth  all  understanding, 
shall  guard  your  hearts  and  your  thoughts " 
(Phil.  iv.  6,  7).  All  that  is  unholy  shall  be  puri- 
fied, all  that  is  unwise  subdued,  all  that  is  ex- 
pedient granted. 

If  this  be  indeed  the  force  of  St.  Mark's 
phrase,  Jesus  felt  their  modest  reticence  to  be  a 
strong  appeal,  for  St.  Luke  says  "  they  besought 
Him,"  while  St.  Matthew  merely  writes  that  He 
saw  her  lying.  The  "  Interpreter  of  St.  Peter  " 
is  most  likely  to  have  caught  the  exact  shade  of 
anxiety  and  appeal  by  which  her  friends  drew 
His  attention,  and  which  was  indeed  a  prayer. 

The  gentle  courtesy  of  our  Lord's  healings 
cannot  be  too  much  studied  by  those  who  would 
know  His  mind  and  love  Him.  Never  does  He 
fling  a  careless  blessing  as  coarse  benefactors 
fling  their  alms;  we  shall  hereafter  see  how  far 
He  was  from  leaving  fallen  bread  to  be  snatched 
as  by  a  dog,  even  by  one  who  would  have  wel- 
comed a  boon  thus  contemptuously  given  to  her; 
and  in  the  hour  of  His  arrest,  when  He  would 
heal  the  ear  of  a  persecutor,  His  courtesy  appeals 
to  those  who  had  laid  hold  on  Him,  "  Suffer  ye 
thus  far."  Thus  He  went  to  this  woman  and 
took  her  by  the  hand  and  raised  her  up,  laying 
a  cool  touch  upon  her  fevered  palm,  bestowing 
His  strength  upon  her  weakness,  healing  her  as 
He  would  fain  heal  humanity.  For  at  His  touch 
the  disease  was  banished;  with  His  impulse  her, 
strength   returned. 

We  do  not  read  that  she  felt  bound  thereupon 
to  become  an  obtrusive  public  witness  to  His 
powers:  that  was  not  her  function;  but  in  her 
quiet  home  she  failed  not  to  minister  unto  Him 
who  had  restored  her  powers.  Would  that  all 
whose  physical  powers  Jesus  renews  from  sick- 
ness, might  devote  their  energies  to  Him. 
Would  that  all  for  whom  He  has  calmed  the 
fever  of  earthly  passion,  might  arise  and  be  en- 
ergetic in  His  cause. 


824 


THE  "DOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


Think  of  the  wonder,  the  gladness  and  grati- 
tude of  their  humble  feast.  But  if  we  felt  aright 
the  sickness  of  our  souls,  and  the  grace  which 
heals  them,  equal  gratitude  would  fill  our  lives 
as  He  sups  with  us  and  we  with  Him. 

Tidings  of  the  two  miracles  have  quickly  gone 
abroad,  and  as  the  sun  sets,  and  the  restraint 
of  the  sabbath  is  removed,  all  the  city  gathers  all 
the  sick  around  His  door. 

Now  here  is  a  curious  example  of  the  peril  of 
pressing  too  eagerly  our  inferences  from  the 
expressions  of  an  evangelist.  St.  Mark  tells  us 
that  they  brought  "  all  their  sick  and  them  that 
were  possessed  with  devils.  And  He  healed  " 
(not  all,  but)  "  many  that  were  sick,  and  cast 
out  many  devils."  How  easily  we  might  dis- 
tinguish between  the  "  all  "  who  came,  and  the 
"  many "  who  were  healed.  Want  of  faith 
would  explain  the  difiference,  and  spiritual  anal- 
ogies would  be  found  for  those  who  remained 
unhealed  at  the  feet  of  the  good  Physician. 
These  lessons  might  be  very  edifying,  but  they 
would  be  out  of  place,  for  St.  Matthew  tells  us 
that  He  healed  them  all. 

But  who  can  fail  to  contrast  this  universal 
movement,  the  urgent  quest  of  bodily  h-ealth,  and 
the  willingness  of  friends  and  neighbours  to  con- 
vey their  sick  to  Jesus,  with  our  indifference  to 
the  health  of  the  soul,  and  -our  neglect  to  lead 
others  to  the  Saviour.  Disease  being  the  cold 
shadow  of  sin,  its  removal  was  a  kind  of  sacra- 
ment, an  outward  and  visible  sign  that  the  Healer 
of  souls  was  nigh.  But  the  chillness  of  the 
shadow  afflicts  us  more  than  the  pollution  of  the 
substance,  and  few  professing  Christians  lament 
a  hot  temper  as  sincerely  as  A  fever. 

As  Jesus  drove  out  the  demons.  He  suffered 
them  not  to  speak  because  they  knew  Him.  We 
cannot  believe  that  His  rejection  of  their  im- 
pure testimony  was  prudential  only,  whatever 
possibility  there  may  have  been  of  that  charge 
of  complicity  which  was  afterwards  actually 
brought.  Any  help  which  might  have  come  to 
Him  from  the  lips  of  Hell  was  shocking  and  re- 
volting to  our  Lord.  And  this  is  a  lesson  for 
all  religious  and  political  partisans  who  stop 
short  of  doing  evil  themselves,  but  reject  no 
advantage  which  the  evil  deeds  of  others  may 
bestow.  Not  so  cold  and  negative  is  the  mo- 
rality of  Jesus.  He  regards  as  contamination 
whatever  help  fraud,  suppressions  of  truth,  in- 
justice, by  whomsoever  wrought,  can  yield.  He 
rejects  them  by  an  instinct  of  abhorrence,  and 
not  only  because  shame  and  dishonour  have  al- 
ways befallen  the  purest  cause  which  stooped 
to  unholy  alliances. 

Jesus  that  day  showed  Himself  powerful  alike 
in  the  congregation,  in  the  home,  and  in  the 
streets,  and  over  evil  spirits  and  physical  dis- 
ease alike. 


JESUS  IN  SOLITUDE. 

Mark  i.  35-39  (R.  V.). 

St.  Mark  is  pre-eminently  the  historian  of 
Christ's  activities.  From  Him  chiefly  we  learn  to 
add  to  our  thought  of  perfect  love  and  gentle- 
ness that  of  One  whom  the  zeal  of  God's  house 
ate  up.  But  this  evangelist  does  not  omit  to  tell 
us  by  what  secret  fountains  this  river  of  life  was 
fed;  how  the  active  labours  of  Jesus  were  in- 
spired in  secret  prayers.     Too  often  we  allow  to 


one  side  of  religion  a  development  which  is 
not  excessive,  but  disproportionate,  and  we  are 
punished  when  contemplation  becomes  nerveless, 
or  energy  burns  itself  away. 

After  feeding  the  five  thousand,  St.  Mark  tells 
us  that  Jesus,  while  the  storm  gathered  over  His 
disciples  on  the  lake,  went  up  into  a  mountain 
to  pray.  And  St.  Luke  tells  of  a  whole  night 
of  prayer  before  choosing  His  disciples,  and  how 
it  was  to  pray  that  He  climbed  the  mountain  of 
transfiguration. 

And  we  read  of  Him  going  into  a  desert  place 
with  His  disciples  and  to  Olivet,  and  oft-times 
resorting  to  the  garden  where  Judas  found  Him, 
where,  in  the  dead  of  night,  the  traitor  naturally 
sought   Him. 

Prayer  was  the  spring  of  all  His  energies,  and 
His  own  saying  indicated  the  habit  of  His  mortal 
life  as  truly  as  the  law  of  His  mysterious  gen- 
eration: "  I  live  by  the  Father." 

His  prayers  impress  nothing  on  us  more 
powerfully  than  the  reality  of  His  manhood. 
He,  Who  possesses  all  things,  bends  His  knees 
to  crave,  and  His  prayers  are  definite,  no  empty 
form,  no  homage  without  sense  of  need,  no  firing 
of  blank  cartridge  without  an  aim.  He  asks 
that  His  disciples  may  be  with  Him  where  He 
is,  that  Simon's  strength  may  fail  not,  that  He 
may  Himself  be  saved  from  a  dreadful  hour. 
"  Such  touches,"  said  Godet,  "  do  not  look  like 
an  artificial  apotheosis  of  Jesus,  and  they  consti- 
tute a  striking  difiference  between  the  gospel 
portrait  and  the  legendary  caricature." 

The  entire  evening  had  been  passed  rn  healing 
the  diseases  of  the  whole  town;  not  the  light  and 
careless  bestowal  of  a  boon  which  cost  nothing, 
but  wrought  with  so  much  sympathy,  such  drain- 
ing of  His  own  vital  forces,  that  St.  M?tthew 
found  in  it  a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  tha*  He 
should  Himself  bear  our  sicknesses.  And  thus 
exhausted,  the  frame  might  have  been  forgiven 
for  demanding  some  indulgence,  some  prolonga- 
tion of  repose. 

But  the  course  of  our  Lord's  ministry  was 
now  opening  up  before  Him,  and  the  hindrances 
becoming  visible.  How  much  was  to  be  hoped 
from  the  great  impression  already  made;  how 
much  to  be  feared  from  the  weakness  of  His 
followers,  the  incipient  envy  of  priest  and 
Pharisee,  and  the  volatile  excitability  of  th<^ 
crowd.  At  such  a  time,  to  relieve  His  burdened 
heart  with  Divine  communion  was  more  tc» 
Jesus  than  repose,  as,  at  another  time,  to  serve 
Him  was  meat  to  eat.  And  therefore,  in  the  still 
fresh  morning,  long  before  the  dawn,  while 
every  earthly  sight  was  dim  but  the  abysses  of 
heaven  were  vivid,  declaring  without  voice, 
amid  the  silence  of  earth's  discord,  the  glory  and 
the  handiwork  of  His  Father,  Jesus  went  into  a 
solitary  place  and  prayed. 

What  is  it  that  makes  solitude  and  darkness 
dreadful  to  some,  and  oppressive  to  very  many? 

Partly  the  sense  of  physical  danger,  born  of 
helplessness  and  uncertainty.  This  He  never 
felt,  who  knew  that  He  must  walk  to-day  and  to- 
morrow, and  on  the  third  day  be  perfected.  And 
partly  it  is  the  weight  of  unwelcome  reflection, 
the  searching  and  rebukes  of  memory,  fears  that 
come  of  guilt  and  inward  distractions  of  a  na- 
ture estranged  from  the  true  nature  of  the  uni- 
verse. Jesus  was  agitated  by  no  inward  dis- 
cords, upbraided  by  no  remorse.  And  He  had 
probably  no  reveries;  He  is  never  recorded  to 
soliloquise;    solitude    to    Him    was    but   another 


Mark  i.  40-45.] 


THE    LEPER. 


825 


name  for  communion  with  God  His  Father;  He 
was  never  alone,  for  God  was  with  Him. 

This  retirement  enabled  Him  to  remain  undis- 
turbed until  His  disciples  found  Him,  long  after 
the  crowds  had  besieged  their  dwelling.  They 
had  not  yet  learned  how  all  true  external  life 
must  rest  upon  the  hidden  life  of  devotion,  and 
there  is  an  accent  of  regret  in  the  words,  "  All 
are  seeking  Thee,''  as  if  Jesus  could  neglect  in 
self-culture  any  true  opportunity  for  service. 

The  answer,  noteworthy  in  itself,  demands  es- 
pecial attention  in  these  times  of  missions,  dem- 
onstrations. Salvation  Armies,  and  other  wise 
and  unwise  attempts  to  gather  excited  crowds 
around  th§  cross. 

Mere  sensation  actually  repelled  Jesus.  Again 
and  again  He  charged  men  not  to  make  Him 
known,  in  places  where  He  would  stay;  while 
in  Gadara,  which  He  had  to  leave.  His  command 
to  the  demoniac  was  the  reverse.  Deep  and  real 
convictions  are  not  of  kin  with  sightseeing  and 
the  pursuit  of  wonders.  Capernaum  has  now 
heard  His  message,  has  received  its  full  share  of 
physical  blessing,  is  exalted  unto  heaven.  Those 
who  were  looking  for  redemption  knew  the  gos- 
pel, and  Jesus  must  preach  it  in  other  towns  also. 
Therefore,  and  not  to  be  the  centre  of  admiring 
multitudes,  came  He  forth  from  His  quiet  home. 

Such  is  the  sane  and  tranquil  action  of  Jesus, 
in  face  of  the  excitement  caused  by  His  many 
miracles.  Now  the  miracles  themselves,  and  all 
that  depends  on  them,  are  declared  to  be  the 
creation  of  the  wildest  fanaticism,  either  dur- 
ing His  lifetime  or  developing  His  legend  after- 
wards. And  if  so,  we  have  here,  in  the  action 
of  human  mind,  the  marvel  of  modern  physicists, 
ice  from  a  red-hot  retort,  absolute  moderation 
from  a  dream  of  frenzy.  And  this  paradox  is 
created  in  the  act  of  "  explaining  "  the  miracles. 
The  explanation,  even  were  it  sustained  by  any 
evidence,  would  be  as  difficult  as  any  miracle  to 
believe. 

THE    LEPER. 

Mark  i.  40-45  (R.  V.). 

The  disease  of  leprosy  was  peculiarly  fearful 
to  a  Jew.  In  its  stealthy  beginning,  its  irresist- 
ible advance,  the  utter  ruin  which  it  wrought 
from  the  blood  outward  until  the  flesh  was  cor- 
roded and  fell  away,  it  was  a  fit  type  of  sin,  at 
first  so  trivial  in  its  indications,  but  gradually 
usurping  all  the  nature  and  corrupting  it.  And 
the  terrible  fact,  that  the  children  of  its  victims 
were  also  doomed,  reminded  the  Israelite  of  the 
transmission  of  the  taint  of  Adam. 

The  story  of  Naaman  and  that  of  Gehazi  make 
it  almost  certain  that  the  leprosy  of  Scripture 
was  not  contagious,  for  they  were  intimate  with 
kings.  But,  apparently  to  complete  the  type, 
the  law  gave  to  it  the  artificial  contagion  of 
ceremonial  uncleanness,  and  banished  the  un- 
happy sufferer  from  the  dwellings  of  men.  Thus 
he  came  to  be  regarded  as  under  an  especial 
ban,  and  the  prophecy  which  announced  that  the 
illustrious  Man  of  Sorrows  would  be  esteemed 
"  stricken  of  God,"  was  taken  to  mean  that  He 
should  be  a  leper.  This  banishment  of  the  leper 
was  indeed  a  remarkable  exception  to  the  hu- 
manity of  the  ancient  law,  but  when  his  distress 
began  to  be  extreme,  and  "  the  plague  was 
turned  into  white,"  he  was  released  from  his 
uncleanness  (Lev.  xiii.  17).     And  this  may  teach 


us  that  sin  is  to  be  dreaded  most  while  it  is 
yet  insidious;  when  developed  it  gives  a  sufifi- 
cient  warning  against  itself.  And  now  such  a 
sufferer  appeals  to  Jesus.  The  incident  is  one  of 
the  most  pathetic  in  the  Gospel;  and  its  graphic 
details,  and  the  shining  character  which  it  re- 
veals, make  it  very  perplexing  to  moderate  and 
thoughtful  sceptics. 

Those  who  believe  that  the  charm  of  His 
presence  was  "  worth  all  the  resources  of  medi- 
cine," agree  that  Christ  may  have  cured  even 
leprosy,  and  insist  that  this  story,  as  told  by  St. 
Mark,  "  must  be  genuine."  Others  suppose  that 
the  leper  was  already  cured,  and  Jesus  only  urged 
him  to  fulfil  the  requirements  of  the  law.  And 
why  not  deny  the  story  boldly?  Why  linger  so 
longingly  over  the  details,  when  credence  is  re- 
fused to  what  is  plainly  the  mainspring  of  the 
whole,  the  miraculous  power  of  Jesus?  The  an- 
swer is  plain.  Honest  minds  feel  the  touch  of  a 
great  nature;  the  misery  of  the  suppliant  and  the 
compassion  of  his  Restorer  are  so  vivid  as  to 
prove  themselves;  no  dreamer  of  a  myth,  no 
process  of  legend-building,  ever  wrought  after 
this  fashion.  But  then,  the  misery  and  compas- 
sion being  granted,  the  whole  story  is  practically 
conceded.  It  only  remains  to  ask,  whether  the 
"  presence  of  the  Saintly  Man "  could  work  a 
chemical  change  in  tainted  blood.  For  it  must 
be  insisted  that  the  man  was  "  full  of  leprosy," 
and  not,  as  one  suggests,  already  far  advanced 
towards  cure.  The  contrast  between  his  running 
and  kneeling  at  the  very  feet  of  Jesus,  and  the 
conduct  of  the  ten  lepers,  not  yet  released  from 
their  exclusion,  who  stood  afar  off  while  they 
cried  out  (Luke  xvii.  12),  is  sufficient  evidence 
of  this,  even  if  the  express  statement  of  St.  Luke 
were  not  decisive. 

Repulsive,  and  until  naw  despairing,  only 
tolerated  among  men  through  the  completeness 
of  his  plague,  this  man  pushes  through  the 
crowd  which  shrinks  from  him,  kneels  in  an 
agony  of  supplication,  and  says  ''  If  Thou  wilt. 
Thou  canst  make  me  clean."  If  Thou  wilt! 
The  cruelty  of  man  has  taught  him  to  doubt  the 
heart,  even  though  satisfied  of  the  power  of 
Jesus.  In  a  few  years,  men  came  to  assume  the 
love,  and  exult  in  the  reflection  that  He  was 
"  able  to  keep  what  '  was  '  committed  to  Him," 
"  able  to  do  exceeding  abundantly  above  all  that 
we  ask  or  think."  It  did  not  occur  to  St.  Paul 
that  any  mention  of  His  will  was  needed. 

Nor  did  Jesus  Himself  ask  a  later  suppliant, 
"  Believest  thou  that  I  am  willing,"  but  "  Be- 
lievest  thou  that  I  am  able  to  do  this?  " 

But  the  charm  of  this  delightful  incident  is  the 
manner  in  which  our  Lord  grants  the  impas- 
sioned prayer.  We  might  have  expected  a 
shudder,  a  natural  recoil  from  the  loathsome 
spectacle,  and  then  a  wonder-working  word. 
But  misery  which  He  could  relieve  did  not  repel 
Jesus;  it  attracted  Him.  His  impulse  was  to  ap- 
proach. He  not  only  answered  "  I  will," — and 
deep  is  the  will  to  remove  all  anguish  in  the  won- 
derful heart  of  Jesus, — but  He  stretched  forth 
an  unshrinking  hand,  and  touched  that  death  in 
life.  It  is  a  parable  of  all  His  course,  this  laying 
of  a  clean  hand  on  the  sin  of  the  world  to  cleanse 
it.  At  His  touch,  how  was  the  morbid  frame 
thrilled  with  delightful  pulses  of  suddenly  reno- 
vated health.  And  how  was  the  despairing,  joy- 
less heart,  incredulous  of  any  real  will  to  help 
him,  soothed  and  healed  hj,  the  pure  delight  of 
being  loved. 


826 


THBruGOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


This  is  the  true  lesson  of  the  narrative.  St. 
Mark  treats  the  rniraculous  cure  much  more 
lightly  than  the  tenrler  compassion  and  the  swift 
movement  to  relieve  suffering.  And  He  is 
right.  The  warm  and  generous  nature  revealed 
by  this  fine  narrative  is  what,  as  we  have  seen, 
most  impresses  the  doubter,  and  ought  most  to 
comfort  the  Church.  For  He  is  the  same  yes- 
terday and  to-day.  And  perhaps,  if  the  divinity 
of  love  impressed  men  as  much  as  that  of  power, 
there  would  be  less  denial  of  the  true  Godhead 
of  our  Lord. 

The  touch  of  a  leper  made  a  Jew  unclean. 
And  there  is  a  surprising  theory,  that  when  Jesus 
could  no  more  openly  enter  into  a  city,  it  was 
because  the  leper  had  disobediently  published 
what  implied  His  ceremonial  defilement.  As  if 
our  Lord  were  one  to  violate  the  law  by  stealth. 

But  is  it  very  remarkable  that  Christ,  Who  was 
born  under  the  law,  never  betrayed  any  anxiety 
about  cleanness?  The  law  of  impurity  was  in  fact 
an  expression  of  human  frailty.  Sin  spreads  cor- 
ruption far  more  easily  than  virtue  diffuses  pu- 
rity. The  touch  of  goodness  fails  to  reproduce 
goodness.  And  the  prophet  Haggai  has  laid 
stress  upon  this  contrast,  that  bread  or  pottage 
or  wine  or  oil  or  any  meat  will  not  become  holy 
at  the  touch  of  one  who  bears  holy  flesh  in  the 
skirt  of  his  garment,  but  if  one  that  is  unclean 
by  a  dead  body  touch  any  of  these,  it  shall  be 
unclean  (ii.  12,  13).  Our  hearts  know  full  well 
how  true  to  nature  is  the  ordinance. 

But  Christ  brought  among  us  a  virtue  more 
contagious  than  our  vices  are,  being  not  only 
a  living  soul,  but  a  life-imparting  Spirit.  And 
thus  He  lays  His  hand  upon  this  leper,  upon  the 
bier  at  Nain,  upon  the  corpse  of  the  daughter  of 
Jairus,  and  as  fire  is  kindled  at  the  touch  of  fire, 
so  instead  of  pollution  to  Him,  the  pureness  of 
healthful  life  is  imparted  to  the  defiling  and  de- 
filed. 

And  His  followers  also  are  to  possess  a  reli- 
gion that  is  vitalising,  to  be  the  light  of  the 
world,  and  the  salt  of  the  earth. 

If  we  are  thus  to  further  His  cause,  we  must 
not  only  be  zealous,  but  obedient.  Jesus  strictly 
charged  the  leper  not  to  fan. the  flame  of  an  ex- 
citement which  already  impeded  His  work.  But 
there  was  an  invaluable  service  which  he  might 
render:  the  formal  registration  of  his  cure,  the 
securing  its  official  recognition  by  the  priests, 
and  their  consent  to  offer  the  commanded  sacri- 
fices. In  many  a  subsequent  controversy,  that 
"  testimony  unto  them  "  might  have  been  em- 
barrassing indeed.  But  the  leper  lost  his  op- 
portunity, and  put  them  upon  their  guard.  And 
as  through  his  impulsive  clamour  Jesus  could 
no  more  openly  enter  into  a  city,  but  even  in 
desert  places  was  beset  by  excited  crowds,  so  is 
He  deprived  to-day  of  many  a  tranquil  ministra- 
tion and  lowly  service,  by  the  zeal  which  de- 
spises order  and  quiet  methods,  by  the  undis- 
ciplined and  ill-judged  demonstrations  of  men 
and  women  whom  He  has  blessed. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE   SICK   OF    THE   PALSY. 

Mark  ii.  i  (R.  V.). 

Jesus  returns  to  Capernaum,  and  an  eager 
crowd  blocks  even  the  approaches  to  the  house 
where    He   is   known    to    be.     St.    Mark,    as    we 


should  expect,  relates  the  course  of  events,  the 
multitudes,  the  ingenious  device  by  which  a  mir- 
acle is  obtained,  the  claim  which  Jesus  advances 
to  yet  greater  authority  than  heretofore,  and  the 
impression  produced.  But  St.  Luke  explains 
that  there  were  "  sitting  by,"  having  obtained 
the  foremost  places  which  they  loved,  Pharisees 
and  doctors  of  the  law  from  every  village  of 
Galilee  and  Judaea,  and  from  Jerusalem  itself. 
And  this  concourse,  evidently  preconcerted  and 
unfriendly,  explains  the  first  murmurs  of  oppo- 
sition recorded  by  St.  Mark.  It  was  the  jeal- 
ousy of  rival  teachers  which  so  readily  pro- 
nounced Him  a  blasphemer. 

The  crowds  besiege  the  very  pass'ages,  there 
was  no  room,  no,  not  around  the  door,  and  even 
if  one  might  struggle  forward,  four  men  bearing 
a  litter  might  well  despair.  But  with  palsied 
paralysis  at  stake,  they  would  not  be  repulsed. 
They  gained  the  roof  by  an  outer  staircase,  such 
as  the  fugitives  from  Jerusalem  should  here- 
after use,  not  going  through  the  house.  Then 
they  uncovered  and  broke  up  the  roof,  by  which 
strong  phrases  St.  Mark  means  that  they  first 
lifted  the  tiles  which  lay  in  a  bed  of  mortar  or 
mud,  broke  through  this,  and  then  tore  up  the 
poles  and  light  rafters  by  which  all  this  covering 
was  supported.  Then  they  lowered  the  sick  man 
upon  his  pallet,  in  front  of  the  Master  as  He 
taught. 

It  was  an  unceremonious  act.  However  care- 
fully performed,  the  audience  below  must  have 
been  not  only  disturbed  but  inconvenienced,  and 
doubtless  among  the  precise  and  unmerciful  per- 
sonages in  the  chief  seats  there  was  many  an  an- 
gry glance,  many  a  murmur,  many  a  conjecture 
of  rebukes  presently  to  be  inflicted  on  the  in- 
truders. 

But  Jesus  never  in  any  circumstances  rebuked 
for  intrusion  any  suppliant.  And  now  He  dis- 
cerned the  central  spiritual  impulse  of  these  men, 
which  was  not  obtrusiveness  nor  disrespect. 
They  believed  that  neither  din  while  He 
preached,  nor  rubbish  falling  among  His  audi- 
ence, nor  the  strange  interruption  of  a  patient 
and  a  litter  intruded  upon  His  discourse,  could 
weigh  as  much  with  Jesus  as  the  appeal  on  a 
sick  man's  face.  And  this  was  faith.  These 
peasants  may  have  been  far  enough  from  intel- 
lectual discernment  of  Christ's  Personality  and 
the  scheme  of  salvation.  They  had,  however,  a 
strong  and  practical  conviction  that  He  would 
make   whole   their  palsied   friend. 

Now  the  preaching  of  faith  is  suspected  of  en- 
dangering good  works.  But  was  this  persuasion 
likely  to  make  these  men  torpid?  Is  it  not  plain 
that  all  spiritual  apathy  comes  not  from  over- 
trust,  but  from  unbelief,  either  doubting  that  sin 
is  present  death,  or  else  that  holiness  is  life,  and 
that  Jesus  has  a  gift  to  bestow,  not  in  heaven, 
but  promptly,  which  is  better  to  gain  than  all 
the  world?  Therefore  salvation  is  linked  with 
faith,  which  earns  nothing  but  elicits  all,  like 
the  touch  that  evokes  electricity,  but  which  no 
man  supposes  to  have  made  it. 

Because  they  knew  the  curse  of  palsy,  and  be- 
lieved in  a  present  remedy,  these  men  broke  up 
the  roof  to  come  where  Jesus  was.  They  won 
their  blessing,  but  not  the  less  it  was  His  free 
gift. 

Jesus  saw  and  rewarded  the  faith  of  all  the 
group.  The  principle  of  mutual  support  and  co- 
operation is  the  basis  alike  of  the  family,  the 
nation,  and  the  Church.    Thus  the  great  Apostle 


Mark  li.  lo.] 


THE    SON    OF   MAN. 


827 


d«;sired  obscure  and  long-forgotten  men  and  wo- 
men to  help  together  with  him  in  their  prayers. 
And  He  who  visits  the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon 
the  children  unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation, 
shows  mercy  unto  many  more,  unto  thousands, 
in  them  that  love  Him.  What  a  rebuke  is  all 
this  to  men  who  think  it  enough  that  they  should 
do  no  harm,  and  live  inoffensive  lives.  Jesus 
now  bestowed  such  a  blessing  as  awoke  strange 
misgivings  among  the  bystanders.  He  divined 
the  true  burden  of  that  afflicted  heart,  the  dreary 
memories  and  worse  fears  which  haunted  that 
sick  bed, — and  how  many  are  even  now  prepar- 
ing such  remorse  and  gloom  for  a  bed  of  pain 
hereafter! — and  perhaps  He  discerned  the  con- 
sciousness of  some  guilty  origin  of  the  disease. 
Certainly  He  saw  there  one  whose  thoughts  went 
beyond  his  malady,  a  young  soul,  with  hope 
glowing  like  red  sparks  amid  the  ashes  of  his 
self-reproach,  that  a  teacher  so  gracious  as  men 
reported  Jesus,  might  bring  with  Him  a  gospel 
indeed.  We  know  that  he  felt  thus,  for  Jesus 
made  him  of  good  cheer  by  pardon  rather  than 
by  healing,  and  spoke  of  the  cure  itself  as 
wrought  less  for  his  sake  than  as  evidence. 

Surely  that  was  a  great  moment  when  the 
wistful  gaze  of  eyes  which  disease  had  dimmed, 
met  the  eyes  which  were  as  a  fiame  of  fire,  and 
knew  that  all  its  sullied  past  was  at  once  com- 
prehended and  forgiven. 

Jesus  said  to  him,  "  Son,  thy  sins  are  forgiven 
thee."  The  term  of  endearment  was  new  to  his 
lips,  and  very  emphatic;  the  same  which  Mary 
used  when  she  found  Him  in  the  temple,  the 
same  as  when  He  argued  that  even  evil  men  give 
good  gifts  unto  their  children.  Such  a  relation 
towards  Himself  He  recognised  in  this  afflicted 
penitent.  On  the  other  hand,  the  dry  argumenta- 
tive temper  of  the  critics  is  well  expressed  by 
the  short  crackling  unemotional  utterances  of 
their  orthodoxy:  "  Why  doth  this  man  thus 
speak?  He  blasphemeth.  Who  can  forgive  sins 
but  one,  God."  There  is  no  zeal  in  it,  no  passion 
for  God's  honour,  no  spiritual  insight,  it  is  as 
heartless  as  a  syllogism.  And  in  what  follows  a 
fine  contrast  is  implied  between  their  perplexed 
orthodoxy,  and  Christ's  profound  discernment. 
For  as  He  had  just  read  the  sick  man's  heart,  so 
He  "perceived  in  His  spirit  that  they  so  reasoned 
within  themselves."  And  He  asks  them  the 
searching  question,  "  Whether  is  easier  to  say, 
Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee,  or  to  say.  Arise  and 
walk?  "  Now  which  is  really  easier?  It  is  not 
enough  to  lay  all  the  emphasis  upon  "  to  say," 
as  if  with  Jesus  the  ease  of  an  utterance  depended 
on  the  difficulty  of  testing  it.  There  is  indeed  a 
certain  irony  in  the  question.  Tliey  doubtless 
imagine  that  Jesus  was  evading  their  scrutiny  by 
only  bestowing  what  they  could  not  test.  To 
them  forgiveness  seemed  more  easily  offered 
than  a  cure.  To  the  Christian,  it  is  less  to  heal 
disease,  which  is  a  mere  consequence,  than  sin, 
which  is  the  source  of  all  our  woes.  To  the 
power  of  Jesus  they  were  alike,  and  connected 
with  each  other  as  the  symptom  and  the  true 
disease.  In  truth,  all  the  compassion  which 
blesses  our  daily  life  is  a  pledge  of  grace;  and 
He  Who  healeth  all  our  diseases  forgiveth  also 
all  our  iniquities.  But  since  healing  was  the 
severer  test  in  their  reckoning,  Jesus  does  not 
evade  it.  He  restores  the  palsied  man  to  health, 
that  they  might  know  that  the  Son  of  man  hath 
authority  on  earth  to  forgive  sins.  So  then, 
pardon  does  not  lie  concealed  and  doubtful  in 


the  councils  of  an  unknown  world.  It  is  pro- 
nounced on  earth.  The  Son  of  man,  wearing 
our  nature  and  touched  with  our  infirmities,  be- 
stows it  still,  in  the  Scriptures,  in  the  Sacra- 
ments, in  the  ministrations  of  His  servants. 
Wherever  He  discerns  faith.  He  responds  with 
assurance  of  the  absolution  and  remission  of 
sins. 

He  claims  to  do  this,  as  men  had  so  lately  ob- 
served that  He  both  taught  and  worked  miracles, 
"  with  authority."  We  then  saw  that  this  word 
expressed  the  direct  and  personal  mastery  with 
which  He  wrought,  and  which  the  apostles  never 
claimed  for  themselves. 

Therefore  this  text  cannot  be  quoted  in  de- 
fence of  priestly  absolutions,  as  long  as  these  are 
hypothetical,  and  depend  on  the  recipient's  ear- 
nestness, or  on  any  supposition,  any  uncertainty 
whatever.     Christ  did  not  utter  a  hypothesis. 

Fortunately,  too,  the  argument  that  men, 
priestly  men,  must  have  authority  on  earth  to 
forgive  sins,  because  the  Son  of  man  has  such  au- 
thority, can  be  brought  to  an  easy  test.  There 
is  a  passage  elsewhere,  whish  asserts  His  au- 
thority, and  upon  which  the  claim  to  share  it  can 
be  tried.  The  words  are,  "  The  Father  gave 
Him  authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  He 
is  the  Son  of  man,"  and  they  are  immediately 
followed  by  an  announcement  of  the  resurrection 
to  judgment  (John  v.  27,  29).  Is  any  one  pre- 
pared to  contend  that  such  authority  as  that  is 
vested  in  other  sons  of  men?  And  if  not  that, 
why  this? 

But  if  priestly  absolutions  are  not  here,  there 
remains  the  certainty  that  Jesus  brought  to  earth, 
to  man,  the  gift  of  prompt  effective  pardon,  to 
be  realised  by  faith. 

The  sick  man  is  ordered  to  depart  at  once. 
Further  discourse  might  perhaps  be  reserved  for 
others,  but  he  may  not  linger,  having  received 
his  own  bodily  and  spiritual  medicine.  The 
teaching  of  Christ  is  not  for  curiosity.  It  is 
good  for  the  greatly  blessed  to  be  alone.  And 
it  is  sometimes  dangerous  for  obscure  people  to 
be  thrust  into  the  centre  of  attraction. 

Hereupon,  another  touch  of  nature  discovers 
itself  in  the  narrative,  for  it  is  now  easy  to  pass 
through  the  crowd.  Men  who  would  not  in  their 
selfishness  give  place  for  palsied  misery,  readily 
make  room  for  the  distinguished  person  who  has 
received  a  miraculous  blessing. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN. 
Mark  ii.    10. 

When  asserting  His  power  to  forgive  sins, 
Jesus,  for  the  first  time  in  our  Gospel,  called 
Himself  the  Son  of  man. 

It  is  a  remarkable  phrase.  The  profound  rev- 
erence which  He  from  the  first  inspired  re- 
strained all  other  lips  from  using  it,  save  only 
when  the  first  martyr  felt  such  a  rush  of  sym- 
pathy from  above  poured  into  his  soul,  that  the 
thought  of  Christ's  humanity  was  more  moving 
than  that  of  His  deity.  So  too  it  is  then  alone 
that  He  is  said  to  be  not  enthroned  in  heaven, 
but  standing,  "  the  Son  of  man,  standing  on  the 
right  hand  of  God"  (Acts  vii.  56).* 

What    then    does    this    title    imply?     Beyond 

•  The  exceptions  in  the  Revelation  are  only  apparent. 
St.  John  does  not  call  Jesus  the  Son  of  man  (i.  13),  nor  see 
Him,  but  only  the  type  of  Him,  standing  (v.  6).  " 


828 


THEL  GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


doubt  it  is  derived  from  Daniel's  vision:  "  Be- 
hold there  came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven  one 
like  unto  a  Son  of  rtian,  and  He  came  even  to  the 
Ancient  of  Days  "  (vii.  13).  And  it  was  by  the 
bold  and  unequivocal  appropriation  of  this  verse 
that  Jesus  brought  upon  Himself  the  judgment 
of  the  council  (Matt.  xxvi.  64;  Mark  xiv.  62). 

Now  the  first  impression  which  the  phrase  in 
Daniel  produces  is  that  of  strong  and  designed 
contrast  between  the  Son  of  man  and  the  Eternal 
God.  We  wonder  at  seeing  man  "  brought 
nigh  "  to  Deity.  Nor  may  we  suppose  that  to 
be  "  like  unto  a  Son  of  man,"  implies  only  an 
appearance  of  manhood.  In  Daniel  the  Messiah 
can  be  cut  off.  When  Jesus  uses  the  epithet,  and 
even  when  He  quotes  the  prophecy.  He  not  only 
resembles  a  Son  of  man,  He  is  truly  such;  He 
is  most  frequently  "  the  Son  of  man,"  the  pre- 
eminent, perhaps  the  only  one.* 

But  while  the  expression  intimates  a  share  in 
the  lowliness  of  human  nature,  it  does  not  imply 
a  lowly  rank  among  men. 

Our  Lord  often  suggested  by  its  use  the  differ- 
ence between  His  circumstances  and  His  dignity. 
"  The  Son  of  ma^  hath  not  where  to  lay  His 
head:"  "  Betrayest  thou  the  Son  of  man  with  a 
kiss,"  in  each  of  these  we  feel  that  the  title  as- 
serts a  claim  to  different  treatment.  And  in  the 
great  verse,  God  "  hath  given  Him  authority  to 
execute  judgment,  because  He  is  the  Son  of 
man,"  we  discern  that  although  human  hands 
are  chosen  as  fittest  to  do  judgment  upon  hu- 
manity, yet  His  extraordinary  dignity  is  also 
taken  into  account.  The  title  belongs  to  our 
Lord's  humiliation,  but  is  far  from  an  additional 
abasement;  it  asserts  His  supremacy  over  those 
whom  He  is  not  ashamed  to  call  brethren. 

We  all  are  sons  of  men;  and  Jesus  used  the 
phrase  when  He  promised  that  all  manner  of  sins 
and  blasphemies  shall  be  forgiven  to  us.  But 
there  is  a  higher  sense  in  which,  among  thou- 
sands of  the  ignoble,  we  single  out  one  "  real 
man;"  and  in  this  sense,  as  fulfilling  the  idea, 
Jesus  was  the  Second  Man.  What  a  difference 
exists  between  the  loftiest  sons  of  vulgar  men, 
and  the  Son  of  our  complete  humanity,  of  the 
race,  "  of  Man."  The  pre-eminence  even  of  our 
best  and  greatest  is  fragmentary  and  incomplete. 
In  their  veins  runs  but  a  portion  of  the  rich  life- 
blood  of  the  race:  but  a  share  of  its  energy 
throbs  in  the  greatest  bosom.  We  seldom  find 
the  typical  thinker  in  the  typical  man  of  action. 
Originality  of  purpose  and  of  means  are  not 
commonly  united.  To  know  all  that  holiness 
embraces,  we  must  combine  the  energies  of  one 
saint  with  the  gentler  graces  of  a  second  and  the 
spiritual  insight  of  a  third.  There  is  no  man  of 
genius  who  fails  to  make  himself  the  child  of 
his  nation  and  his  age,  so  that  Shakespeare 
would  be  impossible  in  France,  Hugo  in  Ger- 
many, Goethe  in  England.  Two  great  nations 
slay  their  kings  and  surrender  their  liberties  to 
military  dictators,  but  Napoleon  would  have  been 
unendurable  to  us,  and  Cromwell  ridiculous 
across  the   channel. 

Large  allowances  are  to  be  made  for  the 
Greek  in  Plato,  the  Roman  in  Epictetus,  before 
we  can  learn  of  them.  Each  and  all  are  the  sons 
of  their  tribe  and  century,  not  of  all  mankind 
and  all  time.     But  who  will  point  out  the  Jewish 

*  And  this  proves  beyond  question  that  He  did  not 
merely  follow  Ezekiel  in  applying  to  himself  the  epithet 
as  if  it  meant  a  son  among  many  sons  of  men,  but  took 
the  description  in  Daniel  for  His  own.  Ezekiel  himself 
indeed  never  employs  the  phrase  :  he  only  records  it. 


warp  in  any  word  or  institution  of  Jesus?  In 
the  new  man  which  is  after  His  image  there  can- 
not be  Greek  and  Jew,  circumcision  and  uncir- 
cumcision,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bondman,  free- 
man, but  Christ  is  all  and  in  all,  something  of 
Him  represented  by  each,  all  of  them  concen- 
trated in  Him.  He  alone  speaks  to  all  men  with- 
out any  foreign  accent,  and  He  alone  is  recog- 
nised and  understood  as  widely  as  the  voices  of 
nature,  as  the  sigh  of  waves  and  breezes,  and  the 
still  endurance  of  the  stars.  Reading  the  Gos- 
pels, we  become  aware  that  four  writers  of 
widely  different  bias  and  temperament  have  all 
found  an  equally  congenial  subject,  so  that  each 
has  given  a  portrait  harmonious  with  the  others, 
and  yet  unique.  It  is  because  the  sum  total  of 
humanity  is  in  Christ,  that  no  single  writer  could 
have  told  His  story. 

But  now  consider  what  this  implies.  It  de- 
mands an  example  from  which  lonely  women  and 
heroic  leaders  of  action  should  alike  take  fire. 
It  demands  that  He  should  furnish  meditation  for 
sages  in  the  closet,  and  should  found  a  kingdom 
more  brilliant  than  those  of  conquerors.  It  de- 
mands that  He  should  strike  out  new  paths  to- 
wards new  objects,  and  be  supremely  original 
without  deviating  from  what  is  truly  sane  and 
human,  for  any  selfish  or  cruel  or  unwholesome 
joy.  It  demands  the  gentleness  of  a  sheep  be- 
fore her  shearers,  and  such  burning  wrath  as 
seven  times  over  denounced  against  the  hypo- 
crites of  Jerusalem  woe  and  the  damnation  of 
hell.  It  demands  the  sensibilities  which  made 
Gethsemane  dreadful,  and  the  strength  which 
made  Calvary  sublime.  It  demands  that  when  we 
approach  Him  we  should  learn  to  feel  the  awe  of 
other  worlds,  the  nearness  of  God,  the  sinfulness 
of  sin,  the  folly  of  laying  up  much  goods  for 
many  years;  that  life  should  be  made  solemn  and 
profound,  but  yet  that  it  should  not  be  darkened 
nor  depressed  unduly;  that  nature  and  man 
should  be  made  dear  to  us,  little  children, 
and  sinners  who  are  scorned  yet  who  love 
much,  and  lepers  who  stand  afar  off — yes, 
and  even  the  lilies  of  the  field  and  the  fowls 
of  the  air;  that  He  should  not  be  unaware 
of  the  silent  processes  of  nature  which  bears 
fruit  of  itself,  of  sunshine  and  rain,  and  the  fury  of 
storms  and  torrents,  and  the  leap  of  the  lightning 
across  all  the  sky.  Thus  we  can  bring  to  Jesus 
every  anxiety  and  every  hope,  for  He,  and  only 
He,  was  tempted  in  all  points  like  unto  us.  Uni- 
versality of  power,  of  sympathy,  and  of  in- 
fluence, is  the  import  of  this  title  which  Jesus 
claims.  And  that  demand  Jesus  only  has  satis- 
fied. Who  is  the  Master  of  Sages,  the  Friend  of 
sinners,  the  Man  of  Sorrows,  and  the  King  of 
kings,  the  one  perfect  blossom  on  the  tree  of 
our  humanity,  the  ideal  of  our  nature  incarnate, 
the  Second  Adam  in  Whom  the  fulness  of  the 
race  is  visible.  The  Second  Man  is  the  Lord 
from  Heaven.  And  this  strange  and  solitary 
grandeur  He  foretold,  when  He  took  to  Himself 
this  title,  itself  equally  strange  and  solitary,  the 
Son  of  man. 


THE  CALL  AND  FEAST  OF  LEVL 

Mark  ii.  13-17  (R-  V.). 

Jesus  loved  the  open  air.  His  custom  when 
teaching  was  to  point  to  the  sower,  the  lily,  and 
the  bird.     He  is  no  pale  recluse  emerging  from 


Mark  ii.  13-17  J 


THE    CALL   AND    THE    FEAST    OF    LEVL 


829 


a  library  to  instruct,  in  the  dim  religious  light 
of  cloisters,  a  world  unknown  except  by  books. 
Accordingly  we  find  Him  "  again  by  the  sea- 
side." And  however  the  scribes  and  Pharisees 
may  have  continued  to  murmur,  the  multitudes 
resorted  to  Him,  confiding  in  the  evidence  of 
their  experience,  which  never  saw  it  on  this  fash- 
ion. 

That  argument  was  perfectly  logical;  it  was  an 
induction,  yet  it  led  them  to  a  result  curiously 
the  reverse  of  theirs  who  reject  miracles  for 
being  contrary  to  experience.  "  Yes,"  they 
said,  "  we  appeal  to  experience,  but  the  con- 
clusion is  that  good  deeds  which  it  cannot  par- 
allel must  come  directly  from  the  Giver  of 
all  good." 

Such  good  deeds  continue.  The  creed  of 
Christ  has  re-formed  Europe,  it  is  awakening 
Asia,  it  has  transformed  morality,  and  imposed 
new  virtues  on  the  conscience.  It  is  the  one  re- 
ligion for  the  masses,  the  lapsed,  and  indeed  for 
the  sick  in  body  as  truly  as  in  soul;  for  while 
science  discourses  with  enthusiasm  upon  prog- 
ress by  the  rejection  of  the  less  fit,  pur  faith 
cherishes  these  in  hospitals,  asylums,  and  re- 
treats, and  prospers  by  lavishing  care  upon  the 
outcast  and  rejected  of  the  world.  Now  this 
transcends  experience:  we  never  saw  it  on  this 
fashion;  it  is  supernatural.  Or  else  let  scientific 
atheism  produce  its  reformed  magdalens,  and  its 
homes  for  the  hopelessly  diseased  and  imbecile, 
and  all  "  the  weakest  "  who  go,  as  she  tenderly 
assures  us,  "  to  the  wall." 

Jesus  now  gave  a  signal  proof  of  His  inde- 
pendence of  human  judgment,  His  care  for  the 
despised  and  rejected.  For  such  a  one  He  com- 
pleted the  rupture  between  Himself  and  the 
rulers  of  the  people. 

Sitting  at  the  receipt  of  toll,  in  the  act  of  levy- 
ing from  his  own  nation  the  dues  of  the  con- 
queror, Levi  the  publican  received  the  call  to  be- 
come an  Apostle  and  Evangelist.  It  was  a  reso- 
lute defiance  of  the  pharisaic  judgment.  It  was 
a  memorable  rebuke  for  those  timid  slaves  of  ex- 
pediency who  nurse  their  influence,  refuse  to  give 
offence,  fear  to  "  mar  their  usefulness "  by 
"  compromising  themselves,"  and  so  make  their 
whole  life  one  abject  compromise,  and  let  all 
emphatic  usefulness  go  by. 

Here  is  one  upon  whom  the  bigot  scowls  more 
darkly  still  than  upon  Jesus  Himself,  by  whom 
the  Roman  yoke  is  pressed  upon  Hebrew  necks, 
an  apostate  in  men's  judgment  from  the  national 
faith  and  hope.  And  such  judgments  sadly 
verify  themselves;  a  despised  man  easily  be- 
comes despicable. 

But  however  Levi  came  by  so  strange  and 
hateful  an  office,  Jesus  saw  in  him  no  slavish 
earner  of  vile  bread  by  doing  the  foreigner's 
hateful  work.  He  was  more  willing  than  they 
who  scorn  him  to  follow  the  true  King  of  Is- 
rael. It  is  even  possible  that  the  national  humil- 
iations to  which  his  very  office  testified  led  him 
to  other  aspirations,  longings  after  a  spiritual 
kingdom  beyond  reach  of  the  sword  or  the  ex- 
actions of  Rome.  For  his  Gospel  is  full  of  the 
true  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  spiritual  fulfilments 
of  prophecy,  and  the  relations  between  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  Messiah. 

Here  then  is  an  opportunity  to  show  the  sneer- 
ing scribe  and  carping  Pharisee  how  little  their 
cynical  criticism  weighs  with  Jesus.  He  calls 
the  despised  agent  of  the  heathen  to  His  side, 
and  is  obeyed.     And  now  the  name  of  the  pub- 


lican is  engraven  upon  one  of  the  foundations 
of  the  city  of  God. 

Nor  did  Jesus  refuse  to  carry  such  condescen- 
sion to  its  utmost  limit,  eating  and  drinking  in 
Levi's  house  with  many  publicans  and  sinners, 
who  were  already  attracted  by  His  teaching,  and 
now  rejoiced  in  His  familiarity.  Just  in  pro- 
portion as  He  offended  the  pharisaic  scribes,  so 
did  He  inspire  with  new  hope  the  unhappy 
classes  who  were  taught  to  consider  themselves 
castaway.  His  very  presence  was  medicinal,  a 
rebuke  to  foul  words  and  thoughts,  an  outward 
and  visible  sign  of  grace.  It  brought  pure  air 
and  sunshine  into  a  fever-stricken  chamber. 

And  this  was  His  justification  when  assailed. 
He  had  borne  healing  to  the  sick.  He  had  called 
sinners  to  repentance.  And  therefore  His  ex- 
ample has  a  double  message.  It  rebukes  those 
who  look  curiously  on  the  intercourse  of  religious 
people  with  the  world,  who  are  plainly  of  opinion 
that  the  leaven  should  be  hid  anywhere  but  in 
the  meal,  who  can  never  fairly  understand  St. 
Paul's  permission  to  go  to  an  idolater's  feast. 
But  it  gives  no  license  to  go  where  we  cannot 
be  a  healing  influence,  where  the  light  must  be 
kept  in  a  dark  lantern  if  not  under  a  bushel, 
where,  instead  of  drawing  men  upward,  we  shall 
only  confirm  their  indolent  self-satisfaction. 

Christ's  reason  for  seeking  out  the  sick,  the 
lost,  is  ominous  indeed  for  the  self-satisfied. 
The  whole  have  no  need  of  a  physician;  He  came 
not  to  call  the  righteous.  Such  persons,  what- 
ever else  they  be,  are  not  Christians  until  they 
come  to  a  different  mind.  ' 

In  calling  Himself  the  Physician  of  sick  souls, 
Jesus  made  a  startling  claim,  which  becomes 
more  emphatic  when  we  observe  that  He  also 
quoted  the  words  of  Hosea,  "  I  will  have  mercy 
and  not  sacrifice"  (Matt.  ix.  13;  Hos.  vi.  6). 
For  this  expression  occurs  in  that  chapter  which 
tells  us  how  the  Lord  Himself  hath  smitten  and 
will  bind  us  up.  And  the  complaint  is  just  be- 
fore it  that  when  Ephraim  saw  his  sickness  and 
Judah  saw  his  wound,  then  went  Ephraim  to  As- 
syria and  sent  to  king  Jareb,  but  he  is  not  able 
to  heal  you,  neither  shall  he  cure  you  of  your 
wound  (Hos.  v.  13-vi.  i).  As  the  Lord  Himself 
hath  torn,  so  He  must  heal. 

Now  Jesus  comes  to  that  part  of  Israel  which 
the  Pharisees  despise  for  being  wounded  and 
diseased,  and  justifies  Himself  by  words  which 
must,  from  their  context,  have  reminded  every 
Jew  of  the  declaration  that  God  is  the  physician, 
and  it  is  vain  to  seek  healing  elsewhere.  And 
immediately  afterwards,  He  claims  to  be  the 
Bridegroom,  whom  also  Hosea  spoke  of  as 
divine.  Yet  men  profess  that  only  in  St.  John 
does  He  advance  such  claims  that  we  should 
ask.  Whom  makest  Thou  Thyself?  Let  them 
try  the  experiment,  then,  of  putting  such  words 
into  the  lips  of  any  mortal. 

The  choice  of  the  apostles,  and  most  of  all 
that  of  Levi,  illustrates  the  power  of  the  cross 
to  elevate  obscure  and  commonplace  lives.  He 
was  born,  to  all  appearance,  to  an  uneventful,  un- 
observed existence.  We  read  no  remarkable 
action  of  the  Apostle  Matthew;  as  an  Evangelist 
he  is  simple,  orderly,  and  accurate,  as  becomes 
a  man  of  business,  but  the  graphic  energy  of 
St.  Mark,  the  pathos  of  St.  Luke,  the  profundity 
of  St.  John  are  absent.  Yet  his  greatness  will 
outlive   the  world. 

Now  as  Christ  provided  nobility  and  a  career 
for  this  man  of  the  people,  so  He  does  for  all. 


«3o 


THE'^OSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


"Are  all  apostles?"  Nay,  but  all  may  become 
pillars  in  the  temple  of  eternity.  The  gospel 
finds  men  plunged  in  monotony,  in  the  routine 
of  callings  which  machinery  and  the  subdivision 
of  labour  make  ever  more  colourless,  spiritless, 
and  dull.  It  is  a  small  thing  that  it  introduces 
them  to  a  literature  more  sublime  than  Milton, 
more  sincere  and  direct  than  Shakespeare.  It 
brings  their  little  lives  into  relationship  with 
eternity.  It  braces  them  for  a  vast  struggle, 
watched  by  a  great  cloud  of  witnesses.  It  gives 
meaning  and  beauty  to  the  sordid  present,  and 
to  the  future  a  hope  full  of  immortality.  It 
brings  the  Christ  of  God  nearer  to  the  humblest 
than  when  of  old  He  ate  and  drank  with  publi- 
cans and  sinners. 

THE   CONTROVERSY    CONCERNING 
FASTING. 

Mark  ii.  i8  (R.  V.). 

The  Pharisees  had  just  complained  to  the  dis- 
ciples that  Jesus  ate  and  drank  in  questionable 
company.  Now  they  join  with  the  followers  of 
the  ascetic  Baptist  in  complaining  to  Jesus  that 
His  disciples  eat  and  drink  at  improper  seasons, 
when  others  fast.  And  as  Jesus  had  then  replied, 
that  being  a  Physician,  He  was  naturally  found 
among  the  sick,  so  He  now  answered,  that  being 
the  Bridegroom,  fasting  in  His  presence  is  im- 
possible: "  Can  the  sons  of  the  bridechamber  fast 
while  the  Bridegroom  is  with  them?  "  A  new 
spirit  is  working  in  Christianity,  far  too  mightily 
to  be  restrained  by  ancient  usages;  if  the  new 
wine  be  put  into  such  wineskins  it  will  spoil 
them,  and  itself  be  lost. 

Hereupon  three  remarkable  subjects  call  for 
attention:  the  immense  personal  claim  advanced; 
the  view  which  Christ  takes  of  fasting;  and,  aris- 
ing out  of  this,  the  principle  which  He  applies 
to  all  external  rites  and  ceremonies. 

I.  Jesus  does  not  inquire  whether  the  fasts  of 
other  men  were  unreasonable  or  not.  In  any 
case,  He  declares  that  His  mere  presence  put 
everything  on  a  new  footing  for  His  followers 
who  could  not  fast  simply  because  He  was  by. 
Thus  He  assumes  a  function  high  above  that  of 
any  prophet  or  teacher:  He  not  only  reveals  duty 
as  a  lamp  casts  light  upon  the  compass  by  which 
men  steer;  but  He  modifies  duty  itself,  as  iron 
deflects  the  needle. 

This  is  because  He  is  the  Bridegroom. 

The  disciples  of  John  would  hereupon  recall 
his  words  of  self-effacement;  that  he  was  only 
the  friend  of  the  Bridegroom,  whose  fullest  joy 
was  to  hear  the  Bridegroom's  exultant  voice. 

But  no  Jew  could  forget  the  Old  Testament 
use  of  the  phrase.  It  is  clear  from  St.  Matthew 
that  this  controversy  followed  immediately  upon 
the  last,  when  Jesus  assumed  a  function  ascribed 
to  God  Himself  by  the  very  passage  from  Hosea 
which  He  then  quoted.  Then  He  was  the  Phy- 
sician for  the  soul's  diseases;  now  He  is  the 
Bridegroom,  in  Whom  centre  its  hopes,  its  joys, 
its  affections,  its  new  life.  That  position  in  the 
spiritual  existence  cannot  be  given  away  from 
God  without  idolatry.  The  same  Hosea  who 
makes  God  the  Healer,  gives  to  Him  also,  in  the 
most  explicit  words,  what  Jesus  now  claims  for 
Himself.  "  I  will  betroth  thee  unto  Me  for 
ever  ...  I  will  even  betroth  thee  unto  Me  in 
faithfulness,  and  thou  shalt  know  the  Lord  "  (ii. 
^c  20").     Isaiah  too  declares  "  thy  Maker  is  thy 


husband,"  and  "  as  the  bridegroom  rejoiceth 
over  the  bride,  so  shall  thy  God  rejoice 
over  thee"  (liv.  5;  Ixii.  5).  And  in  Jeremiah, 
God  remembers  the  love  of  Israel's  espousals, 
who  went  after  Him  in  the  wilderness,  in  a  land 
that  was  not  sown  (ii.  2).  Now  all  this  is  trans- 
ferred throughout  the  New  Testament  to  Jesus. 
The  Baptist  is  not  alone  in  this  respect.  St. 
John  regards  the  Bride  as  the  wife  of  the  Lamb 
(Rev.  xxi.  9).  St.  Paul  would  fain  present  his 
Corinthian  Church  as  a  pure  virgin  to  Christ, 
as  to  one  husband  (2  Cor.  xi.  2).  For  him, 
the  absolute  oneness  of  marriage  is  a  mystery 
of  the  union  betwixt  Christ  and  His  Church 
(Eph.  v.  32).  If  Jesus  be  not  God,  then  a  re- 
lation hitherto  exclusively  belonging  to  Jeho- 
vah, to  rob  Him  of  which  is  the  adultery  of 
the  soul,  has  been  systematically  transferred  by 
the  New  Testament  to  a  creature.  His  glory 
has  been  given  to  another. 

This  remarkable  change  is  clearly  the  work 
of  Jesus  Himself.  The  marriage  supper  of  which 
He  spoke  is  for  the  King's  Son.  At  His  return 
the  cry  will  be  heard.  Behold  the  Bridegroom 
Cometh.  In  this  earliest  passage  His  presence 
causes  the  joy  of  the  Bride,  who  said  to  the 
Lord  in  the  Old  Testament,  Thou  art  my  Hus- 
band (Hosea  ii.  16). 

There  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John  a  passage  more  certainly  calculated  to 
inspire,  when  Christ's  dignity  was  assured  by 
His  resurrection  and  ascension,  the  adoration 
which  His  Church  has  always  paid  to  the  Lamb 
in  the  midst  of  the  throne. 

II.  The  presence  of  the  Bridegroom  dispenses 
with  the  obligation  to  fast.  Yet  it  is  beyond  de- 
nial that  fasting  as  a  religious  exercise  comes 
within  the  circle  of  New  Testament  sanctions. 
Jesus  Himself,  when  taking  our  burdens  upon 
Him,  as  He  had  stooped  to  the  baptism  of  re- 
pentance, condescended  also  to  fast.  He  taught 
His  disciples  when  they  fasted  to  anoint  their 
head  and  wash  their  face.  The  mention  of  fast- 
ing is  indeed  a  later  addition  to  the  words  "  this 
kind  (of  demon)  goeth  not  out  but  by  prayer  " 
(Mark  ix.  29),  but  we  know  that  the  prophets 
and  teachers  of  Antioch  were  fasting  when  bid- 
den to  consecrate  Barnabas  and  Saul,  and  they 
fasted  again  and  prayed  before  they  laid  their 
hands  upon  them  (Acts  xiii.  2,  3). 

Thus  it  is  right  to  fast,  at  times  and  from 
one  point  of  view;  but  at  other  times,  and  from 
Jewish  and  formal  motives,  it  is  unnatural  and 
mischievous.  It  is  right  when  the  Bridegroom 
is  taken  away,  a  phrase  which  certainly  does 
not  cover  all  this  space  between  the  Ascension 
and  the  Second  Advent,  since  Jesus  still  reveals 
Himself  to  His  own  though  not  unto  the  world, 
and  is  with  His  Church  all  the  days.  Scripture 
has  no  countenance  for  the  notion  that  we  lost 
by  the  Ascension  in  privilege  or  joy.  But  when 
the  body  would  fain  rise  up  against  the  spirit, 
it  must  be  kept  under  and  brought  into  subjec- 
tion (i  Cor.  ix.  27).  When  the  closest  domestic 
joys  would  interrupt  the  seclusion  of  the  soul 
with  God,  they  may  be  suspended,  though  but 
for  a  time  (i  Cor.  vii.  5).  And  when  the  su- 
preme blessing  of  intercourse  with  God,  the 
presence  of  the  Bridegroom,  is  obscured  or  for- 
feited through  sin,  it  will  then  be  as  inevitable 
that  the  loyal  heart  should  turn  away  from 
worldly  pleasures,  as  that  the  first  disciples 
should  reject  these  in  the  dread  hours  of  their 
bereavement 


Mark  li.  23-28.]                                        THE    SABBATH.  831 

Thus    Jesus    abolished    the    superstition    that  THE  SABBATH. 
grace  may  be  had  by  a  mechanical  observance 

of  a  prescribed  regimen   at  an  appointed  time.  Mark  ii.  23-28   (R.   Y-). 
He  did  not  deny,  but  rather  implied  the  truth, 

that  body  and  soul  act  and  counteract,  so  that  Twice  in  succession  Christ  had  now  asserted 

spiritual  impressions  may  be  weakened  and  for-  the  freedom  of  the  soul  against  His  Jewish  an- 

feited  by  untimely  indulgence  of  the  flesh.  tagonists.     He  was  free  to  eat  with  sinners,  for 

By   such   teaching  Jesus   carried    forward   the  their  good,  and  His  followers  were  free  to  dis- 

doctrine  already  known  to  the   Old  Testament,  regard  fasts,  because  the  Bridegroom  was  with 

There  it  was  distinctly  announced   that  the   re-  them.     A  third  attack  in  the  same  series  is  pre- 

turn    from    exile    abrogated    those    fasts    which  pared.    The  Pharisees  now  take  stronger  ground, 

commemorated  national  calamities,  so  that  "  the  since   the   law  itself  enforced   the   obligation   of 

fast  of  the  fourth  month,  and  of  the  fifth,  and  the  Sabbath.     Even  Isaiah,  the  most  free-spirited 

of  the  seventh  ana  of  the  tenth  shall  be  to  the  of  all  the  prophets,  in  the  same  passage  where 

houses  of  Israel  joy  and  gladness,  cheerful  feasts"  he    denounced    the    fasts    of    the    self-righteous, 

(Zech.  vii.  3,  viii.    19).     Even  while  these  fasts  bade  men  to  keep  their  foot  from  the  Sabbath 

had   lasted   they   had   been    futile,    because    they  (Isa.  Iviii.  13,  14).     Here  they  felt  sure  of  their 

were    only    formal.       "When    ye     fasted     and  position;  and  when  they  found  the  disciples,  in 

mourned,  did  ye  at  all  fast  unto  me?  And  when  a  cornfield  where  the  long  stems  had  closed  over 

ye  eat,   and  when  ye   drink,   do  ye   not  eat  for  the   path,    "  making  a   way,"    which   was   surely 

yourselves,   and   drink   for   yourselves?"    (Zech.  forbidden    labour,    and    this    by    "plucking    the 

vii.    5,   6).     And    Isaiah   had   plainly   laid   down  ears,"    which    was    reaping,    and    then    rubbing 

the    great    rule,    that   a    fast    and    an    acceptable  these  in  their  hands  to  reject  the  chafT,   which 

day  unto  the  Lord  was  not  a  day  to  afflict  the  was  winnowing,  they  cried  out  in  affected  horror, 

soul  and   bow  the   head,   but  to   deny  and   dis-  Behold,  why  do  they  that  which  is  not  lawful? 

cipline   our  selfishness   for  some    good   end,   to  To  them  it  mattered  nothing  that  the  disciples 

loose   the   bonds   of    wickedness,    to    undo     the  really  hungered,  and  that  abstinence,  rather  than 

bands  of  the  yoke,  and  to  let  the  oppressed  go  the  slight  exertion  which  they  condemned,  would 

free,  to  deal  bread  to  the  hungry,  and  to  bring  cause  real  inconvenience  and  unrest, 

home  the  poor  that  is  cast  out  (Isa.  Iviii.  5-7).  Perhaps  the  answer  of  our  Lord  has  been  as 

The  true  spirit  of  fasting  breathes  an  ampler  much  misunderstood  as  any  other  words  He  ever 
breath  in  any  of  the  thousand  forms  of  Chris-  spoke.  It  has  been  assumed  that  He  spoke 
tian  self-denial,  than  in  those  petty  abstinences,  across  the  boundary  between  the  new  dispensa- 
those  microscopic  observances,  which  move  our  tion  and  the  old,  as  One  from  whose  move- 
wonder  less  by  the  superstition  which  expects  nients  the  restraints  of  Judaism  had  entirely 
them  to  bring  grace  than  by  the  childishness  fallen  away,  to  those  who  were  still  entangled, 
which  expects  them  to  have  any  effect  what-  And  it  has  been  inferred  that  the  Fourth  Com- 
ever.  mandment  was  no  more  than  such  a  restraint, 

III.  Jesus  now  applies  a  great  principle  to  now  thrown  off  among  the  rest.  But  this  is 
all  external  rites  and  ceremonies.  They  have  quite  a  misapprehension  both  of  His  position 
their  value.  As  the  wineskin  retains  the  wine,  and  theirs.  On  earth  He  was  a  minister  of  the 
so  are  feelings  and  aspirations  aided,  and  even  circumcision.  He  bade  His  disciples  to  observe 
preserved,  by  suitable  external  forms.  Without  and  do  all  that  was  commanded  from  the  seat 
these,  emotion  would  lose  itself  for  want  of  re-  of  Moses.  And  it  is  by  Old  Testament  prec- 
straint,  wasted,  like  spirit  wine,  by  diffuseness.  edent,  and  from  Old  Testament  principles,  that 
And  if  the  forms  are  unsuitable  and  outworn.  He  now  refutes  the  objection  of  the  Pharisees, 
the  same  calamity  happens,  the  strong  new  feel-  This  is  what  gives  the  passage  half  its  charm, 
ings  break  through  them,  "  and  the  wine  per-  this  discovery  of  freedom  like  our  own  in  the 
isheth,  and  the  skins."  In  this  respect,  how  heart  of  the  stern  old  Hebrew  discipline,  as  a 
many  a  sad  experience  of  the  Church  attests  fountain  and  flowers  on  the  face  of  a  granite 
the  wisdom  of  her  Lord;  what  lofeses  have  been  crag,  this  demonstration  that  all  we  now  enjoy 
suffered  in  the  struggle  between  form?  that  had  is  developed  from  what  already  lay  in  germ  en- 
stiffened  into  archaic  ceremonialism  and  new  zeal  folded  in  the  law. 

demanding  scope  for  its  energy,  between  the  David  and  his  followers,  when  at  extremity, 
antiquated  phrases  of  a  bygone  age  and  the  new  had  eaten  the  showbread  which  it  was  not  law- 
experience,  knowledge,  and  requirements  of  the  ful  for  them  to  eat.  It  is  a  striking  assertion, 
next,  between  the  frosty  precisions  of  unsym-  We  should  probably  have  sought  a  softer  phrase, 
pathetic  age  and  the  innocent  warmth  and  fresh-  We  should  have  said  that  in  other  circumstances 
ness  of  the  young,  too  often,  alas,  lost  to  their  it  would  have  been  unlawful,  that  only  necessity 
Master  in  passionate  revolt  against  restraints  made  it  lawful;  we  should  have  refused  to  look 
which  He  neither  imposed  nor  smiled  upon.  straight    in   the    face   the    naked    ugly    fact    that 

Therefore    the    coming    of    a    new    revelation  David  broke  the  law.     But  Jesus  was  not  afraid 

meant  the  repeal  of  old  observances,  and  Christ  of  any  fact.    He  saw  and  declared  that  the  priests 

refused  to  sew  His  new  faith  like  a  patchwork  in  the  Temple  itself  profaned  the  Sabbath  when 

upon  ancient  institutions,  of  which  it  would  only  they  baked  the   showbread  and  when   they   cir- 

complete  the  ruin.     Thus  He  anticipated  the  de-  cumcised    children.      They    were    blameless,    not 

cision    of    His    apostles    releasing    the    Gentiles  because  the  Fourth  Commandment  remained  in- 

from  the  law  of  Moses.     And  He  bestowed  on  violate,  but  because  circumstances  made  it  right 

His  Church  an  adaptiveness  to  various  times  and  for    them    to    profane    the    Sabbath.      And    His 

places,  not  always  remembered  by  missionaries  disciples    were    blameless    also,    upon    the    same 

among  the  heathen,  by  fastidious  critics  of  new  principle,  that  the  larger  obligation  overruled  the 

movements  at   home,   nor   by   men   who   would  lesser,  that  all  ceremonial  observance  gave  way 

reduce  the  lawfulness  of  modern  agencies  to  a  to  human  need,  that  mercy  is  a  better  thing  than 

question  of  precedent  and  archaeology.  sacrifice. 


832 


THE^GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


And  thus  it  appeared  that  the  objectors  were 
themselves  the  transgressors;  they  had  con- 
demned the  guiltless. 

A  little  reflection  will  show  that  our  Lord's 
bold  method,  His  startling  admission  that  David 
and  the  priests  alike  did  that  which  was  not 
lawful,  is  much  more  truly  reverential  than  our 
soft  modern  compromises,  our  shifty  devices  for 
persuading  ourselves  that  in  various  permissible 
and  even  necessary  deviations  from  prescribed 
observances,  there  is  no  real  infraction  of  any 
law  whatever. 

To  do  this,  we  reduce  to  a  minimum  the  de- 
mands of  the  precept.  We  train  ourselves  to 
think,  not  of  its  full  extension,  but  of  what 
we  can  compress  it  into.  Therefore,  in  future, 
even  when  no  urgency  exists,  the  precept  has 
lost  all  beyond  this  minimum;  its  sharp  ..dges 
are  filed  away.  Jesus  leaves  it  to  resume  all  its 
energy,  when  mercy  no  longer  forbids  the  sac- 
rifice. 

The  text,  then,  says  nothing  about  the  aboli- 
tion of  a  Day  of  Rest.  On  the  contrary,  it  de- 
clares that  this  day  is  not  a  Jewish,  but  a  uni- 
versal ordinance,  it  is  made  for  man.  At  the 
same  time,  it  refuses  to  place  the  Sabbath  among 
the  essential  and  inflexible  laws  of  right  and 
wrong.  It  is  made  for  man,  for  his  physical 
repose  and  spiritual  culture;  nictn  was  not  made 
for  it,  as  he  is  for  purity,  truth,  and  godliness. 
Better  for  him  to  die  than  outrage  these;  they 
are  the  laws  of  his  very  being;  he  is  royal  by 
serving  them;  in  obeying  them  he  obeys  his  God. 
It  is  not  thus  with  anything  external,  ceremonial, 
any  ritual,  any  rule  of  conduct,  however  uni- 
versal be  its  range,  however  permanent  its  sanc- 
tions. The  Sabbath  is  such  a  rule,  permanent, 
far-reaching  as  humanity,  made  "  for  man."  But 
this  very  fact,  Jesus  tells  us,  is  the  reason  why 
He  Who  represented  the  race  and  its  interests, 
was  "  Lord  even  of  the  Sabbath." 

Let  those  who  deny  the  Divine  authority  of 
this  great  institution  ponder  well  the  phrase 
which  asserts  its  universal  range,  and  which 
finds  it  a  large  assertion  of  the  mastery  of  Christ 
that  He  is  Lord  "  even  of  the  Sabbath."  But 
those  who  have  scruples  about  the  change  of 
day  by  which  honour  is  paid  to  Christ's  resur- 
rection, and  those  who  would  make  burdensome 
and  dreary,  a  horror  to  the  young  and  a  torpor 
to  the  old,  what  should  be  called  a  delight  and 
honourable,  these  should  remember  that  the  or- 
dinance is  blighted,  root  and  branch,  when  it 
is  forbidden  to  minister  to  the  physical  or  spirit- 
ual welfare  of  the  human  race. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  WITHERED  HAND. 

Mark  iii.  i-6  (R.  V.). 

In  the  controversies  just  recorded  we  have 
recognised  the  ideal  Teacher,  clear  to  discern 
and  quick  to  exhibit  the  decisive  point  at  issue, 
careless  of  small  pedantries,  armed  with  prin- 
ciples and  precedents  which  go  to  the  heart  of 
the  dispute. 

But  the  perfect  man  must  be  competent  in 
more  than  theory;  and  we  have  now  a  mar- 
vellous example  of  tact,  decision,  and  self-con- 
trol in  action.  When  Sabbath  observance  is 
again   discussed,    his   enemies    have    resolved   to 


push  matters  to  extremity.  They  watch,  no 
longer  to  cavil,  but  that  they  may  accuse  Him. 
It  is  in  the  synagogue;  and  their  expectations 
are  sharpened  by  the  presence  of  a  pitiable  ob- 
ject, a  man  whose  hand  is  not  only  paralysed  in 
the  sinews,  but  withered  up  and  hopeless.  St. 
Luke  tells  us  that  it  was  the  right  hand,  which 
deepened  his  misery.  And  St.  Matthew  records 
that  they  asked  Christ,  Is  it  lawful  to  heal  on 
the  Sabbath  day?  thus  urging  Him  by  a  chal- 
lenge to  the  deed  which  they  condemned.  What 
a  miserable  state  of  mind!  They  believe  that 
Jesus  can  work  the  cure,  since  this  is  the  very 
basis  of  their  plot;  and  yet  their  hostility  is  not 
shaken,  for  belief  in  a  miracle  is  not  conversion; 
to  acknowledge  a  prodigy  is  one  thing,  and  to 
surrender  the  will  is  quite  another.  Or  how 
should  we  see  around  us  so  many  Christians  in 
theory,  reprobates  in  life?  They  long  to  see  the 
man  healed,  yet  there  is  no  compassion  in  this 
desire,  hatred  urges  them  to  wish  what  mercy 
impels  Christ  to  grant.  But  while  He  relieves 
the  sufferer  He  will  also  expose  their  malice. 
Therefore  He  makes  His  intention  public,  and 
whets  their  expectation,  by  calling  the  man 
forth  into  the  midst.  And  then  He  meets  their 
question  with  another:  Is  it  lawful  to  do  good 
on  the  Sabbath  day  or  evil,  to  save  life  or  to 
kill?  And  when  they  preserved  their  calculated 
silence,  we  know  how  He  pressed  the  question 
home,  reminding  them  that  not  one  of  them 
would  fail  to  draw  his  own  sheep  out  of  a  pit 
upon  the  Sabbath  day.  Selfishness  made  the  dif- 
ference, for  a  man  was  better  than  a  sheep, 
but  did  not,  like  the  sheep,  belong  to  them. 
They  do  not  answer:  instead  of  warning  Him 
away  from  guilt,  they  eagerly  await  the  incrim- 
inating act:  we  can  almost  see  the  spiteful  subtle 
smile  playing  about  their  bloodless  lips;  and 
Jesus  marks  them  well.  He  looked  round  about 
them  in  anger,  but  not  in  bitter  personal  re- 
sentment, for  He  was  grieved  at  the  hardness 
of  their  hearts,  and  pitied  them  also,  even  while 
enduring  such  contradiction  of  sinners  against 
Himself.  This  is  the  first  mention  by  St.  Mark 
of  that  impressive  gaze,  afterwards  so  frequent 
in  every  Gospel,  which  searched  the  scribe  who 
answered  well,  and  melted  the  heart  of  Peter. 

And  now,  by  one  brief  utterance,  their  prey 
breaks  through  their  meshes.  Any  touch  would 
have  been  a  work,  a  formal  infraction  of  the 
law.  Therefore  there  is  no  touch,  neither  is 
the  helpless  man  bidden  to  take  up  any  burden, 
or  instigated  to  the  slightest  ritual  irregularity. 
Jesus  only  bids  him  do  what  was  forbidden 
to  none,  but  what  had  been  impossible  for  him 
to  perform;  and  the  man  succeeds,  he  does 
stretch  forth  his  hand:  he  is  healed:  the  work  is 
done.  Yet  nothing  has  been  done;  as  a  work  of 
healing  not  even  a  word  has  been  said.  For  He 
who  would  so  often  defy  their  malice  had  chosen 
to  show  once  how  easily  He  can  evade  it,  and 
not  one  of  them  is  more  free  from  any  blame, 
however  technical,  than  He.  The  Pharisees  are 
so  utterly  baffled,  so  helpless  in  His  hands,  so 
"  filled  with  madness  "  that  they  invoke  against 
this  new  foe  the  help  of  their  natural  enemies, 
the  Herodians.  These  appear  on  the  stage  be- 
cause the  immense  spread  of  the  Messianic 
movement  endangers .  the  Idumsean  dynasty. 
When  first  the  wise  men  sought  an  infant  King 
of  the  Jews,  the  Herod  of  that  day  was  troubled. 
That  instinct  which  struck  at  His  cradle  is  now 
re-awakened,   and   will   not   slumber   again   until 


Mark  111.  7-19. J 


THE   CHOICE    OF   THE   TWELVE. 


833 


the  fatal  day  when  the  new  Herod  shall  set  Him 
at  nought  and  mock  Him.  In  the  meanwhile 
these  strange  allies  perplex  themselves  with  the 
hard  question,  How  is  it  possible  to  destroy  so 
acute  a  foe? 

While  observing  their  malice,  and  the  exquisite 
skill  which  baffles  it,  we  must  not  lose  sight  of 
other  lessons.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  no  of- 
fence to  hypocrites,  no  danger  to  Himself,  pre- 
vented Jesus  from  removing  human  suffering. 
And  also  that  He  expects  from  the  man  a  certain 
co-operation  involving  faith:  he  must  stand  forth 
in  the  midst;  every  one  must  see  his  unhappi- 
ness;  he  is  to  assume  a  position  which  will  be- 
come ridiculous  unless  a  miracle  is  wrought. 
Then  he  must  make  an  eflfort.  In  the  act  of 
stretching  forth  his  hand  the  strength  to  fetch 
it  forth  is  given;  but  he  would  not  have  tried 
the  experiment  unless  he  trusted  before  he  dis- 
covered the  power.  Such  is  the  faith  demanded 
of  our  sin-stricken  and  helpless  souls;  a  faith 
which  confesses  its  wretchedness,  believes  in  the 
good  will  of  God  and  the  promises  of  Christ, 
and  receives  the  experience  of  blessing  through 
having  acted  on  the  belief  that  already  the  bless- 
ing is  a  fact  in  the  Divine  volition. 

Nor  may  we  overlook  the  mysterious  impalp- 
able spiritual  power  which  effects  its  purposes 
without  a  touch,  or  even  an  explicit  word  of 
healing  import.  What  is  it  but  the  power  of 
Him  Who  spake  and  it  was  done.  Who  com- 
manded and  it  stood  fast? 

And  all  this  vividness  of  look  and  bearing, 
this  innocent  subtlety  of  device  combined  with 
a  boldness  which  stung  His  foes  to  madness, 
all  this  richness  and  verisimilitude  of  detail,  this 
truth  to  the  character  of  Jesus,  this  spiritual  free- 
dom from  the  trammels  of  a  system  petrified 
and  grown  rigid,  this  observance  in  a  secular 
act  of  the  requirements  of  the  spiritual  king- 
dom, all  this  wealth  of  internal  evidence  goes 
to  attest  one  of  the  minor  miracles  which  scep- 
tics declare  to  be  incredible. 


THE  CHOICE  OF  THE  TWELVE. 

Mark  iii.  7-19  (R.  V.). 

We  have  reached  a  crisis  in  the  labours  of  the 
Lord,  when  hatred  which  has  become  deadly  is 
preparing  a  blow.  The  Pharisees  are  aware,  by 
a  series  of  experiences,  that  His  method  is  de- 
structive to  their  system,  that  He  is  too  fearless 
to  make  terms  with  them,  that  He  will  strip  the 
mask  ofT  their  faces.  Their  rage  was  presently 
intensified  by  an  immense  extension  of  His  fame. 
And  therefore  He  withdrew  from  the  plots  which 
ripen  most  easily  in  cities,  the  hotbeds  of  in- 
trigue, to  the  open  coast.  It  is  His  first  retreat 
before  opposition,  and  careful  readers  of  the  Gos- 
pels must  observe  that  whenever  the  pressure 
of  His  enemies  became  extreme.  He  turned  for 
safety  to  the  simple  fishermen,  among  whom 
they  had  no  party,  since  they  had  preached  no 
gospel  to  the  poor,  and  that  He  was  frequently 
conveyed  by  water  from  point  to  point,  easily 
reached  by  followers,  who  sometimes  indeed  out- 
ran Him  upon  foot,  but  where  treason  had  to 
begin  its  wiles  afresh.  Hither,  perhaps  camping 
along  the  beach,  came  a  great  multitude  not 
only  from  Galilee  but  also  from  Judaea,  and  even 
from  the  capital,  the  headquarters  of  the  priest- 
hood, and  by  a  journey  of  several  days  from 
sa-Vol.  IV. 


Idumaea,  and  from  Tyre  and  Sidon,  so  that  after- 
wards, even  there.  He  could  not  be  hid.  Many 
came  to  see  what  great  things  He  did,  but  others 
bore  with  them  some  afflicted  friend,  or  were 
themselves  sore  stricken  by  disease.  And  Jesus 
gave  like  a  God,  opening  His  hand  and  satisfy- 
ing their  desires,  "  for  power  went  out  of  Him, 
and  healed  them  all."  Not  yet  had  the  unbelief 
of  man  restrained  the  compassion  of  His  heart, 
and  forced  Him  to  exhibit  another  phase  of  the 
mind  of  God,  by  refusing  to  give  that  which  is 
holy  to  the  dogs.  As  yet,  therefore,  He  healeth 
all  their  diseases.  Then  arose  an  unbecoming 
and  irreverent  rush  of  as  many  as  had  plagues  to 
touch  Him.  A  more  subtle  danger  mingled  it- 
self with  this  peril  from  undue  eagerness.  For 
unclean  spirits,  who  knew  His  mysterious  per- 
sonality, observed  that  this  was  still  a  secret, 
and  was  no  part  of  His  teaching,  since  His  dis- 
ciples could  not  bear  it  yet.  Many  months  after- 
wards, fiesh  and  blood  had  not  revealed  it  even 
to  Peter.  And  therefore  the  demons  made  mali- 
cious haste  to  proclaim  Him  the  Son  of  God, 
and  Jesus  was  obliged  to  charge  them  much  that 
they  should  not  make  Him  known.  This  action 
of  His  may  teach  His  followers  to  be  discreet. 
Falsehood  indeed  is  always  evil,  but  at  times  ret- 
icence is  a  duty,  because  certain  truths  are  a 
medicine  too  powerful  for  some  stages  of  spirit- 
ual disease.  The  strong  sun  which  ripens  the 
grain  in  autumn,  would  burn  up  the  tender  germs 
of  spring. 

But  it  was  necessary  to  teach  as  well  as  to 
heal.  And  Jesus  showed  His  ready  practical  in- 
genuity, by  arranging  that  a  little  boat  should 
wait  on  Him,  and  furnish  at  once  a  pulpit  and 
a  retreat. 

And  now  Jesus  took  action  distinctly  Messi- 
anic. The  harvest  of  souls  was  plenteous,  but 
the  appointed  labourers  were  unfaithful,  and  a 
new  organisation  was  to  take  their  place.  The 
sacraments  and  the  apostolate  are  indeed  the 
only  two  institutions  bestowed  upon  His  Church 
by  Christ  Himself;  but  the  latter  is  enough  to 
show  that,  so  early  in  His  course.  He  saw  His 
way  to  a  revolution.  He  appointed  twelve  apos- 
tles, in  clear  allusion  to  the  tribes  of  a  new  Is- 
rael, a  spiritual  circumcision,  another  peculiar 
people.  A  new  Jerusalem  should  arise,  with  their 
names  engraven  upon  its  twelve  foundation 
stones.  But  since  all  great  changes  arrive,  not 
by  manufacture  but  by  growth,  and  in  co-opera- 
tion with  existing  circumstances,  since  nations 
and  constitutions  are  not  made  but  evolved,  so 
was  it  also  with  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  first 
distinct  and  formal  announcement  of  a  new 
sheepfold,  entered  by  a  new  and  living  Way, 
only  came  when  evoked  by  the  action  of  His 
enemies  in  casting  out  the  man  who  was  born 
blind.  By  that  time,  the  apostles  were  almost 
ready  to  take  their  place  in  it.  They  had  learned 
much.  They  had  watched  the  marvellous  ca- 
reer to  which  their  testimony  should  be  ren- 
dered. By  exercise  they  had  learned  the  reality, 
and  by  failure  the  condition  of  the  miraculous 
powers  which  they  should  transmit.  But  long 
before,  at  the  period  we  have  now  reached,  the 
apostles  had  been  chosen  under  pressure  of  the 
necessity  to  meet  the  hostility  of  the  Pharisees 
with  a  counter-agency,  and  to  spread  the  knowl- 
edge of  His  power  and  doctrine  farther  than 
One  Teacher,  however  endowed,  could  reach. 
They  were  to  be  workers  together  with  Him. 

St.   Mark  tells  us  that   He  went  up  into  the 


«34 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


mountain,  the  well-known  hill  of  the  neighbour- 
hood, as  St.  Luke  also  implies,  and  there  called 
unto  Him  whom  He  Himself  would.  The  em- 
phasis refutes  a  curious  conjecture,  that  Judas 
may  have  been  urged  upon  Him  with  such  im- 
portunity by  the  rest  that  to  reject  became  a 
worse  evil  than  to  receive  him.*  The  choice 
was  all  His  own,  and  in  their  early  enthusiasm 
not  one  whom  He  summoned  refused  the  call. 
Out  of  these  He  chose  the  Twelve,  elect  of  the 
election. 

We  learn  from  St.  Luke  (v.  12)  that  His 
choice,  fraught  with  such  momentous  issues,  was 
made  after  a  whole  night  of  prayer,  and  from 
St.  Matthew  that  He  also  commanded  the  whole 
body  of  His  disciples  to  pray  the  Lord  of  the 
Harvest,  not  that  they  themselves  should  be 
chosen,  but  that  He  would  send  forth  labourers 
into  His  harvest. 

Now  who  were  these  by  whose  agency  the 
downward  course  of  humanity  was  reversed,  and 
the  traditions  of  a  Divine  faith  were  poured  into 
a  new   mould? 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  their  ranks  were 
afterwards  recruited  from  the  purest  Hebrew 
blood  and  ripest  culture  of  the  time.  The  addition 
of  Saul  of  Tarsus  proved  that  knowledge  and 
position  were  no  more  proscribed  than  indispen- 
sable. Yet  is  it  in  the  last  degree  suggestive, 
that  Jesus  drew  His  personal  followers  from 
classes,  not  indeed  oppressed  by  want,  but  lowly, 
unwarped  by  the  prejudices  of  the  time,  living 
in  close  contact  with  nature  and  with  unsophis- 
ticated men,  speaking  and  thinking  the  words 
and  thou.sjhts  of  the  race  and  not  of  its  coteries, 
and  face  'io  face  with  the  great  primitive  wants 
and  sorrows  over  which  artificial  refinement 
spreads  a  thin,  but  often  a  baffling  veil. 

With  o;'\e  exception  the  Nazarene  called  Gal- 
ileans to  His  ministry;  and  the  Carpenter  was 
followed  lt)y  a  group  of  fishermen,  by  a  despised 
publican,  Sy  a  zealot  whose  love  of  Israel  had 
betrayed  him  into  wild  and  lawless  theories  at 
least,  perhaps  into  evil  deeds,  and  by  several 
whose  previous  life  and  subsequent  labours  are 
unknown  to  earthly  fame.  Such  are  the  Judges 
enthroned  over  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 

A  mere  comparison  of  the  lists  refutes  the  no- 
tion that  any  one  Evangelist  has  worked  up  the 
materials  of  another,  so  diverse  are  they,  and 
yet  so  easily  reconciled.  Matthew  in  one  is  Levi 
in  another.  Thadd'eus,  Jude,  and  Lebbseus, 
are  interchangeable.  The  order  of  the  Twelve 
differs  in  all  the  four  lists,  and  yet  there  are  such 
agreements,  even  in  this  respect,  as  to  prove 
that  ail  the  Evangelists  were  writing  about  what 
they  understood.  Divide  the  Twelve  into  three 
ranks  of  four,  and  in  none  of  the  four  catalogues 
will  any  name,  or  its  equivalent,  be  found  to 
have  wandered  out  of  its  subdivision,  out  of  the 
first,  second,  or  third  rank,  in  which  doubtless 
that  apostle  habitually  followed  Jesus.  Within 
each  rank  there  is  the  utmost  diversity  of  place, 
except  that  the  foremost  name  in  each  is  never 
varied;  Peter,  Philip,  and  the  Lesser  James,  hold 
the  first,  fifth,  and  ninth  place  in  every  catalogue. 
And  the  traitor  is  always  last.  These  are  co- 
incidences too  slight  for  design  and  too  striking 
for  accident,  they  are  the  natural  signs  of  truth. 
For  they  indicate,  without  obtruding  or  explain- 
ing, some  arrangement  of  the  ranks,  and  some 
leadership  of  an  individual  in  each. 

Moreover,  the  group  of  the  apostles  presents 
♦  Lange,  "  Life  of  Christ,"  ii.  p.  179. 


a  wonderfully  lifelike  aspect.  Fear,  ambitioh, 
rivalry,  perplexity,  silence  when  speech  is  called 
for,  and  speech  when  silence  is  befitting,  vows, 
failures,  and  yet  real  loyalty,  alas!  we  know  the.n 
all.  The  incidents  which  are  recorded  of  the 
chosen  of  Christ  no  inventor  of  the  second  cen- 
tury would  have  dared  to  devise;  and  as  we 
study  them,  we  feel  the  touch  of  genuine  life; 
not  of  colossal  statues  such  as  repose  beneath 
the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  but  of  men,  genuine, 
simple  and  even  somewhat  childlike,  yet  full  of 
strong,  fresh,  unsophisticated  feeling,  fit  there- 
fore to  become  a  great  power,  and  especially  so 
in  the  capacity  of  witnesses  for  an  ennobling  yet 
controverted  fact. 


CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  TWELVE. 
Mark  iii.   14-19  (R.  V.). 

The  pictures  of  the  Twelve,  then,  are  drawn 
from  a  living  group.  And  when  they  are  ex- 
amined in  detail,  this  appearance  of  vitality  is 
strengthened,  by  the  richest  and  most  vivid  in- 
dications of  individual  character,  such  indeed  as 
in  several  cases  to  throw  light  upon  the  choice 
of  Jesus.  To  invent  such  touches  is  the  last  at- 
tainment of  dramatic  genius,  and  the  artist  rarely 
succeeds  except  by  deliberate  and  palpable  char- 
acter-painting. The  whole  story  of  Hamlet  and 
of  Lear  is  constructed  with  this  end  in  view,  but 
no  one  has  ever  conjectured  that  the  Gospels 
were  psychological  studies.  If,  then,  we  can  dis- 
cover several  well-defined  characters,  harmoni- 
ously drawn  by  various  writers,  as  natural  as  the 
central  figure  is  supernatural,  and  to  be  recog- 
nised equally  in  the  common  and  miraculous  nar- 
ratives, this  will  be  an  evidence  of  the  utmost 
value. 

We  are  all  familiar  with  the  impetuous  vigour 
of  St.  Peter,  a  quality  which  betrayed  him  into 
grave  and  well-nigh  fatal  errors,  but  when  chas- 
tened by  suffering  made  him  a  noble  and  formi- 
dable leader  of  the  Twelve.  We  recognise  it 
when  He  says,  "Thou  shalt  never  wash  my 
feet,"  "  Though  all  men  should  deny  Thee,  yet 
will  I  never  deny  Thee,"  "  Lord,  to  whom  should 
we  go?  Thou  hast  the  words  of  everlasting  life." 
"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living 
God,"  and  in  his  rebuke  of  Jesus  for  self-sac- 
rifice, and  in  his  rash  blow  in  the  garden.  Does 
this,  the  best-established  mental  quality  of  any 
apostle,  fail  or  grow  faint  in  the  miraculous  sto- 
ries which  are  condemned  as  the  accretions  of  a 
later  time?  In  such  stories  he  is  related  to  have 
cried  out,  "  Depart  from  Me,  for  I  am  a  sinful 
man,  O  Lord,"  he  would  walk  upon  the  sea  to 
Jesus,  he  proposed  to  shelter  Moses  and  Elijah 
from  the  night  air  in  booths  (a.  notion  so  natural 
to  a  bewildered  man,  so  exquisite  in  its  officious 
well-meaning  absurdity  as  to  prove  itself,  for 
who  could  have  invented  it?),  he  ventured  into 
the  empty  sepulchre  w'hile  John  stood  awe- 
stricken  at  the  portal,  he  plunged  into  the  lake 
to  seek  his  risen  Master  on  the  shore,  and  he 
was  presently  the  first  to  draw  the  net  to  land. 
Observe  the  restless  curiosity  which  beckoned  to 
John  to  ask  who  was  the  traitor,  and  compare 
it  with  his  question.  "Lord,  and  what  shall  this 
man  do?"  But  the  second  of  these  was  after 
the  resurrection,  and  in  answer  to  a  prophecy. 
Everywhere  we  find  a  real  person  and  the  same, 
and  the  vehemence  is  everywhere  that  of  a  warm 


Mark  iii.  14-19.] 


CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE    TWELVE. 


83s 


heart,  which  could  fail  signally  but  could  weep 
bitterly  as  well,  which  could  learn  not  to  claim, 
though  twice  invited,  greater  love  than  that  of 
others,  but  when  asked  "  Lovest  thou  Me  "  at  all, 
broke  out  into  the  passionate  appeal,  "  Lord, 
Thou  knowest  all  things,  Thou  knowest  that  I 
love  Thee."  Dull  is  the  ear  of  the  critic  which 
fails  to  recognise  here  the  voice  of  Simon.  Yet 
the   story   implies   the   resurrection. 

The  mind  of  Jesus  was  too  lofty  and  grave  for 
epigram;  but  He  put  the  wilful  self-reliance 
which  Peter  had  to  subdue  even  to  crucifixion, 
into  one  delicate  and  subtle  phrase:  "  When 
thou  was  young,  thou  girdedst  thyself,  and  walk- 
edst  whither  thou  wouldest."  That  self-willed 
stride,  with  the  loins  girded,  is  the  natural  gait  of 
Peter,    w*hen   he   was  young. 

St.  James,  the  first  apostolic  martyr,  seems  to 
have  over-topped  for  a  while  his  greater  brother 
St.  John,  before  whom  he  is  usually  named, 
and  who  is  once  distinguished  as  "  the  brother  of 
James."  He  shares  with  him  the  title  of  a  Son 
of  Thunder  (Mark  iii.  17).  They  were  together 
in  desiring  to  rival  the  fiery  and  avenging  miracle 
of  Elijah,  and  to  partake  of  the  profound  bap- 
tism and  bitter  cup  of  Christ.  It  is  an  undesigned 
coincidence  in  character,  that  while  the  latter  of 
these  events  is  recorded  by  St.  Matthew  and  St. 
Mark,  the  former,  which,  it  will  be  observed,  im- 
plies perfect  confidence  in  the  supernatural  power 
of  Christ,  is  found  in  St.  Luke  alone,  who  has 
not  mentioned  the  title  it  justifies  so  curiously 
(Matt.  XX.  20;  Mark  x.  35;  Luke  ix.  54).  It  is 
more  remarkable  that  he  whom  Christ  bade  to 
share  his  distinctive  title  with  another,  should 
not  once  be  named  as  having  acted  or  spoken 
by  himself.  With  a  fire  like  that  of  Peter,  but 
no  such  power  of  initiative  and  of  dhieftainship, 
how  natural  it  is  that  his  appointed  task  was 
martyrdom.  Is  it  objected  that  his  brother  also, 
the  great  apostle  St.  John,  received  only  a  share 
in  that  divided  title?  But  the  family  trait  is 
quite  as  palpable  in  him.  The  deeds  of  John 
were  seldom  wrought  upon  his  own  responsibil- 
ity, never  if  we  except  the  bringing  of  Peter 
into  the  palace  of  the  high  priest.  He  is  a  keen 
observer  and  a  deep  thinker.  But  he  cannot,  like 
his  Master,  combine  the  quality  of  leader  with 
those  of  student  and  sage.  In  company  with 
Andrew  he  found  the  Messiah.  We  have  seen 
James  leading  him  for  a  time.  It  was  in  obedi- 
ence to  a  sign  from  Peter  that  He  asked  who 
was  the  traitor.  With  Peter,  when  Jesus  was 
arrested,  he  followed  afar  off.  It  is  very  char- 
acteristic that  he  shrank  from  entering  the  sep- 
ulchre until  Peter,  coming  up  behind,  went  in 
first,  although  it  was  John  who  thereupon  "  saw 
and  believed."  * 

With  like  discernment,  he  was  the  first  to  rec- 
ognise Jesus  beside  the  lake,  but  then  it  was 
equally  natural  that  he  should  tell  Peter,  and 
follow  in  the  ship,  dragging  the  net  to  land,  as 
that  Peter  should  gird  himself  and  plunge  into 
the  lake.  Peter,  when  Jesus  drew  'him  aside, 
turned  and  saw  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved 
following,  with  the  same  silent,  gentle,  and  so- 
ciable affection,  which  had  so  recently  joined  him 
with  the  saddest  and  tenderest  of  all  companions 
underneath  the  cross.  At  this  point  there  is 
a  delicate   and   suggestive   turn   of  phrase.     By 

*It  is  also  very  natural  that,  in  telling  the  story,  he 
should  remember  how,  while  hesitating  to  enter,  he 
'•  stooped  down  "  to  gaze,  in  the  wild  dawn  of  his  new 


w'hat  incident  would  any  pen  except  his  own 
have  chosen  to  describe  the  beloved  disciple  as 
Peter  then  beheld  him?  Assuredly  we  should 
have  written.  The  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved, 
who  also  followed  Him  to  Calvary,  and  to  whom 
he  confided  His  mother.  But  from  St.  John  him- 
self there  would  have  been  a  trace  of  boastfulness 
in  such  a  phrase.  Now  the  author  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  choosing  rather  to  speak  of  privilege 
than  service,  wrote  "  The  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved,  which  also  leaned  back  on  His  breast  at 
the  supper,  and  said,  Lord,  who  is  he  fhat  be- 
trayeth  Thee?  " 

St.  John  was  again  with  St.  Peter  at  the  Beau- 
tiful Gate,  and  although  it  was  not  he  who  healed 
the  cripple,  yet  Tiis  co-operation  is  implied  in 
the  words,  "  Peter,  fastening  his  eyes  on  him, 
with  John."  And  when  the  Council  would  fain 
have  silenced  them,  the  boldness  which  spoke  in 
Peter's  reply  was  "  the  boldness  of  Peter  and 
John." 

Could  any  series  of  events  justify  more  per^ 
fectly  a  title  which  implied  much  zeal,  yet  zeal 
that  did  not  demand  a  specific  unshared  epithet? 
But  these  events  are  interwoven  with  the  mirac- 
ulous narratives. 

Add  to  this  the  keenness  and  deliberation 
which  so  much  of  his  story  exhibits,  which  at 
the  beginning  tendered  no  hasty  homage,  but 
followed  Jesus  to  examine  and  to  learn,  which 
saw  the  meaning  of  the  orderly  arrangement 
of  the  graveclothes  in  the  empty  tomb,  which 
was  first  to  recognise  the  Lord  upon  the  beach, 
which  before  this  had  felt  something  in  Christ's 
regard  for  the  least  and  weakest,  inconsistent 
with  the  forbidding  of  any  one  to  cast  out  devils-, 
and  we  have  the  very  qualities  required  to  sup- 
plement those  of  Peter,  without  being  discordant 
or  uncongenial.  And  therefore  it  is  with  Peter, 
even  more  than  with  his  brother,  that  we  have 
seen  John  associated.  In  fact  Christ,  who  sent 
out  His  apostles  by  two  and  two,  joins  these  in 
such  small  matters  as  the  tracking  a  man  with 
a  pitcher  into  the  house  where  He  would  keep 
the  Passover.  And  so,  when  Mary  of  Magdala 
would  announce  the  resurrection,  she  found  the 
penitent  Simon  in  company  with  this  loving 
John,  comforted,  and  ready  to  seek  the  tomb 
where  he  met  the  Lord  of  all  Pardons. 

All  this  is  not  only  coherent,  and  full  of  vital 
force,  but  it  also  strengthens  powerfully  the  ev- 
idence for  his  authorship  of  the  Gospel,  written 
the  last,  looking  deepest  into  sacred  mysteries, 
and  comparatively  unconcerned  for  the  mere 
flow  of  narrative,  but  tender  with  private  and 
loving  discburse,  with  thoughts  of  the  protect- 
ing Shepherd,  the  >  sustaining  Vine,  the  Friend 
Who  wept  by  a  grave.  Who  loved  John,  Who 
provided  amid  tortures  for  His  mother,  Who 
knew  that  Peter  loved  Him.  and  bade  him  feed 
the  lambs — and  yet  thunderous  as  becomes  a 
Boanerges,  with  indignation  half  suppressed 
against  "  the  Jews  "  (so  called  as  if  he  had  re- 
nounced his  murderous  nation),  against  the 
selfish  high-priest  of  "  that  same  year,"  and 
against  the  son  of  perdition,  for  whom  certain 
astute  worldlings  have  surmised  that  his  wrath 
was  such  as  they  best  understand,  personal,  and 
perhaps  a  little  spiteful.  The  temperament  of 
John,  revealed  throughout,  was  that  of  August, 
brooding  and  warm  and  hushed  and  fruitful,  with 
low  rumblings   of  tempest   in   the   night. 

It  is  remarkable  that  such  another  family  re- 
semblance as  between  James  and  John  exists  be- 


836 


THE  ^OSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


tween  Peter  and  Andrew.  The  directness  and 
self-reliance  of  his  greater  brofher  may  be  dis- 
covered in  the  few  incidents  recorded  of  An- 
drew also.  At  the  beginning,  and  after  one  inter- 
view with  Jesus,  when  he  finds  his  brother,  and 
becomes  the  first  of  the  Twelve  to  spread  the 
gospel,  he  utters  the  short  unhesitating  an- 
nouncement, "  We  have  found  the  Messiah." 
When  Philip  is  uncertain  about  introducing  the 
Greeks  who  would  see  Jesus,  he  consults  An- 
drew, and  there  is  no  more  hesitation,  Andrew 
and  Philip  tell  Jesus.  And  in  just  the  same  way, 
when  Philip  argues  that  two  hundred  penny- 
worth of  bread  are  not  enough  for  the  multi- 
tude, Andrew  intervenes  with  practical  informa- 
tion about  the  five  barley  loaves  and  the  two 
small  fishes,  insufificient  althoug'h  they  seem.  A 
man  prompt  and  ready,  and  not  blind  to  the  re- 
sources  that  exist  because  they  appear   scanty. 

Twice  we  have  found  Philip  mentioned  in  con- 
junction with  him.  It  was  Philip,  apparently 
accosted  by  the  Greeks  because  of  his  Gentile 
name,  who  could  not  take  upon  himself  the  re- 
sponsibility of  telling  Jesus  of  their  wish.  And  it 
was  he,  w*hen  consulted  about  the  feeding  of  the 
five  thousand,  who  went  off  into  a  calculation 
of  the  price  of  the  food  required — two  hundred 
pennyworth,  he  says,  would  not  suffice.  Is  it  not 
highly  consistent  with  this  slow  deliberation,  that 
he  should  have  accosted  Nathanael  with  a  state- 
ment so  measured  and  explicit:  "  We  have  found 
Him,  of  whom  Moses  in  the  law,  and  the  proph- 
ets did  write,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  Son  of 
Joseph."  What  a  contrast  to  Andrew's  terse  an- 
nouncement, "  We  have  found  the  Messiah." 
And  how  natural  that  Philip  should  answer  the 
objection,  "  Can  any  good  thing  come  out  of 
Nazareth?"  with  the  passionless  reasonable  in- 
vitation, "  Come  and  see."  It  was  in  the  same 
unimaginative  prosaic  way  that  he  said  long 
after,  "  Lord,  show  us  the  Father,  and  it  suf- 
ficeth  us."  To  this  comparatively  sluggish  tem- 
perament, therefore,  Jesus  Himself  had  to  ad- 
dress the  first  demand  He  made  on  any.  "  Fol- 
low me,"  He  said,  and  was  obeyed.  It  would 
not  be  easy  to  compress  into  such  brief  and 
incidental  notices  a  more  graphic  indication  of 
character. 

Of  the  others  we  know  little  except  fhe  names. 
The  choice  of  Matthew,  the  man  of  business,  is 
chiefiy  explained  by  the  nature  of  his  Gospel,  so 
explicit,  orderly,  and  methodical,  and  until  it 
approaches  the  crucifixion,  so  devoid  of  fire. 

But  when  we  come  to  Thomas,  we  are  once 
more  aware  of  a  defined  and  vivid  personality, 
somewhat  perplexed  and  melancholy,  of  little 
hope  but  settled  loyalty.  / 

All  the  three  sayings  reported  of  him  belong 
to  a  dejected  temperamemt:  "  Let  us  also  go, 
that  we  may  die  with  Him  " — as  if  there  could  be 
no  brighter  meaning  than  death  in  Christ's  pro- 
posal to  interrupt  a  dead  man's  sleep.  "  Lord, 
we  know  not  whither  Thou  goest,  and  how  can 
we  know  the  way?" — these  words  express  ex- 
actly the  same  despondent  failure  to  apprehend. 
And  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  nothing  s'hort  of 
tangible  experience  will  convince  him  of  the 
resurrection.  And  yet  there  is  a  warm  and  de- 
voted heart  to  be  recognised  in  the  proposal  to 
share  Christ's  death,  in  the  yearning  to  know 
whither  .  He  went,  and  even  in  that  agony  of 
unbelief,  which  dwelt  upon  the  cruel  details  of 
suffering,  until  it  gave  way  to  one  glad  cry  of 
recognition    and    of   worship;    therefore    his    de- 


mand was  granted,  although  a  richer  blessing  was 
reserved  for  those  who,  not  having  seen,  be- 
lieved. 

THE  APOSTLE  JUDAS. 

Mark  iii.  19. 

The  evidential  value  of  what  has  been  written 
about  the  apostles  will,  to  some  minds,  seem 
to  be  overborne  by  the  difficulties  which  start 
up  at  the  name  of  Judas.  And  yet  the  fact  that 
Jesus  chose  him — that  awful  fact  which  has  of- 
fended many — is  in  harmony  with  all  that  we  see 
around  us,  with  the  prodigious  powers  bestowed 
upon  Napoleon  and  Voltaire,  bestowed  in  full 
knowledge  of  the  dark  results,  yet  given  because 
the  issues  of  human  freewill  never  cancel  the 
trusts  imposed  on  human  responsibility.  There- 
fore the  issues  of  the  freewill  of  Judas  did  not 
cancel  the  trust  imposed  upon  his  responsibility; 
and  Jesus  acted  not  on  His  foreknowledge  of 
the  future,  but  on  the  mighty  possibilities,  for 
good  as  for  evil,  which  heaved  in  the  bosom  of 
the  fated  man  as  he  stood  upon  the  mountain 
sward. 

In  the  story  of  Judas,  the  principles  which  rule 
the  world  are  made  visible.  From  Adam  to  this 
day  men  have  been  trusted  who  failed  and  fell, 
and  out  of  their  very  downfall,  but  not  by  pre- 
cipitating it,  the  plans  of  God  have  evolved  them- 
selves. 

It  is  not  possible  to  make  such  a  study  of  the 
character  of  Judas  as  of  some  others  of  the 
Twelve.  A  traitor  is  naturally  taciturn.  No 
word  of  his  draws  our  attention  to  the  fact  that 
he  had  gained  possession  of  the  bag,  even  though 
one  who  had  sat  at  the  receipt  of  custom  might 
more  naturally  have  become  the  treasurer.  We 
do  not  hear  his  voice  above  the  rest,  until  St. 
John  explains  the  source  of  the  general  discon- 
tent, which  remonstrated  against  the  waste  of 
ointment.  He  is  silent  even  at  the  feast,  in 
despite  of  the  words  which  revealed  his  guilty 
secret,  until  a  slow  and  tardy  question  is  wrung 
from  him,  not,  "  Is  it  I,  Lord?  "  but  "  Rabbi,  is 
it  I?"  His  influence  is  like  that  of  a  subtle 
poison,  not  discerned  until  its  effects  betray  it. 

But  many  words  of  Jesus  acquire  new  force 
and  energy  when  we  observe  that,  whatever  their 
drift  beside,  they  were  plainly  calculated  to  in- 
fluence and  warn  Iscariot.  Such  are  the  re- 
peated and  urgent  warnings  against  covetous- 
ness,  from  the  first  parable,  spoken  so  shortly 
after  his  vocation,  which  reckons  the  deceitful- 
ness  of  riches  and  the  lust  of  other  things  among 
the  tares  that  choke  the  seed,  down  to  the  dec- 
laration that  they  who  trust  in  riches  shall  hardly 
enter  the  kingdom.  Such  are  the  denunciations 
against  hypocrisy,  spoken  openly,  as  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  or  to  His  own  apart,  as 
when  He  warned  them  of  the  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees  which  is  hypocrisy,  that  secret  vice 
which  was  eating  out  the  soul  of  one  among 
them.  Such  were  the  opportunities  given  to  re- 
treat without  utter  dishonour,  as  when  He  said, 
"  Do  ye  also  will  to  go  away?  .  .  .  Did  I  not 
choose  you  the  Twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a 
devil?"  (John  vi.  67,  70).  And  such  also  were 
the  awful  warnings  given  of  the  solemn  re- 
sponsibilities of  special  privileges.  The  exalted 
city  which  is  brought  down  to  hell,  the  salt  which 
is  trodden  under  foot,  the  men  whose  sin  re- 
mained because  they  can  claim  to  see,  and  still 


Mark  iii.  20-27.] 


CHRIST    AND    BEELZEBUB. 


837 


more  plainly,  the  first  that  shall  be  last,  and  the 
man  for  whom  it  were  good  that  he  had  not 
been  born.  In  many  besides  the  last  of  these, 
Judas  must  have  felt  himself  sternly  because 
faithfully  dealt  with.  And  the  exasperation 
which  always  results  from  rejected  warnings,  the 
sense  of  a  presence  utterly  repugnant  to  his  na- 
ture, may  have  largely  contributed  to  his  final 
and  disastrous  collapse. 

In  the  life  of  Judas  there  was  a  mysterious  im- 
personation of  all  the  tendencies  of  godless 
Judaism,  and  his  dreadful  personality  seems  to 
express  the  whole  movement  of  the  nation  which 
rejected  Christ.  We  see  this  in  the  powerful  at- 
traction felt  toward  Messiah  before  His  aims 
were  understood,  in  the  deadly  estrangement  and 
hostility  which  were  kindled  by  the  gentle  and 
self-effacing  ways  of  Jesus,  in  the  treachery  of 
Judas  in  the  garden  and  the  unscrupulous  wili- 
ness  of  the  priests  accusing  Christ  before  the 
governor,  in  the  fierce  intensity  of  rage  which 
turned  his  hands  against  himself  and  which  de- 
stroyed the  nation  under  Titus.  Nay,  the  very 
sordidness  which  made  a  bargain  for  thirty 
pieces  of  silver  has  ever  since  been  a  part  of  the 
popular  conception  of  the  race.  We  are  apt  to 
think  of  a  gross  love  of  money  as  inconsistent 
with  intense  passion,  but  in  Shylock,  the  com- 
patriot of  Judas,  Shakespeare  combines  the  two. 

Contemplating  this  blighted  and  sinister  ca- 
reer, the  lesson  is  burnt  in  upon  the  conscience, 
that  since  Judas  by  transgression  fell,  no  place 
in  the  Church  of  Christ  can  render  any  man 
secure.  And  since,  falling,  he  was  openly  ex- 
posed, none  may  flatter  himself  that  the  cause 
of  Christ  is  bound  up  with  his  reputation,  that 
the  mischief  must  needs  be  averted  which  his 
downfall  would  entail,  that  Providence  must 
needs  avert  from  him  the  natural  penalties  of 
evil-doing.  Though  one  was  as  the  signet  upon 
the  Lord's  hand,  yet  was  he  plucked  thence. 
There  is  no  security  for  any  soul  anywhere  ex- 
cept where  love  and  trust  repose,  upon  the 
bosom  of  Christ. 

Now  if  this  be  true,  and  if  sin  and  scandal  may 
conceivably  penetrate  even  the  inmost  circle  of 
the  chosen,  how  great  an  error  is  it  to  break, 
because  of  these  offences,  the  unity  of  the 
Church,  and  institute  some  new  communion, 
purer  far  than  the  Churches  of  Corinth  and 
Galatia,  which  were  not  abandoned  but  reformed, 
and  more  impenetrable  to  corruption  than  the 
little  group  of  those  who  ate  and  drank  with 
Jesus. 

CHRIST  AND  BEELZEBUB. 

Mark  iii.  20-27  (R.  V.). 

While  Christ  was  upon  the  mountain  with  His 
more  immediate  followers,  the  excitement  in  the 
plain  did  not  exhaust  itself;  for  even  when  He 
entered  into  a  house,  the  crowds  prevented  Him 
and  His  followers  from  taking  necessary  food. 
And  when  His  friends  heard  of  this,  they  judged 
Him  as  men  who  profess  to  have  learned  the 
lesson  of  His  life  still  judge,  too  often,  all  whose 
devotion  carries  them  beyond  the  boundaries  of 
convention  and  of  convenience.  For  there  is  a 
curious  betrayal  of  the  popular  estimate  of  this 
world  and  the  world  to  come,  in  the  honour 
paid  to  those  who  cast  away  life  in  battle,  or  sap 
it  slowly  in  pursuit  of  wealth  or  honours,  and  the 
contempt  expressed  for  those  who  compromise 


it  on  behalf  of  souls  for  which  Christ  died. 
Whenever  by  exertion  in  any  unselfish  cause 
health  is  broken,  or  fortune  impaired,  or  influ- 
ential friends  estranged,  the  follower  of  Christ  is 
called  an  enthusiast,  a  fanatic,  or  even  more 
plainly  a  man  of  unsettled  mind.  He  may  be 
comforted  by  remembering  that  Jesus  was  said 
to  be  beside  Himself  when  teaching  and  healing 
left  Him  not  leisure  even  to  eat. 

To  this  incessant  and  exhausting  strain  upon 
His  energies  and  sympathies,  St.  Matthew  applies 
the  prophetic  words,  "  Himself  took  our  infirmi- 
ties and  bare  our  diseases  "  (viii.  17).  And  it 
is  worth  while  to  compare  with  that  passage  and 
the  one  before  us,  Renan's  assertion,  that  He 
traversed  Galilee  "  in  the  midst  of  a  perpetual 
fete,"  and  that  "joyous  Galilee  celebrated  in 
fetes  the  approach  of  the  well-beloved."  ("  Vie 
de  J.,"  pp.  197,  202).  The  contrast  gives  a  fine 
illustration  of  the  inaccurate  shallowness  of  the 
Frenchman's  whole  conception  of  the  sacred  life. 

But  it  is  remarkable  that  while  His  friends 
could  not  yet  believe  His  claims,  and  even  strove 
to  lay  hold  on  Him,  no  worse  suspicion  ever 
darkened  the  mind  of  those  who  knew  Him  best 
than  that  His  reason  had  been  disturbed.  Not 
these  called  Him  gluttonous  and  a  winebibber. 
Not  these  blasphemed  His  motives.  But  the  en- 
voys of  the  priestly  faction,  partisans  from  Jeru- 
salem, were  ready  with  an  atrocious  suggestion. 
He  was  Himself  possessed  with  a  worse  devil, 
before  whom  the  lesser  ones  retired.  By  the 
prince  of  the  devils  He  cast  out  the  devils.  To 
this  desperate  evasion,  St.  Matthew  tells  us,  they 
were  driven  by  a  remarkable  miracle,  the  ex- 
pulsion of  a  blind  and  dumb  spirit,  and  the  per- 
fect healing  of  his  victim.  Now  the  literature 
of  the  world  cannot  produce  invective  more  ter- 
rible than  Jesus  had  at  His  command  for  these 
very  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites.  This  is 
what  gives  majesty  to  His  endurance.  No  per- 
sonal insult,  no  resentment  at  His  own  wrong, 
could  ruffle  the  sublime  composure  which,  upon 
occasion,  gave  way  to  a  moral  indignation 
equally  sublime.  Calmly  He  calls  His  traducers 
to  looJv  Him  in  the  face,  and  appeals  to  their 
own  reason  against  their  blasphemy.  Neither 
kingdom  nor  house  divided  against  itself  can 
stand.  And  if  Satan  be  divided  against  himself 
and  his  evil  works,  undoing  the  miseries  and 
opening  the  eyes  of  men,  h'is  kingdom  has  an 
end.  All  the  experience  of  the  world  since  the 
beginning  was  proof  enough  that  such  a  suicide 
of  evil  was  beyond  hope.  The  best  refutation  of 
the  notion  that  Satan  had  risen  up  against  him- 
self and  was  divided  was  its  clear  expression. 
But  what  was  the  alternative?  If  Satan  were  not 
committing  suicide,  he  was  overpowered.  There 
is  indeed  a  fitful  temporary  reformation,  followed 
by  a  deeper  fall,  which  St.  Matthew  tells  us  that 
Christ  compared  to  the  cleansing  of  a  house 
from  whence  the  evil  tenant  has  capriciously  wan- 
dered forth,  confident  that  it  is  still  his  own,  and 
prepared  to  return  to  it  with  seven  other  and 
worse  fiends.  A  little  observation  would  detect 
such  illusory  improvement.  But  the  case  before 
them  was  that  of  an  external  summons  reluct- 
antly obeyed.  It  required  the  interference  of  a 
stronger  power,  which  could  only  be  the  power 
of  God.  None  could  enter  into  the  strong  man's 
house,  and  spoil  his  goods,  unless  the  strong 
man  were  first  bound,  "  and  then  he  will  spoil 
his  house."  No  more  distinct  assertion  of  the 
personality  of  evil  spirits  than  this  could  be  de- 


838 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


vised.  Jesus  and  the  Pharisees  are  not  at  all 
at  issue  upon  this  point.  He  does  not  scout 
as  a  baseless  superstition  their  belief  that  evil 
spirits  are  at  work  in  the  world.  But  He  de- 
clares that  His  own  work  is  the  reversal  of  theirs. 
He  is  spoiling  the  strong  man,  whose  terrible 
ascendancy  over  the  possessed  resembles  the  do- 
minion of  a  man  in  his  own  house,  among  chat- 
tels without  a  will. 

That  dominion  Christ  declares  that  only  a 
stronger  can  overcome,  and  His  argument  as- 
sumes that  the  stronger  must  needs  be  the  finger 
of  God,  the  power  of  God,  come  unto  them. 
The  supernatural  exists  only  above  us  and  below. 

Ages  have  passed  away  since  then.  Innumera- 
ble schemes  have  been  devised  for  the  expulsion 
of  the  evils  under  .which  the  world  is  groaning, 
and  if  they  are  evils  of  merely  human  origin, 
human  power  should  suffice  for  their  removal. 
The  march  of  civilisation  is  sometimes  appealed 
to.  But  what  blessings  has  civilisation  without 
Christ  ever  borne  to  savage  men?  The  answer 
is  painful:  rum,  gunpowder,  slavery,  massacre, 
small-pox,  pulmonary  consumption,  and  the  ex- 
tinction of  their  races,  these  are  all  it  has  been 
able  to  bestow.  Education  is  sometimes  spoken 
of,  as  if  it  would  gradually  heal  our  passions  and 
expel  vice  and  misery  from  the  world,  as  if  the 
worst  crimes  and  most  flagrant  vices  of  our  time 
were  peculiar  to  the  ignorant  and  the  untaught, 
as  if  no  forger  had  ever  learned  to  write.  And 
sometimes  great  things  are  promised  from  the 
advance  of  science,  as  if  all  the  works  of  dyna- 
mite and  nitro-glycerine,  were,  like  those  of  the 
Creator,  very  good. 

No  man  can  be  deceived  by  such  flattering 
hopes,  who  rightly  considers  the  volcanic  ener- 
gies, the  frantic  rage,  the  unreasoning  all-sacri- 
ficing recklessness  of  human  passions  and  desires. 
Surely  they  are  set  on  fire  of  hell,  and  only 
heaven  can  quench  the  conflagration.  Jesus  has 
undertaken  to  do  this.  His  religion  has  been  a 
spell  of  power  among  the  degraded  and  the  lost; 
and  when  we  come  to  consider  mankind  in  bulk, 
it  is  plain  enough  that  no  other  power  has  had 
a  really  reclaiming,  elevating  effect  upon  tribes 
and  races.  In  our  own  land,  what  great  or  last- 
ing work  of  reformation,  or  even  of  temporal 
benevolence,  has  ever  gone  forward  without  the 
blessing  of  religion  to  sustain  it?  Nowhere  is 
Satan  cast  out  but  by  the  Stronger  than  he,  bind- 
ing him,  overmastering  the  evil  principle  which 
tramples  human  nature  down,  as  the  very  first 
step  towards  spoiling  his  goods.  The  spiritual 
victory  must  precede  the  removal  of  misery, 
convulsion,  and  disease.  There  is  no  golden  age 
for  the  world,  except  the  reign  of  Christ. 


"ETERNAL  SIN." 
Mark  iii.  28,  29  (R.  V.). 

Having  first  shown  that  His  works  cannot  be 
ascribed  to  Satan,  Jesus  proceeds  to  utter  the 
most  terrible  of  warnings,  because  they  said,  He 
hath  an  unclean  spirit. 

"  All  their  sins  shall  be  forgiven  unto  the  sons 
of  men,  and  their  blasphemies  wherewith  soever 
they  shall  blaspheme,  but  whosoever  shall  blas- 
pheme against  the  Holy  Spirit  hath  never  for- 
giveness, but  is  guilty  of  an  eternal  sin." 

What  is  the  nature  of  this  terrible  oflfence?  It 
is  plain  that  their  slanderous  attack  lay  in  the 


direction  of  it,  since  they  needed  warning;  and 
probable  that  they  had  not  yet  fallen  into  the 
abyss,  because  they  could  still  be  warned 
against  it.  At  least,  if  the  guilt  of  some  had 
reached  that  depth,  there  must  have  been  others 
involved  in  their  ofifence  who  were  still  within 
reach  of  Christ's  solemn  admonition.  It  would 
seem  therefore  that  in  saying,  "  He  casteth  out 
devils  by  Beelzebub  .  .  .  He  hath  an  unclean 
spirit,"  they  approached  the  confines  and  doubt- 
ful boundaries  between  that  blasphemy  against 
the  Son  of  man  which  shall  be  forgiven,  and 
the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit  which 
hath  never  forgiveness. 

It  is  evident  also  that  any  crime  declared  by 
Scripture  elsewhere  to  be  incurable,  must  be 
identical  with  this,  however  dififerent  its  guise, 
since  Jesus  plainly  and  indisputably  announces 
that  all  other  sins  but  this  shall  be  forgiven. 

Now  there  are  several  other  passages  of  the 
kind.  St.  John  bade  his  disciples  to  pray,  when 
any  saw  a  brother  sinning  a  sin  not  unto  death, 
"  and  God  will  give  him  life  for  them  that  sin 
not  unto  death.  There  is  a  sin  unto  death:  not 
concerning  this  do  I  say  that  he  should  make 
request"  (i  John  v.  16).  It  is  idle  to  suppose 
that,  in  the  case  of  this  sin  unto  death,  the 
Apostle  only  meant  to  leave  his  disciples  free  to 
pray  or  not  to  pray.  If  death  were  not  certain, 
it  would  be  their  duty,  in  common  charity,  to 
pray.  But  the  sin  is  so  vaguely  and  even  mys- 
teriously referred  to,  that  we  learn  little  more 
from  that  passage  than  that  it  was  an  overt  public 
act,  of  which  other  men  could  so  distinctly  judge 
the  flagrancy  that  from  it  they  should  withhold 
their  prayers.  It  has  nothing  in  common  with 
those  unhappy  wanderings  of  thought  or  affec- 
tion which  morbid  introspection  broods  upon, 
until  it  pleads  guilty  to  the  unpardonable  sin, 
for  lapses  of  which  no  other  could  take  cog- 
nizance. And  in  Christ's  words,  the  very 
epithet,  blasphemy,  involves  the  same  public, 
open  revolt  against  good.*  And  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  every  other  sin  shall  be  forgiven. 

There  are  also  two  solemn  passages  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (vi.  4-6;  x.  26-31).  The 
first  of  these  declares  that  it  is  impossible  for 
men  who  once  experienced  all  the  enlightening 
and  sweet  influences  of  God,  "  and  then  fell 
away,"  to  be  renewed  again  unto  repentance. 
But  falling  upon  the  road  is  very  different  from 
thus  falling  away,  or  how  could  Peter  have  been 
recovered?  Their  fall  is  total  apostasy,  "  they 
crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh, 
and  put  Him  to  an  open  shame."  They  are  not 
fruitful  land  in  which  tares  are  mingled;  they 
bear  only  thorns  and  thistles,  and  are  utterly 
rejected.  And  so  in  the  tenth  chapter,  they  who 
sin  wilfully  are  men  who  tread  under  foot  the 
Son  of  God,  and  count  the  blood  of  the  cove- 
nant an  unholy  thing,  and  do  despite  (insult) 
unto  the  Spirit  of  grace. 

Again  we  read  that  in  the  last  time  there  will 
arise  an  enemy  of  God  so  unparalleled  that  his 
movement  will  outstrip  all  others,  and  be  "  the 
falling  away,"  and  he  himself  will  be  "  the  man 
of  sin  "  and  "  the  son  of  perdition,"  which  latter 
title  he  only  shares  with  Iscariot.  Now  the  es- 
sence of  his  portentous  guilt  is  that  "  he  opposeth 

*  •'  Theology  would  have  been  spared  much  trouble 
concerning  this  passage,  and  anxious  timid  souls  ur- 
speakable  anguish,  if  men  had  adhered  strictly  to  Christ's 
own  expression.  For  it  is  not  a  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost  which  is  here  spoken  of,  but  blasphemy  against  the 
Holy  Ghost."— Lange,  "  Life  of  Christ,'' vol.  ii.  p.  269. 


Mark  iii.  31-35.] 


THE    FRIENDS    OF   JESUS. 


839 


and  exalteth  himself  against  all  that  is  called 
God  or  that  is  worshipped":  it  is  a  monstrous 
egotism,  "  setting  himself  forth  as  God,"  and 
such  a  hatred  of  restraint  as  makes  him  "  the 
lawless  one  "  (2  Thess.  ii.  3-10). 

So  far  as  these  passages  are  at  all  definite  in 
their  descriptions,  they  are  entirely  harmonious. 
They  describe  no  sin  of  the  flesh,  of  impulse, 
frailty,  or  passion,  nor  yet  a  spiritual  lapse  of  an 
unguarded  hour,  of  rash  speculation,  of  erring 
or  misled  opinion.  They  speak  not  of  sincere 
failure  to  accept  Christ's  doctrine  or  to  recog- 
nise His  commission,  even  though  it  breathe  out 
threats  and  slaughters.  They  do  not  even  apply 
to  the  dreadful  sin  of  denying  Christ  in  terror, 
though  one  should  curse  and  swear,  saying,  I 
know  not  the  man.  They  speak  of  a  deliberate 
and  conscious  rejection  of  good  and  choice  of 
evil,  of  the  wilful  aversion  of  the  soul  from 
sacred  influences,  the  public  denial  and  tram- 
pling under  foot  of  Christ,  the  opposing  of  all 
that  is  called  God. 

And  a  comparison  of  these  passages  enables 
us  to  understand  why  this  sin  never  can  be  par- 
doned. It  is  because  good  itself  has  become  the 
food  and  fuel  of  its  wickedness,  stirring  up  its 
opposition,  calling  out  its  rage,  that  the  apos- 
tate cannot  be  renewed  again  unto  repentance. 
The  sin  is  rather  indomitable  than  unpardonable: 
it  has  become  part  of  the  sinner's  personality;  it 
is  incurable,  an  eternal  sin. 

Here  is  nothing  to  alarm  any  mourner  whose 
contrition  proves  that  it  has  actually  been  possi- 
ble to  renew  him  unto  repentance.  No  penitent 
has  ever  yet  been  rejected  for  this  guilt,  for  no 
penitent  has  ever  been  thus  guilty. 

And  this  being  so,  here  is  the  strongest  pos- 
sible encouragement  for  all  who  desire  mercy. 
Every  other  sin,  every  other  blasphemy  shall  be 
forgiven.  Heaven  does  not  reject  the  vilest 
whom  the  world  hisses  at,  the  most  desperate 
and  bloodstained  whose  life  the  world  exacts  in 
vengeance  for  his  outrages.  None  is  lost  but 
the  hard  and  impenitent  heart  which  treasures 
up  for  itself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath. 


THE  FRIENDS  OF  JESUS. 
Mark  iii.  31-35  (R.  V.). 

We  have  lately  read  that  the  relatives  of  Jesus, 
hearing  of  His  self-sacrificing  devotion,  sought 
to  lay  hold  on  Him,  because  they  said.  He  is 
beside  Himself.  Their  concern  would  not  be 
lightened  upon  hearing  of  His  rupture  with  the 
chiefs  of  their  religion  and  their  nation.  And 
so  it  was,  that  while  a  multitude  hung  upon  His 
lips,  some  unsympathising  critic,  or  perhaps 
some  hostile  scribe,  interrupted  Him  with  their 
message.  They  desired  to  speak  with  Him,  pos« 
sibly  with  rude  intentions,  while  in  any  case,  to 
grant  their  wish  might  easily  have  led  to  a  pain- 
ful altercation,  ofTending  weak  disciples,  and 
furnishing  a  scandal  to  His  eager  foes. 

Their  interference  must  have  caused  the  Lord 
a  bitter  pang.  It  was  sad  that  they  were  not 
among  His  hearers,  but  worse  that  they  should 
seek  to  mar  His  work.  To  Jesus,  endowed  with 
every  innocent  human  instinct,  worn  with  la« 
bour  and  aware  of  gathering  perils,  they  were 
an  oflfence  of  the  same  kind  as  Peter  made  him- 
self when  he  became  the  mouthpiece  of  the 
tempter.     For  their  own  sakes,  whose  faith  He 


was  yet  to  win,  it  was  needful  to  be  very  firm. 
Moreover,  He  was  soon  to  make  it  a  law  of  the 
kingdom  that  men  should  be  ready  for  His  sake 
to  leave  brethren,  or  sisters,  or  mother,  and  in 
so  doing  should  receive  back  all  these  a  hun- 
dredfold in  the  present  time  (x.  29,  30).  To  this 
law  it  was  now  His  own  duty  to  conform.  Yet 
it  was  impossible  for  Jesus  to  be  harsh  and  stern 
to  a  group  of  relatives  with  His  mother  in  the 
midst  of  them;  and  it  would  be  a  hard  problem 
for  the  finest  dramatic  genius  to  reconcile  the 
conflicting  claims  of  the  emergency,  fidelity  to 
God  and  the  cause,  a  striking  rebuke  to  the 
officious  interference  of  His  kinsfolk,  and  a  full 
and  affectionate  recognition  of  the  relationship 
which  could  not  make  Him  swerve.  How  shall 
He  "  leave  "  His  mother  and  his  brethren,  and 
yet  not  deny  His  heart?  How  shall  He  be 
strong  without  being  harsh? 

Jesus  reconciles  all  the  conditions  of  the 
problem,  as  pointing  to  His  attentive  hearers, 
He  pronounces  these  to  be  His  true  relatives, 
but  yet  finds  no  warmer  term  to  express  what 
He  feels  for  them  than  the  dear  names  of 
mother,  sisters,  brethren. 

Observers  whose  souls  were  not  warmed  as 
He  spoke  may  have  supposed  that  it  was  cold 
indifference  to  the  calls  of  nature  which  allowed 
His  mother  and  brethren  to  stand  without.  In 
truth,  it  was  not  that  He  denied  the  claims  of 
the  flesh,  but  that  He  was  sensitive  to  other, 
subtler,  profounder  claims  of  the  spirit  and 
spiritual  kinship.  He  would  not  carelessly 
wound  a  mother's  or  a  brother's  heart,  but  the 
life  Divine  had  also  its  fellowships  and  its  affini- 
ties, and  still  less  could  He  throw  these  aside. 
No  cold  sense  of  duty  detains  Him  with  His 
congregation  while  affection  seeks  Him  in  the 
vestibule;  no,  it  is  a  burning  love,  the  love  of 
a  brother  or  even  of  a  son,  which  binds  Him 
to  His  people. 

Happy  are  they  who  are  in  such  a  case.  And 
Jesus  gives  us  a  ready  means  of  knowing 
whether  we  are  among  those  whom  He  so  won- 
derfully condescends  to  love.  "  Whosoever 
shall  do  the  will  of  My  Father  which  is  in 
heaven."  Feelings  may  ebb,  and  self-confidence 
may  be  shaken,  but  obedience  depends  not  upon 
excitement,  and  may  be  rendered  by  a  breaking 
heart. 

It  is  important  to  observe  that  this  saying  de- 
clares that  obedience  does  not  earn  kinship; 
but  only  proves  it,  as  the  fruit  proves  the  tree. 
Kinship  must  go  before  acceptable  service;  none 
can  do  the  will  of  the  Father  who  is  not  already 
the  kinsman  of  Jesus,  for  He  says.  Whosoever 
shall  (hereafter)  do  the  will  of  My  Father,  the 
same  is  (already)  My  brother  and  sister  and 
mother.  There  are  men  who  would  fain  reverse 
the  process,  and  do  God's  will  in  order  to  merit 
the  brotherhood  of  Jesus.  They  would  drill 
themselves  and  win  battles  for  Him,  in  order  to 
be  enrolled  among  His  soldiers.  They  would 
accept  the  gospel  invitation  as  soon  as  they  re- 
fute the  gospel  warnings  that  without  Him  they 
can  do  nothing,  and  that  they  heed  the  creation 
of  a  new  heart  and  the  renewal  of  a  right  spirit 
within  them.  But  when  homage  was  offered  to 
Jesus  as  a  Divine  teacher  and  no  more.  He  re- 
joined. Teaching  is  not  what  is  required:  holi- 
ness does  not  result  from  mere  enlightenment: 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  except  a  man  be 
born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Because  the  new  birth  is  the  condition  of  all 


S4^ 


THE  ^GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


spiritual  power  and  energy,  it  follows  that  if  any 
man  shall  henceforth  do  God's  will,  he  must  al- 
ready be  of  the  family  of  Christ. 

Men  may  avoid  evil  through  self-respect,  from 
early  training  and  restraints  of  conscience,  from 
temporal  prudence  or  dread  of  the  future.  And 
this  is  virtuous  only  as  the  paying  of  a  fire- 
insurance  is  so.  But  secondary  motives  will 
never  lift  any  man  so  high  as  to  satisfy  this  sub- 
lime standard,  the  doing  of  the  will  of  the  Father. 
That  can  only  be  attained,  like  all  true  and 
glorious  service  in  every  cause,  by  the  heart,  by 
enthusiasm,  by  love.  And  Jesus  was  bound  to 
all  who  loved  His  Father  by  as  strong  a  cord 
as  united  His  perfect  heart  with  brother  and 
sister  and  mother. 

But  as  there  is  no  true  obedience  without  re^ 
lationship,  so  is  there  no  true  relationship  unfol- 
lowed  by  obedience.  Christ  was  not  content  to 
say.  Whoso  doeth  God's  will  is  My  kinsman:  He 
asked.  Who  is  My  kinsman?  and  gave  this  as  an 
exhaustive  reply.  He  has  none  other.  Every 
sheep  in  His  fold  hears  His  voice  and  follows 
Him.  We  may  feel  keen  emotions  as  we  listen 
to  passionate  declamations,  or  kneel  in  an  excited 
prayer-meeting,  or  bear  our  part  in  an  imposing 
ritual;  we  may  be  moved  to  tears  by  thinking  of 
the  dupes  of  whatever  heterodoxy  we  most  con- 
demn; tender  and  soft  emotions  may  be  stirred 
in  our  bosom  by  the  story  of  the  perfect  life  and 
Divine  death  of  Jesus;  and  yet  we  may  be  as  far 
from  a  renewed  heart  as  was  that  ancient  tyrant 
from  genuine  compassion,  who  wept  over  the 
brevity  of  the  lives  of  the  soldiers  whom  he  sent 
into  a  wanton  war. 

Mere  feeling  is  not  life.  It  moves  truly;  but 
only  as  a  balloon  moves,  rising  by  virtue  of  its 
emptiness,  driven  about  by  every  blast  that  veers, 
and  sinking  when  its  inflation  is  at  an  end.  But 
mark  the  living  creature  poised  on  widespread 
wings;  it  has  a  will,  an  intention,  and  an  initia- 
tive, and  as  long  as  its  life  is  healthy  and  unen- 
slaved,  it  moves  at  its  own  good  pleasure.  How 
shall  I  know  whether  or  not  I  am  a  true  kinsman 
of  the  Lord?  By  seeing  whether  I  advance, 
whether  I  work,  whether  I  have  real  and  practi- 
cal zeal  and  love,  or  whether  I  have  grown  cold, 
and  make  more  allowance  for  the  flesh  than  I 
used  to  do,  and  expect  less  from  the  spirit.  Obe- 
dience does  not  produce  grace.  But  it  proves 
it,  for  we  can  no  more  bear  fruit  except  we 
abide  in  Christ,  than  the  branch  that  does  not 
abide  in  the  vine. 

Lastly,  we  observe  the  individual  love,  the 
personal  affection  of  Christ  for  each  of  His  peo- 
ple. There  is  a  love  for  masses  of  men  and 
philanthropic  causes,  which  does  not  much  ob- 
serve the  men  who  compose  the  masses,  and 
upon  whom  the  causes  depend.  Thus,  one  may 
love  his  country,  and  rejoice  when  her  flag  ad- 
vances, without  much  care  for  any  soldier  who 
has  been  shot  down,  or  has  won  promotion. 
And  so  we  think  of  Africa  or  India,  without 
really  feeling  much  about  the  individual  Egyp- 
tian or  Hindoo.  Who  can  discriminate  and  feel 
for  each  one  of  the  multitudes  included  in  such 
a  word  as  Want,  or  Sickness,  or  Heathenism? 
And  judging  by  our  own  frailty,  we  are  led  to 
think  that  Christ's  love  can  mean  but  little  be- 
yond this.  As  a  statesman  who  loves  the  na- 
tion may  be  said,  in  some  vague  way,  to  love 
and  care  for  me,  so  people  think  of  Christ  as 
loving  and  pitying  us  because  we  are  items  in 
the  race  He  loves.     But  He  has  eyes  and  a  heart, 


not  only  for  all,  but  for  each  one.  Looking 
down  the  shadowy  vista  of  the  generations,  every 
sigh,  every  broken  heart,  every  blasphemy,  is  a 
separate  pang  to  His  all-embracing  heart.  "  Be- 
fore that  Philip  called  thee,  when  thou  wast  under 
the  fig-tree,  I  saw  thee,"  lonely,  unconscious,  un- 
distinguished drop  in  the  tide  of  life,  one  leaf 
among  the  myriads  which  rustle  and  fall  in  the 
vast  forest  of  existence.  St.  Paul  speaks  truly 
of  Christ  "  Who  loved  me,  and  gave  Himself  for 
me."  He  shall  bring  every  secret  sin  to  judg- 
ment, and  shall  we  so  far  wrong  Him  as  to  think 
His  justice  more  searching,  more  penetrating, 
more  individualising  than  His  love,  His  memory 
than  His  heart?  It  is  not  so.  The  love  He 
oflfers  adapts  itself  to  every  age  and  sex:  it  dis- 
tinguishes brother  from  sister,  and  sister  again 
from  mother.  It  is  mindful  of  "  the  least  of 
these  My  brethren."  But  it  names  no  Father 
except  One. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  PARABLES. 

Mark  iv.  i,  2,  10-13  (R-  V.). 

As  opposition  deepened,  and  to  a  vulgar  am- 
bition the  temptation  to  retain  disciples  by  all 
means  would  have  become  greater,  Jesus  began 
to  teach  in  parables.  We  know  that  He  had  not 
hitherto  done  so,  both  by  the  surprise  of  the 
Twelve,  and  by  the  necessity  which  He  found, 
of  giving  them  a  clue  to  the  meaning  of  such 
teachings,  and  so  to  "  all  the  parables."  His 
own  ought  to  have  understood.  But  He  was 
merciful  to  the  weakness  which  confessed  its 
failure  and  asked  for  instruction. 

And  yet  He  foresaw  that  they  which  were 
without  would  discern  no  spiritual  meaning  in 
such  discourse.  It  was  to  have,  at  the  same 
time,  a  revealing  and  a  baffling  effect,  and  there- 
fore it  was  peculiarly  suitable  for  the  purposes  of 
a  Teacher  watched  by  vindictive  foes.  Thus, 
when  cross-examined  about  His  authority  by 
men  who  themselves  professed  to  know  not 
whence  John's  baptism  was.  He  could  refuse  to 
be  entrapped,  and  yet  tell  of  One  Who  sent 
His  own  Son,  His  Beloved,  to  receive  the  fruit 
of  the  vineyard. 

This  diverse  eflfect  is  derived  from  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  parables  of  Jesus.  They  are  not,  like 
some  in  the  Old  Testament,  mere  fables,  in  which 
things  occur  that  never  happen  in  real  life. 
Jotham's  trees  seeking  a  king  are  as  incredible 
as  ^sop's  fox  leaping  for  grapes.  But  Jesus 
never  uttered  a  parable  which  was  not  true  to 
nature,  the  kind  of  thing  which  one  expects  to 
happen.  We  cannot  say  that  a  rich  man  in  hell 
actually  spoke  to  Abraham  in  heaven.  But  if 
he  could  do  so,  of  which  we  are  not  competent 
to  judge,  we  can  well  believe  that  he  would 
have  spoken  just  what  we  read,  and  that  his  pa- 
thetic cry,  "  Father  Abraham,"  would  have  been 
as  gently  answered,  "  Son,  remember."  There 
is  no  ferocity  in  the  skies;  neither  has  the  lost 
soul  become  a  liend.  Everything  commends  it- 
self to  our  judgment.  And  therefore  the  story 
not  only  illustrates,  but  appeals,  enforces,  almost 
proves. 

God  in  nature  does  not  arrange  that  all  seeds 
should  grow:  men  have  patience  while  the  germ 
slowly    fructifies,    they    know    not    how;    in    all 


Mark  iv.  3-9,  14-20.] 


THE    SOWER. 


841 


things  but  religion  such  sacrifices  are  made,  that 
the  merchant  sells  all  to  buy  one  goodly  pearl; 
an  earthly  father  kisses  his  repentant  prodigal; 
and  even  a  Samaritan  can  be  neighbour  to  a 
Jew  in  his  extremity.  So  the  world  is  con- 
structed: such  is  even  the  fallen  human  heart. 
Is  it  not  reasonable  to  believe  that  the  same 
principles  will  extend  farther;  that  as  God  gov- 
erns the  world  of  matter  so  He  may  govern  the 
world  of  spirits,  and  that  human  helpfulness  and 
clemency  will  not  outrun  the  graces  of  the  Giver 
of  all  good? 

This  is  the  famous  argument  from  analogy, 
applied  long  before  the  time  of  Butler,  to  pur- 
poses farther-reaching  than  his.  But  there  is 
this  remarkable  difference,  that  the  analogy  is 
never  pressed,  men  are  left  to  discover  it  for 
themselves,  or  at  least,  to  ask  for  an  explanation, 
because  they  are  conscious  of  something  beyond 
the  tale,  something  spiritual,  something  which 
they  fain  would  understand. 

Now  this  difference  is  not  a  mannerism;  it  is 
intended.  Butler  pressed  home  his  analogies  be- 
cause he  was  striving  to  silence  gainsayers.  His 
Lord  and  ours  left  men  to  discern  or  to  be 
blind,  because  they  had  already  opportunity  to 
become  His  disciples  if  they  would.  The  faith- 
ful among  them  ought  to  be  conscious,  or  at 
least  they  should  now  become  conscious,  of  the 
God  of  grace  in  the  God  of  nature.  To  them  the 
world  should  be  eloquent  of  the  Father's  mind. 
They  should  indeed  find  tongues  in  trees,  books 
in  the  running  brooks,  sermons  in  stones.  He 
spoke  to  the  sensitive  mind,  which  would  under- 
stand Him,  as  a  wife  reads  her  husband's  joys 
and  sorrows  by  signs  no  stranger  can  under- 
stand. Even  if  she  fails  to  comprehend,  she 
knows  there  is  something  to  ask  about.  And 
thus,  when  they  were  alone,  the  Twelve  asked 
Him  of  the  parables.  When  they  were  in- 
structed, they  gained  not  only  the  moral  lesson, 
and  the  sweet  pastoral  narrative,  the  idyllic  pic- 
ture which  conveyed  it,  but  also  the  assurance 
imparted  by  recognising  the  same  mind  of  God 
which  is  revealed  in  His  world,  or  justified  by  the 
best  impulses  of  humanity.  Therefore,  no  para~ 
ble  is  sensational.  It  cannot  root  itself  in  the  ex- 
ceptional, the  abnormal  events  on  which  men  do 
not  reckon,  which  come  upon  us  with  a  shock. 
For  we  do  not  argue  from  these  to  daily  life. 

But  while  this  mode  of  teaching  was  profitable 
to  His  disciples,  and  protected  Him  against  His 
foes,  it  had  formidable  consequences  for  the 
frivolous  empty  followers  after  a  sign.  Because 
they  were  such  they  could  only  find  frivolity 
and  lightness  in  these  stories;  the  deeper  mean- 
ing lay  farther  below  the  surface  than  such  eyes 
could  pierce.  Thus  the  light  they  had  abused 
was  taken  from  them.  And  Jesus  explained  to 
His  disciples  that,  in  acting  thus.  He  pursued 
the  fixed  rule  of  God.  The  worst  penalty  of 
vice  is  that  it  loses  the  knowledge  of  virtue,  and 
of  levity  that  it  cannot  appreciate  seriousness. 
He  taught  in  parables,  as  Isaiah  prophesied, 
"  that  seeing  they  may  see,  and  not  perceive, 
and  hearing  they  may  hear,  and  not  understand; 
lest  haply  they  should  turn  again  and  it  should 
be  forgiven  them."  These  last  words  prove  how 
completely  penal,  how  free  from  all  caprice,  was 
this  terrible  decision  of  our  Gentle  Lord,  that  pre- 
cautions must  be  taken  against  the  evasion  of  the 
consequences  of  crime.  But  it  is  a  warning  by 
no  means  unique.  He  said,  "  The  things  which 
make   I'or  thy   peace    .    •     .    are   hid   from  thine 


eyes  "  (Luke  xix.  42).  And  St.  Paul  said,  "  If 
our  gospel  is  veiled,  it  is  veiled  in  them  that  are 
perishing  "  ;  and  still  more  to  the  point,  "  The 
natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit 
of  God,  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him;  and 
he  cannot  know  them,  because  they  are  spirit- 
ually discerned"  (2  Cor.  iv.  3;  i  Cor.  ii.  14). 
To  this  law  Christ,  in  speaking  by  parables,  was 
conscious  that  He  conformed. 

But  now  let  it  be  observed  how  completely 
this  mode  of  teaching  suited  our  Lord's  habit 
of  mind.  If  men  could  finally  rid  themselves  of 
His  Divine  claim,  they  would  at  once  recognise 
the  greatest  of  the  sages;  and  they  would  also 
find  in  Him  the  sunniest,  sweetest,  and  most  ac- 
curate discernment  of  nature,  and  its  more  quiet 
beauties,  that  ever  became  a  vehicle  for  moral 
teaching.  The  sun  and  rain  bestowed  on  the 
evil  and  the  good,  the  fountain  and  the  trees 
which  regulate  the  waters  and  the  fruit,  the 
death  of  the  seed  by  which  it  buys  its  increase, 
the  provision  for  bird  and  blossom  without 
anxiety  of  theirs,  the  preference  for  a  lily  over 
Solomon's  gorgeous  robes,  the  meaning  of  a 
red  sky  at  sunrise  and  sunset,  the  hen  gathering 
her  chickens  under  her  wing,  the  vine  and  its 
branches,  the  sheep  and  their  shepherd,  the  light- 
ning seen  over  all  the  sky,  every  one  of  these 
needed  only  to  be  re-set  and  it  would  have  be- 
come  a   parable. 

All  the  Gospels,  including  the  fourth,  are  full 
of  proofs  of  this  rich  and  attractive  endowment, 
this  warm  sympathy  with  nature;  and  this  fact 
is  among  the  evidences  that  they  all  drew  the 
same  character,  and  drew  it  faithfully. 


THE  SOWER. 
Mark  iv.  3-9,  14-20  (R.  V.). 

"  Hearken,"  Jesus  said;  willing  to  caution 
men  against  the  danger  of  slighting  His  simple 
story,  and  to  impress  on  them  that  it  conveyed 
more  than  met  their  ears.  In  so  doing  He  pro- 
tested in  advance  against  fatalistic  abuses  of  the 
parable,  as  if  we  were  already  doomed  to  be  hard, 
or  shallow,  or  thorny,  or  fruitful  soil.  And  at 
the  close  He  brought  out  still  more  clearly  His 
protest  against  such  doctrine,  by  impressing 
upon  all,  that  if  the  vitalising  seed  were  the  im- 
parted word,  it  was  their  part  to  receive  and 
treasure  it.  Indolence  and  shallowness  must  fail 
to  bear  fruit:  that  is  the  essential  doctrine  of 
the  parable;  but  it  is  not  necessary  that  we  should 
remain  indolent  or  shallow:  "  He  that  hath 
ears   to   hear,   let   him   hear." 

And  when  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  repro- 
duces the  image  of  land  which  bringeth  forth 
thorns  and  thistles,  our  Revised  Version  rightly 
brings  out  the  fact,  on  which  indeed  the  whole 
exhortation  depends,  that  the  same  piece  of  land 
might  have  borne  herbs  meet  for  those  for  whose 
sake  it  is  tilled  (vi.  7). 

Having  said  "  Hearken,"  Jesus  added,  "  Be- 
hold." It  has  been  rightly  inferred  that  the 
scene  was  before  their  eyes.  Very  possibly  some 
such  process  was  within  sight  of  the  shore  on 
which  they  were  gathered;  but  in  any  case,  a  proc- 
ess was  visible,  if  they  would  but  see,  of  which 
the  tilling  of  the  ground  was  only  a  type.  A 
nobler  seed  was  being  scattered  for  a  vaster 
harvest,  and  it  was  no  common  labourer,  but  the 
true  sower,  who  went  forth  to  sow.    "  The  sower 


84s 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


soweth  the  word."  But  who  was  he?  St. 
Matthew  tells  us  "  the  sower  is  the  Son  of  man," 
and  whether  the  words  were  expressly  uttered, 
or  only  implied,  as  the  silence  of  St.  Mark  and 
St.  Luke  might  possibly  suggest,  it  is  clear  that 
none  of  His  disciples  could  mistake  His  meaning. 
Ages  have  passed  and  He  is  the  sower  still,  by 
whatever  instrument  He  works,  for  we  are  God's 
husbandry  as  well  as  God's  building.  And  the 
seed  is  the  Word  of  God,  so  strangely  able  to 
work  below  the  surface  of  human  life,  invisible  at 
first,  yet  vital,  and  grasping  from  within  and  with- 
out, from  secret  thoughts  and  from  circum- 
stances, as  from  the  chemical  ingredients  of  the 
soil  and  from  the  sunshine  and  the  shower,  all 
that  will  contribute  to  its  growth,  until  the  field 
itself  is  assimilated,  spread  from  end  to  end  with 
waving  ears,  a  corn-field  now.  This  is  why  Jesus 
in  His  second  parable  did  not  any  longer  say 
"  the  seed  is  the  word,"  but  "  the  good  seed  are 
the  sons  of  the  kingdom  "  (Matt.  xiii.  38).  The 
word  planted  was  able  to  identify  itself  with  the 
heart. 

And  this  seed,  the  Word  of  God,  is  sown 
broadcast  as  all  our  opportunities  are  given.  A 
talent  was  not  refused  to  him  who  buried  it.  Ju- 
das was  an  apostle.  Men  may  receive  the  grace 
of  God  in  vain,  and  this  in  more  ways  than  one. 
On  some  it  produces  no  vital  impression  what- 
ever; it  lies  on  the  surface  of  a  mind  which  the 
feet  of  earthly  interests  have  trodden  hard. 
There  is  no  chance  for  it  to  expand,  to  begin 
its  operation  by  sending  out  the  smallest  ten- 
drils to  grasp,  to  appropriate  anything,  to  take 
root.  And  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether  any 
soul,  wholly  indifferent  to  religious  truth,  ever 
retained  even  its  theoretic  knowledge  long.  The 
foolish  heart  is  darkened.  The  fowls  of  the  air 
catch  away  for  ever  the  priceless  seed  of  eternity. 
Now  it  is  of  great  importance  to  observe  how 
Jesus  explained  this  calamity.  We  should  prob- 
ably have  spoken  of  forgetfulness,  the  fading 
away  of  neglected  impressions,  or  at  most  of 
some  judicial  act  of  providence  hiding  the  truth 
from  the  careless.  But  Jesus  said,  "  straight- 
way cometh  Satan  and  taketh  away  the  word 
which  hath  been  sown  in  them."  No  person 
can  fairly  explain  this  text  away,  as  men  have 
striven  to  explain  Christ's  language  to  the  demo- 
niacs, by  any  theory  of  the  use  of  popular  lan- 
guage, or  the  toleration  of  harmless  notions. 
The  introduction  of  Satan  into  this  parable  is 
unexpected  and  uncalled  for  by  any  demand  save 
one,  the  necessity  of  telling  all  the  truth.  It  is 
true  therefore  that  an  active  and  deadly  enemy 
of  souls  is  at  work  to  quicken  the  mischief  which 
neglect  and  indifiference  would  themselves  pro- 
duce, that  evil  processes  art  helped  from  be- 
neath as  truly  as  good  ones  from  above;  that 
the  seed  which  is  left  to-day  upon  the  surface 
may  be  maliciously  taken  thence  long  before 
it  would  have  perished  by  natural  decay;  that 
men  cannot  reckon  upon  stopping  short  in  their 
contempt  of  grace,  since  what  they  neglect  the 
devil  snatches  quite  away  from  them.  And  as 
seed  is  only  safe  from  fowls  when  buried  in  the 
soil,  so  is  the  word  of  life  only  safe  against  the 
rapacity  of  hell  when  it  has  sunk  down  into  our 
hearts. 

In  the  story  of  the  early  Church,  St.  Paul 
sowed  upon  such  ground  as  this  in  Athens.  Men 
who  spent  their  time  in  the  pursuit  of  artistic 
and  cultivated  novelties,  in  hearing  and  telling 
some  new  thing,  mocked  the  gospel,  or  at  best 


proposed  to  hear  its  preacher  yet  again.  How 
long  did  such  a  purpose   last? 

But  there  are  other  dangers  to  dread,  besides 
absolute  indifference  to  truth.  And  the  first  of 
these  is  a  too  shallow  and  easy  acquiescence. 
The  message  of  salvation  is  designed  to  aflfect 
the  whole  of  human  life  profoundly.  It  comes 
to  bind  a  strong  man  armed,  it  summons  easy 
and  indiflferent  hearts  to  wrestle  against  spiritual 
foes,  to  crucify  the  flesh,  to  die  daily.  On  these 
conditions  it  offers  the  noblest  blessings.  But 
the  conditions  are  grave  and  sobering.  If  one 
hears  them  without  solemn  and  earnest  searching 
of  heart,  he  has  only,  at  the  best,  apprehended 
half  the  message.  Christ  has  warned  us  that  we 
cannot  build  a  tower  without  sitting  down  to 
count  our  means,  nor  fight  a  hostile  king  without 
reckoning  the  prospects  of  invasion.  And  it  is 
very  striking  to  compare  the  gushing  and  im- 
pulsive sensationalism  of  some  modern  schools, 
with  the  deliberate  and  circumspect  action  of 
St.  Paul,  even  after  God  had  been  pleased  mirac- 
ulously to  reveal  His  Son  in  him.  He  went  into 
seclusion.  He  returned  to  Damascus  to  his  first 
instructor.  Fourteen  years  afterwards  he  delib- 
erately laid  his  gospel  before  the  Apostles,  lest 
by  any  means  he  should  be  running  or  had  run 
in  vain.  Such  is  the  action  of  one  penetrated 
with  a  sense  of  reality  and  responsibility  in  his 
decision;  it  is  not  the  action  likely  to  result  from 
teaching  men  that  it  suffices  to  "  say  you  be- 
lieve "  and  to  be  "  made  happy."  And  in  this 
parable,  our  Saviour  has  given  striking  expres- 
sion to  His  judgment  of  the  school  which  relies 
upon  mere  happiness.  Next  to  those  who  leave 
the  Seed  for  Satan  to  snatch  away.  He  places 
them  "  who,  when  they  have  heard  the  word, 
straightway  receive  it  with  joy."  They  have 
taken  the  promises  without  the  precepts,  they 
have  hoped  for  the  crown  without  the  cross. 
Their  type  is  the  thin  layer  of  earth  spread  over 
a  shelf  of  rock.  The  water,  which  cannot  sink 
down,  and  the  heat  reflected  up  from  the  stone, 
make  it  for  a  time  almost  a  hot  bed.  Straight- 
way the  seed  sprang  up,  because  it  had  no  deep- 
ness of  earth.  But  the  moisture  thus  detained 
upon  the  surface  vanished  utterly  i.i  time  of 
drought;  the  young  roots,  unable  to  penetrate 
to  any  deeper  supplies,  were  scorched;  and  it 
w-thered  away.  That  superficial  heat  and  mois- 
ture was  impulsive  emotion,  glad  to  hear  of 
heaven,  and  love,  and  privilege,  but  forgetful  to 
mortify  the  flesh,  and  to  be  partaker  with  Christ 
in  His  death.  The  roots  of  a  real  Christian  life 
must  strike  deeper  down.  Consciousness  of  sin 
and  its  penalty  and  of  the  awful  price  by  which 
that  penalty  has  been  paid,  consciousness  of  what 
life  should  have  been  and  how  we  have  degraded 
it,  consciousness  of  what  it  must  yet  be  made  by 
grace — these  do  not  lead  to  joy  so  immediate,  so 
impulsive,  as  the  growth  of  this  shallow  vege- 
tation. A  mature  and  settled  joy  is  among  "the 
fruits  of  the  spirit:  "  it  is  not  the  first  blade  that 
shoots  up. 

Now  because  the  sense  of  sin,  and  duty,  and 
atonement  have  not  done  their  sobering  work, 
the  feelings,  so  easily  quickened,  are  also  easily 
perverted:  "When  tribulation  or  persecution 
ariseth  because  of  the  word,  straightway  they 
stumble."  These  were  not  counted  upon.  Neither 
trouble  of  mind  nor  opposition  of  wicked  men 
was  included  in  the  holiday  scheme  of  the  life 
Divine.  And  their  pressure  is  not  counter- 
weighted  by  that  of  any  deep  convictions.     The 


i^ark  iv.  21-25.] 


LAMP   AND   STAND. 


843 


r<ots  have  never  penetrated  farther  than  tempo- 
ral calamities  and  trials  can  reach.  In  the  time 
ol  drought  they  have  not  enough.  They  endure, 
but  only  for  a  while. 

St.  Paul  sowed  upon  just  such  soil  in  Galatia. 
There  his  hearers  spoke  of  such  blessedness  that 
they  would  have  plucked  out  their  eyes  for  him. 
But  he  became  their  enemy  because  he  told  them 
all  the  truth,  when  only  a  part  was  welcome. 
And  as  Christ  said,  Straightway  they  stumble, 
so  St.  Paul  had  to  marvel  that  they  were  so  soon 
subverted. 

If  indifference  be  the  first  danger,  and  shal- 
lowness the  second,  mixed  motive  is  the  third. 
Men  there  are  who  are  very  earnest,  and  far 
indeed  from  slight  views  of  truth,  who  are  never- 
theless in  sore  danger,  because  they  are  equally 
earnest  about  other  things;  because  they  cannot 
resign  this  world,  whatever  be  their  concern 
about  the  next;  because  the  soil  of  their  life 
would  fain  grow  two  inconsistent  harvests.  Like 
seed  sown  among  thorns,  "  choked "  by  their 
entangling  roots  and  light-excluding  growths, 
the  word  in  such  hearts,  though  neither  left  upon 
a  hard  surface  nor  forbidden  by  rock  to  strike 
deep  into  the  earth,  is  overmastered  by  an  un- 
worthy rivalry.  A  kind  of  vegetation  it  does 
produce,  but  not  such  as  the  tiller  seeks:  the 
word  becometh  unfruitful.  It  is  the  same  lesson 
as  When  Jesus  said,  "  No  man  can  serve  two 
masters.  Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  mammon." 
Perhaps  it  is  the  one  most  needed  in  our  time 
of  feverish  religious  controversy  and  heated 
party  spirit,  when  every  one  hath  a  teaching, 
hath  a  revelation,  hath  a  tongue,  hath  an  inter- 
pretation, but  sea  cely  any  have  denied  the  world 
and  taken    in  exchange  a  cross. 

St.  Paul  found  a  thorny  soil  in  Corinth  which 
came  behind  in  no  gift,  if  only  gifts  had  been 
graces,  but  was  indulgent,  factious,  and  selfish, 
puffed  up  amid  flagrant  vices,  one  hungry  and 
another  drunken,  while  wrangling  about  the  doc- 
trine of  the   resurrection. 

The  various  evils  of  this  parable  are  all  of  them 
worldliness,  differently  manifested.  The  deaden- 
ing effect  of  habitual  forgetfulness  of  God,  tread- 
ing the  soil  so  hard  that  no  seed  can  enter  it; 
t  )e  treacherous  effect  of  secret  love  of  earth,  a 
buried  obstruction  refusing  to  admit  the  gospel 
ii  to  the  recesses  of  the  life,  however  it  may 
reach  the  feelings;  and  the  fierce  and  stubborn 
competition  of  worldly  interests,  wherever  they 
are  not  resolutely  weeded  out,  against  these  Jesus 
spoke  His  earliest  parable.  And  it  is  instructive 
to  review  the  foes  by  which  He  represented  His 
Gospel  as  warred  upon.  The  personal  activity  of 
Satan;  "tribulation  or  persecution"  from  with- 
out, and  within  the  heart  "  cares "  rather  for 
self  than  for  the  dependent  and  the  poor,  "  de- 
ceitfulness  of  riches "  for  those  who  possess 
enough  to  trust  in,  or  to  replace  with  a  fictitious 
importance  the  only  genuine  value,  which  is  that 
of  character  (although  men  are  still  esteemed 
for  being  "  worth  "  a  round  sum,  a  strange  esti- 
mate, to  be  made  by  Christians,  of  a  being  with 
a  soul  burning  in  him);  and  alike  for  rich  and 
poor,  "  the  lusts  of  other  things,"  since  none  is 
too  poor  to  covet,  and  none  so  rich  that  his  de- 
sires shall  not  increase,  like  some  diseases,  by 
being  fed. 

Lastly,  we  have  those  on  the  good  ground, 
who  are  not  described  by  their  sensibilities  or 
their  enjoyments,  but  by  their  loyalty.  They 
"  hear  the  word  and  accept  it  and  bear  fruit." 


To  accept  is  what  distinguishes  them  alike  from 
the  wayside  hearers  into  whose  attention  the 
word  never  sinks,  from  the  rocky  hearers  who 
only  receive  it  with  a  superficial  welcome,  and 
from  the  thorny  hearers  who  only  give  it  a 
divided  welcome.  It  is  not  said,  as  if  the  word 
were  merely  the  precepts,  that  they  obey  it.  The 
sower  of  this  seed  is  not  he  who  bade  the  soldier 
not  to  do  violence,  and  the  publican  not  to  ex- 
tort: it  is  He  who  said,  Repent,  and  believe  the 
gospel.  He  implanted  new  hopes,  convic- 
tions, and  affections,  as  the  germ  which  should 
unfold  in  a  new  life.  And  the  good  fruit  is 
borne  by  those  who  honestly  "  accept "  His 
word. 

Fruitfulness  is  never  in  the  gospel  the  condi- 
tion by  which  life  is  earned,  but  it  is  always  the 
test  by  which  to  prove  it.  In  all  the  accounts 
of  the  final  judgment,  we  catch  the  principle  of 
the  bold  challenge  of  St.  James,  "  Show  me  thy 
faith  without  thy  works,  and  I  will  show  thee 
my  faith  by  my  works."  The  talent  must  pro- 
duce more  talents,  and  the  pound  more  pounds; 
the  servant  must  have  his  loins  girt  and  a  light 
in  his  hand;  the  blessed  are  they  who  did  unto 
Jesus  the  kindness  they  did  unto  the  least  of 
His  brethren,  and  the  accursed  are  they  who  did 
it  not  to  Jesus  in  His  people. 

We  are  not  wrong  in  preaching  that  honest 
faith  in  Christ  is  the  only  condition  of  accept- 
ance, and  the  way  to  obtain  strength  for  good 
works.  But  perhaps  we  fail  to  add,  with  suffi- 
cient emphasis,  that  good  works  are  the  only 
sufficient  evidence  of  real  faith,  of  genuine  con- 
version. Lydia,  whose  heart  the  Lord  opened 
and  who  constrained  the  Apostle  to  abide  in  her 
house,  was  converted  as  truly  as  the  gaoler  who 
passed  through  all  the  vicissitudes  of  despair, 
trembling  and  astonishment,  and  belief. 

"  Tbey  bear  fruit,  thirtyfold  and  sixtyfold  and 
an  hundredfold."  And  all  are  alike  accepted. 
But  the  parable  of  the  pounds  shows  that  all 
are  not  alike  rewarded,  and  in  equal  circum- 
stances superior  efficiency  wins  a  superior  prize. 
One  star  differeth  from  another  star  in  glory, 
and  they  who  turn  many  to  righteousness  shall 
shine  as  the  sun  forever. 


LAMP  AND  STAND. 
Mark  iv.  21-25  (R-  V.). 

Jesus  had  now  taught  that  the  only  good 
ground  was  that  in  which  the  good  seed  bore 
fruit.  And  He  adds  explicitly,  that  men  receive 
the  truth  in  order  to  spread  it,  and  are  given 
grace  that  they  may  become,  in  turn,  good  stew- 
ards of  the  manifold  grace  of  God. 

"  Is  the  lamp  brought  to  be  put  under  the 
bushel  or  under  the  bed,  and  not  to  be  put  on 
the  stand?"  The  language  may  possibly  be  due, 
as  men  have  argued,  to  the  simple  conditions  of 
life  among  the  Hebrew  peasantry,  who  possessed 
only  one  lamp,  one  corn-measure,  and  perhaps 
one  bed.  All  the  greater  marvel  is  it  that  amid 
such  surroundings  He  should  have  announced, 
and  not  in  vain,  that  His  disciples.  His  Church, 
should  become  the  light  of  all  humanity,  "  the 
lamp."  Already  he  had  put  forward  the  same 
claim  even  more  explicitly,  saying,  "  Ye  are  the 
light  of  the  world."  And  in  each  case.  He  spoke 
not  in  the  intoxication  of  pride  or  self-assertion, 
but  in  all  gravity,  and  as  a  solemn  warning.    The 


844 


THE^GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


city  on  the  hill  could  not  be  hid.  The  lamp 
would  burn  dimly  under  the  bed;  it  would  be 
extinguished  entirely  by  the  bushel.  Publicity 
is  the  soul  of  religion,  since  religion  is  light. 
It  is  meant  to  diffuse  itself,  to  be,  as  He  expressed 
it,  like  leaven  which  may  be  hid  at  first,  but 
cannot  be  concealed,  since  it  will  leaven  all  the 
lump.  And  so,  if  He  spoke  in  parables,  and 
consciously  hid  His  meaning  by  so  doing,  this 
was  not  to  withdraw  His  teaching  from  the 
masses,  it  was  to  shelter  the  fiame  which  should 
presently  illuminate  all  the  house.  Nothing  was 
hid,  save  that  it  should  be  manifested,  nor  made 
secret,  but  that  it  should  come  to  light.  And 
it  has  never  been  otherwise.  Our  religion  has  no 
privileged  inner  circle,  no  esoteric  doctrine;  and 
its  chiefs,  when  men  glorified  one  or  another, 
asked,  What  then  is  Apollos?  And  what  is  Paul? 
Ministers  through  whom  ye  believed.  Agents 
only,  for  conveying  to  others  what  they  had  re- 
ceived from  God.  And  thus  He  Who  now  spoke 
in  parables,  and  again  charged  them  not  to  make 
Him  known,  was  able  at  the  end  to  say,  In  se- 
cret have  I  spoken  nothing.  Therefore  He  re- 
peats with  emphasis  His  former  words,  frequent 
on  His  lips  henceforward,  and  ringing  through 
the  messages  He  spoke  in  glory  to  His 
Churches.  If  any  man  hath  ears  to  hear,  let 
him  hear.     None  is  excluded  but  by  himself. 

Yet  another  caution  follows.  If  the  seed  be  the 
Word,  there  is  sore  danger  from  false  teaching; 
from  strewing  the  ground  with  adulterated 
grain.  St.  Mark,  indeed,  has  not  recorded  the 
Parable  of  the  Tares.  But  there  are  indications 
of  it,  and  the  same  thought  is  audible  in  this 
saying,  "  Take  heed  what  ye  hear."  The  added 
words  are  a  little  surprising:  "  With  what  meas- 
ure ye  mete  it  shall  be  measured  unto  you,  and 
more  shall  be  given  unto  you."  The  last  clause 
expresses  exactly  the  principle  on  which  the 
forfeited  pound  was  given  to  him  who  had  ten 
pounds  already,  the  op^.i  hand  of  God  lavishing 
additional  gifts  upon  him  who  was  capable  of 
using  them.  But  does  not  the  whole  statement 
seem  to  follow  more  suftably  upon  a  command 
to  beware  what  we  teach,  and  thus  "  mete  "  to 
others,  than  what  we  hear?  A  closer  examina- 
tion finds  in  this  apparent  unfitness  a  deeper 
harmony  of  thought.  To  "  accept  "  the  genuine 
word  is  the  same  as  to  bring  forth  fruit  for  God; 
it  is  to  reckon  with  the  Lord  of  the  talents,  and 
to  yield  the  fruit  of  the  vineyard.  And  this  is  to 
"  mete,"  not  indeed  unto  man,  but  unto  God, 
Who  shows  Himself  froward  with  the  froward, 
and  from  him  that  hath  not,  whose  possession 
is  below  his  accountability,  takes  away  even  that 
he  hath,  but  gives  exceeding  abundantly  above 
all  they  ask  or  think  to  those  who  have,  who  are 
not    disobedient    to    the    heavenly    calling. 

All  this  is  most  delicately  connected  with  what 
precedes  it;  and  the  parables,  hiding  the  truth 
from  some,  giving  it  authority,  and  colour,  and 
effect  to  others,  were  a  striking  example  of  the 
process  here  announced. 

Never  Was  the  warning  to  be  heedful  what  we 
hear  more  needful  than  at  present.  Men  think 
themselves  tree  to  follow  any  teacher,  especially 
if  he  be  eloquent;  to  read  any  book,  if  only  it  be 
in  demand;  and  to  discuss  any  theory,  provided 
it  be  fashionable,  while  perfectly  well  aware  that 
they  are  neither  earnest  inquirers  after  truth,  nor 
qualified  champions  against  its  assailants.  For 
what  then  do  they  read  and  hear?  For  the  pleas- 
ure   of  a    rounded   phrase,    or   to    augment   the 


prattle    of   conceited    ignorance    in    a    drawing- 
room. 

Do  we  wonder  when  these  players  with  edged 
tools  injure  themselves,  and  become  perverts  or 
agnostics?  It  would  be  more  wonderful  if  they 
remained  unhurt,  since  Jesus  said,  "  Take  heed 
what  ye  hear  .  .  .  from  him  that  hath  not  shall 
be  taken  even  that  he  hath."  A  rash  and  unin- 
structed  exposure  of  our  intellects  to  evil  influ- 
ences, is  meting  to  God  with  an  unjust  measure, 
as  really  as  a  wilful  plunge  into  any  other  tempta- 
tion, since  we  are  bidden  to  cleanse  ourselves 
from  all  defilement  of  the  spirit  as  well  as  of  the 
flesh. 


THE  SEED  GROWING  SECRETLY. 
Mark  iv.  26-29  (R-  V.). 

St.  Mark  alone  records  this  parable  of  a  sower 
who  sleeps  by  night,  and  rises  for  other  business 
by  day,  and  knows  not  how  the  seed  springs  up. 
That  is  not  the  sower's  concern:  all  that  remains 
for  him  is  to  put  forth  the  sickle  when  the  har- 
vest is  come. 

It  is  a  startling  parable  for  us  who  believe 
in  the  fostering  care  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  And 
the  paradox  is  forced  on  our  attention  by  the 
words  "  the  earth  beareth  fruit  of  herself,"  con- 
trasting strangely  as  it  does  with  such  other  as- 
sertions, as  that  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit 
of  itself,  that  without  Christ  we  can  do  nothing, 
and  that  when  \ye  live  it  is  not  we  but  Christ 
who  liveth  in  us. 

It  will  often  help  us  to  understand  a  paradox 
if  we  can  discover  another  like  it.  And  exactly 
such  an  one  as  this  will  be  found  in  the  record 
of  creation.  God  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from 
all  His  work,  yet  we  know  that  His  providence 
never  slumbers,  that  by  Him  all  things  consist, 
and  that  Jesus  defended  His  own  work  of  heal- 
ing on  a  Sabbath  day  by  urging  that  the  Sabbath 
of  God  was  occupied  in  gracious  provision  for 
His  world.  "  My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and 
I  work."  Thus  the  rest  of  God  from  creative 
work  says  nothing  about  His  energies  in  that 
other  field  of  providential  care.  Exactly  so  Je- 
sus here  treats  only  of  what  may  be  called  the 
creative  spiritual  work,  the  deposit  of  the  seed 
of  life.  And  the  essence  of  this  remarkable  par- 
able is  the  assertion  that  we  are  to  expect  an 
orderly,  quiet,  and  gradual  development  from  this 
principle  of  life,  not  a  series  of  communications 
from  without,  of  additional  revelations,  of  semi- 
miraculous  interferences.  The  life  of  grace  is  a 
natural  process  in  the  supernatural  sphere.  In 
one  sense  it  is  all  of  God,  who  maketh  His  sun 
to  rise,  and  sendeth  rain,  without  which  the  earth 
could  bear  no  fruit  of  herself.  In  another  sense 
we  must  work  out  our  own  salvation  all  the 
more  earnestly  because  it  is  God  that  worketh 
in  us. 

Now  this  parable,  thus  explained,  has  been 
proved  true  in  the  wonderful  history  of  the 
Church.  She  has  grown,  not  only  in  extent  but 
by  development,  as  marvellously  as  a  corn  of 
wheat  which  is  now  a  waving  wheat-stem  with 
its  ripening  ear.  When  Cardinal  Newman  urged 
that  an  ancient  Christian,  returning  to  earth, 
would  recognise  the  services  and  the  Church 
of  Rome,  and  would  fail  to  recognise  ours,  he 
was  probably  mistaken.  To  go  no  farther,  there 
is  no  Church  on  earth  so  unlike  the  Churches 


Mark  iv.  30-3^.] 


THE    MUSTARD   SEED. 


84s 


of  the  New  Testament  as  that  which  offers  praise 
to  God  in  a  strange  tongue.  St.  Paul  appre- 
hended that  a  stranger  in  such  an  assembly 
would  reckon  the  worshippers  mad.  But  in  any 
case  the  argument  forgets  that  the  whole  king- 
dom of  God  is  to  resemble  seed,  not  in  a  drawer, 
but  in  the  earth,  and  advancing  towards  the  har- 
vest. It  must  "  die  "  to  much  if  it  will  bring 
forth  fruit.  It  must  acquire  strange  bulk,  strange 
forms,  strange  organisms.  It  must  become,  to 
those  who  only  knew  it  as  it  was,  quite  as  un- 
recognisable as  our  Churches  are  said  to  be. 
And  yet  the  changes  must  be  those  of  logical 
growth,  not  of  corruption.  And  this  parable 
tells  us  they  must  be  accomplished  without  any 
special  interference  such  as  marked  the  sowing 
time.  Well  then,  the  parable  is  a  prophecy. 
Movement  after  movement  lias  modified  the  life 
of  the  Church.  Even  its  structure  is  not  all  it 
was.  But  these  changes  have  every  one  been 
wrought  by  Imman  agency,  they  have  come  from 
within  it,  like  the  force  which  pushes  the  germ 
out  of  the  soil,  and  expands  the  bud  into  the 
full  corn  in  the  ear.  There  has  been  no  graft- 
ing knife  to  insert  a  new  principle  of  richer  life; 
the  gospel  and  the  sacraments  of  our  Lord  have 
contained  in  them  the  promise  and  potency  of 
all  that  was  yet  to  be  unfolded,  all  the  graceful- 
ness and  all  the  fruit.  And  these  words,  "  the 
earth  beareth  fruit  of  herself,  first  the  blade,  then 
the  ear,  then  the  full  corn  in  the  ear,"  each  so 
different,  and  yet  so  dependent  on  what  pre- 
ceded, teach  us  two  great  ecclesiastical  lessons. 
They  condemn  the  violent  and  revolutionary 
changes,  which  would  not  develop  old  germs,  but 
tear  them  open  or  perhaps  pull  them  up.  Much 
may  be  distasteful  to  the  spirit  of  sordid  utilita- 
rianism; a  mere  husk,  which  nevertheless  within 
it  shelters  precious  grain,  otherwise  sure  to  per- 
ish. If  thus  we  learn  to  respect  the  old,  still 
more  do  we  learn  that  what  is  new  has  also  its 
all-important  part  to  play.  The  blade  and  the 
ear  in  turn  are  mnovations.  We  must  not  con- 
demn those  new  forms  of  Christian  activity, 
Christian  association,  and  Christian  councils, 
which  new  times  evoke,  until  we  have  considered 
well  whether  they  are  truly  expansions,  in  the 
light  and  heat  of  our  century,  of  the  lecred  life- 
germ  of  the  ancient  faith  and  the  ancient  love. 
And  what  lessons  has  this  parable  for  the  indi- 
vidual? Surely  that  of  active  present  faith,  not 
waiting  for  future  gifts  of  light  or  feeling,  but 
confident  that  the  seed  already  sown,  the  seed  of 
the  word,  has  power  to  develop  into  the  rich 
fruit  of  Christian  character.  In  this  respect  the 
parable  supplements  the  first  one.  From  that 
we  learned  that  if  the  soil  were  not  in  fault, 
if  the  heart  were  honest  and  good,  the  seed 
would  fructify.  From  this  we  learn  that  these 
conditions  suffice  for  a  perfect  harvest.  The  in- 
cessant, all-important  help  of  God,  we  have  seen, 
is  not  denied;  it  is  taken  for  granted,  as  the  at- 
mospheric and  magnetic  influences  upon  the 
grain.  So  should  we  reverentially  and  thankfully 
rely  upon  the  aid  of  God,  and  then,  instead  of 
waiting  for  strange  visitations  and  special  stir- 
rings of  grace,  account  that  we  already  possess 
enough  to  make  us  responsible  for  the  harvest 
of  the  soul.  Multitudes  of  souls,  whose  true 
calling  is,  in  obedient  trust,  to  arise  and  walk, 
are  at  this  moment  lying  impotent  beside  some 
pool  which  they  expect  an  angel  to  stir, 
and  into  which  they  fain  would  then  be  put  by 
some  one,  they  know  not  whom — multitudes  of 


expectant,  inert,  inactive  so"ls,  who  know  not 
that  the  text  they  have  most  need  to  ponder 
is  this:  "the  earth  beareth  fruit  of  itself."  For 
want  of  this  they  are  actually,  day  by  day,  receiv- 
ing the  grace  of  God  in  vain. 

We  learn  also  to  be  content  with  gradual  prog- 
ress. St.  John  did  not  blame  the  children  and 
young  men  to  whom  he  wrote,  because  they 
were  not  mature  in  wisdom  and  experience. 
St.  Paul  exhorts  us  to  grow  up  in  all  things 
into  Him  which  is  the  Head,  even  Christ.  They 
do  not  ask  for  more  than  steady  growth;  and 
their  Master,  as  He  distrusted  the  fleeting  joy 
of  hearers  whose  hearts  were  shallow,  now  ex- 
plicitly bids  us  not  to  be  content  with  any  first 
attainment,  not  to  count  all  done  if  we  are  con- 
verted, but  to  develop  first  the  blade,  then  the  ear, 
and  lastly  the  full  corn  in  the  ear. 

Does  it  seem  a  tedious  weary  sentence?  Are 
we  discontent  for  want  of  conscious  interferences 
of  heaven?  Do  we  complain  that,  to  human 
consciousness,  the  great  Sower  sleeps  and  rises 
up  and  leaves  the  grain  to  fare  He  knows  not 
how?  It  is  only  for  a  little  while.  When  the 
fruit  is  ripe.  He  will  Himself  gather  it  into  His 
eternal  garner. 


THE  MUSTARD  SEED. 
Mark  iv.  30-34  (R.  V.). 

St.  Mark  has  recorded  one  other  parable  of 
this  great  cycle.  Jesus  now  invites  the  disciples 
to  let  their  own  minds  play  upon  the  subject. 
Each  is  to  ask  himself  a  question:  How  shall 
we  liken  the  kingdom  of  God?  or  in  what  parable 
shall  we  set  it  forth? 

A  gentle  pause,  time  for  them  to  form  some 
splendid  and  ambitious  image  in  their  minds, 
and  then  we  can  suppose  with  what  surprise  they 
heard  His  own  answer,  "  It  is  like  a  grain  of 
mustard  seed."  And  truly  some  Christians  of 
a  later  day  might  be  astonished  also,  if  they 
could  call  up  a  fair  image  of  their  own  concep- 
tions of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  compare  it 
with  this  figure,  employed  by  Jesus. 

But  here  one  must  observe  a  peculiarity  in 
our  Saviour's  use  of  images.  His  illustrations  of 
His  first  coming,  and  of  His  work  of  grace, 
which  are  many,  are  all  of  the  homeliest  kind. 
He  is  a  shepherd  who  seeks  one  sheep.  He 
is  not  an  eagle  that  fluttereth  over  her  young 
and  beareth  them  on  her  pinions,  but  a  hen  who 
gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings.  Never 
once  does  He  rise  into  that  high  and  poetic 
strain  with  which  His  followers  have  loved  to 
sing  of  the  Star  of  Bethlehem,  and  which  Isaiah 
lavished  beforehand  upon  the  birth  of  the  Prince 
of  Peace.  There  is  no  language  more  intensely 
concentrated  and  glowing  than  He  has  employed 
to  describe  the  judgment  of  the  hypocrites  who 
rejected  Him,  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  world 
at  last.  But  when  He  speaks  of  His  first  coming 
and  its  effects,  it  is  not  of  that  sunrise  to  which 
all  kings  and  nations  shall  hasten,  but  of  a  little 
grain  of  mustard  seed,  which  is  to  become 
"  greater  than  all  the  herbs,"  and  put  forth  great 
branches,  "  so  that  the  birds  of  the  heaven  can 
lodge  under  the  shadow  of  them."  When  one 
thinks  of  such  an  image  for  such  an  event  of 
the  founding  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  its 
advance  to  universal  supremacy,  represented  by 
the  small  seed  of  a  shrub  which  grows  to  the 


846 


THE"  GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


height  of  a  tree,  and  even  harbours  birds,  he  is 
conscious  almost  of  incongruity.  But  when  one 
reconsiders  it,  he  is  filled  with  awe  and  rever- 
ence. For  this  exactly  expresses  the  way  of 
thinking  natural  to  One  who  has  stooped  im- 
measurably down  to  the  task  which  all  others 
feel  to  be  so  lofty.  There  is  a  poem  of  Shelley, 
which  expresses  the  relative  greatness  of  three 
spirits  by  the  less  and  less  value  which  they  set 
on  the  splendours  of  the  material  heavens.  To 
the  first  they  are  a  palace-roof  of  golden  lights, 
to  the  second  but  the  mind's  first  chamber,  to  the 
last  only  drops  which  Nature's  mighty  heart 
drives  through  thinnest  veins.  Now  that  which 
was  to  Isaiah  the  exalting  of  every  valley  and 
the  bringing  low  of  every  mountain,  and  to 
Daniel  the  overthrow  of  a  mighty  image  whose 
aspect  was  terrible,  by  a  stone  cut  out  without 
hands,  was  to  Jesus  but  the  sowing  of  a  grain 
of  mustard  seed.  Could  any  other  have  spoken 
thus  of  the  founding  of  the  kingdom  of  God? 
An  enthusiast  over-values  his  work,  he  can  think 
of  nothing  else;  and  he  expects  immediate  revo- 
lutions. Jesus  was  keenly  aware  that  His  work 
in  itself  was  very  small,  no  more  than  the  sow- 
ing of  a  seed,  and  even  of  the  least,  popularly 
speaking,  among  all  seeds.  Clearly  He  did  not 
overrate  the  apparent  efifect  of  His  work  on 
earth.  And  indeed,  what  germ  of  religious  teach- 
ing could  be  less  promising  than  the  doctrine 
of  the  cross,  held  by  a  few  peasants  in  a  despised 
province  of  a  nation  already  subjugated  and 
soon  to  be  overwhelmed. 

The  image  expresses  more  than  the  feeble  be- 
ginning and  victorious  issue  of  His  work,  more 
than  even  the  gradual  and  logical  process  by 
which  this  final  triumph  should  be  attained.  All 
this  we  found  in  the  preceding  parable.  But  here 
the  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  development  of 
Christ's  influence  in  unexpected  spheres.  Un- 
like other  herbs,  the  mustard  in  Eastern  climates 
does  grow  into  a  tree,  shoot  out  great  branches 
from  the  main  stem,  and  give  shelter  to  the  birds 
of  the  air.  So  has  the  Christian  faith  developed 
ever  new  collateral  agencies,  charitable,  educa- 
tional, and  social:  so  have  architecture,  music, 
literature,  flourished  under  its  shade,  and  there  is 
not  one  truly  human  interest  which  would  not  be 
deprived  of  its  best  shelter  if  the  rod  of  Jesse  were 
hewn  down.  Nay,  we  may  urge  that  the  Church 
itself  has  become  the  most  potent  force  in  direc- 
tions not  its  own:  it  broke  the  chains  of  the 
negro;  it  asserts  the  rights  of  woman  and  of  the 
poor;  its  noble  literature  is  finding  a  response 
in  the  breasts  of  a  hundred  degraded  races;  the 
herb  has  become  a  tree. 

And  so  in  the  life  of  individuals,  if  the  seed 
be  allowed  its  due  scope  and  place  to  grow,  it 
gives  shelter  and  blessing  to  whatsoever  things 
are  honest  and  lovely,  not  only  if  there  be  any 
virtue,  but  also  if  there  be  any  praise. 

Well  is  it  with  the  nation,  and  well  with  the 
soul,  when  the  faith  of  Jesus  is  not  rigidly  re- 
stricted to  a  prescribed  sphere,  when  the  leaves 
which  are  for  the  healing  of  the  nations  cast 
their  shadow  broad  and  cool  over  all  the  spaces 
in   wthich   all    its   birds    of   song   are    nestling. 

A  remarkable  assertion  is  added.  Although 
the  parabolic  mode  of  teaching  was  adopted  in 
judgment,  yet  its  severe  efifect  was  confined 
within  the  narrowest  limits.  His  many  parables 
were  spoken  "  as  they  were  able  to  hear,"  but 
only  to  His  own  disciples  privately  was  all  their 
meaning  expounded. 


FOUR  MIRACLES. 
Mark  iv.  39,  v.  15,  31,  41   (R.  V.). 

There  are  two  ways,  equally  useful,  of  study- 
ing Scripture,  as  there  are  of  regarding  the  other 
book  of  God,  the  face  of  Nature.  We  may 
bend  over  a  wild  flower,  or  gaze  across  a  land- 
scape; and  it  will  happen  that  a  naturalist,  pursu- 
ing a  moth,  loses  sipht  of  a  mountain-range. 
It  is  a  well-knov.n  proverb,  that  one  may  fail 
to  see  the  wood  foi  the  trees,  losing  in  details 
the  general  effect.  And  so  the  careful  student  of 
isolated  texts  may  never  perceive  the  force  and 
cohesion  of  a  connected  passage. 

The  reader  of  a  Gospel  narrative  thinks,  that 
by  pondering  it  as  a  whole,  he  secures  himself 
against  any  such  misfortune.  But  a  narrative 
dislocated  often  loses  as  much  as  a  detached 
verse.  The  actions  of  our  Lord  are  often  ex- 
quisitely grouped,  as  becometh  Him  who  hath 
made  everything  not  beautiful  only,  but  espe- 
cially beautiful  in  its  season.  And  we  should  not 
be  content  without  combining  the  two  ways 
of  reading  Scripture,  the  detailed  and  the  rapid, — 
lingering  at  times  to  apprehend  the  marvellous 
force  of  a  solitary  verse,  and  again  sweeping 
over  a  broad  expanse,  like  a  surveyor,  who,  to 
map  a  country,  stretches  his  triangles  from 
mountain  peak  to  peak. 

We  have  reached  a  pcint  at  which  St.  Mark 
records  a  special  outshining  of  miraculous  power. 
Four  striking  works  follow  each  other  without 
a  break,  and  it  must  not  for  a  moment  be  sup- 
posed that  the  narrative  is  thus  constructed,  cer- 
tain intermediate  discourses  and  events  being  sac- 
rificed for  the  purpose,  without  a  deliberate  and 
a  truthful  intention.  That  intention  is  to  repre- 
sent the  effect,  intense  and  exalting,  produced  by 
such  a  cycle  of  wonders  on  the  minds  of  His 
disciples.  They  saw  them  come  close  upon  each 
other:  we  should  lose  the  impression  as  we  read, 
if  other  incidents  were  allowed  to  interpose  them- 
selves. It  is  one  more  example  of  St.  Mark's 
desire  to  throw  light,  above  all  things,  upon  the 
energy  and  power  of  the  sacred  life. 

We  have  to  observe  therefore  the  bearing  of 
these  four  miracles  on  each  other,  and  upon 
what  precedes,  before  studying  them  one  by  one. 

It  was  a  time  of  trial.  The  Pharisees  had  de- 
cided that  He  had  a  devil.  His  relatives  had 
said  He  was  beside  Himself.  His  manner  of 
teaching  had  changed,  because  the  people  should 
see  without  perceiving,  and  hear  without  under- 
standing. They  who  understood  His  parables 
heard  much  of  seed  that  failed,  of  success  a  great 
way  off,  of  a  kingdom  which  would  indeed  be 
great  at  last,  but  for  the  present  weak  and  small. 
And  it  is  certain  that  there  must  have  been 
heavy  hearts  among  those  who  left,  with  Him, 
the  populous  side  of  the  lake,  to  cross  over  into 
remote  and  semi-pagan  retirement.  To  encour- 
age them,  and  as  if  in  protest  against  His  rejec- 
tion by  the  authorities,  Jesus  enters  upon  this 
great  cycle  of  miracles. 

They  find  themselves,  as  the  Church  has  often 
since  been  placed,  and  as  every  human  soul  has 
had  to  feel  itself,  far  from  shore,  and  tempest- 
beaten.  The  rage  of  human  foes  is  not  so  deaf, 
so  implacable,  as  that  of  wind  and  wave.  It 
is  the  stress  of  adverse  circumstances  in  the 
direst  form.  But  Jesus  prove'^  Himself  to  be 
Master  of  the  forces  of  nature  whv-'h  wah^<<  -over- 
whelm them. 


iNlark  vi.  47-52.] 


THE    TWO    STORMS. 


847 


Nay,  they  learn  that  His  seeming  indifference 
is  no  proof  that  they  are  neglected,  by  the  re- 
buke He  speaks  to  their  over-importunate  ap- 
peals, Why  are  ye  so  fearful?  have  ye  not  yet 
faith?  And  they,  who  might  have  been  shaken 
by  the  infidelity  of  other  men,  fear  exceedingly 
as  they  behold  the  obedience  of  the  wind  and  the 
sea,  and  ask.  Who  then  is  this? 

But  in  their  mission  as  His  disciples,  a  worse 
danger  than  the  enmity  of  man  or  convulsions 
of  nature  awaits  them.  On  landing,  they  are  at 
once  confronted  by  one  whom  an  tvil  spirit  has 
made  exceeding  fierce,  so  that  no  man  could  pass 
by  that  way.  It  is  their  way  nevertheless,  and 
they  must  tread  it.  And  the  demoniac  adores, 
and  the  evil  spirits  themselves  are  abject  in  sup- 
plication, and  at  the  word  of  Jesus  are  expelled. 
Even  the  inhabitants,  who  will  not  receive  Him, 
are  awe-struck  and  deprecatory,  and  if  at  their 
bidding  Jesus  turns  away  again.  His  followers 
may  judge  whether  the  habitual  meekness  of 
such  a  one  is  due  to  feebleness  or  to  a  noble 
self-command. 

Landing  once  more,  they  are  soon  accosted  by 
a  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  whom  sorrow  has  puri- 
fied from  the  prejudices  of  his  class.  And  Jesus 
is  about  to  heal  the  daughter  of  Jairus,  when  an- 
other form  of  need  is  brought  to  light.  A  slow 
and  secret  decline,  wasting  the  vital  powers,  a 
silent  woe,  speechless,  stealthily  approaching  the 
Healer — over  this  grief  also  He  is  Lord.  And 
it  is  seen  that  neither  the  visible  actions  of  Jesus 
nor  the  audible  praises  of  His  petitioners  can 
measure  the  power  that  goes  out  of  Him,  the 
physical  benefits  which  encompass  the  Teacher  as 
a  halo  envelops  flame. 

Circumstances,  and  the  fiends  of  the  pit,  and 
the  woes  that  waste  the  lives  of  men,  over  these 
He  has  been  seen  to  triumph.  But  behind  all 
that  we  strive  with  here,  there  lurks  the  last  en- 
emy, and  he  also  shall  be  subdued.  And  now 
first  an  example  is  recorded  of  what  we  know 
to  have  already  taken  place,  the  conquest  of 
death  by  his  predicted  Spoiler.  Youth  and  gentle 
maidenhood,  high  hope  and  prosperous  circum- 
stances have  been  wasted,  but  the  call  of  Jesus  is 
heard  by  the  ear  that  was  stopped  with  dust,  and 
the  spirit  obeys  Him  in  the  tar-off  realm  of  the 
departed,  and  they  who  have  just  seen  such  other 
marvels,  are  nevertheless  amazed  with  a  great 
amazement. 

No  cycle  of  miracles  could  be  more  rounded, 
symmetrical,  and  exhaustive;  none  could  better 
vindicate  to  His  disciples  His  impugned  author- 
ity, or  brace  their  endangered  faith,  or  fit  them 
for  what  almost  immediately  followed,  their  own 
commission,  and  the  first  journey  upon  which 
they  too  cast  out  many  devils,  and  anointed  with 
oil  many  that  were  sick,  and  healed  them. 


THE  TWO  STORMS. 
Mark  vi.  47-52  (R.  V.). 

Few  readers  are  insensible  to  the  wonderful 
power  with  which  the  Gospels  tell  the  story  of 
the  two  storms  upon  the  lake.  The  narratives 
are  favourites  in  every  Sunday  school;  they 
form  fhe  basis  of  countless  hymns  and  poems; 
and  we  always  recur  to  them  with  fresh  delight. 

In  the  first  account  we  see  as  in  a  picture  the 
weariness  of  the  great  Teacher,  when,  the  long 
day  being  over  and  the  multitude  dismissed,  He 


retreats  across  the  sea  without  preparation,  and 
"  as  He  was,"  and  sinks  to  sleep  on  the  one 
cushion  in  the  stern,  undisturbed  by  the  raging 
tempest  or  by  the  waves  which  beat  into  the 
boat.  We  observe  the  reluctance  of  the  disciples 
to  arouse  Him  until  the  peril  is  extreme,  and  the 
boat  is  "  now  "  filling.  We  hear  from  St.  Mark, 
the  associate  of  St.  Peter,  the  presumptuous  and 
characteristic  cry  which  expresses  terror,  and 
perhaps  dread  lest  His  tranquil  slumbers  may  in- 
dicate a  separation  betwen  His  cause  and  theirs, 
who  perish  while  He  is  unconcerned.  We  ad- 
mire equally  the  calm  and  masterful  words  which 
quell  the  tempest,  and  those  which  enjoin  a  faith 
so  lofty  as  to  endure  the  last  extremities  of  peril 
without  dismay,  witho  t  agitation  in  its  prayers. 
We  observe  the  strange  incident,  that  no  sooner 
does  the  storm  cease  than  the  waters,  commonly 
seething  for  many  hours  afterwards,  grow  calm. 
And  the  picture  is  completed  by  the  mention  of 
their  new  dread  (fear  of  the  supernatural  Man 
replacing  their  terror  amid  the  convulsions  of 
nature),  and  of  their  awestruck  questioning 
among  themselves. 

In  the  second  narrative  we  see  the  ship  far  out 
in  the  lake,  but  watched  by  One,  Who  is  alone 
upon  the  land.  Through  the  gloom  He  sees 
them  "  tormented "  by  fruitless  rowing;  but 
Chough  this  is  the  reason  why  He  comes,  He  is 
about  to  pass  them  by.  The  watch  of  the  night 
is  remembered;  it  is  the  fourth.  The  cry  of  their 
alarm  is  universal,  for  they  all  saw  Him  and  were 
troubled.  We  are  told  of  the  promptitude  with 
which  He  thereupon  relieved  their  fears;  we  see 
Hirn  climb  up  into  the  boat,  and  the  sudden 
ceasing  of  the  storm,  and  their  amazement.  Nor 
is  that  after-thought  omitted  in  which  they 
blamed  themselves  for  their  astonishment.  If 
their  hearts  had  not  been  hardened,  the  miracle 
of  the  loaves  would  have  taught  them  fhat  Jesus 
was  the  Master  of  the  physical  world. 

Now  all  this  picturesque  detail  belongs  to  a 
single  Gospel.  And  it  is  exactly  what  a  believer 
would  expect.  How  much  soever  the  healing  of 
disease  might  interest  St.  Luke  the  physician, 
who  relates  all  such  events  so  vividly,  it  would 
have  impressed  the  patient  himself  yet  more,  and 
an  account  of  it  by  him,  if  we  had  it,  would  be 
full  of  graphic  touches.  Now  these  two  miracles 
were  wrought  tor  the  rescue  of  the  apostles  them- 
selves. The  Twelve  took  the  place  held  in  othe/s 
by  the  lame,  the  halt,  and  the  blind:  the  suspense, 
the  appeal,  and  the  joy  of  deliverance  were  all 
their  own.  It  is  therefore  no  wonder  that  we 
find  their  accounts  of  these  especial  miracles  so 
picturesque.  But  this  is  a  solid  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  t'he  narratives;  for  while  the  remem- 
brance of  such  actual  events  Should  thrill  with 
agitated  life,  there  is  no  reason  why  a  legend  of 
the  kind  should  be  especially  clear  and  vivid. 
The  same  argument  might  easily  be  carried  far- 
ther. When  the  disciples  began  to  reproach 
themselves  for  their  unbelieving  astonishment, 
they  were  naturally  conscious  of  having  failed  to 
learn  the  lesson  which  had  been  taught  them 
just  before.  Later  students  and  moralists  would 
have  observed  that  another  miracle,  a  little 
earlier,  was  a  still  closer  precedent,  but  they  natu- 
rally blamed  themselves  most  for  being  blind  to 
what  was  immediately  before  their  eyes.  Now 
vvhen  Jesus  walked  upon  the  waters  and  the  dis- 
ciples were  amazed,  it  is  not  said  that  they  for- 
got how  He  had  already  stilled  a  tempest,  but 
they  considered  not  the   miracle  of  the  loaves. 


848 


THE  'gospel   according    TO    ST.    MARK. 


for  their  heart  was  hardened.  In  touches  like  this 
we  find  the  influence  of  a  bystander  beyond  de- 
nial. 

Every  student  of  Scripture  must  have  observed 
the  special  significance  of  those  parables  and  mir- 
acles which  recur  a  second  time  with  certain  de- 
signed variations.  In  the  miraculous  draughts 
of  fishes,  Christ  Himself  avowed  an  allusion  to 
the  catching  of  men.  And  the  Church  has  always 
discerned  a  spiritual  intention  in  these  two 
storms,  in  one  of  which  Christ  slept,  while  in  the 
other  His  disciples  toiled  alone,  and  which  ex- 
press, between  them,  the  whole  strain  exercised 
upon  a  devout  spirit  by  adverse  circumstances. 
Dangers  never  alarmed  one  who  realised  both  the 
presence  of  Jesus  and  His  vigilant  care.  Temp- 
tation enters  only  because  this  is  veiled.  Why  do 
adversities  press  hard  upon  me,  if  indeed  I  be- 
long to  Christ?  He  must  either  be  indiflferent 
and  sleeping,  or  else  absent  altogether  from  my 
frail  and  foundering  bark.  It  is  thus  that  we  let 
go  our  confidence,  and  incur  agonies  of  mental 
suffering,  and  the  rebuke  of  our  Master,  even 
though  He  continues  to  be  the  Protector  of  His 
unworthy  people. 

On  the  voyage  of  life  we  may  conceive  of  Jesus 
as  our  Companion,  for  He  is  with  us  always, 
or  as  watching  us  from  the  everlasting  hills, 
whither  it  was  expedient  for  us  that  He  should 
go.  Nevertheless,  we  are  storm-tossed  and  in 
danger.  Although  we  are  His,  and  not  sepa- 
rated from  Him  by  any  conscious  disobedience, 
yet  the  conditions  of  life  are  unmitigated,  the 
winds  as  wild,  the  waves  as  merciless,  the  boat 
as  cruelly  "  tormented  "  as  ever.  And  no  rescue 
comes:  Jesus  is  asleep:  He  cares  not  that  we 
perish.  Then  we  pray  after  a  fashion  so  clam- 
orous, and  with  supplication  so  like  demands, 
that  we  too  appear  to  have  undertaken  to  awake 
our  Lord.  Then  we  have  to  learn  from  the  first 
of  these  miracles,  and  especially  from  its  delay. 
The  disciples  were  safe,  had  they  only  known  it, 
whether  Jesus  would  have  interposed  of  His  own 
accord,  or  whether  they  might  still  have  needed 
to  appeal  to  Him,  but  in  a  gentler  fashion.  We 
may  ask  help,  provided  that  we  do  so  in  a  serene 
and  trustful  spirit,  anxious  for  nothing,  not  seek- 
ing to  extort  a  concession,  but  approaching  with 
boldness  the  throne  of  grace,  on  which  our 
Father  sits.  It  is  thus  that  the  peace  of  God 
shall  rule  our  hearts  and  minds,  for  want  of 
which  the  apostles  were  asked.  Where  is  your 
faith?  Comparing  the  narratives,  we  learn  that 
Jesus  reassured  their  hearts  even  before  He 
arose,  and  then,  having  first  silenced  by  His 
calmness  the  storm  within  them,  He  stood  up 
and  rebuked  the  storm  around. 

St.  Augustine  gave  a  false  turn  to  the  applica- 
tion, when  he  said,  "  If  Jesus  were  not  asleep 
within  thee,  thou  wouldst  be  calm  and  at  rest. 
But  why  is  He  asleep?  Because  thy  faith  is 
asleep,"  etc.  (Sermon  Ixiii.)  The  sleep  of  Jesus 
was  natural  and  right;  and  it  answers  not  to  our 
spiritual  torpor,  but  to  His  apparent  indifference 
and  non-intervention  in  our  time  of  distress. 
And  the  true  lesson  of  the  miracle  is  that  we 
should  trust  Him  Whose  care  fails  not  when  it 
seems  to  fail.  Who  is  able  to  save  to  the  utter- 
most, and  Whom  we  should  approach  in  the 
direst  peril  without  panic.  It  was  fitly  taught 
them  first  when  all  the  powers  of  the  State  and 
the  Church  were  leagued  against  Him,  and  He 
as  a  blind  man  saw  not  and  as  a  dumb  man 
opened  not  His  mouth. 


The  second  storm  should  have  found  them 
braver  by  the  experience  of  the  first;  but  spirit- 
ually as  well  as  bodily  they  were  farther  removed 
from  Christ.  The  people,  profoundly  moved  by 
the  murder  of  the  Baptist,  wished  to  set  Jesus 
on  the  throne,  and  the  disciples  were  too  ambi- 
tious to  be  allowed  to  be  present  while  He  dis- 
missed the  multitudes.  They  had  to  be  sent 
away,  and  it  was  from  the  distant  hillside  that 
Jesus  saw  their  danger.  Surely  it  is  instructive, 
that  neither  the  shades  of  night,  nor  the  ab- 
stracted fervour  of  His  prayers,  prevented  Him 
from  seeing  it,  nor  the  stormlashed  waters  from 
bringing  aid.  And  significant  also,  that  the  ex- 
perience of  remoteness,  though  not  sinful,  since 
He  had  sent  them  away,  was  yet  the  result  of 
their  own  worldliness.  It  is  when  we  are  out  of 
sympathy  w*ith  Jesus  that  we  are  most  likely  to 
be  alone  in  trouble.  None  was  in  their  boat  to 
save  them,  and  in  heart  also  they  had  gone 
out  from  the  presence  of  their  God.  Therefore 
they  failed  to  trust  in  His  guidance  Who  had 
sent  them  into  the  ship:  they  had  no  sense  of 
protection  or  of  supervision;  and  it  was  a  terrible 
moment  when  a  form  was  vaguely  seen  to  glide 
over  the  waves.  Christ,  it  would  seem,  would 
have  gone  before  and  led  them  to  the  haven 
where  they  would  be.  Or  perhaps  He  "  would 
have  passed  by  them,"  as  He  would  afterwards 
have  gone  further  than  Emmaus,  to  elicit  any 
trustful  half-recognition  which  might  call  to  Him 
and  be  rewarded.  But  they  cried  out  for  fear. 
And  so  it  is  continually  with  God  in  His  world: 
men  are  terrified  at  the  presence  of  the  super- 
natural, because  they  fail  to  apprehend  the  abid- 
ing presence  of  the  supernatural  Christ.  And 
yet  there  is  one  point  at  least  in  every  life,  the 
final  moment,  in  which  all  else  must  recede,  and 
the  soul  be  left  alone  with  the  beings  of  another 
world.  Then,  and  in  every  trial,  and  especially 
in  all  trials  which  press  in  upon  us  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  spiritual  universe,  well  is  it  for  him 
who  hears  the  voice  of  Jesus  saying,  It  is  I,  be 
not  afraid. 

For  only  through  Jesus,  only  in  His  person, 
has  that  unknown  universe  ceased  to  be  dreadful 
and  mysterious.  Only  when  He  is  welcomed 
does  the  storm  cease  to  rage  around  us. 

It  was  the  earlier  of  these  miracles  which  first 
taught  the  disciples  that  not  only  were  human 
disorders  under  His  control,  and  gifts  and  bless- 
ings at  His  disposal,  but  also  the  whole  range 
of  nature  was  subject  to  Him,  and  the  winds  and 
the  sea  obey  Him. 

Shall  we  say  that  His  rebuke  addressed  to 
these  was  a  mere  figure  of  speech?  Some  have 
inferred  that  natural  convulsions  are  so  directly 
the  work  of  evil  angels  that  the  words  of  Jesus 
were  really  spoken  to  them.  But  the  plain  asser- 
tion is  that  He  rebuked  the  winds  and  the  waves, 
and  these  would  not  become  identical  with  Sa- 
tan even  upon  the  supposition  that  he  excites 
them.  We  ourselves  continually  personify  the 
course  of  nature,  and  even  complain  of  it,  wan- 
tonly enough,  and  Scripture  does  not  deny  itself 
the  use  of  ordinary  human  forms  of  speech.  Yet 
the  very  peculiar  word  employed  by  Jesus  cannot 
be  without  significance.  It  is  the  same  with 
which  He  had  already  confronted  the  violence  of 
the  demoniac  in  the  synagogue.  Be  muzzled.  At 
the  least  it  expresses  stern  repression,  and  thus 
it  reminds  us  that  creation  itself  is  made  subject 
to  vanity,  the  world  deranged  by  sin,  so  that  all 
around  us  requires  readjustment  as  truly  as  all 


Mark  v.  1-20.J 


THE    DEMONIAC    OF   GADARA. 


849 


within,  and  Christ  shall  at  last  create  a  new 
earth  as  well  as  a  new  heaven. 

Some  pious  people  resign  themselves  much  too 
passively  to  the  mischiefs  of  the  material  uni- 
verse, supposing  that  troubles  which  are  not  of 
their  own  making  must  needs  be  a  Divine  in- 
fliction, calling  only  for  submission.  But  God 
sends  oppositions  to  be  conquered  as  well  as 
burdens  to  be  borne;  and  even  before  the  fall 
the  world  had  to  be  subdued.  And  our  final 
mastery  over  the  surrounding  universe  was  ex- 
pressed, when  Jesus  our  Head  rebuked  the  winds, 
and  stilled  the  waves  when  they  arose. 

As  they  beheld,  a  new  sense  fell  upon  His  dis- 
ciples of  a  more  awful  presence  than  they  had 
yet  discerned.  They  asked  not  only  what  manner 
of  man  is  this?  but,  with  surmises  which  went 
out  beyond  the  limits  of  human  greatness.  Who 
then  is  this,  that  even  the  winds  and  the  sea 
obey   Him? 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  DEMONIAC  OF  GADARA. 

Mark  v.   1-20  (R.  V.). 

Fresh  from  asserting  His  mastery  over  winds 
and  waves,  the  Lord  was  met  by  a  more  terrible 
enemy,  the  rage  of  human  nature  enslaved  and 
impelled  by  the  cruelty  of  hell.  The  place  where 
He  landed  was  a  theatre  not  unfit  for  the  trag- 
edy which  it  revealed.  A  mixed  race  was  there, 
indifferent  to  religion,  rearing  great  'herds  'of 
swine,  upon  which  the  law  looked  askance,  but 
the  profits  of  which  they  held  so  dear  that  they 
would  choose  to  banish  a  Divine  ambassador, 
and  one  who  had  released  them  from  an  inces- 
sant peril,  rather  than  be  deprived  of  these.  Now 
it  has  already  been  shown  that  the  wretches  pos- 
sessed by  devils  were  not  of  necessity  stained 
with  special  guilt.  Even  children  fell  into  this 
misery.  But  yet  we  should  expect  to  find  it  most 
rampant  in  places  where  God  was  dishonoured, 
in  Gerasa  and  in  the  coasts  of  Tyre  and  Sidon. 
And  it  is  so.  All  misery  is  the  consequence  of 
sin,  although  individual  misery  does  not  meas- 
ure individual  guilt.  And  the  places  where  the 
shadow  of  sin  has  fallen  heaviest  are  always  the 
haunts  of  direst  wretchedness. 

T^ie  first  Gospel  mentions  two  demoniacs,  but 
one  was  doubtless  so  pre-eminently  fierce,  and 
possibly  so  zealous  afterward  in  proclaiming  his 
deliverance,  that  only  St.  Matthew  learned  the 
existence  of  another,  upon  whom  also  Satan  had 
wrought,  if  not  his  worst,  enough  to  show  his 
hatred,  and  the  woes  he  would  fain  bring  upon 
humanity. 

Among  the  few  terrible  glimpses  given  us  of 
the  mind  of  the  fallen  angels,  one  is  most  sig- 
nificant and  sinister.  When  the  unclean  spirit  is 
gone  out  of  a  man,  to  what  haunts  does  he  turn? 
He  has  no  sympathy  with  what  is  lovely  or  sub- 
lime: in  search  of  rest  he  wanders  through  dry 
places,  deserts  of  arid  sand  in  which  his  misery 
may  be  soothed  by  congenial  desolation.  Thus 
the  ruins  of  the  mystic  Babylon  become  an  abode 
of  devils.  And  thus  the  unclean  spirit,  when  he 
mastered  this  demoniac,  drove  him  to  a  foul  and 
dreary  abode  among  the  tombs.  One  can  picture 
the  victim  in  some  lucid  moment,  awakening  to 
*  onsciousness  onlv  to  shudder  in  his  dreadful 
54— Vol.  IV. 


home,  and  scared  back  again  into  that  ferocity 
which  is  the  child  of  terror. 

"  Is  it  not  very  like. 
The  horrible  conceit  of  death  and  night, 
Together  with  the  terror  of  the  place 

Oh  !  if  I  wake,  shall  I  not  be  distraught, 
Environed  with  all  these  hideous  fears?" 

— "  Romeo  and  Juliet,"  iv.  3. 

There  was  a  time  when  he  had  been  under  re- 
straint, but  '■  now  no  man  could  any  more  bind 
him  "  even  with  iron  upon  feet  and  wrists.  The 
ferocity  of  his  cruel  subjugator  turned  his  own 
strength  against  himself,  so  that  night  and  day 
his  howling  was  heard,  as  he  cut  himself  with 
stones,  and  his  haunts  in  the  tombs  and  in  the 
mountains  were  as  dangerous  as  the  lair  of  a  wild 
beast,  which  no  man  dared  pass  by.  What 
strange  impulse  drove  him  thence  to  the  feet  of 
Jesus?  Very  dreadful  is  the  picture  of  his  con- 
flicting tendencies;  the  fiend  within  him  strug- 
gling against  something  still  human  and  at- 
tracted by  the  Divine,  so  that  he  runs  from  afar, 
yet  cries  aloud,  and  worships  yet  disowns  having 
anything  to  do  with  Him;  and  as  if  the  fiend 
had  subverted  the  true  personality,  and  become 
the  very  man,  when  ordered  to  come  out  he  ad- 
jures Jesus  to  torment  him  not. 

And  here  we  observe  the  knowledge  of  Christ's 
rank  possessed  by  the  evil  ones.  Long  before 
Peter  won  a  special  blessing  for  acknowledging 
the  Son  of  the  living  God,  the  demoniac  called 
Him  by  the  very  name  which  flesh  and  blood 
did  not  reveal  to  Cephas.  For  their  chief  had 
tested  and  discovered  Him  in  the  wilderness, 
saying  twice  with  dread  surmise.  If  Thou  be  the 
Son  of  God.  It  is  also  noteworthy  that  the 
phrase,  the  most  High  God,  is  the  name  of  Je- 
hovah among  the  non-Jewish  races.  It  occurs  in 
both  Testaments  in  connection  with  Melchizedek 
the  Canaanite.  It  is  used  throughout  the  Baby- 
lonian proclamations  in  the  book  of  Daniel. 
Micah  puts  it  into  the  lips  of  Balaam.  And  the 
damsel  with  a  spirit  of  divination  employed  it  in 
Philippi.  Except  once,  in  a  Psalm  which  tells 
of  the  return  of  apostate  Israel  to  the  Most  High 
God  (Ixxviii.  35),  the  epithet  is  used  only  in  re- 
lation with  the  nations  outside  the  covenant. 
Its  occurrence  here  is  probably  a  sign  of  the  pa- 
gan influences  by  which  Gadara  was  infected, 
and  for  which  it  was  plagued.  By  the  name  of 
God  then,  whose  Son  he  loudly  confessed  that 
Jesus  was,  the  fiend  within  the  man  adjures  Him 
to  torment  him  not.  But  Jesus  had  not  asked 
to  be  acknowledged;  He  had  bidden  the  devil  to 
come  out.  And  persons  who  substitute  loud  con- 
fessions and  clamorous  orthodoxies  for  obedi- 
ence should  remember  that  so  did  the  fiend  of 
Gadara.  Jesus  replied  by  asking.  What  is  thy 
name?  The  question  was  not  an  idle  one,  but 
had  a  healing  tendency.  For  the  man  was  be- 
side himself:  it  was  part  of  his  cure  that  he  was 
found  '■  in  his  right  mind;  "  and  meanwhile  his 
very  consciousness  was  merged  in  that  of  the 
fiends  who  tortured  him,  so  that  his  voice  was 
their  voice,  and  they  returned  a  vaunting  an- 
swer through  his  lips.  Our  Lord  sought  there- 
fore both  to  calm  His  excitement  and  to  remind 
him  of  himself,  and  of  what  he  once  had  been 
before  evil  beings  dethroned  his  will.  These 
were  not  the  man,  but  his  enemies  by  whom  he 
was  "carried  about,"  and  "  led  captive  at  their 
will."  And  it  is  always  sobering  to  think  of 
"  Myself,"  the  lonely  individual,  apart  from  even 


850 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


those  who  most  influence  me,  with  a  soul  to  lose 
or  save.  With  this  very  question  the  Church 
Catechism  begins  its  work  of  arousing  and  in- 
structing the  conscience  of  each  child,  separating 
him  from  his  fellows  in  order  to  lead  him  on 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  individualising  grace  of 
God. 

It  may  be  that  the  fiends  within  him  dictated 
his  reply,  or  that  he  himself,  conscious  of  their 
tyranny,  cried  out  in  agony,  We  are  many;  a 
regiment  like  those  of  conquering  Rome,  drilled 
and  armed  to  trample  and  destroy,  a  legion. 
This  answer  distinctly  contravened  what  Christ 
had  just  implied,  that  he  was  one,  an  individual, 
and  precious  in  his  Maker's  eyes.  But  there  are 
men  and  women  in  every  Christian  land,  whom 
it  might  startle  to  look  within,  and  see  how  far 
their  individuality  is  oppressed  and  overlaid  by 
a  legion  of  impulses,  appetites,  and  convention- 
alities, which  leave  them  nothing  personal,  noth- 
ing essential  and  characteristic,  nothing  that 
deserves  a  name.  The  demons,  now  con- 
scious of  the  power  that  calls  them  forth, 
besought  Him  to  leave  them  a  refuge  in  that 
country.  St.  Luke  throws  light  upon  this  peti- 
tion, as  well  as  their  former  complaint,  when  he 
tells  us  they  feared  to  be  sent  to  "  the  abyss  " 
of  their  final  retribution.  And  as  we  read  of 
men  who  are  haunted  by  a  fearful  looking  for 
of  judgment  and  a  fierceness  of  fire,  so  they  had 
no  hope  of  escape,  except  until  "  the  time."  For 
a  little  respite  they  prayed  to  be  sent  even  into 
the  swine,  and  Jesus  gave  them  leave. 

What  a  difference  there  is  between  the  proud 
and  heroic  spirits  whom  Milton  celebrated,  and 
these  malignant  but  miserable  beings,  haunting 
the  sepulchres  like  ghosts,  truculent  and  yet  das- 
tardly, as  ready  to  supplicate  as  to  rend,  filled 
with  dread  of  the  appointed  time  and  of  the 
a'byss,  clinging  to  that  outlying  country  as  a 
congenial  haunt,  and  devising  for  themselves  a 
last  asylum  among  the  brutes.  And  yet  there  are 
equally  far  from  the  materialistic  superstitions 
of  that  age  and  place;  they  are  not  amenable  to 
fumigations  or  exorcisms,  and  they  do  not  upset 
the  furniture  in  rushing  out.  Many  questions 
have  been  asked  about  the  petition  of  the  demons 
and  our  Lord's  consent.  But  none  of  them  need 
much  distress  the  reverential  enquirer,  who  re- 
members by  what  misty  horizons  all  our  knowl- 
edge is  enclosed.  Most  absurd  is  the  charge 
that  Jesus  acted  indefensibly  in  destroying  prop- 
erty. Is  it  then  so  clear  that  the  owners  did  not 
deserve  their  loss  through  the  nature  of  their 
investments?  Was  it  merely  as  a  man,  or  as  the 
Son  of  the  living  God,  that  His  consent  was  felt 
to  be  necessary?  And  was  it  any  part  of  His 
mission  to  protect  brutes  from  death? 

The  loss  endured  was  no  greater  than  when  a 
crop  is  beaten  down  by  hail,  or  a  vineyard  dev- 
astated by  insects,  and  in  these  cases  an  agency 
beyond  the  control  of  man  is  sent  or  permitted 
by  God,  Who  was  in  Christ. 

A  far  harder  question  it  is,  How  could  devils 
enter  into  brute  creatures?  And  again,  why  did 
they  desire  to  do  so?  But  the  first  of  these  is  only 
a  subdivision  of  the  vaster  problem,  at  once  in- 
evitable and  insoluble.  How  does  spirit  in  any 
of  its  forms  animate  matter,  or  even  manipulate 
it?  We  know  not  by  what  strange  link  a  thought 
contracts  a  sinew,  and  transmutes  itself  into 
words  or  deeds.  And  if  we  believe  the  dread  and 
melancholy  fact  of  the  possession  of  a  child  by 
a  fiend,  what  reason  have  we,  beyond  prejudice. 


for  doubting  the  possession  of  swine?  It 
must  be  observed  also,  that  no  such  pos- 
session is  proved  by  this  narrative  to  be 
a  common  event,  but  the  reverse.  The  no- 
tion is  a  last  and  wild  expedient  of  de- 
spair, proposing  to  content  itself  with  the  utter- 
most  abasement,  if  only  the  demons  might  still 
haunt  the  region  where  they  had  thriven  so  well. 
And  the  consent  of  Jesus  does  not  commit  Him 
to  any  judgment  upon  the  merit  or  the  possibility 
of  the  project.  He  leaves  the  experiment  to 
prove  itself,  exactly  as  when  Peter  would  walk 
upon  the  water;  and  a  laconic  "Go"  in  this 
case  recalls  the  "  Come  "  in  that;  an  assent,  with- 
out approval,  to  an  attempt  which  was  about  to 
fail.  Not  in  the  world  of  brutes  could  they  find 
shelter  from  the  banishment  they  dreaded;  for 
the  whole  herd,  frantic  and  ungoverned,  rushed 
headlong  into  the  sea  and  was  destroyed.  The 
second  victory  of  the  series  was  thus  completed. 
Jesus  was  Master  over  the  evil  spirits  which  af- 
flict humanity,  as  well  as  over  the  fierceness  of 
the  elements  which  rise  against  us. 


THE  MEN  OF  GADARA. 

Mark  v.  14-20  (R.  V.). 

The  expulsion  of  the  demons  from  the  pos- 
sessed, their  entrance  into  the  herd,  and  the  de- 
struction of  the  two  thousand  swine,  were  vir- 
tually one  transaction,  and  must  have  impressed 
the  swineherds  in  its  totality.  They  saw  on  the 
one  hand  the  restoration  of  a  dangerous  and  rag- 
ing madman,  known  to  be  actuated  by  evil 
spirits,  the  removal  of  a  standing  peril  which  had 
already  made  one  tract  of  country  impassable, 
and  (if  they  considered  such  a  thing  at  all)  the 
calming  of  a  human  soul,  and  its  advent  within 
the  reach  of  all  sacred  influences.  On  the  other 
side  what  was  there?  The  loss  of  two  thousand 
swine;  and  the  consciousness  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  was  come  nigh  unto  them.  This  was 
always  an  alarming  discovery.  Isaiah  said.  Woe 
is  me!  when  his  eyes  beheld  God  high  and  lifted 
up.  And  Peter  said.  Depart  from  me,  when  he 
learned  by  the  miraculous  draught  of  fish  that 
the  Lord  was  there.  But  Isaiah's  concern  was 
because  he  was  a  man  of  unclean  lips,  and  Peter's 
was  because  he  was  a  sinful  man.  Their  alarm  was 
that  of  an  awakened  conscience,  and  therefore 
they  became  the  heralds  of  Him  Whom  they 
feared.  But  these  men  were  simply  scared  at 
what  they  instinctively  felt  to  be  dangerous;  and 
so  they  took  refuge  in  a  crowd,  that  frequent 
resort  of  the  frivolous  and  conscience-stricken, 
and  told  in  the  city  what  they  had  seen.  And 
when  the  inhabitants  came  forth,  a  sight  met 
them  which  might  have  won  the  sternest,  the 
man  sitting,  clothed  (a  nice  coincidence,  since 
St.  Mark  had  not  mentioned  that  he  "  ware  no 
clothes,")  and  in  his  right  mind,  even  him  that 
had  the  legion,  as  the  narrative  emphatically 
adds.  And  doubtless  the  much  de'bated  incident 
of  the  swine  had  greatly  helped  to  reassure  this 
afflicted  soul;  the  demons  were  palpably  gone, 
visibly  enough  they  were  overmastered.  But  the 
citizens,  like  the  swineherds,  were  merely  terri- 
fied, neither  grateful  nor  sympathetic;  uninspired 
with  hope  of  pure  teaching,  of  rescue  from  other 
influences  of  the  evil  one,  or  of  any  unearthly 
kingdom.     Their  formidable  visitant  was  one  to 


Mark  V.  21-43.] 


WITH    JAIRUS. 


851 


treat  with  all  respect,  but  to  remove  with  all 
speed,  "  and  they  began  to  beseech  Him  to  de^ 
part  from  their  borders."  They  began,  for  it  did 
not  require  long  entreaty;  the  gospel  which  was 
free  to  all  was  not  to  be  forced  upon  any.  But 
how  much  did  they  blindly  fling  away,  who  re- 
fused the  presence  of  the  meek  and  lowly  Giver 
of  rest  unto  souls;  and  chose  to  be  denied,  as 
strangers  whom  He  never  knew,  in  the  day  when 
every  eye  shall  see  Him. 

With  how  sad  a  heart  must  Jesus  have  turned 
away.  Yet  one  soul  at  least  was-  won,  for  as 
He  was  entering  into  the  boat,  the  man  who 
owed  all  to  Him  prayed  Him  that  he  might  be 
with  Him.  Why  was  the  prayer  refused? 
Doubtless  it  sprang  chiefly  from  gratitude  and 
love,  thinking  it  hard  to  lose  so  soon  the  won- 
drous benefactor,  the  Man  at  w'hose  feet  he  had 
sat  down.  Who  alone  had  looked  with  pitiful  and 
helpful  eyes  on  one  whom  others  only  sought 
to  "  tame."  Such  feelings  are  admirable,  but 
they  must  be  disciplined  so  as  to  seek,  not  their 
own  indulgence,  but  their  Master's  real  service. 
Now  a  reclaimed  demoniac  would  have  been  a 
suspected  companion  for  One  who  was  accused 
of  league  with  the  Prince  of  the  devils.  There 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  he  had  any  fitness 
whatever  to  enter  the  immediate  circle  of  our 
Lord's  intimate  disciples.  His  special  testimony 
would  lose  all  its  force  when  he  left  the  district 
where  he  was  known;  but  there,  on  the  contrary, 
the  miracle  could  not  fail  to  be  impressive,  as 
its  extent  and  permanence  were  seen.  This  man 
was  perhaps  the  only  missionary  who  could 
reckon  upon  a  hearing  from  those  who  banished 
Jesus  from  their  coasts.  And  Christ's  loving  and 
unresentful  heart  would  give  this  testimony  to 
them  in  its  fulness.  It  should  begin  at  his  own 
house  and  among  his  friends,  who  would  surely 
listen.  They  should  be  told  how  great  things 
the  Lord  had  done  for  him,  and  Jesus  expressly 
added,  how  He  had  mercy  upon  thee,  that  so 
they  might  learn  their  mistake,  who  feared  and 
shrank  from  such  a  kindly  visitant.  Here  is  a 
lesson  for  these  modern  days,  when  the  con- 
version of  any  noted  profligate  is  sure  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  attempts  to  push  him  into  a  vagrant 
publicity,  not  only  full  of  peril  in  itself,  but  also 
removing  him  from  the  familiar  sphere  in  which 
his  consistent  life  would  be  more  convincing 
than  all  sermons,  and  where  no  suspicion  of  self- 
interest  could  overcloud  the  brightness  of  his 
testimony. 

Possibly  there  was  yet  another  reason  for  leav- 
ing him  in  his  home.  He  may  have  desired  to 
remain  close  to  Jesus,  lest,  when  the  Saviour 
was  absent,  the  evil  spirits  should  resume  their 
sway.  In  that  case  it  would  be  necessary  to  ex- 
ercise his  faith  and  convince  him  that  the  words 
of  Jesus  were  far-reaching  and  effectual,  even 
when  He  was  Himself  remote.  If  so,  he  learned 
the  lesson  well,  and  became  an  evangelist 
through  all  the  region  of  Decapolis.  And  where 
all  did  marvel,  we  may  hope  that  some  were  won. 
What  a  revelation  of  mastery  over  the  darkest 
and  most  dreadful  forces  of  evil,  and  of  respect 
for  the  human  will  (which  Jesus  never  once 
coerced  by  miracle,  even  when  it  rejected  Him), 
what  unwearied  care  for  the  rebellious,  and  what 
a  sense  of  sacredness  in  lowly  duties,  better  for 
the  demoniac  than  the  physical  nearness  of  his 
Lord,  are  combined  in  this  astonishing  narrative, 
which  to  invent  in  the  second  century  would 
itself  have  required  miraculous  powers. 


WITH  JAIRUS. 
Mark  v.  21-43  (R-  V.). 

Repulsed  from  Decapolis,  but  consoled  by  the 
rescue  and  zeal  of  the  demoniac,  Jesus  returned 
to  the  western  shore,  and  a  great  multitude  as- 
sembled. The  other  boats  which  were  with  Him 
had  doubtless  spread  the  tidings  of  the  preter- 
natural calm  which  rescued  them  from  deadly 
peril,  and  it  may  be  that  news  of  the  event  of 
Gadara  arrived  almost  as  soon  as  He  Whom  they 
celebrated.  We  have  seen  that  St.  Mark  aims 
at  bringing  the  four  great  miracles  of  this  period 
into  the  closest  sequence.  And  so  he  passes  over 
a  certain  brief  period  with  the  words  "  He  was 
by  the  sea."  But  in  fact  Jesus  was  reasoning 
with  the  Pharisees,  and  with  the  disciples  of 
John,  who  had  assailed  Him  and  His  followers, 
when  one  of  their  natural  leaders  threw  himself 
at  His  feet. 

The  contrast  is  sharp  enough,  as  He  rises  from 
a  feast  to  go  to  the  house  of  mourning,  from 
eating  with  publicans  and  sinners  to  accompany 
a  ruler  of  the  synagogue.  These  unexpected 
calls,  these  sudden  alternations  all  found  Him 
equally  ready  to  bear  the  same  noble  part,  in  the 
most  dissimilar  scenes,  and  in  treating  tempera- 
ments the  most  unlike.  But  the  contrast  should 
also  be  observed  between  those  harsh  and  hostile 
critics  who  hated  Him  in  the  interests  of  dogma 
and  of  ceremonial,  and  Jairus,  whose  views  were 
theirs,  but  whose  heart  was  softened  by  trouble. 
The  danger  of  his  child  was  what  drove  him,  per- 
haps reluctantly  enough,  to  beseecTi  Jesus  much. 
And  nothing  could  be  more  touching  than  his 
prayer  for  his  "  little  daughter,"  its  sequence 
broken  as  if  with  a  sob;  wistfully  pictorial  as  to 
the  process,  "  that  Thou  come  and  lay  Thy  hands 
upon  her,"  and  dilating  wistfully  too  upon  the 
effect,  "  that  she  may  be  made  whole  and  live." 
If  a  miracle  were  not  in  question,  the  dullest 
critic  in  Europe  would  confess  that  this  exquisite 
supplication  was  not  composed  by  an  evangelist, 
but  a  father.  And  he  would  understand  also  why 
the  very  words  in  their  native  dialect  were  not 
forgotten,  which  men  had  heard  awake  the  dead. 

As  Jesus  went  with  him,  a  great  multitude 
followed  Him,  and  they  thronged  Him.  It  is 
quite  evident  that  Jesus  did  not  love  these  gath- 
erings of  the  idly  curious.  Partly  from  such 
movements  He  had  withdrawn  Himself  to 
Gadara;  and  partly  to  avoid  exciting  them  He 
strove  to  keep  many  of  His  miracles  a  secret. 
Sensationalism  is  neither  grace  nor  a  means  of 
grace.  And  it  must  be  considered  that  the  per- 
fect Man,  as  far  from  mental  apathy  or  physical 
insensibility  as  from  morbid  fastidiousness,  would 
find  much  to  shrink  away  from  in  the  pressure  of 
a  city  crowd.  The  contact  of  inferior  organisa- 
tions, selfishness  driving  back  the  weak  and  gen- 
tle, vulgar  scrutiny  and  audible  comment,  and  the 
desire  for  some  miracle  as  an  idle  show,  which 
He  would  only  work  because  His  gentle  heart 
was  full  of  pity,  all  these  would  be  utterly  dis- 
tressing to  Him  who  was 

"The  first  true  gentleman  that  ever  breathed," 

as  well  as  the  retelation  of  God  in  flesh.  It  is 
therefore  noteworthy  that  we  have  many  exam- 
ples of  His  grace  and  goodness  amid  such  try- 
ing scenes,  as  when  He  spoke  to  Zacchaeus,  and 
called  Bartimseus  to  Him  to  be  healed.  Jesus 
could  be  wrathful,   but  He  w4s  never  irritated. 


852 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


Of  these  examples  one  of  the  most  beautiful  is 
here  recorded,  for  as  He  went  with  Jairus,  amidst 
the  rude  and  violent  thronging  of  the  crowds, 
moving  alone  (as  men  often  are  in  sympathy  and 
in  heart  alone  amid  seething  thoroughfares),  He 
suddenly  became  aware  of  a  touch,  the  timid  and 
stealthy  touch  of  a  broken-hearted  woman,  pale 
and  wasted  with  disease,  but  borne  through  the 
crowd  by  the  last  effort  of  despair  and  the  first 
energy  of  a  newborn  hope.  She  ought  not  to 
have  come  thither,  since  her  touch  spread  cere- 
monial uncleanness  far  and  wide.  Nor  ought  she 
to  have  stolen  a  blessing  instead  of  praying  for 
it.  And  if  we  seek  to  blame  her  still  further,  we 
may  condemn  the  superstitious  notion  that 
Christ's  gifts  of  healing  were  not  conscious  and 
loving  actions,  but  a  mere  contagion  of  health, 
by  which  one  might  profit  unfelt  and  undiscov- 
ered. It  is  urged  indeed  that  hers  was  not  a  faith 
thus  clouded,  but  so  majestic  as  to  believe  that 
Christ  would  know  and  respond  to  the  silent  hint 
of  a  gentle  touch.  And  is  it  supposed  that  Jesus 
would  have  dragged  into  publicity  such  a  per- 
fect lily  of  the  vale  as  this?  and  what  means  her 
trembling  confession,  and  the  discovery  that  she 
could  not  be  hid?  But  when  our  keener  intel- 
lects have  criticised  her  errors,  and  our  clearer 
ethics  have  frowned  upon  her  misconduct,  one 
fact  remains  She  is  the  only  woman  upon 
whom  Jesus  is  recorded  to  have  bestowed  any 
epithet  but  a  formal  one.  Her  misery  and  her 
faith  drew  from  His  guarded  lips,  the  tender  and 
yet  lofty  word  Daughter. 

So  much  better  is  the  faith  which  seeks  for 
blessing,  however  erroneous  be  its  means,  than 
t'he  heartless  propriety  which  criticises  with  most 
dispassionate  clearness,  chiefly  because  it  really 
seeks  nothing  for  itself  at  all.  Such  faith  is  al- 
ways an  appeal,  and  is  responded  to,  not  as  she 
supposed,  mechanically,  unconsciously,  nor,  of 
course,  by  the  opus  operatum  of  a  garment 
touched  (or  of  a  sacrament  formally  received), 
but  by  the  going  forth  of  power  from  a  conscious 
Giver,  in  response  to  the  need  which  has  ap~ 
preached  His  fulness.  He  knew  her  secret  and 
fearful  apprpach  to  Him,  as  He  knew  the  guile- 
less heart  of  Nathanael,  whom  He  marked  be- 
neath the  fig-tree.  And  He  dealt  with  her  very 
gently.  Doubtless  there  are  many  such  con« 
cealed  woes,  secret,  untold  miseries  which  eat 
deep  into  gentle  hearts,  and  are  never  spoken, 
and  cannot,  like  Bartimseus,  cry  aloud  for  public 
pity.  For  these  also  there  is  balm  in  Gilead,  and 
if  the  Lord  requires  them  to  confess  Him  pub- 
licly. He  will  first  give  them  due  strength  to  do 
so.  This  enfeebled  and  emaciated  woman  was 
allowed  to  feel  in  her  body  that  she  was  healed 
of  her  plague,  before  she  was  called  upon  for 
her  confession.  Jesus  asked.  Who  touched  my 
clothes?  It  was  one  thing  to  press  Him,  driven 
forward  by  the  multitude  around,  as  circum- 
stances impel  so  many  to  become  churchgoers, 
readers  of  Scripture,  interested  in  sacred  ques- 
tions and  controversies  until  they  are  borne  as 
by  physical  propulsion  into  the  closest  contact 
with  our  Lord,  but  not  drawn  thither  by  any  per- 
sonal craving  or  sense  of  want,  nor  expecting 
any  blessed  reaction  of  "  the  power  proceeding 
from  Him."  It  was  another  thing  to  reach  out 
a  timid  hand  and  touch  appealingly  even  that  tas- 
selled  fringe  of  His  garment  which  had  a  reli- 
gious significance,  whence  perhaps  she  drew  a 
semi-superstitious  hope.  In  the  face  of  this  in- 
cident, can  any  orthodoxy  forbid  us  to  believe 


that  the  grace  of  Christ  extends,  now  as  of  yore, 
to  many  a  superstitious  and  erring  approach  by 
which  souls  reach  after  Christ? 

The  disciples  wondered  at  His  question:  they 
knew  not  that  "  the  flesh  presses,  but  faith 
touches;  "  but  as  He  continued  to  look  around 
and  seek  her  that  had  done  this  thing,  she  fell 
down  and  told  Him  all  the  truth.  Fearing  and 
trembling  she  spoke,  for  indeed  she  had  been 
presum.ptuous,  and  ventured  without  permission. 
But  the  chief  thing  was  that  she  had  ventured, 
and  so  He  graciously  replied.  Daughter,  thy 
faith  hath  made  thee  whole;  go  in  peace  and  be 
whole  of  thy  plague.  Thus  she  received  more 
than  she  had  asked  or  thought;  not  only  healing 
for  the  body,  but  also  a  victory  over  that  self- 
effacing,  fearful,  half-morbid  diffidence,  which 
long  and  weakening  disease  entails.  Thus  also, 
instead  of  a  secret  cure,  she  was  given  the  open 
benediction  of  her  Lord,  and  such  confirmation 
in  her  privilege  as  many  more  would  enjoy  if 
only  with  their  mouth  confession  were  made 
unto  salvation. 

While  He  yet  spoke,  and  the  heart  of  Jairus 
was  divided  between  joy  at  a  new  evidence  of 
the  power  of  Christ,  and  impatience  at  every  mo- 
ment of  delay,  not  knowing  that  his  Benefactor 
was  the  Lord  of  time  itself,  the  fatal  message 
came,  tinged  with  some  little  irony  as  it  asked, 
Why  troublest  thou  the  Teacher  any  more?  It 
is  quite  certain  that  Jesus  had  before  now  raised 
the  dead,  but  no  miracle  of  the  kind  had  ac- 
quired such  prominence  as  afterwards  to  claim 
a  place  in  the  Gospel  narratives. 

One  is  led  to  suspect  that  the  care  of  Jesus  had 
prevailed,  and  they  had  not  been  widely  pub- 
lished. To  those  who  brought  this  message,  per- 
haps no  such  case  had  travelled,  certainly  none 
had  gained  their  credence.  It  was  in  their  eyes 
a  thing  incredible  that  He  should  raise  the  dead, 
and  indeed  there  is  a  wide  difference  between 
every  other  miracle  and  this.  We  struggle 
against  all  else,  but  when  death  comes  we  feel 
that  all  is  over  except  to  bury  out  of  our  sight 
what  once  was  beautiful  and  dear.  Death  is 
destiny  made  visible;  it  is  the  irrevocable.  Who 
shall  unsay  the  words  of  a  bleeding  heart,  I  shall 
go  to  hi'm  but  he  shall  not  return  to  me?  But 
Christ  came  to  destroy  him  that  had  the  power 
of  death.  Even  now,  through  Him,  we  are  par- 
takers of  a  more  intense  and  deeper  life,  and 
have  not  only  the  hope  but  the  beginning  of 
immortality.  And  it  was  the  natural  seal  upon 
His  lofty  mission,  that  He  should  publicly  raise 
up  the  dead.  For  so  great  a  task,  shall  we  say 
that  Jesus  now  gathers  all  His  energies?  That 
would  be  woefully  to  misread  the  story;  for  a 
grand  simplicity,  the  easy  bearing  of  unstrained 
and  amply  adequate  resources,  is  common  to  all 
the  narratives  of  life  brought  back.  We  shall 
hereafter  see  good  reason  why  Jesus  employed 
means  for  other  miracles,  and  even  advanced  by 
stages  in  the  work.  But  lest  we  should  suppose 
that  effort  was  necessary,  and  His  power  but 
just  sufficed  to  overcome  the  resistance,  none  of 
these  supreme  miracles  is  wrought  with  the 
slightest  effort.  Prophets  and  apostles  may 
need  to  stretch  themselves  upon  the  bed  or  to 
embrace  the  corpse;  Jesus,  in  His  own  noble 
phrase,  awakes  it  out  of  sleep.  A  wonderful  ease 
and  quietness  pervade  the  narratives,  expressing 
exactly  the  serene  bearing  of  the  Lord  of  the 
dead  and  of  the  living.  There  is  no  holding 
back,  no  toying  with  the  sorrow  of  the  bereaved, 


Mark  vi.  1-6.] 


REJECTED    IN    HIS    OWN    COUNTRY. 


853 


such  as  even  Euripides,  the  tenderest  of  the 
Greeks,  ascribed  to  the  demigod  who  tore  from 
the  grip  of  death  the  heroic  wife  of  Admetus. 
Hercules  plays  with  the  husband's  sorrow,  sug- 
gests the  consolation  of  a  new  bridal,  and  extorts 
the  angry  cry,  "  Silence,  what  have  you  said? 
I  would  not  have  believed  it  of  you."  But  what 
is  natural  to  a  hero,  flushed  with  victory  and 
the  sense  of  patronage,  would  have  ill  become 
the  absolute  self-possession  and  gentle  grace  of 
Jesus.  In  every  case,  therefore,  He  is  full  of 
encouragement  and  sympathy,  even  before  His 
work  is  wrought.  To  the  widow  of  Nain  He 
says,  "  Weep  not."  He  tells  the  sister  of  Laz- 
arus, "  If  thou  wilt  believe,  thou  shalt  see  the 
salvation  of  God."  And  when  these  disastrous 
tidings  shake  all  the  faith  of  Jairus,  Jesus  loses 
not  a  moment  in  reassuring  Him:  "  Fear  not, 
only  believe,"  He  says,  not  heeding  the  word 
spoken;  that  is  to  say.  Himself  unagitated  and 
serene.* 

In  every  case  some  co-operation  was  expected 
from  the  bystanders.  The  bearers  of  the  widow's 
son  halted,  expectant,  when  this  majestic  and 
tender  Wayfarer  touched  the  bier.  The  friends 
of  Lazarus  rolled  away  the  stone  from  the 
sepulchre.  But  the  professional  mourners  in  the 
house  of  Jairus  were  callous  and  insensible,  and 
when  He  interrupted  their  clamorous  wailing, 
with  the  question.  Why  make  ye  tumult  and 
weep?  they  laughed  Him  to  scorn;  a  fit  expres- 
sion of  the  world's  purblind  incredulity,  its  re- 
liance upon  ordinary  "  experience  "  to  disprove 
all  possibilities  of  the  extraordinary  and  Divine, 
and  its  heartless  transition  from  conventional 
sorrow  to  ghastly  laughter,  mocking  in  the  pres- 
ence of  death — which  is,  in  its  view,  so  desperate 
— the  last  hope  of  humanity.  Laughter  is  not  the 
fitting  mood  in  which  to  contradict  the  Christian 
hope,  that  our  lost  ones  are  not  dead,  but  sleep. 
The  new  and  strange  hope  for  humanity  which 
Jesus  thus  asserted.  He  went  on  to  prove,  but  not 
for  them.  Exerting  that  moral  ascendency, 
which  sufficed  Him  twice  to  cleanse  the  Temple, 
He  put  them  all  forth,  as  already  He  had  shut 
out  the  crowd,  and  all  His  disciples  but  "  the 
elect  of  His  election,"  the  three  who  now  first 
obtain  a  special  privilege.  The  scene  was  one  of 
surpassing  solemnity  and  awe;  but  not  more  so 
than  that  of  Nain.  or  by  the  tomb  of  Lazarus. 
Why  then  were  not  only  the  idly  curious  and 
the  scornful,  but  nine  of  His  chosen  ones  ex- 
cluded? Surely  we  may  believe,  for  the  sake  of 
the  little  girl,  whose  tender  grace  of  unconscious 
maidenhood  should  not,  in  its  hour  of  reawak- 
ened vitality,  be  the  centre  of  a  gazing  circle. 
He  kept  with  Him  the  deeply  reverential  and  the 
loving,  the  ripest  apostles,  and  the  parents  of  the 
child,  since  love  and  reverence  are  ever  the  con- 
ditions of  real  insight.  And  then,  first,  was  ex- 
hibited the  gentle  and  profound  regard  of  Christ 
for  children.  He  did  not  arouse  her,  as  others, 
with  a  call  only,  but  took  her  by  the  hand,  while 
He  spoke  to  her  those  Aramaic  words,  so  mar- 
vellous in  their  effect,  which  St.  Peter  did  not  fail 
to  repeat  to  St.  Mark  as  he  had  heard  them, 
Talitha  cumi;  Damsel,  I  say  unto  thee.  Arise. 
They  have  an  added  sweetness  when  we  reflect 
that  the  former  word,  though  applied  to  a  very 
young  child,  is  in  its  root  a  variation  of  the  word 
for  a  little  lamb.     How  exquisite  from  the  lips 

♦Unless  indeed  the  meaning  be  rather,  '■'■over  hearing 
the  word,"  which  is  not  its  force  in  the  New  Testament 
(Matt,  xviii.  17,  twice). 


of  the  Good  Shepherd,  Who  gave  His  life  for 
the  sheep.  How  strange  to  be  thus  awakened 
from  the  mysterious  sleep,  and  to  gaze  with  a 
child's  fresh  eyes  into  the  loving  eyes  of  Jesus. 
Let  us  seek  to  realise  such  positions,  to  compre- 
hend the  tnarvellous  heart  which  they  reveal  to 
us,  and  we  shall  derive  more  love  and  trust  from 
the  effort  than  from  all  such  doctrinal  inference 
and  allegorising  as  would  dry  up,  into  a  hortus 
siccus,  the  sweetest  blooms  of  the  sweetest  story 
ever  told. 

So  shall  we  understand  what  happened  next 
in  all  three  cases.  Something  preternatural,  and 
therefore  dreadful,  appeared  to  hang  about  the 
lives  so  wondrously  restored.  The  widow  of 
Nain  did  not  dare  to  embrace  her  son  until 
Christ  "  gave  him  to  his  mother."  The  by- 
standers did  not  touch  Lazarus,  bound  hand  and 
foot,  until  Jesus  bade  them  "  loose  him  and  let 
him  go."  And  the  five  who  stood  about  this 
child's  bed,  amazed  straightway  with  a  great 
amazement,  had  to  be  reminded  that  being  now 
in  perfect  health,  after  an  illness  which  left  her 
system  wholly  unsupplied,  something  should  be 
given  her  to  eat.  This  is  the  point  at  which 
Euripides  could  find  nothing  fitter  for  Hercules 
to  utter  than  the  awkward  boast,  "  Thou  wilt 
some  day  say  that  the  son  of  Jove  was  a  capital 
guest  to  entertain."  What  a  contrast!  For 
Jesus  was  utterly  unflushed,  undazzled,  appar- 
ently unconscious  of  anything  to  disturb  His 
composure.  And  so  far  was  He  from  the  un- 
happy modern  notion,  that  every  act  of  grace 
must  be  proclaimed  on  the  housetop,  and  every 
recipient  of  grace,  however  young,  however  un- 
matured, paraded  and  exhibited,  that  He  charged 
them  much  that  no  man  should  know  this. 

The  story  throughout  is  graphic  and  full  of 
character;  every  touch,  every  word  reveals  the 
Divine  Man;  and  only  reluctance  to  believe  a 
miracle  prevents  it  from  proving  itself  to  every 
candid  mind.  Whether  it  be  accepted  or  re- 
jected, it  is  itself  miraculous.  It  could  not  have 
grown  up  in  the  soil  which  generated  the  early 
myths  and  legends,  by  the  working  of  the  ordi- 
nary laws  of  mind.  It  is  beyond  their  power  to 
invent  or  to  dream,  supernatural  in  the  strictest 
sense. 

This  miracle  completes  the  cycle.  Nature,  dis- 
tracted by  the  Fall,  has  revolted  against  Him  in 
vain.  Satan,  intrenched  in  his  last  stronghold, 
has  resisted,  and  humbled  himself  to  entreaties 
and  to  desperate  contrivances,  in  vain.  Secret 
and  unspoken  woes,  and  silent  germs  of  belief, 
have  hidden  from  Him,  in  vain.  Death  itself  has 
closed  its  bony  finp^ers  upon  its  prey,  in  vain. 
Nothing  can  resist  the  power  and  love  which  are 
enlisted  on  behalf  of  all  who  put  their  trust  in 
Jesus. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

REJECTED  IN  HIS  OWN  COUNTRY. 

Mark  vi.  i-6  (R.  V.). 

We  have  seen  how  St.  Mark,  to  bring  out 
more  vividly  the  connection  between  four 
mighty  signs,  their  ideal  completeness  as  a  whole, 
and  that  mastery  over  nature  and  the  spiritual 
world  which  they  reveal,  grouped  them  reso- 
lutely together,  excluding  even  significant  inci- 
dents which  would  break  in  upon  their  sequence. 
Bearing  this  in  mind,  how  profoundly  instructive 


854 


THE  ^GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


it  is  that  our-  Evangelist  shows  us  this  Master 
over  storm  and  demons,  over  too-silent  disease, 
and  over  death,  too  clamorously  bewailed,  in 
the  next  place  teaching  His  own  countryrnen 
in  vain,  and  an  offence  to  them.  How  startling 
to  read,  at  this  juncture,  when  legend  would 
surely  have  thrown  all  men  prostrate  at  his  feet, 
of  His  homely  family  and  His  trade,  and  how 
He  Who  rebuked  the  storm  "  could  there  do  no 
mighty  work." 

First  of  all,  it  is  touching  to  see  Jesus  turning 
once  more  to  "  His  own  country,"  just  at  this 
crisis.  They  had  rejected  Him  in  a  frenzy  of 
rage,  at  the  outset  of  His  ministry.  And  He  had 
very  lately  repulsed  the  rude  attempt  of  His  im- 
mediate relatives  to  interrupt  His  mission.  But 
now  His  heart  leads  Him  thither,  once  again 
to  appeal  to  the  companions  of  His  youth,  with 
the  halo  of  His  recent  and  surpassing  works 
upon  His  forehead.  He  does  not  abruptly  inter- 
rupt their  vocations,  but  waits  as  'before  for  the 
Sabbath,  and  the  hushed  assembly  in  the  sacred 
place.  And  as  He  teaches  in  the  synagogue, 
they  are  conscious  of  His  power.  Whence  could 
He  have  these  things?  His  wisdom  was  an  equal 
wonder  with  His  mighty  works,  of  the  reality 
of  which  they  could  not  doubt.  And  what  ex- 
cuse then  had  they  for  listening  to  His  wisdom 
in  vain?  But  they  went  on  to  ask.  Is  not  this 
the  carpenter?  the  Son  of  Mary?  they  knew  His 
brothers,  and  His  sisters  were  living  among 
them.  And  they  were  offended  in  Him,  natu- 
rally enough.  It  is  hard  to  believe  in  the  su- 
premacy of  one  whom  circumstances  marked  as 
our  equal,  and  to  admit  the  chieftainship  of  one 
who  started  side  by  side  with  us.  In  Palestine 
it  was  not  disgraceful  to  be  a  tradesman,  but  yet 
they  could  fairly  claim  equality  with  "  the  car- 
penter." And  it  is  plain  enough  that  they  found 
no  impressive  or  significant  difference  from  their 
neighbours  in  the  "  sisters  "  of  Jesus,  nor  even 
in  her  whom  all  generations  call  blessed.  Why 
then  should  they  abase  themselves  before  the 
claims  of  Jesus? 

It  is  an  instructive  incident.  First  of  all,  it 
shows  us  the  perfection  of  our  Lord's  abase- 
ment. He  was  not  only  a  carpenter's  son,  but 
what  this  passage  only  declares  to  us  explicitly, 
He  wrought  as  an  artisan,  and  consecrated  for 
ever  a  lowly  trade,  by  the  toil  of  those  holy  limbs 
whose  sufferings  should  redeem  the  world. 

And  we  learn  the  abject  folly  of  judging  by 
mere  worldly  standards.  We  are  bound  to  give 
due  honour  and  precedence  to  rank  and  station. 
Refusing  to  do  this,  we  virtually  undertake  to 
dissolve  society,  and  readjust  it  upon  other  prin- 
ciples, or  by  instincts  and  intuitions  of  our  own, 
a  grave  task,  when  it  is  realised.  But  we  are 
not  to  be  dazzled,  much  less  to  be  misled,  by  the 
advantages  of  station  or  of  birth.  Yet  if,  as  it 
would  seem,  Nazareth  rejected  Christ  because 
He  was  not  a  person  of  quality,  this  is  only  the 
most  extreme  and  ironical  exhibition  of  what 
happens  every  day,  when  a  noble  character,  self- 
denying,  self-controlled,  and  wise,  fails  to  win  the 
respect  which  is  freely  and  gladly  granted  to  vice 
and  folly  in  a  coronet. 

And  yet,  to  one  who  reflected,  the  very  objec- 
tion they  put  forward  was  an  evidence  of  His 
mission.  His  wisdom  was  confessed,  and  His 
miracles  were  not  denied;  were  they  less  wonder- 
ful or  more  amazing,  more  supernatural,  as  the 
endowments  of  the  carpenter  whom  they  knew? 
Whence,  they  asked,  had  He  derived  His  learn- 


ing, as  if  it  were  not  more  noble  for  being 
original. 

Are  we  sure  that  men  do  not  still  make  the 
same  mistake?  The  perfect  and  lowly  humanity 
of  Jesus  is  a  stumbling  block  to  some  who  will 
freely  admit  His  ideal  perfections,  and  the  match- 
less nobility  of  His  moral  teaching.  They  will 
grant  anything  but  the  supernatural  origin  of 
Him  to  Whom  they  attribute  qualities  beyond 
parallel.  But  whence  had  He  those  qualities? 
What  is  there  in  the  Galilee  of  the  first  century 
which  prepares  one  for  discovering  there  and 
then  the  revolutioniser  of  the  virtues  of  the 
world,  the  most  original,  profound,  and  unique 
of  all  teachers,  Him  Whose  example  is  still 
mightier  t'han  His  precepts,  and  only  not  more 
perfect,  because  these  also  are  without  a  flaw. 
Him  Whom  even  unbelief  would  shrink  from 
saluting  by  so  cold  a  title  as  that  of  the  most 
saintly  of  the  saints.  To  ask  with  a  clear  scru- 
tiny, whence  the  teaching  of  Jesus  came,  to  real- 
ise the  isolation  from  all  centres  of  thought  and 
movement,  of  this  Hebrew,  this  provincial 
among  Hebrews,  this  villager  in  Galilee,  this 
carpenter  in  a  village,  and  then  to  observe  His 
mighty  works  in  every  quarter  of  the  globe,  is 
enough  to  satisfy  all  candid  minds  that  His 
earthly  circumstances  have  something  totally  un- 
like themselves  behind  them.  And  the  more 
men  give  ear  to  materialism  and  to  materialistic 
evolution  without  an  evolving  mind,  so  much  the 
more  does  the  problem  press  upon  them.  Whence 
hath  this  man  this  wisdom?  and  what  mean  these 
mighty  works? 

From  our  Lord's  own  commentary  upon  their 
rejection  we  learn  to  beware  of  the  vulgarising 
effects  of  familiarity.  They  had  seen  His  holy 
youth,  against  which  no  slander  was  ever 
breathed.  And  yet,  while  His  teaching  aston- 
ished them.  He  had  no  honour  in  his  own  house. 
It  is  the  same  result  which  so  often  seems  to 
follow  from  a  lifelong  familiarity  with  Scripture 
and  the  means  of  grace.  We  read,  almost  me- 
chanically, what  melts  and  amazes  the  pagan  to 
whom  it  is  a  new  word.  We  forsake,  or  submit 
to  the  dull  routine  of  ordinances  the  most  sacred, 
the  most  searching,  the  most  invigorating,  and 
the  most  picturesque. 

And  yet  we  wonder  that  the  men  of  Nazareth 
could  not  discern  the  divinity  of  "  the  carpenter," 
whose  family  lived  quiet  and  unassuming  lives 
in  their  own  village. 

It  is  St.  Mark,  the  historian  of  the  energies  of 
Christ,  who  tells  us  that  He  "  could  there  do  no 
m.ighty  work,"  with  only  sufficient  exception  to 
prove  that  neither  physical  power  nor  compas- 
sion was  what  failed  Him,  since  "  He  laid  His 
hands  upon  a  few  sick  folk  and  healed  them." 
What  then  is  conveyed  by  this  bold  phrase? 
Surely  the  fearful  power  of  the  human  will  to  re- 
sist the  will  of  man's  compassionate  Redeemer. 

He  would  have  gathered  Jerusalem  under  His 
wing,  but  she  would  not;  and  the  temporal  re- 
sults of  her  disobedience  had  to  follow:  siege, 
massacre,  and  ruin.  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  him  who  dieth,  yet  death  follows,  as  the 
inevitable  wages  of  sin.  Therefore,  as  surely  as 
the  miracles  of  Jesus  typified  His  gracious  pur- 
poses for  the  souls  of  men.  Who  forgiyeth  all  our 
iniquities,  Who  healeth  all  our  diseases,  so 
surely  the  rejection  and  defeat  of  those  loving 
purposes  paralysed  the  arm  stretched  out  to  heal 
their  sick. 

Does  it  seem  as  if  the  words  "  He  could  not," 


Mark  vi.  7-13.] 


THE    MISSION    OF   THE    TWELVE. 


855 


even  thus  explained,  convey  a  certain  affront, 
throw  a  shadow  upon  the  glory  of  our  Master? 
And  the  words  "  they  mocked,  scourged,  cruci- 
fied Him,"  do  these  convey  no  affront?  The  suf- 
fering of  Jesus  was  not  only  physical:  His  heart 
was  wounded;  His  overtures  were  rejected;  His 
hands  were  stretched  out  in  vain;  His  pity  and 
love  were  crucified. 

But  now  let  this  be  considered,  that  men  who 
refuse  His  Spirit  continually  presume  upon  His 
mercy,  and  expect  not  to  suffer  the  penalty  of 
their  evil  deeds.  Alas!  this  is  impossible. 
Where  unbelief  rejected  His  teaching.  He  "  could 
not  "  work  the  marvels  of  His  grace.  How  shall 
they  escape  who  reject  so  great  salvation? 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  TWELVE. 
Mark  vi.  7-13  (R.  V.). 

Repulsed  a  second  time  from  the  cradle  of  His 
youth,  even  as  lately  from  Decapolis,  with  what 
a  heavy  heart  must  the  Loving  One  have  turned 
away.  Yet  we  read  of  no  abatement  of  His  la- 
bours. He  did  not,  like  the  fiery  prophet,  wan- 
der into  the  desert  and  make  request  that  He 
might  die.  And  it  helps  us  to  realise  the  eleva- 
tion of  our  Lord,  when  we  reflect  how  utterly 
the  discouragement  with  which  we  sympathise  in 
the  great  Elijah  would  ruin  our  conception  of 
Jesus. 

It  was  now  that  He  set  on  foot  new  ef- 
forts, and  advanced  in  the  training  of  His  elect. 
For  Himself,  He  went  atout  the  villages,  whither 
slander  and  prejudice  had  not  yet  penetrated,  and 
was  content  to  break  new  ground  among  the 
most  untaught  and  sequestered  of  the  people. 
The  humblest  field  of  labour  was  not  too  lowly 
for  the  Lord,  although  we  meet,  every  day,  with 
men  who  are  "  thrown  away  "  and  "  buried  "  in 
obscure  fields  of  usefulness.  We  have  not  yet 
learned  to  follow  without  a  murmur  the  Car- 
penter, and  the  Teacher  in  villages,  even  though 
we  are  soothed  in  grief  by  thinking,  because  we 
endure  the  inevitable,  that  we  are  followers  of 
the  Man  of  Sorrows.  At  the  same  moment  when 
democracies  and  priesthoods  are  rejecting  their 
Lord,  a  king  had  destroyed  His  forerunner.  On 
every  account  it  was  necessary  to  vary  as  well 
a>  multiply  the  means  for  the  evangelisation  of 
the  country.  Thus  the  movement  would  be  ac- 
celerated, and  it  would  no  longer  present  one 
solitary  point  of  attack  to  its  unscrupulous  foes. 

Jesus  therefore  called  to  Him  the  Twelve,  and 
b'?gan  to  send  them  forth.  In  so  doing.  His 
d'rections  revealed  at  once  His  wisdom  and  His 
fears  for  them. 

Not  even  for  unfallen  man  was  it  good  to  be 
a' one.  It  was  a  bitter  ingredient  in  the  cup 
which  Christ  Himself  drank,  that  His  followers 
should  be  scattered  to  their  own  and  leave  Him 
alone.  And  it  was  at  the  last  extremity,  when 
he  could  no  longer  forbear,  that  St.  Paul  thought 
it  good  to  be  at  Athens  alone.  Jesus  therefore 
would  not  send  His  inexperienced  heralds  forth 
for  the  first  time  except  by  two  and  two,  that 
each  might  sustain  the  courage  and  wisdom  of 
his  comrade.  And  His  example  was  not  for- 
gotten. Peter  and  John  together  visited  the 
converts  in  Samaria.  And  when  Paul  and  Bar- 
rabas,  whose  first  journey  was  together,  could 
10  longer  agree,  each  of  them  took  a  new  com- 
itide  and   departed.     Perhaps   our  modern   mis- 


sionaries lose  more  in  energy  than  is  gained  in 
area  by  neglecting  so  humane  a  precedent,  and 
forfeiting  the  special  presence  vouchsafed  to  the 
common  worship  of  two  or  three. 

St.  Mark  has  not  recorded  the  mission  of  the 
seventy  evangelists,  but  this  narrative  is  clearly 
coloured  by  his  knowledge  of  that  event.  Thus 
He  does  not  mention  the  gift  of  miraculous 
power,  which  was  common  to  both,  but  He  does 
tell  of  the  authority  over  unclean  spirits,  which 
was  explicitly  given  to  the  Twelve,  and  which 
the  Seventy,  returning  with  joy,  related  that  they 
also  had  successfully  dared  to  claim.  In  con- 
ferring such  power  upon  His  disciples,  Jesus 
took  the  first  step  towards  that  marvellous 
identification  of  Himself  and  His  mastery  over 
evil,  with  all  His  followers,  that  giving  of  His 
presence  to  their  assemblies.  His  honour  to  their 
keeping.  His  victory  to  their  experience,  and  His 
lifeblood  to  their  veins,  which  makes  Him  the 
second  Adam,  represented  in  all  the  newborn 
race,  and  which  finds  its  most  vivid  and  blessed 
expression  in  the  sacrament  where  His  flesh  is 
meat  indeed  and  His  blood  is  drink  indeed.  Now 
first  He  is  seen  to  commit  His  powers  and  His 
honour  into  mortal  hands. 

In  doing  this.  He  impressed  on  them  the  fact 
that  they  were  not  sent  at  first  upon  a  toilsome 
and  protracted  journey.  Their  personal  connec- 
tion with  Him  was  not  broken,  but  suspended 
for  a  little  while.  Hereafter,  they  would  need 
to  prepare  for  hardship,  and  he  that  had  two 
coats  should  take  them.  It  was  not  so  now: 
sandals  would  suffice  their  feet;  they  should 
carry  no  wallet;  only  a  staff  was  needed  for  their 
brief  exrcusion  through  a  hospitable  land.  But 
hospitality  itself  would  have  its  dangers  for 
them,  and  when  warmly  received  they  might  be 
tempted  to  be  feted  by  various  hosts,  enjoying 
the  first  enthusiastic  welcome  of  each,  and  re- 
fusing to  share  afterwards  the  homely  domestic 
life  which  would  succeed.  Yet  it  was  when  they 
ceased  to  be  strangers  that  their  influence  would 
really  be  the  strongest;  and  so  there  was  good 
reason,  both  for  the  sake  of  the  family  they 
might  win,  and  for  themselves  who  should  not 
become  self-indulgent,  why  they  should  not  go 
from  house  to  house. 

These  directions  were  not  meant  to  become 
universal  rules,  and  we  have  seen  how  Jesus 
afterwards  explicitly  varied  them.  But  their 
spirit  is  an  admonition  to  all  who  are  tempted  to 
forget  their  mission  in  personal  advantages  which 
it  may  offer.  Thus  commissioned  and  endowed, 
they  should  feel  as  they  went  the  greatness  of 
the  message  they  conveyed.  Wherever  they 
were  rejected,  no  false  meekness  should  forbid 
their  indignant  protest,  and  they  should  refuse 
to  carry  even  the  dust  of  that  evil  and  doomed 
place  upon  their  feet. 

And  they  went  forth  and  preached  repentance, 
casting  out  many  devils,  and  healing  many  that 
were  sick.  In  doing  this,  they  anointed  them 
with  oil,  as  St.  James  afterwards  directed,  but  as 
Jesus  never  did.  He  used  no  means,  or  when 
faith  needed  to  be  helped  by  a  visible  application, 
it  was  always  the  touch  of  His  own  hand  or 
the  moisture  of  His  own  lip.  The  distinction  is 
significant.  And  also  it  must  be  remembered  that 
oil  was  never  used  by  disciples  for  the  edification 
of  the  dying,  but  for  the  recovery  of  the  sick. 

By  this  new  agency  the  name  of  Jesus  was 
more  than  ever  spread  abroad,  until  it  reached 
the  ears  of  a  murderous  tyrant,  and  stirred  in  his 


856 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


bosom  not  the  repentance  which  they  preached, 
but  the  horrors  of  ineffectual  remorse. 


HEROD. 
Mark  vi.  14-29  (R.  V.). 

The  growing  influence  of  Jesus  demanded  the 
mission  of  the  Twelve,  and  this  in  its  turn  in- 
creased His  fame  until  it  alarmed  the  tetrarch 
Herod.  An  Idumaean  ruler  of  Israel  was  forced 
to  dread  every  religious  movement,  for  all  the 
waves  of  Hebrew  fanaticism  beat  against  the  for- 
eign throne.  And  Herod  Antipas  was  especially 
the  creature  of  circumstances,  a  weak  and  plastic 
man.  He  is  the  Ahab  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  it  is  a  curious  coincidence  that  he  should 
have  to  do  with  its  Elijah.  As  Ahab  fasted 
when  he  heard  his  doom,  and  postponed  the  evil 
by  his  submission,  so  Herod  was  impressed  and 
agitated  by  the  teaching  of  the  Baptist.  But 
Ahab  surrendered  his  soul  to  the  imperious  Jeze- 
bel, and  Herod  was  ruined  by  Herodias.  Each 
is  the  sport  of  strong  influences  from  without, 
and  warns  us  that  a  man,  no  mbre  than  a  ship, 
can  hope  by  drifting  to  come  safe  to  haven. 

No  contrast  could  be  imagined  more  dramatic 
than  between  the  sleek  seducer  of  his  brother's 
wife  and  the  imperious  reformer,  rude  in  garment 
and  frugal  of  fare,  thundering  against  the  genera- 
tion of  vipers  who  were  the  chiefs  of  his  religion. 

How  were  these  two  brought  together?  Did 
the  Baptist  stride  unsummoned  into  the  court? 
Did  his  crafty  foemen  contrive  his  ruin  by  incit- 
ing the  Tetrarch  to  consult  him?  Or  did  that 
restless  religious  curiosity,  which  afterwards  de- 
siied  to  see  Jesus,  lead  Herod  to  consult  his  fore- 
runner? The  abrupt  words  of  John  are  not  un- 
like an  answer  to  some  feeble  question  of  casuis- 
try, some  plea  of  extenuating  circumstances  such 
as  all  can  urge  in  mitigation  of  their  worst  deeds. 
He  simply  and  boldly  states  the  inflexible  ordi- 
nance of  God:  It  is  not  lawful  for  thee  to  have 
her. 

What  follows  may  teach  us  much. 

1.  It  warns  us  that  good  inclinations,  venera- 
tion for  holiness  in  others,  and  ineffectual  strug- 
gles against  our  own  vices,  do  not  guarantee 
salvation.  He  who  feels  them  is  not  God- 
forsaken, since  every  such  emotion  is  a  grace. 
But  he  must  not  infer  that  he  never  may  be  for- 
saken, or  that  because  he  is  not  wholly  indiffer- 
ent or  disobedient,  God  will  some  day  make  him 
all  that  his  better  moods  desire.  Such  a  man 
should  be  warned  by  Herod  Antipas.  Ruggedly 
and  abruptly  rebuked,  his  soul  recognised  and 
did  homage  to  the  truthfulness  of  his  teacher. 
Admiration  replaced  the  anger  in  which  he  cast 
him  into  prison.  As  he  stood  between  him  and 
the  relentless  Herodias,  and  "  kept  him  safely," 
he  perhaps  believed  that  the  gloomy  dungeon, 
and  the  utter  interruption  of  a  great  career,  were 
only  for  the  Baptist's  preservation.  Alas,  there 
was  another  cause.  He  was  "  much  perplexed  ": 
he  dared  not  provoke  his  temptress  by  releasing 
the  man  of  God.  And  thus  temporising,  and 
daily  weakening  the  voice  of  conscience  by  dis- 
obedience, he  was  lost. 

2.  It  is  distinctly  a  bad  omen  that  he  "  heard 
him  gladly,"  since  he  had  no  claim  to  well- 
founded  religious  happiness.  Our  Lord  had  al- 
ready observed  the  shallowness  of  men  who  im- 
mediately with  joy  receive  the  word,  yet  have  no 


root.  But  this  guilty  man,  disquieted  by  the  r««- 
proaches  of  memory  and  the  demands  of  coi.- 
science,  found  it  a  relief  to  hear  stern  truth,  and 
to  see  from  far  the  beauteous  light  of  righteous- 
ness. He  would  not  reform  his  life,  but  he  would 
fain  keep  his  sensibilities  alive.  It  was  so  that 
Italian  brigands  used  to  maintain  a  priest.  And 
it  is  so  that  fraudulent  British  tradesmen  too 
frequently  pass  for  religious  men.  People  cry 
shame  on  their  hypocrisy.  Yet  perhaps  they 
less  often  wear  a  mask  to  deceive  others  than  a 
cloak  to  keep  their  own  hearts  warm,  and  should 
not  be  quoted  to  prove  that  religion  is  a  deceit, 
but  as  witnesses  that  even  the  most  worldly  soul 
craves  as  much  of  it  as  he  can  assimilate.  So  it 
was  with  Herod  Antipas. 

3.  But  no  man  can  serve  two  masters.  He 
who  refuses  the  command  of  God  to  choose 
whom  he  will  serve,  in  calmness  and  meditation, 
when  the  means  of  grace  and  the  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  are  with  him,  shall  hear  some  day  the 
voice  of  the  Tempter,  derisive  and  triumphant, 
amid  evil  companions,  when  flushed  with  guilty 
excitements  and  with  sensual  desires,  and  deeply 
committed  by  rash  words  and  "  honour  rooted 
in  dishonour,"  bidding  him  choose  now,  and 
choose  finally.  Salome  will  tolerate  neither  weak 
hesitation  nor  half  measures;  she  must  herself 
possess  "  forthwith  "  the  head  of  her  mother's 
foe,  which  is  worth  more  than  half  the  kingdom, 
since  his  influence  might  rob  them  of  it  all.  And 
the  king  was  exceeding  sorry,  but  chose  to  be 
a  murderer  rather  than  be  taken  for  a  perjtirer 
by  the  bad  companions  who  sat  with  him.  What 
a  picture  of  a  craven  soul,  enslaved  even  in  the 
purple — and  of  the  meshes  for  his  own  feet 
which  that  man  weaves,  who  gathers  around  him 
such  friends  that  their  influence  will  surely  mis- 
lead his  lonely  soul  in  its  future  struggles  to  be 
virtuous.  What  a  lurid  light  does  this  passage 
throw  upon  another  and  a  worse  scene,  when  we 
meet  Herod  again,  not  without  the  tyrannous 
influence  of  his  men  of  war. 

4.  We  learn  the  mysterious  interconnection  of 
sin  with  sin.  Vicious  luxury  and  self-indulgence, 
the  plastic  feebleness  of  character  which  half 
yields  to  John,  yet  cannot  break  with  Herodias 
altogether,  these  do  not  seem  likely  to  end  in 
murder.  They  have  scarcely  strength  enough, 
we  feel,  for  a  great  crime.  Alas,  they  have  fee- 
bleness enough  for  it,  for  he  who  joins  in  the 
dance  of  the  graces  may  give  his  hand  to  the 
furies  unawares.  Nothing  formidable  is  to  be 
seen  in  Herod,  up  to  the  fatal  moment  when 
revelry,  and  the  influence  of  his  associates,  and 
the  graceful  dancing  of  a  woman  whose  beauty 
was  pitiless,  urged  him  irresistibly  forward  to 
bathe  his  shrinking  hands  in  blood.  And  from 
this  time  forward  he  is  a  lost  man.  When  a 
greater  than  John  is  reported  to  be  working 
miracles,  he  has  a  wild  explanation  for  the  new 
portent,  and  his  agitation  is  betrayed  in  his 
broken  words,  "  John,  whom  I  beheaded,  he  is 
risen."  "  For,"  St.  Mark  adds  with  quiet  but 
grave  significance,  "  Herod  himself  had  sent 
forth  and  laid  hold  upon  John,  and  bound  him."' 
Others  might  speak  of  a  mere  teacher,  but  the 
conscience  of  Herod  will  not  suffer  it  to  be  so; 
it  is  his  victim;  he  has  learnt  the  secret  of  eter- 
nity; "and  therefore  do  these  powers  work  in 
him."     Yet  Herod  was  a  Sadducee. 

5.  These  words  are  dramatic  enough  to  prove 
themselves;  it  would  have  tasked  Shakespeare  to 
invent  them.       But  they  involve  the  ascription 


Mark  vi.  30-46. J 


BREAD    IN    THE    DESERT. 


857 


from  the  first  of  unearthly  powers  to  Jesus,  and 
they  disprove,  what  sceptics  would  fain  persuade 
us,  that  miracles  were  inevitably  ascribed,  by  the 
credulity  of  the  age,  to  all  great  teachers,  since 
John  wrought  none,  and  the  astonishing  theory 
that  he  had  graduated  in  another  world,  was 
invented  by  Herod  to  account  for  those  of  Jesus. 
How  inevitable  it  was  that  such  a  man  should 
set  at  naught  our  Lord.  Dread,  and  moral  re- 
pulsion, and  the  suspicion  that  he  himself  was  the 
mark  against  which  all  the  powers  pi  the  avenger 
would  be  directed,  these  would  not  produce  a 
mood  in  which  to  comprehend  One  who  did  not 
strive  nor  cry.  To  them  it  was  a  supreme  relief 
to  be  able  to  despise  Christ. 

Elsewhere  we  can  trace  the  gradual  cessation 
of  the  alarm  of  Herod.  At  first  he  dreads  the 
presence  of  the  new  Teacher,  and  yet  dares  not 
assail  Him  openly.  And  so,  when  Jesus  was  ad- 
vised to  go  thence  or  Herod  would  kill  Him, 
He  at  once  knew  who  had  instigated  the  crafty 
monition,  and  sent  back  his  defiance  to  that  fox. 
But  even  fear  quickly  dies  in  a  callous  heart,  and 
only  curiosity  survives.  Herod  is  soon  glad  to 
see  Jesus,  and  hopes  that  He  may  work  a  miracle. 
For  religious  curiosity  and  the  love  of  spiritual 
excitement  often  survive  grace,  just  as  the  love 
of  stimulants  survives  the  healthy  appetite  for 
bread.  But  our  Lord,  Who  explained  so  much 
for  Pilate,  spoke  not  a  word  to  him.  And  the 
wretch,  whom  once  the  forerunner  had  all  but 
won,  now  set  the  Christ  Himself  at  naught,  and 
mocked  Him.  So  yet  does  the  god  of  this  world 
blind  the  eyes  of  the  unbelieving.  So  great  are 
still  the  dangers  of  hesitation,  since  not  to  be 
for  Christ  is  to  be  against  Him. 

6.  But  the  blood  of  the  martyr  was  not  shed 
before  his  work  was  done.  As  the  falling  blos- 
som admits  the  sunshine  to  the  fruit,  so  tlie 
herald  died  when  his  influence  might  have 
clashed  with  the  growing  influence  of  his  Lord, 
Whom  the  Twelve  were  at  last  trained  to  pro- 
claim far  and  wide.  At  a  stroke,  his  best  fol- 
lowers were  naturally  transferred  to  Jesus, 
Whose  way  he  had  prepared.  Rightly,  therefore, 
has  St.  Mark  placed  the  narrative  at  this  junc- 
ture, and  very  significantly  does  St.  Matthew 
relate  that  his  disciples,  when  they  had  buried 
him,  "  came  and  told  Jesus." 

Upon  the  path  of  our  Lord  Himself  this  vio- 
lent death  fell  as  a  heavy  shadow.  Nor  was  He 
unconscious  of  its  menace,  for  after  the  trans- 
figuration He  distinctly  connected  with  a  pre- 
diction of  His  own  death  the  fact  that  they  had 
done  to  Elias  also  whatsoever  they  listed.  Such 
connections  of  thought  help  us  to  realise  the 
truth,  that  not  once  only,  but  throughout  His 
ministry.  He  Who  bids  us  bear  our  cross  while 
we  follow  Him,  was  consciously  bearing  His 
own.  We  must  not  limit  to  "  three  days  "  the 
sorrows  which  redeemed  the  world. 


BREAD  IN  THE  DESERT. 

Mark  vi.  30-46  (R.  V.). 

The  Apostles,  now  first  called  by  that  name, 
because  now  first  these  "  Messengers  "  had  car- 
ried the  message  of  their  Lord,  returned  and  told 
Him  all,  the  miracles  they  had  performed,  and 
whatever  they  had  taught.  From  the  latter 
clause  it  is  plain  that  to  preach  "  that  men  should 
repent,"  involved  arguments,  motives,  promises, 


and  perhaps  t'hreatenings  which  rendered  it  no 
meagre  announcement.  It  is  in  truth  a  demand 
which  involves  free  will  and  responsibility  as  its 
bases,  and  has  hell  or  heaven  for  the  result  of 
disobedience  or  compliance.  Into  what  contro- 
versies may  it  have  led  these  first  preachers  of 
Jesus!  All  was  now  submitted  to  the  judgment 
of  their  Master.  And  happy  are  they  still  who 
do  not  shrink  from  the  healing  pain  of  bringing 
all  their  actions  and  words  to  Him,  and  hearken- 
ing what  the  Lord  will  speak. 

Upon  the  whole,  they  brought  a  record  of  suc- 
cess. And  around  Him  also  were  so  many  com- 
ing and  going  that  they  had  no  leisure  so  much 
as  to  eat.  Whereupon  Jesus  draws  them  aside  to 
rest  awhile.  For  the  balance  must  never  be  for- 
gotten between  the  outer  and  the  inner  life.  The 
Lord  Himself  spent  the  following  night  in 
prayer,  until  He  saw  the  distress  of  His  disciples, 
and  came  to  them  upon  the  waves.  And  the 
time  was  at  hand  when  they,  who  now  rejoiced 
that  the  devils  were  subject  unto  them,  should 
learn  by  sore  humiliation  and  defeat  that  this 
kind  goeth  not  forth  except  by  prayer.  We  may 
be  certain  that  it  was  not  bodily  repose  alone  that 
Jesus  desired  for  his  flushed  and  excited  am- 
bassadors, in  the  hour  of  their  success.  And  yet 
bodily  repose  also  at  such  a  time  is  healing,  and 
in  the  very  pause,  the  silence,  the  cessation  of 
the  rush,  pressure,  and  excitement  of  every  con- 
spicuous career,  there  is  an  opportunity  and  even 
a  suggestion  of  calm  and  humble  recollection  of 
the  soul.  Accordingly  they  crossed  in  the  boat 
to  some  quiet  spot,  open  and  unreclaimed,  but 
very  far  from  such  dreariness  as  the  mention  of  a 
desert  suggests  to  us.  But  the  people  saw  Him, 
and  watched  His  course,  while  outrunning  him 
along  the  coast,  and  their  numbers  were  aug- 
mented from  every  town  as  they  poured  through 
it,  until  He  came  forth  and  saw  a  great  multitude, 
and  knew  that  His  quest  of  solitude  was  baffled. 
Few  things  are  more  trying  than  the  world's  re- 
morseless intrusion  upon  one's  privacy,  and  sub- 
versions of  plans  which  one  has  laid,  not  for 
himself  alone.  But  Jesus  was  as  thoughtful  for 
the  multitude  as  He  had  just  shown  Himself  to 
be  for  His  disciples.  Not  to  petulance  but  to 
compassion  did  their  urgency  excite  Him;  for 
as  they  streamed  across  the  wilderness,  far  from 
believing  upon  Him,  but  yet  conscious  of  sore 
need,  unsatisfied  with  the  doctrine  of  their  pro- 
fessional teachers,  and  just  bereaved  of  the  Bap- 
tist, they  seemed  in  the  desert  like  sheep  that  had 
no  shepherd.  And  He  patiently  taught  them 
many  things. 

Nor  was  He  careful  only  for  their  souls.  We 
have  now  reached  that  remarkable  miracle  which 
alone  is  related  by  all  the  four  Evangelists.  And 
the  narratives,  while  each  has  its  individual  and 
peculiar  points,  corroborate  each  other  very 
strikingly.  All  four  mention  the  same  kind  of 
basket,  quite  different  from  what  appears  in  the 
feeding  of  the  four  thousand.  St.  John  alone 
tells  us  that  it  was  the  season  of  the  Passover,  the 
middle  of  the  Galilean  spring-time;  but  yet  this 
agrees  exactly  with  St.  Mark's  allusion  to  the 
"  green  grass  "  which  summer  has  not  yet  dried 
up.  All  four  have  recorded  that  Jesus  "  blessed  " 
or  "  gave  thanks,"  and  three  of  them  that  He 
looked  up  to  heaven  while  doing  so.  What  was 
there  so  remarkable,  so  intense  or  pathetic  in 
His  expression,  that  it  should  have  won  this 
three-fold  celebration?  If  we  remember  the 
symbolical  meaning  of  what  He  did,  and  that  as 


858 


THE ''GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


His  hands  were  laid  upon  the  bread  which  He 
would  break,  so  His  own  body  should  soon  be 
broken  for  the  relief  of  the  hunger  of  the  world, 
how  can  we  doubt  that  absolute  self-devotion, 
infinite  love,  and  pathetic  resignation  were  in  that 
wonderful  look,  which  never  could  be  forgotten? 

There  could  have  been  but  few  women  and 
children  among  the  multitudes  who  "  outran 
Jesus,"  and  these  few  would  certainly  have  been 
trodden  down  if  a  rush  of  strong  and  hungry 
men  for  bread  had  taken  place.  Therefore  St. 
John  mentions  that  while  Jesus  bade  "  the  peo- 
ple "  to  be  seated,  it  was  t'he  men  who  were 
actually  arranged  (vi.  10  R.  V.).  Groups  of  fifty 
were  easy  to  keep  in  order,  and  a  hundred  of 
these  were  easily  counted.  And  thus  it  comes  to 
pass  that  we  know  that  there  were  five  thousand 
men,  while  the  women  and  children  remained  un~ 
reckoned,  as  St.  Matthew  asserts,  and  St.  Mark 
implies.  This  is  a  kind  of  harmony  which  we  do 
not  find  in  two  versions  of  any  legend.  Nor 
could  any  legendary  impulse  have  imagined  the 
remarkable  injunction,  which  impressed  all  four 
Evangelists,  to  be  frugal  when  it  would  seem 
that  the  utmost  lavishness  was  pardonable.  They 
were  not  indeed  bidden  to  gather  up  fragments 
left  behind  upon  the  ground,  for  thrift  is  not 
meanness;  but  the  "broken  pieces"  which  our 
Lord  had  provided  over  and  above  should  not 
be  lost.  "  This  union  of  economy  with  creative 
power,"  said  Olshausen,  "  could  never  have  been 
invented,  and  yet  Nature,  that  mirror  of  the  Di- 
vine perfections,  exhibits  the  same  combination 
of  boundless  munificence  with  truest  frugality." 
And  Godet  adds  the  excellent  remark,  that  "  a 
gift  so  obtained  was  not  to  be  squandered." 

There  is  one  apparent  discord  to  set  against 
these  remarkable  harmonies,  and  it  will  at  least 
serve  to  show  that  they  are  not  calculated  and 
artificial. 

St.  John  represents  Jesus  as  the  first  to  ask 
Philip,  Whence  are  we  to  buy  bread?  whereas 
the  others  represent  the  Twelve  as  urging  upon 
Him  the  need  to  dismiss  the  multitude,  at  so  late 
an  hour,  from  a  place  so  ill  provided.  The  in- 
consistency is  only  an  apparent  one.  It  was 
early  in  the  day,  and  upon  "  seeing  a  great  com- 
pany come  unto  Him,"  that  Jesus  questioned 
Philip,  who  might  have  remembered  an  Old  Tes- 
tament precedent,  when  Elisha  said  "  Give  unto 
the  people  that  they  may  eat.  And  his  servitor 
said.  What?  shall  I  set  this  before  an  hundred 
men?  He  said,  again  .  .  .  they  shall  both  eat 
and  shall  also  leave  thereof."  But  the  faith  of 
Philip  did  not  respond,  and  if  any  hope  of  a  mir- 
acle were  excited,  it  faded  as  time  passed  over. 
Hours  later,  when  the  day  was  far  spent,  the 
Twelve,  now  perhaps  excited  by  Philip's  misgiv- 
ing, and  repeating  his  calculation  about  the  two 
hundred  pence,  urge  Jesus  to  dismiss  the  multi- 
tude. They  took  no  action  until  "  the  time  was 
already  past,"  but  Jesus  saw  the  end  from  the 
beginning.  As  surely  the  issue  taught  them  not 
to  distrust  their  Master's  power.  Now  the  same 
power  is  for  ever  with  the  Church;  and  our 
heavenly  Father  knoweth  that  we  have  need  of 
food  and  raiment. 

Even  in  the  working  of  a  miracle,  the  scanti- 
est means  vouchsafed  by  Providence  are  not  de- 
spised. Jesus  takes  the  barley-loaves  and  the 
fishes,  and  so  teaches  all  men  that  true  faith  is 
remote  indeed  from  the  tanaticism  which  neg- 
lects any  resources  brought  within  the  reach  of 
our  study  and  our  toil.    And  to  show  how  really 


these  materials  were  employed,  the  broken  pieces 
which  they  gathered  are  expressly  said  to  have 
been  composed  of  the  barley-loaves  and  of  the 
fish. 

Indeed  it  must  be  remarked  that  in  no  miracle 
of  the  Gospel  did  Jesus  actually  create.  He 
makes  no  new  members  of  the  body,  but  restores 
old  useless  ones.  "  And  so,  without  a  substratum 
to  work  upon  He  creates  neither  bread  nor 
wine."  To  do  this  would  not  have  been  a  whit 
more  diificult,  but  it  would  have  expressed  less 
aptly  His  mission,  which  was  not  to  create  a 
new  system  of  things,  but  to  renew  the  old,  to 
recover  the  lost  sheep,  and  to  heal  the  sick  at 
heart. 

Every  circumstance  of  this  miracle  is  precious. 
That  vigilant  care  of  the  weak  which  made  the 
people  sit  down  in  groups,  and  await  their  turn 
to  be  supplied,  is  a  fine  example  of  the  practical 
eye  for  details  which  was  never,  before  or  since, 
so  perfectly  united  with  profound  thought,  in- 
sight into  the  mind  of  God,  and  the  wants  of  the 
human  race. 

The  words,  Give  ye  them  to  eat,  may  serve 
as  an  eternal  rebuke  to  the  helplessness  of  the 
Church,  face  to  face  with  a  starving  world,  and 
regarding  her  own  scanty  resources  with  dis- 
may. In  the  presence  of  heathenism,  of  disso- 
lute cities,  and  of  semi-pagan  peasantries,  she  is 
ever  looking  wistfully  to  some  costly  far-off  sup- 
ply. And  her  Master  is  ever  bidding  her  believe 
that  the  few  loaves  and  fishes  in  her  hand,  if 
blessed  and  distributed  by  Him,  will  satisfy  the 
famine  of  mankind. 

For  in  truth  He  is  Himself  this  bread.  All  that 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John  explains,  underlies  the 
naratives  of  the  four.  And  shame  on  us,  with 
Christ  given  to  feed  and  strengthen  us,  if  we 
think  our  resources  scanty,  if  we  grudge  to  share 
them  with  mankind,  if  we  let  our  thoughts  wan- 
der away  to  the  various  palliatives  for  human 
misery  and  salves  for  human  anguish,  which 
from  time  to  time  gain  the  credence  of  an  hour; 
if  we  send  the  hungry  to  the  country  and  villages 
round  about,  when  Christ  the  dispenser  of  the 
Bread  of  souls,  for  ever  present  in  His  Church, 
is  saying,  They  need  not  depart,  give  ye  them  to 
eat. 

The  sceptical  explanations  of  this  narrative  are 
exquisitely  ludicrous.  One  tells  us  how,  finding 
themselves  in  a  desert,  "  thanks  to  their  extreme 
frugality  they  were  able  to  exist,  and  this  was 
naturally"  (what,  naturally?)  "regarded  as  a 
miracle."  This  is  called  the  legendary  explana- 
tion, and  every  one  can  judge  for  himself  how 
much  it  succeeds  in  explaining  to  him.  Another 
tells  us  that  Jesus  being  greater  than  Moses,  it 
was  felt  that  He  must  have  outstripped  him  in 
miraculous  power.  And  so  the  belief  grew  up 
that  as  Moses  fed  a  nation  during  forty  years, 
with  angels'  food.  He,  to  exceed  this,  must  have 
bestowed  upon  five  thousand  men  one  meal  of 
barley  bread. 

This  is  called  the  mythical  explanation,  and  the 
credulity  which  accepts  it  must  not  despise  Chris- 
tians, who  only  believe  their  Bibles. 

Jesus  had  called  away  His  followers  to  rest. 
The  multitude  which  beheld  this  miracle  was  full 
of  passionate  hate  against  the  tyrant,  upon  whose 
hands  the  blood  of  the  Baptist  was  still  warm. 
All  they  wanted  was  a  leader.  And  now  they 
would  fain  have  taken  Jesus  by  force  to  thrust 
this  perilous  honour  upon  Him.  Therefore  He 
sent  away  His  disciples  first,  that  ambition  and 


Mark  vi.  53-vii.  13.] 


UNWASHEN    HANDS. 


859 


hope  might  not  agitate  and  secularise  their 
•minds:  and  when  He  had  dismissed  the  multi- 
tude He  Himself  ascended  the  neighbouring 
mountain,  to  cool  His  frame  with  the  pure 
breezes,  and  to  refresh  His  Holy  Spirit  by  com- 
munion with  His  Father.  Prayer  was  natural  to 
Jesus;  but  think  how  much  more  needful  is  it  to 
us.  And  yet  perhaps  we  have  never  taken  one 
hour  from  sleep  for  God. 


"JESUS  WALKING  ON  THE  WATER." 
Mark  vi.  47-52  (R.  V.). 
(See  iv.  36,  pp.  847-849-) 


UNWASHEN  HANDS. 
Mark  vi.  53-vii.  13  (R.  V.). 

There  is  a  condition  of  mind  which  readily 
accepts  the  temporal  blessings  of  religion,  and 
yet  neglects,  and  perhaps  despises,  the  spiritual 
truths  which  they  ratify  and  seal.  When  Jesus 
landed  on  Gennesaret,  He  was  straightway 
known,  and  as  He  passed  through  the  district, 
there  was  a  hasty  bearing  of  all  the  sick  to  meet 
Him,  laying  them  in  public  places,  and  beseech- 
ing Him  that  they  might  touch,  if  no  more,  the 
border  of  His  garment.  By  the  faith  which  be- 
lieved in  so  easy  a  cure,  a  timid  woman  had  re- 
cently won  signal  commendation.  But  the  very 
fact  that  her  cure  had  become  public,  while  it  ac- 
counts for  the  action  of  these  crowds,  deprives 
it  of  any  special  merit.  We  only  read  that  as 
many  as  touched  Him  were  made  whole.  And 
we  know  that  just  now  He  was  forsaken  by  many 
even  of  His  disciples,  and  had  to  ask  His  very 
Apostles,  Will  ye  also  go  away? 

Thus  we  find  these  two  conflicting  movements: 
among  the  sick  and  their  friends  a  profound 
persuasion  that  He  can  heal  them;  and  among 
those  whom  He  would  fain  teach,  resentment 
and  revolt  against  His  doctrine.  The  combina- 
tion is  strange,  but  we  dare  not  call  it  unfa- 
miliar. We  see  the  opposing  tendencies  even  in 
the  same  man,  for  sorrow  and  pain  drive  to  His 
knees  many  a  one  who  will  not  take  upon  his 
neck  the  easy  yoke.  Yet  how  absurd  it  is  to  be- 
lieve in  Christ's  goodness  and  power,  and  still 
to  dare  to  sin  against  Him,  still  to  reject  the 
inevitable  inference  that  His  teaching  must  bring 
bliss.  Men  ought  to  ask  themselves  what  is  in- 
volved when  they  pray  to  Christ  and  yet  refuse 
to  serve  Him. 

As  Jesus  moved  thus  around  the  district,  and 
responded  so  amply  to  their  supplication  that 
His  very  raiment  was  charged  with  health  as  if 
with  electricity,  which  leaps  out  at  a  touch,  what 
an  effect  He  must  have  produced,  even  upon  the 
ceremonial  purity  of  the  district.  Sickness  meant 
defilement,  not  for  the  sufferer  alone,  but  for  his 
friends,  his  nurse,  and  the  bearers  of  his  little 
pallet.  By  the  recovery  of  one  sick  man,  a  foun- 
tain of  Levitical  pollution  was  dried  up.  And 
the  harsh  and  rigid  legalist  ought  to  have  per- 
ceived that  from  his  own  point  of  view  the  pil- 
grimage of  Jesus  was  like  the  breath  of  spring 
upon  a  garden,  to  restore  its  freshness  and 
bloom. 

It   was   therefore   an   act   of  portentous    way- 


wardness when,  at  this  juncture,  a  complaint  was 
made  of  His  indifference  to  ceremonial  clean- 
ness. For  of  course  a  charge  against  His  disci- 
ples was  really  a  complaint  against  the  influence 
which  guided  them  so  ill. 

It  was  not  a  disinterested  complaint.  Jerusa- 
lem was  alarmed  at  the  new  movement  resulting 
from  the  mission  of  the  Twelve,  their  miracles, 
and  the  mighty  works  which  He  Himself  had 
lately  \vrought.  And  a  deputation  of  Pharisees 
and  scribes  came  from  this  centre  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal prejudice,  to  bring  Him  to  account.  They 
do  not  assail  His  doctrine,  nor  charge  Him  with 
violating  the  law  itself,  for  He  had  put  to  shame 
their  querulous  complaints  about  the  Sabbath 
day.  But  tradition  was  altogether  upon  their 
side:  it  was  a  weapon  ready  sharpened  for  their 
use  against  one  so  free,  unconventional,  and  fear- 
less. 

The  law  had  imposed  certain  restrictions  upon 
the  chosen  race,  restrictions  which  were  admira- 
bly sanitary  in  their  nature,  while  aiming  also  at 
preserving  the  isolation  of  Israel  from  the  cor- 
rupt and  foul  nations  which  lay  around.  AH 
such  restrictions  were  now  about  to  pass  away, 
because  religion  was  to  become  aggressive,  it 
was  henceforth  to  invade  the  nations  from  whose 
inroads  it  had  heretofore  sought  a  covert.  But 
the  Pharisees  had  not  been  content  even  with 
the  severe  restrictions  of  the  law.  They  had  not 
regarded  these  as  a  fence  for  themselves  against 
spiritual  impurity,  but  as  an  elaborate  and  artifi- 
cial substitute  for  love  and  trust.  And  therefore, 
as  love  and  spiritual  religion  faded  out  of  their 
hearts,  they  were  the  more  jealous  and  sensitive 
about  the  letter  of  the  law.  They  "  fenced  "  it 
with  elaborate  rules,  and  precautions  against  ac- 
cidental transgressions,  superstitiously  dreading 
an  involuntary  infraction  of  its  minutest  details. 
Certain  substances  were  unclean  food.  But  who 
could  tell  whether  some  atom  of  such  substance, 
blown  about  in  the  dust  of  summer,  might  ad- 
here to  the  hand  with  which  he  ate,  or  to  the 
cups  and  pots  whence  his  food  was  drawn? 
Moreover,  the  Gentile  nations  were  unclean,  and 
it  was  not  possible  to  avoid  all  contact  with  them 
in  the  market-places,  returning  whence,  there- 
fore, every  devout  Jew  was  careful  to  wash  him- 
self, which  washing,  though  certainly  not  an  im- 
mersion, is  here  plainly  called  a  baptism.  Thus 
an  elaborate  system  of  ceremonial  washing,  not 
for  cleansing,  but  as  a  religious  precaution,  had 
grown  up  among  the  Jews. 

But  the  disciples  of  Jesus  had  begun  to  learn 
their  emancipation.  Deeper  and  more  spiritual 
conceptions  of  God  and  man  and  duty  had  grown 
up  in  them.  And  the  Pharisees  saw  that  they 
ate  their  bread  with  unwashen  hands.  It  availed 
nothing  that  half  a  population  owed  purity  and 
health  to  their  Divine  benevolence,  if  in  the  proc- 
ess the  letter  of  a  tradition  were  infringed.  It 
was  necessary  to  expostulate  with  Jesus,  because 
they  walked  not  according  to  the  tradition  of  the 
elders,  that  dried  skin  of  an  old  orthodoxy  in 
which  prescription  and  routine  would  ever  fain 
shut  up  the  seething  enthusiasms  and  insights 
of  the  present  time. 

With  such  attempts  to  restrict  and  cramp  the 
free  life  of  the  soul,  Jesus  could  have  no  sympa- 
thy. He  knew  well  that  an  exaggerated  trust  in 
any  form,  any  routine  or  ritual  whatever,  was 
due  to  the  need  of  some  stay  and  support  for 
hearts  which  have  ceased  to  trust  in  a  Father 
of  souls.     But  He  chose  to  leave  them  without 


86o 


THE  GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


excuse  by  showing  their  transgression  of  actual 
precepts  which  real  reverence  for  God  would 
have  respected.  Like  books  of  etiquette  for  peo- 
ple who  have  not  the  instincts  of  gentlemen; 
so  do  ceremonial  religions  spring:  up  \yhere  the 
instinct  of  respect  for  the  will  of  God  is  dull  or 
dead.  Accordingly  Jesus  quotes  against  these 
Pharisees  a  distinct  precept,  a  word  not  of  their 
fathers,  but  of  God,  which  their  tradition  had 
caused  them  to  trample  upon.  If  any  genuine 
reverence  for  His  commandment  had  survived, 
it  would  have  been  outraged  by  such  a  collision 
between  the  text  and  the  gloss,  the  precept  and 
the  precautionary  supplement.  But  they  had 
never  felt  the  incongruity,  never  been  jealous 
enough  for  the  commandment  of  God  to  revolt 
against  the  encroaching  tradition  which  insulted 
it.  The  case  which  Jesus  gave,  only  as  one  of 
"  many  such  things,"  was  an  abuse  of  the  system 
of  vows,  and  of  dedicated  property.  It  would 
seem  that  from  the  custom  of  "  devoting "  a 
man's  property,  and  thus  putting  it  beyond  his 
further  control,  had  grown  up  the  abuse  of  con- 
secrating it  with  such  limitations  that  it  should 
still  be  available  for  the  owner,  but  out  of  his 
power  to  give  to  others.  And  thus,  by  a  spell 
as  abject  as  the  taboo  of  the  South  Sea  islanders, 
a  man  glorified  God  by  refusing  help  to  his  father 
and  mother,  without  being  at  all  the  poorer  for 
the  so-called  consecration  of  his  means.  And 
even  if  he  awoke  up  to  the  shameful  nature  of 
his  deed,  it  was  too  late,  for  "  ye  no  longer  suf- 
fer him  to  do  aught  for  his  father  or  his  mother." 
And  yet  Moses  had  made  it  a  capital  offence  to 
"  speak  evil  of  father  or  mother."  Did  they  then 
allow  such  slanders?  Not  at  all,  and  so  they 
would  have  refused  to  confess  any  aptness  in  the 
quotation.  But  Jesus  was  not  thinking  of  the 
letter  of  a  precept,  but  of  the  spirit  and  tendency 
of  a  religion,  to  which  they  were  blind.  With 
what  scorn  He  regarded  their  miserable  subter- 
fuges, is  seen  by  His  vigorous  word,  "  full  well 
do  ye  make  void  the  commandment  of  our  God 
that  ye  may  keep  your  traditions." 

Now  the  root  of  all  this  evil  was  unreality.  It 
was  not  merely  because  their  heart  was  far  from 
God  that  they  invented  hollow  formalisms;  indif- 
ference leads  to  neglect,  not  to  a  perverted  and 
fastidious  earnestness.  But  while  their  hearts 
were  earthly,  they  had  learned  to  honour  God 
with  their  lips.  The  judgments  which  had  sent 
their  fathers  into  exile,  the  pride  of  their  unique 
position  among  the  nations,  and  the  self-interest 
of  privileged  classes,  all  forbade  them  to  neglect 
the  worship  in  which  they  had  no  joy,  and  which, 
therefore,  they  were  unable  to  follow  as  it 
reached  out  into  infinity,  panting  after  God,  a  liv- 
ing God.  There  was  no  principle  of  life,  growth, 
aspiration,  in  their  dull  obedience.  And  what 
could  it  turn  into  but  a  routine,  a  ritual,  a  verbal 
homage,  and  the  honour  of  the  lips  only?  And 
how  could  such  a  worship  fail  to  shelter  itself 
in  evasions  from  the  heart-searching  earnestness 
of  a  law  which  was  spiritual,  while  the  worship- 
per was  carnal  and  sold  under  sin? 

It  was  inevitable  that  collisions  should  arise. 
And  the  same  results  will  always  follow  the 
same  causes.  Wherever  men  bow  the  knee  for 
the  sake  of  respectability,  or  because  they  dare 
not  absent  themselves  from  the  outward  haunts 
of  piety,  yet  fail  to  love  God  and  their  neigh- 
bour, there  will  the  form  outrage  the  spirit,  and 
in  vain  will  they  worship,  teaching  as  their  doc- 
trines the  traditions  of  men. 


Very  completely  indeed  was  the  relative  posf- 
tion  of  Jesus  and  His  critics  reversed,  since  thty 
had  expressed  pain  at  the  fruitless  effort  of  H^s 
mother  to  speak  with  Him,  and  He  had  seemed 
to  set  the  meanest  disciple  upon  a  level  with  her. 
But  He  never  really  denied  the  voice  of  nature, 
and  they  never  really  heard  it.  An  affectation 
of  respect  would  have  satisfied  their  heartless 
formality:  He  thought  it  the  highest  reward  of 
discipleship  to  share  the  warmth  of  His  love. 
And  therefore,  in  due  time,  it  was  seen  that  His 
critics  were  all  unconscious  of  the  wickedness 
of  filial  neglect  which  set  His  heart  on  fire. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THINGS  WHICH  DEFILE. 

Mark  vii.  14-23  (R.  V.). 

When  Jesus  had  exposed  the  hypocrisy  of  the 
Pharisees,  He  took  a  bold  and  significant  step. 
Calling  the  multitude  to  Him,  He  publicly  an- 
nounced that  no  diet  can  really  pollute  the  soul; 
only  its  own  actions  and  desires  can  do  that:  not 
that  which  entereth  into  the  man  can  defile  him. 
but  the  things  which  proceed  out  of  the  man. 

He  does  not  as  yet  proclaim  the  abolition  of 
the  law,  but  He  surely  declares  that  it  is  only 
temporary,  because  it  is  conventional,  not  rooted 
in  the  eternal  distinctions  between  right  and 
wrong,  but  artificial.  And  He  shows  that  its 
time  is  short  indeed,  by  charging  the  multitude  to 
understand  how  limited  is  its  reach,  how  poor  are 
its  effects. 

Such  teaching,  addressed  with  marked  empha- 
sis to  the  public,  the  masses,  whom  the  Phari- 
sees despised  as  ignorant  of  the  law,  and  cursed, 
was  a  defiance  indeed.  And  the  natural  conse- 
quence was  an  opposition  so  fierce  that  He  was 
driven  to  betake  Himself,  for  the  only  time,  and 
like  Elijah  in  his  extremity,  to  a  Gentile  land. 
And  yet  there  was  abundant  evidence  in  the 
Old  Testament  itself  that  the  precepts  of  the 
law  were  not  the  life  of  souls.  David  ate  the 
showbread.  The  priests  profaned  the  Sabbath, 
Isaiah  spiritualised  fasting.  Zechariah  foretold 
the  consecration  of  the  Philistines.  Whenever 
the  spiritual  energies  of  the  ancient  saints  re- 
ceived a  fresh  access,  they  were  seen  to  strive 
against  and  shake  off  some  of  the  trammels  of 
a  literal  and  servile  legalism.  The  doctrine  of 
Jesus  explained  and  justified  what  already  was 
felt  by  the  foremost  spirits  in  Israel. 

When  they  were  alone,  "  the  disciples  asked  of 
Him  the  parable,"  that  is,  in  other  words,  the 
saying  which  they  felt  to  be  deeper  than  they 
understood,  and  full  of  far-reaching  issues.  But 
Jesus  rebuked  them  for  not  understanding  what 
uncleanness  really  meant.  For  Him,  defilement 
was  badness,  a  condition  of  the  soul.  And  there- 
fore meats  could  not  defile  a  man,  because  they 
did  not  reach  the  heart,  but  only  the  bodily  or- 
gans. In  so  doing,  as  St.  Mark  plainly  adds. 
He  made  all  meats  clean,  and  thus  pronounced 
the  doom  of  Judaism,  and  the  new  dispensation 
of  the  Spirit.  In  truth,  St.  Paul  did  little  more 
than  expand  this  memorable  saying.  "  Nothing 
that  goeth  into  a  man  can  defile  him,"  here  is 
the  germ  of  all  the  decision  about  idol  meats — 
"  neither  if  '  one  '  eat  is  he  the  better,  neither  if 
he  eat  not  is  he  the  worse."  "  The  things  which 
proceed  out  of  a  man  are  those  which  defile  the 


Mark  vii.  24-30.] 


THE    CHILDREN    AND    THE    DOGS. 


861 


man,"  here  is  the  germ  of  all  the  demonstration 
that  love  fulfils  the  law,  and  that  our  true  need 
is  to  be  renewed  inwardly,  so  that  we  may  bring 
forth  fruit  unto  God. 

But  the  true  pollution  of  the  man  comes  from 
within;  and  the  life  is  stained  because  the  heart 
is  impure.  For  from  within,  out  of  the  heart  of 
men,  evil  thoughts  proceed,  like  the  uncharitable 
and  bitter  judgments  of  His  accusers — and  thence 
come  also  the  sensual  indulgences  which  men 
ascribe  to  the  flesh,  but  which  depraved  imagi- 
nations excite,  and  love  of  God  and  their  neigh- 
bour would  restrain — and  thence  are  the  sins  of 
violence  which  men  excuse  by  pleading  sudden 
provocation,  whereas  the  spark  led  to  a  confla- 
gration only  because  the  heart  was  a  dry  fuel — • 
and  thence,  plainly  enough,  come  deceit  and  rail- 
ing, pride  and  folly. 

It  is  a  hard  saying,  but  our  conscience  ac- 
knowledges the  truth  of  it.  We  are  not  the  toy 
of  circumstances,  but  such  as  we  have  made  our- 
selves; and  our  lives  would  have  been  pure  if 
the  stream  had  flowed  from  a  pure  fountain. 
However  modern  sentiment  may  rejoice  in 
highly  coloured  pictures  of  the  noble  profligate 
and  his  pure-minded  and  elegant  victim;  of  the 
brigand  or  the  border  ruffian  full  of  kindness, 
with  a  heart  as  gentle  as  his  hands  are  red;  and 
however  true  we  may  feel  it  to  be  that  the  worst 
heart  may  never  have  betrayed  itself  by  the  worst 
actions,  but  many  that  are  first  shall  be  last,  it 
still  continues  to  be  the  fact,  and  undeniable 
when  we  do  not  sophisticate  our  judgment,  that 
"  all  these  evil  things  proceed  from  within." 

It  is  also  true  that  they  "  further  defile  the 
man."  The  corruption  which  already  existed  in 
the  heart  is  made  worse  by  passing  into  action; 
shame  and  fear  are  weakened;  the  will  is  con- 
firmed in  evil;  a  gap  is  opened  or  widened  be- 
tween the  man  who  commits  a  new  sin,  and  the 
virtue  on  which  he  has  turned  his  back.  Few, 
alas!  are  ignorant  of  the  defiling  power  of  a  bad 
action,  or  even  of  a  sinful  thought  deliberately 
harboured,  and  the  harbouring  of  which  is  really 
an  action,  a   decision  of  the  will. 

This  word,  which  makes  all  meats  clean,  ought 
for  ever  to  decide  the  question  whether  certain 
drinks  are  in  the  abstract  unlawful  for  a  Chris- 
tian. 

We  must  remember  that  it  leaves  untouched 
the  question,  what  restrictions  may  be  necessary 
for  men  who  have  depraved  and  debased  their 
own  appetites,  until  innocent  indulgence  does 
reach  the  heart  and  pervert  it.  Hand  and  foot 
are  innocent,  but  men  there  are  who  cannot  enter 
into  life  otherwise  than  halt  or  maimed.  Also 
it  leaves  untouched  the  question,  as  long  as  such 
men  exist,  how  far  may  I  be  privileged  to  share 
and  so  to  lighten  the  burden  imposed  on  them 
by  past  transgressions?  It  is  surely  a  noble 
sign  of  religious  life  in  our  day,  that  many  thou- 
sands can  say,  as  the  Apostle  said,  of  innocent 
joys,  "  Have  we  not  a  right?  .  .  .  Nevertheless 
we  did  not  use  this  right,  but  we  bear  all  things, 
that  we  may  cause  no  hindrance  to  the  gospel 
of  Christ." 

Nevertheless  the  rule  is  absolute:  "Whatso- 
ever from  without  goeth  into  the  man,  it  cannot 
defile  him."  And  the  Church  of  Christ  is  bound 
to  maintain,  uncompromised  and  absolute,  the 
liberty  of  Christian  souls. 

Let  us  not  fail  to  contrast  such  teaching  as 
this  of  Jesus  with  that  of  our  modern  materialism. 

"  The    value    of    meat    and    drink    is    perfectly 


transcendental,"  says  one.  "  Man  is  what  he 
eats,"  says  another.  But  it  is  enough  to  make 
us  tremble,  to  ask  what  will  issue  from  such 
teaching  if  it  ever  grasps  firmly  the  mind  of  a 
single  generation.  What  will  become  of  honesty, 
when  the  value  of  what  may  be  had  by  theft  is 
transcendental?  How  shall  armies  be  persuaded 
to  suffer  hardness,  and  populations  to  famish 
within  beleaguered  walls,  when  they  learn  that 
"  man  is  what  he  eats,"  so  that  his  very  essence 
is  visibly  enfeebled,  his  personality  starved  out, 
as  he  grows  pale  and  wasted  underneath  his 
country's  flag?  In  vain  shall  such  a  generation 
strive  to  keep  alive  the  flame  of  generous  self- 
devotion.  Self-devotion  seemed  to  their  fathers 
to  be  the  noblest  attainment;  to  them  it  can  be 
only  a  worn-out  form  of  speech  to  say  that  the 
soul  can  overcome  the  flesh.  For  to  them  the 
man  is  the  flesh;  he  is  the  resultant  of  his  nour- 
ishment; what  enters  into  the  mouth  makes  his 
character,  for  it  makes  him  all. 

There  is  that  within  us  all  which  knows  better; 
which  sets  against  the  aphorism,  "  Man  is  what 
he  eats;  "  the  text  "  As  a  man  thinketh  in  his 
heart  so  is  he;  "  which  will  always  spurn  the  doc- 
trine of  the  brute,  when  it  is  boldly  confronted 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  Crucified. 


THE  CHILDREN  AND   THE  DOGS. 

Mark  vii.  24-30  (R.  V.). 

The  ingratitude  and  perverseness  of  His  coun- 
trymen have  now  driven  Jesus  into  retirement 
"  on  the  borders "  of  heathenism.  It  is  not 
clear  that  He  has  yet  crossed  the  frontier,  and 
some  presumption  to  the  contrary  is  found  in  the 
statement  that  a  woman,  drawn  by  a  fame  which 
had  long  since  gone  throughout  all  Syria,  "  came 
out  of  those  borders  "  to  reach  Him.  She  was 
not  only  "'  a  Greek  "  (by  language  or  by  creed 
as  conjecture  may  decide,  though  very  probably 
the  word  means  little  more  than  a  Gentile),  but 
even  of  the  especially  cursed  race  of  Canaan, 
the  reprobate  of  reprobates.  And  yet  the  prophet 
Zechariah  had  foreseen  a  time  when  the  Philis- 
tine also  should  be  a  remnant  for  our  God,  and 
as  a  chieftain  in  Judah,  and  when  the  most  stub- 
born race  of  all  the  Canaanites  should  be  ab- 
sorbed in  Israel  as  thoroughly  as  that  which 
gave  Araunah  to  the  kindliest  intercourse  with 
David,  for  Ekron  should  be  as  a  Jebusite  (ix.  7). 
But  the  hour  for  breaking  down  the  middle  wall 
of  partition  was  not  yet  fully  come.  Nor  did 
any  friend  plead  for  this  unhappy  woman,  that 
she  loved  the  nation  and  had  built  a  synagogue; 
nothing  as  yet  lifted  her  above  the  dead  level 
of  that  paganism  to  which  Christ,  in  the  days  of 
His  flesh  and  upon  earth,  had  no  commission. 
Even  the  great  champion  and  apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles confessed  that  His  Lord  was  a  minister  of 
the  circumcision  by  the  grace  of  God,  and  it 
was  by  His  ministry  to  the  Jews  that  the  Gentiles 
were  ultimately  to  be  won.  We  need  not  be  sur- 
prised therefore  at  His  silence  when  she  pleaded, 
for  this  might  well  be  calculated  to  elicit  some 
expression  of  faith,  something  to  separate  her 
from  her  fellows,  and  so  enable  Him  to  bless  her 
without  breaking  down  prematurely  all  distinc- 
tions. Also  it  must  be  considered  that  nothing 
could  more  offend  His  countrymen  than  to  grant 
her  prayer,  while  as  yet  it  was  impossible  to 
hope  for  any  compensating  harvest  among  her 


862 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK 


fellows,  such  as  had  been  reaped  in  Samaria. 
What  is  surprising^  is  the  apparent  harshness  of 
expression  which  follows  that  silence,  when  even 
His  disciples  are  induced  to  intercede  for  her. 
But  theirs  was  only  the  softness  which  yields 
to  clamour,  as  many  people  give  alms,  not  to 
silent  worth,  but  to  loud  and  pertinacious  impor- 
tunity. And  they  even  presumed  to  throw  their 
own  discomfort  into  the  scale,  and  urge  as  a  rea- 
son for  this  intercession,  that  she  crieth  after 
us.  But  Jesus  was  occupied  with  His  mission, 
and  unwilling  to  go  farther  than  He  was  sent. 

In  her  agony  she  pressed  nearer  still  to  Him 
when  He  refused,  and  worshipped  Him,  no 
longer  as  the  Son  of  David,  since  vvhat  was  He- 
brew in  His  commission  made  against  her;  but 
simply  appealed  to  His  compassion,  calling  Him 
Lord.  The  absence  of  these  details  from  St. 
Mark's  narrative  is  interesting,  and  shows  the 
mistake  of  thinking  that  his  gospel  is  simply 
the  most  graphic  and  the  fullest.  It  is  such  when 
our  Lord  Himself  is  in  action;  its  information 
is  derived  from  one  who  pondered  and  told  all 
things,  not  as  they  were  pictorial  in  themselves, 
but  as  they  illustrated  the  one  great  figure  of 
the  Son  of  man.  And  so  the  answer  of  Jesus  is 
fully  given,  although  it  does  not  appear  as  if 
grace  were  poured  into  His  lips.  "  Let  the  chil- 
dren first  be  filled,  for  it  is  not  meet  to  take  the 
children's  bread,  and  to  cast  it  to  the  dogs."  It 
might  seem  that  sterner  words  could  scarcely 
have  been  spoken,  and  that  His  kindness  was 
only  for  the  Jews,  who  even  in  their  ingratitude 
were  to  the  best  of  the  Gentiles  as  children  com- 
pared with  dogs.  Yet  she  does  not  contradict 
Him.  Neither  does  she  argue  back, — for  the 
words,  "  Truth,  Lord,  but  .  .  ."  have  rightly 
disappeared  from  the  Revised  Version,  and  with 
them  a  certain  contentious  aspect  which  they 
give  to  her  reply.  On  the  contrary  she  assents, 
she  accepts  all  the  seeming  severity  of  His  view, 
because  her  penetrating  faith  has  detected  its 
kindly  undertone,  and  the  triple  opportunity 
which  it  offers  to  a  quick  and  confiding  intelli- 
gence. It  is  indeed  touching  to  reflect  how  im- 
pregnable was  Jesus  in  controversy  with  the 
keenest  intellects  of  Judaism,  with  how  sharp  a 
weapon  He  rent  their  snares,  and  retorted  their 
arguments  to  their  confusion,  and  then  to  ob- 
serve Him  inviting,  tempting,  preparing  the  way 
for  an  argument  which  would  lead  Him,  gladly 
won,  captive  to  a  heathen's  and  a  woman's  im- 
portunate and  trustful  sagacity.  It  is  the  same 
Divine  condescension  which  gave  to  Jacob  his 
new  name  of  Israel  because  He  had  striven  with 
God  and  prevailed. 

And  let  us  reverently  ponder  the  fact  that  this 
pagan  mother  of  a  demoniacal  child,  this  woman 
whose  name  has  perished,  is  the  only  person 
who  won  a  dialectical  victory  in  striving  with 
the  Wisdom  of  God;  such  a  victory  as  a  father 
allows  to  his  eager  child,  when  he  raises  gentle 
obstacles,  and  even  assumes  a  transparent  mask 
of  harshness,  but  never  passess  the  limit  of  the 
trust  and  love  which  He  is  probing. 

The  first  and  most  obvious  opportunity  which 
He  gives  to  her  is  nevertheless  hard  to  show 
in  English.  He  might  have  used  an  epithet  suit- 
able for  those  fierce  creatures  which  prowl 
through  Eastern  streets  at  night  without  any 
master,  living  upon  refuse,  a  peril  even  to  men 
who  are  unarmed.  But  Jesus  used  a  diminutive 
word,  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  quite  unsuitable  to  those  fierce  beasts, 


a  word  "  in  which  the  idea  of  uncleanness  gives 
place  to  that  of  dependence,  of  belonging  to  man 
and  to  the  family."  No  one  applies  our  coUo- 
quial  epithet  "  doggie  "  to  a  fierce  or  rabid  brute. 
Thus  Jesus  really  domesticated  the  Gentile  world. 
And  nobly,  eagerly,  yet  very  modestly  she  used 
this  tacit  concession,  when  she  repeated  His 
carefully  selected  word,  and  inferred  from  it  that 
her  place  was  not  among  those  vile  "  dogs " 
which  are  "  without,"  but  with  the  domestic 
dogs,  the  little  dogs  underneath  the  table. 

Again,  she  observed  the  promise  which  lurked 
under  seeming  refusal,  when  He  said,  "  Let  the 
children  first  be  filled,"  and  so  implied  that  her 
turn  should  come,  that  it  was  only  a  question  of 
time.  And  so  she  answers  that  such  dogs  as 
He  would  make  of  her  and  hers  do  not  fast  ut- 
terly until  their  mealtime  after  the  children  have 
been  satisfied;  they  wait  under  the  table,  and 
some  ungrudged  fragments  reach  them  there, 
some  "  crumbs." 

Moreover,  and  perhaps  chiefly,  the  bread  she 
craves  need  not  to  be  torn  from  hungry  children. 
Their  Benefactor  has  had  to  wander  off  into  con- 
cealment, they  have  let  fall,  unheeding,  not  only 
crumbs,  although  her  noble  tact  expresses  it  thus 
lightly  to  their  countryman,  but  far  more  than 
she  divined,  even  the  very  Bread  of  Life.  Surely 
His  own  illustration  has  admitted  her  right  to 
profit  by  the  heedlessness  of  "  the  children." 
And  He  had  admitted  all  this:  He  had  meant  to 
be  thus  overcome.  One  loves  to  think  of  the 
first  flush  of  hope  in  that  trembling  mother's 
heavy  heart,  as  she  discerned  His  intention  and 
said  within  herself,  "  Oh,  surely  I  am  not  mis- 
taken; He  does  not  really  refuse  at  all;  He  wills 
that  I  should  answer  Him  and  prevail."  One 
supposes  that  she  looked  up,  half  afraid  to  utter 
the  great  rejoinder,  and  took  courage  when  she 
met  His  questioning  inviting  gaze. 

And  then  comes  the  glad  response,  no  longer 
spoken  coldly  and  without  an  epithet:  "  Oh, 
woman,  great  is  thy  faith."  He  praises  not  her 
adroitness  nor  her  humility,  but  the  faith  which 
would  not  doubt,  in  that  dark  hour,  that  light 
was  behind  the  cloud;  and  so  He  sets  no  other 
limit  to  His  reward  than  the  limit  of  her  de- 
sires: "  Be  it  unto  thee  even  as  thou  wilt." 

Let  us  learn  that  no  case  is  too  desperate  for 
prayer,  and  perseverance  will  surely  find  at  last 
that  our  Lord  delighteth  to  be  gracious.  Let  us 
be  certain  that  the  brightest  and  most  confiding 
view  of  all  His  dealings  is  the  truest,  and  man, 
if  only  he  trusts  aright,  shall  live  by  every  word 
that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God. 

Thus  did  Jesus  declare,  in  action  as  in  word, 
the  fading  out  of  all  distinction  between  the  cere- 
monially clean  and  unclean.  He  crossed  the 
limits  of  the  Holy  Land:  He  found  great  faith 
in  a  daughter  of  the  accursed  race;  and  He  rati- 
fied and  acted  upon  her  claim  that  the  bread 
which  fell  neglected  from  the  table  of  the  Jew 
was  not  forbidden  to  the  hunger  of  the  Gentile. 
The  history  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  already 
here  in  spirit. 

THE  DEAF  AND  DUMB  MAN. 

Mark  vii.  31-37  (R-  V.). 

There  are  curious  and  significant  varieties  in 
the  methods  by  which  our  Saviour  healed.  We 
have  seen  Him,  when  watched  on  the  Sabbath 


Mark  viii. 


] 


THE    FOUR    THOUSAND. 


86.3 


by  eager  and  expectant  foes,  baflfling  all  their 
malice  by  a  miracle  without  a  deed,  by  refusing 
to  cross  the  line  ot  the  most  rigid  and  ceremonial 
orthodoxy,  by  only  commanding  an  innocent 
gesture.  Stretch  forth  thine  hand.  In  sharp  con- 
trast with  such  a  miracle  is  the  one  which  we 
have  now  reached.  There  is  brought  to  Him  a 
man  who  is  deaf,  and  whose  speech  therefore 
could  not  have  been  more  than  a  babble,  since  it 
is  by  hearing  that  we  learn  to  articulate;  but  of 
whom  we  are  plainly  told  that  he  suffered  from 
organic  inability  to  utter  as  well  as  to  hear,  for 
he  had  an  impediment  in  his  speech,  the  string 
of  his  tongue  needed  to  be  loosed,  and  Jesus 
touched  his  tongue  as  well  as  his  ears,  to  heal 
him. 

It  should  be  observed  that  no  unbelieving  the- 
ory can  explain  the  change  in  our  Lord's  method. 
Some  pretend  that  all  the  stories  of  His  miracles 
grew  up  afterward,  from  the  sense  of  awe  with 
which  He  was  regarded.  How  does  that  agree 
with  effort,  sighing,  and  even  gradation  in  the 
stages  of  recovery,  following  after  the  most  easy, 
astonishing,  and  instantaneous  cures?  Others 
believe  that  the  enthusiasm  of  His  teaching  and 
the  charm  of  His  presence  conveyed  healing  ef- 
ficacy to  the  impressible  and  the  nervous.  How 
does  this  account  for  the  fact  that  His  earliest 
miracles  were  the  prompt  and  effortless  ones,  and 
as  time  passes  on,  He  secludes  the  patient  and 
uses  agencies,  as  if  the  resistance  to  His  power 
were  more  appreciable?  Enthusiasm  would 
gather  force  with  every  new  success. 

All  becomes  clear  when  we  accept  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine.  Jesus  came  in  the  fulness  of  the 
lore  of  God,  with  both  hands  filled  with  gifts. 
On  His  part  there  is  no  hesitation  and  no  limit. 
But  on  the  part  of  man  there  is  doubt,  miscon- 
ception, and  at  last  open  hostility.  A  real  chasm 
is  opened  between  man  and  the  grace  He  gives, 
so  that,  although  not  straitened  in  Him,  they  are 
straitened  in  their  own  affections.  Even  while 
they  believe  in  Him  as  a  healer,  they  no  longer 
accept  Him  as  their  Lord. 

And  Jesus  makes  it  plain  to  them  that  the  gift 
is  no  longer  so  easy,  spontaneous,  and  of  public 
right  as  formerly.  In  His  own  country  He  could 
not  do  many  mighty  works.  And  now,  return- 
ing by  indirect  routes,  and  privately,  from  the 
heathen  shores  whither  Jewish  enmity  had  driven 
Him,  He  will  make  the  multitude  feel  a  kind  of 
exclusion,  taking  the  patient  from  among  them, 
as  He  does  again  presently  in  Bethsaida  (chap, 
viii.  23).  There  is  also,  in  the  deliberate  act  of 
seclusion  and  in  the  means  employed,  a  stimulus 
for  the  faith  of  the  sufferer,  which  would  scarcely 
have  been  needed  a  little  while  before. 

The  people  were  unconscious  of  any  reason 
why  this  cure  should  differ  from  former  ones. 
And  so  they  besought  Jesus  to  lay  His  hand  on 
him,  the  usual  and  natural  expression  for  a  con- 
veyance of  invisible  power.  But  even  if  no  other 
objection  had  existed,  this  action  would  have 
meant  little  to  the  deaf  and  dumb  man,  living  in 
a  silent  world,  and  needing  to  have  his  faith 
aroused  by  some  yet  plainer  sign.  Jesus  there- 
fore removes  him  from  the  crowd  whose  curi- 
osity would-  distract  his  attention — even  as  by 
affliction  and  pain  He  still  isolates  each  of  us 
at  times  from  the  world,  shutting  us  up  with  God. 

He  speaks  the  only  language  intelligible  to 
such  a  man,  the  language  of  signs,  putting  His 
fingers  into  his  ears  as  if  to  break  a  seal,  con- 
veyinfc  the  moisture  of  His  own  lip  to  the  silent 


tongue,  as  if  to  impart  its  faculty,  and  then,  at 
what  should  have  been  the  exultant  moment  of 
conscious  and  triumphant  power.  He  sighed 
deeply. 

What  an  unexpected  revelation  of  the  man 
rather  than  the  wonder  worker.  How  unlike 
anything  that  theological  myth  or  heroic  legend 
would  have  invented.  Perhaps,  as  Keble  sings, 
He  thought  of  those  moral  defects  for  which, 
in  a  responsible  universe,  no  miracle  may  be 
wrought,  of  "  the  deaf  heart,  the  dumb  by 
choice."  Perhaps,  according  to  Stier's  ingenious 
guess.  He  sighed  because,  in  our  sinful  world, 
the  gift  of  hearing  is  so  doubtful  a  blessing,  and 
the  faculty  of  speech  so  apt  to  be  perverted. 
One  can  almost  imagine  that  no  human  endow- 
ment is  ever  given  by  Him  Who  knows  all,  with- 
out a  touch  of  sadness.  But  it  is  more  natural 
to  suppose  that  He  Who  is  touched  with  the 
feeling  of  our  infirmities,  and  Who  bare  our  sick- 
ness, thought  upon  the  countless  miseries  of 
which  this  was  but  a  specimen,  and  sighed  for 
the  perverseness  by  which  the  fulness  of  Hia 
compassion  was  being  restrained.  We  are  re- 
minded by  that  sigh,  however  we  explain  it,  that 
the  only  triumphs  which  made  Him  rejoice  in 
Spirit  were  very  different  from  displays  of  Hi» 
physical  ascendancy. 

It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  St.  Mark,  in- 
formed by  the  most  ardent  and  impressible  of  the 
apostles,  by  him  who  reverted,  long  afterwards, 
to  the  voice  which  he  heard  in  the  holy  mount, 
has  recorded  several  of  the  Aramaic  words  which 
'Jesus  uttered  at  memorable  junctures.  "  Eph- 
phatha.  Be  opened,"  He  said,  and  the  bond  of 
his  tongue  was  loosed,  and  his  speech,  hitherto 
incoherent,  became  plain.  But  the  Gospel  which 
tells  us  the  first  word  he  heard  is  silent  about 
what  he  said.  Only  we  read,  and  this  is  sug- 
gestive enough,  that  the  command  was  at  once 
given  to  him,  as  well  as  to  the  bystanders,  to 
keep  silent.  Not  copious  speech,  but  wise  re- 
straint, is  what  the  tongue  needs  most  to  learn. 
To  him,  as  to  so  many  whom  Christ  had  healed, 
the  injunction  came,  not  to  preach  writhout  a 
commission,  not  to  suppose  that  great  blessings 
require  loud  announcement,  or  unfit  men  for 
lowly  and  quiet  places.  Legend  would  surely 
have  endowed  with  special  eloquence  the  lipiv 
which  Jesus  unsealed.  He  charged  them  that 
they  should  tell  no  man. 

It  was  a  double  miracle,  and  the  latent  unbelief 
became  clear  of  the  very  men  who  had  hoped 
for  some  measure  of  blessing.  For  they  were  be- 
yond measure  astonished,  saying  He  doeth  all 
things  well,  celebrating  the  power  which  re- 
stored the  hearing  and  the  speech  together.  Do 
we  blame  their  previous  incredulity?  Perhaps 
we  also  expect  some  blessing  from  our  Lord,  yet 
fail  to  bring  Him  all  we  have  and  all  we  are 
for  blessing.  Perhaps  we  should  be  astonished 
beyond  measure  if  we  received  at  the  hands  ot 
Jesus  a  sanctification  that  extended  to  all  our 
powers. 

CHAPTER  Vin. 

THE  FOUR  THOUSAND. 

Mark  viii.  i-io  (R.  V.). 

We  now  come  upon  a  miracle  strangely  sim- 
ilar to  that  of  the  Feeding  of  the  Four  Thou- 
sand.     And    it    is    worth    while    to    ask    what 


864 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


would  have  been  the  result,  if  the  Gospels  which 
contain  this  narrative  had  omitted  the  former 
one.  Scepticism  would  have  scrutinised  every 
difTerence  between  the  two,  regarding  them  as 
variations  of  the  same  story,  to  discover  traces 
of  the  growth  of  the  myth  or  legend,  and  en- 
tirely to  discredit  it.  Now,  however,  it  is  plain 
that  the  events  are  quite  distinct;  and  we  cannot 
doubt  but  that  information  as  full  would  clear 
away  as  completely  many  a  perplexity  which  still 
entangles  us.  Archbishop  Trench  has  well 
shown  that  the  later  narrative  cannot  have  grown 
out  of  the  earlier,  because  it  has  not  grown  at 
all,  but  fallen  away.  A  new  legend  always  "  out- 
strips the  old,  but  here  .  .  .  the  numbers  fed 
are  smaller,  the  supply  of  food  is  greater,  and 
the  fragments  that  remain  are  fewer."  The  latter 
point  is,  however,  doubtful.  It  is  likely  that  the 
baskets,  though  fewer,  were  larger,  for  in  such 
a  one  St.  Paul  was  lowered  down  over  the  wall 
of  Damascus  (Acts  ix.  25).  In  all  the 
Gospels  the  Greek  word  for  baskets  in  the  for- 
mer miracle  is  different  from  the  latter.  And 
hence  arises  an  interesting  coincidence;  for 
when  the  disciples  had  gone  into  a  desert  place, 
and  there  gathered  the  fragments  into  wallets, 
each  of  them  naturally  carried  one  of  these,  and 
accordingly  twelve  were  filled.  But  here  they 
had  recourse  apparently  to  the  large  baskets  of 
persons  who  sold  bread,  and  the  number  seven 
remains  unaccounted  for.  Scepticism  indeed 
persuades  itself  that  the  whole  story  is  to  be 
spiritualised,  the  twelve  baskets  answering  to  the 
twelve  apostles  who  distributed  the  Bread  of 
Life,  and  the  seven  to  the  seven  deacons.  How 
came  it  then  that  the  sorts  of  baskets  are  so 
well  discriminated,  that  the  inferior  ministers  are 
represented  by  the  larger  ones,  and  that  the 
bread  is  not  dealt  out  from  these  baskets  but 
gathered  into  them? 

The  second  repetition  of  such  a  work  is  a 
fine  proof  of  that  genuine  kindness  of  heart, 
to  which  a  miracle  is  not  merely  an  evidence, 
nor  rendered  useless  as  soon  as  the  power  to 
work  it  is  confessed.  Jesus  did  not  shrink  from 
thus  repeating  Himself,  even  upon  a  lower  level, 
because  His  object  was  not  spectacular  but  be- 
neficent. He  sought  not  to  astonish  but  to  bless. 
It  is  plain  that  Jesus  strove  to  lead  His 
disciples,  aware  of  the  former  miracle,  up  to  the 
notion  of  its  repetition.  With  this  object  He 
marshalled  all  the  reasons  why  the  people  should 
be  relieved.  "  I  have  compassion  on  the  multi- 
tude, because  they  continue  with  Me  now  three 
days,  and  have  nothing  to  eat:  and  if  I  send 
,  them  away  fasting  to  their  home,  they  will  faint 
in  the  way;  and  some  of  them  are  come  from 
far."  It  is  the  grand  argument  from  human 
necessity  to  the  Divine  compassion.  It  is  an 
argument  which  ought  to  weigh  equally  with 
the  Church.  For  if  it  is  promised  that  "  noth- 
ing shall  be  impossible "  to  faith  and  prayer, 
then  the  deadly  wants  of  debauched  cities,  of 
ignorant  and  brutal  peasantries,  and  of  heathen- 
isms festering  in  their  corruptions — all  these,  by 
their  very  urgency,  are  vehement  appeals  in- 
stead of  the  discouragements  we  take  them  for. 
And  whenever  man  is  baffled  and  in  need,  then 
he  is  entitled  to  fall  back  upon  the  resources  of 
the  Omnipotent. 

It  may  be  that  the  disciples  had  some  glimmer- 
ing hope,  but  they  did  not  venture  to  suggest 
anything;  they  only  asked,  Whence  shall  one 
be    able    to    fill    these    men    with    bread    here 


in  a  desert  place?  It  is  the  cry  of  unbelief — 
our  cry,  when  we  look  at  our  resources,  and 
declare  our  helplessness,  and  conclude  that  pos- 
sibly God  may  interpose,  but  otherwise  noth- 
ing can  be  done.  We  ought  to  be  the  priests 
of  a  famishing  world  (so  ignorant  of  any  re- 
lief, so  miserable),  its  interpreters  and  interces- 
sors, full  of  hope  and  energy.  But  we  are  con- 
tent to  look  at  our  empty  treasuries,  and  inef- 
fective organisations,  and  to  ask,  Whence  shall 
a  man  be  able  to  fill  these  men  with  bread? 

They  have  ascertained,  however,  what  re- 
sources are  forthcoming,  and  these  He  proceeds 
to  use,  first  demanding  the  faith  which  He  will 
afterwards  honour,  by  bidding  the  multitudes  to 
sit  down.  And  then  His  loving  heart  is  gratified 
by  relieving  the  hunger  which  it  pitied,  and  He 
promptly  sends  the  multitude  away,  refreshed 
and  competent  for  their  journey. 


THE  LEAVEN  OF  THE  PHARISEES. 
Mark  viii.  11-21  (R.  V.). 

Whenever  a  miracle  produced  a  deep  and 
special  impression  the  Pharisees  strove  to  spoil 
its  eflfect  by  some  counter-demonstration.  By 
so  doing,  and  at  least  appearing  to  hold  the  field, 
since  Jesus  always  yielded  this  to  them,  ttiey 
encouraged  their  own  faction,  and  shook  the 
confidence  of  the  feeble  and  hesitating  multitude. 
At  almost  every  crisis  they  might  have  been 
crushed  by  an  appeal  to  the  stormy  passions 
of  those  whom  the  Lord  had  blessed.  Once 
He  might  have  been  made  a  king.  Again  and 
again  His  enemies  were  conscious  that  an  im- 
prudent word  would  suffice  to  make  the  people 
stone  them.  But  that  would  have  spoiled  the 
real  work  of  Jesus  more  than  to  retreat  before 
them,  now  across  the  lake,  or,  just  before,  into 
the  coasts  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  IDoubtless  it  was 
this  constant  avoidance  of  physical  conflict,  this 
habitual  repression  of  the  carnal  zeal  of  His 
supporters,  this  refusal  to  form  a  party  instead 
of  founding  a  Church,  which  renewed  incess- 
antly the  courage  of  His  often-baffled  foes,  and 
led  Him,  by  the  path  of  steady  ceaseless  self- 
depression,  to  the  cross  which  He  foresaw,  even 
while  maintaining  His  unearthly  calm,  amid  the 
contradiction  of  sinners  against  Himself. 

Upon  the  feeding  of  the  four  thousand  they 
demand  of  Him  a  sign  from  heaven.  He  had 
wrought  for  the  public  no  miracle  of  this  peculiar 
kind.  And  yet  Moses  had  gone  up,  in  the  sight 
of  all  Israel,  to  commune  with  God  in  the  mount 
that  burned;  Samuel  had  been  answered  by  thun- 
der and  rain  in  the  wheat  harvest;  and  Elijah  had 
called  down  fire  both  upon  his  sacrifice  and  also 
upon  two  captains  and  their  bands  of  fifty.  Such 
a  miracle  was  now  declared  to  be  the  regular 
authentication  of  a  messenger  from  God,  and  the 
only  sign  which  evil  spirits  could  not  counter- 
feit. 

Moreover  the  demand  would  specially  embar- 
rass Jesus,  because  He  alone  was  not  accustomed 
to  invoke  heaven:  His  miracles  were  wrought 
by  the  exertion  of  His  own  will.  And  perhaps 
the  challenge  implied  some  understanding  of 
what  this  peculiarity'  involved,  such  as  Jesus 
charged  them  with,  when  putting  into  their 
mouth  the  words.  This  is  the  heir,  come,  let 
us  kill  Him.  Certainly  the  demand  ignored 
much.      Conceding  the   fact  of   certain   miracles, 


Mark  viii.  22-26.1 


MEN    AS    TREES. 


865 


and  yet  imposing  new  conditions  of  belief,  they 
shut  their  eyes  to  the  unique  nature  of  the  works 
already  wrought,  the  glory  as  of  the  Only-be- 
gotten of  the  Father  which  they  displayed.  They 
held  that  thunder  and  lightning  revealed  God 
more  certainly  than  supernatural  victories  of 
compassion,  tenderness,  and  love.  What  could 
be  done  for  moral  blindness  such  as  this?  How 
could  any  sign  be  devised  which  unwilling 
hearts  could  not  evade?  No  wonder  that  hear- 
ing this  demand,  Jesus  sighed  deeply  in  His 
spirit.  It  revealed  their  utter  hardness;  it  was 
a  snare  by  which  others  would  be  entangled; 
and  for  Himself  it  foretold  the  cross. 

St.  Mark  simply  tells  us  that  He  refused  to 
give  them  any  sign.  In  St.  Matthew  He  jus- 
tifies this  decision  by  rebuking  the  moral  blind- 
ness which  demanded  it.  They  had  material 
enough  for  judgment.  The  face  of  the  sky  fore- 
told storm  and  clear  weather,  and  the  process 
of  nature  could  be  anticipated  without  miracles 
to  coerce  belief.  And  thus  they  should  have 
discerned  the  import  of  the  prophecies,  the 
course  of  history,  the  signs  of  the  times  in  which 
they  lived,  so  plainly  radiant  with  Messianic 
promise,  so  menacing  with  storm-clouds  of  ven- 
geance upon  sin.  The  sign  was  refused  more- 
over to  an  evil  and  adulterous  generation,  as 
God,  in  the  Old  Testament,  would  not  be  in- 
quired of  at  all  by  such  a  people  as  this.  This 
indignant  rejoinder  St.  Mark  has  compressed 
into  the  words,  "  There  shall  no  sign  be  given 
unto  this  generation  " — this  which  has  proof 
enough,  and  which  deserves  none.  Men  there 
were  to  whom  a  sign  from  heaven  was  not  re- 
fused. At  His  baptism,  on  the  Mount  of  Trans- 
figuration, and  when  the  Voice  answered  His 
appeal,  "  Father,  glorify  Thy  name,"  while  the 
multitude  said  only  that  it  thundered — at  these 
times  His  chosen  ones  received  a  sign  from 
heaven.  But  from  those  who  had  not  was  taken 
away  even  that  which  thev  seemed  to  have;  and 
the  sign  of  Jonah  availed  them  not. 

Once  more  Jesus  "  left  them  "  and  crossed 
the  lake.  The  disciples  found  themselves  with 
but  one  loaf,  approaching  a  wilder  district,  where 
the  ceremonial  purity  of  food  could  not  easily 
be  ascertained.  But  they  had  already  acted  on 
the  principle  which  Jesus  had  formally  pro- 
claimed, that  all  meats  were  clean.  And  there- 
fore it  was  not  too  much  to  expect  them  to 
penetrate  below  the  letter  of  the  words,  "  Take 
heed,  beware  of  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  the  leaven  of  Herod."  In  giving  them  this 
enigma  to  discover.  He  acted  according  to  His 
usage,  wrapping  the  spiritual  truth  in  earthly 
phrases,  picturesque  and  impressive;  and  He 
treated  them  as  life  treats  every  one  of  us,  which 
keeps  our  responsibility  still  upon  the  strain, 
by  presenting  new  moral  problems,  fresh  ques- 
tions and  trials  of  insight,  for  every  added  attain- 
ment which  lays  our  old  tasks  aside.  But  they 
understood  Him  not.  Some  new  ceremonial 
appeared  to  them  to  be  designed,  in  which  every- 
thing should  be  reversed,  and  the  unclean  should 
be  those  hypocrites,  the  strictest  observers  of  the 
old  code.  Such  a  mistake,  however  blame- 
worthy, reveals  the  profound  sense  of  an  ever- 
widening  chasm,  and  an  expectation  of  a  final 
and  hopeless  rupture  with  the  chiefs  of  their  re- 
ligion. It  prepares  us  for  what  is  soon  to  come, 
tkecontrastbetweenthe  popular  belief  and  theirs, 
and  the  selection  of  a  rock  on  which  a  new 
Church  is  to  be  built.  In  the  meantime  the  dire 
55— Vol.  IV- 


practical  inconvenience  of  this  announcement  led 
to  hot  discussion,  because  they  had  no  bread. 
And  Jesus,  perceiving  this,  remonstrated  in  a 
series  of  indignant  questions.  Personal  want 
should  not  have  disturbed  their  judgment,  re- 
membering that  twice  over  He  had  fed  hungry 
multitudes,  and  loaded  them  with  the  surplus  of 
His  gift.  Their  eyes  and  ears  should  have 
taught  them  that  He  was  indififerent  to  such  dis- 
tinctions, and  His  doctrine  could  never  result 
in  a  new  Judaism.  How  was  it  that  they  did 
not  understand? 

Thereupon  they  perceived  that  His  warning 
was  figurative.  He  had  spoken  to  them,  after 
feeding  the  five  thousand,  of  spiritual  bread 
which  He  would  give,  even  His  flesh  to  be  their 
food.  What  then  could  He  have  meant  by  the 
leaven  of  the  Pharisees  but  the  imparting  of 
their  religious  tendencies,  their  teaching,  and 
their  insincerity? 

Was  there  any  real  danger  that  these.  His 
chosen  ones,  should  be  shaken  by  the  demand  for 
a  sign  from  heaven?  Did  not  Philip  presently, 
when  Christ  spoke  of  seeing  the  Father,  eagerly 
cry  out  that  this,  if  it  were  granted,  would  suffice 
them?  In  these  words  he  confessed  the  mis- 
giving which  haunted  their  minds,  and  the  long- 
ing for  a  heavenly  sign.  And  yet  the  essence  of 
the  vision  of  God  was  in  the  life  and  the  love 
which  they  had  failed  to  know.  If  they  could 
not  see  Him  in  these,  He  must  for  ever  remain 
invisible  to  them. 

We  too  require  the  same  caution.  When  we 
long  for  miracles,  neglecting  those  standing  mir- 
acles of  our  faith,  the  gospel  and  the  Church: 
when  our  reason  is  satisfied  of  a  doctrine  or  a 
duty,  and  yet  we  remain  irresolute,  sighing  for 
the  impulse  of  some  rare  spiritual  enlightenment 
or  excitement,  for  a  revival,  or  a  mission,  or  an 
oration  to  lift  us  above  ourselves,  we  are  virtu- 
ally asking  to  be  shown  what  we  already  confess, 
to  behold  a  sign,  while  we  possess  the  evidence. 

And  the  only  wisdom  of  the  languid,  irresolute 
will,  which  postpones  action  in  hope  that  feeling 
may  be  deepened,  is  to  pray.  It  is  by  the  effort 
of  communion  with  the  unfelt,  but  confessed  Re- 
ality above  us,  that  healthy  feeling  is  to  be  re- 
covered. 

MEN    AS    TREES. 

Mark  viii.  22-26  (R.  V.). 

When  the  disciples  arrived  at  Bethsaida,  they 
were  met  by  the  friends  of  a  blind  man,  who  be- 
sought Him  to  touch  him.  And  this  gave  oc- 
casion to  the  most  remarkable  by  far  of  all  the 
progressive  and  tentative  miracles,  in  which 
means  were  employed,  and  the  result  was  grad- 
ually reached.  The  reasons  for  advancing  to  this 
cure  by  progressive  stages  have  been  much  dis- 
cussed. St.  Chrysostom  and  many  others  have 
conjectured  that  the  blind  man  had  but  little 
faith,  since  he  neither  found  his  own  way  to 
Jesus,  nor  pleaded  his  own  cause,  like  Bar- 
timasus.  Others  brought  him,  and  interceded 
for  him.  This  may  be  so,  but  since  he  was 
clearly  a  consenting  party,  we  can  infer  little 
from  details  which  constitutional  timidity  would 
explain,  or  helplessness  (for  the  resources  of  the 
blind  are  very  various),  or  the  zeal  of  friends  or 
of  paid  servants,  or  the  mere  eagerness  of  % 
crowd,  pushing  him  forward  in  desire  to  see  a 
marvel. 


S66 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


We  cannot  expect  always  to  penetrate  the  mo- 
tives which  varied  our  Saviour's  mode  of  action; 
it  is  enough  that  we  can  pretty  clearly  discern 
some  principles  which  led  to  their  variety. 
Many  of  them,  including  all  the  greatest,  were 
wrought  without  instrumentality  and  without  de- 
lay, showing  His  unrestricted  and  UQderived 
power.  Others  were  gradual,  and  wrought  by 
means.  These  connected  His  "  signs  "  with  na- 
ture and  the  God  of  nature;  and  they  could  be  so 
watched  as  to  silence  many  a  cavil;  and  they  ex- 
hibited, by  the  very  disproportion  of  the  means, 
the  grandeur  of  the  Worker.  In  this  respect  the 
successive  stages  of  a  miracle  were  like  the  sub- 
divisions by  which  a  skilful  architect  increases 
the  effect  of  a  fagade  or  an  interior.  In  every 
case  the  means  employed  were  such  as  to  connect 
the  result  most  intimately  with  the  person  as  well 
as  the  will  of  Christ. 

It  must  be  repeated  also,  that  the  need  of  sec- 
ondary agents  shows  itself,  only  as  the  increas- 
ing wilfulness  of  Israel  separates  between  Christ 
and  the  people.  It  is  as  if  the  first  rush  of  gen- 
erous and  spontaneous  power  had  been  frozen 
by  the  chill  of  their  ingratitude. 

Jesus  again,  as  when  healing  the  deaf  and 
dumb,  withdraws  from  idle  curiosity.  And  we 
read,  what  is  very  impressive  when  we  remember 
that  any  of  the  disciples  could  have  been  bidden 
to  lead  the  blind  man,  that  Jesus  Himself  drew 
Him  by  the  hand  out  of  the  village.  What 
would  have  been  afifectation  in  other  cases  was  a 
graceful  courtesy  to  the  blind.  And  it  reveals 
to  us  the  hearty  human  benignity  and  conde- 
scension of  Him  Whom  to  see  was  to  see  the 
Father,  that  He  should  have  clasped  in  His  help- 
ful hand  the  hand  of  a  blind  suppliant  for  His 
grace.  Moistening  his  eyes  from  His  own  lips, 
and  laying  His  hands  upon  him,  so  as  to  convey 
the  utmost  assurance  of  power  actually  exerted, 
He  asked,  Seest  thou  aught? 

The  answer  is  very  striking:  it  is  such  as  the 
knowledge  of  that  day  could  scarcely  have  im- 
agined; and  yet  it  is  in  the  closest  accord  with 
later  scientific  discovery.  What  we  call  the  act 
of  vision  is  really  a  two-fold  process;  there  is  in 
it  the  report  of  the  nerves  to  the  brain,  and  also 
an  inference,  drawn  by  the  mind,  which  previous 
experience  has  educated  to  understand  what  that 
report  implies.  For  want  of  such  experience,  an 
infant  thinks  the  moon  as  near  him  as  the  lamp, 
and  reaches  out  for  it.  And  when  Christian 
science  does  its  Master's  work  by  opening  the 
eyes  of  men  who  have  been  born  blind,  they  do 
not  know  at  first  what  appearances  belong  to 
globes  and  what  to  flat  and  square  objects.  It  is 
certain  that  every  image  conveyed  to  the  brain 
reaches  it  upside  down,  and  is  corrected  there. 
When  Jesus  then  restored  a  blind  man  to  the 
perfect  enjoyment  of  effective  intelligent  vision. 
He  wrought  a  double  miracle;  one  which  in- 
structed the  intelligence  of  the  blind  man  as  well 
as  opened  his  eyes.  This  was  utterly  unknown 
to  that  age.  But  the  scepticism  of  our  century 
would  complain  that  to  open  the  eyes  was  not 
enough,  and  that  such  a  miracle  would  have  left 
the  man  perplexed;  and  it  would  refuse  to  ac- 
cept narratives  which  took  no  account  of  this 
difficulty,  but  that  the  cavil  is  anticipated.  The 
miracle  now  before  us  refutes  it  in  advance,  for  it 
recognises,  what  no  spectator  and  no  early  reader 
of  the  marvel  could  have  understood,  the  middle 
stage,  when  sight  is  gained  but  is  still  uncom- 
prehended  and  inefifective.    The  process  is  shown 


as  well  as  the  completed  work.  Onl^  by  their 
motion  could  he  at  first  distinguish  living  crea- 
tures from  lifeless  things  of  far  greater  bulk. 
"  He  looked  up,"  (mark  this  picturesque  detail,) 
"  and  said,  I  see  men;  for  I  behold  them  as  trees, 
walking." 

But  Jesus  leaves  no  unfinished  work:  "Then 
again  laid  He  His  hands  upon  his  eyes,  and  he 
looked  steadfastly,  and  was  restored,  and  saw 
all  things  clearly." 

In  this  narrative  there  is  a  deep  significance. 
That  vision,  forfeited  until  grace  restores  it,  by 
which  we  look  at  the  things  which  are  not  seen, 
is  not  always  quite  restored  at  once.  We  are 
conscious  of  great  perplexity,  obscurity,  and 
confusion.  But  a  real  work  of  Christ  may  have 
begun  amid  much  that  is  imperfect,  much  that 
is  even  erroneous.  And  the  path  of  the  just 
is  often  a  haze  and  twilight  at  the  first,  yet  is  its 
light  real,  and  one  that  shineth  more  and  more 
unto  the  perfect  day. 


THE  CONFESSION  AND   THE    WARNING. 
Mark  viii.  27-32  (R.  V.). 

We  have  now  reached  an  important  stage  in 
the  Gospel  narrative,  the  comparative  withdrawal 
from  evangelistic  effort,  and  the  preparation  of 
the  disciples  for  an  approaching  tragedy.  We 
find  them  in  the  wild  country  to  the  north  of  the 
Lake  of  Galilee,  and  even  as  far  withdrawn  as 
to  the  neighbourhood  of  the  sources  of  the 
Jordan.  Not  without  a  deliberate  intention  has 
Jesus  led  them  thither.  He  wishes  them  to 
realise  their  separation.  He  will  fix  upon  their 
consciousness  the  failure  of  the  world  to  com- 
prehend Him,  and  give  them  the  opportunity 
either  to  acknowledge  Him,  or  sink  back  to  the 
lower  level  of  the  crowd. 

This  is  what  interests  St.  Mark;  and  it  is 
worthy  of  notice  that  he,  the  friend  of  Peter, 
mentions  not  the  special  honour  bestowed  upon 
him  by  Christ,  nor  the  first  utterance  of  the 
memorable  words  "  My  Church." 

"  Who  do  men  say  that  I  am?  "  Jesus  asked. 
The  answer  would  tell  of  acceptance  or  rejection, 
the  success  or  failure  of  His  ministry,  regarded 
in  itself,  and  apart  from  ultimate  issues  unknown 
to  mortals.  From  this  point  of  view  it  had  very 
plainly  failed.  At  the  beginning  there  was  a 
clear  hope  that  this  was  He  that  should  come, 
the  Son  of  David,  the  Holy  One  of  God.  But 
now  the  pitch  of  men's  expectation  was  lowered. 
Some  said,  John  the  Baptist,  risen  from  the 
dead,  as  Herod  feared;  others  spoke  of  Elijah, 
who  was  to  come  before  the  great  and  notable 
day  of  the  Lord;  in  the  sadness  of  His  later  days 
some  had  begun  to  see  a  resemblance  to  Jere- 
miah, lamenting  the  ruin  of  his  nation;  and 
others  fancied  a  resemblance  to  various  of  the 
prophets.  Beyond  this  the  Apostles  confessed 
that  men  were  not  known  to  go.  Their  enthu-  ^ 
siasm  had  cooled,  almost  as  rapidly  as  in  the 
triumphal  procession,  where  they  who  blessed 
both  Him,  and  "  the  kingdom  that  cometh,"  no 
sooner  felt  the  chill  of  contact  with  the  priestly 
faction,  than  their  confession  dwindled  into 
"  This  is  Jesus,  the  prophet  of  Nazareth."  "  But 
Who  say  ye  that  I  am?"  He  added;  and  it  de- 
pended on  the  answer  whether  or  not  there 
should  prove  to  be  any  solid  foundation,  any 
rock,  on  which  to  build  His  Church.     Much  dif- 


Mark  viii.  32-ix.  i,] 


THE    REBUKE    OF    PETER. 


867 


ference,  much  error  may  be  tolerated  there,  but 
on  one  subject  there  must  be  no  hesitation.  To 
make  Him  only  a  prophet  among  others,  to 
honour  Him  even  as  the  first  among  the  teachers 
of  mankind,  is  to  empty  His  life  of  its  meaning, 
His  death  of  its  efificacy,  and  His  Church  of  its 
authority.  And  yet  the  danger  was  real,  as  we 
may  see  by  the  fervent  blessing  (unrecorded  in 
our  Gospel)  which  the  right  answer  won.  For 
it  was  no  longer  the  bright  morning  of  His 
career, when  all  bare  Him  witness  and  wondered; 
the  noon  was  over  now,  and  the  evening  shadows 
were  heavy  and  lowering.  To  confess  Him  then 
was  to  have  learned  what  flesh  and  blood  could 
not  Teveal. 

But  Peter  did  not  hesitate.  In  answer  to  the 
question,  "  Who  say  ye?  Is  your  judgment  like 
the  world's?  "  He  does  not  reply,  "  We  believe, 
we  say,"  but  with  all  the  vigour  of  a  mind  at 
rest,  "Thou  art  the  Christ;"  that  is  not  even  a 
subject  of  discussion:  the  fact  is  so. 

Here  one  pauses  to  admire  the  spirit  of  the 
disciples,  so  unjustly  treated  in  popular  exposi- 
tion because  they  were  but  human,  because 
there  were  dangers  which  could  appal  them, 
and  because  the  course  of  providence  was 
designed  to  teach  them  how  weak  is  the  loftiest 
human  virtue.  Nevertheless,  they  could  part 
company  with  all  they  had  been  taught  to  rev- 
ence  and,  with  the  unanimous  opinion  of  their 
native  land,  they  could  watch  the  slow  fading  out 
of  public  enthusiasm,  and  continue  faithful,  be- 
cause they  knew  and  revered  the  Divine  life,  and 
the  glory  which  was  hidden  from  the  wise  and 
prudent. 

The  confession  of  Peter  is  variously  stated  in 
the  Gospels.  St.  Matthew  wrote  for  Jews,  famil- 
iar with  the  notion  of  a  merely  human  Christ, 
and  St.  Luke  for  mixed  Churches.  Therefore 
the  first  Gospel  gives  the  explicit  avowal  not 
only  of  Messiahship,  but  of  divinity;  and  the 
third  Gospel  implies  this.  "  Thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God  " — "  the  Christ 
of  God."  But  St.  Mark  "wrote  for  Gentiles, 
whose  first  and  only  notion  of  the  Messiah  was 
derived  from  Christian  sources,  and  steeped  in 
Christian  attributes,  so  that,  for  their  intelli- 
gence, all  the  great  avowal  was  implied  in  the 
title  itself.  Thou  art  the  Christ.  Yet  it  is  instruc- 
tive to  see  men  insisting  on  the  difference,  and 
even  exaggerating  it,  who  know  that  this  Gospel 
opens  with  an  assertion  of  the  Divine  sonship  of 
Jesus,  and  whose  theory  is  that  its  author  worked 
with  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  before  his  eyes. 
How  then,  or  why,  do  they  suppose  the  confes- 
sion to  have  been  weakened? 

This  foundation  of  His  Church  being  secured, 
His  Divine  Messiahship  being  confessed  in  the 
face  of  an  unbelieving  world,  Jesus  lost  no  time 
in  leading  His  apostles  forward.  They  were  for- 
bidden to  tell  any  man  of  Him:  the  vain  hope 
was  to  be  absolutely  suppressed  of  winning  the 
people  to  confess  their  king.  The  effort  would 
only  make  it  harder  for  themselves  to  accept  that 
stern  truth  which  they  were  now  to  learn,  that 
His  matchless  royalty  was  to  be  won  by  match- 
less suffering.  Never  hitherto  had  Jesus  pro- 
claimed this  truth,  as  He  now  did,  in  so  many 
words.  It  had  been,  indeed,  the  secret  spring  of 
many  of  His  sayings;  and  we  ought  to  mark 
what  loving  ingenuity  was  lavished  upon  the 
task  of  gradually  preparing  them  for  the  dread 
shock  of  this  announcement.  The  Bridegroom 
was  to  be  taken  away  from  them,  and  then  they 


should  fast.  The  temple  of  His  body  should  be 
destroyed  and  in  three  days  reared  again.  The 
blood  of  all  the  slaughtered  prophets  was  to 
come  upon  this  generation.  It  should  suffice 
them,  when  persecuted  unto  death,  that  the  dis- 
ciple was  as  His  Master.  It  was  still  a  plainer 
intimation  when  He  said  that  to  follow  Him 
was  to  take  up  a  cross.  His  flesh  was  promised 
to  them  for  meat  and  His  blood  for  drfnk. 
(Chap.  ii.  20;  John  ii.  19;  Luke  xi.  50;  Matt.  x. 
21,  25;  38;  John  vi.  54.)  Such  intimations  Jesus 
had  already  given  them,  and  doubtless  many  a 
cold  shadow,  many  a  dire  misgiving  had  crept 
over  their  sunny  hopes.  But  these  it  had  been 
possible  to  explain  away,  and  the  effort,  the  atti- 
tude of  mental  antagonism  thus  forced  upon 
them,  would  make  the  grief  more  bitter,  the 
gloom  more  deadly,  when  Jesus  spoke  openly 
the  saying,  thenceforth  so  frequently  repeated, 
that  He  must  suffer  keenly,  be  rejected  form- 
ally by  the  chiefs  of  His  creed  and  nation,  and 
be  killed.  When  He  recurs  to  the  subject  (ix. 
31),  He  adds  the  horror  of  being  "  delivered  into 
the  hands  of  men."  In  the  tenth  chapter  we 
find  Him  setting  His  face  toward  the  city  out- 
side which  a  prophet  could  not  perish,  with  such 
fixed  purpose  and  awful  consecration  in  His 
bearing  that  His  followers  were  amazed  and 
afraid.  And  then  He  reveals  the  complicity  of 
the  Gentiles  who  shall  mock  and  spit  upon  and 
scourge  and  kill  Him. 

But  in  every  case,  without  exception.  He  an- 
nounced that  on  the  third  day  He  should  arise 
again.  For  neither  was  He  Himself  sustained 
by  a  sullen  and  stoical  submission  to  the  worst, 
nor  did  He  seek  so  to  instruct  His  followers. 
It  was  for  the  joy  that  was  set  before  Him  that 
He  endured  the  cross.  And  all  the  faithful  who 
suffer  with  Him  shall  also  reign  together  with 
Him,  and  are  instructed  to  press  toward  the 
mark  for  the  prize  of  their  high  calling.  For  we 
are  saved  by  hope. 

But  now,  contrast  with  the  utmost  courage  of 
the  martyrs,  who  braved  the  worst,  when  it 
emerged  at  last  suddenly  from  the  veil  which 
mercifully  hides  our  future,  and  which  hope  can 
always  gild  with  starry  pictures,  this  courage 
that  looked  steadily  forward,  disguising  nothing, 
hoping  for  no  escape,  living  through  all  the 
agony  so  long  before  it  came,  seeing  His  wounds 
in  the  breaking  of  bread,  and  His  blood  when 
wine  was  poured.  Consider  how  marvellous  was 
the  love,  which  met  with  no  real  sympathy,  nor 
even  comprehension,  as  He  spoke  such  dreadful 
words,  and  forced  Himself  to  repeat  what  must 
have  shaken  the  barb  He  carried  in  His  heart, 
that  by-and-by  His  followers  might  be  some- 
what helped  by  remembering  that  He  had  told 
them. 

-And  yet  again,  consider  how  immediately  the 
doctrine  of  His  suffering  follows  upon  the  con- 
fession of  His  Christhood.  and  judge  whether  the 
crucifixion  was  merely  a  painful  incident,  the 
sad  close  of  a  noble  life  and  a  pure  ministry,  or 
in  itself  a  necessary  and  cardinal  event,  fraught 
with  transcendent  issues. 

THE  REBUKE  OF  PETER. 

Mark  viii.  32-ix.  i  (R.  V.). 

The  doctrine  of  a  suffering  Messiah  was 
strange  in  the  time  of  Jesus.  And  to  the  warm- 
hearted apostle  the  announcement  that  his  be- 


868 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


loved  Master  should  endure  a  shameful  death 
was  keenly  painful.  '  Moreover,  what  had  just 
passed  made  it  specially  unwelcome  then.  Jesus 
had  accepted  and  applauded  a  confession  which 
implied  all  honour.  He  had  promised  to  build 
a  new  Church  upon  a  rock;  and  claimed,  as  His 
to  give  away,  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Hopes  were  thus  excited  which  could  not  brook 
His  stern  repression;  and  the  career  which  the 
apostle  promised  himself  was  very  unlike  that 
defence  of  a  lost  cause,  and  a  persecuted  and 
martyred  leader,  which  now  threatened  him. 
The  rebuke  of  Jesus  clearly  warns  Peter  that  he 
had  miscalculated  his  own  prospect  as  well  as 
that  of  his  Lord,  and  that  he  must  prepare  for 
the  burden  of  a  cross.  Above  all,  it  is  plain  that 
Peter  was  intoxicated  by  the  great  position  just 
assigned  to  him,  and  allowed  himself  an  utterly 
strange  freedom  of  interference  with  his  Master's 
plans.  He  "  took  Him  and  began  to  rebuke 
Him,"  evidently  drawing  Him  aside  for  the  pur-- 
pose,  since  Jesus  "  turned  about  "  in  order  to  see 
the  disciples  whom  He  had  just  addressed.  Thus 
our  narrative  implies  that  commission  of  the  keys 
to  him  which  it  omits  to  mention,  and  we  learn 
how  absurd  is  the  infidel  contention  that  each'* 
evangelist  was  ignorant  of  all  that  he  did  not 
record.  Did  the  appeal  against  those  gloomy 
forebodings  of  Jesus,  the  protest  that  such  evil 
must  not  be,  the  refusal  to  recognise  a  prophecy 
in  His  fears,  awaken  any  answer  in  the  sinless 
heart?  Sympathy  was  not  there,  nor  approval, 
nor  any  shade  of  readiness  to  yield.  But  inno- 
cent human  desire  for  escape,  the  love  of  life, 
horror  of  His  fate,  more  intense  as  it  vibrated 
in  the  apostle's  shaken  voice,  these  He  assuredly 
felt.  For  He  tells  us  in  so  many  words  that 
Peter  was  a  stumbling-block  to  Him,  although 
He,  walking  in  the  clear  day,  stumbled  not. 
Jesus,  let  us  repeat  it  again  and  again,  endured 
not  like  a  Stoic,  deadening  the  natural  impulses 
of  humanity.  Whatever  outraged  His  tender 
and  perfect  nature  was  not  less  dreadful  to  Him 
than  to  us;  it  was  much  more  so,  because  His 
sensibilities  were  unblunted  and  exquisitely 
strung.  At  every  thought  of  what  lay  before 
Him,  his  soul  shuddered  like  a  rudely  touched 
instrument  of  most  delicate  structure.  And  it 
was  necessary  that  He  should  throw  back  the 
temptation  with  indignation  and  even  vehe- 
mence, with  the  rebuk  of  heaven  set  against  the 
presumptuous  rebuke  of  fiesh,  "  Get  thee  behind 
Me.  ...  for  thou  art  mindful  not  of  the  things 
of  God,  but  the  things  of  men." 

But  what  shall  we  say  to  the  hard  word, 
"Satan"  ?  Assuredly  Peter,  who  remained  faith- 
ful to  Him,  did  not  take  it  for  an  outbreak  of 
bitterness,  an  exaggerated  epithet  of  unbridled 
and  undisciplined  resentment.  The  very  time  oc- 
cupied in  looking  around,  the  "  circumspection  " 
which  was  shown,  while  it  gave  emphasis,  re- 
moved passion  from  the  saying. 

Peter  would  therefore  understand  that  Jesus 
heard,  in  his  voice,  the  prompting  of  the  great 
tempter,  to  whom  He  had  once  already  spoken 
the  same  words.  He  would  be  warned  that  soft 
and.  indulgent  sentiment,  while  seeming  kind, 
may  become  the  very  snare  of  the  destroyer. 

And  the  strong  word  which  sobered  him  will 
continue  to  be  a  warning  to  the  end  of  time.       , 

When  love  of  ease  or  worldly  prospects  would 
lead  us  to  discourage  the  self-devotion,  and  re- 
press the  zeal  of  any  convert;  when  toil  or  lib- 
erality   beyond    the    recognised    level    seems    a 


thing  to  discountenance,  not  because  it  is  per- 
haps misguided,  but  only  because  it  is  excep- 
tional; when,  for  a  brother  or  a  son,  we  are 
tempted  to  prefer  an  easy  and  prosperous  life 
rather  than  a  fruitful  but  stern  and  even  perilous 
course,  then  we  are  in  the  same  danger  as  Peter 
of  becoming  the  mouthpiece  of  the  Evil  One. 

Danger  and  hardness  are  not  to  be  chosen  for 
their  own  sake;  but  to  reject  a  noble  vocation, 
because  these  are  in  the  way,  is  to  mind  not 
the  things  of  God  but  the  things  of  men.  And 
yet  the  temptation  is  one  from  which  men  are 
never  free,  and  which  intrudes  into  what  seems 
most  holy.  It  dared  to  assail  Jesus;  and  it  is 
most  perilous  still,  because  it  often  speaks  to 
us,  as  then  to  Him,  through  compassionate  and 
loving  lips. 

But  now  the  Lord  calls  to  Himself  all  the 
multitude,  and  lays  down  the  rule  by  which 
discipleship  must  to  the  end  be  regulated. 

The  inflexible  law  is  that  every  follower  of 
Jesus  must  deny  himself  and  take  up  his  cross. 
It  is  not  said.  Let  him  devise  some  harsh  and 
ingenious  instrument  of  self-torture:  wanton 
self-torture  is  cruelty,  and  is  often  due  to  the 
soul's  readiness  rather  to  endure  any  other  suf- 
fering than  that  which  God  assigns.  Nor  is 
it  said.  Let  him  take  up  My  cross,  for  the  bur- 
den Christ  bore  devolves  upon  no  other;  the 
fight  He  fought  is  over. 

But  it  speaks  of  some  cross  allotted,  known, 
but  not  yet  accepted,  some  lowly  form  of  suffer- 
ing, passive  or  active,  against  which  nature 
pleads,  as  Jesus  heard  His  own  nature  pleading 
when  Peter  spoke.  In  taking  up  this  cross  we 
must  deny  self,  for  it  will  refuse  the  dreadful 
burden.  What  it  is,  no  man  can  tell,  his  neigh- 
bour, for  often  what  seems  a  fatal  besetment  is 
but  a  symptom  and  not  the  true  disease;  and 
the  angry  man's  irritability,  and  the  drunkard's 
resort  to  stimulants,  are  due  to  remorse  and 
self-reproach  for  a  deeper  hidden  evil  gnawing 
the  spiritual  life  away.  But  the  man  himself 
knows  it.  Our  exhortations  miss  the  mark  when 
we  bid  him  reform  in  this  direction  or  in  that, 
but  conscience  does  not  err;  and  he  well  dis- 
cerns the  effort  or  the  renouncement,  hateful  to 
him  as  the  very  cross  itself,  by  which  alone  he 
can  enter  into  life. 

To  him,  that  life  seems  death,  the  death  of 
all  for  which  he  cares  to  live,  being  indeed  the 
death  of  selfishness.  But  from  the  beginning, 
when  God  in  Eden  set  a  barrier  against  lawless 
appetite,  it  was  announced  that  the  seeming  life 
of  self-indulgence  and  of  disobedience  was  really 
death.  In  the  day  when  Adam  ate  of  the  for- 
bidden fruit  he  surely  died.  And  thus  our  Lord 
declared  that  whosoever  is  resolved  to  save  his 
life — the  life  of  wayward,  isolated  selfishness — 
he  shall  lose  all  its  reality,  the  sap,  the  sweet- 
ness, and  the  glow  of  it.  And  whosoever  is 
content  to  lose  all  this  for  the  sake  of  the  Great 
Cause,  the  cause  of  Jesus  and  His  gospel,  he 
shall  save  it. 

It  was  thus  that  the  great  apostle  was  crucified 
with  Christ,  yet  lived,  and  yet  no  longer  he, 
for  Christ  Himself  inspired  in  his  breast  a  nobler 
and  deeper  life  than  that  which  he  had  lost,  for 
Jesus  and  the  gospel.  The  world  knows,,  as  the 
Church  does,  how  much  superior  is  self-devotion 
to  self-indulgence,  and  that  one  crowded  hour 
of  glorious  life  is  worth  an  age  without  a  name. 
Its  imagination  is  not  inflamed  by  the  picture 
of   indolence   and   luxury,    but   by   resolute   and 


Mark  ix.  2-8.] 


THE    TRANSFIGURATION. 


860 


victorious  effort.  But  it  knows  not  how  to  mas- 
ter the  rebellious  senses,  nor  how  to  insure  vic- 
tory in  the  struggle,  nor  how  to  bestow  upon 
the  masses,  phinged  in  their  monotonous  toils, 
the  rapture  of  triumphant  strife.  That  can  only 
be  done  by  revealing  to  them  the  spiritual  re- 
sponsibilities of  life,  and  the  beauty  of  His  love 
Who  calls  the  humblest  to  walk  in  His  own 
sacred  footsteps. 

Very  striking  is  the  moderation  of  Jesus,  Who 
does  not  refuse  discipleship  to  self-seeking 
wishes  but  only  to  the  self-seeking  will,  in  which 
wishes  have  ripened  into  choice,  nor  does  He 
demand  that  we  should  welcome  the  loss  of 
the  inferior  life,  but  only  that  we  should  accept 
it.  He  can  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our 
infirmities. 

And  striking  also  is  this,  that  He  condemns 
not  the  vicious  life  only:  not  alone  the  man 
whose  desires  are  sensual  and  depraved;  but  all 
who  live  for  self.  No  matter  how  refined  and 
artistic  the  personal  ambitions  be,  to  devote  our- 
selves to  them  is  to  lose  the  reality  of  life,  it 
is  to  become  querulous  or  jealous  or  vain  or 
forgetful  of  the  claims  of  other  men,  or  scorn- 
ful of  the  crowd.  Not  self-culture  but  self- 
sacrifice  is  the  vocation  of  the  child  of  God. 

Many  people  speak  as  if  this  text  bade  us 
sacrifice  the  present  life  in  hope  of  gaining  an- 
other life  beyond  the  grave.  That  is  apparently 
the  common  notion  of  saving  our  "  souls."  But 
Jesus  used  one  word  for  the  "  life  "  renounced 
and  gained.  He  spoke  indeed  of  saving  it  unto 
life  eternal,  but  His  hearers  were  men  who 
trusted  that  they  had  eternal  life,  not  that  it 
was  a  far-off  aspiration  (John  vi.  47,  54). 

And  it  is  doubtless  in  the  same  sense,  thinking 
of  the  freshness  and  joy  which  we  sacrifice  for 
worldliness,  and  how  sadly  and  soon  we  are 
disillusionised,  that  He  went  on  to  ask.  What 
shall  it  profit  a  man  to  gain  the  whole  world 
and  forfeit  his  life?  Or  with  what  price  shall 
he  buy  it  back  when  he  discovers  his  error? 
But  that  discovery  is  too  often  postponed  be- 
yond the  horizon  of  mortality.  As  one  desire 
proves  futile,  another  catches  the  eye,  and  some- 
what excites  again  the  often  baffled  hope.  But 
the  day  shall  come  when  the  last  self-decep- 
tion shall  be  at  an  end.  The  cross  of  the  Son 
of  man,  that  type  of  all  noble  sacrifice,  shall 
then  be  replaced  by  the  glory  of  His  Father 
with  the  holy  angels;  and  ignoble  compromise, 
aware  of  Jesus  and  His  words,  yet  ashamed  of 
them  in  a  vicious  and  self-indulgent  age,  shall 
in  turn  endure  His  averted  face.  What  price 
shall  they  offer  then,  to  buy  back  what  they 
have  forfeited? 

Men  who  were  standing  there  should  see  the 
beginning  of  the  end,  the  approach  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  with  power,  in  the  fall  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  the  removal  of  the  Hebrew  candle- 
stick out  of  its  place. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  TRANSFIGURATION. 

Mark  ix.  2-8  (R.  V.). 

The  Transfiguration  is  an  event  without  a 
parallel  in  all  the  story  of  our  Lord.  This  break- 
ing forth  of  unearthly  splendour  in  a  life  of 
self-negation,  this  miracle  wrought  without  suf- 


fering to  be  relieved  or  want  supplied,  and  in 
which  He  seems  to  be  not  the  Giver  of  Help 
but  the  Receiver  of  Glory,  arrests  our  attention 
less  by  the  greatness  of  the  marvel  than  by  its 
loneliness. 

But  if  myth  or  legend  had  to  do  with  the 
making  of  our  Gospels,  we  should  have  had  won- 
ders enough  which  bless  no  suppliant,  but  only 
crown  the  sacred  head  with  laurels.  They  are 
as  plentiful  in  the  false  Gospels  as  in  the  later 
stories  of  Mahomed  or  Gautama.  Can  we  find 
a  sufificient  difference  between  these  romantic 
tales  and  this  memorable  event — causes  enough 
to  lead  up  to  it,  and  ends  enough  for  it  to 
serve? 

An  answer  is  hinted  by  the  stress  laid  in  all 
three  narratives  upon  the  date  of  the  Transfig- 
uration. It  was  "  after  six  days  "  according  to 
the  first  two.  St.  Luke  reckons  the  broken 
portions  of  the  first  day  and  the  last,  and  makes 
it  "  about  eight  days  after  these  sayings."  A 
week  has  passed  since  the  solemn  announcement 
that  their  Lord  was  journeying  to  a  cruel  death, 
that  self-pity  was  discordant  with  the  things 
of  God,  that  all  His  followers  must  in  spirit 
endure  the  cross,  that  life  was  to  be  won  by  los- 
ing it.  Of  that  week  no  action  is  recorded, 
and  we  may  well  believe  that  it  was  spent  in 
profound  searchings  of  heart.  The  thief  Iscariot 
would  more  than  ever  be  estranged.  The  rest 
would  aspire  and  struggle  and  recoil,  and  ex- 
plain away  His  words  in  such  strange  ways,  as 
when  they  presently  failed  to  understand  what 
the  rising  again  from  the  dead  should  mean 
(ver.  10).  But  in  the  deep  heart  of  Jesus  there 
was  peace,  the  same  which  He  bequeathed  to 
all  His  followers,  the  perfect  calm  of  an  abso- 
lutely surrendered  will.  He  had  made  the  dread 
announcement  and  rejected  the  insidious  appeal; 
the  sacrifice  was  already  accomplished  in  His 
inner  self,  and  the  word  spoken,  Lo,  I  come  to 
do  Thy  will,  O  God.  We  must  steadily  resist 
the  notion  that  the  Transfiguration  was  required 
to  confirm  His  consecration;  or,  after  six  days 
had  passed  since  He  bade  Satan  get  behind  Him, 
to  complete  and  perfect  His  decision.  Yet 
doubtless  it  had  its  meaning  for  Him  also.  Such 
times  oi  more  than  heroic  self-devotion  make 
large  demands  upon  the  vital  energies.  And  He 
whom  the  angels  more  than  once  sustained,  now 
sought  refreshment  in  the  pure  air  and  solemn 
silence  of  the  hills,  and  above  all  in  communion 
with  His  Father,  since  we  read  in  St.  Luke 
thafHe  Went  up  to  pray.  Who  shall  say  how 
far-reaching,  how  all-embracing  such  a  prayer 
would  be?  What  age,  what  race  may  not  hope 
to  have  shared  its  intercessions,  remembering 
how  He  once  expressly  prayed  not  for  His  im- 
mediate followers  alone.  But  we  need  not  doubt 
that  now,  as  in  the  Garden,  He  prayed  also 
for  Himself,  and  for  support  in  the  approaching 
death-struggle.  And  the  Twelve,  so  keenly 
tried,  would  be  especially  remembered  in  this 
season.  And  even  among  these  there  would  be 
distinctions;  for  we  know  His  manner,  we  re- 
member that  when  Satan  claimed  to  have  them 
all,  Jesus  prayed  especially  for  Peter,  because 
his  conversion  would  strengthen  his  brethren. 
Now  this  principle  of  benefit  to  all  through 
the  selection  of  the  fittest,  explains  why  three 
were  chosen  to  be  the  eyewitnesses  of  His 
glory.  If  the  others  had  been  there,  perhaps 
they  would  have  been  led  away  into  millennarian 
day-dreams.     Perhaps  the  worldly  aspirations  of 


370 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


Judas,  thus  inflamed,  would  have  spread  far. 
Perhaps  they  would  have  murmured  against 
that  return  to  common  life  which  St.  Peter 
was  so  anxious  to  postpone.  Perhaps  even 
the  chosen  three  were  only  saved  from  in- 
toxicating and  delusive  hopes  by  the  sober- 
ing knowledge  that  what  they  had  seen  was 
to  remain  a  secret  until  some  intervening 
and  mysterious  event.  The  unripeness  of 
the  others  for  special  revelations  was  abun- 
dantly shown,  on  the  morrow,  by  their  fail- 
ure to  cast  out  a  devil.  It  was  enough  that 
their  leaders  should  have  this  grand  confirma- 
tion of  their  faith.  There  was  among  them, 
V  henceforth,  a  secret  fountain  of  encouragement 
and  trust,  amid  the  darkest  circumstances.  The 
panic  "in  which  all  forsook  Him  might  have 
been  final  but  for  this  vision  of  His  glory.  For 
it  is  noteworthy  that  these  three  are  the  fore- 
most afterwards  in  sincere  though  frail  devotion: 
one  offering  to  die  with  Him,  and  the  others 
desiring  to  drink  of  His  cup  and  to  be  baptised 
with  His  baptism. 

While  Jesus  prays  for  them.  He  is  Himself 
made  the  source  of  their  revival.  He  had  lately 
promised  that  they  who  willed  to  lose  their  life 
should  find  it  unto  life  eternal.  And  now,  in 
Him  who  had  perfectly  so  willed,  they  beheld 
the  eternal  glory  beaming  forth,  until  His  very 
garments  were  steeped  in  light.  There  is  no 
need  of  proof  that  the  spirit  has  power  over 
the  body;  the  question  is  only  of  degree.  Vile 
passions  can  permanently  degrade  human  come- 
liness. And  there  is  a  beauty  beyond  that  of 
line  or  colour,  seen  in  vivid  hours  of  emotion, 
on  the  features  of  a  mother  beside  her  sleep- 
ing babe,  of  an  orator  when  his  soul  burns  within 
him,  of  a  martyr  when  his  face  is  as  the  face 
of  an  angel,  and  often  making  fairer  than  youth- 
ful bloom  the  old  age  that  has  suffered  long 
and  been  kind.  These  help  us,  however  faintly, 
to  believe  that  there  is  a  spiritual  body,  and 
that  we  may  yet  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly. 
And  so  once,  if  only  once,  it  is  given  to  sinful 
men  to  see  how  a  perfect  spirit  can  illuminate 
its  fleshly  tabernacle,  as  a  flame  illuminates  a 
lamp,  and  what  the  life  is  like  in  which  self- 
crucifixion  issues.  In  this  hour  of  rapt  devo- 
tion His  body  was  steeped  in  the  splendour 
which  was  natural  to  holiness,  and  which  would 
never  have  grown  dim  but  that  the  great  sac- 
rifice had  still  to  be  carried  out  in  action.  We 
shall  best  think  of  the  glories  of  transfiguration 
not  as  poured  over  Jesus,  but  as  a  revelation 
from  within.  Moreover,  while  they  gaze,  the 
conquering  chiefs  of  the  Old  Testament  ap- 
proach the  Man  of  Sorrows.  Because  the  spirit 
of  the  hour  is  that  of  self-devotion,  they  see 
not  Abraham,  the  prosperous  friend  of  God,  nor 
Isaiah  whose  burning  words  befit  the  lips  that 
were  touched  by  fire  from  an  unearthly  altar, 
but  the  heroic  law-giver  and  the  lion-hearted 
prophet,  the  typical  champions  of  the  ancient 
dispensation.  Elijah  had  not  seen  death;  a  ma- 
jestic obscurity  veiled  the  ashes  of  Moses  from 
excess  of  honour;  yet  these  were  not  offended 
by  the  cross  which  tried  so  cruelly  the  faith 
of  the  apostles.  They  spoke  of  His  decease, 
and  their  word  seems  to  have  lingered  in  the 
narrative  as  strangely  appropriate  to  one  of  the 
speakers;  it  is  Christ's  "  exodus."  * 


But  St.  Mark  does  not  linger  over  this  detail, 
nor  mention  the  drowsiness  with  which  they 
struggled;  he  leans  all  the  weight  of  his  vivid 
narrative  upon  one  great  fact,  the  evidence  now 
given  of  our  Lord's  absolute  supremacy. 

For  at  this  juncture  Peter  interposed.  He 
"  answered,"  a  phrase  which  points  to  his  con- 
sciousness that  he  was  no  unconcerned  by- 
stander, that  the  vision  was  in  some  degree  ad- 
dressed to  him  and  his  companions.  But  he 
answers  at  random,  and  like  a  man  distraught. 
"  Lord,  it  is  good  for  us  to  be  here,"  as  if  it 
were  not  always  good  to  be  where  Jesus  led, 
even  though  men  should  bear  a  cross  to  follow 
Him.  Intoxicated  by  the  joy  of  seeing  the  King 
in  His  beauty,  and  doubtless  by  the  revulsion  of 
new  hope  in  the  stead  of  his  dolorous  forebod- 
ings, he  proposes  to  linger  there.  He  will  have 
more  than  is  granted,  just  as,  when  Jesus 
washed  his  feet,  he  said  "  not  my  feet  only,  but 
also  my  hands  and  my  head."  And  if  this  might 
be,  it  was  fitting  that  these  superhuman  person- 
ages should  have  tabernacles  made  for  them. 
No  doubt  the  assertion  that  he  wist  not  what  to 
say,  bears  specially  upon  this  strange  offer  to 
shelter  glorified  bodies  from  the  night  air,  and 
to  provide  for  each  a  place  of  separate  repose. 
The  words  are  incoherent,  but  they  are  quite 
natural  from  one  who  has  so  impulsively  begun 
to  speak  that  now  he  must  talk  on,  because  he 
knows  not  how  to  stop.  They  are  the  words  of 
the  very  Peter  whose  actions  we  know  so  well. 
As  he  formerly,  walked  upon  the  sea,  before 
considering  how  boisterous  were  the  waves,  and 
would  soon  afterwards  smite  with  the  sword, 
and  risk  himself  in  the  High  Priest's  palace, 
without  seeing  his  way  through  either  adven- 
ture, exactly  so  in  this  bewildering  presence  he 
ventures  into  a  sentence  without  knowing  how 
to  close  it. 

Now  this  perfect  accuracy  of  character,  so 
dramatic  and  yet  so  unaffected,  is  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  this  great  miracle.  To  a  frank  stu- 
dent who  knows  human  nature,  it  is  a  very  ad- 
mirable evidence.  To  one  who  knows  how 
clumsily  such  effects  are  produced  by  all  but  the 
greatest  masters  of  creative  literature,  it  is 
almost  decisive. 

In  speaking  thus,  he  has  lowered  his  Master 
to  the  level  of  the  others,  unconscious  that 
Moses  and  Elijah  were  only  attendants  upon 
Jesus,  who  have  come  from  heaven  because  He 
is  upon  earth,  and  who  speak  not  of  their 
achievements,  but  of  His  sufferings.  If  Peter 
knew  it,  the  hour  had  struck  when  their  work, 
the  law  of  Moses  and  the  utterances  of  the 
prophets  whom  Elijah  represented,  should  cease 
to  be  the  chief  impulse  in  religion,  and  without 
being  destroyed,  should  be  "  fulfilled,"  and  ab- 
sorbed in  a  new  system.  He  was  there  to  whom 
Moses  in  the  law,  and  the  prophets  bore  witness, 
and  in  His  presence  they  had  no  glory  by  reason 
of  the  glory  that  excelleth.  Yet  Peter  would 
fain  build  equal  tabernacles  for  all  alike. 

Now  St.  Luke  tells  us  that  he  interposed  just 
when  they  were  departing,  and  apparently  in  the 
hope  of  staying  them.  But  all  the  narratives 
convey  a  strong  impression  that  his  words 
hastened  their  disappearance,  and  decided  the 
manner  of  it.  For  while  he  yet  spake,  as  if  all 
the  vision  were  eclipsed  on  being  thus  misunder- 


*  Once  besides  in  the  New  Testament  this  phrase  was  in  his  mind,  and  its  voices  lingered  unconsciously  in  his 
applied  to  death.  That  was  by  St.  Peter  speaking  of  his  memory  (2  Pet.  i.  15,  cf.  ver.  17).  Ihe  phrase,  though  not 
own,  when  the  thought  of  the  transfiguration  was  floating    unclassical,  is  not  common. 


Mark  ix.  9-13.] 


THE    DESCENT    FROM    THE    MOUNT. 


871 


itood,  a  cloud  swept  over  the  three — bright,  yet 
overshadowing  them — and  the  voice  of  God 
proclaimed  their  Lord  to  be  His  beloved  Son 
(not  faithful  only,  like  Moses,  as  a  steward  over 
the  house),  and  bade  them,  instead  of  desiring 
to  arrest  the  flight  of  rival  teachers,  hear  Him. 

Too  often  Christian  souls  err  after  the  same 
fashion.  We  cling  to  authoritative  teachers, 
familiar  ordinances,  and  traditional  views,  good 
it  may  be,  and  even  divinely  given,  as  if  they 
were  not  intended  wholly  to  lead  us  up  to  Christ. 
And  in  many  a  spiritual  eclipse,  from  many  a 
cloud  which  the  heart  fears  to  enter,  the  great 
lesson  resounds  through  the  conscience  of  the 
believer,   Hear  Him  ! 

Did  the  words  remind  Peter  how  he  had  lately 
begun  to  rebuke  his  Lord?  Did  the  visible 
glory,  the  ministration  of  blessed  spirits  and  the 
voice  of  God  teach  him  henceforth  to  hear  and 
to    submit?     Alas,    he    could    again    contradict 

{esus,  and  say  Thou  shalt  never  wash  my  feet. 
never  will  deny  Thee.  And  we,  who  wonder 
and  blame  him,  as  easily  forget  what  we  are 
taught. 

Let  it  be  observed  that  the  miraculous  and 
Divine  Voice  reveals  nothing  new  to  them.  For 
the  words,  This  is  My  beloved  Son,  and  also 
their  drift  in  raising  Him  above  all  rivalry,  were 
involved  in  the  recent  confession  of  this  very 
Peter  that  He  was  neither  Elijah  nor  one  of  the 
prophets,  but  the  Son  of  the  Living  God.  So 
true  is  it  that  we  may  receive  a  truth  into  our 
creed,  and  even  apprehend  it  with  such  vital  faith 
as  makes  us  "  blessed,"  long  before  it  grasps  and 
subdues  oiy  nature,  and  saturates  the  obscure  re- 
gions where  impulse  and  excitement  are  con- 
trolled. What  we  all  need  most  is  not  clearer 
and  sounder  views,  but  the  bringing  of  our 
thoughts  into  subjection  to  the  mind  of  Jesus. 


THE    DESCENT    FROM    THE    MOUNT. 
Mark  ix.  9-13  (R.  V.). 

In  what  state  of  mind  did  the  apostles  return 
from  beholding  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  and  His 
ministers  from  another  world?  They  seem  to 
have  been  excited,  demonstrative,  ready  to  blaze 
abroad  the  wonderful  event  which  ought  to  put 
nn  end  to  all  men's  doubts. 

They  would  have  been  bitterly  disappointed, 
if  they  had  prematurely  exposed  their  experi- 
ence to  ridicule,  cross-examination,  conjectural 
theories,  and  all  the  controversy  which  reduces 
facts  to  logical  form,  but  strips  them  of  their 
freshness  and  vitality.  In  the  first  age  as  in  the 
nineteenth,  it  was  possible  to  be  witnesses  for  the 
Lord  without  exposing  to  coarse  and  irreverent 
handling  all  the  delicate  and  secret  experiences 
of  the  soul  with  Christ. 

Therefore  Jesus  charged  them  that  they 
should  tell  no  man.  Silence  would  force  back 
the  impression  upon  the  depths  of  their  own 
spirits,  and  spread  its  roots  under  the  surface 
there. 

Nor  was  it  right  to  make  such  a  startling  de- 
mand upon  the  faith  of  others  before  public  evi- 
dence had  been  given,  enough  to  make  scepti- 
cism blameworthy.  His  resurrection  from  the 
dead  would  suffice  to  unseal  their  lips.  And  the 
experience  of  all  the  Church  has  justified  that 
decision.  The  resurrection  is,  in  fact,  the  centre 
of  all  their  miraculous  narratives,  the  sun  which 


keeps  them  in  their  orbit.  Some  of  them,  as  iso- 
lated events,  might  have  failed  to  challenge  cre- 
dence. But  authority  and  sanction  are  given  to 
all  the  rest  by  this  great  and  publicly  attested 
marvel,  which  has  modified  history,  and  the  de- 
nial of  which  makes  history  at  once  untrust- 
worthy and  incoherent.  When  Jesus  rose  from 
the  dead,  the  whole  significance  of  His  life  and 
its  events  was  deepened. 

This  mention  of  the  resurrection  called  them 
away  from  pleasant  day-dreams,  by  reminding 
them  that  their  Master  was  to  die.  For  Him 
there  was  no  illusion.  Coming  back  from  the 
light  and  voices  of  heaven,  the  cross  before  Him 
was  as  visible  as  ever  to  His  undazzled  eyes,  and 
He  was  still  the  sober  and  vigilant  friend  to 
warn  them  against  false  hopes.  They,  however, 
found  means  of  explaining  the  unwelcome  truth 
away.  Various  theories  were  discussed  among 
them,  what  the  rising  from  the  dead  should 
mean,  what  should  be  in  fact  the  limit  to  their 
silence.  This  very  perplexity,  and  the  chill  upon 
their  hopes,  aided  them  to  keep  the  matter  close. 

One  hope  was  too  strong  not  to  be  at  least 
hinted  to  Jesus.  They  had  just  seen  Elias. 
Surely  they  were  right  in  expecting  his  inter- 
ference, as  the  scribes  had  taught.  Instead  of  a 
lonely  road  pursued  by  the  Messiah  to  a  painful 
death,  should  not  that  great  prophet  come  as  a 
forerunner  and  restore  all  things?  How  then 
was  murderous  opposition  possible? 

And  Jesus  answered  that  one  day  this  should 
come  to  pass.  The  herald  should  indeed  recon- 
cile all  hearts,  before  the  great  and  notable  day 
of  the  Lord  came.  But  for  the  present  time 
there  was  another  question.  That  promise  to 
which  they  clung,  was  it  their  only  light  upon 
futurity?  Was  not  the  assertion  quite  as  plain 
that  the  Son  of  Man  should  suffer  many  things 
and  be  set  at  nought?  So  far  was  Jesus  from 
that  state  of  mind  in  which  men  buoy  themselves 
up  with  false  hope.  No  apparent  prophecy,  no 
splendid  vision,  deceived  His  unerring  insight. 
And  yet  no  despair  arrested  His  energies  for 
one  hour. 

But,  He  added,  Elias  had  already  been  offered 
to  this  generation  in  vain;  they  had  done  to  him 
as  they  listed.  They  had  re-enacted  what  history 
recorded  of  his  life  on  earth. 

Then  a  veil  dropped  from  the  disciples'  eyes. 
They  recognised  the  dweller  in  lonely  places, 
the  man  of  hairy  garment  and  ascetic  life,  perse- 
cuted by  a  feeble  tyrant  who  cowered  before  his 
rebuke,  and  by  the  deadlier  hatred  of  an  adulter- 
ous queen.  They  saw  how  the  very  name  of 
Elias  raised  a  probability  that  the  second  prophet 
should  be  treated  "  as  it  is  written  of  "  the  first. 

If  then  they  had  so  strangely  misjudged  the 
preparation  of  His  way,  what  might  they  not  ap- 
prehend of  the  issue?  So  should  also  the  Son 
of  man  suffer  of  them. 

Do  we  wonder  that  they  had  not  hitherto 
recognised  the  prophet?  Perhaps,  when  all  is 
made  clear  at  last,  we  shall  wonder  more  at  our 
own  refusals  of  reverence,  our  blindness  to  the 
meaning  of  noble  lives,  our  moderate  and  quali- 
fied respect  for  men  of  whom  the  world  is  not 
worthy. 

How  much  solid  greatness  would  some  of  us 
overlook,  if  it  went  with  an  unpolished  and  un- 
attractive exterior?  Now  the  Baptist  was  a  rude 
and  abrupt  person,  of  little  culture,  unwelcome 
in  kings'  houses.  Yet  no  greater  had  been  born 
of  woman. 


872 


THE  T^OSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


THE  DEMONIAC  BOY. 
Mark  ix.  14-29  (R.  V.). 

Peter  soon  had  striking  evidence  that  it  would 
not  have  been  "  good  "  for  them  to  linger  too 
long  upon  the  mountain.  And  our  Lord  was 
recalled  with  painful  abruptness  from  the  glories 
of  transfiguration  to  the  scepticism  of  scribes, 
the  failure  and  shame  of  disciples,  and  the  tri- 
umph of  the  powers  of  evil. 

To  the  Twelve  He  had  explicitly  given  au- 
thority over  devils,  and  even  the  Seventy, 
venturing  by  faith  to  cast  them  out,  had  told 
Him  of  their  success  with  joy.  But  now,  in  the 
sorrow  and  fear  of  these  latter  days,  deprived  of 
their  Master  and  of  their  own  foremost  three, 
oppressed  with  gloomy  forebodings,  and  infected 
with  the  worldliness  which  fails  to  pray,  the  nine 
had  striven  in  vain.  It  is  the  only  distinct  re- 
pulse recorded,  and  the  scribes  attacked  them 
keenly.  Where  was  their  Master  at  this  crisis? 
Did  not  they  profess  equally  to  have  the  neces- 
sary power?  Here  was  a  test,  and  some  failed, 
and  the  others  did  not  present  themselves.  We 
can  imagine  the  miserable  scene,  contrasting 
piteously  with  what  passed  on  the  summit  of  the 
hill.  And  in  the  centre  were  an  agonised  father 
and  a  tortured  lad. 

At  this  moment  the  crowds,  profoundly  moved, 
rushed  to  meet  the  Lord,  and  on  seeing  Him, 
became  aware  that  failure  was  at  an  end.  Per- 
haps the  exceeding  brightness  lingered  still  upon 
His  face;  perhaps  it  was  but  the  unearthly  and 
victorious  calm  of  His  consecration,  visible  in 
His  mien;  what  is  certain  is  that  they  were 
greatly  amazed,  and  ran  to  Him  and  did  homage. 

Jesus  at  once  challenged  a  renewal  of  the  at- 
tack which  had  been  too  much  for  His  apostles. 
"  What  question  ye  with  them?  "  But  awe  has 
fallen  upon  the  scribes  also,  and  misery  is  left 
to  tell  its  own  tale.  Their  attack  by  preference 
upon  the  disciples  is  very  natural,  and  it  by  no 
means  stands  alone.  They  did  not  ask  Him,  but 
His  followers,  why  He  ate  and  drank  with  sin- 
ners, nor  whether  He  paid  the  half-shekel 
(Mark  ii.  16;  Matt.  xvii.  24).  When  they  did 
complain  to  the  Master  Himself,  it  was  com- 
monly of  some  fault  in  His  disciples:  Why  do 
Thy  disciples  fast  not?  Why  do  they  on  the 
Sabbath  day  that  which  is  not  lawful?  Why  do 
they  eat  with  defiled  hands?  (Mark  ii.  18,  24; 
vii.  5).  Their  censures  of  Himself  were  usually 
muttered  or  silent  murmurings,  which  He  dis- 
cerned, as  when  He  forgave  the  sins  of  the 
palsied  man;  when  the  Pharisee  marvelled  that 
He  had  not  washed  His  hands;  when  He  ac- 
cepted the  homage  of  the  sinful  woman,  and 
again  when  He  spoke  her  pardon  (Mark  ii-.  8; 
Luke  xi.  38;  vii.  39-49).  When  He  healed  the 
woman  whom  a  spirit  of  infirmity  had  bent 
down  for  eighteen  years,  the  ruler  of  the  syna- 
gogue spoke  to  the  people,  without  venturing  to 
address  Jesus  (Luke  xiii.  14}. 

It  is  important  to  observe  such  indications, 
unobtrusive,  and  related  by  various  evangelists, 
of  the  majesty  and  impressiveness  which  sur- 
rounded our  Lord,  and  awed  even  His  bitter 
foes. 

The  silence  is  broken  by  an  unhappy  father, 
who  had  been  the  centre  of  the  group,  but 
whom  the  abrupt  movement  to  meet  Jesus  has 
merged  in  the  crowd  again.  The  case  of  his  son 
is   among   those   which   proved   that   demoniacal 


possession  did  not  imply  the  exceptional  guilt 
of  its  victims,  for  though  still  young,  he  has 
suffered  long.  The  demon  which  afflicts  him  is 
dumb;  it  works  in  the  guise  of  epilepsy,  and  as 
a  disease  it  is  affected  by  the  changes  of  the 
moon;  a  malicious  design  is  visible,  in  frequent 
falls  into  fire  and  water,  to  destroy  him.  The 
father  had  sought  Jesus  with  him,  and  since  He 
was  absent  had  appealed  to  His  followers,  but 
in  vain.  Some  consequent  injury  to  his  own 
faith,  clearly  implied  in  what  follows,  may  pos- 
sibly be  detected  already,  in  the  absence  of  any 
further  petition,  and  in  the  cold  epithet, 
"  Teacher,"  which  he  employs. 

Even  as  an  evidence  the  answer  of  Jesus  is  re- 
markable, being  such  as  human  ingenuity  would 
not  have  invented,  nor  the  legendary  spirit  have 
conceived.  It  would  have  seemed  natural  that 
He  should  hasten  to  vindicate  His  claims  and  ex- 
pose the  folly  of  the  scribes,  or  else  have  re- 
proached His  followers  for  the  failure  which  had 
compromised  Him. 

But  the  scribes  were  entirely  set  aside  from  the 
moment  when  the  Good  Physician  was  invoked 
by  a  bleeding  heart.  Yet  the  physical  trouble  is 
dealt  with  deliberately,  not  in  haste,  as  by  one 
whose  mastery  is  assured.  The  passing  shadow 
which  has  fallen  on  His  cause  only  concerns 
Him  as  a  part  of  the  heavy  spiritual  burden 
which  oppresses  Him,  which  this  terrible  scene 
so  vividly  exhibits. 

For  the  true  importance  of  His  words  is  this, 
that  they  reveal  sufferings  which  are  too  often 
forgotten,  and  \yhich  few  are  pure  enough  even 
to  comprehend.  The  prevalent  evil  weighed 
upon  Him.  And  here  the  visible  power  of 
Satan,  the  hostility  of  the  scribes,  the  failure  of 
His  own,  the  suspense  and  agitation  of  the 
crowd,  all  breathed  the  spirit  of  that  evil  age, 
alien  and  harsh  to  Him  as  an  infected  atmos- 
phere. He  blames  none  more  than  others;  it 
is  the  "  generation,"  so  faithless  and  perverse, 
which  forces  Him  to  exclaim:  "  How  long  shall 
I  be  with  you?  how  long  shall  I  bear  with  you?  " 
It  is  the  cry  of  the  pain  of  Jesus.  It  bids  us  to 
consider  Him  Who  endured  such  contradiction 
of  sinners,  who  were  even  sinners  against  Him- 
self. So  that  the  distress  of  Jesus  was  not  that 
of  a  mere  eye-witness  of  evil  or  sufferer  by  it. 
His  priesthood  established  a  closer  and  more 
agonising  connection  between  our  Lord  and  the 
sins  which  tortured  Him. 

Do  the  words  startle  us,  with  the  suggestion 
of  a  limit  to  the  forbearance  of  Jesus,  well-nigh 
reached?  There  was  such  a  limit.  The  work  of 
His  messenger  had  been  required,  lest  His  com- 
ing should  be  to  smite  the  world.  His  mind  was 
the  mind  of  God,  and  it  is  written.  Kiss  the  Son, 
lest  He  be  angry. 

Now  if  Jesus  looked  forward  to  shame  and 
anguish  with  natural  shrinking,  we  here  perceive 
another  aspect  in  which  His  coming  Baptism  of 
Blood  was  viewed,  and  we  discover  why  He  was 
straitened  until  it  was  accomplished.  There  is 
an  intimate  connection  between  this  verse  and 
His  saying  in  St.  John,  "  If  ye  loved  Me,  ye 
would  rejoice,  because  I  go  unto  My  Father." 

But  swiftly  the  mind  of  Jesus  recurs  to  the 
misery  which  awaits  help;  and  He  bids  them 
bring  the  child  to  Him.  Now  the  sweet  in- 
fluence of  His  presence  would  have  soothed  and 
mitigated  any  mere  disease.  It  is  to  such  in- 
fluence that  sceptical  writers  are  wont  to  turn  for 
an  explanation,  such  as  it  is,  of  the  works  He 


Mark  ix.  14-29.] 


THE    DEMONIAC    BOY. 


S73 


wrought.  But  it  was  the  reverse  in  cases  of 
possession.  There  a  wild  sense  of  antagonism 
and  revolt  was  wont  to  show  itself.  And  we 
might  learn  that  this  was  something  more  than 
epilepsy,  even  were  it  left  doubtful  otherwise,  by 
the  outburst  of  Satanic  rage.  When  he  saw  Him, 
straightway  the  spirit  convulsed  him  grievously, 
and  he  fell  wallowing  and  foaming. 

Yet  Jesus  is  neither  hurried  nor  agitated.  In 
not  one  of  His  miracles  does  precipitation,  or 
mere  impulse,  mingle  with  His  grave  and  self- 
contained  compassion.  He  will  question  the 
scribes  while  the  man  with  a  withered  hand 
awaits  His  help.  He  will  rebuke  the  disciples 
before  quelling  the  storm.  At  Nain  He  will 
touch  the  bier  and  arrest  the  bearers.  When  He 
feeds  the  multitude.  He  will  first  command  a 
search  for  loaves.  He  will  stand  still  and  call 
BartimiEUS  to  Him.  He  will  evoke,  even  by 
seeming  harshness,  the  faith  of  the  woman  of 
Canaan.  He  will  have  the  stone  rolled  away 
from  the  sepulchre  of  Lazarus.  When  He  H'm- 
self  rises,  the  grave-clothes  are  found  folded  up, 
and*  the  napkin  which  bound  His  head  laid  in  a 
place  by  itself,  the  last  tribute  of  mortals  to  His 
mortality  not  being  flung  contemptuously  aside. 
All  His  miracles  are  authenticated  by  the  stamp 
of  the  same  character— serene,  not  in  haste  nor 
tardy,  since  He  saw  the  end  from  the  beginning. 
In  this  case  delay  is  necessary,  to  arouse  the 
father,  if  only  by  interrogation,  from  his  dull  dis- 
appointment and  hopelessness.  He  asks  there- 
fore "  How  long  time  is  it  since  this  came  upon 
him?  "  and  the  answer  shows  that  he  was  now 
at  least  a  stripling,  for  he  had  suffered  ever  since 
he  was  a  child.  Then  the  unhappy  man  is  swept 
away  by  his  emotions:  as  he  tells  their  sorrows, 
and  thinks  what  a  wretched  life  or  miserable 
death  lies  before  his  son,  he  bursts  into  a  pas- 
sionate appeal.  If  Thou  canst  do  anything,  do 
this.  Let  pity  for  such  misery,  for  the  misery 
of  father  as  well  as  child,  evoke  all  Thy  power  to 
save.  The  form  is  more  disrespectful  than  the 
substance  of  his  cry;  its  very  vehemence  is  evi- 
dence that  some  hope  is  working  in  his  breast; 
and  there  is  more  real  trust  in  its  wild  urgency 
than  in  many  a  reverential  and  carefully  weighed 
prayer. 

Yet  how  much  rashness,  self-assertion,  and 
wilfulness  (which  is  really  unbelief)  were 
mingled  with  his  germinant  faith  and  needed  re- 
buke. Therefore  Christ  responded  with  his  own 
word:  "  If  thou  canst:  thou  sayest  it  to  Me,  but 
I  retort  the  condition  upon  thyself:  with  thee  are 
indeed  the  issues  of  thine  own  application,  for 
all  things  are  possible  to  him  that  believeth." 

This  answer  is  in  two  respects  important. 
There  was  a  time  when  popular  religion  dealt 
too  much  with  internal  experience  and  attain- 
ent.  But  perhaps  there  are  schools  among  us 
now  which  verge  upon  the  opposite  extreme. 
Faith  and  love  are  generally  strongest  when  they 
forget  themselves,  and  do  not  say  "  I  am  faithful 
and  loving,"  but-  "  Christ  is  trustworthy,  Christ 
is  adorable."  This  is  true,  and  these  virtues  are 
becoming  artificial,  and  so  false,  as  soon  as  they 
grow  self-complacent.  Yet  we  should  give 
at  least  enough  attention  to  our  own  attainments 
to  warn  us  of  our  deficiencies.  And  wherever 
we  find  a  want  of  blessedness,  we  may  seek  for 
the  reason  within  ourselves.  Many  a  one  is  led 
to  doubt  whether  Christ  "  can  do  anything " 
practical  for  him,  since  private  prayer  and  pub- 
lic ordinances  help  him  little,  and  his  temptations 


continue  to  prevail,  whose  true  need  is  to  be 
roused  up  sharply  to  the  consciousness  that  it 
is  not  Christ  who  has  failed;  it  is  he  himself: 
his  faith  is  dim,  his  grasp  on  his  Lord  is  half- 
hearted, he  is  straitened  in  his  own  affections. 
Our  personal  experiences  should  never  teach  us 
confidence,  but  they  may  often  serve  to  humble 
and  warn  us. 

This  answer  also  impresses  upon  "us  the  dig- 
nity of  Him  who  speaks.  Failure  had  already 
come  through  the  spiritual  defects  of  His  dis- 
ciples, but  for  Him,  though  "  meek  and  lowly 
of  heart,"  no  such  danger  is  even  contemplated. 
No  appeal  to  Him  can  be  frustrated  except 
through  fault  of  the  suppliant,  since  all  things 
are  possible  to  him  that  believeth. 

Now  faith  is  in  itself  nothing,  and  may  even 
be  pernicious;  all  its  effect  depends  upon  the  ob- 
ject. Trust  reposed  in  a  friend  avails  or  mis- 
leads according  to  his  love  and  his  resources; 
trust  in  a  traitor  i§  ruinous,  and  ruinous  in  pro- 
portion to  its  energy.  And  since  trust  in  Jesus 
is  omnipotent,  Who  and  what  is  He? 

The  word  pierces  like  a  two-edged  sword,  and 
reveals  to  the  agitated  father  the  conflict,  the  im- 
purity of  his  heart.  Unbelief  is  there,  and  of 
himself  he  cannot  conquer  it.  Yet  is  he  not  en- 
tirely unbelieving,  else  what  drew  him  thither? 
What  impulse  led  to  that  passionate  recital  of  his 
griefs,  that  over-daring  cry  of  anguish?  And 
what  is  now  this  burning  sense  within  him  of  a 
great  and  inspiring  Presence,  which  uges  him  to 
a  bolder  appeal  for  a  miracle  yet  more  spiritual 
and  Divine,  a  cry  well  directed  to  the  Author 
and  Finisher  of  our  faith?  Never  was  medicine 
better  justified  by  its  operation  upon  disease, 
than  the  treatment  which  converted  a  too-impor- 
tunate clamour  for  bodily  relief  into  a  contrite 
prayer  for  grace.  "  I  believe,  help  Thou  mine  un- 
belief." The  same  sense  of  mixed  imperfect  and 
yet  real  trust  should  exist  in  every  one  of  us, 
or  else  our  belief  being  perfect  shouJd  be  irre- 
sistible in  the  moral  sphere,  and  in  the  physical 
world  so  resigned,  so  confident  in  the  Love 
which  governs,  as  never  to  be  conscious  of  any 
gnawing  importunate  desire.  And  from  the 
same  sense  of  need  the  same  cry  of  help  should 
spring. 

Miraculous  legends  have  gathered  around  the 
lives  of  many  good  and  gracious  men  within 
Christendom  and  outside  it.  But  they  cannot 
claim  to  weigh  against  the  history  of  Jesus,  until 
at  least  one  example  can  be  produced  of  such 
direct  spiritual  action,  so  profound,  penetrating, 
and  effectual,  inextricably  interwoven  in  the 
tissue  of  any  fable. 

All  this  time  the  agitation  of  the  people  had 
increased.  A  multitude  was  rushing  forward, 
whose  excitement  would  do  more  to  distract  the 
father's  mind  than  further  delay  to  help  him. 
And  Jesus,  even  in  the  midst  of  His  treatment 
of  souls,  was  not  blind  to  such  practical  consider- 
ations, or  to  the  influence  of  circumstances.  Un- 
like modern  dealers  in  sensation.  He  can  never 
be  shown  to  have  aimed  at  religious  excitement, 
while  it  was  His  custom  to  discourage  it. 
Therefore  He  now  rebuked  the  unclean  spirit  in 
the  lad,  addressing  it  directly,  speaking  as  a  su- 
perior. "  Thou  deaf  and  dumb  spirit.  I  com- 
mand thee,  come  out  of  him,"  and  adding,  with 
explicitness  which  was  due  perhaps  to  the  obsti- 
nate ferocity  of  "  this  kind,"  or  perhaps  was  in- 
tended to  help  the  father's  lingering  unbelief, 
'■  enter    no    more    into    him."     The    evil    being 


874 


THE    GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


obeys,  yet  proves  his  reluctance  by  screaming 
and  convulsing  his  victim  for  the  last  time,  so 
that  he,  though  healed,  lies  utterly  prostrate,  and 
"  the  more  part  said.  He  is  dead."  It  was  a  fear- 
ful exhibition  of  the  disappointed  malice  of  the 
pit.  But  it  only  calls  forth  another  display  of 
the  power  and  love  of  Jesus,  Who  will  not  leave 
the  sufferer  to  a  gradual  recovery,  nor  speak,  as 
to  the  fiend,  in  words  of  mere  authority,  but 
reaches  forth  His  benign  hand,  and  raises  him, 
restored.  Here  we  discover  the  same  heart 
which  provided  that  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
should  have  food,  and  delivered  her  son  to  the 
widow  of  Nain,  and  was  first  to  remind  others 
that  Lazarus  was  encumbered  by  his  grave- 
clothes.  The  good  works  of  Jesus  were  not 
melodramatic  marvels  for  stage  effect:  they  were 
the  natural  acts  of  supernatural  power  and  love. 


JESUS  AND  THE  DISCIPLES. 

Mark  ix.  28-37  (R-  V.). 

When  the  apostles  had  failed  to  expel  the  de- 
mon from  the  child  they  gave  a  very  natural  ex- 
pression to  their  disappointment.  Waiting  until 
Jesus  was  in  private  and  in  the  house,  they  said, 
"  We  for  our  parts  were  unable  to  cast  it  out." 
They  take  no  blame  to  themselves.  The  tone  is 
rather  of  perplexity  and  complaint  because  the 
commission  formerly  received  had  not  held 
good.  And  it  implies  the  question  which  is 
plainly  expressed  by  St.  Matthew,  Why  could 
we  not  cast  it  out?  Their  very  unconsciousness 
of  personal  blame  is  ominous,  and  Jesus  replies 
that  the  fault  is  entirely  their  own.  They  ought 
to  have  stimulated,  as  He  did  afterwards,  what 
was  flagging  but  not  absent  in  the  father,  what 
their  failure  must  have  daunted  further  in  him. 
Want  of  faith  had  overcome  them,  says  the  fuller 
account:  the  brief  statement  in  St.  Mark  is,"  This 
kind  [of  demon]  can  come  out  by  nothing  but 
by  prayer";  to  which  fasting  was  added  as  a  sec- 
ond condition  by  ancient  copyists,  but  without 
authority.  What  is  important  is  to  observe  the 
connection  between  faith  and  prayer;  so  that 
while  the  devil  would  only  have  gone  out  if  they 
had  prayed,  or  even  perhaps  only  if  they  had 
been  men  of  prayer,  yet  their  failure  was  through 
unbelief.  It  plainly  follows  that  prayer  is  the 
nurse  of  faith,  and  would  have  strengthened  it 
so  that  it  should  prevail.  Only  in  habitual  com- 
munion with  God  can  we  learn  to  trust  Him 
aright.  There,  as  we  feel  His  nearness,  as  we  are 
reminded  that  He  bends  to  hear  our  cry,  as  the 
sense  of  eternal  and  perfect  power  blends  with 
that  of  immeasurable  love,  and  His  sympathy 
becomes  a  realised  abiding  fact,  as  our  vain- 
glory is  rebuked  by  confessions  of  sin,  and  of 
dependence,  it  is  made  possible  for  man  to  wield 
the  forces  of  the  spiritual  world  and  yet  not  be 
intoxicated  with  pride.  The  nearness  of  God  is 
inconsistent  with  boastfulness  of  man.  For 
want  of  this,  it  was  better  that  the  apostles 
should  fail  and  be  humbled,  than  succeed  and  be 
puffed  up. 

There  are  promises  still  unenjoyed,  dormant 
and  unexercised  powers  at  the  disposal  of  the 
Church  to-day.  If  in  many  Christian  families 
the  children  are  not  practically  holy,  if  purity 
and  consecration  are  not  leavening  our  Chris- 
tian land,  where  after  so  many  centuries  license 


is  but  little  abashed  and  the  faith  of  Jesus  is  still 
disputed,  if  the  heathen  are  not  yet  given  for  ouf 
Lord's  inheritance  nor  the  uttermost  parts  of  the 
earth  for  His  possession — why  are  we  unable  to 
cast  out  the  devils  that  afflict  our  race?  It  is  be- 
cause our  efforts  are  so  faithless.  And  this  again 
is  because  they  are  not  inspired  and  elevated  by 
sufficient  communion  with  our  God  in  prayer. 

Further  evidences  continued  to  be  given  of 
the  dangerous  state  of  the  mind  of  His  followers, 
weighed  down  by  earthly  hopes  and  fears,  want- 
ing in  faith  and  prayer,  and  therefore  open  to  the 
sinister  influences  of  the  thief  who  was  soon  to 
become  the  traitor.  They  were  now  moving  for 
the  last  time  through  Galilee.  It  was  a  different 
procession  from  those  glad  circuits,  not  long  be- 
fore, when  enthusiasm  everywhere  rose  high,  and 
sometimes  the  people  would  have  crowned  Him. 
Now  He  would  not  that  any  man  should  know 
it.  The  word  which  tells  of  His  journey  seems 
to  imply  that  He  avoided  the  main  thorough- 
fares, and  went  by  less  frequented  by-ways. 
Partly  no  doubt  His  motives  were  prudential, 
resulting  from  the  treachery  which  He  discerned. 
Partly  it  was  because  His  own  spirit  was  heavily 
weighed  upon  and  retirement  was  what  He 
needed  most.  And  certainly  most  of  all  be- 
cause crowds  and  tumult  would  have  utterly  un- 
fitted the  apostles  to  learn  the  hard  lesson,  how 
vain  their  daydreams  were,  and  what  a  trial  lay 
before  their  Master. 

We  read  that  "  He  taught  them  "  this,  which 
implies  more  than  a  single  utterance,  as  also  per- 
haps does  the  remarkable  phrase  in  St.  Luke, 
"  Let  these  sayings  sink  into  your  ears."  When 
the  warning  is  examined,  we  find  it  almost  a 
repetition  of  what  they  had  heard  after  Peter's 
great  confession.  Then  they  had  apparently  sup- 
posed the  cross  of  their  Lord  to  be  such  a  figura- 
tive one  as  all  His  followers  have  to  bear.  Even 
after  the  Transfiguration,  the  chosen  three  had 
searched  for  a  meaning  for  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead.  But  now,  when  the  words  were  re- 
.peated  with  a  naked,  crude,  resolute  distinctness, 
marvellous  from  the  lips  of  Him  Who  should  en- 
dure the  reality,  and  evidently  chosen  in  order 
to  beat  down  their  lingering  evasive  hopes,  when 
He  says  "  They  shall  kill  Him,  and  when  He  is 
killed,  after  three  days  He  shall  rise  again," 
surely  they  ought  to  have  understood. 

In  fact  they  comprehended  enough  to  shrink 
from  hearing  more.  They  did  not  dare  to  lift 
the  veil  which  covered  a  mystery  so  dreadful; 
they  feared  to  ask  Him.  It  is  a  natural  impulse, 
not  to  know  the  worst.  Insolvent  tradesmen 
leave  their  books  unbalanced.  The  course  of 
history  would  have  run  in  another  channel,  if  the 
great  Napoleon  had  looked  in  the  face  the  need 
to  fortify  his  own  capital  while  plundering  others. 
No  wonder  that  these  Galileans  recoiled  from 
searching  what  was  the  calamity  which  weighed 
so  heavily  upon  the  mighty  spirit  of  their 
Master.  Do  not  men  stifle  the  voice  of  con- ' 
science,  and  refuse  to  examine  themselves 
whether  they  are  in  the  faith,  in  the  same  abject 
dread  of  knowing  the  facts,  and  looking  the  in- 
evitable in  the  face?  How  few  there  are,  who 
bear  to  think,  calmly  and  well,  of  the  certain- 
ties of  death  and  judgment? 

But  at  the  appointed  time  the  inevitable  ar- 
rived for  the  disciples.  The  only  eft'ect  of  their 
moral  cowardice  was  that  it  found  them  unready, 
surprised  and  therefore  fearful,  and  still  worse, 
prepared  to  forsake  Jesus  by  having  already  in 


Mark  ix.  3S-50.J 


OFFENCES. 


875 


heart  drawn  away  from  Him,  by  having  refused 
to  comprehend  and  share  His  sorrows.  It  is 
easy  to  blame  them,  to  assume  that  in  their  place 
we  should  not  have  been  partakers  in  their  evil 
deeds,  to  make  little  of  the  chosen  foundation 
stones  upon  which  Christ  would  build  His  New 
Jerusalem.  But  in  so  doing  we  forfeit  the  sober- 
ing lessons  of  their  weakness,  who  failed,  not 
because  they  were  less  than  we,  but  because  they 
were  not  more  than  mortal.  And  we  who  pen- 
sure  them  are  perhaps  indolently  refusing  day 
by  day  to  reflect,  to  comprehend  the  meaning  of 
our  lives  and  of  their  tendencies,  to  realise  a 
thousand  warnings,  less  terrible  only  because 
they  continue  to  be  conditional,  but  claiming 
more  attention  for  that  very  reason. 

Contrast  with  their  hesitation  the  noble  forti- 
tude with  which  Christ  faced  His  agony.  It  was 
His,  and  their  concern  in  it  was  secondary.  Yet 
for  their  sakes  He  bore  to  speak  of  what  they 
could  not  bear  to  hear.  Therefore  to  Him  there 
came  no  surprise,  no  sudden  shock;  his  arrest 
found  Him  calm  and  reassured  after  the  conflict 
in  the  Garden,  and  after  all  the  preparation  which 
had  already  gone  forward  through  all  these  latter 
days. 

One  only  ingredient  in  His  cup  of  bitterness  is 
now  added  to  those  which  had  been  already  men- 
tioned: "  The  Son  of  man  is  delivered  up  into  the 
hands  of  men."  And  this  is  the  same  which  He 
mentioned  in  the  Garden:  "The  Son  of  man  is 
betrayed  into  the  hands  of  sinners." 

It  was  that  from  which  David  recoiled  when 
he  said,  "  Let  me  fall  into  the  hands  of  God, 
but  let  me  not  fall  into  the  hands  of  men."  Suf- 
fering has  not  reached  its  height  until  conscious 
malice  designs  the  pang,  and  says,  "  So  would  we 
have  it."  Especially  true  was  this  of  the  most 
tender  of  all  hearts.  Yet  this  also  Jesus  fore- 
knew, while  He  steadfastly  set  His  face  to  go 
toward  Jerusalem. 

Faithless  inability  to  grapple  with  the  powers 
of  darkness,  faithless  unreadiness  to  share  the 
cross  of  Jesus,  what  was  to  be  expected  next? 
Estrangement,  jealousy,  and  ambition,  the  pas- 
sions of  the  world  heaving  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Church.  But  while  they  fail  to  discern  the  spirit 
of  Judas,  the  Lord  discerned  theirs,  and  asked 
them  in  the  house.  What  were  ye  reasoning  in 
the  way?  It  was  a  sweet  and  gentle  prudence, 
•which  had  not  corrected  them  publicly  nor  while 
their  tempers  were  still  ruffled,  nor  in  the  lan- 
guage of  severe  rebuke,  for  by  the  way  they  had 
not  only  reasoned  but  disputed  one  with  another, 
who  was  the  greatest. 

Language  of  especial  honour  had  been  ad- 
dressed to  Peter.  Three  had  become  possessed 
of  a  remarkable  secret  on  the  Holy  Mount,  con- 
cerning which  hints  on  one  side,  and  surmises  on 
the  other,  may  easily  have  excited  jealousy. 
The  failure  of  the  nine  to  cast  out  the  devil  would 
also,  as  they  were  not  humbled,  render  them  ir- 
ritable and  self-asserting. 

But  they  held  their  peace.  No  one  asserted 
his  right  to  answer  on  behalf,  of  all.  Peter,  who 
was  so  willingly  their  spokesman  at  other  times, 
did  not  vindicate  his  boasted  pre-eminence  now. 
The  claim,  which  seemed  so  reasonable  while 
they  forgot  Jesus,  was  a  thing  to  blush  for  in 
His  presence.  And  they,  who  feared  to  ask  Him 
of  His  own  sufferings,  knew  enough  to  feel  the 
contrast  between  their  temper,  their  thoughts 
and  His.  Would  that  we  too  by  prayer  and  self- 
examination,  more  often  brought  our  desires  and 


ambitions  into  the  searching  light  of  the  pres- 
ence of  the  lowly  King  of  kings. 

The  calmness  of  their  Lord  was  in  strange 
contrast  with  their  confusion.  He  pressed  no 
further  His  inquiry,  but  left  them  to  weigh  His 
silence  in  this  respect  against  their  own.  But 
importing  by  His  action  something  deliberate 
and  grave.  He  sat  down  and  called  the  Twelve, 
and  pronounced  the  great  law  of  Christian  rank, 
which  is  lowliness  and  the  lowliest  service.  "  If 
any  man  would  be  the  first,  he  shall  be  the  least 
of  all,  and  the  servant  of  all."  When  Kaisers 
and  Popes  ostentatiously  wash  the  feet  of  pau- 
pers, they  do  not  really  serve,  and  therefore 
they  exhibit  no  genuine  lowliness.  Christ  does 
not  speak  of  the  luxurious  nursing  of  a  senti- 
ment, but  of  that  genuine  humility  which  ef- 
faces itself  that  it  may  really  become  a  servant 
of  the  rest.  Nor  does  He  prescribe  this  as  a 
penance,  but  as  the  appointed  way  to  eminence. 
Something  similar  He  had  already  spoken,  bid- 
ding men  sit  down  in  the  lowest  room,  that  the 
Master  of  the  house  might  call  them  higher. 
But  it  is  in  the  next  chapter,  when  despite  this 
lesson  the  sons  of  Zebedee  persisted  in  claim- 
ing the  highest  places,  and  the  indignation  of 
the  rest  betrayed  the  very  passion  it  resented, 
that  Jesus  fully  explains  how  lowly  service,  that 
wholesome  medicine  for  ambition,  is  the  essence 
of  the  very  greatness  in  pursuit  of  which  men 
spurn  it. 

To  the  precept,  which  will  then  be  more  con- 
veniently examined,  Jesus  now  added  a  practi- 
cal lesson  of  amazing  beauty.  In  the  midst 
of  twelve  rugged  and  unsympathetic  men,  the 
same  who,  despite  this  action,  presently  rebuked 
parents  for  seeking  the  blessing  of  Christ  upon 
their  babes,  Jesus  sets  a  little  child.  What  but 
the  grace  and  love  which  shone  upon  the  sa- 
cred face  could  have  prevented  this  little  one 
from  being  utterly  disconcerted?  But  children 
have  a  strange  sensibility  for  love.  Presently 
this  happy  child  was  caught  up  in  His  arms, 
and  pressed  to  His  bosom,  and  there  He  seems 
to  have  lain  while  John,  possibly  conscience- 
stricken,  asked  a  question  and  received  an  un- 
expected answer.  And  the  silent  pathetic  trust 
of  this  His  lamb  found  its  way  to  the  heart  of 
Jesus,  who  presently  spoke  of  "  these  little  ones 
who  believe  in   Me  "   (v.  42). 

Meanwhile  the  child  illustrated  in  a  double 
sense  the  rule  of  greatness  which  He  had  laid 
down.  So  great  is  lowliness  that  Christ  Him- 
self may  be  found  in  the  person  of  a  little  child. 
And  again,  so  great  is  service,  that  in  receiving 
one,  even  one,  of  the  multitude  of  children  who 
claim  our  sympathies,  we  receive  the  very  Mas- 
ter; and  in  that  lowly  Man,  who  was  among 
them  as  He  that  serveth,  is  manifested  the  very 
God:  whoso  receiveth  Me  receiveth  not  Me  but 
Him  that  sent  me. 


OFFENCES. 

Mark  ix.  38-50  (R.  V.). 

When  Jesus  spoke  of  the  blessedness  of  re- 
ceiving in  His  name  even  a  little  child,  the  con- 
science of  St.  John  became  uneasy.  They  had 
seen  one  casting  out  devils  in  that  name,  and 
had  forbidden  him,  "  because  he  followeth  not 
us."  The  spirit  of  partisanship  which  these 
words  betray   is   somewhat   softer  in    St.    Luke, 


876 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


but  it  exists.  He  reports  "  because  he  followeth 
not  (Jesus)  with  us." 

The  behaviour  of  the  disciples  all  through  this 
period  is  unsatisfactory.  From  the  time  when 
Peter  contradicted  and  rebuked  Jesus,  down  to 
their  final  desertion,  there  is  weakness  at  every 
turn.  And  this  is  a  curious  example  of  it,  that 
immediately  after  having  failed  themselves,* 
they  should  reliukc  another  for  doing  what  their 
Master  had  once  declared  could  not  possibly  be 
an  evil  work.  If  Satan  cast  out  Satan  his  house 
was  divided  against  itself:  if  the  finger  of  God 
was  there  no  doubt  the  kingdom  of  God  was 
come  unto  them. 

It  is  interesting  and  natural  that  St.  John 
should  have  introduced  the  question.  Others 
were  usually  more  forward,  but  that  was  because 
he  was  more  thoughtful.  Peter  went  first  into 
the  sepulchre;  but  he  first,  seeing  what  was  there, 
believed.  And  it  was  he  who  said  "  It  is  the 
Lord,"  although  Peter  thereupon  plunged  into 
the  lake  to  reach  Him.  Discerning  and  grave; 
such  is  the  character  from  which  his  Gospel 
would  naturally  come,  and  it  belongs  to  him 
who  first  discerned  the  rebuke  to  their  conduct 
implied  in  the  words  of  Jesus.  He  was  right. 
The  Lord  answered,  "  Forbid  him  not,  for  there 
is  no  man  which  shall  do  a  mighty  work  in  My 
name,  and  be  able  quickly  to  speak  evil  of  Me:  " 
his  own  action  would  seal  his  lips;  he  would 
have  committed  himself.  Now  this  points  out 
a  very  serious  view  of  human  life,  too  often 
overlooked.  The  deed  of  to-day  rules  to-mor- 
row; one  is  half  enslaved  by  the  consequences 
of  his  own  free  will.  Let  no  man,  hesitating 
between  two  lines  of  action,  ask.  What  harm  in 
this?  what  use  in  that?  without  adding,  And 
what  future  actions,  good  or  evil,  may  they 
carry  in  their  train? 

The  man  whom  they  had  rebuked  was  at  least 
certain  to  be  for  a  time  detached  from  the  op- 
ponents of  truth,  silent  if  not  remonstrant  \;hen 
it  was  assailed,  diluting  and  enfeebling  the  en- 
mity of  its  opponents.  And  so  Christ  laid  down 
the  principle,  "  He  that  is  not  against  us  is  for 
us."  In  St.  Luke  the  words  are  more  plainly 
pointed  against  this  party  spirit,  "  He  that  is  not 
against  you  is  for  you." 

How  shall  we  reconcile  this  principle  with 
Christ's  declaration  elsewhere,  "  He  that  is  not 
with  Me  is  against  Me,  and  he  that  gathereth 
not  with  Me  scattereth  "  ? 

It  is  possible  to  argue  that  there  is  no  con- 
tradiction whatever,  for  both  deny  the  existence 
of  a  neutral  class,  and  from  this  it  equally  fol- 
lows that  he  who  is  not  with  is  against,  and 
he  who  is  not  against  us  is  with  us.  But  this  an- 
swer only  evades  the  difficulty,  which  is,  that 
one  passage  reckons  seeming  neutrality  as  friend- 
ship, while  the  other  denounces  it  as  enmity. 

A  closer  examination  reveals  a  more  profound 
reconciliation.  In  St.  Matthew,  Christ  an- 
nounced His  own  personal  claim;  in  St.  Mark 
He  declares  that  His  peoole  must  not  share 
it.  The  manifestation  of  God  was  not  made 
to  be  criticised  or  set  aside:  He  loves  them 
who  love  Him;  He  demands  the  hearts  He  died 
for;  and  to  give  Him  less  is  to  refuse  Him  the 
travail  of  His  soul.  Therefore  he  that  is  not 
with  Christ  is  against  Him.  The  man  who  boasts 
that  he  does  no  harm,  but  makes  no  pretence 

*  That  the  event  was  recent  is  implied  in  the  present 
tense;  "he  followeth  not":  "forbid  him  not";  the 
matter  is  still  fresh. 


of  religion,  is  proclaiming  that  one  may  inno- 
cently refuse  Christ.  And  it  is  very  noteworthy 
that  St.  Matthew's  aphorism  was  evoked,  like 
this,  by  a  question  about  the  casting  out  of 
devils.  There  the  Pharisees  had  said  that  He 
cast  out  devils  by  Beelzebub.  And  Jesus  had 
warned  all  who  heard,  that  in  such  a  controversy, 
to  be  indifferent  was  to  deny  Him.  Here,  the 
man  had  himself  appealed  to  the  power  of  Jesus. 
He  had  passed,  long  ago.  the  stage  of  cool 
semi-contemptuous  indifference.  Whether  he 
was  a  disciple  of  the  Baptist,  not  yet  entirely 
won,  or  a  later  convert  who  shrank  from  the 
loss  of  all  things,  what  is  plain  is  that  he  had 
come  far  on  the  way  towards  Jesus.  It  does 
not  follow  that  he  enjoyed  a  saving  faith,  for 
Christ  will  at  last  profess  to  many  who  cast 
out  devils  in  His  name,  that  He  never  knew 
them.  But  intellectual  persuasion  and  some  ac- 
tive reliance  were  there.  Let  them  beware  of 
crushing  the  germs,  because  they  were  not  yet 
developed.  Nor  should  the  disciples  suppose 
that  loyalty  to  their  organisation,  although  Christ 
was  with  them,  was  the  same  as  loyalty  to  Him. 
"  He  that  is  not  against  yon  is  for  you,"  ac- 
cording to  St.  Luke.  Nay  more,  "  He  that  is 
not  against  us  is  for  us,"  according  to  St.  Mark. 
But  already  He  had  spoken  the  stronger  word, 
"  He  that  is  not  for  Me  is  against  Me." 

No  verse  has  been  more  employed  than  this 
in  sectarian  controversy.  And  sometimes  it  has 
been  pressed  too  far.  The  man  whom  St.  John 
would  have  silenced  was  not  spreading  a  rival 
organisation;  and  we  know  how  the  same  apostle 
wrote,  long  afterwards,  of  those  who  did  so: 
"  If  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  have  con- 
tinued with  us;  but  they  went  out  that  they 
might  be  made  manifest  how  all  they  are  not 
of  us"  (i  John  ii.  19).  This  was  simply  a  doer 
of  good  without  ecclesiastical  sanction,  and  the 
warning  of  the  text  is  against  all  who  would  use 
the  name  of  discipline  or  of  order  to  bridle  the 
zeal,  to  curb  the  energies,  of  any  Christian  soul. 
But  it  is  as  least  as  often  the  new  movement  as 
the  old  organisation  that  would  silence  all  who 
follow  not  with  it. 

But  the  energies  of  Christ  and  His  gospel 
can  never  be  monopolised  by  any  organisation 
whatsoever.  Every  good  gift  and  every  perfect 
gift,  wherever  we  behold  it,  is,  from  Him. 

All  help,  then,  is  to  be  welcomed;  not  to 
hinder  is  to  speed  the  cause.  And  therefore 
Jesus,  repeating  a  former  saying,  adds  that  who- 
soever, moved  by  the  name  of  Christ,  shall  give 
His  followers  one  cup  of  water,  shall  be  re- 
warded. He  may  be  and  continue  outside  the 
Church;  his  after  life  may  be  sadly  inconsist- 
ent with  this  one  action:  that  is  not  the  ques- 
tion; the  sole  condition  is  the  genuine  motive 
— one  impulse  of  true  respect,  one  flicker  of 
loyalty,  only  decided  enough  to  speed  the  weary 
ambassador  with  the  simplest  possible  refresh- 
ment, should  "  in  no  wise  lose  its  reward." 
Does  tins  imply  that  the  giver  shoul 
enter  heaven?  Alas,  no!  But  this 
every  spark  of  fire  in  the  smoking  fiax 
every  gracious  movement  is  answered  by  a  gift 
of  further  grace,  to  employ  or  to  abuse.  Not 
more  surely  is  the  thirsty  disciple  refreshed, 
than  the  feverish  worldliness  of  him  who  just 
attains  to  render  this  service  is  fanned  and  cooled 
by  breezes  from  heaven,  he  becomes  aware  of 
a  deeper  and  nobler  life,  he  is  melted  and  drawn 
towards   better   things.      Very  blessed,    or  very 


ible   refresh-  j 
its    reward." 

lid  assuredly  \ 

it  says,  that  | 

ax  is  tended,  ^ 


Mark  x.  1-12.J 


DIVORCE. 


877 


miserable  is  he  who  cannot  remember  the  holy 
shame,  the  yearning,  the  sigh  because  he  is  not 
always  thus,  which  followed  naturally  upon  some 
deed,  small  in  itself  perhaps,  but  good  enough 
to  be  inconsistent  with  his  baser  self.  The 
deepening  of  spiritual  capacity  is  one  exceeding 
great  reward  of  every  act  of  loyalty  to  Christ. 

This  was  graciously  said  of  a  deed  done  to 
the  apostles,  despite  their  failures,  rivalries,  and 
rebukes  of  those  who  would  fain  speed  the  com- 
mon cause.  Not,  however,  because  they  were 
apostles,  but  "  because  ye  are  Christ's."  And 
so  was  the  least,  so  was  the  child  who  clung 
to  Him.  But  if  the  slightest  sympathy  with 
these  is  thus  laden  with  blessing,  then  to  hinder, 
to  cause  to  stumble  one  such  little  one,  how 
terrible  was  that.  Better  to  die  a  violent  and 
shameful  death,  and  never  sleep  in  a  peaceful 
grave. 

There  is  a  worse  peril  than  from  others.  We 
ourselves  may  cause  ourselves  to  stumble.  We 
may  pervert  beyond  recall  things  innocent, 
natural,  all  but  necessary,  things  near  and  dear 
and  useful  to  our  daily  life  as  are  our  very 
limbs.  The  loss  of  them  may  be  so  lasting  a 
deprivation  that  we  shall  enter  heaven  maimed. 
But  if  the  moral  evil  is  irrevocably  identified 
with  the  worldly  good,  we  must  renounce  it. 

The  hand  with  its  subtle  and  marvellous  power 
may  well  stand  for  harmless  accomplishments 
now  fraught  with  evil  suggestiveness;  for  in- 
nocent modes  of  livelihood  which  to  relinquish 
means  crippled  helplessness,  yet  which  have  be- 
come hopelessly  entangled  with  unjust  or  at 
least  questionable  ways;  for  the  great  posses- 
sions, honestly  come  by,  which  the  ruler  would 
not  sell;  for  all  endowments  which  we  can  no 
longer  hope  to  consecrate,  and  which  make  one 
resemble  the  old  Chaldeans,  whose  might  was 
their  god.  who  sacrificed  to  their  net  and  burned 
incense  to  their  drag. 

And  the  foot,  with  its  swiftness  in  boyhood, 
its  plodding  walk  along  the  pavement  in  maturer 
age,  may  well  represent  the  caprices  of  youth 
so  hard  to  curb,  and  also  the  half-mechanical 
habits  which  succeed  to  these,  and  by  which 
manhood  is  ruled,  often  to  its  destruction.  If 
the  hand  be  capacity,  resource,  and  possession, 
the  foot  is  swift  perilous  impulse,  and  also  fixed 
habitude,  monotonous  recurrence,  the  settled 
ways   of  the  world. 

Cut  off  hand  and  foot,  and  what  is  left  to 
the  mutilated  trunk,  the  ravaged  and  desolated 
life?  Desire  is  left;  the  desire  of  the  eyes. 
The  eyes  may  not  touch  the  external  world; 
all  may  now  be  correct  in  our  actions  and  inter- 
course with  men.  But  yet  greed,  passion,  in- 
flamed imagination  may  desecrate  the  temple  of 
the  soul.  The  eyes  misled  Eve  when  she  saw 
that  the  fruit  was  good,  and  David  on  his  pal- 
ace roof.  Before  the  eyes  of  Jesus,  Satan  spread 
his  third  and  worst  temptation.  And  our  Lord 
seems  to  imply  that  thitj  last  sacrifice  of  the 
worst  becaus^e  the  deepest  evil  must  be  made 
with  indignant  vehemence;  hand  and  foot  must 
be  cut  off,  but  the  eye  must  be  cast  out,  though 
life  be  half  darkened  in  the  process. 

These  latter  days  have  invented  a  softer  gos- 
pel, which  proclaims  that  even  the  fallen  err 
if  they  utterly  renounce  any  good  creature  of 
God,  which  ought  to  be  received  with  thanks- 
giving; that  the  duty  of  moderation  and  self- 
control  can  never  be  replaced  by  renunciation, 
and  that  distrust  of  any  lawful  enjoyment  revives 


the  Manichean  heresy.  Is  the  eye  a  good  crea- 
ture of  God?  May  the  foot  be  received  with 
thanksgiving?  Is  the  hand  a  source  of  lawful 
enjoyment?  Yet  Jesus  made  these  the  types  of 
what  must,  if  it  has  become  an  occasion  of 
stumbling,  be  entirely  cast  away. 

He  added  that  in  such  cases  the  choice  is  be- 
tween mutilation  and  the  loss  of  all.  It  is  no 
longer  a  question  of  the  full  improvement  of 
every  faculty,  the  doubling  of  all  the  talents, 
but  a  choice  between  living  a  life  impoverished 
and  half  spoiled,  and  going  complete  to  Ge- 
henna, to  the  charnel  valley  where  the  refuse 
of  Jerusalem  was  burned  in  a  continual  fire, 
and  the  worm  of  corruption  never  died.  The 
expression  is  too  metaphorical  to  decide  such 
questions  as  that  of  the  eternal  duration  of  pun- 
ishment, or  of  the  nature  of  the  suffering  of 
the  lost.  The  metaphors  of  Jesus,  however,  are 
not  employed  to  exaggerate  His  meaning,  but 
only  to  express  it.  And  what  He  said  is  this: 
The  man  who  cherishes  one  dear  and  excusable 
occasion  of  offence,  who  spares  himself  the 
keenest  spiritual  surgery,  shall  be  cast  forth  with 
everything  that  defileth,  shall  be  ejected  with  the 
ofTal  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  shall  suffer  corrup- 
tion like  the  transgressors  of  whom  Isaiah  first 
used  the  tremendous  phrase,  "  riieir  worm  shall 
not  die,  neither  shall  their  fire  be  quenched,'' 
shall  endure  at  once  internal  and  external  mis- 
ery, as  of  decomposition  and  of  burning. 

Such  is  the  most  terrible  menace  that  ever 
crossed  the  lips  into  which  grace  was  poured. 
And  it  was  not  addressed'  to  the  outcast  or  the 
Pharisee,  but  to  His  own.  They  were  called 
to  the  highest  life;  on  them  the  influence  of 
the  world  was  to  be  as  constant  and  as  disin- 
tegrating as  that  of  the  weather  upon  a  mountain 
top.  Therefore  they  needed  solemn  warning, 
and  the  counter-pressure  of  those  awful  issues 
known  to  be  dependent  on  their  stern  self-dis- 
cipline. They  could  not.  He  said  in  an  obscure 
passage  which  has  been  greatly  tampered  with, 
they  could  not  escape  fiery  suffering  in  some 
form.  But  the  fire  which  tried  would  preserve 
and  bless  them  if  they  endured  it;  every  one  shall 
be  salted  with  fire.  But  if  they  who  ought  to 
be  the  salt  of  the  world  received  the  grace  of 
God  in  vain,  if  the  salt  have  lost  its  saltness,  the 
case  is  desperate  indeed. 

And  since  the  need  of  this  solemn  warning 
sprang  from  their  rivalry  and  partisanship,  Jesus 
concludes  with  an  emphatic  charge  to  discipline 
and  correct  themselves  and  to  beware  of  im- 
peding others:  to  be  searching  in  the  closet, 
and  charitable  in  the  church:  to  have  salt  in 
yourselves,  and  be  at  peace  with  one  another. 


CHAPTER  X. 

DIVORCE. 

Mark  x.    1-12   (R.   V.). 

It  is  easy  to  read  without  emotion  that  Jesus 
arose  from  the  scene  of  His  last  discourse,  and 
came  into  the  borders  of  Judaea  beyond  Jordan. 
But  not  without  emotion  did  Jesus  bid  farewell 
to  Galilee,  to  the  home  of  His  childhood  and 
sequestered  youth,  the  cradle  of  His  Church, 
the  centre  of  nearly  all  the  love  and  faith  He 
had  awakened.  When  closer  still  to  death,  His 
heart  reverted  to  Galilee,  and  He  promised  that 


878 


THETGOSPEL   according   to   ST.    MARK. 


when  He  was  risen  He  would  go  thither  before 
His  disciples.  Now  He  had  to  leave  it.  And 
we  must  not  forget  that  every  step  He  took  to- 
wards Jerusalem  was  a  deliberate  approach  to 
His  assured  and  anticipated  cross.  He  was  not 
like  other  brave  men,  who  endure  death  when 
it  arrives,  but  are  sustained  until  the  crisis  by  a 
thousand  flattering  hopes  and  undefined  possi- 
bilities. Jesus  knew  precisely  where  and  how 
He  should  suffer.  And  now,  as  He  arose  from 
Galilee,  every  step  said,  Lo,  I  come  to  do  Thy 
will,   O    God. 

As  soon  as  He  entered  Peraea  beyond  Jordan, 
multitudes  came  to  Him  again.  Nor  did  His 
burdened  heart  repress  His  zeal:  rather  He 
found  relief  in  their  importunity  and  in  His 
Father's  business,  and  so,  "  as  He  was  wont, 
He  taught  them  again."  These  simple  words 
express  the  rule  He  lived  by,  the  patient  con- 
tinuance in  well-doing  which  neither  hostilities 
nor  anxieties  could  chill. 

Not  long  was  He  left  undisturbed.  The  Phar- 
isees come  to  Him  with  a  question  dangerous 
in  itself,  because  there  is  no  conceivable  answer 
which  will  not  estrange  many,  and  especially 
dangerous  for  Jesus,  because  already,  on  the 
Mount,  He  had  spoken  upon  this  subject  words 
at  seeming  varia-nce  with  His  free  views  concern- 
ing Sabbath  observance,  fasting,  and  ceremonial 
purity.  Most  perilous  of  all  was  the  decision 
they  expected  when  given  by  a  teacher  already 
under  suspicion,  and  now  within  reach  of  that 
Herod  who  had,  during  the  lifetime  of  his  first 
wife,  married  the  wife  of  a  living  man.  "  Is 
it  lawful  for  a  man  to  put  away  his  wife  for  every 
cause?  "  It  was  a  decision  upon  this  very  sub- 
ject which  had  proved  fatal  to  the  forerunner. 

But  Jesus  spoke  out  plainly.  In  a  question 
and  answer  which  are  variously  reported,  what 
is  clear  is  that  He  carefully  distinguished  be- 
tween a  command  and  a  permission  of  Moses. 
Divorce  had  been  allowed;  yes,  but  some  reason 
had  been  exacted,  whatever  disputes  might  exist 
about  its  needful  gravity,  and  deliberation  had 
been  enforced  by  demanding  a  legal  document, 
a  writing  of  divorcement.  Thus  conscience  was 
bidden  to  examine  its  motives,  and  time  was 
gained  for  natural  relentings.  But  after  all,  Jesus 
declared  that  divorce  was  only  a  concession  to 
their  hardness  of  heart.  Thus  we  learn  that  Old 
Testament  institutions  were  not  all  and  of  neces- 
sity an  expression  of  the  Divine  ideal.  They 
were  sometimes  a  temporary  concession,  meant 
to  lead  to  better  things;  an  expedient  rather 
than  a  revelation. 

These  words  contain  the  germ  of  St.  Paul's 
doctrine  that  the  law  itself  was  a  schoolmaster, 
and  its  function  temporary. 

To  whatever  concessions  Moses  had  been 
driven,  the  original  and  unshaken  design  of  God 
was  that  man  and  woman  should  find  the  per- 
manent completion  of  their  lives  each  in  the 
other.  And  this  is  shown  by  three  separate 
considerations.  The  first  is  the  plan  of  the  crea- 
tion, making  them  male  and  female,  and  such 
that  body  and  soul  alike  are  only  perfect  when 
to  each  its  complement  is  added,  when  the  mas- 
culine element  and  the  feminine  "  each  fulfils 
defect  in  each  .  .  .  the  two-celled  heart  beat- 
ing with  one  full  stroke  life."  Thus  by  antici- 
pation Jesus  condemned  the  tame-spirited  ver- 
dict of  His  disciples,  that  since  a  man  cannot 
relieve  himself  from  a  union  when  it  proves 
galling,  "  it  is  not  good"  to  marry  at  all.     To 


this  he  distinctly  answered  that  such  an  inference 
could  not  prove  even  tolerable,  except  when 
nature  itself,  or  else  some  social  wrong,  or  else 
absorbing  devotion  to  the  cause  of  God,  virtually 
cancelled  the  original  design.  But  already  He 
had  here  shown  that  such  prudential  calculation 
degrades  man,  leaves  him  incomplete,  traverses 
the  design  of  God  Who  from  the  beginning  of 
the  creation  made  them  male  and  female.  In 
our  own  days,  the  relation  between  the  sexes 
is  undergoing  a  social  and  legislative  revolution. 
Now  Christ  says  not  a  word  against  the  equal 
rights  of  the  sexes,  and  in  more  than  one  pas- 
sage St.  Paul  goes  near  to  assert  it.  But  equal- 
ity is  not  identity,  either  of  vocation  or  capacity. 
This  text  asserts  the  separate  and  reciprocal  vo- 
cation of  each,  and  it  is  worthy  of  consideration^ 
how  far  the  special  vocation  of  womanhood  is 
consistent  with  loud  assertion  of  her  "  separate 
rights." 

Christ's  second  proof  that  marriage  cannot  be 
dissolved  without  sin  is  that  glow  of  heart,  that 
noble  abandonment,  in  which  a  man  leaves  even 
father  and  mother  for  the  joy  of  his  youth  and 
the  love  of  his  espousals.  In  that  sacred  hour, 
how  hideous  and  base  a  wanton  divorce  would 
be  felt  to  be.  Now  man  is  not  free  to  live 
by  the  mean,  calculating,  selfish  afterthought, 
which  breathes  like  a  frost  on  the  bloom  of  his 
noblest  impulses  and  aspirations.  He  should 
guide  himself  by  the  light  of  his  highest  and 
most  generous  intuitions. 

And  the  third  reason  is  that  no  man,  by  any 
possibility,  can  undo  what  marriage  does.  They 
two  are  one  flesh;  each  has  become  part  of  the 
very  existence  of  the  other;  and  it  is  simply  in- 
credible that  a  union  so  profound,  so  interwoven 
with  the  very  tissue  of  their  being,  should  lie 
at  the  mercy  of  the  caprice  or  the  calculations 
of  one  or  other,  or  of  both.  Such  a  union  arises 
from  the  profoundest  depths  of  the  nature  God 
created,  not  from  mean  cravings  of  that  na- 
ture in  its  degradation;  and  like  waters  spring- 
ing up  from  the  granite  underneath  the  soil, 
it  may  suffer  stain,  but  it  is  in  itself  free  from 
the  contamination  of  the  fall.  Despite  of  monk- 
ish and  of  Manichean  slanders,  impure  dreams 
pretending  to  especial  purity,  God  is  He  Who 
joins  together  man  and  woman  in  a  bond  which 
"  no  man,"  king  or  prelate,  may  without  guilt 
dissolve. 

Of  what  followed,  St.  Mark  is  content  to  tell 
us  that  in  the  house,  the  disciples  pressed  the 
question  further.  How  far  did  the  relaxation 
which  Moses  granted  over-rule  the  original  de- 
sign? To  what  extent  was  every  individual 
bound  in  actual  life?  And  the  answer,  given  by 
Jesus  to  guide  His  own  people  through  all  time, 
is  clear  and  unmistakable.  The  tie  cannot  be 
torn  asunder  without  sin.  The  first  marriage 
holds,  until  actual  adultery  poisons  the  pure  life 
in  it,  and  man  or  woman  who  breaks  through 
its  barriers  commits  ^adultery.  The  Baptist's 
judgment  of  Herod  was  confirmed. 

So  Jesus  taught.  Ponder  well  that  honest  un- 
shrinking grasp  of  solid  detail,  which  did  not 
overlook  the  phy.'^ical  union  whereof  is  one  flesh, 
that  sympathy  with  high  and  chivalrous  devotion 
forsaking  all  else  for  its  beloved  one,  that  still 
more  spiritual  penetration  which  discerned  a 
Divine  purpose  and  a  destiny  in  the  correlation 
of  masculine  and  feminine  gifts,  of  strength  and 
grace,  of  energy  and  gentleness,  of  courage  and 
long-suffering — observe  with  how  easy  and  yet 


Mark  x.  13-16.] 


CHRIST   AND    LITTLE   CHILDREN. 


879 


firm  a  grasp  He  combines  all  these  into  one 
overmastering  argument — remember  that  when 
He  spoke,  the  marriage  tie  was  being  relaxed  all 
over  the  ancient  world,  even  as  godless  legisla- 
tion is  to-day  relaxing  it — reflect  that  with  such 
relaxation  came  inevitably  a  blight  upon  the  fam- 
ily, resulting  in  degeneracy  and  ruin  for  the  na- 
tion, while  every  race  which  learned  the  lesson 
of  Jesus  grew  strong  and  pure  and  happy — and 
then  say  whether  this  was  only  a  Judaean  peasant 
or  the  Light  of  the  World  indeed. 


CHRIST   AND    LITTLE    CHILDREN. 
Mark  x.  13-16  (R.  V.). 

This  beautiful  story  gains  new  loveliness  from 
its  context.  The  disciples  had  weighed  the  ad- 
vantages and  disadvantages  of  marriage,  and  de- 
cided in  their  calculating  selfishness,  that  the 
prohibition  of  divorce  made  it  "  not  good  for  a 
man  to  marry."  But  Jesus  had  regarded  the 
matter  from  quite  a  different  position;  and  their 
saying  could  only  be  received  by  those  to  whom 
special  reasons  forbade  the  marriage  tie.  It  was 
then  that  the  fair  blossom  and  opening  flower 
of  domestic  life,  the  tenderness  and  winning 
grace  of  childhood,  appealed  to  them  for  a  softer 
judgment.  Little  children  (St.  Luke  says 
"babes")  were  brought  to  Him  to  bless,  to 
touch  them.  It  was  a  remarkable  sight.  He 
was  just  departing  from  Peraea  on  His  last 
journey  to  Jerusalem.  The  nation  was  about  to 
abjure  its  King  and  perish,  after  having  invoked 
His  blood  to  be  not  on  them  only,  but  on  their 
children.  But  here  were  some  at  least  of  the 
next  generation  led  by  parents  who  revered 
Jesus,  to  receive  His  blessing.  And  who  shall 
dare  to  limit  the  influence  exerted  by  that  bene- 
diction on  their  future  lives?  Is  it  forgotten  that 
this  very  Per?ea  was  the  haven  of  refuge  for  Jew- 
ish believers  when  the  wrath  fell  upon  their  na- 
tion? Meanwhile  the  fresh  smile  of  their  uncon- 
scious, unstained,  unforeboding  infancy  met  the 
grave  smile  of  the  all-conscious,  death-boding 
Man  of  Sorrows,  as  much  purer  as  it  was  more 
profound. 

But  the  disciples  were  not  melted.  They  were 
occupied  with  grave  questions.  Babes  could 
understand  nothing,  and  therefore  could  receive 
no  conscious  intelligent  enlightenment.  What 
then  could  Jesus  do  for  them?  Many  wise  per- 
sons are  still  of  quite  the  same  opinion.  No 
spiritual  influences,  they  tell  us,  can  reach  the 
soul  until  the  brain  is  capable  of  drawing  logical 
distinctions.  A  gentle  mother  may  breathe  soft- 
ness and  love  into  a  child's  nature,  or  a  harsh 
nurse  may  jar  and  disturb  its  temper,  until  the 
effects  are  as  visible  on  the  plastic  face  as  is  the 
sunshine  or  storm  upon  the  bosom  of  a  lake; 
but  for  the  grace  of  God  there  is  no  opening  yet. 
As  if  soft  and  loving  influences  are  not  them- 
selves a  grace  of  God.  As  if  the  world  were 
given  certain  odds  in  the  race,  and  the  powers  of 
heaven  were  handicapped.  As  if  the  young  heart 
of  every  child  were  a  place  where  sin  abounds 
(since  he  is  a  fallen  creature,  with  an  original 
tendency  towards  evil),  but  where  grace  doth  not 
at  all  abound.  Such  is  the  unlovely  theory. 
And  as  long  as  it  prevails  in  the  Church  we  need 
not  wonder  at  the  compensating  error  of  ration- 
alism, denying  evil  where  so  many  of  us  deny 
grace.     It  is  the  more  amiable  error  of  the  two. 


Since  then  the  disciples  could  not  believe  that 
edification  was  for  babes,  they  naturally  rebuked 
those  that  brought  them.  Alas,  how  often  still 
do  the  beauty  and  innocence  of  childhood  ap- 
peal to  men  in  vain.  And  this  is  so,  because  we 
see  not  the  Divine  grace,  "  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,"  in  these.  Their  weakness  chafes  our 
impatience,  their  simplicity  irritates  our  world- 
liness,  and  their  touching  helplesstiess  and  trust- 
fulness do  not  find  in  us  heart  enough  for  any 
glad  response. 

In  ancient  times  they  had  to  pass  through  the 
fire  to  Moloch,  and  since  then  through  other 
fires:  to  fashion  when  mothers  leave  them  to  the 
hired  kindness  of  a  nurse,  to  selfishness  when 
their  want  appeals  to  our  charities  in  vain,  and  to 
cold  dogmatism,  which  would  banish  them  from 
the  baptismal  font  as  the  disciples  repelled  them 
from  the  embrace  of  Jesus.  But  He  was  moved 
with  indignation,  and  reiterated,  as  men  do  when 
they  feel  deeply,  "  Suffer  the  little  children  to 
come  unto  Me;  forbid  them  not."  And  He 
added  this  conclusive  reason,  "  for  of  such,"  of 
children  and  childlike  men,  "  is  the  kingdom  of 
God." 

What  is  the  meaning  of  this  remarkable  asser- 
tion? To  answer  aright,  let  us  return  in  fancy 
to  the  morning  of  our  days;  let  our  flesh,  and  all 
our  primitive  being,  come  back  to  us  as  those  of 
a  little  child. 

We  were  not  faultless  then.  The  theological 
dogma  of  original  sin,  however  unwelcome  to 
many,  is  in  harmony  with  all  experience.  Im- 
patience is  there,  and  many  a  childish  fault;  and 
graver  evils  develop  as  surely  as  life  unfolds, 
just  as  weeds  show  themselves  in  summer,  the 
germs  of  which  were  already  mingled  with  the 
better  seed  in  spring.  It  is  plain  to  all  observers 
that  the  weeds  of  human  nature  are  latent  in  the 
early  soil,  that  this  is  not  pure  at  the  beginning 
of  each  individual  life.  Does  not  our  new- 
fangled science  explain  this  fact  by  telling  us 
that  we  have  still  in  our  blood  the  transmitted 
influences  of  our  ancestors  the  brutes? 

But  Christ  never  meant  to  say  that  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  was  only  for  the  immaculate  and 
stainless.  If  converted  men  receive  it,  in  spite 
of  many  a  haunting  appetite  and  recurring  lust, 
then  the  frailties  of  our  babes  shall  not  forbid 
us  to  believe  the  blessed  assurance  that  the  king- 
dom is  also  theirs. 

How  many  hindrances  to  the  Divine  life  fall 
away  from  us,  as  our  fancy  recalls  our  childhood 
What  weary  and  shameful  memories,  base  hopes, 
tawdry  splendours,  envenomed  pleasures,  entan- 
gling associations  vanish,  what  sins  need  to  be 
confessed  no  longer,  how  much  evil  knowledge 
fades  out  that  we  never  now  shall  quite  unlearn, 
which  haunts  the  memory  even  though  the  con- 
science be  absolved  from  it.  The  days  of  our 
youth  are  not  those  evil  days,  when  anything 
within  us  saith.  My  soul  hath  no  pleasure  in  the 
ways  of  God. 

When  we  ask  to  what  especial  qualities  of 
childhood  did  Jesus  attach  so  great  value,  two 
kindred  attributes  are  distinctly  indicated  in 
Scripture. 

One  is  humility.  The  previous  chapter  showed 
us  a  little  child  set  in  the  midst  of  the  emulous 
disciples,  whom  Christ  instructed  that  the  way 
to  be  greatest  was  to  become  like  this  little  child, 
the  least. 

A  child  is  not  humble  through  affectation,  it 
never  professes  nor  thinks  about  humility.     But 


8Xo 


THE^GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK, 


it  understands,  however  imperfectly,  that  it  is 
beset  by  mysterious  and  perilous  forces,  which 
it  neither  comprehends  nor  can  grapple  with. 
And  so  are  we.  Therefore  all  its  instincts  and 
experiences  teach  it  to  submit,  to  seek  guidance, 
not  to  put  its  own  judgment  in  competition  with 
those  of  its  appointed  guides.  To  them,  there- 
fore,  it  clings  and  is  obedient. 

Why  is  it  not  so  with  us?  Sadly  we  also 
know  the  peril  of  self-will,  the  misleading  power 
of  appetite  and  passion,  the  humiliating  failures 
which  track  the  steps  of  self-assertion,  the  dis- 
tortion of  our  judgments,  the  feebleness  of  our 
wills,  the  mysteries  of  life  and  death  amid  which 
we  grope  in  vain.  Milton  anticipated  Sir  Isaac 
Newton  in  describing  the  wisest 

"  As  children  gathering  pebbles  on  the  shore." 

—"Par.  Reg.,"  iv.  330. 

And  if  this  be  so  true  in  the  natural  world 
that  its  sages  become  as  little  children,  how 
much  more  in  those  spiritual  realms  for  which 
our  faculties  are  still  so  infantile,  and  of  which 
our  experience  is  so  rudimentary.  We  should 
all  be  nearer  to  the  kingdom,  or  greater  in  it, 
if  we  felt  our  dependence,  and  like  the  child 
were  content  to  obey  our  Guide  and  cling  to 
Him. 

The  second  childlike  quality  to  which  Christ 
attached  value  was  readiness  to  receive  simply. 
Dependence  naturally  results  from  humility. 
Man  is  proud  of  his  independence  only  because 
he  relies  on  his  own  powers;  when  these  are 
paralysed,  as  in  the  sickroom  or  before  the  judge, 
he  is  willing  again  to  become  a  child  in  the  hands 
of  a  nurse  or  of  an  advocate.  In  the  realm  of 
the  spirit  these  natural  powers  are  paralysed. 
Learning  cannot  resist  temptation,  nor  wealth 
expiate  a  sin.  And  therefore,  in  the  spiritual 
world,  we  are  meant  to  be  dependent  and  recep- 
tive. 

Christ  taught,  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
that  to  those  who  asked  Him,  God  would  give 
His  Spirit  as  earthly  parents  give  good  things 
to  their  children.  Here  also  we  are  taught  to 
accept,  to  receive  the  kingdom  as  little  children, 
not  flattering  ourselves  that  our  own  exertions 
can  dispense  with  the  free  gift,  not  unwilling  to 
become  pensioners  of  heaven,  not  distrustful  of 
the  heart  which  grants,  not  finding  the  bounties 
irksome  which  are  prompted  by  a  Father's  love. 
What  can  be  more  charming  in  its  gracefulness 
than  the  reception  of  a  favour  by  an  affectionate 
child.  His  glad  and  confident  enjoyment  is  a 
picture  of  what  ours  might  be. 

Since  children  receive  the  kingdom,  and  are 
a  pattern  for  us  in  doing  so,  it  is  clear  that  they 
do  not  possess  the  kingdom  as  a  natural  right, 
but  as  a  gift.  But  since  they  do  receive  it,  they 
must  surely  be  capable  of  receiving  also  that 
sacrament  which  is  the  sign  and  seal  of  it.  It  is 
a  startling  position  indeed  which  denies  admis- 
sion into  the  visible  Church  to  those  of  whom 
is  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  a  position  taken  up 
only  because  many,  who  would  shrink  from  any 
such  avowal,  half-unconsciously  believe  that  God 
becomes  gracious  to  us  only  when  His  grace  is 
attracted  by  skilful  movements  upon  our  part, 
by  conscious  and  well-instructed  efforts,  by  peni- 
tence, faith,  and  orthodoxy.  But  whatever  soul 
is  capable  of  any  taint  of  sin  must  be  capable  of 
compensating  influences  of  the  Spirit,  by  Whom 
Jeremiah    was    sanctified,    and    the    Baptist    was 


filled,  even  before  their  birth  into  this  world 
(Jer.  i.  5;  Luke  i.  15).  Christ  Himself,  in  Whom 
dwelt  bodily  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead,  was 
not  therefore  incapable  of  the  simplicity  and  de- 
pendence of  infancy. 

Having  taught  His  disciples  this  great  lesson, 
Jesus  let  His  affections  loose.  He  folded  the 
children  in  His  tender  and  pure  embrace,  and 
blessed  them  much,  laying  His  hands  on  them, 
instead  of  merely  touching  them.  He  blessed 
them  not  because  they  were  baptised.  But  we 
baptise  our  children,  because  all  such  have  re- 
ceived the  blessing,  and  are  clasped  in  the  arms 
of  the  Founder  of  the  Church. 


THE   RICH   INQUIRER. 
Mark  x.  17-22  (R.  V.). 

The  excitement  stirred  by  our  Lord's  teaching 
must  often  have  shown  itself  in  a  scene  of  eager- 
ness like  this  which  St.  Mark  describes  so  well. 
The  Saviour  is  just  "  going  forth  "  when  one 
rushes  to  overtake  Him,  and  kneels  down  to 
Him,  full  of  the  hope  of  a  great  discovery.  He 
is  so  frank,  so  innocent  and  earnest,  as  to  win 
the  love  of  Jesus.  And  yet  he  presently  goes 
away,  not  as  he  came,  but  with  a  gloomy  fore- 
head and  a  heavy  heart,  and  doubtless  with  slow 
reluctance. 

The  authorities  were  now  in  such  avowed  op- 
position that  to  be  Christ's  disciple  was  dis- 
graceful, if  not  dangerous,  to  a  man  of  mark. 
Yet  no  fear  withheld  this  young  ruler  who  had  so 
m.uch  to  lose;  he  would  not  come  by  night,  like 
Nicodemus  before  the  storm  had  gathered  which 
was  now  so  dark;  he  openly  avowed  his  belief  in 
the  goodness  of  the  Master,  and  his  own  igno- 
rance of  some  great  secret  which  Jesus  could  re- 
veal. 

There  is  indeed  a  charming  frankness  in  his 
bearing,  so  that  we  admire  even  his  childlike  as- 
sertion of  his  own  virtues,  while  the  heights  of 
a  nobility  yet  unattained  are  clearly  possible  for 
one  so  dissatisfied,  so  anxious  for  a  higher  life, 
so  urgent  in  his  questioning,  What  shall  I  do? 
What  lack  I  yet?  That  is  what  makes  the  differ- 
ence between  the  Pharisee  who  thanks  God  that 
he  is  not  as  other  men,  and  this  youth  who  has 
kept  all  the  commandments,  yet  would  fain  be 
other  than  he  is,  and  readily  confesses  that  all 
is  not  enough,  that  some  unknown  act  still 
awaits  achievement.  The  goodness  which  thinks 
itself  upon  the  summit  will  never  toil  much 
farther.  The  conscience  that  is  really  awake 
cannot  be  satisfied,  but  is  perplexed  rather  and 
baffled  by  the  virtues  of  a  dutiful  and  well- 
ordered  life.  For  a  chasm  ever  yawns  between 
the  actual  and  the  ideal,  what  we  have  done  and 
what  we  fain  would  do.  And  a  spiritual  glory, 
undefined  and  perhaps  undefinable,  floats  ever 
before  the  eyes  of  all  men  whom  the  god  of  this 
world  has  not  blinded.  This  inquirer  honestly 
thinks  himself  not  far  from  the  great  attainment; 
he  expects  to  reach  it  by  some  transcendent  act, 
some  great  deed  done,  and  for  this  he  has  no 
doubt  of  his  own  prowess,  if  only  he  were  well 
directed.  What  shall  I  do  that  I  may  have  eter- 
nal life,  not  of  grace,  but  as  a  debt — that  I  may 
inherit  it?  Thus  he  awaits  direction  upon  the 
road  where  heathenism  and  semi-heathen  Chris- 
tianity are  still  toiling,  and  all  who  would  pur- 


Mark  x.  17-22.] 


THE    RICH    ENQUIRER. 


chase   the   gift   of   God   with   money   or  toil   or 
merit  or  bitterness  of  remorseful  tears. 

One  easily  foresees  that  the  reply  of  Jesus  will 
disappoint  and  humble  him,  but  it  startles  us 
to  see  him  pointed  back  to  works  and  to  the  law 
of  Moses. 

Again,  we  observe  that  what  this  inquirer  seeks 
he  very  earnestly  believes  Jesus  to  have  attained. 
And  it  is  no  mean  tribute  to  the  spiritual  eleva- 
tion of  our  Lord,  no  doubtful  indication  that 
amid  perils  and  contradictions  and  on  His  road 
to  the  cross  the  peace  of  God  sat  visibly  upon 
His  brow,  that  one  so  pure  and  yet  so  keenly 
aware  that  his  own  virtue  sufficed  not  and  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  yet  unattained,  should 
kneel  in  the  dust  before  the  Nazarene,  and  be- 
seech this  good  Master  to  reveal  to  him  all  his 
questioning.  It  was  a  strange  request,  and  it 
was  granted  in  an  unlooked  for  way.  The  de- 
mand of  the  Chaldean  tyrant  that  his  forgotten 
dream  should  be  interpreted  was  not  so  extrava- 
gant as  this,  that  the  defect  in  an  unknown 
career  should  be  discovered.  It  was  upon  a 
lofty  pedestal  indeed  that  this  ruler  placed  our 
Lord. 

And  yet  his  question  supplies  the  clue  to  that 
answer  of  Christ  which  has  perplexed  so  many. 
The  youth  is  seeking  for  himself. a  purely  human 
merit,  indigenous  and  underived.  And  the  same, 
of  course,  is  what  he  ascribes  to  Jesus,  to  Him 
who  is  so  far  from  claiming  independent  human 
attainment,  or  professing  to  be  what  this  youth 
would  fain  become,  that  He  said,  "  The  Son  can 
do  nothing  of  Himself.  ...  I  can  of  Mine  own 
self  do  nothing."  The  secret  of  His  human  per- 
fection is  the  absolute  dependence  of  His  hu- 
manity upon  God,  with  whom  He  is  one.  No 
wonder,  then,  that  He  repudiates  any  such  good- 
ness as  the  ruler  had  in  view. 

The  Socinian  finds  quite  another  meaning  in 
His  reply,  and  urges  that  by  these  words  Jesus 
denied  His  Deity.  There  is  none  good  but  one. 
That  is  God,  was  a  reason  why  He  should  not  be 
called  so.  Jesus,  however,  does  not  remonstrate 
absolutely  against  being  called  good,  but  against 
being  thus  addressed  from  this  ruler's  point  of 
view,  by  one  who  regards  Him  as  a  mere  teacher 
and  expects  to  earn  the  same  title  for  himself. 
And  indeed  the  Socinian  who  appeals  to  this 
text  gasps  a  sword  by  the  blade.  For  if  it  denied 
Christ's  divinity  it  must  exactly  to  the  same  ex- 
tent deny  also  Christ's  goodness,  which  he  ad- 
mits. Now  it  is  beyond  question  that  Jesus  dif- 
fered from  all  the  saints  in  the  serene  confidence 
with  which  He  regarded  the  moral  law,  from  the 
time  when  He  received  the  baptism  of  repent- 
ance only  that  He  might  fulfil  all  righteousness, 
to  the  hour  when  He  cried,  "  Why  hast  Thou 
forsaken  Me?"  and  although  deserted,  claimed 
God  as  still  His  God.  The  saints  of  to-day  were 
the  penitents  of  yesterday.  But  He  has  finished 
the  work  that  was  given  Him  to  do.  He  knows 
that  God  hears  Him  always,  and  in  Him  the 
Prince  of  this  world  hath  nothing.  And  yet 
there  is  none  good  but  God.  Who  then  is  He? 
If  this  saying  docs  npt  confess  what  is  intoler- 
able to  a  reverential  Socinian,  what  Strauss  and 
Renan  shrank  from  insinuating,  what  is  alien  to 
the  whole  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  and  assuredly 
far  from  the  mind  of  the  evangelists,  then  it 
claims  all  that  His  Church  rejoices  to  ascribe  to 
Christ. 

Moreover  Jesus  does  not  deny  even   to  ordi- 
nary men  the  possibility  of  being  "  good." 
56- Vol.  IV. 


A  good  man  out  pi  the  good  treasure  of  his 
heart  bringeth  forth  good  things.  Some  shall 
hear  at  last  the  words.  Well  done,  good  and  faith- 
ful servant.  The  children  of  the  kingdom  are 
good  seed  among  the  tares.  Clearly  His  re- 
pugnance is  not  to  the  epithet,  but  to  the  spirit 
in  which  it  is  bestowed,  to  the  notion  that  good- 
ness can  spring  spontaneously  from  the  soil  of 
our  humanity.  But  there  is  nothing  here  to  dis- 
courage the  highest  aspirations  of  the  trust- 
ful and  dependent  soul,  who  looks  for  more 
grace. 

The  doctrinal  importance  of  this  remarkable 
utterance  is  what  most  afifects  us,  who  look  back 
through  the  dust  of  a  hundred  controversies. 
But  it  was  very  secondary  at  the  time,  and  what 
the  ruler  doubtless  felt  most  was  a  chill  sense  of 
repression  and  perhaps  despair.  It  was  indeed 
the  death-knell  of  his  false  hopes.  For  if  only 
God  is  good,  how  can  any  mortal  inherit  eternal 
life  by  a  good  deed?  And  Jesus  goes  on  to 
deepen  this  conviction  by  words  which  find  a 
wonderful  commentary  in  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of 
the  function  of  the  law.  It  was  to  prepare  men 
for  the  gospel  by  a  challenge,  by  revealing  the 
standard  of  true  righteousness,  by  saying  to  all 
who  seek  to  earn  heaven,  "  The  man  that  doeth 
these  things  shall  live  by  them."  The  attempt 
was  sure  to  end  in  failure,  for,  "  by  the  law  is  the 
knowledge  of  sin."  It  was  exactly  upon  this 
principle  that  Jesus  said  "  Keep  the  command- 
ments," spiritualising  them,  as  St.  Matthew  tells 
us,  by  adding  to  the  injunctions  of  the  second 
table,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thy- 
self," which  saying,  we  know,  briefly  compre- 
hends them  all. 

But  the  ruler  knew  not  Kow  much  he  loved 
himself:  his  easy  life  had  met  no  searching  and 
stern  demand  until  now,  and  his  answer  has  a 
tone  of  relief,  after  the  ominous  words  he  had 
first  heard.  "  Master,"  and  he  now  drops  the 
questionable  adjective,  "  all  these  have  I  kept 
from  my  youth;"  these  never  were  so  burden- 
some that  he  should  despair;  not  these,  he  thinks, 
inspired  that  unsatisfied  longing  for  some  good 
thing  yet  undone.  We  pity  and  perhaps  blame 
the  shallow  answer,  and  the  dull  perception 
which  it  betrayed.  But  Jesus  looked  on  him  and 
loved  him.  And  well  it  is  for  us  that  no  eyes 
fully  discern  our  weakness  but  those  which  were 
so  often  filled  with  sympathetic  tears.  He  sees 
error  more  keenly  than  the  sharpest  critic,  but  he 
sees  earnestness  too.  And  the  love  which  de- 
sired all  souls  was  attracted  especially  by  one 
who  had  felt  from  his  youth  up  the  obligation  of 
the  moral  law,  and  had  not  consciously  trans- 
gressed it. 

This  is  not  the  teaching  of  those  vile  proverbs 
which  declare  that  wild  oats  must  be  sown  if  one 
would  reap  good  corn,  and  that  the  greater  the 
sinner  the  greater  will  be  the  saint. 

Nay,  even  religionists  of  the  sensational  school 
delight  in  the  past  iniquities  of  those  they 
honour,  not  only  to  glorify  God  for  their  recov- 
ery, nor  with  the  joy  which  is  in  the  presence  of 
the  angels  over  one  sinner  that  repenteth,  but  as 
if  these  possess  through  their  former  wickedness 
some  passport  to  special  service  now.  Yet 
neither  in  Scripture  nor  in  the  history  of  the 
Church  will  it  appear  that  men  of  licentious  re- 
volt against  known  laws  have  attained  to  useful- 
ness of  the  highest  order.  The  Baptist  was  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  his  mother's  womb,^ 
The   Apostle   of   the   Gentiles   was   blameless  as 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


touching  the  righteousness  .of  the  law.  And  each 
Testament  has  a  special  promise  for  those  who 
seek  the  Lord  early,  who  seek  His  kingdom  and 
righteousness  first.  The  undefiled  are  nearest  to 
the  throne. 

Now  mark  how  endearing,  how  unlike  the 
stern  zeal  of  a  propagandist,  was  Christ's  tender 
and  loving  gaze;  and  hear  the  encouraging  prom- 
ise of  heavenly  treasure,  and  offer  of  His  own 
companionship,  which  presently  softened  the 
severity  of  His  demand;  and  again,  when  all 
failed,  when  His  followers  doubtless  scorned  the 
deserter,  ponder  the  truthful  and  compassionate 
words.  How  hard  it  is! 

Yet  will  Christ  teach  him  how  far  the  spirit 
of  the  law  pierces,  since  the  letter  has  not 
wrought  the  knowledge  of  sin.  If  he  loves  his 
neighbour  as  himself,  let  his  needier  neighbour 
receive  what  he  most  values.  If  he  loves  God 
supremely,  let  him  be  content  with  treasure  in 
the  hands  of  God,  and  with  a  discipleship  which 
shall  ever  reveal  to  him,  more  and  more  pro- 
foundly, the  will  of  God,  the  true  nobility  of  man, 
and  the  way  to  that  eternal  life  he  seeks. 

The  socialist  would  justify  by  this  verse  a  uni- 
versal confiscation.  But  he  forgets  that  the 
spirit  which  seizes  all  is  widely  different  from 
that  which  gives  all  freely:  that  Zacchaeus  re- 
tained half  his  goods;  that  Joseph  of  Arimathea 
was  rich;  that  the  property  of  Ananias  was  his 
own,  and  when  he  sold  it  the  price  was  in  his  own 
power;  that  St.  James  warned  the  rich  in  this 
world  only  against  trusting  in  riches  instead 
of  trusting  God,  who  gave  them  all  richly, 
for  enjoyment,  although  not  to  be  confided  in. 
Soon  after  this  Jesus  accepted  a  feast  from  his 
friends  in  Bethany,  and  rebuked  Judas,  who  com- 
plained that  a  costly  luxury  had  not  been  sold  for 
the  benefit  of  the  poor.  Why  then  is  his  demand 
now  so  absolute?  It  is  simply  an  application  of 
his  bold  universal  rule,  that  every  cause  of 
stumbling  must  be  sacrificed,  be  it  innocent  as 
hand  or  foot  or  eye.  And  affluent  indeed  would 
be  all  the  charities  and  missions  of  the  Church 
in  these  latter  days,  if  the  demand  were  obeyed 
in  cases  where  it  really  applies,  if  every  luxury 
which  enervates  and  all  pomp  which  intoxicates 
were  sacrificed,  if  all  who  know  that  wealth  is  a 
snare  to  them  corrected  their  weakness  by  rig- 
orous discipline,  their  unfruitfulness  by  a  sharp 
pruning  of  superfluous  frondage. 

The  rich  man  neither  remonstrated  nor  de- 
fended himself.  His  self-confidence  gave  way. 
He  felt  that  what  he  could  not  persuade  himself 
to  do  was  a  "  good  thing."  And  he  who  came 
running  went  away  sorrowful,  and  with  a  face 
"  lowering  "  like  the  sky  which  forebodes  "  foul 
weather."  That  is  too  often  the  issue  of  such 
vaunting  offers.  Yet  feeling  his  weakness,  and 
neither  resisting  nor  upbraiding  the  faithfulness 
which  exposes  him,  doubtless  he  was  long  dis- 
quieted by  new  desires,  a  strange  sense  of  failure 
and  unworthiness,  a  clear  vision  of  that  higher  life 
which  had  already  haunted  his  reveries.  Hence- 
forward he  had  no  choice  but  to  sink  to  a  baser 
contentment,  or  else  rise  to  a  higher  self-devo- 
tion. Who  shall  say,  because  he  failed  to  de- 
cide then,  that  he  persisted  for  ever  in  the  great 
refusal?  Yet  was  it  a  perilous  and  hardening  ex- 
perience, and  it  was  easier  henceforward  to  live 
below  his  ideal,  when  once  he  had  turned  away 
from  Christ.  Nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt 
that  the  inner  circle  of  our  Lord's  immediate  fol- 
lowers was  then  io'-  ^^er  closed  against  him. 


WHO    THEN   CAN  BE   SAVED f 
Mark  x.  23-31  (R.  V.). 

As  the  rich  man  turned  away  with  the  arrow 
in  his  breast,  Jesus  looked  round  about  on  His 
disciples.  The  Gospels,  and  especially  St.  Mark, 
often  mention  the  gaze  of  Jesus,  and  all  who 
know  the  power  of  an  intense  and  pure  nature 
silently  searching  others,  the  piercing  intuition, 
the  calm  judgment  which  sometimes  looks  out 
of  holy  eyes,  can  well  understand  the  reason. 
Disappointed  love  was  in  His  look,  and  that  com- 
passionate protest  against  harsh  judgments  which 
presently  went  on  to  admit  that  the  necessary 
demand  was  hard.  Some,  perhaps,  who  had  be- 
gun to  scorn  the  ruler  in  his  defeat,  were  re- 
minded of  frailties  of  their  own,  and  had  to  ask, 
Shall  I  next  be  judged?  And  one  was  among 
them,  pilfering  from  the  bag  what  was  intended 
for  the  poor,  to  whom  that  look  of  Christ  must 
have  been  very  terrible.  Unless  we  remember 
Judas,  we  shall  not  comprehend  all  the  fitness  of 
the  repeated  and  earnest  warnings  of  Jesus 
against  covetousness.  Never  was  secret  sin  dealt 
with  so  faithfully  as  his. 

And  now  Jesus,  as  He  looks  around,  says, 
"  How  hardly  shall  they  that  have  riches  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God."  But  the  disciples 
were  amazed.  To  the  ancient  Jew,  from  Abra- 
ham to  Solomon,  riches  appeared  to  be  a  sign 
of  the  Divine  favour,  and  if  the  pathetic  figure 
of  Job  reminded  him  how  much  sorrow  might 
befall  the  just,. yet  the  story  showed  even  him  at 
the  end  more  prosperous  than  at  the  beginning. 
In  the  time  of  Jesus,  the  chiefs  of  their  religion 
were  greedily  using  their  position  as  a  means  of 
amassing  enormous  fortunes.  To  be  told  that 
wealth  was  a  positive  hindrance  on  the  way  to 
God  was  wonderful  indeed. 

When  Jesus  modified  His  utterance,  it  was  not 
to  correct  Himself,  like  one  who  had  heedlessly 
gone  beyond  His  meaning.  His  third  speech 
reiterated  the  first,  declaring  that  a  manifest  and 
proverbial  physical  impossibility  was  not  so  hard 
as  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  God, 
here  or  hereafter.  But  He  interposed  a  saying 
which  both  explained  the  first  one  and  enlarged 
its  scope.  "  Children  "  He  begins,  like  one  who 
pitied  their  inexperience  and  dealt  gently  with 
their  perplexities,  "  Children,  how  hard  is  it  for 
them  that  trust  in  riches  to  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God."  And  therefore  is  it  hard  for  all 
the  rich,  since  they  must  wrestle  against  this 
temptation  to  trust  in  their  possessions.  It  is 
exactly  in  this  spirit  that  St.  James,  who  quoted 
Jesus  more  than  any  of  the  later  writers  of  Scrip- 
ture, charges  the  rich  that  they  be  not  high- 
minded,  nor  trust  in  uncertain  riches,  but  in  the 
living  God.  Immediately  before,  Jesus  had  told 
them  how  alone  the  kingdom  might  be  entered, 
even  by  becoming  as  little  children;  lowly,  de- 
pendent, willing  to  receive  all  at  the  hands  of  a 
superior.  Would  riches  help  them  to  do  this? 
Is  it  easier  to  pray  for  daily  bread  when  one  has 
much  goods  laid  up  for  many  years?  Is  it  easier 
to  feel  that  God  alone  can  make  us  drink  of  true 
pleasures  as  of  a  river,  when  a  hundred  luxuries 
and  indulgences  lull  us  in  sloth  or  allure  us  into 
excess?  Hereupon  the  disciples  perceived  what 
was  more  alarming  still,  that  not  alone  do  rich 
men  trust  in  riches,  but  all  who  confound  pos- 
sessions with  satisfaction,  all  who  dream  that  to 
have  much  is  to  be  blessed,  as  if  property  were 


Mark  x.  35-40.] 


CHRIST'S    CUP    AND    BAPTISM. 


885 


character.  They  were  right.  Wc  may  follow  the 
guidance  of  Mammon  beckonijig  from  afar,  with 
a  trust  as  idolatrous  as  if  we  held  his  hand.  But 
who  could  abide  a  principle  so  exacting?  It  was 
the  revelation  of  a  new  danger,  and  they  were 
astonished  exceedingly,  saying,  Then  who  can  be 
saved?  .Again  Jesus  looked  upon  them,  with 
solemn  but  reassuring  gaze.  They  had  learned 
the  secret  of  the  new  life,  the  natural  impossibil- 
ity throwing  us  back  in  helpless  appeal  to  the 
powers  of  the  world  to  come.  "  With  men  it  is 
impossible,  but  not  with  God,  for  all  things  are 
possible  with  God." 

Peter,  not  easily  nor  long  to  be  discouraged, 
now  saw  ground  for  hope.  If  the  same  danger 
existed  for  rich  and  poor,  then  either  might  be 
encouraged  by  having  surmounted  it,  and  the 
apostles  had  done  what  the  rich  man  failed  to 
do — they  had  left  all  and  followed  Jesus.  The 
claim  has  provoked  undue  censure,  as  if  too 
.much  were  made  out  of  a  very  trifling  sacrifice, 
a  couple  of  boats  and  a  paltry  trade.  But  the  ob- 
jectors have  missed  the  point;  the  apostles  really 
broke  away  from  the  service  of  the  world  when 
they  left  their  nets  and  followed  Jesus.  Their 
world  was  perhaps  a  narrow  one,  but  He  Who 
reckoned  two  mites  a  greater  oiTering  than  the 
total  of  the  gifts  of  many  rich  casting  in  much, 
was  unlikely  to  despise  a  fisherman  or  a  publican 
who  laid  all  his  living  upon  the  altar.  The  fault, 
if  fault  there  were,  lay  rather  in  the  satisfaction 
with  which  Peter  contemplates  their  decision  as 
now  irrevocable  and  secure,  so  that  nothing  re- 
mained except  to  claim  the  reward,  which  St. 
Matthew  tells  us  he  very  distinctly  did.  The 
young  man  should  have  had  treasure  in  heaven: 
what  then  should  they  have? 

But  in  truth,  their  hardest  battles  with  world- 
liness  lay  still  before  them,  and  he  who  thought 
he  stood  might  well  take  heed  lest  he  fell.  They 
would  presently  unite  in  censuring  a  woman's 
costly  gift  to  Him  for  Whom  they  professed  to 
have  surrendered  all.  Peter  himself  would 
shrink  from  his  Master's  side.  And  what  a  satire 
upon  this  confident  claim  would  it  have  been, 
could  the  heart  of  Judas  then  and  there  have  been 
revealed  to  them. 

The  answer  of  our  Lord  is  suf^ciently  remark- 
able. St.  Matthew  tells  how  frankly  and  fully 
He  acknowledged  their  collective  services,  and 
what  a  large  reward  He  promised,  when  they 
should  sit  with  Him  on  thrones,  judging  their 
nation.  So  far  was  that  generous  heart  from 
weighing  their  losses  in  a  worldly  scale,  or  criti- 
cising the  form  of  a  demand  which  was  not  all 
unreasonable. 

But  St.  Mark  lays  exclusive  stress  upon  other 
and  sobering  considerations,  which  also  St.  Mat- 
thew has  recorded. 

There  is  a  certain  tone  of  egoism  in  the  words, 
"  Lo,  we  .  .  .  what  shall  we  have?  "  And  Jesus 
corrects  this  in  the  gentlest  way,  by  laying  down 
such  a  general  rule  as  implies  that  many  others 
will  do  the  same;  "  there  is  no  man  "  whose  self- 
sacrifice  shall  go  without  its  reward. 

Secondary  and  lower  motives  begin  to  mingle 
with  the  generous  ardour  of  self-sacrifice  as  soon 
as  it  is  careful  to  record  its  losses,  and  inquire 
about  its  wages.  Such  motives  are  not  abso- 
lutely forbidden,  but  they  must  never  push  into 
the  foremost  place.  The  crown  of  glory  ani- 
mated and  sustained  St.  Paul,  but  it  was  for 
Christ,  and  not  for  this,  that  he  suffered  the  loss 
of  all  things. 


Jesus  accordingly  demands  purity  of  motive. 
The  sacrifice  must  not  be  for  ambition,  even  with 
aspirations  prolonged  across  the  frontiers  of 
eternity:  it  must  be  altogether  "  for  My  sake  and 
for  the  gospel's  sake."  And  here  we  observe 
once  more  the  portentous  demand  of  Christ's 
person  upon  His  followers.  They  are  servants 
of  no  ethical  or  theological  system,  however 
lofty.  Christ  does  not  regard  Hims'elf  and  them, 
as  alike  devoted  to  some  cause  above  and  ex- 
ternal to  them  all.  To  Him  they  are  to  be  con- 
secrated, and  to  the  gospel,  which,  as  wc  have 
seen,  is  the  story  of  His  Life,  Death,  and  Resur- 
rection. For  Him  they  are  to  break  the  dearest 
and  strongest  of  earthly  ties.  He  had  just  pro- 
claimed how  indissoluble  was  the  marriage  bond. 
No  man  should  sever  those  whom  God  had 
joined.  But  St.  Luke  informs  us  that  to  forsake 
even  a  wife  for  Christ's  sake,  was  a  deed  worthy 
of  being  rewarded  an  hundredfold.  Nor  does 
He  mention  any  higher  being  in  whose  name 
the  sacrifice  is  demanded.  Now  this  is  at  least 
implicitly  the  view  of  His  own  personality  which 
some  profess  to  find  only  in  St.  John. 

Again,  there  was  perhaps  an  undertone  of 
complaint  in  Peter's  question,  as  if  no  com- 
pensation for  all  their  sacrifices  were  hitherto 
bestowed.  What  should  their  compensation  be? 
But  Christ  declares  that  losses  endured  for  Him 
are  abundantly  repaid  on  earth,  in  this  present 
time,  and  even  amid  the  fires  of  persecution. 
Houses  and  lands  are  replaced  by  the  conscious- 
ness of  inviolable  shelter  and  inexhaustible  pro- 
vision. "  Whither  wilt  thou  betake  thyself  to 
find  covert?"  asks  the  menacing  cardinal;  but 
Luther  answers,  "  Under  the  heaven  of  God." 
And  if  dearest  friends  be  estranged,  or  of  neces- 
sity abandoned,  then,  in  such  times  of  high  at- 
tainment and  strong  spiritual  insight,  member- 
ship in  the  Divine  family  is  felt  to  be  no  unreal 
tie,  and  earthly  relationships  are  well  recovered 
in  the  vast  fraternity  of  souls.  Brethren,  and 
sisters,  and  mothers,  are  thus  restored  an  hun- 
dredfold; but  although  a  father  is  also  lost,  we 
do  not  hear  that  a  hundred  fathers  shall  be  given 
back,  for  in  the  spiritual  family  that  place  is 
reserved   for   One. 

Lastly,  Jesus  reminded  them  that  the  race  was 
not  yet  over;  that  many  first  shall  be  last  and  the 
last  first.  We  know  how  Judas  by  transgression 
fell,  and  how  the  persecitting  Saul  became  not 
a  whit  behind  the  very  chiefest  apostle.  But  this 
word  remains  for  the  warning  and  incitement  of 
all  Christians,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
There  are  "  many  "  such. 

Next  after  this  warning  comes  yet  another 
prediction  of  His  own  suffering,  with  added  cir- 
cumstances of  horror.  Would  they  who  were 
now  first  remain  faithful?  or  should  another  take 
their  bishopric? 

With  a  darkening  heart  Judas  heard,  and  made 
his  choice. 


[Mark  x.  32-34.     See  Mark  viii.  31,  p.  867.] 


CHRIST'S  CUP  AND  BAPTISM. 

Mark  x.  35-40  (R.  V.). 

We  learn  from  St.  Matthew  that  Salome  was 
associated  with  her  sons,  and  was  indeed  the 
chief  speaker  in  the  earlier  part  of  this  incident 


884 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


And  her  request  has  commonly  been  regarded 
as  the  mean  and  shortsighted  intrigue  of  an  am- 
bitious woman,  recklessly  snatching  at  an  ad- 
vantage for  her  family,  and  unconscious  of  the 
stern  and  steep  road  to  honour  in  the  kingdom 
of  Jesus. 

Nor  can  we  deny  that  her  prayer  was  some- 
what presumptuous,  or  that  it  was  especially  un- 
becoming to  aim  at  entangling  her  Lord  in  a 
blindfold  promise,  desiring  Him  to  do  something 
undefined,  "  whatsoever  we  shall  ask  of  Thee." 
Jesus  was  too  discreet  to  answer  otherwise  than, 
"What  would  ye  that  I  should  do  for  you?" 
And  when  they  asked  for  the  chief  seats  in  the 
glory  that  was  yet  to  be  their  Master's,  no 
wonder  that  the  Ten,  hearing  of  it,  had  indigna- 
tion. But  Christ's  answer,  and  the  gentle  man- 
ner in  which  He  explains  His  refusal,  when  a 
sharp  rebuke  is  what  we  would  expect  to  read, 
alike  suggest  that  there  may  have  been  some 
softening,  half-justifying  circumstance.  And 
this  we  find  in  the  period  at  which  the  daring 
request  was  made. 

It  was  on  the  road,  during  the  last  journey, 
when  a  panic  had  seized  the  company;  and  our 
Lord,  apparently  out  of  the  strong  craving  for 
sympathy  which  possesses  the  noblest  souls,  had 
once  more  told  the  Twelve  what  insults  and  cruel 
sufferings  lay  before  Him.  It  was  a  time  for 
deep  searching  of  hearts,  for  the  craven  to  go 
back  and  walk  no  more  with  Him,  and  for  the 
traitor  to  think  of  making  His  own  peace,  at  any 
price,  with  His  Master's  foes. 

But  this  dauntless  woman  could  see  the  clear 
sky  beyond  the  storm.  Her  sons  shall  be  loyal, 
and  win  the  prize,  whatever  be  the  hazard,  and 
however  long  the  struggle. 

Ignorant  and  rash  she  may  have  been,  but  it 
was  no  base  ambition  which  chose  such  a  mo- 
ment to  declare  its  unshaken  ardour,  and  claim 
distinction  in  the  kingdom  for  which  so  much 
must  be  endured. 

And  when  the  stern  price  was  plainly  stated, 
she  and  her  children  were  not  startled,  they 
conceived  themselves  able  for  the  baptism  and 
the  cup;  and  little  as  they  dreamed  of  the  cold- 
ness of  the  waters,  and  the  bitterness  of  the 
draught,  yet  Jesus  did  not  declare  them  to  be  de- 
ceived.    He  said.  Ye  shall  indeed  share  these. 

Nor  can  we  doubt  that  their  faith  and  loyalty 
refreshed  His  soul  amid  so  much  that  was  sad 
and  selfish.  He  knew  indeed  on  what  a  dreadful 
seat  He  was  soon  to  claim  His  kingdom,  and 
who  should  sit  upon  His  right  hand  and  His  left. 
These  could  not  follow  Him  now,  but  they 
should  follow  Him  hereafter — one  by  the  brief 
pang  of  the  earliest  apostolic  martyrdom,  and 
the  other  by  the  longest  and  sorest  experience  of 
that  faithless  and  perverse  generation. 

I.  Very  significant  is  the  test  of  worth  which 
Jesus  propounds  to  them:  not  successful  service, 
but  endurance;  not  the  active,  but  the  passive 
graces.  It  is  not  our  test,  except  in  a  few  bril- 
liant and  conspicuous  martyrdoms.  The  Church, 
like  the  world,  has  crowns  for  learning,  elo- 
quence, energy;  it  applauds  the  force  by  which 
great  things  are  done.  The  reformer  who  abol- 
ishes an  abuse,  the  scholar  who  defends  a  doc- 
trine, the  orator  who  sways  a  multitude,  and  the 
missionary  who  adds  a  new  tribe  to  Christen- 
dom,— all  these  are  sure  of  honour.  Our  loudest 
plaudits  are  not  for  simple  men  and  women,  but 
for  high  station,  genius,  and  success.  But  the 
Lord  looketh  upon  the  heart,   not  the  brain  or 


the  hand;  He  values  the  worker,  not  the  work; 
the  love,  not  the  achievement.  And,  therefore, 
one  of  the  tests  He  constantly  applied  was  this, 
the  capability  for  noble  endurance.  We  our- 
selves, in  our  saner  moments,  can  judge  whether 
it  demands  more  grace  to  refute  a  heretic,  or  to 
sustain  the  long  inglorious  agonies  of  some  dis- 
ease which  slowly  gnaws  away  the  heart  of  life. 
And  doubtless  among  the  heroes  for  whom 
Christ  is  twining  immortal  garlands,  there  is 
many  a  pale  and  shattered  creature,  nerveless  and 
unstrung,  tossing  on  a  mean  bed,  breathing  in 
imperfect  English  loftier  praises  than  many  an 
anthem  which  resounds  through  cathedral 
arches,  and  laying  on  the  altar  of  burnt  sacrifice 
all  he  has,  even  his  poor  frame  itself,  to  be 
racked  and  tortured  without  a  murmur.  Culture 
has  never  heightened  his  forehead  nor  refined  his 
face:  we  look  at  him,  but  little  dream  what  the 
angels  see,  or  how  perhaps  because  of  such  an 
one  the  great  places  which  Salome  sought  were 
not  Christ's  to  give  away  except  only  to  them 
for  whom  it  was  prepared.  For  these,  at  last,  the 
reward  shall  be  His  to  give,  as  He  said,  "  To 
him  that  overcometh  will  I  give  to  sit  down  with 
Me  upon  My  throne." 

2.  Significant  also  are  the  phrases  by  which 
Christ  expressed  the  sufferings  of  His  people. 
Some,  which  it  is  possible  to  escape,  are  volun- 
tarily accepted  for  Christ's  sake,  as  when  the 
Virgin  mother  bowed  her  head  to  slander  and 
scorn,  and  said,  ".Behold  the  servant  of  the  Lord, 
be  it  unto  me  according  to  Thy  word."  Such 
sufferings  are  .a  cup  deliberately  raised  by  one's 
own  hand  to  the  reluctant  lips.  Into  other  suf- 
ferings we  are  plunged:  they  are  inevitable. 
Malice,  ill-health,  or  bereavement  plies  the 
scourge;  they  come  on  us  like  the  rush  of  bil- 
lows in  a  storm;  they  are  a  deep  and  dreadful 
baptism.  Or  we  may  say  that  some  woes  are  ex- 
ternal, visible,  we  are  seen  to  be  submerged  in 
them;  but  others  are  like  the  secret  ingredients 
of  a  bitter  draught,  which  the  lips  know,  but  the 
eye  of  the  bystander  cannot  analyse.  But  there  is 
One  Who  knows  and  rewards;  even  the  Man  of 
Sorrows  Who  said.  The  cup,  which  My  heavenly 
Father  giveth,  shall  I  not  drink  it? 

Now  it  is  this  standard  of  excellence,  an- 
nounced by  Jesus,  which  shall  give  high  place  to 
many  of  the  poor  and  ignorant  and  weak,  when 
rank  shall  perish,  when  tongues  shall  cease,  and 
when  our  knowledge,  in  the  blaze  of  new  revela- 
tions, shall  utterly  vanish  away,  not  quenched, 
but  absorbed  like  the  starlight  at  noon. 

3.  We  observe  again  that  men  are  not  said  to 
drink  of  another  cup  as  bitter,  or  to  be  baptised 
in  other  waters  as  chill,  as  tried  their  Master; 
but  to  share  His  very  baptism  and  His  cup. 
Not  that  we  can  add  anything  to  His  all-suffi- 
cient sacrifice.  Our  goodness  extendeth  not  to 
God.  But  Christ's  work  availed  not  only  to  rec- 
oncile us  to  the  Father,  but  also  to  elevate  and 
consecrate  sufferings  which  would  otherwise 
have  been  penal  and  degrading.  Accepting  our 
sorrows  in  the  grace  of  Christ,  and  receiving 
Him  into  our  hearts,  then  our  sufferings  fill  up 
that  which  is  lacking  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ 
(Col.  i.  24),  and  at  the  last  He  will  say,  when 
the  glories  of  heaven  are  as  a  robe  around  Him, 
"  I  was  hungry,  naked,  sick,  and  in  prison  in  the 
person  of  the  least  of  these." 

Hence  it  is  that  a  special  nearness  to  God 
has  ever  been  felt  in  holy  sorrow,  and  in  the 
pain  of  hearts  which,  amid  all  clamours  and  tu- 


Mark  x.  46-52.] 


BARTIM^US. 


885 


mults  of  the  world,  are  hushed  and  calmed  by 
the  example  of  Him  Who  was  led  as  a  lamb 
to  the  slaughter. 

And  thus  they  are  not  wrong  who  speak  of 
the  Sacrament  of  Sorrow,  for  Jesus,  in  this  pas- 
sage, applies  to  it  the  language  of  both  sacra- 
ments. 

It  is  a  harmless  superstition  even  at  the  worst 
which  brings  to  the  baptism  of  many  noble 
houses  water  from  the  stream  where  Jesus  was 
baptised  by  John.  But  here  we  read  of  another 
and  a  dread  baptism,  consecrated  by  the  fellow- 
ship of  Christ,  in  depths  which  plummet  never 
sounded,  and  into  which  the  neophyte  goes  down 
sustained  by  no  mortal  hand. 

Here  is  also  the  communion  of  an  awful  cup. 
No  human  minister  sets  it  in  our  trembling 
hand;  no  human  voice  asks,  "Are  ye  able  to 
drink  the  cup  that  I  drink? "  Our  lips  grow 
pale,  and  our  blood  is  chill;  but  faith  responds, 
"  We  are  able."  And  the  tender  and  pitying 
voice  of  our  Master,  too  loving  to  spare  one 
necessary  pang,  responds  with  the  word  of 
doom:  "The  cup  that  I  drink  ye  shall  drink; 
and  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptised  withal 
shall  ye  be  baptised."  Even  so:  it  is  enough 
for  the  servant  that  he  be  as  his  Master. 


THE  LAW  OF  GREATNESS. 
Mark  x.  41-45  (R.  V.). 

When  the  Ten  heard  that  James  and  John 
had  asked  for  the  dhief  places  in  the  kingdom, 
they  proved,  by  their  indignation,  that  they  also 
nourished  the  same  ambitious  desires  which 
they  condemned.  But  Jesus  called  them  to  Him, 
for  it  was  not  there  that  angry  passions  had 
broken  out.  And  happy  are  they  who  hear  and 
obey  His  summons  to  approach,  when,  removed 
from  His  purifying  gaze  by  carelessness  or  wil- 
fulness, ambition  and  anger  begin  to  excite  their 
hearts. 

Now  Jesus  addressed  them  as  being  aware  of 
their  hidden  emulation.  And  His  treatment  of 
it  is  remarkable.  He  neither  condemns,  nor 
praises  it,  but  simply  teaches  them  what  Chris- 
tian greatness  means,  and  the  conditions  on 
which  it  may  be  won. 

The  greatness  of  the  world  is  measured  by 
authority  and  lordliness.  Even  there  it  is  an 
uncertain  test;  fbr  the  most  real  power  is  often 
wielded  by  some  anonymous  thinker,  or  by  some 
crafty  intriguer,  content  with  the  substance  of 
authority  while  his  puppet  enjoys  the  trappings. 
Something  of  this  may  perhaps  be  detected  in 
the  words,  "  They  which  are  accounted  to  rule 
over  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them."  And  it 
is  certain  that  "  their  great  ones  exercise  author- 
ity over  them."  But  the  Divine  greatness  is 
a  meek  and  gentle  influence.  To  minister  to 
the  Church  is  better  than  to  command  it,  and 
whoever  desires  to  be  the  chief  must  become 
the  servant  of  all.  Thus  shall  whatever  is  vain- 
glorious and  egoistic  in  our  ambition  defeat 
itself;  the  more  one  struggles  to  be  great  the 
more  he  is  disqualified:  even  benefits  rendered 
to  others  with  this  object  will  not  really  be  ser- 
vice done  for  them  but  for  self;  nor  will  any  cal- 
culated assumption  of  humility  help  one  to  be- 
come indeed  the  least,  being  but  a  subtle  asser- 
tion that  he  is  great,  and  like  the  last  place  in  an 
ecclesiastical  procession,  when  occupied  in  a  self- 


conscious  spirit.  And  thus  it  comes  to  pass  that 
the  Church  knows  very  distinctly  who  are  its 
greatest  sons.  As  the  gift  of  two  mites  by  the 
widow  was  greater  than  that  of  large  sums  by  the 
rich,  so  a  small  service  done  in  the  spirit  of  per- 
fect self-effacement, — a  service  which  thought 
neither  of  its  merit  nor  of  its  reward,  but  only 
of  a  brother's  need,  shall  be  more,  in  the  day 
of  reckoning  than  sacrifices  which  are  celebrated 
by  the  historians  and  sung  by  the  poets  of  the 
Church.  For  it  may  avail  nothing  to  give  all 
my  goods  to  feed  the  poor,  and  my  body  to 
be  burned;  while  a  cup  of  cold  water,  rendered 
by  a  loyal  hand,  shall  in  no  wise  lose  its  re- 
ward. 

Thus  Jesus  throws  open  to  all  men  a  com- 
petition which  has  no  charms  for  flesh  and  blood. 
And  as  He  spoke  of  the  entry  upon  His  ser- 
vice, bearing  a  cross,  as  being  the  following 
of  Himself,  so  He  teaches  us,  that  the  great- 
ness of  lowliness,  to  which  we  are  called,  is 
His  own  greatness.  "  For  verily  the  Son  of 
Man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto  but  to 
minister."  Not  here,  not  in  this  tarnished  and 
faded  world,  would  He  Who  was  from  everlast- 
ing with  the  Father  have  sought  His  own  ease 
or  honour.  But  the  physician  came  to  them 
that  were  sick,  and  the  good  Shepherd  followed 
His  lost  sheep  until  He  found  it.  Now  this 
comparison  proves  that  we  also  are  to  carry 
forward  the  same  restoring  work,  or  else  we 
might  infer  that,  because  He  came  to  minister 
to  us,  we  may  accept  ministration  with  a  good 
heart.  It  is  not  so.  We  are  the  light  and  the 
salt  'of  the  earth,  and  must  suffer  with  Him 
that  we  may  also  be  glorified  together. 

But  He  added  another  memorable  phrase. 
He  came  "  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  in  ex- 
change for  many."  It  is  not  a  question,  there- 
fore, of  the  inspiring  example  of  His  life. 
Something  has  been  forfeited  which  must  be  re- 
deemed, and  Christ  has  paid  the  price.  Nor 
is  this  done  only  on  behalf  of  many,  but  in  ex- 
change  for  them. 

So  then  the  crucifixion  is  not  a  sad  inci- 
dent in  a  great  career;  it  is  the  mark  towards 
which  Jesus  moved,  the  power  by  which  He  re- 
deemed  the    world. 

Surely,  we  recognise  here  the  echo  of  the 
prophet's  words,  "  Thou  shalt  make  His  soul 
an  offering  for  sin  .  .  .  by  His  knowledge  shall 
My  righteous  servant  justify  many,  and  He  shall 
bear  their  iniquities"   (Isa.  liii.   10,  11). 

The  elaborated  doctrine  of  the  atonement 
may  not  perhaps  be  here,  much  less  the  subtle- 
ties of  theoloErians  who  have,  to  their  own  sat- 
isfaction, known  the  mind  of  the  Almighty  to 
perfection.  But  it  is  beyond  reasonable  contro- 
versy that  in  this  verse  Jesus  declared  that  His 
sufferings  were  vicarious,  and  endured  in  the  sin- 
ners'  stead. 


BARTIM^US. 
Mark  x.  46-52  (R.  V.). 

There  is  no  miracle  in  the  Gospels  of  which 
the  accounts  are  so  hard  to  reconcile  as  those  of 
the  healing  of  the  blind  at  Jericho. 

It  is  a  small  thing  that  St.  Matthew  mentions 
two  blind  men,  while  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke 
are  only  aware  of  one.  The  same  is  true  of 
the  demoniacs  at  Gadara,  and  it  is  easily  under- 


886 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


stood  that  only  an  eyewitness  should  remember 
the  obscure  comrade  of  a  remarkable  and  ener- 
getic man,  who  would  have  spread  far  and  wide 
the  particulars  of  his  own  cure.  The  fierce  and 
dangerous  demoniac  of  Gadara  was  just  such 
a  man,  and  there  is  ample  evidence  of  energy 
and  vehemence  in  the  brief  account  of  Barti- 
maeus.  What  is  really  perplexing  is  that  St. 
Luke  places  the  miracle  at  the  entrance  to  Jeri- 
cho, but  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  as  Jesus 
came  out  of  it.  It  is  too  forced  and  violent 
a  theory  which  speaks  of  an  old  and  a  new  town, 
so  close  together  that  one  was  entered  and  the 
other  left  at  the  same  time. 

It  is  possible  that  there  were  two  events,  and 
the  success  of  one  sufferer  at  the  entrance  to 
the  town  led  others  to  use  the  same  importu- 
nities at  the  exit.  And  this  would  not  be  much 
more  remarkable  than  the  two  miracles  of  the 
loaves,  or  the  two  miraculous  draughts  of  fish. 
It  is  also  possible,  though  unlikely,  that  the 
same  supplicant  who  began  his  appeals  without 
success  when  Jesus  entered,  resumed  his  en- 
treaties, with  a  comrade,  at  the  gate  by  which 
He  left. 

Such  difficulties  exist  in  all  the  best  authen- 
ticated histories:  discrepancies  of  the  kind  arise 
continually  between  the  evidence  of  the  most 
trustworthy  witnesses  in  courts  of  justice.  And 
the  student  who  is  humble  as  well  as  devout 
will  not  shut  his  eyes  against  facts,  merely  be- 
cause they  are  perplexing,  but  will  remember 
that  they  do  nothing  to  shake  the  solid  narra- 
tive itself. 

As  we  read  St.  Mark's  account,  we  are  struck 
by  the  vividness  of  the  whole  picture,  and  es- 
pecially by  the  robust  personality  of  the  blind 
man.  The  scene  is  neither  Jerusalem,  the  city 
of  the  Pharisees,  nor  Galilee,  where  they  have 
persistently  sapped  the  popularity  of  Jesus. 
Eastward  of  the  Jordan,  He  has  spent  the  last 
peaceful  and  successful  weeks  of  His  brief  and 
stormy  career,  and  Jericho  lies  upon  the  bor- 
ders of  that  friendly  district.  Accordingly 
something  is  here  of  the  old  enthusiasm:  a  great 
multitude  moves  along  with  His  disciples  to  the 
gates,  and  the  rushing  concourse  excites  the 
curiosity  of  the  blind  son  of  Timaeus.  So  does 
many  a  religious  movement  lead  to  inquiry  and 
explanation  far  and  wide.  But  when  he,  sitting 
by  the  way,  and  unable  to  follow,  knows  that 
the  great  Healer  is  at  hand,  1  nt  only  in  passing, 
and  for  a  moment,  his  interest  suddenly  becomes 
personal  and  ardent,  and  "  he  began  to  cry  out  " 
(the  expression  implies  that  his  supplication,  be- 
ginning as  the  crowd  drew  near,  was  not  one 
utterance  but  a  prolonged  appeal),  "  and  to  say, 
Jesus,  Thou  Son  of  David,  have  mercy  on  me." 
To  the  crowd  his  outcry  seemed  to  be  only 
an  intrusion  upon  One  Who  was  too  rapt,  too 
heavenly,  to  be  disturbed  by  the  sorrows  of  a 
blind  beggar.  But  that  was  not  the  view  of 
Bartimseus,  whose  personal  affliction  gave  him 
the  keenest  interest  in  those  verses  of  the  Old 
Testament  which  spoke  of  opening  the  blind 
•eyes.  If  he  did  not  understand  their  exact  force 
as  prophecies,  at  least  they  satisfied  him  that 
his  petition  could  not  be  an  insult  to  the  great 
Prophet  of  Whom  just  such  actions  were  told, 
for  Whose  visit  he  had  often  sighed,  and  Who 
was  now  fast  going  by,  perhaps  for  ever.  The 
j>icture  is  one  of  great  eagerness,  bearing  up 
against  great  discouragement.  We  catch  the 
;spirit  of  the  man  as  he  inquires  what  the  mul- 


titude means,  as  the  epithet  of  his  informants, 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  changes  on  his  lips  into  Jesus. 
Thou  Son  of  David,  as  he  persists,  without  any 
vision  of  Christ  to  encourage  him,  and  amid 
the  rebukes  of  many,  in  crying  out  the  more 
a  great  deal,  although  pain  is  deepening  every 
moment  in  his  accents,  and  he  will  presently 
need  cheering.  The  ear  of  Jesus  is  quick  for 
such  a  call,  and  He  stops.  He  does  not  raise 
His  own  voice  to  summon  him,  but  teaches  a 
lesson  of  humanity  to  those  who  would  fain 
have  silenced  the  appeal  of  anguish,  and  says, 
Call  ye  him.  And  they  obey  with  a  courtier- 
like change  of  tone,  saying,  Be  of  good  cheer, 
rise,  He  calleth  thee.  And  Bartimaeus  cannot 
endure  even  the  slight  hindrance  of  his  loose  gar- 
ent,  but  flings  it  aside,  and  rises  and  comes  to 
Jesus,  a  pattern  of  the  importunity  which  prays 
and  never  faints,  which  perseveres  amid  all  dis- 
couragement, which  adverse  public  opinion  can- 
not hinder.  And  the  Lord  asks  of  him  almost 
exactly  the  same  question  as  recently  of  James 
and  John,  What  wilt  thou  that  I  should  do 
for  thee?  But  in  his  reply  there  is  no  aspiring 
pride:  misery  knows  how  precious  are  the  com- 
mon gifts,  the  every-day  blessings  which  we 
hardly  pause  to  think  about;  and  he  replies, 
Rabboni,  that  I  may  receive  my  sight.  It  is 
a  glad  and  eager  answer.  Many  a  petition  he 
had  urged  in  vain;  and  many  a  small  favour 
had  been  discourteously  bestowed;  but  Jesus, 
Whose  tenderness  loves  to  commend  while  He 
blesses,  shares  with  him,  so  to  speak,  the  glory 
of  his  healing,  as  He  answers,  Go  thy  way,  thy 
faith  hath  made  thee  whole.  By  thus  fixing 
his  attention  upon  his  own  part  in  the  miracle, 
so  utterly  worthless  as  a  contribution,  but  so 
indispensable  as  a  condition,  Jesus  taught  him 
to  exercise  hereafter  the  same  gift  of  faith. 

"  Go  thy  way,"  He  said.  And  Bartimaeus 
"  followed  Him  on  the  road."  Happy  is  that 
man  whose  eyes  are  open  to  discern,  and  his 
heart  prompt  to  follow,  the  print  of  those  holy 
feet. 

CHAPTER  XI. 

THE   TRIUMPHANT  ENTRY. 

Mark  xi.  i-ii  (R.  V.). 

Jesus  had  now  come  near  to  Jerusalem,  into 
what  was  possibly  the  sacred  district  of  Beth- 
phage,  of  which,  in  that  case,  Bethany  was  the 
border  village.  Not  without  pausing  here  (as 
we  learn  from  the  fourth  Gospel),  yet  as  the 
next  step  forward.  He  sent  two  of  His  disciples 
to  untie  and  bring  back  an  ass,  which  was  fast- 
ened with  her  colt  at  a  spot  which  He  minutely 
described.  Unless  th^y  were  challenged  they 
should  simply  bring  the  animals  away;  but  if 
any  one  remonstrated,  they  should  answer, 
"  The  Lord  hath  need  of  them,"  and  thereupon 
the  owner  would  not  only  acquiesce,  but  send 
them.  In  fact  they  are  to  make  a  requisition, 
such  as  the  State  often  institutes  for  horses  and 
cattle  during  a  campaign,  when  private  rights 
must  give  way  to  a  national  exigency.  And  this 
masterful  demand,  this  abrupt  and  decisive  re- 
joinder to  a  natural  objection,  not  arguing  nor 
requesting,  but  demanding,  this  title  which  they 
are  bidden  to  give  to  Jesus,  by  which,  standing 
thus  alone.  He  is  rarely  described  in  Scripture 
(chiefly  in  the  later  Epistles,  when  the  remera- 


Mark  xi.  12-14,  20-25.] 


THE    BARREN    FIG-TREE. 


brance  of  His  earthly  style  gave  place  to  the 
influence  of  habitual  adoration),  all  this  prelim- 
inary arrangement  makes  us  conscious  of  a 
change  of  tone,  of  royalty  issuing  its  mandates, 
and  claiming  its  rights.  But  what  a  claim,  what 
a  requisition,  when  He  takes  the  title  of  Jeho- 
vah, and  yet  announces  His  need  of  the  colt 
of  an  ass.  It  is  indeed  the  lowliest  of  all  mem- 
orable processions  which  He  plans,  and  yet,  in 
its  very  humility,  it  appeals  to  ancient  prophecy, 
and  says  unto  Zion  that  her  king  cometh  unto 
her.  The  monarchs  of  the  East  and  the  cap- 
tains of  the  West  might  ride  upon  horses  as 
for  war,  but  the  King  of  Sion  should  come  unto 
her  meek,  and  sitting  upon  an  ass,  upon  a  colt, 
the  foal  of  an  ass.  Yet  there  are  fitness  and  dig- 
nity in  the  use  of  "  a  colt  whereon  man  never 
sat,"  and  it  reminds  us  of  other  facts,  such  as 
that  He  was  the  firstborn  of  a  virgin  mother, 
and  rested  in  a  tomb  which  corruption  had  never 
soiled. 

^"^^^^Tllus  He  comes  forth,  the  gentlest  of  the 
mighty,  with  no  swords  gleaming  around  to 
guard  Him,  or  to  smite  the  foreigner  who  tram- 
ples Israel,  or  the  worse  foes  of  her  own  house- 
hold. Men  who  will  follow  such  a  King  must 
lay  aside  their  vain  and  earthly  ambitions,  and 
awake  to  the  truth  that  spiritual  powers  are 
grander  than  any  which  violence  ever  grasped. 
But  men  who  will  not  follow  Him  shall  some 
day  learn  the  same  lesson,  perhaps  in  the  crash 
of  their  reeling  commonwealth,  perhaps  not  until 
the  armies  of  heaven  follow  Him,  as  He  goes 
forth,  riding  now  upon  a  white  horse,  crowned 
with  many  diadems,   smiting  the  nations  with  a 

_sharp  sword,  and  ruling  them  with  an  iron  rod. 
Lowly  though  His  procession  was,  yet  it  was 
palpably  a  royal  one.  When  Jehu  was  pro- 
claimed king  at  Ramoth-Gilead,  the  captains 
hastened  to  make  him  sit  upon  the  garments 
of  every  one  of  them,  expressing  by  this  national 
symbol  their  subjection.  Somewhat  the  same 
feeling  is  in  the  famous  anecdote  of  Sir  Walter 
Raleigh  and  Queen  Elizabeth.  And  thus  the 
disciples  who  brought  the  ass  cast  on  him  their 
garments,  and  Jesus  sat  thereon,  and  many 
spread  their  garments  in  the  way.  Others 
strewed  the  road  with  branches;  and  as  they 
Hfent  they  cried  aloud  certain  verses  of  that 
great  song  of  triumph,  which  told  how  the  na- 
f'ons,  swarming  like  bees,  were  quenched  like 
the  light  fire  of  thorns,  how  the  right  hand  of 
the  Lord  did  valiantly,  how  the  gates  of  right- 
eousness should  be  thrown  open  for  the  right- 
eous, and,  more  significant  still,  how  the  stone 
which  the  builders  rejected  should  became  the 
head-stone  of  the  corner.  Often  had  Jesus 
quoted  this  saying  \vhen  reproached  by  the  un- 
belief of  the  rulers,  and  now  the  people  rejoiced 
and  were  glad  in  it,  as  they  sang  of  His  sal- 
vation, saying,  "  Hosanna,  blessed  is  He  that 
cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  Blessed  is 
the  kingdom  that  cometh,  the  Kingdom  of  our 
father  David,   Hosanna  in  the  highest." 

Such  is  the  narrative  as  it  impressed  St.  Mark. 
For  his  purpose  it  mattered  nothing  that  Jeru- 
salem took  no  part  in  the  rejoicings,  but  was 
perplexed,  and  said.  Who  is  this?  or  that,  when 
confronted  by  this  somewhat  scornful  and  af- 
fected ignorance  of  the  capital,  the  voice  of 
Galilee  grew  weak,  and  proclaimed  no  longer 
the  advent  of  the  kingdom  of  David,  but  only 
Jesus,  the  prophet  of  Nazareth;  or  that  the 
Pharisees    in    the    temple    avowed    their    disap- 


proval, while  contemptuously  ignoring  the  Gal- 
ilean multitude,  by  inviting  Him  to  reprove  some 
children.  What  concerned  St.  Mark  was  that 
now,  at  last,  Jesus  openly  and  practically  as- 
sumed rank  as  a  monarch,  allowed  men  to  pro- 
claim the  advent  of  His  kingdom,  and  proceeded 
to  exercise  its  rights  by  calling  for  the  surren- 
der of  property,  and  by  cleansing  the  temple 
with  a  scourge.  The  same  avowal  of  kingship 
is  almost  all  that  he  has  cared  to  record  of  the 
remarkable  scene  before  His  Roman  judge. 

After  this  heroic  fashion  did  Jesus  present 
Himself  to  die.  Without  a  misleading  hope, 
conscious  of  the  hollowness  of  His  seeming  pop- 
ularity, weeping  for  the  impending  ruin  of  the 
glorious  city  whose  walls  were  ringing  with  His 
praise,  and  predicting  the  murderous  triumph  of 
the  crafty  faction  which  appears  so  helpless,  He 
not  only  refuses  to  recede  or  compromise,  but 
does  not  hesitate  to  advance  His  claims  in  a 
manner  entirely  new,  and  to  defy  the  utmost 
animosity  of  those  who  still  rejected  Him. 

After  such  a  scene  there  could  be  no  middle 
course  between  crushing  Him,  and  bowing  to 
Him.  He  was  no  longer  a  Teacher  of  doctrines, 
however  revolutionary,  but  an  aspirant  to,  prac- 
tical authority.  Who  must  be  dealt  with  prac- 
tically. 

There  was  evidence  also  of  His  intention  to 
proceed  upon  this  new  line,  when  He  entered 
into  the  temple,  investigated  its  glaring  abuses, 
and  only  left  it  for  the  moment  because  it  was 
now  eventide.  To-morrow  would  show  more  of 
His   designs. 

Jesus  is  still,  and  in  this  world,  King.  And 
it  will  hereafter  avail  us  nothing  to  have  re- 
ceived His  doctrine,  unless  we  have  taken  His 
yoke. 


THE  BARREN  FIG-TREE. 

Mark  xi.  12-14,  20-25  (R.  V.). 

No  sooner  has  Jesus  claimed  His  kingdom, 
than  He  performs  His  first  and  only  miracle 
of  judgment.  And  it  is  certain  that  no  mortal, 
informed  that  such  a  miracle  was  impending, 
could  have  guessed  where  the  blow  would  fall. 
In  this  miracle  an  element  is  predominant  which 
exists  in  all,  since  it  is  wrought  as  an  acted 
dramatised  parable,  not  for  any  physical  advan- 
tage, but  wholly  for  the  instruction  which  it  con- 
veys. Jesus  hungered  at  the  very  outset  of  a 
day  of  toil,  as  He  came  out  from  Bethany.  And 
this  was  not  due  to  poverty,  since  the  disciples 
there  had  recently  made  Him  a  great  feast,  but 
to  His  own  absorbing  ardour.  The  zeal  of  God's 
house,  which  He  had  seen  polluted  and  was 
about  to  cleanse,  had  either  left  Him  indiffer- 
ent to  food  until  the  keen  air  of  morning  aroused 
the  sense  of  need,  or  else  it  had  detained  Him, 
all  night  long,  in  prayer  and  meditation  out  of 
doors.  As  He  walks.  He  sees  afar  off  a  lonely 
fig-tree  covered  with  leaves,  and  comes  if  haply 
He  might  find  anything  thereon.  It  is  true  that 
figs  would  not  be  in  season  for  two  months, 
but  yet  they  ought  to  present  themselves  be- 
fore the  leaves  did;  and  s^nce  the  tree  was  pre- 
cocious in  the  show  and  profusion  of  luxuriance, 
it  ought  to  bear  early  figs.  If  it  failed,  it  would 
at  least  point  a  powerful  moral;  and,  therefore, 
when  only  leaves  appeared  upon  it,  Jesus  cursed 
it  with  perpetual  barrenness,  and  passed  on.    Not 


888 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


in  the  dusk  of  that  evening  as  they  returned, 
but  when  they  passed  by  again  in  the  morning 
the  blight  was  manifest,  the  tree  was  withered 
from  its  very  roots. 

It  is  complained  that  by  this  act  Jesus  de- 
prived some  one  of  his  property.  But  the  same 
retributive  justice  of  which  this  was  an  expres- 
sion was  preparing  to  blight,  presently,  all  the 
possessions  of  all  the  nation.  Was  this  unjust? 
And  of  the  numberless  trees  that  are  blasted 
year  by  year,  why  should  the  loss  of  this  one 
only  be  resented?  Every  physical  injury  must 
be  intended  to  further  some  spiritual  end;  but 
it  is  not  often  that  the  purpose  is  so  clear,  and 
the  lesson  so  distinctly  learned. 

Others  blame  our  Lord's  word  of  sentence,  be- 
cause a  tree,  not  being  a  moral  agent,  ought 
not  to  be  punished.  It  is  an  obvious  rejoinder 
that  neither  could  it  suffer  pain;  that  the  whole 
action  is  symbolic;  and  that  we  ourselves  jus- 
tify the  Saviour's  method  of  expression  as  often 
as  we  call  one  tree  "  good  "  and  another  "  bad," 
and  say  that  a  third  "  ought "  to  bear  fruit, 
while  not  much  could  be  "  expected  of "  a 
fourth.  It  should  rather  be  observed  that  in 
this  word  of  sentence  Jesus  revealed  His  ten- 
derness. It  would  have  been  a  false  and  cruel 
kindness  never  to  work  any  miracle  except  of 
compassion,  and  thus  to  suggest  the  inference 
that  He  could  never  strike,  whereas  indeed,  be- 
fore that  generation  passed  away,  He  would 
break  His  enemies  in  pieces  like  a  potter's 
'vessel. 

Yet  He  came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives  but 
to  save  them.  And.  therefore,  while  showing 
Himself  neither  indifferent  nor  powerless  against 
barren  and  false  pretensions,  He  did  this  only 
once,  and  then  only  by  a  sign  wrought  upon  an 
unsentient  tree. 

Retribution  fell  upon  it  not  for  its  lack  of 
fruit,  since  at  that  season  it  shared  this  with 
all  its  tribe,  but  for  ostentatious,  much-profess- 
ing fruitlessness.  And  thus  it  pointed  with  dread 
significance  to  the  condition  of  God's  own  peo- 
ple, differing  from  Greece  and  Rome  and  Syria, 
not  in  the  want  of  fruit,  but  in  the  show  of  lux- 
uriant frondage,  in  the  expectation  it  excited  and 
mocked.  When  the  season  of  the  world's  fruit- 
fulness  was  yet  remote,  only  Israel  put  forth 
leaves,  and  made  professions  which  were  not  ful- 
filled. And  the  permanent  warning  of  the  mir- 
acle is  not  for  heathen  men  and  races,  but  for 
Christians  who  have  a  name  to  live,  and  who  are 
called  to  bear  fruit  unto  God. 

While  the  disciples  marvelled  at  the  sudden  ful- 
filment of  its  sentence,  they  could  not  have  for- 
gotten the  parable  of  a  fig-tree  in  the  vineyard, 
on  which  care  and  labour  were  lavished,  but 
which  must  be  destroyed  after  one  year  of  res- 
pite if  it  continued  to  be  a  cumberer  of  the 
ground. 

And  Jesus  drove  the  lesson  home.  He  pointed 
to  "  this  mountain  "  full  in  front,  with  the  gold 
and  marble  of  the  temple  sparkling  like  a  dia- 
dem upon  its  brow,  and  declared  that  faith  is 
not  only  able  to  smite  barrenness  with  death, 
but  to  remove  into  the  midst  of  the  sea,  to  plant 
among  the  wild  and  storm-swept  races  of  the 
immeasurable  pagan  world,  the  glory  and  privi- 
lege of  the  realised  presence  of  the  Lord.  To 
do  this  was  the  purpose  of  God,  hinted  by  many 
a  prophet,  and  clearly  announced  by  Christ  Him- 
self. But  its  accomplishment  was  left  to  His 
followers,  who  should  succeed  in  exact  propor- 


tion to  the  union  of  their  will  and  that  of  God, 
so  that  the  condition  of  that  moral  miracle, 
transcending  all  others  in  marvel  and  in  efficacy, 
was   simple   faith. 

And  the  same  rule  covers  all  the  exigencies 
of  life.  One  who  truly  relies  on  God,  whose 
mind  and  will  are  attuned  to  those  of  the  Eter- 
nal, cannot  be  selfish,  or  vindictive,  or  pre- 
sumptuous. As  far  as  we  rise  to  the  grandeur 
of  this  condition  we  enter  into  the  Omnipotence 
of  God,  and  no  limit  need  be  imposed  upon 
the  prevalence  of  really  and  utterly  believing 
prayer.  The  wishes  that  ought  to  be  refused 
will  vanish  as  we  attain  that  eminence,  like  the 
hoar  frost  of  morning  as  the  sun  grows  strong. 

To  this  promise  Jesus  added  a  precept,  the 
admirable  suitability  of  which  is  not  at  first  ap- 
parent. Most  sins  are  made  evident  to  the  con- 
science in  the  act  of  prayer.  Drawing  nigh  to 
God,  we  feel  our  unfitness  to  be  there,  we  are 
made  conscious  of  what  He  frowns  upon,  and 
if  we  have  such  faith  as  Jesus  spoke  of,  we 
at  once  resign  what  would  grieve  the  Spirit  of 
adoption.  No  saint  is  ignorant  of  the  convict- 
ing power  of  prayer.  But  it  is  not  of  neces- 
sity so  with  resentment  for  real  grievances.  We 
may  think  we  do  well  to  be  angry.  We  may 
confound  our  selfish  fire  with  the  pure  flame  of 
holy  zeal,  and  begin,  with  confidence  enough, 
yet  not  with  the  mind  of  Christ,  to  remove' 
mountains,  not  because  they  impede  a  holy  cause, 
but  because  they  throw  a  shadow  upon  our  own 
field.  And,  therefore,  Jesus  reminds  us  that  not 
only  wonder-working  faith,  but  even  the  for- 
giveness of  our  sins  requires  from  us  the  for- 
giveness of  our  brother.  This  saying  is  the 
clearest  proof  of  how  much  is  implied  in  a  truly 
undoubting  heart.  And  this  promise  is  the 
sternest  rebuke  of  the  Church,  endowed  with 
such  ample  powers,  and  yet  after  nineteen  cen- 
turies confronted  by  an  unconverted  world. 

THE  SECOND  CLEANSING  OF  THE 
TEMPLE. 

Mark  xi.  15-19  (R.  V.). 

With  the  authority  of  yesterday's  triumph  still 
about  Him,  Jesus  returned  to  the  temple,  which 
He  had  then  inspected.  There  at  least  the  priest- 
hood were  not  thwarted  by  popular  indifference 
or  ignorance:  they  had  power  to  carry  out  fully 
their  own  views;  they  were  solely  responsible 
for  whatever  abuses  could  be  discovered.  In 
fact  the  iniquities  which  moved  the  indignation 
of  Jesus  were  of  their  own  contrivance,  and  they 
enriched  themselves  by  a  vile  trade  which  robbed 
the  worshippers  and  profaned  the  holy  house. 

Pilgrims  from  a  distance  needed  the  sacred 
money,  the  half-shekel  of  the  sanctuary,  still 
coined  for  this  one  purpose  to  offer  for  a  ran- 
som of  their  souls  (Exod.  xxx.  ^3).  And  the 
priests  had  sanctioned  a  trade  in  the  exchange 
of  money  under  the  temple  roof,  so  fraudulent 
that  the  dealers'  evidence  was  refused  in  the 
courts  of  justice. 

Doves  were  necessary  for  the  purification  of 
the  poor,  who  could  not  afford  more  costly  sac- 
rifices, and  sheep  and  oxen  were  also  in  great 
demand.  And  since  the  unblemished  quality  of 
the  sacrifices  should  be  attested  by  the  priests, 
they  had  been  able  to  put  a  fictitious  value  upon 
these  animals,  by  which  the  family  of  Annas  in 
particular  had  accumulated  enormous  wealth. 


Mark  xi.  27-33]      THE    BAPTISM    OF    JOHN,    WHENCE    WAS    IT  ? 


88c 


To  facilitate  this  trade,  they  had  dared  to 
bring  the  defilement  of  the  cattle  market  within 
the  precincts  of  the  House  of  God.  Not  indeed 
into  the  place  where  the  Pharisee  stood  in  his 
pride  and  "  prayed  with  himself,"  for  that  was 
holy;  but  the  court  of  the  Gentiles  was  pro- 
fane; the  din  which  distracted  and  the  foulness 
which  revolted  Gentile  worship  were  of  no  ac- 
count to  the  average  Jew.  But  Jesus  regarded 
the  scene  with  different  eyes.  How  could  the 
sanctity  of  that  holy  place  not  extend  to  the 
court  of  the  stranger  and  the  proselyte,  when 
it  was  written.  Thy  house  shall  be  called  a  house 
of  prayer  for  all  the  nations?  Therefore  Jesus 
had  already,  at  the  outset  of  His  ministry, 
cleansed  His  Father's  house.  Now,  in  the  ful- 
ness of  His  newly  asserted  royalty.  He  calls  it 
My  House:  He  denounces  the  iniquity  of  their 
trafific  by  branding  it  as  a  den  of  robbers;  He 
casts  out  the  traders  themselves,  as  well  as  the 
implements  of  their  trafific:  and  in  so  doing  He 
fanned  to  a  mortal  heat  the  hatred  of  the  chief 
priests  and  the  scribes,  who  saw  at  once  their 
revenues  threatened  and  their  reputation  tar- 
nished, and  yet  dared  not  strike,  because  all  the 
multitude  was  astonished  at  His  teaching. 

But  the  wisdom  of  Jesus  did  not  leave  Him 
within  their  reach  at  night;  every  evening  He 
went  forth  out  of  the  city. 

From  this  narrative  we  learn  the  blinding 
force  of  self-interest,  for  doubtless  they  were  no 
more  sensible  of  their  iniquity  than  many  a  mod- 
ern slavedealer.  And  we  must  never  rest  con- 
tent because  our  own  conscience  acquits  us,  un- 
less we  have  by  thought  and  prayer  supplied  it 
with  light  and  guiding. 

We  learn  reverence  for  sacred  places,  since 
the  one  exercise  of  His  royal  authority  which 
Jesus  publicly  displayed  was  to  cleanse  the 
temple,  even  though  upon  the  morow  He  would 
relinquish  it  for  ever,  to  be  "  your  house  " — and 
desolate. 

We  learn  also  how  much  apparent  sanctity, 
what  dignity  of  worship,  splendour  of  oflferings, 
and  pomp  of  architecture  may  go  along  with 
corruption   and   unreality. 

And  yet  again,  by  their  overawed  and  abject 
helplessness  we  learn  the  might  of  holy  indig- 
nation, and  the  awakening  power  of  a  bold 
appeal  to  conscience.  "  The  people  hung  upon 
Him,  listening,"  and  if  all  seemed  vain  and 
wasted  effort  on  the  following  Friday,  what  fruit 
of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  did  not  His  followers 
gather  in,  as  soon  as  He  poured  down  on  them 
the  gifts  of  Pentecost. 

Did  they  now  recall  their  own  reflections  after 
the  earlier  cleansing  of  the  temple?  and  their 
Master's  ominous  words?  Thev  had  then  re- 
membered how  it  was  written.  The  zeal  of  thine 
house  shall  eat  Me  up.  And  He  had  said,  De- 
stroy this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  shall  raise 
it  up,  speaking  of  the  Temple  of  His  body,  which 
was  now  about  to  be  thrown  down. 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  JOHN,  WHENCE  WAS 
IT? 

Mark  xi.  27-33  (R-  V.). 

The  question  put  to  Jesus  by  the  hierarchy 
of  Jerusalem  is  recorded  in  all  the  synoptic  Gos- 
pels. But  in  some  respects  the  story  is  most 
pointed  in  the  narrative  of  St.    Mark.     And  it 


is  natural  that  he,  the  historian  especially  of  t'ne 
energies  of  Christ,  should  lay  stress  upon  a  chal- 
lenge addressed  to  Him,  by  reason  of  His  mas- 
terful words  and  deeds.  At  the  outset,  he  hid 
recorded  the  astonishment  of  the  people  because 
Jesus  taught  with  authority,  because  "  Verily  I 
say  "  replaced  the  childish  and  servile  methods 
by  which  the  scribe  and  the  Pharisee  sustained 
their  most  wilful  innovations. 

When  first  he  relates  a  miracle,  he  tells  how 
their  wonder  increased,  because  with  authority 
Jesus  commanded  the  unclean  spirits  and  they 
obeyed,  respecting  His  self-reliant  word  "  I 
command  thee  to  come  out,"  more  than  the 
most  elaborate  incantations  and  exorcisms.  St. 
Mark's  first  record  of  collision  with  the  priests 
was  when  Jesus  carried  His  claim  still  farther, 
and  said  "  The  Son  of  man  hath  authority " 
(it  is  the  same  word)  "  on  earth  to  forgive  sins." 
Thus  we  find  the  Gospel  quite  conscious  of  what 
so  forcibly  strikes  a  careful  modern  reader,  the 
assured  and  independent  tone  of  Jesus;  His 
bearing,  so  unlike  that  of  a  disciple  or  a  com- 
mentator; His  consciousness  that  the  Scriptures 
themselves  are  they  which  testify  of  Him,  and 
that  only  He  can  give  the  life  which  men  think 
they  possess  in  these.  In  the  very  teaching  of 
lowliness  Jesus  exempts  Himself,  and  forbids 
others  to  be  Master  and  Lord,  because  these 
titles  belong  to  Him. 

Impressive  as  such  claims  appear  when  we 
awake  to  them,  it  is  even  more  suggestive  to 
reflect  that  we  can  easily  read  the  Gospels  and 
not  be  struck  by  them.  We  do  not  start  when 
He  bids  all  the  weary  come  to  Him,  and  offers 
them  rest,  and  yet  declares  Himself  to  be  meek 
and  lowly.  He  is  meek  and  lowly  while  He 
makes  I  such  claims.  His  bearing  is  that  of  the 
highest  rank,  joined  with  the  most  perfect  gra- 
ciousness;  His  great  claims  never  irritate  us,  be- 
cause they  are  palpably  His  due,  and  we  readily 
concede  the  astonishing  elevation  whence  He 
so  graciously  bends  down  so  low.  And  this  is 
one  evidence  t)f  the  truth  and  power  of  the  char- 
acter which   the   Apostles   drew. 

How  natural  is  this  also,  that  immediately  after 
Palm  Sunday,  when  the  people  have  hailed  their 
Messiah,  royal  and  a  Saviour,  and  when  He  has 
accepted  their  homage,  we  find  new  indications 
of  authority  in  His  bearing  and  His  actions.  He 
promptly  took  them  at  their  word.  It  was  now 
that  He  wrought  His  only  miracle  of  judgment, 
and  although  it  was  but  the  withering  of  a  tree 
(since  He  came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives  but 
to  save  them),  yet  was  there  a  dread  symbolical 
sentence  involved  upon  all  ^  arren  and  unfruit- 
ful men  and  Churches.  In  the  very  act  of  tri- 
umphal entry.  He  solemnly  pronounced  judg- 
ment upon  the  guilty  city  which  would  not  ac- 
cept her  King. 

Arrived  at  the  temole.  He  surveyed  its  abuses 
and  defilements,  and  returned  on  the  morrow 
(and  so  not  spurred  by  sudden  impulse,  but  of 
deliberate  purpose),  to  drive  out  them  that  sold 
and  bought.  Two  years  ago  He  had  needed 
to  scourge  the  intruders  forth,  but  now  they  are 
overawed  by  His  majesty,  and  obey  His  word. 
Then,  too,  they  were  rebuked  for  making  His 
Father's  house  a  house  of  merchandise,  but  now 
it  is  His  own — "  My  House  " — but  degraded  yet 
farther  into  a  den  of  thieves. 

But  while  traffic  and  pollution  shrank  away, 
misery  and  privation  were  attracted  to  Him; 
the  blind  and  the  lame   came  and  were  healed 


890 


THE  tJOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


in  the  very  temple;  and  the  centre  and  rallying- 
place  of  the  priests  and  scribes  beheld  His  power 
to  save.  This  drove  them  to  extremities.  He 
was  carrying  the  war  into  the  heart  of  their 
territories,  establishing  Himself  in  their  strong- 
hold, and  making  it  very  plain  that  since  the 
people  had  hailed  Him  King,  and  He  had  re- 
sponded to  their  acclaims.  He  would  not  shrink 
from  whatever  His  views  of  that  great  office 
might  involve. 

While  they  watched,  full  of  bitterness  and 
envy,  they  were  again  impressed,  as  at  the  be- 
ginning, by  the  strange,  autocratic,  spontaneous 
manner  in  which  He  worked,  making  Himself 
the  source  of  His  blessings,  as  no  prophet  had 
ever  done  since  Moses  expiated  so  dearly  the 
offence  of  saying.  Must  we  fetch  you  water  out 
of  the  rock?  Jesus  acted  after  the  fashion 
of  Him  Who  openeth  His  hands  and  satisfieth 
the  desire  of  every  living  thing.  Why  did  He 
not  give  the  glory  to  One  above?  Why  did 
He  not  supplicate,  nor  invoke,  but  simply  be- 
stow? Where  were  the  accustomed  words  of 
supplication,  "  Hear  me,  O  Lord  God,  hear  me," 
or,  "  Where  is  the  Lord  God  of  Israel?  " 

Here  they  discerned  a  flaw,  a  heresy;  and  they 
would  force  Him  either  to  make  a  fatal  claim, 
or  else  to  moderate  His  pretensions  at  their 
bidding,  which  would  promptly  restore  their  lost 
influence  and  leadership. 

Nor  need  we  shrink  from  confessing  that  our 
Lord  was  justly  open  to  such  reproach,  unless 
He  was  indeed  Divine,  unless  He  was  deliber- 
ately preparing  His  followers  for  that  astonish- 
ing revelation,  soon  to  come,  which  threw  the 
Church  upon  her  knees  in  adoration  of  her  God 
manifest  in  flesh.  It  is  hard  to  understand  how 
the  Socinian  can  defend  his  Master  against  the 
charge  of  encroaching  on  the  rights  and  honours 
of  Deity,  and  (to  borrow  a  phrase  from  a  dif- 
ferent connection)  sitting  down  at  the  right  hand 
of  the  Majesty  of  God,  whereas  every  priest 
standeth  ministering.  If  He  were  a  creature, 
He  culpably  failed  to  tell  us  the  conditions  upon 
which  He  received  a  delegated  authority,  and 
the  omission  has  made  His  Church  ever  since 
idolatrous.  It  is  one  great  and  remarkable  les- 
son suggested  by  this  verse:  if  Jesus  were  not 
Divine,  what  was  He? 

Thus  it  came  to  pass,  in  direct  consequence 
upon  the  events  which  opened  the  great  week 
of  the  triumph  and  the  cross  of  Jesus,  that  the 
whole  rank  and  authority  of  the  temple  system 
confronted  Him  with  a  stern  question.  They 
sat  in  Moses'  seat.  They  were  entitled  to  ex- 
amine the  pretensions  of  a  new  and  aspiring 
teacher.  They  had  a  perfect  right  to  demand 
"  Tell  us  by  what  authority  thou  doest  these 
things."  The  works  are  not  denied,  but  the 
source  whence  they  flow  is  questioned. 

After  so  many  centuries,  the  question  is  fresh 
to-day.  For  still  the  spirit  of  Christ  is  work- 
ing in  His  world,  openly,  palpably,  spreading 
blessings  far  and  wide.  It  is  exalting  multitudes 
of  ignoble  lives  by  hopes  that  are  profound, 
far-reaching,  and  sublime.  When  savage  realms 
are  explored,  it  is  Christ  Who  hastens  thither 
with  His  gospel,  before  the  trader  in  rum  and 
gunpowder  can  exhibit  the  charms  of  a  civili- 
sation without  a  creed.  In  the  gloomiest  haunts 
of  disease  and  misery,  madness,  idiotcy,  orphan- 
age, and  vice,  there  is  Christ  at  work,  the  good 
Samaritan,  pouring  oil  and  wine  into  the  gap- 
in«j  wounds  of  human  nature,  acting  quite  upon 


His  own  authority,  careless  who  looks  askance, 
not  asking  political  economy  whether  genuine 
charity  is  pauperisation,  nor  questioning  the  doc- 
trine of  development,  whether  the  progress  of 
the  race  demands  the  pitiless  rejection  of  the 
unfit,  and  selection  only  of  the  strongest  speci- 
mens for  survival.  That  iron  creed  may  be  nat- 
ural; but  if  so,  ours  is  supernatural,  it  is  a 
law  of  spirit  and  life,  setting  us  free  from  that 
base  and  selfish  law  of  sin  and  death.  The  ex- 
istence and  energy  of  Christian  forces  in  our 
modern  world  is  indisputable:  never  was  Jesus 
a  more  popular  and  formidable  claimant  of  its 
crown;  never  did  more  Hosannas  follow  Him 
into  the  temple.  But  now  as  formerly  His  cre- 
dentials are  demanded:  what  is  His  authority 
and  how  has  He  come  by  it? 

Now  we  say  of  modern  as  of  ancient  inqui- 
ries, that  they  are  right;  investigation  is  inevi- 
table and  a  duty. 

But  see  how  Jesus  dealt  with  those  men  of 
old.  Let  us  not  misunderstand  Him.  He  did 
not  merely  set  one  difficulty  against  another, 
as  if  we  should  start  some  scientific  problem, 
and  absolve  ourselves  from  the  duty  of  answer- 
ing any  inquiry  until  science  had  disposed  of 
this.  Doubtless  it  is  logical  enough  to  point  out 
that  all  creeds,  scientific  and  religious  alike, 
have  their  unsolved  problems.  But  the  reply  of 
Jesus  was  not  a  dexterous  evasion,  it  went  to 
the  root  of  things,  and,  therefore,  it  stands  good 
for  time  and  for  eternity.  He  refused  to  sur- 
render the  advantage  of  a  witness  to  whom  He 
was  entitled:  He  demanded  that  all  the  facts  and 
not  some  alone  should  be  investigated.  In  truth 
their  position  bound  His  interrogators  to  exam- 
ine His  credentials;  to  do  so  was  not  only  their 
privilege  but  their  duty.  But  then  they  must 
begin  at  the  beginning.  Had  they  performed 
this  duty  for  the  Baptist?  Who  or  what  was 
that  mysterious,  lonely,  stern  preacher  of  right- 
eousness who  had  stirred  the  national  heart  so 
profoundly,  and  whom  all  men  still  revered? 
They  themselves  had  sent  to  question  him,  and 
his  answer  was  notorious:  he  had  said  that  he 
was  sent  before  the  Christ'  he  was  only  a  voice, 
but  a  voice  which  demanded  the  preparation  of 
a  way  before  the  Lord  Himself,  Who  was  ap- 
proaching, and  a  highway  for  our  God.  What 
was  the  verdict  of  these  investigators  npon  that 
great  movement?  What  would  they  make  of 
the  decisive  testimony  of  the  Baptist? 

As  the  perilous  significance  of  this  consum- 
mate rejoinder  bursts  on  their  crafty  intelligence, 
as  they  recoil  confounded  from  the  exposure 
they  have  brought  upon  themselves,  St.  Mark 
tells  how  the  question  was  pressed  home,  "  An- 
swer Me!  "  But  they  dared  not  call  John  an  im- 
postor, and  yet  to  confess  him  was  to  authenti- 
cate the  seal  upon  our  Lord's  credentials.  And 
Jesus  is  palpably  within  His  rights  in  refusing 
to  be  questioned  of  such  authorities  as  these. 
Yet  immediately  afterwards,  with  equal  skill  and 
boldness,  He  declared  Himself,  and  yet  defied 
their  malice,  in  the  story  of  the  lord  of  a  vine- 
yard, who  had  vainly  sent  many  servants  to  claim 
its  fruit,  and  at  the  last  sent  his  beloved  son. 

Now  apply  the  same  process  to  the  modern 
opponents  of  the  faith,  and  it  will  be  found  that 
multitudes  of  their  assaults  on  Christianity  im- 
ply the  negation  of  what  they  will  not  and  dare 
not  deny.  Some  will  not  believe  in  miracles  be- 
cause the  laws  of  nature  work  uniformly.  But 
their  uniformity  is  undisturbed  by  human  oper- 


Mark  xii.  1-12.] 


THE    HUSBANDMEN. 


891 


ations;  the  will  of  man  wields,  without  cancel- 
ling, these  mighty  forces  which  surround  us. 
And  why  may  not  the  will  of  God  do  the  same, 
if  there  be  a  God?  Ask  them  whether  they  deny 
His  existence,  and  they  will  probably  declare 
themselves  Agnostics,  which  is  exactly  the  an- 
cient answer,  "  We  cannot  tell,"  Now  as  long 
as  men  avow  their  ignorance  of  the  existence  or 
non-existence  of  a  Deity,  they  cannot  assert  the 
impossibility  of  miracles,  for  miracles  are  simply 
actions  which  reveal  God,  as  men's  actions  re- 
veal their  presence. 

Again,  a  demand  is  made  for  such  evidence, 
to  establish  the  faith,  as  cannot  be  had  for  any 
fact  beyond  the  range  of  the  exact  sciences.  We 
are  asked.  Why  should  we  stake  eternity  upon 
anything  short  of  demonstration?  Yet  it  wi!l  be 
found  that  the  objector  is  absolutely  persuaded, 
and  acts  on  his  persuasion  of  many  "  truths 
which  never  can  be  proved  " — of  the  fidelity  of 
his  wife  and  children,  and  above  all,  of  the  dif- 
ference between  right  and  wrong.  That  is  a 
fundamental  principle:  deny  it,  and  society  be- 
comes impossible.  And  j^et  sceptical  theories 
are  widely  diffused  which  really,  though  uncon- 
sciously, sap  the  very  foundations  of  morality, 
or  assert  that  it  is  not  from  heaven  but  of  men, 
a  mere  expediency,  a  prudential  arrangeqient  of 
society. 

Such  arguments  may  well  "  fear  the  people," 
for  the  instincts  of  mankind  know  well  that  all 
such  explanations  of  conscience  do  really  ex- 
plain it  away. 

And  it  is  quite  necessary  in  our  days,  when  re- 
ligion is  impugned,  to  see  whether  the  assump- 
tions of  its  assailants  would  not  compromise  time 
as  well  as  eternity,  and  to  ask.  What  think  ye  of 
all  those  fundamental  principles  which  sustain 
the  family,  society,  and  the  state,  while  they  bear 
testimony  to  the  Church  of  Christ. 


CHAPTER   XH. 

THE   HUSBANDMEN. 
Mark  xii.  1-12  (R.  V.). 

The  rulers  of  His  people  have  failed  to  make 
Jesus  responsible  to  their  inquisition.  He  has 
exposed  the  hollowness  of  their  claim  to  investi- 
gate His  commission,  and  formally  refused  to 
tell  them  by  what  authority  He  did  these  things. 
But  what  He  would  not  say  for  an  unjust  cross- 
examination,  He  proclaimed  to  all  docile  hearts; 
and  the  skill  which  disarmed  His  enemies  is  not 
more  wonderful  than  that  which  in  their  hearing 
answered  their  question,  yet  left  them  no  room' 
for  accusation.  This  was  achieved  by  speaking 
to  them  in  parables.  The  indifferent  might  hear 
and  not  perceive:  the  keenness  of  malice  would 
surely  understand  but  could  not  easily  impeach 
a  simple  story;  but  to  His  own  followers  it  would 
be  given  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom 
of  God. 

His  first  words  would  be  enough  to  arouse 
attention.  The  psalmist  had  told  how  God 
brought  a  vine  out  of  Egypt,  and  cast  out  the 
heathen  and  planted  it.  Isaiah  had  carried  the 
image  farther,  and  sung  of  a  vineyard  in  a  very 
fruitful  hill.  The  Well-beloved,  Whose  it  was, 
cleared  the  ground  for  it,  and  planted  it  with  the 
choicest  vine,  and  built  a  tower,  and  hewed  out 
a   wine-press,    and   looked   that   it   should   bring 


forth  grapes,  but  it  had  brought  forth  wild 
grapes.  Therefore  He  would  lay  it  waste.  This 
well-known  and  recognised  type  the  Lord  now 
adopted,  but  modified  it  to  suit  His  purpose.  As 
in  a  former  parable  the  sower  slept  and  rose,  and 
left  the  earth  to  bring  forth  fruit  of  itself,  so  in 
this,  the  Lord  of  the  vineyard  let  it  out  to 
husbandmen  and  went  into  a  far  country.  This 
is  our  Lord's  own  explanation  of  that  silent  time 
in  which  no  special  interpositions  asserted  that 
God  was  nigh,  no  prophecies  were  heard,  no 
miracles  startled  the  careless.  It  was  the  time 
when  grace  already  granted  should  have  been 
peacefully  ripening.  Now  we  live  in  such  a  pe- 
riod. Unbelievers  desire  a  sign.  Impatient  be- 
lievers argue  that  if  our  Master  is  as  near  us  as 
ever,  the  same  portents  must  attest  His  presence; 
and,  therefore,  they  recognise  the  gift  of 
tongues  in  hysterical  clamour,  and  stake  the 
honour  of  religion  upon  faith-healing,  and  those 
various  obscure  phenomena  which  the  annals  of 
every  fanaticism  can  rival.  But  the  sober  Chris- 
tian understands  that,  even  as  the  Lord  of  the 
vineyard  went  into  another  country,  so  Christ 
His  Son  (Who  in  spiritual  communion  is  ever 
with  His  people)  in  another  sense  has  gone  into 
a  far  country  to  receive  a  kingdom  and  to  return. 
In  the  interval,  marvels  would  be  simply  an 
anachronism.  The  best  present  evidence  of  the 
faith  lies  in  the  superior  fruitfulness  of  the  vine- 
yard He  has  planted,  in  the  steady  advance  to 
rich  maturity  of  the  vine  He  has  imported  from 
another  clime. 

At  this  point  Jesus  begins  to  add  a  new  sig- 
nificance to  the  ancient  metaphor.  The  husband- 
men are  mentioned.  Men  there  were  in  the  an- 
cient Church,  who  were  specially  responsible  for 
the  culture  of  the  vineyard.  As  He  spoke,  the 
symbol  explained  itself.  The  imposing  array  of 
chief  priests  and  scribes  and  elders  stood  by, 
who  had  just  claimed  as  their  prerogative  that 
He  should  make  good  His  commission  to  their 
scrutiny;  and  none  would  be  less  likely  to  mis- 
take His  meaning  than  these  self-conscious 
lovers  of  chief  seats  in  the  synagogues.  The 
structure  of  the  parable,  therefore,  admits  their 
official  rank,  as  frankly  as  when  Jesus  bade  His 
disciples  submit  to  their  ordinances  because  they 
sit  in  Moses'  seat.  But  He  passes  on,  easily  and 
as  if  unconsciously,  to  record  that  special  mes- 
sengers from  heaven  had,  at  times,  interrupted 
the  self-indulgent  quietude  of  the  husbandmen. 
Because  the  fruit  of  the  vineyard  had  not  been 
freely  rendered,  a  bondservant  was  sent  to  de- 
mand it.  The  epithet  implies  that  the  messenger 
was  lower  in  rank,  although  his  direct  mission 
gave  him  authority  even  over  the  keepers  of  the 
vineyard.  It  expresses  exactly  the  position  of 
the  prophets,  few  of  them  of  priestly  rank,  some 
of  them  very  humble  in  extraction,  and  very  rus- 
tic in  expression,  but  all  sent  in  evil  days  to 
faithless  husbandmen,  to  remind  them  that  the 
vineyard  was  not  their  own,  and  to  receive  the 
fruits  of  righteousness.  Again  and  again  the  de- 
mand is  heard,  for  He  sent  "  many  others;"  and 
always  it  is  rejected  with  violence,  which  some- 
times rises  to  murder.  As  they  listened,  they 
must  have  felt  that  all  this  was  true,  that  while 
prophet  after  prophet  had  come  to  a  violent  end, 
not  one  had  seen  the  ofiicial  hierarchy  making 
common  cause  with  him.  And  they  must  a.\s<y 
have  felt  how  ruinous  was  this  rejoinder  to  their 
own  demand  that  the  people  should  forsake  a 
teacher  when  they  rejected  him.     Have  any  dl 


892 


THE  GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


the  rulers  or  of  the  Pharisees  believed  on  Him? 
was  their  scornful  question.  But  the  answer  was 
plain,  As  long  as  they  built  the  sepulchres  of  the 
prophets,  and  garnished  the  tombs  of  the  right- 
eous, and  said,  If  we  had  been  in  the  days  of  our 
fathers,  we  would  not  have  been  partakers  with 
them  in  the  blood  of  the  prophets,  they  confessed 
that  men  could  not  blindly  follow  a  hierarchy 
merely  as  such,  since  they  were  not  the  official 
successors  of  the  prophets  but  of  those  who 
slew  them.  The  worst  charge  brought  against 
them  was  only  that  they  acted  according  to  anal- 
ogy, and  filled  up  the  deeds  of  their  fathers.  It 
had  always  been  the  same. 

The  last  argument  of  Stephen,  which  filled  his 
judges  with  madness,  was  but  the  echo  of  this 
great  impeachment.  Which  of  the  prophets  did 
not  your  fathers  persecute?  and  they  killed  them 
which  showed  before  of  the  coming  of  the  Right- 
eous One,  of  Whom  ye  have  now  become  the  be- 
trayers and  murderers. 

That  last  defiance  of  heaven,  which  Stephen 
thus  denounced,  his  Master  distinctly  foretold. 
And  He  added  the  appalling  circumstance,  that 
however  they  might  deceive  themselves  and 
sophisticate  their  conscience,  they  really  knew 
Him  Who  He  was.  They  felt,  at  the  very  least, 
that  into  His  hands  should  pass  all  the  authority 
and  power  they  had  so  long  monopolised: 
"  This  is  the  Heir;  come  let  us  kill  Him  and  the 
inheritance  shall  be  ours."  If  there  were  no 
more,  the  utterance  of  these  words  put  forth  an 
extraordinary   claim. 

All  that  should  have  been  rendered  up  to 
heaven  and  was  withheld,  all  that  previous  mes- 
sengers had  demanded  on  behalf  of  God  without 
avail,  all  "  the  inheritance  "  which  these  wicked 
husbandmen  were  intercepting,  all  this  Jesus  an- 
nounces to  be  His  own,  while  reprehending  the 
dishonesty  of  any  other  claim  upon  it.  And  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  if  Jesus  be  not  Divine,  He  has 
intercepted  more  of  the  worship  due  to  the 
Eternal,  has  attracted  to  Himself  more  of  the 
homage  of  the  loftiest  and  profoundest  minds, 
than  any  false  teacher  within  the  pale  of  mono- 
theism has  ever  done.  It  is  the  bounden  duty  of 
all  who  revere  Jesus  even  as  a  teacher,  of  all  who 
have  eyes  to  see  that  His  coming  was  the  greatest 
upward  step  in  the  progress  of  humanity,  to  con- 
sider well  what  was  implied,  when,  in  the  act  of 
blaming  the  usurpers  of  the  heritage  of  God, 
Jesus  declared  that  inheritance  to  be  His  own. 
But  this  is  not  all,  though  it  is  what  He  declares 
that  the  husbandmen  were  conscious  of.  The 
parable  states,  not  only  that  He  is  heir,  but  heir 
by  virtue  of  His  special  relationship  to  the  Su- 
preme. Others  are  bondservants  or  husband- 
men, but  He  is  the  Son.  He  does  not  inherit  as 
the  worthiest  and  most  obedient,  but  by  right  of 
birth;  and  His  Father,  in  the  act  of  sending  Him, 
expects  even  these  bloodstained  outlaws  to  rev- 
erence His  Son.  In  such  a  phrase,  applied  to 
such  criminals,  we  are  made  to  feel  the  lofty  rank 
alike  of  the  Father  and  His  Son,  which  ought 
to  have  overawed  even  them.  And  when  we 
read  that  "  He  had  yet  one,  a  beloved  Son,"  it 
seems  as  if  the  veil  of  eternity  were  uplifted,  to 
reveal  a  secret  and  awful  intimacy,  of  which, 
nevertheless,  some  glimmering  consciousness 
should  have  controlled  the  most  desperate  heart. 

But  they  only  reckoned  that  if  they  killed  the 
Heir,  the  inheritance  would  become  their  own. 
It  seems  the  wildest  madness,  that  men  should 
icnow  and  feel  Who  He  was,  and  yet  expect  to 


profit  by  desecrating  His  rights.  And  yet  so  it 
was  from  the  beginning.  If  Herod  were  not 
fearful  that  the  predicted  King  of  the  Jews  was 
indeed  born,  the  massacre  of  the  Innocents 
was  idle.  If  the  rulers  were  not  fearful  that 
this  counsel  and  work  was  of  God,  they 
would  not,  at  Gamaliel's  bidding,  have  re- 
frained from  the  Apostles.  And  it  comes  still 
closer  to  the  point  to  observe  that,  if  they  had 
attached  no  importance,  even  in  their  moment  of 
triumph,  to  the  prediction  of  His  rising  from  the 
dead,  they  would  not  have  required  a  guard,  nor 
betrayed  the  secret  recognition  which  Jesus  here 
exposes.  The  same  blind  miscalculation  is  in 
every  attempt  to  obtain  profit  or  pleasure  by 
means  which  are  known  to  transgress  the  laws  of 
the  all-beholding  Judge  of  all.  It  is  committed 
every  day,  under  the  pressure  of  strong  tempta- 
tion, by  men  who  know  clearly  that  nothing  but 
misery  can  result.  So  true  is  it  that  action  is 
decided,  not  by  a  course  of  logic  in  the  brain, 
but  by  the  temperament  and  bias  of  our  nature 
as  a  whole.  We  need  not  suppose  that  the  rulers 
roundly  spoke  such  words  as  these,  even  to 
themselves.  The  infamous  motive  lurked  in  am- 
bush, too  far  in  the  background  of  the  mind 
perhaps  even  for  consciousness.  But  it  was 
there,  and  it  affected  their  decision,  as  lurking 
passions  and  self-interests  always  will,  as  surely 
as  iron  deflects  the  compass.  "  They  caught 
Him  and  killed  Him,"  said  the  unfaltering  lips 
of  their  victim.  And  He  added  a  circumstance 
of  pain  which  we  often  overlook,  but  to  which 
the  great  minister  of  the  circumcision  was  keenly 
sensitive,  and  often  reverted,  the  giving  Him  up 
to  the  Gentiles,  to  death  accursed  among  the 
Jews;  "  they  cast  Him  forth  out  of  the  vine- 
yard." 

All  evil  acts  are  based  upon  an  overestimate 
of  the  tolerance  of  God.  He  had  seemed  to  re- 
main passive  while  messenger  after  messenger 
was  beaten,  stoned,  or  slain.  But  now  that  they 
had  filled  up  the  iniquity  of  their  fathers,  the 
Lord  of  the  vineyard  would  come  in  person  to 
destroy  them,  and  give  the  vineyard  to  others. 
This  last  phrase  is  strangely  at  variance  with  the 
notion  that  the  days  of  a  commissioned  ministry 
are  over,  as,  on  the  other  hand,  the  whole  parable 
is  at  variance  with  the  notion  that  a  priesthood 
can  be  trusted  to  sit  in  exclusive  judgment  upon 
doctrine  for  the  Church. 

At  this  point  St.  Mark  omits  an  incident  so 
striking,  although  small,  that  its  absence  is  sig- 
nificant. The  by-standers  said,  "  God  forbid!  " 
and  when  the  horrified  exclamation  betrayed 
their  consciousness  of  the  position,  Jesus  was 
content,  without  a  word,  to  mark  their  self-con- 
viction by  His  searching  gaze.  "  He  looked 
upon  them."  The  omission  would  be  unaccount- 
able if  St.  Mark  were  simply  a  powerful  narra- 
tor of  graphic  incidents;  but  it  is  explained  when 
we  think  that  for  him  the  manifestation  of  a 
mighty  Personage  was  all  in  all,  and  the  most 
characteristic  and  damaging  admissions  of  the 
hierarchy  were  as  nothing  compared  with  a  word 
of  his  Lord.  Thereupon  he  goes  straight  on  to 
record  that,  besides  refuting  their  claim  by  the 
history  of  the  past,  and  asserting  His  own  su- 
premacy in  a  phrase  at  once  guarded  in  form  and 
decisive  in  import,  Jesus  also  appealed  to  Scrip- 
ture. It  was  written  that  by  special  and  marvel- 
lous interposition  of  the  Lord  a  stone  which  the 
recognised  builders  had  rejected  should  crown 
the  building.     And  the  quotation  was  not  only 


MaiK  xii.  13-17.] 


THE    TRIBUTE    MONEY. 


893 


decisive  as  showing  that  their  rejection  could  not 
close  the  controversy;  it  also  compensated,  with 
a  promise  of  final  victory,  the  ominous  words  in 
which  their  malice  had  seemed  to  do  its  worst. 
Jesus  often  predicted  His  death,  but  He  never 
despaired  of  His  kingdom. 

No  wonder  that  the  rulers  sought  to  arrest 
Him,  and  perceived  that  He  penetrated  and  de- 
spised their  schemes.  And  their  next  device  is 
a  natural  outcome  from  the  fact  that  they  feared 
the  people,  but  did  not  discontinue  their  in- 
trigues; for  this  was  a  crafty  and  dangerous  at- 
tempt to  estrange  from  Him  the  admiring  multi- 
tude. 


THE    TRIBUTE   MONEY. 
Mark  xii.  13-17  (R.  V.). 

The  contrast  is  very  striking  between  this  in- 
cident and  the  last.  Instead  of  a  challenge, 
Jesus  is  respectfully  consulted;  and  instead  of  a 
formal  concourse  of  the  authorities  of  His  re- 
ligion. He  is  Himself  the  authority  to  Whom  a 
few  perplexed  people  profess  to  submit  their  dif- 
ficulty. Nevertheless,  it  is  a  new  and  subtle  effort 
of  the  enmity  of  His  defeated  foes.  They  have 
sent  to  Him  certain  Pharisees  who  will  excite 
the  popular  indignation  if  He  yields  anything  to 
the  foreigner,  and  Herodians  who  will,  if  He  re- 
fuses, bring  upon  Him  the  colder  and  deadlier 
vengeance  of  Rome.  They  flatter,  in  order  to 
stimulate,  that  fearless  utterance  which  must 
often  have  seemed  to  them  so  rash:  "  We  know 
that  Thou  art  true,  and  carest  not  for  a,ny  one, 
for  Thou  regardest  not  the  person  of  men.  but  of 
a  truth  teachest  the  way  of  God."  And  they  ap- 
peal to  a  higher  motive  by  representing  the  case 
to  be  one  of  practical  and  personal  urgency. 
"  Shall  we  give,  or  shall  we  not  give?  " 

Never  was  it  more  necessary  to  join  the  wis- 
dom of  the  serpent  to  the  innocence  of  the 
dove,  for  it  would  seem  that  He  must  needs  an- 
swer directly,  and  that  no  direct  answer  can  fail 
to  have  the  gravest  consequences.  But  in  their 
eagerness  to  secure  this  menacing  position,  they 
have  left  one  weak  point  in  the  attack.  They 
have  made  the  question  altogether  a  practical 
one.  The  abstract  doctrine  of  the  right  to  drive 
out  a  foreign  power,  of  the  limits  of  authority 
and  freedom,  they  have  not  raised.  It  is  simply 
a  question  of  the  hour,  Shall  we  give  or  shall 
we  not  give? 

And  Jesus  baffled  them  by  treating  it  as  such. 
There  was  no  longer  a  national  coinage,  except 
only  of  the  half  shekel  for  the  temple  tax.  When 
He  asked  them  for  a  smaller  coin,  they  produced 
a  Roman  penny  stamped  with  the  effigy  of 
Caesar.  Thus  they  confessed  the  use  of  the  Ro- 
man currency.  Now  since  they  accepted  the  ad- 
vantages of  subjugation,  they  ought  also  to  en- 
dure its  burdens:  since  they  traded  as  Roman 
subjects,  they  ought  to  pay  the  Roman  tribute. 
Not  He  had  preached  submission,  but  they  had 
avowed  it;  and  any  consequent  unpopularity 
would  fall  not  upon  Him  but  them.  They  had 
answered  their  own  question.  And  Jesus  laid 
down  the  broad  and  simple  rule,  "  Render  (pay 
back)  unto  Ca?sar  the  things  that  are  Qesar's, 
and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's.  And 
they  marvelled  greatly  at  Him."  No  wonder 
they  marvelled,  tor  it  would  be  hard  to  find  in 
all  the  records  pf  philosophy  so  ready  and  prac- 


tical a  device  to  baffle  such  cunning  intriguers, 
such  keenness  in  One  Whose  life  was  so  far  re- 
moved from  the  schools  of  worldly  wisdom, 
joined  with  so  firm  a  grasp  on  principle,  in  an 
utterance  so  brief,  yet  going  down  so  far  to  the 
roots  of  action. 

Now  the  words  of  Jesus  are  words  for  all  time; 
even  when  He  deals  with  a  question  of  the  hour. 
He  treats  it  from  the  point  of  view  of  eternal 
fitness  and  duty;  and  this  command  to  render 
unto  Caesar  the  things  which  are  Qesar's  has  be- 
come the  charter  of  the  state  against  all  usur- 
pations of  tyrannous  ecclesiastics.  A  sphere  is 
recognised  in  which  obedience  to  the  law  is  a 
duty  to  God.  But  it  is  absurd  to  pretend  that 
Christ  taught  blind  and  servile  obedience  to  all 
tyrants  in  all  circumstances,  for  this  would  often 
make  it  impossible  to  obey  the  second  injunction, 
and  to  render  unto  God  the  things  which  are 
God's, — a  clause  which  asserts  in  turn  the  right 
of  conscience  and  the  Church  against  all  secular 
encroachments.  The  point  to  observe  is,  that 
the  decision  of  Jesus  is  simply  an  inference,  a 
deduction.  St.  Matthew  has  inserted  the  word 
"  therefore,"  and  it  is  certainly  implied:  render 
unto  Caesar  the  things  which  you  confess  to  be 
his  own,  which  bear  his  image  upon  their  face. 

Can  we  suppose  that  no  such  inference  gives 
point  to  the  second  clause?  It  would  then  be- 
come, like  too  many  of  our  pious  sayings,  a 
mere  supplement  inappropriate,  however  ex- 
cellent, a  make-weight,  ancT  a  platitude.  No  ex- 
ample of  such  irrelevance  can  be  found  in  the 
story  of  our  Lord.  When,  finding  the  likeness 
of  Caesar  on  the  coin.  He  said.  Render,  there- 
fore, unto  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  and 
unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's,  He  at  least 
suggested  that  the  reason  for  both  precepts  ran 
parallel,  and  the  image  of  the  higher  and  heaven- 
lier  Monarch  could  be  found  on  what  He  claims 
of  us.  And  it  is  so.  He  claims  all  we  have  and 
all  we  are.  "  The  earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  the 
fulness  thereof:"  and  "  I  have  made  thee,  thou 
art  Mine."  And  for  us  and  ours  alike  the  argu- 
ment holds  good.  All  the  visible  universe  bears 
deeply  stamped  into  its  substance  His  image  and 
superscription.  The  grandeur  of  mountains  and 
stars,  the  fairness  of  violet  and  harebell,  are 
alike  revelations  of  the  Creator.  The  heavens 
declare  His  glory:  the  firmament  showeth  His 
handiwork:  the  earth  is  full  of  His  riches:  all  the 
discoveries  which  expand  our  mastery  over  na- 
ture and  disease,  over  time  and  space,  are  proofs 
of  His  wisdom  and  goodness,  Who  laid  the 
amazing  plan  which  we  grow  wise  by  tracing  out. 
Find  a  corner  on  which  contrivance  and  benevo- 
lence have  not  stamped  the  royal  image,  and  we 
may  doubt  whether  that  bleak  spot  owes  Him 
tribute.  But  no  desert  is  so  blighted,  no  soli- 
tude so  forlorn. 

And  we  should  render  unto  God  the  things 
which  are  God's,  seeing  His  likeness  in  His 
world.  "  For  the  invisible  things  of  Him  since 
the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being 
perceived  through  the  things  which  are  made, 
even  His  everlasting  power  and  divinity." 

And  if  most  of  all  He  demands  the  love,  the 
heart  of  man,  here  also  He  can  ask,  "  Whose 
image  and  superscription  is  this?"  For  in  the 
image  of  God  made  He  man.  It  is  sometimes 
urged  that  this  image  was  quite  effaced  when 
Adam  fell.  But  it  was  not  to  protect  the  un- 
fallen  that  the  edict  was  spoken  "  Whoso  she<i- 
deth   man's   blood,    by   man   shall    his   blood   bt 


894 


THE  tyOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


shed,  for  in  the  image  of  God  made  He  man." 
He  was  not  an  unfallen  man  of  whom  St.  Paul 
said  that  he  "  ought  not  to  have  his  head  veiled, 
forasmuch  as  he  is  the  image  and  glory  of  God;" 
neither  were  they  unfallen.  of  whom  St.  James 
said,  "  We  curse  men  which  are  made  after  the 
likeness  of  God  "  (Gen.  ix.  6;  i  Cor.  xi.  7;  James 
iii.  9).  Common  men,  for  whom  the  assassin 
lurks,  who  need  instruction  how  to  behave  in 
church,  and  whom  others  scorn  and  curse,  these 
bear  upon  them  an  awful  likeness;  and  even 
when  they  refuse  tribute  to  their  king,  He  can 
ask  them,  Whose  is  this  image? 

We  see  it  in  the  intellect,  ever  demanding  new 
worlds  to  conquer,  overwhelming  us  with  its 
victories  over  time  and  space.  "  In  apprehen- 
sion how  like  a  God."  Alas  for  us!  if  we  forget 
that  the  Spirit  of  knowledge  and  wisdom  is  no 
other  than  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  God. 

We  see  this  likeness  far  more  in  our  moral 
nature.  It  is  true  that  sin  has  spoiled  and 
wasted  this,  yet  there  survives  in  man's  heart,  as 
nowhere  else  in  our  world,  a  strange  sympathy 
with  the  holiness  and  love  of  God.  No  other  of 
His  attributes  has  the  same  power  to  thrill  us. 
Tell  me  that  He  lit  the  stars  and  can  quench 
them  with  a  word,  and  I  reverence,  perhaps  I 
fear  Him;  yet  such  power  is  outside  and  beyond 
my  sphere;  it  fails  to  touch  me,  it  is  high,  I  can- 
not attain  unto  it.  Even  the  rarer  human  gifts, 
the  power  of  a  Czar,  the  wisdom  of  Bacon,  are 
thus  beyond  me,  I  am  unkindled,  they  do  not 
find  me  out.  But  speak  of  holiness,  even,  the 
stainless  holiness  of  God,  undefiled  through  all 
eternity,  and  you  shake^  the  foundations  of  my 
being.  And  why  does  the  reflection  that  God 
is  pure  humble  me  more  than  the  knowledge  that 
God  is  omnipotent?  Because  it  is  my  spiritual 
nature  which  is  most  conscious  of  the  Divine 
image,  blurred  and  defaced  indeed,  but  not  oblit- 
erated yet.  Because  while  I  listen  I  am  dimly 
conscious  of  my  birthright,  my  destiny,  that  I 
was  born  to  resemble  this,  and  all  is  lost  if  I 
come  short  of  it.  Because  every  child  and  every 
sinner  feels  that  it  is  more  possible  for  him  to  be 
like  his  God  than  like  Newton,  or  Shakespeare, 
or  Napoleon.  Because  the  work  of  grace  is  to 
call  in  the  worn  and  degraded  coinage  of  hu- 
manity, and  as  the  mint  restamps  and  reissues 
the  pieces  which  have  grown  thin  and  worn,  so 
to  renew  us  after  the  image  of  Him  that  created 
us. 


CHRIST    AND    THE    SADDUCEES. 
Mark  xii.  18-27  (R-  V.). 

Christ  came  that  the  thoughts  of  many  hearts 
might  be  revealed.  And  so  it  was,  that  when  He 
had  silenced  the  examination  of  the  hierarchy, 
and  baflled  their  craft,  the  Sadducees  were 
tempted  to  assail  Him.  Like  the  rationalists  of 
every  age,  they  stood  coldly  aloof  from  popular 
movements,  and  we  seldom  find  them  interfering 
with  Christ  or  His  followers,  until  their  ener- 
gies were  roused  by  the  preaching  of  His  Resur- 
rection, so  directly  opposed  to  their  fundamental 
doctrines. 

Their  appearance  now  is  extremely  natural. 
The  repulse  of  every  other  party  left  them  the 
only  champions  of  orthodoxy  against  the  new 
movement,  with  everything  to  win  by  success, 
and  little  to  lose  by  failure.     There  is  a  tone  of 


quiet  and  confident  irony  in  their  interrogation, 
well  befitting  an  upper-class  group,  a  secluded 
party  of  refined  critics,  rather  than  practical 
teachers  with  a  mission  to  their  fellow-men. 
They  break  utterly  new  ground  by  raising  an  ab- 
stract and  subtle  question,  a  purely  intellectual 
problem,  but  one  which  reduced  the  doctrine  of 
a  resurrection  to  an  absurdity,  if  only  their 
premises  can  be  made  good.  And  this  peculiar- 
ity is  often  overlooked  in  criticism  upon  our 
Lord's  answer.  Its  intellectual  subtlety  was  only 
the  adoption  by  Christ  of  the  weapons  of  his  ad- 
versaries. But  at  the  same  time.  He  lays  great 
and  special  stress  upon  the  authority  of  Scrip- 
ture, in  this  encounter  with  the  party  which  least 
acknowledged  it. 

Their  objection,  stated  in  its  simplest  form, 
is  the  complication  which  would  result  if  the 
successive  ties  for  which  death  makes  room  must 
all  revive  together  when  death  is  abolished.  If 
a  woman  has  married  a  second  time,  whose  wife 
shall  she  be?  But  their  statement  of  the  case 
is  ingenious,  not  only  because  they  push  the 
difificulty  to  an  absurd  and  ludicrous  extent,  but 
much  more  so  because  they  base  it  upon  a  Di- 
vine ordinance.  If  there  be  a  Resurrection, 
Moses  must  answer  for  all  the  confusion  that  will 
ensue,  for  Moses  gave  the  commandment,  by 
virtue  of  which  a  woman  married  seven  times. 
No  offspring  of  any  union  gave  it  a  special  claim 
upon  her  future  life.  "  In  the  Resurrection, 
whose  wife  shall  she  be  of  them?  "  they  ask,  con- 
ceding with  a  quiet  sarcasm  that  this  absurd 
event  must  needs  occur. 

For  these  controversialists  the  question  was 
solely  of  the  physical  tie,  which  had  made  of 
twain  one  flesh.  They  had  no  conception  that 
the  body  can  be  raised  otherwise  than  as  it 
perished,  and  they  rightly  enough  felt  certain 
that  on  such  a  resurrection  woeful  complications 
must  ensue. 

Now  Jesus  does  not  rebuke  their  question  with 
such  stern  words  as  He  had  just  employed  to 
others,  "  Why  tempt  ye  Me,  ye  hypocrites? " 
They  were  doubtless  sincere  in  their  conviction, 
and  at  least  they  had  not  come  in  the  disguise 
of  perplexed  inquirers  and  almost  disciples.  He 
blames  them,  but  more  gently:  "  Is  it  not  for  this 
cause  that  ye  err,  because  ye  know  not  the  Scrip- 
tures, nor  the  power  of  God?"  They  could  not 
know  one  and  not  the  other,  but  the  boastful 
wisdom  of  this  world,  so  ready  to  point  a  jibe 
by  quoting  Moses,  had  never  truly  grasped  the 
meaning  of  the  writer  it  appealed  to. 

Jesus,  it  is  plain,  does  not  quote  Scripture  only 
as  having  authority  with  His  opponents:  He  ac- 
cepts it  heartily:  He  declares  that  human  error 
is  due  to  ignorance  of  its  depth  and  range  of 
teaching;  and  He  recognises  the  full  roll  of  the 
sacred  books  "  the  Scriptures." 

It  has  rightly  been  said  that  none  of  the  ex- 
plicit statements,  commonlv  relied  upon,  do 
more  to  vindicate  for  Holy  Writ  the  authority 
of  our  Lord   than  this  simple  incidental  question. 

Jesus  proceeded  to  restate  the  doctrine  of  the 
Resurrection  and  then  to  prove  it;  and  the  more 
His  brief  words  are  pondered,  the  more  they  will 
expand  and  deepen. 

St.  Paul  has  taught  us  that  the  dead  in  Christ 
shall  rise  first  (i  Thess.  iv.  16).  Of  such  attain- 
ment it  is  written.  Blessed  and  holy  is  he  that 
hath  part  in  the  first  Resurrection  (Rev.  xx.  6). 

Now  since  among  the  lost  there  could  be  no 
question   of  family   ties,   and  consequent  embar- 


Mark  xii.  28-34.] 


THE    DISCERNING    SCRIBE. 


895 


rassments,  Jesus  confines  His  statement  to  these 
happy  ones,  of  whom  the  Sadducee  could  think 
no  better  than  that  their  new  life  should  be  a  re- 
production of  their  existence  here, — a  theory 
which  they  did  wisely  in  rejecting.  He  uses  the 
very  language  taken  up  afterwards  by  His  apos- 
tle, and  says,  "  When  they  shall  rise  from  the 
dead."  And  He  asserts  that  mai-riage  is  at  an 
end,  and  they  are  as  the  angels  in  heaven.  Here 
is  no  question  of  the  duration  of  pure  and  tender 
human  affection,  nor  do  these  words  compromise 
in  any  degree  the  hopes  of  faithful  hearts,  which 
cling  to  one  another.  Surely  we  may  believe 
that  in  a  life  which  is  the  outcome  and  resultant 
of  this  life,  as  truly  as  the  grain  is  of  the  seed, 
in  a  life  also  where  nothing  shall  be  forgotten, 
but  on  the  contrary  we  shall  know  what  we  know 
not  now,  there,  tracing  back  the  flood  of  their 
immortal  energies  to  obscure  fountains  upon 
earth,  and  seeing  all  that  each  has  owed  half  un- 
consciously to  the  fidelity  and  wisdom  of  the 
other,  the  true  partners  and  genuine  helpmeets 
of  this  world  shall  for  ever  drink  some  peculiar 
gladness,  each  from  the  other's  joy.  There  is  no 
reason  why  the  close  of  formal  unions  which  in- 
clude the  highest  and  most  perfect  friendships 
should  forbid  such  friendships  to  survive  and 
flourish  in  the  more  kindly  atmosphere  of 
heaven. 

What  Christ  asserts  is  simply  the  dissolution 
of  the  tie,  as  an  inevitable  consequence  of  such 
a  change  in  the  very  nature  of  the  blessed  ones 
as  makes  the  tie  incongruous  and  impossible. 
In  point  of  fact,  marriage  as  the  Sadducee 
thought  of  it,  is  but  the  counterpoise  of  death, 
renewing  the  face  which  otherwise  would  dis- 
appear, and  when  death  is  swallowed  up,  it  van- 
ishes as  an  anachronism,  m  heaven  "  they  are 
as  the  angels,"  the  body  itself  being  made  "  a 
spiritual  body,"  set  free  from  the  appetites  of  the 
flesh,  and  in  harmony  with  the  glowing  aspira- 
tions of  the  Spirit,  which  now  it  weighs  upon  and 
retards.  If  any  would  object  that  to  be  as  the 
angels  is  to  be  without  a  body,  rather  than  to 
possess  a  spiritual  body,  it  is  answer  enough  that 
the  context  implies  the  existence  of  a  body, 
since  no  person  ever  spoke  of  a  resurrection  of 
the  soul.  Moreover,  it  is  an  utterly  unwarrant- 
able assumption  that  angels  are  wholly  without 
substance.  Many  verses  appear  to  imply  the  op- 
posite, and  the  cubits  of  measurement  of  the 
New  Jerusalem  were  ''  according  to  the  measure 
of  a  man,  that  is  of  an  angel  "  (Rev.  xxi.  17), 
which  seems  to  assert  a  very  curious  similarity 
indeed. 

The  objection  of  the  Sadducees  was  entirely 
obviated,  therefore,  by  the  broader,  bolder,  and 
more  spiritual  view  of  a  resurrection  which  Jesus 
taught.  And  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  cavils 
against  this  same  doctrine  which  delight  the  in- 
fidel lecturer  and  popular  essayist  of  to-day 
would  also  die  a  natural  death,  if  the  free  and 
spiritual  teaching  of  Jesus  and  its  expansion  by 
St.  Paul  were  understood.  But  we  breathe  a 
wholly  different  air  when  we  read  the  speculations 
even  of  so  great  a  thinker  as  St.  Augustine,  who 
supposed  that  we  should  rise  with  bodies  some- 
what greater  than  our  present  ones,  because  all 
the  hair  and  nails  we  ever  trimmed  away  must 
be  diffused  throughout  the  mass,  lest  they  should 
produce  deformity  by  their  excessive  proportions 
("  De  Civitate  Dei,"  xxii.  19).  To  all  such 
speculation,  he  who  said.  To  every  seed  his  own 
body,  says.  Thou  fool,  thou  sowest  not  that  body 


that  shall  be.  But  though  Jesus  had  met  these 
questions,  it  did  not  follow  that  His  doctrine  was 
true  merely  because  a  certain  difficulty  did  not 
apply.  And,  therefore,  He  proceeded  to  prove  it 
by  the  same  Moses  to  whom  they  had  appealed, 
and  whom  Jesus  distinctly  asserts  to  be  the  au- 
thor of  the  book  of  Exodus.  God  said,  "  I  am 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and 
the  God  of  Jacob.  He  is  not  the  God  of  the 
dead,  but  of  the  living:  ye  do  greatly  err." 

The  argument  is  not  based  upon  the  present 
tense  of  the  verb  to  be  in  this  assertion,  for  in 
the  Greek  the  verb  is  not  expressed.  In  fact 
the  argument  is  not  a  verbal  one  at  all;  or  else 
it  would  be  satisfied  by  the  doctrine  of  'the  im- 
mortality of  the  spirit,  and  would  not  establish 
any  resurrection  of  the  body.  It  is  based  upon 
the  immutability  of  God,  and,  therefore,  the  im- 
perishability of  all  that  ever  entered  into  vital 
and  real  relationship  with  Him.  To  cancel  such 
a  relationship  would  introduce  a  change  into 
the  Eternal.  And  Moses,  to  whom  tjiey  ap- 
pealed, had  heard  God  expressly  proclaim  Him- 
self the  God  of  those  who  had  long  since  passed 
out  of  time.  It  was,  therefore,  clear  that  His 
relationship  with  them  lived  on,  and  this  guar- 
anteed that  no  portion,  even  the  humblest,  of 
their  true  personality  should  perish.  Now  the 
body  is  as  real  a  part  of  humanity  as  the  soul 
and  spirit  are,  although  a  much  lowlier  part. 
And  therefore  it  must  not  really  die. 

It  is  solemn  to  observe  how  Jesus,  in  this  sec- 
ond part  of  His  argument,  passes  from  the  con- 
sideration of  the  future  of  the  blessed  to  that 
of  all  mankind;  "  as  touching  the  dead  that  they 
are  raised."  With  others  than  the  blessed,  there- 
fore, God  has  a  real  though  a  dread  relationship. 
And  it  will  prove  hard  to  reconcile  this  argument 
of  Christ  with  the  existence  of  any  time  when 
any  soul  shall  be  extinguished. 

"  The  body  is  for  the  Lord,"  said  St.  Paul, 
arguing  against  the  vices  of  the  flesh,  "  and  the 
Lord  for  the  body."  From  these  words  of 
Christ  he  may  well  have  learned  that  profound 
and  far-reaching  doctrine,  which  will  never  helve 
done  its  work  in  the^Church  and  in  the  world, 
until  whatever  defiles,  degrades,  or  weakens 
that  which  the  Lord  has  consecrated  is  felt  to 
blaspheme  by  implication  the  God  of  our  man- 
hood, unto  Whom  all  our  life  ought  to  be  lived; 
until  men  are  no  longer  dwarfed  in  mines,  nor 
poisoned  in  foul  air,  nor  massacred  in  battle,  men 
whose  intimate  relationship  with  God  the  Eternal 
is  of  such  a  kind  as  to  guarantee  the  resurrection 
of  the  poor  frames  which  we  destroy. 

How  much  more  does  this  great  proclamation 
frown  upon  the  sins  by  which  men  dishonour 
their  own  flesh.  "  Know  ye  not,"  asked  the 
apostle,  carrying  the  same  doctrine  to  its  ut- 
most limit,  "  that  your  bodies  are  the  temples  of 
the  Holy  Ghost?  "     So  truly  is  God  our  God. 


THE   DISCERNING    SCRIBE. 

M.\RK  xii.  28-34  (R-  v.). 

The  praise  which  Jesus  bestowed  upon  this 
lawyer  is  best  understood  when  we  take  into 
account  the  circumstances,  the  pressure  of  as- 
sailants with  ensnaring  questions,  the  sullen  dis- 
appointment or  palpable  exasperation  of  the 
party  to  which  the  scribe  belonged.  He  had 
probably  sympathised  in  their  hostility  and  had 


896 


THE- GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


come  expecting  and  desiring  the  discomfiture  of 
Jesus.  But  if  so,  he  was  a  candid  enemy;  and  as 
each  new  attempt  revealed  more  clearly  the  spir- 
itual insight,  the  self-possession  and  balanced 
wisdom  of  Him  Who  had  been  represented  as  a 
dangerous  fanatic,  his  unfriendly  opinion  began 
to  waver.  For  he  too  was  at  issue  with  popular 
views:  he  had  learned  in  the  Scriptures  that  God 
desireth  not  sacrifice,  that  incense  might  be  an 
abomination  to  Him,  and  new  moons  and  sab- 
baths things  to  do  away  with.  And  so,  perceiv- 
ing that  He  had  answered  them  well,  the  scribe 
asked,  upon  his  own  account,  a  very  different 
question,  not  rarely  debated  in  their  schools,  and 
often  answered  with  grotesque  frivolity,  but 
which  he  felt  to  go  down  to  the  very  root  of 
things.  Instead  of  challenging  Christ's  author- 
ity, he  tries  His  wisdom.  Instead  of  striving  to 
entangle  Him  in  dangerous  politics,  or  to  assail 
with  shallow  ridicule  the  problems  of  the  life 
to  come,  he  asks,  What  commandment  is  the 
first  of  all?  And  if  we  may  accept  as  complete 
this  abrupt  statement  of  his  interrogation,  it 
would  seem  to  have  been  drawn  from  him  by  a 
sudden  impulse,  or  wrenched  by  an  over-master- 
ing desire,  despite  of  reluctance  and  false  shame. 

The  Lord  answered  him  with  great  solemnity 
and  emphasis.  He  might  have  quoted  the  com- 
mandment only.  But  He  at  once  supported  the 
precept  itself  and  also  His  own  view  of  its  im- 
portance by  including  the  majestic  prologue, 
"  Hear,  O  Israel;  the  Lord  our  God.  the  Lord 
is  one;  and  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with 
all  thy  mind,  and  with  all  thy  strength." 

The  unity  of  God,  what  a  massive  and  reas- 
suring thought!  Amid  the  debasements  of 
idolatry,  with  its  deification  of  every  impulse  and 
every  force,  amid  the  distractions  of  chance  and 
change,  seemingly  so  capricious  and  even  dis- 
cordant, amid  the  complexities  of  the  universe 
and  its  phenomena,  there  is  wonderful  strength 
and  wisdom  in  the  reflection  that  God  is  one. 
All  changes  obey  His  hand  which  holds  the  rein; 
by  Him  the  worlds  were  made.  The  exiled 
patriarch  was  overwhelmed  by  the  majesty  of  the 
revelation  that  his  father's  God  was  God  in 
Bethel  even  as  in  Beer-sheba:  it  charmed  away 
the  bitter  sense  of  isolation,  it  unsealed  in  him 
the  fountains  of  worship  and  trust,  and  sent  him 
forward  with  a  new  hope  of  protection  and  pros- 
perity. The  unity  of  God,  really  apprehended,  is 
a  basis  for  the  human  will  to  repose  upon,  and 
to  become  self-consistent  and  at  peace.  It  was 
the  parent  of  the  fruitful  doctrine  of  the  unity 
of  nature  which  underlies  all  the  scientific  vic- 
tories of  the  modern  world.  In  religion,  St. 
Paul  felt  that  it  implies  the  equal  treatment  of  all 
the  human  race,  when  he  asked,  "  Is  He  the  God, 
of  Jews  only?  Is  He  not  the  God  of  Gentiles 
also?  Yea,  of  Gentiles  also,  if  so  be  that  God 
is  one"  (Rom.  iii.  29  R.  V.).  To  be  one,  he 
seems  to  say,  implies  being  universal  also.  And 
if  it  thus  excludes  the  reprobation  of  races,  it 
disproves  equally  that  of  individual  souls,  and  all 
thought  of  such  unequal  and  partial  treatment  as 
should  inspire  one  with  hope  of  indulgence  in 
guilt,  or  with  fear  that  his  way  is  hid  from  the 
Lord. 

But  if  this  be  true,  if  there  be  one  fountain  of 
all  life  and  loveliness  and  joy,  of  all  human  ten- 
derness and  all  moral  glory,  how  are  we  bound 
to  love  Him.  Every  other  affection  should  only 
deepen  our  adoring  loyalty  to  Him  Who  gives  it. 


No  cold  or  formal  service  can  meet  His  claim, 
Who  gives  us  the  power  to  serve.  No,  we  must 
love  Him.  And  as  all  our  nature  comes  from 
Him,  so  must  all  be  consecrated:  that  love  must 
embrace  all  the  afifections  of  "  heart  and  soul  " 
panting  after  Him,  as  the  heart  after  the  water- 
brooks;  and  all  the  deep  and  steady  convictions 
of  the  "  mind,"  musing  on  the  work  of  His  hand, 
able  to  give  a  reason  for  its  faith;  and  all  the 
practical  homage  of  the  "  strength,"  living  and 
dying  to  the  Lord.  How  easy,  then,  would  be 
the  fulfilment  of  His  commandments  in  detail, 
and  how  surely  it  would  follow.  All  the  pre- 
cepts of  the  first  table  are  clearly  implied  in  this. 

In  such  another  commandment  were  summed 
up  also  the  precepts  which  concerned  our  neigh- 
bour. When  we  love  him  as  ourselves  (neither 
exaggerating  his  claims  beyond  our  own,  nor 
allowing  our  own  to  trample  upon  his),  then  we 
shall  work  no  ill  to  our  neighbour,  and  so  love 
shall  fulfil  the  law.  There  is  none  other  com- 
mandment greater  than  these. 

The  questioner  saw  all  the  nobility  of  this  re- 
ply; and  the  disdain,  the  anger,  and  perhaps  the 
persecution  of  his  associates  could  not  prevent 
him  from  an  admiring  and  reverent  repetition 
of  the  Saviour's  words,  and  an  avowal  that  all 
the  ceremonial  observances  of  Judaism  were  as 
nothing  compared  with  this. 

While  he  was  thus  judging,  he  was  being 
judged.  As  he  knew  that  Jesus  had  answered 
well,  so  Jesus  saw  that  he  answered  discreetly; 
and  in  view  of  his  unprejudiced  judgment,  his 
spiritual  insight,  and  his  frank  approval  of  One 
Who  was  theti  despised  and  rejected.  He  said, 
Thou  art  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God. 
But  he  was  not  yet  within  it,  and  no  man  knows 
his  fate. 

Sad,  yet  instructive,  it  is  to  think  that  he  may 
have  won  the  approval  of  Christ,  and  heard  His 
words,  so  full  of  discernment  and  of  desire  for 
his  adherence,  and  yet  never  crossed  the  invis- 
ible and  mysterious  boundary  which  he  then  ap- 
proached so  nearly.  But  we  also  may  know,  and 
admire,  and  confess  the  greatness  and  goodness 
of  Jesus,  without  forsaking  all  to  follow  Him. 

His  enemies  had  been  defeated  and  put  to 
shame,  their  murderous  hate  had  been  de- 
nounced, and  the  nets  of  their  cunning  had  been 
rent  like  cobwebs;  they  had  seen  the  heart  of  one 
of  their  own  order  kindled  into  open  admiration, 
and  they  henceforth  renounced  as  hopeless  the 
attempt  to  conquer  Jesus  in  debate.  No  man 
after  that  durst  ask  Him  any  questions. 

He  will  now  carry  the  war  into  their  own 
country.     It  will  be  for  them  to  answer  Jesus. 


DAVID'S    LORD. 

Mark  xii.  35-40  (R.  V.). 

Jesus,  having  silenced  in  turn  His  official  in- 
terrogators and  the  Sadducees,  and  won  the 
heart  of  His  honest  questioner,  proceeded  to 
submit  a  searching  problem  to  His  assailants. 
Whose  son  was  the  Messiah?  And  when  they 
gave  Him  an  obvious  and  shallow  answer.  He 
covered  them  with  confusion  publicly.  The 
event  is  full  of  that-  dramatic  interest  which  St. 
Mark  is  so  well  able  to  discern  and  reproduce. 
How  is  it  then  that  he  passes  over  all  this  aspect 
of  it,  leaves  us  ignorant  of  the  defeat  and  even 
of  the  presence  of  the  scribes,  and  free  to  sup- 


Mark  xii.  4i-44>] 


THE   WIDOW'S    MITE. 


897 


pose  that  Jesus  stated  the  whole  problem  in  one 
long  question,  possibly  without  an  opponent  at 
hand  to  feel  its  force? 

This  is  a  remarkable  proof  that  his  concern 
was  not  really  for  the  pictorial  element  in  the 
story,  but  for  the  manifestation  of  the  power  of 
his  Master,  the  "  authority "  which  resounds 
through  his  opening  chapters,  the  royalty  which 
he  exhibits  at  the  close.  To  him  the  vital  point 
is  that  Jesus,  upon  openly  claiming  to  be  the 
Christ,  and  repelling  the  vehement  attacks  which 
were  made  upon  Him  as  such,  proceeded  to  un- 
fold the  astonishing  greatness  which  this  im- 
plied; and  that  after  asserting  the  unity  of  God 
and  His  claim  upon  all  hearts.  He  demonstrated 
that  the  Christ  was  sharer  of  His  throne. 

The  Christ,  they  said,  was  the  Son  of  David, 
and  this  was  not  false:  Jesus  had  wrought  many 
miracles  for  suppliants  who  addressed  Him  by 
that  title.  But  was  it  all  the  truth?  How  then 
did  David  call  Him  Lord?  A  greater  than 
David  might  spring  from  among  his  descendants, 
and  hold  rule  by  an  original  and  not  merely  an 
ancestral  claim:  He  might  not  reign  as  a  son  of 
David.  Yet  this  would  not  explain  the  fact  that 
David,  who  died  ages  before  His  coming,  was 
inspired  to  call  Him  My  Lord.  Still  less  would 
it  satisfy  the  assertion  that  God  had  bidden  Him 
sit  beside  Him  on  His  throne.  For  the  scribes 
there  was  a  serious  warning  in  the  promise  that 
His  enemies  should  be  made  His  footstool,  and 
for  all  the  people  a  startling  revelation  in  the 
words  which  follow,  and  which  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  has  unfolded,  making  this  Son  of  David 
a  priest  for  ever,  after  another  order  than  that  of 
Aaron. 

No  wonder  that  the  multitude  heard  with  glad- 
ness teaching  at  once  so  original,  so  profound, 
and  so  clearly  justified  by  Scripture. 

But  it  must  be  observed  how  remarkably  this 
question  of  Jesus  follows  up  His  conversation 
with  the  scribe.  Then  He  had  based  the  su- 
preme duty  of  love  to  God  upon  the  supreme 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  Unity.  He  now  proceeds 
to  show  that  the  throne  of  Deity  is  not  a  lonely 
throne,  and  to  demand.  Whose  Son  is  He  Who 
i  hares  it,  and  Whom  David  in  Spirit  accosts  by 
the  same  title  as  his  God? 

St.  Mark  is  now  content  to  give  the  merest  in- 
dication of  the  final  denunciation  with  which  the 
Lord  turned  His  back  upon  the  scribes  of  Jeru- 
salem, as  He  previously  broke  with  those  of 
Galilee.  But  it  is  enough  to  show  how  utterly 
beyond  compromise  was  the  rupture.  The  peo- 
ple were  to  beware  of  them:  their  selfish  objects 
were  betrayed  in  their  very  dress,  and  their  desire 
for  respectful  salutations  and  seats  of  honour. 
Their  prayers  were  a  pretence,  and  they  devoured 
widows'  houses,  acquiring  under  the  cloak  of  re- 
ligion what  should  have  maintained  the  friend- 
less. But  their  affected  piety  would  only  bring 
upon  them  a  darker  doom. 

It  is  a  tremendous  impeachment.  None  is  en- 
titled to  speak  as  Jesus  did,  who  is  unable  to  read 
hearts  as  He  did.  And  yet  we  may  learn  from 
it  that  mere  softness  is  not  the  meekness  He  de- 
mands, and  that,  when  sinister  motives  are  be- 
yond doubt,  the  spirit  of  Jesus  is  the  spirit  of 
burning. 

There  is  an  indulgence  for  the  wrongdoer 
which  is  mere  feebleness  and  half  compliance, 
and  which  shares  in  the  guilt  of  Eli.  And  there 
is  a  dreadful  anger  which  sins  not,  the  wrath  of 
the -Lamb,      . 

67-Vol.  XV. 


THE  WIDOW'S  MITE. 

Mark  xii.  41-44  (R.  V.). 

With  words  of  stern  denunciation  Jesus  for 
ever  left  the  temple.  Yet  He  lingered,  as  if  re- 
luctant, in  the  outer  court;  and  while  the  storm 
of  His  wrath  was  still  resounding  in  all  hearts, 
observed  and  pointed  out  an  action  of  the  low- 
liest beauty,  a  modest  flower  of  Hebrew  piety  in 
the  vast  desert  of  formality.  It  was  not  too 
modest,  however,  to  catch,  even  in  that  agitating 
hour,  the  eye  of  Jesus;  and  while  the  scribes  were 
devouring  widows'  houses,  a  poor  widow  could 
still,  with  two  mites  which  make  a  farthing,  win 
honourable  mention  from  the  Son  of  God.  Thus 
He  ever  observes  realities  among  pretences,  the 
pure  flame  of  love  amid  the  sour  smoke  which 
wreathes  around  it.  What  He  saw  was  the  last 
pittance,  cast  to  a  service  which  in  reality  was  no 
longer  God's,  yet  given  with  a  noble  earnestness, 
a  sacrifice  pure  from  the  heart. 

1.  His  praise  suggests  to  us  the  unknown  ob- 
servation, the  unsuspected  influences  which  sur- 
round us.  She  little  guessed  herself  to  be  the 
one  figure,  amid  a  glittering  group  and  where 
many  were  rich,  who  really  interested  the  all- 
seeing  Eye.  She  went  away  again,  quite  uncon- 
scious that  the  Lord  had  converted  her  two  mites 
into  a  perennial  wealth  of  contentment  for  lowly 
hearts  and  instruction  for  the  Church,  quite  ig- 
norant that  she  was  approved  of  Messiah,  and 
that  her  little  gift  was  the  greatest  event  of  all 
her  story.  So  are  we  watched  and  judged  in  our 
least  conscious  and  our  most  secluded  hours. 

2.  We  learn  St.  Paul's  lesson,  that,  "  if  the 
readiness  is  there,  it  is  acceptable  according  as 
a  man  hath,  and  not  according  as  he  hath  not." 

In  war,  in  commerce,  in  the  senate,  how  often 
does  an  accident  at  the  outset  blight  a  career  for 
ever.  One  is  taken  in  the  net  of  circumstances, 
and  his  clipped  wings  can  never  soar  again.  But 
there  is  no  such  disabling  accident  in  religion. 
God  seeth  the  heart.  The  world  was  redeemed 
by  the  blighted  and  thwarted  career  of  One  Who 
would  fain  have  gathered  His  own  city  under 
His  wing,  but  was  refused  and  frustrated.  And 
whether  we  cast  in  much,  or  only  possess  two 
mites,  an  offering  for  the  rich  to  mock.  He 
marks,  understands,  and  estimates  aright. 

And  while  the  world  only  sees  the  quality.  He 
weighs  the  motive  of  our  actions.  This  is  the 
true  reason  why  we  can  judge  nothing  before  the 
time,  why  the  great  benefactor  is  not  really 
pointed  out  by  the  splendid  benefaction,  and  why 
many  that  are  last  shall  yet  be  first,  and  the  first 
last. 

3.  The  poor  widow  gave  not  a  greater  propor- 
tion of  her  goods,  she  gave  all;  and  it  has  been 
often  remarked  that  she  had  still,  in  her  poverty, 
the  opportunity  of  keeping  back  one  half.  But 
her  heart  went  with  her  two  mites.  And,  there- 
fore, she  was  blessed.  We  may  picture  her  re- 
turn to  her  sordid  drudgery,  unaware  of  the 
meaning  of  the  new  light  and  peace  which  fol- 
lowed her,  and  why  her  heart  sang  for  joy.  We 
may  think  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in 
her,  leading  her  afterwards  into  the  Church  of 
Christ,  an  obscure  and  perhaps  illiterate  convert, 
undistinguished  by  any  special  gift,  and  only 
loved  as  the  first  Christians  all  loved  each  other. 
And  we  may  think  of  her  now,  where  the  secrets 
of  all  hearts  are  made  known,  followed  by  myr-.  > 
iads.  of  the  obscure  and  undistinguished  whoniv, 


898 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


her  story  has  sustained  and  cheered,  and  by 
some  who  knew  her  upon  earth,  and  were  aston- 
ished to  learn  that  this  was  she.  Then  let  us  ask 
ourselves,  Is  there  any  such  secret  of  unobtrusive 
lowly  service,  born  of  love,  which  the  future 
will  associate  with  me? 


CHAPTER    Xni. 

THINGS  PERISHING  AND   THINGS 
STABLE. 

Mark  xiii.  1-7  (R.  V.). 

Nothing  is  more  impressive  than  to  stand  be- 
fore one  of  the  great  buildings  of  the  world,  and 
mark  how  the  toil  of  man  has  rivalled  the  sta- 
bility of  nature,  and  his  thought  its  grandeur. 
It  stands  up  like  a  crag,  and  the  wind  whistles 
through  its  pinnacles  as  in  a  grove,  and  the  rooks 
float  and  soar  about  its  towers  as  they  do  among 
the  granite  peaks.  Face  to  face  with  one  of 
these  mighty  structures,  man  feels  his  own  petti- 
ness, shivering  in  the  wind,  or  seeking  a  shadow 
from  the  sun,  and  thinking  how  even  this  breeze 
may  blight  or  this  heat  fever  him,  and  how  at 
the  longest  he  shall  have  crumbled  into  dust  for 
ages,  and  his  name,  and  possibly  his  race,  have 
perished,  while  this  same  pile  shall  stretch  the 
same  long  shadow  across  the  plain. 

No  wonder  that  the  great  masters  of  nations 
have  all  delighted  in  building,  for  thus  they  saw 
their  power,  and  the  immortality  for  which  they 
hoped,  made  solid,  embodied  and  substantial, 
and  it  almost  seemed  as  if  they  had  blended 
their  memory  with  the  enduring  fabric  of  the 
World. 

Such  a  building,  solid,  and  vast,  and  splendid, 
white  with  marble,  and  blazing  with  gold,  was 
the  temple  which  Jesus  now  forsook.  A  little 
afterwards,  we  read  that  its  Roman  conqueror, 
whose  race  were  the  great  builders  of  the  world, 
in  spite  of  the  rules  of  war,  and  the  certainty 
that  the  Jews  would  never  remain  quietly  in  sub- 
jection while  it  stood,  "  was  reluctant  to  burn 
down  so  vast  a  work  as  this,  since  this  would  be 
a  mischief  to  the  Romans  themselves,  as  it  would 
be  an  ornament  to  their  government  while  it 
lasted." 

No  wonder,  then,  that  one  of  the  disciples,  who 
had  seen  Jesus  weep  for  its  approaching  ruin,  and 
who  now  followed  His  steps  as  He  left  it  deso- 
late, lingered,  and  spoke  as  if  in  longing  and  ap- 
peal, "  Master,  see  what  manner  of  stones,  and 
what  manner  of  buildings." 

But  to  the  eyes  of  Jesus  all  was  evanescent  as 
a  bubble,  doomed  and  ab  ut  to  perish:  "  Seest 
thou  these  great  buildings,  there  shall  not  be  left 
here  one  stone  upon  another  that  shall  not  be 
thrown  down." 

The  words  were  appropriate  to  His  solemn 
mood,  for  He  had  just  denounced  its  guilt  and 
flung  its  splendour  from  Him,  calling  it  no 
longer  "  My  house,"  nor  "  My  Father's  house," 
but  saying,  "  Your  house  is  left  unto  you  deso- 
late." Little  could  all  the  solid  strength  of  the 
very  foundations  of  the  world  itself  avail  against 
the  thunderbolt  of  God.  Moreover,  it  was  a 
time  when  He  felt  most  keenly  the  consecration, 
the  approaching  surrender  of  His  own  life.  In 
such  an  hour  no  splendours  distract  the  penetrat- 
iiig' 'vision;  all  the  world  is  brief  and  frail  and 


hollow  to  the  man  who  has  consciously  given 
himself  to  God.  It  was  the  fitting  moment  «t 
which  to  utter  such  a  prophecy. 

But,  as  He  sat  on  the  opposite  slope,  and 
gazed  back  upon  the  towers  that  were  to  fall, 
His  three  favoured  disciples  and  Andrew  came 
to  ask  Him  privately  when  should  these  thinj:s 
be,  and  what  would  be  the  sign  of  their  ap- 
proach. 

It  is  the  common  assertion  of  all  unbelievers 
that  the  prophecy  which  followed  has  been  com- 
posed since  what  passes  for  its  fulfilment.  When 
Jesus  was  murdered,  and  a  terrible  fate  befell 
the  guilty  city,  what  more  natural  than  to  con- 
nect the  two  events?  And  how  easily  would 
a  legend  spring  up  that  the  sufferer  foretold 
the  penalty?  But  there  is  an  obvious  and  com- 
plete reply.  The  prediction  is  too  mysterious, 
its  outlines  are  too  obscure;  and  the  ruin  of 
Jerusalem  is  too  inexplicably  complicated  with 
the  final  visitation  of  the  whole  earth,  to  be  tie 
issue  of  any  vindictive  imagination  working 
with  the  history  in  view. 

We  are  sometimes  tempted  to  complain  «  f 
this  obscurity.  But  in  truth  it  is  wholesome  and 
designed.  We  need  not  ask  whether  the  orij^- 
inal  discourse  was  thus  ambiguous,  or  they  aie 
right  who  suppose  that  a  veil  has  since  been 
drawn  between  us  and  a  portion  of  the  answer 
given  by  Jesus  to  His  disciples.  We  know  as 
much  as  it  is  meant  that  we  should  know.  And 
this  at  least  is  plain,  that  any  process  of  con- 
scious or  uncoriscious  invention,  working  back- 
wards after  Jerusalem  fell,  would  have  given  us 
far  more  explicit  predictions  than  we  possess. 
And,  moreover,  that  what  we  lose  in  gratifica- 
tion of  our  curiosity,  we  gain  in  personal  warn- 
ing to  walk  warily  and  vigilantly. 

Jesus  did  not  answer  the  question.  When  shall 
these  things  be?  But  He  declared,  to  men  who 
wondered  at  the  overthrow  of  their  splendid 
temple,  that  all  earthly  splendot  rs  must  perish. 
And  He  revealed  to  them  where  true  perma-. 
nence  may  be  discovered.  These  are  two  of  the 
central  thoughts  of  the  discourse,  and  they  are 
worthy  of  much  more  attention  from  its  students 
than  they  commonly  receive,  being  overlooked 
in  the  universal  eagerness  "  to  know  the  timrs 
and  the  seasons."  They  come  to  the  surfa<  e 
in  the  distinct  words,  "  Heaven  and  earth  shail 
pass  away,  but  My  words  shall  not  pass  away." 

Now,  if  we  are  to  think  of  this  great  prophecy 
as  a  lurid  reflection  thrown  back  by  later  su- 
perstition on  the  storm-clouds  of  the  nation  s 
fall,  how  shall  we  account  for  its  solemn  and 
pensive  mood,  utterly  free  from  vindictiveness, 
entirely  suited  to  Jesus  as  we  think  of  Hini, 
when  leaving  for  ever  the  dishonoured  shrine, 
and  moving  forward,  as  His  meditations  would 
surely  do,  beyond  the  occasions  which  evoked 
them?  Not  such  is  the  manner  of  resentful  con- 
troversialists, eagerly  tracing  imaginary  judg- 
ments.   They  are  narrow,  and  sharp,  and  sour. 

I.  The  fall  of  Jerusalem  blended  itself,  in  the 
thought  of  Jesus,  with  the  catastrophe  which 
awaits  all  that  appears  to  be  great  and  stable. 
Nation  shall  rise  against  nation,  and  kingdom 
against  kingdom,  so  that,  although  armies  set 
their  bodies  in  the  gap  for  these,  and  heroes 
shed  their  blood  like  water,  yet  they  are  divided 
among  themselves  and  cannot  stand.  This  pre- 
diction, we  must  remember,  was  made  when  the 
iron  yoke:  of  Rome  imposed  quiet  upon  as  much 
of  the  world  as  a  Galilean  was  likely  to  take 


Mark  xiii.  8-16.] 


THE    IMPENDING   JUDGMENT. 


899 


into  account,  and,  therefore,  was  by  no  means 
so  easy  as  it  may  now  appear  to  us. 

Nature  itself  should  be  convulsed.  Earth- 
quakes should  rend  the  earth,  blight  and  famine 
should  disturb  the  regular  course  of  seed-time 
and  harvest.  And  these  perturbations  should  be 
the  working  out  of  a  stern  law,  and  the  sure 
token  of  sorer  woes  to  come,  the  beginning  of 
pangs  which  should  usher  in  another  dispensa- 
tion, the  birth-agony  of  a  new  time.  A  little 
later,  and  the  sun  should  be  darkened,  and  the 
moon  should  withdraw  her  light,  and  the  stars 
should  "  be  falling  "  from  heaven,  and  the  pow- 
ers that  are  in  the  heaven  should  be  darkened. 
Lastly,  the  course  of  history  should  close,  and 
the  affairs  of  earth  should  come  to  an  end,  when 
the  elect  should  be  gathered  together  to  the 
glorified  Son  of  Man. 

2.  It  was  in  sight  of  the  ruin  of  all  these  things 
that  He  dared  to  add.  My  word  shall  not  pass 
away. 

Heresy  should  assail  it,  for  many  should  come 
in  the  name  of  Christ,  saying,  I  am  He,  and 
should  lead  many  astray.  Fierce  persecutions 
should  try  His  followers,  and  they  should  be 
led  to  judgment  and  delivered  up.  The  worse 
afflictions  of  the  heart  would  wring  them,  for 
brother  should  deliver  up  brother  to  death,  and 
the  father  his  child,  and  children  should  rise 
up  against  parents  and  cause  them  to  be  put 
to  death.  But  all  should  be  too  little  to  quench 
the  immortality  bestowed  upon  His  elect.  In 
their  sore  need,  the  Holy  Ghost  should  speak 
in  them:  when  they  were  caused  to  be  put  to 
death,  he  that  endureth  to  the  end,  the  same 
shall  be  saved. 

Now  these  words  were  treasured  up  as  the 
utterances  of  One  Who  had  just  foretold  His 
own  approaching  murder,  and  Who  died  ac- 
cordingly amid  circumstances  full  or  horror  and 
shame.  Yet  His  followers  rejoiced  to  think  that 
when  the  sun  grew  dark,  and  the  stars  were  fall- 
ing, He  should  be  seen  in  the  clouds  coming 
with  great  glory. 

It  is  the  reversal  of  human  judgment:  the 
announcement  that  all  is  stable  which  appears 
unsubstantial,  and  all  which  appears  solid  is 
about  to  melt  like   snow. 

And  yet  the  world  itself  has  since  grown  old 
enough  to  know  that  convictions  are  stronger 
than  empires,  and  truths  than  armed  hosts.  And 
this  is  the  King  of  Truth.  He  was  born  and 
came  into  the  world  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth, 
and  every  one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  His 
voice.  He  is  the  Truth  become  vital,  the  Word 
which  was  with  God  in  the  beginning. 


THE  IMPENDING  JUDGMENT. 

Mark  xiii.  8-16  (R.  V.). 

When  we  perceive  that  one  central  thought  in 
our  Lord's  discourse  about  the  last  things  is 
the  contrast  between  material  things  which  are 
fleeting,  and  spiritual  realities  which  abide,  a 
question  naturally  arises,  which  ought  not  to  be 
overlooked.  Was  the  prediction  itself  any  more 
than  a  result  of  profound  spiritual  insight?  Are 
we  certain  that  prophecy  in  general  was  more 
than  keenness  of  vision?  There  are  flourishing 
empires  now  which  perhaps  a  keen  politician, 
and  certainly  a  firm  believer  in  retributive  jus- 
tice governing  the  world,  must  consider  to  be 


doomed.  And  one  who  felt  the  transitory  na- 
ture of  earthly  resources  might  expect  a  time 
when  the  docks  of  London  will  resemble  the 
lagoons  of  Venice,  and  the  State  which  now  pre- 
dominates in  Europe  shall  become  partaker  of 
the  decrepitude  of  Spain.  But  no  such  presage  is 
a  prophecy  in  the  Christian  sense.  Even  when 
suggested  by  religion,  it  does  not  claim  any 
greater  certainty  than  that  of  sagacious  infer- 
ence. 

The  general  question  is  best  met  by  pointing 
to  such  specific  and  detailed  prophecies,  es- 
pecially concerning  the  Messiah,  as  the  twenty- 
second  Psalm,  the  fifty-third  of  Isaiah,  and  the 
ninth  of  Daniel. 

But  the  prediction  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem, 
while  we  have  seen  that  it  has  none  of  the 
minuteness  and  sharpness  of  an  after-thought, 
is  also  too  definite  for  a  presentiment.  The 
abomination  which  defiled  the  Holy  Place,  and 
yet  left  one  last  brief  opportunity  for  hasty  flight, 
the  persecutions  by  which  that  catastrophe  would 
be  heralded,  and  the  precipitating  of  the  crisis 
for  the  elect's  sake,  were  details  not  to  be  con- 
jectured. So  was  the  coming  of  the  great  ret- 
ribution, the  beginning  of  His  kingdom  within 
that  generation,  a  limit  which  was  foretold  at 
least  twice  besides  (Mark  ix.  i  and  xiv.  62), 
with  which  the  "  henceforth  "  in  Matthew  xxvi. 
64  must  be  compared.  And  so  was  another  cir- 
cumstance which  is  not  enough  considered:  the 
fact  that  between  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
Second  Coming,  however  long  or  short  the  in- 
terval, no  second  event  of  a  similar  character, 
so  universal  in  its  effect  upon  Christianity,  so 
epoch-making,  should  intervene.  The  coming  of 
the  Son  of  man  should  be  "  in  those  days  after 
that  tribulation." 

The  intervening  centuries  lay  out  like  a  plain 
country  between  two  mountain  tops,  and  did 
not  break  the  vista,  as  the  eye  passed  from  the 
judgment  of  the  ancient  Church,  straight  on  to 
the  judgment  of  the  world.  Shall  we  say,  then, 
that  Jesus  foretold  that  His  coming  would  follow 
speedily?  and  that  He  erred?  Men  have  been 
very  willing  to  bring  this  charge,  even  in  the 
face  of  His  explicit  assertions.  "  After  a  long 
time  the  Lord  of  that  servant  cometh.  .  .  . 
While  the  bridegroom  tarried  they  all  slumbered 
and  slept.  ...  If  that  wicked  servant  shall 
say  in  his  heart,  My  Lord  delayeth  His  com- 
ing." 

It  is  true  that  these  expressions  are  not  found 
in  St.  Mark.  But  instead  of  them  stands  a  sen- 
tence so  startling,  so  unique,  that  it  has  caused 
to  ill-instructed  orthodoxy  great  searchings  of 
heart.  At  least,  however,  the  flippant  pretence 
that  Jesus  fixed  an  early  date  for  His  return, 
ought  to  be  silenced  when  we  read,  "  Of  that 
day  or  that  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not  even  the 
angels  of  heaven,  nor  the  Son,  but  the  Father." 

These  words  are  not  more  surprising  than  that 
He  increased  in  wisdom  and  marvelled  at  the 
faith  of  some,  and  the  unbelief  of  others  (Luke 
ii.  52;  Matt.  viii.  10;  Mark  vi.  6).  They  are  in- 
volved in  the  great  assertion  that  He  not  only 
took  the  form  of  a  servant,  but  emptied  Himself 
(Phil.  ii.  7).  But  they  decide  the  question  of 
the  genuineness  of  the  discourse;  for  when  could 
they  have  been  invented?  And  they  are  to  be 
taken  in  connection  with  others,  which  speak 
of  Him  not  in  His  low  estate,  but  as  by  nature 
and  inherently,  the  Word  and  the  Wisdom  of 
God;  aware  of  all  that  the   Father  doeth;  and 


900 


THE  ^GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


Him  in  Whom  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the 
Godhead  bodily. <John  i.  i;  Luke  xi.  49;  John  v. 
20;  Col.  ji.  9).    -  .  ... 

•But  these  w«re  "the  days  of  His  flesh;"  and 
that  expressiqn  is  not  meant  to  convey  that  i\e 
Jias  since  laid,  aside  His  body,  for  He  says,  "A 
spirit  hath  not  flesh ...  .  .  as  ye  see  Me  have" 
(H-eb.  y.  ,7;  Luke  xxiv.  39).  It  must  therefore 
express,  the  .limitations,  now  removed,  by  which 
He  once  condescended  to  be  trammelled.  What 
forbids  us,  then,  to  believe  that  His  knowledge, 
like  His  poweir,  was  limited  by  a  lowliness  not 
enforced,  .but  for; .our  sakes  chosen;  and  that  as 
He  could,  have  asked  for  twelve  legions  of  an- 
g'els,  yet  chose  to  be  bound  and  buffeted,  so 
He  could  have  known  that  day  and  hour,  yet 
submitted  to  ignorance,  that  He  might  be  made 
like  jn  all  point3.  to  His  brethren?  Souls  there 
«ye  for  whom  this,  wonderful  saying,  "  the  Son 
knoweth  not/.'  is  even  more  affecting  than  the 
words,  "The  Son  of  man  hath  not  where  to  lay 
His  head."    ,  .: 

.  But  now  the  climax  must  be  observed  which 
made  His  ignorance  more  astonishing  than  that 
of  the.  angels  in  heaven.  The  recent  discourse 
must.be  rernemjjered,  which  had  asked  His  ene- 
mies to.  eJf  plain.- the  fact  that  David  called  Him 
Lord,  and  spoke  of  God  as  occupying  no  lonely 
throne.  And  we  must,  observe  His  emphatic  ex- 
pression, that  His  return  shall  be  that  of  the 
Lord  of  the  House  (ver.  35),  so  unlike  the  tem- 
per which  He.  impressed  on  every  servant,  and 
clear-ly  teaching,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to 
speak  of  His  fidelity  as  that  of  a  Son  over  His 
house,  and  to. contrast  it  sharply  with  that  of  the 
most  honourable  .servant  (iii.  6). 

It  is  plain;  hovy.ever,  that  Jesus  did  not  fix, 
and  renounce  the  power  to  fix,  a  speedy  date 
for  His  second  coming.  He  checked  the  im- 
patience of-  the  early  Church  by  insisting  that 
none  knew  the  tim.e. 

But  He  drew  the  closest  analogy  between  that 
event  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  re- 
quired a  like  (Spirit  in  those  who  looked  for 
each. 

.  Persecution  -should  go  before  them.  Signs 
would  indicate  their  approach  as  surely  as  the 
budding  of  the  fig-tree  told  of  summer.  And 
in  each  case  the .  disciples  of  Jesus  must  be 
ready.  When  the  siege  came,  they  should  not 
turn  back  from,  the  field  into  the  city,  nor  es- 
cape from  the  housetop  by  the  inner  staircase. 
When  the  Son  of  man  comes,  their  loins  should 
be  girt,  and  their  lights  already  burning.  But 
if  the  end.  has  been  so  long  delayed,  and  if  there 
were  signs  by  which  its  approach  might  be 
known,  how  could  it  be  the  practical  duty  of 
all  men,  in  all  the  ages,  to  expect  it?  What  is 
the  meaning  of.  bidding  us  to  learn  from  the 
fig-tree  her  parable,  which  is  the  approach  of 
summer  when  her,  branch  becomes  tender,  and 
yet  asserting,  that  .we  know  not  when  the  time 
is,  that  it  shall  .come  upon  us  as  a  snare,  that 
the- Mastpr  will  surely  surprise  us,  but  need  not 
find  us  unprepared,  because  all  the  Church  ought 
to  be  always: ready? 

What  does,  it  mean,  especially  when  we  ob- 
serve, beneath  the.  surface,  that  our  Lord  was 
conscious  of  addressing  more  than  that  genera- 
tion, since  He:  declared  to  the  first  hearers, 
"  What  I  say  unto  you  I  say  unto  all,  Watch  "  ? 
It,- is  a  strange  paradox.  But  yet  the  history  of 
the  Church  supplies,  abundant  proof  that  in  no 
age  has:  the  •  ej^ppcfjation  of  the  Second  Advent 


disappeared,  and  the  faithful  have  always  been 
mocked  by  the  illusion,  or  else  keen  to  discern 
the  fact,  that  He  is  near,  even  at  the  doors. 
It  is  not  enough  to  reflect  that,  for  each  soul, 
dissolution  has  been  the  preliminary  advent  of 
Him  who  has  promised  to  come  again  and  re- 
ceive us  unto  Himself,  and  the  Angel  of  Death 
is  indeed  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant.  It  must 
be  asserted  that  for  the  universal  Church,  the 
feet  of  the  Lord  have  been  always  upon  the 
threshold,  and  the  time  has  been  prolonged  only 
because  the  Judge  standeth  at  the  door.  The 
"  birth-pangs  "  of  which  Jesus  spoke  have  never 
been  entirely  stilled.  And  the  march  of  time 
has  not  been  towards  a  far-ofT  eternity,  but 
along  the  margin  of  that  mysterious  ocean,  by 
which  it  must  be  engulfed  at  last,  and  into 
which,  fragment  by  fragment,  the  beach  it  treads 
is  crumbling. 

Now  this  necessity,  almost  avowed,  for  giv- 
ing signs  which  should  only  make  the  Church 
aware  of  her  Lord's  continual  nearness,  without 
ever  enabling  her  to  assign  the  date  of  His 
actual  arrival,  is  the  probable  explanation  of 
what  has  been  already  remarked,  the  manner  in 
which  the  judgment  of  Jerusalem  is  made  to 
symbolise  the  final  judgment.  But  this  symbol- 
ism makes  the  warning  spoken  to  that  age  for 
ever  fruitful.  As  they  were  not  to  linger  in  the 
guilty  city,  so  we  are  to  let  no  earthly  inter- 
ests arrest  our  flight, — not  to  turn  back,  but 
promptly  and  resolutely  to  flee  unto  the  ever- 
lasting hills.  As  they  should  pray  that  their 
flight  through  the  mountains  should  not  be  in 
the  winter,  so  should  we  beware  of  needing  to 
seek  salvation  in  the  winter  of  the  soul,  when  the 
storms  of  passion  and  appetite  are  wildest,  when 
evil  habits  have  made  the  road  slippery  under 
foot,  and  sophistry  and  selfwill  have  hidden  the 
gulfs  in  a  treacherous  wreath  of  snow. 

Heedfulness,  a  sense  of  surrounding  peril  and 
of  the  danger  of  the  times,  is  meant  to  inspire 
us  while  we  read.  The  discourse  opens  with  a 
caution  against  heresy:  "  Take  heed  that  no  man 
deceive  you."  It  goes  on  to  caution  them  against 
the  weakness  of  their  own  flesh:  "  Take  heed  to 
yourselves,  for  they  shall  deliver  you  up."  It 
bids  them  watch,  because  they  know  not  when 
the  time  is.  And  the  way  to  watchfulness  is 
prayerfulness;  so  that  presently,  in  the  Garden, 
when  they  could  not  watch  with  Him  one  hour, 
they  were  bidden  to  watch  and  pray,  that  they 
enter  not  into  temptation. 

So  is  the  expectant  Church  to  watch  and 
pray.  Nor  must  her  mood  be  one  of  passive 
idle  expectation,  dreamful  desire  of  the  prom- 
ised change,  neglect  of  duties  in  the  interval. 
The  progress  of  all  art  and  science,  and  even 
the  culture  of  the  ground,  is  said  to  have  been 
arrested  by  the  universal  persuasion  that  the 
year  One  Thousand  should  see  the  return  of 
Christ.  The  luxury  of  millennarian  expectation 
seems  even  now  to  relieve  some  consciences 
from  the  active  duties  of  religion.  But  Jesus 
taught  His  followers  that  on  leaving  His  house, 
to  sojourn  in  a  far  country.  He  regarded  them 
as  His  servants  still,  and  gave  them  every  one 
his  work.  And  it  is  the  companion  of  that  dis- 
ciple to  whom  Jesus  gave  the  keys,  and  to  whom 
especially  He  said,  '  What,  couldest  thou  not 
watch  with  Me  one  hour?  "  St.  Mark  it  is  who 
specifies  the  command  to  the  porter  that  he 
should  watch.  To  watch  is  not  to  gaze  from  the 
roof   across    the    distant    roads.      It    is    to    have 


Mark  xiv.  1-9.] 


THE    CRUSE    OF    OINTMENT. 


901 


girded  loins  and  a  kindled  lamp;  it  is  not  meas- 
»ured  by  excited  expectation,  but  by  readiness. 
Does  it  seem  to  us  that  the  world  is  no  longer 
hostile,  because  persecution  and  torture  are  at 
an  end?  That  the  need  is  over  for  a  clear  dis- 
tinction between  her  and  us?  This  very  belief 
may  prove  that  we  are  falling  asleep.  Never 
was  there  an  age  to  which  Jesus  did  not  say 
Watch.  Never  one  in  which  His  return  would 
be  other  than  a  snare  to  all  whose  life  is  on  the 
level  of  the  world. 

Now  looking  back  over  the  whole  discourse, 
we  come  to  ask  ourselves,  What  is  the  spirit 
which  it  sought  to  breathe  into  His  Church? 
Clearly  it  is  that  of  loyal  expectation  of  the 
Absent  One.  There  is  in  it  no  hint,  that  because 
we  cannot  fail  to  be  deceived  without  Him, 
therefore  His  infallibility  and  His  Vicar  shall 
for  ever  be  left  on  earth.  His  place  is  empty 
until  He  returns.  Whoever  says  Lo,  here  is 
Christ,  is  a  deceiver,  and  it  proves  nothing  that 
he  shall  deceive  many.  When  Christ  is  mani- 
fested again,  it  shall  be  as  the  blaze  of  lightning 
across  the  sky.  There  is  perhaps  no  text  in  this 
discourse  which  directly  assails  the  Papacy;  but 
the  atmosphere  which  pervades  it  is  deadly  alike 
to  her  claims,  and  to  the  instincts  and  desires  on 
which  those  claims  rely. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  CRUSE  OF  OINTMENT. 

Mark  xiv.  1-9  (R.  V.). 

Perfection  implies  not  only  the  absence  of 
blemishes,  but  the  presence,  in  equal  proportions, 
of  every  virtue  and  every  grace.  And  so  the 
perfect  life  is  full  of  the  most  striking,  and  yet 
the  easiest  transitions.  We  have  just  read  pre- 
dictions of  trial  more  startling  and  intense  than 
any  in  the  ancient  Scripture.  If  we  knew  of 
Jesus  only  by  the  various  reports  of  that  dis- 
course, we  should  think  of  a  recluse  like  Elijah 
or  the  Baptist,  and  imagine  that  His  disciples, 
with  girded  loins,  should  be  more  ascetic  than 
St.  Anthony.  We  are  next  shown  Jesus  at  a 
supper  gracefully  accepting  the  graceful  homage 
of  a  woman. 

From  St.  John  we  learn  that  this  feast  was 
given  six  days  before  the  passover.  The  other 
accounts  postponed  the  mention  of  it,  plainly  be- 
cause of  an  incident  which  occurred  then,  but  is 
vitally  connected  with  a  decision  arrived  at  some- 
what later  by  the  priests.  Two  days  before  the 
passover,  the  council  finally  determined  that 
Jesus  must  be  destroyed.  They  recognised  all 
the  dangers  of  that  course.  It  must  be  done 
with  subtlety;  the  people  must  not  be  aroused; 
and  therefore  they  said.  Not  on  the  feast-day. 
It  is  remarkable,  however,  that  at  the  very  time 
when  they  so  determined,  Jesus  clearly  and 
calmly  made  to  His  disciples  exactly  the  oppo- 
site announcement.  "  After  two  days  the  pass- 
over  Cometh,  and  the  Son  of  man  is  delivered 
up  to  be  crucified  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  2).  Thus  we 
find  at  every  turn  of  the  narrative  that  their 
plans  are  over-ruled,  and  they  are  unconscious 
agents  of  a  mysterious  design,  which  their  Vic- 
tim comprehends  and  accepts.  On  one  side, 
perplexity  snatches  at  all  base  expedients;  the 
traitor  is  welcomed,  false  witnesses  are  sought 
after,   and   the   guards   of  the   sepulchre   bribed. 


On  the  other  side  is  clear  foresight,  the  delib- 
erate unmasking  of  Judas,  and  at  the  trial  a  cir- 
cumspect composure,  a  lofty  silence,  and  speefh 
more  majestic  still. 

Meanwhile  there  is  a  heart  no  longer  light  (for 
He  foresees  His  burial),  yet  not  so  burdened  that 
He  should  decline  the  entertainment  offered  Him 
at  Bethany. 

This  was  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper,  but 
St.  John  tells  us  that  Martha  served,  Lazarus 
sat  at  meat,  and  the  woman  who  anointed  Jesus 
was  Mary.  We  naturally  infer  some  relationship 
between  Simon  and  this  favoured  family:  but  the 
nature  of  the  tie  we  know  not,  and  no  purpose 
can  be  served  by  guessing.  Better  far  to  let 
the  mind  rest  upon  the  sweet  picture  of  Jesus, 
at  home  among  those  who  loved  Him:  upon  the 
eager  service  of  Martha;  upon  the  man  who  had 
known  death,  somewhat  silent,  one  fancies,  a  re- 
markable sight  for  Jesus,  as  He  sat  at  meat,  and 
perhaps  suggestive  of  the  thought  which  found 
utterance  a  few  days  afterwards,  that  a  banquet 
was  yet  to  come,  when  He  also,  risen  from  the 
grave,  should  drink  new  wine  among  His 
friends  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  there  the 
adoring  face  of  her  who  had  "chosen  the  better 
part  was  turned  to  her  Lord  with  a  love  which 
comprehended  His  sorrow  and  His  danger,  while 
even  the  Twelve  were  blind — an  insight  which 
knew  the  awful  presence  of  One  upon  his  way 
to  the  sepulchre,  as  well  as  one  who  had  re- 
turned thence.  Therefore  she  produced  a  tfuse 
of  very  precious  ointment,  whifch  had  been 
"kept"  for  Him,  perhaps  since  her  brother  was 
embalmed.  And  as  such  alabaster  flasks  were 
commonly  sealed  in  making,  and  only  to.be 
opened  by  breaking  off  the  neck,  she  crushed  the 
cruse  between  her  hands  and  poured  it  on  His 
head.  On  His  feet  also,  according  to  St.  John, 
who  is  chiefly  thinking  of  the  embalming  of  the 
body,  as  the  others  of  the  .anointing  of  the 
head.  The  discovery  of  contradiction  here  is 
worthy  of  the  abject  "  criticism  "  which  detects 
in  this  account  a  variation  upon'the  story  of  h'er 
who  was  a  sinner.  As  if  two  women  who  loved 
much  might  not  both  express  their  loyalty,  which 
could  not  speak,  by  so  fair  and  feminine  a  de- 
vice; or  as  if  it  were  inconceivable  that  the 
blameless  Mary  shculd  consciously  imitate  the 
gentle  penitent. 

But  even  as  this  unworthy  controversy  breaks 
in  upon  the  tender  story,  so  did  indignation  and 
murmuring  spoil  that  peaceful  scene.  "  Why 
was  not  this  ointment  sold  for  much,  and  given 
to  the  poor?  "  It  was  not  common  that  others 
should  be  more  thoughtful  of  the  poor  than 
Jesus. 

He  fed  the  multitudes  they  would  have  sent 
away;  He  gave  sight  to  Bartimseus  whom  they 
rebuked.  But  it  is  still  true,  that  whenever  gen- 
erous impulses  express  themselves  with  lavish 
hands,  some  heartless  calculator  reckons  up  the 
value  of  what  is  spent,  and  especially  its  value 
to  "  the  poor;  "  the  poor,  who  would  be  worse 
oflf  if  the  instincts  of  love  were  arrested  and  the 
human  heart  frozen.  Almshouses  are  not  usu- 
ally built  by  those  who  declaim  against  church 
architecture;  nor  is  utilitarianism  famous  for  its 
charities.  And  so  we  are  not  surprised  when 
St.  John  tells  us  how  the  quarrel  was  fomented. 
Iscariot,  the  dishonest  pursebearer,  was  exasper- 
ated at  the  loss  of  a  chance  of  theft,  perhaps  of 
absconding  without  being  so  great  a  loser  at 
the  end  of  his  three  unrequited  years.    True  that 


902 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


the  chance  was  gone,  and  speech  would  only 
betray  his  estrangement  from  Jesus,  upon  Whom 
so  much  good  property  was  wasted.  But  evil 
tempers  must  express  themselves  at  times,  and 
Judas  had  craft  enough  to  involve  the  rest  in  his 
misconduct.  It  is  the  only  indication  in  the 
Gospels  of  intrigue  among  the  Twelve  which 
even  indirectly  struck  at  their  Master's  honour. 

Thus,  while  the  fragrance  of  the  ointment  filled 
the  house,  their  parsimony  grudged  the  homage 
which  soothed  His  heart,  and  condemned  the 
spontaneous  impulse  of  Mary's  love. 

It  was  for  her  that  Jesus  interfered,  and  His 
words  went  home. 

The  poor  were  always  with  them:  opportuni- 
ties would  never  fail  those  who  were  so  zealous; 
and  whensoever  they  would  they  could  do  them 
good, — whensoever  Judas,  for  example,  would. 
As  for  her,  she  had  wrought  a  good  work  (a 
high-minded  and  lofty  work  is  implied  rather 
than  a  useful  one)  upon  Him,  Whom  they  should 
not  always  have.  Soon  His  body  would  be  in 
the  hands  of  sinners,  desecrated,  outraged.  And 
she  only  had  comprehended,  however  dimly,  the 
silent  sorrow  of  her  Master;  she  only  had  laid 
to  heart  His  warnings;  and,  unable  to  save  Him, 
or  even  to  watch  with  Him  one  hour,  she  (and 
through  all  that  week  none  other)  had  done 
what  she  could.  She  had  anointed  His  body 
beforehand  for  the  burial,  and  indeed  with  clear 
intention  "  to  prepare  Him  for  burial "  (Matt. 
xxvi.  12). 

It  was  for  this  that  His  followers  had  chidden 
her.  Alas,  how  often  do  our  shrewd  calcula- 
tions and  harsh  judgments  miss  the  very  es- 
sence of  some  problem  which  only  the  heart 
can  solve,  the  silent  intention  of  some  deed 
which  is  too  fine,  too  sensitive,  to  explain  itself 
except  only  to  that  sympathy  which  understands 
«s  all.  Men  thought  of  Jesus  as  lacking  nothing, 
and  would  fain  divert  His  honour  to  the  poor; 
but  this  woman  comprehended  the  lonely  heart, 
and  saw  the  last  inexorable  need  before  Him, 
Love  read  the  secret  in  the  eyes  of  love,  and  this 
which  Mary  did  shall  be  told  while  the  world 
stands,  as  being  among  the  few  human  actions 
which  refreshed  the  lonely  One,  the  purest,  the 
most  graceful,  and  perhaps  the  last. 


THE  TRAITOR. 

Mark  xiv.  10-16  (R.  V.). 

It  was  when  Jesus  rebuked  the  Twelve  for 
censuring  Mary,  that  the  patience  of  Judas, 
chafing  in  a  service  which  had  grown  hateful, 
finally  gave  way.  He  offered  a  treacherous  and 
odious  help  to  the  chiefs  of  his  religion,  and 
these  pious  men,  too  scrupulous  to  cast  blood- 
money  into  the  treasury  or  to  defile  themselves 
by  entering  a  pagan  judgment  hall,  shuddered 
not  at  the  contact  of  such  infamy,  warned  him 
not  that  perfidy  will  pollute  the  holiest  cause, 
cared  as  little  then  for  his  ruin  as  when  they 
asked  what  to  them  was  his  remorseful  agony; 
but  were  glad,  and  promised  to  give  him  money. 
By  so  doing,  they  became  accomplices  in  the 
only  crime  by  which  it  is  quite  certain  that  a 
soul  was  lost.  The  supreme  "  oflfence "  was 
planned  and  perpetrated  by  no  desperate  crim- 
inal. It  was  the  work  of  an  apostle,  and  his  ac- 
complices were  the  heads  of  a  divinely  given  reli- 
gion.    What  an  awful  example  of  the  deadening 


power,  palsying  the  conscience,  petrifying  the 
heart,  of  religious  observances  devoid  of  real 
trust  and  love. 

The  narrative,  as  we  saw,  somewhat  displaced 
the  story  of  Simon's  feast,  to  connect  this  in- 
cident more  closely  with  the  betrayal.  And  it 
now  proceeds  at  once  to  the  passover,  and  the 
final  crisis.  In  so  doing,  it  pauses  at  a  curious 
example  of  circumspection,  intimately  linked 
also  with  the  treason  of  Judas.  The  disciples, 
unconscious  of  treachery,  asked  where  they 
should  prepare  the  paschal  supper.  And  Jesus 
gave  them  a  sign  by  which  to  recognise  one 
who  had  a  large  upper  room  prepared  for  that 
purpose,  to  which  he  would  make  them  welcome. 
It  is  not  quite  impossible  that  the  pitcher  of 
water  was  a  signal  preconcerted  with  some  dis- 
ciple in  Jerusalem,  although  secret  understand- 
ings are  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  life  of  Jesus. 
What  concerns  us  to  observe  is  that  the  owner 
of  the  house  which  the  bearer  entered  was  a  be- 
liever. To  him  Jesus  is  "  the  Master,"  and  can 
say  "  Where  is  My  guest-chamber?" 

So  obscure  a  disciple  was  he,  that  Peter  and 
John  required  a  sign  to  guide  them  to  his  house. 
Yet  his  upper  room  would  now  receive  such  a 
consecration  as  the  Temple  never  knew.  With 
strange  feelings  would  he  henceforth  enter  the 
scene  of  the  last  supper  of  his  Lord.  But  now, 
what  if  he  had  only  admitted  Jesus  with  hesita- 
tion and  after  long  delay?  We  should  wonder; 
yet  there  are  lowlier  doors  at  which  the  same 
Jesus  stands  and  knocks,  and  would  fain  come  in 
and  sup.  And  cold  is  His  welcome  to  many 
a  chamber  which  is  neither  furnished  nor  made 
ready. 

The  mysterious  and  reticent  indication  of  the 
place  is  easily  understood.  Jesus  would  not  en- 
able His  enemies  to  lay  hands  upon  Him  before 
the  time.  His  nights  had  hitherto  been  spent  at 
Bethany;  now  first  it  was  possible  to  arrest  Him 
in  the  darkness,  and  hurry  on  the  trial  before  the 
Galileans  at  the  feast,  strangers  and  compara- 
tively isolated,  could  learn  the  danger  of  their 
"  prophet  of  Galilee."  It  was  onlv  too  certain 
that  when  the  blow  was  struck,  the  light  and 
fickle  adhesion  of  the  populace  would  transfer 
itself  to  the  successful  party.  Meanwhile,  the 
prudence  of  Jesus  gave  Him  time  for  the  Last 
Supper,  and  the  wonderful  discourse  recorded 
by  St.  John,  and  the  conflict  and  victory  in  the 
Garden.  When  the  priests  learned,  at  a  late 
hour,  that  Jesus  might  yet  be  arrested  before 
morning,  but  that  Judas  could  never  watch  Him 
any  more,  the  necessity  for  prompt  action  came 
with  such  surprise  upon  them  that  the  arrest 
was  accomplished  while  they  still  had  to  seek 
false  witnesses,  and  to  consult  how  a  sentence 
might  best  be  extorted  from  the  Governor.  It 
is  right  to  observe  at  every  point,  the  mastery 
of  Jesus,  the  perplexity  and  confusion  of  His 
foes. 

And  it  is  also  right  that  we  should  learn  to 
include,  among  the  woes  endured  for  us  by  the 
Man  of  Sorrows,  this  haunting  consciousness 
that  a  base  vigilance  was  to  be  watched  against, 
that  He  breathed  the  air  of  treachery  and  vile- 
ness. 

Here  then,  in  view  of  the  precautions  thus 
forced  upon  our  Lord,  we  pause  to  reflect  upon 
the  awful  fall  of  Judas,  the  degradation  of  an 
apostle  into  a  hireling,  a  traitor,  and  a  spy.  Men 
have  failed  to  believe  that  one  whom  Jesus  called 
to  His  side  should  smk  so  low. 


Mark  xiv.  10-16.] 


THE   TRAITOR. 


903 


They  have  not  observed  how  inevitably  great 
goodness  rejected  brings  out  special  turpitude, 
and  dark  shadows  go  with  powerful  lights;  how, 
in  this  supreme  tragedy,  all  the  motives,  pas- 
sions, moral  and  immoral  impulses  are  on  the 
tragic  scale;  what  gigantic  forms  of  baseness, 
hypocrisy,  cruelty,  and  injustice  stalk  across  the 
awful  platform,  and  how  the  forces  of  hell  strip 
themselves,  and  string  their  muscles  for  a  last 
desperate  wrestle  against  the  powers  of  heaven, 
so  that  here  is  the  very  place  to  expect  the  ex- 
treme apostasy.  And  so  they  have  conjectured 
that  Iscariot  was  only  half  a  traitor.  Some  proj- 
ect misled  him  of  forcing  his  Master  to  turn  to 
bay.  Then  the  powers  which  wasted  themselves 
iii  scattering  unthanked  and  unprofitable  bless- 
ings would  exert  themselves  to  crush  the  foe. 
1  hen  he  could  claim  for  himself  the  credit  de- 
st  rved  by  much  astuteness,  the  consideration  due 
1(1  the  only  man  of  political  resource  among  the 
Twelve.  But  this  well-intending  Judas  is  equally 
unknown  to  the  narratives  and  the  prophecies, 
and  this  theory  does  not  harmonise  with  any  of 
the  facts.  Profound  reprobation  and  even  con- 
tempt are  audible  in  all  the  narratives;  they  are 
quite  as  audible  in  the  reiterated  phrase,  "  which 
was  one  of  the  Twelve,"  and  in  almost  every 
mention  of  his  name,  as  in  the  round  assertion 
of  St.  John  that  he  was  a  thief  and  stole  from 
the  common  purse.  Only  the  lowest  motive  is 
discernible  in  the  fact  that  his  project  ripened 
just  when  the  waste  of  the  ointment  spoiled  his 
last  hope  from  apostleship, — the  hope  of  unjust 
gain,  and  in  his  bargaining  for  the  miserable 
price  which  he  still  carried  with  him  when  the 
veil  dropped  from  his  inner  eyes,  when  he  awoke 
to  the  sorrow  of  the  world  which  worketh  death, 
to  the  remorse  which  was  not  penitence. 

One  who  desired  that  Jesus  should  be  driven 
to  counter-measures  and  yet  free  to  take  them, 
would  probably  have  favoured  His  escape  when 
once  the  attempt  to  arrest  Him  inflicted  the 
necessary  spur,  and  certainly  he  would  have 
anxiously  avoided  any  appearance  of  insult.  But 
it  will  be  seen  that  Judas  carefully  closed  every 
door  against  his  Lord's  escape,  and  seized  Him 
with  something  very  like  a  jibe  on  his  recreant 
lips. 

No,  his  infamy  cannot  be  palliated,  but  it  can 
be  understood.  For  it  is  a  solemn  and  awful 
truth,  that  in  every  defeat  of  grace  the  reaction 
is  equal  to  the  action;  they  who  have  been  ex- 
alted unto  heaven  are  brought  down  far  below 
the  level  of  the  world;  and  the  principle  is  uni- 
versal that  Israel  cannot,  by  willing  it,  be  as  the 
nations  that  are  round  about,  to  serve  other 
gods.  God  Himself  gives  him  statutes  that  are 
not  good.  He  makes  fat  the  heart  and  blinds  the 
eyes  of  the  apostate.  Therefore  it  comes  that 
religion  without  devotion  is  the  mockery  of  hon- 
est worldlings;  that  hypocrisy  goes  so  constantly 
with  the  meanest  and  most  sordid  lust  of  gain, 
and  selfish  cruelty;  that  publicans  and  harlots 
enter  heaven  before  scribes  and  pharisees;  that 
salt  which  has  lost  its  savour  is  fit  neither  for 
the  land  nor  tor  ^  the  dung-hill.  Oh,  then,  to 
what  place  of  shame  shall  a  recreant  apostle  be 
thrust  down? 

Moreover  it  must  be  observed  that  the  guilt 
of  Judas,  however  awful,  is  but  a  shade  more 
dark  than  that  of  his  sanctimonious  employers, 
who  sought  false  witnesses  against  Christ,  ex- 


torted by  menace  and  intrigue  a  sentence  which 
Pilate  openly  pronounced  to  be  unjust,  mocked 
His  despairing  agony,  and  on  the  resurrection 
morning  bribed  a  pagan  soldiery  to  lie  for  the 
Hebrew  faith.  It  is  plain  enough  that  Jesus 
could  not  and  did  not  choose  the  apostles 
through  foreknowledge  of  what  they  would  here- 
after prove,  but  by  His  perception  of  what  they 
then  were,  and  what  they  were  capable  of  be- 
coming, if  faithful  to  the  light  they  should 
receive. 

Not  one,  when  chosen  first,  was  ready  to  wel- 
come the  purely  spiritual  kingdom,  the  despised 
Messiah,  the  life  of  poverty  and  scorn.  They 
had  to  learn,  and  it  was  open  to  them  to  refuse 
the  discipline.  Once  at  least  they  were  asked. 
Will  ye  also  go  away?  How  severe  was  the  trial 
may  be  seen  by  the  rebuke  of  Peter,  and  the 
petition  of  "  Zebedee's  children "  and  their 
mother.  They  conquered  the  same  reluctance  of 
the  flesh  which  overcame  the  better  part  in 
Judas.  But  he  clung  desperately  to  secular  hope, 
until  the  last  vestige  of  such  hope  was  over. 
Listening  to  the  warnings  of  Christ  against  the 
cares  of  this  world,  the  lust  of  other  things, 
love  of  high  places  and  contempt  of  lowly  service, 
and  watching  bright  offers  rejected  and  influ- 
ential classes  estranged,  it  was  inevitable  that  a 
sense  of  personal  wrong,  and  a  vindictive  re- 
sentment, should  spring  up  in  his  gloomy  heart. 
The  thorns  choked  the  good  seed.  Then  came 
a  deeper  fall.  As  he  rejected  the  pure  light  of 
self-sacrifice,  and  the  false  light  of  his  romantic 
daydreams  faded,  no  curb  was  left  on  the  baser 
instincts  which  are  latent  in  the  human  heart. 
Self-respect  being  already  lost,  and  conscience 
beaten  down,  he  was  allured  by  low  compensa- 
tions, and  the  apostle  became  a  thief.  What  bet- 
ter than  gain,  however  sordid,  was  left  to  a  life 
so  plainly  frustrated  and  spoiled?  That  is  the 
temptation  of  disillusion,  as  fatal  to  middle  life 
as  the  passions  are  to  early  manhood.  And  this 
fall  reacted  again  upon  his  attitude  towards  Jesus. 
Like  all  who  will  not  walk  in  the  light,  he  hated 
the  light;  like  all  hirelings  of  two  masters,  he 
hated  the  one  he  left.  Men  ask  how  Judas  could 
have  consented  to  accept  for  Jesus  the  blood- 
money  of  a  slave.  The  truth  is  that  his  treason 
itself  yielded  him  a  dreadful  satisfaction,  and  the 
insulting  kiss,  and  the  sneering  "  Rabbi,"  ex- 
pressed the  malice  of  his  heart.  Well  for  him  if 
he  had  never  been  born.  For  when  his  con- 
science awoke  with  a  start  and  told  him  what 
thing  he  had  become,  only  self-loathing  re- 
mained to  him.  Peter  denying  Jesus  was  never- 
theless at  heart  His  own;  a  look  sufificed  to  melt 
him. 

For  Judas,  Christ  was  become  infinitely  re- 
mote and  strange,  an  abstraction,  "  the  inno- 
cent blood,"  no  more  than  that.  And  so,  when 
Jesus  was  passing  into  the  holiest  through  the 
rent  veil  which  was  His  flesh,  this  first  Anti- 
christ had  already  torn  with  his  own  hands  the 
tissue  of  the  curtain  which  hides  eternity. 

Now  let  us  observe  that  all  this  ruin  was  the 
result  of  forces  continually  at  work  upon  human 
hearts  Aspiration,  vocation,  failure,  degrada- 
tion— it  is  the  summary  of  a  thousand  lives. 
Only  it  is  here  exhibited  on  a  vast  and  dreadful 
scale  (magnified  by  the  light  which  was  behind, 
as  images  thrown  by  a  lantern  upon  a  screen)  for 
the  instruction  and  warning  of  the  world. 


904 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


THE  SOP. 
Mark  xiv.  17-21  (R.  V.). 

In  the  deadly  wine  which  our  Lord  was  made 
to  drink,  every  ingredient  of  mortal  bitterness 
was  mingled.  And  it  shows  how  far  is  even 
His  Church  from  comprehending  Him,  that  we 
think  so  much  more  of  the  physical  than  the 
mental  and  spiritual  horrors  which  gather 
around  the  closing  scene. 

But  the  tone  of  all  the  narratives,  and  per- 
haps especially  of  St.  Mark's,  is  that  of  the  ex- 
quisite Collect  which  reminds  us  that  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  was  contented  to  be  betrayed,  and 
given  up  into  the  hands  of  wicked  men,  as  well 
as  to  suffer  death  on  the  cross.  Treason  and 
outrage,  the  traitor's  kiss,  and  the  weakness  of 
those  who  loved  Him,  the  hypocrisy  of  the 
priest  and  the  ingratitude  of  the  mob,  perjury 
and  a  mock  trial,  the  injustice  of  His  judges,  the 
brutal  outrages  of  the  soldiers,  the  worse  and 
more  malignant  mockery  of  scribe  and  Pharisee, 
and  last  and  direst,  the  averting  of  the  face  of 
God,  these  were  more  dreadful  to  Jesus  than  the 
scourging  and  the  nails. 

And  so  there  is  great  stress  laid  upon  His  an- 
ticipation of  the  misconduct  of  His  own. 

As  the  dreadful  evening  closes  in,  having  come 
to  the  guest  chamber  "  with  the  Twelve  "— 
eleven  whose  hearts  should  fail  them  and  one 
whose  heart  was  dead,  it  was  "  as  they  sat  and 
were  eating  "  that  the  oppression  of  the  traitor's 
hypocrisy  became  intolerable,  and  the  outraged 
One  spoke  out.  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  One 
of  you  shall  betray  Me,  even  he  that  eateth  with 
Me."  The  words  are  interpreted  as  well  as  pre- 
dicted in  the  plaintive  Psalm  which  says,  "  Mine 
own  familiar  friend  in  whom  I  trusted,  which 
did  also  eat  of  My  bread,  hath  lifted  up  his  heel 
against  Me."  And  perhaps  they  are  less  a  dis- 
closure than  a  cry. 

Every  attempt  to  mitigate  the  treason  of  Judas, 
every  suggestion  that  he  may  only  have  striven 
too  wilfully  to  serve  our  Lord  by  forcing  Him 
to  take  decided  measures,  must  fail  to  account 
for  the  sense  of  utter  wrong  which  breathes  in 
the  simple  and  piercing  complaint  "  one  of  you 
.  .  .  even  he  that  eateth  with  Me."  There  is 
a  tone  in  all  the  narratives  which  is  at  variance 
with  any  palliation  of  the  crime. 

No  theology  is  worth  much  if  it  fails  to  con- 
fess, at  the  centre  of  all  the  words  and  deeds  of 
Jesus,  a  great  and  tender  human  heart.  He 
might  have  spoken  of  teaching  and  warnings  lav- 
ished on  the  traitor,  and  miracles  which  he  had 
beheld  in  vain.  What  weighs  heaviest  on  His 
burdened  spirit  is  none  of  these;  it  is  that  one 
should  betray  Him  who  had  eaten  His  bread. 

When  Brutus  was  dying  he  is  made  to  say — 

"  My  heart  doth  joy,  that  yet,  in  all  my  life, 
I  found  no  man,  but  he  was  true  to  me." 

But   no   form   of  innocent   sorrow   was   to   pass 
Jesus  by. 

The  vagueness  in  the  words  "  one  of  you  shall 
betray  Me,"  was  doubtless  intended  to  suggest 
in  all  a  great  searching  of  heart.  Coming  just 
before  the  institution  of  the  Eucharistic  feast,  this 
incident  anticipates  the  command  which  it  per- 
haps suggested:  "  Let  a  man  examine  himself, 
and  so  let  him  eat."  It  is  good  to  be  distrustful 
of  one's  self.  And  if,  as  was  natural,  the  Eleven 
looked  one  upon  another  doubting  of  whom  He 


spake,  they  also  began  to  say  to  Him,  one  by 
one  (first  the  most  timid,  and  then  others  as  the 
circle  narrowed),  Is  it  I?  For  the  prince  of  this 
world  had  something  in  each  of  them, — some 
frailty  there  was,  some  reluctance  to  bear  the 
yoke,  some  longing  for  the  forbidden  ways  of 
worldliness,  which  alarmed  each  at  this  solemn 
warning,  and  made  him  ask.  Is  it,  can  it  be  possi- 
ble, that  it  is  I?  Religious  self-sufficiency  was 
not  then  the  apostolic  mood.  Their  questioning 
is  also  remarkable  as  a  proof  how  little  they  sus- 
pected Judas,  how  firmly  he  bore  himself  even 
as  those  all-revealing  words  were  spoken,  how 
strong  and  wary  was  the  temperament  which 
Christ  would  fain  have  sanctified.  For  between 
the  Master  and  him  there  could  have  been  no 
more  concealment. 

The  apostles  Vere  right  to  distrust  themselves, 
and  not  to  distrust  another.  They  were  right, 
because  th^y  were  so  feeble,  so  unlike  their 
Lord.  But  for  Him  there  is  no  misgiving:  His 
composure  is  serene  in  the  hour  of  the  power  of 
darkness.  And  His  perfect  spiritual  sensibility 
discerned  the  treachery,  unknown  to  others,  as 
instinctively  as  the  eye  resents  the  presence  of 
a  mote  imperceptible  to  the  hand. 

The  traitor's  iron  nerve  is  somewhat  strained 
as  he  feels  himself  discovered,  and  when  Jesus 
is  about  to  hand  a  sop  to  him,  he  stretches  over, 
and  their  hands  meet  in  the  dish.  That  is  the 
appointed  sign:  "  It  is  one  of  the  Twelve,  he  that 
dippeth  with  Me  in  the  dish,"  and  as  he  rushes 
out  into  the  darkness,  to  seek  his  accomplices 
and  his  revenge,  Jesus  feels  the  awful  contrast 
between  the  betrayer  and  the  Betrayed.  For 
Himself,  He  goeth  as  it  is  written  of  Him.  This 
phrase  admirably  expresses  the  co-operation  of 
Divine  purpose  and  free  human  will,  and  by  the 
woe  that  follows  He  refutes  all  who  would  make 
of  God's  fore-knowledge  an  excuse  for  human 
sin.  He  then  is  not  walking  in  the  dark  and 
stumbling,  though  men  shall  think  Him  falling. 
But  the  life  of  the  false  one  is  worse  than  utterly 
cast  away:  of  him  is  spoken  the  dark  and  omi- 
nous word,  never  indisputably  certain  of  any 
other  soul,  "  Good  were  it  for  him  if  that  man 
had  not  been  born." 

"That  man!"  The  order  and  emphasis  are 
very  strange.  The  Lord,  who  felt  and  said  that 
one  of  His  chosen  was  a  devil,  seems  here  to 
lay  stress  upon  the  warning  thought,  that  he 
who  fell  so  low  was  human,  and  his  frightful 
ruin  was  evolved  from  none  but  human  capabili- 
ties for  good  and  evil.  In  "  the  Son  of  man  " 
and  "  that  man,"  the  same  humanity  was  to  be 
found. 

For  Himself,  He  is  the  same  to-day  as  yes- 
terday. All  that  we  eat  is  His.  And  in  the  most 
especial  and  far-reaching  sense,  it  is  His  bread 
which  is  broken  for  us  at  His  table.  Has  He 
never  seen  traitor  except  one  who  violated  so 
close  a  bond?  Alas,  the  night  when  the  Supper 
of  the  Lord  was  given  was  the  same  night  when 
He  was  betrayed. 


BREAD  AND  WINE. 

Mark  xiv.  22-25  (R-  V.). 

How  much  does  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark  tell 
us  about  the  supper  of  the  Lord?  He  is  writing 
to  Gentiles.  He  is  writing  probably  before  the 
sixth  chapter  of  St.  John  was  penned,  certainly 


Mark  xiv.  22-25.] 


BREAD    AND   WINE. 


90s 


before  it  reached  his  readers.  Now  we  must  not 
undervalue  the  reflected  light  thrown  by  one 
Scripture  upon  another.  Still  less  may  we  sup- 
pose that  each  account  conveys  all  the  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharist.  But  it  is  obvious  that  St. 
Mark  intended  his  narrative  to  be  complete  in 
itself,  even  if  not  exhaustive.  No  serious  ex- 
positor will  ignore  the  fulness  of  any  word  or 
action  in  which  later  experience  can  discern 
meanings,  truly  involved,  although  not  apparent 
at  the  first.  That  would  be  to  deny  the  inspir- 
ing guidance  of  Him  who  sees  the  end  from  the 
beginning.  But  it  is  reasonable  to  omit  frorn  the 
interpretation  of  St.  Mark  whatever  is  not  either 
explicitly  there,  or  else  there  in  germ,  waiting 
underneath  the  surface  for  other  influences  to 
develop  it.  For  instance,  the  "remembrance  "  of 
Christ  in  St.  Paul's  narrative  may  (or  it  may  not) 
mean  a  sacrificial  memorial  to  God  of  His  Body 
and  His  Blood.  If  it  be,  this  notion  was  to  be 
conveyed  to  the  readers  of  this  Gospel  hereafter, 
as  a  quite  new  fact,  resting  upon  other  author- 
ity. It  has  no  place  whatever  here,  and  need 
only  be  mentioned  to  point  out  that  St.  Mark 
did  not  feel  bound  to  convey  the  slightest  hint 
of  it.  A  communion,  therefore,  could  be  profita- 
bly celebrated  by  persons  who  had  no  glimmer- 
ing of  any  such  conception.  Nor  does  he  rely, 
for  an  understanding  of  his  narrative,  upon  such 
familiarity  with  Jewish  ritual  as  would  enable  his 
readers  to  draw  subtle  analogies  as  they  went 
along.  They  were  so  ignorant  of  these  observ- 
ances that  he  had  just  explained  to  them  on  what 
day  the  passover  was  sacrificed  (ver.  12). 

But  this  narrative  conveys  enough  to  make 
the  Lord's  Supper,  for  every  believing  heart,  the 
supreme  help  to  faith,  both  intellectual  and 
spiritual,  and  the  mightiest  of  promises,  and  the 
richest  gift  of  grace. 

It  is  hard  to  imagine  that  any  reader  would 
conceive  that  the  bread  in  Christ's  hands  had  be- 
come His  body,  which  still  lived  and  breathed; 
or  that  His  blood,  still  flowing  in  His  veins, 
was  also  in  the  cup  He  gave  to  His  disciples. 
No  resort  could  be  made  to  the  glorification  of 
the  risen  Body  as  an  escape  from  the  perplexities 
of  such  a  notion,  for  in  whatever  sense  the  words 
are  true,  they  were  spoken  of  the  body  of  His 
humiliation,  before  which  still  lay  the  agony  and 
the  tomb. 

Instinct  would  revolt  yet  more  against  such  a 
gross  explanation,  because  the  friends  of  Jesus 
are  bidden  to  eat  and  drink.  And  all  the  anal- 
ogy of  Christ's  language  would  prove  that  His 
vivid  style  refuses  to  be  tied  down  to  so  lifeless 
and  mechanical  a  treatment.  Even  in  this  Gos- 
pel they  could  discover  that  seed  was  teaching, 
and  fowls  were  Satan,  and  that  they  were  them- 
selves His  mother  and  His  brethren.  Further 
knowledge  of  Scripture  would  not  impair  this 
natural  freedom  of  interpretation.  For  they 
would  discover  that  if  animated  language  were  to 
be  frozen  to  such  literalism,  the  partakers  of 
the  Supper  were  themselves,  though  many,  one 
body  and  one  loaf,  that  Onesimus  was  St.  Paul's 
very  heart,  that  leaven  is  hypocrisy,  that  Hagar 
is  Mount  Sinai,  and  that  the  veil  of  the  temple 
is  the  flesh  of  Christ  (i  Cor.  x.  17;  Philem.  ver. 
12;  Luke  xii.  i:  Gal.  iv.  25;  Heb.  x.  20).  And 
they  would  also  find,  in  the  analogous  institu- 
tion of  the  paschal  feast,  a  similar  use  of  lan- 
guage (Exod.  xii.  11). 

But  when  they  had  failed  to  discern  the  doc- 
trine of  a  transubstantiation,  how  much  was  left 


to  them.     The  great  words  remained,  in  all  their 
spirit  and  life,  "  Take  ye,  this  is  My  Body   .   . 
this  is  My  Blood  of  the  Covenant,  which  is  shed 
for  many." 

(i)  So  then,  Christ  did  not  look  forward  to 
His  death  as  to  ruin  or  overthrow.  The  Supper 
is  an  institution  which  could  never  have  been 
devised  at  any  later  period.  It  comes  to  us  by 
an  unbroken  line  from  the  Founder's  hand,  and 
attested  by  the  earliest  witnesses.  None  could 
have  interpolated  a  new  ordinance  into  th*  sim- 
ple worship  of  the  early  Church,  and  the  last 
to  suggest  such  a  possibility  should  be  those 
sceptics  who  are  deeply  interested  in  exaggerat- 
ing the  estrangements  which  existed  from  the 
first,  and  which  made  the  Jewish  Church  a  keen 
critic  of  Gentile  innovation,  and  the  Gentiles  of 
a  Jewish  novelty. 

Nor  could  any  genius  have  devised  its  yivid 
and  pictorial  earnestness,  its  copious  meaning, 
and  its  pathetic  power  over  the  heart,  except 
His,  Who  spoke  of  the  Good  Shepherd  and  of 
the  Prodigal  Son.  And  so  it  tells  us  plainly  what 
Christ  thought  about  His  own  death.  Death 
is  to  most  of  us  simply  the  close  of  life.  To 
Him  it  was  itself  an  achievement,  and  a  supreme 
one.  Now  it  is  possible  to  remember  with  ex- 
ultation a  victory  which  cost  the  conqueror's 
life.  But  on  the  Friday  which  we  call  Good, 
nothing  happened  except  the  crucifixion.  The 
efifect  on  the  Church,  which  is  amazing  and  be- 
yond dispute,  is  produced  by  the  death  of  her 
Founder,  and  by  nothing  else.  The  Supper  has 
no  reference  to  Christ's  resurrection.  It  is  as 
if  the  nation  exulted  in  Trafalgar,  not  in  spite 
of  the  death  of  our  great  Admiral,  but  solely 
because  he  died;  as  if  the  shot  which  slew  Nel- 
son had  itself  been  the  overthrow  of  hostile 
navies.  Now  the  history  of  religions  offers  no 
parallel  to  this.  The  admirers  of  the  Buddha 
love  to  celebrate  the  long  spiritual  struggle,  the 
final  illumination,  and  the  career  of  gentle  help- 
fulness. They  do  not  derive  life  and  energy  from 
the  somewhat  vulgar  manner  of  his  death.  But 
the  followers  of  Jesus  find  an  inspiration  (very 
displeasing  to  some  recent  apostles  of  good 
taste)  in  singing  of  their  Redeemer's  blood.  Re- 
move from  the  Creed  (which  does  not  even  men- 
tion His  three  years  of  teaching)  the  proclama- 
tion of  His  death,  and  there  may  be  left,  dimly 
visible  to  man,  the  outline  of  a  sage  among  the 
sages,  but  there  will  be  no  longer  a  Messiah,  nor 
a  Church.  It  is  because  He  was  lifted  up  that 
He  draws  all  men  unto  Him.  The  perpetual 
nourishment  of  the  Church,  her  bread  and  wine, 
are  beyond  question  the  slain  body  of  her  Mas- 
ter and  His  blood  poured  out  for  man. 

What  are  we  to  make  of  this  admitted  fact,  that 
from  the  first  she  thought  less  of  His  miracles. 
His  teaching,  and  even  of  His  revelation  of  the 
Divine  character  in  a  perfect  life,  than  of  the 
doctrine  that  He  who  thus  lived,  died  for  the 
men  who  slew  Him?  And  what  of  this,  that 
Jesus  Himself,  in  the  presence  of  imminent 
death,  when  men  review  their  lives  and  set  a 
value  on  their  achievements,  embodied  in  a 
solemn  ordinance  the  conviction  that  all  He  had 
taught  and  done  was  less  to  man  than  what  He 
was  about  to  suffer?  The  Atonement  is  here 
proclaimed  as  a  cardinal  fact  in  our  religion,  not 
worked  out  into  doctrinal  subtleties,  but  placed 
with  marvellous  simplicity  and  force,  in  the  fore- 
front of  the  conscioii-ness  of  the  simplest. 
What  the  Incarnation  ddfes  for  our  bewildering 


9o6 


THfi  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO   ST.    MARK. 


thoughts  of  God,  the  absolute  and  unconditioned, 
that  does  the  Eucharist  for  our  subtle  reasonings 
upon  the  Atonement. 

(2)  The  death  of  Christ  is  thus  precious,  be- 
cause He  Who  sacrificed  for  us  can  give  Him- 
self away.  "  Take  ye  "  is  a  distinct  offer.  And 
so  the  communion  feast  is  not  a  mere  com- 
memoration, such  as  nations  hold  for  great  de- 
liverances. It  is  this,  but  it  is  much  more,  else 
the  language  of  Christ  would  apply  worse  to 
that  first  supper  whence  all  our  Eucharistic  lan- 
guage is  derived,  than  to  any  later  celebration. 
When  He  was  absent,  the  bread  would  very  aptly 
remind  them  of  His  wounded  body,  and  the  wine 
of  His  blood  poured  out.  It  might  naturally  be 
said,  Henceforward,  to  your  loving  remembrance 
this  shall  be  my  Body,  as  indeed,  the  words,  As 
oft  as  ye  drink  it,  are  actually  linked  with  the 
injunction  to  do  this  in  remembrance.  But 
scarcely  could  it  have  been  said  by  Jesus,  look- 
ing His  disciples  in  the  face,  that  the  elements 
were  then  His  body  and  blood,  if  nothing  more 
than  commemoration  were  in  His  mind.  And 
so  long  as  popular  Protestantism  fails  to  look  be- 
yond this,  so  long  will  it  be  hard  pressed  and 
harassed  by  the  evident  weight  of  the  words  of 
institution.  These  are  given  in  Scripture  solely 
as  having  been  spoken  then,  and  no  interpreta- 
tion is  valid  which  attends  chiefly  to  subsequent 
celebrations,  and  only  in  the  second  place  to  the 
Supper  of  Jesus  and  the  Eleven. 

Now  the  most  strenuous  opponent  of  the  doc- 
trine that  any  change  has  passed  over  the  ma- 
terial substance  of  the  bread  and  wine,  need  not 
resist  the  palpable  evidence  that  Christ  appointed 
these  to  represent  Himself.  And  how?  Not 
only  as  sacrificed  for  His  people,  but  as  verily 
bestowed  upon  them.  Unless  Christ  mocks  us, 
"  Take  ye "  is  a  word  of  absolute  assurance. 
Christ's  Body  is  not  only  slain,  and  His  Blood 
shed  on  our  behalf;  He  gives  Himself  to  us  as 
well  as  for  us;  He  is  ours.  And  therefore  whoever 
is  convinced  that  he  may  take  part  in  "  the  sacra- 
ment of  so  great  a  mystery  "  should  realise  that 
he  there  receives,  conveyed  to  him  by  the 
Author  of  that  wondrous  feast,  all  that  is  ex- 
pressed by  the  bread  and  wine. 

(3)  And  yet  this  very  word  "  Take  ye,"  de- 
mands our  co-operation  in  the  sacrament.  It 
requires  that  we  should  receive  Christ,  as  it  de- 
clares that  He  is  ready  to  impart  Himself,  utterly, 
like  food  which  is  taken  into  the  system,  ab- 
sorbed, assimilated,  wrought  into  bone,  into  tis- 
sue, and  into  blood.  And  if  any  doubt  lingered 
in  our  minds  of  the  significance  of  this  word,  it 
is  removed  when  we  remember  how  belief  is 
identified  with  feeding,  in  St.  John's  Gospel.  "  I 
am  the  bread  of  life:  he  that  cometh  to  Me  shall 
not  hunger,  and  he  that  believeth  on  Me  shall 
never  thirst.  .  .  .  He  that  believeth  hath  eternal 
life.  I  am  the  bread  of  life."  (John  vi.  35,  47, 
48.)  If  it  follows  that  to  feed  upon  Christ  is  to 
believe,  it  also  follows  quite  as  plainly  that  belief 
is  not  genuine  unless  it  really  feeds  upon  Christ. 

It  is  indeed  impossible  to  imagine  a  more 
direct  and  vigorous  appeal  to  man  to  have  faith 
in  Christ  than  this,  that  He  formally  conveys, 
by  the  agency  of  His  Church,  to  the  hands  and 
lips  of  His  disciples,  the  appointed  emblem  of 
Himself,  and  of  Himself  in  the  act  of  blessing 
them.  For  the  emblem  is  food  in  its  most  nour- 
ishing and  in  its  most  stimulating  form,  in  a 
form  the  best  fitted  to  speak  of  utter  self-sacri- 
fice, by  the  bruised  dorn  of  broken  bread,  and 


by  the  solemn  resemblance  to  His  sacred  blood. 
We  are  taught  to  see,  in  the  absolute  absorption 
of  our  food  into  our  bodily  system,  a  type  of  the 
completeness  wherewith  Christ  gives  Himself  to 
us. 

That  gift  is  not  to  the  Church  in  the  gross, 
it  is  "divided  among"  us;  it  individualises  each 
believer;  and  yet  the  common  food  expresses  the 
unity  of  the  whole  Church  in  Christ.  Being 
many  we  are  one  bread. 

Moreover,  the  institution  of  a  meal  reminds  us 
that  faith  and  emotion  do  not  always  exist  to- 
gether. Times  there  are  when  the  hunger  and 
thirst  of  the  soul  are  like  the  craving  of  a  sharp 
appetite  for  food.  But  the  wise  man  will  not 
postpone  his  meal  until  such  a  keen  desire  re- 
turns, and  the  Christian  will  seek  for  the  Bread 
of  life,  however  his  emotions  may  flag,  and  his 
soul  cleave  unto  the  dust.  Silently  and  often 
unaware,  as  the  substance  of  the  body  is  reno- 
vated and  restored  by  food,  shall  the  inner  man 
be  strengthened  and  built  up  by  that  living 
Bread. 

(4)  We  have  yet  to  ask  the  great  question, 
what  is  the  specific  blessing  expressed  by  the  ele- 
ments, and  therefore  surely  given  to  the  faithful 
by  the  sacrament?  Too  many  are  content  to 
think  vaguely  of  Divine  help,  given  us  for  the 
merit  of  the  death  of  Christ.  But  bread  and 
wine  do  not  express  an  indefinite  Divine  help, 
they  express  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  they 
have  to  do  with  His  Humanity.  We  must  be- 
ware, indeed,  of  limiting  the  notion  overmuch. 
At  the  Supper  He  said  not  "  My  flesh,"  but  "  My 
body,"  which  is  plainly  a  more  comprehensive 
term.  And  in  the  discourse  when  He  said  "  My 
Flesh  is  meat  indeed,"  He  also  said  "  I  am  the 
bread  of  life.  .  .  .  He  that  eateth  Me,  the  same 
shall  live  by  Me."  And  we  may  not  so  carnalise 
the  Body  as  to  exclude  the  Person,  who  bestows 
Himself.  Yet  is  all  the  language  so  constructed 
as  to  force  the  conviction  upon  us  that  His  body 
and  blood.  His  Humanity,  is  the  special  gift  of 
the  Lord's  Supper.  As  man  He  redeemed  us, 
and  as  man  He  imparts  Himself  to  man. 

Thus  we  are  led  up  to  the  sublime  conception 
of  a  new  human  force  working  in  humanity. 
As  truly  as  the  life  of  our  parents  is  in  our 
veins,  and  the  corruption  which  they  inherited 
from  Adam  is  passed  on  to  us,  so  truly  there 
is  abroad  in  the  world  another  influence,  stronger 
to  elevate  than  the  infection  of  the  fall  is  to  de- 
grade; and  the  heart  of  the  Church  is  propelling 
to  its  utmost  extremities  the  pure  life  of  the 
Second  Adam,  the  Second  Man,  the  new  Father 
of  the  race.  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in 
Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive;  and  we  who  bear 
now  the  image  of  our  earthy  progenitor  shall 
hereafter  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly.  Mean- 
while, even  as  the  waste  and  dead  tissues  of  our 
bodily  frame  are  replaced  by  new  material  from 
every  meal,  so  does  He,  the  living  Bread,  impart 
not  only  aid  from  heaven,  but  nourishment, 
strength  to  our  poor  human  nature,  so  weary  and 
exhausted,  and  renovation  to  what  is  sinful  and 
decayed.  How  well  does  such  a  doctrine  of  the 
sacrament  harmonise  with  the  declarations  of  St. 
Paul:  "I  live,  and  yet  no  longer  I,  but  Christ 
liveth  in  me."  "  The  Head,  from  whom  all  the 
body  being  supplied  and  knit  together  through 
the  joints  and  bands,  increaseth  with  the  increase 
of  God  "  (Gal.  ii.  20;  Col.  ii.  19). 

(5)  In  the  brief  narrative  of  St.  Mark  there  are 
a  few  minor  points  of  interest. 


Mark  xiv.  26-31.] 


THE    WARNING. 


907 


Fasting  communions  may  possibly  be  an  ex- 
pression of  reverence  only.  The  moment  they 
are  pressed  further,  or  urged  as  a  duty,  they  are 
strangely  confronted  by  the  words,  "  While  they 
were  eating,  Jesus  took  bread." 

The  assertion  that  "  they  all  drank,"  follows 
from  the  express  commandment  recorded  else- 
where. And  while  we  remember  that  the  first 
communicants  were  not  laymen,  yet  the  em- 
phatic insistence  upon  this  detail,  and  with  refer- 
ence only  to  the  cup,  is  entirely  at  variance  with 
the  Roman  notion  of  the  completeness  of  a  com- 
munion in  one  kind. 

It  is  most  instructive  also  to  observe  how  the 
far-reaching  expectation  of  our  Lord  looks  be- 
yond the  Eleven,  and  beyond  His  infant  Church, 
forward  to  the  great  multitude  which  no  man 
can  number,  and  speaks  of  the  shedding  of  His 
blood  "  for  many."  He,  who  is  to  see  of  the 
•travail  of  His  soul  and  to  be  satisfied,  has  already 
spoken  of  a  great  supper  when  the  house  of  God 
shall  be  filled.  And  now  He  will  no  more  drink 
of  the  fruit  of  the  vine  until  that  great  day  when 
the  marriage  of  the  Lamb  having  come,  and  His 
Bride  having  made  herself  ready,  He  shall  drink 
it  new  in  the  consummated  kingdom  of  God. 

With  the  announcement  of  that  kingdom  He 
began  His  gospel:  how  could  the  mention  of  it 
be  omitted  from  the  great  gospel  of  the  Eu- 
charist? or  how  could  the  Giver  of  the  ^arthly 
feast  be  silent  concerning  the  banquet  yet  to 
•come? 


THE  WARNING. 
Mark  xiv.  26-31  (R.  V.). 

Some  uncertainty  attaches  to  the  position  of 
Christ's  warning  to  the  Eleven  in  the  narrative 
■of  the  last  evening.  Was  it  given  at  the  supper, 
or  on  Mount  Olivet;  or  were  there  perhaps  pre- 
monitory admonitions  on  His  part,  met  by  vows 
of  faithfulness  on  theirs,  which  at  last  led  Him 
to  speak  out  so  plainly,  and  elicited  such  vain- 
glorious protestations,  when  they  sat  together  in 
the  night  air? 

What  concerns  us  more  is  the  revelation  of  a 
calm  and  beautiful  nature,  at  every  point  in  the 
narrative.  Jesus  knows  and  has  declared  that 
His  life  is  now  closing,  and  His  blood  already 
"  being  shed  for  many."  But  that  does  not  pre- 
vent Him  from  joining  with  them  in  singing  a 
hymn.  It  is  the  only  time  when  we  are  told  that 
our  Saviour  sang,  evidently  because  no  other 
occasion  needed  mention;  a  warning  to  those 
who  draw  confident  infer«»Mces  from  such  facts 
as  that  "  none  ever  said  H-?  smiled,"  or  that  there 
is  no  record  of  His  havitjg  been  sick.  It  would 
surprise  such  theorists  *.o  observe  the  number  of 
biographies  much  longer  than  any  of  the  Gos- 
pels, which  also  mention  nothing  of  the  kind.  The 
Psalms  usually  sung  at  the  close  of  the  feast  are 
cxv.  and  the  three  following.  The  first  tells  how 
the  dead  praise  not  the  Lord,  but  we  will  praise 
Him  from  this  time  forth  for  ever.  The  second 
proclaims  that  the  Lord  hath  delivered  my  soul 
from  death,  mine  eyes  from  tears,  and  my  feet 
from  falling.  The  third  bids  all  the  nations 
praise  the  Lord,  for  his  merciful  kindness  is 
great  and  His  truth  endureth  for  ever.  And  the 
fourth  rejoices  because,  although  all  nations  com- 
passed me  about,  yet  I  shall  not  die,  but  live 
and  declare  the  works  of  the  Lord;  and  because 


the  stone  which  the  builders  rejected  is  become 
the  head  stone  of  the  corner.  Memories  of  in- 
finite sadness  were  awakened  by  the  words  which 
had  so  lately  rung  around  His  path:  "  Blessed 
is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord;  "  but 
His  voice  was  strong  to  sing,  "  Bind  the  sacri- 
fice with  cords,  even  to  the  horns  of  the  altar;  " 
and  it  rose  to  the  exultant  close,  "  Thou  art  my 
God,  and  I  will  praise  Thee:  Thou  art  my  God, 
I  will  exalt  Thee.  O  give  thanks  unto  the  Lord 
for  He  is  good,  for  His  mercy  endureth  for 
ever." 

This  hymn,  from  the  lips  of  the  Perfect  One, 
could  be  no  "  dying  swan-song."  It  uplifted  that 
more  than  heroic  heart  to  the  wonderful  tran- 
quillity which  presently  said,  "  When  I  am  risen, 
I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee."  It  is  full  of 
victory.  And  now  they  go  unto  the  Mount  of 
Olives. 

Is  it  enough  considered  how  much  of  the  life 
of  Jesus  was  passed  in  the  open  air?  He 
preached  on  the  hill  side;  He  desired  that  a  boat 
should  be  at  His  command  upon  the  lake;  He 
prayed  upon  the  mountain;  He  was  transfigured 
beside  the  snows  of  Hermon;  He  oft-times  re- 
sorted to  a  garden  which  had  not  yet  grown 
awful;  He  met  His  disciples  on  a  Galilean  moun- 
tain; and  He  finally  ascended  from  the  Mount  of 
Olives.  His  unartificial  normal  life,  a  pattern 
to  us,  not  as  students  but  as  men — was  spent  by 
preference  neither  in  the  study  nor  the  street. 

In  this  crisis,  most  solemn  and  yet  most  calm. 
He  leaves  the  crowded  city  into  which  all  the 
tribes  had  gathered,  and  chooses  for  His  last 
intercourse  with  His  disciples,  the  slopes  of  the 
opposite  hill  side,  while  overhead  is  glowing, 
in  all  the  still  splendour  of  an  Eastern  sky,  the 
full  moon  of  Passover.  Here  then  is  the  place 
for  one  more  emphatic  warning.  Think  how  He 
loved  them.  As  His  mind  reverts  to  the  im- 
pending blow,  and  apprehends  it  in  its  most 
awful  form,  the  very  buffet  of  God  Who  Him- 
self will  smite  the  Shepherd,  He  remembers  to 
warn  His  disciples  of  their  weakness.  We  feel 
it  to  be  gracious  that  He  should  think  of  them 
at  such  a  time.  But  if  we  drew  a  little  nearer, 
we  should  almost  hear  the  beating  of  the  most 
loving  heart  that  ever  broke.  They  were  all  He 
had.  In  them  He  had  confided  utterly.  Even 
as  the  Father  had  loved  Him,  He  also  had  loved 
them,  the  firstfruits  of  the  travail  of  His  soul- 
He  had  ceased  to  call  them  servants  and  had 
called  them  friends.  To  them  He  had  spoken 
those  affecting  words,  "  Ye  are  they  which  have 
continued  with  me  in  My  temptations."  How 
intensely  He  clung  to  their  sympathy,  imperfect 
though  it  was,  is  best  seen  by  His  repeated  ap- 
peals to  it  in  the  Agony.  And  He  knew  that 
they  loved  Him,  that  the  spirit  was  willing,  that 
they  would  weep  and  lament  for  Him,  sorrowing 
with  a  sorrow  which  He  hastened  to  add  that 
He  would  turn  into  joy. 

It  is  the  preciousness  of  their  fellowship  which 
reminds  Him  how  this,  like  all  else,  must  fail 
Him.  If  there  is  blame  in  the  words,  "  Ye 
shall  be  offended,"  this  passes  at  once  into  ex- 
quisite sadness  when  He  adds  that  He,  Who  so 
lately  said,  "  Them  that  Thou  gavest  Me,  I  have 
guarded,"  should  Himself  be  the  cause  of  their 
offence,  "  All  ye  shall  be  caused  to  stumble  be- 
cause of  Me."  And  there  is  an  unfathomable 
tenderness,  a  marvellous  allowance  for  their 
frailty  in  what  follows.  They  were  His  sheep, 
and  therefore  as  helpless,  as  little  to  be  relied 


9Q8 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


upon, '  as  sheep  when  the  shepherd  is  stricken. 
How  natural  it  was  for  sheep  to  be  scattered. 

The  world  has  no  parallel  for  such  a  warning 
to  comrades  who  are  about  to  leave  their  leader, 
so  faithful  and  yet  so  tender,  so  far  from  es- 
trangement  or  reproach. 

If  it  stood  alone  it  would  prove  the  Founder 
of  the  Church  to  be  not  only  a  great  teacher, 
but  a  genuine  Son  of  man. 

For  Himself,  He  does  not  share  their  weak- 
ness, nor  apply  to  Himself  the  lesson  of  dis- 
trustfulness  which  He  teaches  them;  He  is  of 
another  nature  from  these  trembling  sheep,  the 
Shepherd  of  Zechariah,  "  Who  is  My  fellow, 
saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts."  He  does  not  shrink 
from  applying  to  Himself  this  text,  which  awak- 
ens against  Him  the  sword  of  God  (Zechariah 
xiii.  7). 

Looking  now  beyond  the  grave  to  the  resur- 
rection, and  unestranged  by  their  desertion,  He 
resumes  at  once  the  old  relation;  for  as  the  shep- 
herd goeth  before  his  sheep,  and  they  follow  him, 
so  He  will  go  before  them  into  Galilee,  to  the 
familiar  places,  far  from  the  city  where  men  hate 
Him. 

This  last  touch  of  quiet  human  feeling  com- 
pletes an  utterance  too  beautiful,  too  characteris- 
tic to  be  spurious,  yet  a  prophecy,  and  one  which 
attests  the  ancient  predictions,  and  which  in- 
volves an  amazing  claim. 

At  first  sight  it  is  surprising  that  the  Eleven 
who  were  lately  so  conscious  of  weakness  that 
each  asked  was  he  the  traitor,  should  since  have 
become  too  self-confident  to  profit  by  a  solemn 
admonition.  But  a  little  examination  shows  the 
two  statements  to  be  quite  consistent.  They  had 
wronged  themselves  by  that  suspicion,  and  never 
is  self-reliance  more  boastful  than  when  it  is 
reassured  after  being  shaken.  The  institution  of 
the  Sacrament  had  invested  them  with  new  privi- 
leges, and  drawn  them  nearer  than  ever  to  their 
Master.  Add  to  this  the  infinite  tenderness  of 
the  last  discourse  in  St.  John,  and  the  prayer 
which  was  for  them  and  not  for  the  world.  How 
did  their  hearts  burn  within  them  as  He  said, 
"  Holy  Father,  keep  them  in  Thy  name  whom 
Thou  hast  given  Me."  How  incredible  must  it 
then  have  seemed  to  them,  thrilling  with  real 
sympathy  and  loyal  gratitude,  that  they  should 
forsake  such  a  Master. 

Nor  must  we  read  in  their  words  merely  a  loud 
and  indignant  self-assertion,  all  unworthy  of  the 
time  and  scene.  They  were  meant  to  be  a 
solemn  vow.  The  love  they  professed  was  gen- 
uine and  warm.  Only  they  forgot  their  weak- 
ness; they  did  not  observe  the  words  which  de- 
clared them  to  be  helpless  sheep,  entirely  de- 
pendent on  the  Shepherd,  whose  support  would 
speedily  seem  to  fail. 

Instead  of  harsh  and  unbecoming  criticism, 
which  repeats  almost  exactly  their  fault  by  im- 
plying that  we  should  not  yield  to  the  same 
pressure,  let  us  learn  the  lesson,  that  religious 
exaltation,  a  sense  of  special  privilege,  and  the 
glow  of  generous  emotions,  have  their  own  dan- 
ger. Unless  we  continue  to  be  as  little  children, 
receiving  the  Bread  of  Life  without  any  pretence 
to  have  deserved  it,  and  conscious  still  that  our 
only  protection  is  the  stafif  of  our  Shepherd,  then 
the  very  notion  that  we  are  something,  when  we 
are  nothing,  will  betray  us  to  defeat  and  shame. 

Peter  is  the  loudest  in  his  protestations;  and 
there  is  a  painful  egoism  in  his  boast,  that  even 
if  the  others  fail,  he  will  never  deny  Him.     So  in 


the  storm,  it  is  he  who  should  be  called  across 
the  waters.  And  so  an  early  reading  makes  him 
propose  that  he  alone  should  build  the  taber- 
nacles for  the  wondrous  Three. 

Naturally  enough,  this  egoism  stimulates  the 
rest.  For  them,  Peter  is  among  those  who  may 
fail,  while  each  is  confident  that  he  himself  can- 
not. Thus  the  pride  of  one  excites  the  pride  of 
many. 

But  Christ  has  a  special  humiliation  to  reveal 
for  his  special  self-assertion.  That  day,  and 
even  before  that  brief  night  was  over,  before  the 
second  cock-crowing  ("  the  cock-crow  "  of  the 
rest,  being  that  which  announced  the  dawn)  he 
shall  deny  his  Master  twice.  Peter  does  not  ob- 
serve that  his  eager  contradictions  are  already 
denying  the  Master's  profoundest  claims.  The 
others  join  in  his  renewed  protestations,  and 
their  Lord  answers  them  no  more.  Since  they 
refuse  to  learn  from  Him,  they  must  be  left  to 
the  stern  schooling  of  experience.  Even  before 
the  betrayal,  they  had  an  opportunity  to  judge 
how  little  their  good  intentions  might  avail. 
For  Jesus  now  enters  Gethsemane. 


IN  THE  GARDEN. 
Mark  xiv.  32-42  (R.  V.). 

All  Scripture,  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  is 
profitable;  yet  muse  we  approach  with  reverence 
and  solemn  shrinking  the  story  of  our  Saviour's 
anguish.  It  is  a  subject  for  caution  and  for  ret- 
icence, putting  away  all  over-curious  surmise, 
all  too-subtle  theorising,  and  choosing  to  say  too 
little  rather  than  too  much. 

It  is  possible  so  to  argue  about  the  metaphysics 
of  the  Agony  as  to  forget  that  a  suffering  human 
heart  was  there,  and  that  each  of  us  owes  his 
soul  to  the  victory  which  was  decided,  if  not  com- 
pleted, in  that  fearful  place.  The  Evangelists 
simply  tell  us  how  He  suffered. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  accessories  of  the  scene, 
and  gradually  approach  the  centre. 

In  the  warning  of  Jesus  to  His  disciples  there 
was  an  undertone  of  deep  sorrow.  God  will 
smite  Him,  and  they  will  all  be  scattered  like 
sheep.  However  dauntless  be  the  purport  of 
such  words,  it  is  impossible  to  lose  sight  of  their 
melancholy.  And  when  the  Eleven  rejected  His 
prophetic  warning,  and  persisted  in  trusting  the 
hearts  He  knew  to  be  so  fearful,  their  professions 
of  loyalty  could  only  deepen  His  distress,  and  in- 
tensify His  isolation. 

In  silence  He  turns  to  the  deep  gloom  of  the 
olive  grove,  aware  now  of  the  approach  of  the 
darkest  and  deadliest  assault. 

There  was  a  striking  contrast  between  the 
scene  of  His  first  temptation  and  His  last;  and 
His  experience  was  exactly  the  reverse  of  that 
of  the  first  Adam,  who  began  in  a  garden,  and 
was  driven  thence  into  the  desert,  because  he 
failed  to  refuse  himself  one  pleasure  more  be^ 
side  ten  thousand.  Jesus  began  where  the  trans- 
gression of  men  had  driven  them,  in  the  desert 
among  the  wild  beasts,  and  resisted  not  a  lux- 
ury, but  the  passion  of  hunger  craving  for  bread. 
Now  He  is  in  a  garden,  but  how  different  from 
theirs.  Close  by  is  a  city  filled  with  foenien, 
whose  messengers  are  already  on  His  track. 
Instead  of  the  attraction  o^  a  fruit  good  for  food, 
and  pleasant,  and  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise, 
there  is  the  grim  repulsion  of  death,  and  its  an- 


Mark  xiv.  34-42.] 


THE   AGONY. 


909 


guish,  and  its  shame  and  mockery.  He  is  now 
to  be  asailed  by  the  utmost  terrors  of  the  flesh 
and  of  the  spirit.  And  like  the  temptation  in  the 
wilderness,  the  asault  is  three  times  renewed. 

As  the  dark  "  hour  "  approached,  Jesus  con- 
fessed the  two  conflicting  instincts  of  our  human 
nature  in  its  extremity — the  desire  of  sympathy, 
and  the  desire  of  solitude.  Leaving  eight  of  the 
disciples  at  some  distance,  He  led  still  nearer  to 
the  appointed  place  His  elect  of  His  election,  on 
whom  He  had  so  often  bestowed  special  privi- 
lege, and  whose  faith  would  be  less  shaken  by 
the  sight  of  His  human  weakness,  because  they 
had  beheld  His  Divine  glory  on  the  holy  mount. 
To  these  He  opened  His  heart.  "  My  soul  is 
exceeding  sorrowful,  even  unto  death;  abide  ye 
here  and  watch."  And  He  went  from  them  a 
little.  Their  neighbourhood  was  a  support  in 
His  dreadful  conflict,  and  He  could  at  times  re- 
turn to  them  for  sympathy;  but  they  might  not 
enter  with  Him  into  the  cloud,  darker  and  dead- 
lier than  that  which  they  feared  on  Hermon.  He 
would  fain  not  be  desolate,  and  yet  He  must  be 
alone. 

But  when  He  returned,  they  were  asleep.  As 
Jesus  spoke  of  watching  for  one  hour,  some  time 
had  doubtless  elapsed.  And  sorrow  is  exhaust- 
ing. If  the  spirit  do  not  seek  for  support  from 
God,  it  will  be  dragged  down  by  the  flesh  into 
heavy  sleep,  and  the  brief  and  dangerous  respite 
of  oblivion. 

It  was  the  failure  of  Peter  which  most  keenly 
affected  Jesus,  not  only  because  his  professions 
had  been  so  loud,  but  because  much  depended  on 
his  force  of  character.  Thus,  when  Satan  had  de- 
sired to  have  them,  that  he  might  sift  them  all 
like  wheat,  the  prayers  of  Jesus  were  especially 
for  Simon,  and  it  was  he  when  he  was  converted 
who  should  strengthen  the  rest.  Surely  then  he 
at  least  might  have  watched  one  hour.  And 
what  of  John,  His  nearest  human  friend,  whose 
head  had  reposed  upon  His  bosom?  However 
keen  the  pang,  the  lips  of  the  Perfect  Friend  were 
silent;  only  He  warned  them  all  alike  to  watch 
and  pray,  because  they  were  themselves  in  dan 
ger  of  temptation. 

That  is  a  lesson  for  all  time.  No  affection  and 
no  zeal  are  a  substitute  for  the  presence  of  God 
realised,  and  the  protection  of  God  invoked. 
Loyalty  and  love  are  not  enough  without  watch- 
fulness and  prayer,  for  even  when  the  spirit  is 
willing,  the  flesh  is  weak,  and  needs  to  be  up- 
held. 

Thus,  in  His  severest  trial  and  heaviest  oppres- 
sion, there  is  neither  querulousness  nor  invective, 
but  a  most  ample  recognition  of  their  good  will, 
a  most  generous  allowance  for  their  weakness, 
a  most  sedulous  desire,  not  that  He  should  be 
comforted,  but  that  they  should  escape  tempta- 
tion. 

With  His  yearning  heart  unsoothed,  with  an- 
other anxiety  added  to  His  heavy  burden,  Jesus 
returned  to  His  vigil.  Three  times  He  felt  the 
wound  of  unrequited  affection,  for  their  eyes 
were  very  heavy,  and  they  wist  not  what  to  an- 
swer Him  when   He  spoke. 

Nor  should  we  omit  to  contrast  their  bewil- 
dered stupefaction,  with  the  keen  vigilance  and 
self-possession  of  their  more  heavily  burdened 
Lord. 

If  we  reflect  that  Jesus  must  needs  experience 
all  the  sorrows  that  human  weakness  and  human 
wickedness  could  inflict,  we  may  conceive  of 
these  varied  wrongs  as  circles  with  a  common 


centre,  on  which  the  cross  was  planted.  And 
our  Lord  has  now  entered  the  first  of  these;  He 
has  looked  for  pity,  but  there  was  no  man;  His 
own,  although  it  was  grief  which  pressed  them 
down,  slept  in  the  hour  of  His  anguish,  and  when 
He  bade  them  watch. 

It  is  right  to  observe  that  our  Saviour  had 
not  bidden  them  to  pray  with  Him.  They  should 
watch  and  pray.  They  should  even  watch  with 
Him.  But  to  pray  for  Him,  or  even  to  pray 
with  Him,  they  were  not  bidden.  And  this  is 
always  so.  Never  do  we  read  that  Jesus  and 
any  mortal  joined  together  in  any  prayer  to  God. 
On  the  contrary,  when  two  or  three  of  them 
asked  anything  in  His  name.  He  took  for  Him- 
self the  position  of  the  Giver  of  their  petition. 
And  we  know  certainly  that  He  did  not  invite 
them  to  join  His  prayers,  for  it  was  as  He 
was  praying  in  a  certain  place  that  when  He 
ceased,  one  of  His  disciples  desired  that  they 
also  might  be  taught  to  pray  (Luke  xi.  i). 
Clearly  then  they  were  not  wont  to  approach  the 
mercy  seat  hand  in  hand  with  Jesus.  And  the 
reason  is  plain.  He  came  directly  to  His  Father; 
no  man  else  came  unto  the  Father  but  by  Him; 
there  was  an  essential  difference  between  His 
attitude  towards  God  and  ours. 

Has  the  Socinian  ever  asked  himself  why,  in 
this  hour  of  His  utmost  weakness,  Jesus  sought 
no  help  from  the  intercession  of  even  the  chiefs 
of  the  apostles? 

It  is  in  strict  harmony  with  this  position  that 
St.  Matthew  tells  us,  He  now  said  not  Our 
Father,  but  My  Father.  No  disciple  is  taught, 
in  any  circumstances  to  claim  for  himself  a  mo- 
nopolised or  special  sonship.  He  may  be  in 
his  closet  and  the  door  shut,  yet  must  he  re- 
member his  brethren  and  say.  Our  Father.  That 
is  a  phrase  which  Jesus  never  addressed  to  God. 
None  is  partaker  of  His  Sonship;  none  joined 
with  Him  in  supplication  to  His  Father. 


THE  AGONY. 
Mark  xiv.  34-42  (R.  V.). 

Sceptics  and  believers  have  both  remarked 
that  St.  John,  the  only  Evangelist  who  was  said 
to  have  been  present,  gives  no  account  of  the 
Agony. 

It  is  urged  by  the  former,  that  the  serene  com- 
posure of  the  discourse  in  his  Gospel  leaves  no 
room  for  subsequent  mental  conflict  and  recoil 
from  suffering,  which  are  inconsistent  besides 
with  his  conception  of  a  Divine  man,  too  exalted 
to  be  the  subject  of  such  emotions. 

But  do  not  the  others  know  of  composure 
which  bore  to  speak  of  His  Body  as  broken 
bread,  and  seeing  in  the  cup  the  likeness  of  His 
Blood  shed,  gave  it  to  be  the  food  of  His  Church 
for  ever? 

Was  the  resignation  less  serene  which  spoke 
of  the  smiting  ot  the  Shepherd,  and  yet  of  His 
leading  back  the  flock  to  Galilee?  If  the  narra- 
tive was  rejected  as  inconsistent  with  the  calm- 
ness of  Jesus  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  it  should 
equally  have  repelled  the  authors  of  the  other 
three. 

We  may  grant  that  emotion,  agitation,  is  in- 
consistent with  unbelieving  conceptions  of  the 
Christ  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  But  this  only  proves 
how  false  those  conceptions  are.  For  the  emotion, 
the  agitation  is  already  there.     At  the  g^ave  of 


9IO 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


Lazarus  the  word  which  tells  that  when  He 
groaned  in  spirit  He  was  troubled,  describes 
one's  distress  in  the  presence  of  some  palpable 
opposing  force  (John  xi.  34).  There  was,  how- 
ever, a  much  closer  approach  to  His  emotion 
in  the  garden,  when  the  Greek  world  first  ap- 
proached Him.  Then  he  contrasted  its  pursuit 
of  self-culture  with  His  own  doctrine  of  self- 
sacrifice,  declaring  that  even  a  grain  of  wheat 
must  either  die  or  abide  by  itself  alone.  To 
Jesus  that  doctrine  was  no  smooth,  easily  an- 
nounced theory,  and  so  He  adds,  "  Now  is  My 
soul  troubled,  and  what  shall  I  say?  Father, 
save  Me  from  this  hour.  But  for  this  cause  came 
I  unto  this  hour  "  (John  xii.  27). 

Such  is  the  Jesus  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  by  no 
means  that  of  the  modern  analysts.  Nor  is 
enough  said,  when  we  remind  them  that  the 
Speaker  of  these  words  was  capable  of  suffering; 
we  must  add  that  profound  agitation  at  the  last 
was  inevitable,  for  One  so  resolute  in  coming  to 
this  hour,  yet  so  keenly  sensitive  of  its  dread. 

The  truth  is  that  the  silence  of  St.  John  is  quite 
in  his  manner.  It  is  so  that  he  passes  by  the 
Sacraments,  as  being  familiar  to  his  readers,  al- 
ready instructed  in  the  gospel  story.  But  he 
gives  previous  discourses  in  which  the  same  doc- 
trine is  expressed  which  was  embodied  in  each 
Sacrament, — the  declaration  that  Nicodemus 
must  be  born  of  water,  and  that  the  Jews  must 
eat  His  flesh  and  drink  His  blood.  It  is  thus 
that  instead  of  the  agony,  he  records  that  earlier 
agitation.  And  this  threefold  recurrence  of  the 
same  expedient  is  almost  incredible  except  by 
design.  St.  John  was  therefore  not  forgetful  of 
Gethsemane. 

A  coarser  infidelity  has  much  to  say  about  the 
shrinking  of  our  Lord  from  death.  Such  weak- 
ness is  pronounced  unworthy,  and  the  bearing  of 
multitudes  of  brave  men  and  even  of  Christian 
martyrs,  unmoved  in  the  flames,  is  contrasted 
with  the  strong  crying  and  tears  of  Jesus. 

It  would  suf^ce  to  answer  that  Jesus  also  failed 
not  when  the  trial  came,  but  before  Pontius  Pi- 
late witnessed  a  good  confession,  and  won  upon 
the  cross  the  adoration  of  a  fellow-suflferer  and 
the  confession  of  a  Roman  soldier.  It  is  more 
than  enough  to  answer  that  His  story,  so  far 
from  relaxing  the  nerve  of  human  fortitude,  has 
made  those  who  love  Him  stronger  to  endure 
tortures  than  were  emperors  and  inquisitors  to 
invent  them.  What  men  call  His  weakness  has 
inspired  ages  with  fortitude.  Moreover,  the  cen- 
sure which  such  critics,  much  at  ease,  pronounce 
on  Jesus  expecting  crucifixion,  arises  entirely 
from  the  magnificent  and  unique  standard  by 
which  they  try  Him;  for  who  is  so  hard-hearted 
as  to  think  less  of  the  valour  of  the  martyrs 
because  it  was  bought  by  many  a  lonely  and 
intense  conflict  with  the  flesh? 

For  us,  we  accept  the  standard;  we  deny  that 
Jesus  in  the  garden  came  short  of  absolute  per- 
fection; but  we  call  attention  to  the  fact  that 
much  is  conceded  to  us,  when  a  criticism  is  ruth- 
lessly applied  to  our  Lord  which  would  excite 
indignation  and  contempt  if  brought  to  bear  on 
the  silent  sufferings  of  any  hero  or  martyr  but 
Himself. 

Perfection  is  exactly  what  complicates  the 
problem   here. 

Conscious  of  our  own  weakness,  we  not  only 
justify  but  enjoin  upon  ourselves  every  means 
of  attaining  as  much  nobility  as  we  may.  We 
"  steel  ourselves  to  bear,"  and  therefore  we  are 


led  to  expect  the  same  of  Jesus.  We  aim  at 
some  measure  of  what,  in  its  lowest  stage,  is 
callous  insensibility.  Now  that  word  is  negative; 
it  asserts  the  absence  or  paralysis  of  a  faculty, 
not  its  fulness  and  activity.  Thus  we  attain  vic- 
tory by  a  double  process;  in  part  by  resolutely 
turning  our  mind  away,  and  only  in  part  by  its 
ascendency  over  appreciated  distress.  We  ad- 
minister anodynes  to  the  soul.  But  Jesus,  when 
He  had  tasted  thereof,  would  not  drink.  The 
horrors  which  were  closing  around  Him  were 
perfectly  apprehended,  that  they  might  perfectly 
be  overcome. 

Thus  suffering.  He  became  an  example  for 
gentle  womanhood,  and  tender  childhood,  as  well 
as  man  boastful  of  his  stoicism.  Moreover,  He 
introduced  into  the  world  a  new  type  of  virtue, 
much  softer  and  more  emotional  than  that  of 
the  sages.  The  stoic,  to  whom  pain  is  no  evil, 
and  the  Indian  laughing  and  singing  at  the  stake, 
are  partly  actors  and  partly  perversions  of  hu- 
manity. But  the  Good  Shepherd  is  also,  for  His 
gentleness,  a  lamb.  And  it  is  His  influence  which 
has  opened  our  eyes  to  see  a  charm  unknown 
before,  in  the  sensibility  of  our  sister  and  wife 
and  child.  Therefore,  since  the  perfection  of 
manhood  means  neither  the  ignoring  of  pain  nor 
the  denying  of  it,  but  the  union  of  absolute  rec- 
ognition with  absolute  mastery  of  its  fearfulness, 
Jesus,  on  the  approach  of  agony  and  shame,  and 
who  shall  say  what  besides,  yields  Himself  be- 
forehand to  the  full  contemplation  of  His  lot. 
He  does  so,  while  neither  excited  by  the  trial 
nor  driven  to  bay  by  the  scoffs  of  His  murder- 
ers, but  in  solitude,  in  the  dark,  with  stealthy 
footsteps  approaching  through  the  gloom. 

And  ever  since,  all  who  went  farthest  down 
into  the  dread  Valley,  and  on  whom  the  shadow 
of  death  lay  heaviest,  found  there  the  footsteps 
of  its  conqueror.  It  must  be  added  that  we  can- 
not measure  the  keenness  of  the  sensibility  thus 
exposed  to  torture.  A  physical  organisation  and 
a  spiritual  nature  fresh  from  the  creative  hand, 
undegraded  by  the  transmitted  heritage  of  ages 
of  artificial,  diseased,  and  sinful  habit,  unblunted 
by  one  deviation  from  natural  ways,  undrugged 
by  one  excess,  was  surely  capable  of  a  range  of 
feeling  as  vast  in  anguish  as  in  delight. 

The  sceptic  supposes  that  a  torrent  of  emotion 
swept  our  Saviour  off  His  feet.  The  only  narra- 
tives he  can  go  upon  give  quite  the  opposite  im- 
pression. He  is  seen  to  fathom  all  that  depth  of 
misery.  He  allows  the  voice  of  nature  to  utter 
all  the  bitter  earnestness  of  its  reluctance,  yet 
He  never  loses  self-control,  nor  wavers  in  loyalty 
to  His  Father,  nor  renounces  His  submission  to 
the  Father's  will.  Nothing  in  the  scene  is  more 
astonishing  than  its  combination  of  emotion  with 
self-government.  Time  after  time  He  pauses, 
gently  and  lovingly  admonishing  others,  and 
calmly  returns  to  His  intense  and  anxious  vigil. 

Thus  He  has  won  the  only  perfect  victory. 
With  a  nature  so  responsive  to  emotion,  He  has 
not  refused  to  feel,  nor  abstracted  His  soul  from 
suffering,  nor  silenced  the  flesh  by  such  an  effort 
as  when  we  shut  our  ears  against  a  discord.  Jesus 
sees  all,  confesses  that  He  would  fain  escape, 
but  resigns  Himself  to  God. 

In  the  face  of  all  asceticisms,  as  of  all  stoicisms, 
Gethsemane  is  the  eternal  protest  that  every  part 
of  human  natutre  is  entitled  to  be  heard,  provided 
that  the  spirit  retains  the  arbitration  over  all. 

Hitherto  nothing  has  been  assumed  which  a 
reasonable  sceptic  can  deny.    Nor  should  such  a 


Mark  xiv.  43-52.  J 


THE   ARREST. 


911 


reader  fail  to  observe  the  astonishing  revelation 
of  character  in  the  narrative,  its  gentle  pathos, 
its  intensity  beyond  what  commonly  belongs  to 
gentleness,  its  affection,  its  mastery  over  the  dis- 
ciples, its  filial  submission.  Even  the  rich  imag- 
inative way  of  thinking,  which  invented  the  par- 
ables and  sacraments,  is  in  the  word  "  this  cup." 

But  if  the  story  of  Gethsemane  can  be  vindi- 
cated from  such  a  point  of  view,  what  shall  be 
said  when  it  is  viewed  as  the  Church  regards 
it?  Both  Testaments  declare  that  the  sufferings 
of  the  Messiah  were  supernatural.  In  the  Old 
Testament  it  was  pleasing  to  the  Father  to  bruise 
Him.  The  terrible  cry  of  Jesus  to  a  God  who 
had  forsaken  Him  is  conclusive  evidence  from 
the  New  Testament.  And  if  we  ask  what  such 
a  cry  may  mean,  we  find  that  He  is  a  curse  for 
us,  and  made  to  be  sin  for  us.  Who  knew  no 
sin. 

If  the  older  theology  drew  incredible  conclu- 
sions from  such  words,  that  is  no  reason  why 
we  should  ignore  them.  It  is  incredible  that  God 
was  angry  with  His  Son,  or  that  in  any  sense  the 
Omniscient  One  confused  the  Saviour  with  the 
sinful  world.  It  is  incredible  that  Jesus  ever  en- 
dured estrangement  as  of  lost  souls  from  the  One 
Whom  in  Gethsemane  He  called  Abba  Father, 
and  in  the  hour  of  utter  darkness.  My  God,  and 
into  Whose  Fatherly  hands  He  committed  His 
Spirit.  Yet  it  is  clear  that  He  is  being  treated 
otherwise  than  a  sinless  Being,  as  such,  ought 
to  expect.  His  natural  standing-place  is  ex- 
changed for  ours.  And  as  our  exceeding  misery, 
and  the  bitter  curse  of  all  our  sin  fell  on  Him, 
Who  bore  it  away  by  bearing  it,  our  pollution 
surely  affected  His  purity  as  keenly  as  our  stripes 
tried  His  sensibility.  He  shuddered  as  well  as 
agonised.  The  deep  waters  in  which  He  sank 
were  defiled  as  well  as  cold.  Only  this  can  ex- 
plain the  agony  and  bloody  sweat.  And  as  we, 
for  whom  He  endured  it,  think  of  this,  we  can 
only  be  silent  and  adore. 

Once  more,  Jesus  returns  to  His  disciples,  but 
no  longer  to  look  for  sympathy,  or  to  bid  them 
watch  and  pray.  The  time  for  such  warnings 
is  now  past:  the  crisis,  "  the  hour"  is  come,  and 
His  speech  is  sad  and  solemn.  "  Sleep  on  now 
and  take  your  rest,  it  is  enough."  Had  the  sen- 
tence stopped  there,  none  would  ever  have  pro- 
posed to  treat  it  as  a  question,  "  Do  ye  now 
sleep  on  and  take  your  rest?"  It  would  plainly 
have  meant,  "  Since  ye  refuse  My  counsel  and 
will  none  of  My  reproof,  I  strive  no  further  to 
arouse  the  torpid  will,  the  inert  conscience,  the 
inadequate  affection.  Your  resistance  prevails 
against  My  warning." 

But  critics  fail  to  reconcile  this  with  what  fol- 
lows, "  Arise,  let  us  be  going."  They  fail  through 
supposing  that  words  of  intense  emotion  must 
be  interpreted  like  a  syllogism  or  a  lawyer's 
parchment. 

"  For  My  part,  sleep  on:  but  your  sleep  is  now 
to  be  rudely  broken:  take  your  rest  so  far  as 
respect  for  your  Master  should  have  kept  you 
watchful;  but  the  traitor  is  at  hand  to  break  such 
repose,  let  him  not  find  you  ignobly  slumbering. 
'  Arise,  he  is  at  hand  that  doth  betray  Me.'  " 

This  is  not  sarcasm,  which  taunts  and  wounds. 
But  there  is  a  lofty  and  profound  irony  in  the 
contrast  between  their  attitude  and  their  circum- 
stances, their  sleep  and  the  eagerness  of  the 
traitor. 

And  so  they  lost  the  most  noble  opportunity 
ever  given  to  mortals,  not  through  blank  indif- 


ference nor  unbelief,  but  by  allowing  the  flesh 
to  overcome  the  spirit.  And  thus  do  multitudes 
lose  heaven,  sleeping  until  the  golden  hours  are 
gone,  and  He  who  said,  "  Sleep  on  now,"  says, 
"  He  that  is  unrighteous,  let  him  be  unrighteous 
still." 

Remembering  that  defilement  was  far  more 
urgent  than  pain  in  our  Saviour's  agony,  how  sad 
is  the  meaning  of  the  words,  "  the  Son  of  man  is 
betrayed  into  the  hands  of  sinners,"  and  even 
of  "  the  sinners,"  the  representatives  of  all  the 
evil  from  which  He  had  kept  Himself  unspotted. 

The  one  perfect  flower  of  humanity  is  thrown 
by  treachery  into  the  polluted  and  polluting 
grasp  of  wickedness  in  its  many  forms;  the  trai- 
tor delivers  Him  to  hirelings;  the  hirelings  to 
hypocrites;  the  hypocrites  to  an  unjust  and  scep- 
tical pagan  judge;  the  judge  to  his  brutal 
soldiery;  who  expose  Him  to  all  that  malice  can 
wreak  upon  the  most  sensitive  organisation,  or 
ingratitude  upon  the  most  tender  heart. 

At  every  stage  an  outrage.  Every  outrage  an 
appeal  to  the  indignation  of  Him  who  held  them 
in  the  hollow  of  His  hand.  Surely  it  may  well  be 
said.  Consider  Him  who  endureth  such  contra- 
diction; and  endured  it  from  sinners  against 
Himself. 


THE  ARREST. 
Mark  xiv.  43-52  (R.  V.). 

St.  Mark  has  told  this  tragical  story  in  the 
most  pointed  and  the  fewest  words.  The  healing 
of  the  ear  of  Malchus  concerns  him  not,  that  is 
but  one  miracle  among  many;  and  Judas  passes 
from  sight  unfollowed:  the  thought  insisted  on 
is  of  foul  treason,  pitiable  weakness,  brute  force 
predominant,  majestic  remonstrance  and  panic 
flight.  From  the  central  events  no  accessories 
can  distract  him. 

There  cometh,  he  tells  us,  "  Judas,  one  of  the 
Twelve."  Who  Judas  was,  we  knew  already, 
but  we  are  to  consider  how  Jesus  felt  it  now. 
Before  His  eyes  is  the  catastrophe  which  His 
death  is  confronted  to  avert — the  death  of  a  soul, 
a  chosen  and  richly  dowered  soul  for  ever  lost — 
in  spite  of  so  many  warnings — in  spite  of  that 
incessant  denunciation  of  covetousness  which 
rings  through  so  much  of  His  teaching,  which 
only  the  presence  of  Judas  quite  explains,  and 
which  His  terrible  and  searching  gaze  must  have 
made  like  fire,  to  sear  since  it  could  not  melt — 
in  spite  of  the  outspoken  utterances  of  these 
last  days,  and  doubtless  in  spite  of  many  prayers, 
he  is  lost:  one  of  the  Twelve. 

And  the  dark  thought  would  fall  cold  upon 
Christ's  heart,  of  the  multitudes  more  who  should 
receive  the  grace  of  God,  His  own  dying  love,  in 
vain.  And  with  that,  the  recollection  of  many 
an  hour  of  lovingkindness  wasted  on  this  fa- 
miliar friend  in  whom  He  trusted,  and  who  now 
gave  Him  over,  as  he  had  been  expressly  warned, 
to  so  cruel  a  fate.  Even  toward  Judas,  no  un- 
worthy bitterness  could  pollute  that  sacred  heart, 
the  fountain  of  unfathomable  compassions,  but 
what  speechless  grief  must  have  been  there,  what 
inconceivable  horror.  For  the  outrage  was  dark 
in  form  as  in  essence.  Judas  apparently  con- 
ceived that  the  Eleven  might,  as  they  had  prom- 
ised, rally  around  their  Lord;  and  he  could  have 
no  perception  how  impossible  it  was  that  Messiah 
should  stoop  to  escape  under  cover  of  their  de- 


013 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    ST.    MARK. 


votion,  how  frankly  the  good  Shepherd  would 
give  His  life  for  the  sheep.  In  the  night,  he 
thought,  evasion  might  yet  be  attempted,  and 
the  town  be  raised.  But  he  knew  how  to  make 
the  matter  sure.  No  other  would  as  surely  as 
himself  recognise  Jesus  in  the  uncertain  light. 
If  he  were  to  lay  hold  on  Him  rudely,  the  Eleven 
would  close  in,  and  in  the  struggle,  the  prize 
might  yet  be  lost.  But  approaching  a  little  in 
advance,  and  peaceably,  he  would  ostentatiously 
kiss  his  Master,  and  so  clearly  point  Him  out 
that  the  arrest  would  be  accomplished  before  the 
disciples  realised  what  was  being  done. 

But  at  every  step  the  intrigue  is  overmastered 
by  the  clear  insight  of  Jesus.  As  He  foretold 
the  time  of  His  arrest,  while  yet  the  rulers  said, 
Not  on  the  feast  day,  so  He  announced  the  ap- 
proach of  the  traitor,  who  was  then  contriving 
the  last  momentary  deception  of  his  polluting 
kiss. 

We  have  already  seen  how  impossible  it  is  to 
think  of  Judas  otherwise  than  as  the  Church  has 
always  regarded  him,  an  apostate  and  a  traitor 
in  the  darkest  sense.  The  milder  theory  is  at  this 
stage  shattered  ly  one  small  yet  significant  de- 
tail. At  the  supper,  when  conscious  of  being  sus- 
pected, and  forced  to  speak,  he  said  not,  like  the 
others,  "Lord,"  but  "Rabbi,  is  it  I?"  Now 
they  meet  again,  and  the  same  word  is  on  his 
lips,  whether  by  design  and  in  Satanic  insolence, 
or  in  hysterical  agitation  and  uncertainty,  who 
can  say? 

But  no  loyalty,  however  misled,  inspired  that 
halting  and  inadequate  epithet,  no  wild  hope  of  a 
sudden  blazing  out  of  glories  too  long  concealed 
is  breathed  in  the  traitor's  Rabbi! 

With  that  word,  and  his  envenomed  kiss,  the 
"  much  kissing,"  which  took  care  that  Jesus 
should  not  shake  him  of?,  he  passes  from  this 
great  Gospel.  Not  a  word  is  here  of  his  re- 
morse, or  of  the  dreadful  path  down  which  he 
stumbled  to  his  own  place.  Even  the  lofty  re- 
monstrance of  the  Lord  is  not  recorded:  it  suf- 
fices to  have  told  how  he  betrayed  the  Son  of 
man  with  a  kiss,  and  so  infused  a  peculiar  and 
subtle  poison  into  Christ's  draught  of  deadly 
wine.  That,  and  not  the  punishment  of  that,  is 
what  St.  Mark  recorded  for  the  Church,  the  awful 
fall  of  an  apostle,  chosen  of  Christ;  the  solemn 
warning  to  all  privileged  persons,  richly  endowed 
and  highly  placed;  the  door  to  hell,  as  Bunyan 
has  it,  from  the  very  gate  of  heaven. 

A  great  multitude  with  swords  and  staves  had 
come  from  the  rulers.  Possibly  some  attempt 
at  rescue  was  apprehended  from  the  Galileans 
who  had  so  lately- triumphed  around  Jesus.  More 
probably  the  demonstration  was  planned  to  sug- 
gest to  Pilate  that  a  dangerous  political  agitation 
had  to  be  confronted. 

At  all  events,  the  multitude  did  not  terrify  the 
disciples:  cries  arose  from  their  little  band, 
"  Lord,  shall  we  smite  with  the  sword?"  and  if 
Jesus  had  consented,  it  seems  that  with  two 
swords  the  Eleven  whom  declaimers  make  to  be 
so  craven,  would  have  assailed  the  multitude  in 
arms. 

Now  this  is.  what  points  the  moral  of  their 
failure.  Few  of  us  would  confess  personal  cow- 
ardice by  accepting  a  warning  from  the  fears  of 
the  fearful.  But  the  fears  of  the  brave  must  needs 
alarm  us.  It  is  one  thing  to  defy  death,  sword 
in  hand,  in  some  wild  hour  of  chivalrous  effort — 
although  the  honours  we  shower  upon  the  valiant 
prove  that  even  such  fortitude  is  less  common 


than  we  would  fain  believe.  But  there  is  a  deep 
which  opens  beyond  this.  It  is  a  harder  thing  to 
endure  the  silent  passive  anguish  to  which  the 
Lamb,  dumb  before  the  shearers,  calls  His  fol- 
lowers. The  victories  of  the  spirit  are  beyond 
animal  strength  of  nerve.  In  their  highest  forms 
they  are  beyond  the  noble  reach  of  intellectual 
resolution.  How  far  beyond  it  we  may  learn  by 
contrasting  the  excitement  and  then  the  panic 
of  the  Eleven  with  the  sublime  composure  of 
their  Lord. 

One  of  them,  whom  we  know  to  have  been 
the  impulsive  Simon,  showed  his  loss  of  self-con' 
trol  by  what  would  have  been  a  breach  of  disci- 
pline, even  had  resistance  been  intended.  While 
others  asked  should  they  smite  with  the  sword, 
he  took  the  decision  upon  himself,  and  struck 
a  feeble  and  abortive  blow,  enough  to  exasperate 
but  not  to  disable.  In  so  doing  he  added,  to 
the  sorrows  of  Jesus,  disobedience,  and  the  in- 
flaming of  angry  passion  among  His  captors. 

Strange  it  is,  and  instructive,  that  the  first  act 
ol  violence  in  the  annals  of  Christianity  came 
not  from  her  assailants  but  from  her  son.  And 
strange  to  think  with  what  emotions  Jesus  must 
have  beheld  that  blow. 

St.  Mark  records  neither  the  healing  of  Mai-, 
chus  nor  the  rebuke  of  Peter.  Throughout  the 
events  which  now  crowd  fast  upon  us,  we  shall 
not  find  Him  careful  about  fulness  of  detail.  This 
is  never  his  manner,  though  he  loyes  any  detail 
which  is  graphic,  characteristic,  or  intensifying. 
But  his  concern  is  with  the  spirit  of  the  Lord 
and  of  His  enemies:  he  is  blind  to  no  foriti  of 
injustice  or  insult  which  heightened  the  suffer- 
ings of  Jesus,  to  no  manifestation  of  dignity  and 
self-control  overmastering  the  rage  of  hell.  If 
He  is  unjustly  tried  by  Caiaphas,  it  matters  noth- 
ing that  Annas  also  wronged  Him.  If  the  sol- 
diers of  Pilate  insulted  Him,  it  matters  noth- 
ing that  the  soldiers  of  Herod  also  set  Him  at 
nought.  Yet  the  flight  of  a  nameless  youth  is 
recorded,  since  it  adds  a  touch  to  the  picture  of 
His  abandonment. 

And  therefore  he  records  the  indignant  remon- 
strance of  Jesus  upon  the  manner  of  His  arrest. 
He  was  no  man  of  violence  and  blood,  to  be  ar- 
rested with  a  display  of  overwhelming  force.  He 
needed  not  to  be  sought  in  concealment  and  at 
midnight. 

He  had  spoken  daily  in  the  Temple,  but  then 
their  mdlice  was  defeated,  their  snares  rent  asun- 
der, and  the  people  witnessed  their  exposure. 
But  all  this  was  part  of  His  predicted  suffering, 
for  Whom  not  only  pain  but  injustice  was  fore- 
told. Who  should  be  taken  from  prison  and  from 
judgment. 

It  was  a  lofty  remonstrance.  It  showed  how 
little  could  danger  and  betrayal  disturb  His  con- 
sciousness, and  how  clearly  He  discerned  the 
calculation  of  His  foes. 

At  this  moment  of  unmistakable  surrender.  His 
disciples  forsook  Him  and  fled.  One  young 
man  did  indeed  follow  Him,  springing  hastily 
from  slumber  in  some  adjacent  cottage,  and 
wrapped  only  in  a  linen  cloth.  But  he  too,  when 
seized,  fled  away,  leaving  his  only  covering  in  the 
hands  of  the  soldiers. 

This  youth  may  perhaps  have  been  the  Evan- 
gelist himself,  of  whom  we  know  that,  a  few 
years  later,  he  joined  Paul  and  Barnabas  at  the 
outset,  but  forsook  them  when  their  journey  be- 
came perilous. 

It  is  at  least  as  probable  that  the  incident  is 


Mark  xiv.  53-65.] 


BEFORE    CAIAPHAS. 


913= 


recorded  as  a  picturesque  climax  to  that  utter 
panic  which  left  Jesus  to  tread  the  winepress 
alone,  deserted  by  all,  though  He  never  forsook 
any. 


BEFORE  CAIAPHAS. 
Mark  xiv.  53-65  (R.  V.)  . 

We  have  now  to  see  the  Judge  of  quick  and 
dead  taken  from  prison  and  judgment,  the 
Preacher  of  liberty  to  the  captives  bound,  and 
the  Prince  of  Life  killed.  It  is  the  most  solemn 
page  in  earthly  story;  and  as  we  read  St.  Mark's 
account,  it  will  concern  us  less  to  reconcile  his 
statements  with  those  of  the  other  three,  than 
to  see  what  is  taught  us  by  his  especial  manner 
of  regarding  it.  Reconciliation,  indeed,  is  quite 
unnecessary,  if  we  bear  in  mind  that  to  omit  a 
fact  is  not  to  contradict  it.  For  St.  Mark  is  not 
writing  a  history,  but  a  Gospel,  and  his  readers 
are  Gentiles,  for  whom  the  details  of  Hebrew  in- 
trigue matter  nothing,  and  the  trial  before  a  Gal- 
ilean Tetrarch  would  be  only  half  intelligible. 

St.  John,  who  had  been  an  eye-witness,  knew 
that  the  private  inquiry  before  Annas  was  vital, 
for  there  the  decision  was  taken  which  subse- 
quent and  more  formal  assemblies  did  but  ratify. 
He  therefore,  writing  last,  threw  this  ray  of  ex- 
planatory light  over  all  that  the  others  had  re- 
lated. St.  Luke  recorded  in  the  Acts  (iv.  27) 
that  the  apostles  recognised,  in  the  consent  of 
Romans  and  Jews,  and  of  Herod  and  Pilate,  what 
the  Psalmist  had  long  foretold,  the  rage  of  the 
heathen  and  the  vain  imagination  of  the  peoples, 
and  the  conjunction  of  kings  and  rulers.  His 
Gospel  therefore  lays  stress  upon  the  part  played 
by  all  of  these.  And  St.  Matthew's  readers  could 
appreciate  every  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy,  and 
every  touch  of  local  colour.  St.  Mark  offers  to 
us  the  essential  points:  rejection  and  cruelty  by 
His  countrymen,  rejection  and  cruelty  over  again 
by  Rome,  and  the  dignity,  the  elevation,  the  lofty 
silence,  and  the  dauntless  testimony  of  his  Lord. 
As  we  read,  we  are  conscious  of  the  weakness 
of  His  crafty  foes,  who  are  helpless  and  baffled, 
and  have  no  resort  except  to  abandon  their 
charges  and  appeal  to  His  own  truthfulness  to 
destroy  Him. 

He  shows  us  first  the  informal  assembly  be- 
fore Caiaphas,  whither  Annas  sent  Him  with  that 
sufficient  sign  of  his  own  judgment,  the  binding 
of  His  hands,  and  the  first  buffet,  inflicted  by 
an  officer,  upon  His  holy  face.  It  was  not  yet 
daylight,  and  a  formal  assembly  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim was  impossible.  But  what  passed  now  was 
so  complete  a  rehearsal  of  the  tragedy,  that  the 
regular  meeting  could  be  disposed  of  in  a  single 
verse. 

There  were  confusion  and  distress  among  the 
conspirators.  It  was  not  their  intention  to  have 
arrested  Jesus  on  the  feast  day,  at  the  risk  of 
an  uproar  among  the  peoole.  But  He  had  driven 
them  to  do  so  by  the  expulsion  of  their  spy,  who, 
if  they  delayed  longer,  would  be  unable  to  guide 
their  officers.  And  so  they  found  themselves 
without  evidence,  and  had  to  play  the  part  of 
prosecutors  when  they  ought  to  be  impartial 
judges.  There  is  something  frightful  in  the  spec- 
tacle of  these  chiefs  of  the  religion  of  Jehovah 
suborning  perjury  as  the  way  to  murder;  and 
it  reminds  us  of  the  solemn  truth,  that  no  wick- 
edness is  so  perfect  and  heartless  as  that  upon 
58— Vol.  IV 


which  sacred  influences  have  -long-  been  vainly- 
operating,  no  corruption  so  hateful  as  that  of  a 
dead  religion.  Presently  they -would  cause  the 
name  of  God  to  be  blaspheined  among  the 
heathen,  by  bribing  the  Roman  guards  to  Tie 
about  the  corpse.  And  the  heart  of  Jesus  was- 
tried  by  the  disgraceful  spectacle  of  many  false 
witnesses,  found  in  turn  and  paraded  against* 
Him,  but  unable  to  agree  upon  any  consistent 
charge,  while  yet  the  shameless  proceedings  were 
not  discontinued.  At  the  last  stood  up  witnesses 
to  pervert  what  He  had  spoken  at  the  first  cleans- 
ing of  the  Temple,  which  the  -second  cleansing 
had  so  lately  recalled  to  mind.  They  represented 
Him  as  saying,  "  I  am  able  to  destroy  this  temple 
made  with  hands," — or  perhaps,  "  I  will  de- 
stroy "  it,  for  their  testimony  varied  on  this, 
grave  point — "and  in  three  days  I  will  build  an- 
other made  without  hands."  It  was  for  blas-- 
pheming  the  Holy  Place  that  Stephen  died,  and 
the  charge  was  a  grave  one;  but  His  words  were 
impudently  manipulated  to  justify  it.  There  had 
been  no  proposal  to  substitute  a  different  temple, 
and  no  mention  of  the  temple  made  with  hands. 
Nor  had  Jesus  ever  proposed  to  destroy  any-^ 
thir>g.  He  had  spoken  of  their  destroying  the 
Temple  of  His  Body,  and  in  the  use  they  made  of- 
the  prediction  they  fulfilled  it. 

As  we  read  of  these  repeated  failures  before 
a  tribunal  so  unjust,  we  are  led  to  suppose  that 
opposition  must  have  sprung  up  to  disconcert 
them;  we  remember  the  councillor  of  honourable- 
estate,  who  had  not  consented  to  their  counsel 
and  deed,  and  we  think.  What  if,  even  in  that 
hour  of  evil,  one  voice  was  uplifted  for  right- 
eousness? What  if  Joseph  confessed  Him  in  the- 
conclave,  like  the  penitent  thief  upon  the  cross? 

And  now  the  high  priest,  enraged  and  alarmed 
by  imminent  failure,  rises  in  the  midst,  and  in  thtf 
face  of  all  law  cross-questions  the  prisoner,  An- 
swerest  Thou  nothing?  What  is  it  which  these- 
witness  against  Thee?  But  Jesus  will  not  be-- 
corne  their  accomplice;  He  maintains  the  silence 
which  contrasts  so  nobly  with  their  excitement; 
which  at  once  sees  through  their  schemes  and 
leaves  them  to  fall  asunder.  And  the  urgency  of 
the  occasion,  since  hesitation  now  will  give  thfe 
city  time  to  rise,  drives  them  to  a  desperate  ex- 
pedient. Without  discussion  of  His  claims,  with- 
out considering  that  some  day  there  must  be 
some  Messiah  (else  what  is  their  faith  and  who 
are  they),  they  will  treat  it  as  blasphemous  and 
a  capital  offence  simply  to  claim  that  title.  Caia- 
phas adjures  Him  by  their  common  God  to  an- 
swer. Art  Thou  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
Blessed?  So  then  they  were  not  utterly  ignorant 
of  the  higher  nature  of  the  Son  of  David:  they 
remembered  the  words.  Thou  art  My  Son,  this 
day  have  I  begotten  Thee.  But  the  only  use 
they  ever  made  of  their  knowledge  was  to 
heighten  to  the  uttermost  the  Messianic  dignity 
which  they  would  make  it  death  to  claim.  And 
the  prisoner  knew  well  the  consequences  of  re- 
plying. But  He  had  come  into  the  world  to 
bear  witness  to  the  truth,  and  this  was  the  cen- 
tral truth  of  all.  "  And  Jesus  said,  I  am."  Now 
Renan  tells  us  that  He  was  the  greatest  religious 
genius  who  ever  lived,  or  probably  ever  shall 
live.  Mill  tells  us  that  religion  cannot  be  said 
to  have  made  a  bad  choice  in  pitching  on  this 
Man  as  the  ideal  representative  and  guide  of 
humanity.  And  Strauss  thinks  that  we  know 
enough  of  Him  to  assert  that  His  consciousness 
was  unclouded  by  the  memory  of  any  sin.    Well, 


914 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


then,  if  anything  in  the  life  of  Jesus  is  beyond 
controversy,  it  is  this,  that  the  sinless  Man,  our 
ideal  representative  and  guide,  the  greatest  re- 
ligous  genius  of  the  race,  died  for  asserting  upon 
oath  that  He  was  the  Son  of  God.  A  good  deal 
has  been  said  lately,  both  wise  and  foolish,  about 
Comparative  Religion:  is  there  anything  to  com- 
pare with  this?  Lunatics,  with  this  example  be- 
fore their  eyes,  have  conceived  wild  and  dreadful 
infatuations.  But  these  are  the  words  of  Him 
whose  character  has  dominated  nineteen  centu- 
ries, and  changed  the  history  of  the  world.  And 
they  stand  alone  in  the  records  of  mankind. 

As  Jesus  spoke  the  fatal  words,  as  malice  and 
hatred  lighted  the  faces  of  His  wicked  judges 
with  a  base  and  ignoble  joy,  what  was  His  own 
thought?  We  know  it  by  the  warning  that  He 
added.  They  supposed  themselves  judges  and  ir- 
responsible, but  there  should  yet  be  another  tri- 
bunal, with  justice  of  a  far  different  kind,  and 
there  they  should  occupy  another  place.  For 
all  that  was  passing  before  His  eyes,  so  false, 
hypocritical,  and  murderous,  there  was  no  lasting 
victory,  no  impunity,  no  escape:  "Ye  shall  see 
the  Son  of  man  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  power 
and  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven."  There- 
fore His  apostle  Peter  tells  us  that  in  this  hour, 
when  He  was  reviled  and  reviled  not  again,  "  He 
committed  Himself  to  Him  that  judgeth  right- 
eously "  (i  Peter  ii.  23). 

He  had  now  quoted  that  great  vision  in  which 
the  prophet  Daniel  saw  Him  brought  near  unto 
the  Ancient  of  Days,  and  invested  with  an  ever- 
lasting dominion  (Dan.  vii.  13,  14).  But  St. 
Matthew  adds  one  memorable  word.  He  did  not 
warn  them,  and  He  was  not  Himself  sustained, 
only  by  the  mention  of  a  far-off  judgment:  He 
said  they  should  behold  Him  thus  "  henceforth." 
And  that  very  day  they  saw  the  veil  of  their 
temple  rent,  felt  the  world  convulsed,  and  re- 
membered in  their  terror  that  He  had  foretold 
His  own  death  and  resurrection,  against  which 
they  had  still  to  guard.  And  in  the  open  sepul- 
chre, and  the  supernatural  vision  told  them  by 
its  keepers,  in  great  and  notable  miracles 
wrought  by  the  name  of  Jesus,  in  the  desertion 
of  a  great  multitude  even  of  priests,  and  their 
own  fear  to  be  found  fighting  against  God,  in 
all  this  the  rise  of  that  new  power  was  hence- 
forth plainly  visible,  which  was  presently  to  bury 
them  and  their  children  under  the  ruins  of  their 
temple  and  their  palaces.  But  for  the  moment 
the  high-priest  was  only  relieved;  and  he  pro- 
ceeded, rending  his  clothes,  to  announce  his 
judgment,  before  consulting  the  court,  who  had 
no  further  need  of  witnesses,  and  were  quite  con- 
tent to  become  formally  the  accusers  before 
themselves.  The  sentence  of  this  irregular  and 
informal  court  was  now  pronounced,  to  fit  them 
for  bearing  part,  at  sunrise,  in  what  should  be  an 
unbiassed  trial;  and  while  they  awaited  the  dawn 
Jesus  was  abandoned  to  the  brutality  of  their  ser- 
vants, one  of  whom  he  had  healed  that  very 
night.  They  spat  on  the  Lord  of  Glory.  They 
covered  His  face,  an  act  which  was  the  symbol 
of  a  death  sentence  (Esther  vii.  8),  and  then  they 
buffeted  Him,  and  invited  Him  to  prophesy  who 
smote  Him.  And  the  officers  "  received  Him  " 
with  blows. 

What  was  the  meaning  of  this  outburst  of  sav- 
age cruelty  of  men  whom  Jesus  had  never 
wronged,  and  some  of  whose  friends  must  have 
shared  His  super-human  gifts  of  love?  Partly 
it  was  the  instinct  of  low  natures  to  trample  on 


the  fallen,  and  partly  the  result  of  partisanship. 
For  these  servants  of  the  priests  must  have  seen 
many  evidences  of  the  hate  and  dread  with  which 
their  masters  regarded  Jesus.  But  there  was 
doubtless  another  motive.  Not  without  fear,  we 
may  be  certain,  had  they  gone  forth  to  arrest  at 
midnight  the  Personage  of  whom  so  many  mirac- 
ulous tales  were  universally  believed.  They  must 
have  remembered  the  captains  of  fifty  whom  Eli- 
jah consumed  with  fire.  And  in  fact  there  was 
a  moment  when  they  all  fell  prostrate  before  His 
majestic  presence.  But  now  their  terror  was  at 
an  end:  He  was  helpless  in  their  hands;  and  they 
revenged  their  fears  upon  the  Author  of  them. 

Thus  Jesus  suffered  shame  to  make  us  par- 
takers of  His  glory;  and  the  veil  of  death  covered 
His  head,  that  He  might  destroy  the  face  of  the 
covering  cast  over  all  peoples,  and  the  veil  that 
was  spread  over  all  nations.  And  even  in  this 
moment  of  bitterest  outrage  He  remembered  and 
rescued  a  soul  in  the  extreme  of  jeopardy,  for  it 
was  now  that  the  Lord  turned  and  looked  upon 
Peter. 


THE  FALL  OF  PETER. 
Mark  xiv.  66-72  (R.  V.). 

The  fall  of  Peter  has  called  forth  the  easy 
scorn  of  multitudes  who  never  ran  any  risk  for 
Christ.  But  if  he  had  been  a  coward,  and  his 
denial  a  dastardly  weakness,  it  would  not  be  a 
warning  for  the  whole  Church,  but  only  for 
feeble  natures.  Whereas  the  lesson  which  it 
proclaims  is  this  deep  and  solemn  one,  that  no 
natural  endowments  can  bear  the  strain  of  the 
spiritual  life.  Peter  had  dared  to  smite  when 
only  two  swords  were  forthcoming  against  the 
band  of  Roman  soldiers  and  the  multitude  from 
the  chief  priests.  After  the  panic  in  which  all 
forsook  Jesus,  and  so  fulfilled  the  prediction  "  ye 
shall  leave  Me  alone,"  none  ventured  so  far  as 
Peter.  John  indeed  accompanied  him;  but  John 
ran  little  risk,  he  had  influence  and  was  therefore 
left  unassailed,  whereas  Peter  was  friendless  and 
a  mark  for  all  men,  and  had  made  himself  con- 
spicuous in  the  garden.  Of  those  who  declaim 
about  his  want  of  ccyurage  few  indeed  would  have 
dared  so  much.  And  whoever  misunderstands 
him,  Jesus  did  not.  He  said  to  him,  "  Satan 
hath  desired  to  have  you  (all)  that  he  may  sift 
you  like  wheat,  but  I  have  prayed  for  thee  (es- 
pecially)  that  thy  strength  fail  not."  Around 
him  the  fiercest  of  the  struggle  was  to  rage,  as 
around  some  point  of  vantage  on  a  battlefield; 
and  it  was  he,  when  once  he  had  turned  again, 
who  should  establish  his  brethren  (Luke  xxii.  31, 
32). 

God  forbid  that  we  should  speak  one  light  or 
scornful  word  of  this  great  apostle!  God  grant 
us,  if  our  footsteps  slip,  the  heart  to  weep  such 
tears  as  his. 

Peter  was  a  loving,  brave,  and  loyal  man.  But 
the  circumstances  were  not  such  as  human  brav- 
ery could  deal  with.  Resistance,  which  would 
have  kindled  his  spirit,  had  been  forbidden  to 
him,  and  was  now  impossible.  The  public  was 
shut  out,  and  he  was  practically  alone  among  his 
enemies.  He  had  come  "  to  see  the  end,"  and 
it  was  a  miserable  sight  that  he  beheld.  Jesus 
was  passive,  silent,  insulted:  His  foes  fierce,  un- 
scrupulous, and  confident.  And  Peter  was  more 
and  more  conscious  of  being  alone,  in  peril,  and 


Mark  xv.  1-20.] 


PILATE. 


9»5 


utterly  without  resource.  Moreover  sleepless- 
ness and  misery  lead  to  physical  languor  and 
cold,*  and  as  the  officers  had  kindled  a  fire,  he 
was  drawn  thither,  like  a  moth,  by  the  double 
wish  to  avoid  isolation  and  to  warm  himself.  In 
thus  seeking  to  pass  for  one  of  the  crowd,  he 
showed  himself  ashamed  of  Jesus,  and  incurred 
the  menaced  penalty,  "  of  him  shall  the  Son  of 
man  be  ashamed,  when  He  cometh."  And  the 
method  of  self-concealment  which  he  adopted 
only  showed  his  face,  strongly  illuminated,  as  St. 
Mark  tells  us,  by  the  flame. 

If  now  we  ask  for  the  secret  of  his  failing  reso- 
lution, we  can  trace  the  disease  far  back.  It  was 
self-confidence.  He  reckoned  himself  the  one  to 
walk  upon  the  waters.  He  could  not  be  silent 
on  the  holy  mount,  when  Jesus  held  high  com- 
munion with  the  inhabitants  of  heaven.  He  re- 
buked the  Lord  for  dark  forebodings.  When 
Jesus  would  wash  his  feet,  although  expressly 
told  that  he  should  understand  the  act  hereafter, 
he  rejoined.  Thou  shalt  never  wash  my  feet,  and 
was  only  sobered  by  the  peremptory  announce- 
ment that  further  rebellion  would  involve  rejec- 
tion. He  was  sure  that  if  all  the  rest  were  to 
deny  Jesus,  he  never  should  deny  Him.  In  the 
garden  he  slept,  because  he  failed  to  pray  and 
watch.  And  then  he  did  not  wait  to  be  directed, 
but  strove  to  fight  the  battle  of  Jesus  with  the 
weapons  of  the  flesh.  Therefore  he  forsook  Him 
and  fled.  And  the  consequences  of  that  hasty 
blow  were  heavy  upon  him  now.  It  marked  him 
for  the  attention  of  the  servants:  it  drove  him  to 
merge  himself  in  the  crowd.  But  his  bearing 
was  too  suspicious  to  enable  him  to  escape  un- 
questioned. The  first  assault  came  very  natu- 
rally, from  the  maid  who  kept  the  door,  and  had 
therefore  seen  him  with  John.  He  denied  in- 
deed, but  with  hesitation,  not  so  much  affirming 
that  the  charge  was  false  as  that  he  could  not 
understand  it.  And  thereupon  he  changed  his 
place,  either  to  escape  notice  or  through  mental 
disquietude;  but  as  he  went  into  the  porch  the 
cock  crew.  The  girl,  however,  was  not  to  be 
shaken  off:  she  pointed  him  out  to  others,  and 
since  he  had  forsaken  the  only  solid  ground,  he 
now  denied  the  charge  angrily  and  roundly.  An 
hour  passed,  such  an  hour  of  shame,  perplexity, 
and  guilt  as  he  had  never  known,  and  then  there 
came  a  still  more  dangerous  attack.  They  had 
detected  his  Galilean  accent,  while  he  strove  to 
pass  for  one  of  them.  And  a  kinsman  of  Mal- 
chus  used  words  as  threatening  as  were  possible 
without  enabling  a  miracle  to  be  proved,  since 
the  wound  had  vanished:  "  Did  I  myself  not  see 
thee  in  the  garden  with  Him?"     Whereupon,  to 

yrove  that  his  speech  had  nothing  to  do  with 
esus,  he  began  to  curse  and  swear,  saying,  I 
know  not  the  man.  And  the  cock  crew  a  second 
time,  and  Peter  remembered  the  warning  of  his 
Lord,  which  then  sounded  so  harsh,  but  now 
proved  to  be  the  means  of  his  salvation.  And 
the  eyes  of  his  Master,  full  of  sorrow  and  reso- 
lution, fell  on  him.  And  he  knew  that  he  had 
added  a  bitter  pang  to  the  sufferings  of  the 
Blessed  One.  And  the  crowd  and  his  own  dan- 
ger were  forgotten,  and  he  went  out  and  wept. 

It  was  for  Judas  to  strive  desperately  to  put 
himself  right  with  man:  the  sorrow  of  Peter  was 
for  himself  and  God  to  know. 

What  lessons  are  we  taught  by  this  most  nat- 

•  "  By  the  fire  the  children  sit 

Cold  in  that  atmosphere  of  death." 

— "  In  Memoriam,"  xx. 


ural  and  humbling  story?  That  he  who  thinketh 
he  standeth  must  take  heed  lest  he  fall.  That  we 
are  in  most  danger  when  self-confident,  and  only 
strong  when  we  are  weak.  That  the  beginning 
of  sin  is  like  the  letting  out  of  water.  That 
Jesus  does  not  give  us  up  when  we  cast  our- 
selves away,  but  as  long  as  a  pulse  of  love  sur- 
vives, or  a  spark  of  loyalty,  He  will  appeal  to  that 
by  rnany  a  subtle  suggestion  of  meniory  and  of 
providence,  to  recall  His  wanderer  to  Himself. 

And  surely  we  learn  by  the  fall  of  this  great 
and  good  apostle  to  restore  the  fallen  in  the 
spirit  of  meekness,  considering  ourselves  lest  we 
also  be  tempted,  remembering  also  that  to  Peter 
Jesus  sent  the  first  tidings  of  His  resurrection, 
and  that  the  message  found  him  in  company  with 
John,  and  therefore  in  the  house  with  Mary. 
What  might  have  been  the  issue  of  his  anguish 
if  these  holy  ones  had  cast  Him  off? 


CHAPTER  XV. 

PILATE. 

Mark  xv.  1-20  (R.  V.). 

With  morning  came  the  formal  assembly, 
which  St.  Mark  dismisses  in  a  single  verse.  It 
was  indeed  a  disgraceful  mockery.  Before  the 
trial  began  its  members  had  prejudged  the  case, 
passed  sentence  by  anticipation,  and  abandoned 
Jesus,  as  one  condemned,  to  the  brutality  of  their 
servants.  And  now  the  spectacle  of  a  prisoner 
outraged  and  maltreated  moves  no  indignation  in 
their  hearts. 

Let  us,  for  whom  His  sufferings  were  endured, 
reflect  upon  the  strain  and  anguish  of  all  these 
repeated  examinations,  these  foregone  conclu- 
sions gravely  adopted  in  the  name  of  justice, 
these  exhibitions  of  greed  for  blood.  Among 
'the  "  unknown  sufferings  "  by  which  the  Eastern 
Church  invokes  her  Lord,  surely  not  the  least 
was  His  outraged  moral  sense. 

As  the  issue  of  it  all,  they  led  Him  away  to 
Pilate,  meaning,  by  the  weight  of  such  an  ac- 
cusing array,  to  overpowe;-  any  possible  scruples 
of  the  governor,  but  in  fact  fulfilling  His  words, 
"  they  shall  deliver  Him  unto  the  Gentiles." 
And  the  first  question  recorded  by  St.  Mark  ex- 
presses the  intense  surprise  of  Pilate.  "  Thou," 
so  meek,  so  unlike  the  numberless  conspirators 
that  I  have  tried, — or  perhaps,  "  Thou,"  Whom 
no  sympathising  multitude  sustains,  and  for 
Whose  death  the  disloyal  priesthood  thirsts, 
"Art  Thou  the  King  of  the  Jews?"  We  know 
how  carefully  Jesus  disentangled  His  claim  from 
the  political  associations  which  the  high  priests 
intended  that  it  should  suggest,  how  the  King 
of  Truth  would  not  exaggerate  any  more  than 
understate  the  case,  and  explained  that  His  King- 
dom was  not  of  this  world,  that  His  servants  did 
not  fight,  that  His  royal  function  was  to  uphold 
the  truth,  not  to  expel  conquerors.  The  eyes 
of  a  practised  Roman  governor  saw  through  the 
accusation  very  clearly.  Before  him,  Jesus  was 
accused  of  sedition,  but  that  was  a  transparent 
pretext;  Jews  did  not  hate  Him  for  enmity  to 
Rome:  He  was  a  rival  teacher  and  a  successful 
one,  and  for  envy  they  had  delivered  Him.  So 
far  all  was  well.  Pilate  investigated  the  charge, 
arrived  at  the  correct  judgment,  and  it  only  re- 
mained that  he  should  release  the  innocent  man. 
In  reaching  this  conclusion  Jesus  had  given  him 


9i6 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING    TO    ST.    MARK. 


the  most  prudent  and  skilful  help,  but  as  soon 
as  the  fact's  became  clear,  He  resumed  His  im- 
p'ressive  and  mysterious  silence.  Thus,  before 
each  of  his  judges  'in  turn.  Jesus  avowed  Himself 
the  Messiah  and  then  held  His  peace.  It  was  an 
awful  silence,  which  would  not  give  that  which 
was  holy  to  the'  dogs,  nor  profane  the  truth  by 
unavailing  protests'  or  controversies.  It  was, 
however,  a  -silence  'only  possible  to  an  exalted 
nature  full  of  seif-control,  since  the  words  actu- 
ally spoken  redeem-  it  from  any  suspicion  or 
stain  of  sullenness.  It  is  the  conscience  of  Pilate 
which  must  •  henceforth  speak.  The  Romans 
■were  the  lawgivers  of  the  ancient  world,  and  a 
few  years  earlier  their  greatest  poet  had  boasted 
that  their  mission  was  to  spare  the  helpless  and 
to  crush  the  protid.  In  no  man  was  an  act  of 
deliberate  injustice,  of  complaisance  to  the 
powerful  at  the  cost  of  the  good,  more  unpar- 
donable than  in  a  leader  of  that  splendid  race, 
whose  laws  are  still  the  favourite  study  of  those 
who  frame  and  administer  our  own.  And  the 
conscience  of  Pilate  struggled  hard,  aided  by 
superstitious  fear.  The  very  silence  of  Jesus 
amid  many  charges,  by  none  of  which  His  ac- 
cusers would  stand-  or  fall,  excited  the  wonder 
of  His  judge.  His  wife's  dream  aided  the  effect. 
And  he  was  still  more  afraid  when  he  heard  that 
this  strange  and  elevated  Personage,  so  unlike 
any  other  prisoner  whom  he  had  ever  tried,  laid 
claim  to  be  Divine.  Thus  even  in  his  desire  to 
save  Jesus,  his  motive  was  not  pure,  it  was  rather 
an  instinct  of  self-preservation  than  a  sense  of 
justice.  But  there  was  danger  on  the  other  side 
as  well;  since  he  had  already  incurred  the  im- 
perial censure,  he  could  not  without  grave  ap- 
prehensions contemplate  a  fresh  complaint,  and 
.would  certainly  be  ruined  if  he  were  accused  of 
releasing  a  conspirator  against  Caesar.  And  ac- 
cordingly he  stooped  to  mean  and  crooked  ways, 
he  lost  hold  o'f  the  only  clue  in  the  perplexing 
labyrinth  of  expediencies,  which  is  principle,  and 
his'  name  in  the  creed  of  Christendom  is 
spoken  with  a  shudder — "  crucified  under  Pontius 
Pilate!" 

It  wafe  the-tirhe  for  him  to  release  a  prisoner 
to  them,  according  to  an  obscure  custom,  which 
some  suppose  to  have  sprung  from  the  release  of 
one  of  the  two  sacrificial  goats,  and  others  from 
the  fact  that  they  how  celebrated  their  own  de- 
liverance from  Egypt.  At  this  moment  the  peo- 
ple began  to  demand  their  usual  indulgence,  and 
an  evil  hope  arose  in-  the  heart  of  Pilate.  They 
■would  surely  welcome  One  who  was  in  danger 
as  a  patriot:  he  would  himself  make  the  offer; 
and  he- 'would  put  it  in  this  tempting  form,  "  Will 
ye  that  I  release  unto  you  the  King  of  the 
Jews?"  Thus  would  the  enmity  of  the  priests 
be  gratified,  since  Jesus  would  henceforth  be  a 
•condemned  .culprit,  and  owe  His  life  to  their  in- 
tercession with'  the  foreigner.  But  the  proposal 
■was  a  su  render.  -The  life  of  Jesus  had  not  been 
•forfeited;'  and  when  it  was  placed  at  their  dis- 
cretion, it  was-  already  lawlessly  taken  away. 
Moreover,' when  the  offer  was  rejected,  Jesus  was 
•i-n  the  place  of  a  culprit  who  should  not  be  re- 
leased. To  •  the  priests,  nevertheless,  it  was  a 
darigerous  proposal,  and  they  needed  to  stir  up 
ihe  people,;- or  perhaps 'Barabbas  would  not  have 
been-prefer-red.^"  •  - 

Ins'tigafed' by  their' natural  guides,  their  reli- 
gious teacliers,  the 'Jews  made  the  tremendous 
choice,  which  has  ever  since  been  heavy  on  their 
'heads  and-  on  their  -childre-a's-     Yet  if  ever  an 


error  could  be  excused  by  the  plea  of  authority, 
and  the  duty  of  submission  to  constituted  lead- 
ers, it  was  this  error.  They  followed  men  who 
sat  in  Moses'  seat,  and  who  were  thus  entitled, 
according  to  Jesus  Himself,  to  be  obeyed.  Yet 
that  authority  has  not  relieved  the  Hebrew  na- 
tion from  the  wrath  which  came  upon  them  to 
the  uttermost.  The  salvation  they  desired  was 
not  moral  elevation  or  spiritual  life,  and  so  Jesus 
had  nothing  to  bestow  upon  them;  they  refused 
the  Holy  One  and  the  Just.  What  they  wanted 
was  the  world,  the  place  which  Rome  held,  and 
which  they  fondly  hoped  was  yet  to  be  their 
own.  Even  to  have  failed  in  the  pursuit  of  this 
was  better  than  to  have  the  words  of  everlasting 
life,  and  so  the  name  of  Barabbas  was  enough 
to  secure  the  rejection  of  Christ.  It  would  al- 
most seem  that  Pilate  was  ready  to  release  both, 
if  that  would  satisfy  them,  for  he  asks,  in  hesita- 
tion and  perplexity,  "  What  shall  I  do  then  with 
Him  Whom  ye  call  the  King  of  the  Jews?" 
Surely  in  their  excitement  for  an  insurgent,  that 
title,  given  by  themselves,  will  awake  their  pity. 
But  again  and  again,  like  the  howl  of  wolves, 
resounds  their  ferocious  cry,  Crucify  Him, 
crucify  Him. 

The  irony  of  Providence  is  known  to  every 
student  of  history,  but  it  never  was  so  manifest 
as  here.  Under  the  pressure  of  circumstances 
upon  men  whom  principle  has  not  made  firm,  we 
find  a  Roman  governor  striving  to  kindle  every 
disloyal  passion  or  his  subjects,  on  behalf  of  the 
King  of  the  Jews, — appealing  to  men  whom  he 
hated  and  despised,  and  whose  charges  have 
proved  empty  as  chaff,  to  say,  What  evil  has  He 
done?  and  even  to  tell  him,  on  his  judgment 
throne,  what  he  shall  do  with  their  King;  we 
find  the  men  who  accused  Jesus  of  stirring  up  the 
people  to  sedition,  now  shamelessly  agitating  for 
the  release  of  a  red-handed  insurgent;  forced 
moreover  to  accept  the  responsibility  which  they 
would  fain  have  devolved  on  Pilate,  and  them- 
selves to  pronounce  the  hateful  sentence  of  cruci- 
fixion, unknown  to  their  law,  but  for  which  they 
had  secretly  intrigued;  and  we  find  the  multitude 
fiercely  clamouring  for  a  defeated  champion  of 
brute  force,  whose  weapon  has  snapped  in  his 
hands,  who  has  led  his  followers  to  the  cross,  and 
from  whom  there  is  no  more  to  hope.  What 
satire  upon  their  hope  of  a  temporal  Messiah 
could  be  more  bitter  than  their  own  cry,  "  We 
have  no  king  but  Caesar"?  And  what  satire 
upon  this  profession  more  destructive  than  their 
choice  of  Barabbas  and  refusal  of  Christ?  And 
all  the  while,  Jesus  looks  on  in  silence,  carrying 
out  His  mournful  but  effectual  plan,  the  true 
Master  of  the  movements  which  design  to  crush 
Him,  and  which  He  has  foretold.  As  He  ever 
receives  gifts  for  the  rebellious,  and  is  the  Sav- 
iour of  all  men,  though  especially  of  them  that 
believe,  so  now  His  passion,  which  retrieved  the 
erring  soul  of  Peter,  and  won  the  penitent  thief, 
rescues  Barabbas  from  the  cross.  His  suffering 
was  made  visibly  vicarious. 

One  is  tempted  to  pity  the  feeble  judge,  the 
only  person  who  is  known  to  have  attempted  to 
rescue  Jesus,  beset  by  his  old  faults,  which  will 
make  an  impeachment  fatal,  wishing  better  than 
he  dares  to  act,  hesitating,  sinking  inch  by  inch 
and  like  a  bird  with  broken  wing.  No  accom- 
plice in  this  frightful  crime  is  so  suggestive  of 
warning  to  hearts  not  entirely  hardened. 

But  pity  is  lost  in  sterner  emotion  as  we  re- 
member that  this  wicked  governor,  having  borne 


Mark  xv.  21-32.] 


CHRIST   CRUCIFIED. 


91 J 


witness  to  the  perfect  innocence  of  Jesus,  was 
content,  in  order  to  save  himself  from  danger, 
to  watch  the  Blessed  One  enduring  all  the  hor- 
rors of  a  Roman  scourging,  and  then  to  yield 
Him  up  to  die. 

It  is  now  the  unmitigated  cruelty  of  ancient 
paganism  which  has  closed  its  hand  upon  our 
Lord.  When  the  soldiers  led  Him  away  within 
the  court,  He  was  lost  to  His  nation,  which  had 
renounced  Him.  It  is  upon  this  utter  alienation, 
even  more  than  the  locality  where  the  cross  was 
fixed,  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  turns  our 
attention,  when  it  reminds  us  that  ''  the  bodies 
of  those  beasts  whose  blood  is  brought  into  the 
holy  place  by  the  high  priest  as  an  offering  for 
sin,  are  burned  without  the  camp.  Wherefore 
Jesus  also,  that  He  might  sanctify  the  people 
through  His  own  blood,  suffered  without  the 
gate."  The  physical  exclusion,  the  material 
parallel,  points  to  something  deeper,  for  the  in- 
ference is  that  of  estrangement.  Those  who  serve 
the  tabernacle  cannot  eat  of  our  altar.  Let  us 
go  forth  unto  Him,  bearing  His  reproach. 
(Heb.  xii.   10-13). 

Renounced  by  Israel,  and  about  to  become  a 
curse  under  the  law,  he  has  now  to  suflfer  the 
cruelty  of  wantonness,  as  He  has  already  en- 
dured the  cruelty  of  hatred  and  fear.  Now,  more 
than  ever  perhaps.  He  looks  for  pity  and  there 
is  no  man.  None  responded  to  the  deep  appeal 
of  the  eyes  which  had  never  seen  misery  without 
relieving  it.  The  contempt  of  the  strong  for  the 
weak  and  suffering,  of  coarse  natures  for  sensi- 
tive ones,  of  Romans  for  Jews,  all  these  were 
blended  with  bitter  scorn  of  the  Jewish  expecta- 
tion that  some  day  Rome  shall  bow  before  a 
Hebrew  conqueror,  in  the  mockery  which  Jesu* 
now  underwent,  when  they  clad  Him  in  such 
cast-off  purple  as  the  Palace  yielded,  thrust  a 
reed  into  His  pinioned  hand,  crowned  Him  with 
thorns,  beat  these  into  His  holy  head  with  the 
sceptre  they  had  offered  Him,  and  then  pro- 
ceeded to  render  the  homage  of  their  nation  to 
the  Messiah  of  Jewish  hopes.  It  may  have  been 
this  mockery  which  suggested  to  Pilate  the  in- 
scription for  the  cross.  But  where  is  the  mock- 
ery now?  In  crowning  Him  King  of  suffering."?, 
and  Royal  among  those  who  weep,  they  secured 
to  Him  the  adherence  of  all  hearts.  Christ  was 
made  perfect  by  the  things  which  He  suflfered; 
and  it  was  not  only  in  spite  of  insult  and 
anguish,  but  by  means  of  them,  that  He  drew  all 
men  unto  Him. 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 
Mark  xv.  21-32  (R.  V.). 

At  last  the  preparations  were  complete  and  the 
interval  of  mental  agony  was  over.  They  led 
Him  away  to  crucify  Him.  And  upon  the  road 
an  event  of  mournful  interest  took  place.  It  was 
the  custom  to  lay  the  two  arms  of  the  cross  upon 
the  doomed  man,  fastening  them  together  at 
such  an  angle  as  to  pass  behind  His  neck,  while 
his  hands  were  bound  to  the  ends  in  front.  And 
thus  it  was  that  Jesus  went  forth  bearing  His 
cross.  Did  He  think  of  this  when  He  bade  us 
take  His  yoke  upon  us?  Did  He  wait  for  event* 
to  explain  the  words,  by  making  it  visibly  one 
and  the  same  to  take  His  yoke  and  to  take  up 
our  cross  and  follow  Him? 

On  the  road,  however,  they  forced  a  reluctant 
stranger  to  go  with  them  that  he  might  bear  the 


cross.  The  traditional  reason  is  that  our  Re- 
deemer's strength  gave  way,  and  it  became  physi- 
cally impossible  for  Him  to  proceed;  but  this  is 
challenged  upon  the  ground  that  to  fail  would 
have  been  unworthy  of  our  Lord,  and  would  mar 
the  perfection  of  His  example.  How  so,  when 
the  failure  was  a  real  one?  Is  there  no  fitness 
in  the  belief  that  He  who  was  tempted  in  all 
points  like  as  we  are,  endured  this  hardness  also, 
of  struggling  with  the  impossible  demands  of 
human  cruelty,  the  spirit  indeed  willing  but  the 
flesh  weak?  It  is  not  easy  to  believe  that  any 
other  rea.son  than  manifest  inability  would  have 
induced  his  persecutors  to  spare  Him  one  drop 
of  bitterness,  one  throb  of  pain.  The  noblest  and 
most  delicately  balanced  frame,  like  all  other 
exquisite  machines,  is  not  capable  of  the  rudest 
strain:  and  we  know  that  Jesus  had  once  sat 
wearied  by  the  well,  while  the  hardy  fishers  went 
into  the  town,  and  returned  with  bread.  And 
this  night  our  gentle  Master  had  endured  what 
no  common  victim  knew.  Long  before  the 
scourging,  or  even  the  buffeting  began,  His 
spiritual  exhaustion  had  needed  that  an  angol 
from  heaven  should  strengthen  Him.  And  the 
utmost  possibility  of  exertion  was  now  reached: 
the  spot  where  they  met  Simon  of  Cyrene  marks 
this  melancholy  limit;  and  suffering  henceforth 
must  be  purely  passive. 

We  cannot  assert  with  confidence  that  Simon 
and  his  family  were  saved  by  this  event.  The 
coercion  put  upon  him,  the  fact  that  he  was 
seized  and  "  impressed  "  into  the  service,  already 
seems  to  indicate  sympathy  with  Jesus.  And  we 
are  fain  to  believe  that  he  who  received  the 
honour,  so  strange  and  sad  and  sacred,  the 
unique  privilege  of  lifting  some  little  of  the 
crushing  burden  of  the  Saviour,  was  not  utterly 
ignorant  of  what  he  did.  We  know  at  least  that 
the  names  of  his  children.  Alexander  and  Rufus, 
were  familiar  in  the  Church  for  which  St.  Mark 
was  writing,  and  that  in  Rome  a  Rufus  was 
chosen  in  the  Lord,  and  his  mother  was  like  a 
mother  to  St.  Paul  (Rom.  xvi.  13).  With  what 
feelings  may  they  have  recalled  the  story,  "  him 
they  compelled  to  bear  His  cross." 

They  led  Him  to  a  place  where  the  rounded 
summit  of  a  knoll  had  its  grim  name  from  some 
resemblance  to  a  human  skull,  and  prepared  the 
crosses  there. 

It  was  the  custom  of  the  daughters  of  Jeru- 
salem, who  lamented  Him  as  He  went,  to  provide 
a  stupefying  draught  for  the  sufferers  of  this 
atrocious  cruelty.  "  And  they  offered  Him  wine 
mixed  with  myrrh,  but  He  received  it  not,"  al- 
though that  dreadful  thirst,  which  was  part  of 
the  suffering  of  crucifixion,  had  already  begun, 
for  He  only  refused  when  He  had  tasted  it. 

In  so  doing  He  rebuked  all  who  seek  to  drown 
sorrows  or  benumb  the  soul  in  wine,  all  who 
degrade  and  dull  their  sensibilities  by  physical 
excess  or  indulgence,  all  who  would  rather  blind 
their  intelligence  than  pay  the  sharp  cost  of  its 
exercise.  He  did  not  condemn  the  use  of 
anodynes,  but  the  abuse  of  them.  It  is  one  thing 
to  suspend  the  senses  during  an  operation,  and 
quite  another  thing  by  one's  own  choice  to  pass 
into  eternity  without  consciousness  enough  to 
commit  the  soul  into  its  Father's  hands. 

"And  they  crucify  Him."  Let  the  words  re- 
main as  the  Evangelist  left  them,  to  tell  their 
own  story  of  kuman  sin,  and  of  Divine  love 
which  many  waters  could  not  quench,  neither 
could  the  depths  drown  it. 


9i8 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


Only  let  us  think  in  silence  of  all  that  those 
words  convey. 

In  the  first  sharpness  of  mortal  anguish,  Jesus 
saw  His  executioners  sit  down  at  ease,  all  un- 
conscious of  the  dread  meaning  of  what  was  pass- 
ing by  their  side,  to  part  His  garments  among 
them,  and  cast  lots  for  the  raiment  which  they 
had  stripped  from  His  sacred  form.  The  Gos- 
pels are  content  thus  to  abandon  those  relics 
about  which  so  many  legends  have  been  woven. 
But  indeed  all  through  these  four  wonderful  nar- 
ratives the  self-restraint  is  perfect.  When  the 
Epistles  touch  upon  the  subject  of  the  crucifixion 
they  kindle  into  flame.  When  St.  Peter  soon 
afterwards  referred  to  it,  his  indignation  is  be- 
yond question,  and  Stephen  called  the  rulers  be- 
trayers and  murderers  (Acts  ii.  23,  24;  iii.  13,  14; 
vii.  51-53)  but  not  one  single  syllable  of  com- 
plaint or  comment  mingles  with  the  clear  flow  of 
narrative  in  the  four  Gospels.  The  truth  is  that 
the  subject  was  too  great,  too  fresh  and  vivid  in 
their  minds,  to  be  adorned  or  enlarged  upon. 
What  comment  of  St.  Mark,  what  mortal  com- 
ment, could  add  to  the  weight  of  the  words 
"they  crucify  Him"?  Men  use  no  figures  of 
speech  when  telling  how  their  own  beloved  one 
died.  But  it  was  differently  that  the  next  age 
wrote  about  the  crucifixion;  and  perhaps  the 
lofty  self-restrain  of  the  Evangelists  has  never 
been  attained  again. 

St.  Mark  tells  us  that  He  was  crucified  at  the 
third  hour,  whereas  we  read  in  St.  John  that  it 
was  "  about  the  sixth  hour "  when  Pilate  as- 
cended the  seat  of  judgment  (xix.  14).  It  seems 
likely  that  St.  John  used  the  Roman  reckoning, 
and  his  computation  does  not  pretend  to  be  ex- 
act; vhile  we  must  remember  that  mental  agita- 
tion conspired  with  the  darkening  of  the  sky,  to 
render  such  an  estimate  as  he  offers  even  more 
than  usually  vague. 

It  has  been  supposed  that  St.  Mark's  "  third 
hour "  goes  back  to  the  scourging,  which,  as 
being  a  regular  part  of  Roman  crucifixion,  he 
includes,  although  inflicted  in  this  case  before  the 
sentence.  But  it  will  prove  quite  as  hard  to 
reconcile  this  distribution  of  time  with  "  the  sixth 
hour  "  in  St.  John,  while  it  is  at  variance  with 
the  context  in  which  St.  Mark  asserts  it. 

The  small  and  bitter  heart  of  Pilate  keenly 
resented  his  defeat  and  the  victory  of  the  priests. 
Perhaps  it  was  when  his  soldiers  offered  the 
scornful  homage  of  Rome  to  Israel  and  her  mon- 
arch that  he  saw  the  way  to  a  petty  revenge. 
And  all  Jerusalem  was  scandalised  by  reading  the 
inscription  over  a  crucified  malefactor's  head. 
The  King  of  the  Jews. 

It  needs  some  reflection  to  perceive  how  sharp 
the  taunt  was.  A  few  years  ago  they  had  a  king, 
but  the  sceptre  had  departed  from  Judah;  Rome 
had  abolished  him.  It  was  their  hope  that  soon 
a  native  king  would  for  ever  sweep  away  the 
foreigner  from  their  fields.  But  here  the  Roman 
exhibited  the  fate  of  such  a  claim,  and  professed 
to  inflict  its  horrors  not  upon  one  whom  they 
disavowed,  but  upon  their  king  indeed.  We 
know  how  angrily  and  vainly  they  protested; 
and  again  we  seem  to  recognise  the  solemn  irony 
of  Providence.  For  this  was  their  true  King, 
and  they,  who  resented  the  superscription,  had 
fixed  their  Anointed  there. 

All  the  more  they  would  disconnect  themselves 
from  Him,  and  wreak  their  passion  upon  the 
helpless  One  whom  they  hated.  The  populace 
mocked  Him  openly:  the  chief  priests,  too  culti- 


vated to  insult  avowedly  a  dying  man,  mocked 
Him  "  among  themselves,"  speaking  bitter  worcs 
for  Him  to  hear.  The  multitude  repeated  the 
false  charge  which  had  probably  done  much  to 
inspire  their  sudden  preference  for  Barabba\ 
"  Thou  that  destroyest  the  temple  and  buildest 
it  again  in  three  days,  save  Thyself  and  conie 
down  from  the  cross." 

They  little  suspected  that  they  were  recalling 
words  of  consolation  to  His  memory,  reminding 
Him  that  all  this  suffering  was  foreseen,  and  how 
it  was  all  to  end.  The  chief  priests  spoke  also 
a  truth  full  of  consolation,  "  He  saved  others, 
Himself  He  cannot  save,"  although  it  was  no 
physical  bar  which  forbade  Him  to  accept  their 
challenge.  And  when  they  flung  at  Him  His 
favourite  demand  for  faith,  saying  "  Let  the 
Christ,  the  King  of  Israel,  now  come  down  from 
the  cross,  that  we  may  see  and  believe,"  surely 
they  reminded  Him  of  the  great  multitude  who 
should  not  see,  and  yet  should  believe,  when  He 
came  back  through  the  gates  of  death. 

Thus  the  words  they  spoke  could  not  afflict 
Him.  But  what  horror  to  the  pure  soul  to  be- 
hold these  yawning  abysses  of  malignity,  these 
gulfs  of  pitiless  hate.  The  affronts  hurled  at 
suffering  and  defeat  by  prosperous  and  exultant 
malice  are  especially  Satanic.  Many  diseases  in- 
flict more  physical  pain  than  torturers  ever  in- 
vented, but  they  do  not  excite  the  same  horror, 
because  gentle  ministries  are  there  to  charm  away 
the  despair  which  human  hate  and  execration 
conjure  up. 

To  add  to  the  insult  of  His  disgraceful  death, 
the  Romans  had  crucified  two  robbers,  doubtless 
from  the  band  of  Barabbas,  one  upon  each  side 
of  Jesus.  We  know  how  this  outrage  led  to  the 
salvation  of  one  of  them,  and  refreshed  the 
heavy  laden  soul  of  Jesus,  oppressed  by  so  much 
guilt  and  vileness,  with  the  visible  firstfruit  of 
His  passion,  giving  Him  to  see  of  the  travail  of 
His  soul,  by  which  He  shall  yet  be  satisfied. 

But  in  their  first  agony  and  despair,  when  all 
voices  were  unanimous  against  the  Blessed  One, 
and  they  too  must  needs  find  some  outlet  for 
their  frenzy,  they  both  reproached  Him.  Thus 
the  circle  of  human  wrong  was  rounded. 

The  traitor,  the  deserters,  the  forsworn  apostle, 
the  perjured  witnesses,  the  hypocritical  pontiff 
professing  horror  at  blasphemy  while  himself  ab- 
juring his  national  hope,  the  accomplices  in  a 
sham  trial,  the  murderer  of  the  Baptist  and  his 
men  of  war,  the  abject  ruler  who  declared  Him 
innocent  yet  gave  Him  up  to  die,  the  servile 
throng  who  waited  on  the  priests,  the  soldiers  of 
Herod  and  of  Pilate,  the  pitiless  crowd  which 
clamoured  for  His  blood,  and  they  who  mocked 
Him  in  His  agony, — not  one  of  them  whom 
Jesus  did  not  compassionate,  whose  cruelty  had 
not  power  to  wring  His  heart.  Disciple  and 
foeman,  Roman  and  Jew,  priest  and  soldier  and 
judge,  all  had  lifted  up  their  voice  against  Him. 
And  when  the  comrades  of  His  passion  joined 
the  cry,  the  last  ingredient  of  human  cruelty  was 
infused  into  the  cup  which  Jarnes  and  John  had 
once  proposed  to  drink  with  Him. 

THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS. 

Mark  xv.  33-4X  (R.  V.)- 

Three  hours  of  raging  human  passion,  endured 
with  Godlike  patience,  were  succeeded  by  three 
hours  of  darkness,   hushing  mortal  hatred  into 


Mark  xv.  33-41.] 


THE    DEATH    OF   JESUS. 


919 


silence,  and  perhaps  contributing  to  the  peni- 
tence of  the  rcviler  at  His  side.  It  was  a  super- 
natural gloom,  since  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  was 
impossible  during  the  full  moon  of  Passover. 
Shall  we  say  that,  as  it  shall  be  in  the  last  days, 
nature  sympathised  with  humanity,  and  the  angel 
of  the  sun  hid  his  face  from  his  suffering  Lord? 

Or  was  it  the  shadow  of  a  still  more  dreadful 
eclipse,  for  now  the  eternal  Father  veiled  His 
countenance  from  the  Son  in  whom  He  was  well 
pleased? 

In  some  true  sense  God  forsook  Him.  And  we 
have  to  seek  for  a  meaning  of  this  awful  state- 
ment— inadequate,  no  doubt,  for  all  our  thoughts 
must  come  short  of  such  a  reality,  but  free  from 
prevarication  and  evasion. 

It  is  wholly  unsatisfactory  to  regard  the  verse 
as  merely  the  heading  of  a  psalm,  cheerful  for 
the  most  part,  which  Jesus  inaudibly  recited. 
Why  was  only  this  verse  uttered  aloud?  How 
false  an  impression  must  have  been  produced 
upon  the  multitude,  upon  St.  John,  upon  the 
penitent  thief,  if  Jesus  were  suffering  less  than 
the  extreme  of  spiritual  anguish.  Nay,  we  feel 
that  never  before  can  the  verse  have  attained  its 
fullest  meaning,  a  meaning  which  no  experience 
of  David  could  more  than  dimly  shadow  forth, 
since  we  ask  in  our  sorrows,  Why  have  we  for- 
saken God?  but  Jesus  said,  Why  hast  Thou  for- 
saken Me? 

And  this  unconsciousness  of  any  reason  for 
desertion  disproves  the  old  notion  that  He  felt 
Himself  a  sinner,  and  "  suffered  infinite  remorse, 
as  being  the  chief  sinner  in  the  universe,  all  the 
sins  of  mankind  being  His."  One  who  felt  thus 
could  neither  have  addressed  God  as  "  My  God," 
nor  asked  why  He  was  forsaken. 

Still  less  does  it  allow  us  to  believe  that  the 
Father  perfectly  identified  Jesus  with  sin,  so  as 
to  be  "  wroth  "  with  Him,  and  even  "  to  hate 
Him  to  the  uttermost."  Such  notions,  the  off- 
spring of  theories  carried  to  a  wild  and  irreverent 
extreme,  when  carefully  examined  impute  to  the 
Deity  confusion  of  thought,  a  mistaking  of  the 
Holy  One  for  a  sinner  or  rather  for  the  aggre- 
gate of  sinners.  But  it  is  very  different  when  we 
pass  from  the  Divine  consciousness  to  the  bear- 
ing of  God  toward  Christ  our  representative,  to 
the  outshining  or  eclipse  of  His  favour.  That 
this  was  overcast  is  manifest  from  the  fact  that 
Jesus  everywhere  else  addresses  Him  as  My 
Father,  here  only  as  My  God.  Even  in  the  gar- 
den it  was  Abba  Father,  and  the  change  indi- 
cates not  indeed  estrangement  of  heart,  but  cer- 
tainly remoteness.  Thus  we  have  the  sense  of 
desertion,  combined  with  the  assurance  which 
once  breathed  in  the  words,  O  God,  Thou  art 
my  God. 

Thus  also  it  came  to  pass  that  He  who  never 
forfeited  the  most  intimate  communion  and 
sunny  smile  of  heaven,  should  yet  give  us  an 
example  at  the  last  of  that  utmost  struggle  and 
sternest  effort  of  the  soul,  which  trusts  without 
experience,  without  emotion,  in  the  dark,  be- 
cause God  is  God,  not  because  I  am  happy. 

But  they  who  would  empty  the  death  of  Jesus 
of  its  sacrificial  import,  and  leave  only  the  attrac- 
tion and  inspiration  of  a  sublime  life  and  death, 
must  answer  the  hard  questions,  How  came  God 
to  forsake  the  Perfect  One?  Or,  how  came  He 
to  charge  God  with  such  desertion?  His  fol- 
lower, twice  using  this  very  word,  could  boast 
that  he  was  cast  down  yet  not  forsaken,  and  that 
at  his  first  trial  all   men   forsook  him,   yet  the 


Lord  stood  by  him  (2  Cor.  iv.  9;  2  Tim.  iv.  16, 
17).     How  came  the  disciple  to  be  above  his 

Master? 

The  only  explanation  is  in  His  own  word,  that 
His  life  is  a  ransom  in  exchange  for  many  (Mark 
X.  45).  The  chastisement  of  our  peace,  not  the 
remorse  of  our  guiltiness,  was  upon  Him.  No 
wonder  that  St.  Mark,  who  turns  aside  from  his 
narrative  for  no  comment,  no  exposition,  was 
yet  careful  to  preserve  this  alone  among  the  dy- 
ing words  of  Christ. 

And  the  Father  heard  His  Son.  At  that  cry 
the  mysterious  darkness  passed  away;  and  the 
soul  of  Jesus  was  relieved  from  its  burden,  so 
that  He  became  conscious  of  physical  suffering; 
and  the  mockery  of  the  multitude  was  converted 
into  awe.  It  seemed  to  them  that  His  Eloi 
might  indeed  bring  Elias,  and  the  great  and 
notable  day,  and  they  were  willing  to  relieve  the 
thirst  which  no  stoical  hardness  forbade  that 
gentlest  of  all  sufferers  to  confess.  Thereupon 
the  anguish  that  redeemed  the  world  was  over; 
a  loud  voice  told  that  exhaustion  was  not  com- 
plete; and  yet  Jesus  "  gave  up  the  ghost."  * 

Through  the  veil,  that  is  to  say  His  flesh,  we 
have  boldness  to  enter  into  the  holy  place;  and 
now  that  He  had  opened  the  way,  the  veil  of 
the  temple  was  rent  asunder  by  no  mortal  hand, 
but  downward  from  the  top.  The  way  into  the 
holiest  was  visibly  thrown  open,  when  sin  was 
expiated,  which  had  forfeited  our  right  of  access. 

And  the  centurion,  seeing  that  His  death  itself 
was  abnormal  and  miraculous,  and  accompanied 
with  miraculous  signs,  said.  Truly  this  was  a 
righteous  man.  But  such  a  confession  could  not 
rest  there:  if  He  was  this.  He  was  all  He  claimed 
to  be:  and  the  mockery  of  His  enemies  had  be- 
trayed the  secret  of  their  hate;  He  was  the  Son 
of  God. 

"  When  the  centurion  saw.  .  .  .  There  were 
also  many  women  beholding."  Who  can  over- 
look the  connection?  Their  gentle  hearts  were 
not  to  be  utterly  overwhelmed:  as  the  cen- 
turion saw  and  drew  his  inference,  so  they  be- 
held, and  felt,  however  dimly,  amid  sorrows  that 
benumb  the  mind,  that  still,  even  in  such  wreck 
and  misery,  God  was  not  far  from  Jesus. 

When  the  Lord  said.  It  is  finished,  there  was 
not  only  an  end  of  conscious  anguish,  but  also 
of  contempt  and  insult.  His  body  was  not  to 
see  corruption,  nor  was  a  bone  to  be  broken,  nor 
should  it  remain  in  hostile  hands. 

Respect  for  Jewish  prejudice  prevented  the 
Romans  from  leaving  it  to  moulder  on  the  cross, 
and  the  aproaching  Sabbath  was  not  one  to  be 
polluted.  And  knowing  this,  Joseph  of  Ari- 
mathasa  boldly  went  in  to  Pilate  and  asked  for 
the  body  of  Jesus.  It  was  only  secretly  and  in 
fear  that  he  had  been  a  disciple,  but  the  deadly 
crisis  had  developed  what  was  hidden;  he  had 
opposed  the  crime  of  his  nation  in  their  council, 
and  in  the  hour  of  seeming  overthrow  he  chose 
the  good  part.  Boldly  the  timid  one  "  went  in," 
braving  the  scowls  of  the  priesthood,  defiling 
himself  moreover,  and  forfeiting  his  share  in  the 
sacred  feast,  in  hope  to  win  the  further  defile- 
ment of  contact  with  the  dead. 

Pilate  was  careful  to  verify  so  rapid  a  death; 
but  when  he  was  certain  of  the  fact,  "  he  granted 
the  corpse  to  Joseph,"  as  a  worthless  thing.    His 

•  The  ingenious  and  plausible  attempt,  to  show  that  His 
death  was  caused  by  a  physical  rupture  of  the  heart  has 
one  fatal  weakness.  Death  came  too  late  for  this ;  the 
severest  pressure  was  already  relieved. 


920 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


frivolity  is  expressed  alike  in  the  unusual  verb  * 
and  substantive:  he  "  freely  bestowed,"  he  "  gave 
away  "  not  "  the  body  "  as  when  Joseph  spoke 
of  it,  but  "  the  corpse,"  the  fallen  thing,  like  a 
prostrated  and  uprooted  tree  that  shall  revive 
no  more.  Wonderful  it  is  to  reflect  that  God 
had  entered  into  eternal  union  with  what  was 
thus  given  away  to  the  only  man  of  "rank  who 
cared  to  ask  for  it.  Wonderful  to  think  what 
opportunities  of  eternal  gain  men  are  content  to 
lose;  what  priceless  treasures  are  given  away, 
or  thrown  away  as  worthless.  Wonderful  to  im- 
agine the  feelings  of  Joseph  in  heaven  to-day,  as 
he  gazes  with  gratitude  and  love  upon  the  glori- 
ous Body  which  once,  for  a  little,  was  consigned 
to  his  reverent  care. 

St.  John  tells  us  that  Nicodemus  brought  a 
hundred  pound  weight  of  myrrh  and  aloes,  and 
they  together  wrapped  Him  in  these,  in  the 
linen  which  had  been  provided;  and  Joseph  laid 
Him  in  his  own  new  tomb,  undesecrated  by 
mortality. 

And  there  Jesus  rested.  His  friends  had  no 
such  hope  as  would  prevent  them  from  closing 
the  door  with  a  great  stone.  His  enemies  set 
a  watch,  and  sealed  the  stone.  The  broad  moon 
of  Passover  made  the  night  as  clear  as  the  day, 
and  the  multitude  of  strangers,  who  thronged 
the  city  and  its  suburbs,  rendered  any  attempt  at 
robbery  even  more  hopeless  than  at  another 
season. 

What  indeed  could  the  trembling  disciples  of 
an  executed  pretender  do  with  such  an  object 
as  a  dead  body?  What  could  they  hope  from  the 
possession  of  it?  But  if  they  did  not  steal  it,  if 
the  moral  glories  of  Christianity  are  not  sprung 
from  deliberate  mendacity,  why  was  the  body  not 
produced,  to  abash  the  wild  dreams  of  their 
fanaticism?  It  was  fearfully  easy  to  identify. 
The  scourging,  the  cross,  and  the  spear,  left  no 
slight  evidence  behind,  and  the  broken  bones  of 
the  malefactors  completed  the  absolute  isolation 
of  the  sacred  body  of  the  Lord. 

The  providence  of  God  left  no  precaution  un- 
'  supplied  to  satisfy  honest  and  candid  inquiry.  It 
remained  to  be  seen,  would  He  leave  Christ's  soul 
in  Hades,  or  suffer  His  Holy  One  (such  is  the 
epithet  applied  to  the  body  of  Jesus)  to  see 
corruption? 

Meantime,  through  what  is  called  three  days 
and  nights — a  space-  which  touched,  but  only 
touched,  the  confines  of  a  first  and  third  day,  as 
well  as  the  Saturday  which  intervened,  Jesus 
shared  the  humiliation  of  common  men,  the  di- 
vorce of  soul  and  body.  He  slept  as  sleep  the 
dead,  but  His  soul  was  where  He  promised  that 
the  penitent  should  come,  refreshed  in  Paradise. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

CHRIST  RISEN. 

Mark  xvi.  1-18  (R.  V.). 

The  Gospels  were  not  written  for  the  curious, 
but  for  the  devout.  They  are  most  silent  there- 
fore where  myth  and  legend  would  be  most  gar- 
rulous, and  it  is  instructive  to  seek,  in  the  story 
of  Jesus,  for  anything  similar  to  the  account  of 
the  Buddha's  enlightenment  under  the  Bo  tree. 
We  read  nothing  of  the  interval  in  Hades;  noth- 

*  /.  e.,  in  the  New  Testament,  where  it  occurs  but  once 
besides. 


ing  of  the  entry  of  His  crowned  and  immortal 
body  into  the  presence  chamber  of  God;  nothing 
of  the  resurrection.  Did  He  awake  alone?  Was 
He  waited  upon  by  the  hierarchy  of  heaven,  who 
robed  Him  in  raiment  unknown  to  men?  We 
are  only  told  what  concerns  mankind,  the  suf- 
ficient manifestation  of  Jesus  to  His  disciples. 

And  to  harmonise  the  accounts  a  certain  eflfort 
is  necessary,  because  they  tell  of  interviews  with 
men  and  women  who  had  to  pass  through  all 
the  vicissitudes  of  despair,  suspense,  rapturous 
incredulity,*  and  faith.  Each  of  them  contributes 
a  portion  of  the  tale. 

From  St.  John  we  learn  that  Mary  Magdalene 
came  early  to  the  sepulchre,  from  St.  Matthew 
that  others  were  with  her,  from  St.  Mark  that 
these  women,  dissatisfied  with  the  unskilful  min- 
istrations of  men  (and  men  whose  rank  knew 
nothing  of  such  functions),  had  brought  sweet 
spices  to  anoint  Him  Who  was  about  to  claim 
their  adoration;  St.  John  tells  how  Mary,  seeing 
the  empty  sepulchre,  ran  to  tell  Peter  and  John 
of  its  desecration;  the  others,  that  in  her  absence 
an  angel  told  the  glad  tidings  to  the  women; 
St.  Mark,  that  Mary  was  the  first  to  whom  Jesus 
Himself  appeared.  And  thenceforth  the  narra- 
tive more  easily  falls  into  its  place. 

This  confusion,  however  perplexing  to 
thoughtless  readers,  is  inevitable  in  the  inde- 
pendent histories  of  such  events,  derived  from  the 
various  parties  who  delighted  to  remember,  each 
what  had  befallen  himself. 

But  even  a  genuine  contradiction  would  avail 
nothing  to  refute  the  substantial  fact.  When  the 
generals  of  Henry  the  Fourth  strove  to  tell  him 
what  passed  after  he  was  wounded  at  Aumale,  no 
two  of  them  agreed  in  the  course  of  events  which 
gave  them  victory.  Two  armies  beheld  the  bat- 
tle of  Waterloo,  but  who  can  tell  when  it  began? 
At  ten  o'clock,  said  the  Duke  of  Wellington. 
At  half-past  eleven,  said  General  Alava,  who 
rode  beside  him.  At  twelve  according  to  Na- 
poleon and  Drouet;  and  at  one  according  to 
Ney. 

People  who  doubt  the  reality  of  the  resur- 
rection, because  the  harmony  of  the  narratives  is 
underneath  the  surface,  do  not  deny  these  facts. 
They  are  part  of  history.  Yet  it  is  certain  that 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  colours  the  history  of 
the  world  more  powerfully  to-day  than  the 
events  which  are  so  much  more  recent. 

If  Christ  were  not  risen,  how  came  these  de- 
spairing men  and  women  by  their  new  hope,  their 
energy,  their  success  among  the  very  men  who 
slew  Him?  If  Christ  be  not  risen,  how  has  the 
morality  of  mankind  been  raised?  Was  it  ever 
known  that  a  falsehood  exercised  for  ages  a 
quickening  and  purifying  power  which  no  truth 
can  rival? 

From  the  ninth  verse  to  the  end  of  St.  Mark's 
account  it  is  curiously  difficult  to  decide  on  the 
true  reading.  And  it  must  be  said  that  the  note 
in  the  Revised  Version,  however  accurate,  does 
not  succeed  in  giving  any  notion  of  the  strength 
of  the  case  in  favour  of  the  remainder  of  the 
Gospel.  It  tells  us  that  the  two  oldest  manu- 
scripts omit  them,  but  we  do  not  read  that  in 
one  of  these  a  space  is  left  for  the  insertion  of 
something,  known  by  the  scribe  to  be  wanting 
there.  Nor  does  it  mention  the  twelve  manu- 
scripts of  almost  equal  antiquity  in  which  they 

*  Can  anything  surpass  that  masterstroke  of  insight 
and  descriptive  power,  "they  still  disbelieved  for  joy" 
(Luke  xxiv.  41). 


Mark  xvi,  19-20.] 


THE    ASCENSION. 


psn 


are  contained,  nor  the  early  date  at  which  they 
w?re  quoted. 

The  evidence  appears  to  lean  towards  the  be- 
lief that  they  were  added  in  a  later  edition,  or 
else  torn  off  in  an  early  copy  from  which  some 
transcribers  worked.  But  unbelief  cannot  gain 
anything  by  converting  them  into  a  separate  tes- 
timony, of  the  very  earliest  antiquity,  to  events 
related  in  each  of  the  other  Gospels. 

And  the  uncertainty  itself  will  be  wholesome 
if  it  reminds  us  that  saving  faith  is  not  to  be 
reposed  m  niceties  of  criticism,  but  in  a  living 
Christ,  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God.  Jesus 
blamed  men  for  thinking  that  they  had  eternal 
life  in  their  inspired  Scriptures,  and  so  refusing 
to  come  for  life  to  Him,  of  Whom  those  Scrip- 
tures testified.  Has  sober  criticism  ever  shaken 
for  one  hour  that  sacred  function  of  Holy  Writ? 

What  then  is  especially  shown  us  in  the  closing 
words  of  St.  Mark? 

Readiness  to  requite  even  a  spark  of  grace,  and 
to  bless  with  the  first  tidings  of  a  risen  Re- 
deemer the  love  which  sought  only  to  embalm 
His  corpse.  Tender  care  for  the  fallen  and  dis- 
heartened, in  the  message  sent  especially  to 
Peter.  Immeasurable  condescension,  such  as 
rested  formerly,  a  Babe,  in  a  peasant  woman's 
arms,  and  announced  its  Advent  to  shepherds, 
now  appearing  first  of  all  to  a  woman  "  out  of 
whom  He  had  cast  seven  devils." 

A  state  of  mind  among  the  disciples,  far  in- 
deed from  that  rapt  and  hysterical  enthusiasm 
which  men  have  fancied,  ready  to  be  whirled 
away  in  a  vortex  of  religious  propagandism  (and 
to  whirl  the  whole  world  after  it),  upon  the  im- 
pulse of  dreams,  hallucinations,  voices  mistaken 
on  a  misty  shore,  longings  which  begot  con- 
victions. Jesus  Himself,  and  no  second,  no 
messenger  from  Jesus,  inspired  the  zeal  which 
kindled  mankind.  The  disciples,  mourning  and 
weeping,  found  the  glad  tidings  incredible,  while 
Mary  who  had  seen  Him,  believed.  When  two, 
as  they  walked,  beheld  Him  in  another  shape,  the 
rest  remained  incredulous,  announcing  indeed 
that  He  had  actually  risen  and  appeared  unto 
Peter,  yet  so  far  from  a  true  conviction  that  when 
He  actually  came  to  them,  they  supposed  that 
they  beheld  a  spirit  (Luke  xxiv.  34,  37).  Yet  He 
looked  in  the  face  those  pale  discouraged  Gali- 
leans, and  bade  them  go  into  all  the  world,  bear- 
ing to  the  whole  creation  the  issues  of  eternal 
life  and  death.  And  they  went  forth,  and  the 
power  and  intellect  of  the  world  are  won.  What- 
ever unbelievers  think  about  individual  souls,  it 
is  plain  that  the  words  of  the  Nazarene  have 
proved  true  for  communities  and  nations.  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptised  has  been  saved.  He 
that  believeth  not  has  been  condemned.  The 
nation  and  kingdom  that  has  not  served  Christ 
has  perished. 

Nor  does  any  one  pretend  that  the  agents  in 
this  marvellous  movement  were  insincere.  If  all 
this  was  a  dream,  it  was  a  strange  one  surely,  and 
demands  to  be  explained.  If  it  was  otherwise, 
no  doubt  the  finger  of  God  has  come  unto  us. 


THE  ASCENSION. 

g.  Mark  xvi.  19-20  (R.  V.). 

We  have  reached  the  close  of  the  great  Gospel 
of  the  energies  of  Jesus,  His  toils,  His  manner, 


His  searching  gaze.  His  noble  indignation.  His 
love  of  children,  the  consuming  zeal  by  virtue  of 
which  He  was  not  more  truly  the  Lamb  of  God 
than  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  St.  Mark 
has  just  recorded  how  He  bade  His  followers 
carry  on  His  work,  defying  the  serpents  of  the 
world,  and  renewing  the  plague-stricken  race  of 
Adam.  In  what  strength  did  they  fulfil  this 
commission?  How  did  they  fare-  without  the 
Master?  And  what  is  St.  Mark's  view  of  the 
Ascension? 

Here,  as  all  through  the  Gospel,  mirror  points 
are  neglected.  Details  are  only  valued  when 
they  carry  some  aid  for  the  special  design  of  the 
Evangelist,  who  presses  to  the  core  of  his  subject 
at  once  and  boldly.  As  he  omitted  the  bribes 
with  which  Satan  tempted  Jesus,  and  cared  not 
for  the  testimony  of  the  Baptist  when  the  voice 
of  God  was  about  to  peal  from  heaven  over  the 
Jordan,  as  on  the  holy  mount  he  told  not  the 
subject  of  which  Moses  and  Elijah  spoke,  but 
how  Jesus  Himself  predicted  His  death  to  His 
disciples,  so  now  He  is  silent  about  the  mountain 
slope,  the  final  benediction,  the  cloud  which 
withdrew  Him  from  their  sight,  and  the  angels 
who  sent  back  the  dazed  apostles  to  their  homes 
and  their  duties.  It  is  not  caprice  nor  haste  that 
omits  so  much  interesting  information.  His 
mind  is  fixed  on  a  few  central  thoughts;  what 
concerns  him  is  to  link  the  mighty  story  of  the 
life  and  death  of  Jesus  with  these  great  facts, 
that  He  was  received  up  into  Heaven,  that  He 
there  sat  down  upon  the  right  hand  of  God,  and 
that  His-  disciples  were  never  forsaken  of  Him  at 
all,  but  proved,  by  the  miraculous  spread  of  the 
early  Church,  that  His  power  was  among  them 
still.  St.  Mark  does  not  record  the  promise,  but 
he  asserts  the  fact  that  Christ  was  with  them  all 
the  days.  There  is  indeed  a  connection  between 
his  two  closing  verses,  subtle  and  hard  to  render 
into  English,  and  yet  real,  which  suggests  the 
notion  of  balance,  of  relation  between  the  two 
movements,  the  ascent  of  Jesus  and  the  evangel- 
isation of  the  world,  such  as  exists,  for  example, 
between  detachments  of  an  army  co-operating  for 
a  common  end,  so  that  our  Lord,  for  His  part, 
ascended,  while  the  disciples,  for  their  part,  went 
forth  and  found  Him  with  them  still. 

But  the  link  is  plainer  which  binds  the  Ascen- 
sion to  His  previous  story  of  suffering  and  con- 
flict. It  was  "  then,"  and  "  after  He  had  spoken 
unto  them,"  that  "  the  Lord  Jesus  was  received 
up."  In  truth  His  ascension  was  but  the  carry- 
ing forward  to  completion  of  His  resurrection, 
which  was  not  a  return  to  the  poor  conditions  of 
our  mortal  life,  but  an  entrance  into  glory,  only 
arrested  in  its  progress  until  He  should  have 
quite  convinced  His  followers  that  "  it  is  I  in- 
deed," and  made  them  understand  that  "  thus  it 
is  written  that  the  Christ  should  suffer,  and  rise 
again  from  the  dead  the  third  day."  and  filled 
them  with  holy  shame  for  their  unbelief,  and  with 
courage  for  their  future  course,  so  strange,  so 
weary,  so  sublime. 

There  is  something  remarkable  in  the  words, 
"  He  was  received  up  into  heaven."  We  habitu* 
ally  speak  of  Him  as  ascending,  but  Scripture 
more  frequently  declares  that  He  was  the  subject 
of  the  action  of  another,  and  was  taken  up.  St. 
Luke  tells  us  that,  "  while  they  worshipped,  He 
was  carried  up  into  heaven,"  and  again  "  He  was 
received  up.  .  .  .  He  was  taken  up "  (Luke 
xxiv.  51;  Acts  i.  2,  9).  Physical  interference  is 
not  implied:  no  angels  bore  Him  aloft;  and  the 


922 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO   ST.    MARK. 


narratives  make  it  clear  that  His  glorious  Body, 
obedient  to  its  new  mysterious  nature,  arose  un- 
aided. But  the  decision  to  depart,  and  the  choice 
of  a  time,  came  not  from  Him:  He  did  not  go, 
but  was  taken.  Never  hitherto  had  He  glorified 
Himself.  He  had  taught  His  disciples  to  be  con- 
tented in  the  lowest  room  until  the  Master  of  the 
house  should  bid  them  come  up  higher.  And  so, 
when  His  own  supreme  victory  is  won,  and 
heaven  held  its  breath  expectant  and  astonished, 
the  conquering  Lord  was  content  to  walk  with 
peasants  by  the  Lake  of  Galilee  and  on  the  slopes 
ai  Olivet  until  the  appointed  time.  What  a  re- 
buke to  us  who  chafe  and  fret  if  the  recognition 
of  our  petty  merits  be  postponed. 

"He  was  received  up  into  heaven!"  What 
sublime  mysteries  are  covered  by  that  simple 
phrase.  It  was  He  who  taught  us  to  make,  even 
of  the  mammon  of  unrighteousness,  friends  who 
shall  welcome  us,  when  mammon  fails  and  all 
things  mortal  have  deserted  us,  into  everlasting 
habitations.  With  what  different  greetings,  then, 
do  men  enter  the  City  of  God.  Some  converts 
of  the  death  bed  perhaps  there  are,  who  scarcely 
make  their  way  to  heaven,  alone,  unbailed  by 
one  whom  they  saved  or  comforted,  and  like  a 
vessel  which  struggles  into  port,  with  rent  cord- 
age and  tattered  sails,  only  not  a  wreck.  Others, 
who  aided  some  few,  sparing  a  little  of  their 
means  and  energies,  are  greeted  and  blessed  by 
a  scanty  group.  But  even  our  chieftains  and 
leaders,  the  martyrs,  sages,  and  philanthropists 
whose  names  brighten  the  annals  of  the  Church, 
what  is  their  influence,  and  how  few  have  they 
reached,  compared  with  that  great  multitude 
whom  none  can  number,  of  all  nations  and  tribes 
and  peoples  and  tongues,  who  cry  with  a  loud 
voice.  Salvation  unto  our  God  who  sitteth  upon 
the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb.  Through  Him 
it  pleased  the  Father  to  reconcile  all  things  unto 
Himself,  through  Him,  whether  things  upon  the 
earth  or  things  in  the  heavens.  And  surely  the 
supreme  hour  in  the  history  of  the  universe  was 
when,  in  flesh,  the  sore-stricken  but  now  the 
all-conquering  Christ  re-entered  His  native 
heaven. 

And  He  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  God. 
The  expression  is,  beyond  all  controversy,  bor- 
rowed from  that  great  Psalm  which  begins  by 
saying,  "  The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Sit  thou 
at  My  right  hand,"  and  which  presently  makes 
the    announcement    never    revealed    until    then. 


"Thou  art  a  Priest  for  ever  after  the  order  «i 
Melchizedec  "  (Ps.  ex.  i,  4).  It  is  therefore  an 
anticipation  of  the  argument  for  the  royal  Priest- 
hood of  Jesus  which  is  developed  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.  Now  priesthood  is  a  human 
function:  every  high  priest  is  chosen  from  among 
men.  And  the  Ascension  proclaims  to  us,  not 
the  Divinity  of  the  Eternal  Word,  but  the  glori- 
fication of  "the  Lord  Jesus;"  not  the  omnipo- 
tence of  God  the  Son,  but  that  all  power  is  com- 
mitted unto  Him  Who  is  not  ashamed  to  call 
us  brethren,  that  His  human  hands  wield  the 
sceptre  as  once  they  held  the  reed,  and  the  brows 
then  insulted  and  torn  with  thorns  are  now 
crowned  with  many  crowns.  In  the  overthrow 
of  Satan  He  won  all,  and  infinitely  more  than  all, 
of  that  vast  bribe  which  Satan  once  offered  for 
His  homage,  and  the  angels  for  ever  worship 
Him  who  would  not  for  a  moment  bend  His 
knee  to  evil. 

Now  since  He  conquered  not  for  Himself,  but 
as  Captain  of  our  Salvation,  the  Ascension  also 
proclaims  the  issue  of  all  the  holy  suffering,  all 
the  baffled  efforts,  all  the  cross-bearing  of  all 
who  follow  Christ. 

His  High  Priesthood  is  with  authority. 
"  Every  high  priest  standeth,"  but  He  has  for 
ever  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  the  throne 
of  the  majesty  in  the  heavens,  a  Priest  sitting 
upon  His  throne  (Heb.  viii.  i;  Zech.  vi.  13). 
And  therefore  it  is  His  office.  Who  pleads  for  us 
and  represents  us.  Himself  to  govern  our  des- 
tinies. No  wonder  that  His  early  followers,  with 
minds  which  He  had  opened  to  understand  the 
Scriptures,  were  mighty  to  cast  down  strong- 
holds. Against  tribulation  and  anguish  and  per- 
secution and  famine  and  nakedness  and  peril  and 
sword  they  were  more  than  conquerors  through 
Him.  For  He  worked  with  them  and  confirmed 
His  word  with  signs.  And  we  have  seen  that 
He  works  with  His  people  still,  and  still  confirms 
His  gospel,  only  withdrawing  signs  of  one  order 
as  those  of  another  kind  are  multiplied. 
Wherever  they  wage  a  faithful  battle,  He  gives 
them  victory.  Whenever  they  cry  to  Him  in 
anguish,  the  form  of  the  Son  of  God  is  with 
them  in  the  furnace,  and  the  smell  of  fire  does 
not  pass  upon  them.  Where  they  come,  the 
desert  blossoms  as  a  rose;  and  where  they  are 
received,  the  serpents  of  life  no  longer  sting,  its 
fevers  grow  cool,  and  the  demons  which  rend 
it  are  cast  out. 


Date  Due 


(v  '^^ifi^  -it 


ujj  i^  ^ 


^^Ujj^^^y^^j^^ 


^i\m  2J- 


AP  19  '^  « 


ii,. 


oei  ■ 


jAir5(- 


rjA 


iUL 


4^1  ^^1  I     '01'- 


5fif 


